THE ANTI-SLAVERY EXAMINER Part 3 of 4

By The American Anti-Slavery Society 1839

 No. 10. American Slavery As It Is: Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses. 

 No. 10. Speech of Hon. Thomas Morris, of Ohio, in Reply to the Speech of the Hon. Henry Clay. 

 No. 11. The Constitution A Pro-Slavery Compact Or Selections From the Madison Papers, &c. 

 No. 11. The Constitution A Pro-Slavery Compact Or Selections From the Madison Papers, &c. Second Edition, Enlarged. 

No. 10 THE ANTI-SLAVERY EXAMINER. 

 * * * * *

AMERICAN SLAVERY

AS IT IS:

TESTIMONY of A THOUSAND WITNESSES. 

 * * * * *

"Behold the wicked abominations that they do!"--Ezekial, viii, 2. 

"The righteous considereth the cause of the poor; but the wickedregardeth not to know it. "--Prov. 29, 7. 

"True humanity consists not in a squeamish ear, but in listening tothe story of human suffering and endeavoring to relieve it. "--CharlesJames Fox. 

 * * * * *

NEW YORK: PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY, OFFICE, No. 143 NASSAU STREET. 1839. 

 * * * * *

This periodical contains 7 sheets--postage, under 100 miles, 10-1/2cts; over 100 miles, 17-1/2 cents. 

ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER. A majority of the facts and testimonycontained in this work rests upon the authority of slaveholders, whosenames and residences are given to the public, as vouchers for thetruth of their statements. That they should utter falsehoods, for thesake of proclaiming their own infamy, is not probable. 

Their testimony is taken, mainly, from recent newspapers, published inthe slave states. Most of those papers will be deposited at the officeof the American Anti-Slavery Society, 143 Nassau street, New YorkCity. Those who think the atrocities, which they describe, incredible, are invited to call and read for themselves. We regret that _all_ ofthe original papers are not in our possession. The idea of preservingthem on file for the inspection of the incredulous, and the curious, did not occur to us until after the preparation of the work was in astate of forwardness, in consequence of this, some of the paperscannot be recovered. _Nearly all_ of them, however have beenpreserved. In all cases the _name_ of the paper is given, and, withvery few exceptions, the place and time, (year, month, and day) ofpublication. Some of the extracts, however not being made withreference to this work, and before its publication was contemplated, are without date; but this class of extracts is exceedingly small, probably not a thirtieth of the whole. 

The statements, not derived from the papers and other periodicals, letters, books, &c. , published by slaveholders, have been furnished byindividuals who have resided in slave states, many of whom are nativesof those states, and have been slaveholders. The names, residences, &c. Of the witnesses generally are given. A number of them, however, still reside in slave states;--to publish their names would be, in mostcases, to make them the victims of popular fury. 

New York, May 4, 1839. 

NOTE. 

The Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society, whiletendering their grateful acknowledgments, in the name of AmericanAbolitionists, and in behalf of the slave, to those who have furnishedfor this publication the result of their residence and travel in theslave states of this Union, announce their determination to publish, from time to time, as they may have the materials and the funds, TRACTS, containing well authenticated facts, testimony, personalnarratives, &c. Fully setting forth the _condition_ of Americanslaves. In order that they may be furnished with the requisitematerials, they invite all who have had personal knowledge of thecondition of slaves in any of the states of this Union, to forwardtheir testimony with their names and residences. To preventimposition, it is indispensable that persons forwarding testimony, whoare not personally known to any of the Executive Committee, or to theSecretaries or Editors of the American Anti-Slavery Society, shouldfurnish references to some person or persons of respectability, withwhom, if necessary, the Committee may communicate respecting thewriter. 

Facts and testimony respecting the condition of slaves, in _allrespects_, are desired; their food, (kinds, quality, and quantity, )clothing, lodging, dwellings, hours of labor and rest, kinds of labor, with the mode of exaction, supervision, &c. --the number and time ofmeals each day, treatment when sick, regulations inspecting theirsocial intercourse, marriage and domestic ties, the system of tortureto which they are subjected, with its various modes; and _in detail_, their _intellectual_ and _moral_ condition. Great care should beobserved in the statement of facts. Well-weighed testimony andwell-authenticated facts; with a responsible name, the Committeeearnestly desire and call for. Thousands of persons in the free stateshave ample knowledge on this subject, derived from their ownobservation in the midst of slavery. Will such hold their peace? Thatwhich maketh manifest is _light_; he who keepeth his candle under abushel at such a time and in such a cause as this, _forges fetters forhimself_, as well as for the slave. Let no one withhold his testimonybecause others have already testified to similar facts. The value oftestimony is by no means to be measured by the _novelty_ of thehorrors which it describes. _Corroborative_ testimony, --facts, similarto those established by the testimony of others, --is highly valuable. Who that can give it and has a heart of flesh, will refuse to theslave so small a boon?

Communications may be addressed to Theodore D. Weld, 143Nassau-street, New York. New York, May, 1839. 

CONTENTS. 

INTRODUCTION. 

 Twenty-seven hundred thousand free born citizens of the U. S. In slavery; Tender mercies of slaveholders; Abominations of slavery; Character of the testimony. 

PERSONAL NARRATIVES--PART I. 

NARRATIVE of NEHEMIAH CAULKINS; North Carolina Slavery; Methodist preaching slavedriver, Galloway; Women at child-birth; Slaves at labor; Clothing of slaves; Allowance of provisions; Slave-fetters; Cruelties to slaves; Burying a slave alive; Licentiousness of Slave-holders; Rev. Thomas P. Hunt, with his "hands tied"; Preachers cringe to slavery; Nakedness of slaves; Slave-huts; Means of subsistence for slaves; Slaves' prayer. 

NARRATIVE of REV. HORACE MOULTON; Labor of the slaves; Tasks; Whipping posts; Food; Houses; Clothing; Punishments; Scenes of horror; Constables, savage and brutal; Patrols; Cruelties at night; _Paddle-torturing_; _Cat-hauling_; Branding with hot iron; Murder with impunity; Iron collars, yokes, clogs, and bells. 

NARRATIVE of SARAH M. GRIMKÉ; Barbarous Treatment of slaves; Converted slave; Professor of religion, near death, tortured his slave for visiting his companion; Counterpart of James Williams' description of Larrimore's wife; Head of runaway slave on a pole; Governor of North Carolina left his sick slave to perish; Cruelty to Women slaves; Christian slave a martyr for Jesus. 

TESTIMONY of REV. JOHN GRAHAM; Twenty-seven slaves whipped. 

TESTIMONY of WILLIAM POE; Harris whipped a girl to death; Captain of the U. S. Navy murdered his boy, was tried and acquitted; Overseer burnt a slave; Cruelties to slaves. 

PRIVATIONS OF THE SLAVES. 

FOOD; Suffering from hunger; Rations in the U. S. Army, &c; Prison rations; Testimony. LABOR; Slaves are overworked; Witnesses; Henry Clay; Child-bearing prevented; Dr. Channing; Sacrifice of a set of hands every seven years; Testimony; Laws of Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. CLOTHING; Witnesses; Advertisements; Testimony; Field-hands; Nudity of slaves; John Randolph's legacy to Essex and Hetty. DWELLINGS; Witnesses; Slaves are wretchedly sheltered and lodged. TREATMENT OF THE SICK. 

PERSONAL NARRATIVES, PART II. 

TESTIMONY of the REV. WILLIAM T. ALLAN; Woman delivered of a dead child, being whipped; Slaves shot by Hilton; Cruelties to slaves; Whipping post; Assaults, and maimings; Murders; Puryear, "the Devil, "; Overseers always armed; Licentiousness of Overseers; "Bend your backs"; Mrs. H. , a Presbyterian, desirous to cut Arthur Tappan's throat; Clothing, Huts, and Herding of slaves; Iron yokes with prongs; Marriage unknown among slaves; Presbyterian minister at Huntsville; Concubinage in Preacher's house; Slavery, the great wrong. 

NARRATIVE of WILLIAM LEFTWICH; Slave's life. 

TESTIMONY of LEMUEL SAPINGTON; Nakedness of slaves; Traffic in slaves. 

TESTIMONY of MRS. LOWRY; Long, a professor of religion killed three men; Salt water applied to wounds to keep them from putrefaction. 

TESTIMONY of WILLIAM C. GILDERSLEEVE; Acts of cruelty. 

TESTIMONY of HIRAM WHITE; Woman with a child chained to her neck; Amalgamation, and mulatto children. 

TESTIMONY of JOHN M. NELSON; Rev. Conrad Speece influenced Alexander Nelson when dying not to emancipate his slaves; George Bourne opposed Slavery in 1810. 

TESTIMONY of ANGELINA GRIMKÉ WELD; House-servants; Slave-driving female professors of religion at Charleston, S. C. ; Whipping women and prayer in the same room; Tread-mills; _Slaveholding religion_; Slave-driving mistress prayed for the divine blessing upon her whipping of an aged woman; Girl killed with impunity; Jewish law; Barbarities; Medical attendance upon slaves; Young man beaten to epilepsy and insanity; Mistresses flog their slaves; Blood-bought luxuries; Borrowing of slaves; Meals of slaves; All comfort of slaves disregarded; Severance of companion lovers; Separation of parents and children; Slave espionage; Sufferings of slaves; Horrors of slavery indescribable. 

TESTIMONY of CRUELTY INFLICTED UPON SLAVES; Colonization Society; Emancipation Society of North Carolina; Kentucky. 

PUNISHMENTS; Floggings; Witnesses and Testimony. 

SLAVE DRIVING; Droves of slaves. 

CRUELTY TO SLAVES; Slaves like Stock without a shelter; "Six pound paddle. "

TORTURES OF SLAVES. Iron collars, chains, fetters, and hand-cuffs; Advertisements for fugitive slaves; Testimony; Iron head-frame; Chain coffles; Droves of 'human cattle'; Washington, the National slave market; Testimony of James K. Paulding, Secretary of the Navy; _Literary fraud and pretended prophecy_ by Mr. Paulding; Brandings, Maimings, and Gun-shot wounds; Witnesses and Testimony; Mr. Sevier, senator of the U. S. ; Judge Hitchcock, of Mobile; Commendable fidelity to truth in the advertisements of slaveholders; Thomas Aylethorpe cut off a slave's ear, and sent it to Lewis Tappan; Advertisements for runaway slaves with their teeth mutilated; Excessive cruelty to slaves; Slaves burned alive; Mr. Turner, a slave-butcher; Slaves roasted and flogged; Cruelties common; Fugitive slaves; Slaves forced to eat tobacco worms; Baptist Christians escaping from slavery; Christian whipped for praying; James K. Paulding's testimony; Slave driven to death; Coroner's inquest on Harney's murdered female slave; Man-stealing encouraged by law; Trial for a murdered slave; Female slave whipped to death, and during the torture delivered of a dead infant; Slaves murdered; Slave driven to death; Slaves killed with impunity; George, a slave, chopped piece-meal, and burnt by Lilburn Lewis; Retributive justice in the awful death of Lilburn Lewis; Trial of Isham Lewis, a slave murderer. 

PERSONAL NARRATIVES. --PART III. 

NARRATIVE OF REV. FRANCIS HAWLEY; Plantations; Overseers; No appeal from Overseers to Masters. 

CLOTHING; Nudity of slaves. 

WORK; Cotton-picking; Mothers of slaves; Presbyterian minister killed his slave; Methodist colored preacher hung; Licentiousness; Slave-traffic; Night in a Slaveholder's house; Twelve slaves murdered; Slave driving Baptist preachers; Hunting of runaways slaves; Amalgamation. 

TESTIMONY OF REUBEN C. MACY, AND RICHARD MACY. Whipping of slaves. Testimony of Eleazer Powel; Overseer of Hinds Stuart, shot a slave for opposing the torture of his female companion. 

TESTIMONY OF REV. WILLIAM SCALES. Three slaves murdered with impunity; Separation of lovers, parents, and children. 

TESTIMONY OF JOS. IDE. Mrs. T. A Presbyterian kind woman-killer; Female slave whipped to death; Food; Nakedness of slaves; Old man flogged after praying for his tyrant; Slave-huts not as comfortable as pig-sties. 

TESTIMONY OF REV. PHINEAS SMITH. Texas; Suit for the value of slave 'property'; Anson Jones, Ambassador from Texas; No trial or punishment for the murder of slaves; Slave-hunting in Texas; Suffering drives the slaves to despair and suicide. 

TESTIMONY OF PHIL'N BLISS. Ignorance of northern citizens respecting slavery; Betting upon crops; Extent and cruelty of the punishment of slaves; Slaveholders excuse their cruelties by the example of Preachers, and professors of religion, and Northern citizens; Novel torture, eulogized by a professor of religion; Whips as common as the plough; _Ladies_ use cowhides, with shovel and tongs. 

TESTIMONY OF REV. WM. A. CHAPIN. Slave-labor; Starvation of slaves; Slaves lacerated, without clothing, and without food. 

TESTIMONY OF T. M. MACY. Cotton plantations on St. Simon's Island; Cultivation of rice; No time for relaxation; Sabbath a nominal rest; Clothing; Flogging. 

TESTIMONY OF F. C. MACY. Slave cabins; Food; Whipping every day; Treatment of slaves as brutes; Slave-boys fight for slaveholder's amusement; Amalgamation common. 

TESTIMONY OF A CLERGYMAN. Natchez; 'Lie down, ' for whipping; Slave-hunting; 'Ball and chain' men; Whipping at the same time, on three plantations; Hours of Labor; _Christians_ slave-hunting; Many runaway slaves annually shot; Slaves in the stocks; Slave branding. 

CONDITION OF SLAVES. Slavery is unmixed cruelty; Fear the only motive of slaves; Pain is the means, not the end of slave-driving; Characters of Slave drivers and Overseers, brutal, sensual, and violent; Ownership of human beings utterly destroys _their_ comfort. 

OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED:

I. Such cruelties are incredible. Slaves deemed to be working animals, or merchandize; and called 'Stock, ' 'Increase, ' 'Breeders, ' 'Drivers, ' 'Property, ' 'Human cattle'; Testimony of Thomas Jefferson; Slaves worse treated than quadrupeds; Contrast between the usage of slaves and animals; Testimony; Northern incredulity discreditable to consistency; Religious persecutions; Recent 'Lynchings, ' and Riots, in the United States; Many outrageous Felonies perpetrated with impunity; Large faith of the objectors who 'can't believe'; 'Doe faces, ' and 'Dough faces'; Slave-drivers acknowledge their own enormities; Slave plantations in Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi 'second only to hell'; Legislature of North Carolina; Incredulity discreditable to intelligence; Abuse of power in the state, and churches; Legal restraints; American slaveholders possess absolute power; Slaves deprived of the safe guards of law; Mutual aversion between the oppressor and the slave; Cruelty the product of arbitrary power; Testimony of Thomas Jefferson; Judge Tucker; Presbyterian Synod of South Carolina, and Georgia; General William H. Harrison; President Edwards; Montesquieu; Wilberforce; Whitbread; Characters. 

OBJECTION II. --"Slaveholders protest that they treat their slaves well. " Not testimony but opinion; 'Good treatment' of slaves; Novel form of cruelty. 

OBJECTION III. --"Slaveholders are proverbial for their kindness, and generosity. " Hospitality and benevolence contrasted; Slaveholders in Congress, respecting Texas and Hayti; 'Fictitious kindness and hospitality. '

OBJECTION IV. --"Northern visitors at the south testify that the slaves are not cruelly treated. " Testimony; 'Gubner poisened'; Field-hands; Parlor slaves; Chief Justice Durell. 

OBJECTION V. --"It is for the interest of the masters to treat their slaves well. " Testimony; Rev. J. N. Maffitt; Masters interest to treat cruelly the great body of the slaves; Various classes of slaves; Hired slaves; Advertisements. 

OBJECTION VI. --"Slaves multiply; a proof that they are not inhumanly treated, and are in a comfortable condition. " Testimony; Martin Van Buren; Foreign slave trade; 'Beware of Kidnappers'; 'Citizens sold as slaves'; Kidnapping at New Orleans; Slave breeders. 

OBJECTION VII. --"Public opinion is a protection to the slave. " Decision of the Supreme Court of North and South Carolina; 'Protection of slaves'; Mischievous effects of 'public opinion' concerning slavery; Laws of different states; Heart of slaveholders; Reasons for enacting the laws concerning cruelties to slaves; 'Moderate correction'; Hypocrisy and malignity of slave laws; Testimony of slaves excluded; Capital crimes for slaves; 'Slaveholding brutality, ' worse than that of Caligula; Public opinion destroys fundamental rights; Character of slaveholders' advertisements; Public opinion is diabolical; Brutal indecency; Murder of slaves by law; Judge Lawless; Slave-hunting; Health of slaves; Acclimation of slaves; Liberty of Slaves; Kidnapping of free citizens; Law of Louisiana; FRIENDS', memorial; Domestic slavery; Advertisements; Childhood, old age; Inhumanity; Butchering dead slaves; South Carolina Medical college; Charleston Medical Infirmary; Advertisements; Slave murders; John Randolph; Charleston slave auctions; 'Never lose a day's work'; Stocks; Slave-breeding; Lynch law; Slaves murdered; Slavery among Christians; Licentiousness encouraged by preachers; 'Fine old preacher who dealt in slaves'; Cruelty to slaves by professors of religion; Slave-breeding; Daniel O'Connel, and Andrew Stevenson; Virginia a negro raising menagerie; Legislature of Virginia; Colonization Society; Inter-state slave traffic; Battles in Congress; Duelling; Cock-fighting; Horse-racing; Ignorance of slaveholders; 'Slaveholding civilization, and morality'; Arkansas; Slave driving ruffians; Missouri; Alabama; Butcheries in Mississippi; Louisiana; Tennessee; Fatal Affray in Columbia; Presentment of the Grand Jury of Shelby County; Testimony of Bishop Smith of Kentucky. 

ATLANTIC SLAVEHOLDING REGION. Georgia; North Carolina; Trading with Negroes; Conclusion. 

INTRODUCTION. 

Reader, you are empannelled as a juror to try a plain case and bringin an honest verdict. The question at issue is not one of law, but offacts--"What is the actual condition of the slaves in the UnitedStates?" A plainer case never went to a jury. Look at it. TWENTY-SEVENHUNDRED THOUSAND PERSONS in this country, men, women, and children, are in SLAVERY. Is slavery, as a condition for human beings, good, bad, or indifferent? We submit the question without argument. You havecommon sense, and conscience, and a human heart;--pronounce upon it. You have a wife, or a husband, a child, a father, a mother, a brotheror a sister--make the case your own, make it theirs, and bring in yourverdict. The case of Human Rights against Slavery has been adjudicatedin the court of conscience times innumerable. The same verdict hasalways been rendered--"Guilty;" the same sentence has always beenpronounced, "Let it be accursed;" and human nature, with her millionechoes, has rung it round the world in every language under heaven, "Let it be accursed. Let it be accursed. " His heart is false to humannature, who will not say "Amen. " There is not a man on earth who doesnot believe that slavery is a curse. Human beings may be inconsistent, but human _nature_ is true to herself. She has uttered her testimonyagainst slavery with a shriek ever since the monster was begotten; andtill it perishes amidst the execrations of the universe, she willtraverse the world on its track, dealing her bolts upon its head, anddashing against it her condemning brand. We repeat it, every man knowsthat slavery is a curse. Whoever denies this, his lips libel hisheart. Try him; clank the chains in his ears, and tell him they arefor _him_; give him an hour to prepare his wife and children for alife of slavery; bid him make haste and get ready their necks for theyoke, and their wrists for the coffle chains, then look at his palelips and trembling knees, and you have _nature's_ testimony againstslavery. 

Two millions seven hundred thousand persons in these States are inthis condition. They were made slaves and are held each by force, andby being put in fear, and this for no crime! Reader, what have you tosay of such treatment? Is it right, just, benevolent? Suppose I shouldseize you, rob you of your liberty, drive you into the field, and makeyou work without pay as long as you live, would that be justice andkindness, or monstrous injustice and cruelty? Now, every body knowsthat the slaveholders do these things to the slaves every day, and yetit is stoutly affirmed that they treat them well and kindly, and thattheir tender regard for their slaves restrains the masters frominflicting cruelties upon them. We shall go into no metaphysics toshow the absurdity of this pretence. The man who _robs_ you every day, is, forsooth, quite too tender-hearted ever to cuff or kick you! True, he can snatch your money, but he does it gently lest he should hurtyou. He can empty your pockets without qualms, but if your _stomach_is empty, it cuts him to the quick. He can make you work a life timewithout pay, but loves you too well to let you go hungry. He fleecesyou of your _rights_ with a relish, but is shocked if you workbareheaded in summer, or in winter without warm stockings. He can makeyou go without your _liberty_, but never without a shirt. He cancrush, in you, all hope of bettering your condition, by vowing thatyou shall die his slave, but though he can coolly torture yourfeelings, he is too compassionate to lacerate your back--he can breakyour heart, but he is very tender of your skin. He can strip you ofall protection and thus expose you to all outrages, but if you areexposed to the _weather_, half clad and half sheltered, how yearn histender bowels! What! slaveholders talk of treating men well, and yetnot only rob them of all they get, and as fast as they get it, but robthem of _themselves_, also; their very hands and feet, all theirmuscles, and limbs, and senses, their bodies and minds, their time andliberty and earnings, their free speech and rights of conscience, their right to acquire knowledge, and property, and reputation;--andyet they, who plunder them of all these, would fain make us believethat their soft hearts ooze out so lovingly toward their slaves thatthey always keep them well housed and well clad, never push them toohard in the field, never make their dear backs smart, nor let theirdear stomachs get empty. 

But there is no end to these absurdities. Are slaveholders dunces, ordo they take all the rest of the world to be, that they think tobandage our eyes with such thin gauzes? Protesting their kind regardfor those whom they hourly plunder of all they have and all they get!What! when they have seized their victims, and annihilated all their_rights_, still claim to be the special guardians of their_happiness_! Plunderers of their liberty, yet the careful suppliers oftheir wants? Robbers of their earnings, yet watchful sentinels roundtheir interests, and kind providers for their comfort? Filching alltheir time, yet granting generous donations for rest and sleep?Stealing the use of their muscles, yet thoughtful of their ease?Putting them under _drivers_, yet careful that they are nothard-pushed? Too humane forsooth to stint the stomachs of theirslaves, yet force their _minds_ to starve, and brandish over thempains and penalties, if they dare to reach forth for the smallestcrumb of knowledge, even a letter of the alphabet!

It is no marvel that slaveholders are always talking of their _kindtreatment_ of their slaves. The only marvel is, that men of sense canbe gulled by such professions. Despots always insist that they aremerciful. The greatest tyrants that ever dripped with blood haveassumed the titles of "most gracious, " "most clement, " "mostmerciful, " &c. , and have ordered their crouching vassals to accostthem thus. When did not vice lay claim to those virtues which are theopposites of its habitual crimes? The guilty, according to their ownshowing, are always innocent, and cowards brave, and drunkards sober, and harlots chaste, and pickpockets honest to a fault. Every bodyunderstands this. When a man's tongue grows thick, and he begins tohiccough and walk cross-legged, we expect him, as a matter of course, to protest that he is not drunk; so when a man is always singing thepraises of his own honesty, we instinctively watch his movements andlook out for our pocket-books. Whoever is simple enough to be hoaxedby such professions, should never be trusted in the streets withoutsomebody to take care of him. Human nature works out in slaveholdersjust as it does to other men, and in American slaveholders just as inEnglish, French, Turkish, Algerine, Roman and Grecian. The Spartansboasted of their kindness to their slaves, while they whipped them todeath by thousands at the altars of their gods. The Romans laudedtheir own mild treatment of their bondmen, while they branded theirnames on their flesh with hot irons, and when old, threw them intotheir fish ponds, or like Cato "the Just, " starved them to death. Itis the boast of the Turks that they treat their slaves as though theywere their children, yet their common name for them is "dogs, " and forthe merest trifles, their feet are bastinadoed to a jelly, or theirheads clipped off with the scimetar. The Portuguese pride themselveson their gentle bearing toward their slaves, yet the streets of RioJaneiro are filled with naked men and women yoked in pairs to cartsand wagons, and whipped by drivers like beasts of burden. 

Slaveholders, the world over, have sung the praises of their tendermercies towards their slaves. Even the wretches that plied the Africanslave trade, tried to rebut Clarkson's proofs of their cruelties, byspeeches, affidavits, and published pamphlets, setting forth theaccommodations of the "middle passage, " and their kind attentions tothe comfort of those whom they had stolen from their homes, and keptstowed away under hatches, during a voyage of four thousand miles. So, according to the testimony of the autocrat of the Russias, heexercises great clemency towards the Poles, though he exiles them bythousands to the snows of Siberia, and tramples them down by millions, at home. Who discredits the atrocities perpetrated by Ovando inHispaniola, Pizarro in Peru, and Cortez in Mexico, --because theyfilled the ears of the Spanish Court with protestations of theirbenignant rule? While they were yoking the enslaved natives likebeasts to the draught, working them to death by thousands in theirmines, hunting them with bloodhounds, torturing them on racks, andbroiling them on beds of coals, their representations to the mothercountry teemed with eulogies of their parental sway! The bloodyatrocities of Philip II, in the expulsion of his Moorish subjects, arematters of imperishable history. Who disbelieves or doubts them? Andyet his courtiers magnified his virtues and chanted his clemency andhis mercy, while the wail of a million victims, smitten down by atempest of fire and slaughter let loose at his bidding, rose above the_Te Deums_ that thundered from all Spain's cathedrals. When Louis XIV. Revoked the edict of Nantz, and proclaimed two millions of hissubjects free plunder for persecution, --when from the English channelto the Pyrennees the mangled bodies of the Protestants were dragged onreeking hurdles by a shouting populace, he claimed to be "the fatherof his people, " and wrote himself "His most _Christian_ Majesty. "

But we will not anticipate topics, the full discussion of which morenaturally follows than precedes the inquiry into the actual conditionand treatment of slaves in the United States. 

As slaveholders and their apologists are volunteer witnesses in theirown cause, and are flooding the world with testimony that their slavesare kindly treated; that they are well fed, well clothed, well housed, well lodged, moderately worked, and bountifully provided with allthings needful for their comfort, we propose--first, to disprove theirassertions by the testimony of a multitude of impartial witnesses, andthen to put slaveholders themselves through a course ofcross-questioning which shall draw their condemnation out of their ownmouths. We will prove that the slaves in the United States are treatedwith barbarous inhumanity; that they are overworked, underfed, wretchedly clad and lodged, and have insufficient sleep; that they areoften made to wear round their necks iron collars armed with prongs, to drag heavy chains and weights at their feet while working in thefield, and to wear yokes, and bells, and iron horns; that they areoften kept confined in the stocks day and night for weeks together, made to wear gags in their mouths for hours or days, have some oftheir front teeth torn out or broken off, that they may be easilydetected when they run away; that they are frequently flogged withterrible severity, have red pepper rubbed into their lacerated flesh, and hot brine, spirits of turpentine, &c. , poured over the gashes toincrease the torture; that they are often stripped naked, their backsand limbs cut with knives, bruised and mangled by scores and hundredsof blows with the paddle, and terribly torn by the claws of cats, drawn over them by their tormentors; that they are often hunted withbloodhounds and shot down like beasts, or torn in pieces by dogs; thatthey are often suspended by the arms and whipped and beaten till theyfaint, and when revived by restoratives, beaten again till they faint, and sometimes till they die; that their ears are often cut off, theireyes knocked out, their bones broken, their flesh branded with red hotirons; that they are maimed, mutilated and burned to death over slowfires. All these things, and more, and worse, we shall _prove_. Reader, we know whereof we affirm, we have weighed it well; _more andworse_ WE WILL PROVE. Mark these words, and read on; we will establishall these facts by the testimony of scores and hundreds of eyewitnesses, by the testimony of _slaveholders_ in all parts of theslave states, by slaveholding members of Congress and of statelegislatures, by ambassadors to foreign courts, by judges, by doctorsof divinity, and clergymen of all denominations, by merchants, mechanics, lawyers and physicians, by presidents and professors incolleges and _professional_ seminaries, by planters, overseers anddrivers. We shall show, not merely that such deeds are committed, butthat they are frequent; not done in corners, but before the sun; notin one of the slave states, but in all of them; not perpetrated bybrutal overseers and drivers merely, but by magistrates, bylegislators, by professors of religion, by preachers of the gospel, bygovernors of states, by "gentlemen of property and standing, " and bydelicate females moving in the "highest circles of society. " We know, full well, the outcry that will be made by multitudes, at thesedeclarations; the multiform cavils, the flat denials, the charges of"exaggeration" and "falsehood" so often bandied, the sneers ofaffected contempt at the credulity that can believe such things, andthe rage and imprecations against those who give them currency. Weknow, too, the threadbare sophistries by which slaveholders and theirapologists seek to evade such testimony. If they admit that such deedsare committed, they tell us that they are exceedingly rare, andtherefore furnish no grounds for judging of the general treatment ofslaves; that occasionally a brutal wretch in the _free_ statesbarbarously butchers his wife, but that no one thinks of inferringfrom that, the general treatment of wives at the North and West. 

They tell us, also, that the slaveholders of the South areproverbially hospitable, kind, and generous, and it is incredible thatthey can perpetrate such enormities upon human beings; further, thatit is absurd to suppose that they would thus injure their ownproperty, that self-interest would prompt them to treat their slaveswith kindness, as none but fools and madmen wantonly destroy their ownproperty; further, that Northern visitors at the South come backtestifying to the kind treatment of the slaves, and that the slavesthemselves corroborate such representations. All these pleas, andscores of others, are bruited in every corner of the free States; andwho that hath eyes to see, has not sickened at the blindness that sawnot, at the palsy of heart that felt not, or at the cowardice andsycophancy that dared not expose such shallow fallacies. We are not tobe turned from our purpose by such vapid babblings. In theirappropriate places, we propose to consider these objections andvarious others, and to show their emptiness and folly. 

The foregoing declarations touching the inflictions upon slaves, arenot hap-hazard assertions, nor the exaggerations of fiction conjuredup to carry a point; nor are they the rhapsodies of enthusiasm, norcrude conclusions, jumped at by hasty and imperfect investigation, northe aimless outpourings either of sympathy or poetry; but they areproclamations of deliberate, well-weighed convictions, produced byaccumulations of proof, by affirmations and affidavits, by writtentestimonies and statements of a cloud of witnesses who speak what theyknow and testify what they have seen, and all these impregnablyfortified by proofs innumerable, in the relation of the slaveholder tohis slave, the nature of arbitrary power, and the nature and historyof man. 

Of the witnesses whose testimony is embodied in the following pages, amajority are slaveholders, many of the remainder have beenslaveholders, but now reside in free States. 

Another class whose testimony will be given, consists of those whohave furnished the results of their own observation during periods ofresidence and travel in the slave States. 

We will first present the reader with a few PERSONAL NARRATIVESfurnished by individuals, natives of slave states and others, embodying, in the main, the results of their own observation in themidst of slavery--facts and scenes of which they were eye-witnesses. 

In the next place, to give the reader as clear and definite a view ofthe actual condition of slaves as possible, we propose to makespecific points; to pass in review the various particulars in theslave's condition, simply presenting sufficient testimony under eachhead to settle the question in every candid mind. The examination willbe conducted by stating distinct propositions, and in the followingorder of topics. 

1. THE FOOD OF THE SLAVES, THE KINDS, QUALITY AND QUANTITY, ALSO, THENUMBER AND TIME OF MEALS EACH DAY, &c. 

2. THEIR HOURS OF LABOR AND REST. 

3. THEIR CLOTHING. 

4. THEIR DWELLINGS. 

5. THEIR PRIVATIONS AND INFLICTIONS. 

6. _In conclusion, _ a variety of OBJECTIONS and ARGUMENTS will beconsidered which are used by the advocates of slavery to setaside the force of testimony, and to show that the slaves are kindlytreated. 

Between the larger divisions of the work, brief personal narrativeswill be inserted, containing a mass of facts and testimony, bothgeneral and specific. 

 * * * * *

PERSONAL NARRATIVES. 

MR. NEHEMIAH CAULKINS, of Waterford, New London Co. , Connecticut, hasfurnished the Executive Committee of the American Anti-SlaverySociety, with the following statements relative to the condition andtreatment of slaves, in the south eastern part of North Carolina. Mostof the facts related by Mr. Caulkins fell under his personalobservation. The air of candor and honesty that pervades thenarrative, the manner in which Mr. C. Has drawn it up, the good sense, just views, conscience and heart which it exhibits, are sufficient ofthemselves to commend it to all who have ears to hear. 

The Committee have no personal acquaintance with Mr. Caulkins, butthey have ample testimonials from the most respectable sources, all ofwhich represent him to be a man whose long established character forsterling integrity, sound moral principle and piety, have secured forhim the uniform respect and confidence of those who know him. 

Without further preface the following testimonials are submitted tothe reader. 

This may certify, that we the subscribers have lived for a number ofyears past in the neighborhood with Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins, and have nohesitation in stating that we consider him a man of highrespectability and that his character for truth and veracity isunimpeachable. PETER COMSTOCK. A. F. PERKINS, M. D. ISAAC BEEBE. LODOWICK BEEBE. D. G. OTIS. PHILIP MORGAN. JAMES ROGERS, M. D. _Waterford, Ct. , Jan. 16th, 1839. _

Mr. Comstock is a Justice of the Peace. Mr. L. Beebe is the Town Clerkof Waterford. Mr. J. Beebe is a member of the Baptist Church. Mr. Otisis a member of the Congregational Church. Mr. Morgan is a Justice ofthe Peace, and Messrs. Perkins and Rogers are designated by theirtitles. All those gentlemen are citizens of Waterford, Connecticut. 

To whom it may concern. This may certify that Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins, of Waterford, in New London County, is a near neighbor to thesubscriber, and has been for many years. I do consider him a man of_unquestionable veracity_ and certify that he is so considered bypeople to whom he is personally known. EDWARD R. WARREN. _Jan. 15th, 1839. _

Mr. Warren is a Commissioner (Associate Judge) of the County Court, for New London County. 

This may certify that Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins, of the town of Waterford, County of New London, and State of Connecticut, is a member of thefirst Baptist Church in said Waterford, is in good standing, and isesteemed by us a man of truth and veracity. FRANCIS DARROW, Pastor ofsaid Church. _Waterford, Jan. 16th, 1839. _

This may certify that Nehemiah Caulkins, of Waterford, lives near me, and I always esteemed him, and believe him to be a man of truth andveracity. ELISHA BECKWITH. _Jan. 16th, 1839. _

Mr. Beckwith is a Justice of the Peace, a Post Master, and a Deacon ofthe Baptist Church. 

Mr. Dwight P. Jones, a member of the Second Congregational Church inthe city of New London, in a recent letter, says;

"Mr. Caulkins is a member of the Baptist Church in Waterford, and inevery respect a very worthy citizen. I have labored with him in theSabbath School, and know him to be a man of active piety. The most_entire confidence_ may be placed in the truth of his statements. Where he is known, no one will call them in question. "

We close these testimonials with an extract, of a letter from WilliamBolles, Esq. , a well known and respected citizen of New London, Ct. 

"Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins resides in the town of Waterford, about sixmiles from this City. His opportunities to acquire exact knowledge inrelation to Slavery, in that section of our country, to which hisnarrative is confined, have been very great. He is a carpenter, andwas employed principally on the plantations, working at his trade, being thus almost constantly in the company of the slaves as well asof their masters. His full heart readily responded to the call, [forinformation relative to slavery, ] for, as he expressed it, he had longdesired that others might know what he had seen, being confident thata general knowledge of facts as they exist, would greatly promote theoverthrow of the system. He is a man of undoubted character; and whereknown, his statements need no corroboration. 

Yours, &c. WILLIAM BOLLES. "

NARRATIVE OF MR. CAULKINS. 

I feel it my duty to tell some things that I know about slavery, inorder, if possible, to awaken more feeling at the North in behalf ofthe slave. The treatment of the slaves on the plantations where I hadthe greatest opportunity of getting knowledge, _was not so bad_ asthat on some neighboring estates, where the owners were noted fortheir cruelty. There were, however, other estates in the vicinity, where the treatment was better; the slaves were better clothed andfed, were not worked so hard, and more attention was paid to theirquarters. 

The scenes that I have witnessed are enough to harrow up the soul; butcould the slave be permitted to tell the story of his sufferings, which no white man, not linked with slavery, _is allowed to know, _ theland would vomit out the horrible system, slaveholders and all, ifthey would not unclinch their grasp upon their defenceless victims. 

I spent eleven winters, between the years 1824 and 1835, in the stateof North Carolina, mostly in the vicinity of Wilmington; and four outof the eleven on the estate of Mr. John Swan, five or six miles fromthat place. There were on his plantation about seventy slaves, maleand female: some were married, and others lived together as man andwife, without even a mock ceremony. With their owners generally, it isa matter of indifference; the marriage of slaves not being recognizedby the slave code. The slaves, however, think much of being married bya clergyman. 

The cabins or huts of the slaves were small, and were builtprincipally by the slaves themselves, as they could find time onSundays and moonlight nights; they went into the swamps, cut the logs, backed or hauled them to the quarters, and put up their cabins. 

When I first knew Mr. Swan's plantation, his overseer was a man whohad been a Methodist minister. He treated the slaves with greatcruelty. His reason for leaving the ministry and becoming an overseer, as I was informed, was this: his wife died, at which providence he wasso enraged, that he swore he would not preach for the Lord anotherday. This man continued on the plantation about three years; at theclose of which, on settlement of accounts, Mr. Swan owed him about$400, for which he turned him out a negro woman, and about twentyacres of land. He built a log hut, and took the woman to live withhim; since which, I have been at his hut, and seen four or fivemulatto children. He has been appointed _justice of the peace_, andhis place as overseer was afterwards occupied by a Mr. Galloway. 

It is customary in that part of the country, to let the hogs run inthe woods. On one occasion a slave caught a pig about two months old, which he carried to his quarters. The overseer, getting information ofthe fact, went to the field where he was at work, and ordered him tocome to him. The slave at once suspected it was something about thepig, and fearing punishment, dropped his hoe and ran for the woods. Hehad got but a few rods, when the overseer raised his gun, loaded withduck shot, and brought him down. It is a common practice for overseersto go into the field armed with a gun or pistols, and sometimes both. He was taken up by the slaves and carried to the plantation hospital, and the physician sent for. A physician was employed by the year totake care of the sick or wounded slaves. In about six weeks this slavegot better, and was able to come out of the hospital. He came to themill where I was at work, and asked me to examine his body, which Idid, and counted twenty-six duck shot still remaining in his flesh, though the doctor had removed a number while he was laid up. 

There was a slave on Mr. Swan's plantation, by the name of Harry, who, during the absence of his master, ran away and secreted himself is thewoods. This the slaves sometimes do, when the master is absent forseveral weeks, to escape the cruel treatment of the overseer. It iscommon for them to make preparations, by secreting a mortar, ahatchet, some cooking utensils, and whatever things they can get thatwill enable them to live while they are in the woods or swamps. Harrystaid about three months, and lived by robbing the rice grounds, andby such other means as came in his way. The slaves generally knowwhere the runaway is secreted, and visit him at night and on Sundays. On the return of his master, some of the slaves were sent for Harry. When he came home, he was seized and confined in the stocks. Thestocks were built in the barn, and consisted of two heavy pieces oftimber, ten or more feet in length, and about seven inches wide; thelower one, on the floor, has a number of holes or places cut in it, for the ancles; the upper piece, being of the same dimensions, isfastened at one end by a hinge, and is brought down after the anclesare placed in the holes, and secured by a clasp and padlock at theother end. In this manner the person is left to sit on the floor. Barry was kept in the stocks _day and night for a week_, and flogged_every morning_. After this, he was taken out one morning, a log chainfastened around his neck, the two ends dragging on the ground, and hesent to the field, to do his task with the other slaves. At night hewas again put in the stocks, in the morning he was sent to the fieldin the same manner, and thus dragged out another week. 

The overseer was a very miserly fellow, and restricted his wife inwhat are considered the comforts of life--such as tea, sugar, &c. Tomake up for this, she set her wits to work, and, by the help of aslave, named Joe, used to take from the plantation whatever she couldconveniently, and watch her opportunity during her husband's absence, and send Joe to sell them and buy for her such things as she directed. Once when her husband was away, she told Joe to kill and dress one ofthe pigs, sell it, and get her some tea, sugar, &c. Joe did as he wasbid, and she gave him the offal for his services. When Gallowayreturned, not suspecting his wife, he asked her if she knew what hadbecome of his pig. She told him she suspected one of the slaves, naming him, had stolen it, for she had heard a pig squeal the eveningbefore. The overseer called the slave up, and charged him with thetheft. He denied it, and said he knew nothing about it. The overseerstill charged him with it, and told him he would give him one week tothink of it, and if he did not confess the theft, or find out who didsteal the pig, he would flog every negro on the plantation; before theweek was up it was ascertained that Joe had killed the pig. He wascalled up and questioned, and admitted that he had done so, and toldthe overseer that he did it by the order of Mrs. Galloway, and thatshe directed him to buy some sugar, &c. With the money. Mrs. Gallowaygave Joe the lie; and he was terribly flogged. Joe told me he had beenseveral times to the smoke-house with Mrs. G, and taken hams and soldthem, which her husband told me he supposed were stolen by the negroeson a neighboring plantation. Mr. Swan, hearing of the circumstance, told me he believed Joe's story, but that his statement would not betaken as proof; and if every slave on the plantation told the samestory it could not be received as evidence against a white person. 

To show the manner in which old and worn-out slaves are sometimestreated, I will state a fact. Galloway owned a man about seventy yearsof age. The old man was sick and went to his hut; laid himself down onsome straw with his feet to the fire, covered by a piece of an oldblanket, and there lay four or five days, groaning in great distress, without any attention being paid him by his master, until death endedhis miseries; he was then taken out and buried with as little ceremonyand respect as would be paid to a brute. 

There is a practice prevalent among the planters, of letting a negrooff from severe and long-continued punishment on account of theintercession of some white person, who pleads in his behalf, that hebelieves the negro will behave better, that he promises well, and hebelieves he will keep his promise, &c. The planters sometimes gettired of punishing a negro, and, wanting his services in the field, they get some white person to come, and, in the presence of the slave, intercede for him. At one time a negro, named Charles, was confined inthe stocks in the building where I was at work, and had been severelywhipped several times. He begged me to intercede for him and try toget him released. I told him I would; and when his master came in towhip him again, I went up to him and told him I had been talking withCharles, and he had promised to behave better, &c. , and requested himnot to punish him any more, but to let him go. He then said toCharles, "As Mr. Caulkins has been pleading for you, I will let you goon his account;" and accordingly released him. 

Women are generally shown some little indulgence for three or fourweeks previous to childbirth; they are at such times not oftenpunished if they do not finish the task assigned them; it is, in somecases, passed over with a severe reprimand, and sometimes without anynotice being taken of it. They ate generally allowed four weeks afterthe birth of a child, before they are compelled to go into the field, they then take the child with them, attended sometimes by a littlegirl or boy, from the age of four to six, to take care of it while themother is at work. When there is no child that can be spared, or notyoung enough for this service, the mother, after nursing, lays itunder a tree, or by the side of a fence, and goes to her task, returning at stated intervals to nurse it. While I was on thisplantation, a little negro girl, six years of age, destroyed the lifeof a child about two months old, which was left in her care. It seemsthis little nurse, so called, got tired of her charge and the labor ofcarrying it to the quarters at night, the mother being obliged to workas long as she could see. One evening she nursed the infant at sunsetas usual, and sent it to the quarters. The little girl, on her wayhome, had to cross a run or brook, which led down into the swamp; whenshe came to the brook she followed it into the swamp, then took theinfant and plunged it head foremost into the water and mud, where itstuck fast; she there left it and went to the negro quarters. When themother came in from the field, she asked the girl where the child was;she told her she had brought it home, but did not know where it was;the overseer was immediately informed, search was made, and it wasfound as above stated, and dead. The little girl was shut up in thebarn, and confined there two or three weeks, when a speculator camealong and bought her for two hundred dollars. 

The slaves are obliged to work from daylight till dark, as long asthey can see. When they have tasks assigned, which is often the case, a few of the strongest and most expert, sometimes finish them beforesunset; others will be obliged to work till eight or nine o'clock inthe evening. All must finish their tasks or take a flogging. The whipand gun, or pistol, are companions of the overseer; the former he usesvery frequently upon the negroes, during their hours of labor, withoutregard to age or sex. Scarcely a day passed while I was on theplantation, in which some of the slaves were not whipped; I do notmean that they were _struck a few blows_ merely, but had a _setflogging_. The same labor is commonly assigned to men and women, --suchas digging ditches in the rice marshes, clearing up land, choppingcord-wood, threshing, &c. I have known the women go into the barn assoon as they could see in the morning, and work as late as they couldsee at night, threshing rice with the flail, (they now have athreshing machine, ) and when they could see to thresh no longer, theyhad to gather up the rice, carry it up stairs, and deposit it in thegranary. 

The allowance of clothing on this plantation to each slave, was givenout at Christmas for the year, and consisted of one pair of coarseshoes, and enough coarse cloth to make a jacket and trowsers. If theman has a wife she makes it up; if not, it is made up in the house. The slaves on this plantation, being near Wilmington, procuredthemselves extra clothing by working Sundays and moonlight nights, cutting cordwood in the swamps, which they had to back about a quarterof a mile to the ricer; they would then get a permit from theirmaster, and taking the wood in their canoes, carry it to Wilmington, and sell it to the vessels, or dispose of it as they best could, andwith the money buy an old jacket of the sailors, some coarse cloth fora shirt, &c. They sometimes gather the moss from the trees, which theycleanse and take to market. The women receive their allowance of thesame kind of cloth which the men have. This they make into a frock; ifthey have any under garments _they must procure them for themselves_. When the slaves get a permit to leave the plantation, they sometimesmake all ring again by singing the following significant ditty, whichshows that after all there is a flow of spirits in the human breastwhich for a while, at least, enables them to forget theirwretchedness. [1]

Hurra, for good ole Massa, He giv me de pass to go to de cityHurra, for good ole Missis, She bile de pot, and giv me de licker. Hurra, I'm goin to de city. 

[Footnote 1: Slaves sometimes sing, and so do convicts in jails undersentence, and both for the same reason. Their singing proves that they_want_ to be happy not that they _are_ so. It is the _means_ that theyuse to make themselves happy, not the evidence that they are soalready. Sometimes, doubtless, the excitement of song whelms theirmisery in momentary oblivion. He who argues from this that they haveno conscious misery to forget, knows as little of human nature as ofslavery. --EDITOR. ]

Every Saturday night the slaves receive their allowance of provisions, which must last them till the next Saturday night. "Potatoe time, " asit is called, begins about the middle of July. The slave may measurefor himself, the overseer being present, half a bushel of sweetpotatoes, and heap the measure as long as they will lie on; I have, however, seen the overseer, if he think the negro is getting too many, kick the measure; and if any fall off tell him he has got his measure. No salt is furnished them to eat with their potatoes. When rice orcorn is given, they give them a little salt; sometimes half a pint ofmolasses is given, but not often. The quantity of rice, which is ofthe small, broken, unsaleable kind, is one peck. When corn is giventhem, their allowance is the same, and if they get it ground, (Mr. Swan had a mill on his plantation, ) they must give one quart forgrinding, thus reducing their weekly allowance to seven quarts. Whenfish (mullet) were plenty, they were allowed, in addition, one fish. As to meat, they seldom had any. I do not think they had an allowanceof meat oftener than once in two or three months, and then thequantity was very small. When they went into the field to work, theytook some of the meal or rice and a pot with them; the pots were givento an old woman, who placed two poles parallel, set the pots on them, and kindled a fire underneath for cooking; she took salt with her andseasoned the messes as she thought proper. When their breakfast wasready, which was generally about ten or eleven o'clock, they werecalled from labor, ate, and returned to work; in the afternoon, dinnerwas prepared in the same way. They had but two meals a day while inthe field; if they wanted more, they cooked for themselves after theyreturned to their quarters at night. At the time of killing hogs onthe plantation, the pluck, entrails, and blood were given to theslaves. 

When I first went upon Mr. Swan's plantation, I saw a slave inshackles or fetters, which were fastened around each ankle and firmlyriveted, connected together by a chain. To the middle of this chain hehad fastened a string, so as in a manner to suspend them and keep themfrom galling his ankles. This slave, whose name was Frank, was anintelligent, good looking man, and a very good mechanic. There wasnothing vicious in his character, but he was one of thosehigh-spirited and daring men, that whips, chains, fetters, and all themeans of cruelty in the power of slavery, could not subdue. Mr. S. Hademployed a Mr. Beckwith to repair a boat, and told him Frank was agood mechanic, and he might have his services. Frank was sent for, his_shackles still on_. Mr. Beckwith set him to work making _trundels_, &c. I was employed in putting up a building, and after Mr. Beckwithhad done with Frank, he was sent for to assist me. Mr. Swan sent himto a blacksmith's shop and had his shackles cut off with a coldchisel. Frank was afterwards sold to a cotton planter. 

I will relate one circumstance, which shows the little regard that ispaid to the feelings of the slave. During the time that Mr. IsaiahRogers was superintending the building of a rice machine, one of theslaves complained of a severe toothache. Swan asked Mr. Rogers to takehis hammer and _knock out the tooth_. 

There was a slave on the plantation named Ben, a waiting man. Ioccupied a room in the same hut, and had frequent conversations withhim. Ben was a kind-hearted man, and, I believe, a Christian; he wouldalways ask a blessing before he sat down to eat, and was in theconstant practice of praying morning and night. --One day when I was atthe hut, Ben was sent for to go to the house. Ben sighed deeply andwent. He soon returned with a girl about seventeen years of age, whomone of Mr. Swan's daughters had ordered him to flog. He brought herinto the room where I was, and told her to stand there while he wentinto the next room: I heard him groan again as he went. While there Iheard his voice, and he was engaged in prayer. After a few minutes hereturned with a large cowhide, and stood before the girl, withoutsaying a word. I concluded he wished me to leave the hut, which I did;and immediately after I heard the girl scream. At every blow she wouldshriek, "Do, Ben! oh do, Ben!" This is a common expression of theslaves to the person whipping them: "Do, Massa!" or, "Do, Missus!"

After she had gone, I asked Ben what she was whipped for: he told meshe had done something to displease her young missus; and in boxingher ears, and otherwise beating her, she had scratched her finger by apin in the girl's dress, for which she sent her to be flogged. I askedhim if he stripped her before flogging; he said, yes; he did not liketo do this, but was _obliged_ to: he said he was once ordered to whipa woman, which he did without stripping her: on her return to thehouse, her mistress examined her back; and not seeing any marks, hewas sent for, and asked why he had not whipped her: he replied that hehad; she said she saw no marks, and asked him if he had made her pullher clothes off; he said, No. She then told him, that when he whippedany more of the women, he must make them strip off their clothes, aswell as the men, and flog them on their bare backs, or he should beflogged himself. 

Ben often appeared very gloomy and sad: I have frequently heard him, when in his room, mourning over his condition, and exclaim, "PoorAfrican slave! Poor African slave!" Whipping was so common anoccurrence on this plantation, that it would be too great a repetitionto state the _many_ and _severe_ floggings I have seen inflicted onthe slaves. They were flogged for not performing their tasks, forbeing careless, slow, or not in time, for going to the fire to warm, &c. &c. ; and it often seemed as if occasions were sought as an excusefor punishing them. 

On one occasion, I heard the overseer charge the hands to be at acertain place the next morning at sun-rise. I was present in themorning, in company with my brother, when the hands arrived. Joe, theslave already spoken of, came running, all out of breath, about fiveminutes behind the time, when, without asking any questions, theoverseer told him to take off his jacket. Joe took off his jacket. Hehad on a piece of a shirt; he told him to take it off: Joe took itoff: he then whipped him with a heavy cowhide full six feet long. Atevery stroke Joe would spring from the ground, and scream, "O my God!Do, Massa Galloway!" My brother was so exasperated; that he turned tome and said, "If I were Joe, I would kill the overseer if I knew Ishould be shot the next minute. "

In the winter the horn blew at about four in the morning, and all thethreshers were required to be at the threshing floor in fifteenminutes after. They had to go about a quarter of a mile from theirquarters. Galloway would stand near the entrance, and all who did notcome in time would get a blow over the back or head as heavy as hecould strike. I have seen him, at such times, follow after them, striking furiously a number of blows, and every one followed by theirscreams. I have seen the women go to their work after such a flogging, crying and taking on most piteously. 

It is almost impossible to believe that human nature can endure suchhardships and sufferings as the slaves have to go through: I have seenthem driven into a ditch in a rice swamp to bail out the water, inorder to put down a flood-gate, when they had to break the ice, andthere stand in the water among the ice until it was bailed out. I have_often_ known the hands to be taken from the field, sent down theriver in flats or boats to Wilmington, absent from twenty-four tothirty hours, _without any thing to eat, _ no provision being made forthese occasions. 

Galloway kept medicine on hand, that in case any of the slaves weresick, he could give it to them without sending for the physician; buthe always kept a good look out that they did not sham sickness. Whenany of them excited his suspicions, he would make them take themedicine in his presence, and would give them a rap on the top of thehead, to make them swallow it. A man once came to him, of whom he saidhe was suspicious: he gave him two potions of salts, and fastened himin the stocks for the night. His medicine soon began to operate; and_there he lay in all his filth till he was taken out the next day. _

One day, Mr. Swan beat a slave severely, for alleged carelessness inletting a boat get adrift. The slave was told to secure the boat:whether he took sufficient means for this purpose I do not know; hewas not allowed to make any defence. Mr. Swan called him up, and askedwhy he did not secure the boat: he pulled off his hat and began totell his story. Swan told him he was a damned liar, and commencedbeating him over the head with a hickory cane, and the slave retreatedbackwards; Swan followed him about two rods, threshing him over thehead with the hickory as he went. 

As I was one day standing near some slaves who were threshing, thedriver, thinking one of the women did not use her flail quick enough, struck her over the head: the end of the whip hit her in the eye. Ithought at the time he had put it out; but, after poulticing anddoctoring for some days, she recovered. Speaking to him about it, hesaid that he once struck a slave so as to put one of her eyes entirelyout. 

A patrol is kept upon each estate, and every slave found off theplantation without a pass is whipped on the spot. I knew a slave whostarted without a pass, one night, for a neighboring plantation, tosee his wife: he was caught, tied to a tree, and flogged. He statedhis business to the patrol, who was well acquainted with him but allto no purpose. I spoke to the patrol about it afterwards: he said heknew the negro, that he was a very clever fellow, but he had to whiphim; for, if he let him pass, he must another, &c. He stated that hehad sometimes caught and flogged four in a night. 

In conversation with Mr. Swan about runaway slaves, he stated to methe following fact:--A slave, by the name of Luke, was owned inWilmington; he was sold to a speculator and carried to Georgia. Afteran absence of about two months the slave returned; he watched anopportunity to enter his old master's house when the family wereabsent, no one being at home but a young waiting man. Luke went to theroom where his master kept his arms; took his gun, with someammunition, and went into the woods. On the return of his master, thewaiting man told him what had been done: this threw him into a violentpassion; he swore he would kill Luke, or lose his own life. He loadedanother gun, took two men, and made search, but could not find him: hethen advertised him, offering a large reward if delivered to him orlodged in jail. His neighbors, however, advised him to offer a rewardof two hundred dollars for him _dead or alive_, which he did. Nothinghowever was heard of him for some months. Mr. Swan said, one of hisslaves ran away, and was gone eight or ten weeks; on his return hesaid he had found Luke, and that he had a rifle, two pistols, and asword. 

I left the plantation in the spring, and returned to the north; when Iwent out again, the next fall, I asked Mr. Swan if any thing had beenheard of Luke; he said he was _shot_, and related to me the manner ofhis death, as follows:--Luke went to one of the plantations, andentered a hut for something to eat. Being fatigued, he sat down andfell asleep. There was only a woman in the hut at the time: as soon asshe found he was asleep, she ran and told her master, who took hisrifle, and called two white men on another plantation: the three, withtheir rifles, then went to the hut, and posted themselves in differentpositions, so that they could watch the door. When Luke waked up hewent to the door to look out, and saw them with their rifles, hestepped back and raised his gun to his face. They called to him tosurrender; and stated that they had him in their power, and said hehad better give up. He said he would not: and if they tried to takehim, he would kill one of them; for, if he gave up, he knew they wouldkill him, and he was determined to sell his life as dear as he could. They told him, if he should shoot one of them, the other two wouldcertainly kill him: he replied, he was determined not to give up, andkept his gun moving from one to the other; and while his rifle wasturned toward one, another, standing in a different direction, shothim through the head, and he fell lifeless to the ground. 

There was another slave shot while I was there; this man had run away, and had been living in the woods a long time, and it was not knownwhere he was, till one day he was discovered by two men, who went onthe large island near Belvidere to hunt turkeys; they shot him andcarried his head home. 

It is common to keep dogs on the plantations, to pursue and catchrunaway slaves. I was once bitten by one of them. I went to theoverseer's house, the dog lay in the piazza, as soon as I put my footupon the floor, he sprang and bit me just above the knee, but notseverely; he tore my pantaloons badly. The overseer apologized for hisdog, saying he never knew him to bite a _white_ man before. He said heonce had a dog, when he lived on another plantation, that was veryuseful to him in hunting runaway negroes. He said that a slave on theplantation once ran away; as soon as he found the course he took, heput the dog on the track, and he soon came so close upon him that theman had to climb a tree, he followed with his gun, and brought theslave home. 

The slaves have a great dread of being sold and carried south. It isgenerally said, and I have no doubt of its truth, that they are muchworse treated farther south. 

The following are a few among the many facts related to me while Ilived among the slaveholder. The names of the planters andplantations, I shall not give, _as they did not come under my ownobservation_. I however place the fullest confidence in their truth. 

A planter not far from Mr. Swan's employed an overseer to whom he paid$400 a year; he became dissatisfied with him, because he did not drivethe slaves hard enough, and get more work out of them. He thereforesent to South Carolina, or Georgia, and got a man to whom he paid Ibelieve $800 a year. He proved to be a cruel fellow, and drove theslaves almost to death. There was a slave on this plantation, who hadrepeatedly run away, and had been severely flogged every time. Thelast time he was caught, a hole was dug in the ground, and he buriedup to the chin, his arms being secured down by his sides. He was keptin this situation four or five days. 

The following was told me by an intimate friend; it took place on aplantation containing about one hundred slaves. One day the ownerordered the women into the barn, he then went in among them, whip inhand, and told them he meant to flog them all to death; they beganimmediately to cry out "What have I done Massa? What have I doneMassa?" He replied; "D--n you, I will let you know what you have done, you don't breed, I haven't had a young one from one of you for severalmonths. " They told him they could not breed while they had to work inthe rice ditches. (The rice grounds are low and marshy, and have to bedrained, and while digging or clearing the ditches, the women had towork in mud and water from one to two feet in depth; they were obligedto draw up and secure their frocks about their waist, to keep them outof the water, in this manner they frequently had to work from daylightin the morning till it was so dark they could see no longer. ) Afterswearing and threatening for some time, he told them to tell theoverseer's wife, when they got in that way, and he would put them uponthe land to work. 

This same planter had a female slave who was a member of the MethodistChurch; for a slave she was intelligent and conscientious. He proposeda criminal intercourse with her. She would not comply. He left her andsent for the overseer, and told him to have her flogged. It was done. Not long after, he renewed his proposal. She again refused. She wasagain whipped. He then told her why she had been twice flogged, andtold her he intended to whip her till she should yield. The girl, seeing that her case was hopeless, her back smarting with thescourging she had received, and dreading a repetition, gave herself upto be the victim of his brutal lusts. 

One of the slaves on another plantation, gave birth to a child whichlived but two or three weeks. After its death the planter called thewoman to him, and asked her how she came to let the child die; said itwas all owing to her carelessness, and that he meant to flog her forit. She told, him with all the feeling of a mother, the circumstancesof its death. But her story availed her nothing against the savagebrutality of her master. She was severely whipped. A healthy childfour months old was then considered worth $100 in North Carolina. 

The foregoing facts were related to me by white persons of characterand respectability. The following fact was related to me on aplantation where I have spent considerable time and where thepunishment was inflicted. I have no doubt of its truth. A slave ranaway from his master, and got as far as Newbern. He took provisionsthat lasted him a week; but having eaten all, he went to a house toget something to satisfy his hunger. A white man suspecting him to bea runaway, demanded his pass; as he had none he was seized and put inNewbern jail. He was there advertised, his description given, &c. Hismaster saw the advertisement and sent for him; when he was broughtback, his wrists were tied together and drawn over his knees. A stickwas then passed over his arms and under his knees, and he secured inthis manner, his trowsers were then stripped down, and he turned overon his side, and severely beaten with the paddle, then turned over andseverely beaten on the other side, and then turned back again, andtortured by another bruising and beating. He was afterwards kept inthe stocks a week, and whipped every morning. 

To show the disgusting pollutions of slavery, and how it covers withmoral filth every thing it touches, I will state two or three facts, which I have on such evidence I cannot doubt their truth. A planteroffered a white man of my acquaintance twenty dollars for every one ofhis female slaves, whom he would get in the family way. This offer wasno doubt made for the purpose of improving the stock, on the sameprinciple that farmers endeavour to improve their cattle by crossingthe breed. 

Slaves belonging to merchants and others in the city, often hire theirown time, for which they pay various prices per week or month, according to the capacity of the slave. The females who thus hiretheir time, pursue various modes to procure the money; their mastersmaking no inquiry how they get it, provided the money comes. If it isnot regularly paid they are flogged. Some take in washing, some cookon board vessels, pick oakum, sell peanuts, &c. , while others, youngerand more comely, often resort to the vilest pursuits. I knew a manfrom the north who, though married to a respectable southern woman, kept two of these mulatto girls in an upper room at his store; hiswife told some of her friends that he had not lodged at home for twoweeks together, I have seen these two _kept misses_, as they are therecalled, at his store; he was afterwards stabbed in an attempt toarrest a runaway slave, and died in about ten days. 

The clergy at the north cringe beneath the corrupting influence ofslavery, and their moral courage is borne down by it. Not thehypocritical and unprincipled alone, but even such as can hardly besupposed to be destitute of sincerity. 

Going one morning to the Baptist Sunday School, in Wilmington, inwhich I was engaged, I fell in with the Rev. Thomas P. Hunt, who wasgoing to the Presbyterian school. I asked him how he could bear to seethe little negro children beating their hoops, hallooing, and runningabout the streets, as we then saw them, their moral condition entirelyneglected, while the whites were so carefully gathered into theschools. His reply was substantially this:--"I can't bear it, Mr. Caulkins. I feel as deeply as any one can on this subject, but whatcan I do? MY HANDS ARE TIED. "

Now, if Mr. Hunt was guilty of neglecting his duty, as a servant ofHIM who never failed to rebuke sin in high places, what shall be saidof those clergymen at the north, where the power that closed his mouthis comparatively unfelt, who refuse to tell their people how Godabhors oppression, and who seldom open their mouth on this subject, but to denounce the friends of emancipation, thus giving the strongestsupport to the accursed system of slavery. I believe Mr. Hunt hassince become an agent of the Temperance Society. 

In stating the foregoing facts, my object has been to show thepractical workings of the system of slavery, and if possible tocorrect the misapprehension on this subject, so common at the north. In doing this I am not at war with slave-holders. No, my soul is movedfor them as well as for the poor slaves. May God send them repentanceto the acknowledgment of the truth! Principle, on a subject of thisnature, is dearer to me than the applause of men, and should not besacrificed on any subject, even though the ties of friendship may bebroken. We have too long been silent on this subject, the slave hasbeen too much considered, by our northern states, as being kept bynecessity in his present condition. --Were we to ask, in the languageof Pilate, "what evil have they done"--we may search their history, wecannot find that they have taken up arms against our government, norinsulted us as a nation--that they are thus compelled to drag out alife in chains! subjected to the most terrible inflictions if in anyway they manifest a wish to be released. --Let us reverse the question. What evil has been done to them by those who call themselves masters?First let us look at their persons, "neither clothed nor naked"--Ihave seen instances where this phrase would not apply to boys andgirls, and that too in winter. I knew one young man seventeen years ofage, by the name of Dave, on Mr. J. Swan's plantation, worked dayafter day in the rice machine as naked as when he was born. The reasonof his being so, his master said in my hearing, was, that he could notkeep clothes on him--he would get into the fire and burn them off. 

Follow them next to their huts; some with and some without floors:--Goat night, view their means of lodging, see them lying on benches, someon the floor or ground, some sitting on stools, dozing away thenight:--others, of younger age, with a bare blanket wrapped aboutthem; and one or two lying in the ashes. These things _I have oftenseen with my own eyes. _

Examine their means of subsistence, which consists generally of sevenquarts of meal or eight quarts of small rice for one week; then followthem to their work, with driver and overseer pushing them to theutmost of their strength, by threatening and whipping. 

If they are sick from fatigue and exposure, go to their huts, as Ihave often been, and see them groaning under a burning fever orpleurisy, lying on some straw, their feet to the fire with barely ablanket to cover them; or on some boards nailed together in form of abedstead. 

And after seeing all this, and hearing them tell of their sufferings, need I ask, is there any evil connected with their condition? and ifso; upon whom is it to be charged? I answer for myself, and the readercan do the same. Our government stands first chargeable for allowingslavery to exist, under its own jurisdiction. Second, the states forenacting laws to secure their victim. Third, the slaveholder forcarrying out such enactments, in horrid form enough to chill theblood. Fourth, every person who knows what slavery is, and does notraise his voice against this crying sin, but by silence gives consentto its continuance, is chargeable with guilt in the sight of God. "Theblood of Zacharias who was slain between the temple and altar, " saysChrist, "WILL I REQUIRE OF THIS GENERATION. "

Look at the slave, his condition but little, if at all, better thanthat of the brute; chained down by the law, and the will of hismaster; and every avenue closed against relief; and the names of thosewho plead for him, cast out as evil;--must not humanity let its voicebe heard, and tell Israel their transgressions and Judah their sins?

May God look upon their afflictions, and deliver them from their crueltask-masters! I verily believe he will, if there be any efficacy inprayer. I have been to their prayer meetings and with them offeredprayer in their behalf. I have heard some of them in their huts beforeday-light praying in their simple broken language, telling theirheavenly Father of their trials in the following and similar language. 

"Fader in heaven, look upon de poor slave, dat have to work all de daylong, dat cant have de time to pray only in de night, and den massamus not know it. [2] Fader, have mercy on massa and missus. Fader, whenshall poor slave get through de world! when will death come, and depoor slave go to heaven;" and in their meetings they frequently add, "Fader, bless de white man dat come to hear de slave pray, bless hisfamily, " and so on. They uniformly begin their meetings by singing thefollowing--

"And are we yet alive To see each other's face, " &c. 

[Footnote 2: At this time there was some fear of insurrection and theslaves were forbidden to hold meetings. ]

Is the ear of the Most High deaf to the prayer of the slave? I dofirmly believe that their deliverance will come, and that the prayerof this poor afflicted people will be answered. 

Emancipation would be safe. I have had eleven winters to learn thedisposition of the slaves, and am satisfied that they would peaceablyand cheerfully work for pay. Give them education, equal and just laws, and they will become a most interesting people. Oh, let a cry beraised which shall awaken the conscience of this guilty nation, todemand for the slaves immediate and unconditional emancipation. NEHEMIAH CAULKINS. 

 * * * * *

NARRATIVE AND TESTIMONY OF REV. HORACE MOULTON. 

Mr. Moulton is an esteemed minister of the Methodist Episcopal Church, in Marlborough, Mass. He spent five years in Georgia, between 1817 and1824. The following communication has been recently received from him. 

MARLBOROUGH, MASS. , Feb. 18, 1839. 

DEAR BROTHER--

Yours of Feb. 2d, requesting me to write out a few facts on thesubject of slavery, as it exists at the south, has come to hand. Ihasten to comply with your request. Were it not, however, for theclaims of those "who are drawn unto death, " and the responsibilityresting upon me, in consequence of this request, I should forever holdmy peace. For I well know that I shall bring upon myself a flood ofpersecution, for attempting to speak out for the dumb. But I amwilling to be set at nought by men, if I can be the means of promotingthe welfare of the oppressed of our land. I shall not relate manyparticular cases of cruelty, though I might a great number; but shallgive some general information as to their mode of treatment, theirfood, clothing, dwellings, deprivations, &c. 

Let me say, in the first place, that I spent nearly five years inSavannah, Georgia, and in its vicinity, between the years 1817 and1824. My object in going to the south, was to engage in making andburning brick; but not immediately succeeding, I engaged in nobusiness of much profit until late in the winter, when I took chargeof a set of hands and went to work. During my leisure, however, I wasan observer, at the auctions, upon the plantations, and in almostevery department of business. The next year, during the cold months, Ihad several two-horse teams under my care, with which we used to haulbrick, boards, and other articles from the wharf into the city, andcotton, rice, corn, and wood from the country. This gave me anextensive acquaintance with merchants, mechanics and planters. I hadslaves under my control some portions of every year when at the south. All the brick-yards, except one, on which I was engaged, wereconnected either with a corn field, potatoe patch, rice field, cottonfield, tan-works, or with a wood lot. My business, usually, was totake charge of the brick-making department. At those jobs I havesometimes taken in charge both the field and brick-yard hands. I havebeen on the plantations in South Carolina, but have never been anoverseer of slaves in that state, as has been said in the publicpapers. 

I think the above facts and explanations are necessary to be connectedwith the account I may give of slavery, that the reader may have someknowledge of my acquaintance with _practical_ slavery: for manymechanics and merchants who go to the South, and stay there for years, know but little of the dark side of slavery. My account of slaverywill apply to _field hands_, who compose much the largest portion ofthe black population, (probably nine-tenths, ) and not to those who arekept for kitchen maids, nurses, waiters, &c. , about the houses of theplanters and public hotels, where persons from the north obtain mostof their knowledge of the evils of slavery. I will now proceed to takeup specific points. 

THE LABOR OF THE SLAVES

Males and females work together promiscuously on all the plantations. On many plantations _tasks_ are given them. The best working hands canhave some leisure time; but the feeble and unskilful ones, togetherwith slender females, have indeed a hard time of it, and very oftenanswer for non-performance of tasks at the _whipping-posts_. None whoworked with me had tasks at any time. The rule was to work them fromsun to sun. But when I was burning brick, they were obliged to taketurns, and _sit up all night_ about every other night, and work allday. On one plantation, where I spent a few weeks, the slaves werecalled up to work long before daylight, when business pressed, andworked until late at night; and sometimes some of them _all night_. Alarge portion of the slaves are owned by masters who keep them onpurpose to hire out--and they usually let them to those who will givethe highest wages for them, irrespective of their mode of treatment;and those who hire them, will of course try to get the greatestpossible amount of work performed, with the least possible expense. Women are seen bringing their infants into the field to their work, and leading others who are not old enough to stay at the cabins withsafety. When they get there, they must set them down in the dirt andgo to work. Sometimes they are left to cry until they fall asleep. Others are left at home, shut up in their huts. Now, is it notbarbarous, that the mother, with her child of children around her, half starved, must be whipped at night if she does not perform hertask? But so it is. Some who have very young ones, fix a little sack, and place the infants on their backs, and work. One reason, I presumeis, that they will not cry so much when they can hear their mother'svoice. Another is, the mothers fear that the poisonous vipers andsnakes will bite them. Truly, I never knew any place where the land isso infested with all kinds of the most venomous snakes, as in the lowlands round about Savannah. The moccasin snakes, so called, and waterrattle-snakes--the bites of both of which are as poisonous as ourupland rattlesnakes at the north, --are found in myriads about thestagnant waters and swamps of the South. The females, in order tosecure their infants from these poisonous snakes, do, as I have said, often work with their infants on their backs. Females are sometimescalled to take the hardest part of the work. On some brick yards whereI have been, the women have been selected as the _moulders_ of brick, instead of the men. 

II. THE FOOD OF THE SLAVES. 

It was a general custom, wherever I have been, for the masters to giveeach of his slaves, male and female, _one peck of corn per week_ fortheir food. This at fifty cents per bushel, which was all that it wasworth when I was there, would amount to twelve and a half cents perweek for board per head. 

It cost me upon an average, when at the south, one dollar per day forboard. The price of fourteen bushels of corn per week. This would makemy board equal in amount to the board of _forty-six slaves!_ This isall that good or bad masters allow their slaves round about Savannahon the plantations. One peck of gourd-seed corn is to be measured outto each slave once every week. One man with whom I labored, however, being desirous to get all the work out of his hands he could, before Ileft, (about fifty in number, ) bought for them every week, or twice aweek, a beef's head from market. With this, they made a soup in alarge iron kettle, around which the hands came at meal-time, anddipping out the soup, would mix it with their hommony, and eat it asthough it were a feast. This man permitted his slaves to eat twice aday while I was doing a job for him. He promised me a beaver hat andas good a suit of clothes as could be bought in the city, if I wouldaccomplish so much for him before I returned to the north; giving methe entire control over his slaves. Thus you may see the temptationsoverseers sometimes have, to get all the work they can out of the poorslaves. The above is an exception to the general rule of feeding. Forin all other places where I worked and visited; the slaves had_nothing from their masters but the corn_, or its equivalent inpotatoes or rice, and to this, they were not permitted to come but_once a day_. The custom was to blow the horn early in the morning, as a signal for the hands to rise and go to work, when commenced; theycontinued work until about eleven o'clock, A. M. , when, at the signal, all hands left off and went into their huts, made their fires, madetheir corn-meal into hommony or cake, ate it, and went to work againat the signal of the horn, and worked until night, or until theirtasks were done. Some cooked their breakfast in the field while atwork. Each slave must grind his own corn in a hand-mill after he hasdone his work at night. There is generally one hand-mill on everyplantation for the use of the slaves. 

Some of the planters have no corn, others often get out. Thesubstitute for it is, the equivalent of one peek of corn either inrice or sweet potatoes; neither of which is as good for the slaves ascorn. They complain more of being faint, when fed on rice or potatoes, than when fed on corn. I was with one man a few weeks who gave me hishands to do a job of work, and to save time one cooked for all therest. The following course was taken, --Two crotched sticks were drivendown at one end of the yard, and a small pole being laid on thecrotches, they swung a large iron kettle on the middle of the pole;then made up a fire under the kettle and boiled the hommony; whenready, the hands were called around this kettle with their woodenplates and spoons. They dipped out and ate standing around the kettle, or sitting upon the ground, as best suited their convenience. Whenthey had potatoes they took them out with their hands, and ate them. As soon as it was thought they had had sufficient time to swallowtheir food they were called to their work again. _This was the onlymeal they ate through the day. _ now think of the little, almost nakedand half starved children, nibbling upon a piece of cold Indian cake, or a potato! Think of the poor female, just ready to be confined, without any thing that can be called convenient or comfortable! Thinkof the old toil-worn father and mother, without anything to eat butthe coarsest of food, and not half enough of that! then think of_home_. When sick, their physicians are their masters and overseers, in most cases, whose skill consists in bleeding and in administeringlarge potions of Epsom salts, when the whip and _cursing_ will notstart them from their cabins. 

III. HOUSES. 

The huts of the slaves are mostly of the poorest kind. They are not asgood as those temporary shanties which are thrown up beside railroads. They are erected with posts and crotches, with but little or noframe-work about them. They have no stoves or chimneys; some of themhave something like a fireplace at one end, and a board or two off atthat side, or on the roof, to let off the smoke. Others have nothinglike a fireplace in them; in these the fire is sometimes made in themiddle of the hut. These buildings have but one apartment in them; theplaces where they pass in and out, serve both for doors and windows;the sides and roofs are covered with coarse, and in many instanceswith refuse boards. In warm weather, especially in the spring, theslaves keep up a smoke, or fire and smoke, all night, to drive awaythe gnats and musketoes, which are very troublesome in all the lowcountry of the south; so much so that the whites sleep under frameswith nets over them, knit so fine that the musketoes cannot flythrough them. 

Some of the slaves have rugs to cover them in the coldest weather, butI should think _more have not_. During driving storms they frequentlyhave to run from one hut to another for shelter. In the coldestweather, where they can get wood or stumps, they keep up fires allnight in their huts, and lay around them, with their feet towards theblaze. Men, women and children all lie down together, in mostinstances. There may be exceptions to the above statements in regardto their houses, but so far as my observations have extended, I havegiven a fair description, and I have been on a large number ofplantations in Georgia and South Carolina up and down the Savannahriver. Their huts are generally built compactly on the plantations, forming villages of huts, their size proportioned to the number ofslaves on them. In these miserable huts the poor blacks are herded atnight like swine, _without any conveniences of beadsteads, tables orchairs. _ O Misery to the full! to see the aged sire beating off theswarms of gnats and musketoes in the warm weather, and shivering inthe straw, or bending over a few coals in the winter, clothed in rags. I should think males and females, both lie down at night with theirworking clothes on them. God alone knows how much the poor slavessuffer for the want of convenient houses to secure them from thepiercing winds and howling storms of winter, almost as much in Georgiaas I do in Massachusetts. 

IV. CLOTHING. 

The masters [in Georgia] make a practice of getting two suits ofclothes for each slave per year, a thick suit for winter, and a thinone for summer. They provide also one pair of northern made sale shoesfor each slave in _winter_. These shoes usually begin to rip in a fewweeks. The negroes' mode of mending them is, to _wire_ them together, in many instances. Do our northern shoemakers know that they areaugmenting the sufferings of the poor slaves with their almost goodfor nothing sale shoes? Inasmuch as it is done unto one of those poorsufferers it is done unto our Saviour. The above practice of clothingthe slave is customary to some extent. How many, however, fail ofthis, God only knows. The children and old slaves are, I should think, _exceptions_ to the above rule. The males and females have their suitsfrom the same cloth for their winter dresses. These winter garmentsappear to be made of a mixture of cotton and wool, very coarse and_sleazy_. The whole suit for the men consists of a pair of pantaloonsand a short sailor-jacket, _without shirt, vest, hat, stockings, orany kind of loose garments!_ These, if worn steadily when at work, would not probably last more than one or two months; therefore, forthe sake of saving them, many of them work, especially in the summer, with no clothing on them except a cloth tied round their waist, and_almost all_ with nothing more on them than pantaloons, and thesefrequently so torn that they do not serve the purposes of commondecency. The women have for clothing a short petticoat, and a shortloose gown, something like the male's sailor-jacket, _without anyunder garment, stockings, bonnets, hoods, caps, or any kind ofover-clothes. _ When at work in the warm weather, they usually stripoff the loose gown, and have nothing on but a short petticoat withsome kind of covering over their breasts. Many children may be seen inthe summer months _as naked as they came into the world_. I think, asa whole, they suffer more for the want of comfortable bed clothes, than they do for wearing apparel. It is true, that some by begging orbuying have more clothes than above described, but the _mastersprovide them with no more_. They are miserable objects of pity. It maybe said of many of them, "I was _naked_ and ye clothed me not. " It isenough to melt the hardest heart to see the ragged mothers nursingtheir almost naked children, with but a morsel of the coarsest food toeat. The Southern horses and dogs have enough to eat and good caretaken of them, but Southern negroes, who can describe their misery?

V. PUNISHMENTS. 

The ordinary mode of punishing the slaves is both cruel and barbarous. The masters seldom, if ever, try to govern their slaves by moralinfluence, but by whipping, kicking, beating, starving, branding, _cat-hauling_, loading with irons, imprisoning, or by some other cruelmode of torturing. They often boast of having invented some new modeof torture, by which they have "tamed the rascals, " What is called amoderate flogging at the south is horribly cruel. Should we whip ourhorses for any offence as they whip their slaves for small offences, we should expose ourselves to the penalty of the law. The masters whipfor the smallest offences, such as not performing their tasks, beingcaught by the guard or patrol by night, or for taking any thing fromthe master's yard without leave. For these, and the like crimes, theslaves are whipped thirty-nine lashes, and sometimes seventy or ahundred, on the bare back. One slave, who was under my care, waswhipped, I think one hundred lashes, for getting a small handful ofwood from his master's yard without leave. I heard an overseerboasting to this same master that he gave one of the boys seventylashes, for not doing a job of work just as he thought it ought to bedone. The owner of the slave appeared to be pleased that the overseerhad been so faithful. The apology they make for whipping so cruellyis, that it is to frighten the rest of the gang. The masters say, thatwhat we call an ordinary flogging will not subdue the slaves; hencethe most cruel and barbarous scourgings ever witnessed by man aredaily and _hourly_ inflicted upon the naked bodies of these miserablebondmen; not by masters and negro-drivers only, but by the constablesin the common markets and jailors in their yards. 

When the slaves are whipped, either in public or private, they havetheir hands fastened by the wrists, with a rope or cord prepared forthe purpose: this being thrown over a beam, a limb of a tree, orsomething else, the culprit is drawn up and stretched by the arms ashigh as possible, without raising his feet from the ground or floor:and sometimes they are made to stand on tip-toe; then the feet aremade fast to something prepared for them. In this distorted posturethe monster flies at them, sometimes in great rage, with hisimplements of torture, and cuts on with all his might, over theshoulders, under the arms, and sometimes over the head and ears, or onparts of the body where he can inflict the greatest torment. Occasionally the whipper, especially if his victim does not beg enoughto suit him, while under the lash, will fly into a passion, utteringthe most horrid oaths; while the victim of his rage is crying, atevery stroke, "Lord have mercy! Lord have mercy!" The scenes exhibitedat the whipping post are awfully terrific and frightful to one whoseheart has not turned to stone; I never could look on but a moment. While under the lash, the bleeding victim writhes in agony, convulsedwith torture. Thirty-nine lashes on the bare back, which tear the skinat almost every stroke, is what the South calls a very _moderatepunishment!_ Many masters whip until they are tired--until the back isa gore of blood--then rest upon it: after a short cessation, get upand go at it again; and after having satiated their revenge in theblood of their victims, they sometimes _leave them tied, for hourstogether, bleeding at every wound_. --Sometimes, after being whipped, they are bathed with a brine of salt and water. Now and then a master, but more frequently a mistress who has no husband, will send them tojail a few days, giving orders to have them whipped, so many lashes, once or twice a day. Sometimes, after being whipped, some have beenshut up in a dark place and deprived of food, in order to increasetheir torments: and I have heard of some who have, in suchcircumstances, died of their wounds and starvation. 

Such scenes of horror as above described are so common in Georgia thatthey attract no attention. To threaten them with death, with breakingin their teeth or jaws, or cracking their heads, is _common talk_, when scolding at the slaves. --Those who run away from their mastersand are caught again generally fare the worst. They are generallylodged in jail, with instructions from the owner to have them cruellywhipped. Some order the constables to whip them publicly in themarket. Constables at the south are generally savage, brutal men. Theyhave become so accustomed to catching and whipping negroes, that theyare as fierce as tigers. Slaves who are absent from their yards, orplantations, after eight o'clock P. M. , and are taken by the guard inthe cities, or by the patrols in the country, are, if not called forbefore nine o'clock A. M. The next day, secured in prisons; and hardlyever escape, until their backs are torn up by the cowhide. Onplantations, the _evenings_ usually present scenes of horror. Thoseslaves against whom charges are preferred for not having performedtheir tasks, and for various faults, must, after work-hours at night, undergo their torments. I have often heard the sound of the lash, thecurses of the whipper, and the cries of the poor negro rending theair, late in the evening, and long before day-light in the morning. 

It is very common for masters to say to the overseers or drivers, "putit on to them, " "don't spare that fellow, " "give that scoundrel onehundred lashes, " &c. Whipping the women when in delicatecircumstances, as they sometimes do, without any regard to theirentreaties or the entreaties of their nearest friends, is trulybarbarous. If negroes could testify, they would tell you of instancesof women being whipped until they have miscarried at thewhipping-post. I heard of such things at the south--they areundoubtedly facts. Children are whipped unmercifully for the smallestoffences, and that before their mothers. A large proportion of theblacks have their shoulders, backs, and arms all scarred up, and not afew of them have had their heads laid open with clubs, stones, andbrick-bats, and with the butt-end of whips and canes--some have hadtheir jaws broken, others their teeth knocked in or out; while othershave had their ears cropped and the sides of their cheeks gashed out. Some of the poor creatures have lost the sight of one of their eyes bythe careless blows of the whipper, or by some other violence. 

But punishing of slaves as above described, is not the only mode oftorture. Some tie them up in a very uneasy posture, where they muststand _all night_, and they will then work them hard all day--that is, work them hard all day and torment them all night. Others punish byfastening them down on a log, or something else, and strike them onthe bare skin with a board paddle full of holes. This breaks the skin, I should presume, at every hole where it comes in contact with it. Others, when other modes of punishment will not subdue them, _cat-haul_ them--that is, take a cat by the nape of the neck and tail, or by the hind legs, and drag the claws across the back untilsatisfied. This kind of punishment poisons the flesh much worse thanthe whip, and is more dreaded by the slave. Some are branded by a hotiron, others have their flesh cut out in large gashes, to mark them. Some who are prone to run away, have iron fetters riveted around theirancles, sometimes they are put only on one foot, and are dragged onthe ground. Others have on large iron collars or yokes upon theirnecks, or clogs riveted upon their wrists or ancles. Some have bellsput upon them, hung upon a sort of frame to an iron collar. Somemasters fly into a rage at trifles and knock down their negroes withtheir fists, or with the first thing that they can get hold of. Thewhiplash-knots, or rawhide, have sometimes by a reckless strokereached round to the front of the body and cut through to the bowels. One slaveholder with whom I lived, whipped one of his slaves one day, as many, I should think, as one hundred lashes, and then turned the_butt-end_ and went to beating him over the head and ears, and truly Iwas amazed that the slave was not killed on the spot. Not a fewslaveholders whip their slaves to death, and then say that they diedunder a "moderate correction. " I wonder that ten are not killed whereone is! Were they not much hardier than the whites many more of themmust die than do. One young mulatto man, with whom I was wellacquainted, was killed by his master in his yard with _impunity_. Iboarded at the same time near the place where this glaring murder wascommitted, and knew the master well. He had a plantation, on which heenacted, almost daily, cruel barbarities, some of them, I wasinformed, more terrific, if possible, than death itself. Little noticewas taken of this murder, and it all passed off without any actionbeing taken against the murderer. The masters used to try to make mewhip their negroes. They said I could not get along with them withoutflogging them--but I found I could get along better with them bycoaxing and encouraging them than by beating and flogging them. I hadnot a heart to beat and kick about those beings; although I had notgrace in my heart the three first years I was there, yet I sympathisedwith the slaves. I never was guilty of having but one whipped, and hewas whipped but eight or nine blows. The circumstances were asfollows: Several negroes were put under my care, one spring, _who werefresh from Congo and Guinea_. I could not understand them, neithercould they me, in one word I spoke. I therefore pointed to them to goto work; all obeyed me willingly but one--he refused. I told thedriver that he must tie him up and whip him. After he had tied him, bythe help of some others, we struck him eight or nine blows, and heyielded. I told the driver not to strike him another blow. We untiedhim, and he went to work, and continued faithful all the time he waswith me. This one was not a sample, however--many of them have suchexalted views of freedom that it is hard work for the masters to whipthem into brutes, that is to subdue their noble spirits. The negroesbeing put under my care, did not prevent the masters from whippingthem when they pleased. But they never whipped much in my presence. This work was usually left until I had dismissed the hands. On theplantations, the masters chose to have the slaves whipped in thepresence of all the hands, to strike them with terror. 

VI. RUNAWAYS

Numbers of poor slaves run away from their masters; some of whomdoubtless perish in the swamps and other secret places, rather thanreturn back again to their masters; others stay away until they almostfamish with hunger, and then return home rather than die, while otherswho abscond are caught by the negro-hunters, in various ways. Sometimes the master will hire some of his most trusty negroes tosecure any stray negroes, who come on to their plantations, for manycome at night to beg food of their friends on the plantations. Theslaves assist one another usually when they can, and not be found outin it. The master can now and then, however, get some of his hands tobetray the runaways. Some obtain their living in hunting after lostslaves. The most common way is to train up young dogs to follow them. This can easily be done by obliging a slave to go out into the woods, and climb a tree, and then put the young dog on his track, and with alittle assistance he can be taught to follow him to the tree, and whenfound, of course the dog would bark at such game as a poor negro on atree. There was a man living in Savannah when I was there, who kept alarge number of dogs for no other purpose than to hunt runawaynegroes. And he always had enough of this work to do, for hundreds ofrunaways are never found, but could he get news soon after one hadfled, he was almost sure to catch him. And this fear of the dogsrestrains multitudes from running off. 

When he went out on a hunting excursion, to be gone several days, hetook several persons with him, armed generally with rifles andfollowed by the dogs. The dogs were as true to the track of a negro, if one had passed recently, as a hound is to the track of a fox whenhe has found it. When the dogs draw near to their game, the slave mustturn and fight them or climb a tree. If the latter, the dogs will stayand bark until the pursuer come. The blacks frequently deceive thedogs by crossing and recrossing the creeks. Should the hunters whohave no dogs, start a slave from his hiding place, and the slave notstop at the hunter's call, he will shoot at him, as soon as he wouldat a deer. Some masters advertise so much for a runaway slave, dead oralive. It undoubtedly gives such more satisfaction to know that theirproperty is dead, than to know that it is alive without being able toget it. Some slaves run away who never mean to be taken alive. I willmention one. He run off and was pursued by the dogs, but having aweapon with him he succeeded in killing two or three of the dogs; butwas afterwards shot. He had declared, that he never would be takenalive. The people rejoiced at the death of the slave, but lamented thedeath of the dogs, they were such ravenous hunters. Poor fellow, hefought for life and liberty like a hero; but the bullets brought himdown. A negro can hardly walk unmolested at the south. --Every coloredstranger that walks the streets is suspected of being a runaway slave, hence he must be interrogated by every negro hater whom he meets, andshould he not have a pass, he must be arrested and hurried off tojail. Some masters boast that their slaves would not be free if theycould. How little they know of their slaves! They are all sighing andgroaning for freedom. May God hasten the time!

VII. CONFINEMENT AT NIGHT. 

When the slaves have done their day's work, they must be herdedtogether like sheep in their yards, or on their plantations. They havenot as much liberty as northern men have, who are sent to jail fordebt, for they have liberty to walk a larger yard than the slaveshave. The slaves must all be at their homes precisely at eighto'clock, P. M. At this hour the drums beat in the cities, as a signalfor every slave to be in his den. In the country, the signal is givenby firing guns, or some other way by which they may know the hour whento be at home. After this hour, the guard in the cities, and patrolsin the country, being well armed, are on duty until daylight in themorning. If they catch any negroes during the night without a pass, they are immediately seized and hurried away to the guard-house, or ifin the country to some place of confinement, where they are kept untilnine o'clock, A. M. , the next day, if not called for by that time, theyare hurried off to jail, and there remain until called for by theirmaster and his jail and guard house fees paid. The guards and patrolsreceive one dollar extra for every one they can catch, who has not apass from his master, or overseer, but few masters will give theirslaves passes to be out at night unless on some special business:notwithstanding, many venture out, watching every step they take forthe guard or patrol, the consequence is, some are caught almost everynight, and some nights many are taken; some, fleeing after beinghailed by the watch, are shot down in attempting their escape, othersare crippled for life. I find I shall not be able to write out more atpresent. My ministerial duties are pressing, and if I delay this tillthe next mail, I fear it will not be in season. Your brother for thosewho are in bonds, HORACE MOULTON

 * * * * *

NARRATIVE AND TESTIMONY OF SARAH M. GRIMKÉ. 

Miss Grimké is a daughter of the late Judge Grimké, of the SupremeCourt of South Carolina, and sister of the late Hon. Thomas S. Grimké. 

As I left my native state on account of slavery, and deserted the homeof my fathers to escape the sound of the lash and the shrieks oftortured victims, I would gladly bury in oblivion the recollection ofthose scenes with which I have been familiar; but this may not, cannotbe; they come over my memory like gory spectres, and implore me withresistless power, in the name of a God of mercy, in the name of acrucified Savior, in the name of humanity; for the sake of theslaveholder, as well as the slave, to bear witness to the horrors ofthe southern prison house. I feel impelled by a sacred sense of duty, by my obligations to my country, by sympathy for the bleeding victimsof tyranny and lust, to give my testimony respecting the system ofAmerican slavery, --to detail a few facts, most of which came under my_personal observation_. And here I may premise, that the actors inthese tragedies were all men and women of the highest respectability, and of the first families in South Carolina, and, with one exception, citizens of Charleston; and that their cruelties did not in theslightest degree affect their standing in society. 

A handsome mulatto woman, about 18 or 20 years of age, whoseindependent spirit could not brook the degradation of slavery, was inthe habit of running away: for this offence she had been repeatedlysent by her master and mistress to be whipped by the keeper of theCharleston work-house. This had been done with such inhuman severity, as to lacerate her back in a most shocking manner; a finger could notbe laid between the cuts. But the love of liberty was too strong to beannihilated by torture; and, as a last resort, she was whipped atseveral different times, and kept a close prisoner. A heavy ironcollar, with three long prongs projecting from it, was placed roundher neck, and a strong and sound front tooth was extracted, to serveas a mark to describe her, in case of escape. Her sufferings at thistime were agonizing; she could lie in no position but on her back, which was sore from scourgings, as I can testify, from personalinspection, and her only place of rest was the floor, on a blanket. These outrages were committed in a family where the mistress dailyread the scriptures, and assembled her children for family worship. She was accounted, and was really, so far as almsgiving was concerned, a charitable woman, and tender hearted to the poor; and yet thissuffering slave, who was the seamstress of the family, was continuallyin her presence, sitting in her chamber to sew, or engaged in herother household work, with her lacerated and bleeding back, hermutilated mouth, and heavy iron collar, without, so far as appeared, exciting any feelings of compassion. 

A highly intelligent slave, who panted after freedom with ceaselesslongings, made many attempts to get possession of himself. For everyoffence he was punished with extreme severity. At one time he was tiedup by his hands to a tree, and whipped until his back was one gore ofblood. To this terrible infliction he was subjected at intervals forseveral weeks, and kept heavily ironed while at his work. His masterone day accused him of a fault, in the usual terms dictated by passionand arbitrary power; the man protested his innocence, but was notcredited. He again repelled the charge with honest indignation. Hismaster's temper rose almost to frenzy; and seizing a fork, he made adeadly plunge at the breast of the slave. The man being far hissuperior in strength, caught the arm, and dashed the weapon on thefloor. His master grasped at his throat, but the slave disengagedhimself, and rushed from the apartment, having made his escape, hefled to the woods; and after wandering about for many months, livingon roots and berries, and enduring every hardship, he was arrested andcommitted to jail. Here he lay for a considerable time, allowedscarcely food enough to sustain life, whipped in the most shockingmanner, and confined in a cell so loathsome, that when his mastervisited him, he said the stench was enough to knock a man down. Thefilth had never been removed from the apartment since the poorcreature had been immured in it. Although a black man, such had beenthe effect of starvation and suffering, that his master declared hehardly recognized him--his complexion was so yellow, and his hair, naturally thick and black, had become red and scanty; an infalliblesign of long continued living on bad and insufficient food. Stripes, imprisonment, and the gnawings of hunger, had broken his lofty spiritfor a season; and, to use his master's own exulting expression, he was"as humble as a dog. " After a time he made another attempt to escape, and was absent so long, that a reward was offered for him, _dead oralive_. He eluded every attempt to take him, and his master, despairing of ever getting him again, offered to pardon him if hewould return home. It is always understood that such intelligence willreach the runaway; and accordingly, at the entreaties of his wife andmother, the fugitive once more consented to return to his bitterbondage. I believe this was the last effort to obtain his liberty. Hisheart became touched with the power of the gospel; and the spiritwhich no inflictions could subdue, bowed at the cross of Jesus, andwith the language on his lips--"the cup that my father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" submitted to the yoke of the oppressor, andwore his chains in unmurmuring patience till death released him. Themaster who perpetrated these wrongs upon his slave, was one of themost influential and honored citizens of South Carolina, and to hisequals was bland, and courteous, and benevolent even to a proverb. 

A slave who had been separated from his wife, because it best suitedthe convenience of his owner, ran away. He was taken up on theplantation where his wife, to whom he was tenderly attached, thenlived. His only object in running away was to return to her--no otherfault was attributed to him. For this offence he was confined in thestocks _six weeks_, in a miserable hovel, not weather-tight. Hereceived fifty lashes weekly during that time, was allowed food barelysufficient to sustain him, and when released from confinement, was notpermitted to return to his wife. His master, although himself ahusband and a father, was unmoved by the touching appeals of theslave, who entreated that he might only remain with his wife, promising to discharge his duties faithfully; his master continuedinexorable, and he was torn from his wife and family. The owner ofthis slave was a professing Christian, in full membership with thechurch, and this circumstance occurred when he was confined to hischamber during his last illness. 

A punishment dreaded more by the slaves than whipping, unless it isunusually severe, is one which was invented by a female acquaintanceof mine in Charleston--I heard her say so with much satisfaction. Itis standing on one foot and holding the other in the hand. Afterwardsit was improved upon, and a strap was contrived to fasten around theankle and pass around the neck; so that the least weight of the footresting on the strap would choke the person. The pain occasioned bythis unnatural position was great; and when continued, as it sometimeswas, for an hour or more, produced intense agony. I heard this samewoman say, that she had the ears of her waiting maid _slit_ for somepetty theft. This she told me in the presence of the girl, who wasstanding in the room. She often had the helpless victims of hercruelty severely whipped, not scrupling herself to wield theinstrument of torture, and with her own hands inflict severechastisement. Her husband was less inhuman than his wife, but he wasoften goaded on by her to acts of great severity. In his last illnessI was sent for, and watched beside his death couch. The girl on whomhe had so often inflicted punishment, haunted his dying hours; andwhen at length the king of terrors approached, he shrieked in utteragony of spirit, "Oh, the blackness of darkness, the black imps, I cansee them all around me--take them away!" and amid such exclamations heexpired. These persons were of one of the first families inCharleston. 

A friend of mine, in whose veracity I have entire confidence, told methat about two years ago, a woman in Charleston with whom I was wellacquainted, had starved a female slave to death. She was confined in asolitary apartment, kept constantly tied, and condemned to the slowand horrible death of starvation. This woman was notoriously cruel. Tothose who have read the narrative of James Williams I need only say, that the character of young Larrimore's wife is an exact descriptionof this female tyrant, whose countenance was ever dressed in smileswhen in the presence of strangers, but whose heart was as the nethermillstone toward her slaves. 

As I was traveling in the lower country in South Carolina, a number ofyears since, my attention was suddenly arrested by an exclamation ofhorror from the coachman, who called out, "Look there, Miss Sarah, don't you see?"--I looked in the direction he pointed, and saw a humanhead stuck up on a high pole. On inquiry, I found that a runawayslave, who was outlawed, had been shot there, his head severed fromhis body, and put upon the public highway, as a terror to deter slavesfrom running away. 

On a plantation in North Carolina, where I was visiting, I happenedone day, in my rambles, to step into a negro cabin; my compassion wasinstantly called forth by the object which presented itself. A slave, whose head was white with age, was lying in one corner of the hovel;he had under his head a few filthy rags but the boards were his onlybed, it was the depth of winter, and the wind whistled through everypart of the dilapidated building--he opened his languid eyes when Ispoke, and in reply to my question, "What is the matter?" He said, "Iam dying of a cancer in my side. "--As he removed the rags whichcovered the sore, I found that it extended half round the body, andwas shockingly neglected. I inquired if he had any nurse. "No, missey, " was his answer, "but de people (the slaves) very kind to me, dey often steal time to run and see me and fetch me some ting to eat;if dey did not, I might starve. " The master and mistress of this man, who had been worn out in their service, were remarkable for theirintelligence, and their hospitality knew no bounds towards those whowere of their own grade in society: the master had for some time heldthe highest military office in North Carolina, and not long previousto the time of which I speak, was the Governor of the State. 

On a plantation in South Carolina, I witnessed a similar case ofsuffering--an aged woman suffering under an incurable disease in thesame miserably neglected situation. The "owner" of this slave wasproverbially kind to her negroes; so much so, that the planters in theneighborhood said she spoiled them, and set a bad example, which mightproduce discontent among the surrounding slaves; yet I have seen thiswoman tremble with rage, when her slaves displeased her, and heard heruse language to them which could only be expected from an inmate ofBridewell; and have known her in a gust of passion send a favoriteslave to the workhouse to be severely whipped. 

Another fact occurs to me. A young woman about eighteen, stated somecircumstances relative to her young master, which were thoughtderogatory to his character; whether true or false, I am unable tosay; she was threatened with punishment, but persisted in affirmingthat she had only spoken the truth. Finding her incorrigible, it wasconcluded to send her to the Charleston workhouse and have her whipt;she pleaded in vain for a commutation of her sentence, not so muchbecause she dreaded the actual suffering, as because her delicate mindshrunk from the shocking exposure of her person to the eyes of brutaland licentious men; she declared to me that death would be preferable;but her entreaties were vain, and as there was no means of escapingbut by running away, she resorted to it as a desperate remedy, for hertimid nature never could have braved the perils necessarilyencountered by fugitive slaves, had not her mind been thrown into astate of despair. --She was apprehended after a few weeks, by twoslave-catchers, in a deserted house, and as it was late in the eveningthey concluded to spend the night there. What inhuman treatment shereceived from them has never been revealed. They tied her with cordsto their bodies, and supposing they had secured their victim, soonfell into a deep sleep, probably rendered more profound byintoxication and fatigue; but the miserable captive slumbered not; bysome means she disengaged herself from her bonds, and again fledthrough the lone wilderness. After a few days she was discovered in awretched hut, which seemed to have been long uninhabited; she wasspeechless; a raging fever consumed her vitals, and when a physiciansaw her, he said she was dying of a disease brought on by overfatigue; her mother was permitted to visit her, but ere she reachedher, the damps of death stood upon her brow, and she had only the sadconsolation of looking on the death-struck form and convulsive agoniesof her child. 

A beloved friend in South Carolina, the wife of a slaveholder, withwhom I often mingled my tears, when helpless and hopeless we deploredtogether the horrors of slavery, related to me some years since thefollowing circumstance. 

On the plantation adjoining her husband's, there was a slave ofpre-eminent piety. His master was not a professor of religion, but thesuperior excellence of this disciple of Christ was not unmarked byhim, and I believe he was so sensible of the good influence of hispiety that he did not deprive him of the few religious privilegeswithin his reach. A planter was one day dining with the owner of thisslave, and in the course of conversation observed, that all professionof religion among slaves was mere hypocrisy. The other asserted acontrary opinion, adding, I have a slave who I believe would ratherdie than deny his Saviour. This was ridiculed, and the master urged toprove the assertion. He accordingly sent for this man of God, andperemptorily ordered him to deny his belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. The slave pleaded to be excused, constantly affirming that he wouldrather die than deny the Redeemer, whose blood was shed for him. Hismaster, after vainly trying to induce obedience by threats, had himterribly whipped. The fortitude of the sufferer was not to be shaken;he nobly rejected the offer of exemption from further chastisement atthe expense of destroying his soul, and this blessed martyr _died inconsequence of this severe infliction_. Oh, how bright a gem will thisvictim of irresponsible power be, in that crown which sparkles on theRedeemer's brow; and that many such will cluster there, I have not theshadow of a doubt. 

SARAH M. GRIMKÉ. _Fort Lee, Bergen County, New Jersey, 3rd Month, 26th_, 1830. 

TESTIMONY OF THE LATE REV. JOHN GRAHAM of Townsend, Mass. , who residedin S. Carolina, from 1831, to the latter part of 1833. Mr. Grahamgraduated at Amherst College in 1829, spent some time at theTheological Seminary, in New Haven, Ct. , and went to South Carolina, for his health in 1830. He resided principally on the island of St. Helena, S. C. , and most of the time in the family of James Tripp, Esq. , a wealthy slave holding planter. During his residence at St. Helena, he was engaged as an instructer, and was most of the time the statedpreacher on the island. Mr. G. Was extensively known in Massachusetts;and his fellow students and instructers, at Amherst College, and atYale Theological Seminary, can bear testimony to his integrity andmoral worth. The following are extracts of letters, which he wrotewhile in South Carolina, to an intimate friend in Concord, Massachusetts, who has kindly furnished them for publication. 

EXTRACTS. 

_Springfield, St. Helena Isl. , S. C. , Oct. 22, 1832. _

"Last night, about one o'clock, I was awakened by the report of amusket. I was out of bed almost instantly. On opening my window, Ifound the report proceeded from my host's chamber. He had let off hispistol, which he usually keeps by him night and day, at a slave, whohad come into the yard, and as it appears, had been with one of hishouse servants. He did not hit him. The ball, taken from a pine treethe next morning, I will show you, should I be spared by Providenceever to return to you. The house servant was called to the master'schamber, where he received 75 lashes, very severe too; and I could notonly hear every lash, but each groan which succeeded very distinctlyas I lay in my bed. What was then done with the servant I know not. Nothing was said of this to me in the morning and I presume it willever be kept from me with care, if I may judge of kindred acts. Ishall make no comment. "

In the same letter, Mr. Graham says:--

"You ask me of my hostess"--then after giving an idea of her charactersays: "To day, she has I verily believe laid, in a very severe mannertoo, more than 300 _stripes_, upon the house servants, " (17 innumber. )

_Darlington, Court Moons. S. C. March, 28th, 1838. _

"I walked up to the Court House to day, where I heard one of the mostinteresting cases I ever heard. I say interesting, on account of itsnovelty to me, though it had no novelty for the people, as such casesare of frequent occurrence. The case was this: To know whether twoladies, present in court, were _white_ or _black_. The ladies weredressed well, seemed modest, and were retiring and neat in their look, having blue eyes, black hair, and appeared to understand much of theetiquette of southern behaviour. 

"A man, more avaricious than humane, as is the case with most of therich planters, laid a remote claim to those two modest, unassuming, innocent and free young ladies as his property, with the design ofputting them into the field, and thus increasing his STOCK! As well asthe people of Concord are known to be of a peaceful disposition, andfor their love of good order, I verily believe if a similar trialshould be brought forward there and conducted as this was, the goodpeople would drive the lawyers out of the house. Such would be theirindignation at their language, and at the mean under-handed manner oftrying to ruin those young ladies, as to their standing in society inthis district, if they could not succeed in dooming them for life tothe degraded condition of slavery, and all its intolerable cruelties. Oh slavery! if statues of marble could curse you, they would speak. Ifbricks could speak, they would all surely thunder out their anathemasagainst you, accursed thing! How many white sons and daughters havebled and groaned under the lash in this sultry climate, " &c. 

Under date of March, 1832, Mr. G. Writes, "I have been doing what Ihope never to be called to do again, and what I fear I have badlydone, though performed to the best of my ability, namely, sewing up avery bad wound made by a wild hog. The slave was hunting wild hogs, when one, being closely pursued, turned upon his pursuer, who turningto run, was caught by the animal, thrown down, and badly wounded inthe thigh. The wound is about five inches long and very deep. It wasmade by the tusk of the animal. The slaves brought him to one of thehuts on Mr. Tripp's plantation and made every exertion to stop theblood by filling the wound with ashes, (their remedy for stoppingblood) but finding this to fail they came to me (there being no otherwhite person on the plantation, as it is now holidays) to know if Icould stop the blood. I went and found that the poor creature mustbleed to death unless it could be stopped soon. I called for a needleand succeeded in sewing it up as well as I could, and in stopping theblood. In a short time his master, who had been sent for came; andoh, you would have shuddered if you had heard the awful oaths thatfell from his lips, threatening in the same breath "_to pay him forthat_!" I left him as soon as decency would permit, with his heartythanks that I had saved him $500! Oh, may heaven protect the poor, suffering, fainting slave, and show his master his wanton cruelty--ohslavery! slavery!"

Under date of July, 1832, Mr. G. Writes, "I wish you could have beenat the breakfast table with me this morning to have seen and heardwhat I saw and heard, not that I wish your ear and heart and soulpained as mine is, with every day's observation 'of wrong and outrage'with which this place is filled, but that you might have auricular andocular evidence of the cruelty of slavery, of cruelties that mortallanguage can never describe--that you might see the tender mercies ofa hardened slaveholder, one who bears the name of being _one of themildest and most merciful masters of which this island can boast_. Oh, my friend, another is screaming under the lash, in the shed-room, butfor what I know not. The scene this morning was truly distressing tome. It was this:--_After the blessing was asked_ at the breakfasttable, one of the servants, a woman grown, in giving one of thechildren some molasses, happened to pour out a little more than usual, though not more than the child usually eats. Her master was angry atthe petty and indifferent mistake, or slip of the hand. He rose fromthe table, took both of her hands in one of his, and with the otherbegan to beat her, first on one side of her head and then on theother, and repeating this, till, as he said on sitting down at table, it hurt his hand too much to continue it longer. He then took off his_shoe_, and with the heel began in the same manner as with his hand, till the poor creature could no longer endure it without screeches andraising her elbow as it is natural to ward off the blows. He thencalled a great overgrown negro _to hold her hands behind her_ while heshould wreak his vengeance upon the poor servant. In this position hebegan again to beat the poor suffering wretch. It now becameintolerable to bear; she _fell, screaming to me for help_. After shefell, he beat her until I thought she would have died in his hands. She got up, however, went out and washed off the blood and came inbefore we rose from table, one of the most pitiable objects I ever sawtill I came to the South. Her ears were almost as thick as my hand, her eyes awfully blood-shotten, her lips, nose, cheeks, chin, andwhole head swollen so that no one would have known it was Etta--andfor all this, she had to turn round as she was going out and _thankher master!_ Now, all this was done while I was sitting at breakfastwith the rest of the family. Think you not I wished myself sittingwith the peaceful and happy circle around your table? Think of myfeelings, but pity the poor negro slave, who not only fans his cruelmaster when he eats and sleeps, but bears the stripes his caprice mayinflict. Think of this, and let heaven hear your prayers. "

In a letter dated St. Helena Island, S. C. , Dec. 3, 1832, Mr. G. Writes, "If a slave here complains to his master, that his task is toogreat, his master at once calls him a scoundrel and tells him it isonly because he has not enough to do, and orders the driver toincrease his task, however unable he may be for the performance of it. I saw TWENTY-SEVEN _whipped at one time_ just because they did not domore, when the poor creatures were so tired that they could scarcelydrag one foot after the other. "

TESTIMONY OF MR. WILLIAM POE

Mr. Poe is a native of Richmond, Virginia, and was formerly aslaveholder. He was for several years a merchant in Richmond, andsubsequently in Lynchburg, Virginia. A few years since, he emancipatedhis slaves, and removed to Hamilton County, Ohio, near Cincinnati;where he is a highly respected ruling elder in the Presbyterianchurch. He says, --

"I am pained exceedingly, and nothing but my duty to God, to theoppressors, and to the poor down-trodden slaves, who go mourning alltheir days, could move me to say a word. I will state to you a _few_cases of the abuse of the slaves, but time would fail, if I hadlanguage to tell how many and great are the inflictions of slavery, even in its mildest form. 

Benjamin James Harris, a wealthy tobacconist of Richmond, Virginia, whipped a slave girl fifteen years old to death. While he was whippingher, his wife heated a smoothing iron, put it on her body in variousplaces, and burned her severely. The verdict of the coroner's inquestwas, "Died of excessive whipping. " He was tried in Richmond, andacquitted. I attended the trial. Some years after, this same Harriswhipped another slave to death. The man had not done so much work aswas required of him. After a number of protracted and violentscourgings, with short intervals between, the slave died under thelash. Harris was tried, and again acquitted, because none but blackssaw it done. The same man afterwards whipped another slave severely, for not doing work to please him. After repeated and severe floggingsin quick succession, for the same cause, the slave, in despair ofpleasing him, cut off his own hand. Harris soon after became abankrupt, went to New Orleans to recruit his finances, failed, removedto Kentucky, became a maniac, and died. 

A captain in the United States' Navy, who married a daughter of thecollector of the port of Richmond, and resided there, became offendedwith his negro boy, took him into the meat house, put him upon astool, crossed his hands before him, tied a rope to them, threw itover a joist in the building, drew the boy up so that he could juststand on the stool with his toes, and kept him in that position, flogging him severely at intervals, until the boy became so exhaustedthat he reeled off the stool, and swung by his hands until he died. The master was tried and acquitted. 

In Goochland County, Virginia, an overseer tied a slave to a tree, flogged him again and again with great severity, then piled brusharound him, set it on fire, and burned him to death. The overseer wastried and imprisoned. The whole transaction may be found on therecords of the court. 

In traveling, one day, from Petersburg to Richmond, Virginia, I heardcries of distress at a distance, on the road. I rode up, and found twowhite men, beating a slave. One of them had hold of a rope, which waspassed under the bottom of a fence; the other end was fastened aroundthe neck of the slave, who was thrown flat on the ground, on his face, with his back bared. The other was beating him furiously with a largehickory. 

A slaveholder in Henrico County, Virginia, had a slave who usedfrequently to work for my father. One morning he came into the fieldwith his back completely _cut up_, and mangled from his head to hisheels. The man was so stiff and sore he could scarcely walk. This sameperson got offended with another of his slaves, knocked him down, andstruck out one of his eyes with a maul. The eyes of several of hisslaves were injured by similar violence. 

In Richmond, Virginia, a company occupied as a dwelling a largewarehouse. They got angry with a negro lad, one of their slaves, tookhim into the cellar, tied his hands with a rope, bored a hole thoughthe floor, and passed the rope up through it. Some of the family drewup the boy, while others whipped. This they continued until the boydied. The warehouse was owned by a Mr. Whitlock, on the scite of oneformerly owned by a Mr. Philpot. 

Joseph Chilton, a resident of Campbell County, Virginia, purchased aquart of tanners' oil, for the purpose, as he said, of putting it onone of his negro's heads, that he had sometime previous pitched ortarred over, for running away. 

In the town of Lynchburg, Virginia, there was a negro man put inprison, charged with having pillaged some packages of goods, which he, as head man of a boat, received at Richmond, to be delivered atLynchburg. The goods belonged to A. B. Nichols, of Liberty, BedfordCounty, Virginia. He came to Lynchburg, and desired the jailor topermit him to whip the negro, to make him confess, as there was _noproof against him_. Mr. Williams, (I think that is his name, ) a piousMethodist man, a great stickler for law and good order, professedly agreat friend to the black man, delivered the negro into the hands ofNichols. Nichols told me that he took the slave, tied his wriststogether, then drew his arms down so far below his knees as to permita staff to pass above the arms under the knees, thereby placing theslave in a situation that he could not move hand or foot. He thencommenced his bloody work, and continued, at intervals, until 500blows were inflicted. I received this statement from Nichols himself, who was, by the way, a _son of the land of "steady habits_, " wherethere are many like him, if we may judge from their writings, sayings, and doings. "

PRIVATIONS OF THE SLAVES. 

I. FOOD. 

We begin with the _food_ of the slaves, because if they are illtreated in this respect we may be sure that they will be ill treatedin other respects, and generally in a greater degree. For a manhabitually to stint his dependents in their food, is the extreme ofmeanness and cruelty, and the greatest evidence he can give of utterindifference to their comfort. The father who stints his children ordomestics, or the master his apprentices, or the employer hislaborers, or the officer his soldiers, or the captain his crew, whenable to furnish them with sufficient food, is every where looked uponas unfeeling and cruel. All mankind agree to call such a characterinhuman. If any thing can move a hard heart, it is the appeal ofhunger. The Arab robber whose whole life is a prowl for plunder, willfreely divide his camel's milk with the hungry stranger who halts athis tent door, though he may have just waylaid him and stripped him ofhis money. Even savages take pity on hunger. Who ever went famishingfrom an Indian's wigwam? As much as hunger craves, is the Indian'sfree gift even to an enemy. The necessity for food is such a universalwant, so constant, manifest and imperative, that the heart is moretouched with pity by the plea of hunger, and more ready to supply thatwant than any other. He who can habitually inflict on others the painof hunger by giving them insufficient food, can habitually inflict onthem any other pain. He can kick and cuff and flog and brand them, putthem in irons or the stocks, can overwork them, deprive them of sleep, lacerate their backs, make them work without clothing, and sleepwithout covering. 

Other cruelties may be perpetrated in hot blood and the acts regrettedas soon as done--the feeling that prompts them is not a permanentstate of mind, but a violent impulse stung up by sudden provocation. But he who habitually withholds from his dependents sufficientsustenance, can plead no such palliation. The fact itself shows, thathis permanent state of mind toward them is a brutal indifference totheir wants and sufferings--A state of mind which will naturally, necessarily, show itself in innumerable privations and inflictionsupon them, when it can be done with impunity. 

If, therefore, we find upon examination, that the slaveholders do notfurnish their slaves with sufficient food, and do thus habituallyinflict upon them the pain of hunger, we have a clue furnished totheir treatment in other respects, and may fairly infer habitual andsevere privations and inflictions; not merely from the fact that menare quick to feel for those who suffer from hunger, and perhaps moreready to relieve that want than any other; but also, because it ismore for the interest of the slaveholder to supply that want than anyother; consequently, if the slave suffer in this respect, he must asthe general rule, suffer _more_ in other respects. 

We now proceed to show that the slaves have insufficient food. Thiswill be shown first from the express declarations of slaveholders, andother competent witnesses who are, or have been residents of slavestates, that the slaves generally are _under-fed. _ And then, by thelaws of slave states, and by the testimony of slaveholders and others, the _kind, quantity_, and _quality, _ of their allowance will be given, and the reader left to judge for himself whether the slave _must_ notbe a sufferer. 

THE SLAVES SUFFER FROM HUNGER--DECLARATIONS OF SLAVE-HOLDERS ANDOTHERS

Hon. Alexander Smyth, a slave holder, and for ten years, Member ofCongress from Virginia, in his speech on the Missouri question. Jan28th, 1820. 

"By confining the slaves to the Southern states, where crops areraised for exportation, and bread and meat are purchased, you _doomthem to scarcity and hunger. _ It is proposed to hem in the blackswhere they are ILL FED. "

Rev. George Whitefield, in his letter, to the slave holders of Md. Va. N. C. S. C. And Ga. Published in Georgia, just one hundred years ago, 1739. 

"My blood has frequently run cold within me, to think how many of yourslaves _have not sufficient food to eat;_ they are scarcely permittedto _pick up the crumbs, _ that fall from their master's table. "

Rev. John Rankin, of Ripley, Ohio, a native of Tennessee, and for sameyears a preacher in slave states. 

"Thousands of the slaves are pressed with the gnawings of cruel hungerduring their whole lives. "

Report of the Gradual Emancipation Society, of North Carolina, 1826. Signed Moses Swain, President, and William Swain, Secretary. 

Speaking of the condition of slaves, in the eastern part of thatstate, the report says, --"The master puts the unfortunate wretchesupon short allowances, scarcely sufficient for their sustenance, sothat a _great part_ of them go _half starved_ much of the time. "

Mr. Asa A. Stone, a Theological Student, who resided near Natchez, Miss. , in 1834-5. 

"On almost every plantation, the hands suffer more or less from hungerat some seasons of almost every year. There is always a _good deal ofsuffering_ from hunger. On many plantations, and particularly inLouisiana, the slaves are in a condition of _almost utter famishment, _during a great portion of the year. "

Thomas Clay, Esq. , of Georgia, a Slaveholder. 

"From various causes this [the slave's allowance of food] is _often_not adequate to the support of a laboring man. "

Mr. Tobias Boudinot, St Albans, Ohio, a member of the MethodistChurch. Mr. B. For some years navigated the Mississippi. 

"The slaves down the Mississippi, are _half-starved, _ the boats, whenthey stop at night, are constantly boarded by slaves, begging forsomething to eat. "

President Edwards, the younger, in a sermon before the Conn. AbolitionSociety, 1791. 

"The slaves are supplied with barely enough to keep them from_starving. _"

Rev. Horace Moulton, a Methodist Clergyman of Marlboro' Mass. , wholived five years in Georgia. 

"As a general thing on the plantations, the slaves suffer extremelyfor the want of food. "

Rev. George Bourne, late editor of the Protestant Vindicator, N. Y. , who was seven years pastor of a church in Virginia. 

"The slaves are deprived of _needful_ sustenance. "

2. KINDS OF FOOD. 

Hon. Robert Turnbull, a slaveholder of Charleston, South Carolina. 

"The subsistence of the slaves consists, from March until August, ofcorn ground into grits, or meal, made into what is called _hominy_, orbaked into corn bread. The other six months, they are fed upon thesweet potatoe. Meat, when given, is only by way of _indulgence orfavor. _"

Mr. Eleazar Powell, Chippewa, Beaver Co. , Penn. , who resided inMississippi, in 1836-7. 

"The food of the slaves was generally corn bread, and _sometimes_ meator molasses. "

Reuben G. Macy, a member of the Society of Friends, Hudson, N. Y. , whoresided in South Carolina. 

"The slaves had no food allowed them besides _corn, _ excepting atChristmas, when they had beef. "

Mr. William Leftwich, a native of Virginia, and recently of MadisonCo. , Alabama, now member, of the Presbyterian Church, Delhi, Ohio. 

"On my uncle's plantation, the food of the slaves, was corn-pone and asmall allowance of meat. "

WILLIAM LADD, Esq. , of Minot, Me. , president of the American PeaceSociety, and formerly a slaveholder of Florida, gives the followingtestimony as to the allowance of food to slaves. 

"The usual food of the slaves was _corn_, with a modicum of salt. Insome cases the master allowed no salt, but the slaves boiled the seawater for salt in their little pots. For about eight days nearChristmas, i. E. , from the Saturday evening before, to the Sundayevening after Christmas day, they were allowed some _meat_. Theyalways with one single exception ground their corn in a hand-mill, andcooked their food themselves. "

Extract of a letter from Rev. D. C. EASTMAN, a preacher of theMethodist Episcopal church, in Fayette county, Ohio. 

"In March, 1838, Mr. Thomas Larrimer, a deacon of the Presbyterianchurch in Bloomingbury, Fayette county, Ohio, Mr. G. S. Fullerton, merchant, and member of the same church, and Mr. William A. Ustick, anelder of the same church, spent a night with a Mr. Shepherd, about 30miles North of Charleston, S. C. , on the Monk's corner road. He ownedfive families of negroes, who, he said, were fed from the same mealand meat tubs as himself, but that 90 out of a 100 of all the slavesin that county _saw meat but once a year_, which was on Christmasholidays. "

As an illustration of the inhuman experiments sometimes tried uponslaves, in respect to the _kind_ as well as the quality and quantityof their food, we solicit the attention of the reader to the testimonyof the late General Wade Hampton, of South Carolina. General Hamptonwas for some time commander in chief of the army on the Canadafrontier during the last war, and at the time of his death, aboutthree years since, was the largest slaveholder in the United States. The General's testimony is contained in the following extract of aletter, just received from a distinguished clergyman in the west, extensively known both as a preacher and a writer. His name is withthe executive committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society. 

"You refer in your letter to a statement made to you while in thisplace, respecting the late General Wade Hampton, of South Carolina, and task me to write out for you the circumstances of thecase--considering them well calculated to illustrate two points in thehistory of slavery: 1st, That the habit of slaveholding dreadfullyblunts the feelings toward the slave, producing such insensibilitythat his sufferings and death are regarded with indifference. 2d, Thatthe slave often has insufficient food, both in quantity and quality. 

"I received my information from a lady in the west of highrespectability and great moral worth, --but think it best to withholdher name, although the statement was not made in confidence. 

"My informant stated that she sat at dinner once in company withGeneral Wade Hampton, and several others; that the conversation turnedupon the treatment of their servants, &c. ; when the General undertookto entertain the company with the relation of an experiment he hadmade in the feeding of his slaves on cotton seed. He said that hefirst mingled one-fourth cotton seed with three-fourths corn, on whichthey seemed to thrive tolerably well; that he then had measured out tothem equal quantities of each, which did not seem to produce anyimportant change; afterwards he increased the quantity of cotton seedto three-fourths, mingled with one-fourth corn, and then he declared, with an oath, that 'they died like rotten sheep!!' It is but justiceto the lady to state that she spoke of his conduct with the utmostindignation; and she mentioned also that he received no countenancefrom the company present, but that all seemed to look at each otherwith astonishment. I give it to you just as I received it from one whowas present, and whose character for veracity is unquestionable. 

"It is proper to add that I had previously formed an acquaintance withDr. Witherspoon, now of Alabama, if alive; whose former residence wasin South Carolina; from whom I received a particular account of themanner of feeding and treating slaves on the plantations of GeneralWade Hampton, and others in the same part of the State; and certainlyno one could listen to the recital without concluding that suchmasters and overseers as he described must have hearts like the nethermillstone. The cotton seed experiment I had heard of before also, ashaving been made in other parts of the south; consequently, I wasprepared to receive as true the above statement, even if I had notbeen so well acquainted with the high character of my informant. "

2. QUANTITY OF FOOD

The legal allowance of food for slaves in North Carolina, is in thewords of the law, "a quart of corn per day. " See Haywood's Manual, 525. The legal allowance in Louisiana is more, a barrel [flour barrel]of corn, (in the ear, ) or its equivalent in other grain, and a pint ofsalt a month. In the other slave states the amount of food for theslaves is left to the option of the master. 

Thos. Clay, Esq. , of Georgia, a slave holder, in his address beforethe Georgia Presbytery, 1833. 

"The quantity allowed by custom is _a peck of corn a week_!"

The Maryland Journal, and Baltimore Advertiser, May 30, 1788. 

"_A single peck of corn a week, or the like measure of rice_, is the_ordinary_ quantity of provision for a _hard-working_ slave; to whicha small quantity of meat is occasionally, though _rarely_, added. "

W. C. Gildersleeve, Esq. , a native of Georgia, and Elder in thePresbyterian Church, Wilksbarre, Penn. 

"The weekly allowance to grown slaves on this plantation, where I wasbest acquainted, was _one peck of corn_. "

Wm. Ladd, of Minot, Maine, formerly a slaveholder in Florida. 

"The usual allowance of food was _one quart of corn a day_, to a fulltask hand, with a modicum of salt; kind masters allowed _a peck ofcorn a week_; some masters allowed no salt. "

Mr. Jarvis Brewster, in his "Exposition of the treatment of slaves inthe Southern States, " published in N. Jersey, 1815. 

"The allowance of provisions for the slaves, is _one peck of corn, inthe grain, per week_. "

Rev. Horace Moulton, a Methodist Clergyman of Marlboro, Mass. , wholived five years in Georgia. 

"In Georgia the planters give each slave only _one peck of their gourdseed corn per week_, with a small quantity of salt. "

Mr. F. C. Macy, Nantucket, Mass. , who resided in Georgia in 1820. 

"The food of the slaves was three pecks of potatos a week during thepotato season, and _one peck of corn_, during the remainder of theyear. "

Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins, a member of the Baptist Church in Waterford, Conn. , who resided in North Carolina, eleven winters. 

"The subsistence of the slaves, consists of _seven quarts of meal_ or_eight quarts of small rice for one week!_"

William Savery, late of Philadelphia, an eminent Minister of theSociety of Friends, who travelled extensively in the slave states, ona Religious Visitation, speaking of the subsistence of the slaves, says, in his published Journal, "_A peck of corn_ is their (the slaves, ) miserable subsistence _for aweek_. "

The late John Parrish, of Philadelphia, another highly respectedMinister of the Society of Friends, who traversed the South, on asimilar mission, in 1804 and 5, says in his "Remarks on the slavery ofBlacks;"

"They allow them but _one peck of meal_, for a whole week, in some ofthe Southern states. "

Richard Macy, Hudson, N. Y. A Member of the Society of Friends, who hasresided in Georgia. 

"Their usual allowance of food was one peck of corn per week, whichwas dealt out to them every first day of the week. They had nothingallowed them besides the corn, except one quarter of beef atChristmas. "

Rev. C. S. Renshaw, of Quincy, Ill. , (the testimony of a Virginian). 

"The slaves are generally allowanced: a pint of corn meal and a saltherring is the allowance, or in lieu of the herring a "dab" of fatmeat of about the same value. I have known the sour milk, and clauberto be served out to the hands, when there was an abundance of milk onthe plantation. This is a luxury not often afforded. "

Testimony of Mr. George W. Westgate, member of the CongregationalChurch, of Quincy, Illinois. Mr. W. Has been engaged in the lowcountry trade for twelve years, more than half of each year, principally on the Mississippi, and its tributary streams in thesouth-western slave states. 

"_Feeding is not sufficient_, --let facts speak. On the coast, i. E. Natchez and the Gulf of Mexico, the allowance was one barrel of earsof corn, and a pint of salt per month. They may cook this in whatmanner they please, but it must be done after dark; they have no daylight to prepare it by. Some few planters, but only a few, let themprepare their corn on Saturday afternoon. Planters, overseers, andnegroes, have told me, that in _pinching times_, i. E. When corn ishigh, they did not get near that quantity. In Miss. , I know someplanters who allowed their hands three and a half pounds of meat perweek, when it was cheap. Many prepare their corn on the Sabbath, whenthey are not worked on that day, which however is frequently the caseon sugar plantations. There are very many masters on "the coast" whowill not suffer their slaves to come to the boats, because they stealmolasses to barter for meat; indeed they generally trade more or lesswith stolen property. But it is impossible to find out what and when, as their articles of barter are of such trifling importance. Theywould often come on board our boats to beg a bone, and would tell howbadly they were fed, that they were almost starved; many a time I haveset up all night, to prevent them from stealing something to eat. "

3. QUALITY OF FOOD. 

Having ascertained the kind and quantity of food allowed to theslaves, it is important to know something of its _quality_, that wemay judge of the amount of sustenance which it contains. For, if theirprovisions are of an inferior quality, or in a damaged state, theirpower to sustain labor must be greatly diminished. 

Thomas Clay, Esq. Of Georgia, from an address to the GeorgiaPresbytery, 1834, speaking of the quality of the corn given to theslaves, says, "There is _often a defect here_. "

Rev. Horace Moulton, a Methodist clergyman at Marlboro, Mass. Andfive years a resident of Georgia. 

"The food, or 'feed' of slaves is generally of the _poorest_ kind. "

The "Western Medical Reformer, " in an article on the diseases peculiarto negroes, by a Kentucky physician, says of the diet of the slaves;

"They live on a coarse, _crude, unwholesome diet_. "

Professor A. G. Smith, of the New York Medical College; formerly aphysician in Louisville, Kentucky. 

I have myself known numerous instances of large families of _badlyfed_ negroes swept off by a prevailing epidemic; and it is well knownto many intelligent planters in the south, that the best method ofpreventing that horrible malady, _Chachexia Africana_, is to feed thenegroes with _nutritious_ food. 

4. NUMBER AND TIME OF MEALS EACH DAY. 

In determining whether or not the slaves suffer for want of food, thenumber of hours intervening, and the labor performed between theirmeals, and the number of meals each day, should be taken intoconsideration. 

Philemon Bliss, Esq. , a lawyer in Elyria, Ohio, and member of thePresbyterian church, who lived in Florida, in 1834, and 1835. 

"The slaves go to the field in the morning; they carry with them cornmeal wet with water, and at _noon_ build a fire on the ground and bakeit in the ashes. After the labors of the day are over, they take their_second_ meal of ash-cake. "

President Edwards, the younger. 

"The slaves eat _twice_ during the day. "

Mr. Eleazar Powell, Chippewa, Beaver county, Penn. , who resided inMississippi in 1836 and 1837. 

"The slaves received _two_ meals during the day. Those who have theirfood cooked for them get their breakfast about eleven o'clock, andtheir other meal _after night_. "

Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins, Waterford, Conn. , who spent eleven winters inNorth Carolina. 

"The _breakfast_ of the slaves was generally about _ten or eleven_o'clock. "

Rev. Phineas Smith, Centreville, N. Y. , who has lived at the south someyears. 

"The slaves have usually _two_ meals a day, viz: at eleven o'clockand at night. "

Rev. C. S. Renshaw, Quincy, Illinois--the testimony of a Virginian. 

"The slaves have _two_ meals a day. They breakfast at from ten toeleven, A. M. , and eat their supper at from six to nine or ten atnight, as the season and crops may be. "

The preceding testimony establishes the following points. 

1st. That the slaves are allowed, in general, _no meat_. This appearsfrom the fact, that in the _only_ slave states which regulate theslaves' rations _by law_, (North Carolina and Louisiana, ) the _legalration_ contains _no meat_. Besides, the late Hon. R. J. Turnbull, oneof the largest planters in South Carolina, says expressly, "meat, whengiven, is only by the way of indulgence or favor. " It is shown also bythe direct testimony recorded above, of slaveholders and others, inall parts of the slaveholding south and west, that the generalallowance on plantations is corn or meal and salt merely. To thisthere are doubtless many exceptions, but they are _only_ exceptions;the number of slaveholders who furnish meat for their _field-hands_, is small, in comparison with the number of those who do not. Thehouse slaves, that is, the cooks, chambermaids, waiters, &c. , generally get some meat every day; the remainder bits and bones oftheir masters' tables. But that the great body of the slaves, thosethat compose the field gangs, whose labor and exposure, and consequentexhaustion, are vastly greater than those of house slaves, toiling asthey do from day light till dark, in the fogs of the early morning, under the scorchings of mid-day, and amid the damps of evening, are_in general_ provided with _no meat_, is abundantly established by thepreceding testimony. 

Now we do not say that meat _is necessary_ to sustain men under hardand long continued labor, nor that it is _not_. This is not a treatiseon dietetics; but it is a notorious fact, that the medical faculty inthis country, with very few exceptions, do most strenuously insistthat it is necessary; and that working men in all parts of the countrydo _believe_ that meat is indispensable to sustain them, even thosewho work within doors, and only ten hours a day, every one knows. Further, it is notorious, that the slaveholders themselves _believe_the daily use of meat to be absolutely necessary to the comfort, notmerely of those who labor, but of those who are idle, as is proved bythe fact of meat being a part of the daily ration of food provided forconvicts in the prisons, in every one of the slave states, except inthose rare cases where meat is expressly prohibited, and the convictis, by _way of extra punishment_ confined to bread and water; he isoccasionally, and for a little time only, confined to bread and water;that is, to the _ordinary diet_ of slaves, with this difference infavor of the convict, his bread is made for him, whereas the slave isforced to pound or grind his own corn and make his own bread, whenexhausted with toil. 

The preceding testimony shows also, that _vegetables_ form generallyno part of the slaves' allowance. The _sole_ food of the majority is_corn_: at every meal--from day to day--from week to week--from monthto month, _corn_. In South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, the sweetpotato is, to a considerable extent, substituted for corn during apart of the year. 

2d. The preceding testimony proves conclusively, that the _quantity offood_ generally allowed to a full-grown field-hand, is a peck of corna week, or a fraction over a quart and a gill of corn a day. The legalration of North Carolina is _less_--in Louisiana it is _more_. Of theslaveholders and other witnesses, who give the fore-going testimony, the reader will perceive that no one testifies to a larger allowanceof corn than a peck for a week; though a number testify, that withinthe circle of their knowledge, _seven_ quarts was the usual allowance. Frequently a small quantity of meat is added; but this, as has alreadybeen shown, is not the general rule for _field-hands_. We may add, also, that in the season of "pumpkins, " "cimblins, " "cabbages, ""greens, " &c. , the slaves on small plantations are, to some extent, furnished with those articles. 

Now, without entering upon the vexed question of how much food isnecessary to sustain the human system, under severe toil and exposure, and without giving the opinions of physiologists as to theinsufficiency or sufficiency of the slaves' allowance, we affirm thatall civilized nations have, in all ages, and in the most emphaticmanner, declared, that _eight quarts of corn a week_, (the usualallowance of our slaves, ) is utterly insufficient to sustain the humanbody, under such toil and exposure as that to which the slaves aresubjected. 

To show this fully, it will be necessary to make some estimates, andpresent some statistics. And first, the northern reader must bear inmind, that the corn furnished to the slaves at the south, is almostinvariably the _white gourd seed_ corn, and that a quart of this kindof corn weighs five or six ounces _less_ than a quart of "flint corn, "the kind generally raised in the northern and eastern states;consequently a peck of the corn generally given to the slaves, wouldbe only equivalent to a fraction more than six quarts and a pint ofthe corn commonly raised in the New England States, New York, NewJersey, &c. Now, what would be said of the northern capitalist, whoshould allow his laborers but _six quarts and five gills of corn for aweek's provisions?_

Further, it appears in evidence, that the corn given to the slaves isoften _defective_. This, the reader will recollect, is the voluntarytestimony of Thomas Clay, Esq. , the Georgia planter, whose testimonyis given above. When this is the case, the amount of actual nutrimentcontained in a peck of the "gourd seed, " may not be more than in five, or four, or even three quarts of "flint corn. "

As a quart of southern corn weighs at least five ounces less than aquart of northern corn, it requires little arithmetic to perceive, that the daily allowance of the slave fed upon that kind of corn, would contain about one third of a pound less nutriment than thoughhis daily ration were the same quantity of northern corn, which wouldamount, in a year, to more than a hundred and twenty pounds of humansustenance! which would furnish the slave with his full allowance of apeck of corn a week for two months! It is unnecessary to add, thatthis difference in the weight of the two kinds of corn, is an item tooimportant to be overlooked. As one quart of the southern corn weighsone pound and eleven-sixteenths of a pound, it follows that it wouldbe about one pound and six-eighths of a pound. We now solicit theattention of the reader to the following unanimous testimony, of thecivilized world, to the utter insufficiency of this amount of food tosustain human beings under labor. This testimony is to be found in thelaws of all civilized nations, which regulate the rations of soldiersand sailors, disbursements made by governments for the support ofcitizens in times of public calamity, the allowance to convicts inprisons, &c. We will begin with the United States. 

The daily ration for each United States soldier, established by act ofCongress, May 30, 1796. Was the following: one pound of beef, onepound of bread, half a gill of spirits; and at the rate of one quartof salt, two quarts of vinegar, two pounds of soap, and one pound ofcandles to every hundred rations. To those soldiers "who were on thefrontiers, " (where the labor and exposure were greater, ) the rationwas one pound two ounces of beef and one pound two ounces of bread. Laws U. S. Vol. 3d, sec. 10, p. 431. 

After an experiment of two years, the preceding ration being found_insufficient_, it was increased, by act of Congress, July 16, 1798, and was as follows: beef one pound and a quarter, bread one pound twoounces; salt two quarts, vinegar four quarts, soap four pounds, andcandles one and a half pounds to the hundred rations. The precedingallowance was afterwards still further increased. 

The _present daily ration_ for the United States' soldiers, is, as welearn from an advertisement of Captain Fulton, of the United States'army, in a late number of the Richmond (Va. ) Enquirer, as follows: oneand a quarter pounds of beef, one and three-sixteenths pounds ofbread; and at the rate of _eight quarts of beans, eight pounds ofsugar_, four pounds of coffee, two quarts of salt, four pounds ofcandles, and four pounds of soap, to every hundred rations. 

We have before us the daily rations provided for the emigrating OttawaIndians, two years since, and for the emigrating Cherokees last fall. They were the same--one pound of fresh beef, one pound of flour, &c. 

The daily ration for the United States' navy, is fourteen ounces ofbread, half a pound of beef, six ounces of pork, three ounces of rice, three ounces of peas, one ounce of cheese, one ounce of sugar, half anounce of tea, one-third of a gill molasses. 

The daily ration in the British army is one and a quarter pounds ofbeef, one pound of bread, &c. 

The daily ration in the French army is one pound of beef, one and ahalf pounds of bread, one pint of wine, &c. 

The common daily ration for foot soldiers on the continent, is onepound of meat, and one and a half pounds of bread. 

The _sea ration_ among the Portuguese, has become the usual ration inthe navies of European powers generally. It is as follows: "one and ahalf pounds of biscuit, one pound of salt meat, one pint of wine, withsome dried fish and onions. "

PRISON RATIONS. --Before giving the usual daily rations of food allowedto convicts, in the principal prisons in the United States, we willquote the testimony of the "American Prison Discipline Society, " whichis as follows:

"The common allowance of food in the penitentiaries, is equivalent toONE POUND OF MEAT, ONE POUND OF BREAD, AND ONE POUND OF VEGETABLES PERDAY. It varies a little from this in some of them, but it is generallyequivalent to it. " First Report of American Prison Discipline Society, page 13. 

The daily ration of food to each convict, in the principal prisons inthis country, is as follows:

In the New Hampshire State Prison, one and a quarter pounds of meal, and fourteen ounces of beef, for _breakfast and dinner;_ and forsupper, a soup or porridge of potatos and beans, or peas, the_quantity not limited_. 

In the Vermont prison, the convicts are allowed to eat _as much asthey wish_. 

In the Massachusetts' penitentiary, one and a half pounds of bread, fourteen ounces of meat, half a pint of potatos, and one gill ofmolasses, or one pint of milk. 

In the Connecticut State Prison, one pound of beef, one pound ofbread, two and a half pounds of potatos, half a gill of molasses, withsalt, pepper, and vinegar. 

In the New York State Prison, at Auburn, one pound of beef, twenty-twoounces of flour and meal, half a gill of molasses; with two quarts ofrye, four quarts of salt, two quarts of vinegar, one and a half ouncesof pepper, and two and a half bushels of potatos to every hundredrations. 

In the New York State Prison at Sing Sing, one pound of beef, eighteenounces of flour and meal, besides potatos, rye coffee, and molasses. 

In the New York City Prison, one pound of beef, one pound of flour;and three pecks of potatos to every hundred rations, with other smallarticles. 

In the New Jersey State Prison, one pound of bread, half a pound ofbeef, with potatos and cabbage, (quantity not specified, ) one gill ofmolasses, and a bowl of mush for supper. 

In the late Walnut Street Prison, Philadelphia, one and a half poundsof bread and meal, half a pound of beef, one pint of potatos, one gillof molasses, and half a gill of rye, for coffee. 

In the Baltimore prison, we believe the ration is the same with thepreceding. 

In the Pennsylvania Eastern Penitentiary, one pound of bread and onepint of coffee for breakfast, one pint of meat soup, with potatoswithout limit, for dinner, and mush and molasses for supper. 

In the Penitentiary for the District of Columbia, Washington city, onepound of beef, twelve ounces of Indian meal, ten ounces of wheatflour, half a gill of molasses; with two quarts of rye, four quarts ofsalt, four quarts of vinegar, and two and a half bushels of potatos toevery hundred rations. 

RATIONS IN ENGLISH PRISONS. --The daily ration of food in theBedfordshire Penitentiary, is _two pounds of bread;_ and if at hardlabor, _a quart of soup for dinner. _

In the Cambridge County House of Correction, three pounds of bread, and one pint of beer. 

In the Millbank General Penitentiary, one and a half pounds of bread, one pound of potatos, six ounces of beef, with half a pint of broththerefrom. 

In the Gloucestershire Penitentiary, one and a half pounds of bread, three-fourths of a pint of peas, made into soup, with beef, quantitynot stated. Also gruel, made of vegetables, quantity not stated, andone and a half ounces of oatmeal mixed with it. 

In the Leicestershire House of Correction, two pounds of bread, andthree pints of gruel; and when at hard labor, one pint of milk inaddition, and twice a week a pint of meat soup at dinner, instead ofgruel. 

In the Buxton House of Correction, one and a half pounds of bread, oneand a half pints of gruel, one and a half pints of soup, four-fifthsof a pound of potatos, and two-sevenths of an ounce of beef. 

Notwithstanding the preceding daily ration in the Buxton Prison isabout double the usual daily allowance of our slaves, yet the visitingphysicians decided, that for those prisoners who were required to workthe tread-mill, it was _entirely sufficient_. This question wasconsidered at length, and publicly discussed at the sessions of theSurry magistrates, with the benefit of medical advice; which resultedin "large additions" to the rations of those who worked on thetread-mill. See London Morning Chronicle, Jan. 13, 1830. 

To the preceding we add the _ration of the Roman slaves_. The monthlyallowance of food to slaves in Rome was called "Dimensum. " The"Dimensum" was an allowance of wheat or of other grain, whichconsisted of five _modii_ a month to each slave. Ainsworth, in hisLatin Dictionary estimates the _modius_, when used for the measurementof grain, at _a peck and a half_ our measure, which would make theRoman slave's allowance _two quarts of grain a day_, just double theallowance provided for the slave by _law_ in North Carolina, and _six_quarts more per week than the ordinary allowance of slaves in theslave states generally, as already established by the testimony ofslaveholders themselves. But it must by no means be overlooked thatthis "dimensum, " or _monthly_ allowance, was far from being the soleallowance of food to Roman slaves. In _addition_ to this, they had astated _daily_ allowance (_diarium_) besides a monthly allowance of_money_, amounting to about a cent a day. 

Now without further trenching on the reader's time, we add, comparethe preceding daily allowances of food to soldiers and sailors in thisand other countries; to convicts in this and other countries; tobodies of emigrants rationed at public expense; and finally, with thefixed allowance given to Roman slaves, and we find the states of thisUnion, the _slave_ states as well as the free, the United States'government, the different European governments, the old Roman empire, in fine, we may add, the _world_, ancient and modern, uniting in thetestimony that to furnish men at hard labor from daylight till darkwith but 1-1/2 lbs. Of _corn_ per day, their sole sustenance, is toMURDER THEM BY PIECE-MEAL. The reader will perceive by examining thepreceding statistics that the _average daily_ ration throughout thiscountry and Europe exceeds the usual slave's allowance _at least apound a day_; also that one-third of this ration for soldiers andconvicts in the United States, and for solders and sailors in Europeis _meat_, generally beef; whereas the allowance of the mass of ourslaves is corn, only. Further, the convicts in our prisons aresheltered from the heat of the sun, and from the damps of the earlymorning and evening, from cold, rain, &c. ; whereas, the great body ofthe slaves are exposed to all of these, in their season, from daylighttill dark; besides this, they labor more hours in the day thanconvicts, as will be shown under another head, and are obliged toprepare and cook their own food after they have finished the labor ofthe day, while the convicts have theirs prepared for them. These, withother circumstances, necessarily make larger and longer draughts uponthe strength of the slave, produce consequently greater exhaustion, and demand a larger amount of food to restore and sustain the laborerthan is required by the convict in his briefer, less exposed, and lessexhausting toils. 

That the slaveholders themselves regard the usual allowance of food toslaves as insufficient, both in kind and quantity, for hard-workingmen, is shown by the fact, that in all the slave states, we believewithout exception, _white_ convicts at hard labor, have a much_larger_ allowance of food than the usual one of slaves; and generallymore than _one third_ of this daily allowance is meat. This convictionof slaveholders shows itself in various forms. When persons wish tohire slaves to labor on public works, in addition to the inducement ofhigh wages held out to masters to hire out their slaves, thecontractors pledge themselves that a certain amount of food shall begiven the slaves, taking care to specify a _larger_ amount than theusual allowance, and a part of it _meat_. 

The following advertisement is an illustration. We copy it from the"Daily Georgian, " Savannah, Dec. 14, 1838. 

NEGROES WANTED. 

The Contractors upon the Brunswick and Alatamaha Canal are desirous tohire a number of prime Negro Men, from the 1st October next, forfifteen months, until the 1st January, 1810. They will pay at the rateof eighteen dollars per month for each prime hand. 

These negroes will be employed in the excavation of the Canal. Theywill be provided with _three and a half pounds of pork or bacon, andten quarts of gourd seed corn per week_, lodged in comfortableshantees and attended constantly a skilful physician. J. H. COUPER, P. M. NIGHTINGALE. 

But we have direct testimony to this point. The late Hon. John Taylor, of Caroline Co. Virginia, for a long time Senator in Congress, and formany years president of the Agricultural Society of the State, says inhis "Agricultural Essays, " No. 30, page 97, "BREAD ALONE OUGHT NEVERTO BE CONSIDERED A SUFFICIENT DIET FOR SLAVES EXCEPT AS A PUNISHMENT. "He urges upon the planters of Virginia to give their slaves, inaddition to bread, "salt meat and vegetables, " and adds, "we shall beASTONISHED to discover upon trial, that this great comfort to them isa profit to the master. "

The Managers of the American Prison Discipline Society, in their thirdReport, page 58, say, "In the Penitentiaries generally, in the UnitedStates, the animal food is equal to one pound of meat per day for eachconvict. "

Most of the actual suffering from hunger on the part of the slaves, isin the sugar and cotton-growing region, where the crops are exportedand the corn generally purchased from the upper country. Where this isthe case there cannot but be suffering. The contingencies of badcrops, difficult transportation, high prices, &c. &c. , naturallyoccasion short and often precarious allowances. The following extractfrom a New Orleans paper of April 26, 1837, affords an illustration. The writer in describing the effects of the money pressure inMississippi, says:

"They, (the planters, ) are now left without provisions and the meansof living and using their industry, for the present year. In thisdilemma, planters whose crops have been from 100 to 700 bales, findthemselves forced to sacrifice many of their slaves in order to getthe common necessaries of life for the support of themselves and therest of their negroes. In many places, heavy planters compel theirslaves to fish for the means of subsistence, rather than sell them atsuch ruinous rates. There are at this moment THOUSANDS OF SLAVES inMississippi, that KNOW NOT WHERE THE NEXT MORSEL IS TO COME FROM. Themaster must be ruined to save the wretches from being STARVED. "

II. LABOR

THE SLAVES ARE OVERWORKED. 

This is abundantly proved by the number of hours that the slaves areobliged to be in the field. But before furnishing testimony as totheir hours of labor and rest, we will present the expressdeclarations of slaveholders and others, that the slaves are severelydriven in the field. 

The Senate and House of Representatives of the State of SouthCarolina. 

"Many owners of slaves, and others who have the management of slaves, _do confine them so closely at hard labor that they have notsufficient time for natural rest_. --See 2 Brevard's Digest of the Lawsof South Carolina, 243. "

History of Carolina. --Vol. I, page 190. 

"So _laborious_ is the task of raising, beating, and cleaning rice, that had it been possible to obtain European servants in sufficientnumbers, _thousands and tens of thousands_ MUST HAVE PERISHED. "

Hon. Alexander Smyth, a slaveholder, and member of Congress fromVirginia, in his speech on the "Missouri question, " Jan. 28, 1820. 

"Is it not obvious that the way to render their situation _morecomfortable_, is to allow them to be taken where there is not the samemotive to force the slave to INCESSANT TOIL that there is in thecountry where cotton, sugar, and tobacco are raised for exportation. It is proposed to hem in the blacks _where they are_ HARD WORKED, that they may be rendered unproductive and the race be prevented fromincreasing. * * * The proposed measure would be EXTREME CRUELTY to theblacks. * * * You would * * * doom them to HARD LABOR. "

"Travels in Louisiana, " translated from the French by John Davies, Esq. --Page 81. 

"At the rolling of sugars, an interval of from two to three months, they _work both night and day_. Abridged of their sleep, they _scarceretire to rest during the whole period_. "

The Western Review, No. 2, --article "Agriculture of Louisiana. "

"The work is admitted to be severe for the hands, (slaves, ) requiringwhen the process is commenced to be _pushed night and day_. "

W. C. Gildersleeve, Esq. , a native of Georgia, elder of thePresbyterian church, Wilkesbarre, Penn. 

"_Overworked_ I know they (the slaves) are. "

Mr. Asa A. Stone, a theological student, near Natchez, Miss. , in 1834and 1835. 

"Every body here knows _overdriving_ to be one of the most commonoccurrences, the planters do not deny it, except, perhaps, tonortherners. "

Philemon Bliss, Esq. , a lawyer of Elyria, Ohio, who lived in Floridain 1834 and 1835. 

"During the cotton-picking season they usually labor in the fieldduring the whole of the daylight, and then spend a good part of thenight in ginning and baling. The labor required is very frequentlyexcessive, and speedily impairs the constitution. "

Hon. R. J. Turnbull of South Carolina, a slaveholder, speaking of theharvesting of cotton, says:

"_All the pregnant women_ even, on the plantation, and weak and_sickly_ negroes incapable of other labour, are then _inrequisition_. "

HOURS OF LABOR AND REST. 

Asa A. Stone, theological student, a classical teacher near Natchez, Miss. , 1835. 

"It is a general rule on all regular plantations, that the slaves bein the field as _soon as it is light enough for them to see to work_, and remain there until it is _so dark that they cannot see_. "

Mr. Cornelius Johnson, of Farmington, Ohio, who lived in Mississippia part of 1837 and 1838. 

"It is the common rule for the slaves to be kept at work _fifteenhours in the day_, and in the time of picking cotton a certain numberof pounds is required of each. If this amount is not brought in atnight, the slave is whipped, and the number of pounds lacking is addedto the next day's job; this course is often repeated from day to day. "

W. C. Gildersleeve, Esq. , Wilkesbarre, Penn, a native of Georgia. "Itwas customary for the overseers to call out the gangs _long beforeday_, say three o'clock, in the winter, while dressing out the crops;such work as could be done by fire light (pitch pine was abundant, )was provided. "

Mr. William Leftwich, a native of Virginia and son of aslaveholder--he has recently removed to Delhi, Hamilton County, Ohio. 

"_From dawn till dark_, the slaves are required to bend to theirwork. "

Mr. Nehemiah Caulkins, Waterford, Conn. , a resident in North Carolinaeleven winters. 

"The slaves are obliged to work _from daylight till dark_, as long asthey can see. "

Mr. Eleazar Powel, Chippewa, Beaver county, Penn. , who lived inMississippi in 1836 and 1837. 

"The slaves had to cook and eat their breakfast and be in the field by_daylight, and continue there till dark_. "

Philemon Bliss, Esq. , a lawyer in Elyria, Ohio, who resided in Floridain 1834 and 1835. 

"The slaves commence labor _by daylight_ in the morning, and do notleave the field _till dark_ in the evening. "

"Travels in Louisiana, " page 87. 

"Both in summer and winter the slave must _be in the field by thefirst dawning of day_. "

Mr. Henry E. Knapp, member of a Christian church in Farmington, Ohio, who lived in Mississippi in 1837 and 1838. 

"The slaves were made to work, from _as soon as they could see_ in themorning, till as late as they could see at night. Sometimes they weremade to work till nine o'clock at night, in such work as they coulddo, as burning cotton stalks, &c. "

A New Orleans paper, dated March 23, 1826, says: "To judge from theactivity reigning in the cotton presses of the suburbs of St. Mary, and the _late hours_ during which their slaves work, the cotton tradewas never more brisk. "

Mr. GEORGE W. WESTGATE, a member of the Congregational Church atQuincy, Illinois, who lived in the south western slaves states anumber of years says, "the slaves are driven to the field in themorning _about four o'clock_, the general calculation is to get themat work by daylight; the time for breakfast is between nine and teno'clock, this meal is sometimes eaten '_bite and work_, ' others allowfifteen minutes, and this is the only rest the slave has while in thefield. I have never known a case of stopping for an hour, inLouisiana; in Mississippi the rule is milder, though entirely subjectto the will of the master. On cotton plantations, in cotton pickingtime, that is from October to Christmas, each hand has a certainquantity to pick, and is flogged if his task is not accomplished;their tasks are such as to keep them all the while busy. "

The preceding testimony under this head has sole reference to theactual labor of the slaves _in the field_. In order to determine howmany hours are left for sleep, we must take into the account, the timespent in going to and from the field, which is often at a distance ofone, two and sometimes three miles; also the time necessary forpounding, or grinding their corn, and preparing, overnight, their foodfor the next day; also the preparation of tools, getting fuel andpreparing it, making fires and cooking their suppers, if they haveany, the occasional mending and washing of their clothes, &c. Besidesthis, as everyone knows who has lived on a southern plantation, manylittle errands and _chores_ are to be done for their masters andmistresses, old and young, which have accumulated during the day andbeen kept in reserve till the slaves return from the field at night. To this we may add that the slaves are _social_ beings, and thatduring the day, silence is generally enforced by the whip of theoverseer or driver. [3] When they return at night, their pent up socialfeelings will seek vent, it is a law of nature, and though the bodymay be greatly worn with toil, this law cannot be wholly stifled. Sharers of the same woes, they are drawn together by strongaffinities, and seek the society and sympathy of their fellows; even"_tired_ nature" will joyfully forego for a time needful rest, tominister to a want of its being equally permanent and imperative asthe want of sleep, and as much more profound, as the yearnings of thehigher nature surpass the instincts of its animal appendage. 

[Footnote 3: We do not mean that they are not suffered to _speak_, but, that, as conversation would be a hindrance to labour, they aregenerally permitted to indulge in it but little. ]

All these things make drafts upon _time_. To show how much of theslave's time, which is absolutely indispensable for rest and sleep, isnecessarily spent in various labors after his return from the field atnight, we subjoin a few testimonies. 

Mr. CORNELIUS JOHNSON, Farmington, Ohio, who lived in Mississippi inthe years 1837 and 38, says:

"On all the plantations where I was acquainted, the slaves were keptin the field till dark; after which, those who had to grind their owncorn, had that to attend to, get their supper, attend to other familyaffairs of their own and of their master, such as bringing water, washing, clothes, &c. &c. , and be in the field as soon as it wassufficiently light to commence work in the morning. "

Mr. GEORGE W. WESTGATE, of Quincy, Illinois, who has spent severalyears in the south western slave states, says:

"Their time, after full dark until four o'clock in the morning istheir own; this fact alone would seem to say they have sufficientrest, but there are other things to be considered; much of theirmaking, mending and washing of clothes, preparing and cooking food, hauling and chopping wood, fixing and preparing tools, and a varietyof little nameless jobs must be done between those hours. "

PHILEMON BLISS, Esq. Of Elyria, Ohio, who resided in Florida in 1834and 5, gives the following testimony:

"After having finished their field labors, they are occupied till nineor ten o'clock in doing _chores_, such as grinding corn, (as all thecorn in the vicinity is ground by hand, ) chopping wood, taking care ofhorses, mules, &c. , and a thousand things necessary to be done on alarge plantation. If any extra job is to be done, it must not hinderthe 'niggers' from their work, but must be done in the night. "

W. C. GILDERSLEEVE, Esq. , a native of Georgia, an elder of thePresbyterian Church at Wilkes-barre, Pa. Says:

"The corn is ground in a handmill by the slave _after his task isdone_--generally there is but one mill on the plantation, and as butone can grind at a time, the mill is going sometimes _very late atnight_. "

We now present another class of facts and testimony, showing that theslaves engaged in raising the large staples, are _overworked_. 

In September, 1831, the writer of this had an interview with JAMES G. BIRNEY, Esq. , who then resided in Kentucky, having removed with hisfamily from Alabama the year before. A few hours before thatinterview, and on the morning of the same day, Mr. B. Had spent acouple of hours with Hon. Henry Clay, at his residence, nearLexington. Mr. Birney remarked, that Mr. Clay had just told him, hehad lately been led to mistrust certain estimates as to the increaseof the slave population in the far south west--estimates which he hadpresented, I think, in a speech before the Colonization Society. Henow believed, that the births among the slaves in that quarter were_not equal to the deaths_--and that, of course, the slave population, independent of immigration from the slave-selling states, was _notsustaining itself_. 

Among other facts stated by Mr. Clay, was the following, which we copy_verbatim_ from the original memorandum, made at the time by Mr. Birney, with which he has kindly furnished us. 

"Sept. 16, 1834. --Hon. H. Clay, in a conversation at his own house, onthe subject of slavery, informed me, that Hon. Outerbridge Horsey, formerly a senator in Congress from the state of Delaware, and theowner of a sugar plantation in Louisiana, declared to him, that hisoverseer worked his hands so closely, that one of the women broughtforth a child whilst engaged in the labors of the field. 

"Also, that a few years since, he was at a brick yard in the environsof New Orleans, in which one hundred hands were employed; among themwere from _twenty to thirty young women_, in the prime of life. He wastold by the proprietor, that there had _not been a child born amongthem for the last two or three years, although they all hadhusbands_. "

The preceding testimony of Mr. Clay, is strongly corroborated byadvertisements of slaves, by Courts of Probate, and by executorsadministering upon the estates of deceased persons. Some of thoseadvertisements for the sale of slaves, contain the names, ages, accustomed employment, &c. , of all the slaves upon the plantation ofthe deceased. These catalogues show large numbers of young men andwomen, almost all of them between twenty and thirty-eight years old;and yet the number of young children is _astonishingly small_. We havelaid aside many lists of this kind, in looking over the newspapers ofthe slaveholding states; but the two following are all we can lay ourhands on at present. One is in the "Planter's Intelligencer, "Alexandria, La. , March 22, 1837, containing one hundred and thirtyslaves; and the other in the New Orleans Bee, a few days later, April8, 1837, containing fifty-one slaves. The former is a "Probate sale"of the slaves belonging to the estate of Mr. Charles S. Lee, deceased, and is advertised by G. W. Keeton, Judge of the Parish of Concordia, La. The sex, name, and age of each slave are contained in theadvertisement which fills two columns. The following are some of theparticulars. 

The whole number of slaves is _one hundred and thirty_. Of these, _only three are over forty years old_. There are _thirty-five females_between the ages of _sixteen and thirty-three_, and yet there are onlyTHIRTEEN children under the age of _thirteen years!_

It is impossible satisfactorily to account for such a fact, on anyother supposition, than that these thirty-five females were sooverworked, or underfed, or both, as to prevent child-bearing. 

The other advertisement is that of a "Probate sale, " ordered by theCourt of the Parish of Jefferson--including the slaves of Mr. WilliamGormley. The whole number of slaves is fifty-one; the sex, age, andaccustomed labors of each are given. The oldest of these slaves is but_thirty-nine years old_: of the females, _thirteen_ are between theages of sixteen and thirty-two, and the oldest female is but_thirty-eight_--and yet there are but _two children under eight yearsold!_

Another proof that the slaves in the south-western states areover-worked, is the fact, that so few of them live to old age. A largemajority of them are _old_ at middle age, and few live beyondfifty-five. In one of the preceding advertisements, out of one hundredand thirty slaves, only _three_ are over forty years old! In theother, out of fifty-one slaves, only _two_ are over _thirty-five_; theoldest is but thirty-nine, and the way in which he is designated inthe advertisement, is an additional proof, that what to others is"middle age, " is to the slaves in the south-west "old age:" he isadvertised as "_old_ Jeffrey. "

But the proof that the slave population of the south-west is soover-worked that it cannot _supply its own waste_, does not rest uponmere inferential evidence. The Agricultural Society of Baton Rouge, La. , in its report, published in 1829, furnishes a labored estimate ofthe amount of expenditure necessarily incurred in conducting "awell-regulated sugar estate. " In this estimate, the annual net lossof slaves, over and above the supply by propagation, is set down atTWO AND A HALF PER CENT! The late Hon. Josiah S. Johnson, a member ofCongress from Louisiana, addressed a letter to the Secretary of theUnited States' Treasury, in 1830, containing a similar estimate, apparently made with great care, and going into minute details. Manyitems in this estimate differ from the preceding; but the estimate ofthe annual _decrease_ of the slaves on a plantation was the same--TWOAND A HALF PER CENT!

The following testimony of Rev. Dr. Channing, of Boston, who residedsome time in Virginia, shows that the over-working of slaves, to suchan extent as to abridge life, and cause a decrease of population, isnot confined to the far south and south-west. 

"I heard of an estate managed by an individual who was considered assingularly successful, and who was able to govern the slaves withoutthe use of the whip. I was anxious to see him, and trusted that somediscovery had been made favorable to humanity. I asked him how he wasable to dispense with corporal punishment. He replied to me, with avery determined look, 'The slaves know that the work _must_ be done, and that it is better to do it without punishment than with it. ' Inother words, the certainty and dread of chastisement were so impressedon them, that they never incurred it. 

"I then found that the slaves on this well-managed estate, _decreased_in number. I asked the cause. He replied, with perfect frankness andease, 'The gang is not large enough for the estate. ' In other words, they were not equal to the work of the plantation, and, yet were _madeto do it_, though with the certainty of abridging life. 

"On this plantation the huts were uncommonly convenient. There was anunusual air of neatness. A superficial observer would have called theslaves happy. Yet they were living under a severe, subduingdiscipline, and were _over-worked_ to a degree that _shortenedlife_. "--_Channing on Slavery_, page 162, first edition. 

PHILEMON BLISS, Esq. , a lawyer of Elyria, Ohio, who spent some time inFlorida, gives the following testimony to the over-working of theslaves:

"It is not uncommon for hands, in hurrying times, beside working allday, to labor half the night. This is usually the case on sugarplantations, during the sugar-boiling season; and on cotton, duringits gathering. Beside the regular task of picking cotton, averaging ofthe short staple, when the crop is good, 100 pounds a day to the hand, the ginning (extracting the seed, ) and baling was done in the night. Said Mr. ---- to me, while conversing upon the customary labor ofslaves, 'I work my niggers in a hurrying time till 11 or 12 o'clock atnight, and have them up by four in the morning. '

"Beside the common inducement, the desire of gain, to make a largecrop, the desire is increased by that spirit of gambling, so common atthe south. It is very common to _bet_ on the issue of a crop. A. Lays a wager that, from a given number of hands, he will make morecotton than B. The wager is accepted, and then begins the contest; andwho bears the burden of it? How many tears, yea, how many brokenconstitutions, and premature deaths, have been the effect of thisspirit? From the desperate energy of purpose with which the gamblerpursues his object, from the passions which the practice calls intoexercise, we might conjecture many. Such is the fact. In MiddleFlorida, a _broken-winded_ negro is more common than a _broken-winded_horse; though usually, when they are declared unsound, or when theirconstitution is so broken that their recovery is despaired of, theyare exported to New Orleans, to drag out the remainder of their daysin the cane-field and sugar house. I would not insinuate that allplanters gamble upon their crops; but I mention the practice as one ofthe common inducements to 'push niggers. ' Neither would I assert thatall planters drive the hands to the injury of their health. I give itas a _general_ rule in the district of Middle Florida, and I have noreason to think that negroes are driven worse there than in otherfertile sections. People there told me that the situation of theslaves was far better than in Mississippi and Louisiana. And fromcomparing the crops with those made in the latter states, and forother reasons, I am convinced of the truth of their statements. "

DR. DEMMING, a gentleman of high respectability, residing in Ashland, Richland county, Ohio, stated to Professor Wright, of New York city, "That during a recent tour at the south, while ascending the Ohioriver, on the steamboat Fame, he had an opportunity of conversing witha Mr. Dickinson, a resident of Pittsburg, in company with a number ofcotton-planters and slave-dealers, from Louisiana, Alabama, andMississippi, Mr. Dickinson stated as a fact, that the sugar plantersupon the sugar coast in Louisiana had ascertained, that, as it wasusually necessary to employ about _twice_ the amount of labor duringthe boiling season, that was required during the season of raising, they could, by excessive driving, day and night, during the boilingseason, accomplish the whole labor _with one set of hands_. Bypursuing this plan, they could afford _to sacrifice a set of handsonce in seven years!_ He further stated that this horrible system wasnow practised to a considerable extent! The correctness of thisstatement was substantially admitted by the slaveholders then onboard. "

The late MR. SAMUEL BLACKWELL, a highly respected citizen of Jerseycity, opposite the city of New York, and a member of the Presbyterianchurch, visited many of the sugar plantations in Louisiana a few yearssince: and having for many years been the owner of an extensive sugarrefinery in England, and subsequently in this country, he had not onlyevery facility afforded him by the planters, for personal inspectionof all parts of the process of sugar-making, but received from themthe most unreserved communications, as to their management of theirslaves. Mr. B. , after his return, frequently made the followingstatement to gentlemen of his acquaintance, --"That the plantersgenerally declared to him, that they were _obliged_ so to over-worktheir slaves during the sugar-making season, (from eight to tenweeks, ) as to use _them up_ in seven or eight years. For, said they, after the process is commenced, it must be pushed without cessation, night and day; and we cannot afford to keep a sufficient number ofslaves to do the _extra_ work at the time of sugar-making, as we couldnot profitably employ them the rest of the year. "

It is not only true of the sugar planters, but of the slaveholdersgenerally throughout the far south and south west, that they believeit for their interest to wear out the slaves by excessive toil ineight or ten years after they put them into the field. [4]

[Footnote 4: Alexander Jones. Esq. , a large planter in West Feliciana, Louisiana, published a communication in the "North Carolina TrueAmerican, " Nov. 25, 1838, in which, speaking of the horses employed inthe mills on the plantations for ginning cotton, he says, they "aremuch whipped and jaded;" and adds, "In fact, this service is so severeon horses, as to shorten their lives in many instances, if notactually kill them in gear. "

Those who work one kind of their "live stock" so as to "shorten theirlives, " or "kill them in gear" would not stick at doing the same thingto another kind. ]

REV. DOCTOR REED, of London, who went through Kentucky, Virginia andMaryland in the summer of 1834, gives the following testimony:

"I was told confidently and from _excellent authority_, that recentlyat a meeting of planters in South Carolina, the question was seriouslydiscussed whether the slave is more profitable to the owner, if wellfed, well clothed, and worked lightly, or if made the most of _atonce_, and exhausted in some eight years. The decision was in favor ofthe last alternative. That decision will perhaps make many shudder. But to my mind this is not the chief evil. The greater and originalevil is considering the _slave as property_. If he is only propertyand my property, then I have some right to ask how I may make thatproperty most available. "

"Visit to the American Churches, " by Rev. Drs. Reed and Mattheson. Vol. 2 p. 173. 

REV. JOHN O. CHOULES, recently pastor of a Baptist Church at NewBedford, Massachusetts, now of Buffalo, New York, made substantiallythe following statement in a speech in Boston. 

"While attending the Baptist Triennial Convention at Richmond, Virginia, in the spring of 1835, as a delegate from Massachusetts, Ihad a conversation on slavery, with an officer of the Baptist Churchin that city, at whose house I was a guest. I asked my host if he didnot apprehend that the slaves would eventually rise and exterminatetheir masters. 

"Why, " said the gentleman, "I used to apprehend such a catastrophe, but God has made a providential opening, a _merciful safety valve_, and now I do not feel alarmed in the _prospect_ of what is coming. 'What do you mean, ' said Mr. Choules, 'by providence opening a mercifulsafety valve?' Why, said the gentleman, I will tell you; the slavetraders come from the cotton and sugar plantations of the South andare willing to buy up more slaves than we can part with. We must keepa stock for the purpose of _rearing_ slaves, but we part with the mostvaluable, and at the same time, the most _dangerous_, and the demandis very constant and likely to be so, for when they go to thesesouthern states, the average existence Is ONLY FIVE YEARS!"

Monsieur C. C. ROBIN, a highly intelligent French gentleman, whoresided in Louisiana from 1802 to 1806, and published a volume oftravels, gives the following testimony to the over-working of theslaves there:

"I have been a witness, that after the fatigue of the day, theirlabors have been prolonged several hours by the light of the moon; andthen, before they could think of rest, they must pound and cook theircorn; and yet, long before day, an implacable scold, whip in hand, would arouse them from their slumbers. Thus, of more than twentynegroes, who in twenty years should have doubled, the number _wasreduced to four or five_. "

In conclusion we add, that slaveholders have in the most public andemphatic manner declared themselves guilty of barbarous inhumanitytoward their slaves in exacting from them such _long continued dailylabor_. The Legislatures of Maryland, Virginia and Georgia, havepassed laws providing that convicts in their state prisons andpenitentiaries, "shall be employed in work each day in the year exceptSundays, not exceeding _eight_ hours, in the months of November, December, and January; _nine_ hours, in the months of February andOctober, and _ten_ hours in the rest of the year. " Now contrast this_legal_ exaction of labor from CONVICTS with the exaction from slavesas established by the preceding testimony. The reader perceives thatthe amount of time, in which by the preceding laws of Maryland, Virginia, and Georgia, the _convicts_ in their prisons are required tolabor, is on an average during the year but little more than NINEHOURS daily. Whereas, the laws of South Carolina permit the master to_compel_ his slaves to work FIFTEEN HOURS in the twenty-four, insummer, and FOURTEEN in the winter--which would be in winter, fromdaybreak in the morning until _four hours_ after sunset!--See 2Brevard's Digest, 243. 

The other slave states, except Louisiana, have _no laws_ respectingthe labor of slaves, consequently if the master should work his slavesday and night without sleep till they drop dead, _he violates no law!_

The law of Louisiana provides for the slaves but TWO AND A HALF HOURSin the twenty-four for "rest!" See law of Louisiana, act of July 71806, Martin's Digest 6. 10--12. 

III. CLOTHING. 

We propose to show under this head, that the clothing of the slaves byday, and their covering by night, are inadequate, either for comfortor decency. 

Hon. T. T. Bouldin, a slave-holder, and member of Congress from Virginiain a speech in Congress, Feb. 16, 1835. 

Mr. Bouldin said "_he knew_ that many negroes had _died_ from exposureto weather, " and added, "they are clad in a _flimsy fabric, that willturn neither wind nor water_. "

George Buchanan, M. D. , of Baltimore, member of the AmericanPhilosophical Society, in an oration at Baltimore, July 4, 1791. 

"The slaves, _naked_ and starved, _often_ fall victims to theinclemencies of the weather. "

Wm. Savery of Philadelphia, an eminent Minister of the Society ofFriends, who went through the Southern states in 1791, on a religiousvisit; after leaving Savannah, Ga. , we find the following entry in hisjournal, 6th, month, 28, 1791. 

"We rode through many rice swamps, where the blacks were verynumerous, great droves of these poor slaves, working up to the middlein water, men and women nearly _naked_. "

Rev. John Rankin, of Ripley, Ohio, a native of Tennessee. 

"In every slave-holding state, _many slaves suffer extremely_, bothwhile they labor and while they sleep, _for want of clothing_ to keepthem warm. "

John Parrish, late of Philadelphia, a highly esteemed minister in theSociety of Friends, who travelled through the South in 1804. 

"It is shocking to the feelings of humanity, in travelling throughsome of those states, to see those poor objects, [slaves, ] especiallyin the inclement season, in _rags_, and _trembling with the cold_. "

"They suffer them, both male and female, _to go without clothing_ atthe age of ten and twelve years"

Rev. Phineas Smith, Centreville, Allegany, Co. , N. Y. Mr. S. Has justreturned from a residence of several years at the south, chiefly inVirginia, Louisiana, and among the American settlers in Texas. 

"The apparel of the slaves, is of the coarsest sort and _exceedinglydeficient_ in quantity. I have been on many plantations wherechildren of eight and ten yeas old, were in a state of _perfectnudity_. Slaves are _in general wretchedly clad_. "

Wm. Ladd, Esq. , of Minot, Maine, recently a slaveholder in Florida. 

"They were allowed two suits of clothes a year, viz. One pair oftrowsers with a shirt or frock of osnaburgh for summer; and forwinter, one pair of trowsers, and a jacket of negro cloth, with abaize shirt and a pair of shoes. Some allowed hats, and some did not;and they were generally, I believe, allowed one blanket in two years. Garments of similar materials were allowed the women. "

A Kentucky physician, writing in the Western Medical Reformer, in1836, on the diseases peculiar to slaves, says. 

"They are _imperfectly clothed_ both summer and winter. "

Mr. Stephen E. Maltby, Inspector of provisions, Skeneateles, N. Y. , whoresided sometime in Alabama. 

"I was at Huntsville, Alabama, in 1818-19, I frequently saw slaves onand around the public square, _with hardly a rag of clothing on them_, and in a _great many_ instances with but a single garment both insummer and in winter; generally the only bedding of the slaves was a_blanket_. "

Reuben G. Macy, Hudson, N. Y. Member of the Society of Friends, whoresided in South Carolina, in 1818 and 19. 

"Their clothing consisted of a pair of trowsers and jacket, made of'negro cloth. ' The women a petticoat, a very short 'short-gown, ' and_nothing else_, the same kind of cloth; some of the women had an oldpair of shoes, but they _generally went barefoot_. "

Mr. Lemuel Sapington, of Lancaster, Pa. , a native of Maryland, andformerly a slaveholder. 

"Their clothing is often made by themselves after night, thoughsometimes assisted by the old women, who are no longer able to doout-door work; consequently it is harsh and uncomfortable. And I havevery frequently seen those who had not attained the age of twelveyears _go naked_. "

Philemon Bliss, Esq. , a lawyer in Elyria, Ohio, who lived in Floridain 1834 and 35. 

"It is very common to see the younger class of slaves up to eight orten _without any clothing_, and most generally the laboring men wear_no shirts_ in the warm season. The perfect nudity of the youngerslaves is so familiar to the whites of both sexes, that they seem towitness it with perfect indifference. I may add that the aged andfeeble often _suffer from cold_. "

Richard Macy, a member of the Society of Friends, Hudson, N. Y. , whohas lived in Georgia. 

"For _bedding_ each slave was allowed _one blanket_, in which theyrolled themselves up. I examined their houses, but could not find anything like _a bed_. "

W. C. Gildersleeve, Esq. , Wilkesbarre, Pa. , a native of Georgia. 

"It is an every day sight to see women as well as men, with no othercovering than a _few filthy rags fastened above the hips_, reachingmidway to the ankles. _I never knew any kind of covering for the head_given. Children of both sexes, from infancy to ten years are seen incompanies on the plantations, _in a state of perfect nudity_. This wasso common that the most refined and delicate beheld them unmoved. "

Mr. William Leftwich, a native of Virginia, now a member of thePresbyterian Church, in Delhi, Ohio. 

"The only bedding of the slaves generally consists of _two oldblankets_. "

Advertisements like the following from the "New Orleans Bee, " May 31, 1837, are common in the southern papers. 

"10 DOLLARS REWARD. --Ranaway, the slave SOLOMON, about 28 years ofage; BADLY CLOTHED. The above reward will be paid on application toFERNANDEZ & WHITING, No. 20, St. Louis St. "

RANAWAY from the subscriber the negress FANNY, always badly dressed, she is about 25 or 26 years old. JOHN MACOIN, 117 S. Ann st. 

The Darien (Ga. ), Telegraph, of Jan. 24, 1837, in an editorialarticle, hitting off the aristocracy of the planters, incidentallylets out some secrets, about the usual _clothing_ of the slaves. Theeditor says, --"The planter looks down, with the most sovereigncontempt, on the merchant and the storekeeper. He deems himself alord, because he gets his two or three RAGGED servants, to row him tohis plantation every day, that he may inspect the labor of his hands. "

The following is an extract from a letter lately received from Rev. C. S. RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois. 

"I am sorry to be obliged to give more testimony without the _name_. An individual in whom I have great confidence, gave me the followingfacts. That I am not alone in placing confidence in him, I subjoin atestimonial from Dr. Richard Eells, Deacon of the CongregationalChurch, of Quincy, and Rev. Mr. Fisher, Baptist Minister of Quincy. 

"We have been acquainted with the brother who has communicated to yousome facts that fell under his observation, whilst in his nativestate; he is a professed follower of our Lord, and we have greatconfidence in him as a man of integrity, discretion, and strictChristian principle. RICHARD EELLS. EZRA FISHER. "

Quincy, Jan. 9th, 1839. 

TESTIMONY. --"I lived for thirty years in Virginia, and have travelledextensively through Fauquier, Culpepper, Jefferson, Stafford, Albemarle and Charlotte Counties; my remarks apply to these Counties. 

"The negro houses are miserably poor, generally they are a shelterfrom neither the wind, the rain, nor the snow, and the earth is thefloor. There are exceptions to this rule, but they are onlyexceptions; you may sometimes see puncheon floor, but never, or almostnever a plank floor. The slaves are generally without _beds orbedsteads_; some few have cribs that they fasten up for themselves inthe corner of the hut. Their bed-clothes are a nest of rags thrownupon a crib, or in the corner; sometimes there are three or fourfamilies in one small cabin. Where the slaveholders have more than onefamily, they put them in the same quarter till it is filled, thenbuild another. I have seen exceptions to this, when only one familywould occupy a hut, and where were tolerably comfortable bed-clothes. 

"Most of the slaves in these counties are _miserably clad_. I haveknown slaves who went without shoes all winter, perfectly barefoot. The feet of many of them are frozen. As a general fact the planters donot serve out to their slaves, drawers, or any under clothing, orvests, or overcoats. Slaves sometimes, by working at night and onSundays, get better things than their masters serve to them. 

"Whilst these things are true of _field-hands_, it is also true thatmany slaveholders clothe their _waiters_ and coachmen like gentlemen. I do not think there is any difference between the slaves ofprofessing Christians and others; at all events, it is so small as tobe scarcely noticeable. 

"I have seen men and women at work in the field more than half naked:and more than once in passing, when the overseer was not near, theywould stop and draw round them a tattered coat or some ribbons of askirt to hide their nakedness and shame from the stranger's eye. "

Mr. GEORGE W. WESTGATE, a member of the Congregational Church inQuincy, Illinois, who has spent the larger part of twelve yearsnavigating the rivers of the south-western slave states with keelboats, as a trader, gives the following testimony as to the clothingand lodging of the slaves. 

"In lower Tennessee, Mississippi and Louisiana, the clothing of theslaves is wretchedly poor; and grows worse as you go south, in theorder of the states I have named. The only material is cotton bagging, i. E. Bagging in which cotton is _baled_, not bagging made of cotton. In Louisiana, especially in the lower country, I have frequently seenthem with nothing but a tattered coat, not sufficient to hide theirnakedness. In winter their clothing seldom serves the purpose ofcomfort, and frequently not even of decent covering. In Louisiana _theplanters never think of serving out shoes to slaves_. In Mississippithey give one pair a year generally. I never saw or heard of aninstance of masters allowing them _stockings_. A _small poor blanketis generally the only bed-clothing_, and this they frequently wear inthe field when they have not sufficient clothing to hide theirnakedness or to keep them warm. Their manner of sleeping varies withthe season. In hot weather they stretch themselves anywhere and sleep. As it becomes cool they roll themselves in their blankets, and layscattered about the cabin. In cold weather they nestle together withtheir feet towards the fire, promiscuously. As a general fact theearth is their only floor and bed--not one in ten have anything like abedstead, and then it is a mere bunk put up by themselves. "

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, an elder in the fourth Congregational Church, Rochester, N. Y. , who spent four years in Virginia, says, "The slavechildren, very commonly of both sexes, up to the ages of eight and tenyears, and I think in some instances beyond this age, go in a state of_disgusting_ nudity. I have often seen them with their tow shirt(their only article of summer clothing) which, to all humanappearance, had not been taken off from the time it was first put on, worn off from the bottom upwards shred by shred, until nothingremained but the straps which passed over their shoulders, and theless exposed portions extending a very little way below the arms, leaving the principal part of the chest, as well as the limbs, entirely uncovered. "

SAMUEL ELLISON, a member of the Society of Friends, formerly ofSouthampton Co. , Virginia, now of Marlborough, Stark Co. , Ohio, says, "I knew a Methodist who was the owner of a number of slaves. Thechildren of both sexes, belonging to him, under twelve years of age, were _entirely_ destitute of clothing. I have seen an old mancompelled to labor in the fields, not having rags enough to cover hisnakedness. "

Rev. H. LYMAN, late pastor of the Free Presbyterian Church, inBuffalo, N. Y. , in describing a tour down and up the Mississippi riverin the winter of 1832-3, says, "At the wood yards where the boatsstop, it is not uncommon to see female slaves employed in carryingwood. Their dress which was quite uniform was provided without anyreference to comfort. They had no covering for their heads; the stuffwhich constituted the outer garment was sackcloth, similar to that inwhich brown domestic goods are done up. It was then December, and Ithought that in such a dress, and being as they were, without_stockings_, they must suffer from the cold. "

Mr. Benjamin Clendenon, Colerain, Lancaster Co. , Pa. , a member of theSociety of Friends, in a recent letter describing a short tour throughthe northern part of Maryland in the winter of 1836, thus speaks of aplace a few miles from Chestertown. "About this place there were anumber of slaves; very few, if any, had _either stockings or shoes_;the weather was intensely cold, and the ground covered with snow. "

The late Major Stoddard of the United States' artillery, who tookpossession of Louisiana for the U. S. Government, under the cession of1804, published a book entitled "Sketches of Louisiana, " in which, speaking of the planters of Lower Louisiana, he says, "_Few of themallow any clothing to their slaves_. "

The following is an extract from the Will of the late celebrated JohnRandolph of Virginia. 

"To my old and faithful servants, Essex and his wife Hetty, I give andbequeath a pair of strong shoes, a suit of clothes and a blanket each, to be paid them annually; also an annual hat to Essex. "

No Virginia slaveholder has ever had a better name as a "kind master, "and "good provider" for his slaves, than John Randolph. Essex andHetty were _favorite_ servants, and the memory of the longuncompensated services of those "old and faithful servants, " seems tohave touched their master's heart. Now as this master was _JohnRandolph_, and as those servants were "faithful, " and favoriteservants, advanced in years, and worn out in his service, and as theirallowance was, in their master's eyes, of sufficient moment toconstitute a paragraph in his last _will and testament_, it is fair toinfer that it would be _very liberal_, far better than the ordinaryallowance for slaves. 

Now we leave the reader to judge what must be the _usual_ allowance ofclothing to common field slaves in the hands of common masters, whenEssex and Hetty, the "old" and "faithful" slaves of John Randolph, were provided, in his last will and testament, with but _one_ suit ofclothes annually, with but _one blanket_ each for bedding, with no_stockings_, nor _socks_, nor _cloaks_, nor overcoats, nor_handkerchiefs_, nor _towels_, and with no _change_ either of under oroutside garments!

IV. DWELLINGS. 

THE SLAVES ARE WRETCHEDLY SHELTERED AND LODGED. 

Mr. Stephen E. Maltby. Inspector of provisions, Skaneateles, N. Y. Whohas lived in Alabama. 

"The huts where the slaves slept, generally contained but _one_apartment, and that _without floor_. "

Mr. George A. Avery, elder of the 4th Presbyterian Church, Rochester, N. Y. Who lived four years in Virginia. 

"Amongst all the negro cabins which I saw in Va. , _I cannot call tomind one_ in which there was any other floor than the _earth_; anything that a northern laborer, or mechanic, white or colored, wouldcall a _bed_, nor a solitary _partition_, to separate the sexes. "

William Ladd, Esq. , Minot, Maine. President of the American PeaceSociety, formerly a slaveholder in Florida. 

"The dwellings of the slaves were palmetto huts, built by themselvesof stakes and poles, thatched with the palmetto leaf. The door, whenthey had any, was generally of the same materials, sometimes boardsfound on the beach. They had _no floors_, no separate apartments, except the guinea negroes had sometimes a small inclosure for their'god house. ' These huts the slaves built themselves after task and onSundays. "

Rev. Joseph M. Sadd, Pastor Pres. Church, Castile, Greene Co. , N. Y. , who lived in Missouri five years previous to 1837. 

"The slaves live _generally_ in _miserable huts_, which are _withoutfloors_, and have a single apartment only, where both sexes are herdedpromiscuously together. "

Mr. George W. Westgate, member of the Congregational Church in Quincy, Illinois, who has spent a number of years in slave states. 

"On old plantations, the negro quarters are of frame and clapboards, seldom affording a comfortable shelter from wind or rain; their sizevaries from 8 by 10, to 10 by 12, feet, and six or eight feet high;sometimes there is a hole cut for a window, but I never saw a sash, orglass in any. In the new country, and in the woods, the quarters aregenerally built of logs, of similar dimensions. "

Mr. Cornelius Johnson, a member of a Christian Church in Farmington, Ohio. Mr. J. Lived in Mississippi in 1837-8. 

"Their houses were commonly built of logs, sometimes they were framed, often they had no floor, some of them have two apartments, commonlybut one; each of those apartments contained a family. Sometimes thesefamilies consisted of a man and his wife and children, while in otherinstances persons of both sexes, were thrown together without anyregard to family relationship. "

The Western Medical Reformer, in an article on the Cachexia Africanaby a Kentucky physician, thus speaks of the huts of the slaves. 

"They are _crowded_ together in a _small hut_, and sometimes having animperfect, and sometimes no floor, and seldom raised from the ground, ill ventilated, and surrounded with filth. "

Mr. William Leftwich, a native of Virginia, but has resided most ofhis life in Madison, Co. Alabama. 

"The dwellings of the slaves are log huts, from 10 to 12 feet square, often without windows, doors, or floors, they have neither chairs, table, or bedstead. "

Reuben L. Macy of Hudson, N. Y. A member of the Religious Society ofFriends. He lived in South Carolina in 1818-19. 

"The houses for the field slaves were about 14 feet square, built inthe coarsest manner, with one room, _without any chimney or flooring, with a hole in the roof to let the smoke out_. "

Mr. Lemuel Sapington of Lancaster, Pa. A native of Maryland, formerlya slaveholder. 

"The descriptions generally given of negro quarters, are correct; thequarters are _without floors, and not sufficient to keep off theinclemency of the weather_; they are uncomfortable both in summer andwinter. "

Rev. John Rankin, a native of Tennessee. 

"When they return to their miserable huts at night, they find notthere the means of comfortable rest; _but on the cold ground they mustlie without covering, and shiver while they slumber. "_

Philemon Bliss, Esq. Elyria, Ohio, who lived in Florida, in 1835. 

"The dwellings of the slaves are usually small _open_ log huts, withbut one apartment, and very generally _without floors_. "

Mr. W. C. Gildersleeve, Wilkesbarre, Pa. , a native of Georgia. 

"Their huts were generally put up without a nail, frequently withoutfloors, and with a single apartment. "

Hon. R. J. Turnbull, of South Carolina, a slaveholder. 

"The slaves live in _clay cabins_. "

V. TREATMENT OF THE SICK. 

THE SLAVES SUFFER FROM HUMAN NEGLECT WHEN SICK

In proof of this we subjoin the following testimony:

Rev. Dr. CHANNING of Boston, who once resided in Virginia, relates thefollowing fact in his work on slavery, page 163, 1st edition. 

"I cannot forget my feelings on visiting a hospital belonging to theplantation of a gentleman _highly esteemed for his virtues_, and whosemanners and conversation expressed much _benevolence andconscientiousness_. When I entered with him the hospital, the firstobject on which my eye fell was a young woman, very ill, probablyapproaching death. She was stretched on the floor. Her head rested onsomething like a pillow; but _her body and limbs were extended on thehard boards. _ The owner, I doubt not, had at least as much kindnessas myself; but he was so used to see the slaves living without commoncomforts, that the idea of unkindness in the present instance did notenter his mind. "

This _dying_ young woman "was _stretched on the floor_"--"her body andlimbs extended upon the hard boards, "--and yet her master "was highlyesteemed for his virtues, " and his general demeanor produced upon Dr. Channing the impression of "benevolence and conscientiousness" If the_sick and dying female_ slaves of _such_ a master, suffer suchbarbarous neglect, whose heart does not fail him, at the thought ofthat inhumanity, exercised by the _majority_ of slaveholders, towardstheir aged, sick, and dying victims. 

The following testimony is furnished by SARAH M. GRIMKÉ, a sister ofthe late Hon. Thomas S. Grimké, of Charleston, South Carolina. 

"When the Ladies' Benevolent Society in Charleston, S. C. , of which Iwas a visiting commissioner, first went into operation, we wereapplied to for the relief of several sick and aged colored persons;one case I particularly remember, of an aged woman who was dreadfullyburnt from having fallen into the fire; she was living with some freeblacks who had taken her in out of compassion. On inquiry, we foundthat _nearly all_ the colored persons who had solicited aid, were_slaves_, who being no longer able to work for their "owners, " werethus inhumanly cast out in their sickness and old age, and must haveperished, but for the kindness of their friends. 

"I was once visiting a sick slave in whose spiritual welfare peculiarcircumstances had led me to be deeply interested. I knew that she hadbeen early seduced from the path of virtue, as nearly all the femaleslaves are. I knew also that her mistress, though a professor ofreligion, had never taught her a single precept of Christianity, yetthat she had had her severely punished for this departure from them, and that the poor girl was then ill of an incurable disease, occasioned partly by her own misconduct, and partly by the crueltreatment she had received, in a situation that called for tendernessand care. Her heart seemed truly touched with repentance for her sins, and she was inquiring, "What shall I do to be saved?" I was sitting byher as she lay on the floor upon a blanket, and was trying toestablish her trembling spirit in the fullness of Jesus, when I heardthe voice of her mistress in loud and angry tones, as she approachedthe door. I read in the countenance of the prostrate sufferer, theterror which she felt at the prospect of seeing her mistress. I knewmy presence would be very unwelcome, but staid hoping that it mightrestrain, in some measure, the passions of the mistress. In this, however, I was mistaken; she passed me without apparently observingthat I was there, and seated herself on the other side of the sickslave. She made no inquiry how she was, but in a tone of angercommenced a tirade of abuse, violently reproaching her with her pastmisconduct, and telling her in the most unfeeling manner, that eternaldestruction awaited her. No word of kindness escaped her. What hadthen roused her temper I do not know. She continued in this strainseveral minutes, when I attempted to soften her by remarking, that------ was very ill, and she ought not thus to torment her, and that Ibelieved Jesus had granted her forgiveness. But I might as well havetried to stop the tempest in its career, as to calm the infuriatedpassions nurtured by the exercise of arbitrary power. She looked at mewith ineffable scorn, and continued to pour forth a torrent of abuseand reproach. Her helpless victim listened in terrified silence, untilnature could endure no more, when she uttered a wild shriek, andcasting on her tormentor a look of unutterable agony, exclaimed, "Oh, mistress, I am dying. " This appeal arrested her attention, and she soonleft the room, but in the same spirit with which she entered it. Thegirl survived but a few days, and, I believe, saw her mistress _nomore_"

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, an elder of a Presbyterian church in Rochester, N. Y. , who lived some years in Virginia, gives the following:

"The manner of treating the sick slaves, and especially in _chronic_cases, was to my mind peculiarly revolting. My opportunities forobservation in this department were better than in, perhaps, anyother, as the friend under whose direction I commenced my medicalstudies, enjoyed a high reputation as a _surgeon_. I rode considerablywith him in his practice, and assisted in the surgical operations anddressings from time to time. In confirmed cases of disease, it wascommon for the master to place the subject under the care of aphysician or surgeon, at whose expense the patient should be kept, andif death ensued to the patient, or the disease was not cured, nocompensation was to be made, but if cured a bonus of one, two, orthree hundred dollars was to be given. No provision was made againstthe _barbarity_ or _neglect_ of the physician, &c. I have seen_fifteen or twenty of these helpless sufferers_ crowded together inthe true spirit of slaveholding inhumanity, like the "brutes thatperish, " and driven from time to time _like_ brutes into a commonyard, where they had to suffer any and every operation and experiment, which interest, caprice, or professional curiosity mightprompt, --unrestrained by law, public sentiment, or the claims ofcommon humanity. "

Rev. WILLIAM T. ALLAN, son of Rev. Dr. Allan, a slaveholder, ofHuntsville, Alabama, says in a letter now before us:

"Colonel Robert H. Watkins, of Laurence county, Alabama, who ownedabout three hundred slaves, after employing a physician among them forsome time, ceased to do so, alleging as the reason, that it wascheaper to lose a few negroes every year than to pay a physician. ThisColonel Watkins was a Presidential elector in 1836. "

A. A. GUTHRIE, Esq. , elder in the Presbyterian church at Putnam, Muskingum county, Ohio, furnishes the testimony which follows. 

"A near female friend of mine in company with another young lady, inattempting to visit a sick woman on Washington's Bottom, Wood county, Virginia, missed the way, and stopping to ask directions of a group ofcolored children on the outskirts of the plantation of Francis Keen, Sen. , they were told to ask 'aunty, in the house. ' On entering thehut, says my informant, I beheld such a sight as I hope never to seeagain; its sole occupant was a female slave of the said Keen--herwhole wearing apparel consisted of a frock, made of the coarsest towcloth, and so scanty, that it could not have been made more tightaround her person. In the hut there was neither table, chair, norchest--a stool and a rude fixture in one corner, were all itsfurniture. On this last were a little straw and a few old remnants ofwhat had been bedding--all exceedingly filthy. 

"The woman thus situated _had been for more than a day in travail_, without any assistance, any nurse, or any kind of properprovision--during the night she said some fellow slave woman wouldstay with her, and the aforesaid children through the day. From awoman, who was a slave of Keen's at the same time, my informantlearned, that this poor woman suffered for three days, and thendied--when too late to save her life her master sent assistance. Itwas understood to be a rule of his, to neglect his women entirely insuch times of trial, unless they previously came and informed him, and asked for aid. "

Rev. PHINEAS SMITH, of Centreville, N. Y, who has resided four yearsat the south, says:

"Often when the slaves are sick, their accustomed toil is exacted fromthem. Physicians are rarely called for their benefit. "

Rev. HORACE MOULTON, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal church inMarlborough, Mass. , who resided a number of years in Georgia, says:

"Another dark side of slavery is the neglect of the _aged_ and_sick_. Many when sick, are suspected by their masters of _feigning_sickness, and are therefore whipped out to work after disease has gotfast hold of them; when the masters learn, that they are really sick, they are in many instances left alone in their cabins during workhours; not a few of the slaves are left to die without having onefriend to wipe off the sweat of death. When the slaves are sick, themasters do not, as a general thing, employ physicians, but "doctor"them themselves, and their mode of practice in almost all cases is tobleed and give salts. When women are confined they have no physician, but are committed to the care of slave midwives. Slaves complain verylittle when sick, when they die they are frequently buried at nightwithout much ceremony, and in many instances without any; theircoffins are made by nailing together rough boards, frequently withtheir feet sticking out at the end, and sometimes they are put intothe ground without a coffin or box of any kind. "

PERSONAL NARRATIVES--PART II. 

TESTIMONY OF THE REV. WILLIAM T. ALLAN, LATE OF ALABAMA. 

Mr. ALLAN is a son of the Rev. Dr. Allan, a slaveholder and pastor ofthe Presbyterian Church at Huntsville, Alabama. He has recentlybecome the pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Chatham, Illinois. 

"I was born and have lived most of my life in the slave states, mainlyin the village of Huntsville, Alabama, where my parents still reside. I seldom went to a _plantation_, and as my visits were confined almostexclusively to the families of professing Christians, my _personal_knowledge of slavery, was consequently a knowledge of its _fairest_side, (if fairest may be predicated of foul. )

"There was one plantation just opposite my father's house in thesuburbs of Huntsville, belonging to Judge Smith, formerly a Senator inCongress from South Carolina, now of Huntsville. The name of hisoverseer was Tune. I have often seen him flogging the slaves in thefield, and have often heard their cries. Sometimes, too, I have metthem with the tears streaming down their faces, and the marks of thewhip, ('whelks, ') on their bare necks and shoulders. Tune was sosevere in his treatment, that his employer dismissed him after two orthree years, lest, it was said, he should kill off all the slaves. Buthe was immediately employed by another planter in the neighborhood. The following fact was stated to me by my brother, James M. Allan, nowresiding at Richmond, Henry county, Illinois, and clerk of the circuitand county courts. Tune became displeased with one of the women whowas pregnant, he made her lay down over a log, with her face towardsthe ground, and beat her so unmercifully, that she was soon afterdelivered of a _dead child_. 

"My brother also stated to me the following, which occurred near myfather's house, and within sight and hearing of the academy and publicgarden. Charles, a fine active negro, who belonged to a bricklayer inHuntsville, exchanged the burning sun of the brickyard to enjoy for aseason the pleasant shade of an adjacent mountain. When his master gothim back, he tied him by his hands so that his feet could just touchthe ground--stripped off his clothes, took a paddle, bored full ofholes, and paddled him leisurely all day long. It was two weeks beforethey could tell whether he would live or die. Neither of these casesattracted any particular notice in Huntsville. 

"While I lived in Huntsville a slave was killed in the mountain nearby. The circumstances were these. A white man (James Helton) huntingin the woods, suddenly came upon a black man, and commanded him tostop, the slave kept on running, Helton fired his rifle and the negrowas killed. [5]

[Footnote 5: This murder was committed about twelve years since. Atthat time, James G. Birney, Esq. , now Corresponding Secretary of theAmerican Anti-Slavery Society was the Solicitor (prosecuting attorney)for that judicial district. His views and feelings upon the subject ofslavery were, even at that period, in advance of the mass ofslaveholders, and he determined if possible to bring the murderer tojustice. He accordingly drew up an indictment and procured the findingof a true bill against Helton. Helton, meanwhile, moved over the lineinto the state of Tennessee, and such was the apathy of the community, individual effort proved unavailing; and though the murderer had goneno further than to an adjoining county (where perhaps he stillresides) he was never brought to trial. --ED. ]

"Mrs. Barr, wife of Rev. H. Barr of Carrollton, Illinois, formerlyfrom Courtland, Alabama, told me last spring, that she has very oftenstopped her ears that she might not hear the screams of slaves whowere under the lash, and that sometimes she has left her house, andretired to a place more distant, in order to get away from theiragonizing cries. 

"I have often seen groups of slaves on the public squares inHuntsville, who were to be sold at auction, and I have often seentheir tears gush forth and their countenances distorted with anguish. A considerable number were generally sold publicly every month. 

"The following facts I have just taken down from the lips of Mr. L. Turner, a regular and respectable member of the Second PresbyterianChurch in Springfield, our county town. He was born and brought up inCaroline county, Virginia. He says that the slaves are neitherconsidered nor treated as human beings. One of his neighbors whosename was Barr, he says, on one occasion stripped a slave and laceratedhis back with a handcard (for cotton or wool) and then washed it withsalt and water, with pepper in it. Mr. Turner _saw_ this. He furtherremarked that he believed there were _many_ slaves there in advancedlife whose backs had never been well since they began to work. 

"He stated that one of his uncles had killed a woman--broke her skullwith an ax helve: she had insulted her mistress! No notice was takenof the affair. Mr. T. Said, further, that slaves were _frequentlymurdered_. 

"He mentioned the case of one slaveholder, whom he had seen lay hisslaves on a large log, which he kept for the purpose, strip them, tiethem with the face downward, then have a kettle of hot waterbrought--take the paddle, made of hard wood, and perforated withholes, dip it into the hot water and strike--before every blow dippingit into the water--every hole at every blow would raise a 'whelk. 'This was the usual punishment fur _running away_. 

"Another slaveholder had a slave who had often run away, and oftenbeen severely whipped. After one of his floggings he burnt his master'sbarn: this so enraged the man, that when he caught him he took a pairof pincers and pulled his toe nails out. The negro then murdered twoof his master's children. He was taken after a desperate pursuit, (having been shot through the shoulder) and hung. 

"One of Mr. Turner's cousins, was employed as overseer on a largeplantation in Mississippi. On a certain morning he called the slavestogether, to give some orders. While doing it, a slave came runningout of his cabin, having a knife in his hand and eating his breakfast. The overseer seeing him coming with the knife, was somewhat alarmed, and instantly raised his gun and shot him dead. He said afterwards, that he believed the slave was perfectly innocent of any evilintentions, he came out hastily to hear the orders whilst eating. _No_notice was taken of the killing. 

"Mr. T. Related the whipping habits of one of his uncles in Virginia. He was a wealthy man, had a splendid house and grounds. A tree in his_front yard_, was used as a _whipping post_. When a slave was to bepunished, he would frequently invite some of his friends, have atable, cards and wine set out under the shade; he would then flog hisslave a little while, and then play cards and drink with his friends, occasionally taunting the slave, giving him the privilege ofconfessing such and such things, at his leisure, after a while floghim again, thus keeping it up for hours or half the day, and sometimesall day. This was his _habit_. 

"_February 4th. _--Since writing the preceding, I have been toCarrollton, on a visit to my uncle, Rev. Hugh Barr, who was originallyfrom Tennessee, lived 12 or 14 years in Courtland, Lawrence county, Alabama, and moved to Illinois in 1835. In conversation with thefamily, around the fireside, they stated a multitude of horrid facts, that were perfectly notorious in the neighborhood of Courtland. 

"William P. Barr, an intelligent young man, and member of his father'schurch in Carrollton, stated the following. Visiting at a Mr. Mosely's, near Courtland, William Mosely came in with a bloody knifein his hand, having just stabbed a negro man. The negro was sittingquietly in a house in the village, keeping a woman company who hadbeen left in charge of the house, --when Mosely, passing along, went inand demanded his business there. Probably his answer was not as civilas slaveholding requires, Mosely rushed upon him and stabbed him. Thewound laid him up for a season. Mosley was called to no account forit. When he came in with the bloody knife, he said he wished he hadkilled him. 

"John Brown, a slaveholder, and a member of the Presbyterian church inCourtland, Alabama, stated the following a few weeks since, inCarrollton. A man near Courtland, of the name of Thompson, recentlyshot a negro _woman_ through the head; and put the pistol so closethat her hair was singed. He did it in consequence of some difficultyin his dealings with her as a concubine. He buried her in a log heap;she was discovered by the buzzards gathering around it. 

"William P. Barr stated the following, as facts well known in theneighborhood of Courtland, but not witnessed by himself. Two men, bythe name of Wilson, found a fine looking negro man at 'Dandridge'sQuarter, ' without a pass; and flogged him so that he died in a shorttime. They were not punished. 

"Col. Blocker's overseer attempted to flog a negro--he refused to beflogged; whereupon the overseer seized an axe, and cleft his skull. The Colonel justified it. 

"One Jones whipped a woman to death for 'grabbling' a potato hill. Heowned 80 or 100 negroes. His own children could not live with him. 

"A man in the neighborhood of Courtland, Alabama, by the name ofPuryear, was so proverbially cruel that among the negroes he wasusually called 'the Devil. ' Mrs. Barr, wife of Rev. H. Barr, was atPuryear's house, and saw a negro girl about 13 years old, waitingaround the table, with a single garment--and that in cold weather;arms and feet bare--feet wretchedly swollen--arms burnt, and full ofsores from exposure. All the negroes under his care made a wretchedappearance. 

"Col. Robert H. Watkins had a runaway slave, who was called JimDragon. Before he was caught the last time, he had been out a year, within a few miles of his master's plantation. He never stole from anyone but his master, except when necessity compelled him. He said hehad a right to take from his master; and when taken, that he had, whilst out, seen his master a hundred times. Having been whipped, clogged with irons, and yoked, he was set at work in the field. Col. Watkins worked about 300 hands--generally had one negro out huntingrunaways. After employing a physician for some time among his negroes, he ceased to do so, alleging as the reason, that it was cheaper tolose a few negroes every year than to pay a physician. He was aPresidential elector in 1836. 

"Col. Ben Sherrod, another large planter in that neighborhood, isremarkable for his kindness to his slaves. He said to Rev. Mr. Barr, that he had no doubt he should be rewarded in heaven for his kindnessto his slaves; and yet his overseer, Walker, had to sleep with loadedpistols, for fear of assassination. Three of the slaves attempted tokill him once, because of his _treatment of their wives_. 

"Old Major Billy Watkins was noted for his severity. I well remember, when he lived in Madison county, to have often heard him yell at hisnegroes with the most savage fury. He would stand at his house, andwatch the slaves picking cotton; and if any of them straitened theirbacks for a moment, his savage yell would ring, 'bend your backs. '

"Mrs. Barr stated, that Mrs. H----, of Courtland, a member of thePresbyterian church, sent a little negro girl to jail, suspecting thatshe had attempted to put poison in the water pail. The fact was, thatthe child had found a vial, and was playing in the water. This samewoman (in high standing too, ) told the Rev. Mr. McMillan, that shecould 'cut Arthur Tappan's throat from ear to ear. '

"The clothing of slaves is in many cases comfortable, and in many itis far from being so. I have very often seen slaves, whose tatteredrags were neither comfortable nor decent. 

"Their _huts_ are sometimes comfortable, but generally they aremiserable _hovels_, where male and female are herded promiscuouslytogether. 

"As to the _usual_ allowance of food on the plantations in NorthAlabama, I cannot speak confidently, from _personal_ knowledge. Therewas a slave named Hadley, who was in the habit of visiting my father'sslaves occasionally. He had run away several times. His reason was, ashe stated, that they would not give him any meat--said he could notwork without meat. The last time I saw him, he had quite a heavy ironyoke on his neck, the two prongs twelve or fifteen inches long, extending out over his shoulders and bending upwards. 

"_Legal_ marriage is unknown among the slaves, they sometimes have amarriage form--generally, however, _none at all_. The pastor of thePresbyterian church in Huntsville, had two families of slaves when Ileft there. One couple were married by a negro preacher--the man wasrobbed of his wife a number of months afterwards, by her '_owner_. 'The other couple just 'took up together, ' without any form ofmarriage. They are both members of churches--the man a Baptist deacon, sober and correct in his deportment. They have a large family ofchildren--all children of concubinage--living in a minister's family. 

"If these statements are deemed of any value by you, in forwardingyour glorious enterprize, you are at liberty to use them as youplease. The great wrong is _enslaving a man_; all other wrongs arepigmies, compared with that. Facts might be gathered abundantly, toshow that it is _slavery itself_, and not cruelties merely, that makeslaves unhappy. Even those that are most kindly treated, are generallyfar from being happy. The slaves in my father's family are almost askindly treated as _slaves_ can be, yet they pant for liberty. 

"May the Lord guide you in this great movement. In behalf of theperishing, Your friend and brother, WILLIAM. T. ALLAN"

NARRATIVE OF MR. WILLIAM LEFTWICH, A NATIVE OF VIRGINIA. 

Mr. Leftwich is a grandson of Gen. Jabez Leftwich, who was for someyears a member of Congress from Virginia. Though born in Virginia, hehas resided most of his life in Alabama. He now lives in Delhi, Hamilton county, Ohio, near Cincinnati. 

As an introduction to his letter, the reader is furnished with thefollowing testimonial to his character, from the Rev. Horace Bushnell, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Delhi. Mr. B. Says:

"Mr. Leftwich is a worthy member of this church, and is a young man ofsterling integrity and veracity. 

H. BUSHNELL. "

The following is the letter of Mr. Leftwich, dated Dec. 26, 1838. 

"Dear Brother--I am not ranked among the abolitionists, yet I cannot, as a friend of humanity, withhold from the public such facts inrelation to the condition of the slaves, as have fallen under my ownobservation. That I am somewhat acquainted with slavery will be seen, as I narrate some incidents of my own life. My parents wereslaveholders, and moved from Virginia to Madison county, Alabama, during my infancy. My mother soon fell a victim to the climate. Beingthe youngest of the children, I was left in the care of my agedgrandfather, who never held a slave, though his sons owned from 90 to100 during the time I resided with him. As soon as I could carry ahoe, my uncle, by the name of Neely, persuaded my grandfather that Ishould be placed in his hands, and brought up in habits of industry. Iwas accordingly placed under his tuition. I left the domestic circle, little dreaming of the horrors that awaited me. My mother's ownbrother took me to the cotton field, there to learn habits ofindustry, and to be benefited by his counsels. But the sequel proved, that I was there to feel in my own person, and witness by experiencemany of the horrors of slavery. Instead of kind admonition, I was toendure the frowns of one, whose sympathies could neither be reached bythe prayers and cries of his slaves, nor by the entreaties andsufferings of a sister's son. Let those who call slaveholders kind, hospitable and humane, mark the course the slaveholder pursues withone born free, whose ancestors fought and bled for liberty; and thensay, if they can without a blush of shame, that he who robs thehelpless of every _right_, can be truly kind and hospitable. 

"In a short time after I was put upon the plantation, there was butlittle difference between me and the slaves, except being _white_, Iate at the master's table. The slaves were my companions in misery, and I well learned their condition, both in the house and field. Theirdwellings are log huts, from ten to twelve feet square; often withoutwindows, doors or floors. They have neither chairs, tables orbedsteads. These huts are occupied by eight, ten or twelve personseach. Their bedding generally consists of two old blankets. Many ofthem sleep night after night sitting upon their blocks or stools;others sleep in the open air. Our task was appointed, and from dawntill dark all must bend to their work. Their meals were taken withoutknife or plate, dish or spoon. Their food was corn _pone_, prepared inthe coarsest manner, with a small allowance of meat. Their meals inthe field were taken from the hands of the carrier, wherever he foundthem, with no more ceremony than in the feeding of swine. My uncle washis own overseer. For punishing in the field, he preferred a largehickory stick; and wo to him whose work was not done to please him, for the hickory was used upon our heads as remorselessly as if we hadbeen mad dogs. I was often the object of his fury, and shall bear themarks of it on my body till I die. Such was my suffering anddegradation, that at the end of five years, I hardly dared to say Iwas _free_. When thinning cotton, we went mostly on our knees. Oneday, while thus engaged, my uncle found my row behind; and, by way ofadmonition, gave me a few blows with his hickory, the marks of which Icarried for weeks. Often I followed the example of the fugitiveslaves, and betook myself to the mountains; but hunger and fear droveme back, to share with the wretched slave his toil and stripes. But Ihave talked enough about my own bondage; I will now relate a fewfacts, showing the condition of the slaves _generally_. 

"My uncle wishing to purchase what is called a good 'house wench, ' a_trader_ in human flesh soon produced a woman, recommending her ashighly as ever a jockey did a horse. She was purchased, but on trialwas found wanting in the requisite qualifications. She then fell avictim to the disappointed rage of my uncle; innocent or guilty, shesuffered greatly from his fury. He used to tie her to a peach tree inthe yard, and whip her till there was no sound place to lay anotherstroke, and repeat it so often that her back was kept continuallysore. Whipping the females around the legs, was a favorite mode ofpunishment with him. They must stand and hold up their clothes, whilehe plied his hickory. He did not, like some of his neighbors, keep apack of hounds for hunting runaway negroes, but be kept one dog forthat purpose, and when he came up with a runaway, it would have beendeath to attempt to fly, and it was nearly so to stand. Sometimes, when my uncle attempted to whip the slaves, the dog would rush uponthem and relieve them of their rags, if not of their flesh. One objectof my uncle's special hate was "Jerry, " a slave of a proud spirit. Hedefied all the curses, rage and stripes of his tyrant. Though he wasoften overpowered--for my uncle would frequently wear out his stickupon his head--yet be would never submit. As he was not expert inpicking cotton, he would sometimes run away in the fall, to escapeabuse. At one time, after an absence of some months, he was arrestedand brought back. As is customary, he was stripped, tied to a log, andthe cow-skin applied to his naked body till his master was exhausted. Then a large log chain was fastened around one ankle, passed up hisback, over his shoulders, then across his breast, and fastened underhis arm. In this condition he was forced to perform his daily task. Add to this he was chained each night, and compelled to chop woodevery Sabbath, to make up lost time. After being thus manacled forsome months, he was released--but his spirit was unsubdued. Soonafter, his master, in a paroxysm of rage, fell upon him, wore out hisstaff upon his head, loaded him again with chains, and after a month, sold him farther south. Another slave, by the name of Mince, who was aman of great strength, purloined some bacon on a Christmas eve. It wasmissed in the morning, and he being absent, was of course suspected. On returning home, my uncle commanded him to come to him, but herefused. The master strove in vain to lay hands on him; in vain heordered his slaves to seize him--they dared not. At length the masterhurled a stone at his head sufficient to have felled a bullock--but hedid not heed it. At that instant my aunt sprang forward, andpresenting the gun to my uncle, exclaimed, 'Shoot him! shoot him !' Hemade the attempt, but the gun missed fire, and Mince fled. He wastaken eight or ten months after while crossing the Ohio. When broughtback, the master, and an overseer on another plantation, took him tothe mountain and punished him to their satisfaction in secret; afterwhich he was loaded with chains and set to his task. 

"I here spent nearly all my life in the midst of slavery. From beingthe son of a slaveholder, I descended to the condition of a slave, andfrom that condition I rose (if you please to call it so, ) to thestation of a '_driver_. ' I have lived in Alabama, Tennessee, andKentucky; and I _know_ the condition of the slaves to be that ofunmixed wretchedness and degradation. And on the part of slaveholders, there is cruelty _untold_. The labor of the slave is constant toil, wrung out by fear. Their food is scanty, and taken without comfort. Their clothes answer the purposes neither of comfort nor decency. Theyare not allowed to read or write. Whether they may worship God or not, depends on the will of the master. The young children, until they canwork, often go naked during the warm weather. I could spend months indetailing the sufferings, degradation and cruelty inflicted uponslaves. But my soul sickens at the remembrance of these things. "

TESTIMONY OF MR. LEMUEL SAPINGTON, A NATIVE OF MARYLAND. 

Mr. Sapington, is a repentant "soul driver" or slave trader, now acitizen of Lancaster, Pa. He gives the following testimony in a letterdated, Jan. 21, 1839. 

"I was born in Maryland, afterwards moved to Virginia, where Icommenced the business of farming and trafficking in slaves. In myneighborhood the slaves were 'quartered. ' The description generallygiven of negro quarters is correct. The quarters are without floors, and not sufficient to keep off the inclemency of the weather, they areuncomfortable both in summer and winter. The food there consists ofpotatoes, pork, and corn, which were given to them daily, by weightand measure. The sexes were huddled together promiscuously. Theirclothing is made by themselves after night, though sometimes assistedby the old women who are no longer able to do out door work, consequently it is harsh and uncomfortable. I have frequently seenthose of both sexes who have not attained the age of twelve years gonaked. Their punishments are invariably cruel. For the slightestoffence, such as taking a hen's egg, I have seen them stripped andsuspended by their hands, their feet tied together, a fence rail ofordinary size placed between their ankles, and then most cruellywhipped, until, from head to foot, they were completely lacerated, apickle made for the purpose of salt and water, would then be appliedby a fellow-slave, for the purpose of healing the wounds as well asgiving pain. Then taken down and without the least respite sent towork with their hoe. 

"Pursuing my assumed right of driving souls, I went to the Southernpart of Virginia for the purpose of trafficking in slaves. In thatpart of the state, the cruelties practised upon the slaves, are fargreater than where I lived. The punishments there often resulted indeath to the slave. There was no law for the negro, but that of theoverseer's whip. In that part of the country, the slaves receivenothing for food, but corn in the ear, which has to be prepared forbaking after working hours, by grinding it with a hand-mill. This theytake to the fields with them, and prepare it for eating, by holding iton their hoes, over a fire made by a stump. Among the gangs, are oftenyoung women, who bring their children to the fields, and lay them in afence corner, while they are at work, only being permitted to nursethem at the option of the overseer. When a child is three weeks old, awoman is considered in working order. I have seen a woman, with heryoung child strapped to her back, laboring the whole day, beside aman, perhaps the father of the child, and he not being permitted togive her any assistance, himself being under the whip. The uncommonhumanity of the driver allowing her the comfort of doing so. I wasthen selling a drove of slaves, which I had brought by water fromBaltimore, my conscience not allowing me to drive, as was generallythe case uniting the slaves by collars and chains, and thus drivingthem under the whip. About that time an unaccountable something, whichI now know was an interposition of Providence, prevented me fromprosecuting any farther this unholy traffic; but though I had quittedit, I still continued to live in a slave state, witnessing every dayits evil effects upon my fellow beings. Among which was aheart-rending scene that took place in my father's house, which led meto lease a slave state, as well as all the imaginary comforts arisingfrom slavery. On preparing for my removal to the state ofPennsylvania, it became necessary for me to go to Louisville, inKentucky, where, if possible, I became more horrified with theimpositions practiced upon the negro than before. There a slave wassold to go farther south, and was hand-cuffed for the purpose ofkeeping him secure. But choosing death rather than slavery, he jumpedoverboard and was drowned. When I returned four weeks afterwards hisbody, that had floated three miles below, was yet unburied. One fact;it is impossible for a person to pass through a slave state, if he haseyes open, without beholding every day cruelties repugnant tohumanity. 

Respectfully Yours, LEMUEL SAPINGTON. 

TESTIMONY OF MRS. NANCY LOWRY, A NATIVE OF KENTUCKY. 

Mrs. Lory, is a member of the non-conformist church in Osnaburg, StarkCounty, Ohio, she is a native of Kentucky. We have received from herthe following testimony. 

"I resided in the family of Reuben Long, the principal part of thetime, from seven to twenty-two years of age. Mr. Long had 16 slaves, among whom were three who were treated with severity, although Mr. Long was thought to be a very human master. These three, namely John, Ned, and James, had wives; John and Ned had theirs at some distance, but James had his with him. All three died a premature death, and itwas generally believed by his neighbors, that extreme whipping was thecause. I believe so too. Ned died about the age of 25 and John 34 or35. The cause of their flogging was commonly staying a little over thetime, with their wives. Mr. Long would tie them up by the wrist, sohigh that their toes would just touch the ground, and then with acow-hide lay the lash upon the naked back, until he was exhausted, when he would sit down and rest. As soon as he had restedsufficiently, he would ply the cow-hide again, thus he would continueuntil the whole back of the poor victim was lacerated into one uniformcoat of blood. Yet he was a strict professor of the Christianreligion, in the southern church. I frequently washed the wounds ofJohn, with salt water, to prevent putrefaction. This was the usualcourse pursued after a severe flogging; their backs would be full ofgashes, so deep the I could almost lay my finger in them. They weregenerally laid up after the flogging for several days. The lastflogging Ned got, he was confined to the bed, which he never left tillhe was carried to his grave. During John's confinement in his lastsickness on one occasion while attending on him, he exclaimed, 'oh, Nancy, Miss Nancy, I haven't much longer in this world, I feel as ifmy whole body inside and all my bones were beaten into a jelly. ' Soonafter he died. John and Ned were both professors of religion. 

"John Ruffner, a slaveholder, had one slave named Pincy, whom he aswell as Mrs. Ruffner would often flog very severely. I frequently sawMrs. Ruffner flog her with the broom, shovel, or any thing she couldseize in her rage. She would knock her down and then kick and stampher most unmercifully, until she would be apparently so lifeless, thatI more than once thought she would never recover. Often Pincy wouldtry to shelter herself from the blows of her mistress, by creepingunder the bed, from which Mrs. Ruffner would draw her by the feet, andthen stamp and leap on her body, till her breath would be gone. OftenPincy, would cry, 'Oh Missee, don't kill me!' 'Oh Lord, don't killme!' 'For God's sake don't kill me!' But Mrs. Ruffner would beat andstamp away, with all the venom of a demon. The cause of Pincy'sflogging was, not working enough, or making some mistake in baking, &c. &c. Many a night Pincy had to lie on the bare floor, by the sideof the cradle, rocking the baby of her mistress, and if she would fallasleep, and suffer the child to cry, so as to waken Mrs. Ruffner, shewould be sure to receive a flogging. "

TESTIMONY OF MR. WM. C. GILDERSLEEVE, A NATIVE OF GEORGIA

MR. W. C. GILDERSLEEVE, a native of Georgia, is an elder of thePresbyterian Church at Wilkesbarre, Pa. 

"_Acts of cruelty, without number, fell under my observation_ while Ilived in Georgia. I will mention but one. A slave of a Mr. Pinkney, onhis way with a wagon to Savannah, 'camped' for the night by the roadside. That night, the nearest hen-roost was robbed. On his return, thehen-roost was again visited, and the fowl counted one less in themorning. The oldest son, with some attendants made search, and cameupon the poor fellow, in the act of dressing his spoil. He was toonimble for them, and made his retreat good into a dense swamp. Whenmuch effort to start him from his hiding place had provedunsuccessful, it was resolved to lay an ambush for him, some distanceahead. The wagon, meantime, was in charge of a lad, who accompaniedthe teamster as an assistant. The little boy lay still till nearlynight, (in the hope probably that the teamster would return, ) when hestarted with his wagon. After travelling some distance, the lost onemade his appearance, when the ambush sprang upon him. The poor fellowwas conducted back to the plantation. He expected little mercy. Hebegged for himself, in the most suplicating manner, 'pray massa giveme 100 lashes and let me go. ' He was then tied by the hands, to a limbof a large mulberry tree, which grew in the yard, so that his feetwere raised a few inches from the ground, while a _sharpened stick_was driven underneath that he might rest his weight on it, or swing byhis hands. In this condition 100 lashes were laid on his bare body. Istood by and witnessed the whole, without as I recollect feeling theleast compassion. So hardening is the influence of slavery, that itvery much destroys feeling for the slave. "

TESTIMONY OF MR. HIRAM WHITE--A NATIVE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Mr. WHITE resided thirty-two years in Chatham county, North Carolina, and is now a member of the Baptist Church, at Otter Creek Prairie, Illinois. 

About the 20th December 1830, a report was raised that the slaves inChatham county, North Carolina, were going to rise on Christmas day, in consequence of which a considerable commotion ensued among theinhabitants; orders were given by the Governor to the militiacaptains, to appoint patrolling captains in each district, and orderswere given for every man subject to military duty to patrol as theircaptains should direct. I went two nights in succession, and afterthat refused to patrol at all. The reason why I refused was this, orders were given to search every negro house for books or prints ofany kind, and _Bibles_ and _Hymn books_ were particularly mentioned. And should we find any, our orders were to inflict punishment bywhipping the slave until he _informed who_ gave them to him, or howthey came by them. 

As regards the comforts of the slaves in the vicinity of my residence, I can say they had nothing that would bear that name. It is true, theslaves in general, of a good crop year, were tolerably well fed, butof a bad crop year, they were, as a general thing, cut short of theirallowance. Their houses were pole cabins, without loft or floor. Theirbeds were made of what is there called "broom-straw. " The men morecommonly sleep on benches. Their clothing would compare well withtheir lodging. Whipping was common. It was hardly possible for a manwith a common pair of ears, if he was out of his house but a shorttime on Monday mornings, to miss of hearing the sound of the lash, andthe cries of the sufferers pleading with their masters to desist. These scenes were more common throughout the time of my residencethere, from 1799 to 1831. 

Mr. Hedding of Chatham county, held a slave woman. I traveled pastHeddings as often as once in two weeks during the winter of 1828, andalways saw her clad in a single cotton dress, sleeves came half way tothe elbow, and in order to prevent her running away, a child, supposedto be about seven years of age, was connected with her by a long chainfastened round her neck, and in this situation she was compelled allthe day to grub up the roots of shrubs and sapplings to prepare groundfor the plough. It is not uncommon for slaves to make up on Sundayswhat they are not able to perform through the week of their tasks. 

At the time of the rumored insurrection above named, Chatham jail wasfilled with slaves who were said to have been concerned in the plot. Without the least evidence of it, they were punished in divers ways;some were whipped, some had their _thumbs screwed in a vice_ to makethem confess, but no proof satisfactory was ever obtained that thenegroes had ever thought of an insurrection, nor did any so far as Icould learn, acknowledge that an insurrection had ever been projected. From this time forth, the slaves were prohibited from assemblingtogether for the worship of God, and many of those who had previouslybeen authorized to preach the gospel were prohibited. 

Amalgamation was common. There was scarce a family of slaves that hadfemales of mature age where there were not some mulatto children. 

HIRAM WHITE

_Otter Creek Prairie, Jan. 22, 1839_. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. JOHN M. NELSON--A NATIVE OF VIRGINIA. 

Extract of a letter, dated January 3, 1839, from John M. Nelson, Esq. , of Hillsborough. Mr. Nelson removed from Virginia to Highland county, Ohio, many years since, where he is extensively known and respected. 

I was born and raised in Augusta county, Virginia; my father was anelder in the Presbyterian Church, and was "owner" of about twentyslaves; he was what was generally termed a "good master. " His slaveswere generally tolerably well fed and clothed, and not over worked, they were sometimes permitted to attend church, and called in tofamily worship; few of them, however, availed themselves of theseprivileges. On _some occasions_ I have seen him whip them severely, particularly for the crime of trying to obtain their liberty, or forwhat was called, "running away. " For _this_ they were scourged moreseverely than for any thing else. After they have been retaken, I haveseen them stripped naked and suspended by the hands, sometimes to atree, sometimes to a post, until their toes barely touched the ground, and whipped with a cowhide until the blood dripped from their backs. Aboy named Jack, particularly, I have seen served in this way more thanonce. When I was quite a child, I recollect it grieved me very much tosee one _tied up_ to be whipped, and I used to intercede with tears intheir behalf, and mingle my cries with theirs, and feel almost willingto take part of the punishment; I have been severely rebuked by myfather for this kind of sympathy. Yet, such is the hardening nature ofsuch scenes, that from this kind of commiseration for the sufferingslave, I became so blunted that I could not only witness their stripeswith composure, but _myself_ inflict them, and that without remorse. One case I have often looked back to with sorrow and contrition, particularly since I have been convinced that "negroes are men. " WhenI was perhaps fourteen or fifteen years of age, I undertook to correcta young fellow named Ned, for some supposed offence; I think it wasleaving a bridle out of its proper place; he being larger and strongerthan myself took hold of my arms and held me, in order to prevent mystriking him; this I considered the height of insolence, and cried forhelp, when my father and mother both came running to my rescue. Myfather stripped and tied him, and took him into the orchard, whereswitches were plenty, and directed me to whip him; when one switchwore out he supplied me with others. After I had whipped him a while, he fell on his knees to implore forgiveness, and I kicked him in theface; my father said, "don't kick him, but whip him;" this I did untilhis back was literally covered with _welts_. I know I have repented, and trust I have obtained pardon for these things. 

My father owned a woman, (we used to call aunt Grace, ) she waspurchased in Old Virginia. She has told me that her old master, in his_will_, gave her her freedom, but at his death, his sons had sold herto my father: when he bought her she manifested some unwillingness togo with him, when she was put in irons and taken by force. This wasbefore I was born; but I remember to have seen the irons, and was toldthat was what they had been used for. Aunt Grace is still living, andmust be between seventy and eighty years of age; she has, for the lastforty years, been an exemplary Christian. When I was a youth I tooksome pains to learn her to read; this is now a great consolation toher. Since age and infirmity have rendered her of little value to her"owners, " she is permitted to read as much as she pleases; this shecan do, with the aid of glasses, in the old family Bible, which isalmost the only book she has ever looked into. This with some littlemending for the black children, is all she does; she is still held asa slave. I well remember what a _heart-rending scene_ there was in thefamily when _my father sold her husband_; this was, I suppose, thirty-five years ago. And yet my father was considered one of thebest of masters. I know of few who were better, but of _many_ who wereworse. 

The last time I saw my father, which was in the fall of 1832, hepromised me that he would free all his slaves at his death. He diedhowever without doing it; and I have understood since, that he omittedit, through the influence of Rev. Dr. Speece, a Presbyterian minister, who lived in the family, and was a _warm friend of the ColonizationSociety_. 

About the year 1809 or 10, I became a student of Rev. George Bourne;he was the first abolitionist I had ever seen, and the first I hadever heard pray or plead for the oppressed, which gave me the firstmisgivings about the _innocence_ of slaveholding. I receivedimpressions from Mr. Bourne which I could not get rid of, [6] anddetermined in my own mind that when I settled in life, it should be ina free state; this determination I carried into effect in 1813, when Iremoved to this place, which I supposed at that time, to be all theopposition to slavery that was necessary, but the moment I becameconvinced that all slaveholding was in itself _sinful_, I became anabolitionist, which was about four years ago. 

[Footnote 6: Mr. Bourne resided seven years in Virginia, "in perilsamong false brethren; fiercely persecuted for his faithful testimonyagainst slavery. More than twenty years since he published a workentitled 'The Book and Slavery irreconcileable. '"]

TESTIMONY OF ANGELINA GRIMKÉ WELD. 

Mrs. Weld is the youngest daughter of the late Judge Grimké, of theSupreme Court of South Carolina, and a sister of the late Hon. ThomasS. Grimké, of Charleston. 

Fort Lee, Bergen Co. , New Jersey, Fourth month 6th, 1839. 

I sit down to comply with thy request, preferred in the name of theExecutive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society. Theresponsibility laid upon me by such a request, leaves me no option. While I live, and slavery lives, I _must_ testify against it. If Ishould hold my peace, "the stone would cry out of the wall, and thebeam out of the timber would answer it. " But though I feel a necessityupon me, and "a woe unto me, " if I withhold my testimony, I give itwith a heavy heart. My flesh crieth out, "if it be possible, let_this_ cup pass from me;" but, "Father, _thy_ will be done, " is, Itrust, the breathing of my spirit. Oh, the slain of the daughter of mypeople! they lie in all the ways; their tears fall as the rain, andare their meat day and night; their blood runneth down like water;their plundered hearths are desolate; they weep for their husbands andchildren, because they are not; and the proud waves do continually goover them, while no eye pitieth, and no man careth for their souls. 

But it is not alone for the sake of my poor brothers and sisters inbonds, or for the cause of truth, and righteousness, and humanity, that I testify; the deep yearnings of affection for the mother thatbore me, who is still a slaveholder, both in fact and in heart; for mybrothers and sisters, (a large family circle, ) and for my numerousother slaveholding kindred in South Carolina, constrain me to speak:for even were slavery no curse to its victims, the exercise ofarbitrary power works such fearful ruin upon the hearts of_slaveholders_, that I should feel impelled to labor and pray for itsoverthrow with my last energies and latest breath. 

I think it important to premise, that I have seen almost nothing ofslavery on _plantations_. My testimony will have respect exclusivelyto the treatment of "_house-servants_, " and chiefly those belonging tothe first families in the city of Charleston, both in the religiousand in the fashionable world. And here let me say, that the treatmentof _plantation_ slaves cannot be fully known, except by the poorsufferers themselves, and their drivers and overseers. In a multitudeof instances, even the master can know very little of the actualcondition of his own field-slaves, and his wife and daughters farless. A few facts concerning my own family will show this. Ourpermanent residence was in Charleston; our country-seat (Bellemont, )was 200 miles distant, in the north-western part of the state; where, for some years, our family spent a few months annually. Our_plantation_ was three miles from this family mansion. There, all thefield-slaves lived and worked. Occasionally, once a month, perhaps, some of the family would ride over to the plantation, but I nevervisited the _fields where the slaves were at work_, and knew almostnothing of their condition; but this I do know, that the overseers whohad charge of them, were generally unprincipled and intemperate men. But I rejoice to know, that the general treatment of slaves in thatregion of country, was far milder than on the plantations in the lowercountry. 

Throughout all the eastern and middle portions of the state, theplanters very rarely reside permanently on their plantations. Theyhave almost invariably _two residences_, and spend less than half theyear on their estates. Even while spending a few months on them, politics, field-sports, races, speculations, journeys, visits, company, literary pursuits, &c. , absorb so much of their time, thatthey must, to a considerable extent, take the condition of theirslaves _on trust_, from the reports of their overseers. I make thisstatement, because these slaveholders (the wealthier class, ) are, Ibelieve, almost the only ones who visit the north with theirfamilies;--and northern opinions of slavery are based chiefly on theirtestimony. 

But not to dwell on preliminaries, I wish to record my testimony tothe faithfulness and accuracy with which my beloved sister, Sarah M. Grimké, has, in her 'narrative and testimony, ' on a preceding page, described the condition of the slaves, and the effect upon the heartsof slaveholders, (even the best, ) caused by the exercise of unlimitedpower over moral agents. Of the _particular acts_ which she hasstated, I have no personal knowledge, as they occurred before myremembrance; but of the spirit that prompted them, and that constantlydisplays itself in scenes of similar horror, the recollections of mychildhood, and the effaceless imprint upon my riper years, with thebreaking of my heart-strings, when, finding that I was powerless toshield the victims, I tore myself from my home and friends, and becamean exile among strangers--all these throng around me as witnesses, andtheir testimony is graven on my memory with a pen of fire. 

Why I did not become totally hardened, under the daily operation ofthis system, God only knows; in deep solemnity and gratitude, I say, it was the _Lord's_ doing, and marvellous in mine eyes. Even before myheart was touched with the love of Christ, I used to say, "Oh that Ihad the wings of a dove, that I might flee away and be at rest;" for Ifelt that there could be no rest for me in the midst of such outragesand pollutions. And yet I saw _nothing_ of slavery in its most vulgarand repulsive forms. I saw it in the city, among the fashionable andthe honorable, where it was garnished by refinement, and decked outfor show. A few _facts_ will unfold the state of society in the circlewith which I was familiar far better than any general assertions I canmake. 

I will first introduce the reader to a woman of the highestrespectability--one who was foremost in every benevolent enterprise, and stood for many years, I may say, at the _head_ of the fashionableElite of the city of Charleston, and afterwards at the head of themoral and religious female society there. It was after she had made aprofession of religion, and retired from the fashionable world, that Iknew her; therefore I will present her in her religious character. This lady used to keep cowhides, or small paddles, (called 'pancakesticks, ') in four different apartments in her house; so that when shewished to punish, or to have punished, any of her slaves, she mightnot have the trouble of sending for an instrument of torture. For manyyears, one or other, and _often_ more of her slaves, were flogged_every day_; particularly the young slaves about the house, whosefaces were slapped, or their hands beat with the 'pancake stick; forevery trifling offence--and often for no fault at all. But thefloggings were not all; the scolding, and abuse daily heaped upon themall, were worse: 'fools' and 'liars, ' 'sluts' and 'husseys, ''hypocrites' and 'good-for-nothing creatures'; were the commonepithets with which her mouth was filled, when addressing her slaves, adults as well as children. Very often she would take a position ather window, in an upper story, and scold at her slaves while workingin the garden, at some distance from the house, (a large yardintervening, ) and occasionally order a flogging. I have known her thuson the watch, scolding for more than an hour at a time, in so loud avoice that the whole neighborhood could hear her; and this without theleast apparent feeling of shame. Indeed, it was no disgrace amongslaveholders, and did not in the least injure her standing, either asa lady or a Christian, in the aristocratic circle in which she moved. After the 'revival' in Charleston, in 1825, she opened her house tosocial prayer-meetings. The room in which they were held in theevening, and where the voice of prayer was heard around the familyaltar, and where she herself retired for private devotion thrice eachday, was the very place in which, when her slaves were to be whippedwith the cowhide, they were taken to receive the infliction; and thewail of the sufferer would be heard, where, perhaps only a few hoursprevious, rose the voices of prayer and praise. This mistress wouldoccasionally send her slaves, male and female, to the Charlestonwork-house to be punished. One poor girl, whom she sent there to beflogged, and who was accordingly stripped _naked_ and whipped, showedme the deep gashes on her back--I might have laid my whole finger inthem--_large pieces of flesh had actually been cut out by thetorturing lash_. She sent another female slave there, to be imprisonedand worked on the tread-mill. This girl was confined several days, andforced to work the mill while in a state of suffering from anothercause. For ten days or two weeks after her return, she was lame, fromthe violent exertion necessary to enable her to keep the step on themachine. She spoke to me with intense feeling of this outrage uponher, as a _woman_. Her men servants were sometimes flogged there; andso exceedingly offensive has been the putrid flesh of their laceratedbacks, for days after the infliction, that they would be kept out ofthe house--the smell arising from their wounds being too horrible tobe endured. They were always stiff and sore for some days, and not ina condition to be seen by visitors. 

This professedly Christian woman was a most awful illustration of theruinous influence of arbitrary power upon the temper--her bursts ofpassion upon the heads of her victims were dreaded even by her ownchildren, and very often, all the pleasure of social intercoursearound the domestic board, was destroyed by her ordering the cook intoher presence, and storming at him, when the dinner or breakfast wasnot prepared to her taste, and in the presence of all her children, commanding the waiter to slap his face. _Fault-finding_, was with herthe constant accompaniment of every meal, and banished that peacewhich should hover around the social board, and smile on every face. It was common for her to order brothers to whip their own sisters, andsisters their own brothers, and yet no woman visited among the poormore than she did, or gave more liberally to relieve their wants. This may seem perfectly unaccountable to a northerner, but theseseeming contradictions vanish when we consider that over _them_ shepossessed no arbitrary power, they were always presented to her mindas unfortunate sufferers, towards whom her sympathies most freelyflowed; she was ever ready to wipe the tears from _their_ eyes, andopen wide her purse for _their_ relief, but the others were her_vassals_, thrust down by public opinion beneath her feet, to be ather beck and call, ever ready to serve in all humility, her, whom Godin his providence had set over them--it was their _duty_ to abide inabject submission, and hers to _compel_ them to do so--_it was thusthat she reasoned_. Except at family prayers, none were permitted to_sit_ in her presence, but the seamstresses and waiting maids, andthey, however delicate might be their circumstances, were forced tosit upon low stools, without backs, that they might be constantlyreminded of their inferiority. A slave who waited in the house, wasguilty on a particular occasion of going to visit his wife, and keptdinner waiting a little, (his wife was the slave of a lady who livedat a little distance. ) When the family sat down to the table, themistress began to scold the waiter for the offence--he attempted toexcuse himself--she ordered him to hold his tongue--he venturedanother apology; her son then rose from the table in a rage, and beatthe face and ears of the waiter so dreadfully that the blood gushedfrom his mouth, and nose, and ears. This mistress was a _professor ofreligion_; her daughter who related the circumstance, was a _fellowmember_ of the Presbyterian church _with the poor outragedslave_--instead of feeling indignation at this outrageous abuse of herbrother in the church, she justified the deed, and said "he got justwhat he deserved. " I solemnly believe this to be a true picture of_slaveholding religion_. 

The following is another illustration of it:

A mistress in Charleston sent a grey headed female slave to theworkhouse, and had her severely flogged. The poor old woman went toan acquaintance of mine and begged her to buy her, and told her howcruelly she had been whipped. My friend examined her _lacerated back_, and out of compassion did purchase her. The circumstance wasmentioned to one of the former owner's relatives, who asked her if itwere true. The mistress told her it was, and said that she had madethe severe whipping of this aged woman a _subject of prayer_, and thatshe believed she had done right to have it inflicted upon her. Thelast 'owner' of the poor old slave, said she, had no fault to findwith her as a servant. 

I remember very well that when I was a child, our next door neighborwhipped a young woman so brutally, that in order to escape his blowsshe rushed through the drawing-room window in the second story, andfell upon the street pavement below and broke her hip. Thiscircumstance produced no excitement or inquiry. 

The following circumstance occurred in Charleston, in 1828:

A slaveholder, after flogging a little girl about thirteen years old, set her on a table with her feet fastened in a pair of stocks. He thenlocked the door and took out the key. When the door was opened shewas found dead, having fallen from the table. When I asked aprominent lawyer, who belonged to one of the first families in theState, whether the murderer of this helpless child could not beindicted, he coolly replied, that the slave was Mr. ----'s property, and if he chose to suffer the _loss_, no one else had any thing to dowith it. The loss of _human life_, the distress of the parents andother relatives of the little girl, seemed utterly out of histhoughts: it was the loss of _property_ only that presented itself tohis mind. 

I knew a gentleman of great benevolence and generosity of character, so essentially to injure the eye of a little boy, about ten years old, as to destroy its sight, by the blow of a cowhide, inflicted whilst hewas whipping him. [7] I have heard the same individual speak of"breaking down the spirit of a slave under the lash" as perfectlyright. 

[Footnote 7: The Jewish law would have set this servant free, for hiseye's sake, but he was held in slavery and sold from hand to hand, although, besides this title to his liberty according to Jewish law, he was a _mulatto_, and therefore free under the Constitution of theUnited States, in whose preamble our fathers declare that theyestablished it expressly to "secure the blessings of _liberty_ tothemselves and _their posterity_. "--Ed. ]

I also know that an aged slave of his, (by marriage, ) was allowed toget a scanty and precarious subsistence, by begging in the streets ofCharleston--he was too old to work, and therefore _his allowance wasstopped_, and he was turned out to make his living by begging. 

When I was about thirteen years old, I attended a seminary, inCharleston, which was superintended by a man and his wife of superioreducation. They had under their instruction the daughters of nearlyall the aristocracy. Their cruelty to their slaves, both male andfemale, I can never forget. I remember one day there was called intothe school room to open a window, a boy whose head had been shaved inorder to disgrace him, and he had been so dreadfully whipped that hecould hardly walk. So horrible was the impression produced upon mymind by his heart-broken countenance and crippled person that Ifainted away. The sad and ghastly countenance of one of their femalemulatto slaves who used to sit on a low stool at her sewing in thepiazza, is now fresh before me. She often told me, secretly, howcruelly she was whipped when they sent her to the work house. I hadknown so much of the terrible scourgings inflicted in that house ofblood, that when I was once obliged to pass it, the very sight smoteme with such horror that my limbs could hardly sustain me. I felt asif I was passing the precincts of hell. A friend of mine who lived inthe neighborhood, told me she often heard the screams of the slavesunder their torture. 

I once heard a physician of a high family, and of great respectabilityin his profession, say, that when he sent his slaves to the work-houseto be flogged, he always went to see it done, that he might be surethey were properly, i. E. _severely_ whipped. He also related thefollowing circumstance in my presence. He had sent a youth of abouteighteen to this horrible place to be whipped and _afterwards_ to beworked upon the treadmill. From not keeping the step, which probablyhe COULD NOT do, in consequence of the lacerated state of his body;his arm got terribly torn, from the shoulder to the wrist. Thisphysician said, he went every day to attend to it himself, in orderthat he might use those restoratives, which _would inflict thegreatest possible pain_. This poor boy, after being imprisoned therefor some weeks, was then brought home, and compelled to wear ironclogs on his ankles for one or two months. I saw him with those ironson one day when I was at the house. This man was, when young, remarkable in the fashionable world for his elegant and fascinatingmanners, but the exercise of the slaveholder's power has thrown thefierce air of tyranny even over these. 

I heard another man of equally high standing say, that he believed hesuffered far more than his waiter did whenever he flogged him for hefelt the _exertion_ for days afterward, but he could not let hisservant go on in the neglect of his business, it was _his duty_ tochastise him. "His duty" to flog this boy of seventeen so severelythat he felt _the exertion_ for days after! and yet he never felt itto be his duty to instruct him, or have him instructed, even in thecommon principles of morality. I heard the mother of this man say itwould be no surprise to her, if he killed a slave some day, for, that, when transported with passion he did not seem to care what he did. Heonce broke a _large_ stick over the back of a slave and at anothertime the ivory butt-end of a long coach whip over the _head_ ofanother. This last was attacked with epileptic fits some months after, and has ever since been subject to them, and occasionally to violentfits of insanity. 

Southern mistresses sometimes flog their slaves themselves thoughgenerally one slave is compelled to flog another. Whilst staying at afriend's house some years ago, I one day saw the mistress with acow-hide in her hand, and heard her scolding in an under tone, herwaiting man, who was about twenty-five years old. Whether she actuallyinflicted the blows I do not know, for I hastened out of sight andhearing. It was not the first time I had seen a mistress thus engaged. I knew she was a cruel mistress, and had heard her daughtersdisputing, whether their mother did right or wrong, to send the slave_children_, (whom she sent out to sweep chimneys) to the work house tobe whipped if they did not bring in their wages regularly. This womanmoved in the most fashionable circle in Charleston. The income of thisfamily was derived mostly from the hire of their slaves, about onehundred in number. Their luxuries were blood-bought luxuries indeed. And yet what stranger would ever have inferred their cruelties fromthe courteous reception and bland manners of the parlor. Every thingcruel and revolting is carefully concealed from strangers, especiallythose from the north. Take an instance. I have known the master andmistress of a family send to their friends to _borrow_ servants towait on company, because their own slaves had been so cruelly floggedin the work house, that they could not walk without limping at everystep, and their putrified flesh emitted such an intolerable smell thatthey were not fit to be in the presence of company. How cannortherners know these things when they are hospitably received atsouthern tables and firesides? I repeat it, no one who has not been an_integral part_ of a slaveholding community, can have any idea of itsabominations. It is a whited sepulchre full of dead men's bones andall uncleanness. Blessed be God, the Angel of _Truth_ has descendedand rolled away the stone from the mouth of the sepulchre, and sitsupon it. The abominations so long hidden are now brought forth beforeall Israel and the sun. Yes, the Angel of Truth _sits upon thisstone_, and it can never be rolled back again. 

The utter disregard of the comfort of the slaves, in _little_ things, can scarcely be conceived by those who have not been a _componentpart_ of slaveholding communities. Take a few particulars out ofhundreds that might be named. In South Carolina musketoes swarm inmyriads, more than half the year--they are so excessively annoying atnight, that no family thinks of sleeping without nets or"musketoe-bars" hung over their bedsteads, yet slaves are neverprovided with them, unless it be the favorite old domestics who getthe cast-off pavilions; and yet these very masters and mistresses willbe so kind to their _horses_ as to provide them with _fly nets_. Bedsteads and bedding too, are rarely provided for any of theslaves--if the waiters and coachmen, waiting maids, cooks, washers, &c. , have beds at all, they must generally get them for themselves. Commonly they lie down at night on the bare floor, with a smallblanket wrapped round them in winter, and in summer a coarse osnaburgsheet, or nothing. Old slaves generally have beds, but it is becausewhen younger _they have provided them for themselves. _

Only two meals a day are allowed the house slaves--the _first attwelve o'clock_. If they eat before this time, it is by stealth, and Iam sure there must be a good deal of suffering among them from_hunger_, and particularly by children. Besides this, they are oftenkept from their meals by way of punishment. No table is provided forthem to eat from. They know nothing of the comfort and pleasure ofgathering round the social board--each takes his plate or tin pan andiron spoon and holds it in the hand or on the lap. I _never_ sawslaves seated round a _table_ to partake of any meal. 

As the general rule, no lights of any kind, no firewood--no towels, basins, or soap, no tables, chairs, or other furniture, are provided. Wood for cooking and washing _for the family_ is found, but when themaster's work is done, the slave must find wood for himself if he hasa fire. I have repeatedly known slave children kept the whole winter'sevening, sitting on the stair-case in a cold entry, just to be at handto snuff candles or hand a tumbler of water from the side-board, or goon errands from one room to another. It may be asked why they were notpermitted to stay in the parlor, when they would be still more athand. I answer, because waiters are not allowed to _sit_ in thepresence of their owners, and as children who were kept running allday, would of course get very tired of standing for two or threehours, they were allowed to go into the entry and sit on the staircaseuntil rung for. Another reason is, that even slaveholders at timesfind the presence of slaves very annoying; they cannot exercise entirefreedom of speech before them on all subjects. 

I have also known instances where seamstresses were kept in coldentries to work by the stair case lamps for one or two hours, everyevening in winter--they could not see without standing up all thetime, though the work was often too large and heavy for them to sewupon it in that position without great inconvenience, and yet theywere expected to do their work as _well_ with their cold fingers, andstanding up, as if they had been sitting by a comfortable fire andprovided with the necessary light. House slaves suffer a great dealalso from not being allowed to leave the house without permission. Ifthey wish to go even for a draught of water, they must _ask leave_, and if they stay longer than the mistress thinks necessary, they areliable to be punished, and often are scolded or slapped, or kept fromgoing down to the next meal. 

It frequently happens that relatives, among slaves, are separated forweeks or months, by the husband or brother being taken by the masteron a journey, to attend on his horses and himself. --When they return, the white husband seeks the wife of his love; but the black husbandmust wait to see _his_ wife, until mistress pleases to let herchambermaid leave her room. Yes, such is the despotism of slavery, that wives and sisters dare not run to meet their husbands andbrothers after such separations, and hours sometimes elapse beforethey are allowed to meet; and, at times, a fiendish pleasure is takenin keeping them asunder--this furnishes an opportunity to ventfeelings of spite for any little neglect of "duty. "

The sufferings to which slaves are subjected by separations of variouskinds, cannot be imagined by those unacquainted with the working outof the system behind the curtain. Take the following instances. 

Chambermaids and seamstresses often sleep in their mistresses'apartments, but with no bedding at all. I know an instance of a womanwho has been married eleven years, and yet has never been allowed tosleep out of her mistress's chamber. --This is a _great_ hardship toslaves. When we consider that house slaves are rarely allowed socialintercourse during _the day_, as their work generally _separates_them; the barbarity of such an arrangement is obvious. It ispeculiarly a hardship in the above case, as the husband of the womandoes not "belong" to her "owner;" and because he is subject todreadful attacks of illness, and can have but little attention fromhis wife in the _day_. And yet her mistress, who is an old lady, givesher the highest character as a faithful servant, and told a friend ofmine, that she was "entirely dependent upon her for _all_ hercomforts; she dressed and undressed her, gave her all her food, andwas so _necessary_ to her that she could not do without her. " I mayadd, that this couple are tenderly attached to each other. 

I also know an instance in which the husband was a slave and the wifewas free: during the illness of the former, the latter was _allowed_to come and nurse him; she was obliged to leave the work by which shehad made a living, and come to stay with her husband, and thus lostweeks of her time, or he would have suffered for want of properattention; and yet his "owner" made her no compensation for herservices. He had long been a faithful and a favorite slave, and hisowner was a woman very benevolent to the poor whites. --She went agreat deal among these, as a visiting commissioner of the Ladies'Benevolent Society, and was in the constant habit of _paying therelatives of the poor whites_ for nursing _their_ husbands, fathers, and other relations; because she thought it very hard, when their timewas taken up, so that they could not earn their daily bread, that theyshould be left to suffer. Now, such is the stupifying influence of the"_chattel_ principle" on the minds of slaveholders, that I do notsuppose it ever occurred to her that this poor _colored_ wife ought tobe paid for her services, and particularly as she was spending hertime and strength in taking care of her "_property_. " She no doubtonly thought how kind she was, to _allow_ her to come and stay so longin her yard; for, let it be kept in mind, that slaveholders haveunlimited power to separate husbands and wives, parents and children, however and whenever they please; and if this mistress had chosen todo it, she could have debarred this woman from all intercourse withher husband, by forbidding her to enter her premises. 

Persons who own plantations and yet live in cities, often takechildren from their parents as soon as they are weaned, and send theminto the country; because they do not want the time of the mothertaken up by attendance upon her own children, it being too valuable tothe mistress. As a _favor_, she is, in some cases, permitted to go tosee them once a year. So, on the other hand, if field slaves happen tohave children of an age suitable to the convenience of the master, they are taken from their parents and brought to the city. Parents arealmost never consulted as to the disposition to be made of theirchildren; they have as little control over them, as have domesticanimals over the disposal of their young. Every natural and socialfeeling and affection are violated with indifference; slaves aretreated as though they did not possess them. 

Another way in which the feelings of slaves are trifled with and oftendeeply wounded, is by changing their names; if, at the time they arebrought into a family, there is another slave of the same name; or ifthe owner happens, for some other reason, not to like the name of thenew comer. I have known slaves very much grieved at having the namesof their children thus changed, when they had been called after a dearrelation. Indeed it would be utterly impossible to recount themultitude of ways in which the _heart_ of the slave is continuallylacerated by the total disregard of his feelings as a social being anda human creature. 

The slave suffers also greatly from being continually watched. Thesystem of espionage which is constantly kept up over slaves is themost worrying and intolerable that can be imagined. Many mistressesare, in fact, during the absence of their husbands, really theirdrivers; and the pleasure of returning to their families often, on thepart of the husband, is entirely destroyed by the complaints preferredagainst the slaves when he comes home to his meals. 

A mistress of my acquaintance asked her servant boy, one day, what wasthe reason she could not get him to do his work whilst his master wasaway, and said to him, "Your master works a great deal harder than youdo; he is at his office all day, and often has to study his law casesat night. " "Master, " said the boy, "is working for himself, and foryou, ma'am, but I am working for _him_". The mistress turned andremarked to a friend, that she was so struck with the truth of theremark, that she could not say a word to him. But I forbear--thesufferings of the slaves are not only innumerable, but they are_indescribable_. I may paint the agony of kindred torn from eachother's arms, to meet no more in time; I may depict the inflictions ofthe blood-stained lash, but I cannot describe the daily, hourly, ceaseless torture, endured by the heart that is constantly trampledunder the foot of despotic power. This is a part of the horrors ofslavery which, I believe, no one has ever attempted to delineate; Iwonder not at it, it mocks all power of language. Who can describe theanguish of that mind which feels itself impaled upon the iron ofarbitrary power--its living, writhing, helpless victim! every humansusceptibility tortured, its sympathies torn, and stung, andbleeding--always feeling the death-weapon in its heart, and yet not sodeep as to _kill_ that humanity which is made the curse of Itsexistence. 

In the course of my testimony I have entered somewhat into the_minutiae_ of slavery, because this is a part of the subject oftenoverlooked, and cannot be appreciated by any but those who have beenwitnesses, and entered into sympathy with the slaves as human beings. Slaveholders think nothing of them, because they regard their slavesas _property_, the mere instruments of their convenience and pleasure. _One who is a slaveholder at heart never recognises a human being in aslave_. 

As thou hast asked me to testify respecting the _physical condition_of the slaves merely, I say nothing of the awful neglect of their_minds and souls_ and the systematic effort to imbrute them. A wrongand an impiety, in comparison with which all the other unutterablewrongs of slavery are but as the dust of the balance. 

ANGELINA G. WELD. 

GENERAL TESTIMONY

TO THE CRUELTIES INFLICTED UPON SLAVES. 

Before presenting to the reader particular details of the crueltiesinflicted upon American slaves, we will present in brief thewell-weighed declarations of slaveholders and other residents of slavestates, testifying that the slaves are treated with barbarousinhumanity. All _details_ and particulars will be drawn out undertheir appropriate heads. We propose in this place to present testimonyof a _general character_--the solemn declarations of slaveholders andothers, that the slaves are treated with great cruelty. 

To discredit the testimony of witnesses who insist upon convictingthemselves, would be an anomalous scepticism. 

To show that American slavery has _always_ had one uniform characterof diabolical cruelty, we will go back one hundred years, and prove itby unimpeachable witnesses, who have given their deliberate testimonyto its horrid barbarity, from 1739 to 1839. 

TESTIMONY OF REV. GEORGE WHITEFIELD. 

In a letter written by him in Georgia, and addressed to theslaveholders of Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina andGeorgia, in 1739. --See Benezet's "Caution to Great Britain and herColonies. "

"As I lately passed through your provinces on my way hither, I wassensibly touched with a fellow-feeling of the miseries of the poornegroes. 

"Sure I am, it is sinful to use them as bad, nay worse than if theywere brutes; and whatever particular _exceptions_ there may be, (as Iwould charitably hope there are _some_, ) I fear the _generality_ ofyou that own negroes _are liable to such a charge_. Not to mentionwhat numbers have been given up to the inhuman usage of cruel_taskmasters_, who by their unrelenting scourges, have ploughed theirbacks and made long furrows, and at length brought them to the grave!

"_The blood of them, spilt for these many years, in your respectiveprovinces, will ascend up to heaven against you!_" The following isthe testimony of the celebrated JOHN WOOLMAN, an eminent minister ofthe Society of Friends, who traveled extensively in the slave state. We copy it from a "Memoir of JOHN WOOLMAN, chiefly extracted from aJournal of his Life and Travels. " It was published in Philadelphia, bythe "Society of Friends. "

"The following reflections, were written in 1757, while he wastraveling on a religious account among slaveholders. "

"Many of the white people in these provinces, take little or no careof negro marriages; and when negroes marry, after their own way, somemake so little account of those marriages, that, with views of outwardinterest, they often part men from their wives, by selling them farasunder; which is common when estates are sold by executors at vendue. 

"Many whose labor is heavy, being followed at their business in thefield by a man with a whip, hired for that purpose, --have, in common, little else allowed them but _one peck_ of Indian corn and some saltfor one week, with a few potatoes. (The potatoes they commonly raiseby their labor on the first day of the week. ) The correction ensuingon their disobedience to overseers, or slothfulness in business, isoften _very severe_, and sometimes _desperate_. Men and women havemany times _scarce clothes enough to hide their nakedness_--and boysand girls, ten and twelve years old, are often _quite naked_ amongtheir masters' children. Some use endeavors to instruct those (negrochildren) they have in reading; but in common, this is not onlyneglected, but disapproved. "--p. 12. 

TESTIMONY OF THE 'MARYLAND JOURNAL AND BALTIMORE ADVERTISER, ' OF MAY30, 1788. 

"In the ordinary course of the business of the country, the punishmentof relations frequently happens on the same farm, and in view of eachother: the father often sees his beloved son--the son his venerablesire--the mother her much loved daughter--the daughter heraffectionate parent--the husband sees the wife of his bosom, and shethe husband of her affection, _cruelly bound up_ without delicacy ormercy, and without daring to interpose in each other's behalf, andpunished with all the _extremity of incensed rage, and all the rigorof unrelenting severity_. Let us reverse the case, and suppose it ours:ALL IS SILENT HORROR!"

TESTIMONY OF THE HON. WILLIAM PINCKNEY, OF MARYLAND. 

In a speech before the Maryland House of Delegates, in 1789, Mr. P. Calls slavery in that state, "a speaking picture of _abominableoppression_;" and adds: "It will not do thus to . . . Act like_unrelenting tyrants_, perpetually sermonizing it with liberty as ourtext, and actual _oppression_ for our commentary. Is she [Maryland]not . . . The foster mother of _petty despots_, --the patron of _wantonoppression?_"

Extract from a speech of Mr. RICE, in the Convention for forming theConstitution of Kentucky, in 1790:

"The master may, and _often does, inflict upon him all the severity ofpunishment the human body is capable of bearing. "_

President Edwards, the Younger, in a sermon before the ConnecticutAbolition Society, 1791, says:

"From these drivers, for every imagined, as well as real neglect orwant of exertion, they receive the lash--the smack of which is all daylong in the ears of those who are on the plantation or in thevicinity; and it is used with such dexterity and severity, as not onlyto lacerate the skin, but to tear out small portions of the flesh atalmost every stroke. 

"This is the general treatment of the slaves. But many individualssuffer still more severely. _Many, many are knocked down; some havetheir eyes beaten out: some have an arm or a leg broken, or choppedoff_; and many, for a very small, or for no crime at all, have beenbeaten to death, merely to gratify the fury of an enraged master oroverseer. "

Extract from an oration, delivered at Baltimore, July 4, 1797, byGEORGE BUCHANAN, M. D. , member of the American Philosophical Society. 

Their situation (the slaves') is _insupportable_; misery inhabitstheir cabins, and pursues them in the field. Inhumanly beaten, they_often_ fall sacrifices to the turbulent tempers of their masters! Whois there, unless inured to savage cruelties, that can hear of theinhuman punishments _daily inflicted_ upon the unfortunate blacks, without feeling for them? Can a man who calls himself a Christian, coolly and deliberately tie up, _thumb-screw, torture with pincers_, and beat unmercifully a poor slave, for perhaps a trifling neglect ofduty?--p. 14. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN RANDOLPH, OF ROANOKE--A SLAVEHOLDER. 

In one of his Congressional speeches, Mr. R. Says: "Avarice alone candrive, as it does drive, this _infernal_ traffic, and the wretchedvictims of it, like so many post-horses _whipped to death_ in a mailcoach. Ambition has its cover-sluts in the pride, pomp, andcircumstance of glorious war; but where are the trophies of avarice?_The hand-cuff; the manacle, the blood-stained cowhide!_"

MAJOR STODDARD, of the United States' army, who took possession ofLouisiana in behalf of the United States, under the cession of 1804, in his Sketches of Louisiana, page 332, says:

"The feelings of humanity are outraged--the most odious tyrannyexercised in a land of freedom, and hunger and nakedness prevailamidst plenty. * * * Cruel, and even unusual punishments are dailyinflicted on these wretched creatures, enfeebled with hunger, laborand the lash. The scenes of misery and distress constantly witnessedalong the coast of the Delta, [of the Mississippi, ] the wounds andlacerations occasioned by demoralized masters and overseers, torturethe feelings of the passing stranger, and wring blood from the heart. "

Though only the third of the following series of resolutions isdirectly relevant to the subject now under consideration, we insertthe other resolutions, both because they are explanatory of the third, and also serve to reveal the public sentiment of Indiana, at the dateof the resolutions. As a large majority of the citizens of Indiana atthat time, were _natives of slave states_, they well knew the actualcondition of the slaves. 

1. "RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY, by the Legislative Council and House ofRepresentatives of Indiana Territory, that a suspension of the sixtharticle of compact between the United States and the territories andstates north west of the river Ohio, passed the 13th day of January, 1783, for the term of ten years, would be highly advantageous to theterritory, and meet the approbation of at least nine-tenths of thegood citizens of the same. "

2. "RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY, that the abstract question of liberty andslavery, is not considered as involved in a suspension of the saidarticle, inasmuch as the number of slaves in the United States wouldnot be augmented by the measure. "

3. "RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY, that the suspension of the said articlewould be equally advantageous to the territory, to the states fromwhence the negroes would be brought, and _to the negroes themselves. _The states which are overburthened with negroes which they cannotcomfortably support; * * and THE NEGRO HIMSELF WOULD EXCHANGE A SCANTYPITTANCE OF THE COARSEST FOOD, for a plentiful and nourishing diet;and a situation which admits not the most distant prospect ofemancipation, for one which presents no considerable obstacle to hiswishes. "

4. "RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY, that a copy of these resolutions bedelivered to the delegate to Congress from this territory, and that hebe, and he hereby is, instructed to use his best endeavors to obtain asuspension of the said article. "

J. B. THOMAS, _Speaker of the House of Representatives. _

PIERRE MINARD, _President pro tem. Of the Legislative Council. Vincennes, Dec. _ 20, 1806. 

"Forwarded to the Speaker the United States' Senate, by WILLIAM HENRYHARRISON, Governor"--_American State Papers_ vol 1. P. 467. 

MONSIEUR C. C. ROBIN, who resided in Louisiana from 1802 to 1806, andpublished a volume containing the results of his observations there, thus speaks of the condition of the slaves:

"While they are at labor, the manager, the master, or the driver hascommonly the whip in hand to strike the idle. But those of the negroeswho are judged guilty of serious faults, are punished twenty, twenty-five, forty, fifty, or one hundred lashes. The manner of thiscruel execution is as follows: four stakes are driven down, making along square; the culprit is extended naked between these stakes, facedownwards; his hands and his feet are bound separately, with strongcords, to each of the stakes, so far apart that his arms and legs, stretched in the form of St. Andrew's cross, give the poor wretch nochance of stirring. Then the executioner, who is ordinarily a negro, armed with the long whip of a coachman, strikes upon the reins andthighs. The crack of his whip resounds afar, like that of an angrycartman beating his horses. The blood flows, the long wounds crosseach other, strips of skin are raised without softening either thehand of the executioner or the heart of the master, who cries 'stinghim harder. '

"The reader is moved; so am I: my agitated hand refuses to trace thebloody picture, to recount how many times the piercing cry of pain hasinterrupted my silent occupations; how many times I have shuddered atthe faces of those barbarous masters, where I saw inscribed the numberof victims sacrificed to their ferocity. 

"The women are subjected to these punishments as rigorously as themen--not even pregnancy exempts them; in that case, before bindingthem to the stakes, a hole is made in the ground to accommodate theenlarged form of the victim. 

"It is remarkable that the white creole women are ordinarily moreinexorable than the men. Their slow and languid gait, and the triflingservices which they impose, betoken only apathetic indolence; butshould the slave not promptly obey, should he even fail to divine themeaning of their gestures, or looks, in an instant they are armed witha formidable whip; it is no longer the arm which cannot sustain theweight of a shawl or a reticule--it is no longer the form which butfeebly sustains itself. They themselves order the punishment of one ofthese poor creatures, and with a dry eye see their victim bound tofour stakes; they count the blows, and raise a voice of menace, if thearm that strikes relaxes, or if the blood does not flow in sufficientabundance. Their sensibility changed to fury must needs feed itselffor a while on the hideous spectacle; they must, as if to revivethemselves, hear the piercing shrieks, and see the flow of freshblood; there are some of them who, in their frantic rage, pinch andbite their victims. 

"It is by no means wonderful that the laws designed to protect theslave, should be little respected by the generality of such masters. Ihave seen some masters pay those unfortunate people the miserableovercoat which is their due; but others give them nothing at all, anddo not even leave them the hours and Sundays granted to them by law. Ihave seen some of those barbarous masters leave them, during thewinter, in a state of revolting nudity, even contrary to their owntrue interests, for they thus weaken and shorten the lives upon whichrepose the whole of their own fortunes. I have seen some of thosenegroes obliged to conceal their nakedness with the long moss of thecountry. The sad melancholy of these wretches, depicted upon theircountenances, the flight of some, and the death of others, do notreclaim their masters; they wreak upon those who remain, the vengeancewhich they can no longer exercise upon the others. "

WHITMAN MEAD, Esq. Of New York, in his journal, published nearly aquarter of a century ago, under date of

"SAVANNAH, January 28, 1817. 

"To one not accustomed to such scenes as slavery presents, thecondition of the slaves is _impressively shocking. _ In the course ofmy walks, I was every where witness to their wretchedness. Like thebrute creatures of the north, they are driven about at the pleasure ofall who meet them: _half naked and half starved_, they drag out apitiful existence, apparently almost unconscious of what they suffer. A threat accompanies every command, and a bastinado is the usualreward of disobedience. "

TESTIMONY OF REV. JOHN RANKIN, _A native of Tennessee, educated there, and for a number of years apreacher in slave states--now pastor of a church in Ripley, Ohio. _

"Many poor slaves are stripped naked, stretched and tied acrossbarrels, or large bags, _and tortured with the lash during hours, andeven whole days, until their flesh is mangled to the very bones_. Others are stripped and hung up by the arms, their feet are tiedtogether, and the end of a heavy piece of timber is put between theirlegs in order to stretch their bodies, and so prepare them for thetorturing lash--and in this situation they are often whipped untiltheir bodies are covered _with blood and mangled flesh_--and in orderto add the greatest keenness to their sufferings, their wounds arewashed with _liquid salt_! And some of the miserable creatures arepermitted to hang in that position until they actually _expire_; somedie under the lash, others linger about for a time, and at length dieof their wounds, and many survive, and endure again similar torture. These bloody scenes are _constantly exhibiting in every slave holdingcountry--thousands of whips are every day stained in African blood_!Even the poor _females_ are not permitted to escape these shockingcruelties. "--_Rankin's Letters. _

These letters were published fifteen years ago. --They were addressedto a brother in Virginia, who was a slaveholder. 

TESTIMONY OF THE AMERICAN COLONIZATION SOCIETY. 

"We have heard of slavery as it exists in Asia, and Africa, andTurkey--we have heard of the feudal slavery under which the peasantryof Europe have groaned from the days of Alaric until now, butexcepting only the horrible system of the West India Islands, we havenever heard of slavery in any country, ancient or modern, Pagan, Mohammedan, or _Christian! so terrible in its character_, as theslavery which exists in these United States. "--_Seventh ReportAmerican Colonization Society, _ 1824. 

TESTIMONY OF THE GRADUAL EMANCIPATION SOCIETY OF NORTH CAROLINA. 

_Signed by Moses Swain, President, and William Swain, Secretary. _

"In the eastern part of the state, the slaves considerably outnumberthe free population. Their situation is there wretched beyonddescription. Impoverished by the mismanagement which we have alreadyattempted to describe, the master, unable to support his own grandeurand maintain his slaves, puts the unfortunate wretches upon shortallowances, scarcely sufficient for their sustenance, so that a greatpart of them go half naked and half starved much of the time. Generally, throughout the state, the African is an _abused, amonstrously outraged creature. "--See Minutes of the AmericanConvention, convened in Baltimore, Oct. _ 25, 1826. 

FROM NILES' BALTIMORE REGISTER FOR 1829, VOL 35, p. 4. 

"Dealing in slaves has become a _large business_. Establishments aremade at several places in Maryland and Virginia, at which they aresold like cattle. These places of deposit are strongly built, and wellsupplied with _iron thumb-screws and gags_, and ornamented with_catskins and other whips--often times bloody_. "

Judge RUFFIN, of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, in one of hisjudicial decisions, says--"The slave, to remain a slave, must feelthat there is NO APPEAL FROM HIS MASTER. No man can anticipate theprovocations which the slave would give, nor the consequent wrath ofthe master, prompting him to BLOODY VENGEANCE on the turbulenttraitor, a vengeance _generally_ practiced with impunity, by reason ofits PRIVACY. "--See _Wheeler's Law of Slavery_ p. 247. 

MR. MOORE, of VIRGINIA, in his speech before the Legislature of thatstate, Jan. 15, 1832, says: "It must be confessed, that although thetreatment of our slaves is in the general, as mild and humane as itcan be, that it must always happen, that there will be found hundredsof individuals, who, owing either to the natural ferocity of theirdispositions, or to the effects of intemperance, will be guilty ofcruelty and barbarity towards their slaves, which is _almostintolerable_, and at which humanity revolts. "

TESTIMONY OF B. SWAIN, ESQ. , OF NORTH CAROLINA. 

"Let any man of spirit and feeling, for a moment cast his thoughtsover this land of slavery--think of the _nakedness_ of some, the_hungry yearnings_ of others, the _flowing tears and heaving sighs_ ofparting relations, the _wailings and wo, the bloody cut of the keenlash, and the frightful scream that rends the very skies_--and allthis to gratify ambition, lust, pride, avarice, vanity, and otherdepraved feelings of the human heart. . . . THE WORST IS NOT GENERALLYKNOWN. Were all the miseries, the horrors of slavery, to burst at onceinto view, a peal of seven-fold thunder could scarce strike greateralarm. "--_See "Swain's Address, "_ 1830. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. JAMES C. FINLEY, _Son of Dr. Finley, one of the founders of the Colonization Society, and brother of R. S. Finley, agent of the American ColonizationSociety. _ Dr. J. C. Finley was formerly one of the editors of theWestern Medical Journal, at Cincinnati, and is well known in the westas utterly hostile to immediate abolition. 

"In almost the last conversation I had with you before I leftCincinnati, I promised to give you some account of some scenes ofatrocious cruelty towards slaves, which I witnessed while I lived atthe south. I almost regret having made the promise, for not only arethey _so atrocious_ that you will with difficulty believe them, but Ialso fear that they will have the effect of driving you into that_abolitionism_, upon the borders of which you have been so longhesitating. The people of the north _are ignorant of the horrors ofslavery_--of the _atrocities_ which it commits upon the unprotectedslave. * * *

"I do not know that any thing could be gained by particularizing thescenes of _horrible barbarity_, which fell under my observation duringmy _short_ residence in one of the wealthiest, most intelligent, andmost moral parts of Georgia. Their _number_ and _atrocity_ are such, that I am confident they would gain credit with none but_abolitionists_. Every thing will be conveyed in the remark, that in astate of society calculated to foster the worst passions of ournature, the slave derives _no protection_ either from _law_ or _publicopinion_, and that ALL the cruelties which the Russians are reportedto have acted towards the Poles, after their late subjugation, ARESCENES OF EVERY-DAY OCCURRENCE in the southern states. This statement, incredible as it may seem, falls short, very far short of the truth. "

The foregoing is extracted from a letter written by Dr. Finley to Rev. Asa Mahan, his former pastor, then of Cincinnati, now President ofOberlin Seminary. 

TESTIMONY OF REV. WILLIAM T. ALLAN, OF ILLINOIS, _Son of aSlaveholder, Rev. Dr. Allan of Huntsville, Ala. _

"At our house it is so common to hear their (the slaves') screams, that we think nothing of it: and lest any one should think that in_general_ the slaves are well treated, let me be distinctlyunderstood:--_cruelty_ is the _rule_, and _kindness_ the _exception_. "

Extract of a letter dated July 2d, 1834, from Mr. NATHAN COLE, of St. Louis, Missouri, to Arthur Tappan, Esq. Of this city:

"I am not an advocate of the immediate and unconditional emancipationof the slaves of our country, yet _no man has ever yet depicted thewretchedness of the situation of the slaves in colors as dark for thetruth_. . . . I know that many good people _are not aware of thetreatment to which slaves are usually subjected_, nor have they anyjust idea of the extent of the evil. "

TESTIMONY OF REV. JAMES A. THOME, _A native of Kentucky--Son of ArthurThome Esq. , till recently a Slaveholder. _

"Slavery is the parent of more suffering than has flowed from any onesource since the date of its existence. Such sufferings too!_Sufferings inconceivable and innumerable--unmingled wretchedness_from the ties of nature rudely broken and destroyed, the _acutestbodily tortures, groans, tears and blood_--lying forever in wearinessand painfulness, in watchings, in hunger and in thirst, in cold andnakedness. 

"Brethren of the North, be not deceived. _These sufferings stillexist_, and despite the efforts of their cruel authors to hush themdown, and confine them within the precincts of their own plantations, they will ever and anon, struggle up and reach the ear ofhumanity. "--_Mr. Thome's Speech at New York, May, _ 1834. 

TESTIMONY OF THE MARYVILLE (TENNESSEE) INTELLIGENCER, OF OCT. 4, 1835. 

The Editor, in speaking of the sufferings of the slaves which aretaken by the internal trade to the South West, says:

"Place yourself in imagination, for a moment, in their condition. With _heavy galling chains_, riveted upon your person; _half-naked, half-starved_; your back _lacerated_ with the 'knotted Whip;'traveling to a region where your _condition through time will besecond only to the wretched creatures in Hell_. 

"This depicting is not visionary. Would to God that it was. "

TESTIMONY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN SYNOD OF KENTUCKY; _A large majority ofwhom are slaveholders. _

"This system licenses and produces _great cruelty_. 

"Mangling, imprisonment, starvation, every species of torture, may beinflicted upon him, (the slave, ) and he has no redress. 

"There are now in our whole land two millions of human beings, exposed, defenceless, to every insult, and every injury short ofmaiming or death, which their fellow men may choose to inflict. _Theysuffer all_ that can be inflicted by wanton caprice, by graspingavarice, by brutal lust, by malignant spite, and by insane anger. Their happiness is the sport of every whim, and the prey of everypassion that may, occasionally, or habitually, infest the master'sbosom. If we could calculate the amount of wo endured by ill-treatedslaves, it would overwhelm every compassionate heart--it would moveeven the obdurate to sympathy. There is also a vast sum of sufferinginflicted upon the slave by humane masters, as a punishment for thatidleness and misconduct which slavery naturally produces. 

"_Brutal stripes_ and all the varied kinds of personal indignities, are not the only species of cruelty which slavery licenses. "

TESTIMONY OF THE REV. N. H. HARDING, Pastor of the Presbyterian Church, in Oxford, North Carolina, a slaveholder. 

"I am greatly surprised that you should in any form have been theapologist of a system so full of deadly poison to all holiness andbenevolence as slavery, the concocted essence of fraud, selfishness, and cold hearted tyranny, and the fruitful parent of unnumbered evils, both to the oppressor and the oppressed, THE ONE THOUSANDTH PART OFWHICH HAS NEVER BEEN BROUGHT TO LIGHT. "

MR. ASA A. STONE, a theological student, who lived near Natchez, (Mi. , ) in 1834 and 5, sent the following with other testimony, to bepublished under his own name, in the N. Y. Evangelist, while he wasstill residing there. 

"Floggings for all offences, including deficiencies in work, are_frightfully common_, and _most terribly severe. _

"_Rubbing with salt and red pepper is very common after a severewhipping. _"

TESTIMONY OF REV. PHINEAS SMITH, Centreville, Allegany Co. , N. Y. Wholived four years at the South. 

"They are badly clothed, badly fed, wretchedly lodged, unmercifullywhipped, from month to month, from year to year, from childhood to oldage. "

REV. JOSEPH M. SADD, Castile, Genessee CO. N. Y. Who was till recentlya preacher in Missouri, says, "It is true that barbarous cruelties are inflicted upon them, such asterrible lacerations with the whip, and excruciating tortures aresometimes experienced from the thumb screw. "

Extract of a letter from SARAH M. GRIMKÉ, dated 4th Month, 2nd, 1839

"If the following extracts from letters which I have received fromSouth Carolina, will be of any use thou art at liberty to publishthem. I need not say, that the names of the writers are withheld ofnecessity, because such sentiments if uttered at the south would periltheir lives. "

EXTRACTS

--South Carolina, 4th Month, 5th, 1835. "With regard to slavery Imust confess, though we had heard a great deal on the subject, wefound on coming South the _half_, the _worst_ half too, had not beentold us; not that we have ourselves seen much oppression, though trulywe have felt its deadening influence, but the accounts we havereceived from every tongue that nobly dares to speak upon the subject, are indeed _deplorable_. To quote the language of a lady, who withtrue Southern hospitality, received us at her mansion. "The _northern_people don't know anything of slavery at all, they think it is_perpetual bondage merely_, but of the _depth of degradation_ thatthat word involves, they have no conception; if they had any just ideaof it, they would I am sure use every effort until an end was put tosuch a shocking system. '

"Another friend writing from South Carolina, and who sustains herselfthe legal relation of slaveholder, in a letter dated April 4th, 1838, says--'I have some time since, given you my views on the subject ofslavery, which so much engrosses your attention. I would mostwillingly forget what I have seen and heard in my own family, withregard to the slaves. _I shudder when I think of it_, and increasinglyfeel that slavery is a curse since it leads to such _cruelty_. '"

PUNISHMENTS. 

I. FLOGGINGS. 

The slaves are terribly lacerated with whips, paddles, &c. ; red pepperand salt are rubbed into their mangled flesh; hot brine and turpentineare poured into their gashes; and innumerable other tortures inflictedupon them. 

We will in the first place, prove by a cloud of witnesses, that theslaves are whipped with such inhuman severity, as to lacerate andmangle their flesh in the most shocking manner, leaving permanentscars and ridges; after establishing this, we will present a mass oftestimony, concerning a great variety of other tortures. Thetestimony, for the most part, will be that of the slaveholdersthemselves, and in their own chosen words. A large portion of it willbe taken from the advertisements, which they have published in theirown newspapers, describing by the scars on their bodies made by thewhip, their own runaway slaves. To copy these advertisements _entire_would require a great amount of space, and flood the reader with avast mass of matter irrelevant to the _point_ before us; we shalltherefore insert only so much of each, as will intelligibly set forththe precise point under consideration. In the column under the word"witnesses, " will be found the name of the individual, who signs theadvertisement, or for whom it is signed, with his or her place ofresidence, and the name and date of the paper, in which it appeared, and generally the name of the place where it is published. Oppositethe name of each witness, will be an extract, from the advertisement, containing his or her testimony. 

Mr. D. Judd, jailor, Davidson Co. , Tennessee, in the "NashvilleBanner, " Dec. 10th, 1838. 

"Committed to jail as a runaway, a negro woman named Martha, 17 or 18years of age, has _numerous scars of the whip on her back_. "

Mr. Robert Nicoll, Dauphin st. Between Emmanuel and Conception st's, Mobile, Alabama, in the "Mobile Commercial Advertiser. "

"Ten dollars reward for my woman Siby, _very much scarred about theneck and ears by whipping_. "

Mr. Bryant Johnson, Fort Valley Houston Co. , Georgia, in the "Standardof Union, " Milledgeville Ga. Oct. 2, 1838. "Ranaway, a negro woman, named Maria, _some scars on her back occasioned by the whip_. "

Mr. James T. De Jarnett, Vernon, Autauga Co. , Alabama, in the"Pensacola Gazette, " July 14, 1838. 

"Stolen a negro woman, named Celia. On examining her back you willfind marks _caused by the whip_. "

Maurice Y. Garcia, Sheriff of the County of Jefferson, La. , in the"New Orleans Bee, " August, 14, 1838. 

"Lodged in jail, a mulatto boy, _having large marks of the whip, _ onhis shoulders and other parts of his body. "

R. J. Bland, Sheriff of Claiborne Co, Miss. , in the "Charleston (S. C. )Courier. " August, 28, 1838. 

"Was committed a negro boy, named Tom, is _much marked with thewhip_. "

Mr. James Noe, Red River Landing, La. , in the "Sentinel, " Vicksburg, Miss. , August 22, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a negro fellow named Dick--has _many scars on his back frombeing whipped. "_

William Craze, jailor, Alexandria, La. In the "Planter'sIntelligencer. " Sept. 26, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro slave--his back is _very badly scarred. "_

John A. Rowland, jailor, Lumberton, North Carolina, in the"Fayetteville (N. C. ) Observer, " June 20, 1838. 

"Committed, a mulatto fellow--his back shows _lasting impressions ofthe whip, _ and leaves no doubt of his being A SLAVE"

J. K. Roberts, sheriff, Blount county, Ala. , in the "HuntsvilleDemocrat, " Dec. 9, 1839. 

"Committed to jail, a negro man--his back _much marked_ by the whip. "

Mr. H. Varillat, No. 23 Girod street, New Orleans--in the "CommercialBulletin, " August 27, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negro slave named Jupiter--has a _fresh mark_ of acowskin on one of his cheeks. "

Mr. Cornelius D. Tolin, Augusta, Ga. , in the "Chronicle and Sentinel, "Oct. 18, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man named Johnson--he has a _great many marks of thewhip_ on his back. "

W. H. Brasseale, sheriff; Blount county, Ala. , in the "HuntsvilleDemocrat, " June 9, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro slave named James--_much scarred_ with awhip on his back. "

Mr. Robert Beasley, Macon, Ga. , in the "Georgia Messenger, " July 27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my man Fountain--he is marked _on the back with the whip. "_

Mr. John Wotton, Rockville, Montgomery county, Maryland, in the"Baltimore Republican, " Jan. 13, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Bill--has _several_ LARGE SCARS on his back from a _severe_whipping in _early life. "_

D. S. Bennett, sheriff, Natchitoches, La. , in the "Herald, " July 21, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro boy who calls himself Joe--said negrobears _marks of the whip. "_

Messrs. C. C. Whitehead, and R. A. Evans, Marion, Georgia, in theMilledgeville (Ga. ) "Standard of Union, " June 26, 1838. 

"Ranaway, negro fellow John--from being whipped, has _scars on hisback, arms, and thighs. "_

Mr. Samuel Stewart, Greensboro', Ala. , in the "Southern Advocate, "Huntsville, Jan. 6, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a boy named Jim--with the marks of the _whip_ on the smallof the back, reaching round to the flank. "

Mr. John Walker, No. 6, Banks' Arcade New Orleans, in the "Bulletin, "August 11, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the mulatto boy Quash--_considerably marked_ on the back andother places with the lash. "

Mr. Jesse Beene, Cahawba, Ala. , in the "State Intelligencer, "Tuskaloosa, Dec. 25, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my negro man Billy--he has the _marks of the_ whip. "

Mr. John Turner, Thomaston, Upson county, Georgia--in the "Standard ofUnion, " Milledgeville, June 26, 1838. 

"Left, my negro man named George--has _marks of the whip very plain onhis thighs. "_

James Derrah, deputy sheriff; Claiborne county, Mi. , in the "PortGibson Correspondent, " April 15, 1837. 

"Committed to jail, negro man Toy--he has been _badly whipped. "_

S. B. Murphy, sheriff, Wilkinson county, Georgia--in the Milledgeville"Journal, " May 15, 1838. 

"Brought to jail, a negro man named George--he has a _great many scarsfrom the lash. "_

Mr. L. E. Cooner, Branchville Orangeburgh District, South Carolina--inthe Macon "Messenger, " May 25, 1837. 

"One hundred dollars reward, for my negro Glasgow, and Kate, his wife. Glasgow is 24 years old--has _marks of the whip_ on his back. Kate is26--has a _scar_ on her cheek, _and several marks of a whip. "_

John H. Hand, jailor, parish of West Feliciana, La. , in the St. "Francisville Journal, " July 6, 1837

"Committed to jail, a negro boy named John, about 17 years old--hisback _badly marked_ with the _whip_, his upper lip and chin _severelybruised. "_

The preceding are extracts from advertisements published in southernpapers, mostly in the year 1838. They are the mere _samples_ ofhundreds of similar ones published during the same period, with which, as the preceding are quite sufficient to show the _commonness_ ofinhuman floggings in the slave states, we need not burden the reader. 

The foregoing testimony is, as the reader perceives, that of theslaveholders themselves, voluntarily certifying to the outrages whichtheir own hands have committed upon defenceless and innocent men andwomen, over whom they have assumed authority. We have given to _their_testimony precedence over that of all other witnesses, for the reasonthat when men testify against _themselves_ they are under notemptation to exaggerate. 

We will now present the testimony of a large number of individuals, with their names and residences, --persons who witnessed theinflictions to which they testify. Many of them have beenslaveholders, and _all_ residents for longer or shorter periods inslave states. 

Rev. JOHN H. CURTISS, a native of Deep Creek, Norfolk county, Virginia, now a local preacher of the Methodist Episcopal Church inPortage co. , Ohio, testifies as follows:--

"In 1829 or 30, one of my father's slaves was accused of taking thekey to the office and stealing four or five dollars: he denied it. Aconstable by the name of Hull was called; he took the Negro, verydeliberately tied his hands, and whipped him till the blood ran freelydown his legs. By this time Hull appeared tired, and stopped; he thentook a rope, put a slip noose around his neck, and told the negro hewas going to _kill_ him, at the same time drew the rope and beganwhipping: the Negro fell; his cheeks looked as though they would burstwith strangulation. Hull whipped and kicked him, till I really thoughthe was going to kill him; when he ceased, the negro was in a completegore of blood from head to foot. "

Mr. DAVID HAWLEY, a class-leader in the Methodist Church, at St. Alban's, Licking county, Ohio, who moved from Kentucky to Ohio in1831, testifies as follows:--

"In the year 1821 or 2, I saw a slave hung for killing his master. Themaster had whipped the slave's mother to DEATH, and, locking him in aroom, threatened him with the same fate; and, cowhide in hand, hadbegun the work, when the slave joined battle and slew the master. "

SAMUEL ELLISON, a member of the Society of Friends, formerly ofSouthampton county, Virginia, now of Marlborough, Stark county, Ohio, gives the following testimony:--

"While a resident of Southampton county, Virginia, I knew two men, after having been severely treated, endeavor to make their escape. Inthis they failed--were taken, tied to trees, and whipped to _death_ bytheir overseer. I lived a mile from the negro quarters, and, at thatdistance, could frequently hear the screams of the poor creatures whenbeaten, and could also hear the blows given by the overseer with someheavy instrument. "

Major HORACE NYE, of Putnam, Ohio, gives the following testimony ofMr. Wm. Armstrong, of that place, a captain and supercargo of boatsdescending the Mississippi river:--

"At Bayou Sarah, I saw a slave _staked out, _ with his face to theground, and whipped with a large whip, which laid open the flesh forabout two and a half inches _every stroke. _ I stayed about fiveminutes, but could stand it no longer, and left them whipping. "

Mr. STEPHEN E. MALTBY, inspector of provisions, Skeneateles, New York, who has resided in Alabama, speaking of the condition of the slaves, says:--

"I have seen them cruelly whipped. I will relate one instance. OneSabbath morning, before I got out of my bed, I heard an outcry, andgot up and went to the window, when I saw some six or eight boys, fromeight to twelve years of age, near a rack (made for tying horses) onthe public square. A man on horseback rode up, got off his horse, tooka cord from his pocket, _tied one of the boys_ by the _thumbs_ to therack, and with his horsewhip lashed him most severely. He then untiedhim and rode off without saying a word. 

"It was a general practice, while I was at Huntsville, Alabama, tohave a patrol every night; and, to my knowledge, this patrol was inthe habit of traversing the streets with cow-skins, and, if they foundany slaves out after eight o'clock without a pass, to whip them untilthey were out of reach, or to confine them until morning. "

Mr. J. G. BALDWIN, of Middletown, Connecticut, a member of theMethodist Episcopal Church, gives the following testimony:--

"I traveled at the south in 1827: when near Charlotte, N. C. A freecolored man fell into the road just ahead of me, and went onpeaceably. --When passing a public-house, the landlord ran out with alarge cudgel, and applied it to the head and shoulders of the man withsuch force as to shatter it in pieces. When the reason of his conductwas asked, he replied, that he owned slaves, and he would not permitfree blacks to come into his neighborhood. 

"Not long after, I stopped at a public-house near Halifax, N. C. , between nine and ten o'clock P. M. , to stay over night. A slave satupon a bench in the bar-room asleep. The master came in, seized alarge horsewhip, and, without any warning or apparent provocation, laid it over the face and eyes of the slave. The master cursed, swore, and swung his lash--the slave cowered and trembled, but said not aword. Upon inquiry the next morning, I ascertained that the onlyoffence was falling asleep, and this too in consequence of having beenup nearly all the previous night, in attendance upon company. "

Rev. JOSEPH M. SADD, of Castile, N. Y. , who has lately left Missouri, where he was pastor of a church for some years, says:--

"In one case, near where we lived, a runaway slave, when brought back, was most cruelly beaten--bathed in the _usual_ liquid--laid in thesun, and a physician employed to heal his wounds:--then the sameprocess of punishment and healing was _repeated_, _and repeatedagain_, and then the poor creature was sold for the New Orleansmarket. This account we had from the _physician himself_. "

MR. ABRAHAM BELL, of Poughkeepsie, New York, a member of the ScotchPresbyterian Church, was employed, in 1837 and 38, in levelling andgrading for a rail-road in the state of Georgia: he had under hisdirection, during the whole time, thirty slaves. Mr. B. Gives thefollowing testimony:--

"_All_ the slaves had their backs scarred, from the oft-repeatedwhippings they had received. "

Mr. ALONZO BARNARD, of Farmington, Ohio, who was in Mississippi in1837 and 8, says:--

"The slaves were often severely whipped. I saw one _woman_ veryseverely whipped for accidentally cutting up a stalk of cotton. [8]When they were whipped they were commonly _held down by four men_: ifthese could not confine them, they were fastened by stakes drivenfirmly into the ground, and then lashed often so as to draw blood ateach blow. I saw one woman who had lately been delivered of a child inconsequence of cruel treatment. "

[Footnote 8: Mr. Cornelius Johnson, of Farmington, Ohio, was also awitness to this inhuman outrage upon an unprotected woman, for theunintentional destruction of a stalk of cotton! In his testimony he ismore particular, and says, that the number of lashes inflicted uponher by the overseer was "ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY. "]

Rev. H. LYMAN, late pastor of the Free Presbyterian Church at Buffalo, N. Y. Says:--

"There was a steam cotton press, in the vicinity of my boarding-houseat New Orleans, which was driven night and day, without intermission. My curiosity led me to look at the interior of the establishment. There I saw several slaves engaged in rolling cotton bags, fasteningropes lading carts, &c. 

"The presiding genius of the place was a driver, who held a rope fourfeet long in his hand, which he wielded with cruel dexterity. He usedit in single blows, just as the men were lifting to _tighten_ the balecords. It seemed to me that he was desirous to edify me with aspecimen of his authority; at any rate the cruelty was horrible. "

Mr. JOHN VANCE, a member of the Baptist Church, in St. Albans, Lickingcounty, Ohio, who moved from Culpepper county, Va. , his native statein 1814, testifies as follows:--

"In 1826, I saw a woman by the name of Mallix, flog her female slavewith a horse-whip so horribly that she was washed in salt and waterseveral days, to keep her bruises from mortifying. 

"In 1811, I was returning from mill, in Shenandoah county, when Iheard the cry of murder, in the field of a man named Painter. I rodeto the place to see what was going on. Two men, by the names of JohnMorgan and Michael Siglar, had heard the cry and came running to theplace. I saw Painter beating a negro with a tremendous club, or smallhandspike, swearing he would kill him: but he was rescued by Morganand Siglar. I learned that Painter had commenced flogging the slavefor not getting to work soon enough. He had escaped, and taken refugeunder a pile of rails that were on some timbers up a little from theground. The master had put fire to one end, and stood at the otherwith his club, to kill him as he came out. The pile was still burning. Painter said he was a turbulent fellow and he _would_ kill him. Theapprehension of P. Was TALKED ABOUT, but, as a compromise, the negrowas sold to another man. "

EXTRACT FROM THE PUBLISHED JOURNAL OF THE LATE WM. SAVER, ofPhiladelphia, an eminent minister of the Religious Society ofFriends:--

"6th mo. 22d, 1791. We passed on to Augusta, Georgia. They canscarcely tolerate us, on account of our abhorrence of slavery. On the28th we got to Savannah, and lodged at one Blount's, a hard-heartedslaveholder. One of his lads, aged about fourteen, was ordered to goand milk the cow: and falling asleep, through weariness, the mastercalled out and ordered him a flogging. I asked him what he meant by aflogging. He replied, the way we serve them here is, we cut theirbacks until they are raw all over, and then salt them. Upon this myfeelings were roused; I told him that was too bad, and queried *if itwere possible; he replied it was, with many curses upon the blacks. Atsupper this unfeeling wretch _craved a blessing_!

"Next morning I heard some one begging for mercy, and also the lash asof a whip. Not knowing whence the sound came, I rose, and presentlyfound the poor boy tied up to a post, his toes scarcely touching theground, and a negro whipper. He had already cut him in an unmercifulmanner, and the blood ran to his heels. I stepped in between them, andordered him untied immediately, which, with some reluctance andastonishment, was done. Returning to the house I saw the landlord, whothen showed himself in his true colors, the most abominably wicked manI ever met with, full of horrid execrations and threatenings upon allnorthern people; but I did not spare him; which occasioned a bystanderto say, with an oath, that I should be "popped over. " We left them, and were in full expectation of their way-laying or coming after us, but the Lord restrained them. The next house we stopped at we foundthe same wicked spirit. "

Col. ELIJAH ELLSWORTH, of Richfield, Ohio, gives the followingtestimony:--

"Eight or ten years ago I was in Putnam county, in the state ofGeorgia, at a Mr. Slaughter's, the father of my brother's wife. Anegro, that belonged to Mr. Walker, (I believe, ) was accused ofstealing a pedlar's trunk. The negro denied, but, without ceremony, was lashed to a tree--the whipping commenced--six or eight men tookturns--the poor fellow begged for mercy, but without effect, until hewas literally _cut to pieces, from his shoulders to his hips_, andcovered with a gore of blood. When he said the trunk was in a stack offodder, he was unlashed. They proceeded to the stack, but found notrunk. They asked the poor fellow, what he lied about it for; he said, "Lord, Massa, to keep from being whipped to death; I know nothingabout the trunk. " They commenced the whipping with redoubled vigor, until I really supposed he would be whipped to death on the spot; andsuch shrieks and crying for mercy! Again he acknowledged, and againthey were defeated in finding, and the same reason given as before. Some were for whipping again, others thought he would not surviveanother, and they ceased. About two months after, the trunk was found, and it was then ascertained who the thief was: and the poor fellow, after being nearly beat to death, and twice made to lie about it, wasas innocent as I was. "

The following statements are furnished by Major HORACE NYE, of Putnam, Muskingum county, Ohio. 

"In the summer of 1837, Mr. JOHN H. MOOREHEAD, a partner of mine, descended the Mississippi with several boat loads of flour. He told methat floating in a place in the Mississippi, where he could see formiles a head, he perceived a concourse of people on the bank, that forat least a mile and a half above he saw them, and heard the screams ofsome person, and from a great distance, the crack of a whip, he runnear the shore, and saw them whipping a black man, who was on theground, and at that time nearly unable to scream, but the whipcontinued to be applied without intermission, as long as he was insight, say from one mile and a half, to two miles below--he probablysaw and heard them for one hour in all. He expressed the opinion thatthe man could not survive. 

"About four weeks since I had a conversation with Mr. Porter, arespectable citizen of Morgan county of this state, of about fiftyyears of age. He told me that he formerly traveled about five years inthe southern states, and that on one occasion he stopped at a privatehouse, to stay all night; (I think it was in Virginia, ) while he wasconversing with the man, his wife came in, and complained that thewench had broken some article in the kitchen, and that she must bewhipped. He took the _woman_ into the door yard, stripped her clothesdown to her hips--tied her hands together, and drawing them up to alimb, so that she could just touch the ground, took a very largecowskin whip, and commenced flogging; he said that every stroke atfirst raised the skin, and immediately the blood came through; this hecontinued, until the blood stood in a puddle down at her feet. He thenturned to my informant and said, 'Well, Yankee, what do you think ofthat?'"

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MR. W. DUSTIN, a member of the MethodistEpiscopal Church, and, when the letter was written, 1835, a student ofMarietta College, Ohio. 

"I find by looking over my journal that the murdering, which I spokeof yesterday, took place about the first of June, 1834. 

"Without commenting upon this act of cruelty, or giving vent to my ownfeelings, I will simply give you a statement of the fact, as knownfrom _personal_ observation. 

"Dr. K. A man of wealth, and a practising physician in the county ofYazoo, state of Mississippi, personally known to me, having lived inthe same neighborhood more than twelve months, after having scourgedone of his negroes for running away, declared with an oath, that if heran away again, he would kill him. The negro, so soon as anopportunity offered, ran away again. He was caught and brought back. Again he was scourged, until his flesh, mangled and torn, and thickmingled with the clotted blood, rolled from his back. He becameapparently insensible, and beneath the heaviest stroke would scarcelyutter a groan. The master got tired, laid down his whip and nailed thenegro's ear to a tree; in this condition, nailed fast to the ruggedwood, he remained all night!

"Suffice it to say, in the conclusion, that the next day he was foundDEAD!

"Well, what did they do with the master? The sum total of it is this:he was taken before a magistrate and gave bonds, for his appearance atthe next court. Well, to be sure he had plenty of cash, so he paid uphis bonds and moved away, and there the matter ended. 

"If the above fact will be of any service to you in exhibiting to theworld the condition of the unfortunate negroes, you are at liberty tomake use of it in any way you think best. 

Yours, fraternally, M. DUSTIN. "

Mr. ALFRED WILKINSON, a member of the Baptist Church in Skeneateles, N. Y. And the assessor of that town, has furnished the following:

"I went down the Mississippi in December, 1838 and saw twelve offourteen negroes punished on one plantation, by stretching them on aladder and tying them to it; then stripping off their clothes, andwhipping them on the naked flesh with a heavy whip, the lash seven oreight feet long: most of the strokes cut the skin. I understood theywere whipped for not doing the tasks allotted to them. "

FROM THE PHILANTHROPIST, Cincinnati, Ohio, Feb. 26, 1839. 

"A very intelligent lady the widow of a highly respectable preacher ofthe gospel of the Presbyterian Church, formerly a resident of a freestate, and a colonizationist, and a strong antiabolitionist, who, although an enemy to slavery, was opposed to abolition on the groundthat it was for carrying things too rapidly, and without regard tocircumstances, and especially who believed that abolitionistsexaggerated with regard to the evils of slavery, and used to say thatsuch men ought to go to slave states and see for themselves, to beconvinced that they did the slaveholders injustice, has gone and seenfor herself. Hear her testimony. "

_Kentucky, Dec. _ 25, 1835. 

"Dear Mrs. W. --I am still in the land of oppression and cruelty, buthope soon to breathe the air of a free state. My soul is sick ofslavery, and I rejoice that my time is nearly expired: but the scenesthat I have witnessed have made an impression that never can beeffaced, and have inspired me with the determination to unite myfeeble efforts with those who are laboring to suppress this horridsystem. I am _now_ an _abolitionist_. You will cease to be surprisedat this, when I inform you, that I have just seen a poor slave who wasbeaten by his inhuman master until he could neither walk nor stand. Isaw him from my window carried from the barn where he had beenwhipped to the cabin, by two negro men; and he now lies there, and ifhe recovers, will be a sufferer for months, and probably for life. Youwill doubtless suppose that he committed some great crime; but it wasnot so. He was called upon by a young man (the son of his master, ) todo something, and not moving as quickly as his young master wished himto do, he drove him to the barn, knocked him down, and jumped uponhim, stamped, and then cowhided him until he was almost dead. This isnot the first act of cruelty that I have seen, though it is the_worst_; and I am convinced that those who have described thecruelties of slaveholders, have not exaggerated. "

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM GERRIT SMITH, Esq. , of Peterboro'. N. Y. Peterboro', December 1, 1838. 

_To the Editor of the Union Herald_: "My dear Sir:--You will be happyto hear, that the two fugitive slaves, to whom in the brotherly loveof your heart, you gave the use of your horse, are still makingundisturbed progress towards the _monarchical_ land whither_republican_ slaves escape for the enjoyment of liberty. They hadeaten their breakfast, and were seated in my wagon, before day-dawn, this morning. 

"Fugitive slaves have before taken my house in their way, but neverany, whose lips and persons made so forcible an appeal to mysensibilities, and kindled in me so much abhorrence of thehell-concocted system of American slavery. 

"The fugitives exhibited their bare backs to myself and a number of myneighbors. Williams' back is comparatively scarred. But, I speakwithin bounds, when I say, that one-third to one-half of the wholesurface of the back and shoulders of poor Scott, _consists of scarsand wales resulting from innumerable gashes. _ His natural complexionbeing yellow and the callous places being nearly black, his back andshoulders remind you of a spotted animal. "

The LOUISVILLE REPORTER (Kentucky, ) Jan. 15, 1839, contains the reportof a trial for inhuman treatment of a female slave. The following issome of the testimony given in court. 

"Dr. CONSTANT testified that he saw Mrs. Maxwell at the kitchen door, whipping the negro severely, without being particular whether shestruck her in the face or not. The negro was lacerated by the whip, and the blood flowing. Soon after, on going down the steps, he sawquantities of blood on them, and on returning, saw them again. She hadbeen thinly clad--barefooted in very cold weather. Sometimes she hadshoes--sometimes not. In the beginning of the winter she had linseydresses, since then, calico ones. During the last four months, hadnoticed many scars on her person. At one time had one of her eyes tiedup for a week. During the last three months seemed declining, and hadbecome stupified. Mr. Winters was passing along the street, heardcries, looked up through the window that was hoisted, saw the boywhipping her, as much as forty or fifty licks, while he staid. Thegirl was stripped down to the hips. The whip seemed to be a cow-hide. Whenever she turned her face to him, he would hit her across the faceeither with the butt end or small end of the whip to make her turn herback round square to the lash, that he might get a fair blow at her. 

"Mr. Say had noticed several wounds on her person, chiefly bruises. 

"Captain Porter, keeper of the work-house, into which Milly had beenreceived, thought the injuries on her person very bad--some of themappeared to be burns--some bruises or stripes, as of a cow-hide. "

LETTER OF REV. JOHN RANKIN, of Ripley, Ohio, to the Editor of thePhilanthropist. 

RIPLEY, Feb. 20, 1839. 

"Some time since, a member of the Presbyterian Church of Ebenezer, Brown county, Ohio, landed his boat at a point on the Mississippi. Hesaw some disturbance among the colored people on the bank. He steppedup, to see what was the matter. A black man was stretched naked onthe ground; his hands were tied to a stake, and one held each foot. Hewas doomed to receive fifty lashes; but by the time the overseer hadgiven him twenty-five with his great whip, the blood was standinground the wretched victim in little puddles. It appeared just as if ithad rained blood. --Another observer stepped up, and advised to deferthe other twenty-five to another time, lest the slave might die; andhe was released, to receive the balance when he should have sorecruited as to be able to bear it and live. The offence was, comingone hour too late to work. "

Mr. RANKIN, who is a native of Tennessee, in his letters on slavery, published fifteen years since, says:

"A respectable gentleman, who is now a citizen of Flemingsburg, Fleming county, Kentucky, when in the state of South Carolina, wasinvited by a slaveholder, to walk with him and take a view of hisfarm. He complied with the invitation thus given, and in their walkthey came to the place where the slaves were at work, and found theoverseer whipping one of them very severely for not keeping pace withhis fellows--in vain the poor fellow alleged that he was sick, andcould not work. The master seemed to think all was well enough, hencehe and the gentleman passed on. In the space of an hour they returnedby the same way, and found that the poor slave, who had been whippedas they first passed by the field of labor, was actually dead! This Ihave from unquestionable authority. "

Extract of a letter from a MEMBER OF CONGRESS, to the Editor of theNew York American, dated Washington, Feb. 18, 1839. The name of thewriter is with the Executive Committee of the American Anti-SlaverySociety. 

"Three days ago, the inhabitants in the vicinity of the new PatentBuilding were alarmed by an outcry in the street, which proved to bethat of a slave who had just been knocked down with a brick-bat by hispursuing master. Prostrate on the ground, with a large gash in hishead, the poor slave was receiving the blows of his master on oneside, and the kicks of his master's son on the other. His criesbrought a few individuals to the spot; but no one dared to interfere, save to exclaim--You will kill him--which was met by the response, "Heis mine, and I have a right to do what I please with him. " Theheart-rending scene was closed from _public_ view by dragging the poorbruised and wounded slave from the public street into his master'sstable. What followed is not known. The outcries were heard by membersof Congress and others at the distance of near a quarter of a milefrom the scene. 

"And now, perhaps, you will ask, is not the city aroused by thisflagrant cruelty and breach of the peace? I answer--not at all. Everything is quiet. If the occurrence is mentioned at all, it is spoken ofin whispers. "

_From the Mobile Examiner, August_ 1, 1837. 

"POLICE REPORT--MAYOR'S OFFICE. _Saturday morning, August_ 12, 1837. 

"His Honor the Mayor presiding. 

"Mr. MILLER, of the foundry, brought to the office this morning asmall negro girl aged about eight or ten years, whom he had taken intohis house some time during the previous night. She had crawled underthe window of his bed room to screen herself from the night air, andto find a warmer shelter than the open canopy of heaven afforded. Ofall objects of pity that have lately come to our view, this poorlittle girl most needs the protection of authority, and the sympathiesof the charitable. From the cruelty of her master and mistress, shehas been whipped, worked and starved, until she is now a breathingskeleton, hardly able to stand upon her feet. 

"The back of the poor little sufferer, (which we ourselves saw, ) _wasactually cut into strings, and so perfectly was the flesh worn fromher limbs, _ by the wretched treatment she had received, that _everyjoint showed distinctly its crevices_ and protuberances through theskin. Her little lips clung closely over her teeth--her cheeks weresunken and her head narrowed, and when her eyes were closed, the lidsresembled film more than flesh or skin. 

"We would desire of our northern friends such as choose to publish tothe world their own version of the case we have related, not to forgetto add, in conclusion, that the owner of this little girl is aforeigner, speaks against slavery as an institution, and reads hisBible to his wife, with the view of finding proofs for his opinions. "

Rev. WILLIAM SCALES, of Lyndon, Vermont, gives the following testimonyin a recent letter:

"I had a class-mate at the Andover Theological Seminary, who spent aseason at the south, --in Georgia, I think--who related the followingfact in an address before the Seminary. It occasioned very deepsensation on the part of opponents. The gentleman was Mr. Julius C. Anthony, of Taunton, Mass. He graduated at the Seminary in 1835. I donot know where he is now settled. I have no doubt of the fact, as bewas an _eye-witness_ of it. The man with whom he resided had a veryathletic slave--a valuable fellow--a blacksmith. On a certain day asmall strap of leather was missing. The man's little son accused thisslave of stealing it. He denied the charge, while the boy mostconfidently asserted it. The slave was brought out into the yard andbound--his hands below his knees, and a stick crossing his knees, sothat he would lie upon either side in form of the letter S. One of theoverseers laid on fifty lashes--he still denied the theft--was turnedover and fifty more put on. Sometimes the master and sometimes theoverseers whipping--as they relieved each other to take breath. Thenhe was for a time left to himself, and in the course of the dayreceived FOUR HUNDRED LASHES--still denying the charge, Next morningMr. Anthony walked out--the sun was just rising--he saw the mangreatly enfeabled, leaning against a stump. It was time to go towork--he attempted to rise, but fell back--again attempted, and againfell back--still making the attempt, and still falling back, Mr. Anthony thought, nearly _twenty times_ before he succeeded instanding--he then staggered off to his shop. In course of the morningMr. A. Went to the door and looked in. Two overseers were standing by. The slave was feverish and sick--his skin and mouth dry and parched. He was very thirsty. One of the overseers, while Mr. A, was looking athim, inquired of the other whether it were not best to give him alittle water. 'No. Damn him, he will do well enough, ' was the replyfrom the other overseer. This was all the relief gained by the poorslave. A few days after, the slaveholder's _son confessed that hestole the strap himself. _"

Rev. D. C. EASTMAN, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal church atBloomingburg, Fayette county, Ohio, has just forwarded a letter, fromwhich the following is an extract:

"GEORGE ROEBUCK, an old and respectable farmer, near Bloomingburg, Fayette county, Ohio, a member of the Methodist Episcopal church, says, that almost forty-three years ago, he saw in Bath county, Virginia, a slave girl with a sore between the shoulders of the sizeand shape of a _smoothing iron. _ The girl was 'owned' by one M'Neil. Aslaveholder who boarded at M'Neil's stated that Mrs. M'Neil had placedthe aforesaid iron when hot, between the girl's shoulders, andproduced the sore. 

"Roebuck was once at this M'Neil's father's, and whilst the old manwas at morning prayer, he heard the son plying the whip upon a slaveout of doors. 

"ELI WEST, of Concord township, Fayette county, Ohio, formerly ofNorth Carolina, a farmer and an exhorter in the Methodist Protestantchurch, says, that many years since he went to live with an uncle whoowned about fifty negroes. Soon after his arrival, his uncle orderedhis waiting boy, who was _naked_, to be tied--his hands to horse rack, and his feet together, with a rail passed between his legs, and helddown by a person at each end. In this position he was whipped, fromneck to feet, till covered with blood; after which he was _salted. _

"His uncle's slaves received one quart of corn each day, and thatonly, and were allowed one hour each day to cook and eat it. They hadno meat but once in the year. Such was the general usage in thatcountry. 

"West, after this, lived one year with Esquire Starky and mother. Theyhad two hundred slaves, who received the usual treatment ofstarvation, nakedness, and the cowhide. They had one lively negrowoman who bore no children. For this neglect, her mistress had herback made naked and a severe whipping inflicted. But as she continuedbarren, she was sold to the 'negro buyers. '"

"THOMAS LARRIMER, a deacon in the Presbyterian church at Bloomingburg, Fayette county, Ohio, and a respectable farmer, says, that in April, 1837, as he was going down the Mississippi river, about fifty milesbelow Natchez, he saw ahead, on the left side of the river, a coloredperson tied to a post, and a man with a driver's whip, the lash abouteight or ten feet long. With this the man commenced, with muchdeliberation, to whip, with much apparent force, and continued till hegot out of sight. 

"When coming up the river forty or fifty miles below Vicksburg, aJudge Owens came on board the steamboat. He was owner of a cottonplantation below there, and on being told of the above whipping, hesaid that slaves were often whipped to death for great offences, suchas _stealing, _ &c. --but that when death followed, the overseers weregenerally severely _reproved!_

"About the same time, he spent a night at Mr. Casey's, three milesfrom Columbia, South Carolina. Whilst there they heard him givingorders as to what was to be done, and amongst other things, "Thatnigger must be buried. " On inquiry, he learnt that a gentlemantraveling with a servant, had a short time previous called there, andsaid his servant had just been taken ill, and he should be under thenecessity of leaving him. He did so. The slave became worst, andCasey called in a physician, who pronounced it an old case, and saidthat he must shortly die. The slave said, if that was the case hewould now tell the truth. He had been attacked, a long time since, with a difficulty in the side--his master swore he would 'have his ownout of him' and started off to sell him, with a threat to kill him ifhe told he had been sick, more than a few days. They saw them makinga rough plank box to bury him in. 

"In March, 1833, twenty-five or thirty miles south of Columbia, on thegreat road through Sumpterville district, they saw a large company offemale slaves carrying rails and building fence. Three of them werefar advanced in pregnancy. 

"In the month of January, 1838, he put up with a drove of mules andhorses, at one Adams', on the Drovers' road, near the south border ofKentucky. His son-in-law, who had lived in the south, was there. Inconversation about picking cotton, he said, 'some hands cannot get thesleight of it. I have a girl who to-day has done as good a day's workat grubbing as any _man_, but I could not make her a hand atcotton-picking. I whipped her, and if I did it once I did it fivehundred times, but I found she _could_ not; so I put her to carryingrails with the men. After a few days I found her shoulders were so_raw_ that every rail was _bloody_ as she laid it down. I asked her ifshe would not rather pick cotton than carry rails. 'No, ' said she, 'Idon't get whipped now. '"

WILLIAM A. USTICK, an elder of the Presbyterian church atBloomingburg, and Mr. G. S. Fullerton, a merchant and member of thesame church, were with Deacon Larrimer on this journey, and arewitnesses to the preceding facts. 

Mr. SAMUEL HALL, a teacher in Marietta College, Ohio, and formerlysecretary of the Colonization society in that village, has recentlycommunicated the facts that follow. We quote from his letter. 

"The following horrid flagellation was witnessed in part, till hissoul was sick, by MR. GLIDDEN, an inhabitant of Marietta, Ohio, whowent down the Mississippi river, with a boat load of produce in theautumn of 1837; it took place at what is called 'Matthews' or'Matheses Bend' in December, 1837. Mr. G. Is worthy of credit. 

"A negro was tied up, and flogged until the blood ran down and filledhis shoes, so that when he raised either foot and set it down again, the blood would run over their tops. I could not look on any longer, but turned away in horror; the whipping was continued to the number of500 lashes, as I understood; a quart of spirits of turpentine was thenapplied to his lacerated body. The same negro came down to my boat, toget some apples, and was so weak from his wounds and loss of blood, that he could not get up the bank, but fell to the ground. The crimefor which the negro was whipped, was that of telling the othernegroes, that _the overseer had lain with his wife. "_

Mr. Hall adds:--

"The following statement is made by a young man from Western Virginia. He is a member of the Presbyterian Church, and a student in MariettaCollege. All that prevents the introduction of his _name, _ is theperil to his life, which would probably be the consequence, on hisreturn to Virginia. His character for integrity and veracity is abovesuspicion. 

"On the night of the great meteoric shower, in Nov. 1833. I was atRemley's tavern, 12 miles west of Lewisburg, Greenbrier Co. , Virginia. A drove of 50 or 60 negroes stopped at the same place that night. They usually 'camp out, ' but as it was excessively muddy, they werepermitted to come into the house. So far as my knowledge extends, 'droves, ' on their way to the south, eat but twice a day, early in themorning and at night. Their supper was a compound of 'potatoes andmeal, ' and was, without exception, the _dirtiest, blackest lookingmess I ever saw. _ I remarked at the time that the food was not asclean, in appearance, as that which was given to a _drove of hogs_, atthe same place the night previous. Such as it was, however, a blackwoman brought it on her head, in a tray or trough two and a half feetlong, where the men and women were promiscuously herded. The slavesrushed up and seized it from the trough in handfulls, before the womancould take it off her head. They jumped at it as if half-famished. 

"They slept on the floor of the room which they were permitted tooccupy, lying in every form imaginable, males and females, promiscuously. They were so thick on the floor, that in passingthrough the room it was necessary to step over them. 

"There were three drivers, one of whom staid in the room to watch thedrove, and the other two slept in an adjoining room. Each of thelatter took a female from the drove to lodge with him, as is thecommon practice of the drivers generally. There is no doubt about thisparticular instance, _for they were seen together_. The mud was sothick on the floor where this drove slept, that it was necessary totake a shovel, the next morning, and clear it out. Six or eight inthis drove were chained; all were for the south. 

In the autumn of the same year I saw a drove of upwards of a hundred, between 40 and 50 of them were fastened to one chain, the links beingmade of iron rods, as thick in diameter as a man's little finger. Thisdrove was bound westward to the Ohio river, to be shipped to thesouth. I have seen many droves, and more or less in each, almostwithout exception, were chained. I never saw but one drove, that wenton their way making merry. In that one they were blowing horns, singing, &c. , and appeared as if they had been drinking whisky. 

"They generally appear extremely dejected. I have seen in the courseof five years, on the road near where I reside, 12 or 15 droves atleast, passing to the south. They would average 40 in each drove. Nearthe first of January, 1834, I started about sunrise to go toLewisburg. It was a bitter cold morning. I met a drove of negroes, 30or 40 in number, remarkably ragged and destitute of clothing. Onelittle boy particularly excited my sympathy. He was some distancebehind the others, not being able to keep up with the rest. Althoughhe was shivering with cold and crying, the driver was pushing him upin a trot to overtake the main gang. All of them looked as if theywere half-frozen. There was one remarkable instance of tyranny, exhibited by a boy, not more than eight years old, that came under myobservation, in a family by the name of D----n, six miles fromLewisburg. This youngster would swear at the slaves, and exert all thestrength he possessed, to flog or beat them, with whatever instrumentor weapon he could lay hands on, provided they did not obey him_instanter_. He was encouraged in this by his father, the master ofthe slaves. The slaves often fled from this young tyrant in terror. "

Mr. Hall adds:--

"The following extract is from a letter, to a student in MariettaCollege, by his friend in Alabama. With the writer, Mr. Isaac Knapp, Iam perfectly acquainted. He was a student in the above College, forthe space of one year, before going to Alabama, was formerly aresident of Dummerston, Vt. He is a professor of religion, and asworthy of belief as any member of the community. Mr. K. Has returnedfrom the South, and is now a member of the same college. 

"In Jan. (1838) a negro of a widow Phillips, ranaway, was taken up, and confined in Pulaski jail. One Gibbs, overseer for Mrs. P. , mountedon horseback, took him from confinement, compelled him to run back toElkton, a distance of fifteen miles, whipping him all the way. When hereached home, the negro exhausted and worn out, exclaimed, 'you havebroke my heart, ' i. E. You have killed me. For this, Gibbs flew into aviolent passion, tied the negro to a stake, and, in the language of awitness, '_cut his back to mince-meat_. ' But the fiend was notsatisfied with this. He burnt his legs to a blister, with hot embers, and then chained him _naked_, in the open air, weary with running, weak from the loss of blood, and smarting from his burns. It was acold night--and _in the morning the negro was dead_. Yet this monsterescaped without even _the shadow_ of a trial. 'The negro, ' said thedoctor, 'died, by--he knew not what; any how, Gibbs did not killhim. '[9] A short time since, (the letter is dated, April, 1838. )'Gibbs whipped another negro unmercifully because the horse, withwhich he was ploughing, broke the reins and ran. He then raised hiswhip against Mr. Bowers, (son of Mrs. P. ) who shot him. Since I camehere, ' (a period of about six months, ) there have been eight white menand two negroes killed, within 30 miles of me. "

[Footnote 9: Mr. Knapp, gives me some further verbal particulars aboutthis affair. He says that his informant saw the negro dead the nextmorning, that his legs were blistered, and that the negroes affirmedthat Gibbs compelled them to throw embers upon him. But Gibbs deniedit, and said the blistering was the effect of frost, as the negro wasmuch exposed to before being taken up. Mr. Bowers, a son of Mrs. Phillips by a former husband, attempted to have Gibbs brought tojustice, but his mother justified Gibbs, and nothing was thereforedone about it. The affair took place in Upper Elkton, Tennessee, nearthe Alabama line. ]

The following is from Mr. Knapp's own lips, taken down a day or twosince. 

"Mr. Buster, with whom I boarded, in Limestone Co. , Ala. , related to methe following incident: 'George a slave belonging to one of theestates in my neighborhood, was lurking about my residence without apass. We were making preparations to give him a flogging, but heescaped from us. Not long afterwards, meeting a patrol which had justtaken a negro in custody without a pass, I inquired, Who have youthere? on learning that it was _George_, well, I rejoined, there is asmall matter between him and myself that needs adjustment, so give methe raw hide, which I accordingly took, and laid 60 strokes on hisback, to the utmost of my strength. ' I was speaking of this barbarity, afterwards, to Mr. Bradley, an overseer of the Rev. Mr. Donnell, wholives in the vicinity of Moresville, Ala. , 'Oh, ' replied he, 'weconsider _that_ a very light whipping here' Mr. Bradley is a professorof religion, and is esteemed in that vicinity a very pious, exemplaryChristian. '"

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM REV. C. STEWART RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, dated Jan. 1, 1839. 

"I do not feel at liberty to disclose the name of the brother who hasfurnished the following facts. He is highly esteemed as a man ofscrupulous veracity. I will confirm my own testimony by thecertificate of Judge Snow and Mr. Keyes, two of the oldest and mostrespectable settlers in Quincy. 

Quincy, Dec. 29, 1838"

"Dear Sir, --We have been long acquainted with the Christian brotherwho has named to you some facts that fell under his observation whilea resident of slave states. He is a member of a Christian church, ingood standing; and is a man of strict integrity of character. 

Henry H. Snow, Willard Keyes. Rev. C. Stewart Renshaw. "

"My informant spent thirty years of his life in Kentucky and Missouri. Whilst in Kentucky he resided in Hardin co. I noted down his testimonyvery nearly in his own words, which will account for their_evidence-like_ form. On the general condition of the slaves inKentucky, through Hardin co. , he said, their houses were veryuncomfortable, generally without floors, other than the earth: manyhad puncheon floors, but he never remembers to have seen a plankfloor. In regard to clothing they were very badly off. In summerthey cared little for clothing; but in winter they almost froze. Theirrags might hide their nakedness from the sun in summer, but would notprotect them from the cold in winter. Their bed-clothes were tatteredrags, thrown into a corner by day, and drawn before the fire by night. 'The only thing, ' said he, 'to which I can compare them, in winter, is_stock without a shelter. '_

"He made the following comparison between the condition of slaves inKentucky and Missouri. So far as he was able to compare them, he said, that in Missouri the slaves had better _quarters_-but are not so wellclad, and are more severely punished than in Kentucky. In both states, the slaves are huddled together, without distinction of sex, into thesame quarter, till it is filled, then another is built; often two orthree families in a log hovel, twelve feet square. 

"It is proper to state, that the sphere of my informant's observationwas mainly in the region of Hardin co. , Kentucky, and the eastern partof Missouri, and not through those states generally. 

"Whilst at St. Louis, a number of years ago, as he was going to workwith Mr. Henry Males, and another carpenter, they heard groans from abarn by the road-side: they stopped, and looking through the cracks ofthe barn, saw a negro bound hand and foot to a post, so that his toesjust touched the ground; and his master, Captain Thorpe, wasinflicting punishment; he had whipped him till exhausted, --restedhimself, and returned again to the punishment. The wretched suffererwas in a most pitiable condition, and the warm blood and dry dust ofthe barn had formed a mortar up to his instep. Mr. Males jumped thefence, and remonstrated so effectually with Capt. Thorpe, that heceased the punishment. It was six weeks before that slave could put onhis shirt!

"John Mackey, a rich slaveholder, lived near Clarksville, Pike co. , Missouri, some years since. He whipped his slave Billy, a boy fourteenyears old, till he was sick and stupid; he then sent him home. Then, for his stupidity, whipped him again, and fractured his skull with anaxe-helve. He buried him away in the woods; dark words were whispered, and the body was disinterred. A coroner's inquest was held, and Mr. R. Anderson, the coroner, brought in a verdict of death from fracturedskull, occasioned by blows from an axe-handle, inflicted by JohnMackey. The case was brought into court, but Mackey was rich, and hismurdered victim was his SLAVE; after expending about $500 be walkedfree. 

"One Mrs. Mann, living near ----, in ---- co. , Missouri was known tobe very cruel to her slaves. She had a bench made purposely to whipthem upon; and what she called her "six pound paddle, " an instrumentof prodigious torture, bored through with holes; this she would wieldwith both hands as she stood over her prostrate victim. 

"She thus punished a hired slave woman named Fanny, belonging to Mr. Charles Trabue, who lives neat Palmyra, Marion co. , Missouri; on themorning after the punishment Fanny was a corpse; she was silently andquickly buried, but rumor was not so easily stopped. Mr. Trabue heardof it, and commenced suit for his _property_. The murdered slave wasdisinterred, and an inquest held; her back was a mass of jelliedmuscle; and the coroner brought in a verdict of death by the 'sixpound paddle. ' Mrs. Mann fled for a few months, but returned again, and her friends found means to protract the suit. 

"This same Mrs. Mann had another hired slave woman living with her, called Patterson's Fanny, she belonged to a Mr. Patterson; she had ayoung babe with her, just beginning to creep. One day, after washing, whilst a tub of rinsing water yet stood in the kitchen, Mrs. Mann cameout in haste, and sent Fanny to do something out of doors. Fanny triedto beg off--she was afraid to leave her babe, lest it should creep tothe tub and get hurt--Mrs. M. Said she would watch the babe, and senther off. She went with much reluctance, and heard the child struggleas she went out the door. Fearing lest Mrs. M. Should leave the babealone, she watched the room, and soon saw her pass out of the oppositedoor. Immediately Fanny hurried in, and looked around for her babe, she could not see it, she looked at the tub--there her babe wasfloating, a strangled corpse. The poor woman gave a dreadful scream;and Mrs. M. Rushed into the room, with her hands raised, andexclaimed, 'Heavens, Fanny! have you drowned your child?' It was vainfor the poor bereaved one to attempt to vindicate herself: in vain sheattempted to convince them that the babe had not been alone a moment, and could not have drowned itself; and that she had not been in thehouse a moment, before she screamed at discovering her drowned babe. All was false! Mrs. Mann declared it was all pretence--that Fanny haddrowned her own babe, and now wanted to lay the blame upon her! andMrs. Mann was a white woman--of course her word was more valuable thanthe oaths of all the slaves of Missouri. No evidence but that ofslaves could be obtained, or Mr. Patterson would have prosecuted forhis 'loss of property. ' As it was, every one believed Mrs. M. Guilty, though the affair was soon hushed up. "

Extract of a letter from Col. THOMAS ROGERS, a native of Kentucky, nowan elder in the Presbyterian Church at New Petersburg, Highland co. , Ohio. 

"When a boy, in Bourbon co. , Kentucky, my father lived near aslaveholder of the name of Clay, who had a large number of slaves; Iremember being often at their quarters; not one of their shanties, orhovels, had any floor but the earth. Their clothing was truly neitherfit for covering nor decency. We could distinctly, of a still morning, hear this man whipping his blacks, and hear their screams from myfather's farm; this could be heard almost any still morning about thedawn of day. It was said to be his usual custom to repair, about thebreak of day, to their cabin doors, and, as the blacks passed out, togive them as many strokes of his cowskin as opportunity afforded; andhe would proceed in this manner from cabin to cabin until they wereall out. Occasionally some of his slaves would abscond, and upon beingretaken they were punished severely; and some of them, it is believed, died in consequence of the cruelty of their usage. I saw one of thisman's slaves, about seventeen years old, wearing a collar, with longiron horns extending from his shoulders far above his head. 

"In the winter of 1828-29 I traveled through part of the states ofMaryland and Virginia to Baltimore. At Frost Town, on the nationalroad, I put up for the night. Soon after, there came in a slaver withhis drove of slaves; among them were two young men, chained together. The bar room was assigned to them for their place of lodging--those inchains were guarded when they had to go out. I asked the 'owner' whyhe kept these men chained; he replied, that they were stout youngfellows, and should they rebel, he and his son would not be able tomanage them. I then left the room, and shortly after heard a_scream_, and when the landlady inquired the cause, the slaver coollytold her not to trouble herself, he was only chastising one of hiswomen. It appeared that three days previously her child had died onthe road, and been thrown into a hole or crevice in the mountain, anda few stones thrown over it; and the mother weeping for her child waschastised by her master, and told by him, she 'should have somethingto cry for. ' The name of this man I can give if called for. 

"When engaged in this journey I spent about one month with myrelations in Virginia. It being shortly after new year, _the time ofhiring_ was over; but I saw the pounds, and the scaffolds whichremained of the pounds, in which the slaves had been penned up"

M. GEORGE W. WESTGATE, of Quincy, Illinois, who lived in thesouthwestern slave states a number of years, has furnished thefollowing statement. 

"The great mass of the slaves are under drivers and overseers. I neversaw an overseer without a whip; the whip usually carried is a shortloaded stock, with a heavy lash from five to six feet long. When theywhip a slave they make him pull off his shirt, if he has one, thenmake him lie down on his face, and taking their stand at the length ofthe lash, they inflict the punishment. Whippings are so _universal_that a negro that has not been whipped is talked of in all the regionas a wonder. By whipping I do not mean a few lashes across theshoulders, but a set flogging, and generally _lying down. _

"On sugar plantations generally, and on some cotton plantations, theyhave negro drivers, who are in such a degree responsible for theirgang, that if they are at fault, the driver is whipped. The result is, the gang are constantly driven by him to the extent of the influenceof the lash; and it is uniformly the case that gangs dread a negrodriver more than a white overseer. 

"I spent a winter on widow Culvert's plantation, near Rodney, Mississippi, but was not in a situation to see extraordinarypunishments. Bellows, the overseer, for a trifling offence, took oneof the slaves, stripped him, and with a piece of burning wood appliedto his posteriors, burned him cruelly; while the poor wretch screamedin the greatest agony. The principal preparation for punishment thatBellows had, was single handcuffs made of iron, with chains, by whichthe offender could be chained to four stakes on the ground. These arevery common in all the lower country. I noticed one slave on widowCalvert's plantation, who was whipped from twenty-five to fifty lashesevery fortnight during the whole winter. The expression 'whipped todeath, ' as applied to slaves, is common at the south. 

"Several years ago I was going below New Orleans, in what is calledthe Plaquemine country, and a planter sent down in my boat a runawayhe had found in New Orleans, to his plantation at Orange 5 Points. Aswe came near the Points he told me, with deep feeling, that heexpected to be whipped almost to death: pointing to a graveyard, hesaid, 'There lie five who were whipped to death. ' Overseers generallykeep some of the women on the plantation; I scarce know an exceptionto this. Indeed, their intercourse with them is very muchpromiscuous, --they show them not much, if any favor. Mastersfrequently follow the example of their overseers in this thing. 

"GEORGE W. WESTGATE. "

II. TORTURES, BY IRON COLLARS, CHAINS, FETTERS, HANDCUFFS, &c. 

The slaves are often tortured by iron collars, with long prongs or"horns" and sometimes bells attached to them--they are made to wearchains, handcuffs, fetters, iron clogs, bars, rings, and bands of ironupon their limbs, iron masks upon their faces, iron gags in theirmouths, &c. 

In proof of this, we give the testimony of slaveholders themselves, under their own names; it will be mostly in the form of extracts fromtheir own advertisements, in southern newspapers, in which, describingtheir runaway slaves, they specify the iron collars, handcuffs, chains, fetters, &c. , which they wore upon their necks, wrists, ankles, and other parts of their bodies. To publish the _whole_ ofeach advertisement, would needlessly occupy space and tax the reader;we shall consequently, as heretofore, give merely the name of theadvertiser, the name and date of the newspaper containing theadvertisement, with the place of publication, and only so much of theadvertisement as will give the particular _fact_, proving the truth ofthe assertion contained in the _general head_. 

William Toler, sheriff of Simpson county, Mississippi, in the"Southern Sun, " Jackson, Mississippi, September 22, 1838. 

"Was committed to jail, a yellow boy named Jim--had on a _large lockchain around his neck. "_

Mr. James R. Green, in the "Beacon, " Greensborough, Alabama, August23, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man named Squire--had on a _chain locked with ahouse-lock, around his neck. "_

Mr. Hazlet Loflano, in the "Spectator, " Staunton, Virginia, Sept. 27, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro named David--with some _iron hobbles around eachankle. "_

Mr. T. Enggy, New Orleans, Gallatin street, between Hospital andBarracks, N. O. "Bee, " Oct. 27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, negress Caroline--had on a _collar with one prong turneddown. "_

Mr. John Henderson, Washington, county, Mi. , in the "Grand GulfAdvertiser, " August 29, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a black woman, Betsey--had an _iron bar on her right leg. "_

William Dyer sheriff, Claiborne, Louisiana, in the "Herald, "Natchitoches, (La. ) July 26, 1837. 

"Was committed to jail, a negro named Ambrose--has a _ring of ironaround his neck. "_

Mr. Owen Cooke, "Mary street, between Common and Jackson streets, " NewOrleans, in the N. O. "Bee, " September 12, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my slave Amos, had a _chain_ attached to one of his legs"

H. W. Rice, sheriff, Colleton district, South Carolina, in the"Charleston Mercury, " September 1, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro named Patrick, about forty-five years old, and is _handcuffed. _"

W. P. Reeves, jailor, Shelby county, Tennessee, in the "MemphisEnquirer, June 17, 1837. 

"Committed to jail, a negro--had on his right leg an _iron band_ withone link of a chain. "

Mr. Francis Durett, Lexington, Lauderdale county, Ala. , in the"Huntsville Democrat, " August 29, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a negro man named Charles--had on a _drawing chain, _fastened around his ankle with a house lock. "

Mr. A. Murat, Baton Rouge, in the New Orleans "Bee, " June 20, 1837. 

"Ranaway, the negro Manuel, _much marked with irons. "_

Mr. Jordan Abbott, in the "Huntsville Democrat, " Nov. 17, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro boy named Daniel, about nineteen years old, and was_handcuffed. "_

Mr. J. Macoin, No. 177 Ann street, New Orleans, in the "Bee, " Augustll, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negress Fanny--had on an _iron band about her neck. "_

Menard Brothers, parish of Bernard, Louisiana, In the N. O. "Bee, "August 18, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro named John--having an _iron around his right foot. "_

Messrs. J. L. And W. H. Bolton, Shelby county, Tennessee, in the"Memphis Enquirer, " June 7, 1837. 

"Absconded, a colored boy named Peter--had an _iron round his neck_when he went away. "

H. Gridly, sheriff of Adams county, Mi. , in the "Memphis (Tenn. )Times, " September, 1834. 

"Was committed to jail, a negro boy--had on a _large neck iron_ with a_huge pair of horns and a large bar or band of iron_ on his left leg. "

Mr. Lambre, in the "Natchitoches (La. ) Herald, " March 29, 1837. 

"Ranaway, the negro boy Teams--he had on his neck an _iron collar. "_

Mr. Ferdinand Lemos, New Orleans, in the "Bee, " January 29, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negro George--he had on _his neck an iron collar, _ thebranches of which had been taken off"

Mr. T. J. De Yampert, merchant, Mobile, Alabama, of the firm of DeYampert, King & Co. , in the "Mobile Chronicle, " June 15, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro boy about _twelve_ years old--had round his neck _achain dog-collar_, with 'De Yampert' engraved on it. "

J. H. Hand, jailor, St. Francisville, La. , in the "LouisianaChronicle, " July 26, 1837. 

"Committed to jail, slave John--has several scars on his wrists, occasioned, as he says, by _handcuffs. "_

Mr. Charles Curener, New Orleans, in the "Bee, " July 2, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negro, Hown--has a ring of iron on his left foot. Also, Grise, his _wife, _ having a _ring and chain on the left leg. "_

Mr. P. T. Manning, Huntsville, Alabama, in the "Huntsville Advocate, "Oct. 23, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro boy named James--said boy was _ironed_ when he leftme. "

Mr. William L. Lambeth, Lynchburg, Virginia, in the "Moulton [Ala. ]Whig, " January 30, 1836. 

"Ranaway, Jim--had on when he escaped a pair of _chain handcuffs. "_

Mr. D. F. Guex, Secretary of the Steam Cotton Press Company, NewOrleans, in the "Commercial Bulletin, " May 27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Edmund Coleman--it is supposed he must have _iron shackleson his ankles_. "

Mr. Francis Durett, Lexington, Alabama, in the "Huntsville Democrat, "March 8, 1838. 

"Ranaway ----, a mulatto--had on when he left, a _pair of handcuffs_and a _pair of drawing chains_. "

B. W. Hodges, jailor, Pike county, Alabama, in the "MontgomeryAdvertiser, " Sept. 29, 1837. 

"Committed to jail, a man who calls his name John--he has a _clog ofiron on his right foot which will weigh four or five pounds_. "

P. Bayhi captain of police, in the N. O. "Bee, " June 9, 1838. 

"Detained at the police jail, the negro wench Myra--has several marksof _lashing_, and has _irons on her feet_. "

Mr. Charles Kernin, parish of Jefferson, Louisiana, in the N. O. "Bee, "August 11, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Betsey--when she left she had on her _neck an iron collar_. "

The foregoing advertisements are sufficient for our purpose, scores ofsimilar ones may be gathered from the newspapers of the slave statesevery month. 

To the preceding testimony of slaveholders, published by themselves, and vouched for by their own signatures, we subjoin the followingtestimony of other witnesses to the same point. 

JOHN M. NELSON, Esq. , a native of Virginia, now a highly respectedcitizen of highland county, Ohio, and member of the PresbyterianChurch in Hillsborough, in a recent letter states the following:--

"In Staunton, Va. , at the horse of Mr. Robert M'Dowell, a merchant ofthat place, I once saw a colored woman, of intelligent and dignifiedappearance, who appeared to be attending to the business of the house, with an _iron collar_ around her neck, with horns or prongs extendingout on either side, and up, until they met at something like a footabove her head, at which point there was a bell attached. This _yoke_, as they called it, I understood was to prevent her from running away, or to punish her for having done so. I had frequently seen _men_ withiron collars, but this was the first instance that I recollect to haveseen a _female_ thus degraded. "

Major HORACE NYE, an elder in the Presbyterian Church at Putnam, Muskingum county, Ohio, in a letter, dated Dec. 5, 1838, makes thefollowing statement:--

"Mr. Wm. Armstrong, of this place, who is frequently employed by ourcitizens as captain and supercargo of descending boats, whose word maybe relied on, has just made to me the following statement:--

"While laying at Alexandria, on Red River, Louisiana, he saw a slavebrought to a blacksmith's shop and a collar of iron fastened round hisneck, with two pieces rivetted to the sides, meeting some distanceabove his head. At the top of the arch, thus formed, was attached alarge cow-bell, the motion of which, while walking the streets, madeit necessary for the slave to hold his hand to one of its sides, tosteady it. 

"In New Orleans he saw several with iron collars, with horns attachedto them. The first he saw had three prongs projecting from the collarten or twelve inches, with the letter S on the end of each. He saysiron collars are quite frequent there. "

To the preceding Major Nye adds:--

"When I was about twelve years of age I lived at Marietta, in thisstate: I knew little of slaves, as there were few or none, at thattime, in the part of Virginia opposite that place. But I rememberseeing a slave who had run away from some place beyond my knowledge atthat time: he had an iron collar round his neck, to which was a strapof iron rivetted to the collar, on each side, passing over the top ofthe head; and another strap, from the back side to the top of thefirst--thus inclosing the head on three sides. I looked on while theblacksmith severed the collar with a file, which, I think, took himmore than an hour. "

Rev. JOHN DUDLEY, Mount Morris, Michigan, resided as a teacher at themissionary station, among the Choctaws, in Mississippi, during theyears 1830 and 31. In a letter just received Mr. Dudley says:--

"During the time I was on missionary ground, which was in 1830 and 31, I was frequently at the residence of the agent, who was aslaveholder. --I never knew of his treating his own slaves withcruelty; but the poor fellows who were escaping, and lodged with himwhen detected, found no clemency. I once saw there a fetter for '_thed----d runaways_, ' the weight of which can be judged by its size. Itwas at least three inches wide, half an inch thick, and something overa foot long. At this time I saw a poor fellow compelled to work in thefield, at 'logging, ' with such a galling fetter on his ankles. Toprevent it from wearing his ankles, a string was tied to the centre, by which the victim suspended it when he walked, with one hand, andwith the other carried his burden. Whenever he lifted, the fetterrested on his bare ankles. If he lost his balance and made a misstep, which must very often occur in lifting and rolling logs, the tortureof his fetter was severe. Thus he was doomed to work while wearing thetorturing iron, day after day, and at night he was confined in therunaways' jail. Some time after this, I saw the same dejected, heart-broken creature obliged to wait on the other hands, who werehusking corn. The privilege of sitting with the others was too muchfor him to enjoy; he was made to hobble from house to barn and barn tohouse, to carry food and drink for the rest. He passed round the endof the house where I was sitting with the agent: he seemed to take nonotice of me, but fixed his eyes on his tormentor till he passed quiteby us. "

Mr. ALFRED WILKINSON, member of the Baptist Church in Skeneateles, N. Y. And an assessor of that town, testifies as follows :--

"I stayed in New Orleans three weeks: during that time there used topass by where I stayed a number of slaves, each with an iron bandaround his ankle, a chain attached to it, and an eighteen pound ballat the end. They were employed in wheeling dirt with a wheelbarrow;they would put the ball into the barrow when they moved. --I recollectone day, that I counted nineteen of them, sometimes there were not asmany; they were driven by a slave, with a long lash, as if they werebeasts. These, I learned, were runaway slaves from the plantationsabove New Orleans. 

"There was also a negro woman, that used daily to come to the marketwith milk; she had an iron band around her neck, with three rodsprojecting from it, about sixteen inches long, crooked at the ends. "

For the fact which follows we are indebted to Mr. SAMUEL HALL, ateacher in Marietta College, Ohio. We quote his letter. 

"Mr. Curtis, a journeyman cabinet-maker, of Marietta, relates thefollowing, of which he was an eye witness. Mr. Curtis is every wayworthy of credit. 

"In September, 1837, at 'Milligan's Bend, ' in the Mississippi river, Isaw a negro with an iron band around his head, locked behind with apadlock. In the front, where it passed the mouth, there was aprojection inward of an inch and a half, which entered the mouth. 

"The overseer told me, he was so addicted to running away, it did notdo any good to whip him for it. He said he kept this gag constantly onhim, and intended to do so as long as he was on the plantation: sothat, if he ran away, he could not eat, and would starve to death. Theslave asked for drink in my presence; and the overseer made him liedown on his back, and turned water on his face two or three feet high, in order to torment him, as he could not swallow a drop. --The slavethen asked permission to go to the river; which being granted, hethrust his face and head entirely under the water, that being the onlyway he could drink with his gag on. The gag was taken off when he tookhis food, and then replaced afterwards. "

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MRS. SOPHIA LITTLE, of Newport, Rhode Island, daughter of Hon. Asher Robbins, senator in Congress for that state. 

"There was lately found, in the hold of a vessel engaged in thesouthern trade, by a person who was clearing it out, an iron collar, with three horns projecting from it. It seems that a young femaleslave, on whose slender neck was riveted this fiendish instrument oftorture, ran away from her tyrant, and begged the captain to bring heroff with him. This the captain refused to do; but unriveted the collarfrom her neck, and threw it away in the hold of the vessel. The collaris now at the anti-slavery office, Providence. To the truth of thesefacts Mr. William H. Reed, a gentleman of the highest moral character, is ready to vouch. 

"Mr. Reed is in possession of many facts of cruelty witnessed bypersons of veracity; but these witnesses are not willing to give theirnames. One case in particular he mentioned. Speaking with a certaincaptain, of the state of the slaves at the south, the captaincontended that their punishments were often very _lenient_; and, as aninstance of their excellent clemency, mentioned, that in one instance, not wishing to whip a slave, they sent him to a blacksmith, and had aniron band fastened around him, with three long projections reachingabove his head; and this he wore some time. "

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MR. JONATHON F. BALDWIN, of Lorain county, Ohio. Mr. B. Was formerly a merchant in Massillon, Ohio, and an elderin the Presbyterian Church there. 

"Dear Brother, --In conversation with Judge Lyman, of Litchfieldcounty, Connecticut, last June, he stated to me, that several yearssince he was in Columbia, South Carolina, and observing a colored manlying on the floor of a blacksmith's shop, as he was passing it, hiscuriosity led him in. He learned the man was a slave and ratherunmanageable. Several men were attempting to detach from his ankle aniron which had been bent around it. 

"The iron was a piece of a flat bar of the ordinary size from theforge hammer, and bent around the ankle, the ends meeting, and forminga hoop of about the diameter of the leg. There was one or more stringsattached to the iron and extending up around his neck, evidently so tosuspend it as to prevent its galling by its weight when at work, yetit had galled or griped till the leg had swollen out beyond the ironand inflamed and suppurated, so that the leg for a considerabledistance above and below the iron, was a mass of putrefaction, themost loathsome of any wound he had ever witnessed on any livingcreature. The slave lay on his back on the floor, with his leg on ananvil which sat also on the floor, one man had a chisel used forsplitting iron, and another struck it with a sledge, to drive itbetween the ends of the hoop and separate it so that it might be takenoff. Mr. Lyman said that the man swung the sledge over his shouldersas if splitting iron, and struck many blows before he succeeded inparting the ends of the iron at all, the bar was so large andstubborn--at length they spread it as far as they could withoutdriving the chisel so low as to ruin the leg. The slave, a man oftwenty-five years, perhaps, whose countenance was the index of a mindill adapted to the degradations of slavery, never uttered a word or agroan in all the process, but the copious flow of sweat from everypore, the dreadful contractions and distortions of every muscle in hisbody, showed clearly the great amount of his sufferings; and all thiswhile, such was the diseased state of the limb, that at every blow, the bloody, corrupted matter gushed out in all directions severalfeet, in such profusion as literally to cover a large area around theanvil. After various other fruitless attempts to spread the iron, theyconcluded it was necessary to weaken by filing before it could be gotoff which he left them attempting to do. "

Mr. WILLIAM DROWN, a well known citizen of Rhode Island, formerly ofProvidence, who has traveled in nearly all the slave states, thustestifies in a recent letter:

"I recollect seeing large gangs of slaves, generally a considerablenumber in each gang, being chained, passing westward over themountains from Maryland, Virginia, &c. To the Ohio. On that river Ihave frequently seen flat boats loaded with them, and their keepersarmed with pistols and dirks to guard them. 

"At New Orleans I recollect seeing gangs of slaves that were drivenout every day, the Sabbath not excepted, to work on the streets. These had heavy chains to connect two or more together, and some hadiron collars and yokes, &c. The noise as they walked, or worked intheir chains, was truly dreadful!"

Rev. THOMAS SAVAGE, pastor of the Congregational Church at Bedford, New Hampshire, who was for some years a resident of Mississippi andLouisiana, gives the following fact, in a letter dated January 9, 1839. 

"In 1819, while employed as an instructor at Second Creek, nearNatchez, Mississippi, I resided on a plantation where I witnessed thefollowing circumstance. One of the slaves was in the habit of runningaway. He had been repeatedly taken, and repeatedly whipped, withgreat severity, but to no purpose. He would still seize the firstopportunity to escape from the plantation. At last his ownerdeclared, I'll fix him, I'll put a stop to his running away. Heaccordingly took him to a blacksmith, and had an _iron head-frame_made for him, which may be called lock-jaw, from the use that was madeof it. It had a lock and key, and was so constructed, that when on thehead and locked, the slave could not open his mouth to take food, andthe design was to prevent his running away. But the device provedunavailing. He was soon missing, and whether by his own desperateeffort, or the aid of others, contrived to sustain himself with food;but he was at last taken, and if my memory serves me, his life wassoon terminated by the cruel treatment to which he was subjected. "

The Western Luminary, a religious paper published at Lexington, Kentucky, in an editorial article, in the summer of 1833, says:

"A few weeks since we gave an account of a company of men, women andchildren, part of whom were manacled, passing through our streets. Last week, a number of slaves were driven through the main street ofour city, among whom were a number manacled together, two abreast, allconnected by, and supporting a _heavy iron chain_, which extended thewhole length of the line. "

TESTIMONY OF A VIRGINIAN. 

The _name_ of this witness cannot be published, as it would put him inperil; but his _credibility_ is vouched for by the Rev. Ezra Fisher, pastor of the Baptist Church, Quincy, Illinois, and Dr. Richard Eels, of the same place. These gentlemen say of him, "We have greatconfidence in his integrity, discretion, and strict Christianprinciple. " He says--

"About five years ago, I remember to have passed, in _a single day_, four droves of slaves for the south west; the largest drove had 350slaves in it, and the smallest upwards of 200. I counted 68 or 70 ina single _coffle_. The '_coffle chain_' is a chain fastened at oneend to the centre of the bar of a pair of hand cuffs, which arefastened to the right wrist of one, and the left wrist of anotherslave, they standing abreast, and the chain between them. These arethe head of the coffle. The other end is passed through a ring in thebolt of the next handcuffs, and the slaves being manacled thus, twoand two together, walk up, and the coffle chain is passed, and they goup towards the head of the coffle. Of course they are closer or widerapart in the coffle, according to the number to be coffled, and to thelength of the chain. _I have seen HUNDREDS of droves andchain-coffles of this description_, and every coffle was a scene ofmisery and wo, of tears and brokenness of heart. "

Mr. SAMUEL HALL a teacher in Marietta College, Ohio, gives, in a lateletter, the following statement of a fellow student, from Kentucky, ofwhom he says, "he is a professor of religion, and worthy of entireconfidence. "

"I have seen at least _fifteen_ droves of 'human cattle, ' passing byus on their way to the south; and I do not recollect an exception, where there were not more or less of them _chained_ together. "

Mr. GEORGE P. C. HUSSEY, of Fayetteville, Franklin county, Pennsylvania, writes thus:

"I was born and raised in Hagerstown, Washington county, Maryland, where slavery is perhaps milder than in any other part of the slavestates; and yet I have seen _hundreds_ of colored men and womenchained together, two by two, and driven to the south. I have seenslaves tied up and lashed till the blood ran down to their heels. "

Mr. GIDDINGS, member of Congress from Ohio, in his speech in the Houseof Representatives, Feb. 13, 1839, made the following statement:

"On the beautiful avenue in front of the Capitol, members of Congress, during this session, have been compelled to turn aside from theirpath, to permit a coffle of slaves, males and females, _chained toeach other by their necks_, to pass on their way to this _nationalslave market_. "

Testimony of JAMES K. PAULDING, Esq. The present Secretary of theUnited States' Navy. 

In 1817, Mr. Paulding published a work, entitled 'Letters from theSouth, written during an excursion in the summer of 1816. ' In thefirst volume of that work, page 128, Mr. P. Gives the followingdescription:

"The sun was shining out very hot--and in turning the angle of theroad, we encountered the following group: first, a little cart drawnby one horse, in which five or six half naked black children weretumbled like pigs together. The cart had no covering, and they seemedto have been broiled to sleep. Behind the cart marched three blackwomen, with head, neck and breasts uncovered, and without shoes orstockings: next came three men, bare-headed, and _chained togetherwith an ox-chain_. Last of all, came a white man on horse back, carrying his pistols in his belt, and who, as we passed him, had theimpudence to look us in the face without blushing. At a house where westopped a little further on, we learned that he had bought thesemiserable beings in Maryland, and was marching them in this manner toone of the more southern states. Shame on the State of Maryland! and Isay, shame on the State of Virginia! and every state through whichthis wretched cavalcade was permitted to pass! I do say, that whenthey (the slaveholders) permit such flagrant and indecent outragesupon humanity as that I have described; when they sanction a villainin thus marching half naked women and men, loaded with chains, withoutbeing charged with any crime but that of being _black_ from onesection of the United States to another, hundreds of miles in the faceof day, they disgrace themselves, and the country to which theybelong. "[10]

[Footnote 10: The fact that Mr. Paulding, in the reprint of these"Letters, " in 1835, struck out this passage with all othersdisparaging to slavery and its supporters, does not impair the forceof his testimony, however much it may sink the man. Nor will the nextgeneration regard with any more reverence, his character as a prophet, because in the edition of 1835, two years after the AmericanAntislavery Society was formed, and when its auxiliaries were numberedby hundreds, he inserted a _prediction_ that such movements would bemade at the North, with most disastrous results. "Wot ye not that sucha man as I can certainly divine!" Mr. Paulding has already been taughtby Judge Jay, that he who aspires to the fame of an oracle, withoutits inspiration, must resort to other expedients to prevent detection, than the clumsy one of _antedating_ his responses. ]

III. BRANDINGS, MAIMINGS, GUY-SHOT WOUNDS, &c. 

The slaves are often branded with hot irons, pursued with fire armsand _shot_, hunted with dogs and torn by them, shockingly maimed withknives, dirks, &c. ; have their ears cut off, their eyes knocked out, their bones dislocated and broken with bludgeons, their fingers andtoes cut off, their faces and other parts of their persons disfiguredwith scars and gashes, _besides_ those made with the lash. 

We shall adopt, under this head, the same course as that pursued underprevious ones, --first give the testimony of the slaveholdersthemselves, to the mutilations, &c. By copying their own graphicdescriptions of them, in advertisements published under their ownnames, and in newspapers published in the slave states, and, generally, in their own immediate vicinity. We shall, as heretofore, insert only so much of each advertisement as will be necessary to makethe point intelligible. 

Mr. Micajah Ricks, Nash County, North Carolina, in the Raleigh"Standard, " July 18, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro woman and two children; a few days before she wentoff, _I burnt her with a hot iron_, on the left side of her face, _ Itried to make the letter M. _"

Mr. Asa B. Metcalf, Kingston, Adams Co. Mi. In the "Natchez Courier;'June 15, 1832. 

"Ranaway Mary, a black woman, has a _scar_ on her back and right armnear the shoulder, _caused by a rifle ball. _"

Mr. William Overstreet, Benton, Yazoo Co. Mi. In the "Lexington(Kentucky) Observer, " July 22, 1838. 

"Ranaway a negro man named Henry, _his left eye out_, some scars froma _dirk_ on and under his left arm, and _much scarred_ with the whip. "

Mr. R. P. Carney, Clark Co. Ala. , in the Mobile Register, Dec. 22, 1832

One hundred dollars reward for a negro fellow Pompey, 40 years old, heis _branded_ on the _left jaw_. 

Mr. J. Guyler, Savannah Georgia, in the "Republican, " April 12, 1837. 

"Ranaway Laman, an old negro man, grey, has _only one eye. _"

J. A. Brown, jailor, Charleston, South Carolina, in the "Mercury, " Jan. 12, 1837. 

"Committed to jail a negro man, has _no toes_ on his left foot. "

Mr. J. Scrivener, Herring Bay, Anne Arundel Co. Maryland, in theAnnapolis Republican, April 18, 1837. 

"Ranaway negro man Elijah, has a scar on his left cheek, apparentlyoccasioned by _a shot_. "

Madame Burvant corner of Chartres and Toulouse streets, New Orleans, in the "Bee, " Dec. 21, 1838. 

"Ranaway a negro woman named Rachel, has _lost all her toes_ exceptthe large one. "

Mr. O. W. Lains, In the "Helena, (Ark. ) Journal, " June 1, 1833. 

"Ranaway Sam, he was _shot_ a short time since, through the hand, andhas _several shots in his left arm and side_. "

Mr. R. W. Sizer, in the "Grand Gulf, [Mi. ] Advertiser, " July 8, 1837. 

"Ranaway my negro man Dennis, said negro has been _shot_ in the leftarm between the shoulders and elbow, which has paralyzed the lefthand. "

Mr. Nicholas Edmunds, in the "Petersburgh [Va. ] Intelligencer, " May22, 1838. 

"Ranaway my negro man named Simon, _he has been shot badly_ in hisback and right arm. "

Mr. J. Bishop, Bishopville, Sumpter District, South Carolina, in the"Camden [S. C. ] Journal, " March 4, 1837. 

"Ranaway a negro named Arthur, has a considerable _scar_ across his_breast and each arm_, made by a knife; loves to talk much of thegoodness of God. "

Mr. S. Neyle, Little Ogeechee, Georgia, in the "Savannah Republican, "July 3, 1837. 

"Ranaway George, he has a _sword cut_ lately received on his leftarm. "

Mrs. Sarah Walsh, Mobile, Ala. In the "Georgia Journal, " March 27, 1837. 

"Twenty five dollars reward for my man Isaac, he has a scar on hisforehead caused by a _blow_, and one on his back made by _a shot froma pistol_. "

Mr. J. P. Ashford, Adams Co. Mi. In the "Natchez Courier, " August 24, 1838. 

"Ranaway a negro girl called Mary, has a small scar over her eye, a_good many teeth missing_, the letter A _is branded on her cheek andforehead_. "

Mr. Ely Townsend, Pike Co. Ala. In the "Pensacola Gazette, " Sep. 16, 1837. 

"Ranaway negro Ben, has a scar on his right hand, his thumb and forefinger being injured by being _shot_ last fall, a part of _the bonecame out_, he has also one or two _large scars_ on his back and hips. "

S. B. Murphy, jailer, Irvington, Ga. In the "Milledgeville Journal, "May 29, 1838. 

"Committed a negro man, is _very badly shot in the right side_ andright hand. "

Mr. A. Luminais, Parish of St. John Louisiana, in the New Orleans"Bee, " March 3, 1838. 

"Detained at the jail, a mulatto named Tom, has a _scar_ on the rightcheek and appears to have been _burned with powder_ on the face. "

Mr. Isaac Johnson, Pulaski Co. Georgia, in the "MilledgevilleJournal, " June 19, 1838. 

"Ranaway a negro man named Ned, _three of his fingers_ are drawn intothe palm of his hand by a _cut_, has a _scar_ on the back of his necknearly half round, done by a _knife_. "

Mr. Thomas Hudnall, Madison Co. Mi. In the "Vicksburg Register, "September 5, 1838. 

"Ranaway a negro named Hambleton, _limps_ on his left foot where hewas _shot_ a few weeks ago, while runaway. "

Mr. John McMurrain, Columbus, Ga. In the "Southern Sun, " August 7, 1838. 

"Ranaway a negro boy named Mose, he has a _wound_ in the rightshoulder near the back bone, which was occasioned by a _rifle shot_. "

Mr. Moses Orme, Annapolis, Maryland, in the "Annapolis Republican, "June 20, 1837. 

"Ranaway my negro man Bill, he has a _fresh wound in his head_ abovehis ear. "

William Strickland, Jailor, Kershaw District, S. C. In the "Camden[S. C. ] Courier, " July 8, 1837. 

"Committed to jail a negro, says his name is Cuffee, he is lame in oneknee, occasioned _by a shot_. "

The Editor of the "Grand Gulf Advertiser, " Dec. 7, 1838. 

"Ranaway Joshua, his thumb is off of his left hand. "

Mr. William Bateman, in the "Grand Gulf Advertiser, " Dec. 7, 1838. 

"Ranaway William, _scar_ over his left eye, one between his eye brows, one on his breast, and his right leg has been _broken_. "

Mr. B. G. Simmons, in the "Southern Argus, " May 30, 1837. 

"Ranaway Mark, his left arm has been _broken_. "

Mr. James Artop, in the "Macon [Ga. ] Messenger, May 25, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Caleb, 50 years old, has an awkward gait occasioned by hisbeing _shot_ in the thigh. "

J. L. Jolley, Sheriff of Clinton, Co. Mi. In the "Clinton Gazette, "July 23, 1836. 

"Was committed to jail a negro man, says his name is Josiah, his backvery much scarred by the whip, and _branded on the thigh and hips, inthree or four places_, thus (J. M. ) the _rim of his right ear has beenbit or cut off_. "

Mr. Thomas Ledwith, Jacksonville East Florida, in the "Charleston[S. C. ] Courier, Sept. 1, 1838. 

"Fifty dollars reward, for my fellow Edward, he has a _scar_ on thecorner of his mouth, two _cuts_ on and under his arm, and the _letterE on his arm_. "

Mr. Joseph James, Sen. , Pleasant Ridge, Paulding Co. Ga. , in the"Milledgeville Union, " Nov. 7, 1837. 

"Ranaway, negro boy Ellie, has a _scar_ on one of his arms _from thebite of a dog_. "

Mr. W. Riley, Orangeburg District, South Carolina, in the "Columbia[S. C. ] Telescope, " Nov. 11, 1837. 

"Ranaway a negro man, has a _scar_ on the ankle produced by a _burn_, and a _mark on his arm_ resembling the letter S. "

Mr. Samuel Mason, Warren Co, Mi. In the "Vicksburg Register, " July 18, 1838. "

"Ranaway, a negro man named Allen, he has a scar on his breast, also ascar under the left eye, and has _two buck shot in his right arm_. "

Mr. F. L. C. Edwards, in the "Southern Telegraph", Sept. 25, 1837

"Ranaway from the plantation of James Surgette, the following negroes, Randal, _has one ear cropped_; Bob, _has lost one eye_, Kentucky Tom, _has one jaw broken_. "

Mr. Stephen M. Jackson, in the "Vicksburg Register", March 10, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Anthony, _one of his ears cut off_, and his left hand cutwith an axe. "

Philip Honerton, deputy sheriff of Halifax Co. Virginia, Jan. 1837. 

"Was committed, a negro man, has a _scar_ on his right side by a burn, one on his knee, and one on the calf of his leg _by the bite of adog_. "

Stearns & Co. No. 28, New Levee, New Orleans, in the "Bee", March 22, 1837. 

"Absconded, the mulatto boy Tom, his fingers _scarred_ on his righthand, and has a _scar_ on his right cheek"

Mr. John W. Walton, Greensboro, Ala. In the "Alabama Beacon", Dec. 13, 1838. 

"Ranaway my black boy Frazier, with a _scar_ below and one above hisright ear. "

Mr. R. Furman, Charleston, S. C. In the "Charleston Mercury" Jan. 12, 1839. 

"Ranaway, Dick, about 19, has lost the small toe of one foot. "

Mr. John Tart, Sen. In the "Fayetteville [N. C. ] Observer", Dec. 26, 1838

"Stolen a mulatto boy, _ten_ years old, he has a _scar_ over his eyewhich was made by an axe. "

Mr. Richard Overstreet, Brook Neal, Campbell Co. Virginia, in the"Danville [Va. ] Reporter", Dec. 21, 1838. 

"Absconded my negro man Coleman, has a _very large scar_ on one of hislegs, also one on _each_ arm, by a burn, and his heels have beenfrosted. "

The editor of the New Orleans "Bee" in that paper, August 27, 1837. 

"Fifty dollars reward, for the negro Jim Blake--has a _piece cut outof each ear_, and the middle finger of the left hand _cut off_ to thesecond joint. "

Mr. Bryant Jonson, Port Valley, Houston county, Georgia, in theMilledgeville "Union", Oct. 2, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro woman named Maria--has a scar on one side of hercheek, by a _cut_--some scars on her back. "

Mr. Leonard Miles, Steen's Creek, Rankin county, Mi. In the "SouthernSun", Sept. 22, 1838

"Ranaway, Gabriel--has _two or three scars across his neck_ made witha knife. "

Mr. Bezou, New Orleans, in the "Bee" May 23, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the mulatto wench Mary--has a _cut on the left arm, a scaron the shoulder, and two upper teeth missing_. "

Mr. James Kimborough, Memphis, Tenn. In the "Memphis Enquirer" July13, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro boy, named Jerry--has a _scar_ on his right checktwo inches long, from the cut of a knife. "

Mr. Robert Beasley, Macon, Georgia, in the "Georgia Messenger", July27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my man Fountain--has _holes in his ears, a scar_ on theright side of his forehead--has been _shot in the hind parts of hislegs_--is marked on the back with the whip. "

Mr. B. G. Barrer, St. Louis, Missouri, in the "Republican", Sept. 6, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a negro man named Jarret--_has a scar_ on the under part ofone of his arms, occasioned by a wound from a knife. "

Mr. John D. Turner, near Norfolk, Virginia, in the "Norfolk Herald", June 27, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro by the name of Joshua--he has a cut across one ofhis ears, which he will conceal as much as possible--one of hisankles is _enlarged by an ulcer_. "

Mr. William Stansell, Picksville, Ala. In the "Huntsville Democrat", August 29, 1837. 

"Ranaway, negro boy Harper--has a scar on one of his hips in the formof a G. "

Hon. Ambrose H. Sevier Senator, in Congress, from Arkansas in the"Vicksburg Register", of Oct. 18. 

"Ranaway, Bob, a slave--has a _scar across his breast_, another on the_right side of his head_--his back is _much scarred_ with the whip. "

Mr. R. A. Greene, Milledgeville, Georgia, in the "Macon Messenger" July27, 1837. 

"Two hundred and fifty dollars reward, for my negro man Jim--he ismuch marked with _shot_ in his right thigh, --the shot entered on theoutside, half way between the hip and knee joints. "

Benjamin Russel, deputy sheriff, Bibb county, Ga. In the "MaconTelegraph", December 25, 1837. 

"Brought to jail, John--_left ear cropt_. "

Hon. H Hitchcock, Mobile, judge of the Supreme Court, in the"Commercial Register", Oct. 27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, the slave Ellis--he has _lost one of his ears_. "

Mrs. Elizabeth L. Carter, near Groveton, Prince William county, Virginia, in the "National Intelligencer", Washington, D. C. June 10, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a negro man, Moses--he has _lost a part_ of one of hisears. "

Mr. William D. Buckels, Natchez, Mi. In the "Natchez Courier, " July28, 1838. 

"Taken up, a negro man--is _very much scarred_ about the face andbody, and has the left _ear bit off_. "

Mr. Walter R. English, Monroe county, Ala. In the "Mobile Chronicle, "Sept. 2, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my slave Lewis--he has lost a _piece of one ear_, and a_part of one of his fingers_, a _part of one of his toes_ is alsolost. "

Mr. James Saunders, Grany Spring, Hawkins county, Tenn. In the"Knoxville Register, " June 6, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a black girl named Mary--has a _scar_ on her cheek, and theend of one of her toes _cut off_. "

Mr. John Jenkins, St Joseph's, Florida, captain of the steamboatEllen, "Apalachicola Gazette, " June 7, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negro boy Caesar--he has _but one eye_. "

Mr. Peter Hanson, Lafayette city, La. , in the New Orleans "Bee, " July28, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negress Martha--she has _lost her right eye_. "

Mr. Orren Ellis, Georgeville, Mi. In the "North Alabamian, " Sept. 15, 1837. 

"Ranaway, George--has had the lower part of _one of his ears bitoff_. "

Mr. Zadock Sawyer, Cuthbert, Randolph county, Georgia, in the"Milledgeville Union, " Oct. 9, 1838. 

"Ranaway, my negro Tom--has a piece _bit off the top of his rightear_, and his little finger is _stiff_. "

Mr. Abraham Gray, Mount Morino, Pike county, Ga. In the "MilledgevilleUnion, " Oct. 9, 1838. 

"Ranaway, my mulatto woman Judy--she has had her _right arm broke_. "

S. B. Tuston, jailer, Adams county, Mi. In the "Natchez Courier, " June15, 1838. 

"Was committed to jail, a negro man named Bill--has had the _thumb ofhis left hand split_. "

Mr. Joshua Antrim, Nineveh, Warren county, Virginia, in the"Winchester Virginian, " July 11, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a mulatto man named Joe--his fingers on the left hand are_partly amputated_. "

J. B. Randall, jailor, Marietta, Cobb county, Ga. , in the "SouthernRecorder;" Nov. 6, 1838. 

"Lodged in jail, a negro man named Jupiter--is very _lame in his lefthip_, so that he can hardly walk--has lost a joint of the middlefinger of his left hand. "

Mr. John N. Dillahunty, Woodville, Mi. , in the "N. O. CommercialBulletin, " July 21, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Bill--has a scar over one eye, also one on his leg, from_the bite of a dog_--has a _burn on his buttock, from a piece of hotiron in shape of a T_. "

William K. Ratcliffe, sheriff, Franklin county, Mi. In the "NatchezFree Trader, " August 23, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro named Mike--_his left ear off_"

Mr. Preston Halley, Barnwell, South Carolina, in the "Augusta [Ga. ]Chronicle, " July 27, 1838. 

"Ranaway, my negro man Levi--his left hand has been _burnt_, and Ithink the end of his fore finger _is off_. "

Mr. Welcome H. Robbins, St. Charles county, Mo. In the "St. LouisRepublican, " June 30, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro named Washington--has _lost a part of his middlefinger and the end of his little finger_. "

G. Gourdon & Co. Druggists, corner of Rampart and Hospital streets, New Orleans, in the "Commercial Bulletin, " Sept. 18, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro named David Drier--has _two toes cut_. "

Mr. William Brown, in the "Grand Gulf Advertiser, " August 29, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Edmund--has a _scar_ on his right temple, and under hisright eye, and _holes in both ears_. "

Mr. James McDonnell, Talbot county, Georgia, in the "ColumbusEnquirer, " Jan. 18, 1838. 

"Runaway, a negro boy _twelve or thirteen_ years old--has a scar onhis left cheek _from the bite of a dog_. "

Mr. John W. Cherry, Marengo county, Ala. In the "Mobile Register, "June 15, 1838. 

"Fifty dollars reward, for my negro man John--he has a considerablescar on his _throat_, done with a _knife_. "

Mr. Thos. Brown, Roane co. Tenn. In the "Knoxville Register, " Sept 12, 1838. 

"Twenty-five dollars reward, for my man John--the _tip_ of his nose is_bit off_. "

Messrs. Taylor, Lawton & Co. , Charleston, South Carolina, in the"Mercury, " Nov. 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro fellow called Hover--has a _cut_ above the righteye. "

Mr. Louis Schmidt, Faubourg, Sivaudais, La. In the New Orleans "Bee, "Sept. 5, 1837. 

"Ranaway, the negro man Hardy--has a _scar_ on the upper lip, andanother made with a _knife_ on his neck. "

W. M. Whitehead, Natchez, in the "New Orleans Bulletin, " July 21, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Henry--has half of one _ear bit off_. "

Mr. Conrad Salvo, Charleston, South Carolina, in the "Mercury, " August10, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my negro man Jacob--he has but _one eye_. "

William Baker, jailer, Shelby county, Ala. , in the "Montgomery (Ala. )Advertiser, " Oct. 5, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, Ben--his _left thumb off_ at the first joint. "

Mr. S. N. Hite, Camp street, New Orleans, in the "Bee, " Feb. 19, 1838. 

"Twenty-five dollars reward for the negro slave Sally--walks as though_crippled_ in the back. "

Mr. Stephen M. Richards, Whitesburg, Madison county, Alabama, in the"Huntsville Democrat, " Sept 8, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man named Dick--has a _little finger off_ the righthand. "

Mr. A. Brose, parish of St. Charles, La. In the "New Orleans Bee, "Feb. 19, 1838. 

"Ranaway, the negro Patrick--has his little finger of the right hand_cut close to the hand_. "

Mr. Needham Whitefield, Aberdeen, Mi. In the "Memphis (Tenn. )Enquirer, " June 15, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Joe Dennis--has a small _notch_ in one of his ears. "

Col. M. J. Keith, Charleston, South Carolina, in the "Mercury, " Nov. 27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Dick--has _lost the little toe_ of one of his feet. "

Mr. R. Faucette, Haywood, North Carolina, in the "Raleigh Register, "April 30, 1838. 

"Escaped, my negro man Eaton--his _little finger_ of the right handhas been _broke_. "

Mr. G. C. Richardson, Owen Station, Mo. , in the St. Louis "Republican, "May 5, 1838. 

"Ranaway, my negro man named Top--has had one of his _legs broken_. "

Mr. E. Han, La Grange, Fayette county, Tenn. In the Gallatin "Union, "June 23, 1837. 

"Ranaway, negro boy Jack--has a small _crop out of his left ear_. "

D. Herring, warden of Baltimore city jail, in the "Marylander, " Oct 6, 1837. 

"Was committed to jail, a negro man--has _two scars_ on his forehead, and the _top of his left ear cut off_. "

Mr. James Marks, near Natchitoches, La. In the "Natchitoches Herald, "July 21, 1838. 

"Stolen, a negro man named Winter--has a _notch_ cut out of the leftear, and the mark of _four or five buck shot_ on his legs. "

Mr. James Barr, Amelia Court House, Virginia, in the "Norfolk Herald, "Sept. 12, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man--_scar back of his left eye_, as if from the_cut_ of a knife. "

Mr. Isaac Michell, Wilkinson county, Georgia, in the "AugustaChronicle, " Sept 21, 1837. 

"Ranaway, negro man Buck--has a very _plain mark_ under his ear on hisjaw, about the size of a dollar, having been _inflicted by a knife. _"

Mr. P. Bayhi, captain of the police, Suburb Washington, thirdmunicipality, New Orleans, in the "Bee, " Oct. 13, 1837. 

"Detained at the jail, the negro boy Hermon--has a scar below his leftear, from the _wound of a knife_. "

Mr. Willie Paterson, Clinton, Jones county, Ga. In the "DarienTelegraph, " Dec. 5, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a negro man by the name of John--he has a _scar_ across hischeek, and one on his right arm, apparently done with a _knife_. "

Mr. Samuel Ragland, Triana, Madison county, Alabama, in the"Huntsville Advocate, " Dec. 23, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Isham--has a _scar_ upon the breast and upon the under lip, from the _bite of a dog_. "

Mr. Moses E. Bush, near Clayton, Ala. In the "Columbus (Ga. )Enquirer, " July 5, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man--has a _scar_ on his hip and on his breast, and_two front teeth out_. "

C. W. Wilkins, sheriff Baldwin Co, Ala, is the "Mobile Advertiser;"Sept. 24, 1837. 

"Committed to jail, a negro man, he is _crippled_ in the right leg. "

Mr. James H. Taylor, Charleston South Carolina, in the "Courier, "August 7, 1837. 

"Absconded, a colored boy, named Peter, _lame_ in the right leg. "

N. M. C. Robinson, jailer, Columbus, Georgia, in the "Columbus (Ga. )Enquirer, " August 2, 1838. 

"Brought to jail, a negro man, his left ankle has been _broke_. "

Mr. Littlejohn Rynes, Hinds Co. Mi. In the "Natchez Courier, " August, 17, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man named Jerry, has a small piece _cut out of thetop of each ear_. "

The Heirs of J. A. Alston, near Georgetown, South Carolina, in the"Georgetown [S. C. ] Union, " June 17, 1837. 

"Absconded a negro named Cuffee, has _lost one finger_; has an_enlarged leg_. "

A. S. Ballinger, Sheriff, Johnston Co, North Carolina, In the "RaleighStandard, " Oct. 18, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro man; has a _very sore leg_. "

Mr. Thomas Crutchfield, Atkins, Ten. In the "Tennessee Journal, " Oct. 17, 1838. 

"Ranaway, my mulatto boy Cy, has but _one hand_, all the fingers ofhis right hand were _burnt off_ when young. "

J. A. Brown, jailer, Orangeburg, South Carolina, in the "CharlestonMercury, " July 18, 1838. 

"Was committed to jail, a negro named Bob, appears to be _crippled_ inthe right leg. "

S. B. Turton, jailer, Adams Co. Miss. In the "Natchez Courier, " Sept. 29, 1838. 

"Was committed to jail, a negro man, has his _left thigh broke_. "

Mr. John H. King, High street, Georgetown, in the "NationalIntelligencer, " August 1, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my negro man, he has the _end of one_ of his fingers_broken_. "

Mr. John B. Fox, Vicksburg, Miss. In the "Register, " March 29, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a yellowish negro boy named Tom, has a _notch_ in the backof one of his ears. "

Messrs. Fernandez and Whiting, auctioneers, New Orleans, in the "Bee, "April 8, 1837. 

"Will be sold Martha, aged nineteen, _has one eye out_. "

Mr. Marshall Jett, Farrowsville, Fauquier Co. Virginia, in the"National Intelligencer, " May 30, 1837. 

"Ranaway, negro man Ephraim, has a _mark_ over one of his eyes, occasioned by a _blow_. "

S. B. Turton, jailer Adams Co. Miss. In the "Natches Courier, " Oct. 12, 1838. 

"Was committed a negro, calls himself Jacob, has been _crippled_ inhis right leg. "

John Ford, sheriff of Mobile County, in the "Mississippian, " JacksonMi. Dec. 28, 1838. 

"Committed to jail, a negro man Cary, a _large scar on his forehead_. "

E. W. Morris, sheriff of Warren County, in the "Vicksburg [Mi. ]Register, " March 28, 1838. 

"Committed as a runaway, a negro man Jack, he has _several scars_ onhis face. "

Mr. John P. Holcombe, In the "Charleston Mercury, " April 17, 1828. 

"Absented himself, his negro man Ben, _has scars_ on his throat, occasioned by the _cut of a knife_. "

Mr. Geo. Kinlock, in the "Charleston, S. C. Courier, " May 1, 1839. 

"Ranaway, negro boy Kitt, 15 or 16 years old, _has a piece taken outof one of his ears_. "

Wm. Magee, sheriff, Mobile Co. In the "Mobile Register, " Dec. 27, 1837. 

"Committed to jail, a runaway slave, Alexander, a _scar_ on his leftcheck. "

Mr. Henry M. McGregor, Prince George County, Maryland, in the"Alexandria [D. C. ] Gazette, " Feb. 6, 1838. 

"Ranaway, negro Phil, _scar through the right eye brow_ part of the_middle toe_ right foot _cut off_. "

Green B Jourdan, Baldwin County Ga. In the "Georgia Journal, " April18, 1837. 

"Ranaway, John, has a _scar_ on one of his hands extending from thewrist joint to the little finger, also a _scar_ on one of his legs. "

Messrs. Daniel and Goodman, New Orleans, in the "N. O. Bee, " Feb. 2, 1838. 

"Absconded, mulatto slave Alick, has a _large scar over_ one of hischeeks. "

Jeremiah Woodward, Gonchland, Co. Va. In the "Richmond Va. Whig, " Jan. 30, 1838. 

"200 DOLLARS REWARD for Nelson, has a _scar_ on his foreheadoccasioned by a _burn_, and one on his lower lip and one about theknee. "

Samuel Rawlins, Gwinet Co. Ga. In the "Columbus Sentinel, " Nov. 29, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro man and his wife, named Nat and Priscilla, he has asmall _scar_ on his left cheek, _two stiff fingers_ on his right handwith a _running sore_ on them; his wife has a _scar_ on her left arm, and one _upper tooth out_. "

The reader perceives that we have under this head, as under previousones, given to the testimony of the slaveholders themselves, undertheir own names, a precedence over that of all other witnesses. We nowask the reader's attention to the testimonies which follow. They areendorsed by responsible names--men who 'speak what they know, andtestify what they have seen'--testimonies which show, that theslaveholders who wrote the preceding advertisements, describing thework of their own hands, in branding with hot irons, maiming, mutilating, cropping, shooting, knocking out the teeth and eyes oftheir slaves, breaking their bones, &c. , have manifested, _as far asthey have gone_ in the description, a commendable fidelity to truth. 

It is probable that some of the scars and maimings in the precedingadvertisements were the result of accidents; and some _may be_ theresult of violence inflicted by the slaves upon each other. Withoutarguing that point, we say, these are the _facts_; whoever reads andponders them, will need no argument to convince him, that theproposition which they have been employed to sustain, _cannot beshaken_. That any considerable portion of them were _accidental_, istotally improbable, from the nature of the case; and is in mostinstances disproved by the advertisements themselves. That they havenot been produced by assaults of the slaves upon each other, ismanifest from the fact, that injuries of that character inflicted bythe slaves upon each other, are, as all who are familiar with thehabits and condition of slaves well know, exceedingly rare; and ofnecessity must be so, from the constant action upon them of thestrongest dissuasives from such acts that can operate on human nature. 

Advertisements similar to the preceding may at any time be gathered byscores from the daily and weekly newspapers of the slave states. Before presenting the reader with further testimony in proof of theproposition at the head of this part of our subject, we remark, thatsome of the tortures enumerated under this and the preceding heads, are not in all cases inflicted by slaveholders as _punishments_, butsometimes merely as preventives of escape, for the greater security oftheir 'property'. Iron collars, chains, &c. Are put upon slaves whenthey are driven or transported from one part of the country toanother, in order to keep them from running away. Similar measures areoften resorted to upon plantations. When the master or owner suspectsa slave of plotting an escape, an iron collar with long 'horns, ' or abar of iron, or a ball and chain, are often fastened upon him, for thedouble purpose of retarding his flight, should he attempt it, and ofserving as an easy means of detection. 

Another inhuman method of _marking_ slaves, so that they may be easilydescribed and detected when they escape, is called _cropping_. In thepreceding advertisements, the reader will perceive a number of cases, in which the runaway is described as '_cropt_, ' or a '_notch cut_ inthe ear, or a part or the whole of the ear _cut off_, ' &c. 

Two years and a half since, the writer of this saw a letter, then justreceived by Mr. Lewis Tappan, of New York, containing a negro's earcut off close to the head. The writer of the letter, who signedhimself Thomas Oglethorpe, Montgomery, Alabama, sent it to Mr. Tappanas 'a specimen of a negro's ears, ' and desired him to add it to his'collection. '

Another method of _marking_ slaves, is by drawing out or breaking offone or two _front teeth_--commonly the upper ones, as the mark wouldin that case be the more obvious. An instance of this kind the readerwill recall in the testimony of Sarah M. Grimké, page 30, and of whichshe had _personal_ knowledge; being well acquainted both with theinhuman master, (a distinguished citizen of South Carolina, ) by whoseorder the brutal deed was done, and with the poor young girl whosemouth was thus barbarously mutilated, to furnish a convenient mark bywhich to describe her in case of her elopement, as she had frequentlyrun away. 

The case stated by Miss G. Serves to unravel what, to one uninitiated, seems quite a mystery: i. E. The frequency with which, in theadvertisements of runaway slaves published in southern papers, theyare described as having _one or two front teeth out_. Scores of suchadvertisements are in southern papers now on our table. We willfurnish the reader with a dozen or two. 

Jesse Debruhl, sheriff, Richland District, "Columbia (S. C. )Telescope, " Feb. 24, 1839. 

"Committed to jail, Ned, about 25 years of age, has lost his _twoupper front teeth_. "

Mr. John Hunt, Black Water Bay, "Pensacola (Ga. ) Gazette, " October 14, 1837. 

"100 DOLLARS REWARD, for Perry, _one under front tooth_ missing, aged23 years. "

Mr. John Frederick, Branchville, Orangeburgh District, S. C. "Charleston (S. C. ) Courier, " June 12, 1837. 

"10 DOLLARS REWARD, for Mary, _one or two upper teeth_ out, about 25years old. "

Mr. Egbert A. Raworth, eight miles west of Nashville on the Charlotteroad "Daily Republican Banner, " Nashville, Tennessee, April 30, 1938. 

"Ranaway, Myal, 23 years old, one of his _fore teeth out_. "

Benjamin Russel, Deputy sheriff Bibb Co. Ga. "Macon (Ga. ) Telegraph, "Dec. 25, 1837. 

"Brought to jail John, 23 years old, _one fore tooth out_. "

F. Wisner, Master of the Work House, "Charleston (S. C. ) Courier. " Oct. 17, 1837. 

"Committed to the Charleston Work House Tom, _two of his upper frontteeth out_, about 30 years of age. "

Mr. S. Neyle, "Savannah (Ga. ) Republican, " July 3, 1837. 

"Ranaway Peter, has lost _two front teeth_ in the upper jaw. "

Mr. John McMurrain, near Columbus, "Georgia Messenger, " Aug. 2, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a boy named Moses, some of his _front teeth out_. "

Mr. John Kennedy, Stewart Co. La. "New Orleans Bee, " April 7, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Sally, her _fore teeth out_. "

Mr. A. J. Hutchings, near Florence, Ala. "North Alabamian, " August 25, 1838

"Ranaway, George Winston, two of his _upper fore teeth out_immediately in front. "

Mr. James Purdon, 33 Commons street, N. O. "New Orleans Bee, " Feb. 13, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Jackson, has lost _one of his front teeth_. "

Mr. Robert Calvert, in the "Arkansas State Gazette, " August 22, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Jack, 25 years old, has lost _one of his fore teeth_. "

Mr. A. G. A. Beazley, in the Memphis Gazette, March 18, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Abraham, 20 or 22 years of age, _his front teeth out_. "

Mr. Samuel Townsend, in the "Huntsville [Ala. ] Democrat, " May 24, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Dick, 18 or 20 years of age, _has one front tooth out_. "

Mr. Philip A. Dew, in the "Virginia Herald, " of May 24, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Washington, about 25 years of age, has _an upper front toothout_. "

J. G. Dunlap, "Georgia Constitutionalist, " April 24, 1838. 

"Ranaway, negro woman Abbe, _upper front teeth out_. "

John Thomas, "Southern Argus, " August 7, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Lewis, 25 or 26 years old, _one or two of his front teethout_. "

M. E. W. Gilbert, in the "Columbus [Ga. ] Enquirer, " Oct. 5. 1837. 

"50 DOLLARS REWARD, for Prince, 25 or 26 years old, _one or two teethout_ in front on the upper jaw. "

Publisher of the "Charleston Mercury, " Aug. 31, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Seller Saunders, _one fore tooth out_, about 22 years ofage. "

Mr. Byrd M. Grace, in the "Macon [Ga. ] Telegraph, " Oct. 16, 1383. 

"Ranaway, Warren, about 25 or 26 years old, has lost _some of hisfront teeth_. "

Mr. George W. Barnes, in the "Milledgeville [Ga. ] Journal, " May 22, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Henry, about 23 years old, has one of his _upper front teethout_. "

D. Herring, Warden of Baltimore Jail, in "Baltimore Chronicle, " Oct. 6, 1837. 

"Committed to jail Elizabeth Steward, 17 or 18 years old, has _one ofher front teeth out_. "

Mr. J. L. Colborn, in the "Huntsville [Ala. ] Democrat, " July 4, 1837. 

"Ranaway Liley, 26 years of age, _one fore tooth gone_. "

Samuel Harman Jr. In the "New Orleans Bee, " Oct. 12, 1838. 

"50 DOLLARS REWARD, for Adolphe, 28 years old, _two of his frontteeth_ are missing. "

Were it necessary, we might easily add to the preceding list, _hundreds_. The reader will remark that all the slaves, whose ages aregiven, are _young_--not one has arrived at middle age; consequently itcan hardly be supposed that they have lost their teeth either from ageor decay. The probability that their teeth were taken out by force, isincreased by the fact of their being _front teeth_ in almost everycase, and from the fact that the loss of no _other_ is mentioned inthe advertisements. It is well known that the front teeth are notgenerally the first to fail. Further, it is notorious that the teethof the slaves are remarkably sound and serviceable, that they decayfar less, and at a much later period of life than the teeth of thewhites: owing partly, no doubt, to original constitution; but moreprobably to their diet, habits, and mode of life. 

As an illustration of the horrible mutilations _sometimes_ suffered bythem in the breaking and tearing out of their teeth, we insert thefollowing, from the New Orleans Bee of May 31, 1837. 

$10 REWARD. --Ranaway, Friday, May 12, JULIA, a negress, EIGHTEEN ORTWENTY YEARS OLD. SHE HAS LOST HER UPPER TEETH, and the under ones AREALL BROKEN. Said reward will be paid to whoever will bring her to hermaster, No. 172 Barracks-street, or lodge her in the jail. 

The following is contained in the same paper. 

Ranaway, NELSON, 27 years old, --"ALL HIS TEETH ARE MISSING. "

This advertisement is signed by "S. ELFER, " Faubourg Marigny. 

We now call the attention of the reader to a mass of testimony insupport of our general proposition. 

GEORGE B. RIPLEY, Esq. Of Norwich, Connecticut, has furnished thefollowing statement, in a letter dated Dec. 12, 1838. 

"GURDON CHAPMAN, Esq. , a respectable merchant of our city, one of ourcounty commissioners, --last spring a member of our statelegislature, --and whose character for veracity is above suspicion, about a year since visited the county of Nansemond, Virginia, for thepurpose of buying a cargo of corn. He purchased a large quantity ofMr. ----, with whose family he spent a week or ten days; after hereturned, he related to me and several other citizens the followingfacts. In order to prepare the corn for market by the time agreedupon, the slaves were worked as hard as they would bear, from daybreakuntil 9 or 10 o'clock at night. They were called directly from theirbunks in the morning to their work, without a morsel of food untilnoon, when they took their breakfast and dinner, consisting of baconand corn bread. The quantity of meat was not one tenth of what thesame number of northern laborers usually have at a meal. They wereallowed but fifteen minutes to take this meal, at the expiration ofthis time the horn was blown. The rigor with which they enforcepunctuality to its call, may be imagined from the fact, that a littleboy only nine years old was whipped so severely by the driver, that inmany places the whip cut through his clothes (which were of cotton, )for tardiness of not over three minutes. They then worked withoutintermission until 9 or 10 at night; after which they prepared and atetheir second meal, as scanty as the first. An aged slave, who wasremarkable for his industry and fidelity, was working with all hismight on the threshing floor; amidst the clatter of the shelling andwinnowing machines the master spoke to him, but he did not hear; hepresently gave him several severe cuts with the raw hide, saying, atthe same time, 'damn you, if you cannot hear I'll see if you canfeel. ' One morning the master rose from breakfast and whipped mostcruelly, with a raw hide, a nice girl who was waiting on the table, for not opening a _west_ window when he had told her to open an eastone. The number of slaves was only forty, and yet the lash was inconstant use. The bodies of all of them were literally covered withold scars. 

"Not one of the slaves attended church on the Sabbath. The socialrelations were scarcely recognised among them, and they lived in astate of promiscuous concubinage. The master said he took pains tobreed from his best stock--the whiter the progeny the higher theywould sell for house servants. When asked by Mr. C. If he did not fearhis slaves would run away if he whipped them so much, he replied, theyknow too well what they must suffer if they are taken--and then said, 'I'll tell you how I treat my runaway niggers. I had a big nigger thatran away the second time; as soon as I got track of him I took threegood fellows and went in pursuit, and found him in the night, somemiles distant, in a corn-house; we took him and ironed him hand andfoot, and carted him home. The next morning we tied him to a tree, andwhipped him until there was not a sound place on his back. I then tiedhis ankles and hoisted him up to a _limb_--feet up and head down--wethen whipped him, until the damned nigger smoked so that I thought hewould take fire and burn up. We then took him down; and to make surethat he should not run away the third time, I run my knife in back ofthe ankles, and _cut off the large cords_, --and then I ought to haveput some lead into the wounds, but I forgot it'

"The truth of the above is from unquestionable authority; and you maypublish or suppress it, as shall best subserve the cause of God andhumanity. "

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM STEPHAN SEWALL, Esq. , Winthrop, Maine, datedJan. 12th, 1839. Mr. S. Is a member of the Congregational church inWinthrop, and late agent of the Winthrop Manufacturing company. 

"Being somewhat acquainted with slavery, by a residence of about fiveyears in Alabama, and having witnessed many acts of slaveholdingcruelty, I will mention one or two that came under my eye; and one ofexcessive cruelty mentioned to me at the time, by the gentleman (nowdead, ) that interfered in behalf of the slave. 

"I was witness to such cruelties by an overseer to a slave, that hetwice attempted to drown himself, to get out of his power: this was ona raft of slaves, in the Mobile river. I saw an owner take his runawayslave, tie a rope round him, then get on his horse, give the slave andhorse a cut the whip, and run the poor creature barefooted, very fast, over rough ground, where small black jack oaks had been cut up, leaving the sharp stumps, on which the slave would frequently fall;then the master would drag him as long as he could himself hold out;then stop, and whip him up on his feet again--then proceed as before. This continued until he got out of my sight, which was about half amile. But what further cruelties this wretched man, (whose passion wasso excited that he could scarcely utter a word when he took the slaveinto his own power, ) inflicted upon his poor victim, the day ofjudgment will unfold. 

"I have seen slaves severely whipped on plantations, but this _is anevery day occurrence_, and comes under the head of general treatment. 

"I have known the case of a husband compelled to whip his wife. This Idid not witness, though not two rods from the cabin at the time. 

"I will now mention the case of cruelty before referred to. In 1820 or21, while the public works were going forward on Dauphin Island, Mobile Bay, a contractor, engaged on the works, beat one of his slavesso severely that the poor creature had no longer power to writhe underhis suffering: he then took out his knife, and began to _cut his fleshin strips, from his hips down_. At this moment, the gentleman referredto, who was also a contractor, shocked at such inhumanity, steppedforward, between the wretch and his victim, and exclaimed, 'If youtouch that slave again you do it at the peril of your life. ' Theslaveholder raved at him for interfering between him and his slave;but he was obliged to drop his victim, fearing the arm of myfriend--whose stature and physical powers were extraordinary. "

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MRS. MARY COWLES, a member of thePresbyterian church at Geneva, Ashtabula county, Ohio, dated 12th, mo. 18th, 1838. Mrs. Cowles is a daughter of Mr. James Colwell of Brookcounty, Virginia, near West Liberty. 

"In the year 1809, I think, when I was twenty-one years old, a man inthe vicinity where I resided, in Brooke co. Va. Near West Liberty, bythe name of Morgan, had a little slave girl about six years old, whohad a habit or rather a natural infirmity common to children of thatage. On this account her master and mistress would pinch her ears withhot tongs, and throw hot embers on her legs. Not being able toaccomplish their object by these means, they at last resorted to amethod too indelicate, and too horrible to describe in detail. Sufficeit to say, it soon put an end to her life in the most excruciatingmanner. If further testimony to authenticate what I have stated isnecessary, I refer you to Dr. Robert Mitchel who then resided in thevicinity, but now lives at Indiana, Pennsylvania, above Pittsburgh. "

MARY COWLES. 

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM LADD, Esq. , now of Minot, Maine, formerly aslaveholder in Florida. Mr. Ladd is now the President of the AmericanPeace Society. In a letter dated November 29, 1838, Mr. Ladd says:

"While I lived in Florida I knew a slaveholder whose name wasHutchinson, he had been a preacher and a member of the Senate ofGeorgia. He told me that he dared not keep a gun in his house, becausehe was so passionate; and that he had _been the death of three or fourmen_. I understood him to mean _slaves_. One of his slaves, a girl, once came to my house. She had run away from him at Indian river. Thecords of one of her hands were so much contracted that her hand wasuseless. It was said that he had thrust her hand into the fire whilehe was in a fit of passion, and held it there, and this was theeffect. My wife had hid the girl, when Hutchinson came for her. Out ofcompassion for the poor slave, I offered him more than she was worth, which he refused. We afterward let the girl escape, and I do not knowwhat became of her, but I believe he never got her again. It wascurrently reported of Hutchinson, that he once knocked down a _new_negro (one recently from Africa) who was clearing up land, and whocomplained of the cold, as it was mid-winter. The slave was stunnedwith the blow. Hutchinson, supposing he had the 'sulks, ' applied fireto the side of the slave until it was so roasted that he said theslave was not worth curing, and ordered the other slaves to pile onbrush, and he was consumed. 

"A murder occurred at the settlement, (Musquito) while I lived there. An overseer from Georgia, who was employed by a Mr. Cormick, in a fitof jealousy shot a slave of Samuel Williams, the owner of the nextplantation. He was apprehended, but afterward suffered to escape. Thisman told me that he had rather whip a negro than sit down to the bestdinner. This man had, near his house, a contrivance like that which isused in armies where soldiers are punished with the picket; by thisthe slave was drawn up from the earth, by a cord passing round hiswrists, so that his feet could just touch the ground. It somewhatresembled a New England well sweep, and was used when the slaves wereflogged. 

"The treatment of slaves at Musquito I consider much milder than thatwhich I have witnessed in the United States. Florida was under theSpanish government while I lived there. There were about fifteen ortwenty plantations at Musquito. I have an indistinct recollection offour or five slaves dying of the cold in Amelia Island. They belongedto Mr. Bunce of musquito. The compensation of the overseers was acertain portion of the crop. "

GERRIT SMITH, Esq. Of Peterboro, in a letter, dated Dec. 15, 1838, says:

"I have just been conversing with an inhabitant of this town, on thesubject of the cruelties of slavery. My neighbors inform me that he isa man of veracity. The candid manner of his communication utterlyforbade the suspicion that he was attempting to deceive me. 

"My informant says that he resided in Louisiana and Alabama during agreat part of the years 1819 and 1820:--that he frequently saw slaveswhipped, never saw any killed; but often heard of their beingkilled:--that in several instances he had seen a slave receive, in thespace of two hours, five hundred lashes--each stroke drawing blood. Headds that this severe whipping was always followed by the applicationof strong brine to the lacerated parts. 

"My informant further says, that in the spring of 1819, he steered aboat from Louisville to New Orleans. Whilst stopping at a plantationon the east bank of the Mississippi, between Natchez and New Orleans, for the purpose of making sale of some of the articles with which theboat was freighted, he and his fellow boatmen saw a shockingly cruelpunishment inflicted on a couple of slaves for the repeated offence ofrunning away. Straw was spread over the whole of their backs, and, after being fastened by a band of the same material, was ignited, andleft to burn, until entirely consumed. The agonies and screams of thesufferers he can never forget. "

Dr. DAVID NELSON, late president of Marion College, Missouri, a nativeof Tennessee, and till forty years old a slaveholder, said in anAnti-Slavery address at Northampton, Mass. Jan. 1839--

"I have not attempted to harrow your feelings with stories of cruelty. I will, however, mention one or two among the many incidents that cameunder my observation as family physician. I was one day dressing ablister, and the mistress of the house sent a little black girl intothe kitchen to bring me some warm water. She probably mistook hermessage; for she returned with a bowl full of boiling water; which hermistress no sooner perceived, than she thrust her hand into it, andheld it there till it was half cooked. "

Mr. HENRY H. LOOMIS, a member of the Presbyterian Theological Seminaryin the city of New York, says, in a recent letter--

"The Rev. Mr. Hart, recently my pastor, in Otsego county, New York, and who has spent some time at the south as a teacher, stated to methat in the neighborhood in which he resided a slave was set to watcha turnip patch near an academy, in order to keep off the boys whooccasionally trespassed on it. Attempting to repeat the trespass inpresence of the slave, they were told that his 'master forbad it. ' Atthis the boys were enraged, and hurled brickbats at the slave untilhis face and other parts were much injured and wounded--but nothingwas said or done about it as an injury to the slave. 

"He also said, that a slave from the same neighborhood was found outin the woods, with his arms and legs burned almost to a cinder, up asfar as the elbow and knee joints; and there appeared to be but littlemore said or thought about it than if he had been a brute. It wassupposed that his master was the cause of it--making him an example ofpunishment to the rest of the gang!"

The following is an extract of a letter dated March 5, 1839, from Mr. JOHN CLARKE, a highly respected citizen of Scriba, Oswego county, NewYork, and a member of the Presbyterian church. 

The 'Mrs. Turner' spoken of in Mr. C. 's letter, is the wife of Hon. Fielding S. Turner, who in 1803 resided at Lexington, Kentucky, andwas the attorney for the Commonwealth. Soon after that, he removed toNew Orleans, and was for many years Judge of the Criminal Court ofthat city. Having amassed an immense fortune, he returned to Lexingtona few years since, and still resides there. Mr. C. The writer, spentthe winter of 1836-7 in Lexington. He says, "Yours of the 27th ult. Is received, and I hasten to state the factswhich came to my knowledge while in Lexington, respecting theoccurrences about which you inquire. Mrs. Turner was originally aBoston lady. She is from 35 to 40 years of age, and the wife of JudgeTurner, formerly of New Orleans, and worth a large fortune in slavesand plantations. I repeatedly heard, while in Lexington, Kentucky, during the winter of 1836-7, of the wanton cruelty practised by thiswoman upon her slaves, and that she had caused several to be _whippedto death_; but I never heard that she was suspected of being deranged, otherwise than by the indulgence of an ungoverned temper, until Iheard that her husband was attempting to incarcerate her in theLunatic Asylum. The citizens of Lexington, believing the charge to bea false one, rose and prevented the accomplishment for a time, until, lulled by the fair promises of his friends, they left his domicil, andin the dead of night she was taken by force, and conveyed to theasylum. This proceeding being judged illegal by her friends, a suitwas instituted to liberate her. I heard the testimony on the trial, which related only to proceedings had in order to getting her admittedinto the asylum; and no facts came out relative to her treatment ofher slaves, other than of a general character. 

"Some days after the above trial, (which by the way did not come to anultimate decision, as I believe) I was present in my brother's office, when Judge Turner, in a long conversation with my brother on thesubject of his trials with his wife, said, '_That woman has been theimmediate cause of the death of_ six _of my servants, by herseverities_!

"I was repeatedly told, while I was there, that she drove a coloredboy from the second story window, a distance of 15 to 18 feet, on tothe pavement, which made him a cripple for a time. 

"I heard the trial of a man for the murder of his slave, by whipping, where the evidence was to my mind perfectly conclusive of his guilt;but the jury were two of them for convicting him of manslaughter, andthe rest for acquitting him; and as they could not agree weredischarged--and on a subsequent trial, as I learned by the papers, theculprit was acquitted. "

Rev. THOMAS SAVAGE, of Bedford, New Hampshire, in a recent letter, states the following fact:

"The following circumstance was related to me last summer, by mybrother, now residing as a physician, at Rodney, Mississippi; and who, though a pro-slavery man, spoke of it in terms of reprobation, as anact of capricious, wanton cruelty. The planter who was the actor in itI myself knew; and the whole transaction is so characteristic of theman, that, independent of the strong authority I have, I shouldentertain but little doubt of its authenticity. He is a wealthyplanter, residing near Natchez, eccentric, capricious and intemperate. On one occasion he invited a number of guests to an elegantentertainment, prepared in the true style of southern luxury. Fromsome cause, none of the guests appeared. In a moody humor, and underthe influence, probably, of mortified pride, he ordered the overseerto call the people (a term by which the field hands are generallydesignated, ) on to the piazza. The order was obeyed, and the peoplecame. 'Now, ' said he, 'have them seated at the table. Accordingly theywere seated at the well-furnished, glittering table, while he and hisoverseer waited on them, and helped them to the various dainties ofthe feast. 'Now, ' said he, after awhile, raising his voice, 'takethese rascals, and give them twenty lashes a piece. I'll show them howto eat at my table. ' The overseer, in relating it, said he had tocomply, though reluctantly, with this brutal command. "

Mr. HENRY P. THOMPSON, a native and still a resident of Nicholasville, Kentucky, made the following statement at a public meeting in LaneSeminary, Ohio, in 1833. He was at that time a slaveholder. 

"_Cruelties_, said he, _are so common_, I hardly know what to relate. But one fact occurs to me just at this time, that happened in thevillage where I live. The circumstances are these. A colored man, aslave, ran away. As he was crossing Kentucky river, a white man, whosuspected him, attempted to stop him. The negro resisted. The whiteman procured help, and finally succeeded in securing him. He thenwreaked his vengeance on him for resisting--flogging him till he wasnot able to walk. They then put him on a horse, and came on with himten miles to Nicholasville. When they entered the village, it wasnoticed that he sat upon his horse like a drunken man. It was a veryhot day; and whilst they were taking some refreshment, the negro satdown upon the ground, under the shade. When they ordered him to go, hemade several efforts before he could get up; and when he attempted tomount the horse, his strength was entirely insufficient. One of themen struck him, and with an oath ordered him to get on the horsewithout any more fuss. The negro staggered back a few steps, felldown, and died. I do not know that any notice was ever taken of it. "

Rev. COLEMAN S. HODGES, a native and still a resident of WesternVirginia, gave the following testimony at the same meeting. 

"I have frequently seen the mistress of a family in Virginia, withwhom I was well acquainted, beat the woman who performed the kitchenwork, with a stick two feet and a half long, and nearly as thick as mywrist; striking her over the head, and across the small of the back, as she was bent over at her work, with as much spite as you would asnake, and for what I should consider no offence at all. There livedin this same family a young man, a slave, who was in the habit ofrunning away. He returned one time after a week's absence. The mastertook him into the barn, stripped him entirely naked, tied him up byhis hands so high that he could not reach the floor, tied his feettogether, and put a small rail between his legs, so that he could notavoid the blows, and commenced whipping him. He told me that he gavehim five hundred lashes. At any rate, he was covered with wounds fromhead to foot. Not a place as big as my hand but what was cut. Suchthings as these are perfectly common all over Virginia; at least sofar as I am acquainted. Generally, planters avoid punishing theirslaves before strangers. "

Mr. CALVIN H. TATE, of Missouri, whose father and brothers wereslaveholders, related the following at the same meeting. Theplantation on which it occurred, was in the immediate neighborhood ofhis father's. 

"A young woman, who was generally very badly treated, after receivinga more severe whipping than usual, ran away. In a few days she cameback, and was sent into the field to work. At this time the garmentnext her skin was stiff like a scab, from the running of the soresmade by the whipping. Towards night, she told her master that she wassick, and wished to go to the house. She went, and as soon as shereached it, laid down on the floor exhausted. The mistress asked herwhat the matter was? She made no reply. She asked again; but receivedno answer. 'I'll see, ' said she, 'if I can't make you speak. ' Sotaking the tongs, she heated them red hot, and put them upon thebottoms of her feet; then upon her legs and body; and, finally, in arage, took hold of her throat. This had the desired effect. The poorgirl faintly whispered, 'Oh, misse, don't--I am most gone;' andexpired. "

Extract of a letter from Rev. C. S. RENSHAW, pastor of theCongregational Church, Quincy, Illinois. 

"Judge Menzies of Boone county, Kentucky, an elder in the PresbyterianChurch, and a slaveholder, told me that _he knew_ some overseers inthe tobacco growing region of Virginia, who, to make their slavescareful in picking the tobacco, that is taking the worms off; (youknow what a loathsome thing the tobacco worm is) would make them _eat_some of the worms, and others who made them eat every worm they missedin picking. "

"Mrs. NANCY JUDD, a member of the Non-Conformist Church in Osnaburg, Stark county, Ohio, and formerly a resident of Kentucky, testifiesthat she knew a slaveholder, "Mr. Brubecker, who had a number of slaves, among whom was one whowould frequently avoid labor by hiding himself; for which he would getsevere floggings without the desired effect, and that at last Mr. B. Would tie large cats on his naked body and whip them to make them tearhis back, in order to break him of his habit of hiding. "

Rev. HORACE MOULTON, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal Church inMarlborough, Massachusetts, says:

"Some, when other modes of punishment will not subdue them, _cat-haul_them; that is, take a cat by the nape of the neck and tail, or by itshind legs, and drag the claws across the back until satisfied; thiskind of punishment, as I have understood, poisons the flesh much worsethan the whip, and is more dreaded by the slave. "

Rev. ABEL BROWN, Jr. Late pastor of the first Baptist Church, Beaver, Pennsylvania, in a communication to Rev. C. P. Grosvenor, Editor ofthe Christian Reflector, says:

"I almost daily see the poor heart-broken slave making his way to aland of freedom. A short time since, I saw a noble, pious, distressed, spirit-crushed slave, a member of the Baptist church, escaping from a(professed Christian) bloodhound, to a land where he could enjoy thatof which he had been robbed during forty years. His prayers would havemade us all feel. I saw a Baptist sister of about the same age, herchildren had been torn from her, her head was covered with freshwounds, while her upper lip had scarcely ceased to bleed, inconsequence of a blow with the poker, which knocked out her teeth; shetoo, was going to a land of freedom. Only a very few days since, I sawa girl of about eighteen, with a child as white as myself, aged tenmonths; a Christian master was raising her child (as well his ownperhaps) to sell to a southern market. She had heard of theintention, and at midnight took her only treasure and traveled twentymiles on foot through a land of strangers--she found friends. "

Rev. HENRY T. HOPKINS, pastor of the Primitive Methodist Church in NewYork City, who resided in Virginia from 1821 to 1826, relates thefollowing fact:

"An old colored man, the slave of Mr. Emerson; of Portsmouth, Virginia, being under deep conviction for sin, went into the back partof his master's garden to pour out his soul in prayer to God. For thisoffence he was whipped thirty-nine lashes. "

Extract of a letter from DOCTOR F. JULIUS LEMOYNE, of Washington, Pennsylvania, dated Jan. 9, 1839. 

"Lest you should not have seen the statement to which I am going toallude, I subjoin a brief outline of the facts of a transaction whichoccurred in Western Virginia, adjacent to this county, a number ofyears ago--a full account of which was published in the "Witness"about two years since by Dr. Mitchell, who now resides in Indianacounty, Pennsylvania. A slave boy ran away in cold weather, and duringhis concealment had his legs frozen; he returned, or was retaken. After some time the flesh decayed and _sloughed_--of course wasoffensive--he was carried out to a field and left there without bed, or shelter, _deserted to die_. His only companions were the house dogswhich he called to him. After several days and nights spent insuffering and exposure, he was visited by Drs. McKitchen and Mitchellin the field, of their own accord, having heard by report of hislamentable condition; they remonstrated with the master; brought theboy to the house, amputated both legs, and he finally recovered. "

Hon. JAMES K. PAULDING, the Secretary of the Navy of the U. States, inhis "Letters from the South" published in 1817, relates the following:

"At one of the taverns along the road we were set down in the sameroom with an elderly man and a youth who seemed to be well acquaintedwith him, for they conversed familiarly and with true republicanindependence--for they did not mind who heard them. From the tenor ofhis conversation I was induced to look particularly at the elder. Hewas telling the youth something like the following detested tale. Hewas going, it seems, to Richmond, to inquire about a draft for seventhousand dollars, which he had sent by mail, but which, not havingbeen acknowledged by his correspondent, he was afraid had been stolen, and the money received by the thief. 'I should not like to lose it, 'said he, 'for I worked hard for it, and sold many a poor d----l of ablack to Carolina and Georgia, to scrape it together. ' He then went onto tell many a perfidious tale. All along the road it seems he made ithis business to inquire where lived a man who might be tempted tobecome a party in this accursed traffic, and when he had got some halfdozen of these poor creatures, _he tied their hands behind theirbacks_, and drove them three or four hundred miles or more, bare-headed and half naked through the burning southern sun. Fearfulthat _even southern humanity_ would revolt at such an exhibition ofhuman misery and human barbarity, he gave out that they were runawayslaves he was carrying home to their masters. On one occasion a poorblack woman exposed this fallacy, and told the story of her being_kidnapped_, and when he got her into a wood out of hearing, he beather, to use his own expression, 'till her back was white. ' It seems hemarried all the men and women he bought, himself, because they wouldsell better for being man and wife! But, said the youth, were you notafraid, in traveling through the wild country and sleeping in lonehouses, these slaves would rise and kill you? 'To be sure I was, ' saidthe other, 'but I always fastened my door, put a chair on a tablebefore it, so that it might wake me in falling, and slept with aloaded pistol in each hand. It was a bad life, and I left it off assoon as I could live without it; for many is the time I have separatedwives from husbands, and husbands from wives, and parents fromchildren, but then I made them amends by marrying them again as soonas I had a chance, that is to say, I made them call each other man andwife, and sleep together, which is quite enough for negroes. I madeone bad purchase though, ' continued he. 'I bought a young mulattogirl, a lively creature, a great bargain. She had been the favorite ofher master, who had lately married. The difficulty was to get her togo, for the poor creature loved her master. However, I swore mostbitterly I was only going to take to take her to her mother's at ----and she went with me, though she seemed to doubt me very much. Butwhen she discovered, at last, that we were out of the state, I thoughtshe would go mad, and in fact, the next night she drowned herself inthe river close by. I lost a good five hundred dollars by this foolishtrick. '" Vol. I. P. 121. 

Mr. ---- SPILLMAN, a native, and till recently, a resident ofVirginia, now a member of the Presbyterian church in Delhi, Hamiltonco. , Ohio, has furnished the two following facts, of which he hadpersonal knowledge. 

"David Stallard, of Shenandoah co. , Virginia, had a slave, who runaway; he was taken up and lodged in Woodstock jail. Stallard went withanother man and took him out of the jail--tied him to theirhorses--and started for home. The day was excessively hot, and theyrode so fast, dragging the man by the rope behind them, that he becameperfectly exhausted--fainted--dropped down, and died. 

"Henry Jones, of Culpepper co. , Virginia, owned a slave, who ran away. Jones caught him, tied him up, and for two days, at intervals, continued to flog him, and rub salt into his mangled flesh, until hisback was literally cut up. The slave sunk under the torture; and forsome days it was supposed he must die. He, however, slowly recovered;though it was some weeks before he could walk. "

Mr. NATHAN COLE, of St. Louis, Missouri, in a letter to Mr. ArthurTappan, of New-York, dated July 2, 1834, says, --

"You will find inclosed an account of the proceedings of an inquestlately held in this city upon the body of a slave, the details ofwhich, if published, not one in ten could be induced to believetrue. [11] It appears that the master or mistress, or both, suspectedthe unfortunate wretch of hiding a bunch of keys which were missing;and to extort some explanation, which, it is more than probable, theslave was as unable to do as her mistress, or any other person, hermaster, Major Harney, an officer of our army, had whipped her forthree successive days, and it is supposed by some, that she was kepttied during the time, until her flesh was so lacerated and torn thatit was impossible for the jury to say whether it had been done with awhip or hot iron; some think both--but she was tortured to death. Itappears also that the husband of the said slave had become suspectedof telling some neighbor of what was going on, for which Major Harneycommenced torturing him, until the man broke from him, and ran intothe Mississippi and drowned himself. The man was a pious and veryindustrious slave, perhaps not surpassed by any in this place. Thewoman has been in the family of John Shackford, Esq. , the presentdoorkeeper of the Senate of the United States, for many years; wasconsidered an excellent servant--was the mother of a number ofchildren--and I believe was sold into the family where she met herfate, as matter of conscience, to keep her from being sent below. "

[Footnote 11: The following is the newspaper notice referred to:--

An inquest was held at the dwelling house of Major Harney, in thiscity, on the 27th inst. By the coroner, on the body of Hannah, aslave. The jury, on their oaths, and after hearing the testimony ofphysicians and several other witnesses, found, that said slave "cameto her death by wounds inflicted by William S. Harney. "]

MR. EZEKIEL BIRDSEYE, a highly respected citizen of Cornwall, Litchfield co. , Connecticut, who resided for many years at the south, furnished to the Rev. E. R. Tyler, editor of the Connecticut Observer, the following personal testimony. 

"While I lived in Limestone co. , Alabama, in 1826-7, a tavern-keeperof the village of Moresville discovered a negro carrying away a pieceof old carpet. It was during the Christmas holidays, when the slavesare allowed to visit their friends. The negro stated that one of theservants of the tavern owed him some twelve and a half or twenty-fivecents, and that he had taken the carpet in payment. This the servantdenied. The innkeeper took the negro to a field near by, and whippedhim cruelly. He then struck him with a stake, and punched him in theface and mouth, knocking out some of his teeth. After this, he tookhim back to the house, and committed him to the care of his son, whohad just then come home with another young man. This was at evening. They whipped him by turns, with heavy cowskins, and made the _dogsshake him_. A Mr. Phillips, who lodged at the house, heard the crueltyduring the night. On getting up he found the negro in the bar-room, terribly mangled with the whip, and his flesh so torn by the dogs, that the cords were bare. He remarked to the landlord that he wasdangerously hurt, and needed care. The landlord replied that hedeserved none. Mr. Phillips went to a neighboring magistrate, who tookthe slave home with him, where he soon died. The father and son wereboth tried, and acquitted!! A suit was brought, however, for damagesin behalf of the owner of the slave, a young lady by the name of AgnesJones. _I was on the jury when these facts were stated on oath_. Twomen testified, one that he would have given $1000 for him, the other$900 or $950. The jury found the latter sum. 

"At Union Court House, S. C. , a tavern-keeper, by the name of SamuelDavis, procured the conviction and execution of his own slave, forstealing a cake of gingerbread from a grog shop. The slave raised thelatch of the back door, and took the cake, doing no other injury. Theshop keeper, whose name was Charles Gordon, was willing to forgivehim, but his master procured his conviction and execution by hanging. The slave had but one arm; and an order on the state treasury by thecourt that tried him, which also assessed his value, brought him moremoney than he could have obtained for the slave in market. "

Mr. ----, an elder of the Presbyterian Church in one of the slavestates, lately wrote a letter to an agent of the Anti-Slavery Society, in which he states the following fact. The name of the writer is withthe Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society. 

"I was passing through a piece of timbered land, and on a sudden Iheard a sound as of murder; I rode in that direction, and at somedistance discovered a naked black man, hung to the limb of a tree byhis hands, his feet chained together, and a pine rail laid with oneend on the chain between his legs, and the other upon the ground, tosteady him; and in this condition the overseer gave him _four hundredlashes_. The miserably lacerated slave was then taken down, and put tothe care of a physician. And what do you suppose was the offence forwhich all this was done? Simply this; his owner, observing that helaid off corn rows too crooked, he replied, 'Massa, much corn grow oncrooked row as on straight one!' This was it--this was enough. Hisoverseer, boasting of his skill in managing a _nigger_, he wassubmitted to him, and treated as above. "

DAVID L. CHILD, Esq. , of Northampton, Massachusetts, Secretary of theUnited States' minister at the Court of Lisbon during theadministration of President Monroe, stated the following fact in anoration delivered by him in Boston, in 1831. (See Child's "Despotismof Freedom, " p. 30. 

"An honorable friend, who stands high in the state and in the nation, [12] was _present at the_ burial of a female slave in Mississippi, who_had been whipped to death_ at the stake by her master, because shewas gone longer of an errand to the neighboring town than her masterthought necessary. Under the lash she protested tlat she was ill, andwas obliged to rest in the fields. To complete the climax of horror, she was delivered of a dead infant while undergoing the punishment. "

[Footnote 12: "The narrator of this fact is now absent from the UnitedStates, and I do not feel at liberty to mention his name. "]

The same fact is stated by MRS. CHILD in her "Appeal. " In answer to arecent letter, inquiring of Mr. And Mrs. Child if they were now atliberty to disclose the name of their informant, Mr. C. Says, --

"The witness who stated to us the fact was John James Appleton, Esq. , of Cambridge, Mass. He is now in Europe, and it is not without somehesitation that I give his name. He, however, has openly embraced ourcause, and taken a conspicuous part in some anti-slavery publicmeetings since the time that I felt a scruple at publishing his name. Mr. Appleton is a gentleman of high talents and accomplishments. Hehas been Secretary of Legation at Rio Janeiro, Madrid, and the Hague;Commissioner at Naples, and Charge d'Affaires at Stockholm. "

The two following facts are stated upon the authority of the REV. JOSEPH G. WILSON, pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Salem, Washington co. , Indiana. 

"In Bath co. , Kentucky, Mr. L. , in the year '32 or '33, whileintoxicated, in a fit of rage whipped a female slave until she faintedand fell on the floor. Then he whipped her to get up; then with redhot tongs he burned off her ears, and whipped her again! but all invain. He then ordered his negro men to carry her to the cabin. Thereshe was found dead next morning. 

"One Wall, in Chester district, S. C. , owned a slave, whom he hired tohis brother-in-law, Wm. Beckman, for whom the slave worked eighteenmonths, and worked well. Two weeks after returning to his master heran away on account of bad treatment. To induce him to return, themaster sold him _nominally_ to his neighbor, to whom the slave gavehimself up, and by whom he was returned to his master:--Punishment, _stripes_. To prevent escape a bar of iron was fastened with threebands, at the waist, knee, and ankle. That night he broke the bandsand bar, and escaped. Next day he was taken and whipped to death, bythree men, the master, Thorn, and the overseer. First, he was whippedand driven towards home; on the way he attempted to escape, and wasshot at by the master, --caught, and knocked down with the butt of thegun by Thorn. In attempting to cross a ditch he fell, with his feetdown, and face on the bank; they whipped in vain to get him up--hedied. His soul ascended to God, to be a swift witness against hisoppressors. This took place at 12 o'clock. Next evening an inquest washeld. Of thirteen jurors, summoned by the coroner, nine said it wasmurder; two said it was manslaughter, and two said it was JUSTIFIABLE!He was bound over to court, tried, and acquitted--not even fined!"

The following fact is stated on the authority of Mr. WM. WILLIS, ofGreen Plains, Clark co. Ohio; formerly of Caroline co. On the easternshore of Maryland. 

"Mr. W. Knew a slave called Peter White, who was sold to be taken toGeorgia; he escaped, and lived a long time in the woods--was finallytaken. When he found himself surrounded, he surrendered himselfquietly. When his pursuers had him in their possession, they shot himin the leg, and broke it, out of mere wantonness. The next day aMethodist minister set his leg, and bound it up with splints. The manwho took him, then went into his place of confinement, wantonly jumpedupon his leg and crushed it. His name was William Sparks. "

Most of our readers are familiar with the horrible atrocitiesperpetrated in New Orleans, in 1834, by a certain Madame La Laurie, upon her slaves. They were published extensively in northernnewspapers at the time. The following are extracts from the accountsas published in the New Orleans papers immediately after theoccurrence. The New Orleans Bee says:--

"Upon entering one of the apartments, the most appalling spectacle mettheir eyes. Seven slaves, more or less horribly mutilated, were seensuspended by the neck, with their limbs apparently stretched and torn, from one extremity to the other. They had been confined for severalmonths in the situation from which they had thus providentially beenrescued; and had been merely kept in existence to prolong theirsufferings, and to make them taste all that a most refined crueltycould inflict. "

The New Orleans Mercantile Advertiser says:

"A negro woman was found chained, covered with bruises and wounds fromsevere flogging. --All the apartments were then forced open. In a roomon the ground floor, two more were found chained, and in a deplorablecondition. Up stairs and in the garret, four more were found chained;some so weak as to be unable to walk, and all covered with wounds andsores. One mulatto boy declares himself to have been chained for fivemonths, being fed daily with only a handful of meal, and receivingevery morning the most cruel treatment. "

The New Orleans Courier says:--

"We saw one of these miserable beings. --He had a large hole in hishead--his body, from head to foot, was covered with scars and filledwith worms. "

The New Orleans Mercantile Advertiser says:

"Seven poor unfortunate slaves were found--some chained to the floor, others with chains around their necks, fastened to the ceiling; andone poor old man, upwards of sixty years of age, chained hand andfoot, and made fast to the floor, in a _kneeling position_. His headbore the appearance of having been beaten until it was broken, and theworms were actually to be seen making a feast of his brains!! A womanhad her back literally cooked (if the expression may be used) with thelash; _the very bones might be seen projecting through the skin!_"

The New York Sun, of Feb. 21, 1837, contains the following:--

"Two negroes, runaways from Virginia, were overtaken a few days sincenear Johnstown, Cambria co. Pa. When the persons in pursuit called outfor them to stop or they would shoot them. --One of the negroes turnedaround and said, he would die before he would be taken, and at themoment received a rifle ball through his knee: the other started torun, but was brought to the ground by a ball being shot in his back. After receiving the above wounds they made battle with their pursuers, but were captured and brought into Johnstown. It is said that theyoung men who shot them had orders to take them dead or alive. "

Mr. M. M. SHAFTER, of Townsend, Vermont, recently a graduate of theWesleyan University at Middletown, Connecticut, makes the followingstatement:

"Some of the events of the Southampton, Va. Insurrection were narratedto me by Mr. Benjamin W. Britt, from Riddicksville, N. C. Mr. Brittclaimed the honor of having shot a black on that occasion, for thecrime of disobeying Mr. Britt's imperative 'Stop. ' And Mr. Ashurst, ofEdenton, Georgia, told me that a neighbor of his 'fired at a likelynegro boy of his mother, ' because the said boy encroached upon hispremises. "

Mr. DAVID HAWLEY, a class leader in the Methodist Episcopal Church atSt. Albans, Licking county, Ohio, who moved from Kentucky to Ohio in1831, certifies as follows:--

"About the year 1825, a slave had escaped for Canada, but was arrestedin Hardin county. On his return, I saw him in Hart county--his wriststied together before, his arms tied close to his body, the rope thenpassing behind his body, thence to the neck of a horse on which rodethe master, with a club about three feet long, and of the size of ahoe handle; which, by the appearance of the slave, had been used onhis head, so as to wear off the hair and skin in several places, andthe blood was running freely from his mouth and nose; his heels verymuch bruised by the horse's feet, as his master had rode on himbecause he _would_ not go fast enough. Such was the slave's appearancewhen passing through where I resided. Such cases were not unfrequent. "

The following is furnished by Mr. F. A. HART, of Middletown, Connecticut, a manufacturer, and an influential member of theMethodist Episcopal Church. It occurred in 1824, about twenty-fivemiles this side of Baltimore, Maryland. --

"I had spent the night with a Methodist brother; and while atbreakfast, a person came in and called for help. We went out and founda crowd collected around a carriage. Upon approaching we discoveredthat a slave-trader was endeavoring to force a woman into hiscarriage. He had already put in three children, the youngestapparently about eight years of age. The woman was strong, andwhenever he brought her to the side of the carriage, she resisted soeffectually with her feet that he could not get her in. The womanbecoming exhausted, at length, by her frantic efforts, he thrust herin with great violence, _stamped her down upon the bottom with hisfeet_! shouted to the driver to go on; and away they rolled, themiserable captives moaning and shrieking, until their voices were lostin the distance. "

Mr. SAMUEL HALL, a teacher in Marietta College, Ohio, writes asfollows:--

"Mr. ISAAC C. FULLER is a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church inMarietta. He was a fellow student of mine while in college, and nowresides in this place. He says:--In 1832, as I was descending the Ohiowith a flat boat, near the 'French Islands, ' so called, belowCincinnati, I saw two negroes on horseback. The horses apparently tookfright at something and ran. Both jumped over a rail fence; and one ofthe horses, in so doing, broke one of his fore-legs, falling at thesame time and throwing the negro who was upon his back. A white mancame out of a house not over two hundred yards distant, and came tothe spot. Seizing a stake from the fence, he knocked the negro downfive or six times in succession. 

"In the same year I worked for a Mr. Nowland, eleven miles above BatonRouge, La. At a place called 'Thomas' Bend. ' He had an overseer whowas accustomed to flog more or less of the slaves every morning. Iheard the blows and screams as regularly as we used to hear thecollege bell that summoned us to any duty when we went to school. Thisoverseer was a nephew of Nowland, and there were about fifty slaves onhis plantation. Nowland himself related the following to me. One ofhis slaves ran away, and came to the Homo Chitto river, where he foundno means of crossing. Here he fell in with a white man who knew hismaster, being on a journey from that vicinity. He induced the slave toreturn to Baton Rouge, under the promise of giving him a pass, bywhich he might escape, but, in reality, to betray him to his master. This he did, instead of fulfilling his promise. Nowland said that hetook the slave and inflicted five hundred lashes upon him, cutting hisback all to pieces, and then thew on hot embers. The slave was on theplantation at the time, and told me the same story. He also rolled uphis sleeves, and showed me the scars on his arms, which, inconsequence, appeared in places to be callous to the bone. I was withNowland between five and six months. "

Rev. JOHN RANKIN, formerly of Tennessee, now pastor of thePresbyterian Church of Ripley, Ohio, has furnished the followingstatement:--

"The Rev. LUDWELL G. GAINES, now pastor of the Presbyterian Church ofGoshen, Clermont county, Ohio, stated to me, that while a resident ofa slave state, he was summoned to assist in taking a man who had madehis black woman work naked several days, and afterwards murdered her. The murderer armed himself, and threatened to shoot the officer whowent to take him; and although there was ample assistance at hand, theofficer declined further interference. "

Mr. RANKIN adds the following:--

"A Presbyterian preacher, now resident in a slave state, and thereforeit is not expedient to give his name, stated, that he saw on board ofa steamboat at Louisville, Kentucky, a woman who had been forced onboard, to be carried off from all she counted dear on earth. She ranacross the boat and threw herself into the river, in order to end alife of intolerable sorrows. She was drawn back to the boat and takenup. The brutal driver beat her severely, and she immediately threwherself again into the river. She was hooked up again, chained, andcarried off. "

Testimony of M. WILLIAM HANSBOROUGH, of Culpepper county, Virginia, the "owner" of sixty slaves. 

"I saw a slave taken out of prison by his master, on a hot summer'sday, and driven, by said master, on the road before him, till hedropped down dead. "

The above statement was made by Mr. Hansborough to Lindley Coates, ofLancaster county, Pa. A distinguished member of the Society ofFriends, and a member of the late Convention in Pa. For altering theState Constitution. The letter from Mr. C. Containing this testimonyof Mr. H. Is now before us. 

Mr. TOBIAS BOUDINOT, a member of the Methodist Church in St. Albans, Licking county, Ohio, says:

"In Nicholasville, Ky. In the year 1823, he saw a slave fleeing beforethe patrol, but he was overtaken near where he stood, and a man with aknotted cane, as large as his wrist, struck the slave a number oftimes on his head, until the club was broken and he made tame; theblood was thrown in every direction by the violence of the blows. "

The Rev. WILLIAM DICKEY, of Bloomingburg, Fayette county, Ohio, wrotea letter to the Rev. John Rankin, of Ripley, Ohio thirteen yearssince, containing a description of the cutting up of a slave with abroad axe; beginning at the feet and gradually cutting the legs, arms, and body into pieces! This diabolical atrocity was committed in thestate of Kentucky, in the year 1807. The perpetrators of the deed weretwo brothers, Lilburn and Isham Lewis, NEPHEWS OF PRESIDENT JEFFERSON. The writer of this having been informed by Mr. Dickey, that some ofthe facts connected with this murder were not contained in his letterpublished by Mr. Rankin, requested him to write the account _anew_, and furnish the additional facts. This he did, and the lettercontaining it was published in the "Human Rights" for August, 1837. Weinsert it here, slightly abridged, with the introductory remarks whichappeared in that paper. 

"Mr. Dickey's first letter has been scattered all over the country, south and north; and though multitudes have affected to disbelieve itsstatements, _Kentuckians_ know the truth of them quite too well tocall them in question. The story is fiction or fact--if _fiction_, whyhas it not been nailed to the wall? Hundreds of people around themouth of Cumberland River are personally knowing to these facts. _There_ are the records of the court that tried the wretches. --_There_their acquaintances and kindred still live. All over that region ofcountry, the brutal butchery of George is a matter of publicnotoriety. It is quite needless, perhaps, to add, that the Rev. Wm. Dickey is a Presbyterian clergyman, one of the oldest members of theChilicothe Presbytery, and greatly respected and beloved by thechurches in Southern Ohio. He was born in South Carolina, and was formany years pastor of a church in Kentucky. "

REV. WM. DICKEY'S LETTER. 

"In the county of Livingston, KY. Near the mouth of Cumberland River, lived Lilburn Lewis, a sister's son of the celebrated Jefferson. Hewas the wealthy owner of a considerable gang of negroes, whom he droveconstantly, fed sparingly, and lashed severely. The consequence was, that they would run away. Among the rest was an ill-thrived boy ofabout seventeen, who, having just returned from a skulking spell, wassent to the spring for water, and in returning let fall an elegantpitcher: it was dashed to shivers upon the rocks. This was made theoccasion for reckoning with him. It was night, and the slaves were allat home. The master had them all collected in the most roomy negrohouse, and a rousing fire put on. When the door was secured, that nonemight escape, either through _fear of him_ or _sympathy with George_, he opened to them the design of the interview, namely, that they mightbe effectually advised to _stay at home and obey his orders_. Allthings now in train, he called up George, who approached his masterwith unreserved submission. He bound him with cords; and by theassistance of Isham Lewis, his youngest brother, laid him on a broadbench, the _meat-block_. He then proceeded to _hack off George at theankles_! It was with the _broad axe_! In vain did the unhappy victim_scream and roar_! for he was completely in his master's power; not ahand among so many durst interfere; casting the feet into the fire, helectured them at some length. --He next _chopped him off below theknees_! George _roaring out_ and praying his master to begin at the_other end_! He admonished them again, throwing the legs into thefire--then, above the knees, tossing the joints into the fire--thenext stroke severed the thighs from the body; these were alsocommitted to the flames--and so it may be said of the arms, head, andtrunk, until all was in the fire! He threatened any of them withsimilar punishment who should in future disobey, run away, or disclosethe proceedings of that evening. Nothing now remained but to consumethe flesh and bones; and for this purpose the fire was brightlystirred until two hours after midnight; when a coarse and heavyback-wall, composed of rock and clay, covered the fire and the remainsof George. It was the Sabbath--this put an end to the _amusements_ ofthe evening. The negroes were now permitted to disperse, with chargesto keep this matter among themselves, and never to whisper it in theneighbourhood, under the penalty of a like punishment. 

"When he returned home and retired, his wife exclaimed, 'Why, Mr. Lewis, where have you been, and what were you doing?' She had heard astrange _pounding_ and dreadful _screams_, and had smelled somethinglike fresh meat _burning_. The answer he returned was, that he hadnever enjoyed himself at a ball so well as he had enjoyed himself thatnight. 

"Next morning he ordered the hands to rebuild the back-wall, and hehimself superintended the work, throwing the pieces of flesh thatstill remained, with the bones, behind, as it went up--thus hoping toconceal the matter. But it _could not be hid_--much as the negroesseemed to hazard, they did _whisper the horrid deed_. The neighborscame, and in his presence tore down the wall; and finding the_remains_ of the boy, they apprehended Lewis and his brother, andtestified against them. They were committed to jail, that they mightanswer at the coming court for this shocking outrage; but findingsecurity for their appearance at court, THEY WERE ADMITTED TO BAIL!

"In the interim, other articles of evidence leaked out. That of Mrs. Lewis hearing a pounding, and screaming and her smelling fresh meatburning, for not till now had this come out. He was offended with herfor disclosing these things, alleging that they might have some weightagainst him at the pending trial. 

"In connection with this is another item, full of horror. Mr. S. Lewis, or her girl, in making her bed one morning after this, found, underher bolster, a keen BUTCHER KNIFE! The appalling discovery forced fromher the confession that she considered her life in jeopardy. Messrs. Rice and Philips, whose wives were her sisters, went to see her and tobring her away if she wished it. Mr. Lewis received them with all theexpressions of _Virginia hospitality_. As soon as they were seatedthey said, 'Well, Letitia, we supposed that you might be unhappy here, and afraid for your life; and we have come to-day to take you to yourfather's, if you desire it. ' She said, 'Thank you, kind brothers, I amindeed afraid for my life. '--We need not interrupt the story to tellhow much surprised he affected to be with this strange procedure ofhis brothers-in-law, and with this declaration of his wife. But allhis professions of fondness for her, to the contrary notwithstanding, they rode off with her before his eyes. --He followed and overtook, andwent with them to her father's; but she was locked up from him, withher own consent, and he returned home. 

"Now he saw that his character was gone, his respectable friendsbelieved that he had massacred George; but, worst of all, he saw thatthey considered the life of the harmless Letitia was in danger fromhis perfidious hands. It was too much for his chivalry to sustain. Theproud Virginian sunk under the accumulated load of public odium. Heproposed to his brother Isham, who had been his accomplice in theGeorge affair, that they should finish the play of life with a stilldeeper tragedy. The plan was, that they should shoot one another. Having made the hot-brained bargain, they repaired with their guns tothe grave-yard, which was on an eminence in the midst of hisplantation. It was inclosed with a railing, say thirty feet square. One was to stand at one railing, and the other over against him at theother. They were to make ready, take aim, and count deliberately 1, 2, 3, and then fire. Lilburn's will was written, and thrown down openbeside him. They cocked their guns and raised them to their faces; butthe peradventure occurring that one of the guns might miss fire, Ishamwas sent for a rod, and when it was brought, Lilburn cut it off atabout the length of two feet, and was showing his brother how thesurvivor might do, provided one of the guns should fail; (for theywere determined upon going together;) but forgetting, perhaps, in theperturbation of the moment that the gun was cocked, when he touchedtrigger with the rod the gun fired, and he fell, and died in a fewminutes--and was with George in the eternal world, where _the slave isfree from his master_. But poor Isham was so terrified with thisunexpected occurrence and so confounded by the awful contortions ofhis brother's face, that he had not nerve enough to follow up theplay, and finish the plan as was intended, but suffered Lilburn to goalone. The negroes came running to see what it meant that a gun shouldbe fired in the grave-yard. There lay their master, dead! They ran forthe neighbors. Isham still remained on the spot. The neighbors at thefirst charged him with the murder of his brother. But he, though as ifhe had lost more than half his mind, told the whole story; and thecourse of range of the ball in the dead man's body agreeing with hisstatement, Isham was not farther charged with Lilburn's death. 

"The Court sat--Isham was judged to be guilty of a capital crime inthe affair of George. He was to be hanged at Salem. The day was set. My good old father visited him in the prison--two or three timestalked and prayed with him; I visited him once myself. We fondly hopedthat he was a sincere penitent. Before the day of execution came, bysome means, I never knew what, Isham was _missing_. About two yearsafter, we learned that he had gone down to Natchez, and had married alady of some refinement and piety. I saw her letters to his sisters, who were worthy members of the church of which I was pastor. The lastletter told of his death. He was in Jackson's army, and fell in thefamous battle of New Orleans. "

"I am, sir, your friend, "WM. DICKEY. "

PERSONAL NARRATIVES-PART III. 

NARRATIVE AND TESTIMONY OF REV. FRANCIS HAWLEY. 

Mr. Hawley is the pastor of the Baptist Church in Colebrook, Litchfield county, Connecticut. He has resided fourteen years in theslave states, North and South Carolina. His character and standingwith his own denomination at the south, may be inferred from thefact, that the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina appointedhim, a few years since, their general agent to visit the Baptistchurches within their bounds, and to secure their co-operation inthe objects of the Convention. Mr. H. Accepted the appointment, andfor some time traveled in that capacity. 

"I rejoice that the Executive Committee of the American Anti-SlaverySociety have resolved to publish a volume of facts and testimonyrelative to the character and workings of American slavery. Havingresided fourteen years at the south, I cheerfully comply with yourrequest, to give the result of my observation and experience. 

"And I would here remark, that one may reside at the south for years, and not witness extreme cruelties; a northern man, and one who is nota slaveholder, would be the last to have an opportunity of witnessingthe infliction of cruel punishments. "

PLANTATIONS. 

"A majority of the large plantations are on the banks of rivers, farfrom the public eye. A great deal of low marshy ground lies in thevicinity of most of the rivers at the south; consequently the mainroads are several miles from the rivers, and generally no _public_road passes the plantations. A stranger traveling on the _ridge_, would think himself in a miserably poor country; but every two orthree miles he will see a road turning off and leading into the swamp;taking one of those roads, and traveling from two to six miles, hewill come to a large gate; passing which, he will find himself in aclearing of several hundred acres of the first quality of land;passing on, he will see 30, or 40, or more slaves--men, women, boysand girls, at their task, every one with a hoe; or, if in cottonpicking season, with their baskets. The overseer, with his whip, either riding or standing about among them; or if the weather is hot, sitting under a shade. At a distance, on a little rising ground, ifsuch there be, he will see a cluster of huts, with a tolerable housein the midst, for the overseer. Those huts are from ten to fifteenfeet square, built of logs, and covered, not with shingles, but withboards, about four feet long, split out of pine timber with a'_frow_'. The floors are very commonly made in this way. Clay is firstworked until it is soft; it is then spread upon the ground, about fouror five inches thick; when it dries, it becomes nearly as hard as abrick. The crevices between the logs are sometimes filled with thesame. These huts generally cost the master nothing--they are commonlybuilt by the negroes at night, and on Sundays. When a slave of aneighboring plantation takes a wife, or to use the phrase common atthe south, 'takes up' with one of the women, he builds a hut, and itis called her house. Upon entering these huts, (not as comfortable inmany instances as the horse stable, ) generally, you will find nochairs, but benches and stools; no table, no bedstead, and no bed, except a blanket or two, and a few rags or moss; in some instances aknife or two, but very rarely a fork. You may also find a pot orskillet, and generally a number of gourds, which serve them instead ofbowls and plates. The cruelties practiced on those secludedplantations, the judgment day alone can reveal. Oh, Brother, could Isummon ten slaves from ten plantations that I could name, and havethem give but one year's history of their bondage, it would thrill theland with horror. Those overseers who follow the business ofoverseeing for a livelihood, are generally the most unprincipled andabandoned of men. Their wages are regulated according to their skillin extorting labor. The one who can make the most bags of cotton, witha given number of hands, is the one generally sought after; and thereis a competition among them to see who shall make the largest crop, according to the hands he works. I ask, what must be the condition ofthe poor slaves, under the unlimited power of such men, in whom, bythe long-continued practise of the most heart-rending cruelties, everyfeeling of humanity has been obliterated? But it may be asked, cannotthe slaves have redress by appealing to their masters? In manyinstances it is impossible, as their masters live hundreds of milesoff. There are perhaps thousands in the northern slave states, [andmany in the free states, ] who own plantations in the southern slavestates, and many more spend their summers at the north, or at thevarious watering places. But what would the slaves gain, if theyshould appeal to the master? He has placed the overseer over them, with the understanding that he will make as large a crop as possible, and that he is to have entire control, and manage them according tohis own judgment. Now suppose that in the midst of the season, theslaves make complaint of cruel treatment. The master cannot get alongwithout an overseer--it is perhaps very sickly on the plantation hedare not risk his own life there. Overseers are all enraged at thatseason, and if he takes part with his slave against the overseer, hewould destroy his authority, and very likely provoke him to leave hisservice--which would of course be a very great injury to him. Thus, innineteen cases out of twenty, self-interest would prevent the masterfrom paying any attention to the complaints of his slaves. And, if anyshould complain, it would of course come to the ears of the overseer, and the complainant would be inhumanly punished for it. "

CLOTHING. 

"The rule, where slaves are hired out, is two suits of clothes peryear, one pair of shoes, and one blanket; but as it relates to thegreat body of the slaves, this cannot be called a general rule. Onmany plantations, the children under ten or twelve years old, go_entirely naked_--or, it clothed at all, they have nothing more than ashirt. The cloth is of the coarsest kind, far from being durable orwarm; and their shoes frequently come to pieces in a few weeks. Ihave never known any provision made, or time allowed for the washingof clothes. If they wish to wash, as they have generally but one suit, they go after their day's toil to some stream, build a fire, pull offtheir clothes and wash them in the stream, and dry them by the fire;and in some instances they wear their clothes until they are worn off;without washing. I have never known an instance of a slaveholderputting himself to any expense, that his slaves might have decentclothes for the Sabbath. If by making baskets, brooms, mats, &c. Atnight or on Sundays, the slaves can get money enough to buy a Sundaysuit, very well. I have never known an instance of a slaveholderfurnishing his slaves with stockings or mittens. I _know_ that theslaves suffer much, and no doubt many die in consequence of not beingwell clothed. "

FOOD. 

"In the grain-growing part of the south, the slaves, as it relates tofood, fare tolerably well; but in the cotton, and rice-growing, andsugar-making portion, some of them fare badly. I have been onplantations where, from the appearance of the slaves, I should judgethey were half-starved. They receive their allowance very commonly onSunday morning. They are left to cook it as they please, and when theyplease. Many slaveholders rarely give their slaves meat, and very fewgive them more food than will keep them in a working condition. Theyrarely ever have a _change_ of food. I have never known an instance ofslaves on plantations being furnished either with sugar, butter, cheese, or milk. "

WORK. 

"If the slaves on plantations were well fed and clothed, and had thestimulus of wages, they could perhaps in general perform their taskswithout injury. The horn is blown soon after the dawn of day, when allthe hands destined for the field must be 'on the march!' If the fieldis far from their huts, they take their breakfast with them. They toiltill about ten o'clock, when they eat it. They then continue theirtoil till the sun is set. 

"A neighbor of mine, who has been an overseer in Alabama, informs me, that there they ascertain how much labor a slave can perform in a day, in the following manner. When they commence a new cotton field, theoverseer takes his watch, and marks how long it takes them to hoe onerow, and then lays out the task accordingly. My neighbor also informsme, that the slaves in Alabama are worked very hard; that the lash isalmost universally applied at the close of the day, if they fail toperform their task in the cotton-picking season. You will see them, with their baskets of cotton, slowly bending their way to the cottonhouse, where each one's basket is weighed. They have no means ofknowing accurately, in the course of the day, how they make progress;so that they are in suspense, until their basket is weighed. Herecomes the mother, with her children; she does not know whetherherself, or children, or all of them, must take the lash; they cannotweigh the cotton themselves--the whole must be trusted to theoverseer. While the weighing goes on, all is still. So many poundsshort, cries the overseer, and takes up his whip, exclaiming, 'Stepthis way, you d--n lazy scoundrel, or bitch. ' The poor slave begs, andpromises, but to no purpose. The lash is applied until the overseer issatisfied. Sometimes the whipping is deferred until the weighing isall over. I have said that all must be _trusted_ to the overseer. Ifhe owes any one a grudge, or wishes to enjoy the fiendish pleasure ofwhipping a little, (for some overseers really delight in it, ) theyhave only to tell a falsehood relative to the weight of their basket;they can then have a pretext to gratify their diabolical disposition;and from the character of overseers, I have no doubt that it isfrequently done. On all plantations, the male and female slaves farepretty much alike; those who are with child are driven to their tasktill within a few days of the time of their delivery; and when thechild is a few weeks old, the mother must again go to the field. If itis far from her hut, she must take her babe with her, and leave it inthe care of some of the children--perhaps of one not more than four orfive years old. If the child cries, she cannot go to its relief; theeye of the overseer is upon her; and if, when she goes to nurse it, she stays a little longer than the overseer thinks necessary, hecommands her back to her task, and perhaps a husband and father musthear and witness it all. Brother, you cannot begin to know what thepoor slave mothers suffer, on thousands of plantations at the south. 

"I will now give a few facts, showing the workings of the system. Someyears since, a Presbyterian minister moved from North Carolina toGeorgia. He had a negro man of an uncommon mind. For some cause, Iknow not what, this minister whipped him most unmercifully. He nextnearly _drowned_ him; he then put him _in the fence_; this is done bylifting up the corner of a 'worm' fence, and then putting the feetthrough; the rails serve as _stocks_. He kept him there some time, howlong I was not informed, but the poor slave _died_ in a few days; and, if I was rightly informed, nothing was done about it, either in churchor state. After some tame, he moved back to North Carolina, and is nowa member of ---- Presbytery. I have heard him preach, and have been inthe pulpit with him. May God forgive me!

"At Laurel Hill, Richmond county, North Carolina, it was reported thata runaway slave was in the neighborhood. A number of young men tooktheir guns, and went in pursuit. Some of them took their station nearthe stage road, and kept on the look-out. It was early in theevening--the poor slave came along, when the ambush rushed upon him, and ordered him to surrender. He refused, and kept them off with hisclub. They still pressed upon him with their guns presented to hisbreast. Without seeming to be daunted, he caught hold of the muzzle ofone of the guns, and came near getting possession of it. At length, retreating to a fence on one side of the road, he sprang over into acorn-field, and started to run in one of the rows. One of the youngmen stepped to the fence, fired, and lodged the whole charge betweenhis shoulders; he fell, and died in a short time. He died withouttelling who his master was, or whether he had any, or what his ownname was, or where he was from. A hole was dug by the side of the roadhis body tumbled into it, and thus ended the whole matter. 

"The Rev, Mr. C. A Methodist minister, held as his slave a negro man, who was a member of his own church. The slave was considered a verypious man, had the confidence of his master, and all who knew him, andif I recollect right, he sometimes attempted to preach. Just beforethe Nat Turner insurrection, in Southampton county, Virginia, by whichthe whole south was thrown into a panic, then worthy slave obtainedpermission to visit his relatives, who resided either in Southampton, or the county adjoining. This was the only instance that ever came tomy knowledge, of a slave being permitted to go so far to visit hisrelatives. He went and returned according to agreement. A few weeksafter his return, the insurrection took place, and the whole countrywas deeply agitated. Suspicion soon fixed on this slave. Nat Turnerwas a Baptist minister, and the south became exceedingly jealous ofall negro preachers. It seemed as if the whole community wereimpressed with the belief that he knew all about it; that he and NatTurner had concocted an extensive insurrection; and so confident werethey in this belief, that they took the poor slave, tried him, andhung him. It was all done in a few days. He protested his innocence tothe last. After the excitement was over, many were ready toacknowledge that they believed him innocent. He was hung upon_suspicion_!

"In R---- county, North Carolina, lived a Mr. B. Who had the name ofbeing a cruel master. Three or four winters since, his slaves wereengaged in clearing a piece of new land. He had a negro girl, about 14years old, whom he had severely whipped a few days before, for notperforming her task. She again failed. The hands left the field forhome; she went with them a part of the way, and fell behind; but thenegroes thought she would soon be along; the evening passed away, andshe did not come. They finally concluded that she had gone back to thenew ground, to lie by the log heaps that were on fire. But they weremistaken: she had sat down by the foot of a large pine. She was thinlyclad--the night was cold and rainy. In the morning the poor girl wasfound, but she was speechless and died in a short time. 

"One of my neighbors sold to a speculator a negro boy, about 14 yearsold. It was more than his poor mother could bear. Her reason fled, andshe became a perfect _maniac_, and had to be kept in closeconfinement. She would occasionally get out and run off to theneighbors. On one of these occasions she came to my house. She wasindeed a pitiable object. With tears rolling down her checks, and herframe shaking with agony, she would cry out, _'don't you hearhim--they are whipping him now, and he is calling for me!'_ Thisneighbor of mine, who tore the boy away from his poor mother, and thusbroke her heart, was a _member of the Presbyterian church. _

"Mr. S----, of Marion District, South Carolina, informed me that a boywas killed by the overseer on Mr. P----'s plantation. The boy wasengaged in driving the horses in a cotton gin. The driver generallysits on the end of the sweep. Not driving to suit the overseer, heknocked him off with the butt of his whip. His skull was fractured. Hedied in a short time. 

"A man of my acquaintance in South Carolina, and of considerablewealth, had an only son, whom he educated for the bar; but notsucceeding in his profession, he soon returned home. His father havinga small plantation three or four miles off; placed his son on it as anoverseer. Following the example of his father, as I have good reasonto believe, he took the wife of one of the negro men. The poor slavefelt himself greatly injured, and expostulated with him. The wretchtook his gun, and deliberately shot him. Providentially he onlywounded him badly. When the father came, and undertook to remonstratewith his son about his conduct, he threatened to shoot him also! andfinally, took the negro woman, and went to Alabama, where he stillresided when I left the south. 

"An elder in the Presbyterian church related to me the following. --'Aspeculator with his drove of negroes was passing my house, and Ibought a little girl, nine or ten years old. After a few months, Iconcluded that I would rather have a plough-boy. Another speculatorwas passing, and I sold the girl. She was much distressed, and wasvery unwilling to leave. '--She had been with him long enough to becomeattached to his own and his negro children, and he concluded bysaying, that in view of the little girl's tears and cries, he haddetermined never to do the like again. I would not trust him, for Iknow him to be a very avaricious man. 

"While traveling in Anson county, North Carolina, I put up for a nightat a private house. The man of the house was not at home when Istopped, but came in the course of the evening, and was noisy andprofane, and nearly drunk. I retired to rest, but not to sleep; hiscursing and swearing were enough to keep a regiment awake. Aboutmidnight he went to his kitchen, and called out his two slaves, a manand woman. His object, he said, was to whip them. They both begged andpromised, but to no purpose. The whipping began, and continued forsome time. Their cries might have been heard at a distance. 

"I was acquainted with a very wealthy planter, on the Pedee river, inSouth Carolina, who has since died in consequence of intemperance. Itwas said that he had occasioned the death of twelve of his slaves, bycompelling them to work in water, opening a ditch in the midst ofwinter. The disease with which they died was a pleurisy. 

"In crossing Pedee river, at Cashway Ferry, I observed that theferryman had no hair on either side of his head, I asked him thecause. He informed me that it was caused by his master's cane. I said, you have a very bad master. 'Yes, a very bad master. ' I understoodthat he was once a number of Congress from South Carolina. 

"While traveling as agent for the North Carolina Baptist StateConvention, I attended a three days' meeting in Gates county, Friday, the first day, passed off. Saturday morning came, and the pastor ofthe church, who lived a few miles off, did not make his appearance. The day passed off, and no news from the pastor. On Sabbath morning, he came hobbling along, having but little use of one foot. He soonexplained: said he had a hired negro man, who, on Saturday morning, gave him a 'little _slack jaw. '_ Not having a stick at hand, he fellupon him with his fist and foot, and in _kicking_ him, he injured hisfoot so seriously, that he could not attend meeting on Saturday. 

"Some of the slaveholding ministers at the south, put their slavesunder overseers, or hire them out, and then take the pastoral care ofchurches. The Rev. Mr. B----, formerly of Pennsylvania, had aplantation in Marlborough District, South Carolina, and was the pastorof a church in Darlington District. The Rev. Mr. T----, of Johnsoncounty, North Carolina, has a plantation in Alabama. 

"I was present, and saw the Rev. J---- W----, of Mecklenburg county, North Carolina, hire out four slaves to work in the gold mines isBurke county. The Rev. H---- M----, of Orange county, sold for $900, anegro man to a speculator, on a Monday of a camp meeting. 

"Runaway slaves are frequently hunted with guns and dogs. _I was onceout on such an excursion, with my rifle and two dogs. _ I trust theLord has forgiven me this heinous wickedness! We did not take therunaways. 

"Slaves are sometimes most unmercifully punished for triflingoffences, or mere mistakes. 

"As it relates to amalgamation, I can say, that I have been inrespectable families, (so called, ) where I could distinguish thefamily resemblance in the slaves who waited upon the table. I oncehired a slave who belonged to his own _uncle. _ It is so common for thefemale slaves to have white children, that little or nothing is eversaid about it. Very few inquiries are made as to who the father is. 

"Thus, brother ----, I have given you very briefly, the result, inpart, of my observations and experience relative to slavery. You canmake what disposition of it you please. I am willing that my nameshould go to the world with what I have now written. 

"Yours affectionately, for the oppressed, "FRANCIS HAWLEY. "

_Colebrook, Connecticut, March_ 18, 1839. 

TESTIMONY OF REUBEN G. MACY AND RICHARD MACY. 

The following is an extract of a letter recently received from CHARLESMARRIOTT of Hudson, New York. Mr. Marriott is an elder in theReligious Society of Friends, and is extensively known and respected. 

"The two following brief statements, are furnished by Richard Macy andReuben G. Macy, brothers, both of Hudson, New York. They are headcarpenters by trade, and have been well known to me for more thanthirty years, as esteemed members of the Religious Society of Friends. They inform me that during their stay in South Carolina, a number moresimilar cases to those here related, came under their notice, which toavoid repetition they omit. 

C. MARRIOTT. "

TESTIMONY OF REUBEN G. MACY. 

"During the winter of 1818 and 19, I resided on an island near themouth of the Savanna river, on the South Carolina side. Most of theslaves that came under my particular notice, belonged to a widow andher daughter, in whose family I lived. No white man belonged to theplantation. Her slaves were under the care of an overseer who cameonce a week to give orders, and settled the score laid up against suchas their mistress thought deserved punishment, which was fromtwenty-five to thirty lashes on their naked backs, with a whip whichthe overseer generally brought with him. This whip had a stout handleabout two feet long, and a lash about four and a half feet. From twoto four received the above, I believe nearly every week during thewinter, sometimes in my presence, and always in my hearing. I examinedthe backs and shoulders of a number of the men, which were mostlynaked while they were about their labor, and found them covered withhard ridges in every direction. One day, while busy in the cottonhouse, hearing a noise, I ran to the door and saw a colored womanpleading with the overseer, who paid no attention to her cries, buttied her hands together, and passed the rope over a beam, over head, where was a platform for spreading cotton, he then drew the rope astight as he could, so as to let her toes touch the ground; thenstripped her body naked to the waist, and went deliberately to workwith his whip, and put on twenty-five or thirty lashes, she pleadingin vain all the time. I inquired, the cause of such treatment, and wasinformed it was for answering her mistress rather '_short_. '"

"A woman from a neighboring plantation came where I was, on a visit;she came in a boat rowed by six slaves, who, according to the commonpractice, were left to take care of themselves, and having laid themdown in the boat and fallen asleep, the tide fell, and the waterfilling the stern of the boat, wet their mistresses trunk of clothes. When she discovered it, she called them up near where I was, andcompelled them to whip each other, till they all had received a severeflogging. She standing by with a whip in her hand to see that they didnot spare each other. Their usual allowance of food was one peck ofcorn per week, which was dealt out to them every first day of theweek, and such as were not there to receive their portion at theappointed time, had to live as they could during the coming week. Eachone had the privilege of planting a small piece of ground, and raisingpoultry for their own use which they generally sold, that is, such asdid improve the privilege which were but few. They had nothing allowedthem besides the corn, except one quarter of beef at Christmas which aslave brought three miles on his head. They were allowed three daysrest at Christmas. Their clothing consisted of a pair of trowsers andjacket, made of whitish woollen cloth called negro cloth. The womenhad nothing but a petticoat, and a very short short-gown, made of thesame king of cloth. Some of the women had an old pair of shoes, butthey generally went _barefoot_. The houses for the field slaves wereabout fourteen feet square, built in the coarsest manner, having butone room, without any chimney, or flooring, with a hole at the roof atone end to let the smoke out. 

"Each one was allowed one blanket in which they rolled themselves up. I examined their houses but could not discover any thing like a bed. Iwas informed that when they had a sufficiency of potatoes the slaveswere allowed some; but the season that I was there they did not raisemore than were wanted for seed. All their corn was ground in onehand-mill, every night just as much as was necessary for the family, then each one his daily portion, which took considerable time in thenight. I often awoke and heard the sound of the mill. Grinding thecorn in the night, and in the dark, after their day's labor, and thewant of other food, were great hardships. 

"The traveling in those parts, among the islands, was altogether withboats, rowed by from four to ten slaves, which often stopped at ourplantation, and staid through the night, when the slaves, after rowingthrough the day, were left to shift for themselves; and when they wentto Savannah with a load of cotton the were obliged to sleep in theopen boats, as the law did not allow a colored person to be out aftereight o'clock in the evening, without a pass from his master. "

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD MACY. 

"The above account is from my brother, I was at work on Hilton Headabout twenty miles north of my brother, during the same winter. Thesame allowance of one peck of corn for a week, the same kind of housesto live in, and the same method of grinding their corn, and always inthe night, and in the dark, was practiced there. 

"A number of instances of severe whipping came under my notice. Thefirst was this:--two men were sent out to saw some blocks out of largelive oak timber on which to raise my building. Their saw was in poororder, and they sawed them badly, for which their master stripped themnaked and flogged them. 

"The next instance was a boy about sixteen years of age. He had creptinto the coach to sleep; after two or three nights he was caught bythe coach driver, a _northern man_, and stripped _entirely naked_, andwhipped without mercy, his master looking on. 

"Another instance. The overseer, a young white man, had orderedseveral negroes a boat's crew, to be on the spot at a given time. Oneman did not appear until the boat had gone. The overseer was veryangry and told him to strip and be flogged; he being slow, was told ifhe did not instantly strip off his jacket, he, the overseer, wouldwhip it off which he did in shreds, whipping him cruelly. 

"The man ran into the barrens and it was about a month before theycaught him. He was newly starved, and at last stole a turkey; thenanother, and was caught. 

"Having occasion to pass a plantation very early one foggy morning, ina boat we heard the sound of the whip, before we could see, but as wedrew up in front of the plantation, we could see the negroes at workin the field. The overseer was going from one to the other causingthem to lay down their hoe, strip off their garment, hold up theirhands and receive their number of lashes. Thus he went on from one tothe other until we were out of sight. In the course of the winter afamily came where I was, on a visit from a neighboring island; ofcourse, in a boat with negroes to row them--one of these a barber, told me that he ran away about two years before, and joined a companyof negroes who had fled to the swamps. He said they suffered a greatdeal--were at last discovered by a party of hunters, who fired amongthem, and caused them to scatter. Himself and one more fled to thecoast, took a boat and put off to sea, a storm came on and swamped orupset them, and his partner was drowned, he was taken up by a passingvessel and returned to his master. 

RICHARD MACY. 

_Hudson, 12 mo. 29th_, 1838. "

TESTIMONY OF MR. ELEAZAR POWELL

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MR. WILLIAM SCOTT, a highly respectablecitizen of Beaver co. Pennsylvania, dated Jan 7, 1839. 

_Chippeca Township, Beaver co. Pa. Jan. _ 7, 1839. 

"I send you the statement of Mr. Eleazar Powell, who was born, and hasmostly resided in this township from his birth. His character forsobriety and truth stands above impeachment. 

"With sentiments of esteem, I am your friend, WILLIAM SCOTT. 

"In the month of December, 1836, I went to the State of Mississippi towork at my trade, (masonry and bricklaying, ) and continued to work inthe counties of Adams and Jefferson, between four and five months. Infollowing my business I had an opportunity of seeing the treatment ofslaves in several places. 

"In Adams county I built a chimney for a man named Joseph Gwatney; hehad forty-five field hands of both sexes. The field in which theyworked at that time, lay about two miles from the house; the hands hadto cook and eat their breakfast, prepare their dinner, and be in thefield at daylight, and continue there till dark. In the evening thecotton they had picked was weighed, and if they fell short of theirtask they were whipped. One night I attended the weighing--two womenfell short of their task, and the master ordered the black driver totake them to the quarters and flog them; one of them was to receivetwenty-five lashes and pick a peck of cotton seed. I have been withthe overseer several times through the negro quarters. The huts aregenerally built of split timber, some larger than rails, twelve and ahalf feet wide and fourteen feet long--some with and some withoutchimneys, and generally without floors; they were generally withoutdaubing, and mostly had split clapboards nailed on the cracks on theoutside, though some were without even that: in some there was a kindof rough bedstead, made from rails, polished with the axe, and puttogether in a very rough manner, the bottom covered with clapboards, and over that a bundle of worn out clothes. In some huts there was nobedstead at all. The above description applies to the places generallywith which I was acquainted, and they were mostly _old settlements. _

"In the east part of Jefferson county I built a chimney for a mannamed ---- M'Coy; he had forty-seven laboring hands. Near where I wasat work, M'Coy had ordered one of his slaves to set a post for a gate. When he came to look at it, he said the slave had not set it in theright place; and ordered him to strip, and lie down on his face;telling him that if he struggled, or attempted to get up, two men, whohad been called to the spot, should seize and hold him fast. The slaveagreed to be quiet, and M'Coy commenced flogging him on the bare back, with the wagon whip. After some time the sufferer attempted to get up;one of the slaves standing by, seized him by the feet and held himfast; upon which he yielded, and M'Coy continued to flog him ten orfifteen minutes. When he was up, and had put on his trowsers, theblood came through them. 

"About half a mile from M'Coy's was a plantation owned by hisstep-daughter. The overseer's name was James Farr, of whom it appearsMrs. M'Coy's waiting woman was enamoured. One night, while I livedthere, M'Coy came from Natchez, about 10 o'clock at night. He saidthat Dinah was gone, and wished his overseer to go with him to Farr'slodgings. They went accordingly, one to each door, and caught Dinah asshe ran out, she was partly dressed in her mistress's clothes; M'Coywhipped her unmercifully, and she afterwards made her escape. On thenext day, (Sabbath), M'Coy came to the overseer's, where I lodged, andrequested him and me to look for her, as he was afraid that she hadhanged herself. He then gave me the particulars of the flogging. Hestated that near Farr's he had made her strip and lie down, and hadflogged her until he was tired; that before he reached home he had asecond time made her strip, and again flogged her until he was tired;that when he reached home he had tied her to a peach-tree, and aftergetting a drink had flogged her until he was thirsty again; and whilehe went to get a drink the woman made her escape. He stated that heknew, from the whipping he had given her, there must be in her backcuts an inch deep. He showed the place where she had been tied to thetree; there appeared to be as much blood as if a hog had been stuckthere. The woman was found on Sabbath evening, near the sprang, andhad to be carried into the house. 

"While I lived there I heard M'Coy say, if the slaves did not raisehim three hundred bales of cotton the ensuing season, he would killevery negro he had. 

"Another case of flogging came under my notice: Philip O. Hughes, sheriff of Jefferson county, had hired a slave to a man, whose name Ido not recollect. On a Sabbath day the slave had drank somewhatfreely; he was ordered by the tavern keeper, (where his present masterhad left his horse and the negro, ) to stay in the kitchen; the negrowished to be out. In persisting to go out he was knocked down threetimes; and afterwards flogged until another young man and myself ranabout half a mile, having been drawn by the cries of the negro and thesound of the whip. When we came up, a number of men that had beenabout the tavern, were whipping him, and at intervals would ask him ifhe would take off his clothes. At seeing them drive down the stakesfor a regular flogging he yielded, and took them off. They thenflogged him until satisfied. On the next morning I saw him, and hispantaloons were all in a gore of blood. 

"During my stay in Jefferson county, Philip O. Hughes was out one daywith his gun--he saw a negro at some distance, with a club in one handand an ear of corn in the other--Hughes stepped behind a tree, andwaited his approach; he supposed the negro to be a runaway, who hadescaped about nine months before from his master, living not very fardistant. The negro discovered Hughes before he came up, and started torun; he refusing to stop, Hughes fired, and shot him through the arm. Through loss of blood the negro was soon taken and put in jail. I sawhis wound twice dressed, and heard Hughes make the above statement. 

"When in Jefferson county I boarded six weeks in Fayette, the countytown, with a tavern keeper named James Truly. He had a slave namedLucy, who occupied the station of chamber maid and table waiter. Oneday, just after dinner Mrs. Truly took Lucy and bound her arms round apine sapling behind the house, and commenced flogging her with ariding-whip; and when tired would take her chair and rest. Shecontinued thus alternately flogging and resting, for at least an hourand a half. I afterwards learned from the bar-keeper, and others, thatthe woman's offence was that she had bought two candles to set on thetable the evening before, not knowing there were yet some in the box. I did nor see the act of flogging above related; but it was commencedbefore I left the house after dinner, and my work not being more thantwenty rods from the house, I distinctly heard the cries of the womanall the time, and the manner of tying I had from those who did see it. 

"While I boarded at Truly's, an overseer shot a negro about two milesnorthwest of Fayette, belonging to a man named Hinds Stuart. I heardStuart himself state the particulars. It appeared that the negro'swife fell under the overseer's displeasure, and he went to whip her. The negro said she should not be whipped. The overseer then let hergo, and ordered him to be seized. The negro, having been a driver, rolled the lash of his whip round his hand, and said he would not bewhipped at that time. The overseer repeated his orders. The negro tookup a hoe, and none dared to take hold of him. The overseer then wentto his coat, that he had laid off to whip the negro's wife, and tookout his pistol and shot him dead. His master ordered him to be buriedin a hole without a coffin. Stuart stated that he would not have takentwo thousand dollars for him. No punishment was inflicted on theoverseer. 

ELEAZAR POWELL, Jr. "

TESTIMONY ON THE AUTHORITY OF REV. WM. SCALES, LYNDON, VT

The following is an extract of a letter from two professionalgentlemen and their wives, who have lived for some years in a smallvillage in one of the slave states. They are all persons of thehighest respectability, and are well known in at least one of the NewEngland states. Their names are with the Executive Committee of theAmerican Anti-Slavery Society; but as the individuals would doubtlessbe murdered by the slaveholders, if they were published, the Committeefeel sacredly bound to withhold them. The letter was addressed to arespected clergyman in New England. The writers say:

"A man near us owned a valuable slave--his best--most faithful servant. In a gust of passion, he struck him dead with a lever, or stick ofwood. 

"During the years '36 and '37, the following transpired. A slave inour neighborhood ran away and went to a place about thirty milesdistant. There he was found by his pursuers on horseback, andcompelled by the whip to run the distance of thirty miles. It was anexceedingly hot day--and within a few hours after he arrived at theend of his journey the slave was dead. 

"Another slave ran away, but concluded to return. He had proceededsome distance on his return, when he was met by a company of two orthree drivers who raced, whipped and abused him until he fell down andexpired. This took place on the Sabbath. " The writer after speaking ofanother murder of a slave in the neighborhood, without giving thecircumstances, say--"There is a powerful New England influence at----" the village where they reside--"We may therefore suppose thatthere would he as little of barbarian cruelty practiced there as anywhere;--at least we might suppose that the average amount of crueltyin that vicinity would be sufficiently favorable to the side ofslavery. --Describe a circle, the centre of which shall be--, theresidence of the writers, and the radius fifteen miles, and in aboutone year three, and I think four slaves have been _murdered_, withinthat circle, under circumstances of horrid cruelty. --What must havebeen the amount of murder in the whole slave territory? The wholesouth is rife with the crime of separating husbands and wives, parentsand children. "

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH IDE, ESQ. 

Mr. IDE is a respected member of the Baptist Church in Sheffield, Caledonia county, Vt. ; and recently the Postmaster in that town. Hespent a few months at the south in the years 1837 and 8. In a letterto the Rev. Wm. Scales of Lyndon, Vt. Written a few weeks since, Mr. Ide writes as follows. 

"In answering the proposed inquiries, I will say first, that althoughthere are various other modes resorted to, whipping with the cowskinis the usual mode of inflicting punishment on the poor slave. I havenever actually witnessed a whipping scene, for they are usually takeninto some back place for that purpose; but I have often heard theirgroans and screams while writhing under the lash; and have seen theblood flow from their torn and lacerated skins after the vengeance ofthe inhuman master or mistress had been glutted. You ask if the womanwhere I boarded whipped a slave to death. I can give you theparticulars of the transaction as they were related to me. Myinformant was a gentleman--a member of the Presbyterian church inMassachusetts--who the winter before boarded where I did. He said thatMrs. T---- had a female slave whom she used to whip unmercifully, and onone occasion, she whipped her as long as she had strength, and afterthe poor creature was suffered to go, she crawled off into a cellar. As she did not immediately return, search was made, and she was founddead in the cellar, and the horrid deed was kept a secret in thefamily, and it was reported that she died of sickness. This wretch atthe same time was a member of a Presbyterian church. Towards herslaves she was certainly the most cruel wretch of any woman with whomI was ever acquainted--yet she was nothing more than a slaveholder. She would deplore slavery as much as I did, and often told me she wasmuch of an abolitionist as I was. She was constant in the declarationthat her kind treatment to her slaves was proverbial. Thought I, thenthe Lord have mercy on the rest. She has often told me of the crueltreatment of the slaves on a plantation adjoining her father's in thelow country of South Carolina. She says she has often seen them drivento the necessity of eating frogs and lizards to sustain life. As tothe mode of living generally, my information is rather limited, beingwith few exceptions confined to the different families where I haveboarded. My stopping places at the south have mostly been in cities. In them the slaves are better fed and clothed than on plantations. Thehouse servants are fed on what the families leave. But they are keptshort, and I think are oftener whipped for stealing something to eatthan any other crime. On plantations their food is principallyhommony, as the southerners call it. It is simply cracked corn boiled. This probably constitutes seven-eights of their living. Thehouse-servants in cities are generally decently clothed, and somefavorite ones are richly dressed, but those on the plantations, especially in their dress, if it can be called dress, exhibit the mosthaggard and squalid appearance. I have frequently seen those of bothsexes more than two-thirds naked. I have seen from forty to sixty, male and female, at work in a field, many of both sexes with theirbodies entirely naked--who did not exhibit signs of shame more thancattle. As I did not go among them much on the plantations, I havehad but few opportunities for examining the backs of slaves--but havefrequently passed where they were at work, and been occasionallypresent with them, and in almost every case there were marks ofviolence on some parts of them--every age, sex and condition beingliable to the whip. A son of the gentleman with whom I boarded, ayoung man about twenty-one years of age, had a plantation and eight orten slaves. He used to boast almost every night of whipping some ofthem. One day he related to me a case of whipping an old negro--Ishould judge sixty years of age. He said he called him up to flog himfor some real or supposed offence, and the poor old man, being pious, asked the privilege of praying before he received his punishment. Hesaid he granted him the favor, and to use his own expression, 'The oldnigger knelt down and prayed for me, and then got up and took hiswhipping. ' In relation to negro huts, I will say that planters usuallyown large tracts of land. They have extensive clearings and abeautiful mansion house--and generally some forty or fifty rods fromthe dwelling are situated the negro cabins, or huts, built of logs inthe rudest manner. Some consist of poles rolled up together andcovered with mud or clay--many of them not as comfortable as northernpig-sties. "

TESTIMONY OF REV. PHINEAS SMITH

MR. SMITH is now pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Centreville, Allegany county, N. Y. He has recently returned from a residence in theslave states, and the American slave holding settlements in Texas. Thefollowing is an extract of a letter lately received from him. 

"You inquire respecting instances of cruelty that have come within myknowledge. I reply. Avarice and cruelty constitute the very gist ofthe whole slave system. Many of the enormities committed upon theplantations will not be described till God brings to light the hiddenthings of darkness, then the tears and groans and blood of innocentmen, women and children will be revealed, and the oppressor's spiritmust confront that of his victim. 

"I will relate a case of _torture_ which occurred on the Brassos whileI resided a few miles distant upon the Chocolate Bayou. The caseshould be remembered as a true illustration of the nature of slavery, as it exists at the south. The facts are these. An overseer by thename of Alexander, notorious for his cruelty, was found dead in thetimbered lands of the Brassos. It was supposed that he was murdered, but who perpetrated the act was unknown. Two black men were howeverseized, taken into the Prairie and put to the torture. A physician bythe name of Parrott from Tennessee, and another from New England bythe name of Anson Jones, were present on this occasion. The lattergentleman is now the Texan minister plenipotentiary to the UnitedStates, and resides at Washington. The unfortunate slaves beingstripped, and all things arranged, the torture commenced by whippingupon their bare backs. Six athletic men were employed in this scene ofinhumanity, the names of some of whom I well remember. There was oneof the name of Brown, and one or two of the name of Patton. Those sixexecutioners were successively employed in cutting up the bodies ofthese defenceless slaves, who persisted to the last in the avowal oftheir innocence. The bloody whip was however kept in motion tillsavage barbarity itself was glutted. When this was accomplished, thebleeding victims were re-conveyed to the inclosure of the mansionhouse where they were deposited for a few moments. '_The dying groanshowever incommoding the ladies, they were taken to a back shed whereone of them soon expired_. '[13] The life of the other slave was for atime despaired of, but after hanging over the grave for months, he atlength so far recovered as to walk about and labor at light work. These facts _cannot be controverted_. They were disclosed under thesolemnity of an oath, at Columbia, in a court of justice. I waspresent, and shall never forget them. The testimony of Drs. Parrottand Jones was most appalling. I seem to hear the death-groans of thatmurdered man. His cries for mercy and protestations of innocence fellupon adamantine hearts. The facts above stated, and others in relationto this scene of cruelty came to light in the following manner. Themaster of the murdered man commenced legal process against the actorsin this tragedy for the _recovery of the value of the chattel_, as onewould institute a suit for a horse or an ox that had been unlawfullykilled. It was a suit for the recovery of _damages_ merely. No_indictment_ was even dreamed of. Among the witnesses brought upon thestand in the progress of this cause were the physicians, Parrott andJones above named. The part which they were called to act in thisaffair was, it is said, to examine the pulse of the victims during theprocess of _torture_. But they were mistaken as to the quantum oftorture which a human being can undergo and not die under it. Can itbe believed that one of these physicians was born and educated in theland of the pilgrims? Yes, in my own native New England. It is evenso! The stone-like apathy manifested at the trial of the above cause, and the screams and the death-groans of an innocent man, as developedby the testimony of the witnesses, can never be obliterated from mymemory. They form an era in my life, a point to which I look back withhorror. 

[Footnote 13: The words of Dr. Parrott, a witness on the trial hereafterreferred to. ]

"Another case of cruelty occurred on the San Bernard near ChancePrairie, where I resided for some time. The facts were these. A slaveman fled from his master, (Mr. Sweeny) and being closely _pursued_ bythe overseer and a son of the owner, he stepped a few yards in theBernard and placed himself upon a root, from which there was nopossibility of his escape, for he could not swim. In this situation hewas fired upon with a blunderbuss loaded heavily with ball and grapeshot. The overseer who shot the gun was at a distance of a few feetonly. The charge entered the body of the negro near the groin. He wasconveyed to the plantation, lingered in inexpressible agony a few daysand expired. A physician was called, but medical and surgical skillwas unavailing. No notice whatever was taken of this murder by thepublic authorities, and the murderer was not discharged from theservice of his employer. 

"When slaves flee, as they not unfrequently do, to the timbered landsof Texas, they are hunted with guns and dogs. 

"The sufferings of the slave not unfrequently drive him to despair andsuicide. At a plantation on the San Bernard, where there were but fiveslaves, two during the same year committed suicide by drowning. "

TESTIMONY OF PHILEMON BLISS, ESQ. 

Mr. Bliss is a highly respectable member of the bar, in Elyria, LorainCo. Ohio, and member of the Presbyterian church, in that place. Heresided in Florida, during the years 1834 and 5. 

The following extracts are from letters, written by Mr. B. In 1835, while residing on a plantation near Tallahassee, and published soonafter in the Ohio Atlas; also from letters written in 1836 andpublished in the New York Evangelist. 

"In speaking of slavery as it is, I hardly know where to begin. Thephysical condition of the slave is far from being accurately known atthe north. Gentlemen _traveling_ in the south can know nothing of it. They must make the south their residence; they must live onplantations, before they can have any opportunity of judging of theslave. I resided in Augustine five months, and had I not made_particular_ inquiries, which most northern visitors very seldom ornever do, I should have left there with the impression that the slaveswere generally very _well_ treated, and were a happy people. Such isthe report of many northern travelers who have no more opportunity ofknowing their real condition than if they had remained at home. Whatconfidence could we place in the reports of the traveler, relative tothe condition of the Irish peasantry, who formed his opinion from theappearance of the waiters at a Dublin hotel, or the household servantsof a country gentleman? And it is not often on plantations even, that_strangers_ can witness the punishment of the slave. I was conversingthe other day with a neighboring planter, upon the brutal treatment ofthe slaves which I had witnessed: he remarked, that had I been withhim I should not have seen this. "When I whip niggers, I take them outof sight and hearing. " Such being the difficulties in the way of astranger's ascertaining the treatment of the slaves, it is not to bewondered at that gentlemen, of undoubted veracity, should givedirectly false statements relative to it. But facts cannot lie, and ingiving these I confine myself to what has come under my own personalobservation. 

"The negroes commence labor by daylight in the morning, and, exceptingthe plowboys, who must feed and rest their horses, do not leave thefield till dark in the evening. There is a good deal of contentionamong planters, who shall make the most cotton to the hand, or, whoshall drive their negroes the hardest; and I have heard bets made andstaked upon the issue of the crops. Col. W. Was boasting of his largecrops, and swore that 'he made for his force, the largest crops in thecountry. ' He was disputed of course. On riding home in company withMr. C. The conversation turned upon Col. W. My companion remarked, that though Col. W. Had the reputation of making a large crop, yet hecould beat him himself, and did do it the last year. I remarked that Iconsidered it no honor to _Col. W_. To drive his slaves to death tomake a large crop. I have heard no more about large crops from himsince. Drivers or overseers usually drive the slaves worse thanmasters. --Their reputation for good overseers depends in a greatmeasure upon the crops they make, and the death of a slave is no lossto them. 

"Of the extent and cruelty of the punishment of the slave, thenorthern public know nothing. From the nature of the case they canknow little, as I have before mentioned. 

"I _have seen_ a woman, a mother, compelled, in the presence of hermaster and mistress, _to hold up her clothes_, and endure the whip ofthe driver on the naked body for more than _twenty minutes_, and whileher cries would have rent the heart of any one, who had not hardenedhimself to human suffering. Her master and mistress were conversingwith apparent indifference. What was her crime? She had a task givenher of sewing which she _must finish_ that day. Late at night shefinished it; but _the stitches were too long_, and she must bewhipped. The same was repeated three or four nights for the sameoffence. _I have seen_ a man tied to a tree, hands and feet, andreceive 305 blows with the paddle[14] on the fleshy parts of the body. Two others received the same kind of punishment at the time, though Idid not count the blows. One received 230 lashes. Their crime wasstealing mutton. I have _frequently_ heard the shrieks of the slaves, male and female, accompanied by the strokes of the paddle or whip, when I have not gone near the scene of horror. I knew not theircrimes, excepting of one woman, which was stealing _four potatoes_ toeat with her bread! The more common number of lashes inflicted wasfifty or eighty; and this I saw not once or twice, but so frequentlythat I can not tell the number of times I have seen it. So frequently, that my own heart was becoming so hardened that I could witness withcomparative indifference, the female writhe under the lash, and hershrieks and cries for mercy ceased to pierce my heart with thatkeenness, or give me that anguish which they first caused. It was notalways that I could learn their crimes; but of those I did learn, themost common was non-performance of tasks. I have seen men strip andreceive from one to three hundred strokes of the whip and paddle. Mystudies and meditations were almost nightly interrupted by the criesof the victims of cruelty and avarice. Tom, a slave of Col. N. Obtained permission of his overseer on Sunday, to visit his son, on aneighboring plantation, belonging in part to his master, but neglectedto take a "pass. " Upon its being demanded by the other overseer, hereplied that he had permission to come, and that his having a mule wassufficient evidence of it, and if he did not consider it as such, hecould take him up. The overseer replied he would take him up; givinghim at the same time a blow on the arm with a stick he held in hishand, sufficient to lame it for some time. The negro collared him, andthrew him; and on the overseer's commanding him to submit to be tiedand whipped, he said he would not be whipped by _him_ but would leaveit to massa J. They came to massa J. 's. I was there. After theoverseer had related the case as above, he was blamed for not shootingor stabbing him at once. --After dinner the negro was tied, and thewhip given to the overseer, and he used it with a severity that wasshocking. I know not how many lashes were given, but from hisshoulders to his heels there was not a spot unridged! and at almostevery stroke the blood flowed. He could not have received less than300, _well laid on_. But his offence was great, almost the greatestknown, laying hands on a _white_ man! Had he struck the overseer, under any provocation, he would have been in some way disfigured, perhaps by the loss of his ears, in addition to a whipping: or hemight have been hung. The most common cause of punishments is, notfinishing tasks. 

[Footnote 14: A piece of oak timber two and a half feet long, flat andwide at one end. ]

"But it would be tedious mentioning further particulars. The negro hasno other inducement to work but the _lash_; and as man never actswithout motive, the lash must be used so long as all other motives arewithheld. Hence corporeal punishment is a necessary part of slavery. 

"Punishments for runaways are usually severe. Once whipping is notsufficient. I have known runaways to be whipped for six or sevennights in succession for one offence. I have known others who, withpinioned hands, and a chain extending from an iron collar on theirneck, to the saddle of their master's horse, have been driven at asmart trot, one or two hundred miles, being compelled to ford watercourses, their drivers, according to their own confession, not abatinga whit in the rapidity of their journey for the case of the slave. Onetied a kettle of sand to his slave to render his journey more arduous. 

"Various are the instruments of torture devised to keep the slave insubjection. The stocks are sometimes used. Sometimes blocks are filledwith pegs and nails, and the slave compelled to stand upon them. 

"While stopping on the plantation of a Mr. C. I saw a whip with aknotted lash lying on the table, and inquired of my companion, who wasalso an acquaintance of Mr. C's, if he used that to whip his negroes?"Oh, " says he, "Mr. C. Is not severe with his hands. He never whipsvery hard. The _knots in the lash are so large_ that he does notusually draw blood in whipping them. "

"It was principally from hearing the conversation of southern men onthe subject, that I judge of the cruelty that is generally practicedtoward slaves. They will deny that slaves are generally ill treated;but ask them if they are not whipped for certain offences, whicheither a freeman would have no temptation to commit, or which wouldnot be an offence in any but a slave, and for non-performance oftasks, they will answer promptly in the affirmative. And frequentlyhave I heard them excuse their cruelty by citing Mr. A. Or Mr. B. Whois a Christian, or Mr. C. A preacher, or Mr. D. From the _north_, who"drives his hands tighter, and whips them harder, than we ever do. "Driving negroes to the utmost extent of their ability, withoccasionally a hundred lashes or more, and a few switchings in thefield if they hang back in the driving seasons, viz: in the hoing andpicking months, is perfectly consistent with good treatment!

"While traveling across the Peninsula in a stage, in company with anorthern gentleman, and southern lady, of great worth and piety, adispute arose respecting the general treatment of slaves, thegentleman contending that their treatment was generally good--'O, no!'interrupted the lady, 'you can know nothing of the treatment theyreceive on the plantations. People here do whip the poor negroes mostcruelly, and many half starve them. You have neither of you hadopportunity to know scarcely anything of the cruelties that arepracticed in this country, ' and more to the same effect. I met withseveral others, besides this lady, who appeared to feel for the sinsof the land, but they are few and scattered, and not usually ofsufficiently stern mould to withstand the popular wave. 

"Masters are not forward to publish their "domestic regulations, " andas neighbors are usually several miles apart, one's observation mustbe limited. Hence the few instances of cruelty which break out can bebut a fraction of what is practised. A planter, a professor ofreligion, in conversation upon the universality of whipping, remarkedthat a planter in G--, who had whipped a great deal, at length gottired of it, and invented the following _excellent_ method ofpunishment, which I saw practised while I was paying him a visit. Thenegro was placed in a sitting position, with his hands made fast abovehis head, and feet in the stocks, so that he could not move any partof the body. 

"The master retired, intending to leave him till morning, but we wereawakened in the night by the groans of the negro, which were sodoleful that we feared he was dying. We went to him, and found himcovered with a cold sweat, and almost gone. He could not have lived anhour longer. Mr. ---- found the 'stocks' such an effective punishment, that it almost superseded the whip. "

"How much do you give your niggers for a task while hoeing cotton, "inquired Mr. C---- of his neighbor Mr. H----. "

H. "I give my men an acre and a quarter, and my women an acre. "[15]

[Footnote 15: Cotton is planted in drills about three feet apart, andis hilled like corn. ]

C. "Well, that is a fair task. Niggers do a heap better if they aredrove pretty tight. "

H. "O yes, I have driven mine into complete subordination. When Ifirst bought them they were discontented and wished me to sell them, but I soon whipped _that_ out of them; and they now work verycontentedly!"

C. "Does Mary keep up with the rest?"

H. "No, she does'nt often finish the task alone, she has to get Sam tohelp her out after he has done his, _to save her a whipping_. There'sno other way but to be severe with them. "

C. "No other, sir, if you favor a nigger you spoil him. "

"The whip is considered as necessary on a plantation as the plough;and its use is almost as common. The negro whip is the commonteamster's whip with a black leather stock, and a short, fine, knottedlash. The paddle is also frequently used, sometimes with holes boredin the flattened end. The ladies (!) in chastising their domesticservants, generally use the cowhide. I have known some use shovel andtongs. It is, however, more common to commit them to the driver to bewhipped. The manner of whipping is as follows: The negro is tied byhis hands, and sometimes feet, to a post or tree, and stripped to theskin. The female slave is not always tied. The number of lashesdepends upon the character for severity of the master or overseer. 

"Another instrument of torture is sometimes used, how extensively Iknow not. The negro, or, in the case which came to my knowledge, thenegress was compelled to stand barefoot upon a block filled with sharppegs and nails for two or three hours. In case of sickness, if themaster or overseer thinks them seriously ill, they are taken care of, but their complaints are usually not much heeded. A physician told methat he was employed by a planter last winter to go to a plantation ofhis in the country, as many of the negroes were sick. Says he--"Ifound them in a most miserable condition. The weather was cold, andthe negroes were barefoot, with hardly enough of _cotton_ clothing tocover their nakedness. Those who had huts to shelter them were obligedto build them nights and Sundays. Many were sick and some had died. Ihad the sick taken to an older plantation of their masters, where theycould be made comfortable, and they recovered. I directed that theyshould not go to work till after sunrise, and should not work in therain till their health became established. But the overseer refusingto permit it, I declined attending on them farther. I was called, 'continued he, 'by the overseer of another plantation to see one of themen. I found him lying by the side of a log in great pain. I asked himhow he did, 'O, ' says he, 'I'm most dead, can live but little longer. 'How long have you been sick? I've felt for more than six weeks asthough I could hardly stir. ' Why didn't you tell your master, you wassick? 'I couldn't see my master, and the overseer always whips us whenwe complain, I could not stand a whipping. ' I did all I could for thepoor fellow, but his _lungs were rotten_. He died in three days fromthe time he left off work. ' The cruelty of that overseer is such thatthe negroes almost tremble at his name. Yet he gets a high salary, forhe makes the largest crop of any other man in the neighborhood, thoughnone but the hardiest negroes can stand it under him. "That man, " saysthe Doctor, "would be hung in my country. " He was a German. "

TESTIMONY OF REV. WILLIAM A. CHAPIN. 

REV. WILLIAM SCALES, of Lyndon, Vermont, has furnished the followingtestimony, under date of Dec. 15, 1838. 

"I send you an extract from a letter that I have just received, whichyou may use _ad libitum_. The letter is from Rev. Wm. A. Chapin, Greensborough, Vermont. To one who is acquainted with Mr. C. Hisopinion and statements must carry conviction even to the mostobstinate and incredulous. He observes, 'I resided, as a teacher, nearly two years in the family of Carroll Webb, Esq. , of Hampstead, New Kent co. About twenty miles from Richmond, Virginia. Mr. Webb hadthree or four plantations, and was considered one of the twowealthiest men in the county: it was supposed he owned about twohundred slaves. He was a member of the Presbyterian Church, and waselected an elder while I was with him. He was a native of Virginia, but a graduate of a New-England college. 

"The slaves were called in the morning before daylight, I believe atall seasons of the year, that they might prepare their food, and beready to go to work as soon as it was light enough to see. I know thatat the season of husking corn, October and November, they were usuallycompelled to work late--till 12 or 1 o'clock at night. I know thisfact because they accompanied their work with a loud singing of theirown sort. I usually retired to rest between 11 and 12 o'clock, andgenerally heard them at their work as long as I was awake. The slaveslived in wretched log cabins, of one room each, without floors orwindows. I believe the slaves sometimes suffer for want of food. Oneevening, as I was sitting in the parlor with Mr. W. One of the mostresolute of the slaves came to the door, and said, "Master, I amwilling to work for you, but I want something to eat. " The only replywas, "Clear yourself. " I learned that the slaves had been without foodall day, because the man who was sent to mill could not obtain hisgrinding. He went again the next day, and obtained his grist, and theslaves had no food till he returned. He had to go about fivemiles. [16]

[Footnote 16: To this, Rev. Mr. Scales adds, "In familiar language, andin more detail, as I have learned it in conversation with Mr. Chapin, the fact is as follows:--

"Mr. W. Kept, what he called a 'boy, ' i. E. A _man_, to go to mill. Itwas his custom not to give his slaves anything to eat while he wasgone to mill--let him have been gone longer or shorter--for thisreason, if he was lazy, and delayed, the slaves would become hungry:hence indignant, and abuse him--this was his punishment. On thatoccasion he went to mill in the morning. The slaves came up at noon, and returned to work without food. At night, after having worked hardall day, without food, went to bed without supper. About 10 o'clockthe next day, they came up in a company, to their master's door, (thatmaster an elder in the church), and deputed one more resolute than therest to address him. This he did in the most respectful tones andterms. "We are willing to work for you, master, but we can't workwithout food; we want something to eat. " "Clear yourself, " was theanswer. The slaves retired; and in the morning were driven away towork without food. At noon, I think, or somewhat after, they werefed. "]

"I know the slaves were sometimes severely whipped. I saw the backs ofseveral which had numerous scars, evidently caused by long and deeplacerations of the whip; and I have good reason to believe that theslaves were generally in that condition; for I never saw the back ofone exposed that was not thus marked, --and from their tattered andscanty clothing their backs were often exposed. "

TESTIMONY OF MESSRS. T. D. M. AND F. C. MACY. 

This testimony is communicated in a letter from Mr. Cyrus Pierce, arespectable and well known citizen of Nantucket, Mass. Of thewitnesses, Messrs. T. D. M. And F. C. Macy, Mr. Pierce says, "They areboth inhabitants of this island, and have resided at the south; theyare both worthy men, for whose integrity and intelligence I can vouchunqualifiedly; the former has furnished me with the followingstatement. 

"During the winter of 1832-3, I resided on the island of St. Simon, Glynn county, Georgia. There are several extensive cotton plantationson the island. The overseer of the plantation on that part of theisland where I resided was a Georgian--a man of stern character, andat times _cruelly abusive_ to his slaves. I have often been witness ofthe _abuse_ of his power. In South Carolina and Georgia, on the lowlands, the cultivation is chiefly of rice. The land where it is raisedis often inundated, and the labor of preparing it, and raising a crop, is very arduous. Men and women are in the field from earliest dawn todark--often _without hats_, and up to their arm-pits in mud and water. At St. Simon's, cotton was the staple article. Ocra, the driver, usually waited on the overseer to receive orders for the succeedingday. If any slave was insolent, or negligent, the driver wasauthorized to punish him with the whip, with as many blows as themagnitude of the crime justified. He was frequently cautioned, uponthe peril of his skin, to see that all the negroes were off to thefield in the morning. 'Ocra, ' said the overseer, one evening, to thedriver, 'if any pretend to be sick, send me word--allow no lazy wenchor fellow to skulk in the negro house. ' Next morning, a few minutesafter the departure of the hands to the field, Ocra was seen hasteningto the house of the overseer. He was soon in his presence. 'Well, Ocra, what now?' 'Nothing, sir, only Rachel says she sick--can't go to defield to-day. ' 'Ah, sick, is she? I'll see to her; you may be off. Sheshall see if I am longer to be fooled with in this way. Here, Christmas, mix these salts--bring them to me at the negro house. ' Andseizing his whip, he made off to the negro settlement. Having a strongdesire to see what would be the result, I followed him. As Iapproached the negro house, I heard high words. Rachel was stating hercomplaint--children were crying from fright--and the overseerthreatening. Rachel. --'I can't work to-day--I'm sick!' Overseer. --'Butyou shall work, if you die for it. Here, take these salts. Now moveoff--quick--let me see your face again before night, and, by G--d, you shall smart for it. Be off--no begging--not a word;'--and hedragged her from the house, and followed her 20 or 30 rods, threatening. The woman did not reach the field. Overcome by theexertion of walking, and by agitation, she sunk down exhausted by theroad side--was taken up, and carried back to the house, where an_abortion_ occurred, and her life was greatly jeoparded. 

"It was _no uncommon_ sight to see a whole family, father, mother, andfrom two to five children, collected together around their piggin ofhommony, or pail of potatoes, watched by the overseer. One meal wasalways eaten in the field. No time was allowed for relaxation. 

"It was not unusual for a child of five or six years to perform theoffice of nurse--because the mother worked in a remote part of thefield, and was not allowed to leave her employment to take care of herinfant. Want of proper nutriment induces sickness of the worst type. 

"No matter what the nature of the service, a peck of corn, dealt outon Sunday, must supply the demands of nature for a week. 

"The Sabbath, on a southern plantation, is a mere nominal holiday. Theslaves are liable to be called upon at all times, by those who haveauthority over them. 

"When it rained, the slaves were allowed to collect under a tree untilthe shower had passed. Seldom, on a week day, were they permitted togo to their huts during rain; and even had this privilege beengranted, many of those miserable habitations were in so dilapidated acondition, that they would afford little or no protection. Negro hutsare built of logs, covered with boards or thatch, having _noflooring_, and but one apartment, serving all the purposes ofsleeping, cooking, &c. Some are furnished with a temporary loft. Ihave seen a whole family herded together in a loft ten feet by twelve. In cold weather, they gather around the fire, spread their blankets_on the ground_, and keep as comfortable as they can. Their supply ofclothing is scanty--each slave being allowed a Holland coat andpantaloons, of the coarsest manufacture, and one pair of cowhideshoes. The women, enough of the same kind of cloth for one frock. Theyhave also one pair of shoes. Shoes are given to the slaves in thewinter only. In summer, their clothing is composed of osnaburgs. Slaves on different plantations are not allowed without a writtenpermission, to visit their fellow bondsmen, under penalty of severechastisement. I witnessed the chastisement of a young male slave, whowas found lurking about the plantation, and could give no otheraccount of himself, than that he wanted to visit some of hisacquaintance. Fifty lashes was the penalty for this offence. I couldnot endure the dreadful shrieks of the tortured slave, and rushed awayfront the scene. "

The remainder of this testimony is furnished by Mr. F. C. Macy. 

"I went to Savannah in 1820. Sailing up the river, I had my first viewof slavery. A large number of men and women, with _a piece of board ontheir heads, carrying mud_, for the purpose of dyking, near the river. After tarrying a while in Savannah, I went down to the sea islands ofDe Fuskee and Hilton Head, where I spent six months. Negro houses aresmall, built of rough materials, _and no floor_. Their clothing, (onesuit, ) coarse; which they received on Christmas day. Their food wasthree pecks of potatoes per week, in the potatoe season, and one peckof corn the remainder of the year. The slaves carried with them intothe field their meal, and a gourd of water. They cooked their hommonyin the field, and ate it with a wooden paddle. Their treatment waslittle better than that of brutes. _Whipping_ was nearly an every-daypractice. On Mr. M----'s plantation, at the island De Fuskee, I saw anold man whipped; he was about 60. He had no clothing on, except ashirt. The man that inflicted the blows was Flim, a tall and stoutman. The whipping was _very severe_. I inquired into the cause. Somevegetables had been stolen from his master's garden, of which he couldgive no account. I saw several women whipped, some of whom were invery _delicate_ circumstances. The case of one I will relate. She hadbeen purchased in Charleston, and separated from her husband. On herpassage to Savannah, or rather to the island, she was delivered of achild; and in about three weeks after this, she appeared to bederanged. She would leave her work, go into the woods, and sing. Hermaster sent for her, and ordered the driver to whip her. I was nearenough to hear the strokes. 

"I have known negro boys, partly by persuasion, and partly by force, made to strip off their clothing and fight for _the amusement of theirmasters_. They would fight until both got to crying. 

"One of the planters told me that his boat had been used withoutpermission. A number of his negroes were called up, and put in abuilding that was lathed and shingled. The covering could be easilyremoved from the inside. He called one out for examination. Whileexamining this one, he discovered another negro, coming out of theroof. He ordered him back: he obeyed. In a few moments he attempted itagain. The master took deliberate aim at his head, but his gun missedfire. He told me he should probably have killed him, had his gun goneoff. The negro jumped and run. The master took aim again, and fired;but he was so far distant, that he received only a few shots in thecalf of his leg. After several days he returned, and received a severewhipping. 

"Mr. B----, planter at Hilton Head, freely confessed, that he kept oneof his slaves as a mistress. She slept in the same room with him. This, I think, is a very common practice. "

TESTIMONY OF A CLERGYMAN. 

The following letter was written to Mr. ARTHUR TAPPAN, of New York, inthe summer of 1833. As the name of the writer cannot be published withsafety to himself, it is withheld. 

The following testimonials, from Mr. TAPPAN, Professor WRIGHT, andTHOMAS RITTER, M. D. Of New York, establish the trust-worthiness andhigh respectability of the writer. 

"I received the following letters from the south during the year 1833. They were written by a gentleman who had then resided some years inthe slave states. Not being at liberty to give the writer's name, Icheerfully certify that he is a gentleman of established character, agraduate of Yale College, and a respected minister of the gospel. 

"ARTHUR TAPPAN. "

"My acquaintance with the writer of the following letter commenced, Ibelieve, in 1823, from which time we were fellow students in YaleCollege till 1826. I have occasionally seen him since. His character, so far as it has come within my knowledge, has been that of an uprightand remarkably _candid_ man. I place great confidence both in hishabits of careful and unprejudiced observation and his veracity. 

"E. WRIGHT, jun. New York, April 13, 1839. "

"I have been acquainted with the writer of the following letter abouttwelve years, and know him to be a gentleman of high respectability, integrity, and piety. We were fellow students in Yale College, and myopportunities for judging of his character, both at that time andsince our graduation, have been such, that I feel myself fullywarranted in making the above unequivocal declaration. 

"THOMAS RITTER. 104, Cherry-street, New York. "

"NATCHEZ, 1833. 

"It has been almost four years since I came to the south-west; andalthough I have been told, from month to month, that I should soonwear off my northern prejudices, and probably have slaves of my own, yet my judgment in regard to oppression, or my prejudices, if they arepleased so to call them, remain with me still. I judge still fromthose principles which were fixed in my mind at the north; and aresidence at the south has not enabled me so to pervert truth, as tomake injustice appear justice. 

"I have studied the state of things here, now for years, coolly anddeliberately, with the eye of an uninterested looker on; and hence Imay not be altogether unprepared to state to you some facts, and todraw conclusions from them. 

"Permit me then to relate what I have seen; and do not imagine thatthese are all exceptions to the general treatment, but rather believethat thousands of cruelties are practised in this Christian land, every year, which no eye that ever shed a tear of pity could lookupon. 

"Soon after my arrival I made an excursion into the country, to thedistance of some twenty miles. And as I was passing by a cotton field, where about fifty negroes were at work, I was inclined to stop by theroad side to view a scene which was then new to me. While I was, in mymind, comparing this mode of labor with that of my own native place, Iheard the driver, with a rough oath, order one that was near him, whoseemed to be laboring to the extent of his power, to "lie down. " In amoment he was obeyed; and he commenced whipping the offender upon hisnaked back, and continued, to the amount of about twenty lashes, witha heavy raw-hide whip, the crack of which might have been heard morethan half a mile. Nor did the females escape; for although I stoppedscarcely fifteen minutes, no less than three were whipped in the samemanner, and that so severely, I was strongly inclined to interfere. 

"You may be assured, sir, that I remained not unmoved: I could nolonger look on such cruelty, but turned away and rode on, while theechoes of the lash were reverberating in the woods around me. Suchscenes have long since become familiar to me. But then the full effectwas not lost; and I shall never forget, to my latest day, the mingledfeelings of pity, horror, and indignation that took possession of mymind. I involuntarily exclaimed, O God of my fathers, how dost thoupermit such things to defile our land! Be merciful to us! and visit usnot in justice, for all our iniquities and the iniquities of ourfathers!

"As I passed on I soon found that I had escaped from one horriblescene only to witness another. A planter with whom I was wellacquainted, had caught a negro without a pass. And at the moment I waspassing by, he was in the act of fastening his feet and hands to thetrees, having previously made him take off all his clothing except histrowsers. When he had sufficiently secured this poor creature, he beathim for several minutes with a green switch more than six feet long;while he was writhing with anguish, endeavoring in vain to break thecords with which he was bound, and incessantly crying out, "Lord, master! do pardon me this time! do, master, have mercy!" Theseexpressions have recurred to me a thousand times since; and althoughthey came from one that is not considered among the sons of men, yet Ithink they are well worthy of remembrance, as they might lead a wiseman to consider whether such shall receive mercy from the righteousJudge, as never showed mercy to their fellow men. 

"At length I arrived at the dwelling of a planter of my acquaintance, with whom I passed the night. At about eight o'clock in the evening Iheard the barking of several dogs, mingled with the most agonizingcries that I ever heard from any human being. Soon after the gentlemancame in, and began to apologize, by saying that two of his runawayslaves had just been brought home; and as he had previously triedevery species of punishment upon them without effect, he knew not whatelse to add, except to set his blood hounds upon them. 'And, 'continued he, 'one of them has been so badly bitten that he has beentrying to die. I am only sorry that he did not; for then I should nothave been further troubled with him. If he lives I intend to send himto Natchez or to New Orleans, to work with the ball and chain. '

"From this last remark I understood that private individuals have theright of thus subjecting their unmanageable slaves. I have since seennumbers of these 'ball and chain' men, both in Natchez and NewOrleans, but I do not know whether there were any among them exceptthe state convicts. 

"As the summer was drawing towards a close, and the yellow feverbeginning to prevail in town, I went to reside some months in thecountry. This was the cotton picking season, during which, theplanters say, there is a greater necessity for flogging than at anyother time. And I can assure you, that as I have sat in my windownight after night, while the cotton was being weighed, I have heardthe crack of the whip, without much intermission, for a whole hour, from no less than three plantations, some of which were a full miledistant. 

"I found that the slaves were kept in the field from daylight untildark; and then, if they had not gathered what the master or overseerthought sufficient, they were subjected to the lash. 

"Many by such treatment are induced to run away and take up theirlodging in the woods. I do not say that all who run away are thusclosely pressed, but I do know that many are; and I have known no lessthan a dozen desert at a time from the same plantation, in consequenceof the overseer's forcing them to work to the extent of their power, and then whipping them for not having done more. 

"But suppose that they run away--what is to become of them in theforest? If they cannot steal they must perish of hunger--if the nightsare cold, their feet will be frozen; for if they make a fire they maybe discovered, and be shot at. If they attempt to leave the country, their chance of success is about nothing. They must return, bewhipped--if old offenders, wear the collar, perhaps be branded, andfare worse than before. 

"Do you believe it, sir, not six months since, I saw a number of my_Christian_ neighbors packing up provisions, as I supposed for a deerhunt; but as I was about offering myself to the party, I learned thattheir powder and balls were destined to a very different purpose: itwas, in short, the design of the party to bring home a number ofrunaway slaves, or to shoot them if they should not be able to getpossession of them in any other way. 

"You will ask, Is not this murder? Call it, sir, by what name youplease, such are the facts:--many are shot every year, and that toowhile the masters say they treat their slaves well. 

"But let me turn your attention to another species of cruelty. About ayear since I knew a certain slave who had deserted his master, to becaught, and for the first time fastened to the stocks. In those samestocks, from which at midnight I have heard cries of distress, whilethe master slept, and was dreaming, perhaps, of drinking wine and ofdiscussing the price of cotton. On the next morning he was chained inan immovable posture, and branded in both cheeks with red hot stampsof iron. Such are the tender mercies of men who love wealth, and aredetermined to obtain it at any price. 

"Suffer me to add another to the list of enormities, and I will notoffend you with more. 

"There was, some time since, brought to trial in this town a planterresiding about fifteen miles distant, for whipping his slave to death. You will suppose, of course, that he was punished. No, sir, he wasacquitted, although there could be no doubt of the fact. I heard thetale of murder from a man who was acquainted with all thecircumstances. 'I was, ' said he, 'passing along the road near theburying-ground of the plantation, about nine o'clock at night, when Isaw several lights gleaming through the woods; and as I approached, inorder to see what was doing, I beheld the coroner of Natchez, with anumber of men, standing around the body of a young female, which bythe torches seemed almost perfectly white. On inquiry I learned thatthe master had so unmercifully beaten this girl that she died underthe operation: and that also he had so severely punished another ofhis slaves that he was but just alive. '"

We here rest the case for the present, so far as respects thepresentation of facts showing the condition of the slaves, and proceedto consider the main objections which are usually employed to weakensuch testimony, or wholly to set it aside. But before we enter uponthe examination of specific objections, and introductory to them, weremark, --

1. That the system of slavery must be a system of horrible cruelty, follows of necessity, from the fact that two millions seven hundredthousand human beings _are held by force_, and used as articles ofproperty. Nothing but a heavy yoke, and an iron one, could possiblykeep so many necks in the dust. That must be a constant and mightypressure which holds so still such a vast army; nothing could do itbut the daily experience of severities, and the ceaseless dread andcertainty of the most terrible inflictions if they should dare to tossin their chains. 

2. Were there nothing else to prove it a system of monstrous cruelty, the fact that FEAR is the only motive with which the slave is pliedduring his whole existence, would be sufficient to brand it withexecration as the grand tormentor of man. The slave's _susceptibilityof pain_ is the sole fulcrum on which slavery works the lever thatmoves him. In this it plants all its stings; here it sinks its hotirons; cuts its deep gashes; flings its burning embers, and dashes itsboiling brine and liquid fire: into this it strikes its cold fleshhooks, grappling irons, and instruments of nameless torture; and by itdrags him shrieking to the end of his pilgrimage. The fact that themaster inflicts pain upon the slave not merely as an _end_ to gratifypassion, but constantly as a _means_ of extorting labor, is enough ofitself to show that the system of slavery is unmixed cruelty. 

3. That the slaves must suffer frequent and terrible inflictions, follows inevitably from the _character of those who direct theirlabor_. Whatever may be the character of the slaveholders themselves, all agree that the overseers are, as a class, most abandoned, brutal, and desperate men. This is so well known and believed that anytestimony to prove it seems needless. The testimony of Mr. WIRT, lateAttorney General of the United States, a Virginian and a slaveholder, is as follows. In his life of Patrick Henry, p. 36, speaking of thedifferent classes of society in Virginia, he says, --"Last and lowest afeculum, of beings called 'overseers'--_the most abject, degraded, unprincipled race_, always cap in hand to the dons who employ them, and furnishing materials for the exercise of their _pride, insolence, and spirit of domination_. "

Rev. PHINEAS SMITH, of Centreville, New-York, who has resided someyears at the south, says of overseers--

"It need hardly be added that overseers are in general ignorant, _unprincipled and cruel_, and in such low repute that they are notpermitted to come to the tables of their employers; yet they have theconstant control of all the human cattle that belong to the master. 

"These men are continually advancing from their low station to thehigher one of masters. These changes bring into the possession ofpower a class of men of whose mental and moral qualities I havealready spoken. "

Rev. HORACE MOULTON, Marlboro', Massachusetts, who lived in Georgiaseveral years, says of them, --

"The overseers are _generally loose in their morals_; it is the objectof masters to employ those whom they think will get the most work outof their hands, --hence those who _whip and torment the slaves themost_ are in many instances called the best overseers. The mastersthink those whom the slaves fear the most are the best. Quite aportion of the masters employ their own slaves as overseers, or ratherthey are called drivers; these are more subject to the will of themasters than the white overseers are; some of them are as lordly as anAustrian prince, and sometimes more cruel even than the whites. "

That the overseers are, as a body, sensual, brutal, and violent men is_proverbial_. The tender mercies of such men _must be cruel_. 

4. The _ownership_ of human beings necessarily presupposes an utterdisregard of their happiness. He who assumes it monopolizes their_whole capital_, leaves them no stock on which to trade, and out ofwhich to _make_ happiness. Whatever is the master's gain is theslave's loss, a loss wrested from him by the master, for the expresspurpose of making it _his own gain_; this is the master's constantemployment--forcing the slave to toil--violently wringing from himall he has and all he gets, and using it as his own;--like the vilebird that never builds its nest from materials of its own gathering, but either drives other birds from theirs and takes possession ofthem, or tears them in pieces to get the means of constructing theirown. This daily practice of forcibly robbing others, and habituallyliving on the plunder, cannot but beget in the mind the _habit_ ofregarding the interests and happiness of those whom it robs, as of nosort of consequence in comparison with its own; consequently wheneverthose interests and this happiness are in the way of its owngratification, they will be sacrificed without scruple. He who cannotsee this would be unable to _feel_ it, if it were seen. 

OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 

Objection I--"SUCH CRUELTIES ARE INCREDIBLE. "

The enormities inflicted by slaveholders upon their slaves will neverbe discredited except by those who overlook the simple fact, that hewho holds human beings as his bona fide property, _regards_ them asproperty, and not as _persons;_ this is his permanent state of mindtoward them. He does not contemplate slaves as human beings, consequently does not _treat_ them as such; and with entireindifference sees them suffer privations and writhe under blows, which, if inflicted upon whites, would fill him with horror andindignation. He regards that as good treatment of slaves, which wouldseem to him insufferable abuse if practiced upon others; and woulddenounce that as a monstrous outrage and horrible cruelty, ifperpretated upon white men and women, which he sees every day metedout to black slaves, without perhaps ever thinking it cruel. Accustomed all his life to regard them rather as domestic animals, tohear them stormed at, and to see them cuffed and caned; and beinghimself in the constant habit of treating them thus, such practiceshave become to him a mere matter of course, and make no impression onhis mind. True, it is incredible that men should treat as _chattels_those whom they truly regard as _human beings;_ but that they shouldtreat as chattels and working animals those whom they _regard_ assuch, is no marvel. The common treatment of dogs, when they are in theway, is to kick them out of it; we see them every day kicked off thesidewalks, and out of shops, and on Sabbaths out of churches, --yet, asthey are but _dogs_, these do not strike us as outrages; yet, if wewere to see men, women, and children--our neighbors and friends, kicked out of stores by merchants, or out of churches by the deaconsand sexton, we should call the perpetrators inhuman wretches. 

We have said that slaveholders regard their slaves not as humanbeings, but as mere working animals, or merchandise. The wholevocabulary of slaveholders, their laws, their usages, and their entiretreatment of their slaves fully establish this. The same terms areapplied to slaves that are given to cattle. They are called "stock. "So when the children of slaves are spoken of prospectively, they arecalled their "increase;" the same term that is applied to flocks andherds. So the female slaves that are mothers, are called "breeders"till past child bearing; and often the same terms are applied to thedifferent sexes that are applied to the males and females amongcattle. Those who compel the labor of slaves and cattle have the sameappellation, "drivers:" the names which they call them are the sameand similar to those given to their horses and oxen. The laws of slavestates make them property, equally with goats and swine; they arelevied upon for debt in the same way; they are included in the sameadvertisements of public sales with cattle, swine, and asses; whenmoved from one part of the country to another, they are herded indroves like cattle, and like them urged on by drivers; their labor iscompelled in the same way. They are bought and sold, and separatedlike cattle: when exposed for sale, their good qualities are describedas jockies show off the good points of their horses; their strength, activity, skill, power of endurance, &c. Are lauded, --and those whobid upon them examine their persons, just as purchasers inspect horsesand oxen; they open their mouths to see if their teeth are sound;strip their backs to see if they are badly scarred, and handle theirlimbs and muscles to see if they are firmly knit. Like horses, theyare warranted to be "sound, " or to be returned to the owner if"unsound. " A father gives his son a horse and a _slave_; by his willhe distributes among them his race-horses, hounds, game-cocks, and_slaves_. We leave the reader to carry out the parallel which we haveonly begun. Its details would cover many pages. 

That slaveholders do not practically regard slaves as _human beings_is abundantly shown by their own voluntary testimony. In a recent workentitled, "The South vindicated from the Treason and Fanaticism ofNorthern Abolitionists, " which was written, we are informed, byColonel Dayton, late member of Congress from South Carolina; thewriter, speaking of the awe with which the slaves regard the whites, says, --

"The northerner looks upon a band of negroes as upon so many _men_, but the planter or southerner _views them in a very different light. _"

Extract from the speech of Mr. SUMMERS, of Virginia, in thelegislature of that state, Jan. 26, 1832. See the Richmond Whig. 

"When, in the sublime lessons of Christianity, he (the slaveholder) istaught to 'do unto others as he would have others do unto him, ' HENEVER DREAMS THAT THE DEGRADED NEGRO IS WITHIN THE PALE OF THAT HOLYCANON. "

PRESIDENT JEFFERSON, in his letter to GOVERNOR COLES, of Illinois, dated Aug. 25, 1814, asserts, that slaveholders regard their slaves asbrutes, in the following remarkable language. 

"Nursed and educated in the daily habit of seeing the degradedcondition, both bodily and mental, of these unfortunate beings [theslaves], FEW MINDS HAVE YET DOUBTED BUT THAT THEY WERE AS LEGITIMATESUBJECTS OF PROPERTY AS THEIR HORSES OR CATTLE. "

Having shown that slaveholders regard their slaves as mere workinganimals and cattle, we now proceed to show that their actual treatmentof them, is _worse_ than it would be if they were brutes. We repeatit, SLAVEHOLDERS TREAT THEIR SLAVES WORSE THAN THEY DO THEIR BRUTES. Whoever heard of cows or sheep being deliberately tied up and beatenand lacerated till they died? or horses coolly tortured by the hour, till covered with mangled flesh, or of swine having their legs tiedand being suspended from a tree and lacerated with thongs for hours, or of hounds stretched and made fast at full length, flayed withwhips, red pepper rubbed into their bleeding gashes, and hot brinedashed on to aggravate the torture? Yet just such forms and degrees oftorture are _daily_ perpetrated upon the slaves. Now no man that knowshuman nature will marvel at this. Though great cruelties have alwaysbeen inflicted by men upon brutes, yet incomparably the most horridever perpetrated, have been those of men upon _their own species_. Anyleaf of history turned over at random has proof enough of this. Everyreflecting mind perceives that when men hold _human beings_ as_property_, they must, from the nature of the case, treat them worsethan they treat their horses and oxen. It is impossible for _cattle_to excite in men such tempests of fury as men excite in each other. Men are often provoked if their horses or hounds refuse to do, ortheir pigs refuse to go where they wish to drive them, but the feelingis rarely intense and never permanent. It is vexation and impatience, rather than settled rage, malignity, or revenge. If horses and dogswere intelligent beings, and still held as property, their oppositionto the wishes of their owners, would exasperate them immeasurably morethan it would be possible for them to do, with the minds of brutes. None but little children and idiots get angry at sticks and stonesthat lie in their way or hurt them; but put into sticks and stonesintelligence, and will, and power of feeling and motion, while theyremain as now, articles of property, and what a towering rage wouldmen be in, if bushes whipped them in the face when they walked amongthem, or stones rolled over their toes when they climbed hills! andwhat exemplary vengeance would be inflicted upon door-steps andhearth-stones, if they were to move out of their places, instead oflying still where they were put for their owners to tread upon. Thegreatest provocation to human nature is _opposition to its will_. If aman's will be resisted by one far _below_ him, the provocation isvastly greater, than when it is resisted by an acknowledged superior. In the former case, it inflames strong passions, which in the latterlie dormant. The rage of proud Haman knew no bounds against the poorJew who would not do as he wished, and so he built a gallows for him. If the person opposing the will of another, be so far below him as tobe on a level with chattels, and be actually held and used as anarticle of property; pride, scorn, lust of power, rage and revengeexplode together upon the hapless victim. The idea of _property_having a will, and that too in opposition to the will of its _owner_, and counteracting it, is a stimulant of terrible power to the mostrelentless human passions and from the nature of slavery, and theconstitution of the human mind, this fierce stimulant must, withvarious degrees of strength, act upon slaveholders almost withoutceasing. The slave, however abject and crushed, is an intelligentbeing: he has a _will_, and that will cannot be annihilated, _it willshow itself_; if for a moment it is smothered, like pent up fires whenvent is found, it flames the fiercer. Make intelligence _property_, and its manager will have his match; he is met at every turn by an_opposing will_, not in the form of down-right rebellion and defiance, but yet, visibly, an _ever-opposing will_. He sees it in thedissatisfied look, and reluctant air and unwilling movement; theconstrained strokes of labor, the drawling tones, the slow hearing, the feigned stupidity, the sham pains and sickness, the short memory;and he _feels_ it every hour, in innumerable forms, frustrating hisdesigns by a ceaseless though perhaps invisible countermining. Thisunceasing opposition to the will of its 'owner, ' on the part of hisrational 'property, ' is to the slaveholder as the hot iron to thenerve. He raves under it, and storms, and gnashes, and smites; but themore he smites, the hotter it gets, and the more it burns him. Further, this opposition of the slave's will to his owner's, not onlyexcites him to severity, that he may gratify his rage, but makes itnecessary for him to use violence in breaking down thisresistance--thus subjecting the slave to additional tortures. There isanother inducement to cruel inflictions upon the slave, and anecessity for it, which does not exist in the case of brutes. Offenders must be made an example to others, to strike them withterror. If a slave runs away and is caught, his master flogs him withterrible severity, not merely to gratify his resentment, and to keephim from running away again, but as a warning to others. So in everycase of disobedience, neglect, stubbornness, unfaithfulness, indolence, insolence, theft, feigned sickness, when his directions areforgotten, or slighted, or supposed to be, or his wishes crossed, orhis property injured, or left exposed, or his work ill-executed, themaster is tempted to inflict cruelties, not merely to wreak his ownvengeance upon him, and to make the slave more circumspect in future, but to sustain his authority over the other slaves, to restrain themfrom like practices, and to preserve his own property. 

A multitude of facts, illustrating the position that slaveholderstreat their slaves _worse_ than they do their cattle, will occur toall who are familiar with slavery. When cattle break through theirowners' inclosures and escape, if found, they are driven back andfastened in again; and even slaveholders would execrate as a wretch, the man who should tie them up, and bruise and lacerate them forstraying away; but when _slaves_ that have escaped are caught, theyare flogged with the most terrible severity. When herds of cattle aredriven to market, they are suffered to go in the easiest way, each byhimself; but when slaves are driven to market, they are fastenedtogether with handcuffs, galled by iron collars and chains, and thusforced to travel on foot hundreds of miles, sleeping at night in theirchains. Sheep, and sometimes horned cattle are marked with theirowners' initials--but this is generally done with paint, and of courseproduces no pain. Slaves, too, are often marked with their owners'initials, but the letters are stamped into their flesh with a hotiron. Cattle are suffered to graze their pastures without stint; butthe slaves are restrained in their food to a fixed allowance. Theslaveholders' horses are notoriously far better fed, more moderatelyworked, have fewer hours of labor, and longer intervals of rest thantheir slaves; and their valuable horses are far more comfortablyhoused and lodged, and their stables more effectually defended fromthe weather, than the slaves' huts. We have here merely _begun_ acomparison, which the reader can easily carry out at length, from thematerials furnished in this work. 

We will, however, subjoin a few testimonies of slaveholders, andothers who have resided in slave states, expressly asserting thatslaves are treated _worse than brutes_. 

The late Dr. GEORGE BUCHANAN, of Baltimore, Maryland, a member of theAmerican Philosophical Society, in an oration delivered in Baltimore, July 4, 1791, page 10, says:

"The Africans whom you despise, whom you _more inhumanly treat thanbrutes_, are equally capable of improvement with yourselves. "

The Rev. GEORGE WHITEFIELD, in his celebrated letter to theslaveholders of Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, andGeorgia, written one hundred years ago, (See Benezet's Caution toGreat Britain and her Colonies, page 13), says:

"Sure I am, it is sinful to use them as bad, nay worse than if theywere brutes; and whatever particular _exceptions_ there may be, (as Iwould charitably hope there are _some_) I fear the _generality_ of youthat own negroes, _are liable to such a charge_. "

Mr. RICE, of Kentucky in his speech in the Convention that formed theConstitution of that state, in 1790, says:

"He [the slave] is a rational creature, reduced by the power oflegislation to the _state of a brute_, and thereby deprived of everyprivilege of humanity. . . . The brute may steal or rob, to supplyhis hunger; but the slave, though in the most starving condition, _dare not do either, on penalty of death, or some severe punishment_. "

Rev. HORACE MOULTON, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal Church, inMarlborough, Mass. Who lived some years in Georgia, says:

"The southern horses and dogs have enough to eat, and good care istaken of them; but southern negroes--who can describe their misery andtheir wretchedness, their nakedness and their cruel scourgings! Nonebut God. Should we _whip our horses_ as they whip their slaves, evenfor small offences, we should expose ourselves to the penalty of thelaw. "

Rev. PHINEAS SMITH, Centerville, Allegany county, New York, who hasresided four years in the midst of southern slavery--

"Avarice and cruelty are twin sisters; and I do not hesitate todeclare before the world, as my deliberate opinion, that there is_less compassion_ for working slaves at the south, than for workingoxen at the north. "

STEVEN SEWALL, Esq. Winthrop, Maine, a member of the CongregationalChurch, and late agent of the Winthrop Manufacturing Company, whoresided five years in Alabama, says--

"I do not think that brutes, not even horses, are treated with _somuch cruelty_ as American slaves. "

If the preceding considerations are insufficient to remove incredulityrespecting the cruelties suffered by slaves, and if northern objectorsstill say, 'We might believe such things of savages, but thatcivilized men, and republicans, in this Christian country, can openlyand by system perpetrate such enormities, is impossible';--to such wereply, that this incredulity of the people of the free states, is notonly discreditable to their intelligence, but to their consistency. 

Who is so ignorant as not to know, or so incredulous as to disbelieve, that the early Baptists of New England were fined, imprisoned, scourged, and finally banished by our puritan forefathers?--and thatthe Quakers were confined in dungeons, publicly whipped at thecart-tail, had their ears cut off, cleft sticks put upon theirtongues, and that five of them, four men and one woman, were hung onBoston Common, for propagating the sentiments of the Society ofFriends? Who discredits the fact, that the civil authorities inMassachusetts, less than a hundred and fifty years ago, confined inthe public jail a little girl of four years old, and publicly hung theRev. Mr. Burroughs, and eighteen other persons, mostly women, andkilled another, (Giles Corey, ) by extending him upon his back, andpiling weights upon his breast till he was crushed to death [17]--andthis for no other reason than that these men and women, and thislittle child, were accused by others of _bewitching_ them. 

[Footnote 17: Judge Sewall, of Mass. In his diary, describing thishorrible scene, says that when the tongue of the poor sufferer had, inthe extremity of his dying agony, protruded from his mouth, a personin attendance took his cane and thrust it back into his mouth. ]

Even the children in Connecticut, know that the following was once alaw of that state:

"No food or lodging shall be allowed to a Quaker. If any person turnsQuaker, he shall be banished, and not be suffered to return on pain ofdeath. "

These objectors can readily believe the fact, that in the city of NewYork, less than a hundred years since, thirteen persons were publiclyburned to death, over a slow fire: and that the legislature of thesame State took under its paternal care the African slave-trade, anddeclared that "all encouragement should be given to the _direct_importation of slaves; that all _smuggling_ of slaves should becondemned, as _an eminent discouragement to the fair trader_. "

They do not call in question the fact that the African slave-trade wascarried on from the ports of the free states till within thirty years;that even members of the Society of Friends were actively engaged init, shortly before the revolutionary war; [18] that as late as 1807, no less than fifty-nine of the vessels engaged in that trade, weresent out from the little state of Rhode Island, which had then onlyabout seventy thousand inhabitants; that among those most largelyengaged in these foul crimes, are the men whom the people of RhodeIsland delight to honor: that the man who dipped most deeply in thattrade of blood (James De Wolf, ) and amassed a most princely fortune byit, was not long since their senator in Congress; and another, who wascaptain of one of his vessels, was recently Lieutenant Governor of thestate. 

[Footnote 18: See Life and Travels of John Woolman, page 92. ]

They can believe, too, all the horrors of the middle passage, thechains, suffocation, maimings, stranglings, starvation, drownings, andcold blooded murders, atrocities perpetrated on board theseslave-ships by their own citizens, perhaps by their own townsmen andneighbors--possibly by their own _fathers_: but oh! they 'can'tbelieve that the slaveholders can be so hard-hearted towards theirslaves as to treat them with great cruelty. ' They can believe that hisHoliness the Pope, with his cardinals, bishops and priests, havetortured, broken on the wheel, and burned to death thousands ofProtestants--that eighty thousand of the Anabaptists were slaughteredin Germany--that hundreds of thousands of the blameless Waldenses, Huguenots and Lollards, were torn in pieces by the most titleddignitaries of church and state, and that _almost every professedlyChristian sect, has, at some period of its history, persecuted untoblood_ those who dissented from their creed. They can believe, also, that in Boston, New York, Utica, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Alton, andin scores of other cities and villages of the free states, 'gentlemenof property and standing, ' led on by civil officers, by members ofstate legislatures, and of Congress, by judges and attorneys-general, by editors of newspapers, and by professed ministers of the gospel, have organized mobs, broken up lawful meetings of peaceable citizens, committed assault and battery upon their persons, knocked them downwith stones, led them about with ropes, dragged them from their bedsat midnight, gagged and forced them into vehicles, and driven theminto unfrequented places, and there tormented and disfiguredthem--that they have rifled their houses, made bonfires of theirfurniture in the streets, burned to the ground, or torn in pieces thehalls or churches in which they were assembled--attacked them withdeadly weapons, stabbed some, shot others, and killed one. They canbelieve all this--and further, that a majority of the citizens in theplaces where these outrages have been committed, connived at them; andby refusing to indict the perpetrators, or, if they were indicted, bycombining to secure their acquittal, and rejoicing in it, havepublicly adopted these felonies as their own. All these things theycan believe without hesitation, and that they have even been done bytheir own acquaintances, neighbors, relatives; perhaps those with whomthey interchange courtesies, those for whom they _vote_, or to whose_salaries they contribute_--but yet, oh! they can never believe thatslaveholders inflict cruelties upon their slaves!

They can give full credence to the kidnapping, imprisonment, anddeliberate murder of WILLIAM MORGAN, and that by men of high standingin society; they can believe that this deed was aided and abetted, andthe murderers screened from justice, by a large number of influentialpersons, who were virtually accomplices, either before or after thefact; and that this combination was so effectual, as successfully todefy and triumph over the combined powers of the government;--yetthat those who constantly rob men of their time, liberty, and wages, and all their _rights_, should rob them of bits of flesh, andoccasionally of a tooth, make their backs bleed, and put fetters ontheir legs, is too monstrous to be credited! Further these samepersons, who 'can't believe' that slaveholders are so iron-hearted asto ill-treat their slaves, believe that the very _elite_ of theseslaveholders, those most highly esteemed and honored among them, arecontinually daring each other to mortal conflict, and in the presenceof mutual friends, taking deadly aim at each other's hearts, withsettled purpose to _kill_, if possible. That among the mostdistinguished governors of slave states, among their most celebratedjudges, senators, and representatives in Congress, there is hardly_one_, who has not either killed, or tried to kill, or aided andabetted his friends in trying to kill, one or more individuals. Thatpistols, dirks, bowie knives, or other instruments of death aregenerally carried throughout the slave states--and that deadly affrayswith them, in the streets of their cities and villages, are matters ofdaily occurrence; that the sons of slaveholders in southern colleges, bully, threaten, and fire upon their teachers, and their teachers uponthem; that during the last summer, in the most celebrated seat ofscience and literature in the south, the University of Virginia, theprofessors were attacked by more than seventy armed students, and, inthe words of a Virginia paper, were obliged 'to conceal themselvesfrom their fury;' also that almost all the riots and violence thatoccur in northern colleges, are produced by the turbulence and lawlesspassions of southern students. That such are the furious passions ofslaveholders, no considerations of personal respect, none for theproprieties of life, none for the honor of our national legislature, none for the character of our country abroad, can restrain theslaveholding members of Congress from the most disgraceful personalencounters on the floor of our nation's legislature--smiting theirfists in each other's faces, throttling and even _kicking_ and tryingto _gouge_ each other--that during the session of the Congress justclosed, no less than six slaveholders, taking fire at words spoken indebate, have either rushed at each other's throats, or kicked, orstruck, or attempted to knock each other down; and that in all theseinstances, they would doubtless have killed each other, if theirfriends had not separated them. Further, they know full well, thesewere not insignificant, vulgar blackguards, elected because they werethe head bullies and bottle-holders in a boxing ring, or because theirconstituents went drunk to the ballot box; but they were some of themost conspicuous members of the House--one of them a former speaker. 

Our newspapers are full of these and similar daily occurrences amongslaveholders, copied verbatim from their own accounts of them in theirown papers and all this we fully credit; no man is simpleton enough tocry out 'Oh, I can't believe that slaveholders do such things;'--andyet when we turn to the treatment which these men mete out to their_slaves_, and show that they are in the habitual practice of striking, kicking, knocking down and shooting _them_ as well as each other--thelook of blank incredulity that comes over northern dough-faces, is astudy for a painter: and then the sentimental outcry, with eyes andhands uplifted, 'Oh, indeed, I can't believe the slaveholders are socruel to their slaves. ' Most amiable and touching charity! Truly, ofall Yankee notions and free state products, there is nothing like a'_dough face_'--the great northern staple for the southernmarket--'made to order, ' in any quantity, and _always on hand_. 'Doughfaces!' Thanks to a slaveholder's contempt for the name, with itsimmortality of truth, infamy and scorn. [19]

[Footnote 19: "_Doe_ face, " which owes its paternity to John Randolph, age has mellowed into "_dough_ face"--a cognomen quite as expressiveand appropriate, if not as classical. ]

Though the people of the free states affect to disbelieve thecruelties perpetrated upon the slaves, yet slaveholders believe _eachother_ guilty of them, and speak of them with the utmost freedom. Ifslaveholders disbelieve any statement of cruelty inflicted upon aslave, it is not on account of its _enormity_. The traveler at thesouth will hear in Delaware, and in all parts of Maryland andVirginia, from the lips of slaveholders, statements of the mosthorrible cruelties suffered by the slaves _farther_ south, in theCarolinas and Georgia; when he finds himself in those states he willhear similar accounts about the treatment of the slaves in _Florida_and _Louisiana_; and in Missouri, Kentucky, and Tennessee he will hearof the tragedies enacted on the plantations in Arkansas, Alabama andMississippi. Since Anti-Slavery Societies have been in operation, andslaveholders have found themselves on trial before the world, and putupon their good behavior, northern slaveholders have grown cautious, and now often substitute denials and set defences, for the voluntarytestimony about cruelty in the far south, which, before that period, was given with entire freedom. Still, however, occasionally the 'truthwill out, ' as the reader will see by the following testimony of anEast Tennessee newspaper, in which, speaking of the droves of slavestaken from the upper country to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc. , the editor says, they are 'traveling to a region where their conditionthrough time WILL BE SECOND ONLY TO THAT OF THE WRETCHED CREATURES INHELL. ' See "Maryville Intelligencer, " of Oct, 4, 1835. Distantcruelties and cruelties _long past_, have been till recently, favoritetopics with slaveholders. They have not only been ready to acknowledgethat their _fathers_ have exercised great cruelty toward their slaves, but have voluntarily, in their official acts, made proclamation of itand entered it on their public records. The Legislature of NorthCarolina, in 1798, branded the successive legislatures of that statefor more than thirty years previous, with the infamy of treatmenttowards their slaves, which they pronounce to be 'disgraceful tohumanity, and degrading in the highest degree to the laws andprinciples of a free, Christian, and enlightened country. ' Thistreatment was the enactment and perpetuation of a most barbarous andcruel law. 

But enough. As the objector can and does believe all the preceedingfacts, if he still '_can't_ believe' as to the cruelties ofslaveholders, it would be barbarous to tantalize his incapacity eitherwith evidence or argument. Let him have the benefit of the act in suchcase made and provided. 

Having shown that the incredulity of the objector respecting thecruelty inflicted upon the slaves, is discreditable to hisconsistency, we now proceed to show that it is equally so to his_intelligence_. 

Whoever disbelieves the foregoing statements of cruelties, on theground of their enormity, proclaims his own ignorance of the natureand history of man. What! incredulous about the atrocities perpetratedby those who hold human beings as property, to be used for theirpleasure, when history herself has done little else in recording humandeeds, than to dip her blank chart in the blood shed by arbitrarypower, and unfold to human gaze the great red scroll? That cruelty isthe natural effect of arbitrary power, has been the result of allexperience, and the voice of universal testimony since the worldbegan. Shall human nature's axioms, six thousand years old, go fornothing? Are the combined product of human experience, and theconcurrent records of human character, to be set down as 'old wives'fables?' To disbelieve that arbitrary power naturally and habituallyperpetrates cruelties, where it can do it with impunity, is not onlyignorance of man, but of _things_. It is to be blind to innumerableproofs which are before every man's eyes; proofs that are stereotypedin the very words and phrases that are on every one's lips. Take forexample the words _despot_ and _despotic_. Despot, signifiesetymologically, merely one who _possesses_ arbitrary power, and atfirst, it was used to designate those alone who _possessed_ unlimitedpower over human beings, entirely irrespective of the way in whichthey exercised it, whether mercifully or cruelly. But the fact, thatthose who possessed such power, made their subjects their _victims_, has wrought a total change in the popular meaning of the word. It nowsignifies, in common parlance, not one who _possesses_ unlimited powerover others, but one who exercises the power that he has, whetherlittle or much, _cruelly_. So _despotic_, instead of meaning what itonce did, something pertaining to the _possession_ of unlimited power, signifies something pertaining to the _capricious, unmerciful andrelentless exercise_ of such power. 

The word tyrant, is another example--formerly it implied merely a_possession_ of arbitrary power, but from the invariable abuse of suchpower by its possessors, the proper and entire meaning of the word islost, and it now signifies merely one who _exercises power to theinjury of others_. The words tyrannical and tyranny follow the sameanalogy. So the word arbitrary; which formerly implied that whichpertains to the will of one, independently of others; but from thefact that those who had no restraint upon their wills, were invariablycapricious, unreasonable and oppressive, these words convey accuratelythe present sense of _arbitrary_, when applied to a person. 

How can the objector persist in disbelieving that cruelty is thenatural effect of arbitrary power, when the very words of every day, rise up on his lips in testimony against him--words which oncesignified the _mere possession_ of arbitrary power, but have losttheir meaning, and now signify merely its cruel _exercise_; becausesuch a use of it has been proved by the experience of the world, to beinseparable from its _possession_--words now frigid with horror, andnever used even by the objector without feeling a cold chill run overhim. 

Arbitrary power is to the mind what alcohol is to the body; itintoxicates. Man loves power. It is perhaps the strongest humanpassion; and the more absolute the power, the stronger the desire forit; and the more it is desired, the more its exercise is enjoyed: thisenjoyment is to human nature a fearful temptation, --generally anovermatch for it. Hence it is true, with hardly an exception, thatarbitrary power is abused in proportion as it is _desired_. The factthat a person intensely desires power over others, _withoutrestraint_, shows the absolute necessity of restraint. What womanwould marry a man who made it a condition that he should have thepower to divorce her whenever he pleased? Oh! he might never wish toexercise it, but the _power_ he would have! No woman, not stark mad, would trust her happiness in such hands. 

Would a father apprentice his son to a master, who insisted that hispower over the lad should be _absolute_? The master might perhaps, never wish to commit a battery upon the boy, but if he should, heinsists upon having full swing! He who would leave his son in the, clutches of such a wretch, would be bled and blistered for a lunaticas soon as his friends could get their hands upon him. 

The possession of power, even when greatly restrained, is such a fierystimulant, that its lodgement in human hands is always perilous. Givemen the handling of immense sums of money, and all the eyes of Argusand the hands of Briarcus can hardly prevent embezzlement. 

The mutual and ceaseless accusations of the two great politicalparties in this country, show the universal belief that this tendencyof human nature to abuse power, is so strong, that even the mostpowerful legal restraints are insufficient for its safe custody. Fromcongress and state legislatures down to grog-shop caucuses and streetwranglings, each party keeps up an incessant din about _abuses ofpower_. Hardly an officer, either of the general or state governments, from the President down to the ten thousand postmasters, and fromgovernors to the fifty thousand constables, escapes the charge of'_abuse of power_. ' 'Oppression, ' 'Extortion, ' 'Venality, ' 'Bribery, ''Corruption, ' 'Perjury, ' 'Misrule, ' 'Spoils, ' 'Defalcation, ' stand onevery newspaper. Now without any estimate of the lies told in thesemutual charges, there is truth enough to make each party ready tobelieve of the other, and _of their best men too, _ any abuse of power, however monstrous. As is the State, so is the Church. From GeneralConferences to circuit preachers; and from General Assemblies tochurch sessions, abuses of power spring up as weeds from the dunghill. 

All legal restraints are framed upon the presumption, that men willabuse their power if not hemmed in by them. This lies at the bottom ofall those checks and balances contrived for keeping governments upontheir centres. If there is among human convictions one that isinvariable and universal, it is, that when men possess unrestrainedpower over others, over their time, choice, conscience, persons, votes, or means of subsistence, they are under great temptations toabuse it; and that the intensity with which such power is desired, generally measures the certainty and the degree of its abuse. 

That American slaveholders possess a power over their slaves which isvirtually absolute, none will deny. [20] That they _desire_ thisabsolute power, is shown from the fact of their holding and exercisingit, and making laws to confirm and enlarge it. That the desire topossess this power, every tittle of it, is _intense_, is proved by thefact, that slaveholders cling to it with such obstinate tenacity, aswell as by all their doings and sayings, their threats, cursings andgnashings against all who denounce the exercise of such power asusurpation and outrage, and counsel its immediate abrogation. 

[Footnote 20: The following extracts from the laws of slave-states areproofs sufficient. 

"The slave is ENTIRELY subject to the WILL of his master. "--LouisianaCivil Code, Art. 273. 

"Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged in law tobe _chattels personal, _ in the hands of their owner and possessors, and their executors, administrators and assigns, TO ALL INTENTS, CONSTRUCTIONS, AND PURPOSES, WHATSOEVER. "--Laws of South Carolina, 2Brev. Dig. 229; Prince's Digest, 446, &c. ]

From the nature of the case--from the laws of mind, such power, sointensely desired, griped with such a death-clutch, and with suchfierce spurnings of all curtailment or restraint, _cannot but beabused. _ Privations and inflictions must be its natural, habitualproducts, with ever and anon, terror, torture, and despair let looseto do their worst upon the helpless victims. 

Though power over others is in every case liable to be used to theirinjury, yet, in almost all cases, the subject individual is shieldedfrom great outrages by strong safeguards. If he have talents, orlearning, or wealth, or office, or personal respectability, orinfluential friends, these, with the protection of law and the rightsof citizenship, stand round him as a body guard: and even if he lackedall these, yet, had he the same color, features, form, dialect, habits, and associations with the privileged caste of society, hewould find in _them_ a shield from many injuries, which would be_invited, _ if in these respects he differed widely from the rest ofthe community, and was on that account regarded with disgust andaversion. This is the condition of the slave; not only is he deprivedof the artificial safeguards of the law, but has none of those_natural_ safeguards enumerated above, which are a protection toothers. But not only is the slave destitute of those peculiarities, habits, tastes, and acquisitions, which by assimilating the possessorto the rest of the community, excite their interest in him, and thus, in a measure, secure for him their protection; but he possesses thosepeculiarities of bodily organization which are looked upon with deepdisgust, contempt, prejudice, and aversion. Besides this, constantcontact with the ignorance and stupidity of the slaves, their filth, rags, and nakedness; their cowering air, servile employments, repulsive food, and squalid hovels, their purchase and sale, and useas brutes--all these associations, constantly mingling and circulatingin the minds of slaveholders, and inveterated by the hourlyirritations which must assail all who use human beings as things, produce in them a permanent state of feeling toward the slave, made upof repulsion and settled ill-will. When we add to this the corrosionsproduced by the petty thefts of slaves, the necessity of constantwatching, their reluctant service, and indifference to their master'sinterests, their ill concealed aversion to him, and spurning of hisauthority; and finally, that fact, as old as human nature, that menalways hate those whom they oppress, and oppress those whom they hate, thus oppression and hatred mutually begetting and perpetuating eachother--and we have a raging compound of fiery elements and disturbingforces, so stimulating and inflaming the mind of the slaveholderagainst the slave, that _it cannot but break forth upon him withdesolating fury. _

To deny that cruelty is the spontaneous and uniform product ofarbitrary power, and that the natural and controlling tendency of suchpower is to make its possessor cruel, oppressive, and revengefultowards those who are subjected to his control, is, we repeat, to setat nought the combined experience of the human race, to invalidate itstestimony, and to reverse its decisions from time immemorial. 

A volume might be filled with the testimony of American slaveholdersalone, to the truth of the preceding position. We subjoin a fewillustrations, and first, the memorable declaration of PresidentJefferson, who lived and died a slaveholder. It has been published athousand times, and will live forever. In his "Notes on Virginia, "sixth Philadelphia edition, p. 251, he says, --

"The WHOLE COMMERCE between master and slave, is a PERPETUAL EXERCISEof the most _boisterous passions_, the most unremitting DESPOTISM onthe one part, and degrading submission on the other. . . . . The parent_storms_, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of _wrath_, putson the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, GIVES LOOSE TO THEWORST OF PASSIONS; and thus _nursed, educated, and daily exercised intyranny, _ cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. "

Hon. Lewis Summers, Judge of the General Court of Virginia, and aslaveholder, said in a speech before the Virginia legislature in 1832;(see Richmond Whig of Jan. 26, 1832, )

"A slave population exercises _the most pernicious influence_ upon themanners, habits and character, of those among whom it exists. Lispinginfancy learns the vocabulary of abusive epithets, and struts the_embryo tyrant_ of its little domain. The consciousness of superiordestiny takes possession of his mind at its earliest dawning, and loveof power and rule, 'grows with his growth, and strengthens with hisstrength. ' Unless enabled to rise above the operation of thosepowerful causes, he enters the world with miserable notions ofself-importance, and under the government of an unbridled temper. "

The late JUDGE TUCKER of Virginia, a slaveholder, and Professor of Lawin the University of William and Mary, in his "Letter to a Member ofthe Virginia Legislature, " 1801, says, --

"I say nothing of the baneful effects of slavery on our _moralcharacter_, because I know you have been long sensible of this point. "

The Presbyterian Synod of South Carolina and Georgia, consisting ofall the clergy of that denomination in those states, with a layrepresentation from the churches, most, if not all of whom areslaveholders, published a report on slavery in 1834, from which thefollowing is an extract. 

"Those only who have the management of servants, know what the_hardening effect_ of it is upon _their own feelings towards them. _There is no necessity to dwell on this point, as all _owners_ and_managers_ fully understand it. He who commences to manage them withtenderness and with a willingness to favor them in every way, must bewatchful, otherwise he will settle down in _indifference, if notseverity. "_

GENERAL WILLIAM H. HARRISON, now of Ohio, son of the late GovernorHarrison of Virginia, a slaveholder, while minister from the UnitedStates to the Republic of Colombia, wrote a letter to General SimonBolivar, then President of that Republic, just as he was aboutassuming despotic power. The letter is dated Bogota, Sept. 22, 1826. The following is an extract. 

"From a knowledge of your own disposition and present feelings, yourexcellency will not be willing to believe that you could ever bebrought to an act of tyranny, or even to execute justice withunnecessary rigor. But trust me, sir, there is nothing morecorrupting, nothing more _destructive of the noblest and finestfeelings of our nature than the exercise of unlimited power_. The man, who in the beginning of such a career, might shudder at the idea oftaking away the life of a fellow-being, might soon have his conscienceso seared by the repetition of crime, that the agonies of his murderedvictims might become music to his soul, and the drippings of thescaffold afford blood to swim in. History is full of such excesses. "

WILLIAM H. FITZHUGH, Esq. Of Virginia, a slaveholder, says, --"Slavery, in its mildest form, is cruel and unnatural; _its injurious effects onour morals and habits are mutually felt. "_

HON. SAMUEL S. NICHOLAS, late Judge of the Court of Appeals ofKentucky, and a slaveholder, in a speech before the legislature ofthat state, Jan. 1837, says, --

"The deliberate convictions of the most matured consideration I cangive the subject, are, that the institution of slavery is a _mostserious injury to the habits, manners and morals_ of our whitepopulation--that it leads to sloth, indolence, dissipation, and vice. "

Dr. THOMAS COOPER, late President of the College of South Carolina, ina note to his edition of the "Institutes of Justinian" page 413, says, --

"All absolute power has a direct tendency, not only to detract fromthe happiness of the persons who are subject to it, but to DEPRAVE THEGOOD QUALITIES of those who possess it. . . . . The whole history of humannature, in the present and every former age, will justify me in sayingthat _such is the tendency of power_ on the one hand and slavery onthe other. "

A South Carolina slaveholder, whose name is with the executivecommittee of the Am. A. S. Society, says, in a letter, dated April 4, 1838:--

"I think it (slavery) _ruinous to the temper_ and to our spirituallife; it is a thorn in the flesh, for ever and for ever goading us onto say and to do what the Eternal God cannot but be displeased with. Ispeak from experience, and oh! my desire is to be delivered from it. "

Monsieur C. C. ROBIN, who was a resident of Louisiana from 1802 to1806, published a work on that country; in which, speaking of theeffect of slaveholding on masters and their children, he says:--

"The young creoles make the negroes who surround them the play-thingsof their whims: they flog, for pastime, those of their own age, justas their fathers flog others at their will. These young creoles, arrived at the age in which the passions are impetuous, do not _knowhow to bear contradiction_; they will have every thing done which theycommand, _possible or not_; and in default of this, they avenge theiroffended pride by multiplied punishments. "

Dr. GEORGE BUCHANAN, of Baltimore, Maryland, member of the AmericanPhilosophical Society, in an oration at Baltimore, July 4, 1791, said:--

"For such are the effects of subjecting man to slavery, that it_destroys every humane principle_, vitiates the mind, instills ideasof unlawful cruelties, and eventually subverts the springs ofgovernment. "--_Buchanan's Oration_, p. 12. 

President EDWARDS the younger, in a sermon before the ConnecticutAbolition Society, in 1791, page 8, says:--

"Slavery has a most direct tendency to haughtiness, and a _domineeringspirit_ and conduct in the proprietors of the slaves, in theirchildren, and in all who have the control of them. A man who has beenbred up in domineering over negroes, can scarcely avoid contractingsuch a habit of haughtiness and domination as will express itself inhis general treatment of mankind, whether in his private capacity, orin any office, civil or military, with which he may be invested. "

The celebrated MONTESQUIEU, in his "Spirit of the Laws, " thusdescribes the effect of slaveholding upon the master:--

"The master contracts all sorts of bad habits; and becomes _haughty, passionate, obdurate, vindictive, voluptuous, and cruel_. "

WILBERFORCE, in his speech at the anniversary of the LondonAnti-Slavery Society, in March, 1828, said:--

"It is _utterly impossible_ that they who live in the administrationof the petty despotism of a slave community, whose minds have been_warped_ and _polluted_ by that contamination, should not _lose thatrespect_ for their fellow creatures over whom they tyrannize, which isessential in the nature and moral being of man, to rescue them fromthe abuse of power over their prostrate fellow creatures. "

In the great debate, in the British Parliament, on the Africanslave-trade, Mr. WHITBREAD said:

"Arbitrary power would spoil the hearts of the best. "

But we need not multiply proofs to establish our position: it issustained by the concurrent testimony of sages, philosophers, poets, statesmen, and moralists, in every period of the world; and who canmarvel that those in all ages who have wisely pondered men and things, should be unanimous in such testimony, when the history of arbitrarypower has come down to us from the beginning of time, strugglingthrough heaps of slain, and trailing her parchments in blood. 

Time would fail to begin with the first despot and track down thecarnage step by step. All nations, all ages, all climes crowd forwardas witnesses, with their scars, and wounds, and dying agonies. 

But to survey a multitude bewilders; let us look at a single nation. We instance Rome; both because its history is more generally known, and because it furnishes a larger proportion of instances, in whicharbitrary power was exercised with comparative mildness, than anyother nation ancient or modern. And yet, her whole existence was atragedy, every actor was an executioner, the curtain rose amidstshrieks and fell upon corpses, and the only shifting of the scenes wasfrom blood to blood. The whole world stood aghast, as under sentenceof death, awaiting execution, and all nations and tongues were driven, with her own citizens, as sheep to the slaughter. Of her seven kings, her hundreds of consuls, tribunes, decemvirs, and dictators, and herfifty emperors, there is hardly one whose name has come down to usunstained by horrible abuses of power; and that too, notwithstandingwe have mere shreds of the history of many of them, owing to theirantiquity, or to the perturbed times in which they lived; and theseshreds gathered from the records of their own partial countrymen, whowrote and sung their praises. What does this prove? Not that theRomans were worse than other men, nor that their rulers were worsethan other Romans, for history does not furnish nobler models ofnatural character than many of those same rulers, when first investedwith arbitrary power. Neither was it mainly because the martialenterprise of the earlier Romans and the gross sensuality of thelater, hardened their hearts to human suffering. In both periods ofRoman history, and in both these classes, we find men, the keensympathies, generosity, and benevolence of whose general characterembalmed their names in the grateful memories of multitudes. _Theywere human beings, and possessed power without restraint_--thisunravels the mystery. 

Who has not heard of the Emperor Trajan, of his moderation, hisclemency, his gashing sympathies, his forgiveness of injuries andforgetfulness of self, his tearing in pieces his own robe, to furnishbandages for the wounded--called by the whole world in his day, "thebest emperor of Rome;" and so affectionately regarded by his subjects, that, ever afterwards, in blessing his successors upon their accessionto power, they always said, "May you have the virtue and goodness ofTrajan!" yet the deadly conflicts of gladiators who were trained tokill each other, to make sport for the spectators, furnished his chiefpastime. At one time he kept up those spectacles for 123 days insuccession. In the tortures which he inflicted on Christians, fireand poison, daggers and dungeons, wild beasts and serpents, and therack, did their worst. He threw into the sea, Clemens, the venerablebishop of Rome, with an anchor about his neck; and tossed to thefamished lions in the amphitheatre the aged Ignatius. 

Pliny the younger, who was proconsul under Trajan, may well bementioned in connection with the emperor, as a striking illustrationof the truth, that goodness and amiableness towards one class of menis often turned into cruelty towards another. History can hardly showa more gentle and lovely character than Pliny. While pleading at thebar, he always sought out the grievances of the poorest and mostdespised persons, entered into their wrongs with his whole soul, andnever took a fee. Who can read his admirable letters without beingtouched by their tenderness and warmed by their benignity andphilanthropy: and yet, this tender-hearted Pliny coolly plied withexcruciating torture two spotless females, who had served asdeaconesses in the Christian church, hoping to extort from them matterof accusation against the Christians. He commanded Christians toabjure their faith, invoke the gods, pour out libations to the statuesof the emperor, burn incense to idols, and curse Christ. If theyrefused, he ordered them to execution. 

Who has not heard of the Emperor Titus--so beloved for his mildvirtues and compassionate regard for the suffering, that he was named"The Delight of Mankind;" so tender of the lives of his subjects thathe took the office of high priest, that his hands might never bedefiled with blood; and was heard to declare, with tears, that he hadrather die than put another to death. So intent upon making othershappy, that when once about to retire to sleep, and not being able torecall any particular act of beneficence performed during the day, hecried out in anguish, "Alas! I have lost a day!" And, finally, whomthe learned Kennet, in his Roman Antiquities, characterizes as "theonly prince in the world that has the character of _never doing an illaction_. " Yet, witnessing the mortal combats of the captives taken towar, killing each other in the amphitheatre, amidst the acclamationsof the populace, was a favorite amusement with Titus. At one time heexhibited shows of gladiators, which lasted one hundred days, duringwhich the amphitheatre was flooded with human blood. At another ofhis public exhibitions he caused five thousand wild beasts to bebaited in the amphitheatre. During the siege of Jerusalem, he setambushes to seize the famishing Jews, who stole out of the city bynight to glean food in the valleys: these he would first dreadfullyscourge, then torment them with all conceivable tortures, and, atlast, crucify them before the wall of the city. According toJosephus, not less than five hundred a day were thus tormented. Andwhen many of the Jews, frantic with famine, deserted to the Romans, Titus cut off their hands and drove them back. After the destructionof Jerusalem, he dragged to Rome one hundred thousand captives, soldthem as slaves, and scattered them through every province of theempire. 

The kindness, condescension, and forbearance of Adrian wereproverbial; he was one of the most eloquent orators of his age; andwhen pleading the cause of injured innocence, would melt and overwhelmthe auditors by the pathos of his appeals. It was his constant maxim, that he was an Emperor, not for his own good, but for the benefit ofhis fellow creatures. He stooped to relieve the wants of the meanestof his subjects, and would peril his life by visiting them when sickof infectious diseases; he prohibited, by law, masters from killingtheir slaves, gave to slaves legal trial, and exempted them fromtorture; yet towards certain individuals and classes, he showedhimself a monster of cruelty. He prided himself on his knowledge ofarchitecture, and ordered to execution the most celebrated architectof Rome, because he had criticised one of the Emperor's designs. Hebanished all the Jews from their native land, and drove them to theends of the earth; and unloosed the bloodhounds of persecution to rendin pieces his Christian subjects. 

The gentleness and benignity of the Emperor Aurelius, have beencelebrated in story and song. History says of him, 'Nothing couldquench his desire of being a blessing to mankind;' and Pope's eulogyof him is in the mouth of every schoolboy--'Like good Aurelius, lethim reign;' and yet, '_good_ Aurelius, ' lifted the flood gates of thefourth, and one of the most terrible persecutions against Christiansthat ever raged. He sent orders into different parts of his empire, to have the Christians murdered who would not deny Christ. Theblameless Polycarp, trembling under the weight of a hundred years, wasdragged to the stake and burned to ashes. Pothinus, Bishop of Lyons, at the age of ninety, was dragged through the streets, beaten, stoned, trampled upon by the soldiers, and left to perish. Tender virginswere put into nets, and thrown to infuriated wild bulls; others werefastened in red hot iron chairs; and venerable matrons were thrown tobe devoured by dogs. 

Constantine the Great has been the admiration of Christendom for hisvirtues. The early Christian writers adorn his justice, benevolenceand piety with the most exalted eulogy. He was baptized, and admittedto the Christian church. He abrogated Paganism, and made Christianitythe religion of his empire; he attended the councils of the earlyfathers of the church, consulted with the bishops, and devoted himselfwith the most untiring zeal to the propagation of Christianity, and tothe promotion of peace and love among its professors; he convened theCouncil of Nice, to settle disputes which had long distracted thechurch, appeared in the assembly with admirable modesty and temper, moderated the heats of the contending parties, implored them toexercise mutual forbearance, and exhorted them to love unfeigned, toforgive one another, as they hoped to be forgiven by Christ. Who wouldnot think it uncharitable to accuse such a man of barbarity in theexercise of power?--and yet he drove Arius and his associates intobanishment, for opinion's sake, denounced death against all with whomhis books should afterwards be found, and prohibited, on pain ofdeath, the exercise, however peaceably, of the functions of any otherreligion than Christianity. In a fit of jealousy and rage, he orderedhis innocent son, Crispus, to execution, without granting him ahearing; and upon finding him innocent, killed his own wife, who hadfalsely accused him. 

To the preceding maybe added Theodosius the Great, the last Romanemperor before the division of the empire. He was a member of theChristian church, and in his zeal against paganism, and what he deemedheresy, surpassed all who were before him. The Christian writers ofhis time speak of him as a most illustrious model of justice, generosity, magnanimity, benevolence, and every virtue. And yetTheodosius denounced capital punishments against those who held'heretical' opinions, and commanded inter-marriage between cousins tobe punished by burning the parties alive. On hearing that the peopleof Antioch had demolished the statues set up in that city, in honor ofhimself, and had threatened the governor, he flew into a transport offury, ordered the city to be laid in ashes, and all the inhabitants tobe slaughtered; and upon hearing of a resistance to his authority inThessalonica, in which one of his lieutenants was killed, he instantlyordered a _general massacre_ of the inhabitants; and in obedience tohis command, seven thousand men, women and children were butchered inthe space of three hours. 

The foregoing are a few of many instances in the history of Rome, andof a countless multitude in the history of the world, illustrating thetruth, that the lodgement of arbitrary power, in the best human hands, is always a fearfully perilous experiment; that the mildest tempers, the most humane and benevolent dispositions, the most blameless andconscientious previous life, with the most rigorous habits of justice, are no security, that, in a moment of temptation, the possessors ofsuch power will not make their subjects their victims; illustratingalso the truth, that, while men may exhibit nothing but honor, honesty, mildness, justice, and generosity, in their intercourse withthose of their own grade, or language, or nation, or hue, they maypractice towards others, for whom they have contempt and aversion, themost revolting meanness, perpetrate robbery unceasingly, and inflictthe severest privations, and the most barbarous cruelties. But this isnot all: history is full of examples, showing not only the effects ofarbitrary power on its victims, but its terrible reaction on those whoexercise it; blunting their sympathies, and hardening to adamant theirhearts toward _them_, at least, if not toward the human racegenerally. This is shown in the fact, that almost every tyrant in thehistory of the world, has entered upon the exercise of absolute powerwith comparative moderation; multitudes of them with markedforbearance and mildness, and not a few with the most signalcondescension, magnanimity, gentleness and compassion. Among theselast are included those who afterwards became the bloodiest monstersthat ever cursed the earth. Of the Roman Emperors, almost every one ofwhom perpetrated the most barbarous atrocities, Vitellius seems tohave been the only one who cruelly exercised his power from the_outset_. Most of the other emperors, sprung up into fiends in thehot-bed of arbitrary power. If they had not been plied with its fierystimulants, but had lived under the legal restraints of other men, instead of going to the grave under the curses of their generation, multitudes might have called them blessed. 

The moderation which has generally distinguished absolute monarchs atthe commencement of their reigns, was doubtless in some cases assumedfrom policy; in the greater number, however, as is manifest from theirhistory, it has been the natural workings of minds held in check byprevious associations, and not yet hardened into habits of cruelty, bybeing accustomed to the exercise of power without restraint. But asthose associations have weakened, and the wielding of uncontrolledsway has become a habit, like other evil doers, they have, in theexpressive language of Scripture, 'waxed worse and worse. '

For eighteen hundred years an involuntary shudder has run over thehuman race, at the mention of the name of Nero; yet, at thecommencement of his reign, he burst into tears when called upon tosign the death-warrant of a criminal, and exclaimed, 'Oh, that I hadnever learned to write!' His mildness and magnanimity won theaffections of his subjects; and it was not till the poison of absolutepower had worked within his nature for years, that it swelled him intoa monster. 

Tiberius, Claudius, and Caligula, began the exercise of their powerwith singular forbearance, and each grew into a prodigy of cruelty. Soaverse was Caligula to bloodshed, that he refused to look at a list ofconspirators against his own life, which was handed to him; yetafterwards, a more cruel wretch never wielded a sceptre. In his thirstfor slaughter, he wished all the necks in Rome _one_, that he mightcut them off at a blow. 

Domitian, at the commencement of his reign, carried his abhorrence ofcruelty to such lengths, that he forbad the sacrificing of oxen, andwould sit whole days on the judgment-seat, reversing the unjustdecisions of corrupt judges; yet afterwards, he surpassed even Nero incruelty. The latter was content to torture and kill by proxy, andwithout being a spectator; but Domitian could not be denied the luxuryof seeing his victims writhe, and hearing them shriek; and often withhis own hand directed the instrument of torture, especially when someillustrious senator or patrician was to be killed by piece-meal. Commodus began with gentleness and condescension, but soon became aterror and a scourge, outstripping in his atrocities most of hispredecessors. Maximin too, was just and generous when first investedwith power, but afterwards rioted in slaughter with the relish of afiend. History has well said of this monarch, 'the change in hisdisposition may readily serve to show how dangerous a thing is power, that could transform a person of such rigid virtues into such amonster. '

Instances almost innumerable might be furnished in the history ofevery age, illustrating the blunting of sympathies, and the totaltransformation of character wrought in individuals by the exercise ofarbitrary power. Not to detain the reader with long details, let asingle instance suffice. 

Perhaps no man has lived in modern times, whose name excites suchhorror as that of Robespierre. Yet it is notorious that he wasnaturally of a benevolent disposition, and tender sympathies. 

"Before the revolution, when as a judge in his native city of Arras hehad to pronounce judgment on an assassin, he took no food for two daysafterwards, but was heard frequently exclaiming, 'I am sure he wasguilty; he is a villain; but yet, to put a human being to death!!' Hecould not support the idea; and that the same necessity might notrecur, he relinquished his judicial office. --(See Laponneray's Life ofRobespierre, p. 8. ) Afterwards, in the Convention of 1791, he urgedstrongly the abolition of the punishment of death; and yet, forsixteen months, in 1793 and 1794, till he perished himself by the sameguillotine which he had so mercilessly used on others, no one at Parisconsigned and caused so many fellow-creatures to be put to death byit, with more ruthless insensibility. "--_Turner's Sacred history ofthe World_, vol. 2 p. 119. 

But it is time we had done with the objection, "such cruelties areINCREDIBLE. " If the objector still reiterates it, he shall have thelast word without farther molestation. 

An objection kindred to the preceding now claims notice. It is theprofound induction that slaves _must_ be well treated because_slaveholders say they are!_

OBJECTION. II. --'SLAVEHOLDERS PROTEST THAT THEY TREAT THEIR SLAVESWELL. '

Self-justification is human nature; self-condemnation is a sublimetriumph over it, and as rare as sublime. What culprits would beconvicted, if their own testimony were taken by juries as goodevidence? Slaveholders are on trial, charged with cruel treatment totheir slaves, and though in their own courts they can clear themselves_by their own oaths_, [21] they need not think to do it at the bar ofthe world. The denial of crimes, by men accused of them, goes fornothing as evidence in all _civilized_ courts; while the voluntaryconfession of them, is the best evidence possible, as it is testimony_against themselves_, and in the face of the strongest motives toconceal the truth. On the preceding pages, are hundreds of just suchtestimonies; the voluntary and explicit testimony of slaveholdersagainst themselves, their families and ancestors, their constituentsand their rulers; against their characters and their memories; againsttheir justice, their honesty, their honor and their benevolence. Nowlet candor decide between those two classes of slaveholders, which ismost entitled to credit; that which testifies in its own favor, justas self-love would dictate, or that which testifies against allselfish motives and in spite of them; and though it has nothing togain, but every thing to lose by such testimony, still utters it. 

But if there were no counter testimony, if all slaveholders wereunanimous in the declaration that the treatment of the slaves is_good_, such a declaration would not be entitled to a feather's weightas testimony; it is not _testimony_ but _opinion_. Testimony respectsmatters of _fact_, not matters of opinion: it is the declaration of awitness as to _facts_, not the giving of an opinion as to the natureor qualities of actions, or the _character_ of a course of conduct. Slaveholders organize themselves into a tribunal to adjudicate upontheir own conduct, and give us in their decisions, their estimate oftheir own character; informing us with characteristic modesty, thatthey have a high opinion of themselves; that in their own judgmentthey are very mild, kind, and merciful gentlemen! In these conceptionsof their own merits, and of the eminent propriety of their bearingtowards their slaves, slaveholders remind us of the Spaniard, whoalways took off his hat whenever he spoke of himself, and of theGovernor of Schiraz, who, from a sense of justice to his own characteradded to his other titles, those of, 'Flower of Courtesy, ' 'Nutmeg ofConsolation, ' and 'Rose of Delight. '

[Footnote 21: The law of which the following is an extract, exists inSouth Carolina. "If any slave shall suffer in life, limb or member, when no white person shall be present, or being present, shall refuseto give evidence, the owner or other person, who shall have the careof such slave, and in whose power such slave shall be, shall be deemedguilty of such offence, _unless_ such owner or other person shall makethe contrary appear by good and sufficient evidence, or shall BY HISOWN OATH CLEAR AND EXCULPATE HIMSELF. Which oath every court wheresuch offence shall be tried, is hereby compared to administer, and to_acquit the offender_, if clear proof of the offence be not made by_two_ witnesses at least. "--2 Brevard's Digest, 242. The state ofLouisiana has a similar law. ]

The _sincerity_ of those worthies, no one calls in question; theirreal notions of their own merits doubtless ascended into the sublime:but for aught that appears, they had not the arrogance to demand thattheir own notions of their personal excellence, should be taken as the_proof_ of it. Not so with our slaveholders. Not content with offeringincense at the shrine of their own virtues, they have the effronteryto demand, that the rest of the world shall offer it, because _they_do; and shall implicitly believe the presiding divinity to be a goodSpirit rather than a Devil, because _they_ call him so! In otherwords, since slaveholders profoundly appreciate their own gentledispositions toward their slaves, and their kind treatment of them, and everywhere protest that they do truly show forth these rareexcellencies, they demand that the rest of the world shall not onlybelieve that they _think_ so, but that they think _rightly_; thatthese notions of themselves are _true_, that their taking off theirhats to themselves proves them worthy of homage, and that theirassumption of the titles of, 'Flower of Kindness, ' and 'Nutmeg ofConsolation, ' is conclusive evidence that they deserve suchappellations!

Was there ever a more ridiculous doctrine, than that a man's opinionof his own actions is the true standard for measuring them, and thecertificate of their real qualities!--that his own estimate of histreatment of others; is to be taken as the true one, and suchtreatment be set down as _good_ treatment upon the strength of hisjudgment. He who argues the good treatment of the slave, from theslaveholder's _good opinion_ of such treatment, not only arguesagainst human nature and all history, his own common sense, and eventhe testimony of his senses, but refutes his own arguments by hisdaily practice. Every body acts on the presumption that men's feelingswill vary with their _practices_; that the light in which they viewindividuals and classes, and their feelings towards them, will modifytheir opinions of the treatment which they receive. In any case oftreatment that affects himself, his church, or his political party, noman so stultifies himself as to argue that such treatment must begood, because the _author_ of it thinks so. 

Who would argue that the American Colonies were well treated by themother country, because parliament thought so? Or that Poland was welltreated by Russia, because Nicholas thought so? Or that the treatmentof the Cherokees by Georgia is proved good by Georgia notions of it?Or that of the Greeks by the Turks, by Turkish opinions of it? Or thatof the Jews by almost all nations, by the judgment of theirpersecutors? Or that of the victims of the Inquisition, by theopinions of the Inquisitor general, or of the Pope and his cardinals?Or that of the Quakers and Baptists, at the hands of the Puritans, --tobe judged of by the opinions of the legislatures that authorized, andthe courts that carried it into effect. All those classes of personsdid not, in their own opinion, abuse their victims. If charged withperpetrating outrageous cruelty upon them, all those oppressors wouldhave repelled the charge with indignation. 

Our slaveholders chime lustily the same song, and no man with humannature within him, and human history before him, and with sense enoughto keep him out of the fire, will be gulled by such professions, unless his itch to be humbugged has put on the type of a downrightchronic incurable. We repeat it--when men speak of the treatment ofothers as being either good or bad, their declarations are notgenerally to be taken as testimony to matters of _fact_, so much asexpressions of _their own feelings_ towards those persons or classeswho are the subjects of such treatment. If those persons are theirfellow citizens; if they are in the same class of society withthemselves; of the same language, creed, and color; similar in theirhabits, pursuits, and sympathies; they will keenly feel any wrong doneto them, and denounce it as base, outrageous treatment; but let thesame wrongs be done to persons of a condition in all respects thereverse, persons whom they habitually despise, and regard only in thelight of mere conveniences, to be used for their pleasure, and theidea that such treatment is barbarous will be laughed at asridiculous. When we hear slaveholders say that their slaves are _welltreated_, we have only to remember that they are not speaking of_persons_, but of _property_; not of men and women, but of _chattels_and _things_; not of friends but of _vassals_ and _victims_; not ofthose whom they respect and honor, but of those whom they _scorn_ andtrample on; not of those with whom they sympathize, and co-operate, and interchange courtesies, but of those whom they regard withcontempt and aversion and disdainfully set with the dogs of theirflock. Reader, keep this fact in your mind, and you will have a clueto the slaveholder's definition of "_good treatment_. " Remember also, that a part of this "good treatment" of which the slaveholders boast, is plundering the slaves of all their inalienable rights, of theownership of their own bodies, of the use of their own limbs andmuscles, of all their time, liberty, and earnings, of the freeexercise of choice, of the rights of marriage and parental authority, of legal protection, of the right to be, to do, to go, to stay, tothink, to feel, to work, to rest, to eat, to sleep, to learn, toteach, to earn money, and to expend it, to visit, and to be visited, to speak, to be silent, to worship according to conscience, in fine, their right to be protected by just and equal laws, and to be_amenable to such only_. Of _all these rights the slaves areplundered_; and this is a _part_ of that "good treatment" of whichtheir plunderers boast! What then is the _rest_ of it? The above isenough for a sample, at least a specimen-brick from the kiln. Reader, we ask you no questions, but merely tell you what _you know_, when wesay that men and women who can habitually do such things to humanbeings, _can do_ ANY THING _to them_. 

The declarations of slaveholders, that they treat their slaves well, will put no man in a quandary, who keeps in mind this simpleprinciple, that the state of mind towards others, which leads one toinflict cruelties on them _blinds the inflicter to the real nature ofhis own acts_. To him, they do not _seem_ to be cruelties;consequently, when speaking of such treatment toward such persons, hewill protest that it is not cruelty; though if inflicted upon himselfor his friends, he would indignantly stigmatize it as atrociousbarbarity. The objector equally overlooks another every-day fact ofhuman nature, which is this, that cruelties invariably cease to _seem_cruelties when the _habit_ is formed though previously the mindregarded them as such, and shrunk from them with horror. 

The following fact, related by the late lamented THOMAS PRINGLE, whoseLife and Poems have published in England, is an appropriateillustration. Mr. Pringle states it on the authority of Captain W. F. Owen, of the Royal Navy. 

"When his Majesty's ships, the Leven and the Barracouta, employed insurveying the coast of Africa, were at Mozambique, in 1823, theofficers were introduced to the family of Senor Manuel Pedrod'Almeydra, a native of Portugal, who was a considerable merchantsettled on that coast; and it was an opinion agreed in by all, thatDonna Sophia d'Almeydra was the most superior woman they had seensince they left England, Captain Owen, the leader of the expedition, expressing to Senor d'Almeydra his detestation of slavery, the Senorreplied, 'You will not be long here before you change your sentiments. Look at my Sophia there. Before she would marry me, she made mepromise that I should give up the slave trade. When we first settledat Mozambique, she was continually interceding for the slaves, and she_constantly wept when I punished them_; and now she is among theslaves front morning to night; she regulates the whole of my slaveestablishment; she inquires into every offence committed by them, pronounces sentence upon the offender, and _stands by and sees thempunished_. '

"To this, Mr. Pringle, who was himself for six years a resident of theEnglish settlement at the Cape of Good Hope, adds, 'The writer of thisarticle has seen, in the course of five or six years, as great achange upon English ladies and gentleman of respectability, as thatdescribed to have taken place in Donna Sophia d'Almeydra; and one ofthe individuals whom he has in his eye, while he writes this passage, lately confessed to him this melancholy change, remarking at the sametime, 'how altered I am in my feelings with regard to slavery. I donot appear to myself the same person I was on my arrival in thiscolony, and if I would give the world for the feelings I then had, Icould not recall them. '"

Slaveholders know full well that familiarity with slavery producesindifference to its cruelties and reconciles the mind to them. Thelate Judge Tucker, a Virginia slaveholder and professor of law in theUniversity of William and Mary, in the appendix to his edition ofBlackstone's Commentaries, part 2, pp. 56, 57, commenting on the lawof Virginia previous to 1792, which outlawed fugitive slaves, says:

"Such are the cruelties to which slavery gives rise, such the horrorsto which the mind becomes _reconciled_ by its adoption. "

The following facts from the pen of CHARLES STUART, happily illustratethe same principle:

"A young lady, the daughter of a Jamaica planter, was sent at an earlyage to school to England, and after completing her education, returnedto her native country. 

"She is now settled with her husband and family in England. I visitedher near Bath, early last spring, (1834. ) Conversing on the abovesubject, the paralyzing effects of slaveholding on the heart, shesaid:

"'While at school in England, I often thought with peculiar tendernessof the kindness of a slave who had nursed and carried me about. Uponreturning to my father's, one of my first inquiries was about him. Iwas deeply afflicted to find that he was on the point of undergoing a"law flogging for having run away. " I threw myself at my father's feetand implored with tears, his pardon; but my father steadily replied, that it would ruin the discipline of the plantation, and that thepunishment must take place. I wept in vain, and retired so grieved anddisgusted, that for some days after, I could scarcely bear withpatience, the sight of my own father. But many months had not elapsedere _I was as ready as any body_ to seize the domestic whip, _and flogmy slaves without hesitation_. '

"This lady is one of the most Christian and noble minds of myacquaintance. She and her husband distinguished themselves severalyears ago, in Jamaica, by immediately emancipating their slaves. "

"A lady, now in the West Indies, was sent in her infancy, to herfriends, near Belfast, in Ireland, for education. She remained undertheir charge from five to fifteen years of age, and grew up everything which her friends could wish. At fifteen, she returned to theWest Indies--was married--and after some years paid her friends nearBelfast, a second visit. Towards white people, she was the sameelegant, and interesting woman as before; apparently full of everyvirtuous and tender feeling; but towards the colored people she waslike a tigress. If Wilberforce's name was mentioned, she would say, 'Oh, I wish we had the wretch in the West Indies, I would be one ofthe first to help to tear his heart out!'--and then she would tell ofthe manner in which the West Indian ladies used to treat their slaves. 'I have often, ' she said, 'when my women have displeased me, snatchedtheir baby from their bosom, and running with it to a well, have tiedmy shawl round its shoulders and pretended to be drowning it: oh, itwas so funny to hear the mother's screams!'--and then she laughedalmost convulsively at the recollection. "

Mr. JOHN M. NELSON, a native of Virginia, whose testimony is on apreceding page, furnishes a striking illustration of the principle inhis own case. He says:

"When I was quite a child, I recollect it grieved me very much to seeone tied up to be whipped, and I used to intercede _with tears intheir behalf_, and _mingle my cries with theirs_, and feel almostwilling to take part of the punishment. Yet such is the hardeningnature of such scenes, that from this kind of commiseration for thesuffering slave, I became so blunted that I could not only witnesstheir stripes with composure, but _myself_ inflict them, and thatwithout remorse. When I was perhaps fourteen or fifteen years of age, I undertook to correct a young fellow named Ned, for some supposedoffence, I think it was leaving a bridle out of its proper place; hebeing larger and stronger than myself took hold of my arms and heldme, in order to prevent my striking him; this I considered the heightof insolence, and cried for help, when my father and mother both camerunning to my rescue. My father stripped and tied him, and took himinto the orchard, where switches were plenty, and directed me to whiphim; when one switch wore out he supplied me with others. After I hadwhipped him a while, he fell on his knees to implore forgiveness, andI kicked him in the face; my father said, 'don't kick him but whiphim, ' this I did until his back was literally covered with _welts_. "

W. C. GILDERSLEEVE, Esq. , a native of Georgia, now elder of thePresbyterian church, Wilkes-barre, Penn. After describing the floggingof a slave, in which his hands were tied together, and the slavehoisted by a rope, so that his feet could not touch the ground; inwhich condition one hundred lashes were inflicted, says:

"I stood by and witnessed the whole without feeling the leastcompassion; so _hardening_ is the influence of slavery that it _verymuch destroys feeling for the slave_. "

Mrs. CHILD, in her admirable "Appeal, " has the following remarks:

"The ladies who remove from the free States into the slaveholding onesalmost invariably write that the sight of slavery was at firstexceedingly painful; but that they soon become habituated to it; andafter a while, they are very apt to vindicate the system, upon theground that it is extremely convenient to have such submissiveservants. This reason was actually given by a lady of my acquaintance, who is considered an unusually fervent Christian. Yet Christianityexpressly teaches us to love our neighbor as ourselves. This shows howdangerous it is, for even the best of us, to become _accustomed_ towhat is wrong. 

"A judicious and benevolent friend lately told me the story of one ofher relatives, who married a slave owner, and removed to hisplantation. The lady in question was considered very amiable, and hada serene, affectionate expression of countenance. After several yearsresidence among her slaves, she visited New England. 'Her history waswritten in her face, ' said my friend; 'its expression had changed intothat of a fiend. She brought but few slaves with her; and those fewwere of course compelled to perform additional labor. One faithfulnegro woman nursed the twins of her mistress, and did all the washing, ironing, and scouring. If, after a sleepless night with the restlessbabes, (driven from the bosom of their mother, ) she performed hertoilsome avocations with diminished activity, her mistress, with herown lady-like hands, applied the cowskin, and the neighborhoodresounded with the cries of her victim. The instrument of punishmentwas actually kept hanging in the entry, to the no small disgust of herNew England visitors. 'For my part, ' continued my friend, 'I did nottry to be polite to her; for I was not hypocrite enough to conceal myindignation. '"

The fact that the greatest cruelties may be exercised quiteunconsciously when cruelty has become a habit, and that at the sametime, the mind may feel great sympathy and commiseration towards otherpersons and even towards irrational animals, is illustrated in thecase of Tameriane the Great. In his Life, written by himself, hespeaks with the greatest sincerity and tenderness of his grief athaving accidentally crushed an ant; and yet he ordered melted lead tobe poured down the throats of certain persons who drank wine contraryto his commands. He was manifestly sincere in thinking himself humane, and when speaking of the most atrocious cruelties perpetrated byhimself, it does not seem to ruffle in the least the self-complacencywith which he regards his own humanity and piety. In one place hesays, "I never undertook anything but I commenced it placing my faithon God"--and he adds soon after, "the people of Shiraz took part withShah Mansur, and put my governor to death; I therefore ordered _ageneral massacre of all the inhabitants_. "

It is one of the most common caprices of human nature, for the heartto become by habit, not only totally insensible to certain forms ofcruelty, which at first gave it inexpressible pain, but even to findits chief amusement in such cruelties, till utterly intoxicated bytheir stimulation; while at the same time the mind seems to be painedas keenly as ever, at forms of cruelty to which it has not becomeaccustomed, thus retaining _apparently_ the same generalsusceptibilities. Illustrations of this are to be found every where;one happens to lie before us. Bourgoing, in his history of modernSpain, speaking of the bull fights, the barbarous national amusementof the Spaniards, says:

"Young ladies, old men, people of all ages and of all characters arepresent, and yet the habit of attending these bloody festivals doesnot correct their weakness or their timidity, nor injure the sweetnessof their manners. I have moreover known foreigners, distinguished bythe gentleness of their manners, who experienced at first seeing abull-fight such very violent emotions as made them turn pale, and theybecame ill; but, notwithstanding, this entertainment became afterwardsan irresistible attraction, without operating any revolution in theircharacters. " Modern State of Spain, by J. F. Bourgoing, MinisterPlenipotentiary from France to the Court of Madrid, Vol ii. , page 342. 

It is the _novelty_ of cruelty, rather than the _degree_, which repelsmost minds. Cruelty in a _new_ form, however slight, will often pain amind that is totally unmoved by the most horrible cruelties in a formto which it is _accustomed_. When Pompey was at the zenith of hispopularity in Rome, he ordered some elephants to be tortured in theamphitheatre for the amusement of the populace; this was the firsttime they had witnessed the torture of those animals, and though foryears accustomed to witness in the same place, the torture of lions, tigers, leopards, and almost all sorts of wild beasts, as well as thatof men of all nations, and to shout acclamations over their agonies, yet, this _novel form_ of cruelty so shocked the beholders, that themost popular man in Rome was execrated as a cruel monster, and camenear falling a victim to the fury of those who just before were readyto adore him. 

We will now briefly notice another objection, somewhat akin to thepreceding, and based mainly upon the same and similar fallacies. 

OBJECTION III. --'SLAVEHOLDERS ARE PROVERBIAL FOR THEIR KINDNESS, HOSPITALITY, BENEVOLENCE, AND GENEROSITY. '

Multitudes scout as fictions the cruelties inflicted upon slaves, because slaveholders are famed for their courtesy and hospitality. They tell us that their generous and kind attentions to their guests, and their well-known sympathy for the suffering, sufficiently provethe charges of cruelty brought against them to be calumnies, of whichtheir uniform character is a triumphant refutation. 

Now that slaveholders are proverbially hospitable to their guests, andspare neither pains nor expense in ministering to their accommodationand pleasure, is freely admitted and easily accounted for. That thosewho make their inferiors work for them, without pay, should becourteous and hospitable to those of their equals and superiors whosegood opinions they desire, is human nature in its every-day dress. Theobjection consists of a fact and an inference: the fact, thatslaveholders have a special care to the accommodation of their_guests;_ the inference, that therefore they must seek the comfort oftheir _slaves_--that as they are bland and obliging to their equals, they must be mild and condescending to their inferiors--that as thewrongs of their own grade excite their indignation, and their woesmove their sympathies, they must be touched by those of theirchattels--that as they are full of pains-taking toward those whosegood opinions and good offices they seek, they will, of course, showspecial attention to those to whose good opinions they areindifferent, and whose good offices they can _compel_--that as theyhonor the literary and scientific, they must treat with highconsideration those to whom they deny the alphabet--that as they arecourteous to certain _persons_, they must be so to "property"--eagerto anticipate the wishes of visitors, they cannot but gratify those oftheir vassals--jealous for the rights of the Texans, quick to feel atthe disfranchisement of Canadians and of Irishmen, alive to theoppressions of the Greeks and the Poles, they must feel keenly fortheir _negroes!_ Such conclusions from such premises do not call forserious refutation. Even a half-grown boy, who should argue, thatbecause men have certain feelings toward certain persons in certaincircumstances, they must have the same feelings toward all persons inall circumstances, or toward persons in opposite circumstances, oftotally different grades, habits, and personal peculiarities, mightfairly be set down as a hopeless simpleton: and yet, men of sense andreflection on other subjects, seem bent upon stultifying themselves byjust such shallow inferences from the fact, that slaveholders arehospitable and generous to certain persons in certain grades ofsociety belonging to their own caste. On the ground of this reasoning, all the crimes ever committed may be disproved, by showing, that theirperpetrators were hospitable and generous to those who sympathized andco-operated with them. To prove that a man does not hate one of hisneighbors, it is only necessary to show that he loves another; to makeit appear that he does not treat contemptuously the ignorant, he hasonly to show that he bows respectfully to the learned; to demonstratethat he does not disdain his inferiors, lord it over his dependents, and grind the faces of the poor, he need only show that he is politeto the rich, pays deference to titles and office, and fawns for favorupon those above him! The fact that a man always smiles on hiscustomers, proves that he never scowls at those who dun him! and sincehe has always a melodious "good morning!" for "gentlemen of propertyand standing, " it is certain that he never snarls at beggars. He whois quick to make room for a doctor of divinity, will, of course, seeto it that he never runs against a porter; and he who clears the wayfor a lady, will be sure never to rub against a market woman, orjostle an apple-seller's board. If accused of beating down hislaundress to the lowest fraction, of making his boot-black call adozen times for his pay, of higgling and screwing a fish boy till hetakes off two cents, or of threatening to discharge his seamstressunless she will work for a shilling a day, how easy to brand it all asslander, by showing that he pays his minister in advance, is generousin Christmas presents, gives a splendid new-year's party, expendshundreds on elections, and puts his name with a round sum on thesubscription paper of the missionary society. 

Who can forget the hospitality of King Herod, that model of generosity"beyond all ancient fame, " who offered half his kingdom to a guest, asa compensation for an hour's amusement. --Could such a noble spirithave murdered John the Baptist? Incredible! Joab too! how his softheart was pierced at the exile of Absalom! and how his bowels yearnedto restore him to his home! Of course, it is all fiction about hisassassinating his nephew, Amasa, and Abner the captain of the host!Since David twice spared the life of Saul when he came to murder him, wept on the neck of Jonathan, threw himself upon the ground in anguishwhen his child sickened, and bewailed, with a broken heart, the lossof Absalom--it proves that he did not coolly plot and deliberatelyconsummate the murder of Uriah! As the Government of the United Statesgenerously gave a township of land to General La Fayette, it provesthat they have never defrauded the Indians of theirs! So the fact, that the slaveholders of the present Congress are, to a man, favorableto recognizing the independence of Texas, with her fifty or sixtythousand inhabitants, _before she has achieved it_, and before it isrecognized by any other government, proves that these sameslaveholders do _not oppose_ the recognition of Hayti, with hermillion of inhabitants, whose independence was achieved nearly half acentury ago, and which is recognized by the most powerful governmentson earth!

But, seriously, no man is so slightly versed in human nature as not toknow that men habitually exercise the most opposite feelings, andindulge in the most opposite practices toward different persons ordifferent classes of persons around them. No man has ever lived whowas more celebrated for his scrupulous observance of the most exactjustice, and for the illustration furnished in his life of the noblestnatural virtues, than the Roman Cato. His strict adherence to thenicest rules of equity--his integrity, honor, and incorruptiblefaith--his jealous watchfulness over the rights of his fellowcitizens, and his generous devotion to their interest, procured forhim the sublime appellation of "The Just. " Towards _freemen_ his lifewas a model of every thing just and noble: but to his slaves he was amonster. At his meals, when the dishes were not done to his liking, orwhen his slaves were careless or inattentive in serving, he wouldseize a thong and violently beat them, in presence of hisguests. --When they grew old or diseased, and were no longerserviceable, however long and faithfully they might have served him, he either turned them adrift and left them to perish, or starved themto death in his own family. No facts in his history are betterauthenticated than these. 

No people were ever more hospitable and munificent than the Romans, and none more touched with the sufferings of others. Their publictheatres often rung with loud weeping, thousands sobbing convulsivelyat once over fictitious woes and imaginary sufferers: and yet thesesame multitudes would shout amidst the groans of a thousand dyinggladiators, forced by their conquerors to kill each other in theamphitheatre for the _amusement_ of the public. [22]

[Footnote 22: Dr. Leland, in his "Necessity of a Divine Revelation, "thus describes the prevalence of these shows among the Romans:--"Theywere exhibited at the funerals of great and rich men, and on manyother occasions, by the Roman consuls, praetors, aediles, senators, knights, priests, and almost all that bore great offices in the state, as well as by the emperors; and in general, by all that had a mind tomake an interest with the people, who were extravagantly fond of thosekinds of shows. Not only the men, but the women, ran eagerly afterthem; who were, by the prevalence of custom, so far divested of thatcompassion and softness which is natural to the sex, that they took apleasure in seeing them kill one another, and only desired that theyshould fall genteelly, and in an agreeable attitude. Such was thefrequency of those shows, and so great the number of men that werekilled on those occasions, that Lipsius says, no war caused suchslaughter of mankind, as did these sports of pleasure, throughout theseveral provinces of the vast Roman empire. "--_Leland's Neces. Of Div. Rev. _ vol. Ii. P. 51. ]

Alexander, the tyrant of Phaeres, sobbed like a child over themisfortunes of the Trojan queens, when the tragedy of Andromache andHecuba was played before him; yet he used to murder his subjects everyday for no crime, and without even setting up the pretence of any, butmerely _to make himself sport_. 

The fact that slaveholders may be full of benevolence and kindnesstoward their equals and toward whites generally, even so much so as toattract the esteem and admiration of all, while they treat with themost inhuman neglect their own slaves, is well illustrated by acircumstance mentioned by the Rev. Dr. CHANNING, of Boston, (who oncelived in Virginia, ) is his work on slavery, p. 162, 1st edition:--

"I cannot, " says the doctor, "forget my feelings on visiting ahospital belonging to the plantation of a gentleman _highly esteemedfor his virtues_, and whose manners and conversation expressed much_benevolence_ and _conscientiousness_. When I entered with him thehospital, the first object on which my eye fell was a young woman veryill, probably approaching death. She was stretched on the floor. Herhead rested on something like a pillow, but her body and limbs wereextended on the hard boards. The owner, I doubt not, had, at least, asmuch kindness as myself; but he was so used to see the slaves livingwithout common comforts, that the idea of unkindness in the presentinstance did not enter his mind. "

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, an elder of a Presbyterian church in Rochester, N. Y. Who resided some years in Virginia, says:--

"On one occasion I was crossing the plantation and approaching thehouse of a friend, when I met him, _rifle in hand_, in pursuit of oneof his negroes, declaring he would shoot him in a moment if he got hiseye upon him. It appeared that the slave had refused to be flogged, and ran off to avoid the consequences; _and yet the generoushospitality of this man to myself, and white friends generally, scarcely knew any bounds. _

"There were amongst my slaveholding friends and acquaintances, personswho were as _humane_ and _conscientious_ as men can be, and persist inthe impious claim of _property_ in a fellow being. Still I canrecollect but _one instance_ of corporal punishment, whether thesubject were male or female, in which the infliction was not on the_bare back_ with the _raw hide_, or a similar instrument, the subjectbeing _tied_ during the operation to a post or tree. The _exception_was under the following circumstances. I had taken a walk with afriend on his plantation, and approaching his gang of slaves, I satdown whilst he proceeded to the spot where they were at work; andaddressing himself somewhat earnestly to a female who was wielding thehoe, in a moment caught up what I supposed a _tobacco stick_, (a sticksome three feet in length on which the tobacco, when out, is suspendedto dry. ) about the size of a _man's wrist_, and laid on a number ofblows furiously over her head. The woman crouched, and seemed stunnedwith the blows, but presently recommenced the motion of her hoe. "

Dr. DAVID NELSON, a native of Tennessee, and late president of MarionCollege, Missouri, in a lecture at Northampton, Mass. In January, 1839, made the following statement:--

"I remember a young lady who played well on the piano, and was veryready to weep over any fictitious tale of suffering. I was presentwhen one of her slaves lay on the floor in a high fever, and we fearedshe might not recover. I saw that young lady _stamp upon her with herfeet;_ and the only remark her mother made was, 'I am afraid Evelinais too _much_ prejudiced against poor Mary. '"

General WILLIAM EATON, for some years U. S. Consul at Tunis, andcommander of the expedition against Tripoli, in 1895, thus gives ventto his feelings at the sight of many hundreds of Sardinians who hadbeen enslaved by the Tunisians:

"Many have died of grief, and the others linger out a life lesstolerable than death. Alas! remorse seizes my whole soul when Ireflect, that this is indeed but a copy of the very barbarity which_my eyes have seen_ in my own native country. _How frequently_, in thesouthern states of my own country, have I seen _weeping mothers_leading the guiltless infant to the sales with as _deep anguish_ as ifthey led them to the slaughter; and _yet felt my bosom tranquil_ inthe view of these aggressions on defenceless humanity. But when I seethe same enormities practised upon beings whose complexions and bloodclaim kindred with my own, _I curse the perpetrators, and weep overthe wretched victims of their rapacity. _ Indeed, truth and justicedemand from me the confession, that the Christian slaves among thebarbarians of Africa are treated with more humanity than the Africanslaves among professing Christians of civilized America; and yet_here_ [in Tunis] sensibility _bleeds at every pore_ for the wretcheswhom fate has doomed to slavery. "

Rev. H. LYMAN, late pastor of the free Presbyterian Church, Buffalo, N. Y. Who spent the winter of 1832-3 at the south, says:--

"In the interior of Mississippi I was invited to the house of aplanter, where I was received with great cordiality, and entertainedwith marked hospitality. 

"There I saw a master in the midst of his household slaves. Theevening passed most pleasantly, as indeed it must, where assiduoushospitalities are exercised towards the guest. 

"Late in the morning, when I had gained the tardy consent of my hostto go on my way, as a final act of kindness, he called a slave to showme across the fields by a nearer route to the main road. 'David, ' saidhe, 'go and show this gentleman as far as the post-office. Do you knowthe big bay tree?' 'Yes, sir. ' 'Do you know where the cotton mill is?''Yes, sir. ' 'Where Squire Malcolm's old field is?' 'Y--e--s, sir, 'said David, (beginning to be bewildered). 'Do you know where SquireMalcolm's cotton field is?' 'No, sir. ' 'No, sir, ' said the enragedmaster, _levelling his gun at him_. 'What do you stand here, saying, Yes, yes, yes, for, when you don't know?' All this was accompaniedwith _threats_ and _imprecations_, and a manner that contrastedstrangely with the _religious conversation and gentle manners_ of theprevious evening. "

The Rev. JAMES H. DICKEY, formerly a slaveholder in South Carolina, now pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Hennepin, Ill. In his "Reviewof Nevins' Biblical Antiquities, " after asserting that slaveholdingtends to beget "a spirit of cruelty and tyranny, and to destroy everygenerous and noble feeling, " (page 33, ) he adds the following as anote:--

"It may be that this will be considered censorious, and the proverbialgenerosity and hospitality of the south will be appealed to as a fullconfutation of it. The writer thinks he can appreciate southernkindness and hospitality. Having been born in Virginia, raised andeducated in South Carolina and Kentucky, he is altogether southern inhis feelings, and habits, and modes of familiar conversation. He cansay of the south as Cowper said of England, 'With all thy faults Ilove thee still, my country. ' And nothing but the abominations ofslavery could have induced him willingly to forsake a land endeared tohim by all the associations of childhood and youth. 

"Yet it is candid to admit that it is not all gold that glitters. There is a fictitious kindness and hospitality. The famous Robin Hoodwas kind and generous--no man more hospitable--he robbed the rich tosupply the necessities of the poor. Others rob the poor to bestowgifts and lavish kindness and hospitality on their rich friends andneighbors. It is an easy matter for a man to appear kind and generous, when he bestows that which others have earned. 

"I said, there is a fictitious kindness and hospitality. I once knew aman who left his wife and children three days, without fire-wood, without bread-stuff and without shoes, while the ground was coveredwith snow--that he might indulge in his cups. And when I attempted toexpostulate with him, he took the subject out of my hands, andexpatiating on the evils of intemperance more eloquently than I could, concluded by warning me, _with tears_, to avoid the snares of thelatter. He had tender feelings, yet a hard heart. I once knew a younglady of polished manners and accomplished education, who would weepwith sympathy over the fictitious woes exhibited in a novel. Andwaking from her reverie of grief, while her eye was yet wet withtears, would call her little waiter, and if she did not appear at thefirst call, would rap her head with her thimble till my head ached. 

"I knew a man who was famed for kindly sympathies. He once took offhis shirt and gave it to a poor white man. The same man hired a blackman, and gave him for his _daily task_, through the winter, to feedthe beasts, keep fires, and make one hundred rails: and in case offailure the lash was applied so freely, that, in the spring, his backwas _one continued sore, from his shoulders to his waist_. Yet thisman was a professor of religion, and famous for his tender sympathiesto white men!"

OBJECTION IV. --'NORTHERN VISITORS AT THE SOUTH TESTIFY THAT THE SLAVESARE NOT CRUELLY TREATED. '

ANSWER:--Their knowledge on this point must have been derived, eitherfrom the slaveholders and overseers themselves, or from the slaves, orfrom their own observation. If from the slaveholders, _their_testimony has already been weighed and found wanting; if they derivedit from the slaves, they can hardly be so simple as to suppose thatthe _guest, associate and friend of the master_, would be likely todraw from his _slaves_ any other testimony respecting his treatment ofthem, than such as would please _him_. The great shrewdness and tactexhibited by slaves in _keeping themselves out of difficulty_, whenclose questioned by strangers as to their treatment, cannot fail tostrike every accurate observer. The following remarks of CHIEF JUSTICEHENDERSON, a North Carolina slaveholder, in his decision (in 1830, ) inthe case of the State _versus_ Charity, 2 Devereaux's North CarolinaReports, 513, illustrate the folly of arguing the good treatment ofslaves from their own declarations, _while in the power of theirmasters_. In the case above cited, the Chief Justice, in refusing topermit a master to give in evidence, declarations made to him by hisslave, says of masters and slaves generally--

"The master has an almost _absolute control_ over the body and _mind_of his slave. The master's _will_ is the slave's _will_. All his acts, _all his sayings_, are made with a view to propitiate his master. Hisconfessions are made, not from a love of truth, not from a sense ofduty, not to speak a falsehood, but to _please his master_--and it isin vain that his master tells him to speak the truth and conceals fromhim how he wishes the question answered. The slave _will_ ascertain, or, which is the same thing, think that he has ascertained _the wishesof his master, _ and MOULD HIS ANSWER ACCORDINGLY. We therefore moreoften get the wishes of the master, or the slave's belief of hiswishes, than the truth. "

The following extract of a letter from the Hon. SETH M. GATES, memberelect of the next Congress, furnishes a clue by which to interpret thelooks, actions, and protestations of slaves, when in the presence oftheir masters' guests, and the pains sometimes taken by slaveholders, in teaching their slaves the art of _pretending_ that they are treatedwell, love their masters, are happy, &c. The letter is dated Leroy, Jan. 4, 1839. 

"I have sent your letter to Rev. Joseph M. Sadd, Castile, Geneseecounty, who resided five years in a slave state, and left, disgustedwith slavery. I trust he will give you some facts. I remember onefact, which his wife witnessed. A relative, where she boarded, returning to his plantation after a temporary absence, was not met byhis servants with such demonstrations of joy as was their wont. Heordered his horse put out, took down his whip, ordered his servants tothe barn, and gave them a most cruel beating, because they did not runout to meet him, and pretend great attachment to him. Mrs. Sadd hadoverheard the servants agreeing not to go out, before his return, asthey said _they did not love him_--and this led her to watch hisconduct to them. This man was a professor of religion!"

If these northern visitors derived their information that the slavesare _not_ cruelly treated from _their own observation_, it amounts tothis, _they did not see_ cruelties inflicted on the slaves. To whichwe reply, that the preceding pages contain testimony from hundreds ofwitnesses, who testify that they _did see_ the cruelties whereof theyaffirm. Besides this, they contain the solemn declarations of scoresof slaveholders themselves, in all parts of the slave states, that theslaves are cruelly treated. These declarations are moreover fullycorroborated, by the laws of slave states, by a multitude ofadvertisements in their newspapers, describing runaway slaves, bytheir scars, brands, gashes, maimings, cropped ears, iron collars, chains, &c. &c. 

Truly, after the foregoing array of facts and testimony, and after theobjectors' forces have one after another filed off before them, now tomarch up a phalanx of northern _visitors_, is to beat a retreat. 'Visitors!' What insight do casual visitors get into the tempers anddaily practices of those whom they visit, or of the treatment thattheir slaves receive at their hands, especially if these visitors arestrangers, and from a region where there are no slaves, and whichclaims to be opposed to slavery? What opportunity has a stranger, anda temporary guest, to learn the every-day habits and caprices of hishost? Oh, these northern visitors tell us they have visited scores offamilies at the south and never saw a master or mistress whip theirslaves. Indeed! They have, doubtless, visited hundreds of families atthe north--did they ever see, on such occasions, the father or motherwhip their children? If so, they must associate with very ill-bredpersons. Because well-bred parents do not whip their children in thepresence, or within the hearing of their guests are we to infer thatthey never do it _out_ of their sight and hearing? But perhaps thefact that these visitors do not _remember_ seeing slaveholders striketheir slaves, merely proves, that they had so little feeling for them, that though they might be struck every day in their presence, yet asthey were only slaves and 'niggers, ' it produced no effect upon them;consequently they have no impressions to recall. These visitors havealso doubtless _rode_ with scores of slaveholders. Are they quitecertain they ever saw them whip their _horses_? and can they recallthe persons, times, places, and circumstances? But even if thesevisitors regarded the slaves with some kind feelings, when they firstwent to the south, yet being constantly with their oppressors, seeingthem used as articles of property, accustomed to hear them chargedwith all kinds of misdemeanors, their ears filled with complaints oftheir laziness, carelessness, insolence, obstinacy, stupidity, thefts, elopements, &c. And at the same time, receiving themselves the mostgratifying attentions and caresses from the same persons, who, whilethey make to them these representations of their slaves, are givingthem airings in their coaches, making parties for them, taking them onexcursions of pleasure, lavishing upon them their choicesthospitalities, and urging them to protract indefinitely theirstay--what more natural than for the flattered guest to admire suchhospitable people, catch their spirit, and fully sympathize with theirfeelings toward their slaves, regarding with increased disgust andaversion those who can habitually tease and worry such loveliness andgenerosity[23]. After the visitor had been in contact with theslave-holding spirit long enough to have imbibed it, (no very tediousprocess, ) a cuff, or even a kick administered to a slave, would not belikely to give him such a shock that his memory would long retain thetraces of it. But lest we do these visitors injustice, we will supposethat they carried with them to the south humane feelings for theslave, and that those feelings remained unblunted; still, whatopportunity could they have to witness the actual condition of theslaves? They come in contact with the house-servants only, and as ageneral thing, with none but the select ones of these, the_parlor_-servants; who generally differ as widely in their appearanceand treatment from the cooks and scullions in the kitchen, as parlorfurniture does from the kitchen utensils. Certain servants areassigned to the parlor, just as certain articles of furniture areselected for it, _to be seen_--and it is no less ridiculous to inferthat the kitchen scullions are clothed and treated like those servantswho wait at the table, and are in the presence of guests, than toinfer that the kitchen is set out with sofas, ottomans, piano-fortes, and full-length mirrors, because the parlor is. But the house-slavesare only a fraction of the whole number. The _field-hands_ constitutethe great mass of the slaves, and these the visitors rarely get aglimpse at. They are away at their work by day-break, and do notreturn to their huts till dark. Their huts are commonly at somedistance from the master's mansion, and the fields in which theylabor, generally much farther, and out of sight. If the visitortraverses the plantation, care is taken that he does not go alone; ifhe expresses a wish to see it, the horses are saddled, and the masteror his son gallops the rounds with him; if he expresses a desire tosee the slaves at work, his conductor will know _where_ to take him, and _when_, and _which_ of them to show; the overseer, too, knowsquite too well the part he has to act on such occasions, to shock theuninitiated ears of the visitors with the shrieks of his victims. Itis manifest that visitors can see only the least repulsive parts ofslavery, inasmuch as it is wholly at the option of the master, whatparts to show them; as a matter of necessity, he can see only the_outside_--and that, like the outside of doorknobs and andirons isfurbished up to be _looked at_. So long as it is human nature to wear_the best side out_, so long the northern guests of southernslaveholders will see next to nothing of the reality of slavery. Thosevisitors may still keep up their autumnal migrations to the slavestates, and, after a hasty survey of the tinsel hung before thecurtain of slavery, without a single glance behind it, and at thepaint and varnish that _cover up_ dead men's bones, and while thosewho have hoaxed them with their smooth stories and white-washedspecimens of slavery, are tittering at their gullibility, they returnin the spring on the same fool's-errand with their predecessors, retailing their lesson, and mouthing the praises of the masters, andthe comforts of the slaves. They now become village umpires in alldisputes about the condition of the slaves, and each thence forwardends all controversies with his oracular, "I've _seen_, and sure Iought to know. "

[Footnote 23: Well saith the Scripture, "A gift blindeth the eyes. " Theslaves understand this, though the guest may not; they know very wellthat they have no sympathy to expect from their master's guests; thatthe good cheer of the "big house, " and the attentions shown them, willgenerally commit them in their master's favor, and against themselves. Messrs. Thome and Kimball, in their late work, state the followingfact, in illustration of this feeling among the negro apprentices inJamaica. 

"The governor of one of the islands, shortly after his arrival, dinedwith one of the wealthiest proprietors. The next day one of thenegroes of the estate said to another, "De new gubner been_poison'd_. " "What dat you say?" inquired the other in astonishment, "De gubner been _poison'd_! Dah, now!--How him poisoned?" "_Him eatmassa's turtle soup last night_, " said the shrewd negro. The othertook his meaning at once; and his sympathy for the governor wasturned into concern for himself, when he perceived that thepoison was one from which he was likely to suffer more than hisexcellency. "--_Emancipation in the West Indies_, p. 334. ]

But all northern visitors at the south are not thus easily gulled. Many of them, as the preceding pages show, have too much sense to becaught with chaff. 

We may add here, that those classes of visitors whose representationsof the treatment of slaves are most influential in moulding theopinions of the free states, are ministers of the gospel, agents ofbenevolent societies, and teachers who have traveled and temporarilyresided in the slave states--classes of persons less likely than anyothers to witness cruelties, because slaveholders generally take morepains to keep such visitors in ignorance than others, because theirvocations would furnish them fewer opportunities for witnessing them, and because they come in contact with a class of society in whichfewer atrocities are committed than in any other, and that too, undercircumstances which make it almost impossible for them to witnessthose which are actually committed. 

Of the numerous classes of persons from the north who temporarilyreside in the slave states, the mechanics who find employment on the_plantations_, are the only persons who are in circumstances to look"behind the scenes. " Merchants, pedlars, venders of patents, drovers, speculators, and almost all descriptions of persons who go from thefree states to the south to make money see little of slavery, except_upon the road_, at public inns, and in villages and cities. 

Let not the reader infer from what has been said, that the_parlor_-slaves, chamber-maids, &c. In the slave states are nottreated with cruelty--far from it. They often experience terribleinflictions; not generally so terrible or so frequent as thefield-hands, and very rarely in the presence of guests[24]House-slaves are for the most part treated far better thanplantation-slaves, and those under the immediate direction of themaster and mistress, than those under overseers and drivers. It isquite worthy of remark, that of the thousands of northern men who havevisited the south, and are always lauding the kindness of slaveholdersand the comfort of the slaves, protesting that they have never seencruelties inflicted on them, &c. Each perhaps, without exception, hassome story to tell which reveals, better perhaps than the mostbarbarous butchery could do, a public sentiment toward slaves, showingthat the most cruel inflictions must of necessity be the constantportion of the slaves. 

[Footnote 24: Rev. JOSEPH M. SADD, a Presbyterian clergyman, inCastile, Genesee county, N. Y. Recently from Missouri, where he haspreached five years, in the midst of slaveholders, says, in a letterjust received, speaking of the pains taken by slaveholders to concealfrom the eyes of strangers and visitors, the cruelties which theyinflict upon their slaves--

"It is difficult to be an eye-witness of these things; the master andmistress, almost invariably punish their slaves only in the presenceof themselves and other slaves. "]

Though facts of this kind lie thick in every corner, the reader will, we are sure, tolerate even a needless illustration, if told that it isfrom the pen of N. P. Rogers, Esq. Of Concord, N. H. Who, whatever hewrites, though it be, as in this case, a mere hasty letter, alwaysfinds readers to the end. 

"At a court session at Guilford, Stafford county, N. H. In August, 1837, the Hon. Daniel M. Durell, of Dover, formerly Chief Justiceof the Common Pleas for that state, and a member of Congress, was charging the abolitionists, in presence of several gentlemenof the bar, at their boarding house, with exaggerations andmisrepresentations of slave treatment at the south. 'One instancein particular, ' he witnessed, he said, where he 'knew theymisrepresented. It was in the Congregational meeting house at Dover. He was passing by, and saw a crowd entering and about the door; and oninquiry, found that _abolition was going on in there_. He stood in theentry for a moment, and found the Englishman, Thompson, was holdingforth. The fellow was speaking of the treatment of slaves; and he saidit was no uncommon thing for masters, when exasperated with the slave, to hang him up by the two thumbs, and flog him. I knew the fellow liedthere, ' said the judge, 'for I had traveled through the south, fromGeorgia north, and I never saw a single instance of the kind. Thefellow said it was a common thing. ' 'Did you see any _exasperatedmasters_, Judge, ' said I, 'in your journey?' 'No sir, ' said he, 'notan individual instance. ' 'You hardly are able to convict Mr. Thompsonof falsehood, then, Judge, ' said I, 'if I understood you right. Hespoke, as I understood you, of _exasperated masters_--and you say youdid not see any. Mr. Thompson did not say it was common for masters ingood humor to hang up their slaves. ' The Judge did not perceive themateriality of the distinction. 'Oh, they misrepresent and lie aboutthis treatment of the niggers, ' he continued. 'In going through allthe states I visited, I do not now remember a single instance of crueltreatment. Indeed, I remember of seeing but one nigger struck, duringmy whole journey. There was one instance. We were riding in the stage, pretty early one morning, and we met a black fellow, driving a span ofhorses, and a load (I think he said) of hay. The fellow turned outbefore we got to him, clean down into the ditch, as far as he couldget. He knew, you see, what to depend on, if he did not give the road. Our driver, as we passed the fellow, fetched him a smart crack withhis whip across the chops. He did not make any noise, though I guessit hurt him some--he grinned. --Oh, no! these fellows exaggerate. Theniggers, as a general thing, are kindly treated. There may beexceptions, but I saw nothing of it. ' (By the way, the Judge did notknow there were any abolitionists present. ) 'What did you _do_ to thedriver, Judge, ' said I, 'for striking that man?' 'Do, ' said he, 'I didnothing to him, to be sure. ' 'What did you _say_ to him, sir?' said I. 'Nothing, ' he replied: 'I said nothing to him. ' 'What did the otherpassengers do?' said I. 'Nothing, sir, ' said the Judge. 'The fellowturned out the white of his eye, but he did not make any noise. ' 'Didthe driver say any thing, Judge, when he struck the man?' 'Nothing, 'said the Judge, 'only he _damned him_, and told him he'd learn him tokeep out of the reach of his whip. ' 'Sir, ' said I, 'if George Thompsonhad told this story, in the warmth of an anti-slavery speech, I shouldscarcely have credited it. I have attended many anti-slavery meetings, and I never heard an instance of such _cold-blooded, wanton, insolent_, DIABOLICAL cruelty as this; and, sir, if I live to attendanother meeting, I shall relate this, and give Judge Durell's name asthe witness of it. ' An infliction of the most insolent character, entirely unprovoked, on a perfect stranger, who had showed the utmostcivility, in giving all the road, and only could not get beyond thelong reach of the driver's whip--and he a stage driver, a class_generous_ next to the sailor, in the sober hour of morning--and_borne in silence_--and _told to show that the colored man of thesouth was kindly treated_--all evincing, to an unutterable extent, that the temper of the south toward the slave is merciless, even to_diabolism_--and that the north regards him with, if possible, a morefiendish indifference still!"

It seems but an act of simple justice to say, in conclusion, that manyof the slaveholders from whom our northern visitors derive theirinformation of the "good treatment" of the slave, may not design todeceive them. Such visitors are often, perhaps generally brought incontact with the better class of slaveholders, whose slaves are reallybetter fed, clothed, lodged, and housed; more moderately worked; moreseldom whipped, and with less severity, than the slaves generally. Those masters in speaking of the good condition of their slaves, andasserting that they are treated _well_, use terms that are not_absolute_ but _comparative_: and it may be, and doubtless often istrue that their stares are treated well _as slaves_, in comparisonwith the treatment received by slaves generally. So the overseers ofsuch slaves, and the slaves themselves, may, without lying ordesigning to mislead, honestly give the same testimony. As the greatbody of slaves within their knowledge _fare worse_, it is not strangethat, when speaking of the treatment on their own plantation, theyshould call it _good_. 

OBJECTION V. --'IT IS FOR THE INTEREST OF THE MASTERS TO TREAT THEIRSLAVES WELL. '

So it is for the interest of the drunkard to quit his cups; for theglutton to curb his appetite; for the debauchee to bridle his lust;for the sluggard to be up betimes; for the spendthrift to beeconomical, and for all sinners to stop sinning. Even if it were forthe interest of masters to treat their slaves well, he must be anovice who thinks _that_ a proof that the slaves _are_ well treated. The whole history of man is a record of real interests sacrificed topresent gratification. If all men's actions were consistent with theirbest interests, folly and sin would be words without meaning. 

If the objector means that it is for the pecuniary interests ofmasters to treat their slaves well, and thence infers their goodtreatment, we reply, that though the love of money is strong, yetappetite and lust, pride, anger and revenge, the love of power andhonor, are each an overmatch for it; and when either of them is rousedby a sudden stimulant, the love of money worsted in the grapple withit. Look at the hourly lavish outlays of money to procure a momentarygratification for those passions and appetites. As the desire formoney is, in the main, merely a desire for the means of gratifying_other_ desires, or rather for one of the means, it must be the_servant_ not the sovereign of those desires, to whose gratificationits only use is to minister. But even if the love of money were thestrongest human passion, who is simple enough to believe that it isall the time so powerfully excited, that no other passion or appetitecan get the mastery over it? Who does not know that gusts of rage, revenge, jealousy and lust drive it before them as a tempest tosses afeather?

The objector has forgotten his first lessons; they taught him that itis human nature to gratify the _uppermost_ passion: and is _prudence_the uppermost passion with slaveholders, and self-restraint theirgreat characteristic? The strongest feeling of any moment is thesovereign of that moment, and rules. Is a propensity to practice_economy_ the predominant feeling with slaveholders? Ridiculous!Every northerner knows that slaveholders are proverbial for lavishexpenditures, never higgling about the _price_ of a gratification. Human passions have not, like the tides, regular ebbs and flows, withtheir stationary, high and low water marks. They are a dominionconvulsed with revolutions; coronations and dethronements in ceaslesssuccession--each ruler a usurper and a despot. Love of money gets asnatch at the sceptre as well as the rest, not by hereditary right, but because, in the fluctuations of human feelings, a chance wavewashes him up to the throne, and the next perhaps washes him offwithout time to nominate his successor. Since, then, as a matter offact, a host of appetites and passions do hourly get the better oflove of money, what protection does the slave find in his master's_interest_, against the sweep of his passions and appetites? Besides, a master can inflict upon his slave horrible cruelties withoutperceptibly injuring his health, or taking time from his labor, orlessening his value as property. Blows with a small stick give moreacute pain, than with a large one. A club bruises, and benumbs thenerves, while a switch, neither breaking nor bruising the flesh, instead of blunting the sense of feeling, wakes up and stings totorture all the susceptibilities of pain. By this kind of infliction, more actual cruelty can be perpetrated in the giving of pain at theinstant, than by the most horrible bruisings and lacerations; andthat, too, with little comparative hazard to the slave's health, or tohis value as property, and without loss of time from labor. Evengiving to the objection all the force claimed for it, what protectionis it to the slave? It _professes_ to shield the slave from suchtreatment alone, as would either lay him aside from labor, or injurehis health, and thus lessen his value as a working animal, making hima _damaged article_ in the market. Now, is nothing _bad treatment_ ofa human being except that which produces these effects? Does the factthat a man's constitution is not actually shattered, and his lifeshortened by his treatment, prove that he is treated well? Is notreatment cruel except what sprains muscles, or cuts sinews, or burstsblood vessels, or breaks bones, and thus lessens a man's value as aworking animal?

A slave may get blows and kicks every hour in the day, without havinghis constitution broken, or without suffering sensibly in his health, or flesh, or appetite, or power to labor. Therefore, beaten and kickedas he is, he must be treated _well_, according to the objector, sincethe master's _interest_ does not suffer thereby. 

Finally, the objector virtually maintains that all possible privationsand inflictions suffered by slaves, that do not actually cripple theirpower to labor, and make them 'damaged merchandize, ' are to be setdown as 'good treatment, ' and that nothing is _bad_ treatment exceptwhat produces these effects. 

Thus we see that even if the slave were effectually shielded from allthose inflictions, which, by lessening his value as property, wouldinjure the interests of his master, he would still nave no protectionagainst numberless and terrible cruelties. But we go further, andmaintain that in respect to large classes of slaves, it is for the_interest_ of their masters to treat them with barbarous inhumanity. 

1. _Old slaves. _ It would be for the interest of the masters toshorten their days. 

2. _Worn out slaves. _ Multitudes of slaves by being overworked, havetheir constitutions broken in middle life. It would be _economical_for masters to starve or flog such to death. 

3. _The incurably diseased and maimed. _ In all such cases it would be_cheaper_ for masters to buy poison than medicine. 

4. _The blind, lunatics, and idiots_. As all such would be a tax onhim, it would be for his interest to shorten their days. 

5. _The deaf and dumb, and persons greatly deformed. _ Such might ormight not be serviceable to him; many of them at least would be aburden, and few men carry burdens when they can throw them off. 

6. _Feeble infants. _ As such would require much nursing, the time, trouble and expense necessary to raise them, would generally be morethan they would be worth as _working animals_. How many such infantswould be likely to be 'raised, ' from _disinterested_ benevolence? Tothis it may be added that in the far south and south west, it isnotoriously for the interest of the master not to 'raise' slaves atall. To buy slaves when nearly grown, from the northern slave states, would be _cheaper_ than to raise them. This is shown in the fact, thatmothers with infants sell for less in those states than those withoutthem. And when slave-traders purchase such in the upper country, it isnotorious that they not unfrequently either sell their infants, orgive them away. Therefore it would be for the _interest_ of themasters, throughout that region, to have all the new-born childrenleft to perish. It would also be for their interest to make sucharrangements as effectually to separate the sexes, or if that were notdone, so to overwork the females as to prevent childbearing. 

7. _Incorrigible slaves_. On most of the large plantations, there are, more or less, incorrigible slaves, --that is, slaves who _will not_ beprofitable to their masters--and from whom torture can extort littlebut defiance. [25] These are frequently slaves of uncommon minds, whofeel so keenly the wrongs of slavery that their proud spirits spurntheir chains and defy their tormentors. 

[Footnote 25: Advertisements like the following are not unfrequent inthe southern papers. 

_From the Elizabeth (N. C. ) Phenix, Jan. 5, 1839. _ "The subscriberoffers for sale his blacksmith NAT, 28 years of age, and _remarkablylarge and likely_. The only cause of my selling him is I CANNOTCONTROL HIM. _Hertford, Dec. 5, 1838. _ J. GORDON. "]

They have commonly great sway over the other slaves, their example iscontagious, and their influence subversive of 'plantation discipline. 'Consequently they must be made a warning to others. It is for the_interest_ of the masters (at least they believe it to be) to put uponsuch slaves iron collars and chains, to brand and crop them; todisfigure, lacerate, starve and torture them--in a word, to inflictupon them such vengeance as shall strike terror into the other slaves. To this class may be added the incorrigibly thievish and indolent; itwould be for the interest of the masters to treat them with suchseverity as would deter others from following their example. 

7. _Runaways. _ When a slave has once runaway from his master and iscaught, he is thenceforward treated with severity. It is for theinterest of the master to make an example of him, by the greatestprivations and inflictions. 

8. _Hired slaves. _ It is for the interest of those who hire slaves toget as much out of them as they can; the temptation to overwork themis powerful. If it be said that the master could, in that case, recover damages, the answer is, that damages would not be recoverablein law unless actual injury--enough to impair the power of the slaveto labor, be _proved. _ And this ordinarily would be impossible, unlessthe slave has been worked so greatly beyond his strength as to producesome fatal derangement of the vital functions. Indeed, as all who arefamiliar with such cases in southern courts well know, the proof ofactual injury to the slave, so as to lessen his value, is exceedinglydifficult to make out, and every hirer of slaves can overwork them, give them insufficient food, clothing, and shelter, and inflict uponthem nameless cruelties with entire impunity. We repeat then that itis for the _interest_ of the hirer to push his slaves to their utmoststrength, provided he does not drive them to such an extreme, thattheir constitutions actually give way under it, while in his hands. The supreme court of Maryland has decided that, 'There must be _atleast a diminution of the faculty of the slave for bodily labor_ towarrant an action by the master. '--_1 Harris and Johnson's Reports, 4. _

9. _Slaves under overseers whose wages are proportioned to the cropwhich they raise. _ This is an arrangement common in the slave states, and in its practical operation is equivalent to a bounty on _harddriving_--a virtual premium offered to overseers to keep the slaveswhipped up to the top of their strength. Even where the overseer has afixed salary, irrespective of the value of the crop which he takesoff, he is strongly tempted to overwork the slaves, as those overseersget the highest wages who can draw the largest income from aplantation with a given number of slaves; so that we may include inthis last class of slaves, the majority of all those who are underoverseers, whatever the terms on which those overseers are employed. 

Another class of slaves may be mentioned; we refer to the slaves ofmasters who _bet_ upon their crops. In the cotton and sugar regionthere is a fearful amount of this desperate gambling, in which, thoughmoney is the ostensible stake and forfeit, human life is the real one. The length to which this rivalry is carried at the south and southwest, the multitude of planters who engage in it, and the recklessnessof human life exhibited in driving the murderous game to its issue, cannot well be imagined by one who has not lived in the midst of it. Desire of gain is only one of the motives that stimulates them;--the_eclat_ of having made the largest crop with a given number of hands, is also a powerful stimulant; the southern newspapers, at the cropseason, chronicle carefully the "cotton brag, " and the "crack cottonpicking, " and "unparalleled driving, " &c. Even the editors ofprofessedly religious papers, cheer on the méleé and sing the triumphsof the victor. Among these we recollect the celebrated Rev. J. N. Maffit, recently editor of a religious paper at Natchez, Miss. Inwhich he took care to assign a prominent place, and capitals to "THECOTTON BRAG. " The testimony of Mr. Bliss, page 38, details some of theparticulars of this _betting_ upon crops. All the preceding classes ofslaves are in circumstances which make it "for the _interest_ of theirmasters, " or those who have the management of them, to treat themcruelly. 

Besides the operation of the causes already specified, which make itfor the interest of masters and overseers to treat cruelly _certainclasses_ of their slaves, a variety of others exist, which make it fortheir interest to treat cruelly _the great body_ of their slaves. These causes are, the nature of certain kinds of products, the kind oflabor required in cultivating and preparing them for market, the besttimes for such labor, the state of the market, fluctuations in prices, facilities for transportation, the weather, seasons, &c. &c. Some ofthe causes which operate to produce this are--

1. _The early market_. If the planter can get his crop into marketearly, he may save thousands which might be lost if it arrived later. 

2. _Changes in the market_. A sudden rise in the market with theprobability that it will be short, or a gradual fall with aprobability that it will be long, is a strong temptation to the masterto push his slaves to the utmost, that he may in the one case make allhe can, by taking the tide at the flood, and in the other lose aslittle as may be, by taking it as early as possible in the ebb. 

3. _High prices_. Whenever the slave-grown staples bring a high price, as is now the case with cotton, every slaveholder is tempted tooverwork his slaves. By forcing them to do double work for a few weeksor months, while the price is up, he can _afford_ to lose a number ofthem and to lessen the value of all by over-driving. A cotton planterwith a hundred vigorous slaves, would have made a profitablespeculation, if, during the years '34, 5, and 6, when the averageprice of cotton was 17 cents a pound, he had so overworked his slavesthat half of them died upon his hands in '37, when cotton had fallento six and eight cents. No wonder that the poor slaves pray that cottonand sugar may be cheap. The writer has frequently heard it declared byplanters in the lower country, that, it is more profitable to drivethe slaves to such over exertion as to _use them up_, in seven oreight years, than to give them only ordinary tasks and protract theirlives to the ordinary period. [26]

[Footnote 26: The reader is referred to a variety of facts andtestimony on this point on the 39th page of this work. ]

4. _Untimely seasons_. When the winter encroaches on the spring, andmakes late seed time, the first favorable weather is a temptation tooverwork the slaves, too strong to be resisted by those who hold menas mere working animals. So when frosts set in early, and a greatamount of work is to be done in a little time, or great loss suffered. So also after a long storm either in seed or crop time, when theweather becomes favorable, the same temptation presses, and in allthese cases the master would _save money_ by overdriving his slaves. 

5. _Periodical pressure of certain kinds of labor. _ The manufacture ofsugar is an illustration. In a work entitled "Travels in Louisiana in1802, " translated from the French, by John Davis, is the followingtestimony under this head:--

"At the rolling of sugars, an interval of from two to three months, they (the slaves in Louisiana, ) work _both night and day_. Abridged oftheir sleep, they scarcely retire to rest during the whole period" Seepage 81. 

In an article on the agriculture of Louisiana, published in the secondnumber of the "Western Review, " is the following:--"The work isadmitted to be severe for the hands, (slaves) requiring, when theprocess of making sugar is commenced, TO BE PRESSED NIGHT AND DAY. "

It would be for the interest of the sugar planter greatly to overworkhis slaves, during the annual process of sugar-making. 

The severity of this periodical pressure, in preparing for marketother staples of the slave states besides sugar, may be inferred fromthe following. Mr. Hammond, of South Carolina, in his speech inCongress, Feb. 1. 1836, (See National Intelligencer) said, "In theheat of the crop, the loss of one or two days, would inevitably ruinit. "

6. _Times of scarcity_. Drought, long rain, frost, &c. Are liable tocut off the corn crop, upon which the slaves are fed. If this happenswhen the staple which they raise is at a low price, it is for theinterest of the master to put the slave on short rations, thus forcinghim to suffer from hunger. 

7. _The raising of crops for exportation_. In all those states wherecotton and sugar are raised for exportation, it is, for the most part, more profitable to buy provisions for the slaves than to raise them. Where this is the case the slaveholders believe it to be for theirinterest to give their slaves less food, than their hunger craves, andthey do generally give them insufficient sustenance. [27]

[Footnote 27: Hear the testimony of a slaveholder, on this subject, amember of Congress from Virginia, from 1817 to 1830, Hon. AlexanderSmyth. 

In the debate on the Missouri question in the U. S. Congress, 1819-20, the admission of Missouri to the Union, as a slave state, was urged, among other grounds, as a measure of humanity to the slaves of thesouth. Mr. Smyth, of Virginia said, "The plan of our opponents seemsto be to confine the slave population to the southern states, to thecountries where _sugar, cotton, and tobacco_ are cultivated. But, sir, by confining the slaves to a part of the country where crops areraised for exportation, and the bread and meat are _purchased, youdoom them to scarcity and hunger_. Is it not obvious that the way torender their situation more comfortable, is to allow them to be takenwhere there is not the same motive to force the slave to INCESSANTTOIL, that there is in the country where cotton, sugar, and tobacco, are raised for exportation. It is proposed to hem in the blacks _wherethey are_ HARD WORKED and ILL FED, that they may be renderedunproductive and the race be prevented from increasing. . . . Theproposed measure would be EXTREME CRUELTY to the blacks. . . . Youwould . . . Doom them to SCARCITY and HARD LABOR. "--[Speech of Mr. Smyth, Jan. 28, 1820]--See National Intelligencer. 

Those states where the crops are raised for exportation, and a largepart of the provisions purchased, are, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Western Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and, to aconsiderable extent, South Carolina. That this is the case inLouisiana, is shown by the following. "Corn, flour, and bread stuffs, generally are obtained from Kentucky, Ohio;" &c. See "Emigrants Guidethrough the Valley of the Mississippi, " Page 275. That it is the casewith Alabama, appears from the testimony of W. Jefferson Jones, Esq. Alawyer of high standing in Mobile. In a series of articles publishedby him in the Mobile Morning Chronicle, he says; (See that paper forAug. 26, 1837. )

"The people of Alabama _export_ what they raise, and _import_ nearlyall they consume. " But it seems quite unnecessary to prove, what allpersons of much intelligence well know, that the states mentionedexport the larger part of what they raise, and import the larger partof what they consume. Now more than _one million of slaves_ are heldin those states, and parts of states, where provisions are mainlyimported, and consequently they are "_doomed to scarcity and hunger_. "]

Now let us make some estimate of the proportion which the slaves, included in the foregoing _nine classes_, sustain to the whole number, and then of the proportion affected by the operation of the _seven_causes just enumerated. 

It would be nearly impossible to form an estimate of the proportion ofthe slaves included in a number of these classes, such as the old, theworn out, the incurably diseased, maimed and deformed, idiots, feebleinfants, incorrigible slaves, &c. More or less of this description areto be found on all the considerable plantations, and often, many onthe same plantation; though we have no accurate data for an estimate, the proportion cannot be less than one in twenty-five of the wholenumber of slaves, which would give a total of more than _one hundredthousand_. Of some of the remaining classes we have data for a prettyaccurate estimate. 

1st. _Lunatics_. --Various estimates have been made, founded upon thedata procured by actual investigation, prosecuted under the directionof the Legislatures of different States; but the returns have been soimperfect and erroneous, that little reliance can be placed upon them. The Legislature of New Hampshire recently ordered investigations to bemade in every town in the state, and the number of insane persons tobe reported. A committee of the legislature, who had the subject incharge say, in their report--"From many towns no returns have beenreceived, from others the accounts are erroneous, there being cases_known to the committee_ which escaped the notice of the 'selectmen. 'The actual number of insane persons is therefore much larger thanappears by the documents submitted to the committee. " The MedicalSociety of Connecticut appointed a committee of their number, composedof some of the most eminent physicians in the state, to ascertain andreport the whole number of insane persons in that state. The committeesay, in their report, "The number of towns from which returns havebeen received is seventy, and the cases of insanity which have beennoticed in them are five hundred and ten. " The committee add, "fiftymore towns remain to be heard from, and if insanity should be foundequally prevalent in them, the entire number will scarcely fall shortof _one thousand_ in the state. " This investigation was made in 1821, when the population of the state was less than two hundred and eightythousand. If the estimate of the Medical Society be correct, theproportion of the insane to the whole population would be about one intwo hundred and eighty. This strikes us as a large estimate, and yet acommittee of the legislature of that state in 1837, reported sevenhundred and seven insane persons in the state, who were either whollyor in part supported as _town paupers, or by charity_. It can hardlybe supposed that more than _two-thirds_ of the insane in Connecticutbelong to families _unable to support them_. On this supposition, thewhole number would be greater than the estimate of the Medical Societysixteen years previous, when the population was perhaps thirtythousand less. But to avoid the possibility of an over estimate, letus suppose the present number of insane persons in Connecticut to beonly seven hundred. 

The population of the state is now probably about three hundred andtwenty thousand; according to this estimate, the proportion of theinsane to the whole population, would be one to about four hundred andsixty. Making this the basis of our calculation, and estimating theslaves in the United States at two millions, seven hundred thousand, their present probable number, and we come to this result, that thereare about six thousand insane persons among the slaves of the UnitedStates. We have no adequate data by which to judge whether theproportion of lunatics among slaves is greater or less than among thewhites; some considerations favor the supposition that it is less. Butthe dreadful physical violence to which the slaves are subjected, andthe constant sunderings of their tenderest ties, might lead us tosuppose that it would be more. The only data in our possession is theofficial census of Chatham county, Georgia, for 1838, containing thenumber of lunatics among the whites and the slaves. --(See the SavannahGeorgian, July 24, 1838. ) According to this census, the number oflunatics among eight thousand three hundred and seventy three whitesin the country, is only _two, _ whereas, the number among ten thousandeight hundred and ninety-one slaves, is _fourteen_. 

2d. _The Deaf and Dumb. _--The proportion of deaf and dumb persons tothe other classes of the community, is about one in two thousand. Thisis the testimony of the directors of the 'American Asylum for the Deafand Dumb, ' located at Hartford, Connecticut. Making this the basis ofour estimate, there would be one thousand six hundred deaf and dumbpersons among the slaves of the United States. 

3d. _The Blind. _--We have before us the last United States census, from which it appears, that in 1830, the number of blind persons inNew Hampshire was one hundred and seventeen, out of a population oftwo hundred and sixty-nine thousand five hundred and thirty-three. Adopting this as our basis, the number of blind slaves in the UnitedStates would be nearly one thousand three hundred. 

4th. _Runaways. _--Of the proportion of the slaves that run away, tothose that do not, and of the proportion of the runaways that are_taken_ to those that escape entirely, it would be difficult to make aprobable estimate. Something, however, can be done towards such anestimate. We have before us, in the Grand Gulf (Miss. ) Advertiser, forAugust 2, 1838, a list of runaways that were then in the jails of thetwo counties of Adams and Warren, in that State; the names, ages, &c. Of each one given; and their owners are called upon to take them away. The number of runaways thus taken up and committed in these _two_counties is FORTY-SIX. The whole number of _counties_ in Mississippiis _fifty-six. _ Many of them, however, are thinly populated. Now, without making this the basis of our estimate for the whole slavepopulation in all the state--which would doubtless make the numbermuch too large--we are sure no one who has any knowledge of facts asthey are in the south, will charge upon us an over-statement when wesay, that of the present generation of slaves, probably _one inthirty_ is of that class--i. E. , has at some time, perhaps often, runaway and been retaken; on that supposition the whole number wouldbe not far from NINETY THOUSAND. 

5th. _Hired Slaves. _--It is impossible to estimate with accuracy theproportion which the hired slaves bear to the whole number. That it isvery large all who have resided at the south, or traveled there, withtheir eyes open, well know. Some of the largest slaveholders in thecountry, instead of purchasing plantations and working their slavesthemselves, hire them out to others. This practice is very common. 

Rev. Horace Moulton, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal church inMarlborough, Mass. , who lived some years in Georgia, says: "A _largeproportion_ of the slave are owned by masters who keep them on purposeto hire out. "

Large numbers of slaves, especially in Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, and Florida, are owned by _non-residents_;thousands of them by northern capitalists, who _hire them out_. Thesecapitalists in many cases own large plantations, which are oftenleased for a term of years with a 'stock' of slaves sufficient to workthem. 

Multitudes of slaves 'belonging' to _heirs_, are hired out by theirguardians till such heirs become of age, or by the executors ortrustees of persons deceased. 

That the reader may form some idea of the large number of slaves thatare hired out, we insert below a few advertisements, as a specimen ofhundreds in the newspapers of the slave states. 

From the "Pensacola Gazette, " May 27. 

"NOTICE TO SLAVEHOLDERS. Wanted upon my contract, on the Alabama, Florida, and Georgia Rail Road, FOUR HUNDRED BLACK LABORERS, _forwhich_ a liberal price will be paid. 

R. LORING, _Contractor_. "

The same paper has the following, signed by an officer of the UnitedStates. 

"WANTED AT THE NAVY YARD, PENSACOLA, SIXTY LABORERS. The OWNERS tosubsist and quarter them beyond the limits of the yard. Persons havingLaborers to hire, will apply to the Commanding Officer. 

W. K. LATIMER. "

From the "Richmond (Va. ) Enquirer, " April 10, 1838. 

"LABORERS WANTED. --The James River, and Kenawha Company, are inimmediate want of SEVERAL HUNDRED good laborers. Gentlemen wishing tosend negroes from the country, are assured that the very best careshall be taken of them. 

RICHARD REINS, _Agent of the James River, and Kenawha Co_. "

From the "Vicksburg (Mis. ) Register, " Dec. 27, 1838. 

"60 NEGROES, males and females, _for hire for the year_ 1839. Apply toH. HENDREN. "

From the "Georgia Messenger, " Dec. 27, 1838. "NEGROES To HIRE. On thefirst Tuesday next, Including CARPENTERS, BLACKSMITHS, SHOEMAKERS, SEAMSTRESSES, COOKS, &c. &c. For information; Apply to OSSIANGREGORY. "

From the "Alexandria (D. C. ) Gazette, " Dec. 30, 1837. 

"THE subscriber wishes to _employ_ by the month or year, ONE HUNDREDABLE BODIED MEN, AND THIRTY BOYS. Persons having servants, will dowell to give him a call. PHILIP ROACH, near Alexandria. "

From the "Columbia (S. C. ) Telescope, " May 19, 1838. 

"WANTED TO HIRE, twelve or fifteen NEGRO GIRLS, from ten to fourteenyears of age. They are wanted for the term of two or three years. 

E. H. & J. FISHER. "

"NEGROES WANTED. The Subscriber is desirous of hiring 50 of 60 _firstrate Negro Men_. WILSON NESBITT. "

From the "Norfolk (Va. ) Beacon, " March 21, 1838. 

"LABORERS WANTED. One hundred able bodied men are wanted. The handswill be required to be delivered in Halifax by the _owners_. Apply toSHIELD & WALKE. "

From the "Lynchburg Virginian, " Dec. 13, 1838. 

"40 NEGRO MEN. The subscribers wish to hire for the next year 40 NEGROMEN. LANGHORNE, SCRUGGS & COOK. "

"HIRING of NEGROES. On Saturday, the 29th day of December, 1838, atMrs. Tayloe's tavern, in Amherst county, there will be _hired_ thirtyor forty valuable Negroes. 

In addition to the above, I have for _hire_, 20 men, women, boys, andgirls--several of them excellent house servants. MAURICE H. GARLAND. "

From the "Savannah Georgian, " Feb. 5, 1838. 

"WANTED TO HIRE, ONE HUNDRED prime negroes, by the year. J. V. REDDEN. "

From the "North Carolina Standard, " Feb. 31, 1838. 

"NEGROES WANTED. --W. & A. STITH, will give twelve dollars per monthfor FIFTY strong Negro fellows, to commence work immediately; and forFIFTY more on the first day of February, and for FIFTY on the firstday of March. "

From the "Lexington (Ky. ) Reporter, " Dec. 26, 1838. 

"WILL BE HIRED, for one year; on the first day of January, 1839, onthe farm of the late Mrs. Meredith, a number of valuable NEGROES. R. S. TODD, Sheriff of Fayette Co. And Curator for James and ElizabethBreckenridge. "

"NEGROES TO HIRE. On Wednesday, the 26th inst. I will hire to thehighest bidder, the NEGROES belonging to Charles and Robert Innes. GEO. W. WILLIAMS. _Guardian_. "

The following _nine_ advertisements were published in one column ofthe "Winchester Virginian, " Dec. 20, 1838. 

"NEGRO HIRINGS. 

"WILL be offered for hire, at Captain Long's Hotel, a number ofSLAVES--men, women, boys and girls--belonging to the orphans of GeorgeAsh, deceased. RICHARD W. BARTON. " _Guardian_. 

"WILL be offered for hire, at my Hotel, a number of SLAVES, consistingof men, women, boys and girls. JOSEPH LONG. _Exr. Of EdmundShackleford, dec'd_. "

"WILL be offered for hire, for the ensuing year, at Capt. Long'sHotel, a number of SLAVES. MOSES R. RICHARDS. "

"WILL be offered for hire, the slaves belonging to the estate of JamesBowen, deceased, consisting of men, and women, boys and girls. GILESCOOK. _One of the Exrs. Of James Bowen dec'd_. "

"THE _hiring_ at Millwood will take place on Friday, the 28th day ofDecember, 1838. BURWELL. "

"N. B. We are desired to say that other valuable NEGROES will also be_hired_ at Millwood on the same day, besides those offered by Mr. B. "

"The SLAVES of the late John Jolliffe, about twenty in number, and ofall ages and both sexes, will be offered for hire at Cain's Depot. DAVID W. BARTON. _Administrator_. "

"I WILL hire at public hiring before the tavern door of Dr. Lacy, about 30 NEGROES, consisting of men, and women. JAMES R. RICHARDS. "

"WILL be hired, at Carter's Tavern, on 31st of December, a number ofNEGROES. JOHN J. H. GUNNELL. "

"NEGROES FOR HIRE, (PRIVATELY. ) About twelve servants, consisting ofmen, women, boys, and girls, for hire privately. Apply to thesubscriber at Col. Smith's in Battletown. JOHN W. OWEN. "

A volume might easily be filled with advertisements like thepreceding, showing conclusively that _hired_ slaves must be a largeproportion of the whole number. The actual proportion has beenvariously estimated, at 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/2, &c. If we adopt the lastas our basis, it will make the number of hired slaves, in the UnitedStates, FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND!

6th. _Slaves under overseers whose wages are a part of thecrop_. --That this is a common usage; appears from the followingtestimony. The late Hon. John Taylor, of Caroline Co. Virginia, one ofthe largest slaveholders in the state, President of the StateAgricultural Society, and three times elected to the Senate of theUnited States, says, in his "Agricultural Essays, " No. 15. P. 57, "This necessary class of men, (overseers, ) are bribed byagriculturalists, not to improve, but to impoverish their land, _by ashare of the crop for one year_. . . . The _greatest_ annual crop, andnot the most judicious culture, advances his interest, and establisheshis character; and the fees of these land-doctors, are much higher forkilling than for curing. . . . The most which the land can yield, andseldom or never improvement with a view to future profit, is a pointof common consent, and mutual need between the agriculturist and hisoverseer. . . . Must the practice of hiring a man for one year, by ashare of the crop, to lay out all his skill and industry in killingland, and as little as possible in improving it, be kept up tocommemorate the pious leaning of man to his primitive state ofignorance and barbarity? _Unless this is abolished_, the attempt tofertilize our lands is needless. "

Philemon Bliss, Esq, of Elyria, Ohio, who lived in Florida, in 1834-5, says, "It is common for owners of plantations and slaves, to hire overseersto take charge of them, while they themselves reside at a distance. _Their wages depend principally upon the amount of labor which theycan exact from the slave_. The term "good overseer, " signifies one whocan make the greatest amount of the staple, cotton for instance, froma given number of hands, besides raising sufficient provisions fortheir consumption. He has no interest in the life of the slave. Hencethe fact, so notorious at the south, that negroes are driven harderand fare worse under overseers than under their owners. "

William Ladd, Esq. Of Minot, Maine, formerly a slaveholder in Florida, speaking, in a recent letter of the system of labor adopted there, says; "The compensation of the overseers _was a certain portion of thecrop_. "

Rev. Phineas Smith, of Centreville, Allegany Co. N. Y. Who hasrecently returned from a four years' residence, in the Southern slavestates and Texas, says, "The mode in which _many_ plantations are managed, is calculated and_designed_, as an inducement to the slave driver, to lay upon theslave the _greatest possible burden, the overseer being entitled bycontract, to a certain share of the crop_. "

We leave the reader to form his own opinion, as to the proportion ofslaves under overseers, whose wages are in proportion to the crop, raised by them. We have little doubt that we shall escape the chargeof wishing to make out a "strong case" when we put the proportion at_one-eighth_ of the whole number of slaves, which would be _threehundred and fifty thousand_. 

Without drawing out upon the page a sum in addition for the reader to"run up, " it is easily seen that the slaves in the preceding classesamount to more than ELEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND, exclusive of the deaf anddumb, and the blind, some of whom, especially the former, might beprofitable to their "owners";

Now it is plainly for the interest of the "owners" of these slaves, orof those who have the charge of them, to _treat than cruelly_, tooverwork, under-feed, half-clothe, half-shelter, poison, or killoutright, the aged, the broken down, the incurably diseased, idiots, feeble infants, most of the blind, some deaf and dumb, &c. It isbesides a part of the slave-holder's creed, that it is _for hisinterest_ to treat with terrible severity, all runaways and theincorrigibly stubborn, thievish, lazy, &c. ; also for those who hireslaves, to overwork them; also for overseers to overwork the slavesunder them, when their own wages are increased by it. 

We have thus shown that it would be "_for the interest_, " of mastersand overseers to treat with _habitual_ cruelty _more than one million_of the slaves in the United States. But this is not all; as we havesaid already, it is for the interest of overseers generally, whethertheir wages are proportioned to the crop or not, to overwork theslaves; we need not repeat the reasons. 

Neither is it necessary to re-state the arguments, going to show thatit is for the interest of slaveholders, who cultivate the greatsouthern staples, especially cotton, and the sugarcane, to overworkperiodically _all_ their slaves, and _habitually_ the majority ofthem, when the demand for those staples creates high prices, as hasbeen the case with cotton for many years, with little exception. Instead of entering into a labored estimate to get at the proportionof the slaves, affected by the operation of these and the other causesenumerated, we may say, that they operate _directly_ on the "fieldhands, " employed in raising the southern staples, and indirectly uponall classes of the slaves. 

Finally, the conclude this head by turning the objector's negativeproposition into an affirmative one, and state formally what has beenalready proved. 

_It is for the interest of shareholders, upon their own principles, and by their own showing, TO TREAT CRUELLY the great body of theirslaves. _

Objection VI. --THE FACT THAT THE SLAVES MULTIPLY SO RAPIDLY PROVESTHAT THEY ARE NOT INHUMANELY TREATED, BUT ARE IN A COMFORTABLECONDITION

To this we reply in brief, 1st. It has been already shown under aprevious head, that, in considerable sections of the slave states, especially in the South West, the births among slaves are fewer thanthe deaths, which would exhibit a fearful decrease of the slavepopulation in those sections, if the deficiency were not made up bythe slave trade from the upper country. 

2d. The fact that all children born of slave _mothers_, whether theirfathers are whites or free colored persons, are included in the censuswith the slaves, and further that all children born of white mothers, whose fathers are mulattos or blacks, are also included in the censuswith colored persons and almost invariably with _slaves_, shows thatit is impossible to ascertain with any accuracy, _what is the actualincrease of the slaves alone. _

3d. The fact that thousands of slaves, generally in the prime of life, are annually smuggled into the United States from Africa, Cuba, andelsewhere, makes it manifest that all inferences drawn from theincrease of the slave population, which do not make large deductions, for constant importations, must be fallacious. Mr. Middleton of SouthCarolina, in a speech in Congress in 1819, declared that "THIRTEENTHOUSAND AFRICANS ARE ANNUALLY SMUGGLED INTO THE SOUTHERN STATES. " Mr. Mercer of Virginia, in a speech in Congress about the same timedeclared that "_Cargoes_, " of African slaves were smuggled into theSouth to a deplorable extent. 

Mr. Wright, of Maryland, in a speech in Congress, estimated the numberannually at FIFTEEN THOUSAND. Miss Martineau, in her recent work, (Society in America, ) informs us that a large slaveholder inLouisiana, assured her in 1835, that the annual importation of nativeAfricans was from thirteen to fifteen thousand. 

The President of the United States, in his message to Congress, December, 1837, says, "The large force under Commodore Dallas, (on theWest India station, ) has been most actively and efficiently employedin protecting our commerce, IN PREVENTING THE IMPORTATION OF SLAVES, "&c. &c. 

The New Orleans Courier of 15th February, 1839, has these remarks:

"It is believed that African negroes have been _repeatedly_ introducedinto the United States. The number and the proximity of the Floridaports to the island of Cuba, make it no difficult matter; nor is ourextended frontier on the Sabine and Red rivers, at all unfavorable tothe smuggler. Human laws have, in all countries and ages, beenviolated whenever the inducements to do so afforded hopes of greatprofit. 

"The United States' law against the importation of Africans, _could itbe strictly enforced_, might in a few years give the sugar and cottonplanters of Texas advantage over those of this state; as it would, weapprehend, enable the former, under a stable government, to furnishcotton and sugar at a lower price than we can do. When givingpublicity to such reflections as the subject seems to suggest, weprotest against being considered advocates for any violation of thelaws of our country. Every good citizen must respect those laws, notwithstanding we may deem them likely to be evaded by men lessscrupulous. "

That both the south and north swarm with men 'less scrupulous, ' everyone knows. 

The Norfolk (Va. ) Beacon, of June 8, 1837, has the following:

"_Slave Trade. --Eight African negroes_ have been taken into custody, at Apalachicola, by the U. S. Deputy Marshal, alleged to have beenimported from Cuba, on board the schooner Emperor, Captain Cox. Indictments for piracy, under the acts for the suppression of theslave trade, have been found against Captain Cox, and other partiesimplicated. The negroes were bought in Cuba by a Frenchman namedMalherbe, formerly a resident of Tallahassee, who was drowned soonafter the arrival of the schooner. "

The following testimony of Rev. Horace Moulton, now a minister of theMethodist Episcopal Church, in Marlborough, Mass. , who resided someyears in Georgia, reveals some of the secrets of the slave-smugglers, and the connivance of the Georgia authorities at their doings. It iscontained in a letter dated February 24, 1839. 

"The foreign slave-trade was carried on to some considerable extentwhen I was at the south, notwithstanding a law had been made some tenyears previous to this, making this traffic piracy on the high seas. Iwas somewhat acquainted with the secrets of this traffic, and, Isuppose, I might have engaged in it, had I so desired. Were you tovisit all the plantations in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, andMississippi, I think you would be convinced that the horrors of thetraffic in human flesh have not yet ceased. I was _surprised to findso many that could not speak English among the slaves, _ until themystery was explained. This was done, when I learned thatslave-cargoes were landed on the coast of Florida, not a thousandmiles from St. Augustine. They could, and can still, in my opinion, belanded as safely on this coast as in any port of this continent. Youcan imagine for yourself how easy it was to carry on the trafficbetween this place and the West Indies. When landed on the coast ofFlorida, it is an easy matter to distribute them throughout the moresouthern states. The law which makes it piracy to traffic in theforeign slave trade is a dead letter; and I doubt not it has been soin the more southern states ever since it was enacted. For you canperceive at once, that interested men, who believe the colored man is somuch better off here than he possibly can be in Africa, will nothesitate to kidnap the blacks whenever an opportunity presents itself. I will notice one fact that came under my own observation, which willconvince you that the horrors of the foreign slave-trade have not yetceased among our southern gentry. It is as follows. A slave ship, which I have reason to believe was employed by southern men, came nearthe port of Savannah with about FIVE HUNDRED SLAVES, from Guinea andCongo. It was said that the ship was driven there by contrary winds;and the crew, pretending to be short of provisions, run the ship intoa by place, near the shore, between Tybee Light and Darien, to recruittheir stores. Well, as Providence would have it, the revenue cutter, at that time taking a trip along the coast, fell in with this slaveship, took her as a prize, and brought her up into the port ofSavannah. The cargo of human chattels was unloaded, and the captiveswere placed in an old barracks, in the fort of Savannah, under theprotection of the city authorities, they pretending that they shouldreturn them all to their native country again, as soon as a convenientopportunity presented itself. The ship's crew of course were arrested, and confined in jail. Now for the sequel of this history. About onethird part of the negroes died in a few weeks after they were landed, in seasoning, so called, or in becoming acclimated--or, as I shouldthink, a distemper broke out among them, and they died like theIsraelites when smitten with the plague. Those who did not die inseasoning, must be hired out a little while, to be sure, as the cityauthorities could not afford to keep them on expense doing nothing. Asit happened, the man in whose employ I was when the cargo of humanbeings arrived, hired some twenty or thirty of them, and put themunder my care. They continued with me until the sickly season drove meoff to the north. I soon returned, but could not hear a word about thecrew of pirates. They had something like a mock trial, as I shouldthink, for no one, as I ever learned, was condemned, fined, orcensured. But where were the poor captives, who were going to bereturned to Africa by the city authorities, as soon as they could makeit convenient? Oh, forsooth, those of whom I spoke, being under mycare, were tugging away for the same man; the remainder were scatteredabout among different planters. When I returned to the north again, the next year, the city authorities had not, down to that time; madeit convenient to return these poor victims. The fact is, they belongedthere; and, in my opinion, they were designed to be landed near by theplace where the revenue cutter seized them. Probably those veryplanters for whom they were originally designed received them; andstill there was a pretence kept up that they would be returned toAfrica. This must have been done, that the consciences of those mightbe quieted, who were looking for justice to be administered to thesepoor captives. It is easy for a company of slaveholders, who desire totraffic in human flesh, to fit out a vessel, under Spanish colors, andthen go prowling about the African coast for the victims of theirlusts. If all the facts with relation to the African slave-trade, nowsecretly carried on at the south, could be disclosed, the people ofthe free states would be filled with amazement. "

It is plain, from the nature of this trade, and the circumstancesunder which it is carried on, that the number of slaves imported wouldbe likely to be estimated far _below_ the truth. There can be littledoubt that the estimate of Mr. Wright, of Maryland, (fifteen thousandannually, ) is some thousands too small. But even according to hisestimate, the African slave-trade adds ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSANDSLAVES TO EACH UNITED STATES' CENSUS. These are in the prime of life, and their children would swell the slave population many thousandsannually--thus making a great addition to each census. 

4. It is a notorious fact, that large numbers of free colored personsare kidnapped every year in the free states, taken to the south, andsold as slaves. 

Hon. GEORGE M. STROUD, Judge of the Criminal Court of Philadelphia, inhis sketch of the slave laws, speaking of the kidnapping of freecolored persons in the northern states, says--

"Remote as is the city of Philadelphia from those slaveholding statesin which the introduction of slaves from places within the territoryof the United States is freely permitted, and where also the market istempting, _it has been ascertained, _ that MORE THAN THIRTY FREECOLORED PERSONS, MOSTLY CHILDREN, HAVE BEEN KIDNAPPED HERE, ANDCARRIED AWAY, WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS. Five of these, through thekind interposition of several humane gentlemen, have been restored totheir friends, though not without _great expense and difficulty_; theothers _are still retained in bondage_, and if rescued at all, it mustbe by sending white witnesses a journey of more than a thousand miles. The costs attendant upon lawsuits, under such circumstances, willprobably fall but little short of the estimated value, as slaves, ofthe individuals kidnapped. "

The following is an extract from Mrs. CHILD's Appeal, pp. 64-6. 

"I know the names of four colored citizens of Massachusetts, who wentto Georgia on board a vessel, were seized under the laws of thatstate, and sold as slaves. They have sent the most earnestexhortations to their families and friends, to do something for theirrelief; but the attendant expenses require more money than the friendsof negroes are apt to have, and the poor fellows, as yet, remainunassisted. 

"A New York paper, of November, 1829, contains the following caution. 

_"Beware of Kidnappers!_--It is well understood, that there is atpresent in this city, a gang of kidnappers, busily engaged in theirvocation, of stealing colored children for the southern market. It isbelieved that three or four have been stolen within as many days. There are suspicions of a foul nature connected with some who servethe police in subordinate capacities. It is hinted that there may bethose in some authority, not altogether ignorant of these diabolicalpractices. Let the public be on their guard! It is still fresh in thememories of all, that a cargo, or rather drove of negroes, was made upfrom this city and Philadelphia, about the time that the emancipationof all the negroes in this state took place, under our presentconstitution, and were taken through Virginia, the Carolinas, andTennessee, and disposed of in the state of Mississippi. Some of thosewho were taken from Philadelphia were persons of intelligence; andafter they had been driven through the country in chains, and disposedof by sale on the Mississippi, wrote back to their friends, and wererescued from bondage. The persons who were guilty of this abominabletransaction are known, and now reside in North Carolina. They may veryprobably be engaged in similar enterprizes at the present time--atleast there is reason to believe, that the system of kidnapping freepersons of color from the northern cities, has been carried on moreextensively than the public arc generally aware of. "

GEORGE BRADBURN, Esq. Of Nantucket, Mass. A member of the Legislatureof that state, at its last session, made a report to that body, March6, 1839, 'On the deliverance of citizens liable to be sold as slaves. 'That report contains the following facts and testimony. 

"The following facts are a few out of a VAST MULTITUDE, to which theattention of the undersigned has been directed. 

"On the 27th of February last, the undersigned had an interview withthe Rev. Samuel Snowden, a respectable and intelligent clergyman ofthe city of Boston. This gentleman stated, and he is now ready to makeoath, that during the last six years, he has himself, by the aid ofvarious benevolent individuals, procured the deliverance from jail ofsix citizens of Massachusetts, who had been, arrested and imprisonedas runaway slaves, and who, but for his timely interposition, wouldhave been sold into perpetual bondage. The names and the places ofimprisonment of those persons, as stated by Mr. S. Were as follows:

"James Hight, imprisoned at Mobile; William Adams, at Norfolk; WilliamHolmes, also at Norfolk; James Oxford, at Wilmington; James Smith, atBaton Rouge; John Tidd, at New Orleans. 

"In 1836, Mary Smith, a native of this state, returning from NewOrleans, whither she had been in the capacity of a servant, was castupon the shores of North Carolina. She was there seized and sold as aslave. Information of the fact reached her friends at Boston. Thosefriends made an effort to obtain her liberation. They invoked theassistance of the Governor of this Commonwealth. A correspondenceensued between His Excellency and the Governor of North Carolina:copies of which were offered for the inspection of your committee. Soon afterwards, by permission of the authorities of North Carolina, 'Mary Smith' returned to Boston. But it turned out, that this was not_the_ Mary Smith, whom our worthy Governor, and other excellentindividuals of Boston, had taken so unwearied pains to redeem fromslavery. It was another woman, of the same name, who was also a nativeof Massachusetts, and had been seized in North Carolina as a runawayslave. The Mary Smith has not yet been heard of. If alive, she is now, in all probability, wearing the chains of slavery. 

"About a year and a half since, several citizens of different freestates were rescued from slavery, at New Orleans, by the directpersonal efforts of an acquaintance of the undersigned. The benevolentindividual alluded to is Jacob Barker, Esq. A name not unknown to thecommercial world. Mr. Barker is a resident of New Orleans. A statementof the cases in reference is contained in a letter addressed by him tothe Hon. Samuel H. Jenks, of Nantucket. "

The letter of Mr. Barker, referred to in this report to theLegislature of Massachusetts, bears date August 19, 1837. Thefollowing are extracts from it. 

"A free man, belonging to Baltimore, by the name of Ephraim Larkin, who came here cook of the William Tell, was arrested and thrown intoprison a few weeks since, and sent in chains to work on the road. Iheard of it, and with difficulty found him; and after the mostdiligent and active exertions, got him released--in effecting which, Itraveled in the heat of the day, thermometer ranging in the shade from94 to 100, more than twenty times to and from prison, the place of hislabor, and the different courts, a distance of near three miles frommy residence; and after I had established his freedom, had to pay forhis arrest, maintenance, and the advertising him as a runaway slave, $29. 89, as per copy of bill herewith--the allowance for work notequalling the expenses, the amount augments with every day ofconfinement. 

"In pursuing the cook of the William Tell, I found three other freemen, confined in the same prison; one belonged also to Baltimore, bythe name of Leaven Dogerty: he was also released, on my paying $28expenses; one was a descendant of the Indians who once inhabitedNantucket--his name is Eral Lonnon. Lonnon had been six weeks inprison; he was released without difficulty, on my paying $20. 38expenses--and no one seemed to know why he had been confined orarrested, as the law does not presume persons of mixed blood to beslaves. But for the others, I had great difficulty in procuring whatwas considered competent witnesses to prove them free. No complaint ofimproper conduct had been made against either of them. At one time, the Recorder said the witness must be white; at another, that onerespectable witness was insufficient; at another, that a person whohad been (improperly) confined and released, was not a competentwitness, &c. &c. Lonnon has been employed in the South Sea fisheryfrom Nantucket and New Bedford, nearly all his life; has sailed onthose voyages in the ships Eagle, Maryland, Gideon, Triton, andSamuel. He was born at Marshpee, Plymouth (Barnstable) county, Mass. And prefers to encounter the leviathan of the deep, rather than theturnkeys of New Orleans. 

"The other was born in St. Johns, Nova Scotia, and bears the name ofWilliam Smith, a seaman by profession. 

"Immediately after these men were released, two others were arrested. They attempted to escape, and being pursued, ran for the river, in thevain hope of being able to swim across the Mississippi, a distance ofa mile, with a current of four knots. One soon gave out, and made fora boat which had been despatched for their recovery, and was saved;the other being a better swimmer, continued on until much exhausted, then also made for the boat--it was too late; he sank before the boatcould reach him, and was drowned. They claimed to be freemen. 

"On Sunday last I was called to the prison of the Municipality inwhich I reside, to serve on an inquest on the body of a drowned man. There I saw one other free man confined, by the name of Henry Tier, ayellow man, born in New York, and formerly in my employ. He had beenconfined as a supposed runaway, near six months, without a particle oftestimony; although from his color, the laws of Louisiana presume himto be free. I applied immediately for his release, which was promptlygranted. At first, expenses similar to those exacted in the thirdMunicipality were required; but on my demonstrating to the recorderthat the law imposed no such burden on free men, he was releasedwithout any charge whatever. How free men can obtain satisfaction forhaving been thus wrongfully imprisoned, and made to work in chains onthe highway, is not for me to decide. I apprehend no satisfaction canbe had without more active friends, willing to espouse their cause, than can be found in this quarter. Therefore I repeat, that no personof color should come here without a certificate of freedom from thegovernor of the state to which he belongs. 

"Very respectfully, your assured friend, Jacob Barker. "

"N. B. --Since writing the preceding, I have procured the release ofanother free man from the prison of the third Municipality, on thepayment of $39. 65, as per bill, copy herewith. His name is WilliamLockman--he was born in New Jersey, of free parents, and resides atPhiladelphia. A greater sum was required which was reduced by theallowance of his maintenance (written _labor_, ) while at work on theroad, which the law requires the Municipality to pay; but it had notbefore been so expounded in the third Municipality. I hope to get itback in the case of the other three. The allowance for labor, inaddition to their maintenance, is twenty-five cents per day; but theyrequire those illiterate men to advance the whole before they canleave the prison, and then to take a certificate for their labor, andgo for it to another department--to collect which, is ten times moretrouble than the money when received is worth. While these free men, without having committed any fault, were compelled to work in chains, on the roads, in the burning sun, for 25 cents per day, and pay inadvance 18 3-4 cents per day for maintenance, doctor's, and otherbills, and not able to work half their time, I paid others, working onship-board, in sight, two dollars per day. J. B. "

The preceding letter of Mr. Barker, furnishes grounds for the belief, that _hundreds_, if not _thousands_ of free colored persons, from thedifferent states of this Union, both slave and free from the WestIndies, South America, Mexico, and the British possessions in NorthAmerica, and from other parts of the world, are reduced to slavery_every year_ in our slave states. If a single individual, in thecourse of a few days, _accidentally_ discovered _six_ colored freemen, working in irons, and soon to be sold as slaves, in a _single_southern city, is it not fair to infer, that in all the slave states, there must be _multitudes_ of such persons, now in slavery, and thatthis number is rapidly increasing, by ceaseless accessions?

The letter of Mr. Barker is valuable, also, as a graphic delineationof the 'public opinion' of the south. The great difficulty with whichthe release of these free men was procured, notwithstanding thepersonal efforts of Mr. Jacob Barker, who is a gentleman of influence, and has, we believe, been an alderman of New Orleans, reveals a'public opinion, ' insensible as adamant to the liberty of colored men. 

It would be easy to fill scores of pages with details similar to thepreceding. We have furnished enough, however, to show, that, in allprobability, _each_ United States' census of the _slave_ population, is increased by the addition to it of _thousands_ of free coloredpersons, kidnapped and sold as slaves. 

5th. To argue that the rapid multiplication of any class in thecommunity, is proof that such a class is well-clothed, well-housed, abundantly fed, and very _comfortable_, is as absurd as to argue thatthose who have _few children_, must of course, be ill-clothed, ill-housed, badly lodged, overworked, ill-fed, &c. &c. True, privations and inflictions may be carried to such an extent as tooccasion a fearful diminishment of population. That was the casegenerally with the slave population in the West Indies, and, as hasbeen shown, is true of certain portions of the southern states. Butthe fact that such an effect is _not_ produced, does not prove thatthe slaves do not experience great privations and severe inflictions. They may suffer much hardship, and great cruelties, withoutexperiencing so great a derangement of the vital functions as toprevent child-bearing. The Israelites multiplied with astonishingrapidity, under the task-masters and burdens of Egypt. Does thisfalsify the declarations of Scripture, that 'they sighed by reason oftheir bondage, ' and that the Egyptians 'made them serve _with rigor_, 'and made 'their lives bitter with _hard bondage_. ' 'I have seen, ' saidGod, 'their _afflictions_. I have beard their _groanings_, ' &c. Thehistory of the human race shows, that great _privations and muchsuffering_ may be experienced, without materially checking the rapidincrease of population. 

Besides, if we should give to the objection all it claims, it wouldmerely prove, that the female slaves, or rather a portion of them, arein a comfortable condition; and that, so far as the absolutenecessities of life are concerned, the females of _child-bearing_ age, in Delaware, Maryland, northern, western, and middle Virginia, theupper parts of Kentucky and Missouri, and among the mountains of eastTennessee and western North Carolina, are in general tolerably wellsupplied. The same remark, with some qualifications, may be made ofthe slaves generally, in those parts of the country where the peopleare slaveholders, mainly, that they may enjoy the privilege and profitof being _slave-breeders_. 

OBJECTION VIII. --'PUBLIC OPINION IS A PROTECTION TO THE SLAVE. '

ANSWER. It was public opinion that _made him a slave_. In a republicangovernment the people make the laws, and those laws are merely publicopinion _in legal forms_. We repeat it, --public opinion made themslaves, and keeps them slaves; in other words, it sunk them from mento chattels, and now, forsooth, this same public opinion will see toit, that these _chattels_ are treated like _men!_

By looking a little into this matter, and finding out how this 'publicopinion' (law) protects the slaves in some particulars, we can judgeof the amount of its protection in others. 1. It protects the slavesfrom _robbery_, by declaring that those who robbed their mothers mayrob them and their children. "All negroes, mulattoes, or mestizoes whonow are, or shall hereafter be in this province, and all theiroffspring, are hereby declared to be, and shall remain, forever, hereafter, absolute slaves, and shall follow the condition of themother. "--Law of South Carolina, 2 Brevard's Digest, 229. Others ofthe slave states have similar laws. 

2. It protects their _persons_, by giving their master a right toflog, wound, and beat them when he pleases. See Devereaux's NorthCarolina Reports, 263. --Case of the State vs. Mann, 1829; in which theSupreme Court decided, that a master who _shot_ at a female slave andwounded her, because she got loose from him when he was flogging her, and started to run from him, had violated _no law_, AND COULD NOT BEINDICTED. It has been decided by the highest courts of the slavestates generally, that assault and battery upon a slave is notindictable as a criminal offence. 

The following decision on this point was made by the Supreme Court ofSouth Carolina in the case of the State vs. Cheetwood, 2 Hill'sReports, 459. 

_Protection of slaves_. --"The criminal offence of assault and battery_cannot, at common law, be committed on the person of a slave_. For, notwithstanding for some purposes a slave is regarded in law as aperson, yet generally he is a mere chattel personal, and his right ofpersonal protection belongs to his master, who can maintain an actionof trespass for the battery of his slave. 

"There can be therefore no offence against the state for a merebeating of a slave, unaccompanied by any circumstances of cruelty, oran attempt to kill and murder. The peace of the state is not therebybroken; for a slave is not generally regarded as legally capable ofbeing within the peace of the state. He is not a citizen, and _is notin that character entitled to her protection_. "

This 'public opinion' protects the _persons_ of the slaves bydepriving them of Jury trial;[28] their _consciences_, by forbiddingthem to assemble for worship, unless their oppressors are present;[29]their _characters_, by branding them as liars, in denying them theiroath in law;[30] their _modesty_, by leaving their master to clothe, or let them go naked, as he pleases;[31] and their _health_, byleaving him to feed or starve them, to work them, wet or dry, with orwithout sleep, to lodge them, with or without covering, as the whimtakes him;[32] and their _liberty_, marriage relations, parentalauthority, and filial obligations, by _annihilating_ the whole. [33]This is the protection which 'PUBLIC OPINION, ' in the form of _law_, affords to the slaves; this is the chivalrous knight, always instirrups, with lance in rest, to champion the cause of the slaves. 

[Footnote 28: Law of South Carolina. James' Digest, 392-3. Law ofLouisiana. Martin's Digest, 42. Law of Virginia. Rev. Code, 429. ]

[Footnote 29: Miss. Rev. Code, 390. Similar laws exist in the slavestates generally. ]

[Footnote 30: "A slave cannot be a witness against a white person, either in a civil or criminal cause. " Stroud's Sketch of the Laws ofSlavery, 65. ]

[Footnote 31: Stroud's Sketch of the Slave Laws, 132. ]

[Footnote 32: Stroud's Sketch, 26-32. ]

[Footnote 33: Stroud's Sketch, 22-24. ]

Public opinion, protection to the slave! Brazen effrontery, hypocrisy, and falsehood! We have, in the laws cited and referred to above, theformal testimony of the Legislatures of the slave states, that, 'public opinion' does pertinaciously _refuse_ to protect the slaves;not only so, but that it does itself persecute and plunder them all:that it originally planned, and now presides over, sanctions, executesand perpetuates the whole system of robbery, torture, and outrageunder which they groan. 

In all the slave states, this 'public opinion' has taken away from theslave his _liberty_; it has robbed him of his right to his own body, of his right to improve his mind, of his right to read the Bible, ofhis right to worship God according to his conscience, of his right toreceive and enjoy what he earns, of his right to live with his wifeand children, of his right to better his condition, of his right toeat when he is hungry, to rest when he is tired, to sleep when beneeds it, and to cover his nakedness with clothing: this 'publicopinion' makes the slave a prisoner for life on the plantation, exceptwhen his jailor pleases to let him out with a 'pass, ' or sells him, and transfers him in irons to another jail-yard: this 'public opinion'traverses the country, buying up men, women, children--chaining themin coffles, and driving them forever from their nearest friends; itsets them on the auction table, to be handled, scrutinized, knockedoff to the highest bidder; it proclaims that they shall not have theirliberty; and, if their masters give it them, 'public opinion' seizesand throws them back into slavery. This same 'public opinion' hasformally attached the following legal penalties to the following actsof slaves. 

If more than seven slaves are found together in any road, without awhite person, _twenty lashes a piece_; for visiting a plantationwithout a written pass, ten lashes; for letting loose a boat fromwhere it is made fast, _thirty-nine lashes for the first offence_; andfor the second, '_shall have cut off from his head one ear_;' forkeeping or carrying a _club, thirty-nine lashes_; for having anyarticle for sale, without a ticket from his master, _ten lashes_; fortraveling in any other than 'the most usual and accustomed road, ' whengoing alone to any place, _forty lashes_; for traveling in the night, without a pass, _forty lashes_; for being found in another person'snegro-quarters, _forty lashes_; for hunting with dogs in the woods, _thirty lashes_; for being on _horseback_ without the writtenpermission of his master, _twenty-five lashes_; for riding or goingabroad in the night, or riding horses in the day time, without leave, a slave may be whipped, _cropped_, or _branded in the cheek_ with theletter R, or otherwise punished, _not extending to life_, or so as torender him _unfit for labor_. The laws referred to may be found byconsulting 2 Brevard's Digest, 228, 213, 216; Haywood's Manual, 78, chap. 13, pp. 518, 529; 1 Virginia Revised Code, 722-3; Prince'sDigest, 454; 2 Missouri Laws, 741; Mississippi Revised Code, 571. Lawssimilar to these exist throughout the southern slave code. Extractsenough to fill a volume might be made from these laws, showing thatthe protection which 'public opinion' grants to the slaves, is hunger, nakedness, terror, bereavements, robbery, imprisonment, the stocks, iron collars, hunting and worrying them with dogs and guns, mutilatingtheir bodies, and murdering them. 

A few specimens of the laws and the judicial decisions on them, willshow what is the state of 'public opinion' among slaveholders towardstheir slaves. Let the following suffice. --'Any person may lawfullykill a slave, who has been outlawed for running away and lurking inswamps, &c. '--Law of North Carolina; Judge Stroud's Sketch of theSlave Laws, 103; Haywood's Manual, 524. 'A slave _endeavoring_ toentice another slave to runaway, if provisions, &c. Be prepared forthe purpose of aiding in such running away, shall be punished withDEATH. And a slave who shall aid the slave so endeavoring to enticeanother slave to run away, shall also suffer DEATH. '--Law of SouthCarolina; Stroud's Sketch of Slave Laws, 103-4; 2 Brevard's Digest, 233, 244. Another law of South Carolina provides that if a slaveshall, when absent from the plantation, refuse to be examined by '_anywhite_ person, ' (no matter how crazy or drunk, ) 'such white person mayseize and chastise him; and if the slave shall _strike_ such whiteperson, such slave may be lawfully killed. '--2 Brevard's Digest, 231. 

The following is a law of Georgia. --'If any slave shall presume tostrike any white person, such slave shall, upon trial and convictionbefore the justice or justices, suffer such punishment for the firstoffence as they shall think fit, not extending to life or limb; andfor the second offence, DEATH. '--Prince's Digest, 450. The same lawexists in South Carolina, with this difference, that death is made thepunishment for the _third_ offence. In both states, the law containsthis remarkable proviso: 'Provided always, that such striking be notdone by the command and in the defence of the person or property ofthe owner, or other person having the government of such slave, inwhich case the slave shall be wholly excused!' According to this law, if a slave, by the direction of his OVERSEER, strike a white man whois beating said overseer's _dog_, 'the slave shall be wholly excused;'but if the white man has rushed upon the slave himself, instead of the_dog_, and is furiously beating him, if the slave strike back but asingle blow, the legal penalty is 'ANY _punishment_ not extending tolife or limb;' and if the tortured slave has a second onset made uponhim, and, after suffering all but death, again strike back inself-defence, the law KILLS him for it. So, if a female slave, inobedience to her mistress, and in defence of 'her property, ' strike awhite man who is kicking her mistress' pet kitten, she 'shall bewholly excused, ' saith the considerate law: but if the unprotectedgirl, when beaten and kicked _herself_, raise her hand against herbrutal assailant, the law condemns her to 'any punishment, notextending to life or limb; and if a wretch assail her again, andattempt to violate her chastity, and the trembling girl, in heranguish and terror, instinctively raise her hand against him inself-defence, she shall, saith the law, 'suffer DEATH. '

Reader, this diabolical law is the 'public opinion' of Georgia andSouth Carolina toward the slaves. This is the vaunted 'protection'afforded them by their 'high-souled chivalry. ' To show that the'public opinion' of the slave states far more effectually protects the_property_ of the master than the _person_ of the slave, the reader isreferred to two laws of Louisiana, passed in 1819. The one attaches apenalty 'not exceeding one thousand dollars, ' and 'imprisonment notexceeding two years, ' to the crime of 'cutting or breaking any ironchain or collar, ' which any master of slaves has used to prevent theirrunning away; the other, a penalty 'not exceeding five hundreddollars, ' to 'wilfully cutting out the tongue, putting out the eye, _cruelly_ burning, or depriving any slave of _any limb_. ' Look atit--the most horrible dismemberment conceivable cannot be punished bya fine of _more_ than five hundred dollars. The law expressly fixesthat, as the utmost limit, and it _may_ not be half that sum; not asingle moment's imprisonment stays the wretch in his career, and thenext hour he may cut out another slave's tongue, or burn his hand off. But let the same man break a chain put upon a slave, to keep him fromrunning away, and, besides paying double the penalty that could beexacted from him for cutting off a slave's leg, the law imprisons himnot exceeding two years!

This law reveals the _heart_ of slaveholders towards their slaves, their diabolical indifference to the most excruciating and protractedtorments inflicted on them by '_any_ person;' it reveals, too, the_relative_ protection afforded by 'public opinion' to the _person_ ofthe slave, in appalling contrast with the vastly surer protectionwhich it affords to the master's _property_ in the slave. The wretchwho cuts out the tongue, tears out the eyes, shoots off the arms, orburns off the feet of a slave, over a slow fire, _cannot_ legally befined more than five hundred dollars; but if he should in pity loose achain from his galled neck, placed there by the master to keep himfrom escaping, and thus put his property in some jeopardy, he may befined _one thousand dollars_, and thrust into a dungeon for two years!and this, be it remembered, not for _stealing_ the slave from themaster, nor for _enticing_, or even advising him to run away, orgiving him any information how he can effect his escape; but merely, because, touched with sympathy for the bleeding victim, as he sees therough iron chafe the torn flesh at every turn, he removes it;--and, asescape without this incumbrance would be easier than with it, themaster's property in the slave is put at some risk. For having causedthis slight risk, the law provides a punishment--fine not exceedingone thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding _two years_. Wesay 'slight risk, ' because the slave may not be disposed to encounterthe dangers, and hunger, and other sufferings of the woods, and thecertainty of terrible inflictions if caught; and if he should attemptit, the risk of losing him is small. An advertisement of five lineswill set the whole community howling on his track; and the tremblingand famished fugitive is soon scented out in his retreat, and draggedback and delivered over to his tormentors. 

The preceding law is another illustration of the 'protection' affordedto the limbs and members of slaves, by 'public opinion' amongslaveholders. 

Here follow two other illustrations of the brutal indifference of'public opinion' to the _torments_ of the slave, while it is full ofzeal to compensate the master, if any one disables his slave so as tolessen his market value. The first is a law of South Carolina. Itprovides, that if a slave, engaged in his owner's service, be attackedby a person 'not having sufficient cause for so doing, ' and if theslave shall be '_maimed or disabled_' by him, so that the ownersuffers a loss from his inability to labor, the person maiming himshall pay for his 'lost time, ' and 'also the charges for the cure ofthe slave!' This Vandal law does not deign to take the least notice ofthe anguish of the '_maimed' slave_, made, perhaps, a groaning cripplefor life; the horrible wrong and injury done to _him_, is passed overin utter silence. It is thus declared to be _not a criminal act_. Butthe pecuniary interests of the master are not to be thus neglected by'public opinion'. Oh no! its tender bowels run over with sympathy atthe master's injury in the 'lost _time_' of his slave, and itcarefully provides that he shall have pay for the whole of it. --See 2_Brevard's Digest_, 231, 2. 

A law similar to the above has been passed in Louisiana, whichcontains an additional provision for the benefit of the_master_--ordaining, that 'if the slave' (thus _maimed and disabled_, )'be forever rendered unable to work, ' the person maiming, shall paythe master the appraised value of the slave before the injury, andshall, in addition, _take_ the slave, and maintain him during life. 'Thus 'public opinion' transfers the helpless cripple from the hand ofhis master, who, as he has always had the benefit of his services, might possibly feel some tenderness for him, and puts him in the solepower of the wretch who has disabled him for life--protecting thevictim from the fury of his tormentor, by putting him into his hands!What but butchery by piecemeal can, under such circumstances, beexpected from a man brutal enough at first to 'maim' and 'disable'him, and now exasperated by being obliged to pay his full value to themaster, and to have, in addition, the daily care and expense of hismaintenance. Since writing the above, we have seen the followingjudicial decision, in the case of Jourdan, vs. Patton--5 Martin'sLouisiana Reports, 615. A slave of the plaintiff had been deprived ofhis _only eye_, and thus rendered _useless_, on which account thecourt adjudged that the defendant should pay the plaintiff his fullvalue. The case went up, by appeal, to the Supreme court. JudgeMathews, in his decision said, that 'when the defendant had paid thesum decreed, the slave ought to be placed in his possession, '--adding, that 'the judgment making full compensation to the owner _operates achange of property_. He adds, 'The principle of humanity which wouldlead us to suppose, that the mistress whom he had long served, wouldtreat her miserable blind slave with more kindness than the defendantto whom the judgment ought to transfer him, CANNOT BE TAKEN INTOCONSIDERATION!' The full compensation of the mistress for the loss ofthe services of the slave, is worthy of all 'consideration, ' even tothe uttermost farthing; 'public opinion' is omnipotent for _her_protection; but when the food, clothing, shelter, fire and lodging, medicine and nursing, comfort and entire condition and treatment ofher poor blind slave throughout his dreary pilgrimage, is thequestion--ah! that, says the mouthpiece of the law, and therepresentative of 'public opinion, ' 'CANNOT BE TAKEN INTOCONSIDERATION. ' Protection of slaves by 'public opinion' amongslaveholders!!

The foregoing illustrations of southern 'public opinion, ' from thelaws made by it and embodying it, are sufficient to show, that, so farfrom being an efficient protection to the slaves, it is theirdeadliest foe, persecutor and tormentor. 

But here we shall probably be met by the legal lore of some 'JusticeShallow, ' instructing us that the life of the slave is fully protectedby law, however unprotected he may be in other respects. Thisassertion we meet with a point blank denial. The law does not, inreality, protect the life of the slave. But even if the letter of thelaw would fully protect the life of the slave, 'public opinion' in theslave states would make it a dead letter. The letter of the law wouldhave been all-sufficient for the protection of the lives of themiserable gamblers in Vicksburg, and other places in Mississippi, fromthe rage of those whose money they had won; but 'gentlemen of propertyand standing 'laughed the law to scorn, rushed to the gamblers' house, put ropes round their necks, dragged them through the streets, hangedthem in the public square, and thus saved the sum they had not yetpaid. Thousands witnessed this wholesale murder, yet of the scores oflegal officers present, not a soul raised a finger to prevent it, thewhole city consented to it, and thus aided and abetted it. How manyhundreds of them helped to commit the murders, _with their own hands_, does not appear, but not one of them has been indicted for it, and noone made the least effort to bring them to trial. Thus, up to thepresent hour, the blood of those murdered men rests on that wholecity, and it will continue to be a CITY OF MURDERERS, so long as itscitizens, agree together to shield those felons from punishment; andthey do thus agree together so long as they encourage each other inrefusing to bring them to justice. Now, the _laws_ of Mississippi werenot in fault that those men were murdered; nor are they now in fault, that their murderers are not punished; the laws demand it, but thepeople of Mississippi, the legal officers, the grand juries andlegislature of the state, with one consent agree, that the law _shallbe a dead letter_, and thus the whole state assumes the guilt of thosemurders, and in bravado, flourishes her reeking hands in the face ofthe world. [34]

[Footnote 34: We have just learned from Mississippi papers, that thecitizens of Vicksburg are erecting a public monument in honor of Dr. H. S. Bodley, who was the ring-leader of the Lynchers in their attackupon the miserable victims. To give the crime the cold encouragementof impunity alone, or such slight tokens of favor as a home and asanctuary, is beneath the chivalry and hospitality of Mississippians;so they tender it incense, an altar, and a crown of glory. Let themarble rise till it be seen from afar, a beacon marking the spot wherelaw lies lifeless by the hand of felons; and murderers, with chapletson their heads, dance and shout upon its grave, while 'all the peoplesay, amen. ']

The letter of the law on the statute book is one thing, the practiceof the community under that law often a totally different thing. Eachof the slave states has laws providing that the life of no _white_ manshall be taken without his having first been indicted by a grand jury, allowed an impartial trial by a petit jury, with the right of counsel, cross-examination of witnesses, &c. ; but who does not know that ifARTHUR TAPPAN were pointed out in the streets of New Orleans, Mobile, Savannah, Charleston, Natchez, or St. Louis, he would be torn inpieces by the citizens with one accord, and that if any one shouldattempt to bring his murderers to punishment, he would be torn inpieces also. The editors of southern newspapers openly vaunt, thatevery abolitionist who sets foot in their soil, shall, if he bediscovered, be hung at once, without judge or jury. What mockery toquote the _letter of the law_ in those states, to show thatabolitionists would have secured to them the legal protection of animpartial trial!

Before the objector can make out his case, that the life of the slaveis protected by the law, he must not only show that the _words of thelaw_ grant him such protection, but that such a state of publicsentiment exists as will carry out the provisions of the law in theirtrue spirit. Any thing short of this will be set down as mere pratingby every man of common sense. It has been already abundantly shown inthe preceding pages, that the public sentiment of the slaveholdingstates toward the slaves is diabolical. Now, if there were laws inthose states, the _words_ of which granted to the life of the slavethe same protection granted to that of the master, what would theyavail? ACTS constitute protection; and is that public sentiment whichmakes the slave 'property, ' and perpetrates hourly robbery andbatteries upon him, so penetrated with a sense of the sacredness ofhis right to life, that it will protect it at all hazards, and drag tothe gallows his OWNER, if he take the life of his own _property_? Ifit be asked, why the penalty for killing a slave is not a mere _fine_then, if his life is not really regarded as sacred by publicsentiment--we answer, that formerly in most, if not in all the slavestates, the murder of a slave _was_ punished by a mere fine. This wasthe case in South Carolina till a few years since. Yes, as late as1821, in the state of South Carolina, which boasts of its chivalry andhonor, at least as loudly as any state in the Union, a slaveholdermight butcher his slave in the most deliberate manner--with the mostbarbarous and protracted torments, and yet not be subjected to asingle hour's imprisonment--pay his fine, stride out of the court andkill another--pay his fine again and butcher another, and so long ashe paid to the state, cash down, its own assessment of damages, without putting it to the trouble of prosecuting for it, he mightstrut 'a gentleman. '--See 2 _Brevard's Digest_, 241. 

The reason assigned by the legislature for enacting a law whichpunished the wilful murder of a human being by a _fine_, was that'CRUELTY _is_ HIGHLY UNBECOMING, ' and 'ODIOUS. ' It was doubtless thesame reason that induced the legislature in 1821, to make a show ofgiving _more_ protection to the life of the slave. Their fathers, whenthey gave _some_ protection, did it because the time had come when, not to do it would make them 'ODIOUS, ' So the legislature of 1821 madea show of giving still greater protection, because, not to do it wouldmake them '_odious_. ' Fitly did they wear the mantles of theirascending fathers! In giving to the life of a slave the miserableprotection of a fine, their fathers did not even pretend to do it outof any regard to the sacredness of his life as a human being, butmerely because cruelty is 'unbecoming' and 'odious. ' The legislatureof 1821 _nominally_ increased this protection; not that they caredmore for the slave's rights, or for the inviolabity of his life as ahuman being, but the civilized world had advanced since the date ofthe first law. The slave-trade which was then honorable merchandise, and plied by lords, governors, judges, and doctors of divinity, raising them to immense wealth, had grown 'unbecoming, ' and onlyraised its votaries by a rope to the yard arm; besides this, thebarbarity of the slave codes throughout the world was fast becoming'odious' to civilized nations, and slaveholders found that the onlyconditions on which they could prevent themselves from being thrustout of the pale of civilization, was to meliorate the iron rigor oftheir slave code, and thus _seem_ to secure to their slaves someprotection. Further, the northern states had passed laws for theabolition of slavery--all the South American states were acting in thematter; and Colombia and Chili passed acts of abolition that veryyear. In addition to all this the Missouri question had been for twoyears previous under discussion in Congress, in State legislatures, and in every village and stage coach; and this law of South Carolinahad been held up to execration by northern members of Congress, and innewspapers throughout the free states--in a word, the legislature ofSouth Carolina found that they were becoming 'odious;' and while intheir sense of justice and humanity they did not surpass theirfathers, they winced with equal sensitiveness under the sting of theworld's scorn, and with equal promptitude sued for a truce bymodifying the law. 

The legislature of South Carolina modified another law at the samesession. Previously, the killing of a slave 'on a sudden heat orpassion, or by undue correction, ' was punished by a fine of threehundred and fifty pounds. In 1821 an act was passed diminishing thefine to five hundred dollars, but authorizing an imprisonment 'notexceeding six months. ' Just before the American Revolution, theLegislature of North Carolina passed a law making _imprisonment_ thepenalty for the wilful and malicious murder of a slave. About twentyyears after the revolution, the state found itself becoming 'odious, 'as the spirit of abolition was pervading the nations. The legislature, perceiving that Christendom would before long rank them withbarbarians if they so cheapened human life, repealed the law, candidlyassigning in the preamble of the new one the reason for repealing theold--that it was 'DISGRACEFUL' and 'DEGRADING! As this preambleexpressly recognizes the slave as 'a human creature, ' and as it iscouched in a phraseology which indicates some sense of justice, wewould gladly give the legislature credit for sincerity, and believethem really touched with humane movings towards the slave, were it notfor a proviso in the law clearly revealing that the show of humanityand regard for their rights, indicated by the words, is nothing morethan a hollow pretence--hypocritical flourish to produce an impressionfavorable to their justice and magnanimity. After declaring that hewho is 'guilty of wilfully and maliciously killing a slave, shallsuffer the same punishment as if he had killed a freeman;' the actconcludes thus: 'Provided, always, this act shall not extend to theperson killing a slave outlawed by virtue of any act of Assembly ofthis state; or to any slave in the act of resistance to his lawfuloverseer, or master, or to any slave dying under _moderatecorrection_. ' Reader, look at this proviso. 1. It gives free licenseto all persons to kill _outlawed slaves_. Well, what is an outlawedslave? A slave who runs away, lurks in swamps, &c. , and kills a _hog_or any other domestic animal to keep himself from starving, is subjectto a proclamation of _outlawry_; (Haywood's Manual, 521, ) and thenwhoever finds him may shoot him, tear him in pieces with dogs, burnhim to death over a slow fire, or kill him by any other tortures. 2. The proviso grants full license to a master to kill his slave, if theslave _resist_ him. The North Carolina Bench has decided that this lawcontemplates not only actual resistance to punishment, &c. , but also_offering_ to resist. (Stroud's Sketch, 37. ) If, for example, a slaveundergoing the process of branding should resist by pushing aside theburning stamp; or if wrought up to frenzy by the torture of the lash, he should catch and hold it fast; or if he break loose from his masterand run, refusing to stop at his command; or if he _refuse_ to beflogged; or struggle to keep his clothes on while his master is tryingto strip him; if, in these, or any one of a hundred other ways he_resist_, or offer, or _threaten_ to resist the infliction; or, if themaster attempt the violation of the slave's wife, and the husbandresist his attempts without the least effort to injure him, but merelyto shield his wife from his assaults, this law does not merely permit, but it _authorizes_ the master to murder the slave on the spot. 

The brutality of these two provisos brands its authors as barbarians. But the third cause of exemption could not be outdone by thelegislation of fiends. 'DYING under MODERATE _correction_!' MODERATE_correction_ and DEATH--cause and effect! 'Provided ALWAYS, ' says thelaw, 'this act shall not extend to any slave dying under _moderatecorrection_!' Here is a formal proclamation of impunity to murder--anexpress pledge of _acquittal_ to all slaveholders who wish to murdertheir slaves, a legal absolution--an indulgence granted before thecommission of the crime! Look at the phraseology. Nothing is said ofmaimings, dismemberments, skull fractures, of severe bruisings, orlacerations, or even of floggings; but a word is used thecommon-parlance import of which is, _slight chastisement_; it is noteven _whipping_, but '_correction_' And as if hypocrisy and malignitywere on the rack to outwit each other, even that weak word must bestill farther diluted; so '_moderate_' is added: and, to crown theclimax, compounded of absurdity, hypocrisy, and cold-blooded murder, the _legal definition_ of 'moderate correction' is covertly given;which is, _any punishment_ that KILLS the victim. All inflictions areeither _moderate_ or _immoderate_; and the design of this law wasmanifestly to shield the murderer from conviction, _by carrying on itsface the rule for its own interpretation_; thus advertising, beforehand, courts and juries, that the fact of any infliction_producing death_, was no evidence that it was _immoderate_, and thatbeating a man to death came within the legal meaning of 'moderatecorrection!' The _design_ of the legislature of North Carolina inframing this law is manifest; it was to produce the impression uponthe world, that they had so high a sense of justice as voluntarily togrant adequate protection to the lives of their slaves. This isostentatiously set forth in the preamble, and in the body of the law. That this was the most despicable hypocrisy, and that they hadpredetermined to grant no such protection, notwithstanding the painstaken to get the _credit_ of it, is fully revealed by the _proviso_, which was framed in such a way as to nullify the law, for the expressaccommodation of slaveholding gentlemen murdering their slaves. Allsuch find in this proviso a convenient accomplice before the fact, anda packed jury, with a ready-made verdict of 'not guilty, ' bothgratuitously furnished by the government! The preceding law andproviso are to be found in Haywood's Manual, 530; also in Laws ofTennessee, Act of October 23, 1791; and in Stroud's Sketch, 37. 

Enough has been said already to show, that though the laws of theslave states profess to grant adequate protection to the life of theslave, such professions are mere empty pretence, no such protectionbeing in reality afforded by them. But there is still another fact, showing that all laws which profess to protect the slaves from injuryby the whites are a mockery. It is this--that the testimony, neitherof a slave nor of a free colored person, is _legal_ testimony againsta white. To this rule there is _no exception_ in any of the slavestates: and this, were there no other evidence, would be sufficient tostamp, as hypocritical, all the provisions of the codes which_profess_ to protect the slaves. Professing to grant _protection_, while, at the same time, it strips them of the only _means_ by whichthey can make that protection available! Injuries must be legally_proved_ before they can be legally _redressed_: to deprive men of thepower of _proving_ their injuries, is itself the greatest of allinjuries; for it not only exposes to all, but invites them, by avirtual guarantee of impunity, and is thus the _author_ of allinjuries. It matters not what other laws exist, professing to throwsafeguards round the slave--_this_ makes them blank paper. How can aslave prove outrages perpetrated upon him by his master or overseer, when his own testimony and that of all his fellow-slaves, his kindred, associates, and acquaintances, is ruled out of court? and when he isentirely in the _power_ of those who injure him, and when the onlycare necessary, on their part, is, to see that no _white_ witness islooking on. Ordinarily, but _one_ white man, the overseer, is with theslaves while they are at labor; indeed, on most plantations, to commitan outrage in the _presence_ of a white witness would be moredifficult than in their absence. He who wished to commit an illegalact upon a slave, instead of being obliged to _take pains_ and watchfor an opportunity to do it unobserved by a white, would find itdifficult to do it in the presence of a white if he wished to do so. The supreme court of Louisiana, in their decision, in the case ofCrawford vs. Cherry, (15, _Martin's La. Rep. _ 112; also "_Law ofSlavery, _" 249, ) where the defendant was sued for the value of a slavewhom he had shot and killed, say, "The act charged here, is one_rarely_ committed in the presence of _witnesses_, " (whites). So inthe case of the State vs. Mann, (_Devereux, N. C. Rep. _ 263; and _"Lawof Slavery, " _247;) in which the defendant was charged with shooting aslave girl 'belonging' to the plaintiff; the Supreme Court of NorthCarolina, in their decision, speaking of the provocations of themaster by the slave, and 'the consequent wrath of the master'prompting him to _bloody vengeance_, add, _'a vengeance generallypractised with impunity, by reason of its privacy. '_

Laws excluding the testimony of slaves and free colored persons, wherea white is concerned, do not exist in all the slave states. One or twoof them have no legal enactment on the subject; but, in those, _'public opinion'_ acts with the force of law, and the courts_invariably reject it_. This brings us back to the potency of thatoft-quoted 'public opinion, ' so ready, according to our objector, todo battle for the _protection_ of the slave!

Another proof that 'public opinion, ' in the slave states, plunders, tortures, and murders the slaves, instead of _protecting_ them, isfound in the fact, that the laws of slave states inflict _capital_punishment on slaves for a variety of crimes, for which, if theirmasters commit them, the legal penalty is merely _imprisonment_. JudgeStroud in his Sketch of the Laws of Slavery, says, that by the laws ofVirginia, there are 'seventy-one crimes for which slaves are capitallypunished though in none of these are whites punished in manner moresevere than by imprisonment in the penitentiary. ' (P. 107, where thereader will find all the crimes enumerated. ) It should be added, however, that though the penalty for each of these seventy-one crimesis 'death, ' yet a majority of them are, in the words of the law, 'death within clergy;' and in Virginia, _clergyable_ offences, though_technically_ capital, are not so in fact. In Mississippi, slaves arepunished capitally for more than _thirty_ crimes, for which whites arepunished only by fine or imprisonment, or both. Eight of these are not_recognized as crimes_, either by common law or by statute, whencommitted by whites. In South Carolina slaves are punished capitallyfor _nine_ more crimes than the whites--in Georgia, for _six_--and inKentucky, for _seven_ more than whites, &c. We surely need not detainthe reader by comments on this monstrous inequality with which thepenal codes of slave states treat slaves and their masters. When weconsider that guilt is in proportion to intelligence, and that thesemasters have by law doomed their slaves to ignorance, and then, asthey darkle and grope along their blind way, inflict penalties uponthem for a variety of acts regarded as praise worthy in whites;killing them for crimes, when whites are only fined or imprisoned--tocall such a 'public opinion' inhuman, savage, murderous, diabolical, would be to use tame words, if the English vocabulary could supplyothers of more horrible import. 

But slaveholding brutality does not stop here. While punishing theslaves for crimes with vastly greater severity than it does theirmasters for the same crimes, and making a variety of acts _crimes_ inlaw, which are right, and often _duties_, it persists in refusing tomake known to the slaves that complicated and barbarous penal codewhich loads them with such fearful liabilities. The slave is left toget a knowledge of these laws as he can, and cases must be of constantoccurrence at the south, in which slaves get their first knowledge ofthe existence of a law by suffering its penalty. Indeed, this isprobably the way in which they commonly learn what the laws are; forhow else can the slave get a knowledge of the laws? He cannot_read_--he cannot _learn_ to read; if he try to master the alphabet, so that he may spell out the words of the law, and thus avoid itspenalties, the law shakes its terrors at him; while, at the same time, those who made the laws refuse to make them known to those for whomthey are designed. The memory of Caligula will blacken with execrationwhile time lasts, because be hung up his laws so high that peoplecould not read them, and then punished them because they did not keepthem. Our slaveholders aspire to blacker infamy. Caligula was contentwith hanging up his laws where his subjects could _see_ them; and ifthey could not read them, they knew where they were, and might get atthem, if, in their zeal to learn his will, they had used the samemeans to get up to them that those did who hung them there. EvenCaligula, wretch as he was, would have shuddered at cutting their legsoff, to prevent their climbing to them; or, if they had got there, atboring their eyes out, to prevent their reading them. Our slaveholdersvirtually do both; for they prohibit their slaves acquiring thatknowledge of letters which would enable them to read the laws; and if, by stealth, they get it in spite of them, they prohibit them books andpapers, and flog them if they are caught at them. Further--Caligulamerely hung his laws so high that they could not be _read_--ourslaveholders have hung theirs so high above the slave that they cannotbe _seen_--they are utterly out of sight, and he finds out that theyare there only by the falling of the penalties on his head. [35] Thusthe "public opinion" of slave states protects the defenceless slave byarming a host of legal penalties and setting them in ambush at everythicket along his path, to spring upon him unawares. 

[Footnote 35: The following extract from the Alexandria (D. C. ) Gazetteis all illustration. "CRIMINALS CONDEMNED. --On Monday last the Courtof the borough of Norfolk, Va. Sat on the trial of four negro boysarraigned for burglary. The first indictment charged them withbreaking into the hardware store of Mr. E. P. Tabb, upon which two ofthem were found guilty by the Court, and condemned to suffer thepenalty of the law, which, in the case of a slave, is death. Thesecond Friday in April is appointed for the execution of their awfulsentence. _Their ages do not exceed sixteen_. The first, a fine activeboy, belongs to a widow lady in Alexandria; the latter, a houseservant, is owned by a gentleman in the borough. The value of one wasfixed at $1000, and the other at $800; which sums are to bere-imbursed to their respective owners out of the state treasury. " Inall probability these poor boys, who are to be hung for stealing, never dreamed that death was the legal penalty of the crime. 

Here is another, from the "New Orleans Bee" of ---- 14, 1837--"Theslave who STRUCK some citizens in Canal street, some weeks since, hasbeen tried and found guilty, and is sentenced to be HUNG on the 24th. "]

Stroud, in his Sketch of the Laws of Slavery, page 100, thus commentson this monstrous barbarity. 

"The hardened convict moves their sympathy, and is to be taught thelaws before he is expected to obey them;[36] yet the guiltless slaveis subjected to an extensive system of cruel enactments, of no part ofwhich, probably, has he ever heard. "

[Footnote 36: "It shall be the duty of the keeper [of the penitentiary]on the receipt of each prisoner, to _read_ to him or her such parts ofthe penal laws of this state as impose penalties for escape, and tomake all the prisoners in the penitentiary acquainted with the same. It shall also be his duty, on the discharge of such prisoner, to readto him or her such parts of the laws as impose additional punishmentsfor the repetition of offences. "--_Rule 12th_, for the internalgovernment of the Penitentiary of Georgia. Sec. 26 of the PenitentiaryAct of 1816. --Prince's Digest, 386. ]

Having already drawn so largely on the reader's patience, inillustrating southern 'public opinion' by the slave laws, instead ofadditional illustrations of the same point from another class of thoselaws, as was our design, we will group together a few particulars, which the reader can take in at a glance, showing that the "publicopinion" of slaveholders towards their slaves, which exists at thesouth, in the form of law, tramples on all those fundamentalprinciples of right, justice, and equity, which are recognized assacred by all civilized nations, and receive the homage even ofbarbarians. 

1. One of these principles is, that the _benefits_ of law to thesubject should overbalance its burdens--its protection more thancompensate for its restraints and exactions--and its blessingsaltogether outweigh its inconveniences and evils--the former beingnumerous, positive, and permanent, the latter few, negative, andincidental. Totally the reverse of all this is true in the case of theslave. Law is to him all exaction and no protection: instead oflightening his _natural_ burdens, it crushes him under a multitude ofartificial ones; instead of a friend to succor him, it is hisdeadliest foe, transfixing him at every step from the cradle to thegrave. Law has been beautifully defined to be "benevolence acting byrule;" to the American slave it is malevolence torturing by system. Itis an old truth, that _responsibility_ increases with _capacity_; butthose same laws which make the slave a "_chattel_, " require of him_more_ than of _men_. The same law which makes him a _thing_ incapableof obligation, loads him with obligations superhuman--while sinkinghim below the level of a brute in dispensing its _benefits_, he laysupon him burdens which would break down an angel. 

2. _Innocence is entitled to the protection of law. _ Slaveholders makeinnocence free plunder; this is their daily employment; their lawsassail it, make it their victim, inflict upon it all, and, in somerespects, more than all the penalties of the greatest guilt. To otherinnocent persons, law is a blessing, to the slave it is a curse, onlya curse and that continually. 

3. _Deprivation of liberty is one of the highest punishments ofcrime_; and in proportion to its justice when inflicted on the guilty, is its injustice when inflicted on the innocent; this terrible penaltyis inflicted on two million seven hundred thousand, innocent personsin the Southern states. 

4. _Self-preservation and self-defence_, are universally regarded asthe most sacred of human rights, yet the laws of slave states punishthe slave with _death_ for exercising these rights in that way, whichin others is pronounced worthy of the highest praise. 

5. _The safeguards of law are most needed where natural safe-guardsare weakest. _ Every principle of justice and equity requires, that, those who are totally unprotected by birth, station, wealth, friends, influence, and popular favor, and especially those who are theinnocent objects of public contempt and prejudice, should be morevigilantly protected by law, than those who are so fortified bydefence, that they have far less need of _legal_ protection; yet thepoor slave who is fortified by _none_ of these _personal_ bulwarks, isdenied the protection of law, while the master, surrounded by themall, is panoplied in the mail of legal protection, even to the hair ofhis head; yea, his very shoe-tie and coat-button are legal protegees. 

6. The grand object of law is to _protect men's natural rights_, butinstead of protecting the natural rights of the slaves, it givesslaveholders license to wrest them from the weak by violence, protectsthem in holding their plunder, and _kills_ the rightful owner if heattempt to recover it. 

This is the _protection_ thrown around the rights of American slavesby the 'public opinion, ' of slaveholders; these the restraints thathold back their masters, overseers, and drivers, from inflictinginjuries upon them!

In a Republican government, _law_ is the pulse of its _heart_--as theheart beats the pulse beats, except that it often beats _weaker_ thanthe heart, never stronger--or to drop the figure, laws are never_worse_ than those who make them, very often better. If human historyproves anything, cruelty of practice will always go beyond cruelty oflaw. 

Law-making is a formal, deliberate act, performed by persons of matureage, embodying the intelligence, wisdom, justice and humanity, of thecommunity; performed, too, at leisure, after full opportunity had fora comprehensive survey of all the relations to be affected, aftercareful investigation and protracted discussion. Consequently lawsmust, in the main, be a true index of the permanent feelings, thesettled _frame of mind_, cherished by the community upon thosesubjects, and towards those persons and classes whose condition thelaws are designed to establish. If the laws are in a high degree crueland inhuman, towards any class of persons, it proves that the feelingshabitually exercised towards that class of persons, by those who makeand perpetuate those laws, are at least _equally_ cruel and inhuman. We say _at least equally_ so; for if the _habitual_ state of feelingtowards that class be unmerciful, it must be unspeakably cruel, relentless and malignant when _provoked_; if its _ordinary_ action isinhuman, its contortions and spasms must be tragedies; if the wavesrun high when there has been no wind, where will they not break whenthe tempest heaves them!

Further, when cruelty is the _spirit_ of the law towards a proscribedclass, when it _legalizes great outrages_ upon them, it connives at, and abets _greater_ outrages, and is virtually an accomplice of allwho perpetrate them. Hence, in such cases, though the _degree_ of theoutrage is illegal, the perpetrator will rarely be convicted, and, even if convicted, will be almost sure to escape punishment. This isnot _theory_ but _history_. Every judge and lawyer in the slave states_knows_, that the legal conviction and _punishment_ of masters andmistresses, for illegal outrages upon their slaves, is an event whichhas rarely, if ever, occurred in the slave states; they know, also, that although _hundreds_ of slaves have been _murdered_ by theirmasters and mistresses in the slave states, within the lasttwenty-five years, and though the fact of their having committed thosemurders has been established beyond a _doubt_ in the minds of thesurrounding community, yet that the murderers have not, in a singleinstance, suffered the penalty of the law. 

Finally, since slaveholders have deliberately legalized theperpetration of the most cold-blooded atrocities upon their slaves, and do pertinaciously refuse to make these atrocities _illegal_, andto punish those who perpetrate them, they stand convicted before theworld, upon their own testimony, of the most barbarous, brutal, andhabitual inhumanity. If this be slander and falsehood, their own lipshave uttered it, their own fingers have written it, their own actshave proclaimed it; and however it may be with their _morality_, theyhave too much human nature to perjure themselves for the sake ofpublishing their own infamy. 

Having dwelt at such length on the legal code of the slave states, that unerring index of the public opinion of slaveholders towardstheir slaves; and having shown that it does not protect the slavesfrom cruelty, and that even in the few instances in which the letterof the law, if _executed_, would afford some protection, it isvirtually nullified by the connivance of courts and juries, or bypopular clamor; we might safely rest the case here, assured that everyhonest reader would spurn the absurd falsehood, that the 'publicopinion' of the slave states protects the slaves and restrains themaster. But, as the assertion is made so often by slaveholders, andwith so much confidence, notwithstanding its absurdity is fullyrevealed by their own legal code, we propose to show its falsehood byapplying other tests. 

We lay it down as a truth that can be made no plainer by reasoning, that the same 'public opinion, ' which restrains men from _committing_outrages, will restrain them from _publishing_ such outrages, if theydo commit them;--in other words, if a man is restrained from certainacts through fear of losing his character, should they become known, he will not voluntarily destroy his character by _making them known_, should he be guilty of them. Let us look at this. It is assumed byslaveholders, that 'public opinion' at the south so frowns on crueltyto the slaves, that _fear of disgrace_ would restrain from theinfliction of it, were there no other consideration. 

Now, that this is sheer fiction is shown by the fact, that thenewspapers in the slaveholding states, teem with advertisements forrunaway slaves, in which the masters and _mistresses_ describe theirmen and women, as having been 'branded with a hot iron, ' on their'cheeks, ' 'jaws, ' 'breasts, ' 'arms, ' 'legs, ' and 'thighs;' also as'scarred, ' 'very much scarred, ' 'cut up, ' 'marked, ' &c. 'with thewhip, ' also with 'iron collars on, ' 'chains, ' 'bars of iron, ''fetters, ' 'bells, ' 'horns, ' 'shackles, ' &c. They, also, describe themas having been wounded by 'buck-shot, ' 'rifle-balls, ' &c. Fired atthem by their 'owners, ' and others when in pursuit; also, as having'notches, ' cut in their ears, the tops or bottoms of their ears 'cutoff, ' or 'slit, ' or 'one ear cut off' or 'both ears cut off' &c. &c. The masters and mistresses who thus advertise their runaway slaves, coolly sign their names to their advertisements, giving the street andnumber of their residences, if in cities, their post office address, &c. If in the country; thus making public proclamation as widely aspossible that _they_ 'brand, ' 'scar, ' 'gash, ' 'cut up, ' &c. The fleshof their slaves; load them with irons, cut off their ears, &c. ; theyspeak of these things with the utmost _sang froid_, not seeming tothink it possible, that any one will esteem them at all the lessbecause of these outrages upon their slaves; further, theseadvertisements swarm in many of the largest and most widely circulatedpolitical and commercial papers that are published in the slavestates. The editors of those papers constitute the main body of theliterati of the slave states; they move in the highest circle ofsociety, are among the 'popular' men in the community, and _as aclass_, are more influential than any other; yet these editors publishthese advertisements with iron indifference. So far from proclaimingto such felons, homicides, and murderers, that they will not be theirblood-hounds, to hunt down the innocent and mutilated victims who haveescaped from their torture, they freely furnish them with everyfacility, become their accomplices and share their spoils; and insteadof outraging 'public opinion, ' by doing it, they are the men after itsown heart, its organs, its representatives, its _self_. 

To show that the 'public opinion' of the slave states, towards theslaves, is absolutely _diabolical_, we will insert a few, out of amultitude, of similar advertisements from a variety of southern papersnow before us. 

The North Carolina Standard, of July 18, 1838, contains thefollowing:--

"TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD. Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro woman andtwo children; the woman is tall and black, and _a few days before shewent off_, I BURNT HER WITH A HOT IRON ON THE LEFT SIDE OF HER FACE; ITRIED TO MAKE THE LETTER M, _and she kept a cloth over her head andface, and a fly bonnet on her head so as to cover the burn;_ herchildren are both boys, the oldest is in his seventh year; he is a_mulatto_ and has blue eyes; the youngest is black and is in his fifthyear. The woman's name is Betty, commonly called Bet. "

MICAJAH RICKS. 

_Nash County, July 7_, 1838. 

Hear the wretch tell his story, with as much indifference as if hewere describing the cutting of his initials in the bark of a tree. 

_"I burnt her with a hot iron on the left side of her face, "--"I triedto make the letter M_, " and this he says in a newspaper, and puts hisname to it, and the editor of the paper who is, also, its proprietor, publishes it for him and pockets his fee. Perhaps the reader will say, 'Oh, it must have been published in an insignificant sheet printed insome obscure corner of the state; perhaps by a gang of 'squatters, ' inthe Dismal Swamp, universally regarded as a pest, and edited by somescape-gallows, who is detested by the whole community. ' To this I replythat the "North Carolina Standard, " the paper which contains it, is alarge six columned weekly paper, handsomely printed and ably edited;it is the leading Democratic paper in that state, and is published atRaleigh, the Capital of the state, Thomas Loring, Esq. Editor andProprietor. The motto in capitals under the head of the paper is, "THECONSTITUTION AND THE UNION OF THE STATES--THEY MUST BE PRESERVED. " Thesame Editor and Proprietor, who exhibits such brutality of feelingtowards the slaves, by giving the preceding advertisement aconspicuous place in his columns, and taking his pay for it, hasapparently a keen sense of the proprieties of life, where _whites_ areconcerned, and a high regard for the rights, character and feelings ofthose whose skin is colored like his own. As proof of this, we copyfrom the number of the paper containing the foregoing advertisement, the following _Editorial_ on the pending political canvass. 

"We cannot refrain from expressing the hope that the Gubernatorialcanvass will be conducted with a _due regard to the character_, and_feelings_ of the distinguished individuals who are candidates forthat office; and that the press of North Carolina will _set anexample_ in this respect, worthy of _imitation and of praise_. "

What is this but chivalrous and honorable feeling? The good name ofNorth Carolina is dear to him--on the comfort, 'character andfeelings, ' of her _white_ citizens he sets a high value; he feels too, most deeply for the _character of the Press_ of North Carolina, seesthat it is a city set on a hill, and implores his brethren of theeditorial corps to 'set an example' of courtesy and magnanimity worthyof imitation and praise. Now, reader, put all these things togetherand con them over, and then read again the preceding advertisementcontained in the same number of the paper, and you have the true"North Carolina STANDARD, " by which to measure the protection extendedto slaves by the 'public opinion' of that state. 

J. P. Ashford advertises as follows in the "Natchez Courier, " August24, 1838. 

"Ranaway, a negro girl called Mary, has a small scar over her eye, a_good many teeth missing_, the letter A. _is branded on her cheek andforehead_. "

A. B. Metcalf thus advertises a woman in the same paper, June 15, 1838. 

"Ranaway, Mary, a black woman, has a _scar_ on her back and right armnear the shoulder, _caused by a rifle ball_. "

John Henderson, in the "Grand Gulf Advertiser, " August 29, 1838, advertises Betsey. 

"Ranaway, a black woman Betsey, has an _iron bar on her right leg_. "

Robert Nicoll, whose residence is in Mobile, in Dauphin street, between Emmanuel and Conception streets, thus advertises a woman inthe "Mobile Commercial Advertiser. "

"TEN DOLLARS REWARD will be given for my negro woman Liby. The saidLiby is about 30 years old and VERY MUCH SCARRED ABOUT THE NECK ANDEARS, occasioned by whipping, had on a handkerchief tied round herears, as she COMMONLY wears it to HIDE THE SCARS. "

To show that slaveholding brutality now is the same that it was theeighth of a century ago, we publish the following advertisement fromthe "Charleston (S. C. ) Courier, " of 1825. 

"TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD. --Ranaway from the subscriber, on the 14thinstant, a negro girl named Molly. 

"The said girl was sold by Messrs. Wm. Payne & Sons, as the propertyof an estate of a Mr. Gearrall, and purchased by a Mr. Moses, and soldby him to a Thomas Prisley, of Edgefield District, of whom I boughther on the 17th of April, 1819. She is 16 or 17 years of age, slimmade, LATELY BRANDED ON THE LEFT CHEEK, THUS, R, AND A PIECE TAKEN OFFOF HER EAR ON THE SAME SIDE; THE SAME LETTER ON THE INSIDE OF BOTH HERLEGS. 

"ABNER ROSS, Fairfield District. "

But instead of filling pages with similar advertisements, illustratingthe horrible brutality of slaveholders towards their slaves, thereader is referred to the preceding pages of this work, to the scoresof advertisements written by slaveholders, printed by slaveholders, published by slaveholders, in newspapers edited by slaveholders andpatronized by slaveholders; advertisement describing not only men andboys, but women aged and middle-aged, matrons and girls of tenderyears, their necks chafed with iron collars with prongs, their limbsgalled with iron rings and chains, and bars of iron, iron hobbles andshackles, all parts of their persons scarred with the lash, andbranded with hot irons, and torn with rifle bullets, pistol balls andbuck shot, and gashed with knives, their eyes out, their ears cut off, their teeth drawn out, and their bones broken. He is referred also tothe cool and shocking indifference with which these slaveholders, 'gentlemen' and 'ladies, ' Reverends, and Honorables, and Excellencies, write and print, and publish and pay, and take money for, and read andcirculate, and sanction, such infernal barbarity. Let the readerponder all this, and then lay it to heart, that this is that 'publicopinion' of the slaveholders which protects their slaves from allinjury, and is an effectual guarantee of personal security. 

However far gone a community may be in brutality, something ofprotection may yet be hoped for from its 'public opinion, ' if _respectfor woman_ survive the general wreck; that gone, protection perishes;public opinion becomes universal rapine; outrages, once occasional, become habitual; the torture, which was before inflicted only bypassion, becomes the constant product of a _system_, and, instead ofbeing the index of sudden and fierce impulses, is coolly plied as thepermanent means to an end. When _women_ are branded with hot irons ontheir faces; when iron collars, with prongs, are riveted about theirnecks; when iron rings are fastened upon their limbs, and they areforced to drag after them chains and fetters; when their flesh is tornwith whips, and mangled with bullets and shot, and lacerated withknives; and when those who do such things, are regarded in thecommunity, and associated with as 'gentlemen' and 'ladies;' to saythat the 'public opinion' of _such_ a community is a protection to itsvictims, is to blaspheme God, whose creatures they are, cast in hisown sacred image, and dear to him as the apple of his eye. 

But we are not yet quite ready to dismiss this protector, 'PublicOpinion. ' To illustrate the hardened brutality with which slaveholdersregard their slaves, the shameless and apparently unconsciousindecency with which they speak of their female slaves, examine theirpersons, and describe them, under their own signatures, in newspapers, hand-bills, &c. Just as they would describe the marks of cattle andswine, on all parts of their bodies; we will make a few extracts fromsouthern papers. Reader, as we proceed to these extracts, remember ourmotto--'True humanity consists _not_ in a squeamish ear. '

Mr. P. ABDIE, of New Orleans, advertises in the New Orleans Bee, ofJanuary 29, 1838, for one of his female slaves, as follows;

"Ranaway, the negro wench named Betsey, aged about 22 years, handsome-faced, and good countenance; having the marks of the whipbehind her neck, and SEVERAL OTHERS ON HER RUMP. The above reward, ($10, ) will be given to whoever will bring that wench to P. ABDIE. "

The New Orleans Bee, in which the advertisement of this Vandalappears, is the 'Official Gazette of the State--of the GeneralCouncil--and of the first and third Municipalities of New Orleans. ' Itis the largest, and the most influential paper in the south-westernstates, and perhaps the most ably edited--and has undoubtedly a largercirculation than any other. It is a daily paper, of $12 a year, andits circulation being mainly among the larger merchants, planters, andprofessional men, it is a fair index of the 'public opinion' ofLouisiana, so far as represented by those classes of persons. Advertisements equally gross, indecent, and abominable, or nearly so, can be found in almost every number of that paper. 

Mr. WILLIAM ROBINSON, Georgetown, District of Columbia, advertised forhis slave in the National Intelligencer, of Washington City, Oct. 2, 1837, as follows:

"Eloped from my residence a young negress, 22 years old, of achestnut, or brown color. She has a very singular mark--this mark, tothe best of my RECOLLECTION, covers a part of her _breasts_, _body_, and _limbs_; and when her neck and arms are uncovered, is veryperceptible; she has been frequently seen east and south of theCapitol Square, and is harbored by ill-disposed persons, of everycomplexion, for her services. "

Mr. JOHN C. BEASLEY, near Huntsville, Alabama, thus advertises a younggirl of eighteen, in the Huntsville Democrat, of August 1st, 1837. "Ranaway Maria, about 18 years old, _very far advanced with child. _"He then offers a reward to any one who will commit this young girl, inthis condition, _to jail_. 

Mr. JAMES T. DE JARNETT, Vernon, Autauga co. Alabama, thus advertisesa woman in the Pensacola Gazette, July 14, 1838. "Celia is a _bright_copper-colored negress, _fine figure_ and _very smart_. On EXAMININGHER BACK, you will find marks caused by the whip. " He closes theadvertisement, by offering a reward of _five hundred dollars_ to anyperson who will lodge her in _jail_, so that he can get her. 

A person who lives at 124 Chartres street, New Orleans, advertises inthe 'Bee, ' of May 31, for "the negress Patience, about 28 years old, has _large hips_, and is _bow-legged_. " A Mr. T. CUGGY, in the samepaper, thus describes "the negress Caroline. " "_She has awkward feet, clumsy ankles, turns out her toes greatly in walking, and has a soreon her left shin_. "

In another, of June 22, Mr. P. BAHI advertises "Maria, with a clearwhite complexion, and _double nipple on her right breast_. "

Mr. CHARLES CRAIGE, of Federal Point, New Hanover co. North Carolina, in the Wilmington Advertiser, August 11, 1837, offers a reward for hisslave Jane, and says "_she is far advanced in pregnancy_. "

The New Orleans Bulletin, August 18, 1838, advertises "the negressMary, aged nineteen, has a scar on her face, walks parrot-toed, and is_pregnant_. "

Mr. J. G. MUIR, of Grand Gulf, Mississippi, thus advertises a woman inthe Vicksburg Register, December 5, 1838. "Ranaway a negro girl--has anumber of _black lumps on her breasts, and is in a state ofpregnancy_. "

Mr. JACOB BESSON, Donaldsonville, Louisiana, advertises in the NewOrleans Bee, August 7, 1838, "the negro woman Victorine--she is_advanced in pregnancy_. "

Mr. J. H. LEVERICH & Co. No. 10, Old Levee, New Orleans, advertises inthe 'Bulletin, ' January 22, 1839, as follows. 

"$50 REWARD. --Ranaway a negro girl named Caroline about 18 years ofage, is _far advanced in child-bearing_. The above reward will be paidfor her delivery at either of the _jails_ of the city. "

Mr. JOHN DUGGAN, thus advertises a woman in the New Orleans Bee, ofSept. 7. 

"Ranaway from the subscriber a mulatto woman, named Esther, aboutthirty years of age, _large stomach_, wants her upper front teeth, andwalks pigeon-toed--supposed to be about the lower fauxbourg. "

Mr. FRANCIS FOSTER, of Troop co. Georgia, advertises in the Columbus(Ga. ) Enquirer of June 22, 1837--"My negro woman Patsey, has a stoopin her walking, occasioned by a _severe burn on her abdomen_. "

The above are a few specimens of the gross details, in describing thepersons of females, of all ages, and the marks upon all parts of theirbodies; proving incontestably, that slaveholders are in the habit notonly of stripping their female slaves of their clothing, andinflicting punishment upon their 'shrinking flesh, ' but of subjectingtheir naked persons to the most minute and revolting inspection, andthen of publishing to the world the results of their examination, aswell as the scars left by their own inflictions upon them, theirlength, size, and exact position on the body; and all this withoutimpairing in the least, the standing in the community of the shamelesswretches who thus proclaim their own abominations. That such thingsshould not at all affect the standing of such persons in society, iscertainly no marvel: how could they affect it, when the samecommunities enact laws _requiring_ their own legal officers to inspectminutely the persons and bodily marks of all slaves taken up asrunaways, and to publish in the newspapers a particular description ofall such marks and peculiarities of their persons, their size, appearance position on the body, &c. Yea, verily, when the 'publicopinion' of the community, in the solemn form of law, commandsjailors, sheriffs, captains of police, &c. To divest of their clothingaged matrons and young girls, minutely examine their naked persons, and publish the results of their examination--who can marvel, that thesame 'public opinion' should tolerate the slaveholders themselves, indoing the same things to their own property, which they have appointedlegal officers to do as their proxies. [37]

[Footnote 37: 'As a sample of these laws, we give the following extractfrom one of the laws of Maryland, where slaveholding 'public opinion'exists in its mildest form. '

"It shall be the duty of the sheriffs of the several counties of thisstate, upon any runaway servant or slave being committed to hiscustody, to cause the same to be advertised, &c. And to makeparticular and minute descriptions of _the person and bodily marks_, of such runaway. "--_Laws of Maryland of 1802_, Chap. 96, Sec. 1 and 2. 

That the sheriffs, jailors, &c. Do not neglect this part of theirofficial 'duty, ' is plain from the minute description which they givein the advertisements of marks upon all parts of the persons offemales, as well as males; and also from the occasional declaration, 'no scars discoverable on any part, ' or 'no marks discoverable _about_her;' which last is taken from an advertisement in the Milledgeville(Geo. ) Journal, June 26, 1838, signed 'T. S. Denster, Jailor. ']

The zeal with which slaveholding '_public opinion_' protects the livesof the slaves, may be illustrated by the following advertisements, taken from a multitude of similar ones in southern papers. To showthat slaveholding 'public opinion' is the same _now_, that it was halfa century ago, we will insert, in the first place, an advertisementpublished in a North Carolina newspaper, Oct. 29, 1785, by W. SKINNER, the Clerk of the County of Perquimons, North Carolina. 

"Ten silver dollars reward will be paid for apprehending anddelivering to me my man Moses, who ran away this morning; or I willgive five times the sum to any person who will make due proof of his_being killed_, and never ask a question to know by whom it was done. "

W. SKINNER. 

_Perquimons County, N. C. Oct. 29, 1785. _

The late JOHN PARRISH, of Philadelphia, an eminent minister of thereligious society of Friends, who traveled through the slave statesabout _thirty-five years_ since, on a religious mission, published onhis return a pamphlet of forty pages, entitled 'Remarks on the Slaveryof the Black People. ' From this work we extract the followingillustrations of 'public opinion' in North and South Carolina andVirginia at that period. 

"When I was traveling through North Carolina, a black man, who wasoutlawed, being shot by one of his pursuers, and left wounded in thewoods, they came to an ordinary where I had stopped to feed my horse, in order to procure a cart to bring the poor wretched object in. Another, I was credibly informed, was shot, his head cut off, andcarried in a bag by the perpetrators of the murder, who received thereward, which was said to be $200, continental currency, and that hishead was stuck on a coal house at an iron works in Virginia--and thisfor going to visit his wife at a distance. Crawford gives an accountof a man being gibbetted alive in South Carolina, and the buzzardscame and picked out his eyes. Another was burnt to death at a stake inCharleston, surrounded by a multitude of spectators, some of whom werepeople of the _first rank_; . . . The poor object was heard to cry, aslong as he could breathe, 'not guilty--not guilty. '"

The following is an illustration of the 'public opinion' of SouthCarolina about fifty years ago. It is taken from Judge Stroud's Sketchof the Slave Laws, page 39. 

"I find in the case of 'the State vs. M'Gee, ' I Bay's Reports, 164, itis said incidentally by Messrs. Pinckney and Ford, counsel for thestate (of S. C. ), 'that the _frequency_ of the offence (_wilful_ murderof a slave) was owing to the _nature of the punishment_', &c. . . . Thisremark was made in 1791, when the above trial took place. It was madein a public place--a courthouse--and by men of great personalrespectability. There can be, therefore, no question as to its_truth_, and as little of its _notoriety_. "

In 1791 the Grand Jury for the district of Cheraw, S. C. Made a_presentment_, from which the following is an extract. 

"We, the Grand Jurors of and for the district of Cheraw, do presentthe INEFFICACY of the present punishment for killing negroes, as agreat defect in the legal system of this state: and we do earnestlyrecommend to the attention of the legislature, that clause of thenegro act, which confines the penalty for killing slaves to fine andimprisonment only: in full confidence, that they will provide someother _more effectual_ measures to prevent the FREQUENCY of crimes ofthis nature. "--_Matthew Carey's American Museum, for Feb. 1791_. --Appendix, p. 10. 

The following is a specimen of the 'public opinion' of Georgia twelveyears since. We give it in the strong words of COLONEL STONE, Editorof the New York Commercial Advertiser. We take it from that paper ofJune 8, 1827. 

"HUNTING MEN WITH DOGS. -A negro who had absconded from his master, andfor whom a reward of $100 was offered, has been apprehended andcommitted to prison in Savannah. The editor, who states the fact, adds, with as much coolness as though there were no barbarity in thematter, that he did not surrender till _he was considerably_ MAIMED BYTHE DOGS that had been set on him--desperately fighting them--one ofwhich he badly cut with a sword. "

Twelve days after the publication of the preceding fact, the followinghorrible transaction took place in Perry county, Alabama. We extractit from the African Observer, a monthly periodical, published inPhiladelphia, by the society of Friends. See No. For August, 1827. 

"Tuscaloosa, Ala. June 20, 1827. 

"Some time during the last week a Mr. M'Neilly having lost someclothing, or other property of no great value, the slave of aneighboring planter was charged with the theft. M'Neilly, in companywith his brother, found the negro driving his master's wagon; theyseized him, and either did, or were about to chastise him, when thenegro stabbed M'Neilly, so that he died in an hour afterwards. Thenegro was taken before a justice of the peace, who _waved hisauthority_, perhaps through fear, as a crowd of persons had collectedto the number of seventy or eighty, near Mr. People's (the justice)house. _He acted as president of the mob, _ and put the vote, when itwas decided he should be immediately executed by _being burnt todeath_. The sable culprit was led to a tree, and tied to it, and alarge quantity of pine knots collected and placed around him, and thefatal torch applied to the pile, even against the remonstrances ofseveral gentlemen who were present; and the miserable being was in ashort time burned to ashes. 

"This is the SECOND negro who has been THUS put to death, withoutjudge or jury, in this county. "

The following advertisements, testimony, &c. Will show that theslaveholders of _to-day_ are the _children_ of those who shot, andhunted with bloodhounds, and burned over slow fires, the slaves ofhalf a century ago; the worthy inheritors of their civilization, chivalry, and tender mercies. 

The "Wilmington (North Carolina) Advertiser" of July 13, 1838, contains the following advertisement. 

"$100 will be paid to any person who may apprehend and safely confinein any jail in this state, a certain negro man, named ALFRED. And thesame reward will be paid, if satisfactory evidence is given of _havingbeen_ KILLED. He has one or more scars on one of his hands, caused byhis having been shot. 

"THE CITIZENS OF ONSLOW. 

"Richlands, Onslow co. May 16th, 1838. "

In the same column with the above and directly under it is thefollowing:--

"RANAWAY my negro man RICHARD. A reward of $25 will be paid for hisapprehension DEAD or ALIVE. Satisfactory proof will only be requiredof his being KILLED. He has with him, in all probability, his wifeELIZA, who ran away from Col. Thompson, now a resident of Alabama, about the time he commenced his journey to that state. DURANT H. RHODES. "

In the "Mason (Georgia) Telegraph, " May 28, is the following:

"About the 1st of March last the negro man RANSOM left me without theleast provocation whatever; I will give a reward of twenty dollars forsaid negro, if taken DEAD OR ALIVE, --and if killed in any attempt, anadvance of five dollars will be paid. BRYANT JOHNSON. 

"_Crawford co. Georgia_"

See the "Newbern (N. C. ) Spectator, " Jan. 5, 1838, for thefollowing:--

"RANAWAY, from the subscriber, a negro man named SAMPSON. Fiftydollars reward will be given for the delivery of him to me, or hisconfinement in any jail so that I get him, and should he resist inbeing taken, so that violence is necessary to arrest him, I will nothold any person liable for damages should the slave be KILLED. ENOCHFOY. 

"Jones County, N. C. "

From the "Macon (Ga. ) Messenger, " June 14, 1838. 

"TO THE OWNERS OF RUNAWAY NEGROES. A large mulatto Negro man, betweenthirty-five and forty years old, about six feet in height, having ahigh forehead, and hair slightly grey, was KILLED, near my plantation, on the 9th inst. _He would not surrender_ but assaulted Mr. Bowen, whokilled him in self-defence. If the owner desires further informationrelative to the death of his negro, he can obtain it by letter, or bycalling on the subscriber ten miles south of Perry, Houston county. EDM'D. JAS. McGEHEE. "

From the 'Charleston (S. C. ) Courier, ' Feb. 20, 1836. 

"$300 REWARD. Ranaway from the subscriber, in November last, his twonegro men, named Billy and Pompey. 

"Billy is 25 years old, and is known as the patroon of my boat formany years; in all probability he may resist; in that event 50 dollarswill be paid for his HEAD. "

From the 'Newbern (N. C. ) Spectator, ' Dec 2. 1836. 

"$200 REWARD. Ranaway from the subscriber, about three years ago, acertain negro man named Ben, commonly known by the name of Ben Fox. Hehad but one eye. Also, one other negro, by the name of Rigdon, whoranaway on the 8th of this month. 

"I will give the reward of one hundred dollars for each of the abovenegroes, to be delivered to me or confined in the jail of Lenoir orJones county, or FOR THE KILLING OF THEM, SO THAT I CAN SEE THEM. W. D. COBB. "

In the same number of the Spectator two Justices of the Peaceadvertise the same runaways, and give notice that if they do notimmediately return to W. D. Cobb, their master, they will be consideredas outlaws, and any body may kill them. The following is an extractfrom the proclamation of the JUSTICES. 

"And we do hereby, by virtue of an act of the assembly of this state, concerning servants and slaves, intimate and declare, if the saidslaves do not surrender themselves and return home to their masterimmediately after the publication of these presents, _that any personmay kill and destroy said slaves by such means as he or they thinkfit, without accusation or impeachment of any crime or offence for sodoing, or without incurring any penalty or forfeiture thereby. _

"Given under our hands and seals, this 12th November, 1836. 

"B. COLEMAN, J. P. [Seal. ]

"JAS. JONES, J. P. [Seal. ]"

On the 28th, of April 1836, in the city of St Louis, Missouri, a blackman, named McIntosh who had stabbed an officer, that had arrested him, was seized by the multitude, fastened to a tree _in the midst of thecity_, wood piled around him, and in open day and in the presence ofan immense throng of citizens, he was burned to death. The Alton(Ill. ) Telegraph, in its account of the scene says;

"All was silent as death while the executioners were piling woodaround their victim. He said not a word, until feeling that the flameshad seized upon him. He then uttered an awful howl, attempting to singand pray, then hung his head, and suffered in silence, except in thefollowing instance:--After the flames had surrounded their prey, hiseyes burnt out of his head, and his mouth seemingly parched to acinder, some one in the crowd, more compassionate than the rest, proposed to put an end to his misery by shooting him, when it wasreplied, 'that would be of no use, since he was already out of pain. ''No, no, ' said the wretch, 'I am not, I am suffering as much as ever;shoot me, shoot me. ' 'No, no, ' said one of the fiends who was standingabout the sacrifice they were roasting, 'he shall not be shot. _Iwould sooner slacken the fire, if that would increase his misery_;'and the man who said this was, as we understand, an OFFICER OFJUSTICE!"

The St. Louis correspondent of a New York paper adds, "The shrieks and groans of the victim were loud and piercing, and toobserve one limb after another drop into the fire was awful indeed. Hewas about fifteen minutes in dying. I visited the place this morning, and saw his body, or the remains of it, at the place of execution. Hewas burnt to a crump. His legs and arms were gone, and only a part ofhis head and body were left. "

Lest this demonstration of 'public opinion' should be regarded as asudden impulse merely, not an index of the settled tone of feeling inthat community, it is important to add, that the Hon. Luke E. Lawless, Judge of the Circuit Court of Missouri, at a session of that Court inthe city of St. Louis, some months after the burning of this man, decided officially that since the burning of McIntosh was the act, either directly or by countenance of a _majority_ of the citizens, itis 'a case which transcends the jurisdiction, ' of the Grand Jury! Thusthe state of Missouri has proclaimed to the world, that the wretcheswho perpetrated that unspeakably diabolical murder, and the thousandsthat stood by consenting to it, were _her representatives_, and theBench sanctifies it with the solemnity of a judicial decision. 

The 'New Orleans Post, ' of June 7, 1836, publishes the following;

"We understand, that a negro man was lately condemned, by the mob, tobe BURNED OVER A SLOW FIRE, which was put into execution at GrandGulf, Mississippi, for murdering a black woman, and her master. "

Mr. HENRY BRADLEY, of Pennyan, N. Y. , has furnished us with an extractof a letter written by a gentleman in Mississippi to his brother inthat village, detailing the particulars of the preceding transaction. The letter is dated Grand Gulf, Miss. August 15, 1836. The extract isas follows:

"I left Vicksburg and came to Grand Gulf. This is a fine placeimmediately on the banks of the Mississippi, of something like fifteenhundred inhabitants in the winter, and at this time, I suppose, thereare not over two hundred white inhabitants, but in the town and itsvicinity there are negroes by thousands. The day I arrived at thisplace there was a man by the name of G---- murdered by a negro manthat belonged to him. G---- was born and brought up in A----, state ofNew York. His father and mother now live south of A----. He has left aproperty here, it is supposed, of forty thousand dollars, and nofamily. 

"They took the negro, mounted him on a horse, led the horse under atree, put a rope around his neck, raised him up by throwing the ropeover a limb; they then got into a quarrel among themselves; some sworethat he should be burnt alive; the rope was cut and the negro droppedto the ground. He immediately jumped to his feet; they then made himwalk a short distance to a tree; he was then tied fast and a firekindled, when another quarrel took place; the fire was pulled awayfrom him when about half dead, and a committee of twelve appointed tosay in what manner he should be disposed of. They brought in that heshould then be cut down, his head cut off, his body burned, and hishead stuck on a pole at the corner of the road in the edge of thetown. That was done and all parties satisfied!

"G---- _owned the negro's wife, and was in the habit of sleeping withher!_ The negro said he had killed him, and he believed he should berewarded in heaven for it. 

"This is but one instance among many of a similar nature. 

S. S. "

We have received a more detailed account of this transaction from Mr. William Armstrong, of Putnam, Ohio, through Maj. Horace Nye, of thatplace. Mr. A. Who has been for some years employed as captain andsupercargo of boats descending the river, was at Grand Gulf at thetime of the tragedy, and _witnessed_ it. It was on the Sabbath. From Mr. Armstrong's statement, it appears that the slave wasa man of uncommon intelligence; had the over-sight of a largebusiness--superintended the purchase of supplies for his master, &c. --that exasperated by the intercourse of his master with his wife, he was upbraiding her one evening, when his master overhearing him, went out to quell him, was attacked by the infuriated man and killedon the spot. The name of the master was Green; he was a native ofAuburn, New York, and had been at the south but a few years. 

Mr. EZEKIEL BIRDSEYE, of Cornwall, Conn. , a gentleman well known andhighly respected in Litchfield county, who resided a number of yearsin South Carolina, gives the following testimony:--

"A man by the name of Waters was killed by his slaves, in NewberryDistrict. Three of them were tried before the court, and ordered to beburnt. I was but a few miles distant at the time, and conversed withthose who saw the execution. The slaves were tied to a stake, andpitch pine wood piled around them, to which the fire was communicated. Thousands were collected to witness this barbarous transaction. _Otherexecutions of this kind took place in various parts of the state, during my residence in it, from 1818 to 1824_. About three or fouryears ago, a young negro was burnt in Abbeville District, for anattempt at rape. "

In the fall of 1837, there was a rumor of a projected insurrection onthe Red River, in Louisiana. The citizens forthwith seized and hangedNINE SLAVES, AND THREE FREE COLORED MEN, WITHOUT TRIAL. A few monthsprevious to that transaction, a slave was seized in a similar mannerand publicly burned to death, in Arkansas. In July, 1835, the citizensof Madison county, Mississippi, were alarmed by rumors of aninsurrection arrested five slaves and publicly executed them withouttrial. 

The Missouri Republican, April 30, 1838, gives the particulars of thedeliberate murder of a negro man named Tom, a cook on board thesteamboat Pawnee, on her passage up from New Orleans to St. Louis. Some of the facts stated by the Republican are the following:

"On Friday night, about 10 o'clock, a deaf and dumb German girl wasfound in the storeroom with Tom. The door was locked, and at first Tomdenied she was there. The girl's father came. Tom unlocked the door, and the girl was found secreted in the room behind a barrel. The nextmorning some four or five of the deck passengers spoke to the captainabout it. This was about breakfast time. Immediately after he left thedeck, a number of the deck passengers rushed upon the negro, bound hisarms behind his back and carried him forward to the bow of the boat. Avoice cried out 'throw him overboard, ' and was responded to from everyquarter of the deck--and in an instant he was plunged into the river. The whole scene of tying him and throwing him overboard scarcelyoccupied _ten minutes_, and was so precipitate that the officers wereunable to interfere in time to save him. 

"There were between two hundred and fifty and three hundred passengerson board. "

The whole process of seizing Tom, dragging him upon deck, binding hisarms behind his back, forcing him to the bow of the boat, and throwinghim overboard, occupied, the editor informs us, about TEN MINUTES, andof the two hundred and fifty or three hundred deck passengers, withperhaps as many cabin passengers, it does not appear that _a singleindividual raised a finger to prevent this deliberate murder_; and thecry "throw him overboard, " was it seems, "responded to from everyquarter of the deck!"

Rev. JAMES A. THOME, of Augusta, Ky. , son of Arthur Thome, Esq. , tillrecently a slaveholder, published five years since the followingdescription of a scene witnessed by him in New Orleans:

"In December of 1833, I landed at New Orleans, in the steamer W----. It was after night, dark and rainy. The passengers were called out ofthe cabin, from the enjoyment of a fire, which the cold, dampatmosphere rendered very comfortable, by a sudden shout of, 'catchhim--catch him--catch the negro. ' The cry was answered by a hundredvoices--'Catch him--_kill_ him, ' and a rush from every directiontoward our boat, indicated that the object of pursuit was near. Thenext moment we heard a man plunge into the river, a few paces aboveus. A crowd gathered upon the shore, with lamps and stones, and clubs, still crying, 'catch him--kill him--catch him--shoot him. '

"I soon discovered the poor man. He had taken refuge under the prow ofanother boat, and was standing in the water up to his waist. Theangry vociferation of his pursuers, did not intimidate him. He defiedthem all. 'Don't you _dare_ to come near me, or I will sink you in theriver. ' He was armed with despair. For a moment the mob was palsied bythe energy of his threatenings. They were afraid to go to him with askiff, but a number of them went on to the boat and tried to seizehim. They threw a noose rope down repeatedly, _that they might pullhim up by the neck_! but he planted his hand firmly against the boatand dashed the rope away with his arms. One of them took a long bar ofwood, and leaning over the prow, endeavored to strike him on the head, The blow must have shattered the skull, but it did not reach lowenough. The monster raised up the heavy club again and said, 'Come outnow, you old rascal, or die. ' 'Strike, ' said the negro;'strike--shiver my brains _now_; I want to die;' and down went theclub again, without striking. This was repeated several times. Themob, seeing their efforts fruitless, became more enraged andthreatened to stone him, if he did not surrender himself into theirhands. He again defied them, and declared that he would drown himselfin the river, before they should have him. They then resorted topersuasion, and promised they would not hurt him. 'I'll die first;'was his only reply. Even the furious mob was awed, and for a whilestood dumb. 

"After standing in the cold water for an hour, the miserable beingbegan to fail. We observed him gradually sinking--his voice grew weakand tremulous--yet he continued to _curse_! In the midst of his oathshe uttered broken sentences--'I did'nt steal the meat--I did'ntsteal--my master lives--master--master lives up the river--(his voicebegan to gurgle in his throat, and he was so chilled that his teethchattered audibly)--I did'nt--steal--I did'nt steal--my--mymaster--my--I want to see my master--I didn't--no--my mas--youwant--you want to kill me--I didn't steal the'--His last words couldjust be heard as be sunk under the water. 

"During this indescribable scene, _not one of the hundred that stoodaround made any effort to save the man until he was apparentlydrowned_. He was then dragged out and stretched on the bow of theboat, and soon sufficient means were used for his recovery. The brutalcaptain ordered him to be taken off his boat--declaring, with an oath, that he would throw him into the river again, if he was notimmediately removed. I withdrew, sick and horrified with thisappalling exhibition of wickedness. 

"Upon inquiry, I learned that the colored man lived some fifty milesup the Mississippi; that he had been charged with stealing somearticle from the wharf; was fired upon with a pistol, and pursued bythe mob. 

"In reflecting upon this unmingled cruelty--this insensibility tosuffering and disregard of life--I exclaimed, 'Is there no flesh in man's obdurate heart?'

"One poor man, chased like a wolf by a hundred blood hounds, yelling, howling, and gnashing their teeth upon him--plunges into the coldriver to seek protection! A crowd of spectators witness the scene, with all the composure with which a Roman populace would look upon agladiatorial show. Not a voice heard in the sufferer's behalf. Atlength the powers of nature give way; the blood flows back to theheart--the teeth chatter--the voice trembles and dies, while thevictim drops down into his grave. 

"What an atrocious system is that which leaves two millions of souls, friendless and powerless--hunted and chased--afflicted and torturedand driven to death, without the means of redress. --Yet such is thesystem of slavery. "

The 'public opinion' of slaveholders is illustrated by scores ofannouncements in southern papers, like the following, from theRaleigh, (N. C. ) Register, August 20, 1838. Joseph Gale and Son, editors and proprietors--the father and brother of the editor of theNational Intelligence, Washington city, D. C. 

"On Saturday night, Mr. George Holmes, of this county, and some of hisfriends, were in pursuit of a runaway slave (the property of Mr. Holmes) and fell in with him in attempting to make his escape. Mr. H. Discharged a gun at his legs, for the purpose of disabling him; butunfortunately, the slave stumbled, and the shot struck him near thesmall of the back, of which wound he died in a short time. The slavecontinued to run some distance after he was shot, until overtaken byone of the party. We are satisfied, from all that we can learn, thatMr. H. Had no intention of inflicting a mortal wound. "

Oh! the _gentleman_, it seems, only shot at his legs, merely to'disable'--and it must be expected that every _gentleman_ will amusehimself in shooting at his own property whenever the notion takes him, and if he should happen to hit a little higher and go through thesmall of the back instead of the legs, why every body says it is'unfortunate, ' and the whole of the editorial corps, instead ofbranding him as a barbarous wretch for shooting at his slave, whateverpart be aimed at, join with the oldest editor in North Carolina, incomplacently exonerating Mr. Holmes by saying, "We are satisfied thatMr. H. Had no intention of inflicting a mortal wound. " And so 'publicopinion' wraps it up!

The Franklin (La. ) Republican, August 19, 1837, has the following:

"NEGROES TAKEN. --Four gentlemen of this vicinity, went out yesterdayfor the purpose of finding the camp of some noted runaways, supposedto be near this place; the camp was discovered about 11 o'clock, thenegroes four in number, three men and one woman, finding they werediscovered, tried to make their escape through the cane; two of themwere fired on, one of which made his escape; the other one fell afterrunning a short distance, his wounds are not supposed to be dangerous;the other man was taken without any hurt; the woman also made herescape. "

Thus terminated the mornings amusement of the '_four gentlemen_, 'whose exploits are so complacently chronicled by the editor of theFranklin Republican. The three men and one woman were all fired upon, it seems, though only one of them was shot down. The half famishedrunaways made not the least resistance, they merely rushed in panicamong the canes, at the sight of their pursuers, and the bulletswhistled after them and brought to the ground one poor fellow, who wascarried back by his captors as a trophy of the 'public opinion' amongslaveholders. 

In the Macon (Ga. ) Telegraph, Nov. 27, 1838, we find the followingaccount of a runaway's den, and of the good luck of a 'Mr. Adams, ' inrunning down one of them 'with his excellent dogs:'

"A runaway's den was discovered on Sunday near the Washington Spring, in a little patch of woods, where it had been for several months, soartfully concealed under ground, that it was detected only byaccident, though in sight of two or three houses, and near the roadand fields where there has been constant daily passing. The entrancewas concealed by a pile of pine straw, representing a hog bed--whichbeing removed, discovered a trap door and steps that led to a roomabout six feet square, comfortably ceiled with plank, containing asmall fire-place the flue of which was ingeniously conducted aboveground and concealed by the straw. The inmates took the alarm and madetheir escape; but Mr. Adams and his excellent dogs being put upon thetrail, soon run down and secured one of them, which proved to be anegro fellow who had been out about a year. He stated that the otheroccupant was a woman, who had been a runaway a still longer time. Inthe den was found a quantity of meal, bacon, corn, potatoes, &c. , andvarious cooking utensils and wearing apparel. "

Yes, Mr. Adams' 'EXCELLENT DOGS' did the work! They were well trained, swift, fresh, keen-scented, 'excellent' men-hunters, and though thepoor fugitive in his frenzied rush for liberty, strained every muscle, yet they gained upon him, and after dashing through fens, brier-beds, and the tangled undergrowth till faint and torn, he sinks, and theblood-hounds are upon him. What blood-vessels the poor struggler burstin his desperate push for life--how much he was bruised and laceratedin his plunge through the forest, or how much the dogs tore him, theMacon editor has not chronicled--they are matters of no moment--buthis heart is touched with the merits of Mr. Adams' 'EXCELLENT DOGS, 'that 'soon _run down_ and _secured_' a guiltless and trembling humancreature!

The Georgia Constitutionalist, of Jan. 1837, contains the followingletter from the coroner of Barnwell District, South Carolina, datedAiken, S. C. Dec. 20, 1836. 

"_To the Editor of the Constitutionalist:_

"I have just returned from an inquest I held over the body of a negroman, a runaway, that was shot near the South Edisto, in this District, (Barnwell, ) on Saturday last. He came to his death by his ownrecklessness. He refused to be taken alive--and said that otherattempts to take him had been made, and he was determined that hewould not be taken. He was at first, (when those in pursuit of himfound it absolutely necessary, ) shot at with small shot, with theintention of merely crippling him. He was shot at several times, andat last he was so disabled as to be compelled to surrender. He kept inthe run of a creek in a very dense swamp all the time that theneighbors were in pursuit of him. As soon as the negro was taken, thebest medical aid was procured, but he died on the same evening. One ofthe witnesses at the Inquisition, stated that the negro boy said hewas from Mississippi, and belonged to so many persons, that he did notknow who his master was, but again he said his master's name wasBrown. He said his name was Sam, and when asked by another witness, who his master was, he muttered something like Augusta or Augustine. The boy was apparently above thirty-five or forty years of age, aboutsix feet high, slightly yellow in the face, very long beard orwhiskers, and very stout built, and a stern countenance; and appearedto have been a runaway for a long time. 

WILLIAM H. PRITCHARD, _Coroner (Ex-officio, ) Barnwell Dist. S. C. _"

The Norfolk (Va. ) Herald, of Feb. 1837, has the following:

"Three negroes in a ship's yawl, came on shore yesterday evening, nearNew Point Comfort, and were soon after apprehended and lodged in jail. Their story is, that they belonged to a brig from New York bound toHavana, which was cast away to the southward of Cape Henry, some daylast week; that the brig was called the Maria, Captain Whittemore. Ihave no doubt they are deserters from some vessel in the bay, as theirstatements are very confused and inconsistent. One of these fellows isa mulatto, and calls himself Isaac Turner; the other two are quiteblack, the one passing by the name of James Jones and the other JohnMurray. They have all their clothing with them, and are dressed insea-faring apparel. They attempted to make their escape, and _it wasnot till a musket was fired at them, and one of them slightlywounded_, that they surrendered. They will be kept in jail tillsomething further is discovered respecting them. "

The 'St. Francisville (La. ) Chronicle, ' of Feb. 1, 1839. Gives thefollowing account of a 'negro hunt, ' in that Parish. 

"Two or three days since a gentleman of this parish, in _huntingrunaway negroes_, came upon a camp of them in the swamp on Cat Island. He succeeded in arresting two of them, but the third made fight; andupon _being shot in the shoulder_, fled to a sluice, where the _dogssucceeded_ in drowning him before assistance could arrive. "

"'The dogs _succeeded_ in drowning him'! Poor fellow! He tried hard forhis life, plunged into the sluice, and, with a bullet in his shoulder, and the blood hounds unfleshing his bones, he bore up for a momentwith feeble stroke as best he might, but 'public opinion, ''_succeeded_ in drowning him, ' and the same 'public opinion, ' callsthe man who fired and crippled him, and cheered on the dogs, 'agentleman, ' and the editor who celebrates the exploit is a 'gentleman'also!"

A large number of extracts similar to the above, might here beinserted from Southern newspapers in our possession, but the foregoingare more than sufficient for our purpose, and we bring to a close thetestimony on this point, with the following. Extract of a letter, fromthe Rev. Samuel J. May, of South Scituate, Mass. Dated Dec. 20, 1838. 

"You doubtless recollect the narrative given in the Oasis, of a slavein Georgia, who having ranaway from his master, (accounted a veryhospitable and even humane gentleman, ) was hunted by his master andhis retainers with horses, dogs, and rifles, and having been driveninto a tree by the hounds, was shot down by his more cruel pursuers. All the facts there given, and some others equally shocking, connectedwith the same case, were first communicated to me in 1833, by Mr. W. Russell, a highly respectable teacher of youth in Boston. He isdoubtless ready to vouch for them. The same gentleman informed me thathe was keeping school on or near the plantation of the monster whoperpetrated the above outrage upon humanity, that he was even invitedby him to join in the hunt, and when he expressed abhorrence at thethought, the planter holding up the rifle which he had in his handsaid with an oath, 'damn that rascal, this is the third time he hasrunaway, and he shall never run again. I'd rather put a ball into hisside, than into the best buck in the land. '"

Mr. Russell, in the account given by him of this tragedy in the'Oasis, ' page 267, thus describes the slaveholder who made the aboveexpression, and was the leader of the 'hunt, ' and in whose family heresided at the time as an instructor he says of him--he was "anopulent planter, in whose family the evils of slaveholding werepalliated by every expedient that a humane and generous dispositioncould suggest. He was a man of noble and elevated character, anddistinguished for his generosity, and kindness of heart. "

In a letter to Mr. May, dated Feb. 3, 1839, Mr. Russell, speaking ofthe hunting of runaways with dogs and guns, says: "Occurrences of anature similar to the one related in the 'Oasis, ' were not unfrequentin the interior of Georgia and South Carolina twenty years ago. _Several_ such fell under my notice within the space of fifteenmonths. In two such 'hunts, ' I was solicited to join. "

The following was written by a sister-in-law of Gerrit Smith, Esq. , Peterboro. She is married to the son of a North Carolinian. 

"In North Carolina, some years ago, several slaves were arrested forcommitting serious crimes and depredations, in the neighborhood ofWilmington, among other things, burning houses, and, in one or moreinstances, murder. 

"It happened that the wife of one of these slaves resided in one ofthe most respectable families in W. In the capacity of nurse. Mr. J. _the first lawyer in the place_, came into the room, where the lady ofthe house, was sitting, with the nurse, who held a child in her arms, and, addressing the nurse, said, Hannah! would you know your husbandif you should see him?--Oh, yes, sir, she replied--When HE DREW FROMBENEATH HIS CLOAK THE HEAD OF THE SLAVE, at the sight of which thepoor woman immediately fainted. The heads of the others were placedupon poles, in some part of the town, afterwards known as 'Negro HeadPoint. '"

We have just received the above testimony, enclosed in a letter fromMr. Smith, in which he says, "that the fact stated by mysister-in-law, actually occurred, there can be no doubt. "

The following extract from the Diary of the Rev. ELIAS CORNELIUS, weinsert here, having neglected to do it under a preceding head, towhich it more appropriately belongs. 

"New Orleans, Sabbath, February 15, 1818. Early this morningaccompanied A. H. Esq. To the _hospital_, with the view of makingarrangements to preach to such of the sick as could understandEnglish. The first room we entered presented a scene of human misery, such as I had never before witnessed. A poor negro man was lying upona couch, apparently in great distress; a more miserable object canhardly be conceived. His face was much _disfigured_, an IRON COLLAR, TWO INCHES WIDE AND HALF AN INCH THICK, WAS CLASPED ABOUT HIS NECK, while one of his feet and part of the leg were in a state ofputrefaction. We inquired the cause of his being in this distressingcondition, and he answered us in a faltering voice, that he waswilling to tell us all the truth. 

"He belonged to Mr. ---- a Frenchman, ran-away, was caught, andpunished with one hundred lashes! This happened about Christmas; andduring the cold weather at that time, he was confined in the_Cane-house, with a scanty portion of clothing, and without fire_. Inthis situation his foot had frozen, and mortified, and having beenremoved from place to place, he was yesterday brought here by order ofhis new master, who was an American. I had no time to protract myconversation with him then, but resolved to return in a few hours andpray with him. 

"Having returned home, I again visited the hospital at half pasteleven o'clock, and concluded first of all [he was to preach at 12, ]to pray with the poor lacerated negro. I entered the apartment inwhich he lay, and observed an old man sitting upon a couch; but, without saying anything went up to the bed-side of the negro, whoappeared to be asleep. I spoke to him, but he gave no answer. I spokeagain, and moved his head, still he said nothing. My apprehensionswere immediately excited, and I felt for his pulse, but it was gone. Said I to the old man, 'surely this negro is dead. ' 'No, ' he answered, 'he has fallen asleep, for he had a very restless season last night. 'I again examined and called the old gentleman to the bed, and alas, itwas found true, that he was dead. Not an eye had witnessed his laststruggle, and I was the first, as it should happen, to discover thefact. I called several men into the room, and without ceremony theywrapped him in a sheet, and carried him to the _dead-house_ as it iscalled. "--Edwards' Life of Rev. Elias Cornelius, pp. 101, 2, 3. 

THE PROTECTION EXTENDED BY 'PUBLIC OPINION, ' TO THE HEALTH[38] OF THESLAVES. 

This may be judged of from the fact that it is perfectly notoriousamong slaveholders, both North and South, that of the tens ofthousands of slaves sold annually in the northern slave states to betransported to the south, large numbers of them die under the severe, process of acclimation, _all_ suffer more or less, and multitudes_much_, in their health and strength, during their first years in thefar south and south west. That such is the case is sufficiently provedby the care taken by all who advertise for sale or hire in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, &c. To inform the reader, that theirslaves are 'Creoles, ' 'southern born, ' 'country born, ' &c. Or if theyare from the north, that they are 'acclimated, ' and the importanceattached to their _acclimation_, is shown in the fact, that it isgenerally distinguished from the rest of the advertisements either by_italics_ or CAPITALS. Almost every newspaper published in the statesfar south contains advertisements like the following. 

[Footnote 38: See pp. 37-39. ]

From the "Vicksburg (Mi. ) Register, " Dec. 27, 1838. 

"I OFFER my plantation for sale. Also seventy-five _acclimatedNegroes_. O. B. COBB. "

From the "Southerner, " June 7, 1837. 

"I WILL sell my Old-River plantation near Columbia in Arkansas;--alsoONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY ACCLIMATED SLAVES. 

BENJ. HUGHES. "_Port Gibson, Jan. 14, 1837. _

From the "Planters' (La. ) Intelligencer, " March 22. 

"Probate sale--Will be offered for sale at Public Auction, to thehighest bidder, ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY _acclimated_ slaves. "

G. W. KEETON. Judge of the Parish of Concordia"

From the "Arkansas Advocate, " May 22, 1837. 

"By virtue of a Deed of Trust, executed to me, I will sell at publicauction at Fisher's Prairie, Arkansas, sixty LIKELY NEGROES, consisting of Men, Women, Boys and Girls, the most of whom are WELLACCLIMATED. 

GRANDISON D. ROYSTON, _Trustee_. "

From the "New Orleans Bee, " Feb. 9, 1838. 

"VALUABLE ACCLIMATED NEGROES"

"Will be sold on Saturday, 10th inst. At 12 o'clock, at the cityexchange, St. Louis street. "

Then follows a description of the slaves, closing with the sameassertion, which forms the caption of the advertisement "ALLACCLIMATED. "

General Felix Houston, of Natchez, advertises in the "NatchezCourier, " April 6, 1838, "Thirty five very fine _acclimated_ Negroes. "

Without inserting more advertisements, suffice it to say, that whenslaves are advertised for sale or hire, in the lower southern country, if they are _natives_, or have lived in that region long enough tobecome acclimated, it is _invariably_ stated. 

But we are not left to _conjecture_ the amount of sufferingexperienced by slaves from the north in undergoing the severe processof 'seasoning' to the climate, or '_acclimation_' A writer in the NewOrleans Argus, September, 1830, in an article on the culture of thesugar cane, says; 'The loss by _death_ in bringing slaves from anorthern climate, which our planters are under the necessity of doing, is not less than TWENTY-FIVE PER CENT. '

Nothwithstanding the immense amount of suffering endured in theprocess of acclimation, and the fearful waste of life, and the_notoriety_ of this fact, still the 'public opinion' of Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, &c. Annually DRIVES to the farsouth, thousands of their slaves to undergo these sufferings, and the'public opinion, ' of the far south buys them, and forces the helplessvictims to endure them. 

THE 'PROTECTION' VOUCHSAFED BY 'PUBLIC OPINION, ' TO LIBERTY. 

This is shown by hundreds of advertisements in southern papers, likethe following:

From the "Mobile Register, " July 21. 1837. "WILL BE SOLD CHEAP FORCASH, in front of the Court House of Mobile County, on the 22d day ofJuly next, one mulatto man named HENRY HALL, WHO SAYS HE IS FREE; hisowner or owners, _if any_, having failed to demand him, he is to besold according to the statute in such cases made and provided, _to payJail fees. _

WM. MAGEE, Sh'ff M. C. "

From the "Grand Gulf (Miss. ) Advertiser, " Dec. 7, 1838. 

"COMMITTED to the jail of Chickasaw Co. Edmund, Martha, John andLouisa; the man 50, the woman 35, John 3 years old, and Louisa 14months. They say they are FREE and were decoyed to this state. "

The "Southern Argus, " of July 25, 1837, contains the following. 

"RANAWAY from my plantation, a negro boy named William. Said boy wastaken up by Thomas Walton, and says _he was free_, and that hisparents live near Shawneetown, Illinois, and that he was _taken_ fromthat place in July 1836; says his father's name is William, and hismother's Sally Brown, and that they moved from Fredericksburg, Virginia. I will give twenty dollars to any person who will deliversaid boy to me or Col. Byrn, Columbus. SAMUEL H. BYRN"

The first of the following advertisements was a standing one, in the"Vicksburg Register, " from Dec. 1835 till Aug. 1836. The secondadvertises the same FREE man for sale. 

"SHERIFF'S SALE" "COMMITTED, to the jail of Warren county, as aRunaway, on the 23d inst. A Negro man, who calls himself John J. Robinson; _says that he is free_, says that he kept a baker's shop inColumbus, Miss. And that he peddled through the Chickasaw nation toPontotoc, and came to Memphis, where he sold his horse, took water, and came to this place. The owner of said boy is requested to comeforward, prove property, pay charges, and take him away, or he will bedealt with as the law directs. 

WM. EVERETT, Jailer. Dec. 24, 1835"

"NOTICE is hereby given, that the above described boy, who callshimself John J. Robinson, having been confined in the Jail of Warrencounty as a Runaway, for six months--and having been regularlyadvertised during this period, I shall proceed to sell said Negro boyat public auction, to the highest bidder for cash, at the door of theCourt House in Vicksburg, on Monday, 1st day of August, 1836, inpursuance of the statute in such cases made and provided. 

E. W. MORRIS, Sheriff. _Vicksburg, July 2, 1836. _"

See "Newborn (N. C. ) Spectator, " of Jan. 5, 1838, for the followingadvertisement. 

"RANAWAY, from the subscriber a negro man known as Frank Pilot. He isfive feet eight inches high, dark complexion, and about 50 years old, _HAS BEEN FREE SINCE_ 1829--is now my property, as heir at law of hislast owner, _Samuel Ralston_, dec. I will give the above reward if heis taken and confined in any jail so that I can get him. 

SAMUEL RALSTON. Pactolus, Pitt County. "

From the Tuscaloosa (Ala. ) "Flag of the Union, " June 7. 

"COMMITTED to the jail of Tuscaloosa county, a negro man, who says hisname is Robert Winfield, and _says he is free_. 

R. W. BARBER, _Jailer_. "

That "public opinion, " in the slave states affords no protection tothe liberty of colored persons, even after those persons becomelegally free, by the operation of their own laws, is declared byGovernor Comegys, of Delaware, in his recent address to theLegislature of that state, Jan. 1839. The Governor, commenting uponthe law of the state which provides that persons convicted of certaincrimes shall be sold as servants for a limited time, says, "_The case is widely different with the negro(!)_ Although ordered tobe disposed of as a servant for a term of years, _perpetual slavery inthe south is his inevitable doom_; unless, peradventure, age ordisease may have rendered him worthless, or some resident of theState, from motives of _benevolence_, will pay for him three or fourtimes his intrinsic _value_. It matters not for how short a time he isordered to be sold, so that he can be carried from the State. Oncebeyond its limits, _all chance of restored freedom is gone_--for he isremoved far from the reach of any testimony to aid him in an effort tobe released from bondage, when his _legal_ term of servitude hasexpired. _Of the many colored convicts sold out of the State, it isbelieved none ever return_. Of course they are purchased _with theexpress view to their transportation for life_, and bring suchenormous prices as to prevent all _competition_ on the part of thoseof our citizens who _require_ their services, and _would keep them inthe State_. "

From the "Memphis (Ten. ) Enquirer, " Dec. 28, 1838. 

"$50 REWARD. Ranaway, from the subscriber, on Thursday last, a negroman named Isaac, 22 years old, about 5 feet 10 or 11 inches high, darkcomplexion, well made, full face, speaks quick, and very correctly fora negro. _He was originally from New-York_, and no doubt will attemptto pass himself as free. I will give the above reward for hisapprehension and delivery, or confinement, so that I obtain him, iftaken out of the state, or $30 if taken within the state. 

JNO. SIMPSON. _Memphis, Dec. 28. _"

Mark, with what shameless hardihood this JNO. SIMPSON, tells thepublic that _he knew_ Isaac Wright was a free man! 'HE WAS ORIGINALLYFROM NEW YORK, ' he tells us. And yet he adds with brazen effrontery, '_he will attempt to pass himself as free. _' This Isaac Wright, wasshipped by a man named Lewis, of New Bedford, Massachusetts, and soldas a slave in New Orleans. After passing through several hands, andbeing flogged nearly to death, he made his escape, and five days ago, (March 5, ) returned to his friends in Philadelphia. 

From the "Baltimore Sun, " Dec. 23, 1838. 

"FREE NEGROES--Merry Ewall, a FREE NEGRO, from Virginia, was committedto jail, at Snow Hill, Md. Last week, for remaining in the Statelonger than is allowed by the law of 1831. The fine in his caseamounts to $225. Capril Purnell, a negro from Delaware, is now in jailin the same place, for a violation of the same act. His fine amountsto FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS, and he WILL BE SOLD IN A SHORT TIME. "

The following is the decision of the Supreme Court, of Louisiana, inthe case of Gomez _vs_. Bonneval, Martin's La. Reports, 656, andWheeler's "Law of Slavery, " p. 380-1. 

_Marginal remark of the Compiler. --"A slave does not become free onhis being illegally imported into the state. "_

"_Per Cur. Derbigny_, J. The petitioner is a negro in actual state ofslavery; he claims his freedom, and is bound to prove it. In hisattempt, however, to show that he was free before he was introducedinto this country, he has failed, so that his claim rests entirely onthe laws prohibiting the introduction of slaves in the United States. That the plaintiff was imported since that prohibition does exist is afact sufficiently established by the evidence. What right he hasacquired under the laws forbidding such importation is the onlyquestion which we have to examine. Formerly, while the act dividingLouisiana into two territories was in force in this country, slavesintroduced here in contravention to it, were freed by operation oflaw; but that act was merged in the legislative provisions which weresubsequently enacted on the subject of importation of slaves into theUnited States generally. Under the now existing laws, the individualsthus imported acquire _no personal right_, they are mere passivebeings, who are disposed of _according to the will_ of the differentstate legislatures. In this country they are to _remain slaves_, andTO BE SOLD FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE STATE. The plaintiff, therefore, hasnothing to claim as a freeman; and as to a mere change of master, should such be his wish, _he cannot be listened to in a court ofjustice_. "

Extract from a speech of Mr. Thomson of Penn. In Congress, March 1, 1826, on the prisons in the District of Columbia. 

"I visited the prisons twice that I might myself ascertain the truth. * * In one of these cells (but eight feet square, ) were confined atthat time, seven persons, three women and four children. The childrenwere confined under a strange system of law in this District, by whicha colored person who _alleges_ HE IS FREE, and appeals to thetribunals of the country, to have the matter tried, is COMMITTED TOPRISON, till the decision takes place. They were almost naked--one ofthem was sick, lying on the damp brick floor, _without bed, pillow, orcovering_. In this abominable cell, seven human beings were confinedday by day, and night after night, without a bed, chair, or stool, orany other of the most common necessaries of life. "--_Gales'Congressional Debates_, v. 2, p. 1480. 

The following facts serve to show, that the present generation ofslaveholders do but follow in the footsteps of their fathers, in theirzeal for LIBERTY. 

Extract from a document submitted by the Committee of the yearlymeeting of Friends in Philadelphia, to the Committee of Congress, towhom was referred the memorial of the people called Quakers, in 1797. 

"In the latter part of the year 1776, several of the people calledQuakers, residing in the counties of Perquimans and Pasquotank, in thestate of North Carolina, liberated their negroes, as it was then clearthere was no existing law to prevent their so doing; for the law of1741 could not at that time be carried into effect; and they weresuffered to remain free, until a law passed, in the spring of 1777, under which they were taken up and sold, contrary to the Bill ofRights, recognized in the constitution of that state, as a partthereof, and to which it was annexed. 

"In the spring of 1777, when the General Assembly met for the firsttime, a law was enacted to prevent slaves from being emancipated, except for meritorious services, &c. To be judged of by the countycourts or the general assembly; and ordering, that if any should bemanumitted in any other way, they be taken up, and the county courtswithin whose jurisdictions they are apprehended should order them tobe sold. Under this law the county courts of Perquimans andPasquotank, in the year 1777, ordered A LARGE NUMBER OF PERSONS TO BESOLD, WHO WERE FREE AT THE TIME THE LAW WAS MADE. In the year 1778several of those cases were, by certiorari, brought before thesuperior court for the district of Edentorn, where the decisions ofthe county courts were reversed, the superior court declaring, thatsaid county courts, in such their proceedings, have exceeded theirjurisdiction, violated the rights of the subject, and acted in directopposition to the Bill of Rights of this state, considered justly aspart of the constitution thereof; by giving to a law, not intended toaffect this case, a retrospective operation, thereby to deprive freemen of this state of their liberty, contrary to the laws of the land. In consequence of this decree several of the negroes were again set atliberty; but the next General Assembly, early in 1779, passed a law, wherein they mention, that doubts have arisen, whether the purchasersof such slaves have a good and legal title thereto, and CONFIRM thesame; under which they were again taken up by the purchasers andreduced to slavery. "

[The number of persons thus re-enslaved was 134. ]

The following are the decrees of the Courts, ordering the sale ofthose freemen:--

"Perquimans County, July term, at Hartford, A. D. 1777. 

"These may certify, that it was then and there ordered, that thesheriff of the county, to-morrow morning, at ten o'clock, expose tosale, to the highest bidder, for ready money, at the court-house door, the several negroes taken up as free, and in his custody, agreeable tolaw. 

"Test. WM. SKINNER, Clerk. "A true copy, 25th August, 1791. "Test. J. HARVEY, Clerk. "

"Pasquotank County, September Court, &c. &c. 1777. 

"Present, the Worshipful Thomas Boyd, Timothy Hickson, John Paelin, Edmund Clancey, Joseph Reading, and Thomas Rees, Esqrs. Justices. 

"It was then and there ordered, that Thomas Reading, Esq. Take theFREE negroes taken up under an act to prevent domestic insurrectionsand other purposes, and expose the same to _the best bidder_, atpublic vendue, for ready money, and be accountable for the same, agreeable to the aforesaid act; and make return to this or the nextsucceeding court of his proceedings. 

"A copy. ENOCH REESE, C. C. "

THE PROTECTION OF "PUBLIC OPINION" TO DOMESTICS TIES. 

The barbarous indifference with which slaveholders regard the forciblesundering of husbands and wives, parents and children, brothers andsisters, and the unfeeling brutality indicated by the language inwhich they describe the efforts made by the slaves, in their yearningsafter those from whom they have been torn away, reveals a 'publicopinion' towards them as dead to their agony as if they were cattle. It is well nigh impossible to open a southern paper without findingevidence of this. Though the truth of this assertion can hardly becalled in question, we subjoin a few illustrations, and could easilygive hundreds. 

From the "Savannah Georgian, " Jan. 17, 1839. "$100 reward will begiven for my two fellows, Abram and Frank. Abram has a _wife_ atColonel Stewart's, in Liberty county, and a _sister_ in Savannah, atCapt. Grovenstine's. Frank has a _wife_ at Mr. Le Cont's, Libertycounty; a _mother_ at Thunderbolt, and a _sister_ in Savannah. 

WM. ROBARTS. Wallhourville, 5th Jan. 1839"

From the "Lexington (Ky. ) Intelligencer. " July 7, 1838. 

"$160 Reward. --Ranaway from the subscribers living in this city, onSaturday 16th inst. A negro man, named Dick, about 37 years of age. Itis highly probable said boy will make for New Orleans as _he has awife_ living in that city, and he has been heard to say frequentlythat _he was determined to go to New Orleans_. 

"DRAKE C. THOMPSON. "Lexington, June 17, 1838"

From the "Southern Argus, " Oct. 31, 1837. 

"Runaway--my negro man, Frederick, about 20 years of age. He is nodoubt near the plantation of G. W. Corprew, Esq of Noxubbee County, Mississippi, as _his wife belongs to that gentleman, and he followedher from my residence_. The above reward will be paid to any one whowill confine him in jail and inform me of it at Athens, Ala. "Athens, Alabama. KERKMAN LEWIS. "

From the "Savannah Georgian, " July 8, 1837. 

"Ran away from the subscriber, his man Joe. He visits the cityoccasionally, where he has been harbored by his _mother_ and _sister_. I will give one hundred dollars for proof sufficient to _convict hisharborers_. R. P. T. MONGIN. "

The "Macon (Georgia) Messenger, " Nov. 23, 1837, has the following:--

"$25 Reward. --Ran away, a negro man, named Cain. He was brought fromFlorida, and _has a wife near Mariana_, and probably will attempt tomake his way there. H. L. COOK. "

From the "Richmond (Va. ) Whig, " July 25, 1837. 

"Absconded from the subscriber, a negro man, by the name of Wilson. Hewas born in the county of New Kent, and raised by a gentleman namedRatliffe, and by him sold to a gentleman named Taylor, on whose farmhe had a _wife_ and _several children_. Mr. Taylor sold him to a Mr. Slater, who, in consequence of removing to Alabama, Wilson left; andwhen retaken was sold, and afterwards purchased, by his present owner, from T. McCargo and Co. Of Richmond. "

From the "Savannah (Ga. ) Republican, " Sept. 3, 1838. 

"$20 Reward for my negro man Jim. --Jim is about 50 or 55 years of age. It is probable he will aim for Savannah, as he said _he had children_in that vicinity. 

J. G. OWENS. Barnwell District, S. C. "

From the "Staunton (Va. ) Spectator, " Jan. 3, 1839. 

"Runaway, Jesse. --He has a _wife_, who belongs to Mr. John Ruff, ofLexington, Rockbridge county, and he may probably be lurking in thatneighborhood. MOSES McCUE. "

From the "Augusta (Georgia) Chronicle, " July 10, 1837. 

"$120 Reward for my negro Charlotte. She is about 20 years old. Shewas purchased some months past from Mr. Thomas. J. Walton, of Augusta, by Thomas W. Oliver; and, as her _mother_ and acquaintances live inthat city, it is very likely she is _harbored_ by some of them. MARTHAOLIVER. "

From the "Raleigh (N. C. ) Register, " July 18, 1837. 

Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Jim, the property ofMrs. Elizabeth Whitfield. He _has a wife_ at the late Hardy Jones', and may probably be lurking in that neighborhood. JOHN O'RORKE. "

From the "Richmond (Va. ) Compiler, " Sept. 8, 1837. 

"Ranaway from the subscriber, Ben. He ran off without any known cause, and _I suppose he is aiming to go to his wife, who was carried fromthe neighborhood last winter_. JOHN HUNT. "

From the "Charleston (S. C. ) Mercury, " Aug. 1, 1837. 

"Absconded from Mr. E. D. Bailey, on Wadmalaw, his negro man, namedSaby. Said fellow was purchased in January, from Francis Dickinson, ofSt. Paul's parish, and is probably now in that neighborhood, _where hehas a wife_. THOMAS N. GADSDEN. "

From the "Portsmouth (Va. ) Times, " August 3, 1838. 

"$50 dollars Reward will be given for the apprehension of my negro manIsaac. He _has a wife_ at James M. Riddick's, of Gates county, N. C. Where he may probably be lurking. C. MILLER. "

From the "Savannah (Georgia) Republican. " May 24, 1838. 

"$40 Reward. --Ran away from the subscriber in Savannah, his negro girlPatsey. She was purchased among the gang of negroes, known as theHargreave's estate. She is no doubt lurking about Liberty county, atwhich place _she has relatives_. EDWARD HOUSTOUN, of Florida"

From the "Charleston (S. C. ) Courier, " June 29, 1837. 

"$20 Reward will be paid for the apprehension and delivery, at theworkhouse in Charleston, of a mulatto woman, named Ida. It is probableshe may have made her way into Georgia, where she has _connections_. MATTHEW MUGGRIDGE. "

From the "Norfolk (Va. ) Beacon, " March 31, 1838. 

"The subscriber will give $20 for the apprehension of his negro woman, Maria, who ran away about twelve months since. She is known to belurking in or about Chuckatuch, in the county of Nansemond, where _shehas a husband_, and _formerly belonged_. PETER ONEILL. "

From the "Macon (Georgia) Messenger, " Jan. 16, 1839. 

"Ranaway from the subscriber, two negroes, Davis, a man about 45 yearsold; also Peggy, his wife, near the same age. Said negroes willprobably make their way to Columbia county, as _they have children_living in that county. I will liberally reward any person who maydeliver them to me. NEHEMIAH KING. "

From the "Petersburg (Va. ) Constellation, " June 27, 1837. 

"Ranaway, a negro man, named Peter. _He has a wife_ at the plantationof Mr. C. Haws, near Suffolk, where it is supposed he is stilllurking. JOHN L. DUNN. "

From the "Richmond (Va. ) Whig, " Dec. 7, 1739. 

"Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man, named John Lewis. It issupposed that he is lurking about in New Kent county, where heprofesses to have a _wife_. HILL JONES, Agent for R. F. & P. Railroad Co. "

From the "Red River (La. ) Whig, " June 2d, 1838. 

"Ran away from the subscriber, a mulatto woman, named Maria. It isprobable she may be found in the neighborhood of Mr. Jesse Bynum'splantation, where _she has relations_, &c. THOMAS J. WELLS. "

From the "Lexington (Ky. ) Observer and Reporter, " Sept. 28, 1838. 

"$50 Reward. --Ran away from the subscriber, a negro girl, named Maria. She is of a copper color, between 13 and 14 years of age--_bareheaded_ and _bare footed_. She is small of her age--very sprightly andvery likely. She stated she was _going to see her mother_ atMaysville. SANFORD THOMSON. "

From the "Jackson (Tenn. ) Telegraph, " Sept. 14, 1838. 

"Committed to the jail of Madison county, a negro woman, who calls hername Fanny, and says she belongs to William Miller, of Mobile. Sheformerly belonged to John Givins, of this county, who now owns_several of her children_. DAVID SHROPSHIRE, Jailor. "

From the "Norfolk (Va. ) Beacon, " July 3d, 1838. 

"Runaway from my plantation below Edenton, my negro man, Nelson. _Hehas a mother living_ at Mr. James Goodwin's, in Ballahack, Perquimanscounty; and _two brothers_, one belonging to Job Parker, and the otherto Josiah Coffield. WM. D. RASCOE. "

From the "Charleston (S. C. ) Courier, " Jan. 12, 1838. 

"$100 Reward. --Run away from the subscriber, his negro fellow, John. He is well known about the city as one of my bread carriers: _has awife_ living at Mrs. Weston's, on Hempstead. John formerly belonged toMrs. Moor, near St. Paul's church, where his _mother_ still lives, and_has been harbored by her_ before. 

JOHN T. MARSHALL. 60, Tradd street. "

From the "Newbern (N. C. ) Sentinel, " March 17, 1837. 

"Ranaway, Moses, a black fellow, about 40 years of age--has a _wife_in Washington. 

THOMAS BRAGG, Sen. Warrenton, N. C. "

From the "Richmond (Va. ) Whig, " June 30, 1837. 

"Ranaway, my man Peter. --He has a _sister_ and _mother_ in New Kent, and a _wife_ about fifteen or eighteen miles above Richmond, at orabout Taylorsville. THEO. A. LACY. "

From the "New Orleans Bulletin, " Feb. 7, 1838. 

"Ranaway, my negro Philip, aged about 40 years. --He may have gone toSt. Louis, as _he has a wife there_. W. G. CLARK, 70 New Levee. "

From the "Georgian, " Jan. 29, 1838. 

"A Reward of $5 will be paid for the apprehension of his negro woman, Diana. Diana is from 45 to 50 age. She formerly belonged to Mr. Nath. Law, of Liberty county, _where her husband still lives_. She willendeavor to go there perhaps. D. O'BYRNE. "

From the "Richmond (Va. ) Enquirer, " Feb. 20, 1838. 

"$10 Reward for a negro woman, named Sally, 40 years old. We have justreason to believe the said negro to be now lurking on the James RiverCanal, or in the Green Spring neighborhood, where, we are informed, _her husband resides_. The above reward will be given to any person_securing_ her. 

POLLY C. SHIELDS. Mount Elba, Feb. 19, 1838. "

"$50 Reward. --Ran away from the subscriber, his negro man Pauladore, commonly called Paul. I understand GEN. R. Y. HAYNE _has purchased hiswife and children_ from H. L. PINCKNEY, Esq. And has them now on hisplantation at Goosecreek, where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently_lurking_. T. DAVIS. "

"$25 Reward. --Ran away from the subscriber, a negro woman, namedMatilda. It is thought she may be somewhere up James River, as she wasclaimed as _a wife_ by some boatman in Goochland. J. ALVIS. "

"Stop the Runaway!!!--$25 Reward. Ranaway from the Eagle Tavern, anegro fellow, named Nat. He is no doubt attempting to _follow hiswife, who was lately sold to a speculator_ named Redmond. The abovereward will be paid by Mrs. Lucy M. Downman, of Sussex county, Va. "

Multitudes of advertisements like the above appear annually in thesouthern papers. Reader, look at the preceding list--mark theunfeeling barbarity with which their masters and _mistresses_ describethe struggles and perils of sundered husbands and wives, parents andchildren, in their weary midnight travels through forests and rivers, with torn limbs and breaking hearts, seeking the embraces of eachother's love. In one instance, a mother torn from all her children andtaken to a remote part of another state, presses her way back throughthe wilderness, hundreds of miles, to clasp once more her children toher heart: but, when she has arrived within a few miles of them, inthe same county, is discovered, seized, dragged to jail, and herpurchaser told, through an advertisement, that she awaits his order. But we need not trace out the harrowing details already before thereader. 

Rev. C. S. RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, who resided some time inKentucky, says;--

"I was told the following fact by a young lady, daughter of aslaveholder in Boone county, Kentucky, who lived within half a mile ofMr. Hughes' farm. Hughes and Neil traded in slaves down the river:they had bought up a part of their stock in the upper counties ofKentucky, and brought them down to Louisville, where the remainder oftheir drove was in jail, waiting their arrival. Just before thesteamboat put off for the lower country, two negro women were offeredfor sale, each of them having a young child at the breast. The tradersbought them, took their babes from their arms, and offered them to thehighest bidder; and they were sold for one dollar apiece, whilst thestricken parents were driven on board the boat; and in an hour were ontheir way to the New Orleans market. You are aware that a young babe_decreases_ the value of a field hand in the lower country, whilst itincreases her value in the 'breeding states. '"

The following is an extract from an address, published by thePresbyterian Synod of Kentucky, to the churches under their care, in1835:--

"Brothers and sisters, parents and children, husbands and wives, are_torn asunder_, and permitted to see each other no more. These actsare DAILY occurring in the midst of us. The _shrieks_ and the _agony, often_ witnessed on such occasions, proclaim, with a trumpet tongue, the iniquity of our system. _There is not a neighborhood_ where theseheart-rending scenes are not displayed. _There is not a village orroad_ that does not behold the sad procession of manacled outcasts, whose mournful countenances tell that they are exiled by _force_ fromALL THAT THEIR HEARTS HOLD DEAR. "--_Address_, p. 12. 

Professor ANDREWS, late of the University of North Carolina, in hisrecent work on Slavery and the Slave Trade, page 147, in relating aconversation with a slave-trader, whom he met near Washington City, says, he inquired, "'Do you _often_ buy the wife without the husband?' 'Yes, VERY OFTEN;and FREQUENTLY, too, they _sell me the mother while they keep herchildren. I have often known them take away the infant from itsmother's breast, and keep it, while they sold her_. '"

The following sale is advertised in the "Georgia Journal, " Jan, 2, 1838. 

"Will be sold, the following PROPERTY, to wit: One ---- CHILD, by thename of James, _about eight months old_, levied on as the property ofGabriel Gunn. "

The following is a standing advertisement in the Charleston (S. C. )papers:--

"120 Negroes for Sale--The subscriber has _just arrived fromPetersburg, Virginia_, with one hundred and twenty _likely young_negroes of both sexes and every description, which he offers for saleon the most reasonable terms. 

"The lot now on hand consists of plough boys several likely andwell-qualified house servants of both sexes, several _women withchildren, small girls_ suitable for nurses, and several SMALL BOYSWITHOUT THEIR MOTHERS. Planters and traders are earnestly requested togive the subscriber a call previously to making purchases elsewhere, as he is enabled and will sell as cheap, or cheaper, than can be soldby any other person in the trade. BENJAMIN DAVIS. Hamburg, S. C. Sept. 28, 1838. "

Extract Of a letter to a member of Congress from a friend inMississippi, published in the "Washington Globe, " June, 1837. 

"The times are truly alarming here. Many plantations _are entirelystripped of negroes_ (protection!) and horses, by the marshal orsheriff. --Suits are multiplying--two thousand five hundred in theUnited States Circuit Court, and three thousand in Hinds CountyCourt. "

Testimony of MR. SILAS STONE, of Hudson, New York. Mr. Stone is amember of the Episcopal Church, has several times been elected anAssessor of the city of Hudson, and for three years has filled theoffice of Treasurer of the County. In the fall of 1807, Mr. Stonewitnessed a sale of slaves, in Charleston, South Carolina, which hethus describes in a communication recently received from him. 

"I saw droves of the poor fellows driven to the slave markets kept indifferent parts of the city, one of which I visited. The arrangementsof this place appeared something like our northern horse-markets, having sheds, or barns, in the rear of a public house, where alcoholwas a handy ingredient to stimulate the spirit of jockeying. As thetraders appeared, lots of negroes were brought from the stables intothe bar room, and by a flourish of the whip were made to assume anactive appearance. 'What will you give for these fellows?' 'How oldare they? 'Are they healthy?' 'Are they quick?' &c. At the same timethe owner would give them a cut with a cowhide, and tell them to danceand jump, cursing and swearing at them if they did not move quick. Infact all the transactions in buying and selling slaves, partakes ofjockey-ship, as much as buying and selling horses. There was as littleregard paid to the feelings of the former as we witness in the latter. 

"From these scenes I turn to another, which took place in front of thenoble 'Exchange Buildings, ' in the heart of the city. On the left sideof the steps, as you leave the main hall, immediately under thewindows of that proud building, was a stage built, on which a motherwith eight children were placed, and sold at auction. I watched theiremotions closely, and saw their feelings were in accordance to humannature. The sale began with the eldest child, who, being struck off tothe highest bidder, was taken from the stage or platform by thepurchaser, and led to his wagon and stowed away, to be carried intothe country; the second, and third were also sold, and so until sevenof the children were torn from their mother, while her discernmenttold her they were to be separated probably forever, causing in thatmother the most agonizing sobs and cries, in which the children seemedto share. The scene beggars description; suffice it to say, it wassufficient to cause tears from one at least 'whose skin was notcolored like their own, ' and I was not ashamed to give vent to them. "

THE "PROTECTION" AFFORDED BY "PUBLIC OPINION"TO CHILDHOOD AND OLD AGE. 

In the "New Orleans Bee, " May 31, 1837, MR. P. BAHI, gives notice thathe has _committed to_ JAIL as a runaway 'a _little_ negro AGED ABOUTSEVEN YEARS. '

In the "Mobile Advertiser, " Sept. 13, 1838, WILLIAM MAGEE, Sheriff, gives notice that George Walton, Esq. Mayor of the city has_committed_ to JAIL as a runaway slave, Jordan, ABOUT TWELVE YEARSOLD, and the Sheriff proceeds to give notice that if no one claims himthe boy will be _sold as a slave_ to pay jail fees. 

In the "Memphis (Tenn. ) Gazette, " May 2, 1837, W. H. MONTGOMERYadvertises that he will sell at auction a BOY AGED 14, ANOTHER AGED12, AND A GIRL 10, to pay the debts of their deceased master. 

B. F. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, Natchitoches (La. ) advertises in the'Herald, ' of May 17, 1837, that he has "_committed to_ JAIL, as arunaway a negro boy BETWEEN 11 AND 12 YEARS OF AGE. "

In the "Augusta (Ga. ) Chronicle, " Feb. 13, 1838. R. H. JONES, jailor, says, "Brought to _jail_ a negro _woman_ Sarah, she is about 60 or 65_years old_. "

In the "Winchester Virginian, " August 8, 1837, Mr. R. H. MENIFEE, offers ten dollars reward to any one who will catch and lodge in jail, Abram and Nelly, _about_ 60 _years old_, so that he can get themagain. 

J. SNOWDEN, Jailor, Columbia, S. C. Gives notice in the "Telescope, "Nov, 18, 1837, that he has committed to jail as a runaway slave, "_Caroline fifty years of age_. "

Y. S. PICKARD, Jailor, Savannah, Georgia, gives notice in the"Georgian, " June 22, 1837, that he has taken up for a runaway andlodged in jail Charles, 60 _years of age_. 

In the Savannah "Georgian, " April 12, 1837, Mr. J. CUYLER, says hewill give five dollars, to anyone who will catch and bring back to him"Saman, _an old negro man, and grey, and has only one eye_. "

In the "Macon (Ga. ) Telegraph, " Jan. 15, 1839, MESSRS. T. AND L. NAPIER, advertise for sale Nancy, a woman 65 _years of age_, andPeggy, a woman 65 _years of age_. 

The following is from the "Columbian (Ga. ) Enquirer, " March 8, 1838. 

"$25 REWARD. --Ranaway, a Negro Woman named MATILDA, aged about 30 or35 years. Also, on the same night, a Negro Fellow of small size, VERYAGED, _stoop-shouldered_, who walks VERY DECREPIDLY, is supposed tohave gone off. His name is DAVE, and he has claimed Matilda for wife. It may be they have gone off together. 

"I will give twenty-five dollars for the woman, delivered to me inMuscogee county, or confined in any jail so that I can get her. MOSESBUTT. "

J. B. RANDALL, Jailor, Cobb (Co. ) Georgia, advertises an old negro man, in the "Milledgeville Recorder, " Nov. 6, 1838. 

"A NEGRO MAN, has been lodged in the common jail of this county, whosays his name is JUPITER. He _has lost all his front teeth above andbelow--speaks very indistinctly, is very lame, so that he can hardlywalk_. "

Rev. CHARLES STEWART RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, who spent some timein slave states, speaking of his residence in Kentucky, says:--

"One Sabbath morning, whilst riding to meeting near Burlington, BooneCo. Kentucky, in company with Mr. Willis, a teacher of sacred musicand a member of the Presbyterian Church, I was startled at mingledshouts and screams, proceeding from an old log house, some distancefrom the road side. As we passed it, some five or six boys from 12 to15 years of age, came out, some of them cracking whips, followed bytwo colored boys crying. I asked Mr. W. What the scene meant. 'Oh, ' hereplied, 'those boys have been whipping the niggers; that is the waywe bring slaves into subjection in Kentucky--we let the children beatthem. ' The boys returned again into the house, and again theirshouting and stamping was heard, but ever and anon a scream of agonythat would not be drowned, rose above the uproar; thus they continuedtill the sounds were lost in the distance. "

Well did Jefferson say, that the children of slaveholders are 'NURSED, EDUCATED, AND DAILY EXERCISED IN TYRANNY. '

The 'protection' thrown around a mother's yearnings, and thehelplessness of childhood by the 'public opinion' of slaveholders, isshown by _thousands_ of advertisements of which the following aresamples. 

From the "New Orleans Bulletin, " June 2. 

"NEGROES FOR SALE. --A negro woman 21 years of age, and has twochildren, one eight and the other three years. Said negroes will besold SEPARATELY or together _as desired_. The woman is a goodseamstress. She will be sold low for cash, or _exchanged_ forGROCERIES. For terms apply to MAYHEW BLISS, & CO. 1 Front Levee. "

From the "Georgia Journal, " Nov. 7. 

"TO BE SOLD--One negro girl about 18 _months old_, belonging to theestate of William Chambers, dec'd. Sold for the purpose of_distribution!!_ JETHRO DEAN, SAMUEL BEALL, Ex'ors. "

From the "Natchez Courier, " April 2, 1838. 

"NOTICE--Is hereby given that the undersigned pursuant to a certainDeed of Trust will on Thursday the 12th day of April next, expose tosale at the Court House, to the highest bidder for cash, the followingNegro slaves, to wit; Fanny, aged about 28 years; Mary, aged about 7years; Amanda, aged about 3 months; Wilson, aged about 9 months. 

Said slaves, to be sold for the satisfaction of the debt secured insaid Deed of Trust. W. J. MINOR. "

From the "Milledgeville Journal, " Dec. 26, 1837. 

"EXECUTOR'S SALE. 

"Agreeable to an order of the court of Wilkinson county, will be soldon the first Tuesday in April next, before the Court-house door in thetown of Irwington, ONE NEGRO GIRL _about two years old_, named Rachel, belonging to the estate of William Chambers dec'd. Sold _for thebenefit_ of the heirs and creditors of said estate. 

SAMUEL BELL, JESSE PEACOCK, Ex'ors. "

From the "Alexandria (D. C. ) Gazette" Dec. 19. 

"I will give the highest cash price for likely negroes, _from 10 to 25years of age_. 

GEO. KEPHART. "

From the "Southern Whig, " March 2, 1838. --

"WILL be sold in La Grange, Troup county, one negro girl, by the nameof Charity, aged about 10 or 12 years; as the property of Littleton L. Burk, to satisfy a mortgage fi. Fa. From Troup Inferior Court, infavor of Daniel S. Robertson vs. Said Burk. "

From the "Petersburgh (Va. ) Constellation, " March 18, 1837. 

"50 _Negroes wanted immediately_. --The subscriber will give a goodmarket price for fifty likely negroes, _from 10 to 30 years of age_. 

HENRY DAVIS. "

The following is an extract of a letter from a gentleman, a native andstill a resident of one of the slave states, and _still aslaveholder_. He is an elder in the Presbyterian Church, his letter isnow before us, and his name is with the Executive Committee of the Am. Anti-slavery Society. 

"Permit me to say, that around this very place where I reside, slavesare brought almost constantly, and sold to Miss. And Orleans; that _itis usual_ to part families forever by such sales--the parents from thechildren and the children from the parents, of every size and age. Amother was taken not long since, in this town, from a _sucking child_, and sold to the lower country. Three young men I saw some time agotaken from this place in chains--while the mother of one of them, oldand decrepid, _followed with tears and prayers her son, 18 or 20miles, and bid him a final farewell_! O, thou Great Eternal, is thisjustice! is this equity!!--Equal Rights!!"

We subjoin a few miscellaneous facts illustrating the INHUMANITY ofslaveholding 'public opinion. '

The shocking indifference manifested at the death of slaves as _humanbeings_, contrasted with the grief at their loss _as property_, is atrue index to the public opinion of slaveholders. 

Colonel Oliver of Louisville, lost a valuable race-horse by theexplosion of the steamer Oronoko, a few months since on theMississippi river. Eight human beings whom he held as slaves were alsokilled by the explosion. They were the riders and grooms of hisrace-horses. A Louisville paper thus speaks of the occurrence:

"Colonel Oliver suffered severely by the explosion of the Oronoko. Helost _eight_ of his rubbers and riders, and his horse, Joe Kearney, which he had sold the night before for $3, 000. "

Mr. King, of the New York American, makes the following just commenton the barbarity of the above paragraph:

"Would any one, in reading this paragraph from an evening paper, conjecture that these '_eight_ rubbers and riders, ' that together witha horse, are merely mentioned as a 'loss' to their owner, were humanbeings--immortal as the writer who thus brutalizes them, and perhapscherishing life as much? In this view, perhaps, the 'eight' lost asmuch as Colonel Oliver. "

The following is from the "Charleston (S. C. ) Patriot, " Oct. 18. 

"_Loss of Property_!--Since I have been here, (Rice Hope, N. Santee, )I have seen much misery, and much of human suffering. The loss ofPROPERTY has been immense, not only on South Santee, but also on thisriver. Mr. Shoolbred has lost, (according to the statement of thephysician, ) forty-six negroes--the majority lost being the _primesthands_ he had--bricklayers, carpenters, blacksmiths and Coopers. Mr. Wm. Mazyck has lost 35 negroes. Col. Thomas Pinkney, in theneighborhood of 40, and many other planters, 10 to 20 on eachplantation. Mrs. Elias Harry, adjoining the plantation of Mr. Lucas, has lost up to date, 32 negroes--the _best part of her primest_negroes on her plantation. "

From the "Natchez (Miss. ) Daily Free Trader, " Feb. 12, 1838. 

"_Found_. --A NEGRO'S HEAD WAS PICKED UP ON THE RAIL-ROAD YESTERDAY, WHICH THE OWNER CAN HAVE BY CALLING AT THIS OFFICE AND PAYING FOR THEADVERTISEMENT. "

The way in which slaveholding 'public opinion' protects a poor femalelunatic is illustrated in the following advertisement in the"Fayetteville (N. C. ) Observer, " June 27, 1838:

"Taken and committed to jail, a negro girl named Nancy, who issupposed to belong to Spencer P. Wright, of the State of Georgia. Sheis about 30 years of age, and is a LUNATIC. The owner is requested tocome forward, prove property, pay charges, and take her away, or SHEWILL BE SOLD TO PAY HER JAIL FEES. 

FRED'K HOME, Jailor. "

A late PROSPECTUS Of the South Carolina Medical College, located inCharleston, contains the following passage:--

"Some advantages of a _peculiar_ character are connected with thisInstitution, which it may be proper to point out. No place in theUnited States offers as great opportunities for the acquisition ofanatomical knowledge, SUBJECTS BEING OBTAINED FROM AMONG THE COLOREDPOPULATION IN SUFFICIENT NUMBER FOR EVERY PURPOSE, AND PROPERDISSECTIONS CARRIED ON WITHOUT OFFENDING ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THECOMMUNITY!!"

_Without offending any individuals in the community_! More than halfthe population of Charleston, we believe, is 'colored;' _their_ gravesmay be ravaged, their dead may be dug up, dragged into the dissectingroom, exposed to the gaze, heartless gibes, and experimenting knives, of a crowd of inexperienced operators, who are given to understand inthe prospectus, that, if they do not acquire manual dexterity indissection, it will be wholly their own fault, in neglecting toimprove the unrivalled advantages afforded by the institution--sinceeach can have as many human bodies as he pleases to experimentupon--and as to the fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, brothers, andsisters, of those whom they cut to pieces from day to day, why, theyare not 'individuals in the community, ' but 'property, ' and however_their_ feelings may be tortured, the 'public opinion' of slaveholdersis entirely too 'chivalrous' to degrade itself by caring for them!

The following which has been for some time a standing advertisement ofthe South Carolina Medical College, in the Charleston papers, isanother index of the same 'public opinion' toward slaves. We give anextract:--

"_Surgery of the Medical College of South Carolina, Queen st_. --TheFaculty inform their professional brethren, and the public that theyhave established a _Surgery_, at the Old College, Queen street, FORTHE TREATMENT OF NEGROES, which will continue in operation, during thesession of the College, say from first November, to the fifteenth ofMarch ensuing. 

"The _object_ of the Faculty, in opening this Surgery, is to collectas _many interesting cases_, as possible, for the _benefit_ and_instruction_ of their pupils--at the same time, they indulge thehope, that it may not only prove an _accommodation_, but also a matterof economy to the public. They would respectfully call the attentionof planters, living in the vicinity of the city, to this subject;particularly such as may have servants laboring under Surgicaldiseases. Such _persons of color_ as may not be able to pay forMedical advice, will be attended to gratis, at stated hours, as oftenas may be necessary. 

"The Faculty take this opportunity of soliciting the co-operation ofsuch of their professional brethren, as are favorable to theirobjects. "

"The first thing that strikes the reader of the advertisement is, thatthis _Surgery_ is established exclusively 'for the treatment of_negroes_; and, if he knows little of the hearts of slaveholderstowards their slaves, he charitably supposes, that they 'feel the dintof pity, ' for the poor sufferers and have founded this institution asa special charity for their relief. But the delusion vanishes as hereads on; the professors take special care that no such derogatoryinference shall be drawn from their advertisement. They give us thethree reasons which have induced them to open this 'Surgery for thetreatment of negroes. ' The first and main one is, 'to collect as many_interesting cases_ as possible for the benefit and instruction oftheir _pupils_--another is, 'the hope that it may prove an_accommodation_, '--and the third, that it may be 'a matter of economyto the _public_' Another reason, doubtless, and controlling one, though the professors are silent about it, is that a large collectionof 'interesting surgical cases, ' always on hand, would prove apowerful attraction to students, and greatly increase the popularityof the institution. In brief, then, the motives of its founders, theprofessors, were these, the accommodation of their _students_--theaccommodation of the _public_ (which means, _the whites_)--and theaccommodation of slaveholders who have on their hands disabled slaves, that would make 'interesting cases, ' for surgical operation in thepresence of the pupils--to these reasons we may add the accommodationof the Medical Institution and the accommodation of _themselves_! Nota syllable about the _accommodation_ of the hopeless sufferers, writhing with the agony of those gun shot wounds, fractured sculls, broken limbs and ulcerated backs which constitute the 'interestingcases' for the professors to 'show off' before their pupils, and, aspractice makes perfect, for the students themselves to try their handsat by way of experiment. 

Why, we ask, was this surgery established 'for the treatment of_negroes'_ alone? Why were these 'interesting cases' selected fromthat class exclusively? No man who knows the feeling of slave holderstowards slaves will be at a loss for the reason. 'Public opinion'would tolerate surgical experiments, operations, processes, performedupon them, which it would execrate if performed upon their master orother whites. As the great object in collecting the disabled negroesis to have 'interesting cases' for the students, the professors whoperform the operations will of course endeavor to make them as'interesting' as possible. The _instruction of the student_ is theimmediate object, and if the professors can accomplish it best by_protracting_ the operation, pausing to explain the differentprocesses, &c. The subject is only a negro, and what is his protractedagony, that it should restrain the professor from making the case as'interesting' as possible to the students by so using his knife aswill give them the best knowledge of the parts, and the process, however it may protract or augment the pain of the subject. The _end_to be accomplished is the _instruction_ of the student, operationsupon the negroes are the _means_ to the end; _that_ tells the wholestory--and he who knows the hearts of slaveholders and has commonsense, however short the allowance, can find the way to hisconclusions without a lantern. 

By an advertisement of the same Medical Institution, dated November12, 1838, and published in the Charleston papers, it appears that an'infirmary has been opened in connection with the college. ' Theprofessors manifest a great desire that the masters of servants shouldsend in their disabled slaves, and as an inducement to the furnishingof such _interesting cases_ say, all medical and surgical aid will beoffered _without making them liable to any professional charges_. Disinterested bounty, pity, sympathy, philanthropy. However difficultor numerous the surgical cases of slaves thus put into their hands bythe masters, they charge not a cent for their _professional services_. Their yearnings over human distress are so intense, that they beg theprivilege of performing all operations, and furnishing all the medicalattention needed, _gratis_, feeling that the relief of misery is itsown reward!!! But we have put down our exclamation points toosoon--upon reading the whole of the advertisement we find theprofessors conclude it with the following paragraph:--

"The SOLE OBJECT Of the faculty in the establishment of such aninstitution being to promote the interest of Medical Education withintheir native State and City. "

In the "Charleston (South Carolina) Mercury" of October 12, 1838, wefind an advertisement of half a column, by a Dr. T. Stillman, settingforth the merits of another 'Medical Infirmary, ' under his own specialsupervision, at No. 110 Church street, Charleston. The doctor, afterinveighing loudly against 'men totally ignorant of medical science, 'who flood the country with quack nostrums backed up by 'fabricatedproofs of miraculous cures, ' proceeds to enumerate the diseases towhich his 'Infirmary' is open, and to which his practice will bemainly confined. Appreciating the importance of 'interesting cases, 'as a stock in trade, on which to commence his experiments, he copiesthe example of the medical professors, and advertises for them. But, either from a keener sense of justice, or more generosity, or greaterconfidence in his skill, or for some other reason, he proposes to _buyup_ an assortment of _damaged_ negroes, given over, as incurable, byothers, and to make such his 'interesting cases, ' instead ofexperimenting on those who are the 'property' of others. 

Dr. Stillman closes his advertisement with the following notice:--

"To PLANTERS AND OTHERS. --Wanted _fifty negroes_. Any person havingsick negroes, considered incurable by their respective physicians, andwishing to dispose of them, Dr. S. Will pay cash for negroes affectedwith scrofula or king's evil, confirmed hypocondriasm, apoplexy, diseases of the liver, kidneys, spleen, stomach and intestines, bladder and its appendages, diarrhea, dysentery, &c. The highest cashprice will be paid on application as above. "

The absolute barbarism of a 'public opinion' which not only tolerates, but _produces_ such advertisements as this, was outdone by nothing inthe dark ages. If the reader has a heart of flesh, he can feel itwithout help, and if he has not, comment will not create it. The totalindifference of slaveholders to such a cold blooded proposition, theirutter unconsciousness of the paralysis of heart, and death ofsympathy, and every feeling of common humanity for the slave, which itreveals, is enough, of itself to show that the tendency of the spiritof slaveholding is, to kill in the soul whatever it touches. It has noeyes to see, nor ears to hear, nor mind to understand, nor heart tofeel for its victims as _human beings_. To show that the aboveindication of the savage state is not an index of individual feeling, but of 'public opinion, ' it is sufficient to say, that it appears tobe a standing advertisement in the Charleston Mercury, the leadingpolitical paper of South Carolina, the organ of the Honorables John C. Calhoun, Robert Barnwell Rhett, Hugh S. Legare, and others regarded asthe elite of her statesmen and literati. Besides, candidates forpopular favor, like the doctor who advertises for the fifty'incurables, ' take special care to conciliate, rather than outrage, 'public opinion. ' Is the doctor so ignorant of 'public opinion' in hisown city, that he has unwittingly committed violence upon it in hisadvertisement? We trow not. The same 'public opinion' which gave birthto the advertisement of doctor Stillman, and to those of theprofessors in both the medical institutions, founded the Charleston'Work House'--a soft name for a Moloch temple dedicated to torture, and reeking with blood, in the midst of the city; to which masters andmistresses send their slaves of both sexes to be stripped, tied up, and cut with the lash till the blood and mangled flesh flow to theirfeet, or to be beaten and bruised with the terrible paddle, or forcedto climb the tread-mill till nature sinks, or to experience othernameless torments. 

The "Vicksburg (Miss. ) Register, " Dec. 27, 1838, contains thefollowing item of information: "ARDOR IN BETTING. --Two gentlemen, at atavern, having summoned the waiter, the poor fellow had scarcelyentered, when he fell down in a fit of apoplexy. 'He's dead!'exclaimed one. 'He'll come to!' replied the other. 'Dead, for fivehundred!' 'Done!' retorted the second. The noise of the fall, and theconfusion which followed, brought up the landlord, who called out tofetch a doctor. 'No! no! we must have no interference--there's a betdepending!' 'But, sir, I shall lose a valuable servant!' 'Never mind!you can put him down in the bill!'"

About the time the Vicksburg paper containing the above came to hand, we received a letter from N. P. ROGERS, Esq. Of Concord, N. H. Theeditor of the 'Herald of Freedom, ' from which the following is anextract:

"Some thirty years ago, I think it was, Col. Thatcher, of Maine, alawyer, was in Virginia, on business, and was there invited to dine ata public house, with a company of the gentry of the south. _The place_I forget--the fact was told me by George Kimball, Esq. Now of Alton, Illinois who had the story from Col. Thatcher himself. Among theservants waiting was a young negro man, whose beautiful person, obliging and assiduous temper, and his activity and grace in serving, made him a favorite with the company. The dinner lasted into theevening, and the wine passed freely about the table. At length, one ofthe gentlemen, who was pretty highly excited with wine, becameunfortunately incensed, either at some trip of the young slave, inwaiting, or at some other cause happening when the slave was withinhis reach. He seized the long-necked wine bottle, and struck the youngman suddenly in the temple, and felled him dead upon the floor. Thefall arrested, for a moment, the festivities of the table. 'Devilishunlucky, ' exclaimed one. 'The gentleman is very unfortunate, ' criedanother. 'Really a loss, ' said a third, &c, &c. The body was draggedfrom the dining hall, and the feast went on; and at the close, one ofthe gentlemen, and the very one, I believe, whose hand had done thehomicide, shouted, in bacchanalian bravery, and _southern generosity_, amid the broken glasses and fragments of chairs, 'LANDLORD! PUT THENIGGER INTO THE BILL!' This was that murdered young man's _requiem andfuneral service_. "

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, a merchant in Rochester, New York, and an elderin the Fourth Presbyterian Church in that city, who resided four yearsin Virginia, gives the following testimony:

"I knew a young man who had been out hunting, and returning with someof his friends, seeing a negro man in the road, at a little distance, deliberately drew up his rifle, and shot him dead. This was donewithout the slightest provocation, or a word passing. This young manpassed through the _form_ of a trial, and, although it was not even_pretended_ by his counsel that he was not guilty of the act, deliberately and wantonly perpetrated, _he was acquitted_. It wasurged by his counsel, that he was a _young_ man, (about 20 years ofage, ) had no _malicious_ intention, his mother was a widow, &c, &c"

Mr. BENJAMIN CLENDENON, of Colerain, Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, amember of the Society of Friends, gives the following testimony:

"Three years ago the coming month, I took a journey of aboutseventy-five miles from home, through the eastern shore of Maryland, and a small part of Delaware. Calling one day, near noon, atGeorgetown Cross-Roads, I found myself surrounded in the tavern byslaveholders. Among other subjects of conversation, their human cattlecame in for a share. One of the company, a middle-aged man, thenliving with a second wife, acknowledged, that after the death of hisfirst wife, he lived in a state of concubinage with a female slave;but when the time drew near for the taking of a second wife, he foundit expedient to remove the slave from the premises. The same persongave an account of a female slave he formerly held, who had apropensity for some one pursuit, I think the attendance of religiousmeetings. On a certain occasion, she presented her petition to him, asking for this indulgence; he refused--she importuned--and he, withsovereign indignation, seized a chair, and with a blow upon the head, knocked her senseless upon the floor. The same person, for some act ofdisobedience, on the part, I think, of the same slave, when employedin stacking straw, felled her to the earth with the handle of a pitchfork. All these transactions were related with the _utmost composure_, in a bar-room within thirty miles of the Pennsylvania line. "

The two following advertisements are illustrations of the regard paidto the marriage relations by slaveholding judges, governors, senatorsin Congress, and mayors of cities. 

From the "Montgomery, (Ala. ) Advertiser, " Sept. 29, 1837. 

"$20 REWARD. --Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Moses. Heis of common size, about 28 years old. He formerly belonged to JudgeBenson, of Montgomery, and it is said, has a wife in that county. JohnGayle"

The John Gayle who signs this advertisement, is an Ex-Governor ofAlabama. 

From the "Charleston Courier, " Nov. 28. 

"Ranaway from the subscriber, about twelve months since, his negro manPaulladore. His complexion is dark--about 50 years old. I understandGen. R. Y. Hayne has purchased his wife and children from H. L. Pinckney, Esq. And has them now on his plantation, at Goose Creek, where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently lurking. Thomas Davis. "

It is hardly necessary to say, that the GENERAL R. Y. HAYNE, and H. L. PINCKNEY, Esq. Named in the advertisement, are Ex-Governor Hayne, formerly U. S. Senator from South Carolina, and Hon. Henry L. Pinckney, late member of Congress from Charleston District, and nowIntendant (mayor) of that city. 

It is no difficult matter to get at the 'public opinion' of acommunity, when _ladies_ 'of property and standing' publish, undertheir own names, such advertisements as the following. 

Mrs. ELIZABETH L. CARTER, of Groveton, Prince William county, Virginia, thus advertises her negro man Moses:

"Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Moses, aged about 40years, about six feet high, well made, and possessing a good address, and HAS LOST A PART ON ONE OF HIS EARS. "

Mrs. B. NEWMAN, of the same place, and in the same paper, advertises--

"Penny, the wife of Moses, aged about 30 years, brown complexion, talland likely, _no particular marks of person recollected. _"

Both of the above advertisements appear in the National Intelligencer, (Washington city, ) June 10, 1837. 

In the Mobile Mercantile Advertiser, of Feb. 13, 1838, is anadvertisement Signed SARAH WALSH, of which the following is anextract:

"Twenty-five dollars reward will be paid to any one who may apprehendand deliver to me, or confine in any jail, so that, I can get him, myman Isaac, who ranaway sometime in September last. He is 26 years ofage, 5 feet 10 inches high, has a _scar on his forehead, caused by ablow_, and one on his back, MADE BY A SHOT FROM A PISTOL. "

In the "New Orleans Bee, " Dec. 21, 1838, Mrs. BURVANT, whose residenceis at the corner of Chartres and Toulouse streets, advertises a womanas follows:

"Ranaway, a negro woman named Rachel--_has lost all her toes exceptthe large one_. "

From the "Huntsville (Ala. ) Democrat, " June 16, 1838:

"TEN DOLLARS REWARD. --Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro woman namedSally, about 21 years of age, taking along her two children--one threeyears, and the other seven months old. These negroes were PURCHASED BYME at the sale of George Mason's negroes, on the first Monday in May, and left _a few days_ thereafter. Any person delivering them to thejailor in Huntsville, or to me, at my plantation, five miles aboveTriana, on the Tennessee river, shall receive the above reward. CHARITY COOPER"

From the "Mississippian, " May 13, 1838:

"TEN DOLLARS REWARD. --Ranaway from the subscriber, a man named Aaron, yellow complexion, blue eyes, &c. I have no doubt he is lurking aboutJackson and its vicinity, probably harbored by some of the negroessold as the property of _my late husband_, Harry Long, deceased. Someof them are about Richland, in Madison co. I will give the abovereward when brought to me, about six miles north-west of Jackson, orput IN JAIL, _so that I can get him_. LUCY LONG. "

If the reader, after perusing the preceding facts, testimony, andarguments, still insists that the 'public opinion' of the slave statesprotects the slave from outrages, and alleges, as proof of it, that_cruel_ masters are frowned upon and shunned by the communitygenerally, and regarded as monsters, we reply by presenting thefollowing facts and testimony. 

"Col. MEANS, of Manchester, Ohio, says, that when he resided in SouthCarolina, _his neighbor_, a physician, became enraged with his slave, and sentenced him to receive two hundred lashes. After having receivedone hundred and forty, he fainted. After inflicting the full number oflashes, the cords with which he was bound were loosed. When herevived, he staggered to the house, and sat down in the sun. Beingfaint and thirsty, he _begged_ for some water to drink. The masterwent to the well, and procured some water but instead of giving him todrink, he threw the whole bucket-full in his face. Nature could notstand the shock--he sunk to rise no more. For this crime, thephysician was bound over to Court, and tried, and _acquitted_--and THENEXT YEAR HE WAS ELECTED TO THE LEGISLATURE!"

Testimony of Hon. JOHN RANDOLPH, of Virginia

"In one of his Congressional speeches, Mr. R. Says: Avarice alone candrive, as it does drive, this _infernal_ traffic, and the wretchedvictims of it, like so many post horses, _whipped to death_ in a mailcoach. Ambition has its cover-sluts in the pride, pomp, andcircumstance of glorious war; but where are the trophies of avarice?The hand cuff, the manacle, the blood-stained cowhide! WHAT MAN ISWORSE RECEIVED IN SOCIETY FOR BEING A HARD MASTER? WHO DENIES THE HANDOF A SISTER OR DAUGHTER TO SUCH MONSTERS?"

Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, of Rochester, New York, who resided four years inVirginia, testifies as follows:

"I know a local Methodist minister, a man of talents, and popular as apreacher, who took his negro girl into his barn, in order to whipher--and _she was brought out a corpse_! His friends seemed to thinkthis of _so little importance to his ministerial standing_, thatalthough I lived near him about three years, I do not recollect tohave heard them apologize for the deed, though I recollect havingheard ONE of his neighbors allege this fact as a reason why he did notwish to hear him preach. "

Notwithstanding the mass of testimony which has been presentedestablishing the fact that in the 'public opinion' of the South theslaves find no protection, some may still claim that the 'publicopinion' exhibited by the preceding facts is not that of the _highestclass of society at the South_, and in proof of this assertion, referto the fact, that 'Negro Brokers, ' Negro Speculators, NegroAuctioneers, and Negro Breeders, &c. , are by that class universallydespised and avoided, as are all who treat their slaves with cruelty. 

To this we reply, that, if all claimed by the objector were true, itcould avail him nothing for 'public opinion' is neither made norunmade by 'the first class of society. ' That class produces in it, atmost, but slight modifications; those who belong to it have generallya 'public opinion, ' within their own circle which has rarely more, either of morality or mercy than the public opinion of the mass, andis, at least, equally heartless and more intolerant. As to theestimation in which 'speculators, ' 'soul drivers, ' &c. Are held, weremark, that, they are not despised because they _trade in slaves_ butbecause they are _working_ men, all such are despised by slaveholders. White drovers who go with droves of swine and cattle from the freestates to the slave states, and Yankee pedlars, who traverse thesouth, and white day-laborers are, in the main, equally despised, or, if negro-traders excite more contempt than drovers, pedlars, andday-laborers, it is because, they are, as a class more ignorant andvulgar, men from low families and boors in their manners. Ridiculousto suppose, that a people, who have, _by law_, made men articles oftrade equally with swine, should despise men-drovers and traders, morethan hog-drovers and traders. That they are not despised because it istheir business to trade in _human beings_ and bring them to market, isplain from the fact that when some 'gentleman of property andstanding' and of a 'good family' embarks in a negro speculation, andemploys a dozen 'soul drivers' to traverse the upper country, anddrive to the south coffles of slaves, expending hundreds of thousandsin his wholesale purchases, he does not lose caste. It is known inAlabama, that Mr. Erwin, son-in-law of the Hon. Henry Clay, andbrother of J. P. Erwin, formerly postmaster, and late mayor of thecity of Nashville, laid the foundation of a princely fortune in theslave-trade, carried on from the Northern Slave States to the PlantingSouth; that the Hon. H. Hitchcock, brother-in-law of Mr. E. , and sinceone of the judges of the Supreme Court of Alabama, was interested withhim in the traffic; and that a late member of the Kentucky Senate(Col. Wall) not only carried on the same business, a few years ago, but accompanied his droves in person down the Mississippi. Not as the_driver_, for that would be vulgar drudgery, beneath a gentleman, butas a nabob in state, ordering his understrappers. 

It is also well known that President Jackson was a 'soul driver, ' andthat even so late as the year before the commencement of the last war, he bought up a coffle of slaves and drove them down to Louisiana forsale. 

Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. The principal slave auctioneer in Charleston, S. C. Is of one of the first families in the state, and moves in thevery highest class of society there. He is a descendant of thedistinguished General Gadsden of revolutionary memory, the mostprominent southern member in the Continental Congress of 1765, andafterwards elected lieutenant governor and then governor of the state. The Rev. Dr. Gadsden, rector of St. Phillip's Church, Charleston, andthe Rev. Phillip Gadsden, both prominent Episcopal clergymen in SouthCarolina, and Colonel James Gadsden of the United States army, afterwhom a county in Florida was recently named, are all brothers of thisThomas N. Gadsden, Esq. The largest slave auctioneer in the state, under whose hammer, men, women and children go off by thousands; itsstroke probably sunders _daily_, husbands and wives, parents andchildren, brothers and sisters, perhaps to see each other's faces nomore. Now who supply the auction table of this Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. With its loads of human merchandize? These same detested 'souldrivers' forsooth! They prowl through the country, buy, catch, andfetter them, and drive their chained coffles up to his stand, whereThomas N. Gadsden, Esq. Knocks them off to the highest bidder, toEx-Governor Butler perhaps, or to Ex-Governor Hayne, or to Hon. RobertBarnwell Rhett, or to his own reverend brother, Dr. Gadsden. Now thishigh born, wholesale _soul-seller_ doubtless despises the retail'soul-drivers' who give him their custom, and so does the wholesalegrocer, the drizzling tapster who sneaks up to his counter for a kegof whiskey to dole out under a shanty in two cent glasses; and bothfor the same reason. 

The plea that the 'public opinion' among the highest classes ofsociety at the south is mild and considerate towards the slaves, that_they_ do not overwork, underfeed, neglect when old and sick, scantilyclothe, badly lodge, and half shelter their slaves; that _they_ do notbarbarously flog, load with irons, imprison in the stocks, brand andmaim them; hunt them when runaway with dogs and guns, and sunder byforce and forever the nearest kindred--is shown, by almost every pageof this work, to be an assumption, not only utterly groundless, butdirectly opposed to masses of irrefragable evidence. If the readerwill be at the pains to review the testimony recorded on the foregoingpages he will find that a very large proportion of the atrocitiesdetailed were committed, not by the most ignorant and lowest classesof society, but by persons 'of property and standing, ' by masters andmistresses belonging to the 'upper classes, ' by persons in the learnedprofessions, by civil, judicial, and military officers, by the_literati_, by the fashionable elite and persons of more than ordinary'respectability' and external morality--large numbers of whom areprofessors of religion. 

It will be recollected that the testimony of Sarah M. Grimké, andAngelina G. Weld, was confined exclusively to the details of slaveryas exhibited in the _highest classes of society_, mainly inCharleston, S. C. See their testimony pp. 22-24 and 52-57. The formerhas furnished us with the following testimony in addition to thatalready given. 

"Nathaniel Heyward of Combahee, S. C. , one of the wealthiest plantersin the state, stated, in conversation with some other planters whowere complaining of the idle and lazy habits of their slaves, and thedifficulty of ascertaining whether their sickness was real orpretended, and the loss they suffered from their frequent absence onthis account from their work, said, 'I never lose a day's work: it isan _established_ rule on my plantations that the tasks of all the sicknegroes _shall be done by those who are well in addition to theirown_. By this means a vigilant supervision is kept up by the slavesover each other, and they take care that nothing but real sicknesskeeps any one out of the field. ' I spent several winters in theneighborhood of Nathaniel Heyward's plantations, and well remember hischaracter as a severe task master. _I was present when the abovestatement was made_. "

The cool barbarity of such a regulation is hardly surpassed by theworst edicts of the Roman Caligula--especially when we consider thatthe plantations of this man were in the neighborhood of the Combaheeriver, one of the most unhealthy districts in the low country of SouthCarolina; further, that large numbers of his slaves worked in the_rice marshes_, or 'swamps' as they are called in that state--and thatduring six months of the year, so fatal to health is the malaria ofthe swamps in that region that the planters and their familiesinvariably abandon their plantations, regarding it as downrightpresumption to spend a single day upon them 'between the frosts' ofthe early spring and the last of November. 

The reader may infer the high standing of Mr. Heyward in SouthCarolina, from the fact that he was selected with four otherfreeholders to constitute a Court for the trial of the conspirators inthe insurrection plot at Charleston, in 1822. Another of theindividuals chosen to constitute that court was Colonel Henry Deas, now president of the Board of Trustees of Charleston College, and afew years since a member of the Senate of South Carolina. From a latecorrespondence in the "Greenvile (S. C. ) Mountaineer, " between Rev. William M. Wightman, a professor in Randolph, Macon, College, and anumber of the citizens of Lodi, South Carolina, it appears that thecruelty of this Colonel Deas to his slaves, is proverbial in SouthCarolina, so much that Professor Wightman, in the sermon whichoccasioned the correspondence, spoke of the Colonel's inhumanity tohis slaves as a matter of perfect notoriety. 

Another South Carolina slaveholder, Hon. Whitmarsh B. Seabrook, recently, we believe, Lieut. Governor of the state, gives thefollowing testimony to his own inhumanity, and his certificate of the'public opinion' among South Carolina slaveholders 'of high degree. '

In an essay on the management of slaves, read before the AgriculturalSociety of St. Johns, S. C. And published by the Society, Charleston, 1834, Mr. S. Remarks:

"I consider _imprisonment in the stocks at night_, with or withouthard labor in the day, as a powerful auxiliary in the cause of _good_government. To the correctness of this opinion _many_ can beartestimony. EXPERIENCE has convinced ME that there is no punishment towhich the slave looks with more _horror_. "

The advertisements of the Professors in the Medical Colleges of SouthCarolina, published with comments--on pp. 169, 170, are additionalillustrations of the 'public opinion' of the _literati_. 

That the 'public opinion' of _the highest class of society_ in SouthCarolina, regards slaves a mere _cattle_, is shown by the followingadvertisement, which we copy from the "Charleston (S. C. ) Mercury" ofMay 16:

"NEGROES FOR SALE. --A girl about twenty years of age, (raised inVirginia, ) and her two female children, one four and the other twoyear old--is remarkably strong and healthy--never having had a day'ssickness, with the exception of the small pox, in her life. Thechildren are fine and healthy. She is VERY PROLIFIC IN HER GENERATINGQUALITIES, _and affords a rare opportunity to any person who wishes toraise a family of strong and healthy servants for their own use. _

"Any person wishing to purchase will please leave their address at theMercury office. "

The Charleston Mercury, in which this advertisement appears, _is theleading political paper in South Carolina_, and is well known to bethe political organ of Messrs. Calhoun, Rhett, Pickens, and others ofthe most prominent politicians in the state. Its editor, John Stewart, Esq. , is a lawyer of Charleston, and of a highly respectable family. He is a brother-in-law of Hon. Robert Barnwell Rhett, the lateAttorney-General, now a Member of Congress, and Hon. James Rhett, aleading member of the Senate of South Carolina; his wife is a niece ofthe late Governor Smith, of North Carolina, and of the late Hon. PeterSmith, Intendant (Mayor) of the city of Charleston; and a cousin ofthe late Hon. Thomas S. Grimké. 

The circulation of the 'Mercury' among the wealthy, the literary, andthe fashionable, is probably much larger than that of any other paperin the state. 

These facts in connection with the preceding advertisement, are asufficient exposition of the 'public opinion' towards slaves, prevalent in these classes of society. 

The following scrap of 'public opinion' in Florida, is instructive. Wetake it from the Florida Herald, June 23, 1838:

Ranaway from my plantation, on Monday night, the 13th instant, a negrofellow named Ben; eighteen years of age, polite when spoken to, andspeaks very good English for a negro. As I have traced him out inseveral places in town, I am certain he is harbored. This notice isgiven that I am determined, that whenever he is taken, _to punish himtill he informs me_ who has given him food and protection, and _Ishall apply the law of Judge Lynch to my own satisfaction_, on thoseconcerned in his concealment. 

A. WATSON. June 16, 1838. "

Now, who is this A. Watson, who proclaims through a newspaper, hisdetermination to _put to the torture_ this youth of eighteen, and toLynch to his 'satisfaction' whoever has given a cup of cold water tothe panting fugitive. Is he some low miscreant beneath publiccontempt? Nay, verily, he is a 'gentleman of property and standing, 'one of the wealthiest planters and largest slaveholders in Florida. Heresides in the vicinity of St. Augustine, and married the daughter ofthe late Thomas C. Morton, Esq. One of the first merchants in NewYork. 

We may mention in this connection the well known fact, that manywealthy planters make it a _rule never to employ a physician amongtheir slaves_. Hon. William Smith, Senator in Congress, from SouthCarolina, from 1816 to 1823, and afterwards from 1826 to 1831, is oneof this number. He owns a number of large plantations in the southwestern states. One of these, borders upon the village of Huntsville, Alabama. The people of that village can testify that it is a part ofJudge Smith's _system_ never to employ a physician _even in the mostextreme cases_. If the medical skill of the overseer, or of the slavesthemselves, can contend successfully with the disease, they live, ifnot, _they die_. At all events, a physician is _not to be called_. Judge Smith was appointed a judge of the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates three years since. 

The reader will recall a similar fact in the testimony of Rev. W. T. Allan, son of Rev. Dr. Allan, of Huntsville, (see p. 47, ) who saysthat Colonel Robert H. Watkins, a wealthy planter, in Alabama, and aPRESIDENTIAL ELECTOR in 1836, who works on his plantations threehundred slaves, 'After employing a physician for some time among hisnegroes, he ceased to do so, alledging as the reason, that it was_cheaper to lose a few negroes every year than to pay a physician_. '

It is a fact perfectly notorious, that the late General Wade Hampton, of South Carolina, who was the largest slaveholder in the UnitedStates, and probably the wealthiest man south of the Potomac, was_excessively cruel_ in the treatment of his slaves. The anecdote ofhim related by a clergyman, on page 29, is perfectly characteristic. 

For instances of barbarous inhumanity of various kinds, and manifestedby persons BELONGING TO THE MOST RESPECTABLE CIRCLES OF SOCIETY, thereader can consult the following references:--Testimony of Rev. JohnGraham, p. 25, near the bottom; of Mr. Poe, p. 26, middle; of Rev. J. O. Choules, p. 39, middle; of Rev. Dr. Channing, p. 41, top; of Mr. George A. Avery, p. 44, bottom; of Rev. W. T. Allan, p. 47; of Mr. JohnM. Nelson, p. 51, bottom; of Dr. J. C. Finley, p. 61, top; of Mr. Dustin, p. 66, bottom; of Mr. John Clarke, p. 87; of Mr. Nathan Cole, p. 89, middle; Rev. William Dickey, p. 93; Rev. Francis Hawley, p. 97;of Mr. Powell, p. 100, middle; of Rev. P. Smith p. 102. 

The preceding are but a few of a large number of similar casescontained in the foregoing testimonies. The slaveholder mentioned byMr. Ladd, p. 86, who knocked down a slave and afterwards piled brushupon his body, and consumed it, held the hand of a female slave in thefire till it was burned so as to be useless for life, and confessed toMr. Ladd, that he had killed _four_ slaves, had been a _member of theSenate of Georgia_ and a _clergyman_. The slaveholder who whipped afemale slave to death in St. Louis, in 1837, as stated by Mr. Cole, p. 69, was a _Major in the United States Army_. One of the physicianswho was an abettor of the tragedy on the Brassos, in which a slave wastortured to death, and another so that he barely lived, (see Rev. Mr. Smith's testimony, p. 102. ) was Dr. Anson Jones, a native ofConnecticut, who was soon after appointed minister plenipotentiaryfrom Texas to this government, and now resides at Washington city. Theslave mistress at Lexington, Ky. , who, as her husband testifies, haskilled six of his slaves, (see testimony of Mr. Clarke, p. 87, ) is thewife of Hon. Fielding S. Turner, late judge of the criminal court ofNew Orleans, and one of the wealthiest slaveholders in Kentucky. Lilburn Lewis, who deliberately chopped in pieces his slave George, with a broad-axe, (see testimony of Rev. Mr. Dickey, p. 93) was awealthy slaveholder, and a nephew of President Jefferson. Rev. FrancisHawley, who was a general agent of the Baptist State Convention ofNorth Carolina, confesses (see p. 47, ) that while residing in thatstate he once went out with his hounds and rifle, to hunt fugitiveslaves. But instead of making further reference to testimony alreadybefore the reader, we will furnish additional instances of thebarbarous cruelty which is tolerated and sanctioned by the 'upperclasses' of society at the south; we begin with clergymen, and otherofficers and members of churches. 

That the reader may judge of the degree of 'protection' which slavesreceive from 'public opinion, ' and among the members and ministers ofprofessed christian churches, we insert the following illustrations. 

Extract from an editorial article in the "Lowell (Mass. ) Observer" areligious paper edited at the time (1833) by the Rev. DANIEL S. SOUTHMAYD, who recently died in Texas. 

"We have been among the slaves at the south. We took pains to makediscoveries in respect to the evils of slavery. We formed oursentiments on the subject of the cruelties exercised towards theslaves from having witnessed them. We now affirm that we never saw aman, who had never been at the south, who thought as much of thecruelties practiced on the slaves, as we _know_ to be a fact. 

"A slave whom I loved for his kindness and the amiableness of hisdisposition, and who belonged to the family where I resided, happenedto stay out _fifteen minutes longer_ than he had permission to stay. It was a mistake--it was _unintentional_. But what was the penalty? Hewas sent to the house of correction with the order that he should have_thirty lashes upon his naked body with a knotted rope!!!_ He wasbrought home and laid down in the stoop, in the back of the house, in_the sun, upon the floor_. And there he lay, with more the appearanceof a rotten carcass than a living man, for four days before he coulddo more than move. And who was this inhuman being calling God'sproperty his own, and ruing it as he would not have dared to use abeast? You may say he was a tiger--one of the more wicked sort, andthat we must not judge others by him. _He was a professor of thatreligion which will pour upon the willing slaveholder the retributiondue to his sin_. 

"We wish to mention another fact, which our own eyes saw and our ownears heard. We were called to evening prayers. The family assembledaround the altar of their accustomed devotions. There was one female_slave_ present, who belonged to another master, but who had beenhired for the day and tarried to attend family worship. The preciousBible was opened, and nearly half a chapter had been read, when theeye of the master, who was reading, observed that the new femaleservant, instead of being seated like his own slaves, _flat upon thefloor_, was standing in a stooping posture upon her feet. He told herto sit down on the floor. She said it was not her custom at home. Heordered her again to do it. She replied that her master did notrequire it. Irritated by this answer, he repeatedly _struck her uponthe head with the very Bible he held in his hand_. And not contentwith this, he seized his cane and _caned her down stairs mostunmercifully_. He then returned to resume his profane work, but weneed not say that _all_ the family were not there. Do you ask again, who was this wicked man? _He was a professor of religion!!_"

Rev. HUNTINGTON LYMAN, late pastor of the Free Church in Buffalo, NewYork, says:--

"Walking one day in New Orleans with a professional gentleman, who waseducated in Connecticut, we were met by a black man; the gentleman wasgreatly incensed with the black man for passing so _near_ him, andturning upon him _he pushed him with violence off walk into thestreet_. This man was a professor of religion. "

(And _we_ add, a member, and if we mistake not an officer of thePresbyterian Church which was established there by Rev. Joel Parker, and which was then under his teachings-ED. )

Mr. EZEKIEL BIRDSEYE, a gentleman of known probity, in Cornwall, Litchfield county, Conn. Gives the testimony which follows:--

"A BAPTIST CLERGYMAN in Laurens District, S. C. WHIPPED HIS SLAVE TODEATH, whom he _suspected_ of having stolen about sixty dollars. Theslave was in the prime of life and was purchased a few weeks beforefor $800 of a slave trader from Virginia or Maryland. The coroner, Wm. Irby, at whose house I was then boarding, _told me_, that on reviewingthe dead body, he found it _beat to a jelly from head to foot_. Themaster's wife discovered the money a day or two after the death of theslave. She had herself removed it from where it was placed, notknowing what it was, as it was tied up in a thick envelope. I happenedto be present when the trial of this man took place, at Laurens CourtHouse. His daughter testified that her father untied the slave, whenhe appeared to be failing, and gave him cold water to drink, of whichhe took freely. His counsel pleaded that his death _might_ have beencaused by drinking cold water in a state of excitement. The Judgecharged the jury, that it would be their duty to find the defendantguilty, if they believed the death was caused by the whipping; but ifthey were of opinion that drinking cold water caused the death, theywould find him not guilty! The jury found him--NOT GUILTY!"

Dr. JEREMIAH S. WAUGH, a physician in Somerville, Butler county, Ohio, testifies as follows:--

"In the year 1825, I boarded with the Rev. John Mushat, a Secederminister, and principal of an academy in Iredel county, N. C. He hadslaves, and was in the habit of restricting them on the Sabbath. Oneof his slaves, however, ventured to disobey his injunctions. Theoffence was he went away on Sabbath evening, and did not return tillMonday morning. About the time we were called to breakfast, the Rev. Gentleman was engaged in chastising him for _breaking the Sabbath_. Hedetermined not to submit--attempted to escape by flight. The masterimmediately took down his gun and pursued him--levelled his instrumentof death, and told him, if he did not stop instantly _he would blowhim through_. The poor slave returned to the house and submittedhimself to the lash; and the good master, while YET PALE WITH RAGE, _sat down to the table, and with a trembling voice_ ASKED GOD'SBLESSING!"

The following letter was sent by Capt. JACOB DUNHAM, of New York city, to a slaveholder in Georgetown, D. C. More than twenty years since:

"Georgetown, June 13, 1815. 

"Dear sir--Passing your house yesterday, I beheld a scene of crueltyseldom witnessed--that was the brutal chastisement of your negro girl, _lashed to a ladder and beaten in an inhuman manner, too bad todescribe_. My blood chills while I contemplate the subject. This hasled me to investigate your character from your neighbors; who informme that you have _caused the death_ of one negro man, whom you struckwith a sledge for some trivial fault--that you have beaten anotherblack girl with such severity that the _splinters_ remained in herback for some weeks after you sold her--and many other acts ofbarbarity, too lengthy to enumerate. And to my great surprise, I findyou are a _professor of the Christian religion!_

"You will naturally inquire, why I meddle with your family affairs. Myanswer is, the cause of humanity and a sense of my duty requiresit. --these hasty remarks I leave you to reflect on the subject; butwish you to remember, that there is an all-seeing eye who knows allour faults and will reward us according to our deeds. 

I remain, sir, yours, &c

JACOB DUNHAM. Master of the brig Cyrus, of N. Y. "

Rev. SYLVESTER COWLES, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Fredonia, N. Y. Says:--

"A young man, a member of the church in Conewango, went to Alabamalast year, to reside as a clerk in an uncle's store. When he had beenthere about nine months, he wrote his father that he must return home. To see members of the same church sit at the communion table of ourLord one day, and the next to see one seize any weapon and knock theother down, _as he had seen_, he _could not_ live there. His goodfather forthwith gave him permission to return home. "

The following is a specimen of the shameless hardihood with which aprofessed minister of the Gospel, and editor of a religious paper, assumes the right to hold God's image as a chattel. It is from theSouthern Christian Herald:--

"It is stated in the Georgetown Union, that a negro, supposed to havedied of cholera, when that disease prevailed in Charleston, wascarried to the public burying ground to be interred; but beforeinterment signs of life appeared, and, by the use of proper means, hewas restored to health. And now the man who first perceived the signsof life in the slave, and that led to his preservation, claims theproperty as his own, and is about bringing suit for its recovery. Aswell might a man who rescued his neighbor's slave, or his _horse_, from drowning, or who extinguished the flames that would otherwisesoon have burnt down his neighbor's house, claim the _property_ as hisown. "

Rev. GEORGE BOURNE, of New York city, late Editor of the "ProtestantVindicator, " who was a preacher seven years in Virginia, gives thefollowing testimony. [39]

"Benjamin Lewis, who was an elder in the Presbyterian church, engageda carpenter to repair and enlarge his house. After some time hadelapsed, Kyle, the builder, was awakened very early in the morning bya most piteous moaning and shrieking. He arose, and following thesound, discovered a colored woman nearly naked, tied to a fence, whileLewis was lacerating her. Kyle instantly commanded the slave driver todesist. Lewis maintained his jurisdiction over his slaves, andthreatened Kyle that he would punish him for his interference. Finally Kyle obtained the release of the victim. 

"A second and a third scene of the same kind occurred, and on thethird occasion the altercation almost produced a battle between theelder and the carpenter. 

"Kyle immediately arranged his affairs, packed up his tools andprepared to depart. 'Where are you going?' demanded Lewis. 'I amgoing home;' said Kyle. 'Then I will pay you nothing for what youhave done, ' retorted the slave driver, 'unless you complete yourcontract. ' The carpenter went away with this edifying declaration, 'Iwill not stay here a day longer; for I expect the fire of God willcome down and burn you up altogether, and I do not choose to go tohell with you. ' Through hush-money and promises not to whip the womenany more, I believe Kyle returned and completed his engagement. 

"James Kyle of Harrisonburg, Virginia, frequently narrated thatcircumstance, and his son, the carpenter, confirmed it with all theminute particulars combined with his temporary residence on theShenandoah river. 

"John M'Cue of Augusta county, Virginia, a _Presbyterian preacher_, frequently on the Lord's day morning, tied up his slaves and whippedthem; and left them bound, while he went to the meeting house andpreached--and after his return home repeated his scourging. Thatfact, with others more heinous, was known to all persons in hiscongregation and around the vicinity; and so far from being censuredfor it, he and his brethren justified it as essential to preservetheir 'domestic institutions. '

"Mrs. Pence, of Rockingham county, Virginia, used to boast, --'I am thebest hand to whip a _wench_ in the whole county. ' She used to pinionthe girls to a post in the yard on the Lord's day morning, scourgethem, put on the '_negro plaster_, ' salt, pepper, and vinegar, leavethem tied, and walk away to church as demure as a nun, and afterservice repeat her flaying, if she felt the whim. I once expostulatedwith her upon her cruelly. 'Mrs. Pence, how can you whip your girlsso publicly and disturb your neighbors so on the Lord's day morning. 'Her answer was memorable. 'If I were to whip them on any other day Ishould lose a day's work; but by whipping them on Sunday, their backsget well enough by Monday morning. ' That woman, if alive, isdoubtless a member of the church now, as then. 

"Rev. Dr. Staughton, formerly of Philadelphia, often stated, that whenhe lived at Georgetown, S. C. He could tell the doings of one of theslaveholders of the Baptist church there by his prayers at the prayermeeting. 'If, ' said he, 'that man was upon good terms with hisslaves, his words were cold and heartless as frost; if he had beenwhipping a man, he would pray with life; but if he had left a womanwhom he had been flogging, tied to a post in his cellar, with adetermination to go back and torture her again, O! how he would pray!' The Rev. Cyrus P. Grosvenor of Massachusetts can confirm the abovestatement by Dr. Staughton. 

"William Wilson, a Presbyterian preacher of Augusta county, Virginia, had a young colored girl who was constitutionally unhealthy. As nomeans to amend her were availing, he sold her to a member of hiscongregation, and in the usual style of human flesh dealers, warrantedher 'sound, ' &c. The fraud was instantly discovered; but he would notrefund the amount. A suit was commenced, and was long continued, andfinally the plaintiff recovered the money out of which he had beenswindled by slave-trading with his own preacher. No Presbyterycensured him, although Judge Brown, the chancellor, severely condemnedthe imposition. 

"In the year 1811, Johab Graham, a preacher, lived with AlexanderNelson a Presbyterian elder, near Stanton, Virginia, and he informedme that a man had appeared before Nelson, who was a magistrate, andswore falsely against his slave, --that the elder ordered himthirty-nine lashes. All that wickedness was done as an excuse for hisdissipated owner to obtain money. A negro trader had offered him aconsiderable sum for the 'boy, ' and under the pretence of saving himfrom the punishment of the law, he was trafficked away from his womanand children to another state. The magistrate was aware of theperjury, and the whole abomination, but all the truth uttered by everycolored person in the southern states would not be of any availagainst the notorious false swearing of the greatest white villain whoever cursed the world. 'How, ' said Johab Graham, can I preachto-morrow?' I replied, 'Very well; go and thunder the doctrine ofretribution in their ears, Obadiah 15, till by the divine blessing youkill or cure them. My friends, John M. Nelson of Hillsborough, Ohio, Samuel Linn, and Robert Herron, and others of the same vicinity, could'make both the ears of every one who heareth them tingle' with theaccounts which they can give of slave-driving by professors ofreligion in the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia. 

"In 1815, near Frederick, in Maryland, a most barbarous planter waskilled in a fit of desperation, by four of his slaves _inself-defence_. It was declared by those slaves while in prison that, besides his atrocities among their female associates, he haddeliberately butchered a number of his slaves. The four men weremurdered by law, to appease the popular clamor. I saw them executed onthe twenty-eighth day of Jan'y, 1816. The facts I received from theRev. Patrick Davidson of Frederick, who constantly visited them duringtheir imprisonment--and who became an abolitionist in consequence ofthe disclosures which he heard from those men in the jail. The name ofthe planter is not distinctly recollected, but it can be known by ainspection of the record of the trial in the clerk's office, Frederick. 

"A minister of Virginia, still living, and whose name must not bementioned for fear of Nero Preston and his confederate-hangingmyrmidons, informed me of this fact in 1815, in his own house. 'Amember of my church, said he, lately whipped a colored youth to death. What shall I do?' I answered, 'I hope you do not mean to continue himin your church. ' That minister replied, 'How can we help it'We dare not call him to an account. We have no legal testimony. 'Their communion season was then approaching. I addressed hiswife, --'Mrs. ---- do you mean to sit at the Lord's table with thatmurderer?'--, 'Not I, ' she answered: 'I would as soon commune with thedevil himself. ' The slave killer was equally unnoticed by the civiland ecclesiastical authority. 

"John Baxter, a Presbyterian elder, the brother of that slaveholdingdoctor in divinity, George A. Baxter, held as a slave the wife of aBaptist colored preacher, familiarly called 'Uncle Jack. ' In a lateperiod of pregnancy he scourged her so that the lives of herself andher unborn child were considered in jeopardy. Uncle Jack was advisedto obtain the liberation of his wife. Baxter finally agreed, I think, to sell the woman and her children, three of them, I believe for sixhundred dollars, and an additional hundred if the unborn childsurvived a certain period after its birth. Uncle Jack was to pay onehundred dollars per annum for his wife and children for seven years, and Baxter held a sort of mortgage upon them for the payment. UncleJack showed me his back in furrows like a ploughed field. His masterused to whip up the flesh, then beat it downwards, and then apply the'negro plaster, ' salt, pepper, mustard, and vinegar, until all Jack'sback was almost as hard and unimpressible as the bones. There isslaveholding religion! A Presbyterian elder receiving from a Baptistpreacher seven hundred dollars for his wife and children. James Kyleand uncle Jack used to tell that story with great Christiansensibility; and uncle Jack would weep tears of anguish over hiswife's piteous tale, and tears of ecstasy at the same moment that hewas free, and that soon, by the grace of God, his wife and children, as he said, 'would be all free together. '"

Rev. JAMES NOURSE, a Presbyterian clergyman of Mifflia co. Penn. , whose father is, we believe, a slaveholder in Washington City, says, --

"The Rev. Mr. M----, now of the Huntingdon Presbytery, after an absenceof many months, was about visiting his old friends on what is commonlycalled the 'Eastern Shore. ' Late in the afternoon, on his journey, hecalled at the house of Rev. A. C. Of P----town, Md. With this brotherhe had been long acquainted. Just at that juncture Mr. C. Was aboutproceeding to whip a colored female, who was his slave. She was firmlytied to a post in FRONT of his dwelling-house. The arrival of aclerical visitor at such a time, occasioned a temporary delay in theexecution of Mr. C's purpose. But the delay was only temporary; fornot even the presence of such a guest could destroy the bloody design. The guest interceded with all the mildness yet earnestness of abrother and new visitor. But all in vain, 'the woman had been saucyand must be punished. ' The cowhide was accordingly produced, and the_Rev. Mr. C_. , a large and very stout man, applied it 'manfully' on'woman's' bare and 'shrinking flesh. ' I say bare, because you knowthat the slave women generally have but three or four inches of thearm near the shoulder covered, and the neck is left entirely exposed. As the cowhide moved back and forward, striking right and left, on thehead, neck and arms, at every few strokes the sympathizing guest wouldexclaim, 'O, brother C. Desist' But brother C. Pursued his brutalwork, till, after inflicting about sixty lashes, the woman was foundto be suffused with blood on the hinder part of her neck, and underher frock between the shoulders. Yet this Rev. Gentleman is wellesteemed in the church--was, three or four years since, moderator ofthe synod of Philadelphia, and yet walks abroad, feeling himselfunrebuked by law or gospel. Ah, sir does not this narration givefearful force to the query--_What has the church to do with slavery_?'Comment on the facts is unnecessary, yet allow me to conclude bysaying, that it is my opinion such occurrences _are not rare in thesouth_. 

J. N. "

REV. CHARLES STEWART RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, in a recent letter, speaking of his residence, for a period, in Kentucky, says--

"In a conversation with Mr. Robert Willis, he told me that his negrogirl had run away from him some time previous. He was convinced thatshe was lurking round, and he watched for her. He soon found the placeof her concealment, drew her from it, got a rope, and tied her handsacross each other, then threw the rope over a beam in the kitchen, andhoisted her up by the wrists; 'and, ' said he, 'I whipped her theretill I made the lint fly, I tell you. ' I asked him the meaning ofmaking 'the lint fly, ' and he replied, '_till the blood flew_. ' I spokeof the iniquity and cruelty of slavery, and of its immediateabandonment. He confessed it an evil, but said, 'I am a_colonizationist_--I believe in that scheme. ' Mr. Willis is a teacherof sacred music, and a member of the Presbyterian Church in Lexington, Kentucky. "

Mr. R. Speaking of the PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER and church where heresided, says:

"The minister and all the church members held slaves. Some weretreated kindly, others harshly. _There was not a shade of difference_between their slaves and those of their _infidel_ neighbors, either intheir physical, intellectual, or moral state: in some cases they would_suffer_ in the comparison. 

"In the kitchen of the minister of the church, a slave man was livingin open adultery with a slave woman, who was a member of the church, with an 'assured hope' of heaven--whilst the man's wife was on theminister's farm in Fayette county. The minister had to bring a cookdown from his farm to the place in which he was preaching. The choicewas between the wife of the man and this church member. He _left thewife_, and brought the church member to the adulterer's bed. 

"A METHODIST PREACHER last fall took a load of produce down the river. Amongst other _things_ he took down five slaves. He sold them at NewOrleans--he came up to Natchez--bought seven there--and took them downand sold them also. Last March he came up to preach the Gospel again. A number of persons on board the steamboat (the Tuscarora. ) who hadseen him in the slave-shambles in Natchez and New Orleans, and now, for the first time, found him to be a preacher, had much sport at theexpense of 'the fine old preacher who dealt in slaves. '

A non-professor of religion, in Campbell county, Ky. Sold a female andtwo children to a Methodist professor, with the proviso that theyshould not leave that region of country. The slave-driver came, andoffered $5 more for the woman than he had given, and he sold her. Sheis now in the lower country, and _her orphan babes are in Kentucky_. 

"I was much shocked once, to see a Presbyterian elder's wife call alittle slave to her to kiss her feet. At first the boy hesitated--butthe command being repeated in tones not to be misunderstood, beapproached timidly, knelt, and kissed her foot. "

Rev. W. T. ALLAN, of Chatham, Illinois, gives the following in a letterdated Feb. 4, 1839:

"Mr. Peter Vanarsdale, an elder of the Presbyterian church inCarrollton, formerly from Kentucky, told me, the other day, that aMrs. Burford, in the neighborhood of Harrodsburg, Kentucky, had_separated a woman and her children_ from their husband and father, taking them into another state. Mrs. B. Was a member of the_Presbyterian Church_. The bereaved husband and father was also aprofessor of religion. 

"Mr. V. Told me of a slave woman who had lost her son, separated fromher by public sale. In the anguish of her soul, she gave vent to herindignation freely, and perhaps harshly. Sometime after, she wished tobecome a member of the church. Before they received her, she had tomake humble confession for speaking as she had done. _Some of theelders that received her, and required the confession, were engaged isselling the son from his mother_. "

The following communication from the Rev. WILLIAM BARDWELL, ofSandwich, Massachusetts, has just been published in Zion's Watchman, New York city:

_Mr. Editor_:--The following fact was given me last evening, from thepen of a shipmaster, who has traded in several of the principal portsin the south. He is a man of unblemished character, a member of theM. E. Church in this place, and familiarly known in this town. Thefacts were communicated to me last fall in a letter to his wife, witha request that she would cause them to be published. I give verbatim, as they were written from the letter by brother Perry's own hand whileI was in his house. 

"A Methodist preacher, Wm. Whitby by name, who married in Bucksville, S. C. , and by marriage came into possession of some slaves, in July, 1838, was about moving to another station to preach, and wished, also, to move his family and slaves to Tennessee, much against the will ofthe slaves, one of which, to get clear from him, ran into the woodsafter swimming a brook. The parson took after him with his gun, which, however, got wet and missed fire, when he ran to a neighbor foranother gun, with the intention, as he said, of killing him: he didnot, however, catch or kill him; he chained another for fear of hisrunning away also. The above particulars were related to me by WilliamWhitby himself. THOMAS C. PERRY. March 3, 1839. "

"I find by examining the minutes of the S. C. Conference, that there issuch a preacher in the Conference, and brother Perry further stated tome that he was well acquainted with him, and if this statement waspublished, and if it could be known where he was since the lastConference, he wished a paper to be sent him containing the wholeaffair. He also stated to me, verbally, that the young man heattempted to shoot was about nineteen years of age, and had been shutup in a corn-house, and in the attempt of Mr. Whitby to chain him, hebroke down the door and made his escape as above mentioned, and thatMr. W. Was under the necessity of hiring him out for one year, withthe risk of his employer's getting him. Brother Perry conversed withone of the slaves, who was so old that he thought it not profitable toremove so far, and had been sold; _he_ informed him of all the abovecircumstances, and said, with tears, that he thought he had been sofaithful as to be entitled to liberty, but instead of making him free, he had sold him to another master, besides parting one husband andwife from those ties rendered a thousand times dearer by an infantchild which was torn for ever from the husband. 

WILLIAM BARDWELL. _Sandwich, Mass. _, March 4, 1839. "

Mr. WILLIAM POE, till recently a slaveholder in Virginia, now an elderin the Presbyterian Church at Delhi, Ohio, gives the followingtestimony:--

"An elder in the Presbyterian Church in Lynchburg had a most faithfulservant, whom he flogged severely and sent him to prison, and had himconfined as a felon a number of days, for being _saucy_. Another elderof the same church, an auctioneer, habitually sold slaves at hisstand--very frequently _parted families_--would often go into thecountry to sell slaves on execution and otherwise; when remonstratedwith, he justified himself, saying, 'it was his business;' the churchalso justified him on the same ground. 

"A Doctor Duval, of Lynchburg, Va. Got offended with a very faithful, worthy servant, and immediately sold him to a negro trader, to betaken to New Orleans; Duval still keeping the wife of the man as hisslave. This Duval was a professor of religion. "

Mr. SAMUEL HALL, a teacher in Marietta College, Ohio, says, in arecent letter:--

"A student in Marietta College, from Mississippi, a professor ofreligion, and in every way worthy of entire confidence, made to me thefollowing statement. [If his name were published it would probablycost him his life. ]

"When I was in the family of the Rev. James Martin, of Louisville, Winston county, Mississippi, in the spring of 1838, Mrs. Martin becameoffended at a female slave, because she did not move faster. Shecommanded her to do so; the girl quickened her pace; again she wasordered to move faster, or, Mrs. M. Declared, she would break thebroomstick over her head. Again the slave quickened her pace; but notcoming up to the _maximum_ desired by Mrs. M. The latter declared shewould _see_ whether she (the slave) could move or not: and, going intoanother apartment, she brought in a raw hide, awaiting the return ofher husband for its application. In this instance I know not what wasthe final result, but I have heard the sound of the raw-hide in atleast _two_ other instances, applied by this same reverend gentlemanto the back of his _female_ servant. "

Mr. Hall adds--"The name of my informant must be suppressed, as" hesays, "there are those who would cut my throat in a moment, if theinformation I give were to be coupled with my name. " Suffice it to saythat he is a professor of religion, a native of Virginia, and astudent of Marietta College, whose character will bear the strictestscrutiny. He says:--

"In 1838, at Charlestown, Va. I conversed with several members of thechurch under the care of the Rev. Mr. Brown, of the same place. Takingoccasion to speak of slavery, and of the sin of slaveholding, to oneof them who was a lady, she replied, "I am a slaveholder, and I_glory_ in it. " I had a conversation, a few days after, with thepastor himself, concerning the state of religion in his church, andwho were the most exemplary members in it. The pastor mentionedseveral of those who were of that description; the _first_ of whom, however, was the identical lady who _gloried_ in being a slaveholder!That church numbers nearly two hundred members. 

"Another lady, who was considered as devoted a Christian as any in thesame church, but who was in poor health, was accustomed to flog someof her female domestics with a raw-hide till she was exhausted, andthen go and lie down till her strength was recruited, rising again andresuming the flagellation. This she considered as not at allderogatory to her Christian character. "

Mr. JOEL S. BINGHAM, of Cornwall, Vermont, lately a student inMiddlebury College, and a member of the Congregational Church, spent afew weeks in Kentucky, in the summer of 1838. He relates the followingoccurrence which took place in the neighborhood where he resided, andwas a matter of perfect notoriety in the vicinity. 

"Rev. Mr. Lewis, a Baptist minister in the vicinity of Frankfort, Ky. Had a slave that ran away, but was retaken and brought back to hismaster, who threatened him with punishment for making an attempt toescape. Though terrified the slave immediately attempted to run awayagain. Mr. L. Commanded him to stop, but he did not obey. _Mr. L. Thentook a gun, loaded with small shot and fired at the slave, who fell_;but was not killed, and afterward recovered. Mr. L. Did not probablyintend to kill the slave, as it was his legs which were aimed at andreceived the contents of the gun. The master asserted that he wasdriven to this necessity to maintain his authority. This took placeabout the first of July, 1838. "

The following is given upon the authority of Rev. ORANGE SCOTT, ofLowell, Mass. For many years a presiding elder in the MethodistEpiscopal Church. 

"Rev. Joseph Hough, a Baptist minister, formerly of Springfield, Mass. Now of Plainfield, N. H. While traveling in the south, a few years ago, put up one night with a Methodist family, and spent the Sabbath withthem. While there, one of the female slaves did something whichdispleased her mistress. She took a chisel and mallet, and verydeliberately cut off one of her toes!"

SLAVE BREEDING AN INDEX OF PUBLIC 'OPINION' AMONG THE 'HIGHEST CLASSOF SOCIETY' IN VIRGINIA AND OTHER NORTHERN SLAVE STATES. 

But we shall be told, that 'slave-breeders' are regarded withcontempt, and the business of slave breeding is looked upon asdespicable; and the hot disclaimer of Mr. Stevenson, our MinisterPlenipotentiary at the Court of St. James, in reply to Mr. O'Connell, who had intimated that he might be a 'slave breeder, ' will doubtlessbe quoted. [40] In reply, we need not say what every body knows, thatif Mr. Stevenson is not a 'slave breeder, ' he is a solitary exceptionamong the large slaveholders of Virginia. What! Virginia slaveholdersnot 'slave-breeders?' the pretence is ridiculous and contemptible; itis meanness, hypocrisy, and falsehood, as is abundantly proved by thetestimony which follows:--

Mr. GHOLSON, of Virginia, in his speech in the Legislature of thatstate, Jan. 18, 1832, (see Richmond Whig, ) says:--

"It has always (perhaps erroneously) been considered by steady andold-fashioned people, that the owner of land had a reasonable right toits annual profits; the owner of orchards, to their annual fruits; theowner of _brood mares_, to their product; and the owner of _femaleslaves, to their increase_. We have not the fine-spun intelligence, nor legal acumen, to discover the technical distinctions drawn bygentlemen. The legal maxim of '_Partus sequitur ventrem_' is coevalwith the existence of the rights of property itself, and is founded inwisdom and justice. It is on the justice and inviolability of thismaxim that the master foregoes the service of the female slave; hasher nursed and attended during the period of her gestation, and raisesthe helpless and infant offspring. The value of the property justifiesthe expense; and I do not hesitate to say, that in its _increaseconsists much of our wealth_. "

Hon. THOMAS MANN RANDOLPH, of Virginia. Formerly Governor of thatstate, in his speech before the legislature in 1832, while speaking ofthe number of slaves annually sold from Virginia to the more southernslave states, said:--

"The exportation has _averaged_ EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED for thelast twenty years. Forty years ago, the whites exceeded the colored25, 000, the colored now exceed the whites 81, 000; and these resultstoo during an exportation of near 260, 000 slaves since the year 1790, now perhaps the fruitful progenitors of half a million in otherstates. It is a practice and an increasing practice, in parts ofVirginia, to rear slaves for market. How can an honorable mind, apatriot and a lover of his country, bear to see this ancient dominionconverted into one grand menagerie, where men are to be reared formarket, like oxen for the shambles. "

Professor DEW, now President of the University of William and Mary, Virginia, in his Review of the Debate in the Virginia Legislature, 1831-2, says, p 49. 

"From all the information we can obtain, we have no hesitation insaying that upwards of six thousand [slaves] are yearly exported [fromVirginia] to other states. ' Again, p. 61: 'The 6000 slaves whichVirginia annually sends off to the south, are a source of wealth toVirginia'--Again, p. 120: 'A full equivalent being thus left in theplace of the slave, this emigration becomes an advantage to the state, and does not check the black population as much as, at first view, wemight imagine--because it furnishes every inducement to the master toattend to the negroes, to ENCOURAGE BREEDING, and to cause the_greatest number possible to be raised. _ &c. "

_"Virginia is, in fact, a negro-raising state for other states. "_

Extract from the speech of MR. FAULKNER, in the Va. House ofDelegates, 1832. [See Richmond Whig. ]

"But he [Mr. Gholson, ] has labored to show that the Abolition ofSlavery, were it practicable, would be _impolitic_, because as thedrift of this portion of his argument runs, your slaves constitute theentire wealth of the state, all the _productive capacity_ Virginiapossesses. And, sir, as things are, _I believe he is correct_. Hesays, and in this he is sustained by the gentleman from Halifax, Mr. Bruce, that the slaves constitute the entire available wealth atpresent, of Eastern Virginia. Is it true that for 200 years the onlyincrease in the wealth and resources of Virginia, has been a remnantof the natural _increase_ of this miserable race?--Can it be, that onthis _increase_, she places her solo dependence? I had alwaysunderstood that indolence and extravagance were the necessaryconcomitants of slavery; but, until I heard these declarations, I hadnot fully conceived the horrible extent of this evil. These gentlemenstate the fact, which the history and _present aspect of theCommowealth but too well sustain_. The gentlemen's facts and argumentin support of his plea of impolicy, to me, seem rather unhappy. To me, such a state of things would itself be conclusive at least, thatsomething, even as a measure of policy, should be done. What, sir, have you lived for two hundred years, without personal effort orproductive industry, in extravagance and indolence, sustained alone_by the return from sales of the increase of slaves_, and retainingmerely such a number as your now impoverished lands can sustain, ASSTOCK, _depending, too, upon a most uncertain market_? When thatmarket is closed, as in the nature of things it must be, what thenwill become of this gentleman's hundred millions worth of slaves, ANDTHE ANNUAL PRODUCT?"

In the debates in the Virginia Convention, in 1829, Judge Upshersaid--"The value of slaves as an article of property [and it is inthat view only that they are legitimate subjects of taxation] _dependsmuch on the state of the market abroad_. In this view, it is the valueof land _abroad_, and not of land here, which furnishes the ratio. Itis well known to us all, that nothing is more fluctuating than thevalue of slaves. A late law of Louisiana reduced their value 25 percent, in two hours after its passage was known. IF IT SHOULD BE OURLOT, AS I TRUST IT WILL BE, TO ACQUIRE THE COUNTRY OF TEXAS, THEIRPRICE WILL RISE AGAIN. "--p. 77. 

Mr. Goode, Of Virginia, in his speech before the Virginia Legislature, in Jan. 1832, [See Richmond Whig, of that date, ] said:--

"The superior usefulness of the slaves in the south, will constitutean _effectual demand_, which will remove them from our limits. Weshall send them from our state, because _it will be our interest to doso_. Our planters are already becoming farmers. Many who grew tobaccoas their only staple, have already introduced, and commingled thewheat crop. They are already semi-farmers; and in the natural courseof events, they must become more and more so. --As the greater quantityof rich western lands are appropriated to the production of the stapleof our planters, that staple will become less profitable. --We shallgradually divert our lands from its production, until we shall becomeactual farmers. --Then will the necessity for slave labor diminish;then will the effectual demand diminish, and then will the quantity ofslaves diminish, until they shall be adapted to the effectual demand. 

"But gentlemen are alarmed _lest the markets of other states be closedagainst the introduction of our slaves_. Sir, the demand for slavelabor MUST INCREASE through the South and West. It has been heretoforelimited by the want of capital; but when emigrants shall be relievedfrom their embarrassments, contracted by the purchase of their lands, the annual profits of their estates, will constitute an accumulatingcapital, which they will _seek to invest in labor_. That the demandfor labor must increase in proportion to the increase of capital, isone of the demonstrations of political economists; and I confess, thatfor the removal of slavery from Virginia, I look to the efficacy ofthat principle; together with the circumstance that our southernbrethren are constrained to continue planters, by their position, soiland climate. "

The following is from Niles' Weekly Register, published at Baltimore, Md. Vol. 35, p. 4. 

_"Dealing in slaves has become a large business_; establishments aremade in several places in Maryland and Virginia, at which they aresold like cattle; these places of deposit are strongly built, and wellsupplied with thumb-screws and gags, and ornamented with cow-skins andother whips oftentimes bloody. "

R. S. FINLEY, Esq. , late General Agent of the American ColonizationSociety, at a meeting in New York, 27th Feb. 1833, said:

"In Virginia and other grain-growing slave states, the blacks do notsupport themselves, and the only profit their masters derive from themis, repulsive as the idea may justly seem, in breeding them, likeother live stock for the more southern states. "

Rev. Dr. GRAHAM, of Fayetteville, N. C. At a Colonization Meeting, held in that place in the fall of 1837 said:

"He had resided for 15 years in one of the largest slaveholdingcounties in the state, had long and anxiously considered the subject, and still it was dark. There were nearly 7000 slaves offered in NewOrleans market last winter. From Virginia alone 6000 were annuallysent to the south; and from Virginia and N. C. There had gone, in thesame direction, in the last twenty years, 300, 000 slaves. While not4000 had gone to Africa. What it portended, he could not predict, buthe felt deeply, that _we must awake in these states and consider thesubject_. "

Hon. PHILIP DODDRIDGE, of Virginia, in his speech in the VirginiaConvention, in 1829, [Debates p. 89. ] said:--

"The acquisition of Texas will greatly _enhance the value of theproperty_, in question, [Virginia slaves. ]"

Hon C. F. MERCER, in a speech before the same Convention, in 1829, says:

"The tables of the natural growth of the slave population demonstrate, when compared with the increase of its numbers in the commonwealth fortwenty years past, that an annual revenue of not less than a millionand a half of dollars is derived from the exportation of a part ofthis population. " (Debates, p. 199. )

Hon. HENRY CLAY, of Ky. , in his speech before the ColonizationSociety, in 1829, says:

"It is believed that nowhere in the farming portion of the UnitedStates, would slave labor be generally employed, if the proprietorwere not tempted to RAISE SLAVES BY THE HIGH PRICE OF THE SOUTHERNMARKET WHICH KEEPS IT UP IN HIS OWN. "

The New Orleans Courier, Feb. 15, 1839, speaking of the prohibition ofthe African Slave-trade, while the internal slave-trade is plied, says:

"The United States law may, and probably does, put MILLIONS _into thepockets of the people living between the Roanoke, and Mason andDixon's line_; still we think it would require some casuistry to showthat _the present slave-trade from that quarter_ is a whit better thanthe one from Africa. One thing is certain--that its results are moremenacing to the tranquillity of the people in this quarter, as therecan be no comparison between the ability and inclination to domischief, possessed by the Virginia negro, and that of the rude andignorant African. "

That the New Orleans Editor does not exaggerate in saying that theinternal slave-trade puts 'millions' into the pockets of theslaveholders in Maryland and Virginia, is very clear from thefollowing statement, made by the editor of the Virginia Times, aninfluential political paper, published at Wheeling, Virginia. Of theexact date of the paper we are not quite certain, it was, however, sometime in 1836, probably near the middle of the year--the file willshow. The editor says:--

"We have heard intelligent men estimate the number of slaves exportedfrom Virginia within the last twelve months, at 120, 000--each slaveaveraging at least $600, making an aggregate at $72, 000, 000. Of thenumber of slaves exported, not more than _one-third_ have been sold, (the others having been carried by their owners, who have removed, )_which would leave in the state the_ SUM OF $24, 000, 000 ARISING FROMTHE SALE OF SLAVES. "

According to this estimate about FORTY THOUSAND SLAVES WERE SOLD OUTOF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA IN A SINGLE YEAR, and the 'slave-breeders'who hold them, put into their pockets TWENTY-FOUR MILLION OF DOLLARS, the price of the 'souls of men. '

The New York Journal of Commerce of Oct. 12, 1835, contained a letterfrom a Virginian, whom the editor calls 'a very good and sensibleman, ' asserting that TWENTY THOUSAND SLAVES had been driven to thesouth from Virginia _during that year_, nearly one-fourth of which wasthen remaining. 

The Maryville (Tenn. ) Intelligencer, some time in the early part of1836, (we have not the date, ) says, in an article reviewing acommunication of Rev. J. W. Douglass, of Fayetteville, North Carolina:"Sixty thousand slaves passed through a little western town for thesouthern market, during the year 1835. "

The Natchez (Miss. ) Courier, says "that the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas, imported TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTYTHOUSAND SLAVES from the more northern slave states in the year 1836. "

The Baltimore American gives the following from a Mississippi paper, of 1837:

"The report made by the committee of the citizens Of Mobile, appointedat their meeting held on the 1st instant, on the subject of theexisting pecuniary pressure, states, among other things: that so largehas been the return of slave labor, that purchases by Alabama of thatspecies of property from other states since 1833, have amounted toabout TEN MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY. "

FURTHER the _inhumanity_ of a slaveholding 'public opinion' towardslaves, follows legitimately from the downright ruffianism of theslaveholding _spirit_ in the 'highest class of society, ' When roused, it tramples upon all the proprieties and courtesies, and even commondecencies of life, and is held in check by none of thoseconsiderations of time, and place, and relations of station, character, law, and national honor, which are usually sufficient, evenin the absence of conscientious principles, to restrain other men fromoutrages. Our National Legislature is a fit illustration of this. Slaveholders have converted the Congress of the United States into avery bear garden. Within the last three years some of the mostprominent slaveholding members of the House, and among them the latespeaker, have struck and kicked, and throttled, and seized each otherby the hair, and with their fists pummelled each other's faces, on thefloor of Congress. We need not publish an account of what every bodyknows, that during the session of the last Congress, Mr. Wise ofVirginia and Mr. Bynum of North Carolina, after having called eachother "liars, villains" and "damned rascals" sprung from their seats"both sufficiently armed for any desperate purpose, " cursing eachother as they rushed together, and would doubtless have butchered eachother on the floor of Congress, if both had not been seized and heldby their friends. 

The New York Gazette relates the following which occurred at the closeof the session of 1838. 

"The House could not adjourn without another brutal and bloody row. Itoccurred on Sunday morning immediately at the moment of adjournment, between Messrs. Campbell and Maury, both of Tennessee. He took offenceat some remarks made to him by his colleague, Mr. Campbell, and thefight followed. "

The Huntsville (Ala. ) Democrat of June 16, 1838, gives the particularswhich follow:

"Mr. Maury is said to be badly hurt. He was near losing his life bybeing knocked through the window; but his adversary, it is said, savedhim by clutching the hair of his head with his left hand, while hestruck him with his right. "

The same number of the Huntsville Democrat, contains the particularsof a fist-fight on the floor of the House of Representatives, betweenMr. Bell, the late Speaker, and his colleague Mr. Turney of Tennessee. The following is an extract:

"Mr. Turney concluded his remarks in reply to Mr. Bell, in the courseof which he commented upon that gentleman's course at differentperiods of his political career with great severity. 

"He did not think his colleague [Mr. Turney, ] was actuated by privatemalice, but was the willing voluntary instrument of others, the toolof tools. 

Mr. Turney. It is false! it is false!

Mr. Stanley called Mr. TURNEY to order. 

At the same moment both gentlemen were perceived in personal conflict, and blows with the fist were aimed by each at the other. Severalmembers interfered, and suppressed the personal violence; otherscalled order, order, and some called for the interference of theSpeaker. 

The Speaker hastily took the chair, and insisted upon order; but bothgentlemen continued struggling, and endeavoring, notwithstanding theconstraint of their friends, to strike each other. "

The correspondent of the New York Gazette gives the following, whichtook place about the time of the preceding affrays:

"The House was much agitated last night, by the passage between Mr. Biddle, of Pittsburgh, and Mr. Downing, of Florida. Mr. D. Exclaimed"do you impute falsehood to me!" at the same time catching up somemissile and making a demonstration to advance upon Mr. Biddle. Mr. Biddle repeated his accusation, and meanwhile, Mr. Downing wasarrested by many members. "

The last three fights all occurred, if we mistake not, in the shortspace of one month. The fisticuffs between Messrs. Bynum and Wiseoccurred at the previous session of Congress. At the same sessionMessrs. Peyton of Tenn. And Wise of Virginia, went armed with pistolsand dirks to the meeting of a committee of Congress, and threatened toshoot a witness while giving his testimony. 

We begin with the first on the list. Who are Messrs. Wise and Bynum?Both slaveholders. Who are Messrs. Campbell and Maury? Bothslaveholders. Who are Messrs. Bell and Turney? Both slaveholders. Whois Mr. Downing, who seized a weapon and rushed upon Mr. Biddle? Aslaveholder. Who is Mr. Peyton who drew his pistol on a witness beforea committee of Congress? A slaveholder of course. All these bullieswere slaveholders, and they magnified their office, and slaveholdingwas justified of her children. We might fill a volume with similarchronicles of slaveholding brutality. But time would fail us. Sufficeit to say, that since the organization of the government, a majorityof the most distinguished men in the slaveholding states have gloriedin strutting over the stage in the character of murderers. Look at themen whom the people delight to honor. President Jackson, SenatorBenton, the late Gen. Coffee, --it is but a few years since theseslaveholders shot at, and stabbed, and stamped upon each other in atavern broil. General Jackson had previously killed Mr. Dickenson. Senator Clay of Kentucky has immortalized himself by shooting at anear relative of Chief Justice Marshall, and being wounded by him; andnot long after by shooting at John Randolph of Virginia. GovernorM'Duffie of South Carolina has signalized himself also, both byshooting and being shot, --so has Governor Poindexter, and GovernorRowan, and Judge M'Kinley of the U. S. Supreme Court, late senator inCongress from Alabama, --but we desist; a full catalogue would fillpages. We will only add, that a few months since, in the city ofLondon, Governor Hamilton, of South Carolina, went armed with pistols, to the lodgings of Daniel O'Connell, 'to stop his wind' in thebullying slang of his own published boast. During the last session ofCongress Messrs. Dromgoole and Wise[41] of Virginia, W. Cost Johnsonand Jenifer of Maryland, Pickens and Campbell of South Carolina, andwe know not how many more slaveholding members of Congress have beenengaged, either as principals or seconds, in that species of murderdignified with the name of duelling. But enough; we are heart-sick. What meaneth all this? Are slaveholders worse than other men? No! butarbitrary power has wrought in them its mystery of iniquity, andpoisoned their better nature with its infuriating sorcery. 

Their savage ferocity toward each other when their passions are up, isthe natural result of their habit of daily plundering and oppressingthe slave. 

The North Carolina Standard of August 30, 1837, contains the followingillustration of this ferocity exhibited by two southern lawyers insettling the preliminaries of a duel. 

"The following conditions were proposed by Alexander K. McClung, ofRaymond, in the State of Mississippi, to H. C. Stewart, as the laws togovern a duel they were to fight near Vicksburg:

"Article 1st. The parties shall meet opposite Vicksburg, in the Stateof Louisiana, on Thursday the 29th inst. Precisely at 4 o'clock, P. M. Agreed to. 

"2d. The weapons to be used by each shall weigh one pound two and ahalf ounces, measuring sixteen inches and a half in length, includingthe handle, and one inch and three-eighths in breadth. Agreed to. 

"3d. Both knives shall be sharp on one edge, and on the back shall besharp only one inch at the point. Agreed to. 

"4th. Each party shall stand at the distance of eight feet from theother, until the word is given. Agreed to. 

"5th. The second of each party shall throw up, with a silver dollar, onthe ground, for the word, and two best out of three shall win theword. Agreed to. 

"6th. After the word is given, either party may take what advantage hecan with his knife, but on throwing his knife at the other, shall beshot down by the second of his opponent. Agreed to. 

"7th. Each party shall be stripped entirely naked, except one pair oflinen pantaloons; one pair of socks, and boots or pumps as the partyplease. Acceded to. 

"8th. The wrist of the left arm of each party shall be tied tight tohis left thigh, and a strong cord shall be fastened around his leftarm at the elbow, and then around his body. Rejected. 

"9th. After the word is given, each party shall be allowed to advanceor recede as he pleases, over the space of twenty acres of ground, until death ensues to one of the parties. Agreed to--the parties to beplaced in the centre of the space. 

"10th. The word shall be given by the winner of the same, in thefollowing manner, viz: "Gentlemen are you ready?" Each party shallthen answer, "I am!" The second giving the word shall then distinctlycommand--_strike_. Agreed to. 

"If either party shall violate these rules, upon being notified by thesecond of either party, he may be liable to be shot down instantly. Asestablished usage points out the duty of both parties, thereforenotification is considered unnecessary. "

The FAVORITE AMUSEMENTS of slaveholders, like the gladiatorial showsof Rome and the Bull Fights of Spain, reveal a public feelinginsensible to suffering, and a depth of brutality in the highestdegree revolting to every truly noble mind. One of their most commonamusements is cock fighting. Mains of cocks, with twenty, thirty, andfifty cocks on each side, are fought for hundreds of dollars aside. The fowls are armed with steel spurs or '_gafts_, ' about two incheslong. These 'gafts' are fastened upon the legs by sawing off the_natural_ 'spur, ' leaving only enough of it to answer the purpose of a_stock_ for the tube of the "gafts, " which are so sharp that at astroke the fowls thrust them through each other's necks and heads, andtear each other's bodies till one or both dies, then two others arebrought forward for the amusement of the multitude assembled, and thisbarbarous pastime is often kept up for days in succession, hundredsand thousands gathering from a distance to witness it. The followingadvertisements from the Raleigh Register, June 18, 1838, edited byMessrs. Gales and Son, the father and brother of Mr. Gales, editor ofthe National Intelligencer, and late Mayor of Washington City, revealthe public sentiment of North Carolina. 

"CHATHAM AGAINST NASH, or any other county in the State. I amauthorized to take a bet of any amount that may be offered, to FIGHT AMAIN OF COCKS, at any place that may be agreed upon by the parties--tobe fought the ensuing spring. GIDEON ALSTON. Chatham county, June 7, 1838. "

Two weeks after, this challenge was answered as follows:

"TO MR. GIDEON ALSTON, of Chatham county, N. C. 

"SIR: In looking over the North Carolina Standard of the 20th inst. Idiscover a challenge over your signature, headed 'Chatham againstNash, ' in which you state: that you are 'authorized to take a bet ofany amount that may be offered, to fight a main of cocks, at any placethat may be agreed upon by the parties, to be fought the ensuingspring' which challenge I ACCEPT: and do propose to meet you atRolesville, in Wake county, N. C. On the last Wednesday in May next, the parties to show thirty-one cocks each--fight four days, and begoverned by the rules as laid down in Turner's Cock Laws--which, ifyou think proper to accede to, you will signify through this or anyother medium you may select, and then I will name the sum for which weshall fight, as that privilege was surrendered by you in yourchallenge. 

"I am, sir, very respectfully, &c. NICHOLAS W. ARRINGTON, nearHilliardston, Nash co. North Carolina June 22nd, 1838"

The following advertisement in the Richmond Whig, of July 12, 1837, exhibits the public sentiment of Virginia. 

"MAIN OF COCKS. --A large 'MAIN OF COCKS, ' 21 a side, for $25 'thefight', and $500 'the odd, ' will be fought between the County ofDinwiddie on one part, and the Counties of Hanover and Henrico on theother. 

"The 'regular' fighting will be continued _three days_, and from thelarge number of 'game uns' on both sides and in the adjacent country, will be prolonged no doubt a _fourth_. To prevent confusion andpromote 'sport, ' the Pit will be enclosed and furnished with _seats_;so that those having a curiosity to witness a species of diversionoriginating in a better day (for they had no rag money then, ) can have_that_ very _natural_ feeling gratified. 

"The Petersburg Constellation is requested to copy. "

_Horse-racing_ too, as every body knows, is a favorite amusement ofslaveholders. Every slave state has its race course, and in the olderstates almost every county has one on a small scale. There is hardly aday in the year, the weather permitting, in which crowds do notassemble at the south to witness this barbarous sport. Horriblecruelty is absolutely inseparable from it. Hardly a race occurs of anycelebrity in which some one of the coursers is not lamed, 'brokendown, ' or in some way seriously injured, often for life, and notunfrequently they are killed by the rupture of some vital part in thestruggle. When the heats are closely contested, the blood of thetortured animal drips from the lash and flies at every leap from thestroke of the rowel. From the breaking of girths and other accidents, their riders (mostly slaves) are often thrown and maimed or killed. Yet these amusements are attended by thousands in every part of theslave states. The wealth and fashion, the gentlemen and _ladies_ ofthe 'highest circles' at the south, throng the race course. 

That those who can fasten steel spurs upon the legs of dunghill fowls, and goad the poor birds to worry and tear each other to death--andthose who can crowd by thousands to _witness_ such barbarity--thatthose who can throng the race-course and with keen relish witness thehot pantings of the life-struggle, the lacerations and fitful spasmsof the muscles, swelling through the crimsoned foam, as the torturedsteeds rush in blood-welterings to the goal--that such, should lookupon the sufferings of their slaves with, indifference is certainlysmall wonder. 

Perhaps we shall be told that there are thronged race-courses at theNorth. True, there are a few, and they are thronged chiefly by_Southerners_, and 'Northern men with _Southern_ principles, ' andsupported mainly by the patronage of slaveholders who summer at theNorth. Cock-fighting and horse-racing are "_Southern_ institutions. "The idleness, contempt of labor, dissipation, sensuality, brutality, cruelty, and meanness, engendered by the habit of making men and womenwork without pay, and flogging them if they demur at it, constitutes acongenial soil out of which cock-fighting and horse-racing are thespontaneous growth. 

Again, --The kind treatment of the slaves is often argued from theliberal education and enlarged views of slaveholders. The facts andreasonings of the preceding pages have shown, that 'liberaleducation, ' despotic habits and ungoverned passions work together withslight friction. And every day's observation shows that the former isoften a stimulant to the latter. 

But the notion so common at the north that the majority of theslaveholders are persons of education, is entirely erroneous. A _veryfew_ slaveholders in each of the slave states have been men of _ripe_education, to whom our national literature is much indebted. A largernumber may be called _well_ educated--these reside mostly in thecities and large villages, but a majority of the slaveholders areignorant men, thousands of them notoriously so, _mere boors_ unable towrite their names or to read the alphabet. 

No one of the slave states has probably so much general education asVirginia. It is the oldest of them--has furnished one half of thepresidents of the United States--has expended more upon her universitythan any state in the Union has done during the same time upon itscolleges--sent to Europe nearly twenty years since for her mostlearned professors, and in fine, has far surpassed every other slavestate in her efforts to disseminate education among her citizens, andyet, the Governor of Virginia in his message to the legislature (Jan. 7, 1839) says, that of four thousand six hundred and fourteen adultmales in that state, who applied to the county clerks for marriagelicenses in the year 1837, 'ONE THOUSAND AND FORTY SEVEN _were unableto write their names_. ' The governor adds, 'These statements, it willbe remembered, are confined to one sex: the education of females it isto be feared, is in a condition of _much greater neglect_. '

The Editor of the Virginia Times, published at Wheeling, in his paperof Jan. 23, 1839, says, --

"We have every reason to suppose that one-fourth of the people of thestate cannot write their names, and they have not, of course, anyother species of education. "

Kentucky is the child of Virginia; her first settlers were some of themost distinguished citizens of the mother state; in the generaldiffusion of intelligence amongst her citizens Kentucky is probably inadvance of all the slave states except Virginia and South Carolina;and yet Governor Clark, in his last message to the KentuckyLegislature, (Dec 5, 1838) makes the following declaration: "From thecomputation of those most familiar with the subject, it appears thatAT LEAST ONE THIRD OF THE ADULT POPULATION OF THE STATE ARE UNABLE TOWRITE THEIR NAMES. "

The following advertisement in the "Milledgeville (Geo. ) Journal, "Dec. 26, 1837, is another specimen from one of the 'old thirteen. '

"NOTICE. --I, Pleasant Webb, of the State of Georgia, Oglethorpecounty, being an _illiterate man, and not able to write my own name_, and whereas it hath been represented to me that there is a certainpromissory note or notes out against me that I know nothing of, andfurther that some man in this State holds a bill of sale for _acertain negro woman named Ailsey and her increase, a part of which isnow in my possession_, which I also know nothing of. Now do herebycertify and declare, that I have no knowledge whatsoever of any suchpapers existing in my name as above stated and I hereby require all orany person or persons whatsoever holding or pretending to hold anysuch papers, to produce them to me within thirty days from the datehereof, shewing their authority for holding the same, or they will beconsidered fictitious and fraudulently obtained or raised, by someperson or persons for base purposes after my death. 

"Given under my hand this 2nd day of December, 1837. PLEASANT WEBB. His mark X. "

FINALLY, THAT SLAVES MUST HABITUALLY SUFFER GREAT CRUELTIES, FOLLOWSINEVITABLY FROM THE BRUTAL OUTRAGES WHICH THEIR MASTERS INFLICT ONEACH OTHER. 

Slaveholders, exercising from childhood irresponsible power over humanbeings, and in the language of President Jefferson, "giving loose tothe worst of passions" in the treatment of their slaves, become in agreat measure unfitted for self control in their intercourse with eachother. Tempers accustomed to riot with loose reins, spurn restraints, and passions inflamed by indulgence, take fire on the least friction. We repeat it, the state of society in the slave states, the duels, anddaily deadly affrays of slaveholders with each other--the fact thatthe most deliberate and cold-blooded murders are committed at noonday, in the presence of thousands, and the perpetrators eulogized bythe community as "honorable men, " reveals such a prostration of law, as gives impunity to crime--a state of society, an omnipresent publicsentiment reckless of human life, taking bloody vengeance on the spotfor every imaginary affront, glorying in such assassinations as theonly true honor and chivalry, successfully defying the civil arm, andlaughing its impotency to scorn. 

When such things are done in the green tree, what will be done in thedry? When slaveholders are in the habit of caning, stabbing, andshooting _each other_ at every supposed insult, the unspeakableenormities perpetrated by such men, with such passions, upon theirdefenceless slaves, _must_ be beyond computation. To furnish thereader with an illustration of slaveholding civilization and morality, as exhibited in the unbridled fury, rage, malignant hate, jealousy, diabolical revenge, and all those infernal passions that shoot up rankin the hot-bed of arbitrary power, we will insert here a mass oftestimony, detailing a large number of affrays, lynchings, assassinations, &c. , &c. , which have taken place in various parts ofthe slave states within a brief period--and to leave no room for cavilon the subject, these extracts will be made exclusively fromnewspapers published in the slave states, and generally in theimmediate vicinity of the tragedies described. They will not be madesecond hand from _northern_ papers, but from the original _southern_papers, which now lie on our table. 

Before proceeding to furnish details of certain classes of crimes inthe slave states, we advertise the reader--1st. That _we shall not_include in the list those crimes which are ordinarily committed in thefree, as well as in the slave states. 2d. We shall not include any ofthe crimes perpetrated by whites upon slaves and free colored persons, who constitute a majority of the population in Mississippi andLouisiana, a large majority in South Carolina, and, on an average, two-fifths in the other slave states. 3d. Fist fights, canings, beatings, biting off noses and ears, gougings, knockings down, &c. , unless they result in _death_, will not be included in the list, norwill _ordinary_ murders, unless connected with circumstances thatserve as a special index of public sentiment. 4th. Neither will_ordinary, formal duels_ be included, except in such cases as justspecified. 5th. The only crimes which, as the general rule, will bespecified, will be deadly affrays with bowie knives, dirks, pistols. Rifles, guns, or other death weapons, and _lynchings_. 6th. The crimesenumerated will, for the most part, be only those perpetrated_openly_, without _attempt at concealment_. 7th. We shall not attemptto give a full list of the affrays, &c. , that took place in therespective states during the period selected, as the only files ofsouthern papers to which we have access are very imperfect. 

The reader will perceive, from these preliminaries, that only a_small_ proportion of the crimes actually perpetrated in therespective slave states during the period selected, will be enteredupon this list. He will also perceive, that the crimes which will bepresented are of a class rarely perpetrated in the free states; and ifperpetrated there at all, they are, with scarcely an exception, committed either by slaveholders, temporarily resident in them, or bypersons whose passions have been inflamed by the poison of a southerncontact--whose habits and characters have become perverted by livingamong slaveholders, and adopting the code of slaveholding morality. 

We now proceed to the details, commencing with the new state ofArkansas. 

ARKANSAS. 

At the last session of the legislature of that state, Col. JohnWilson, President of the Bank at Little Rock, the capital of thestate, was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives. He hadbeen elected to that office for a number of years successively, andwas one of the most influential citizens of the state. While presidingover the deliberations of the House, he took umbrage at words spokenin debate by Major Anthony, a conspicuous member, came down from theSpeaker's chair, drew a large bowie knife from his bosom, and attackedMajor A. , who defended himself for some time, but was at last stabbedthrough the heart, and fell dead on the floor. Wilson deliberatelywiped the blood from his knife, and returned to his seat. Thefollowing statement of the circumstances of the murder, and the trialof the murderer, is abridged from the account published in theArkansas Gazette, a few months since--it is here taken from theKnoxville (Tennessee) Register, July 4, 1838. 

"On the 14th of December last, Maj. Joseph J. Anthony, a member of theLegislature of Arkansas, was murdered, while performing his duty as amember of the House of Representatives, by John Wilson, Speaker ofthat House. 

"The facts were these: A bill came from the Senate, commonly called the_Wolf Bill_. Among the amendments proposed, was one by Maj. Anthony, that the signature of the President of the Real Estate Bank should beattached to the certificate of the wolf scalp. Col. Wilson, theSpeaker, asked Maj. Anthony whether he intended the remark aspersonal. Maj. Anthony promptly said, "_No, I do not_. " And at thatinstant of time, a message was delivered from the Senate, whichsuspended the proceedings of the House for a few minutes. Immediatelyafter the messenger from the Senate had retired, Maj. Anthony rosefrom his seat, and said he wished to explain, that he did not intendto insult the Speaker or the House; when Wilson, interrupting, peremptorily ordered him to take his seat. Maj. Anthony said, as amember, he had a right to the floor, to explain himself. Wilson said, in an angry tone, 'Sit down, or you had better;' and thrust his handinto his bosom, and drew out a large bowie knife, 10 or 11 inches inlength, and descended from the Speaker's chair to the floor, with theknife drawn in a menacing manner. Maj. Anthony, seeing the danger hewas placed in, by Wilson's advance on him with a drawn knife, rosefrom his chair, set it out of his way, stepped back a pace or two, anddrew his knife. Wilson caught up a chair, and struck Anthony with it. Anthony, recovering from the blow, caught the chair in his left hand, and a fight ensued over the chair. Wilson received two wounds, one oneach arm, and Anthony lost his knife, either by throwing it at Wilson, or it escaped by accident. After Anthony had lost his knife, Wilsonadvanced on Anthony, who was then retreating, looking over hisshoulder. Seeing Wilson pursuing him, he threw a chair. Wilson stillpursued, and Anthony raised another chair as high as his breast, witha view, it is supposed, of keeping Wilson off. Wilson then caught holdof the chair with his left hand, raised it up, and with his right handdeliberately thrust the knife, up to the hilt, into Anthony's heart, and as deliberately drew it out, and wiping off the blood with histhumb and finger, retired near to the Speaker's chair. 

"As the knife was withdrawn from Anthony's heart, he fell a lifelesscorpse on the floor, without uttering a word, or scarcely making astruggle; so true did the knife, as deliberately directed, pierce hisheart. 

"Three days elapsed before the constituted authorities took any noticeof this horrible deed; and not then, until a relation of the murderedAnthony had demanded a warrant for the apprehension of Wilson. Severaldays then elapsed before he was brought before an examining court. Hethen, in a carriage and four, came to the place appointed for histrial. Four or five days were employed in the examination ofwitnesses, and never was a clearer case of murder proved than on thatoccasion. Notwithstanding, the court (Justice Brown dissenting)admitted Wilson to bail, and positively refused that the prosecutingattorney for the state should introduce the law, to show that it wasnot a bailable case, or even to hear an argument from him. 

"At the time appointed for the session of the Circuit Court, Wilsonappeared agreeably to his recognizance. A motion was made by Wilson'scounsel for _change of venue_, founded on the affidavits of Wilson, and two other men. The court thereupon removed the case to Salinecounty, and ordered the Sheriff to take Wilson into custody, anddeliver him over to the Sheriff of Saline county. 

"The Sheriff of Pulaski never confined Wilson one minute, butpermitted him to go where he pleased, without a guard, or anyrestraint imposed on him whatever. On his way to Saline, heentertained him freely at his own house, and the next day deliveredhim over to the Sheriff of that county, who conducted the prisoner tothe debtor's room in the jail, and gave him the key, so that he andevery body else had free egress and ingress at all times. Wilsoninvited every body to call on him, as he wished to see his friends, and his room was crowded with visitors, who called to drink grog, andlaugh and talk with him. But this theatre was not sufficiently largefor his purpose. He afterwards visited the dram-shops, where he freelytreated all that would partake with him, and went fishing and huntingwith others at pleasure, and entirely with out restraint. He also ateat the same table with the Judge, while on trial. 

"When the court met at Saline, Wilson was put on his trial. Severaldays were occupied in examining the witnesses in the case. After theexamination was closed, while Col. Taylor was engaged in a very able, lucid, and argumentative speech, on the part of the prosecution, someman collected a parcel of the rabble, and came within a few yards ofthe court-house door, and bawled in a loud voice, 'part them--partthem!' Every body supposed there was an affray, and ran to the doorsand windows to see; behold, there was nothing more than the man, andthe rabble he had collected around him, for the purpose of annoyingCol. Taylor while speaking. A few minutes afterwards, this same personbrought a horse near the court-house door, and commenced crying thehorse, as though he was for sale, and continued for ten or fifteenminutes to ride before the court-house door, crying the horse, in aloud and boisterous tone of voice. The Judge sat as a silent listenerto the indignity thus offered the court and counsel by this man, without interposing his authority. 

"To show the depravity of the times, and the people, after the verdicthad been delivered by the jury, and the court informed Wilson that hewas discharged, there was a rush toward him: some seized him by thehand, some by the arm, and there was great and loud rejoicing andexultation, directly in the presence of the court: and Wilson told theSheriff to take the jury to a grocery, that he might treat them, andinvited every body that chose to go. The house was soon filled tooverflowing. The rejoicing was kept up till near supper time: but tocap the climax, soon after supper was over, a majority of the jury, together with many others, went to the rooms that had been occupiedseveral days by the friend and relation of the murdered Anthony, andcommenced a scene of the most ridiculous dancing, (as it is believed, )in triumph for Wilson, and as a triumph over the feelings of therelations of the departed Anthony. The scene did not close here. Theparty retired to a dram-shop, and continued their rejoicing untilabout half after 10 o'clock. They then collected a parcel of horns, trumpets, &c. , and marched through the streets, blowing them, tillnear day, when one of the company rode his horse in the porchadjoining the room which was occupied by the relations of thedeceased. "

This case is given to the reader at length, in order fully to show, that in a community where the law sanctions the commission of everyspecies of outrage upon one class of citizens, it fosters passionswhich will paralyze its power to protect the other classes. Look atthe facts developed in this case, as exhibiting the state of societyamong slaveholders. 1st. That the members of the legislature are _inthe habit_ of wearing bowie knives. Wilson's knife was 10 or 11 incheslong. [42] 2d. The murderer, Wilson, was a man of wealth, president ofthe bank at the capital of the state, a high military officer, andhad, for many years, been Speaker of the House of Representatives, asappears from a previous statement in the Arkansas Gazette. 3d. Themurder was committed in open day, before all the members of the House, and many spectators, not one of whom seems to have made the leastattempt to intercept Wilson, as he advanced upon Anthony with hisknife drawn, but "made way for him, " as is stated in another account. 4th. Though the murder was committed in the state-house, at thecapital of the state, days passed before the civil authorities movedin the matter; and they did not finally do it, until the relations ofthe murdered man demanded a warrant for the apprehension of themurderer. Even then, several days elapsed before he was brought beforean examining court. When his trial came on, he drove to it in state, drew up before the door with "his coach and four, " alighted, andstrided into court like a lord among his vassals; and there, though aclearer case of deliberate murder never reeked in the face of the sun, yet he was admitted to bail, the court absolutely refusing to hear anargument from the prosecuting attorney, showing that it was not abailable case. 5th. The sheriff of Pulaski county, who had Wilson incustody, "never confined him a moment, but permitted him to go atlarge wholly unrestrained. " When transferred to Saline co. For trial, the sheriff of that county gave Wilson the same liberty, and he spenthis time in parties of pleasure, fishing, hunting, and at houses ofentertainment. 6th. Finally, to demonstrate to the world, that justiceamong slaveholders is consistent with itself; that authorizingman-stealing and patronising robbery, it will, of course, be thepatron and associate of murder also, the judge who sat upon the case, and the murderer who was on trial for his life before him, wereboon-companions together, eating and drinking at the same tablethroughout the trial. Then came the conclusion of the farce--theuproar round the court-house during the trial, drowning the voice ofthe prosecutor while pleading, without the least attempt by the courtto put it down--then the charge of the judge to the jury, and theirunanimous verdict of acquittal--then the rush from all quarters aroundthe murderer with congratulations--the whole crowd in the court roomshouting and cheering--then Wilson leading the way to a tavern, inviting the sheriff, and jury, and all present to "a treat"--then thebacchanalian revelry kept up all night, a majority of the jurorsparticipating--the dancing, the triumphal procession through thestreets with the blowing of horns and trumpets, and the prancing ofhorses through the porch of the house occupied by the relations of themurdered Anthony, adding insult and mockery to their agony. 

A few months before this murder on the floor of the legislature, George Scott, Esq. , formerly marshall of the state was shot in anaffray at Van Buren, Crawford co. , Arkansas, by a man named Walker;and Robert Carothers, in an affray in St. Francis co. , shot WilliamRachel, just as Rachel was shooting at Carothers' father. (_NationalIntelligencer, May 8, 1837, and Little Rock Gazette, August 30, 1837. _)

While Wilson's trial was in progress, Mr. Gabriel Sibley was stabbedto the heart at a public dinner, in St. Francis co. , Arkansas, byJames W. Grant. (_Arkansas Gazette, May 30, 1838. _)

Hardly a week before this, the following occurred:

"On the 16th ult. , an encounter took place at Little Rock, Ark. , between David F. Douglass, a young man of 18 or 19, and Dr. Wm. C. Howell. A shot was exchanged between them at the distance of 8 or 10feet with double-barrelled guns. The load of Douglass entered the lefthip of Dr. Howell, and a buckshot from the gun of the latter struck anegro girl, 13 or 14 years of age, just below the pit of the stomach. Douglass then fired a second time and hit Howell in the left groin, penetrating the abdomen and bladder, and causing his death in fourhours. The negro girl, at the last dates, was not dead, but no hopeswere entertained of her recovery. Douglass was committed to await histrial at the April term of the Circuit Court. "--_Louisville Journal_. 

The Little Rock Gazette of Oct. 24, says, "We are again called uponto record the cold blooded murder of a valuable citizen. On the 10thinstant, Col. John Lasater, of Franklin co. , was murdered by John W. Whitson, who deliberately shot him with a shot gun, loaded with ahandful of rifle balls, six of which entered his body. He lived twelvehours after he was shot. 

"Whitson is the son of William Whitson, who was unfortunately killed, about a year since, in a rencontre with Col. Lasater, (who was fullyexonerated from all blame by a jury, ) and, in revenge of his father'sdeath, committed this bloody deed. "

These atrocities were all perpetrated within a few months of the timeof the deliberate assassination, on the floor of the legislature bythe speaker, already described, and are probably but a small portionof the outrages committed in that state during the same period. Thestate of Arkansas contains about forty-five thousand whiteinhabitants, which is, if we mistake not, the present population ofLitchfield county, Connecticut. And we venture the assertion, that apublic affray, with deadly weapons, has not taken place in that countyfor fifty years, if indeed ever since its settlement a century and ahalf ago. 

MISSOURI. 

Missouri became one of the United States in 1821. Its present whitepopulation is about two hundred and fifty thousand. The following area few of the affrays that have occurred there during the years 1837and '38. 

The "Salt River Journal" March 8, 1838, has the following. 

"_Fatal Affray_. --An affray took place during last week, in the townof New London, between Dr. Peake and Dr. Bosley, both of that village, growing out of some trivial matter at a card party. After some words, Bosley threw a glass at Peake, which was followed up by other acts ofviolence, and in the quarrel Peake stabbed Bosley, several times witha dirk, in consequence of which, Bosley died the following morning. The court of inquiry considered Peake justifiable, and discharged himfrom arrest. "

From the "St. Louis Republican, " of September 29, 1837. 

"We learn that a fight occurred at Bowling-Green, in this state, a fewdays since, between Dr. Michael Reynolds and Henry Lalor. Lalorprocured a gun, and Mr. Dickerson wrested the gun from him; thisproduced a fight between Lalor and Dickerson, in which the formerstabbed the latter in the abdomen. Mr. Dickerson died of the wound. "

The following was in the same paper about a month previous, August 21, 1837. 

"_A Horse Thief Shot_. --A thief was caught in the act of stealing ahorse on Friday last, on the opposite side of the river, by a companyof persons out sporting. Mr. Kremer, who was in the company, levelledhis rifle and ordered him to stop; which he refused; he then fired andlodged the contents in the thief's body, of which he died soonafterwards. Mr. K. Went before a magistrate, who after hearing thecase, REFUSED TO HOLD HIM FOR FURTHER TRIAL!"

On the 5th of July, 1838, Alpha P. Buckley murdered William Yaochum inan affray in Jackson county, Missouri. (Missouri Republican, July 24, 1838. )

General Atkinson of the United States Army was waylaid on the 4th ofSeptember, 1838, by a number of persons, and attacked in his carriagenear St. Louis, on the road to Jefferson Barracks, but escaped aftershooting one of the assailants. The New Orleans True American ofOctober 29, '38, speaking of this says: "It will be recollected that afew weeks ago, Judge Dougherty, one of the most respectable citizensof St. Louis, was murdered upon the same road. "

The same paper contains the following letter from the murderer ofJudge Dougherty. 

"_Murder of Judge Dougherty_. --The St. Louis Republican received thefollowing mysterious letter, unsealed, regarding this brutalmurder:"--

"NATCHEZ, Miss. , Sept. 24. 

"Messrs. Editors:--Revenge is sweet. On the night of the 11th, 12th, and 13th, I made preparations, and did, on the 14th July kill arascal, and only regret that I have not the privilege of telling thecircumstance. I have so placed it that I can never be identified; andfurther, I have no compunctions of conscience for the death of ThomasM. Dougherty. "

But instead of presenting individual affrays and single atrocities, however numerous, (and the Missouri papers abound with them, ) in orderto exhibit the true state of society there, we refer to the fact nowuniversally notorious, that for months during the last fall andwinter, some hundreds of inoffensive Mormons, occupying a considerabletract of land; and a flourishing village in the interior of the state, have suffered every species of inhuman outrage from the inhabitants ofthe surrounding counties--that for weeks together, mobs consisting ofhundreds and thousands, kept them in a state of constant siege, layingwaste their lands, destroying their cattle and provisions, tearingdown their houses, ravishing the females, seizing and dragging off andkilling the men. Not one of the thousands engaged in these horribleoutrages and butcheries has, so far as we can learn, been indicted. The following extract of a letter from a military officer of one ofthe brigades ordered out by the Governor of Missouri, to terminate thematter, is taken from the North Alabamian of December 22, 1838. 

Correspondence of the Nashville Whig. 

THE MORMON WAR. 

"MILLERSBURG, Mo. November 8. 

"Dear Sir--A lawless mob had organized themselves for the expresspurpose of driving the Mormons from the country, or exterminatingthem, for no other reason, that I can perceive, than that these poordeluded creatures owned a large and fertile body of land in theirneighborhood, and would not let them (the Mobocrats) have it for theirown price. I have just returned from the seat of difficulty, and amperfectly conversant with all the facts in relation to it. The mobmeeting with resistance altogether unanticipated, called loudly uponthe kindred spirits of adjacent counties for help. The Mormonsdetermined to die in defence of their rights, set about fortifyingtheir town "Far West, " with a resolution and energy that kept the mob(who all the time were extending their cries of help to all parts ofMissouri) at bay. The Governor, from exaggerated accounts of theMormon depredations, issued orders for the raising of several thousandmounted riflemen, of which this division raised five hundred, and thewriter of this was _honored_ with the appointment of ---- to theBrigade. 

"On the first day of this month, we marched for the "seat of war, " butGeneral Clark, Commander-in-chief, having reached Far West on the dayprevious with a large force, the difficulty was settled when wearrived, so we escaped the infamy and disgrace of a bloody victory. Before General Clark's arrival, the mob had increased to about fourthousand, and determined to attack the town. The Mormons upon theapproach of the mob, sent out a white flag, which being fired on bythe mob, Jo Smith and Rigdon, and a few other Mormons of lessinfluence, gave themselves up to the mob, with a view of so farappeasing their wrath as to save their women and children fromviolence. Vain hope! The prisoners being secured, the mob entered thetown and perpetrated every conceivable act of brutality andoutrage--forcing fifteen or twenty Mormon girls to yield to theirbrutal passions!!! Of these things I was assured by many persons whileI was at Far West, in whose veracity I have the utmost confidence. Iconversed with many of the prisoners, who numbered about eighthundred, among whom there were many young and interesting girls, and Iassure you, a more distracted set of creatures I never saw. I assureyou, my dear sir, it was peculiarly heart-rending to see old grayheaded fathers and mothers, young ladies and innocent babes, forced atthis inclement season, with the thermometer at 8 degrees below zero, to abandon their warm houses, and many of them the luxuries andelegances of a high degree of civilization and intelligence and takeup their march for the uncultivated wilds of the Missouri frontier. 

"The better informed here have but one opinion of the result of thisMormon persecution, and that is, it is a most fearful extension ofJudge Lynch's jurisdiction. "

The present white population of Missouri is but thirty thousand lessthan that of New Hampshire, and yet the insecurity of human life inthe former state to that in the latter, is probably at least twenty toone. 

ALABAMA. 

This state was admitted to the Union in 1819. Its present whitepopulation is not far from three hundred thousand. The security ofhuman life to Alabama, may be inferred from the facts and testimonywhich follow:

The Mobile Register of Nov. 15, 1837, contains the annual message ofMr. McVay, the acting Governor of the state, at the opening of theLegislature. The message has the following on the frequency ofhomicides:

"We hear of homicides in different parts of the state _continually_, and yet how few convictions for murder, and still fewer executions?How is this to be accounted for? In regard to 'assault and batterywith intent to commit murder, ' why is it that this offence continuesso common--why do we hear of stabbings and shootings _almost daily_ insome part or other of our state?"

The "Montgomery (Alabama) Advertiser" of April 22, 1837, has thefollowing from the Mobile Register:

"Within a few days a man was shot in an affray in the upper part ofthe town, and has since died. The perpetrator of the violence is atlarge. We need hardly speak of another scene which occurred in Royalstreet, when a fray occurred between two individuals, a third standingby with a cocked pistol to prevent interference. On Saturday night astill more exciting scene of outrage took place in the theatre. 

"An altercation commenced at the porquett entrance between thecheck-taker and a young man, which ended in the first beingdesperately wounded by a stab with a knife. The other also drew apistol. If some strange manifestations of public opinion, do notcoerce a spirit of deference to law, and the abandonment of the habitof carrying secret arms, we shall deserve every reproach we mayreceive, and have our punishment in the unchecked growth of a spiritof lawlessness, reckless deeds, and exasperated feeling, which willdestroy our social comfort at home, and respectability abroad. "

From the "Huntsville Democrat, " of Nov. 7, 1837. 

"A trifling dispute arose between Silas Randal and Pharaoh Massingale, both of Marshall county. They exchanged but a few words, when theformer drew a Bowie knife and stabbed the latter in the abdomenfronting the left hip to the depth of several inches; also inflictedseveral other dangerous wounds, of which Massengale diedimmediately. --Randal is yet at large, not having been apprehended. "

From the "Free Press" of August 16, 1838. 

"The streets of Gainesville, Alabama, have recently been the scene ofa most tragic affair. Some five weeks since, at a meeting of thecitizens, Col. Christopher Scott, a lawyer of good standing, and oneof the most influential citizens of the place, made a violent attackon the Tombeckbee Rail Road Company. A Mr. Smith, agent for the T. R. R. Company, took Col. C's remarks as a personal insult, and demanded anexplanation. A day or two after, as Mr. Smith was passing ColonelScott's door, he was shot down by him, and after lingering a few hoursexpired. 

"It appears also from an Alabama paper, that Col. Scott's brother, L. S. Scott Esq. , and L. J. Smith Esq. , were accomplices of the Colonelin the murder. "

The following is from the "Natchez Free Trader, " June 14, 1838. 

"An affray, attended with fatal consequences, occurred in the town ofMoulton, Alabama, on the 12th May. It appears that three young menfrom the country, of the name of J. Walton, Geo. Bowling, andAlexander Bowling, rode into Moulton on that day for the purpose ofchastising the bar-keeper at McCord's tavern, whose name is Cowan, foran alleged insult offered by him to the father of young Walton. Theymade a furious attack on Cowan, and drove him into the bar room of thetavern. Some time after, a second attack was made upon Cowan in thestreet by one of the Bowlings and Walton, when pistols were resortedto by both parties. Three rounds were fired, and the third shot, whichwas said to have been discharged by Walton, struck a young man by thename of Neil, who happened to be passing in the street at the time, and killed him instantly. The combatants were taken into custody, andafter an examination before two magistrates, were bailed. "

The following exploits of the "Alabama Volunteers, " are recorded inthe Florida Herald, Jan. 1, 1838. 

"SAVE US FROM OUR FRIENDS. --On Monday last, a large body of men, calling themselves Alabama Volunteers, arrived in the vicinity of thiscity. It is reported that their conduct during their march fromTallahassee to this city has been a series of excesses of everydescription. They have committed almost every crime except murder, andhave even threatened life. 

"Large numbers of them paraded our streets, grossly insulted ourfemales, and were otherwise extremely riotous in their conduct. One ofthe squads, forty or fifty in number, on reaching the bridge, wherethere was a small guard of three or four men stationed, assaulted theguard, overturned the sentry-box into the river, and bodily seized twoof the guard, and threw them into the river, where the water was deep, and they were forced to swim for their lives. At one of the men whilein the water, they pointed a musket, threatening to kill him; andpelted with every missile which came to hand. "

The following Alabama tragedy is published by the "Columbia (S. C. )Telescope, " Sept. **, 1837, from the Wetumpka Sentinel. 

"Our highly respectable townsman, Mr. Hugh Ware, a merchant ofWetumpka, was standing in the door of his counting room, between thehours of 8 and 9 o'clock at night, in company with a friend, when anassassin lurked within a few paces of his position, and discharged hismusket, loaded with ten or fifteen buckshot. Mr. Ware instantly fell, and expired without a struggle or a groan. A coroner's inquest decidedthat the deceased came to his death by violence, and that Abner J. Cody, and his servant John, were the perpetrators. John franklyconfessed, that his master, Cody, compelled him to assist, threateninghis life if he dared to disobey; that he carried the musket to theplace at which it was discharged; that his master then received itfrom him, rested it on the fence, fired and killed Mr. Ware. "

From the "Southern (Miss. ) Mechanic, " April 17, 1838. 

"HORRID BUTCHERY. --A desperate fight occurred in Montgomery, Alabama, on the 28th ult. We learn from the Advocate of that city, that thepersons engaged were Wm. S. Mooney and Kenyon Mooney, his son, EdwardBell, and Bushrod Bell, Jr. The first received a wound in the abdomen, made by that fatal instrument, the Bowie knife, which caused his deathin about fifteen hours. The second was shot in the side, and woulddoubtless have been killed, had not the ball partly lost its force byfirst striking his arm. The third received a shot in the neck, and nowlies without hope of recovery. The fourth escaped unhurt, and, weunderstand has fled. This is a brief statement of one of the bloodiestfights that we ever heard of. "

From the "Virginia Statesman, " May 6, 1837. 

"Several affrays, wherein pistols, dirks and knives were used, latelyoccurred at Mobile. One took place on the 8th inst. , at the theatre, in which a Mr. Bellum was so badly stabbed that his life is despairedof. On the Wednesday preceding, a man named Johnson shot another namedSnow dead. No notice was taken of the affair. "

From the "Huntsville Advocate, " June 20, 1837. 

"DESPERATE AFFRAY. --On Sunday the 11th inst. , an affray of desparateand fatal character occurred near Jeater's Landing, Marshall county, Alabama. The dispute which led to it arose out of a contested right to_possession_ of a piece of land. A Mr. Steele was the occupant, andMr. James McFarlane and some others, claimants. Mr. F. And his friendswent to Mr. Steele's house with a view to take possession, whetherpeaceably or by violence, we do not certainly know. As they enteredthe house a quarrel ensued between the opposite parties, and someblows perhaps followed; in a short time, several guns were dischargedfrom the house at Mr. McFarlane and friends. Mr. M. Was killed, a Mr. Freamster dangerously wounded, and it is thought will not recover; twoothers were also wounded, though not so as to endanger life. Mr. Steele's brother was wounded by the discharge of a pistol from one ofMr. M's friends. We have heard some other particulars about theaffray, but we abstain from giving them, as incidental versions areoften erroneous, and as the whole matter will be submitted to legalinvestigation. Four of Steele's party, his brother, and three whosenames are Lenten, Collins and Wills, have been arrested, and are nowconfined in the gaol in this place. "

From the "Norfolk Beacon, " July 14, 1838. 

"A few days since at Claysville, Marshal co. , Alabama, Messrs. Nathaniel and Graves W. Steele, while riding in a carriage, were shotdead, and Alex. Steele and Wm. Collins, also in the carriage, wereseverely wounded, (the former supposed mortally, ) by Messrs. JesseAllen, Alexander and Arthur McFarlane, and Daniel Dickerson. TheSteeles, it appears, last year killed James McFarlane and anotherperson in a similar manner, which led to this dreadful retaliation. "

From the Montgomery (Ala. ) Advocate--Washington, Autauga Co. , Dec. 28, 1838. 

"FATAL RENCONTRE. --On Friday last, the 28th ult. , a fatal rencontretook place in the town of Washington, Autauga county, between JohnTittle and Thomas J. Tarleton, which resulted in the death of theformer. After a patient investigation of the matter, Mr. Tarleton wasreleased by the investigating tribunal, on the ground that thehomicide was clearly justifiable. "

The "Columbus (Ga. ) Sentinel" July 6, 1837, quotes the following fromthe Mobile (Ala. ) Examiner. 

"A man by the name of Peter Church was killed on one of the wharvesnight before last. The person by whom it was done delivered himself tothe proper authorities yesterday morning. The deceased and destroyerwere friends and the act occurred in consequence of an immaterialquarrel. "

The "Milledgeville Federal Union" of July 11, 1837, has the following

"In Selma, Alabama resided lately messrs. Philips and Dickerson, physicians. Mr. P. Is brother to the wife of V. Bleevin Esq. , a richcotton planter in that neighborhood; the latter has a very lovelydaughter, to whom Dr. D. Paid his addresses. A short time since agentleman from Mobile married her. Soon after this, a schoolmaster inSelma set a cry afloat to the effect, that he had heard Dr. D. Saythings about the lady's conduct before marriage which ought not to besaid about any lady. Dr. D. Denied having said such things, and theother denied having spread the story; but neither denials sufficed topacify the enraged parent. He met Dr. D. Fired at him two pistols, andwounded him. Dr. D. Was unarmed, and advanced to Mr. Bleevin, holdingup his hands imploringly, when Mr. B. Drew a Bowie knife, and stabbedhim to the heart. The doctor dropped dead on the spot: and Mr. Bleevinhas been held to bail. "

The following is taken from the "Alabama, Intelligencer, " Sept. 17, 1838. 

"On the 5th instant, a deadly rencounter took place in the streets ofRusselville, (our county town, ) between John A. Chambers, Esq. , of thecity of Mobile, and Thomas L. Jones, of this county. In therencounter, Jones was wounded by several balls which took effect inhis chin, mouth, neck, arm, and shoulder, believed to be mortal; hedid not fire his gun. 

"Mr. Chambers forthwith surrendered himself to the Sheriff of thecounty, and was on the 6th, tried and fully acquitted, by a court ofinquiry. "

The "Maysville (Ky. ) Advocate" of August 14, 1838, gives the followingaffray, which took place in Girard, Alabama, July 10th. 

"Two brothers named Thomas and Hal Lucas, who had been much in thehabit of quarrelling, came together under strong excitement, and Tom, as was his frequent custom, being about to flog Hal with a stick ofsome sort, the latter drew a pistol and shot the former, his ownbrother, through the heart, who almost instantly expired!"

The "New Orleans Bee" of Oct. 5, 1838, relates an affray in Mobile, Alabama, between Benjamin Alexander, an aged man of ninety, withThomas Hamilton, his grandson, on the 24th of September, in which theformer killed the latter with a dirk. 

The "Red River Whig" of July 7, 1838, gives the particulars of atragedy in Western Alabama, in which a planter near Lakeville, lefthome for some days, but suspecting his wife's fidelity, returned homelate at night, and finding his suspicions verified, set fire to hishouse and waited with his rifle before the door, till his wife and herparamour attempted to rush out, when he shot them both dead. 

From the "Morgan (Ala. ) Observer, " Dec. 1838. 

"We are informed from private sources, that on last Saturday, a poorman who was moving westward with his wife and three little childrenand driving a small drove of sheep, and perhaps a cow or two, whichwas driven by his family, on arriving in Florence, and while passingthrough, met with a citizen of that place, who rode into his flock andcaused him some trouble to keep it together, when the mover informedthe individual that he must not do so again or he would throw a rockat him, upon which some words ensued, and the individual againdisturbed the flock, when the mover, as near as we can learn, threw athim upon this the troublesome man got off his horse, went into agrocery, got a gun, and came out and deliberately shot the poorstranger in the presence of his wife and little children. The woundedman then made an effort to get into some house, when his murderousassailant overtook and stabbed him to the heart with a _Bowie knife_. This revolting scene, we are informed, occurred in the presence ofmany citizens, who, report says, never even lifted their voices indefence of the murdered man. "

A late number of the "Flag of the Union, " published at Tuscalosa, theseat of the government of Alabama, states that "since the commencementof the late session of the legislature of that state, no less thanTHIRTEEN FIGHTS had been had within sight of the capitol. " _Pistolsand Bowie knives were used in every case_. 

The present white population of Alabama is about the same with that ofNew Jersey, yet for the last twenty years there has not been so manypublic deadly affrays, and of such a horrible character, in NewJersey, as have taken place in Alabama within the last eight months. 

MISSISSIPPI. 

Mississippi became one of the United States in 1817. Its present whitepopulation is about one hundred and sixty thousand. 

The following extracts will serve to show that those who combinetogether to beat, rob, and manacle innocent men, women and children, will stick at nothing when their passions are up. 

The following murderous affray at Canton, Mississippi, is from the"Alabama Beacon, " Sept, 13, 1838. 

"A terrible tragedy recently occurred at Canton, Miss. , growing out ofthe late duel between Messrs. Dickins and Drane of that place. AKentuckian happening to be in Canton, spoke of the duel, and chargedMr. Mitchell Calhoun, the second of Drane, with cowardice andunfairness. Mr. Calhoun called on the Kentuckian for an explanation, and the offensive charge was repeated. _A challenge and fight withBowie knives, toe to toe_, were the consequences. Both parties weredreadfully and dangerously wounded, though neither was dead at thelast advices. Mr. Calhoun is a brother to the Hon. John Calhoun, member of Congress. "

Here follows the account of the duel referred to above, betweenMessrs. Dickins and Drane. 

"Intelligence has been received in this town of a fatal duel that tookplace in Canton, Miss. , on the 28th ult. , between Rufus K. Dickins, and a Mr. Westley Drane. They fought with double barrelled guns, loaded with buckshot--both were mortally wounded. "

The "Louisville Journal" publishes the following, Nov. 23. 

"On the 7th instant, a fatal affray took place at Gallatin, Mississippi. The principal parties concerned were, Messrs. John W. Scott, James G. Scott, and Edmund B. Hatch. The latter was shot downand then stabbed twice through the body, by J. G. Scott. "

The "Alabama Beacon" of Sept. 13, 1838, says:

"An attempt was made in Vicksburg lately, by a gang of Lynchers, toinflict summary punishment on three men of the name of Fleckenstein. The assault was made upon the house, about 11 o'clock at night. Meeting with some resistance from the three Fleckensteins, a leader ofthe gang, by the name of Helt, discharged his pistol, and wounded oneof the brothers severely in the neck and jaws. A volley of four orfive shots was almost instantly returned, when Helt fell dead, a pieceof the top of the skull being torn off, and almost the whole of hisbrains dashed out. His comrades seeing him fall, suddenly took totheir heels. There were, it is supposed, some _ten or fifteen_concerned in the transaction. "

The "Manchester (Miss. ) Gazette, " August 11, 1838, says:

"It appears that Mr. Asa Hazeltine, who kept a public or boardinghouse in Jackson, during the past winter, and Mr. Benjamin Tanner, came here about five or six weeks since, with the intention of openinga public house. Foiled in the design, in the settlement of theiraffairs some difficulty arose as to a question of veracity between theparties. Mr. Tanner, deeply excited, procured a pistol and loaded itwith the charge of death, sought and found the object of his hatred inthe afternoon, in the yard of Messrs. Kezer & Maynard, and in thepresence of several persons, after repeated and ineffectual attemptson the part of Capt. Jackson to baffle his fell spirit, shot theunfortunate victim, of which wound Mr. Hazeltine died in a short time. 

"We understand that Mr. Hazeltine was a native of Boston. "

The "Columbia (S. C. ) Telescope, " Sept. 16, 1837, gives the detailsbelow:

"By a letter from Mississippi, we have an account of a rencontre whichtook place in Rodney, on the 27th July, between Messrs. Thos. J. Johnston and G. H. Wilcox, both formerly of this city. In consequenceof certain publications made by these gentlemen against each other, Johnston challenged Wilcox. The latter declining to accept thechallenge, Johnston informed his friends at Rodney, that he would bethere at the term of the court then not distant, when he would make anattack upon him. He repaired thither on the 26th, and on the nextmorning the following communication was read aloud in the presence ofWilcox and a large crowd:

"Rodney, July 27, 1837. 

"Mr. Johnston informs Mr. Wilcox, that at or about 1 o'clock of thisday, he will be on the common, opposite the Presbyterian Church ofthis town, waiting and expecting Mr. Wilcox to meet him there. 

"I pledge my honor that Mr. Johnston will not fire at Mr. Wilcox, until he arrives at a distance of one hundred yards from him, and Idesire Mr. Wilcox or any of his friends, to see that distanceaccurately measured. 

"Mr. Johnston will wait there thirty minutes. 

"J. M. DUFFIELD. 

"Mr. Wilcox declined being a party to any such arrangement, and Mr. D. Told him to be prepared for an attack. Accordingly, about an hourafter this, Johnston proceeded towards Wilcox's office, armed with adouble-barrelled gun, (one of the barrels rifled, ) and three pistolsin his belt. He halted about fifty yards from W's door and leveled hisgun. W. Withdrew before Johnston could fire, and seized a musket, returned to the door and flashed. Johnston fired both barrels withouteffect. Wilcox then seized a double barrel gun, and Johnston a musket, and both again fired. Wilcox sent twenty-three buck shot overJohnston's head, one of them passing through his hat, and Wilcox wasslightly wounded on both hands, his thigh and leg. "

From the "Alabama Beacon, " May 27, 1838. 

"An affray of the most barbarous nature was expected to take place inArkansas opposite Princeton, on Thursday last. The two originalparties have been endeavoring for several weeks, to settle theirdifferences at Natchez. One of the individuals concerned stoodpledged, our informant states, to fight three different antagonists inone day. The fights, we understand, were to be with pistols; but avariety of other weapons were taken along--among others, the deadlyBowie knife. These latter instruments, we are told, were whetted anddressed up at Grand Gulf, as the parties passed up, avowedly with theintention of being used in the field. "

From the "Southern (Miss) Argus, " Nov. 21, 1837. 

"We learn that, at a wood yard above Natchez, on Sunday evening last, a difficulty arose between Captain Crosly, of the steamboat Galenian, and one of his deck passengers. Capt. C. Drew a Bowie knife, and madea pass at the throat of the passenger, which failed to do any harm, and the captain then ordered him to leave his boat. The man went onboard to get his baggage, and the captain immediately sought the cabinfor a pistol. As the passenger was about leaving the boat, the captainpresented a pistol to his breast, which snapped. Instantly the enragedand wronged individual seized Capt. Crosly by the throat, and broughthim to the ground, when he drew a dirk and stabbed him eight or ninetimes in the breast, each blow driving the weapon into his body up tothe hilt. The passenger was arrested, carried to Natchez, tried andacquitted. "

The "Planter's Intelligencer" publishes the following from theVicksburg Sentinel of June 19, 1838. 

"About 1 o'clock, we observed two men 'pummeling' one another in thestreet, to the infinite amusement of a crowd. Presently a third heromade his appearance in the arena, with Bowie knife in hand, and hecried out, "Let me come at him!" Upon hearing this threat, one of thepugilists 'took himself off, ' our hero following at full speed. Finding his pursuit was vain, our hero returned, when an attack wascommenced upon another individual. He was most cruelly beat, and cutthrough the skull with a knife; it is feared the wounds will provemortal. The sufferer, we learn, is an inoffensive German. "

From the "Mississippian, " Nov. 9, 1838. 

"On Tuesday evening last, 23d, an affray occurred at the town ofTallahasse, in this county, between Hugh Roark and Captain Flack, which resulted in the death of Roark. Roark went to bed, and Flack, who was in the barroom below, observed to some persons there, that hebelieved they had set up Roark to whip him; Roark, upon hearing hisname mentioned, got out of bed and came downstairs. Flack met andstabbed him in the lower part of his abdomen with a knife, letting outhis bowels. Roark ran to the door, and received another stab in theback. He lived until Thursday night, when he expired in great agony. Flack was tried before a justice of the peace, and we understand wasonly held to bail to appear at court in the event Roark should die. "

From the "Grand Gulf Advertiser" Nov. 7, 1838. 

"_Attempt at Riot at Natchez_. --The _Courier_ says, that inconsequence of the discharge of certain individuals who had beenarraigned for the murder of a man named _Medill_, a mob of about 200persons assembled on the night of the 1st instant, with the avowedpurpose of _lynching_ them. But fortunately, the objects of theirvengeance had escaped from town. Foiled in their purpose, the riotersrepaired to the shantee where the murder was committed, andprecipitated it over the bluff. The military of the city were orderedout to keep order. "

From the "Natchez Free Trader. "

"A violent attack was lately made on Captain Barrett, of the steamboatSoutherner, by three persons from Wilkinson co. , Miss. , whose namesare Carey, and one of the name of J. S. Towles. The only reason for theoutrage was, that Captain B. Had the assurance to require of thegentlemen, who were quarreling on board his boat, to keep order forthe peace and comfort of the other passengers. _Towles_ drew a Bowieknife upon the Captain; which the latter wrested from him. A pistol, drawn by one of the Careys was also taken, and the assailant wasknocked overboard. Fortunately for him he was rescued from drowning. The brave band then landed. On her return up the river, the Southernerstopped at Fort Adams, and on her leaving that place, an armed party, among whom were the Careys and Towles, fired into the boat, buthappily the shot missed a crowd of passengers on the hurricane deck. "

From the "Mississippian, " Dec. 18, 1838. 

"Greet Spikes, a citizen of this county, was killed a few days ago, between this place and Raymond, by a man named Pegram. It seems thatPegram and Spikes had been carrying weapons for each other for sometime past. Pegram had threatened to take Spikes' life on first sight, for the base treatment he had received at his hands. 

"We have heard something of the particulars, but not enough to givethem at this time. Pegram had not been seen since. "

The "Lynchburg Virginian, " July 23, 1638, says:

"A fatal affray occurred a few days ago in Clinton, Mississippi. Theactors in it were a Mr. Parham, Mr. Shackleford, and a Mr. Henry. Shackleford was killed on the spot, and Henry was slightly wounded bya shot gun with which Parham was armed. "

From the "Columbus (Ga. ) Sentinel, " Nov. 22, 1838. 

"_Butchery_. --A Bowie knife slaughter took place a few days since inHonesville, Miss. A Mr. Hobbs was the victim; Strother the butcher. "

The "Vicksburg Sentinel, " Sept. 28, 1837, says:

"It is only a few weeks since humanity was shocked by a most atrociousoutrage, inflicted by the Lynchers, on the person of a Mr. Saundersonof Madison, co. In this state. They dragged this respectable planterfrom the bosom of his family, and mutilated him in the most brutalmanner--maiming him most inhumanly, besides cutting off his nose andears and scarifying his body to the very ribs! We believe the subjectof this foul outrage still drags out a miserable existence--an objectof horror and of pity. Last week a club of Lynchers, amounting to fouror five individuals, as we have been credibly informed, broke into thehouse of Mr. Scott of Wilkinson co. , a respectable member of the bar, forced him out, and hung him dead on the next tree. We have heard ofnumerous minor outrages committed against the peace of society, andthe welfare and happiness of the country; but we mention these as themost enormous that we have heard for some months. 

"It now becomes our painful duty, to notice a most disgraceful outragecommitted by the Lynchers of Vicksburg, on last Sunday. The victim wasa Mr. Grace, formerly of the neighborhood of Warrenton, Va. , but fortwo years a resident of this city. He was detected in giving freepasses to slaves and brought to trial before Squire Maxey. Unfortunately for the wretch, either through the want of law orevidence, he could not be punished, and he was set at liberty by themagistrate. The city marshal seeing that a few in the crowd weredisposed to lay violent hands on the prisoner in the event of hisescaping punishment by law, resolved to accompany him to his house. The Lynch mob still followed, and the marshal finding the prisonercould only be protected by hurrying him to jail, endeavored to effectthat object. The Lynchers, however, pursued the officer of the law, dragged him from his horse, bruised him, and conveyed the prisoner tothe most convenient point of the city for carrying their blood-thirstydesigns into execution. We blush while we record the atrocious deed;in this city, containing nearly 5, 000 souls, in the broad light ofday, this aged wretch was stripped and flogged, we believe withinhearing of the lamentations and the shrieks of his afflicted wife andchildren. "

In an affray at Montgomery, Mississippi, July 1, 1838, Mr. A. L. Herbert was killed by Dr. J. B. Harrington. See Grand Gulf Advertiser, August 1, 1838. 

The "Maryland Republican" of January 30, 1838, has the following:

"A street rencounter lately took place in Jackson, Miss. , between Mr. Robert McDonald and Mr. W. H. Lockhart, in which McDonald was shot witha pistol and immediately expired. Lockhart was committed to prison. "

The "Nashville Banner, " June 22, 1838, has the following:

"On the 8th inst. Col. James M. Hulet was shot with a rifle withoutany apparent provocation in Gallatin, Miss. , by one Richard M. Jones. "

From the "Huntsville Democrat, " Dec. 8, 1838. 

"The Aberdeen (Miss. ) Advocate, of Saturday last, states that on themorning of the day previous, (the 9th) a dispute arose between Mr. Robert Smith and Mr. Alexander Eanes, both of Aberdeen, which resultedin the death of Mr. Smith, who kept a boarding house, and was anamiable man and a good citizen. In the course of the contradictorywords of the disputants, the lie was given by Eanes, upon which Smithgathered up a piece of iron and threw it at Eanes, but which missedhim and lodged in the walls of the house. At this Eanes drew a largedirk knife, and stabbed Smith in the abdomen, the knife penetratingthe vitals, and thus causing immediate death. Smith breathed only afew seconds after the fatal thrust. 

"Eanes immediately mounted his horse and rode off, but was pursued byMr. Hanes, who arrested and took him back, when he was put under guardto await a trial before the proper authorities. "

From the "Vicksburg Register, " Nov. 17, 1838. 

"On the 2d inst. An affray occurred between one Stephen Scarbrough andA. W. Higbee of Grand Gulf, in which Scarbrough was stabbed with aknife, which occasioned his death in a few hours. Higbee has beenarrested and committed for trial. "

From the "Huntsville (Ala. ) Democrat" Nov. 10, 1838. 

"_Life in the Southwest_. --A friend in Louisiana writes, under date ofthe 31st ult. , that a fight took place a few days ago in Madisonparish, 60 miles below Lake Providence, between a Mr. Nevils and a Mr. Harper, which terminated fatally. The police jury had ordered a roadon the right bank of the Mississippi, and the neighboring planterswere out with their forces to open it. For some offence, Nevils, thesuperintendent of the operations, flogged two of Harper's negroes. Thenext day the parties met on horseback, when Harper dismounted, andproceeded to cowskin Nevils for the chastisement inflicted on thenegroes. Nevils immediately drew a pistol and shot his assailant deadon the spot. Both were gentlemen of the highest respectability. 

"An affray also came off recently, as the same correspondent writesus, in Raymond, Hinds co. , Miss. , which for a serious one, was ratheramusing. The sheriff had a process to serve on a man of the name ofBright, and, in consequence of some difficulty and intemperatelanguage, thought proper to commence the service by the application ofhis cowskin to the defendant. Bright thereupon floored his adversary, and, wresting his cowhide from him, applied it to its owner to theextent of at least five hundred lashes, meanwhile threatening to shootthe first bystander who attempted to interfere. The sheriff wascarried home in a state of insensibility, and his life has beendespaired of. The mayor of the place, however, issued his warrant, andstarted three of the sheriff's deputies in pursuit of the delinquent, but the latter, after keeping them at bay till they found itimpossible to arrest him, surrendered himself to the magistrate, bywhom he was bound over to the next Circuit Court. From the mayor'soffice, his honor and the parties litigant proceeded to the tavern totake a drink by way of ending hostilities. But the civil functionaryrefused to sign articles of peace by touching glasses with Bright, whereupon the latter made a furious assault upon him, and then turnedand flogged 'mine host' within an inch of his life because heinterfered. Satisfied with his day's work, Bright retired. Can we showany such specimens of chivalry and refinement in Kentucky!"

From the "Grand Gulf (Miss. ) Advertiser, " June 27, 1837. 

"DEATH BY VIOLENCE. --The moral atmosphere in our state appears to bein a deleterious and sanguinary condition. _Almost every exchangepaper which reaches us contains some inhuman and revolting case ofmurder or death by violence. Not less than fifteen deaths by violencehave occurred, to our certain knowledge, within the past threemonths. _ Such a state of things, in a country professing to be moraland christian, is a disgrace to human nature and is well calculated, to induce those abroad unacquainted with our general habits andfeelings, to regard the morals of our people in no very enviablelight; and does more to injure and weaken our political institutionsthan years of pecuniary distress. The frequency of such events is aburning disgrace to the morality, civilization, and refinement offeeling to which we lay claim and so often boast in comparison withthe older states. And unless we set about and put an immediate andeffectual termination to such revolting scenes, we shall be compelledto part with what all genuine southerners have ever regarded as theirrichest inheritance, the proud appellation of the '_brave, high-mindedand chivalrous sons of the south_. '

"This done, we should soon discover a change for the better--peace andgood order would prevail, and the ends of justice be effectually andspeedily attained, and then the people of this wealthy state would bein a condition to bid defiance to the disgraceful reproaches which arenow daily heaped upon them by the religious and moral of otherstates. "

"The present white population of Mississippi is but little more thanhalf as great as that of Vermont, and yet more horrible crimes areperpetrated by them EVERY MONTH, than have ever been perpetrated inVermont since it has been a state, now about half a century. Whoeverdoubts it, let him get data and make his estimate, and he will findthat this is no random guess. "

LOUISIANA. 

Louisiana became one of the United States in 1811. Its present whitepopulation is about one hundred and fifteen thousand. 

The extracts which follow furnish another illustration of the horrorsproduced by passions blown up to fury in the furnace of arbitrarypower. We have just been looking over a broken file of Louisianapapers, including the last six months of 1837, and the whole of 1838, and find ourselves obliged to abandon our design of publishing even anabstract of the scores and _hundreds_ of affrays, murders, assassinations, duels, lynchings, assaults, &c. Which took place inthat state during that period. Those which have taken place in NewOrleans alone, during the last eighteen months, would, in detail, filla volume. Instead of inserting the details of the principal atrocitiesin Louisiana, as in the states already noticed, we will furnish thereader with the testimony of various editors of newspapers, andothers, residents of the state, which will perhaps as truly set forththe actual state of society there, as could be done by a publicationof the outrages themselves. 

From the "New Orleans Bee, " of May 23, 1838. 

"_Contempt of human life. _--In view of the crimes which are _daily_committed, we are led to inquire whether it is owing to theinefficiency of our laws, or to the manner in which those laws areadministered, that this _frightful deluge of human blood fowl throughour streets and our places of public resort_. 

"Whither will such contempt for the life of man lead us? Theunhealthiness of the climate mows down annually a part of ourpopulation; the murderous steel despatches its proportion; and ifcrime increases as it has, the latter will soon become _the mostpowerful agent in destroying life_. 

"We cannot but doubt the perfection of our criminal code, when we seethat _almost every criminal eludes the law_, either by boldly avowingthe crime, or by the tardiness with which legal prosecutions arecarried on, or, lastly, by the convenient application of _bail_ incriminal cases. "

The "New Orleans Picayune" of July 30, 1837, says:

"It is with the most painful feelings that we _daily_ hear of some_fatal_ duel. Yesterday we were told of the unhappy end of one of ourmost influential and highly respectable merchants, who fell yesterdaymorning at sunrise in a duel. As usual, the circumstances which led tothe meeting were trivial. "

The New Orleans correspondent of the New York Express, in his letterdated New Orleans, July 30, 1837, says:

"THIRTEEN DUELS have been fought in and near the city during the week;_five more were to take place this morning_. "

The "New Orleans Merchant" of March 20, 1838, says:

"Murder has been rife within the two or three weeks last past; andwhat is worse, the authorities of those places where they occur are_perfectly regardless of the fact_. "

The "New Orleans Bee" of September 8, 1838, says:

"Not two months since, the miserable BARBA became a victim to one ofthe most cold-blooded schemes of assassination that ever disgraced acivilized community. Last Sunday evening an individual, Gonzales byname, was seen in perfect health, in conversation with his friends. OnMonday morning his dead body was withdrawn from the Mississippi, nearthe ferry of the first municipality, in a state of terriblemutilation. To cap the climax of horror, on Friday morning, about halfpast six o'clock, the coroner was called to hold an inquest over thebody of an individual, between Magazine and Tchoupitoulas streets. Thehead was entirely severed from the body; the lower extremities hadlikewise suffered amputation; the right foot was completelydismembered from the leg, and the left knee nearly severed from thethigh. Several stabs, wounds and bruises, were discovered on variousparts of the body, which of themselves were sufficient to producedeath. "

The "Georgetown (South Carolina) Union" of May 20, 1837, has thefollowing extract from a New Orleans paper. 

"A short time since, two men shot one another down in one of our barrooms, one of whom died instantly. A day or two after, one or twoinfants were found murdered, there was every reason to believe, bytheir own mothers. Last week we had to chronicle a brutal and bloodymurder, committed in the heart of our city: the very next day amurder-trial was commenced in our criminal court: the day ensuingthis, we published the particulars of Hart's murder. The day afterthat, Tibbetts was hung for attempting to commit a murder; the nextday again we had to publish a murder committed by two Spaniards at theLake--this was on Friday last. On Sunday we published the account ofanother murder committed by the Italian, Gregorio. On Monday, anothermurder was committed, and the murderer lodged in jail. On Tuesdaymorning another man was stabbed and robbed, and is not likely torecover, but the assassin escaped. The same day Reynolds, who killedBarre, shot himself in prison. On Wednesday, another person, Mr. Nicolet, blew out his brains. Yesterday, the unfortunate GeorgeClement destroyed himself in his cell; and in addition to thisdreadful catalogue we have to add that of the death of two, brothers, who destroyed themselves through grief at the death of their mother;and truly may we say that 'we know not what to-morrow will bringforth. '"

The "Louisiana Advertiser, " as quoted by the Salt River (Mo. ) Journalof May 25, 1837, says:

"Within the last ten or twelve days, three suicides, four murders, andtwo executions, have occurred in the city!"

The "New Orleans Bee" of October 25, 1837, says:

"We remark with regret the frightful list of homicides that are_daily_ committed in New Orleans. "

The "Planter's Banner" of September 30. 1838, published at Franklin, Louisiana, after giving an account of an affray between a number ofplanters, in which three were killed and a fourth mortally wounded, says that "Davis (one of the murderers) was arrested by theby-standers, but a _justice of the peace_ came up and told them, hedid not think it right to keep a man 'tied in that manner, ' and'thought it best to turn him loose. ' _It was accordingly so done_. "

This occurred in the parish of Harrisonburg. The Banner closes theaccount by saying:

"Our informant states that _five white men_ and _one_ negro have beenmurdered in the parish of Madison, during the months of July andAugust. "

This _justice of the peace_, who bade the by-standers unloose themurderer, mentioned above, has plenty of birds of his own featheramong the law officers of Louisiana. Two of the leading officers inthe New Orleans police took two witnesses, while undergoing legalexamination at Covington, near New Orleans, "carried them to abye-place, and _lynched_ them, during which inquisitorial operation, they divulged every thing to the officers, Messrs. Foyle and Crossman. "The preceding fact is published in the Maryland Republican of August22, 1837. 

Judge Canonge of New Orleans, in his address at the opening of thecriminal court, Nov. 4, 1837, published in the "Bee" of Nov. 8, inremarking upon the prevalence of out-breaking crimes, says:

"Is it possible in a civilized country such crying abuses are_constantly_ encountered? How many individuals have given themselvesup to such culpable habits! Yet we find magistrates and jurieshesitating to expose crimes of the blackest dye to eternal contemptand infamy, to the vengeance of the law. 

"As a Louisianian parent, _I reflect with terror_ that our belovedchildren, reared to become one day honorable and useful citizens, maybe the victims of these votaries of vice and licentiousness. Withoutsome powerful and certain remedy, _our streets will become butcheriesoverflowing with the blood of our citizens_. "

The Editor of the "New Orleans Bee, " in his paper of Oct. 21, 1837, has a long editorial article, in which he argues for the virtuallegalizing of LYNCH LAW, as follows:

"We think then that in the circumstances in which we are placed, theLegislature ought to sanction such measures as the situation of thecountry render necessary, by giving to justice a _convenientlatitude_. There are occasions when the delays inseparable from theadministration of justice would be inimical to the public safety, andwhen the most fatal consequences would be the result. 

"It appears to us, that there is an urgent necessity to provideagainst the inconveniences which result from popular judgment, and tocheck the disposition for the speedy execution of justice resultingfrom the unconstitutional principle of a pretended Lynch law, byauthorizing the parish court to take cognizance without delay, againstevery free man who shall be convicted of a crime; from the accusationsarising from the mere provocations to the insurrection of the workingclasses. 

"All judicial sentences ought to be based upon law, and the terribleprivilege which the populace now have of punishing with death certaincrimes, _ought to be consecrated by law_, powerful interests would notsuffice in our view to excuse the interruption of social order, if thepublic safety was not with us the supreme law. 

"This is the reason that whilst we deplore the imperious necessitywhich exists, we entreat the legislative power to give the sanction ofprinciple to what already exists in fact. "

The Editor of the "New Orleans Bee, " in his paper, Oct 25, 1837, says:

"We remark with regret the frightful list of homicides, whetherjustifiable or not, that are daily committed in New Orleans. It is notthrough any inherent vice of legal provision that such outrages areperpetrated with impunity: it is rather in the neglect of the_application of the law_ which exists on this subject. 

"We will confine our observation to the dangerous facilities affordedby this code for the escape of the homicide. We are well aware thatthe laws in question are intended for the distribution of equaljustice, yet we have too often witnessed the acquittal of delinquentswhom we can denominate by no other title than that of homicides, whilethe simple affirmation of others has been admitted (in default oftestimony) who are themselves the authors of the deed, for which theystand in judgment. The _indiscriminate system of accepting bail_ is ablot on our criminal legislation, and is one great reason why so manyviolators of the law avoid its penalties. To this doubtless must beascribed the non-interference of the Attorney General. The law of_habeas corpus_ being subjected to the interpretation of everymagistrate, whether versed or not in criminal cases, a degree ofarbitrary and incorrect explanation necessarily results. Howfrequently does it happen that the Mayor or Recorder decides upon thegravest case without putting himself to the smallest trouble to informthe Attorney General, who sometimes only hears of the affair wheninvestigation is no longer possible, or when the criminal has wiselycommuted his punishment into temporary or perpetual exile. "

That morality suffers by such practices, is beyond a doubt; yetmoderation and mercy are so beautiful in themselves, that we wouldscarcely protest against indulgence, were it not well known that theacceptance of bail is the safeguard of every delinquent who, throughwealth or connections, possesses influence enough to obtain it. Herearbitrary construction glides amidst the confusion of testimony; thereit presumes upon the want of evidence, and from one cause or anotherit is extremely rare, that a refusal to bail has delivered the accusedinto the hands of justice. In criminal cases, the Court and Jury arethe proper tribunals to decide upon the reality of the crime, and thepalliating circumstances; _yet it is not unfrequent_ for the publicvoice to condemn as an odious assassin, the very individual who by theacquittal of the judge, walks at large and scoffs at justice. 

"It is time to restrict within its proper limits this pretended rightof personal protection; it is time to teach our population to abstainfrom mutual murder upon slight provocation. --Duelling, Heaven knows, is dreadful enough, and quite a sufficient means of gratifying privateaversion, and avenging insult. Frequent and serious brawls in ourcafes, streets and houses, every where attest the insufficiency ormisapplication of our legal code, or the want of energy in its organs. To say that unbounded license is the insult of liberty is folly. Liberty is the consequence of well regulated laws--without these, Freedom can exist only in name, and the law which favors the escape ofthe opulent and aristocratic from the penalties of retribution, butconsigns the poor and friendless to the chain-gang or the gallows, isin fact the very essence of slavery!!"

The editor of the same paper says (Nov. 4, 1837. )

"Perhaps by an equitable, but strict application of that law, (the lawwhich forbids the wearing of deadly weapons concealed, ) the effusionof human blood might be stopt _which now defiles our streets and ourcoffee-houses as if they were shambles_! Reckless disregard of thelife of man is rapidly gaining ground among us, and the habit ofseeing a man whom it is taken for granted was armed, murdered merelyfor a _gesture_, may influence the opinion of a jury composed ofcitizens, whom, LONG IMPUNITY TO HOMICIDES OF EVERY KIND haspersuaded, that the right of self-defence extends even to the takingof life for _gestures_, more or less threatening. So many DAILYinstances of outbreaking passion which have thrown whole families intothe deepest affliction, teach us a terrible lesson. "

From the "Columbus (Ga. ) Sentinel, " July 6, 1837. 

"_Wholesale Murders_. --No less than three murders were committed inNew Orleans on Monday evening last. The first was that of a man inPoydras, near the corner of Tehapitoulas. The murdered individual hadbeen suspected of a _liason_ with another man's wife in theneighbourhood, was caught in the act, followed to the above corner andshot. 

"The second was that of a man in Perdido street. Circumstances notknown. 

"The third was that of a watchman, on the corner of Custom House andBurgundy street, who was found dead yesterday morning, shot throughthe heart. The deed was evidently committed on the opposite side fromwhere he was found, as the unfortunate man was tracked by his bloodacross the street. In addition to being shot through the heart, twowounds in his breast, supposed to have been done with a Bowie knife, were discovered. No arrests have been made to our knowledge. "

The editor of the "Charleston, (S. C. ) Mercury" of April, 1837, snakesthe following remarks. 

"The energy of a Tacon is much needed to vivify the police of NewOrleans. In a single paper we find an account of the execution of oneman for robbery and intent to kill, of the arrest of another forstabbing a man to death with a carving knife; and of a third foundmurdered on the Levee on the previous Sunday morning. In the lastcase, although the murderer was known, _no steps had been taken forhis arrest_; and to crown the whole, it is actually stated in so manywords, that the City guards are not permitted, according to theirinstructions, to patrol the Levee after night, for fear of attacksfrom persons employed in steamboats!"

The present white population of Louisiana is but little more than thatof Rhode Island, yet more appalling crime is committed in Louisiana_every day_, than in Rhode Island during a year, notwithstanding thetone of public morals is probably lower in the latter than in anyother New England state. 

TENNESSEE. 

Tennessee became one of the United States in 1796. Its present whitepopulation is about seven hundred thousand. 

The details which follow, go to confirm the old truth, that theexercise of arbitrary power tends to make men monsters. The following, from the "Memphis (Tennessee) Enquirer, " was published in the VirginiaAdvocate, Jan. 26, 1838. 

"Below will be found a detailed account of one of the most unnaturaland aggravated murders ever recorded. Col. Ward, the deceased, was aman of high standing in the state, and very much esteemed by hisneighbors, and by all who knew him. The brothers concerned in this'murder, most foul and unnatural, ' were Lafayette, Chamberlayne, Caesar, and Achilles Jones, (the nephews of Col. Ward. )

"The four brothers, all armed, went to the residence of Mr. A. G. Ward, in Shelby co. , on the evening of 22d instant. They were conducted intothe room in which Col. Ward was sitting, together with some two orthree ladies, his intended wife amongst the number. Upon theirentering the room, Col. Ward rose, and extended his hand to Lafayette. He refused, saying he would shake hands with no such d----d rascal. The rest answered in the same tone. Col. Ward remarked that they werenot in a proper place for a difficulty, if they sought one. Col. Wardwent from the room to the passage, and was followed by the brothers. He said he was unarmed, but if they would lay down their arms, hecould whip the whole of them; or if they would place him on an equalfooting, he could whip the whole of them one by one. Caesar toldChamberlayne to give the Col. One of his pistols, which he did, andboth went out into the yard, the other brothers following. Whilestanding a few paces from each other, Lafayette came up, and remarkedto the Col. , 'If you spill my brother's blood, I will spill yours, 'about which time Chamberlayne's pistol fired, and immediatelyLafayette bursted a cap at him. The Colonel turned to Lafayette, andsaid, 'Lafayette, you intend to kill, ' and discharged his pistol athim. The ball struck the pistol of Lafayette, and glanced into hisarm. By this time Albert Ward, being close by, and hearing the fuss, came up to the assistance of the Colonel, when a scuffle amongst allhands ensued. The Colonel stumbled and fell down--he received severalwounds from a large bowie knife; and, after being stabbed, Chamberlayne jumped upon him, and stamped him several times. After thescuffle, Caesar Jones was seen to put up a large bowie knife. ColonelWard said he was a dead man. By the assistance of Albert Ward, hereached the house, distance about 15 or 20 yards, and in a few minutesexpired. On examination by the Coroner, it appeared that he hadreceived several wounds from pistols and knives. Albert Ward was alsobadly bruised, not dangerously. "

The "New Orleans Bee, " Sept. 22, 1838, published the following fromthe "Nashville (Tennessee) Whig. "

"The Nashville Whig, of the 11th ult. , says: Pleasant Watson, of DeKalb county, and a Mr. Carmichael, of Alabama, were the principals inan affray at Livingston, Overton county, last week, which terminatedin the death of the former. Watson made the assault with a dirk, andCarmichael defended himself with a pistol, shooting his antagonistthrough the body, a few inches below the heart. Watson was living atthe last account. The dispute grew out of a horse race. "

The New Orleans Courier, April 7, 1837, has the following extract fromthe "McMinersville (Tennessee) Gazette. "

"On Saturday, the 8th instant, Colonel David L. Mitchell, the worthysheriff of White county, was most barbarously murdered by a man namedJoseph Little. Colonel Mitchell had a civil process against Little. Hewent to Little's house for the purpose of arresting him. He foundLittle armed with a rifle, pistols, &c. He commenced a conversationwith Little upon the impropriety of his resisting, and stated hisdetermination to take him, at the same time slowly advancing uponLittle, who discharged his rifle at him without effect. Mitchell thenattempted to jump in, to take hold of him when Little struck him overthe head with the barrel of his rifle, and literally mashed his skullto pieces; and, as he lay prostrate on the earth, Little deliberatelypulled a large pistol from his belt, and placing the muzzle close toMitchell's head, he shot the ball through it. Little has made hisescape. _There were three men near by when the murder was committed, who made no attempt to arrest the murderer_. "

The following affray at Athens, Tennessee, from the Mississippian, August 10, 1838. 

"An unpleasant occurrence transpired at Athens on Monday. CaptainJames Byrnes was stabbed four times, twice in the arm, and twice inthe side by A. R. Livingston. The wounds are said to be very severe, and fears are entertained of their proving mortal. The affairunderwent an examination before Sylvester Nichols, Esq. , by whomLivingston was let to bail. "

The "West Tennessean, " Aug. 4, 1837, says--

"A duel was fought at Calhoun, Tenn. , between G. W. Carter and J. C. Sherley. They used yaugers at the distance of 20 yards. The former wasslightly wounded, and the latter quite dangerously. "

June 23d, 1838, Benjamin Shipley, of Hamilton co. , Tennessee, shotArchibald McCallie. (_Nashville Banner_, July 16, 1838. )

June 23d, 1838, Levi Stunston, of Weakly co. , Tennessee, killedWilliam Price, of said county, in an affray. (_Nashville Banner, July6, 1838_. )

October 8, 1838, in an affray at Wolf's Ferry, Tennessee, MartinFarley, Senior, was killed by John and Solomon Step. (_GeorgiaTelegraph, Nov 6, 1838. _. )

Feb. 14, 1838, John Manie was killed by William Doss at Decatur, Tennessee. (_Memphis Gazette, May 15, 1838_. )

 "From the Nashville Whig. "

"_Fatal Affray in Columbia, Tenn_. --A fatal street encounter occurredat that place, on the 3d inst. , between Richard H. Hays, attorney atlaw, and Wm. Polk, brother to the Hon. Jas. K. Polk. The parties met, armed with pistols, and exchanged shots simultaneously. A buck-shotpierced the brain of Hays, and he died early the next morning. Thequarrel grew out of a sportive remark of Hays', at dinner, at theColumbia Inn, for which he offered an apology, not accepted, it seems, as Polk went to Hays' office, the same evening, and chastised him witha whip. This occurred on Friday, the fatal result took place onMonday. "

In a fight near Memphis, Tennessee, May 15, 1837, Mr. Jackson, of thatplace, shot through the heart Mr. W. F. Gholson, son of the late Mr. Gholson, of Virginia. (_Raleigh Register, June 13, 1837_. )

The following horrible outrage, committed in West Tennessee, not farfrom Randolph, was published by the Georgetown (S. C. ) Union, May 26, 1837, from the Louisville Journal. 

"A feeble bodied man settled a few years ago on the Mississippi, ashort distance below Randolph, on the Tennessee side. He succeeded inamassing property to the value of about $14, 000, and, like most of thesettlers, made a business of selling wood to the boats. This he soldat $2. 50 a cord, while his neighbors asked $3. One of them came toremonstrate against his underselling, and had a fight with hisbrother-in-law Clark, in which he was beaten. He then went andobtained legal process against Clark, and returned with a deputysheriff, attended by a posse of desperate villains. When they arrivedat Clark's house, he was seated among his children--they put two orthree balls through his body. Clark ran, was overtaken and knockeddown; in the midst of his cries for mercy, one of the villains fired apistol in his mouth, killing him instantly. They then required thesettler to sell his property to them, and leave the country. He, fearing that they would otherwise take his life, sold them hisvaluable property for $300, and departed with his family. _The sheriffwas one of the purchasers. _"

The Baltimore American, Feb. 8, 1838, publishes the following from theNashville (Tennessee) Banner:

"A most atrocious murder was committed a few days ago at Lagrange, inthis state, on the body of Mr. John T. Foster, a respectable merchantof that town. The perpetrators of this bloody act are E. Moody, ThomasMoody, J. E. Douglass, W. R. Harris, and W. C. Harris. The circumstancesattending this horrible affair, are the following:--On the nightprevious to the murder, a gang of villains, under pretence of wishingto purchase goods, entered Mr. Foster's store, took him by force, androde him through the streets _on a rail_. The next morning, Mr. F. Metone of the party, and gave him a caning. For this just retaliation forthe outrage which had been committed on his person, he was pursued bythe persons alone named, while taking a walk with a friend, andmurdered in the open face of day. "

The following presentment of a Tennessee Grand Jury, sufficientlyexplains and comments on itself:

The Grand Jurors empanelled to inquire for the county of Shelby, wouldseparate without having discharged their duties, if they were to omitto notice public evils which they have found their powers inadequateto put in train for punishment. The evils referred to exist moreparticularly in the town of Memphis. 

The audacity and frequency with which outrages are committed, forbidus, in justice to our consciences, to omit to use the powers wepossess, to bring them to the severe action of the law; and when wefind our powers inadequate, to draw upon them public attention, andthe rebuke of the good. 

An infamous female publicly and grossly assaults a lady; therefore apublic meeting is called, the mayor of the town is placed in thechair, resolutions are adopted, providing for the summary and lawlesspunishment of the wretched woman. In the progress of the affair, _hundreds of citizens_ assemble at her house, and raze it to theground. The unfortunate creature, together with two or three men oflike character, are committed, in an open canoe or boat, without oaror paddle, to the middle of the Mississippi river. 

Such is a concise outline of the leading incidents of a recenttransaction in Memphis. It might be filled up by the detail ofindividual exploits, which would give vivacity to the description; butwe forbear to mention them. We leave it to others to admire themanliness of the transaction, and the courage displayed by a mob ofhundreds, in the various outrages upon the persons and property ofthree or four individuals who fell under its vengeance. 

The present white population of Tennessee is about the same with thatof Massachusetts, and yet more outbreaking crimes are committed inTennessee in a _single month_, than in Massachusetts during a wholeyear; and this, too, notwithstanding the largest town in Tennessee hasbut six thousand inhabitants; whereas, in Massachusetts, besides oneof eighty thousand, and two others of nearly twenty thousand each, there are at least a dozen larger than the chief town in Tennessee, which gives to the latter state an important advantage on the score ofmorality, the country being so much more favorable to it than largetowns. 

KENTUCKY. 

Kentucky has been one of the United States since 1792. Its presentwhite population is about six hundred thousand. 

The details which follow show still further that those who unite toplunder of their rights one class of human beings, regard as _sacred_the rights of no class. 

The following affair at Maysville, Kentucky, is extracted from theMaryland Republican, January 30, 1838. 

"A fight came on at Maysville, Ky. On the 29th ultimo, in which a Mr. Coulster was stabbed in the side and is dead; a Mr. Gibson was wellhacked with a knife; a Mr. Ferris was dangerously wounded in the head, and another of the same name in the hip; a Mr. Shoemaker was severelybeaten, and several others seriously hurt in various ways. "

The following is extracted from the N. C. Standard. 

"A most bloody and shocking transaction took place in the little townof Clinton, Hickman co. Ken. The circumstances are briefly as follows:A special canvass for a representative from the county of Hickman, hadfor some time been in progress. A gentleman by the name of Binford wasa candidate. The State Senator from the district, Judge James, tooksome exceptions to the reputation of Binford, and intimated that if B. Should be elected, he (James) would resign rather than serve with sucha colleague. Hearing this, Binford went to the house of James todemand an explanation. Mrs. James remarked, in a jest as Binfordthought, that if she was in the place of her husband she would resignher seat in the Senate, and not serve with such a character. B. Toldher that she was a woman, and could say what she pleased. She repliedthat she was not in earnest. James then looked B. In the face and saidthat, if his wife said so, it was the fact--'he was an infamousscoundrel and d----d rascal. ' He asked B. If he was armed, and onbeing answered in the affirmative, he stepped into an adjoining roomto arm himself; He was prevented by the family from returning, andBinford walked out. J. Then told him from his piazza, that he wouldmeet him next day in Clinton. 

"True to their appointment, the enraged parties met on the streets thefollowing day. James shot first, his ball passing through hisantagonist's liver, whose pistol fired immediately afterwards, andmissing J. , the ball pierced the head of a stranger by the name ofCollins, who instantly fell and expired. After being shot, Binfordsprang upon J. With the fury of a wounded tiger, and would have takenhis life but for a second shot received through the back from BartinJames, the brother of Thomas. Even after he received the last fatalwound he struggled with his antagonist until death relaxed his grasp, and he fell with the horrid exclamation, _'I am a dead man!'_

"Judge James gave himself up to the authorities; and when theinformant of the editor left Clinton, Binford, and the unfortunatestranger lay shrouded corpses together. "

The "N. O. Bee" thus gives the conclusion of the matter:

"Judge James was tried and acquitted, the death of Binford beingregarded as an act of justifiable homicide. "

From the "Flemingsburg Kentuckian, " June 23, '38. 

AFFRAY. --Thomas Binford, of Hickman county, Kentucky, recently attackeda Mr. Gardner of Dresden, with a drawn knife, and cut his face prettybadly. Gardner picked up a piece of iron and gave him a side-wipeabove the ear that brought him to terms. The skull was fractured abouttwo inches. Binford's brother was killed at Clinton, Kentucky, lastfall by Judge James. 

The "Red River Whig" of September 15, 1838, says:--"A ruffian of thename of Charles Gibson, attempted to murder a girl named Mary Green, of Louisville, Ky. On the 23d ult. He cut her in six different placeswith a Bowie knife. His object, as stated in a subsequentinvestigation before the Police Court, was to cut her throat, whichshe prevented by throwing up her arms. "

From the "Louisville Advertiser, " Dec. 17th, 1838:--"A startlingtragedy occurred in this city on Saturday evening last, in which A. H. Meeks was instantly killed, John Rothwell mortally wounded, WilliamHolmes severely wounded, and Henry Oldham slightly, by the use ofBowie knives, by Judge E. C. Wilkinson, and his brother, B. R. Wilkinson, of Natchez, and J. Murdough, of Holly Springs, Mississippi. It seems that Judge Wilkinson had ordered a coat at the shop ofMessrs. Varnum & Redding. The coat was made; the Judge, accompanied byhis brother and Mr. Murdough, went to the shop of Varnum & Redding, tried on the coat, and was irritated because, as he believed, it didnot fit him. Mr. Redding undertook to convince him that he was inerror, and ventured to assure the Judge that the coat was well made. The Judge instantly seized an iron poker, and commenced an attack onRedding. The blow with the poker was partially warded off--Reddinggrappled his assailant, when a companion of the Judge drew a Bowieknife, and, but for the interposition and interference of theunfortunate Meeks, a journeyman tailor, and a gentleman passing by atthe moment, Redding might have been assassinated in his own shop. Shortly afterwards, Redding, Meeks, Rothwell, and Holmes went to theGalt House. They sent up stairs for Judge Wilkinson, and he came downinto the bar room, when angry words were passed. The Judge went upstairs again, and in a short time returned with his companions, allarmed with knives. Harsh language was again used. Meeks, felt calledon to state what he had seen of the conflict, and did so, and Murdoughgave him the d--d lie, for which Meeks struck him. On receiving theblow with the whip, Murdough instantly plunged his Bowie knife intothe abdomen of Meeks, and killed him on the spot. 

"At the same instant B. R. Wilkinson attempted to get at Redding, andHolmes and Rothwell interfered, or joined in the affray. Holmes waswounded, probably by B. R. Wilkinson; and the Judge, having left theroom for an instant, returned, and finding Rothwell contending withhis brother, or bending over him, he (the Judge) stabbed Rothwell inthe back, and inflicted a mortal wound. 

"Judge Wilkinson, his brother, and J. Murdough, have been recentlytried and ACQUITTED. "

From the "New Orleans Bee, " Sept. 27, 1838. 

"It appears from the statement of the Lexington Intelligencer, thatthere has been for some time past, an enmity between the drivers ofthe old and opposition lines of stages running from that city. On theevening of the 13th an encounter took place at the Circus between twoof them, Powell and Cameron, and the latter was so much injured thathis life was in imminent danger. About 12 o'clock the same night, several drivers of the old line rushed into Keizer's Hotel, wherePowell and other drivers of the opposition-line boarded, and a generalmelee took place, in the course of which several pistols weredischarged, the ball of one of them passing through the head ofCrabster, an old line driver, and killing him on the spot. Crabster, before he was shot, had discharged his own pistol which had burst intofragments. Two or three drivers of the opposition were wounded withbuck shot, but not dangerously. "

The "Mobile Advertiser" of September 15, 1838, copies the followingfrom the Louisville (Ky. ) Journal. 

"A Mr. Campbell was killed in Henderson county on the 31st ult. By aMr. Harrison. It appears, that there was an affray between the partiessome months ago, and that Harrison subsequently left home and returnedon the 31st in a trading boat. Campbell met him at the boat with aloaded rifle and declared his determination to kill him, at the sametime asking him whether he had a rifle and expressing a desire to givehim a fair chance. Harrison affected to laugh at the whole matter andinvited Campbell into his boat to take a drink with him. Campbellaccepted the invitation, but, while he was in the act of drinking, Harrison seized his rifle, fired it off, and laid Campbell dead bystriking him with the barrel of it. "

The "Missouri Republican" of July 29, 1837 published the details whichfollow from the Louisville Journal. 

MOUNT STERLING, Ky. July 20, 1837. 

"Gentlemen:--A most unfortunate and fatal occurrence transpired in ourtown last evening, about 6 o'clock. Some of the most prominent friendsof Judge French had a meeting yesterday at Col. Young's, near thisplace, and warm words ensued between Mr. Albert Thomas and BelvardPeters, Esq. , and a few blows were exchanged, and several of thefriends of each collected at the spot. Whilst the parties were thusengaged. Mr. Wm. White, who was a friend of Mr. Peters, struck Mr. Thomas, whereupon B. F. Thomas Esq. Engaged in the combat on the sideof his brother and Mr. W. Roberts on the part of Peters--Mr. G. W. Thomas taking part with his brothers. Albert Thomas had Peters downand was taken off by a gentleman present, and whilst held by thatgentleman, he was struck by White; and B. F. Thomas having made someremark White struck him. B. F. Thomas returned the blow, and having alarge knife, stabbed White, who nevertheless continued the contest, and, it is said, broke Thomas's arm with a rock of a chair. Thomasthen inflicted some other stabs, of which White died in a few minutes. Roberts was knocked down twice by Albert Thomas, and, I believe, ismuch hurt. G. W. Thomas was somewhat hurt also. White and B. F. Thomashad always been on friendly terms. You are acquainted with the Messrs. Thomas. Mr. White was a much larger man than either of them, weighingnearly 200 pounds, and in the prime of life. As you may very naturallysuppose, great excitement prevails here, and Mr. B. F. Thomas regretsthe fatal catastrophe as much as any one else, but believes from allthe circumstances that he was justifiable in what he did, although hewould be as far from doing such an act when cool and deliberate as anyman whatever. "

The "New Orleans Bulletin" of Aug. 24, 1838, extracts the followingfrom the Louisville Journal. 

"News has just reached us, that Thomas P. Moore, attacked the SeniorEditor of this paper in the yard of the Harrodsburg Springs. Mr. Mooreadvanced upon Mr. Prentice with a drawn pistol and fired at him; Mr. Prentice then fired, neither shot taking effect. Mr. Prentice drew asecond pistol, when Mr. Moore quailed and said he had no other arms;whereupon Mr. Prentice from superabundant magnanimity spared themiscreant's life. "

From "The Floridian" of June 10, 1837. MURDER. Mr. Gillespie, arespectable citizen aged 50, was murdered a few days since by a Mr. Arnett, near Mumfordsville, Ky. , which latter shot his victim twicewith a rifle. 

The "Augusta (Ga. ) Sentinel, " May 11, 1838, has the following accountof murders in Kentucky:

"At Mill's Point, Kentucky, Dr. Thomas Rivers was shot one day lastweek, from out of a window, by Lawyer Ferguson, both citizens of thatplace, and both parties are represented to have stood high in theestimation of the community in which they lived. The difficulty weunderstand to have grown out of a law suit at issue between them. "

Just as our paper was going to press, we learn that the brother of Dr. Rivers, who had been sent for, had arrived, and immediately shotLawyer Ferguson. He at first shot him with a shot gun, upon hisretreat, which did not prove fatal; he then approached him immediatelywith a pistol, and killed him on the spot. "

The Right Rev. B. B. Smith, Bishop of the Episcopal diocese ofKentucky, published about two years since an article in the Lexington(Ky. ) Intelligencer, entitled "Thoughts on the frequency of homicidesin the state of Kentucky. " We conclude this head with a brief extractfrom the testimony of the Bishop, contained in that article. 

"The writer has never conversed with a traveled and enlightenedEuropean or eastern man, who has not expressed the most undisguisedhorror at the frequency of homicide and murder within our bounds, andat the _ease with which the homicide escapes from punishment_. 

"As to the frequency of these shocking occurrences, the writer hassome opportunity of being correctly impressed, by means of a yearlytour through many counties of the State. He has also been particularin making inquiries of our most distinguished legal and politicalcharacters, and from some has derived conjectural estimates which weretruly alarming. A few have been of the opinion, that on an average onemurder a year may be charged to the account of every county in thestate, making the frightful aggregate of 850 human lives sacrificed torevenge, or the victims of momentary passion, in the course of everyten years. 

"Others have placed the estimate much lower, and have thought thatthirty for the whole state, every year, would be found much nearer thetruth. An attempt has been made lately to obtain data moresatisfactory than conjecture, and circulars have been addressed to theclerks of most of the counties, in order to arrive at as correct anestimate as possible of the actual number of homicides during thethree years last past. It will be seen, however, that statistics thusobtained, even from every county in the state, would necessarily beimperfect, inasmuch as the records of the courts _by no means show allthe cases_, which occur, some escaping without _any_ of the forms of alegal examination, and there being _many affrays_ which end only inwounds, or where the parties are separated. 

"From these returns, it appears that in 27 counties there have been, within the last three years, of homicides of every grade, 35, but only8 convictions in the same period, leaving 27 cases which have passedwholly unpunished. During the same period there have been fromeighty-five counties, only eleven commitments to the state prison, nine for manslaughter, and two for shooting with intent to kill, _andnot an instance of capital punishment in the person of any whiteoffender_. Thus an approximation is made to a general average, whichprobably would not vary much from one in each county every threeyears, or about 280 in ten years. 

"It is believed that such a register of crime amongst a peopleprofessing the protestant religion and speaking the English language, is not to be found, with regard to any three-quarters of a million ofpeople, since the downfall of the feudal system. Compared with therecords of crime in Scotland, or the eastern states, the results areABSOLUTELY SHOCKING! _It is believed there are more homicides, on anaverage of two years, in any of our more populous counties, than inthe whole of several of our states, of equal or nearly equal whitepopulation with Kentucky. _

"The victims of these affrays are not always, by any means, the mostworthless of our population. 

"It too often happens that the enlightened citizen, the devotedlawyer, the affectionate husband, and precious father, are thusinstantaneously taken from their useful stations on earth, andhurried, all unprepared, to their final account!

"The question, is again asked, what could have brought about, and canperpetuate, this shocking state of things?"

As an illustration of the recklessness of life in Kentucky, and theterrible paralysis of public sentiment, the bishop states thefollowing fact. 

"A case of shocking homicide is remembered, where the guilty personwas acquitted by a sort of acclamation, and the next day was seen inpublic, with two ladies hanging on his arm!"

Notwithstanding the frightful frequency of deadly affrays in Kentucky, as is certified by the above testimony of Bishop Smith, there arefewer, in proportion to the white population, than in any of thestates which have passed under review, unless Tennessee may be anexception. The present white population of Kentucky is perhaps seventythousand more than that of Maine, and yet more public fatal affrayshave taken place in the former, within the last six months, than inthe latter during its entire existence as a state. 

The seven slave states which we have already passed under review, arejust one half of the slave states and territories, included in theAmerican Union. Before proceeding to consider the condition of societyin the other slave states, we pause a moment to review the groundalready traversed. 

The present entire white population of the states already considered, is about two and a quarter millions; just about equal to the presentwhite population of the state of New York. If the amount of crimeresulting in loss of life, which is perpetrated by the whitepopulation of those states upon the _whites alone_, be contrasted withthe amount perpetrated in the state of New York, by _all_ classes, upon _all_, we believe it will be found, that more of such crimes havebeen committed in these states within the last 18 months, than haveoccurred in the state of New York for half a century. But perhaps weshall be told that in these seven states, there are scores of citiesand large towns, and that a majority of all these deadly affrays, &c. , take place in _them_; to this we reply, that there are _three times asmany_ cities and large towns in the state of New York, as in all thosestates together, and that nearly all the capital crimes perpetrated inthe state take place in these cities and large villages. In the stateof New York, there are more than _half a million_ of persons who livein cities and villages of more than two thousand inhabitants, whereasin Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas andMissouri, there are on the largest computation not more than _onehundred thousand_ persons, residing in cities and villages of morethan two thousand inhabitants, and the white population of theseplaces (which alone is included in the estimate of crime, and that too_inflicted upon whites only_, ) is probably not more than _sixty-fivethousand_. 

But it will doubtless be pleaded in mitigation, that the cities andlarge villages in those states are _new_; that they have not hadsufficient time thoroughly to organize their police, so as to make itan effectual terror to evil doers; and further, that the rapid growthof those places has so overloaded the authorities with all sorts ofresponsibilities, that due attention to the preservation of the publicpeace has been nearly impossible; and besides, they have had noofficial experience to draw upon, as in the older cities, the officesbeing generally filled by young men, as a necessary consequence of thenewness of the country, &c. To this we reply, that New Orleans is morethan a century old, and for half that period has been the centre of agreat trade; that St. Louis, Natchez, Mobile, Nashville, Louisvilleand Lexington, are all half a century old, and each had arrived atyears of discretion, while yet the sites of Buffalo, Rochester, Lockport, Canandaigua, Geneva, Auburn, Ithaca, Oswego, Syracuse, andother large towns in Western New-York, _were a wilderness_. Further, as _a number_ of these places are larger than _either_ of the former, their growth must have been more _rapid_, and, consequently, they musthave encountered still greater obstacles in the organization of anefficient police than those south western cities, with this exception, THEY WERE NOT SETTLED BY SLAVEHOLDERS. 

The absurdity of assigning the _newness_ of the country, theunrestrained habits of pioneer settlers, the recklessness of lifeengendered by wars with the Indians, &c. , as reasons sufficient toaccount for the frightful amount of crime in the states under review, is manifest from the fact, that Vermont is of the same age withKentucky; Ohio, ten years younger than Kentucky, and six years youngerthan Tennessee; Indiana, five years younger than Louisiana; Illinois, one year younger than Mississippi; Maine, of the same age withMissouri, and two years younger than Alabama; and Michigan of the sameage with Arkansas. Now, let any one contrast the state of society inMaine, Vermont, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan with that ofKentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Missouri, Louisiana, Arkansas, andMississippi, and candidly ponder the result. It is impossiblesatisfactorily to account for the immense disparity in crime, on anyother supposition than that the latter states were settled and areinhabited almost exclusively by those who carried with them theviolence, impatience of legal restraint, love of domination, fierypassions, idleness, and contempt of laborious industry, which areengendered by habits of despotic sway, acquired by residence incommunities where such manners, habits and passions, mould societyinto their own image. [43] The practical workings of this cause arepowerfully illustrated in those parts of the slave states where slavesabound, when contrasted with those where very few are held. Who doesnot know that there are fewer deadly affrays in proportion to thewhite population--that law has more sway and that human life is lessinsecure in East Tennessee, where there are very few slaves, than inWest Tennessee, where there are large numbers. This is true also ofnorthern and western Virginia, where few slaves are held, whencontrasted with eastern Virginia; where they abound; the same remarkapplies to those parts of Kentucky and Missouri, where large numbersof slaves are held, when contrasted with others where there arecomparatively few. 

We see the same cause operating to a considerable extent in thoseparts of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, settled mainly by slaveholdersand others, who were natives of slave states, in contrast with otherparts of these states settled almost exclusively by persons from freestates; that affrays and breaches of the peace are far more frequentin the former than in the latter, is well known to all. 

We now proceed to the remaining slave states. Those that have not yetbeen considered, are Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North and SouthCarolina, Georgia, and the territory of Florida. As Delaware hashardly two thousand five hundred slaves, arbitrary power over humanbeings is exercised by so few persons, that the turbulence infusedthereby into the public mind is but an inconsiderable element, quiteinsufficient to inflame the passions, much less to cast the characterof the mass of the people; consequently, the state of society there, and the general security of life is but little less than in New Jerseyand Pennsylvania, upon which states it borders on the north and east. The same causes operate in a considerable measure, though to a muchless extent to Maryland and in Northern and Western Virginia. But inlower Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, thegeneral state of society as it respects the successful triumph ofpassion over law, and the consequent and universal insecurity of lifeis, in the main, very similar to that of the states alreadyconsidered. In some portions of each of these states, human life hasprobably as little real protection as in Arkansas, Mississippi andLouisiana; but generally throughout the former states and sections, the laws are not so absolutely powerless as in the latter three. Deadly affrays, duels, murders, lynchings, &c. , are, in proportion tothe white population, as frequent and as rarely punished in lowerVirginia as in Kentucky and Missouri; in North Carolina and SouthCarolina as in Tennessee; and in Georgia and Florida as in Alabama. 

To insert the criminal statistics of the remaining slave states indetail, as those of the states already considered have been presented, would, we find, fill more space than can well be spared. Instead ofthis, we propose to exhibit the state of society in all theslaveholding region bordering on the Atlantic, by the testimony of theslaveholders themselves, corroborated by a few plain facts. Leavingout of view Florida, where law is the _most_ powerless, and Marylandwhere probably it is the _least_ so, we propose to select as a fairillustration of the actual state of society in the Atlanticslaveholding regions, North Carolina whose border is but 250 milesfrom the free states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and Georgia whichconstitutes its south western boundary. 

We will begin with GEORGIA. This state was settled more than a centuryago by a colony under General Oglethorpe. The colony was memorable forits high toned morality. One of its first regulations was an absoluteprohibition of slavery in every form: but another generation arose, the prohibition was abolished, a multitude of slaves were imported, the exercise of unlimited power over them lashed up passion to thespurning of all control, and now the dreadful state of society thatexists in Georgia, is revealed by the following testimony out of herown mouth. 

The editor of the Darien (Georgia) Telegraph, in his paper of November6, 1838, published the following. 

"_Murderous Attack_. --Between the hours of three and four o'clock, onSaturday last, the editor of this paper was attacked by FOURTEEN armedruffians, and knocked down by repeated blows of bludgeons. All hisassailants were armed with pistols, dirks, and large clubs. Many ofthem are known to us; but _there is neither law nor justice to be hadin Darien! We are doomed to death_ by the employers of the assassinswho attacked us on Saturday, and no less than our blood will satisfythem. The cause alleged for this unmanly, base, cowardly outrage, issome expressions which occurred in an election squib, printed at thisoffice, and extensively circulated through the county, _before theelection_. The names of those who surrounded us, when the attack wasmade, are, A. Lefils, jr. (son to the representative), Madison Thomas, Francis Harrison, Thomas Hopkins, Alexander Blue, George Wing, JamesEilands, W. I. Perkins, A. J. Raymur: the others we cannot at presentrecollect. The two first, LEFILS and THOMAS struck us at the sametime. Pistols were levelled at us in all directions. We can producethe most respectable testimony of the truth of this statement. "

The same number of the "Darien Telegraph, " from which the preceding istaken, contains a correspondence between six individuals, settling thepreliminaries of duels. The correspondence fills, with the exceptionof a dozen lines, _five columns_ of the paper. The parties were Col. W. Whig Hazzard, commander of one of the Georgia regiments in therecent Seminole campaign, Dr. T. F. Hazzard, a physician of St. Simons, and Thomas Hazzard, Esq. A county magistrate, on the one side, and Messrs. J. A. Willey, A. W. Willey, and H. B. Gould, Esqs. OfDarien, on the other. In their published correspondence the partiescall each other "liar, " "mean rascal, " "puppy, " "villain, " &c. 

The magistrate, Thomas Hazzard, who accepts the challenge of J. A. Willey, says, in one of his letters, "Being a magistrate, under asolemn oath to do all in my power to keep the peace, " &c. , and yetthis personification of Georgia justice superscribes his letter asfollows: "To the Liar, Puppy, Fool, and Poltroon, Mr. John A. Willey"The magistrate closes his letter thus:

"Here I am; call upon me for personal satisfaction (in _propriaforma_); and in the Farm Field, on St. Simon's Island, (_Deojuvante_, ) I will give you a full front of my body, and do all in mypower to satisfy your thirst for blood! And more, I will wager you$100, to be planked on the scratch! that J. A. Willey will neitherkill or defeat T. F. Hazzard. "

The following extract from the correspondence is a sufficient index ofslaveholding civilization. 

"ARTICLES OF BATTLE BETWEEN JOHN A. WILLEY AND W. WHIG HAZZARD. 

"Condition 1. The parties to fight on the same day, and at the sameplace, (St. Simon's beach, near the lighthouse, ) where the meetingbetween T. F. Hazzard and J. A. Willey will take place. 

"Condition 2. The parties to fight with broad-swords in the right hand, and a dirk in the left. 

"Condition 3. On the word "Charge, " the parties to advance, and attackwith the broadsword, or close with the dirk. 

"Condition 4. THE HEAD OF THE VANQUISHED TO BE CUT OFF BY THE VICTOR, AND STUCK UPON A POLE ON THE FARM FIELD DAM, the original cause ofdispute. 

"Condition 5. Neither party to object to each other's weapons; and if asword breaks, the contest to continue with the dirk. 

"This Col. W. Whig Hazzard is one of the most prominent citizens in thesouthern part of Georgia, and previously signalized himself, as welearn from one of the letters in the correspondence, by "threedeliberate rounds in a duel. "

The Macon (Georgia) Telegraph of October 9, 1838, contains thefollowing notice of two affrays in that place, in each of which anindividual was killed, one on Tuesday and the other on Saturday of thesame week. In publishing the case, the Macon editor remarks:

"We are compelled to remark on the inefficiency of our laws inbringing to the bar of public justice, persons committing capitaloffences. Under the present mode, a man has nothing more to do than toleave the state, or step over to Texas, or some other place notfarther off, and he need entertain no fear of being apprehended. Solong as such a state of things is permitted to exist, just so longwill every man who has an enemy (and there are but few who have not)_be in constant danger of being shot down in the streets_. "

To these remarks of the Macon editor, who is in the centre of thestate, near the capital, the editor of the Darien Telegraph, twohundred miles distant, responds as follows, in his paper of October30. 1838. 

"The remarks of our contemporary are not without cause. They apply, with peculiar force, to this community. _Murderers and rioters willnever stand in need of a sanctuary as long as Darien is what it is_. "

It is a coincidence which carries a comment with it, that in less thana week after this Darien editor made these remarks, he was attacked inthe street by "_fourteen_ gentlemen" armed with bludgeons, knives, dirks, pistols, &c. , and would doubtless have been butchered on thespot if he had not been rescued. 

We give the following statement at length as the chief perpetrator ofthe outrages, Col. W. N. Bishop, was at the time a high functionary ofthe State of Georgia, and, as we learn from the Macon Messenger, stillholds two public offices in the State, one of them from the directappointment of the governor. 

From the "Georgia Messenger" of August 25, 1837. 

"During the administration of WILSON LUMPKIN, WILLIAM N. BISHOPreceived from his Excellency the appointment of Indian Agent, in theplace of William Springer. During that year (1834, ) the said governorgave the command of a company of men, 40 in number, to the said W. N. Bishop, to be selected by him, and armed with the muskets of theState. This band was organized for the special purpose of keeping theCherokees in subjection, and although it is a notorious fact that theCherokees in the neighborhood of Spring Place were peaceable and by nomeans refractory, the said band were kept there, and seldom made anyexcursion whatever out of the county of Murray. It is also _anotorious fact_, that the said band, from the day of theirorganization, never permitted a citizen of Murray county opposed tothe dominant party of Georgia, to exercise the right of suffrage atany election whatever. From that period to the last of Januaryelection, the said band appeared at the polls with the arms of theState, rejecting every vote that "was not of the true stripe, " as theycalled it. That they frequently seized and dragged to the polls honestcitizens, and compelled them to vote contrary to their will. 

"Such acts of arbitrary despotism were tolerated by theadministration. Appeals from the citizens of Murray county broughtthem no relief--and incensed at such outrages, they determined on thefirst Monday in January last, to turn out and elect such Judges of theInferior Court and county officers, as would be above the control ofBishop, that he might thereby be prevented from packing such a jury ashe chose to try him for his brutal and unconstitutional outrages ontheir rights. Accordingly on Sunday evening previous to the election, about twenty citizens who lived a distance from the county site, camein unarmed and unprepared for battle, intending to remain in town, vote in the morning and return home. They were met by Bishop and hisState band, and asked by the former 'whether they were for peace orwar. ' They unanimously responded, "we are for peace:' At that momentBishop ordered a fire, and instantly _every musket of his band wasdischarged on those citizens_, 5 of whom were wounded, and othersescaped with bullet holes in their clothes. Not satisfied with theoutrage, _they dragged an aged man from his wagon and beat him nearlyto death_. 

"In this way the voters were driven from Spring Place, and before daylight the next morning, the polls were opened by order of Bishop, andsoon after sun rise they were closed; Bishop having ascertained thatthe band and Schley men had all voted. A runner was then dispatched toMilledgeville, and received from Governor Schley commissions for thoseself-made officers of Bishop's, two of whom have since runaway, andthe rest have been called on by the citizens of the county to resign, being each members of Bishop's band, and doubtless runaways from otherStates. 

"After these outrages, Bishop apprehending an appeal to the judiciaryon the part of the injured citizens of Murray county, had a jury drawnto suit him and appointed one of his band Clerk of the Superior Court. For these acts, the Governor and officers of the Central Bank rewardedhim with an office in the Bank of the State, since which his own juryfound _eleven true bills_ against him. "

In the Milledgeville Federal Union of May 2, 1837, we find thefollowing presentment of the Grand Jury of Union County, Georgia, which as it shows some relics of a moral sense, still lingering in thestate we insert. 

Presentment of the Grand Jury of Union Co. , March term, 1837. 

"We would notice, as a subject of painful interest, the appointment ofWm. N. Bishop to the high and responsible office of Teller, of theCentral Bank of the State of Georgia--an institution of such magnitudeas to merit and demand the most unslumbering vigilance of the freemenof this State; as a portion of whom, we feel bound to express our_indignant reprehension_ of the promotion of such a character to oneof its most responsible posts--and do exceedingly regret the blindnessor _depravity_ of those who can sanction such a measure. 

"We request that our presentment be published in the Miners' Recorderand Federal Union. 

JOHN MARTIN, Foreman"

On motion of Henry L. Sims, Solicitor General, "Ordered by the court, that the presentments of the Grand Jury, be published according totheir request. " THOMAS HENRY, Clerk. 

The same paper, four weeks after publishing the preceding facts, contained the following: we give it in detail as the wretch whoenacted the tragedy was another public functionary of the state ofGeorgia and acting in an official capacity. 

"MURDER. --One of the most brutal and inhuman murders it has everfallen to our lot to notice, was lately committed in Cherokee county, by Julius Bates, the son of the principal keeper of the Penitentiary, upon an Indian. 

"The circumstances as detailed to us by the most respectable men ofboth parties, are these. At the last Superior Court of Cass county, the unfortunate Indian was sentenced to the Penitentiary. Bates, as_one of the Penitentiary guard_, was sent with another to carry himand others, from other counties to Milledgeville. He started fromCassville with the Indian ironed and bare footed; and walked himwithin a quarter of a mile of Canton, the C. H. In Cherokee, a distanceof twenty-eight to thirty miles, over a very rough road in little morethan half the day. On arriving at a small creek near town, the Indian[who had walked until the _soles of his feet were off and those of hisheel turned back_, ] made signs to get water, Bates refused to let him, and ordered him to go on: the Indian stopped and finally set down, whereupon Bates dismounted and gathering a pine knot, commenced andcontinued beating him and jirking him by a chain around his neck, until the citizens of the village were drawn there by the severity ofthe blows. The unfortunate creature was taken up to town and died in afew hours. 

"An inquest was held, and the jury found a verdict of murder by Bates. A warrant was issued, but Bates had departed that morning in charge ofother prisoners taken from Canton, and the worthy officers of thecounty desisted from his pursuit, 'because they apprehended he hadpassed the limits of the county. ' We understand that the warrant wasimmediately sent to the Governor to have him arrested. Will it bedone? We shall see. "

Having devoted so much space to a revelation of the state of societyamong the slaveholders of Georgia, we will tax the reader's patiencewith only a single illustration of the public sentiment--the degree ofactual legal protection enjoyed in the state of North Carolina. 

North Carolina was settled about two centuries ago; its present whitepopulation is about five hundred thousand. 

Passing by the murders, affrays, &c. With which the North Carolinapapers abound, we insert the following as an illustration of thepublic sentiment of North Carolina among 'gentlemen of property andstanding. '

The 'North Carolina Literary and Commercial Journal, ' of January 20, 1838, published at Elizabeth City, devotes a column and a half to adescription of the lynching, tarring, feathering, ducking, riding on arail, pumping, &c. , of a Mr. Charles Fife, a merchant of that city, for the crime of 'trading with negroes. ' The editor informs us thatthis exploit of vandalism was performed very deliberately, at mid-day, and _by a number of the citizens_, 'THE MOST RESPECTABLE IN THE CITY, '&c. We proceed to give the reader an abridgement of the editor'sstatement in his own words. --

"Such being the case, a number of the citizens, THE MOST RESPECTABLEIN THIS CITY, collected, about ten days since, and after putting thefellow on a rail, carried him through town with a duck and chickentied to him. He was taken down to the water and his head tarred andfeathered; and when they returned he was put under a pump, where for afew minutes he underwent a little cooling. He was then told that hemust leave town by the next Saturday--if he did not he would bevisited again, and treated more in accordance with the principles ofthe laws of Judge Lynch. 

"On Saturday last, he was again visited, and as Fife had several ofhis friends to assist him, some little scuffle ensued, when severalwere knocked down, but nothing serious occurred. Fife was againmounted on a rail and brought into town, but as he promised if theywould not trouble him he would leave town in a few days, he was set atliberty. Several of our magistrates _took no notice of the affair_, and rather seemed to tacitly acquiesce in the proceedings. The wholesubject every one supposed was ended, as Fife was to leave in a fewdays, when WHAT WAS OUR ASTONISHMENT to hear that Mr. Charles R. Kinney had visited Fife, advised him not to leave, and actually tookupon himself to examine witnesses, and came before the public as thedefender of Fife. The consequence was, that all the rioters weresummoned by the Sheriff to appear in the Court House and give bail fortheir appearance at our next court. On Monday last the court opened at12 o'clock, Judge Bailey presiding. Such an excitement we neverwitnessed before in our town. A great many witnesses were examined, which proved the character of Fife beyond a doubt. At one time ratherserious consequences were apprehended--high words were spoken, andluckily a blow which was aimed at Mr. Kinney, was parried off, and weare happy to say the court adjourned after ample securities beinggiven. The next day Fife was taken to jail for trading with negroes, but has since been released on paying $100. The interference of Mr. Kinney was wholly unnecessary; it was an assumption on his part whichproperly belonged to our magistrates. Fife had agreed to go away, andthe matter would have been amicably settled but for him. We have nounfriendly feelings towards Mr. Kinney: no personal animosities togratify: we have always considered him as one of our best lawyers. Butwhen he comes forth as the supporter of such a fellow as Fife, underthe plea that the laws have been violated--when he arraigns the actsof thirty of the inhabitants of this place, it is high time for him toreflect seriously on the consequences. The Penitentiary system is theresult of the refinement of the eighteenth century. As man advances inthe sciences, in the arts, in the intercourse of social and civilizedlife, in the same proportion does crime and vice keep an equal pace, and always makes demands on the wisdom of legislators. Now, what isthe Lynch law but the Penitentiary system carried out to its fullextent, with a little more steam power? or more properly, it is simplythus: _There are some scoundrels in society on whom the laws take noeffect; the most expeditious and short way is to let a majority decideand give them_ JUSTICE. "

Let the reader notice, 1st, that this outrage was perpetrated withgreat deliberation, and after it was over, the victim was commanded toleave town by the next week: when that cooling interval had passed, the outrage was again deliberately repeated. 2d. It was perpetrated by"thirty persons, ' "_the most respectable in the city_. " 3d. That atthe second lynching of Fife, several of his neighbors who had gatheredto defend him, (seeing that all the legal officers in the city hadrefused to do it, thus violating their oaths of office, ) _were knockeddown_, to which the editor adds, with the business air of aprofessional butcher, "nothing _serious_ occurred!" 4th. That not asingle magistrate in the city took the least notice either of thebarbarities inflicted upon Fife, or of the assaults upon his friends, knocking them down, &c. , but, as the editor informs us, all "seemed toacquiesce in the proceedings. " 5th. That this conduct of themagistrates was well pleasing to the great mass of the citizens, isplain, from the remark of the editor that "every one supposed that thewhole subject was ended, " and from his wondering exclamation, "WHATWAS OUR ASTONISHMENT to hear that Mr. C. R. Kinney had actually tookupon him to examine witnesses, " &c. , and also from the editor'sdeclaration, "Such an excitement we never before witnessed in ourtown. " Excitement at what? Not because the laws had been mostimpiously trampled down at noon-day by a conspiracy of thirty persons, "the most respectable in the city;" not because a citizen had beentwice seized and publicly tortured for hours, without trial, and inutter defiance of all authority; nay, verily! this was allcomplacently acquiesced in; but because in this slaveholding Sodomthere was found a solitary Lot who dared to uplift his voice for _law_and the _right of trial by jury_; this crime stirred up such an uproarin that city of "most respectable" lynchers as was "_never witnessedbefore_, " and the noble lawyer who thus put every thing at stake ininvoking the majesty of law, would, it seems, have been knocked down, even in the presence of the Court, if the blow had not been "parried. "6th. Mark the murderous threat of the editor--when he arraigns the_acts_, " (no matter how murderous) "of thirty citizens of this place, it is high time for him to reflect seriously _on the consequences_. "7th. The open advocacy of "Lynch law" by a set argument, boldlysetting it above all codes, with which the editor closes his article, reveals a public sentiment in the community which shows, that in NorthCarolina, though society may still rally under the flag ofcivilization, and insist on wrapping itself in its folds, barbarism isnone the less so in a stolen livery, and savages are savages still, though tricked out with the gauze and tinsel of the stars and stripes. 

It may be stated, in conclusion, that the North Carolina "Literary andCommercial Journal, " from which the article is taken, is a largesix-columned paper, edited by F. S. Proctor, Esq. , a graduate of aUniversity, and of considerable literary note in the South. 

Having drawn out this topic to so great a length, we waive allcomments, and only say to the reader, in conclusion, _ponder thesethings_, and lay it to heart, that slaveholding "is justified _of herchildren_. " Verily, they have their reward! "With what measure ye metewithal it shall be measured to you again. " Those who combine totrample on others, will trample on _each other_. The habit oftrampling upon _one_, begets a state of mind that will trample upon_all_. Accustomed to wreak their vengeance on their slaves, indulgenceof passion becomes with slaveholders a second law of nature, and, whenexcited even by their equals, their hot blood brooks neither restraintnor delay; _gratification_ is the _first_ thought--prudence generallycomes too late, and the slaves see their masters fall a prey to eachother, the victims of those very passions which have been engenderedand infuriated by the practice of arbitrary rule over _them_. Surelyit need not be added, that those who thus tread down their equals, must trample as in a wine-press their defenceless vassals. If, when inpassion, they seize those who are _on their own level_, and dash themunder their feet, with what a crushing vengeance will they leap uponthose who are _always_ under their feet?

 * * * * *

FOOTNOTES. 

Footnote 39: A few years since Mr. Bourne published a work entitled, "Picture of slavery in the United States. " In which he describes avariety of horrid atrocities perpetrated upon slaves; such as brutalscourging and lacerations with the application of pepper, mustard, salt, vinegar, &c. , to the bleeding gashes; also maimings, cat-haulings, burnings, and other tortures similar to hundredsdescribed on the preceeding pages. These descriptions of Mr. Bournewere, at that time, thought by multitudes _incredible_, and probably, even by some abolitionists, who had never given much reflection to thesubject. We are happy to furnish the reader with the followingtestimony of a Virginia slaveholder to the _accuracy_ of Mr. Bourne'sdelineations. Especially as this slaveholder is a native of one of thecounties (Culpepper) near to which the atrocities described by Mr. B. Were committed. 

Testimony of Mr. WILLIAM HANSBOROUGH, of Culpepper, County, Virginia, the "owner" of sixty slaves, to Mr. Bourne's "Picture or Slavery" as a_true_ delineation. 

Lindley Coates, of Lancaster Co. , Pa. , a well known member of theSociety of Friends, and a member of the late Pennsylvania Conventionfor revising, the Constitution of the State, in a letter now beforeus, describing a recent interview between him and Mr. Hansborough, ofseveral days continuance, says, --"I handed him Bourne's Picture ofslavery to read: _after reading it_, he said, that all of thesufferings of slaves therein related, were _true delineations, andthat he had seen all those modes of torture himself_. "

Footnote 40: The following is Mr. Stevenson's disclaimer: It waspublished in the 'London Mail, ' Oct 30, 1838. 

_To the Editor of the Evening Mail:_

Sir--I did not see until my return from Scotland the note addressed byMr. O'Connell, to the editor of the Chronicle, purporting to give anexplanation of the correspondence which has passed between us, andwhich I deemed it proper to make public. I do not intend to be drawninto any discussion of the subject of domestic slavery as it exists inthe United States, nor to give any explanation of the motives orcircumstances under which I have acted. 

Disposed to regard Mr. O'Connell as a man of honor. I was induced totake the course I did; whether justifiable or not, the world will nowdecide. The tone and report of his last note (in which he disavowsresponsibility for any thing he may say) precludes any further noticefrom me, than to say that the charge which he has thought proper againto repeat, of my being a breeder of slaves for sale and traffick, iswholly destitute of truth; and that I am warranted in believing it hasbeen made by him without the slightest authority. SUCH, TOO, I VENTURETO SAY, IS THE CASE IN RELATION TO HIS CHARGE OF SLAVE-BREEDING INVIRGINIA. 

I make this declaration, not because I admit Mr. O'Connell's right tocall for it, but to prevent my silence from being misinterpreted. 

A. STEVENSON

_23 Portland Place, Oct. 29_

Footnote 41: Mr. WISE said in one of his speeches during the lastsession of Congress, that he was obliged to go armed for theprotection of his life in Washington. It could not have been for fearof _Northern_ men. 

Footnote 42: A correspondent of the "Frederick Herald, " writing fromLittle Rock, says, "Anthony's knife was about _twenty-eight inches_ inlength. They _all_ carry knives here, or pistols. There are severalkinds of knives in use--a narrow blade, and about twelve inches long, is called an 'Arkansas tooth-pick. '"

Footnote 43: Bishop Smith of Kentucky, in his testimony respectinghomicides, which is quoted on a preceding pages, thus speaks of theinfluence of slave-holding, as an exciting cause. 

"Are not some of the indirect influences of a system, the existence ofwhich amongst us can never be sufficiently deplored, discoverable inthese affrays? Are not our young men more heady, violent and imperiousin consequence of their early habits of command? And are not ourtaverns and other public places of resort, much more crowded with aninflammable material, than if young men were brought up in the staidand frugal habits of those who are constrained to earn their bread bythe sweat of their brow? * * * Is not intemperance more social, moreinflammatory, more pugnacious where a fancied superiority ofgentlemanly character is felt in consequence of exemption from severemanual labor? Is there ever stabbing where there is not idleness andstrong drink?"

The Bishop also gives the following as another exciting cause; it ishowever only the product of the preceding. 

"Has not a public sentiment which we hear characterized as singularlyhigh-minded and honorable, and sensitively alive to every affront, whether real or imaginary, but which strangers denominate rough andferocious, much to do in provoking these assaults, and then inapplauding instead of punishing the offender. "

The Bishop says of the young men of Kentucky, that they "grow upproud, impetuous, and reckless of all responsibility;" and adds, thatthe practice of carrying deadly weapons is with them "NEARLYUNIVERSAL. "

 * * * * *

INDEX. 

 * * * * *

To facilitate the use of the Index, some of the more common topics arearranged under one general title. Thus all the volumes which are citedare classed under the word, BOOKS; and to that head reference must bemade. The same plan has been adopted concerning _Female Slave-Drivers, Laws, Narratives, Overseers, Runaways, Slaveholders, Slave-Murderers, Slave-Plantations, Slaves, Female_ and _Male, Testimony_ and_Witnesses_. Therefore, with a few _emphatical_ exceptions only, thefacts will be found, by recurring to the prominent person or subjectwhich any circumstance includes. All other miscellaneous articles willbe discovered in alphabetical order. 

 * * * * *

A. 

Absolute power of slaveholdersAbsurdity of slaveholding pretextsAbuse of powerAcclimated slavesAdrianAdultery in a preacher's houseAdvertisement for slavesAdvertisement for slaves to hireAdvertisementsAffrayAfrican slave-tradeAged slaves uncommonAlabamaAlexander the tyrantAllowance of provisionsAmalgamationAmerican Colonization Society"Amiable and touching charity!"Amusements of slave-driversAnimals and slaves, usage of, contrastedAntioch, massacre at"Arbitrary, "Arbitrary power, cruelty of " " perniciousArdor in bettingAriusArkansasAtlantic Slaveholding RegionAuctioneers of slavesAuctions for slavesAugustineAureliusAversion between the oppressor and the slave

B. 

Babbling of slaveholdersBacks of slaves carded " " putrid"Ball and chain" menBaptist preachersBattles in CongressBeating a woman's face with shoesBedaubing of slaves with oil and tarBegetting slaves for pay"Bend your backs"Benevolence of slaveholdersBetting on crops " slavesBeware of KidnappersBibles searched forBlind slavesBlocks with sharp pegs and nailsBlood-bought luxuriesBodley, H. S. Bones dislocated

BOOKS. 

 African Observer American Convention, minutes of " Museum " State Papers Andrews' Slavery and the Slave Trade Bay's Reports Benezet's Caution to Britain and her Colonies Blackstone's Commentaries, by Tucker Book and Slavery irreconcilable Bourgoing's Spain Bourne's Picture of Slavery Brevard's Digest of the Laws of South Carolina Brewster's Exposition of Slave Treatment Buchanan's Oration Carey's American Museum Carolina, History of Channing on Slavery Charity, "amiable and touching!" Childs' Appeal Civil Code of Louisiana Clay's Address to Georgia Presbytery Colonization Society's Reports Cornelius Elias, Life of Davis's Travels in Louisiana Debates in Virginia Convention Devereux's North Carolina Reports Dew's Review of Debates in the Virginia Legislature Edwards' Sermon Emancipation in the West Indies Emigrant's Guide through the Valley of Mississippi Gales' Congressional Debates Harris and Johnson's Reports Haywood's Manual Hill's reports Human Rights James' Digest Jefferson's Notes Josephus' History Justinian, Institutes of Kennet's Roman Antiquities Laponneray's Life of Robespierre Law of Slavery Laws of United States Leland's necessity of Divine Revelation Letters from the South, by J. K. Paulding Life of Elias Cornelius Louisiana, civil code of ", sketches of Martineau's Harriet, Society in America Martin's Digest of the laws of Louisiana Maryland laws of Mead's Journal Mississippi Revised Code Missouri Laws Modern state of Spain by J. F. Bourgoing Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws Necessity of Divine Revelation Niles' Baltimore Register North Carolina Reports by Devereaux Oasis Parrish's remarks on slavery Paulding's letters from the South Paxton's letters on slavery Presbyterian Synod, Report of Picture of slavery Prince's Digest Prison Discipline Society, reports of Rankin's Letters Reed and Matheson's visit to Am. Churches Review of Nevins' Biblical Antiquities Rice, speech of in Kentucky convention Robespierre, Life of Robin's travels Roman Antiquities Slavery's Journal Slavery and the Slave Trade Society in America Sewall's Diary South Carolina, Laws of South vindicated by Drayton Spirit of Laws Swain's address Stroud's Sketch of the Slave Laws Taylor's Agricultural Essays Travels in Louisiana Tucker's Blackstone Tucker's Judge, Letter Turner's Sacred History of the world Virginia Legislature, Review of Debates in ", Revised Code ", Negro-raising state Visit to American churches Western Medical Journal Western Medical Reformer Western Review Wheeler's Law of slavery Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry Woolman John, Life of

Books of slaves stolenBorrowing of slavesBourne, George, anecdote ofBoy killedBoys' fight to amuse their driversBowie KnivesBoys' retortBrandingsBranding with hot ironBrasses"Breeders"Breeding of slaves prevented"Breeding wenches" " " comparative value ofBribes for begetting slavesBrick-yards"Broken-winded" slavesBrutality to slavesBrutes and slaves treated alikeBurial of slavesBurning of McIntoshBurning slavesBurning with hot ironBurning with smoothing ironsButchery

C. 

Cabins of slavesCachexia AfricanaCaligulaCan't believeCapital CrimesCaptain in the U. S. Navy, tried for murderCarding of SlavesCat-haulingCato the JustCauses of the laws punishing cruelty to slavesChained slaveChainsChanges in the marketCharacter of Overseers " Romans " Slave-driversCharleston " Infirmary at " Jail " Slave auctions " Surgery at " Work-houseChastity punishedChild-bearing preventedChildbirth of slavesChildhood unprotectedChildren flogged " nakedChoking of slavesChopping of slaves piecemealChristian females tortured " martyr " slave-hunting " slave-murdererChristian, slave whipped to deathChristians, persecutions of " slavery among " treat their slaves like othersChristian woman kidnappedChronic diseasesChurches, abuse of power inChurch members"Citizens sold as slaves"Civilization and moralityClarkson, ThomasClaudiusClemensClothing for slavesCock-fightingCode of LouisianaCollars of ironColumbia, district of " fatal affray atComfort of slaves disregardedCommodusConcubinageCondemned criminalsCondition of slavesConfinement at nightCongress of the United States " a bear gardenConnecticut, law of, against QuakersConstables, character ofConstantine the GreatContempt of human lifeContrasts of benevolenceConversation between C. And HConverted slaveCooking for slavesCorrection moderateCorrupting influence of slaveryCotton-pickingCotton-plantationsCotton seed mixed with corn for foodCouncil of NiceCourts, decrees ofCowhides, with shovel and tongsCrack of the whip heard afar offCrimes of slaves, capitalCriminals condemnedCringing of Northern PreachersCropping of earsCrops for exportationCruelties, common " inflicted upon slaves " of Cortez in Mexico " Ovando in Hispaniola " Pizarro in Peru " of slave-drivers incredibleCruel treatment of slaves the masters' interestCultivation of riceCutting of A. T. S throat by a Presbyterian woman

D. 

D'Almeydra, Donna SophiaDamaged negroes boughtDarlington C. H. , South CarolinaDauphin Island, Mobile Bay"Dead or Alive"Dead slave claimedDeaf slavesDeath at child birthDeath-bed, horrors of a slave driverDeath by violence, Death of a slave murdererDecrees of CourtsDecisions, judicialDeclarations of slaveholdersDeformed slavesDelivery of a dead child from whippingDescription of slave drivers, by John RandolphDespair of slavesDesperate affray"Despot""Dimensum" of Roman slavesDiseased slavesDislocation of bonesDistrict of Columbia " " prisons inDitty of slaves"Doe-faces"--"Dough-faces"Dogs provided forDogs to hunt slavesDomestic slaveryDomitianDonnell, Rev. Mr. "Dough-faces""Drivers"Driving of slavesDroves of "human cattle" " " slavesDuellingDumb slavesDwellings of slavesDying slaveDying young women

E. 

Ear-croppingEarly marketEar-notchingEar-slittingEating tobacco wormsEffects of public opinion concerning slaveryEmancipation society of North CarolinaEnglish ladies and gentlemenEnormities of slave driversEvenings in the "Negro quarter"Evidence of slaves vs. White persons nullEwall, MerryExamples pleaded in justification of cruelty to slavesExchange of slavesExportation of slave from VirginiaEyes struck out

F. 

Faith objectors who "_can't believe_"Fatal rencontre"Fault-finding"Favorite amusements of slaveholdersFear, the only motive of slavesFeast for slavesFeeding insufficientFeeble infants_Felonies_ on account of slavery " perpetrated with impunityFemale hypocriteFemale slave deranged

FEMALE SLAVE DRIVERS

 Burford, Mrs. Carter, Mrs. Elizabeth L. Charleston Charlestown, Va Galway, Mrs. Harris, Mrs. H. , Mrs. Throat cutter Laurie, Madame La Mallix, Mrs. Mann, Mrs. Mabtin, Mrs. Maxwell, Mrs. McNeil, Mrs. Morgan, Mrs. Newman, Mrs. B. Pence, Mrs. Phinps, Mrs. Professor of religion Ruffner, Mrs. South Carolina Starky, Mrs. Swan, Mrs. Teacher at Charleston T. , Mrs. Trip, Mrs. Truby, Mrs Turner, Mrs. Walsh, Sarah

Female slave starved to death " " whipped to death by a Methodist preacherFemale stripped by order of her mistressFettersField-handsLighting of boys to amuse their driversFine old preacher who dealt in slavesFingers cut offFlogging for unfinished tasks " of children " pregnant women until they miscarry " slaves " young manFloggingsFloridaFood, kinds of " of slaves " quality of " quantity ofFree citizens stolenFree woman " " kidnappedFrequent murdersFriends, memorial ofFront-teeth knocked outFundamental rights destroyed

G. 

Gadsden Thomas N. Slave AuctioneerGagging of slavesGalloway flogging Jo. Gambling on cropsGambling slaveholderGang of slavesGenerosity of slaveholdersGeorgiaGirls' backs burnt with smoothing ironsGirls' toe cut offGood treatment of slavesGovernor of North Carolina " " ShirazGrand Jury presentment of, Guiltiness of SlaveryGun shot wounds

H. 

Habits of slave-driversHampton Wade, murderer of slavesHandcuffs"Hands tied"Hanging of nine slavesHarris Benjamin, slave murdererHead foundHead of a runaway slave on a poleHealth of slavesHeart of slaveholdersHerding of slavesHilton James, slave murdererHired slavesHiring of slaves"Horrible malady""Horrid butchery"Horrors of a slave-driver at death " " the "middle passage"Horse-racingHorses more cared for than slavesHospitality of slaveholdersHours of rest " " workHospital at New OrleansHouse-slavesHouses of slaves"House-wench"Hovels of slavesHuguenots, persecution of"Human cattle"Human rights against slaveryHunger of slavesHunter of slavesHunting men with dogsHunting of slavesHunt, Rev. Thomas P. Husband whipping his wifeHuts of slavesHymn-books searched forHypocrisy of vice

I. 

Idiot slavesIgnatiusIgnorance of northern citizens of slavery " " slaveholdersImpunity of killing slavesInadequate clothingIncome from hiring slavesIncorrigible slavesIncredibility of evidence against slaveryIncredulity discreditable to consistency " " " intelligenceIndecency of slave-driversIndiana Legislature, resolutions ofInfant drownedInfant slavesInfirmary at CharlestonInfliction of painInspection of naked slavesIntercession for slavesInterest of slaveholdersIntroductionIron collarsIron fettersIron head-frontIsraelites in Egypt

J. 

Jewish lawJoe floggedJones, Anson, Minister from TexasJudicial decisions

K. 

Kentucky " Sunday morningKicking of slavesKidnappersKidnappingKindness of slaveholdersKinds of foodKind treatment of slaves. Knives, BowieKnocking out of teeth

L. 

Labor, hours ofLabor of slavesLadies Benevolent SocietyLadies flog with cowhidesLadies, public opinion known byLadies use shovel and tongsLaw concerning slaveryLaw-makingLaws, Georgia " Louisiana " Maryland " Mississippi " North Carolina " South Carolina " Spirit of " Tennessee " United States " VirginiaLaw, safeguards of taken from slavesLaw suit for a murdered slave, Legal restraintsLicentiousness " encouraged by preachersLicentiousness of slavedrivers"Lie down" for whipping, Life in the South-west, Lives of slaves unprotectedLodging of slavesLong, his cruelty'Loss of property'Louisiana " law of " sketches of, Louis XIV. Of FranceLovers severed, Lunatic slaves"Lynchings" in the United StatesLynch Law, M. 

Maimed slavesMaimingsMalady of slavesManacling of slavesManiac womanMan sold by a Presbyterian elderMan-stealing paid forMarriage unknown among slavesMartyr for ChristMaryland JournalMaryville IntelligencerMassacre at Antioch " " Thessalonica " " VicksburgMasters grant no redress to slavesMcIntosh, burning ofMaximinMeals number of " of slaves"Meat once a year"Mediation for slavesMedical attendance " college of South Carolina " Infirmary at CharlestonMedicine administered to slavesMembers of churchesMemorial of friendsMenagerie of slavesMen and women whippedMethodist colored preacher hung, Methodist girl whipped for her chastityMethodist preacher, a slave dealer " " " driver " woman cut off a girl's toeMethod of taking meals"Middle passage"Miscarriage of women at the whipping postMississippiMissouriMistresses flog slavesMobile"Moderate correction"Moors, repulsion ofMorgan, WilliamMormonsMothers and babes separatedMothers of slavesMulatto children in all familiesMultiplying of slavesMurderers of slaves tried and acquittedMurder of slaves by law " " " bad feeling " " " piece-meal " " every seven years " " frequent " " with impunityMurders in Alabama " " Arkansas

N. 

Naked children " "Dave" " females whipped " " inspected " Men and women at work in a fieldNakedness of slavesNantz, edict of'National slave-market'NatchezNat Turner'Negro Head Point'Negroes for sale'Negroes takenNero'Never lose a day's work'New England, witches ofNew Orleans " " HospitalNew York, thirteen persons burnt atNice, council of'Nigger put in the bill'Night-confinementNight at a slaveholder's houseNight in slave hutsNine slaves hangedNo marriage among slavesNorth Carolina " " Governor of " " Legislature of " " KidnappersNorthern visitors to the slave statesNothing can disgrace slave-driversNovel tortureNudity of slavesNursing of slave-children

O. 

Objections consideredOcra, a slave-driverOiling of a slaveOld age uncommon among slaves " " unprotectedOld dying slaves"Old settlement" " slavesOppressor aversion of to his slaveOutlawry of slavesOutrageous Felonies on account of slavery " " perpetrated with impunityOverseers, character of " generally armed " no appeal from

OVERSEERS OF SLAVES--

 Alabama Alexander killed Bellemont Bellows Blocken's Bradley Cormick's Cruel to a proverb Farr, James Galloway Gibbs Goochland Methodist preacher Milligan's Bend Nowland's Tune Turner's cousin Walker Overworking of slaves Ownership Of human beings destroys their comfort. 

P. 

"Paddle" torturePaddle whippingPain, the means of slave drivers"Pancake sticks"Parents and children separatedParlor-slavesParricide threatenedPatrolPay for begetting mulatto slavesPeriodical pressurePersecution of HuguenotsPersecution for religionPERSONAL NARRATIVESPhilanthropistPhilip II. And the MoorsPhysicians not employed for slavesPhysicians of slavesPhysician's statementPig-sties more comfortable than slave-hutsPlantationsPleas for cruelty to slavesPloughs and whips equally commonPlinyPoles, Russian clemency toPolycarp"Poor African slave"Portuguese slavesPothinusPrayer of slavesPraying and slave-whipping in the same roomPraying slaves whippedPreacher claims a dead slavePreacher hungPreachers, cringing ofPreacher's "hands tied"Preachers silencedPregnant slaves " " whippedPresbyterian Elders at LynchburgPresbyterian minister killed his slavePresbyterian slave-traderPresbyterian woman desirious to cut A. T. 's throatPresentment of the Grand Jury at CherawPretexts for slavery absurdPrisons in the District of ColumbiaPrison slave

PRIVATIONS OF THE SLAVES-- Clothing Dwellings Food Kinds of food Labor Number of meals Quality of food Quantity of food Time of meals. 

Promiscuous concubinage"Property" " 'loss of'Protection of slavesProtestants in FranceProvisions, allowance ofPublic opinion destroys fundamental rights, " " diabolical " " protects the slavePunishment of slavesPunishmentsPurchasing a wifePuryer "the devil"Putrid backs of slaves

Q. 

Quality of foodQuantity of food

R. 

Race of slaves murdered every seven yearsRandolph John will of " " description of slavedrivers " " "Doe faces"RationsRearing of slavesRelaxation, no time forReligious persecutionsRespect for woman lostRest, hours ofRestraints, legalRetort of a boyRhode Island, kidnappers and pirates ofRice plantationsRichmond WhigRio Janeiro slavery atRiot at NatchezRiots in the United StatesRobespierreRomansRoman slaveryRunawaysRUNAWAY SLAVES-- Advertisements for Baptist man and woman Buried alive Chilton's Converted "Dead or alive" Head on a pole Hung Hunting of Intelligent man Jim Dragon Luke Man buried " dragged by a horse " maimed " murdered " severe punishments of " shot " " by Baptist preacher " taken from jail " tied and driven " to his wife " whipped to death Many, annually shot I Stallard's man White Peter Young woman

S. 

Sabbath, a nominal holidaySafeguards of the law taken from slavesSale of a man by a Presbyterian elderSale of slavesSavannah, Ga. Savannah slave-hunterSave us from our friendsScarcity, times ofScenes of horrorSearch for Bibles and Hymn booksSecretary of the NavySeparation of slavesShame unknown among naked slavesShoes for slavesSick, treatment of"Six pound paddle, ""Slack-jaw, "Slave-breeders " breedingSlave-drivers acknowledge their enormities " " character ofSLAVEHOLDERS-- Adams Baptist preachers Barr Baxter, George A Baxter, John Blocker, Colonel Blount Britt, Benjamin W. Burbecker Burvant, Mrs. C. A. , Rev. Casey Chilton, Joseph Clay C. , Mr. Cooper, Charity Curtis, Davis, Samuel Dras, Henry Delaware Female hypocrite Gautney, Joseph Gayle, Governor Governor of North Carolina Green Hampton, Wade Harney, William S. Harris, Benjamin James Hayne, Governor Hedding Henrico county, Va. Heyward, Nathaniel Hughes, Philip O. Hutchinson Hypocrite woman Indecency of Jones Jones, Henry Lewis, Benjamin Lewis, Isham Lewis, Lilburn Lewis, Rev. Mr. Long, Lucy Long, Reuben L. , of Bath, Ky. Maclay, John Martin, Rev. James Matthews' Bend M'Coy M'Cue, John Methodist Methodist Preachers M'Neilly Moresville Morgan Mosely, William Murderer Mushat, Rev. John Nansemond, Va. Natchez planter Nelson, Alexander Nichols, of Connecticut North Carolina Owens, Judge Painter Physician Pinckney, H. L. Presbyterian Presbyterian minister, Huntsville " " North Carolina " preacher Professing Christian Puryar, "the Devil" Randolph, John Reiks, Micajah Rodney Ruffner Shepherd, S. C. Sherrod, Ben Slaughter, Smith, Judge Sophistry of South Carolina Sparks, William Stallard, David Starky, Swan, John Teacher at Charleston Thompson Thorpe Tripp, James Truly, James Turner, Fielding S. Turner, uncle of Virginian, Wall Watkins, Billy Watkins, Robert H. Watson, A. W. , Colonel Webb, Carroll " Pleasant West's uncle Widow and daughter, Savannah river Willis, Robert Wilson, William Woman Woman, professor of religion, Slaveholders justify their cruelties by example " possess absolute power " sophistry ofSlaveholding amusements " brutality " indecency " murderers " religionSlave-mothers, " plantations second only to hellSlavery among ChristiansSLAVERY ILLUSTRATED--Slave-auctions " blocks with nails " boys fight to amuse their drivers, " branding " breeding " burner " burningSlave-cabins " " at nightSlave-children nursed " choking " clothing " collars " cookerySlave-ditty " dogs " driver's death " " licentiousness of " driving " fetters " food " gagging " gangs " handcuffs " herdingSlaveholders, civilization and morality of " declarations of " habits of " heart of " hospitality of " interest of " sophistry of " "treat their slaves well"Slaveholding professor"Slaveholding religion"Slave-hovels " hunting " " by ChristiansSlave imprisoned " in chains " in the stocks " kicking " killed, and put in the bill " killing with impunity " labor " manacles " martyr " meals " mothers " murderers, tried and acquitted " patrol " physicians " punishments ofSlave quarters, Slavery, code of law respecting " among Christians " domestic " guilt of " of whites " public opinion and effects of " unmixed crueltySlave sellingSlaves aversion of to their oppressors " backs of, putrid " blind " books of searched for " branded " brutality to " burial of " carded " cat-hauling of " comfort of disregarded " deaf " dead or alive " deformed " deprived of every safeguard of the law " described " diseased " dread to be sold for the South " dumb " dying " evidence of against white persons null " exchanged " reported from Virginia " fear their only motive " feasted and flogged " hired " idiots " incorrigible " infant " in the stocks " " U. S. Treatment of " lunatics " maimed " merchandise " multiply " murdered by cottonseed " " overwork " " piece-meal " " starvation " " every seven years " " frequently " " with impunity " naked " not treated as human beings " outlawed " overworked " prayers of " privations of " protection of " sale of " stock " surgeons of " taking medicine " tantalized " starvation of " teeth of knocked out " tied up all night " toe cut off " torments of " travelling in droves " treated worse as they are farther South " treatment of by Christians " under overseers " watching of " without redress " " shelter " working animals " worn out " worse treated than brutes " wounded by gun-shotSlave testimony excluded " torturing hypocrite " trade with Africa " trading " " honorable " trafficSlave MurderersSlave plantationSlave usage contrasted with that of animals Slave whipping Slave yokes Whipped Whipped and burnt Whipped to death Slaves treatment of Slave tradeSleeping in clothesSlitting of earsSmoothing iron on girl's backsSophistry of slaveholdersSouth Carolina laws of " " medical collegeSouthern dogs and horsesSpartan slaverySpeece, Rev. Conrad opposed to emancipationSpirit of lawsSpringfield, S. C. Starvation of a female slave " " slavesStatement of a physicianState, abuse of power inStealing of freemenStevenson, Andrew, letter bySt. Helena, S. C. Stillman's, Dr. Medical infirmary at CharlestonStocks for slaves"Stock without shelter:"Subject of prayer"Suffering of slaves " " " drives to despair and suicideSugar-plantersSuicide of slavesSuit for a dead slave " " " murdered slaveSunday morning in KentuckySurgeon of slavesSurgery at Charleston"Susceptibility of pain"

T. 

Tanner's oil poured on a slaveTantalising of slavesTappan, ArthurTarring of slavesTaskwork of slavesTeeth knocked outTender regard of slaveholders for slaveTennesseeTESTIMONY. -- Allen, Rev. William T. Avery, George A. Caulkins, Nehemiah Channing, Dr. Chapin, Rev. William A. Chapman, Gordon Clergyman Cruelty to slaves Dickey, Rev. William Drayton, Colonel Gildersleeve, William C. Graham, Rev. John Grimké, Sarah M. Hawley, Rev. Francis Ide, Joseph Jefferson, Thomas Macy, F. C. " Reuben G. " Richard " T. D. M. Moulton, Rev. Horace Nelson, John M. New Orleans Of slaves excluded Paulding, James K. Poe, William Powel, Eleazar Sapington, Lemuel Scales, Rev. William Secretary of the Navy Smith, Rev. Phineas Summers, Mr. Virginian Westgate, George W. Weld, Angelina Grimké White, Hiram Wist, WilliamTexasTheodosius the GreatThessalonica, massacre atThumb-screwsTiberiusTime for relaxation, not allowedTimes of scarcityTitusTobacco worms eatenTooth knocked outTortures " eulogized by a professor of religionTrading with negroesTraffic in slavesTrajanTreatment of sick slavesTreatment of slaves in the United States by professing Christians, " little better than that of brutesTrial of women, --"_white and black_, "Trials for murdering slavesTurkish slaveryTurner, NatTwelve slaves killed by overworkTwenty-seven hundred thousands of free-born citizens in the United StatesTying up of slaves at night"Tyrant"

"Uncle Jack, " Baptist preacherUnder garments not allowed to slavesUnited States, Laws ofUniversity of VirginiaUntimely seasonsUsage of slaves and brutes contrasted

Vapid babblings of slaveholdersVice, hypocrisy ofVicksburg, massacre ofVirginia, a slave menagerie " exportation of slaves from " University ofVisitors to slave statesVitellius

Washing for slavesWashington slavery " the national slave marketWest Indian slavesWhip, cracking of heard at a distance"Whipped to death"

WHIPPING-- Children Every day Females On three plantations heard at one time Pregnant women Slaves Slaves after a feast " for praying With paddle Women with prayerWhipping-postsWhips equally common on plantations as ploughs"White or black;" trial ofWhites in slaveryWhite slaveWholesale murdersWife, purchase of aWill of John RandolphWilmington, N. C. Witches of New-England

WITNESSES. Abbot, Jordan Abdie, P. Adams, Mr. African Observer Alexandria Gazette Allan, Rev. William T. Alston, J. A. , Heirs of Alton Telegraph Alvis, J. Anderson, Benjamin Andrews, Professor Anthony, Julius C. Antram, Joshua Appleton, John James Arkansas Advocate Armstrong, William Artop, James Ashford, J. P. Augusta Chronicle Avery, George A. Aylethorpe, Thomas Bahi, P. Baker, William Baldwin, J. G. Baldwin, Jonathan F. Ballinger, A. S. Baltimore Sun Baptist Deacon Bardwell, Rev. William Barker, Jacob Barnard, Alonzo Barnes, George W. Barr, James " Mrs. " Rev. Hugh Barrer, B. G. Barton, David W. " Richard W. Bateman, William Baton Rouge, Agricultural Society of Bayli, P. Beall, Samuel Beasley, A. G. A. " John C. " Robert Beene, Jesse Bell, Abraham " Samuel Bennett, D. B. Besson, Jacob Bezon, Mr. Bingham, Joel S. Birdseye, Ezekiel Birney, James G. Bishop, J. Blackwell, Samuel Bland, R. J. Bliss Mayhew and Co " Philemon, Bolton, J. L. And W. H. Boudinot, Tobias Bouldin, T. T. Bourgoing, J. F. Bourne, George Bradley, Henry Bragg, Thomas Brasseale, W. H. Brewster, Jarvis Brothers, Menard Brove, A. Brown, J. A. " John " Rev. Abel " William Bruce Mr. Buchanan, Dr. Buckels, William D. Burvant, Madame Burwell Bush, Moses E. Buster, Mr. Butt, Moses Byrn, Samuel H. Calvert, Robert Carney, R. P. Carolina, History of Carter, Mrs. Elizabeth Caulkins, Nehemiah Channing, Dr. Chapin, Rev. William A. Chapman, B. F. " Gardon Charleston Courier " Mercury " Patriot Cherry, John W. Child, David L. " Mrs. Choules, Rev. John O. Citizens of Onslow Clark, W. G. Clarke John Clay, Henry, " Thomas Clenderson, Benjamin Clergyman Coates Lindley Cobb, W. D. Colborn, J. L. Cole, Nathan Coleman, H. Colonization Society Columbian Inquirer Comegys, Governor Congress, Member of Connecticut, Medical Society of Constant, Dr. Cooke, Owen Cook, Giles " H. L. Cooper, Thomas Cornelius, Rev. Elias Corner, Charles " L. E. Cotton plantere Cowles, Mrs. Mary " Rev. Sylvester Craige, Charles Crane, William Crutchfield, Thomas Cuggy, T. Curtis, Mr. " Rev. John H. Cuyler, J. Daniel and Goodman Darien Telegraph Davidson, Rev. Patrick Davis, John Davis, Benjamin Dean, Jethro " Thomas Demming, Dr. Denser, T. S. Derbigny, Judge Dew, Philip A. " President Dickey, Rev. James H. " William Dickinson, Mr. Dillahunty, John H. Doddridge, Philip Dorrah, James Downman, Mrs. Lucy M. Douglas, Rev. J. W. Drake and Thomson Drayton, Colonel Drown, William Dudley, Rev. John Duggan, John Dunn, John L. Dunham, Jacob Durell, Judge Durett, Francis Dustin, W. Dyer, William Eastman, Rev. D. B. Eaton, General William Edmunds, Nicholas Edwards, F. L. C. " President " Junior " Ellison, Samuel Ellis, Orren Ellsworth, Elijah Emancipation Society of N. C. English, Walter R. Evans, R. A. Everett, William Faulkner, Mr. Fayetteville Observer Fernandez and Whiting Finley, James C. " R. S. Fishers, E. H. And I. Fitzhugh, William H. Ford, John Foster, Francis Fox, John B. Foy, Enoch Francisville Chronicle Franklin Republican Frederick, John Friends, Yearly Meeting of Fuller, Isaac C. Fullerton, G. S. Furman, B. Gadsden, Thomas N. Gaines, Rev. Ludwell, G. Gales, Joseph Garcia, Henrico Y. Garland, Maurice H. Gates, Seth M. Gayle, John Georgetown Union Georgia Constitutionalist " Journal Georgian Gholson, Mr. Giddings, Mr. Gilbert, E. W. Gildersterre, William C. Glidden, Mr. Goode, Mr. Gourden and Co. Grace, Byrd M. Graham, Rev. John " Rev. Dr. Grand Gulf Advertiser Graham, Jehab Gray, Abraham Greene, R. A. Green, James R. Gregory, Ossian Gridley, H. Grimké, Sarah M. Grosvenor. Rev. Cyrus P. Guex, D. F. Gunnell, John J. H. Guthrie, A. A. Guyler, J. Halley, Preston Hall, Samuel Han, E. Hand, John H. Hansborough, William Hanson, Peter Harding, N. H. Harman, Samuel Harrison, General W. H. Hart, F. A. " Rev. Mr. Harvey, J. Hawley, David " Rev. Francis Hayne, General R. Y. Henderson, John " Judge Hendren, H. Herring, D. " Dr. Hitchcock, Judge Hite, S. N. Hodges, B. W. " Rev. Coleman S. Holcombe, John P. Holmes, George Home, Frederick Honerton, Philip Hopkins, Rev. Henry T. Horsey, Outerbridge Hough, Rev. Joseph Houstoun, Edward Hudnall, Thomas Hughes, Benjamin Hunt, John " Rev. Thomas P. Hussey, George P. C. Huston, Felix Hutchings, A. J. Ide, Joseph Indiana, Legislature of Jackson, Stephen M. " Telegraph James, Joseph Jarnett, James T. De Jarvett, James T. Jefferson, Thomas Jenkins, John Jett, Marshall Johnson, Bryant " Cornelius " Isaac " Josiah S. Jolley, J. L. Jones, Alexander " Anson " Hill " James " R. H. " W. Jefferson Jourdan, Green B. Judd, D. " Mrs. Nancy Keeton, G. W. Kennedy, John Kentucky, Synod of Kephart, George Kernin, Charles Keyes, Willard Kimball and Thome " George Kimborough, James King, Charles " John H. " Nehemiah Knapp, Henry E. " Isaac Kyle, Frederick " James Lacy, Theodore A. Ladd, William Lains, O. W. Lambeth, William L. Lambre, Mr. Lancette, R. Langhorne, Scruggs and Cook Larrimer, Thomas Latimer, W. K. Lawless, Judge Lawyer, Zadok Ledwith, Thomas Leftwich, William Lemes, Ferdinand Leverich and Co. Lewis, Kirkman Lexington Intelligencer " Observer Little, Mrs. Sophia Loflano, Hazlet Long, Joseph Loomis, Henry H. Loring, R. " Thomas Louisville Reporter Lowry, Mrs. Nancy Luminais, A. Lyman, Judge " Rev. H. Macoin, J. Macon Messenger " Telegraph Macy, F. C. " Reuben G. " Richard " T. D. M. Magee, William Males, Henry Maltby, Stephen E. Manning, P. T. Marietta College, student of Marks, James Marriott, Charles Marshall, John T. Martineau, Harriet Maryland Journal Maryville Intelligencer Mason, Samuel Mathieson, Rev. James May, Rev. Samuel J. McCue, Moses McDonnell, James McGehee, Edward J. McGregor, Henry M. McMurrain, John Mead Whitman Medical College of South Carolina Memphis Gazette " Inquirer Menefee, R. H. Menzies, Judge Mercer, Mr. Metcalf, Asa B. Middleton, Mr. Miles, Lemuel Milledgeville Journal " Recorder Miller, C. Minister from Texas, A. Jones Minor, W. I. Missouri Republican Mitchell, Dr. Robert Mitchell, Isaac M'Neilly Mobile Advertiser " Examiner " Register Mongin, R. P. T. Montesquieu Montgomery, W. H. Moore, Mr. Va. Moorhead, John H. Morris, E. W. Moulton, Rev. Horace Moyne Dr. F. Julius Le Muggridge, Matthew Muir J. G. Murat A. Murphy S. B. Napier T. And L. Natchez Courier " Daily Free Trade National Intelligencer Nelson Dr. David " John M. Nesbitt Wilson Newbern Sentinel " Spectator New Hampshire, legislature of Newman Mrs. B. New Orleans Argus " Bee " Bulletin " Courier " Kidnapping at " Mercantile Advertiser " Post New York American " Sun Neyle S. Nicholas Judge Nicoll Robert Niles Hezekiah Noe James Norfolk Beacon " Herald N. C. Literary and Commercial-Standard N. C. Journal Nourse Rev. James Nye Horace O'Byrne O'Connell Daniel Oliver Colonel O'Neill Peter Onslow, Citizens of Orme Moses O'Rorke John Overstreet, Richard Overstreet, William Owen, Captain N. F. Owen, John W. Owens, J. G. 

 Parrish, John Parrott, Dr. Patterson, Willie Paulding, James K. Peacock, Jesse Perry, Thomas C. Petersburg Constellation Philanthropist Pickard, J. S. Pinckney, H. L. Pinkney, William Planter's Intelligencer Planters of South Carolina Poe, William Porter, Mr. Portsmouth Times Powell, Eleazar Presbyterian elder President of the United States Pringle, Thomas Pritchard, William H. Probate sale Purdon, James

 Ragland, Samuel Raleigh Register Ralston, Samuel Randall, J. B. Randolph, John Riadolph, Thomas Mann Rankin, Rev. John Rascoe, William D. Rawlins, Samuel Raworth, Egbert A. Redden J. V. Red River Whig Reed, Rev. Andrew Reed, William H. Reese, Enoch Reins, Richard Reeves, W. P. Renshaw Rev. C. S. Rhodes, Durant H. Rice, H. W. Rice, Rev. David Richardson, G. C. Richards, James K. Richards, Moses R. Richards, Stephen M. Richmond Compiler Richmond Inquirer Richmond Whig Ricks, Micajah Riley, W. Ripley, George B. Roach, Philip Robbins, Welcome H. Robarts, William Roberts, J. H. Robin, C. C. Robinson, N. M. C. Robinson, William Roebuck, George Rogers, N. P. Rogers, Thomas Ross, Abner Rowland, John A. Ruffin, Judge Russel, Benjamin Russel, W. Rymes, Littlejohn

 Sadd, Rev. Joseph M. Salvo, Conrad Sapington, Lemuel Saunders, James Savage, Rev. Thomas Savannah Georgian Savannah Republican Savory, William Scales, Rev. William Schmidt, Louis Scott, Rev. Orange Scott, William Scrivener, J. Seabrook, Whitmarsh B. Secretary of the navy Selfer Senator of the United States Sevier, Ambrose H. Sewall, Stephen Shafter, M. M. Sheith, M. J. Shield and Walker Shields, Polly C. Shropshire, David Simmons, B. C. Simpson, John Sizer, R. W. Skinner, W. Slaveholders Smith, Bishop of Kentucky Smith, Gerrit Smith, Professor Smith, Rev. Phineas Smyth, Alexander Snow, Henry H. Snowden, J. Snowden, Rev. Samuel South Carolina, legislature of South Carolina, Medical College of South Carolina, Slaveholder of Southern Argus Southern Christian Herald Southerner Southmayd, Rev. Daniel S. Spillman, Mr. Stansell, William Staughton, Rev. Dr. Staunton Spectator Steams and Co. Stevenson, Andrew Stewart, Samuel Stillmam, Dr. Stith, W. And A. Stone, Asa A. Stone, Silas Stone, William L. Strickland, William Stroud, George M. Stuart, Charles Summers, Mr. Swain, B. Synod of South Carolina and Georgia

 Tart, John Tate, Calvin H. Taylor, James H. " John " Lawton, and Co. Texan minister, Anson Jones Thatcher, Colonel Thome and Kimball Thome, James A. Thompson, Henry P. Thomson, Mr. ", Sandford Todd, R. S. Toler, William Tolin, Cornelius D. Townsend, Ely ", Samuel Tucker, Judge Turnbull, Robert Turner, John ", John D. ", L. Tarton, S. B. Tuscaloosa Flag of the Union Upsher, Judge Ustick, William A. Vance, John Van Buren, Martin Varillat, H. Vicksburg Register Virginia Minister Virginian Walker, John Walton, George ", John W. Walsh, Sarah Washington Globe Waugh, Dr. Jeremiah S. Weld, Angelina Grimké Wells, Thomas J. West Eli Western Luminary " Medical Journal " " Reformer " Review Westgate, George W. Whitbread, Samuel Whitefield, George ", Needham Whitehead, C. C. ", W. W. White, Hiram Wightman, Rev. William M. Wilberforce, W. Wilkins, C. W. Wilkinson, Alfred Williams, George W. Willis, Robert Willis, William Wilmington Advertiser Wilson, Rev. Joseph G. Winchester Virginian Wirt, William Wisner, F. Witherspoon, Dr. Woodward, Jeremiah Woolman, John Wotton, John Wright, Mr. Yampert, T. J. De Yearly meeting of FriendsWoman dying " flogged because her child died " maniac " no respect forWomen at childbirth " " the same labor with men " " work " miscarry under the whip " not breeding " pregnant whipped " severe whippers of slaves " slavesWorkhouse at CharlestonWorking hours " of slavesWorn-out slaves"Worse and worse"Worship of God prohibitedWounds by gunshotWright IsaacYokes for slaves

THE

ANTI-SLAVERY EXAMINER. 

No. 10. 

 * * * * *

SPEECH

of

HON. THOMAS MORRIS, OF OHIO, IN REPLY TO THE SPEECH OF

THE

HON. HENRY CLAY. 

IN SENATE, FEBRUARY 9, 1839. 

NEW YORK:

PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY, NO. 143 NASSAU STREET:

1839. 

 * * * * *

This No. Contains 2-1/2 sheets. --Postage, under 100 miles, 4 cts. Over 100, 7 cts. 

_Please Read and circulate. _

SPEECH

 * * * * *

MR. PRESIDENT--I rise to present for the consideration of the Senate, numerous petitions signed by, not only citizens of my own State, butcitizens of several other States, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, and Indiana. These petitioners, amounting in number toseveral thousand, have thought proper to make me their organ, incommunicating to Congress their opinions and wishes on subjects which, to them, appear of the highest importance. These petitions, sir, areon the subject of slavery, the slave trade as carried on within andfrom this District, the slave trade between the different States ofthis Confederacy, between this country and Texas, and against theadmission of that country into the Union, and also against that of anyother State, whose constitution and laws recognise or permit slavery. I take this opportunity to present all these petitions together, having detained some of them for a considerable time in my hands, inorder that as small a portion of the attention of the Senate might betaken up on their account as would be consistent with a strict regardto the rights of the petitioners. And I now present them under themost peculiar circumstances that have ever probably transpired in thisor any other country. I present them on the heel of the petitionswhich have been presented by the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Clay]signed by the inhabitants of this District, praying that Congresswould not receive petitions on the subject of slavery in the District, from any body of men or citizens, but themselves. This is somethingnew; it is one of the devices of the slave power, and mostextraordinary in itself. These petitions I am bound in duty topresent--a duty which I cheerfully perform, for I consider it not onlya duty but an honor. The respectable names which these petitions bear, and being against a practice which I as deeply deprecate and deploreas they can possibly do, yet I well know the fate of these petitions;and I also know the time, place, and disadvantage under which Ipresent them. In availing myself of this opportunity to explain my ownviews on this agitating topic, and to explain and justify thecharacter and proceedings of these petitioners, it must be obvious toall that I am surrounded with no ordinary discouragements. The strongprejudice which is evinced by the petitioners of the District, theunwillingness of the Senate to hear, the power which is arrayedagainst me on this occasion, as well as in opposition to those whoserights I am anxious to maintain; opposed by the very lions of debatein this body, who are cheered on by an applauding gallery andsurrounding interests, is enough to produce dismay in one far moreable and eloquent than the _lone_ and humble individual who nowaddresses you. 

What, sir, can there be to induce me to appear on this public arena, opposed by such powerful odds? Nothing, sir, nothing but a strongsense of duty, and a deep conviction that the cause I advocate isjust; that the petitioners whom I represent are honest, upright, intelligent and respectable citizens; men who love their country, whoare anxious to promote its best interests, and who are actuated by thepurest patriotism, as well as the deepest philanthropy andbenevolence. In representing such men, and in such a cause, though bythe most feeble means, one would suppose that, on the floor of theSenate of the United States, order, and a decent respect to theopinions of others, would prevail. From the causes which I havementioned, I can hardly hope for this. I expect to proceed throughscenes which ill become this hall; but nothing shall deter me from afull and faithful discharge of my duty on this important occasion. Permit me, sir, to remind gentlemen that I have been now six years amember of this body. I have seldom, perhaps too seldom, in the opinionof many of my constituents, pressed myself upon the notice of theSenate, and taken up their time in useless and windy debate. Iquestion very much if I have occupied the time of the Senate duringthe six years as some gentlemen have during six weeks, or even sixdays. I hope, therefore, that I shall not be thought obtrusive, orcharged with taking up time with abolition petitions. I hope, Mr. President, to hear no more about agitating this slave question here. Who has began the agitation now? The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Clay. ]Who has responded to that agitation, and congratulated the Senate andthe country on its results? The Senator from South Carolina, Mr. [Calhoun. ] And pray, sir, under what circumstances is this agitationbegun? Let it be remembered, let us collect the facts from the recordson your table, that when I, as a member of this body, but a few dayssince offered a resolution as the foundation of proceedings on thesepetitions, gentlemen, as if operated on by an electric shock, sprungfrom their seats and objected to its introduction. And when you, sir, decided that it was the right of every member to introduce such motionor resolution as he pleased, being responsible to his constituents andthis body for the abuse of this right, gentlemen seemed to wonder thatthe Senate had no power to prevent the action of one of its members incases like this, and the poor privilege of having the resolutionprinted, by order of the Senate, was denied. 

Let the Senator from South Carolina before me remember that, at thelast session, when he offered resolutions on the subject of slavery, they were not only received without objection, but printed, voted on, and decided; and let the Senator from Kentucky reflect, that thepetition which he offered against our right, was also received andordered to be printed without a single dissenting voice; and I call onthe Senate and the country to remember, that the resolutions which Ihave offered on the same subject have not only been refused theprinting, but have been laid on the table without being debated, orreferred. Posterity, which shall read the proceedings of this time, may well wonder what power could induce the Senate of the UnitedStates to proceed in such a strange and contradictory manner. Permitme to tell the country now what this power behind the throne, greaterthan the throne itself, is. It is the power of SLAVERY. It is a power, according to the calculation of the Senator from Kentucky, which ownstwelve hundred millions of dollars in human beings as property; and ifmoney is power, this power is not to be conceived or calculated; apower which claims human property more than double the amount whichthe whole money of the world could purchase. What can stand beforethis power? Truth, everlasting truth, will yet overthrow it. Thispower is aiming to govern the country, its constitutions and laws; butit is not certain of success, tremendous as it is, without foreign orother aid. Let it be borne in mind that the Bank power, some yearssince, during what has been called the panic session, had influencesufficient in this body, and upon this floor, to prevent the receptionof petitions against the action of the Senate on their resolutions ofcensure against the President. The country took instant alarm, and thepolitical complexion of this body was changed as soon as possible. Thesame power, though double in means and in strength, is now doing thesame thing. This is the array of power that even now is attemptingsuch an unwarrantable course in this country; and the people are alsonow moving against the slave, as they formerly did against the Bankpower. It, too, begins to tremble for its safety. What is to be done?Why, petitions are received and ordered to be printed, against theright of petitions which are not received, and the whole power ofdebate is thrown into the scale with the slaveholding power. But allwill not do; these two powers must now be united: an amalgamation ofthe black power of the South with the white power of the North musttake place, as either, separately, cannot succeed in the destructionof the liberty of speech and the press, and the right of petition. Letme tell gentlemen, that both united will never succeed; as I said on aformer day, God forbid that they should ever rule this country! I haveseen this billing and cooing between these different interests forsome time past; I informed my private friends of the political partywith which I have heretofore acted, during the first week of thissession, that these powers were forming a union to overthrow thepresent administration; and I warned them of the folly and mischiefthey were doing in their abuse of those who were opposed to slavery. All doubts are now terminated. The display made by the Senator fromKentucky, [Mr. Clay, ] and his denunciations of these petitioners asabolitionists, and the hearty response and cordial embrace which hisefforts met from the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. Calhoun, ]clearly shows that new moves have taken place on the politicalchessboard, and new coalitions are formed, new compromises and newbargains, settling and disposing of the rights of the country for theadvantage of political aspirants. 

The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Calhoun] seemed, at theconclusion of the argument made by the Senator from Kentucky, to befilled not only with delight but with ecstasy. He told us, that abouttwelve months since HE had offered a resolution which turned the tidein favor of the great principle of State rights, and says he is highlypleased with the course taken by the Kentucky Senator. All is now safeby the acts of that Senator. The South is now consolidated as one man;it was a great epoch in our history, but we have now passed it; it isthe beginning of a moral revolution; slavery, so far from being apolitical evil, is a great blessing; both races have been improved byit; and that abolition is now DEAD, and will soon be forgotten. So farthe Senator from South Carolina, as I understand him. But, sir, isthis really the case? Is the South united as one man, and is theSenator from Kentucky the great centre of attraction? What a lesson tothe friends of the present Administration, who have been throwingthemselves into the arms of the southern slave-power for support! Theblack enchantment I hope is now at an end--the dream dissolved, and weawake into open day. No longer is there any uncertainty or any doubton this subject. But is the great epoch passed? is it not rather justbeginning? Is abolitionism DEAD--or is it just awaking into life? Isthe right of petition strangled and forgotten--or is it increasing instrength and force? These are serious questions for the gentleman'sconsideration, that may damp the ardor of his joy, if examined with animpartial mind, and looked at with an unprejudiced eye. Sir, whenthese paeans were sung over the death of abolitionists, and, ofcourse, their right to liberty of speech and the press, at least infancy's eye, we might have seen them lying in heaps upon heaps, likethe enemies of the strong man in days of old. But let me bring backthe gentleman's mind from this delightful scene of abolition death, tosober realities and solemn facts. I have now lying before me the namesof thousands of living witnesses, that slavery has not entirelyconquered liberty; that abolitionists (for so are all thesepetitioners called) are not _all dead_. These are my first proofs toshow the gentleman his ideas are all fancy. I have also, sir, sincethe commencement of this debate, received a newspaper, as if sent byProvidence to suit the occasion, and by whom I know not. It is theCincinnati Republican of the 2d instant, which contains an extractfrom the Louisville Advertiser, a paper printed in Kentucky, inLouisville, our sister city; and though about one hundred and fiftymiles below us, it is but a few hours distant. That paper is theleading Administration journal, too, as I am informed, in Kentucky. Hear what it says on the death of abolition:--

"ABOLITION--CINCINNATI--THE LOUISVILLE ADVERTISER. 

"We copy the following notice of an article which we lately published, upon the subject of abolition movements in this quarter, from theLouisville Advertiser:--

"'ABOLITION. --The reader is referred to an interesting article which wehave copied from the Cincinnati Republican--a paper which latelysupported the principles of Democracy; a paper which has _turned_, butnot quite far enough to act with the Adamses and Slades in Congress, or the Whig abolitionists of Ohio. It does not, however, give acorrect view of the strength of the abolitionists in Cincinnati. Therethey are in the ascendant. They control the city elections, regulatewhat may be termed the morals of the city, give tone to publicopinion, and "rule the roast, " by virtue of their superior piety andintelligence. The Republican tells us, that they are not laboring LocoFocos--but "drones" and "consumers"--the "rich and well-born, " ofcourse; men who have leisure and means, and a disposition to employthe latter, to equalize whites and blacks in the slaveholding States. Even now, the absconding slave is perfectly safe in Cincinnati. Wedoubt whether an instance can be adduced of the recovery of a runawayin that place in the last four years. When negroes reach "the Queencity" they are protected by its intelligence, its piety, and itswealth. They receive the aid of the _elite_ of the Buckeyes; and wehave a strong faction in Kentucky, struggling zealously to make herone of the dependencies of Cincinnati! Let our mutual sons go on. Theday of mutual retribution is at hand--much nearer than is nowimagined. The Republican, which still looks with a friendly eye to theslaveholding States, warns us of the danger which exists, although itsnew-born zeal for Whiggery prompts it to insist, indirectly, on theright of petitioning Congress to abolish slavery. There are about twohundred and fifty abolition societies in Ohio at the present time, and, from the circular issued at head quarters, Cincinnati, it appearsthat agents are to be sent through every county to distribute booksand pamphlets designed to inflame the public mind, and then organizeadditional societies--or, rather, form new clans, to aid in the warwhich has been commenced on the slaveholding States. '"

I do not, sir, underwrite for the truth of this statement as an entirewhole; much of it I repel as an unjust charge on my fellow-citizens ofCincinnati; but, as it comes from a slaveholding State--from the Stateof the Senator who has so eloquently anathematized abolitionists thatit is almost a pity they could not die under such sweet sounds--and asthe South Carolina Senator pronounces them dead, I produce this from aslaveholding State, for the special benefit and consolation of the twoSenators. It comes from a source to which, I am sure, both gentlemenought to give credit. But suppose, sir, that abolitionism is dead, isliberty dead also and slavery triumphant? Is liberty of speech, of thepress, and the right of petition also dead? True, it has beenstrangled here; but gentlemen will find themselves in great error ifthey suppose it also strangled in the country; and the very attempt, in legislative bodies, to sustain a local and individual interest, tothe destruction of our rights, proves that those rights are not dead, but a living principle, which slavery cannot extinguish; and be my lotwhat it may, I shall, to the utmost of my abilities, under allcircumstances, and at all times, contend for that freedom which is thecommon gift of the Creator to all men, and against the power of thesetwo great interests--the slave power of the South, and banking powerof the North--which are now uniting to rule this country. The cottonbale and the bank note have formed an alliance; the credit system withslave labor. These two congenial spirits have at last met and embracedeach other, both looking to the same object--to live upon theunrequited labor of others--and have now erected for themselves acommon platform, as was intimated during the last session, on whichthey can meet, and bid defiance, as they hope, to free principles andfree labor. 

With these introductory remarks, permit me, sir, to say here, and letno one pretend to misunderstand or misrepresent me, that I chargegentlemen, when they use the word abolitionists, they mean petitionershere such as I now present--men who love liberty, and are opposed toslavery--that in behalf of these citizens I speak; and, by whatevername they may be called, it is those who are opposed to slavery whosecause I advocate. I make no war upon the rights of others. I do no actbut what is moral, constitutional, and legal, against the peculiarinstitutions of any State; but acts only in defence of my own rights, of my fellow citizens, and, above all, of my State, I shall not ceasewhile the current of life shall continue to flow. 

I shall, Mr. President, in the further consideration of this subject, endeavor to prove, first, the right of the people to petition; second, why slavery is wrong, and why I am opposed to it; third, the power ofslavery in this country, and its dangers; next, answer the question, so often asked, what have the free States to do with slavery? Thenmake some remarks by way of answer to the arguments of the Senatorfrom Kentucky, [Mr. Clay. ]

Mr. President, the duty I am requested to perform is one of thehighest which a Representative can be called on to discharge. It is tomake known to the legislative body the will and the wishes of hisconstituents and fellow-citizens; and, in the present case, I feelhonored by the confidence reposed in me, and proceed to discharge theduty. The petitioners have not trusted to my fallible judgment alone, but have declared, in written documents, the most solemn expression oftheir will. It is true these petitions have not been sent here by thewhole people of the United States, but from a portion of them only;yet such is the justice of their claim, and the sure foundation uponwhich it rests, that no portion of the American people, until a day ortwo past, have thought it either safe or expedient to present counterpetitions; and even now, when counter petitions have been presented, they dare not justify slavery, and the selling of men and women inthis District, but content themselves with objecting to othersenjoying the rights they practise, and praying Congress not to receiveor hear petitions from the people of the States--a new device of slavepower this, never before thought of or practiced in any country. Iwould have been gratified if the inventors of this system, whichdenies to others what they practise themselves, had, in theirpetition, attempted to justify slavery and the slave trade in theDistrict, if they believe the practice just, that their names mighthave gone down to posterity. No, sir; very few yet have the moralcourage to record their names to such an avowal; and even some ofthese petitioners are so squeamish on this subject, as to say thatthey might, from conscientious principles, be prevented from holdingslaves. Not so, sir, with the petitioners which I have the honor torepresent; they are anxious that their sentiments and their namesshould be made matter of record; they have no qualms of conscience onthis subject; they have deep convictions and a firm belief thatslavery is an existing evil, incompatible with the principles ofpolitical liberty, at war with our system of government, and extendinga baleful and blasting influence over our country, withering andblighting its fairest prospects and brightest hopes. Who has said thatthese petitions are unjust in principle, and on that ground ought notto be granted? Who has said that slavery is not an evil? Who has saidit does not tarnish the fair fame of our country? Who has said it doesnot bring dissipation and feebleness to one race, and poverty andwretchedness to another, in its train? Who has said, it is not unjustto the slave, and injurious to the happiness and best interest of themaster? Who has said it does not break the bonds of human affection, by separating the wife from the husband, and children from theirparents? In fine, who has said it is not a blot upon our country'shonor, and a deep and foul stain upon her institutions? Few, very few, perhaps none but him who lives upon its labor, regardless of itsmisery; and even many whose local situations are within itsjurisdiction, acknowledge its injustice, and deprecate itscontinuance; while millions of freemen deplore its existence, and lookforward with strong hope to its final termination. SLAVERY! a word, like a secret idol, thought too obnoxious or sacred to be pronouncedhere but by those who worship at its shrine--and should one who is notsuch worshipper happen to pronounce the word, the most disastrousconsequences are immediately predicted, the Union is to be dissolved, and the South to take care of itself. 

Do not suppose, Mr. President, that I feel as if engaged in aforbidden or improvident act. No such thing. I am contending with alocal and "_peculiar_" interest, an interest which has already bandedtogether with a force sufficient to seize upon every avenue by which apetition can enter this chamber, and exclude all without its haven. Iam not now contending for the rights of the negro, rights which hisCreator gave him and which his fellow-man has usurped or taken away. No, sir! I am contending for the rights of the white person in thefree States, and am endeavoring to prevent them from being troddendown and destroyed by that power which claims the black person as_property_. I am endeavoring to sound the alarm to my fellow-citizensthat this power, tremendous as it is, is endeavoring to unite itselfwith the monied power of the country, in order to extend its dominionand perpetuate its existence. I am endeavoring to drive from the backof the _negro slave_ the politician who has seated himself there toride into office for the purpose of carrying out the object of thisunholy combination. The chains of slavery are sufficiently strong, without being riveted anew by tinkering politicians of the freeStates. I feel myself compelled into this contest, in defence of theinstitutions of my own State, the persons and firesides of hercitizens, from the insatiable grasp of the slaveholding power as beingused and felt in the free States. To say that I am opposed to slaveryin the abstract, are but cold and unmeaning words, if, however capableof any meaning whatever, they may fairly be construed into a love forits existence; and such I sincerely believe to be the feeling of manyin the free States who use the phrase. I, sir, am not only opposed toslavery in the abstract, but also in its whole volume, in its theoryas well as practice. This principle is deeply implanted within me; ithas "grown with my growth and strengthened with my strength. " In myinfant years I learned to hate slavery. Your fathers taught me it waswrong in their Declaration of Independence: the doctrines which theypromulgated to the world, and upon the truth of which they staked theissue of the contest that made us a nation. They proclaimed "that allmen are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator withcertain inalienable rights; that amongst these are life, liberty, andthe pursuit of happiness. " These truths are solemnly declared by them. I believed then, and believe now, they are self-evident. Who canacknowledge this, and not be opposed to slavery? It is, then, becauseI love the principles which brought your government into existence, and which have become the corner stone of the building supporting you, sir, in that chair, and giving to myself and other Senators seats inthis body--it is because I love all this, that I hate slavery. Is itbecause I contend for the right of petition, and am opposed toslavery, that I have been denounced by many as an abolitionist? Yes;Virginia newspapers have so denounced me, and called upon theLegislature of my State to dismiss me from public confidence. Whotaught me to hate slavery, and every other oppression? _Jefferson_, the great and the good Jefferson! Yes, _Virginia Senators_, it wasyour own Jefferson, Virginia's favorite son, a man who did more forthe natural liberty of man, and the civil liberty of his country, thanany man that ever lived in our country; it was him who taught me tohate slavery; it was in his school I was brought up. That Mr. Jefferson was as much opposed to slavery as any man that ever lived inour country, there can be no doubt; his life and his writingsabundantly prove the fact. I hold in my hand a copy, as he penned it, of the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, a part ofwhich was stricken out, as he says, in compliance with the wishes ofSouth Carolina and Georgia. I will read it. Speaking of the wrongsdone us by the British Government, in introducing slaves among us, hesays: "He (the British King) has waged cruel war against human natureitself, violating its most sacred right of life and liberty in thepersons of a distant people, who never offended him, captivating andcarrying them into SLAVERY in another hemisphere, or to incurmiserable death in their transportation thither. This piraticalwarfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of theChristian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a marketwhere MEN should be BOUGHT and SOLD, he has prostituted hisprerogative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit orrestrain execrable commerce, and that this assemblage of horrors mightwant no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those verypeople to rise in arms against us, and purchase that liberty of whichhe has deprived them by murdering the people on whom he has alsoobtruded them, thus paying off former crimes committed against theliberties of one people with crimes which he urges them to commitagainst the lives of another. " Thus far this great statesman andphilanthropist. Had his contemporaries been ruled by his opinions, thecountry had now been at rest on this exciting topic. Whatabolitionist, sir, has used stronger language against slavery than Mr. Jefferson has done? "Cruel war against human nature, " "violating itsmost sacred rights, " "piratical warfare, " "opprobrium of infidelpowers, " "a market where men should be bought and sold, " "execrablecommerce, " "assemblage of horrors, " "crimes committed against theliberty of the people, " are the brands which Mr. Jefferson has burnedinto the forehead of slavery and the slave trade. When, sir, have I, or any other person opposed to slavery, spoken in stronger and moreopprobrious terms of slavery, than this? You have caused the bust ofthis great man to be placed in the centre of your Capitol; in thatconspicuous part where every visitor must see it, with its handresting on the Declaration of Independence, engraved upon marble. Whyhave you done this? Is it not mockery? Or is it to remind uscontinually of the wickedness and danger of slavery? I never pass thatstatue without new and increased veneration for the man it represents, and increased repugnance and sorrow that he did not succeed in drivingslavery entirely from the country. Sir, if I am an abolitionist, Jefferson made me so; and I only regret that the disciple should be sofar behind the master, both in doctrine and practice. But, sir, otherreasons and other causes have combined to fix and establish myprinciples in this matter, never, I trust, to be shaken. A free Statewas the place of my birth; a free Territory the theatre of my juvenileactions. Ohio is my country, endeared to me by every fondrecollection. She gave me political existence, and taught me in herpolitical school; and I should be worse than an unnatural son did Iforget or disobey her precepts. In her Constitution it is declared, "That all men are born equally free and independent, " and "that thereshall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the State, otherwise than for the punishment of crimes. " Shall I stand up forslavery in any case, condemned as it is by such high authority asthis? No, never! But this is not all, Indiana, our younger Westernsister, endeared to us by every social and political tie, a Stateformed in the same country as Ohio, from whose territory slavery wasforever excluded by the ordinance of July, 1787--she too, has declaredher abhorrence of slavery in more strong and empathic terms than wehave done. In her constitution, after prohibiting slavery, orinvoluntary servitude, being introduced into the State, she declares, "But as to the holding any part of the human creation in slavery, orinvoluntary servitude, can originate only in _tyranny_ and_usurpation_, no alteration of her constitution should ever takeplace, so as to introduce slavery or involuntary servitude into theState, otherwise than for the punishment of crimes whereof the partyhad been duly convicted. " Illinois and Michigan also formed theirconstitutions on the same principles. After such a cloud of witnessesagainst slavery, and whose testimony is so clear and explicit, as acitizen of Ohio, I should be recreant to every principle of honor andof justice, to be found the apologist or advocate of slavery in anyState, or in any country whatever. No, I cannot be so inconsistent asto say I am opposed to slavery in the _abstract_, in its separationfrom a human being, and still lend my aid to build it up, and make itperpetual in its operation and effects upon _man_ in this or any othercountry. I also, in early life, saw a slave kneel before his master, and hold up his hands with as much apparent submission, humility, andadoration, as a man would have done before his Maker, while his masterwith out-stretched rod stood over him. This, I thought, is slavery;one man subjected to the will and power of another, and the lawsaffording him no protection, and he has to beg pardon of man, becausehe has offended man, (not the laws, ) as if his master were a superiorand all powerful being. Yes, this is slavery, boasted Americanslavery, without which, it is contended even here, that the union ofthese States would be dissolved in a day, yes, even in an hour!Humiliating thought, that we are bound together as States by thechains of slavery! It cannot be--the blood and the tears of slaveryform no part of the cement of our Union--and it is hoped that byfalling on its bands they may never corrode and eat them asunder. Wewho are opposed to and deplore the existence of slavery in ourcountry, are frequently asked, both in public and private, what haveyou to do with slavery? It does not exist in your State; it does notdisturb you! Ah, sir, would to God it were so--that we had nothing todo with slavery, nothing to fear from its power, or its action withinour own borders, that its name and its miseries were unknown to us. But this is not our lot; we live upon its borders, and in hearing ofits cries; yet we are unwilling to acknowledge, that if we enter itsterritories and violate its laws, that we should be punished at itspleasure. We do not complain of this, though it might well beconsidered just ground of complaint. It is our firesides, our rights, our privileges, the safety of our friends, as well as the sovereigntyand independence of our State, that we are now called upon to protectand defend. The slave interest has at this moment the whole power ofthe country in its hands. It claims the President as a Northern manwith Southern feelings, thus making the Chief Magistrate the head ofan interest, or a party, and not of the country and the people atlarge. It has the cabinet of the President, three members of which arefrom the slave States, and one who wrote a book in favor of Southernslavery, but which fell dead from the press, a book which I have seen, in my own family, thrown musty upon the shelf. Here then is a decidedmajority in favor of the slave interest. It has five out of ninejudges of the Supreme Court; here, also, is a majority from the slaveStates. It has, with the President of the Senate, and the Speaker ofthe House of Representatives, and the Clerks of both Houses, the armyand the navy; and the bureaus, have, I am told, about the sameproportion. One would suppose that, with all this power operating inthis Government, it would be content to _permit_--yes I will use theword _permit_--it would be content to permit us, who live in the freeStates, to enjoy our firesides and our homes in quietness; but this isnot the case. The slaveholders and slave laws claim that as property, which the free States know only as persons, a reasoning property, which, of its own will and mere motion, is frequently found in ourStates; and upon which THING we sometimes bestow food and raiment, ifit appear hungry and perishing, believing it to be a human being; thisperhaps is owing to our want of vision to discover the process bywhich a man is converted into a THING. For this act of ours, which isnot prohibited by our laws, but prompted by every feeling, Christianand humane, the slaveholding power enters our territory, tramplesunder foot the sovereignty of our State, violates the sanctity ofprivate residence, seizes our citizens, and disregarding the authorityof our laws, transports them into its own jurisdiction, casts theminto prison, confines them in fetters, and loads them with chains, forpretended offences against their own laws, found by willing grandjuries upon the oath (to use the language of the late Governor ofOhio) of a perjured villain. Is this fancy, or is it fact, soberreality, solemn fact? Need I say all this, and much more, as nowmatter of history in the case of the Rev. John B. Mahan, of Browncounty, Ohio? Yes, it is so; but this is but the beginning--a case ofequal outrage has lately occurred, if newspapers are to be relied on, in the seizure of a citizen of Ohio, without even the forms of law, and who was carried into Virginia and shamefully punished by tar andfeathers, and other disgraceful means, and rode upon a rail, accordingto the order of Judge Lynch, and this, only because in Ohio he was anabolitionist. Would I could stop here--but I cannot. This slaveinterest or power seizes upon persons of color in our States, carriesthem into States where men are property, and makes merchandize ofthem, sometimes under sanction of law, but more properly by its abuse, and sometimes by mere personal force, thus disturbing our quiet andharassing our citizens. A case of this kind has lately occurred, wherea colored boy was seduced from Ohio into Indiana, taken from thenceinto Alabama and sold as a slave; and to the honor of the slaveStates, and gentlemen who administer the laws there, be it said, thatmany who have thus been taken and sold by the connivance, if notdownright corruption, of citizens in the free States, have beenliberated and adjudged free in the States where they have been sold, as was the case of the boy mentioned, who was sold in Alabama. 

Slave power is seeking to establish itself in every State, in defianceof the constitution and laws of the States within which it isprohibited. In order to secure its power beyond the reach of theStates, it claims its parentage from the Constitution of the UnitedStates. It demands of us total silence as to its proceedings, deniesto our citizens the liberty of speech and the press, and punishes themby mobs and violence for the exercise of these rights. It has sent itsagents into the free States for the purpose of influencing theirLegislatures to pass laws for the security of its power within suchState, and for the enacting new offences and new punishments for theirown citizens, so as to give additional security to its interest. Itdemands to be heard in its own person in the hall of our Legislature, and mingle in debate there. Sir, in every stage of these oppressionsand abuses, permit me to say, in the language of the Declaration ofIndependence--and no language could be more appropriate--we havepetitioned for redress in the most humble terms, and our repeatedpetitions have been answered by repeated injury. A power, whosecharacter is marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfitto rule over a free people. In our sufferings and our wrongs we havebesought our fellow-citizens to aid us in the preservation of ourconstitutional rights, but, influenced by the love of gain orarbitrary power, they have sometimes disregarded all the sacred rightsof man, and answered in violence, burnings, and murder. After allthese transactions, which are now of public notoriety and matter ofrecord, shall we of the free States tauntingly be asked what we haveto do with slavery? We should rejoice, indeed, if the evils of slaverywere removed far from us, that it could be said with truth, that wehave nothing to do with slavery. Our citizens have not entered itsterritories for the purpose of obstructing its laws, nor do we wish todo so, nor would we justify any individual in such act; yet we havebeen branded and stigmatized by its friends and advocates, both in thefree and slave States, as incendiaries, fanatics, disorganizers, enemies to our country, and as wishing to dissolve the Union. We haveborne all this without complaint or resistance, and only ask to besecure in our persons, by our own firesides, and in the free exerciseof our thoughts and opinions in speaking, writing, printing andpublishing on the subject of slavery, that which appears to us to bejust and right; because we all know the power of truth, and that itwill ultimately prevail, in despite of all opposition. But in theexercise of all these rights, we acknowledge subjection to the laws ofthe State in which we are, and our liability for their abuse. We wishpeace with all men; and that the most amicable relations and freeintercourse may exist between the citizens of our State and ourneighboring slaveholding States; we will not enter their States, either in our proper persons, or by commissioners, legislativeresolutions, or otherwise, to interfere with their slave policy orslave laws; and we shall expect from them and their citizens a likereturn, that they do not enter our territories for the purpose ofviolating our laws in the punishment of our people for the exercise oftheir undoubted rights--the liberty of speech and of the press on thesubject of slavery. We ask that no man shall be seized and transportedbeyond our State, in violation of our own laws, and that we shall notbe carried into and imprisoned in another State for acts done in ourown. We contend that the slaveholding power is properly chargeablewith all the riots and disorders which take place on account ofslavery. We can live in peace with all our sister States; if thatpower will be controlled by law, each can exercise and enjoy the fullbenefits secured by their own laws; and this is all we ask. If we holdup slavery to the view of an impartial public as it is, and if suchview creates astonishment and indignation, surely we are not to becharged as libellers. A State institution ought to be considered thepride, not the shame of the State; and if we falsify suchinstitutions, the disgrace is ours, not theirs. If slavery, however, is a blemish, a blot, an eating cancer in the body politic, it is notour fault if, by holding it up, others should see in the mirror oftruth its deformity, and shrink back from the view. We have not, andwe intend not, to use any weapons against slavery, but the moral powerof truth and the force of public opinion. If we enter the slaveStates, and tamper with the slave contrary to law, punish us, wedeserve it; and if a slaveholder is found in a free State, and isguilty of a breach of the law there, he also ought to be punished. These petitioners, as far as I understand them, disclaim all right toenter a slave State for the purpose of intercourse with the slave. Itis the master whom they wish to address; and they ask and ought toreceive protection from the laws, as they are willing to be judged bythe laws. We invite into the arena of public discussion in our Statethe slaveholder; we are willing to hear his reasons and facts in favorof slavery, or against abolitionists: we do not fear his errors whilewe are ourselves free to combat them. The angry feelings which in somedegree exist between the citizens of the free and slaveholding States, on account of slavery, are, in many cases, properly chargeable tothose who defend and support slavery. Attempts are almost daily makingto force the execution of slave laws in the free States; at least, their power and principles: and no term is too reproachful to beapplied to those who resist such acts, and contend for the rightssecured to every man under their own laws. We are often reminded thatwe ought to take color as evidence of property in a human being. We donot believe in such evidence, nor do we believe that a man can justlybe made property by human laws. We acknowledge, however, that a _man_, not a _thing_ may be held to service or labor under the laws of aState, and, if he escape into another State, he ought to be deliveredup on claim of the party to whom such labor or service may be due;that this delivery ought to be in pursuance of the laws of the Statewhere such person is found, and not by virtue of any act of Congress. 

This brings me, Mr. President, to the consideration of the petitionpresented by the Senator from Kentucky, and to an examination of theviews he has presented to the Senate on this highly important subject. Sir, I feel, I sensibly feel my inadequacy in entering into acontroversy with that old and veteran Senator; but nothing high or lowshall prevent me from an honest discharge of my duty here. Ifimperfectly done, it may be ascribed to the want of ability, notintention. If the power of my mind, and the strength of my body, wereequal to the task, I would arouse every man, yes, every woman andchild in the country, to the danger which besets them, if suchdoctrines and views as are presented by the Senator should ever becarried into effect. His denunciations are against abolitionists, andunder that term are classed all those who petition Congress on thesubject of slavery. Such I understand to be his argument, and as suchI shall treat it. I, in the first place, put in a broad denial to allhis general facts, charging this portion of my fellow citizens withimproper motives or dangerous designs. That their acts are lawful hedoes not pretend to deny. I called for proof to sustain his charges. None such has been offered, and none such exists, or can be found. Irepel them as calumnies double-distilled in the alembic of slavery. Ideny them, also, in the particulars and inferences; and let us seeupon what ground they rest, or by what process of reasoning they aresustained. 

The very first view of these petitioners against our right of petitionstrikes the mind that more is intended than at first meets the eye. Why was the committee on the District overlooked in this case, and theSenator from Kentucky made the organ of communication? Is itunderstood that anti-abolitionism is a passport to popular favor, andthat the action of this District shall present for that favor to thepublic a gentleman upon this hobby? Is this petition presented as asubject of fair legislation? Was it solicited by members of Congress, from citizens here, for political effect? Let the country judge. Thepetitioners state that no persons but themselves are authorized tointerfere with slavery in the District; that Congress are their ownLegislature; and the question of slavery in the District is onlybetween them and their constituted legislators; and they protestagainst all interference of others. But, sir, as if ashamed of thisopen position in favor of slavery, they, in a very coy manner, saythat some of them are not slaveholders, and might be forbidden byconscience to hold slaves. There is more dictation, more politicalheresy, more dangerous doctrine contained in this petition, than Ihave ever before seen couched together in so many words. We! Congresstheir OWN Legislature in all that concerns this District! Let thosewho may put on the city livery, and legislate for them and not for hisconstituents, do so; for myself, I came here with a different view, and for different purposes. I came a free man, to represent the peopleof Ohio; and I intend to leave this as such representative, withoutwearing any other livery. Why talk about executive usurpation andinfluence over the members of Congress? I have always viewed thisDistrict influence as far more dangerous than that of any other power. It has been able to extort, yes, extort from Congress, millions to payDistrict debts, make District improvements, and in support of thecivil and criminal jurisprudence of the District. Pray, sir, whatright has Congress to pay the corporate debts of the cities in theDistrict more than the Debts of the corporate cities in your State andmine? None, sir. Yet this has been done to a vast amount; and the nextstep is, that we, who pay all this, shall not be permitted to petitionCongress on the subject of their institutions, for, if we can beprevented in one case, we can in all possible cases. Mark, sir, howplain a tale will silence these petitioners. If slavery in theDistrict concerns only the inhabitants and Congress, so does allmunicipal regulations. Should they extend to granting lottery, gaming-houses, tippling-houses, and other places calculated to promoteand encourage vice--should a representative in Congress be instructedby his constituents to use his influence, and vote against suchestablishments, and the people of the District should instruct him tovote for them, which should he obey? To state the question is toanswer it; otherwise the boasted right of instruction by theconstituent body is "mere sound, " signifying nothing. Sir, theinhabitants of this district are subject to state legislation andstate policy; they cannot complain of this, for their condition isvoluntary; and as this city is the focus of power, of influence, andconsidered also as that of fashion, if not of folly, and as thestreams which flow from here irradiate the whole country, it is right, it is proper, that it should be subject to state policy and statepower, and not used as a leaven to ferment and corrupt the whole bodypolitic. 

The honorable Senator has said the petition, though from a city, isthe fair expression of the opinion of the District. As such I treatedit, am willing to acknowledge the respectability of the petitionersand their rights, and I claim for the people of my own state equalrespectability and equal rights that the people of the District areentitled to: any peculiar rights and advantages I cannot admit. 

I agree with the Senator, that the proceedings on abolition petitions, heretofore, have not been the most wise and prudent course. They oughtto have been referred and acted on. Such was my object, a day or twosince, when I laid on your table a resolution to refer them to acommittee for inquiry. You did not suffer it, sir, to be printed. Thecountry and posterity will judge between the people whom I representand those who caused to be printed the petition from the city. Itcannot be possible that justice can have been done in both cases. Theexclusive legislation of Congress over the District is as much the actof the constituent body, as the general legislation of Congress overthe States, and to the operation of this act have the people withinthe District submitted themselves. I cannot, however, join the Senatorthat the majority, in refusing to receive and refer petitions, did notintend to destroy or impair the right in this particular. Theycertainly have done so. 

The Senator admits the abolitionists are now formidable; thatsomething must be done to produce harmony. Yes, sir, do justice, andharmony will be restored. Act impartially, that justice may be done:hear petitions on both sides, if they are offered, and give righteousjudgments, and your people will be satisfied. You cannot compromisethem out of their rights, nor lull them to sleep with fallacies in theshape of reports. You cannot conquer them by rebuke, nor deceive themby sophistry. Remember you cannot now turn public opinion, nor can youoverthrow it. You must, and you will, abandon the high ground you havetaken, and receive petitions. The reason of the case, the argument andthe judgment of the people, are all against you. One in this cause can"chase a thousand, " and the voice of justice will be heard wheneveryou agitate the subject. In Indiana, the right to petition has beenmost nobly advocated in a protest, by a member, against some punyresolutions of the Legislature of that State to whitewash slavery. Permit me to read a paragraph, worthy an American freeman:

"But who would have thought until lately, that any would have doubtedthe right to petition in a respectful manner to Congress? Who wouldhave believed, that Congress had any authority to refuse to considerthe petitions of the people? Such a step would overthrow the autocratof Russia, or cost the Grand Seignior of Constantinople his head. Canit be possible, therefore, that it has been reserved for a republicanGovernment, in a land boasting of its free institutions, to set thefirst precedent of this kind? Our city councils, our courts ofjustice, every department of Government are approached by petition, however unanswerable, or absurd, so that its terms are respectful. None go away unread, or unheard. The life of every individual is aperfect illustration of the subject of petitioning. Petition is thelanguage of want, of pain, of sorrow, of man in all his sad variety ofwoes, imploring relief, at the hand of some power superior to himself. Petitioning is the foundation of all government, and of alladministrations of law. Yet it has been reserved for our Congress, seconded indirectly by the vote of this Legislature, to question thisright, hitherto supposed to be so old, so heaven-deeded, so undoubted, that our fathers did not think it necessary to place a guaranty of itin the first draft of the Federal Constitution. Yet this sacred righthas been, at one blow, driven, destroyed, and trodden under the feetof slavery. The old bulwarks of our Federal and State Constitutionsseem utterly to have been forgotten, which declare, 'that the freedomof speech and the press shall not be abridged, nor the right of thepeople peaceably to assemble and _petition_ for the redress of theirgrievances. '"

These, sir, are the sentiments which make abolitionists formidable, and set at nought all your councils for their overthrow. The honorableSenator not only admits that abolitionists are formidable, but thatthey consist of three classes. The friends of humanity and justice, orthose actuated by those principles, compose one class. These form avery numerous class, and the acknowledgment of the Senator proves theimmutable principles upon which opposition to slavery rests. Men areopposed to it from principles of humanity and justice--men areabolitionists, he admits, on that account. We thank the Senator forteaching us that word, we intend to improve it. The next class ofabolitionists, the Senator says, are so, apparently, for the purposeof advocating the right of petition. What are we to understand fromthis? That the right of petition needs advocacy. Who has denied thisright, or who has attempted to abridge it? The slaveholding power, that power which avoids open discussion, and the free exercise ofopinion; it is that power alone which renders the advocacy of theright of petition necessary, having seized upon all the powers of theGovernment. It is fast uniting together those opposed to its ironrule, no matter to what political party they have heretofore belonged;they are uniting with the first class, and act from principles ofhumanity and justice; and if the mists and shades of slavery were notthe atmosphere in which gentlemen were enveloped, they would seeconstant and increasing numbers of our most worthy and intelligentcitizens attaching themselves to the two classes mentioned, andrallying under the banners of abolitionism. They are compelled to gothere, if the gentleman will have it so, in order to defend andperpetuate the liberties of the country. The hopes of the oppressedspring up afresh from this discussion of the gentleman. The thirdclass, the Senator says, are those who, to accomplish their ends, actwithout regard to consequences. To them, all the rights of property, of the States, of the Union, the Senator says, are nothing. He saysthey aim at other objects than those they profess--emancipation in theDistrict of Columbia. No, says the Senator, their object is _universalemancipation_, not only in the District, but in the Territories and inthe States. Their object is to set free three millions of negroslaves. Who made the Senator, in his place here, the censor of hisfellow citizens? Who authorized him to charge them with other objectsthan those they profess? How long is it since the Senator himself, onthis floor, denounced slavery as an evil? What other inducements orobject had he then in view? Suppose universal emancipation to be theobject of these petitioners; is it not a noble and praiseworthyobject; worthy of the Christian, the philanthropist, the statesman, and the citizen? But the Senator says, they (the petitioners) aim toexcite one portion of the country against another. I deny, sir, thischarge, and call for the proof; it is gratuitous, uncalled for, andunjust towards my fellow citizens. This is the language of a strickenconscience, seeking for the palliation of its own acts by chargingguilt upon others. It is the language of those who, failing inargument, endeavor to cast suspicion upon the character of theiropponents, in order to draw public attention from themselves. It isthe language of disguise and concealment, and not that of fair andhonorable investigation, the object of which is truth. I again put ina broad denial to this charge, that any portion of these petitioners, whom I represent, seek to excite one portion of the country againstanother; and without proof I cannot admit that the assertion of thehonorable Senator establishes the fact. It is but opinion, and nakedassertion only. The Senator complains that the means and views of theabolitionists are not confined to securing the right of petition only;no, they resort to other means, he affirms, to the BALLOT BOX; and ifthat fail, says the Senator, their next appeal will be to the bayonet. Sir, no man, who is an American in feeling and in heart, but ought torepel this charge instantly, and without any reservation whatever, that if they fail at the ballot box they will resort to the bayonet. If such a fratricidal course should ever be thought of in our country, it will not be by those who seek redress of wrongs, by exercising theright of petition, but by those only who deny that right to others, and seek to usurp the whole power of the Government. If the ballot boxfail them, the bayonet may be their resort, as mobs and violence noware. Does the Senator believe that any portion of the honest yeomanryof the country entertain such thoughts? I hope he does not. Ifthoughts of this kind exist, they are to be found in the hearts ofaspirants to office, and their adherents, and none others. Who, sir, is making this question a political affair? Not the petitioners. Itwas the slaveholding power which first made this move. I have noticedfor some time past that many of the public prints in this city, aswell as elsewhere, have been filled with essays against abolitionistsfor exercising the rights of freemen. 

Both political parties, however, have courted them in private anddenounced them in public, and both have equally deceived them. And whoshall dare say that an abolitionist has no right to carry hisprinciples to the _ballot box? Who fears the ballot box?_ The honestin heart, the lover of our country and its institutions? No, sir! Itis feared by the tyrant; he who usurps power, and seizes upon theliberty of others; he, for one, fears the ballot box. Where is theslave to party in this country who is so lost to his own dignity, orso corrupted by interest or power, that he does not, or will not, carry his principles and his judgment into the ballot box? Such an oneought to have the mark of Cain in his forehead, and sent to laboramong the negro slaves of the South. The honorable Senator seemsanxious to take under his care the ballot box, as he has the slavesystem of the country, and direct who shall or who shall not use itfor the redress of what they deem a political grievance. Suppose thepower of the Executive chair should take under its care the right ofvoting, and who should proscribe any portion of our citizens whoshould carry with them to the polls of election their own opinions, creeds, and doctrines. This would at once be a deathblow to ourliberties, and the remedy could only be found in revolution. There canbe no excuse or pretext for revolution while the ballot box is free. Our Government is not one of force, but of principle; its foundationrests on public opinion, and its hope is in the morality of thenation. The moral power of that of the ballot box is sufficient tocorrect all abuses. Let me, then, proclaim here, from this high arena, to the citizens not only of my own State, but to the country, to allsects and parties who are entitled to the right of suffrage, To THEBALLOT BOX! carry with you honestly your own sentiments respecting thewelfare of your country, and make them operate as effectually as youcan, through that medium, upon its policy and for its prosperity. Fearnot the frowns of power. It trembles while it denounces you. TheSenator complains that the abolitionists have associated with thepolitics of the country. So far as I am capable of judging, thischarge is not well founded; many politicians of the country have usedabolitionists as stepping stones to mount into power; and, when there, have turned about and traduced them. He admits that political partiesare willing to unite with them any class of men, in order to carrytheir purposes. Are abolitionists, then, to blame if they pursue thesame course? It seems the Senator is willing that his party shouldmake use of even abolitionists; but he is not willing thatabolitionists should use the same party for their purpose. This seemsnot to be in accordance with that equality of rights about which weheard so much at the last session. Abolitionists have nothing to fear. If public opinion should be for them, politicians will be around andamongst them as the locusts of Egypt. The Senator seems to admit that, if the abolitionists are joined to either party, there isdanger--danger of what? That humanity and justice will prevail? thatthe right of petition will be secured to ALL EQUALLY? and that thelong lost and trodden African race will be restored to their naturalrights? Would the Senator regret to see this accomplished by argument, persuasion, and the force of an enlightened public opinion? I hopenot; and these petitioners ask the use of no other weapons in thiswarfare. 

These ultra-abolitionists, says the Senator, invoke the power of thisgovernment to their aid. And pray, sir, what power should they invoke?Have they not the same right to approach this government as other men?Is the Senator or this body authorized to deny them any privilegessecured to other citizens? If so, let him show me the charter of hispower and I will be silent. Until he can do this, I shall uphold, justify, and sustain them, as I do other citizens. The exercise ofpower by Congress in behalf of the slaves within this District, theSenator seems to think, no one without the District has the leastclaim to ask for. It is because I reside without the District, and amcalled within it by the Constitution, that I object to the existenceof slavery here. I deny the gentleman's position, then, on this point. On this then, we are equal. The Senator, however, is at war withhimself. He contends the object of the cession by the States ofVirginia and Maryland, was to establish a seat of Government _only_, and to give Congress whatever power was necessary to render theDistrict a valuable and comfortable situation for that purpose, andthat Congress have full power to do whatever is necessary for thisDistrict; and if to abolish slavery be necessary, to attain theobject, Congress have power to abolish slavery in the District. I amsure I quote the gentleman substantially; and I thank him for thisprecious confession in his argument; it is what I believe, and I knowit is all I feel disposed to ask. If we can, then, prove that thisDistrict is not as comfortable and convenient a place for thedeliberations of Congress, and the comfort of our citizens who mayvisit it, while slavery exists here, as it would be without slavery, then slavery ought to be abolished; and I trust we shall have thedistinguished Senator from Kentucky to aid us in this great nationalreformation. I take the Senator at his word. I agree with him thatthis ought to be such a place as he has described; but I deny that itis so. And upon what facts do I rest my denial? We are a Christiannation, a moral and religious people. I speak for the free States, atleast for my own State; and what a contrast do the very streets ofyour capital daily present to the Christianity and morality of thenation? A race of slaves, or at least colored persons, of every huefrom the jet black African, in regular gradation, up to the almostpure Anglo-Saxon color. During the short time official duty has calledme here, I have seen the really red haired, the freckled, and thealmost white negro; and I have been astonished at the numbers of themixed race, when compared with those of full color, and I have deeplydeplored this stain upon our national morals; and the words of Dr. Channing have, thousands of times, been impressed on my mind, that "aslave country reeks with licentiousness. " How comes this amalgamationof the races? It comes from slavery. It is a disagreeable annoyance topersons who come from the free States, especially to their Christianand moral feelings. It is a great hindrance to the proper discharge oftheir duties while here. Remove slavery from this District, and thisevil will disappear. We argue this circumstance alone as sufficientcause to produce that effect. But slavery presents within the Districtother and still more appalling scenes--scenes well calculated toawaken the deepest emotions of the human heart. The slave-trade existshere in all its HORRORS, and unwhipt of all its crimes. In view of thevery chair which you now occupy, Mr. President, if the massy walls ofthis building, did not prevent it, you could see the prison, the_pen_, the HELL, where human beings, when purchased for sale, are keptuntil a cargo can be procured for transportation to a Southern orforeign market, for I have little doubt slaves are carried to Texasfor sale, though I do not know the fact. 

Sir, since Congress have been in session, a mournful group of theseunhappy beings, some thirty or forty, were marched, as if in derisionof members of Congress, in view of your Capitol, chained and manacledtogether, in open day-light, yes, in the very face of heaven itself, to be shipped at Baltimore for a foreign market. I did not witnessthis cruel transaction, but speak from what I have heard and believe. Is this District, then, a fit place for our deliberations, whosefeelings are outraged with impunity with transactions like this?Suppose, sir, that mournful and degrading spectacle was at this momentexhibited under the windows of our chamber, do you think the Senatecould deliberate, could continue with that composure and attentionwhich I see around me? No, sir; all your powers could not preserveorder for a moment. The feelings of humanity would overcome those ofregard for the peculiar institutions of the States; and though wewould be politically and legally bound not to interfere, we are notmorally bound to withhold our sympathy and our execration inwitnessing such inhuman traffic. This traffic alone, in this District, renders it an uncomfortable and unfit place for your seat ofGovernment. Sir, it is but one or two years since I saw standing atthe railroad depot, as I passed from my boarding house to thischamber, some large wagons and teams, as if waiting for freight; thecars had not then arrived. I was inquired of, when I returned to mylodgings, by my landlady, if I knew the object of those wagons which Isaw in the morning. I replied, I did not; I suppose they came and werewaiting for loading. "Yes, for slaves, " said she; "and one of thosewagons was filled with little boys and little girls, who had beenbought up through the country, and were to be taken to a southernmarket. Ah, sir!" continued she, "it made my very heart ache to seethem. " The very recital unnerved and unfitted me for thought orreflection on any other subject for some time. It is scenes like this, of which ladies of my country and my state complained in theirpetitions, some time since, as rendering this District unpleasant, should they visit the capital of the nation as wives, sisters, daughters, or friends of members of Congress. Yet, sir, theserespectable females were treated here with contemptuous sneers; theywere compared, on this floor, to the fish-women of Paris, who dippedtheir fingers in the blood of revolutionary France. Sir, if thetransaction in slaves here, which I have mentioned, could make such animpression on the heart of a lady, a resident of the District, one whohad been used to slaves, and was probably an owner, what would be thefeelings of ladies from free states on beholding a like transaction? Iwill leave every gentleman and every lady to answer for themselves. Iam unable to describe it. Shall the capital of your country longerexhibit scenes so revolting to humanity, that the ladies of yourcountry cannot visit it without disgust? No; wipe off the foul stain, and let it become a suitable and comfortable place for the seat ofGovernment. The Senator, as if conscious that his argument on thispoint had proved too much, and of course had proven the converse ofwhat he wished to establish, concluded this part by saying, that ifslavery is abolished, the act ought to be confined to the city alone. We thank him for this small sprinkling of correct opinion upon thisarid waste of public feeling. Liberty may yet vegetate and grow evenhere. 

The Senator insists that the States of Virginia and Maryland wouldnever have ceded this District if they had have thought slavery wouldever have been abolished in it. This is an old story twice told. Itwas never, however, thought of, until the slave power imagined it, forits own security. Let the States ask a retrocession of the District, and I am sure the free States will rejoice to make the grant. 

The Senator condemns the abolitionists for desiring that slaveryshould not exist in the Territories, even in Florida. He insists that, by the treaty, the inhabitants of that country have the right toremove their EFFECTS when they please; and that, by this condition, they have the right to retain their slaves as effects, independentlyof the power of Congress. I am no diplomatist, sir, but I venture todeny the conclusion of the Senator's argument. In all our intercoursewith foreign nations, in all our treaties in which the words "goods, effects, " &c. Are used, slaves have never been considered as included. In all cases in which slaves are the subject matter of controversy, they are specially named by the word "slaves; and, if I rememberrightly, it has been decided in Congress, that slaves are not propertyfor which a compensation shall be made when taken for public use, (orrather, slaves cannot be considered as taken for public use, ) or asproperty by the enemy, when they are in the service of the UnitedStates. If I am correct, as I believe I am, in the positions I haveassumed, the gentleman can say nothing, by this part of his argument, against abolitionists, for asking that slavery shall not exist inFlorida. "

The gentleman contends that the power to remove slaves from one Stateto another, for sale, is found in that part of the Constitution whichgives Congress the power to regulate commerce within the States, &c. This argument is _non sequiter_, unless the honorable Senator canfirst prove that slaves are proper articles for commerce. We say thatCongress have power over slaves only as persons. The United States canprotect persons, _but cannot make them property_, and they have fullpower in regulating commerce, and can, in such regulations, prohibitfrom its operations every thing but property; property made so by thelaws of nature, and not by any municipal regulations. The dominion ofman over things, as property, was settled by his Creator when man wasfirst placed upon the earth. He was to subdue the earth, and havedominion over the fish of the sea, the fowls of the air, and overevery living thing that moveth upon the earth; every herb bearingseed, and the fruit of a tree yielding seed, was given for his use. This is the foundation of all right in property of every description. It is for the use of man the grant is made, and of course man cannotbe included in the grant. Every municipal regulation, then, of anyState, or any of its peculiar institutions, which makes man property, is a violation of this great law of nature, and is founded inusurpation and tyranny, and is accomplished by force, fraud, or anabuse of power. It is a violation of the principles of truth andjustice, in subjecting the weaker to the stronger man. In a Christiannation such property can form no just ground for commercialregulations, but ought to be strictly prohibited. I therefore believeit is the duty of Congress, by virtue of this power, to regulatecommerce, to prohibit, at once, slaves being used as articles oftrade. 

The gentleman says, the Constitution left the subject of slaveryentirely to the States. To this position I assent; and, as the Statescannot regulate their own commerce, but the same being the right ofCongress, that body cannot make slaves an article of commerce, becauseslavery is left entirely to the States in which it exists; and slaveswithin those States, according to the gentleman, are excluded from thepower of Congress. Can Congress, in regulating commerce among theseveral States, authorize the transportation of articles from oneState, and their sale in another, which they have not power so toauthorize in any State? I cannot believe in such doctrine; and I nowsolemnly protest against the power of Congress to authorize thetransportation to, and the sale in, Ohio, of any negro slave whatever, or for any possible purpose under the sun. Who is there in Ohio, orelsewhere, that will dare deny this position? If Ohio contains such arecreant to her constitution and policy, I hope he may have theboldness to stand forth and avow it. If the States in which slaveryexists love it as a household god, let them keep it there, and notcall upon us in the free States to offer incense to their idol. We donot seek to touch it with unhallowed hands, but with pure hands, upraised in the cause of truth and suffering humanity. 

The gentleman admits that, at the formation of our Government, it wasfeared that slavery might eventually divide or distract our country;and, as the BALLOT BOX seems continually to haunt his imagination, hesays there is real danger of dissolution of the Union ifabolitionists, as is evident they do, will carry their principles intothe BALLOT BOX. If not disunion in fact, at least in feeling, in thecountry, which is always the precursor to the clash of arms. And thegentleman further says we are taught by holy writ, "that the race isnot to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. " The moral of thegentleman's argument is, that truth and righteousness will prevail, though opposed by power and influence; that abolitionists, though fewin number, are greatly to be feared; one, as I have said, may chase athousand, and two put ten thousand to flight; and, as their weapons ofwarfare are not "carnal, but mighty to the pulling down of strongholds, " even slavery itself; and as the ballot box is the great morallever in political action, the gentleman would exclude abolitionistsentirely from its use, and for opinion's sake, deny them this highprivilege of every American citizen. Permit me, sir, to remind thegentleman of another text of holy writ. "The wicked flee when no manpursueth, but the righteous are bold as a lion. " The Senator says thatthose who have slaves, are sometimes supposed to be under too muchalarm. Does this prove the application of the text I have just quoted:"Conscience sometimes makes cowards of us all. " The Senator appeals toabolitionists, and beseeches them to cease their efforts on thesubject of slavery, if they wish, says he, "to exercise theirbenevolence. " What! Abolitionists benevolent! He hopes they willselect some object not so terrible. Oh, sir, he is willing they shouldpay tithes of "mint and rue, " but the weighter matters of the law, judgment and mercy, he would have them entirely overlook. I ought tothank the Senator for introducing holy writ into this debate, andinform him his arguments are not the sentiments of Him, who, when onearth, went about doing good. 

The Senator further entreats the clergy to desist from their effortsin behalf of abolitionism. Who authorized the Senator, as apolitician, to use his influence to point out to the clergy what theyshould preach, or for what they should pray? Would the Senator dareexert his power here to bind the consciences of men? By what rule ofethics, then, does he undertake to use his influence, from this highplace of power, in order to gain the same object, I am at a loss todetermine. Sir, this movement of the Senator is far more censurableand dangerous, as an attempt to unite Church and State, than were thepetitions against Sunday mails, the report in opposition to whichgained for you, Mr. President, so much applause in the country. I, sir, also appeal to the clergy to maintain their rights of conscience;and if they believe slavery to be a sin, we ought to honor and respectthem for their open denunciation of it, rather than call on them todesist, for between their conscience and their God, we have no powerto interfere; we do not wish to make them political agents for anypurpose. 

But the Senator is not content to entreat the clergy alone to desist;he calls on his countrywomen to warn them, also, to cease theirefforts, and reminds them that the ink shed from the pen held in theirfair fingers when writing their names to abolition petitions, may bethe cause of shedding much human blood! Sir, the language towards thisclass of petitioners is very much changed of late; they formerly werepronounced idlers, fanatics, old women and school misses, unworthy ofrespect from intelligent and respectable men. I warned gentlemen thenthat they would change their language; the blows they aimed fellharmless at the feet of those against whom they were intended toinjure. In this movement of my countrywomen I thought was plainly tobe discovered the operations of Providence, and a sure sign of thefinal triumph of _universal emancipation_. All history, both sacredand profane, both ancient and modern, bears testimony to the efficacyof female influence and power in the cause of human liberty. From thetime of the preservation, by the hands of women, of the great Jewishlaw-giver, in his infantile hours, and who was preserved for thepurpose of freeing his countrymen from Egyptian bondage, has womanbeen made a powerful agent in breaking to pieces the rod of theoppressor. With a pure and uncontaminated mind, her actions springfrom the deepest recesses of the human heart. Denounce her as youwill, you cannot deter her from her duty. Pain, sickness, want, poverty and even death itself form no obstacles in her onward march. Even the tender Virgin would dress, as a martyr for the stake, as forher bridal hour, rather than make sacrifice of her purity and duty. The eloquence of the Senate, and clash of arms, are alike powerfulwhen brought in opposition to the influence of pure and virtuouswoman. The liberty of the slave seems now to be committed to hercharge, and who can doubt her final triumph? I do not. --You cannotfight against her and hope for success; and well does the Senator knowthis; hence this appeal to her feelings to terrify her from that whichshe believes to be her duty. It is a vain attempt. 

The Senator says that it was the principles of the Constitution whichcarried us through the Revolution. Surely it was; and to use thelanguage of another Senator from a slave State, on a former occasion, these are the very principles on which the abolitionists plantthemselves. It was the principle that all men are born FREE AND EQUAL, that nerved the arm of our fathers in their contest for independence. It was for the natural and inherent rights of _man_ they contended. Itis a libel upon the Constitution to say that its object was notliberty, but slavery, for millions of the human race. 

The Senator, well fearing that all his eloquence and his argumentsthus far are but chaff, when weighed in the balance against truth andjustice, seems to find consolation in the idea, and says that whichopposes the ulterior object of abolitionists, is that the generalgovernment has no power to act on the subject of slavery, and that theConstitution or the Union would not last an hour if the power claimedwas exercised by Congress. It is slavery, then, and not liberty, thatmakes us one people. To dissolve slavery, is to dissolve the Union. Why require of us to support the Constitution by oath, if theConstitution itself is subject to the power of slavery, and not themoral power of the country? Change the form of the oath which youadminister to Senators on taking seats here, swear them to supportslavery, and according to the logic of the gentleman, the Constitutionand the Union will both be safe. We hear almost daily threats ofdissolving the Union, and from whence do they come? From citizens ofthe free States? No! From the slave States only. Why wish to dissolveit? The reason is plain, that a new government may be formed, by whichwe, as a nation, may be made a slaveholding people. No impartialobserver of passing events, can, in my humble judgment, doubt thetruth of this. The Senator thinks the abolitionists in error, if theywish the slaveholder to free his slave. He asks, why denounce him? Icannot admit the truth of the question; but I might well ask thegentleman, and the slaveholders generally, "why are you angry at me, because I tell you the truth?" It is the light of truth which theslaveholder cannot endure; a plain unvarnished tale of what slaveryis, he considers a libel upon himself. The fact is, the slaveholderfeels the leprosy of slavery upon him. He is anxious to hide theodious disease from the public eye, and the ballot box and the rightof petition, when used against him, he feels as sharp reproof; andbeing unwilling to renounce his errors, he tries to escape from theirconsequences, by making the world believe that HE is the persecuted, and not the persecutor. Slaveholders have said here, during this verysession, "the fact is, slavery will not bear examination. " It is theSenator who denounces abolitionists for the exercise of their mostunquestionable rights, while abolitionists condemn that only which theSenator himself will acknowledge to be wrong at all times and underall circumstances. Because he admits that if it was an originalquestion whether slaves should be introduced among us, but fewcitizens would be found to agree to it, and none more opposed to itthan himself. The argument is, that the evil of slavery is incurable;that the attempt to eradicate it would commence a struggle which wouldexterminate one race or the other. What a lamentable picture of ourgovernment, so often pronounced the best upon earth! The seeds ofdisease, which were interwoven into its first existence, have nowbecome so incorporated into its frame, that they cannot be extractedwithout dissolving the whole fabric; that we must endure the evilwithout hope and without complaint. Our very natures must be changedbefore we can be brought tamely to submit to this doctrine. The evilwill be remedied: and to use the language of Jefferson again, "thispeople will yet be free. " The Senator finds consolation, however inthe midst of this existing evil, in color and caste. The black race(says he) is the strong ground of slavery in our country. Yes, it is_color_, not right and justice, that is to continue forever slavery inour country. It is prejudice against color, which is the strong groundof the slaveholder's hope. Is that prejudice founded in nature, or isit the effect of base and sordid interest? Let the mixed race which wesee here, from black to almost perfect white, springing from whitefathers, answer the question. Slavery has no just foundation in color:it rests exclusively upon usurpation, tyranny, oppressive fraud, andforce. These were its parents in every age and country of the world. 

The Senator says, the next or greatest difficulty to emancipation is, the amount of property it would take from the owners. All ideas ofright and wrong are confounded in these words: emancipate property, emancipate a horse, or an ox, would not only be unmeaning, but aludicrous expression. To emancipate is to set free from slavery. Toemancipate, is to set free a man, not property. The Senator estimatesthe number of slaves--_men_ now held in bondage--at three millions inthe United States. Is this statement made here by the same voice whichwas heard in this Capitol in favor of the liberties of Greece, and forthe emancipation of our South American brethren from politicalthralldom? It is; and has all its fervor in favor of liberty beenexhausted upon foreign countries, so as not to leave a single whisperin favor of three millions of men in our own country, now groaningunder the most galling oppression the world ever saw? No, sir. Sordidinterest rules the hour. Men are made property, and paper is mademoney, and the Senator, no doubt, sees in these two peculiarinstitutions a power which, if united, will be able to accomplish allhis wishes. He informs us that some have computed the slaves to beworth the average amount of five hundred dollars each. He willestimate within bounds at four hundred dollars each. Making the amounttwelve hundred millions of dollars' worth of slave property. I heardthis statement, Mr. President, with emotions of the deepest feeling. By what rule of political or commercial arithmetic does the Senatorcalculate the amount of property in human beings? Can it be fancy orfact, that I hear such calculation, that the people of the UnitedStates own twelve hundred millions' (double the amount of all thespecie in the world) worth of property in human flesh! And thisproperty is owned, the gentleman informs us, by all classes ofsociety, forming part of all our contracts within our own country andin Europe. I should have been glad, sir, to have been spared thehearing of a declaration of this kind, especially from the high sourceand the place from which it emanated. But the assertion has gone forththat we have twelve hundred millions of slave property at the South;and can any man so close his understanding here as not plainly toperceive that the power of this vast amount of property at the Southis now uniting itself to the banking power of the North, in order togovern the destinies of this country. Six hundred millions of bankingcapital is to be brought into this coalition, and the slave power andthe bank power are thus to unite in order to break down the presentadministration. There can be no mistake, as I believe, in this matter. The aristocracy of the North, who, by the power of a corrupt bankingsystem, and the aristocracy of the South, by the power of the slavesystem, both fattening upon the labor of others, are now about tounite in order to make the reign of each perpetual. Is there anindependent American to be found, who will become the recreant slaveto such an unholy combination? Is this another compromise to barterthe liberties of the country for personal aggrandisement? "Resistanceto tyrants is obedience to God. "

The Senator further insists, "that what the law makes property isproperty. " This is the predicate of the gentleman; he has neitherfacts nor reason to prove it; yet upon this alone does he rest thewhole case that negroes are property. I deny the predicate and theargument. Suppose the Legislature of the Senator's own State shouldpass a law declaring his wife, his children, his friends, indeed, anywhite citizen of Kentucky, _property_, and should they be sold andtransferred as such, would the gentleman fold his arms and say, "Yes, they are property, for the law has made them such?" No, sir; he woulddenounce such law with more vehemence than he now denouncesabolitionists, and would deny the authority of human legislation toaccomplish an object so clearly beyond its power. 

Human laws, I contend, cannot make human beings property, if humanforce can do it. If it is competent for our legislatures to make ablack man _property_, it is competent for them to make a white man thesame; and the same objection exists to the power of the people in anorganic law for their own government; they cannot make property ofeach other; and, in the language of the Constitution of Indiana, suchan act "can only originate in usurpation and tyranny. " Dreadful, indeed, would be the condition of this country, if these principlesshould not only be carried into the ballot box, but into thepresidential chair. The idea that abolitionists ought to pay for theslaves if they are set free, and that they ought to think of this, isaddressed to their fears, and not to their judgment. There is noprinciple of morality or justice that should require them or ourcitizens generally to do so. To free a slave is to take fromusurpation that which it has made property and given to another, andbestow it upon the rightful owner. It is not taking property from itstrue owner for public use. Men can do with their own as they please, to vary their peace if they wish, but cannot be compelled to do so. 

The gentleman repeats the assertion that has been repeated a thousandand one times: that abolitionists are retarding the emancipation ofthe slave, and have thrown it back fifty or a hundred years; that theyhave increased the rigors of slavery, and caused the master to treathis slave with more severity. Slavery, then, is to cease at someperiod; and because the abolitionists have said to the slaveholder, "Now is the accepted time, " and because he thinks this an improperinterference, and not having the abolitionists in his power, heinflicts his vengeance on his unoffending slave! The moral of thisstory is, the slaveholder will exercise more cruelty because he isdesired to show mercy. I do not envy the senator the full benefit ofhis argument. It is no doubt a true picture of the feelings andprinciples which slavery engenders in the breast of the master. It isin perfect keeping with the threat we almost daily hear; that ifpetitioners do not cease their efforts in the exercise of theirconstitutional rights, others will dissolve the Union. These, however, ought to be esteemed idle assertions and idle threats. 

The Senator tells us that the consequences arising from the freedom ofslaves, would be to reduce the wages of the white laborer. He hasfurnished us with neither data nor fact upon which this opinion canrest. He, however, would draw a line, on one side of which he wouldplace the slave labor, and on the other side free white labor; andlooking over the whole, as a general system, both would appear on aperfect equality. I have observed, for some years past, that thesouthern slaveholder has insisted that his laborers are, in point ofintegrity, morality, usefulness, and comfort, equal to the laboringpopulation of the North. Thus endeavoring to raise the slave in publicestimation, to an equality with the free white laborer of the North;while, on the other hand, the northern aristocrat has, in the samemanner, viz. : by comparison, endeavored to reduce his laborers to themoral and political condition of the slaves of the South. It is forthe free white American citizens to determine whether they will permitsuch degrading comparisons longer to exist. Already has this spiritbroken forth in denunciation of the right of universal suffrage. Willfree white laboring citizens take warning before it is too late?

The last, the great, the crying sin of abolitionists, in the eyes ofthe Senator, is that they are opposed to colonization, and in favor ofamalgamation. It is not necessary now to enter into any of thebenefits and advantages of colonization; the Senator has pronounced itthe noblest scheme ever devised by man; he says it is powerful butharmless. I have no knowledge of any resulting benefits from thescheme to either race. I have not a doubt as to the real objectintended by its founders; it did not arise from principles of humanityand benevolence towards the colored race, but a desire to remove thefree of that race beyond the United States, in order to perpetuate andmake slavery more secure. 

The Senator further makes the broad charge, that abolitionists wish to_enforce_ the unnatural system of amalgamation. We deny the fact, andcall on the Senator for proof. The citizens of the free States, thepetitioners against slavery, the abolitionists of the free States infavor of amalgamation! No, sir! If you want evidence of the fact, andreasoning in support of amalgamation, you must look into the slaveStates; it is there it spreads and flourishes from slave mothers, andpresents all possible colors and complexions, from the jet blackAfrican to the scarcely to be distinguished white person. Does any oneneed proof of this fact? let him take but a few turns through thestreets of your capital, and observe those whom he shall meet, and hewill be perfectly satisfied. Amalgamation, indeed! The charge is madewith a very bad grace on the present occasion. No, sir; it is not thenegro _woman_, it is the _slave_ and the contaminating influence ofslavery that is the mother of amalgamation. Does the gentleman wantfacts on this subject? let him look at the colored race in the freeStates; it is a rare occurrence there. A colony of blacks, some threeor four hundred, were settled, some fifteen or twenty years since, inthe county of Brown, a few miles distant from my former residence inOhio, and I was told by a person living near them, a country merchantwith whom they dealt, when conversing with him on this very subject, he informed me he knew of but one instance of a mulatto child beingborn amongst them for the last fifteen years; and I venture theassertion, had this same colony been settled in a slave State, thecases of a like kind would have been far more numerous. I repeatagain, in the words of Dr. Channing, it is a slave country that reekswith licentiousness of this kind, and for proof I refer to theopinions of Judge Harper, of North Carolina, in his defence ofsouthern slavery. 

The Senator, as if fearing that he had made his charge too broad, andmight fail in proof to sustain it, seems to stop short, and make theinquiry, where is the process of amalgamation to begin? He had heardof no instance of the kind against abolitionists; they (theabolitionists) would begin it with the laboring class; and if Iunderstand the Senator correctly, that abolitionism, by throwingtogether the white and the black laborers, would naturally producethis result. Sir, I regret, I deplore, that such a charge should bemade against the laboring class--that class which tills the ground;and, in obedience to the decree of their Maker, eat their bread inthe sweat of their face--that class, as Mr. Jefferson says, if God hasa chosen people on earth, they are those who thus labor. This chargeis calculated for effect, to induce the laboring class to believe, that if emancipation takes place, they will be, in the free States, reduced to the same condition as the colored laborer. The reverse ofthat is the truth of the case. It is the slaveholder NOW, he who looksupon labor as only fit for a servile race, it is him and his kindredspirits who live upon the labor of others, endeavoring to reduce thewhite laborer to the condition of the slave. They do not yet claim himas property, but they would exclude him from all participation in thepublic affairs of the country. It is further said, that if the negroeswere free, the black would rival the white laborer in the free States. I cannot believe it, while so many facts exist to prove the contrary. Negroes, like the white race, but with stronger feelings, are attachedto the place of their birth, and the home of their youth; and theclimate of the South is congenial to their natures, more than that ofthe North. If emancipation should take place at the South--and thenegro be freed from the fear of being made merchandize, they wouldremove from the free States of the North and West, immediately returnto that country, because it is the home of their friends and fathers. Already in Ohio, as far as my knowledge extends, has free white labor, (emigrants, ) from foreign countries, engrossed almost entirely allsituations in which male or female labor is found. But, sir, this pleaof necessity and convenience is the plea of tyrants. Has not the freeblack person the same right to the use of his hands as the whiteperson: the same right to contract and labor for what price hepleases? Would the gentleman extend the power of the government to theregulation of the productive industry of the country? This was hisformer theory, but put down effectually by the public voice. Takingadvantage of the prejudice against labor, the attempt is now beingmade to begin this same system, by first operating on the poor blacklaborer. For shame! let us cease from attempts of this kind. 

The Senator informs us that the question was asked fifty years agothat is now asked, Can the negro be continued forever in bondage? Yes;and it will continue to be asked, in still louder and louder tones. But, says the Senator, we are yet a prosperous and happy nation. Pray, sir, in what part of your country do you find this prosperity andhappiness? In the slave States? No! no! There all is weakness gloom, and despair; while, in the free States, all is light, business, andactivity. What has created the astonishing difference between thegentleman's State and mine--between Kentucky and Ohio? Slavery, thewithering curse of slavery, is upon Kentucky, while Ohio is free. Kentucky, the garden of the West, almost the land of promise, possessing all the natural advantages, and more than is possessed byOhio, is vastly behind in population and wealth. Sir, I can see fromthe windows of my upper chamber, in the city of Cincinnati, lands inKentucky, which, I am told, can be purchased from ten to fifty dollarsper acre; while lands of the same quality, under the sameimprovements, and the same distance from me in Ohio, would probablysell from one to five hundred dollars per acre. I was told by afriend, a few days before I left home, who had formerly resided in thecounty of Bourbon, Kentucky--a most excellent county of landsadjoining, I believe, the county in which the Senator resides--thatthe white population of that county was more than four hundred lessthan it was five years since. Will the Senator contend, after aknowledge of these facts, that slavery in this country has been thecause of our prosperity and happiness? No, he cannot. It is becauseslavery has been excluded and driven from a large proportion of ourcountry, that we are a prosperous and happy people. But its lateattempts to force its influence and power into the free States, anddeprive our citizens of their unquestionable rights, has been themoving cause of all the riots, burnings, and murders that have takenplace on account of abolitionism; and it has, in some degree, even inthe free States, caused mourning, lamentation, and woe. Removeslavery, and the country, the whole country, will recover its naturalvigor, and our peace and future prosperity will be placed on a moreextensive, safe, and sure foundation. It is a waste of time to answerthe allegations that the emancipation of the negro race would inducethem to make war on the white race. Every fact in the history ofemancipation proves the reverse; and he that will not believe thosefacts, has darkened his own understanding, that the light of reasoncan make no impression: he appeals to interest, not to truth, forinformation on this subject. We do not fear his errors, while we areleft free to combat them. The Senator implores us to cease allcommotion on this subject. Are we to surrender all our rights andprivileges, all the official stations of the country, into the handsof the slaveholding power, without a single struggle? Are we to ceaseall exertions for our own safety, and submit in quiet to the rule ofthis power? Is the calm of despotism to reign over this land, and thevoice of freemen to be no more heard! This sacrifice is required ofus, in order to sustain slavery. _Freemen_, will you make it? Will youshut your ears and your sympathies, and withhold from the poor, famished slave, a morsel of bread? Can you thus act, and expect theblessings of heaven upon your country? I beseech you to consider foryourselves. 

Mr. President, I have been compelled to enter into this discussionfrom the course pursued by the Senate on the resolutions I submitted afew days since. The cry of abolitionist has been raised against me. Ifthose resolutions are abolitionism, then I am an abolitionist from thesole of my feet to the crown of my head. If to maintain the rights ofthe States, the security of the citizen from violence and outrage; ifto preserve the supremacy of the laws; if insisting on the right ofpetition, a medium through which _every person_ subject to the lawshas an undoubted right to approach the constitutional authorities ofthe country, be the doctrines of abolitionists, it finds a response inevery beating pulse in my veins. Neither power, nor favor, nor want, nor misery, shall deter me from its support while the vital currentcontinues to flow. 

Condemned at home for my opposition to slavery, alone and singlehandedhere, well may I feel tremor and emotion in bearding this lion ofslavery in his very _den_ and upon his own ground. I should shrink, sir, at once, from this fearful and unequal contest, was I notthoroughly convinced that I am sustained by the power of truth and thebest interests of the country. 

I listened to the Senator of Kentucky with undivided attention. I wasdisappointed, sadly disappointed. I had heard of the Senator's tact inmaking compromises and agreements on this floor, and though opposed inprinciple to all such proceedings, yet I hoped to hear something uponwhich we could hang a hope that peace would be restored to the bordersof our own States, and all future aggression upon our citizens fromthe free States be prevented. Now, sir, he offers us nothing butunconditional submission to political death; and not political alone, but absolute _death_. We have counted the cost in this matter, and aredetermined to live or die free. Let the slaveholder hug his system tohis bosom in his own State, we will not go there to disturb him; but, sir, within our own borders we claim to enjoy the same privileges. Even, sir, here in this District, this ten miles square of commonproperty and common right, the slave power has the assurance to comeinto this very Hall, and request that we--yes, Mr. President, that myconstituents--be denied the right of petition on the subject ofslavery in this District. This most extraordinary petition against theright of others to petition on the same subject of theirs, isgraciously received and ordered to be printed; paeans sung to it by theslave power, while the petitions I offer, from as honorable, free, high-minded and patriotic American citizens as any in this District, are spit upon, and turned out of doors as an _unclean thing_! Geniusof liberty! how long will you sleep under this iron power ofoppression? Not content with ruling over their own slaves, they claimthe power to instruct Congress on the question of receiving petitions;and yet we are tauntingly and sneeringly told that we have nothing todo with the existence of slavery in the country, a suggestion asabsurd as it is ridiculous. We are called upon to make laws in favorof slavery in the District, but it is denied that we can make lawsagainst it; and at last the right of petition on the subject, by thepeople of the free States, is complained of as an improperinterference. I leave it to the Senator to reconcile all thesedifficulties, absurdities, claims and requests of the people of thisDistrict, to the country at large; and I venture the opinion that hewill find as much difficulty in producing the belief that he iscorrect now, that he has found in obtaining the same belief that hewas before correct in his views and political course on the subject ofbanks, internal improvements, protective tariffs, &c. , and theregulation, by acts of Congress, of the productive industry of thecountry, together with all the compromises and coalitions he hasentered into for the attainment of those objects. I rejoice, however, that the Senator has made the display he has on this occasion. It is apowerful shake to awaken the sleeping energies of liberty, and hisvoice, like a trumpet, will call from their slumbers millions offreemen to defend their rights; and the overthrow of his theory now, is as sure and certain, by the force of public opinion, as was theoverthrow of all his former schemes, by the same mighty power. 

I feel, Mr. President, as if I had wearied your patience, while I amsure my own bodily powers admonish me to close; but I cannot do sowithout again reminding my constituents of the greetings that havetaken place on the consummation and ratification of the treaty, offensive and defensive, between the slaveholding and bank powers, inorder to carry on a war against the liberties of our country, and toput down the present administration. Yes, there is no voice heard fromNew England now. Boston and Faneuil Hall are silent as death. The freeday-laborer is, in prospect, reduced to the political, if not moralcondition of the slave; an ideal line is to divide them in theirlabor; yes, the same principle is to govern on both sides. Even thefarmer, too, will soon be brought into the same fold. It will be againsaid, with regard to the government of the country, "The farmer withhis huge paws upon the statute book, what can he do?" I haveendeavored to warn my fellow-citizens of the present and approachingdanger, but the dark cloud of slavery is before their eyes, andprevents many of them from seeing the condition of things as they are. That cloud, like the cloud of summer, will soon pass away, and itsthunders cease to be heard. Slavery will come to an end, and thesunshine of prosperity warm, invigorate and bless our whole country. 

I do not know, Mr. President, that my voice will ever again be heardon this floor. I now willingly, yes, gladly, return to myconstituents, to the people of my own State. I have spent my lifeamongst them, and the greater portion of it in their service, and theyhave bestowed upon me their confidence in numerous instances. I feelperfectly conscious that, in the discharge of every trust which theyhave committed to me, I have, to the best of my abilities, actedsolely with a view to the general good, not suffering myself to beinfluenced by any particular or private interest whatever; and I nowchallenge those who think I have done otherwise, to lay their fingerupon any public act of mine, and prove to the country its injustice oranti-republican tendency. That I have often erred in the selection ofmeans to accomplish important ends I have no doubt, but my belief inthe truth of the doctrines of the Declaration of Independence, thepolitical creed of President Jefferson, remains unshaken andunsubdued. My greatest regret is that I have not been more zealous, and done more for the cause of individual and political liberty than Ihave done. I hope, on returning to my home and my friends, to jointhem again in rekindling the beacon-fires of liberty upon every hillin our State, until their broad glare shall enlighten every valley, and the song of triumph will soon be heard, for the hearts of ourpeople are in the hands of a just and holy being, (who can not lookupon oppression but with abhorrence. ) and he can turn themwhithersoever he will, as the rivers of water are turned. Though ournational sins are many and grievous, yet repentance, like that ofancient Nineveh, may divert from us that impending danger which seemsto hang over our heads as by a single hair. That all may be safe, Iconclude that THE NEGRO WILL YET BE SET FREE. 

THE

ANTI-SLAVERY EXAMINER. 

No. 11. 

 * * * * *

THE

CONSTITUTION

A PRO-SLAVERY COMPACT. 

OR

SELECTIONS

FROM

THE MADISON PAPERS, &c. 

 * * * * *

NEW YORK:

AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY. 

142 NASSAU STREET. 

1844. 

CONTENTS. 

Introduction. Debates in the Congress of the ConfederationDebates in the Federal ConventionList of Members of the Federal ConventionSpeech of Luther Martin

 DEBATES IN STATE CONVENTIONSMassachusettsNew YorkPennsylvaniaVirginiaNorth CarolinaSouth CarolinaExtracts from the FederalistDebates in First CongressAddress of the Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery SocietyLetter from Francis Jackson to Gov. BriggsExtract from Mr. Webster's SpeechExtracts from J. Q. Adams's Address, November, 1844

INTRODUCTION. 

Every one knows that the "Madison papers" contain a Report, from thepen of James Madison, of the Debates in the Old Congress of theConfederation and in the Convention which formed the Constitution ofthe United States. We have extracted from them, in these pages, allthe Debates on those clauses of the Constitution which relate toslavery. To these we have added all that is found, on the same topic, in the Debates of the several State Conventions which ratified theConstitution: together with so much of the Speech of Luther Martinbefore the Legislature of Maryland, and of the Federalist, as relateto our subject; with some extracts, also, from the Debates of thefirst Federal Congress on Slavery. These are all printed withoutalteration, except that, in some instances, we have inserted inbrackets, after the name of a speaker, the name of the State fromwhich he came. The notes and italics are those of the original, butthe editor has added one note on page 30th, which is marked as his, and we have taken the liberty of printing in capitals one sentiment ofRufus King's, and two of James Madison's--a distinction which theimportance of the statements seemed to demand--otherwise we havereprinted exactly from the originals. 

These extracts develope most clearly all the details of that"compromise, " which was made between freedom and slavery, in 1787;granting to the slaveholder distinct privileges and protection for hisslave property, in return for certain commercial concessions on hispart toward the North. They prove also that the Nation at large werefully aware of this bargain at the time, and entered into it willinglyand with open eyes. 

We have added the late "Address of the American Anti-Slavery Society, "and the letter of Francis Jackson to Governor Briggs, resigning hiscommission of Justice of the Peace--as bold and honorable protestsagainst the guilt and infamy of this National bargain, and as provingmost clearly the duty of each individual to trample it under his feet. 

The clauses of the Constitution to which we refer as of a pro-slaverycharacter are the following:--

Art. 1, Sect. 2. Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportionedamong the several States, which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined byadding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound toservice for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, _threefifths of all other persons_. 

Art. 1, Sect. 8. Congress shall have power . . . To suppressinsurrections. 

Art. 1, Sect. 9. The migration or importation of such persons as anyof the States now existing, shall think proper to admit, shall not beprohibited by the Congress, prior to the year one thousand eighthundred and eight: but a tax or duty may be imposed on suchimportation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

Art. 4. Sec. 2. No person, held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping, into another, shall, in consequenceof any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service orlabor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom suchservice or labor may be due. 

Art. 4, Sect. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State inthis Union a republican form of government; and shall protect each ofthem against invasion; and, on application of the legislature, or ofthe executive, (when the legislature cannot be convened) _againstdomestic violence_. 

The first of these clauses, relating to representation, confers on aslaveholding community additional political power for every slave heldamong them, and thus tempts them to continue to uphold the system: thesecond and the last, relating to insurrection and domestic violence, perfectly innocent in themselves--yet being made with the factdirectly in view that slavery exists among us, do deliberately pledgethe whole national force against the unhappy slave if he imitate ourfathers and resist oppression--thus making us partners in the guilt ofsustaining slavery: the third, relating to the slave trade, disgracesthe nation by a pledge not to abolish that traffic till after twentyyears, _without obliging Congress to do so even then_, and thus theslave trade may be legalized to-morrow if Congress choose: the fourthis a promise on the part of the whole Nation to return fugitive slavesto their masters, a deed which God's law expressly condemns and whichevery noble feeling of our nature repudiates with loathing andcontempt. 

These are the articles of the "Compromise, " so much talked of, betweenthe North and South. 

We do not produce the extracts which make up these pages to show whatis the meaning of the clauses above cited. For no man or party, of anyauthority in such matters, has ever pretended to doubt to what subjectthey all relate. If indeed they were ambiguous in their terms, aresort to the history of those times would set the matter at rest forever. A few persons, to be sure, of late years, to serve the purposesof a party, have tried to prove that the Constitution makes nocompromise with slavery. Notwithstanding the clear light ofhistory;--the unanimous decision of all the courts in the land, both State and Federal;--the action of Congress and the StateLegislature;--the constant practice of the Executive in all itsbranches;--and the deliberate acquiescence of the whole people forhalf a century, still they contend that the Nation does not know itsown meaning, and that the Constitution does not tolerate slavery!Every candid mind however must acknowledge that the language of theConstitution is clear and explicit. 

Its terms are so broad, it is said, that they include many othersbeside slaves, and hence it is wisely (!) inferred that they cannotinclude the slaves themselves! Many persons beside slaves in thiscountry doubtless are "held to service and labor under the laws of theStates, " but that does not at all show that slaves are not "held toservice;" many persons beside the slaves may take part "ininsurrections, " but that does not prove that when the slaves rise, theNational government is not bound to put them down by force. Such athing has been heard of before as one description including a greatvariety of persons, --and this is the case in the present instance. 

But granting that the terms of the Constitution are ambiguous--thatthey are susceptible of two meanings, if the unanimous, concurrent, unbroken practice of every department of the Government, judicial, legislative, and executive, and the acquiescence of the whole peoplefor fifty years do not prove which is the true construction, then howand where can such a question ever be settled? If the people and theCourts of the land do not know what they themselves mean, who hasauthority to settle their meaning for them?

If then the people and the Courts of a country are to be allowed todetermine what their own laws mean, it follows that at this time andfor the last half century, the Constitution of the United States, hasbeen, and still is, a pro-slavery instrument, and that any one whoswears to support it, swears to do pro-slavery acts, and violates hisduty both as a man and an abolitionist. What the Constitution maybecome a century hence, we know not; we speak of it _as it is_, andrepudiate it _as it is_. 

But the purpose, for which we have thrown these pages before thecommunity, is this. Some men, finding the nation unanimously decidingthat the Constitution tolerates slavery, have tried to prove that thisfalse construction, as they think it, has been foisted in upon theinstrument by the corrupting influence of slavery itself, tainting allit touches. They assert that the known anti-slavery spirit ofrevolutionary times never _could_ have consented to so infamous abargain as the Constitution is represented to be, and has in itspresent hands become. Now these pages prove the melancholy fact thatwillingly, with deliberate purpose, our fathers bartered honesty forgain and became partners with tyrants that they might share in theprofits of their tyranny. 

And in view of this fact, will it not require a very strong argumentto make any candid man believe, that the bargain which the fatherstell us they meant to incorporate into the Constitution, and which thesons have always thought they found there incorporated, does not existthere after all? Forty of the shrewdest men and lawyers in the landassemble to make a bargain, among other things, about slaves, --aftermonths of anxious deliberation they put it into writing and sign theirnames to the instrument, --fifty years roll away, twenty millions atleast of their children pass over the stage of life, --courts sit andpass judgment, --parties arise and struggle fiercely; still all concurin finding in the Instrument just that meaning which the fathers tellus they intended to express:--must not he be a desperate man, who, after all this, sets out to prove that the fathers were bunglers andthe sons fools, and that slavery is not referred to at all?

Besides, the advocates of this new theory of the Anti-slaverycharacter of the Constitution, quote some portions of the MadisonPapers in support of their views, --and this makes it proper that thecommunity should hear all that these Debates have to say on thesubject. The further we explore them, the clearer becomes the factthat the Constitution was meant to be, what it has always beenesteemed, a compromise between slavery and freedom. 

If then the Constitution be, what these Debates show that our fathersintended to make it, and what, too, their descendants, this nation, say they did make it and agree to uphold, --then we affirm that it is a"covenant with death and an agreement with hell, " and ought to beimmediately annulled. 

But if, on the contrary, our fathers failed in their purpose, and theConstitution is all pure and untouched by slavery, --then, Union itselfis impossible, without guilt. For it is undeniable that the fiftyyears passed under this (anti-slavery) Constitution, shew us theslaves trebling in numbers;--slaveholders monopolizing the offices anddictating the policy of the Government;--prostituting the strength andinfluence of the Nation to the support of slavery here andelsewhere;--trampling on the rights of the free States and making thecourts of the country their tools. To continue this disastrousalliance longer is madness. The trial of fifty years with the best ofmen and the best of Constitutions, on this supposition, only provesthat it is impossible for free and slave States to unite on any terms, without all becoming partners in the guilt and responsible for thesin of slavery. We dare not prolong the experiment, and with doubleearnestness we repeat our demand upon every honest man to join in theoutcry of the American Anti-Slavery Society, NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS. 

THE CONSTITUTION

A PRO-SLAVERY COMPACT. 

 * * * * *

_Extracts from Debates in the Congress of Confederation, preserved byThomas Jefferson, 1776_. 

On Friday, the twelfth of July, 1776, the committee appointed to drawthe articles of Confederation reported them, and on the twenty-second, the House resolved themselves into a committee to take them intoconsideration. On the thirtieth and thirty-first of that month, andthe first of the ensuing, those articles were debated which determinedthe proportion or quota of money which each State should furnish tothe common treasury, and the manner of voting in Congress. The firstof these articles was expressed in the original draught in thesewords:--

"Article 11. All charges of war and all other expenses that shall beincurred for the common defence, or general welfare, and allowed bythe United States assembled, shall be defrayed out of a commontreasury, which shall be supplied by the several colonies inproportion to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex and quality, except Indians not paying taxes, in each colony, a true account ofwhich, distinguishing the white inhabitants, shall be trienniallytaken and transmitted to the assembly of the United States. "

Mr. Chase (of Maryland) moved, that the quotas should be paid, not bythe number of inhabitants of every condition but by that of the "whiteinhabitants. " He admitted that taxation should be always in proportionto property; that this was in theory the true rule, but that from avariety of difficulties it was a rule which could never be adopted inpractice. The value of the property in every State could never beestimated justly and equally. Some other measure for the wealth of theState must therefore be devised, some standard referred to which wouldbe more simple. He considered the number of inhabitants as a tolerablygood criterion of property, and that this might always be obtained. Hetherefore thought it the best mode we could adopt, with one exceptiononly. He observed that negroes are property, and as such cannot bedistinguished from the lands or personalities held in those Stateswhere there are few slaves. That the surplus of profit which aNorthern farmer is able to lay by, he invests in cattle, horses, &c. ;whereas, a Southern farmer lays out that same surplus in slaves. Thereis no more reason therefore for taxing the Southern States on thefarmer's head and on his slave's head, than the Northern ones on theirfarmer's heads and the heads of their cattle. That the method proposedwould therefore tax the Southern States according to their numbers andtheir wealth conjunctly, while the Northern would be taxed on numbersonly: that negroes in fact should not be considered as members of theState, more than cattle, and that they have no more interest in it. 

Mr. John Adams (of Massachusetts) observed, that the numbers of peoplewere taken by this article as an index of the wealth of the State, andnot as subjects of taxation. That as to this matter, it was of noconsequence by what name you called your people, whether by that offreemen or of slaves. That in some countries the laboring poor werecalled freemen, in others they were called slaves: but that thedifference as to the state was imaginary only. What matters it whethera landlord employing ten laborers on his farm gives them annually asmuch money as will buy them the necessaries of life, or gives themthose necessaries at short hand? The ten laborers add as much wealth, annually to the State, increase its exports as much, in the one caseas the other. Certainly five hundred freemen produce no more profits, no greater surplus for the payment of taxes, than five hundred slaves. Therefore the State in which are the laborers called freemen, shouldbe taxed no more than that in which are those called slaves. Suppose, by any extraordinary operation of nature or of law, one half thelaborers of a State could in the course of one night be transformedinto slaves, --would the State be made the poorer, or the less able topay taxes? That the condition of the laboring poor in mostcountries, --that of the fishermen, particularly, of the NorthernStates, --is as abject as that of slaves. It is the number of laborerswhich produces the surplus for taxation; and numbers, therefore, indiscriminately, are the fair index of wealth. That it is the use ofthe word "property" here, and its application to some of the people ofthe State, which produces the fallacy. How does the Southern farmerprocure slaves? Either by importation or by purchase from hisneighbor. If he imports a slave, he adds one to the number of laborersin his country, and proportionably to its profits and abilities to paytaxes; if he buys from his neighbor, it is only a transfer of alaborer from one firm to another, which does not change the annualproduce of the State, and therefore should not change its tax; that ifa Northern farmer works ten laborers on his farm, he can, it is true, invest the surplus of ten men's labor in cattle; but so may theSouthern farmer working ten slaves. That a State of one hundredthousand freemen can maintain no more cattle than one of one hundredthousand slaves; therefore they have no more of that kind of property. That a slave may, indeed, from the custom of speech, be more properlycalled the wealth of his master, than the free laborer might be calledthe wealth of his employer: but as to the State, both were equally itswealth, and should therefore equally add to the quota of its tax. 

Mr. Harrison (of Virginia) proposed, as a compromise, that two slavesshould be counted as one freeman. He affirmed that slaves did not doas much work as freemen, and doubted if two affected more than one. That this was proved by the price of labor, the hire of a laborer inthe Southern colonies being from £9 to £12, while in the Northern itwas generally £24. 

Mr. Wilson (of Pennsylvania) said, that if this amendment should takeplace, the Southern colonies would have all the benefit of slaves, whilst the Northern ones would bear the burthen. That slaves increasethe profits of a State, which the Southern States mean to take tothemselves; that they also increase the burthen of defence, whichwould of course fall so much the heavier on the Northern; that slavesoccupy the places of freemen and eat their food. Dismiss your slaves, and freemen will take their places. It is our duty to lay everydiscouragement on the importation of slaves; but this amendment wouldgive thee _jus trium liberorum_ to him who would import slaves. Thatother kinds of property were pretty equally distributed through allthe colonies: there were as many cattle, horses, and sheep, in theNorth as the South, and South as the North; but not so as to slaves:that experience has shown that those colonies have been always able topay most, which have the most inhabitants, whether they be black orwhite; and the practice of the Southern colonies has always been tomake every farmer pay poll taxes upon all his laborers, whether theybe black or white. He acknowledged indeed that freemen worked themost; but they consume the most also. They do not produce a greatersurplus for taxation. The slave is neither fed nor clothed soexpensively as a freeman. Again, white women are exempted from laborgenerally, which negro women are not. In this then the Southern Stateshave an advantage as the article now stands. It has sometimes beensaid that slavery was necessary, because the commodities they raisewould be too dear for market if cultivated by freemen; but now it issaid that the labor of the slave is the dearest. 

Mr. Payne (of Massachusetts) urged the original resolution of Congress, to proportion the quotas of the States to the number of souls. 

Mr. Witherspoon (of New-Jersey) was of opinion, that the value oflands and houses was the best estimate of the wealth of a nation, andthat it was practicable to obtain such a valuation. This is the truebarometer of wealth. The one now proposed is imperfect in itself, andunequal between the States. It has been objected that negroes eat thefood of freemen, and therefore should be taxed. Horses also eat thefood of freemen; therefore they also should be taxed. It has been saidtoo, that in carrying slaves into the estimate of the taxes the Stateis to pay, we do no more than those States themselves do, who alwaystake slaves into the estimate of the taxes the individual is to pay. But the cases are not parallel. In the Southern Colonies, slavespervade the whole colony; but they do not pervade the whole continent. That as to the original resolution of Congress, it was temporary only, and related to the moneys heretofore emitted: whereas we are nowentering into a new compact, and therefore stand on original ground. 

AUGUST 1st. The question being put, the amendment proposed wasrejected by the votes of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode-Island, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey and Pennsylvania, against those ofDelaware, Maryland, Virginia, North, and South Carolina. Georgia wasdivided. _Vol. I. Pp_. 27-8-9, 30-1-2. 

_Extracts from Madison's Report of Debates in the Congress of theConfederation. _

TUESDAY, Feb. 11, 1783. 

Mr. Wolcott declares his opinion that the Confederation ought to beamended by substituting numbers of inhabitants as the rule; admits thedifference between freemen and blacks; and suggests a compromise, byincluding in the numeration such blacks only as were within sixteenand sixty years of age. _p_. 331. 

TUESDAY, March 27, 1783. 

The eleventh and twelfth paragraphs:

Mr. Wilson (of Pennsylvania) was strenuous in their favor; said he wasin Congress when the Articles of Confederation directing a valuationof land were agreed to; that it was the effect of the impossibility ofcompromising the different ideas of the Eastern and Southern States, as to the value of slaves compared with the whites, the alternative inquestion. 

Mr. Clark (of New Jersey) was in favor of them. He said that he wasalso in Congress when this article was decided; that the SouthernStates would have agreed to numbers in preference to the value ofland, if half their slaves only should be included; but that theEastern States would not concur in that proposition. 

It was agreed, on all sides, that, instead of fixing the proportion byages, as the, report proposed, it would be best to fix the proportionin absolute numbers. With this view, and that the blank might befilled up, the clause was recommitted. _p. _ 421-2. 

FRIDAY, March 28, 1783. 

The committee last mentioned, reported that two blacks be rated as onefreeman. 

Mr. Wolcott (of Connecticut) was for rating them as four to three. Mr. Carroll as four to one. Mr. Williamson (of North Carolina) said he wasprincipled against slavery; and that he thought slaves an incumbranceto society, instead of increasing its ability to pay taxes. Mr. Higginson (of Massachusetts) as four to three. Mr. Rutledge (of SouthCarolina) said, for the sake of the object, he would agree to rateslaves as two to one, but he sincerely thought three to one would he ajuster proportion. Mr. Holton as four to three. --Mr. Osgood said hedid not go beyond four to three. On a question for rating them asthree to two, the votes were. New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, no;Rhode Island, divided; Connecticut, aye; New Jersey, aye;Pennsylvania, aye; Delaware, aye; Maryland, no; Virginia, no; NorthCarolina, no; South Carolina, no. The paragraph was then proposed, bygeneral consent, some wishing for further time to deliberate on it;but it appearing to be the general opinion that no compromise would beagreed to. 

After some further discussions on the Report, in which the necessityof some simple and practicable rule of apportionment came fully intoview, Mr. Madison (of Virginia) said that, in order to give a proof ofthe sincerity of his professions of liberality, he would propose thatslaves should be rated as five to three. Mr. Rutledge (of SouthCarolina) seconded the motion. Mr. Wilson (of Pennsylvania) said hewould sacrifice his opinion on this compromise. 

Mr. Lee was against changing the rule, but gave it as his opinion thattwo slaves were not equal to one freeman. 

On the question for five to three, it passed in the affirmative; NewHampshire, aye; Massachusetts, divided; Rhode Island, no;Connecticut, no; New Jersey, aye; Pennsylvania, aye; Maryland, aye;Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye: South Carolina, aye. 

A motion was then made by Mr. Bland, seconded by Mr. Lee, to strikeout the clause so amended, and, on the question "Shall it stand, " itpassed in the negative; New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, no; RhodeIsland, no; Connecticut, no; New Jersey, aye; Pennsylvania, aye;Delaware, no; Maryland, aye; Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye; SouthCarolina, no; so the clause was struck out. 

The arguments used by those who were for rating slaves high were, thatthe expense of feeding and clothing them was as far below thatincident to freemen as their industry and ingenuity were below thoseof freemen; and that the warm climate within which the States havingslaves lay, compared with the rigorous climate and inferior fertilityof the others, ought to have greater weight in the case; and that theexports of the former States were greater than of the latter. On theother side, it was said, that slaves were not put to labor as young asthe children of laboring families; that, having no interest in theirlabor, they did as little as possible and omitted every exertion ofthought requisite to facilitate and expedite it: that if the exportsof the States having slaves exceeded those of the others, theirimports were in proportion, slaves being employed wholly inagriculture, not in manufacturers; and that, in fact, the balance oftrade formerly was much more against the Southern States than theothers. 

On the main question, New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, no; RhodeIsland, no; Connecticut, no; New York (Mr. Lloyd, aye); New Jersey, aye; Delaware, no; Maryland, aye; Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye;South Carolina, no. _pp. _ 423-4-5. 

Tuesday, April 1, 1783. 

Congress resumed the Report on Revenue, &c. Mr. Hamilton, who had beenabsent when the last question was taken for substituting numbers inplace of the value of land, moved to reconsider that vote. He wasseconded by Mr. Osgood. Those who voted differently from their formervotes were influenced by the conviction of the necessity of thechange, and despair on both sides of a more favorable rate of theslaves. The rate of three-fifths was agreed to without opposition. _p_. 430. 

Monday, May 26. 

The Resolutions on the Journal, instructing the ministers in Europe toremonstrate against the carrying off the negroes--also those forfurloughing the troops--passed _unanimously_. _p_. 456. 

 * * * * *

_Extract from "Debates in the Federal Convention" of 1787, for theformation of the Constitution of the United States_. 

Monday, June 11, 1787. 

It was then moved by Mr. Rutledge, seconded by Mr. Butler, to add tothe words, "equitable ratio of representation, " at the end of themotion just agreed to, the words, "according to the quotas ofcontribution. " On motion of Mr. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Pinckney, thiswas postponed, in order to add, after the words, "equitable rates ofrepresentation, " the words following: "In proportion to the wholenumber of white and other free citizens and inhabitants of every age, sex and condition, including those bound to servitude for a term ofyears, and three fifths of all other persons not comprehended in theforegoing description, except Indians not paying taxes, in eachState"--this being the rule in the act of Congress, agreed to byeleven States, for apportioning quotas of revenue on the States, andrequiring a census only every five, seven, or ten years. 

Mr. Gerry (of Massachusetts) thought property not the rule ofrepresentation. Why, then, should the blacks, who were property in theSouth, be in the rule of representation more than, the cattle andhorses of the North?

On the question, --Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--9;New jersey, Delaware, no--2. _Vol. II. Pp. _ 842-3. 

Saturday, June 30, 1787. 

He (Mr. Madison) admitted that every peculiar interest, whether in anyclass of citizens, or any description of states, ought to be securedas far as possible. Wherever there is danger of attack, there ought tobe given a constitutional power of defence. But he contended that theStates were divided into different interests, not by their differenceof size, but by other circumstances; the most material of whichresulted partly from climate, but principally from the effects oftheir having or not having slaves. These two causes concurred informing the great division of interests in the United States. It didnot lie between the large and small States. IT LAY BETWEEN THENORTHERN AND SOUTHERN; and if any defensive power were necessary, itought to be mutually given to these two interests. He was so stronglyimpressed with this important truth, that he had been casting about inhis mind for some expedient that would answer the purpose. The onewhich had occurred was, that instead of proportioning the votes of theStates in both branches to their respective numbers of inhabitants, computing the slaves in the ratio of five to three, they should herepresented in one branch according to the number of free inhabitantsonly; and in the other, according to the whole number, counting theslaves us free. By this arrangement the Southern scale would have theadvantage in one House, and the Northern in the other. He had beenrestrained from proposing this expedient by two considerations; onewas his unwillingness to urge any diversity of interests on anoccasion where it is but too apt to arise of itself; the other was, the inequality of powers that must be vested in the two branches, andwhich would destroy the equilibrium of interests. _pp. _ 1006-7. 

Monday, July 9, 1787. 

Mr. Patterson considered the proposed estimate for the futureaccording to the combined rules of numbers and wealth, as too vague. For this reason New Jersey was against it. He could regard negroslaves in no light but as property. They are no free agents, have nopersonal liberty, no faculty of acquiring property, but on thecontrary are themselves property, and like other property, entirely atthe will of the master. Has a man in Virginia a number of votes inproportion to the number of his slaves? And if negroes are notrepresented in the States to which they belong, why should they berepresented in the General Government. What is the true principle ofrepresentation? It is an experiment by which an assembly of certainindividuals, chosen, by the people, is substituted in place of theinconvenient meeting of the people themselves. If such a meeting ofthe people was actually to take place, would the slaves vote? Theywould not. Why then should they be represented? He was also againstsuch an indirect encouragement of the slave trade; observing thatCongress, in their act relating to the change of the eighth article ofConfederation, had been assigned to use the term "slaves, " and hadsubstituted a description. 

Mr. Madison reminded Mr. Patterson that his doctrine ofrepresentation, which was in its principle the genuine one, must forever silence the pretensions of the small States to an equality ofvotes with the large ones. They ought to vote in the same proportionin which their citizens would do if the people of all the States werecollectively met. He suggested, as a proper ground of compromise, thatin the first branch the States should be represented according totheir number of free inhabitants; and in the second, which has for oneof its primary objects, the guardianship of property, according to thewhole number, including slaves. 

Mr. Butler urged warmly the justice and necessity of regarding wealthin the apportionment of representation. 

Mr. King had always expected, that, as the Southern States are therichest, they would not league themselves with the Northern, unlesssome respect was paid to their superior wealth. If the latter expectthose preferential distinctions in commerce, and other advantageswhich they will derive from the connexion, they must not expect toreceive them without allowing some advantages in return. Eleven out ofthirteen of the States had agreed to consider slaves in theapportionment of taxation; and taxation and representation ought to gotogether. _pp_. 1054-5-6. 

Tuesday, July 10; 1787. 

Mr. King remarked that the four Eastern States, having 800, 000 souls, have one-third fewer representatives than the four Southern States, having not more than 700, 000 souls, rating the blacks as five forthree. The Eastern people will advert to these circumstances, and bedissatisfied. He believed them to be very desirous of uniting withtheir Southern brethren, but did not think it prudent to rely so faron that disposition, as to subject them to any gross inequality. Hewas fully convinced that THE QUESTION CONCERNING A DIFFERENCE OFINTERESTS DID NOT LIE WHERE IT HAD HITHERTO BEEN DISCUSSED, BETWEENTHE GREAT AND SMALL STATES: BUT BETWEEN THE SOUTHERN AND EASTERN. _p_. 1057. 

Wednesday, July 11, 1787. 

Mr. Butler and General Pinckney insisted that blacks be included inrule of representation _equally_ with the whites; and for that purposemoved that the words "three-fifths" be struck out. 

Mr. Gerry thought that three fifths of them was, to say the least, thefull proportion that could be admitted. 

Mr. Gorham. This ratio was fixed by Congress as a rule of taxation. Then, it was urged, by the delegates representing the States havingslaves, that the blacks were still more inferior to freemen. Atpresent, when the ratio of representation is to be established, we areassured that they are equal to freemen. The arguments on the formeroccasion had convinced them that three fifths was pretty near the justproportion, he should vote according to the same opinion now. 

Mr. Butler insisted that the labor of a slave in South Carolina was asproductive and valuable as that of a freeman in Massachusetts; that aswealth was the greatest means of defence and utility to the nation, they were equally valuable to it with freemen; and that consequentlyan equal representation ought to be allowed for them in a governmentwhich was instituted principally, for the protection of property, andwas itself to be supported by property. 

Mr. Mason could not agree to the motion, notwithstanding it wasfavorable to Virginia, because he thought it unjust. It was certainthat the slaves were valuable, as they raised the value of land, increased the exports and imports, and of course the revenue, wouldsupply the means of feeding and supporting an army, and might in casesof emergency become themselves soldiers. As in these importantrespects they were useful to the community at large, they ought not tobe excluded from the estimate of representation. He could not, however, regard them as equal to freemen, and could not vote for themas such. He added, as worthy of remark, that the Southern States havethis peculiar species of property, over and above the other species ofproperty common to all the States. 

Mr. Williamson reminded Mr. Gorham, that if the Southern Statescontended for the inferiority of blacks to whites, when taxation wasin view, the Eastern States, on the same occasion, contended for theirequality. He did not, however, either then or now, concur in eitherextreme, but approved of the ratio of three-fifths. 

On Mr. Butler's motion, for considering blacks as equal to whites inthe apportionment of representation, --Delaware, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--3; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, no--7. New York not on the floor. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris said he had several objections to theproposition of Mr. Williamson. In the first place it fettered theLegislature too much. In the second place, it would exclude someStates altogether who would not have a sufficient number to entitlethem to a single representation. In the third place, it will notconsist with the resolution passed on Saturday last, authorizing theLegislature to adjust the representation, from time to time on theprinciples of population and wealth; nor with the principles ofequity. If slaves were to be considered as inhabitants, not as wealth, then the said resolution would not be pursued; if as wealth, then whyis no other wealth but slaves included? These objections may perhapsbe removed by amendments. . . . Another objection with him, againstadmitting the blacks into the census, was, that the people ofPennsylvania would revolt at the idea of being put on a footing withslaves. They would reject any plan that was to have such an effect. Pp. 1067-8-9 & 1072. 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1787. 

The next clause as to three-fifths of the negroes being considered:

Mr. King, being much opposed to fixing numbers as the rule ofrepresentation, was particularly so on account of the blacks. Hethought the admission of them along with whites at all, would excitegreat discontents among the States having no slaves. He had neversaid, as to any particular point, that he would in no event acquiescein and support it; but he would say that if in any case such adeclaration was to be made by him, it would be in this. 

He remarked that in the temporary allotment of representatives made bythe Committee, the Southern States had received more than the numberof their white and three-fifths of their black inhabitants entitledthem to. 

Mr. Sherman. South Carolina had not more beyond her proportion thanNew York and New Hampshire; nor either of them more than was necessaryin order to avoid fractions, or reducing them below their proportion. Georgia had more; but the rapid growth of that State seemed to justifyit. In general the allotment might not be just, but considering allcircumstances he was satisfied with it. 

Mr. Gorham was aware that there might be some weight in what hadfallen from his colleague, as to the umbrage which might be taken bythe people of the Eastern States. But he recollected that when theproposition of Congress for changing the eighth Article of theConfederation was before the Legislature of Massachusetts, the onlydifficulty then was, to satisfy them that the negroes ought not tohave been counted equally with the whites, instead of being counted inthe ratio of three-fifths only. [1]

[Footnote 1: They were then to have been a rule of taxation only. ]

Mr. Wilson did not well see, on what principle the admission of blacksin the proportion of three fifths could be explained. Are theyadmitted as citizens--then why are they not admitted on an equalitywith white citizens? Are they admitted as property--then why is notother property admitted into the computation? These were difficulties, however, which he thought must be overruled by the necessity ofcompromise. He had some apprehensions also, from the tendency of theblending of the blacks with the whites, to give disgust to the peopleof Pennsylvania, as had been intimated by his colleague (Mr. Gouverneur Morris. )

Mr. Gouvemeur Morris was compelled to declare himself reduced to thedilemma of doing injustice to the Southern States, or to human nature;and he must therefore do it to the former. For he could never agree togive such encouragement to the slave trade, as would be given byallowing them a representation for their negroes; and he did notbelieve those States would ever confederate on terms that woulddeprive them of that trade. 

On the question for agreeing to include three-fifths of theblacks, --Connecticut, Virginia, North Carolina. Georgia, aye--4;Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, [2] SouthCarolina, no--6. Pp. 1076-7-8. 

[Footnote 2: Mr. Carroll said, in explanation of the vote of Maryland, that he wished the _phraseology_ to be altered as to obviate, ifpossible, the danger which had been expressed of giving umbrage to theEastern and Middle States. ]

THURSDAY, July 12, 1787. 

Mr. Butler contended that representation should be according to thefull number of inhabitants, including all the blacks. 

General Pinckney was alarmed at what was said yesterday, [byGouverneur Morris, ] concerning the negroes. He was now again alarmedat what had been thrown out concerning the taxing of exports. SouthCarolina has in one year exported to the amount of 600, 000£. Sterling, all which was the fruit of the labor of her blacks. Will she berepresented in proportion to this amount? She will not. Neither oughtshe then be subject to a tax on it. He hoped a clause would beinserted in the system, restraining the Legislature from taxingexports. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris having so varied his motion by inserting theword "direct, " it passed, _nem. Con. _, as follows: "provided alwaysthat direct taxation ought to be proportioned to representation. "

Mr. Davie said it was high time now to speak out. He saw that it wasmeant by some gentlemen to deprive the Southern States of any share ofrepresentation for their blacks. He was sure that North Carolina wouldnever confederate on any terms that did not rate them at least asthree-fifths. If the Eastern States meant, therefore, to exclude themaltogether, the business was at an end. 

Dr. Johnson thought that wealth and population were the true, equitable rules of representation; but he conceived that these twoprinciples resolved themselves into one, population being the bestmeasure of wealth. He concluded, therefore, that the number of peopleought to be established as the rule, and that all descriptions, including blacks _equally_ with the whites, ought to fall within thecomputation. As various opinions had been expressed on the subject, hewould move that a committee might be appointed to take them intoconsideration, and report them. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris. It had been said that it is high time to speakout. As one member, he would candidly do so. He came here to form acompact for the good of America. He was ready to do so with all theStates. He hoped, and believed, that all would enter into suchcompact. If they would not, he was ready to join with any States thatwould. But as the compact was to be voluntary, it is in vain for theEastern States to insist on what the Southern States will never agreeto. It is equally vain for the latter to require, what the otherStates can never admit; and he verily believed the people ofPennsylvania will never agree to a representation of negroes. What canbe desired by these States more then has been already proposed--thatthe legislature shall from time to time regulate representationaccording to population and wealth?

General Pinckney desired that the rule of wealth should beascertained, and not left to the pleasure of the legislature; and thatproperty in slaves should not be exposed to danger, under a governmentinstituted for the protection of property. 

The first clause in the Report of the first Grand Committee waspostponed. 

Mr. Ellsworth, in order to carry into effect the principleestablished, moved to add to the last clause adopted by the House, thewords following, "and that the rule of contribution for directtaxation, for the support of the government of the United States, shall be the number of white inhabitants, and three-fifths of everyother description in the several States, until some other use rulethat shall more accurately ascertain the wealth of the several States, can be devised and adopted by the Legislature. "

Mr. Butler seconded the motion, in order that it might be committed. 

Mr. Randolph was not satisfied with the motion. The danger will berevived, that the ingenuity of the Legislature may evade or pervertthe rule, so as to perpetuate the power where it shall be lodged inthe first instance. He proposed, in lieu of Mr. Ellsworth's motion, "that in order to ascertain the alterations in representation that maybe required, from time to time, by changes in the relativecircumstances of the States, a census shall be taken within two yearsfrom the first meeting of the General Legislature of the UnitedStates, and once within the term of every ---- years afterwards, ofall the inhabitants, in the manner and according to the ratiorecommended by Congress in their Resolution of the eighteenth day ofApril, 1783, (rating the blacks at three-fifths of their number;) andthat the Legislature of the United States shall arrange therepresentation accordingly. " He urged strenuously that expresssecurity ought to be provided for including slaves in the ratio ofrepresentation. He lamented that such a species of property existed. But as it did exist, the holders of it would require this security. Itwas perceived that the design was entertained by some of excludingslaves altogether; the Legislature therefore ought not to be left atliberty. 

Mr. Ellsworth withdraws his motion, and seconds that of Mr. Randolph. 

Mr. Wilson observed, that less umbrage would perhaps be taken againstan admission of the slaves into the rule of representation, if itshould be so expressed as to make them indirectly only an ingredientin the rule, by saying that they should enter into the rule oftaxation; and as representation was to be according to taxation, theend would be equally attained. 

Mr. Pinckney moved to amend Mr. Randolph's motion, so as to make"blacks equal to the whites in the ratio of representation. " This, heurged, was nothing more than justice. The blacks are the laborers, thepeasants, of the Southern States. They are as productive of pecuniaryresources as those of the northern states. They add equally to thewealth, and, considering money as the sinew of war, to the strength, of the nation. It will also be politic with regard to the NorthernStates, as taxation is to keep pace with representation. 

On Mr. Pinckney's (of S. Carolina) motion, for rating blacks as equalto whites, instead of as three-fifths, --South Carolina, Georgia, aye--2; Massachusetts, Connecticut (Doctor Johnson, aye), New Jersey, Pennsylvania (three against two), Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, NorthCarolina, no--8. 

Mr. Randolph's (of Virginia) proposition, as varied by Mr. Wilson (ofPennsylvania) being read for taking the question on the whole, --

Mr. Gerry (of Massachusetts) urged that the principle of it could notbe carried into execution, as the States were not to be taxed asStates. With regard to taxes on imposts, he conceived they would bemore productive when there were no slaves, than where there were; theconsumption being greater. 

Mr. Ellsworth (of Connecticut. ) In the case of a poll-tax there wouldbe no difficulty. But there would probably be none. The sum allottedto a State may be levied without difficulty, according to the planused by the State in raising its own supplies. 

On the question on the whole proposition, as proportioningrepresentation to direct taxation, and both to the white andthree-fifths of the black inhabitants, and requiring a census withinsix years, and within every ten years afterwards, --Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye--6;New-Jersey, Delaware, no--2; Massachusetts, South Carolina, divided. _pp. _ 1079 to 1087. 

Friday, July 13, 1787. 

On the motion of Mr. Randolph (of Virginia), the vote of Monday last, authorizing the Legislature to adjust, from time to time, therepresentation upon the principles of _wealth_ and numbers ofinhabitants, was reconsidered by common consent, in order to strikeout _wealth_ and adjust the resolution to that requiring periodicalrevisions according to the number of whites and three-fifths of theblacks. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris (of Pennsylvania) opposed the alteration, asleaving still an incoherence. If negroes were to be viewed asinhabitants, and the revision was to proceed on the principle ofnumbers of inhabitants, they ought to be added in their entire number, and not in the proportion of three-fifths. If as property, the wordwealth was right; and striking it out would produce the veryinconsistency which it was meant to get rid of. The train ofbusiness, and the late turn which it had taken, had led him, he said, into deep meditation on it, and he would candidly state the result. Adistinction has been set up, and urged, between the Northern andSouthern States. He had hitherto considered this doctrine asheretical. He still thought the distinction groundless. He sees, however, that it is persisted in; and the Southern gentlemen will notbe satisfied unless they see the way open to their gaining a majorityin the public councils. The consequence of such a transfer of powerfrom the maritime to the interior and landed interest, will, heforesees, be such an oppression to commerce, that he shall be obligedto vote for the vicious principle of equality in the second branch, inorder to provide some defence for the Northern States against it. Butto come more to the point, either this distinction is fictitious orreal; if fictitious, let it be dismissed, and let us proceed with dueconfidence. If it be real, instead of attempting to blendincompatible things, let us at once take a friendly leave of eachother. There can be no end of demands for security, if everyparticular interest is to be entitled to it. The Eastern States mayclaim it for their fishery, and for other objects, as the SouthernStates claim it for their peculiar objects. In this struggle betweenthe two ends of the Union, what part ought the Middle States, in pointof policy, to take? To join their Eastern brethren, according to hisideas. If the Southern States get the power into their hands, and bejoined, as they will be, with the interior country, they willinevitably bring on a war with Spain for the Mississippi. Thislanguage is already held. The interior country, leaving no propertynor interest exposed to the sea, will be little affected by such awar. He wished to know what security the Northern and Middle Stateswill have against this danger. It has been said that North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia only, will in a little time have amajority of the people of America. They must in that case include thegreat interior country, and every thing was to be apprehended fromtheir getting the power into their hands. 

Mr. Butler (of South Carolina). The security the Southern States wantis, that their negroes may not be taken from them, which somegentlemen within or without doors have a very good mind to do. It wasnot supposed that North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, wouldhave more people than all the other States, but many more relativelyto the other States, than they now have. The people and strength ofAmerica are evidently bearing southwardly, and southwestwardly. 

On the question to strike out _wealth_, and to make the change asmoved by Mr. Randoph (of Virginia), it passed in the affirmative, --Massachusetts, Connecticut, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--9; Delaware, divided. _pp_. 1090-1-2-3-4. 

SATURDAY, July 14, 1787. 

Mr. Madison (of Virginia). It seemed now pretty well understood, thatthe real difference of interests lay, not between the large and small, but between the Northern and Southern States. THE INSTITUTION OFSLAVERY, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES, FORMED THE LINE OF DISCRIMINATION. _p_. 1104. 

MONDAY, July 23, 1787. 

General Pinckney reminded the Convention, that if the Committee shouldfail to insert some security to the Southern States against anemancipation of slaves, and taxes on exports, he should be bound byduty to his State to vote against their report. _p_. 1187. 

TUESDAY, July 24, 1787. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris hoped the Committee would strike out the wholeof the clause proportioning direct taxation to representation. He hadonly meant it as a bridge[3] to assist us over a certain gulf; havingpassed the gulf, the bridge may be removed. He thought the principlelaid down with so much strictness liable to strong objections. _p_. 1197. 

[Footnote 3: The object was to lessen the eagerness, on one side, for, and the opposition, on the other, to the share of representationclaimed by the Southern States on account of the negroes. ]

WEDNESDAY, August 8, 1787. 

Mr. King wished to know what influence the vote just passed was meantto have on the succeeding part of the Report, concerning the admissionof slaves into the rule of representation. He could not reconcile hismind to the Article, if it was to prevent objections to the latterpart. The admission of slaves was a most grating circumstance to hismind, and he believed would be so to a great part of the people ofAmerica. He had not made a strenuous opposition to it heretofore, because he had hope that this concession would have produced areadiness, which had not been manifested, to strengthen the GeneralGovernment, and to mark a full confidence in it. The Report underconsideration had, by the tenor of it, put an end to all those hopes. In two great points the hands of the Legislature were absolutely tied. The importation of slaves could not be prohibited. Exports could notbe taxed. Is this reasonable? What are the great objects of thegeneral system? First, defence against foreign invasion; secondly, against internal sedition. Shall all the States, then, be bound todefend each, and shall each be at liberty to introduce a weaknesswhich will render defence more difficult? Shall one part of the UnitedStates be bound to defend another part, and that other part be atliberty, not only to increase its own danger, but to withhold thecompensation for the burden? If slaves are to be imported, shall notthe exports produced by their labor supply a revenue the better toenable the General Government to defend their masters? There was somuch inequality and unreasonableness in all this, that the people ofthe Northern States could never be reconciled to it. No candid mancould undertake to justify it to them. He had hoped that someaccommodation would have taken place on this subject; that at least atime would have been limited for the importation of slaves. He nevercould agree to let them be imported without limitation, and then berepresented in the National Legislature. Indeed, he could so littlepersuade himself of the rectitude of such a practice, that he was notsure he could assent to it under any circumstances. At all events, either slaves should not be represented, or exports should be taxable. 

Mr. Sherman regarded the slave trade as iniquitous; but the point ofrepresentation having been settled after much difficulty anddeliberation, he did not think himself bound to make opposition;especially as the present Article, as amended, did not preclude anyarrangement whatever on that point, in another place of the report. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris moved to insert "free" before the word"inhabitants. " Much, he said, would depend on this point. He neverwould concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefariousinstitution. It was the curse of Heaven on the States where itprevailed. Compare the free regions of the Middle States, where a richand noble cultivation marks the prosperity and happiness of thepeople, with the misery and poverty which overspread the barren wastesof Virginia, Maryland, and the other States having slaves. Travelthrough the whole continent, and you behold the prospect continuallyvarying with the appearance and disappearance of slavery. The momentyou leave the Eastern States, and enter New-York, the effects of theinstitution become visible. Passing through the Jerseys and enteringPennsylvania, every criterion of superior improvement witnesses thechange. Proceed southwardly, and every step you take, through thegreat regions of slaves, presents a desert increasing with theincreasing proportion of these wretched beings. Upon what principle isit that the slaves shall be computed in the representation? Are theymen? Then make them citizens, and let them vote. Are they property?Why, then is no other property included? The houses in this city(Philadelphia) are worth more than all the wretched slaves who coverthe rice swamps of South Carolina. The admission of slaves into therepresentation, when fairly explained, comes to this, that theinhabitant of Georgia and South Carolina, who goes to the coast ofAfrica, and, in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity, tearsaway his fellow-creatures from their dearest connections, and damnsthem to the most cruel bondage, shall have more votes in a governmentinstituted for protection of the rights of mankind, than the citizenof Pennsylvania or New-Jersey, who views with a laudable horror sonefarious a practice. He would add, that domestic slavery is the mostprominent feature in the aristocratic countenance of the proposedConstitution. The vassalage of the poor has ever been the favoriteoffspring of aristocracy. And what is the proposed compensation to theNorthern States, for a sacrifice of every principle of right, of everyimpulse of humanity? They are to bind themselves to march theirmilitia for the defence of the Southern States, for their defenceagainst those very slaves of whom they complain. They must supplyvessels and seamen, in case of foreign attack. The Legislature willhave indefinite power to tax them by excises, and duties on imports;both of which will fall heavier on them than on the Southerninhabitants; for the bohea tea used by a Northern freeman will paymore tax than the whole consumption of the miserable slave, whichconsists of nothing more than his physical subsistence and the ragthat covers his nakedness. On the other side, the Southern States arenot to be restrained from importing fresh supplies of wretchedAfricans, at once to increase the danger of attack, and the difficultyof defence; nay, they are to be encouraged to it, by an assurance ofhaving their votes in the National Government increased in proportion;and are, at the same time, to have their exports and their slavesexempt from all contributions for the public service. Let it not besaid, that direct taxation is to be proportioned to representation. It is idle to suppose that the General Government can stretch its handdirectly into the pockets of the people, scattered over so vast acountry. They can only do it through the medium of exports, importsand excises. For what, then, are all the sacrifices to be made? Hewould sooner submit himself to a tax for paying for all the negroes inthe United States, than saddle posterity with such a Constitution. 

Mr. Dayton seconded the motion. He did it, he said, that hissentiments on the subject might appear, whatever might be the fate ofthe amendment. 

Mr. Sherman did not regard the admission of the negroes into the ratioof representation, as liable to such insuperable objections. It wasthe freemen of the Southern States who were, in fact, to berepresented according to the taxes paid by them, and the negroes areonly included in the estimate of the taxes. This was his idea of thematter. 

Mr. Pinckney considered the fisheries, and the western frontier, asmore burthensome to the United States than the slaves. He thought thiscould be demonstrated, if the occasion were a proper one. 

Mr. Wilson thought the motion premature. An agreement to the clausewould be no bar to the object of it. 

On the question, on the motion to insert "free" before "inhabitants, "New-Jersey, aye--1; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, SouthCarolina, Georgia, no--10. Pp. 1261-2-3-4-5-6. 

TUESDAY, August 21, 1787. 

Mr. L. Martin proposed to vary Article 7, Section 4, so as to allow aprohibition or tax on the importation of slaves. In the first place, as five slaves are to be counted as three freemen, in theapportionment of Representatives, such a clause would leave anencouragement to this traffic. In the second place, slaves weakenedone part of the Union, which the other parts were bound to protect;the privilege of importing them was therefore unreasonable. And in thethird place, it was inconsistent with the principles of theRevolution, and dishonorable to the American character, to have such afeature in the Constitution. 

Mr. Rutledge did not see how the importation of slaves could beencouraged by this section. He was not apprehensive of insurrections, and would readily exempt the other states from the obligation toprotect the Southern against them. Religion and humanity had nothingto do with this question. Interest alone is the governing principlewith nations. The true question at present is, whether the SouthernStates shall or shall not be parties to the Union. If the NorthernStates consult their interest, they will not oppose the increase ofslaves, which will increase the commodities of which they will becomethe carriers. 

Mr. Ellsworth was for leaving the clause as it stands. Let every Stateimport what it pleases. The morality or wisdom of slavery areconsiderations belonging to the States themselves. What enriches apart enriches the whole, and the States are the best judges of theirparticular interest. The Old Confederation had not meddled with thispoint; and he did not see any greater necessity for bringing it withinthe policy of the new one. 

Mr. Pinckney. South Carolina can never receive the plan if itprohibits the slave trade. In every proposed extension of the powersof Congress, that State has expressly and watchfully excepted that ofmeddling with the importation of negroes. If the States be all left atliberty on this subject, South Carolina may perhaps, by degrees, do ofherself what is wished, as Virginia and Maryland already have done. Adjourned. _pp_. 1388-9. 

WEDNESDAY, August 22, 1787. 

Article 7, Section 4, was resumed. 

Mr. Sherman was for leaving the clause as it stands. He disapproved ofthe slave trade; yet as the States were now possessed of the right toimport slaves, as the public good did not require it to be taken fromthem, and as it was expedient to have as few objections as possible tothe proposed scheme of government, he thought it best to leave thematter as we find it. He observed that the abolition of slavery seemedto be going on in the United States, and that the good sense of theseveral States would probably by degrees complete it. He urged on theConvention the necessity of despatching its business. 

Col. Mason. This infernal traffic originated in the avarice of Britishmerchants. The British Government constantly checked the attempts ofVirginia to put a stop to it. The present question concerns not theimporting States alone, but the whole Union. The evil of having slaveswas experienced during the late war. Had slaves been treated as theymight have been by the enemy, they would have proved dangerousinstruments in their hands. But their folly dealt by the slaves as itdid by the tories. He mentioned the dangerous insurrections of theslaves in Greece and Sicily; and the instructions given by Cromwell tothe commissioners sent to Virginia, to arm the servants and slaves, incase other means of obtaining its submission should fail. Maryland andVirginia he said had already prohibited the importation of slavesexpressly. North Carolina had done the same in substance. All thiswould be in vain, if South Carolina and Georgia be at liberty toimport. The Western people are already calling out for slaves fortheir new lands; and will fill that country with slaves, if they canbe got through South Carolina and Georgia. Slavery discourages artsand manufactures. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves. They prevent the emigration of whites, who really enrich andstrengthen a country. They produce the most pernicious effect onmanners. Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring thejudgment of Heaven on a country. As nations cannot be rewarded orpunished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitablechain of causes and effects, Providence punishes national sins bynational calamities. He lamented that some of our Eastern brethrenhad, from a lust of gain, embarked in the nefarious traffic. As to theStates being in possession of the right to import, this was the casewith many other rights, now to be properly given up. He held itessential in every point of view, that the General Government shouldhave power to prevent the increase of slavery. 

Mr. Ellsworth, as he had never owned a slave, could not judge of theeffects of slavery on character. He said, however, that if it was tobe considered in a moral light, we ought to go further and free thosealready in the country. As slaves also multiply so fast in Virginiaand Maryland that it is cheaper to raise than import them, whilst inthe sickly rice swamps foreign supplies are necessary, if we go nofurther than is urged, we shall be unjust towards South Carolina andGeorgia. Let us not intermeddle. As population increases, poorlaborers will be so plenty as to render slaves useless. Slavery, intime, will not be a speck in our country. Provision is already made inConnecticut for abolishing it. And the abolition has already takenplace in Massachusetts. As to the danger of insurrections from foreigninfluence, that will become a motive to kind treatment of the slaves. 

Mr. Pinckney. If slavery be wrong, it is justified by the example ofall the world. He cited the case of Greece, Rome and other ancientStates; the sanction given by France, England, Holland and othermodern States. In all ages, one half of mankind have been slaves. Ifthe Southern States were let alone, they will probably of themselvesstop importations. He would himself, as a citizen of South Carolina, vote for it. An attempt to take away the right, as proposed, willproduce serious objections to the Constitution, which he wished to seeadopted. 

Gen. Pinckney declared it to be his firm opinion that if himself andall his colleagues were to sign the Constitution and use theirpersonal influence, it would be of no avail towards obtaining theassent of their constituents. South Carolina and Georgia cannot dowithout slaves. As to Virginia, she will gain by stopping theimportations. Her slaves will rise in value, and she has more than shewants. It would be unequal, to require South Carolina and Georgia, toconfederate on such unequal terms. He said the Royal assent, beforethe Revolution, had never been refused to South Carolina, as toVirginia. He contended that the importation of slaves would be for theinterest of the whole Union. The more slaves, the more produce toemploy the carrying trade; the more consumption also; and the more ofthis, the more revenue for the common treasury. He admitted it to bereasonable that slaves should be dutied like other imports; but shouldconsider a rejection of the clause as an exclusion of South Carolinafrom the Union. 

Mr. Baldwin had conceived national objects alone to be before theConvention; not such as, like the present, were of a local nature. Georgia was decided on this point. That State has always hithertosupposed a General Government to be the pursuit of the central States, who wished to have a vortex for every thing; that her distance wouldpreclude her, from equal advantage; and that she could not prudentlypurchase it by yielding national powers. From this it might beunderstood, in what light she would view an attempt to abridge one ofher favorite prerogatives. If left to herself, she may probably put astop to the evil. As one ground for this conjecture, he took notice ofthe sect of ----; which he said was a respectable class of people, who carried their ethics beyond the mere _equality of men_, extendingtheir humanity to the claims of the whole animal creation. 

Mr. Wilson observed that if South Carolina and Georgia were themselvesdisposed to get rid of the importation of slaves in a short time, ashad been suggested, they would never refuse to unite because theimportation might be prohibited. As the section now stands, allarticles imported are to be taxed. Slaves alone are exempt. This is infact a bounty on that article. 

Mr. Gerry thought we had nothing to do with the conduct of the Statesas to slaves, but ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it. 

Mr. Dickinson considered it as inadmissible, on every principle ofhonor and safety, that the importation of slaves should be authorizedto the States by the Constitution. The true question was, whether thenational happiness would be promoted or impeded by the importation;and this question ought to be left to the National Government, not tothe States particularly interested. If England and France permitslavery, slaves are, at the same time, excluded from both thosekingdoms. Greece and Rome were made unhappy by their slaves. He couldnot believe that the Southern States would refuse to confederate onthe account apprehended; especially as the power was not likely to beimmediately exercised by the General Government. 

Mr. Williamson stated the law of North Carolina on the subject, towit, that it did not directly prohibit the importation of slaves. Itimposed a duty of £5 on each slave imported from Africa; £10 on eachfrom elsewhere; and £50 on each from a State licensing manumission. Hethought the Southern States could not be members of the Union, if theclause should be rejected; and that it was wrong to force any thingdown not absolutely necessary, and which any State must disagree to. 

Mr. King thought the subject should be considered in a political lightonly. If two states will not agree to the Constitution, as stated onone side, he could affirm with equal belief, on the other, that greatand equal opposition would be experienced from the other States. Heremarked on the exemption of slaves from duty, whilst every otherimport was subjected to it, as an inequality that could not fail tostrike the commercial sagacity of the Northern and Middle States. 

Mr. Langdon was strenuous for giving the power to the GeneralGovernment. He could not, with a good conscience, have it with theStates, who could then go on with the traffic, without beingrestrained by the opinions here given, that they will themselves ceaseto import slaves. 

Gen. Pinckney thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he didnot think South Carolina would stop her importations of slaves, in anyshort time; but only stop them occasionally as she now does. He movedto commit the clause, that slaves might be made liable to an equal taxwith other imports; which he thought right, and which would remove onedifficulty that had been started. 

Mr. Rutledge. If the Convention thinks that North Carolina, SouthCarolina, and Georgia, will ever agree to the plan, unless their rightto import slaves be untouched, the expectation is vain. The people ofthose States will never be such fools, as to give up so important aninterest. He was strenuous against striking out the section, andseconded the motion of Gen. Pinckney for a commitment. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris wished the whole subject to be committedincluding the clauses relating to taxes on exports and to a navigationact. These things may form a bargain among the Northern and SouthernStates. 

Mr. Butler declared that he never would agree to the power of taxingexports. 

Mr. Sherman said it was better to let the Southern States importslaves, than to part with them, if they made that a _sine qua non_. Hewas opposed to a tax on slaves imported, as making the matter worse, because it implied they were _property_. He acknowledged that if thepower of prohibiting the importation should be given to the GeneralGovernment, that it would be exercised. He thought it would be itsduty to exercise the power. 

Mr. Read was for the commitment, provided the clause concerning taxeson experts should also be committed. 

Mr. Sherman observed that that clause had been agreed to, andtherefore could not be committed. 

Mr. Randolph was for committing, in order that some middle groundmight, if possible, be found. He could never agree to the clause as itstands. He would sooner risk the Constitution. He dwelt on the dilemmato which the Convention was exposed. By agreeing to the clause, itwould revolt the Quakers, the Methodists, and many others in theStates having no slaves. On the other hand, two States might be lostto the Union. Let us then, he said, try the chance of a commitment. 

On the question for committing the remaining part of Sections 4 and 5, of Article 7, --Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, NorthCarolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--7; New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Delaware, no--3; Massachusetts absent. P. 1390-97. Friday, August 24, 1787. 

_In Convention_, --Governor Livingston, from the committee of eleven, to whom were referred the two remaining clauses of the fourth section, and the fifth and sixth sections, of the seventh Article, delivered inthe following Report:

"Strike out so much of the fourth section as was referred to theCommittee, and insert, 'The migration or importation of such personsas the several States, now existing, shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Legislature prior to the year 1800; buta tax or duty may be imposed on such migration or importation, at arate not exceeding the average of the duties laid on imports. '

"The fifth Section to remain as in the Report. 

"The sixth Section[4] to be stricken out. " p. 1415. 

[Footnote 4: This sixth Section was, "No Navigation act shall be passedwithout the assent of two-thirds of the members present in eachHouse. "--EDITOR. ]

Saturday, August 25, 1787. 

The Report of the Committee of eleven (see Friday, the twenty-fourth)being taken up, --

Gen. Pinckney moved to strike out the words, "the year eighteenhundred, " as the year limiting the importation of slaves; and toinsert the words, "the year eighteen hundred and eight. "

Mr. Gorham seconded the motion. 

Mr. Madison. Twenty years will produce all the mischief that can beapprehended from the liberty to import slaves. So long a term will bemore dishonorable to the American character, than to say nothing aboutit in the Constitution. 

On the motion, which passed in the affirmative, --New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--7; New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, no--4. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris was for making the clause read at once, "theimportation of slaves in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, shall not be prohibited, &c. " This he said, would be most fair, andwould avoid the ambiguity by which, under the power with regard tonaturalization, the liberty reserved to the States might be defeated. He wished it to be known, also, that this part of the Constitution wasa compliance with those States. If the change of language, however, should be objected to, by the members from those States, he should noturge it. 

Col. Mason was not against using the term "slaves, " but against namingNorth Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, lest it should giveoffence to the people of those States. 

Mr. Sherman liked a description better than the terms proposed, whichhad been declined by the old Congress, and were not pleasing to somepeople. 

M. Clymer concurred with Mr. Sherman. 

Mr. Williamson said, that both in opinion and practice he was againstslavery; but thought it more in favor of humanity, from a view of allcircumstances, to let in South Carolina and Georgia on those terms, than to exclude them from the Union. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris withdrew his motion. 

Mr. Dickinson wished the clause to be confined to the States which hadnot themselves prohibited the importation of slaves; and for thatpurpose moved to amend the clause, so as to read: "The importation ofslaves into such of the States as shall permit the same, shall not beprohibited by the Legislature of the United States, until the year1808;" which was disagreed to, _nem. Con. _[5]

[Footnote 5: In the printed Journals, Connecticut, Virginia, andGeorgia, voted in the affirmative. ]

The first part of the Report was then agreed to, amended as follows:"The migration or importation of such persons as the several Statesnow existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited bythe Legislature prior to the year 1808, "--

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--7; New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, no--4. 

Mr. Baldwin, in order to restrain and more explicitly define, "theaverage duty, " moved to strike out of the second part the words, "average of the duties and on imports, " and insert "common impost onarticles not enumerated;" which was agreed to, _nem. Con. _

Mr. Sherman was against this second part, as acknowledging men to beproperty, by taxing them as such under the character of slaves. 

Mr. King and Mr. Langdon considered this as the price of the firstpart. 

Gen. Pinckney admitted that it was so. 

Col. Mason. Not to tax, will be equivalent to a bounty on, theimportation of slaves. 

Mr. Gorham thought that Mr. Sherman should consider the duty, not asimplying that slaves are property, but as a discouragement to theimportation of them. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris remarked, that, as the clause now stands, itimplies that the Legislature may tax freemen imported. 

Mr. Sherman, in answer to Mr. Gorham, observed, that the smallness ofthe duty showed revenue to be the object, not the discouragement ofthe importation. 

Mr. Madison thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the ideathat there could be property in men. The reason of duties did nothold, as slaves are not, like merchandise, consumed, &c. 

Col. Mason, in answer to Mr. Gouverneur Morris. The provision as itstands, was necessary for the case of convicts; in order to preventthe introduction of them. 

It was finally agreed, _nem. Con_. , to make the clause read: "but atax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding tendollars for each person;" and then the second part, as amended, wasagreed to. _pp_. 1427 to 30. 

Tuesday, August 28, 1787. 

Article 14, was then taken up. 

General Pinckney was not satisfied with it. He seemed to wish someprovision should be included in favor of property in slaves. 

On the question on Article 14, --

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, aye--9; South Carolina, no--1; Georgia, divided. 

Article 15, being then taken up, the words, "high misdemeanor, " werestruck out, and the words, "other crime, " inserted, in order tocomprehend all proper cases; it being doubtful whether "highmisdemeanor" had not a technical meaning too limited. 

Mr. Butler and Mr. Pinckney moved to require "fugitive slaves andservants to be delivered up like criminals. "

Mr. Wilson. This would oblige the Executive of the State to do it, atthe public expense. 

Mr. Sherman saw no more propriety in the public seizing andsurrendering a slave or servant, than a horse. 

Mr. Butler withdrew his proposition, in order that some particularprovision might be made, apart from this article. 

Article 15, as amended, was then agreed to, _nem. Con_. _pp_. 1447-8. 

Wednesday, August 29, 1787. 

General Pinckney said it was the true interest of the Southern Statesto have no regulation of commerce; but considering the loss brought onthe commerce of the Eastern States by the Revolution, their liberalconduct towards the views[6] of South Carolina, and the interest theweak Southern States had in being united with the strong EasternStates, he thought it proper that no fetters should be imposed on thepower of making commercial regulations, and that his constituents, though prejudiced against the Eastern States, would be reconciled tothis liberality. He had, himself, he said, prejudices against theEastern States before he came here, but would acknowledge that he hadfound them as liberal and candid as any men whatever. _p_. 1451. 

[Footnote 6: He meant the permission to import slaves. An understandingon the two subjects of _navigation_ and _slavery_, had taken placebetween those parts of the Union, which explains the vote on themotion depending, as well as the language of General Pinckney andothers. ]

Mr. Butler moved to insert after Article 15, "If any person bound toservice or labor in any of the United States, shall escape intoanother State, he or she shall not be discharged from such service orlabor, in consequence of any regulations subsisting in the State towhich they escape, but shall be delivered up to the person justlyclaiming their service or labor, "--which was agreed to, _nem. Con_. _p_. 1456. 

Monday, September 10, 1787. 

Mr. Rutledge said he never could agree to give a power by which thearticles relating to slaves might be altered by the States notinterested in that property, and prejudiced against it. In order toobviate this objection, these words were added to the proposition:"provided that no amendments, which may be made prior to the year 1808shall in any manner affect the fourth and fifth sections of theseventh Article. " _p_. 1536. 

Thursday, September 13, 1787. 

Article 1, Section 2. On motion of Mr. Randolph, the word "servitude"was struck out, and "service" unanimously[7] inserted, the formerbeing thought to express the condition of slaves, and the latter theobligations of free persons. 

[Footnote 7: See page 372 of the printed journal. ]

Mr. Dickinson and Mr. Wilson moved to strike out, "and direct taxes, "from Article 1, Section 2, as improperly placed in a clause relatingmerely to the Constitution of the House of Representatives. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris. The insertion here was in consequence of whathad passed on this point; in order to exclude the appearance ofcounting the negroes in the _representation_. The including of themmay now be referred to the object of direct taxes, and incidentallyonly to that representation. 

On the motion to strike out, "and direct taxes, " from this place, --NewJersey, Delaware, Maryland, aye--3; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no--8. _pp_. 1569-70. 

Saturday, September 15, 1787. 

Article 4, Section 2, (the third paragraph, ) the term "legally" wasstruck out; and the words, "under the laws thereof, " inserted afterthe word "State, " in compliance with the wish of some who thought theterm _legal_ equivocal, and favoring the idea that slavery was legalin a moral view. _p_. 1589. 

Mr. Gerry stated the objections which determined him to withhold hisname from the Constitution: 1--2--3--4--5--6, that three fifths ofthe blacks are to be represented, as if they were freemen. _p_. 1595. 

 * * * * *

LIST OF MEMBERS

OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION WHO FORMED THE CONSTITUTION OFTHE UNITED STATES. 

 From Attended. New Hampshire, 1 John Langdon, July 23, 1787. _John Pickering, _ 2 Nicholas Gilman, " 23. _Benjamin West_. Massachusetts, _Francis Dana_, Elbridge Gerry, May 29. 3 Nath'l Gorham, " 25. 4 Rufus King, " 25. Caleb Strong, " 28. Rhode Island, (No appointment. )Connecticut, 5 W. S. Johnson, June 2. 6 Roger Sherman, May 30. Oliver Ellsworth, " 29. New York, Robert Yates, " 25. 7 Alex'r Hamilton, " 25. John Lansing, June 2. New Jersey, 8 Wm. Livingston, " 5. 9 David Brearly, May 5. Wm. C. Houston, do. 10 Wm. Patterson, do. _John Nielson_, _Abraham Clark_. 11 Jonathan Dayton, June 21. Pennsylvania, 12 Benj. Franklin, May 28. 13 Thos. Miffin, do. Pennsylvania. 14 Robert Morris, May 25. 15 Gen. Clymer, " 28. 16 Thos. Fitzsimmons, " 25. 17 Jared Ingersoll, " 28. 18 James Wilson, " 25. 19 Gouv'r Morris, " 25. Delaware, 20 Geo. Reed, " 25. 21 G. Bedford, Jr. " 28. 22 John Dickinson, " 28. 23 Richard Bassett, " 25. 24 Jacob Broom, " 25. Maryland, 25 James M'Henry, " 29. 26 Daniel of St. Tho. Jenifer, June 2. 27 Daniel Carroll, July 9. John F. Mercer, Aug. 6. Luther Martin, June 9. Virginia, 28 G. Washington, May 25. _Patrick Henry_, (declined. ) Edmund Randolph, " 25. 29 John Blair, " 25. 30 Jas. Madison, Jr. " 25. George Mason, " 25. George Wythe, " 25. James McClurg, (in room P. Henry) " 25. North Carolina, _Rich'd Caswell_ (resigned). Alex'r Martin, May 25. Wm. R. Davie, " 25. 31 Wm. Blount (in room of R. Caswell), June 20. _Willie Jones_ (declined). 32 R. D. Spaight, May 25. 33 Hugh Williamson, (in room of W. Jones, ) May 25. South Carolina, 34 John Rutledge, " 25. 35 Chas. C. Pinckney, " 25. 36 Chas. Pinckney, " 25. 37 Peirce Butler, " 25. Georgia, 38 William Few, " 25. 39 Abr'm Baldwin, June 11. William Pierce, May 31. _George Walton_. Wm. Houston, June 1. _Nath'l Pendleton_. 

Those with numbers before their names signed the Constitution. 39Those in italics never attended. 10Members who attended, but did not sign the Constitution, 16 -- 65

Extract from a Speech of Luther Martin, (delivered before theLegislature of Maryland, ) one of the delegates from Maryland to theConvention that formed the Constitution of the United States. 

With respect to that part of the _second_ section of the _first_Article, which relates to the apportionment of representation anddirect taxation, there were considerable objections made to it, besides the great objection of inequality--It was urged, that noprinciple could justify taking _slaves_ into computation inapportioning the number of _representatives_ a state should have inthe government--That it involved the absurdity of increasing the powerof a state in making laws for _free men_ in proportion as that Stateviolated the rights of freedom--That it might be proper to takeslaves into consideration, when _taxes_ were to be apportioned, because it had a tendency to _discourage slavery_; but to take theminto account in giving representation tended to _encourage_ the _slavetrade_, and to make it the _interest_ of the states to _continue_ that_infamous traffic_--That slaves could not be taken into account as_men_, or _citizens_, because they were not admitted to the _rights ofcitizens_, in the states which adopted or continued slavery--If theywere to be taken into account as _property_, it was asked, whatpeculiar circumstance should render this property (of all others themost odious in its nature) entitled to the high privilege ofconferring consequence and power in the government to its possessors, rather than _any other_ property: and why _slaves_ should, asproperty, be taken into account rather than horses, cattle, mules, orany other species; and it was observed by an honorable member fromMassachusetts, that he considered it as dishonorable and humiliatingto enter into compact with the _slaves_ of the _southern states_, asit would with the _horses_ and _mules_ of the _eastern_. 

By the ninth section of this Article, the importation of such personsas any of the States now existing, shall think proper to admit, shallnot be prohibited prior to the year 1808, but a duty may be imposed onsuch importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

The design of this clause is to prevent the general government fromprohibiting the importation of slaves; but the same reasons whichcaused them to strike out the word "national, " and not admit the word"stamps, " influenced them here to guard against the word "_slaves_. "They anxiously sought to avoid the admission of expressions whichmight be odious in the ears of Americans, although they were willingto admit into their system those _things_ which the expressionsignified; and hence it is that the clause is so worded as really toauthorize the general government to impose a duty of ten dollars onevery foreigner who comes into a State to become a citizen, whether hecomes absolutely free, or qualifiedly so as a servant; although thisis contrary to the design of the framers, and the duty was only meantto extend to the importation of slaves. 

This clause was the subject of a great diversity of sentiment in theConvention. As the system was reported by the committee of detail, theprovision was general, that such importation should not be prohibited, without confining it to any particular period. This was rejected byeight States--Georgia, South Carolina, and, I think, North Carolina, voting for it. 

We were then told by the delegates of the two first of those states, that their states would never agree to a system, which put it in thepower of the general government to prevent the importation of slaves, and that they, as delegates from those states, must withhold theirassent from such a system. 

A committee of one member from each State was chosen by ballot, totake this part of the system under their consideration, and toendeavor to agree upon some report, which should reconcile thoseStates. To this committee also was referred the following proposition, which had been reported by the committee of detail, to wit: "Nonavigation act shall be passed without the assent of two-thirds of themembers present in each house;" a proposition which the staple andcommercial States were solicitous to retain, lest their commerceshould be placed too much under the power of the Eastern States; butwhich these last States were as anxious to reject. This committee, ofwhich also I had the honor to be a member, met and took under theirconsideration the subjects committed to them. I found the _eastern_States, notwithstanding their _aversion to slavery_, were very willingto indulge the southern States, at least with a temporary liberty toprosecute the _slave trade_, provided the southern states would intheir turn gratify them, by laying no restriction on navigation acts;and after a very little time, the committee, by a great majority, agreed on a report, by which the general government was to beprohibited from preventing the importation of slaves for a limitedtime, and the restricted clause relative to navigation acts was to beomitted. 

This report was adopted by a majority of the Convention, but notwithout considerable opposition. 

It was said, we had just assumed a place among independent nations inconsequence of our opposition to the attempts of Great Britain to_enslave us_; that this opposition was grounded upon the preservationof those, rights to which God and nature had entitled us, not in_particular_, but in _common_ with all the rest of mankind; that wehad appealed to the Supreme Being for his assistance, as the God offreedom, who could not but approve our efforts to preserve the_rights_ which he had thus imparted to his creatures; that now, whenwe had scarcely risen from our knees, from supplicating his mercy andprotection in forming our government over a free people, a governmentformed pretendedly on the principles of liberty, and for itspreservation, --in that government to have a provision not onlyputting it out of its power to restrain and prevent the slave trade, even encouraging that most infamous traffic, by giving the States thepower and influence in the Union in proportion as they cruelly andwantonly sported with the rights of their fellow-creatures, ought tobe considered as a solemn mockery of, and an insult to, that God whoseprotection we had then implored, and could not fail to hold us up indetestation, and render us contemptible to every true friend ofliberty in the world. It was said, it ought to be considered thatnational crimes can only be, and frequently are, punished in thisworld by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slavetrade, and thus giving it a national sanction, and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure andvengeance of him who is equally Lord of all, and who views with equaleye the poor African slave and his American master!

It was urged that by this system, we were giving the generalgovernment full and absolute power to regulate commerce, under whichgeneral power it would have a right to restrain, or totally prohibit, the slave trade: it must, therefore, appear to the world absurd anddisgraceful to the last degree, that we should except from theexercise of that power, the only branch of commerce which isunjustifiable in its nature, and contrary to the rights of mankind. That, on the contrary, we ought rather to prohibit expressly in ourConstitution, the further importation of slaves, and to authorize thegeneral government, from time to time, to make such regulations asshould be thought most advantageous for the gradual abolition ofslavery, and the emancipation of the slaves which are already in theStates. That slavery is inconsistent with the genius of republicanismand has a tendency to destroy those principles on which it issupported, as it lessens the sense of the equal rights of mankind, andhabituates us to tyranny and oppression. It was further urged, that, by this system of government, every State is to be protected both fromforeign invasion and from domestic insurrections; from thisconsideration, it was of the utmost importance it should have a powerto restrain the importation of slaves, since, in proportion as thenumber of slaves are increased in any State, in the same proportionthe State is weakened and exposed to foreign invasion or domesticinsurrection, and by so much less will it be able to protect itselfagainst either, and therefore will by so the much want aid from, andbe a burden to, the Union. 

It was further said, that, as in this system we were giving thegeneral government a power, under the idea of national character, ornational interest, to regulate even our weights and measures, and haveprohibited all possibility of emitting paper money, and passinginsolvent laws, &c. , it must appear still more extraordinary, that weshould prohibit the government from interfering with the slave trade, than which nothing could so materially affect both our national honorand interest. 

These reasons influenced me, both on the committee and in convention, most decidedly to oppose and vote against the clause, as it now makespart of the system. 

You will perceive, sir, not only that the general government isprohibited from interfering in the slave-trade before the yeareighteen hundred and eight, but that there is no provision in theConstitution that it shall afterwards be prohibited, nor any securitythat such prohibition will ever take place; and I think there is greatreason to believe, that, if the importation of slaves is permitteduntil the year eighteen hundred and eight, it will not be prohibitedafterwards. At this time, we do not generally hold this commerce in sogreat abhorrence as we have done. When our liberties were at stake, wewarmly felt for the common rights of men. The danger being thought tobe past, which threatened ourselves, we are daily growing moreinsensible to those rights. In those States which have restrained orprohibited the importation of slaves, it is only done by legislativeacts, which may be repealed. When those States find that they must, intheir national character and connexion, suffer in the disgrace, andshare in the inconveniences attendant upon that detestable andiniquitous traffic, they may be desirous also to share in the benefitsarising from it; and the odium attending it will be greatly effaced bythe sanction which is given to it in the general government. 

By the next paragraph, the general government is to have a power ofsuspending the _habeas corpus act_, in cases of _rebellion_ or_invasion_. 

As the State governments have a power of suspending the habeas corpusact in those cases, it was said, there could be no reason for givingsuch a power to the general government; since, whenever the Statewhich is invaded, or in which an insurrection takes place, finds itssafety requires it, it will make use of that power. And it was urged, that if we gave this power to the general government, it would be anengine of oppression in its hands; since whenever a State shouldoppose its views, however arbitrary and unconstitutional, and refusesubmission to them, the general government may declare it to be an actof rebellion, and, suspending the habeas corpus act, may seize uponthe persons of those advocates of freedom, who have had virtue andresolution enough to excite the opposition, and may imprison themduring its pleasure in the remotest part of the Union; so that acitizen of Georgia might be _bastiled_ in the furthest part of NewHampshire; or a citizen of New Hampshire in the furthest extreme ofthe South, cut off from their family, their friends, and their everyconnexion. These considerations induced me, sir, to give my negativealso to this clause. 

 * * * * *

EXTRACTS FROM DEBATES IN THE SEVERAL STATE CONVENTIONS ON THE ADOPTIONOF THE UNITED STATES' CONSTITUTION. 

 * * * * *

MASSACHUSETTS CONVENTION. 

The third paragraph of the 2d section being read, Mr. King rose to explain it. There has, says he, been muchmisconception of this section. It is a principle of this Constitution, that representation and taxation should go hand in hand. Thisparagraph states, that the numbers of free persons shall bedetermined, by adding to the whole number of free persons, includingthose bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians nottaxed, three-fifths of all other persons. These persons are theslaves. By this rule is representation and taxation to be apportioned. And it was adopted, because it was the language of all America. 

Mr. Widgery asked, if a boy of six years of age was to be consideredas a free person?

Mr. King in answer said, all persons born free were to be consideredas freemen; and to make the idea of _taxation by numbers_ moreintelligible, said that five negro children of South Carolina, are topay as much tax as the three Governors of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. 

Mr. Gorham thought the proposed section much in favor of Massachusetts;and if it operated against any state, it was Pennsylvania, becausethey have more white persons _bound_ than any other. 

Judge Dana, in reply to the remark of some gentlemen, that thesouthern States were favored in this mode of apportionment, by havingfive of their negroes set against three persons in the eastern, thehonorable judge observed, that the negroes of the southern States workno longer than when the eye of the driver is on them. Can, asked he, that land flourish like this, which is cultivated by the hands offreemen? Are not _three_ of these independent freemen of more realadvantage to a State, than _five_ of those poor slaves?

Mr. Nasson remarked on the statement of the honorable Mr. King, bysaying that the honorable gentleman should have gone further, andshown us the other side of the question. It is a good rule that worksboth ways--and the gentlemen should also have told us, that three ofour infants in the cradle, are to be rated as high as five of theworking negroes of Virginia. Mr. N. Adverted to a statement of Mr. King, who had said, that five negro children of South Carolina wereequally rateable as three governors of New England, and wished, hesaid, the honorable gentleman had considered this question upon theother side--as it would then appear that this State will pay as greata tax for three children in the cradle, as any of the southern Stateswill for five hearty working negro men. He hoped, he said, while wewere making a new government, we should make it better than the oldone: for if we had made a bad bargain before, as had been hinted, itwas a reason why we should make a better one now. 

Mr. Dawes said, he was sorry to hear so many objections raised againstthe paragraph under consideration. He thought them wholly unfounded;that the black inhabitants of the southern States must be consideredeither as slaves, and as so much property, or in the character of somany freemen; if the former, why should they not be whollyrepresented? Our _own_ State laws and Constitution would lead us toconsider those blacks as _freemen_, and so indeed would our own ideasof natural justice: if, then, they are freemen, they might form anequal basis for representation as though they were all whiteinhabitants. In either view, therefore, he could not see that thenorthern States would suffer, but directly to the contrary. Hethought, however, that gentlemen would do well to connect the passagein dispute with another article in the Constitution, that permitsCongress, in the year 1808, wholly to prohibit the importation ofslaves, and in the mean time to impose a duty of ten dollars a head onsuch blacks as should be imported before that period. Besides, by thenew Constitution, every particular State is left to its own optiontotally to prohibit the introduction of slaves into its ownterritories. What could the convention do more? The members of thesouthern States, like ourselves, have _their_ prejudices. It wouldnot do to abolish slavery, by an act of Congress, in a moment, and sodestroy what our southern brethren consider as property. But we maysay, that although slavery is not smitten by an apoplexy, yet it hasreceived a mortal wound and will die of a consumption. 

Mr. Neal (from Kittery, ) went over the ground of objection to thissection on the idea that the slave trade was allowed to be continuedfor 20 years. His profession, he said, obliged him to bear witnessagainst any thing that should favor the making merchandise of thebodies of men, and unless his objection was removed, he could not puthis hand to the Constitution. Other gentlemen said, in addition tothis idea, that there was not even a proposition that the negroes evershall be free, and Gen. Thompson exclaimed:

Mr. President, shall it be said, that after we have established ourown independence and freedom, we make slaves of others? Oh!Washington, what a name has he had! How he has immortalized himself!but he holds those in slavery who have a good right to be free as hehas--he is still for self; and, in my opinion, his character has sunk50 per cent. 

On the other side, gentlemen said, that the step taken in thisarticle, towards the abolition of slavery, was one of the beauties ofthe Constitution. They observed, that in the confederation there wasno provision whatever for its ever being abolished; but thisConstitution provides, that Congress may, after 20 years, totallyannihilate the slave trade; and that, as all the States, except two, have passed laws to this effect, it might reasonably be expected, thatit would then be done. In the interim, all the States were at libertyto prohibit it. 

Saturday, January 26. --[The debate on the 9th section still continueddesultory--and consisted of similar objections, and answers thereto, as had before been used. Both sides deprecated the slave trade in themost pointed terms; on one side it was pathetically lamented, by Mr. Nason, Major Lusk, Mr. Neal, and others, that this Constitutionprovided for the continuation of the slave trade for 20 years. On theother, the honorable Judge Dana, Mr. Adams and others, rejoiced that adoor was now to be opened for the annihilation of this odious, abhorrent practice, in a certain time. ]

Gen. Heath. Mr. President, --By my indisposition and absence, I havelost several important opportunities: I have lost the opportunity ofexpressing my sentiments with a candid freedom, on some of theparagraphs of the system, which have lain heavy on my mind. I havelost the opportunity of expressing my warm approbation on some of theparagraphs. I have lost the opportunity of hearing those judicious, enlightening and convincing arguments, which have been advanced duringthe investigation of the system. This is my misfortune, and I mustbear it. The paragraph respecting the migration or importation of suchpersons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, &c. , is one of those considered during my absence, and I have heardnothing on the subject, save what has been mentioned this morning; butI think the gentlemen who have spoken, have carried the matter rathertoo far on both sides. I apprehend that it is not in our power to doany thing for or against those who are in slavery in the southernStates. No gentleman within these walls detests every idea of slaverymore than I do: it is generally detested by the people of thisCommonwealth; and I ardently hope that the time will soon come, whenour brethren in the southern States will view it as we do, and put astop to it; but to this we have no right to compel them. Two questionsnaturally arise: if we ratify the Constitution, shall we do any thingby our act to hold the blacks in slavery--or shall we become thepartakers of other men's sins? I think neither of them. Each State issovereign and independent to a certain degree, and they have a right, and will regulate their own internal affairs, as to themselves appearsproper; and shall we refuse to eat, or to drink, or to be united, withthose who do not think, or act, just as we do? surely not. We are notin this case partakers of other men's sins, for in nothing do wevoluntarily encourage the slavery of our fellow-men; a restriction islaid on the Federal Government, which could not be avoided, and aunion take place. The federal Convention went as far as they could;the migration or importation, &c. , is confined to the States, now_existing only_, new States cannot claim it. Congress, by theirordinance for erecting new States, some time since, declared that thenew States shall be republican, and that there shall be no slavery inthem. But whether those in slavery in the southern States will beemancipated after the year 1808, I do not pretend to determine: Irather doubt it. 

Mr. Neal rose and said, that as the Constitution at large, was nowunder consideration, he would just remark, that the article whichrespected the Africans, was the one which laid on his mind--and, unless his objections to that were removed, it must, how much soeverhe liked the other parts of the Constitution, be a sufficient reasonfor him to give his negative to it. 

Major Lusk concurred in the idea already thrown out in the debate, that although the insertion of the amendments in the Constitution wasdevoutly wished, yet he did not see any reason to suppose they everwould be adopted. Turning from the subject of amendments, the Majorentered largely into the consideration of the 9th section, and in themost pathetic and feeling manner, described the miseries of the poornatives of Africa, who are kidnapped and sold for slaves. With thebrightest colors he painted their happiness and ease on their nativeshores, and contrasted them with their wretched, miserable and unhappycondition, in a state of slavery. 

Rev. Mr. Buckus. Much, sir, has been said about the importation ofslaves into this country. I believe that, according to my capacity, noman abhors that wicked practice more than I do, and would gladly makeuse of all lawful means towards the abolishing of slavery in all partsof the land. But let us consider where we are, and what we are doing. In the articles of confederation, no provision was made to hinder theimportation of slaves into any of these States: but a door is nowopened hereafter to do it; and each State is at liberty now to abolishslavery as soon as they please. And let us remember our formerconnexion with Great Britain, from whom many in our land think weought not to have revolted. How did they carry on the slave trade! Iknow that the Bishop of Gloucester, in an annual sermon in London, inFebruary, 1766, endeavored to justify their tyrannical claims of powerover us, by casting the reproach of the slave trade upon theAmericans. But at the close of the war, the Bishop of Chester, in anannual sermon, in February, 1783, ingenuously owned, that their nationis the most deeply involved in the guilt of that trade, of any nationin the world; and also, that they have treated their slaves in theWest Indies worse than the French or Spaniards have done theirs. Thusslavery grows more and more odious through the world; and, as anhonorable gentleman said some days ago, "Though we cannot say thatslavery is struck with an apoplexy, yet we may hope it will die with aconsumption. " And a main source, sir, of that iniquity, hath been anabuse of the covenant of circumcision, which gave the seed of Abrahamto destroy the inhabitants of Canaan, and to take their houses, vineyards, and all their estates, as their own; and also to buy andhold others as servants. And as Christian privileges are greater thanthose of the Hebrews were, many have imagined that they had a right toseize upon the lands of the heathen, and to destroy or enslave them asfar as they could extend their power. And from thence the mystery ofiniquity, carried many into the practice of making merchandise ofslaves and souls of men. But all ought to remember, that when Godpromised the land of Canaan to Abraham and his seed, he let him knowthat they were not to take possession of that land, until the iniquityof the Amorites was full; and then they did it under the immediatedirection of Heaven; and they were as real executors of the judgmentof God upon those heathens, as any person ever was an executor of acriminal justly condemned. And in doing it they were not allowed toinvade the lands of the Edomites, who sprang from Esau, who was notonly of the seed of Abraham, but was born at the same birth withIsrael; and yet they were not of that church. Neither were Israelallowed to invade the lands of the Moabites, or of the children ofAmmon, who were of the seed of Lot. And no officer in Israel had anylegislative power, but such as were immediately inspired. Even David, the man after God's own heart, had no legislative power, but only ashe was inspired from above: and he is expressly called a _prophet_ inthe New Testament. And we are to remember that Abraham and his seed, for four hundred years, had no warrant to admit any strangers intothat church, but by buying of him as a servant, with money. And it wasa great privilege to be bought, and adopted into a religious familyfor seven years, and then to have their freedom. And that covenant wasexpressly repealed in various parts of the New Testament; andparticularly in the first epistle to the Corinthians, wherein it issaid--Ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. And again--Circumcision isnothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping of thecommandments of God. Ye are bought with a price; be not ye theservants of men. Thus the gospel sets all men upon a level, verycontrary to the declaration of an honorable gentleman in this house, "that the Bible was contrived for the advantage of a particular orderof men. "

 * * * * *

NEW YORK CONVENTION. 

Mr. Smith. He would now proceed to state his objections to the clausejust read, (section 2, of article 1, clause 3. ) His objections werecomprised under three heads: 1st, the rule of apportionment is unjust;2d, there is no precise number fixed on, below which the house shallnot be reduced; 3d, it is inadequate. In the first place, the rule ofapportionment of the representatives is to be according to the wholenumber of the white inhabitants, with three-fifths of all others; thatis, in plain English, each State is to send representatives inproportion to the number of freemen, and three-fifths of the slaves itcontains. He could not see any rule by which slaves were to beincluded in the ratio of representation;--the principle of arepresentation being that every free agent should be concerned ingoverning himself, it was absurd to give that power to a man who couldnot exercise it--slaves have no will of their own: the very operationof it was to give certain privileges to those people, who were sowicked as to keep slaves. He knew it would be admitted, that this ruleof apportionment was founded on unjust principles, but that it was theresult of accommodation; which, he supposed, we should be under thenecessity of admitting, if we meant to be in union with the southernStates, though utterly repugnant to his feelings. 

Mr. Hamilton. In order that the committee may understand clearly theprinciples on which the General Convention acted, I think it necessaryto explain some preliminary circumstances. 

Sir, the natural situation of this country seems to divide itsinterests into different classes. There are navigating andnon-navigating States--the Northern are properly the navigatingStates: the Southern appear to possess neither the means; nor thespirit of navigation. This difference of situation naturally producesa dissimilarity of interest and views respecting foreign commerce. Itwas the interest of the Northern States that there should be norestraints on their navigation, and that they should leave full power, by a majority in Congress, to make commercial regulations in favor oftheir own, and in restraint of the navigation of foreigners. TheSouthern States wished to impose a restraint on the Northern, byrequiring that two-thirds in Congress should be requisite to pass anact in regulation of commerce: they were apprehensive that therestraints of a navigation law would discourage foreigners, and byobliging them to employ the shipping of the Northern States wouldprobably enhance their freight. This being the case, they insistedstrenuously on having this provision engrafted in the constitution;and the Northern States were as anxious in opposing it. On the otherhand, the small States seeing themselves embraced by the confederationupon equal terms, wished to retain the advantages which they alreadypossessed: the large States, on the contrary, thought it improper thatRhode Island and Delaware should enjoy an equal suffrage withthemselves: from these sources a delicate and difficult contest arose. It became necessary, therefore, to compromise; or the Convention musthave dissolved without effecting any thing. Would it have been wiseand prudent in that body, in this critical situation, to have desertedtheir country? No. Every man who hears me--every wise man in theUnited States, would have condemned them. The Convention were obligedto appoint a committee for accommodation. In this committee thearrangement was formed as it now stands; and their report wasaccepted. It was a delicate point; and it was necessary that allparties should be indulged. Gentlemen will see, that if there had notbeen a unanimity, nothing could have been done: for the Convention hadno power to establish, but only to recommend a government. Any othersystem would have been impracticable. Let a Convention be calledto-morrow--let them meet twenty times; nay, twenty thousand times;they will have the same difficulties to encounter; the same clashinginterests to reconcile. 

But dismissing these reflections, let us consider how far thearrangement is in itself entitled to the approbation of this body. Wewill examine it upon its own merits. 

The first thing objected to, is that clause which allows arepresentation for three-fifths of the negroes. Much has been said ofthe impropriety of representing men, who have no will of their own. Whether this be reasoning or declamation, I will not presume to say. It is the unfortunate situation of the southern states, to have agreat part of their population, as well as property, in blacks. Theregulations complained of was one result of the spirit ofaccommodation, which governed the convention; and without thisindulgence, no union could possibly have been formed. But, sir, considering some peculiar advantages which we derived from them, it isentirely just that they should be gratified. The southern statespossess certain staples, tobacco, rice, indigo, &c. , which must becapital objects in treaties of commerce with foreign nations; and theadvantage which they necessarily procure in these treaties will befelt throughout all the states. But the justice of this plan willappear in another view. The best writers on government have held thatrepresentation should be compounded of persons and property. This rulehas been adopted, as far as it could be, in the Constitution ofNew-York. It will, however, by no means, be admitted, that the slavesare considered altogether as property. They are men, though degradedto the condition of slavery. They are persons known to the municipallaws of the states which they inhabit as well as to the laws ofnature. But representation and taxation go together--and one uniformrule ought to apply to both. Would it be just to compute these slavesin the assessment of taxes, and discard them from the estimate in theapportionment of representatives? Would it be just to impose asingular burthen, without conferring some adequate advantage?

Another circumstance ought to be considered. The rule we have beenspeaking of is a general rule, and applies to all the states. Now, youhave a great number of people in your state, which are not representedat all; and have no voice in your government; these will be includedin the enumeration--not two-fifths--nor three-fifths, but the whole. This proves that the advantages of the plan are not confined to thesouthern states, but extend to other parts of the Union. 

Mr. M. Smith. I shall make no reply to the arguments offered by thehon. Gentleman to justify the rule of apportionment fixed by thisclause: for though I am confident they might be easily refuted, yet Iam persuaded we must yield this point, in accommodation to thesouthern states. The amendment therefore proposes no alteration tothe clause in this respect. 

Mr. Harrison. Among the objections, that, which has been made to themode of apportionment of representatives, has been relinquished. Ithink this concession does honor to the gentleman who had stated theobjection. He has candidly acknowledged, that this apportionment wasthe result of accommodation; without which no union could have beenformed. 

 * * * * *

PENNSYLVANIA CONVENTION. 

Mr. Wilson. Much fault has been found with the mode of expression, used in the first clause of the ninth section of the first article. Ibelieve I can assign a reason, why that mode of expression was used, and why the term slave was not admitted in this constitution--and asto the manner of laying taxes, this is not the first time that thesubject has come into the view of the United States, and of thelegislatures of the several states. The gentleman, (Mr. Findley) willrecollect, that in the present congress, the quota of the federaldebt, and general expenses, was to be in proportion to the value ofland, and other enumerated property, within the states. After tryingthis for a number of years, it was found on all hands, to be a modethat could not be carried into execution. Congress were satisfied ofthis, and in the year 1783 recommended, in conformity with the powersthey possessed under the articles of confederation, that the quotashould be according to the number of free people, including thosebound to servitude, and excluding Indians not taxed. These were theexpressions used in 1783, and the fate of this recommendation wassimilar to all their other resolutions. It was not carried intoeffect, but it was adopted by no fewer than eleven, out of thirteenstates; and it cannot but be matter of surprise, to hear gentlemen, who agreed to this very mode of expression at that time, come forwardand state it as an objection on the present occasion. It was natural, sir, for the late convention, to adopt the mode after it had beenagreed to by eleven states, and to use the expression, which theyfound had been received as unexceptional before. With respect to theclause, restricting congress from prohibiting the migration orimportation of such persons, as any of the states now existing, shallthink proper to admit, prior to the year 1808. The honorable gentlemansays, that this cause is not only dark, but intended to grant tocongress, for that time, the power to admit the importation of slaves. No such thing was intended; but I will tell you what was done, and itgives me high pleasure, that so much was done. Under the presentconfederation, the states may admit the importation of slaves as longas they please; but by this article, after the year 1808 the congresswill have power to prohibit such importation, notwithstanding thedisposition of any state to the contrary. I consider this as layingthe foundation for banishing slavery out of this country; and thoughthe period is more distant than I could wish, yet it will produce thesame kind, gradual change, which was pursued in Pennsylvania. It iswith much satisfaction I view this power in the general government, whereby they may lay an interdiction on this reproachful trade; but animmediate advantage is also obtained, for a tax or duty may be imposedon such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person; andthis, sir, operates as a partial prohibition; it was all that could beobtained, I am sorry it was no more; but from this I think there isreason to hope, that yet a few years, and it will be prohibitedaltogether; and in the mean time, the new states which are to beformed, will be under the control of congress in this particular; andslaves will never be introduced amongst them. The gentleman says, thatit is unfortunate in another point of view; it means to prohibit theintroduction of white people from Europe, as this tax may deter themfrom coming amongst us; a little impartiality and attention willdiscover the care that the convention took in selecting theirlanguage. The words are the _migration_ or IMPORTATION of suchpersons, &c. , shall not be prohibited by congress prior to the year1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation; it isobservable here, that the term migration is dropped, when a tax orduty is mentioned, so that congress have power to impose the tax onlyon those imported. 

I recollect, on a former day, the honorable gentleman fromWestmoreland (Mr. Findley) and the honorable gentleman from Cumberland(Mr. Whitehill, ) took exception against the first clause of the 9thsection, art. 1, arguing very unfairly, that because congress mightimpose a tax or duty of ten dollars on the importation of slaves, within any of the United States, congress might therefore permitslaves to be imported within this state, contrary to its laws. Iconfess I little thought that this part of the system would beexcepted to. 

I am sorry that it could be extended no further; but so far as itoperates, it presents us with the pleasing prospect, that the rightsof mankind will be acknowledged and established throughout the union. 

If there was no other lovely feature in the constitution but this one, it would diffuse a beauty over its whole countenance. Yet the lapse ofa few years! and congress will have power to exterminate slavery fromwithin our borders. 

How would such a delightful prospect expand the breast of a benevolentand philanthropic European? Would he cavil at an expression? catch ata phrase? No, sir, that is only reserved for the gentleman on theother side of your chair to do. 

Mr. McKean. The arguments against the constitution are, I think, chiefly these: . . . 

That migration or importation of such persons, as any of the statesshall admit, shall not be prohibited prior to 1808, nor a tax or dutyimposed on such importation exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

Provision is made that congress shall have power to prohibit theimportation of slaves after the year 1808, but the gentlemen inopposition, accuse this system of a crime, because it has notprohibited them at once. I suspect those gentlemen are not wellacquainted with the business of the diplomatic body, or they wouldknow that an agreement might be made, that did not perfectly accordwith the will and pleasure of any one person. Instead of finding faultwith what has been gained, I am happy to see a disposition in theUnited States to do so much. 

 * * * * *

VIRGINIA CONVENTION. 

Gov Randolph said, we are told in strong language, of dangers to whichwe will be exposed unless we adopt this Constitution. Among the rest, domestic safety is said to be in danger. This government does notattend to our domestic safety. It authorizes the importation of slavesfor twenty-odd years, and thus continues upon us that nefarious trade. Instead of securing and protecting us, the continuation of thisdetestable trade adds daily to our weakness. Though this evil isincreasing, there is no clause in the Constitution that will preventthe northern and eastern States from meddling with our whole propertyof that kind. There is a clause to prohibit the importation of slavesafter twenty years, but there is no provision made for securing to thesouthern States those they now possess. It is far from being adesirable property. But it will involve us in great difficulties andinfelicity to be now deprived of them. There ought to be a clause inthe Constitution to secure us that property, which we have acquiredunder our former laws, and the loss of which would bring ruin on agreat many people. 

Mr. Lee. The honorable gentleman abominates it, because it does notprohibit the importation of slaves, and because it does not secure thecontinuance of the existing slavery! Is it not obviously inconsistentto criminate it for two contradictory reasons? I submit it to theconsideration of the gentleman, whether, if it be reprehensible in theone case, it can be censurable in the other? Mr. Lee then concluded byearnestly recommending to the committee to proceed regularly. 

Mr. Henry. It says, that "no state shall engage in war, unlessactually invaded. " If you give this clause a fair construction, whatis the true meaning of it? What does this relate to? Not domesticinsurrections, but war. If the country be invaded, a state may go towar; but cannot suppress insurrections. If there should happen aninsurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to beinvaded. --They cannot therefore suppress it, without the interpositionof congress. 

Mr. George Nicholas said, another worthy member says, there is nopower in the States to quell an insurrection of slaves. Have they itnow? If they have, does the Constitution take it away? If it does, itmust be in one of the three clauses which have been mentioned by theworthy member. The first clause gives the general government power tocall them out when necessary. Does this take it away from the States?No. But it gives an additional security: for, besides the power in theState governments to use their own militia, it will be the duty of thegeneral government to aid them with the strength of the Union whencalled for. No part of the Constitution can show that this power istaken away. 

Mr. George Mason. Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which hascreated more dangers than any other. The first clause allows theimportation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attemptswere made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchantsprevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of ourseparation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principalobject of this State, and most of the States in the Union. Theaugmentation of slaves weakens the States; and such a trade isdiabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind. Yet, by thisConstitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value anunion of all the States, I would not admit the Southern States intothe Union, unless they agreed to the discontinuance of thisdisgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness and not strength tothe Union. And though this infamous traffic be continued, we have nosecurity for the property of that kind which we have already. There isno clause in this Constitution to secure it; for they may lay such taxas will amount to manumission. And should the government be amended, still this detestable kind of commerce cannot be discontinued tillafter the expiration of twenty years. For the fifth article, whichprovides for amendments, expressly excepts this clause. I have everlooked upon this as a most disgraceful thing to America. I cannotexpress my detestation of it. Yet they have not secured us theproperty of the slaves we have already. So that, "they have done whatthey ought not to have done, and have left undone what they ought tohave done. "

Mr. Madison. Mr. Chairman, I should conceive this clause to beimpolitic, if it were one of those things which could be excludedwithout encountering greater evils. The Southern States would not haveentered into the Union of America, without the temporary permission ofthat trade. And if they were excluded from the Union, the consequencesmight be dreadful to them and to us. We are not in a worse situationthan before. That traffic is prohibited by our laws, and we maycontinue the prohibition. The Union in general is not in a worsesituation. Under the articles of confederation, it might be continuedforever: but by this clause an end may be put to it after twentyyears. There is, therefore, an amelioration of our circumstances. Atax may be laid in the mean time; but it is limited, otherwiseCongress might lay such a tax as would amount to a prohibition. Fromthe mode of representation and taxation, Congress cannot lay such atax on slaves as will amount to manumission. Another clause secures usthat property which we now possess. At present, if any slave elopes toany of those States where slaves are free, he becomes emancipated bytheir laws. For the laws of the States are uncharitable to one anotherin this respect. But in this Constitution, "no person held to service, or labor, in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be dischargedfrom such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of theparty to whom such service or labor may be due. " This clause wasexpressly inserted to enable owners of slaves to reclaim them. This isa better security than any that now exists. No power is given to thegeneral government to interpose with respect to the property in slavesnow held by the States. The taxation of this State being equal only toits representation, such a tax cannot be laid as he supposes. Theycannot prevent the importation of slaves for twenty years; but afterthat period, they can. The gentlemen from South Carolina and Georgiaargued in this manner: "We have now liberty to import this species ofproperty, and much of the property now possessed, has been purchased, or otherwise acquired, in contemplation of improving it by theassistance of imported slaves. What would be the consequence ofhindering us from it? The slaves of Virginia would rise in value, andwe would be obliged to go to your markets. " I need not expatiate onthis subject. Great as the evil is, a dismemberment of the Union wouldbe worse. If those States should disunite from the other States, fornot including them in the temporary continuance of this traffic, theymight solicit and obtain aid from foreign powers. 

Mr. Tyler warmly enlarged on the impolicy, iniquity, anddisgracefulness of this wicked traffic. He thought the reasons urgedby gentlemen in defence of it were inconclusive, and ill founded. Itwas one cause of the complaints against British tyranny, that thistrade was permitted. The Revolution had put a period to it; but now itwas to be revived. He thought nothing could justify it. This temporaryrestriction on Congress militated, in his opinion, against thearguments of gentlemen on the other side, that what was not given up, was retained by the States; for that if this restriction had not beeninserted, Congress could have prohibited the African trade. The powerof prohibiting it was not expressly delegated to them; yet they wouldhave had it by implication, if this restraint had not been provided. This seemed to him to demonstrate most clearly the necessity ofrestraining them by a bill of rights, from infringing our unalienablerights. It was immaterial whether the bill of rights was by itself, orincluded in the Constitution. But he contended for it one way or theother. It would be justified by our own example, and that of England. His earnest desire was, that it should be handed down to posterity, that he had opposed this wicked clause. 

Mr. Madison. As to the restriction in the clause under consideration, it was a restraint on the exercise of a power expressly delegated tocongress, namely, that of regulating commerce with foreign nations. 

Mr. Henry insisted, that the insertion of these restrictions onCongress, was a plain demonstration that Congress could exercisepowers by implication. The gentleman had admitted that Congress couldhave interdicted the African trade, were it not for this restriction. If so, the power not having been expressly delegated, must be obtainedby implication. He demanded where, then, was their doctrine ofreserved rights? He wished for negative clauses to prevent them fromassuming any powers but those expressly given. He asked why it wasmoited to secure us that property in slaves, which we held now? Hefeared its omission was done with design. They might lay such heavytaxes on slaves, as would amount to emancipation; and then theSouthern States would be the only sufferers. His opinion was confirmedby the mode of levying money. Congress, he observed, had power to layand collect taxes, imposts, and excises. Imposts (or duties) andexcises, were to be uniform. But this uniformity did not extend totaxes. This might compel the Southern States to liberate theirnegroes. He wished this property therefore to be guarded. Heconsidered the clause which had been adduced by the gentleman as asecurity for this property, as no security at all. It was no more thanthis--that a runaway negro could be taken up in Maryland or New-York. This could not prevent Congress from interfering with that property bylaying a grievous and enormous tax on it, so as to compel owners toemancipate their slaves rather than pay the tax. He apprehended itwould be productive of much stock-jobbing, and that they would playinto one another's hands in such a manner as that this property wouldbe lost to the country. 

Mr. George Nicholas wondered that gentlemen who were against slavery, would be opposed to this clause; as after that period the slave tradewould be done away. He asked, if gentlemen did not see theinconsistency of their arguments? They object, says he, to theConstitution, because the slave trade is laid open for twenty-oddyears; and yet tell you, that by some latent operation of it, theslaves who are so now, will be manumitted. At the same moment, it isopposed for being promotive and destructive of slavery. He contendedthat it was advantageous to Virginia, that it should be in the powerof Congress to prevent the importation of slaves after twenty years, as it would then put a period to the evil complained of. 

As the Southern States would not confederate without this clause, heasked, if gentlemen would rather dissolve the confederacy than tosuffer this temporary inconvenience, admitting it to be such? Virginiamight continue the prohibition of such importation during theintermediate period, and would be benefitted by it, as a tax of tendollars on each slave might be laid, of which she would receive ashare. He endeavored to obviate the objection of gentlemen, that therestriction on Congress was a proof that they would have power notgiven them, by remarking, that they would only have had a generalsuperintendency of trade, if the restriction had not been inserted. But the Southern States insisted on this exception to that generalsuperintendency for twenty years. It could not therefore have been apower by implication, as the restriction was an exception from adelegated power. The taxes could not, as had been suggested, be laidso high on negroes as to amount to emancipation; because taxation andrepresentation were fixed according to the census established in theConstitution. The exception of taxes, from the uniformity annexed toduties and excises, could not have the operation contended for by thegentleman; because other clauses had clearly and positively fixed thecensus. Had taxes been uniform, it would have been universallyobjected to, for no one object could be selected without involvinggreat inconveniences and oppressions. But, says Mr. Nicholas, is itfrom the general government we are to fear emancipation? Gentlemenwill recollect what I said in another house, and what other gentlemenhave said that advocated emancipation. Give me leave to say, that thatclause is a great security for our slave tax. I can tell thecommittee, that the people of our country are reduced to beggary bythe taxes on negroes. Had this Constitution been adopted, it would nothave been the case. The taxes were laid on all our negroes. By thissystem two-fifths are exempted. He then added, that he imaginedgentlemen would not support here what they had opposed in anotherplace. 

Mr. Henry replied, that though the proportion of each was to be fixedby the census, and three-fifths of the slaves only were included inthe enumeration, yet the proportion of Virginia being once fixed, might be laid on blacks and blacks only. For the mode of raising theproportion of each State being to be directed by Congress, they mightmake slaves the sole object to raise it. Personalities he wished totake leave of: they had nothing to do with the question, which wassolely whether that paper was wrong or not. 

Mr. Nicholas replied, that negroes must he considered as persons, orproperty. If as property, the proportion of taxes to be laid on themwas fixed in the Constitution. If he apprehended a poll tax onnegroes, the Constitution had prevented it. For, by the census, wherea white man paid ten shillings, a negro paid but six shillings. Forthe exemption of two-fifths of them reduced it to that proportion. 

The second, third, and fourth clauses, were then read as follows:

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety mayrequire it. 

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed. 

No capitation or other direct tax shall be paid, unless in proportionto the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken. 

Mr. George Mason said, that gentlemen might think themselves securedby the restriction in the fourth clause, capitation or other directtax should he laid but in proportion to the census before directed tobe taken. But that when maturely considered it would be found to be nosecurity whatsoever. It was nothing but a direct assertion, or mereconfirmation of the clause which fixed the ratio of taxes andrepresentation. It only meant that the quantum to be raised of eachState should be in proportion to their numbers in the manner thereindirected. But the general government was not precluded from laying theproportion of any particular State on any one species of property theymight think proper. For instance, if five hundred thousand dollarswere to be raised, they might lay the whole of the proportion ofSouthern States on the blacks, or any one species of property: so thatby laying taxes too heavily on slaves, they might totally annihilatethat kind of property. No real security could arise from the clausewhich provides, that persons held to labor in one State, escaping intoanother, shall be delivered up. This only meant, that runaway slavesshould not be protected in other States. As to the exclusion of _expost facto_ laws, it could not be said to create any security in thiscase. For laying a tax on slaves would not be _ex post facto_. 

Mr. Madison replied, that even the Southern States, who were mostaffected, were perfectly satisfied with this provision, and dreaded nodanger to the property they now hold. It appeared to him, that thegeneral government would not intermeddle with that property for twentyyears, but to lay a tax on every slave imported, not exceeding tendollars; and that after the expiration of that period they mightprohibit the traffic altogether. The census in the constitution wasintended to introduce equality in the burdens to be laid on thecommunity. No gentleman objected to laying duties, imposts, andexcises, uniformly. But uniformity of taxes would be subversive to theprinciples of equality: for that it was not possible to select anyarticle which would be easy for one State, but what would be heavy foranother. That the proportion of each State being ascertained, it wouldbe raised by the general government in the most convenient manner forthe people, and not by the selection of any one particular object. That there must be some decree of confidence put in agents, or else wemust reject a state of civil society altogether. Another greatsecurity to this property, which he mentioned, was, that five Stateswere greatly interested in that species of property, and there wereother States which had some slaves, and had made no attempt, or takenany step to take them from the people. There were a few slaves in NewYork, New Jersey and Connecticut: these States could, probably, opposeany attempts to annihilate this species of property. He concluded, byobserving, that he would be glad to leave the decision of this to thecommittee. 

The second section was then read as follows:

 * * * * *

No person held to service or labor in one State, under the lawsthereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law orregulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, butshall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service orlabor may be due. 

Mr. George Mason. --Mr. Chairman, on some former part of theinvestigation of this subject, gentlemen were pleased to make someobservations on the security of property coming within this section. It was then said, and I now say, that there is no security, nor havegentlemen convinced me of this. 

Mr. Henry. Among ten thousand implied powers which they may assume, they may, if we be engaged in war, liberate every one of your slavesif they please. And this must and will be done by men, a majority ofwhom have not a common interest with you. They will, therefore, haveno feeling for your interests. It has been repeatedly said here, thatthe great object of a national government, was national defence. Thatpower which is said to be intended for security and safety, may berendered detestable and oppressive. If you give power to the generalgovernment to provide for the general defence, the means must becommensurate to the end. All the means in the possession of the peoplemust be given to the government which is entrusted with the publicdefence. In this State there are 236, 000 blacks, and there are many inseveral other States. But there are few or none in the NorthernStates, and yet if the Northern States shall be of opinion, that ournumbers are numberless, they may call forth every national resource. May Congress not say, that every black man must fight? Did we not seea little of this last war? We were not so hard pushed, as to makeemancipation general. But acts of assembly passed, that every slavewho would go to the army should be free. Another thing will contributeto bring this event about--slavery is detested--we feel its fataleffects--we deplore it with all the pity of humanity. Let all theseconsiderations, at some future period, press with full force on theminds of Congress. Let that urbanity, which I trust will distinguishAmerica, and the necessity of national defence, let all these thingsoperate on their minds, they will search that paper, and see if theyhave power of manumission. And have they not, sir? Have they not powerto provide for the general defence and welfare? May they not thinkthat these call for the abolition of slavery? May not they pronounceall slaves free, and will they not be warranted by that power? Thereis no ambiguous implication or logical deduction. The paper speaks tothe point. They have the power in clear, unequivocal terms; and willclearly and certainly exercise it. As much as I deplore slavery, Isee that prudence forbids its abolition. I deny that the generalgovernment ought to set them free, because a decided majority of theStates have not the ties of sympathy and fellow-feeling for thosewhose interest would be affected by their emancipation. The majorityof Congress is to the North, and the slaves are to the South. In thissituation, I see a great deal of the property of the people ofVirginia in jeopardy, and their peace and tranquillity gone away. Irepeat it again, that it would rejoice my very soul, that every one ofmy fellow-beings was emancipated. As we ought with gratitude toadmire that decree of Heaven, which has numbered us among the free, weought to lament and deplore the necessity of holding our fellow-men inbondage. But is it practicable by any human means, to liberate them, without producing the most dreadful and ruinous consequences? We oughtto possess them in the manner we have inherited them from ourancestors, as their manumission is incompatible with the felicity ofthe country. But we ought to soften, as much as possible, the rigor oftheir unhappy fate. I know that in a variety of particular instances, the legislature, listening to complaints, have admitted theiremancipation. Let me not dwell on this subject. I will only add, thatthis, as well as every other property of the people of Virginia, is injeopardy, and put in the hands of those who have no similarity ofsituation with us. This is a local matter, and I can see no proprietyin subjecting it to Congress. 

Have we not a right to say, _hear our propositions_? Why, sir, yourslaves have a right to make their humble requests. --Those who are inthe meanest occupations of human life, have a right to complain. 

Gov. Randolph said, that honorable gentleman, and some others, haveinsisted that the abolition of slavery will result from it, and at thesame time have complained, that it encourages its continuation. Theinconsistency proves in some degree, the futility of their arguments. But if it be not conclusive, to satisfy the committee that there is nodanger of enfranchisement taking place, I beg leave to refer them tothe paper itself. I hope that there is none here, who, considering thesubject in the calm light of philosophy, will advance an objectiondishonorable to Virginia; that at the moment they are securing therights of their citizens, an objection is started that there is aspark of hope, that those unfortunate men now held in bondage, may, bythe operation of the general government, be made _free_. But if anygentleman be terrified by this apprehension, let him read the system. I ask, and I will ask again and again, till I be answered (not bydeclamation) where is the part that has a tendency to the abolition ofslavery? Is it the clause which says, that "the migration orimportation of such persons as any of the States now existing, shallthink proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by Congress prior tothe year 1808?" This is an exception from the power of regulatingcommerce, and the restriction is only to continue till 1808. ThenCongress can, by the exercise of that power, prevent futureimportations; but does it affect the existing state of slavery? Wereit right here to mention what passed in convention on the occasion, Imight tell you that the Southern States, even South Carolina herself, conceived this property to be secure by these words. I believe, whatever we may think here, that there was not a member of theVirginia delegation who had the smallest suspicion of the abolition ofslavery. Go to their meaning. Point out the clause where thisformidable power of emancipation is inserted. But another clause ofthe Constitution proves the absurdity of the supposition. The words ofthe clause are, "No person held to service or labor in our State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequenceof any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service orlabor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom suchservice or labor may be due. " Every one knows that slaves are held toservice and labor. And when authority is given to owners of slaves tovindicate their property, can it be supposed they can be deprived ofit? If a citizen of this State, in consequence of this clause, cantake his runaway slave in Maryland, can it be seriously thought, thatafter taking him and bringing him home, he could be made free?

I observed that the honorable gentleman's proposition comes in a trulyquestionable shape, and is still more extraordinary and unaccountablefor another consideration; that although we went article by articlethrough the Constitution, and although we did not expect a generalreview of the subject, (as a most comprehensive view had been taken ofit before it was regularly debated, ) yet we are carried back to theclause giving that dreadful power, for the general welfare. Pardon meif I remind you of the true state of that business. I appeal to thecandor of the honorable gentleman, and if he thinks it an improperappeal, I ask the gentlemen here, whether there be a generalindefinite power of providing for the general welfare? The power is, "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay thedebts and provide for the common defence and general welfare. " So thatthey can only raise money by these means, in order to provide for thegeneral welfare. No man who reads it can say it is general as thehonorable gentleman represents it. You must violate every rule ofconstruction and common sense, if you sever it from the power ofraising money and annex it to any thing else, in order to make it thatformidable power which it is represented to be. 

Mr. George Mason. Mr. Chairman, with respect to commerce andnavigation, he has given it as his opinion, that their regulation, asit now stands, was a _sine qua non_ of the Union, and that without it, the States in convention would never concur. I differ from him. Itnever was, nor in my opinion ever will be, a _sine qua non_ of theUnion. I will give you, to the best of my recollection, the history ofthat affair. This business was discussed at Philadelphia for fourmonths, during which time the subject of commerce and navigation wasoften under consideration; and I assert, that eight States out oftwelve, for more than three months, voted for requiring two-thirds ofthe members present in each house to pass commercial and navigationlaws. True it is, that afterwards it was carried by a majority, as itstands. If I am right, there was a great majority for requiringtwo-thirds of the States in this business, till a compromise tookplace between the Northern and Southern States; the Northern Statesagreeing to the temporary importation of slaves, and the SouthernStates conceding, in return, that navigation and commercial lawsshould be on the footing on which they now stand. If I am mistaken, let me be put right. These are my reasons for saying that this wasnot a _sine qua non_ of their concurrence. The Newfoundland fisherieswill require that kind of security which we are now in want of. TheEastern States therefore agreed at length, that treaties shouldrequire the consent of two-thirds of the members present in thesenate. 

Mr. Madison said--

I was struck with surprise when I heard him express himself alarmedwith respect to the emancipation of slaves. Let me ask, if they shouldeven attempt it, if it will not be an usurpation of power? There is nopower to warrant it, in that paper. If there be, I know it not. Butwhy should it be done? Says the honorable gentleman, for the generalwelfare--it will infuse strength into our system. Can any member ofthis committee suppose, that it will increase our strength? Can anyone believe, that the American councils will come into a measure whichwill strip them of their property, discourage and alienate theaffections of five-thirteenths of the Union? Why was nothing of thissort aimed at before? I believe such an idea never entered into anAmerican breast, nor do I believe it ever will, unless it will enterinto the heads of those gentlemen who substitute unsupportedsuspicious for reasons. 

Mr. Henry. He asked me where was the power of emancipating slaves? Isay it will be implied, unless implication be prohibited. He admitsthat the power of granting passports will be in the new congresswithout the insertion of this restriction--yet he can show me nothinglike such a power granted in that constitution. Notwithstanding headmits their right to this power by implication, he says that I amunfair and uncandid in my deduction, that they can emancipate ourslaves, though the word emancipation is not mentioned in it. They canexercise power by implication in one instance, as well as in another. Thus, by the gentleman's own argument, they can exercise the powerthough it not be delegated. 

Mr. Z. Johnson. They tell us that they see a progressive danger ofbringing about emancipation. The principle has begun since therevolution. Let us do what we will, it will come round. Slavery hasbeen the foundation of that impiety and dissipation, which have beenso much disseminated among our countrymen. If it were totallyabolished, it would do much good. 

 * * * * *

NORTH CAROLINA CONVENTION. 

The first three clauses of the second section read. 

Mr. Goudy. Mr. Chairman, this clause of taxation will give anadvantage to some States over others. It will be oppressive to theSouthern States. Taxes are equal to our representation. To augmentour taxes and increase our burthens, our negroes are to berepresented. If a State has fifty thousand negroes, she is to send onerepresentative for them. I wish not to be represented with negroes, especially if it increases my burthens. 

Mr. Davie. Mr. Chairman, I will endeavor to obviate what thegentleman last up has said. I wonder to see gentlemen so precipitateand hasty on the subject of such awful importance. It ought to beconsidered, that _some_ of _us_ are slow of apprehension, not havingthose quick conceptions, and luminous understandings, of which othergentlemen may be possessed. The gentleman "does not wish to berepresented with negroes. " This, sir, is an unhappy species ofpopulation, but we cannot at present alter their situation. TheEastern States had great jealousies on this subject. They insistedthat their cows and horses were equally entitled to representation;that the one was property as well as the other. It became our duty onthe other hand, to acquire as much weight as possible in thelegislation of the Union; and as the Northern States were morepopulous in whites, this only could be done by insisting that acertain proportion of our slaves should make a part of the computedpopulation. It was attempted to form a rule of representation from acompound ratio of wealth and population; but, on consideration, it wasfound impracticable to determine the comparative value of lands, andother property, in so extensive a territory, with any degree ofaccuracy; and population alone was adopted as the only practicablerule or criterion of representation. It was urged by the deputies ofthe Eastern States, that a representation of two-fifths would be oflittle utility, and that their entire representation would be unequaland burthensome. That in a time of war, slaves rendered a country morevulnerable, while its defence devolved upon its _free_ inhabitants. Onthe other hand, we insisted, that in time of peace they contributed bytheir labor to the general wealth as well as other members of thecommunity. That as rational beings they had a right of representation, and in some instances might be highly useful in war. On theseprinciples, the Eastern States gave the matter up, and consented tothe regulation as it has been read. I hope these reasons will appearsatisfactory. It is the same rule or principle which was proposed someyears ago by Congress, and assented to by twelve of the States. It maywound the delicacy of the gentleman from Guilford, [Mr. Goudy, ] but Ihope he will endeavor to accommodate his feelings to the interests andcircumstances of his country. 

Mr. James Galloway said, that he did not object to the representationof negroes, so much as he did to the fewness of the number ofrepresentatives. He was surprised how we came to have but five, including those intended to represent negroes. That in his humbleopinion North Carolina was entitled to that number independent of thenegroes. 

First clause of the 9th section read. 

Mr. J. M'Dowall wished to hear the reasons of this restriction. 

Mr. Spaight answered that there was a contest between the Northern andSouthern States--that the Southern States, whose principal supportdepended on the labor of slaves, would not consent to the desire ofthe Northern States to exclude the importation of slaves absolutely. That South Carolina and Georgia insisted on this clause, as they werenow in want of hands to cultivate their lands: That in the course oftwenty years they would be fully supplied: That the trade would beabolished then, and that in the mean time some tax or duty might belaid on. 

Mr. M'Dowall replied, that the explanation was just such as heexpected, and by no means satisfactory to him and that he looked uponit as a very objectionable part of the system. 

Mr. Iredell. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express sentiments similar tothose of the gentleman from Craven. For my part, were it practicableto put an end to the importation of slaves immediately, it would giveme the greatest pleasure, for it certainly is a trade utterlyinconsistent with the rights of humanity, and under which greatcruelties have been exercised. When the entire abolition of slaverytakes place, it will be an event which must be pleasing to everygenerous mind, and every friend of human nature; but we often wish forthings which are not attainable. It was the wish of a great majorityof the Convention to put an end to the trade immediately, but theStates of South Carolina and Georgia would not agree to it. Considerthen what would be the difference between our present situation inthis respect, if we do not agree to the Constitution, and what it willbe if we do agree to it. If we do not agree to it, do we remedy theevil? No, sir, we do not; for if the constitution be not adopted, itwill be in the power of every State to continue it forever. They mayor may not abolish it at their discretion. But if we adopt theconstitution, the trade must cease after twenty years, if congressdeclare so, whether particular States please so or not: surely, then, we gain by it. This was the utmost that could be obtained. I heartilywish more could have been done. But as it is, this government is noblydistinguished above others by that very provision. Where is thereanother country in which such a restriction prevails? We, therefore, sir, set an example of humanity by providing for the abolition of thisinhuman traffic, though at a distant period. I hope, therefore, thatthis part of the constitution will not be condemned because it has notstipulated for what it was impracticable to obtain. 

Mr. Spaight further explained the clause. That the limitation of thistrade to the term of twenty years, was a compromise between theEastern States and the Southern States. South Carolina and Georgiawished to extend the term. The Eastern States insisted on the entireabolition of the trade. That the State of North Carolina had notthought proper to pass any law prohibiting the importation of slaves, and therefore its delegation in the convention did not thinkthemselves authorized to contend for an immediate prohibition of it. 

Mr. Iredell added to what he had said before, that the States ofGeorgia and South Carolina had lost a great many slaves during thewar, and that they wished to supply the loss. 

Mr. Galloway. Mr. Chairman, the explanation given to this clause doesnot satisfy my mind. I wish to see this abominable trade put an end to. But in case it be thought proper to continue this abominable trafficfor twenty years, yet I do not wish to see the tax on the importationextended to all persons whatsoever. Our situation is different fromthe people to the North. We want citizens; they do not. Instead oflaying a tax, we ought to give a bounty, to encourage foreigners tocome among us. With respect to the abolition of slavery, it requiresthe utmost consideration. The property of the Southern States consistsprincipally of slaves. If they mean to do away slavery altogether, this property will be destroyed. I apprehend it means to bring forwardmanumission. If we must manumit our slaves, what country shall we sendthem to? It is impossible for us to be happy if, after manumission, they are to stay among us. 

Mr. Iredell. Mr. Chairman, the worthy gentleman, I believe, hasmisunderstood this clause, which runs in the following words: "Themigration or importation of such persons as any of the States nowexisting, shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by theCongress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on_such importation_, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. "

Now, sir, observe that the Eastern States, who long ago have abolishedslavery, did not approve of the expression _slaves_; they thereforeused another that answered the same purpose. The committee willobserve the distinction between the two words migration andimportation. The first part of the clause will extend to persons whocome into the country as free people, or are brought as slaves, butthe last part extends to slaves only. The word _migration_ refers tofree persons; but the word _importation_ refers to slaves, becausefree people cannot be said to be imported. The tax, therefore, is onlyto be laid on slaves who are imported, and not on free persons whomigrate. I further beg leave to say, that this gentleman is mistakenin another thing. He seems to say that this extends to the abolitionof slavery. Is there anything in this constitution which says thatCongress shall have it in their power to abolish the slavery of thoseslaves who are now in the country? Is it not the plain meaning of it, that after twenty years they may prevent the future importation ofslaves? It does not extend to those now in the country. There isanother circumstance to be observed. There is no authority vested incongress to restrain the States in the interval of twenty years, fromdoing what they please. If they wish to inhibit such importation, theymay do so. Our next assembly may put an entire end to the importationof slaves. 

Article fourth. The first section and two first clauses of the secondsection read without observation. 

The last clause read--

Mr. Iredell begged leave to explain the reason of this clause. In someof the Northern States, they have emancipated all their slaves. If anyof our slaves, said he, go there and remain there a certain time, theycould, by the present laws, be entitled to their freedom, so thattheir masters could not get them again. This would be extremelyprejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern States, and to preventit, this clause is inserted in the constitution. Though the word slavebe not mentioned, this is the meaning of it. The Northern delegates, owing to their particular scruples on the subject of slavery, did notchoose the word _slave_ to be mentioned. 

The rest of the fourth article read without any observation. 

 * * * * *

It is however to be observed, (said Mr. Iredell, ) that the first andfourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article, areprotected from any alteration till the year 1808; and in order that noconsolidation should take place, it is provided, that no State shall, by any amendment or alteration, be ever deprived of an equal suffragein the Senate without its own consent. The two first prohibitions arewith respect to the census, according to which direct taxes areimposed, and with respect to the importation of slaves. As to thefirst, it must be observed, that there is a material differencebetween the Northern and Southern States. The Northern States havebeen much longer settled, and are much fuller of people than theSouthern, but have not land in equal proportion, nor scarcely anyslaves. The subject of this article was regulated with greatdifficulty, and by a spirit of concession which it would not beprudent to disturb for a good many years. In twenty years there willprobably be a great alteration, and then the subject may be consideredwith less difficulty and greater coolness. In the mean time, thecompromise was upon the best footing that could be obtained. Acompromise likewise took place with regard to the importation ofslaves. It is probable that all the members reprobated this inhumantraffic, but those of South Carolina and Georgia would not consent toan immediate prohibition of it; one reason of which was, that duringthe last war they lost a vast number of negroes, which loss they wishto supply. In the mean time, it is left to the States to admit orprohibit the importation, and Congress may impose a limited duty uponit. 

 * * * * *

SOUTH CAROLINA CONVENTION. 

Hon. Rawlins Lowndes. In the first place, what cause was there forjealousy of our importing negroes? Why confine us to twenty years, orrather why limit us at all? For his part he thought this trade couldbe justified on the principles of religion, humanity, and justice; forcertainly to translate a set of human beings from a bad country to abetter, was fulfilling every part of these principles. But they don'tlike our slaves, because they have none themselves; and therefore wantto exclude us from this great advantage; why should the SouthernStates allow of this, without the consent of nine States?

Judge Pendleton observed, that only three States, Georgia, SouthCarolina, and North Carolina, allowed the importation of negroes. Virginia had a clause in her constitution for this purpose, andMaryland, he believed, even before the war, prohibited them. 

Mr. Lowndes continued--that we had a law prohibiting the importationof negroes for three years, a law he greatly approved of; but therewas no reason offered, why the Southern States might not find itnecessary to alter their conduct, and open their ports. Withoutnegroes this State would degenerate into one of the most contemptiblein the Union: and cited an expression that fell from Gen. Pinckney ona former debate, that whilst there remained one acre of swamp land inSouth Carolina he should raise his voice against restricting theimportation of negroes. Even in granting the importation for twentyyears, care had been taken to make us pay for this indulgence, eachnegro being liable, on importation, to pay a duty not exceeding tendollars, and, in addition this, were liable to a capitation tax. Negroes were our wealth, our only natural resource; yet behold how ourkind friends in the North were determined soon to tie up our hands, and drain us of what we had. The Eastern States drew their means ofsubsistence, in a great treasure, from their shipping; and on thathead, they had been particularly careful not to allow of any burdens:they were not to pay tonnage, or duties; no, not even the form ofclearing out: all ports were free and open to them! Why, then, callthis a reciprocal bargain, which took all from one party, to bestow iton the other?

Major Butler observed that they were to pay a five per cent impost. This, Mr. Lowndes proved, must fall upon the consumer. They are to bethe carriers: and we, being the consumers, therefore all expenseswould fall upon us. 

Hon. E. Rutledge. The gentleman had complained of the inequality ofthe taxes between the Northern and Southern States--that ten dollars ahead was imposed on the importation of negroes, and that those negroeswere afterwards taxed. To this it was answered, that the ten dollarsper head was an equivalent to the five per cent on imported articles;and as to their being afterwards taxed, the advantage is on our side;or, at least, not against us. 

In the Northern State, the labor is performed by white people; in theSouthern by black. All the free people (and there are few others) inthe Northern States, are to be taxed by the new constitution whereas, only the free people, and two-fifths of the slaves in the SouthernStates are to be rated in the apportioning of taxes. 

But the principal objection is, that no duties are laid onshipping--that in fact the carrying trade was to be vested in a greatmeasure in the Americans; that the ship-building business wasprincipally carried on in the Northern States. When this subject isduly considered, the Southern States, should be the last to object toit. Mr. Rutledge then went into a consideration of the subject; afterwhich the House adjourned. 

Gen. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney. We were at a loss for some time fora rule to ascertain the proportionate wealth of the States, at last wethought that the productive labor of the inhabitants was the best rulefor ascertaining their wealth; in conformity to this rule, joined to aspirit of concession, we determined that representatives should beapportioned among the several States, by adding to the whole number offree persons three-fifths of the slaves. We thus obtained arepresentation for our property, and I confess I did not expect thatwe had conceded too much to the Eastern States, when they allowed us arepresentation for a species of property which they have not amongthem. 

The honorable gentleman alleges, that the Southern States are weak, Isincerely agree with him--we are so weak that by ourselves we couldnot form an union strong enough for the purpose of effectuallyprotecting each other. Without union with the other States, SouthCarolina must soon fall. Is there any one among us so much a Quixotteas to suppose that this State could long maintain her independence ifshe stood alone, or was only connected with the Southern States? Iscarcely believe there is. Let an invading power send a naval forceinto the Chesapeake to keep Virginia in alarm, and attack SouthCarolina with such a naval and military force as Sir Henry Clintonbrought here in 1780, and though they might not soon conquer us, theywould certainly do us an infinite deal of mischief; and if theyconsiderably increased their numbers, we should probably fall. As, from the nature of our climate, and the fewness of our inhabitants, weare undoubtedly weak, should we not endeavor to form a close unionwith the Eastern States, who are strong?

For who have been the greatest sufferers in the Union, by ourobtaining, our independence? I answer, the Eastern States; they havelost every thing but their country, and their freedom. It is notoriousthat some ports to the Eastward, which used to fit out one hundred andfifty sail of vessels, do not now fit out thirty; that their trade ofship-building, which used to be very considerable, is now annihilated;that their fisheries are trifling, and their mariners in want ofbread; surely we are called upon by every tie of justice, friendships, and humanity, to relieve their distresses; and as by their exertionsthey have assisted us in establishing our freedom, we should let them, in some measure, partake of our prosperity. The General then said hewould make a few observations on the objections which the gentlemanhad thrown out on the restrictions that might be laid on the Africantrade after the year 1808. On this point your delegates had to contendwith the religious and political prejudices of the Eastern and MiddleStates, and with the interested and inconsistent opinion of Virginia, who was warmly opposed to our importing more slaves. I am of the sameopinion now as I was two years ago, when I used the expressions thatthe gentleman has quoted, that while there remained one acre of swampland uncleared of South Carolina, I would raise my voice againstrestricting the importation of negroes. I am as thoroughly convincedas that gentleman is, that the nature of our climate, and the flatswampy situation of our country, obliges us to cultivate our land withnegroes, and that without them South Carolina would soon be a desertwaste. 

You have so frequently heard my sentiments on this subject that I neednot now repeat them. It was alleged, by some of the members whoopposed an unlimited importation, that slaves increased the weaknessof any State who admitted them; that they were a dangerous species ofproperty, which an invading enemy could easily turn against ourselvesand the neighboring States, and that as we were allowed arepresentation for them in the House of Representatives, our influencein government would be increased in proportion as we were less able todefend ourselves. "Show some period, " said the members from theEastern States, "when it may be in our power to put a stop, if weplease, to the importation of this weakness, and we will endeavor, foryour convenience, to restrain the religious and political prejudicesof our people on this subject. "

The Middle States and Virginia made us no such proposition; they werefor an immediate and total prohibition. We endeavored to obviate theobjections that were made, in the best manner we could, and assignedreasons for our insisting on the importation, which there is nooccasion to repeat, as they must occur to every gentleman in theHouse: a committee of the States was appointed in order to accommodatethis matter, and after a great deal of difficulty, it was settled onthe footing recited in the Constitution. 

By this settlement we have secured an unlimited importation of negroesfor twenty years; nor is it declared that the importation shall bethen stopped; it may be continued--we have a security that the generalgovernment can never emancipate them, for no such authority isgranted, and it is admitted on all hands, that the general governmenthas no powers but what are expressly granted by the constitution; andthat all rights not expressed were reserved by the several States. Wehave obtained a right to recover our slaves, in whatever part ofAmerica they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. Inshort, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms, forthe security of this species of property, it was in our power to make. We would have made better if we could, but on the whole I do not thinkthem bad. 

Hon. Robert Barnwell. Mr. Barnwell continued to say, I now come to thelast point for consideration, I mean the clause relative to thenegroes; and here I am particularly pleased with the Constitution; ithas not left this matter of so much importance to us open to immediateinvestigation; no, it has declared that the United States shall not, at any rate, consider this matter for twenty-one years, and yetgentlemen are displeased with it. 

Congress has guaranteed this right for that space of time, and at itsexpiration may continue it as long as they please. This question thenarises, what will their interest lead them to do? The Eastern States, as the honorable gentleman says, will become the carriers of America, it will, therefore certainly be their interest to encourageexportation to as great an extent as possible; and if the quantum ofour products will be diminished by the prohibition of negroes, Iappeal to the belief of every man, whether he thinks those verycarriers will themselves dam up the resources from whence their profitis derived? To think so is so contradictory to the general conduct ofmankind, that I am of opinion, that without we ourselves put a stop tothem, the traffic for negroes will continue forever. 

 * * * * *

FEDERALIST, No. 42. 

BY JAMES MADISON

It were doubtless to be wished, that the power of prohibiting theimportation of slaves, had not been postponed until the year 1808, orrather that it had been suffered to have immediate operation. But itis not difficult to account either for this restriction on the generalgovernment, or for the manner in which the whole clause is expressed. 

It ought to be considered as a great point gained in favor ofhumanity, that a period of twenty years may terminate for ever withinthese States, a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided thebarbarism of modern policy; that within that period, it will receive aconsiderable discouragement from the Federal government, and may betotally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continuethe unnatural traffic, in the prohibitory example which has been givenby so great a majority of the Union. Happy would it be for theunfortunate Africans, if an equal prospect lay before them, of beingredeemed from the oppressions of their European brethern! Attemptshave been made to pervert this clause into an objection against theConstitution, by representing it on one side, as a criminal tolerationof an illicit practice; and on another, as calculated to preventvoluntary and beneficial emigrations from Europe to America. I mentionthese misconstructions, not with a view to give them an answer, forthey deserve none; but as specimens of the manner and spirit, in whichsome have thought fit to conduct their opposition to the proposedgovernment. 

 * * * * *

FEDERALIST, No. 54. 

BY JAMES MADISON. 

All this is admitted, it will perhaps be said: but does it follow froman admission of numbers for the measure of representation, or ofslaves combined with free citizens as a ratio of taxation, that slavesought to be included in the numerical rule of representation?

Slaves are considered as property, not as persons. They oughttherefore, to be comprehended in estimates of taxation, which arefounded on property, and to be excluded from representation, which isregulated by a census of persons. This is the objection as Iunderstand it, stated in its full force. I shall be equally candid instating the reasoning which may be offered on the opposite side. Wesubscribe to the doctrine, might one of our Southern brethern observe, that representation relates more immediately to persons, and taxationmore immediately to property; and we join in the application of thisdistinction to the case of our slaves. 

But we must deny the fact, that slaves are considered merely asproperty, and in no respect whatever as persons. The true state of thecase is, that they partake of both these qualities, being consideredby our laws, in some respects as persons, and in other respects asproperty. 

In being compelled to labor, not for himself, but for a master; inbeing vendible by one master to another master; and in being subjectat all times to be restrained in his liberty: and chastised in hisbody by the capricious will of another; the slave may appear to bedegraded from the human rank, and classed with those irrationalanimals which fall under the legal denomination of property. In beingprotected, on the other hand, in his life, and in his limbs, againstthe violence of all others, even the master of his labor and hisliberty; and in being punishable himself for all violence committedagainst others; the slave is no less evidently regarded by the law asa member of the society, not as a part of the irrational creation; asa moral person, not as a mere article of property. The Federalconstitution, therefore, decides with great propriety on the case ofour slaves, when it views them in the mixed character of persons andproperty. This is in fact their true character. It is the characterbestowed on them by the laws under which they live, and it will not bedenied, that these are the proper criterion; because it is only underthe pretext, that the laws have transformed the negroes into subjectsof property, that a place is disputed them in the computation ofnumbers; and it is admitted, that if the laws were to restore therights which have been taken away, the negroes could no longer berefused an equal share of representation with the other inhabitants. 

This question may be placed in another light. It is agreed on allsides, that numbers are the best scale of wealth and taxation, as theyare the only proper scale of representation. Would the convention havebeen impartial or consistent, if they had rejected the slaves from thelist of inhabitants, when the shares of representation were to becalculated; and inserted them on the lists when the tariff ofcontributions was to be adjusted?

Could it be reasonably expected, that the Southern States would concurin a system, which considered their slaves in some degree as men, whenburdens were to be imposed, but refused to consider them in the samelight, when advantages were to be conferred?

Might not some surprise also be expressed, that those who reproach theSouthern States with the, barbarous policy of considering as propertya part of their human brethern, should themselves contend, that thegovernment to which all the States are to be parties, ought toconsider this unfortunate race more completely in the unnatural lightof property, than the very laws of which they complain?

It may be replied, perhaps, that slaves are not included in theestimate of representatives in any of the States possessing them. Theyneither vote themselves, nor increase the votes of their masters. Uponwhat principle, then, ought they to be taken into the Federal estimateof representation? In rejecting them altogether, the constitutionwould, in this respect, have followed the very laws which have beenappealed to as the proper guide. 

This objection is repelled by a single observation. It is afundamental principle of the proposed constitution, that as theaggregate number of representatives allotted to the several States isto be determined by a Federal rule, founded on the aggregate number ofinhabitants; so, the right of choosing this allotted number in eachState, is to be exercised by such part of the inhabitants, as theState itself may designate. The qualifications of which the right ofsuffrage depends, are not perhaps the same in any two States. In someof the States the difference is very material. In every State, acertain proportion of inhabitants are deprived of this right by theconstitution of the State, who will be included in the census by whichthe Federal constitution apportions the representatives. In this pointof view, the Southern States might retort the complaint, by insisting, that the principle laid down by the convention required that no regardshould be had to the policy of particular States towards their owninhabitants; and consequently, that the slaves, as inhabitants, shouldhave been admitted into the census according to their full number, inlike manner with other inhabitants, who, by the policy of otherStates, are not admitted to all the rights of citizens. A rigorousadherence, however, to this principle is waived by those who would begainers by it. All that they ask, is that equal moderation be shown onthe other side. Let the case of the slaves be considered, as it is intruth, a peculiar one. Let the compromising expedient of theconstitution be annually adopted, which regards them as inhabitants, but as debased by servitude below the equal level of free inhabitants, which regards the _slave_ as divested of two-fifths of the _man_. 

DEBATES IN FIRST CONGRESS, MAY 13, 1789. 

Mr. Parker (of Va. ) moved to insert a clause in the bill, imposing aduty on the importation of slaves of ten dollars each person. He wassorry that the constitution prevented Congress from prohibiting theimportation altogether; he thought it a defect in that instrument thatit allowed of such actions, it was contrary to the revolutionprinciples, and ought not to be permitted; but as he could not do allthe good he desired, he was willing to do what lay in his power. Hehoped such a duty as he moved for would prevent, in some degree, thisirrational and inhuman traffic; if so, he should feel happy from thesuccess of his motion. 

Mr. Smith (of South Carolina, ) hoped that such an important andserious proposition as this would not be hastily adopted; it was avery late moment for the introduction of new subjects. He expected thecommittee had got through the business, and would rise withoutdiscussing any thing further; at least, if gentlemen were determinedon considering the present motion, he hoped they would delay for a fewdays, in order to give time for an examination of the subject. It wascertainly a matter big with the most serious consequences to the Statehe represented; he did not think any one thing that had been discussedwas so important to them, and the welfare of the Union, as thequestion now brought forward, but he was not prepared to enter on anyargument, and therefore requested the motion might either be withdrawnor laid on the table. 

Mr. Sherman (of Ct. ) approved of the object of the motion, but he didnot think this bill was proper to embrace the subject. He could notreconcile himself to the insertion of human beings as an article ofduty, among goods, wares and merchandise. He hoped it would bewithdrawn for the present, and taken up hereafter as an independentsubject. 

Mr. Jackson, (of Geo. ) observing the quarter from which this motioncame, said it did not surprise him, though it might have that effecton others. He recollected that Virginia was an old settled State, andhad her complement of slaves, so she was careless of recruiting hernumbers by this means; the natural increase of her imported blackswere sufficient for their purpose; but he thought gentlemen ought tolet their neighbors get supplied before they imposed such a burthenupon the importation. He knew this business was viewed in an odiouslight to the Eastward, because the people were capable of doing theirown work, and had no occasion for slaves; but gentlemen will have somefeeling for others; they will not try to throw all the weight uponothers, who have assisted in lightening their burdens; they do notwish to charge us for every comfort and enjoyment of life, and at thesame time take away the means of procuring them; they do not wish tobreak us down at once. 

He was convinced, from the inaptitude of the motion, and the want oftime to consider it, that the candor of the gentleman would induce himto withdraw it for the present; and if ever it came forward again, hehoped it would comprehend the white slaves as well as black, who wereimported from all the goals of Europe; wretches, convicted of the mostflagrant crimes, were brought in and sold without any duty whatever. He thought that they ought to be taxed equal to the Africans, and hadno doubt but the constitutionality and propriety of such a measure wasequally apparent as the one proposed. 

Mr. Tucker (of S. C. ) thought it unfair to bring in such an importantsubject at the time when debate was almost precluded. The committeehad gone through the impost bill, and the whole Union were impatientlyexpecting the result of their deliberations, the public must bedisappointed and much revenue lost, or this question cannot undergothat full discussion which it deserves. 

We have no right, said he, to consider whether the importation ofslaves is proper or not; the Constitution gives us no power on thatpoint, it is left to the States to judge of that matter as they seefit. But if it was a business the gentleman was determined todiscourage, he ought to have brought his motion forward sooner, andeven then not have introduced it without previous notice. He hoped thecommittee would reject the motion, if it was not withdrawn; he was notspeaking so much for the State he represented, as for Georgia, becausethe State of South Carolina had a prohibitory law, which could berenewed when its limitation expired. 

Mr. Parker (of Va. , ) had ventured to introduce the subject after fulldeliberation, and did not like to withdraw it. Although the gentlemanfrom Connecticut (Mr. Sherman) had said, that they ought not to beenumerated with goods, wares, and merchandise, he believed they werelooked upon by the African traders in this light, he knew it wasdegrading the human species to annex that character to them; but hewould rather do this than continue the actual evil of importing slavesa moment longer. He hoped Congress would do all that lay in theirpower to restore to human nature its inherent privileges, and ifpossible wipe off the stigma which America laboured under. Theinconsistency in our principles, with which we are justly charged, should be done away; that we may shew by our actions the purebeneficence of the doctrine we held out to the world in ourdeclaration of independence. 

Mr. Sherman (of Ct. , ) thought the principles of the motion and theprinciples of the bill were inconsistent; the principle of the billwas to raise revenue, the principle of the motion to correct a moralevil. Now, considering it as an object of revenue, it would be unjust, because two or three States would bear the whole burthen, while hebelieved they bore their full proportion of all the rest. He wasagainst receiving the motion into this bill, though he had noobjection to taking it up by itself, on the principles of humanity andpolicy; and therefore would vote against it if it was not withdrawn. 

Mr. Ames (of Mass. , ) joined the gentleman last up. No one couldsuppose him favorable to slavery, he detested it from his soul, but hehad some doubts whether imposing a duty on the importation, would nothave the appearance of countenancing the practice; it was certainly asubject of some delicacy, and no one appeared to be prepared for thediscussion, he therefore hoped the motion would be withdrawn. 

Mr. Livermore. Was not against the principle of the motion, but in thepresent case he conceived it improper. If negroes were goods, wares, or merchandise, they came within the title of the bill; if they werenot, the bill would be inconsistent: but if they are goods, wares ormerchandise, the 5 per cent ad valorum, will embrace the importation;and the duty of 5 per cent is nearly equal to 10 dollars per head, sothere is no occasion to add it even on the score of revenue. 

Mr. Jackson (of Ga. , ) said it was the fashion of the day, to favor theliberty of slaves; he would not go into a discussion of the subject, but he believed it was capable of demonstration that they were betteroff in their present situation, than they would be if they weremanumitted; what are they to do if they are discharged? Work for aliving? Experience has shewn us they will not. Examine what is becomeof those in Maryland, many of them have been set free in that State;did they turn themselves to industry and useful pursuits? No, theyturn out common pickpockets, petty larceny villains; and is thismercy, forsooth, to turn them into a way in which they must lose theirlives, --for where they are thrown upon the world, void of property andconnections, they cannot get their living but by pilfering. What is tobe done for compensation? Will Virginia set all her negroes free? Willthey give up the money they cost them, and to whom? When this practicecomes to be tried there, the sound of liberty will lose those charmswhich make it grateful to the ravished ear. 

But our slaves are not in a worse situation than they were on thecoast of Africa; it is not uncommon there for the parents to selltheir children in peace; and in war the whole are taken and madeslaves together. In these cases it is only a change of one slavery foranother; and are they not better here, where they have a master boundby the ties of interest and law to provide for their support andcomfort in old age, or infirmity, in which, if they were free, theywould sink under the pressure of woe for want of assistance. 

He would say nothing of the partiality of such a tax, it was admittedby the avowed friends of the measure; Georgia in particular would beoppressed. On this account it would be the most odious tax Congresscould impose. 

Mr. Schureman (of N. J. ) hoped the gentleman would withdraw his motion, because the present was not the time or place for introducing thebusiness; he thought it had better be brought forward in the House, asa distinct proposition. If the gentleman persisted in having thequestion determined, he would move the previous question if he wassupported. 

Mr. Madison, (of Va. ) I cannot concur with gentlemen who think thepresent an improper time or place to enter into a discussion of theproposed motion; if it is taken up in a separate view, we shall do thesame thing at a greater expense of time. But the gentlemen say that itis improper to connect the two objects, because they do not comewithin the title of the bill. But this objection may be obviated byaccommodating the title to the contents; there may be someinconsistency in combining the ideas which gentlemen have expressed, that is, considering the human race as a species of property; but theevil does not arise from adopting the clause now proposed, it is fromthe importation to which it relates. Our object in enumerating personson paper with merchandise, is to prevent the practice of actuallytreating them as such, by having them, in future, forming part of thecargoes of goods, wares, and merchandise to be imported into theUnited States. The motion is calculated to avoid the very evilintimated by the gentleman. It has been said that this tax will bepartial and oppressive; but suppose a fair view is taken of thissubject, I think we may form a different conclusion. But if it bepartial or oppressive, are there not many instances in which we havelaid taxes of this nature? Yet are they not thought to be justified bynational policy? If any article is warranted on this account, how muchmore are we authorized to proceed on this occasion? The dictates ofhumanity, the principles of the people, the national safety andhappiness, and prudent policy requires it of us; the constitution hasparticularly called our attention to it--and of all the articlescontained in the bill before us, this is one of the last I should bewilling to make a concession upon so far as I was at liberty to go, according to the terms of the constitution or principles of justice--Iwould not have it understood that my zeal would carry me to disobeythe inviolable commands of either. 

I understood it had been intimated, that the motion was inconsistentor unconstitutional. I believe, sir, my worthy colleague has formedthe words with a particular reference to the constitution; any how, sofar as the duty is expressed, it perfectly accords with thatinstrument; if there are any inconsistencies in it, they may berectified; I believe the intention is well understood, but I am farfrom supposing the diction improper. If the description of the personsdoes not accord with the ideas of the gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. Jackson, ) and his idea is a proper one for the committee to adopt, Isee no difficulty in changing the phraseology. 

I conceive the constitution, in this particular, was formed in orderthat the government, whilst it was restrained from laying a totalprohibition, might be able to give some testimony of the sense ofAmerica, with respect to the African trade. We have liberty to imposea tax or duty upon the importation of such persons as any of theStates now existing shall think proper to admit; and this liberty wasgranted, I presume, upon two considerations--the first was, that untilthe time arrived when they might abolish the importation of slaves, they might have an opportunity of evidencing their sentiments, on thepolicy and humanity of such a trade; the other was that they might betaxed in due proportion with other articles imported; for if thepossessor will consider them as property, of course they are of valueand ought to be paid for. If gentlemen are apprehensive of oppressionfrom the weight of the tax, let them make an estimate of itsproportion, and they will find that it very little exceeds five percent, ad valorem, so that they will gain very little by having themthrown into that mass of articles, whilst by selecting them in themanner proposed, we shall fulfil the prevailing expectation of ourfellow citizens, and perform our duty in executing the purposes of theconstitution. It is to be hoped that by expressing a nationaldisapprobation of this trade, we may destroy it, and save ourselvesfrom reproaches, and our posterity the imbecility ever attendant on acountry filled with slaves. 

I do not wish to say any thing harsh, to the hearing of gentlemen whoentertain different sentiments from me, or different sentiments fromthose I represent; but if there is any one point in which it isclearly the policy of this nation, so far as we constitutionally can, to vary the practice obtaining under some of the State governments, itis this; but it is certain a majority of the States are opposed tothis practice, therefore, upon principle, we ought to discountenanceit as far as is in our power. 

If I was not afraid of being told that the representatives of theseveral States, are the best able to judge of what is proper andconducive to their particular prosperity, I should venture to say thatit is as much the interest of Georgia and South Carolina, as of any inthe Union. Every addition they receive to their number of slaves, tends to weaken them and renders them less capable of self defence. Incase of hostilities with foreign nations, they will be the means ofinviting attack instead of repelling invasion. It is a necessary dutyof the general government to protect every part of the empire againstdanger, as well internal as external; every thing therefore whichtends to increase this danger, though it may be a local affair, yet ifit involves national expense or safety, becomes of concern to everypart of the Union, and is a proper subject for the consideration ofthose charged with the general administration of the government. Ihope, in making these observations, I shall not be understood to meanthat a proper attention ought not to be paid to the local opinions andcircumstances of any part of the United States, or that the particularrepresentatives are not best able to judge of the sense of theirimmediate constituents. 

If we examine the proposal measure by the agreement there is betweenit, and the existing State laws, it will show us that it is patronizedby a very respectable part of the Union. I am informed that SouthCarolina has prohibited the importation of slaves for several yearsyet to come; we have the satisfaction then of reflecting that we donothing more than their own laws do at this moment. This is not thecase with one State. I am sorry that her situation is such as to seemto require a population of this nature, but it is impossible in thenature of things, to consult the national good without doing what wedo not wish to do, to some particular part. Perhaps gentlemen contendagainst the introduction of the clause, on too slight grounds. If itdoes not conform with the title of the bill, alter the latter; if itdoes not conform to the precise terms of the constitution, amend it. But if it will tend to delay the whole bill, that perhaps will be thebest reason for making it the object of a separate one. If this is thesense of the committee I shall submit. 

Mr. Gerry (of Mass. ) thought all duties ought to be laid as equal aspossible. He had endeavored to enforce this principle yesterday, butwithout the success he wished for, he was bound by the principles ofjustice therefore to vote for the proposition; but if the committeewere desirous of considering the subject fully by itself, he had noobjection, but he thought when gentlemen laid down a principle, theyought to support it generally. 

Mr. Burke (of S. C. ) said, gentlemen were contending for nothing; thatthe value of a slave averaged about £80, and the duty on that sum atfive per cent, would be ten dollars, as congress could go no fartherthan that sum, he conceived it made not difference whether they wereenumerated or left in the common mass. 

Mr. Madison, (of Va. ) If we contend for nothing, the gentlemen who areopposed to us do not contend for a great deal; but the question is, whether the five percent ad valorem, on all articles imported, willhave any operation at all upon the introduction of slaves, unless wemake a particular enumeration on this account; the collector maymistake, for he would not presume to apply the term goods, wares, andmerchandise to any person whatsoever. But if that general definitionof goods, wares, and merchandise are supposed to include AfricanSlaves, why may we not particularly enumerate them, and lay the dutypointed out by the Constitution, which, as gentlemen tell us, is nomore than five per cent upon their value; this will not increase theburden upon any, but it will be that manifestation of our sense, expected by our constituents, and demanded by justice and humanity. 

Mr. Bland (of Va. ) had no doubt of the propriety or good policy ofthis measure. He had made up his mind upon it, he wished slaves hadnever been introduced into America; but if it was impossible at thistime to cure the evil, he was very willing to join in any measuresthat would prevent its extending farther. He had some doubts whetherthe prohibitory laws of the States were not in part repealed. Thosewho had endeavored to discountenance this trade, by laying a duty onthe importation, were prevented by the Constitution from continuingsuch regulation, which declares, that no State shall lay any impost orduties on imports. If this was the case, and he suspected prettystrongly that it was, the necessity of adopting the proposition of hiscolleague was not apparent. 

Mr. Sherman (of Ct. ) said, the Constitution does not consider thesepersons as a species of property; it speaks of them as persons, andsays, that a tax or duty may be imposed on the importation of theminto any State which shall permit the same, but they have no power toprohibit such importation for twenty years. But Congress have power todeclare upon what terms persons coming into the United States shall beentitled to citizenship; the rule of naturalization must however beuniform. He was convinced there were others ought to be regulated inthis particular, the importation of whom was of an evil tendency, hemeant convicts particularly. He thought that some regulationrespecting them was also proper; but it being a different subject, itought to be taken up in a different manner. 

Mr. Madison (of Va. ) was led to believe, from the observation that hadfell from the gentlemen, that it would be best to make this thesubject of a distinct bill: he therefore wished his colleague wouldwithdraw his motion, and move in the house for leave to bring in abill on the same principles. 

Mr. Parker (of Va. ) consented to withdraw his motion, under aconviction that the house was fully satisfied of its propriety. Heknew very well that these persons were neither goods, nor wares, butthey were treated as articles of merchandise. Although he wished toget rid of this part of his property, yet he should not consent todeprive other people of theirs by any act of his without theirconsent. 

The committee rose, reported progress, and the house adjourned. 

FEBRUARY 11th, 1790. 

Mr. Lawrance (of New York, ) presented an address from the society ofFriends, in the City of New York; in which they set forth their desireof co-operating with their Southern brethren. 

Mr. Hartley (of Penn. ) then moved to refer the address of the annualassembly of Friends, held at Philadelphia, to a committee; he thoughtit a mark of respect due so numerous and respectable a part of thecommunity. 

Mr. White (of Va. ) seconded the motion. 

Mr. Smith, (of S. C. ) However respectable the petitioners may be, Ihope gentlemen will consider that others equally respectable areopposed to the object which is aimed at, and are entitled to anopportunity of being heard before the question is determined. Iflatter myself gentlemen will not press the point of commitmentto-day, it being contrary to our usual mode of procedure. 

Mr. Fitzsimons, (of Penn. ) If we were now about to determine the finalquestion, the observation of the gentleman from South Carolina wouldapply; but, sir, the present question does not touch upon the meritsof the case; it is merely to refer the memorial to a committee, toconsider what is proper to be done; gentlemen, therefore, who do notmean to oppose the commitment to-morrow, may as well agree to itto-day, because it will tend to save the time of the house. 

Mr. Jackson (of Geo. ) wished to know why the second reading was to becontended for to-day, when it was diverting the attention of themembers from the great object that was before the committee of thewhole? Is it because the feelings of the Friends will be hurt, to havetheir affair conducted in the usual course of business? Gentlemen whoadvocate the second reading to-day, should respect the feelings of themembers who represent that part of the Union which is principally tobe affected by the measure. I believe, sir, that the latter classconsists of as useful and as good citizens as the petitioners, menequally friends to the revolution, and equally susceptible of therefined sensations of humanity and benevolence. Why then should suchparticular attention be paid to them, for bringing forward a businessof questionable policy? If Congress are disposed to interfere in theimportation of slaves, they can take the subject up without advisers, because the Constitution expressly mentions all the power they canexercise on the subject. 

Mr. Sherman (of Conn. ) suggested the idea of referring it to acommittee, to consist of a member from each State, because severalStates had already made some regulations on this subject. The soonerthe subject was taken up he thought it would be the better. 

Mr. Parker, (of Va. ) I hope, Mr. Speaker, the petition of theserespectable people, will be attended to with all the readiness theimportance of its object demands: and I cannot help expressing thepleasure I feel in finding so considerable a part of the communityattending to matters of such momentous concern to the futureprosperity and happiness of the people of America. I think it my duty, as a citizen of the Union, to espouse their cause; and it is incumbentupon every member of this house to sift the subject well, andascertain what can be done to restrain a practice so nefarious. TheConstitution has authorized as to levy a tax upon the importation ofsuch persons as the States shall authorize to be admitted. I wouldwillingly go to that extent; and if any thing further can be devisedto discountenance the trade, consistent with the terms of theConstitution, I shall cheerfully give it my assent and support. 

Mr. Madison, (of Va. ) The gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Fitzsimons) has put this question on its proper ground. If gentlemendo not mean to oppose the commitment to-morrow, they may as wellacquiesce in it to-day; and I apprehend gentlemen need not be alarmedat any measure it is likely Congress should take; because they willrecollect, that the Constitution secures to the individual States theright of admitting, if they think proper, the importation of slavesinto their own territory, for eighteen years yet unexpired; subject, however, to a tax, if Congress are disposed to impose it, of not morethan ten dollars on each person. 

The petition, if I mistake not, speaks of artifices used byself-interested persons to carry on this trade; and the petition fromNew York states a case, that may require the consideration ofCongress. If anything is within the Federal authority to restrain suchviolation of the rights of nations, and of mankind, as is supposed tobe practised in some parts of the United States it will certainly tendto the interest and honor of the community to attempt a remedy, and isa proper subject for our discussion. It may be, that foreigners takethe advantage of the liberty afforded them by the American trade, toemploy our shipping in the slave trade between Africa and the WestIndies, when they are restrained from employing their own byrestrictive laws of their nation. If this is the case, is there anyperson of humanity that would not wish to prevent them? Anotherconsideration why we should commit the petition is, that we may giveno ground of alarm by a serious opposition, as if we were about totake measures that were unconstitutional. 

Mr. Stone (of Md. ) feared that if Congress took any measures, indicative of an intention to interfere with the kind of propertyalluded to, it would sink it in value very considerably, and might beinjurious to a great number of the citizens, particularly in theSouthern States. 

He thought the subject was of general concern, and that thepetitioners had no more right to interfere with it than any othermembers of the community. It was an unfortunate circumstance, that itwas the property of sects to imagine they understood the rights ofhuman nature letter than all the world beside; and that they would, inconsequence, be meddling with concerns in which they had nothing todo. 

As the petition relates to a subject of a general nature, it ought tolie on the table, as information; he would never consent to referpetitions, unless the petitioners were exclusively interested. Supposethere was a petition to come before us from a society, praying us tobe honest in our transactions, or that we should administer theConstitution according to its intention--what would you do with apetition of this kind? Certainly it would remain on your table. Hewould, nevertheless, not have it supposed, that the people had not aright to advise and give their opinion upon public measures; but hewould not be influenced by that advice or opinion, to take up asubject sooner than the convenience of other business would admit. Unless he changed his sentiments, he would oppose the commitment. 

Mr. Burke (of S. C. ) thought gentlemen were paying attention to whatdid not deserve it. The men in the gallery had come here to meddle ina business with which they have nothing to do; they were volunteeringit in the cause of others, who neither expected nor desired it. He hada respect for the body of Quakers, but, nevertheless, he did notbelieve they had more virtue, or religion, than other people, norperhaps so much, if they were examined to the bottom, notwithstandingtheir outward pretences. If their petition is to be noticed, Congressought to wait till counter applications were made, and then they mighthave the subject more fairly before them. The rights of the SouthernStates ought not to be threatened, and their property endangered, toplease people who were to be unaffected by the consequences. 

Mr. Hartley (of Penn. ) thought the memorialists did not deserve to beaspersed for their conduct, if influenced by motives of benignity, they solicited the Legislature of the Union to repel, as far as intheir power, the increase of a licentious traffic. Nor do they meritcensure, because their behavior has the appearance of more moralitythan other people's. But it is not for Congress to refuse to hear theapplications of their fellow-citizens, while those applicationscontain nothing unconstitutional or offensive. What is the object ofthe address before us? It is intended to bring before this House asubject of great importance to the cause of humanity; there arecertain facts to be enquired into, and the memorialists are ready togive all the information in their power; they are waiting, at a greatdistance from their homes, and wish to return; if, then, it will beproper to commit the petition to-morrow, it will be equally properto-day, for it is conformable to our practice, beside, it will tend totheir conveniency. 

Mr. Lawrance, (of N. Y. ) The Gentleman from South Carolina says, thepetitioners are of a society not known in the laws or Constitution. Sir, in all our acts, as well as in the Constitution, we have noticedthis Society; or why is it that we admit them to affirm, in caseswhere others are called upon to swear? If we pay this attention tothem, in one instance, what good reason is there for condemning themin another? I think the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Stone, ) carrieshis apprehensions too far, when he fears that negro-property will fallin value, by the suppression of the slave-trade: not that I suppose itimmediately in the power of Congress to abolish a traffic which is adisgrace to human nature; but it appears to me, that, if theimportation was crushed, the value of a slave would be increasedinstead of diminished; however, considerations of this kind havenothing to do with the present question; gentlemen may acquiesce inthe commitment of the memorial, without pledging themselves to supportits object. 

Mr. Jackson, (of Ga. ) I differ much in opinion with the gentleman lastup. I apprehend if, through the interference of the generalgovernment, the slave-trade was abolished, it would evince to thepeople a disposition toward a total emancipation, and they would holdtheir property in jeopardy. Any extraordinary attention of Congress tothis petition may have, in some degree, a similar effect. I would begto ask those, then, who are so desirous of freeing the negroes, ifthey have funds sufficient to pay for them? If they have, they maycome forward on that business with some propriety; but, if they havenot, they should keep themselves quiet, and not interfere with abusiness in which they are not interested. They may as well comeforward, and solicit Congress to interdict the West-India trade, because it is injurious to the morals of mankind; from thence weimport rum, which has a debasing influence upon the consumer. But, sir, is the whole morality of the United States confined to theQuakers? Are they the only people whose feelings are to be consultedon this occasion? Is it to them we owe our present happiness? Was itthey who formed the Constitution? Did they, by their arms, orcontributions, establish our independence? I believe they weregenerally opposed to that measure. Why, then, on their application, shall we injure men, who, at the risk of their lives and fortunes, secured to the community their liberty and property? If Congress payany uncommon degree of attention to their petition, it will furnishjust ground of alarm to the Southern States. But, why do these men setthemselves up, in such a particular manner, against slavery? Do theyunderstand the rights of mankind, and the disposition of Providencebetter than others? If they were to consult that Book which claims ourregard, they will find that slavery is not only allowed, butcommended. Their Saviour, who possessed more benevolence andcommiseration than they pretend to, has allowed of it. And if theyfully examine the subject, they will find that slavery has been nonovel doctrine since the days of Cain. But be these things as theymay, I hope the house will order the petition to lie on the table, inorder to prevent alarming our Southern brethren. 

Mr. Sedgwick, (of Mass. ) If it was a serious question, whether theMemorial should be committed or not, I would not urge it at this time;but that cannot be a question for a moment, if we consider ourrelative situation with the people. A number of men, --who arecertainly very respectable, and of whom, as a society, it may be saidwith truth, that they conform their moral conduct to their religioustenets, as much as any people in the whole community, --come forwardand tell you, that you may effect two objects by the exercise of aConstitutional authority which will give great satisfaction; on theone hand you may acquire revenue, and on the other, restrain apractice productive of great evil. Now, setting aside the religiousmotives which influenced their application, have they not a right, ascitizens, to give their opinion of public measures? For my part I donot apprehend that any State, or any considerable number ofindividuals in any State, will be seriously alarmed at the commitmentof the petition, from a fear that Congress intend to exercise anunconstitutional authority, in order to violate their rights; Ibelieve there is not a wish of the kind entertained by any member ofthis body. How can gentlemen hesitate then to pay that respect to amemorial which it is entitled to, according to the ordinary mode ofprocedure in business? Why shall we defer doing that till to-morrow, which we can do to-day? for the result, I apprehend, will be the samein either case. 

Mr. Smith, (of S. C. ) The question, I apprehend, is, whether we willtake the petition up for a second reading, and not whether it shall becommitted? Now, I oppose this, because it is contrary to our usualpractice, and does not allow gentlemen time to consider of the meritsof the prayer; perhaps some gentlemen may think it improper to commitit to so large a committee as has been mentioned; a variety of causesmay be supposed to show that such a hasty decision is improper;perhaps the prayer of it is improper. If I understood it right, on itsfirst reading, though, to be sure, I did not comprehend perfectly allthat the petition contained, it prays that we should take measures forthe abolition of the slave trade; this is desiring an unconstitutionalact, because the constitution secures that trade to the States, independent of congressional restrictions, for the term of twenty-oneyears. If, therefore, it prays for a violation of constitutionalrights, it ought to be rejected, as an attempt upon the virtue andpatriotism of the house. 

Mr. Boudinot, (of N. J. ) It has been said that the Quakers have noright to interfere in this business; I am surprised to hear thisdoctrine advanced, after it has been so lately contended, and settled, that the people have a right to assemble and petition for redress ofgrievances; it is not because the petition comes from the society ofQuakers that I am in favor of the commitment, but because it comesfrom citizens of the United States, who are as equally concerned inthe welfare and happiness of their country as others. There certainlyis no foundation for the apprehensions which seem to prevail ingentlemen's minds. If the petitioners were so uninformed as to supposethat congress could be guilty of a violation of the constitution, yet, I trust we know our duty better than to be led astray by anapplication from any man, or set of men whatever. I do not considerthe merits of the main question to be before us; it will be timeenough to give our opinions upon that, when the committee havereported. If it is in our power, by recommendation, or any other way, to put a stop to the slave-trade in America, I do not doubt of itspolicy; but how far the constitution will authorize us to attempt todepress it, will be a question well worthy of our consideration. 

Mr. Sherman (of Conn. ) observed, that the petitioners from New York, stated that they had applied to the legislature of that State, toprohibit certain practices which they conceived to be improper, andwhich tended to injure the well-being of the community; that thelegislature had considered the application, but had applied no remedy, because they supposed that power was exclusively vested in the generalgovernment, under the constitution of the United States; it would, therefore, be proper to commit that petition, in order to ascertainwhat were the powers of the general government, in the case doubted bythe legislature of New York. 

Mr. Gerry (of Mass. ) thought gentlemen were out of order in enteringupon the merits of the main question at this time, when they wereconsidering the expediency of committing the petition; he should, therefore, now follow them further in that track than barely toobserve, that it was the right of the citizens to apply for redress, in every case they conceived themselves aggrieved in; and it was theduty of congress to afford redress as far as in their power. Thattheir Southern brethren had been betrayed into the slave-trade by thefirst settlers, was to be lamented; they were not to be reflected onfor not viewing this subject in a different light, the prejudice ofeducation is eradicated with difficulty; but he thought nothing wouldexcuse the general government for not exerting itself to prevent, asfar as they constitutionally could, the evils resulting from suchenormities as were alluded to by the petitioners; and the sameconsiderations induced him highly to commend the part the society ofFriends had taken; it was the cause of humanity they had interestedthemselves in, and he wished, with them, to see measures pursued byevery nation, to wipe off the indelible stain which the slave-tradehad brought upon all who were concerned in it. 

Mr. Madison (of Va. ) thought the question before the committee was nootherwise important than as gentlemen made it so by their seriousopposition. Did they permit the commitment of the Memorial, as amatter of course, no notice would be taken of it out of doors; itcould never be blown up into a decision of the question respecting thediscouragement of the African slave-trade, nor alarm the owners withan apprehension that the general government were about to abolishslavery in all the States; such things are not contemplated by anygentleman; but, to appearance, they decide the question more againstthemselves than would be the case if it was determined on its realmerits, because gentlemen may be disposed to vote for the commitmentof a petition, without any intention of supporting the prayer of it. 

Mr. White (of Va. ) would not have seconded the motion, if he hadthought it would have brought on a lengthy debate. He conceived that abusiness of this kind ought to be decided without much discussion; ithad constantly been the practice of the house, and he did not supposethere was any reason for a deviation. 

Mr. Page (of Va. ) said, if the memorial had been presented by anyindividual, instead of the respectable body it was, he should havevoted in favor of a commitment, because it was the duty of thelegislature to attend to subjects brought before them by theirconstituents; if, upon inquiry, it was discovered to be improper tocomply with the prayer of the petitioners, he would say so, and theywould be satisfied. 

Mr. Stone (of Md. ) thought the business ought to be left to take itsusual course; by the rules of the house, it was expressly declared, that petitions, memorials, and other papers, addressed to the house, should not be debated or decided on the day they were first read. 

Mr. Baldwin (of Ga. ) felt at a loss to account why precipitation wasused on this occasion, contrary to the customary usage of the house;he had not heard a single reason advanced in favor of it. To be sureit was said the petitioners are a respectable body of men--he did notdeny it--but, certainly, gentlemen did not suppose they were payingrespect to them, or to the house, when they urged such a hastyprocedure; anyhow it was contrary to his idea of respect, and the ideathe house had always expressed, when they had important subjects underconsideration; and, therefore, he should be against the motion. He wasafraid that there was really a little volunteering in this business, as it had been termed by the gentleman from Georgia. 

Mr. Huntington (of Conn. ) considered the petitioners as muchdisinterested as any person in the United States; he was persuadedthey had an aversion to slavery; yet they were not singular in this, others had the same; and he hoped when congress took up the subject, they would go as far as possible to prohibit the evil complained of. But he thought that would better be done by considering it in thelight of revenue. When the committee of the whole, on the financebusiness, came to the ways and means, it might properly be taken intoconsideration, without giving any ground for alarm. 

Mr. Tucker, (of S. C. ) I have no doubt on my mind respecting what oughtto be done on this occasion; so far from committing the memorial, weought to dismiss it without further notice. What is the purport of thememorial? It is plainly this; to reprobate a particular kind ofcommerce, in a moral view, and to request the interposition ofcongress to effect its abrogation. But congress have no authority, under the constitution, to do more than lay a duty of ten dollars uponeach person imported; and this is a political consideration, notarising from either religion or morality, and is the only principleupon which we can proceed to take it up. But what effect do these mensuppose will arise from their exertions? Will a duty of ten dollarsdiminish the importation? Will the treatment be better than usual? Iapprehend it will not, nay, it may be worse. Because an interferencewith the subject may excite a great degree of restlessness in theminds of those it is intended to serve, and that may be a cause forthe masters to use more rigor towards them, than they would otherwiseexert; so that these men seem to overshoot their object. But if theywill endeavor to procure the abolition of the slave-trade, let themprefer their petitions to the State legislatures, who alone have thepower of forbidding the importation; I believe their applicationsthere would be improper; but if they are any where proper, it isthere. I look upon the address then to be ill-judged, however good theintention of the framers. 

Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) claimed it as a right, that the petition shouldlay over till to-morrow. 

Mr. Boudinor (of N. J. ) said it was not unusual to commit petitions onthe day they were presented; and the rules of the house admitted thepractice, by the qualification which followed the positive order, thatpetitions should not be decided on the day they were first read, "unless where the house shall direct otherwise. "

Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) declared his intention of calling the yeas andnays, if gentlemen persisted in pressing the question. 

Mr. Clymer (of Penn. ) hoped the motion would be withdrawn for thepresent, and the business taken up in course to-morrow; because, though he respected the memorialists, he also respected order and thesituation of the members. 

Mr. Fitzsimons (of Penn. ) did not recollect whether he moved orseconded the motion, but if he had, he should not withdraw it onaccount of the threat of calling the yeas and nays. 

Mr. Baldwin (of Ga. ) hoped the business would be conducted with temperand moderation, and that gentlemen would concede and pass the subjectover a day at least. 

Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) had no idea of holding out a threat to anygentleman. If the declaration of an intention to call the yeas andnays was viewed by gentlemen in that light, he would withdraw thatcall. 

Mr. White (of Va. ) hereupon withdrew his motion. And the address wasordered to lie on the table. 

FEBRUARY 12th, 1790. 

The following memorial was presented and read:

"To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States: TheMemorial of the Pennsylvania Society for promoting the abolition ofslavery, the relief of free negroes unlawfully held in bondage, andthe improvement of the condition of the African race, respectfullyshoweth: That from a regard for the happiness of mankind, anassociation was formed several years since in this State, by a numberof her citizens, of various religious denominations, for promoting theabolition of slavery, and for the relief of those unlawfully held inbondage. A just and acute conception of the true principles ofliberty, as it spread through the land, produced accessions to theirnumbers, many friends to their cause, and a legislative co-operationwith their views, which, by the blessing of Divine Providence, havebeen successfully directed to the relieving from bondage a largenumber of their fellow creatures of the African race. They have alsothe satisfaction to observe, that, in consequence of that spirit ofphilanthropy and genuine liberty which is generally diffusing itsbeneficial influence, similar institutions are forming at home andabroad. That mankind are all formed by the same Almighty Being, alikeobjects of his care, and equally designed for the enjoyment ofhappiness, the Christian religion teaches us to believe, and thepolitical creed of Americans fully coincides with the position. Yourmemorialists, particularly engaged in attending to the distressesarising from slavery, believe it their indispensable duty to presentthis subject to your notice. They have observed with realsatisfaction, that many important and salutary powers are vested inyou for 'promoting the welfare and securing the blessings of libertyto the people of the United States;' and as they conceive, that theseblessings ought rightfully to be administered, without distinction ofcolor, to all descriptions of people, so they indulge themselves inthe pleasing expectation, that nothing which can be done for therelief of the unhappy objects of their care, will be either omitted ordelayed. From a persuasion that equal liberty was originally theportion, and is still the birth-right of all men, and influenced bythe strong ties of humanity and the principles of their institution, your memorialists conceived themselves bound to use all justifiableendeavors to loosen the bands of slavery, and promote a generalenjoyment of the blessings of freedom. Under these impressions, theyearnestly entreat your serious attention to the subject of slavery;that you will be pleased to countenance the restoration of liberty tothose unhappy men, who alone, in this land of freedom, are degradedinto perpetual bondage, and who, amidst the general joy of surroundingfreemen, are groaning in servile subjection; that you will devisemeans for removing this inconsistency from the character of theAmerican people; that you will promote mercy and justice towards thisdistressed race, and that you will step to the very verge of the powervested in you, for discouraging every species of traffic in thepersons of our fellow-men. 

"BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, _President_. 

"PHILADELPHIA, _February_ 3, 1790. "

Mr. Hartley (of Penn. ) then called up the memorial presentedyesterday, from the annual meeting of Friends at Philadelphia, for asecond reading; whereupon the same was read a second time, and movedto be committed. 

Mr. Tucker (of S. C. ) was sorry the petition had a second reading as heconceived it contained an unconstitutional request, and from thatconsideration he wished it thrown aside. He feared the commitment ofit would be a very alarming circumstance to the Southern States; forif the object was to engage Congress in an unconstitutional measure, it would be considered as an interference with their rights, thepeople would become very uneasy under the government, and lament thatthey ever put additional powers into their hands. He was surprised tosee another memorial on the same subject and that signed by a man whoought to have known the constitution better. He thought it amischievous attempt, as it respected the persons in whose favor it wasintended. It would buoy them up with hopes, without a foundation, andas they could not reason on the subject, as more enlightened menwould, they might be led to do what they would be punished for, andthe owners of them, in their own defence, would be compelled toexercise over them a severity they were not accustomed to. Do thesemen expect a general emancipation of slaves by law? This would neverbe submitted to by the Southern States without a civil war. Do theymean to purchase their freedom? He believed their money would fallshort of the price. But how is it they are more concerned in thisbusiness than others? Are they the only persons who possess religionand morality? If the people are not so exemplary, certainly they willadmit the clergy are; why then do we not find them uniting in a body, praying us to adopt measures for the promotion of religion and piety, or any moral object? They know it would be an improper interference;and to say the best of this memorial, it is an act of imprudence, which he hoped would receive no countenance from the house. 

Mr. Seney (of Md. ) denied that there was anything unconstitutional inthe memorial, at least, if there was, it had escaped his attention, and he should be obliged to the gentleman to point it out. Its onlyobject was, that congress should exercise their constitutionalauthority, to abate the horrors of slavery, as far as they could:Indeed, he considered that all altercation on the subject ofcommitment was at an end, as the house had impliedly determinedyesterday that it should be committed. 

Mr. Burke (of S. C. ) saw the disposition of the house, and he feared itwould be refered to a committee, maugre all their opposition; but hemust insist that it prayed for an unconstitutional measure. Did it notdesire congress to interfere and abolish the slave-trade, while theconstitution expressly stipulated that congress should exercise nosuch power? He was certain the commitment would sound in alarm, andblow the trumpet of sedition in the Southern States. He was sorry tosee the petitioners paid more attention to than the constitution;however, he would do his duty, and oppose the business totally; and ifit was referred to a committee, as mentioned yesterday, consisting ofa member from each State, and he was appointed, he would declineserving. 

Mr. Scott, (of Penn. ) I can't entertain a doubt but the memorial dutyparticularly assigned to us by that instrument, and I hope we may beinclined to take it into consideration. We can, at present, lay ourhands upon a small duty of ten dollars. I would take this, and if itis all we can do, we must be content. But I am sorry that the framersof the constitution did not go farther and enable us to interdict itfor good and all; for I look upon the slave-trade to be one of themost abominable things on earth; and if there was neither God nordevil, I should oppose it upon the principles of humanity and the lawof nature. I cannot, for my part, conceive how any person can be saidto acquire a property in another; is it by virtue of conquest? Whatare the rights of conquest? Some have dared to advance this monstrousprinciple, that the conqueror is absolute master of his conquest; thathe may dispose of it as his property, and treat it as he pleases; butenough of those who reduce men to the state of transferable goods, oruse them like beasts of burden; who deliver them up as the property orpatrimony of another man. Let us argue on principles countenanced byreason and becoming humanity; the petitioners view the subject in areligious light, but I do not stand in need of religious motives toinduce me to reprobate the traffic in human flesh; otherconsiderations weigh with me to support the commitment of thememorial, and to support every constitutional measure likely to bringabout its total abolition. Perhaps, in our legislative capacity, wecan go no further than to impose a duty of ten dollars, but I do notknow how far I might go, if I was one of the judges of the UnitedStates, and those people were to come before me and claim theiremancipation; but I am sure I would go as far as I could. 

Mr. Jackson (of Ga. ) differed with the gentleman last up, and supposedthe master had a qualified property in his slave; he said the contrarydoctrine would go to the destruction of every species of personalservice. The gentleman said he did not stand in need of religion toinduce him to reprobate slavery, but if he is guided by that evidence, which the Christian system is founded upon, he will find that religionis not against it; he will see, from Genesis to Revelation, thecurrent setting strong that way. There never was a government on theface of the earth, but what permitted slavery. The purest sons offreedom in the Grecian republics, the citizens of Athens andLacedaemon all held slaves. On this principle the nations of Europeare associated; it is the basis of the feudal system. But suppose allthis to have been wrong, let me ask the gentleman, if it is policy tobring forward a business at this moment, likely to light up a flame ofcivil discord, for the people of the Southern States will resist onetyranny as soon as another; the other parts of the continent may bearthem down by force of arms, but they will never suffer themselves tobe divested of their property without a struggle. The gentleman says, if he was a federal judge, he does not know to what length he would goin emancipating these people; but, I believe his judgment would be ofshort duration in Georgia; perhaps even the existence of such a judgemight be in danger. 

Mr. Sherman (of Conn. ) could see no difficulty in committing thememorial; because it was probable the committee would understand theirbusiness, and perhaps they might bring in such a report as would besatisfactory to gentlemen on both sides of the House. 

Mr. Baldwin (of Ga. ) was sorry the subject had ever been broughtbefore Congress, because it was a delicate nature, as it respectedsome of the States. Gentlemen who had been present at the formation ofthis Constitution, could not avoid the recollection of the pain anddifficulty which the subject caused in that body; the members from theSouthern States were so tender upon this point, that they had wellnigh broken up without coming to any determination; however, from theextreme desire of preserving the Union, and obtaining an efficientgovernment, they were induced mutually, to concede, and theConstitution jealously guarded what they agreed to. If gentlemen lookover the footsteps of that body, they will find the greatest degree ofcaution used to imprint them, so as not to be easily eradicated; butthe moment we go to jostle on that ground, said he, I fear we shallfeel it tremble under our feet. Congress have no power to interferewith the importation of slaves, beyond what is given in the 9thsection of the first article of the Constitution; every thing else isinterdicted to them in the strongest terms. If we examine theConstitution, we shall find the expressions, relative to this subject, cautiously expressed, and more punctiliously guarded than any otherpart. "The migration or importation of such persons, shall not beprohibited by Congress. " But lest this should not have secured theobject sufficiently, it is declared in the same section, "That nocapitation or direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to thecensus;" this was intended to prevent Congress from laying any specialtax upon negro slaves, as they might, in this way, so burthen thepossessors of them, as to induce a general emancipation. If we go onto the 5th article, we shall find the 1st and 5th clauses of the 9thsection of the 1st article restrained from being altered before theyear 1808. 

Gentlemen have said, that this petition does not pray for an abolitionof the slave-trade; I think, sir, it prays for nothing else, andtherefore we have no more to do with it, than if it prayed us toestablish an order of nobility, or a national religion. 

Mr. Sylvester of (N. Y. ) said that he had always been in the habit ofrespecting the society called Quakers; he respected them for theirexertions in the cause of humanity, but he thought the present was nota time to enter into a consideration of the subject, especially as heconceived it to be a business in the province of the Statelegislature. 

Mr. Lawrance of (of N. Y. ) observed that the subject would undoubtedlycome under the consideration of the House; and he thought, that as itwas now before them, that the present time was as proper as any; hewas therefore for committing the memorial; and when the prayer of ithad been properly examined, they could see how far congress mayconstitutionally interfere; as they knew the limits of their power onthis, as well as on every other occasion, there was no justapprehension to be entertained that they would go beyond them. 

Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) insisted that it was not in the power of the Houseto grant the prayer of the petition, which went to the totalabolishment of the slave trade, and it was therefore unnecessary tocommit it. He observed, that in the Southern States, difficulties hadarisen on adopting the Constitution, inasmuch as it was apprehended, that Congress might take measures under it for abolishing theslave-trade. 

Perhaps the petitioners, when they applied to this house, did notthink their object unconstitutional, but now they are told that it is, they will be satisfied with the answer, and press it no further. Iftheir object had been for Congress to lay a duty of ten dollars perhead on the importation of slaves, they would have said so, but thatdoes not appear to have been the case; the commitment of the petition, on that ground, cannot be contended; if they will not be content withthat, shall it be committed to investigate facts? The petition speaksof none; for what purpose then shall it be committed? If gentlemen canassign no good reason for the measure, they will not support it, whenthey are told that it will create great jealousies and alarm in theSouthern States; for I can assure them, that there is no point onwhich they are more jealous and suspicious, than on a business withwhich they think the government has nothing to do. 

When we entered into this Confederacy, we did it from political, notfrom moral motives, and I do not think my constituents want to learnmorals from the petitioners; I do not believe they want improvement intheir moral system; if they do, they can get it at home. 

The gentleman from Georgia, has justly stated the jealousy of theSouthern States. On entering into this government, they apprehendedthat the other States, not knowing the necessity the citizens of theSouthern States were under to hold this species of property, would, from motives of humanity and benevolence, be led to vote for a generalemancipation; and had they not seen that the Constitution providedagainst the effect of such a disposition, I may be bold to say, theynever would have adopted it. And notwithstanding all the calmness withwhich some gentlemen have viewed the subject, they will find, that thediscussion alone will create great alarm. We have been told, that ifthe discussion will create alarm, we ought to have avoided it, bysaying nothing; but it was not for that purpose that we were senthere, we look upon this measure as an attack upon the palladium of theproperty of our country; it is therefore our duty to oppose it byevery means in our power. Gentlemen should consider that when weentered into a political connexion with the other States, that thisproperty was there; it was acquired under a former government, conformably to the laws and Constitution; therefore anything that willtend to deprive them of that property, must be an _ex post facto_ law, and as such is forbid by our political compact. 

I said the States would never have entered into the confederation, unless their property had been guaranteed to them, for such is thestate of agriculture in that country, that without slaves it must bedepopulated. Why will these people then make use of arguments toinduce the slave to turn his hand against his master? We labor underdifficulties enough from the ravages of the late war. A gentleman canhardly come from that country, with a servant or two, either to thisplace or Philadelphia, but what there are persons trying to seduce hisservants to leave him; and, when they have done this, the poorwretches are obliged to rob their master in order to obtain asubsistence; all those, therefore, who are concerned in thisseduction, are accessaries to the robbery. 

The reproaches which they cast upon the owners of negro property, ischarging them with the want of humanity; I believe the proprietors arepersons of as much humanity as any part of the continent and are asconspicuous for their good morals as their neighbors. It was saidyesterday, that the Quakers were a society known to the laws, and theConstitution, but they are no more so than other religious societies;they stand exactly in the same situation; their memorial, therefore, relates to a matter in which they are no more interested than anyother sect, and can only be considered as a piece of advice; it iscustomary to refer a piece of advice to a committee, but if it issupposed to pray for what they think a moral purpose, is thatsufficient to induce us to commit it? What may appear a moral virtuein their eyes, may not be so in reality. I have heard of a sect ofShaking Quakers, who, I presume, suppose their tenets of a moraltendency; I am informed one of them forbids to intermarry, yet inconsequence of their shakings and concussions, you may see them with anumerous offspring about them. Now, if these people were to petitionCongress to pass a law prohibiting matrimony, I ask, would gentlemenagree to refer such a petition? I think if they would reject one ofthat nature, as improper, they ought also to reject this. 

Mr. Page (of Va. ) was in favor of the commitment; he hoped that thedesigns of the respectable memorialists would not be stopped at thethreshold, in order to preclude a fair discussion of the prayer of thememorial. He observed that gentlemen had founded their arguments upona misrepresentation; for the object of the memorial was not declaredto be the total abolition of the slave trade: but that Congress wouldconsider, whether it be not in reality within their power to exercisejustice and mercy, which, if adhered to, they cannot doubt mustproduce the abolition of the slave trade. If then the prayer containednothing unconstitutional, he trusted the meritorious effort would notbe frustrated. With respect to the alarm that was apprehended, heconjectured there was none; but there might be just cause, if thememorial was not taken into consideration. He placed himself in thecase of a slave, and said, that, on hearing that Congress had refusedto listen to the decent suggestions of a respectable part of thecommunity, he should infer, that the general government (from whichwas expected great good would result to every class of citizens) hadshut their ears against the voice of humanity, and he should despairof any alleviation of the miseries he and his posterity had inprospect; if any thing could induce him to rebel, it must be a strokelike this, impressing on his mind all the horrors of despair. But ifhe was told, that application was made in his behalf, and thatCongress were willing to hear what could be urged in favor ofdiscouraging the practice of importing his fellow-wretches, he wouldtrust in their justice and humanity, and wait the decision patiently. He presumed that these unfortunate people would reason in the sameway; and he, therefore, conceived the most likely way to preventdanger, was to commit the petition. He lived in a State which had themisfortune of having in her bosom a great number of slaves, he heldmany of them himself, and was as much interested in the business, hebelieved, as any gentleman in South Carolina or Georgia, yet, if hewas determined to hold them in eternal bondage, he should feel nouneasiness or alarm on account of the present measure, because heshould rely upon the virtue of Congress, that they would not exerciseany unconstitutional authority. 

Mr. Madison (of Va. ) The debate has taken a serious turn, and it willbe owing to this alone if an alarm is created; for had the memorialbeen treated in the usual way, it would have been considered as amatter of course, and a report might have been made, so as to havegiven general satisfaction. 

If there was the slightest tendency by the commitment to break in uponthe constitution, he would object to it; but he did not see upon whatground such an event was to be apprehended. The petition prayed, ingeneral terms, for the interference of congress, so far as they wereconstitutionally authorized; but even if its prayer was, in somedegree, unconstitutional, it might be committed, as was the case onMr. Churchman's petition, one part of which was supposed to apply foran unconstitutional interference by the general government. 

He admitted that congress was restricted by the constitution fromtaking measures to abolish the slave-trade; yet there were a varietyof ways by which they could countenance the abolition, and they mightmake some regulations respecting the introduction of them into the newStates, to be formed out of the Western Territory, different from whatthey could in the old settled States. He thought the object wellworthy of consideration. 

Mr. Gerry (of Mass. ) thought the interference of congress fullycompatible with the constitution, and could not help lamenting themiseries to which the tribes of Africa were exposed by this inhumancommerce; and said that he never contemplated the subject, withoutreflecting what his own feelings would be, in case himself, hischildren, or friends, were placed in the same deplorablecircumstances. He then adverted to the flagrant acts of cruelty whichare committed in carrying on that traffic; and asked whether it can besupposed, that congress has no power to prevent such transactions? Hethen referred to the constitution, and pointed out the restrictionslaid on the general government respecting the importation of slaves. It was not, he presumed, in the contemplation of any gentleman in thishouse to violate that part of the constitution; but that we have aright to regulate this business, is as clear as that we have anyrights whatever; nor has the contrary been shown by any person who hasspoken on the occasion. Congress can, agreeable to the constitution, lay a duty of ten dollars on imported slaves; they may do thisimmediately. He made a calculation of the value of the slaves in theSouthern States, and supposed they might be worth ten millions ofdollars; congress have a right, if they see proper, to make a proposalto the Southern States to purchase the whole of them, and theirresources in the Western Territory may furnish them with means. He didnot intend to suggest a measure of this kind, he only instanced theseparticulars, to show that congress certainly have a right tointermeddle in the business. He thought that no objection had beenoffered, of any force, to prevent the commitment of the memorial. 

Mr. Boudinot (of N. J. ) had carefully examined the petition, and foundnothing like what was complained of by gentlemen, contained in it; he, therefore, hoped they would withdraw their opposition, and suffer itto be committed. 

Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) said, that as the petitioners had particularlyprayed congress to take measures for the annihilation of the slavetrade, and that was admitted on all hands to be beyond their power, and as the petitioners would not be gratified by a tax of ten dollarsper head, which was all that was within their power, there was, ofconsequence, no occasion for committing it. 

Mr. Stone (of Md. ) thought this memorial a thing of course; for therenever was a society, of any considerable extent, which did notinterfere with the concerns of other people, and this kind ofinterference, whenever it has happened, has never failed to deluge thecountry in blood: on this principle he was opposed to the commitment. 

The question on the commitment being about to be put, the yeas andnays were called for, and are as follows:--

Yeas. --Messrs. Ames, Benson, Boudinot, Brown, Cadwallader, Clymer, Fitzsimons, Floyd, Foster, Gale, Gerry, Gilman, Goodhue, Griffin, Grout, Hartley, Hathorne, Heister, Huntington, Lawrence, Lee, Leonard, Livermore, Madison, Moore, Muhlenberg, Pale, Parker, Partridge, Renssellaer, Schureman, Scott, Sedgwick, Seney, Sherman, Sinnickson, Smith of Maryland, Sturges, Thatcher, Trumbull, Wadsworth, White, andWynkoop--43. 

Noes--Messrs. Baldwin, Bland, Bourke, Coles, Huger, Jackson, Mathews, Sylvester, Smith of S. C. , Stone, and Tucker--11. 

Whereupon it was determined in the affirmative; and on motion, thepetition of the Society of Friends, at New York, and the memorial fromthe Pennsylvania Society, for the abolition of slavery, were alsoreferred to a committee. --LLOYD'S DEBATES. 

_Debate on Committee's Report, March_, 1790. 

ELIOT'S DEBATES. 

Mr. Tucker moved to modify the first paragraph by striking out all thewords after the word opinion, and to insert the following: that theseveral memorials proposed to the consideration of this house, asubject on which its interference would be unconstitutional, and evenits deliberations highly injurious to some of the States in the Union. 

Mr. Jackson rose and observed, that he had been silent on the subjectof the reports coming before the committee, because he wished theprinciples of the resolutions to be examined fairly, and to be decidedon their true grounds. He was against the propositions generally, andwould examine the policy, the justice and the use of them, and hehoped, if he could make them appear in the same light to others asthey did to him by fair argument, that the gentlemen in oppositionwere not so determined in their opinions as not to give up theirpresent sentiments. 

With respect to the policy of the measure, the situation of the slaveshere, their situation in their native States, and the disposal of themin case of emancipation, should be considered. That slavery was anevil habit, he did not mean to controvert; but that habit was alreadyestablished, and there were peculiar situations in countries whichrendered that habit necessary. Such situations the States of SouthCarolina and Georgia were in--large tracts of the most fertile landson the continent remained uncultivated for the want of population. Itwas frequently advanced on the floor of Congress, how unhealthy thoseclimates were, and how impossible it was for northern constitutions toexist there. What, he asked, is to be done with this uncultivatedterritory? Is it to remain a waste? Is the rice trade to be banishedfrom our coasts? Are congress willing to deprive themselves of therevenue arising from that trade, and which is daily increasing, and tothrow this great advantage into the hands of other countries?

Let us examine the use or the benefit of the resolutions contained inthe report. I call upon gentlemen to give me one single instance inwhich they can be of service. They are of no use to congress. Thepowers of that body are already defined, and those powers cannot beamended, confirmed or diminished by ten thousand resolutions. Is notthat the guide and rule of this legislature. A multiplicity of laws isreprobated in any society, and tend but to confound and perplex. Howstrange would a law appear which was to confirm a law; and how muchmore strange must it appear for this body to pass resolutions toconfirm the constitution under which they sit! This is the case withothers of the resolutions. 

A gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Stone) very properly observed, that theUnion had received the different States with all their ill habitsabout them. This was one of these habits established long before theconstitution, and could not now be remedied. He begged congress toreflect on the number on the continent who were opposed to thisconstitution, and on the number which yet remained in the SouthernStates. The violation of this compact they would seize on withavidity; they would make a handle of it to cover their designs againstthe government, and many good federalists, who would be injured by themeasure, would be induced to join them: his heart was truly federal, and it had always been so, and he wished those designs frustrated. Hebegged congress to beware before they went too far: he called on themto attend to the interest of two whole States, as well as to thememorials of a society of quakers, who came forward to blow thetrumpet of sedition, and to destroy that constitution which they hadnot in the least contributed by personal service or supply toestablish. 

He seconded Mr. Tucker's motion. 

Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) said, the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Gerry, ) had declared that it was the opinion of the select committee, of which he was a member, that the memorial of the Pennsylvaniasociety, required congress to violate the constitution. It was notless astonishing to see Dr. Franklin taking the lead in a businesswhich looks so much like a persecution of the Southern inhabitants, when he recollected the parable he had written some time ago, with aview of showing the immorality of one set of men persecuting othersfor a difference of opinion. The parable was to this effect: an oldtraveller, hungry and weary, applied to the patriarch Abraham for anight's lodging. In conversation, Abraham discovered that the strangerdiffered with him on religious points, and turned him out of doors. Inthe night God appeared unto Abraham, and said, where is the stranger?Abraham answered, I found that he did not worship the true God, and soI turned him out of doors. The Almighty thus rebuked the patriarch:have I borne with him three-score and ten years, and couldst thou notbear with him one night? Has the Almighty, said Mr. Smith, borne withus for more than three-score years and ten: He has even made ourcountry opulent, and shed the blessings of affluence and prosperity onour land, notwithstanding all its slaves, and must we now be ruinedon account of the tender consciences of a few scrupulous individualswho differ from us on this point?

Mr. Boudinot agreed with the general doctrines of Mr. S. , but couldnot agree that the clause in the constitution relating to the want ofpower in congress to prohibit the importation of such persons as anyof the States, _now existing_, shall think proper to admit, prior tothe year 1808, and authorizing a tax or duty on such importation notexceeding ten dollars for each person, did not extend to negro slaves. Candor required that he should acknowledge that this was the expressdesign of the constitution, and therefore congress could not interferein prohibiting the importation or promoting the emancipation of them, prior to that period. Mr. Boudinot observed, that he was well informedthat the tax or duty of ten dollars was provided, instead of the fiveper cent. Ad valorem, and was so expressly understood by all partiesin the convention; that therefore it was the interest and duty ofcongress to impose this tax, or it would not be doing justice to theStates, or equalizing the duties throughout the Union. If this wasnot done, merchants might bring their whole capitals into this branchof trade, and save paying any duties whatever. Mr. Boudinot observed, that the gentleman had overlooked the prophecy of St. Peter, where heforetells that among other damnable heresies, "Through covetousnessshall they with feigned words make merchandize of you. "

[NOTE. --This petition, with others of a similar object, was committedto a select committee; that committee made a report; the report wasreferred to a committee of the whole house, and discussed on foursuccessive days; it was then reported to the House with amendments, and by the House ordered to be inscribed in its Journals, and thenlaid on the table. 

That report, as amended in committee, is in the following words: Thecommittee to whom were referred sundry memorials from the peoplecalled Quakers, and also a memorial from the Pennsylvania Society forpromoting the abolition of slavery, submit the following report, (asamended in committee of the whole. )

"First: That the migration or importation of such persons as any ofthe States now existing shall think proper to admit, cannot beprohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808. "

"Secondly: That Congress have no power to interfere in theemancipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them, within any of theStates; it remaining with the several States alone to provide anyregulations therein which humanity and true policy may require. "

"Thirdly: That Congress have authority to restrain the citizens of theUnited States from carrying on the African Slave trade, for thepurpose of supplying foreigners with slaves, and of providing byproper regulations for the humane treatment, during their passage, ofslaves imported by the said citizens into the states admitting suchimportations. "

"Fourthly: That Congress have also authority to prohibit foreignersfrom fitting out vessels in any part of the United States fortransporting persons from Africa to any foreign port. "]

ADDRESS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERYSOCIETY TO THE Friends of Freedom and Emancipation in the UnitedStates. 

At the Tenth Anniversary of the American Anti-Slavery Society, held inthe city of New York, May 7th, 1844, --after grave deliberation, and along and earnest discussion, --it was decided, by a vote of nearlythree to one of the members present, that fidelity to the cause ofhuman freedom, hatred of oppression, sympathy for those who are heldin chains and slavery in this republic, and allegiance to God, requirethat the existing national compact should be instantly dissolved; thatsecession from the government is a religious and political duty; thatthe motto inscribed on the banner of Freedom should be, NO UNION WITHSLAVEHOLDERS; that it is impracticable for tyrants and the enemies oftyranny to coalesce and legislate together for the preservation ofhuman rights, or the promotion of the interests of Liberty; and thatrevolutionary ground should be occupied by all those who abhor thethought of doing evil that good may come, and who do not mean tocompromise the principles of Justice and humanity. 

A decision involving such momentous consequences, so well calculatedto startle the public mind, so hostile to the established order ofthings, demands of us, as the official representatives of theAmerican Society, a statement of the reasons which led to it. This isdue not only to the Society, but also to the country and the world. 

It is declared by the American people to be a self-evident truth, "that all men are created equal; that they are endowed BY THEIRCREATOR with certain inalienable rights; that among these are _life, _LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness. " It is further maintained bythem, that "all governments derive their just powers from the consentof the governed;" that "whenever any form of government becomesdestructive of human rights, it is the right of the people to alter orto abolish it, and institute a new government, laying its foundationon such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to themshall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. " Thesedoctrines the patriots of 1776 sealed with their blood. They wouldnot brook even the menace of oppression. They held that there shouldbe no delay in resisting at whatever cost or peril, the firstencroachments of power on their liberties. Appealing to the greatRuler of the universe for the rectitude of their course, they pledgedto each other "their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, " toconquer or perish in their struggle to be free. 

For the example which they set to all people subjected to a despoticsway, and the sacrifices which they made, their descendants cherishtheir memories with gratitude, reverence their virtues, honor theirdeeds, and glory in their triumphs. 

It is not necessary, therefore, for us to prove that a state ofslavery is incompatible with the dictates of reason and humanity; orthat it is lawful to throw off a government which is at war with thesacred rights of mankind. 

We regard this as indeed a solemn crisis, which requires of every mansobriety of thought, prophetic forecast, independent judgment, invincible determination, and a sound heart. A revolutionary step isone that should not be taken hastily, nor followed under the influenceof impulsive imitation. To know what spirit they are of--whether theyhave counted the cost of the warfare--what are the principles theyadvocate--and how they are to achieve their object--is the first dutyof revolutionists. 

But, while circumspection and prudence are excellent qualities inevery great emergency, they become the allies of tyranny whenever theyrestrain prompt, bold and decisive action against it. 

We charge upon the present national compact, that it was formed at theexpense of human liberty, by a profligate surrender of principle, andto this hour is cemented with human blood. 

We charge upon the American Constitution, that it contains provisions, and enjoins duties, which make it unlawful for freemen to take theoath of allegiance to it, because they are expressly designed to favora slaveholding oligarchy, and consequently, to make one portion of thepeople a prey to another. 

We charge upon the existing national government, that it is aninsupportable despotism, wielded by a power which is superior to alllegal and constitutional restraints--equally indisposed and unable toprotect the lives or liberties of the people--the prop and safeguardof American slavery. 

These charges we proceed briefly to establish:

I. It is admitted by all men of intelligence, --or if it be denied inany quarter, the records of our national history settle the questionbeyond doubt, --that the American Union was effected by a guiltycompromise between the free and slaveholding States; in other words, by immolating the colored population on the altar of slavery, bydepriving the North of equal rights and privileges, and byincorporating the slave system into the government. In the expressiveand pertinent language of scripture, it was "a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell"--null and void before God, from the firsthour of its inception--the framers of which were recreant to duty, andthe supporters of which are equally guilty. 

It was pleaded at the time of the adoption, it is pleaded now, that, without such a compromise there could have been no union; that, without union, the colonies would have become an easy prey to themother country; and, hence, that it was an act of necessity, deplorable indeed when viewed alone, but absolutely indispensable tothe safety of the republic. 

To this see reply: The plea is as profligate as the act wastyrannical. It is the jesuitical doctrine, that the end sanctifies themeans. It is a confession of sin, but the denial of any guilt in itsperpetration. It is at war with the government of God, and subversiveof the foundations of morality. It is to make lies our refuge, andunder falsehood to hide ourselves, so that we may escape theoverflowing scourge. "Therefore, thus saith the Lord God, Judgmentwill I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet; and the hailshall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow thehiding place. " Moreover, "because ye trust in oppression andperverseness, and stay thereon; therefore this iniquity shall be toyou as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whosebreaking cometh suddenly at an instant. And he shall break it as thebreaking of the potter's vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall notspare. "

This plea is sufficiently broad to cover all the oppression andvillany that the sun has witnessed in his circuit, since God said, "Let there be light. " It assumes that to be practicable, which isimpossible, namely, that there can be freedom with slavery, union withinjustice, and safety with bloodguiltiness. A union of virtue withpollution is the triumph of licentiousness. A partnership betweenright and wrong, is wholly wrong. A compromise of the principles ofJustice, is the deification of crime. 

Better that the American Union had never been formed, than that itshould have been obtained at such a frightful cost! If they wereguilty who fashioned it, but who could not foresee all its frightfulconsequences, how much more guilty are they, who, in full view of allthat has resulted from it, clamor for its perpetuity! If it was sinfulat the commencement, to adopt it on the ground of escaping a greaterevil, is it not equally sinful to swear to support it for the samereason, or until, in process of time, it be purged from itscorruption?

The fact is, the compromise alluded to, instead of effecting a union, rendered it impracticable; unless by the term union are to understandthe absolute reign of the slaveholding power over the whole country, to the prostration of Northern rights. In the just use of words, theAmerican Union is and always has been a sham--an imposture. It is aninstrument of oppression unsurpassed in the criminal history of theworld. How then can it be innocently sustained? It is not certain, itis not even probable, that if it had not been adopted, the mothercountry would have reconquered the colonies. The spirit that wouldhave chosen danger in preference to crime, --to perish with justicerather than live with dishonor, --to dare and suffer whatever mightbetide, rather than sacrifice the rights of one human being, --couldnever have been subjugated by any mortal power. Surely it is paying apoor tribute to the valor and devotion of our revolutionary fathers inthe cause of liberty, to say that, if they had sternly refused tosacrifice their principles, they would have fallen an easy prey to thedespotic power of England. 

II. The American Constitution is the exponent of the national compact. We affirm that it is an instrument which no man can innocently bindhimself to support, because its anti-republican and anti-christianrequirements are explicit and peremptory; at least, so explicit that, in regard to all the clauses pertaining to slavery, they have beenuniformly understood and enforced in the same way, by all the courtsand by all the people; and so peremptory, that no individualinterpretation or authority can set them aside with impunity. It isnot a ball of clay, to be moulded into any shape that partycontrivance or caprice may choose it to assume. It is not a form ofwords, to be interpreted in any manner, or to any extent, or for theaccomplishment of any purpose, that individuals in office under it maydetermine. _It means precisely what those who framed and adopted itmeant_--NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS, _as a matter of bargain andcompromise_. Even if it can be construed to mean something else, without violence to its language, such construction is not to betolerated _against the wishes of either party_. No just or honest useof it can be made, in opposition to the plain intention of itsframers, _except to declare the contract at an end, and to refuse toserve under it_. 

To the argument, that the words "slaves" and "slavery" are not to befound in the Constitution, and therefore that it was never intended togive any protection or countenance to the slave system, it issufficient to reply, that though no such words are contained in thatinstrument, other words were used, intelligently and specifically, TOMEET THE NECESSITIES OF SLAVERY; and that these were adopted _in goodfaith, to be observed until a constitutional change could beeffected_. On this point, as to the design of certain provisions, nointelligent man can honestly entertain a doubt. If it be objected, that though these provisions were meant to cover slavery, yet, as theycan fairly be interpreted to mean something exactly the reverse, it isallowable to give to them such an interpretation, _especially as thecause of freedom will thereby be promoted_--we reply, that this is toadvocate fraud and violence toward one of the contracting parties, _whose co-operation was secured only by an express agreement andunderstanding between them both, in regard to the clauses alluded to_;and that such a construction, if enforced by pains and penalties, would unquestionably lead to a civil war, in which the aggrieved partywould justly claim to have been betrayed, and robbed of theirconstitutional rights. 

Again, if it be said, that those clauses, being immoral, are null andvoid--we reply, it is true they are not to be observed; but it is alsotrue that they are portions of an instrument, the support of which, ASA WHOLE, is required by oath or affirmation; and, therefore, _becausethey are immoral_, and BECAUSE OF THIS OBLIGATION TO ENFORCEIMMORALITY, no one can innocently swear to support the Constitution. 

Again, if it be objected, that the Constitution was formed by thepeople of the United States, in order to establish justice, to promotethe general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to themselvesand their posterity; and therefore, it is to be so construed as toharmonize with these objects; we reply, again, that its language is_not to be interpreted in a sense which neither of the contractingparties understood_, and which would frustrate every design of theiralliance--to wit, _union at the expense of the colored population ofthe country_. Moreover, nothing is more certain than that the preamblealluded to never included, in the minds of those who framed it, _thosewho were then pining in bondage_--for, in that case, a generalemancipation of the slaves would have instantly been proclaimedthroughout the United States. The words, "secure the blessings ofliberty to ourselves and our posterity, " assuredly meant only thewhite population. "To promote the general welfare, " referred to theirown welfare exclusively. "To establish justice, " was understood to befor their sole benefit as slaveholders, and the guilty abettors ofslavery. This is demonstrated by other parts of the same instrument, and by their own practice under it. 

We would not detract aught from what is justly their due; but it is asreprehensible to give them credit for _what they did not possess_, asit is to rob them of what is theirs. It is absurd, it is false, it isan insult to the common sense of mankind, to pretend that theConstitution was intended to embrace the entire population of thecountry under its sheltering wings; or that the parties to it wereactuated by a sense of justice and the spirit of impartial liberty; orthat it needs no alteration, but only a new interpretation, to make itharmonize with the object aimed at by its adoption. As truly might itbe argued, that because it is asserted in the Declaration ofIndependence, that all men are created equal and endowed with aninalienable right to liberty, therefore none of its signers wereslaveholders, and since its adoption, slavery has been banished fromthe American soil! The truth is, our fathers were intent on securingliberty _to themselves_, without being very scrupulous as to the meansthey used to accomplish their purpose. They were not actuated by thespirit of universal philanthropy; and though in _words_ theyrecognized occasionally the brotherhood of the human race, _inpractice_ they continually denied it. They did not blush to enslave aportion of their fellow-men, and to buy and sell them as cattle in themarket, while they were fighting against the oppression of the mothercountry, and boasting of their regard for the rights of man. Why, then, concede to them virtues which they did not posses? _Why cling tothe falsehood, that they were no respecters of person in the formationof the government_?

Alas! that they had no more fear of God, no more regard for man, intheir hearts! "The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah [TheNorth and South] is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of perverseness; for they say, the Lord hathforsaken the earth, and the Lord seeth not. "

We proceed to a critical examination of the American Constitution, inits relations to slavery. 

In ARTICLE I, Section 9, it is declared--"The migration or importationof such persons as any of the States now existing shall think properto admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress, prior to the yearone thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax or duty may be imposedon such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. "

In this Section, it will be perceived, the phraseology is so guardedas not to imply, _ex necessitate_, any criminal intent or inhumanarrangement; and yet no one has ever had the hardihood or folly todeny, that it was clearly understood by the contracting parties, tomean that there should be no interference with the African slavetrade, on the part of the general government, until the year 1808. Fortwenty years after the adoption of the Constitution, the citizens ofthe United States were to be encouraged and protected in theprosecution of that infernal traffic--in sacking and burning thehamlets of Africa--in slaughtering multitudes of the inoffensivenatives on the soil, kidnapping and enslaving a still greaterproportion, crowding them to suffocation in the holds of the slaveships, populating the Atlantic with their dead bodies, and subjectingthe wretched survivors to all the horrors of unmitigated bondage! Thisawful covenant was strictly fulfilled; and though, since itstermination, Congress has declared the foreign slave traffic to bepiracy, yet all Christendom knows that the American flag, instead ofbeing the terror of the African slavers, has given them the most ampleprotection. 

The manner in which the 9th Section was agreed to, by the nationalconvention that formed the constitution, is thus frankly avowed by theHon. Luther Martin, [8] who was a prominent member of that body:

[Footnote 8: Speech before the Legislature of Maryland in 1787. ]

"The Eastern States, notwithstanding their aversion of slavery, (!)were _very willing to indulge the Southern States_ at least with atemporary liberty to prosecute the slave trade, provided the SouthernStates would, in their turn, _gratify_ them by laying no restrictionon navigation acts; and, after a very little time, the committee, by agreat majority, agreed on a report, _by which the general governmentwas to be prohibited from preventing the importation of slaves_ for alimited time; and the restrictive clause relative to navigation actswas to be omitted. "

Behold the iniquity of this agreement! how sordid were the motiveswhich led to it! what a profligate disregard of justice and humanity, on the part of those who had solemnly declared the inalienable rightof all men to be free and equal, to be a self-evident truth!

It is due to the national convention to say, that this section was notadopted "without considerable opposition. " Alluding to it, Mr. Martinobserves--

"It was said we had just assumed a place among the independent nationsin consequence of our opposition to the attempts of Great Britain to_enslave us_; that this opposition was grounded upon the preservationof those rights to which God and nature has entitled us, not in_particular_, but in _common with all the rest of mankind_; that wehad appealed to the Supreme Being for his assistance, as the God offreedom, who could not but approve our efforts to preserve the rightswhich he had thus imparted to his creatures; that now, when we hadscarcely risen from our knees, from supplicating his mercy andprotection in forming our government over a free people, a governmentformed pretendedly on the principles of liberty, and for itspreservation, --in that government to have a provision, not only ofputting out of its power to restrain and prevent the slave trade, evenencouraging that most infamous traffic, by giving the States the powerand influence in the Union in proportion as they cruelly and wantonlysported with the rights of their fellow-creatures, ought to beconsidered as a solemn mockery of, and insult to, that God whoseprotection we had thus implored, and could not fail to hold us up indetestation, and render us contemptible to every true friend ofliberty in the world. It was said that national crimes can only be, and frequently are, punished in this world by _national punishments_, and that the continuance of the slave trade, and thus giving it anational character, sanction, and encouragement, ought to beconsidered as justly exposing us to the displeasure and vengeance ofhim who is equally the Lord of all, and who views with equal eye thepoor _African slave_ and his _American master!_ [9]

[Footnote 9: How terribly and justly as the guilty nation beenscourged, since these words were spoken, on account of slavery and theslave trade!]

"It was urged that, by this system, we were giving the generalgovernment full and absolute power to regulate commerce, under whichgeneral power it would have a right to restrain, or totally prohibit, the slave trade: it must, therefore, appear to the world absurd anddisgraceful to the last degree that we should except from the exerciseof that power the only branch of commerce which is unjustifiable inits nature, and contrary to the rights of mankind. That, on thecontrary, we ought to prohibit expressly, in our Constitution, thefurther importation of slaves, and to authorize the generalgovernment, from time to time, to make such regulations as should bethought most advantageous for the gradual abolition of slavery, andthe emancipation of the slaves already in the States. That slavery isinconsistent with the genius of republicanism, and has a tendency todestroy those principles on which it is supported, as it lessens thesense of the equal rights of mankind, and habituates to tyranny andoppression. It was further urged that, by this system of government, every State is to be protected both from foreign invasion and fromdomestic insurrections; and, from this consideration, it was of theutmost importance it should have the power to restrain the importationof slaves, since in proportion as the number of slaves increased inany State, in the same proportion is the State weakened and exposed toforeign invasion and domestic insurrection; and by so much less willit be able to protect itself against either, and therefore by so much, want aid and be a burden to, the Union. 

"It was further said, that, in this system, as we were giving thegeneral government power, under the idea of national character, ornational interest, to regulate even our weights and measures, and haveprohibited all possibility of emitting paper money, and passinginsolvent laws, &c. , it must appear still more extraordinary that weprohibited the government from interfering with the slave trade, thanwhich nothing could more effect our national honor and interest. 

"These reasons influenced me, both in the committee and in theconvention, most decidedly to oppose and vote against the clause, asit now makes part of the system. " [10]

[Footnote 10: Secret Proceedings, p. 61. ]

Happy had it been for this nation, had these solemn considerationsbeen heeded by the framers of the Constitution! But for the sake ofsecuring some local advantages, they choose to do evil that good maycome, and to make the end sanctify the means. They were willing toenslave others, that they might secure their own freedom. They didthis deed deliberately, with their eyes open, with all the facts andconsequences arising therefrom before them, in violation of all theirheaven-attested declarations, and in atheistical distrust of theoverruling power of God. "The Eastern States were very willing to_indulge_ the Southern States" in the unrestricted prosecution oftheir piratical traffic, provided in return they could be _gratified_by no restriction on being laid on navigation acts!!--Had there beenno other provision of the Constitution justly liable to objection, this one alone rendered the support of that instrument incompatiblewith the duties which men owe to their Creator, and to each other. Itwas the poisonous infusion in the cup, which, though constituting buta very slight portion of its contents, perilled the life of every onewho partook of it. 

If it be asked to what purpose are these animadversions, since theclause alluded to has long since expired by its own limitation--weanswer, that, if at any time the foreign slave trade could be_constitutionally_ prosecuted, it may yet be renewed, under theConstitution, at the pleasure of Congress, whose prohibitory statuteis liable to be reversed at any moment, in the frenzy of Southernopposition to emancipation. It is ignorantly supposed that the bargainwas, that the traffic _should cease_ in 1808; but the only thingsecured by it was, the _right_ of Congress (not any obligation) toprohibit it at that period. If, therefore, Congress had not chosen toexercise that right, _the traffic might have been prolongedindefinitely, under the Constitution_. The right to destroy anyparticular branch of commerce, implies the right to re-establish it. True, there is no probability that the African slave trade will everagain be legalized by the national government; but no credit is duethe framers of the Constitution on this ground; for, while they threwaround it all the sanction and protection of the national characterand power for twenty years, _they set no bounds to its continuance byany positive constitutional prohibition_. 

Again, the adoption of such a clause, and the faithful execution ofit, prove what was meant by the words of the preamble--"to form a moreperfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, andsecure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and ourposterity"--namely, that the parties to the Constitution regardedonly their own rights and interests, and never intended that itslanguage should be so interpreted as to interfere with slavery, or tomake it unlawful for one portion of the people to enslave another, _without an express alteration in the instrument, in the mannertherein set forth_. While, therefore, the Constitution remains as itwas originally adopted, they who swear to support it are bound tocomply with all its provisions, as a matter of allegiance. For itavails nothing to say, that some of those provisions are at war withthe law of God and the rights of man, and therefore are notobligatory. Whatever may be their character, they are_constitutionally_, obligatory; and whoever feels that he cannotexecute them, or swear to execute them, without committing sin, has no other choice left than to withdraw from the government, or toviolate his conscience by taking on his lips an impious promise. Theobject of the Constitution is not to define _what is the law of God_, but WHAT IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE--which will is not to be frustratedby an ingenious moral interpretation, by those whom they have electedto serve them. 

ARTICLE 1, Sect. 2, provides--"Representatives and direct taxes shallbe apportioned among the several States, which may be included withinthis Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall bedetermined by adding to the whole number of free persons, includingthose bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians nottaxed, _three-fifths of all other persons_. "

Here, as in the clause we have already examined, veiled beneath a formof words as deceitful as it is unmeaning in a truly democraticgovernment, is a provision for the safety, perpetuity and augmentationof the slaveholding power--a provision scarcely less atrocious thanthat which related to the African slave trade, and almost asafflictive in its operation--a provision still in force, with nopossibility of its alteration, so long as a majority of the slaveStates choose to maintain their slave system--a provision which, atthe present time, enables the South to have twenty-five additionalrepresentatives in Congress on the score of _property_, while theNorth is not allowed to have one--a provision which concedes to theoppressed three-fifths of the political power which is granted to allothers, and then puts this power into the hands of their oppressors, to be wielded by them for the more perfect security of their tyrannousauthority, and the complete subjugation of the non-slaveholdingStates. 

Referring to this atrocious bargain, ALEXANDER HAMILTON remarked inthe New York Convention--

"The first thing objected to, is that clause which allows arepresentation for three-fifths of the negroes. Much has been said ofthe impropriety of representing men who have no will of their own:whether this is _reasoning_, or _declamation_, (!!) I will not presumeto say. It is the _unfortunate_ situation of the Southern States tohave a great part of their population, as well as _property_, inblacks. The regulation complained of was one result of _the spirit ofaccommodation_ which governed the Convention: and without this_indulgence_, NO UNION COULD POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN FORMED. But, sir, considering some _peculiar advantages_ which we derive from them, itis entirely JUST that they should be _gratified_. --The Southern Statespossess certain staples, tobacco, rice, indigo, &c. --which must be_capital_ objects in treaties of commerce with foreign nations; andthe advantage which they necessarily procure in these treaties will befelt throughout the United states. "

If such was the patriotism, such the love of liberty, such themorality of ALEXANDER HAMILTON, what can be said of the character ofthose who were far less conspicuous than himself in securing Americanindependence, and in framing the American Constitution?

Listen, now, to the questions of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, respecting theconstitutional clause now under consideration:--

"'In outward show, it is a representation of persons in bondage; infact, it is a representation of their masters, --the oppressorrepresenting the oppressed. '--'Is it in the compass of humanimagination to devise a more perfect exemplification of the art ofcommitting the lamb to the tender custody of the wolf?'--'Therepresentative is thus constituted, not the friend, agent and trusteeof the person whom he represents, but the most inveterate of hisfoes. '--'It was _one_ of the curses from that Pandora's box, adjustedat the time, as usual, by a _compromise_, the whole advantage of whichinured to the benefit of the South, and to aggravate the burdens ofthe North. '--'If there be a parallel to it in human history, it canonly be that of the Roman Emperors, who, from the days when JuliusCaesar substituted a military despotism in the place of a republic, among the offices which they always concentrated upon themselves, wasthat of tribune of the people. A Roman Emperor tribune of the people, is an exact parallel to that feature in the Constitution of the UnitedStates which makes the master the representative of his slave. '--'TheConstitution of the United States expressly prescribes that no titleof nobility shall be granted by the United States. The spirit of thisinterdict is not a rooted antipathy to the grant of mere powerlessempty _titles_, but to titles of _nobility_; to the institution ofprivileged orders of men. But what order of men under the mostabsolute of monarchies, or the most aristocratic of republics, wasever invested with such an odious and unjust privilege as that of theseparate and exclusive representation of less than half a millionowners of slaves, in the Hall of this House, in the Chair of theSenate, and in the Presidential mansion?'--'This investment of powerin the owners of one species of property concentrated in the highestauthorities of the nation, and disseminated through thirteen of thetwenty-six States of the Union, constitutes a privileged order of menin the community, more adverse to the rights of all, and morepernicious to the interests of the whole, than any order of nobilityever known. To call government thus constituted a democracy, is toinsult the understanding of mankind. To call it an aristocracy, is todo injustice to that form of government. Aristocracy is the governmentof _the best_. Its standard qualification for accession to power _ismerit_, ascertained by popular election recurring at short intervalsof time. If even that government is prone to degenerate into tyranny, what must be the character of that form of polity in which thestandard qualification for access to power is wealth in the possessionof slaves? It is doubly tainted with the infection of riches and ofslavery. _There is no name in the language of national jurisprudencethat can define it_--no model in the records of ancient history, or inthe political theories of Aristotle, with which it can be likened. Itwas introduced into the Constitution of the United States by anequivocation--a representation of property under the name of persons. Little did the members of the Convention from the free States foreseewhat a sacrifice to Moloch was hidden under the mask of thisconcession. '--'The House of Representatives of the United Statesconsists of 223 members--all, by _the letter_ of the Constitution, representatives only of _persons_, as 135 of them really are; but theother 88, equally representing the _persons_ of their constituents, bywhom they are elected, also represent, under the name of _otherpersons_, upwards of two and a half millions of _slaves_, held as the_property_ of less than half a million of the white constituents, andvalued at twelve hundred millions of dollars. Each of these 88 membersrepresents in fact the whole of that mass of associated wealth, andthe persons and exclusive interests of its owners; all thus knittogether, like the members of a moneyed corporation, with a capitalnot of thirty-five or forty or fifty, but of twelve hundred millionsof dollars, exhibiting the most extraordinary exemplification of theanti-republican tendencies of associated wealth that the world eversaw. '--'Here is one class of men, consisting of not more than onefortieth part of the whole people, not more than one-thirtieth part ofthe free population, exclusively devoted to their personal interestsidentified with their own as slaveholders of the same associatedwealth, and wielding by their votes, upon every question of governmentor of public policy, two-fifths of the whole power of the House. Inthe Senate of the Union, the proportion of the slaveholding power isyet greater. By the influence of slavery, in the States where theinstitution is tolerated, over their elections, no other than aslaveholder can rise to the distinction of obtaining a seat in theSenate; and thus, of the 52 members of the federal Senate, 26 areowners of slaves, and as effectively representatives of that interestas the 88 members elected by them to the House. '--'By this process itis that all political power in the States is absorbed and engrossed bythe owners of _slaves_, and the overruling policy of the States isshaped to strengthen and consolidate their domination. Thelegislative, executive, and judicial authorities are all in theirhands--the preservation, propagation, and perpetuation of the blackcode of slavery--every law of the legislature becomes a link in thechain of the slave; every executive act a rivet to his hapless fate;every judicial decision a perversion of the human intellect to thejustification of _wrong. _'--'Its reciprocal operation upon thegovernment of the nation is, to establish an artificial majority inthe slave representation over that of the free people, in the AmericanCongress, and thereby to make the PRESERVATION, PROPAGATION, ANDPERPETUATION OF SLAVERY THE VITAL AND ANIMATING SPIRIT OF THE NATIONALGOVERNMENT. '--'The result is seen in the fact that, at this day, thePresident of the United States, the President of the Senate, theSpeaker of the House of Representatives, and five out of nine of theJudges of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the United States, are notonly citizens of slaveholding States, but individual slaveholdersthemselves. So are, and constantly have been, with scarcely anexception, all the members of both Houses of Congress from theslaveholding States; and so are, in immensely disproportionatenumbers, the commanding officers of the army and navy; the officers ofthe customs; the registers and receivers of the land offices, and thepost-masters throughout the slaveholding States. --The BiennialRegister indicates the birth-place of all the officers employed in thegovernment of the Union. If it were required to designate the ownersof this species of property among them, it would be little more than acatalogue of slaveholders. '"

It is confessed by Mr. Adams, alluding to the national convention thatframed the Constitution, that "the delegation from the free States, intheir extreme anxiety to conciliate the ascendency of the Southernslaveholder, did listen to _a compromise between right andwrong--between freedom and slavery_; of the ultimate fruits of whichthey had no conception, but which already even now is urging the Unionto its inevitable ruin and dissolution, by a civil, servile, foreign, and Indian war, all combined in one; a war, the essential issue ofwhich will be between freedom and slavery, and in which the unhallowedstandard of slavery will be the desecrated banner of the NorthAmerican Union--that banner, first unfurled to the breeze, inscribedwith the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence. "

Hence to swear to support the Constitution of the United States, _asit is_, is to make "a compromise between right and wrong, " and to wagewar against human liberty. It is to recognize and honor as republicanlegislators, _incorrigible men-stealers_, MERCILESS TYRANTS, BLOODTHIRSTY ASSASSINS, who legislate with deadly weapons about theirpersons, such as pistols, daggers, and bowie-knives, with which theythreaten to murder any Northern senator or representative who shalldare to stain their _honor_, or interfere with their _rights_! Theyconstitute a banditti more fierce and cruel than any whose atrocitiesare recorded on the pages of history or romance. To mix with them onterms of social or religious fellowship, is to indicate a low state ofvirtue; but to think of administering a free government by theirco-operation, is nothing short of insanity. 

Article IV. , Section 2, declares, --"no person held to service or laboron one State, _under the laws thereof_, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged fromsuch service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the partyto whom such service or labor may be due. "

Here is a third clause, which, like the other two, makes no mention ofslavery or slaves, in express terms; and yet, like them, wasintelligently framed and mutually understood by the parties to theratification, and intended both to protect the slave system and torestore runaway slaves. It alone makes slavery a national institution, a national crime, and all the people who are not enslaved, thebody-guard over those whose liberties have been cloven down. Thisagreement, too, has been fulfilled to the letter by the North. 

Under the Mosaic dispensation it was imperatively commanded, --"Thoushalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped fromhis master unto thee: he shall dwell with thee, even among you, inthat place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it likethhim best: thou shalt not oppress him. " The warning which the prophetIsaiah gave to oppressing Moab was of a similar kind: "Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of thenoon-day; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth. Let mineoutcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the faceof the spoiler. " The prophet Obadiah brings the following chargeagainst treacherous Edom, which is precisely applicable to this guiltynation:--"For thy violence against thy brother Jacob, shame shall comeover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thoustoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried awaycaptive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and castlots upon Jerusalem, _even thou wast as one of them_. But thoushouldst not have looked on the day of thy brother, in the day that hebecame a stranger; neither shouldst thou have rejoiced over thechildren of Judah, in the day of their destruction; neither shouldstthou have spoken proudly in the day of distress; neither shouldst thouhave _stood in the cross-way, to cut off those of his that didescape_; neither shouldst thou have _delivered up those of his thatdid remain_, in the day of distress. "

How exactly descriptive of this boasted republic is the impeachment ofEdom by the same prophet! "The pride of thy heart hath deceived thee, thou whose habitation is high; that saith in thy heart, Who shallbring me down to the ground? Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring theedown, saith the Lord. " The emblem of American pride and power is the_eagle_, and on her banner she has mingled _stars_ with its _stripes_. Her vanity, her treachery, her oppression, her self-exaltation, andher defiance of the Almighty, far surpass the madness and wickednessof Edom. What shall be her punishment? Truly, it may be affirmed ofthe American people, (who live not under the Levitical but Christiancode, and whose guilt, therefore, is the more awful, and theircondemnation the greater, ) in the language of another prophet--"Theyall lie in wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net. That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the prince asketh, and the judge asketh for a reward; and the great man, he uttereth hismischievous desire: _so they wrap it up_. " Likewise of the coloredinhabitants of this land it may be said, --"This is a people robbed andspoiled; they are all of them snared in holes, and they are hid inprison-houses; they are for a prey, and none delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore. "

By this stipulation, the Northern States are made the hunting groundof slave-catchers, who may pursue their victims with bloodhounds, andcapture them with impunity wherever they can lay their robber handsupon them. At least twelve or fifteen thousand runaway slaves are nowin Canada, exiled from their native land, because they could not find, throughout its vast extent, a single road on which they could dwell insafety, in _consequence of this provision of the Constitution_? How isit possible, then, for the advocates of liberty to support agovernment which gives over to destruction one-sixth part of the wholepopulation?

It is denied by some at the present day, that the clause which hasbeen cited, was intended to apply to runaway slaves. This indicateseither ignorance, or folly or something worse. JAMES MADISON, as oneof the framers of the Constitution, is of some authority on thispoint. Alluding to that instrument, in the Virginia convention, hesaid:--

"Another clause _secures us that property which we now possess_. Atpresent, if any slave elopes to those States where slaves are free, _he becomes emancipated by their laws_; for the laws of the States are_uncharitable_ (!) to one another in this respect; but in thisconstitution, 'No person held to service or labor in one State, underthe laws thereof, shall, in consequence of any law or regulationtherein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall bedelivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor maybe due. ' THIS CLAUSE WAS EXPRESSLY INSERTED TO ENABLE THE OWNERS OFSLAVES TO RECLAIM THEM. _This is a better security than any that nowexists_. No power is given to the general government to interfere withrespect to the property in slaves now held by the States. "

In the same convention, alluding to the same clause, GOV. RANDOLPHsaid:--

"Every one knows that slaves are held to service or labor. And, whenauthority is given to owners of slaves _to vindicate their property_, can it be supposed they can be deprived of it? If a citizen of thisState, in consequence of this clause, can take his runaway slave inMaryland, can it be seriously thought that, after taking him andbringing him home, he could be made free?"

It is objected, that slaves are held as property, and therefore, asthe clause refers to persons, it cannot mean slaves. But this iscriticism against fact. Slaves are recognized not merely as property, but also as persons--as having a mixed character--as combining thehuman with the brutal. This is paradoxical, we admit; but slavery is aparadox--the American Constitution is a paradox--the American Union isa paradox--the American Government is a paradox; and if any one ofthese is to be repudiated on that ground, they all are. That it is theduty of the friends of freedom to deny the binding authority of themall, and to secede from them all, we distinctly affirm. After theindependence of this country had been achieved, the voice of Godexhorted the people, saying, "Execute true judgment, and show mercyand compassion, every man to his brother: and oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor; and let none of youimagine evil against his brother in your heart. But they refused tohearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, thatthey should not hear; yea, they made their hearts as an adamantstone. " "Shall I not visit for these things? saith the Lord. Shall notmy soul be avenged on such a notion as this?"

Whatever doubt may have rested on any honest mind, respecting themeaning of the clause in relation to persons held to service or labor, must have been removed by the unanimous decision of the Supreme Courtof the United States, in the case of Prigg versus The State ofPennsylvania. By that decision, any Southern slave-catcher isempowered to seize and convey to the South, without hindrance ormolestation on the part of the State, and without any legal processduly obtained and served, any person or persons, irrespective of casteor complexion, whom he may choose to claim as runaway slaves; and if, when thus surprised and attacked, or on their arrival South, theycannot prove by legal witnesses, that they are freemen, their doom issealed! Hence the free colored population of the North are speciallyliable to become the victims of this terrible power, and all the otherinhabitants are at the mercy of prowling kidnappers, because there aremultitudes of white as well as black slaves on Southern plantations, and slavery is no longer fastidious with regard to the color of itsprey. 

As soon as that appalling decision of the Supreme Court wasenunciated, in the name of the Constitution, the people of the Northshould have risen _en masse_, if for no other cause, and declared theUnion at an end; and they would have done so, if they had not losttheir manhood, and their reverence for justice and liberty. 

In the 4th Sect. Of Art. IV. , the United States guarantee to protectevery State in the Union "against _domestic violence_. " By the 8thSection of Article I. , congress is empowered "to provide for callingforth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, _suppressinsurrections_, and repel invasions. " These provisions, howeverstrictly they may apply to cases of disturbance among the whitepopulation, were adopted with special reference to the slavepopulation, for the purpose of keeping them in their chains by thecombined military force of the country; and were these repealed, andthe South left to manage her slaves as best she could, a servileinsurrection would ere long be the consequence, as general as it wouldunquestionably be successful. Says Mr. Madison, respecting theseclauses:--

"On application of the legislature or executive, as the case may be, the militia of the other States are to be called to suppress domesticinsurrections. Does this bar the States from calling forth their ownmilitia? No; but it gives them a _supplementary_ security to suppressinsurrections and domestic violence. "

The answer to Patrick Henry's objection, as urged against theconstitution in the Virginia convention, that there was no power leftto the _States_ to quell an insurrection of slaves, as it was whollyvested in congress, George Nicholas asked:--

"Have they it now? If they have, does the constitution take it away?If it does, it must be in one of those clauses which have beenmentioned by the worthy member. The first part gives the generalgovernment power to call them out when necessary. Does this take itaway from the States? No! but _it gives an additional security;_ for, beside the power in the State government to use their own militia, itwill be _the duty of the general government_ to aid them WITH THESTRENGTH OF THE UNION, when called for. "

This solemn guaranty of security to the slave system, caps the climaxof national barbarity, and stains with human blood the garments of allthe people. In consequence of it, that system has multiplied itsvictims from five hundred thousand to nearly three millions--a vastamount of territory has been purchased, in order to give it extensionand perpetuity--several new slave States have been admitted into theUnion--the slave trade has been made one of the great branches ofAmerican commerce--the slave population, though over-worked, starved, lacerated, branded, maimed, and subjected to every form of deprivationand every species of torture, have been overawed and crushed, --or, whenever they have attempted to gain their liberty by revolt, theyhave been shot down and quelled by the strong arm of the nationalgovernment; as, for example, in the case of Nat Turner's insurrectionin Virginia, when the naval and military forces of the government werecalled into active service. Cuban bloodhounds have been purchased withthe money of the people, and imported and used to hunt slave fugitivesamong the everglades of Florida. A merciless warfare has been wagedfor the extermination or expulsion of the Florida Indians, becausethey gave succor to those poor hunted fugitives--a warfare which hascost the nation several thousand lives, and forty millions of dollars. But the catalogue of enormities is too long to be recapitulated in thepresent address. 

We have thus demonstrated that the compact between the North and theSouth embraces every variety of wrong and outrage, --is at war with Godand man, cannot be innocently supported, and deserves to beimmediately annulled. In behalf of the Society which we represent, wecall upon all our fellow-citizens, who believe it is right to obey Godrather than man, to declare themselves peaceful revolutionists, and tounite with us under the stainless banner of Liberty, having for itsmotto--"EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL--NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS!"

It is pleaded that the Constitution provides for its own amendment;and we ought to use the elective franchise to effect this object. True, there is such a proviso; but, until the amendment be made, thatinstrument is binding as it stands. Is it not to violate every moralinstinct, and to sacrifice principle to expediency, to argue that wemay swear to steal, oppress and murder by wholesale, because it may benecessary to do so only for the time being, and because there is someremote probability that the instrument which requires that we shouldbe robbers, oppressors and murderers, may at some future day beamended in these particulars? Let us not palter with our consciencesin this manner--let us not deny that the compact was conceived in sinand brought forth in iniquity--let us not be so dishonest, even topromote a good object, as to interpret the Constitution in a mannerutterly at variance with the intentions and arrangements of thecontracting parties; but, confessing the guilt of the nation, acknowledging the dreadful specifications in the bond, washing ourhands in the waters of repentance from all further participation inthis criminal alliance, and resolving that we will sustain none otherthan a free and righteous government, let us glory in the name ofrevolutionists, unfurl the banner of disunion, and consecrate ourtalents and means to the overthrow of all that is tyrannical in theland, --to the establishment of all that is free, just, true andholy, --to the triumph of universal love and peace. 

If, in utter disregard of the historical facts which have been cited, it is still asserted, that the Constitution needs no amendment to makeit a free instrument, adapted to all the exigencies of a free people, and was never intended to give any strength or countenance to theslave system--the indignant spirit of insulted Liberty replies:--"Whatthough the assertion be true? Of what avail is a mere piece ofparchment? In itself, though it be written all over with words oftruth and freedom--though its provisions be as impartial and just aswords can express, or the imagination paint--though it be as pure asthe gospel, and breathe only the spirit of Heaven--it is powerless; ithas no executive vitality; it is a lifeless corpse, even thoughbeautiful in death. I am famishing for lack of bread! How is myappetite relieved by holding up to my gaze a painted loaf? I ammanacled, wounded, bleeding, dying! What consolation is it to know, that they who are seeking to destroy my life, profess in words to bemy friends?" If the liberties of the people have been betrayed--ifjudgement is turned away backward and justice standeth afar off, andtruth has fallen in the streets, and equality cannot enter--if theprinces of the land are roaring lions, the judges evening wolves, thepeople light and treacherous persons, the priests covered withpollution--if we are living under a frightened despotism, which scoffsat all constitutional restrains, and wields the resources of thenation to promote its own bloody purposes--tell us not that the formsof freedom are still left to us! "Would such tameness and submissionhave freighted the May-Flower for Plymouth Rock? Would it haveresisted the Stamp Act, the Tea Tax, or any of those entering wedgesof tyranny with which the British government sought to rive theliberties of America? The wheel of the Revolution would have rusted onits axle, if a spirit so weak had been the only power to give itmotion. Did our fathers say, when their rights and liberties wereinfringed--"_Why, what is done cannot be undone_. That is the firstthought. " No it was the last thing they thought of: or, rather itnever entered their minds at all. They sprang to the conclusion atonce--"_What is done_ SHALL _be undone_. That is our FIRST and ONLYthought. "

 "Is water running in our veins? Do we remember still Old Plymouth Rock, and Lexington, and famous Bunker Hill? The debt we owe our fathers' graves? and to the yet unborn, Whose heritage ourselves must make a thing of pride or scorn?

 Gray Plymouth Rock hath yet a tongue, and Concord is not dumb; And voices from our fathers' graves and from the future come: They call on us to stand our ground--they charge us still to be Not only free from chains ourselves, but foremost to make free!"

It is of little consequence who is on the throne, if there be behindit a power mightier than the throne. It matters not what is the theoryof the government, if the practice of the government be unjust andtyrannical. We rise in rebellion against a despotism incomparably moredreadful than that which induced the colonists to take up arms againstthe mother country; not on account of a three-penny tax on tea, butbecause fetters of living iron are fastened on the limbs of millionsof our countrymen, and our own sacred rights are trampled in the dust. As citizens of the State, we appeal to the State in vain forprotection and redress. As citizen of the United States, we aretreated as outlaws in one half of the country, and the nationalgovernment consents to our destruction. We are denied the right oflocomotion, freedom of speech, the right of petition, the liberty ofthe press, the right peaceably to assemble together to protest againstoppression and plead for liberty--at least in thirteen States of theUnion. If we venture, as avowed and unflinching abolitionists, totravel South of Mason and Dixon's line, we do so at the peril of ourlives. If we would escape torture and death, on visiting any of theslave States, we must stifle our conscientious convictions, hear notestimony against cruelty and tyranny, suppress the strugglingemotions of humanity, divest ourselves of all letters and papers of anantislavery character, and do homage to the slaveholding power--or runthe risk of a cruel martyrdom! These are appalling and undeniablefacts. 

Three millions of the American people are crushed under the AmericanUnion! They are held as slaves--trafficked as merchandise--registeredas goods and chattels! The government gives them no protection--thegovernment is their enemy--the government keeps them in chains! Therethey lie bleeding--we are prostrate by their side--in their sorrowsand sufferings we participate--their stripes are inflicted on ourbodies, their shackles are fastened to our limbs, their cause is ours!The Union which grinds them to the dust rests upon us, and with themwe will struggle to overthrow it! The Constitution, which subjectsthem to hopeless bondage, is one that we cannot swear to support! Ourmotto is, "NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS, " either religious or political. They are the fiercest enemies of mankind, and the bitterest foes ofGod! We separate from them not in anger, not in malice, not for aselfish purpose, not to do them an injury, not to cease warning, exhorting, reproving them for their crimes, not to leave the perishingbondman to his fate--O no! But to clear our skirts of innocentblood--to give the oppressor no countenance--to signify our abhorrenceof injustice and cruelty--to testify against an ungodly compact--tocease striking hands with thieves and consenting with adulterers--tomake no compromise with tyranny--to walk worthily of our highprofession--to increase our moral power over the nation--to obey Godand vindicate the gospel of His Son--to hasten the downfall of slaveryin America, and throughout the world!

We are not acting under a blind impulse. We have carefully counted thecost of this warfare, and are prepared to meet its consequences. Itwill subject us to reproach, persecution, infamy--it will prove afiery ordeal to all who shall pass through it--it may cost us ourlives. We shall be ridiculed as fools, scorned as visionaries, brandedas disorganizers, reviled as madmen, threatened and perhaps punishedas traitors. But we shall bide our time. Whether safety or peril, whether victory or defeat, whether life or death be ours, believingthat our feet are planted on an eternal foundation, that our positionis sublime and glorious, that our faith in God is rational andsteadfast, that we have exceeding great and precious promises on whichto rely, THAT WE ARE IN THE RIGHT, we shall not falter nor bedismayed, "though the earth be removed, and though the mountains becarried into the midst of the sea, "--though our ranks be thinned tothe number of "three hundred men. " Freemen! are you ready for theconflict? Come what may, will you sever the chain that binds you to aslaveholding government, and declare your independence? Up, then, withthe banner of revolution! Not to shed blood--not to injure the personor estate of any oppressor--not by force and arms to resist anylaw--not to countenance a servile insurrection--not to wield anycarnal weapons! No--ours must be a bloodless strife, excepting _our_blood be shed--for we aim, as did Christ our leader, not to destroymen's lives, but to save them--to overcome evil with good--to conquerthrough suffering for righteousness' sake--to set the captive free bythe potency of truth!

Secede, then, from the government. Submit to its exactions, but pay itno allegiance, and give it no voluntary aid. Fill no offices under it. Send no senators or representatives to the national or Statelegislature; for what you cannot conscientiously perform yourself, youcannot ask another to perform as your agent. Circulate a declarationof DISUNION FROM SLAVEHOLDERS, throughout the country. Hold massmeetings--assemble in conventions--nail your banners to the mast!

Do you ask what can be done, if you abandon the ballot-box? What didthe crucified Nazarene do without the elective franchise? What did theapostles do? What did the glorious army of martyrs and confessors do?What did Luther and his intrepid associates do? What can women andchildren do? What has Father Mathew done for teetotalism? What hasDaniel O'Connell done for Irish repeal? "Stand, having your loins girtabout with truth, and having on the breast-plate of righteousness, " andarrayed in the whole armor of God!

The form of government that shall succeed the present government ofthe United States, let time determine. It would be a waste of time toargue that question, until the people are regenerated and turned fromtheir iniquity. Ours is no anarchical movement, but one of order andobedience. In ceasing from oppression, we establish liberty. What isnow fragmentary, shall in due time be crystallized, and shine like agem set in the heavens, for a light to all coming ages. 

Finally--we believe that the effect of this movement will be, --First, to create discussion and agitation throughout the North; and thesewill lead to a general perception of its grandeur and importance. 

Secondly, to convulse the slumbering South like an earthquake, andconvince her that her only alternative is, to abolish slavery, or beabandoned by that power on which she now relies for safety. 

Thirdly, to attack the slave power in its most vulnerable point, andto carry the battle to the gate. 

Fourthly, to exalt the moral sense, increase the moral power, andinvigorate the moral constitution of all who heartily espouse it. 

We reverently believe that, in withdrawing from the American Union, wehave the God of justice with us. We know that we have our enslavedcountrymen with us. We are confident that all free hearts will be withus. We are certain that tyrants and their abettors will be against us. 

In behalf of the Executive committee of the American Anti-SlaverySociety, WM. LLOYD GARRISON, _President_. WENDELL PHILLIPS, MARIA WESTON CHAPMAN } _Secretaries_. _Boston, May 20, 1844_. 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS JACKSON. 

BOSTON, 4th July, 1844. 

_To His Excellency George N. Briggs_:

SIR--Many years since, I received from the executive of theCommonwealth a commission as Justice of the Peace. I have held theoffice that it conferred upon me till the present time, and have foundit a convenience to myself, and others. It might continue to be so, could I consent longer to hold it. But paramount considerationsforbid, and I herewith transmit to you my commission respectfullyasking you to accept my resignation. 

While I deem it a duty to myself to take this step, I feel called onto state the reasons that influence me. 

In entering upon the duties of the office in question, I complied withthe requirements of the law, by taking an oath "_to support theConstitution of the United States_. " I regret that I ever took thatoath. Had I then as maturely considered its full import, and theobligations under which it is understood, and meant to lay those whotake it, as I have done since, I certainly never would have taken it, seeing, as I now do, that the Constitution of the United Statescontains provisions calculated and intended to foster, cherish, upholdand perpetuate _slavery_. It pledges the country to guard and protectthe slave system so long as the slaveholding States choose to retainit. It regards the slave code as lawful in the States which enact it. Still more, "it has done that, which, until its adoption, was neverbefore done for African slavery. It took it out of its former categoryof municipal law and local life, adopted it as a national institution, spread around it the broad and sufficient shield of national law, andthus gave to slavery a national existence. " Consequently, the oath tosupport the Constitution of the United States is a solemn promise todo that which is morally wrong; that which is a violation of thenatural rights of man, and a sin in the sight of God. 

I am not, in this matter, constituting myself a judge of others. I donot say that no honest man can take such an oath, and abide by it. Ionly say, that _I_ would not now deliberately take it; and that, having inconsiderately taken it, I can no longer suffer it to lie uponmy soul. I take back the oath, and ask you, sir, to take back thecommission, which was the occasion of my taking it. 

I am aware that my course in this matter is liable to be regarded assingular, if not censurable; and I must, therefore, be allowed to makea more specific statement of those _provisions of the Constitution_which support the enormous wrong, the heinous sin of slavery. 

The very first Article of the Constitution takes slavery at once underits legislative protection, as a basis of representation in thepopular branch of the National Legislature. It regards slaves underthe description "of all other _persons_"--as of only three-fifths ofthe value of free persons; thus to appearance undervaluing them incomparison with freemen. But its dark and involved phraseology seemsintended to blind us to the consideration, that those underratedslaves are merely a _basis_, not the _source_ of representation; thatby the laws of all the States where they live, they are regarded notas _persons_, but as _things_; that they are not the _constituency_ ofthe representative, but his property; and that the necessary effect ofthis provision of the Constitution is, to take legislative power outof the hands of _men_ as such, and give it to the mere possessors ofgoods and chattels. Fixing upon thirty thousand persons, as thesmallest number that shall send one member into the House ofRepresentatives, it protects slavery by distributing legislative powerin a free and in a slave State thus: To a congressional district inSouth Carolina, containing fifty thousand slaves, claimed as theproperty of five hundred whites, who hold, on an average, one hundredapiece, it gives one Representative in Congress; to a district inMassachusetts containing a population of thirty thousand five hundred, one Representative is assigned. But inasmuch as a slave is neverpermitted to vote, the fifty thousand persons in a district inCarolina form no part of "the constituency;" _that_ is found only inthe five hundred free persons. Five hundred freemen of Carolina couldsend one Representative to Congress, while it would take thirtythousand five hundred freemen of Massachusetts, to do the same thing;that is, one slaveholder in Carolina is clothed by the Constitutionwith the same political power and influence in the RepresentativesHall at Washington, as sixty Massachusetts men like you and me, who"eat their bread in the sweat of their own brows. "

According to the census of 1830, and the _ratio_ of representationbased upon that, slave property added twenty-five members to the Houseof Representatives. And as it has been estimated, (as an approximationto the truth, ) that the two and a half million slaves in the UnitedStates are held as property by about two hundred and fifty thousandpersons--giving an average of ten slaves to each slaveholder, thosetwenty-five Representatives, each chosen, at most, by only tenthousand voters, and probably by less than three-fourths of thatnumber, were the representatives, not only of the two hundred andfifty thousand persons who chose them; but of _property_ which, fiveyears ago, when slaves were lower in market, than at present, wereestimated, by the man who is now the most prominent candidate for thePresidency, at twelve hundred millions of dollars--a sum, which, bythe natural increase of five years, and the enhanced value resultingfrom a more prosperous state of the planting interest, cannot now beless than fifteen hundred millions of dollars. All this vast amount ofproperty, as it is "peculiar, " is also identical in its character. InCongress, as we have seen, it is animated by one spirit, moves in onemass, and is wielded with one aim; and when we consider that tyrannyis always timid, and despotism distrustful, we see that this vastmoney power would be false to itself, did it not direct all its eyesand hands, and put forth all its ingenuity and energy, to oneend--self-protection and self-perpetuation. And this it has ever done. In all the vibrations of the political scale, whether in relation to aBank or Sub-Treasury, Free Trade or a Tariff, this immense power hasmoved, and will continue to move, in one mass, for its own protection. 

While the weight of the slave influence is thus felt in the House ofRepresentatives, "in the Senate of the Union, " says John Quincy Adams, "the proportion of slaveholding power is still greater. By theinfluence of slavery in the States where the institution is tolerated, over their elections, no other than a slaveholder can rise to thedistinction of obtaining a seat in the Senate; and thus, of thefifty-two members of the federal Senate, twenty-six are owners ofslaves, and are as effectually representatives of that interest, asthe eighty-eight members elected by them to the House. "

The dominant power which the Constitution gives to the slave interest, as thus seen and exercised in the _Legislative Halls_ of our nation, is equally obvious and obtrusive in every other department of theNational government. 

In the _Electoral college_, the same cause produces the sameeffect--the same power is wielded for the same purpose, as in theHalls of Congress. Even the preliminary nominating conventions, beforethey dare name a candidate for the highest office in the gift of thepeople, must ask of the Genius of slavery, to what votary she willshow herself propitious. This very year, we see both the greatpolitical parties doing homage to the slave power, by nominating eacha slaveholder for the chair of State. The candidate of one partydeclares, "I should have opposed, and would continue to oppose, anyscheme whatever of emancipation, either gradual or immediate;" andadds, "It is not true, and I rejoice that it is not true, that eitherof the two great parties of this country has any design or aim atabolition. I should deeply lament it, if it were true. "[11]

[Footnote 11: Henry Clay's speech in the United States Senate in 1839, and confirmed at Raleigh, N. C. 1844. ]

The other party nominates a man who says, "I have no hesitation indeclaring that I am in favor of the immediate re-annexation of Texasto the territory and government of the United States. "

Thus both the political parties, and the candidates of both, vie witheach other, in offering allegiance to the slave power, as a conditionprecedent to any hope of success in the struggle for the executivechair; a seat that, for more than three-fourths of the existence ofour constitutional government, has been occupied by a slaveholder. 

The same stern despotism overshadows even the sanctuaries of justice. Of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, fiveare slaveholders and of course, must be faithless to their owninterest, as well as recreant to the power that gives them place, ormust, so far as _they_ are concerned, give both to law andconstitution such a construction as shall justify the language of JohnQuincy Adams, when he says--"The legislative, executive, and judicialauthorities, are all in their hands--for the preservation, propagation, and perpetuation of the black code of slavery. Every lawof the legislature becomes a link in the chain of the slave; everyexecutive act a rivet to his hapless fate; every judicial decision aperversion of the human intellect to the justification of wrong. "

Thus by merely adverting but briefly to the theory and the practicaleffect of this clause of the Constitution, that I have sworn tosupport, it is seen that it throws the political power of the nationinto the hands of the slaveholders; a body of men, which, however itmay be regarded by the Constitution as "persons, " is in fact andpractical effect, a vast moneyed corporation, bound together by anindissoluble unity of interest, by a common sense of a common danger;counselling at all times for its common protection; wielding the wholepower, and controlling the destiny of the nation. 

If we look into the legislative halls, slavery is seen in the chair ofthe presiding officer of each, and controlling the action of both. Slavery occupies, by prescriptive right, the Presidential chair. Theparamount voice that comes from the temple of national justice, issuesfrom the lips of slavery. The army is in the hands of slavery, and ather bidding, must encamp in the everglades of Florida, or march fromthe Missouri to the borders of Mexico, to look after her interests inTexas. 

The navy, even that part that is cruising off the coast of Africa, tosuppress the foreign slave trade, is in the hands of slavery. 

Freemen of the North, who have even dared to lift up their voiceagainst slavery, cannot travel through the slave States, but at theperil of their lives. 

The representatives of freemen are forbidden, on the floor onCongress, to remonstrate against the encroachments of slavery, or topray that she would let her poor victims go. 

I renounce my allegiance to a Constitution that enthrones such apower, wielded for the purpose of depriving me of my rights, ofrobbing my countrymen of their liberties, and of securing its ownprotection, support and perpetuation. 

Passing by that clause of the Constitution, which restricted Congressfor twenty years, from passing any law against the African slavetrade, and which gave authority to raise a revenue on the stolen sonsof Africa, I come to that part of the fourth article, which guaranteesprotection against "_domestic violence_, " and which pledges to theSouth the military force of the country, to protect the mastersagainst their insurgent slaves: binds us, and our children, to shootdown our fellow-countrymen, who may rise, in emulation of ourrevolutionary fathers, to vindicate their inalienable "right to life, _liberty_ and the pursuit of happiness, "--this clause of theConstitution, I say distinctly, I never will support. 

That part of the Constitution which provides for the surrender offugitive slaves, I never have supported and never will. I will join inno slave-hunt. My door shall stand open, as it has long stood, for thepanting and trembling victim of the slave-hunter. When I shut itagainst him, may God shut the door of her mercy against me! Under thisclause of the Constitution, and designed to carry it into effect, slavery has demanded that laws should be passed, and of such acharacter, as have left the free citizen of the North withoutprotection for his own liberty. The question, whether a man seized ina free State as a slave, _is_ a slave or not, the law of Congress doesnot allow a jury to determine: but refers it to the decision of aJudge of a United State' Court, or even of the humblest Statemagistrate, it may be, upon the testimony or affidavit of the partymost deeply interested to support the claim. By virtue of this law, freemen have been seized and dragged into perpetual slavery--andshould I be seized by a slave-hunter in any part of the country whereI am not personally known, neither the Constitution nor laws of theUnited States would shield me from the same destiny. 

These, sir, are the specific parts of the Constitution of the unitedStates, which in my opinion are essentially vicious, hostile at onceto the liberty and to the morals of the nation. And these are theprincipal reasons of my refusal any longer to acknowledge myallegiance to it, and of my determination to revoke my oath to supportit. I cannot, in order to keep the law of man, break the law of God, or solemnly call him to witness my promise that I will break it. 

It is true that the Constitution provides for its own amendment, andthat by this process, all the guarantees of Slavery may be expunged. But it will be time enough to swear to support it when this is done. It cannot be right to do so, until these amendments are made. 

It is also true that the framers of the Constitution did studiouslykeep the words "Slave" and "Slavery" from its face. But to do ourconstitutional fathers justice, while they forebore--from veryshame--to give the word "Slavery" a place in the Constitution, theydid not forbear--again to do them justice--to give place in it to the_thing_. They were careful to wrap up the idea, and the substance ofSlavery, in the clause for the surrender of the fugitive, though theysacrificed justice in doing so. 

There is abundant evidence that this clause touching "persons held toservice or labor, " not only operates practically, under the judicialconstruction, for the protection of the slave interest; but that itwas _intended_ so to operate by the framers of the Constitution. Thehighest judicial authorities--Chief Justice Shaw, of the Supreme Courtof Massachusetts, in the Latimer case, and Mr. Justice Story, in theSupreme Court of the United States, in the case of _Prigg vs. TheState of Pennsylvania_, --tell us, I know not on what evidence, thatwithout this "compromise, " this security for Southern slaveholders, "the Union could not have been formed. " And there is still higherevidence, not only that the framers of the Constitution meant by thisclause to protect slavery, but that they did this, knowing thatslavery was wrong. Mr. Madison[12] informs us that the clause inquestion, as it came out of the hands of Dr. Johnson, the chairman ofthe "committee on style, " read thus: "No person legally held toservice, or labor, in one State, escaping into another, shall, " &c. , and the word "legally" was struck out, and the words "under the lawsthereof" inserted after the word "State, " in compliance with the wishof some, who thought the term _legal_ equivocal, and favoring the ideathat slavery was legal "_in a moral view_. " A conclusive proof that, although future generations might apply that clause to other kinds of"service or labor, " when slavery should have died out, or been killedoff by the young spirit of liberty, which was _then_ awake and at workin the land; still, slavery was what they were wrapping up in"equivocal" words: and wrapping it up for its protection and safekeeping: a conclusive proof that the framers of the Constitution weremore careful to protect themselves in the judgement of cominggenerations, from the charge of ignorance, than of sin; a conclusiveproof that they knew that slavery was not "legal in a moral view, "that it was a violation of the moral law of God; and yet knowing andconfessing its immorality, they dared to make this stipulation for itssupport and defence. 

[Footnote 12: Madison Papers, p. 1589. ]

This language may sound harsh to the ears of those who think it a partof their duty, as citizens, to maintain that whatever the patriots ofthe revolution did, was right; and who hold that we are bound to _do_all the iniquity that they covenanted for us that we _should_ do. Butthe claims of truth and right are paramount to all other claims. 

With all our veneration for our constitutional fathers, we mustadmit, --for they have left on record their own confession ofit, --that in this part of their work they _intended_ to hold theshield of their protection over a wrong, knowing that it was a wrong. They made a "compromise" which they had no right to make--a compromiseof moral principle for the sake of what they probably regarded as"political expediency. " I am sure they did not know--no man couldknow, or can now measure, the extent, or the consequences of the wrongthat they were doing. In the strong language of John Quincy Adams, [13]in relation to the article fixing the basis of representation, "Littledid the members of the Convention, from the free States, imagine orforesee what a sacrifice to Moloch was hidden under the mask of thisconcession. "

[Footnote 13: See his Report on the Massachusetts Resolutions. ]

I verily believe that, giving all due consideration to the benefitsconferred upon this nation by the Constitution, its national unity, its swelling masses of wealth, its power, and the external prosperityof its multiplying millions; yet the _moral_ injury that has beendone, by the countenance shown to slavery by holding over thattremendous sin the shield of the Constitution, and thus breaking downin the eyes of the nation the barrier between right and wrong; by sotenderly cherishing slavery as, in less than the life of man, tomultiply her children from half a million to nearly three millions; byexacting oaths from those who occupy prominent stations in society, that they will violate at once the rights of man and the law of God;by substituting itself as a rule of right, in place of the moral lawsof the universe;--thus in effect, dethroning the Almighty in thehearts of this people and setting up another sovereign in hisstead--more than outweighs it all. A melancholy and monitory lessonthis, to all time-serving and temporising statesmen! A strikingillustration of the _impolicy_ of sacrificing _right_ to anyconsiderations of expediency! Yet, what better than the evil effectsthat we have seen, could the authors of the Constitution havereasonably expected, from the sacrifice of right, in the concessionsthey made to slavery? Was it reasonable in them to expect that afterthey had introduced a vicious element into the very Constitution ofthe body politic which they were calling into life, it would not exertits vicious energies? Was it reasonable in them to expect that, afterslavery had been corrupting the public morals for a whole generation, their children would have too much virtue to _use_ for the defence ofslavery, a power which they themselves had not too much virtue to_give_? It is dangerous for the sovereign power of a State to licenseimmorality; to hold the shield of its protection over any thing thatis not "legal in a moral view. " Bring into your house a benumbedviper, and lay it down upon your warm hearth, and soon it will not askyou into which room it may crawl. Let Slavery once lean upon thesupporting arm, and bask in the fostering smile of the State, and youwill soon see, as we now see, both her minions and her victimsmultiply apace till the politics, the morals, the liberties, even thereligion of the nation, are brought completely under her control. 

To me, it appears that the virus of slavery, introduced into theConstitution of our body politic, by a few slight punctures, has nowso pervaded and poisoned the whole system of our National Government, that literally there is no health in it. The only remedy that I cansee for the disease, is to be found in the _dissolution of thepatient_. 

The Constitution of the United States, both in theory and practice, isso utterly broken down by the influence and effects of slavery, soimbecile for the highest good of the nation, and so powerful for evil, that I can give no voluntary assistance in holding it up any longer. 

Henceforth it is dead to me, and I to it. I withdraw all profession ofallegiance to it, and all my voluntary efforts to sustain it. Theburdens that it lays upon me, while it is held up by others, I shallendeavor to bear patiently, yet acting with reference to a higher law, and distinctly declaring, that while I retain my own liberty, I willbe a part to no compact, which helps to rob any other man of his. 

Very respectfully, your friend, FRANCIS JACKSON. 

 * * * * *

FROM

MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH

AT NIBLO'S GARDENS. 

"We have slavery, already, amongst us. The Constitution found it amongus; it recognized it and gave it SOLEMN GUARANTIES. To the full extentof these guaranties we are all bound, in honor, in justice, and by theConstitution. All the stipulations, contained in the Constitution, _infavor of the slaveholding States_ which are already in the Union, ought to be fulfilled, and so far as depends on me, shall befulfilled, in the fulness of their spirit, and to the exactness oftheir letter. "!!!

 * * * * *

EXTRACTS FROM

JOHN Q. ADAMS'S ADDRESS

AT NORTH BRIDGEWATER, NOV. 6, 1844. 

The benefits of the Constitution of the United States, were therestoration of credit and reputation, to the country--the revival ofcommerce, navigation, and ship-building--the acquisition of the meansof discharging the debts of the Revolution, and the protection andencouragement of the infant and drooping manufactures of the country. All this, however, as is now well ascertained, was insufficient topropitiate the rulers of the Southern States to the adoption of theConstitution. What they specially wanted was _protection_. --Protectionfrom the powerful and savage tribes of Indians within theirborders, and who were harrassing them with the most terrible ofwars--and protection from their own negroes--protection from theirinsurrections--protection from their escape--protection even to thetrade by which they were brought into the country--protection, shall Inot blush to say, protection to the very bondage by which they wereheld. Yes! it cannot be denied--the slaveholding lords of the Southprescribed, as a condition of their assent to the Constitution, threespecial provisions to secure the perpetuity of their dominion overtheir slaves. The first was the immunity for twenty years ofpreserving the African slave-trade; the second was the stipulation tosurrender fugitive slaves--an engagement positively prohibited by thelaws of God, delivered from Sinai; and thirdly, the exaction fatal tothe principles of popular representation, of a representation forslaves--for articles of merchandise, under the name of persons. 

The reluctance with which the freemen of the North submitted to thedictation of these conditions, is attested by the awkward andambiguous language in which they are expressed. The word slave ismost cautiously and fastidiously excluded from the whole instrument. Astranger, who should come from a foreign land, and read theConstitution of the United States, would not believe that slavery or aslave existed within the borders of our country. There is not word inthe Constitution _apparently_ bearing up on the condition of slavery, nor is there a provision but would be susceptible of practicalexecution if there were not a slave in the land. 

The delegates from South Carolina and Georgia distinctly avowed that, without this guarantee of protection to their property in slaves, theywould not yield their assent to the Constitution; and the freemen ofthe North, reduced to the alternative of departing from the vitalprinciple of their liberty, or of forfeiting the Union itself, avertedtheir faces, and with trembling hand subscribed the bond. 

Twenty years passed away--the slave markets of the South weresaturated with the blood of African bondage, and from midnight of the31st December, 1807, not a slave from Africa was suffered ever more tobe introduced upon our soil. But the internal traffic was stilllawful, and the _breeding_ States soon reconciled themselves to aprohibition which gave them the monopoly of the interdicted trade, andthey joined the full chorus of reprobation, to punish with death theslave-trader from Africa, while they cherished and shielded andenjoyed the precious profits of the American slave-trade exclusivelyto themselves. 

Perhaps this unhappy result of their concession had not altogetherescaped the foresight of the freemen of the North; but their intenseanxiety for the preservation of the whole Union, and the habit alreadyformed of yielding to the somewhat peremptory and overbearing tonewhich the relation of master and slave welds into the nature of thelord, prevailed with them to overlook this consideration, the internalslave-trade having scarcely existed while that with Africa had beenallowed. But of one consequence which has followed from the slaverepresentation, pervading the whole organic structure of theConstitution, they certainly were not prescient; for if they had been, never--no, never would they have consented to it. 

The representation, ostensibly of slaves, under the name of persons, was in its operation an exclusive grant of power to one class ofproprietors, owners of one species of property, to the detriment ofall the rest of the community. This species of property was odious inits nature, held in direct violation of the natural and inalienablerights of man, and of the vital principles of Christianity; it was allaccumulated in one geographical section of the country, and was allheld by wealthy men, comparatively small in numbers, not amounting toa tenth part of the free white population of the States in which itwas concentrated. 

In some of the ancient, and in some modern republics, extraordinarypolitical power and privileges have been invested in the owners ofhorses; but then these privileges and these powers have been grantedfor the equivalent of extraordinary duties and services to thecommunity, required of the favored class. The Roman knightsconstituted the cavalry of their armies, and the bushels of ringsgathered by Hannibal from their dead bodies, after the battle ofCannae, amply prove that the special powers conferred upon them wereno gratuitous grants. But in the Constitution of the United States, the political power invested in the owners of slaves is entirelygratuitous. No extraordinary service is required of them; they are, onthe contrary, themselves grievous burdens upon the community, alwaysthreatened with the danger of insurrections, to be smothered in theblood of both parties, master and slave, and always depressing thecondition of the poor free laborer, by competition with the labor ofthe slave. The property in horses was the gift of God to man, at thecreation of the world; the property in slaves is property acquired andheld by crimes, differing in no moral aspect from the pillage of afreebooter, and to which no lapse of time can give a prescriptiveright. You are told that this is no concern of yours, and that thequestion of freedom and slavery is exclusively reserved to theconsideration of the separate States. But if it be so, as to the merequestion of right between master and slave, it is of tremendousconcern to you that this little cluster of slave-owners shouldpossess, besides their own share in the representative hall of thenation, the exclusive privilege of appointing two-fifths of the wholenumber of the representatives of the people. This is now yourcondition, under that delusive ambiguity of language and of principle, which begins by declaring the representation in the popular branch ofthe legislature a representation of persons, and then provides thatone class of persons shall have neither part nor lot in the choice oftheir representative; but their elective franchise shall hetransferred to their masters, and the oppressors shall represent theoppressed. The same perversion of the representative principlepollutes the composition of the colleges of electors of President andVice President of the United States, and every department of thegovernment of the Union is thus tainted at its source by the gangreneof slavery. 

Fellow-citizens, --with a body of men thus composed, for legislatorsand executors of the laws, what will, what must be, what has been yourlegislation? The numbers of freemen constituting your nation are muchgreater than those of the slaveholding States, bond and free. You haveat least three-fifths of the whole population of the Union. Yourinfluence on the legislation and the administration of the governmentought to be in the proportion of three to two. --But how stands thefact? Besides the legitimate portion of influence exercised by theslaveholding States by the measure of their numbers, here is anintrusive influence in every department, by a representation nominallyof persons, but really of property, ostensibly of slaves, buteffectively of their masters, overbalancing your superiority ofnumbers, adding two-fifths of supplementary power to the two-fifthsfairly secured to them by the compact, CONTROLLING AND OVERRULING THEWHOLE ACTION OF YOUR GOVERNMENT AT HOME AND ABROAD, and warping it tothe sordid private interest and oppressive policy of 300, 000 owners ofslaves. 

From the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the UnitedStates, the institution of domestic slavery has been becoming more andmore the abhorrence of the civilized world. But in proportion as ithas been growing odious to all the rest of mankind, it has beensinking deeper and deeper into the affections of the holders ofslaves themselves. The cultivation of cotton and of sugar, unknown inthe Union at the establishment of the Constitution, has added largelyto the pecuniary value of the slave. And the suppression of theAfrican slave-trade as piracy upon pain of death, by securing thebenefit of a monopoly to the virtuous slaveholders of the ancientdominion, has turned her heroic tyrannicides into a community ofslave-breeders for sale, and converted the land of George Washington, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, and Thomas Jefferson, into a greatbarracoon--a cattle-show of human beings, an emporium, of which thestaple articles of merchandise are the flesh and blood, the bones andsinews of immortal man. 

Of the increasing abomination of slavery in the unbought hearts of menat the time when the Constitution of the United States was formed, what clearer proof could be desired, than that the very same year inwhich that charter of the land was issued, the Congress of theConfederation, with not a tithe of the powers given by the people tothe Congress of the new compact, actually abolished slavery for everthroughout the whole Northwestern territory, without a remonstrance ora murmur. But in the articles of confederation, there was no guarantyfor the property of the slaveholder--no double representation of himin the Federal councils--no power of taxation--no stipulation for therecovery of fugitive slaves. But when the powers of _government_ cameto be delegated to the Union, the--that is, South Carolina andGeorgia--refused their subscription to the parchment, till it shouldbe saturated with the infection of slavery, which no fumigation couldpurify, no quarantine could extinguish. The freemen of the North gaveway, and the deadly venom of slavery was infused into the Constitutionof freedom. Its first consequence has been to invert the firstprinciple of Democracy, that the will of the majority of numbers shallrule the land. By means of the double representation, the minoritycommand the whole, and a KNOT OF SLAVEHOLDERS GIVE THE LAW ANDPRESCRIBE THE POLICY OF THE COUNTRY. To acquire this superiority of alarge majority of freemen, a persevering system of engrossing nearlyall the seats of power and place, is constantly for a long series ofyears pursued, and you have seen, in a period of fifty-six years, theChief-magistracy of the Union held, during forty-four of them, by theowners of slaves. The Executive departments, the Army and Navy, theSupreme Judicial Court and diplomatic missions abroad, all present thesame spectacle;--an immense majority of power in the hands of a verysmall minority of the people--millions made for a fraction of a fewthousands. 

 * * * * *

From that day (1830, ) SLAVERY, SLAVEHOLDING, SLAVE-BREEDING ANDSLAVE-TRADING, HAVE FORMED THE WHOLE FOUNDATION OF THE POLICY OF THEFEDERAL GOVERNMENT, and of the slaveholding States, at home andabroad; and at the very time when a new census has exhibited a largeincrease upon the superior numbers of the free States, it haspresented the portentous evidence of increased influence andascendancy of the slaveholding power. 

Of the prevalence of that power, you have had continual and conclusiveevidence in the suppression for the space of ten years of the right ofpetition, guarantied, if there could be a guarantee against slavery, by the first article amendatory of the Constitution. 

 * * * * *

THE ANTI-SLAVERY EXAMINER. --NO. XI

THE

CONSTITUTION

A PRO-SLAVERY COMPACT

OR

SELECTIONS

FROM

THE MADISON PAPERS, &C. 

SECOND EDITION, ENLARGED. 

 * * * * *

NEW YORK:

AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY, 142 NASSAU STREET. 

1845. 

CONTENTS. 

INTRODUCTION. 

Debates in the Congress of the Confederation. Debates in the Federal Convention. List of Members of the Federal Convention. Speech of Luther Martin. 

DEBATES IN STATE CONVENTIONS. 

 Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Extracts from the Federalist, Debates in First Congress, Address of the Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society, Letter from Francis Jackson to Gov. Briggs, Extract from Mr. Webster's Speech, Extracts from J. Q. Adams's Address, November, 1844. 

INTRODUCTION. 

 * * * * *

Every one knows that the "Madison Papers" contain a Report, from thepen of James Madison, of the Debates in the Old Congress of theConfederation and in the Convention which formed the Constitution ofthe United States. We have extracted from them, in these pages, allthe Debates on those clauses of the Constitution which relate toslavery. To these we have added all that is found, on the same topic, in the Debates of the several State Conventions which ratified theConstitution: together with so much of the Speech of Luther Martinbefore the Legislature of Maryland, and of the Federalist, as relateto our subject; with some extracts, also, from the Debates of thefirst Federal Congress on Slavery. These are all printed withoutalteration, except that, in some instances, we have inserted inbrackets, after the name of a speaker, the name of the State fromwhich he came. The notes and italics are those of the original, butthe editor has added two notes on page 38, which are marked as his, and we have taken the liberty of printing in capitals one sentiment ofRufus King's, and two of James Madison's--a distinction which theimportance of the statements seemed to demand--otherwise we havereprinted exactly from the originals. 

These extracts develop most clearly all the details of that"compromise, " which was made between freedom and slavery, in 1787;granting to the slaveholder distinct privileges and protection for hisslave property, in return for certain commercial concessions on hispart toward the North. They prove also that the Nation at large werefully aware of this bargain at the time, and entered into it willinglyand with open eyes. 

We have added the late "Address of the American Anti-Slavery Society, "and the Letter of FRANCIS JACKSON to Governor BRIGGS, resigning hiscommission of Justice of the Peace--as bold and honorable protestsagainst the guilt and infamy of this National bargain, and as provingmost clearly the duty of each individual to trample it under his feet. The clauses of the Constitution to which we refer as of a pro-slaverycharacter are the following :--

ART. 1, SECT. 2. --Representatives and direct taxes shall beapportioned among the several States, which may be included withinthis Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall bedetermined by adding to the whole number of free persons, includingthose bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians nottaxed, _three-fifths of all other persons_. 

ART. 1, SECT. 8. --Congress shall have power . . . To suppressinsurrections. 

ART. 1, SECT. 9. --The migration or importation of such persons as anyof the States now existing, shall think proper to admit, shall not beprohibited by the Congress, prior to the year one thousand eighthundred and eight: but a tax or duty may be imposed on suchimportation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

ART. 4, SECT. 2. --No person, held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequenceof any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service orlabor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom suchservice or labor may be due. 

ART. 4, SECT. 4. --The United States shall guarantee to every State inthis Union a republican form of government; and shall protect each ofthem against invasion; and, on application of the legislature, or ofthe executive, (when the legislature cannot be convened) _againstdomestic violence_. 

The first of these clauses, relating to representation, confers on aslaveholding community additional political power for every slave heldamong them, and thus tempts them to continue to uphold the system: thesecond and the last, relating to insurrection and domestic violence, perfectly innocent in themselves--yet being made with the factdirectly in view that slavery exists among us, do deliberately pledgethe whole national force against the unhappy slave if he imitate ourfathers and resist oppression--thus making us partners in the guilt ofsustaining slavery: the third, relating to the slave-trade, disgracesthe nation by a pledge not to abolish that traffic till after twentyyears, _without obliging Congress to do so even then_, and thus theslave-trade may be legalized to-morrow if Congress choose: the fourthis a promise on the part of the whole Nation to return fugitive slavesto their masters, a deed which God's law expressly condemns and whichevery noble feeling of our nature repudiates with loathing andcontempt. 

These are the articles of the "Compromise, " so much talked of, betweenthe North and South. 

We do not produce the extracts which make up these pages to show whatis the meaning of the clauses above cited. For no man or party, of anyauthority in such matters, has ever pretended to doubt to what subjectthey all relate. If indeed they were ambiguous in their terms, aresort to the history of those times would set the matter at restforever. A few persons, to be sure, of late years, to serve thepurposes of a party, have tried to prove that the Constitution makesno compromise with slavery. Notwithstanding the clear light ofhistory;--the unanimous decision of all the courts in the land, bothState and Federal;--the action of Congress and the StateLegislature;--the constant practice of the Executive in all itsbranches;--and the deliberate acquiescence of the whole people forhalf a century, still they contend that the Nation does not know itsown meaning, and that the Constitution does not tolerate slavery!Every candid mind, however, must acknowledge that the language of theConstitution is clear and explicit. 

Its terms are so broad, it is said, that they include many othersbeside slaves, and hence it is wisely (!) inferred that they cannotinclude the slaves themselves! Many persons besides slaves in thiscountry doubtless are "held to service and labor under the laws of theStates, " but that does not at all show that slaves are not "held toservice;" many persons beside the slaves may take part "ininsurrections, " but that does not prove that when the slaves rise, theNational Government is not bound to put them down by force. Such athing has been heard of before as one description including a greatvariety of persons, --and this is the case in the present instance. 

But granting that the terms of the Constitution are ambiguous--thatthey are susceptible of two meanings, if the unanimous, concurrent, unbroken practice of every department of the Government, judicial, legislative, and executive, and the acquiescence of the whole peoplefor fifty years do not prove which is the true construction, then howand where can such a question ever be settled? If the people and theCourts of the land do not know what they themselves mean, who hasauthority to settle their meaning for them?

If then the people and the Courts of a country are to be allowed todetermine what their own laws mean, it follows that at this time andfor the last half century, the Constitution of the United States hasbeen, and still is, a pro-slavery instrument, and that any one whoswears to support it, swears to do pro-slavery acts, and violates hisduty both as a man and an abolitionist. What the Constitution maybecome a century hence, we know not; we speak of it _as it is_, andrepudiate it _as it is_. 

But the purpose, for which we have thrown these pages before thecommunity, is this. Some men, finding the nation unanimously decidingthat the Constitution tolerates slavery, have tried to prove that thisfalse construction, as they think it, has been foisted into theinstrument by the corrupting influence of slavery itself, tainting allit touches. They assert that the known anti-slavery spirit ofrevolutionary times never _could_ have consented to so infamous abargain as the Constitution is represented to be, and has in itspresent hands become. Now these pages prove the melancholy fact, thatwillingly, with deliberate purpose, our fathers bartered honesty forgain, and became partners with tyrants, that they might share in theprofits of their tyranny. 

And in view of this fact, will it not require a very strong argumentto make any candid man believe, that the bargain which the fatherstell us they meant to incorporate into the Constitution, and which thesons have always thought they found there incorporated, does not existthere, after all? Forty of the shrewdest men and lawyers in the landassemble to make a bargain, among other things, about slaves, --aftermonths of anxious deliberation they put it into writing and sign theirnames to the instrument, --fifty years roll away, twenty millions, atleast, of their children pass over the stage of life, --courts sit andpass judgment, --parties arise and struggle fiercely; still all concurin finding in the instrument just that meaning which the fathers tellus they intended to express:--must not he be a desperate man, who, after all this, sets out to prove that the fathers were bunglers andthe sons fools, and that slavery is not referred to at all?

Besides, the advocates of this new theory of the Anti-slaverycharacter of the Constitution, quote some portions of the MadisonPapers in support of their views, --and this makes it proper that thecommunity should hear _all_ that these Debates have to say on thesubject. The further we explore them, the clearer becomes the fact, that the Constitution was meant to be, what it has always beenesteemed, a compromise between slavery and freedom. 

If then the Constitution be, what these Debates show that our fathersintended to make it, and what, too, their descendants, this nation, say they did make it and agree to uphold, --then we affirm that it is a"covenant with death and an agreement with hell, " and ought to beimmediately annulled. No abolitionist can consistently take officeunder it, or swear to support it. 

But if, on the contrary, our fathers failed in their purpose, and theConstitution is all pure and untouched by slavery, --then, Union itselfis impossible, without guilt. For it is undeniable that the fiftyyears passed under this (anti-slavery) Constitution, show us theslaves trebling in numbers;--slaveholders monopolizing the offices anddictating the policy of the Government;--prostituting the strength andinfluence of the Nation to the support of slavery here andelsewhere;--trampling on the rights of the free States, and making thecourts of the country their tools. To continue this disastrousalliance longer is madness. The trial of fifty years with the best ofmen and the best of Constitutions, on this supposition, only provesthat it is impossible for free and slave States to unite on any terms, without all becoming partners in the guilt and responsible for the sinof slavery. We dare not prolong the experiment, and with doubleearnestness we repeat our demand upon every honest man to join in theoutcry of the American Anti-Slavery Society, --

NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS!

THE CONSTITUTION

A PRO-SLAVERY COMPACT. 

 * * * * *

_Extracts from Debates in the Congress of Confederation, preserved byThomas Jefferson, 1776. _

Congress proceeded the same day to consider the Declaration ofIndependence, * * *

The clause too reprobating the enslaving the inhabitants of Africa wasstruck out, in compliance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had neverattempted to restrain the importation of Slaves, and who on thecontrary still wished to continue it. Our Northern brethren also, Ibelieve, felt a little tender under those censures; for though theirpeople have very few slaves themselves, yet they had been prettyconsiderable carriers of them to others. --p. 18. 

On Friday, the twelfth of July, 1776, the committee appointed to drawthe articles of Confederation reported them, and on the twenty-second, the House resolved themselves into a committee to take them intoconsideration. On the thirtieth and thirty-first of that month, andthe first of the ensuing, those articles were debated which determinedthe proportion or quota of money which each State should furnish tothe common treasury, and the manner of voting in Congress. The firstof these articles was expressed in the original draught in thesewords:--

"Article 11. All charges of war and all other expenses that shall beincurred for the common defence, or general welfare, and allowed bythe United States assembled, shall be defrayed out of a commontreasury, which shall be supplied by the several Colonies inproportion to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex and duality, except Indians not paying taxes, in each Colony, a true account ofwhich, distinguishing the white inhabitants, shall be trienniallytaken and transmitted to the Assembly of the United States. "

Mr. CHASE (of Maryland) moved, that the quotas should be paid, not bythe number of inhabitants of every condition but by that of the "whiteinhabitants. " He admitted that taxation should be always in proportionto property; that this was in theory the true rule, but that from avariety of difficulties it was a rule which could never be adopted inpractice. The value of the property in every State could never beestimated justly and equally. Some other measure for the wealth of theState must therefore be devised, some standard referred to whichwould be more simple. He considered the number of inhabitants as atolerably good criterion of property, and that this might always beobtained. He therefore thought it the best mode we could adopt, withone exception only. He observed that negroes are property, and as suchcannot be distinguished from the lands or personalities held in thoseStates where there are few slaves. That the surplus of profit which aNorthern farmer is able to lay by, he invests in cattle, horses, &c. ;whereas, a Southern farmer lays out that same surplus in slaves. Thereis no more reason therefore for taxing the Southern States on thefarmer's head and on his slave's head, than the Northern ones on theirfarmers' heads and the heads of their cattle. That the method proposedwould therefore tax the Southern States according to their numbers andtheir wealth conjunctly, while the Northern would be taxed on numbersonly: that negroes in fact should not be considered as members of theState, more than cattle, and that they have no more interest in it. 

Mr. John Adams (of Massachusetts) observed, that the numbers of peoplewere taken by this article as an index of the wealth of the State andnot as subjects of taxation. That as to this matter it was of noconsequence by what name you called your people, whether by that offreemen or of slaves. That in some countries the laboring poor werecalled freemen, in others they were called slaves: but that thedifference as to the state was imaginary only. What matters it whethera landlord employing ten laborers on his farm gives them annually asmuch money as will buy them the necessaries of life, or gives themthose necessaries at short hand? The ten laborers add as much wealthannually to the State, increase its exports as much, in the one caseas the other. Certainly five hundred freemen produce no more profits, no greater surplus for the payment of taxes, than five hundred slaves. Therefore the State in which are the laborers called freemen, shouldbe taxed no more than that in which are those called slaves. Suppose, by any extraordinary operation of nature or of law, one half thelaborers of a State could in the course of one night be transformedinto slaves, --would the State be made the poorer, or the less able topay taxes? That the condition of the laboring poor in mostcountries, --that of the fishermen, particularly, of the NorthernStates, --is as abject as that of slaves. It is the number of laborerswhich produces the surplus for taxation; and numbers, therefore, indiscriminately, are the fair index of wealth. That it is the use ofthe word "property" here, and its application to some of the people ofthe State, which produces the fallacy. How does the Southern farmerprocure slaves? Either by importation or by purchase from hisneighbor. If he imports a slave, he adds one to the number of laborersin his country, and proportionably to its profits and abilities to paytaxes; if he buys from his neighbor, it is only a transfer of alaborer from one farm to another, which does not change the annualproduce of the State, and therefore should not change its tax; that ifa Northern farmer works ten laborers on his farm, he can, it is true, invest the surplus of ten men's labor in cattle; but so may theSouthern farmer working ten slaves. That a State of one hundredthousand freemen can maintain no more cattle than one of one hundredthousand slaves; therefore they have no more of that kind of property. That a slave may, indeed, from the custom of speech, be more properlycalled the wealth of his master, than the free laborer might be calledthe wealth of his employer: but as to the State, both were equally itswealth, and should therefore equally add to the quota of its tax. 

Mr. HARRISON (of Virginia) proposed, as a compromise, that two slavesshould be counted as one freeman. He affirmed that slaves did not doas much work as freemen, and doubted if two effected more than one. That this was proved by the price of labor, the hire of a laborer inthe Southern colonies being from £8 to £12, while in the Northern itwas generally £24. 

Mr. WILSON (of Pennsylvania) said, that if this amendment should takeplace, the Southern colonies would have all the benefit of slaves, whilst the Northern ones would bear the burthen. That slaves increasethe profits of a State, which the Southern States mean to take tothemselves; that they also increase the burthen of defence, whichwould of course fall so much the heavier on the Northern; that slavesoccupy the places of freemen and eat their food. Dismiss your slaves, and freemen will take their places. It is our duty to lay everydiscouragement on the importation of slaves; but this amendment wouldgive the _jus trium liberorum_ to him who would import slaves. Thatother kinds of property were pretty equally distributed through allthe Colonies: there were as many cattle, horses, and sheep, in theNorth as the South, and South as the North; but not so as to slaves:that experience has shown that those colonies have been always able topay most, which have the most inhabitants, whether they be black orwhite; and the practice of the Southern colonies has always been tomake every farmer pay poll taxes upon all his laborers, whether theybe black or white. He acknowledged indeed that freemen worked themost; but they consume the most also. They do not produce a greatersurplus for taxation. The slave is neither fed nor clothed soexpensively as a freeman. Again, white women are exempted from laborgenerally, which negro women are not. In this then the Southern Stateshave an advantage as the article now stands. It has sometimes beensaid that slavery was necessary, because the commodities they raisewould be too dear for market if cultivated by freemen; but now it issaid that the labor of the slave is the dearest. 

Mr. PAYNE (of Massachusetts) urged the original resolution ofCongress, to proportion the quotas of the States to the number ofsouls. 

Dr. WITHERSPOON (of New-Jersey) was of opinion, that the value oflands and houses was the best estimate of the wealth of a nation, andthat it was practicable to obtain such a valuation. This is the truebarometer of wealth. The one now proposed is imperfect in itself, andunequal between the States. It has been objected that negroes eat thefood of freemen, and therefore should be taxed: horses also eat thefood of freemen; therefore they also should be taxed. It has been saidtoo, that in carrying slaves into the estimate of the taxes the Stateis to pay, we do no more than those States themselves do, who alwaystake slaves into the estimate of the taxes the individual is to pay. But the cases are not parallel. In the Southern Colonies, slavespervade the whole Colony; but they do not pervade the whole continent. That as to the original resolution of Congress, it was temporary only, and related to the moneys heretofore emitted: whereas we are nowentering into a new compact, and therefore stand on original ground. 

AUGUST 1st. The question being put, the amendment proposed wasrejected by the votes of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode-Island, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey and Pennsylvania, against those ofDelaware, Maryland, Virginia, North; and South Carolina. Georgia wasdivided. --_pp_. 27-8-9, 30-1-2. 

 * * * * *

_Extracts from Madison's Report of Debates in the Congress of theConfederation. _

TUESDAY, January 14, 1783. 

If the valuation of land had not been prescribed by the FederalArticles, the Committee would certainly have preferred some other ruleof appointment, particularly that of numbers, under certainqualifications as to slaves. --_p_. 260

TUESDAY, Feb. 11, 1783. 

Mr. WOLCOTT declares his opinion that the Confederation ought to beamended by substituting numbers of inhabitants as the rule; admits thedifference between freemen and blacks; and suggests a compromise, byincluding in the numeration such blacks only as were within sixteenand sixty years of age. --_p_. 331

THURSDAY, March 27, 1783. 

(The eleventh and twelfth paragraphs:)

Mr. WILSON (of Pennsylvania) was strenuous in their favor; said he wasin Congress when the Articles of Confederation directing a valuationof land were agreed to; that it was the effect of the impossibility ofcompromising the different ideas of the Eastern and Southern States, as to the value of slaves compared with the whites, the alternative inquestion. 

Mr. CLARK (of New-Jersey) was in favor of them. He said that he wasalso in Congress when this article was decided; that the SouthernStates would have agreed to numbers in preference to the value of landif half their slaves only should be included; but that the EasternStates would not concur in that proposition. 

It was agreed, on all sides, that, instead of fixing the proportion byages, as the report proposed, it would be best to fix the proportionin absolute numbers. With this view, and that the blank might befilled up, the clause was recommitted. _p_. 421-2. 

FRIDAY, March 28, 1783. 

The committee last mentioned, reported that two blacks be rated as onefreeman. 

Mr. WOLCOTT (of Connecticut) was for rating them as four to three. Mr. CARROLL as four to one. Mr. WILLIAMSON (of North Carolina) said hewas principled against slavery; and that he thought slaves anincumbrance to society, instead of increasing its ability to paytaxes. Mr. HIGGINSON (of Massachusetts) as four to three. Mr. RUTLEDGE(of South Carolina) said, for the sake of the object, he would agreeto rate slaves as two to one, but he sincerely thought three to onewould be a juster proportion. Mr. HOLTON as four to three. --Mr. OSGOODsaid he did not go beyond four to three. On a question for rating themas three to two, the votes were, New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, no; Rhode Island; divided; Connecticut, aye; New Jersey, aye;Pennsylvania, aye; Delaware, aye; Maryland, no; Virginia, no; NorthCarolina, no; South Carolina, no. The paragraph was then postponed, bygeneral consent, some wishing for further time to deliberate on it;but it appearing to be the general opinion that no compromise would beagreed to. 

After some further discussions on the Report, in which the necessityof some simple and practicable rule of apportionment came fully intoview, Mr. MADISON (of Virginia) said that, in order to give a proof ofthe sincerity of his professions of liberality, he would propose thatslaves should be rated as five to three. Mr. RUTLEDGE (of SouthCarolina) seconded the motion. Mr. WILSON (of Pennsylvania) said hewould sacrifice his opinion on this compromise. 

Mr. LEE was against changing the rule, but gave it as his opinion thattwo slaves were not equal to one freeman. 

On the question for five to three, it passed in the affirmative; NewHampshire, aye; Massachusetts, divided; Rhode Island, no; Connecticut, no; New Jersey, aye; Pennsylvania, aye; Maryland, aye; Virginia, aye;North Carolina, aye; South Carolina, aye. 

A motion was then made by Mr. BLAND, seconded by Mr. LEE, to strikeout the clause so amended, and, on the question "Shall it stand, " itpassed in the negative; New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, no; RhodeIsland, no; Connecticut, no; New Jersey, aye; Pennsylvania, aye;Delaware, no; Maryland, aye; Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye; SouthCarolina, no; so the clause was struck out. 

The arguments used by those who were for rating slaves high were, thatthe expense of feeding and clothing them was as far below thatincident to freemen as their industry and ingenuity were below thoseof freemen; and that the warm climate within which the States havingslaves lay, compared with the rigorous climate and inferior fertilityof the others, ought to have great weight in the case; and that theexports of the former States were greater than of the latter. On theother side, it was said, that slaves were not put to labor as young asthe children of laboring families; that, having no interest in theirlabor, they did as little as possible, and omitted every exertion ofthought requisite to facilitate and expedite it; that if the exportsof the States having slaves exceeded those of the others, theirimports were in proportion, slaves employed wholly in agriculture, notin manufactures; and that, in fact, the balance of trade formerly wasmuch more against the Southern States than the others. 

On the main question, New Hampshire, aye; Massachusetts, no; RhodeIsland, no; Connecticut, no; New York (Mr. FLOYD, aye;) New Jersey, aye; Delaware, no; Maryland, aye; Virginia, aye; North Carolina, aye;South Carolina, no. --_pp. 423-4-5_. 

TUESDAY, April l, 1783. 

Congress resumed the Report on Revenue, &c. Mr. HAMILTON, whohad been absent when the last question was taken for substitutingnumbers in place of the value of land, moved to reconsider that vote. He was seconded by Mr. OSGOOD. Those who voted differently fromtheir former votes were influenced by the conviction of the necessityof the change, and despair on both sides of a more favorable rateof the slaves. The rate of three-fifths was agreed to withoutopposition. --_p. 430_. 

MONDAY, MAY 26, 1783. 

The Resolutions on the Journal instructing the ministers in Europe toremonstrate against the carrying off the negroes--also those forfurloughing the troops--passed _unanimously. --p. 456. _

 * * * * *

_Letter from Mr. Madison to Edmund Randolph_. 

PHILADELPHIA, April 8, 1783. 

A change of the valuation of lands for the number of inhabitants, deducting two-fifths of the slaves, has received a tacit sanction, and, unless hereafter expunged, will go forth in the generalrecommendation, as material to future harmony and justice among themembers of the Confederacy. The deduction of two-fifths was acompromise between the wide opinions and demands of the Southern andother States. --_p. 523_. 

 * * * * *

_Extract from "Debates in the Federal Convention" of 1787, for theformation of the Constitution of the United States_. 

TUESDAY, May 29, 1787. 

Mr. CHARLES PINCKNEY laid before the House the draft of a FederalGovernment. * * * "The proportion of direct taxation shall beregulated by the whole number of inhabitants of everydescription"--_pp_. 735, 741. 

WEDNESDAY, May 30, 1787. 

The following Resolution, being the second of those proposed by Mr. RANDOLPH, was taken up, viz. 

"_That the rights of suffrage in the National Legislature ought to beproportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number of freeinhabitants, as the one or the other rule may seem best in differentcases_. "

Colonel HAMILTON moved to alter the resolution so as to read, "thatthe rights of suffrage in the National Legislature ought to beproportioned to the number of free inhabitants. " Mr. SPAIGHT secondedthe motion. --_p_. 750. 

WEDNESDAY, June 6, 1787. 

Mr. MADISON. We have seen the mere distinction of color made, in themost enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressivedominion ever exercised by man over man. --_p_. 806. 

MONDAY, June 11, 1787. 

Mr. SHERMAN proposed, that the proportion of suffrage in the firstbranch should be according to the respective numbers of freeinhabitants;

Mr. RUTLEDGE proposed, that the proportion of suffrage in the firstbranch should be according to the quotas of contribution. 

Mr. KING and Mr. WILSON, in order to bring the question to a point, moved, "that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the NationalLegislature ought not to be according to the rule established in theArticles of Confederation, but according to some equitable ratio ofrepresentation. "--_p_. 836. 

It was then moved by Mr. RUTLEDGE, seconded by Mr. BUTLER, to add tothe words, "equitable ratio of representation, " at the end of themotion just agreed to, the words "according to the quotas ofcontribution. " On motion of Mr. WILSON, seconded by Mr. PINCKNEY, thiswas postponed; in order to add, after the words, "equitable ratio ofrepresentation, " the words following: "In proportion to the wholenumber of white and other free citizens and inhabitants of every age, sex and condition, including those bound to servitude for a term ofyears, and three-fifths of all other persons not comprehended in theforegoing description, except Indians not paying taxes, in eachState"--this being the rule in the act of Congress, agreed to byeleven States, for apportioning quotas of revenue on the States, andrequiring a census only every five, seven, or ten years. 

Mr. GERRY (of Massachusetts) thought property not the rule ofrepresentation. Why, then, should the blacks, who were property in theSouth, be in the rule of representation more than the cattle andhorses of the North?

On the question, --Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--9;New Jersey, Delaware, no--2. --_pp_. 842-3. 

TUESDAY, June 19, 1787. 

Mr. MADISON. Where slavery exists, the republican theory becomes stillmore fallacious. --_p_. 899. 

SATURDAY, June 30, 1787. 

Mr. Madison, --admitted that every peculiar interest, whether in anyclass of citizens, or any description of states, ought to be securedas far as possible. Wherever there is danger of attack, there ought tobe given a constitutional power of defence. But he contended that theStates were divided into different interests, not by their differenceof size, but by other circumstances; the most material of whichresulted partly from climate, but principally from the effects oftheir having or not having slaves. These two causes concurred informing the great division of interests in the United States. It didnot lie between the large and small States. IT LAY BETWEEN THENORTHERN AND SOUTHERN; and if any defensive power were necessary, itought to be mutually given to these two interests. He was so stronglyimpressed with this important truth, that he had been casting about inhis mind for some expedient that would answer the purpose. The onewhich had occurred was, that, instead of proportioning the votes ofthe States in both branches, to the irrespective numbers ofinhabitants, computing the slaves in the ratio of five to three, theyshould be represented in one branch according to the number of freeinhabitants only; and in the other according to the whole number, counting slaves as free. By this arrangement the Southern scale wouldhave the advantage in one House, and the Northern in the other. He hadbeen restrained from proposing this expedient by two considerations;one was his unwillingness to urge any diversity of interests on anoccasion where it is but too apt to arise of itself; the other was theinequality of powers that must be vested in the two branches, andwhich would destroy the equilibrium of interests. --_pp_. 1006-7

MONDAY, July 2, 1787. 

Mr. PINCKNEY. There is a real distinction between the Northern andSouthern interests. North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, intheir rice and indigo, had a peculiar interest which might besacrificed. --_p_. 1016. 

FRIDAY, July 6, 1787. 

Mr. PINCKNEY--thought the blacks ought to stand on an equality withthe whites; but would agree to the ratio settled by Congress. --_p. _1039. 

MONDAY, July 9, 1787. 

Mr. PATTERSON considered the proposed estimate for the futureaccording to the combined rules of numbers and wealth, as too vague. For this reason New Jersey was against it. He could regard negroslaves in no light but as property. They are no free agents, have nopersonal liberty, no faculty of acquiring property, but on thecontrary are themselves property, and like other property entirely atthe will of the master. Has a man in Virginia a number of votes inproportion to the number of his slaves? And if negroes are notrepresented in the States to which they belong, why should they berepresented in the General Government. What is the true principle ofrepresentation? It is an expedient by which an assembly of certainindividuals, chosen by the people, is substituted in place of theinconvenient meeting of the people themselves. If such a meeting ofthe people was actually to take place, would the slaves vote? Theywould not. Why then should they be represented? He was also againstsuch an indirect encouragement of the slave trade; observing thatCongress, in their act relating to the change of the eighth article ofConfederation, had been ashamed to use the term "slaves, " and hadsubstituted a description. 

Mr. MADISON reminded Mr. PATTERSON that his doctrine ofrepresentation, which was in its principle the genuine one, must forever silence the pretensions of the small States to an equality ofvotes with the large ones. They ought to vote in the same proportionin which their citizens would do, if the people of all the States werecollectively met. He suggested, as a proper ground of compromise, thatin the first branch the States should be represented according totheir number of free inhabitants; and in the second, which had for oneof its primary objects the guardianship of property, according to thewhole number, including slaves. 

Mr. BUTLER urged warmly the justice and necessity of regarding wealthin the apportionment of representation. 

Mr. KING had always expected, that, as the Southern States are therichest, they would not league themselves with the Northern, unlesssome respect were paid to their superior wealth. If the latter expectthose preferential distinctions in commerce, and other advantageswhich they will derive from the connexion, they must not expect toreceive them without allowing some advantages in return. Eleven out ofthirteen of the States had agreed to consider slaves in theapportionment of taxation; and taxation and representation ought to gotogether. --_pp_. 1054-5-6. 

TUESDAY, July 10, 1787. 

_In Convention_, --Mr. KING reported, from the Committee yesterdayappointed, "that the States at the first meeting of the GeneralLegislature, should be represented by sixty-five members, in thefollowing proportions, to wit:--New Hampshire, by 3; Massachusetts, 8;Rhode Island, 1; Connecticut, 5; New York, 6; New Jersey, 4;Pennsylvania, 8; Delaware, 1; Maryland, 6; Virginia, 10; NorthCarolina, 5; South Carolina, 5; Georgia, 3. "

Mr. KING remarked that the four Eastern States, having 800, 000 souls, have one-third fewer representatives than the four Southern States, having not more than 700, 000 souls, rating the blacks as five forthree. The Eastern people will advert to these circumstances, and bedissatisfied. He believed them to be very desirous of uniting withtheir Southern brethren, but did not think it prudent to rely so faron that disposition, as to subject them to any gross inequality. Hewas fully convinced that THE QUESTION CONCERNING A DIFFERENCE OFINTERESTS DID NOT LIE WHERE IT HAD HITHERTO BEEN DISCUSSED, BETWEENTHE GREAT AND SMALL STATES; BUT BETWEEN THE SOUTHERN AND EASTERN. Forthis reason be had been ready to yield something, in the proportion ofrepresentatives, for the security of the Southern. No principle wouldjustify the giving them a majority. They were brought as near anequality as was possible. He was not averse to giving them a stillgreater security, but did not see how it could be done. 

General PINCKNEY. The Report before it was committed was more favorableto the Southern States than as it now stands. If they are to form soconsiderable a minority, and the regulation of trade is to be given tothe General Government, they will be nothing more than overseers forthe Northern States. He did not expect the Southern States to beraised to a majority of representatives; but wished them to havesomething like an equality. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON. The Southern interest must be extremely endangered bythe present arrangement. The Northern States are to have a majority inthe first instance, and the means of perpetuating it. 

General PINCKNEY urged the reduction; dwelt on the superior wealth ofthe Southern States, and insisted on its having its due weight in theGovernment. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS regretted the turn of the debate. The States, hefound, had many representatives on the floor. Few, he feared, were tobe deemed the representatives of America. He thought the SouthernStates have, by the Report, more than their share of Representation. Property ought to have its weight, but not all the weight. If theSouthern States are to supply money, the Northern States are to spilltheir blood. Besides, the probable revenue to be expected from theSouthern States has been greatly overrated. --_pp_. 1056-7-8-9. 

WEDNESDAY, July 11, 1787. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON moved that Mr. RANDOLPH's propositions be postponed, inorder to consider the following, "that in order to ascertain thealterations that may happen in the population and wealth of theseveral States, a census shall be taken of the free white inhabitants, and three-fifths of those of other descriptions on the first yearafter this government shall have been adopted, and every ---- yearthereafter; and that the representation be regulated accordingly. "

Mr. BUTLER and General PINCKNEY insisted that blacks be included in therule of representation _equally_ with the whites; and for that purposemoved that the words "three-fifths" be struck out. 

Mr. GERRY thought that three-fifths of them was, to say the least, thefull proportion that could be admitted. 

Mr. GORHAM. This ratio was fixed by Congress as a rule of taxation. Then, it was urged, by the Delegates representing the States havingslaves, that the blacks were still more inferior to freemen. Atpresent, when the ratio of representation is to be established, we areassured that they are equal to freemen. The arguments on the formeroccasion had convinced him, that three-fifths was pretty near the justproportion, and he should vote according to the same opinion now. 

Mr. BUTLER insisted that the labor of a slave in South Carolina was asproductive and valuable, as that of a freeman in Massachusetts; thatas wealth was the great means of defence and utility to the nation, they were equally valuable to it with freemen; and that consequentlyan equal representation ought to be allowed for them in a governmentwhich was instituted principally, for the protection of property, andwas itself to be supported by property. 

Mr. MASON could not agree to the motion, notwithstanding it wasfavorable to Virginia, because he thought it unjust. It was certainthat the slaves were valuable, as they raised the value of land, increased the exports and imports, and of course the revenue, wouldsupply the means of feeding and supporting an army, and might in casesof emergency become themselves soldiers. As in these importantrespects they were useful to the community at large, they ought not tobe excluded from the estimate of representation. He could not, however, regard them as equal to freemen, and could not vote for themas such. He added, as worthy of remark, that the Southern States havethis peculiar species of property, over and above the other species ofproperty common to all the States. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON reminded Mr. GORHAM that if the Southern Statescontended for the inferiority of blacks to whites when taxation was inview, the Eastern States, on the same occasion, contended for theirequality. He did not, however, either then or now, concur in eitherextreme, but approved of the ratio of three-fifths. 

On Mr. BUTLER'S motion, for considering blacks as equal to whites inthe apportionment of representation, --Delaware, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--3; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, no--7; New York, not on the floor. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS said he had several objections to theproposition of Mr. WILLIAMSON. In the first place, it fettered theLegislature too much. In the second place, it would exclude someStates altogether who would not have a sufficient number to entitlethem to a single representation. In the third place, it will notconsist with the resolution passed on Saturday last, authorizing theLegislature to adjust the representation from time to time on theprinciples of population and wealth; nor with the principles ofequity. If slaves were to be considered as inhabitants, not as wealth, then the said Resolution would not be pursued; if as wealth, then whyis no other wealth but slaves included? These objections may perhapsbe removed by amendments. 

Mr. KING thought there was great force in the objections of Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. He would, however, accede to the proposition forthe sake of doing something. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. Another objection with him, against admittingthe blacks into the census, was, that the people of Pennsylvania wouldrevolt at the idea of being put on a footing with slaves. They wouldreject any plan that was to have such an effect. 

Mr. MADISON. Future contributions, it seemed to be understood on allhands, would be principally levied on imports and exports. --pp. 1066-7-8-9; 1070-2-3. 

On the question on the first clause of Mr. WILLIAMSON's motion, as totaking a census of the _free_ inhabitants, it passed in theaffirmative, --Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, aye--6; Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, no--4. 

The next clause as to three-fifths of the negroes being considered, Mr. KING, being much opposed to fixing numbers as the rule ofrepresentation, was particularly so on account of the blacks. Hethought the admission of them along with whites at all, would excitegreat discontents among the States having no slaves. He had neversaid, as to any particular point, that he would in no event acquiescein and support it; but he would say that if in any case such adeclaration was to be made by him, it would be in this. 

He remarked that in the temporary allotment of representatives made bythe Committee, the Southern States had received more than the numberof their white and three-fifths of their black inhabitants entitledthem to. 

Mr. SHERMAN. South Carolina had not more beyond her proportion thanNew York and New Hampshire; nor either of them more than was necessaryin order to avoid fractions, or reducing them below their proportion. Georgia had more; but the rapid growth of that State seemed to justifyit. In general the allotment might not be just, but considering allcircumstances he was satisfied with it. 

Mr. GORHAM was aware that there might be some weight in what hadfallen from his colleague, as to the umbrage which might be taken bythe people of the Eastern States. But he recollected that when theproposition of Congress for changing the eighth Article of theConfederation was before the Legislature of Massachusetts, the onlydifficulty then was, to satisfy them that the negroes ought not tohave been counted equally with the whites, instead of being counted inthe ratio of three-fifths only. [1]

[Footnote 1: They were then to have been a rule of taxation only. ]

Mr. WILSON did not well see, on what principle the admission of blacksin the proportion of three-fifths could be explained. Are theyadmitted as citizens--then why are they not admitted on an equalitywith white citizens? Are they admitted as property--then why is notother property admitted into the computation? These were difficulties, however, which he thought must be overruled by the necessity ofcompromise. He had some apprehensions also, from the tendency of theblending of the blacks with the whites, to give disgust to the peopleof Pennsylvania, as had been intimated by his colleague (Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. )

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS was compelled to declare himself reduced to thedilemma of doing injustice to the Southern States, or to human nature;and he must therefore do it to the former. For he could never agree togive such encouragement to the slave trade, as would be given byallowing them a representation for their negroes; and he did notbelieve those States would ever confederate on terms that woulddeprive them of that trade. 

On the question for agreeing to include three-fifths of theblacks, --Connecticut, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye--4;Massachusetts, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, [2] SouthCarolina, no--6. --_pp_. 1076-7-8. 

[Footnote 2: Mr. Carroll said, in explanation of the vote of Maryland, that he wished the _phraseology_ to be so altered as to obviate, ifpossible, the danger which had been expressed of giving umbrage to theEastern and Middle States. ]

THURSDAY, July 12, 1787. 

_In Convention_, --Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved a proviso, "thattaxation shall be in proportion to representation. "

Mr. BUTLER contended again, that representation should be according tothe full number of inhabitants, including all the blacks; admittingthe justice of Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS'S motion. 

General PINCKNEY was alarmed at what was said yesterday, [byGOUVERNEUR MORRIS] concerning the negroes. He was now again alarmed atwhat had been thrown out concerning the taxing of exports. SouthCarolina has in one year exported to the amount of 600, 000£. Sterling, all which was the fruit of the labor of her blacks. Will she berepresented in proportion to this amount? She will not. Neither oughtshe then to be subject to a tax on it. He hoped a clause would beinserted in the system, restraining the Legislature from taxingexports. 

Mr. WILSON approved the principle, but could not see how it could becarried into execution; unless restrained to direct taxation. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS having so varied his motion by inserting theword "direct, " it passed, _nem. Con_. , as follows: "provided alwaysthat direct taxation ought to be proportioned to representation"

Mr. DAVIE said it was high time now to speak out. He saw that it wasmeant by some gentlemen to deprive the Southern States of any share ofrepresentation for their blacks. He was sure that North Carolina wouldnever confederate on any terms that did not rate them at least asthree-fifths. If the Eastern States meant, therefore, to exclude themaltogether, the business was at an end. 

Dr. JOHNSON thought that wealth and population were the true, equitable rules of representation; but he conceived that these twoprinciples resolved themselves into one, population being the bestmeasure of wealth. He concluded, therefore, that the number of peopleought to be established as the rule, and that all descriptions, including blacks _equally_ with the whites, ought to fall within thecomputation. As various opinions had been expressed on the subject, hewould move that a committee might be appointed to take them intoconsideration, and report them. 

Mr. GOUVENEUR MORRIS. It had been said that it is high time to speakout. As one member, he would candidly do so. He came here to form acompact for the good of America. He was ready to do so with all theStates. He hoped, and believed, that all would enter into suchcompact. If they would not, he was ready to join with any states thatwould. But as the compact was to be voluntary, it is in vain for theEastern States to insist on what the Southern States will never agreeto. It is equally vain for the latter to require, what the otherStates can never admit; and he verily believed the people ofPennsylvania will never agree to a representation of negroes. What canbe desired by these States more than has been already proposed--thatthe legislature shall from time to time regulate representationaccording to population and wealth?

General PINCKNEY desired that the rule of wealth should beascertained, and not left to the pleasure of the legislature, and thatproperty in slaves should not be exposed to danger, under a governmentinstituted for the protection of property. 

The first clause in the Report of the first Grand Committee waspostponed. 

Mr. ELLSWORTH, in order to carry into effect the principleestablished, moved to add to the last clause adopted by the house thewords following, "and that the rule of contribution by directtaxation, for the support of the Government of the United States, shall be the number of white inhabitants, and three-fifths of everyother description in the several States, until some other rule thatshall more accurately ascertain the wealth of the several States, canbe devised and adopted by the Legislature. "

Mr. BUTLER seconded the motion, in order that it might be committed. 

Mr. RANDOLPH was not satisfied with the motion. The danger will berevived, that the ingenuity of the Legislature may evade or pervertthe rule, so as to perpetuate the power where it shall be lodged inthe first instance. He proposed, in lieu of Mr. ELLSWORTH'S motion"that in order to ascertain the alterations in representation thatstay be required, from time to time, by changes in the relativecircumstances of the States, a census shall be taken within two yearsfrom the first meeting of the General Legislature of the UnitedStates, and once within the term of every ---- years afterwards, ofall the inhabitants, in the manner and according to the ratiorecommended by Congress in their Resolution of the eighteenth day ofApril, 1783, (rating the blacks at three-fifths of their number); andthat the Legislature of the United States shall arrange therepresentation accordingly. " He urged strenuously that expresssecurity ought to be presided for including slaves in the ratio ofrepresentation. He lamented that such a species of property existed. But as it did exist, the holders of it would require this security. It was perceived that the design was entertained by some of excludingslaves altogether; the Legislature therefore ought not to be left atliberty. 

Mr. ELLSWORTH withdraws his motion, and seconds that of Mr. RANDOLPH. 

Mr. WILSON observed, that less umbrage would perhaps be taken againstan admission of the slaves into the rule of representation, if itshould be so expressed as to make them indirectly only an ingredientin the rule, by saying that they should enter into the rule oftaxation; and as representation was to be according to taxation, theend would be equally attained. 

Mr. PINCKNEY moved to amend Mr. RANDOLPH'S motion, so as to make"blacks equal to the whites in the ratio of representation. " This, he urged was nothing more than justice. The blacks are the laborers, the peasants, of the Southern States. They are as productive ofpecuniary resources as those of the Northern States. They add equallyto the wealth, and, considering money as the sinew of war, to thestrength, of the nation. It will also be politic with regard to theNorthern States, as taxation is to keep pace with representation. 

On Mr. PINCKNEY'S (of S. Carolina) motion, for rating blacks as equalto whites, instead of as three-fifths, --South Carolina, Georgia, aye--2; Massachusetts, Connecticut (Doctor JOHNSON, aye), New Jersey, Pennsylvania (three against two), Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, NorthCarolina, no--8. 

Mr. RANDOLPH'S (of Virginia) proposition, as varied by Mr. WILSON (ofPennsylvania) being read for taking the question on the whole, --

Mr. GERRY (of Massachusetts) urged that the principle of it could notbe carried into execution, as the States were not to be taxed asStates. With regard to taxes on imposts, he conceived they would bemore productive where there were no slaves, than where there were; theconsumption being greater. 

Mr. ELLSWORTH (of Connecticut). In the case of a poll-tax there wouldbe no difficulty. But there would probably be none. The sum allottedto a State may be levied without difficulty, according to the planused by the State in raising its own supplies. 

On the question on the whole proposition, as proportioningrepresentation to direct taxation, and both to the white andthree-fifths of the black inhabitants, and requiring a census withinsix years, and within every ten years afterwards, --Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye--6; NewJersey, Delaware, no--2; Massachusetts, South Carolina, divided. --pp. 1079 to 1087. 

Friday, July 13, 1787. Mr. MADISON said, that having always conceivedthat the difference of interest in the United States lay not betweenthe large and small, but the Northern and Southern States. -p. 1088. 

On the motion of Mr. RANDOLPH (of Virginia) the vote of Monday last, authorizing the Legislature to adjust, from time to time, therepresentation upon the principles of _wealth_ and numbers ofinhabitants, was reconsidered by common consent, in order to strikeout _wealth_ and adjust the resolution to that requiring periodicalrevisions according to the number of whites and three-fifths of theblacks. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS (of Pennsylvania) opposed the alteration, asleaving still an incoherence. If negroes were to be viewed asinhabitants, and the revision was to proceed on the principle ofnumbers of inhabitants, they ought to be added in their entire number, and not in the proportion of three-fifths. If as property, the wordwealth was right; and striking it out would produce the veryinconsistency which it was meant to get rid of. The train of business, and the late turn which it had taken, had led him, he said, into deepmeditation on it, and he would candidly state the result. Adistinction had been set up, and urged, between the Northern andSouthern States. He had hitherto considered this doctrine asheretical. He still thought the distinction groundless. He sees, however, that it is persisted in; and the Southern gentlemen will notbe satisfied unless they see the way open to their gaining a majorityin the public councils. The consequence of such a transfer of powerfrom the maritime to the interior and landed interest, will, heforesees, be such an oppression to commerce, that he shall be obligedto vote for the vicious principle of equality in the second branch, inorder to provide some defence for the Northern States against it. Butto come more to the point, either this distinction is fictitious orreal; if fictitious, let it be dismissed, and let us proceed with dueconfidence. If it be real, instead of attempting to blend incompatiblethings, let us at once take a friendly leave of each other. There canbe no end of demands for security, if every particular interest is tobe entitled to it. The Eastern States may claim it for their fishery, and for other objects, as the Southern States claim it for theirpeculiar objects. In this struggle between the two ends of the Union, what part ought the Middle States, in point of policy, to take? Tojoin their Eastern brethren, according to his ideas. If the SouthernStates get the power into their hands, and be joined, as they will be, with the interior country, they will inevitably bring on a war withSpain for the Mississippi. This language is already held. The interiorcountry, having no property nor interest exposed on the sea, will belittle affected by such a war. He wished to know what security theNorthern and Middle States will have against this danger. It has beensaid that North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia only, will in alittle time have a majority of the people of America. They must inthat case include the great interior country, and every thing was tobe apprehended from their getting the power into their hands. 

Mr. BUTLER (of South Carolina). The security the Southern States wantis, that their negroes may not be taken from them, which somegentlemen within or without doors have a very good mind to do. It wasnot supposed that North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, wouldhave more people than all the other States, but many more relativelyto the other States, than they now have. The people and strength ofAmerica are evidently bearing southwardly, and southwestwardly. 

On the question to strike out _wealth_, and to make the changeas moved by Mr. RANDOLPH (of Virginia) it passed in theaffirmative, --Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--9;Delaware, divided. --_pp_. 1090-1-2-3-4. 

SATURDAY, July 14, 1787. 

Mr. MADISON. It seemed now to be pretty well understood, that the realdifference of interests lay, not between the large and small, butbetween the Northern and Southern, States. THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY, AND IT'S CONSEQUENCES, FORMED THE LINE OF DISCRIMINATION. --_p_. 1104. 

TUESDAY, July 17, 1787. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON. The largest State will be sure to succeed. This willnot be Virginia, however. Her slaves will have no suffrage. --_p_. 1123. 

THURSDAY, July 19, 1787. 

Mr. MADISON. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in theNorthern than the Southern States; and the latter could have noinfluence in the election, on the score of the negroes. --p. 1148. 

MONDAY, July 23, 1787. 

General PINCKNEY reminded the Convention, that if the Committee shouldfail to insert some security to the Southern States against anemancipation of slaves, and taxes on exports, he should be bound byduty to his State to vote against their report. --_p_. 1187. 

TUESDAY, July 24, 1787. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON. As the Executive is to have a kind of veto on thelaws, and there is an essential difference of interests between theNorthern and Southern States, particularly in the carrying trade, thepower will be dangerous, if the Executive is to be taken from part ofthe Union, to the part from which he is not taken. --_p_. 1189. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS hoped the Committee would strike out the wholeof the clause proportioning direct taxation to representation. He hadonly meant it as a bridge[3] to assist us over a certain gulf; havingpassed the gulf, the bridge may be removed. He thought the principlelaid down with so much strictness liable to strong objections. --_p_. 1197. 

[Footnote 3: The object was to lessen the eagerness, on one side, for, and the opposition, on the other, to the share of representationclaimed by the Southern States on account of the negroes. ]

WEDNESDAY, July 25, 1787. 

Mr. MADISON. Refer the appointment of the National Executive to theState Legislatures, and * * *

The remaining mode was an election by the people, or rather by thequalified part of them at large. * * *

The second difficulty arose from the disproportion of qualified votersin the Northern and Southern States, and the disadvantages which thismode would throw on the latter. The answer to this objection was--inthe first place, that this disproportion would be continuallydecreasing under the influence of the republican laws introduced inthe Southern States, and the more rapid increase of their population;in the second place, that local considerations must give way to thegeneral interest. As an individual from the Southern States, he waswilling to make the sacrifice. --pp. 1200-1. 

THURSDAY, July 26, 1787. 

Mr. Gouverneur Morris. Revenue will be drawn, it is foreseen, as muchas possible from trade. --p. 1217. 

MONDAY, August 6, 1787. 

Mr. Rutledge delivered in the Report of the Committee of Detail. 

ARTICLE VII. 

SECT. 3. The proportions of direct taxation shall be regulated by thewhole number of white and other free citizens and inhabitants of everyage, sex and condition, including those bound to servitude for a termof years, and three-fifths of all other persons not comprehended inthe foregoing description, (except Indians not paying taxes); whichnumber shall, within six years after the first meeting of theLegislature, and within the term of every ten years afterwards, betaken in such a manner as the said Legislature shall direct. 

SECT. 4. No tax or duty shall be laid by the Legislature on articlesexported from any State; nor on the migration or importation of suchpersons as the several States shall think proper to admit; nor shallsuch migration or importation be prohibited. 

SECT. 5. No capitation tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to thecensus herein before directed to be taken. 

SECT. 6. No navigation act shall be passed without the assent oftwo-thirds of the members present in each house. --pp. 1226-33-34. 

WEDNESDAY, August 8, 1787. 

Mr. King wished to know what influence the vote just passed was meantto have on the succeeding part of the Report, concerning the admissionof slaves into the rule of representation. He could not reconcile hismind to the Article, if it was to prevent objections to the latterpart. The admission of slaves was a most grating circumstance to hismind, and he believed would be so to a great part of the people ofAmerica. He had not made a strenuous opposition to it heretofore, because he had hoped that this concession would have produced areadiness, which had not been manifested, to strengthen the GeneralGovernment, and to mark a full confidence in it. The Report underconsideration had, by the tenor of it, put an end to all those hopes. In two great points the hands of the Legislature were absolutely tied. The importation of slaves could not be prohibited. Exports could notbe taxed. Is this reasonable? What are the great objects of thegeneral system? First, defence against foreign invasion; secondly, against internal sedition. Shall all the States, then, be bound todefend each, and shall each be at liberty to introduce a weaknesswhich will render defence more difficult? Shall one part of the UnitedStates be bound to defend another part, and that other part be atliberty, not only to increase its own danger, but to withhold thecompensation for the burden? If slaves are to be imported, shall notthe exports produced by their labor supply a revenue the better toenable the General Government to defend their masters? There was somuch inequality and unreasonableness in all this, that the people ofthe Northern States could never be reconciled to it. No candid mancould undertake to justify it to them. He had hoped that someaccommodation would have taken place on this subject; that at least atime would have been limited for the importation of slaves. He nevercould agree to let them be imported without limitation, and then berepresented in the National Legislature. Indeed, he could so littlepersuade himself of the rectitude of such a practice, that he was notsure be could assent to it under any circumstances. At all events, either slaves should not be represented, or exports should be taxable. 

Mr. SHERMAN regarded the slave trade as iniquitous; but the point ofrepresentation having been settled after much difficulty anddeliberation, he did not think himself bound to make opposition;especially as the present Article, as amended, did not preclude anyarrangement whatever on that point, in another place of the report. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to insert "free" before the word"inhabitants. " Much, he said, would depend on this point. He neverwould concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefariousinstitution. It was the curse of Heaven on the States where itprevailed. Compare the free regions of the Middle States, where a richand noble cultivation marks the prosperity and happiness of thepeople, with the misery and poverty which overspread the barren wastesof Virginia, Maryland, and the other States having slaves. Travelthrough the whole continent, and you behold the prospect continuallyvarying with the appearance and disappearance of slavery. The momentyou leave the Eastern States, and enter New York, the effects of theinstitution become visible. Passing through the Jerseys and enteringPennsylvania, every criterion of superior improvement witnesses thechange. Proceed southwardly, and every step you take, through thegreat regions of slaves, presents a desert increasing with theincreasing proportion of these wretched beings. Upon what principle isit that the slaves shall be computed in the representation? Are theymen? Then make them citizens, and let them vote. Are they property?Why, then, is no other property included? The houses in this city(Philadelphia) are worth more than all the wretched slaves who coverthe rice swamps of South Carolina. The admission of slaves into therepresentation, when fairly explained, comes to this, that theinhabitant of Georgia and South Carolina who goes to the coast ofAfrica, and, in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity, tearsaway his fellow creatures from their dearest connections, and damnsthem to the most cruel bondage, shall have more votes in a governmentinstituted for protection of the rights of mankind, than the citizenof Pennsylvania or New Jersey, who views with a laudable horror sonefarious a practice. He would add, that domestic slavery is the mostprominent feature in the aristocratic countenance of the proposedConstitution. The vassalage of the poor has ever been the favoriteoffspring of aristocracy. And what is the proposed compensation to theNorthern States, for a sacrifice of every principle of right, of everyimpulse of humanity? They are to bind themselves to march theirmilitia for the defence of the Southern States, for their defenceagainst those very slaves of whom they complain. They must supplyvessels and seamen, in case of foreign attack. The Legislature willhave indefinite power to tax them by excises, and duties on imports;both of which will fall heavier on them than on the Southerninhabitants; for the bohea tea used by a Northern freeman will paymore tax than the whole consumption of the miserable slave, whichconsists of nothing more than his physical subsistence and the ragthat covers his nakedness. On the other side, the Southern States arenot to be restrained from importing fresh supplies of wretchedAfricans, at once to increase the danger of attack, and the difficultyof defence; nay, they are to be encouraged to it, by an assurance ofhaving their votes in the National Government increased in proportion;and are, at the same time, to have their exports and their slavesexempt from all contributions for the public service. Let it not besaid, that direct taxation is to be proportioned to representation. Itis idle to suppose that the General Government can stretch its handdirectly into the pockets of the people, scattered over so vast acountry. They can only do it through the medium of exports, importsand excises. For what, then, are all the sacrifices to be made? Hewould sooner submit himself to a tax for paying for all the negroes inthe United States, than saddle posterity with such a Constitution. 

Mr. DAYTON seconded the motion. He did it, he said, that hissentiments on the subject might appear, whatever might be the fate ofthe amendment. 

Mr. SHERMAN did not regard the admission of the negroes into the ratioof representation, as liable to such insuperable objections. It wasthe freemen of the Southern States who were, in fact, to berepresented according to the taxes paid by them, and the negroes areonly included in the estimate of the taxes. This was his idea of thematter. 

Mr. PINCKNEY considered the fisheries, and the western frontier, asmore burdensome to the United States than the slaves. He thought thiscould be demonstrated, if the occasion were a proper one. 

Mr. WILSON thought the motion premature. An agreement to the clausewould be no bar to the object of it. 

On the question, on the motion to insert "free" before "inhabitants, "New-Jersey, aye--1; New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, SouthCarolina, Georgia, no--10. --pp. 1261-2-3-4-5-6. 

THURSDAY, August 16, 1787. 

Mr. MASON urged the necessity of connecting with the powers of levyingtaxes, duties, &c. , the prohibition in Article 6, Sect. 4, "that notax should be laid on exports. "

He hoped the Northern States did not mean to deny the Southern thissecurity. 

MR. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS considered such a proviso as inadmissibleanywhere. 

MR. MADISON. Fourthly, the Southern States, being most in danger andmost needing naval protection, could the less complain, if the burthenshould be somewhat heaviest on them. And finally, we are not providingfor the present moment only; and time will equalize the situation ofthe States in this matter. He was, for these reasons, against themotion. 

MR. MERCER. It had been said the Southern States had most need ofnaval protection. The reverse was the case. Were it not for promotingthe carrying trade of the Northern States, the Southern States couldlet the trade go into foreign bottoms, where it would not need ourprotection. --pp. 1339-40-41-42. 

TUESDAY, August 21, 1787. 

Articles 7, Section 3, was then resumed. 

MR. DICKINSON moved to postpone this, in order to reconsider Article4, Section 4, and to _limit_ the number of Representatives to beallowed to the large States. Unless this were done, the small Stateswould be reduced to entire insignificance, and encouragement given tothe importation of slaves. 

MR. SHERMAN would agree to such a reconsideration; but did not see thenecessity of postponing the section before the House. MR. DICKINSONwithdrew his motion. 

Article 7, Section 3, was then agreed to, --ten ayes; Delaware alone, no. --p. 1379. 

Article 7, Section 4, was then taken up. 

MR. LANGDON. By this section the States are left at liberty to taxexports. This could not be admitted. It seems to be feared that theNorthern States will oppress the trade of the Southern. This may beguarded against, by requiring the concurrence of two-thirds, orthree-fourths of the Legislature, in such cases. --p. 1382-3. 

MR. MADISON. As to the fear of disproportionate burthens on the moreexporting States, it might be remarked that it was agreed, on allhands, that the revenue would principally be drawn from trade. --p. 1385. 

COL. MASON--A majority, when interested, will oppress the minority. 

If we compare the States in this point of view, the eight NorthernStates have an interest different from the five Southern States; andhave, in one branch of the Legislature, thirty-six votes, againsttwenty-nine, and in the other in the proportion of eight against five. The Southern States had therefore ground for their suspicions. Thecase of exports was not the same with that of imports. --pp. 1386-7. 

MR. L. MARTIN proposed to vary Article 7, Section 4, so as to allow aprohibition or tax on the importation of slaves. In the first place, as five slaves are to be counted as three freemen, in theapportionment of Representatives, such a clause would leave anencouragement to this traffic. In the second place, slaves weakenedone part of the Union, which the other parts were bound to protect;the privilege of importing them was therefore unreasonable. And in thethird place, it was inconsistent with the principles of theRevolution, and dishonorable to the American character, to have such afeature in the Constitution. 

Mr. RUTLEDGE did not see how the importation of slaves could beencouraged by this section. He was not apprehensive of insurrections, and would readily exempt the other States from the obligation toprotect the Southern against them. Religion and humanity had nothingto do with this question. Interest alone is the governing principlewith nations. The true question at present is, whether the SouthernStates shall or shall not be parties to the Union. If the NorthernStates consult their interest, they will not oppose the increase ofslaves, which will increase the commodities of which they will becomethe carriers. 

Mr. ELLSWORTH was for leaving the clause as it stands. Let every Stateimport what it pleases. The morality or wisdom of slavery areconsiderations belonging to the States themselves. What enriches apart enriches the whole, and the States are the best judges of theirparticular interest. The Old Confederation had not meddled with thispoint; and he did not see any greater necessity for bringing it withinthe policy of the new one. 

Mr. PINCKNEY. South Carolina can never receive the plan if itprohibits the slave trade. In every proposed extension of the powersof Congress, that State has expressly and watchfully excepted that ofmeddling with the importation of negroes. If the States be all left atliberty on this subject, South Carolina may perhaps, by degrees, do ofherself what is wished, as Virginia and Maryland already have done. Adjourned. --_pp_. 1388-9. 

WEDNESDAY, August 22, 1787. 

_In Convention_, --Article 7, Section 4, was resumed. 

Mr. SHERMAN was for leaving the clause as it stands. He disapproved ofthe slave trade; yet as the States were now possessed of the right toimport slaves, as the public good did not require it to be taken fromthem, and as it was expedient to have as few objections as possible tothe proposed scheme of government, he thought it best to leave thematter as we find it. He observed that the abolition of slavery seemedto be going on in the United States, and that the good sense of theseveral States would probably by degrees complete it. He urged on theConvention the necessity of despatching its business. 

Col. MASON. This infernal traffic originated in the avarice of Britishmerchants. The British Government constantly checked the attempts ofVirginia to put a stop to it. The present question concerns not theimporting States alone, but the whole Union. The evil of having slaveswas experienced during the late war. Had slaves been treated as theymight have been by the enemy, they would have proved dangerousinstruments in their hands. But their folly dealt by the slaves as itdid by the tories. He mentioned the dangerous insurrections of theslaves in Greece and Sicily; and the instructions given by Cromwell tothe commissioners sent to Virginia, to arm the servants and slaves, incase other means of obtaining its submission should fail. Maryland andVirginia he said had already prohibited the importation of slavesexpressly. North Carolina had done the same in substance. All thiswould be in vain, if South Carolina and Georgia be at liberty toimport. The Western people are already calling out for slaves fortheir new lands; and will fill that country with slaves, if they canbe got through South Carolina and Georgia. Slavery discourages artsand manufactures. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves. They prevent the emigration of whites, who really enrich andstrengthen a country. They produce the most pernicious effect onmanners. Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring thejudgment of Heaven on a country. As nations cannot be rewarded orpunished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitablechain of causes and effects, Providence punishes national sins bynational calamities. He lamented that some of our Eastern brethrenhad, from a lust of gain, embarked in this nefarious traffic. As tothe States being in possession of the right to import, this was thecase with many other rights, now to be properly given up. He held itessential in every point of view, that the General Government shouldhave power to prevent the increase of slavery. 

Mr. ELLSWORTH, as he had never owned a slave, could not judge of theeffects of slavery on character. He said, however, that if it was tobe considered in a moral light, we ought to go further and free thosealready in the country. As slaves also multiply so fast in Virginiaand Maryland that it is cheaper to raise than import them, whilst inthe sickly rice swamps foreign supplies are necessary, if we go nofurther than is urged, we shall be unjust towards South Carolina andGeorgia. Let us not intermeddle. As population increases, poorlaborers will be so plenty as to render slaves useless. Slavery, intime, will not be a speck in our country. Provision is already made inConnecticut for abolishing it. And the abolition has already takenplace in Massachusetts. As to the danger of insurrections from foreigninfluence, that will become a motive to kind treatment of the slaves. 

Mr. PINCKNEY. If slavery be wrong, it is justified by the example ofall the world. He cited the case of Greece, Rome and other ancientStates; the sanction given by France, England, Holland and othermodern States. In all ages one half of mankind have been slaves. Ifthe Southern States were let alone, they will probably of themselvesstop importations. He would himself, as a citizen of South Carolina, vote for it. An attempt to take away the right, as proposed, willproduce serious objections to the Constitution, which he wished to seeadopted. 

Gen. PINCKNEY declared it to be his firm opinion that if himself andall his colleagues were to sign the Constitution and use theirpersonal influence, it would be of no avail towards obtaining theassent of their constituents. South Carolina and Georgia cannot dowithout slaves. As to Virginia, she will gain by stopping theimportations. Her slaves will rise in value, and she has more than shewants. It would be unequal, to require South Carolina and Georgia, toconfederate on such unequal terms. He said the Royal assent, beforethe Revolution, had never been refused to South Carolina, as toVirginia. He contended that the importation of slaves would be for theinterest of the whole Union. The more slaves, the more produce toemploy the carrying trade; the more consumption also; and the more ofthis, the more revenue for the common treasury. He admitted it to bereasonable that slaves should be dutied like other imports; but shouldconsider a rejection of the clause as an exclusion of South Carolinafrom the Union. 

Mr. BALDWIN had conceived national objects alone to be before theConvention; not such as, like the present, were of a local nature. Georgia was decided on this point. That State has always hithertosupposed a General Government to be the pursuit of the central States, who wished to have a vortex for everything; that her distance wouldpreclude her, from equal advantage; and that she could not prudentlypurchase it by yielding national powers. From this it might beunderstood, in what light she would view an attempt to abridge one ofher favorite prerogatives. If left to herself, she may probably put astop to the evil. As one ground for this conjecture, he took notice ofthe sect of ----; which he said was a respectable class of people, whocarried their ethics beyond the mere _equality of men_, extendingtheir humanity to the claims of the whole animal creation. 

Mr. WILSON observed that if South Carolina and Georgia were themselvesdisposed to get rid of the importation of slaves in a short time, ashad been suggested, they would never refuse to unite because theimportation might be prohibited. As the section now stands, allarticles imported are to be taxed. Slaves alone are exempt. This is infact a bounty on that article. 

Mr. GERRY thought we had nothing to do with the conduct of the Statesas to slaves, but ought to be careful not to give any sanction to it. 

Mr. DICKINSON considered it as inadmissible, on every principle ofhonor and safety, that the importation of slaves should be authorizedto the States by the Constitution. The true question was, whether thenational happiness would be promoted or impeded by the importation;and this question ought to be left to the National Government, not tothe States particularly interested. If England and France permitslavery, slaves are, at the same time, excluded from both thosekingdoms. Greece and Rome were made unhappy by their slaves. He couldnot believe that the Southern States would refuse to confederate onthe account apprehended; especially as the power was not likely to beimmediately exercised by the General Government. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON stated the law of North Carolina on the subject, towit, that it did not directly prohibit the importation of slaves. Itimposed a duty of £5 on each slave imported from Africa; £10 on eachfrom elsewhere; and £50 on each from a State licensing manumission. Hethought the Southern States could not be members of the Union, if theclause should be rejected; and that it was wrong to force any thingdown not absolutely necessary, and which any State must disagree to. 

Mr. KING thought the subject should be considered in a political lightonly. If two States will not agree to the Constitution, as stated onone side, he could affirm with equal belief, on the other, that greatand equal opposition would be experienced from the other States. Heremarked on the exemption of slaves from duty, whilst every otherimport was subjected to it, as an inequality that could not fail tostrike the commercial sagacity of the Northern and Middle States. 

Mr. LANGDON was strenuous for giving the power to the GeneralGovernment. He could not, with a good conscience, leave it with theStates, who could then go on with the traffic, without beingrestrained by the opinions here given, that they will themselves ceaseto import slaves. 

Gen. PINCKNEY thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he didnot think South Carolina would stop her importations of slaves, in anyshort time; but only stop them occasionally as she now does. He movedto commit the clause, that slaves might be made liable to an equal taxwith other imports; which he thought right, and which would remove onedifficulty that had been started. 

Mr. RUTLEDGE. If the Convention thinks that North Carolina, SouthCarolina, and Georgia, will ever agree to the plan, unless their rightto import slaves be untouched, the expectation is vain. The people ofthose States will never be such fools, as to give up so important aninterest. He was strenuous against striking out the section, andseconded the motion of Gen. PINCKNEY for a commitment. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS wished the whole subject to be committed, including the clauses relating to taxes on exports and to a navigationact. These things may form a bargain among the Northern and SouthernStates. 

MR. BUTLER declared that he never would agree to the power of taxingexports. 

Mr. SHERMAN said it was better to let the Southern States importslaves, than to part with them, if they made that a _sine qua non_. Hewas opposed to a tax on slaves imported, as making the matter worse, because it implied they were _property_. He acknowledged that if thepower of prohibiting the importation should be given to the GeneralGovernment, that it would be exercised. He thought it would be itsduty to exercise the power. 

Mr. READ was for the commitment, provided the clause concerning taxeson exports should also be committed. 

Mr. SHERMAN observed that that clause had been agreed to, andtherefore could not be committed. 

Mr. Randolph was for committing, in order that some middle groundmight, if possible, be found. He could never agree to the clause as itstands. He would sooner risk the Constitution. He dwelt on the dilemmato which the Convention was exposed. By agreeing to the clause, itwould revolt the Quakers, the Methodists, and many others in theStates having no slaves. On the other hand, two States might be lostto the Union. Let us then, he said, try the chance of a commitment. 

On the question for committing the remaining part of Sections 4 and 5, of Article 7, --Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, NorthCarolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--7; New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Delaware, no--3; Massachusetts absent. 

Mr. Pinckney and Mr. Langdon moved to commit Section 6, as to anavigation act by two-thirds of each House. 

Mr. Gorham did not see the propriety of it. Is it meant to require agreater proportion of votes? He desired it to be remembered, that theEastern States had no motive to union but a commercial one. They wereable to protect themselves. They were not afraid of external danger, and did not need the aid of the Southern States. 

Mr. Wilson wished for a commitment, in order to reduce the proportionof votes required. 

Mr. Ellsworth was for taking the plan as it is. This widening ofopinions had a threatening aspect. If we do not agree on this middleand moderate ground, he was afraid we should lose two States, withsuch others as may be disposed to stand aloof; should fly into avariety of shapes and directions, and most probably into severalconfederations, --and not without bloodshed. 

On the question for committing Section 6, as to a navigation act, to amember from each State, --New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--9; Connecticut, New Jersey, no--2. 

The Committee appointed were Messrs. Langdon, King, Johnson, Livingston, Clymer, Dickinson, L. Martin, Madison, Williamson, C. C. Pinckney, and Baldwin. 

To this Committee were referred also the two clauses above mentionedof the fourth and fifth Sections of Article 7. --pp. 1390 to 1397. 

Friday, August 24, 1787

_In Convention_, --Governor Livingston, from the committee of eleven, to whom were referred the two remaining clauses of the fourth section, and the fifth and sixth sections, of the seventh Article, delivered inthe following Report:

"Strike out so much of the fourth section as was referred to theCommittee, and insert, 'The migration or importation of such personsas the several States, now existing, shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Legislature prior to the year 1800; buta tax or duty may be imposed on such migration or importation, at arate not exceeding the average of the duties laid on imports. 

"The fifth Section to remain as in the Report. The sixth Section to be stricken out. "--p. 1415. 

SATURDAY, August 25, 1787. 

The Report of the Committee of eleven (see Friday, the twenty-fourth), being taken up, --

Gen. PINCKNEY moved to strike out the words, "the year eighteenhundred, " as the year limiting the importation of slaves; and toinsert the words, "the year eighteen hundred and eight. "

Mr. GORHAM seconded the motion. 

Mr. MADISON. Twenty years will produce all the mischief that can beapprehended from the liberty to import slaves. So long a term will bemore dishonorable to the American character, than to say nothing aboutit in the Constitution. 

On the motion, which passed in the affirmative, --New-Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--7; New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, no--4. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS was for making the clause read at once, "theimportation of slaves in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, shall not be prohibited, &c. " This he said, would be most fair, andwould avoid the ambiguity by which, under the power with regard tonaturalization, the liberty reserved to the States might be defeated. He wished it to be known, also, that this part of the Constitution wasa compliance with those States. If the change of language, however, should be objected to, by the members from those States, he should noturge it. 

Col. MASON was not against using the term "slaves, " but against namingNorth Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, lest it should giveoffence to the people of those States. 

Mr. SHERMAN liked a description better than the terms proposed, whichhad been declined by the old Congress, and were not pleasing to somepeople. 

Mr. CLYMER concurred with Mr. SHERMAN. 

Mr. WILLIAMSON said, that both in opinion and practice he was againstslavery; but thought it more in favor of humanity, from a view of allcircumstances, to let in South Carolina and Georgia on those terms, than to exclude them from the Union. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS withdrew his motion. 

Mr. DICKINSON wished the clause to be confined to the States which hadnot themselves prohibited the importation of slaves; and for thatpurpose moved to amend the clause, so as to read: "The importation ofslaves into such of the States as shall permit the same, shall not beprohibited by the Legislature of the United States, until the year1808;" which was disagreed to, _nem. Con_. [4]

[Footnote 4: In the printed Journals, Connecticut, Virginia, andGeorgia, voted in the affirmative. ]

The first part of the Report was then agreed to, amended as follows:"The migration or importation of such persons as the several Statesnow existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited bythe Legislature prior to the year 1808, "--

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--7; New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, no--4. 

Mr. BALDWIN, in order to restrain and more explicitly define, "theaverage duty, " moved to strike out of the second part the words, "average of the duties laid on imports, " and insert "common impost onarticles not enumerated;" which was agreed to, _nem. Con_. 

Mr. SHERMAN was against this second part, as acknowledging men to beproperty, by taxing them as such under the character of slaves. 

Mr. KING and Mr. LANGDON considered this as the price of the firstpart. Gen. PINCKNEY admitted that it was so. Col. MASON. Not to tax, will be equivalent to a bounty on, the importation of slaves. 

Mr. GORHAM thought that Mr. SHERMAN should consider the duty, not asimplying that slaves are property, but as a discouragement to theimportation of them. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS remarked, that, as the clause now stands, itimplies that the Legislature may tax freemen imported. 

Mr. SHERMAN, in answer to Mr. GORHAM, observed, that the smallness ofthe duty showed revenue to be the object, not the discouragement ofthe importation. 

Mr. MADISON thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the ideathat there could be property in men. The reason of duties did nothold, as slaves are not, like merchandize consumed, &c. 

Col. MASON, in answer to Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. The provision, as itstands, was necessary for the case of convicts, in order to preventthe introduction of them. 

It was finally agreed, _nem. Con_. , to make the clause read: "but atax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding tendollars for each person;" and then the second part, as amended, wasagreed to. --_pp_. 1427 to 30. 

TUESDAY, August 28, 1787. 

Article 14, was then taken up. [5]

[Footnote 5: Article 14 was, --The citizens of each State shall beentitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the severalStates. --EDITOR. ]

General PINCKNEY was not satisfied with it. He seemed to wish someprovision should be included in favor of property in slaves. 

On the question on Article 14, --New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, aye--9; South Carolina, no--1; Georgia, divided. 

Article 15, [6] being then taken up, the words, "high misdemeanor, "were struck out, and the words, "other crime, " inserted, in order tocomprehend all proper cases; it being doubtful whether "highmisdemeanor" had not a technical meaning too limited. 

[Footnote 6: Article 15 was, --Any person charged with treason, felonyor high misdemeanor in any State, who shall flee from justice, andshall be found in any other State, shall, on demand of the Executivepower of the State from which he fled, be delivered up and removed tothe State having jurisdiction of the offence. --EDITOR. ]

Mr. BUTLER and Mr. PINCKNEY moved to require "fugitive slaves andservants to be delivered up like criminals. "

Mr. WILSON. This would oblige the Executive of the State to do it, atthe public expense. 

Mr. SHERMAN saw no more propriety in the public seizing andsurrendering a slave or servant, than a horse. 

Mr. BUTLER withdrew his proposition, in order that some particularprovision might be made, apart from this article. 

Article 15, as amended, was then agreed to, _nem. Con_. --_pp_. 1447-8. 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 29, 1787. 

Article 7, Section 6, by the Committee of Eleven reported to be struckout (see the twenty-fourth inst. ) being now taken up, --

Mr. PINCKNEY moved to postpone the Report, in favor of the followingproposition: "That no act of the Legislature for the purpose ofregulating the Commerce of the United States with foreign powers, among the several States, shall be passed without the assent oftwo-thirds of the members of each House. " He remarked that there werefive distinct commercial interests. 

The power of regulating commerce was a pure concession on the part ofthe Southern States. They did not need the protection of the NorthernStates at present. --_p_. 1450. 

General PINCKNEY said it was the true interest of the Southern Statesto have no regulation of commerce; but considering the loss brought onthe commerce of the Eastern States by the Revolution, their liberalconduct towards the views[7] of South Carolina, and the interest theweak Southern States had in being united with the strong EasternStates, he thought it proper that no fetters should be imposed on thepower of making commercial regulations, and that his constituents, though prejudiced against the Eastern States, would be reconciled tothis liberality. He had, himself, he said, prejudices against theEastern States before he came here, but would acknowledge that he hadfound them as liberal and candid as any men whatever. --_p_. 1451. 

[Footnote 7: He meant the permission to import slaves. An understandingon the two subjects of _navigation_ and _slavery_, had taken placebetween those parts of the Union, which explains the vote of themotion depending, as well as the language of General Pinckney andothers. ]

Mr. PINCKNEY replied, that his enumeration meant the five minuteinterests. It still left the two great divisions of Northern andSouthern interests. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS opposed the object of the motion as highlyinjurious. --A navy was essential to security, particularly of theSouthern States;--

Mr. WILLIAMSON. As to the weakness of the Southern States, he was notalarmed on that account. The sickliness of their climate for invaderswould prevent their being made an object. He acknowledged that he didnot think the motion requiring two-thirds necessary in itself; becauseif a majority of the Northern States should push their regulations toofar, the Southern States would build ships for themselves; but he knewthe Southern people were apprehensive on this subject, and would bepleased with the precaution. 

Mr. SPAIGHT was against the motion. The Southern States could at anytime save themselves from oppression, by building ships for their ownuse. --_p_. 1452. 

Mr. BUTLER differed from those who considered the rejection of themotion as no concession on the part of the Southern States. Heconsidered the interests of these and of the Eastern States to be asdifferent as the interests of Russia and Turkey. Being, notwithstanding, desirous of conciliating the affections of theEastern States, he should vote against requiring two-thirds instead ofa majority. --_p_. 1453. 

Mr. MADISON. He added, that the Southern States would derive anessential advantage, in the general security afforded by the increaseof our maritime strength. He stated the vulnerable situation of themall, and of Virginia in particular. 

Mr. RUTLEDGE was against the motion of his colleague. At the worst, anavigation act could bear hard a little while only on the SouthernStates. As we are laying the foundation for a great empire, we oughtto take a permanent view of the subject, and not look at the presentmoment only. 

Mr. GORMAN. The Eastern States were not led to strengthen the Union byfear for their own safety. 

He deprecated the consequences of disunion; but if it should takeplace, it was the Southern part of the Continent that had most reasonto dread them. 

On the question to postpone, in order to take up Mr. PINCKNEY'smotion, --

Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye--4; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, SouthCarolina, no--7. The Report of the Committee for striking out Section6, requiring two-thirds of each House to pass a navigation act, wasthen agreed to, _nem. Con_. 

Mr. BUTLER moved to insert after Article 15, "If any person bound toservice or labor in any of the United States, shall escape intoanother State, he or she shall not be discharged from such service orlabor, in consequence of any regulations subsisting in the State towhich they escape, but shall be delivered up to the person justlyclaiming their service or labor, "--which was agreed to, _nem. Con_. --_p_. 1454-5-6. 

THURSDAY, August 30, 1787. 

Article 18, being taken up, On a question for striking out "domestic violence, " and inserting"insurrections, " it passed in the negative, --New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye--5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, no--6. --_pp_. 1466-7. 

MONDAY, September 10, 1787. 

Mr. RUTLEDGE said he never could agree to give a power by which thearticles relating to slaves might be altered by the States notinterested in that property, and prejudiced against it. In order toobviate this objection, these words were added to the proposition:"provided that no amendments, which may be made prior to the year 1808shall in any manner affect the fourth and fifth sections of theseventh Article:"--_p_. 1536. 

TUESDAY, September 13, 1787. 

Article 1, Section 2. On motion of Mr. RANDOLPH, the word "servitude"was struck out, and "service" unanimously[8] inserted, the formerbeing thought to express the condition of slaves, and the latter theobligations of free persons. 

[Footnote 8: See page 372 of the printed journal. ]

Mr. DICKENSON and Mr. WILSON moved to strike out, "and direct taxes, "from Article 1, Section 2, as improperly placed in a clause relatingmerely to the Constitution of the House of Representatives. 

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. The insertion here was in consequence of whathad passed on this point; in order to exclude the appearance ofcounting the negroes in the _representation_. The including of themmay now be referred to the object of direct taxes, and incidentallyonly to that of representation. 

On the motion to strike out, "and direct taxes, " from this place, --

New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, aye--3; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no--8. --_pp_. 1569-70. 

SATURDAY, September 15, 1787. 

Article 4, Section 2, (the third paragraph, ) the term "legally" wasstruck out; and the words, "under the laws thereof, " inserted afterthe word "State, " in compliance with the wish of some who thought theterm _legal_ equivocal, and favoring the idea that slavery was legalin a moral view. --p. 1589. 

Mr. GERRY stated the objections which determined him to withhold hisname from the Constitution: 1-2-3-4-5-6, that three-fifths of theblacks are to be represented, as if they were freemen. --p. 1595. 

 LIST OF MEMBERSOF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION WHO FORMED THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 

_From_ _Attended. _New Hampshire, 1 John Langdon, July 23, 1787. _John Pickering_, 2 Nicholas Gilman, " 23. _Benjamin West_, Massachusetts, _Francis Dana_, Elbridge Gerry, May 29. 3 Nath'l Gorham, " 28. 4 Rufus King, " 25. Caleb Strong, May 28. Rhode Island, (No appointment. )Connecticut, 5 W. S. Johnson, June 2. 6 Roger Sherman, May 30. Oliver Ellsworth, " 29. New York, Robert Yates, " 25. 7 Alex'r Hamilton, " 25. John Lansing, June 2. New Jersey, 8 Wm. Livingston, " 5. 9 David Brearly, May 25. Wm. C. Houston, May 25. 10 Wm. Patterson, do. _John Nielson_, _Abraham Clark_. 11 Jonathan Dayton, June 21. Pennsylvania, 12 Benj. Franklin, May 28. 13 Thos. Mifflin, do. 14 Robert Morris, May 25. 15 Geo. Clymer, " 28. 16 Thos. Fitzsimons, " 25. 17 Jared Ingersoll, " 28. 18 James Wilson, " 25. 19 Gouv'r Morris, " 25. Delaware, 20 Geo. Reed, " 25. 21 G. Bedford, Jr. " 28. 22 John Dickenson, " 28. 23 Richard Bassett, " 25. 24 Jacob Broom, " 25. Maryland, 25 James M'Henry, " 29. 26 Daniel of St. Tho. Jenifer, June 2. 27 Daniel Carroll, July 9. John F. Mercer, Aug. 6. Luther Martin, June 9. Virginia, 28 G. Washington, May 25. _Patrick Henry_, (declined. ) Edmund Randolph, " 25. 29 John Blair, " 25. 30 Jas. Madison, Jr. " 25. George Mason, " 25. George Wythe, " 25. James McClurg, (in room of P. Henry) " 25. 31 Wm. Blount (in room of R. Caswell), June 20. _Willie Jones_, (declined. ) 32 R. D. Spaight, May 25. 33 Hugh Williamson, (in room of W. Jones, ) May 25. South Carolina, 34 John Rutledge, " 25. 35 Chas. C. Pinckney, " 25. 36 Chas. Pinckney, " 25. 37 Peirce Butler, " 25. Georgia, 38 William Few, May 25. 39 Abr'm Baldwin, June 11. William Pierce, May 31. _George Walton. _ Wm. Houston, June 1. _Nath'l Pendleton. _

Those with numbers before their names signed the Constitution. 39Those in italics never attended. 10Members who attended, but did not sign the Constitution, 16 -- 65

Extracts from a speech of Luther Martin, (delivered before theLegislature of Maryland, ) one of the delegates from Maryland to theConvention that formed the Constitution of the United States. 

With respect to that part of the _second_ section of the _first_Article, which relates to the apportionment of representation anddirect taxation, there were considerable objections made to it, besides the great objection of inequality--It was urged, that noprinciple could justify taking _slaves_ into computation inapportioning the number of _representatives_ a State should have inthe government--That it involved the absurdity of increasing the powerof a State in making laws for _free men_ in proportion as that Stateviolated the rights of freedom--That it might be proper to take slavesinto consideration, when _taxes_ were to be apportioned, because ithad a tendency to _discourage slavery_; but to take them into accountin giving representation tended to _encourage_ the _slave trade_, andto make it the interest of the States to continue that _infamoustraffic_--That slaves could not be taken into account as _men_, or_citizens_, because they were not admitted to the _rights ofcitizens_, in the States which adopted or continued slavery--If theywere to be taken into account as _property_, it was asked, whatpeculiar circumstance should render this property (of all others themost odious in its nature) entitled to the high privilege ofconferring consequence and power in the government to its possessors, rather than _any other_ property: and why _slaves_ should, asproperty, be taken into account rather than horses, cattle, mules, orany other species; and it was observed by an honorable member fromMassachusetts, that he considered it as dishonorable and humiliatingto enter into compact with the _slaves_ of the _Southern States_, asit would with the _horses_ and _mules_ of the _Eastern_. 

By the ninth section of this Article, the importation of such personsas any of the States now existing, shall think proper to admit, shallnot be prohibited prior to the year 1808, but a duty may be imposed onsuch importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

The design of this clause is to prevent the general government fromprohibiting the importation of slaves; but the same reasons whichcaused them to strike out the word "national, " and not admit the word"stamps, " influenced them here to guard against the word "_slaves_. "They anxiously sought to avoid the admission of expressions whichmight be odious in the ears of Americans, although they were willingto admit into their system those _things_ which the expressionssignified; and hence it is that the clause is so worded as really toauthorize the general government to impose a duty of ten dollars onevery foreigner who comes into a State to become a citizen, whether hecomes absolutely free, or qualifiedly so as a servant; although thisis contrary to the design of the framers, and the duty was only meantto extend to the importation of slaves. 

This clause was the subject of a great diversity of sentiment in theConvention. As the system was reported by the committee of detail, theprovision was general, that such importation should not be prohibited, without confining it to any particular period. This was rejected byeight States--Georgia, South Carolina, and, I think, North Carolina, voting for it. 

We were then told by the delegates of the two first of those States, that their States would never agree to a system, which put it in thepower of the general government to prevent the importation of slaves, and that they, as delegates from those States, must withhold theirassent from such a system. 

A committee of one member from each State was chosen by ballot, totake this part of the system under their consideration, and toendeavor to agree upon some report, which should reconcile thoseStates. To this committee also was referred the following proposition, which had been reported by the committee of detail, to wit: "Nonavigation act shall be passed without the assent of two-thirds of themembers present in each house;" a proposition which the staple andcommercial States were solicitous to retain, lest their commerceshould be placed too much under the power of the Eastern States; butwhich these last States were as anxious to reject. This committee, ofwhich also I had the honor to be a member, met and took under theirconsideration the subjects committed to them. I found the _Eastern_States, notwithstanding their _aversion to slavery_, were very willingto indulge the Southern States, at least with a temporary liberty toprosecute the _slave trade_, provided the Southern States would intheir turn gratify them, by laying no restriction on navigation acts;and after a very little time, the committee, by a great majority, agreed on a report, by which the general government was to beprohibited from preventing the importation of slaves for a limitedtime, and the restricted clause relative to navigation acts was to beomitted. 

This report was adopted by a majority of the Convention, but notwithout considerable opposition. 

It was said, we had just assumed a place among independent nations inconsequence of our opposition to the attempts of Great Britain to_enslave us_; that this opposition was grounded upon the preservationof those rights to which God and nature had entitled us, not in_particular_, but in _common_ with all the rest of mankind; that wehad appealed to the Supreme Being for his assistance, as the God offreedom, who could not but approve our efforts to preserve the_rights_ which he had thus imparted to his creatures; that now, whenwe had scarcely risen from our knees, from supplicating his mercy andprotection in forming our government over a free people, a governmentformed pretendedly on the principles of liberty, and for itspreservation, --in that government to have a provision not only puttingit out of its power to restrain and prevent the slave trade, evenencouraging that most infamous traffic, by giving the States the powerand influence in the Union in proportion as they cruelly and wantonlysported with the rights of their fellow-creatures, ought to beconsidered as a solemn mockery of, and an insult to, that God whoseprotection we had then implored, and could not fail to hold us up indetestation, and render us contemptible to every true friend ofliberty in the world. It was said, it ought be considered thatnational crimes can only be, and frequently are, punished in thisworld by national punishments; and that the continuance of the slavetrade, and thus giving it a national sanction, and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure andvengeance of him who is equally Lord of all, and who views with equaleye the poor African slave and his American master!

It was urged that by this system, we were giving the generalgovernment full and absolute power to regulate commerce, under whichgeneral power it would have a right to restrain, or totally prohibit, the slave trade: it must, therefore, appear to the world absurd anddisgraceful to the last degree, that we should except from theexercise of that power, the only branch of commerce which isunjustifiable in its nature, and contrary to the rights of mankind. That, on the contrary, we ought rather to prohibit expressly in ourConstitution, the further importation of slaves, and to authorize thegeneral government, from time to time, to make such regulations asshould be thought most advantageous for the gradual abolition ofslavery, and the emancipation of the slaves which are already in theStates. That slavery is inconsistent with the genius of republicanism, and has a tendency to destroy those principles on which it issupported, as it lessens the sense of the equal rights of mankind, andhabituates us to tyranny and oppression. It was further urged, that, by this system of government, every State is to be protected both fromforeign invasion and from domestic insurrections; from thisconsideration, it was of the utmost importance it should have a powerto restrain the importation of slaves, since, in proportion as thenumber of slaves are increased in any State, in the same proportionthe State is weakened and exposed to foreign invasion or domesticinsurrection, and by so much less will it be able to protect itselfagainst either, and therefore will by so much the more want aid from, and be a burden to, the Union. 

It was further said, that, as in this system we were giving thegeneral government a power, under the idea of national character, ornational interest, to regulate even our weights and measures, and haveprohibited all possibility of emitting paper money, and passinginsolvent laws, &c. , it must appear still more extraordinary, that weshould prohibit the government from interfering with both slave trade, than which nothing could so materially affect both our national honorand interest. 

These reasons influenced me, both on the committee and in convention, most decidedly to oppose and vote against the clause, as it now makespart of the system. 

You will perceive, sir, not only that the general government isprohibited from interfering in the slave trade before the yeareighteen hundred and eight, but that there is no provision in theConstitution that it shall afterwards be prohibited, nor any securitythat such prohibition will ever take place; and I think there is greatreason to believe, that, if the importation of slaves is permitteduntil the year eighteen hundred and eight, it will not be prohibitedafterwards. At this time, we do not generally hold this commerce in sogreat abhorrence as we have done. When our liberties were at stake, wewarmly felt for the common rights of men. The danger being thought tobe past, which threatened ourselves, we are daily growing moreinsensible to those rights. In those States which have restrained orprohibited the importation of slaves, it is only done by legislativeacts, which may be repealed. When those States find that they must, intheir national character and connexion, suffer in the disgrace, andshare in the inconveniences attendant upon that detestable andiniquitous traffic, they may be desirous also to share in the benefitsarising from it; and the odium attending it will be greatly effaced bythe sanction which is given to it in the general government. 

By the next paragraph, the general government is to have a power ofsuspending the _habeas corpus act_, in cases of _rebellion_ or_invasion_. 

As the State governments have a power of suspending the habeas corpusact in those cases, it was said, there could be no reason for givingsuch a power to the general government; since, whenever the Statewhich is invaded, or in which an insurrection takes place, finds itssafety requires it, it will make use of that power. And it was urged, that if we gave this power to the general government, it would be anengine of oppression in its hands; since whenever a State shouldoppose its views, however arbitrary and unconstitutional, and refusesubmission to them, the general government may declare it to be an actof rebellion, and, suspending the habeas corpus act, may seize uponthe persons of those advocates of freedom, who have had virtue andresolution enough to excite the opposition, and may imprison themduring its pleasure in the remotest part of the Union; so that acitizen of Georgia might be _bastiled_ in the furthest part of NewHampshire; or a citizen of New Hampshire in the furthest extreme ofthe South, cut off from their family, their friends, and their everyconnexion. These considerations induced me, sir, to give my negativealso to this clause. 

EXTRACTS FROM DEBATES IN THE SEVERAL STATE CONVENTIONS ON THE ADOPTIONOF THE UNITED STATES' CONSTITUTION. 

 * * * * *

MASSACHUSETTS CONVENTION. 

The third paragraph of the 2d section being read, Mr. KING rose to explain it. There has, says he, been muchmisconception of this section. It is a principle of this Constitution, that representation and taxation should go hand in hand. Thisparagraph states, that the number of free persons shall be determined, by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those boundto service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons. These persons are the slaves. Bythis rule is representation and taxation to be apportioned. And it wasadopted, because it was the language of all America. 

Mr. WIDGERY asked, if a boy of six years of age was to be consideredas a free person?

Mr. KING in answer said, all persons born free were to be consideredas freemen; and to make the idea of _taxation by numbers_ moreintelligible, said that five negro children of South Carolina, are topay as much tax as the three Governors of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. 

Mr. GORHAM thought the proposed section much in favor ofMassachusetts; and if it operated against any State, it wasPennsylvania, because they have more white persons _bound_ than anyother. 

Judge DANA, in reply to the remark of some gentlemen, that thesouthern States were favored in this mode of apportionment, by havingfive of their negroes set against three persons in the eastern, thehonorable judge observed, that the negroes of the southern States workno longer than when the eye of the driver is on them. Can, asked he, that land flourish like this, which is cultivated by the hands offreemen? Are not _three_ of these independent freemen of more realadvantage to a State, than _five_ of those poor slaves?

Mr. NASSON remarked on the statement of the honorable Mr. KING, bysaying that the honorable gentleman should have gone further, andshown us the other side of the question. It is a good rule that worksboth ways--and the gentleman should also have told us, that three ofour infants in the cradle, are to be rated as high as five of theworking negroes of Virginia. Mr. N. Adverted to a statement of Mr. KING, who had said, that five negro children of South Carolina wereequally rateable as three governors of New England, and wished, hesaid, the honorable gentleman had considered this question upon theother side--as it would then appear that this State will pay as greata tax for three children in the cradle, as any of the southern Stateswill for five hearty working negro men. He hoped, he said, while wewere making a new government, we should make it better than the oldone: for if we had made a bad bargain before, as had been hinted, itwas a reason why we should make a better one now. 

Mr. DAWES said, he was sorry to hear so many objections raised againstthe paragraph under consideration. He though them wholly unfounded;that the black inhabitants of the southern States must be consideredeither as slaves, and as so much property, or in the character of somany freemen; if the former, why should they not be whollyrepresented? Our _own_ State laws and Constitution would lead us toconsider those blacks as _freemen_, and so indeed would our own ideasof natural justice: if, then, they are freemen, they might form anequal basis for representation as though they were all whiteinhabitants. In either view, therefore, he could not see that thenorthern States would suffer, but directly to the contrary. Hethought, however, that gentlemen would do well to connect the passagein dispute with another article in the Constitution, that permitsCongress, in the year 1808, wholly to prohibit the importation ofslaves, and in the mean time to impose a duty of ten dollars a head onsuch blacks as should be imported before that period. Besides, by thenew Constitution, every particular State is left to its own optiontotally to prohibit the introduction of slaves into its ownterritories. What could the convention do more? The members of thesouthern States, like ourselves, have _their_ prejudices. It would notdo to abolish slavery, by an act of Congress, in a moment, and sodestroy what our southern brethren consider as property. But we maysay, that although slavery is not smitten by an apoplexy, yet it hasreceived a mortal wound and will die of a consumption. 

Mr. NEAL (from Kittery, ) went over the ground of objection to thissection on the idea that the slave trade was allowed to be continuedfor 20 years. His profession, he said, obliged him to bear witnessagainst any thing that should favor the making merchandise of thebodies of men, and unless his objection was removed, he could not puthis hand to the Constitution. Other gentlemen said, in addition tothis idea, that there was not even a proposition that the negroes evershall be free, and Gen. THOMPSON exclaimed:

Mr. President, shall it be said, that after we have established ourown independence and freedom, we make slaves of others? Oh!Washington, what a name has he had! How he has immortalized himself!but he holds those in slavery who have a good right to be free as hehas--he is still for self; and, in my opinion, his character has sunk50 per cent. 

On the other side, gentlemen said, that the step taken in this articletowards the abolition of slavery, was one of the beauties of theConstitution. They observed, that in the confederation there was noprovision whatever for its ever being abolished; but this Constitutionprovides, that Congress may, after 20 years, totally annihilate theslave trade; and that, as all the States, except two, have passed lawsto this effect, it might reasonably be expected, that it would then bedone. In the interim, all the States were at liberty to prohibit it. 

SATURDAY, January 26. --[The debate on the 9th section still continueddesultory--and consisted of similar objections, and answers thereto, as had before been used. Both sides deprecated the slave trade in themost pointed terms; on one side it was pathetically lamented, by Mr. NASON, Major LUSK, Mr. NEAL, and others, that this Constitutionprovided for the continuation of the slave trade for 20 years. On theother, the honorable Judge DANA, Mr. ADAMS and others, rejoiced that adoor was now to be opened for the annihilation of this odious, abhorrent practice, in a certain time. ]

Gen. HEATH. Mr. President, --By my indisposition and absence, I havelost several important opportunities: I have lost the opportunityof expressing my sentiments with a candid freedom, on some of theparagraphs of the system, which have lain heavy on my mind. I havelost the opportunity of expressing my warm approbation on some of theparagraphs. I have lost the opportunity of hearing those judicious, enlightening and convincing arguments, which have been advanced duringthe investigation of the system. This is my misfortune, and I mustbear it. The paragraph respecting the migration or importation of suchpersons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, &c. , is one of those considered during my absence, and I have heardnothing on the subject, save what has been mentioned this morning; butI think the gentlemen who have spoken, have carried the matter rathertoo far on both sides. I apprehend that it is not in our power to doany thing for or against those who are in slavery in the southernStates. No gentleman within these walls detests every idea of slaverymore than I do: it is generally detested by the people of thisCommonwealth; and I ardently hope that the time will soon come, whenour brethren in the southern States will view it as we do, and put astop to it; but to this we have no right to compel them. Two questionsnaturally arise: if we ratify the Constitution, shall we do any thingby our act to hold the blacks in slavery--or shall we become thepartakers of other men's sins? I think neither of them. Each State issovereign and independent to a certain degree, and they have a right, and will regulate their own internal affairs, as to themselves appearsproper; and shall we refuse to eat, or to drink, or to be united, withthose who do not think, or act, just as we do? surely not. We are notin this case partakers of other men's sins, for in nothing do wevoluntarily encourage the slavery of our fellow-men; a restriction islaid on the Federal Government, which could not be avoided, and aunion take place. The Federal Convention went as far as they could;the migration or importation, &c. , is confined to the States, now_existing only_, new States cannot claim it. Congress, by theirordinance for erecting new States, some time since, declared that thenew States shall be republican, and that there shall be no slavery inthem. But whether those in slavery in the southern States will beemancipated after the year 1808, I do not pretend to determine: Irather doubt it. 

Mr. NEAL rose and said, that as the Constitution at large, was nowunder consideration, he would just remark, that the article whichrespected the Africans, was the one which laid on his mind--and, unless his objections to that were removed, it must, how much soeverhe liked the other parts of the Constitution, be a sufficient reasonfor him to give his negative to it. 

Major LUSK concurred in the idea already thrown out in the debate, that although the insertion of the amendments in the Constitution wasdevoutly wished, yet he did not see any reason to suppose they everwould be adopted. Turning from the subject of amendments, the Majorentered largely into the consideration of the 9th section, and in themost pathetic and feeling manner, described the miseries of the poornatives of Africa, who are kidnapped and sold for slaves. With thebrightest colors he painted their happiness and ease on their nativeshores, and contrasted them with their wretched, miserable and unhappycondition, in a state of slavery. 

Rev. Mr. BACKUS. Much, sir, hath been said about the importation ofslaves into this country. I believe that, according to my capacity, noman abhors that wicked practice more than I do, and would gladly makeuse of all lawful means towards the abolishing of slavery in all partsof the land. But let us consider where we are, and what we are doing. In the articles of confederation, no provision was made to hinder theimportation of slaves into any of these States: but a door is nowopened hereafter to do it; and each State is at liberty now to abolishslavery as soon as they please. And let us remember our formerconnexion with Great Britain, from whom many in our land think weought not to have revolted. How did they carry on the slave trade! Iknow that the Bishop of Gloucester, in an annual sermon in London, inFebruary, 1766, endeavored to justify their tyrannical claims of powerover us, by casting the reproach of the slave trade upon theAmericans. But at the close of the war, the Bishop of Chester, in anannual sermon, in February, 1783, ingenuously owned, that their nationis the most deeply involved in the guilt of that trade, of any nationin the world; and also, that they have treated their slaves in theWest Indies worse than the French or Spaniards have done theirs. Thusslavery grows more and more odious through the world; and, as anhonorable gentleman said some days ago, "Though we cannot say thatslavery is struck with an apoplexy, yet we may hope it will die with aconsumption. " And a main source, sir, of that iniquity, hath been anabuse of the covenant of circumcision, which gave the seed of Abrahamto destroy the inhabitants of Canaan, and to take their houses, vineyards, and all their estates, as their own; and also to buy andhold others as servants. And as Christian privileges are greater thanthose of the Hebrews were, many have imagined that they had a right toseize upon the lands of the heathen, and to destroy or enslave them asfar as they could extend their power. And from thence the mystery ofiniquity, carried many into the practice of making merchandise ofslaves and souls of men. But all ought to remember, that when Godpromised the land of Canaan to Abraham and his seed, he let him knowthat they were not to take possession of that land, until the iniquityof the Amorites was full; and then they did it under the immediatedirection of Heaven; and they were as real executors of the judgmentof God upon those heathens, as any person ever was an executor of acriminal justly condemned. And in doing it they were not allowed toinvade the lands of the Edomites, who sprang from Esau, who was notonly of the seed of Abraham, but was born at the same birth withIsrael; and yet they were not of that church. Neither were Israelallowed to invade the lands of the Moabites, or of the children ofAmmon, who were of the seed of Lot. And no officer in Israel had anylegislative power, but such as were immediately inspired. Even David, the man after God's own heart, had no legislative power, but only ashe was inspired from above: and he is expressly called a _prophet_ inthe New Testament And we are to remember that Abraham and his seed, for four hundred years, had no warrant to admit any strangers intothat church, but by buying of him as a servant, with money. And it wasa great privilege to be bought, and adopted into a religious familyfor seven years, and then to have their freedom. And that covenant wasexpressly repealed in various parts of the New Testament; andparticularly in the first epistle to the Corinthians, wherein it issaid--Ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. And again--Circumcision isnothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping of thecommandments of God. Ye are bought with a price; be not ye theservants of men. Thus the gospel sets all men upon a level, verycontrary to the declaration of an honorable gentleman in this house, "that the Bible was contrived for the advantage of a particular orderof men. "

NEW YORK CONVENTION. 

Mr. M. SMITH. He would now proceed to state his objections to theclause just read, (section 2, of article 1, clause 3). His objectionswere comprised under three heads: 1st, the rule of apportionment isunjust; 2d, there is no precise number fixed on, below which the houseshall not be reduced; 3d, it is inadequate. In the first place, therule of apportionment of the representatives is to be according to thewhole number of the white inhabitants, with three-fifths of allothers; that is, in plain English, each State is to sendrepresentatives in proportion to the number of freemen, andthree-fifths of the slaves it contains. He could not see any rule bywhich slaves were to be included in the ratio of representation;--theprinciple of a representation being that every free agent should beconcerned in governing himself, it was absurd to give that power to aman who could not exercise it--slaves have no will of their own: thevery operation of it was to give certain privileges to those peoplewho were so wicked as to keep slaves. He knew it would be admitted, that this rule of apportionment was founded on unjust principles, butthat it was the result of accommodation; which, he supposed, we shouldbe under the necessity of admitting, if we meant to be in union withthe southern States, though utterly repugnant to his feelings. 

Mr. HAMILTON. In order that the committee may understand clearly theprinciples on which the General Convention acted, I think it necessaryto explain some preliminary circumstances. 

Sir, the natural situation of this country seems to divide itsinterests into different classes. There are navigating andnon-navigating States--the Northern are properly the navigatingStates: the Southern appear to possess neither the means nor thespirit of navigation. This difference of situation naturally producesa dissimilarity of interest and views respecting foreign commerce. Itwas the interest of the Northern States that there should be norestraints on the navigation, and that they should have full power, bya majority on Congress, to make commercial regulations. The SouthernStates wished to impose a restraint on the Northern, by requiring thattwo-thirds in Congress should be requisite to pass an act inregulation of commerce: they were apprehensive that the restraints ofa navigation law would discourage foreigners, and by obliging them toemploy the shipping of the Northern States would probably enhancetheir freight. This being the case, they insisted strenuously onhaving this provision engrafted in the Constitution; and the NorthernStates were as anxious in opposing it. On the other hand, the smallStates seeing themselves embraced by the confederation upon equalterms, wished to retain the advantages which they already possessed:the large States, on the contrary, thought it improper that RhodeIsland and Delaware should enjoy an equal suffrage with themselves:from these sources a delicate and difficult contest arose. It becamenecessary, therefore, to compromise; or the Convention must havedissolved without effecting any thing. Would it have been wise andprudent in that body, in this critical situation, to have desertedtheir country? No. Every man who hears me--every wise man in theUnited States, would have condemned them. The Convention were obligedto appoint a committee for accommodation. In this committee thearrangement was formed as it now stands; and their report wasaccepted. It was a delicate point; and it was necessary that allparties should be indulged. Gentlemen will see, that if there had notbeen a unanimity, nothing could have been done: for the Convention hadno power to establish, but only to recommend a government. Any othersystem would have been impracticable. Let a Convention be calledto-morrow--let them meet twenty times; nay, twenty thousand times;they will have the same difficulties to encounter; the same clashinginterests to reconcile. 

But dismissing these reflections, let us consider how far thearrangement is in itself entitled to the approbation of this body. Wewill examine it upon its own merits. 

The first thing objected to, is that clause which allows arepresentation for three-fifths of the negroes. Much has been said ofthe impropriety of representing men, who have no will of their own. Whether this be reasoning or declamation, I will not presume to say. It is the unfortunate situation of the southern States, to have agreat part of their population, as well as property, in blacks. Theregulations complained of was one result of the spirit ofaccommodation, which governed the Convention; and without thisindulgence, no union could possibly have been formed. But, sir, considering some peculiar advantages which we derived from them, it isentirely just that they should be gratified. The southern Statespossess certain staples, tobacco, rice, indigo, &c. , which must becapital objects in treaties of commerce with foreign nations; and theadvantage which they necessarily procure in these treaties will befelt throughout all the States. But the justice of this plan willappear in another view. The best writers on government have held thatrepresentation should be compounded of persons and property. This rulehas been adopted, as far as it could be, in the Constitution of NewYork. It will, however, by no means, be admitted, that the slaves areconsidered altogether as property. They are men, though degraded tothe condition of slavery. They are persons known to the municipal lawsof the States which they inhabit as well as to the laws of nature. Butrepresentation and taxation go together--and one uniform rule ought toapply to both. Would it be just to compute these slaves in theassessment of taxes, and discard them from the estimate in theapportionment of representatives? Would it be just to impose asingular burthen, without conferring some adequate advantage?

Another circumstance ought to be considered. The rule we have beenspeaking of is a general rule, and applies to all the States. Now, youhave a great number of people in your State, which are not representedat all; and have no voice in your government: these will be includedin the enumeration--not two-fifths--nor three-fifths, but the whole. This proves that the advantages of the plan are not confined to thesouthern States, but extend to other parts of the Union. 

Mr. M. SMITH. I shall make no reply to the arguments offered by thehonorable gentleman to justify the rule of apportionment fixed by thisclause: for though I am confident they might be easily refuted, yet Iam persuaded we must yield this point, in accommodation to thesouthern States. The amendment therefore proposes no alteration to theclause in this respect. 

Mr. HARRISON. Among the objections, that, which has been made to themode of apportionment of representatives, has been relinquished. Ithink this concession does honor to the gentleman who had stated theobjection. He has candidly acknowledged, that this apportionment wasthe result of accommodation; without which no union could have beenformed. 

 * * * * *

PENNSYLVANIA CONVENTION. 

Mr. WILSON. Much fault has been found with the mode of expression, used in the first clause of the ninth section of the first article. Ibelieve I can assign a reason, why that mode of expression was used, and why the term slave was not admitted in this Constitution--and asto the manner of laying taxes, this is not the first time that thesubject has come into the view of the United States, and of theLegislatures of the several States. The gentleman, (Mr. FINDLEY) willrecollect, that in the present Congress, the quota of the federaldebt, and general expenses, was to be in proportion to the value ofland, and other enumerated property, within the States. After tryingthis for a number of years, it was found on all hands, to be a modethat could not be carried into execution. Congress were satisfied ofthis, and in the year 1783 recommended, in conformity with the powersthey possessed under the articles of confederation, that the quotashould be according to the number of free people, including thosebound to servitude, and excluding Indians not taxed. These were theexpressions used in 1783, and the fate of this recommendation wassimilar to all their other resolutions. It was not carried intoeffect, but it was adopted by no fewer than eleven, out of thirteenStates; and it cannot but be matter of surprise, to hear gentlemen, who agreed to this very mode of expression at that time, come forwardand state it as an objection on the present occasion. It was natural, sir, for the late convention, to adopt the mode after it had beenagreed to by eleven States, and to use the expression, which theyfound had been received as unexceptionable before. With respect to theclause, restricting Congress from prohibiting the migration orimportation of such persons, as any of the States now existing, shallthink proper to admit, prior to the year 1808. The honorable gentlemansays, that this clause is not only dark, but intended to grant toCongress, for that time, the power to admit the importation of slaves. No such thing was intended; but I will tell you what was done, and itgives me high pleasure, that so much was done. Under the presentConfederation, the States may admit the importation of slaves as longas they please; but by this article, after the year 1808 the Congresswill have power to prohibit such importation, notwithstanding thedisposition of any State to the contrary. I consider this as layingthe foundation for banishing slavery out of this country; and thoughthe period is more distant than I could wish, yet it will produce thesame kind, gradual change, which was pursued in Pennsylvania. It iswith much satisfaction I view this power in the general government, whereby they may lay an interdiction on this reproachful trade; but animmediate advantage is also obtained, for a tax or duty may be imposedon such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person; andthis, sir, operates as a partial prohibition; it was all that could beobtained, I am sorry it was no more; but from this I think there isreason to hope, that yet a few years, and it will be prohibitedaltogether; and in the mean time, the new States which are to beformed, will be under the control of Congress in this particular; andslaves will never be introduced amongst them. The gentleman says, thatit is unfortunate in another point of view; it means to prohibit theintroduction of white people from Europe, as this tax may deter themfrom coming amongst us; a little impartiality and attention willdiscover the care that the Convention took in selecting theirlanguage. The words are the _migration_ or IMPORTATION of suchpersons, &c. , shall not be prohibited by Congress prior to the year1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation; it isobservable here, that the term migration is dropped, when a tax orduty is mentioned, so that Congress have power to impose the tax onlyon those imported. 

I recollect, on a former day, the honorable gentlemen fromWestmoreland (Mr. FINDLEY, ) and the honorable gentleman fromCumberland (Mr. WHITEHILL, ) took exception against the first clause ofthe 9th section, art. 1, arguing very unfairly, that because Congressmight impose a tax or duty of ten dollars on the importation ofslaves, within any of the United States, Congress might thereforepermit slaves to be imported within this State, contrary to its laws. I confess I little thought that this part of the system would beexcepted to. 

I am sorry that it could be extended no further; but so far as itoperates, it presents us with the pleasing prospect, that the rightsof mankind will be acknowledged and established throughout the union. 

If there was no other lovely feature in the Constitution but this one, it would diffuse a beauty over its whole countenance. Yet the lapse ofa few years! and Congress will have power to exterminate slavery fromwithin our borders. 

How would such a delightful prospect expand the breast of a benevolentand philanthropic European? Would he cavil at an expression? catch ata phrase? No, sir, that is only reserved for the gentleman on theother side of your chair to do. 

Mr. McKEAN. The arguments against the Constitution are, I think, chiefly these:. . . . 

That migration or importation of such persons, as any of the Statesshall admit, shall not be prohibited prior to 1808, nor a tax or dutyimposed on such importation exceeding ten dollars for each person. 

Provision is made that Congress shall have power to prohibit theimportation of slaves after the year 1808, but the gentlemen inopposition, accuse this system of a crime, because it has notprohibited them at once. I suspect those gentlemen are not wellacquainted with the business of the diplomatic body, or they wouldknow that an agreement might be made, that did not perfectly accordwith the will and pleasure of any one person. Instead of finding faultwith what has been gained, I am happy to see a disposition in theUnited States to do so much. 

VIRGINIA CONVENTION. 

GOV. RANDOLPH. This is one point of weakness I wish for the honor ofmy countrymen that it was the only one. There is another circumstancewhich renders us more vulnerable. Are we not weakened by thepopulation of those whom we hold in slavery? The day may come whenthey may make impression upon us. Gentlemen who have been longaccustomed to the contemplation of the subject, think there is a causeof alarm in this case: the number of those people, compared to that ofthe whites, is in an immense proportion: their number amounts to236, 000--that of the whites, only to 352, 000. * * * * I beseech themto consider, whether Virginia and North Carolina, both oppressed withdebts and slaves, can defend themselves externally, or make theirpeople happy internally. 

GEORGE MASON. We are told in strong language, of dangers to which wewill be exposed unless we adopt this Constitution. Among the rest, domestic safety is said to be in danger. This government does notattend to our domestic safety. It authorizes the importation of slavesfor twenty-odd years, and thus continues upon us that nefarious trade. Instead of securing and protecting us, the continuation of thisdetestable trade adds daily to our weakness. Though this evil isincreasing, there is no clause in the Constitution that will preventthe Northern and Eastern States from meddling with our whole propertyof that kind. There is a clause to prohibit the importation of slavesafter twenty years, but there is no provision made for securing to theSouthern States those they now possess. It is far from being adesirable property. But it will involve us in great difficulties andinfelicity to be now deprived of them. There ought to be a clause inthe Constitution to secure us that property, which we have acquiredunder our former laws, and the loss of which would bring ruin on agreat many people. 

MR. LEE. The honorable gentleman abominates it, because it does notprohibit the importation of slaves, and because it does not secure thecontinuance of the existing slavery! Is it not obviously inconsistentto criminate it for two contradictory reasons? I submit it to theconsideration of the gentleman, whether, if it be reprehensible in theone case, it can be censurable in the other? MR. LEE then concluded byearnestly recommending to the committee to proceed regularly. 

MR. HENRY. It says that "no state shall engage in war, unless actuallyinvaded. " If you give this clause a fair construction, what is thetrue meaning of it? What does this relate to? Not domesticinsurrections, but war. If the country be invaded, a State may go towar; but cannot suppress insurrections. If there should happen aninsurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to beinvaded. --They cannot therefore suppress it, without the interpositionof Congress. 

MR. GEORGE NICHOLAS. Another worthy member says, there is no power inthe States to quell an insurrection of slaves. Have they it now? Ifthey have, does the Constitution take it away? If it does, it must bein one of the three clauses which have been mentioned by the worthymember. The first clause gives the general government power to callthem out when necessary. Does this take it away from the States? No. But it gives an additional security: for, besides the power in theState governments to use their own militia, it will be the duty of thegeneral government to aid them with the strength of the Union whencalled for. No part of this Constitution can show that this power istaken away. 

Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which hascreated more dangers than any other. The first clause allows theimportation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attemptswere made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchantsprevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of ourseparation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principalobject of this State, and most of the States in the Union. Theaugmentation of slaves weakens the States; and such a trade isdiabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind. Yet, by thisConstitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value anunion of all the States, I would not admit the Southern States intothe Union, unless they agreed to the discontinuance of thisdisgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness and not strength tothe Union. And though this infamous traffic be continued, we have nosecurity for the property of that kind which we have already. There isno clause in this Constitution to secure it; for they may lay such taxas will amount to manumission. And should the government be amended, still this detestable kind of commerce cannot be discontinued tillafter the expiration of twenty years. For the fifth article, whichprovides for amendments, expressly excepts this clause. I have everlooked upon this as a most disgraceful thing to America. I cannotexpress my detestation of it. Yet they have not secured us theproperty of the slaves we have already. So that, "they have done whatthey ought not to have done, and have left undone what they ought tohave done"

Mr. MADISON. Mr. Chairman, I should conceive this clause to beimpolitic, if it were one of those things which could be excludedwithout encountering greater evils. The Southern States would not haveentered into the union of America, without the temporary permission ofthat trade. And if they were excluded from the union, the consequencesmight be dreadful to them and to us. We are not in a worse situationthan before. That traffic is prohibited by our laws, and we maycontinue the prohibition. The union in general is not in a worsesituation. Under the articles of confederation, it might be continuedforever: but by this clause an end may be put to it after twentyyears. There is, therefore, an amelioration of our circumstances. Atax may be laid in the mean time; but it is limited, otherwiseCongress might lay such a tax as would amount to a prohibition. Fromthe mode of representation and taxation, Congress cannot lay such atax on slaves as will amount to manumission. Another clause secures usthat property which we now possess. At present, if any slave elopes toany of those States where slaves are free, he becomes emancipated bytheir laws. For the laws of the States are uncharitable to one anotherin this respect. But in this Constitution, "no person held to service, or labor, in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be dischargedfrom such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of theparty to whom such service or labor may be due. " This clause wasexpressly inserted to enable owners of slaves to reclaim them. This isa better security than any that now exist. No power is given to thegeneral government to interpose with respect to the property in slavesnow held by the States. The taxation of this State being equal only toits representation, such a tax cannot be laid as he supposes. Theycannot prevent the importation of slaves for twenty years: but afterthat period, they can. The gentlemen from South Carolina and Georgiaargued in this manner: "We have now liberty to import this species ofproperty, and much of the property now possessed, has been purchased, or otherwise acquired, in contemplation of improving it by theassistance of imported slaves. What would be the consequence ofhindering us from it? The slaves of Virginia would rise in value, andwe would be obliged to go to your markets. " I need not expatiate onthis subject. Great as the evil is, a dismemberment of the union wouldbe worse. If those States should disunite from the other States, fornot including them in the temporary continuance of this traffic, theymight solicit and obtain aid from foreign powers. 

Mr. TYLER warmly enlarged on the impolicy, iniquity, anddisgracefulness of this wicked traffic. He thought the reasons urgedby gentlemen in defence of it were inconclusive, and ill founded. Itwas one cause of the complaints against British tyranny, that thistrade was permitted. The Revolution had put a period to it; but now itwas to be revived. He thought nothing could justify it. This temporaryrestriction on Congress militated, in his opinion, against thearguments of gentlemen on the other side, that what was not given up, was retained by the States; for that if this restriction had not beeninserted, Congress could have prohibited the African trade. The powerof prohibiting it was not expressly delegated to them; yet they wouldhave had it by implication, if this restraint had not been provided. This seemed to him to demonstrate most clearly the necessity ofrestraining them by a bill of rights, from infringing our unalienablerights. It was immaterial whether the bill of rights was by itself, orincluded in the Constitution. But he contended for it one way or theother. It would be justified by our own example, and that of England. His earnest desire was, that it should be handed down to posterity, that he had opposed this wicked clause. 

Mr. MADISON. As to the restriction in the clause under consideration, it was a restraint on the exercise of a power expressly delegated toCongress, namely, that of regulating commerce with foreign nations. 

Mr. HENRY insisted, that the insertion of these restrictions onCongress, was a plain demonstration that Congress could exercisepowers by implication. The gentleman had admitted that Congress couldhave interdicted the African trade, were it not for this restriction. If so, the power not having been expressly delegated, must be obtainedby implication. He demanded where, then, was their doctrine ofreserved rights? He wished for negative clauses to prevent them fromassuming any powers but those expressly given. He asked why it wasmoited to secure us that property in slaves, which we held now? Hefeared its omission was done with design. They might lay such heavytaxes on slaves, as would amount to emancipation; and then theSouthern States would be the only sufferers. His opinion was confirmedby the mode of levying money. Congress, he observed, had power to layand collect taxes, imposts, and excises. Imposts (or duties) andexcises, were to be uniform. But this uniformity did not extend totaxes. This might compel the Southern States to liberate theirnegroes. He wished this property therefore to be guarded. Heconsidered the clause which had been adduced by the gentleman as asecurity for this property, as no security at all. It was no more thanthis--that a runaway negro could be taken up in Maryland or New York. This could not prevent Congress from interfering with that property bylaying a grievous and enormous tax on it, so as to compel owners toemancipate their slaves rather than pay the tax. He apprehended itwould be productive of much stockjobbing, and that they would playinto one another's hands in such a manner as that this property wouldbe lost to the country. 

Mr. GEORGE NICHOLAS wondered that gentlemen who were against slaverywould be opposed to this clause; as after that period the slave tradewould be done away. He asked if gentlemen did not see theinconsistency of their arguments? They object, says he, to theConstitution, because the slave trade is laid open for twenty-oddyears; and yet tell you, that by some latent operation of it, theslaves who are now, will be manumitted. At that same moment, it isopposed for being promotive and destructive of slavery. He contendedthat it was advantageous to Virginia, that it should be in the powerof Congress to prevent the importation of slaves after twenty years, as it would then put a period to the evil complained of. 

As the Southern States would not confederate without this clause, heasked, if gentlemen would rather dissolve the confederacy than tosuffer this temporary inconvenience, admitting to it to be such?Virginia might continue the prohibition of such importation during theintermediate period, and would be benefitted by it, as a tax of tendollars on each slave might be laid, of which she would receive ashare. He endeavored to obviate the objection of gentlemen, that therestriction on Congress was a proof that they would have power notgiven them, by remarking, that they would only have had a generalsuperintendency of trade, if the restriction had not been inserted. But the Southern States insisted on this exception to that generalsuperintendency for twenty years. It could not therefore have been apower by implication, as the restriction was an exception from adelegated power. The taxes could not, as had been suggested, be laidso high on negroes as to amount to emancipation; because taxation andrepresentation were fixed according to the census established in theConstitution. The exception of taxes, from the uniformity annexed toduties and excises, could not have the operation contended for by thegentleman; because other clauses had clearly and positively fixed thecensus. Had taxes been uniform, it would have been universallyobjected to, for no one object could be selected without involvinggreat inconveniences and oppressions. But, says Mr. Nicholas, is itfrom the general government we are to fear emancipation? Gentlemenwill recollect what I said in another house, and what other gentlemenhave said that advocated emancipation. Give me leave to say, that thatclause is a great security for our slave tax. I can tell thecommittee, that the people of our country are reduced to beggary bythe taxes on negroes. Had this Constitution been adopted, it would nothave been the case. The taxes were laid on all our negroes. By thissystem two-fifths are exempted. He then added, that he had imaginedgentlemen would not support here what they had opposed in anotherplace. 

Mr. HENRY replied, that though the proportion of each was to be fixedby the census, and three-fifths of the slaves only were included inthe enumeration, yet the proportion of Virginia being once fixed, might be laid on blacks and blacks only. For the mode of raising theproportion of each State being to be directed by Congress, they mightmake slaves the sole object to raise it. Personalities he wished totake leave of; they had nothing to do with the question, which wassolely whether that paper was wrong or not. 

Mr. NICHOLAS replied, that negroes must be considered as persons, orproperty. If as property, the proportion of taxes to be laid on themwas fixed in the Constitution. If he apprehended a poll tax onnegroes, the Constitution had prevented it. For, by the census, wherea white man paid ten shillings, a negro paid but six shillings. Forthe exemption of two-fifths of them reduced it to that proportion. 

The second, third, and fourth clauses, were then read as follows:

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety mayrequire it. 

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed. 

No capitation or other direct tax shall be paid, unless in proportionto the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken. 

Mr. GEORGE MASON said, that gentlemen might think themselves securedby the restriction in the fourth clause, that no capitation or otherdirect tax should be laid but in proportion to the census beforedirected to be taken. But that when maturely considered it would befound to be no security whatsoever. It was nothing but a directassertion, or mere confirmation of the clause which fixed the ratio oftaxes and representation. It only meant that the quantum to be raisedof each State should be in proportion to their numbers in the mannertherein directed. But the general government was not precluded fromlaying the proportion of any particular State on any one species ofproperty they might think proper. For instance, if five hundredthousand dollars were to be raised, they might lay the whole of theproportion of the Southern States on the blacks, or any one species ofproperty: so that by laying taxes too heavily on slaves, they mighttotally annihilate that kind of property. No real security could arisefrom the clause which provides, that persons held to labor in oneState, escaping into another, shall be delivered up. This only meant, that runaway slaves should not be protected in other States. As to theexclusion of _ex post facto_ laws, it could not be said to create anysecurity in this case. For laying a tax on slaves would not be _expost facto_. 

Mr. MADISON replied, that even the Southern States, who were mostaffected, were perfectly satisfied with this provision, and dreaded nodanger to the property they now hold. It appeared to him, that thegeneral government would not intermeddle with that property for twentyyears, but to lay a tax on every slave imported, not exceeding tendollars; and that after the expiration of that period they mightprohibit the traffic altogether. The census in the Constitution wasintended to introduce equality in the burdens to be laid on thecommunity. No gentleman objected to laying duties, imposts, andexcises, uniformly. But uniformity of taxes would be subversive to theprinciples of equality: for that it was not possible to select anyarticle which would be easy for one State, but what would be heavy foranother. That the proportion of each State being ascertained, it wouldbe raised by the general government in the most convenient manner forthe people, and not by the selection of any one particular object. That there must be some degree of confidence put in agents, or else wemust reject a state of civil society altogether. Another greatsecurity to this property, which he mentioned, was, that five Stateswere greatly interested in that species of property, and there wereother States which had some slaves, and had made no attempt, or takenany step to take them from the people. There were a few slaves in NewYork, New Jersey and Connecticut: these States would, probably, opposeany attempts to annihilate this species of property. He concluded, byobserving, that he would be glad to leave the decision of this to thecommittee. 

The second section was then read as follows: * * *

No person held to service or labor in one State, under the lawsthereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law orregulation therein be discharged from such service. 

Mr. GEORGE MASON. --Mr. Chairman, on some former part of theinvestigation of this subject, gentlemen were pleased to make someobservations on the security of property coming within this section. It was then said, and I now say, that there is no security, nor havegentlemen convinced me of this. 

Mr. HENRY. Among ten thousand implied powers which they may assume, they may, if we be engaged in war, liberate every one of your slavesif they please. And this must and will be done by men, a majority ofwhom have not a common interest with you. They will, therefore, haveno feeling for your interests. It has been repeatedly said here, thatthe great object of a national government, was national defence. Thatpower which is said to be intended for security and safety, may berendered detestable and oppressive. If you give power to the generalgovernment to provide for the general defence, the means must becommensurate to the end. All the means in the possession of the peoplemust be given to the government which is entrusted with the publicdefence. In this State there are 236, 000 blacks, and there are many inseveral other States. But there are few or none in the NorthernStates, and yet if the Northern States shall be of opinion, that ournumbers are numberless, they may call forth every national resource. May Congress not say, that every black man must fight? Did we not seea little of this last war? We were not so hard pushed, as to makeemancipation general. But acts of assembly passed, that every slavewho would go to the army should be free. Another thing will contributeto bring this event about--slavery is detested--we feel its fataleffects--we deplore it with all the pity of humanity. Let all theseconsiderations, at some future period, press with full force on theminds of Congress. Let that urbanity, which I trust will distinguishAmerica, and the necessity of national defence, let all these thingsoperate on their minds, they will search that paper, and see if theyhave power of manumission. And have they not, sir? Have they not powerto provide for the general defence and welfare? May they not thinkthat these call for the abolition of slavery? May not they pronounceall slaves free, and will they not be warranted by that power? Thereis no ambiguous implication or logical deduction. The paper speaks tothe point. They have the power in clear, unequivocal terms; and willclearly and certainly exercise it. As much as I deplore slavery, I seethat prudence forbids its abolition. I deny that the generalgovernment ought to set them free, because a decided majority of theStates have not the ties of sympathy and fellow-feeling for thosewhose interest would be affected by their emancipation. The majorityof Congress is to the North, and the slaves are to the South. In thissituation, I see a great deal of the property of the people ofVirginia in jeopardy, and their peace and tranquillity gone away. Irepeat it again, that it would rejoice my very soul, that every one ofmy fellow-beings was emancipated. As we ought with gratitude to admireto admire that decree of Heaven, which has numbered us among the free, we ought to lament and deplore the necessity of holding our fellow-menin bondage. But is it practicable by any human means, to liberatethem, without producing the most dreadful and ruinous consequences? Weought to possess them in the manner we have inherited them from ourancestors, as their manumission is incompatible with the felicity ofthe country. But we ought to soften, as much as possible, the rigor oftheir unhappy fate. I know that in a variety of particular instances, the legislature, listening to complaints, have admitted theiremancipation. Let me not dwell on this subject. I will only add, thatthis, as well as every other property of the people of Virginia, is injeopardy, and put in the hands of those who have no similarity ofsituation with us. This is a local matter, and I can see no proprietyin subjecting it to Congress. 

Have we not a right to say, _hear our propositions_? Why, sir, yourslaves have a right to make their humble requests. --Those who are inthe meanest occupations of human life, have a right to complain. 

Gov. RANDOLPH. That honorable gentleman, and some others, haveinsisted that the abolition of slavery will result from it, and at thesame time have complained, that it encourages its continuation. Theinconsistency proves in some degree, the futility of their arguments. But if it be not conclusive, to satisfy the committee that there is nodanger of enfranchisement taking place, I beg leave to refer them tothe paper itself. I hope that there is none here, who, considering thesubject in the calm light of philosophy, will advance an objectiondishonorable to Virginia; that at the moment they are securing therights of their citizens, an objection is started that there is aspark of hope, that those unfortunate men now held in bondage, may, bythe operation of the general government be made _free_. But if anygentleman be terrified by this apprehension, let him read the system. I ask, and I will ask again and again, till I be answered (not bydeclamation) where is the part that has a tendency to the abolition ofslavery? Is it the clause which says, that "the migration orimportation of such persons as any of the States now existing, shallthink proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by Congress prior tothe year 1808?" This is an exception from the power of regulatingcommerce, and the restriction is only to continue till 1808. ThenCongress can, by the exercise of that power, prevent futureimportations; but does it affect the existing state of slavery? Wereit right here to mention what passed in Convention on the occasion, Imight tell you that the Southern States, even South Carolina herself;conceived this property to be secure by these words. I believe, whatever we may think here, that there was not a member of theVirginia delegation who had the smallest suspicion of the abolition ofslavery. Go to their meaning. Point out the clause where thisformidable power of emancipation is inserted. But another clause ofthe Constitution proves the absurdity of the supposition. The words ofthe clause are, "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequenceof any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service orlabor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom suchservice or labor may be due. " Every one knows that slaves are held toservice and labor. And when authority is given to owners of slaves tovindicate their property, can it be supposed they can be deprived ofit? If a citizen of this State, in consequence of this clause, cantake his runaway slave in Maryland, can it be seriously thought, thatafter taking him and bringing him home, he could be made free?

I observed that the honorable gentleman's proposition comes in a trulyquestionable shape, and is still more extraordinary and unaccountablefor another consideration; that although we went article by articlethrough the Constitution, and although we did not expect a generalreview of the subject, (as a most comprehensive view had been taken ofit before it was regularly debated, ) yet we are carried back to theclause giving that dreadful power, for the general welfare. Pardon meif I remind you of the true state of that business. I appeal to thecandor of the honorable gentleman, and if he thinks it an improperappeal, I ask the gentlemen here, whether there be a generalindefinite power of providing for the general welfare? The power is, "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay thedebts and provide for the common defence and general welfare. " So thatthey can only raise money by these means, in order to provide for thegeneral welfare. No man who reads it can say it is general as thehonorable gentleman represents it. You must violate every rule ofconstruction and common sense, if you sever it from the power ofraising money and annex it to any thing else, in order to make it thatformidable power which it is represented to be. 

Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, with respect to commerce andnavigation, he has given it as his opinion, that their regulation, asit now stands, was a _sine qua non_ of the Union, and that without it, the States in Convention would never concur. I differ from him. Itnever was, nor in my opinion ever will be, a _sine qua non_ of theUnion. I will give you, to the best of my recollection, the history ofthat affair. This business was discussed at Philadelphia for fourmonths, during which time the subject of commerce and navigation wasoften under consideration; and I assert, that eight States out oftwelve, for more than three months, voted for requiring two-thirds ofthe members present in each house to pass commercial and navigationlaws. True it is, that afterwards it was carried by a majority, as itstands. If I am right, there was a great majority for requiringtwo-thirds of the States in this business, till a compromise tookplace between the Northern and Southern States; the Northern Statesagreeing to the temporary importation of slaves, and the SouthernStates conceding, in return, that navigation and commercial lawsshould be on the footing on which they now stand. If I am mistaken, let me be put right. These are my reasons for saying that this was nota _sine qua non_ of their concurrence. The Newfoundland fisheries willrequire that kind of security which we are now in want of. The EasternStates therefore agreed at length, that treaties should require theconsent of two-thirds of the members present in the senate. 

Mr. Madison. I was struck with surprise when I heard him expresshimself alarmed with respect to the emancipation of slaves. Let meask, if they should even attempt it, if it will not be an usurpationof power? There is no power to warrant it, in that paper. If there be, I know it not. But why should it be done? Says the honorablegentleman, for the general welfare--it will infuse strength into oursystem. Can any member of this committee suppose, that it willincrease our strength? Can any one believe, that the American councilswill come into a measure which will strip them of their property, discourage and alienate the affections of five-thirteenths of theUnion? Why was nothing of this sort aimed at before? I believe such anidea never entered into an American breast, nor do I believe it everwill, unless it will enter into the heads of those gentlemen whosubstitute unsupported suspicions for reasons. 

Mr. Henry. He asked me where was the power of emancipating slaves? Isay it will be implied, unless implication be prohibited. He admitsthat the power of granting passports will be in the new Congresswithout the insertion of this restriction--yet he can shew me nothinglike such a power granted in that Constitution. Notwithstanding headmits their right to this power by implication, he says that I amunfair and uncandid in my deduction, that they can emancipate ourslaves, though the word emancipation be not mentioned in it. They canexercise power by implication in one instance, as well as in another. Thus, by the gentleman's own argument, they can exercise the powerthough it be not delegated. 

Mr. Z. Johnson. They tell us that they see a progressive danger ofbringing about emancipation. The principle has begun since therevolution. Let us do what we will, it will come round. Slavery hasbeen the foundation of that impiety and dissipation, which have beenso much disseminated among our countrymen. If it were totallyabolished, it would do much good. 

NORTH CAROLINA CONVENTION. 

The first three clauses of the second section read. 

Mr. GOUDY. Mr. Chairman, this clause of taxation will give anadvantage to some States, over the others. It will be oppressive tothe Southern States. Taxes are equal to our representation. To augmentour taxes and increase our burthens, our negroes are to berepresented. If a State has fifty thousand negroes, she is to send onerepresentative for them. I wish not to be represented with negroes, especially if it increases my burthens. 

Mr. Davie. Mr. Chairman, I will endeavor to obviate what the gentlemanlast up has said. I wonder to see gentlemen so precipitate and hastyon a subject of such awful importance. It ought to be considered, that_some_ of _us_ are slow of apprehension, not having those quickconceptions, and luminous understandings, of which other gentlemen maybe possessed. The gentleman "does not wish to be represented withnegroes. " This, sir, is an unhappy species of population, but cannotat present alter their situation. The Eastern States had greatjealousies on this subject. They insisted that their cows and horseswere equally entitled to representation; that the one was property aswell as the other. It became our duty on the other hand, to acquire asmuch weight as possible in the legislation of the Union; and as theNorthern States were more populous in whites, this only could be doneby insisting that a certain proportion of our slaves should make apart of the computed population. It was attempted to form a rule ofrepresentation from a compound ratio of wealth and population; but, onconsideration, it was found impracticable to determine the comparativevalue of lands, and other property, in so extensive a territory, withany degree of accuracy; and population alone was adopted as the onlypracticable rule or criterion of representation. It was urged by thedeputies of the Eastern States, that a representation of two-fifthswould of little utility, and that their entire representation would beunequal and burthensome. That in a time of war, slaves rendered acountry more vulnerable, while its defence devolved upon its _free_inhabitants. On the other hand, we insisted, that in time of peacethey contributed by their labor to the general wealth as well as othermembers of the community. That as rational beings they had a right ofrepresentation, and in some instances might be highly useful in war. On these principles, the Eastern States gave the matter up, andconsented to the regulation as it has been read. I hope these reasonswill appear satisfactory. It is the same rule or principle which wasproposed some years ago by Congress, and assented to by twelve of theStates. It may wound the delicacy of the gentleman from Guilford, (Mr. GOUDY, ) but I hope he will endeavor to accommodate his feelings to theinterests and circumstances of his country. 

Mr. JAMES GALLOWAY said, that he did not object to the representationof negroes, so much as he did to the fewness of the number ofrepresentatives. He was surprised how we came to have but five, including those intended to represent negroes. That in his humbleopinion North Carolina was entitled to that number independent of thenegroes. 

First clause of the 9th section read. 

Mr. J. M'DOWALL wished to hear the reasons of this restriction. 

Mr. SPAIGHT answered that there was a contest between the Northern andSouthern States--that the Southern States, whose principal supportdepended on the labor of slaves, would not consent to the desire ofthe Northern States to exclude the importation of slaves absolutely. That South Carolina and Georgia insisted on this clause, as they werenow in want of hands to cultivate their lands: That in the course oftwenty years they would be fully supplied: That the trade would beabolished then, and that in the mean time some tax or duty might belaid on. 

Mr. M'DOWALL replied, that the explanation was just such as heexpected, and by no means satisfactory to him, and that he looked uponit as a very objectionable part of the system. 

Mr. IREDELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express sentiments similar tothose of the gentleman from Craven. For my part, were it practicableto put an end to the importation of slaves immediately, it would giveme the greatest pleasure, for it certainly is a trade utterlyinconsistent with the rights of humanity, and under which greatcruelties have been exercised. When the entire abolition of slaverytakes place, it will be an event which must be pleasing to everygenerous mind, and every friend of human nature; but we often wish forthings which are not attainable. It was the wish of a great majorityof the Convention to put an end to the trade immediately, but theStates of South Carolina and Georgia would not agree to it. Considerthen what would be the difference between our present situation inthis respect, if we do not agree to the Constitution, and what it willbe if we do agree to it. If we do not agree to it, do we remedy theevil? No, sir, we do not; for if the Constitution be not adopted, itwill be in the power of every State to continue it forever. They mayor may not abolish it at their discretion. But if we adopt theConstitution, the trade must cease after twenty years, if Congressdeclare so, whether particular States please so or not: surely, then, we gain by it. This was the utmost that could be obtained. I heartilywish more could have been done. But as it is, this government is noblydistinguished above others by that very provision. Where is thereanother country in which such a restriction prevails? We, therefore, sir, set an example of humanity by providing for the abolition of thisinhuman traffic, though at a distant period. I hope, therefore, thatthis part of the Constitution will not be condemned, because it hasnot stipulated for what it was impracticable to obtain. 

Mr. SPAIGHT further explained the clause. That the limitation of thistrade to the term of twenty years, was a compromise between theEastern States and the Southern States. South Carolina and Georgiawished to extend the term. The Eastern States insisted on the entireabolition of the trade. That the State of North Carolina had notthought proper to pass any law prohibiting the importation of slaves, and therefore its delegation in the convention did not thinkthemselves authorized to contend for an immediate prohibition of it. 

Mr. IREDELL added to what he had said before, that the States ofGeorgia and South Carolina had lost a great many slaves during thewar, and that they wished to supply the loss. 

Mr. GALLOWAY. Mr. Chairman, the explanation given to this clause doesnot satisfy my mind. I wish to see this abominable trade put an endto. But in case it be thought proper to continue this abominabletraffic for twenty years, yet I do not wish to see the tax on theimportation extended to all persons whatsoever. Our situation isdifferent from the people to the North. We want citizens; they do not. Instead of laying a tax, we ought to a give a bounty, to encourageforeigners to come among us. With respect to the abolition of slavery, it requires the utmost consideration. The property of the SouthernStates consists principally of slaves. If they mean to do away slaveryaltogether, this property will be destroyed. I apprehend it means tobring forward manumission. If we must manumit our slaves, what countryshall we send them to? It is impossible for us to be happy if, aftermanumission, they are to stay among us. 

Mr. IREDELL. Mr. Chairman, the worthy gentleman, I believe, hasmisunderstood this clause, which runs in the following words: "Themigration or importation of such persons as any of the States nowexisting, shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by theCongress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on_such importation_, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. "

Now, sir, observe that the Eastern States, who long ago have abolishedslavery, did not approve of the expression _slaves_; they thereforeused another that answered the same purpose. The committee willobserve the distinction between the two words migration andimportation. The first part of the clause will extend to persons whocome into the country as free people, or are brought as slaves, butthe last part extends to slaves only. The word _migration_ refers tofree persons; but the word _importation_ refers to slaves, becausefree people cannot be said to be imported. The tax, therefore, is onlyto be laid on slaves who are imported, and not on free persons whomigrate. I further beg leave to say, that the gentleman is mistaken inanother thing. He seems to say that this extends to the abolition ofslavery. Is there anything in this constitution which says thatCongress shall have it in their power to abolish the slavery of thoseslaves who are now in the country? Is it not the plain meaning of it, that after twenty years they may prevent the future importation ofslaves? It does not extend to those now in the country. There isanother circumstance to be observed. There is no authority vested incongress to restrain the States in the interval of twenty years, fromdoing what they please. If they wish to inhibit such importation, theymay do so. Our next assembly may put an entire end to the importationof slaves. 

Article fourth. The first section and two first clauses of the secondsection read without observation. 

The last clause read--

Mr. IREDELL begged leave to explain the reason of this clause. In someof the Northern States, they have emancipated all their slaves. If anyof our slaves, said he, go there and remain there a certain time, theywould, by the present laws, be entitled to their freedom, so thattheir masters could not get them again. This would be extremelyprejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern States, and to preventit, this clause is inserted in the Constitution. Though the word_slave_ be not mentioned, this is the meaning of it. The Northerndelegates, owing to their particular scruples on the subject ofslavery, did not choose the word _slave_ to be mentioned. 

The rest of the forth article read without observation. 

 * * * * *

Mr. IREDELL. It is however to be observed, that the first and forthclauses in the ninth section of the first article, are protected fromany alteration until the year 1808; and in order that no consolidationshould take place, it is provided, that no State shall, by anyamendment or alteration, be ever deprived of an equal suffrage in theSenate without its own consent. The two first prohibitions are withrespect to the census, according to which direct taxes are imposed, and with respect to the importation of slaves. As to the first, itmust be observed, that there is a material difference between theNorthern and Southern States. The Northern States have been muchlonger settled, and are much fuller of people than the Southern, buthave not land in equal proportion, nor scarcely any slaves. Thesubject of this article was regulated with great difficulty, and by aspirit of concession which it would not be prudent to disturb for agood many years. In twenty years there will probably be a greatalteration, and then the subject may be re-considered with lessdifficulty and greater coolness. In the mean time, the compromise wasupon the best footing that could be obtained. A compromise likewisetook place in regard to the importation of slaves. It is probable thatall the members reprobated this inhuman traffic, but those of SouthCarolina and Georgia would not consent to an immediate prohibition ofit; one reason of which was, that during the last war they lost a vastnumber of negroes, which loss they wish to supply. In the mean time, it is left to the States to admit or prohibit the importation, andCongress may impose a limited duty upon it. 

SOUTH CAROLINA CONVENTION. 

Hon. RAWLINS LOWNDES. In the first place, what cause was there forjealously of our importing negroes? Why confine us to twenty years, orrather why limit us at all? For his part he thought this trade couldbe justified on the principles of religion, humanity, and justice; forcertainly to translate a set of human beings from a bad country to abetter, was fulfilling every part of these principles. But they don'tlike our slaves, because they have none themselves; and therefore wantto exclude us from this great advantage; why should the SouthernStates allow of this, without the consent of nine States?

Judge PENDLETON observed, that only three States, Georgia, SouthCarolina, and North Carolina, allowed the importation of negroes. Virginia had a clause in her Constitution for this purpose, andMaryland, he believed, even before the war, prohibited them. 

Mr. LOWNDES continued--that we had a law prohibiting the importationof negroes for three years, a law he greatly approved of; but therewas no reason offered, why the Southern States might not find itnecessary to alter their conduct, and open their ports. Withoutnegroes this State would degenerate into one of the most contemptiblein the Union; and cited an expression that fell from Gen. PINCKNEY ona former debate, that whilst there remained one acre of swamp land inSouth Carolina he should raise his voice against restricting theimportation of negroes. Even in granting the importation for twentyyears, care had been taken to make us pay for this indulgence, eachnegro being liable, on importation, to pay a duty not exceeding tendollars, and, in addition to this, were liable to a capitation tax. Negroes were our wealth, our only natural resource; yet behold how ourkind friends in the North were determined soon to tie up our hands, and drain us of what we had. The Eastern States drew their means ofsubsistence, in a great measure, from their shipping; and on thathead, they had been particularly careful not to allow of any burdens;they were not to pay tonnage, or duties; no, not even the form ofclearing out: all ports were free and open to them! Why, then, callthis a reciprocal bargain, which took all from one party, to bestow iton the other?

Major BUTLER observed that they were to pay a five per cent impost. This, Mr. LOWNDES proved, must fall upon the consumer. They are to bethe carriers; and we, being the consumers, therefore all expenseswould fall upon us. 

Hon. E. RUTLEDGE. The gentleman had complained of the inequality ofthe taxes between the Northern and Southern States--that ten dollars ahead was imposed on the importation of negroes, and that those negroeswere afterwards taxed. To this it was answered, that the ten dollarsper head was an equivalent to the five per cent on imported articles;and as to their being afterwards taxed, the advantage is on our side;or, at least, not against us. 

In the Northern States, the labor is performed by white people; in theSouthern by black. All the free people (and there are few others) inthe Northern States, are to be taxed by the new Constitution, whereas, only the free people, and two-fifths of the slaves in the SouthernStates are to be rated in the apportioning of taxes. But the principle objection is, that no duties are laid on shipping--that in fact thecarrying trade was to be vested in a great measure in the Americans;that the shipbuilding business was principally carried on in theNorthern States. When this subject is duly considered, the SouthernStates, should be the last to object to it. Mr. RUTLEDGE then wentinto a consideration of the subject; after which the house adjourned. 

Gen. CHARLES COTESWORTH PINCKNEY. We were at a loss for some time fora role to ascertain the proportionate wealth of the States, at last wethought that the productive labor of the inhabitants was the best rulefor ascertaining their wealth; in conformity to this rule, joined toa spirit of concession, we determined that representatives should beapportioned among the several States, by adding to the whole number offree persons three-fifths of the slaves. We thus obtained arepresentation for our property, and I confess I did not expect thatwe had conceded too much to the Eastern States, when they allowed us arepresentation for a species of property which they have not amongthem. 

The honorable gentleman alleges, that the Southern States are weak, Isincerely agree with him--we are so weak that by ourselves we couldnot form an union strong enough for the purpose of effectuallyprotecting each other. Without union with the other States, SouthCarolina must soon fall. Is there any one among us so much a Quixotteas to suppose that this State could long maintain her independence ifshe stood alone, or was only connected with the Southern States? Iscarcely believe there is. Let an invading power send a naval forceinto the Chesapeake to keep Virginia in alarm, and attack SouthCarolina with such a naval and military force as Sir Henry Clintonbrought here in 1780, and though they might not soon conquer us, theywould certainly do us an infinite deal of mischief; and if theyconsiderably increased their numbers, we should probably fall. As, from the nature of our climate, and the fewness of our inhabitants, weare undoubtedly weak, should we not endeavor to form a close unionwith the Eastern States, who are strong?

For who have been the greatest sufferers in the Union, by ourobtaining our independence? I answer, the Eastern States; they havelost every thing but their country, and their freedom. It is notoriousthat some ports to the Eastward, which used to fit out one hundred andfifty sail of vessels, do not now fit out thirty; that their trade ofship-building, which used to be very considerable, is now annihilated;that their fisheries are trifling, and their mariners in want ofbread; surely we are called upon by every tie of justice, friendship, and humanity, to relieve their distresses; and as by their exertionsthey have assisted us in establishing our freedom, we should let them, in some measure, partake of our prosperity. The General then said hewould make a few observations on the objections which the gentlemanhad thrown out on the restrictions that might be laid on the Africantrade after the year 1808. On this point your delegates had to contendwith the religious and political prejudices of the Eastern and MiddleStates, and with the interested and inconsistent opinion of Virginia, who was warmly opposed to our importing more slaves. I am of the sameopinion now as I was two years ago, when I used the expressions thatthe gentleman has quoted, that while there remained one acre of swampland uncleared of South Carolina, I would raise my voice againstrestricting the importation of negroes. I am as thoroughly convincedas that gentleman is, that the nature of our climate, and the flat, swampy situation of our country, obliges us to cultivate our land withnegroes, and that without them South Carolina would soon be a desertwaste. 

You have so frequently heard my sentiments on this subject that I neednot now repeat them. It was alleged, by some of the members whoopposed an unlimited importation, that slaves increased the weaknessof any State who admitted them; that they were a dangerous species ofproperty, which an invading enemy could easily turn against ourselvesand the neighboring States, and that as we were allowed arepresentation for them in the House of Representatives, our influencein government would be increased in proportion as we were less able todefend ourselves. "Show some period, " said the members from theEastern States, "when it may be in our power to put a stop, if weplease, to the importation of this weakness, and we will endeavor, foryour convenience, to restrain the religious and political prejudicesof our people on this subject. "

The Middle States and Virginia made us no such proposition; they werefor an immediate and total prohibition. We endeavored to obviate theobjections that were made, in the best manner we could, and assignedreasons for our insisting on the importation, which there is nooccasion to repeat, as they must occur to every gentleman in thehouse: a committee of the States was appointed in order to accommodatethis matter, and after a great deal of difficulty, it was settled onthe footing recited in the Constitution. 

By this settlement we have secured an unlimited importation of negroesfor twenty years; nor is it declared that the importation shall bethen stopped; it may be continued--we have a security that the generalgovernment can never emancipate them, for no such authority isgranted, and it is admitted on all hands, that the general governmenthas no powers but what are expressly granted by the Constitution; andthat all rights not expressed were reserved by the several States. Wehave obtained a right to recover our slaves, in whatever part ofAmerica they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. Inshort, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms, forthe security of this species of property, it was in our power to make. We would have made better if we could, but on the whole I do not thinkthem bad. 

Hon. ROBERT BARNWELL. Mr. BARNWELL continued to say, I now come to thelast point for consideration, I mean the clause relative to thenegroes; and here I am particularly pleased with the Constitution; ithas not left this matter of so much importance to us open to immediateinvestigation; no, it has declared that the United States shall not, at any rate, consider this matter for twenty-one years, and yetgentlemen are displeased with it. 

Congress has guaranteed this right for that space of time, and at itsexpiration may continue it as long as they please. This question thenarises, what will their interest lead them to do? The Eastern States, as the honorable gentleman says, will become the carriers of America, it will, therefore, certainly be their interest to encourageexportation to as great an extent as possible; and if the quantum ofour products will be diminished by the prohibition of negroes, Iappeal to the belief of every man, whether he thinks those verycarriers will themselves dam up the resources from whence their profitis derived? To think so is so contradictory to the general conduct ofmankind, that I am of opinion, that without we ourselves put a stop tothem, the traffic for negroes will continue forever. 

FEDERALIST, No. 42

BY JAMES MADISON. 

It were doubtless to be wished, that the power of prohibiting theimportation of slaves, had not been postponed until the year 1808, orrather that it had been suffered to have immediate operation. But itis not difficult to account either for this restriction on the generalgovernment, or for the manner in which the whole clause is expressed. 

It ought to be considered as a great point gained in favor ofhumanity, that a period of twenty years may terminate for ever withinthese States, a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided thebarbarism of modern policy; that within that period, it will receive aconsiderable discouragement from the Federal government, and may betotally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continuethe unnatural traffic in the prohibitory example which has been givenby so great a majority of the Union. Happy would it be for theunfortunate Africans, if an equal prospect lay before them, of beingredeemed from the oppressions of their European brethren! Attemptshave been made to pervert this clause into an objection against theConstitution, by representing it on one side, as a criminal tolerationof an illicit practice; and on another, as calculated to preventvoluntary and beneficial emigrations from Europe to America. I mentionthese misconstructions, not with a view to give them an answer, forthey deserve none; but as specimens of the manner and spirit, in whichsome have thought fit to conduct their opposition to the proposedgovernment. 

FEDERALIST, No. 54. 

BY JAMES MADISON. 

All this is admitted, it will perhaps be said: but does it follow froman admission of numbers for the measure of representation, or ofslaves combined with free citizens as a ratio of taxation, that slavesought to be included in the numerical rule of representation?

Slaves are considered as property, not as persons. They oughttherefore, to be comprehended in estimates of taxation, which arefounded on property, and to be excluded from representation, which isregulated by a census of persons. This is the objection as Iunderstand it; stated in its full force. I shall be equally candid instating the reasoning which may be offered on the opposite side. Wesubscribe to the doctrine, might one of our Southern brethren observe, that representation relates more immediately to persons, and taxationmore immediately to property; and we join in the application of thisdistinction to the case of our slaves. 

But we must deny the fact, that slaves are considered merely asproperty, and in no respect whatever as persons. The true state of thecase is, that they partake of both these qualities, being consideredby our laws, in some respects as persons, and in other respects asproperty. 

In being compelled to labor, not for himself; but for a master; inbeing vendible by one master to another master; and in being subjectat all times to be restrained in his liberty and chastised in his bodyby the capricious will of another; the slave may appear to be degradedfrom the human rank, and classed with those irrational animals whichfall under the legal denomination of property. In being protected, onthe other hand, in his life, and in his limbs, against the violence ofall others, even the master of his labor and his liberty; and in beingpunishable himself for all violence committed against others; theslave is no less evidently regarded by the law as a member of thesociety, not as a part of the irrational creation; as a moral person, not as a mere article of property. The Federal Constitution, therefore, decides with great propriety on the case of our slaves, when it views them in the mixed character of persons and property. This is in fact their true character. It is the character bestowed onthem by the laws under which they live, and it will not be denied, that these are the proper criterion; because it is only under thepretext, that the laws have transformed the negroes into subjects ofproperty, that a place is disputed them in the computation of numbers;and it is admitted, that if the laws were to restore the rights whichhave been taken away, the negroes could no longer be refused an equalshare of representation with the other inhabitants. 

This question may be placed in another light. It is agreed on allsides, that numbers are the best scale of wealth and taxation, as theyare the only proper scale of representation. Would the convention havebeen impartial or consistent, if they had rejected the slaves from thelist of inhabitants, when the shares of representation were to becalculated; and inserted them on the lists when the tariff ofcontributions was to be adjusted?

Could it be reasonably expected, that the Southern States would concurin a system, which considered their slaves in some degree as men, whenburdens were to be imposed, but refused to consider them in the samelight, when advantages were to be conferred?

Might not some surprise also be expressed, that those who reproach theSouthern States with the barbarous policy of considering as property apart of their human brethren, should themselves contend, that thegovernment to which all the States are to be parties, ought toconsider this unfortunate race more completely in the unnatural lightof property, than the very laws of which they complain?

It may be replied, perhaps, that slaves are not included in theestimate of representatives in any of the States possessing them. Theyneither vote themselves, nor increase the votes of their masters. Uponwhat principle, then, ought they to be taken into the Federal estimateof representation? In rejecting them altogether, the Constitutionwould, in this respect, have followed the very laws which have beenappealed to the proper guide. 

This objection is repelled by a single observation. It is afundamental principle of the proposed Constitution, that as theaggregate number of representatives allotted to the several States isto be determined by a Federal rule, founded on the aggregate number ofinhabitants; so, the right of choosing this allotted number in eachState, is to be exercised by such part of the inhabitants, as theState itself may designate. The qualifications on which the right ofsuffrage depends, are not perhaps the same in any two States. In someof the States the difference is very material. In every State, acertain proportion of inhabitants are deprived of this right by theConstitution of the State, who will be included in the census by whichthe Federal Constitution apportions the representatives. In this pointof view, the Southern States might retort the complaint, by insisting, that the principle laid down by the convention required that no regardshould be had to the policy of particular States towards their owninhabitants; and consequently, that the slaves, as inhabitants, shouldhave been admitted into the census according to their full number, inlike manner with other inhabitants, who, by the policy of otherStates, are not admitted to all the rights of citizens. A rigorousadherence, however, to this principle is waived by those who would begainers by it. All that they ask, is that equal moderation be shown onthe other side. Let the case of the slaves be considered, as it is intruth, a peculiar one. Let the compromising expedient of theConstitution be mutually adopted, which regards them as inhabitants, but as debased by servitude below the equal level of free inhabitants, which regards the _slave_ as divested of two-fifths of the _man_. 

DEBATES IN FIRST CONGRESS. 

LLOYD'S DEBATES. 

May 13, 1789. 

Mr. PARKER (of Va. ) moved to insert a clause in the bill, imposing aduty on the importation of slaves of ten dollars each person. He wassorry that the Constitution prevented Congress from prohibiting theimportation altogether; he thought it a defect in that instrument thatit allowed of such actions, it was contrary to the revolutionprinciples, and ought not to be permitted; but as he could not do allthe good he desired, he was willing to do what lay in his power. Hehoped such a duty as he moved for would prevent, in some degree, thisirrational and inhuman traffic; if so, he should feel happy from thesuccess of his motion. 

Mr. SMITH (of South Carolina, ) hoped that such an important andserious proposition as this would not be hastily adopted; it was avery late moment for the introduction of new subjects. He expected thecommittee had got through the business, and would rise withoutdiscussing any thing further; at least, if gentlemen were determinedon considering the present motion, he hoped they would delay for a fewdays, in order to give time for an examination of the subject. It wascertainly a matter big with the most serious consequences to the Statehe represented; be did not think any one thing that had been discussedwas so important to them, and the welfare of the Union, as thequestion now brought forward, but he was not prepared to enter on anyargument, and therefore requested the motion might either be withdrawnor laid on the table. 

Mr. SHERMAN (of Ct. ) approved of the object of the motion, but he didnot think this bill was proper to embrace the subject. He could notreconcile himself to the insertion of human beings as an article ofduty, among goods, wares and merchandise. He hoped it would bewithdrawn for the present, and taken up hereafter as an independentsubject. 

Mr. JACKSON, (of Geo. ) observing the quarter from which this motioncame, said it did not surprise him, though it might have that effecton others. He recollected that Virginia was an old settled State, andhad her complement of slaves, so she was careless of recruiting hernumbers by this means; the natural increase of her imported blackswere sufficient for their purpose; but he thought gentlemen ought tolet their neighbors get supplied before they imposed such a burdenupon the importation. He knew this business was viewed in an odiouslight to the Eastward, because the people were capable of doing theirown work, and had no occasion for slaves; but gentlemen will have somefeeling for others; they will not try to throw all the weight uponothers, who have assisted in lightening their burdens; they do notwish to charge us for every comfort and enjoyment of life, and at thesame time take away the means of procuring them; they do not wish tobreak us down at once. 

He was convinced, from the inaptitude of the motion, and the want oftime to consider it, that the candor of the gentleman would induce himto withdraw it for the present; and if ever it came forward again, hehoped it would comprehend the white slaves as well as black, who wereimported from all the goals of Europe; wretches, convicted of the mostflagrant crimes, were brought in and sold without any duty whatever. He thought that they ought to be taxed equal to the Africans, and hadno doubt but the constitutionality and propriety of such a measure wasequally apparent as the one proposed. 

Mr. TUCKER (of S. C. ) thought it unfair to bring in such an importantsubject at a time when debate was almost precluded. The committee hadgone through the impost bill, and the whole Union were impatientlyexpecting the result of their deliberations, the public must bedisappointed and much revenue lost, or this question cannot undergothat full discussion which it deserves. 

We have no right, said he, to consider whether the importation ofslaves is proper or not; the Constitution gives us no power on thatpoint, it is left to the States to judge of that matter as they seefit. But if it was a business the gentleman was determined todiscourage, he ought to have brought his motion forward sooner, andeven then not have introduced it without previous notice. He hoped thecommittee would reject the motion, if it was not withdrawn; he was notspeaking so much for the State he represented, as for Georgia, becausethe State of South Carolina had a prohibitory law, which could berenewed when its limitation expired. 

Mr. PARKER (of Va. , ) had ventured to introduce the subject after fulldeliberation, and did not like to withdraw it. Although the gentlemanfrom Connecticut (Mr. SHERMAN) had said, that they ought not to beenumerated with goods, wares, and merchandise, he believed they werelooked upon by the African traders in this light; he knew it wasdegrading the human species to annex that character to them; but hewould rather do this than continue the actual evil of importing slavesa moment longer. He hoped Congress would do all that lay in theirpower to restore to human nature its inherent privileges, and ifpossible wipe off the stigma which America labored under. Theinconsistency in our principles, with which we are justly charged, should be done away; that we may shew by our actions the purebeneficence of the doctrine we held out to the world in ourdeclaration of independence. 

Mr. SHERMAN (of Ct. , ) thought the principles of the motion and theprinciples of the bill were inconsistent; the principle of the billwas to raise revenue, the principle of the motion to correct a moralevil. Now, considering it as an object of revenue, it would be unjust, because two or three States would bear the whole burden, while hebelieved they bore their full proportion of all the rest. He wasagainst receiving the motion into this bill, though he had noobjection to taking it up by itself, on the principles of humanity andpolicy; and therefore would vote against it if it was not withdrawn. 

Mr. AMES (of Mass. , ) joined the gentleman last up. No one couldsuppose him favorable to slavery, he detested it from his soul, but hehad some doubts whether imposing a duty on the importation, would nothave the appearance of countenancing the practice; it was certainly asubject of some delicacy, and no one appeared to be prepared for thediscussion, he therefore hoped the motion would be withdrawn. 

Mr. LIVERMORE. Was not against the principle of the motion, but in thepresent case he conceived it improper. If negroes were goods, wares, or merchandise, they came within the title of the bill; if they werenot, the bill would be inconsistent; but if they are goods, wares ormerchandise, the 5 per cent ad valorem, will embrace the importation;and the duty of 5 per cent is nearly equal to 10 dollars per head, sothere is no occasion to add it even on the score of revenue. 

Mr. JACKSON (of Ga. , ) said it was the fashion of the day, to favor theliberty of slaves; he would not go into a discussion of the subject, but he believed it was capable of demonstration that they were betteroff in their present situation, than they would be if they weremanumitted; what are they to do if they are discharged? Work for aliving? Experience has shewn us they will not. Examine what is becomeof those in Maryland, many of them have been set free in that State;did they turn themselves to industry and useful pursuits? No, theyturn out common pickpockets, petty larceny villains; and is thismercy, forsooth, to turn them into a way in which they must lose theirlives, --for where they are thrown upon the world, void of property andconnections, they cannot get their living but by pilfering. What is tobe done for compensation? Will Virginia set all her negroes free? Willthey give up the money they cost them, and to whom? When this practicecomes to be tried there, the sound of liberty will lose those charmswhich make it grateful to the ravished ear. 

But our slaves are not in a worse situation than they were on thecoast of Africa; it is not uncommon there for the parents to selltheir children in peace; and in war the whole are taken and madeslaves together. In these cases it is only a change of one slavery foranother; and are they not better here, where they have a master boundby the ties of interest and law to provide for their support andcomfort in old age, or infirmity, in which, if they were free, theywould sink under the pressure of woe for want of assistance. 

He would say nothing of the partiality of such a tax, it was admittedby the avowed friends of the measure; Georgia in particular would beoppressed. On this account it would be the most odious tax Congresscould impose. 

Mr. SCHUREMAN (of N. J. ) hoped the gentleman would withdraw hismotion, because the present was not the time or place for introducingthe business; he thought it had better be brought forward in theHouse, as a distinct proposition. If the gentleman persisted in havingthe question determined, he would move the previous question if he wassupported. 

Mr. MADISON, (of Va. ) I cannot concur with gentlemen who think thepresent an improper time or place to enter into a discussion of theproposed motion; if it is taken up in a separate view, we shall do thesame thing at a greater expense of time. But the gentlemen say that itis improper to connect the two objects, because they do not comewithin the title of the bill. But this objection may be obviated byaccommodating the title to the contents; there may be someinconsistency in combining the ideas which gentlemen have expressed, that is, considering the human race as a species of property; but theevil does not arise from adopting the clause now proposed, it is fromthe importation to which it relates. Our object in enumerating personson paper with merchandise, is to prevent the practice of actuallytreating them as such, by having them, in future, forming part of thecargoes of goods, wares, and merchandise to be imported into theUnited States. The motion is calculated to avoid the very evilintimated by the gentleman. It has been said that this tax will bepartial and oppressive: but suppose a fair view is taken of thissubject, I think we may form a different conclusion. But if it bepartial or oppressive, are there not many instances in which we havelaid taxes of this nature? Yet are they not thought to be justified bynational policy? If any article is warranted on this account, how muchmore are we authorized to proceed on this occasion? The dictates ofhumanity, the principles of the people, the national safety andhappiness, and prudent policy requires it of us; the constitution hasparticularly called our attention to it--and of all the articlescontained in the bill before us, this is one of the last I should bewilling to make a concession upon so far as I was at liberty to go, according to the terms of the constitution or principles of justice--Iwould not have it understood that my zeal would carry me to disobeythe inviolable commands of either. 

I understood it had been intimated, that the motion was inconsistentor unconstitutional. I believe, sir, my worthy colleague has formedthe words with a particular reference to the Constitution; any how, sofar as the duty is expressed, it perfectly accords with thatinstrument; if there are any inconsistencies in it, they may berectified; I believe the intention is well understood, but I am farfrom supposing the diction improper. If the description of the personsdoes not accord with the ideas of the gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. JACKSON, ) and his idea is a proper one for the committee to adopt, Isee no difficulty in changing the phraseology. 

I conceive the Constitution, in this particular, was formed in orderthat the government, whilst it was restrained from laying a totalprohibition, might be able to give some testimony of the sense ofAmerica, with respect to the African trade. We have liberty to imposea tax or duty upon the importation of such persons as any of theStates now existing shall think proper to admit; and this liberty wasgranted, I presume, upon two considerations--the first was, that untilthe time arrived when they might abolish the importation of slaves, they might have an opportunity of evidencing their sentiments, on thepolicy and humanity of such a trade; the other was that they might betaxed in due proportion with other articles imported; for if thepossessor will consider them as property, of course they are of valueand ought to be paid for. If gentlemen are apprehensive of oppressionfrom the weight of the tax, let them make an estimate of itsproportion, and they will find that it very little exceeds five percent ad valorem, so that they will gain very little by having themthrown into that mass of articles, whilst by selecting them in themanner proposed, we shall fulfil the prevailing expectation of ourfellow citizens, and perform our duty in executing the purposes of theConstitution. It is to be hoped that by expressing a nationaldisapprobation of this trade, we may destroy it, and save ourselvesfrom reproaches, and our posterity the imbecility ever attendant on acountry filled with slaves. 

I do not wish to say anything harsh, to the hearing of gentlemen whoentertain different sentiments from me, or different sentiments fromthose I represent; but if there is any one point in which it isclearly the policy of this nation, so far as we constitutionally can, to vary the practice of obtaining under some of the State governments, it is this; but it is certain a majority of the States are opposed tothis practice, therefore, upon principle, we ought to discountenanceit as far as is in our power. 

If I was not afraid of being told that the representatives of theseveral States, are the best able to judge of what is proper andconducive to their particular prosperity, I should venture to say thatit is as much the interest of Georgia and South Carolina, as of any inthe Union. Every addition they receive to their number of slaves, tends to weaken them and renders them less capable of self defence. Incase of hostilities with foreign nations, they will be the means ofinviting attack instead of repelling invasion. It is a necessary dutyof the general government to protect every part of the empire againstdanger, as well internal as external; every thing therefore whichtends to increase this danger, though it may be a local affair, yet ifit involves national expense or safety, becomes of concern to everypart of the Union, and is a proper subject for the consideration ofthose charged with the general administration of the government. Ihope, in making these observations, I shall not be understood to meanthat a proper attention ought not to be paid to the local opinions andcircumstances of any part of the United States, or that the particularrepresentatives are not best able to judge of the sense of theirimmediate constituents. 

If we examine the proposed measure by the agreement there is betweenit, and the existing State laws, it will show us that it is patronizedby a very respectable part of the Union. I am informed that SouthCarolina has prohibited the importation of slaves for several yearsyet to come; we have the satisfaction then of reflecting that we donothing more than their own laws do at this moment. This is not thecase with one State. I am sorry that her situation is such as to seemto require a population of this nature, but it is impossible in thenature of things, to consult the national good without doing what wedo not wish to do, to some particular part. Perhaps gentlemen contendagainst the introduction of the clause, on too slight grounds. If itdoes not conform with the title of the bill, alter the latter; if itdoes not conform to the precise terms of the Constitution, amend it. But if it will tend to delay the whole bill, that perhaps will be thebest reason for making it the object of a separate one. If this is thesense of the committee I shall submit. 

Mr. GERRY (of Mass. ) thought all duties ought to be laid as equal aspossible. He had endeavored to enforce this principle yesterday, butwithout the success he wished for, he was bound by the principles ofjustice therefore to vote for the proposition; but if the committeewere desirous of considering the subject fully by itself, he had noobjection, but he thought when gentlemen laid down a principle, theyought to support it generally. 

Mr. BURKE (of S. C. ) said, gentlemen were contending for nothing; thatthe value of a slave, averaged about £80, and the duty on that sum atfive per cent, would be ten dollars, as congress could go no fartherthan that sum, he conceived it made no difference whether they wereenumerated or left in the common mass. 

Mr. MADISON, (of Va. ) If we contend for nothing, the gentlemen who areopposed to us do not contend for a great deal; but the question is, whether the five per cent ad valorem, on all articles imported, willhave any operation at all upon the introduction of slaves, unless wemake a particular enumeration on this account; the collector maymistake, for he would not presume to apply the term goods, wares, andmerchandise to any person whatsoever. But if that general definitionof goods, wares and merchandise are supposed to include AfricanSlaves, why may we not particularly enumerate them, and lay the dutypointed out by the Constitution, which, as gentlemen tell us, is nomore than five per cent upon their value; this will not increase theburden upon any, but it will be that manifestation of our sense, expected by our constituents, and demanded by justice and humanity. 

Mr. BLAND (of Va. ) had no doubt of the propriety or good policy ofthis measure. He had made up his mind upon it, he wished had neverbeen introduced into America; but if it was impossible at this time tocure the evil, he was very willing to join in any measures that wouldprevent its extending farther. He had some doubts whether theprohibitory laws of the States were not in part repealed. Those whohad endeavored to discountenance this trade, by laying a duty on theimportation, were prevented by the Constitution from continuing suchregulation, which declares, that no State shall lay any impost orduties on imports. If this was the case, and he suspected prettystrongly that it was, the necessity of adopting the proposition of hiscolleague was now apparent. 

Mr. SHERMAN (of Ct. ) said, the Constitution does not consider thesepersons as a species of property; it speaks of them as persons, andsays, that a tax or duty may be imposed on the importation of theminto any State which shall permit the same, but they have no power toprohibit such importation for twenty years. But Congress have power todeclare upon what terms persons coming into the United States shall beentitled to citizenship; the rule of naturalization must however beuniform. He was convinced there were others ought to be regulated inthis particular, the importation of whom was of an evil tendency, hemeant convicts particularly. He thought that some regulationrespecting them was also proper; but it being a different subject, itought to be taken up in a different manner. 

Mr. MADISON (of Va. ) was led to believe, from the observation that hadfell from the gentlemen, that it would be best to make this thesubject of a distinct bill: he therefore wished his colleague wouldwithdraw his motion, and move in the house for leave to bring in abill on the same principles. 

Mr. PARKER (of Va. ) consented to withdraw his motion, under aconviction that the house was fully satisfied of its propriety. Heknew very well that these persons were neither goods, nor wares, butthey were treated as articles of merchandise. Although he wished toget rid of this part of his property, yet he should not consent todeprive other people of theirs by any act of his without theirconsent. 

The committee rose, reported progress, and the house adjourned. 

FEBRUARY 11th, 1790. 

Mr. LAWRANCE (of New York, ) presented an address from the society ofFriends, in the City of New York; in which they set forth their desireof co-operating with their Southern brethren. 

Mr. HARTLEY (of Penn. ) then moved to refer the address of the annualassembly of Friends, held at Philadelphia, to a committee; he thoughtit a mark of respect due so numerous and respectable a part of thecommunity. 

Mr. WHITE (of Va. ) seconded the motion. 

Mr. SMITH, (of S. C. ) However respectable the petitioners may be, Ihope gentlemen will consider that others equally respectable areopposed to the object which is aimed at, and are entitled to anopportunity of being heard before the question is determined. Iflatter myself gentlemen will not press the point of commitmentto-day, it being contrary to our usual mode of procedure. 

Mr. FITZSIMONS (of Penn. ) If we were now about to determine the finalquestion, the observation of the gentleman from South Carolina wouldapply; but, sir, the present question does not touch upon the meritsof the case; it is merely to refer the memorial to a committee, toconsider what is proper to be done; gentlemen, therefore, who do notmean to oppose the commitment to-morrow, may as well agree to itto-day, because it will tend to save the time of the house. 

Mr. JACKSON (of Geo. ) wished to know why the second reading was to becontended for to-day, when it was diverting the attention of themembers from the great object that was before the committee of thewhole? Is it because the feelings of the Friends will be hurt, to havetheir affair conducted in the usual course of business? Gentlemen whoadvocate the second reading to-day, should respect the feelings of themembers who represent that part of the Union which is principally tobe affected by the measure. I believe, sir, that the latter classconsists of as useful and as good citizens as the petitioners, menequally friends to the revolution, and equally susceptible of therefined sensations of humanity and benevolence. Why then should suchparticular attention be paid to them, for bringing forward a businessof questionable policy? If Congress are disposed to interfere in theimportation of slaves, they can take the subject up without advisers, because the Constitution expressly mentions all the power they canexercise on the subject. 

Mr. SHERMAN (of Conn. ) suggested the idea of referring it to acommittee, to consist of a member from each State, because severalStates had already made some regulations on this subject. The soonerthe subject was taken up he thought it would be the better. 

Mr. PARKER, (of Va. ) I hope, Mr. Speaker, the petition of theserespectable people, will be attended to with all the readiness theimportance of its object demands; and I cannot help expressing thepleasure I feel in finding so considerable a part of the communityattending to matters of such momentous concern to the futureprosperity and happiness of the people of America. I think it my duty, as a citizen of the Union, to espouse their cause; and it is incumbentupon every member of this house to sift the subject well, andascertain what can be done to restrain a practice so nefarious. TheConstitution has authorized us to levy a tax upon the importation ofsuch persons as the States shall authorize to be admitted. I wouldwillingly go to that extent; and if any thing further can be devisedto discountenance the trade, consistent with the terms of theConstitution, I shall cheerfully give it my assent and support. 

Mr. MADISON, (of Va. ) The gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. FITZSIMONS) has put this question on its proper ground. If gentlemendo not mean to oppose the commitment to-morrow, they may as wellacquiesce in it to-day; and I apprehend gentlemen need not be alarmedat any measure it is likely Congress should take; because they willrecollect, that the Constitution secures to the individual States theright of admitting, if they think proper, the importation of slavesinto their own territory, for eighteen years yet unexpired; subject, however, to a tax, if Congress are disposed to impose it, of not morethan ten dollars on each person. 

The petition, if I mistake not, speaks of artifices used byself-interested persons to carry on this trade; and the petition fromNew York states a case that may require the consideration of Congress. If anything is within the Federal authority to restrain such violationof the rights of nations, and of mankind, as is supposed to bepractised in some parts of the United States, it will certainly tendto the interest and honor of the community to attempt a remedy, and isa proper subject for our discussion. It may be, that foreigners takeadvantage of the liberty afforded them by the American trade, toemploy our slipping in the slave trade between Africa and the WestIndies, when they are restrained from employing their own byrestrictive laws of their nation. If this is the case, is there anyperson of humanity that would not wish to prevent them? Anotherconsideration why we should commit the petition is, that we may giveno ground of alarm by a serious opposition, as if we were about totake measures that were unconstitutional. 

Mr. STONE (of Md. ) feared that if Congress took any measures, indicative of an intention to interfere with the kind of propertyalluded to, it would sink it in value very considerably, and might beinjurious to a great number of the citizens, particularly in theSouthern States. 

He thought the subject was of general concern, and that thepetitioners had no more right to interfere will it than any othermembers of the community. It was an unfortunate circumstance, that itwas the property of sects to imagine they understood the rights ofhuman nature better than all the world beside; and that they would, inconsequence, be meddling with concerns in which they had nothing todo. 

As the petition relates to a subject of a general nature, it ought tolie on the table, as information; he would never consent to referpetitions, unless the petitioners were exclusively interested. Supposethere was a petition to come before us from a society, praying us tobe honest in our transactions, or that we should administer theConstitution according to its intention--what would you do with apetition of this kind? Certainly it would remain on your table. Hewould, nevertheless, not have it supposed, that the people had not aright to advise and give their opinion upon public measures; but hewould not be influenced by that advice or opinion, to take up asubject sooner than the convenience of other business would admit. Unless he changed his sentiments, he would oppose the commitment. 

Mr. BURKE (of S. C. ) thought gentlemen were paying attention to whatdid not deserve it. The men in the gallery had come here to meddle ina business with which they had nothing to do; they were volunteeringit in the cause of others, who neither expected nor desired it. He hada respect for the body of Quakers, but, nevertheless, he did notbelieve they had more virtue, or religion, than other people, norperhaps so much, if they were examined to the bottom, notwithstandingtheir outward pretences. If their petition is to be noticed, Congressought to wait till counter applications were made, and then they mighthave the subject more fairly before them. The rights of the SouthernStates ought not to be threatened, and their property endangered, toplease people who were to be unaffected by the consequences. 

Mr. HARTLEY (of Penn. ) thought the memorialists did not deserve to beaspersed for their conduct, if influenced by motives of benignity, they solicited the Legislature of the Union to repel, as far as intheir power, the increase of a licentious traffic. Nor do they meritcensure, because their behavior has the appearance of more moralitythan other people's. But it is not for Congress to refuse to hear theapplications of their fellow citizens, while those applicationscontain nothing unconstitutional or offensive. What is the object ofthe address before us? It is intended to bring before this House asubject of great importance to the cause of humanity; there arecertain facts to be enquired into, and the memorialists are ready togive all the information in their power; they are waiting, at a greatdistance from their homes, and wish to return; if, then, it will beproper to commit the petition to-morrow, it will be equally properto-day, for it is conformable to our practice, beside, it will tend totheir conveniency. 

Mr. LAWRANCE (of N. Y. ) The gentleman from South Carolina says, thepetitioners are of a society not known in the laws or Constitution. Sir, in all our acts, as well as in the Constitution, we have noticedthis Society; or why is it that we admit them to affirm, in caseswhere others are called upon to swear? If we pay this attention tothem, in one instance, what good reason is there for contemning themin another? I think the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. STONE, ) carrieshis apprehensions too far, when he fears that negro-property will fallin value, by the suppression of the slave-trade; not that I suppose itimmediately in the power of Congress to abolish a traffic which is adisgrace to human nature; but it appears to me, that, if theimportation was crushed, the value of a slave would be increasedinstead of diminished; however, considerations of this kind havenothing to do with the present question; gentlemen may acquiesce inthe commitment of the memorial, without pledging themselves to supportits object. 

Mr. JACKSON, (of Ga. ) I differ much in opinion with the gentleman lastup. I apprehend if, through the interference of the generalgovernment, the slave trade was abolished, it would evince to thepeople a disposition toward a total emancipation, and they would holdtheir property in jeopardy. Any extraordinary attention of Congress tothis petition may have, in some degree, a similar effect. I would begto ask those, then, who are so desirous of freeing the negroes, ifthey have funds sufficient to pay for them? If they have, they maycome forward on that business with some propriety; but, if they havenot, they should keep themselves quiet, and not interfere with abusiness in which they are not interested. They may as well comeforward, and solicit Congress to interdict the West India trade, because it is injurious to the morals of mankind; from thence weimport rum, which has a debasing influence upon the consumer. But, sir, is the whole morality of the United States confined to theQuakers? Are they the only people whose feelings are to be consultedon this occasion? Is it to them we owe our present happiness? Was itthey who formed the Constitution? Did they, by their arms, orcontributions, establish our independence? I believe they weregenerally opposed to that measure. Why, then, on their application, shall we injure men, who, at the risk of their lives and fortunes, secured to the community their liberty and property? If Congress payany uncommon degree of attention to their petition, it will furnishjust ground of alarm to the Southern States. But, why do these men setthemselves up, in such a particular manner, against slavery? Do theyunderstand the rights of mankind, and the disposition of Providencebetter than others? If they were to consult that Book which claims ourregard, they will find that slavery is not only allowed, butcommended. Their Saviour, who possessed more benevolence andcommiseration than they pretend to, has allowed of it. And if theyfully examine the subject, they will find that slavery has been nonovel doctrine since the days of Cain. But be these things as theymay, I hope the House will order the petition to lie on the table, inorder to prevent alarming our Southern brethren. 

Mr. SEDGWICK, (of Mass. ) If it was a serious question, whether theMemorial should be committed or not, I would not urge it at this time;but that cannot be a question for a moment, if we consider ourrelative situation with the people. A number of men, --who arecertainly very respectable, and of whom, as a society, it may be saidwith truth, that they conform their moral conduct to their religioustenets, as much as any people in the whole community, --come forwardand tell you, that you may effect two objects by the exercise of aConstitutional authority which will give great satisfaction; on theone hand you may acquire revenue, and on the other, restrain apractice productive of great evil. Now, setting aside the religiousmotives which influenced their application, have they not a right, ascitizens, to give their opinion of public measures? For my part I donot apprehend that any State, or any considerable number ofindividuals in any State, will be seriously alarmed at the commitmentof the petition, from a fear that Congress intend to exercise anunconstitutional authority, in order to violate their rights; Ibelieve there is not a wish of the kind entertained by any member ofthis body. How can gentlemen hesitate then to pay that respect to amemorial which it is entitled to, according to the ordinary mode ofprocedure in business? Why shall we defer doing that till to-morrow, which we can do to-day? for the result, I apprehend, will be the samein either case. 

Mr. Smith, (of S. C. ) The question, I apprehend, is, whether we willtake the petition up for a second reading, and not whether it shall becommitted? Now, I oppose this, because it is contrary to our usualpractice, and does not allow gentlemen time to consider of the meritsof the prayer; perhaps some gentlemen may think it improper to commitit to so large a committee as has been mentioned; a variety of causesmay be supposed to show that such a hasty decision is improper;perhaps the prayer of it is improper. If I understood it right, on itsfirst reading, though, to be sure, I did not comprehend perfectly allthat the petition contained, it prays that we should take measures forthe abolition of the slave trade; this is desiring an unconstitutionalact, because the constitution secures that trade to the States, independent of congressional restrictions, for the term of twenty-oneyears. If, therefore, it prays for a violation of constitutionalrights, it ought to be rejected, as an attempt upon the virtue andpatriotism of the house. 

Mr. BOUDINOT, (of N. J. ) It has been said that the Quakers have noright to interfere in this business; I am surprised to hear thisdoctrine advanced, after it has been so lately contended, and settled, that the people have a right to assemble and petition for redress ofgrievances; it is not because the petition comes from the society ofQuakers that I am in favor of the commitment, but because it comesfrom citizens of the United States, who are as equally concerned inthe welfare and happiness of their country as others. There certainlyis no foundation for the apprehensions which seem to prevail ingentlemen's minds. If the petitioners were so uninformed: as tosuppose that Congress could be guilty of a violation of theConstitution, yet, I trust we know our duty better than to be ledastray by an application from any man, or set of men whatever. I donot consider the merits of the main question to be before us; it willbe time enough to give our opinions upon that, when the committee havereported. If it is in our power, by recommendation, or any other way, to put a stop to the slave trade in America, I do not doubt of itspolicy; but how far the Constitution will authorize us to attempt todepress it, will be a question well worthy of our consideration. 

Mr. SHERMAN (of Conn. ) observed, that the petitioners from New York, stated that they had applied to the legislature of that State, toprohibit certain practices which they conceived to be improper, andwhich tended to injure the well-being of the community; that thelegislature had considered the application, but had applied no remedy, because they supposed that power was exclusively vested in the generalgovernment, under the Constitution of the United States; it would, therefore, be proper to commit that petition, in order to ascertainwhat were the powers of the general government, in the case doubted bythe legislature of New York. 

Mr. GERRY (of Mass. ) thought gentlemen were out of order in enteringupon the merits of the main question at this time, when they wereconsidering the expediency of committing the petition; he should, therefore, not follow them further in that track than barely toobserve, that it was the right of the citizens to apply for redress, in every case they conceived themselves aggrieved in; and it was theduty of Congress to afford redress as far as is in their power. Thattheir Southern brethren had been betrayed into the slave trade by thefirst settlers, was to be lamented; they were not to be reflected onfor not viewing this subject in a different light, the prejudice ofeducation is eradicated with difficulty; but he thought nothing wouldexcuse the general government for not exerting itself to prevent, asfar as they constitutionally could, the evils resulting from suchenormities as were alluded to by the petitioners; and the sameconsiderations induced him highly to commend the part the society ofFriends had taken; it was the cause of humanity they had interestedthemselves in, and he wished, with them, to see measures pursued byevery nation, to wipe off the indelible stain which the slave tradehad brought upon all who were concerned in it. 

Mr. MADISON (of Va. ) thought the question before the committee was nootherwise important than as gentlemen made it so by their seriousopposition. Did they permit the commitment of the Memorial, as amatter of course, no notice would be taken of it out of doors; itcould never be blown up into a decision of the question respecting thediscouragement of the African slave trade, nor alarm the owners withan apprehension that the general government were about to abolishslavery in all the States; such things are not contemplated by anygentleman; but, to appearance, they decide the question more againstthemselves than would be the case if it was determined on its realmerits, because gentlemen may be disposed to vote for the commitmentof a petition, without any intention of supporting the prayer of it. 

Mr. WHITE (of Va. ) would not have seconded the motion, if he hadthought it would have brought on a lengthy debate. He conceived that abusiness of this kind ought to be decided without much discussion; ithad constantly been the practice of the house, and he did not supposethere was any reason for a deviation. 

Mr. PAGE (of Va. ) said, if the memorial had been presented by anyindividual, instead of the respectable body it was, he should havevoted in favor of a commitment, because it was the duty of thelegislature to attend to subjects brought before them by theirconstituents; if, upon inquiry, it was discovered to be improper tocomply with the prayer of the petitioners, he would say so, and theywould be satisfied. 

Mr. STONE (of Md. ) thought the business ought to be left to take itsusual course; by the rules of the house, it was expressly declared, that petitions, memorials, and other papers, addressed to the house, should not be debated or decided on the day they were first read. 

Mr. BALDWIN (of Ga. ) felt at a loss to account why precipitation wasused on this occasion, contrary to the customary usage of the house;he had not heard a single reason advanced in favor of it. To be sureit was said the petitioners are a respectable body of men--he did notdeny it--but, certainly, gentlemen did not suppose they were payingrespect to them, or to the house, when they urged such a hastyprocedure; anyhow it was contrary to his idea of respect, and the ideathe house had always expressed, when they had important subjects underconsideration; and, therefore, he should be against the motion. He wasafraid that there was really a little volunteering in this business, as it had been termed by the gentleman from Georgia. 

Mr. HUNTINGTON (of Conn. ) considered the petitioners as muchdisinterested as any person in the United States; he was persuadedthey had an aversion to slavery; yet they were not singular in this, others had the same; and he hoped when Congress took up the subject, they would go as far as possible to prohibit the evil complained of. But he thought that would better be done by considering it in thelight of revenue. When the committee of the whole, on the financebusiness, came to the ways and means, it might properly be taken intoconsideration, without giving any ground for alarm. 

Mr. TUCKER, (of S. C. ) I have no doubt on my mind respecting what oughtto be done on this occasion; so far from committing the memorial, weought to dismiss it without further notice. What is the purport of thememorial? It is plainly this; to reprobate a particular kind ofcommerce, in a moral view, and to request the interposition ofCongress to effect its abrogation. But Congress have no authority, under the constitution, to do more than lay a duty of ten dollars uponeach person imported; and this is a political consideration, notarising from either religion or morality, and is the only principleupon which we can proceed to take it up. But what effect do these mensuppose will arise from their exertions? Will a duty of ten dollarsdiminish the importation? Will the treatment be better than usual? Iapprehend it will not, nay, it may be worse. Because an interferencewith the subject may excite a great degree of restlessness in theminds of those it is intended to serve, and that may be a cause forthe masters to use more rigor towards them, than they would otherwiseexert; so that these men seem to overshoot their object. But if theywill endeavor to procure the abolition of the slave trade, let themprefer their petitions to the State legislatures, who alone have thepower of forbidding the importation; I believe their applicationsthere would be improper; but if they are any where proper, it isthere. I look upon the address then to be ill-judged, however good theintention of the framers. 

Mr. SMITH (of S. C. ) claimed it as a right, that the petition shouldlay over till to-morrow. 

Mr. BOUDINOT (of N. J. ) said it was not unusual to commit petitions onthe day they were presented; and the rules of the house admitted thepractice, by the qualification which followed the positive order, thatpetitions should not be decided on the day they were first read, "unless where the house shall direct otherwise. "

Mr. SMITH (of S. C. ) declared his intention of calling the yeas andnays, if gentlemen persisted in pressing the question. 

Mr. CLYMER (of Penn. ) hoped the motion would be withdrawn for thepresent, and the business taken up in course to-morrow; because, though he respected the memorialists, he also respected order and thesituation of the members. 

Mr. FITZSIMONS (of Penn. ) did not recollect whether he moved orseconded the motion, but if he had, he should not withdraw it onaccount of the threat of calling the yeas and nays. 

Mr. BALDWIN (of Ga. ) hoped the business would be conducted with temperand moderation, and that gentlemen would concede and pass the subjectover for a day at least. 

Mr. SMITH (of S. C. ) had no idea of holding out a threat to anygentleman. If the declaration of an intention to call the yeas andnays was viewed by gentlemen in that light, he would withdraw thatcall. 

Mr. WHITE (of Va. ) hereupon withdrew his motion. And the address wasordered to lie on the table. 

FEBRUARY 12th, 1790. 

The following memorial was presented and read:

"To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States: Thememorial of the Pennsylvania Society for promoting the abolition ofslavery, the relief of free negroes unlawfully held in bondage, andthe improvement of the condition of the African race, respectfullyshoweth: That from a regard for the happiness of mankind, anassociation was formed several years since in this State, by a numberof her citizens, of various religious denominations, for promoting theabolition of slavery, and for the relief of those unlawfully held inbondage. A just and acute conception of the true principles ofliberty, as it spread through the land, produced accessions to theirnumbers, many friends to their cause, and a legislative cooperationwith their views, which, by the blessing of Divine Providence, havebeen successfully directed to the relieving from bondage a largenumber of their fellow creatures of the African race. They have alsothe satisfaction to observe, that, in consequence of that spirit ofphilanthropy and genuine liberty which is generally diffusing itsbeneficial influence, similar institutions are forming at home andabroad. That mankind are all formed by the same Almighty Being, alikeobjects of his care, and equally designed for the enjoyment ofhappiness, the Christian religion teaches us to believe, and thepolitical creed of Americans fully coincides with the position. Yourmemorialists, particularly engaged in attending to the distressesarising from slavery, believe it their indispensable duty to presentthis subject to your notice. They have observed with realsatisfaction, that many important and salutary powers are vested inyou for 'promoting the welfare and securing the blessings of libertyto the people of the United States;' and as they conceive, that theseblessings ought rightfully to be administered without distinction ofcolor, to all descriptions of people, so they indulge themselves inthe pleasing expectation, that nothing which can be done for therelief of the unhappy objects of their care, will be either omitted ordelayed. From a persuasion that equal liberty was originally theportion, and is still the birth-right of all men, and influenced bythe strong ties of humanity and the principles of their institution, your memorialists conceived themselves bound to use all justifiableendeavors to loosen the bands of slavery, and promote a generalenjoyment of the blessings of freedom. Under these impressions, theyearnestly entreat your serious attention to the subject of slavery;that you will be pleased to countenance the restoration of liberty tothose unhappy men, who alone, in this land of freedom, are degradedinto perpetual bondage, and who, amidst the general joy of surroundingfreemen, are groaning in servile subjection; that you will devisemeans for removing this inconsistency from the character of theAmerican people; that you will promote mercy and justice towards thisdistressed race, and that you will step to the very verge of the powervested in you, for discouraging every species of traffic in thepersons of our fellow-men. 

"BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, _President. _

"PHILADELPHIA, _February 3, 1790. "_

Mr. HARTLEY (of Penn. ) then called up the memorial presentedyesterday, from the annual meeting of Friends at Philadelphia, for asecond reading; whereupon the same was read a second time, and movedto be committed. 

Mr. TUCKER (of S. C. ) was sorry the petition had a second reading, ashe conceived it contained an unconstitutional request, and from thatconsideration he wished it thrown aside. He feared the commitment ofit would be a very alarming circumstance to the Southern States; forif the object was to engage Congress in an unconstitutional measure, it would be considered as an interference with their rights, thepeople would become very uneasy under the government, and lament thatthey ever put additional powers into their hands. He was surprised tosee another memorial on the same subject, and that signed by a man whoought to have known the constitution better. He thought it amischievous attempt, as it respected the persons in whose favor it wasintended. It would buoy them up with hopes, without a foundation, andas they could not reason on the subject, as more enlightened menwould, they might be led to do what they would be punished for, andthe owners of them, in their own defence, would be compelled toexercise over them a severity they were not accustomed to. Do thesemen expect a general emancipation of slaves by law? This would neverbe submitted to by the Southern States without a civil war. Do theymean to purchase their freedom? He believed their money would fallshort of the price. But how is it they are more concerned in thisbusiness than others? Are they the only persons who possess religionand morality? If the people are not so exemplary, certainly they willadmit the clergy are; why then do we not find them uniting in a body, praying us to adopt measures for the promotion of religion and piety, or any moral object? They know it would be an improper interference;and to say the best of this memorial, it is an act of imprudence, which he hoped would receive no countenance from the house. 

Mr. SENEY (of Md. ) denied that there was anything unconstitutional inthe memorial, at least, if there was, it had escaped his attention, and he should be obliged to the gentleman to point it out. Its onlyobject was, that congress should exercise their constitutionalauthority, to abate the horrors of slavery, as far as they could:Indeed, he considered that all altercation on the subject ofcommitment was at an end, as the house had impliedly determinedyesterday that it should be committed. 

Mr. BURKE (of S. C. ) saw the disposition of the house, and he fearedit would be referred to a committee, maugre all their opposition; buthe must insist that it prayed for an unconstitutional measure. Did itnot desire congress to interfere and abolish the slave trade, whilethe constitution expressly stipulated that congress should exercise nosuch power? He was certain the commitment would sound an alarm, andblow the trumpet of sedition in the Southern States. He was sorry tosee the petitioners paid more attention to than the constitution;however, he would do his duty, and oppose the business totally; and ifit was referred to a committee, as mentioned yesterday, consisting ofa member from each State, and he was appointed, he would declineserving. 

Mr. SCOTT, (of Penn. ) I can't entertain a doubt but the memorial isstrictly agreeable to the constitution: it respects a part of the dutyparticularly assigned to us by that instrument, and I hope we may, beinclined to take it into consideration. We can, at present, lay ourhands upon a small duty of ten dollars. I would take this, and if itis all we can do, we must be content. But I am sorry that the framersof the constitution did not go farther and enable us to interdict itfor good and all; for I look upon the slave-trade to be one of themost abominable things on earth; and if there was neither God nordevil, I should oppose it upon the principles of humanity and the lawof nature. I cannot, for my part, conceive how any person can be saidto acquire a property in another; is it by virtue of conquest? Whatare the rights of conquest? Some have dared to advance this monstrousprinciple, that the conqueror is absolute master of his conquest; thathe may dispose of it as his property, and treat it as he pleases; butenough of those who reduce men to the state of transferable goods, oruse them like beasts of burden; who deliver them up as the property orpatrimony of another man. Let us argue on principles countenanced byreason and becoming humanity; the petitioners view the subject in areligious light, but I do not stand in need of religious motives toinduce me to reprobate the traffic in human flesh; otherconsiderations weigh with me to support the commitment of thememorial, and to support every constitutional measure likely to bringabout its total abolition. Perhaps, in our legislative capacity, wecan go no further than to impose a duty of ten dollars, but I do notknow how far I might go, if I was one of the judges of the UnitedStates, and those people were to come before me and claim theiremancipation; but I am sure I would go as far as I could. 

Mr. JACKSON (of Ga. ) differed with the gentleman last up, and supposedthe master had a qualified property in his slave; he said the contrarydoctrine would go to the destruction of every species of personalservice. The gentleman said he did not stand in need of religion toinduce him to reprobate slavery, but if he is guided by that evidence, which the Christian system is founded upon, he will find that religionis not against it; he will see, from Genesis to Revelation, thecurrent setting strong that way. There never was a government on theface of the earth, but what permitted slavery. The purest sons offreedom in the Grecian republics, the citizens of Athens andLacedaemon all held slaves. On this principle the nations of Europeare associated; it is the basis of the feudal system. But suppose allthis to have been wrong, let me ask the gentleman, if it is policy tobring forward a business at this moment, likely to light up a flame ofcivil discord, for the people of the Southern States will resist onetyranny as soon as another; the other parts of the continent may bearthem down by force of arms, but they will never suffer themselves tobe divested of their property without a struggle. The gentleman says, if he was a federal judge, he does not know to what length he would goin emancipating these people; but, I believe his judgment would be ofshort duration in Georgia; perhaps even the existence of such a judgemight be in danger. 

Mr. SHERMAN (of Conn. ) could see no difficulty in committing thememorial; because it was probable the committee would understand theirbusiness, and perhaps they might bring in such a report as would besatisfactory to gentlemen on both sides of the House. 

Mr. BALDWIN (of Ga. ) was sorry the subject had ever been broughtbefore Congress, because it was of a delicate nature, as it respectedsome of the States. Gentlemen who had been present at the formation ofthis Constitution, could not avoid the recollection of the pain anddifficulty which the subject caused in that body; the members from theSouthern States were so tender upon this point, that they had wellnigh broken up without coming to any determination; however, from theextreme desire of preserving the Union, and obtaining an efficientgovernment, they were induced mutually, to concede, and theConstitution jealously guarded what they agreed to. If gentlemen lookover the footsteps of that body, they will find the greatest degreeof caution used to imprint them, so as not to be easily eradicated;but the moment we go to jostle on that ground, said he, I fear weshall feel it tremble under our feet. Congress have no power tointerfere with the importation of slaves, beyond what is given in the9th section of the first article of the Constitution; every thing elseis interdicted to them in the strongest terms. If we examine theConstitution, we shall find the expressions, relative to this subject, cautiously expressed, and more punctiliously guarded than any otherpart. "The migration or importation of such persons, shall not beprohibited by Congress. " But lest this should not have secured theobject sufficiently, it is declared in the same section, "That nocapitation or direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to thecensus;" this was intended to prevent Congress from laying any specialtax upon negro slaves, as they might, in this way, so burthen thepossessors of them, as to induce a general emancipation. If we go onto the 5th article, we shall find the 1st and 5th clauses of the 9thsection of the 1st article restrained from being altered before theyear 1808. 

Gentlemen have said, that this petition does not pray for an abolitionof the slave-trade; I think, sir, it prays for nothing else, andtherefore we have no more to do with it, than if it prayed us toestablish an order of nobility, or a national religion. 

Mr. SYLVESTER (of N. Y. ) said that he had always been in the habit ofrespecting the society called Quakers; he respected them for theirexertions in the cause of humanity, but he thought the present was nota time to enter into a consideration of the subject, especially as heconceived it to be a business in the province of the Statelegislatures. 

Mr. LAWRANCE (of N. Y. ) observed that the subject would undoubtedlycome under the consideration of the house; and he thought, that as itwas now before them, that the present time was as proper as any; hewas therefore for committing the memorial; and when the prayer of ithad been properly examined, they could see how far Congress mayconstitutionally interfere; as they knew the limits of their power onthis, as well as on every other occasion, there was no justapprehension to be entertained that they would go beyond them. Mr. Smith (of S. C. ) insisted that it was not in the power of the House tobrunt the prayer of the petition, which event to the total abolishmentof the slave-trade, and it was therefore unnecessary to commit it. Heobserved, that in the Southern States, difficulties had arisen onadopting the Constitution, inasmuch as it was apprehended, thatCongress might take measures under it for abolishing the slave-trade. 

Perhaps the petitioners, when they applied to this House, did notthink their object unconstitutional, but now they are told that if is, they will be satisfied with the answer, and press it no further. Iftheir object had been for Congress to lay a duty of ten dollars perhead on the importation of slaves, they would have said so, but thatdoes not appear to have been the case; the commitment of the petition, on that ground, cannot be contended; if they will not be content withthat, shall it be committed to investigate facts? The petition speaksof none; for what purpose then shall it be committed? If gentlemen canassign no good reason for the measure, they will not support it, whenthey are told that it will create great jealousies and alarm in theSouthern States; for I can assure them, that there is no point onwhich they are more jealous and suspicious, than on a business withwhich they think the government has nothing to do. 

When we entered into this Confederacy, we did it from political, notfrom moral motives, and I do not think my constituents want to learnmorals from the petitioners; I do not believe they want improvement intheir moral system; if they do, they can get it at home. 

The gentleman from Georgia, has justly stated the jealousy of theSouthern States. On entering into this government, they apprehendedthat the other States, not knowing the necessity the citizens of theSouthern States were under to hold this species of property, would, from motives of humanity and benevolence, be led to vote for a generalemancipation; and had they not seen that the Constitution providedagainst the effect of such a disposition, I may be bold to say, theynever would have adopted it. And notwithstanding all the calumny'swith which some gentlemen have viewed the subject, they will find, that the discussion alone will create great alarm. We have been told, that if the discussion will create alarm, we ought to have avoided it, by saying nothing; but it was not for that purpose that we were senthere; we look upon this measure as an attack upon the palladium of theproperty of our country; it is therefore our duty to oppose it byevery means in our power. Gentlemen should consider that when weentered into a political connexion with the other States, that thisproperty was there; it was acquired under a former government, conformably to the laws and Constitution; therefore anything that willtend to deprive them of that property, must be an ex post facto law, and as such is forbid by our political compact. 

I said the States would never have entered into the confederation, unless their property had been guaranteed to them, for such is thestate of agriculture in that county, that without slaves it must bedepopulated. Why will these people then make use of arguments toinduce the slave to turn his hand against his master? We labor underdifficulties enough from the ravages of the late war. A gentleman canhardly come from that country, with a servant or two, either to thisplace or Philadelphia, but what there are persons trying to seduce hisservants to leave him; and, when they have done this, the poorwretches are obliged to rob their master in order to obtain asubsistence; all those, therefore, who are concerned in thisseduction, are accessaries to the robbery. 

The reproaches which they cast upon the owners of negro property, ischarging them with the want of humanity; I believe the proprietors arepersons of as much humanity as any part of the continent and are asconspicuous for their good morals as their neighbors. It was saidyesterday, that the Quakers were a society known to the laws, and theConstitution, but they are no more so than other religious societies;they stood exactly in the same situation; their memorial, therefore, relates to a matter in which they are no more interested than anyother sect, and can only be considered as a piece of advice; it iscustomary to refer a piece of advice to a committee, but if it issupposed to pray for what they think a moral purpose, is thatsufficient to induce us to commit it? What may appear a moral virtuein their eyes, may not be so in reality. I have heard of a sect ofShaking Quakers, who, I presume, suppose their tenets of a moraltendency; I am informed one of them forbids to intermarry, yet inconsequence of their shakings and concussions, you may see them with anumerous offspring about them. Now, if these people were to petitionCongress to pass a law prohibiting matrimony, I ask, would gentlemenagree to refer such a petition? I think if they would reject one ofthat nature, as improper, they ought also to reject this. 

Mr. PAGE (of Va. ) was in favor of the commitment; he hoped that thedesigns of the respectable memorialists would not be stopped at thethreshold, in order to preclude a fair discussion of the prayer of thememorial. He observed that gentlemen had founded their arguments upona misrepresentation; for the object of the memorial was not declaredto be the total abolition, of the slave trade; but that Congress wouldconsider, whether it be not in reality within their power to exercisejustice and mercy, which, if adhered to, they cannot doubt mustproduce the abolition of the slave trade. If then the prayer containednothing unconstitutional, he trusted the meritorious effort would notbe frustrated. With respect to the alarm that was apprehended, heconjectured there was none; but there might be just cause, if thememorial was not taken into consideration. He placed himself in thecase of a slave, and said, that on hearing that Congress had refusedto listen to the decent suggestions of a respectable part of thecommunity, he should infer, that the general government (from whichwas expected great good would result to every class of citizens) hadshut their ears against the voice of humanity, and he should despairof any alleviation of the miseries he and his posterity had inprospect; if anything could induce him to rebel, it must be a strokelike this, impressing on his mind all the horrors of despair. But ifhe was told, that application was made in his behalf and that Congresswere willing to hear what could be urged in favor of discouraging thepractice of importing his fellow-wretches, he would trust in theirjustice and humanity, and wait the decision patiently. He presumedthat these unfortunate people would reason in the same way; and he, therefore, conceived the most likely way to prevent danger, was tocommit the petition. He lived in a State which had the misfortune ofhaving in her bosom a great number of slaves, he held many of themhimself, and was as much interested in the business, he believed, asany gentleman in South Carolina or Georgia, yet, if he was determinedto hold them in eternal bondage, he should feel no uneasiness or alarmon account of the present measure, because he should rely upon thevirtue of Congress, that they would not exercise any unconstitutionalauthority. 

Mr. MADISON (of Va. ) The debate has taken a serious turn, and it willbe owing to this alone if an alarm is created; for had the memorialbeen treated in the usual way, it would have been considered as amatter of course, and a report might have been made, so as to havegiven general satisfaction. 

If there was the slightest tendency by the commitment to break in uponthe Constitution, he would object to it; but he did not see upon whatground such an event was to be apprehended. The petition prayed, ingeneral terms, for the interference of Congress, so far as they wereconstitutionally authorized; but even if its prayer was, in somedegree, unconstitutional, it might be committed, as was the case onMr. Churchman's petition, one part of which was supposed to apply foran unconstitutional interference by the general government. 

He admitted that Congress was restricted by the Constitution fromtaking measures to abolish the slave trade; yet there were a varietyof ways by which they could countenance the abolition, and they mightmake some regulations respecting the introduction of them into the newStates, to be formed out of the Western Territory, different from whatthey could in the old settled States. He thought the object wellworthy of consideration. 

Mr. GERRY (of Mass. ) thought the interference of Congress fullycompatible with the Constitution, and could not help lamenting themiseries to which the natives of Africa were exposed by this inhumancommerce; and said that he never contemplated the subject, withoutreflecting what his own feelings would be, in case himself, hischildren, or friends, were placed in the same deplorablecircumstances. He then adverted to the flagrant acts of cruelty whichare committed in carrying on that traffic; and asked whether it can besupposed, that Congress has no power to prevent such transactions? Hethen referred to the Constitution, and pointed out the restrictionslaid on the general government respecting the importation of slaves. It was not, he presumed, in the contemplation of any gentleman in thishouse to violate that part of the Constitution; but that we have aright to regulate this business, is as clear as that we have anyrights whatever; nor has the contrary been shown by any person who hasspoken on the occasion. Congress can, agreeable to the Constitution, lay a duty of ten dollars on imported slaves; they may do thisimmediately. He made a calculation of the value of the slaves in theSouthern States, and supposed they might be worth ten millions ofdollars; Congress have a right, if they see proper, to make a proposalto the Southern States to purchase the whole of them, and theirresources in the Western Territory may furnish them with means. He didnot intend to suggest a measure of this kind, he only instanced theseparticulars, to show that Congress certainly have a right tointermeddle in the business. He thought that no objection had beenoffered, of any force, to prevent the commitment of the memorial. 

Mr. BOUDINOT (of N. J. ) had carefully examined the petition, and foundnothing like what was complained of by gentlemen, contained in it; he, therefore, hoped they would withdraw their opposition, and suffer itto be committed. 

Mr. SMITH (of S. C. ) said, that as the petitioners had particularlyprayed Congress to take measures for the annihilation of the slavetrade, and that was admitted on all hands to be beyond their power, and as the petitioners would not be gratified by a tax of ten dollarsper head, which was all that was within their power, there was, ofconsequence, no occasion for committing it. 

Mr. STONE (of Md. ) thought this memorial a thing of course; for therenever was a society, of any considerable extent, which did notinterfere with the concerns of other people, and this kind ofinterference, whenever it has happened, has never failed to deluge thecountry in blood: on this principle he was opposed to the commitment. 

The question on the commitment being about to be put, the yeas andnays were called for, and are as follows:--

Yeas. --Messrs. Ames, Benson, Boudinot, Brown, Cadwallader, Clymer, Fitzsimons, Floyd, Foster, Gale, Gerry, Gilman, Goodhue, Griffin, Grout, Hartley, Hathorne, Heister, Huntington, Lawrance, Lee, Leonard, Livermore, Madison, Moore, Muhlenberg, Page, Parker, Partridge, Renssellaer, Schureman, Scott, Sedgwick, Seney, Sherman, Sinnickson, Smith of Maryland, Sturges, Thatcher, Trumbull, Wadsworth, White, andWynkoop--93. 

Noes. --Messrs. Baldwin, Bland, Bourke, Coles, Huger, Jackson, Mathews, Sylvester, Smith of S. C. , Stone, and Tucker--11. 

Whereupon it was determined in the affirmative; and on motion, thepetition of the Society of Friends, at New York, and the memorial fromthe Pennsylvania Society, for the abolition of slavery, were alsoreferred to a committee. 

_Debate on Committee's Report, March 1790. _

ELIOT'S DEBATES. 

Mr. TUCKER moved to modify the first paragraph by striking out all thewords after the word opinion, and to insert the following: that theseveral memorials proposed to the consideration of this house, asubject on which its interference would be unconstitutional, and evenits deliberations highly injurious to some of the States in the Union. 

Mr. JACKSON rose and observed, that he had been silent on the subjectof the reports coming before the committee, because he wished theprinciples of the resolutions to be examined fairly, and to be decidedon their true grounds. He was against the propositions generally, andwould examine the policy, the justice and the use of them, and hehoped, if he could make them appear in the same light to others asthey did to him by fair argument, that the gentlemen in oppositionwere not so determined in their opinions as not to give up theirpresent sentiments. 

With respect to the policy of the measure, the situation of the slaveshere, their situation in their native States, and the disposal of themin case of emancipation, should be considered. That slavery was anevil habit, he did not mean to controvert; but that habit was alreadyestablished, and there were peculiar situations in countries whichrendered that habit necessary. Such situations the States of SouthCarolina and Georgia were in--large tracts of the most fertile landson the continent remained uncultivated for the want of population. Itwas frequently advanced on the floor of Congress, how unhealthy thoseclimates were, and how impossible it was for northern constitutions toexist there. What, he asked, is to be done with this uncultivatedterritory? Is it to remain a waste? Is the rice trade to be banishedfrom our coasts? Are Congress willing to deprive themselves of therevenue arising from that trade, and which is daily increasing, and tothrow this great advantage into the hands of other countries?

Let us examine the use or the benefit of the resolutions contained inthe report. I call upon gentlemen to give me one single instance inwhich they can be of service. They are of no use to Congress. Thepowers of that body are already defined, and those powers cannot beamended, confirmed or diminished by ten thousand resolutions. Is notthe first proposition of the report fully contained in theConstitution? Is not that the guide and rule of this legislature. Amultiplicity of laws is reprobated in any society, and tend but toconfound and perplex. How strange would a law appear which was toconfirm a law; and how much more strange must it appear for this bodyto pass resolutions to confirm the Constitution under which they sit!This is the case with others of the resolutions. 

A gentleman from Maryland (Mr. STONE, ) very properly observed, thatthe Union had received the different States with all their ill habitsabout them. This was one of these habits established long before theConstitution, and could not now be remedied. He begged Congress toreflect on the number on the continent who were opposed to thisConstitution, and on the number which yet remained in the SouthernStates. The violation of this compact they would seize on withavidity; they would make a handle of it to cover their designs againstthe government, and many good federalists, who would be injured by themeasure, would be induced to join them: his heart was truly federal, and it always had been so, and he wished those designs frustrated. Hebegged Congress to beware before they went too far: he called on themto attend to the interests of two whole States, as well as to thememorials of a society of Quakers, who came forward to blow thetrumpet of sedition, and to destroy that Constitution which they hadnot in the least contributed by personal service or supply toestablish. 

He seconded Mr. TUCKER'S motion. 

Mr. SMITH (of S. C. ) said, the gentlemen from Massachusetts, (Mr. GERRY, ) had declared that it was the opinion of the select committee, of which he was a member, that the memorial of the Pennsylvaniasociety, required Congress to violate the Constitution. It was notless astonishing to see Dr. FRANKLIN taking the lead in a businesswhich looks so much like a persecution of the Southern inhabitants, when he recollected the parable he had written some time ago, with aview of showing the impropriety of one set of men persecuting othersfor a difference of opinion. The parable was to this effect: an oldtraveller, hungry and weary, applied to the patriarch Abraham for anight's lodging. In conversation, Abraham discovered that the strangerdiffered with him on religious points, and turned him out of doors. Inthe night God appeared unto Abraham, and said, where is the stranger?Abraham answered, I found that he did not worship the true God, and soI turned him out of doors. The Almighty thus rebuked the patriarch:Have I borne with him three-score and ten years, and couldst thou notbear with him one night? Has the Almighty, said Mr. SMITH, borne withus for more than three-score years and ten: he has even made ourcountry opulent, and shed the blessings of affluence and prosperity onour land, notwithstanding all its slaves, and must we now be ruined onaccount of the tender consciences of a few scrupulous individuals whodiffer from us on this point?

Mr. BOUDINOT agreed with the general doctrines of Mr. S. , but couldnot agree that the clause in the Constitution relating to the want ofpower in Congress to prohibit the importation of such persons as anyof the States, _now existing_, shall think proper to admit, prior tothe year 1808, and authorizing a tax or duty on such importation notexceeding ten dollars for each person, did not extend to negro slaves. Candor required that he should acknowledge that this was the expressdesign of the Constitution, and therefore Congress could not interferein prohibiting the importation or promoting the emancipation of them, prior to that period. Mr. BOUDINOT observed, that he was well informedthat the tax or duty of ten dollars was provided, instead of the fiveper cent ad valorem, and was so expressly understood by all parties inthe Convention; that therefore it was the interest and duty ofCongress to impose this tax, or it would not be doing justice to theStates, or equalizing the duties throughout the Union. If this was notdone, merchants might bring their whole capitals into this branch oftrade, and save paying any duties whatever. Mr. BOUDINOT observed, that the gentleman had overlooked the prophecy of St. Peter, where heforetells that among other damnable heresies, "Through covetousnessshall they with feigned words make merchandize of you. "

[NOTE. --This petition, with others of a similar object, was committedto a select committee; that committee made a report; the report wasreferred to a committee of the whole House, and discussed on foursuccessive days; it was then reported to the House with amendments, and by the House ordered to be inscribed in its Journals, and thenlaid on the table. 

That report, as amended in committee, is in the following words:

The committee to whom were referred sundry memorials from the peoplecalled Quakers, and also a memorial from the Pennsylvania Society forpromoting the abolition of slavery, submit the following report, (asamended in committee of the whole. )

"First: That the migration or importation of such persons as any ofthe States now existing shall think proper to admit, cannot beprohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808. "

"Secondly: That Congress have no power to interfere in theemancipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them, within any of theStates; it remaining with the several States alone to provide anyregulations therein which humanity and true policy may require. "

"Thirdly: That Congress have authority to restrain the citizens of theUnited States from carrying on the African Slave trade, for thepurpose of supplying foreigners with slaves, and of providing byproper regulations for the humane treatment, during their passage, ofslaves imported by the said citizens into the States admitting suchimportations. "

"Fourthly: That Congress have also authority to prohibit foreignersfrom fitting out vessels in any part of the United States fortransporting persons from Africa to any foreign port. "]

ADDRESS

OF THE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

OF

THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY

TO THE

Friends of Freedom and Emancipation in the U. States. 

At the Tenth Anniversary of the American Anti-Slavery Society, held inthe city of New-York, May 7th, 1844, --after grave deliberation, and along and earnest discussion, --it was decided, by a vote of nearlythree to one of the members present, that fidelity to the cause ofhuman freedom, hatred of oppression, sympathy for those who are heldin chains and slavery in this republic, and allegiance to God, requirethat the existing national compact should be instantly dissolved; thatsecession from the government is a religious and political duty; thatthe motto inscribed on the banner of Freedom should be, NO UNION WITHSLAVEHOLDERS; that it is impracticable for tyrants and the enemies oftyranny to coalesce and legislate together for the preservation ofhuman rights, or the promotion of the interests of Liberty; and thatrevolutionary ground should be occupied by all those who abhor thethought of doing evil that good may come, and who do not mean tocompromise the principles of Justice and Humanity. 

A decision involving such momentous consequences, so well calculatedto startle the public mind, so hostile to the established order ofthings, demands of us, as the official representatives of the AmericanSociety, a statement of the reasons which led to it. This is due notonly to the Society, but also to the country and the world. 

It is declared by the American people to be a self-evident truth, "that all men are created equal; that they are endowed BY THEIRCREATOR with certain inalienable rights; that among these are _life_, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness. " It is further maintained bythem, that "all governments derive their just powers from the consentof the governed;" that "whenever any form of government becomesdestructive of human rights, it is the right of the people to alter orto abolish it, and institute a new government, laying its foundationon such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to themshall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. " Thesedoctrines the patriots of 1776 sealed with their blood. They would notbrook even the menace of oppression. They held that there should be nodelay in resisting, at whatever cost or peril, the first encroachmentsof power on their liberties. Appealing to the great Ruler of theuniverse for the rectitude of their course, they pledged to each other"their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, " to conquer orperish in their struggle to be free. 

For the example which they set to all people subjected to a despoticsway, and the sacrifices which they made, their descendants cherishtheir memories with gratitude, reverence their virtues, honor theirdeeds, and glory in their triumphs. 

It is not necessary, therefore, for us to prove that a state ofslavery is incompatible with the dictates of reason and humanity; orthat it is lawful to throw off a government which is at war with thesacred rights of mankind. 

We regard this as indeed a solemn crisis, which requires of every mansobriety of thought, prophetic forecast, independent judgment, invincible determination, and a sound heart. A revolutionary step isone that should not be taken hastily, nor followed under the influenceof impulsive imitation. To know what spirit they are of--whether theyhave counted the cost of the warfare--what are the principles theyadvocate--and how they are to achieve their object--is the first dutyof revolutionists. 

But, while circumspection and prudence are excellent qualities inevery great emergency, they become the allies of tyranny whenever theyrestrain prompt, bold and decisive action against it. 

We charge upon the present national compact, that it was formed at theexpense of human liberty, by a profligate surrender of principle, andto this hour is cemented with human blood. 

We charge upon the American Constitution, that it contains provisions, and enjoins duties, which make it unlawful for freemen to take theoath of allegiance to it, because they are expressly designed to favora slaveholding oligarchy, and, consequently, to make one portion ofthe people a prey to another. 

We charge upon the existing national government, that it is aninsupportable despotism, wielded by a power which is superior to alllegal and constitutional restraints--equally indisposed and unable toprotect the lives or liberties of the people--the prop and safeguardof American slavery. 

These charges we proceed briefly to establish:

1. It is admitted by all men of intelligence, --or if it be denied inany quarter, the records of our national history settle the questionbeyond doubt, --that the American Union was effected by a guiltycompromise between the free and slaveholding States; in other words, by immolating the colored population on the altar of slavery, bydepriving the North of equal rights and privileges, and byincorporating the slave system into the government. In the expressiveand pertinent language of scripture, it was "a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell"--null and void before God, from the firsthour of its inception--the framers of which were recreant to duty, andthe supporters of which are equally guilty. 

It was pleaded at the time of the adoption, it is pleaded now, that, without such a compromise there could have been no union; that, without union, the colonies would have become an easy prey to themother country; and, hence, that it was an act of necessity, deplorable indeed when viewed alone, but absolutely indispensable tothe safety of the republic. 

To this we reply: The plea is as profligate as the act was tyrannical. It is the jesuitical doctrine, that the end sanctifies the means. Itis a confession of sin, but the denial of any guilt in itsperpetration. It is at war with the government of God, and subversiveof the foundations of morality. It is to make lies our refuge, andunder falsehood to hide ourselves, so that we may escape theoverflowing scourge. "Therefore, thus saith the Lord God, Judgmentwill I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet; and the hailshall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow thehiding place. " Moreover, "because ye trust in oppression andperverseness, and stay thereon; therefore this iniquity shall be toyou as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whosebreaking cometh suddenly at an instant. And he shall break it as thebreaking of the potter's vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall notspare. "

This plea is sufficiently broad to cover all the oppression andvillainy that the sun has witnessed in his circuit, since God said, "Let there be light. " It assumes that to be practicable, which isimpossible, namely, that there can be freedom with slavery, union withinjustice, and safety with bloodguiltiness. A union of virtue withpollution is the triumph of licentiousness. A partnership betweenright and wrong, is wholly wrong. A compromise of the principles ofJustice, is the deification of crime. 

Better that the American Union had never been formed, than that itshould have been obtained at such a frightful cost! If they wereguilty who fashioned it, but who could not foresee all its frightfulconsequences, how much more guilty are they, who, in full view of allthat has resulted from it, clamor for its perpetuity! If it was sinfulat the commencement, to adopt it on the ground of escaping a greaterevil, is it not equally sinful to swear to support it for the samereason, or until, in process of time, it be purged from itscorruption?

The fact is, the compromise alluded to, instead of effecting a union, rendered it impracticable; unless by the term union we are tounderstand the absolute reign of the slaveholding power over the wholecountry, to the prostration of Northern rights. In the just use ofwords, the American Union is and always has been a sham--an imposture. It is an instrument of oppression unsurpassed in the criminal historyof the world. How then can it be innocently sustained? It is notcertain, it is not even probable, that if it had not been adopted, themother country would have reconquered the colonies. The spirit thatwould have chosen danger in preference to crime, --to perish withjustice rather than live with dishonor, --to dare and suffer whatevermight betide, rather than sacrifice the rights of one humanbeing, --could never have been subjugated by any mortal power. Surelyit is paying a poor tribute to the valor and devotion of ourrevolutionary fathers in the cause of liberty, to say that, if theyhad sternly refused to sacrifice their principles, they would havefallen an easy prey to the despotic power of England. 

II. The American Constitution is the exponent of the national compact. We affirm that it is an instrument which no man can innocently bindhimself to support, because its anti-republican and anti-Christianrequirements are explicit and peremptory; at least, so explicit that, in regard to all the clauses pertaining to slavery, they have beenuniformly understood and enforced in the same way, by all the courtsand by all the people; and so peremptory, that no individualinterpretation or authority can set them aside with impunity. It isnot a ball of clay, to be moulded into any shape that partycontrivance or caprice may choose it to assume. It is not a form ofwords, to be interpreted in any manner, or to any extent, or for theaccomplishment of any purpose, that individuals in office under it maydetermine. _It means precisely what those who framed and adopted itmeant_--NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS, _as a matter of bargain andcompromise_. Even if it can be construed to mean something else, without violence to its language, such construction is not to betolerated _against the wishes of either party_. No just or honest useof it can be made, in opposition to the plain intention of itsframers, _except to declare the contract at an end, and to refuse toserve under it_. 

To the argument, that the words "slaves" and "slavery" are not to befound in the Constitution, and therefore that it was never intended togive any protection or countenance to the slave system, it issufficient to reply, that though no such words are contained in thatinstrument, other words were used intelligently and specifically, TOMEET THE NECESSITIES OF SLAVERY; and that these were adopted _in goodfaith, to be observed until a constitutional change could beeffected_. On this point, as to the design of certain provisions, nointelligent man can honestly entertain a doubt. If it be objected, that though these provisions were meant to cover slavery, yet, as theycan fairly be interpreted to mean something exactly the reverse, it isallowable to give to them such an interpretation, _especially as thecause of freedom will thereby be promoted_--we reply, that this is toadvocate fraud and violence toward one of the contracting parties, _whose co-operation was secured only by an express agreement andunderstanding between them both, in regard to the clauses alluded to_;and that such a construction, if enforced by pains and penalties, would unquestionably lead to a civil war, in which the aggrieved partywould justly claim to have been betrayed, and robbed of theirconstitutional rights. 

Again, if it be said, that those clauses, being immoral, are null andvoid--we reply, it is true they are not to be observed; but it is alsotrue that they are portions of an instrument, the support of which, ASA WHOLE, is required by oath or affirmation; and, therefore, _becausethey are immoral_, and BECAUSE OF THIS OBLIGATION TO ENFORCEIMMORALITY, no one can innocently swear to support the Constitution. 

Again, if it be objected, that the Constitution was formed by thepeople of the United States, in order to establish justice, to promotethe general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to themselvesand their posterity; and therefore, it is to be so construed as toharmonize with these objects; we reply, again, that its language is_not to be interpreted in a sense which neither of the contractingparties understood_, and which would frustrate every design of theiralliance--to wit, _union at the expense of the colored population ofthe country_. Moreover, nothing is more certain than that the preamblealluded to never included, in the minds of those who framed it, _thosewho were then pining in bondage_--for, in that case, a generalemancipation of the slaves would have instantly been proclaimedthroughout the United States. The words, "secure the blessings ofliberty to ourselves and our posterity, " assuredly meant only thewhite population. "To promote the general welfare, " referred to theirown welfare exclusively. "To establish justice, " was understood to befor their sole benefit as slaveholders, and the guilty abettors ofslavery. This is demonstrated by other parts of the same instrument, and by their own practice under it. 

We would not detract aught from what is justly their due; but it is asreprehensible to give them credit for _what they did not possess_, asit is to rob them of what is theirs. It is absurd, it is false, it isan insult to the common sense of mankind, to pretend that theConstitution was intended to embrace the entire population of thecountry under its sheltering wings; or that the parties to it wereactuated by a sense of justice and the spirit of impartial liberty; orthat it needs no alteration, but only a new interpretation, to make itharmonize with the object aimed at by its adoption. As truly might itbe argued, that because it is asserted in the Declaration ofIndependence, that all men are created equal, and endowed with aninalienable right to liberty, therefore none of its signers wereslaveholders, and since its adoption, slavery has been banished fromthe American soil! The truth is, our fathers were intent on securingliberty to _themselves_, without being very scrupulous as to the meansthey used to accomplish their purpose. They were not actuated by thespirit of universal philanthropy; and though in words they recognizedoccasionally the brotherhood of the human race, _in practice_ theycontinually denied it. They did not blush to enslave a portion oftheir fellow-men, and to buy and sell them as cattle in the market, while they were fighting against the oppression of the mother country, and boasting of their regard for the rights of man. Why, then, concedeto them virtues which they did not possess? _Why cling to thefalsehood, that they were no respecters of persons in the formation ofthe government_?

Alas! that they had no more fear of God, no more regard for man, intheir hearts! "The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah [theNorth and South] is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of perverseness; for they say, the Lord hathforsaken the earth, and the Lord seeth not. "

We proceed to a critical examination of the American Constitution, inits relations to slavery. 

In ARTICLE 1, Section 9, it is declared--"The migration or importationof such persons as any of the States now existing shall think properto admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress, prior to the yearone thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax or duty may be imposedon such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person. "

In this Section, it will be perceived, the phraseology is so guardedas not to imply, _ex necessitate_, any criminal intent or inhumanarrangement; and yet no one has ever had the hardihood or folly todeny, that it was clearly understood by the contracting parties, tomean that there should be no interference with the African slavetrade, on the part of the general government, until the year 1808. For twenty years after the adoption of the Constitution, the citizensof the United States were to be encouraged and protected in theprosecution of that infernal traffic--in sacking and burning thehamlets of Africa--in slaughtering multitudes of the inoffensivenatives on the soil, kidnapping and enslaving a still greaterproportion, crowding them to suffocation in the holds of the slaveships, populating the Atlantic with their dead bodies, and subjectingthe wretched survivors to all the horrors of unmitigated bondage!This awful covenant was strictly fulfilled; and though, since itstermination, Congress has declared the foreign slave traffic to bepiracy, yet all Christendom knows that the American flag, instead ofbeing the terror of the African slavers, has given them the most ampleprotection. 

The manner in which the 9th Section was agreed to, by the nationalconvention that formed the Constitution, is thus frankly avowed by theHon. LUTHER MARTIN[9] who was a prominent member of that body:

[Footnote 9: Speech before the Legislature of Maryland in 1787. ]

"The Eastern States, notwithstanding their aversion to slavery, (!)were _very willing to indulge the Southern States_ at least with atemporary liberty to prosecute the slave trade, provided the SouthernStates would, in their turn, _gratify_ them by laying no restrictionon navigation acts; and, after a very little time, the committee, by agreat majority, agreed on a report, _by which the general governmentwas to be prohibited from preventing the importation of slaves_ for alimited time; and the restrictive clause relative to navigation actswas to be omitted. "

Behold the iniquity of this agreement! how sordid were the motiveswhich led to it! what a profligate disregard of justice and humanity, on the part of those who had solemnly declared the inalienable rightof all men to be free and equal, to be a self-evident truth!

It is due to the national convention to say, that this Section was notadopted "without considerable opposition. " Alluding to it, Mr. MARTINobserves--

"It was said that we had just assumed a place among independentnations in consequence of our opposition to the attempts of GreatBritain to _enslave us_: that this opposition was grounded upon thepreservation of those rights to which God and nature has entitled us, not in _particular_, but in _common with all the rest of mankind_;that we had appealed to the Supreme Being for his assistance, as theGod of freedom, who could not but approve our efforts to preserve therights which he had thus imparted to his creatures; that now, when wescarcely had risen from our knees, from supplicating his aid andprotection in forming our government over a free people, a governmentformed pretendedly on the principles of liberty, and for itspreservation, --in that government to have a provision, not onlyputting it out of its power to restrain and prevent the slave trade, even encouraging that most infamous traffic, by giving the Statespower and influence in the Union in proportion as they cruelly andwantonly sport with the rights of their fellow-creatures, ought to beconsidered as a solemn mockery of, and insult to, that God whoseprotection we had then implored, and could not fail to hold us up indetestation, and render us contemptible to every true friend ofliberty in the world. It was said it ought to be considered thatnational crimes can only be and frequently are, punished in this worldby _national punishments_, and that the continuance of the slavetrade, and thus giving it a national sanction, and encouragement, ought to be considered as justly exposing us to the displeasure andvengeance of Him who is equally Lord of all, and who views with equaleye the poor _African slave_ and his _American master_![10]

[Footnote 10: How terribly and justly has this guilty nation beenscourged, since these words were spoken, on account of slavery and theslave trade!]

"It was urged that, by this system, we were giving the generalgovernment full and absolute power to regulate commerce, under whichgeneral power it would have a right to restrain, or totally prohibit, the slave trade: it must, therefore, appear to the world absurd anddisgraceful to the last degree that we should except from the exerciseof that power the only branch of commerce which is unjustifiable inits nature, and contrary to the rights of mankind. That, on thecontrary, we ought rather to prohibit expressly, in our Constitution, the further importation of slaves, and to authorize the generalgovernment, from time to time, to make such regulations as should bethought most advantageous for the gradual abolition of slavery, andthe emancipation of the slaves which are already in the States. Thatslavery is inconsistent with the genius of republicanism, and has atendency to destroy those principles on which it is supported, as itlessens the sense of the equal rights of mankind, and habituates us totyranny and oppression. It was further urged that, by this system ofgovernment, every State is to be protected both from foreign invasionand from domestic insurrections; that, from this consideration, it wasof the utmost importance it should have a power to restrain theimportation of slaves, since in proportion as the number of slaveswere increased in any State, in the same proportion the State isweakened and exposed to foreign invasion or domestic insurrection; andby so much less will it be able to protect itself against either, andtherefore will by so much the more, want aid from, and be a burden to, the Union. 

"It was further said, that, as in this system, we were giving thegeneral government a power, under the idea of national character, ornational interest, to regulate even our weights and measures, and haveprohibited all possibility of emitting paper money, and passinginsolvent laws, &c. , it must appear still more extraordinary that weshould prohibit the government from interfering with the slave trade, than which nothing could so materially affect both our national honorand interest. 

"These reasons influenced me, both on the committee and in convention, most decidedly to oppose and vote against the clause, as it now makesa part of the system. "[11]

[Footnote 11: Secret Proceedings, p. 64. ]

Happy had it been for this nation, had these solemn considerationsbeen heeded by the framers of the Constitution! But for the sake ofsecuring some local advantages, they chose to do evil that good mightcome, and to make the end sanctify the means. They were willing toenslave others, that they might secure their own freedom. They didthis deed deliberately, with their eyes open, with all the facts andconsequences arising therefrom before them, in violation of all theirheaven-attested declarations, and in atheistical distrust of theoverruling power of God. "The Eastern States were very willing to_indulge_ the Southern States" in the unrestricted prosecution oftheir piratical traffic, provided in return they could be _gratified_by no restriction being laid on navigation acts!!--Had there been noother provision of the Constitution justly liable to objection, thisone alone rendered the support of that instrument incompatible withthe duties which men owe to their Creator, and to each other. It wasthe poisonous infusion in the cup, which, though constituting but avery slight portion of its contents, perilled the life of every onewho partook of it. 

If it be asked to what purpose are these animadversions, since theclause alluded to has long since expired by its own limitation--weanswer, that, if at any time the foreign slave trade could be_constitutionally_ prosecuted, it may yet be renewed, under theConstitution, at the pleasure of Congress, whose prohibitory statuteis liable to be reversed at any moment, in the frenzy of Southernopposition to emancipation. It is ignorantly supposed that the bargainwas, that the traffic _should cease_ in 1808; but the only thingsecured by it was, the _right_ of Congress (not any obligation) toprohibit it at that period. If, therefore, Congress had not chosen toexercise that right, _the traffic might have been prolongedindefinitely under the Constitution. _ The right to destroy anyparticular branch of commerce, implies the right to re-establish it. True, there is no probability that the African slave trade will everagain be legalized by the national government; but no credit is duethe framers of the Constitution on this ground; for, while they threwaround it all the sanction and protection of the national characterand power for twenty years, _they set no bounds to its continuance byany positive constitutional prohibition. _

Again, the adoption of such a clause, and the faithful executionof it, prove what was meant by the words of the preamble--"to forma more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and ourposterity"--namely, that the parties to the Constitution regarded onlytheir own rights and interests, and never intended that its languageshould be so interpreted as to interfere with slavery, or to make itunlawful for one portion of the people to enslave another, _without anexpress alteration in that instrument, in the manner therein setforth. _ While, therefore, the Constitution remains as it wasoriginally adopted, they who swear to support it are bound to complywith all its provisions, as a matter of allegiance. For it availsnothing to say, that some of those provisions are at war with the lawof God and the rights of man, and therefore are not obligatory. Whatever may be their character, they are _constitutionally_obligatory; and whoever feels that he cannot execute them, or swear toexecute them, without committing sin, has no other choice left than towithdraw from the government, or to violate his conscience by takingon his lips an impious promise. The object of the Constitution is notto define _what is the law of God_, but WHAT IS THE WILL OF THEPEOPLE--which will is not to be frustrated by an ingenious moralinterpretation, by those whom they have elected to serve them. 

ARTICLE 1, Sect. 2, provides--"Representatives and direct taxes shallbe apportioned among the several States, which may be included withinthis Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall bedetermined by adding to the whole number of free persons, includingthose bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians nottaxed, _three-fifths of all other persons_. "

Here, as in the clause we have already examined, veiled beneath a formof words as deceitful as it is unmeaning in a truly democraticgovernment, is a provision for the safety, perpetuity and augmentationof the slaveholding power--a provision scarcely less atrocious thanthat which related to the African slave trade, and almost asafflictive in its operation--a provision still in force, with nopossibility of its alteration, so long as a majority of the slaveStates choose to maintain their slave system--a provision which, atthe present time, enables the South to have twenty-five additionalrepresentatives in Congress on the score of property, while the Northis not allowed to have one--a provision which concedes to theoppressed three-fifths of the political power which is granted to allothers, and then puts this power into the hands of their oppressors, to be wielded by them for the more perfect security of their tyrannousauthority, and the complete subjugation of the non-slaveholdingStates. 

Referring to this atrocious bargain, ALEXANDER HAMILTON remarked inthe New York Convention--

"The first thing objected to, is that clause which allows arepresentation for three-fifths of the negroes. Much has been said ofthe impropriety of representing men who have no will of their own:whether this be _reasoning_ or _declamation_, (!!) I will not presumeto say. It is the _unfortunate_ situation of the Southern States tohave a great part of their population as well as _property_, inblacks. The regulation complained of was one result of _the spirit ofaccommodation_ which governed the Convention; and without this_indulgence_, NO UNION COULD POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN FORMED. But, sir, considering some _peculiar advantages_ which we derive from them, itis entirely JUST that they should be _gratified_. --The Southern Statespossess certain staples, tobacco, rice, indigo, &c. --which must be_capital_ objects in treaties of commerce with foreign nations; andthe advantage which they necessarily procure in these treaties will befelt throughout all the States. "

If such was the patriotism, such the love of liberty, such themorality of ALEXANDER HAMILTON, what can be said of the character ofthose who were far less conspicuous than himself in securing Americanindependence, and in framing the American Constitution?

Listen, now, to the opinions of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, respecting theconstitutional clause now under consideration:--

"'In outward show, it is a representation of persons in bondage; infact, it is a representation of their masters, --the oppressorrepresenting the oppressed. '--'Is it in the compass of humanimagination to devise a more perfect exemplification of the art ofcommitting the lamb to the tender custody of the wolf?'--'Therepresentative is thus constituted, not the friend, agent and trusteeof the person whom he represents, but the most inveterate of hisfoes. '--'It was _one_ of the curses from that Pandora's box, adjustedat the time, as usual, by a _compromise_, the whole advantage of whichinured to the benefit of the South, and to aggravate the burthens ofthe North. '--'If there be a parallel to it in human history, it canonly be that of the Roman Emperors, who, from the days when JuliusCaesar substituted a military despotism in the place of a republic, among the offices which they always concentrated upon themselves, wasthat of tribune of the people. A Roman Emperor tribune of the people, is an exact parallel to that feature in the Constitution of the UnitedStates which makes the master the representative of his slave. '--'TheConstitution of the United States expressly prescribes that no titleof nobility shall be granted by the United States. The spirit of thisinterdict is not a rooted antipathy to the grant of mere powerlessempty _titles_, but to titles of _nobility_; to the institution ofprivileged orders of men. But what order of men under the mostabsolute of monarchies, or the most aristocratic of republics, wasever invested with such an odious and unjust privilege as that of theseparate and exclusive representation of less than half a millionowners of slaves, in the Hall of this House, in the chair of theSenate, and in the Presidential mansion?'--'This investment of powerin the owners of one species of property concentrated in the highestauthorities of the nation, and disseminated through thirteen of thetwenty-six States of the Union, constitutes a privileged order of menin the community, more adverse to the rights of all, and morepernicious to the interests of the whole, than any order of nobilityever known. To call government thus constituted a Democracy, is toinsult the understanding of mankind. To call it an Aristocracy, is todo injustice to that form of government. Aristocracy is the governmentof the _best_. Its standard qualification for accession to power is_merit_, ascertained by popular election, recurring at short intervalsof time. If even that government is prone to degenerate into tyranny, what must be the character of that form of polity in which thestandard qualification for access to power is wealth in the possessionof slaves? It is doubly tainted with the infection of riches and ofslavery. _There is no name in the language of national jurisprudencethat can define it_--no model in the records of ancient history, or inthe political theories of Aristotle, with which it can be likened. Itwas introduced into the Constitution of the United States by anequivocation--a representation of property under the name of persons. Little did the members of the Convention from the free States imagineor foresee what a sacrifice to Moloch was hidden under the mask ofthis concession. '--'The House of Representatives of the U. Statesconsists of 223 members--all, by the _letter_ of the Constitution, representatives only of _persons_, as 135 of them really are; but theother 88, equally representing the _persons_ of their constituents, bywhom they are elected, also represent, under the name of _otherpersons_, upwards of two and a half millions of _slaves_, held as the_property_ of less than half a million of the white constituents, andvalued at twelve hundred millions of dollars. Each of these 88 membersrepresents in fact the whole of that mass of associated wealth, andthe persons and exclusive interests of its owners; all thus knittogether, like the members of a moneyed corporation, with a capitalnot of thirty-five or forty or fifty, but of twelve hundred millionsof dollars, exhibiting the most extraordinary exemplification of theanti-republican tendencies of associated wealth that the world eversaw. '--'Here is one class of men, consisting of not more thanone-fortieth part of the whole people, not more than one-thirtiethpart of the free population, exclusively devoted to their personalinterests identified with their own as slaveholders of the sameassociated wealth, and wielding by their votes, upon every question ofgovernment or of public policy, two-fifths of the whole power of theHouse. In the Senate of the Union, the proportion of the slaveholdingpower is yet greater. By the influence of slavery, in the States wherethe institution is tolerated, over their elections, no other than aslaveholder can rise to the distinction of obtaining a seat in theSenate; and thus, of the 52 members of the Federal Senate, 26 areowners of slaves, and as effectively representatives of that interestas the 88 member elected by them to the House. '--'By this process itis that all political power in the States is absorbed and engrossed bythe owners of _slaves_, and the overruling policy of the States isshaped to strengthen and consolidate their domination. Thelegislative, executive, and judicial authorities are all in theirhands--the preservation, propagation, and perpetuation of the blackcode of slavery--every law of the legislature becomes a link in thechain of the slave; every executive act a rivet to his hapless fate;every judicial decision a perversion of the human intellect to thejustification of _wrong_. '--'Its reciprocal operation upon thegovernment of the nation is, to establish an artificial majority inthe slave representation over that of the free people, in the AmericanCongress, and thereby to make the PRESERVATION, PROPAGATION, ANDPERPETUATION OF SLAVERY THE VITAL AND ANIMATING SPIRIT OF THE NATIONALGOVERNMENT. '--'The result is seen in the fact that, at this day, thePresident of the United States, the President of the Senate, theSpeaker of the House of Representatives, and five out of nine of theJudges of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the United States, are notonly citizens of slaveholding States, but individual slaveholdersthemselves. So are, and constantly have been, with scarcely anexception, all the members of both Houses of Congress from theslaveholding States; and so are, in immensely disproportionatenumbers, the commanding officers of the army and navy; the officers ofthe customs; the registers and receivers of the land offices, and thepost-masters throughout the slaveholding States. --The BiennialRegister indicates the birth-place of all the officers employed in thegovernment of the Union. If it were required to designate the ownersof this species of property among them, it would be little more than acatalogue of slaveholders. '"

It is confessed by Mr. ADAMS, alluding to the national conventionthat framed the Constitution, that "the delegation from the freeStates, in their extreme anxiety to conciliate the ascendancy of theSouthern slaveholder, did listen to a _compromise between right andwrong--between freedom and slavery_; of the ultimate fruits of whichthey had no conception, but which already even now is urging the Unionto its inevitable ruin and dissolution, by a civil, servile, foreignand Indian war, all combined in one; a war, the essential issue ofwhich will be between freedom and slavery, and in which the unhallowedstandard of slavery will be the desecrated banner of the NorthAmerican Union--that banner, first unfurled to the breeze, inscribedwith the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence. "

Hence, to swear to support the Constitution of the United States, _asit is_, is to make "a compromise between right and wrong, " and to wagewar against human liberty. It is to recognize and honor as republicanlegislators _incorrigible men-stealers_, MERCILESS TYRANTS, BLOODTHIRSTY ASSASSINS, who legislate with deadly weapons about theirpersons, such as pistols, daggers, and bowie-knives, with which theythreaten to murder any Northern senator or representative who shalldare to stain their _honor_, or interfere with their rights! Theyconstitute a banditti more fierce and cruel than any whose atrocitiesare recorded on the pages of history or romance. To mix with them onterms of social or religious fellowship, is to indicate a low state ofvirtue; but to think of administering a free government by theirco-operation, is nothing short of insanity. 

Article 4, Section 2, declares, --"No person held to service or laborin one State, _under the laws thereof_, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged fromsuch service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the partyto whom such service or labor may be due. "

Here is a third clause, which, like the other two, makes no mention ofslavery or slaves, in express terms; and yet, like them, wasintelligently framed and mutually understood by the parties to theratification, and intended both to protect the slave system and torestore runaway slaves. It alone makes slavery a national institution, a national crime, and all the people who are not enslaved, thebody-guard over those whose liberties have been cloven down. Thisagreement, too, has been fulfilled to the letter by the North. 

Under the Mosaic dispensation it was imperatively commanded, --"Thoushalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped fromhis master unto thee: he shall dwell with thee, even among you, inthat place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it likethhim best: thou shalt not oppress him. " The warning which the prophetIsaiah gave to oppressing Moab was of a similar kind: "Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of thenoon-day; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth. Let mineoutcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the faceof the spoiler. " The prophet Obadiah brings the following chargeagainst treacherous Edom, which is precisely applicable to this guiltynation:--"For thy violence against thy brother Jacob, shame shall comeover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thoustoodst on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried awaycaptive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and castlots upon Jerusalem, _even thou wast as one of them_. But thoushouldst not have looked on the day of thy brother, in the day that hebecame a stranger; neither shouldst thou have rejoiced over thechildren of Judah, in the day of their destruction; neither shouldstthou have spoken proudly in the day of distress; neither shouldst thouhave _stood in the cross-way, to cut off those of his that didescape_; neither shouldst thou have _delivered up those of his thatdid remain_, in the day of distress. "

How exactly descriptive of this boasted republic is the impeachment ofEdom by the same prophet! "The pride of thy heart hath deceived thee, thou whose habitation is high; that saith in thy heart, Who shallbring me down to the ground? Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring theedown, saith the Lord. " The emblem of American pride and power is the_eagle_, and on her banner she has mingled _stars_ with its _stripes_. Her vanity, her treachery, her oppression, her self-exaltation, andher defiance of the Almighty, far surpass the madness and wickednessof Edom. What shall be her punishment? Truly, it may be affirmed ofthe American people, (who live not under the Levitical but Christiancode, and whose guilt, therefore, is the more awful, and theircondemnation the greater, ) in the language of another prophet--"Theyall lie in wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net. That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the prince asketh, and the judge asketh for a reward; and the great man, he uttereth hismischievous desire: _so they wrap it up_. " Likewise of the coloredinhabitants of this land it may be said, --"This is a people robbed andspoiled; they are all of them snared in holes, and they are hid inprison-houses; they are for a prey, and none delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore. "

By this stipulation, the Northern States are made the hunting groundof slave-catchers, who may pursue their victims with blood-hounds, andcapture them with impunity wherever they can lay their robber handsupon them. At least twelve or fifteen thousand runaway slaves are nowin Canada, exiled from their native land, because they could not find, throughout its vast extent, a single road on which they could dwell insafety, _in consequence of this provision of the Constitution_? How isit possible, then, for the advocates of liberty to support agovernment which gives over to destruction one-sixth part of the wholepopulation?

It is denied by some at the present day, that the clause which hasbeen cited, was intended to apply to runaway slaves. This indicates, either ignorance, or folly, or something worse. JAMES MADISON, as oneof the framers of the Constitution, is of some authority on thispoint. Alluding to that instrument, in the Virginia convention, hesaid:--

"Another clause _secures us that property which we now possess_. Atpresent, if any slave elopes to any of those States where slaves arefree, _he becomes emancipated by their laws_; for the laws of theStates are _uncharitable_ (!) to one another in this respect; but inthis constitution, 'No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequenceof any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service orlabor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom suchservice or labor may be due. ' THIS CLAUSE WAS EXPRESSLY INSERTED TOENABLE OWNERS OF SLAVES TO RECLAIM THEM. _This is a better securitythan any that now exists_. No power is given to the general governmentto interpose with respect to the property in slaves now held by theStates. "

In the same convention, alluding to the same clause, Gov. RANDOLPHsaid:--

"Every one knows that slaves are held to service or labor. And, whenauthority is given to owners of slaves to _vindicate their property_, can it be supposed they can be deprived of it? If a citizen of thisState, in consequence of this clause, can take his runaway slave inMaryland, can it be seriously thought that, after taking him andbringing him home, he could be made free?"

It is objected, that slaves are held as property, and therefore, asthe clause refers to persons, it cannot mean slaves. But this iscriticism against fact. Slaves are recognized not merely as property, but also as persons--as having a mixed character--as combining thehuman with the brutal. This is paradoxical, we admit; but slavery is aparadox--the American Constitution is a paradox--the American Union isa paradox--the American Government is a paradox; and if any one ofthese is to be repudiated on that ground, they all are. That it is theduty of the friends of freedom to deny the binding authority of themall, and to secede from them all, we distinctly affirm. After theindependence of this country had been achieved, the voice of Godexhorted the people, saying, "Execute true judgment, and show mercyand compassion, every man to his brother: and oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the stranger, nor the poor; and let none of youimagine evil against his brother in your heart. But they refused tohearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, thatthey should not hear; yea, they made their hearts as an adamantstone. " "Shall I not visit for these things? saith the Lord. Shall notmy soul be avenged on such a nation as this?"

Whatever doubt may have rested on any honest mind, respecting themeaning of the clause in relation to persons held to service or labor, must have been removed by the unanimous decision of the Supreme Courtof the United States, in the case of Prigg versus the State ofPennsylvania. By that decision, any Southern slave-catcher isempowered to seize and convey to the South, without hindrance ormolestation on the part of the State, and without any legal processduly obtained and served, any person or persons, irrespective of casteor complexion, whom he may choose to claim as runaway slaves; and if, when thus surprised and attacked, or on their arrival South, theycannot prove by legal witnesses, that they are freemen, their doom issealed! Hence the free colored population of the North are speciallyliable to become the victims of this terrible power, and all the otherinhabitants are at the mercy of prowling kidnappers, because there aremultitudes of white as well as black slaves on Southern plantations, and slavery is no longer fastidious with regard to the color of itsprey. 

As soon as that appalling decision of the Supreme Court wasenunciated, in the name of the Constitution, the people of the Northshould have risen _en masse_, if for no other cause, and declared theUnion at an end; and they would have done so, if they had not losttheir manhood, and their reverence for justice and liberty. 

In the 4th Sect. Of Art. IV. , the United States guarantee to protectevery State in the Union "against _domestic violence_. " By the 8thSection of Article I. , Congress is empowered "to provide for callingforth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, _suppressinsurrections_, and repel invasions. " These provisions, howeverstrictly they may apply to cases of disturbance among the whitepopulation, were adopted with special reference to the slavepopulation, for the purpose of keeping them in their chains by thecombined military force of the country; and were these repealed, andthe South left to manage her slaves as best she could, a servileinsurrection would ere long be the consequence, as general as it wouldunquestionably be successful. Says Mr. Madison, respecting theseclauses:--

"On application of the legislature or executive, as the case may be, the militia of the other States are to be called to suppress domesticinsurrections. Does this bar the States from calling forth their ownmilitia? No; but it gives them a _supplementary_ security to suppressinsurrections and domestic violence. "

The answer to Patrick Henry's objection, as urged against theConstitution in the Virginia convention, that there was no power leftto the _States_ to quell an insurrection of slaves, as it was whollyvested in Congress, George Nicholas asked:--

"Have they it now? If they have, does the constitution take it away?If it does, it must be in one of the three clauses which have beenmentioned by the worthy member. The first clause gives the generalgovernment power to call them out when necessary. Does this take itaway from the States? No! but it _gives an additional security_; for, beside the power in the State governments to use their own militia, itwill be _the duty of the general government_ to aid them WITH THESTRENGTH OF THE UNION, when called for. "

This solemn guaranty of security to the slave system, caps the climaxof national barbarity, and stains with human blood the garments of allthe people. In consequence of it, that system has multiplied itsvictims from seven hundred thousand to nearly three millions--a vastamount of territory has been purchased, in order to give it extensionand perpetuity--several new slave States have been admitted into theUnion--the slave trade has been made one of the great branches ofAmerican commerce--the slave population, though over-worked, starved, lacerated, branded, maimed, and subjected to every form of deprivationand every species of torture, have been overawed and crushed, --or, whenever they have attempted to gain their liberty by revolt, theyhave been shot down and quelled by the strong arm of the nationalgovernment; as, for example, in the case of Nat Turner's insurrectionin Virginia, when the naval and military forces of the government werecalled into active service. Cuban bloodhounds have been purchased withthe money of the people, and imported and used to hunt slave fugitivesamong the everglades of Florida. A merciless warfare has been wagedfor the extermination or expulsion of the Florida Indians, becausethey gave succor to these poor hunted fugitives--a warfare which hascost the nation several thousand lives, and forty millions of dollars. But the catalogue of enormities is too long to be recapitulated in thepresent address. 

We have thus demonstrated that the compact between the North and theSouth embraces every variety of wrong and outrage, --is at war with Godand man, cannot be innocently supported, and deserves to beimmediately annulled. In behalf of the Society which we represent, wecall upon all our fellow-citizens, who believe it is right to obey Godrather than man, to declare themselves peaceful revolutionists, and tounite with us under the stainless banner of Liberty, having for itsmotto--"EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL--NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS!"

It is pleaded that the Constitution provides for its own amendment;and we ought to use the elective franchise to effect this object. True, there is such a proviso; but, until the amendment be made, thatinstrument is binding as it stands. Is it not to violate every moralinstinct, and to sacrifice principle to expediency, to argue that wemay swear to steal, oppress and murder by wholesale, because it may benecessary to do so only for the time being, and because there is someremote probability that the instrument which requires that we shouldbe robbers, oppressors and murderers, may at some future day beamended in these particulars? Let us not palter with our consciencesin this manner--let us not deny that the compact was conceived in sinand brought forth in iniquity--let us not be so dishonest, even topromote a good object, as to interpret the Constitution in a mannerutterly at variance with the intentions and arrangements of thecontracting parties; but, confessing the guilt of the nation, acknowledging the dreadful specifications in the bond, washing ourhands in the waters of repentance from all further participation inthis criminal alliance, and resolving that we will sustain none otherthan a free and righteous government, let us glory in the name ofrevolutionists, unfurl the banner of disunion, and consecrate ourtalents and means to the overthrow of all that is tyrannical in theland, --to the establishment of all that is free, just, true andholy, --to the triumph of universal love and peace. If, in utterdisregard of the historical facts which have been cited, it is stillasserted, that the Constitution needs no amendment to make it a freeinstrument, adapted to all the exigencies of a free people, and wasnever intended to give any strength or countenance to the slavesystem--the indignant spirit of insulted Liberty replies;--"Whatthough the assertion be true? Of what avail is a mere piece ofparchment? In itself, though it be written all over with words oftruth and freedom--Though its provisions be as impartial and just aswords can express, or the imagination paint--though it be as pure asthe Gospel, and breathe only the spirit of Heaven--it is powerless; ithas no executive vitality: it is a lifeless corpse, even thoughbeautiful in death. I am famishing for lack of bread! How is myappetite relieved by holding up to my gaze a painted loaf? I ammanacled, wounded, bleeding, dying! What consolation is it to know, that they who are seeking to destroy my life, profess in words to bemy friends?" If the liberties of the people have been betrayed--ifjudgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off, andtruth has fallen in the streets, and equity cannot enter--if theprinces of the land are roaring lions, the judges evening wolves, thepeople light and treacherous persons, the priests covered withpollution--if we are living under a frightful despotism, which scoffsat all constitutional restraints, and wields the resources of thenation to promote its own bloody purposes--tell us not that the formsof freedom are still left to us! "Would such tameness and submissionhave freighted the May-Flower for Plymouth Rock? Would it haveresisted the Stamp Act, the Tea Tax, or any of those entering wedgesof tyranny with which the British government sought to rive theliberties of America? The wheel of the Revolution would have rusted onits axle, if a spirit so weak had been the only power to give itmotion. Did our fathers say, when their rights and liberties wereinfringed--"_Why, what is done cannot be undone_. That is the firstthought. " No, it was the last thing they thought of: or, rather, itnever entered their minds at all. They sprang to the conclusion atonce--"_What is done_ SHALL _be undone_. That is our FIRST and ONLYthought. "

 "Is water running in our veins? Do we remember still Old Plymouth Rock, and Lexington, and famous Bunker Hill? The debt we owe our fathers' graves? and to the yet unborn, Whose heritage ourselves must make a thing of pride or scorn?

 Gray Plymouth Rock hath yet a tongue, and Concord is not dumb; And voices from our fathers' graves and from the future come: They call on us to stand our ground--they charge us still to be Not only free from chains ourselves, but foremost to make free!"

It is of little consequence who is on the throne, if there be behindit a power mightier than the throne. It matters not what is the theoryof the government, if the practice of the government be unjust andtyrannical. We rise in rebellion against a despotism incomparably moredreadful than that which induced the colonists to take up arms againstthe mother country; not on account of a three-penny tax on tea, butbecause fetters of living iron are fastened on the limbs of millionsof our countrymen, and our most sacred rights are trampled in thedust. As citizens of the State, we appeal to the State in vain forprotection and redress. As citizens of the United States, we aretreated as outlaws in one half of the country, and the nationalgovernment consents to our destruction. We are denied the right oflocomotion, freedom of speech, the right of petition, the liberty ofthe press, the right peaceably to assemble together to protest againstoppression and plead for liberty--at least in thirteen States of theUnion. If we venture, as avowed and unflinching abolitionists, totravel South of Mason and Dixon's line, we do so at the peril of ourlives. If we would escape torture and death, on visiting any of theslave States, we must stifle our conscientious convictions, bear notestimony against cruelty and tyranny, suppress the strugglingemotions of humanity, divest ourselves of all letters and papersof an anti-slavery character, and do homage to the slaveholdingpower--or run the risk of a cruel martyrdom! These are appallingand undeniable facts. Three millions of the American people arecrushed under the American Union! They are held as slaves--traffickedas merchandise--registered as goods and chattels! The government givesthem no protection--the government is their enemy--the governmentkeeps them in chains! There they lie bleeding--we are prostrate bytheir side--in their sorrows and sufferings we participate--theirstripes are inflicted on our bodies, their shackles are fastened onour limbs, their cause is ours! The Union which grinds them to thedust rests upon us, and with them we will struggle to overthrow it!The Constitution, which subjects them to hopeless bondage, is one thatwe cannot swear to support! Our motto is, "NO UNION WITHSLAVEHOLDERS, " either religious or political. They are the fiercestenemies of mankind, and the bitterest foes of God! We separate fromthem not in anger, not in malice, not for a selfish purpose, not to dothem an injury, not to cease warning, exhorting, reproving them fortheir crimes, not to leave the perishing bondman to his fate--O no!But to clear our skirts of innocent blood--to give the oppressor nocountenance--to signify our abhorrence of injustice and cruelty--totestify against an ungodly compact--to cease striking hands withthieves and consenting with adulterers--to make no compromise withtyranny--to walk worthily of our high profession--to increase ourmoral power over the nation--to obey God and vindicate the Gospel ofhis Son--to hasten the downfall of slavery in America, and throughoutthe world!

We are not acting under a blind impulse. We have carefully counted thecost of this warfare, and are prepared to meet its consequences. Itwill subject us to reproach, persecution, infamy--it will prove afiery ordeal to all who shall pass through it--it may cost us ourlives. We shall be ridiculed as fools, scorned as visionaries, brandedas disorganizers, reviled as madmen, threatened and perhaps punishedas traitors. But we shall bide our time. Whether safety or peril, whether victory or defeat, whether life or death be ours, believingthat our feet are planted on an eternal foundation, that our positionis sublime and glorious, that our faith in God is rational andsteadfast, that we have exceeding great and precious promises on whichto rely, THAT WE ARE IN THE RIGHT, we shall not falter nor bedismayed, "though the earth be removed, and though the mountains becarried into the midst of the sea, "--though our ranks be thinned tothe number of "three hundred men. " Freemen! are you ready for theconflict? Come what may, will you sever the chain that binds you to aslaveholding government, and declare your independence? Up, then, withthe banner of revolution! Not to shed blood--not to injure the personor estate of any oppressor--not by force and arms to resist anylaw--not to countenance a servile insurrection--not to wield anycarnal weapons! No--ours must be a bloodless strife, excepting _our_blood be shed--for we aim, as did Christ our leader, not to destroymen's lives, but to save them--to overcome evil with good--to conquerthrough suffering for righteousness' sake--to set the captive free bythe potency of truth!

Secede, then, from the government. Submit to its exactions, but payit no allegiance, and give it no voluntary aid. Fill no offices underit. Send no senators or representatives to the National or Statelegislature; for what you cannot conscientiously perform yourself, youcannot ask another to perform as your agent. Circulate a declarationof DISUNION FROM SLAVEHOLDERS, throughout the country. Hold massmeetings--assemble in conventions--nail your banners to the mast!

Do you ask what can be done, if you abandon the ballot box? What didthe crucified Nazarene do without the elective franchise? What didthe apostles do? What did the glorious army of martyrs and confessorsdo? What did Luther and his intrepid associates do? What can womenand children do? What has Father Matthew done for teetotalism? Whathas Daniel O'Connell done for Irish repeal? "Stand, having your loinsgirt about with truth, and having on the breast-plate ofrighteousness, " and arrayed in the whole armor of God!

The form of government that shall succeed the present government ofthe United States, let time determine. It would he a waste of time toargue that question, until the people are regenerated and turned fromtheir iniquity. Ours is no anarchical movement, but one of order andobedience. In ceasing from oppression, we establish liberty. What isnow fragmentary, shall in due time be crystallized, and shine like agem set in the heavens, for a light to all coming ages. 

Finally--we believe that the effect of this movement will be, --First, to create discussion and agitation throughout the North; and thesewill lead to a general perception of its grandeur and importance. 

Secondly, to convulse the slumbering South like an earthquake, andconvince her that her only alternative is, to abolish slavery, or beabandoned by that power on which she now relies for safety. 

Thirdly, to attack the slave power in its most vulnerable point, andto carry the battle to the gate. 

Fourthly, to exalt the moral sense, increase the moral power, andinvigorate the moral constitution of all who heartily espouse it. 

We reverently believe that, in withdrawing from the American Union, wehave the God of justice with us. We know that we have our enslavedcountrymen with us. We are confident that all free hearts will bewith us. We are certain that tyrants and their abettors will beagainst us. 

In behalf of the Executive Committee of the American Anti-SlaverySociety, WM. LLOYD GARRISON, _President_. 

WENDELL PHILLIPS, }_Secretaries_. MARIA WESTON CHAPMAN, }

Boston, May 20, 1844. 

LETTER FROM FRANCIS JACKSON. 

BOSTON, 4th July, 1844. 

_To His Excellency George N. Briggs:_

SIR--Many years since, I received from the Executive of theCommonwealth a commission as Justice of the Peace. I have held theoffice that it conferred upon me till the present time, and have foundit a convenience to myself, and others. It might continue to be so, could I consent longer to hold it. But paramount considerationsforbid, and I herewith transmit to you my commission, respectfullyasking you to accept my resignation. 

While I deem it a duty to myself to take this step, I feel called onto state the reasons that influence me. 

In entering upon the duties of the office in question, I complied withthe requirements of the law, by taking an oath "_to support theConstitution of the United States_. " I regret that I ever took thatoath. Had I then as maturely considered its full import, and theobligations under which it is understood, and meant to lay those whotake it, as I have done since, I certainly never would have taken it, seeing, as I now do, that the Constitution of the United Statescontains provisions calculated and intended to foster, cherish, upholdand perpetuate _slavery_. It pledges the country to guard and protectthe slave system so long as the slaveholding States choose to retainit. It regards the slave code as lawful in the States which enact it. Still more, "it has done that, which, until its adoption, was neverbefore done for African slavery. It took it out of its former categoryof municipal law and local life; adopted it as a national institution, spread around it the broad and sufficient shield of national law, andthus gave to slavery a national existence. " Consequently, the oath tosupport the Constitution of the United States is a solemn promise todo that which is morally wrong; that which is a violation of thenatural rights of man, and a sin in the sight of God. 

I am not in this matter, constituting myself a judge of others. I donot say that no honest man can take such an oath, and abide by it. Ionly say, that _I_ would not now deliberately take it; and that, having inconsiderately taken it; I can no longer suffer it to lie uponmy soul. I take back the oath, and ask you, sir, to receive back thecommission, which was the occasion of my taking it. 

I am aware that my course in this matter is liable to be regarded assingular, if not censurable; and I must, therefore, be allowed to makea more specific statement of those _provisions of the Constitution_which support the enormous wrong, the heinous sin of slavery. 

The very first Article of the Constitution takes slavery at once underits legislative protection, as a basis of representation in thepopular branch of the National Legislature. It regards slaves underthe description "of all other _persons_"--as of only three-fifths ofthe value of free persons; thus to appearance undervaluing them incomparison with freemen. But its dark and involved phraseology seemsintended to blind us to the consideration, that those underratedslaves are merely a _basis_, not the _source_ of representation; thatby the laws of all the States where they live, they are regarded notas _persons_, but as _things_; that they are not the _constituency_ ofthe representative, but his property; and that the necessary effect ofthis provision of the Constitution is, to take legislative power outof the hands of _men_, as such, and give it to the mere possessors ofgoods and chattels. Fixing upon thirty thousand persons, as thesmallest number that shall send one member into the House ofRepresentatives, it protects slavery by distributing legislative powerin a free and in a slave State thus: To a congressional district inSouth Carolina, containing fifty thousand slaves, claimed as theproperty of five hundred whites, who hold, on an average, one hundredapiece, it gives one Representative in Congress; to a district inMassachusetts containing a population of thirty thousand five hundred, one Representative is assigned. But inasmuch as a slave is neverpermitted to vote, the fifty thousand persons in a district inCarolina form no part of "the constituency;" _that_ is found only inthe five hundred free persons. Five hundred freemen of Carolina couldsend one Representative to Congress, while it would take thirtythousand five hundred freemen of Massachusetts, to do the same thing:that is, one slaveholder in Carolina is clothed by the Constitutionwith the same political power and influence in the RepresentativesHall at Washington, as sixty Massachusetts men like you and me, who"eat their bread in the sweat of their own brows. "

According to the census of 1830, and the _ratio_ of representationbased upon that, slave property added twenty-five members to the Houseof Representatives. And as it has been estimated, (as anapproximation to the truth, ) that the two and a half million slaves inthe United States are held as property by about two hundred and fiftythousand persons--giving an average of ten slaves to each slaveholder, those twenty-five Representatives, each chosen, at most by only tenthousand voters, and probably by less than three-fourths of thatnumber, were the representatives not only of the two hundred and fiftythousand persons who chose them, but of property which, five yearsago, when slaves were lower in market, than at present, wereestimated, by the man who is now the most prominent candidate for thePresidency, at twelve hundred millions of dollars--a sum, which, bythe natural increase of five years, and the enhanced value resultingfrom a more prosperous state of the planting interest, cannot now beless than fifteen hundred millions of dollars. All this vast amount ofproperty, as it is "peculiar, " is also identical in its character. InCongress, as we have seen, it is animated by one spirit, moves in onemass, and is wielded with one aim; and when we consider that tyrannyis always timid, and despotism distrustful, we see that this vastmoney power would be false to itself, did it not direct all its eyesand hands, and put forth all its ingenuity and energy, to oneend--self-protection and self-perpetuation. And this it has ever done. In all the vibrations of the political scale, whether in relation to aBank or Sub-Treasury, Free Trade or a Tariff, this immense power hasmoved, and will continue to move, in one mass, for its own protection. 

While the weight of the slave influence is thus felt in the House ofRepresentatives, "in the Senate of the Union, " says JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, "the proportion of slaveholding power is still greater. By theinfluence of slavery in the States where the institution is tolerated, over their elections, no other than a slaveholder can rise to thedistinction of obtaining a seat in the Senate; and thus, of thefifty-two members of the federal Senate, twenty-six are owners ofslaves, and are as effectually representatives of that interest, asthe eighty-eight members elected by them to the House"

The dominant power which the Constitution gives to the slave interest, as thus seen and exercised in the _Legislative Halls_ of our nation, is equally obvious and obtrusive in every other department of theNational government. 

In the _Electoral colleges_, the same cause produces the sameeffect--the same power is wielded for the same purpose, as in theHalls of Congress. Even the preliminary nominating conventions, beforethey dare name a candidate for the highest office in the gift of thepeople, must ask of the Genius of slavery, to what votary she willshow herself propitious. This very year, we see both the greatpolitical parties doing homage to the slave power, by nominating eacha slaveholder for the chair of State. The candidate of one partydeclares, "I should have opposed, and would continue to oppose, anyscheme whatever of emancipation, either gradual or immediate;" andadds, "It is not true, and I rejoice that it is not true, that eitherof the two great parties of this country has any design or aim atabolition. I should deeply lament it, if it were true. "[12]

[Footnote 12: Henry Clay's speech in the United States Senate in 1839, and confirmed at Raleigh, N. C. 1844. ]

The other party nominates a man who says, "I have no hesitation indeclaring that I am in favor of the immediate re-annexation of Texasto the territory and government of the United States. "

Thus both the political parties, and the candidates of both, vie witheach other, in offering allegiance to the slave power, as a conditionprecedent to any hope of success in the struggle for the executivechair; a seat that, for more than three-fourths of the existence ofour constitutional government, has been occupied by a slaveholder. 

The same stern despotism overshadows even the sanctuaries of_justice_. Of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates, five are slaveholders, and of course, must be faithless totheir own interest, as well as recreant to the power that gives themplace, or must, so far as _they_ are concerned, give both to law andconstitution such a construction as shall justify the language of JohnQuincy Adams, when he says--"The legislative, executive, and judicialauthorities, are all in their hands--for the preservation, propagation, and perpetuation of the black code of slavery. Every lawof the legislature becomes a link in the chain of the slave; everyexecutive act a rivet to his hapless fate; every judicial decision aperversion of the human intellect to the justification of wrong. "

Thus by merely adverting but briefly to the theory and the practicaleffect of this clause of the Constitution, that I have sworn tosupport, it is seen that it throws the political power of the nationinto the hands of the slaveholders; a body of men, which, however itmay be regarded by the Constitution as "persons, " is in fact andpractical effect, a vast moneyed corporation, bound together by anindissoluble unity of interest, by a common sense of a common danger;counselling at all times for its common protection; wielding the wholepower, and controlling the destiny of the nation. 

If we look into the legislative halls, slavery is seen in the chair ofthe presiding officer of each; and controlling the action of both. Slavery occupies, by prescriptive right, the Presidential chair. Theparamount voice that comes from the temple of national justice, issuesfrom the lips of slavery. The army is in the hands of slavery, and ather bidding, must encamp in the everglades of Florida, or march fromthe Missouri to the borders of Mexico, to look after her interests inTexas. 

The navy, even that part that is cruising off the coast of Africa, tosuppress the foreign slave trade, is in the hands of slavery. 

Freemen of the North, who have even dared to lift up their voiceagainst slavery, cannot travel through the slave States, but at theperil of their lives. 

The representatives of freemen are forbidden, on the floor ofCongress, to remonstrate against the encroachments of slavery, or topray that she would let her poor victims go. 

I renounce my allegiance to a Constitution that enthrones such apower, wielded for the purpose of depriving me of my rights, ofrobbing my countrymen of their liberties, and of securing its ownprotection, support and perpetuation. 

Passing by that clause of the Constitution, which restricted Congressfor twenty years, from passing any law against the African slavetrade, and which gave authority to raise a revenue on the stolen sonsof Africa, I come to that part of the fourth article, which guaranteesprotection against "_domestic violence_, " which pledges to the Souththe military force of the country, to protect the masters againsttheir insurgent slaves, and binds us, and our children, to shoot downour fellow-countrymen, who may rise, in emulation of our revolutionaryfathers, to vindicate their inalienable "right to life, _liberty_, andthe pursuit of happiness, "--this clause of the Constitution, I saydistinctly, I never will support. 

That part of the Constitution which provides for the surrender offugitive slaves, I never have supported and never will. I will join inno slave-hunt. My door shall stand open, as it has long stood, for thepanting and trembling victim of the slave-hunter. When I shut itagainst him, may God shut the door of his mercy against me! Under thisclause of the Constitution, and designed to carry it into effect, slavery has demanded that laws should be passed, and of such acharacter, as have left the free citizen of the North withoutprotection for his own liberty. The question, whether a man seized ina free State as a slave, _is_ a slave or not, the law of Congress doesnot allow a jury to determine: but refers it to the decision of aJudge of a United States' Court, or even of the humblest Statemagistrate, it may be, upon the testimony or affidavit of the partymost deeply interested to support the claim. By virtue of this law, freemen have been seized and dragged into perpetual slavery--andshould I be seized by a slave-hunter in any part of the country whereI am not personally known, neither the Constitution nor laws of theUnited States would shield me from the same destiny. 

These, sir, are the specific parts of the Constitution of the UnitedStates, which in my opinion are essentially vicious, hostile at onceto the liberty and to the morals of the nation. And these are theprincipal reasons of my refusal any longer to acknowledge myallegiance to it, and of my determination to revoke my oath to supportit. I cannot, in order to keep the law of man, break the law of God, or solemnly call him to witness my promise that I will break it. 

It is true that the Constitution provides for its own amendment, andthat by this process, all the guarantees of Slavery may be expunged. But it will be time enough to swear to support it when this is done. It cannot be right to do so, until these amendments are made. 

It is also true that the framers of the Constitution did studiouslykeep the words "Slave" and "Slavery" from its face. But to do ourconstitutional fathers justice, while they forebore--from veryshame--to give the word "Slavery" a place in the Constitution, theydid not forbear--again to do them justice--to give place in it to the_thing_. They were careful to wrap up the idea, and the substance ofSlavery, in the clause for the surrender of the fugitive, though theysacrificed justice in doing so. 

There is abundant evidence that this clause touching "persons held toservice or labor, " not only operates practically, under the Judicialconstruction, for the protection of the slave interest; but that itwas _intended_ so to operate by the farmers of the Constitution. Thehighest Judicial authorities--Chief Justice SHAW, of the Supreme Courtof Massachusetts, in the LATIMER case, and Mr. Justice STORY, in theSupreme Court of the United States, in the case of _Prigg_ vs. _TheState of Pennsylvania_, --tell us, I know not on what evidence, thatwithout this "compromise, " this security for Southern slaveholders, "the Union could not have been formed. " And there is still higherevidence, not only that the framers of the Constitution meant by thisclause to protect slavery, but that they did this, knowing thatslavery was wrong. Mr. MADISON[13] informs us that the clause inquestion, as it came of the hands of Dr. JOHNSON, the chairman of the"committee on style, " read thus: "No person legally held to service, or labor, in one State, escaping into another, shall, " &c. And thatthe word "legally" was struck out, and the words "under the lawsthereof" inserted after the word "State, " in compliance with the wishof some, who thought the term _legal_ equivocal, and favoring the ideathat slavery was legal "_in a moral view_. " A conclusive proof that, although future generations might apply that clause to other kinds of"service or labor, " when slavery should have died out, or been killedoff by the young spirit of liberty, which was _then_ awake and at workin the land; still, slavery was what they were wrapping up in"equivocal" words; and wrapping it up for its protection and safekeeping: a conclusive proof that the framers of the Constitution weremore careful to protect themselves in the judgment of cominggenerations, from the charge of ignorance, than of sin; a conclusiveproof that they knew that slavery was _not_ "legal in a moral view, "that it was a violation of the moral law of God; and yet knowing andconfessing its immorality, they dared to make this stipulation for itssupport and defence. 

[Footnote 13: Madison Papers, p. 1589. ]

This language may sound harsh to the ears of those who think it a partof their duty, as citizens, to maintain that whatever the patriots ofthe Revolution did, was right; and who hold that we are bound to _do_all the iniquity that they covenanted for us that we _should_ do. Butthe claims of truth and right are paramount to all other claims. 

With all our veneration for our constitutional fathers, we mustadmit, --for they have left on record their own confession of it, --thatin this part of their work they _intended_ to hold the shield of theirprotection over a wrong, knowing that it was a wrong. They made a"compromise" which they had no right to make--a compromise of moralprinciple for the sake of what they probably regarded as "politicalexpediency. " I am sure they did not know--no man could know, or cannow measure, the extent, or the consequences of the wrong that theywere doing. In the strong language of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, [14] inrelation to the article fixing the basis of representation, "Littledid the members of the Convention, from the free States, imagine orforesee what a sacrifice to Moloch was hidden under the mask of thisconcession. "

[Footnote 14: See his Report on the Massachusetts Resolutions. ]

I verily believe that, giving all due consideration to the benefitsconferred upon this nation by the Constitution, its national unity, its swelling masses of wealth, its power, and the external prosperityof its multiplying millions; yet the moral injury that has been done, by the countenance shown to slavery; by holding over that tremendoussin the shield of the Constitution, and thus breaking down in the eyesof the nation the barrier between right and wrong; by so tenderlycherishing slavery as, in less than the life of a man, to multiply herchildren from half a million to nearly three millions; by enactingoaths from those who occupy prominent stations in society, that theywill violate at once the rights of man and the law of God; bysubstituting itself as a rule of right, in place of the moral laws ofthe universe;--thus in effect, dethroning the Almighty in the heartsof this people and setting up another sovereign in his stead--morethan outweighs it all. A melancholy and monitory lesson this, to alltime-serving and temporizing statesmen! A striking illustration of the_impolicy_ of sacrificing _right_ to any considerations of expediency!Yet, what better than the evil effects that we have seen, could theauthors of the Constitution have reasonably expected, from thesacrifice of right, in the concessions they made to slavery? Was itreasonable in them to expect that, after they had introduced a viciouselement into the very Constitution of the body politic which they werecalling into life, it would not exert its vicious energies? Was itreasonable in them to expect that, after slavery had been corruptingthe public morals for a whole generation, their children would havetoo much virtue to _use_ for the defence of slavery, a power whichthey themselves had not too much virtue to _give_? It is dangerous forthe sovereign power of a State to license immorality; to hold theshield of its protection over anything that is not "legal in a moralview. " Bring into your house a benumbed viper, and lay it down uponyour warm hearth, and soon it will not ask you into which room it maycrawl. Let Slavery once lean upon the supporting arm, and bask in thefostering smile of the State, and you will soon see, as we now see, both her minions and her victims multiply apace, till the politics, the morals, the liberties, even the religion of the nation, arebrought completely under her control. 

To me, it appears that the virus of slavery, introduced into theConstitution of our body politic, by a few slight punctures, has nowso pervaded and poisoned the whole system of our National Government, that literally there is no health in it. The only remedy that I cansee for the disease, is to be found in the _dissolution of thepatient_. 

The Constitution of the United States, both in theory and practice, isso utterly broken down by the influence and effects of slavery, soimbecile for the highest good of the nation, and so powerful for evil, that I can give no voluntary assistance in holding it up any longer. 

Henceforth it is dead to me, and I to it. I withdraw all profession ofallegiance to it, and all my voluntary efforts to sustain it. Theburdens that it lays upon me, while it is held up by others, I shallendeavor to bear patiently, yet acting with reference to a higher law, and distinctly declaring, that while I retain my own liberty, I willbe a party to no compact, which helps to rob any other man of his. 

Very respectfully, your friend, FRANCIS JACKSON

FROM

MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH

AT NIBLO'S GARDENS. 

"We have slavery, already, amongst us. The Constitution found it amongus; it recognized it and gave it SOLEMN GUARANTIES. To the full extentof these guaranties we are all bound, in honor, in justice, and by theConstitution. All the stipulations, contained in the Constitution, _infavor of the slaveholding States_ which are already in the Union, ought to be fulfilled, and so far as depends on me, shall befulfilled, in the fulness of their spirit, and to the exactness oftheir letter. " !!!

 * * * * *

EXTRACTS FROM

JOHN Q. ADAMS'S ADDRESS

AT NORTH BRIDGEWATER, NOVEMBER 6, 1844. 

The benefits of the Constitution of the United States, were therestoration of credit and reputation, to the country--the revival ofcommerce, navigation, and ship-building--the acquisition of the meansof discharging the debts of the Revolution, and the protection andencouragement of the infant and drooping manufactures of the country. All this, however, as is now well ascertained, was insufficient topropitiate the rulers of the Southern States to the adoption of theConstitution. What they specially wanted was _protection_. --Protectionfrom the powerful and savage tribes of Indians within their borders, and who were harassing them with the most terrible of wars--andprotection from their own negroes--protection from theirinsurrections--protection from their escape--protection even to thetrade by which they were brought into the country--protection, shall Inot blush to say, protection to the very bondage by which they wereheld. Yes! it cannot be denied--the slaveholding lords of the Southprescribed, as a condition of their assent to the Constitution, threespecial provisions to secure the perpetuity of their dominion overtheir slaves. The first was the immunity for twenty years ofpreserving the African slave-trade; the second was the stipulation tosurrender fugitive slaves--an engagement positively prohibited by thelaws of God, delivered from Sinai; and thirdly, the exaction fatal tothe principles of popular representation, of a representation forslaves--for articles of merchandise, under the name of persons. 

The reluctance with which the freemen of the North submitted to thedictation of these conditions, is attested by the awkward andambiguous language in which they are expressed. The word slave is mostcautiously and fastidiously excluded from the whole instrument. Astranger, who should come from a foreign land, and read theConstitution of the United States, would not believe that slavery or aslave existed within the borders of our country. There is not a wordin the Constitution _apparently_ bearing upon the condition ofslavery, nor is there a provision but would be susceptible ofpractical execution, if there were not a slave in the land. 

The delegates from South Carolina and Georgia distinctly avowed that, without this guarantee of protection to their property in slaves, theywould not yield their assent to the Constitution; and the freemen ofthe North, reduced to the alternative of departing from the vitalprinciple of their liberty, or of forfeiting the Union itself, avertedtheir faces, and with trembling hand subscribed the bond. 

Twenty years passed away--the slave markets of the South weresaturated with the blood of African bondage, and from midnight of the31st of December, 1807, not a slave from Africa was suffered ever moreto be introduced upon our soil. But the internal traffic was stilllawful, and the _breeding_ States soon reconciled themselves to aprohibition which gave them the monopoly of the interdicted trade, andthey joined the full chorus of reprobation, to punish with death theslave-trader from Africa, while they cherished and shielded andenjoyed the precious profits of the American slave-trade exclusivelyto themselves. 

Perhaps this unhappy result of their concession had not altogetherescaped the foresight of the freemen of the North; but their intenseanxiety for the preservation of the whole Union, and the habit alreadyformed of yielding to the somewhat peremptory and overbearing tonewhich the relation of master and slave welds into the nature of thelord, prevailed with them to overlook this consideration, the internalslave-trade having scarcely existed, while that with Africa had beenallowed. But of one consequence which has followed from the slaverepresentation, pervading the whole organic structure of theConstitution, they certainly were not prescient; for if they had been, never--no, never would they have consented to it. 

The representation, ostensibly of slaves, under the name of persons, was in its operation an exclusive grant of power to one class ofproprietors, owners of one species of property, to the detriment ofall the rest of the community. This species of property was odious inits nature, held in direct violation of the natural and inalienablerights of man, and of the vital principles of Christianity; it was allaccumulated in one geographical section of the country, and was allheld by wealthy men, comparatively small in numbers, not amounting toa tenth part of the free white population of the States in which itwas concentrated. 

In some of the ancient, and in some modern republics, extraordinarypolitical power and privileges have been invested in the owners ofhorses but then these privileges and these powers have been grantedfor the equivalent of extraordinary duties and services to thecommunity, required of the favored class. The Roman knightsconstituted the cavalry of their armies, and the bushels of ringsgathered by Hannibal from their dead bodies, after the battle ofCannae, amply prove that the special powers conferred upon them wereno gratuitous grants. But in the Constitution of the United States, the political power invested in the owners of slaves is entirelygratuitous. No extraordinary service is required of them; they are, onthe contrary, themselves grievous burdens upon the community, alwaysthreatened with the danger of insurrections, to be smothered in theblood of both parties, master and slave, and always depressing thecondition of the poor free laborer, by competition with the labor ofthe slave. The property in horses was the gift of God to man, at thecreation of the world; the property in slaves is property acquired andheld by crimes, differing in no moral aspect from the pillage of afreebooter, and to which no lapse of time can give a prescriptiveright. You are told that this is no concern of yours, and that thequestion of freedom and slavery is exclusively reserved to theconsideration of the separate States. But if it be so, as to the merequestion of right between master and slave, it is of tremendousconcern to you that this little cluster of slave-owners shouldpossess, besides their own share in the representative hall of thenation, the exclusive privilege of appointing two-fifths of the wholenumber of the representatives of the people. This is now yourcondition, under that delusive ambiguity of language and of principle, which begins by declaring the representation in the popular branch ofthe legislature a representation of persons, and then provides thatone class of persons shall have neither part nor lot in the choice oftheir representatives; but their elective franchise shall betransferred to their masters, and the oppressors shall represent theoppressed. The same perversion of the representative principlepollutes the composition of the colleges of electors of President andVice President of the United States, and every department of thegovernment of the Union is thus tainted at its source by the gangreneof slavery. 

Fellow-citizens, --with a body of men thus composed, for legislatorsand executors of the laws, what will, what must be, what has been yourlegislation? The numbers of freemen constituting your nation are muchgreater than those of the slaveholding States, bond and free. You haveat least three-fifths of the whole population of the Union. Yourinfluence on the legislation and the administration of the governmentought to be in the proportion of three to two--But how stands thefact? Besides the legitimate portion of influence exercised by theslaveholding States by the measure of their numbers, here is anintrusive influence in every department, by a representation nominallyof persons, but really of property, ostensibly of slaves, buteffectively of their masters, overbalancing your superiority ofnumbers, adding two-fifths of supplementary power to the two-fifthsfairly secured to them by the compact, CONTROLLING AND OVERRULING THEWHOLE ACTION OF YOUR GOVERNMENT AT HOME AND ABROAD, and warping it tothe sordid private interest and oppressive policy of 300, 000 owners ofslaves. 

From the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the UnitedStates, the institution of domestic slavery has been becoming more andmore the abhorrence of the civilized world. But in proportion as ithas been growing odious to all the rest of mankind, it has beensinking deeper and deeper into the affections of the holders of slavesthemselves. The cultivation of cotton and of sugar, unknown in theUnion at the establishment of the Constitution, has added largely tothe pecuniary value of the slave. Aud the suppression of the Africanslave-trade as piracy upon pain of death, by securing the benefit of amonopoly to the virtuous slaveholders of the ancient dominion, hasturned her heroic tyrannicides into a community of slave-breeders forsale, and converted the land of GEORGE WASHINGTON, PATRICK HENRY, RICHARD HENRY LEE, and THOMAS JEFFERSON, into a great barracoon--acattle-show of human beings, an emporium, of which the staple articlesof merchandise are the flesh and blood, the bones and sinews ofimmortal man. 

Of the increasing abomination of slavery in the unbought hearts of menat the time when the Constitution of the United States was formed, what clearer proof could be desired, than that the very same year inwhich that charter of the land was issued, the Congress of theConfederation, with not a tithe of the powers given by the people tothe Congress of the new compact, actually abolished slavery for everthroughout the whole Northwestern territory, without a remonstrance ora murmur. But in the articles of confederation, there was no guarantyfor the property of the slaveholder--no double representation of himin the Federal councils--no power of taxation--no stipulation for therecovery of fugitive slaves. But when the powers of _government_ cameto be delegated to the Union, the South--that is, South Carolina andGeorgia--refused their subscription to the parchment, till it shouldbe saturated with the infection of slavery, which no fumigation couldpurify, no quarantine could extinguish. The freemen of the North gaveway, and the deadly venom of slavery was infused into the Constitutionof freedom. Its first consequence has been to invert the firstprinciple of Democracy, that the will of the majority of numbers shallrule the land. By means of the double representation, the minoritycommand the whole, and a KNOT OF SLAVEHOLDERS GIVE THE LAW ANDPRESCRIBE THE POLICY OF THE COUNTRY. To acquire this superiority of alarge majority of freemen, a persevering system of engrossing nearlyall the seats of power and place, is constantly for a long series ofyears pursued, and you have seen, in a period of fifty-six years, theChief-magistracy of the Union held, during forty-four of them, by theowners of slaves. The Executive department, the Army and Navy, theSupreme Judicial Court and diplomatic missions abroad, all present thesame spectacle;--an immense majority of power in the hands of a verysmall minority of the people--millions made for a fraction of a fewthousands. 

 * * * * *

From that day (1830, ) SLAVERY, SLAVEHOLDING, SLAVE-BREEDING ANDSLAVE-TRADING, HAVE FORMED THE WHOLE FOUNDATION OF THE POLICY OF THEFEDERAL GOVERNMENT, and of the slaveholding States, at home andabroad; and at the very time when a new census has exhibited a largeincrease upon the superior numbers of the free States, it haspresented the portentous evidence of increased influence andascendancy of the slave-holding power. 

Of the prevalence of that power, you have had continual and conclusiveevidence in the suppression for the space of ten years of the right ofpetition, guarantied, if there could be a guarantee against slavery, by the first article amendatory of the Constitution.