The Anti-Slavery Examiner Volume I Part 35

President Edwards, the younger, in a sermon preached half a century ago, at New Haven, Conn., says, speaking of the allowance of food given to slaves--"They are supplied with barely enough to keep them from starving."

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 the south.

Mr. Smyth, a member of Congress, from Virginia, and a large slaveholder, said, "The plan of our opponents seems to be to confine the slave population to the southern states, to the countries where sugar, cotton, and tobacco are cultivated. But, sir, by confining the slaves to a part of the country where crops are raised for exportation, and the bread and meat are purchased, _you doom them to scarcity and hunger_. Is it not obvious that the way to render their situation more comfortable is to allow them to be taken where there is not the same motive to force the slave to INCESSANT TOIL that there is in the country where cotton, sugar, and tobacco are raised for exportation. It is proposed to hem in the blacks _where they are_ HARD WORKED and ILL FED, that they may be rendered unproductive and the race be prevented from increasing. * *

* The proposed measure would be EXTREME CRUELTY to the blacks. * * *

You would * * * doom them to SCARCITY and HARD LABOR."--[Speech of Mr. Smyth, of Va., Jan. 28, 1820.]--See National Intelligencer. ]

[Footnote D: See law of Louisiana, Martin's Digest, 6, 10. Mr. Bouldin, a Virginia slaveholder, in a speech in Congress, Feb. 16, 1835, (see National Intelligencer of that date,) said "_he knew_ that many negroes had died from exposure to weather." Mr. B. adds, "they are clad in a flimsy fabric that will turn neither wind nor water." Rev. John Rankin says, in his Letters on slavery, page 57, "In every slaveholding state, _many slaves suffer extremely_, both while they labor and while they sleep, _for want of clothing_ to keep them warm. Often they are driven through frost and snow without either stocking or shoe, until the path they tread is died with their blood. And when they return to their miserable huts at night, they find not there the means of comfortable rest; but _on the cold ground they must lie without covering, and s.h.i.+ver while they slumber_." ]

[Footnote E: See law of Louisiana, act of July 7, 1806, Martin's Digest, 6, 10-12. The law of South Carolina permits the master to _compel_ his slaves to work fifteen hours in the twenty-four, in summer, and fourteen in the winter--which would be in winter, from daybreak in the morning until _four hours_ after sunset!--See 2 Brevard's Digest, 243. The preamble of this law commences thus: "Whereas, _many_ owners of slaves _do confine them so closely to hard labor that they have not sufficient time for natural rest:_ be it therefore enacted," &c. In a work ent.i.tled "Travels in Louisiana in 1802," translated from the French, by John Davis, is the following testimony under this head:--

"The labor of Slaves in Louisiana is _not_ severe, unless it be at the rolling of sugars, an interval of from two to three months, then they work _both night and day_. Abridged of their sleep, they scarce retire to rest during the whole period." See page 81. On the 87th page of the same work, the writer says, _"Both in summer and winter_ the slaves must be _in the field_ by the _first dawn of day."_ And yet he says, "the labor of the slave is _not severe_, except at the rolling of sugars!"

The work abounds in eulogies of slavery.

In the "History of South Carolina and Georgia," vol. 1, p. 120, is the following: "_So laborious_ is the task of raising, beating, and cleaning rice, that had it been possible to obtain European servants in sufficient numbers, _thousands and tens of thousands_ MUST HAVE PERISHED."

In an article on the agriculture of Louisiana, published in the second number of the "Western Review" is the following:--"The work is admitted to be severe for the hands, (slaves) requiring, when the process of making sugar is commenced, TO BE PRESSED NIGHT AND DAY."

Mr. Philemon Bliss, of Ohio, in his letters from Florida, in 1835, says, "The negroes commence labor by daylight in the morning, and excepting the plowboys, who must feed and rest their horses, do not leave the field till dark in the evening."

Mr. Stone, in his letter from Natchez, an extract of which was given above, says, "It is a general rule on all regular plantations, that the slaves rise in season in the morning, to _be in 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_. This is the case at all seasons of the year."

President Edwards, in the sermon already extracted from, says, "The slaves are kept at hard labor from _five o'clock in the morning till nine at night_, excepting time to eat twice during the day."

Hon. R.J. Turnbull, a South Carolina slaveholder, already quoted, speaking of the harvesting of cotton, says: _"All the pregnant women_ even, on the plantation, and weak and _sickly_ negroes incapable of other labor, are then _in requisition_." * * * See "Refutation of the Calumnies circulated against the Southern and Western States," by a South Carolinian. ]

[Footnote F: A late number of the "Western Medical Reformer" contains a dissertation by a Kentucky physician, on _Cachexia Africana_, or African consumption, in which the writer says--

"This form of disease deserves more attention from the medical profession than it has heretofore elicited. Among the causes may be named the mode and manner in which the negroes live. They are _crowded_ together in a _small hut_, sometimes having an imperfect, and sometimes no floor--and seldom raised from the ground, illy ventilated, and surrounded with filth. Their diet and clothing, are also causes which might be enumerated as exciting agents. They live on a coa.r.s.e, crude and unwholesome diet, and are imperfectly clothed, both summer and winter; sleeping upon filthy and frequently damp beds."

Hon. R.J. Turnbull, of South Carolina, whose testimony on another point has been given above, says of the slaves, that they live in "_clay cabins_, with clay chimneys," &c. Mr. Clay, a Georgia slaveholder, from whom an extract has been given already, says, speaking of the dwellings of the slaves, "Too many individuals of both s.e.xes are crowded into one house, and the proper separation of apartments _cannot_ be observed.

That the slaves are insensible to the evils arising from it, does not in the least lessen the unhappy consequences." Clay's Address before the Presbytery of Georgia.--P. 13. ]

[Footnote G: Rev. C.C. Jones, late of Georgia, now Professor in the Theological Seminary at Columbia, South Carolina, made a report before the presbytery of Georgia, in 1833, on the moral condition of the slave population, which report was published under the direction of the presbytery. In that report Mr. Jones says, "They, the slaves, are shut out from our sympathies and efforts as immortal beings, and are educated and disciplined as creatures of profit, and of profit only, for this world." In a sermon preached by Mr. Jones, before two a.s.sociations of planters, in Georgia, in 1831, speaking of the slaves he says, "They are a nation of HEATHEN in our very midst." "What have we done for our poor negroes? With shame we must confess that we have done NOTHING!" "How can you pray for Christ's kingdom to come while you are neglecting a people peris.h.i.+ng for lack of vision around your very doors." "We withhold the Bible from our servants and keep them in ignorance of it, while we _will_ not use the means to have it read and explained to them." Jones'

Sermon, pp. 7, 9.

An official report of the Presbyterian Synod of South Carolina and Georgia, adopted at its session in Columbia, S.C., and published in the Charleston Observer of March 22, 1834, speaking of the slaves, says, "There are over _two millions_ of _human beings_, in the condition of HEATHEN, and, in some respects, _in a worse condition_!" * * * "From long continued and close observation, we believe that their moral and religious condition is such, as that they may justly be considered the _heathen_ of this Christian country, and will _bear comparison with heathen in any country in the world_." * * * "The negroes are dest.i.tute of the privileges of the gospel, and _ever will be under the present state of things."_ Report, &c., p. 4.

A writer in the Church Advocate, published in Lexington, Ky., says, "The poor negroes are left in the ways of spiritual darkness, no efforts are being made for their enlightenment, no seed is being sown, nothing but a moral wilderness is seen, over which the soul sickens--the heart of Christian sympathy bleeds. Here nothing is presented but a moral waste, as _extensive as our influence_, as appalling as the valley of death."

The following is an extract of a letter from Bishop Andrew of the Methodist Episcopal Church, to Messrs. Garrit and Maffit, editors of the "Western Methodist," then published at Nashville, Tennessee.

"_Augusta, Jan. 29, 1835._

"The Christians of the South owe a heavy debt to slaves on their plantations, and the ministers of Christ especially are debtors to the whole slave population. I fear a cry goes up to heaven on this subject against us; and how, I ask, shall the scores who have left the ministry of the Word, that they may make corn and cotton, and buy and sell, and get gain, meet this cry at the bar of G.o.d? and what shall the hundreds of money-making and money-loving masters, who have grown rich by the toil and sweat of their slaves, and _left their souls to perish_, say when they go with them to the judgment of the great day?"

"The Kentucky Union for the moral and religious improvement of the colored race,"--an a.s.sociation composed of some of the most influential ministers and laymen of Kentucky, says in a general circular to the religious public, "To the female character among the black population, we cannot allude but with feelings of the bitterest shame. A similar condition of moral pollution, and utter disregard of a pure and virtuous reputation, is to be found only _without the pale of Christendom_. That such a state of society should exist in a Christian nation, without calling forth any particular attention to its existence, though ever before our eyes and in our families, is a moral phenomenon at once unaccountable and disgraceful."

Rev. James A. Thome, a native of Kentucky, and still residing there, said in a speech in New York, May 1834, speaking of licentiousness among the slaves, "I would not have you fail to understand that this is a _general_ evil. Sir, what I now say, I say from deliberate conviction of its truth; that the slave states are Sodoms, and almost every village family is a brothel. (In this, I refer to the inmates of the kitchen, and not to the whites.)"

A writer in the "Western Luminary," published in Lexington, Ky., made the following declaration to the same point in the number of that paper for May 7, 1835: "There is one topic to which I will allude, which will serve to establish the heathenism of this population. I allude to the UNIVERSAL LICENTIOUSNESS which prevails. _Chast.i.ty is no virtue among them_--its violation neither injures female character in their own estimation, or that of their master or mistress--no instruction is ever given, _no censure p.r.o.nounced_. I speak not of the world. I SPEAK OF CHRISTIAN FAMILIES GENERALLY."

Rev. Mr. Converse, long a resident of Virginia, and agent of the Colonization Society, said, in a sermon before the Vt. C.S.--"Almost nothing is done to instruct the slaves in the principles and duties of the Christian religion. * * * The majority are emphatically _heathens_.

* * Pious masters (with some honorable exceptions) are criminally negligent of giving religious instruction to their slaves. * * * They can and do instruct their own children, and _perhaps_ their house servants; while those called "field hands" live, and labor, and die, without being told by their _pious_ masters (?) that Jesus Christ died to save sinners."

The page is already so loaded with references that we forbear. For testimony from the mouths of slaveholders to the terrible lacerations and other nameless outrages inflicted on the slaves, the reader is referred to the number of the Anti-Slavery Record for Jan. 1837. ]

We now proceed to examine the various objections which will doubtless be set in array against all the foregoing conclusions.

OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED.

The advocates of slavery find themselves at their wit's end in pressing the Bible into their service. Every movement shows them hard pushed.

Their ever-varying s.h.i.+fts, their forced constructions and blind guesswork, proclaim both their _cause_ desperate, and themselves.

Meanwhile their invocations for help to "those good old slaveholders and patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,"[A] sent up without ceasing from the midst of their convulsions, avail as little as did the screams and lacerations of the prophets of Baal to bring an answer of fire. The Bible defences thrown around slavery by the professed ministers of the Gospel, do so torture common sense, Scripture, and historical facts it were hard to tell whether absurdity, fatuity, ignorance, or blasphemy, predominates, in the compound; each strives so l.u.s.tily for the mastery, it may be set down a drawn battle. How often has it been bruited that the color of the negro is the _Cain-mark_, propagated downward. Cain's posterity started an opposition to the ark, forsooth, and rode out the flood with flying streamers! How could miracle be more worthily employed, or better vindicate the ways of G.o.d to man than by pointing such an argument, and filling out for slaveholders a Divine t.i.tle-deed!

[Footnote A: The Presbytery of Harmony, South Carolina, at their meeting in Wainsborough, S.C., Oct. 28, 1836, appointed a special committee to report on slavery. The following resolution is a part of the report adopted by the Presbytery. "Resolved, That slavery has existed from the days of those GOOD OLD SLAVEHOLDERS AND PATRIARCHS, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who are now in the kingdom of Heaven."

Abraham receives abundant honor at the hands of slave-holding divines.

Not because he was the "father of the faithful," forsook home and country for the truth's sake, was the most eminent preacher and practiser of righteousness in his day; nay, verily, for all this he gets faint praise; but then he had "SERVANTS BOUGHT WITH MONEY!!!" This is the finis.h.i.+ng touch of his character, and its effect on slaveholders is electrical. Prose fledges into poetry, cold compliments warm into praise, eulogy rarifies into panegyric and goes off in rhapsody. In their ecstasies over Abraham, Isaac's paramount claims to their homage are lamentably lost sight of. It is quite unaccountable, that in their manifold oglings over Abraham's "servants bought with money," no slaveholder is ever caught casting loving side-glances at Gen. xxvii.

29, 37, where Isaac, addressing Jacob, says, "Be _lord_ over thy brethren and let thy mother's sons _bow down_ to thee." And afterwards, addressing Esau, he says, speaking of the birth-right immunities confirmed to Jacob, "Behold I have made him thy _Lord_ and all his brethren have I GIVEN TO HIM FOR SERVANTS!"

Here is a charter for slaveholding, under the sign manual of that "good old slaveholder and patriarch, Isaac." Yea, more--a "Divine Warrant" for a father holding his _children_ as slaves and bequeathing them as property to his heirs! Better still, it proves that the favorite practice amongst our slaveholders of bequeathing their _colored_ children to those of a different hue, was a "Divine inst.i.tution," for Isaac "_gave_" Esau, who was "_red_ all over," to Jacob, "_as a servant_." Now gentlemen, "honor to whom honor." Let Isaac no longer be stinted of the glory that is his due as the great prototype of that "peculiar domestic inst.i.tution," of which you are eminent patrons, that nice discrimination, by which a father, in his will, makes part of his children _property_, and the rest, their _proprietors_, whenever the propriety of such a disposition is indicated, as in the case of Jacob and Esau, by the decisive tokens of COLOR and HAIR, (for, to show that Esau was Jacob's _rightful_ property after he was "given to him" by Isaac "for a servant," the difference in _hair_ as well as color, is expressly stated by inspiration!)

One prominent feature of patriarchal example has been quite overlooked by slaveholders. We mean the special care of Isaac to inform Jacob that those "given to him as servants" were "HIS BRETHREN," (twice repeated.) The deep veneration of slaveholders for every thing patriarchal, clears them from all suspicion of _designedly_ neglecting this authoritative precedent, and their admirable zeal to perpetuate patriarchal fas.h.i.+ons, proves this seeming neglect, a mere _oversight_: and is an all-sufficient guarantee that henceforward they will religiously ill.u.s.trate in their own practice, the beauty of this. .h.i.therto neglected patriarchal usage. True, it would be an odd codicil to a will, for a slaveholder, after bequeathing to _some_ of his children, all his slaves, to add a supplement, informing them that such and such and such of them were their _brothers and sisters_. Doubtless it would be at first a sore trial also, but what _pious_ slaveholder would not be sustained under it by the reflection that he was humbly following in the footsteps of his ill.u.s.trious patriarchal predecessors!

Great reformers must make great sacrifices, and if the world is to be brought back to the purity of patriarchal times, upon whom will the ends of the earth come, to whom will all trembling hearts and failing eyes spontaneously turn as leaders to conduct the forlorn hope through the wilderness to that promised land, if not to slaveholders, those disinterested pioneers whose self-denying labors have founded far and wide the "patriarchal inst.i.tution" of _concubinage_, and through evil report and good report, have faithfully stamped their own image and superscription, in variegated hues, upon the faces of a swarming progeny from generation to generation. ]

OBJECTION I. "_Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren._" Gen. ix. 25.

This prophecy of Noah is the _vade mec.u.m_ of slaveholders, and they never venture abroad without it; it is a pocket-piece for sudden occasion, a keepsake to dote over, a charm to spell-bind opposition, and a magnet to draw to their standard "whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh a lie." But "cursed be Canaan" is a poor drug to ease a throbbing conscience--a mocking lullaby to unquiet tossings. Those who justify negro slavery by the curse on Canaan, _a.s.sume_ as usual all the points in debate. 1. That _slavery_ was prophesied, rather than mere _service_ to others, and _individual_ bondage rather than _national_ subjection and tribute. 2. That the _prediction_ of crime justifies it; or at least absolves those whose crimes fulfil it. How piously the Pharaohs might have quoted the prophecy, "_Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and they shall afflict them four hundred years._" And then, what saints were those that crucified the Lord of glory! 3. That the Africans are descended from Canaan. Africa was peopled from Egypt and Ethiopia, which countries were settled by Mizraim and Cush. For the location and boundaries of Canaan's posterity, see Gen. x. 15-19. So a prophecy of evil to one people, is quoted to justify its infliction upon another. Perhaps it may be argued that Canaan includes all Ham's posterity. If so, the prophecy is yet unfulfilled. The other sons of Ham settled Egypt and a.s.syria, and, conjointly with Shem, Persia, and afterward, to some extent, the Grecian and Roman empires. The history of these nations gives no verification of the prophecy. Whereas, the history of Canaan's descendants for more than three thousand years, is a record of its fulfillment. First, they were put to tribute by the Israelites; then by the Medes and Persians; then by the Macedonians, Grecians and Romans, successively; and finally, were subjected by the Ottoman dynasty, where they yet remain. Thus Canaan has been for ages the servant mainly of Shem and j.a.phet, and secondarily of the other sons of Ham. It may still be objected, that though Canaan alone is _named_, yet the 22d and 24th verses show the posterity of Ham in general to be meant. "And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without." "And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his YOUNGER son had done unto him, and said," &c. It is argued that this "_younger_ son" cannot be Canaan, as he was the _grandson_ of Noah, and therefore it must be Ham. We answer, whoever that "_younger son_" was, Canaan alone was named in the curse. Besides, the Hebrew word _Ben_, signifies son, grandson, or _any one_ of the posterity of an individual.[A] "_Know ye Laban, the_ SON (grandson) _of Nahor_?" Gen.

xxix. 5. "_Mephibosheth the_ SON (grandson) _of Saul_." 2 Sam. xix. 24; 2 Sam. ix. 6. "_The driving of Jehu the_ SON (grandson) _of Nims.h.i.+_." 2 Kings ix. 20. See also Ruth iv. 17; 2 Sam. xxi. 6; Gen. x.x.xi. 55. Shall we forbid the inspired writer to use the same word when speaking of Noah's grandson? Further, Ham was not the "_younger_ son." The order of enumeration makes him the _second_ son. If it be said that Bible usage varies, the order of birth not always being observed in enumerations; the reply is, that, enumeration in that order, is the _rule_, in any other order the _exception_. Besides, if a younger member of a family takes precedence of older ones in the family record, it is a mark of pre-eminence, either in endowments, or providential instrumentality.

Abraham, though sixty years younger than his eldest brother, stands first in the family genealogy. Nothing in Ham's history shows him pre-eminent; besides, the Hebrew word _Hakkatan_ rendered "the _younger_," means the _little, small_. The same word is used in Isa. lx.

22. "A LITTLE ONE _shall become a thousand_." Isa. xxii. 24. "_All vessels of_ SMALL _quant.i.ty_." Ps. cxv. 13. "_He will bless them that fear the Lord both_ SMALL _and great_." Ex. xviii, 22. "_But every_ SMALL _matter they shall judge_." It would be a literal rendering of Gen. ix. 24, if it were translated thus, "when Noah knew what his little son,"[B] or grandson (_Beno Hakkatan_) "had done unto him, he said cursed be Canaan," &c. Further, even if the Africans were the descendants of Canaan, the a.s.sumption that their enslavement fulfils this prophecy, lacks even plausibility, for, only a _fraction_ of the inhabitants of Africa have at any time been the slaves of other nations.

If the objector say in reply, that a large majority of the Africans have always been slaves _at home_, we answer: _It is false in point of fact_, though zealously bruited often to serve a turn; and _if it were true_, how does it help the argument? The prophecy was, "Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be _unto his_ BRETHREN.," not unto _himself!_

[Footnote A: So _av_, the Hebrew word for father, signifies any ancestor, however remote. 2 Chron. xvii. 3; xxviii. 1; x.x.xiv. 2; Dan. v.

2.]

[Footnote B: The French follows the same a.n.a.logy; _grandson_ being _pet.i.t fils_ (little son.)]

OBJECTION II.--"_If a man smite his servant or his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall surely be punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished, for he is his money._" Ex. xxi. 20, 21. What was the design of this regulation? Was it to grant masters an indulgence to beat servants with impunity, and an a.s.surance, that if they beat them to death, the offence should not be _capital_? This is substantially what commentators tell us. What Deity do such men wors.h.i.+p? Some blood-gorged Moloch, enthroned on human hecatombs, and snuffing carnage for incense? Did He who thundered from Sinai's flames, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL," offer a bounty on _murder_?

Whoever a.n.a.lyzes the Mosaic system, will often find a moot court in session, trying law points, settling definitions, or laying down rules of evidence. Num. x.x.xv. 10-22; Deut. xix. 4-6; Lev. xxiv. 19-22; Ex.