CHAPTER VIII.

Slavery considered.-The right of man to hold his fellow-man in bondage.

WITH all the clamour made by the abolitionists, in relation to "free discussion," there is nothing which they so studiously avoid. They seldom, if ever, resort to candid or manly argument. They appeal to settled prejudices; and, by applying abstract but cherished axioms, without reference to consequences, they urge a course which could never bear the test of cool and practical examination. It is the misfortune of our country that we reason from abstractions. We establish the principle that all men are created free and equal; and following it out, without regard to consequences, often infer that a community of goods is required by a rigid respect for the rights of man. It was this delusion, this proneness to rush recklessly on in the course marked out by some dreamy abstraction, which plunged revolutionary France into the reign of terror. Her principles were generally sound; but pushed to extremes, and followed without regard to practical results, they led to consequences at which the world even now turns pale. It was the prevalence of the spirit alluded to, which induced the French policy towards St. Domingo; and not only lost that colony to France and to the world, but rendered it a Phlegethon, in which evil spirits held, for years, their carnival of blood. Let our people profit by their

experience. Let them rely rather on common sense, practically applied, than on the misty abstractions of fanatical enthusiasts.

It should be distinctly understood, that while the South acknowledges no accountability to any power under heaven for her course or sentiments on the subject of slavery, she freely avows her conviction of her right to hold the negroes in bondage, and her persuasion that the domestic slavery of that section of our country, is not a moral or political evil. These sentiments are the result of a full and general investigation of the subject: and were the people of the North equally well acquainted with it, they would probably subscribe to the opinions of the South. The original importation of the African is regarded by us as a moral wrong, because associated with acts of violence and cruelty, which nothing can justify. But of the justice, necessity, and advantages of the institution, as now entailed upon the South, we cannot, after an examination of the subject, feel a doubt. To the negro himself, we consider it no calamity. He is happier here than on the shores of his own degraded, savage, and most unhappy country-or rather the country of his fathers. He is happier, also, as a slave, than he could be as a freeman. This is the result of the peculiarities of his character; and will, we trust, be demonstrated in the course of this work to the satisfaction of the reader. It may be said that the slave-holders have no right to constitute themselves the tribunal for the decision of this question. If we do not judge for ourselves, of the propriety of our own conduct, who shall judge for us? But were we, or rather the people of the South, not immediately interested in the determination of the question, the ignorance, childlike simplicity and acknowledged incapacity of the blacks, would justify their masters in deciding

on the course which their welfare, as well as that of the whites, rendered necessary.

The abolitionists deny the right of the people of the South, under any circumstances, to hold their fellow men in bondage. Upon what grounds is this position assumed? If the master is guilty of a wrong, it becomes his accusers to give some evidence of his crime. It is their duty to prove that an institution, which has existed almost from the creation of the world to the present time, which has been encouraged by the best men of the most enlightened ages, and which has met the sanction of the Highest -has become, since these moral luminaries arose upon the world, guilty and calamitous. It will be found difficult to obtain a direct and rational answer to so plain a demand. They deal wholly in rhetorical flourishes; and if they reply at all, will tell us that the negro slave should not be a slave, because "he was created free." The fact is exactly the reverse. He comes into the world a slave. Nay, we might go further, and assert that nature, in her earliest developments, exhibits the necessity of reciprocal command and protection. We are all, in early life, slaves; the laws of necessity and nature, as well as those of the land, constitute us bond, and we remain so until we have passed through nearly onethird of our earthly pilgrimage. Who, then, will pretend to assert that the negro should not be a slave because he is born free? But they tell us"it is the will of God that he should be free." It is somewhat strange, that the will of God, in this point, has never been expressed until it came from the oracular mouths of the abolitionists. Such manifestations of the divine will never took place among the Jews, where slavery was universal, nor among the nations to which the disciples of our Saviour preached-nations which were overrun with slaves.

The will and desire of God is the welfare of the species. If negro slavery in the South be inconsistent with the happiness of the human family, the argument may apply: but if, as we confidently assert, its existence is not at war with the well-being of the greatest number of those interested, it is wholly justifiable. And if, to go one step further, the measures of abolition, projected by the fanatics, are calculated to result in consequences calamitous to the race, they are, notwithstanding their ostentatious and obtrusive piety, guilty, in the face of heaven and earth, of crimes of the darkest and deepest crimson.

The phrase which occurs in the Declaration of American Independence—" all men are created free and equal"—is perpetually upon the lips of the abolitionist, to sanction his violation of the rights of the South. The following extract from a speech, delivered at the late public meeting in Philadelphia, by Mr. J. R. Burden, formerly Speaker of the Senate, and an early, fervent, and fearless advocate of the rights of the slave-holder, admirably illustrates the perversion and desecration of that celebrated sentence of Jefferson.

"On the 4th of July, 1776, in the immediate neighbourhood of this place, the Declaration of Independence was made. From it the advocates of black emancipation take their text, 'All men are created free and equal,' &c. The construction they put upon it is unlimited. Let us examine the subject carefully. Did the framers of the Declaration, the representatives of the people, intend to declare that domestic slavery was incompatible with the freedom of the colonies? If they did not, their words are of no use in the defence of negro emancipation. If they did, why were not all the slaves then emancipated?

"In 1781, the Articles of Confederation' were ratified. Domestic slavery still existed. Why did it exist, if the construction of the abolitionists be correct?

"The people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union and secure the blessings of liberty, established the constitution in 1787. Domestic slavery still existed. No constitution could have been formed, had emancipation been persisted in. No union could have been perfected, if theorists and dreamers had determined to deprive the slaveholding states of their property.

"The constitution was adopted; the union was established; the world looked on it with admiration; yet it did not prohibit domestic slavery. So far from it, one of its main features, that of representation, was based upon it. Further, it declared that the traffic should not be prohibited by Congress prior to the year 1808. Perhaps the framers of the constitution thought that, by that period, the increased population of the blacks, would supersede the necessity of importation.

"We hear, in our day, much prating about liberty and philanthropy. The signers of the Declaration of Independence, and the framers of the constitution, were quite as conversant with the rights of man, as the best of us; they had as much philanthropy; and, if you will have it, as much Christianity as we profess to have. They possessed the confidence of the people, and deserved it; they passed through the times that tried men's souls; and, without the fear, favour, or affection of power, but in the spirit of virtue, wisdom, and patriotism, perfected a union as imperishable as the globe we inhabit. Shall it be said that such men put a blot and a stain upon our country?-So much for the text of emancipation!"