Chapter 8

to freedom by the _Jubilee_.--"Ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout the land, and unto all the inhabitants thereof." _Leviticus_ xxv, 10.

At Athens, if the slave possessed property enough to buy his freedom, the law compelled the master to grant it, whenever the money was offered.

The severe laws of Rome discouraged manumission; but it was a very common thing for slaves to pay for freedom, out of their _peculium_; and public opinion made it dishonorable to retain them in bondage under such circumstances. "According to Cicero, sober and industrious slaves, who became such by captivity in war, seldom remained in servitude above six years."

"In Turkey, the right of redemption is expressly regulated by the Koran. The master is commanded to give to all his slaves, that behave themselves faithfully, a writing, fixing beforehand the price at which they may be redeemed; and which he is bound to accept, when tendered by them, or on their behalf."

"In Brazil, a slave who can pay the value of his servitude, (the fair price of which may be settled by the magistrate,) has a right to demand his freedom. And the case frequently happens; for the slaves have one day in the week, and in some places two days, exclusively of Sundays and other festivals, which the industrious employ in providing a fund for their redemption."

"In the Spanish colonies, the law is still more liberal. The civil magistrates are empowered to decide upon the just price of a slave, and when the negro is able to offer this sum, his master is compelled to grant his freedom. He may even redeem himself progressively. For instance, by paying a sixth part of his appreciation, he may redeem for his own use one day in the week; by employing this industriously, he will soon be enabled to buy another day; by pursuing the same laudable course, the remainder of his time may be redeemed with continually accelerated progress, till he becomes entitled to entire manumission."

PROP. 11.--_Operation of the laws interferes with religious privileges._

No places of public worship are prepared for the negro; and churches are so scarce in the slaveholding States, compared with the number of _white_ inhabitants, that it is not to be supposed great numbers of them follow their masters to such places; and if they did, what could their rude, and merely sensual minds comprehend of a discourse addressed to educated men? In Georgia, there is a law which forbids any congregation or company of negroes to assemble themselves contrary to the act regulating patrols. Every justice of the peace may go in person, or send a constable, to disperse any assembly or meeting of slaves, which _may_ disturb the peace, endanger the safety, &c., and every slave taken at such meetings may, by order of the justice, _without trial_, receive on the bare back twenty-five stripes with whip, switch, or cowskin. In South Carolina, an act forbids the police officers to break into any place of religious meeting before nine o'clock, provided a _majority_ of the assembly are _white persons_; but if the quorum of white people should happen to be wanting, every slave would be liable to twenty-five lashes of the cowskin.

These, and various similar regulations, are obviously made to prevent insurrections; but it is plain that they must materially interfere with the slave's opportunities for religious instruction. The fact is, there are _inconveniences_ attending a general diffusion of Christianity in a slaveholding State--light must follow its path, and that light would reveal the surrounding darkness,--slaves might begin to think whether slavery could be reconciled with religious precepts,--and then the system is quite too republican--it teaches that all men are children of the same heavenly Father, who careth alike for all.

The West India planters boldly and openly declared, that slavery and Christianity could not exist together; in their minds the immediate inference was, that Christianity must be put down; and very consistently they began to fine and imprison Methodist missionaries, burn chapels,[P] &c.

[Footnote P: The slaves of any one owner may meet together for religious purposes, if authorized by their master, and private chaplains may be hired to preach to them. The domestic slaves, who are entirely employed in the family, no doubt fare much better in this respect, than the plantation slaves; but this, and all other negro privileges, depend entirely upon the slave's _luck_ in the character of his master.]

In Rome, the introduction of "Christianity abolished slavery; the idea of exclusive property in our fellow-men was too obviously at variance with its holy precepts; and its professors, in the sincerity of their hearts, made a formal surrender of such claims. In various ancient instruments of emancipation, the masters begin by declaring, that, 'for the love of God and Jesus Christ, for the easing of their consciences, and the safety of their souls,' they set their bondmen free."

"It is remarkable that the ancient inhabitants of Great Britain used to sell their countrymen, and even their own children, to the Irish. The port of Bristol, afterwards so famous for the African slave-trade, was then equally distinguished as a market for the same commodity, though of a different color. But when Ireland, in the year 1172, was afflicted with public calamities, the clergy and people of that generous nation began to reproach themselves with the unchristian practice of holding their fellow-men in slavery. Their English bondmen, though fully paid for, were, by an unanimous resolution of the Armagh Assembly, set at liberty. _Their_ repentance dictated present restitution to the injured. More than six hundred years afterwards, when Mr. Wilberforce made his first motion for the abolition of the slave-trade, he was supported by every Irish member of the House of Commons." May God bless thee, warm-hearted, generous old Ireland!

In the English and Dutch colonies, baptism was generally supposed to confer freedom on the slave; and for this reason, masters were reluctant to have them baptized. They got over this difficulty, however, and married self-interest to conscience, by making a law that "no slave should become free by being a Christian." This is a striking proof how closely Christianity and liberty are associated together.

A French planter of St. Domingo, in a book which he published concerning that colony, admits that it is desirable to have negroes know enough of religion to make them friends to humanity, and grateful to their creator; but he considers it very wrong to load their weak minds with a belief in supernatural dogmas, such as a belief in a future state. He says, "such knowledge is apt to render them intractable, averse to labor, and induces them to commit suicide on themselves and their children, _of which the colony, the State, and commerce have equal need_."

Our slaveholders, in general, seem desirous to have the slave just religious enough to know that insurrections and murder are contrary to the maxims of Christianity; but it is very difficult to have them learn just so much as this, without learning more. In Georgia, I have been told, that a very general prejudice prevails against white missionaries. To avoid this danger, old domestic slaves, who are better informed than the plantation slaves, are employed to hear sermons and repeat them to their brethren; and their repetitions are said to be strange samples of pulpit eloquence. One of these old negroes, as the story goes, told his hearers that the Bible said slaves ought to get their freedom; and if they could not do it in any other way, they must murder their masters. The slaves had never been allowed to learn to read, and of course they could not dispute that such a doctrine was actually in the Scriptures. Thus do unjust and absurd laws "return to plague the inventor."

PROP. 12.--_Whole power of the laws exerted to keep negroes in ignorance._

South Carolina made the first law upon this subject. While yet a _province_, she laid a penalty of one hundred pounds upon any person who taught a slave to write, or allowed him to be taught to write.[Q] In Virginia, any school for teaching reading and writing, either to slaves, or to free people of color, is considered _an unlawful assembly_, and may accordingly be dispersed, and punishment administered upon each pupil, not exceeding twenty lashes.

[Footnote Q: Yet it has been said that these laws are entirely owing to the rash efforts of the abolitionists.]

In South Carolina, the law is the same.

The city of Savannah, in Georgia, a few years ago, passed an ordinance, by which "any person that teaches a person of color, slave or free, to read or write, or causes such persons to be so taught, is subjected to a fine of thirty dollars for each offence; and every person of color who shall teach reading or writing, is subject to a fine of thirty dollars, or to be imprisoned ten days and whipped thirty-nine lashes."

From these facts it is evident that legislative power prevents a master from giving liberty and instruction to his slave, even when such a course would be willingly pursued by a benevolent individual. The laws allow almost unlimited power to do _mischief_; but the power to do _good_ is effectually restrained.

PROP. 13.--_There is a monstrous inequality of law and right._

In a civilized country, one would expect that if any disproportion existed in the laws, it would be in favor of the ignorant and defenceless; but the reverse is lamentably the case here. _Obedience_ to the laws is the price freemen pay for the _protection_ of the laws;--but the same legislatures which absolutely sanction the negro's _wrongs_, and, to say the least, make very inadequate provisions for his _safety_, claim the right to _punish_ him with inordinate severity.

"In Kentucky, white men are condemned to death for _four_ crimes only; slaves meet a similar punishment for _eleven_ crimes. In South Carolina, white persons suffer death for _twenty-seven_ crimes; slaves incur a similar fate for _thirty-six_ crimes. In Georgia, whites are punished capitally for _three_ crimes only; slaves for _at least nine_."

Stroud says there are _seventy-one_ crimes in the slave States, for which negroes are punished with _death_, and for each and every one of these crimes the white man suffers nothing worse than imprisonment in the penitentiary.

"Trial by jury is utterly denied to the slave, _even in criminal accusations which may affect his life_; in South Carolina, Virginia, and Louisiana, instead of a jury, is substituted a tribunal composed of two justices of the peace and from three to five _free_-holders, (i. e. _slave_-holders.) In Virginia, it is composed of five justices merely. What chance has an ignorant slave before a tribunal chosen by his accuser, suddenly convoked, and consisting of but five persons?"

If a slave is found out of the limits of the town in which he lives, or beyond the plantation on which he is usually employed, without a written permission from his master, or the company of some white person, _any body_ may inflict twenty lashes upon him; and if the slave resist such punishment, he may be lawfully _killed_.

If a slave visit another plantation without leave in writing from his master, the owner of the plantation may give him ten lashes.

More than seven slaves walking or standing together in the road, without a white man, may receive twenty lashes each from any person.

Any slave, or Indian, who takes away, or lets loose a boat, from any place where it is fastened, receives thirty-nine lashes for the first offence; and, according to some laws, one ear is cut off for the second offence.

For carrying a gun, powder, shot, a club, or any weapon whatsoever, offensive or defensive, thirty-nine lashes by order of a justice; and in some States, twenty lashes from the nearest constable, _without_ a conviction by the justice.

For selling any article, without a specific ticket from his master, ten lashes by the captain of the patrollers,[R] or thirty-nine by order of a magistrate. The same punishment for being at any assembly deemed _unlawful_.

[Footnote R: The patrols are very generally low and dissipated characters, and the cruelties which negroes suffer from them, while in a state of intoxication, are sometimes shocking. The law endows these men with very great power.]

For travelling by himself from his master's land to any other place, unless by the most accustomed road, forty lashes; the same for travelling in the night without a pass; the same for being found in another negro's kitchen, or quarters; and every negro found _in company_ with such vagrant, receives twenty lashes.

For hunting with dogs, even in the woods of his master, thirty lashes.

For running away and lurking in swamps, a negro may be lawfully _killed_ by any person. If a slave _happen_ to die of _moderate_ correction, it is likewise justifiable homicide.

For endeavoring to entice another slave to run away, if provisions are prepared, the slave is punished with DEATH; and any negro aiding or abetting suffers DEATH.

Thirty-nine stripes for harboring a runaway slave one hour.

For disobeying orders, imprisonment as long as the master chooses.

For riding on horseback, without written permission, or for keeping a dog, twenty-five lashes.

For rambling, riding, or going abroad in the night, or riding horses in the day without leave, a slave may be whipped, cropped, or branded on the cheek with the letter R, or otherwise punished, not extending to life, nor _so as to unfit him for labor_.

For beating the Patuxent river, to catch fish, ten lashes; for placing a seine across Transquakin and Chickwiccimo creeks, thirty-nine lashes by order of a justice.

For advising the murder of a person, one hundred lashes may be given.

A runaway slave may be put into jail, and the jailer must forthwith send a letter by mail, to the man whom the negro says is his owner. If an answer does not arrive at the proper time, the jailer must inflict twenty-five lashes, well laid on, and interrogate anew. If the slave's second statement be not corroborated by the letter from the owner, twenty-five lashes are again administered.--The act very coolly concludes thus: "and so on, for the space of _six months_, it shall be the duty of the jailer to interrogate and whip as aforesaid."

The letter may miscarry, the owner may reside at a great distance from the Post-Office, and thus long delays may occur--the ignorant slave may not know his master's christian name--the jailer may not spell it aright; but no matter--"It is the jailer's duty to interrogate and whip, as aforesaid."

The last authorized edition of the laws of Maryland, comprises the following: "If any slave be convicted of any petit treason, or murder, or wilfully burning of dwelling-houses, it may be lawful for the justices to give judgment against such slave to have the right hand cut off, to be hanged in the usual manner, the head severed from the body, the body divided into four quarters, and the head and quarters set up in the most public places of the county," &c.

The laws of Tennessee and Missouri are comparatively mild; yet in Missouri it is _death_ to prepare or administer medicine without the master's consent, unless it can be _proved_ that there was no evil intention. The law in Virginia is similar; it requires proof that there was no evil intention, and that the medicine produced no bad consequences.

To estimate fully the cruel injustice of these laws, it must be remembered that the poor slave is without religious instruction, unable to read, too ignorant to comprehend legislation, and holding so little communication with any person better informed than himself, that the chance is, he does not even know the _existence_ of half the laws by which he suffers. This is worthy of Nero, who caused his edicts to be placed so high that they could not be read, and then beheaded his subjects for disobeying them.

PROP. 14.--_The laws operate oppressively on free colored people._

Free people of color, like the slaves, are excluded by law from all means of obtaining the common elements of education.

The free colored man may at any time be taken up on suspicion, and be condemned and imprisoned as a runaway slave, unless he can _prove_ the contrary; and be it remembered, none but _white_ evidence, or written documents, avail him. The common law supposes a man to be innocent until he is proved guilty; but slave law turns this upside down. Every colored man is _presumed_ to be a slave till it can be proved otherwise; this rule prevails in all the slave States, except North Carolina, where it is confined to negroes. Stephens supposes this harsh doctrine to be peculiar to the British Colonial Code; but in this he is again mistaken--the American _republics_ share the honor with England.

A law passed in December, 1822, in South Carolina, provides that any free colored persons coming into port on board of any vessel shall be seized and imprisoned during the stay of the vessel; and when she is ready to depart, the captain shall take such free negroes and pay the expenses of their arrest and imprisonment; and in case of refusing so to do, he shall be indicted and fined not less than one thousand dollars, and imprisoned not less than two months; and such free negroes shall be sold for slaves. The Circuit Court of the United States, adjudged the law unconstitutional and void. Yet nearly _two years_ after this decision, four colored English seamen were taken out of the brig Marmion. England made a formal complaint to our government. Mr. Wirt, the Attorney-General, gave the opinion that the law was unconstitutional. This, as well as the above-mentioned decision, excited strong indignation in South Carolina. Notwithstanding the decision, the law still remains in force, and other States have followed the example of South Carolina, though with a more cautious observance of appearances.

In South Carolina, if any free negro harbor, conceal, or entertain, any runaway slave, or a slave charged with _any_ criminal matter, he forfeits ten pounds for the first day, and twenty shillings for every succeeding day. In case of inability to pay, the free negro is sold at auction, and if any overplus remain, after the fines and attendant expenses are paid, it is put into the hands of the public treasurer.

The free negro may entertain a slave without _knowing_ that he has done any thing wrong; but his declaration to that effect is of no avail. Where every effort is made to prevent colored people from obtaining any money, they are of course often unable to pay the penalties imposed.

If any omission is made in the forms of emancipation established by law, _any person whatsoever_ may seize the negro so manumitted, and appropriate him to their own use.

If a free colored person remain in Virginia twelve months after his manumission, he can be sold by the overseers of the poor for the benefit of the _literary fund_!

In Georgia, a free colored man, except a regular articled seaman, is fined one hundred dollars for coming into the State; and if he cannot pay it, may be sold at public outcry. This act has been changed to one of increased severity. A free colored person cannot be a witness against a white man. They may therefore be robbed, assaulted, kidnapped and carried off with impunity; and even the legislatures of the old slave States adopt it as a maxim that it is very desirable to get rid of them. It is of no avail to _declare_ themselves free; the law _presumes_ them to be slaves, unless they can _prove_ to the contrary. In many instances written documents of freedom have been wrested from free colored people and destroyed by kidnappers. A lucrative internal slave-trade furnishes constant temptation to the commission of such crimes; and the _new_ States of Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, and the territories of Arkansas, and the Floridas, are not likely to be glutted for years to come.

In Philadelphia, though remote from a slave market, it has been ascertained that _more than thirty_ free persons of color, were stolen and carried off within _two_ years. Stroud says: "Five of these have been restored to their friends, by the interposition of humane gentlemen, though not without great expense and difficulty. The others are still in bondage; and if rescued at all, it must be by sending _white_ witnesses a journey of more than a thousand miles."

I know the names of four colored citizens of Massachusetts, who went to Georgia on board a vessel, were seized under the laws of that State, and sold as slaves. They have sent the most earnest exhortations to their families and friends to do something for their relief; but the attendant expenses require more money than the friends of negroes are apt to have, and the poor fellows as yet remain unassisted.

A New-York paper, November, 1829, contains the following caution:

"_Beware of kidnappers!_--It is _well understood_ that there is at present in this city, a gang of kidnappers, busily engaged in their vocation of stealing colored children for the Southern market! It is believed that three or four have been stolen within as many days. A little negro boy came to this city from the country three or four days ago. Some strange white persons were very friendly to him, and yesterday morning he was mightily pleased that they had given him some new clothes. And the persons pretending thus to befriend him, entirely secured his confidence. This day he cannot be found. Nor can he be traced since seen with one of his new friends yesterday. There are suspicions of a foul nature, connected with some who serve the police in subordinate capacities. It is hinted that there may be those in some authority, not altogether ignorant of these diabolical practices. Let the public be on their guard! It is still fresh in the memories of all, that a cargo, or rather drove, of negroes, was made up from this city and Philadelphia, about the time that the emancipation of all the negroes in this State took place under our present constitution, and were taken through Virginia, the Carolinas, and Tennessee, and disposed of in the State of Mississippi. Some of those who were taken from Philadelphia were persons of intelligence, and after they had been driven through the country in chains, and disposed of by sale on the Mississippi, wrote back to their friends, and were rescued from bondage. The persons who were guilty of this abominable transaction are known, and now reside in North Carolina; they may, very probably, be engaged in similar enterprises at the present time--at least there is reason to believe that the system of kidnapping free persons of color from the Northern cities has been carried on more extensively than the public are generally aware of."

This, and other evils of the system, admit of no radical cure but the utter extinction of slavery. To enact _laws_ prohibiting the slave traffic, and at the same time tempt avarice by the allurements of an _insatiable market_, is irreconcilable and absurd.

To my great surprise, I find that the free States of Ohio and Indiana disgrace themselves by admitting the same maxim of law, which prevents any black or mulatto from being a witness against a white man!

It is naturally supposed that free negroes will sympathize with their enslaved brethren, and that, notwithstanding all exertions to the contrary, they will become a little more intelligent; this excites a peculiar jealousy and hatred in the white population, of which it is impossible to enumerate all the hardships. Even in the _laws_, slaves are always mentioned before free people of color; so desirous are they to degrade the latter class below the level of the former. To complete the wrong, this unhappy class are despised in consequence of the very evils we ourselves have induced--for as slavery inevitably makes its victims servile and vicious, and as none but negroes are allowed to be slaves, we, from our very childhood, associate every thing that is degraded with the _mere color_; though in fact the object of our contempt may be both exemplary and intelligent. In this way the Africans are doubly the victims of our injustice; and thus does prejudice "_make_ the meat it feeds on."

I have repeatedly said that our slave laws are continually increasing in severity; as a proof of this I will give a brief view of some of the most _striking_, which have been passed since Stroud published his compendium of slave laws, in 1827. In the first class are contained those enactments _directly_ oppressive to people of color; in the second are those which injure them _indirectly_, by the penalties or disabilities imposed upon the whites who instruct, assist, or employ them, or endeavor in any way to influence public opinion in their favor.

_Class First._--The Legislature of Virginia passed a law in 1831, by which any free colored person who undertakes to preach, or conduct any religious meeting, by day or night, may be whipped not exceeding thirty-nine lashes, at the discretion of _any_ justice of the peace; and any body may apprehend any such free colored person without a warrant. The same penalty, adjudged and executed in the same way, falls upon any slave, or free colored person, who attends such preaching; and any slave who listens to any _white_ preacher, in the night time, receives the same punishment. The same law prevails in Georgia and Mississippi. A master may permit a slave to preach on _his_ plantation, to none but _his_ slaves.

There is a _naivete_ in the following preamble to a law passed by North Carolina, in 1831, which would be amusing, if the subject were not too serious for mirth: "_Whereas teaching slaves to read and write has a tendency to excite dissatisfaction in their minds_, and to produce insurrection and rebellion," therefore it is enacted that teaching a slave to read or write, or giving or selling to a slave _any_ book or pamphlet, shall be punished with thirty-nine lashes, if the offender be a free black, or with imprisonment at the discretion of the court; if a slave, the _offence_ is punishable with thirty-nine lashes, on his or her bare back, on conviction before a justice of the peace.

In Georgia, any slave, or free person of color, is for a similar offence, fined or whipped, or fined _and_ whipped, at the discretion of the court.

In Louisiana, twelve months' imprisonment is the penalty for teaching a slave to read or write.

For publishing, or circulating, in the State of North Carolina, any pamphlet or paper having an _evident tendency_ to excite slaves, or free persons of color, to insurrection or resistance, imprisonment not less than one year, _and_ standing in the pillory, _and_ whipping, at the discretion of the court, for the first offence; and death for the second. The same offence punished with death in Georgia, without any reservation. In Mississippi, the same as in Georgia. In Louisiana, the same offence punished either with imprisonment for life, or death, at the discretion of the court. In Virginia, the first offence of this sort is punished with thirty-nine lashes, the second with death.

With regard to publications having a _tendency_ to promote discontent among slaves, their masters are so very jealous, that it would be difficult to find _any_ book, that would not come under their condemnation. The Bible, and the Declaration of Independence are certainly unsafe. The preamble to the North Carolina law declares, that the _Alphabet_ has a tendency to excite dissatisfaction; I suppose it is because _freedom_ may be spelt out of it. A storekeeper in South Carolina was nearly ruined by having unconsciously imported certain printed _handkerchiefs_, which his neighbors deemed seditious. A friend of mine asked, "Did the handkerchiefs contain texts from scripture? or quotations from the Constitution of the United States?"

Emancipated slaves must quit North Carolina in ninety days after their enfranchisement, on pain of being sold for life. Free persons of color who shall _migrate into_ that State, may be seized and sold as runaway slaves; and if they _migrate out_ of the State for more than ninety days, they can never return under the same penalty.

This extraordinary use of the word _migrate_ furnishes a new battering ram against the free colored class, which is every where so odious to slave-owners. A _visit_ to relations in another State may be called _migrating_; being taken up and detained by _kidnappers_, over ninety days, may be called _migrating_;--for where neither the evidence of the sufferer nor any of his own color is allowed, it will evidently amount to this.

In South Carolina, if a free negro cross the line of the State, he can _never_ return.

In 1831, Mississippi passed a law to expel all free colored persons under sixty and over sixteen years of age from the State, within ninety days, unless they could prove good characters, and obtain from the court a certificate of the same, for which they paid three dollars; these certificates might be revoked at the discretion of the county courts. If such persons do not quit the State within the time specified, or if they return to it, they may be sold for a term not exceeding five years.

In Tennessee, slaves are not allowed to be emancipated unless they leave the State forthwith. Any free colored person emigrating into this State, is fined from ten to fifty dollars, and hard labor in the penitentiary from one to two years.

North Carolina has made a law subjecting any vessel with _free_ colored persons on board to thirty days' quarantine; as if freedom were as bad as the cholera! Any person of color coming on shore from such vessels is seized and imprisoned, till the vessel departs; and the captain is fined five hundred dollars; and if he refuse to take the colored seaman away, and pay all the expenses of his imprisonment, he is fined five hundred more. If the sailor do not depart within ten days after his captain's refusal, he must be whipped thirty-nine lashes; and all colored persons, bond or free, who _communicate_ with him, receive the same.

In Georgia, there is a similar enactment. The prohibition is, in both States, confined to _merchant_ vessels, (it would be imprudent to meddle with _vessels of war_;) and any colored person communicating with such seaman is whipped not exceeding _thirty_ lashes. If the captain refuse to carry away seamen thus detained, and _pay the expenses of their imprisonment_, he shall be fined five hundred dollars, and also imprisoned, not exceeding three months.

These State laws are a direct violation of the Laws of Nations, and our treaties; and may involve the United States in a foreign war.

Colored seamen are often employed in Spanish, Portuguese, French, and English vessels. These nations are bound to know the United States Laws; but can they be expected to know the enactments of particular States and cities? and if they know them, are they bound to observe them, if they interfere with the established rules of nations? When Mr. Wirt pronounced these laws unconstitutional, great excitement was produced in South Carolina. The Governor of that State, in his Message to the Legislature, implied that separation from the Union was the only remedy, if the laws of the Southern States could not be enforced. They seem to require unconditional submission abroad as well as at home.

The endeavor to prevent insurrections in this way, is as wise as to attempt to extinguish fire with spirits of wine. The short-sighted policy defeats itself. A free colored sailor was lately imprisoned with seven slaves: Here was a fine opportunity to sow the seeds of sedition in their minds!

The upholders of slavery will in vain contend with the liberal spirit of the age; it is too strong for them. They may as well try to bottle up the sunshine for their own exclusive use, as to attempt to keep knowledge and freedom to themselves. We all know that such an experiment would result in bottling up darkness for themselves, while exactly the same amount of sunshine remained abroad for the use of their neighbors.

In North Carolina, free negroes are whipped, fined, and imprisoned, at the discretion of the court, for intermarrying with slaves.

In Georgia, free colored persons when unable to pay _any_ fine, may be sold for a space of time not exceeding five years. This limitation does not probably avail much; if sold to another master before the five years expired, they would never be likely to be free again.

Several other laws have been passed in Georgia, prohibiting slaves from living apart from their master, either to labor for other persons, or to sell refreshments, or to carry on any trade or business although with their master's consent. Any person of color, bond or free, is forbidden to occupy any tenement except a _kitchen_ or an _outhouse_, under penalty of from twenty to fifty lashes. Some of these laws are applicable only to particular cities, towns, or counties; others to several counties.

Sundry general laws of a penal nature have been made more penal; and the number of offences, for which a colored person may suffer _death_, is increased.

A law passed in Tennessee, in 1831, provides that negroes for conspiracy to rebel, shall be punished with whipping, imprisonment and pillory, at the discretion of the court; it has this curious proviso--"Householders _may_ serve as jurors, if _slaveholders_ cannot be had!"[S] The Southern courts need to have a great deal of _discretion_, since so much is trusted to it.

[Footnote S: The Common Law assigns for the trial of a foreigner, six jurors of his own nation, and six native Englishmen.]

_Class Second._--In Virginia, _white_ persons who teach any colored person to read or write, are fined not exceeding fifty dollars; for teaching slaves for pay, from ten to twenty dollars for each offence.

In Georgia, a similar offence is fined not exceeding five hundred dollars, and imprisoned at the discretion of the court. Knowledge seems to be peculiarly _pokerish_ in Georgia.

In North Carolina, if a white person teach a slave to read or write, or give or sell him _any_ book, &c., he is fined from one to two hundred dollars.

In Louisiana, any white person, who teaches a slave to read or write, is imprisoned one year. And if any person shall use any language from the _bar_, _bench_, _stage_, _pulpit_, or any other place,--or hold any conversation having a _tendency_ to promote discontent among free colored people, or insubordination among slaves, he may be imprisoned at hard labor, not less than three, nor more than twenty-one years; or he may suffer death--at the discretion of the court.

In Mississippi, a white man, who prints or circulates doctrines, sentiments, advice, or _innuendoes_, likely to produce discontent among the colored class, is fined from one hundred to a thousand dollars, and imprisoned from three to twelve months.

All the States which have pronounced an anathema against books and alphabets, have likewise forbidden that any colored man shall be employed in a printing-office, under the penalty of ten dollars for every offence.

In Mississippi, any white who employs, or receives a free colored person, without a certificate of freedom, written on parchment, forfeits _one thousand dollars_.

If any master, in that State, allows his slaves to sell any wares or merchandise out of the incorporated towns, he is liable to a fine of from fifty to five hundred dollars.

In Virginia, any person who buys of a slave any article belonging to his master, forfeits from ten to fifty dollars; if the purchase be made on Sunday, ten dollars more are added to the fine for each article.

This enactment is evidently made to prevent a slave from obtaining any money, or holding communication with freemen; a particular proviso is made against Sunday, because the slave has usually more leisure on that day. It is to be remembered that all a slave has belongs to his master.

To carry a slave out of North Carolina, or conceal him with intent to carry him out, is punished with death.

If a runaway slave die in prison, before he or she can be sold, _the county pays the sheriff and jailer_; formerly these officers depended on the life and marketableness of their prisoners for security; but even this poor motive for kindness is now taken away. If ninety-nine out of a hundred die in prison, they will be heard of only in the _jailer's bill_. I never heard or read of an _inquest_ upon the body of a slave found dead. Under the term "runaway slaves" are included many free colored persons taken up unjustly.

Well might Jefferson say, "I tremble for my country, when I reflect that God is just!"

In travelling over this dreary desert, it is pleasant to arrive at one little oasis: Louisiana _has_ enacted that slaves brought into that State for sale, shall forthwith be set free; but they must be sent out of the State.

It is worthy of remark that England pursues a totally different course with regard to allowing slaves to communicate with free people. Their recent laws are all calculated to make it easy for the slave to obtain a fair hearing from people who have no interest to suppress his complaints. He may go upon any plantation, and communicate with any person; and whoever tries to prevent his going to a magistrate is guilty of a misdemeanor.

They have abolished all distinction between white and colored witnesses.

The law expressly stipulates the quality and quantity of provisions.

Inquest is held upon the bodies of slaves dying suddenly, or from any suspected violence.

Use of the cart-whip prohibited; and no female to be punished except by order of the court.

Only fifteen lashes allowed as a punishment to men for one offence, and in one day: two kinds of punishment never allowed for one offence.

When a slave is punished, two competent witnesses must be present.

The owner is obliged to keep a record of domestic punishments and the causes.

Marriages among slaves are encouraged, and husband and wife are not allowed to be sold separately. Children under sixteen years old cannot be separated from their parents.

Masters illegally punishing their slaves, are subject to fine, imprisonment, and loss of the slave, for the first offence; for the second offence, sequestration of all their slaves.

Free colored representatives are allowed to take their seats in the legislature, and share all the other privileges of British subjects.

Yet these humane laws, so carefully framed in favor of the defenceless, have been found insufficient to protect the slave. Experience proves, what reason clearly points out, that the force of good laws must be weakened by the very nature of this unholy relation. Where there is knowledge and freedom on one side, and ignorance and servitude on the other, evasions and subterfuges will of course be frequent. Hence English philanthropists have universally come to the conclusion that nothing effectual can be done, unless slavery itself be destroyed.

The limits of this work compel me to pass by many enactments in our slaveholding States, which would throw still more light on this dark subject.

I have laid open some of the laws which do actually exist, and are constantly enforced in this free country; and knowing all this, and still more, to be true, I blush and hang my head, whenever I hear any one boast of our "glorious institutions."

The slaveholders insist that their _humanity_ is so great, as to render all their ferocious laws perfectly harmless. Are the laws then made on purpose to urge tender-hearted masters to be so much worse than they really desire to be? The democrats of the South appear to be less scrupulous about the liberties of others, than the Autocrat of the Russias;--for, when Madame de Stael told the Emperor Alexander that his _character_ answered instead of a _constitution_ for his country, he replied, "Then, madam, I am but a lucky _accident_." How much more emphatically may it be said, that the slave's destiny is a matter of chance! Reader, would you trust the very best man you know, with your time, your interests, your family, and your life, unless the contract were guarded on every side by the strong arm of the law? If a money-loving neighbor could force you to toil, and could gain a certain number of dollars for every hour of your labor, how much rest should you expect to have?

It is utter nonsense to say that generosity of disposition is a protection against tyranny, where all the power is on one side. It may be, and it no doubt is so, in particular instances; but they must be exceptions to the general rule.

We all know that the Southerners have a high sense of what the world calls honor, and that they are brave, hospitable, and generous to people of their own color; but the more we respect their virtues, the more cause is there to lament the demoralizing _system_, which produces such unhappy effects on all who come within its baneful influence. Most of them may be as kind as can be expected of human nature, endowed with almost unlimited power to do wrong; and some of them may be even more benevolent than the warmest friend of the negro would dare to hope; but while we admit all this, we must not forget that there is in every community a class of men, who will not be any better than the laws compel them to be.

Captain Riley, in his Narrative, says: "Strange as it may seem to the philanthropist, my free and proud-spirited countrymen still hold a million and a half[T] of human beings in the most cruel bonds of slavery; who are kept at hard labor, and smarting under the lash of inhuman mercenary drivers; in many instances enduring the miseries of hunger, thirst, imprisonment, cold, nakedness, and even tortures. This is no picture of the imagination. For the honor of human nature, I wish likenesses were nowhere to be found! I myself have witnessed such scenes in different parts of my own country; and the bare recollection of them now chills my blood with horror."

[Footnote T: There are now over two million.]

When the slave-owners talk of their gentleness and compassion, they are witnesses in their own favor, and have strong motives for showing the fairest side. But what do the laws themselves imply? Are enactments ever made against exigencies which do not exist? If negroes have never been scalded, burned, mutilated, &c., why are such crimes forbidden by an express law, with the marvellous proviso, except said slave _die_ of "_moderate_ punishment!" If a law sanctioning whipping to any extent, incarceration at the discretion of the master, and the body loaded with irons, is called a _restraining_ law, let me ask what crimes must have been committed, to require _prohibition_, where so much is _allowed_? The law which declares that slaves shall be compelled to labor _only_ fourteen or fifteen hours a day, has the following preamble: "Whereas _many_ owners of slaves, managers, &c. _do_ confine them so closely to hard labor that they have not sufficient time for natural rest," &c. Mr. Pinckney, in a public argument, speaking of slaves murdered by severe treatment, says: "The _frequency_ of the crime is no doubt owing to the nature of the punishment." The reader will observe that I carefully refrain from quoting the representations of party spirit, and refer to _facts_ only for evidence.

Where the laws are made by the people, a majority of course approve them; else they would soon be changed. It must therefore in candor be admitted, that the _laws_ of a State speak the prevailing _sentiments_ of the inhabitants.

Judging by this rule, what inference must be drawn from the facts stated above? "At Sparta, the freeman is the freest of all men, and the slave is the greatest of slaves."

Our republic is a perfect Pandora's box to the negro, only there is no _hope_ at the bottom. The wretchedness of his fate is not a little increased by being a constant witness of the unbounded freedom enjoyed by others: the slave's labor must necessarily be like the labor of Sisiphus; and here the torments of Tantalus are added.

Slavery is so inconsistent with free institutions, and the spirit of liberty is so contagious under such institutions, that the system must either be given up, or sustained by laws outrageously severe; hence we find that our slave laws have each year been growing more harsh than those of any other nation.

Shall I be told that all these regulations are necessary for the white man's safety? What then, let me indignantly ask, what must the system be that _requires_ to be supported by such unnatural, such tyrannical means? The very apology pronounces the condemnation of slavery--for it proves that it cannot exist without producing boundless misery to the oppressed, and perpetual terror to the oppressor.

In our fourth of July orations, we are much in the habit of talking about the tyranny of England! and there is no doubt that broad and deep stains do rest upon her history. But there is a vulgar proverb that "those who live in glass houses should not throw stones." In judging of national, as well as individual wrong, it is fair to consider the amount of temptation. England has had power, more extensive and permanent than any nation since the decline of Rome: the negroes and the Indians are the only people who have been dependant on _our_ justice and generosity--and how have we treated _them_?

It is a favorite argument that we are not to blame for slavery, because the British engrafted it upon us, while we were colonies. But did we not take the liberty to _change_ English laws and customs, when they did not suit us? Why not put away _this_, as well as other evils of much less consequence? It could have been done easily, at the time of our confederation; it _can_ be done now.--Have not other nations been making alterations for the better, on this very subject, since we became independent? Is not England trying with all her might to atone for the wrong she has done? Does not the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of each individual State, make provision for such changes as shall tend to the public good?

The plain truth is, the continuation of this system is a sin; and the sin rests upon us: It has been eloquently said that "by this excuse, we try to throw the blame upon our ancestors, and leave repentance to posterity."