Chapter 18

THE MORAL RELATIONS OF PERSONS HOLDING THE _PER SE_ DOCTRINE, ON THE SUBJECT OF SLAVERY, TO THE PURCHASE AND CONSUMPTION OF SLAVE LABOR PRODUCTS.

Moral relations of Slavery--Relations of the consumer of Slave labor products to the system--Grand error of all Anti-Slavery effort--Law of _particeps criminis_--Daniel O'Connell--_Malum in se_ doctrine--Inconsistency of those who hold it--English Emancipationists--Their commercial argument--Differences between the position of Great Britain and the United States--Preaching versus practice by Abolitionists--Cause of their want of influence over the Slaveholder--Necessity of examining the question--Each man to be judged by his own standard--Classification of opinions in the United States, in regard to the morality of Slavery--Three Views--A case in illustration--Apology of _per se_ men for using Slave grown products insufficient--Law relating to "confusion of goods"--_Per se_ men _participes criminis_ with Slaveholders--Taking Slave grown products under _protest_ absurd--World's Christian Evangelical Alliance--Amount of Slave labor Cotton in England at that moment--Pharisaical conduct--The Scotchman taking his wife under protest--Anecdote--American Cotton more acceptable to Englishmen than Republican principles--Secret of England's policy toward American Slavery--The case of robbery again cited, and the English Satirized--A contrast--Causes of the want of moral power of Abolitionists--Slaveholders no cause to cringe--Other results--Effect of the adoption of the _per se_ doctrine by ecclesiastical bodies--Slaves thus left in all their moral destitution--Inconsistency of _per se_ men denouncing others--What the Bible says of similar conduct.

HAVING noticed the political and economical relations of slavery, it may be expected that we shall say something of its moral relations. In attempting this, we choose not to traverse that interminable labyrinth, without a thread, which includes the moral character of the system, as it respects the relation between the master and the slave. The only aspect in which we care to consider it, is in the moral relations which the consumers of slave labor products sustain to slavery: and even on this, we shall offer no opinion, our aim being only to promote inquiry.

This view of the question is not an unimportant one. It includes the germ of the grand error in nearly all anti-slavery effort; and to which, chiefly, is to be attributed its want of moral power over the conscience of the slaveholder. The abolition movement, was designed to create a public sentiment, in the United States, that should be equally as potent in forcing emancipation, as was the public opinion of Great Britain. But why have not the Americans been as successful as the English? This is an inquiry of great importance. When the Anti-Slavery Convention, which met, December 6, 1833, in Philadelphia, declared, as a part of its creed: "That there is no difference in principle, between the African slave trade, and American slavery," it meant to be understood as teaching, that the person who purchased slaves imported from Africa, or who held their offspring as slaves, was _particeps criminis_--partaker in the crime--with the slave trader, on the principle that he who receives stolen property, knowing it be such, is equally guilty with the thief.

On this point Daniel O'Connell was very explicit, when, in a public assembly, he used this language: "When an American comes into society, he will be asked, 'are you one of the thieves, or are you an honest man? If you are an honest man, then you have given liberty to your slaves; if you are among the thieves, the sooner you take the outside of the house, the better.'"

The error just referred to was this: they based their opposition to slavery on the principle, that it was _malum in se_--a sin in itself--like the slave trade, robbery and murder; and, at the same time, continued to use the products of the labor of the slave as though they had been obtained from the labor of freemen. But this seeming inconsistency was not the only reason why they failed to create such a public sentiment as would procure the emancipation of our slaves. The English emancipationists began their work like philosophers--addressing themselves, respectfully to the power that could grant their requests. Beside the moral argument, which declared slavery a crime, the English philanthropists labored to convince Parliament, that emancipation would be advantageous to the commerce of the nation. The commercial value of the Islands had been reduced one-third, as a result of the abolition of the slave trade. Emancipation, it was argued, would more than restore their former prosperity, as the labor of freemen was twice as productive as that of slaves. But American abolitionists commenced their crusade against slavery, by charging those who sustained it, and who alone, held the power to manumit, with crimes of the blackest dye. This placed the parties in instant antagonism, causing all the arguments on human rights, and the sinfulness of slavery, to fall without effect upon the ears of angry men. The error on this point, consisted in failing to discriminate between the sources of the power over emancipation in England and in the United States. With Great Britain, the power was in Parliament. The masters, in the West Indies, had no voice in the question. It was the voters in England alone who controlled the elections, and, consequently, controlled Parliament. But the condition of things in the United States is the reverse of what it was in England. With us, the power of emancipation is in the States, not in Congress. The slaveholders elect the members to the State Legislatures; and they choose none but such as agree with them in opinion. It matters not, therefore, what public sentiment may be at the North, as it has no power over the Legislatures of the South. Here, then, is the difference: with us the slaveholder controls the question of emancipation, while in England the consent of the master was not necessary to the execution of that work.

Our anti-slavery men seem to have fallen into their errors of policy, by following the lead of those of England, who manifested a total ignorance of the relations existing between our General Government and the State Governments. On the abolition platform, slaveholders found themselves placed in the same category with slave traders and thieves. They were told that all laws, giving them power over the slave, were void in the sight of heaven; and that their appropriation of the fruits of the labor of the slave, without giving him compensation, was robbery. Had the preaching of these principles produced conviction, it must have promoted emancipation. But, unfortunately, while these doctrines were held up to the gaze of slaveholders, in the one hand of the exhorter, they beheld his other hand stretched out, from beneath his cloak of seeming sanctity, to clutch the products of the very robbery he was professing to condemn! Take a fact in proof of this view of the subject.

At the date of the declarations of Daniel O'Connell, on behalf of the English, and by the Philadelphia Anti-Slavery Convention, on the part of Americans, the British manufacturers were purchasing, annually, about 300,000,000 lbs. of cotton, from the very men denounced as equally criminal with slave traders and thieves; and the people of the United States were almost wholly dependent upon slave labor for their supplies of cotton and groceries. It is no matter for wonder, therefore, that slaveholders, should treat, as fiction, the doctrine that slave labor products are the fruits of robbery, so long as they are purchased without scruple, by all classes of men, in Europe and America. The pecuniary argument for emancipation, that free labor is more profitable than slave labor, was also urged here, but was treated as the greatest absurdity. The masters had, before their eyes, the evidence of the falsity of the assertion, that, if emancipated, the slaves would be doubly profitable as free laborers. The reverse was admitted, on all hands, to be true in relation to our colored people.

But this question, of the moral relations which the consumers of slave labor products sustain to slavery, is one of too important a nature to be passed over without a closer examination; and, beside, it is involved in less obscurity than the morality of the relation existing between the master and the slave. Its consideration, too, affords an opportunity of discriminating between the different opinions entertained on the broad question of the morality of the institution, and enables us to judge of the consistency and conscientiousness of every man, by the standard which he himself adopts.

The prevalent opinions, as to the morality of the institution of slavery, in the United States, may be classified under three heads: 1. That it is justified by Scripture example and precept. 2. That it is a great civil and social evil, resulting from ignorance and degradation, like despotic systems of government, and may be tolerated until its subjects are sufficiently enlightened to render it safe to grant them equal rights. 3. That it is _malum in se_, like robbery and murder, and can not be sustained, for a moment, without sin; and, like sin, should be immediately abandoned.

Those who consider slavery sanctioned by the Bible, conceive that they can, consistently with their creed, not only hold slaves, and use the products of slave labor, without doing violence to their consciences, but may adopt measures to perpetuate the system. Those who consider slavery merely a great civil and social evil, a despotism that may engender oppression, or may not, are of opinion that they may purchase and use its products, or interchange their own for those of the slaveholder, as free governments hold commercial and diplomatic intercourse with despotic ones, without being responsible for the moral evils connected with the system, But the position of those who believe slavery _malum in se_, like the slave trade, robbery and murder, is a very different one from either of the other classes, as it regards the purchase and use of slave labor products. Let us illustrate this by a case in point.

A company of men hold a number of their fellow men in bondage under the laws of the commonwealth in which they live, so that they can compel them to work their plantations, and raise horses, cattle, hogs, and cotton. These products of the labor of the oppressed, are appropriated by the oppressors to their own use, and taken into the markets for sale. Another company proceed to a community of freemen, on the coast of Africa, who have labored voluntarily during the year, seize their persons, bind them, convey away their horses, cattle, hogs, and cotton, and take the property to market. The first association represents the slaveholders; the second a band of robbers. The commodities of both parties, are openly offered for sale, and every one knows how the property of each was obtained. Those who believe the _per se_ doctrine, place both these associations in the same moral category, and call them robbers. Judged by this rule, the first band are the more criminal, as they have deprived their victims of personal liberty, forced them into servitude, and then "despoiled them of the fruits of their labor."[92] The second band have only deprived their victims of liberty, while they robbed them; and thus have committed but two crimes, while the first have perpetrated three. These parties attempt to negotiate the sale of their cotton, say in London. The first company dispose of their cargo without difficulty--no one manifesting the slightest scruple at purchasing the products of slave labor. But the second company are not so fortunate. As soon as their true character is ascertained, the police drag its members to Court, where they are sentenced to Bridewell. In vain do these robbers quote the Philadelphia Anti-Slavery Convention, and Daniel O'Connell, to prove that their cotton was obtained by means no more criminal than that of the slaveholders, and that, therefore, judgment ought to be reversed. The Court will not entertain such a plea, and they have to endure the penalty of the law. Now, why this difference, if slavery be _malum in se_? And if the receiver of stolen property is _particeps criminis_ with the thief, why is it, that the Englishman, who should receive and sell the cotton of the robbers, would run the risk of being sent to prison with them, while if he acted as agent of the slaveholders, he would be treated as an honorable man? If the master has no moral right to hold his slaves, in what respect can the products of their labor differ from the property acquired by robbery? And if the property be the fruits of robbery, how can any one use it, without violating conscience?

We have met with the following sage exposition of the question, in justification of the use of slave labor products, by those who believe the _per se_ doctrine: The master owns the lands, gives his skill and intelligence to direct the labor, and feeds and clothes the slaves. The slaves, therefore, are entitled only to a part of the proceeds of their labor, while the master is also justly entitled to a part of the crop. When brought into the market, the purchaser can not know what part belongs, rightfully, to the master, and what to his slaves, as the whole is offered in bulk. He may, therefore, purchase the whole, innocently, and throw the sinfulness of the transaction upon the master, who sells what belongs to others. But if the _per se_ doctrine be true, this apology for the purchaser is not a justification. Where a "confusion of goods" has been made by one of the owners, so that they can not be separated, he who "confused" them can have no advantage, in law, from his own wrong, but the goods are awarded to the innocent party. On this well known principle of law, this most equitable rule, the master forfeits his right in the property, and the purchaser, knowing the facts, becomes a party in his guilt. But aside from this, the "confusion of goods," by the master, can give him no moral right to dispose of the interest of his slaves therein for his own benefit; and the persons purchasing such property, acquire no moral right to its possession and use. These are sound, logical views. The argument offered, in justification of those who hold that slavery is _malum in se_, is the strongest that can be made. It is apparent, then, from a fair analysis of their own principles, that they are _participes criminis_ with slaveholders.

Again, if the laws regulating the institution of slavery, be morally null and void, and not binding on the conscience, then the slaves have a moral right to the proceeds of their labor. This right can not be alienated by any act of the master, but attaches to the property wherever it may be taken, and to whomsoever it may be sold. This principle, in law, is also well established. The recent decision on the "Gardiner fraud," confirms it; the Court asserting, that the money paid out of the Treasury of the United States, under such circumstances, continued its character as the money and property of the United States, and may be followed into the hands of those who cashed the orders of Gardiner, and subsequently drew the money, but who are not the true owners of the said fund; and decreeing that the amount of funds, thus obtained, be collected off the estate of said Gardiner, and off those who drew funds from the treasury, on his orders.

These principles of law are so well understood, by every man of intelligence, that we can not conceive how those advocating the _per se_ doctrines, if sincere, can continue in the constant use of slave grown products, without a perpetual violation of conscience and of all moral law. Taking them under _protest_, against the slavery which produced them, is ridiculous. Refusing to fellowship the slaveholder, while eagerly appropriating the products of the labor of the slave, which he brings in his hand, is contemptible. The most noted case of the kind, is that of the British Committee, who had charge of the preliminary arrangements for the admission of members to the World's Christian Evangelical Alliance. One of the rules it adopted, but which the Alliance afterward modified, excluded all American clergymen, suspected of a want of orthodoxy on the _per se_ doctrine, from seats in that body. Their language, to American clergymen, was virtually, "Stand aside, I am holier than thou;" while, at the same moment, their parishioners, the manufacturers, had about completed the purchase of 624,000,000 lbs. of cotton, for the consumption of their mills, during the year; the bales of which, piled together, would have reached mountain-high, displaying, mostly, the brands, "New Orleans," "Mobile," "Charleston."

As not a word was said, by the Committee, against the Englishmen who were buying and manufacturing American cotton, the case may be viewed as one in which the fruits of robbery were taken under _protest_ against the robbers themselves. To all intelligent men, the conduct of the people of Britain, in protesting against slavery, as a system of robbery, while continuing to purchase such enormous quantities of the cotton produced by slaves, appears as Pharasaical as the conduct of the _conscientious_ Scotchman, in early times, in Eastern Pennsylvania, who married his wife under protest against the constitution and laws of the Government, and especially, against the authority, power, and right of the magistrate who had just tied the knot.[93]

Such pliable consciences, doubtless, are very convenient in cases of emergency. But as they relax when selfish ends are to be subserved, and retain their rigidity only when judging the conduct of others, the inference is, that the persons possessing them are either hypocritical, or else, as was acknowledged by Parson D., in similar circumstances, they have mistaken their _prejudices_ for their _consciences_.

So far as Britain is concerned, she is, manifestly, much more willing to receive American slave labor cotton for her factories, than American republican principles for her people. And why so? The profits derived by her, from the purchase and manufacture of slave labor cotton, constitute so large a portion of the means of her prosperity, that the Government could not sustain itself were the supplies of this article cut off. It is easy to divine, therefore, why the people of England are boundless in their denunciation of American slavery, while not a single remonstrance goes up to the throne, against the importation of American cotton. Should she exclude it, the act would render her unable to pay the interest on her national debt; and many a declaimer against slavery, losing his income, would have to go supperless to bed.

Let us contrast the conduct of a pagan government with that of Great Britain. When the Emperor of China became fully convinced of his inability to resist the prowess of the British arms, in the famous "Opium War," efforts were made to induce him to legalize the traffic in opium, by levying a duty on its import, that should yield him a heavy profit. This he refused to do, and recorded his decision in these memorable words:

"It is true, I can not prevent the introduction of the flowing poison. Gain-seeking and corrupt men will, for profit and sensuality, defeat my wishes, but nothing will induce me to derive a revenue from the vice and misery of my people."[94]

Let us revert a moment to the case of robbery, before cited, in further illustration of this subject. The prisoners serve out their term in Bridewell, and, after a year or two, again visit London with a cargo of cotton. The police recognize them, and they are a second time arraigned before the court for trial. The judge demands why they should have dared to revisit the soil of England, to offer for sale the products of their robbery. The prisoners assure his honor that they have neither outraged the public sentiment of the kingdom, nor violated its laws. "While in your prison, sir," they go on to say, "we became instructed in the morals of British economics. Anxious to atone for our former fault, and to restore ourselves to the confidence and respect of the pious subjects of your most gracious Queen, no sooner were we released from prison, than we hastened to the African coast, from whence our former cargo was obtained, and seizing the self-same men whom we had formerly robbed, we bore them off, bodily, to the soil of Texas. They resisted sturdily, it is true, but we mastered them. We touched none of the fruits of their previous labors. Their cotton we left in the fields, to be drenched by the rains or drifted by the winds; because, to have brought it into your markets would have subjected us, anew, to a place in your dungeons. In Texas, we brought our prisoners under the control of the laws, which there give us power to hold them as slaves. Stimulated to labor, under the lash of the overseer, they have produced a crop of cotton, which is now offered in your markets as a lawful article of commerce. We are not subjects of your Government, and, therefore, not indictable under your laws against slave trading. Your honor, will perceive, then, that our moral relations are changed. We come now to your shores, not as dealers in stolen property, but as slaveholders, with the products of slave labor. We are aware that _bunkum_ speakers, at your public assemblies, denounce the slaveholder as a thief, and his appropriation of the fruits of the labor of his slaves, as robbery. We comprehend the motives prompting such utterances. We come not to attend meetings of Ecclesiastical Conventions, representing the republican principles of America, to unsettle the doctrines upon which the throne of your kingdom is based. But we come as cotton planters, to supply your looms with cotton, that British commerce may not be abridged, and England, the great civilizer of the world, may not be forced to slack her pace in the performance of her mission. This is our character and position; and your honor will at once see that it is your duty, and the interest of your Government, to treat us as gentlemen and your most faithful allies." The judge at once admits the justice of their plea, rebukes the police, apologizes to the prisoners, assures them that they have violated no law of the realm; and that, though the public sentiment of the nation denounces the slaveholder as a thief, yet the public necessity demands a full supply of cotton from the planter. He then orders their immediate discharge, and invites them to partake of the hospitalities of his house during their stay in London.

This is a fair example of British consistency, on the subject of slavery, so far as the supply of cotton is concerned. The English manufacturers are under the absolute necessity of procuring it; but as free labor is incapable of increasing its production, slave labor must be made to remedy the defect.

The reason can now be clearly comprehended, why abolitionists have had so little moral power over the conscience of the slaveholder. Their practice has been inconsistent with their precepts; or, at least, their conduct has been liable to this construction. Nor do we perceive how they can exert a more potent influence, in the future, unless their energies are directed to efforts such as will relieve them from a position so inconsistent with their professions, as that of constantly purchasing products which they, themselves, declare to be the fruits of robbery. While, therefore, things remain as they are, with the world so largely dependent upon slave labor, how can it be otherwise, than that the system will continue to flourish? And while its products are used by all classes, of every sentiment, and country, nearly, how can the slaveholder be brought to see any thing, in the practice of the world, to alarm his conscience, and make him cringe, before his fellow-men, as a guilty robber?

But, has nothing worse occurred from the advocacy of the _per se_ doctrine, than an exhibition of inconsistency on the part of abolitionists, and the perpetuation of slavery resulting from their conduct? This has occurred. Three highly respectable religious denominations, now limited to the North, had once many flourishing congregations in the South. On the adoption of the _per se_ doctrine, by their respective Synods, their congregations became disturbed, were soon after broken up, or the ministers in charge had to seek other fields of labor. Their system of religious instruction, for the family, being quite thorough, the slaves were deriving much advantage from the influence of these bodies. But when they resolved to withhold the gospel from the master, unless he would emancipate, they also withdrew the means of grace from the slave; and, so far as they were concerned, left him to perish eternally! Whether this course was proper, or whether it would have been better to have passed by the morality of the legal relation, in the creation of which the master had no agency, and considered him, under Providence, as the moral guardian of the slave, bound to discharge a guardian's duty to an immortal being, we shall not undertake to determine. Attention is called to the facts, merely to show the practical effects of the action of these churches upon the slave, and what the _per se_ doctrine has done in depriving him of the gospel.

Another remark, and we have done with this topic. Nothing is more common, in certain circles, than denunciations of the Christian men and ministers, who refuse to adopt the _per se_ principle. We leave others to judge whether these censures are merited. One thing is certain: those who believe that slavery is a great civil and social evil, entailed upon the country, and are extending the gospel to both master and slave, with the hope of removing it peacefully, can not be reproached with acting inconsistently with their principles; while those who declare slavery _malum in se_, and refuse to fellowship the Christian slaveholder, because they consider him a robber, but yet use the products of slave labor, may fairly be classified, on their own principles, with the hypocritical people of Israel, who were thus reproached by the Most High: "What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldst take my covenant in thy mouth? . . . . . When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him."[95]

FOOTNOTES:

[92] This is the phrase, nearly verbatim, used by Mr. Sumner in his speech on the Fugitive Slave Bill. Language, a little more to the point, is used in "The Friendly Remonstrance of the People of Scotland, on the Subject of Slavery," published in the _American Missionary_, September, 1855. In depicting slavery it speaks of it as a system "which robs its victims of the fruits of their toil."

[93] An anecdote, illustrative of the pliability of some consciences, of this apparently rigid class, where interest or inclination demands it, has often been told by the late Governor Morrow, of Ohio. An old Scotch "Cameronian," in Eastern Pennsylvania, became a widower, shortly after the adoption of the Constitution of the United States. He refused to acknowledge either the National or State Government, but pronounced them both unlawful, unrighteous, and ungodly. Soon he began to feel the want of a wife, to care for his motherless children. The consent of a woman in his own Church was gained, because to take any other would have been like an Israelite marrying a daughter of the land of Canaan. On this point, as in refusing to swear allegiance to Government, he was controlled by conscience. But now a practical difficulty presented itself. There was no minister of his Church in the country--and those of other denominations, in his judgment, had no Divine warrant for exercising the functions of the sacred office. He repudiated the whole of them. But how to get married, that was the problem. He tried to persuade his intended to agree to a marriage contract, before witnesses, which could be confirmed whenever a proper minister should arrive from Scotland. But his "lady-love" would not consent to the plan. She must be married "like other folk," or not at all--because "people would talk so." The Scotchman for want of a wife, like Great Britain for want of cotton, saw very plainly that his children must suffer; and so he resolved to get married at all hazards, as England buys her cotton, but so as not to violate conscience. Proceeding with his intended to a magistrate's office, the ceremony was soon performed, and they twain pronounced "one flesh." But no sooner had he "kissed the bride," the sealing act of the contract at that day, than the good Cameronian drew a written document from his pocket, which he read aloud before the officer and witnesses; and in which he entered his solemn protest against the authority of the Government of the United States, against that of the State of Pennsylvania, and especially against the power, right, and lawfulness of the acts of the magistrate who had just married him. This done, he went his way, rejoicing that he had secured a wife without recognizing the lawfulness of ungodly governments, or violating his conscience.

[94] _National Intelligencer_, 1854.

[95] Psalm 1: 16, 18.

CONCLUSION.

IN concluding our labors, there is little need of extended observation. The work of emancipation, in our country, was checked, and the extension of slavery promoted:--first, by the neglect of the free colored people to improve the advantages afforded them; second, by the increasing value imparted to slave labor; third, by the mistaken policy into which the English and American abolitionists have fallen. Whatever reasons might now be offered for emancipation, from an improvement of our free colored people, is far more than counterbalanced by its failure in the West Indies, and the constantly increasing value of the labor of the slave. If, when the planters had only a moiety of the markets for cotton, the value of slavery was such as to arrest emancipation, how must the obstacles be increased, now, when they have the monopoly of the markets of the world? And, besides all this, a more deadly blow, than has been given by all other causes combined, is now levelled at negro freedom from a quarter the least suspected. The failure of the Canadian immigrants to improve the privileges afforded them under British law, proves, conclusively, that the true laws of progress for the African race, do not consist in a mere escape from slavery.

We propose not to speak of remedies for slavery. That we leave to others. Thus far this very perplexing question, has baffled all human wisdom. Either some radical defect must have existed, in the measures devised for its removal, or the time has not yet come for successfully assailing the institution. Our work is completed, in the delineation we have given of its varied relations to our agricultural, commercial, and social interests. As the monopoly of the culture of cotton, imparts to slavery its economical value, the system will continue as long as this monopoly is maintained. Slave labor products have now become necessities of human life, to the extent of more than half the commercial articles supplied to the Christian world. Even free labor, itself, is made largely subservient to slavery, and vitally interested in its perpetuation and extension.

Can this condition of things be changed? It may be reasonably doubted, whether any thing efficient can be speedily accomplished: not because there is lack of territory where freemen may be employed in tropical cultivation, as all Western and Central Africa, nearly, is adapted to this purpose; not because intelligent free labor, under proper incentives, is less productive than slave labor; but because freemen, whose constitutions are adapted to tropical climates, will not avail themselves of the opportunity offered for commencing such an enterprise.

KING COTTON cares not whether he employs slaves or freemen. It is the _cotton_, not the _slaves_, upon which his throne is based. Let freemen do his work as well, and he will not object to the change. The efforts of his most powerful ally, Great Britain, to promote that object, have already cost her people many hundreds of millions of dollars, with total failure as a reward for her zeal; and she is now compelled to resort to the expedient of employing the slave labor of Africa, to meet the necessities of her manufacturers. One-sixth of the colored people of the United States are free; but they shun the cotton regions, and have been instructed to detest emigration to Liberia. Their improvement has not been such as was anticipated; and their more rapid advancement can not be expected, while they remain in the country. The free colored people of the British West Indies, can no longer be relied on to furnish tropical products, for they are resting contented in a state of almost savage indolence; and the introduction of coolie labor has become indispensable as a means of saving the Islands from ruin, as well as of forcing the negro into habits of industry. Hayti is not in a more promising condition; and even if it were, its population and territory are too limited to enable it to meet the increasing demand. HIS MAJESTY, KING COTTON, therefore, is forced to continue the employment of his slaves; and, by their toil, is riding on, conquering and to conquer! He receives no check from the cries of the oppressed, while the citizens of the world are dragging forward his chariot, and shouting aloud his praise!

KING COTTON is a profound statesman, and knows what measures will best sustain his throne. He is an acute mental philosopher, acquainted with the secret springs of human action, and accurately perceives who can best promote his aims. He has no evidence that colored men can grow his cotton, except in the capacity of slaves. Thus far, all experiments made to increase the production of cotton, by emancipating the slaves employed in its cultivation, have been a total failure. It is his policy, therefore, to defeat all schemes of emancipation. To do this, he stirs up such agitations as lure his enemies into measures that will do him no injury. The venal politician is always at his call, and assumes the form of saint or sinner, as the service may demand. Nor does he overlook the enthusiast, engaged in Quixotic endeavors for the relief of suffering humanity, but influences him to advocate measures which tend to tighten, instead of loosing the bands of slavery. Or, if he can not be seduced into the support of such schemes, he is beguiled into efforts that waste his strength on objects the most impracticable; so that slavery receives no damage from the exuberance of his philanthropy. But should such a one, perceiving the futility of his labors, and the evils of his course, make an attempt to avert the consequences; while he is doing this, some new recruit, pushed forward into his former place, charges him with lukewarmness, or pro-slavery sentiments, destroys his influence with the public, keeps alive the delusions, and sustains the supremacy of KING COTTON in the world.

In speaking of the economical connections of slavery, with the other material interests of the world, we have called it a _tripartite alliance_. It is more than this. It is _quadruple_. Its structure includes four parties, arranged thus: The Western Agriculturists; the Southern Planters; the English Manufacturers; and the American Abolitionists! By this arrangement, the abolitionists do not stand in direct contact with slavery; they imagine, therefore, that they have clean hands and pure hearts, so far as sustaining the system is concerned. But they, no less than their allies, aid in promoting the interests of slavery. Their sympathies are with England on the slavery question, and they very naturally incline to agree with her on other points. She advocates _Free Trade_, as essential to her manufactures and commerce; and they do the same, not waiting to inquire into its bearings upon _American slavery_. We refer now to the people, not to their leaders, whose integrity we choose not to indorse. The free trade and protective systems, in their bearings upon slavery, are so well understood, that no man of general reading, especially an editor, or member of Congress, who professes anti-slavery sentiments, at the same time advocating free trade, will ever convince men of intelligence, pretend what he may, that he is not either woefully perverted in his judgment, or emphatically, a "dough-face" in disguise! England, we were about to say, is in alliance with the cotton planter, to whose prosperity free trade is indispensable. Abolitionism is in alliance with England. All three of these parties, then, agree in their support of the free trade policy. It needed but the aid of the Western farmer, therefore, to give permanency to this principle. His adhesion has been given, the _quadruple alliance_ has been perfected, and slavery and free trade _nationalized_!

Slavery, thus intrenched in the midst of such powerful allies, and without competition in tropical cultivation, has become the sole reliance of KING COTTON. Lest the sources of his aggrandisement should be assailed, we can well imagine him as being engaged constantly, in devising new questions of agitation, to divert the public from all attempts to abandon free trade and restore the protective policy. He now finds an ample source of security, in this respect, in agitating the question of slavery extension. This exciting topic, as we have said, serves to keep politicians of the abolition school at the North in his constant employ. But for the agitation of this subject, few of these men would succeed in obtaining the suffrages of the people. Wedded to England's free trade policy, their votes in Congress, on all questions affecting the tariff, are always in perfect harmony with Southern interests, and work no mischief to the system of slavery. If Kansas comes into the Union as a slave State, he is secure in the political power it will give him in Congress; but if it is received as a free State, it will still be tributary to him, as a source from whence to draw provisions to feed his slaves. Nor does it matter much which way the controversy is decided, so long as all agree not to disturb slavery in the States where it is already established by law. Could KING COTTON be assured that this position will not be abandoned, he would care little about slavery in Kansas; but he knows full well that the public sentiment in the North is adverse to the system, and that the present race of politicians may readily be displaced by others who will pledge themselves to its overthrow in all the States of the Union, Hence he wills to retain the power over the question in his own hands.

The crisis now upon the country, as a consequence of slavery having become dominant, demands that the highest wisdom should be brought to the management of national affairs. Slavery, nationalized, can now be managed only as a national concern. It can now be abolished only with the consent of those who sustain it. Their assent can be gained only by employing other agents to meet the wants it now supplies. It must be superseded, then, if at all, by means that will not injuriously affect the interests of commerce and agriculture, to which it is now so important an auxiliary. None other will be accepted, for a moment, by the slaveholder. To supply the existing demand for tropical products, except by the present mode, is impossible. To make the change, is not the work of a day, nor of a generation. Should the influx of foreigners continue, such a change may, one day, be possible. But to effect the transition from slavery to freedom, on principles that will be acceptable to the parties who control the question; to devise and successfully sustain such measures as will produce this result; must be left to statesmen of broader views and loftier conceptions than are to be found among those at present engaged in this great controversy.

Take a more particular view of this subject, in the light of the commercial operations of the United States, for the year 1859, as best indicating the relations of the North and the South, and their mutual dependence upon each other. The total value of the imports of foreign commodities, including specie, was $338,768,130.[96] Of this $20,895,077 were re-exported, leaving for home consumption, $317,873,053--an amount more than eleven times greater than the whole foreign commerce of Great Britain one hundred and fifty-six years ago, and more than four times greater than her exports eighty-six years ago.[97]

Let us inquire how this immense foreign commerce is sustained; how these $317,873,000 of foreign imports are paid for by the American people; and how far the Northern and Southern States respectively have contributed to its payment. More than one-half the amount, or $161,434,923, was paid in raw cotton, and more than one-third of the remainder, or $57,502,305, in the precious metals; leaving less than $100,000,000 to be paid in the other productions of the country. More than one-third of this remainder was paid in cotton fabrics, tobacco, and rice; while the products of the forest, of the sea, and of various minor manufactures, swelled up our credits, so that the exports of breadstuffs and provisions, needed to liquidate the debt, only amounted to a little over $38,000,000.[98] Of this amount the exports, from the Northern States, of wheat and wheat flour, made up only $15,262,769, and the corn and corn meal but $2,206,396. "King Hay," so much lauded for his magnitude and money value, never once ventured on board a merchant vessel, to seek a foreign land, so as to aid in paying for the commodities which we imported.[99] In a word, the products of the forest and of agriculture, exported by the free States, amounted in value to about $45,300,000; while the same classes of products, supplied for export by the Slave States, amounted to more than $193,400,000.[100]

The economical relations of the North and the South can now be understood more clearly than they could be from the statistics referred to in the body of this work. The facts, in relation to the commerce of the United States, for 1859, were not accessible until after the stereotyping had been completed; and they are only crowded in here by omitting two or three pages of remarks of another kind, but of less importance, which closed the volume. By consulting Table XII, and two or three of the others, which contain similar facts, covering the commercial operations of the country since the year 1821, the whole question of the relations of the North and the South can be fully comprehended. It will be seen that the exports of tobacco, which are mainly from the South, have equaled in value considerably more than one-third the amount of that of breadstuffs and provisions; and that, in the same period, the exports of cotton have exceeded in value those of breadstuffs and provisions to the amount of $1,421,482,261.[101] Here, now, a just conception can be formed of the importance of cotton to the commerce of the country, as compared with our other productions. The amount exported, of that article, in the last thirty-nine years, has exceeded in value the exports of breadstuffs and provisions to the extent of _fourteen hundred and twenty-one millions of dollars_! Verily, Cotton is King!

Another point needs consideration. It is a fact, not to be questioned, that the productions of the Northern States amount to an immense sum, above those of the Southern States, when valued in dollars and cents; but the proportion of the products of the former; exported to foreign countries, is very insignificant, indeed, when compared with the value of the exports from the latter.[102] And, yet, the North is acquiring wealth with amazing rapidity. This fact could not exist, unless the Northern people produce more than they consume--unless they have a surplus to sell, after supplying their own wants. They must, therefore, find a permanent and profitable market, somewhere, for the surplus products that yield them their wealth. As that market is not in Europe, it must be in the Southern States. But the extent to which the South receive their supplies from the North, cannot be determined by any data now in the possession of the public. It must, however, be very large in amount, and, if withheld, would greatly embarrass the Southern people, by lessening their ability to export as largely as hitherto. So, on the other hand, if the Northern people were deprived of the markets afforded by the South, they would find so little demand elsewhere for their products, that it would have a ruinous effect upon their prosperity. All that can be safely said upon this subject is, that the interests of both sections of the country are so intimately connected, so firmly blended together, that a dissolution of the Union would be destructive to all the economical interests of both the North and the South. Cut off from the South all that the North supplies to the planters, in such articles as agricultural implements, furniture, clothing, provisions, horses, and mules, and cotton culture would at once have to be abandoned to a great extent. But would the South alone be the sufferer? Could the Northern agriculturist, manufacturer, and mechanic, remain prosperous, and continue to accumulate wealth, without a market for their products? Could Northern merchants dwell in their palaces, and roll in luxury, with a foreign commerce contracted to one-third of its present extent, and a domestic demand for merchandize reduced to one-half its present amount? Certainly not.

And if the mere necessity of self supply, of food and clothing, such as existed in 1820, would now be disastrous to the South, and react destructively upon the North, what would be the effect of emancipation upon the country at large? What would be the effect of releasing from restraint three and a half millions of negroes, to bask in idleness, under the genial sunshine of the South, or to emigrate hither and thither, at will, with none to control their actions? It is too late to insist that free labor would be more profitable than slave labor, when negroes are to be the operatives: Jamaica has solved that problem. It is too late to claim that white labor could be made to take the place of black labor, while the negroes remain upon the ground: Canada, and the Northern States, demonstrate that the two races cannot be made to labor together peacefully and upon terms of equality. Nothing is more certain, therefore, than that emancipation would inevitably place the Southern States in a similar position to that of Jamaica. On this point take a fact or two.

The _Colonial Standard_,[103] of the 13th January, 1859, in speaking of the present industrial condition of that Island, says, that there are not more than twenty thousand laborers who employ themselves in sugar cultivation for wages. This will seem astonishing to those who expected so much from emancipation, when it is stated that the black population of Jamaica, when liberated from slavery, numbered three hundred and eleven thousand, six hundred and ninety two; and that the exports of sugar from the Island, in 1805, before the slave trade was prohibited, amounted to 237,751,150 lbs.;[104] while, in 1859, the exports of that staple commodity, only amounted to 44,800,000 lbs.[105] It will thus be seen that the exports of sugar from Jamaica is now less than one-fifth of what it was in the prosperous days of slavery; and so it must be as to cotton, in the South, were emancipation forced upon this country. And what would be the condition of our foreign commerce, and what the effect upon the country, generally, were the exports of the South diminished to less than one-fifth of their present amount? Would the lands of the Northern farmers still continue to advance in price, if the markets for the surplus products of the soil no longer existed? Would those of the Southern planters rise in value, in the event of emancipation, to an equality with the lands at the North, when no laborers could be found to till the soil? No man entitled to the name of statesman--no man of practical common sense--could imagine that such a result would follow the liberation of the slaves in the Southern States. Under the philanthropic legislation of Great Britain, no such result followed the passage of the act for the abolition of slavery in her colonies; but, on the contrary, the value of their real estate soon became reduced to a most ruinous extent; and such must inevitably be the result under the adoption of similar measures in the United States. This is the conviction of the men of the South, and they will act upon their own judgment.

There are strong indications that the views presented in the first edition of this work, and reported in the subsequent issues, are rapidly becoming the views of intelligent and unprejudiced men everywhere. At a late date in the British Parliament, Lord Brougham made a strong anti-American cotton and anti-American slavery speech. The _London Times_, thus "takes the backbone all out of his argument, and leaves him nothing but his sophistries to stand on," thus:

"Lord Brougham and the veterans of the old Anti-Slavery Society do not share our delight at this great increase in the employment of our home population. Their minds are still seared by those horrible stories which were burnt in upon them in their youth, when England was not only a slave-owning, but even a slave-trading State. Their remorse is so great that the ghost of a black man is always before them. They are benevolent and excellent people; but if a black man happened to have broken his shin, and a white man were in danger of drowning, we much fear that a real anti-slavery zealot would bind up the black man's leg before he would draw the white man out of the water. It is not an inconsistency, therefore, that while we see only cause of congratulation in this wonderful increase of trade, Lord Brougham sees in it the exaggeration of an evil he never ceases to deplore.

"We, and such as we, who are content to look upon society as Providence allows it to exist--to mend it when we can, but not to distress ourselves immoderately for evils which are not of our creation--we see only the free and intelligent English families who thrive upon the wages which these cotton bales produce. Lord Brougham sees only the black laborers who, on the other side of the Atlantic, pick the cotton pods in slavery. Lord Brougham deplores that in this tremendous exportation of a thousand millions of pounds of cotton, the lion's share of the profits goes to the United States, and has been produced by slave labor. Instead of twenty-three millions, the United States now send us eight hundred and thirty millions, and this is all cultivated by slaves. It is very sad that this should be so, but we do not see our way to a remedy. There seems to be rather a chance of its becoming worse.

"If France, who is already moving onwards in a restless, purblind state, should open her eyes wide, should give herself fair-play, by accepting our coals, iron, and machinery, and, under the stimulus of a wholesome competition, should take to manufacturing upon a large scale, even these three millions of slaves will not be enough. France will be competing with us in the foreign cotton markets, stimulating still further the produce of Georgia and South Carolina. The jump which the consumption of cotton in England has just made is but a single leap, which may be repeated indefinitely. There are a thousand millions of mankind on the globe, all of whom can be most comfortably clad in cotton. Every year new tribes and new nations are added to the category of cotton-wearers. There is every reason to believe that the supply of this universal necessity will, for many years yet to come, fail to keep pace with the demand, and in the interest of that large class of our countrymen to whom cotton is bread, we must continue to hope that the United States will be able to supply us in years to come with twice as much as we bought of them in years past. 'Let us raise up another market,' says the anti-slavery people. So say we all. . . . . .

"But even Lord Brougham would not ask us to believe that there is any proximate hope that the free cotton raised in Africa will, within any reasonable time, drive out of culture the slave-grown cotton of America. If this be so, of what use can it be to make irritating speeches in the House of Lords against a state of things by which we are content to profit? Lord Brougham and Lord Grey are not men of such illogical minds as to be incapable of understanding that it is the demand of the English manufacturers which stimulates the produce of slave-grown American cotton. They are, neither of them, we apprehend, so reckless or so wicked as to close our factories and to throw some two millions of our manufacturing population out of bread. Why, then, these inconsequent and these irritating denunciations? Let us create new fields of produce of we can; but, meanwile, it is neither just nor dignified to buy the raw material from the Americans, and to revile them for producing it."

We have said that the more popular belief, in reference to the moral character of slavery, now prevailing throughout the world, ranks it as identical in principle with despotic forms of government. Here arises a question of importance. Can despotism be acknowledged by Christians as a lawful form of government? Those who hold the view of slavery under consideration, answer in the affirmative. The necessity of civil government, they say, is denied by none. Society can not exist in its absence. Republicanism can be sustained only where the majority are intelligent and moral. In no other condition can free government be maintained. Hence, despotism establishes itself, of necessity, more or less absolutely, over an ignorant or depraved people; obtaining the acquiescence of the enlightened, by offering them security to person and property. Few nations, indeed, possess moral elevation sufficient to maintain republicanism. Many have tried it, have failed, and relapsed into despotism. Republican nations, therefore, must forego all intercourse with despotic governments, or acknowledge them to be lawful. This can be done, it is claimed, without being accountable for moral evils connected with their administration. Elevated examples of such recognitions are on record. Christ paid tribute to Caesar; and Paul, by appealing to Caesar's tribunal, admitted the validity of the despotic government of Rome, with its thirty millions of slaves. To deny the lawfulness of despotism, and yet hold intercourse with such governments, is as inconsistent as to hold the _per se_ doctrine, in regard to slavery, and still continue to use its products.

How far masters in general escape the commission of sin, in the treatment of their slaves, or whether any are free from guilt, is not the point at issue, in this view of slavery. The mere possession of power over the slave, under the sanction of law, is held not to be sinful; but, like despotism, may be used for the good of the governed. That Southern masters are laboring for the good of the slave, to an encouraging extent, is apparent from the missionary efforts they are sustaining among the slave population. And when it is considered that the African race, under American slavery, have made much greater progress than they have ever done in any other part of the world; and that the elevating influences are now greatly increased among them; it is to be expected that dispassionate men will be disposed to leave the present condition of things undisturbed, rather than to rush madly into the adoption of measures that may prove fatal to the existence of the Union.

FOOTNOTES:

[96] See Table XII, in Appendix.

[97] See Speech of Edmund Burke, in Appendix.

[98] See Table VIII, in Appendix.

[99] It has been denied that "Cotton is King," and claimed that Hay is entitled to that royal appellation; because its estimated value exceeds that of Cotton. The imperial character of Cotton rests upon the fact, that it enters so largely into the manufactures, trade, and commerce of the world, while hay is only in demand at home.

[100] See Table XII, in Appendix, for the statistics on this subject.

[101] See Table VIII, in Appendix.

[102] See Table XII.

[103] This paper is published at Kingston, Jamaica, and in confirmation of the views of the _London Economist_, quoted in the body of the work, the following extract is copied from its columns:

"Barbadoes, we all know, is prosperous because she possesses a native population almost as dense as that of China, with a very limited extent of superficial soil. In Barbadoes, therefore, population presses on the means of subsistence, in the same way, if not to the same extent, as in England, and the people are industrious from necessity. Trinidad and British Guiana, on the other hand, have taken steps to produce this pressure artificially, by large importations of foreign labor. The former colony, by the importation of eleven thousand coolies, has trebled her crops since 1854, while the latter has doubled hers by the introduction of twenty-three thousand immigrants.

"While Jamaica is the single instance of retrogression, she affords also the solitary example of non-immigration.

"Mauritius, by importing something like one hundred and seventy thousand laborers, has increased her exports of sugar from 70,000,000 lbs. in 1844, to 250,000,000 lbs. in 1858. Jamaica, by depending wholly on native labor, has fallen from an export of 69,000 hhds. in 1848, to one of 28,000 hhds. in 1859.

"It is believed that there are not at this moment above twenty thousand laborers who employ themselves in sugar cultivation for wages."

[104] Martin's British Colonies. See also Ethiopia, by the author, page 132, for full details on this question.

[105] The hhd. of sugar, as in Martin's tables, is here estimated at 1,600 lbs. See foot note on page 222.

APPENDIX.

EARLY MOVEMENTS IN THE AMERICAN COLONIES ON THE SLAVERY QUESTION.

SENTIMENTS have been quoted from the proceedings of the public meetings held by the fathers of the Revolution, which, when taken in connection with the language of the Declaration of Independence, seem to favor the opinion that it was their purpose to extend to the colored people all the privileges to be secured by that struggle. An examination of the historical records, leads to the conclusion, that no such intention existed on the part of the statesmen and patriots of that day. The opinions expressed, with scarcely an exception, show that they viewed the slave trade and slavery as productive of evils to the colonies, and calculated to retard their prosperity, if not to prevent their acquisition of independence. The question of negro slavery was one of little moment, indeed, in the estimation of the colonists, when compared with the objects at which they aimed; and the resolutions adopted, which bound them not to import any more slaves, or purchase any imported by others, was a blow aimed at the commerce of the mother country, and designed to compel Parliament to repeal its obnoxious laws. But the resolutions themselves must be given, as best calculated to demonstrate what were the designs of those by whom they were adopted. Before doing this, however, it is necessary to ascertain what were the relations which the North American Colonies bore to the commerce of the British Empire, and why it was, that the refusal any longer to purchase imported slaves would be so ruinous to Great Britain, and her other colonies. When this is done, and not till then, can the full meaning of the resolutions be determined. Such were the links connecting these colonies with England--with the West Indies--and with the African slave trade, conducted by British merchants--that more than one-half of the commerce of the mother country was directly or indirectly under their control. The facts on this subject are extracted from the debates in the British Parliament, and especially from the speech of Hon. EDMUND BURKE, on his resolutions, of March 22d, 1775, for conciliation with America.[106] He said:--

"I have in my hand two accounts; one, a comparative statement of the export trade of England to its colonies, as it stood in the year 1704, and as it stood in the year 1772. The other, a state of the export trade of this country to its colonies alone, as it stood in 1772, compared with the whole trade of England to all parts of the world, (the colonies included,) in the year 1704. They are from good vouchers; the latter period from the accounts on your own table, the earlier, from an original manuscript of Davenant, who first established the Inspector General's Office, which has been, ever since his time, so abundant a source of Parliamentary information.

"The export trade to the colonies, consists of three great branches. The African, which, terminating almost wholly in the colonies, must be put to the account of their commerce; the West Indian, and the North American. All these are so interwoven, that the attempt to separate them would tear to pieces the contexture of the whole; and if not entirely destroy, would very much depreciate the value of all the parts. I, therefore, consider these three denominations to be, what in effect they are, one trade.

"The trade to the colonies, taken on the export side, at the beginning of this century, that is, in the year 1704, stood thus:

"Exports to North America and the West Indies $2,416,325 To Africa 433,325 ---------- $2,849,650

"In the year 1772, which I take as a middle year, between the highest and lowest of those lately laid on your table, the account was as follows:

"To North America and the West Indies $23,958,670 To Africa 4,331,990 To which, if you add the export trade from Scotland, which had, in 1704, no existence 1,820,000 ----------- $30,110,660

"From a little over two millions and three quarters, it has grown to over thirty millions.[107] It has increased no less than twelve fold. This is the state of the colony trade, as compared with itself at these two periods, within this century; and this is matter for meditation. But this is not all. Examine my second account. See how the export trade to the colonies alone, in 1772, stood in the other point of view, that is, as compared to the whole trade of England, in 1704.

"The whole trade of England, including that to the colonies, in 1704 $32,545,000 Export to the colonies alone, in 1772 30,120,000 ----------- Difference $2,425,000

"The trade with America alone, is now within less than two millions and a half of being equal to what this great commercial nation, England, carried on at the beginning of this century with the whole world! If I had taken the largest year of those on your table, it would rather have exceeded. But, it will be said, is not this American trade an unnatural protuberance, that has drawn the juices from the rest of the body? The reverse. It is the very food that has nourished every other part into its present magnitude. Our general trade has been greatly augmented; and augmented more or less in almost every part to which it ever extended; but with this material difference, that of the thirty-two millions and a half, which, in the beginning of the century, constituted the whole mass of our export commerce, the colony trade was but one-twelfth part; it is now considerably more than a third of the whole--[which is $80,000,000.] This is the relative proportion of the importance of the colonies at these two periods; and all reasoning concerning our mode of treating them, must have this proportion as its basis; or it is a reasoning, weak, rotten, and sophistical."

It is easy to perceive, from what is said by Mr. Burke, the embarrassments that must fall upon the mother country, in the event of a rebellion in the North American colonies. Take another illustration of this point. More than one-third of the exports of Great Britain were made to North America, the West Indies, and Africa. They stood thus during the three years ending at Christmas, 1773:

Annual average exports to North America $17,500,000 To the West Indies 6,500,000 To Africa 3,500,000 ---------- Total value of exports $27,500,000

But this is not all. The total value of the exports of Great Britain to all the world, at this date, was $80,000,000. These exports were made up, in part, of colonial products, tobacco, rice, sugar, etc., to the amount of $15,000,000;--$5,000,000 to foreign countries, and $10,000,000 to Ireland,--which, when added to the $27,500,000, paid for by the colonies, exhibits them as sustaining more than one-half of the commerce of the mother country.[108]

The immediate cause of the alarm which led to the examination of this subject by the Hon. Edmund Burke, and others, of the British Parliament, was the adoption, by the North American colonies, of the policy of non-importation and non-consumption of all English products, whether from the mother country, or any of her colonies; and the non-exportation of any North American products to Great Britain, the West Indies, or any of the dependencies of the crown. This agreement was adopted as a measure of retaliation upon Parliament, for the passage of the Boston Port Bill, which ordered the closing of Boston harbor to all commerce. The measure was first proposed at a meeting of the citizens of Boston, held on May 13, 1774. It was soon seconded by all the principal cities, towns, and counties, throughout the colonies; and when the Continental Congress met at Philadelphia, the terms of the league were drawn up and adopted, October 20, 1774, and went into operation.

A few extracts from memorials to Parliament, praying that the difficulties with North America might be adjusted, and the threatened evils averted, will show how the slave trade was then interwoven with the commerce and national prosperity of Great Britain, and to what extent the American league could affect that prosperity.

In the House of Commons, January 23, 1775: "Mr. Burke then presented a petition of the Master, Wardens, and Commonalty, of the Society of Merchants Venturers of the city of Bristol, under their common seal; which was read, setting forth, That a very beneficial and increasing trade to the British colonies in America, has been carried on from the port of Bristol, highly to the advantage of the kingdom in general, and of the said city in particular; and that the exports from the said port to America, consist of almost every species of British manufactures, besides East India goods, and other articles of commerce; and the returns are made not only in many valuable and useful commodities from thence, but also, by a circuitous trade, carried on with Ireland, and most parts of Europe, to the great emolument of the merchant, and improvement of his Majesty's revenue; and that the merchants of the said port are also deeply engaged in the trade to the West India islands, which, by the exchange of their produce with America, for provisions, lumber, and other stores, are thereby almost wholly maintained, and consequently, become dependent upon North America for support; and that the trade to Africa, which is carried on from the said port to a very considerable extent, is also dependent upon the flourishing state of the West India islands, and America; and that these different branches of commerce give employment not only to a very numerous body of artists and manufacturers, but also to a great number of ships, and many thousand seamen, by which means a very capital increase is made to the naval strength of Great Britain. . . . . . The passing certain acts of Parliament, and other measures lately adopted, caused such a great uneasiness in the minds of the inhabitants of America, as to make the merchants apprehensive of the most alarming consequences, and which, if not speedily remedied, must involve them in utter ruin. And the petitioners, as merchants deeply interested in measures which so materially affect the commerce of this kingdom, and not less concerned as Englishmen, in every thing that relates to the general welfare, cannot look without emotion on the many thousands of miserable objects, who, by the total stop put to the export trade of America, will be discharged from their manufactories for want of employment, and must be reduced to great distress."[109]

January 26, 1775. A petition of the merchants and tradesmen of the port of Liverpool, was presented to the House, and read, setting forth: "That an extensive and most important trade has been long carried on, from said town to the continent and islands of America; and that the exports from thence infinitely exceed in value the imports from America, from whence an immense debt arises, and remains due to the British merchant; and that every article which the laborer, manufacturer, or more ingenious artist, can furnish for use, convenience, or luxury, makes a part in these exports, for the consumption of the American; and that those demands, as important in amount as various in quality, have for many seasons been so constant, regular, and diffusive, that they are now become essential to the flourishing state of all their manufactures, and of consequence to every ndividual in these kingdoms; and that the bread of thousands in Great Britain, principally and immediately depends upon this branch of commerce, of which a temporary interruption will reduce the hand of industry to idleness and want, and a longer cessation of it would sink the now opulent trader in indigence and ruin; and that at this particular season of the year, the petitioners have been accustomed to send to North America many ships wholly laden with the products of Britain; but by the unhappy differences at present subsisting, from whatever source they flow, the trade to these parts is entirely at a stand; and that the present loss, though great, is nothing, when compared with the dreadful mischiefs which will certainly ensue, if some effectual remedy is not speedily applied to this spreading malady, which must otherwise involve the West India islands, and the trade to Africa, in the complicated ruin; but that the petitioners can still, with pleasing hopes, look up to the British Parliament, from whom they trust that these unhappy divisions will speedily be healed, mutual confidence and credit restored, and the trade of Britain again flourishing with undecaying vigor."[110]

March 16, 1775. To the question "From what places do the sugar colonies draw food for subsistence?" the answer, given before Parliament, was, in part, as follows: "I confine myself at present to necessary food. Ireland furnishes a large quantity of salted beef, pork, butter, and herrings, but no grain. North America supplies all the rest, both corn and provisions. North America is truly the granary of the West Indies; from whence they draw the great quantities of flour and biscuit for the use of one class of people, and of Indian corn for the support of all the others; for the support, not of man only, but of every animal . . . . . . North America also furnishes the West Indies with rice . . . . . . North America not only furnishes the West Indies with bread, but with meat, with sheep, with poultry, and some live cattle; but the demand for these is infinitely short of the demand for the salted beef, pork, and fish. Salted fish, (if the expression may be permitted in contrast with bread,) is the meat of all the lower ranks in Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands. It is the meat of all the slaves in the West Indies. Nor is it disdained by persons in better condition. The North American colonies also furnishes the sugar colonies with salt from Turks' Island, Sal Tortuga, and Anguilla; although these islands are themselves a part of the West Indies. The testimony which some experience has enabled me to bear, you will find confirmed, Sir, by official accounts. The same accounts will distinguish the source of the principal, the great supply of corn and provisions. They will fix it precisely in the middle colonies of North America; in those colonies who have made a public agreement in their Congress, to withhold all their supplies after the tenth of next September. How far that agreement may be precipitated in its execution, may be retarded or frustrated, it is for the wisdom of Parliament to consider: but if it is persisted in, I am well founded to say, that nothing will save Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands from the dreadful consequences of absolute famine. I repeat, the famine will not be prevented. The distress will fall upon them suddenly; they will be overwhelmed with it, before they can turn themselves about to look for relief. What a scene! when rapine, stimulated by hunger, has broken down all screens, confounded the rich with the poor, and leveled the freeman with his slave! The distress will be sudden. The body of the people do not look forward to distant events; if they should do this, they will put their trust in the wisdom of Parliament. Suppose them to be less confident in the wisdom of Parliament, they are destitute of the means of purchasing an extraordinary stock. Suppose them possessed of the means; a very extraordinary stock is not to be found at market. There is a plain reason in the nature of the thing, which prevents any extraordinary stock at market, and which would forbid the planter from laying it in, if there was; it is, that the objects of it are perishable. In those climates, the flour will not keep over six or eight weeks; the Indian corn decays in three months; and all the North American provisions are fit only for present use."[111]

To the question, what are the advantages of the sugar colonies to Great Britain? it was answered: "The advantage is not that the profits all centre here; it is, that it creates, in the course of attaining those profits, a commerce and navigation in which multitudes of your people, and millions of your money are employed; it is that the support which the sugar colonies received in one shape, they give in another. In proportion to their dependence on North America, and upon Ireland, they enable North America and Ireland to trade with Great Britain. By their dependence upon Great Britain for hands to push the culture of the sugar-cane, they uphold the trade of Great Britain to Africa. A trade which in the pursuit of negroes, as the principal, if not the only intention of the adventurer, brings home ivory and gold as secondary objects. In proportion as the sugar colonies consume, or cause to be consumed, among their neighbors, Asiatic commodities, they increase the trade of the English East India Company. In this light I see the India goods which are carried to the coast of Guinea.[112]

To the question, what proportion of land in the Leeward Islands, being applied to raising provisions, would supply the negroes with provisions, on an estate of two hundred hogsheads, for instance? it was answered: "The native products of the Islands are very uncertain; all so, but Guinea corn; therefore, much more land would be applied to this purpose than would be necessary to raise the supply for the regular constant consumption. They must provide against accidents, such as hurricanes, excess of wet weather, or of dry weather, the climate being very uncertain; it is, therefore, impossible to answer this question precisely; but this I can say, that if they were obliged to raise their own food, that their food then must be their principal object, and sugar only a secondary object; it would be but the trifle, which provisions are now."[113]

The testimony in reference to Jamaica, was very similar to that quoted in relation to Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands; except that as Jamaica had more unimproved land, and greater diversity of soil and climate, it might, in time, stand prepared to meet the shock. But as the emergency was likely to be sudden and unexpected, much suffering must ensue in the outset of the non-intercourse policy.

It is only necessary to add a few remarks, from the speech of Mr. Glover, in summing up the testimony. He said: "From this ground see what is put in hazard; not merely a monied profit, but our bulwark of defense, our power in offense--the acts and industry of our Nation. Instead of thousands and tens of thousands of families in comfort, a navigation extensive and enlarging, the value and rents of lands yearly rising, wealth abounding, and at hand for further improvements, see or foresee, that this third of our whole commerce, that sole basis of our Empire, and this third in itself the best, once lost, carries with it a proportion of our national faculties, our treasure, our public revenue, and the value of land, succeeded in its fall by a multiplication of taxes to reinstate that revenue, an increasing burden on every increasing estate, decreasing by the reduced demand of its produce for the support of Manufactures, and menaced with a heavier calamity still--the diminution of our Marine, of our seamen, of our general population, by the emigration of useful subjects, strengthening that very country you wish to humble, and weakening this in the sight of rival powers, who wish to humble us.

"To recapitulate the heads of that material evidence delivered before you, would be tedious in me, unnecessary in itself. Leaving it, therefore, to its own powerful impression, I here add only, in a general mode of my own, that of the inhabitants of those Islands, above four hundred thousand are blacks, from whose labor the immense riches there, so distinctly proved at your bar, are derived, with such immense advantage to these kingdoms. How far these multitudes, if their intercourse with North America is stopped, may be exposed to famine, you have heard. One-half in Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands, say one hundred thousand negroes, in value at least twenty millions of dollars, possibly, it grieves me to say probably, may perish. The remainder must divert to provisions the culture of the produce so valuable to Great Britain. The same must be the practice in great part throughout Jamaica and the new settled acquisitions. They may feel a distress just short of destruction, but must divert for subsistence so much labor as, in proportion, will shorten their rich product."[114]

The North American colonies could not have devised a measure so alarming to Great Britain, and so well calculated to force Parliament into the repeal of her obnoxious laws, as this policy of non-intercourse. It would deprive the West Indies of their ordinary supplies of provisions, and force them to suspend their usual cultivation, to produce their own food. It would cause not only the cessation of imports from Great Britain into the West Indies, on account of the inability of its people to pay, but would, at once, check all demand for slaves, both in the sugar Islands and in North America--thus creating a loss, in the African trade alone, of three and a half millions of dollars, and putting in peril one-half of the commerce of England.

We are now prepared to introduce the resolutions, passed by the North American colonies, on the subject of the slave trade and slavery. It is not considered necessary to burden our pages with a repetition of the whole of the accompanying resolutions. They embraced every item of foreign commodities, excepting in a few instances where medicines, saltpetre, and other necessaries, were exempted from the prohibition. In a few counties, though they condemned the slave trade, they excepted negroes, and desired to retain the privilege of procuring them. This was in the early part of the movement. When the Continental Congress came to act upon it, no such exemption was made.

On May 17, 1774, the citizens of Providence, Rhode Island, met and acquiesced in the Boston resolutions. Their proceedings closed with this declaration: "Whereas, the inhabitants of America are engaged in the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as personal liberty is an essential part of the natural rights of mankind, the deputies of the town are directed to use their endeavors to obtain an act of the General Assembly, prohibiting the importation of negro slaves in this colony; and that all negroes born in the colony should be free at a certain age."

Prince George county, Virginia, June 1774, responded to Boston, and added this resolution: "_Resolved_, That the African trade is injurious to this colony, obstructs the population of it by freemen, prevents manufacturers and other useful emigrants from Europe from settling among us, and occasions an annual balance of trade against the colony."[115]

Culpepper County, Virginia, July 7, 1774 acquiesced in the non-intercourse policy, and added this resolution: "_Resolved_, That the importing slaves and convict servants, is injurious to this colony, as it obstructs the population of it with freemen and useful manufacturers, and that we will not buy such slave or convict hereafter to be imported."[116]

The Provincial Convention, at Charleston, South Carolina, July 6, 7, 8, 1774, resolved to acquiesce in the Boston non-intercourse measures, and the merchants agreed not to import goods or slaves, until the grievances were redressed.[117]

Nansemond County Virginia, July 11, 1774, gave full assent to the Boston measures, and also "_Resolved_, That the African trade is injurious to this colony, obstructs the population of it by freemen, prevents manufacturers and other useful emigrants from Europe from settling among us, and occasions an annual increase of the balance of trade against the colony ."[118]

Caroline County, Virginia, July 14, 1774, cordially acceded to the Boston policy, and also "_Resolved_, That the African trade is injurious to this colony, obstructs our population by freemen, manufacturers, and others, who would emigrate from Europe and settle here, and occasions a balance of trade against the country that ought to be associated against."[119]

Surry County, Virginia, July 6, 1774, decided to sustain the Bostonians and also "_Resolved_, That as the population of this colony, with freemen and useful manufacturers, is greatly obstructed by the importation of slaves and convict servants, we will not purchase any such slaves or servants, hereafter to be imported."[120]

Fairfax County, Virginia, July 18, 1774, took ground strongly with Boston, and further "_Resolved_, That it is the opinion of this meeting, that during our present difficulties and distress, no slaves ought to be imported into any of the British colonies on the continent; and we take this opportunity of declaring our most earnest wishes to see an entire stop forever put so such a wicked, cruel, and unnatural trade."[121]

Hanover county, Virginia, July 20, 1774, sustained the Boston resolutions, and also "_Resolved_, That the African trade for slaves, we consider as most dangerous to virtue and the welfare of this country; we therefore most earnestly wish to see it totally discouraged."[122]

Prince Ann County, Virginia, July 27, 1784, adopted the Boston policy, most distinctly, and also "_Resolved_, That our Burgesses be instructed to oppose the importation of slaves and convicts as injurious to this colony, by preventing the population of it by freemen and useful manufacturers."[123]

The Virginia Convention of Delegates, which met at Williamsburgh, August 1, 1774, fully indorsed the non-intercourse policy, medicines excepted, and in their resolutions declared: "We will neither ourselves import, nor purchase any slave or slaves imported by any other person, after the first day of November next, either from Africa, the West Indies, or any other place."[124]

The North Carolina Convention of Delegates, which met at Newbern, August 24, 1774, fully indorsed the non-intercourse policy, and also passed this among their other resolutions: "_Resolved_, That we will not import any slave or slaves, or purchase any slave or slaves, imported or brought into this Province by others, from any part of the world, after the first day of November next."[125]

And, finally, the Continental Congress, which met at Philadelphia, Sept. 5, 1774, in passing its non-importation, non-exportation, and non-consumption Agreement, included the following as the second article of that document:

"That we will neither import nor purchase any slave imported after the first day of December next; after which time we will wholly discontinue the slave trade, and will neither be concerned in it ourselves, nor will we hire our vessels, nor sell our commodities or manfactures to those who are concerned in it."[126]

To afford a clear view of the reasons which prompted the colonies to adopt such stringent measures to compel Parliament to repeal its oppressive acts, it is only necessary to quote the very brief summary of grievances of which they complained, as drawn up by the Pennsylvania Convention, which met in Philadelphia, July 15, 1774:

"The legislative authority claimed by Parliament over these colonies, consists of two heads: first, a general power of internal legislation; and, secondly, a power of regulating our trade; both, she contends, are unlimited. Under the first may be included, among other powers, those of forbidding us to worship our Creator in the manner we think most acceptable to him--imposing taxes on us--collecting them by their own officers--enforcing the collection by Admiralty Courts, or Courts Martial--abolishing trials by jury--establishing a standing army among us in time of peace, without consent of our Assemblies--paying them with our money--seizing our young men for recruits--changing constitutions of government--stopping the press--declaring any action, even a meeting of the smallest number, to consider of peaceable modes to obtain redress of grievances, high treason--taking colonists to Great Britain to be tried--exempting 'murderers' of colonists from punishment, by carrying them to England, to answer indictments found in the colonies--shutting up our ports--prohibiting us from slitting iron to build our houses, making hats to cover our heads, or clothing to cover the rest of our bodies, etc."[127]

It was in the midst of grievances such as these, and of efforts of redress such as the adoption of the Non-Intercourse Agreement was expected to afford, that the resolutions against the slave trade and slavery were passed. What, then, was their true import? Did the patriots of the Revolution contemplate the enfranchisement of the negro, in the event of securing their own independence? Did their views of free institutions include the idea that barbarism and civilization could coalesce and co-exist in harmony and safety? Or did they not hold, as a great fundamental truth, that a high degree of intelligence and moral principle was essential to the success of free government? And was it not on this very principle, that they opposed the further introduction of negroes from Africa, and afterwards, by a special clause in the Constitution, excluded the Indians from citizenship?

The resolutions which have been quoted, have given rise to much discussion, and have often been misrepresented. By severing them from their connection with the circumstances under which they were adopted, and associating them with the phrase in the Declaration of Independence, that "all men are created equal," the impression has been made that the negroes were to be included in the rights therein claimed. But as they have not been made participants in the benefits of the Revolution, it has been argued that the nation has broken its covenant engagements, and must expect that the judgments of Heaven will be poured out upon her.

Now, what are the facts? The colonists were aiming at a high degree of mental and moral culture, and were desirous of developing the resources of the country, by encouraging the influx of freemen from Europe, and especially of mechanics and manufacturers. They were anxiously looking forward to the time when they could cast off the yoke of oppression which the mother country had forced upon their necks. The multiplication of the negro population was considered as a barrier to the success of their measures, and as most dangerous to virtue and the welfare of the country. It was increasing the indebtedness of the citizens to foreign merchants, and augmenting the balance of trade against the colonies. But there was no settled policy in reference to the future disposition of the colored population. Feelings of pity were manifested toward them, and some expressed themselves in favor of emancipation. The Continental Congress, in addition to its action in the Non-Intercourse Agreement, _Resolved_, April 6, 1776, "That no slaves be imported into any of the thirteen United Colonies."[128] The Delaware Convention, August 27, 1776, adopted, as the 26th article of its Constitution, that "No person hereafter imported into this State from Africa, ought to be held in slavery on any pretense whatever; and no negro, Indian, or mulatto slave ought to be brought into this State, for sale, from any part of the world."[129]

There was more of meaning in this action, than the resolution, standing alone, would seem to indicate. On the 11th of July, preceding, Gen. Washington wrote to the Massachusetts Assembly, that the enemy had excited the slaves and savages to arms against him;[130] and on November 7th, 1775, Lord Dunmore had issued a proclamation, declaring the emancipation of all slaves "that were able and willing to bear arms, they joining his Majesty's troops, as soon as may be, for the more speedy reducing the colonists to their duty to his Majesty's crown and dignity."[131]

Previous to the commencement of hostilities, the resolutions of the colonists, adverse to the slave trade and slavery, were designed to operate against British commerce; but, after that event, the measures adopted had reference, mainly, to the prevention of the increase of a population that had been, and might continue to be, employed against the liberties of the colonies. That such a course formed a part of the policy of Great Britain, is beyond dispute; and that she considered the prosecution of the slave trade as necessary to her purposes, was clearly indicated by the Earl of Dartmouth, who declared, as a sufficient reason for turning a deaf ear to the remonstrances of the colonists against the further importation of slaves, that "Negroes cannot become republicans--they will be a power in our hands to restrain the unruly colonists." That such motives prompted England to prosecute the introduction of slaves into the colonies, was fully believed by American statesmen; and their views were expressed, by Mr. Jefferson, in a clause in the first draft of the Declaration of Independence, but which was afterward omitted.

That the emancipation of the negroes was not contemplated, by those in general, who voted for the resolutions quoted, is evident from the subsequent action of Virginia, where the greater portion of the meetings were held. They could not have intended to enfranchise men, whom they declared to be obstacles in the way of public prosperity, and as dangerous to the virtues of the people. Nor could the signers of the Declaration of Independence have designed to include the Indians and negroes in the assertion that all men are created equal, because these same men, in afterwards adopting the Constitution, deliberately excluded the Indians from citizenship, and forever fixed the negro in a condition of servitude, under that Constitution, by including him, as a slave, in the article fixing the ratio of Congressional representation on the basis of five negroes equaling three white men. The phrase--"all men are created equal"--could, therefore, have meant nothing more than the declaration of a general principle, asserting the equality of the colonists, before God, with those who claimed it as a divine right to lord it over them. The Indians were men as well as the negroes. Both were within the territory over which the United Colonies claimed jurisdiction. The exclusion of both from citizenship under the Constitution, is conclusive that neither were intended to be embraced in the Declaration of Independence.

That the colonists were determined, at any sacrifice, to achieve their own liberties, even at the sacrifice of their slave property, seems to have been the opinion of intelligent Englishmen. Burke, in his speech already quoted, thus dissipates the hopes of those who expected to find less resistance at the South than at the North.

"There is, however, a circumstance attending the [Southern] colonies, which, in my opinion, fully counterbalances this difference, and makes the spirit of liberty still more high and haughty than in those to the Northward. It is that in Virginia and the Carolinas, they have a vast multitude of slaves. Where this is the case, in any part of the world, those who are free, are by far the most proud and jealous of their freedom. Freedom is to them not only an enjoyment, but a kind of rank and privilege. Not seeing there that freedom, as in countries where it is a common blessing, and as broad and general as the air, may be united with much abject toil, with great misery with all the exterior of servitude, liberty looks, among them, like something that is more noble and liberal. I do not mean, sir, to commend the peculiar morality of this sentiment, which has at least as much pride as virtue in it; but I can not alter the nature of man. The fact is so; and these people of the Southern colonies are much more strongly, and with a higher and more stubborn spirit, attached to liberty, than those to the Northward. Such were all the ancient commonwealths; such were our Gothic ancestors; such in our days were the Poles; and such will be all masters of slaves, who are not slaves themselves. In such a people the haughtiness of domination combines with the spirit of freedom, fortifies it, and renders it invincible."

FOOTNOTES:

[106] See American Archives, vol i. folio 1749.

[107] His estimates are in pounds sterling. It is here, for sake of uniformity, reduced to dollars, the pound being estimated at five dollars.

[108] Investigations before the Committee on the Petition of the West India Planters. See American Archives, vol i. folio 1736.

[109] American Archives, vol. i. folio 1519.

[110] American Archives, vol. i. folio 1531.

[111] Testimony of Geo. Walker, Esq, American Archives, vol. i. folios 1723-24.

[112] Testimony of Geo. Walker, Esq, American Archives, vol. i. folios 1728-29,

[113] Testimony of Geo. Walker, Esq, American Archives, vol. i. folio 1730.

[114] American Archives, vol i. folio 1737.

[115] American Archives, vol. i. folio 494.

[116] American Archives, vol. i. folio 523.

[117] American Archives, vol. i. folio 525.

[118] American Archives, vol. i. folio 530.

[119] American Archives, vol. i. folio 541.

[120] American Archives, vol. i. folio 593.

[121] American Archives, vol. i. folio 600.

[122] American Archives, vol. i. folio 616.

[123] American Archives, vol. i. folio 641.

[124] American Archives, vol. i. folio 687.

[125] American Archives, vol. i. folio 735.

[126] American Archives, vol. i. folio 914.

[127] American Archives, vol i. folio 573.

[128] American Archives, 4th series, vol. iii. folio 11.

[129] American Archives, 5th series, vol. i. folio 1178.

[130] American Archives, 5th series, vol. i. folio 192.

[131] American Archives, 4th series, vol. iii. folio 1385.

FREE COLORED POPULATION.

WHEN the author was carefully collating the facts from the Record of MAJOR LACHLAN, in reference to the fugitive slaves in Canada, he was not aware that he should be so fortunate as to obtain, from other sources, any testimony in their support. Canada has all along been a sealed book to the public of the States, so far as the condition of blacks, who had escaped thither, were concerned. Since the completion of the stereotyping of the volume, and just as it was about ready for the press, the _New York Herald_, of January 5, reached us. It embraces a detailed report on this important subject, which was prepared by a special agent, who visited the settlements he describes. It is very interesting to find, that the opinions and predictions of Major Lachlan, made in 1841 to 1850, as to the results of colored immigration into Canada, should be so fully sustained and fulfilled, by a report upon the actual facts in 1859.

It may be remarked, here, that we believe a crisis has arrived in the history of the free colored people of the United States, which demands the most calm and serious consideration; and we would remind the more intelligent colored men, that the honor of conducting their fellow-men in the road to a high civilization, will be as great as are the honors heaped upon the few of the white race, who have been the master spirits in bringing up their fellow-men to the pinnacle of greatness upon which they now stand. More than one field, for the accomplishment of this object, now presents itself; and, as the darkest hour is said to be that which immediately proceeds the dawn of day; it may be hoped that the lowering clouds now overshadowing their prospects, will soon be dissipated by a brighter sun, that shall reveal the highway of their deliverance.

But to the extracts from the _Herald_. After giving a detailed account of the whole subject of negro immigration into Canada, together with the particulars of the results of the several attempts at founding settlements for the refugees, the _Herald's_ reporter sums up the whole matter thus:

"THE SOCIAL AND MORAL EFFECT OF THE IMPORTATION OF FUGITIVE SLAVES INTO CANADA.

"While, as we have seen, the British abolitionists in Canada are laboring with the republican abolitionists of America to entice away the slave property of the South, and to foment a servile insurrection in the Southern States, and a disruption of the Union, there are men of sense and of honor among our neighbors over the borders, who deplore this interference of their countrymen in the affairs of the republic, and appreciate the terrible catastrophe to which, if persevered in, it must eventually lead. I conversed with a prominent abolitionist in Chatham, holding a public position of trust and honor, who told me that the first suggestion of the Harper's Ferry attack was made to Brown by British abolitionists in Chatham, and who assured me that he had himself subscribed money to aid Brown in raising men for the service in Ohio and elsewhere in the States. In reply to some questions I put to him, he stated that he and his associates on the other side looked with expectation and hope to the day, not far distant, when a disruption of the Union would take place; for that, in that case, the British abolitionists would join the republican abolitionists of America in open warfare upon the slaveholding States. When I reminded him that the patriotic men of the North would raise a barrier of brave hearts, through which such traitors would find it difficult to reach the Southern States, he replied--'Oh, we have often talked over and calculated upon that; but you forget that we should have the negroes of the South to help us in their own homes against their oppressors, with the knife and the fire-brand.'

"I conversed on the other hand with conservative, high-minded men, who expressed the most serious apprehension that the bold and unjustifiable association of Canadian abolitionists with the negro stealers and insurrectionists of America would eventually plunge the two countries into war.

"We have seen that the immigration of fugitive slaves into Canada is unattended by any social or moral good to the negro. It is injurious, also, to the white citizens of Canada, inasmuch as it depresses the value of their property, diminishes their personal comfort and safety, and destroys the peace and good order of the community. Mr. Sheriff Mercer, of Kent county, assured me that the criminal statistics of that county prove that nine-tenths of the offenses against the laws are committed by colored persons. The same proportion holds good in Essex county, and the fact is the more startling when it is remembered that the blacks do not at present number more than one-fourth of the whole population.

"In the township of Anderdon, Essex county, this fall, nearly every sheep belonging to the white farmers has been stolen. The fact was presented in the return of the Grand Jury of the county, and some twelve negro families, men, women and children, were committed to jail on the charge of sheep stealing. The cases of petit larceny are incredibly numerous in every township containing negro settlements, and it is a fact that frequently the criminal calendars would be bare of a prosecution but for the negro prisoners.

"The offenses of the blacks are not wholly confined to those of a light character. Occasionally some horrible crime startles the community, and is almost invariably attended by a savage ferocity peculiar to the vicious negro. If a murder is committed by a black, it is generally of an aggravated and brutal nature. The offense of rape is unfortunately peculiarly prevalent among the negroes. Nearly every assize is marked by a charge of this character. A prominent lawyer of the Province, who has held the position of public prosecutor, told me that his greatest dread was of this offense, for that experience had taught him that no white woman was safe at all times, from assault, and those who were rearing daughters in that part of Canada, might well tremble at the danger by which they are threatened. He told me that he never saw a really brutal look on the human face until he beheld the countenances of the negroes charged with the crime of rape. When the lust comes over them they are worse than the wild beast of the forest. Last year, in broad daylight, a respectable white woman, while walking in the public road within the town of Chatham, was knocked down by a black savage and violated. This year, near Windsor, the wife of a wealthy farmer, while driving alone in a wagon, was stopped by a negro in broad daylight, dragged out into the road, and criminally assaulted in a most inhuman manner. It was impossible to hear the recital of these now common crimes without a shudder.

"The fugitive slaves go into Canada as beggars, and the mass of them commit larceny and lay in jail until they become lowered and debased, and ready for worse crimes. Nor does there seem at present a prospect of education doing much to better their condition, for they do not appear anxious to avail themselves of school privileges as a general rule. The worse class of blacks are too poor and too indolent to clothe their children in the winter, and their services are wanted at home in the summer. The better class affect airs as soon as they become tolerably well to do, and refuse to send their little ones to any but white schools. In Windsor there are two public colored schools, but the negroes of that place choose to refuse to allow their children to attend these institutions, and sent them to the schools for whites. They were not admitted, and two of the black residents, named Jones and Green, tested the question at law, to try whether the trustees or teachers had a right to exclude their children. It was decided that the trustees had such power, when separate schools were provided for colored persons.

"That property is seriously depreciated in all neighborhoods in which the negroes settle is a well known fact. Mr. S. S. Macdonnel, a resident of Windsor, and a gentleman of high social and political position, is the owner of a large amount of real estate in that place. The Bowyer farm, a large tract of land belonging to him, was partitioned into lots some few years since, and sold at auction. Some of the lots were bid in by negroes of means, among others, by a mulatto named De Baptiste, residing in Detroit. As soon as the white purchasers found that negroes were among the buyers, they threw up their lots, and since then the value of the property has been much depressed. In several instances Mr. Macdonnel paid premiums to the negroes to give up their purchases, where they had happened to buy in the midst of white citizens. At a subsequent sale of another property, cut up into very fine building lots, by the same gentleman, one of the conditions of sale announced was, that no bid should be received from colored persons. De Baptiste attended and bid in a lot. When his bid was refused, he endeavored to break up the auction in a row, by the aid of other negroes, and failing in this, brought an action at law against Mr. Macdonnel. This Mr. M. prepared to defend, but it was never pressed to a trial. These incidents, together with the attempt of the Windsor negroes to force their children into the schools for whites, illustrate the impudent assumption of the black, as soon as he becomes independent, and the deeply seated antipathy of the whites in Canada to their dark skinned neighbors. At the same time it is observable that the 'free negro' in Canada--that is, the black who was free in the States--endeavors to hold his head above the 'fugitive,' and has a profound contempt for the escaped slave.

"As I desired to obtain the views of intelligent Canadians upon the important questions before me, I requested a prominent and wealthy citizen of Windsor to favor me with a written statement of his observations on the effect of the negro immigration and received the following hastily prepared and brief communication, in reply. The opinions expressed are from one of the most accomplished gentlemen in the Province, and are worthy of serious consideration, although the public position he occupies renders it proper that I should not make public use of his name:--

"'WINDSOR, Dec. 23, 1859.

"'MY DEAR SIR--In reply to your request, I beg to say that I would cheerfully give you my views at length upon the important topics discussed at our interview, did not my pressing engagements just now occupy too much of my time to make it possible that I should do more than hastily sketch down such thoughts as occur to me in the few moments I can devote to the subject.

"'The constant immigration of fugitives from slavery into the two western counties of the Province of Canada, Kent and Essex, has become a matter for serious consideration to the landed proprietors in those counties, both as it effects the value and salability of real estate, and as rendering the locality an undesirable place of abode.

"'It is certain that ever since large numbers of fugitive slaves have, by means of the organization known here and in the States as "the Underground Railroad," and of such associations as the Dawn and Elgin Institutes and the Refugee Home Society, been annually introduced into these two counties, no settlers from the old country, from the States, or from the eastern part of Canada, have taken up lands there. And there is every reason to assign the fact of there being a large colored population, and that population constantly on the increase, as the chief cause why these counties do not draw a portion at least of the many seeking Western homes.

"'Kent and Essex have been justly styled "the Garden of Upper Canada." The soil in most parts of the counties cannot be excelled in richness and fertility, and the climate is mild and delightful. There are thousands of acres open for sale at a moderate price, but it now seldom happens that a lot of wild land is taken up by a new comer. The farmer who has achieved the clearing of the land that years ago was settled upon may wish to extend his possessions for the sake of his sons who are growing up, by the acquisition of an adjoining or neighboring piece of wild land; but seldom or never is the uncleared forest intruded upon now by the encampment of emigrant families.

"'It may be broadly asserted, first, in general, that the existence of a large colored population in Kent and Essex has prevented many white settlers from locating there who otherwise would have made a home in one of those counties; and, secondly, that in particular instances it constantly occurs that the sale of a lot of land is injuriously affected by reason of the near settlement of colored people.

"'Next, as to the general feeling of the gentry and farmers who live in the midst of this population: All regard it with dissatisfaction, and with a foreboding--an uncomfortable anticipation for the future, as they behold the annual inpouring of a people with whom they have few or no sympathies in common, many of whose characteristics are obnoxious and bad, and who have to make a commencement here, in the development of their better nature, should they possess any, from perhaps the lowest point to which the human mind can be degraded, intellectually and morally.

"'There is undoubtedly hardly a well thinking person whose heart is not touched with a feeling of pity for the unfortunates who present themselves as paupers, in the name of liberty, to become denizens of our country. And it would, doubtless, be a great moral spectacle to witness these escaped slaves, as they are sometimes pictured by professional philanthropists, rendering themselves happy in their freedom, acquiring property, surrounding themselves with the comforts, if not the elegancies of life, and advancing themselves intellectually, socially and politically. But, alas for human nature! If the negro is really fitted by the Creator to enjoy freedom as we enjoy it, the habits of mind and of action, however baneful they may be, that have been long exercised, are not to be suddenly broken or changed; and the slave who was idle, and lying, and thievish in the South, will not obtain opposite qualities forthwith by crossing the line that makes him free.

"'This is not said in a spirit of malevolence toward the colored people that are here and are brought here, but as presenting their case as it really is, and as explaining the position in which residents of these counties are placed, or will be placed, if this continuous flow from the slave States is poured in by means of the organizations and societies formed for that purpose in many of the Northern States of America, and fostered and aided by many indiscreet men in our own country.

"'The main argument in favor of the free school system is, that it is a benefit to all to be surrounded by an intelligent and moral community, and for such a benefit every property holder should be glad to contribute his quota. Is there, then, any need of asking the question, if the people of these counties desire the sort of population that comes to them from the Southern States?

"'What is the condition of the negroes on their arrival here? What their progress in the acquisition of property and knowledge, and their conduct as citizens?

"'There are very few indeed who arrive here with sufficient means at once to acquire a farm, or to enter into business of any kind. The great mass of them may be called paupers, claiming aid from the societies through whose agency they are brought out. Some of these societies hold large tracts of land, which they sub-divide and sell to new comers upon long time, but with conditions as to clearing, residence, etc., that are difficult of observance. I believe there is much trouble in carrying out this plan, arising in some measure from the peculiarities of negro character--a want of constancy or steadiness of purpose, as well as from a feeling of distrust as to their having the land secured to them. If the land is not purchased from any of these societies, a parcel of ten or fifteen colored families get together and purchase and settle upon some other spot.

"While there are instances of colored men accumulating property here, the great mass of them fail even in securing a living without charity or crime. They have but little forethought for the future, and care only to live lazily in the present. The criminal records of the county show that nine-tenths of the offenses are committed by the colored population, and I think the experience of every citizen who resides near a settlement will testify to their depredating habits.

"'I have given you thus hurriedly and disconnectedly my views on these subjects. They are important enough to demand more time and consideration in their discussion, but I believe the opinions I have advanced you will find shared in by a large proportion of the residents of the Province. I am, my dear sir, faithfully yours.' ----- -----.

"In addition to the testimony of the writer of the above communication, my views upon the subject under examination were confirmed by the valuable opinion of the Hon. Colonel Prince, the representative of the county in the Provincial Parliament for a long term of years. Colonel Prince has bestowed much consideration upon the negro question, and he has practical experience of the condition and conduct of the colored population. In June, 1858, in the course of a debate in the Legislative Council, Col. Prince was reported to have spoken as follows:

"'In the county of Essex the greatest curse that befell them was the swarm of blacks that infested that county. They were perfectly inundated with them. Some of the finest farmers of the county of Kent had actually left their beautiful farms, so as not to be near this terrible nuisance. If they looked over the criminal calendars of the country they would see that the majority of names were those of colored people. They were a useless, worthless, thriftless set of people, too lazy and indolent to work, and too proud to be taught. . . . . Were the blacks to swarm the country and annoy them with their rascalities? Honorable gentlemen might speak feelingly for the negroes, but they had never lived among them as he had done. Notwithstanding all that he said about them, they would say, if asked on the subject, that they had no better friend than Col. Prince. But there was no use in trying to get the white man to live with them. It was a thing they would not do. There was a great sympathy always expressed for the black man who escaped from the slave life; but he had lived with them twenty-five years, and had come to the conclusion that the black man was born for servitude, and was not fit for any thing else. He might listen to the morbid philanthropy of honorable gentlemen in favor of the negro; but they might as well try to change the spots of the leopard as to change the character of the blacks. They would still retain their idle and thievish propensities.'

"While Col. Prince claims that he was very inaccurately reported, and that he never said one word in favor of slavery, which he professes to abhor with a holy horror, he yet adheres to the opinion that the colored race is not fit to live and mix in freedom with the whites. He deplores deeply the action of such of his countrymen as improperly interfere in the affairs of the States, and condemns the lawless running off of slaves from the South, and the attempts to raise servile insurrection in the slaveholding States. As a constitutional British gentleman, he reveres the laws, and believes that where they are bad, or where the constitution of a country is unwise, the remedy lies in the power of the people by legal means. He sees the evil effect, morally and socially, of the influx of fugitive slaves into Canada, and would shut them out if he could. He knows that the negroes form an enormous portion of the criminals of his county, and the county of Kent, and he is doubly annoyed that men who come from servitude to freedom should abuse their privileges as the negroes do. He admits that every distinct attempt to make a settlement of negroes self-supporting and prosperous, has failed, and he believes that the negro is not yet fit for self-government, and requires over him a guiding, if not a master's hand.

Col. Prince is a gentleman of the old school--hale, hearty and whole-souled--and does not fear to express the sentiments he entertains.

"The lessons taught by an examination into the action of the Canadian abolitionists, and of the condition and prospects of the fugitive slaves in the Province, should be made useful to the American people. The history of the past proves that Great Britain would gladly destroy the Union of the States, which makes the American republic a leading power among nations. As in days past she sought to accomplish this object through the instrumentality of traitors and of the foes of the Union, so now she seeks aid in her designs from the republican abolition enemies of the confederacy in our own States. The intrigues of the British emissaries in Canada should stay the hand of every man who fancies that in helping to rob the South of its slaves he is performing an act of humanity; for they should teach him that he is but helping on the designs of those who look eagerly to the slavery agitation and the sectional passions engendered thereby, to accomplish a disruption of the Union, and encompass the failure of our experiment of free government. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

"Let our merchants and our farmers carefully consider these facts, and then reflect upon what they are required by the abolition agitators to do. To what end are the systematized negro stealing of the North, the attempts to incite insurrection at the South, and their natural results, a dissolution of the Union, to lead? Are we to render New York and the other free States subject to the same deplorable evils as afflict the western counties of Canada? Are our Northern farmers willing to have the value of their lands depreciated, and to subject their crops and stock to constant depredations by inviting here the same class of neighbors that at present deplete whole Canadian townships of their sheep? Unless we desire to accomplish such results, why, under a mistaken idea of charity to the negro, do we take him from a life of usefulness and content at the South to plant him in freedom and suffering at the North? Why do we consent to help forward, directly or indirectly, an agitation that can only incite a disruption of the Union and bring upon us the very evils we deplore?"

IMPORTANT DECISIONS.

Since the volume was in type, the Supreme Court of Ohio has made a decision of great importance to the free colored people. We copy from the _Law Journal_, December, 1859:

"NEGROES AND THE COMMON SCHOOLS.

"The Supreme Court of Ohio, on Tuesday, on a question before them involving the right of _colored_ children to be admitted into the Common Schools of the State, decided that the law of the State interfered with no right of colored children on the subject, and that they were not, therefore, entitled of _right_ to the admission demanded. The following is the reported statement of the case:

"'Enos Van Camp _vs._ Board of Equalization of incorporated village of Logan, Hocking County, Ohio. Error to District Court of Hocking County.

"'Peck J. held:

"'1. That the statute of March 14, 1853, 'to provide for the reorganization, supervision, and maintenance of Common Schools, is a law of _classification_ and not of _exclusion_, providing for the education of _all_ youths within the prescribed ages, and that the words 'white' and 'colored,' as used in said act, are used in their popular and ordinary signification.

"'2. That children of three-eighths African and five-eighths white blood, but who are distinctly colored, and generally treated and regarded as colored children by the community where they reside, are not, _as of right_, entitled to admission into the Common Schools, set apart under said act, for the instruction of white youths.

"'Brinkherhoff, C. J., and Sutliff, J., dissented.'"

(From the Cincinnati Gazette.)

MASSACHUSETTS BLACK MILITIA.

Last Wednesday a bill passed by the Massachusetts Legislature authorizing colored persons to join military organizations, was vetoed by Gov. Banks, on the ground that he believed the chapter in the bill relating to the militia, in which the word "white" was stricken out, to be unconstitutional. In this opinion he is sustained by the Supreme Court and by the Attorney General.

The matter was discussed in the House at some length, and the veto sustained by a vote of 146 to 6.

A new chapter was then introduced on leave, and it being precisely the same as the other, except that the word "white" was restored, it passed the House with but one negative vote.

Under a suspension of the rules the new bill was then sent to the Senate, where, after debate, it was passed by a vote of 11 to 15.

The Governor signed the new bill, and the Legislature adjourned _sine die_.

SOUTH-SIDE VIEWS.

REV. Dr. Fuller, of Baltimore, has written a long letter to Hon. Edward Everett, in regard to the present state of things as regards slavery. We subjoin two or three specimens:--_Cincinnati Gazette._

"In June, 1845, there assembled in Charleston a body of men, representing almost all the wisdom and wealth of South Carolina. There were present, also, delegates from Georgia, and I believe from other States. It was a meeting of the association for the improvement, moral and religious, of the slave population. The venerable Judge Huger presided. Having been appointed to address that large and noble audience, I did not hesitate to speak my whole mind: appealing to masters to imitate the Antonines and other magnanimous Roman Emperors, to become the guardians of their slaves, to have laws enacted protecting them in their relations as husbands and wives and parents; to recognize the rights which the Gospel asserts for servants as well as masters. In a word, I pressed upon them the solemn obligations which their power over these human beings imposed upon them--obligations only the more sacred, because their power was so irresponsible.

"That august assembly not only honored me with their attention, but expressed their approval, the presiding officer concurring most emphatically in the views submitted.

"I need scarcely tell you that no such address would be regarded as wise or prudent at this time. It is not that masters are less engaged in seeking to promote the moral and religious well-being of their servants; but measures which once could have been adopted most beneficially would now only expose master and servant to the baneful influence of fanatical intermeddling.

"If any thing is certain, it is that the Gospel does not recognise hatred, abuse, violence and blood as the means by which good is to be done. The Gospel is a system of love. It assails no established social relations, but it infuses love into the hearts of those who are bound together, and thus unites them in affection."

Again he says:

"I think I speak accurately when I say, that hitherto every sacrifice for the emancipation of slaves has been made by Southern men; and many hundred thousand dollars have been expended in such liberations. The North has wasted large sums for abolition books and lectures; for addresses calculated to inflame the imaginations of women and children, and to mislead multitudes of men--most excellent and pious--but utterly ignorant as to the condition of things at the South. We now find, indeed, that money has been contributed even for the purchase of deadly weapons to be employed against the South, and to enlist the most ferocious passions in secret crusades, compared with which an open invasion by foreign enemies would be a blessing. I believe, however, that not one cent has yet been given to set on foot--or even encourage when proposed--any plausible enterprise for the benefit of the slave."

* * * * *

"I do now believe that the guardianship of a kind master is at this time a great blessing to the African. If emancipation is ever to take place, it will be gradually, and under the mild, but resistless influence of the Gospel. Whether slavery be an evil or not, we at the South did not bring these Africans here--we protested against their introduction. The true friend of the African is at the South, and thousands of hearts there are seeking to know what can be done for the race. There must be some limits to human responsibility, and a man in New England has no more right to interfere with the institutions of Virginia, than he has to interfere with those of England or France. All such interference will be repelled by the master, but it will prove injurious to the slave. Dr. Channing was regarded as a leading abolitionist in his day, but could that noble man now rise up, he would stand aghast at the madness which is rife everywhere on this subject. 'One great principle, which we should lay down as immovably true, is, that if a good work cannot be carried on by the calm, self-controlled, benevolent spirit of Christianity, then the time for doing it has not yet come.' Such was his language, when opposing slavery. Were he now living, the delirious spirit of the day would denounce him, as it denounced Mr. Webster, and now denounces you and every true patriot. Nay, even Mr. Beecher is abused as not truculent enough.

"Jesus saw slavery all around him. Did he seek to employ force? He said 'All power in heaven and earth is given unto me, therefore, go teach, go preach the Gospel.'"

COLORED PEOPLE EMIGRATING FROM LOUISIANA TO HAYTI.

The _New Orleans Picayune_ notices that a vessel cleared from that port on the previous day, having on board eighty-one free colored persons, emigrating to Hayti. The _Picayune_ says:

"These people are all from the Opelousas parishes, and all cultivators--well versed in farming, and in all the mechanical arts connected with a farm. Among them are brickmakers, blacksmiths, wheelwrights, carpenters, etc. Some of them are proficient weavers, who have long been employed making the stuff called Attakapas cottonade, so favorably known in the market. They take along with them the necessary machinery for that trade, and all sorts of agricultural and mechanical implements.

"These eighty-one persons--twenty-four adults and fifty-seven children and youths--compose fourteen families, or rather households, for they are all related, and the eighty-one may be called one family. They are all in easy circumstances, some even rich, one family being worth as much as $50,000. They were all land owners in this State, and have sold out their property with the intention of investing their capital in Hayti."--

_Cincinnati Commercial_, January, 1860.

THE COOLIE TRAFFIC.

It may be well to put upon record one of those extreme cases of hardship and cruelty which necessarily accompany the transportation of laborers to the West Indies, whether under the name of the slave trade, or coolie immigration. The China correspondent of the _New York Journal of Commerce_, of a recent date, says: The Flora Temple, an English vessel, had made all arrangements to secure a full cargo of coolies. They were cheated, inveigled, or stolen, and either taken directly to the ship or else confined in the barracoons in Macao till the ship was ready to sail for Havanna--the crew numbering fifty, and the coolies eight hundred and fifty. The vessel sailed October 8, 1859, when the coolies soon learned their destiny, and resolved to avert it at all hazards. On the morning of the 11th, without weapons of any kind, they rushed upon the guard and killed him. The noise brought the captain and his brother on deck, fully armed with revolvers, who by rapid firing and resolutely pressing forward, drove the miserable wretches below; where, without light and air, they were locked and barred like felons, in a space too limited to permit their living during the long voyage before them. Think of eight hundred and fifty human beings all full grown men, pressed into this contracted, rayless, airless dungeon, in which they were to be deported from China to Havana, all the long way over the China sea, the Indian ocean, and the Atlantic!

On the 14th, the vessel struck upon an unknown reef, a gale of wind in the meantime blowing, and the sea running high. Every effort was made to save the ship by the officers and crew; the poor coolies, battened down beneath the decks, being allowed no chance to aid in saving the ship or themselves. Although the yards were "braced around" and the ship "hove aback," she struck first slightly, and then soon after several times with a tremendous crash, the breakers running alongside very high. Pieces of her timbers and planking floated up on her port side, and after some more heavy thumps she remained apparently immovable. The water rapidly increased in the hold till it reached the "between-decks," where the eight hundred and fifty coolies were confined.

While this was going on, indeed, almost immediately after the ship first struck, the officers and crew very naturally became afraid of the coolies for the treatment they had received, and the captain ordered the boats to be lowered, not to save the coolies in whole or in part, but to preserve himself and crew. These boats, even under favorable circumstances, were not more than sufficient for the officers and crew, showing that no provision had been made for the poor coolies in case of disaster. The boats passed safely through the breakers, leaving the ship almost without motion, all her masts standing, her back broken, and the sea making a clear break over her starboard and quarter.

When the boats left the ship, and steered away, without making an effort to save the eight hundred and fifty coolies, or allowing them to do any thing themselves, with their last look toward the ship they saw that the coolies had escaped from their prison through doors which the concussion had made for them, and stood clustering together, helpless and despairing, upon the decks, and gazing upon the abyss which was opening its jaws to receive them. My friend assures me that he knows these poor creatures were completely imprisoned all the night these terrible occurences were going on, the hatches being "battened down," and made as secure as a jail door under lock and bars.

The ship was three hundred miles from land when it struck, and after fourteen days of toil and struggle, one of the boats only succeeded in reaching Towron, in Cochin-China. The three other boats were never heard of. Here the French fleet was lying; and the admiral at once sent one of his vessels to the fatal scene of the disaster, where some of the wreck was to be seen; but not a _single coolie_! Every one of the _eight hundred and fifty_ had perished.

TABLE I.

FACTS IN RELATION TO COTTON--ITS GROWTH, MANUFACTURE, AND INFLUENCE ON COMMERCE, SLAVERY, EMANCIPATION, ETC., CHRONOLOGICALLY ARRANGED.

| Great Britain Annual Import | United States' Annual | YEARS. | and Consumption of Cotton, | Exports Cotton to Great | | from earliest dates to | Britain and Europe | | 1858, in lbs. | generally. | --------|-----------------------------|--------------------------| 1641 | Cotton manufacture first | | | named in English history. | | | | | | TOTAL IMPORTS. | | 1697 | 1,976,359 | | 1701 | 1,985,868 | | 1700 |} | | to |} 1,170,881 | | 1705 |} | | 1710 | 715,008 | | 1720 | 1,972,805 | | 1730 | 1,545,472 | | 1741 | 1,645,031 | 1747-48, 7 bags of | 1751 | 2,976,610 | Cotton were shipped from | 1764 | 3,870,392 | Charleston, S. C., to | 1771 |} | England. | to |} 6,766,613 | | 1775 |} | 1770, 2,000 lbs. shipped | 1781 | 5,198,778 | from Charleston. | 1782 | 11,828,039 | | 1783 | 9,735,663 | | 1784 | 11,482,083 | 71 bags shipped and | 1785 | 18,400,384 | seized in England, on | 1786 | 19,475,020 | the ground that America | 1787 | 23,250,268 | could not produce so | 1788 | 20,467,436 | much. | 1789 | 32,576,023 | | 1790 | 31,447,605 | | 1791 | 28,706,675 | lbs. 189,316 | 1792 | 34,907,497 | 138,328 | 1793 | 19,040,929 | 500,000 | 1794 | 24,358,567 | 1,601,760 | 1795 | 26,401,340 | 6,276,300 | 1796 | 23,126,357 | 6,100,000 | 1797 | 23,354,371 | 3,800,000 | 1798 | 31,880,641 | 9,330,000 | 1799 | 43,379,278 | 9,500,000 | 1800 | 56,010,732 | 17,789,803 | 1801 | 56,004,305 | 20,900,000 | 1802 | 60,345,600 | 27,500,000 | 1803 | 53,812,284 | 41,900,000 | 1804 | 61,867,329 | 38,900,000 | 1805 | 59,682,406 | 40,330,000 | 1806 | 58,176,283 | 37,500,000 | 1807 | 74,925,306 | 66,200,000 | 1808 | 43,605,982 | 12,000,000 | 1809 | 92,812,282 | 53,200,000 | 1810 | 132,488,935 | 93,900,000 | 1811 | 91,576,535 | 62,200,000 | 1812 | 63,025,936 | 29,000,000 | 1813 | 50,966,000 | 19,400,000 | 1814 | 73,728,000 | 17,800,000 |

================================================================== Great Britain's sources of Cotton supplies other than the | United States, with total Cotton crop of United States at | intervals. | | -----------------------------------------------------------------| Previous to 1791 Great Britain obtained her supplies of Cotton | from the West Indies and South America, and the countries | around the eastern parts of the Mediterranean. From that date | she began to receive supplies from the U. S. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1786. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | Br. W. Indies, lbs. 5,800,000 | Fr. and Spanish Colonies 5,500,000 | Dutch do. 1,600,000 | Portuguese do. 2,000,000 | Turkey and Smyrna, 5,000,000 | 1789. Cotton crop of United States, 1,000,000 lbs. | 1791. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | Br. West Indies, lbs. 12,000,000 | Brazil, 20,000,000 | 1794. Cotton crop of the U. S., 8,000,000 lbs. | 1796. Cotton crop of the U. S., 10,000,000 lbs. | 1798. India, the first imports from, 1,622,000 lbs. | 1799. Cotton crop of the U. S., 20,000,000 lbs. | 1800. _Exports_ from-- | India, lbs. 30,000,000 | West Indies, 17,000,000 | Brazil, 24,000,000 | Elsewhere, 7,000,000 | | 1806. Cotton crop of the U. S., 80,000,000 lbs. | | | | | | 1812. War declared between the United States and Great Britain. | | |

================================================================== Dates of Inventions promoting the growth and manufacture of Cotton, and of movements to elevate the African race.

------------------------------------------------------------------ Previous to the invention of the machinery named below, all carding, spinning, and weaving of wool and cotton had been done by the use of the hand-cards, one-spindle wheels, and common hand-looms. The work, for a long period, was performed in families; but the improved machinery propelled by steam power, has so reduced the cost of cotton manufactures, that all household manufacturing has long since been abandoned, and the monopoly yielded to capitalists, who now fill the world with their cheap fabrics.

1762. Carding machine invented. 1767. Spinning Jenny invented. 1769. Spinning Roller-frame invented. " Cotton first planted in the United States. " Watt's Steam Engine patented. 1775. Mule Jenny invented. 1776. Virginia forbids foreign slave trade. 1780. Emancipation by Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. 1781. Muslins first made in England. 1784. Emancipation by Connecticut and Rhode Island. 1785. Watts' Engine improved and applied to cotton machinery. First cotton mill erected, 1783. 1785. New York Abolition Society organized. 1786. Carding and spinning machines erected in Massachusetts. 1787. Power Loom invented. " First Cotton mill erected in Beverly, Massachusetts. " Pennsylvania Abolition Society formed. " Slavery excluded from N. W. Territory, including Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, &c. 1789. Franklin issues an appeal for aid to instruct the free blacks. 1792. Emancipation by New Hampshire. 1793. Cotton Gin invented. 1799. Emancipation by New York. 1804. Do. New Jersey. 1800. Cotton consumed in the United States, 200,000 lbs. 1801. United States exported to-- France, lbs. 750,000 England 19,000,000 1803. Louisiana Territory acquired, including the region between the Mississippi river (upper and lower) and the Mexican line. 1805. United States export to France, 4,500,000 lbs. 1807. Fulton started his steamboat. 1808. Slave trade prohibited by United States and England. 1808. Cotton manufacture established in Boston. 1810. Cotton consumed in United States, 4,000,000 lbs. 1812. Two-thirds of steam engines in Great Britain employed in cotton spinning, etc. 1813. United States export to France, 10,250,000 lbs.

================================================================== | Great Britain Annual Import | United States' Annual | YEARS. | and Consumption of Cotton, | Exports Cotton to Great | | from earliest times to | Britain and Europe | | 1858, in lbs. | generally. | --------|-----------------------------|--------------------------| 1815 | 96,200,000 | 83,000,000 | 1816 | 97,310,000 | 81,800,000 | 1817 | 126,240,000 | 95,660,000 | | | | | Total Consumption. | | 1818 | 109,902,000 | 92,500,000 | 1819 | 109,518,000 | 88,000,000 | 1820 | 120,265,000 | 127,800,000 | 1821 | 129,029,000 | 124,893,405 | 1822 | 145,493,000 | 144,675,095 | 1823 | 154,146,000 | 173,723,270 | 1824 | 165,174,000 | 142,369,663 | 1825 | 166,831,000 | 176,449,907 | 1826 | 150,213,000 | 204,535,415 | 1827 | 197,200,000 | 294,310,115 | 1828 | 217,860,000 | 210,590,463 | 1829 | 219,200,000 | 264,837,186 | 1830 | 247,600,000 | 298,459,102 | 1831 | 262,700,000 | 276,979,784 | 1832 | 276,900,000 | 322,215,122 | 1833 | 287,000,000 | 324,698,604 | 1834 | 303,000,000 | 384,717,907 | 1835 | 326,407,692 | 387,358,992 | 1836 | 363,684,232 | 423,631,307 | 1837 | 367,564,752 | 444,211,537 | 1838 | 477,206,108 | 595,952,297 | 1839 | 445,744,000 | 413,624,212 | 1840 | 517,254,400 | 743,941,061 | 1841 | 460,387,200 | 530,204,100 | 1842 | 477,339,200 | 584,717,017 | 1843 | 555,214,400 | 792,297,106 | 1844 | 570,731,200 | 663,633,455 | 1845 | 626,496,000 | 872,905,996 | 1846 | 624,000,000 | 547,558,055 | 1847 | 442,416,000 | 527,219,958 | 1848 | 602,160,000 | 814,274,431 | 1849 | 624,000,000 | 1,026,602,269 | 1850 | 606,000,000 | 635,381,604 | 1851 | 648,000,000 | 927,237,089 | 1852 | 817,998,048 | 1,093,230,639 | 1853 | 746,376,848 | 1,111,570,370 | 1854 | 761,646,704 | 987,833,106 | 1855 | 775,814,112 | 1,008,424,601 | 1856 | 877,225,440 | 1,351,431,827 | 1857 | 837,406,300 | 1,048,282,475 | 1858 | 884,733,696 | 1,118,624,012 | 1859 | | 1,372,755,006 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------

================================================================== Great Britain's sources of Cotton supplies other than the | United States, with total Cotton crop of United States at | intervals. | | -----------------------------------------------------------------| 1815. Peace proclaimed between the United States and Great | Britain. | 1818. Cotton crop of the U. S., 125,000,000 lbs. | 1821. _Exports_ from-- | West Indies, lbs. 9,000,000 | Brazil, 28,000,000 | India, 50,000,000 | Turkey and Egypt, 5,500,000 | Elsewhere, 6,000,000 | 1822. Cotton crop of the U. S., 210,000,000 lbs. | 1828. Cotton crop of the U. S., 325,000,000 lbs. | _Imports_ by Great Britain from West Indies,-- | 1829. lbs. 4,640,414 | 1830, 3,449,249 | 1831, 2,401,685 | 1834, 2,296,525 | 1832. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | Brazil, lbs. 20,109,560 | Turkey and Egypt, 9,113,890 | East Indies and Mauritius 5,178,625 | British West Indies. 1,708,764 | Elsewhere, 964,933 | 1838. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | Brazil, lbs. 24,464,505 | East Indies and Mauritius 40,230,064 | British West Indies, 928,425 | 1840. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | British West Indies, lbs. 427,529 | 1841. _Imports_ by Great Britain from India, 1835 to 1839, | annual average, 57,600,000 lbs. | _Imports_ by Great Britain, 1840 to 1844, during the Chinese | war, 92,800,000 lbs. | 1845. Do. from Egypt, 32,537,600 lbs. | 1848. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | West Indies and Demarara, lbs. 3,155,600 | Brazil and Portuguese Colonies 40,080,400 | East Indies, 91,004,800 | _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | 1849. East Indies, lbs. 72,800,000 | 1850. Do. 123,200,000 | 1852. Do. 84,022,432 | 1853. Do. 180,431,496 | 1854. Do. 119,835,968 | 1855. Do. 145,218,976 | 1856. _Imports_ by Great Britain from-- | British East Indies, lbs. 180,496,624 | Brazil, 21,830,704 | Egypt, 34,399,008 | 1857. _Imports_ from-- | Brazil, lbs. 29,910,832 | Egypt, 24,532,256 | 1858. _Imports_ from Brazil, lbs. 18,617,872 | Do. Egypt, 38,232,320 | ------------------------------------------------------------------

================================================================== Dates of Inventions promoting the growth and manufacture of Cotton, and of movements to elevate the African race.

------------------------------------------------------------------ 1815. Power Loom first used in United States. 1816. First steamboat crossed the British Channel. 1816. Power Loom brought into general use in England. 1817. Colonization Society organized. 1819. Florida annexed. 1820. Slave trade declared piracy by Congress. 1820. Emigrants to Liberia first sent. 1821. Benjamin Lundy published his "Genius of Universal Emancipation." 1823. United States export to France, 25,000,000 lbs. 1824. Do. do. do. 40,500,000 lbs. 1825. New York and Erie Canal opened. Production and manufacture of cotton now greatly above the consumption, and prices fell so as to produce general distress and stagnation, which continued with more or less intensity throughout 1828 and 1829. The fall of prices was about 55 per cent.--_Encyc. Amer._ 1826. Creek Indians removed from Georgia. 1829. Emancipation in Mexico. 1830. United States export to France, 75,000,000 lbs. 1831. Slave Insurrection in Virginia. 1832. Garrison declares war against the Colonization Society. 1832. Ohio Canal completed. 1833. Cotton consumption in France, 72,767,551 lbs. 1834. Emancipation in West Indies, commenced. 1834. Birney deserted the Colonization Society. 1835. United States export to France, 100,330,000 lbs. 1836. Gerrit Smith repudiates the Colonization Society. 1836. Cherokee and Choctaw Indians removed from Georgia, Mississippi, and Alabama. 1837. American Anti-Slavery Society had an income of $36,000, and 70 agents commissioned. 1838. Colonization Society had an income of only $10,900. 1840. Cotton consumed in the United States, 106,000,000 lbs. 1844. Value of cotton goods imported into the United States $13,286,830. 1845. Texas annexed. 1846. Mexican War. 1847. Gold discovered in California. 1848. New Mexico and California annexed. 1849. United States export to France, 151,340,000 lbs. Do. Other Continental countries, 128,800,000 lbs. 1850. Cotton consumed in United States, 256,000,000 lbs. 1851. Value of United States cotton fabrics, $61,869,184. 1853. Value of cottons imported, $27,675,000. 1853. United States export to England, 768,596,498 lbs. 1853. Do. do. Continent, 335,271,064 lbs. 1855. United States export to Great Britain and North American Colonies, 672,409,874 lbs. 1855. Do. do. Continent, 322,905,056 lbs. 1855. Value of Cottons imported, $21,655,624. The remaining statistics of this column can be found in the other Tables. ------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE.--Our commercial year ends June 30: that of England January 1. This will explain any seeming discrepancy in the imports by her from us, and our exports to her.

N. B.--In 1781 Great Britain commenced re-exporting a portion of her imports of Cotton to the Continent; but the amount did not reach a million of pounds, except in one year, until 1810, when it rose to over eight millions. The next year, however, it fell to a million and a quarter, and only rose, from near that amount, to six millions in 1814 and 1815. From 1818, her _consumption_, only, of cotton, is given, as best representing her relations to slave labor for that commodity. After this date her exports of cotton gradually enlarged, until, in 1853, they reached over one hundred and forty-seven millions of pounds. Of this, over eighty-two millions were derived from the United States, and over fifty-nine millions from India. That is to say, of her imports of 180,431,000 lbs. in 1853, from India, she re-exported 59,000,000.

We are enabled to add, for our second edition, that the imports of Cotton into Great Britain, from India, for 1854, amounted to 119,835,968 lbs., of which 66,405,920 lbs. were re-exported; and that her imports from the same for 1855 amounted to 145,218,976 lbs., of which 66,210,704 lbs. were re-exported; thus leaving, for the former year, but 53,430,048 lbs., and for the latter but 79,008,272 lbs. of East India Cotton for consumption in England. The present condition of cotton supplies from India up to 1859, will be seen in the extracts from the _London Economist_.

TABLE II.

TABULAR STATEMENT OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS, DOMESTIC ANIMALS, ETC., EXPORTED FROM THE UNITED STATES: THE TOTAL VALUE OF PRODUCTS AND ANIMALS RAISED IN THE COUNTRY; AND THE VALUE OF THE PORTION THEREOF LEFT FOR HOME CONSUMPTION AND USE, FOR THE YEAR 1853. See Patent Office Report; Abstract of Census; Rep. Com. Nav., etc.

======================================================================== | Value of | Total Value | Value of | Exports. | of Products | portion left | | and Animals. | for home | | | consumption. -------------------|--------------|--------------------|---------------- Cattle, and their | | | products, | $3,076,897 | Catt. $400,000,000 | $396,923,103 Horses and Mules, | 246,731 | 300,000,000 | 299,753,269 Sheep and Wool, | 44,375 | Sheep, 46,000,000 | 45,955,625 Hogs and their | | | products, | 6,202,324 | Hogs, 160,000,000 | 153,797,676 Indian Corn and | | | Meal, | 2,084,051 | Corn, 240,000,000 | 237,915,949 Wheat Flour and | | | Biscuit, | 19,591,817 | Wheat, 100,000,000 | 80,408,183 Rye Meal, | 34,186 | Rye, 12,600,000 | 12,565,814 Other Grains, and | | | Peas and Beans, | 165,824 | 54,144,874 | 53,979,050 Potatoes, | 152,569 | 42,400,00 | 42,247,431 Apples, | 107,283 |(1850) 7,723,326 | 7,616,043 Hay, averaged at | | | $10 per ton, | |(1850) 138,385,790 | 138,385,790 Hemp, | 18,195 | 4,272,500 | 4,254,305 Sugar--Cane and | | | maple, etc., | 427,216 |(1850) 36,900,000 | 36,472,784 Rice, | 1,657,658 | 8,750,000 | 7,092,342 |--------------|--------------------|---------------- Totals, | $33,809,126 | $ 1,551,176,490 |$1,517,367,364 |==============|====================|================ Cotton, | $109,456,404 | $128,000,000 | $18,543,596 Tobacco, and its | | | products, | 11,319,319 | 19,900,000 | 8,580,681 |--------------|--------------------|---------------- Totals, | $120,775,723 | $147,900,000 | $27,124,277 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE.--This table is left as it was in the first edition. As the census tables supply a portion of its materials, a new statement cannot be made until after 1860.

TABLE III.

TOTAL IMPORTS OF THE MORE PROMINENT ARTICLES OF GROCERIES, FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1853; SPECIFYING ALSO, THE RE-EXPORTS, AND THE PROPORTIONS FROM SLAVE-LABOR COUNTRIES. See Report on Commerce and Navigation.

======================================================================= Coffee, Imported, | Value, $15,525,954 | lbs. 199,049,823 " Re-Exported, | 1,163,875 | " 13,349,319 " Slave-Labor | | production, | 12,059,476 | " 156,108,569 | | Sugar, Imported, | $15,093,003 | " 464,427,281 " Re-Exported, | 819,439 | " 18,981,601 " Slave-Labor | | production, | 14,810,091 | " 459,743,322 | | Molasses, Imported, | $3,684,888 | gals. 31,886,100 " Re-Exported, | 97,880 | " 488,666 " Slave-Labor | | production, | 3,607,160 | " 31,325,735 | | Tobacco, etc., Imported, | $4,175,238 | " Re-Exported, | 312,733 | " Slave-Labor | | production, | 3,674,402 | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE.--A part of the modifications necessary in this table to adopt it to 1859, can be inferred from some of the tables which follow.

TABLE IV.

FREE COLORED AND SLAVE POPULATION, OF THE STATES NAMED, IN THE PERIODS OF TEN YEARS, FROM 1790 TO 1850, WITH THE RATIO OF INCREASE OR DECREASE PER CENT. PER ANNUM, OF THE FORMER.

=========================================================================== STATES AND CLASSES.| 1790. | 1800. | 1810. | 1820. | 1830. | 1840. | 1850. -------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|------- PENNSYLVANIA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 6,537 | 14,561| 22,492| 30,202| 37,930| 47,854| 53,626 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 12.27| 5.44| 3.42| 2.55| 2.61| 1.20 Slaves | 3,737 | 1,706| 795| 211| 403| 64| ...... MASSACHUSETTS. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 5,463| 6,452| 6,737| 6,740| 7,048| 8,669| 9,064 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 1.81| .44| .004| .45| 2.29| .45 Slaves | ......| ......| ......| ......| ......| ......| ...... NEW YORK. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 4,654| 10,374| 25,333| 29,279| 44,870| 50,027| 49,069 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 12.29| 14.41| 1.55| 5.32| 1.14| [a].19 Slaves | 21,324| 20,343| 15,017| 10,088| 75| 4| ...... NEW JERSEY. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 2,762| 4,402| 7,843| 12,460| 18,303| 21,044| 23,810 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 5.93| 7.81| 5.88| 4.68| 1.49| 1.31 Slaves | 11,423| 12,422| 10,851| 7,557| 2,254| 674| 236 RHODE ISLAND. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 3,469| 3,304| 3,609| 3,554| 3,561| 3,238| 3,670 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| [a].47| .92| [a].15| .01| [a]90| 1.33 Slaves | 952| 381| 108| 48| 17| 5| ...... VERMONT. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 225| 557| 750| 903| 881| 730| 718 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 11.84| 3.46| 2.04| [a].24|[a]1.71| [a]16 Slaves | 17| ......| ......| ......| ......| ......| ......

=========================================================================== STATES AND CLASSES.| 1790. | 1800. | 1810. | 1820. | 1830. | 1840. | 1850. -------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|------- MAINE. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 538| 818| 969| 929| 1,190| 1,355| 1,356 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 5.20| 1.84| [a].41| 2.80| 1.38| .007 Slaves | ......| ......| ......| ......| 2| ......| ...... NEW HAMPSHIRE. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 630| 856| 970| 786| 604| 537| 520 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 3.58| 1.33|[a]1.89|[a]2.31|[a]1.10| [a].31 Slaves | 158| 8| ......| ......| 3| 1| ...... CONNECTICUT. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 2,801| 5,330| 6,453| 7,844| 8,047| 8,105| 7,693 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 9.02| 2.10| 2.15| .25| .07| [a].50 Slaves | 2,759| 951| 310| 97| 25| 17| ...... OHIO. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| 337| 1,899| 4,723| 9,568| 17,342| 25,279 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| ......| 46.35| 14.87| 10.25| 8.12| 4.57 Slaves | ......| ......| ......| ......| 6| 3| ...... INDIANA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| 163| 393| 1,230| 3,629| 7,165| 11,262 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| ......| 14.11| 21.29| 19.50| 9.74| 5.75 Slaves | ......| 135| 237| 190| 3| 3| ...... DELAWARE. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 3,899| 8,268| 13,163| 12,958| 15,855| 16,919| 18,073 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 11.20| 5.88| [a].13| 2.23| .67| .68 Slaves | 8,887| 6,153| 4,177| 4,509| 3,292| 2,605| 2,290 MARYLAND. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 8,043| 19,587| 33,927| 39,730| 52,938| 62,078| 74,723 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 14.35| 7.32| 1.71| 3.32| 1.72| 2.03 Slaves |103,036|105,635|111,502|107,397|102,994| 89,737| 90,368 VIRGINIA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 12,766| 20,124| 30,570| 36,889| 47,348| 49,852| 54,333 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 5.76| 5.99| 2.06| 2.83| .52| .89 Slaves |293,427|345,796|392,518|425,153|469,757|449,087|472,528

========================================================================== STATES AND CLASSES.| 1790. | 1800. | 1810. | 1820. | 1830. | 1840. | 1850. -------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|------- NORTH CAROLINA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 4,975| 7,043| 10,266| 14,612| 19,543| 22,732| 27,463 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 4.15| 4.57| 4.23| 3.37| 1.63| 2.08 Slaves |100,572|133,296|168,824|205,017|245,601|245,817|288,548 SOUTH CAROLINA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 1,801| 3,185| 4,554| 6,826| 7,921| 8,276| 8,960 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 7.68| 4.29| 4.98| 1.60| .44| .82 Slaves |107,094|146,151|196,365|258,475|315,401|327,038|584,984 GEORGIA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 398| 1,019| 1,801| 1,763| 2,486| 2,753| 2,931 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| 15.60| 7.67| [a].21| 4.10| 1.07| .64 Slaves | 22,264| 59,404|105,218|149,654|217,531|280,944|381,682 TENNESSEE. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 361| 309| 1,317| 2,727| 4,555| 5,524| 6,422 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......|[a]1.44| 32.62| 10.70| 6.70| 2.12| 1.62 Slaves | 3,417| 13,584| 44,535| 80,107|141,603|183,050|239,459 MISSISSIPPI. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| 182| 240| 458| 519| 1,366| 930 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| ......| 3.18| 9.08| 1.33| 16.31|[a]3.19 Slaves | ......| 3,489| 17,088| 32,814| 65,659|195,211|309,878 ALABAMA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| ......| 517| 1,572| 2,039| 2,265 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| ......| ......| ......| 17.53| 2.97| 1.10 Slaves | ......| ......| ......| 41,879|117,549|252,532|342,844 MISSOURI. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| 607| 347| 596| 1,574| 2,618 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| ......| ......|[a]4.28| 6.39| 17.66| 6.63 Slaves | ......| ......| 3,011| 10,222| 25,091| 58,240| 87,422 KENTUCKY. | | | | | | | Free Colored | 114| 741| 1,713| 2,759| 4,917| 7,317| 10,011 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| 55.00| 13.11| 6.10| 7.82| 4.88| 3.68 Slaves | 11,830| 40,343| 80,561|126,732|165,213|182,258|210,981

=========================================================================== STATES AND CLASSES.| 1790. | 1800. | 1810. | 1820. | 1830. | 1840. | 1850. -------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|------- LOUISIANA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| 7,585| 10,476| 16,710| 25,502| 17,462 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| ......| ......| 3.81| 5.95| 5.26|[a]3.15 Slaves | ......| ......| 34,660| 69,064|109,588|168,452|244,809 ILLINOIS. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| 613| 457| 1,637| 3,598| 5,436 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| ......| ......|[a]2.54| 25.82| 11.97| 5.10 Slaves | ......| ......| 168| 917| 747| 331| ...... FLORIDA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| ......| ......| 844| 817| 932 Increase or | | | | | | | decrease per | | | | | | | cent. per annum | ......| ......| ......| ......| ...... [a].31| 1.40 Slaves | ......| ......| ......| ......| 15,501| 25,717| 39,310 ARKANSAS. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| ......| 59| 141| 465| 608 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| ......| ......| ......| 13.89| 2.29| 1.10 Slaves | ......| ......| ......| 1,617| 4,576| 19,935| 47,100 MICHIGAN. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| ......| 120| 174| 261| 707| 2,583 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| ......| ......| 4.50| 5.00| 17.08| 25.53 Slaves | ......| ......| 24| ......| 32| ......| ...... DISTRICT OF | | | | | | | COLUMBIA. | | | | | | | Free Colored | ......| 783| 2,549| 4,048| 6,152| 8,361| 10,059 Increase per cent. | | | | | | | per annum | ......| ......| 22.55| 5.88| 5.19| 3.59| 2.03 Slaves | ......| 3,244| 5,395| 6,377| 6,119| 4,694| 3,687 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOOTNOTE:

[a] DECREASE.

TABLE V.

INFLUENCE OF THE COLORED POPULATION ON PUBLIC SENTIMENT.

TABLE SHOWING THE PROPORTION OF THE FREE COLORED POPULATION IN THE NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN PORTIONS OF THE STATE OF OHIO, BY COUNTIES, AS PRESENTED BY THE CENSUS OF 1840 AND 1850, TOGETHER WITH THE POPULAR VOTE FOR AND AGAINST THE ABOLITION CANDIDATE, HON. S. P. CHASE, AT THE ELECTION FOR GOVERNOR, OCTOBER, 1855.

================================================= SOUTHERN COUNTIES. | MR. CHASE. || -------------------------------|---------------|| COUNTIES. | 1840. | 1850. | FOR |AGAINST|| ---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|| Hamilton, | 2,576| 3,600| 4,516| 18,764|| Clermont, | 122| 412| 2,434| 2,879|| Brown, | 614| 863| 1,571| 2,129|| Adams, | 63| 55| 1,139| 1,629|| Scioto, | 206| 211| 1,042| 1,497|| Lawrence, | 148| 326| 1,092| 1,067|| Gallia, | 799| 1,198| 344| 1,972|| Meigs, | 28| 52| 1,515| 1,504|| Jackson, | 315| 391| 714| 906|| Pike, | 329| 618| 641| 1,156|| Highland, | 786| 896| 1,209| 2,599|| Clinton, | 377| 598| 1,640| 964|| Warren, | 341| 602| 2,306| 1,821|| Butler, | 254| 367| 1,960| 3,235|| Preble, | 88| 77| 1,567| 1,326|| Montgomery, | 376| 249| 2,746| 3,830|| Greene, | 344| 654| 1,953| 1,357|| Fayette, | 239| 291| 909| 757|| Ross, | 1,195| 1,906| 2,160| 2,255|| Vinton, | [a]| 107| 722| 901|| Hocking, | 46| 117| 927| 1,199|| Pickaway, | 333| 412| 1,521| 1,862|| Fairfield, | 342| 280| 2,474| 2,726|| Perry, | 47| 29| 1,772| 1,540|| Athens, | 55| 106| 1,634| 1,072|| Washington, | 269| 390| 2,212| 1,774|| Morgan, | 68| 90| 1,776| 1,235|| Noble, | [a]| [b]| 1,361| 1,030|| Monroe, | 13| 69| 1,451| 1,901|| Belmont, | 742| 778| 1,755| 2,856|| Guernsey, | 190| 168| 1,893| 1,491|| Muskingum, | 562| 631| 2,551| 3,204|| Franklin, | 805| 1,607| 2,487| 4,033|| Madison, | 97| 78| 562| 1,012|| Clarke, | 20| 323| 1,866| 1,404|| Miami, | 211| 602| 1,787| 1,977|| Darke, | 200| 248| 1,685| 1,829|| Champaigne, | 328| 494| 1,353| 1,463|| Union, | 78| 128| 1,222| 829|| Delaware, | 76| 135| 1,602| 1,504|| Licking, | 140| 128| 2,021| 3,252|| Harrison, | 163| 287| 1,712| 1,259|| Jefferson, | 497| 665| 2,156| 1,654|| Shelby, | 262| 407| 955| 1,286|| |-------|-------|-------|-------|| Total, South, | 14,924| 21,745| 72,915| 95,941|| -------------------------------------------------

=============================================== NORTHERN COUNTIES. | MR. CHASE. -------------------------------|--------------- COUNTIES. | 1840. | 1850. | FOR |AGAINST ---------------|-------|-------|-------|------- Ashtabula, | 17| 43| 3,772| 1,156 Lake, | 21| 38| 1,640| 521 Geauga, | 3| 7| 1,816| 486 Cuyahoga, | 121| 359| 3,965| 3,545 Trumbull, | 70| 65| 3,109| 1,505 Portage, | 39| 58| 2,660| 1,871 Summit, | 42| 121| 2,242| 1,326 Medina, | 13| 35| 2,032| 1,526 Lorain, | 62| 264| 2,693| 919 Huron, | 106| 39| 2,295| 1,411 Erie, | 97| 202| 1,564| 1,191 Seneca, | 65| 151| 2,332| 1,976 Sandusky, | 41| 47| 1,382| 1,509 Ottawa, | 5| 1| 369| 406 Lucas, | 54| 139| 1,618| 1,156 Fulton, | [a]| 1| 715| 453 Williams, | 2| 0| 890| 878 Defiance, | [a]| 19| 592| 626 Henry, | 6| 0| 440| 511 Wood, | 32| 18| 1,099| 636 Paulding, | 0| 1| 362| 115 Putnam, | [a]| 11| 528| 858 Hancock, | 8| 26| 1,238| 1,359 Vanwert, | 0| 47| 602| 483 Allen, | 23| 27| 1,235| 929 Wyandott, | [a]| 49| 1,143| 1,106 Crawford, | 5| 10| 1,449| 1,753 Richland, | 65| 67| 2,220| 2,329 Ashland, | [a]| 3| 1,580| 1,660 Wayne, | 41| 28| 2,421| 2,585 Starke, | 204| 159| 3,343| 3,044 Mahoning, | [a]| 90| 1,592| 1,552 Columbiana, | 417| 182| 3,118| 2,170 Carroll, | 49| 52| 1,502| 1,082 Tuscarawas, | 71| 89| 2,552| 2,179 Coshocton, | 38| 44| 2,064| 2,014 Holmes, | 3| 5| 1,194| 1,675 Knox, | 63| 62| 2,166| 2,135 Morrow, | [a]| 18| 1,631| 1,371 Marion, | 52| 21| 1,220| 1,184 Hardin, | 4| 14| 903| 725 Logan, | 407| 536| 1,424| 1,119 Mercer, | 204| 399| 492| 968 Auglaise, | [a]| 87| 643| 1,286 |-------|-------|-------|------- Total, North, | 2,450| 3,524| 73,877| 59,319 -----------------------------------------------

FOOTNOTES:

[a] Not organized in 1840.

[b] Not organized in 1850.

TABLE VI.

TOTAL COTTON CROP OF THE UNITED STATES, WITH THE AMOUNTS EXPORTED, THE CONSUMPTION OF THE UNITED STATES, NORTH OF VIRGINIA, AND THE STOCK ON HAND, SEPTEMBER 1, OF EACH YEAR, FROM 1840 TO 1859, IN POUNDS.--_London Economist_, 1859.

======================================================================= | | EXPORTS TO VARIOUS PLACES. | YEARS.| TOTAL CROP. |-------------------------------------------------| | | | | OTHER | | | | ENGLAND. | FRANCE. | POINTS. | TOTAL. | ------|-------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-------------| 1840 | 871,134,000|498,716,400|178,986,000| 72,698,800| 750,401,200| 1841 | 653,978,000|343,496,800|139,510,400| 42,303,600| 525,290,800| 1842 | 673,429,600|374,252,400|159,251,600| 52,594,800| 586,098,800| 1843 | 551,550,000|587,884,400|138,455,600| 77,714,800| 804,052,000| 1844 | 812,163,600|480,999,200|113,074,000| 57,722,800| 651,796,000| 1845 | 957,801,200|575,722,400|143,742,800|114,037,200| 433,502,400| 1846 | 840,214,800|440,497,600|143,881,200| 81,888,000| 666,716,800| 1847 | 711,460,400|332,363,600| 96,594,400| 67,530,800| 496,488,800| 1848 | 939,053,600|529,706,000|111,668,800|101,929,600|1,743,304,400| 1849 |1,091,437,600|615,160,400|147,303,600|128,672,400| 891,141,600| 1850 | 838,682,400|422,708,400|115,850,800| 77,502,800| 636,062,000| 1851 | 942,102,800|565,306,000|120,534,200|107,634,800| 795,484,000| 1852 |1,206,011,600|667,499,600|168,550,000|141,408,800| 977,458,400| 1853 |1,305,152,800|694,744,000|170,691,200|145,924,800|1,011,360,000| 1854 |1,172,010,800|641,500,000|149,623,200|136,536,000| 927,659,200| 1855 |1,138,935,600|619,886,400|163,972,400|113,824,000| 897,683,600| 1856 |1,411,138,000|768,554,400|192,254,800|221,033,200|1,181,842,400| 1857 |1,175,807,600|571,548,000|165,342,800|164,172,000| 901,062,800| 1858 |1,245,584,800|723,986,400|153,600,800|158,594,800|1,036,181,000| 1859 |1,606,800,000|...........|...........|...........|1,208,561,200| -----------------------------------------------------------------------

======================================== |CONSUMPTION OF | YEARS.|U. S. NORTH OF | STOCK ON HAND | VIRGINIA. | 1ST SEPTEMBER. ------|---------------|----------------- 1840 | 118,077,200 | 23,376,800 1841 | 118,915,200 | 28,991,600 1842 | 107,140,000 | 12,722,800 1843 | 130,051,600 | 37,794,400 1844 | 138,697,600 | 63,908,800 1845 | 155,602,400 | 39,368,000 1846 | 169,038,800 | 42,848,800 1847 | 171,186,800 | 85,934,800 1848 | 212,708,800 | 68,587,200 1849 | 207,215,600 | 61,901,200 1850 | 195,107,600 | 67,172,000 1851 | 161,643,200 | 51,321,600 1852 | 241,211,600 | 36,470,400 1853 | 268,403,600 | 54,257,200 1854 | 244,228,400 | 27,120,600 1855 | 237,433,600 | 28,667,200 1856 | 261,091,600 | 25,668,400 1857 | 280,855,200 | 17,703,200 1858 | 184,692,800 | 40,410,000 1859 | 304,087,200 | .......... ----------------------------------------

================================================================== COUNTRIES. | 1850. | 1851. | 1852. | 1853. | ---------------------|----------|----------|----------|----------| France | 2,830,800| 2,869,200| 4,230,000| 3,607,200| Belgium | 453,600| 446,000| 653,600| 615,200| Holland | 415,200| 415,200| 546,000| 469,200| Germany | 661,200| 846,000| 976,800| 1,107,600| Trieste | 915,200| 884,400| 1,038,400| 792,400| Genoa, Naples, etc. | 223,200| 238,400| 376,800| 392,000| Spain | 592,400| 707,200| 730,400| 653,600| Russia, Norway, etc. | 1,169,200| 1,169,200| 1,622,800| 1,600,000| |----------|----------|----------|----------| Total on Continent | 7,260,800| 7,575,600|10,174,800| 9,237,200| Add Great Britain |11,650,000|12,795,200|14,316,000|14,545,200| |----------|----------|----------|----------| Total weekly | | | | | European Consumption |18,910,800|20,370,800|24,490,800|23,882,400| ------------------------------------------------------------------

============================================================================ COUNTRIES. | 1854. | 1855. | 1856. | 1857. | 1858. ---------------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|---------- France | 3,400,000| 3,684,400| 4,046,000| 3,438,400| Belgium | 538,400| 484,400| 615,200| 438,400| Holland | 661,200| 684,400| 761,200| 753,200| Germany | 1,592,400| 822,800| 1,900,000| 444,800| Trieste | 715,200| 651,200| 746,000| 576,800| Genoa, Naples, etc. | 322,800| 439,400| 846,000| 692,000| Spain | 715,200| 876,800| 938,400| 692,000| Russia, Norway, etc. | 1,030,800| 961,600| 1,769,200| 1,538,400| |----------|----------|----------|----------|---------- Total on Continent | 8,976,000| 9,414,000|11,622,000| 9,786,000| Add Great Britain |15,131,600|16,161,200|16,794,800|15,626,000|16,533,200 |----------|----------|----------|----------|---------- Total weekly | | | | | European Consumption |24,107,600|25,575,200|28,416,800|25,412,000| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOOTNOTE:

[135] The _London Economist_, from which we copy, observes, that the figures in this table differ slightly from some other estimates, as must be the case in all computations that are not official, but that from examination it has reason to think them as near the truth as any practical object can require. The quantities consumed in each country include the direct imports from the producing countries, as well as the indirect imports, chiefly from England. The consumption on the Continent, for 1858, was not known. January 15, 1859, the date of publication of the _Economist_. The bales are estimated at 400 lbs. each.

TABLE XII.

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF THE VALUE OF EXPORTS OF THE GROWTH, PRODUCE, AND MANUFACTURE OF THE UNITED STATES, FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1859; THE PRODUCTIONS OF THE NORTH AND OF THE SOUTH, RESPECTIVELY, BEING PLACED IN OPPOSITE COLUMNS; AND THE ARTICLES OF A MIXED ORIGIN BEING STATED SEPARATELY.--_Report on Com. and Nav._, 1859.

============================================================================== EXPORTS OF THE NORTH. | EXPORTS OF THE SOUTH. | PRODUCT OF THE FOREST. | PRODUCT OF THE FOREST. | Wood and its products, $7,829,666 | Wood and its products, $2,210,884 Ashes, pot and pearl, 643,861 | Tar and pitch 141,058 Ginseng, 54,204 | Rosin and turpentine, 2,248,381 Skins and furs, 1,361,352 | Spirits of turpentine, 1,306,035 | PRODUCT OF AGRICULTURE. | PRODUCT OF AGRICULTURE. | Animals and their products, 15,262,769 | Animals and their products, 287,048 Wheat and wheat flour, 15,113,455 | Wheat and wheat flour, 2,169,328 Indian corn and meal, 2,206,396 | Indian corn and meal, 110,976 Other grains, biscuit, and | Biscuit or ship bread, 12,864 vegetables, 2,226,585 | Rice, 2,207,148 Hemp, and Clover seed, 546,060 | Cotton, 161,434,923 Flax seed, 8,177 | Tobacco, in leaf, 21,074,038 Hops, 53,016 | Brown sugar, 196,935 ----------- | ------------ $45,305,541 | $193,399,618

ARTICLES OF MIXED ORIGIN.

Refined sugar, wax, chocolate, molasses, $ 550,937 Spirituous liquors, ale, porter, beer, cider, vinegar, linseed oil, 1,370,787 Household furniture, carriages, rail-road cars, etc. 1,722,797 Hats, fur, silk, palm leaf, saddlery, trunks, valises, 317,727 Tobacco, manufactured and snuff, 3,402,491 Gunpowder, leather, boots, shoes, cables, cordage, 2,011,931 Salt, lead, iron and its manufactures, 5,744,952 Copper and brass, and manufactures of, 1,048,246 Drugs and medicines, candles and soap, 1,933,973 Cotton fabrics of all kinds, 8,316,222 Other products of manufactures and mechanics, 3,852,910 Coal and ice, 818,117 Products not enumerated, 4,132,857 Gold and silver, in coin and bullion, 57,502,305 Products of the sea, being oil, fish, whalebone, etc. 4,462,974 ------------ $97,189,226 Add Northern exports, 45,305,541 Add Southern exports, 193,399,618 ------------ Total exports, $335,894,385 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPLANATORY NOTE.--The whole of the exports from the ports of Delaware, Baltimore, and New Orleans, are placed in the column of Northern exports, because there is no means of determining what proportion of them were from free or slave States, and it has been thought best to give this advantage to the North. Taking into the account only the heavier amounts, the exports from these ports foot up $11,287,898; of which near one-half consisted of provisions and lumber. The total imports for the year were $338,768,130. Of this $20,895,077 were re-exported, which, added to the domestic exports, makes the total exports $356,789,462, thus leaving a balance in our favor of $18,021,332.

LIBERTY AND SLAVERY:

OR,

SLAVERY IN THE LIGHT OF MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

BY

ALBERT TAYLOR BLEDSOE, LL. D.,

PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA.

LIBERTY AND SLAVERY:

OR,

SLAVERY IN THE LIGHT OF MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY,

INTRODUCTION.

THIS work has, for the most part, been thought out for several years, and various portions of it reduced to writing. Though we have long cherished the design of preparing it for the press, yet other engagements, conspiring with a spirit of procrastination, have hitherto induced us to defer the execution of this design. Nor should we have prosecuted it, as we have done, during a large portion of our last summer vacation, and the leisure moments of the first two months of the present session of the University, but for the solicitation of two intelligent and highly-esteemed friends. In submitting the work, as it now is, to the judgment of the truth-loving and impartial reader, we beg leave to offer one or two preliminary remarks.

We have deemed it wise and proper to notice only the more decent, respectable, and celebrated among the abolitionists of the North. Those scurrilous writers, who deal in wholesale abuse of Southern character, we have deemed unworthy of notice. Their writings are, no doubt, adapted to the taste of their readers; but as it is certain that no educated gentleman will tolerate them, so we would not raise a finger to promote their downfall, nor to arrest their course toward the oblivion which so inevitably awaits them.

In replying to the others, we are conscious that we have often used strong language; for which, however, we have no apology to offer. We have dealt with their arguments and positions rather than with their motives and characters. If, in pursuing this course, we have often spoken strongly, we merely beg the reader to consider whether we have not also spoken justly. We have certainly not spoken without provocation. For even these men--the very lights and ornaments of abolitionism--have seldom condescended to argue the great question of Liberty and Slavery with us as with equals. On the contrary, they habitually address us as if nothing but a purblind ignorance of the very first elements of moral science could shield our minds against the force of their irresistible arguments. In the overflowing exuberance of their philanthropy, they take pity of our most lamentable moral darkness, and graciously condescend to teach us the very A B C of ethical philosophy! Hence, if we have deemed it a duty to lay bare their pompous inanities, showing them to be no oracles, and to strip their pitiful sophisms of the guise of a profound philosophy, we trust that no impartial reader will take offense at such vindication of the South against her accusers and despisers.

In this vindication, we have been careful throughout to distinguish between the abolitionists, our accusers, and the great body of the people of the North. Against these we have said nothing, and we could say nothing; since for these we entertain the most profound respect. We have only assailed those by whom we have been assailed; and we have held each and every man responsible only for what he himself has said and done. We should, indeed, despise ourselves if we could be guilty of the monstrous injustice of denouncing a whole people on account of the sayings and doings of a portion of them. We had infinitely rather suffer such injustice--as we have so long done--than practice it toward others.

We cannot flatter ourselves, of course, that the following work is without errors. But these, whatever else may be thought of them, are not the errors of haste and inconsideration. For if we have felt deeply on the subject here discussed, we have also thought long, and patiently endeavored to guard our minds against fallacy. How far this effort has proved successful, it is the province of the candid and impartial reader alone to decide. If our arguments and views are unsound, we hope he will reject them. On the contrary, if they are correct and well-grounded, we hope he will concur with us in the conclusion, that the institution of slavery, as it exists among us at the South, is founded in political justice, is in accordance with the will of GOD and the designs of his providence, and is conducive to the highest, purest, best interests of mankind.