Part 12 (2/2)
The Rev. Sam. Cooper, D.D.
The Rev. Samuel Mather The Rev. John Moorhead Mr. John Wheatley, her Master.
[Footnote 071: In the Preface.]
[Footnote 072: As to Mr. Hume's a.s.sertions with respect to African capacity, we have pa.s.sed them over in silence, as they have been so admirably refuted by the learned Dr. Beattie, in his Essay on Truth, to which we refer the reader. The whole of this admirable refutation extends from p. 458. to 464.]
CHAP. VIII.
The second argument, by which it is attempted to be proved, ”that the Africans are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, and are designed for slavery,” is drawn from _colour_, and from those other marks, which distinguish them from the inhabitants of Europe.
To prove this with the greater facility, the _receivers_ divide in opinion. Some of them contend that the Africans, from these circ.u.mstances, are the descendants of Cain[073]: others, that they are the posterity of Ham; and that as it was declared by divine inspiration, that these should be servants to the rest of the world, so they are designed for slavery; and that the reducing of them to such a situation is only the accomplishment of the will of heaven: while the rest, considering them from the same circ.u.mstances as a totally distinct species of men, conclude them to be an inferiour link of the chain of nature, and deduce the inference described.
To answer these arguments in the clearest and fullest manner, we are under the necessity of making two suppositions, first, that the scriptures are true; secondly, that they are false.
If then the scriptures are true, it is evident that the posterity of Cain were extinguished in the flood. Thus one of the arguments is no more.
With respect to the curse of Ham, it appears also that it was limited; that it did not extend to the posterity of all his sons, but only to the descendants of him who was called Canaan[074]: by which it was foretold that the Canaanites, a part of the posterity of Ham, should serve the posterity of Shem and j.a.phet. Now how does it appear that these wretched Africans are the descendants of Canaan?--By those marks, it will be said, which distinguish them from the rest of the world.--But where are these marks to be found in the divine writings? In what page is it said, that the Canaanites were to be known by their _colour_, their _features_, their _form_, or the very _hair of their heads_, which is brought into the account?--But alas! so far are the divine writings from giving any such account, that they shew the a.s.sertion to be false. They shew that the descendants of Cush[075] were of the colour, to which the advocates for slavery allude; and of course, that there was no such limitation of colour to the posterity of Canaan, or the inheritors of the curse.
Suppose we should now shew, upon the most undeniable evidence[076], that those of the wretched Africans, who are singled out as inheriting the curse, are the descendants of Cush or Phut; and that we should shew farther, that but a single remnant of Canaan, which was afterwards ruined, was ever in Africa at all.--Here all is consternation.--
But unfortunately again for the argument, though wonderfully for the confirmation that the scriptures are of divine original, the whole prophecy has been completed. A part of the descendants of Canaan were hewers of wood and drawers of water, and became tributary and subject to the Israelites, or the descendants of Shem. The Greeks afterwards, as well as the Romans, who were both the descendants of j.a.phet, not only subdued those who were settled in Syria and Palestine, but pursued and conquered all such as were then remaining. These were the Tyrians and Carthaginians: the former of whom were ruined by Alexander and the Greeks, the latter by Scipio and the Romans.
It appears then that the second argument is wholly inapplicable and false: that it is false in its _application_, because those, who were the objects of the curse, were a totally distinct people: that it is false in its _proof_, because no such distinguis.h.i.+ng marks, as have been specified, are to be found in the divine writings: and that, if the proof could be made out, it would be now _inapplicable_, as the curse has been long completed.
With respect to the third argument, we must now suppose that the scriptures are false; that mankind did not all spring from the same original; that there are different species of men. Now what must we justly conclude from such a supposition? Must we conclude that one species is inferiour to another, and that the inferiority depends upon their _colour_, or their _features_, or their _form_?--No--We must now consult the a.n.a.logy of nature, and the conclusion will be this: ”that as she tempered the bodies of the different species of men in a different degree, to enable them to endure the respective climates of their habitation, so she gave them a variety of colour and appearance with a like benevolent design.”
To sum up the whole. If the scriptures are true, it is evident that the posterity of _Cain_ are no more; that the curse of _Ham_ has been accomplished; and that, as all men were derived from the same stock, so this variety of appearance in men must either have proceeded from some interposition of the Deity; or from a co-operation of certain causes, which have an effect upon the human frame, and have the power of changing it more or less from its primitive appearance, as they happen to be more or less numerous or powerful than those, which acted upon the frame of man in the first seat of his habitation. If from the interposition of the Deity, then we must conclude that he, who bringeth good out of evil, produced it for their convenience. If, from the co-operation of the causes before related, what argument may not be found against any society of men, who should happen to differ, in the points alluded to, from ourselves?
If, on the other hand, the scriptures are false, then it is evident, that there was neither such a person as _Cain_, nor _Ham_, nor _Canaan_; and that nature bestowed such colour, features, and form, upon the different species of men, as were best adapted to their situation.
Thus, on which ever supposition it is founded, the whole argument must fall. And indeed it is impossible that it can stand, even in the eye of common sense. For if you admit the _form_ of men as a justification of slavery, you may subjugate your own brother: if _features_, then you must quarrel with all the world: if _colour_, where are you to stop? It is evident, that if you travel from the equator to the northern pole, you will find a regular gradation of colour from black to white.
Now if you can justly take him for your slave, who is of the deepest die, what hinders you from taking him also, who only differs from the former but by a shade. Thus you may proceed, taking each in a regular succession to the poles. But who are you, that thus take into slavery so many people? Where do you live yourself? Do you live in _Spain_, or in _France_, or in _Britain_? If in either of these countries, take care lest the _whiter natives of the north_ should have a claim upon yourself.--But the argument is too ridiculous to be farther noticed.
Having now silenced the whole argument, we might immediately proceed to the discussion of other points, without even declaring our opinion as to which of the suppositions may be right, on which it has been refuted; but we do not think ourselves at liberty to do this. The present age would rejoice to find that the scriptures had no foundation, and would anxiously catch at the writings of him, who should mention them in a doubtful manner. We shall therefore declare our sentiments, by a.s.serting that they are true, and that all mankind, however various their appearances are derived from the same stock.
To prove this, we shall not produce those innumerable arguments, by which the scriptures have stood the test of ages, but advert to a single fact. It is an universal law, observable throughout the whole creation, _that if two animals of a different species propagate, their offspring is unable to continue its own species_. By this admirable law, the different species are preserved distinct; every possibility of confusion is prevented, and the world is forbidden to be over-run by a race of monsters. Now, if we apply this law to those of the human kind, who are said to be of a distinct species from each other, it immediately fails.
The _mulattoe_ is as capable of continuing his own species as his father; a clear and irrefragable proof, that the scripture[077] account of the creation is true, and that ”G.o.d, who hath made the world, hath made of one blood[078] all the nations of men that dwell on all the face of the earth.”
But if this be the case, it will be said that mankind were originally of one colour; and it will be asked at the same time, what it is probable that the colour was, and how they came to a.s.sume so various an appearance? To, each of these we shall make that reply, which we conceive to be the most rational.
<script>