Part 3 (2/2)

15, and reads thus, ”Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee. He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.” Did this verse stand totally unconnected with any other portion of the Scriptures; were it even completely isolated, I could not dare, in common justice, give it that interpretation which would render it in direct opposition to the whole tenor of Scripture; and which Abolitionists do, in order to shelter themselves from the condemnation justly attached to their principles. No marvel that there are thousands of men in the land who consider the Bible a ma.s.s of contradictions, when those who profess to believe in its Divine origin thus _make_ it, to promote their own views, contradict itself. Compare the meaning attached to this pa.s.sage by Abolitionists, with the first column on page 33 in this treatise, and then see if such meaning is not as directly opposed to the spirit and letter of the pa.s.sages of Scripture contained in that column, as any two things possibly can be!

But we need only look at the pa.s.sage alluded to, as it stands in the Bible, to see at once the true meaning of it; and that it, no more sanctions or authorises the conduct of Abolitionists, than the command of G.o.d to the Jews to extirpate the inhabitants of Canaan, authorises the Abolitionists to extirpate our Southern brethren! Much of this chapter (Deut. xxiii.) is taken up with directions to the Jews respecting their future conduct towards their heathen neighbours, the Ammonite, Moabite, &c., _from whom_, (”THINE ENEMIES,”) if a servant escape, thou shalt not deliver him back. This command, be it observed, is not to _individuals_, but to the JEWISH NATION, which the sixteenth verse fully proves: for therein we find directions given, that the servant escaped from those heathen nations, may be permitted to dwell _among_ the Jews, and in whatever place he chooses. This could not, in the nature of things, be a command to one Jewish master, in respect to the treatment of a slave that had escaped from another Jewish master: the one expression ”he may dwell _among_ you” (v. 16.) ends all dispute on this subject. The Abolitionists must now for ever more search for some other pa.s.sage of Scripture, to contradict that which directs us to ”_do unto others as we would he done by_!”

CHAPTER V.

THE CONDUCT AND CHARACTER OF THE SOUTHERN SLAVE-HOLDER, VINDICATED.

One of the peculiar features in the practice of Abolition champions, is to discredit every statement proceeding from all others, except from themselves: and in this respect they resemble very much, as I stated in the preceding part of this pamphlet, the champions of Infidelity! If there be, therefore, any truth in the common adage, that ”none are so suspicious as those who are conscious that their own statements ought not to be credited,” there can be no difficulty in accounting for the unbelief of those gentlemen.

No one pretends to deny that there are in the South, _some_ cruel, irreligious--inhuman--slave-holders--and who will have the hardihood to deny that there are also in the North, _thousands_ of cruel, irreligious and inhuman, masters, husbands, and fathers! Would the latter fact be a justifiable reason for branding _all_ the masters, husbands, and fathers, in the North, as a set of cruel, irreligious, inhuman monsters?

Ah, but says the Abolitionist, they do not use the lash in the North.--Don't they? If not, it is only because many prefer the cudgel, which they use liberally on the head, back, and limbs of their unfortunate _white_ slaves! How many think you (in this religious city of Philadelphia) white masters, and white husbands, and white fathers, are annually bound over or punished for cruelty to their _white_ apprentices--white wives--and white children? And how many more are they, whose barbarity never comes to light, or whose wealth shelters them? Methinks the effects of the cruelty of a husband or of a father, would be just as sore on the back or head of a wife, or of a child, as if they were the effects of the cruelty of a slave-holder: a rose smells as sweet by any other name! You reply they cannot _sell_ them here; I answer, it would be far to the advantage of many if they could.

But now to the matter of this chapter: it is constantly published and circulated by Abolitionists that so hard-hearted, brutal, and inhuman are all the slave-holders in the South, that they all desire slavery, are all inimical to freedom, and revel in their iniquity. So far from this being the case, I reply that the vast majority of them, regret the necessity of holding slaves--are anxious to have them emanc.i.p.ated, and would hail with delight any plan by means of which they could emanc.i.p.ate them, with safety to themselves, and with safety to their slaves. Let us hear the testimony of a few of them on the subject, recollecting that according to the principles of common justice, as established in all civilized nations, _it is not lawful to consider a man unworthy of credit till he is first proved to be a liar_.

Patrick Henry says,--

”I repeat it again, that it would rejoice my very soul that _every one_ of my fellow beings was _emanc.i.p.ated_. As we ought with grat.i.tude to admire that decree of heaven which has numbered us among the _free_, we ought to _lament and deplore_ the necessity of holding our fellow men in bondage.”--_Debates in Virginia Convention._

Zachariah Johnson says,--

”Slavery has been the foundation of that impiety and dissipation which have been so much disseminated among our countrymen. If it were _totally abolished_, it would do much good.” _Ibid._

Judge Tucker says,--

”The introduction of slavery into this country, is, at this day, considered among its _greatest misfortunes_.” And in 1803, he said, after p.r.o.nouncing slavery to be ”a calamity, a reproach, and a curse,”--”those who wish to postpone emanc.i.p.ation, do not reflect that every day renders the task more arduous to be performed.”

General Harper says,--

”It tends, and may powerfully tend, to rid us gradually and _entirely_ in the United States, _of slaves and slavery_, a great _moral and political evil, of increasing virulence and extent_, from which much mischief is now felt, and very great calamity in future, is justly apprehended. It speaks not only to our understandings, but to our senses; and however it may be derided by some, or overlooked by others, who have not the ability or time, or do not give themselves the trouble to reflect on, and estimate properly, the force and extent of those great moral and physical causes, which prepare gradually, and at length bring forth the most terrible convulsions in civil society; it will not be viewed without deep and awful apprehensions by any who shall bring sound minds, and some share of political knowledge and sagacity, to the serious consideration of the subject. Such persons will give their most serious attention to any proposition which has for its object, the eradication of this terrible mischief lurking in our vitals.”--_Letter on Colonization Society._

Darby says,--

”Copying from Montesquieu, and not from observation of nature, climate has been called upon to account for stains on the human character, imprinted by the hand of political mistake.

No country where negro slavery is established, but must bear, in part, the wounds inflicted on nature and justice. Without pursuing a train of metaphysical reasoning, we may at once draw this induction, that if slavery, like pain, is one of the laws of existence, the latter does not more certainly produce physical weakness, debility, and death, than does the former lessen the purity of virtue in the human breast.”--_History of Louisiana._

M'Call says,--

”It is shocking to human nature, that any race of mankind, and their posterity, should be sentenced to perpetual slavery.”

_History of Georgia._

General Mercer says,--

”For, although it is believed, and is, indeed, too obvious to require proof, that the colonization of the free people of colour alone, would not only tend to civilize Africa; to abolish the slave-trade; and greatly to advance their own happiness; but to promote that also of the other cla.s.ses of society, the proprietors and slaves; yet the hope of the gradual and utter abolition of slavery, in a manner consistent with the rights, interests, and happiness of society, ought never to be abandoned.”--_Report to Colonization Society._

F. S. Key, Esq. says,--

<script>