Volume I Part 43 (1/2)
purchase any slave imported from Africa or elsewhere after this date.”
Meetings were numerous and spirited throughout the colonies, in which, by resolutions, the people expressed their sentiments in reference to the mother country. On the 18th of July, 1774, at a meeting held in Fairfax Court-House, Virginia, a series of twenty-four resolutions was presented by George Was.h.i.+ngton, chairman of the committee on resolutions, three of which were directed against slavery.
”17 _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 this continent; and we take this opportunity of declaring our most earnest wishes to see an entire stop for ever put to such a wicked, cruel, and unnatural trade....
”21. _Resolved_, That it is the opinion of this meeting, that this and the other a.s.sociating colonies should break off all trade, intercourse, and dealings with that colony, province, or town, which shall decline, or refuse to agree to, the plan which shall be adopted by the General Congress....
”24. _Resolved_, That George Was.h.i.+ngton and Charles Broadwater, lately elected our representatives to serve in the General a.s.sembly, be appointed to attend the Convention at Williamsburg on the first day of August next, and present these resolves, as the sense of the people of this county upon the measures proper to be taken in the present alarming and dangerous situation of America.”
Mr. Sparks comments upon the resolutions as follows:--
”The draught, from which the resolves are printed, I find among Was.h.i.+ngton's papers, in the handwriting of George Mason, by whom they were probably drawn up; yet, as they were adopted by the Committee of which Was.h.i.+ngton was chairman, and reported by him as moderator of the meeting, they may be presumed to express his opinions, formed on a perfect knowledge of the subject, and after cool deliberation. This may indeed be inferred from his letter to Mr. Bryan Fairfax, in which he intimates a doubt only as to the article favoring the idea of a further pet.i.tion to the king. He was opposed to such a step, believing enough had been done in this way already; but he yielded the point in tenderness to the more wavering resolution of his a.s.sociates.
”These resolves are framed with much care and ability, and exhibit the question then at issue, and the state of public feeling, in a manner so clear and forcible as to give them a special claim to a place in the present work, in addition to the circ.u.mstance of their being the matured views of Was.h.i.+ngton at the outset of the great Revolutionary struggle in which he was to act so conspicuous a part....
”Such were the opinions of Was.h.i.+ngton, and his a.s.sociates in Virginia, at the beginning of the Revolutionary contest. The seventeenth resolve merits attention, from the pointed manner in which it condemns the slave trade.”[522]
Dr. Benjamin Franklin, in a letter to Dean Woodward, dated April 10, 1773, says,--
”I have since had the satisfaction to learn that a disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of the Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty; and that even the Virginia a.s.sembly have pet.i.tioned the king for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that Colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed, and as the interest of a few merchants here has more weight with Government than that of thousands at a distance.”[523]
Virginia gave early and positive proof that she was in earnest on the question of non-importation. One John Brown, a merchant of Norfolk, broke the rules of the colony by purchasing imported slaves, and was severely rebuked in the following article:--
”'TO THE FREEMEN OF VIRGINIA:
”'COMMITTEE CHAMBER, NORFOLK, March 6, 1775
”'Trusting to your sure resentment against the enemies of your country, we, the committee, elected by ballot for the Borough of Norfolk, hold up for your just indignation Mr.
John Brown, merchant of this place.
”'On Thursday, the 2d of March, this committee were informed of the arrival of the brig f.a.n.n.y, Capt. Watson, with a number of slaves for Mr. Brown: and, upon inquiry, it appeared they were s.h.i.+pped from Jamaica as his property, and on his account; that he had taken great pains to conceal their arrival from the knowledge of the committee; and that the s.h.i.+pper of the slaves, Mr. Brown's correspondent, and the captain of the vessel, were all fully apprised of the Continental prohibition against that article.
”'From the whole of this transaction, therefore, we, the committee for Norfolk Borough, do give it as our unanimous opinion, that the said John Brown, has wilfully and perversely violated the Continental a.s.sociation to which he had with his own hand subscribed obedience, and that, agreeable to the eleventh article, we are bound forthwith to publish the truth of the case, to the end that all such foes to the rights of British America may be publicly known and universally contemned as the enemies of American liberty, and that every person may henceforth break off all dealings with him.'”
And the first delegation from Virginia to Congress in August, 1774, had instructions as follows, drawn by Thomas Jefferson:--
”For the most trifling reasons, and sometimes for no conceivable reason at all, his Majesty has rejected laws of the most salutary tendency. _The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those Colonies, where it was, unhappily, introduced in their infant state.
But, previous to the enfranchis.e.m.e.nt of the slaves we have, it is necessary to exclude all further importations from Africa._ Yet our repeated attempts to effect this by prohibitions, and by imposing duties which might amount to a prohibition, have been hitherto defeated by his Majesty's negative; thus preferring the immediate advantages of a few British corsairs to the lasting interests of the American States, and to the rights of human nature, deeply wounded by this infamous practice.”[524]
It is scarcely necessary to mention the fact, that there were several very cogent pa.s.sages in the first draught of the Declaration of Independence that were finally omitted. The one most pertinent to this history is here given:--
”He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him; captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of _Infidel_ powers, is the warfare of the _Christian_ king of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where _men_ should be bought and sold, he has prost.i.tuted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.
And, that this a.s.semblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the _liberties_ of one people with crimes which he urges them to commit against the _lives_ of another.[525]
The solicitude concerning the slavery question was not so great in the Northern colonies. The slaves were not so numerous as in the Carolinas and other Southern colonies. The severe treatment of slaves had been greatly modified, the spirit of masters toward them more gentle and conciliatory, and the public sentiment concerning them more humane.
Public discussion of the Negro question, however, was cautiously avoided. The failure of attempted legislation friendly to the slaves had discouraged their friends, while the critical situation of public affairs made the supporters of slavery less aggressive. On the 25th of October, 1774, an effort was made in the Provincial Congress of Ma.s.sachusetts to re-open the discussion, but it failed. The record of the attempt is as follows:--
”Mr. Wheeler brought into Congress a letter directed to Doct. Appleton, purporting the propriety, that while we are attempting to free ourselves from our present embarra.s.sments, and preserve ourselves from slavery, that we also take into consideration the state and circ.u.mstances of the negro slaves in this province. The same was read, and it was moved that a committee be appointed to take the same into consideration. After some debate thereon, the question was put, whether the matter now subside, and it pa.s.sed in the affirmative.”[526]
Thus ended the attempt to call the attention of the people's representatives to the inconsistency of their doctrine and practice on the question of the equality of human rights. Further agitation of the question, followed by the defeat of just measures in the interest of the slaves, was deemed by many as dangerous to the colony. The discussions were watched by the Negroes with a lively interest; and failure led them to regard the colonists as their enemies, and greatly embittered them. Then it was difficult to determine just what would be wisest to do for the enslaved in this colony. The situation was critical: a bold, clear-headed, loyal-hearted man was needed.
On Tuesday, Oct. 2, 1750, ”The Boston Gazette, or Weekly Journal,”