^ ^ 
 
 
 ^;^*' 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 
 4^ 
 
 1.0 ^^ tii 
 
 ===: Itt Bi 12.2 
 
 1.1 l.-^BS 
 
 l!^IIJi4lJ^ , 
 
 ■' 
 
 
 A" k 
 
 
 O ^ 
 
 #^ 
 
 <^ 
 
 
 
 23 WIST MAIN STRUT 
 
 WItSTIR.N.Y. MSM 
 
 (716)«72-4S03 
 
 '^ 
 

 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHIVi/JCMH 
 Collection de 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductlons historiquet 
 
 O^ 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notaa tachniquas at bibliographiquaa 
 
 Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia 
 copy which may ba bibliographieally uniqua, 
 which may aKar any of tha imagaa in tha 
 raproduction. or which may significantly changa 
 tha usual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Cclourad covars/ 
 Couvartura da coulaur 
 
 I I Covars damagad/ 
 
 Couvartura andommagte 
 
 Covers rastorad and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^ et/ou pelliculto 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 I I Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g4ographic;ues en couleur 
 
 □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates and/or iiluatrations/ 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Rali6 avac d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge Inttrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutAes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais. lorsqua cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 filmAas. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires; 
 
 L'Inatitut a microfilmA le meilleur exemplaira 
 qu'il lui a AtA possible de se procurer. Les details 
 da cat exemplaira qui sont paut-Atre uniquaa du 
 point da vua bibliographiqua. qui pauvant modifier 
 una image raproduita, ou qui pauvent axiger un9 
 modification dans la mAthoda normale de filmage 
 sont indiqute ci-dessous. 
 
 nn Coloured pages/ 
 
 D 
 
 i,;V"*^i, :-,. 
 
 Pagea de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagtes 
 
 Pages restored and/oi 
 
 Pages restaurtes et/ou pelliculAes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxe( 
 Pages dAcolor^as. tachet6es ou piqu6es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages ditachies 
 
 Showthroughy 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Qualit^ inigale de I'impression 
 
 includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du material suppl^mentaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 I — I Pages damaged/ 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 r~Z\ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 r~3 Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I includes supplementary material/ 
 
 I I Only edition available/ 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, una pelure, 
 etc., ont M film6es d nouveau de faqon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 T» 
 to 
 
 T» 
 
 P< 
 of 
 fll 
 
 Oi 
 b4 
 
 th 
 
 Si( 
 01 
 
 fll 
 
 Sii 
 
 or 
 
 Tl 
 sh 
 Tl 
 w 
 
 M 
 di 
 er 
 bfl 
 
 ri| 
 rei 
 mi 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film6 au taex d? reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
Th« copy filmad h«r« haa baan raproducad thanka 
 to tha ganaroaity of: 
 
 National Library off Canada 
 
 L'axamplaira ffilm* f ut raproduit grica A la 
 gAniroaitA da: 
 
 BibliothAqua nationala du Canada 
 
 Tha Imagaa appaaring hara ara tha baat quality 
 poaaibia conaidaring tha condition and lagibility 
 of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha 
 ffilming contract tpacificationa. 
 
 Original copiaa in printad papar covara ara filmad 
 baginning with tha front covar and anding on 
 tha laat paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- 
 sion, or tha back covar whan appropriata. All 
 othar original copiaa ara filmad baginning on tha 
 firat paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- 
 sion, and anding on tha laat paga with a printad 
 or illuatratad impraaaion. 
 
 Tha last racordad frama on aach microficha 
 shall contain tha symbol — ^ (moaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or tha i»ymbol y (moaning "END"), 
 whichavar applias. 
 
 Laa imagas suivantas ont «t« raproduitas avac la 
 plus grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at 
 da la nattat* da l'axamplaira ffilmA, at 9n 
 conformity avac las conditions du contrat da 
 filmaga. 
 
 Laa axamplairas originaux dont la couvartura en 
 papiar ast imprimte sont filmAs an commandant 
 par la pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la 
 darnlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta 
 d'imprassion ou d'illustration. soit par la sacond 
 plat, salon la cas. Tous las autras axamplairas 
 originaux sont ffilmte an commandant par la 
 pramlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta 
 d'imprassion ou d'illustration at an tarminant par 
 la darniAre paga qui comporta una talle 
 amprainta. 
 
 Un das symbolas suivants apparaltra sur la 
 darniAra image da chaque microffiche. salon la 
 cas: la syinbole —^ signlfie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbola ▼ signifia "FIN". 
 
 Mapa. piataa, charts, ate, may ba ffilmad at 
 diffarant reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent §tre 
 film6s A des taux de reduction difffirents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m^thode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 32X 
 
 1 2 3 
 
 4 5 6 
 
? 
 
rief Hyeply 
 
 to 
 
 n 
 
 
 mportant SKuestion; 
 
 BEING A LETTER 
 
 to 
 
 xaitB$ox 
 
 otefoin, 
 
 mit^ 
 
 aimm-'\rf-, from 
 
 ¥ 
 
 n ^mplicit S^eliever in 2|)oly «®cripture. 
 
 I 'V^fi^i.-.^. 
 
 
 
 'i-^> ! (• i- 
 
 •s-ii 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 SAUNDERS, OTLEY, AND CO., 
 
 66, BROOK STREET, W. 
 
 1863. 
 
 \AU right i reserved^ 
 
 ^;:i,/ 
 
 
b '-'^i: 
 
 
 il Ki-,./ 
 
 LOMSOir t 
 
 8ATII.I. AKD ISWABSS, OHAHSOS-STRIVr, 
 
 COYINT OIBDVV. 
 
 ^. 
 
 < / 
 
A LETTE R. 
 
 ETC. 
 
 X i December, 1863. 
 
 IR, — I have just received from an unknown 
 hand a copy of your pamphlet, " Does the 
 Bible sanction * American slavery ?* " The 
 question is one to which my attention has not until 
 very lately been drawn. Like most of my country- 
 men, I have hitherto been content to take the answer 
 for granted, and with them shall owe a debt of grati- 
 tude to any one who shall on sufficient grounds 
 provide us with an answer. It is essential, however, 
 that this answer should carry with it at least some 
 degree of conviction. I purpose, therefore, with all 
 submission, to point out : 
 
 I. Certain respects in which your arguments appear 
 likely to fall short of their intended effect. 
 
 a. Certain points, of no ordinary relevance, which 
 appear to have altogether escaped your observation. 
 
 I shall esteem myself fortunate, if in so doing, I 
 assist, however humbly, in arriving at a correct solu- 
 tion. 
 
 And first let me notice two particulars in which I 
 fear your arguments will suffer from the conditions 
 under which your inquiry is conducted. You say (p. 4): 
 
 A 2 
 
C( 
 
 (C 
 
 <c 
 
 " In this discussion the authority of the Pentateuch 
 is taken for granted on both sides. In using, there- 
 " fore, the common language on the subject, the author 
 is not presuming to pass any opinion upon the ques- 
 tions respecting the date and authorship of the books 
 "which divide great Hebraists and theologians, and 
 " which, he is perfectly aware, can be decided only by 
 **free inquiry y carried on by men learned in the subject y 
 " with absolute faith in the God of Truth." 
 
 And again (p. i ) : — " It is important in more ways 
 " than one to determine whether the slave-owner's 
 "plea .is true. The character of the Bible is 
 " threatened.*' 
 
 A little further on (p. 3) you speak with obvious 
 inference, of denying : — " Not a theory of Inspira- 
 " tion, but a great and manifest fact of history." 
 
 And you propose to yourself (p. 4) : — " To relieve 
 " the distress caused by doubts as to the morality of the 
 " Old Testament on other points as well as on the 
 " question now in issue, at a less expense than that of 
 ** supposing the existence of two different Moralities, 
 " one for God, the other for Man, and thus making 
 " Man worship, what to his mind must be, an immoral 
 « Godr 
 
 Now here, sir, is a matter on which, as I appre- 
 hend, you will be found to differ, at the outset, with 
 no small proportion of those to whom your argu- 
 ments are addressed. We who believe — as thank 
 God the vast majority of Englishmen do still believe — 
 
5 
 
 implicitly and unreservedly the truth and inspiration 
 of Holy Scripture, are altogether opposed to the theory 
 here set forth by you, in agreement apparently with 
 Bishop Colenso and other sceptics, of the questionable 
 character of that most vital portion of it, the Pen- 
 tateuch. Still more strongly, if possible, do we reject 
 the idea that the " character of the Bible " is, or can 
 be, " threatened."* Most emphatically of all do we 
 repudiate, as altogether monstrous and blasphemous, 
 the idea of " immorality " in connexion with God or 
 His Holy Word. 
 
 Nor is this difference of so little moment as, from 
 your point of view, it will no doubt, at first sight, 
 appear. It is of vital importance. Not only does 
 it array against you at starting our deepest and most 
 cherished convictions, and taint beforehand with sus- 
 picion every argument from such a quarter; it affects the 
 whole character and drift of your discourse, and, so far 
 at least as your believing readers are concerned, renders 
 the ends for which we are severally striving as diverse 
 as the points from which we start. You, taking for 
 granted the iniquity of slavery, are anxious, for the 
 Bible's sake, to show that slavery cannot be defended 
 on Scriptural grounds. We, taking for granted the 
 infallibility of God's Holy Word, are anxious only, 
 for our own conscience' sake, to learn whether, by the 
 authority of that Word, the institution of slavery is 
 
 * Comp. Colenso, Part I, p. 144, 1. 24. 
 
sanctioned or condemned. With us, that is to say, 
 it is slavery that is on its trial. With you it is the 
 Bible. 
 
 The second particular of fundamental disagreement 
 springs of necessity from the first. The question 
 which you thus commence by taking for granted, is 
 precisely that on which we are anxious for enlighten- 
 ment. The matter on which we desire only to arrive 
 at a just decision is one on which your foregone con- 
 clusion is so strong as to prepare you, in the event of 
 an adverse judgment, for the rejection of that very 
 authority to which we both appeal. We . look, as in 
 duty bound, for the calm impartiality of a judge. 
 You come before us, almost avowedly, as counsel for 
 the prosecution. 
 
 With a somewhat freer recourse, perhaps, to the 
 ingenious arts of the advocate than, in such a position, 
 the strict tradition of legal practice might allow. Your 
 opening paragraph is indeed a masterpiece of special 
 pleading, and, as such, deserves the highest admiration 
 such efforts may command. But it is not special 
 pleading of which we are now in want. We pay a 
 willing tribute to the ingenuity that seeks to enlist 
 against the South our feelings of abhorrence for the 
 coarse polygamy of the West ; though it is in truth 
 to the ingenuity rather than to the honesty of the 
 artifice that this tribute is due. But the appeal for 
 which we are prepared, lies not to our feelings, but to 
 our reason, and ur reason at once detects two 
 
fallacies of the most transparent kind. The con- 
 nexion you attempt to set up between the two institu- 
 tions has no shadow of foundation in fact. It would 
 be totally irrelevant to the issue if it had. - - 
 
 So, too, with the clever " clap-trap " — pardon the 
 phrase — of the " great Act of Emancipation." Why 
 should the Bible injunction to the slave to return to 
 his master make this great act a *' robber's act ?" The 
 Bible certainly enjoins it in the case of the early Jews, 
 at the very time when that same Bible — as you are at 
 some pains a little further on (p. 48) to show — forbade 
 the Hebrew to give up to any other nation a fugitive 
 slave. Was this law of Jehovah himself — this law 
 on which rests so large a portion of your own case 
 against the South — a " robber's law ?" Or, to compare 
 great things with small : the law of our own Eng- 
 land recognises, I believe, a property in land. Is all 
 our railway, and canal, and public improvement legis- 
 lation a series of " robber's laws ?" 
 
 Unhappily, the same spirit of partisanship, thus 
 displayed in the outset, is but too clearly discernible 
 throughout the entire work. And nowhere is it more 
 conspicuous than in the references by which your state- 
 ments are supported. So marked is this, that it seems 
 to have struck yourself; and the monotony of perpetual 
 reference to one almost solitary authority is judiciously 
 relieved by variations of the mode in which the refe- 
 rence is made. Sometimes (as at p. 61) the names of 
 book and author are given in full ; sometimes (as at 
 
 m 
 
8 
 
 pp. 34 and 62) the name of one or the other is quoted 
 alone ; sometimes (as at p. 36), a portion only of the 
 title is quoted ; or (as at p. 23) a trifling alteration in 
 the spelling of the name gives some relief to the wearied 
 eye. But the authority thus variously designated is, 
 in fact, ever the same ; and it is that of simply one 
 of the most notoriously unscrupulous partizans that 
 ever bore " false witness against his neighbour." 
 
 So, too, with your other authorities. I do not now 
 speak of ** Goodell's American Slave Code," for after 
 careful inquiry of my friends, both North and South, 
 I have been unable to learn anything whatever of that 
 apparently not very generally recognised publication. 
 But surely some more reliable picture of Southern 
 manners and society might have been found than a 
 quotation (p. 49) from a sensation romance ! And 
 surely, too, in endeavouring to establish your point as 
 to the real status of the American slave, some higher 
 authority was accessible than that of " Judge Rufl!in, 
 of North Carolina." 
 
 The laws of each State are published. Would it 
 not have given more weight to your argument to have 
 quoted them ? Or must we believe that they would 
 have failed to bear out your position; and that to 
 support it you were fain to dig and ferret among the 
 obscure records of the minor courts until fortune 
 rewarded your perseverance with the decision of some 
 " hanging judge," on whose dictum you might take 
 your stand ? 
 
I fear me, sir, such slips as these must tend grievously 
 to weaken the effect of your arguments on the minds 
 of English lovers of fair play. 
 
 We come now to the brief consideration of these 
 arguments themselves. And here, too, one seems to 
 recognise more than one fallacy of a nature to thwart 
 very seriously the object you have in view. I will 
 endeavour, for brevity's sake, so far as possible, to 
 classify them. 
 
 First then, you appear to be the victim of some 
 strange delusion, as to the position of the Confederate 
 States with regard to their " peculiar institution." 
 You speak (p. i) of " the conclusion that slavery is 
 . . . established by God for all time.'* In drawing 
 the analogy between this and other Mosaic institutions, 
 you say (p. 8) — 
 
 " Shall we say, then, with these things before us, 
 " that the Bible sanctions private revenge, the right of 
 " asylum for criminals, the exercise of a power of life 
 " and death by parents over their children, or the 
 " practice of polygamy ; that it establishes these as 
 " divine institutions intended for all time ; and enjoins 
 " the revival of tbemy where they have been allowed to 
 ^^ fall out of use i in civilized and Christian lands ?" 
 
 You ask (p. 56), in speaking of S. Peter's words, 
 " servants be subject to your masters"* — 
 
 " Is this an exhortation to modern society to esta- 
 
 * S. Peter ii. 18 — 24. 
 A 3 
 
10 
 
 (C 
 
 blisb or suffer to be established in the midst of Chris- 
 " tianity, freedom, and equal law, an institution 
 " under which men are subject to the frowardness of 
 " masters V* 
 
 And, finally (p. 73), you speak of " a great Slave 
 " Power,'* being " established on the neighbouring 
 " shore." 
 
 Now, to all this there is one simple and obvious 
 reply. It is untrue. The Confederate States are not 
 legislating " for all time." They are simply dealing 
 with facts as they exist at this time present. There is 
 no question of the " revival "of slavery where it has 
 been " allowed to fall out of use." It fell out of use 
 — when it was no longer found to pay — in the 
 Northern States alone, and the one desire of the 
 Southern States is permanent separation from the 
 North. The Confederacy does not wish to "establish" 
 slavery. Throughout their entire territory it was 
 established by ourselves long ago. While, so far from 
 the war being one to establish a " great Slave Power," 
 it is simply the result of the Southern effort to break 
 up and diminish by one half, the greatest Slave Power 
 the world has ever known. 
 
 Another class of error equally extensive and equally 
 fatal, is that relating to the actual status of the Ame- 
 rican slave and the relation between him and his 
 master. You say (p. 5) — 
 
 " Every moral being, in other words, has a right 
 "to be treated as a person and not as a thing." 
 
11 
 
 But it is precisely as a person, and not as a thing, 
 that the American slave is treated by American law.* 
 
 You draw (p. 20) a "picture of patriarchal bondage" 
 too long for quotation here, and familiar already 
 to every reader of the Bible. But it is a picture that, 
 allowing for difference of scenery, manners, and cos- 
 tume, might well bring before us the bondage of the 
 American slave, not indeed "as painted by Judge 
 Ruffin," or Miss Maria Child, or Mrs. Beecher Stowe, 
 but by any one of the many unprejudiced observers 
 among our own countrymen who have dared to 
 speak the truth as they have seen it.f 
 
 So too, (p. 21), with the identity of interest between 
 the patriarchal chief and his " servant, and the reliance 
 " consequently placed by the chief in the servant's 
 " loyalty, which we have noted in the story of Abra- 
 " ham's steward, and which appear elsewhere also. 
 " * When Abraham heard that his brother (Lot) was 
 " ' taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born 
 
 * in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and 
 
 * pursued them unto Dan.* " % How many an 
 instance of similarly affectionate devotedness has not 
 this cruel war revealed. 
 
 You pass from the slavery of the ancient Jews to 
 that of the classic age, and (p. 23) illustrate American 
 
 * " Any slave, or other person, held to service." Vide Con- 
 stitution of the Confederate States, Par. 3. 
 
 t Fide Miss Murray's book} South as it is; British Merchant; 
 Malet, &c. 
 
 X Gen. xxiv. i — 4, 10 — 14. 
 
 <c 
 
 « 
 
slavery by the example of Cato ; that " perfect 
 ** model of the slave-owning agriculturist," who 
 " advises his reader to * sell off his old oxen, his dis- 
 " * carded cows and sheep, wool, hides, old wagons, 
 " * old tools, old and sickly slaves.* " 
 
 Yet a few pages (p. 70) further on you are not 
 ashamed to admit your knowledge of the fact — a little 
 disguised in your representation, it is true — that the 
 Southern States forbid even the emancipation of " old 
 " and sickly slaves,*' that the master may not by an act 
 of spurious philanthropy, relieve himself of their charge. 
 
 So (p. 34) when you speak of " the Slave States of 
 " America, where in law a slave's marriage is a nullity, 
 *' and where, in practice, husbands are sold away from 
 ** their wives, children from their parents ; where the 
 " human cattle are bred like sheep or swine for the 
 ** market : where, in short, the whole system is a 
 ** standing defiance of nature and humanity." 
 
 You know, or should know — for it is shown by an 
 hundred proofs of which it is little less than criminal 
 in one thus setting himself up as a judge to be 
 ignorant — that in the sense in which these charges are 
 made they are altogether false; that the assertion 
 that negroes are " bred like swine for the market " is 
 contradicted »iot merely by the evidence of every one 
 acquainted with the facts, but by the laws of the 
 States, expressly framed to prohibit such an act, and 
 by the census returns, which show, with all the cold 
 i.npartiality of figures, that those laws have had their 
 
l:J 
 
 effect.* Thaf .! jgh the law does not recognise the 
 marriage oi a slave — and nowhere is that law more 
 sincerely condemned than in the South — society, which, 
 as with ourselves, is often in advance of the law, dees 
 recognise it, and visits with heavy penalties its wanton 
 infraction by the master. That, " in practice," slavery 
 separates slave husbands from their wives, and slave 
 parents from their children, far less often than the 
 exigencies of earning a livelihood compel no less 
 inexorably such separations in the families of our 
 free labourers at home. And that even were this not 
 so, the slaveholding confederacy is at the least dis- 
 graced by no such law and no such practice as that — 
 our own boast and pride— which pronounces for the 
 worn-out freeman the economical divorce of the union 
 workhouse. 
 
 I come to an instance which, sad as it is in its lack 
 of Christian charity, might almost make one smile to 
 see how far astray the spirit of partisanship can carry 
 its victims. 
 
 * One of the most ingenious arguments in support of this 
 charge of " breeding like swine" is the comparatively low rate 
 of increase in the Border States, compared with most of those 
 by which the slaves bred in the Border States are supposed to 
 be "consumed." In other words, we are asked to believe that 
 a decreasing stock is a sign of a " breeding," and an increasing 
 stock of a " consuming" state. The argument has at least the 
 advantage of novelty. Applying it to the case of the " swine," 
 used by its originators as an illustration, it proves conclusively 
 that the export of " swine" from England to Ireland must be 
 very large indeed. A fact as novel — almost — as the argument. 
 
«'••■« *M«»y., 
 
 (( 
 
 « 
 
 t€ 
 
 " In America,** say you (p. 40) " the slave is made 
 '* a Christian in a sense of which we may have more 
 ** to say hereafter ; but practically he can scarcely be 
 '* said to belong to the same Church any more than 
 ** to the same State with his master. He sometimes 
 
 sits in a separate part of the same place of worship, 
 
 and receives the Communion separately from the 
 
 same hands ;" and again {Ibid.) " Mr. Olmsted 
 " says, that * though family prayers were held in several 
 " * of the fifty planters' houses in Mississippi and Ala- 
 " * bama, in which he passed a night, he never in a 
 " * single instance saw a field-hand attend, or join in 
 " * the devotion of the family.' " 
 
 What an outrage on our Christian feelings would it 
 not be were the poor farm labourer to sit " in a separate 
 part" of his parish church, or kneel anywhere but 
 between his master and his mistress at the altar rails ! 
 How shocked would you yourself be, on a visit to 
 some large country house, to find that the ploughman 
 and the cartboy did not come in to family prayers ! 
 
 One instance more and I pass to another branch of 
 my subject. It is one I would willingly avoid, but as 
 you have not hesitated to adopt in this respect also the 
 tactics of those sensation writers in v/hose hands it is 
 so pointed a weapon, I cannot altogether pass it by. 
 You say (p. 66) : 
 
 " The only refuge for those who defend Slavery on 
 " grounds of race, if they do not wish to contradict 
 " S. Paul, seems to be to go the full length of saying 
 
" that the negroes are not * a nation of men.' And to 
 " this suggestion the Slave-owner, as we have hinted 
 " before, has given and daily gives a conclusive answer 
 " by the practices which fill the country with a mixed 
 " race." 
 
 You have indeed " hinted at this before," somewhat 
 too frequently, perhaps, even had the charitable asser- 
 tion been true. The universal voice of the entire South, 
 and even yet more clearly the practical evidence of 
 hardihood and vigour which no race guilty of such 
 general licentiousness could have shown, prove it to 
 be a gross and disgusting slander. 
 
 My letter is running to too great a length, and I 
 must hurry rapidly over the remainder of your argu- 
 ments. In those relating to the " principle " on which, 
 as you assume, the Mosaic alterations of the law were 
 made, I cannot but think that you have strangely 
 missed the mark. The right of asylum (p. 5) is not 
 " modified." So far as criminals — moral criminals 
 that is to say — are concerned, it is abrogated altogether. 
 The life and death power of parents (p. 7) is not 
 " checked." It is altogether transferred to the con- 
 gregation before which the parent is henceforth to plead. 
 The case (p. 1 2) of the " President of the Southern 
 States making himself a king," has no more bearing on 
 the question of monarchy as established by God, than 
 the case (p. 13) of a " self-ordained and self-invested 
 " order," on the authority of the priesthood expressly 
 ordained for His service by Himself. 
 
So, too, in your arguments (pp. 24, 25, 26,44, &c.) 
 from the Mosaic injunctions to free, at stated intervals, 
 all Hebrew slaves. The constitution of the Southern 
 States goes far beyond this. It does not permit their 
 own people to be enslaved at all. While if, as you 
 argue (p. 42) from the Mosaic " discouragement of 
 . . . . piracy .... conquest .... and kidnap- 
 ping," the object of the lawgiver was really to stop the 
 supply of slaves, how much more effectually must 
 this end be served by the laws of the Southern States 
 which, instead of " discouraging," forbid these prac- 
 tices altogether ? 
 
 In the case of Onesimus also I cannot but fear that 
 you have missed the real gist and force of the whole 
 story. You ask (p. 64) " Does [S. Paul] send him 
 back as a slave ?" S. Paul's own words seem to give 
 a very straightforward reply. " Whom I would have 
 retained with me, that in thy stead he might have 
 ministered unto me^ in the bonds of the Gospel, but 
 without thy mind would I do nothing, that thy benefit 
 should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly." 
 Thy benefit, be it observed, not that of Onesimus. The 
 " benefit" or benevolence (tittpyeaiag) of the ministration 
 of the slave are spoken of as belonging not to the slave, 
 but to the master. Onesimus renders S. Paul a service, 
 but it is to Philemon that, on account of that service, 
 S. Paul is under obligation ; and the apostle's scruple 
 at claiming these services at the hands of his convert's 
 slave is not that he questions the master's right to 
 
:: 
 
 lend, but rather that he will not even appear to inter- 
 fere with it, by exercising, unlicensed, his own strong 
 claim to borrow. Had he foreseen that this right 
 would one day be called in question, could he have 
 recorded more pointedly his own acknowledgment of 
 its validity ? 
 
 And this brings me to the last of your arguments 
 which I propose at present to analyse. It is perhaps 
 the most extraordinary of any that have come under 
 my notice. You say (p. ;^;i) : 
 
 " The last of the Ten Commandments which we 
 " continue to use instead of the Two,* shews us what 
 was the general state of society for which the code 
 was framed, and fixes the real position of the slave 
 in the household. " Thou shalt not covet thy 
 
 * neighbour's bouse, thou shalt not covet thy neigh- 
 
 * hour's wife, nor his manservant ^ nor his tnaid- 
 
 * servant y nor his ox^ nor his asSy nor anything that 
 'is thy neighbour's* We see that the wife is as 
 completely a subject of property and a part of a 
 
 " man's estate as a manservant or a maidservant; 
 And when this is seen, all thought of degradation 
 as attaching to the condition of a slave is at an end." 
 Had you not yourself italicized the words I should 
 have fancied you must have forgotten that this pas- 
 sage comprises with the manservant and the maid- 
 
 (f 
 
 (C 
 
 i( 
 
 {{ 
 
 <( 
 
 (( 
 
 (< 
 
 {( 
 
 <c 
 
 u 
 
 * The precise gist and animus of this qualification is, I 
 admit, not clear to me. 
 
18 
 
 servant not only the wife, but the ox and the ass, and 
 « everything that is his." Are we really to understand 
 that you, Professor of History in the University of 
 Oxford, would feel it " no degradation " to be con- 
 sidered as an ox — or an ass ? 
 
 And yet it is quite true that the words of this Com- 
 mandment do really and definitively " fix the position 
 of the slave." Like all other words of Holy Writ, the 
 more closely they are examined the more comprehen- 
 sive, the more accurate, the more exhaustive they 
 appear. In three short lines we have a resume of 
 every variety of property that man can hold. The 
 house, type of the inanimate things that are absolutely 
 his, to use well or ill, to sell or to bequeath, to 
 improve, to damage, or to destroy. The wife, 
 slaves, cattle, his living property ; each ranked accord- 
 ing to the nature and extent of its subordination to 
 his will. The wife, her person and her service his, 
 but his alone — untransferable during his life, and at his 
 death reverting ipso facto to herself. The ox and the 
 ass transferable at pleasure ; subjected not merely in 
 respect of person and of service, but of life itself; 
 and differing from the inanimate " house" only in that 
 they must not be hurt or damaged, but tended with 
 the rt^ ,rd due to everything that in common with 
 man himself has received from its Creator some portion 
 at least of the mysterious gift of life. The slave 
 holding a position between the two ; owing, indeed, 
 subordination of person and of service only, not of 
 
 ): :>. 
 
19 
 
 life, but with this obligation, like that of the ox or the 
 , ass, transferable at pleasure, and at his master's death 
 reverting not to himself hut to his master's heir. 
 
 And such is precisely — not perhaps " according to 
 Judge Ruffin, of North Carolina," but according to 
 the written constitution and laws of the Southern 
 States — the present position of the American slave. 
 His legal description and his legal status alike are those 
 of a " person held to service."* It is to his service 
 alone — the precise right so expressly reserved by S. 
 Paul to Philemon, that the master has any claim. And 
 though that service may be transferred from master to 
 master, and in respect of that service he is in the eyes 
 of the law a " chattel personal," f in all other respects 
 he is regarded as a " person" and not as a " thing,'* and 
 as a person his rights and immunities are guarded by 
 jealous and stringent laws. His service differs from 
 that of an English apprentice in two respects. It is 
 perpetual and it is transferable. In all others it is 
 identically the same. 
 
 I pass from the examination of the arguments you 
 have adduced, to consider one or two which seem 
 hitherto to have escaped your attention. 
 
 * Vide note on p. ii. 
 
 t There are few points on which more misunderstanding 
 prevails, than in respect of this phrase. Its meaning is simply 
 that the obhgation of service — in respect of which alone the 
 slave is a "chattel," as the wife also is sometimes called a 
 " chattel".in respect of hers — follows the law, not of " real," but 
 of " personal" estate. 
 
'20 
 
 It is a fact, surely not altogether without signifi- 
 cance, that not only is the relation of master and. 
 slave — or " servant" as we translate it — so continually 
 referred to in our Lord's parables, without any word 
 of reprobation, but that it is under the figure of a slave- 
 holder that our Lord Himself is frequently de- 
 picted.* Nay, more. This very relation is used by 
 S. Paul to illustrate the i-elation in which He stands 
 toward ourselves. We are " not our own, but bought 
 with a price.'' \ Not ransomed and set free, but bought. 
 The property in us, which, by right of our sin, had 
 belonged to Satan, transferred by right of purchase to 
 God. And, therefore y we are bidden to glorify God 
 in our bodies, and in our spirits, "which are God's." 
 Surely it is somewhat hazardous to assume that a 
 relation thus plainly, and without qualification, set forth 
 as illustrating the position of the Almighty, can be of 
 itself essentially evil ! 
 
 We turn from the Bible estimate of the relation of 
 master and slave, to examine the Bible estimate of the 
 relation of the master and his free or hired servant. 
 And here, too, even more, perhaps, than in the former 
 case, do His ways seem strangely at variance with our 
 ways, and His thoughts with our thoughts. 
 
 Shut out by the Mosaic law from that participation 
 
 * S. Matt, xviii. 23 — 34} xxv. 14 — 30. S. Mark xiii. 34. 
 S. Luke xii. 47, 48. 
 t I Cor. vii. 20. 
 
ft 
 
 in the great rite of family worship to which the slave 
 was expressly, and by reason of his slavehoody admitted,* 
 the " hireling " occupies in the New Testament a 
 position of equally little honour. If a faithful and 
 good servantf is to be depicted, he is selected, as a 
 matter of course, from among his master's slaves. If 
 we are to have placed before us, for contrast's sake, 
 the lowest class of all in morals and in social position, 
 this helot's place is filled by the " hireling," not the 
 slave. " How many hired servants of my father have 
 bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger." J 
 " The hireling fleeth because he is an hireling and careth 
 not for the sheep. "§ 
 
 One other Scripture test there is, to which you have 
 not appealed, but by which this question, in common 
 with all other questions, may be judged. " By their 
 fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather grapes of 
 thorns, or figs of thistles ?" 
 
 By their fruits then let us examine for a moment 
 the advocates of slavery and of abolition in the country 
 where alone these questions enter sufliciently into 
 men's daily lives to affect their character and conduct. 
 
 And first, what is the religious aspect of the case ? 
 On which side are ranged the banners of the Church 
 and of her foes ? With scarcely an exception, the 
 whole body of the Church in America upholds and 
 
 * Exod. xii.44, 4";. t S.Matt xxv.21; S. Luke xiii. 37-42. 
 
 * S, Luke XV. 17. § S. John x. 1.3. 
 
82 
 
 maintains the institutions of the South. Their oppo- 
 nents arc to be found among the Colcnsos, the Kenans, 
 the Spurgeons of the North ; the votaries of Mor- 
 monism and Free Love ; the '* War Christians" of 
 every shade of unbelief and misbelief, who with Mr. 
 Ward Beecher preach the "moral agencies" of fire and 
 sword, or with Mr. Brownlow clamour in open blas- 
 phemy for " an anti-slavery Bible, and an anti-slavery 
 "God." 
 
 You may consider this argument irrelevant. Let 
 us inquire then, by whom is the negro — the person 
 whose advantage and happiness is in question — 
 treated, as a rule, with the greater kindness and con- 
 sideration. I will not here speak of the horrors per- 
 petrated by Northern mobs in the excitement of the 
 present war ; of negro soldiers driven at the bayonet's 
 point into the hottest of the fight, with a brutal jest at 
 the economy of white* man's blood; of negro work- 
 men hunted to death in New York streets by their 
 Irish rivals ; or even of the abolitionist President's 
 plan of wholesale consignment to the horrors of 
 a certain slavery among the savage tribes of their own 
 heath n land. I will confine myself to the deliberate 
 language of the laws that guided the conduct of the 
 old calm and peaceful times. The South, as wc hav e 
 seen, while denying to the slave his libertyj pH'ct^s 
 stringent laws for his protection, and even his comfort. 
 WLat is the negro legislation of the North ? 
 
23 
 
 MASSArHVsBTTS. — " No [ni yo] . . shall tarry within thi* 
 Coniiiioiiwi'iiltl) for a lon>;«T time th.m two moiithti, and it »iu-|) 
 pcrst)!! shall nut [then] depart a hin ten dj.>» • . he shuit le 
 whipfml." 
 
 Connecticut. — "ThesiLct men of the town are to wjm 
 any person,* not an inhabitant of this State, to depart (torn such 
 town. . . If 8Uch person ret'ii.se to depart or to pay bi» line, such 
 |)er8on shall he u'hif}f>ed on the naked bwly." 
 
 V' HMONT. — "The select men shall have power to remove . . 
 I! I rson.v* . . and any person returning without permission . . 
 Aaii l-e U'h'tjiped." 
 
 New York. — " If a stranger* be entertained in the dwelling- 
 house or outhouse of any citizen, without giving notice to the 
 overseers of the poor . . above forty days . . the justices may 
 cause such stranger to be . . transported into any other Stare. . . 
 If such person returns, the justices may cause him to If wlnh^fd 
 by evtry constable into whose hands he may come . , if a i lan, 
 not reaching 39 lashes, and if a woman not exceeding 25 lashrs," 
 
 Ohio. — " No white person shall intermarry with a negro or 
 mulatto." 
 
 Indiana. — " No negro or mulatto shall come into or settle in the 
 State." 
 
 Illinois. — (Law enacted i8^^3) : — 
 
 " If any negro or nmlatto, bond or free, shall hereafter come 
 into this state with the intention of residing there, [he] shall be 
 deemed guilty of a high crime and misdemeanour . . and shall 
 be fined the sum of 50 dols. . . and if the fine be not forthwith 
 paid . . the . . justice shall at public auction proceed to sell the 
 said negro to any person that will pay the said fine and costs. . ." 
 
 Oregon.— Admitted 1859: — 
 
 " No free negro . . shall ever come into, or be within this 
 state . . or maintain any suit therein ; and the Legislative 
 Assembly shall provide by penal laws for the removal . . of all 
 
 * By the Constitution of the United States, this could only 
 apply to blacks. — y^ide Art. IV. Section 2. 
 
24 
 
 such free negroes . . and for the punishment of perM>ns who 
 shall bring them into the State or employ or harbour them 
 therein, tv , .,',;,. . .,., -j;;^\^;i ,>v»y.}>>.,,.,Yt^,- ; _,^: ■ '.-■%^}'\ 
 
 " Whether of these twain thinkest thou was neigh- 
 bour unto" this poor helpless negro slave ? 
 
 The one cry of the South is for peace. Is that a 
 less Christian cry than the Northern shriek for blood 
 and war ? " Greek fire for the Southern masses, and 
 Hell Fire for their leaders !" Is it by lips hardened 
 to such words as these that Christian duties and Chris- 
 tian charity are to be taught ? 
 
 My task is done. I do not presume to offer a 
 final solution to the momentous question you have so 
 boldly raised ; I do but suggest a reason here and 
 there why it should not be summarily decided in the 
 manner in which you have endeavoured to decide it. 
 God be thanked that upon us in tranquil England the 
 necessity for a decision is not forced. But it may be — 
 I believe it is — only the more our bounden duty, in 
 very gratitude for the exemption, to see, as far as in 
 us lies, that our own countrymen at least do not abuse 
 the advantages that have been given them, to render 
 yet more grievous, through their injustice and mis- 
 representation, the difiiculties of those on whom this 
 heavy burden has been laid. 
 
 THE END.