^ ^

^;^*'

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

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

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.

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/

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

Si(
01

fll

Sii

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

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.

32X

1 2 3

4 5 6

rief Hyeply

mportant SKuestion;

BEING A LETTER

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

" 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 —

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

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

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."

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.

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-

{{

((

{(

* The precise gist and animus of this qualification is, I
admit, not clear to me.

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

): :>.

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.

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.

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 ?

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.

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.