NARRATIVE AND TESTIMONY OF REV. FRANCIS HAWLEY.
Mr. Hawley is the pastor of the Baptist Church in Colebrook,
Litchfield county, Connecticut. He has resided fourteen years in the
slave states, North and South Carolina. His character and standing
with his own denomination at the south, may be inferred from the fact,
that the Baptist State Convention of North
Carolina appointed him, a few years since, their general agent to
visit the Baptist churches within their bounds, and to secure their
co-operation in the objects of the Convention. Mr. H. accepted the
appointment, and for some time traveled in that capacity.
"I rejoice that the Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery
Society have resolved to publish a volume of facts and testimony
relative to the character and workings of American slavery. Having
resided fourteen years at the south, I cheerfully comply with your
request, to give the result of my observation and experience.
"And I would here remark, that one may reside at the south for years,
and not witness extreme cruelties; a northern man, and one who is not
a slaveholder, would be the last to have an opportunity of witnessing
the infliction of cruel punishments.
"A majority of the large plantations are on the banks of rivers, far
from the public eye. A great deal of low marshy ground lies in the
vicinity of most of the rivers at the south; consequently the main
roads are several miles from the rivers, and generally no public
road passes the plantations. A stranger traveling on the ridge,
would think himself in a miserably poor country; but every two or
three miles he will see a road turning off and leading into the swamp;
taking one of those roads, and traveling from two to six miles, he
will come to a large gate; passing which, he will find himself in a
clearing of several hundred acres of the first quality of land;
passing on, he will see 30, or 40, or more slaves—men, women, boys
and girls, at their task, every one with a hoe; or, if in cotton
picking season, with their baskets. The overseer, with his whip,
either riding or standing about among them; or if the weather is hot,
sitting under a shade. At a distance, on a little rising ground, if
such there be, he will see a cluster of huts, with a tolerable house
in the midst, for the overseer. Those huts are from ten to fifteen
feet square, built of logs, and covered, not with shingles, but with
boards, about four feet long, split out of pine timber with a
'frow'. The floors are very commonly made in this way. Clay is first
worked until it is soft; it is then spread upon the ground, about four
or five inches thick; when it dries, it becomes nearly as hard as a
brick. The crevices between the logs are sometimes filled with the
same. These huts generally cost the master nothing—they are commonly
built by the negroes at night, and on Sundays. When a slave of a
neighboring plantation takes a wife, or to use the phrase common at
the south, 'takes up' with one of the women, he builds a hut, and it
is called her house. Upon entering these huts, (not as comfortable in
many instances as the horse stable,) generally, you will find no
chairs, but benches and stools; no table, no bedstead, and no bed,
except a blanket or two, and a few rags or moss; in some instances a
knife or two, but very rarely a fork. You may also find a pot or
skillet, and generally a number of gourds, which serve them instead of
bowls and plates. The cruelties practiced on those secluded
plantations, the judgment day alone can reveal. Oh, Brother, could I
summon ten slaves from ten plantations that I could name, and have
them give but one year's history of their bondage, it would thrill the
land with horror. Those overseers who follow the business of
overseeing for a livelihood, are generally the most unprincipled and
abandoned of men. Their wages are regulated according to their skill
in extorting labor. The one who can make the most bags of cotton, with
a given number of hands, is the one generally sought after; and there
is a competition among them to see who shall make the largest crop,
according to the hands he works. I ask, what must be the condition of
the poor slaves, under the unlimited power of such men, in whom, by
the long-continued practise of the most heart-rending cruelties, every
feeling of humanity has been obliterated? But it may be asked, cannot
the slaves have redress by appealing to their masters? In many
instances it is impossible, as their masters live hundreds of miles
off. There are perhaps thousands in the northern slave states, [and
many in the free states,] who own plantations in the southern slave
states, and many more spend their summers at the north, or at the
various watering places. But what would the slaves gain, if they
should appeal to the master? He has placed the overseer over them,
with the understanding that he will make as large a crop as possible,
and that he is to have entire control, and manage them according to
his own judgment. Now suppose that in the midst of the season, the
slaves make complaint of cruel treatment. The master cannot get along
without an overseer—it is perhaps very sickly on the plantation he
dare not risk his own life there. Overseers are all enraged at that
season, and if he takes part with his slave against the overseer, he
would destroy his authority, and very likely provoke him to leave his
service—which would of course be a very great injury to him. Thus, in
nineteen cases out of twenty, self-interest would prevent the master
from paying any attention to the complaints of his slaves. And, if any
should complain, it would of course come to the ears of the overseer,
and the complainant would be inhumanly punished for it.
"The rule, where slaves are hired out, is two suits of clothes per
year, one pair of shoes, and one blanket; but as it relates to the
great body of the slaves, this cannot be called a general rule. On
many plantations, the children under ten or twelve years old, go
entirely naked—or, it clothed at all, they have nothing more than a
shirt. The cloth is of the coarsest kind, far from being durable or
warm; and their shoes frequently come to pieces in a few weeks. I
have never known any provision made, or time allowed for the washing
of clothes. If they wish to wash, as they have generally but one suit,
they go after their day's toil to some stream, build a fire, pull off
their clothes and wash them in the stream, and dry them by the fire;
and in some instances they wear their clothes until they are worn off;
without washing. I have never known an instance of a slaveholder
putting himself to any expense, that his slaves might have decent
clothes for the Sabbath. If by making baskets, brooms, mats, &c. at
night or on Sundays, the slaves can get money enough to buy a Sunday
suit, very well. I have never known an instance of a slaveholder
furnishing his slaves with stockings or mittens. I know that the
slaves suffer much, and no doubt many die in consequence of not being
well clothed.
FOOD.
"In the grain-growing part of the south, the slaves, as it relates to
food, fare tolerably well; but in the cotton, and rice-growing, and
sugar-making portion, some of them fare badly. I have been on
plantations where, from the appearance of the slaves, I should judge
they were half-starved. They receive their allowance very commonly on
Sunday morning. They are left to cook it as they please, and when they
please. Many slaveholders rarely give their slaves meat, and very few
give them more food than will keep them in a working condition. They
rarely ever have a change of food. I have never known an instance of
slaves on plantations being furnished either with sugar, butter,
cheese, or milk.
"If the slaves on plantations were well fed and clothed, and had the
stimulus of wages, they could perhaps in general perform their tasks
without injury. The horn is blown soon after the dawn of day, when all
the hands destined for the field must be 'on the march!' If the field
is far from their huts, they take their breakfast with them. They toil
till about ten o'clock, when they eat it. They then continue their
toil till the sun is set.
"A neighbor of mine, who has been an overseer in Alabama, informs me,
that there they ascertain how much labor a slave can perform in a day,
in the following manner. When they commence a new cotton field, the
overseer takes his watch, and marks how long it takes them to hoe one
row, and then lays out the task accordingly. My neighbor also informs
me, that the slaves in Alabama are worked very hard; that the lash is
almost universally applied at the close of the day, if they fail to
perform their task in the cotton-picking season. You will see them,
with their baskets of cotton, slowly bending their way to the cotton
house, where each one's basket is weighed. They have no means of
knowing accurately, in the course of the day, how they make progress;
so that they are in suspense, until their basket is weighed. Here
comes the mother, with her children; she does not know whether
herself, or children, or all of them, must take the lash; they cannot
weigh the cotton themselves—the whole must be trusted to the
overseer. While the weighing goes on, all is still. So many pounds
short, cries the overseer, and takes up his whip, exclaiming, 'Step
this way, you d—n lazy scoundrel, or bitch.' The poor slave begs, and
promises, but to no purpose. The lash is applied until the overseer is
satisfied. Sometimes the whipping is deferred until the weighing is
all over. I have said that all must be trusted to the overseer. If
he owes any one a grudge, or wishes to enjoy the fiendish pleasure of
whipping a little, (for some overseers really delight in it,) they
have only to tell a falsehood relative to the weight of their basket;
they can then have a pretext to gratify their diabolical disposition;
and from the character of overseers, I have no doubt that it is
frequently done. On all plantations, the male and female slaves fare
pretty much alike; those who are with child are driven to their task
till within a few days of the time of their delivery; and when the
child is a few weeks old, the mother must again go to the field. If it
is far from her hut, she must take her babe with her, and leave it in
the care of some of the children—perhaps of one not more than four or
five years old. If the child cries, she cannot go to its relief; the
eye of the overseer is upon her; and if, when she goes to nurse it,
she stays a little longer than the overseer thinks necessary, he
commands her back to her task, and perhaps a husband and father must
hear and witness it all. Brother, you cannot begin to know what the
poor slave mothers suffer, on thousands of plantations at the south.
"I will now give a few facts, showing the workings of the system. Some
years since, a Presbyterian minister moved from North Carolina to
Georgia. He had a negro man of an uncommon mind. For some cause, I
know not what, this minister whipped him most unmercifully. He next
nearly drowned him; he then put him in the fence; this is done by
lifting up the corner of a 'worm' fence, and then putting the feet
through; the rails serve as stocks. He kept him there some time, how
long I was not informed, but the poor slave died in a few days; and,
if I was rightly informed, nothing was done about it, either in church
or state. After some tame, he moved back to North Carolina, and is now
a member of —— Presbytery. I have heard him preach, and have been in
the pulpit with him. May God forgive me!
"At Laurel Hill, Richmond county, North Carolina, it was reported that
a runaway slave was in the neighborhood. A number of young men took
their guns, and went in pursuit. Some of them took their station near
the stage road, and kept on the look-out. It was early in the
evening—the poor slave came along, when the ambush rushed upon him,
and ordered him to surrender. He refused, and kept them off with his
club. They still pressed upon him with their guns presented to his
breast. Without seeming to be daunted, he caught hold of the muzzle of
one of the guns, and came near getting possession of it. At length,
retreating to a fence on one side of the road, he sprang over into a
corn-field, and started to run in one of the rows. One of the young
men stepped to the fence, fired, and lodged the whole charge between
his shoulders; he fell, and died in a short time. He died without
telling who his master was, or whether he had any, or what his own
name was, or where he was from. A hole was dug by the side of the road
his body tumbled into it, and thus ended the whole matter.
"The Rev, Mr. C. a Methodist minister, held as his slave a negro man,
who was a member of his own church. The slave was considered a very
pious man, had the confidence of his master, and all who knew him, and
if I recollect right, he sometimes attempted to preach. Just before
the Nat Turner insurrection, in Southampton county, Virginia, by which
the whole south was thrown into a panic, then worthy slave obtained
permission to visit his relatives, who resided either in Southampton,
or the county adjoining. This was the only instance that ever came to
my knowledge, of a slave being permitted to go so far to visit his
relatives. He went and returned according to agreement. A few weeks
after his return, the insurrection took place, and the whole country
was deeply agitated. Suspicion soon fixed on this slave. Nat Turner
was a Baptist minister, and the south became exceedingly jealous of
all negro preachers. It seemed as if the whole community were
impressed with the belief that he knew all about it; that he and Nat
Turner had concocted an extensive insurrection; and so confident were
they in this belief, that they took the poor slave, tried him, and
hung him. It was all done in a few days. He protested his innocence to
the last. After the excitement was over, many were ready to
acknowledge that they believed him innocent. He was hung upon
suspicion!
"In R—— county, North Carolina, lived a Mr. B. who had the name of
being a cruel master. Three or four winters since, his slaves were
engaged in clearing a piece of new land. He had a negro girl, about 14
years old, whom he had severely whipped a few days before, for not
performing her task. She again failed. The hands left the field for
home; she went with them a part of the way, and fell behind; but the
negroes thought she would soon be along; the evening passed away, and
she did not come. They finally concluded that she had gone back to the
new ground, to lie by the log heaps that were on fire. But they were
mistaken: she had sat down by the foot of a large pine. She was thinly
clad—the night was cold and rainy. In the morning the poor girl was
found, but she was speechless and died in a short time.
"One of my neighbors sold to a speculator a negro boy, about 14 years
old. It was more than his poor mother could bear. Her reason fled, and
she became a perfect maniac, and had to be kept in close
confinement. She would occasionally get out and run off to the
neighbors. On one of these occasions she came to my house. She was
indeed a pitiable object. With tears rolling down her checks, and her
frame shaking with agony, she would cry out, 'don't you hear
him—they are whipping him now, and he is calling for me!' This
neighbor of mine, who tore the boy away from his poor mother, and thus
broke her heart, was a member of the Presbyterian church.
"Mr. S——, of Marion District, South Carolina, informed me that a boy
was killed by the overseer on Mr. P——'s plantation. The boy was
engaged in driving the horses in a cotton gin. The driver generally
sits on the end of the sweep. Not driving to suit the overseer, he
knocked him off with the butt of his whip. His skull was fractured. He
died in a short time.
"A man of my acquaintance in South Carolina, and of considerable
wealth, had an only son, whom he educated for the bar; but not
succeeding in his profession, he soon returned home. His father having
a small plantation three or four miles off; placed his son on it as an
overseer. Following the example of his father, as I have good reason
to believe, he took the wife of one of the negro men. The poor slave
felt himself greatly injured, and expostulated with him. The wretch
took his gun, and deliberately shot him. Providentially he only
wounded him badly. When the father came, and undertook to remonstrate
with his son about his conduct, he threatened to shoot him also! and
finally, took the negro woman, and went to Alabama, where he still
resided when I left the south.
"An elder in the Presbyterian church related to me the following.—'A
speculator with his drove of negroes was passing my house, and I
bought a little girl, nine or ten years old. After a few months, I
concluded that I would rather have a plough-boy. Another speculator
was passing, and I sold the girl. She was much distressed, and was
very unwilling to leave.'—She had been with him long enough to become
attached to his own and his negro children, and he concluded by
saying, that in view of the little girl's tears and cries, he had
determined never to do the like again. I would not trust him, for I
know him to be a very avaricious man.
"While traveling in Anson county, North Carolina, I put up for a night
at a private house. The man of the house was not at home when I
stopped, but came in the course of the evening, and was noisy and
profane, and nearly drunk. I retired to rest, but not to sleep; his
cursing and swearing were enough to keep a regiment awake. About
midnight he went to his kitchen, and called out his two slaves, a man
and woman. His object, he said, was to whip them. They both begged and
promised, but to no purpose. The whipping began, and continued for
some time. Their cries might have been heard at a distance.
"I was acquainted with a very wealthy planter, on the Pedee river, in
South Carolina, who has since died in consequence of intemperance. It
was said that he had occasioned the death of twelve of his slaves, by
compelling them to work in water, opening a ditch in the midst of
winter. The disease with which they died was a pleurisy.
"In crossing Pedee river, at Cashway Ferry, I observed that the
ferryman had no hair on either side of his head, I asked him the
cause. He informed me that it was caused by his master's cane. I said,
you have a very bad master. 'Yes, a very bad master.' I understood
that he was once a number of Congress from South Carolina.
"While traveling as agent for the North Carolina Baptist State
Convention, I attended a three days' meeting in Gates county, Friday,
the first day, passed off. Saturday morning came, and the pastor of
the church, who lived a few miles off, did not make his appearance.
The day passed off, and no news from the pastor. On Sabbath morning,
he came hobbling along, having but little use of one foot. He soon
explained: said he had a hired negro man, who, on Saturday morning,
gave him a 'little slack jaw.' Not having a stick at hand, he fell
upon him with his fist and foot, and in kicking him, he injured his
foot so seriously, that he could not attend meeting on Saturday.
"Some of the slaveholding ministers at the south, put their slaves
under overseers, or hire them out, and then take the pastoral care of
churches. The Rev. Mr. B——, formerly of Pennsylvania, had a
plantation in Marlborough District, South Carolina, and was the pastor
of a church in Darlington District. The Rev. Mr. T——, of Johnson
county, North Carolina, has a plantation in Alabama.
"I was present, and saw the Rev. J—— W——, of Mecklenburg county,
North Carolina, hire out four slaves to work in the gold mines is
Burke county. The Rev. H—— M——, of Orange county, sold for $900, a
negro man to a speculator, on a Monday of a camp meeting.
"Runaway slaves are frequently hunted with guns and dogs. I was once
out on such an excursion, with my rifle and two dogs. I trust the
Lord has forgiven me this heinous wickedness! We did not take the
runaways.
"Slaves are sometimes most unmercifully punished for trifling
offences, or mere mistakes.
"As it relates to amalgamation, I can say, that I have been in
respectable families, (so called,) where I could distinguish the
family resemblance in the slaves who waited upon the table. I once
hired a slave who belonged to his own uncle. It is so common for the
female slaves to have white children, that little or nothing is ever
said about it. Very few inquiries are made as to who the father is.
"Thus, brother ——, I have given you very briefly, the result, in
part, of my observations and experience relative to slavery. You can
make what disposition of it you please. I am willing that my name
should go to the world with what I have now written.
"Yours affectionately, for the oppressed,
"FRANCIS HAWLEY."
Colebrook, Connecticut, March 18, 1839.
TESTIMONY OF REUBEN G. MACY AND RICHARD MACY.
The following is an extract of a letter recently received from CHARLES
MARRIOTT of Hudson, New York. Mr. Marriott is an elder in the
Religious Society of Friends, and is extensively known and respected.
"The two following brief statements, are furnished by Richard Macy and
Reuben G. Macy, brothers, both of Hudson, New York. They are head
carpenters by trade, and have been well known to me for more than
thirty years, as esteemed members of the Religious Society of Friends.
They inform me that during their stay in South Carolina, a number more
similar cases to those here related, came under their notice, which to
avoid repetition they omit.
C. MARRIOTT."
TESTIMONY OF REUBEN G. MACY.
"During the winter of 1818 and 19, I resided on an island near the
mouth of the Savanna river, on the South Carolina side. Most of the
slaves that came under my particular notice, belonged to a widow and
her daughter, in whose family I lived. No white man belonged to the
plantation. Her slaves were under the care of an overseer who came
once a week to give orders, and settled the score laid up against such
as their mistress thought deserved punishment, which was from
twenty-five to thirty lashes on their naked backs, with a whip which
the overseer generally brought with him. This whip had a stout handle
about two feet long, and a lash about four and a half feet. From two
to four received the above, I believe nearly every week during the
winter, sometimes in my presence, and always in my hearing. I examined
the backs and shoulders of a number of the men, which were mostly
naked while they were about their labor, and found them covered with
hard ridges in every direction. One day, while busy in the cotton
house, hearing a noise, I ran to the door and saw a colored woman
pleading with the overseer, who paid no attention to her cries, but
tied her hands together, and passed the rope over a beam, over head,
where was a platform for spreading cotton, he then drew the rope as
tight as he could, so as to let her toes touch the ground; then
stripped her body naked to the waist, and went deliberately to work
with his whip, and put on twenty-five or thirty lashes, she pleading
in vain all the time. I inquired, the cause of such treatment, and was
informed it was for answering her mistress rather 'short.'"
"A woman from a neighboring plantation came where I was, on a visit;
she came in a boat rowed by six slaves, who, according to the common
practice, were left to take care of themselves, and having laid them
down in the boat and fallen asleep, the tide fell, and the water
filling the stern of the boat, wet their mistresses trunk of clothes.
When she discovered it, she called them up near where I was, and
compelled them to whip each other, till they all had received a severe
flogging. She standing by with a whip in her hand to see that they did
not spare each other. Their usual allowance of food was one peck of
corn per week, which was dealt out to them every first day of the
week, and such as were not there to receive their portion at the
appointed time, had to live as they could during the coming week. Each
one had the privilege of planting a small piece of ground, and raising
poultry for their own use which they generally sold, that is, such as
did improve the privilege which were but few. They had nothing allowed
them besides the corn, except one quarter of beef at Christmas which a
slave brought three miles on his head. They were allowed three days
rest at Christmas. Their clothing consisted of a pair of trowsers and
jacket, made of whitish woollen cloth called negro cloth. The women
had nothing but a petticoat, and a very short short-gown, made of the
same king of cloth. Some of the women had an old pair of shoes, but
they generally went barefoot. The houses for the field slaves were
about fourteen feet square, built in the coarsest manner, having but
one room, without any chimney, or flooring, with a hole at the roof at
one end to let the smoke out.
"Each one was allowed one blanket in which they rolled themselves up.
I examined their houses but could not discover any thing like a bed. I
was informed that when they had a sufficiency of potatoes the slaves
were allowed some; but the season that I was there they did not raise
more than were wanted for seed. All their corn was ground in one
hand-mill, every night just as much as was necessary for the family,
then each one his daily portion, which took considerable time in the
night. I often awoke and heard the sound of the mill. Grinding the
corn in the night, and in the dark, after their day's labor, and the
want of other food, were great hardships.
"The traveling in those parts, among the islands, was altogether with
boats, rowed by from four to ten slaves, which often stopped at our
plantation, and staid through the night, when the slaves, after rowing
through the day, were left to shift for themselves; and when they went
to Savannah with a load of cotton the were obliged to sleep in the
open boats, as the law did not allow a colored person to be out after
eight o'clock in the evening, without a pass from his master."
TESTIMONY OF RICHARD MACY.
"The above account is from my brother, I was at work on Hilton Head
about twenty miles north of my brother, during the same winter. The
same allowance of one peck of corn for a week, the same kind of houses
to live in, and the same method of grinding their corn, and always in
the night, and in the dark, was practiced there.
"A number of instances of severe whipping came under my notice. The
first was this:—two men were sent out to saw some blocks out of large
live oak timber on which to raise my building. Their saw was in poor
order, and they sawed them badly, for which their master stripped them
naked and flogged them.
"The next instance was a boy about sixteen years of age. He had crept
into the coach to sleep; after two or three nights he was caught by
the coach driver, a northern man, and stripped entirely naked, and
whipped without mercy, his master looking on.
"Another instance. The overseer, a young white man, had ordered
several negroes a boat's crew, to be on the spot at a given time. One
man did not appear until the boat had gone. The overseer was very
angry and told him to strip and be flogged; he being slow, was told if
he did not instantly strip off his jacket, he, the overseer, would
whip it off which he did in shreds, whipping him cruelly.
"The man ran into the barrens and it was about a month before they
caught him. He was newly starved, and at last stole a turkey; then
another, and was caught.
"Having occasion to pass a plantation very early one foggy morning, in
a boat we heard the sound of the whip, before we could see, but as we
drew up in front of the plantation, we could see the negroes at work
in the field. The overseer was going from one to the other causing
them to lay down their hoe, strip off their garment, hold up their
hands and receive their number of lashes. Thus he went on from one to
the other until we were out of sight. In the course of the winter a
family came where I was, on a visit from a neighboring island; of
course, in a boat with negroes to row them—one of these a barber,
told me that he ran away about two years before, and joined a company
of negroes who had fled to the swamps. He said they suffered a great
deal—were at last discovered by a party of hunters, who fired among
them, and caused them to scatter. Himself and one more fled to the
coast, took a boat and put off to sea, a storm came on and swamped or
upset them, and his partner was drowned, he was taken up by a passing
vessel and returned to his master.
RICHARD MACY.
Hudson, 12 mo. 29th, 1838."
TESTIMONY OF MR. ELEAZAR POWELL
EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MR. WILLIAM SCOTT, a highly respectable
citizen of Beaver co. Pennsylvania, dated Jan 7, 1839.
Chippeca Township, Beaver co. Pa. Jan. 7, 1839.
"I send you the statement of Mr. Eleazar Powell, who was born, and has
mostly resided in this township from his birth. His character for
sobriety and truth stands above impeachment.
"With sentiments of esteem,
I am your friend,
WILLIAM SCOTT.
"In the month of December, 1836, I went to the State of Mississippi to
work at my trade, (masonry and bricklaying,) and continued to work in
the counties of Adams and Jefferson, between four and five months. In
following my business I had an opportunity of seeing the treatment of
slaves in several places.
"In Adams county I built a chimney for a man named Joseph Gwatney; he
had forty-five field hands of both sexes. The field in which they
worked at that time, lay about two miles from the house; the hands had
to cook and eat their breakfast, prepare their dinner, and be in the
field at daylight, and continue there till dark. In the evening the
cotton they had picked was weighed, and if they fell short of their
task they were whipped. One night I attended the weighing—two women
fell short of their task, and the master ordered the black driver to
take them to the quarters and flog them; one of them was to receive
twenty-five lashes and pick a peck of cotton seed. I have been with
the overseer several times through the negro quarters. The huts are
generally built of split timber, some larger than rails, twelve and a
half feet wide and fourteen feet long—some with and some without
chimneys, and generally without floors; they were generally without
daubing, and mostly had split clapboards nailed on the cracks on the
outside, though some were without even that: in some there was a kind
of rough bedstead, made from rails, polished with the axe, and put
together in a very rough manner, the bottom covered with clapboards,
and over that a bundle of worn out clothes. In some huts there was no
bedstead at all. The above description applies to the places generally
with which I was acquainted, and they were mostly old settlements.
"In the east part of Jefferson county I built a chimney for a man
named —— M'Coy; he had forty-seven laboring hands. Near where I was
at work, M'Coy had ordered one of his slaves to set a post for a gate.
When he came to look at it, he said the slave had not set it in the
right place; and ordered him to strip, and lie down on his face;
telling him that if he struggled, or attempted to get up, two men, who
had been called to the spot, should seize and hold him fast. The slave
agreed to be quiet, and M'Coy commenced flogging him on the bare back,
with the wagon whip. After some time the sufferer attempted to get up;
one of the slaves standing by, seized him by the feet and held him
fast; upon which he yielded, and M'Coy continued to flog him ten or
fifteen minutes. When he was up, and had put on his trowsers, the
blood came through them.
"About half a mile from M'Coy's was a plantation owned by his
step-daughter. The overseer's name was James Farr, of whom it appears
Mrs. M'Coy's waiting woman was enamoured. One night, while I lived
there, M'Coy came from Natchez, about 10 o'clock at night. He said
that Dinah was gone, and wished his overseer to go with him to Farr's
lodgings. They went accordingly, one to each door, and caught Dinah as
she ran out, she was partly dressed in her mistress's clothes; M'Coy
whipped her unmercifully, and she afterwards made her escape. On the
next day, (Sabbath), M'Coy came to the overseer's, where I lodged, and
requested him and me to look for her, as he was afraid that she had
hanged herself. He then gave me the particulars of the flogging. He
stated that near Farr's he had made her strip and lie down, and had
flogged her until he was tired; that before he reached home he had a
second time made her strip, and again flogged her until he was tired;
that when he reached home he had tied her to a peach-tree, and after
getting a drink had flogged her until he was thirsty again; and while
he went to get a drink the woman made her escape. He stated that he
knew, from the whipping he had given her, there must be in her back
cuts an inch deep. He showed the place where she had been tied to the
tree; there appeared to be as much blood as if a hog had been stuck
there. The woman was found on Sabbath evening, near the sprang, and
had to be carried into the house.
"While I lived there I heard M'Coy say, if the slaves did not raise
him three hundred bales of cotton the ensuing season, he would kill
every negro he had.
"Another case of flogging came under my notice: Philip O. Hughes,
sheriff of Jefferson county, had hired a slave to a man, whose name I
do not recollect. On a Sabbath day the slave had drank somewhat
freely; he was ordered by the tavern keeper, (where his present master
had left his horse and the negro,) to stay in the kitchen; the negro
wished to be out. In persisting to go out he was knocked down three
times; and afterwards flogged until another young man and myself ran
about half a mile, having been drawn by the cries of the negro and the
sound of the whip. When we came up, a number of men that had been
about the tavern, were whipping him, and at intervals would ask him if
he would take off his clothes. At seeing them drive down the stakes
for a regular flogging he yielded, and took them off. They then
flogged him until satisfied. On the next morning I saw him, and his
pantaloons were all in a gore of blood.
"During my stay in Jefferson county, Philip O. Hughes was out one day
with his gun—he saw a negro at some distance, with a club in one hand
and an ear of corn in the other—Hughes stepped behind a tree, and
waited his approach; he supposed the negro to be a runaway, who had
escaped about nine months before from his master, living not very far
distant. The negro discovered Hughes before he came up, and started to
run; he refusing to stop, Hughes fired, and shot him through the arm.
Through loss of blood the negro was soon taken and put in jail. I saw
his wound twice dressed, and heard Hughes make the above statement.
"When in Jefferson county I boarded six weeks in Fayette, the county
town, with a tavern keeper named James Truly. He had a slave named
Lucy, who occupied the station of chamber maid and table waiter. One
day, just after dinner Mrs. Truly took Lucy and bound her arms round a
pine sapling behind the house, and commenced flogging her with a
riding-whip; and when tired would take her chair and rest. She
continued thus alternately flogging and resting, for at least an hour
and a half. I afterwards learned from the bar-keeper, and others, that
the woman's offence was that she had bought two candles to set on the
table the evening before, not knowing there were yet some in the box.
I did nor see the act of flogging above related; but it was commenced
before I left the house after dinner, and my work not being more than
twenty rods from the house, I distinctly heard the cries of the woman
all the time, and the manner of tying I had from those who did see it.
"While I boarded at Truly's, an overseer shot a negro about two miles
northwest of Fayette, belonging to a man named Hinds Stuart. I heard
Stuart himself state the particulars. It appeared that the negro's
wife fell under the overseer's displeasure, and he went to whip her.
The negro said she should not be whipped. The overseer then let her
go, and ordered him to be seized. The negro, having been a driver,
rolled the lash of his whip round his hand, and said he would not be
whipped at that time. The overseer repeated his orders. The negro took
up a hoe, and none dared to take hold of him. The overseer then went
to his coat, that he had laid off to whip the negro's wife, and took
out his pistol and shot him dead. His master ordered him to be buried
in a hole without a coffin. Stuart stated that he would not have taken
two thousand dollars for him. No punishment was inflicted on the
overseer.
ELEAZAR POWELL, Jr."
TESTIMONY ON THE AUTHORITY OF REV. WM. SCALES, LYNDON, VT
The following is an extract of a letter from two professional
gentlemen and their wives, who have lived for some years in a small
village in one of the slave states. They are all persons of the
highest respectability, and are well known in at least one of the New
England states. Their names are with the Executive Committee of the
American Anti-Slavery Society; but as the individuals would doubtless
be murdered by the slaveholders, if they were published, the Committee
feel sacredly bound to withhold them. The letter was addressed to a
respected clergyman in New England. The writers say:
"A man near us owned a valuable slave—his best—most faithful servant.
In a gust of passion, he struck him dead with a lever, or stick of
wood.
"During the years '36 and '37, the following transpired. A slave in
our neighborhood ran away and went to a place about thirty miles
distant. There he was found by his pursuers on horseback, and
compelled by the whip to run the distance of thirty miles. It was an
exceedingly hot day—and within a few hours after he arrived at the
end of his journey the slave was dead.
"Another slave ran away, but concluded to return. He had proceeded
some distance on his return, when he was met by a company of two or
three drivers who raced, whipped and abused him until he fell down and
expired. This took place on the Sabbath." The writer after speaking of
another murder of a slave in the neighborhood, without giving the
circumstances, say—"There is a powerful New England influence at
——" the village where they reside—"We may therefore suppose that
there would he as little of barbarian cruelty practiced there as any
where;—at least we might suppose that the average amount of cruelty
in that vicinity would be sufficiently favorable to the side of
slavery.—Describe a circle, the centre of which shall be—, the
residence of the writers, and the radius fifteen miles, and in about
one year three, and I think four slaves have been murdered, within
that circle, under circumstances of horrid cruelty.—What must have
been the amount of murder in the whole slave territory? The whole
south is rife with the crime of separating husbands and wives, parents
and children."
TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH IDE, ESQ.
Mr. IDE is a respected member of the Baptist Church in Sheffield,
Caledonia county, Vt.; and recently the Postmaster in that town. He
spent a few months at the south in the years 1837 and 8. In a letter
to the Rev. Wm. Scales of Lyndon, Vt. written a few weeks since, Mr.
Ide writes as follows.
"In answering the proposed inquiries, I will say first, that although
there are various other modes resorted to, whipping with the cowskin
is the usual mode of inflicting punishment on the poor slave. I have
never actually witnessed a whipping scene, for they are usually taken
into some back place for that purpose; but I have often heard their
groans and screams while writhing under the lash; and have seen the
blood flow from their torn and lacerated skins after the vengeance of
the inhuman master or mistress had been glutted. You ask if the woman
where I boarded whipped a slave to death. I can give you the
particulars of the transaction as they were related to me. My
informant was a gentleman—a member of the Presbyterian church in
Massachusetts—who the winter before boarded where I did. He said that
Mrs. T—— had a female slave whom she used to whip unmercifully, and on
one occasion, she whipped her as long as she had strength, and after
the poor creature was suffered to go, she crawled off into a cellar.
As she did not immediately return, search was made, and she was found
dead in the cellar, and the horrid deed was kept a secret in the
family, and it was reported that she died of sickness. This wretch at
the same time was a member of a Presbyterian church. Towards her
slaves she was certainly the most cruel wretch of any woman with whom
I was ever acquainted—yet she was nothing more than a slaveholder.
She would deplore slavery as much as I did, and often told me she was
much of an abolitionist as I was. She was constant in the declaration
that her kind treatment to her slaves was proverbial. Thought I, then
the Lord have mercy on the rest. She has often told me of the cruel
treatment of the slaves on a plantation adjoining her father's in the
low country of South Carolina. She says she has often seen them driven
to the necessity of eating frogs and lizards to sustain life. As to
the mode of living generally, my information is rather limited, being
with few exceptions confined to the different families where I have
boarded. My stopping places at the south have mostly been in cities.
In them the slaves are better fed and clothed than on plantations. The
house servants are fed on what the families leave. But they are kept
short, and I think are oftener whipped for stealing something to eat
than any other crime. On plantations their food is principally
hommony, as the southerners call it. It is simply cracked corn boiled.
This probably constitutes seven-eights of their living. The
house-servants in cities are generally decently clothed, and some
favorite ones are richly dressed, but those on the plantations,
especially in their dress, if it can be called dress, exhibit the most
haggard and squalid appearance. I have frequently seen those of both
sexes more than two-thirds naked. I have seen from forty to sixty,
male and female, at work in a field, many of both sexes with their
bodies entirely naked—who did not exhibit signs of shame more than
cattle. As I did not go among them much on the plantations, I have
had but few opportunities for examining the backs of slaves—but have
frequently passed where they were at work, and been occasionally
present with them, and in almost every case there were marks of
violence on some parts of them—every age, sex and condition being
liable to the whip. A son of the gentleman with whom I boarded, a
young man about twenty-one years of age, had a plantation and eight or
ten slaves. He used to boast almost every night of whipping some of
them. One day he related to me a case of whipping an old negro—I
should judge sixty years of age. He said he called him up to flog him
for some real or supposed offence, and the poor old man, being pious,
asked the privilege of praying before he received his punishment. He
said he granted him the favor, and to use his own expression, 'The old
nigger knelt down and prayed for me, and then got up and took his
whipping.' In relation to negro huts, I will say that planters usually
own large tracts of land. They have extensive clearings and a
beautiful mansion house—and generally some forty or fifty rods from
the dwelling are situated the negro cabins, or huts, built of logs in
the rudest manner. Some consist of poles rolled up together and
covered with mud or clay—many of them not as comfortable as northern
pig-sties."
TESTIMONY OF REV. PHINEAS SMITH
MR. SMITH is now pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Centreville,
Allegany county, N.Y. He has recently returned from a residence in the
slave states, and the American slave holding settlements in Texas. The
following is an extract of a letter lately received from him.
"You inquire respecting instances of cruelty that have come within my
knowledge. I reply. Avarice and cruelty constitute the very gist of
the whole slave system. Many of the enormities committed upon the
plantations will not be described till God brings to light the hidden
things of darkness, then the tears and groans and blood of innocent
men, women and children will be revealed, and the oppressor's spirit
must confront that of his victim.
"I will relate a case of torture which occurred on the Brassos while
I resided a few miles distant upon the Chocolate Bayou. The case
should be remembered as a true illustration of the nature of slavery,
as it exists at the south. The facts are these. An overseer by the
name of Alexander, notorious for his cruelty, was found dead in the
timbered lands of the Brassos. It was supposed that he was murdered,
but who perpetrated the act was unknown. Two black men were however
seized, taken into the Prairie and put to the torture. A physician by
the name of Parrott from Tennessee, and another from New England by
the name of Anson Jones, were present on this occasion. The latter
gentleman is now the Texan minister plenipotentiary to the United
States, and resides at Washington. The unfortunate slaves being
stripped, and all things arranged, the torture commenced by whipping
upon their bare backs. Six athletic men were employed in this scene of
inhumanity, the names of some of whom I well remember. There was one
of the name of Brown, and one or two of the name of Patton. Those six
executioners were successively employed in cutting up the bodies of
these defenceless slaves, who persisted to the last in the avowal of
their innocence. The bloody whip was however kept in motion till
savage barbarity itself was glutted. When this was accomplished, the
bleeding victims were re-conveyed to the inclosure of the mansion
house where they were deposited for a few moments. 'The dying groans
however incommoding the ladies, they were taken to a back shed where
one of them soon expired.'[13] The life of the other slave was for a
time despaired of, but after hanging over the grave for months, he at
length so far recovered as to walk about and labor at light work.
These facts cannot be controverted. They were disclosed under the
solemnity of an oath, at Columbia, in a court of justice. I was
present, and shall never forget them. The testimony of Drs. Parrott
and Jones was most appalling. I seem to hear the death-groans of that
murdered man. His cries for mercy and protestations of innocence fell
upon adamantine hearts. The facts above stated, and others in relation
to this scene of cruelty came to light in the following manner. The
master of the murdered man commenced legal process against the actors
in this tragedy for the recovery of the value of the chattel, as one
would institute a suit for a horse or an ox that had been unlawfully
killed. It was a suit for the recovery of damages merely. No
indictment was even dreamed of. Among the witnesses brought upon the
stand in the progress of this cause were the physicians, Parrott and
Jones above named. The part which they were called to act in this
affair was, it is said, to examine the pulse of the victims during the
process of torture. But they were mistaken as to the quantum of
torture which a human being can undergo and not die under it. Can it
be believed that one of these physicians was born and educated in the
land of the pilgrims? Yes, in my own native New England. It is even
so! The stone-like apathy manifested at the trial of the above cause,
and the screams and the death-groans of an innocent man, as developed
by the testimony of the witnesses, can never be obliterated from my
memory. They form an era in my life, a point to which I look back with
horror.
[Footnote 13: The words of Dr. Parrott, a witness on the trial hereafter
referred to.]
"Another case of cruelty occurred on the San Bernard near Chance
Prairie, where I resided for some time. The facts were these. A slave
man fled from his master, (Mr. Sweeny) and being closely pursued by
the overseer and a son of the owner, he stepped a few yards in the
Bernard and placed himself upon a root, from which there was no
possibility of his escape, for he could not swim. In this situation he
was fired upon with a blunderbuss loaded heavily with ball and grape
shot. The overseer who shot the gun was at a distance of a few feet
only. The charge entered the body of the negro near the groin. He was
conveyed to the plantation, lingered in inexpressible agony a few days
and expired. A physician was called, but medical and surgical skill
was unavailing. No notice whatever was taken of this murder by the
public authorities, and the murderer was not discharged from the
service of his employer.
"When slaves flee, as they not unfrequently do, to the timbered lands
of Texas, they are hunted with guns and dogs.
"The sufferings of the slave not unfrequently drive him to despair and
suicide. At a plantation on the San Bernard, where there were but five
slaves, two during the same year committed suicide by drowning."
TESTIMONY OF PHILEMON BLISS, ESQ.
Mr. Bliss is a highly respectable member of the bar, in Elyria, Lorain
Co. Ohio, and member of the Presbyterian church, in that place. He
resided in Florida, during the years 1834 and 5.
The following extracts are from letters, written by Mr. B. in 1835,
while residing on a plantation near Tallahassee, and published soon
after in the Ohio Atlas; also from letters written in 1836 and
published in the New York Evangelist.
"In speaking of slavery as it is, I hardly know where to begin. The
physical condition of the slave is far from being accurately known at
the north. Gentlemen traveling in the south can know nothing of it.
They must make the south their residence; they must live on
plantations, before they can have any opportunity of judging of the
slave. I resided in Augustine five months, and had I not made
particular inquiries, which most northern visitors very seldom or
never do, I should have left there with the impression that the slaves
were generally very well treated, and were a happy people. Such is
the report of many northern travelers who have no more opportunity of
knowing their real condition than if they had remained at home. What
confidence could we place in the reports of the traveler, relative to
the condition of the Irish peasantry, who formed his opinion from the
appearance of the waiters at a Dublin hotel, or the household servants
of a country gentleman? And it is not often on plantations even, that
strangers can witness the punishment of the slave. I was conversing
the other day with a neighboring planter, upon the brutal treatment of
the slaves which I had witnessed: he remarked, that had I been with
him I should not have seen this. "When I whip niggers, I take them out
of sight and hearing." Such being the difficulties in the way of a
stranger's ascertaining the treatment of the slaves, it is not to be
wondered at that gentlemen, of undoubted veracity, should give
directly false statements relative to it. But facts cannot lie, and in
giving these I confine myself to what has come under my own personal
observation.
"The negroes commence labor by daylight in the morning, and, excepting
the plowboys, who must feed and rest their horses, do not leave the
field till dark in the evening. There is a good deal of contention
among planters, who shall make the most cotton to the hand, or, who
shall drive their negroes the hardest; and I have heard bets made and
staked upon the issue of the crops. Col. W. was boasting of his large
crops, and swore that 'he made for his force, the largest crops in the
country.' He was disputed of course. On riding home in company with
Mr. C. the conversation turned upon Col. W. My companion remarked,
that though Col. W. had the reputation of making a large crop, yet he
could beat him himself, and did do it the last year. I remarked that I
considered it no honor to Col. W. to drive his slaves to death to
make a large crop. I have heard no more about large crops from him
since. Drivers or overseers usually drive the slaves worse than
masters.—Their reputation for good overseers depends in a great
measure upon the crops they make, and the death of a slave is no loss
to them.
"Of the extent and cruelty of the punishment of the slave, the
northern public know nothing. From the nature of the case they can
know little, as I have before mentioned.
"I have seen a woman, a mother, compelled, in the presence of her
master and mistress, to hold up her clothes, and endure the whip of
the driver on the naked body for more than twenty minutes, and while
her cries would have rent the heart of any one, who had not hardened
himself to human suffering. Her master and mistress were conversing
with apparent indifference. What was her crime? She had a task given
her of sewing which she must finish that day. Late at night she
finished it; but the stitches were too long, and she must be
whipped. The same was repeated three or four nights for the same
offence. I have seen a man tied to a tree, hands and feet, and
receive 305 blows with the paddle[14] on the fleshy parts of the body.
Two others received the same kind of punishment at the time, though I
did not count the blows. One received 230 lashes. Their crime was
stealing mutton. I have frequently heard the shrieks of the slaves,
male and female, accompanied by the strokes of the paddle or whip,
when I have not gone near the scene of horror. I knew not their
crimes, excepting of one woman, which was stealing four potatoes to
eat with her bread! The more common number of lashes inflicted was
fifty or eighty; and this I saw not once or twice, but so frequently
that I can not tell the number of times I have seen it. So frequently,
that my own heart was becoming so hardened that I could witness with
comparative indifference, the female writhe under the lash, and her
shrieks and cries for mercy ceased to pierce my heart with that
keenness, or give me that anguish which they first caused. It was not
always that I could learn their crimes; but of those I did learn, the
most common was non-performance of tasks. I have seen men strip and
receive from one to three hundred strokes of the whip and paddle. My
studies and meditations were almost nightly interrupted by the cries
of the victims of cruelty and avarice. Tom, a slave of Col. N.
obtained permission of his overseer on Sunday, to visit his son, on a
neighboring plantation, belonging in part to his master, but neglected
to take a "pass." Upon its being demanded by the other overseer, he
replied that he had permission to come, and that his having a mule was
sufficient evidence of it, and if he did not consider it as such, he
could take him up. The overseer replied he would take him up; giving
him at the same time a blow on the arm with a stick he held in his
hand, sufficient to lame it for some time. The negro collared him, and
threw him; and on the overseer's commanding him to submit to be tied
and whipped, he said he would not be whipped by him but would leave
it to massa J. They came to massa J.'s. I was there. After the
overseer had related the case as above, he was blamed for not shooting
or stabbing him at once.—After dinner the negro was tied, and the
whip given to the overseer, and he used it with a severity that was
shocking. I know not how many lashes were given, but from his
shoulders to his heels there was not a spot unridged! and at almost
every stroke the blood flowed. He could not have received less than
300, well laid on. But his offence was great, almost the greatest
known, laying hands on a white man! Had he struck the overseer,
under any provocation, he would have been in some way disfigured,
perhaps by the loss of his ears, in addition to a whipping: or he
might have been hung. The most common cause of punishments is, not
finishing tasks.
[Footnote 14: A piece of oak timber two and a half feet long, flat and
wide at one end.]
"But it would be tedious mentioning further particulars. The negro has
no other inducement to work but the lash; and as man never acts
without motive, the lash must be used so long as all other motives are
withheld. Hence corporeal punishment is a necessary part of slavery.
"Punishments for runaways are usually severe. Once whipping is not
sufficient. I have known runaways to be whipped for six or seven
nights in succession for one offence. I have known others who, with
pinioned hands, and a chain extending from an iron collar on their
neck, to the saddle of their master's horse, have been driven at a
smart trot, one or two hundred miles, being compelled to ford water
courses, their drivers, according to their own confession, not abating
a whit in the rapidity of their journey for the case of the slave. One
tied a kettle of sand to his slave to render his journey more arduous.
"Various are the instruments of torture devised to keep the slave in
subjection. The stocks are sometimes used. Sometimes blocks are filled
with pegs and nails, and the slave compelled to stand upon them.
"While stopping on the plantation of a Mr. C. I saw a whip with a
knotted lash lying on the table, and inquired of my companion, who was
also an acquaintance of Mr. C's, if he used that to whip his negroes?
"Oh," says he, "Mr. C. is not severe with his hands. He never whips
very hard. The knots in the lash are so large that he does not
usually draw blood in whipping them."
"It was principally from hearing the conversation of southern men on
the subject, that I judge of the cruelty that is generally practiced
toward slaves. They will deny that slaves are generally ill treated;
but ask them if they are not whipped for certain offences, which
either a freeman would have no temptation to commit, or which would
not be an offence in any but a slave, and for non-performance of
tasks, they will answer promptly in the affirmative. And frequently
have I heard them excuse their cruelty by citing Mr. A. or Mr. B. who
is a Christian, or Mr. C. a preacher, or Mr. D. from the north, who
"drives his hands tighter, and whips them harder, than we ever do."
Driving negroes to the utmost extent of their ability, with
occasionally a hundred lashes or more, and a few switchings in the
field if they hang back in the driving seasons, viz: in the hoing and
picking months, is perfectly consistent with good treatment!
"While traveling across the Peninsula in a stage, in company with a
northern gentleman, and southern lady, of great worth and piety, a
dispute arose respecting the general treatment of slaves, the
gentleman contending that their treatment was generally good—'O, no!'
interrupted the lady, 'you can know nothing of the treatment they
receive on the plantations. People here do whip the poor negroes most
cruelly, and many half starve them. You have neither of you had
opportunity to know scarcely anything of the cruelties that are
practiced in this country,' and more to the same effect. I met with
several others, besides this lady, who appeared to feel for the sins
of the land, but they are few and scattered, and not usually of
sufficiently stern mould to withstand the popular wave.
"Masters are not forward to publish their "domestic regulations," and
as neighbors are usually several miles apart, one's observation must
be limited. Hence the few instances of cruelty which break out can be
but a fraction of what is practised. A planter, a professor of
religion, in conversation upon the universality of whipping, remarked
that a planter in G—, who had whipped a great deal, at length got
tired of it, and invented the following excellent method of
punishment, which I saw practised while I was paying him a visit. The
negro was placed in a sitting position, with his hands made fast above
his head, and feet in the stocks, so that he could not move any part
of the body.
"The master retired, intending to leave him till morning, but we were
awakened in the night by the groans of the negro, which were so
doleful that we feared he was dying. We went to him, and found him
covered with a cold sweat, and almost gone. He could not have lived an
hour longer. Mr. —— found the 'stocks' such an effective punishment,
that it almost superseded the whip."
"How much do you give your niggers for a task while hoeing cotton,"
inquired Mr. C—— of his neighbor Mr. H——."
H. "I give my men an acre and a quarter, and my women an acre."[15]
[Footnote 15: Cotton is planted in drills about three feet apart, and
is hilled like corn.]
C. "Well, that is a fair task. Niggers do a heap better if they are
drove pretty tight."
H. "O yes, I have driven mine into complete subordination. When I
first bought them they were discontented and wished me to sell them,
but I soon whipped that out of them; and they now work very
contentedly!"
C. "Does Mary keep up with the rest?"
H. "No, she does'nt often finish the task alone, she has to get Sam to
help her out after he has done his, to save her a whipping. There's
no other way but to be severe with them."
C. "No other, sir, if you favor a nigger you spoil him."
"The whip is considered as necessary on a plantation as the plough;
and its use is almost as common. The negro whip is the common
teamster's whip with a black leather stock, and a short, fine, knotted
lash. The paddle is also frequently used, sometimes with holes bored
in the flattened end. The ladies (!) in chastising their domestic
servants, generally use the cowhide. I have known some use shovel and
tongs. It is, however, more common to commit them to the driver to be
whipped. The manner of whipping is as follows: The negro is tied by
his hands, and sometimes feet, to a post or tree, and stripped to the
skin. The female slave is not always tied. The number of lashes
depends upon the character for severity of the master or overseer.
"Another instrument of torture is sometimes used, how extensively I
know not. The negro, or, in the case which came to my knowledge, the
negress was compelled to stand barefoot upon a block filled with sharp
pegs and nails for two or three hours. In case of sickness, if the
master or overseer thinks them seriously ill, they are taken care of,
but their complaints are usually not much heeded. A physician told me
that he was employed by a planter last winter to go to a plantation of
his in the country, as many of the negroes were sick. Says he—"I
found them in a most miserable condition. The weather was cold, and
the negroes were barefoot, with hardly enough of cotton clothing to
cover their nakedness. Those who had huts to shelter them were obliged
to build them nights and Sundays. Many were sick and some had died. I
had the sick taken to an older plantation of their masters, where they
could be made comfortable, and they recovered. I directed that they
should not go to work till after sunrise, and should not work in the
rain till their health became established. But the overseer refusing
to permit it, I declined attending on them farther. I was called,'
continued he, 'by the overseer of another plantation to see one of the
men. I found him lying by the side of a log in great pain. I asked him
how he did, 'O,' says he, 'I'm most dead, can live but little longer.'
How long have you been sick? I've felt for more than six weeks as
though I could hardly stir.' Why didn't you tell your master, you was
sick? 'I couldn't see my master, and the overseer always whips us when
we complain, I could not stand a whipping.' I did all I could for the
poor fellow, but his lungs were rotten. He died in three days from
the time he left off work.' The cruelty of that overseer is such that
the negroes almost tremble at his name. Yet he gets a high salary, for
he makes the largest crop of any other man in the neighborhood, though
none but the hardiest negroes can stand it under him. "That man," says
the Doctor, "would be hung in my country." He was a German."
TESTIMONY OF REV. WILLIAM A. CHAPIN.
REV. WILLIAM SCALES, of Lyndon, Vermont, has furnished the following
testimony, under date of Dec. 15, 1838.
"I send you an extract from a letter that I have just received, which
you may use ad libitum. The letter is from Rev. Wm. A. Chapin,
Greensborough, Vermont. To one who is acquainted with Mr. C. his
opinion and statements must carry conviction even to the most
obstinate and incredulous. He observes, 'I resided, as a teacher,
nearly two years in the family of Carroll Webb, Esq., of Hampstead,
New Kent co. about twenty miles from Richmond, Virginia. Mr. Webb had
three or four plantations, and was considered one of the two
wealthiest men in the county: it was supposed he owned about two
hundred slaves. He was a member of the Presbyterian Church, and was
elected an elder while I was with him. He was a native of Virginia,
but a graduate of a New-England college.
"The slaves were called in the morning before daylight, I believe at
all seasons of the year, that they might prepare their food, and be
ready to go to work as soon as it was light enough to see. I know that
at the season of husking corn, October and November, they were usually
compelled to work late—till 12 or 1 o'clock at night. I know this
fact because they accompanied their work with a loud singing of their
own sort. I usually retired to rest between 11 and 12 o'clock, and
generally heard them at their work as long as I was awake. The slaves
lived in wretched log cabins, of one room each, without floors or
windows. I believe the slaves sometimes suffer for want of food. One
evening, as I was sitting in the parlor with Mr. W. one of the most
resolute of the slaves came to the door, and said, "Master, I am
willing to work for you, but I want something to eat." The only reply
was, "Clear yourself." I learned that the slaves had been without food
all day, because the man who was sent to mill could not obtain his
grinding. He went again the next day, and obtained his grist, and the
slaves had no food till he returned. He had to go about five
miles.[16]
[Footnote 16: To this, Rev. Mr. Scales adds, "In familiar language, and
in more detail, as I have learned it in conversation with Mr. Chapin,
the fact is as follows:—
"Mr. W. kept, what he called a 'boy,' i.e. a man, to go to mill. It
was his custom not to give his slaves anything to eat while he was
gone to mill—let him have been gone longer or shorter—for this
reason, if he was lazy, and delayed, the slaves would become hungry:
hence indignant, and abuse him—this was his punishment. On that
occasion he went to mill in the morning. The slaves came up at noon,
and returned to work without food. At night, after having worked hard
all day, without food, went to bed without supper. About 10 o'clock
the next day, they came up in a company, to their master's door, (that
master an elder in the church), and deputed one more resolute than the
rest to address him. This he did in the most respectful tones and
terms. "We are willing to work for you, master, but we can't work
without food; we want something to eat." "Clear yourself," was the
answer. The slaves retired; and in the morning were driven away to
work without food. At noon, I think, or somewhat after, they were
fed."]
"I know the slaves were sometimes severely whipped. I saw the backs of
several which had numerous scars, evidently caused by long and deep
lacerations of the whip; and I have good reason to believe that the
slaves were generally in that condition; for I never saw the back of
one exposed that was not thus marked,—and from their tattered and
scanty clothing their backs were often exposed."
TESTIMONY OF MESSRS. T.D.M. AND F.C. MACY.
This testimony is communicated in a letter from Mr. Cyrus Pierce, a
respectable and well known citizen of Nantucket, Mass. Of the
witnesses, Messrs. T.D.M. and F.C. Macy, Mr. Pierce says, "They are
both inhabitants of this island, and have resided at the south; they
are both worthy men, for whose integrity and intelligence I can vouch
unqualifiedly; the former has furnished me with the following
statement.
"During the winter of 1832-3, I resided on the island of St. Simon,
Glynn county, Georgia. There are several extensive cotton plantations
on the island. The overseer of the plantation on that part of the
island where I resided was a Georgian—a man of stern character, and
at times cruelly abusive to his slaves. I have often been witness of
the abuse of his power. In South Carolina and Georgia, on the low
lands, the cultivation is chiefly of rice. The land where it is raised
is often inundated, and the labor of preparing it, and raising a crop,
is very arduous. Men and women are in the field from earliest dawn to
dark—often without hats, and up to their arm-pits in mud and water.
At St. Simon's, cotton was the staple article. Ocra, the driver,
usually waited on the overseer to receive orders for the succeeding
day. If any slave was insolent, or negligent, the driver was
authorized to punish him with the whip, with as many blows as the
magnitude of the crime justified. He was frequently cautioned, upon
the peril of his skin, to see that all the negroes were off to the
field in the morning. 'Ocra,' said the overseer, one evening, to the
driver, 'if any pretend to be sick, send me word—allow no lazy wench
or fellow to skulk in the negro house.' Next morning, a few minutes
after the departure of the hands to the field, Ocra was seen hastening
to the house of the overseer. He was soon in his presence. 'Well, Ocra,
what now?' 'Nothing, sir, only Rachel says she sick—can't go to de
field to-day.' 'Ah, sick, is she? I'll see to her; you may be off. She
shall see if I am longer to be fooled with in this way. Here,
Christmas, mix these salts—bring them to me at the negro house.' And
seizing his whip, he made off to the negro settlement. Having a strong
desire to see what would be the result, I followed him. As I
approached the negro house, I heard high words. Rachel was stating her
complaint—children were crying from fright—and the overseer
threatening. Rachel.—'I can't work to-day—I'm sick!' Overseer.—'But
you shall work, if you die for it. Here, take these salts. Now move
off—quick—let me see your face again before night, and, by G—d,
you shall smart for it. Be off—no begging—not a word;'—and he
dragged her from the house, and followed her 20 or 30 rods,
threatening. The woman did not reach the field. Overcome by the
exertion of walking, and by agitation, she sunk down exhausted by the
road side—was taken up, and carried back to the house, where an
abortion occurred, and her life was greatly jeoparded.
"It was no uncommon sight to see a whole family, father, mother, and
from two to five children, collected together around their piggin of
hommony, or pail of potatoes, watched by the overseer. One meal was
always eaten in the field. No time was allowed for relaxation.
"It was not unusual for a child of five or six years to perform the
office of nurse—because the mother worked in a remote part of the
field, and was not allowed to leave her employment to take care of her
infant. Want of proper nutriment induces sickness of the worst type.
"No matter what the nature of the service, a peck of corn, dealt out
on Sunday, must supply the demands of nature for a week.
"The Sabbath, on a southern plantation, is a mere nominal holiday. The
slaves are liable to be called upon at all times, by those who have
authority over them.
"When it rained, the slaves were allowed to collect under a tree until
the shower had passed. Seldom, on a week day, were they permitted to
go to their huts during rain; and even had this privilege been
granted, many of those miserable habitations were in so dilapidated a
condition, that they would afford little or no protection. Negro huts
are built of logs, covered with boards or thatch, having no
flooring, and but one apartment, serving all the purposes of
sleeping, cooking, &c. Some are furnished with a temporary loft. I
have seen a whole family herded together in a loft ten feet by twelve.
In cold weather, they gather around the fire, spread their blankets
on the ground, and keep as comfortable as they can. Their supply of
clothing is scanty—each slave being allowed a Holland coat and
pantaloons, of the coarsest manufacture, and one pair of cowhide
shoes. The women, enough of the same kind of cloth for one frock. They
have also one pair of shoes. Shoes are given to the slaves in the
winter only. In summer, their clothing is composed of osnaburgs.
Slaves on different plantations are not allowed without a written
permission, to visit their fellow bondsmen, under penalty of severe
chastisement. I witnessed the chastisement of a young male slave, who
was found lurking about the plantation, and could give no other
account of himself, than that he wanted to visit some of his
acquaintance. Fifty lashes was the penalty for this offence. I could
not endure the dreadful shrieks of the tortured slave, and rushed away
front the scene."
The remainder of this testimony is furnished by Mr. F.C. Macy.
"I went to Savannah in 1820. Sailing up the river, I had my first view
of slavery. A large number of men and women, with a piece of board on
their heads, carrying mud, for the purpose of dyking, near the river.
After tarrying a while in Savannah, I went down to the sea islands of
De Fuskee and Hilton Head, where I spent six months. Negro houses are
small, built of rough materials, and no floor. Their clothing, (one
suit,) coarse; which they received on Christmas day. Their food was
three pecks of potatoes per week, in the potatoe season, and one peck
of corn the remainder of the year. The slaves carried with them into
the field their meal, and a gourd of water. They cooked their hommony
in the field, and ate it with a wooden paddle. Their treatment was
little better than that of brutes. Whipping was nearly an every-day
practice. On Mr. M——'s plantation, at the island De Fuskee, I saw an
old man whipped; he was about 60. He had no clothing on, except a
shirt. The man that inflicted the blows was Flim, a tall and stout
man. The whipping was very severe. I inquired into the cause. Some
vegetables had been stolen from his master's garden, of which he could
give no account. I saw several women whipped, some of whom were in
very delicate circumstances. The case of one I will relate. She had
been purchased in Charleston, and separated from her husband. On her
passage to Savannah, or rather to the island, she was delivered of a
child; and in about three weeks after this, she appeared to be
deranged. She would leave her work, go into the woods, and sing. Her
master sent for her, and ordered the driver to whip her. I was near
enough to hear the strokes.
"I have known negro boys, partly by persuasion, and partly by force,
made to strip off their clothing and fight for the amusement of their
masters. They would fight until both got to crying.
"One of the planters told me that his boat had been used without
permission. A number of his negroes were called up, and put in a
building that was lathed and shingled. The covering could be easily
removed from the inside. He called one out for examination. While
examining this one, he discovered another negro, coming out of the
roof. He ordered him back: he obeyed. In a few moments he attempted it
again. The master took deliberate aim at his head, but his gun missed
fire. He told me he should probably have killed him, had his gun gone
off. The negro jumped and run. The master took aim again, and fired;
but he was so far distant, that he received only a few shots in the
calf of his leg. After several days he returned, and received a severe
whipping.
"Mr. B——, planter at Hilton Head, freely confessed, that he kept one
of his slaves as a mistress. She slept in the same room with him.
This, I think, is a very common practice."
TESTIMONY OF A CLERGYMAN.
The following letter was written to Mr. ARTHUR TAPPAN, of New York, in
the summer of 1833. As the name of the writer cannot be published with
safety to himself, it is withheld.
The following testimonials, from Mr. TAPPAN, Professor WRIGHT, and
THOMAS RITTER, M.D. of New York, establish the trust-worthiness and
high respectability of the writer.
"I received the following letters from the south during the year 1833.
They were written by a gentleman who had then resided some years in
the slave states. Not being at liberty to give the writer's name, I
cheerfully certify that he is a gentleman of established character, a
graduate of Yale College, and a respected minister of the gospel.
"ARTHUR TAPPAN."
"My acquaintance with the writer of the following letter commenced, I
believe, in 1823, from which time we were fellow students in Yale
College till 1826. I have occasionally seen him since. His character,
so far as it has come within my knowledge, has been that of an upright
and remarkably candid man. I place great confidence both in his
habits of careful and unprejudiced observation and his veracity.
"E. WRIGHT, jun. New York, April 13, 1839."
"I have been acquainted with the writer of the following letter about
twelve years, and know him to be a gentleman of high respectability,
integrity, and piety. We were fellow students in Yale College, and my
opportunities for judging of his character, both at that time and
since our graduation, have been such, that I feel myself fully
warranted in making the above unequivocal declaration.
"THOMAS RITTER. 104, Cherry-street, New York."
"It has been almost four years since I came to the south-west; and
although I have been told, from month to month, that I should soon
wear off my northern prejudices, and probably have slaves of my own,
yet my judgment in regard to oppression, or my prejudices, if they are
pleased so to call them, remain with me still. I judge still from
those principles which were fixed in my mind at the north; and a
residence at the south has not enabled me so to pervert truth, as to
make injustice appear justice.
"I have studied the state of things here, now for years, coolly and
deliberately, with the eye of an uninterested looker on; and hence I
may not be altogether unprepared to state to you some facts, and to
draw conclusions from them.
"Permit me then to relate what I have seen; and do not imagine that
these are all exceptions to the general treatment, but rather believe
that thousands of cruelties are practised in this Christian land,
every year, which no eye that ever shed a tear of pity could look
upon.
"Soon after my arrival I made an excursion into the country, to the
distance of some twenty miles. And as I was passing by a cotton field,
where about fifty negroes were at work, I was inclined to stop by the
road side to view a scene which was then new to me. While I was, in my
mind, comparing this mode of labor with that of my own native place, I
heard the driver, with a rough oath, order one that was near him, who
seemed to be laboring to the extent of his power, to "lie down." In a
moment he was obeyed; and he commenced whipping the offender upon his
naked back, and continued, to the amount of about twenty lashes, with
a heavy raw-hide whip, the crack of which might have been heard more
than half a mile. Nor did the females escape; for although I stopped
scarcely fifteen minutes, no less than three were whipped in the same
manner, and that so severely, I was strongly inclined to interfere.
"You may be assured, sir, that I remained not unmoved: I could no
longer look on such cruelty, but turned away and rode on, while the
echoes of the lash were reverberating in the woods around me. Such
scenes have long since become familiar to me. But then the full effect
was not lost; and I shall never forget, to my latest day, the mingled
feelings of pity, horror, and indignation that took possession of my
mind. I involuntarily exclaimed, O God of my fathers, how dost thou
permit such things to defile our land! Be merciful to us! and visit us
not in justice, for all our iniquities and the iniquities of our
fathers!
"As I passed on I soon found that I had escaped from one horrible
scene only to witness another. A planter with whom I was well
acquainted, had caught a negro without a pass. And at the moment I was
passing by, he was in the act of fastening his feet and hands to the
trees, having previously made him take off all his clothing except his
trowsers. When he had sufficiently secured this poor creature, he beat
him for several minutes with a green switch more than six feet long;
while he was writhing with anguish, endeavoring in vain to break the
cords with which he was bound, and incessantly crying out, "Lord,
master! do pardon me this time! do, master, have mercy!" These
expressions have recurred to me a thousand times since; and although
they came from one that is not considered among the sons of men, yet I
think they are well worthy of remembrance, as they might lead a wise
man to consider whether such shall receive mercy from the righteous
Judge, as never showed mercy to their fellow men.
"At length I arrived at the dwelling of a planter of my acquaintance,
with whom I passed the night. At about eight o'clock in the evening I
heard the barking of several dogs, mingled with the most agonizing
cries that I ever heard from any human being. Soon after the gentleman
came in, and began to apologize, by saying that two of his runaway
slaves had just been brought home; and as he had previously tried
every species of punishment upon them without effect, he knew not what
else to add, except to set his blood hounds upon them. 'And,'
continued he, 'one of them has been so badly bitten that he has been
trying to die. I am only sorry that he did not; for then I should not
have been further troubled with him. If he lives I intend to send him
to Natchez or to New Orleans, to work with the ball and chain.'
"From this last remark I understood that private individuals have the
right of thus subjecting their unmanageable slaves. I have since seen
numbers of these 'ball and chain' men, both in Natchez and New
Orleans, but I do not know whether there were any among them except
the state convicts.
"As the summer was drawing towards a close, and the yellow fever
beginning to prevail in town, I went to reside some months in the
country. This was the cotton picking season, during which, the
planters say, there is a greater necessity for flogging than at any
other time. And I can assure you, that as I have sat in my window
night after night, while the cotton was being weighed, I have heard
the crack of the whip, without much intermission, for a whole hour,
from no less than three plantations, some of which were a full mile
distant.
"I found that the slaves were kept in the field from daylight until
dark; and then, if they had not gathered what the master or overseer
thought sufficient, they were subjected to the lash.
"Many by such treatment are induced to run away and take up their
lodging in the woods. I do not say that all who run away are thus
closely pressed, but I do know that many are; and I have known no less
than a dozen desert at a time from the same plantation, in consequence
of the overseer's forcing them to work to the extent of their power,
and then whipping them for not having done more.
"But suppose that they run away—what is to become of them in the
forest? If they cannot steal they must perish of hunger—if the nights
are cold, their feet will be frozen; for if they make a fire they may
be discovered, and be shot at. If they attempt to leave the country,
their chance of success is about nothing. They must return, be
whipped—if old offenders, wear the collar, perhaps be branded, and
fare worse than before.
"Do you believe it, sir, not six months since, I saw a number of my
Christian neighbors packing up provisions, as I supposed for a deer
hunt; but as I was about offering myself to the party, I learned that
their powder and balls were destined to a very different purpose: it
was, in short, the design of the party to bring home a number of
runaway slaves, or to shoot them if they should not be able to get
possession of them in any other way.
"You will ask, Is not this murder? Call it, sir, by what name you
please, such are the facts:—many are shot every year, and that too
while the masters say they treat their slaves well.
"But let me turn your attention to another species of cruelty. About a
year since I knew a certain slave who had deserted his master, to be
caught, and for the first time fastened to the stocks. In those same
stocks, from which at midnight I have heard cries of distress, while
the master slept, and was dreaming, perhaps, of drinking wine and of
discussing the price of cotton. On the next morning he was chained in
an immovable posture, and branded in both cheeks with red hot stamps
of iron. Such are the tender mercies of men who love wealth, and are
determined to obtain it at any price.
"Suffer me to add another to the list of enormities, and I will not
offend you with more.
"There was, some time since, brought to trial in this town a planter
residing about fifteen miles distant, for whipping his slave to death.
You will suppose, of course, that he was punished. No, sir, he was
acquitted, although there could be no doubt of the fact. I heard the
tale of murder from a man who was acquainted with all the
circumstances. 'I was,' said he, 'passing along the road near the
burying-ground of the plantation, about nine o'clock at night, when I
saw several lights gleaming through the woods; and as I approached, in
order to see what was doing, I beheld the coroner of Natchez, with a
number of men, standing around the body of a young female, which by
the torches seemed almost perfectly white. On inquiry I learned that
the master had so unmercifully beaten this girl that she died under
the operation: and that also he had so severely punished another of
his slaves that he was but just alive.'"
We here rest the case for the present, so far as respects the
presentation of facts showing the condition of the slaves, and proceed
to consider the main objections which are usually employed to weaken
such testimony, or wholly to set it aside. But before we enter upon
the examination of specific objections, and introductory to them, we
remark,—
1. That the system of slavery must be a system of horrible cruelty,
follows of necessity, from the fact that two millions seven hundred
thousand human beings are held by force, and used as articles of
property. Nothing but a heavy yoke, and an iron one, could possibly
keep so many necks in the dust. That must be a constant and mighty
pressure which holds so still such a vast army; nothing could do it
but the daily experience of severities, and the ceaseless dread and
certainty of the most terrible inflictions if they should dare to toss
in their chains.
2. Were there nothing else to prove it a system of monstrous cruelty,
the fact that FEAR is the only motive with which the slave is plied
during his whole existence, would be sufficient to brand it with
execration as the grand tormentor of man. The slave's susceptibility
of pain is the sole fulcrum on which slavery works the lever that
moves him. In this it plants all its stings; here it sinks its hot
irons; cuts its deep gashes; flings its burning embers, and dashes its
boiling brine and liquid fire: into this it strikes its cold flesh
hooks, grappling irons, and instruments of nameless torture; and by it
drags him shrieking to the end of his pilgrimage. The fact that the
master inflicts pain upon the slave not merely as an end to gratify
passion, but constantly as a means of extorting labor, is enough of
itself to show that the system of slavery is unmixed cruelty.
3. That the slaves must suffer frequent and terrible inflictions,
follows inevitably from the character of those who direct their
labor. Whatever may be the character of the slaveholders themselves,
all agree that the overseers are, as a class, most abandoned, brutal,
and desperate men. This is so well known and believed that any
testimony to prove it seems needless. The testimony of Mr. WIRT, late
Attorney General of the United States, a Virginian and a slaveholder,
is as follows. In his life of Patrick Henry, p. 36, speaking of the
different classes of society in Virginia, he says,—"Last and lowest a
feculum, of beings called 'overseers'—the most abject, degraded,
unprincipled race, always cap in hand to the dons who employ them,
and furnishing materials for the exercise of their pride, insolence,
and spirit of domination."
Rev. PHINEAS SMITH, of Centreville, New-York, who has resided some
years at the south, says of overseers—
"It need hardly be added that overseers are in general ignorant,
unprincipled and cruel, and in such low repute that they are not
permitted to come to the tables of their employers; yet they have the
constant control of all the human cattle that belong to the master.
"These men are continually advancing from their low station to the
higher one of masters. These changes bring into the possession of
power a class of men of whose mental and moral qualities I have
already spoken."
Rev. HORACE MOULTON, Marlboro', Massachusetts, who lived in Georgia
several years, says of them,—
"The overseers are generally loose in their morals; it is the object
of masters to employ those whom they think will get the most work out
of their hands,—hence those who whip and torment the slaves the
most are in many instances called the best overseers. The masters
think those whom the slaves fear the most are the best. Quite a
portion of the masters employ their own slaves as overseers, or rather
they are called drivers; these are more subject to the will of the
masters than the white overseers are; some of them are as lordly as an
Austrian prince, and sometimes more cruel even than the whites."
That the overseers are, as a body, sensual, brutal, and violent men is
proverbial. The tender mercies of such men must be cruel.
4. The ownership of human beings necessarily presupposes an utter
disregard of their happiness. He who assumes it monopolizes their
whole capital, leaves them no stock on which to trade, and out of
which to make happiness. Whatever is the master's gain is the
slave's loss, a loss wrested from him by the master, for the express
purpose of making it his own gain; this is the master's constant
employment—forcing the slave to toil—violently wringing from him
all he has and all he gets, and using it as his own;—like the vile
bird that never builds its nest from materials of its own gathering,
but either drives other birds from theirs and takes possession of
them, or tears them in pieces to get the means of constructing their
own. This daily practice of forcibly robbing others, and habitually
living on the plunder, cannot but beget in the mind the habit of
regarding the interests and happiness of those whom it robs, as of no
sort of consequence in comparison with its own; consequently whenever
those interests and this happiness are in the way of its own
gratification, they will be sacrificed without scruple. He who cannot
see this would be unable to feel it, if it were seen.
Objection I—"SUCH CRUELTIES ARE INCREDIBLE."
The enormities inflicted by slaveholders upon their slaves will never
be discredited except by those who overlook the simple fact, that he
who holds human beings as his bona fide property, regards them as
property, and not as persons; this is his permanent state of mind
toward them. He does not contemplate slaves as human beings,
consequently does not treat them as such; and with entire
indifference sees them suffer privations and writhe under blows,
which, if inflicted upon whites, would fill him with horror and
indignation. He regards that as good treatment of slaves, which would
seem to him insufferable abuse if practiced upon others; and would
denounce that as a monstrous outrage and horrible cruelty, if
perpretated upon white men and women, which he sees every day meted
out to black slaves, without perhaps ever thinking it cruel.
Accustomed all his life to regard them rather as domestic animals, to
hear them stormed at, and to see them cuffed and caned; and being
himself in the constant habit of treating them thus, such practices
have become to him a mere matter of course, and make no impression on
his mind. True, it is incredible that men should treat as chattels
those whom they truly regard as human beings; but that they should
treat as chattels and working animals those whom they regard as
such, is no marvel. The common treatment of dogs, when they are in the
way, is to kick them out of it; we see them every day kicked off the
sidewalks, and out of shops, and on Sabbaths out of churches,—yet, as
they are but dogs, these do not strike us as outrages; yet, if we
were to see men, women, and children—our neighbors and friends,
kicked out of stores by merchants, or out of churches by the deacons
and sexton, we should call the perpetrators inhuman wretches.
We have said that slaveholders regard their slaves not as human
beings, but as mere working animals, or merchandise. The whole
vocabulary of slaveholders, their laws, their usages, and their entire
treatment of their slaves fully establish this. The same terms are
applied to slaves that are given to cattle. They are called "stock."
So when the children of slaves are spoken of prospectively, they are
called their "increase;" the same term that is applied to flocks and
herds. So the female slaves that are mothers, are called "breeders"
till past child bearing; and often the same terms are applied to the
different sexes that are applied to the males and females among
cattle. Those who compel the labor of slaves and cattle have the same
appellation, "drivers:" the names which they call them are the same
and similar to those given to their horses and oxen. The laws of slave
states make them property, equally with goats and swine; they are
levied upon for debt in the same way; they are included in the same
advertisements of public sales with cattle, swine, and asses; when
moved from one part of the country to another, they are herded in
droves like cattle, and like them urged on by drivers; their labor is
compelled in the same way. They are bought and sold, and separated
like cattle: when exposed for sale, their good qualities are described
as jockies show off the good points of their horses; their strength,
activity, skill, power of endurance, &c. are lauded,—and those who
bid upon them examine their persons, just as purchasers inspect horses
and oxen; they open their mouths to see if their teeth are sound;
strip their backs to see if they are badly scarred, and handle their
limbs and muscles to see if they are firmly knit. Like horses, they
are warranted to be "sound," or to be returned to the owner if
"unsound." A father gives his son a horse and a slave; by his will
he distributes among them his race-horses, hounds, game-cocks, and
slaves. We leave the reader to carry out the parallel which we have
only begun. Its details would cover many pages.
That slaveholders do not practically regard slaves as human beings
is abundantly shown by their own voluntary testimony. In a recent work
entitled, "The South vindicated from the Treason and Fanaticism of
Northern Abolitionists," which was written, we are informed, by
Colonel Dayton, late member of Congress from South Carolina; the
writer, speaking of the awe with which the slaves regard the whites,
says,—
"The northerner looks upon a band of negroes as upon so many men,
but the planter or southerner views them in a very different light."
Extract from the speech of Mr. SUMMERS, of Virginia, in the
legislature of that state, Jan. 26, 1832. See the Richmond Whig.
"When, in the sublime lessons of Christianity, he (the slaveholder) is
taught to 'do unto others as he would have others do unto him,' HE
NEVER DREAMS THAT THE DEGRADED NEGRO IS WITHIN THE PALE OF THAT HOLY
CANON."
PRESIDENT JEFFERSON, in his letter to GOVERNOR COLES, of Illinois,
dated Aug. 25, 1814, asserts, that slaveholders regard their slaves as
brutes, in the following remarkable language.
"Nursed and educated in the daily habit of seeing the degraded
condition, both bodily and mental, of these unfortunate beings [the
slaves], FEW MINDS HAVE YET DOUBTED BUT THAT THEY WERE AS LEGITIMATE
SUBJECTS OF PROPERTY AS THEIR HORSES OR CATTLE."
Having shown that slaveholders regard their slaves as mere working
animals and cattle, we now proceed to show that their actual treatment
of them, is worse than it would be if they were brutes. We repeat
it, SLAVEHOLDERS TREAT THEIR SLAVES WORSE THAN THEY DO THEIR BRUTES.
Whoever heard of cows or sheep being deliberately tied up and beaten
and lacerated till they died? or horses coolly tortured by the hour,
till covered with mangled flesh, or of swine having their legs tied
and being suspended from a tree and lacerated with thongs for hours,
or of hounds stretched and made fast at full length, flayed with
whips, red pepper rubbed into their bleeding gashes, and hot brine
dashed on to aggravate the torture? Yet just such forms and degrees of
torture are daily perpetrated upon the slaves. Now no man that knows
human nature will marvel at this. Though great cruelties have always
been inflicted by men upon brutes, yet incomparably the most horrid
ever perpetrated, have been those of men upon their own species. Any
leaf of history turned over at random has proof enough of this. Every
reflecting mind perceives that when men hold human beings as
property, they must, from the nature of the case, treat them worse
than they treat their horses and oxen. It is impossible for cattle
to excite in men such tempests of fury as men excite in each other.
Men are often provoked if their horses or hounds refuse to do, or
their pigs refuse to go where they wish to drive them, but the feeling
is rarely intense and never permanent. It is vexation and impatience,
rather than settled rage, malignity, or revenge. If horses and dogs
were intelligent beings, and still held as property, their opposition
to the wishes of their owners, would exasperate them immeasurably more
than it would be possible for them to do, with the minds of brutes.
None but little children and idiots get angry at sticks and stones
that lie in their way or hurt them; but put into sticks and stones
intelligence, and will, and power of feeling and motion, while they
remain as now, articles of property, and what a towering rage would
men be in, if bushes whipped them in the face when they walked among
them, or stones rolled over their toes when they climbed hills! and
what exemplary vengeance would be inflicted upon door-steps and
hearth-stones, if they were to move out of their places, instead of
lying still where they were put for their owners to tread upon. The
greatest provocation to human nature is opposition to its will. If a
man's will be resisted by one far below him, the provocation is
vastly greater, than when it is resisted by an acknowledged superior.
In the former case, it inflames strong passions, which in the latter
lie dormant. The rage of proud Haman knew no bounds against the poor
Jew who would not do as he wished, and so he built a gallows for him.
If the person opposing the will of another, be so far below him as to
be on a level with chattels, and be actually held and used as an
article of property; pride, scorn, lust of power, rage and revenge
explode together upon the hapless victim. The idea of property
having a will, and that too in opposition to the will of its owner,
and counteracting it, is a stimulant of terrible power to the most
relentless human passions and from the nature of slavery, and the
constitution of the human mind, this fierce stimulant must, with
various degrees of strength, act upon slaveholders almost without
ceasing. The slave, however abject and crushed, is an intelligent
being: he has a will, and that will cannot be annihilated, it will
show itself; if for a moment it is smothered, like pent up fires when
vent is found, it flames the fiercer. Make intelligence property,
and its manager will have his match; he is met at every turn by an
opposing will, not in the form of down-right rebellion and defiance,
but yet, visibly, an ever-opposing will. He sees it in the
dissatisfied look, and reluctant air and unwilling movement; the
constrained strokes of labor, the drawling tones, the slow hearing,
the feigned stupidity, the sham pains and sickness, the short memory;
and he feels it every hour, in innumerable forms, frustrating his
designs by a ceaseless though perhaps invisible countermining. This
unceasing opposition to the will of its 'owner,' on the part of his
rational 'property,' is to the slaveholder as the hot iron to the
nerve. He raves under it, and storms, and gnashes, and smites; but the
more he smites, the hotter it gets, and the more it burns him.
Further, this opposition of the slave's will to his owner's, not only
excites him to severity, that he may gratify his rage, but makes it
necessary for him to use violence in breaking down this
resistance—thus subjecting the slave to additional tortures. There is
another inducement to cruel inflictions upon the slave, and a
necessity for it, which does not exist in the case of brutes.
Offenders must be made an example to others, to strike them with
terror. If a slave runs away and is caught, his master flogs him with
terrible severity, not merely to gratify his resentment, and to keep
him from running away again, but as a warning to others. So in every
case of disobedience, neglect, stubbornness, unfaithfulness,
indolence, insolence, theft, feigned sickness, when his directions are
forgotten, or slighted, or supposed to be, or his wishes crossed, or
his property injured, or left exposed, or his work ill-executed, the
master is tempted to inflict cruelties, not merely to wreak his own
vengeance upon him, and to make the slave more circumspect in future,
but to sustain his authority over the other slaves, to restrain them
from like practices, and to preserve his own property.
A multitude of facts, illustrating the position that slaveholders
treat their slaves worse than they do their cattle, will occur to
all who are familiar with slavery. When cattle break through their
owners' inclosures and escape, if found, they are driven back and
fastened in again; and even slaveholders would execrate as a wretch,
the man who should tie them up, and bruise and lacerate them for
straying away; but when slaves that have escaped are caught, they
are flogged with the most terrible severity. When herds of cattle are
driven to market, they are suffered to go in the easiest way, each by
himself; but when slaves are driven to market, they are fastened
together with handcuffs, galled by iron collars and chains, and thus
forced to travel on foot hundreds of miles, sleeping at night in their
chains. Sheep, and sometimes horned cattle are marked with their
owners' initials—but this is generally done with paint, and of course
produces no pain. Slaves, too, are often marked with their owners'
initials, but the letters are stamped into their flesh with a hot
iron. Cattle are suffered to graze their pastures without stint; but
the slaves are restrained in their food to a fixed allowance. The
slaveholders' horses are notoriously far better fed, more moderately
worked, have fewer hours of labor, and longer intervals of rest than
their slaves; and their valuable horses are far more comfortably
housed and lodged, and their stables more effectually defended from
the weather, than the slaves' huts. We have here merely begun a
comparison, which the reader can easily carry out at length, from the
materials furnished in this work.
We will, however, subjoin a few testimonies of slaveholders, and
others who have resided in slave states, expressly asserting that
slaves are treated worse than brutes.
The late Dr. GEORGE BUCHANAN, of Baltimore, Maryland, a member of the
American Philosophical Society, in an oration delivered in Baltimore,
July 4, 1791, page 10, says:
"The Africans whom you despise, whom you more inhumanly treat than
brutes, are equally capable of improvement with yourselves."
The Rev. GEORGE WHITEFIELD, in his celebrated letter to the
slaveholders of Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, and
Georgia, written one hundred years ago, (See Benezet's Caution to
Great Britain and her Colonies, page 13), says:
"Sure I am, it is sinful to use them as bad, nay worse than if they
were brutes; and whatever particular exceptions there may be, (as I
would charitably hope there are some) I fear the generality of you
that own negroes, are liable to such a charge."
Mr. RICE, of Kentucky in his speech in the Convention that formed the
Constitution of that state, in 1790, says:
"He [the slave] is a rational creature, reduced by the power of
legislation to the state of a brute, and thereby deprived of every
privilege of humanity.... The brute may steal or rob, to supply
his hunger; but the slave, though in the most starving condition,
dare not do either, on penalty of death, or some severe punishment."
Rev. HORACE MOULTON, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal Church, in
Marlborough, Mass. who lived some years in Georgia, says:
"The southern horses and dogs have enough to eat, and good care is
taken of them; but southern negroes—who can describe their misery and
their wretchedness, their nakedness and their cruel scourgings! None
but God. Should we whip our horses as they whip their slaves, even
for small offences, we should expose ourselves to the penalty of the
law."
Rev. PHINEAS SMITH, Centerville, Allegany county, New York, who has
resided four years in the midst of southern slavery—
"Avarice and cruelty are twin sisters; and I do not hesitate to
declare before the world, as my deliberate opinion, that there is
less compassion for working slaves at the south, than for working
oxen at the north."
STEVEN SEWALL, Esq. Winthrop, Maine, a member of the Congregational
Church, and late agent of the Winthrop Manufacturing Company, who
resided five years in Alabama, says—
"I do not think that brutes, not even horses, are treated with so
much cruelty as American slaves."
If the preceding considerations are insufficient to remove incredulity
respecting the cruelties suffered by slaves, and if northern objectors
still say, 'We might believe such things of savages, but that
civilized men, and republicans, in this Christian country, can openly
and by system perpetrate such enormities, is impossible';—to such we
reply, that this incredulity of the people of the free states, is not
only discreditable to their intelligence, but to their consistency.
Who is so ignorant as not to know, or so incredulous as to disbelieve,
that the early Baptists of New England were fined, imprisoned,
scourged, and finally banished by our puritan forefathers?—and that
the Quakers were confined in dungeons, publicly whipped at the
cart-tail, had their ears cut off, cleft sticks put upon their
tongues, and that five of them, four men and one woman, were hung on
Boston Common, for propagating the sentiments of the Society of
Friends? Who discredits the fact, that the civil authorities in
Massachusetts, less than a hundred and fifty years ago, confined in
the public jail a little girl of four years old, and publicly hung the
Rev. Mr. Burroughs, and eighteen other persons, mostly women, and
killed another, (Giles Corey,) by extending him upon his back, and
piling weights upon his breast till he was crushed to death [17]—and
this for no other reason than that these men and women, and this
little child, were accused by others of bewitching them.
[Footnote 17: Judge Sewall, of Mass. in his diary, describing this
horrible scene, says that when the tongue of the poor sufferer had, in
the extremity of his dying agony, protruded from his mouth, a person
in attendance took his cane and thrust it back into his mouth.]
Even the children in Connecticut, know that the following was once a
law of that state:
"No food or lodging shall be allowed to a Quaker. If any person turns
Quaker, he shall be banished, and not be suffered to return on pain of
death."
These objectors can readily believe the fact, that in the city of New
York, less than a hundred years since, thirteen persons were publicly
burned to death, over a slow fire: and that the legislature of the
same State took under its paternal care the African slave-trade, and
declared that "all encouragement should be given to the direct
importation of slaves; that all smuggling of slaves should be
condemned, as an eminent discouragement to the fair trader."
They do not call in question the fact that the African slave-trade was
carried on from the ports of the free states till within thirty years;
that even members of the Society of Friends were actively engaged in
it, shortly before the revolutionary war; [18] that as late as 1807,
no less than fifty-nine of the vessels engaged in that trade, were
sent out from the little state of Rhode Island, which had then only
about seventy thousand inhabitants; that among those most largely
engaged in these foul crimes, are the men whom the people of Rhode
Island delight to honor: that the man who dipped most deeply in that
trade of blood (James De Wolf,) and amassed a most princely fortune by
it, was not long since their senator in Congress; and another, who was
captain of one of his vessels, was recently Lieutenant Governor of the
state.
[Footnote 18: See Life and Travels of John Woolman, page 92.]
They can believe, too, all the horrors of the middle passage, the
chains, suffocation, maimings, stranglings, starvation, drownings, and
cold blooded murders, atrocities perpetrated on board these
slave-ships by their own citizens, perhaps by their own townsmen and
neighbors—possibly by their own fathers: but oh! they 'can't
believe that the slaveholders can be so hard-hearted towards their
slaves as to treat them with great cruelty.' They can believe that his
Holiness the Pope, with his cardinals, bishops and priests, have
tortured, broken on the wheel, and burned to death thousands of
Protestants—that eighty thousand of the Anabaptists were slaughtered
in Germany—that hundreds of thousands of the blameless Waldenses,
Huguenots and Lollards, were torn in pieces by the most titled
dignitaries of church and state, and that almost every professedly
Christian sect, has, at some period of its history, persecuted unto
blood those who dissented from their creed. They can believe, also,
that in Boston, New York, Utica, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Alton, and
in scores of other cities and villages of the free states, 'gentlemen
of property and standing,' led on by civil officers, by members of
state legislatures, and of Congress, by judges and attorneys-general,
by editors of newspapers, and by professed ministers of the gospel,
have organized mobs, broken up lawful meetings of peaceable citizens,
committed assault and battery upon their persons, knocked them down
with stones, led them about with ropes, dragged them from their beds
at midnight, gagged and forced them into vehicles, and driven them
into unfrequented places, and there tormented and disfigured
them—that they have rifled their houses, made bonfires of their
furniture in the streets, burned to the ground, or torn in pieces the
halls or churches in which they were assembled—attacked them with
deadly weapons, stabbed some, shot others, and killed one. They can
believe all this—and further, that a majority of the citizens in the
places where these outrages have been committed, connived at them; and
by refusing to indict the perpetrators, or, if they were indicted, by
combining to secure their acquittal, and rejoicing in it, have
publicly adopted these felonies as their own. All these things they
can believe without hesitation, and that they have even been done by
their own acquaintances, neighbors, relatives; perhaps those with whom
they interchange courtesies, those for whom they vote, or to whose
salaries they contribute—but yet, oh! they can never believe that
slaveholders inflict cruelties upon their slaves!
They can give full credence to the kidnapping, imprisonment, and
deliberate murder of WILLIAM MORGAN, and that by men of high standing
in society; they can believe that this deed was aided and abetted, and
the murderers screened from justice, by a large number of influential
persons, who were virtually accomplices, either before or after the
fact; and that this combination was so effectual, as successfully to
defy and triumph over the combined powers of the government;—yet
that those who constantly rob men of their time, liberty, and wages,
and all their rights, should rob them of bits of flesh, and
occasionally of a tooth, make their backs bleed, and put fetters on
their legs, is too monstrous to be credited! Further these same
persons, who 'can't believe' that slaveholders are so iron-hearted as
to ill-treat their slaves, believe that the very elite of these
slaveholders, those most highly esteemed and honored among them, are
continually daring each other to mortal conflict, and in the presence
of mutual friends, taking deadly aim at each other's hearts, with
settled purpose to kill, if possible. That among the most
distinguished governors of slave states, among their most celebrated
judges, senators, and representatives in Congress, there is hardly
one, who has not either killed, or tried to kill, or aided and
abetted his friends in trying to kill, one or more individuals. That
pistols, dirks, bowie knives, or other instruments of death are
generally carried throughout the slave states—and that deadly affrays
with them, in the streets of their cities and villages, are matters of
daily occurrence; that the sons of slaveholders in southern colleges,
bully, threaten, and fire upon their teachers, and their teachers upon
them; that during the last summer, in the most celebrated seat of
science and literature in the south, the University of Virginia, the
professors were attacked by more than seventy armed students, and, in
the words of a Virginia paper, were obliged 'to conceal themselves
from their fury;' also that almost all the riots and violence that
occur in northern colleges, are produced by the turbulence and lawless
passions of southern students. That such are the furious passions of
slaveholders, no considerations of personal respect, none for the
proprieties of life, none for the honor of our national legislature,
none for the character of our country abroad, can restrain the
slaveholding members of Congress from the most disgraceful personal
encounters on the floor of our nation's legislature—smiting their
fists in each other's faces, throttling and even kicking and trying
to gouge each other—that during the session of the Congress just
closed, no less than six slaveholders, taking fire at words spoken in
debate, have either rushed at each other's throats, or kicked, or
struck, or attempted to knock each other down; and that in all these
instances, they would doubtless have killed each other, if their
friends had not separated them. Further, they know full well, these
were not insignificant, vulgar blackguards, elected because they were
the head bullies and bottle-holders in a boxing ring, or because their
constituents went drunk to the ballot box; but they were some of the
most conspicuous members of the House—one of them a former speaker.
Our newspapers are full of these and similar daily occurrences among
slaveholders, copied verbatim from their own accounts of them in their
own papers and all this we fully credit; no man is simpleton enough to
cry out 'Oh, I can't believe that slaveholders do such things;'—and
yet when we turn to the treatment which these men mete out to their
slaves, and show that they are in the habitual practice of striking,
kicking, knocking down and shooting them as well as each other—the
look of blank incredulity that comes over northern dough-faces, is a
study for a painter: and then the sentimental outcry, with eyes and
hands uplifted, 'Oh, indeed, I can't believe the slaveholders are so
cruel to their slaves.' Most amiable and touching charity! Truly, of
all Yankee notions and free state products, there is nothing like a
'dough face'—the great northern staple for the southern
market—'made to order,' in any quantity, and always on hand. 'Dough
faces!' Thanks to a slaveholder's contempt for the name, with its
immortality of truth, infamy and scorn.[19]
[Footnote 19: "Doe face," which owes its paternity to John Randolph,
age has mellowed into "dough face"—a cognomen quite as expressive
and appropriate, if not as classical.]
Though the people of the free states affect to disbelieve the
cruelties perpetrated upon the slaves, yet slaveholders believe each
other guilty of them, and speak of them with the utmost freedom. If
slaveholders disbelieve any statement of cruelty inflicted upon a
slave, it is not on account of its enormity. The traveler at the
south will hear in Delaware, and in all parts of Maryland and
Virginia, from the lips of slaveholders, statements of the most
horrible cruelties suffered by the slaves farther south, in the
Carolinas and Georgia; when he finds himself in those states he will
hear similar accounts about the treatment of the slaves in Florida
and Louisiana; and in Missouri, Kentucky, and Tennessee he will hear
of the tragedies enacted on the plantations in Arkansas, Alabama and
Mississippi. Since Anti-Slavery Societies have been in operation, and
slaveholders have found themselves on trial before the world, and put
upon their good behavior, northern slaveholders have grown cautious,
and now often substitute denials and set defences, for the voluntary
testimony about cruelty in the far south, which, before that period,
was given with entire freedom. Still, however, occasionally the 'truth
will out,' as the reader will see by the following testimony of an
East Tennessee newspaper, in which, speaking of the droves of slaves
taken from the upper country to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc.,
the editor says, they are 'traveling to a region where their condition
through time WILL BE SECOND ONLY TO THAT OF THE WRETCHED CREATURES IN
HELL.' See "Maryville Intelligencer," of Oct, 4, 1835. Distant
cruelties and cruelties long past, have been till recently, favorite
topics with slaveholders. They have not only been ready to acknowledge
that their fathers have exercised great cruelty toward their slaves,
but have voluntarily, in their official acts, made proclamation of it
and entered it on their public records. The Legislature of North
Carolina, in 1798, branded the successive legislatures of that state
for more than thirty years previous, with the infamy of treatment
towards their slaves, which they pronounce to be 'disgraceful to
humanity, and degrading in the highest degree to the laws and
principles of a free, Christian, and enlightened country.' This
treatment was the enactment and perpetuation of a most barbarous and
cruel law.
But enough. As the objector can and does believe all the preceeding
facts, if he still 'can't believe' as to the cruelties of
slaveholders, it would be barbarous to tantalize his incapacity either
with evidence or argument. Let him have the benefit of the act in such
case made and provided.
Having shown that the incredulity of the objector respecting the
cruelty inflicted upon the slaves, is discreditable to his
consistency, we now proceed to show that it is equally so to his
intelligence.
Whoever disbelieves the foregoing statements of cruelties, on the
ground of their enormity, proclaims his own ignorance of the nature
and history of man. What! incredulous about the atrocities perpetrated
by those who hold human beings as property, to be used for their
pleasure, when history herself has done little else in recording human
deeds, than to dip her blank chart in the blood shed by arbitrary
power, and unfold to human gaze the great red scroll? That cruelty is
the natural effect of arbitrary power, has been the result of all
experience, and the voice of universal testimony since the world
began. Shall human nature's axioms, six thousand years old, go for
nothing? Are the combined product of human experience, and the
concurrent records of human character, to be set down as 'old wives'
fables?' To disbelieve that arbitrary power naturally and habitually
perpetrates cruelties, where it can do it with impunity, is not only
ignorance of man, but of things. It is to be blind to innumerable
proofs which are before every man's eyes; proofs that are stereotyped
in the very words and phrases that are on every one's lips. Take for
example the words despot and despotic. Despot, signifies
etymologically, merely one who possesses arbitrary power, and at
first, it was used to designate those alone who possessed unlimited
power over human beings, entirely irrespective of the way in which
they exercised it, whether mercifully or cruelly. But the fact, that
those who possessed such power, made their subjects their victims,
has wrought a total change in the popular meaning of the word. It now
signifies, in common parlance, not one who possesses unlimited power
over others, but one who exercises the power that he has, whether
little or much, cruelly. So despotic, instead of meaning what it
once did, something pertaining to the possession of unlimited power,
signifies something pertaining to the capricious, unmerciful and
relentless exercise of such power.
The word tyrant, is another example—formerly it implied merely a
possession of arbitrary power, but from the invariable abuse of such
power by its possessors, the proper and entire meaning of the word is
lost, and it now signifies merely one who exercises power to the
injury of others. The words tyrannical and tyranny follow the same
analogy. So the word arbitrary; which formerly implied that which
pertains to the will of one, independently of others; but from the
fact that those who had no restraint upon their wills, were invariably
capricious, unreasonable and oppressive, these words convey accurately
the present sense of arbitrary, when applied to a person.
How can the objector persist in disbelieving that cruelty is the
natural effect of arbitrary power, when the very words of every day,
rise up on his lips in testimony against him—words which once
signified the mere possession of arbitrary power, but have lost
their meaning, and now signify merely its cruel exercise; because
such a use of it has been proved by the experience of the world, to be
inseparable from its possession—words now frigid with horror, and
never used even by the objector without feeling a cold chill run over
him.
Arbitrary power is to the mind what alcohol is to the body; it
intoxicates. Man loves power. It is perhaps the strongest human
passion; and the more absolute the power, the stronger the desire for
it; and the more it is desired, the more its exercise is enjoyed: this
enjoyment is to human nature a fearful temptation,—generally an
overmatch for it. Hence it is true, with hardly an exception, that
arbitrary power is abused in proportion as it is desired. The fact
that a person intensely desires power over others, without
restraint, shows the absolute necessity of restraint. What woman
would marry a man who made it a condition that he should have the
power to divorce her whenever he pleased? Oh! he might never wish to
exercise it, but the power he would have! No woman, not stark mad,
would trust her happiness in such hands.
Would a father apprentice his son to a master, who insisted that his
power over the lad should be absolute? The master might perhaps,
never wish to commit a battery upon the boy, but if he should, he
insists upon having full swing! He who would leave his son in the,
clutches of such a wretch, would be bled and blistered for a lunatic
as soon as his friends could get their hands upon him.
The possession of power, even when greatly restrained, is such a fiery
stimulant, that its lodgement in human hands is always perilous. Give
men the handling of immense sums of money, and all the eyes of Argus
and the hands of Briarcus can hardly prevent embezzlement.
The mutual and ceaseless accusations of the two great political
parties in this country, show the universal belief that this tendency
of human nature to abuse power, is so strong, that even the most
powerful legal restraints are insufficient for its safe custody. From
congress and state legislatures down to grog-shop caucuses and street
wranglings, each party keeps up an incessant din about abuses of
power. Hardly an officer, either of the general or state governments,
from the President down to the ten thousand postmasters, and from
governors to the fifty thousand constables, escapes the charge of
'abuse of power.' 'Oppression,' 'Extortion,' 'Venality,' 'Bribery,'
'Corruption,' 'Perjury,' 'Misrule,' 'Spoils,' 'Defalcation,' stand on
every newspaper. Now without any estimate of the lies told in these
mutual charges, there is truth enough to make each party ready to
believe of the other, and of their best men too, any abuse of power,
however monstrous. As is the State, so is the Church. From General
Conferences to circuit preachers; and from General Assemblies to
church sessions, abuses of power spring up as weeds from the dunghill.
All legal restraints are framed upon the presumption, that men will
abuse their power if not hemmed in by them. This lies at the bottom of
all those checks and balances contrived for keeping governments upon
their centres. If there is among human convictions one that is
invariable and universal, it is, that when men possess unrestrained
power over others, over their time, choice, conscience, persons,
votes, or means of subsistence, they are under great temptations to
abuse it; and that the intensity with which such power is desired,
generally measures the certainty and the degree of its abuse.
That American slaveholders possess a power over their slaves which is
virtually absolute, none will deny.[20] That they desire this
absolute power, is shown from the fact of their holding and exercising
it, and making laws to confirm and enlarge it. That the desire to
possess this power, every tittle of it, is intense, is proved by the
fact, that slaveholders cling to it with such obstinate tenacity, as
well as by all their doings and sayings, their threats, cursings and
gnashings against all who denounce the exercise of such power as
usurpation and outrage, and counsel its immediate abrogation.
[Footnote 20: The following extracts from the laws of slave-states are
proofs sufficient.]
"The slave is ENTIRELY subject to the WILL of his master."—Louisiana
Civil Code, Art. 273.
"Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged in law to
be chattels personal, in the hands of their owner and possessors,
and their executors, administrators and assigns, TO ALL INTENTS,
CONSTRUCTIONS, AND PURPOSES, WHATSOEVER."—Laws of South Carolina, 2
Brev. Dig. 229; Prince's Digest, 446, &c.]
From the nature of the case—from the laws of mind, such power, so
intensely desired, griped with such a death-clutch, and with such
fierce spurnings of all curtailment or restraint, cannot but be
abused. Privations and inflictions must be its natural, habitual
products, with ever and anon, terror, torture, and despair let loose
to do their worst upon the helpless victims.
Though power over others is in every case liable to be used to their
injury, yet, in almost all cases, the subject individual is shielded
from great outrages by strong safeguards. If he have talents, or
learning, or wealth, or office, or personal respectability, or
influential friends, these, with the protection of law and the rights
of citizenship, stand round him as a body guard: and even if he lacked
all these, yet, had he the same color, features, form, dialect,
habits, and associations with the privileged caste of society, he
would find in them a shield from many injuries, which would be
invited, if in these respects he differed widely from the rest of
the community, and was on that account regarded with disgust and
aversion. This is the condition of the slave; not only is he deprived
of the artificial safeguards of the law, but has none of those
natural safeguards enumerated above, which are a protection to
others. But not only is the slave destitute of those peculiarities,
habits, tastes, and acquisitions, which by assimilating the possessor
to the rest of the community, excite their interest in him, and thus,
in a measure, secure for him their protection; but he possesses those
peculiarities of bodily organization which are looked upon with deep
disgust, contempt, prejudice, and aversion. Besides this, constant
contact with the ignorance and stupidity of the slaves, their filth,
rags, and nakedness; their cowering air, servile employments,
repulsive food, and squalid hovels, their purchase and sale, and use
as brutes—all these associations, constantly mingling and circulating
in the minds of slaveholders, and inveterated by the hourly
irritations which must assail all who use human beings as things,
produce in them a permanent state of feeling toward the slave, made up
of repulsion and settled ill-will. When we add to this the corrosions
produced by the petty thefts of slaves, the necessity of constant
watching, their reluctant service, and indifference to their master's
interests, their ill concealed aversion to him, and spurning of his
authority; and finally, that fact, as old as human nature, that men
always hate those whom they oppress, and oppress those whom they hate,
thus oppression and hatred mutually begetting and perpetuating each
other—and we have a raging compound of fiery elements and disturbing
forces, so stimulating and inflaming the mind of the slaveholder
against the slave, that it cannot but break forth upon him with
desolating fury.
To deny that cruelty is the spontaneous and uniform product of
arbitrary power, and that the natural and controlling tendency of such
power is to make its possessor cruel, oppressive, and revengeful
towards those who are subjected to his control, is, we repeat, to set
at nought the combined experience of the human race, to invalidate its
testimony, and to reverse its decisions from time immemorial.
A volume might be filled with the testimony of American slaveholders
alone, to the truth of the preceding position. We subjoin a few
illustrations, and first, the memorable declaration of President
Jefferson, who lived and died a slaveholder. It has been published a
thousand times, and will live forever. In his "Notes on Virginia,"
sixth Philadelphia edition, p. 251, he says,—
"The WHOLE COMMERCE between master and slave, is a PERPETUAL EXERCISE
of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting DESPOTISM on
the one part, and degrading submission on the other.... The parent
storms, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts
on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, GIVES LOOSE TO THE
WORST OF PASSIONS; and thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in
tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities."
Hon. Lewis Summers, Judge of the General Court of Virginia, and a
slaveholder, said in a speech before the Virginia legislature in 1832;
(see Richmond Whig of Jan. 26, 1832,)
"A slave population exercises the most pernicious influence upon the
manners, habits and character, of those among whom it exists. Lisping
infancy learns the vocabulary of abusive epithets, and struts the
embryo tyrant of its little domain. The consciousness of superior
destiny takes possession of his mind at its earliest dawning, and love
of power and rule, 'grows with his growth, and strengthens with his
strength.' Unless enabled to rise above the operation of those
powerful causes, he enters the world with miserable notions of
self-importance, and under the government of an unbridled temper."
The late JUDGE TUCKER of Virginia, a slaveholder, and Professor of Law
in the University of William and Mary, in his "Letter to a Member of
the Virginia Legislature," 1801, says,—
"I say nothing of the baneful effects of slavery on our moral
character, because I know you have been long sensible of this point."
The Presbyterian Synod of South Carolina and Georgia, consisting of
all the clergy of that denomination in those states, with a lay
representation from the churches, most, if not all of whom are
slaveholders, published a report on slavery in 1834, from which the
following is an extract.
"Those only who have the management of servants, know what the
hardening effect of it is upon their own feelings towards them.
There is no necessity to dwell on this point, as all owners and
managers fully understand it. He who commences to manage them with
tenderness and with a willingness to favor them in every way, must be
watchful, otherwise he will settle down in indifference, if not
severity."
GENERAL WILLIAM H. HARRISON, now of Ohio, son of the late Governor
Harrison of Virginia, a slaveholder, while minister from the United
States to the Republic of Colombia, wrote a letter to General Simon
Bolivar, then President of that Republic, just as he was about
assuming despotic power. The letter is dated Bogota, Sept. 22, 1826.
The following is an extract.
"From a knowledge of your own disposition and present feelings, your
excellency will not be willing to believe that you could ever be
brought to an act of tyranny, or even to execute justice with
unnecessary rigor. But trust me, sir, there is nothing more
corrupting, nothing more destructive of the noblest and finest
feelings of our nature than the exercise of unlimited power. The man,
who in the beginning of such a career, might shudder at the idea of
taking away the life of a fellow-being, might soon have his conscience
so seared by the repetition of crime, that the agonies of his murdered
victims might become music to his soul, and the drippings of the
scaffold afford blood to swim in. History is full of such excesses."
WILLIAM H. FITZHUGH, Esq. of Virginia, a slaveholder, says,—"Slavery,
in its mildest form, is cruel and unnatural; its injurious effects on
our morals and habits are mutually felt."
HON. SAMUEL S. NICHOLAS, late Judge of the Court of Appeals of
Kentucky, and a slaveholder, in a speech before the legislature of
that state, Jan. 1837, says,—
"The deliberate convictions of the most matured consideration I can
give the subject, are, that the institution of slavery is a most
serious injury to the habits, manners and morals of our white
population—that it leads to sloth, indolence, dissipation, and vice."
Dr. THOMAS COOPER, late President of the College of South Carolina, in
a note to his edition of the "Institutes of Justinian" page 413,
says,—
"All absolute power has a direct tendency, not only to detract from
the happiness of the persons who are subject to it, but to DEPRAVE THE
GOOD QUALITIES of those who possess it ... the whole history of human
nature, in the present and every former age, will justify me in saying
that such is the tendency of power on the one hand and slavery on
the other."
A South Carolina slaveholder, whose name is with the executive
committee of the Am. A.S. Society, says, in a letter, dated April 4,
1838:—
"I think it (slavery) ruinous to the temper and to our spiritual
life; it is a thorn in the flesh, for ever and for ever goading us on
to say and to do what the Eternal God cannot but be displeased with. I
speak from experience, and oh! my desire is to be delivered from it."
Monsieur C.C. ROBIN, who was a resident of Louisiana from 1802 to
1806, published a work on that country; in which, speaking of the
effect of slaveholding on masters and their children, he says:—
"The young creoles make the negroes who surround them the play-things
of their whims: they flog, for pastime, those of their own age, just
as their fathers flog others at their will. These young creoles,
arrived at the age in which the passions are impetuous, do not know
how to bear contradiction; they will have every thing done which they
command, possible or not; and in default of this, they avenge their
offended pride by multiplied punishments."
Dr. GEORGE BUCHANAN, of Baltimore, Maryland, member of the American
Philosophical Society, in an oration at Baltimore, July 4, 1791,
said:—
"For such are the effects of subjecting man to slavery, that it
destroys every humane principle, vitiates the mind, instills ideas
of unlawful cruelties, and eventually subverts the springs of
government."—Buchanan's Oration, p. 12.
President EDWARDS the younger, in a sermon before the Connecticut
Abolition Society, in 1791, page 8, says:—
"Slavery has a most direct tendency to haughtiness, and a domineering
spirit and conduct in the proprietors of the slaves, in their
children, and in all who have the control of them. A man who has been
bred up in domineering over negroes, can scarcely avoid contracting
such a habit of haughtiness and domination as will express itself in
his general treatment of mankind, whether in his private capacity, or
in any office, civil or military, with which he may be invested."
The celebrated MONTESQUIEU, in his "Spirit of the Laws," thus
describes the effect of slaveholding upon the master:—
"The master contracts all sorts of bad habits; and becomes haughty,
passionate, obdurate, vindictive, voluptuous, and cruel."
WILBERFORCE, in his speech at the anniversary of the London
Anti-Slavery Society, in March, 1828, said:—
"It is utterly impossible that they who live in the administration
of the petty despotism of a slave community, whose minds have been
warped and polluted by that contamination, should not lose that
respect for their fellow creatures over whom they tyrannize, which is
essential in the nature and moral being of man, to rescue them from
the abuse of power over their prostrate fellow creatures."
In the great debate, in the British Parliament, on the African
slave-trade, Mr. WHITBREAD said:
"Arbitrary power would spoil the hearts of the best."
But we need not multiply proofs to establish our position: it is
sustained by the concurrent testimony of sages, philosophers, poets,
statesmen, and moralists, in every period of the world; and who can
marvel that those in all ages who have wisely pondered men and things,
should be unanimous in such testimony, when the history of arbitrary
power has come down to us from the beginning of time, struggling
through heaps of slain, and trailing her parchments in blood.
Time would fail to begin with the first despot and track down the
carnage step by step. All nations, all ages, all climes crowd forward
as witnesses, with their scars, and wounds, and dying agonies.
But to survey a multitude bewilders; let us look at a single nation.
We instance Rome; both because its history is more generally known,
and because it furnishes a larger proportion of instances, in which
arbitrary power was exercised with comparative mildness, than any
other nation ancient or modern. And yet, her whole existence was a
tragedy, every actor was an executioner, the curtain rose amidst
shrieks and fell upon corpses, and the only shifting of the scenes was
from blood to blood. The whole world stood aghast, as under sentence
of death, awaiting execution, and all nations and tongues were driven,
with her own citizens, as sheep to the slaughter. Of her seven kings,
her hundreds of consuls, tribunes, decemvirs, and dictators, and her
fifty emperors, there is hardly one whose name has come down to us
unstained by horrible abuses of power; and that too, notwithstanding
we have mere shreds of the history of many of them, owing to their
antiquity, or to the perturbed times in which they lived; and these
shreds gathered from the records of their own partial countrymen, who
wrote and sung their praises. What does this prove? Not that the
Romans were worse than other men, nor that their rulers were worse
than other Romans, for history does not furnish nobler models of
natural character than many of those same rulers, when first invested
with arbitrary power. Neither was it mainly because the martial
enterprise of the earlier Romans and the gross sensuality of the
later, hardened their hearts to human suffering. In both periods of
Roman history, and in both these classes, we find men, the keen
sympathies, generosity, and benevolence of whose general character
embalmed their names in the grateful memories of multitudes. They
were human beings, and possessed power without restraint—this
unravels the mystery.
Who has not heard of the Emperor Trajan, of his moderation, his
clemency, his gashing sympathies, his forgiveness of injuries and
forgetfulness of self, his tearing in pieces his own robe, to furnish
bandages for the wounded—called by the whole world in his day, "the
best emperor of Rome;" and so affectionately regarded by his subjects,
that, ever afterwards, in blessing his successors upon their accession
to power, they always said, "May you have the virtue and goodness of
Trajan!" yet the deadly conflicts of gladiators who were trained to
kill each other, to make sport for the spectators, furnished his chief
pastime. At one time he kept up those spectacles for 123 days in
succession. In the tortures which he inflicted on Christians, fire
and poison, daggers and dungeons, wild beasts and serpents, and the
rack, did their worst. He threw into the sea, Clemens, the venerable
bishop of Rome, with an anchor about his neck; and tossed to the
famished lions in the amphitheatre the aged Ignatius.
Pliny the younger, who was proconsul under Trajan, may well be
mentioned in connection with the emperor, as a striking illustration
of the truth, that goodness and amiableness towards one class of men
is often turned into cruelty towards another. History can hardly show
a more gentle and lovely character than Pliny. While pleading at the
bar, he always sought out the grievances of the poorest and most
despised persons, entered into their wrongs with his whole soul, and
never took a fee. Who can read his admirable letters without being
touched by their tenderness and warmed by their benignity and
philanthropy: and yet, this tender-hearted Pliny coolly plied with
excruciating torture two spotless females, who had served as
deaconesses in the Christian church, hoping to extort from them matter
of accusation against the Christians. He commanded Christians to
abjure their faith, invoke the gods, pour out libations to the statues
of the emperor, burn incense to idols, and curse Christ. If they
refused, he ordered them to execution.
Who has not heard of the Emperor Titus—so beloved for his mild
virtues and compassionate regard for the suffering, that he was named
"The Delight of Mankind;" so tender of the lives of his subjects that
he took the office of high priest, that his hands might never be
defiled with blood; and was heard to declare, with tears, that he had
rather die than put another to death. So intent upon making others
happy, that when once about to retire to sleep, and not being able to
recall any particular act of beneficence performed during the day, he
cried out in anguish, "Alas! I have lost a day!" And, finally, whom
the learned Kennet, in his Roman Antiquities, characterizes as "the
only prince in the world that has the character of never doing an ill
action." Yet, witnessing the mortal combats of the captives taken to
war, killing each other in the amphitheatre, amidst the acclamations
of the populace, was a favorite amusement with Titus. At one time he
exhibited shows of gladiators, which lasted one hundred days, during
which the amphitheatre was flooded with human blood. At another of
his public exhibitions he caused five thousand wild beasts to be
baited in the amphitheatre. During the siege of Jerusalem, he set
ambushes to seize the famishing Jews, who stole out of the city by
night to glean food in the valleys: these he would first dreadfully
scourge, then torment them with all conceivable tortures, and, at
last, crucify them before the wall of the city. According to
Josephus, not less than five hundred a day were thus tormented. And
when many of the Jews, frantic with famine, deserted to the Romans,
Titus cut off their hands and drove them back. After the destruction
of Jerusalem, he dragged to Rome one hundred thousand captives, sold
them as slaves, and scattered them through every province of the
empire.
The kindness, condescension, and forbearance of Adrian were
proverbial; he was one of the most eloquent orators of his age; and
when pleading the cause of injured innocence, would melt and overwhelm
the auditors by the pathos of his appeals. It was his constant maxim,
that he was an Emperor, not for his own good, but for the benefit of
his fellow creatures. He stooped to relieve the wants of the meanest
of his subjects, and would peril his life by visiting them when sick
of infectious diseases; he prohibited, by law, masters from killing
their slaves, gave to slaves legal trial, and exempted them from
torture; yet towards certain individuals and classes, he showed
himself a monster of cruelty. He prided himself on his knowledge of
architecture, and ordered to execution the most celebrated architect
of Rome, because he had criticised one of the Emperor's designs. He
banished all the Jews from their native land, and drove them to the
ends of the earth; and unloosed the bloodhounds of persecution to rend
in pieces his Christian subjects.
The gentleness and benignity of the Emperor Aurelius, have been
celebrated in story and song. History says of him, 'Nothing could
quench his desire of being a blessing to mankind;' and Pope's eulogy
of him is in the mouth of every schoolboy—'Like good Aurelius, let
him reign;' and yet, 'good Aurelius,' lifted the flood gates of the
fourth, and one of the most terrible persecutions against Christians
that ever raged. He sent orders into different parts of his empire,
to have the Christians murdered who would not deny Christ. The
blameless Polycarp, trembling under the weight of a hundred years, was
dragged to the stake and burned to ashes. Pothinus, Bishop of Lyons,
at the age of ninety, was dragged through the streets, beaten, stoned,
trampled upon by the soldiers, and left to perish. Tender virgins
were put into nets, and thrown to infuriated wild bulls; others were
fastened in red hot iron chairs; and venerable matrons were thrown to
be devoured by dogs.
Constantine the Great has been the admiration of Christendom for his
virtues. The early Christian writers adorn his justice, benevolence
and piety with the most exalted eulogy. He was baptized, and admitted
to the Christian church. He abrogated Paganism, and made Christianity
the religion of his empire; he attended the councils of the early
fathers of the church, consulted with the bishops, and devoted himself
with the most untiring zeal to the propagation of Christianity, and to
the promotion of peace and love among its professors; he convened the
Council of Nice, to settle disputes which had long distracted the
church, appeared in the assembly with admirable modesty and temper,
moderated the heats of the contending parties, implored them to
exercise mutual forbearance, and exhorted them to love unfeigned, to
forgive one another, as they hoped to be forgiven by Christ. Who would
not think it uncharitable to accuse such a man of barbarity in the
exercise of power?—and yet he drove Arius and his associates into
banishment, for opinion's sake, denounced death against all with whom
his books should afterwards be found, and prohibited, on pain of
death, the exercise, however peaceably, of the functions of any other
religion than Christianity. In a fit of jealousy and rage, he ordered
his innocent son, Crispus, to execution, without granting him a
hearing; and upon finding him innocent, killed his own wife, who had
falsely accused him.
To the preceding maybe added Theodosius the Great, the last Roman
emperor before the division of the empire. He was a member of the
Christian church, and in his zeal against paganism, and what he deemed
heresy, surpassed all who were before him. The Christian writers of
his time speak of him as a most illustrious model of justice,
generosity, magnanimity, benevolence, and every virtue. And yet
Theodosius denounced capital punishments against those who held
'heretical' opinions, and commanded inter-marriage between cousins to
be punished by burning the parties alive. On hearing that the people
of Antioch had demolished the statues set up in that city, in honor of
himself, and had threatened the governor, he flew into a transport of
fury, ordered the city to be laid in ashes, and all the inhabitants to
be slaughtered; and upon hearing of a resistance to his authority in
Thessalonica, in which one of his lieutenants was killed, he instantly
ordered a general massacre of the inhabitants; and in obedience to
his command, seven thousand men, women and children were butchered in
the space of three hours.
The foregoing are a few of many instances in the history of Rome, and
of a countless multitude in the history of the world, illustrating the
truth, that the lodgement of arbitrary power, in the best human hands,
is always a fearfully perilous experiment; that the mildest tempers,
the most humane and benevolent dispositions, the most blameless and
conscientious previous life, with the most rigorous habits of justice,
are no security, that, in a moment of temptation, the possessors of
such power will not make their subjects their victims; illustrating
also the truth, that, while men may exhibit nothing but honor,
honesty, mildness, justice, and generosity, in their intercourse with
those of their own grade, or language, or nation, or hue, they may
practice towards others, for whom they have contempt and aversion, the
most revolting meanness, perpetrate robbery unceasingly, and inflict
the severest privations, and the most barbarous cruelties. But this is
not all: history is full of examples, showing not only the effects of
arbitrary power on its victims, but its terrible reaction on those who
exercise it; blunting their sympathies, and hardening to adamant their
hearts toward them, at least, if not toward the human race
generally. This is shown in the fact, that almost every tyrant in the
history of the world, has entered upon the exercise of absolute power
with comparative moderation; multitudes of them with marked
forbearance and mildness, and not a few with the most signal
condescension, magnanimity, gentleness and compassion. Among these
last are included those who afterwards became the bloodiest monsters
that ever cursed the earth. Of the Roman Emperors, almost every one of
whom perpetrated the most barbarous atrocities, Vitellius seems to
have been the only one who cruelly exercised his power from the
outset. Most of the other emperors, sprung up into fiends in the
hot-bed of arbitrary power. If they had not been plied with its fiery
stimulants, but had lived under the legal restraints of other men,
instead of going to the grave under the curses of their generation,
multitudes might have called them blessed.
The moderation which has generally distinguished absolute monarchs at
the commencement of their reigns, was doubtless in some cases assumed
from policy; in the greater number, however, as is manifest from their
history, it has been the natural workings of minds held in check by
previous associations, and not yet hardened into habits of cruelty, by
being accustomed to the exercise of power without restraint. But as
those associations have weakened, and the wielding of uncontrolled
sway has become a habit, like other evil doers, they have, in the
expressive language of Scripture, 'waxed worse and worse.'
For eighteen hundred years an involuntary shudder has run over the
human race, at the mention of the name of Nero; yet, at the
commencement of his reign, he burst into tears when called upon to
sign the death-warrant of a criminal, and exclaimed, 'Oh, that I had
never learned to write!' His mildness and magnanimity won the
affections of his subjects; and it was not till the poison of absolute
power had worked within his nature for years, that it swelled him into
a monster.
Tiberius, Claudius, and Caligula, began the exercise of their power
with singular forbearance, and each grew into a prodigy of cruelty. So
averse was Caligula to bloodshed, that he refused to look at a list of
conspirators against his own life, which was handed to him; yet
afterwards, a more cruel wretch never wielded a sceptre. In his thirst
for slaughter, he wished all the necks in Rome one, that he might
cut them off at a blow.
Domitian, at the commencement of his reign, carried his abhorrence of
cruelty to such lengths, that he forbad the sacrificing of oxen, and
would sit whole days on the judgment-seat, reversing the unjust
decisions of corrupt judges; yet afterwards, he surpassed even Nero in
cruelty. The latter was content to torture and kill by proxy, and
without being a spectator; but Domitian could not be denied the luxury
of seeing his victims writhe, and hearing them shriek; and often with
his own hand directed the instrument of torture, especially when some
illustrious senator or patrician was to be killed by piece-meal.
Commodus began with gentleness and condescension, but soon became a
terror and a scourge, outstripping in his atrocities most of his
predecessors. Maximin too, was just and generous when first invested
with power, but afterwards rioted in slaughter with the relish of a
fiend. History has well said of this monarch, 'the change in his
disposition may readily serve to show how dangerous a thing is power,
that could transform a person of such rigid virtues into such a
monster.'
Instances almost innumerable might be furnished in the history of
every age, illustrating the blunting of sympathies, and the total
transformation of character wrought in individuals by the exercise of
arbitrary power. Not to detain the reader with long details, let a
single instance suffice.
Perhaps no man has lived in modern times, whose name excites such
horror as that of Robespierre. Yet it is notorious that he was
naturally of a benevolent disposition, and tender sympathies.
"Before the revolution, when as a judge in his native city of Arras he
had to pronounce judgment on an assassin, he took no food for two days
afterwards, but was heard frequently exclaiming, 'I am sure he was
guilty; he is a villain; but yet, to put a human being to death!!' He
could not support the idea; and that the same necessity might not
recur, he relinquished his judicial office.—(See Laponneray's Life of
Robespierre, p. 8.) Afterwards, in the Convention of 1791, he urged
strongly the abolition of the punishment of death; and yet, for
sixteen months, in 1793 and 1794, till he perished himself by the same
guillotine which he had so mercilessly used on others, no one at Paris
consigned and caused so many fellow-creatures to be put to death by
it, with more ruthless insensibility."—Turner's Sacred history of
the World, vol. 2 p. 119.
But it is time we had done with the objection, "such cruelties are
INCREDIBLE." If the objector still reiterates it, he shall have the
last word without farther molestation.
An objection kindred to the preceding now claims notice. It is the
profound induction that slaves must be well treated because
slaveholders say they are!
OBJECTION. II.—'SLAVEHOLDERS PROTEST THAT THEY TREAT THEIR SLAVES
WELL.'
Self-justification is human nature; self-condemnation is a sublime
triumph over it, and as rare as sublime. What culprits would be
convicted, if their own testimony were taken by juries as good
evidence? Slaveholders are on trial, charged with cruel treatment to
their slaves, and though in their own courts they can clear themselves
by their own oaths,[21] they need not think to do it at the bar of
the world. The denial of crimes, by men accused of them, goes for
nothing as evidence in all civilized courts; while the voluntary
confession of them, is the best evidence possible, as it is testimony
against themselves, and in the face of the strongest motives to
conceal the truth. On the preceding pages, are hundreds of just such
testimonies; the voluntary and explicit testimony of slaveholders
against themselves, their families and ancestors, their constituents
and their rulers; against their characters and their memories; against
their justice, their honesty, their honor and their benevolence. Now
let candor decide between those two classes of slaveholders, which is
most entitled to credit; that which testifies in its own favor, just
as self-love would dictate, or that which testifies against all
selfish motives and in spite of them; and though it has nothing to
gain, but every thing to lose by such testimony, still utters it.
[Footnote 21: The law of which the following is an extract, exists in
South Carolina. "If any slave shall suffer in life, limb or member,
when no white person shall be present, or being present, shall refuse
to give evidence, the owner or other person, who shall have the care
of such slave, and in whose power such slave shall be, shall be deemed
guilty of such offence, unless such owner or other person shall make
the contrary appear by good and sufficient evidence, or shall BY HIS
OWN OATH CLEAR AND EXCULPATE HIMSELF. Which oath every court where
such offence shall be tried, is hereby compared to administer, and to
acquit the offender, if clear proof of the offence be not made by
two witnesses at least."—2 Brevard's Digest, 242. The state of
Louisiana has a similar law.]
But if there were no counter testimony, if all slaveholders were
unanimous in the declaration that the treatment of the slaves is
good, such a declaration would not be entitled to a feather's weight
as testimony; it is not testimony but opinion. Testimony respects
matters of fact, not matters of opinion: it is the declaration of a
witness as to facts, not the giving of an opinion as to the nature
or qualities of actions, or the character of a course of conduct.
Slaveholders organize themselves into a tribunal to adjudicate upon
their own conduct, and give us in their decisions, their estimate of
their own character; informing us with characteristic modesty, that
they have a high opinion of themselves; that in their own judgment
they are very mild, kind, and merciful gentlemen! In these conceptions
of their own merits, and of the eminent propriety of their bearing
towards their slaves, slaveholders remind us of the Spaniard, who
always took off his hat whenever he spoke of himself, and of the
Governor of Schiraz, who, from a sense of justice to his own character
added to his other titles, those of, 'Flower of Courtesy,' 'Nutmeg of
Consolation,' and 'Rose of Delight.'
The sincerity of those worthies, no one calls in question; their
real notions of their own merits doubtless ascended into the sublime:
but for aught that appears, they had not the arrogance to demand that
their own notions of their personal excellence, should be taken as the
proof of it. Not so with our slaveholders. Not content with offering
incense at the shrine of their own virtues, they have the effrontery
to demand, that the rest of the world shall offer it, because they
do; and shall implicitly believe the presiding divinity to be a good
Spirit rather than a Devil, because they call him so! In other
words, since slaveholders profoundly appreciate their own gentle
dispositions toward their slaves, and their kind treatment of them,
and everywhere protest that they do truly show forth these rare
excellencies, they demand that the rest of the world shall not only
believe that they think so, but that they think rightly; that
these notions of themselves are true, that their taking off their
hats to themselves proves them worthy of homage, and that their
assumption of the titles of, 'Flower of Kindness,' and 'Nutmeg of
Consolation,' is conclusive evidence that they deserve such
appellations!
Was there ever a more ridiculous doctrine, than that a man's opinion
of his own actions is the true standard for measuring them, and the
certificate of their real qualities!—that his own estimate of his
treatment of others; is to be taken as the true one, and such
treatment be set down as good treatment upon the strength of his
judgment. He who argues the good treatment of the slave, from the
slaveholder's good opinion of such treatment, not only argues
against human nature and all history, his own common sense, and even
the testimony of his senses, but refutes his own arguments by his
daily practice. Every body acts on the presumption that men's feelings
will vary with their practices; that the light in which they view
individuals and classes, and their feelings towards them, will modify
their opinions of the treatment which they receive. In any case of
treatment that affects himself, his church, or his political party, no
man so stultifies himself as to argue that such treatment must be
good, because the author of it thinks so.
Who would argue that the American Colonies were well treated by the
mother country, because parliament thought so? Or that Poland was well
treated by Russia, because Nicholas thought so? Or that the treatment
of the Cherokees by Georgia is proved good by Georgia notions of it?
Or that of the Greeks by the Turks, by Turkish opinions of it? Or that
of the Jews by almost all nations, by the judgment of their
persecutors? Or that of the victims of the Inquisition, by the
opinions of the Inquisitor general, or of the Pope and his cardinals?
Or that of the Quakers and Baptists, at the hands of the Puritans,—to
be judged of by the opinions of the legislatures that authorized, and
the courts that carried it into effect. All those classes of persons
did not, in their own opinion, abuse their victims. If charged with
perpetrating outrageous cruelty upon them, all those oppressors would
have repelled the charge with indignation.
Our slaveholders chime lustily the same song, and no man with human
nature within him, and human history before him, and with sense enough
to keep him out of the fire, will be gulled by such professions,
unless his itch to be humbugged has put on the type of a downright
chronic incurable. We repeat it—when men speak of the treatment of
others as being either good or bad, their declarations are not
generally to be taken as testimony to matters of fact, so much as
expressions of their own feelings towards those persons or classes
who are the subjects of such treatment. If those persons are their
fellow citizens; if they are in the same class of society with
themselves; of the same language, creed, and color; similar in their
habits, pursuits, and sympathies; they will keenly feel any wrong done
to them, and denounce it as base, outrageous treatment; but let the
same wrongs be done to persons of a condition in all respects the
reverse, persons whom they habitually despise, and regard only in the
light of mere conveniences, to be used for their pleasure, and the
idea that such treatment is barbarous will be laughed at as
ridiculous. When we hear slaveholders say that their slaves are well
treated, we have only to remember that they are not speaking of
persons, but of property; not of men and women, but of chattels
and things; not of friends but of vassals and victims; not of
those whom they respect and honor, but of those whom they scorn and
trample on; not of those with whom they sympathize, and co-operate,
and interchange courtesies, but of those whom they regard with
contempt and aversion and disdainfully set with the dogs of their
flock. Reader, keep this fact in your mind, and you will have a clue
to the slaveholder's definition of "good treatment." Remember also,
that a part of this "good treatment" of which the slaveholders boast,
is plundering the slaves of all their inalienable rights, of the
ownership of their own bodies, of the use of their own limbs and
muscles, of all their time, liberty, and earnings, of the free
exercise of choice, of the rights of marriage and parental authority,
of legal protection, of the right to be, to do, to go, to stay, to
think, to feel, to work, to rest, to eat, to sleep, to learn, to
teach, to earn money, and to expend it, to visit, and to be visited,
to speak, to be silent, to worship according to conscience, in fine,
their right to be protected by just and equal laws, and to be
amenable to such only. Of all these rights the slaves are
plundered; and this is a part of that "good treatment" of which
their plunderers boast! What then is the rest of it? The above is
enough for a sample, at least a specimen-brick from the kiln. Reader,
we ask you no questions, but merely tell you what you know, when we
say that men and women who can habitually do such things to human
beings, can do ANY THING to them.
The declarations of slaveholders, that they treat their slaves well,
will put no man in a quandary, who keeps in mind this simple
principle, that the state of mind towards others, which leads one to
inflict cruelties on them blinds the inflicter to the real nature of
his own acts. To him, they do not seem to be cruelties;
consequently, when speaking of such treatment toward such persons, he
will protest that it is not cruelty; though if inflicted upon himself
or his friends, he would indignantly stigmatize it as atrocious
barbarity. The objector equally overlooks another every-day fact of
human nature, which is this, that cruelties invariably cease to seem
cruelties when the habit is formed though previously the mind
regarded them as such, and shrunk from them with horror.
The following fact, related by the late lamented THOMAS PRINGLE, whose
Life and Poems have published in England, is an appropriate
illustration. Mr. Pringle states it on the authority of Captain W.F.
Owen, of the Royal Navy.
"When his Majesty's ships, the Leven and the Barracouta, employed in
surveying the coast of Africa, were at Mozambique, in 1823, the
officers were introduced to the family of Senor Manuel Pedro
d'Almeydra, a native of Portugal, who was a considerable merchant
settled on that coast; and it was an opinion agreed in by all, that
Donna Sophia d'Almeydra was the most superior woman they had seen
since they left England. Captain Owen, the leader of the expedition,
expressing to Senor d'Almeydra his detestation of slavery, the Senor
replied, 'You will not be long here before you change your sentiments.
Look at my Sophia there. Before she would marry me, she made me
promise that I should give up the slave trade. When we first settled
at Mozambique, she was continually interceding for the slaves, and she
constantly wept when I punished them; and now she is among the
slaves front morning to night; she regulates the whole of my slave
establishment; she inquires into every offence committed by them,
pronounces sentence upon the offender, and stands by and sees them
punished.'
"To this, Mr. Pringle, who was himself for six years a resident of the
English settlement at the Cape of Good Hope, adds, 'The writer of this
article has seen, in the course of five or six years, as great a
change upon English ladies and gentleman of respectability, as that
described to have taken place in Donna Sophia d'Almeydra; and one of
the individuals whom he has in his eye, while he writes this passage,
lately confessed to him this melancholy change, remarking at the same
time, 'how altered I am in my feelings with regard to slavery. I do
not appear to myself the same person I was on my arrival in this
colony, and if I would give the world for the feelings I then had, I
could not recall them.'"
Slaveholders know full well that familiarity with slavery produces
indifference to its cruelties and reconciles the mind to them. The
late Judge Tucker, a Virginia slaveholder and professor of law in the
University of William and Mary, in the appendix to his edition of
Blackstone's Commentaries, part 2, pp. 56, 57, commenting on the law
of Virginia previous to 1792, which outlawed fugitive slaves, says:
"Such are the cruelties to which slavery gives rise, such the horrors
to which the mind becomes reconciled by its adoption."
The following facts from the pen of CHARLES STUART, happily illustrate
the same principle:
"A young lady, the daughter of a Jamaica planter, was sent at an early
age to school to England, and after completing her education, returned
to her native country.
"She is now settled with her husband and family in England. I visited
her near Bath, early last spring, (1834.) Conversing on the above
subject, the paralyzing effects of slaveholding on the heart, she
said:
"'While at school in England, I often thought with peculiar tenderness
of the kindness of a slave who had nursed and carried me about. Upon
returning to my father's, one of my first inquiries was about him. I
was deeply afflicted to find that he was on the point of undergoing a
"law flogging for having run away." I threw myself at my father's feet
and implored with tears, his pardon; but my father steadily replied,
that it would ruin the discipline of the plantation, and that the
punishment must take place. I wept in vain, and retired so grieved and
disgusted, that for some days after, I could scarcely bear with
patience, the sight of my own father. But many months had not elapsed
ere I was as ready as any body to seize the domestic whip, and flog
my slaves without hesitation.'
"This lady is one of the most Christian and noble minds of my
acquaintance. She and her husband distinguished themselves several
years ago, in Jamaica, by immediately emancipating their slaves."
"A lady, now in the West Indies, was sent in her infancy, to her
friends, near Belfast, in Ireland, for education. She remained under
their charge from five to fifteen years of age, and grew up every
thing which her friends could wish. At fifteen, she returned to the
West Indies—was married—and after some years paid her friends near
Belfast, a second visit. Towards white people, she was the same
elegant, and interesting woman as before; apparently full of every
virtuous and tender feeling; but towards the colored people she was
like a tigress. If Wilberforce's name was mentioned, she would say,
'Oh, I wish we had the wretch in the West Indies, I would be one of
the first to help to tear his heart out!'—and then she would tell of
the manner in which the West Indian ladies used to treat their slaves.
'I have often,' she said, 'when my women have displeased me, snatched
their baby from their bosom, and running with it to a well, have tied
my shawl round its shoulders and pretended to be drowning it: oh, it
was so funny to hear the mother's screams!'—and then she laughed
almost convulsively at the recollection."
Mr. JOHN M. NELSON, a native of Virginia, whose testimony is on a
preceding page, furnishes a striking illustration of the principle in
his own case. He says:
"When I was quite a child, I recollect it grieved me very much to see
one tied up to be whipped, and I used to intercede with tears in
their behalf, and mingle my cries with theirs, and feel almost
willing to take part of the punishment. Yet such is the hardening
nature of such scenes, that from this kind of commiseration for the
suffering slave, I became so blunted that I could not only witness
their stripes with composure, but myself inflict them, and that
without remorse. When I was perhaps fourteen or fifteen years of age,
I undertook to correct a young fellow named Ned, for some supposed
offence, I think it was leaving a bridle out of its proper place; he
being larger and stronger than myself took hold of my arms and held
me, in order to prevent my striking him; this I considered the height
of insolence, and cried for help, when my father and mother both came
running to my rescue. My father stripped and tied him, and took him
into the orchard, where switches were plenty, and directed me to whip
him; when one switch wore out he supplied me with others. After I had
whipped him a while, he fell on his knees to implore forgiveness, and
I kicked him in the face; my father said, 'don't kick him but whip
him,' this I did until his back was literally covered with welts."
W.C. GILDERSLEEVE, Esq., a native of Georgia, now elder of the
Presbyterian church, Wilkes-barre, Penn. after describing the flogging
of a slave, in which his hands were tied together, and the slave
hoisted by a rope, so that his feet could not touch the ground; in
which condition one hundred lashes were inflicted, says:
"I stood by and witnessed the whole without feeling the least
compassion; so hardening is the influence of slavery that it very
much destroys feeling for the slave."
Mrs. CHILD, in her admirable "Appeal," has the following remarks:
"The ladies who remove from the free States into the slaveholding ones
almost invariably write that the sight of slavery was at first
exceedingly painful; but that they soon become habituated to it; and
after a while, they are very apt to vindicate the system, upon the
ground that it is extremely convenient to have such submissive
servants. This reason was actually given by a lady of my acquaintance,
who is considered an unusually fervent Christian. Yet Christianity
expressly teaches us to love our neighbor as ourselves. This shows how
dangerous it is, for even the best of us, to become accustomed to
what is wrong.
"A judicious and benevolent friend lately told me the story of one of
her relatives, who married a slave owner, and removed to his
plantation. The lady in question was considered very amiable, and had
a serene, affectionate expression of countenance. After several years
residence among her slaves, she visited New England. 'Her history was
written in her face,' said my friend; 'its expression had changed into
that of a fiend. She brought but few slaves with her; and those few
were of course compelled to perform additional labor. One faithful
negro woman nursed the twins of her mistress, and did all the washing,
ironing, and scouring. If, after a sleepless night with the restless
babes, (driven from the bosom of their mother,) she performed her
toilsome avocations with diminished activity, her mistress, with her
own lady-like hands, applied the cowskin, and the neighborhood
resounded with the cries of her victim. The instrument of punishment
was actually kept hanging in the entry, to the no small disgust of her
New England visitors. 'For my part,' continued my friend, 'I did not
try to be polite to her; for I was not hypocrite enough to conceal my
indignation.'"
The fact that the greatest cruelties may be exercised quite
unconsciously when cruelty has become a habit, and that at the same
time, the mind may feel great sympathy and commiseration towards other
persons and even towards irrational animals, is illustrated in the
case of Tameriane the Great. In his Life, written by himself, he
speaks with the greatest sincerity and tenderness of his grief at
having accidentally crushed an ant; and yet he ordered melted lead to
be poured down the throats of certain persons who drank wine contrary
to his commands. He was manifestly sincere in thinking himself humane,
and when speaking of the most atrocious cruelties perpetrated by
himself, it does not seem to ruffle in the least the self-complacency
with which he regards his own humanity and piety. In one place he
says, "I never undertook anything but I commenced it placing my faith
on God"—and he adds soon after, "the people of Shiraz took part with
Shah Mansur, and put my governor to death; I therefore ordered a
general massacre of all the inhabitants."
It is one of the most common caprices of human nature, for the heart
to become by habit, not only totally insensible to certain forms of
cruelty, which at first gave it inexpressible pain, but even to find
its chief amusement in such cruelties, till utterly intoxicated by
their stimulation; while at the same time the mind seems to be pained
as keenly as ever, at forms of cruelty to which it has not become
accustomed, thus retaining apparently the same general
susceptibilities. Illustrations of this are to be found every where;
one happens to lie before us. Bourgoing, in his history of modern
Spain, speaking of the bull fights, the barbarous national amusement
of the Spaniards, says:
"Young ladies, old men, people of all ages and of all characters are
present, and yet the habit of attending these bloody festivals does
not correct their weakness or their timidity, nor injure the sweetness
of their manners. I have moreover known foreigners, distinguished by
the gentleness of their manners, who experienced at first seeing a
bull-fight such very violent emotions as made them turn pale, and they
became ill; but, notwithstanding, this entertainment became afterwards
an irresistible attraction, without operating any revolution in their
characters." Modern State of Spain, by J.F. Bourgoing, Minister
Plenipotentiary from France to the Court of Madrid, Vol ii., page 342.
It is the novelty of cruelty, rather than the degree, which repels
most minds. Cruelty in a new form, however slight, will often pain a
mind that is totally unmoved by the most horrible cruelties in a form
to which it is accustomed. When Pompey was at the zenith of his
popularity in Rome, he ordered some elephants to be tortured in the
amphitheatre for the amusement of the populace; this was the first
time they had witnessed the torture of those animals, and though for
years accustomed to witness in the same place, the torture of lions,
tigers, leopards, and almost all sorts of wild beasts, as well as that
of men of all nations, and to shout acclamations over their agonies,
yet, this novel form of cruelty so shocked the beholders, that the
most popular man in Rome was execrated as a cruel monster, and came
near falling a victim to the fury of those who just before were ready
to adore him.
We will now briefly notice another objection, somewhat akin to the
preceding, and based mainly upon the same and similar fallacies.
OBJECTION III.—'SLAVEHOLDERS ARE PROVERBIAL FOR THEIR KINDNESS,
HOSPITALITY, BENEVOLENCE, AND GENEROSITY.'
Multitudes scout as fictions the cruelties inflicted upon slaves,
because slaveholders are famed for their courtesy and hospitality.
They tell us that their generous and kind attentions to their guests,
and their well-known sympathy for the suffering, sufficiently prove
the charges of cruelty brought against them to be calumnies, of which
their uniform character is a triumphant refutation.
Now that slaveholders are proverbially hospitable to their guests, and
spare neither pains nor expense in ministering to their accommodation
and pleasure, is freely admitted and easily accounted for. That those
who make their inferiors work for them, without pay, should be
courteous and hospitable to those of their equals and superiors whose
good opinions they desire, is human nature in its every-day dress. The
objection consists of a fact and an inference: the fact, that
slaveholders have a special care to the accommodation of their
guests; the inference, that therefore they must seek the comfort of
their slaves—that as they are bland and obliging to their equals,
they must be mild and condescending to their inferiors—that as the
wrongs of their own grade excite their indignation, and their woes
move their sympathies, they must be touched by those of their
chattels—that as they are full of pains-taking toward those whose
good opinions and good offices they seek, they will, of course, show
special attention to those to whose good opinions they are
indifferent, and whose good offices they can compel—that as they
honor the literary and scientific, they must treat with high
consideration those to whom they deny the alphabet—that as they are
courteous to certain persons, they must be so to "property"—eager
to anticipate the wishes of visitors, they cannot but gratify those of
their vassals—jealous for the rights of the Texans, quick to feel at
the disfranchisement of Canadians and of Irishmen, alive to the
oppressions of the Greeks and the Poles, they must feel keenly for
their negroes! Such conclusions from such premises do not call for
serious refutation. Even a half-grown boy, who should argue, that
because men have certain feelings toward certain persons in certain
circumstances, they must have the same feelings toward all persons in
all circumstances, or toward persons in opposite circumstances, of
totally different grades, habits, and personal peculiarities, might
fairly be set down as a hopeless simpleton: and yet, men of sense and
reflection on other subjects, seem bent upon stultifying themselves by
just such shallow inferences from the fact, that slaveholders are
hospitable and generous to certain persons in certain grades of
society belonging to their own caste. On the ground of this reasoning,
all the crimes ever committed may be disproved, by showing, that their
perpetrators were hospitable and generous to those who sympathized and
co-operated with them. To prove that a man does not hate one of his
neighbors, it is only necessary to show that he loves another; to make
it appear that he does not treat contemptuously the ignorant, he has
only to show that he bows respectfully to the learned; to demonstrate
that he does not disdain his inferiors, lord it over his dependents,
and grind the faces of the poor, he need only show that he is polite
to the rich, pays deference to titles and office, and fawns for favor
upon those above him! The fact that a man always smiles on his
customers, proves that he never scowls at those who dun him! and since
he has always a melodious "good morning!" for "gentlemen of property
and standing," it is certain that he never snarls at beggars. He who
is quick to make room for a doctor of divinity, will, of course, see
to it that he never runs against a porter; and he who clears the way
for a lady, will be sure never to rub against a market woman, or
jostle an apple-seller's board. If accused of beating down his
laundress to the lowest fraction, of making his boot-black call a
dozen times for his pay, of higgling and screwing a fish boy till he
takes off two cents, or of threatening to discharge his seamstress
unless she will work for a shilling a day, how easy to brand it all as
slander, by showing that he pays his minister in advance, is generous
in Christmas presents, gives a splendid new-year's party, expends
hundreds on elections, and puts his name with a round sum on the
subscription paper of the missionary society.
Who can forget the hospitality of King Herod, that model of generosity
"beyond all ancient fame," who offered half his kingdom to a guest, as
a compensation for an hour's amusement.—Could such a noble spirit
have murdered John the Baptist? Incredible! Joab too! how his soft
heart was pierced at the exile of Absalom! and how his bowels yearned
to restore him to his home! Of course, it is all fiction about his
assassinating his nephew, Amasa, and Abner the captain of the host!
Since David twice spared the life of Saul when he came to murder him,
wept on the neck of Jonathan, threw himself upon the ground in anguish
when his child sickened, and bewailed, with a broken heart, the loss
of Absalom—it proves that he did not coolly plot and deliberately
consummate the murder of Uriah! As the Government of the United States
generously gave a township of land to General La Fayette, it proves
that they have never defrauded the Indians of theirs! So the fact,
that the slaveholders of the present Congress are, to a man, favorable
to recognizing the independence of Texas, with her fifty or sixty
thousand inhabitants, before she has achieved it, and before it is
recognized by any other government, proves that these same
slaveholders do not oppose the recognition of Hayti, with her
million of inhabitants, whose independence was achieved nearly half a
century ago, and which is recognized by the most powerful governments
on earth!
But, seriously, no man is so slightly versed in human nature as not to
know that men habitually exercise the most opposite feelings, and
indulge in the most opposite practices toward different persons or
different classes of persons around them. No man has ever lived who
was more celebrated for his scrupulous observance of the most exact
justice, and for the illustration furnished in his life of the noblest
natural virtues, than the Roman Cato. His strict adherence to the
nicest rules of equity—his integrity, honor, and incorruptible
faith—his jealous watchfulness over the rights of his fellow
citizens, and his generous devotion to their interest, procured for
him the sublime appellation of "The Just." Towards freemen his life
was a model of every thing just and noble: but to his slaves he was a
monster. At his meals, when the dishes were not done to his liking, or
when his slaves were careless or inattentive in serving, he would
seize a thong and violently beat them, in presence of his guests.—When
they grew old or diseased, and were no longer serviceable,
however long and faithfully they might have served him, he either
turned them adrift and left them to perish, or starved them to death
in his own family. No facts in his history are better authenticated
than these.
No people were ever more hospitable and munificent than the Romans,
and none more touched with the sufferings of others. Their public
theatres often rung with loud weeping, thousands sobbing convulsively
at once over fictitious woes and imaginary sufferers: and yet these
same multitudes would shout amidst the groans of a thousand dying
gladiators, forced by their conquerors to kill each other in the
amphitheatre for the amusement of the public.[22]
[Footnote 22: Dr. Leland, in his "Necessity of a Divine Revelation,"
thus describes the prevalence of these shows among the Romans:—"They
were exhibited at the funerals of great and rich men, and on many
other occasions, by the Roman consuls, praetors, aediles, senators,
knights, priests, and almost all that bore great offices in the state,
as well as by the emperors; and in general, by all that had a mind to
make an interest with the people, who were extravagantly fond of those
kinds of shows. Not only the men, but the women, ran eagerly after
them; who were, by the prevalence of custom, so far divested of that
compassion and softness which is natural to the sex, that they took a
pleasure in seeing them kill one another, and only desired that they
should fall genteelly, and in an agreeable attitude. Such was the
frequency of those shows, and so great the number of men that were
killed on those occasions, that Lipsius says, no war caused such
slaughter of mankind, as did these sports of pleasure, throughout the
several provinces of the vast Roman empire."—Leland's Neces. of Div.
Rev. vol. ii. p. 51.]
Alexander, the tyrant of Phaeres, sobbed like a child over the
misfortunes of the Trojan queens, when the tragedy of Andromache and
Hecuba was played before him; yet he used to murder his subjects every
day for no crime, and without even setting up the pretence of any, but
merely to make himself sport.
The fact that slaveholders may be full of benevolence and kindness
toward their equals and toward whites generally, even so much so as to
attract the esteem and admiration of all, while they treat with the
most inhuman neglect their own slaves, is well illustrated by a
circumstance mentioned by the Rev. Dr. CHANNING, of Boston, (who once
lived in Virginia,) is his work on slavery, p. 162, 1st edition:—
"I cannot," says the doctor, "forget my feelings on visiting a
hospital belonging to the plantation of a gentleman highly esteemed
for his virtues, and whose manners and conversation expressed much
benevolence and conscientiousness. When I entered with him the
hospital, the first object on which my eye fell was a young woman very
ill, probably approaching death. She was stretched on the floor. Her
head rested on something like a pillow, but her body and limbs were
extended on the hard boards. The owner, I doubt not, had, at least, as
much kindness as myself; but he was so used to see the slaves living
without common comforts, that the idea of unkindness in the present
instance did not enter his mind."
Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, an elder of a Presbyterian church in Rochester,
N.Y. who resided some years in Virginia, says:—
"On one occasion I was crossing the plantation and approaching the
house of a friend, when I met him, rifle in hand, in pursuit of one
of his negroes, declaring he would shoot him in a moment if he got his
eye upon him. It appeared that the slave had refused to be flogged,
and ran off to avoid the consequences; and yet the generous
hospitality of this man to myself, and white friends generally,
scarcely knew any bounds.
"There were amongst my slaveholding friends and acquaintances, persons
who were as humane and conscientious as men can be, and persist in
the impious claim of property in a fellow being. Still I can
recollect but one instance of corporal punishment, whether the
subject were male or female, in which the infliction was not on the
bare back with the raw hide, or a similar instrument, the subject
being tied during the operation to a post or tree. The exception
was under the following circumstances. I had taken a walk with a
friend on his plantation, and approaching his gang of slaves, I sat
down whilst he proceeded to the spot where they were at work; and
addressing himself somewhat earnestly to a female who was wielding the
hoe, in a moment caught up what I supposed a tobacco stick, (a stick
some three feet in length on which the tobacco, when out, is suspended
to dry.) about the size of a man's wrist, and laid on a number of
blows furiously over her head. The woman crouched, and seemed stunned
with the blows, but presently recommenced the motion of her hoe."
Dr. DAVID NELSON, a native of Tennessee, and late president of Marion
College, Missouri, in a lecture at Northampton, Mass. in January,
1839, made the following statement:—
"I remember a young lady who played well on the piano, and was very
ready to weep over any fictitious tale of suffering. I was present
when one of her slaves lay on the floor in a high fever, and we feared
she might not recover. I saw that young lady stamp upon her with her
feet; and the only remark her mother made was, 'I am afraid Evelina
is too much prejudiced against poor Mary.'"
General WILLIAM EATON, for some years U.S. Consul at Tunis, and
commander of the expedition against Tripoli, in 1895, thus gives vent
to his feelings at the sight of many hundreds of Sardinians who had
been enslaved by the Tunisians:
"Many have died of grief, and the others linger out a life less
tolerable than death. Alas! remorse seizes my whole soul when I
reflect, that this is indeed but a copy of the very barbarity which
my eyes have seen in my own native country. How frequently, in the
southern states of my own country, have I seen weeping mothers
leading the guiltless infant to the sales with as deep anguish as if
they led them to the slaughter; and yet felt my bosom tranquil in
the view of these aggressions on defenceless humanity. But when I see
the same enormities practised upon beings whose complexions and blood
claim kindred with my own, I curse the perpetrators, and weep over
the wretched victims of their rapacity. Indeed, truth and justice
demand from me the confession, that the Christian slaves among the
barbarians of Africa are treated with more humanity than the African
slaves among professing Christians of civilized America; and yet
here [in Tunis] sensibility bleeds at every pore for the wretches
whom fate has doomed to slavery."
Rev. H. LYMAN, late pastor of the free Presbyterian Church, Buffalo,
N.Y. who spent the winter of 1832-3 at the south, says:—
"In the interior of Mississippi I was invited to the house of a
planter, where I was received with great cordiality, and entertained
with marked hospitality.
"There I saw a master in the midst of his household slaves. The
evening passed most pleasantly, as indeed it must, where assiduous
hospitalities are exercised towards the guest.
"Late in the morning, when I had gained the tardy consent of my host
to go on my way, as a final act of kindness, he called a slave to show
me across the fields by a nearer route to the main road. 'David,' said
he, 'go and show this gentleman as far as the post-office. Do you know
the big bay tree?' 'Yes, sir.' 'Do you know where the cotton mill is?'
'Yes, sir.' 'Where Squire Malcolm's old field is?' 'Y—e—s, sir,'
said David, (beginning to be bewildered). 'Do you know where Squire
Malcolm's cotton field is?' 'No, sir.' 'No, sir,' said the enraged
master, levelling his gun at him. 'What do you stand here, saying,
Yes, yes, yes, for, when you don't know?' All this was accompanied
with threats and imprecations, and a manner that contrasted
strangely with the religious conversation and gentle manners of the
previous evening."
The Rev. JAMES H. DICKEY, formerly a slaveholder in South Carolina,
now pastor of the Presbyterian Church in Hennepin, Ill. in his "Review
of Nevins' Biblical Antiquities," after asserting that slaveholding
tends to beget "a spirit of cruelty and tyranny, and to destroy every
generous and noble feeling," (page 33,) he adds the following as a
note:—
"It may be that this will be considered censorious, and the proverbial
generosity and hospitality of the south will be appealed to as a full
confutation of it. The writer thinks he can appreciate southern
kindness and hospitality. Having been born in Virginia, raised and
educated in South Carolina and Kentucky, he is altogether southern in
his feelings, and habits, and modes of familiar conversation. He can
say of the south as Cowper said of England, 'With all thy faults I
love thee still, my country.' And nothing but the abominations of
slavery could have induced him willingly to forsake a land endeared to
him by all the associations of childhood and youth.
"Yet it is candid to admit that it is not all gold that glitters.
There is a fictitious kindness and hospitality. The famous Robin Hood
was kind and generous—no man more hospitable—he robbed the rich to
supply the necessities of the poor. Others rob the poor to bestow
gifts and lavish kindness and hospitality on their rich friends and
neighbors. It is an easy matter for a man to appear kind and generous,
when he bestows that which others have earned.
"I said, there is a fictitious kindness and hospitality. I once knew a
man who left his wife and children three days, without fire-wood,
without bread-stuff and without shoes, while the ground was covered
with snow—that he might indulge in his cups. And when I attempted to
expostulate with him, he took the subject out of my hands, and
expatiating on the evils of intemperance more eloquently than I could,
concluded by warning me, with tears, to avoid the snares of the
latter. He had tender feelings, yet a hard heart. I once knew a young
lady of polished manners and accomplished education, who would weep
with sympathy over the fictitious woes exhibited in a novel. And
waking from her reverie of grief, while her eye was yet wet with
tears, would call her little waiter, and if she did not appear at the
first call, would rap her head with her thimble till my head ached.
"I knew a man who was famed for kindly sympathies. He once took off
his shirt and gave it to a poor white man. The same man hired a black
man, and gave him for his daily task, through the winter, to feed
the beasts, keep fires, and make one hundred rails: and in case of
failure the lash was applied so freely, that, in the spring, his back
was one continued sore, from his shoulders to his waist. Yet this
man was a professor of religion, and famous for his tender sympathies
to white men!"
OBJECTION IV.—'NORTHERN VISITORS AT THE SOUTH TESTIFY THAT THE SLAVES
ARE NOT CRUELLY TREATED.'
ANSWER:—Their knowledge on this point must have been derived, either
from the slaveholders and overseers themselves, or from the slaves, or
from their own observation. If from the slaveholders, their
testimony has already been weighed and found wanting; if they derived
it from the slaves, they can hardly be so simple as to suppose that
the guest, associate and friend of the master, would be likely to
draw from his slaves any other testimony respecting his treatment of
them, than such as would please him. The great shrewdness and tact
exhibited by slaves in keeping themselves out of difficulty, when
close questioned by strangers as to their treatment, cannot fail to
strike every accurate observer. The following remarks of CHIEF JUSTICE
HENDERSON, a North Carolina slaveholder, in his decision (in 1830,) in
the case of the State versus Charity, 2 Devereaux's North Carolina
Reports, 513, illustrate the folly of arguing the good treatment of
slaves from their own declarations, while in the power of their
masters. In the case above cited, the Chief Justice, in refusing to
permit a master to give in evidence, declarations made to him by his
slave, says of masters and slaves generally—
"The master has an almost absolute control over the body and mind
of his slave. The master's will is the slave's will. All his acts,
all his sayings, are made with a view to propitiate his master. His
confessions are made, not from a love of truth, not from a sense of
duty, not to speak a falsehood, but to please his master—and it is
in vain that his master tells him to speak the truth and conceals from
him how he wishes the question answered. The slave will ascertain,
or, which is the same thing, think that he has ascertained the wishes
of his master, and MOULD HIS ANSWER ACCORDINGLY. We therefore more
often get the wishes of the master, or the slave's belief of his
wishes, than the truth."
The following extract of a letter from the Hon. SETH M. GATES, member
elect of the next Congress, furnishes a clue by which to interpret the
looks, actions, and protestations of slaves, when in the presence of
their masters' guests, and the pains sometimes taken by slaveholders,
in teaching their slaves the art of pretending that they are treated
well, love their masters, are happy, &c. The letter is dated Leroy,
Jan. 4, 1839.
"I have sent your letter to Rev. Joseph M. Sadd, Castile, Genesee
county, who resided five years in a slave state, and left, disgusted
with slavery. I trust he will give you some facts. I remember one
fact, which his wife witnessed. A relative, where she boarded,
returning to his plantation after a temporary absence, was not met by
his servants with such demonstrations of joy as was their wont. He
ordered his horse put out, took down his whip, ordered his servants to
the barn, and gave them a most cruel beating, because they did not run
out to meet him, and pretend great attachment to him. Mrs. Sadd had
overheard the servants agreeing not to go out, before his return, as
they said they did not love him—and this led her to watch his
conduct to them. This man was a professor of religion!"
If these northern visitors derived their information that the slaves
are not cruelly treated from their own observation, it amounts to
this, they did not see cruelties inflicted on the slaves. To which
we reply, that the preceding pages contain testimony from hundreds of
witnesses, who testify that they did see the cruelties whereof they
affirm. Besides this, they contain the solemn declarations of scores
of slaveholders themselves, in all parts of the slave states, that the
slaves are cruelly treated. These declarations are moreover fully
corroborated, by the laws of slave states, by a multitude of
advertisements in their newspapers, describing runaway slaves, by
their scars, brands, gashes, maimings, cropped ears, iron collars,
chains, &c. &c.
Truly, after the foregoing array of facts and testimony, and after the
objectors' forces have one after another filed off before them, now to
march up a phalanx of northern visitors, is to beat a retreat.
'Visitors!' What insight do casual visitors get into the tempers and
daily practices of those whom they visit, or of the treatment that
their slaves receive at their hands, especially if these visitors are
strangers, and from a region where there are no slaves, and which
claims to be opposed to slavery? What opportunity has a stranger, and
a temporary guest, to learn the every-day habits and caprices of his
host? Oh, these northern visitors tell us they have visited scores of
families at the south and never saw a master or mistress whip their
slaves. Indeed! They have, doubtless, visited hundreds of families at
the north—did they ever see, on such occasions, the father or mother
whip their children? If so, they must associate with very ill-bred
persons. Because well-bred parents do not whip their children in the
presence, or within the hearing of their guests are we to infer that
they never do it out of their sight and hearing? But perhaps the
fact that these visitors do not remember seeing slaveholders strike
their slaves, merely proves, that they had so little feeling for them,
that though they might be struck every day in their presence, yet as
they were only slaves and 'niggers,' it produced no effect upon them;
consequently they have no impressions to recall. These visitors have
also doubtless rode with scores of slaveholders. Are they quite
certain they ever saw them whip their horses? and can they recall
the persons, times, places, and circumstances? But even if these
visitors regarded the slaves with some kind feelings, when they first
went to the south, yet being constantly with their oppressors, seeing
them used as articles of property, accustomed to hear them charged
with all kinds of misdemeanors, their ears filled with complaints of
their laziness, carelessness, insolence, obstinacy, stupidity, thefts,
elopements, &c. and at the same time, receiving themselves the most
gratifying attentions and caresses from the same persons, who, while
they make to them these representations of their slaves, are giving
them airings in their coaches, making parties for them, taking them on
excursions of pleasure, lavishing upon them their choicest
hospitalities, and urging them to protract indefinitely their
stay—what more natural than for the flattered guest to admire such
hospitable people, catch their spirit, and fully sympathize with their
feelings toward their slaves, regarding with increased disgust and
aversion those who can habitually tease and worry such loveliness and
generosity[23]. After the visitor had been in contact with the
slave-holding spirit long enough to have imbibed it, (no very tedious
process,) a cuff, or even a kick administered to a slave, would not be
likely to give him such a shock that his memory would long retain the
traces of it. But lest we do these visitors injustice, we will suppose
that they carried with them to the south humane feelings for the
slave, and that those feelings remained unblunted; still, what
opportunity could they have to witness the actual condition of the
slaves? They come in contact with the house-servants only, and as a
general thing, with none but the select ones of these, the
parlor-servants; who generally differ as widely in their appearance
and treatment from the cooks and scullions in the kitchen, as parlor
furniture does from the kitchen utensils. Certain servants are
assigned to the parlor, just as certain articles of furniture are
selected for it, to be seen—and it is no less ridiculous to infer
that the kitchen scullions are clothed and treated like those servants
who wait at the table, and are in the presence of guests, than to
infer that the kitchen is set out with sofas, ottomans, piano-fortes,
and full-length mirrors, because the parlor is. But the house-slaves
are only a fraction of the whole number. The field-hands constitute
the great mass of the slaves, and these the visitors rarely get a
glimpse at. They are away at their work by day-break, and do not
return to their huts till dark. Their huts are commonly at some
distance from the master's mansion, and the fields in which they
labor, generally much farther, and out of sight. If the visitor
traverses the plantation, care is taken that he does not go alone; if
he expresses a wish to see it, the horses are saddled, and the master
or his son gallops the rounds with him; if he expresses a desire to
see the slaves at work, his conductor will know where to take him,
and when, and which of them to show; the overseer, too, knows
quite too well the part he has to act on such occasions, to shock the
uninitiated ears of the visitors with the shrieks of his victims. It
is manifest that visitors can see only the least repulsive parts of
slavery, inasmuch as it is wholly at the option of the master, what
parts to show them; as a matter of necessity, he can see only the
outside—and that, like the outside of doorknobs and andirons is
furbished up to be looked at. So long as it is human nature to wear
the best side out, so long the northern guests of southern
slaveholders will see next to nothing of the reality of slavery. Those
visitors may still keep up their autumnal migrations to the slave
states, and, after a hasty survey of the tinsel hung before the
curtain of slavery, without a single glance behind it, and at the
paint and varnish that cover up dead men's bones, and while those
who have hoaxed them with their smooth stories and white-washed
specimens of slavery, are tittering at their gullibility, they return
in the spring on the same fool's-errand with their predecessors,
retailing their lesson, and mouthing the praises of the masters, and
the comforts of the slaves. They now become village umpires in all
disputes about the condition of the slaves, and each thence forward
ends all controversies with his oracular, "I've seen, and sure I
ought to know."
[Footnote 23": Well saith the Scripture, "A gift blindeth the eyes." The
slaves understand this, though the guest may not; they know very well
that they have no sympathy to expect from their master's guests; that
the good cheer of the "big house," and the attentions shown them, will
generally commit them in their master's favor, and against themselves.
Messrs. Thome and Kimball, in their late work, state the following
fact, in illustration of this feeling among the negro apprentices in
Jamaica.
"The governor of one of the islands, shortly after his arrival, dined
with one of the wealthiest proprietors. The next day one of the
negroes of the estate said to another, "De new gubner been
poison'd." "What dat you say?" inquired the other in astonishment,
"De gubner been poison'd! Dah, now!—How him poisoned?" "Him eat
massa's turtle soup last night," said the shrewd negro. The other
took his meaning at once; and his sympathy for the governor was
turned into concern for himself, when he perceived that the
poison was one from which he was likely to suffer more than his
excellency."—Emancipation in the West Indies, p. 334.]
But all northern visitors at the south are not thus easily gulled.
Many of them, as the preceding pages show, have too much sense to be
caught with chaff.
We may add here, that those classes of visitors whose representations
of the treatment of slaves are most influential in moulding the
opinions of the free states, are ministers of the gospel, agents of
benevolent societies, and teachers who have traveled and temporarily
resided in the slave states—classes of persons less likely than any
others to witness cruelties, because slaveholders generally take more
pains to keep such visitors in ignorance than others, because their
vocations would furnish them fewer opportunities for witnessing them,
and because they come in contact with a class of society in which
fewer atrocities are committed than in any other, and that too, under
circumstances which make it almost impossible for them to witness
those which are actually committed.
Of the numerous classes of persons from the north who temporarily
reside in the slave states, the mechanics who find employment on the
plantations, are the only persons who are in circumstances to look
"behind the scenes." Merchants, pedlars, venders of patents, drovers,
speculators, and almost all descriptions of persons who go from the
free states to the south to make money see little of slavery, except
upon the road, at public inns, and in villages and cities.
Let not the reader infer from what has been said, that the
parlor-slaves, chamber-maids, &c. in the slave states are not
treated with cruelty—far from it. They often experience terrible
inflictions; not generally so terrible or so frequent as the
field-hands, and very rarely in the presence of guests[24]
House-slaves are for the most part treated far better than
plantation-slaves, and those under the immediate direction of the
master and mistress, than those under overseers and drivers. It is
quite worthy of remark, that of the thousands of northern men who have
visited the south, and are always lauding the kindness of slaveholders
and the comfort of the slaves, protesting that they have never seen
cruelties inflicted on them, &c. each perhaps, without exception, has
some story to tell which reveals, better perhaps than the most
barbarous butchery could do, a public sentiment toward slaves, showing
that the most cruel inflictions must of necessity be the constant
portion of the slaves.
[Footnote 24: Rev. JOSEPH M. SADD, a Presbyterian clergyman, in
Castile, Genesee county, N.Y. recently from Missouri, where he has
preached five years, in the midst of slaveholders, says, in a letter
just received, speaking of the pains taken by slaveholders to conceal
from the eyes of strangers and visitors, the cruelties which they
inflict upon their slaves—
"It is difficult to be an eye-witness of these things; the master and
mistress, almost invariably punish their slaves only in the presence
of themselves and other slaves."]
Though facts of this kind lie thick in every corner, the reader will,
we are sure, tolerate even a needless illustration, if told that it is
from the pen of N.P. Rogers, Esq. of Concord, N.H. who, whatever he
writes, though it be, as in this case, a mere hasty letter, always
finds readers to the end.
"At a court session at Guilford, Stafford county, N.H. in August,
1837, the Hon. Daniel M. Durell, of Dover, formerly Chief Justice
of the Common Pleas for that state, and a member of Congress,
was charging the abolitionists, in presence of several gentlemen
of the bar, at their boarding house, with exaggerations and
misrepresentations of slave treatment at the south. 'One instance
in particular,' he witnessed, he said, where he 'knew they
misrepresented. It was in the Congregational meeting house at Dover.
He was passing by, and saw a crowd entering and about the door; and on
inquiry, found that abolition was going on in there. He stood in the
entry for a moment, and found the Englishman, Thompson, was holding
forth. The fellow was speaking of the treatment of slaves; and he said
it was no uncommon thing for masters, when exasperated with the slave,
to hang him up by the two thumbs, and flog him. I knew the fellow lied
there,' said the judge, 'for I had traveled through the south, from
Georgia north, and I never saw a single instance of the kind. The
fellow said it was a common thing.' 'Did you see any exasperated
masters, Judge,' said I, 'in your journey?' 'No sir,' said he, 'not
an individual instance.' 'You hardly are able to convict Mr. Thompson
of falsehood, then, Judge,' said I, 'if I understood you right. He
spoke, as I understood you, of exasperated masters—and you say you
did not see any. Mr. Thompson did not say it was common for masters in
good humor to hang up their slaves.' The Judge did not perceive the
materiality of the distinction. 'Oh, they misrepresent and lie about
this treatment of the niggers,' he continued. 'In going through all
the states I visited, I do not now remember a single instance of cruel
treatment. Indeed, I remember of seeing but one nigger struck, during
my whole journey. There was one instance. We were riding in the stage,
pretty early one morning, and we met a black fellow, driving a span of
horses, and a load (I think he said) of hay. The fellow turned out
before we got to him, clean down into the ditch, as far as he could
get. He knew, you see, what to depend on, if he did not give the road.
Our driver, as we passed the fellow, fetched him a smart crack with
his whip across the chops. He did not make any noise, though I guess
it hurt him some—he grinned.—Oh, no! these fellows exaggerate. The
niggers, as a general thing, are kindly treated. There may be
exceptions, but I saw nothing of it.' (By the way, the Judge did not
know there were any abolitionists present.) 'What did you do to the
driver, Judge,' said I, 'for striking that man?' 'Do,' said he, 'I did
nothing to him, to be sure.' 'What did you say to him, sir?' said I.
'Nothing,' he replied: 'I said nothing to him.' 'What did the other
passengers do?' said I. 'Nothing, sir,' said the Judge. 'The fellow
turned out the white of his eye, but he did not make any noise.' 'Did
the driver say any thing, Judge, when he struck the man?' 'Nothing,'
said the Judge, 'only he damned him, and told him he'd learn him to
keep out of the reach of his whip.' 'Sir,' said I, 'if George Thompson
had told this story, in the warmth of an anti-slavery speech, I should
scarcely have credited it. I have attended many anti-slavery meetings,
and I never heard an instance of such cold-blooded, wanton,
insolent, DIABOLICAL cruelty as this; and, sir, if I live to attend
another meeting, I shall relate this, and give Judge Durell's name as
the witness of it.' An infliction of the most insolent character,
entirely unprovoked, on a perfect stranger, who had showed the utmost
civility, in giving all the road, and only could not get beyond the
long reach of the driver's whip—and he a stage driver, a class
generous next to the sailor, in the sober hour of morning—and
borne in silence—and told to show that the colored man of the
south was kindly treated—all evincing, to an unutterable extent,
that the temper of the south toward the slave is merciless, even to
diabolism—and that the north regards him with, if possible, a more
fiendish indifference still!"
It seems but an act of simple justice to say, in conclusion, that many
of the slaveholders from whom our northern visitors derive their
information of the "good treatment" of the slave, may not design to
deceive them. Such visitors are often, perhaps generally brought in
contact with the better class of slaveholders, whose slaves are really
better fed, clothed, lodged, and housed; more moderately worked; more
seldom whipped, and with less severity, than the slaves generally.
Those masters in speaking of the good condition of their slaves, and
asserting that they are treated well, use terms that are not
absolute but comparative: and it may be, and doubtless often is
true that their stares are treated well as slaves, in comparison
with the treatment received by slaves generally. So the overseers of
such slaves, and the slaves themselves, may, without lying or
designing to mislead, honestly give the same testimony. As the great
body of slaves within their knowledge fare worse, it is not strange
that, when speaking of the treatment on their own plantation, they
should call it good.
OBJECTION V.—'IT IS FOR THE INTEREST OF THE MASTERS TO TREAT THEIR
SLAVES WELL.'
So it is for the interest of the drunkard to quit his cups; for the
glutton to curb his appetite; for the debauchee to bridle his lust;
for the sluggard to be up betimes; for the spendthrift to be
economical, and for all sinners to stop sinning. Even if it were for
the interest of masters to treat their slaves well, he must be a
novice who thinks that a proof that the slaves are well treated.
The whole history of man is a record of real interests sacrificed to
present gratification. If all men's actions were consistent with their
best interests, folly and sin would be words without meaning.
If the objector means that it is for the pecuniary interests of
masters to treat their slaves well, and thence infers their good
treatment, we reply, that though the love of money is strong, yet
appetite and lust, pride, anger and revenge, the love of power and
honor, are each an overmatch for it; and when either of them is roused
by a sudden stimulant, the love of money worsted in the grapple with
it. Look at the hourly lavish outlays of money to procure a momentary
gratification for those passions and appetites. As the desire for
money is, in the main, merely a desire for the means of gratifying
other desires, or rather for one of the means, it must be the
servant not the sovereign of those desires, to whose gratification
its only use is to minister. But even if the love of money were the
strongest human passion, who is simple enough to believe that it is
all the time so powerfully excited, that no other passion or appetite
can get the mastery over it? Who does not know that gusts of rage,
revenge, jealousy and lust drive it before them as a tempest tosses a
feather?
The objector has forgotten his first lessons; they taught him that it
is human nature to gratify the uppermost passion: and is prudence
the uppermost passion with slaveholders, and self-restraint their
great characteristic? The strongest feeling of any moment is the
sovereign of that moment, and rules. Is a propensity to practice
economy the predominant feeling with slaveholders? Ridiculous!
Every northerner knows that slaveholders are proverbial for lavish
expenditures, never higgling about the price of a gratification.
Human passions have not, like the tides, regular ebbs and flows, with
their stationary, high and low water marks. They are a dominion
convulsed with revolutions; coronations and dethronements in ceasless
succession—each ruler a usurper and a despot. Love of money gets a
snatch at the sceptre as well as the rest, not by hereditary right,
but because, in the fluctuations of human feelings, a chance wave
washes him up to the throne, and the next perhaps washes him off
without time to nominate his successor. Since, then, as a matter of
fact, a host of appetites and passions do hourly get the better of
love of money, what protection does the slave find in his master's
interest, against the sweep of his passions and appetites? Besides,
a master can inflict upon his slave horrible cruelties without
perceptibly injuring his health, or taking time from his labor, or
lessening his value as property. Blows with a small stick give more
acute pain, than with a large one. A club bruises, and benumbs the
nerves, while a switch, neither breaking nor bruising the flesh,
instead of blunting the sense of feeling, wakes up and stings to
torture all the susceptibilities of pain. By this kind of infliction,
more actual cruelty can be perpetrated in the giving of pain at the
instant, than by the most horrible bruisings and lacerations; and
that, too, with little comparative hazard to the slave's health, or to
his value as property, and without loss of time from labor. Even
giving to the objection all the force claimed for it, what protection
is it to the slave? It professes to shield the slave from such
treatment alone, as would either lay him aside from labor, or injure
his health, and thus lessen his value as a working animal, making him
a damaged article in the market. Now, is nothing bad treatment of
a human being except that which produces these effects? Does the fact
that a man's constitution is not actually shattered, and his life
shortened by his treatment, prove that he is treated well? Is no
treatment cruel except what sprains muscles, or cuts sinews, or bursts
blood vessels, or breaks bones, and thus lessens a man's value as a
working animal?
A slave may get blows and kicks every hour in the day, without having
his constitution broken, or without suffering sensibly in his health,
or flesh, or appetite, or power to labor. Therefore, beaten and kicked
as he is, he must be treated well, according to the objector, since
the master's interest does not suffer thereby.
Finally, the objector virtually maintains that all possible privations
and inflictions suffered by slaves, that do not actually cripple their
power to labor, and make them 'damaged merchandize,' are to be set
down as 'good treatment,' and that nothing is bad treatment except
what produces these effects.
Thus we see that even if the slave were effectually shielded from all
those inflictions, which, by lessening his value as property, would
injure the interests of his master, he would still nave no protection
against numberless and terrible cruelties. But we go further, and
maintain that in respect to large classes of slaves, it is for the
interest of their masters to treat them with barbarous inhumanity.
1. Old slaves. It would be for the interest of the masters to
shorten their days.
2. Worn out slaves. Multitudes of slaves by being overworked, have
their constitutions broken in middle life. It would be economical
for masters to starve or flog such to death.
3. The incurably diseased and maimed. In all such cases it would be
cheaper for masters to buy poison than medicine.
4. The blind, lunatics, and idiots. As all such would be a tax on
him, it would be for his interest to shorten their days.
5. The deaf and dumb, and persons greatly deformed. Such might or
might not be serviceable to him; many of them at least would be a
burden, and few men carry burdens when they can throw them off.
6. Feeble infants. As such would require much nursing, the time,
trouble and expense necessary to raise them, would generally be more
than they would be worth as working animals. How many such infants
would be likely to be 'raised,' from disinterested benevolence? To
this it may be added that in the far south and south west, it is
notoriously for the interest of the master not to 'raise' slaves at
all. To buy slaves when nearly grown, from the northern slave states,
would be cheaper than to raise them. This is shown in the fact, that
mothers with infants sell for less in those states than those without
them. And when slave-traders purchase such in the upper country, it is
notorious that they not unfrequently either sell their infants, or
give them away. Therefore it would be for the interest of the
masters, throughout that region, to have all the new-born children
left to perish. It would also be for their interest to make such
arrangements as effectually to separate the sexes, or if that were not
done, so to overwork the females as to prevent childbearing.
7. Incorrigible slaves. On most of the large plantations, there are,
more or less, incorrigible slaves,—that is, slaves who will not be
profitable to their masters—and from whom torture can extort little
but defiance.[25] These are frequently slaves of uncommon minds, who
feel so keenly the wrongs of slavery that their proud spirits spurn
their chains and defy their tormentors.
[Footnote 25: Advertisements like the following are not unfrequent in
the southern papers.
From the Elizabeth (N.C.) Phenix, Jan. 5, 1839. "The subscriber
offers for sale his blacksmith NAT, 28 years of age, and remarkably
large and likely. The only cause of my selling him is I CANNOT
CONTROL HIM. Hertford, Dec.5, 1838. J. GORDON."]
They have commonly great sway over the other slaves, their example is
contagious, and their influence subversive of 'plantation discipline.'
Consequently they must be made a warning to others. It is for the
interest of the masters (at least they believe it to be) to put upon
such slaves iron collars and chains, to brand and crop them; to
disfigure, lacerate, starve and torture them—in a word, to inflict
upon them such vengeance as shall strike terror into the other slaves.
To this class may be added the incorrigibly thievish and indolent; it
would be for the interest of the masters to treat them with such
severity as would deter others from following their example.
7. Runaways. When a slave has once runaway from his master and is
caught, he is thenceforward treated with severity. It is for the
interest of the master to make an example of him, by the greatest
privations and inflictions.
8. Hired slaves. It is for the interest of those who hire slaves to
get as much out of them as they can; the temptation to overwork them
is powerful. If it be said that the master could, in that case,
recover damages, the answer is, that damages would not be recoverable
in law unless actual injury—enough to impair the power of the slave
to labor, be proved. And this ordinarily would be impossible, unless
the slave has been worked so greatly beyond his strength as to produce
some fatal derangement of the vital functions. Indeed, as all who are
familiar with such cases in southern courts well know, the proof of
actual injury to the slave, so as to lessen his value, is exceedingly
difficult to make out, and every hirer of slaves can overwork them,
give them insufficient food, clothing, and shelter, and inflict upon
them nameless cruelties with entire impunity. We repeat then that it
is for the interest of the hirer to push his slaves to their utmost
strength, provided he does not drive them to such an extreme, that
their constitutions actually give way under it, while in his hands.
The supreme court of Maryland has decided that, 'There must be at
least a diminution of the faculty of the slave for bodily labor to
warrant an action by the master.'—1 Harris and Johnson's Reports,
4.
9. Slaves under overseers whose wages are proportioned to the crop
which they raise. This is an arrangement common in the slave states,
and in its practical operation is equivalent to a bounty on hard
driving—a virtual premium offered to overseers to keep the slaves
whipped up to the top of their strength. Even where the overseer has a
fixed salary, irrespective of the value of the crop which he takes
off, he is strongly tempted to overwork the slaves, as those overseers
get the highest wages who can draw the largest income from a
plantation with a given number of slaves; so that we may include in
this last class of slaves, the majority of all those who are under
overseers, whatever the terms on which those overseers are employed.
Another class of slaves may be mentioned; we refer to the slaves of
masters who bet upon their crops. In the cotton and sugar region
there is a fearful amount of this desperate gambling, in which, though
money is the ostensible stake and forfeit, human life is the real one.
The length to which this rivalry is carried at the south and south
west, the multitude of planters who engage in it, and the recklessness
of human life exhibited in driving the murderous game to its issue,
cannot well be imagined by one who has not lived in the midst of it.
Desire of gain is only one of the motives that stimulates them;—the
eclat of having made the largest crop with a given number of hands,
is also a powerful stimulant; the southern newspapers, at the crop
season, chronicle carefully the "cotton brag," and the "crack cotton
picking," and "unparalleled driving," &c. Even the editors of
professedly religious papers, cheer on the méleé and sing the triumphs
of the victor. Among these we recollect the celebrated Rev. J.N.
Maffit, recently editor of a religious paper at Natchez, Miss. in
which he took care to assign a prominent place, and capitals to "THE
COTTON BRAG." The testimony of Mr. Bliss, page 38, details some of the
particulars of this betting upon crops. All the preceding classes of
slaves are in circumstances which make it "for the interest of their
masters," or those who have the management of them, to treat them
cruelly.
Besides the operation of the causes already specified, which make it
for the interest of masters and overseers to treat cruelly certain
classes of their slaves, a variety of others exist, which make it for
their interest to treat cruelly the great body of their slaves.
These causes are, the nature of certain kinds of products, the kind of
labor required in cultivating and preparing them for market, the best
times for such labor, the state of the market, fluctuations in prices,
facilities for transportation, the weather, seasons, &c. &c. Some of
the causes which operate to produce this are—
1. The early market. If the planter can get his crop into market
early, he may save thousands which might be lost if it arrived later.
2. Changes in the market. A sudden rise in the market with the
probability that it will be short, or a gradual fall with a
probability that it will be long, is a strong temptation to the master
to push his slaves to the utmost, that he may in the one case make all
he can, by taking the tide at the flood, and in the other lose as
little as may be, by taking it as early as possible in the ebb.
3. High prices. Whenever the slave-grown staples bring a high price,
as is now the case with cotton, every slaveholder is tempted to
overwork his slaves. By forcing them to do double work for a few weeks
or months, while the price is up, he can afford to lose a number of
them and to lessen the value of all by over-driving. A cotton planter
with a hundred vigorous slaves, would have made a profitable
speculation, if, during the years '34, 5, and 6, when the average
price of cotton was 17 cents a pound, he had so overworked his slaves
that half of them died upon his hands in '37, when cotton had fallen
to six and eight cents. No wonder that the poor slaves pray that cotton
and sugar may be cheap. The writer has frequently heard it declared by
planters in the lower country, that, it is more profitable to drive
the slaves to such over exertion as to use them up, in seven or
eight years, than to give them only ordinary tasks and protract their
lives to the ordinary period.[26]
[Footnote 26: The reader is referred to a variety of facts and
testimony on this point on the 39th page of this work.]
4. Untimely seasons. When the winter encroaches on the spring, and
makes late seed time, the first favorable weather is a temptation to
overwork the slaves, too strong to be resisted by those who hold men
as mere working animals. So when frosts set in early, and a great
amount of work is to be done in a little time, or great loss suffered.
So also after a long storm either in seed or crop time, when the
weather becomes favorable, the same temptation presses, and in all
these cases the master would save money by overdriving his slaves.
5. Periodical pressure of certain kinds of labor. The manufacture of
sugar is an illustration. In a work entitled "Travels in Louisiana in
1802," translated from the French, by John Davis, is the following
testimony under this head:—
"At the rolling of sugars, an interval of from two to three months,
they (the slaves in Louisiana,) work both night and day. Abridged of
their sleep, they scarcely retire to rest during the whole period" See
page 81.
In an article on the agriculture of Louisiana, published in the second
number of the "Western Review," is the following:—"The work is
admitted to be severe for the hands, (slaves) requiring, when the
process of making sugar is commenced, TO BE PRESSED NIGHT AND DAY."
It would be for the interest of the sugar planter greatly to overwork
his slaves, during the annual process of sugar-making.
The severity of this periodical pressure, in preparing for market
other staples of the slave states besides sugar, may be inferred from
the following. Mr. Hammond, of South Carolina, in his speech in
Congress, Feb. 1. 1836, (See National Intelligencer) said, "In the
heat of the crop, the loss of one or two days, would inevitably ruin
it."
6. Times of scarcity. Drought, long rain, frost, &c. are liable to
cut off the corn crop, upon which the slaves are fed. If this happens
when the staple which they raise is at a low price, it is for the
interest of the master to put the slave on short rations, thus forcing
him to suffer from hunger.
7. The raising of crops for exportation. In all those states where
cotton and sugar are raised for exportation, it is, for the most part,
more profitable to buy provisions for the slaves than to raise them.
Where this is the case the slaveholders believe it to be for their
interest to give their slaves less food, than their hunger craves, and
they do generally give them insufficient sustenance.[27]
[Footnote 27: Hear the testimony of a slaveholder, on this subject, a
member of Congress from Virginia, from 1817 to 1830, Hon. Alexander
Smyth.
In the debate on the Missouri question in the U.S. Congress, 1819-20,
the admission of Missouri to the Union, as a slave state, was urged,
among other grounds, as a measure of humanity to the slaves of the
south. Mr. Smyth, of Virginia said, "The plan of our opponents seems
to be to confine the slave population to the southern states, to the
countries where sugar, cotton, and tobacco are cultivated. But, sir,
by confining the slaves to a part of the country where crops are
raised for exportation, and the bread and meat are purchased, you
doom them to scarcity and hunger. Is it not obvious that the way to
render their situation more comfortable, is to allow them to be taken
where there is not the same motive to force the slave to INCESSANT
TOIL, that there is in the country where cotton, sugar, and tobacco,
are raised for exportation. It is proposed to hem in the blacks where
they are HARD WORKED and ILL FED, that they may be rendered
unproductive and the race be prevented from increasing.... The
proposed measure would be EXTREME CRUELTY to the blacks.... You
would ... doom them to SCARCITY and HARD LABOR."—[Speech of Mr.
Smyth, Jan. 28, 1820]—See National Intelligencer.
Those states where the crops are raised for exportation, and a large
part of the provisions purchased, are, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, Arkansas, Western Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and, to a
considerable extent, South Carolina. That this is the case in
Louisiana, is shown by the following. "Corn, flour, and bread stuffs,
generally are obtained from Kentucky, Ohio;" &c. See "Emigrants Guide
through the Valley of the Mississippi," Page 275. That it is the case
with Alabama, appears from the testimony of W. Jefferson Jones, Esq. a
lawyer of high standing in Mobile. In a series of articles published
by him in the Mobile Morning Chronicle, he says; (See that paper for
Aug. 26, 1837.)
"The people of Alabama export what they raise, and import nearly
all they consume." But it seems quite unnecessary to prove, what all
persons of much intelligence well know, that the states mentioned
export the larger part of what they raise, and import the larger part
of what they consume. Now more than one million of slaves are held
in those states, and parts of states, where provisions are mainly
imported, and consequently they are "doomed to scarcity and hunger."]
Now let us make some estimate of the proportion which the slaves,
included in the foregoing nine classes, sustain to the whole number,
and then of the proportion affected by the operation of the seven
causes just enumerated.
It would be nearly impossible to form an estimate of the proportion of
the slaves included in a number of these classes, such as the old, the
worn out, the incurably diseased, maimed and deformed, idiots, feeble
infants, incorrigible slaves, &c. More or less of this description are
to be found on all the considerable plantations, and often, many on
the same plantation; though we have no accurate data for an estimate,
the proportion cannot be less than one in twenty-five of the whole
number of slaves, which would give a total of more than one hundred
thousand. Of some of the remaining classes we have data for a pretty
accurate estimate.
1st. Lunatics.—Various estimates have been made, founded upon the
data procured by actual investigation, prosecuted under the direction
of the Legislatures of different States; but the returns have been so
imperfect and erroneous, that little reliance can be placed upon them.
The Legislature of New Hampshire recently ordered investigations to be
made in every town in the state, and the number of insane persons to
be reported. A committee of the legislature, who had the subject in
charge say, in their report—"From many towns no returns have been
received, from others the accounts are erroneous, there being cases
known to the committee which escaped the notice of the 'selectmen.'
The actual number of insane persons is therefore much larger than
appears by the documents submitted to the committee." The Medical
Society of Connecticut appointed a committee of their number, composed
of some of the most eminent physicians in the state, to ascertain and
report the whole number of insane persons in that state. The committee
say, in their report, "The number of towns from which returns have
been received is seventy, and the cases of insanity which have been
noticed in them are five hundred and ten." The committee add, "fifty
more towns remain to be heard from, and if insanity should be found
equally prevalent in them, the entire number will scarcely fall short
of one thousand in the state." This investigation was made in 1821,
when the population of the state was less than two hundred and eighty
thousand. If the estimate of the Medical Society be correct, the
proportion of the insane to the whole population would be about one in
two hundred and eighty. This strikes us as a large estimate, and yet a
committee of the legislature of that state in 1837, reported seven
hundred and seven insane persons in the state, who were either wholly
or in part supported as town paupers, or by charity. It can hardly
be supposed that more than two-thirds of the insane in Connecticut
belong to families unable to support them. On this supposition, the
whole number would be greater than the estimate of the Medical Society
sixteen years previous, when the population was perhaps thirty
thousand less. But to avoid the possibility of an over estimate, let
us suppose the present number of insane persons in Connecticut to be
only seven hundred.
The population of the state is now probably about three hundred and
twenty thousand; according to this estimate, the proportion of the
insane to the whole population, would be one to about four hundred and
sixty. Making this the basis of our calculation, and estimating the
slaves in the United States at two millions, seven hundred thousand,
their present probable number, and we come to this result, that there
are about six thousand insane persons among the slaves of the United
States. We have no adequate data by which to judge whether the
proportion of lunatics among slaves is greater or less than among the
whites; some considerations favor the supposition that it is less. But
the dreadful physical violence to which the slaves are subjected, and
the constant sunderings of their tenderest ties, might lead us to
suppose that it would be more. The only data in our possession is the
official census of Chatham county, Georgia, for 1838, containing the
number of lunatics among the whites and the slaves.—(See the Savannah
Georgian, July 24, 1838.) According to this census, the number of
lunatics among eight thousand three hundred and seventy three whites
in the country, is only two, whereas, the number among ten thousand
eight hundred and ninety-one slaves, is fourteen.
2d. The Deaf and Dumb.—The proportion of deaf and dumb persons to
the other classes of the community, is about one in two thousand. This
is the testimony of the directors of the 'American Asylum for the Deaf
and Dumb,' located at Hartford, Connecticut. Making this the basis of
our estimate, there would be one thousand six hundred deaf and dumb
persons among the slaves of the United States.
3d. The Blind.—We have before us the last United States census,
from which it appears, that in 1830, the number of blind persons in
New Hampshire was one hundred and seventeen, out of a population of
two hundred and sixty-nine thousand five hundred and thirty-three.
Adopting this as our basis, the number of blind slaves in the United
States would be nearly one thousand three hundred.
4th. Runaways.—Of the proportion of the slaves that run away, to
those that do not, and of the proportion of the runaways that are
taken to those that escape entirely, it would be difficult to make a
probable estimate. Something, however, can be done towards such an
estimate. We have before us, in the Grand Gulf (Miss.) Advertiser, for
August 2, 1838, a list of runaways that were then in the jails of the
two counties of Adams and Warren, in that State; the names, ages, &c.
of each one given; and their owners are called upon to take them away.
The number of runaways thus taken up and committed in these two
counties is FORTY-SIX. The whole number of counties in Mississippi
is fifty-six. Many of them, however, are thinly populated. Now,
without making this the basis of our estimate for the whole slave
population in all the state—which would doubtless make the number
much too large—we are sure no one who has any knowledge of facts as
they are in the south, will charge upon us an over-statement when we
say, that of the present generation of slaves, probably one in
thirty is of that class—i.e., has at some time, perhaps often,
runaway and been retaken; on that supposition the whole number would
be not far from NINETY THOUSAND.
5th. Hired Slaves.—It is impossible to estimate with accuracy the
proportion which the hired slaves bear to the whole number. That it is
very large all who have resided at the south, or traveled there, with
their eyes open, well know. Some of the largest slaveholders in the
country, instead of purchasing plantations and working their slaves
themselves, hire them out to others. This practice is very common.
Rev. Horace Moulton, a minister of the Methodist Episcopal church in
Marlborough, Mass., who lived some years in Georgia, says: "A large
proportion of the slave are owned by masters who keep them on purpose
to hire out."
Large numbers of slaves, especially in Mississippi, Louisiana,
Arkansas, Alabama, and Florida, are owned by non-residents;
thousands of them by northern capitalists, who hire them out. These
capitalists in many cases own large plantations, which are often
leased for a term of years with a 'stock' of slaves sufficient to work
them.
Multitudes of slaves 'belonging' to heirs, are hired out by their
guardians till such heirs become of age, or by the executors or
trustees of persons deceased.
That the reader may form some idea of the large number of slaves that
are hired out, we insert below a few advertisements, as a specimen of
hundreds in the newspapers of the slave states.
From the "Pensacola Gazette," May 27.
"NOTICE TO SLAVEHOLDERS. Wanted upon my contract, on the Alabama,
Florida, and Georgia Rail Road, FOUR HUNDRED BLACK LABORERS, for
which a liberal price will be paid.
R. LORING, Contractor."
The same paper has the following, signed by an officer of the United
States.
"WANTED AT THE NAVY YARD, PENSACOLA, SIXTY LABORERS. The OWNERS to
subsist and quarter them beyond the limits of the yard. Persons having
Laborers to hire, will apply to the Commanding Officer.
W.K. LATIMER."
From the "Richmond (Va.) Enquirer," April 10, 1838.
"LABORERS WANTED.—The James River, and Kenawha Company, are in
immediate want of SEVERAL HUNDRED good laborers. Gentlemen wishing to
send negroes from the country, are assured that the very best care
shall be taken of them.
RICHARD REINS, Agent of the James River, and Kenawha Co."
From the "Vicksburg (Mis.) Register," Dec. 27, 1838.
"60 NEGROES, males and females, for hire for the year 1839. Apply to
H. HENDREN."
From the "Georgia Messenger," Dec. 27, 1838. "NEGROES To HIRE. On the
first Tuesday next, Including CARPENTERS, BLACKSMITHS, SHOEMAKERS,
SEAMSTRESSES, COOKS, &c. &c. For information; Apply to OSSIAN
GREGORY."
From the "Alexandria (D.C.) Gazette," Dec. 30, 1837.
"THE subscriber wishes to employ by the month or year, ONE HUNDRED
ABLE BODIED MEN, AND THIRTY BOYS. Persons having servants, will do
well to give him a call. PHILIP ROACH, near Alexandria."
From the "Columbia (S.C.) Telescope," May 19, 1838.
"WANTED TO HIRE, twelve or fifteen NEGRO GIRLS, from ten to fourteen
years of age. They are wanted for the term of two or three years. E.H. & J. FISHER."
"NEGROES WANTED. The Subscriber is desirous of hiring 50 of 60 first
rate Negro Men. WILSON NESBITT."
From the "Norfolk (Va.) Beacon," March 21, 1838.
"LABORERS WANTED. One hundred able bodied men are wanted. The hands
will be required to be delivered in Halifax by the owners. Apply to
SHIELD & WALKE."
From the "Lynchburg Virginian," Dec. 13, 1838.
"40 NEGRO MEN. The subscribers wish to hire for the next year 40 NEGRO
MEN. LANGHORNE, SCRUGGS & COOK."
"HIRING of NEGROES. On Saturday, the 29th day of December, 1838, at
Mrs. Tayloe's tavern, in Amherst county, there will be hired thirty
or forty valuable Negroes.
In addition to the above, I have for hire, 20 men, women, boys, and
girls—several of them excellent house servants. MAURICE H. GARLAND."
From the "Savannah Georgian," Feb. 5, 1838.
"WANTED TO HIRE, ONE HUNDRED prime negroes, by the year. J.V.
REDDEN."
From the "North Carolina Standard," Feb. 31, 1838.
"NEGROES WANTED.—W. & A. STITH, will give twelve dollars per month
for FIFTY strong Negro fellows, to commence work immediately; and for
FIFTY more on the first day of February, and for FIFTY on the first
day of March."
From the "Lexington (Ky.) Reporter," Dec. 26, 1838.
"WILL BE HIRED, for one year; on the first day of January, 1839, on
the farm of the late Mrs. Meredith, a number of valuable NEGROES.
R.S. TODD, Sheriff of Fayette Co. And Curator for James and Elizabeth
Breckenridge."
"NEGROES TO HIRE. On Wednesday, the 26th inst. I will hire to the
highest bidder, the NEGROES belonging to Charles and Robert Innes.
GEO. W. WILLIAMS. Guardian."
The following nine advertisements were published in one column of
the "Winchester Virginian," Dec. 20, 1838.
"NEGRO HIRINGS.
"WILL be offered for hire, at Captain Long's Hotel, a number of
SLAVES—men, women, boys and girls—belonging to the orphans of George
Ash, deceased. RICHARD W. BARTON." Guardian.
"WILL be offered for hire, at my Hotel, a number of SLAVES, consisting
of men, women, boys and girls. JOSEPH LONG. Exr. of Edmund
Shackleford, dec'd."
"WILL be offered for hire, for the ensuing year, at Capt. Long's
Hotel, a number of SLAVES. MOSES R. RICHARDS."
"WILL be offered for hire, the slaves belonging to the estate of James
Bowen, deceased, consisting of men, and women, boys and girls. GILES
COOK. One of the Exrs. of James Bowen dec'd."
"THE hiring at Millwood will take place on Friday, the 28th day of
December, 1838. BURWELL."
"N.B. We are desired to say that other valuable NEGROES will also be
hired at Millwood on the same day, besides those offered by Mr. B."
"The SLAVES of the late John Jolliffe, about twenty in number, and of
all ages and both sexes, will be offered for hire at Cain's Depot.
DAVID W. BARTON. Administrator."
"I WILL hire at public hiring before the tavern door of Dr. Lacy,
about 30 NEGROES, consisting of men, and women. JAMES R. RICHARDS."
"WILL be hired, at Carter's Tavern, on 31st of December, a number of
NEGROES. JOHN J.H. GUNNELL."
"NEGROES FOR HIRE, (PRIVATELY.) About twelve servants, consisting of
men, women, boys, and girls, for hire privately. Apply to the
subscriber at Col. Smith's in Battletown. JOHN W. OWEN."
A volume might easily be filled with advertisements like the
preceding, showing conclusively that hired slaves must be a large
proportion of the whole number. The actual proportion has been
variously estimated, at 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/2, &c. if we adopt the last
as our basis, it will make the number of hired slaves, in the United
States, FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND!
6th. Slaves under overseers whose wages are a part of the
crop.—That this is a common usage; appears from the following
testimony. The late Hon. John Taylor, of Caroline Co. Virginia, one of
the largest slaveholders in the state, President of the State
Agricultural Society, and three times elected to the Senate of the
United States, says, in his "Agricultural Essays," No. 15. P. 57,
"This necessary class of men, (overseers,) are bribed by
agriculturalists, not to improve, but to impoverish their land, by a
share of the crop for one year.... The greatest annual crop, and
not the most judicious culture, advances his interest, and establishes
his character; and the fees of these land-doctors, are much higher for
killing than for curing.... The most which the land can yield, and
seldom or never improvement with a view to future profit, is a point
of common consent, and mutual need between the agriculturist and his
overseer.... Must the practice of hiring a man for one year, by a share
of the crop, to lay out all his skill and industry in killing land,
and as little as possible in improving it, be kept up to commemorate
the pious leaning of man to his primitive state of ignorance and
barbarity? Unless this is abolished, the attempt to fertilize our
lands is needless."
Philemon Bliss, Esq, of Elyria, Ohio, who lived in Florida, in 1834-5,
says,
"It is common for owners of plantations and slaves, to hire overseers
to take charge of them, while they themselves reside at a distance.
Their wages depend principally upon the amount of labor which they
can exact from the slave. The term "good overseer," signifies one who
can make the greatest amount of the staple, cotton for instance, from
a given number of hands, besides raising sufficient provisions for
their consumption. He has no interest in the life of the slave. Hence
the fact, so notorious at the south, that negroes are driven harder
and fare worse under overseers than under their owners."
William Ladd, Esq. of Minot, Maine, formerly a slaveholder in Florida,
speaking, in a recent letter of the system of labor adopted there,
says; "The compensation of the overseers was a certain portion of the
crop."
Rev. Phineas Smith, of Centreville, Allegany Co. N.Y. who has
recently returned from a four years' residence, in the Southern slave
states and Texas, says,
"The mode in which many plantations are managed, is calculated and
designed, as an inducement to the slave driver, to lay upon the
slave the greatest possible burden, the overseer being entitled by
contract, to a certain share of the crop."
We leave the reader to form his own opinion, as to the proportion of
slaves under overseers, whose wages are in proportion to the crop,
raised by them. We have little doubt that we shall escape the charge
of wishing to make out a "strong case" when we put the proportion at
one-eighth of the whole number of slaves, which would be three
hundred and fifty thousand.
Without drawing out upon the page a sum in addition for the reader to
"run up," it is easily seen that the slaves in the preceding classes
amount to more than ELEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND, exclusive of the deaf and
dumb, and the blind, some of whom, especially the former, might be
profitable to their "owners";
Now it is plainly for the interest of the "owners" of these slaves, or
of those who have the charge of them, to treat than cruelly, to
overwork, under-feed, half-clothe, half-shelter, poison, or kill
outright, the aged, the broken down, the incurably diseased, idiots,
feeble infants, most of the blind, some deaf and dumb, &c. It is
besides a part of the slave-holder's creed, that it is for his
interest to treat with terrible severity, all runaways and the
incorrigibly stubborn, thievish, lazy, &c.; also for those who hire
slaves, to overwork them; also for overseers to overwork the slaves
under them, when their own wages are increased by it.
We have thus shown that it would be "for the interest," of masters
and overseers to treat with habitual cruelty more than one million
of the slaves in the United States. But this is not all; as we have
said already, it is for the interest of overseers generally, whether
their wages are proportioned to the crop or not, to overwork the
slaves; we need not repeat the reasons.
Neither is it necessary to re-state the arguments, going to show that
it is for the interest of slaveholders, who cultivate the great
southern staples, especially cotton, and the sugarcane, to overwork
periodically all their slaves, and habitually the majority of
them, when the demand for those staples creates high prices, as has
been the case with cotton for many years, with little exception.
Instead of entering into a labored estimate to get at the proportion
of the slaves, affected by the operation of these and the other causes
enumerated, we may say, that they operate directly on the "field
hands," employed in raising the southern staples, and indirectly upon
all classes of the slaves.
Finally, the conclude this head by turning the objector's negative
proposition into an affirmative one, and state formally what has been
already proved.
It is for the interest of shareholders, upon their own principles,
and by their own showing, TO TREAT CRUELLY the great body of their
slaves.
Objection VI.—THE FACT THAT THE SLAVES MULTIPLY SO RAPIDLY PROVES
THAT THEY ARE NOT INHUMANELY TREATED, BUT ARE IN A COMFORTABLE
CONDITION
To this we reply in brief, 1st. It has been already shown under a
previous head, that, in considerable sections of the slave states,
especially in the South West, the births among slaves are fewer than
the deaths, which would exhibit a fearful decrease of the slave
population in those sections, if the deficiency were not made up by
the slave trade from the upper country.
2d. The fact that all children born of slave mothers, whether their
fathers are whites or free colored persons, are included in the census
with the slaves, and further that all children born of white mothers,
whose fathers are mulattos or blacks, are also included in the census
with colored persons and almost invariably with slaves, shows that
it is impossible to ascertain with any accuracy, what is the actual
increase of the slaves alone.
3d. The fact that thousands of slaves, generally in the prime of life,
are annually smuggled into the United States from Africa, Cuba, and
elsewhere, makes it manifest that all inferences drawn from the
increase of the slave population, which do not make large deductions,
for constant importations, must be fallacious. Mr. Middleton of South
Carolina, in a speech in Congress in 1819, declared that "THIRTEEN
THOUSAND AFRICANS ARE ANNUALLY SMUGGLED INTO THE SOUTHERN STATES." Mr.
Mercer of Virginia, in a speech in Congress about the same time
declared that "Cargoes," of African slaves were smuggled into the
South to a deplorable extent.
Mr. Wright, of Maryland, in a speech in Congress, estimated the number
annually at FIFTEEN THOUSAND. Miss Martineau, in her recent work,
(Society in America,) informs us that a large slaveholder in
Louisiana, assured her in 1835, that the annual importation of native
Africans was from thirteen to fifteen thousand.
The President of the United States, in his message to Congress,
December, 1837, says, "The large force under Commodore Dallas, (on the
West India station,) has been most actively and efficiently employed
in protecting our commerce, IN PREVENTING THE IMPORTATION OF SLAVES,"
&c. &c.
The New Orleans Courier of 15th February, 1839, has these remarks:
"It is believed that African negroes have been repeatedly introduced
into the United States. The number and the proximity of the Florida
ports to the island of Cuba, make it no difficult matter; nor is our
extended frontier on the Sabine and Red rivers, at all unfavorable to
the smuggler. Human laws have, in all countries and ages, been
violated whenever the inducements to do so afforded hopes of great
profit.
"The United States' law against the importation of Africans, could it
be strictly enforced, might in a few years give the sugar and cotton
planters of Texas advantage over those of this state; as it would, we
apprehend, enable the former, under a stable government, to furnish
cotton and sugar at a lower price than we can do. When giving
publicity to such reflections as the subject seems to suggest, we
protest against being considered advocates for any violation of the
laws of our country. Every good citizen must respect those laws,
notwithstanding we may deem them likely to be evaded by men less
scrupulous."
That both the south and north swarm with men 'less scrupulous,' every
one knows.
The Norfolk (Va.) Beacon, of June 8, 1837, has the following:
"Slave Trade.—Eight African negroes have been taken into custody,
at Apalachicola, by the U.S. Deputy Marshal, alleged to have been
imported from Cuba, on board the schooner Emperor, Captain Cox.
Indictments for piracy, under the acts for the suppression of the
slave trade, have been found against Captain Cox, and other parties
implicated. The negroes were bought in Cuba by a Frenchman named
Malherbe, formerly a resident of Tallahassee, who was drowned soon
after the arrival of the schooner."
The following testimony of Rev. Horace Moulton, now a minister of the
Methodist Episcopal Church, in Marlborough, Mass., who resided some
years in Georgia, reveals some of the secrets of the slave-smugglers,
and the connivance of the Georgia authorities at their doings. It is
contained in a letter dated February 24, 1839.
"The foreign slave-trade was carried on to some considerable extent
when I was at the south, notwithstanding a law had been made some ten
years previous to this, making this traffic piracy on the high seas. I
was somewhat acquainted with the secrets of this traffic, and, I
suppose, I might have engaged in it, had I so desired. Were you to
visit all the plantations in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and
Mississippi, I think you would be convinced that the horrors of the
traffic in human flesh have not yet ceased. I was surprised to find
so many that could not speak English among the slaves, until the
mystery was explained. This was done, when I learned that
slave-cargoes were landed on the coast of Florida, not a thousand
miles from St. Augustine. They could, and can still, in my opinion, be
landed as safely on this coast as in any port of this continent. You
can imagine for yourself how easy it was to carry on the traffic
between this place and the West Indies. When landed on the coast of
Florida, it is an easy matter to distribute them throughout the more
southern states. The law which makes it piracy to traffic in the
foreign slave trade is a dead letter; and I doubt not it has been so
in the more southern states ever since it was enacted. For you can
perceive at once, that interested men, who believe the colored man is so
much better off here than he possibly can be in Africa, will not
hesitate to kidnap the blacks whenever an opportunity presents itself.
I will notice one fact that came under my own observation, which will
convince you that the horrors of the foreign slave-trade have not yet
ceased among our southern gentry. It is as follows. A slave ship,
which I have reason to believe was employed by southern men, came near
the port of Savannah with about FIVE HUNDRED SLAVES, from Guinea and
Congo. It was said that the ship was driven there by contrary winds;
and the crew, pretending to be short of provisions, run the ship into
a by place, near the shore, between Tybee Light and Darien, to recruit
their stores. Well, as Providence would have it, the revenue cutter,
at that time taking a trip along the coast, fell in with this slave
ship, took her as a prize, and brought her up into the port of
Savannah. The cargo of human chattels was unloaded, and the captives
were placed in an old barracks, in the fort of Savannah, under the
protection of the city authorities, they pretending that they should
return them all to their native country again, as soon as a convenient
opportunity presented itself. The ship's crew of course were arrested,
and confined in jail. Now for the sequel of this history. About one
third part of the negroes died in a few weeks after they were landed,
in seasoning, so called, or in becoming acclimated—or, as I should
think, a distemper broke out among them, and they died like the
Israelites when smitten with the plague. Those who did not die in
seasoning, must be hired out a little while, to be sure, as the city
authorities could not afford to keep them on expense doing nothing. As
it happened, the man in whose employ I was when the cargo of human
beings arrived, hired some twenty or thirty of them, and put them
under my care. They continued with me until the sickly season drove me
off to the north. I soon returned, but could not hear a word about the
crew of pirates. They had something like a mock trial, as I should
think, for no one, as I ever learned, was condemned, fined, or
censured. But where were the poor captives, who were going to be
returned to Africa by the city authorities, as soon as they could make
it convenient? Oh, forsooth, those of whom I spoke, being under my
care, were tugging away for the same man; the remainder were scattered
about among different planters. When I returned to the north again,
the next year, the city authorities had not, down to that time; made
it convenient to return these poor victims. The fact is, they belonged
there; and, in my opinion, they were designed to be landed near by the
place where the revenue cutter seized them. Probably those very
planters for whom they were originally designed received them; and
still there was a pretence kept up that they would be returned to
Africa. This must have been done, that the consciences of those might
be quieted, who were looking for justice to be administered to these
poor captives. It is easy for a company of slaveholders, who desire to
traffic in human flesh, to fit out a vessel, under Spanish colors, and
then go prowling about the African coast for the victims of their
lusts. If all the facts with relation to the African slave-trade, now
secretly carried on at the south, could be disclosed, the people of
the free states would be filled with amazement."
It is plain, from the nature of this trade, and the circumstances
under which it is carried on, that the number of slaves imported would
be likely to be estimated far below the truth. There can be little
doubt that the estimate of Mr. Wright, of Maryland, (fifteen thousand
annually,) is some thousands too small. But even according to his
estimate, the African slave-trade adds ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND
SLAVES TO EACH UNITED STATES' CENSUS. These are in the prime of life,
and their children would swell the slave population many thousands
annually—thus making a great addition to each census.
4. It is a notorious fact, that large numbers of free colored persons
are kidnapped every year in the free states, taken to the south, and
sold as slaves.
Hon. GEORGE M. STROUD, Judge of the Criminal Court of Philadelphia, in
his sketch of the slave laws, speaking of the kidnapping of free
colored persons in the northern states, says—
"Remote as is the city of Philadelphia from those slaveholding states
in which the introduction of slaves from places within the territory
of the United States is freely permitted, and where also the market is
tempting, it has been ascertained, that MORE THAN THIRTY FREE
COLORED PERSONS, MOSTLY CHILDREN, HAVE BEEN KIDNAPPED HERE, AND
CARRIED AWAY, WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS. Five of these, through the
kind interposition of several humane gentlemen, have been restored to
their friends, though not without great expense and difficulty; the
others are still retained in bondage, and if rescued at all, it must
be by sending white witnesses a journey of more than a thousand miles.
The costs attendant upon lawsuits, under such circumstances, will
probably fall but little short of the estimated value, as slaves, of
the individuals kidnapped."
The following is an extract from Mrs. CHILD's Appeal, pp. 64-6.
"I know the names of four colored citizens of Massachusetts, who went
to Georgia on board a vessel, were seized under the laws of that
state, and sold as slaves. They have sent the most earnest
exhortations to their families and friends, to do something for their
relief; but the attendant expenses require more money than the friends
of negroes are apt to have, and the poor fellows, as yet, remain
unassisted.
"A New York paper, of November, 1829, contains the following caution.
"Beware of Kidnappers!—It is well understood, that there is at
present in this city, a gang of kidnappers, busily engaged in their
vocation, of stealing colored children for the southern market. It is
believed that three or four have been stolen within as many days.
There are suspicions of a foul nature connected with some who serve
the police in subordinate capacities. It is hinted that there may be
those in some authority, not altogether ignorant of these diabolical
practices. Let the public be on their guard! It is still fresh in the
memories of all, that a cargo, or rather drove of negroes, was made up
from this city and Philadelphia, about the time that the emancipation
of all the negroes in this state took place, under our present
constitution, and were taken through Virginia, the Carolinas, and
Tennessee, and disposed of in the state of Mississippi. Some of those
who were taken from Philadelphia were persons of intelligence; and
after they had been driven through the country in chains, and disposed
of by sale on the Mississippi, wrote back to their friends, and were
rescued from bondage. The persons who were guilty of this abominable
transaction are known, and now reside in North Carolina. They may very
probably be engaged in similar enterprizes at the present time—at
least there is reason to believe, that the system of kidnapping free
persons of color from the northern cities, has been carried on more
extensively than the public arc generally aware of."
GEORGE BRADBURN, Esq. of Nantucket, Mass. a member of the Legislature
of that state, at its last session, made a report to that body, March
6, 1839, 'On the deliverance of citizens liable to be sold as slaves.'
That report contains the following facts and testimony.
"The following facts are a few out of a VAST MULTITUDE, to which the
attention of the undersigned has been directed.
"On the 27th of February last, the undersigned had an interview with
the Rev. Samuel Snowden, a respectable and intelligent clergyman of
the city of Boston. This gentleman stated, and he is now ready to make
oath, that during the last six years, he has himself, by the aid of
various benevolent individuals, procured the deliverance from jail of
six citizens of Massachusetts, who had been, arrested and imprisoned
as runaway slaves, and who, but for his timely interposition, would
have been sold into perpetual bondage. The names and the places of
imprisonment of those persons, as stated by Mr. S. were as follows:
"James Hight, imprisoned at Mobile; William Adams, at Norfolk; William
Holmes, also at Norfolk; James Oxford, at Wilmington; James Smith, at
Baton Rouge; John Tidd, at New Orleans.
"In 1836, Mary Smith, a native of this state, returning from New
Orleans, whither she had been in the capacity of a servant, was cast
upon the shores of North Carolina. She was there seized and sold as a
slave. Information of the fact reached her friends at Boston. Those
friends made an effort to obtain her liberation. They invoked the
assistance of the Governor of this Commonwealth. A correspondence
ensued between His Excellency and the Governor of North Carolina:
copies of which were offered for the inspection of your committee.
Soon afterwards, by permission of the authorities of North Carolina,
'Mary Smith' returned to Boston. But it turned out, that this was not
the Mary Smith, whom our worthy Governor, and other excellent
individuals of Boston, had taken so unwearied pains to redeem from
slavery. It was another woman, of the same name, who was also a native
of Massachusetts, and had been seized in North Carolina as a runaway
slave. The Mary Smith has not yet been heard of. If alive, she is now,
in all probability, wearing the chains of slavery.
"About a year and a half since, several citizens of different free
states were rescued from slavery, at New Orleans, by the direct
personal efforts of an acquaintance of the undersigned. The benevolent
individual alluded to is Jacob Barker, Esq. a name not unknown to the
commercial world. Mr. Barker is a resident of New Orleans. A statement
of the cases in reference is contained in a letter addressed by him to
the Hon. Samuel H. Jenks, of Nantucket."
The letter of Mr. Barker, referred to in this report to the
Legislature of Massachusetts, bears date August 19, 1837. The
following are extracts from it.
"A free man, belonging to Baltimore, by the name of Ephraim Larkin,
who came here cook of the William Tell, was arrested and thrown into
prison a few weeks since, and sent in chains to work on the road. I
heard of it, and with difficulty found him; and after the most
diligent and active exertions, got him released—in effecting which, I
traveled in the heat of the day, thermometer ranging in the shade from
94 to 100, more than twenty times to and from prison, the place of his
labor, and the different courts, a distance of near three miles from
my residence; and after I had established his freedom, had to pay for
his arrest, maintenance, and the advertising him as a runaway slave,
$29.89, as per copy of bill herewith—the allowance for work not
equalling the expenses, the amount augments with every day of
confinement.
"In pursuing the cook of the William Tell, I found three other free
men, confined in the same prison; one belonged also to Baltimore, by
the name of Leaven Dogerty: he was also released, on my paying $28
expenses; one was a descendant of the Indians who once inhabited
Nantucket—his name is Eral Lonnon. Lonnon had been six weeks in
prison; he was released without difficulty, on my paying $20.38
expenses—and no one seemed to know why he had been confined or
arrested, as the law does not presume persons of mixed blood to be
slaves. But for the others, I had great difficulty in procuring what
was considered competent witnesses to prove them free. No complaint of
improper conduct had been made against either of them. At one time,
the Recorder said the witness must be white; at another, that one
respectable witness was insufficient; at another, that a person who
had been (improperly) confined and released, was not a competent
witness, &c. &c. Lonnon has been employed in the South Sea fishery
from Nantucket and New Bedford, nearly all his life; has sailed on
those voyages in the ships Eagle, Maryland, Gideon, Triton, and
Samuel. He was born at Marshpee, Plymouth (Barnstable) county, Mass.
and prefers to encounter the leviathan of the deep, rather than the
turnkeys of New Orleans.
"The other was born in St. Johns, Nova Scotia, and bears the name of
William Smith, a seaman by profession.
"Immediately after these men were released, two others were arrested.
They attempted to escape, and being pursued, ran for the river, in the
vain hope of being able to swim across the Mississippi, a distance of
a mile, with a current of four knots. One soon gave out, and made for
a boat which had been despatched for their recovery, and was saved;
the other being a better swimmer, continued on until much exhausted,
then also made for the boat—it was too late; he sank before the boat
could reach him, and was drowned. They claimed to be freemen.
"On Sunday last I was called to the prison of the Municipality in
which I reside, to serve on an inquest on the body of a drowned man.
There I saw one other free man confined, by the name of Henry Tier, a
yellow man, born in New York, and formerly in my employ. He had been
confined as a supposed runaway, near six months, without a particle of
testimony; although from his color, the laws of Louisiana presume him
to be free. I applied immediately for his release, which was promptly
granted. At first, expenses similar to those exacted in the third
Municipality were required; but on my demonstrating to the recorder
that the law imposed no such burden on free men, he was released
without any charge whatever. How free men can obtain satisfaction for
having been thus wrongfully imprisoned, and made to work in chains on
the highway, is not for me to decide. I apprehend no satisfaction can
be had without more active friends, willing to espouse their cause,
than can be found in this quarter. Therefore I repeat, that no person
of color should come here without a certificate of freedom from the
governor of the state to which he belongs.
"Very respectfully, your assured friend, Jacob Barker."
"N.B.—Since writing the preceding, I have procured the release of
another free man from the prison of the third Municipality, on the
payment of $39.65, as per bill, copy herewith. His name is William
Lockman—he was born in New Jersey, of free parents, and resides at
Philadelphia. A greater sum was required which was reduced by the
allowance of his maintenance (written labor,) while at work on the
road, which the law requires the Municipality to pay; but it had not
before been so expounded in the third Municipality. I hope to get it
back in the case of the other three. The allowance for labor, in
addition to their maintenance, is twenty-five cents per day; but they
require those illiterate men to advance the whole before they can
leave the prison, and then to take a certificate for their labor, and
go for it to another department—to collect which, is ten times more
trouble than the money when received is worth. While these free men,
without having committed any fault, were compelled to work in chains,
on the roads, in the burning sun, for 25 cents per day, and pay in
advance 18 3-4 cents per day for maintenance, doctor's, and other
bills, and not able to work half their time, I paid others, working on
ship-board, in sight, two dollars per day. J.B."
The preceding letter of Mr. Barker, furnishes grounds for the belief,
that hundreds, if not thousands of free colored persons, from the
different states of this Union, both slave and free from the West
Indies, South America, Mexico, and the British possessions in North
America, and from other parts of the world, are reduced to slavery
every year in our slave states. If a single individual, in the
course of a few days, accidentally discovered six colored free
men, working in irons, and soon to be sold as slaves, in a single
southern city, is it not fair to infer, that in all the slave states,
there must be multitudes of such persons, now in slavery, and that
this number is rapidly increasing, by ceaseless accessions?
The letter of Mr. Barker is valuable, also, as a graphic delineation
of the 'public opinion' of the south. The great difficulty with which
the release of these free men was procured, notwithstanding the
personal efforts of Mr. Jacob Barker, who is a gentleman of influence,
and has, we believe, been an alderman of New Orleans, reveals a
'public opinion,' insensible as adamant to the liberty of colored men.
It would be easy to fill scores of pages with details similar to the
preceding. We have furnished enough, however, to show, that, in all
probability, each United States' census of the slave population,
is increased by the addition to it of thousands of free colored
persons, kidnapped and sold as slaves.
5th. To argue that the rapid multiplication of any class in the
community, is proof that such a class is well-clothed, well-housed,
abundantly fed, and very comfortable, is as absurd as to argue that
those who have few children, must of course, be ill-clothed,
ill-housed, badly lodged, overworked, ill-fed, &c. &c. True,
privations and inflictions may be carried to such an extent as to
occasion a fearful diminishment of population. That was the case
generally with the slave population in the West Indies, and, as has
been shown, is true of certain portions of the southern states. But
the fact that such an effect is not produced, does not prove that
the slaves do not experience great privations and severe inflictions.
They may suffer much hardship, and great cruelties, without
experiencing so great a derangement of the vital functions as to
prevent child-bearing. The Israelites multiplied with astonishing
rapidity, under the task-masters and burdens of Egypt. Does this
falsify the declarations of Scripture, that 'they sighed by reason of
their bondage,' and that the Egyptians 'made them serve with rigor,'
and made 'their lives bitter with hard bondage.' 'I have seen,' said
God, 'their afflictions. I have beard their groanings,' &c. The
history of the human race shows, that great privations and much
suffering may be experienced, without materially checking the rapid
increase of population.
Besides, if we should give to the objection all it claims, it would
merely prove, that the female slaves, or rather a portion of them, are
in a comfortable condition; and that, so far as the absolute
necessities of life are concerned, the females of child-bearing age,
in Delaware, Maryland, northern, western, and middle Virginia, the
upper parts of Kentucky and Missouri, and among the mountains of east
Tennessee and western North Carolina, are in general tolerably well
supplied. The same remark, with some qualifications, may be made of
the slaves generally, in those parts of the country where the people
are slaveholders, mainly, that they may enjoy the privilege and profit
of being slave-breeders.
OBJECTION VIII.—'PUBLIC OPINION IS A PROTECTION TO THE SLAVE.'
ANSWER. It was public opinion that made him a slave. In a republican
government the people make the laws, and those laws are merely public
opinion in legal forms. We repeat it,—public opinion made them
slaves, and keeps them slaves; in other words, it sunk them from men
to chattels, and now, forsooth, this same public opinion will see to
it, that these chattels are treated like men!
By looking a little into this matter, and finding out how this 'public
opinion' (law) protects the slaves in some particulars, we can judge
of the amount of its protection in others. 1. It protects the slaves
from robbery, by declaring that those who robbed their mothers may
rob them and their children. "All negroes, mulattoes, or mestizoes who
now are, or shall hereafter be in this province, and all their
offspring, are hereby declared to be, and shall remain, forever,
hereafter, absolute slaves, and shall follow the condition of the
mother."—Law of South Carolina, 2 Brevard's Digest, 229. Others of
the slave states have similar laws.
2. It protects their persons, by giving their master a right to
flog, wound, and beat them when he pleases. See Devereaux's North
Carolina Reports, 263.—Case of the State vs. Mann, 1829; in which the
Supreme Court decided, that a master who shot at a female slave and
wounded her, because she got loose from him when he was flogging her,
and started to run from him, had violated no law, AND COULD NOT BE
INDICTED. It has been decided by the highest courts of the slave
states generally, that assault and battery upon a slave is not
indictable as a criminal offence.
The following decision on this point was made by the Supreme Court of
South Carolina in the case of the State vs. Cheetwood, 2 Hill's
Reports, 459.
Protection of slaves.—"The criminal offence of assault and battery
cannot, at common law, be committed on the person of a slave. For,
notwithstanding for some purposes a slave is regarded in law as a
person, yet generally he is a mere chattel personal, and his right of
personal protection belongs to his master, who can maintain an action
of trespass for the battery of his slave.
"There can be therefore no offence against the state for a mere
beating of a slave, unaccompanied by any circumstances of cruelty, or
an attempt to kill and murder. The peace of the state is not thereby
broken; for a slave is not generally regarded as legally capable of
being within the peace of the state. He is not a citizen, and is not
in that character entitled to her protection."
This 'public opinion' protects the persons of the slaves by
depriving them of Jury trial;[28] their consciences, by forbidding
them to assemble for worship, unless their oppressors are present;[29]
their characters, by branding them as liars, in denying them their
oath in law;[30] their modesty, by leaving their master to clothe,
or let them go naked, as he pleases;[31] and their health, by
leaving him to feed or starve them, to work them, wet or dry, with or
without sleep, to lodge them, with or without covering, as the whim
takes him;[32] and their liberty, marriage relations, parental
authority, and filial obligations, by annihilating the whole.[33]
This is the protection which 'PUBLIC OPINION,' in the form of law,
affords to the slaves; this is the chivalrous knight, always in
stirrups, with lance in rest, to champion the cause of the slaves.
[Footnote 28: Law of South Carolina. James' Digest, 392-3. Law of
Louisiana. Martin's Digest, 42. Law of Virginia. Rev. Code, 429.]
[Footnote 29: Miss. Rev. Code, 390. Similar laws exist in the slave
states generally.]
[Footnote 30: "A slave cannot be a witness against a white person,
either in a civil or criminal cause." Stroud's Sketch of the Laws of
Slavery, 65.]
[Footnote 31: Stroud's Sketch of the Slave Laws, 132.]
[Footnote 32: Stroud's Sketch, 26-32.]
[Footnote 33: Stroud's Sketch, 22-24.]
Public opinion, protection to the slave! Brazen effrontery, hypocrisy,
and falsehood! We have, in the laws cited and referred to above, the
formal testimony of the Legislatures of the slave states, that,
'public opinion' does pertinaciously refuse to protect the slaves;
not only so, but that it does itself persecute and plunder them all:
that it originally planned, and now presides over, sanctions, executes
and perpetuates the whole system of robbery, torture, and outrage
under which they groan.
In all the slave states, this 'public opinion' has taken away from the
slave his liberty; it has robbed him of his right to his own body,
of his right to improve his mind, of his right to read the Bible, of
his right to worship God according to his conscience, of his right to
receive and enjoy what he earns, of his right to live with his wife
and children, of his right to better his condition, of his right to
eat when he is hungry, to rest when he is tired, to sleep when be
needs it, and to cover his nakedness with clothing: this 'public
opinion' makes the slave a prisoner for life on the plantation, except
when his jailor pleases to let him out with a 'pass,' or sells him,
and transfers him in irons to another jail-yard: this 'public opinion'
traverses the country, buying up men, women, children—chaining them
in coffles, and driving them forever from their nearest friends; it
sets them on the auction table, to be handled, scrutinized, knocked
off to the highest bidder; it proclaims that they shall not have their
liberty; and, if their masters give it them, 'public opinion' seizes
and throws them back into slavery. This same 'public opinion' has
formally attached the following legal penalties to the following acts
of slaves.
If more than seven slaves are found together in any road, without a
white person, twenty lashes a piece; for visiting a plantation
without a written pass, ten lashes; for letting loose a boat from
where it is made fast, thirty-nine lashes for the first offence; and
for the second, 'shall have cut off from his head one ear;' for
keeping or carrying a club, thirty-nine lashes; for having any
article for sale, without a ticket from his master, ten lashes; for
traveling in any other than 'the most usual and accustomed road,' when
going alone to any place, forty lashes; for traveling in the night,
without a pass, forty lashes; for being found in another person's
negro-quarters, forty lashes; for hunting with dogs in the woods,
thirty lashes; for being on horseback without the written
permission of his master, twenty-five lashes; for riding or going
abroad in the night, or riding horses in the day time, without leave,
a slave may be whipped, cropped, or branded in the cheek with the
letter R, or otherwise punished, not extending to life, or so as to
render him unfit for labor. The laws referred to may be found by
consulting 2 Brevard's Digest, 228, 213, 216; Haywood's Manual, 78,
chap. 13, pp. 518, 529; 1 Virginia Revised Code, 722-3; Prince's
Digest, 454; 2 Missouri Laws, 741; Mississippi Revised Code, 571. Laws
similar to these exist throughout the southern slave code. Extracts
enough to fill a volume might be made from these laws, showing that
the protection which 'public opinion' grants to the slaves, is hunger,
nakedness, terror, bereavements, robbery, imprisonment, the stocks,
iron collars, hunting and worrying them with dogs and guns, mutilating
their bodies, and murdering them.
A few specimens of the laws and the judicial decisions on them, will
show what is the state of 'public opinion' among slaveholders towards
their slaves. Let the following suffice.—'Any person may lawfully
kill a slave, who has been outlawed for running away and lurking in
swamps, &c.'—Law of North Carolina; Judge Stroud's Sketch of the
Slave Laws, 103; Haywood's Manual, 524. 'A slave endeavoring to
entice another slave to runaway, if provisions, &c. be prepared for
the purpose of aiding in such running away, shall be punished with
DEATH. And a slave who shall aid the slave so endeavoring to entice
another slave to run away, shall also suffer DEATH.'—Law of South
Carolina; Stroud's Sketch of Slave Laws, 103-4; 2 Brevard's Digest,
233, 244. Another law of South Carolina provides that if a slave
shall, when absent from the plantation, refuse to be examined by 'any
white person,' (no matter how crazy or drunk,) 'such white person may
seize and chastise him; and if the slave shall strike such white
person, such slave may be lawfully killed.'—2 Brevard's Digest, 231.
The following is a law of Georgia.—'If any slave shall presume to
strike any white person, such slave shall, upon trial and conviction
before the justice or justices, suffer such punishment for the first
offence as they shall think fit, not extending to life or limb; and
for the second offence, DEATH.'—Prince's Digest, 450. The same law
exists in South Carolina, with this difference, that death is made the
punishment for the third offence. In both states, the law contains
this remarkable proviso: 'Provided always, that such striking be not
done by the command and in the defence of the person or property of
the owner, or other person having the government of such slave, in
which case the slave shall be wholly excused!' According to this law,
if a slave, by the direction of his OVERSEER, strike a white man who
is beating said overseer's dog, 'the slave shall be wholly excused;'
but if the white man has rushed upon the slave himself, instead of the
dog, and is furiously beating him, if the slave strike back but a
single blow, the legal penalty is 'ANY punishment not extending to
life or limb;' and if the tortured slave has a second onset made upon
him, and, after suffering all but death, again strike back in
self-defence, the law KILLS him for it. So, if a female slave, in
obedience to her mistress, and in defence of 'her property,' strike a
white man who is kicking her mistress' pet kitten, she 'shall be
wholly excused,' saith the considerate law: but if the unprotected
girl, when beaten and kicked herself, raise her hand against her
brutal assailant, the law condemns her to 'any punishment, not
extending to life or limb; and if a wretch assail her again, and
attempt to violate her chastity, and the trembling girl, in her
anguish and terror, instinctively raise her hand against him in
self-defence, she shall, saith the law, 'suffer DEATH.'
Reader, this diabolical law is the 'public opinion' of Georgia and
South Carolina toward the slaves. This is the vaunted 'protection'
afforded them by their 'high-souled chivalry.' To show that the
'public opinion' of the slave states far more effectually protects the
property of the master than the person of the slave, the reader is
referred to two laws of Louisiana, passed in 1819. The one attaches a
penalty 'not exceeding one thousand dollars,' and 'imprisonment not
exceeding two years,' to the crime of 'cutting or breaking any iron
chain or collar,' which any master of slaves has used to prevent their
running away; the other, a penalty 'not exceeding five hundred
dollars,' to 'wilfully cutting out the tongue, putting out the eye,
cruelly burning, or depriving any slave of any limb.' Look at
it—the most horrible dismemberment conceivable cannot be punished by
a fine of more than five hundred dollars. The law expressly fixes
that, as the utmost limit, and it may not be half that sum; not a
single moment's imprisonment stays the wretch in his career, and the
next hour he may cut out another slave's tongue, or burn his hand off.
But let the same man break a chain put upon a slave, to keep him from
running away, and, besides paying double the penalty that could be
exacted from him for cutting off a slave's leg, the law imprisons him
not exceeding two years!
This law reveals the heart of slaveholders towards their slaves,
their diabolical indifference to the most excruciating and protracted
torments inflicted on them by 'any person;' it reveals, too, the
relative protection afforded by 'public opinion' to the person of
the slave, in appalling contrast with the vastly surer protection
which it affords to the master's property in the slave. The wretch
who cuts out the tongue, tears out the eyes, shoots off the arms, or
burns off the feet of a slave, over a slow fire, cannot legally be
fined more than five hundred dollars; but if he should in pity loose a
chain from his galled neck, placed there by the master to keep him
from escaping, and thus put his property in some jeopardy, he may be
fined one thousand dollars, and thrust into a dungeon for two years!
and this, be it remembered, not for stealing the slave from the
master, nor for enticing, or even advising him to run away, or
giving him any information how he can effect his escape; but merely,
because, touched with sympathy for the bleeding victim, as he sees the
rough iron chafe the torn flesh at every turn, he removes it;—and, as
escape without this incumbrance would be easier than with it, the
master's property in the slave is put at some risk. For having caused
this slight risk, the law provides a punishment—fine not exceeding
one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding two years. We
say 'slight risk,' because the slave may not be disposed to encounter
the dangers, and hunger, and other sufferings of the woods, and the
certainty of terrible inflictions if caught; and if he should attempt
it, the risk of losing him is small. An advertisement of five lines
will set the whole community howling on his track; and the trembling
and famished fugitive is soon scented out in his retreat, and dragged
back and delivered over to his tormentors.
The preceding law is another illustration of the 'protection' afforded
to the limbs and members of slaves, by 'public opinion' among
slaveholders.
Here follow two other illustrations of the brutal indifference of
'public opinion' to the torments of the slave, while it is full of
zeal to compensate the master, if any one disables his slave so as to
lessen his market value. The first is a law of South Carolina. It
provides, that if a slave, engaged in his owner's service, be attacked
by a person 'not having sufficient cause for so doing,' and if the
slave shall be 'maimed or disabled' by him, so that the owner
suffers a loss from his inability to labor, the person maiming him
shall pay for his 'lost time,' and 'also the charges for the cure of
the slave!' This Vandal law does not deign to take the least notice of
the anguish of the 'maimed' slave, made, perhaps, a groaning cripple
for life; the horrible wrong and injury done to him, is passed over
in utter silence. It is thus declared to be not a criminal act. But
the pecuniary interests of the master are not to be thus neglected by
'public opinion'. Oh no! its tender bowels run over with sympathy at
the master's injury in the 'lost time' of his slave, and it
carefully provides that he shall have pay for the whole of it.—See 2
Brevard's Digest, 231, 2.
A law similar to the above has been passed in Louisiana, which
contains an additional provision for the benefit of the
master—ordaining, that 'if the slave' (thus maimed and disabled,)
'be forever rendered unable to work,' the person maiming, shall pay
the master the appraised value of the slave before the injury, and
shall, in addition, take the slave, and maintain him during life.'
Thus 'public opinion' transfers the helpless cripple from the hand of
his master, who, as he has always had the benefit of his services,
might possibly feel some tenderness for him, and puts him in the sole
power of the wretch who has disabled him for life—protecting the
victim from the fury of his tormentor, by putting him into his hands!
What but butchery by piecemeal can, under such circumstances, be
expected from a man brutal enough at first to 'maim' and 'disable'
him, and now exasperated by being obliged to pay his full value to the
master, and to have, in addition, the daily care and expense of his
maintenance. Since writing the above, we have seen the following
judicial decision, in the case of Jourdan, vs. Patton—5 Martin's
Louisiana Reports, 615. A slave of the plaintiff had been deprived of
his only eye, and thus rendered useless, on which account the
court adjudged that the defendant should pay the plaintiff his full
value. The case went up, by appeal, to the Supreme court. Judge
Mathews, in his decision said, that 'when the defendant had paid the
sum decreed, the slave ought to be placed in his possession,'—adding,
that 'the judgment making full compensation to the owner operates a
change of property. He adds, 'The principle of humanity which would
lead us to suppose, that the mistress whom he had long served, would
treat her miserable blind slave with more kindness than the defendant
to whom the judgment ought to transfer him, CANNOT BE TAKEN INTO
CONSIDERATION!' The full compensation of the mistress for the loss of
the services of the slave, is worthy of all 'consideration,' even to
the uttermost farthing; 'public opinion' is omnipotent for her
protection; but when the food, clothing, shelter, fire and lodging,
medicine and nursing, comfort and entire condition and treatment of
her poor blind slave throughout his dreary pilgrimage, is the question—ah!
that, says the mouthpiece of the law, and the representative of
'public opinion,' 'CANNOT BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.' Protection of
slaves by 'public opinion' among slaveholders!!
The foregoing illustrations of southern 'public opinion,' from the
laws made by it and embodying it, are sufficient to show, that, so far
from being an efficient protection to the slaves, it is their
deadliest foe, persecutor and tormentor.
But here we shall probably be met by the legal lore of some 'Justice
Shallow,' instructing us that the life of the slave is fully protected
by law, however unprotected he may be in other respects. This
assertion we meet with a point blank denial. The law does not, in
reality, protect the life of the slave. But even if the letter of the
law would fully protect the life of the slave, 'public opinion' in the
slave states would make it a dead letter. The letter of the law would
have been all-sufficient for the protection of the lives of the
miserable gamblers in Vicksburg, and other places in Mississippi, from
the rage of those whose money they had won; but 'gentlemen of property
and standing' laughed the law to scorn, rushed to the gamblers' house,
put ropes round their necks, dragged them through the streets, hanged
them in the public square, and thus saved the sum they had not yet
paid. Thousands witnessed this wholesale murder, yet of the scores of
legal officers present, not a soul raised a finger to prevent it, the
whole city consented to it, and thus aided and abetted it. How many
hundreds of them helped to commit the murders, with their own hands,
does not appear, but not one of them has been indicted for it, and no
one made the least effort to bring them to trial. Thus, up to the
present hour, the blood of those murdered men rests on that whole
city, and it will continue to be a CITY OF MURDERERS, so long as its
citizens, agree together to shield those felons from punishment; and
they do thus agree together so long as they encourage each other in
refusing to bring them to justice. Now, the laws of Mississippi were
not in fault that those men were murdered; nor are they now in fault,
that their murderers are not punished; the laws demand it, but the
people of Mississippi, the legal officers, the grand juries and
legislature of the state, with one consent agree, that the law shall
be a dead letter, and thus the whole state assumes the guilt of those
murders, and in bravado, flourishes her reeking hands in the face of
the world.[34]
[Footnote 34: We have just learned from Mississippi papers, that the
citizens of Vicksburg are erecting a public monument in honor of Dr.
H.S. Bodley, who was the ring-leader of the Lynchers in their attack
upon the miserable victims. To give the crime the cold encouragement
of impunity alone, or such slight tokens of favor as a home and a
sanctuary, is beneath the chivalry and hospitality of Mississippians;
so they tender it incense, an altar, and a crown of glory. Let the
marble rise till it be seen from afar, a beacon marking the spot where
law lies lifeless by the hand of felons; and murderers, with chaplets
on their heads, dance and shout upon its grave, while 'all the people
say, amen.']
The letter of the law on the statute book is one thing, the practice
of the community under that law often a totally different thing. Each
of the slave states has laws providing that the life of no white man
shall be taken without his having first been indicted by a grand jury,
allowed an impartial trial by a petit jury, with the right of counsel,
cross-examination of witnesses, &c.; but who does not know that if
ARTHUR TAPPAN were pointed out in the streets of New Orleans, Mobile,
Savannah, Charleston, Natchez, or St. Louis, he would be torn in
pieces by the citizens with one accord, and that if any one should
attempt to bring his murderers to punishment, he would be torn in
pieces also. The editors of southern newspapers openly vaunt, that
every abolitionist who sets foot in their soil, shall, if he be
discovered, be hung at once, without judge or jury. What mockery to
quote the letter of the law in those states, to show that
abolitionists would have secured to them the legal protection of an
impartial trial!
Before the objector can make out his case, that the life of the slave
is protected by the law, he must not only show that the words of the
law grant him such protection, but that such a state of public
sentiment exists as will carry out the provisions of the law in their
true spirit. Any thing short of this will be set down as mere prating
by every man of common sense. It has been already abundantly shown in
the preceding pages, that the public sentiment of the slaveholding
states toward the slaves is diabolical. Now, if there were laws in
those states, the words of which granted to the life of the slave
the same protection granted to that of the master, what would they
avail? ACTS constitute protection; and is that public sentiment which
makes the slave 'property,' and perpetrates hourly robbery and
batteries upon him, so penetrated with a sense of the sacredness of
his right to life, that it will protect it at all hazards, and drag to
the gallows his OWNER, if he take the life of his own property? If
it be asked, why the penalty for killing a slave is not a mere fine
then, if his life is not really regarded as sacred by public
sentiment—we answer, that formerly in most, if not in all the slave
states, the murder of a slave was punished by a mere fine. This was
the case in South Carolina till a few years since. Yes, as late as
1821, in the state of South Carolina, which boasts of its chivalry and
honor, at least as loudly as any state in the Union, a slaveholder
might butcher his slave in the most deliberate manner—with the most
barbarous and protracted torments, and yet not be subjected to a
single hour's imprisonment—pay his fine, stride out of the court and
kill another—pay his fine again and butcher another, and so long as
he paid to the state, cash down, its own assessment of damages,
without putting it to the trouble of prosecuting for it, he might
strut 'a gentleman.'—See 2 Brevard's Digest, 241.
The reason assigned by the legislature for enacting a law which
punished the wilful murder of a human being by a fine, was that
'CRUELTY is HIGHLY UNBECOMING,' and 'ODIOUS.' It was doubtless the
same reason that induced the legislature in 1821, to make a show of
giving more protection to the life of the slave. Their fathers, when
they gave some protection, did it because the time had come when,
not to do it would make them 'ODIOUS,' So the legislature of 1821 made
a show of giving still greater protection, because, not to do it would
make them 'odious.' Fitly did they wear the mantles of their
ascending fathers! In giving to the life of a slave the miserable
protection of a fine, their fathers did not even pretend to do it out
of any regard to the sacredness of his life as a human being, but
merely because cruelty is 'unbecoming' and 'odious.' The legislature
of 1821 nominally increased this protection; not that they cared
more for the slave's rights, or for the inviolabity of his life as a
human being, but the civilized world had advanced since the date of
the first law. The slave-trade which was then honorable merchandise,
and plied by lords, governors, judges, and doctors of divinity,
raising them to immense wealth, had grown 'unbecoming,' and only
raised its votaries by a rope to the yard arm; besides this, the
barbarity of the slave codes throughout the world was fast becoming
'odious' to civilized nations, and slaveholders found that the only
conditions on which they could prevent themselves from being thrust
out of the pale of civilization, was to meliorate the iron rigor of
their slave code, and thus seem to secure to their slaves some
protection. Further, the northern states had passed laws for the
abolition of slavery—all the South American states were acting in the
matter; and Colombia and Chili passed acts of abolition that very
year. In addition to all this the Missouri question had been for two
years previous under discussion in Congress, in State legislatures,
and in every village and stage coach; and this law of South Carolina
had been held up to execration by northern members of Congress, and in
newspapers throughout the free states—in a word, the legislature of
South Carolina found that they were becoming 'odious;' and while in
their sense of justice and humanity they did not surpass their
fathers, they winced with equal sensitiveness under the sting of the
world's scorn, and with equal promptitude sued for a truce by
modifying the law.
The legislature of South Carolina modified another law at the same
session. Previously, the killing of a slave 'on a sudden heat or
passion, or by undue correction,' was punished by a fine of three
hundred and fifty pounds. In 1821 an act was passed diminishing the
fine to five hundred dollars, but authorizing an imprisonment 'not
exceeding six months.' Just before the American Revolution, the
Legislature of North Carolina passed a law making imprisonment the
penalty for the wilful and malicious murder of a slave. About twenty
years after the revolution, the state found itself becoming 'odious,'
as the spirit of abolition was pervading the nations. The legislature,
perceiving that Christendom would before long rank them with
barbarians if they so cheapened human life, repealed the law, candidly
assigning in the preamble of the new one the reason for repealing the
old—that it was 'DISGRACEFUL' and 'DEGRADING! As this preamble
expressly recognizes the slave as 'a human creature,' and as it is
couched in a phraseology which indicates some sense of justice, we
would gladly give the legislature credit for sincerity, and believe
them really touched with humane movings towards the slave, were it not
for a proviso in the law clearly revealing that the show of humanity
and regard for their rights, indicated by the words, is nothing more
than a hollow pretence—hypocritical flourish to produce an impression
favorable to their justice and magnanimity. After declaring that he
who is 'guilty of wilfully and maliciously killing a slave, shall
suffer the same punishment as if he had killed a freeman;' the act
concludes thus: 'Provided, always, this act shall not extend to the
person killing a slave outlawed by virtue of any act of Assembly of
this state; or to any slave in the act of resistance to his lawful
overseer, or master, or to any slave dying under moderate
correction.' Reader, look at this proviso. 1. It gives free license
to all persons to kill outlawed slaves. Well, what is an outlawed
slave? A slave who runs away, lurks in swamps, &c., and kills a hog
or any other domestic animal to keep himself from starving, is subject
to a proclamation of outlawry; (Haywood's Manual, 521,) and then
whoever finds him may shoot him, tear him in pieces with dogs, burn
him to death over a slow fire, or kill him by any other tortures. 2.
The proviso grants full license to a master to kill his slave, if the
slave resist him. The North Carolina Bench has decided that this law
contemplates not only actual resistance to punishment, &c., but also
offering to resist. (Stroud's Sketch, 37.) If, for example, a slave
undergoing the process of branding should resist by pushing aside the
burning stamp; or if wrought up to frenzy by the torture of the lash,
he should catch and hold it fast; or if he break loose from his master
and run, refusing to stop at his command; or if he refuse to be
flogged; or struggle to keep his clothes on while his master is trying
to strip him; if, in these, or any one of a hundred other ways he
resist, or offer, or threaten to resist the infliction; or, if the
master attempt the violation of the slave's wife, and the husband
resist his attempts without the least effort to injure him, but merely
to shield his wife from his assaults, this law does not merely permit,
but it authorizes the master to murder the slave on the spot.
The brutality of these two provisos brands its authors as barbarians.
But the third cause of exemption could not be outdone by the
legislation of fiends. 'DYING under MODERATE correction!' MODERATE
correction and DEATH—cause and effect! 'Provided ALWAYS,' says the
law, 'this act shall not extend to any slave dying under moderate
correction!' Here is a formal proclamation of impunity to murder—an
express pledge of acquittal to all slaveholders who wish to murder
their slaves, a legal absolution—an indulgence granted before the
commission of the crime! Look at the phraseology. Nothing is said of
maimings, dismemberments, skull fractures, of severe bruisings, or
lacerations, or even of floggings; but a word is used the
common-parlance import of which is, slight chastisement; it is not
even whipping, but 'correction' And as if hypocrisy and malignity
were on the rack to outwit each other, even that weak word must be
still farther diluted; so 'moderate' is added: and, to crown the
climax, compounded of absurdity, hypocrisy, and cold-blooded murder,
the legal definition of 'moderate correction' is covertly given;
which is, any punishment that KILLS the victim. All inflictions are
either moderate or immoderate; and the design of this law was
manifestly to shield the murderer from conviction, by carrying on its
face the rule for its own interpretation; thus advertising,
beforehand, courts and juries, that the fact of any infliction
producing death, was no evidence that it was immoderate, and that
beating a man to death came within the legal meaning of 'moderate
correction!' The design of the legislature of North Carolina in
framing this law is manifest; it was to produce the impression upon
the world, that they had so high a sense of justice as voluntarily to
grant adequate protection to the lives of their slaves. This is
ostentatiously set forth in the preamble, and in the body of the law.
That this was the most despicable hypocrisy, and that they had
predetermined to grant no such protection, notwithstanding the pains
taken to get the credit of it, is fully revealed by the proviso,
which was framed in such a way as to nullify the law, for the express
accommodation of slaveholding gentlemen murdering their slaves. All
such find in this proviso a convenient accomplice before the fact, and
a packed jury, with a ready-made verdict of 'not guilty,' both
gratuitously furnished by the government! The preceding law and
proviso are to be found in Haywood's Manual, 530; also in Laws of
Tennessee, Act of October 23, 1791; and in Stroud's Sketch, 37.
Enough has been said already to show, that though the laws of the
slave states profess to grant adequate protection to the life of the
slave, such professions are mere empty pretence, no such protection
being in reality afforded by them. But there is still another fact,
showing that all laws which profess to protect the slaves from injury
by the whites are a mockery. It is this—that the testimony, neither
of a slave nor of a free colored person, is legal testimony against
a white. To this rule there is no exception in any of the slave
states: and this, were there no other evidence, would be sufficient to
stamp, as hypocritical, all the provisions of the codes which
profess to protect the slaves. Professing to grant protection,
while, at the same time, it strips them of the only means by which
they can make that protection available! Injuries must be legally
proved before they can be legally redressed: to deprive men of the
power of proving their injuries, is itself the greatest of all
injuries; for it not only exposes to all, but invites them, by a
virtual guarantee of impunity, and is thus the author of all
injuries. It matters not what other laws exist, professing to throw
safeguards round the slave—this makes them blank paper. How can a
slave prove outrages perpetrated upon him by his master or overseer,
when his own testimony and that of all his fellow-slaves, his kindred,
associates, and acquaintances, is ruled out of court? and when he is
entirely in the power of those who injure him, and when the only
care necessary, on their part, is, to see that no white witness is
looking on. Ordinarily, but one white man, the overseer, is with the
slaves while they are at labor; indeed, on most plantations, to commit
an outrage in the presence of a white witness would be more
difficult than in their absence. He who wished to commit an illegal
act upon a slave, instead of being obliged to take pains and watch
for an opportunity to do it unobserved by a white, would find it
difficult to do it in the presence of a white if he wished to do so.
The supreme court of Louisiana, in their decision, in the case of
Crawford vs. Cherry,(15, Martin's La. Rep. 112; also "Law of
Slavery," 249,) where the defendant was sued for the value of a slave
whom he had shot and killed, say, "The act charged here, is one
rarely committed in the presence of witnesses," (whites). So in
the case of the State vs. Mann, (Devereux, N.C. Rep. 263; and "Law
of Slavery," 247;) in which the defendant was charged with shooting a
slave girl 'belonging' to the plaintiff; the Supreme Court of North
Carolina, in their decision, speaking of the provocations of the
master by the slave, and 'the consequent wrath of the master' prompting
him to bloody vengeance, add, 'a vengeance generally practised with
impunity, by reason of its privacy.'
Laws excluding the testimony of slaves and free colored persons, where
a white is concerned, do not exist in all the slave states. One or two
of them have no legal enactment on the subject; but, in those,
'public opinion' acts with the force of law, and the courts
invariably reject it. This brings us back to the potency of that
oft-quoted 'public opinion,' so ready, according to our objector, to
do battle for the protection of the slave!
Another proof that 'public opinion,' in the slave states, plunders,
tortures, and murders the slaves, instead of protecting them, is
found in the fact, that the laws of slave states inflict capital
punishment on slaves for a variety of crimes, for which, if their
masters commit them, the legal penalty is merely imprisonment. Judge
Stroud in his Sketch of the Laws of Slavery, says, that by the laws of
Virginia, there are 'seventy-one crimes for which slaves are capitally
punished though in none of these are whites punished in manner more
severe than by imprisonment in the penitentiary.' (P. 107, where the
reader will find all the crimes enumerated.) It should be added,
however, that though the penalty for each of these seventy-one crimes
is 'death,' yet a majority of them are, in the words of the law,
'death within clergy;' and in Virginia, clergyable offences, though
technically capital, are not so in fact. In Mississippi, slaves are
punished capitally for more than thirty crimes, for which whites are
punished only by fine or imprisonment, or both. Eight of these are not
recognized as crimes, either by common law or by statute, when
committed by whites. In South Carolina slaves are punished capitally
for nine more crimes than the whites—in Georgia, for six—and in
Kentucky, for seven more than whites, &c. We surely need not detain
the reader by comments on this monstrous inequality with which the
penal codes of slave states treat slaves and their masters. When we
consider that guilt is in proportion to intelligence, and that these
masters have by law doomed their slaves to ignorance, and then, as
they darkle and grope along their blind way, inflict penalties upon
them for a variety of acts regarded as praise worthy in whites;
killing them for crimes, when whites are only fined or imprisoned—to
call such a 'public opinion' inhuman, savage, murderous, diabolical,
would be to use tame words, if the English vocabulary could supply
others of more horrible import.
But slaveholding brutality does not stop here. While punishing the
slaves for crimes with vastly greater severity than it does their
masters for the same crimes, and making a variety of acts crimes in
law, which are right, and often duties, it persists in refusing to
make known to the slaves that complicated and barbarous penal code
which loads them with such fearful liabilities. The slave is left to
get a knowledge of these laws as he can, and cases must be of constant
occurrence at the south, in which slaves get their first knowledge of
the existence of a law by suffering its penalty. Indeed, this is
probably the way in which they commonly learn what the laws are; for
how else can the slave get a knowledge of the laws? He cannot
read—he cannot learn to read; if he try to master the alphabet,
so that he may spell out the words of the law, and thus avoid its
penalties, the law shakes its terrors at him; while, at the same time,
those who made the laws refuse to make them known to those for whom
they are designed. The memory of Caligula will blacken with execration
while time lasts, because be hung up his laws so high that people
could not read them, and then punished them because they did not keep
them. Our slaveholders aspire to blacker infamy. Caligula was content
with hanging up his laws where his subjects could see them; and if
they could not read them, they knew where they were, and might get at
them, if, in their zeal to learn his will, they had used the same
means to get up to them that those did who hung them there. Even
Caligula, wretch as he was, would have shuddered at cutting their legs
off, to prevent their climbing to them; or, if they had got there, at
boring their eyes out, to prevent their reading them. Our slaveholders
virtually do both; for they prohibit their slaves acquiring that
knowledge of letters which would enable them to read the laws; and if,
by stealth, they get it in spite of them, they prohibit them books and
papers, and flog them if they are caught at them. Further—Caligula
merely hung his laws so high that they could not be read—our
slaveholders have hung theirs so high above the slave that they cannot
be seen—they are utterly out of sight, and he finds out that they
are there only by the falling of the penalties on his head.[35] Thus
the "public opinion" of slave states protects the defenceless slave by
arming a host of legal penalties and setting them in ambush at every
thicket along his path, to spring upon him unawares.
[Footnote 35: The following extract from the Alexandria (D.C.) Gazette
is all illustration. "CRIMINALS CONDEMNED.—On Monday last the Court
of the borough of Norfolk, Va. sat on the trial of four negro boys
arraigned for burglary. The first indictment charged them with
breaking into the hardware store of Mr. E.P. Tabb, upon which two of
them were found guilty by the Court, and condemned to suffer the
penalty of the law, which, in the case of a slave, is death. The
second Friday in April is appointed for the execution of their awful
sentence. Their ages do not exceed sixteen. The first, a fine active
boy, belongs to a widow lady in Alexandria; the latter, a house
servant, is owned by a gentleman in the borough. The value of one was
fixed at $1000, and the other at $800; which sums are to be
re-imbursed to their respective owners out of the state treasury." In
all probability these poor boys, who are to be hung for stealing,
never dreamed that death was the legal penalty of the crime.
Here is another, from the "New Orleans Bee" of —— 14, 1837—"The
slave who STRUCK some citizens in Canal street, some weeks since, has
been tried and found guilty, and is sentenced to be HUNG on the 24th."]
Stroud, in his Sketch of the Laws of Slavery, page 100, thus comments
on this monstrous barbarity.
"The hardened convict moves their sympathy, and is to be taught the
laws before he is expected to obey them;[36] yet the guiltless slave
is subjected to an extensive system of cruel enactments, of no part of
which, probably, has he ever heard."
[Footnote 36: "It shall be the duty of the keeper [of the penitentiary]
on the receipt of each prisoner, to read to him or her such parts of
the penal laws of this state as impose penalties for escape, and to
make all the prisoners in the penitentiary acquainted with the same.
It shall also be his duty, on the discharge of such prisoner, to read
to him or her such parts of the laws as impose additional punishments
for the repetition of offences."—Rule 12th, for the internal
government of the Penitentiary of Georgia. Sec. 26 of the Penitentiary
Act of 1816.—Prince's Digest, 386.]
Having already drawn so largely on the reader's patience, in
illustrating southern 'public opinion' by the slave laws, instead of
additional illustrations of the same point from another class of those
laws, as was our design, we will group together a few particulars,
which the reader can take in at a glance, showing that the "public
opinion" of slaveholders towards their slaves, which exists at the
south, in the form of law, tramples on all those fundamental
principles of right, justice, and equity, which are recognized as
sacred by all civilized nations, and receive the homage even of
barbarians.
1. One of these principles is, that the benefits of law to the
subject should overbalance its burdens—its protection more than
compensate for its restraints and exactions—and its blessings
altogether outweigh its inconveniences and evils—the former being
numerous, positive, and permanent, the latter few, negative, and
incidental. Totally the reverse of all this is true in the case of the
slave. Law is to him all exaction and no protection: instead of
lightening his natural burdens, it crushes him under a multitude of
artificial ones; instead of a friend to succor him, it is his
deadliest foe, transfixing him at every step from the cradle to the
grave. Law has been beautifully defined to be "benevolence acting by
rule;" to the American slave it is malevolence torturing by system. It
is an old truth, that responsibility increases with capacity; but
those same laws which make the slave a "chattel," require of him
more than of men. The same law which makes him a thing incapable
of obligation, loads him with obligations superhuman—while sinking
him below the level of a brute in dispensing its benefits, he lays
upon him burdens which would break down an angel.
2. Innocence is entitled to the protection of law. Slaveholders make
innocence free plunder; this is their daily employment; their laws
assail it, make it their victim, inflict upon it all, and, in some
respects, more than all the penalties of the greatest guilt. To other
innocent persons, law is a blessing, to the slave it is a curse, only
a curse and that continually.
3. Deprivation of liberty is one of the highest punishments of
crime; and in proportion to its justice when inflicted on the guilty,
is its injustice when inflicted on the innocent; this terrible penalty
is inflicted on two million seven hundred thousand, innocent persons
in the Southern states.
4. Self-preservation and self-defence, are universally regarded as
the most sacred of human rights, yet the laws of slave states punish
the slave with death for exercising these rights in that way, which
in others is pronounced worthy of the highest praise.
5. The safeguards of law are most needed where natural safe-guards
are weakest. Every principle of justice and equity requires, that,
those who are totally unprotected by birth, station, wealth, friends,
influence, and popular favor, and especially those who are the
innocent objects of public contempt and prejudice, should be more
vigilantly protected by law, than those who are so fortified by
defence, that they have far less need of legal protection; yet the
poor slave who is fortified by none of these personal bulwarks, is
denied the protection of law, while the master, surrounded by them
all, is panoplied in the mail of legal protection, even to the hair of
his head; yea, his very shoe-tie and coat-button are legal protegees.
6. The grand object of law is to protect men's natural rights, but
instead of protecting the natural rights of the slaves, it gives
slaveholders license to wrest them from the weak by violence, protects
them in holding their plunder, and kills the rightful owner if he
attempt to recover it.
This is the protection thrown around the rights of American slaves
by the 'public opinion,' of slaveholders; these the restraints that
hold back their masters, overseers, and drivers, from inflicting
injuries upon them!
In a Republican government, law is the pulse of its heart—as the
heart beats the pulse beats, except that it often beats weaker than
the heart, never stronger—or to drop the figure, laws are never
worse than those who make them, very often better. If human history
proves anything, cruelty of practice will always go beyond cruelty of
law.
Law-making is a formal, deliberate act, performed by persons of mature
age, embodying the intelligence, wisdom, justice and humanity, of the
community; performed, too, at leisure, after full opportunity had for
a comprehensive survey of all the relations to be affected, after
careful investigation and protracted discussion. Consequently laws
must, in the main, be a true index of the permanent feelings, the
settled frame of mind, cherished by the community upon those
subjects, and towards those persons and classes whose condition the
laws are designed to establish. If the laws are in a high degree cruel
and inhuman, towards any class of persons, it proves that the feelings
habitually exercised towards that class of persons, by those who make
and perpetuate those laws, are at least equally cruel and inhuman.
We say at least equally so; for if the habitual state of feeling
towards that class be unmerciful, it must be unspeakably cruel,
relentless and malignant when provoked; if its ordinary action is
inhuman, its contortions and spasms must be tragedies; if the waves
run high when there has been no wind, where will they not break when
the tempest heaves them!
Further, when cruelty is the spirit of the law towards a proscribed
class, when it legalizes great outrages upon them, it connives at,
and abets greater outrages, and is virtually an accomplice of all
who perpetrate them. Hence, in such cases, though the degree of the
outrage is illegal, the perpetrator will rarely be convicted, and,
even if convicted, will be almost sure to escape punishment. This is
not theory but history. Every judge and lawyer in the slave states
knows, that the legal conviction and punishment of masters and
mistresses, for illegal outrages upon their slaves, is an event which
has rarely, if ever, occurred in the slave states; they know, also,
that although hundreds of slaves have been murdered by their
masters and mistresses in the slave states, within the last
twenty-five years, and though the fact of their having committed those
murders has been established beyond a doubt in the minds of the
surrounding community, yet that the murderers have not, in a single
instance, suffered the penalty of the law.
Finally, since slaveholders have deliberately legalized the
perpetration of the most cold-blooded atrocities upon their slaves,
and do pertinaciously refuse to make these atrocities illegal, and
to punish those who perpetrate them, they stand convicted before the
world, upon their own testimony, of the most barbarous, brutal, and
habitual inhumanity. If this be slander and falsehood, their own lips
have uttered it, their own fingers have written it, their own acts
have proclaimed it; and however it may be with their morality, they
have too much human nature to perjure themselves for the sake of
publishing their own infamy.
Having dwelt at such length on the legal code of the slave states,
that unerring index of the public opinion of slaveholders towards
their slaves; and having shown that it does not protect the slaves
from cruelty, and that even in the few instances in which the letter
of the law, if executed, would afford some protection, it is
virtually nullified by the connivance of courts and juries, or by
popular clamor; we might safely rest the case here, assured that every
honest reader would spurn the absurd falsehood, that the 'public
opinion' of the slave states protects the slaves and restrains the
master. But, as the assertion is made so often by slaveholders, and
with so much confidence, notwithstanding its absurdity is fully
revealed by their own legal code, we propose to show its falsehood by
applying other tests.
We lay it down as a truth that can be made no plainer by reasoning,
that the same 'public opinion,' which restrains men from committing
outrages, will restrain them from publishing such outrages, if they
do commit them;—in other words, if a man is restrained from certain
acts through fear of losing his character, should they become known,
he will not voluntarily destroy his character by making them known,
should he be guilty of them. Let us look at this. It is assumed by
slaveholders, that 'public opinion' at the south so frowns on cruelty
to the slaves, that fear of disgrace would restrain from the
infliction of it, were there no other consideration.
Now, that this is sheer fiction is shown by the fact, that the
newspapers in the slaveholding states, teem with advertisements for
runaway slaves, in which the masters and mistresses describe their
men and women, as having been 'branded with a hot iron,' on their
'cheeks,' 'jaws,' 'breasts,' 'arms,' 'legs,' and 'thighs;' also as
'scarred,' 'very much scarred,' 'cut up,' 'marked,' &c. 'with the
whip,' also with 'iron collars on,' 'chains,' 'bars of iron,'
'fetters,' 'bells,' 'horns,' 'shackles,' &c. They, also, describe them
as having been wounded by 'buck-shot,' 'rifle-balls,' &c. fired at
them by their 'owners,' and others when in pursuit; also, as having
'notches,' cut in their ears, the tops or bottoms of their ears 'cut
off,' or 'slit,' or 'one ear cut off' or 'both ears cut off' &c. &c.
The masters and mistresses who thus advertise their runaway slaves,
coolly sign their names to their advertisements, giving the street and
number of their residences, if in cities, their post office address,
&c. if in the country; thus making public proclamation as widely as
possible that they 'brand,' 'scar,' 'gash,' 'cut up,' &c. the flesh
of their slaves; load them with irons, cut off their ears, &c.; they
speak of these things with the utmost sang froid, not seeming to
think it possible, that any one will esteem them at all the less
because of these outrages upon their slaves; further, these
advertisements swarm in many of the largest and most widely circulated
political and commercial papers that are published in the slave
states. The editors of those papers constitute the main body of the
literati of the slave states; they move in the highest circle of
society, are among the 'popular' men in the community, and as a
class, are more influential than any other; yet these editors publish
these advertisements with iron indifference. So far from proclaiming
to such felons, homicides, and murderers, that they will not be their
blood-hounds, to hunt down the innocent and mutilated victims who have
escaped from their torture, they freely furnish them with every
facility, become their accomplices and share their spoils; and instead
of outraging 'public opinion,' by doing it, they are the men after its
own heart, its organs, its representatives, its self.
To show that the 'public opinion' of the slave states, towards the
slaves, is absolutely diabolical, we will insert a few, out of a
multitude, of similar advertisements from a variety of southern papers
now before us.
The North Carolina Standard, of July 18, 1838, contains the
following:—
"TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD. Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro woman and
two children; the woman is tall and black, and a few days before she
went off, I BURNT HER WITH A HOT IRON ON THE LEFT SIDE OF HER FACE; I
TRIED TO MAKE THE LETTER M, and she kept a cloth over her head and
face, and a fly bonnet on her head so as to cover the burn; her
children are both boys, the oldest is in his seventh year; he is a
mulatto and has blue eyes; the youngest is black and is in his fifth
year. The woman's name is Betty, commonly called Bet."
MICAJAH RICKS.
Nash County, July 7, 1838.
Hear the wretch tell his story, with as much indifference as if he
were describing the cutting of his initials in the bark of a tree.
"I burnt her with a hot iron on the left side of her face,"—"I tried
to make the letter M," and this he says in a newspaper, and puts his
name to it, and the editor of the paper who is, also, its proprietor,
publishes it for him and pockets his fee. Perhaps the reader will say,
'Oh, it must have been published in an insignificant sheet printed in
some obscure corner of the state; perhaps by a gang of 'squatters,' in
the Dismal Swamp, universally regarded as a pest, and edited by some
scape-gallows, who is detested by the whole community.' To this I reply
that the "North Carolina Standard," the paper which contains it, is a
large six columned weekly paper, handsomely printed and ably edited;
it is the leading Democratic paper in that state, and is published at
Raleigh, the Capital of the state, Thomas Loring, Esq. Editor and
Proprietor. The motto in capitals under the head of the paper is, "THE
CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION OF THE STATES—THEY MUST BE PRESERVED." The
same Editor and Proprietor, who exhibits such brutality of feeling
towards the slaves, by giving the preceding advertisement a
conspicuous place in his columns, and taking his pay for it, has
apparently a keen sense of the proprieties of life, where whites are
concerned, and a high regard for the rights, character and feelings of
those whose skin is colored like his own. As proof of this, we copy
from the number of the paper containing the foregoing advertisement,
the following Editorial on the pending political canvass.
"We cannot refrain from expressing the hope that the Gubernatorial
canvass will be conducted with a due regard to the character, and
feelings of the distinguished individuals who are candidates for
that office; and that the press of North Carolina will set an
example in this respect, worthy of imitation and of praise."
What is this but chivalrous and honorable feeling? The good name of
North Carolina is dear to him—on the comfort, 'character and
feelings,' of her white citizens he sets a high value; he feels too,
most deeply for the character of the Press of North Carolina, sees
that it is a city set on a hill, and implores his brethren of the
editorial corps to 'set an example' of courtesy and magnanimity worthy
of imitation and praise. Now, reader, put all these things together
and con them over, and then read again the preceding advertisement
contained in the same number of the paper, and you have the true
"North Carolina STANDARD," by which to measure the protection extended
to slaves by the 'public opinion' of that state.
J.P. Ashford advertises as follows in the "Natchez Courier," August
24, 1838.
"Ranaway, a negro girl called Mary, has a small scar over her eye, a
good many teeth missing, the letter A. is branded on her cheek and
forehead."
A.B. Metcalf thus advertises a woman in the same paper, June 15,
1838.
"Ranaway, Mary, a black woman, has a scar on her back and right arm
near the shoulder, caused by a rifle ball."
John Henderson, in the "Grand Gulf Advertiser," August 29, 1838,
advertises Betsey.
"Ranaway, a black woman Betsey, has an iron bar on her right leg."
Robert Nicoll, whose residence is in Mobile, in Dauphin street,
between Emmanuel and Conception streets, thus advertises a woman in
the "Mobile Commercial Advertiser."
"TEN DOLLARS REWARD will be given for my negro woman Liby. The said
Liby is about 30 years old and VERY MUCH SCARRED ABOUT THE NECK AND
EARS, occasioned by whipping, had on a handkerchief tied round her
ears, as she COMMONLY wears it to HIDE THE SCARS."
To show that slaveholding brutality now is the same that it was the
eighth of a century ago, we publish the following advertisement from
the "Charleston (S.C.) Courier," of 1825.
"TWENTY DOLLARS REWARD.—Ranaway from the subscriber, on the 14th
instant, a negro girl named Molly.
"The said girl was sold by Messrs. Wm. Payne & Sons, as the property
of an estate of a Mr. Gearrall, and purchased by a Mr. Moses, and sold
by him to a Thomas Prisley, of Edgefield District, of whom I bought
her on the 17th of April, 1819. She is 16 or 17 years of age, slim
made, LATELY BRANDED ON THE LEFT CHEEK, THUS, R, AND A PIECE TAKEN OFF
OF HER EAR ON THE SAME SIDE; THE SAME LETTER ON THE INSIDE OF BOTH HER
LEGS.
"ABNER ROSS, Fairfield District."
But instead of filling pages with similar advertisements, illustrating
the horrible brutality of slaveholders towards their slaves, the
reader is referred to the preceding pages of this work, to the scores
of advertisements written by slaveholders, printed by slaveholders,
published by slaveholders, in newspapers edited by slaveholders and
patronized by slaveholders; advertisement describing not only men and
boys, but women aged and middle-aged, matrons and girls of tender
years, their necks chafed with iron collars with prongs, their limbs
galled with iron rings and chains, and bars of iron, iron hobbles and
shackles, all parts of their persons scarred with the lash, and
branded with hot irons, and torn with rifle bullets, pistol balls and
buck shot, and gashed with knives, their eyes out, their ears cut off,
their teeth drawn out, and their bones broken. He is referred also to
the cool and shocking indifference with which these slaveholders,
'gentlemen' and 'ladies,' Reverends, and Honorables, and Excellencies,
write and print, and publish and pay, and take money for, and read and
circulate, and sanction, such infernal barbarity. Let the reader
ponder all this, and then lay it to heart, that this is that 'public
opinion' of the slaveholders which protects their slaves from all
injury, and is an effectual guarantee of personal security.
However far gone a community may be in brutality, something of
protection may yet be hoped for from its 'public opinion,' if respect
for woman survive the general wreck; that gone, protection perishes;
public opinion becomes universal rapine; outrages, once occasional,
become habitual; the torture, which was before inflicted only by
passion, becomes the constant product of a system, and, instead of
being the index of sudden and fierce impulses, is coolly plied as the
permanent means to an end. When women are branded with hot irons on
their faces; when iron collars, with prongs, are riveted about their
necks; when iron rings are fastened upon their limbs, and they are
forced to drag after them chains and fetters; when their flesh is torn
with whips, and mangled with bullets and shot, and lacerated with
knives; and when those who do such things, are regarded in the
community, and associated with as 'gentlemen' and 'ladies;' to say
that the 'public opinion' of such a community is a protection to its
victims, is to blaspheme God, whose creatures they are, cast in his
own sacred image, and dear to him as the apple of his eye.
But we are not yet quite ready to dismiss this protector, 'Public
Opinion.' To illustrate the hardened brutality with which slaveholders
regard their slaves, the shameless and apparently unconscious
indecency with which they speak of their female slaves, examine their
persons, and describe them, under their own signatures, in newspapers,
hand-bills, &c. just as they would describe the marks of cattle and
swine, on all parts of their bodies; we will make a few extracts from
southern papers. Reader, as we proceed to these extracts, remember our
motto—'True humanity consists not in a squeamish ear.'
Mr. P. ABDIE, of New Orleans, advertises in the New Orleans Bee, of
January 29, 1838, for one of his female slaves, as follows;
"Ranaway, the negro wench named Betsey, aged about 22 years,
handsome-faced, and good countenance; having the marks of the whip
behind her neck, and SEVERAL OTHERS ON HER RUMP. The above reward,
($10,) will be given to whoever will bring that wench to P. ABDIE."
The New Orleans Bee, in which the advertisement of this Vandal
appears, is the 'Official Gazette of the State—of the General
Council—and of the first and third Municipalities of New Orleans.' It
is the largest, and the most influential paper in the south-western
states, and perhaps the most ably edited—and has undoubtedly a larger
circulation than any other. It is a daily paper, of $12 a year, and
its circulation being mainly among the larger merchants, planters, and
professional men, it is a fair index of the 'public opinion' of
Louisiana, so far as represented by those classes of persons.
Advertisements equally gross, indecent, and abominable, or nearly so,
can be found in almost every number of that paper.
Mr. WILLIAM ROBINSON, Georgetown, District of Columbia, advertised for
his slave in the National Intelligencer, of Washington City, Oct. 2,
1837, as follows:
"Eloped from my residence a young negress, 22 years old, of a
chestnut, or brown color. She has a very singular mark—this mark, to
the best of my RECOLLECTION, covers a part of her breasts, body,
and limbs; and when her neck and arms are uncovered, is very
perceptible; she has been frequently seen east and south of the
Capitol Square, and is harbored by ill-disposed persons, of every
complexion, for her services."
Mr. JOHN C. BEASLEY, near Huntsville, Alabama, thus advertises a young
girl of eighteen, in the Huntsville Democrat, of August 1st, 1837.
"Ranaway Maria, about 18 years old, very far advanced with child."
He then offers a reward to any one who will commit this young girl, in
this condition, to jail.
Mr. JAMES T. DE JARNETT, Vernon, Autauga co. Alabama, thus advertises
a woman in the Pensacola Gazette, July 14, 1838. "Celia is a bright
copper-colored negress, fine figure and very smart. On EXAMINING
HER BACK, you will find marks caused by the whip." He closes the
advertisement, by offering a reward of five hundred dollars to any
person who will lodge her in jail, so that he can get her.
A person who lives at 124 Chartres street, New Orleans, advertises in
the 'Bee,' of May 31, for "the negress Patience, about 28 years old,
has large hips, and is bow-legged." A Mr. T. CUGGY, in the same
paper, thus describes "the negress Caroline." "She has awkward feet,
clumsy ankles, turns out her toes greatly in walking, and has a sore
on her left shin."
In another, of June 22, Mr. P. BAHI advertises "Maria, with a clear
white complexion, and double nipple on her right breast."
Mr. CHARLES CRAIGE, of Federal Point, New Hanover co. North Carolina,
in the Wilmington Advertiser, August 11, 1837, offers a reward for his
slave Jane, and says "she is far advanced in pregnancy."
The New Orleans Bulletin, August 18, 1838, advertises "the negress
Mary, aged nineteen, has a scar on her face, walks parrot-toed, and is
pregnant."
Mr. J.G. MUIR, of Grand Gulf, Mississippi, thus advertises a woman in
the Vicksburg Register, December 5, 1838. "Ranaway a negro girl—has a
number of black lumps on her breasts, and is in a state of
pregnancy."
Mr. JACOB BESSON, Donaldsonville, Louisiana, advertises in the New
Orleans Bee, August 7, 1838, "the negro woman Victorine—she is
advanced in pregnancy."
Mr. J.H. LEVERICH & Co. No. 10, Old Levee, New Orleans, advertises in
the 'Bulletin,' January 22, 1839, as follows.
"$50 REWARD.—Ranaway a negro girl named Caroline about 18 years of
age, is far advanced in child-bearing. The above reward will be paid
for her delivery at either of the jails of the city."
Mr. JOHN DUGGAN, thus advertises a woman in the New Orleans Bee, of
Sept. 7.
"Ranaway from the subscriber a mulatto woman, named Esther, about
thirty years of age, large stomach, wants her upper front teeth, and
walks pigeon-toed—supposed to be about the lower fauxbourg."
Mr. FRANCIS FOSTER, of Troop co. Georgia, advertises in the Columbus
(Ga.) Enquirer of June 22, 1837—"My negro woman Patsey, has a stoop
in her walking, occasioned by a severe burn on her abdomen."
The above are a few specimens of the gross details, in describing the
persons of females, of all ages, and the marks upon all parts of their
bodies; proving incontestably, that slaveholders are in the habit not
only of stripping their female slaves of their clothing, and
inflicting punishment upon their 'shrinking flesh,' but of subjecting
their naked persons to the most minute and revolting inspection, and
then of publishing to the world the results of their examination, as
well as the scars left by their own inflictions upon them, their
length, size, and exact position on the body; and all this without
impairing in the least, the standing in the community of the shameless
wretches who thus proclaim their own abominations. That such things
should not at all affect the standing of such persons in society, is
certainly no marvel: how could they affect it, when the same
communities enact laws requiring their own legal officers to inspect
minutely the persons and bodily marks of all slaves taken up as
runaways, and to publish in the newspapers a particular description of
all such marks and peculiarities of their persons, their size,
appearance position on the body, &c. Yea, verily, when the 'public
opinion' of the community, in the solemn form of law, commands
jailors, sheriffs, captains of police, &c. to divest of their clothing
aged matrons and young girls, minutely examine their naked persons,
and publish the results of their examination—who can marvel, that the
same 'public opinion' should tolerate the slaveholders themselves, in
doing the same things to their own property, which they have appointed
legal officers to do as their proxies.[37]
[Footnote 37: 'As a sample of these laws, we give the following extract
from one of the laws of Maryland, where slaveholding 'public opinion'
exists in its mildest form.'
"It shall be the duty of the sheriffs of the several counties of this
state, upon any runaway servant or slave being committed to his
custody, to cause the same to be advertised, &c. and to make
particular and minute descriptions of the person and bodily marks,
of such runaway."—Laws of Maryland of 1802, Chap. 96, Sec. 1 and 2.
That the sheriffs, jailors, &c. do not neglect this part of their
official 'duty,' is plain from the minute description which they give
in the advertisements of marks upon all parts of the persons of
females, as well as males; and also from the occasional declaration,
'no scars discoverable on any part,' or 'no marks discoverable about
her;' which last is taken from an advertisement in the Milledgeville
(Geo.) Journal, June 26, 1838, signed 'T.S. Denster, Jailor.']
The zeal with which slaveholding 'public opinion' protects the lives
of the slaves, may be illustrated by the following advertisements,
taken from a multitude of similar ones in southern papers. To show
that slaveholding 'public opinion' is the same now, that it was half
a century ago, we will insert, in the first place, an advertisement
published in a North Carolina newspaper, Oct. 29, 1785, by W. SKINNER,
the Clerk of the County of Perquimons, North Carolina.
"Ten silver dollars reward will be paid for apprehending and
delivering to me my man Moses, who ran away this morning; or I will
give five times the sum to any person who will make due proof of his
being killed, and never ask a question to know by whom it was done."
W. SKINNER.
Perquimons County, N.C. Oct. 29, 1785.
The late JOHN PARRISH, of Philadelphia, an eminent minister of the
religious society of Friends, who traveled through the slave states
about thirty-five years since, on a religious mission, published on
his return a pamphlet of forty pages, entitled 'Remarks on the Slavery
of the Black People.' From this work we extract the following
illustrations of 'public opinion' in North and South Carolina and
Virginia at that period.
"When I was traveling through North Carolina, a black man, who was
outlawed, being shot by one of his pursuers, and left wounded in the
woods, they came to an ordinary where I had stopped to feed my horse,
in order to procure a cart to bring the poor wretched object in.
Another, I was credibly informed, was shot, his head cut off, and
carried in a bag by the perpetrators of the murder, who received the
reward, which was said to be $200, continental currency, and that his
head was stuck on a coal house at an iron works in Virginia—and this
for going to visit his wife at a distance. Crawford gives an account
of a man being gibbetted alive in South Carolina, and the buzzards
came and picked out his eyes. Another was burnt to death at a stake in
Charleston, surrounded by a multitude of spectators, some of whom were
people of the first rank; ... the poor object was heard to cry, as
long as he could breathe, 'not guilty—not guilty.'"
The following is an illustration of the 'public opinion' of South
Carolina about fifty years ago. It is taken from Judge Stroud's Sketch
of the Slave Laws, page 39.
"I find in the case of 'the State vs. M'Gee,' 1 Bay's Reports, 164, it
is said incidentally by Messrs. Pinckney and Ford, counsel for the
state (of S.C.), 'that the frequency of the offence (wilful murder
of a slave) was owing to the nature of the punishment', &c.... This
remark was made in 1791, when the above trial took place. It was made
in a public place—a courthouse—and by men of great personal
respectability. There can be, therefore, no question as to its
truth, and as little of its notoriety."
In 1791 the Grand Jury for the district of Cheraw, S.C. made a
presentment, from which the following is an extract.
"We, the Grand Jurors of and for the district of Cheraw, do present
the INEFFICACY of the present punishment for killing negroes, as a
great defect in the legal system of this state: and we do earnestly
recommend to the attention of the legislature, that clause of the
negro act, which confines the penalty for killing slaves to fine and
imprisonment only: in full confidence, that they will provide some
other more effectual measures to prevent the FREQUENCY of crimes of
this nature."—Matthew Carey's American Museum, for Feb.
1791.—Appendix, p. 10.
The following is a specimen of the 'public opinion' of Georgia twelve
years since. We give it in the strong words of COLONEL STONE, Editor
of the New York Commercial Advertiser. We take it from that paper of
June 8, 1827.
"HUNTING MEN WITH DOGS.-A negro who had absconded from his master, and
for whom a reward of $100 was offered, has been apprehended and
committed to prison in Savannah. The editor, who states the fact,
adds, with as much coolness as though there were no barbarity in the
matter, that he did not surrender till he was considerably MAIMED BY
THE DOGS that had been set on him—desperately fighting them—one of
which he badly cut with a sword."
Twelve days after the publication of the preceding fact, the following
horrible transaction took place in Perry county, Alabama. We extract
it from the African Observer, a monthly periodical, published in
Philadelphia, by the society of Friends. See No. for August, 1827.
"Tuscaloosa, Ala. June 20, 1827.
"Some time during the last week a Mr. M'Neilly having lost some
clothing, or other property of no great value, the slave of a
neighboring planter was charged with the theft. M'Neilly, in company
with his brother, found the negro driving his master's wagon; they
seized him, and either did, or were about to chastise him, when the
negro stabbed M'Neilly, so that he died in an hour afterwards. The
negro was taken before a justice of the peace, who waved his
authority, perhaps through fear, as a crowd of persons had collected
to the number of seventy or eighty, near Mr. People's (the justice)
house. He acted as president of the mob, and put the vote, when it
was decided he should be immediately executed by being burnt to
death. The sable culprit was led to a tree, and tied to it, and a
large quantity of pine knots collected and placed around him, and the
fatal torch applied to the pile, even against the remonstrances of
several gentlemen who were present; and the miserable being was in a
short time burned to ashes.
"This is the SECOND negro who has been THUS put to death, without
judge or jury, in this county."
The following advertisements, testimony, &c. will show that the
slaveholders of to-day are the children of those who shot, and
hunted with bloodhounds, and burned over slow fires, the slaves of
half a century ago; the worthy inheritors of their civilization,
chivalry, and tender mercies.
The "Wilmington (North Carolina) Advertiser" of July 13, 1838,
contains the following advertisement.
"$100 will be paid to any person who may apprehend and safely confine
in any jail in this state, a certain negro man, named ALFRED. And the
same reward will be paid, if satisfactory evidence is given of having
been KILLED. He has one or more scars on one of his hands, caused by
his having been shot.
"THE CITIZENS OF ONSLOW.
"Richlands, Onslow co. May 16th, 1838."
In the same column with the above and directly under it is the
following:—
"RANAWAY my negro man RICHARD. A reward of $25 will be paid for his
apprehension DEAD or ALIVE. Satisfactory proof will only be required
of his being KILLED. He has with him, in all probability, his wife
ELIZA, who ran away from Col. Thompson, now a resident of Alabama,
about the time he commenced his journey to that state. DURANT H.
RHODES."
In the "Mason (Georgia) Telegraph," May 28, is the following:
"About the 1st of March last the negro man RANSOM left me without the
least provocation whatever; I will give a reward of twenty dollars for
said negro, if taken DEAD OR ALIVE,—and if killed in any attempt, an
advance of five dollars will be paid. BRYANT JOHNSON.
"Crawford co. Georgia"
See the "Newbern (N.C.) Spectator," Jan. 5, 1838, for the
following:—
"RANAWAY, from the subscriber, a negro man named SAMPSON. Fifty
dollars reward will be given for the delivery of him to me, or his
confinement in any jail so that I get him, and should he resist in
being taken, so that violence is necessary to arrest him, I will not
hold any person liable for damages should the slave be KILLED. ENOCH
FOY.
"Jones County, N.C."
From the "Macon (Ga.) Messenger," June 14, 1838.
"TO THE OWNERS OF RUNAWAY NEGROES. A large mulatto Negro man, between
thirty-five and forty years old, about six feet in height, having a
high forehead, and hair slightly grey, was KILLED, near my plantation,
on the 9th inst. He would not surrender but assaulted Mr. Bowen, who
killed him in self-defence. If the owner desires further information
relative to the death of his negro, he can obtain it by letter, or by
calling on the subscriber ten miles south of Perry, Houston county.
EDM'D. JAS. McGEHEE."
From the 'Charleston (S.C.) Courier,' Feb. 20, 1836.
"$300 REWARD. Ranaway from the subscriber, in November last, his two
negro men, named Billy and Pompey.
"Billy is 25 years old, and is known as the patroon of my boat for
many years; in all probability he may resist; in that event 50 dollars
will be paid for his HEAD."
From the 'Newbern (N.C.) Spectator,' Dec 2. 1836.
"$200 REWARD. Ranaway from the subscriber, about three years ago, a
certain negro man named Ben, commonly known by the name of Ben Fox. He
had but one eye. Also, one other negro, by the name of Rigdon, who
ranaway on the 8th of this month.
"I will give the reward of one hundred dollars for each of the above
negroes, to be delivered to me or confined in the jail of Lenoir or
Jones county, or FOR THE KILLING OF THEM, SO THAT I CAN SEE THEM. W.D.
COBB."
In the same number of the Spectator two Justices of the Peace
advertise the same runaways, and give notice that if they do not
immediately return to W.D. Cobb, their master, they will be considered
as outlaws, and any body may kill them. The following is an extract
from the proclamation of the JUSTICES.
"And we do hereby, by virtue of an act of the assembly of this state,
concerning servants and slaves, intimate and declare, if the said
slaves do not surrender themselves and return home to their master
immediately after the publication of these presents, that any person
may kill and destroy said slaves by such means as he or they think
fit, without accusation or impeachment of any crime or offence for so
doing, or without incurring any penalty or forfeiture thereby.
"Given under our hands and seals, this 12th November, 1836.
"B. COLEMAN, J.P. [Seal.]
"JAS. JONES, J.P. [Seal.]"
On the 28th, of April 1836, in the city of St Louis, Missouri, a black
man, named McIntosh who had stabbed an officer, that had arrested him,
was seized by the multitude, fastened to a tree in the midst of the
city, wood piled around him, and in open day and in the presence of
an immense throng of citizens, he was burned to death. The Alton
(Ill.) Telegraph, in its account of the scene says;
"All was silent as death while the executioners were piling wood
around their victim. He said not a word, until feeling that the flames
had seized upon him. He then uttered an awful howl, attempting to sing
and pray, then hung his head, and suffered in silence, except in the
following instance:—After the flames had surrounded their prey, his
eyes burnt out of his head, and his mouth seemingly parched to a
cinder, some one in the crowd, more compassionate than the rest,
proposed to put an end to his misery by shooting him, when it was
replied, 'that would be of no use, since he was already out of pain.'
'No, no,' said the wretch, 'I am not, I am suffering as much as ever;
shoot me, shoot me.' 'No, no,' said one of the fiends who was standing
about the sacrifice they were roasting, 'he shall not be shot. I
would sooner slacken the fire, if that would increase his misery;'
and the man who said this was, as we understand, an OFFICER OF
JUSTICE!"
The St. Louis correspondent of a New York paper adds,
"The shrieks and groans of the victim were loud and piercing, and to
observe one limb after another drop into the fire was awful indeed. He
was about fifteen minutes in dying. I visited the place this morning,
and saw his body, or the remains of it, at the place of execution. He
was burnt to a crump. His legs and arms were gone, and only a part of
his head and body were left."
Lest this demonstration of 'public opinion' should be regarded as a
sudden impulse merely, not an index of the settled tone of feeling in
that community, it is important to add, that the Hon. Luke E. Lawless,
Judge of the Circuit Court of Missouri, at a session of that Court in
the city of St. Louis, some months after the burning of this man,
decided officially that since the burning of McIntosh was the act,
either directly or by countenance of a majority of the citizens, it
is 'a case which transcends the jurisdiction,' of the Grand Jury! Thus
the state of Missouri has proclaimed to the world, that the wretches
who perpetrated that unspeakably diabolical murder, and the thousands
that stood by consenting to it, were her representatives, and the
Bench sanctifies it with the solemnity of a judicial decision.
The 'New Orleans Post,' of June 7, 1836, publishes the following;
"We understand, that a negro man was lately condemned, by the mob, to
be BURNED OVER A SLOW FIRE, which was put into execution at Grand
Gulf, Mississippi, for murdering a black woman, and her master."
Mr. HENRY BRADLEY, of Pennyan, N.Y., has furnished us with an extract
of a letter written by a gentleman in Mississippi to his brother in
that village, detailing the particulars of the preceding transaction.
The letter is dated Grand Gulf, Miss. August 15, 1836. The extract is
as follows:
"I left Vicksburg and came to Grand Gulf. This is a fine place
immediately on the banks of the Mississippi, of something like fifteen
hundred inhabitants in the winter, and at this time, I suppose, there
are not over two hundred white inhabitants, but in the town and its
vicinity there are negroes by thousands. The day I arrived at this
place there was a man by the name of G—— murdered by a negro man
that belonged to him. G—— was born and brought up in A——, state of
New York. His father and mother now live south of A——. He has left a
property here, it is supposed, of forty thousand dollars, and no
family.
"They took the negro, mounted him on a horse, led the horse under a
tree, put a rope around his neck, raised him up by throwing the rope
over a limb; they then got into a quarrel among themselves; some swore
that he should be burnt alive; the rope was cut and the negro dropped
to the ground. He immediately jumped to his feet; they then made him
walk a short distance to a tree; he was then tied fast and a fire
kindled, when another quarrel took place; the fire was pulled away
from him when about half dead, and a committee of twelve appointed to
say in what manner he should be disposed of. They brought in that he
should then be cut down, his head cut off, his body burned, and his
head stuck on a pole at the corner of the road in the edge of the
town. That was done and all parties satisfied!
"G—— owned the negro's wife, and was in the habit of sleeping with
her! The negro said he had killed him, and he believed he should be
rewarded in heaven for it.
"This is but one instance among many of a similar nature.
S.S."
We have received a more detailed account of this transaction from Mr.
William Armstrong, of Putnam, Ohio, through Maj. Horace Nye, of that
place. Mr. A. who has been for some years employed as captain and
supercargo of boats descending the river, was at Grand Gulf at the
time of the tragedy, and witnessed it. It was on the Sabbath.
From Mr. Armstrong's statement, it appears that the slave was
a man of uncommon intelligence; had the over-sight of a large
business—superintended the purchase of supplies for his master,
&c.—that exasperated by the intercourse of his master with his wife,
he was upbraiding her one evening, when his master overhearing him,
went out to quell him, was attacked by the infuriated man and killed
on the spot. The name of the master was Green; he was a native of
Auburn, New York, and had been at the south but a few years.
Mr. EZEKIEL BIRDSEYE, of Cornwall, Conn., a gentleman well known and
highly respected in Litchfield county, who resided a number of years
in South Carolina, gives the following testimony:—
"A man by the name of Waters was killed by his slaves, in Newberry
District. Three of them were tried before the court, and ordered to be
burnt. I was but a few miles distant at the time, and conversed with
those who saw the execution. The slaves were tied to a stake, and
pitch pine wood piled around them, to which the fire was communicated.
Thousands were collected to witness this barbarous transaction. Other
executions of this kind took place in various parts of the state,
during my residence in it, from 1818 to 1824. About three or four
years ago, a young negro was burnt in Abbeville District, for an
attempt at rape."
In the fall of 1837, there was a rumor of a projected insurrection on
the Red River, in Louisiana. The citizens forthwith seized and hanged
NINE SLAVES, AND THREE FREE COLORED MEN, WITHOUT TRIAL. A few months
previous to that transaction, a slave was seized in a similar manner
and publicly burned to death, in Arkansas. In July, 1835, the citizens
of Madison county, Mississippi, were alarmed by rumors of an
insurrection arrested five slaves and publicly executed them without
trial.
The Missouri Republican, April 30, 1838, gives the particulars of the
deliberate murder of a negro man named Tom, a cook on board the
steamboat Pawnee, on her passage up from New Orleans to St. Louis.
Some of the facts stated by the Republican are the following:
"On Friday night, about 10 o'clock, a deaf and dumb German girl was
found in the storeroom with Tom. The door was locked, and at first Tom
denied she was there. The girl's father came. Tom unlocked the door,
and the girl was found secreted in the room behind a barrel. The next
morning some four or five of the deck passengers spoke to the captain
about it. This was about breakfast time. Immediately after he left the
deck, a number of the deck passengers rushed upon the negro, bound his
arms behind his back and carried him forward to the bow of the boat. A
voice cried out 'throw him overboard,' and was responded to from every
quarter of the deck—and in an instant he was plunged into the river.
The whole scene of tying him and throwing him overboard scarcely
occupied ten minutes, and was so precipitate that the officers were
unable to interfere in time to save him.
"There were between two hundred and fifty and three hundred passengers
on board."
The whole process of seizing Tom, dragging him upon deck, binding his
arms behind his back, forcing him to the bow of the boat, and throwing
him overboard, occupied, the editor informs us, about TEN MINUTES, and
of the two hundred and fifty or three hundred deck passengers, with
perhaps as many cabin passengers, it does not appear that a single
individual raised a finger to prevent this deliberate murder; and the
cry "throw him overboard," was it seems, "responded to from every
quarter of the deck!"
Rev. JAMES A. THOME, of Augusta, Ky., son of Arthur Thome, Esq., till
recently a slaveholder, published five years since the following
description of a scene witnessed by him in New Orleans:
"In December of 1833, I landed at New Orleans, in the steamer W——.
It was after night, dark and rainy. The passengers were called out of
the cabin, from the enjoyment of a fire, which the cold, damp
atmosphere rendered very comfortable, by a sudden shout of, 'catch
him—catch him—catch the negro.' The cry was answered by a hundred
voices—'Catch him—kill him,' and a rush from every direction
toward our boat, indicated that the object of pursuit was near. The
next moment we heard a man plunge into the river, a few paces above
us. A crowd gathered upon the shore, with lamps and stones, and clubs,
still crying, 'catch him—kill him—catch him—shoot him.'
"I soon discovered the poor man. He had taken refuge under the prow of
another boat, and was standing in the water up to his waist. The
angry vociferation of his pursuers, did not intimidate him. He defied
them all. 'Don't you dare to come near me, or I will sink you in the
river.' He was armed with despair. For a moment the mob was palsied by
the energy of his threatenings. They were afraid to go to him with a
skiff, but a number of them went on to the boat and tried to seize
him. They threw a noose rope down repeatedly, that they might pull
him up by the neck! but he planted his hand firmly against the boat
and dashed the rope away with his arms. One of them took a long bar of
wood, and leaning over the prow, endeavored to strike him on the head,
The blow must have shattered the skull, but it did not reach low
enough. The monster raised up the heavy club again and said, 'Come out
now, you old rascal, or die.' 'Strike,' said the negro;
'strike—shiver my brains now; I want to die;' and down went the
club again, without striking. This was repeated several times. The
mob, seeing their efforts fruitless, became more enraged and
threatened to stone him, if he did not surrender himself into their
hands. He again defied them, and declared that he would drown himself
in the river, before they should have him. They then resorted to
persuasion, and promised they would not hurt him. 'I'll die first;'
was his only reply. Even the furious mob was awed, and for a while
stood dumb.
"After standing in the cold water for an hour, the miserable being
began to fail. We observed him gradually sinking—his voice grew weak
and tremulous—yet he continued to curse! In the midst of his oaths
he uttered broken sentences—'I did'nt steal the meat—I did'nt
steal—my master lives—master—master lives up the river—(his voice
began to gurgle in his throat, and he was so chilled that his teeth
chattered audibly)—I did'nt—steal—I did'nt steal—my—my
master—my—I want to see my master—I didn't—no—my mas—you
want—you want to kill me—I didn't steal the'—His last words could
just be heard as be sunk under the water.
"During this indescribable scene, not one of the hundred that stood
around made any effort to save the man until he was apparently
drowned. He was then dragged out and stretched on the bow of the
boat, and soon sufficient means were used for his recovery. The brutal
captain ordered him to be taken off his boat—declaring, with an oath,
that he would throw him into the river again, if he was not
immediately removed. I withdrew, sick and horrified with this
appalling exhibition of wickedness.
"Upon inquiry, I learned that the colored man lived some fifty miles
up the Mississippi; that he had been charged with stealing some
article from the wharf; was fired upon with a pistol, and pursued by
the mob.
"In reflecting upon this unmingled cruelty—this insensibility to
suffering and disregard of life—I exclaimed,
'Is there no flesh in man's obdurate heart?'
"One poor man, chased like a wolf by a hundred blood hounds, yelling,
howling, and gnashing their teeth upon him—plunges into the cold
river to seek protection! A crowd of spectators witness the scene,
with all the composure with which a Roman populace would look upon a
gladiatorial show. Not a voice heard in the sufferer's behalf. At
length the powers of nature give way; the blood flows back to the
heart—the teeth chatter—the voice trembles and dies, while the
victim drops down into his grave.
"What an atrocious system is that which leaves two millions of souls,
friendless and powerless—hunted and chased—afflicted and tortured
and driven to death, without the means of redress.—Yet such is the
system of slavery."
The 'public opinion' of slaveholders is illustrated by scores of
announcements in southern papers, like the following, from the
Raleigh, (N.C.) Register, August 20, 1838. Joseph Gale and Son,
editors and proprietors—the father and brother of the editor of the
National Intelligence, Washington city, D.C.
"On Saturday night, Mr. George Holmes, of this county, and some of his
friends, were in pursuit of a runaway slave (the property of Mr.
Holmes) and fell in with him in attempting to make his escape. Mr. H.
discharged a gun at his legs, for the purpose of disabling him; but
unfortunately, the slave stumbled, and the shot struck him near the
small of the back, of which wound he died in a short time. The slave
continued to run some distance after he was shot, until overtaken by
one of the party. We are satisfied, from all that we can learn, that
Mr. H. had no intention of inflicting a mortal wound."
Oh! the gentleman, it seems, only shot at his legs, merely to
'disable'—and it must be expected that every gentleman will amuse
himself in shooting at his own property whenever the notion takes him,
and if he should happen to hit a little higher and go through the
small of the back instead of the legs, why every body says it is
'unfortunate,' and the whole of the editorial corps, instead of
branding him as a barbarous wretch for shooting at his slave, whatever
part be aimed at, join with the oldest editor in North Carolina, in
complacently exonerating Mr. Holmes by saying, "We are satisfied that
Mr. H. had no intention of inflicting a mortal wound." And so 'public
opinion' wraps it up!
The Franklin (La.) Republican, August 19, 1837, has the following:
"NEGROES TAKEN.—Four gentlemen of this vicinity, went out yesterday
for the purpose of finding the camp of some noted runaways, supposed
to be near this place; the camp was discovered about 11 o'clock, the
negroes four in number, three men and one woman, finding they were
discovered, tried to make their escape through the cane; two of them
were fired on, one of which made his escape; the other one fell after
running a short distance, his wounds are not supposed to be dangerous;
the other man was taken without any hurt; the woman also made her
escape."
Thus terminated the mornings amusement of the 'four gentlemen,'
whose exploits are so complacently chronicled by the editor of the
Franklin Republican. The three men and one woman were all fired upon,
it seems, though only one of them was shot down. The half famished
runaways made not the least resistance, they merely rushed in panic
among the canes, at the sight of their pursuers, and the bullets
whistled after them and brought to the ground one poor fellow, who was
carried back by his captors as a trophy of the 'public opinion' among
slaveholders.
In the Macon (Ga.) Telegraph, Nov. 27, 1838, we find the following
account of a runaway's den, and of the good luck of a 'Mr. Adams,' in
running down one of them 'with his excellent dogs:'
"A runaway's den was discovered on Sunday near the Washington Spring,
in a little patch of woods, where it had been for several months, so
artfully concealed under ground, that it was detected only by
accident, though in sight of two or three houses, and near the road
and fields where there has been constant daily passing. The entrance
was concealed by a pile of pine straw, representing a hog bed—which
being removed, discovered a trap door and steps that led to a room
about six feet square, comfortably ceiled with plank, containing a
small fire-place the flue of which was ingeniously conducted above
ground and concealed by the straw. The inmates took the alarm and made
their escape; but Mr. Adams and his excellent dogs being put upon the
trail, soon run down and secured one of them, which proved to be a
negro fellow who had been out about a year. He stated that the other
occupant was a woman, who had been a runaway a still longer time. In
the den was found a quantity of meal, bacon, corn, potatoes, &c., and
various cooking utensils and wearing apparel."
Yes, Mr. Adams' 'EXCELLENT DOGS' did the work! They were well trained,
swift, fresh, keen-scented, 'excellent' men-hunters, and though the
poor fugitive in his frenzied rush for liberty, strained every muscle,
yet they gained upon him, and after dashing through fens, brier-beds,
and the tangled undergrowth till faint and torn, he sinks, and the
blood-hounds are upon him. What blood-vessels the poor struggler burst
in his desperate push for life—how much he was bruised and lacerated
in his plunge through the forest, or how much the dogs tore him, the
Macon editor has not chronicled—they are matters of no moment—but
his heart is touched with the merits of Mr. Adams' 'EXCELLENT DOGS,'
that 'soon run down and secured' a guiltless and trembling human
creature!
The Georgia Constitutionalist, of Jan. 1837, contains the following
letter from the coroner of Barnwell District, South Carolina, dated
Aiken, S.C. Dec. 20, 1836.
"To the Editor of the Constitutionalist:
"I have just returned from an inquest I held over the body of a negro
man, a runaway, that was shot near the South Edisto, in this District,
(Barnwell,) on Saturday last. He came to his death by his own
recklessness. He refused to be taken alive—and said that other
attempts to take him had been made, and he was determined that he
would not be taken. He was at first, (when those in pursuit of him
found it absolutely necessary,) shot at with small shot, with the
intention of merely crippling him. He was shot at several times, and
at last he was so disabled as to be compelled to surrender. He kept in
the run of a creek in a very dense swamp all the time that the
neighbors were in pursuit of him. As soon as the negro was taken, the
best medical aid was procured, but he died on the same evening. One of
the witnesses at the Inquisition, stated that the negro boy said he
was from Mississippi, and belonged to so many persons, that he did not
know who his master was, but again he said his master's name was
Brown. He said his name was Sam, and when asked by another witness,
who his master was, he muttered something like Augusta or Augustine.
The boy was apparently above thirty-five or forty years of age, about
six feet high, slightly yellow in the face, very long beard or
whiskers, and very stout built, and a stern countenance; and appeared
to have been a runaway for a long time.
WILLIAM H. PRITCHARD,
The Norfolk (Va.) Herald, of Feb. 1837, has the following:
"Three negroes in a ship's yawl, came on shore yesterday evening, near
New Point Comfort, and were soon after apprehended and lodged in jail.
Their story is, that they belonged to a brig from New York bound to
Havana, which was cast away to the southward of Cape Henry, some day
last week; that the brig was called the Maria, Captain Whittemore. I
have no doubt they are deserters from some vessel in the bay, as their
statements are very confused and inconsistent. One of these fellows is
a mulatto, and calls himself Isaac Turner; the other two are quite
black, the one passing by the name of James Jones and the other John
Murray. They have all their clothing with them, and are dressed in
sea-faring apparel. They attempted to make their escape, and it was
not till a musket was fired at them, and one of them slightly
wounded, that they surrendered. They will be kept in jail till
something further is discovered respecting them."
The 'St. Francisville (La.) Chronicle,' of Feb. 1, 1839. Gives the
following account of a 'negro hunt,' in that Parish.
"Two or three days since a gentleman of this parish, in hunting
runaway negroes, came upon a camp of them in the swamp on Cat Island.
He succeeded in arresting two of them, but the third made fight; and
upon being shot in the shoulder, fled to a sluice, where the dogs
succeeded in drowning him before assistance could arrive."
"'The dogs succeeded in drowning him'! Poor fellow! He tried hard for
his life, plunged into the sluice, and, with a bullet in his shoulder,
and the blood hounds unfleshing his bones, he bore up for a moment
with feeble stroke as best he might, but 'public opinion,'
'succeeded in drowning him,' and the same 'public opinion,' calls
the man who fired and crippled him, and cheered on the dogs, 'a
gentleman,' and the editor who celebrates the exploit is a 'gentleman'
also!"
A large number of extracts similar to the above, might here be
inserted from Southern newspapers in our possession, but the foregoing
are more than sufficient for our purpose, and we bring to a close the
testimony on this point, with the following. Extract of a letter, from
the Rev. Samuel J. May, of South Scituate, Mass. dated Dec. 20, 1838.
"You doubtless recollect the narrative given in the Oasis, of a slave
in Georgia, who having ranaway from his master, (accounted a very
hospitable and even humane gentleman,) was hunted by his master and
his retainers with horses, dogs, and rifles, and having been driven
into a tree by the hounds, was shot down by his more cruel pursuers.
All the facts there given, and some others equally shocking, connected
with the same case, were first communicated to me in 1833, by Mr. W.
Russell, a highly respectable teacher of youth in Boston. He is
doubtless ready to vouch for them. The same gentleman informed me that
he was keeping school on or near the plantation of the monster who
perpetrated the above outrage upon humanity, that he was even invited
by him to join in the hunt, and when he expressed abhorrence at the
thought, the planter holding up the rifle which he had in his hand
said with an oath, 'damn that rascal, this is the third time he has
runaway, and he shall never run again. I'd rather put a ball into his
side, than into the best buck in the land.'"
Mr. Russell, in the account given by him of this tragedy in the
'Oasis,' page 267, thus describes the slaveholder who made the above
expression, and was the leader of the 'hunt,' and in whose family he
resided at the time as an instructor he says of him—he was "an
opulent planter, in whose family the evils of slaveholding were
palliated by every expedient that a humane and generous disposition
could suggest. He was a man of noble and elevated character, and
distinguished for his generosity, and kindness of heart."
In a letter to Mr. May, dated Feb. 3, 1839, Mr. Russell, speaking of
the hunting of runaways with dogs and guns, says: "Occurrences of a
nature similar to the one related in the 'Oasis,' were not unfrequent
in the interior of Georgia and South Carolina twenty years ago.
Several such fell under my notice within the space of fifteen
months. In two such 'hunts,' I was solicited to join."
The following was written by a sister-in-law of Gerrit Smith, Esq.,
Peterboro. She is married to the son of a North Carolinian.
"In North Carolina, some years ago, several slaves were arrested for
committing serious crimes and depredations, in the neighborhood of
Wilmington, among other things, burning houses, and, in one or more
instances, murder.
"It happened that the wife of one of these slaves resided in one of
the most respectable families in W. in the capacity of nurse. Mr. J.
the first lawyer in the place, came into the room, where the lady of
the house, was sitting, with the nurse, who held a child in her arms,
and, addressing the nurse, said, Hannah! would you know your husband
if you should see him?—Oh, yes, sir, she replied—When HE DREW FROM
BENEATH HIS CLOAK THE HEAD OF THE SLAVE, at the sight of which the
poor woman immediately fainted. The heads of the others were placed
upon poles, in some part of the town, afterwards known as 'Negro Head
Point.'"
We have just received the above testimony, enclosed in a letter from
Mr. Smith, in which he says, "that the fact stated by my
sister-in-law, actually occurred, there can be no doubt."
The following extract from the Diary of the Rev. ELIAS CORNELIUS, we
insert here, having neglected to do it under a preceding head, to
which it more appropriately belongs.
"New Orleans, Sabbath, February 15, 1818. Early this morning
accompanied A.H. Esq. to the hospital, with the view of making
arrangements to preach to such of the sick as could understand
English. The first room we entered presented a scene of human misery,
such as I had never before witnessed. A poor negro man was lying upon
a couch, apparently in great distress; a more miserable object can
hardly be conceived. His face was much disfigured, an IRON COLLAR,
TWO INCHES WIDE AND HALF AN INCH THICK, WAS CLASPED ABOUT HIS NECK,
while one of his feet and part of the leg were in a state of
putrefaction. We inquired the cause of his being in this distressing
condition, and he answered us in a faltering voice, that he was
willing to tell us all the truth.
"He belonged to Mr. —— a Frenchman, ran-away, was caught, and
punished with one hundred lashes! This happened about Christmas; and
during the cold weather at that time, he was confined in the
Cane-house, with a scanty portion of clothing, and without fire. In
this situation his foot had frozen, and mortified, and having been
removed from place to place, he was yesterday brought here by order of
his new master, who was an American. I had no time to protract my
conversation with him then, but resolved to return in a few hours and
pray with him.
"Having returned home, I again visited the hospital at half past
eleven o'clock, and concluded first of all [he was to preach at 12,]
to pray with the poor lacerated negro. I entered the apartment in
which he lay, and observed an old man sitting upon a couch; but,
without saying anything went up to the bed-side of the negro, who
appeared to be asleep. I spoke to him, but he gave no answer. I spoke
again, and moved his head, still he said nothing. My apprehensions
were immediately excited, and I felt for his pulse, but it was gone.
Said I to the old man, 'surely this negro is dead.' 'No,' he answered,
'he has fallen asleep, for he had a very restless season last night.'
I again examined and called the old gentleman to the bed, and alas, it
was found true, that he was dead. Not an eye had witnessed his last
struggle, and I was the first, as it should happen, to discover the
fact. I called several men into the room, and without ceremony they
wrapped him in a sheet, and carried him to the dead-house as it is
called."—Edwards' Life of Rev. Elias Cornelius, pp. 101, 2, 3.
THE PROTECTION EXTENDED BY 'PUBLIC OPINION,' TO THE HEALTH[38] OF THE
SLAVES.
This may be judged of from the fact that it is perfectly notorious
among slaveholders, both North and South, that of the tens of
thousands of slaves sold annually in the northern slave states to be
transported to the south, large numbers of them die under the severe,
process of acclimation, all suffer more or less, and multitudes
much, in their health and strength, during their first years in the
far south and south west. That such is the case is sufficiently proved
by the care taken by all who advertise for sale or hire in Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, &c. to inform the reader, that their
slaves are 'Creoles,' 'southern born,' 'country born,' &c. or if they
are from the north, that they are 'acclimated,' and the importance
attached to their acclimation, is shown in the fact, that it is
generally distinguished from the rest of the advertisements either by
italics or CAPITALS. Almost every newspaper published in the states
far south contains advertisements like the following.
[Footnote 38: See pp. 37-39.]
From the "Vicksburg (Mi.) Register," Dec. 27, 1838.
"I OFFER my plantation for sale. Also seventy-five acclimated
Negroes. O.B. COBB."
From the "Southerner," June 7, 1837.
"I WILL sell my Old-River plantation near Columbia in Arkansas;—also
ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY ACCLIMATED SLAVES.
BENJ. HUGHES."
From the "Planters' (La.) Intelligencer," March 22.
"Probate sale—Will be offered for sale at Public Auction, to the
highest bidder, ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY acclimated slaves."
G.W. KEETON.
From the "Arkansas Advocate," May 22, 1837.
"By virtue of a Deed of Trust, executed to me, I will sell at public
auction at Fisher's Prairie, Arkansas, sixty LIKELY NEGROES,
consisting of Men, Women, Boys and Girls, the most of whom are WELL
ACCLIMATED.
GRANDISON D. ROYSTON, Trustee."
From the "New Orleans Bee," Feb. 9, 1838.
"VALUABLE ACCLIMATED NEGROES"
"Will be sold on Saturday, 10th inst. at 12 o'clock, at the city
exchange, St. Louis street."
Then follows a description of the slaves, closing with the same
assertion, which forms the caption of the advertisement "ALL
ACCLIMATED."
General Felix Houston, of Natchez, advertises in the "Natchez
Courier," April 6, 1838, "Thirty five very fine acclimated Negroes."
Without inserting more advertisements, suffice it to say, that when
slaves are advertised for sale or hire, in the lower southern country,
if they are natives, or have lived in that region long enough to
become acclimated, it is invariably stated.
But we are not left to conjecture the amount of suffering
experienced by slaves from the north in undergoing the severe process
of 'seasoning' to the climate, or 'acclimation' A writer in the New
Orleans Argus, September, 1830, in an article on the culture of the
sugar cane, says; 'The loss by death in bringing slaves from a
northern climate, which our planters are under the necessity of doing,
is not less than TWENTY-FIVE PER CENT.'
Nothwithstanding the immense amount of suffering endured in the
process of acclimation, and the fearful waste of life, and the
notoriety of this fact, still the 'public opinion' of Virginia,
Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, &c. annually DRIVES to the far
south, thousands of their slaves to undergo these sufferings, and the
'public opinion,' of the far south buys them, and forces the helpless
victims to endure them.
THE 'PROTECTION' VOUCHSAFED BY 'PUBLIC OPINION,' TO LIBERTY.
This is shown by hundreds of advertisements in southern papers, like
the following:
From the "Mobile Register," July 21. 1837. "WILL BE SOLD CHEAP FOR
CASH, in front of the Court House of Mobile County, on the 22d day of
July next, one mulatto man named HENRY HALL, WHO SAYS HE IS FREE; his
owner or owners, if any, having failed to demand him, he is to be
sold according to the statute in such cases made and provided, to pay
Jail fees.
WM. MAGEE, Sh'ff M.C."
From the "Grand Gulf (Miss.) Advertiser," Dec. 7, 1838.
"COMMITTED to the jail of Chickasaw Co. Edmund, Martha, John and
Louisa; the man 50, the woman 35, John 3 years old, and Louisa 14
months. They say they are FREE and were decoyed to this state."
The "Southern Argus," of July 25, 1837, contains the following.
"RANAWAY from my plantation, a negro boy named William. Said boy was
taken up by Thomas Walton, and says he was free, and that his
parents live near Shawneetown, Illinois, and that he was taken from
that place in July 1836; says his father's name is William, and his
mother's Sally Brown, and that they moved from Fredericksburg,
Virginia. I will give twenty dollars to any person who will deliver
said boy to me or Col. Byrn, Columbus. SAMUEL H. BYRN"
The first of the following advertisements was a standing one, in the
"Vicksburg Register," from Dec. 1835 till Aug. 1836. The second
advertises the same FREE man for sale.
"SHERIFF'S SALE" "COMMITTED, to the jail of Warren county, as a
Runaway, on the 23d inst. a Negro man, who calls himself John J.
Robinson; says that he is free, says that he kept a baker's shop in
Columbus, Miss. and that he peddled through the Chickasaw nation to
Pontotoc, and came to Memphis, where he sold his horse, took water,
and came to this place. The owner of said boy is requested to come
forward, prove property, pay charges, and take him away, or he will be
dealt with as the law directs.
WM. EVERETT, Jailer.
Dec. 24, 1835"
"NOTICE is hereby given, that the above described boy, who calls
himself John J. Robinson, having been confined in the Jail of Warren
county as a Runaway, for six months—and having been regularly
advertised during this period, I shall proceed to sell said Negro boy
at public auction, to the highest bidder for cash, at the door of the
Court House in Vicksburg, on Monday, 1st day of August, 1836, in
pursuance of the statute in such cases made and provided.
E. W. MORRIS, Sheriff.
Vicksburg, July 2, 1836."
See "Newborn (N.C.) Spectator," of Jan. 5, 1838, for the following
advertisement.
"RANAWAY, from the subscriber a negro man known as Frank Pilot. He is
five feet eight inches high, dark complexion, and about 50 years old,
HAS BEEN FREE SINCE 1829—is now my property, as heir at law of his
last owner, Samuel Ralston, dec. I will give the above reward if he
is taken and confined in any jail so that I can get him.
SAMUEL RALSTON. Pactolus, Pitt County."
From the Tuscaloosa (Ala.) "Flag of the Union," June 7.
"COMMITTED to the jail of Tuscaloosa county, a negro man, who says his
name is Robert Winfield, and says he is free.
R.W. BARBER, Jailer."
That "public opinion," in the slave states affords no protection to
the liberty of colored persons, even after those persons become
legally free, by the operation of their own laws, is declared by
Governor Comegys, of Delaware, in his recent address to the
Legislature of that state, Jan. 1839. The Governor, commenting upon
the law of the state which provides that persons convicted of certain
crimes shall be sold as servants for a limited time, says,
"The case is widely different with the negro(!) Although ordered to
be disposed of as a servant for a term of years, perpetual slavery in
the south is his inevitable doom; unless, peradventure, age or
disease may have rendered him worthless, or some resident of the
State, from motives of benevolence, will pay for him three or four
times his intrinsic value. It matters not for how short a time he is
ordered to be sold, so that he can be carried from the State. Once
beyond its limits, all chance of restored freedom is gone—for he is
removed far from the reach of any testimony to aid him in an effort to
be released from bondage, when his legal term of servitude has
expired. Of the many colored convicts sold out of the State, it is
believed none ever return. Of course they are purchased with the
express view to their transportation for life, and bring such
enormous prices as to prevent all competition on the part of those
of our citizens who require their services, and would keep them in
the State."
From the "Memphis (Ten.) Enquirer," Dec. 28, 1838.
"$50 REWARD. Ranaway, from the subscriber, on Thursday last, a negro
man named Isaac, 22 years old, about 5 feet 10 or 11 inches high, dark
complexion, well made, full face, speaks quick, and very correctly for
a negro. He was originally from New-York, and no doubt will attempt
to pass himself as free. I will give the above reward for his
apprehension and delivery, or confinement, so that I obtain him, if
taken out of the state, or $30 if taken within the state.
JNO. SIMPSON. Memphis, Dec. 28."
Mark, with what shameless hardihood this JNO. SIMPSON, tells the
public that he knew Isaac Wright was a free man! 'HE WAS ORIGINALLY
FROM NEW YORK,' he tells us. And yet he adds with brazen effrontery,
'he will attempt to pass himself as free.' This Isaac Wright, was
shipped by a man named Lewis, of New Bedford, Massachusetts, and sold
as a slave in New Orleans. After passing through several hands, and
being flogged nearly to death, he made his escape, and five days ago,
(March 5,) returned to his friends in Philadelphia.
From the "Baltimore Sun," Dec. 23, 1838.
"FREE NEGROES—Merry Ewall, a FREE NEGRO, from Virginia, was committed
to jail, at Snow Hill, Md. last week, for remaining in the State
longer than is allowed by the law of 1831. The fine in his case
amounts to $225. Capril Purnell, a negro from Delaware, is now in jail
in the same place, for a violation of the same act. His fine amounts
to FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS, and he WILL BE SOLD IN A SHORT TIME."
The following is the decision of the Supreme Court, of Louisiana, in
the case of Gomez vs. Bonneval, Martin's La. Reports, 656, and
Wheeler's "Law of Slavery," p. 380-1.
Marginal remark of the Compiler.—"A slave does not become free on
his being illegally imported into the state."
"Per Cur. Derbigny, J. The petitioner is a negro in actual state of
slavery; he claims his freedom, and is bound to prove it. In his
attempt, however, to show that he was free before he was introduced
into this country, he has failed, so that his claim rests entirely on
the laws prohibiting the introduction of slaves in the United States.
That the plaintiff was imported since that prohibition does exist is a
fact sufficiently established by the evidence. What right he has
acquired under the laws forbidding such importation is the only
question which we have to examine. Formerly, while the act dividing
Louisiana into two territories was in force in this country, slaves
introduced here in contravention to it, were freed by operation of
law; but that act was merged in the legislative provisions which were
subsequently enacted on the subject of importation of slaves into the
United States generally. Under the now existing laws, the individuals
thus imported acquire no personal right, they are mere passive
beings, who are disposed of according to the will of the different
state legislatures. In this country they are to remain slaves, and
TO BE SOLD FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE STATE. The plaintiff, therefore, has
nothing to claim as a freeman; and as to a mere change of master,
should such be his wish, he cannot be listened to in a court of
justice."
Extract from a speech of Mr. Thomson of Penn. in Congress, March 1,
1826, on the prisons in the District of Columbia.
"I visited the prisons twice that I might myself ascertain the truth.
* * In one of these cells (but eight feet square,) were confined at
that time, seven persons, three women and four children. The children
were confined under a strange system of law in this District, by which
a colored person who alleges HE IS FREE, and appeals to the
tribunals of the country, to have the matter tried, is COMMITTED TO
PRISON, till the decision takes place. They were almost naked—one of
them was sick, lying on the damp brick floor, without bed, pillow, or
covering. In this abominable cell, seven human beings were confined
day by day, and night after night, without a bed, chair, or stool, or
any other of the most common necessaries of life."—Gales'
Congressional Debates, v.2, p.1480.
The following facts serve to show, that the present generation of
slaveholders do but follow in the footsteps of their fathers, in their
zeal for LIBERTY.
Extract from a document submitted by the Committee of the yearly
meeting of Friends in Philadelphia, to the Committee of Congress, to
whom was referred the memorial of the people called Quakers, in 1797.
"In the latter part of the year 1776, several of the people called
Quakers, residing in the counties of Perquimans and Pasquotank, in the
state of North Carolina, liberated their negroes, as it was then clear
there was no existing law to prevent their so doing; for the law of
1741 could not at that time be carried into effect; and they were
suffered to remain free, until a law passed, in the spring of 1777,
under which they were taken up and sold, contrary to the Bill of
Rights, recognized in the constitution of that state, as a part
thereof, and to which it was annexed.
"In the spring of 1777, when the General Assembly met for the first
time, a law was enacted to prevent slaves from being emancipated,
except for meritorious services, &c. to be judged of by the county
courts or the general assembly; and ordering, that if any should be
manumitted in any other way, they be taken up, and the county courts
within whose jurisdictions they are apprehended should order them to
be sold. Under this law the county courts of Perquimans and
Pasquotank, in the year 1777, ordered A LARGE NUMBER OF PERSONS TO BE
SOLD, WHO WERE FREE AT THE TIME THE LAW WAS MADE. In the year 1778
several of those cases were, by certiorari, brought before the
superior court for the district of Edentorn, where the decisions of
the county courts were reversed, the superior court declaring, that
said county courts, in such their proceedings, have exceeded their
jurisdiction, violated the rights of the subject, and acted in direct
opposition to the Bill of Rights of this state, considered justly as
part of the constitution thereof; by giving to a law, not intended to
affect this case, a retrospective operation, thereby to deprive free
men of this state of their liberty, contrary to the laws of the land.
In consequence of this decree several of the negroes were again set at
liberty; but the next General Assembly, early in 1779, passed a law,
wherein they mention, that doubts have arisen, whether the purchasers
of such slaves have a good and legal title thereto, and CONFIRM the
same; under which they were again taken up by the purchasers and
reduced to slavery."
[The number of persons thus re-enslaved was 134.]
The following are the decrees of the Courts, ordering the sale of
those freemen:—
"Perquimans County, July term, at Hartford, A.D. 1777.
"These may certify, that it was then and there ordered, that the
sheriff of the county, to-morrow morning, at ten o'clock, expose to
sale, to the highest bidder, for ready money, at the court-house door,
the several negroes taken up as free, and in his custody, agreeable to
law.
"Test. WM. SKINNER, Clerk. "A true copy, 25th August, 1791. "Test. J.
HARVEY, Clerk."
"Pasquotank County, September Court, &c. &c. 1777.
"Present, the Worshipful Thomas Boyd, Timothy Hickson, John Paelin,
Edmund Clancey, Joseph Reading, and Thomas Rees, Esqrs. Justices.
"It was then and there ordered, that Thomas Reading, Esq. take the
FREE negroes taken up under an act to prevent domestic insurrections
and other purposes, and expose the same to the best bidder, at
public vendue, for ready money, and be accountable for the same,
agreeable to the aforesaid act; and make return to this or the next
succeeding court of his proceedings.
"A copy. ENOCH REESE, C.C."
THE PROTECTION OF "PUBLIC OPINION" TO DOMESTICS TIES.
The barbarous indifference with which slaveholders regard the forcible
sundering of husbands and wives, parents and children, brothers and
sisters, and the unfeeling brutality indicated by the language in
which they describe the efforts made by the slaves, in their yearnings
after those from whom they have been torn away, reveals a 'public
opinion' towards them as dead to their agony as if they were cattle.
It is well nigh impossible to open a southern paper without finding
evidence of this. Though the truth of this assertion can hardly be
called in question, we subjoin a few illustrations, and could easily
give hundreds.
From the "Savannah Georgian," Jan. 17, 1839. "$100 reward will be
given for my two fellows, Abram and Frank. Abram has a wife at
Colonel Stewart's, in Liberty county, and a sister in Savannah, at
Capt. Grovenstine's. Frank has a wife at Mr. Le Cont's, Liberty
county; a mother at Thunderbolt, and a sister in Savannah.
WM. ROBARTS. Wallhourville, 5th Jan. 1839"
From the "Lexington (Ky.) Intelligencer." July 7, 1838.
"$160 Reward.—Ranaway from the subscribers living in this city, on
Saturday 16th inst. a negro man, named Dick, about 37 years of age. It
is highly probable said boy will make for New Orleans as he has a
wife living in that city, and he has been heard to say frequently
that he was determined to go to New Orleans.
"DRAKE C. THOMPSON. "Lexington, June 17, 1838"
From the "Southern Argus," Oct. 31, 1837.
"Runaway—my negro man, Frederick, about 20 years of age. He is no
doubt near the plantation of G.W. Corprew, Esq of Noxubbee County,
Mississippi, as his wife belongs to that gentleman, and he followed
her from my residence. The above reward will be paid to any one who
will confine him in jail and inform me of it at Athens, Ala. "Athens,
Alabama. KERKMAN LEWIS."
From the "Savannah Georgian," July 8, 1837.
"Ran away from the subscriber, his man Joe. He visits the city
occasionally, where he has been harbored by his mother and sister.
I will give one hundred dollars for proof sufficient to convict his
harborers. R.P.T. MONGIN."
The "Macon (Georgia) Messenger," Nov. 23, 1837, has the following:—
"$25 Reward.—Ran away, a negro man, named Cain. He was brought from
Florida, and has a wife near Mariana, and probably will attempt to
make his way there. H.L. COOK."
From the "Richmond (Va.) Whig," July 25, 1837.
"Absconded from the subscriber, a negro man, by the name of Wilson. He
was born in the county of New Kent, and raised by a gentleman named
Ratliffe, and by him sold to a gentleman named Taylor, on whose farm
he had a wife and several children. Mr. Taylor sold him to a Mr.
Slater, who, in consequence of removing to Alabama, Wilson left; and
when retaken was sold, and afterwards purchased, by his present owner,
from T. McCargo and Co. of Richmond."
From the "Savannah (Ga. ) Republican," Sept. 3, 1838.
"$20 Reward for my negro man Jim.—Jim is about 50 or 55 years of age.
It is probable he will aim for Savannah, as he said he had children
in that vicinity.
J.G. OWENS.
From the "Staunton (Va.) Spectator," Jan. 3, 1839.
"Runaway, Jesse.—He has a wife, who belongs to Mr. John Ruff, of
Lexington, Rockbridge county, and he may probably be lurking in that
neighborhood. MOSES McCUE."
From the "Augusta (Georgia) Chronicle," July 10, 1837.
"$120 Reward for my negro Charlotte. She is about 20 years old. She
was purchased some months past from Mr. Thomas. J. Walton, of Augusta,
by Thomas W. Oliver; and, as her mother and acquaintances live in
that city, it is very likely she is harbored by some of them. MARTHA
OLIVER."
From the "Raleigh (N.C.) Register," July 18, 1837.
Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Jim, the property of
Mrs. Elizabeth Whitfield. He has a wife at the late Hardy Jones',
and may probably be lurking in that neighborhood. JOHN O'RORKE."
From the "Richmond (Va.) Compiler," Sept. 8, 1837.
"Ranaway from the subscriber, Ben. He ran off without any known cause,
and I suppose he is aiming to go to his wife, who was carried from
the neighborhood last winter. JOHN HUNT."
From the "Charleston (S.C.) Mercury," Aug. 1, 1837.
"Absconded from Mr. E.D. Bailey, on Wadmalaw, his negro man, named
Saby. Said fellow was purchased in January, from Francis Dickinson, of
St. Paul's parish, and is probably now in that neighborhood, where he
has a wife. THOMAS N. GADSDEN."
From the "Portsmouth (Va.) Times," August 3, 1838.
"$50 dollars Reward will be given for the apprehension of my negro man
Isaac. He has a wife at James M. Riddick's, of Gates county, N.C.
where he may probably be lurking. C. MILLER."
From the "Savannah (Georgia) Republican." May 24, 1838.
"$40 Reward.—Ran away from the subscriber in Savannah, his negro girl
Patsey. She was purchased among the gang of negroes, known as the
Hargreave's estate. She is no doubt lurking about Liberty county, at
which place she has relatives. EDWARD HOUSTOUN, of Florida"
From the "Charleston (S.C.) Courier," June 29, 1837.
"$20 Reward will be paid for the apprehension and delivery, at the
workhouse in Charleston, of a mulatto woman, named Ida. It is probable
she may have made her way into Georgia, where she has connections.
MATTHEW MUGGRIDGE."
From the "Norfolk (Va.) Beacon," March 31, 1838.
"The subscriber will give $20 for the apprehension of his negro woman,
Maria, who ran away about twelve months since. She is known to be
lurking in or about Chuckatuch, in the county of Nansemond, where she
has a husband, and formerly belonged. PETER ONEILL."
From the "Macon (Georgia) Messenger," Jan. 16, 1839.
"Ranaway from the subscriber, two negroes, Davis, a man about 45 years
old; also Peggy, his wife, near the same age. Said negroes will
probably make their way to Columbia county, as they have children
living in that county. I will liberally reward any person who may
deliver them to me. NEHEMIAH KING."
From the "Petersburg (Va.) Constellation," June 27, 1837.
"Ranaway, a negro man, named Peter. He has a wife at the plantation
of Mr. C. Haws, near Suffolk, where it is supposed he is still
lurking. JOHN L. DUNN."
From the "Richmond (Va.) Whig," Dec. 7, 1739.
"Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man, named John Lewis. It is
supposed that he is lurking about in New Kent county, where he
professes to have a wife. HILL JONES, Agent for R.F. & P. Railroad Co."
From the "Red River (La.) Whig," June 2d, 1838.
"Ran away from the subscriber, a mulatto woman, named Maria. It is
probable she may be found in the neighborhood of Mr. Jesse Bynum's
plantation, where she has relations, &c. THOMAS J. WELLS."
From the "Lexington (Ky.) Observer and Reporter," Sept. 28, 1838.
"$50 Reward.—Ran away from the subscriber, a negro girl, named Maria.
She is of a copper color, between 13 and 14 years of age—bare
headed and bare footed. She is small of her age—very sprightly and
very likely. She stated she was going to see her mother at
Maysville. SANFORD THOMSON."
From the "Jackson (Tenn.) Telegraph," Sept. 14, 1838.
"Committed to the jail of Madison county, a negro woman, who calls her
name Fanny, and says she belongs to William Miller, of Mobile. She
formerly belonged to John Givins, of this county, who now owns
several of her children. DAVID SHROPSHIRE, Jailor."
From the "Norfolk (Va.) Beacon," July 3d, 1838.
"Runaway from my plantation below Edenton, my negro man, Nelson. He
has a mother living at Mr. James Goodwin's, in Ballahack, Perquimans
county; and two brothers, one belonging to Job Parker, and the other
to Josiah Coffield. WM. D. RASCOE."
From the "Charleston (S.C.) Courier," Jan. 12, 1838.
"$100 Reward.—Run away from the subscriber, his negro fellow, John.
He is well known about the city as one of my bread carriers: has a
wife living at Mrs. Weston's, on Hempstead. John formerly belonged to
Mrs. Moor, near St. Paul's church, where his mother still lives, and
has been harbored by her before.
JOHN T. MARSHALL.
From the "Newbern (N.C.) Sentinel," March 17, 1837.
"Ranaway, Moses, a black fellow, about 40 years of age—has a wife
in Washington.
THOMAS BRAGG, Sen.
Warrenton, N.C."
From the "Richmond (Va.) Whig," June 30, 1837.
"Ranaway, my man Peter.—He has a sister and mother in New Kent,
and a wife about fifteen or eighteen miles above Richmond, at or
about Taylorsville. THEO. A. LACY."
From the "New Orleans Bulletin," Feb. 7, 1838.
"Ranaway, my negro Philip, aged about 40 years.—He may have gone to
St. Louis, as he has a wife there. W.G. CLARK, 70 New Levee."
From the "Georgian," Jan. 29, 1838.
"A Reward of $5 will be paid for the apprehension of his negro woman,
Diana. Diana is from 45 to 50 age. She formerly belonged to Mr. Nath.
Law, of Liberty county, where her husband still lives. She will
endeavor to go there perhaps. D. O'BYRNE."
From the "Richmond (Va.) Enquirer," Feb. 20, 1838.
"$10 Reward for a negro woman, named Sally, 40 years old. We have just
reason to believe the said negro to be now lurking on the James River
Canal, or in the Green Spring neighborhood, where, we are informed,
her husband resides. The above reward will be given to any person
securing her.
POLLY C. SHIELDS.
"$50 Reward.—Ran away from the subscriber, his negro man Pauladore,
commonly called Paul. I understand GEN. R.Y. HAYNE has purchased his
wife and children from H.L. PINCKNEY, Esq. and has them now on his
plantation at Goosecreek, where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently
lurking. T. DAVIS."
"$25 Reward.—Ran away from the subscriber, a negro woman, named
Matilda. It is thought she may be somewhere up James River, as she was
claimed as a wife by some boatman in Goochland. J. ALVIS."
"Stop the Runaway!!!—$25 Reward. Ranaway from the Eagle Tavern, a
negro fellow, named Nat. He is no doubt attempting to follow his
wife, who was lately sold to a speculator named Redmond. The above
reward will be paid by Mrs. Lucy M. Downman, of Sussex county, Va."
Multitudes of advertisements like the above appear annually in the
southern papers. Reader, look at the preceding list—mark the
unfeeling barbarity with which their masters and mistresses describe
the struggles and perils of sundered husbands and wives, parents and
children, in their weary midnight travels through forests and rivers,
with torn limbs and breaking hearts, seeking the embraces of each
other's love. In one instance, a mother torn from all her children and
taken to a remote part of another state, presses her way back through
the wilderness, hundreds of miles, to clasp once more her children to
her heart: but, when she has arrived within a few miles of them, in
the same county, is discovered, seized, dragged to jail, and her
purchaser told, through an advertisement, that she awaits his order.
But we need not trace out the harrowing details already before the
reader.
Rev. C.S. RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, who resided some time in
Kentucky, says;—
"I was told the following fact by a young lady, daughter of a
slaveholder in Boone county, Kentucky, who lived within half a mile of
Mr. Hughes' farm. Hughes and Neil traded in slaves down the river:
they had bought up a part of their stock in the upper counties of
Kentucky, and brought them down to Louisville, where the remainder of
their drove was in jail, waiting their arrival. Just before the
steamboat put off for the lower country, two negro women were offered
for sale, each of them having a young child at the breast. The traders
bought them, took their babes from their arms, and offered them to the
highest bidder; and they were sold for one dollar apiece, whilst the
stricken parents were driven on board the boat; and in an hour were on
their way to the New Orleans market. You are aware that a young babe
decreases the value of a field hand in the lower country, whilst it
increases her value in the 'breeding states.'"
The following is an extract from an address, published by the
Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky, to the churches under their care, in
1835:—
"Brothers and sisters, parents and children, husbands and wives, are
torn asunder, and permitted to see each other no more. These acts
are DAILY occurring in the midst of us. The shrieks and the agony,
often witnessed on such occasions, proclaim, with a trumpet tongue,
the iniquity of our system. There is not a neighborhood where these
heart-rending scenes are not displayed. There is not a village or
road that does not behold the sad procession of manacled outcasts,
whose mournful countenances tell that they are exiled by force from
ALL THAT THEIR HEARTS HOLD DEAR."—Address, p. 12.
Professor ANDREWS, late of the University of North Carolina, in his
recent work on Slavery and the Slave Trade, page 147, in relating a
conversation with a slave-trader, whom he met near Washington City,
says, he inquired,
"'Do you often buy the wife without the husband?' 'Yes, VERY OFTEN;
and FREQUENTLY, too, they sell me the mother while they keep her
children. I have often known them take away the infant from its
mother's breast, and keep it, while they sold her.'"
The following sale is advertised in the "Georgia Journal," Jan, 2,
1838.
"Will be sold, the following PROPERTY, to wit: One —— CHILD, by the
name of James, about eight months old, levied on as the property of
Gabriel Gunn."
The following is a standing advertisement in the Charleston (S.C.)
papers:—
"120 Negroes for Sale—The subscriber has just arrived from
Petersburg, Virginia, with one hundred and twenty likely young
negroes of both sexes and every description, which he offers for sale
on the most reasonable terms.
"The lot now on hand consists of plough boys several likely and
well-qualified house servants of both sexes, several women with
children, small girls suitable for nurses, and several SMALL BOYS
WITHOUT THEIR MOTHERS. Planters and traders are earnestly requested to
give the subscriber a call previously to making purchases elsewhere,
as he is enabled and will sell as cheap, or cheaper, than can be sold
by any other person in the trade. BENJAMIN DAVIS. Hamburg, S.C. Sept.
28, 1838."
Extract Of a letter to a member of Congress from a friend in
Mississippi, published in the "Washington Globe," June, 1837.
"The times are truly alarming here. Many plantations are entirely
stripped of negroes (protection!) and horses, by the marshal or
sheriff.—Suits are multiplying—two thousand five hundred in the
United States Circuit Court, and three thousand in Hinds County
Court."
Testimony of MR. SILAS STONE, of Hudson, New York. Mr. Stone is a
member of the Episcopal Church, has several times been elected an
Assessor of the city of Hudson, and for three years has filled the
office of Treasurer of the County. In the fall of 1807, Mr. Stone
witnessed a sale of slaves, in Charleston, South Carolina, which he
thus describes in a communication recently received from him.
"I saw droves of the poor fellows driven to the slave markets kept in
different parts of the city, one of which I visited. The arrangements
of this place appeared something like our northern horse-markets,
having sheds, or barns, in the rear of a public house, where alcohol
was a handy ingredient to stimulate the spirit of jockeying. As the
traders appeared, lots of negroes were brought from the stables into
the bar room, and by a flourish of the whip were made to assume an
active appearance. 'What will you give for these fellows?' 'How old
are they?' 'Are they healthy?' 'Are they quick?' &c. at the same time
the owner would give them a cut with a cowhide, and tell them to dance
and jump, cursing and swearing at them if they did not move quick. In
fact all the transactions in buying and selling slaves, partakes of
jockey-ship, as much as buying and selling horses. There was as little
regard paid to the feelings of the former as we witness in the latter.
"From these scenes I turn to another, which took place in front of the
noble 'Exchange Buildings,' in the heart of the city. On the left side
of the steps, as you leave the main hall, immediately under the
windows of that proud building, was a stage built, on which a mother
with eight children were placed, and sold at auction. I watched their
emotions closely, and saw their feelings were in accordance to human
nature. The sale began with the eldest child, who, being struck off to
the highest bidder, was taken from the stage or platform by the
purchaser, and led to his wagon and stowed away, to be carried into
the country; the second, and third were also sold, and so until seven
of the children were torn from their mother, while her discernment
told her they were to be separated probably forever, causing in that
mother the most agonizing sobs and cries, in which the children seemed
to share. The scene beggars description; suffice it to say, it was
sufficient to cause tears from one at least 'whose skin was not
colored like their own,' and I was not ashamed to give vent to them."
THE "PROTECTION" AFFORDED BY "PUBLIC OPINION"
TO CHILDHOOD AND OLD AGE.
In the "New Orleans Bee," May 31, 1837, MR. P. BAHI, gives notice that
he has committed to JAIL as a runaway 'a little negro AGED ABOUT
SEVEN YEARS.'
In the "Mobile Advertiser," Sept. 13, 1838, WILLIAM MAGEE, Sheriff,
gives notice that George Walton, Esq. Mayor of the city has
committed to JAIL as a runaway slave, Jordan, ABOUT TWELVE YEARS
OLD, and the Sheriff proceeds to give notice that if no one claims him
the boy will be sold as a slave to pay jail fees.
In the "Memphis (Tenn.) Gazette," May 2, 1837, W.H. MONTGOMERY
advertises that he will sell at auction a BOY AGED 14, ANOTHER AGED
12, AND A GIRL 10, to pay the debts of their deceased master.
B.F. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, Natchitoches (La.) advertises in the
'Herald,' of May 17, 1837, that he has "committed to JAIL, as a
runaway a negro boy BETWEEN 11 AND 12 YEARS OF AGE."
In the "Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle," Feb. 13, 1838. R.H. JONES, jailor,
says, "Brought to jail a negro woman Sarah, she is about 60 or 65
years old."
In the "Winchester Virginian," August 8, 1837, Mr. R.H. MENIFEE,
offers ten dollars reward to any one who will catch and lodge in jail,
Abram and Nelly, about 60 years old, so that he can get them
again.
J. SNOWDEN, Jailor, Columbia, S.C. gives notice in the "Telescope,"
Nov, 18, 1837, that he has committed to jail as a runaway slave,
"Caroline fifty years of age."
Y.S. PICKARD, Jailor, Savannah, Georgia, gives notice in the
"Georgian," June 22, 1837, that he has taken up for a runaway and
lodged in jail Charles, 60 years of age.
In the Savannah "Georgian," April 12, 1837, Mr. J. CUYLER, says he
will give five dollars, to anyone who will catch and bring back to him
"Saman, an old negro man, and grey, and has only one eye."
In the "Macon (Ga.) Telegraph," Jan. 15, 1839, MESSRS. T. AND L.
NAPIER, advertise for sale Nancy, a woman 65 years of age, and
Peggy, a woman 65 years of age.
The following is from the "Columbian (Ga.) Enquirer," March 8, 1838.
"$25 REWARD.—Ranaway, a Negro Woman named MATILDA, aged about 30 or
35 years. Also, on the same night, a Negro Fellow of small size, VERY
AGED, stoop-shouldered, who walks VERY DECREPIDLY, is supposed to
have gone off. His name is DAVE, and he has claimed Matilda for wife.
It may be they have gone off together.
"I will give twenty-five dollars for the woman, delivered to me in
Muscogee county, or confined in any jail so that I can get her. MOSES
BUTT."
J.B. RANDALL, Jailor, Cobb (Co.) Georgia, advertises an old negro man,
in the "Milledgeville Recorder," Nov. 6, 1838.
"A NEGRO MAN, has been lodged in the common jail of this county, who
says his name is JUPITER. He has lost all his front teeth above and
below—speaks very indistinctly, is very lame, so that he can hardly
walk."
Rev. CHARLES STEWART RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, who spent some time
in slave states, speaking of his residence in Kentucky, says:—
"One Sabbath morning, whilst riding to meeting near Burlington, Boone
Co. Kentucky, in company with Mr. Willis, a teacher of sacred music
and a member of the Presbyterian Church, I was startled at mingled
shouts and screams, proceeding from an old log house, some distance
from the road side. As we passed it, some five or six boys from 12 to
15 years of age, came out, some of them cracking whips, followed by
two colored boys crying. I asked Mr. W. what the scene meant. 'Oh,' he
replied, 'those boys have been whipping the niggers; that is the way
we bring slaves into subjection in Kentucky—we let the children beat
them.' The boys returned again into the house, and again their
shouting and stamping was heard, but ever and anon a scream of agony
that would not be drowned, rose above the uproar; thus they continued
till the sounds were lost in the distance."
Well did Jefferson say, that the children of slaveholders are 'NURSED,
EDUCATED, AND DAILY EXERCISED IN TYRANNY.'
The 'protection' thrown around a mother's yearnings, and the
helplessness of childhood by the 'public opinion' of slaveholders, is
shown by thousands of advertisements of which the following are
samples.
From the "New Orleans Bulletin," June 2.
"NEGROES FOR SALE.—A negro woman 21 years of age, and has two
children, one eight and the other three years. Said negroes will be
sold SEPARATELY or together as desired. The woman is a good
seamstress. She will be sold low for cash, or exchanged for
GROCERIES. For terms apply to MAYHEW BLISS, & CO. 1 Front Levee."
From the "Georgia Journal," Nov. 7.
"TO BE SOLD—One negro girl about 18 months old, belonging to the
estate of William Chambers, dec'd. Sold for the purpose of
distribution!! JETHRO DEAN, SAMUEL BEALL, Ex'ors."
From the "Natchez Courier," April 2, 1838.
"NOTICE—Is hereby given that the undersigned pursuant to a certain
Deed of Trust will on Thursday the 12th day of April next, expose to
sale at the Court House, to the highest bidder for cash, the following
Negro slaves, to wit; Fanny, aged about 28 years; Mary, aged about 7
years; Amanda, aged about 3 months; Wilson, aged about 9 months.
Said slaves, to be sold for the satisfaction of the debt secured in
said Deed of Trust. W.J. MINOR."
From the "Milledgeville Journal," Dec. 26, 1837.
"EXECUTOR'S SALE.
"Agreeable to an order of the court of Wilkinson county, will be sold
on the first Tuesday in April next, before the Court-house door in the
town of Irwington, ONE NEGRO GIRL about two years old, named Rachel,
belonging to the estate of William Chambers dec'd. Sold for the
benefit of the heirs and creditors of said estate.
SAMUEL BELL, JESSE PEACOCK, Ex'ors."
From the "Alexandria (D.C.) Gazette" Dec. 19.
"I will give the highest cash price for likely negroes, from 10 to 25
years of age.
GEO. KEPHART."
From the "Southern Whig," March 2, 1838.—
"WILL be sold in La Grange, Troup county, one negro girl, by the name
of Charity, aged about 10 or 12 years; as the property of Littleton L.
Burk, to satisfy a mortgage fi. fa. from Troup Inferior Court, in
favor of Daniel S. Robertson vs. said Burk."
From the "Petersburgh (Va.) Constellation," March 18, 1837.
"50 Negroes wanted immediately.—The subscriber will give a good
market price for fifty likely negroes, from 10 to 30 years of age.
HENRY DAVIS."
The following is an extract of a letter from a gentleman, a native and
still a resident of one of the slave states, and still a
slaveholder. He is an elder in the Presbyterian Church, his letter is
now before us, and his name is with the Executive Committee of the Am.
Anti-slavery Society.
"Permit me to say, that around this very place where I reside, slaves
are brought almost constantly, and sold to Miss. and Orleans; that it
is usual to part families forever by such sales—the parents from the
children and the children from the parents, of every size and age. A
mother was taken not long since, in this town, from a sucking child,
and sold to the lower country. Three young men I saw some time ago
taken from this place in chains—while the mother of one of them, old
and decrepid, followed with tears and prayers her son, 18 or 20
miles, and bid him a final farewell! O, thou Great Eternal, is this
justice! is this equity!!—Equal Rights!!"
We subjoin a few miscellaneous facts illustrating the INHUMANITY of
slaveholding 'public opinion.'
The shocking indifference manifested at the death of slaves as human
beings, contrasted with the grief at their loss as property, is a
true index to the public opinion of slaveholders.
Colonel Oliver of Louisville, lost a valuable race-horse by the
explosion of the steamer Oronoko, a few months since on the
Mississippi river. Eight human beings whom he held as slaves were also
killed by the explosion. They were the riders and grooms of his
race-horses. A Louisville paper thus speaks of the occurrence:
"Colonel Oliver suffered severely by the explosion of the Oronoko. He
lost eight of his rubbers and riders, and his horse, Joe Kearney,
which he had sold the night before for $3,000."
Mr. King, of the New York American, makes the following just comment
on the barbarity of the above paragraph:
"Would any one, in reading this paragraph from an evening paper,
conjecture that these 'eight rubbers and riders,' that together with
a horse, are merely mentioned as a 'loss' to their owner, were human
beings—immortal as the writer who thus brutalizes them, and perhaps
cherishing life as much? In this view, perhaps, the 'eight' lost as
much as Colonel Oliver."
The following is from the "Charleston (S.C.) Patriot," Oct. 18.
"Loss of Property!—Since I have been here, (Rice Hope, N. Santee,)
I have seen much misery, and much of human suffering. The loss of
PROPERTY has been immense, not only on South Santee, but also on this
river. Mr. Shoolbred has lost, (according to the statement of the
physician,) forty-six negroes—the majority lost being the primest
hands he had—bricklayers, carpenters, blacksmiths and Coopers. Mr.
Wm. Mazyck has lost 35 negroes. Col. Thomas Pinkney, in the
neighborhood of 40, and many other planters, 10 to 20 on each
plantation. Mrs. Elias Harry, adjoining the plantation of Mr. Lucas,
has lost up to date, 32 negroes—the best part of her primest
negroes on her plantation."
From the "Natchez (Miss.) Daily Free Trader," Feb. 12, 1838.
"Found.—A NEGRO'S HEAD WAS PICKED UP ON THE RAIL-ROAD YESTERDAY,
WHICH THE OWNER CAN HAVE BY CALLING AT THIS OFFICE AND PAYING FOR THE
ADVERTISEMENT."
The way in which slaveholding 'public opinion' protects a poor female
lunatic is illustrated in the following advertisement in the
"Fayetteville (N.C.) Observer," June 27, 1838:
"Taken and committed to jail, a negro girl named Nancy, who is
supposed to belong to Spencer P. Wright, of the State of Georgia. She
is about 30 years of age, and is a LUNATIC. The owner is requested to
come forward, prove property, pay charges, and take her away, or SHE
WILL BE SOLD TO PAY HER JAIL FEES.
FRED'K HOME, Jailor."
A late PROSPECTUS Of the South Carolina Medical College, located in
Charleston, contains the following passage:—
"Some advantages of a peculiar character are connected with this
Institution, which it may be proper to point out. No place in the
United States offers as great opportunities for the acquisition of
anatomical knowledge, SUBJECTS BEING OBTAINED FROM AMONG THE COLORED
POPULATION IN SUFFICIENT NUMBER FOR EVERY PURPOSE, AND PROPER
DISSECTIONS CARRIED ON WITHOUT OFFENDING ANY INDIVIDUALS IN THE
COMMUNITY!!"
Without offending any individuals in the community! More than half
the population of Charleston, we believe, is 'colored;' their graves
may be ravaged, their dead may be dug up, dragged into the dissecting
room, exposed to the gaze, heartless gibes, and experimenting knives,
of a crowd of inexperienced operators, who are given to understand in
the prospectus, that, if they do not acquire manual dexterity in
dissection, it will be wholly their own fault, in neglecting to
improve the unrivalled advantages afforded by the institution—since
each can have as many human bodies as he pleases to experiment
upon—and as to the fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, brothers, and
sisters, of those whom they cut to pieces from day to day, why, they
are not 'individuals in the community,' but 'property,' and however
their feelings may be tortured, the 'public opinion' of slaveholders
is entirely too 'chivalrous' to degrade itself by caring for them!
The following which has been for some time a standing advertisement of
the South Carolina Medical College, in the Charleston papers, is
another index of the same 'public opinion' toward slaves. We give an
extract:—
"Surgery of the Medical College of South Carolina, Queen st.—The
Faculty inform their professional brethren, and the public that they
have established a Surgery, at the Old College, Queen street, FOR
THE TREATMENT OF NEGROES, which will continue in operation, during the
session of the College, say from first November, to the fifteenth of
March ensuing.
"The object of the Faculty, in opening this Surgery, is to collect
as many interesting cases, as possible, for the benefit and
instruction of their pupils—at the same time, they indulge the
hope, that it may not only prove an accommodation, but also a matter
of economy to the public. They would respectfully call the attention
of planters, living in the vicinity of the city, to this subject;
particularly such as may have servants laboring under Surgical
diseases. Such persons of color as may not be able to pay for
Medical advice, will be attended to gratis, at stated hours, as often
as may be necessary.
"The Faculty take this opportunity of soliciting the co-operation of
such of their professional brethren, as are favorable to their
objects."
"The first thing that strikes the reader of the advertisement is, that
this Surgery is established exclusively 'for the treatment of
negroes; and, if he knows little of the hearts of slaveholders
towards their slaves, he charitably supposes, that they 'feel the dint
of pity,' for the poor sufferers and have founded this institution as
a special charity for their relief. But the delusion vanishes as he
reads on; the professors take special care that no such derogatory
inference shall be drawn from their advertisement. They give us the
three reasons which have induced them to open this 'Surgery for the
treatment of negroes.' The first and main one is, 'to collect as many
interesting cases as possible for the benefit and instruction of
their pupils—another is, 'the hope that it may prove an
accommodation,'—and the third, that it may be 'a matter of economy
to the public' Another reason, doubtless, and controlling one,
though the professors are silent about it, is that a large collection
of 'interesting surgical cases,' always on hand, would prove a
powerful attraction to students, and greatly increase the popularity
of the institution. In brief, then, the motives of its founders, the
professors, were these, the accommodation of their students—the
accommodation of the public (which means, the whites)—and the
accommodation of slaveholders who have on their hands disabled slaves,
that would make 'interesting cases,' for surgical operation in the
presence of the pupils—to these reasons we may add the accommodation
of the Medical Institution and the accommodation of themselves! Not
a syllable about the accommodation of the hopeless sufferers,
writhing with the agony of those gun shot wounds, fractured sculls,
broken limbs and ulcerated backs which constitute the 'interesting
cases' for the professors to 'show off' before their pupils, and, as
practice makes perfect, for the students themselves to try their hands
at by way of experiment.
Why, we ask, was this surgery established 'for the treatment of
negroes' alone? Why were these 'interesting cases' selected from
that class exclusively? No man who knows the feeling of slave holders
towards slaves will be at a loss for the reason. 'Public opinion'
would tolerate surgical experiments, operations, processes, performed
upon them, which it would execrate if performed upon their master or
other whites. As the great object in collecting the disabled negroes
is to have 'interesting cases' for the students, the professors who
perform the operations will of course endeavor to make them as
'interesting' as possible. The instruction of the student is the
immediate object, and if the professors can accomplish it best by
protracting the operation, pausing to explain the different
processes, &c. the subject is only a negro, and what is his protracted
agony, that it should restrain the professor from making the case as
'interesting' as possible to the students by so using his knife as
will give them the best knowledge of the parts, and the process,
however it may protract or augment the pain of the subject. The end
to be accomplished is the instruction of the student, operations
upon the negroes are the means to the end; that tells the whole
story—and he who knows the hearts of slaveholders and has common
sense, however short the allowance, can find the way to his
conclusions without a lantern.
By an advertisement of the same Medical Institution, dated November
12, 1838, and published in the Charleston papers, it appears that an
'infirmary has been opened in connection with the college.' The
professors manifest a great desire that the masters of servants should
send in their disabled slaves, and as an inducement to the furnishing
of such interesting cases say, all medical and surgical aid will be
offered without making them liable to any professional charges.
Disinterested bounty, pity, sympathy, philanthropy. However difficult
or numerous the surgical cases of slaves thus put into their hands by
the masters, they charge not a cent for their professional services.
Their yearnings over human distress are so intense, that they beg the
privilege of performing all operations, and furnishing all the medical
attention needed, gratis, feeling that the relief of misery is its
own reward!!! But we have put down our exclamation points too
soon—upon reading the whole of the advertisement we find the
professors conclude it with the following paragraph:—
"The SOLE OBJECT Of the faculty in the establishment of such an
institution being to promote the interest of Medical Education within
their native State and City."
In the "Charleston (South Carolina) Mercury" of October 12, 1838, we
find an advertisement of half a column, by a Dr. T. Stillman, setting
forth the merits of another 'Medical Infirmary,' under his own special
supervision, at No. 110 Church street, Charleston. The doctor, after
inveighing loudly against 'men totally ignorant of medical science,'
who flood the country with quack nostrums backed up by 'fabricated
proofs of miraculous cures,' proceeds to enumerate the diseases to
which his 'Infirmary' is open, and to which his practice will be
mainly confined. Appreciating the importance of 'interesting cases,'
as a stock in trade, on which to commence his experiments, he copies
the example of the medical professors, and advertises for them. But,
either from a keener sense of justice, or more generosity, or greater
confidence in his skill, or for some other reason, he proposes to buy
up an assortment of damaged negroes, given over, as incurable, by
others, and to make such his 'interesting cases,' instead of
experimenting on those who are the 'property' of others.
Dr. Stillman closes his advertisement with the following notice:—
"To PLANTERS AND OTHERS.—Wanted fifty negroes. Any person having
sick negroes, considered incurable by their respective physicians, and
wishing to dispose of them, Dr. S. will pay cash for negroes affected
with scrofula or king's evil, confirmed hypocondriasm, apoplexy,
diseases of the liver, kidneys, spleen, stomach and intestines,
bladder and its appendages, diarrhea, dysentery, &c. The highest cash
price will be paid on application as above."
The absolute barbarism of a 'public opinion' which not only tolerates,
but produces such advertisements as this, was outdone by nothing in
the dark ages. If the reader has a heart of flesh, he can feel it
without help, and if he has not, comment will not create it. The total
indifference of slaveholders to such a cold blooded proposition, their
utter unconsciousness of the paralysis of heart, and death of
sympathy, and every feeling of common humanity for the slave, which it
reveals, is enough, of itself to show that the tendency of the spirit
of slaveholding is, to kill in the soul whatever it touches. It has no
eyes to see, nor ears to hear, nor mind to understand, nor heart to
feel for its victims as human beings. To show that the above
indication of the savage state is not an index of individual feeling,
but of 'public opinion,' it is sufficient to say, that it appears to
be a standing advertisement in the Charleston Mercury, the leading
political paper of South Carolina, the organ of the Honorables John C.
Calhoun, Robert Barnwell Rhett, Hugh S. Legare, and others regarded as
the elite of her statesmen and literati. Besides, candidates for
popular favor, like the doctor who advertises for the fifty
'incurables,' take special care to conciliate, rather than outrage,
'public opinion.' Is the doctor so ignorant of 'public opinion' in his
own city, that he has unwittingly committed violence upon it in his
advertisement? We trow not. The same 'public opinion' which gave birth
to the advertisement of doctor Stillman, and to those of the
professors in both the medical institutions, founded the Charleston
'Work House'—a soft name for a Moloch temple dedicated to torture,
and reeking with blood, in the midst of the city; to which masters and
mistresses send their slaves of both sexes to be stripped, tied up,
and cut with the lash till the blood and mangled flesh flow to their
feet, or to be beaten and bruised with the terrible paddle, or forced
to climb the tread-mill till nature sinks, or to experience other
nameless torments.
The "Vicksburg (Miss.) Register," Dec. 27, 1838, contains the
following item of information: "ARDOR IN BETTING.—Two gentlemen, at a
tavern, having summoned the waiter, the poor fellow had scarcely
entered, when he fell down in a fit of apoplexy. 'He's dead!'
exclaimed one. 'He'll come to!' replied the other. 'Dead, for five
hundred!' 'Done!' retorted the second. The noise of the fall, and the
confusion which followed, brought up the landlord, who called out to
fetch a doctor. 'No! no! we must have no interference—there's a bet
depending!' 'But, sir, I shall lose a valuable servant!' 'Never mind!
you can put him down in the bill!'"
About the time the Vicksburg paper containing the above came to hand,
we received a letter from N.P. ROGERS, Esq. of Concord, N.H. the
editor of the 'Herald of Freedom,' from which the following is an
extract:
"Some thirty years ago, I think it was, Col. Thatcher, of Maine, a
lawyer, was in Virginia, on business, and was there invited to dine at
a public house, with a company of the gentry of the south. The place
I forget—the fact was told me by George Kimball, Esq. now of Alton,
Illinois who had the story from Col. Thatcher himself. Among the
servants waiting was a young negro man, whose beautiful person,
obliging and assiduous temper, and his activity and grace in serving,
made him a favorite with the company. The dinner lasted into the
evening, and the wine passed freely about the table. At length, one of
the gentlemen, who was pretty highly excited with wine, became
unfortunately incensed, either at some trip of the young slave, in
waiting, or at some other cause happening when the slave was within
his reach. He seized the long-necked wine bottle, and struck the young
man suddenly in the temple, and felled him dead upon the floor. The
fall arrested, for a moment, the festivities of the table. 'Devilish
unlucky,' exclaimed one. 'The gentleman is very unfortunate,' cried
another. 'Really a loss,' said a third, &c, &c. The body was dragged
from the dining hall, and the feast went on; and at the close, one of
the gentlemen, and the very one, I believe, whose hand had done the
homicide, shouted, in bacchanalian bravery, and southern generosity,
amid the broken glasses and fragments of chairs, 'LANDLORD! PUT THE
NIGGER INTO THE BILL!' This was that murdered young man's requiem and
funeral service."
Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, a merchant in Rochester, New York, and an elder
in the Fourth Presbyterian Church in that city, who resided four years
in Virginia, gives the following testimony:
"I knew a young man who had been out hunting, and returning with some
of his friends, seeing a negro man in the road, at a little distance,
deliberately drew up his rifle, and shot him dead. This was done
without the slightest provocation, or a word passing. This young man
passed through the form of a trial, and, although it was not even
pretended by his counsel that he was not guilty of the act,
deliberately and wantonly perpetrated, he was acquitted. It was
urged by his counsel, that he was a young man, (about 20 years of
age,) had no malicious intention, his mother was a widow, &c, &c"
Mr. BENJAMIN CLENDENON, of Colerain, Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, a
member of the Society of Friends, gives the following testimony:
"Three years ago the coming month, I took a journey of about
seventy-five miles from home, through the eastern shore of Maryland,
and a small part of Delaware. Calling one day, near noon, at
Georgetown Cross-Roads, I found myself surrounded in the tavern by
slaveholders. Among other subjects of conversation, their human cattle
came in for a share. One of the company, a middle-aged man, then
living with a second wife, acknowledged, that after the death of his
first wife, he lived in a state of concubinage with a female slave;
but when the time drew near for the taking of a second wife, he found
it expedient to remove the slave from the premises. The same person
gave an account of a female slave he formerly held, who had a
propensity for some one pursuit, I think the attendance of religious
meetings. On a certain occasion, she presented her petition to him,
asking for this indulgence; he refused—she importuned—and he, with
sovereign indignation, seized a chair, and with a blow upon the head,
knocked her senseless upon the floor. The same person, for some act of
disobedience, on the part, I think, of the same slave, when employed
in stacking straw, felled her to the earth with the handle of a pitch
fork. All these transactions were related with the utmost composure,
in a bar-room within thirty miles of the Pennsylvania line."
The two following advertisements are illustrations of the regard paid
to the marriage relations by slaveholding judges, governors, senators
in Congress, and mayors of cities.
From the "Montgomery, (Ala.) Advertiser," Sept. 29, 1837.
"$20 REWARD.—Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Moses. He
is of common size, about 28 years old. He formerly belonged to Judge
Benson, of Montgomery, and it is said, has a wife in that county. John
Gayle"
The John Gayle who signs this advertisement, is an Ex-Governor of
Alabama.
From the "Charleston Courier," Nov. 28.
"Ranaway from the subscriber, about twelve months since, his negro man
Paulladore. His complexion is dark—about 50 years old. I understand
Gen. R.Y. Hayne has purchased his wife and children from H.L.
Pinckney, Esq. and has them now on his plantation, at Goose Creek,
where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently lurking. Thomas Davis."
It is hardly necessary to say, that the GENERAL R.Y. HAYNE, and H.L.
PINCKNEY, Esq. named in the advertisement, are Ex-Governor Hayne,
formerly U.S. Senator from South Carolina, and Hon. Henry L.
Pinckney, late member of Congress from Charleston District, and now
Intendant (mayor) of that city.
It is no difficult matter to get at the 'public opinion' of a
community, when ladies 'of property and standing' publish, under
their own names, such advertisements as the following.
Mrs. ELIZABETH L. CARTER, of Groveton, Prince William county,
Virginia, thus advertises her negro man Moses:
"Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro man named Moses, aged about 40
years, about six feet high, well made, and possessing a good address,
and HAS LOST A PART ON ONE OF HIS EARS."
Mrs. B. NEWMAN, of the same place, and in the same paper, advertises—
"Penny, the wife of Moses, aged about 30 years, brown complexion, tall
and likely, no particular marks of person recollected."
Both of the above advertisements appear in the National Intelligencer,
(Washington city,) June 10, 1837.
In the Mobile Mercantile Advertiser, of Feb. 13, 1838, is an
advertisement Signed SARAH WALSH, of which the following is an
extract:
"Twenty-five dollars reward will be paid to any one who may apprehend
and deliver to me, or confine in any jail, so that, I can get him, my
man Isaac, who ranaway sometime in September last. He is 26 years of
age, 5 feet 10 inches high, has a scar on his forehead, caused by a
blow, and one on his back, MADE BY A SHOT FROM A PISTOL."
In the "New Orleans Bee," Dec. 21, 1838, Mrs. BURVANT, whose residence
is at the corner of Chartres and Toulouse streets, advertises a woman
as follows:
"Ranaway, a negro woman named Rachel—has lost all her toes except
the large one."
From the "Huntsville (Ala.) Democrat," June 16, 1838:
"TEN DOLLARS REWARD.—Ranaway from the subscriber, a negro woman named
Sally, about 21 years of age, taking along her two children—one three
years, and the other seven months old. These negroes were PURCHASED BY
ME at the sale of George Mason's negroes, on the first Monday in May,
and left a few days thereafter. Any person delivering them to the
jailor in Huntsville, or to me, at my plantation, five miles above
Triana, on the Tennessee river, shall receive the above reward.
CHARITY COOPER"
From the "Mississippian," May 13, 1838:
"TEN DOLLARS REWARD.—Ranaway from the subscriber, a man named Aaron,
yellow complexion, blue eyes, &c. I have no doubt he is lurking about
Jackson and its vicinity, probably harbored by some of the negroes
sold as the property of my late husband, Harry Long, deceased. Some
of them are about Richland, in Madison co. I will give the above
reward when brought to me, about six miles north-west of Jackson, or
put IN JAIL, so that I can get him. LUCY LONG."
If the reader, after perusing the preceding facts, testimony, and
arguments, still insists that the 'public opinion' of the slave states
protects the slave from outrages, and alleges, as proof of it, that
cruel masters are frowned upon and shunned by the community
generally, and regarded as monsters, we reply by presenting the
following facts and testimony.
"Col. MEANS, of Manchester, Ohio, says, that when he resided in South
Carolina, his neighbor, a physician, became enraged with his slave,
and sentenced him to receive two hundred lashes. After having received
one hundred and forty, he fainted. After inflicting the full number of
lashes, the cords with which he was bound were loosed. When he
revived, he staggered to the house, and sat down in the sun. Being
faint and thirsty, he begged for some water to drink. The master
went to the well, and procured some water but instead of giving him to
drink, he threw the whole bucket-full in his face. Nature could not
stand the shock—he sunk to rise no more. For this crime, the
physician was bound over to Court, and tried, and acquitted—and THE
NEXT YEAR HE WAS ELECTED TO THE LEGISLATURE!"
Testimony of Hon. JOHN RANDOLPH, of Virginia
"In one of his Congressional speeches, Mr. R. says: Avarice alone can
drive, as it does drive, this infernal traffic, and the wretched
victims of it, like so many post horses, whipped to death in a mail
coach. Ambition has its cover-sluts in the pride, pomp, and
circumstance of glorious war; but where are the trophies of avarice?
The hand cuff, the manacle, the blood-stained cowhide! WHAT MAN IS
WORSE RECEIVED IN SOCIETY FOR BEING A HARD MASTER? WHO DENIES THE HAND
OF A SISTER OR DAUGHTER TO SUCH MONSTERS?"
Mr. GEORGE A. AVERY, of Rochester, New York, who resided four years in
Virginia, testifies as follows:
"I know a local Methodist minister, a man of talents, and popular as a
preacher, who took his negro girl into his barn, in order to whip
her—and she was brought out a corpse! His friends seemed to think
this of so little importance to his ministerial standing, that
although I lived near him about three years, I do not recollect to
have heard them apologize for the deed, though I recollect having
heard ONE of his neighbors allege this fact as a reason why he did not
wish to hear him preach."
Notwithstanding the mass of testimony which has been presented
establishing the fact that in the 'public opinion' of the South the
slaves find no protection, some may still claim that the 'public
opinion' exhibited by the preceding facts is not that of the highest
class of society at the South, and in proof of this assertion, refer
to the fact, that 'Negro Brokers,' Negro Speculators, Negro
Auctioneers, and Negro Breeders, &c., are by that class universally
despised and avoided, as are all who treat their slaves with cruelty.
To this we reply, that, if all claimed by the objector were true, it
could avail him nothing for 'public opinion' is neither made nor
unmade by 'the first class of society.' That class produces in it, at
most, but slight modifications; those who belong to it have generally
a 'public opinion,' within their own circle which has rarely more,
either of morality or mercy than the public opinion of the mass, and
is, at least, equally heartless and more intolerant. As to the
estimation in which 'speculators,' 'soul drivers,' &c. are held, we
remark, that, they are not despised because they trade in slaves but
because they are working men, all such are despised by slaveholders.
White drovers who go with droves of swine and cattle from the free
states to the slave states, and Yankee pedlars, who traverse the
south, and white day-laborers are, in the main, equally despised, or,
if negro-traders excite more contempt than drovers, pedlars, and
day-laborers, it is because, they are, as a class more ignorant and
vulgar, men from low families and boors in their manners. Ridiculous
to suppose, that a people, who have, by law, made men articles of
trade equally with swine, should despise men-drovers and traders, more
than hog-drovers and traders. That they are not despised because it is
their business to trade in human beings and bring them to market, is
plain from the fact that when some 'gentleman of property and
standing' and of a 'good family' embarks in a negro speculation, and
employs a dozen 'soul drivers' to traverse the upper country, and
drive to the south coffles of slaves, expending hundreds of thousands
in his wholesale purchases, he does not lose caste. It is known in
Alabama, that Mr. Erwin, son-in-law of the Hon. Henry Clay, and
brother of J.P. Erwin, formerly postmaster, and late mayor of the
city of Nashville, laid the foundation of a princely fortune in the
slave-trade, carried on from the Northern Slave States to the Planting
South; that the Hon. H. Hitchcock, brother-in-law of Mr. E., and since
one of the judges of the Supreme Court of Alabama, was interested with
him in the traffic; and that a late member of the Kentucky Senate
(Col. Wall) not only carried on the same business, a few years ago,
but accompanied his droves in person down the Mississippi. Not as the
driver, for that would be vulgar drudgery, beneath a gentleman, but
as a nabob in state, ordering his understrappers.
It is also well known that President Jackson was a 'soul driver,' and
that even so late as the year before the commencement of the last war,
he bought up a coffle of slaves and drove them down to Louisiana for
sale.
Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. the principal slave auctioneer in Charleston,
S.C. is of one of the first families in the state, and moves in the
very highest class of society there. He is a descendant of the
distinguished General Gadsden of revolutionary memory, the most
prominent southern member in the Continental Congress of 1765, and
afterwards elected lieutenant governor and then governor of the state.
The Rev. Dr. Gadsden, rector of St. Phillip's Church, Charleston, and
the Rev. Phillip Gadsden, both prominent Episcopal clergymen in South
Carolina, and Colonel James Gadsden of the United States army, after
whom a county in Florida was recently named, are all brothers of this
Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. the largest slave auctioneer in the state,
under whose hammer, men, women and children go off by thousands; its
stroke probably sunders daily, husbands and wives, parents and
children, brothers and sisters, perhaps to see each other's faces no
more. Now who supply the auction table of this Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq.
with its loads of human merchandize? These same detested 'soul
drivers' forsooth! They prowl through the country, buy, catch, and
fetter them, and drive their chained coffles up to his stand, where
Thomas N. Gadsden, Esq. knocks them off to the highest bidder, to
Ex-Governor Butler perhaps, or to Ex-Governor Hayne, or to Hon. Robert
Barnwell Rhett, or to his own reverend brother, Dr. Gadsden. Now this
high born, wholesale soul-seller doubtless despises the retail
'soul-drivers' who give him their custom, and so does the wholesale
grocer, the drizzling tapster who sneaks up to his counter for a keg
of whiskey to dole out under a shanty in two cent glasses; and both
for the same reason.
The plea that the 'public opinion' among the highest classes of
society at the south is mild and considerate towards the slaves, that
they do not overwork, underfeed, neglect when old and sick, scantily
clothe, badly lodge, and half shelter their slaves; that they do not
barbarously flog, load with irons, imprison in the stocks, brand and
maim them; hunt them when runaway with dogs and guns, and sunder by
force and forever the nearest kindred—is shown, by almost every page
of this work, to be an assumption, not only utterly groundless, but
directly opposed to masses of irrefragable evidence. If the reader
will be at the pains to review the testimony recorded on the foregoing
pages he will find that a very large proportion of the atrocities
detailed were committed, not by the most ignorant and lowest classes
of society, but by persons 'of property and standing,' by masters and
mistresses belonging to the 'upper classes,' by persons in the learned
professions, by civil, judicial, and military officers, by the
literati, by the fashionable elite and persons of more than ordinary
'respectability' and external morality—large numbers of whom are
professors of religion.
It will be recollected that the testimony of Sarah M. Grimké, and
Angelina G. Weld, was confined exclusively to the details of slavery
as exhibited in the highest classes of society, mainly in
Charleston, S.C. See their testimony pp. 22-24 and 52-57. The former
has furnished us with the following testimony in addition to that
already given.
"Nathaniel Heyward of Combahee, S.C., one of the wealthiest planters
in the state, stated, in conversation with some other planters who
were complaining of the idle and lazy habits of their slaves, and the
difficulty of ascertaining whether their sickness was real or
pretended, and the loss they suffered from their frequent absence on
this account from their work, said, 'I never lose a day's work: it is
an established rule on my plantations that the tasks of all the sick
negroes shall be done by those who are well in addition to their
own. By this means a vigilant supervision is kept up by the slaves
over each other, and they take care that nothing but real sickness
keeps any one out of the field.' I spent several winters in the
neighborhood of Nathaniel Heyward's plantations, and well remember his
character as a severe task master. I was present when the above
statement was made."
The cool barbarity of such a regulation is hardly surpassed by the
worst edicts of the Roman Caligula—especially when we consider that
the plantations of this man were in the neighborhood of the Combahee
river, one of the most unhealthy districts in the low country of South
Carolina; further, that large numbers of his slaves worked in the
rice marshes, or 'swamps' as they are called in that state—and that
during six months of the year, so fatal to health is the malaria of
the swamps in that region that the planters and their families
invariably abandon their plantations, regarding it as downright
presumption to spend a single day upon them 'between the frosts' of
the early spring and the last of November.
The reader may infer the high standing of Mr. Heyward in South
Carolina, from the fact that he was selected with four other
freeholders to constitute a Court for the trial of the conspirators in
the insurrection plot at Charleston, in 1822. Another of the
individuals chosen to constitute that court was Colonel Henry Deas,
now president of the Board of Trustees of Charleston College, and a
few years since a member of the Senate of South Carolina. From a late
correspondence in the "Greenvile (S.C.) Mountaineer," between Rev.
William M. Wightman, a professor in Randolph, Macon, College, and a
number of the citizens of Lodi, South Carolina, it appears that the
cruelty of this Colonel Deas to his slaves, is proverbial in South
Carolina, so much that Professor Wightman, in the sermon which
occasioned the correspondence, spoke of the Colonel's inhumanity to
his slaves as a matter of perfect notoriety.
Another South Carolina slaveholder, Hon. Whitmarsh B. Seabrook,
recently, we believe, Lieut. Governor of the state, gives the
following testimony to his own inhumanity, and his certificate of the
'public opinion' among South Carolina slaveholders 'of high degree.'
In an essay on the management of slaves, read before the Agricultural
Society of St. Johns, S.C. and published by the Society, Charleston,
1834, Mr. S. remarks:
"I consider imprisonment in the stocks at night, with or without
hard labor in the day, as a powerful auxiliary in the cause of good
government. To the correctness of this opinion many can bear
testimony. EXPERIENCE has convinced ME that there is no punishment to
which the slave looks with more horror."
The advertisements of the Professors in the Medical Colleges of South
Carolina, published with comments—on pp. 169, 170, are additional
illustrations of the 'public opinion' of the literati.
That the 'public opinion' of the highest class of society in South
Carolina, regards slaves a mere cattle, is shown by the following
advertisement, which we copy from the "Charleston (S.C.) Mercury" of
May 16:
"NEGROES FOR SALE.—A girl about twenty years of age, (raised in
Virginia,) and her two female children, one four and the other two
year old—is remarkably strong and healthy—never having had a day's
sickness, with the exception of the small pox, in her life. The
children are fine and healthy. She is VERY PROLIFIC IN HER GENERATING
QUALITIES, and affords a rare opportunity to any person who wishes to
raise a family of strong and healthy servants for their own use.
"Any person wishing to purchase will please leave their address at the
Mercury office."
The Charleston Mercury, in which this advertisement appears, is the
leading political paper in South Carolina, and is well known to be
the political organ of Messrs. Calhoun, Rhett, Pickens, and others of
the most prominent politicians in the state. Its editor, John Stewart,
Esq., is a lawyer of Charleston, and of a highly respectable family.
He is a brother-in-law of Hon. Robert Barnwell Rhett, the late
Attorney-General, now a Member of Congress, and Hon. James Rhett, a
leading member of the Senate of South Carolina; his wife is a niece of
the late Governor Smith, of North Carolina, and of the late Hon. Peter
Smith, Intendant (Mayor) of the city of Charleston; and a cousin of
the late Hon. Thomas S. Grimké.
The circulation of the 'Mercury' among the wealthy, the literary, and
the fashionable, is probably much larger than that of any other paper
in the state.
These facts in connection with the preceding advertisement, are a
sufficient exposition of the 'public opinion' towards slaves,
prevalent in these classes of society.
The following scrap of 'public opinion' in Florida, is instructive. We
take it from the Florida Herald, June 23, 1838:
Ranaway from my plantation, on Monday night, the 13th instant, a negro
fellow named Ben; eighteen years of age, polite when spoken to, and
speaks very good English for a negro. As I have traced him out in
several places in town, I am certain he is harbored. This notice is
given that I am determined, that whenever he is taken, to punish him
till he informs me who has given him food and protection, and I
shall apply the law of Judge Lynch to my own satisfaction, on those
concerned in his concealment.
A. WATSON.
Now, who is this A. Watson, who proclaims through a newspaper, his
determination to put to the torture this youth of eighteen, and to
Lynch to his 'satisfaction' whoever has given a cup of cold water to
the panting fugitive. Is he some low miscreant beneath public
contempt? Nay, verily, he is a 'gentleman of property and standing,'
one of the wealthiest planters and largest slaveholders in Florida. He
resides in the vicinity of St. Augustine, and married the daughter of
the late Thomas C. Morton, Esq. one of the first merchants in New
York.
We may mention in this connection the well known fact, that many
wealthy planters make it a rule never to employ a physician among
their slaves. Hon. William Smith, Senator in Congress, from South
Carolina, from 1816 to 1823, and afterwards from 1826 to 1831, is one
of this number. He owns a number of large plantations in the south
western states. One of these, borders upon the village of Huntsville,
Alabama. The people of that village can testify that it is a part of
Judge Smith's system never to employ a physician even in the most
extreme cases. If the medical skill of the overseer, or of the slaves
themselves, can contend successfully with the disease, they live, if
not, they die. At all events, a physician is not to be called.
Judge Smith was appointed a judge of the Supreme Court of the United
States three years since.
The reader will recall a similar fact in the testimony of Rev. W.T.
Allan, son of Rev. Dr. Allan, of Huntsville, (see p. 47,) who says
that Colonel Robert H. Watkins, a wealthy planter, in Alabama, and a
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTOR in 1836, who works on his plantations three
hundred slaves, 'After employing a physician for some time among his
negroes, he ceased to do so, alledging as the reason, that it was
cheaper to lose a few negroes every year than to pay a physician.'
It is a fact perfectly notorious, that the late General Wade Hampton,
of South Carolina, who was the largest slaveholder in the United
States, and probably the wealthiest man south of the Potomac, was
excessively cruel in the treatment of his slaves. The anecdote of
him related by a clergyman, on page 29, is perfectly characteristic.
For instances of barbarous inhumanity of various kinds, and manifested
by persons BELONGING TO THE MOST RESPECTABLE CIRCLES OF SOCIETY, the
reader can consult the following references:—Testimony of Rev. John
Graham, p. 25, near the bottom; of Mr. Poe, p. 26, middle; of Rev. J.
O. Choules, p. 39, middle; of Rev. Dr. Channing, p. 41, top; of Mr.
George A. Avery, p. 44, bottom; of Rev. W.T. Allan, p. 47; of Mr. John
M. Nelson, p. 51, bottom; of Dr. J.C. Finley, p. 61, top; of Mr.
Dustin, p. 66, bottom; of Mr. John Clarke, p. 87; of Mr. Nathan Cole,
p. 89, middle; Rev. William Dickey, p. 93; Rev. Francis Hawley, p. 97;
of Mr. Powell, p. 100, middle; of Rev. P. Smith p. 102.
The preceding are but a few of a large number of similar cases
contained in the foregoing testimonies. The slaveholder mentioned by
Mr. Ladd, p. 86, who knocked down a slave and afterwards piled brush
upon his body, and consumed it, held the hand of a female slave in the
fire till it was burned so as to be useless for life, and confessed to
Mr. Ladd, that he had killed four slaves, had been a member of the
Senate of Georgia and a clergyman. The slaveholder who whipped a
female slave to death in St. Louis, in 1837, as stated by Mr. Cole,
p. 69, was a Major in the United States Army. One of the physicians
who was an abettor of the tragedy on the Brassos, in which a slave was
tortured to death, and another so that he barely lived, (see Rev. Mr.
Smith's testimony, p. 102.) was Dr. Anson Jones, a native of
Connecticut, who was soon after appointed minister plenipotentiary
from Texas to this government, and now resides at Washington city. The
slave mistress at Lexington, Ky., who, as her husband testifies, has
killed six of his slaves, (see testimony of Mr. Clarke, p. 87,) is the
wife of Hon. Fielding S. Turner, late judge of the criminal court of
New Orleans, and one of the wealthiest slaveholders in Kentucky.
Lilburn Lewis, who deliberately chopped in pieces his slave George,
with a broad-axe, (see testimony of Rev. Mr. Dickey, p. 93) was a
wealthy slaveholder, and a nephew of President Jefferson. Rev. Francis
Hawley, who was a general agent of the Baptist State Convention of
North Carolina, confesses (see p. 47,) that while residing in that
state he once went out with his hounds and rifle, to hunt fugitive
slaves. But instead of making further reference to testimony already
before the reader, we will furnish additional instances of the
barbarous cruelty which is tolerated and sanctioned by the 'upper
classes' of society at the south; we begin with clergymen, and other
officers and members of churches.
That the reader may judge of the degree of 'protection' which slaves
receive from 'public opinion,' and among the members and ministers of
professed christian churches, we insert the following illustrations.
Extract from an editorial article in the "Lowell (Mass.) Observer" a
religious paper edited at the time (1833) by the Rev. DANIEL S.
SOUTHMAYD, who recently died in Texas.
"We have been among the slaves at the south. We took pains to make
discoveries in respect to the evils of slavery. We formed our
sentiments on the subject of the cruelties exercised towards the
slaves from having witnessed them. We now affirm that we never saw a
man, who had never been at the south, who thought as much of the
cruelties practiced on the slaves, as we know to be a fact.
"A slave whom I loved for his kindness and the amiableness of his
disposition, and who belonged to the family where I resided, happened
to stay out fifteen minutes longer than he had permission to stay.
It was a mistake—it was unintentional. But what was the penalty? He
was sent to the house of correction with the order that he should have
thirty lashes upon his naked body with a knotted rope!!! He was
brought home and laid down in the stoop, in the back of the house, in
the sun, upon the floor. And there he lay, with more the appearance
of a rotten carcass than a living man, for four days before he could
do more than move. And who was this inhuman being calling God's
property his own, and ruing it as he would not have dared to use a
beast? You may say he was a tiger—one of the more wicked sort, and
that we must not judge others by him. He was a professor of that
religion which will pour upon the willing slaveholder the retribution
due to his sin.
"We wish to mention another fact, which our own eyes saw and our own
ears heard. We were called to evening prayers. The family assembled
around the altar of their accustomed devotions. There was one female
slave present, who belonged to another master, but who had been
hired for the day and tarried to attend family worship. The precious
Bible was opened, and nearly half a chapter had been read, when the
eye of the master, who was reading, observed that the new female
servant, instead of being seated like his own slaves, flat upon the
floor, was standing in a stooping posture upon her feet. He told her
to sit down on the floor. She said it was not her custom at home. He
ordered her again to do it. She replied that her master did not
require it. Irritated by this answer, he repeatedly struck her upon
the head with the very Bible he held in his hand. And not content
with this, he seized his cane and caned her down stairs most
unmercifully. He then returned to resume his profane work, but we
need not say that all the family were not there. Do you ask again,
who was this wicked man? He was a professor of religion!!"
Rev. HUNTINGTON LYMAN, late pastor of the Free Church in Buffalo, New
York, says:—
"Walking one day in New Orleans with a professional gentleman, who was
educated in Connecticut, we were met by a black man; the gentleman was
greatly incensed with the black man for passing so near him, and
turning upon him he pushed him with violence off walk into the
street. This man was a professor of religion."
(And we add, a member, and if we mistake not an officer of the
Presbyterian Church which was established there by Rev. Joel Parker,
and which was then under his teachings-ED.)
Mr. EZEKIEL BIRDSEYE, a gentleman of known probity, in Cornwall,
Litchfield county, Conn. gives the testimony which follows:—
"A BAPTIST CLERGYMAN in Laurens District, S.C. WHIPPED HIS SLAVE TO
DEATH, whom he suspected of having stolen about sixty dollars. The
slave was in the prime of life and was purchased a few weeks before
for $800 of a slave trader from Virginia or Maryland. The coroner, Wm.
Irby, at whose house I was then boarding, told me, that on reviewing
the dead body, he found it beat to a jelly from head to foot. The
master's wife discovered the money a day or two after the death of the
slave. She had herself removed it from where it was placed, not
knowing what it was, as it was tied up in a thick envelope. I happened
to be present when the trial of this man took place, at Laurens Court
House. His daughter testified that her father untied the slave, when
he appeared to be failing, and gave him cold water to drink, of which
he took freely. His counsel pleaded that his death might have been
caused by drinking cold water in a state of excitement. The Judge
charged the jury, that it would be their duty to find the defendant
guilty, if they believed the death was caused by the whipping; but if
they were of opinion that drinking cold water caused the death, they
would find him not guilty! The jury found him—NOT GUILTY!"
Dr. JEREMIAH S. WAUGH, a physician in Somerville, Butler county, Ohio,
testifies as follows:—
"In the year 1825, I boarded with the Rev. John Mushat, a Seceder
minister, and principal of an academy in Iredel county, N.C. He had
slaves, and was in the habit of restricting them on the Sabbath. One
of his slaves, however, ventured to disobey his injunctions. The
offence was he went away on Sabbath evening, and did not return till
Monday morning. About the time we were called to breakfast, the Rev.
gentleman was engaged in chastising him for breaking the Sabbath. He
determined not to submit—attempted to escape by flight. The master
immediately took down his gun and pursued him—levelled his instrument
of death, and told him, if he did not stop instantly he would blow
him through. The poor slave returned to the house and submitted
himself to the lash; and the good master, while YET PALE WITH RAGE,
sat down to the table, and with a trembling voice ASKED GOD'S
BLESSING!"
The following letter was sent by Capt. JACOB DUNHAM, of New York city,
to a slaveholder in Georgetown, D.C. more than twenty years since:
"Georgetown, June 13, 1815.
"Dear sir—Passing your house yesterday, I beheld a scene of cruelty
seldom witnessed—that was the brutal chastisement of your negro girl,
lashed to a ladder and beaten in an inhuman manner, too bad to
describe. My blood chills while I contemplate the subject. This has
led me to investigate your character from your neighbors; who inform
me that you have caused the death of one negro man, whom you struck
with a sledge for some trivial fault—that you have beaten another
black girl with such severity that the splinters remained in her
back for some weeks after you sold her—and many other acts of
barbarity, too lengthy to enumerate. And to my great surprise, I find
you are a professor of the Christian religion!
"You will naturally inquire, why I meddle with your family affairs. My
answer is, the cause of humanity and a sense of my duty requires
it.—these hasty remarks I leave you to reflect on the subject; but
wish you to remember, that there is an all-seeing eye who knows all
our faults and will reward us according to our deeds.
I remain, sir, yours, &c
JACOB DUNHAM.
Master of the brig Cyrus, of N.Y."
Rev. SYLVESTER COWLES, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Fredonia,
N.Y. says:—
"A young man, a member of the church in Conewango, went to Alabama
last year, to reside as a clerk in an uncle's store. When he had been
there about nine months, he wrote his father that he must return home.
To see members of the same church sit at the communion table of our
Lord one day, and the next to see one seize any weapon and knock the
other down, as he had seen, he could not live there. His good
father forthwith gave him permission to return home."
The following is a specimen of the shameless hardihood with which a
professed minister of the Gospel, and editor of a religious paper,
assumes the right to hold God's image as a chattel. It is from the
Southern Christian Herald:—
"It is stated in the Georgetown Union, that a negro, supposed to have
died of cholera, when that disease prevailed in Charleston, was
carried to the public burying ground to be interred; but before
interment signs of life appeared, and, by the use of proper means, he
was restored to health. And now the man who first perceived the signs
of life in the slave, and that led to his preservation, claims the
property as his own, and is about bringing suit for its recovery. As
well might a man who rescued his neighbor's slave, or his horse,
from drowning, or who extinguished the flames that would otherwise
soon have burnt down his neighbor's house, claim the property as his
own."
Rev. GEORGE BOURNE, of New York city, late Editor of the "Protestant
Vindicator," who was a preacher seven years in Virginia, gives the
following testimony.[39]
[Footnote 39: A few years since Mr. Bourne published a work entitled,
"Picture of slavery in the United States." In which he describes a
variety of horrid atrocities perpetrated upon slaves; such as brutal
scourging and lacerations with the application of pepper, mustard,
salt, vinegar, &c., to the bleeding gashes; also maimings,
cat-haulings, burnings, and other tortures similar to hundreds
described on the preceeding pages. These descriptions of Mr. Bourne
were, at that time, thought by multitudes incredible, and probably,
even by some abolitionists, who had never given much reflection to the
subject. We are happy to furnish the reader with the following
testimony of a Virginia slaveholder to the accuracy of Mr. Bourne's
delineations. Especially as this slaveholder is a native of one of the
counties (Culpepper) near to which the atrocities described by Mr. B.
were committed.
Testimony of Mr. WILLIAM HANSBOROUGH, of Culpepper, County, Virginia,
the "owner" of sixty slaves, to Mr. Bourne's "Picture or Slavery" as a
true delineation.
Lindley Coates, of Lancaster Co., Pa., a well known member of the
Society of Friends, and a member of the late Pennsylvania Convention
for revising, the Constitution of the State, in a letter now before
us, describing a recent interview between him and Mr. Hansborough, of
several days continuance, says,—"I handed him Bourne's Picture of
slavery to read: after reading it, he said, that all of the
sufferings of slaves therein related, were true delineations, and
that he had seen all those modes of torture himself."]
"Benjamin Lewis, who was an elder in the Presbyterian church, engaged
a carpenter to repair and enlarge his house. After some time had
elapsed, Kyle, the builder, was awakened very early in the morning by
a most piteous moaning and shrieking. He arose, and following the
sound, discovered a colored woman nearly naked, tied to a fence, while
Lewis was lacerating her. Kyle instantly commanded the slave driver to
desist. Lewis maintained his jurisdiction over his slaves, and
threatened Kyle that he would punish him for his interference.
Finally Kyle obtained the release of the victim.
"A second and a third scene of the same kind occurred, and on the
third occasion the altercation almost produced a battle between the
elder and the carpenter.
"Kyle immediately arranged his affairs, packed up his tools and
prepared to depart. 'Where are you going?' demanded Lewis. 'I am
going home;' said Kyle. 'Then I will pay you nothing for what you
have done,' retorted the slave driver, 'unless you complete your
contract.' The carpenter went away with this edifying declaration, 'I
will not stay here a day longer; for I expect the fire of God will
come down and burn you up altogether, and I do not choose to go to
hell with you.' Through hush-money and promises not to whip the women
any more, I believe Kyle returned and completed his engagement.
"James Kyle of Harrisonburg, Virginia, frequently narrated that
circumstance, and his son, the carpenter, confirmed it with all the
minute particulars combined with his temporary residence on the
Shenandoah river.
"John M'Cue of Augusta county, Virginia, a Presbyterian preacher,
frequently on the Lord's day morning, tied up his slaves and whipped
them; and left them bound, while he went to the meeting house and
preached—and after his return home repeated his scourging. That
fact, with others more heinous, was known to all persons in his
congregation and around the vicinity; and so far from being censured
for it, he and his brethren justified it as essential to preserve
their 'domestic institutions.'
"Mrs. Pence, of Rockingham county, Virginia, used to boast,—'I am the
best hand to whip a wench in the whole county.' She used to pinion
the girls to a post in the yard on the Lord's day morning, scourge
them, put on the 'negro plaster,' salt, pepper, and vinegar, leave
them tied, and walk away to church as demure as a nun, and after
service repeat her flaying, if she felt the whim. I once expostulated
with her upon her cruelly. 'Mrs. Pence, how can you whip your girls
so publicly and disturb your neighbors so on the Lord's day morning.'
Her answer was memorable. 'If I were to whip them on any other day I
should lose a day's work; but by whipping them on Sunday, their backs
get well enough by Monday morning.' That woman, if alive, is
doubtless a member of the church now, as then.
"Rev. Dr. Staughton, formerly of Philadelphia, often stated, that when
he lived at Georgetown, S.C. he could tell the doings of one of the
slaveholders of the Baptist church there by his prayers at the prayer
meeting. 'If,' said he, 'that man was upon good terms with his
slaves, his words were cold and heartless as frost; if he had been
whipping a man, he would pray with life; but if he had left a woman
whom he had been flogging, tied to a post in his cellar, with a
determination to go back and torture her again, O! how he would pray!'
The Rev. Cyrus P. Grosvenor of Massachusetts can confirm the above
statement by Dr. Staughton.
"William Wilson, a Presbyterian preacher of Augusta county, Virginia,
had a young colored girl who was constitutionally unhealthy. As no
means to amend her were availing, he sold her to a member of his
congregation, and in the usual style of human flesh dealers, warranted
her 'sound,' &c. The fraud was instantly discovered; but he would not
refund the amount. A suit was commenced, and was long continued, and
finally the plaintiff recovered the money out of which he had been
swindled by slave-trading with his own preacher. No Presbytery
censured him, although Judge Brown, the chancellor, severely condemned
the imposition.
"In the year 1811, Johab Graham, a preacher, lived with Alexander
Nelson a Presbyterian elder, near Stanton, Virginia, and he informed
me that a man had appeared before Nelson, who was a magistrate, and
swore falsely against his slave,—that the elder ordered him
thirty-nine lashes. All that wickedness was done as an excuse for his
dissipated owner to obtain money. A negro trader had offered him a
considerable sum for the 'boy,' and under the pretence of saving him
from the punishment of the law, he was trafficked away from his woman
and children to another state. The magistrate was aware of the
perjury, and the whole abomination, but all the truth uttered by every
colored person in the southern states would not be of any avail
against the notorious false swearing of the greatest white villain who
ever cursed the world. 'How,' said Johab Graham, can I preach
to-morrow?' I replied, 'Very well; go and thunder the doctrine of
retribution in their ears, Obadiah 15, till by the divine blessing you
kill or cure them. My friends, John M. Nelson of Hillsborough, Ohio,
Samuel Linn, and Robert Herron, and others of the same vicinity, could
'make both the ears of every one who heareth them tingle' with the
accounts which they can give of slave-driving by professors of
religion in the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia.
"In 1815, near Frederick, in Maryland, a most barbarous planter was
killed in a fit of desperation, by four of his slaves in
self-defence. It was declared by those slaves while in prison that,
besides his atrocities among their female associates, he had
deliberately butchered a number of his slaves. The four men were
murdered by law, to appease the popular clamor. I saw them executed on
the twenty-eighth day of Jan'y, 1816. The facts I received from the
Rev. Patrick Davidson of Frederick, who constantly visited them during
their imprisonment—and who became an abolitionist in consequence of
the disclosures which he heard from those men in the jail. The name of
the planter is not distinctly recollected, but it can be known by a
inspection of the record of the trial in the clerk's office,
Frederick.
"A minister of Virginia, still living, and whose name must not be
mentioned for fear of Nero Preston and his confederate-hanging
myrmidons, informed me of this fact in 1815, in his own house. 'A
member of my church, said he, lately whipped a colored youth to death.
What shall I do?' I answered, 'I hope you do not mean to continue him
in your church.' That minister replied, 'How can we help it'
We dare not call him to an account. We have no legal testimony.'
Their communion season was then approaching. I addressed his
wife,—'Mrs. —— do you mean to sit at the Lord's table with that
murderer?'—,'Not I,' she answered: 'I would as soon commune with the
devil himself.' The slave killer was equally unnoticed by the civil
and ecclesiastical authority.
"John Baxter, a Presbyterian elder, the brother of that slaveholding
doctor in divinity, George A. Baxter, held as a slave the wife of a
Baptist colored preacher, familiarly called 'Uncle Jack.' In a late
period of pregnancy he scourged her so that the lives of herself and
her unborn child were considered in jeopardy. Uncle Jack was advised
to obtain the liberation of his wife. Baxter finally agreed, I think,
to sell the woman and her children, three of them, I believe for six
hundred dollars, and an additional hundred if the unborn child
survived a certain period after its birth. Uncle Jack was to pay one
hundred dollars per annum for his wife and children for seven years,
and Baxter held a sort of mortgage upon them for the payment. Uncle
Jack showed me his back in furrows like a ploughed field. His master
used to whip up the flesh, then beat it downwards, and then apply the
'negro plaster,' salt, pepper, mustard, and vinegar, until all Jack's
back was almost as hard and unimpressible as the bones. There is
slaveholding religion! A Presbyterian elder receiving from a Baptist
preacher seven hundred dollars for his wife and children. James Kyle
and uncle Jack used to tell that story with great Christian
sensibility; and uncle Jack would weep tears of anguish over his
wife's piteous tale, and tears of ecstasy at the same moment that he
was free, and that soon, by the grace of God, his wife and children,
as he said, 'would be all free together.'"
Rev. JAMES NOURSE, a Presbyterian clergyman of Mifflia co. Penn.,
whose father is, we believe, a slaveholder in Washington City, says,—
"The Rev. Mr. M——, now of the Huntingdon Presbytery, after an absence
of many months, was about visiting his old friends on what is commonly
called the 'Eastern Shore.' Late in the afternoon, on his journey, he
called at the house of Rev. A.C. of P——town, Md. With this brother
he had been long acquainted. Just at that juncture Mr. C. was about
proceeding to whip a colored female, who was his slave. She was firmly
tied to a post in FRONT of his dwelling-house. The arrival of a
clerical visitor at such a time, occasioned a temporary delay in the
execution of Mr. C's purpose. But the delay was only temporary; for
not even the presence of such a guest could destroy the bloody design.
The guest interceded with all the mildness yet earnestness of a
brother and new visitor. But all in vain, 'the woman had been saucy
and must be punished.' The cowhide was accordingly produced, and the
Rev. Mr. C., a large and very stout man, applied it 'manfully' on
'woman's' bare and 'shrinking flesh.' I say bare, because you know
that the slave women generally have but three or four inches of the
arm near the shoulder covered, and the neck is left entirely exposed.
As the cowhide moved back and forward, striking right and left, on the
head, neck and arms, at every few strokes the sympathizing guest would
exclaim, 'O, brother C. desist' But brother C. pursued his brutal
work, till, after inflicting about sixty lashes, the woman was found
to be suffused with blood on the hinder part of her neck, and under
her frock between the shoulders. Yet this Rev. gentleman is well
esteemed in the church—was, three or four years since, moderator of
the synod of Philadelphia, and yet walks abroad, feeling himself
unrebuked by law or gospel. Ah, sir does not this narration give
fearful force to the query—What has the church to do with slavery?'
Comment on the facts is unnecessary, yet allow me to conclude by
saying, that it is my opinion such occurrences are not rare in the
south.
J.N."
REV. CHARLES STEWART RENSHAW, of Quincy, Illinois, in a recent letter,
speaking of his residence, for a period, in Kentucky, says—
"In a conversation with Mr. Robert Willis, he told me that his negro
girl had run away from him some time previous. He was convinced that
she was lurking round, and he watched for her. He soon found the place
of her concealment, drew her from it, got a rope, and tied her hands
across each other, then threw the rope over a beam in the kitchen, and
hoisted her up by the wrists; 'and,' said he, 'I whipped her there
till I made the lint fly, I tell you.' I asked him the meaning of
making 'the lint fly,' and he replied, 'till the blood flew.' I spoke
of the iniquity and cruelty of slavery, and of its immediate
abandonment. He confessed it an evil, but said, 'I am a
colonizationist—I believe in that scheme.' Mr. Willis is a teacher
of sacred music, and a member of the Presbyterian Church in Lexington,
Kentucky."
Mr. R. speaking of the PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER and church where he
resided, says:
"The minister and all the church members held slaves. Some were
treated kindly, others harshly. There was not a shade of difference
between their slaves and those of their infidel neighbors, either in
their physical, intellectual, or moral state: in some cases they would
suffer in the comparison.
"In the kitchen of the minister of the church, a slave man was living
in open adultery with a slave woman, who was a member of the church,
with an 'assured hope' of heaven—whilst the man's wife was on the
minister's farm in Fayette county. The minister had to bring a cook
down from his farm to the place in which he was preaching. The choice
was between the wife of the man and this church member. He left the
wife, and brought the church member to the adulterer's bed.
"A METHODIST PREACHER last fall took a load of produce down the river.
Amongst other things he took down five slaves. He sold them at New
Orleans—he came up to Natchez—bought seven there—and took them down
and sold them also. Last March he came up to preach the Gospel again.
A number of persons on board the steamboat (the Tuscarora.) who had
seen him in the slave-shambles in Natchez and New Orleans, and now,
for the first time, found him to be a preacher, had much sport at the
expense of 'the fine old preacher who dealt in slaves.'
A non-professor of religion, in Campbell county, Ky. sold a female and
two children to a Methodist professor, with the proviso that they
should not leave that region of country. The slave-driver came, and
offered $5 more for the woman than he had given, and he sold her. She
is now in the lower country, and her orphan babes are in Kentucky.
"I was much shocked once, to see a Presbyterian elder's wife call a
little slave to her to kiss her feet. At first the boy hesitated—but
the command being repeated in tones not to be misunderstood, be
approached timidly, knelt, and kissed her foot."
Rev. W.T. ALLAN, of Chatham, Illinois, gives the following in a letter
dated Feb. 4, 1839:
"Mr. Peter Vanarsdale, an elder of the Presbyterian church in
Carrollton, formerly from Kentucky, told me, the other day, that a
Mrs. Burford, in the neighborhood of Harrodsburg, Kentucky, had
separated a woman and her children from their husband and father,
taking them into another state. Mrs. B. was a member of the
Presbyterian Church. The bereaved husband and father was also a
professor of religion.
"Mr. V. told me of a slave woman who had lost her son, separated from
her by public sale. In the anguish of her soul, she gave vent to her
indignation freely, and perhaps harshly. Sometime after, she wished to
become a member of the church. Before they received her, she had to
make humble confession for speaking as she had done. Some of the
elders that received her, and required the confession, were engaged is
selling the son from his mother."
The following communication from the Rev. WILLIAM BARDWELL, of
Sandwich, Massachusetts, has just been published in Zion's Watchman,
New York city:
Mr. Editor:—The following fact was given me last evening, from the
pen of a shipmaster, who has traded in several of the principal ports
in the south. He is a man of unblemished character, a member of the
M.E. Church in this place, and familiarly known in this town. The
facts were communicated to me last fall in a letter to his wife, with
a request that she would cause them to be published. I give verbatim,
as they were written from the letter by brother Perry's own hand while
I was in his house.
"A Methodist preacher, Wm. Whitby by name, who married in Bucksville,
S.C., and by marriage came into possession of some slaves, in July,
1838, was about moving to another station to preach, and wished, also,
to move his family and slaves to Tennessee, much against the will of
the slaves, one of which, to get clear from him, ran into the woods
after swimming a brook. The parson took after him with his gun, which,
however, got wet and missed fire, when he ran to a neighbor for
another gun, with the intention, as he said, of killing him: he did
not, however, catch or kill him; he chained another for fear of his
running away also. The above particulars were related to me by William
Whitby himself. THOMAS C. PERRY. March 3, 1839."
"I find by examining the minutes of the S.C. Conference, that there is
such a preacher in the Conference, and brother Perry further stated to
me that he was well acquainted with him, and if this statement was
published, and if it could be known where he was since the last
Conference, he wished a paper to be sent him containing the whole
affair. He also stated to me, verbally, that the young man he
attempted to shoot was about nineteen years of age, and had been shut
up in a corn-house, and in the attempt of Mr. Whitby to chain him, he
broke down the door and made his escape as above mentioned, and that
Mr. W. was under the necessity of hiring him out for one year, with
the risk of his employer's getting him. Brother Perry conversed with
one of the slaves, who was so old that he thought it not profitable to
remove so far, and had been sold; he informed him of all the above
circumstances, and said, with tears, that he thought he had been so
faithful as to be entitled to liberty, but instead of making him free,
he had sold him to another master, besides parting one husband and
wife from those ties rendered a thousand times dearer by an infant
child which was torn for ever from the husband.
WILLIAM BARDWELL.
Sandwich, Mass., March 4, 1839."
Mr. WILLIAM POE, till recently a slaveholder in Virginia, now an elder
in the Presbyterian Church at Delhi, Ohio, gives the following
testimony:—
"An elder in the Presbyterian Church in Lynchburg had a most faithful
servant, whom he flogged severely and sent him to prison, and had him
confined as a felon a number of days, for being saucy. Another elder
of the same church, an auctioneer, habitually sold slaves at his
stand—very frequently parted families—would often go into the
country to sell slaves on execution and otherwise; when remonstrated
with, he justified himself, saying, 'it was his business;' the church
also justified him on the same ground.
"A Doctor Duval, of Lynchburg, Va. got offended with a very faithful,
worthy servant, and immediately sold him to a negro trader, to be
taken to New Orleans; Duval still keeping the wife of the man as his
slave. This Duval was a professor of religion."
Mr. SAMUEL HALL, a teacher in Marietta College, Ohio, says, in a
recent letter:—
"A student in Marietta College, from Mississippi, a professor of
religion, and in every way worthy of entire confidence, made to me the
following statement. [If his name were published it would probably
cost him his life.]
"When I was in the family of the Rev. James Martin, of Louisville,
Winston county, Mississippi, in the spring of 1838, Mrs. Martin became
offended at a female slave, because she did not move faster. She
commanded her to do so; the girl quickened her pace; again she was
ordered to move faster, or, Mrs. M. declared, she would break the
broomstick over her head. Again the slave quickened her pace; but not
coming up to the maximum desired by Mrs. M. the latter declared she
would see whether she (the slave) could move or not: and, going into
another apartment, she brought in a raw hide, awaiting the return of
her husband for its application. In this instance I know not what was
the final result, but I have heard the sound of the raw-hide in at
least two other instances, applied by this same reverend gentleman
to the back of his female servant."
Mr. Hall adds—"The name of my informant must be suppressed, as" he
says, "there are those who would cut my throat in a moment, if the
information I give were to be coupled with my name." Suffice it to say
that he is a professor of religion, a native of Virginia, and a
student of Marietta College, whose character will bear the strictest
scrutiny. He says:—
"In 1838, at Charlestown, Va. I conversed with several members of the
church under the care of the Rev. Mr. Brown, of the same place. Taking
occasion to speak of slavery, and of the sin of slaveholding, to one
of them who was a lady, she replied, "I am a slaveholder, and I
glory in it." I had a conversation, a few days after, with the
pastor himself, concerning the state of religion in his church, and
who were the most exemplary members in it. The pastor mentioned
several of those who were of that description; the first of whom,
however, was the identical lady who gloried in being a slaveholder!
That church numbers nearly two hundred members.
"Another lady, who was considered as devoted a Christian as any in the
same church, but who was in poor health, was accustomed to flog some
of her female domestics with a raw-hide till she was exhausted, and
then go and lie down till her strength was recruited, rising again and
resuming the flagellation. This she considered as not at all
derogatory to her Christian character."
Mr. JOEL S. BINGHAM, of Cornwall, Vermont, lately a student in
Middlebury College, and a member of the Congregational Church, spent a
few weeks in Kentucky, in the summer of 1838. He relates the following
occurrence which took place in the neighborhood where he resided, and
was a matter of perfect notoriety in the vicinity.
"Rev. Mr. Lewis, a Baptist minister in the vicinity of Frankfort, Ky.
had a slave that ran away, but was retaken and brought back to his
master, who threatened him with punishment for making an attempt to
escape. Though terrified the slave immediately attempted to run away
again. Mr. L. commanded him to stop, but he did not obey. Mr. L. then
took a gun, loaded with small shot and fired at the slave, who fell;
but was not killed, and afterward recovered. Mr. L. did not probably
intend to kill the slave, as it was his legs which were aimed at and
received the contents of the gun. The master asserted that he was
driven to this necessity to maintain his authority. This took place
about the first of July, 1838."
The following is given upon the authority of Rev. ORANGE SCOTT, of
Lowell, Mass. for many years a presiding elder in the Methodist
Episcopal Church.
"Rev. Joseph Hough, a Baptist minister, formerly of Springfield, Mass.
now of Plainfield, N.H. while traveling in the south, a few years ago,
put up one night with a Methodist family, and spent the Sabbath with
them. While there, one of the female slaves did something which
displeased her mistress. She took a chisel and mallet, and very
deliberately cut off one of her toes!"
SLAVE BREEDING AN INDEX OF PUBLIC 'OPINION' AMONG THE 'HIGHEST CLASS
OF SOCIETY' IN VIRGINIA AND OTHER NORTHERN SLAVE STATES.
But we shall be told, that 'slave-breeders' are regarded with
contempt, and the business of slave breeding is looked upon as
despicable; and the hot disclaimer of Mr. Stevenson, our Minister
Plenipotentiary at the Court of St. James, in reply to Mr. O'Connell,
who had intimated that he might be a 'slave breeder,' will doubtless
be quoted.[40] In reply, we need not say what every body knows, that
if Mr. Stevenson is not a 'slave breeder,' he is a solitary exception
among the large slaveholders of Virginia. What! Virginia slaveholders
not 'slave-breeders?' the pretence is ridiculous and contemptible; it
is meanness, hypocrisy, and falsehood, as is abundantly proved by the
testimony which follows:—
[Footnote 40: The following is Mr. Stevenson's disclaimer: It was
published in the 'London Mail,' Oct 30, 1838.
To the Editor of the Evening Mail:
Sir—I did not see until my return from Scotland the note addressed by
Mr. O'Connell, to the editor of the Chronicle, purporting to give an
explanation of the correspondence which has passed between us, and
which I deemed it proper to make public. I do not intend to be drawn
into any discussion of the subject of domestic slavery as it exists in
the United States, nor to give any explanation of the motives or
circumstances under which I have acted.
Disposed to regard Mr. O'Connell as a man of honor. I was induced to
take the course I did; whether justifiable or not, the world will now
decide. The tone and report of his last note (in which he disavows
responsibility for any thing he may say) precludes any further notice
from me, than to say that the charge which he has thought proper again
to repeat, of my being a breeder of slaves for sale and traffick, is
wholly destitute of truth; and that I am warranted in believing it has
been made by him without the slightest authority. SUCH, TOO, I VENTURE
TO SAY, IS THE CASE IN RELATION TO HIS CHARGE OF SLAVE-BREEDING IN
VIRGINIA.
I make this declaration, not because I admit Mr. O'Connell's right to
call for it, but to prevent my silence from being misinterpreted.
A. STEVENSON
23 Portland Place, Oct. 29]
Mr. GHOLSON, of Virginia, in his speech in the Legislature of that
state, Jan. 18, 1832, (see Richmond Whig,) says:—
"It has always (perhaps erroneously) been considered by steady and
old-fashioned people, that the owner of land had a reasonable right to
its annual profits; the owner of orchards, to their annual fruits; the
owner of brood mares, to their product; and the owner of female
slaves, to their increase. We have not the fine-spun intelligence,
nor legal acumen, to discover the technical distinctions drawn by
gentlemen. The legal maxim of 'Partus sequitur ventrem' is coeval
with the existence of the rights of property itself, and is founded in
wisdom and justice. It is on the justice and inviolability of this
maxim that the master foregoes the service of the female slave; has
her nursed and attended during the period of her gestation, and raises
the helpless and infant offspring. The value of the property justifies
the expense; and I do not hesitate to say, that in its increase
consists much of our wealth."
Hon. THOMAS MANN RANDOLPH, of Virginia. formerly Governor of that
state, in his speech before the legislature in 1832, while speaking of
the number of slaves annually sold from Virginia to the more southern
slave states, said:—
"The exportation has averaged EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED for the
last twenty years. Forty years ago, the whites exceeded the colored
25,000, the colored now exceed the whites 81,000; and these results
too during an exportation of near 260,000 slaves since the year 1790,
now perhaps the fruitful progenitors of half a million in other
states. It is a practice and an increasing practice, in parts of
Virginia, to rear slaves for market. How can an honorable mind, a
patriot and a lover of his country, bear to see this ancient dominion
converted into one grand menagerie, where men are to be reared for
market, like oxen for the shambles."
Professor DEW, now President of the University of William and Mary,
Virginia, in his Review of the Debate in the Virginia Legislature,
1831-2, says, p 49.
"From all the information we can obtain, we have no hesitation in
saying that upwards of six thousand [slaves] are yearly exported [from
Virginia] to other states.' Again, p. 61: 'The 6000 slaves which
Virginia annually sends off to the south, are a source of wealth to
Virginia'—Again, p. 120: 'A full equivalent being thus left in the
place of the slave, this emigration becomes an advantage to the state,
and does not check the black population as much as, at first view, we
might imagine—because it furnishes every inducement to the master to
attend to the negroes, to ENCOURAGE BREEDING, and to cause the
greatest number possible to be raised. &c."
"Virginia is, in fact, a negro-raising state for other states."
Extract from the speech of MR. FAULKNER, in the Va. House of
Delegates, 1832. [See Richmond Whig.]
"But he [Mr. Gholson,] has labored to show that the Abolition of
Slavery, were it practicable, would be impolitic, because as the
drift of this portion of his argument runs, your slaves constitute the
entire wealth of the state, all the productive capacity Virginia
possesses. And, sir, as things are, I believe he is correct. He
says, and in this he is sustained by the gentleman from Halifax, Mr.
Bruce, that the slaves constitute the entire available wealth at
present, of Eastern Virginia. Is it true that for 200 years the only
increase in the wealth and resources of Virginia, has been a remnant
of the natural increase of this miserable race?—Can it be, that on
this increase, she places her solo dependence? I had always
understood that indolence and extravagance were the necessary
concomitants of slavery; but, until I heard these declarations, I had
not fully conceived the horrible extent of this evil. These gentlemen
state the fact, which the history and present aspect of the
Commowealth but too well sustain. The gentlemen's facts and argument
in support of his plea of impolicy, to me, seem rather unhappy. To me,
such a state of things would itself be conclusive at least, that
something, even as a measure of policy, should be done. What, sir,
have you lived for two hundred years, without personal effort or
productive industry, in extravagance and indolence, sustained alone
by the return from sales of the increase of slaves, and retaining
merely such a number as your now impoverished lands can sustain, AS
STOCK, depending, too, upon a most uncertain market? When that
market is closed, as in the nature of things it must be, what then
will become of this gentleman's hundred millions worth of slaves, AND
THE ANNUAL PRODUCT?"
In the debates in the Virginia Convention, in 1829, Judge Upsher
said—"The value of slaves as an article of property [and it is in
that view only that they are legitimate subjects of taxation] depends
much on the state of the market abroad. In this view, it is the value
of land abroad, and not of land here, which furnishes the ratio. It
is well known to us all, that nothing is more fluctuating than the
value of slaves. A late law of Louisiana reduced their value 25 per
cent, in two hours after its passage was known. IF IT SHOULD BE OUR
LOT, AS I TRUST IT WILL BE, TO ACQUIRE THE COUNTRY OF TEXAS, THEIR
PRICE WILL RISE AGAIN."—p. 77.
Mr. Goode, Of Virginia, in his speech before the Virginia Legislature,
in Jan. 1832, [See Richmond Whig, of that date,] said:—
"The superior usefulness of the slaves in the south, will constitute
an effectual demand, which will remove them from our limits. We
shall send them from our state, because it will be our interest to do
so. Our planters are already becoming farmers. Many who grew tobacco
as their only staple, have already introduced, and commingled the
wheat crop. They are already semi-farmers; and in the natural course
of events, they must become more and more so.—As the greater quantity
of rich western lands are appropriated to the production of the staple
of our planters, that staple will become less profitable.—We shall
gradually divert our lands from its production, until we shall become
actual farmers.—Then will the necessity for slave labor diminish;
then will the effectual demand diminish, and then will the quantity of
slaves diminish, until they shall be adapted to the effectual demand.
"But gentlemen are alarmed lest the markets of other states be closed
against the introduction of our slaves. Sir, the demand for slave
labor MUST INCREASE through the South and West. It has been heretofore
limited by the want of capital; but when emigrants shall be relieved
from their embarrassments, contracted by the purchase of their lands,
the annual profits of their estates, will constitute an accumulating
capital, which they will seek to invest in labor. That the demand
for labor must increase in proportion to the increase of capital, is
one of the demonstrations of political economists; and I confess, that
for the removal of slavery from Virginia, I look to the efficacy of
that principle; together with the circumstance that our southern
brethren are constrained to continue planters, by their position, soil
and climate."
The following is from Niles' Weekly Register, published at Baltimore,
Md. vol. 35, p. 4.
"Dealing in slaves has become a large business; establishments are
made in several places in Maryland and Virginia, at which they are
sold like cattle; these places of deposit are strongly built, and well
supplied with thumb-screws and gags, and ornamented with cow-skins and
other whips oftentimes bloody."
R.S. FINLEY, Esq., late General Agent of the American Colonization
Society, at a meeting in New York, 27th Feb. 1833, said:
"In Virginia and other grain-growing slave states, the blacks do not
support themselves, and the only profit their masters derive from them
is, repulsive as the idea may justly seem, in breeding them, like
other live stock for the more southern states."
Rev. Dr. GRAHAM, of Fayetteville, N.C. at a Colonization Meeting,
held in that place in the fall of 1837 said:
"He had resided for 15 years in one of the largest slaveholding
counties in the state, had long and anxiously considered the subject,
and still it was dark. There were nearly 7000 slaves offered in New
Orleans market last winter. From Virginia alone 6000 were annually
sent to the south; and from Virginia and N.C. there had gone, in the
same direction, in the last twenty years, 300,000 slaves. While not
4000 had gone to Africa. What it portended, he could not predict, but
he felt deeply, that we must awake in these states and consider the
subject."
Hon. PHILIP DODDRIDGE, of Virginia, in his speech in the Virginia
Convention, in 1829, [Debates p. 89.] said:—
"The acquisition of Texas will greatly enhance the value of the
property, in question, [Virginia slaves.]"
Hon C.F. MERCER, in a speech before the same Convention, in 1829,
says:
"The tables of the natural growth of the slave population demonstrate,
when compared with the increase of its numbers in the commonwealth for
twenty years past, that an annual revenue of not less than a million
and a half of dollars is derived from the exportation of a part of
this population." (Debates, p. 199.)
Hon. HENRY CLAY, of Ky., in his speech before the Colonization
Society, in 1829, says:
"It is believed that nowhere in the farming portion of the United
States, would slave labor be generally employed, if the proprietor
were not tempted to RAISE SLAVES BY THE HIGH PRICE OF THE SOUTHERN
MARKET WHICH KEEPS IT UP IN HIS OWN."
The New Orleans Courier, Feb. 15, 1839, speaking of the prohibition of
the African Slave-trade, while the internal slave-trade is plied,
says:
"The United States law may, and probably does, put MILLIONS into the
pockets of the people living between the Roanoke, and Mason and
Dixon's line; still we think it would require some casuistry to show
that the present slave-trade from that quarter is a whit better than
the one from Africa. One thing is certain—that its results are more
menacing to the tranquillity of the people in this quarter, as there
can be no comparison between the ability and inclination to do
mischief, possessed by the Virginia negro, and that of the rude and
ignorant African."
That the New Orleans Editor does not exaggerate in saying that the
internal slave-trade puts 'millions' into the pockets of the
slaveholders in Maryland and Virginia, is very clear from the
following statement, made by the editor of the Virginia Times, an
influential political paper, published at Wheeling, Virginia. Of the
exact date of the paper we are not quite certain, it was, however,
sometime in 1836, probably near the middle of the year—the file will
show. The editor says:—
"We have heard intelligent men estimate the number of slaves exported
from Virginia within the last twelve months, at 120,000—each slave
averaging at least $600, making an aggregate at $72,000,000. Of the
number of slaves exported, not more than one-third have been sold,
(the others having been carried by their owners, who have removed,)
which would leave in the state the SUM OF $24,000,000 ARISING FROM
THE SALE OF SLAVES."
According to this estimate about FORTY THOUSAND SLAVES WERE SOLD OUT
OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA IN A SINGLE YEAR, and the 'slave-breeders'
who hold them, put into their pockets TWENTY-FOUR MILLION OF DOLLARS,
the price of the 'souls of men.'
The New York Journal of Commerce of Oct. 12, 1835, contained a letter
from a Virginian, whom the editor calls 'a very good and sensible
man,' asserting that TWENTY THOUSAND SLAVES had been driven to the
south from Virginia during that year, nearly one-fourth of which was
then remaining.
The Maryville (Tenn.) Intelligencer, some time in the early part of
1836, (we have not the date,) says, in an article reviewing a
communication of Rev. J.W. Douglass, of Fayetteville, North Carolina:
"Sixty thousand slaves passed through a little western town for the
southern market, during the year 1835."
The Natchez (Miss.) Courier, says "that the states of Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas, imported TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY
THOUSAND SLAVES from the more northern slave states in the year 1836."
The Baltimore American gives the following from a Mississippi paper,
of 1837:
"The report made by the committee of the citizens Of Mobile, appointed
at their meeting held on the 1st instant, on the subject of the
existing pecuniary pressure, states, among other things: that so large
has been the return of slave labor, that purchases by Alabama of that
species of property from other states since 1833, have amounted to
about TEN MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY."
FURTHER the inhumanity of a slaveholding 'public opinion' toward
slaves, follows legitimately from the downright ruffianism of the
slaveholding spirit in the 'highest class of society,' When roused,
it tramples upon all the proprieties and courtesies, and even common
decencies of life, and is held in check by none of those
considerations of time, and place, and relations of station,
character, law, and national honor, which are usually sufficient, even
in the absence of conscientious principles, to restrain other men from
outrages. Our National Legislature is a fit illustration of this.
Slaveholders have converted the Congress of the United States into a
very bear garden. Within the last three years some of the most
prominent slaveholding members of the House, and among them the late
speaker, have struck and kicked, and throttled, and seized each other
by the hair, and with their fists pummelled each other's faces, on the
floor of Congress. We need not publish an account of what every body
knows, that during the session of the last Congress, Mr. Wise of
Virginia and Mr. Bynum of North Carolina, after having called each
other "liars, villains" and "damned rascals" sprung from their seats
"both sufficiently armed for any desperate purpose," cursing each
other as they rushed together, and would doubtless have butchered each
other on the floor of Congress, if both had not been seized and held
by their friends.
The New York Gazette relates the following which occurred at the close
of the session of 1838.
"The House could not adjourn without another brutal and bloody row. It
occurred on Sunday morning immediately at the moment of adjournment,
between Messrs. Campbell and Maury, both of Tennessee. He took offence
at some remarks made to him by his colleague, Mr. Campbell, and the
fight followed."
The Huntsville (Ala.) Democrat of June 16, 1838, gives the particulars
which follow:
"Mr. Maury is said to be badly hurt. He was near losing his life by
being knocked through the window; but his adversary, it is said, saved
him by clutching the hair of his head with his left hand, while he
struck him with his right."
The same number of the Huntsville Democrat, contains the particulars
of a fist-fight on the floor of the House of Representatives, between
Mr. Bell, the late Speaker, and his colleague Mr. Turney of Tennessee.
The following is an extract:
"Mr. Turney concluded his remarks in reply to Mr. Bell, in the course
of which he commented upon that gentleman's course at different
periods of his political career with great severity.
"He did not think his colleague [Mr. Turney,] was actuated by private
malice, but was the willing voluntary instrument of others, the tool
of tools.
Mr. Turney. It is false! it is false!
Mr. Stanley called Mr. TURNEY to order.
At the same moment both gentlemen were perceived in personal conflict,
and blows with the fist were aimed by each at the other. Several
members interfered, and suppressed the personal violence; others
called order, order, and some called for the interference of the
Speaker.
The Speaker hastily took the chair, and insisted upon order; but both
gentlemen continued struggling, and endeavoring, notwithstanding the
constraint of their friends, to strike each other."
The correspondent of the New York Gazette gives the following, which
took place about the time of the preceding affrays:
"The House was much agitated last night, by the passage between Mr.
Biddle, of Pittsburgh, and Mr. Downing, of Florida. Mr. D. exclaimed
"do you impute falsehood to me!" at the same time catching up some
missile and making a demonstration to advance upon Mr. Biddle. Mr.
Biddle repeated his accusation, and meanwhile, Mr. Downing was
arrested by many members."
The last three fights all occurred, if we mistake not, in the short
space of one month. The fisticuffs between Messrs. Bynum and Wise
occurred at the previous session of Congress. At the same session
Messrs. Peyton of Tenn. and Wise of Virginia, went armed with pistols
and dirks to the meeting of a committee of Congress, and threatened to
shoot a witness while giving his testimony.
We begin with the first on the list. Who are Messrs. Wise and Bynum?
Both slaveholders. Who are Messrs. Campbell and Maury? Both
slaveholders. Who are Messrs. Bell and Turney? Both slaveholders. Who
is Mr. Downing, who seized a weapon and rushed upon Mr. Biddle? A
slaveholder. Who is Mr. Peyton who drew his pistol on a witness before
a committee of Congress? A slaveholder of course. All these bullies
were slaveholders, and they magnified their office, and slaveholding
was justified of her children. We might fill a volume with similar
chronicles of slaveholding brutality. But time would fail us. Suffice
it to say, that since the organization of the government, a majority
of the most distinguished men in the slaveholding states have gloried
in strutting over the stage in the character of murderers. Look at the
men whom the people delight to honor. President Jackson, Senator
Benton, the late Gen. Coffee,—it is but a few years since these
slaveholders shot at, and stabbed, and stamped upon each other in a
tavern broil. General Jackson had previously killed Mr. Dickenson.
Senator Clay of Kentucky has immortalized himself by shooting at a
near relative of Chief Justice Marshall, and being wounded by him; and
not long after by shooting at John Randolph of Virginia. Governor
M'Duffie of South Carolina has signalized himself also, both by
shooting and being shot,—so has Governor Poindexter, and Governor
Rowan, and Judge M'Kinley of the U.S. Supreme Court, late senator in
Congress from Alabama,—but we desist; a full catalogue would fill
pages. We will only add, that a few months since, in the city of
London, Governor Hamilton, of South Carolina, went armed with pistols,
to the lodgings of Daniel O'Connell, 'to stop his wind' in the
bullying slang of his own published boast. During the last session of
Congress Messrs. Dromgoole and Wise[41] of Virginia, W. Cost Johnson
and Jenifer of Maryland, Pickens and Campbell of South Carolina, and
we know not how many more slaveholding members of Congress have been
engaged, either as principals or seconds, in that species of murder
dignified with the name of duelling. But enough; we are heart-sick.
What meaneth all this? Are slaveholders worse than other men? No! but
arbitrary power has wrought in them its mystery of iniquity, and
poisoned their better nature with its infuriating sorcery.
[Footnote 41: Mr. WISE said in one of his speeches during the last
session of Congress, that he was obliged to go armed for the
protection of his life in Washington. It could not have been for fear
of Northern men.]
Their savage ferocity toward each other when their passions are up, is
the natural result of their habit of daily plundering and oppressing
the slave.
The North Carolina Standard of August 30, 1837, contains the following
illustration of this ferocity exhibited by two southern lawyers in
settling the preliminaries of a duel.
"The following conditions were proposed by Alexander K. McClung, of
Raymond, in the State of Mississippi, to H.C. Stewart, as the laws to
govern a duel they were to fight near Vicksburg:
"Article 1st. The parties shall meet opposite Vicksburg, in the State
of Louisiana, on Thursday the 29th inst. precisely at 4 o'clock, P.M.
Agreed to.
"2d. The weapons to be used by each shall weigh one pound two and a
half ounces, measuring sixteen inches and a half in length, including
the handle, and one inch and three-eighths in breadth. Agreed to.
"3d. Both knives shall be sharp on one edge, and on the back shall be
sharp only one inch at the point. Agreed to.
"4th. Each party shall stand at the distance of eight feet from the
other, until the word is given. Agreed to.
"5th. The second of each party shall throw up, with a silver dollar, on
the ground, for the word, and two best out of three shall win the
word. Agreed to.
"6th. After the word is given, either party may take what advantage he
can with his knife, but on throwing his knife at the other, shall be
shot down by the second of his opponent. Agreed to.
"7th. Each party shall be stripped entirely naked, except one pair of
linen pantaloons; one pair of socks, and boots or pumps as the party
please. Acceded to.
"8th. The wrist of the left arm of each party shall be tied tight to
his left thigh, and a strong cord shall be fastened around his left
arm at the elbow, and then around his body. Rejected.
"9th. After the word is given, each party shall be allowed to advance
or recede as he pleases, over the space of twenty acres of ground,
until death ensues to one of the parties. Agreed to—the parties to be
placed in the centre of the space.
"10th. The word shall be given by the winner of the same, in the
following manner, viz: "Gentlemen are you ready?" Each party shall
then answer, "I am!" The second giving the word shall then distinctly
command—strike. Agreed to.
"If either party shall violate these rules, upon being notified by the
second of either party, he may be liable to be shot down instantly. As
established usage points out the duty of both parties, therefore
notification is considered unnecessary."
The FAVORITE AMUSEMENTS of slaveholders, like the gladiatorial shows
of Rome and the Bull Fights of Spain, reveal a public feeling
insensible to suffering, and a depth of brutality in the highest
degree revolting to every truly noble mind. One of their most common
amusements is cock fighting. Mains of cocks, with twenty, thirty, and
fifty cocks on each side, are fought for hundreds of dollars aside.
The fowls are armed with steel spurs or 'gafts,' about two inches
long. These 'gafts' are fastened upon the legs by sawing off the
natural 'spur,' leaving only enough of it to answer the purpose of a
stock for the tube of the "gafts," which are so sharp that at a
stroke the fowls thrust them through each other's necks and heads, and
tear each other's bodies till one or both dies, then two others are
brought forward for the amusement of the multitude assembled, and this
barbarous pastime is often kept up for days in succession, hundreds
and thousands gathering from a distance to witness it. The following
advertisements from the Raleigh Register, June 18, 1838, edited by
Messrs. Gales and Son, the father and brother of Mr. Gales, editor of
the National Intelligencer, and late Mayor of Washington City, reveal
the public sentiment of North Carolina.
"CHATHAM AGAINST NASH, or any other county in the State. I am
authorized to take a bet of any amount that may be offered, to FIGHT A
MAIN OF COCKS, at any place that may be agreed upon by the parties—to
be fought the ensuing spring. GIDEON ALSTON. Chatham county, June 7,
1838."
Two weeks after, this challenge was answered as follows:
"TO MR. GIDEON ALSTON, of Chatham county, N.C.
"SIR: In looking over the North Carolina Standard of the 20th inst. I
discover a challenge over your signature, headed 'Chatham against
Nash,' in which you state: that you are 'authorized to take a bet of
any amount that may be offered, to fight a main of cocks, at any place
that may be agreed upon by the parties, to be fought the ensuing
spring' which challenge I ACCEPT: and do propose to meet you at
Rolesville, in Wake county, N.C. on the last Wednesday in May next,
the parties to show thirty-one cocks each—fight four days, and be
governed by the rules as laid down in Turner's Cock Laws—which, if
you think proper to accede to, you will signify through this or any
other medium you may select, and then I will name the sum for which we
shall fight, as that privilege was surrendered by you in your
challenge.
"I am, sir, very respectfully, &c. NICHOLAS W. ARRINGTON, near
Hilliardston, Nash co. North Carolina June 22nd, 1838"
The following advertisement in the Richmond Whig, of July 12, 1837,
exhibits the public sentiment of Virginia.
"MAIN OF COCKS.—A large 'MAIN OF COCKS,' 21 a side, for $25 'the
fight', and $500 'the odd,' will be fought between the County of
Dinwiddie on one part, and the Counties of Hanover and Henrico on the
other.
"The 'regular' fighting will be continued three days, and from the
large number of 'game uns' on both sides and in the adjacent country,
will be prolonged no doubt a fourth. To prevent confusion and
promote 'sport,' the Pit will be enclosed and furnished with seats;
so that those having a curiosity to witness a species of diversion
originating in a better day (for they had no rag money then,) can have
that very natural feeling gratified.
"The Petersburg Constellation is requested to copy."
Horse-racing too, as every body knows, is a favorite amusement of
slaveholders. Every slave state has its race course, and in the older
states almost every county has one on a small scale. There is hardly a
day in the year, the weather permitting, in which crowds do not
assemble at the south to witness this barbarous sport. Horrible
cruelty is absolutely inseparable from it. Hardly a race occurs of any
celebrity in which some one of the coursers is not lamed, 'broken
down,' or in some way seriously injured, often for life, and not
unfrequently they are killed by the rupture of some vital part in the
struggle. When the heats are closely contested, the blood of the
tortured animal drips from the lash and flies at every leap from the
stroke of the rowel. From the breaking of girths and other accidents,
their riders (mostly slaves) are often thrown and maimed or killed.
Yet these amusements are attended by thousands in every part of the
slave states. The wealth and fashion, the gentlemen and ladies of
the 'highest circles' at the south, throng the race course.
That those who can fasten steel spurs upon the legs of dunghill fowls,
and goad the poor birds to worry and tear each other to death—and
those who can crowd by thousands to witness such barbarity—that
those who can throng the race-course and with keen relish witness the
hot pantings of the life-struggle, the lacerations and fitful spasms
of the muscles, swelling through the crimsoned foam, as the tortured
steeds rush in blood-welterings to the goal—that such, should look
upon the sufferings of their slaves with, indifference is certainly
small wonder.
Perhaps we shall be told that there are thronged race-courses at the
North. True, there are a few, and they are thronged chiefly by
Southerners, and 'Northern men with Southern principles,' and
supported mainly by the patronage of slaveholders who summer at the
North. Cock-fighting and horse-racing are "Southern institutions."
The idleness, contempt of labor, dissipation, sensuality, brutality,
cruelty, and meanness, engendered by the habit of making men and women
work without pay, and flogging them if they demur at it, constitutes a
congenial soil out of which cock-fighting and horse-racing are the
spontaneous growth.
Again,—The kind treatment of the slaves is often argued from the
liberal education and enlarged views of slaveholders. The facts and
reasonings of the preceding pages have shown, that 'liberal
education,' despotic habits and ungoverned passions work together with
slight friction. And every day's observation shows that the former is
often a stimulant to the latter.
But the notion so common at the north that the majority of the
slaveholders are persons of education, is entirely erroneous. A very
few slaveholders in each of the slave states have been men of ripe
education, to whom our national literature is much indebted. A larger
number may be called well educated—these reside mostly in the
cities and large villages, but a majority of the slaveholders are
ignorant men, thousands of them notoriously so, mere boors unable to
write their names or to read the alphabet.
No one of the slave states has probably so much general education as
Virginia. It is the oldest of them—has furnished one half of the
presidents of the United States—has expended more upon her university
than any state in the Union has done during the same time upon its
colleges—sent to Europe nearly twenty years since for her most
learned professors, and in fine, has far surpassed every other slave
state in her efforts to disseminate education among her citizens, and
yet, the Governor of Virginia in his message to the legislature (Jan.
7, 1839) says, that of four thousand six hundred and fourteen adult
males in that state, who applied to the county clerks for marriage
licenses in the year 1837, 'ONE THOUSAND AND FORTY SEVEN were unable
to write their names.' The governor adds, 'These statements, it will
be remembered, are confined to one sex: the education of females it is
to be feared, is in a condition of much greater neglect.'
The Editor of the Virginia Times, published at Wheeling, in his paper
of Jan. 23, 1839, says,—
"We have every reason to suppose that one-fourth of the people of the
state cannot write their names, and they have not, of course, any
other species of education."
Kentucky is the child of Virginia; her first settlers were some of the
most distinguished citizens of the mother state; in the general
diffusion of intelligence amongst her citizens Kentucky is probably in
advance of all the slave states except Virginia and South Carolina;
and yet Governor Clark, in his last message to the Kentucky
Legislature, (Dec 5, 1838) makes the following declaration: "From the
computation of those most familiar with the subject, it appears that
AT LEAST ONE THIRD OF THE ADULT POPULATION OF THE STATE ARE UNABLE TO
WRITE THEIR NAMES."
The following advertisement in the "Milledgeville (Geo.) Journal,"
Dec. 26, 1837, is another specimen from one of the 'old thirteen.'
"NOTICE.—I, Pleasant Webb, of the State of Georgia, Oglethorpe
county, being an illiterate man, and not able to write my own name,
and whereas it hath been represented to me that there is a certain
promissory note or notes out against me that I know nothing of, and
further that some man in this State holds a bill of sale for a
certain negro woman named Ailsey and her increase, a part of which is
now in my possession, which I also know nothing of. Now do hereby
certify and declare, that I have no knowledge whatsoever of any such
papers existing in my name as above stated and I hereby require all or
any person or persons whatsoever holding or pretending to hold any
such papers, to produce them to me within thirty days from the date
hereof, shewing their authority for holding the same, or they will be
considered fictitious and fraudulently obtained or raised, by some
person or persons for base purposes after my death.
"Given under my hand this 2nd day of December, 1837. PLEASANT WEBB.
his mark X."
FINALLY, THAT SLAVES MUST HABITUALLY SUFFER GREAT CRUELTIES, FOLLOWS
INEVITABLY FROM THE BRUTAL OUTRAGES WHICH THEIR MASTERS INFLICT ON
EACH OTHER.
Slaveholders, exercising from childhood irresponsible power over human
beings, and in the language of President Jefferson, "giving loose to
the worst of passions" in the treatment of their slaves, become in a
great measure unfitted for self control in their intercourse with each
other. Tempers accustomed to riot with loose reins, spurn restraints,
and passions inflamed by indulgence, take fire on the least friction.
We repeat it, the state of society in the slave states, the duels, and
daily deadly affrays of slaveholders with each other—the fact that
the most deliberate and cold-blooded murders are committed at noon
day, in the presence of thousands, and the perpetrators eulogized by
the community as "honorable men," reveals such a prostration of law,
as gives impunity to crime—a state of society, an omnipresent public
sentiment reckless of human life, taking bloody vengeance on the spot
for every imaginary affront, glorying in such assassinations as the
only true honor and chivalry, successfully defying the civil arm, and
laughing its impotency to scorn.
When such things are done in the green tree, what will be done in the
dry? When slaveholders are in the habit of caning, stabbing, and
shooting each other at every supposed insult, the unspeakable
enormities perpetrated by such men, with such passions, upon their
defenceless slaves, must be beyond computation. To furnish the
reader with an illustration of slaveholding civilization and morality,
as exhibited in the unbridled fury, rage, malignant hate, jealousy,
diabolical revenge, and all those infernal passions that shoot up rank
in the hot-bed of arbitrary power, we will insert here a mass of
testimony, detailing a large number of affrays, lynchings,
assassinations, &c., &c., which have taken place in various parts of
the slave states within a brief period—and to leave no room for cavil
on the subject, these extracts will be made exclusively from
newspapers published in the slave states, and generally in the
immediate vicinity of the tragedies described. They will not be made
second hand from northern papers, but from the original southern
papers, which now lie on our table.
Before proceeding to furnish details of certain classes of crimes in
the slave states, we advertise the reader—1st. That we shall not
include in the list those crimes which are ordinarily committed in the
free, as well as in the slave states. 2d. We shall not include any of
the crimes perpetrated by whites upon slaves and free colored persons,
who constitute a majority of the population in Mississippi and
Louisiana, a large majority in South Carolina, and, on an average,
two-fifths in the other slave states. 3d. Fist fights, canings,
beatings, biting off noses and ears, gougings, knockings down, &c.,
unless they result in death, will not be included in the list, nor
will ordinary murders, unless connected with circumstances that
serve as a special index of public sentiment. 4th. Neither will
ordinary, formal duels be included, except in such cases as just
specified. 5th. The only crimes which, as the general rule, will be
specified, will be deadly affrays with bowie knives, dirks, pistols.
rifles, guns, or other death weapons, and lynchings. 6th. The crimes
enumerated will, for the most part, be only those perpetrated
openly, without attempt at concealment. 7th. We shall not attempt
to give a full list of the affrays, &c., that took place in the
respective states during the period selected, as the only files of
southern papers to which we have access are very imperfect.
The reader will perceive, from these preliminaries, that only a
small proportion of the crimes actually perpetrated in the
respective slave states during the period selected, will be entered
upon this list. He will also perceive, that the crimes which will be
presented are of a class rarely perpetrated in the free states; and if
perpetrated there at all, they are, with scarcely an exception,
committed either by slaveholders, temporarily resident in them, or by
persons whose passions have been inflamed by the poison of a southern
contact—whose habits and characters have become perverted by living
among slaveholders, and adopting the code of slaveholding morality.
We now proceed to the details, commencing with the new state of
Arkansas.
At the last session of the legislature of that state, Col. John
Wilson, President of the Bank at Little Rock, the capital of the
state, was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives. He had
been elected to that office for a number of years successively, and
was one of the most influential citizens of the state. While presiding
over the deliberations of the House, he took umbrage at words spoken
in debate by Major Anthony, a conspicuous member, came down from the
Speaker's chair, drew a large bowie knife from his bosom, and attacked
Major A., who defended himself for some time, but was at last stabbed
through the heart, and fell dead on the floor. Wilson deliberately
wiped the blood from his knife, and returned to his seat. The
following statement of the circumstances of the murder, and the trial
of the murderer, is abridged from the account published in the
Arkansas Gazette, a few months since—it is here taken from the
Knoxville (Tennessee) Register, July 4, 1838.
"On the 14th of December last, Maj. Joseph J. Anthony, a member of the
Legislature of Arkansas, was murdered, while performing his duty as a
member of the House of Representatives, by John Wilson, Speaker of
that House.
"The facts were these: A bill came from the Senate, commonly called the
Wolf Bill. Among the amendments proposed, was one by Maj. Anthony,
that the signature of the President of the Real Estate Bank should be
attached to the certificate of the wolf scalp. Col. Wilson, the
Speaker, asked Maj. Anthony whether he intended the remark as
personal. Maj. Anthony promptly said, "No, I do not." And at that
instant of time, a message was delivered from the Senate, which
suspended the proceedings of the House for a few minutes. Immediately
after the messenger from the Senate had retired, Maj. Anthony rose
from his seat, and said he wished to explain, that he did not intend
to insult the Speaker or the House; when Wilson, interrupting,
peremptorily ordered him to take his seat. Maj. Anthony said, as a
member, he had a right to the floor, to explain himself. Wilson said,
in an angry tone, 'Sit down, or you had better;' and thrust his hand
into his bosom, and drew out a large bowie knife, 10 or 11 inches in
length, and descended from the Speaker's chair to the floor, with the
knife drawn in a menacing manner. Maj. Anthony, seeing the danger he
was placed in, by Wilson's advance on him with a drawn knife, rose
from his chair, set it out of his way, stepped back a pace or two, and
drew his knife. Wilson caught up a chair, and struck Anthony with it.
Anthony, recovering from the blow, caught the chair in his left hand,
and a fight ensued over the chair. Wilson received two wounds, one on
each arm, and Anthony lost his knife, either by throwing it at Wilson,
or it escaped by accident. After Anthony had lost his knife, Wilson
advanced on Anthony, who was then retreating, looking over his
shoulder. Seeing Wilson pursuing him, he threw a chair. Wilson still
pursued, and Anthony raised another chair as high as his breast, with
a view, it is supposed, of keeping Wilson off. Wilson then caught hold
of the chair with his left hand, raised it up, and with his right hand
deliberately thrust the knife, up to the hilt, into Anthony's heart,
and as deliberately drew it out, and wiping off the blood with his
thumb and finger, retired near to the Speaker's chair.
"As the knife was withdrawn from Anthony's heart, he fell a lifeless
corpse on the floor, without uttering a word, or scarcely making a
struggle; so true did the knife, as deliberately directed, pierce his
heart.
"Three days elapsed before the constituted authorities took any notice
of this horrible deed; and not then, until a relation of the murdered
Anthony had demanded a warrant for the apprehension of Wilson. Several
days then elapsed before he was brought before an examining court. He
then, in a carriage and four, came to the place appointed for his
trial. Four or five days were employed in the examination of
witnesses, and never was a clearer case of murder proved than on that
occasion. Notwithstanding, the court (Justice Brown dissenting)
admitted Wilson to bail, and positively refused that the prosecuting
attorney for the state should introduce the law, to show that it was
not a bailable case, or even to hear an argument from him.
"At the time appointed for the session of the Circuit Court, Wilson
appeared agreeably to his recognizance. A motion was made by Wilson's
counsel for change of venue, founded on the affidavits of Wilson,
and two other men. The court thereupon removed the case to Saline
county, and ordered the Sheriff to take Wilson into custody, and
deliver him over to the Sheriff of Saline county.
"The Sheriff of Pulaski never confined Wilson one minute, but
permitted him to go where he pleased, without a guard, or any
restraint imposed on him whatever. On his way to Saline, he
entertained him freely at his own house, and the next day delivered
him over to the Sheriff of that county, who conducted the prisoner to
the debtor's room in the jail, and gave him the key, so that he and
every body else had free egress and ingress at all times. Wilson
invited every body to call on him, as he wished to see his friends,
and his room was crowded with visitors, who called to drink grog, and
laugh and talk with him. But this theatre was not sufficiently large
for his purpose. He afterwards visited the dram-shops, where he freely
treated all that would partake with him, and went fishing and hunting
with others at pleasure, and entirely with out restraint. He also ate
at the same table with the Judge, while on trial.
"When the court met at Saline, Wilson was put on his trial. Several
days were occupied in examining the witnesses in the case. After the
examination was closed, while Col. Taylor was engaged in a very able,
lucid, and argumentative speech, on the part of the prosecution, some
man collected a parcel of the rabble, and came within a few yards of
the court-house door, and bawled in a loud voice, 'part them—part
them!' Every body supposed there was an affray, and ran to the doors
and windows to see; behold, there was nothing more than the man, and
the rabble he had collected around him, for the purpose of annoying
Col. Taylor while speaking. A few minutes afterwards, this same person
brought a horse near the court-house door, and commenced crying the
horse, as though he was for sale, and continued for ten or fifteen
minutes to ride before the court-house door, crying the horse, in a
loud and boisterous tone of voice. The Judge sat as a silent listener
to the indignity thus offered the court and counsel by this man,
without interposing his authority.
"To show the depravity of the times, and the people, after the verdict
had been delivered by the jury, and the court informed Wilson that he
was discharged, there was a rush toward him: some seized him by the
hand, some by the arm, and there was great and loud rejoicing and
exultation, directly in the presence of the court: and Wilson told the
Sheriff to take the jury to a grocery, that he might treat them, and
invited every body that chose to go. The house was soon filled to
overflowing. The rejoicing was kept up till near supper time: but to
cap the climax, soon after supper was over, a majority of the jury,
together with many others, went to the rooms that had been occupied
several days by the friend and relation of the murdered Anthony, and
commenced a scene of the most ridiculous dancing, (as it is believed,)
in triumph for Wilson, and as a triumph over the feelings of the
relations of the departed Anthony. The scene did not close here. The
party retired to a dram-shop, and continued their rejoicing until
about half after 10 o'clock. They then collected a parcel of horns,
trumpets, &c., and marched through the streets, blowing them, till
near day, when one of the company rode his horse in the porch
adjoining the room which was occupied by the relations of the
deceased."
This case is given to the reader at length, in order fully to show,
that in a community where the law sanctions the commission of every
species of outrage upon one class of citizens, it fosters passions
which will paralyze its power to protect the other classes. Look at
the facts developed in this case, as exhibiting the state of society
among slaveholders. 1st. That the members of the legislature are in
the habit of wearing bowie knives. Wilson's knife was 10 or 11 inches
long.[42] 2d. The murderer, Wilson, was a man of wealth, president of
the bank at the capital of the state, a high military officer, and
had, for many years, been Speaker of the House of Representatives, as
appears from a previous statement in the Arkansas Gazette. 3d. The
murder was committed in open day, before all the members of the House,
and many spectators, not one of whom seems to have made the least
attempt to intercept Wilson, as he advanced upon Anthony with his
knife drawn, but "made way for him," as is stated in another account.
4th. Though the murder was committed in the state-house, at the
capital of the state, days passed before the civil authorities moved
in the matter; and they did not finally do it, until the relations of
the murdered man demanded a warrant for the apprehension of the
murderer. Even then, several days elapsed before he was brought before
an examining court. When his trial came on, he drove to it in state,
drew up before the door with "his coach and four," alighted, and
strided into court like a lord among his vassals; and there, though a
clearer case of deliberate murder never reeked in the face of the sun,
yet he was admitted to bail, the court absolutely refusing to hear an
argument from the prosecuting attorney, showing that it was not a
bailable case. 5th. The sheriff of Pulaski county, who had Wilson in
custody, "never confined him a moment, but permitted him to go at
large wholly unrestrained." When transferred to Saline co. for trial,
the sheriff of that county gave Wilson the same liberty, and he spent
his time in parties of pleasure, fishing, hunting, and at houses of
entertainment. 6th. Finally, to demonstrate to the world, that justice
among slaveholders is consistent with itself; that authorizing
man-stealing and patronising robbery, it will, of course, be the
patron and associate of murder also, the judge who sat upon the case,
and the murderer who was on trial for his life before him, were
boon-companions together, eating and drinking at the same table
throughout the trial. Then came the conclusion of the farce—the
uproar round the court-house during the trial, drowning the voice of
the prosecutor while pleading, without the least attempt by the court
to put it down—then the charge of the judge to the jury, and their
unanimous verdict of acquittal—then the rush from all quarters around
the murderer with congratulations—the whole crowd in the court room
shouting and cheering—then Wilson leading the way to a tavern,
inviting the sheriff, and jury, and all present to "a treat"—then the
bacchanalian revelry kept up all night, a majority of the jurors
participating—the dancing, the triumphal procession through the
streets with the blowing of horns and trumpets, and the prancing of
horses through the porch of the house occupied by the relations of the
murdered Anthony, adding insult and mockery to their agony.
[Footnote 42: A correspondent of the "Frederick Herald," writing from
Little Rock, says, "Anthony's knife was about twenty-eight inches in
length. They all carry knives here, or pistols. There are several
kinds of knives in use—a narrow blade, and about twelve inches long,
is called an 'Arkansas tooth-pick.'"]
A few months before this murder on the floor of the legislature,
George Scott, Esq., formerly marshall of the state was shot in an
affray at Van Buren, Crawford co., Arkansas, by a man named Walker;
and Robert Carothers, in an affray in St. Francis co., shot William
Rachel, just as Rachel was shooting at Carothers' father. (National
Intelligencer, May 8, 1837, and Little Rock Gazette, August 30,
1837.)
While Wilson's trial was in progress, Mr. Gabriel Sibley was stabbed
to the heart at a public dinner, in St. Francis co., Arkansas, by
James W. Grant. (Arkansas Gazette, May 30, 1838.)
Hardly a week before this, the following occurred:
"On the 16th ult., an encounter took place at Little Rock, Ark.,
between David F. Douglass, a young man of 18 or 19, and Dr. Wm. C.
Howell. A shot was exchanged between them at the distance of 8 or 10
feet with double-barrelled guns. The load of Douglass entered the left
hip of Dr. Howell, and a buckshot from the gun of the latter struck a
negro girl, 13 or 14 years of age, just below the pit of the stomach.
Douglass then fired a second time and hit Howell in the left groin,
penetrating the abdomen and bladder, and causing his death in four
hours. The negro girl, at the last dates, was not dead, but no hopes
were entertained of her recovery. Douglass was committed to await his
trial at the April term of the Circuit Court."—Louisville Journal.
The Little Rock Gazette of Oct. 24, says, "We are again called upon
to record the cold blooded murder of a valuable citizen. On the 10th
instant, Col. John Lasater, of Franklin co., was murdered by John W.
Whitson, who deliberately shot him with a shot gun, loaded with a
handful of rifle balls, six of which entered his body. He lived twelve
hours after he was shot.
"Whitson is the son of William Whitson, who was unfortunately killed,
about a year since, in a rencontre with Col. Lasater, (who was fully
exonerated from all blame by a jury,) and, in revenge of his father's
death, committed this bloody deed."
These atrocities were all perpetrated within a few months of the time
of the deliberate assassination, on the floor of the legislature by
the speaker, already described, and are probably but a small portion
of the outrages committed in that state during the same period. The
state of Arkansas contains about forty-five thousand white
inhabitants, which is, if we mistake not, the present population of
Litchfield county, Connecticut. And we venture the assertion, that a
public affray, with deadly weapons, has not taken place in that county
for fifty years, if indeed ever since its settlement a century and a
half ago.
Missouri became one of the United States in 1821. Its present white
population is about two hundred and fifty thousand. The following are
a few of the affrays that have occurred there during the years 1837
and '38.
The "Salt River Journal" March 8, 1838, has the following.
"Fatal Affray.—An affray took place during last week, in the town
of New London, between Dr. Peake and Dr. Bosley, both of that village,
growing out of some trivial matter at a card party. After some words,
Bosley threw a glass at Peake, which was followed up by other acts of
violence, and in the quarrel Peake stabbed Bosley, several times with
a dirk, in consequence of which, Bosley died the following morning.
The court of inquiry considered Peake justifiable, and discharged him
from arrest."
From the "St. Louis Republican," of September 29, 1837.
"We learn that a fight occurred at Bowling-Green, in this state, a few
days since, between Dr. Michael Reynolds and Henry Lalor. Lalor
procured a gun, and Mr. Dickerson wrested the gun from him; this
produced a fight between Lalor and Dickerson, in which the former
stabbed the latter in the abdomen. Mr. Dickerson died of the wound."
The following was in the same paper about a month previous, August 21,
1837.
"A Horse Thief Shot.—A thief was caught in the act of stealing a
horse on Friday last, on the opposite side of the river, by a company
of persons out sporting. Mr. Kremer, who was in the company, levelled
his rifle and ordered him to stop; which he refused; he then fired and
lodged the contents in the thief's body, of which he died soon
afterwards. Mr. K. went before a magistrate, who after hearing the
case, REFUSED TO HOLD HIM FOR FURTHER TRIAL!"
On the 5th of July, 1838, Alpha P. Buckley murdered William Yaochum in
an affray in Jackson county, Missouri. (Missouri Republican, July 24,
1838.)
General Atkinson of the United States Army was waylaid on the 4th of
September, 1838, by a number of persons, and attacked in his carriage
near St. Louis, on the road to Jefferson Barracks, but escaped after
shooting one of the assailants. The New Orleans True American of
October 29, '38, speaking of this says: "It will be recollected that a
few weeks ago, Judge Dougherty, one of the most respectable citizens
of St. Louis, was murdered upon the same road."
The same paper contains the following letter from the murderer of
Judge Dougherty.
"Murder of Judge Dougherty.—The St. Louis Republican received the
following mysterious letter, unsealed, regarding this brutal
murder:"—
"NATCHEZ, Miss., Sept. 24.
"Messrs. Editors:—Revenge is sweet. On the night of the 11th, 12th,
and 13th, I made preparations, and did, on the 14th July kill a
rascal, and only regret that I have not the privilege of telling the
circumstance. I have so placed it that I can never be identified; and
further, I have no compunctions of conscience for the death of Thomas
M. Dougherty."
But instead of presenting individual affrays and single atrocities,
however numerous, (and the Missouri papers abound with them,) in order
to exhibit the true state of society there, we refer to the fact now
universally notorious, that for months during the last fall and
winter, some hundreds of inoffensive Mormons, occupying a considerable
tract of land; and a flourishing village in the interior of the state,
have suffered every species of inhuman outrage from the inhabitants of
the surrounding counties—that for weeks together, mobs consisting of
hundreds and thousands, kept them in a state of constant siege, laying
waste their lands, destroying their cattle and provisions, tearing
down their houses, ravishing the females, seizing and dragging off and
killing the men. Not one of the thousands engaged in these horrible
outrages and butcheries has, so far as we can learn, been indicted.
The following extract of a letter from a military officer of one of
the brigades ordered out by the Governor of Missouri, to terminate the
matter, is taken from the North Alabamian of December 22, 1838.
Correspondence of the Nashville Whig.
THE MORMON WAR.
"MILLERSBURG, Mo. November 8.
"Dear Sir—A lawless mob had organized themselves for the express
purpose of driving the Mormons from the country, or exterminating
them, for no other reason, that I can perceive, than that these poor
deluded creatures owned a large and fertile body of land in their
neighborhood, and would not let them (the Mobocrats) have it for their
own price. I have just returned from the seat of difficulty, and am
perfectly conversant with all the facts in relation to it. The mob
meeting with resistance altogether unanticipated, called loudly upon
the kindred spirits of adjacent counties for help. The Mormons
determined to die in defence of their rights, set about fortifying
their town "Far West," with a resolution and energy that kept the mob
(who all the time were extending their cries of help to all parts of
Missouri) at bay. The Governor, from exaggerated accounts of the
Mormon depredations, issued orders for the raising of several thousand
mounted riflemen, of which this division raised five hundred, and the
writer of this was honored with the appointment of —— to the
Brigade.
"On the first day of this month, we marched for the "seat of war," but
General Clark, Commander-in-chief, having reached Far West on the day
previous with a large force, the difficulty was settled when we
arrived, so we escaped the infamy and disgrace of a bloody victory.
Before General Clark's arrival, the mob had increased to about four
thousand, and determined to attack the town. The Mormons upon the
approach of the mob, sent out a white flag, which being fired on by
the mob, Jo Smith and Rigdon, and a few other Mormons of less
influence, gave themselves up to the mob, with a view of so far
appeasing their wrath as to save their women and children from
violence. Vain hope! The prisoners being secured, the mob entered the
town and perpetrated every conceivable act of brutality and
outrage—forcing fifteen or twenty Mormon girls to yield to their
brutal passions!!! Of these things I was assured by many persons while
I was at Far West, in whose veracity I have the utmost confidence. I
conversed with many of the prisoners, who numbered about eight
hundred, among whom there were many young and interesting girls, and I
assure you, a more distracted set of creatures I never saw. I assure
you, my dear sir, it was peculiarly heart-rending to see old gray
headed fathers and mothers, young ladies and innocent babes, forced at
this inclement season, with the thermometer at 8 degrees below zero,
to abandon their warm houses, and many of them the luxuries and
elegances of a high degree of civilization and intelligence and take
up their march for the uncultivated wilds of the Missouri frontier.
"The better informed here have but one opinion of the result of this
Mormon persecution, and that is, it is a most fearful extension of
Judge Lynch's jurisdiction."
The present white population of Missouri is but thirty thousand less
than that of New Hampshire, and yet the insecurity of human life in
the former state to that in the latter, is probably at least twenty to
one.
This state was admitted to the Union in 1819. Its present white
population is not far from three hundred thousand. The security of
human life to Alabama, may be inferred from the facts and testimony
which follow:
The Mobile Register of Nov. 15, 1837, contains the annual message of
Mr. McVay, the acting Governor of the state, at the opening of the
Legislature. The message has the following on the frequency of
homicides:
"We hear of homicides in different parts of the state continually,
and yet how few convictions for murder, and still fewer executions?
How is this to be accounted for? In regard to 'assault and battery
with intent to commit murder,' why is it that this offence continues
so common—why do we hear of stabbings and shootings almost daily in
some part or other of our state?"
The "Montgomery (Alabama) Advertiser" of April 22, 1837, has the
following from the Mobile Register:
"Within a few days a man was shot in an affray in the upper part of
the town, and has since died. The perpetrator of the violence is at
large. We need hardly speak of another scene which occurred in Royal
street, when a fray occurred between two individuals, a third standing
by with a cocked pistol to prevent interference. On Saturday night a
still more exciting scene of outrage took place in the theatre.
"An altercation commenced at the porquett entrance between the
check-taker and a young man, which ended in the first being
desperately wounded by a stab with a knife. The other also drew a
pistol. If some strange manifestations of public opinion, do not
coerce a spirit of deference to law, and the abandonment of the habit
of carrying secret arms, we shall deserve every reproach we may
receive, and have our punishment in the unchecked growth of a spirit
of lawlessness, reckless deeds, and exasperated feeling, which will
destroy our social comfort at home, and respectability abroad."
From the "Huntsville Democrat," of Nov. 7, 1837.
"A trifling dispute arose between Silas Randal and Pharaoh Massingale,
both of Marshall county. They exchanged but a few words, when the
former drew a Bowie knife and stabbed the latter in the abdomen
fronting the left hip to the depth of several inches; also inflicted
several other dangerous wounds, of which Massengale died
immediately.—Randal is yet at large, not having been apprehended."
From the "Free Press" of August 16, 1838.
"The streets of Gainesville, Alabama, have recently been the scene of
a most tragic affair. Some five weeks since, at a meeting of the
citizens, Col. Christopher Scott, a lawyer of good standing, and one
of the most influential citizens of the place, made a violent attack
on the Tombeckbee Rail Road Company. A Mr. Smith, agent for the T.R.R.
Company, took Col. C's remarks as a personal insult, and demanded an
explanation. A day or two after, as Mr. Smith was passing Colonel
Scott's door, he was shot down by him, and after lingering a few hours
expired.
"It appears also from an Alabama paper, that Col. Scott's brother,
L.S. Scott Esq., and L.J. Smith Esq., were accomplices of the Colonel
in the murder."
The following is from the "Natchez Free Trader," June 14, 1838.
"An affray, attended with fatal consequences, occurred in the town of
Moulton, Alabama, on the 12th May. It appears that three young men
from the country, of the name of J. Walton, Geo. Bowling, and
Alexander Bowling, rode into Moulton on that day for the purpose of
chastising the bar-keeper at McCord's tavern, whose name is Cowan, for
an alleged insult offered by him to the father of young Walton. They
made a furious attack on Cowan, and drove him into the bar room of the
tavern. Some time after, a second attack was made upon Cowan in the
street by one of the Bowlings and Walton, when pistols were resorted
to by both parties. Three rounds were fired, and the third shot, which
was said to have been discharged by Walton, struck a young man by the
name of Neil, who happened to be passing in the street at the time,
and killed him instantly. The combatants were taken into custody, and
after an examination before two magistrates, were bailed."
The following exploits of the "Alabama Volunteers," are recorded in
the Florida Herald, Jan. 1, 1838.
"SAVE US FROM OUR FRIENDS.—On Monday last, a large body of men,
calling themselves Alabama Volunteers, arrived in the vicinity of this
city. It is reported that their conduct during their march from
Tallahassee to this city has been a series of excesses of every
description. They have committed almost every crime except murder, and
have even threatened life.
"Large numbers of them paraded our streets, grossly insulted our
females, and were otherwise extremely riotous in their conduct. One of
the squads, forty or fifty in number, on reaching the bridge, where
there was a small guard of three or four men stationed, assaulted the
guard, overturned the sentry-box into the river, and bodily seized two
of the guard, and threw them into the river, where the water was deep,
and they were forced to swim for their lives. At one of the men while
in the water, they pointed a musket, threatening to kill him; and
pelted with every missile which came to hand."
The following Alabama tragedy is published by the "Columbia (S.C.)
Telescope," Sept. 2, 1837, from the Wetumpka Sentinel.
"Our highly respectable townsman, Mr. Hugh Ware, a merchant of
Wetumpka, was standing in the door of his counting room, between the
hours of 8 and 9 o'clock at night, in company with a friend, when an
assassin lurked within a few paces of his position, and discharged his
musket, loaded with ten or fifteen buckshot. Mr. Ware instantly fell,
and expired without a struggle or a groan. A coroner's inquest decided
that the deceased came to his death by violence, and that Abner J.
Cody, and his servant John, were the perpetrators. John frankly
confessed, that his master, Cody, compelled him to assist, threatening
his life if he dared to disobey; that he carried the musket to the
place at which it was discharged; that his master then received it
from him, rested it on the fence, fired and killed Mr. Ware."
From the "Southern (Miss.) Mechanic," April 17, 1838.
"HORRID BUTCHERY.—A desperate fight occurred in Montgomery, Alabama,
on the 28th ult. We learn from the Advocate of that city, that the
persons engaged were Wm. S. Mooney and Kenyon Mooney, his son, Edward
Bell, and Bushrod Bell, Jr. The first received a wound in the abdomen,
made by that fatal instrument, the Bowie knife, which caused his death
in about fifteen hours. The second was shot in the side, and would
doubtless have been killed, had not the ball partly lost its force by
first striking his arm. The third received a shot in the neck, and now
lies without hope of recovery. The fourth escaped unhurt, and, we
understand has fled. This is a brief statement of one of the bloodiest
fights that we ever heard of."
From the "Virginia Statesman," May 6, 1837.
"Several affrays, wherein pistols, dirks and knives were used, lately
occurred at Mobile. One took place on the 8th inst., at the theatre,
in which a Mr. Bellum was so badly stabbed that his life is despaired
of. On the Wednesday preceding, a man named Johnson shot another named
Snow dead. No notice was taken of the affair."
From the "Huntsville Advocate," June 20, 1837.
"DESPERATE AFFRAY.—On Sunday the 11th inst., an affray of desparate
and fatal character occurred near Jeater's Landing, Marshall county,
Alabama. The dispute which led to it arose out of a contested right to
possession of a piece of land. A Mr. Steele was the occupant, and
Mr. James McFarlane and some others, claimants. Mr. F. and his friends
went to Mr. Steele's house with a view to take possession, whether
peaceably or by violence, we do not certainly know. As they entered
the house a quarrel ensued between the opposite parties, and some
blows perhaps followed; in a short time, several guns were discharged
from the house at Mr. McFarlane and friends. Mr. M. was killed, a Mr.
Freamster dangerously wounded, and it is thought will not recover; two
others were also wounded, though not so as to endanger life. Mr.
Steele's brother was wounded by the discharge of a pistol from one of
Mr. M's friends. We have heard some other particulars about the
affray, but we abstain from giving them, as incidental versions are
often erroneous, and as the whole matter will be submitted to legal
investigation. Four of Steele's party, his brother, and three whose
names are Lenten, Collins and Wills, have been arrested, and are now
confined in the gaol in this place."
From the "Norfolk Beacon," July 14, 1838.
"A few days since at Claysville, Marshal co., Alabama, Messrs.
Nathaniel and Graves W. Steele, while riding in a carriage, were shot
dead, and Alex. Steele and Wm. Collins, also in the carriage, were
severely wounded, (the former supposed mortally,) by Messrs. Jesse
Allen, Alexander and Arthur McFarlane, and Daniel Dickerson. The
Steeles, it appears, last year killed James McFarlane and another
person in a similar manner, which led to this dreadful retaliation."
From the Montgomery (Ala.) Advocate—Washington, Autauga Co., Dec. 28,
1838.
"FATAL RENCONTRE.—On Friday last, the 28th ult., a fatal rencontre
took place in the town of Washington, Autauga county, between John
Tittle and Thomas J. Tarleton, which resulted in the death of the
former. After a patient investigation of the matter, Mr. Tarleton was
released by the investigating tribunal, on the ground that the
homicide was clearly justifiable."
The "Columbus (Ga.) Sentinel" July 6, 1837, quotes the following from
the Mobile (Ala.) Examiner.
"A man by the name of Peter Church was killed on one of the wharves
night before last. The person by whom it was done delivered himself to
the proper authorities yesterday morning. The deceased and destroyer
were friends and the act occurred in consequence of an immaterial
quarrel."
The "Milledgeville Federal Union" of July 11, 1837, has the following
"In Selma, Alabama resided lately messrs. Philips and Dickerson,
physicians. Mr. P. is brother to the wife of V. Bleevin Esq., a rich
cotton planter in that neighborhood; the latter has a very lovely
daughter, to whom Dr. D. paid his addresses. A short time since a
gentleman from Mobile married her. Soon after this, a schoolmaster in
Selma set a cry afloat to the effect, that he had heard Dr. D. say
things about the lady's conduct before marriage which ought not to be
said about any lady. Dr. D. denied having said such things, and the
other denied having spread the story; but neither denials sufficed to
pacify the enraged parent. He met Dr. D. fired at him two pistols, and
wounded him. Dr. D. was unarmed, and advanced to Mr. Bleevin, holding
up his hands imploringly, when Mr. B. drew a Bowie knife, and stabbed
him to the heart. The doctor dropped dead on the spot: and Mr. Bleevin
has been held to bail."
The following is taken from the "Alabama, Intelligencer," Sept. 17,
1838.
"On the 5th instant, a deadly rencounter took place in the streets of
Russelville, (our county town,) between John A. Chambers, Esq., of the
city of Mobile, and Thomas L. Jones, of this county. In the
rencounter, Jones was wounded by several balls which took effect in
his chin, mouth, neck, arm, and shoulder, believed to be mortal; he
did not fire his gun.
"Mr. Chambers forthwith surrendered himself to the Sheriff of the
county, and was on the 6th, tried and fully acquitted, by a court of
inquiry."
The "Maysville (Ky.) Advocate" of August 14, 1838, gives the following
affray, which took place in Girard, Alabama, July 10th.
"Two brothers named Thomas and Hal Lucas, who had been much in the
habit of quarrelling, came together under strong excitement, and Tom,
as was his frequent custom, being about to flog Hal with a stick of
some sort, the latter drew a pistol and shot the former, his own
brother, through the heart, who almost instantly expired!"
The "New Orleans Bee" of Oct. 5, 1838, relates an affray in Mobile,
Alabama, between Benjamin Alexander, an aged man of ninety, with
Thomas Hamilton, his grandson, on the 24th of September, in which the
former killed the latter with a dirk.
The "Red River Whig" of July 7, 1838, gives the particulars of a
tragedy in Western Alabama, in which a planter near Lakeville, left
home for some days, but suspecting his wife's fidelity, returned home
late at night, and finding his suspicions verified, set fire to his
house and waited with his rifle before the door, till his wife and her
paramour attempted to rush out, when he shot them both dead.
From the "Morgan (Ala.) Observer," Dec. 1838.
"We are informed from private sources, that on last Saturday, a poor
man who was moving westward with his wife and three little children
and driving a small drove of sheep, and perhaps a cow or two, which
was driven by his family, on arriving in Florence, and while passing
through, met with a citizen of that place, who rode into his flock and
caused him some trouble to keep it together, when the mover informed
the individual that he must not do so again or he would throw a rock
at him, upon which some words ensued, and the individual again
disturbed the flock, when the mover, as near as we can learn, threw at
him upon this the troublesome man got off his horse, went into a
grocery, got a gun, and came out and deliberately shot the poor
stranger in the presence of his wife and little children. The wounded
man then made an effort to get into some house, when his murderous
assailant overtook and stabbed him to the heart with a Bowie knife.
This revolting scene, we are informed, occurred in the presence of
many citizens, who, report says, never even lifted their voices in
defence of the murdered man."
A late number of the "Flag of the Union," published at Tuscalosa, the
seat of the government of Alabama, states that "since the commencement
of the late session of the legislature of that state, no less than
THIRTEEN FIGHTS had been had within sight of the capitol." Pistols
and Bowie knives were used in every case.
The present white population of Alabama is about the same with that of
New Jersey, yet for the last twenty years there has not been so many
public deadly affrays, and of such a horrible character, in New
Jersey, as have taken place in Alabama within the last eight months.
Mississippi became one of the United States in 1817. Its present white
population is about one hundred and sixty thousand.
The following extracts will serve to show that those who combine
together to beat, rob, and manacle innocent men, women and children,
will stick at nothing when their passions are up.
The following murderous affray at Canton, Mississippi, is from the
"Alabama Beacon," Sept, 13, 1838.
"A terrible tragedy recently occurred at Canton, Miss., growing out of
the late duel between Messrs. Dickins and Drane of that place. A
Kentuckian happening to be in Canton, spoke of the duel, and charged
Mr. Mitchell Calhoun, the second of Drane, with cowardice and
unfairness. Mr. Calhoun called on the Kentuckian for an explanation,
and the offensive charge was repeated. A challenge and fight with
Bowie knives, toe to toe, were the consequences. Both parties were
dreadfully and dangerously wounded, though neither was dead at the
last advices. Mr. Calhoun is a brother to the Hon. John Calhoun,
member of Congress."
Here follows the account of the duel referred to above, between
Messrs. Dickins and Drane.
"Intelligence has been received in this town of a fatal duel that took
place in Canton, Miss., on the 28th ult., between Rufus K. Dickins,
and a Mr. Westley Drane. They fought with double barrelled guns,
loaded with buckshot—both were mortally wounded."
The "Louisville Journal" publishes the following, Nov. 23.
"On the 7th instant, a fatal affray took place at Gallatin,
Mississippi. The principal parties concerned were, Messrs. John W.
Scott, James G. Scott, and Edmund B. Hatch. The latter was shot down
and then stabbed twice through the body, by J.G. Scott."
The "Alabama Beacon" of Sept. 13, 1838, says:
"An attempt was made in Vicksburg lately, by a gang of Lynchers, to
inflict summary punishment on three men of the name of Fleckenstein.
The assault was made upon the house, about 11 o'clock at night.
Meeting with some resistance from the three Fleckensteins, a leader of
the gang, by the name of Helt, discharged his pistol, and wounded one
of the brothers severely in the neck and jaws. A volley of four or
five shots was almost instantly returned, when Helt fell dead, a piece
of the top of the skull being torn off, and almost the whole of his
brains dashed out. His comrades seeing him fall, suddenly took to
their heels. There were, it is supposed, some ten or fifteen
concerned in the transaction."
The "Manchester (Miss.) Gazette," August 11, 1838, says:
"It appears that Mr. Asa Hazeltine, who kept a public or boarding
house in Jackson, during the past winter, and Mr. Benjamin Tanner,
came here about five or six weeks since, with the intention of opening
a public house. Foiled in the design, in the settlement of their
affairs some difficulty arose as to a question of veracity between the
parties. Mr. Tanner, deeply excited, procured a pistol and loaded it
with the charge of death, sought and found the object of his hatred in
the afternoon, in the yard of Messrs. Kezer & Maynard, and in the
presence of several persons, after repeated and ineffectual attempts
on the part of Capt. Jackson to baffle his fell spirit, shot the
unfortunate victim, of which wound Mr. Hazeltine died in a short time.
"We understand that Mr. Hazeltine was a native of Boston."
The "Columbia (S.C.) Telescope," Sept. 16, 1837, gives the details
below:
"By a letter from Mississippi, we have an account of a rencontre which
took place in Rodney, on the 27th July, between Messrs. Thos. J.
Johnston and G.H. Wilcox, both formerly of this city. In consequence
of certain publications made by these gentlemen against each other,
Johnston challenged Wilcox. The latter declining to accept the
challenge, Johnston informed his friends at Rodney, that he would be
there at the term of the court then not distant, when he would make an
attack upon him. He repaired thither on the 26th, and on the next
morning the following communication was read aloud in the presence of
Wilcox and a large crowd:
"Rodney, July 27, 1837.
"Mr. Johnston informs Mr. Wilcox, that at or about 1 o'clock of this
day, he will be on the common, opposite the Presbyterian Church of
this town, waiting and expecting Mr. Wilcox to meet him there.
"I pledge my honor that Mr. Johnston will not fire at Mr. Wilcox,
until he arrives at a distance of one hundred yards from him, and I
desire Mr. Wilcox or any of his friends, to see that distance
accurately measured.
"Mr. Johnston will wait there thirty minutes.
"J. M. DUFFIELD.
"Mr. Wilcox declined being a party to any such arrangement, and Mr. D.
told him to be prepared for an attack. Accordingly, about an hour
after this, Johnston proceeded towards Wilcox's office, armed with a
double-barrelled gun, (one of the barrels rifled,) and three pistols
in his belt. He halted about fifty yards from W's door and leveled his
gun. W. withdrew before Johnston could fire, and seized a musket,
returned to the door and flashed. Johnston fired both barrels without
effect. Wilcox then seized a double barrel gun, and Johnston a musket,
and both again fired. Wilcox sent twenty-three buck shot over
Johnston's head, one of them passing through his hat, and Wilcox was
slightly wounded on both hands, his thigh and leg."
From the "Alabama Beacon," May 27, 1838.
"An affray of the most barbarous nature was expected to take place in
Arkansas opposite Princeton, on Thursday last. The two original
parties have been endeavoring for several weeks, to settle their
differences at Natchez. One of the individuals concerned stood
pledged, our informant states, to fight three different antagonists in
one day. The fights, we understand, were to be with pistols; but a
variety of other weapons were taken along—among others, the deadly
Bowie knife. These latter instruments, we are told, were whetted and
dressed up at Grand Gulf, as the parties passed up, avowedly with the
intention of being used in the field."
From the "Southern (Miss) Argus," Nov. 21, 1837.
"We learn that, at a wood yard above Natchez, on Sunday evening last,
a difficulty arose between Captain Crosly, of the steamboat Galenian,
and one of his deck passengers. Capt. C. drew a Bowie knife, and made
a pass at the throat of the passenger, which failed to do any harm,
and the captain then ordered him to leave his boat. The man went on
board to get his baggage, and the captain immediately sought the cabin
for a pistol. As the passenger was about leaving the boat, the captain
presented a pistol to his breast, which snapped. Instantly the enraged
and wronged individual seized Capt. Crosly by the throat, and brought
him to the ground, when he drew a dirk and stabbed him eight or nine
times in the breast, each blow driving the weapon into his body up to
the hilt. The passenger was arrested, carried to Natchez, tried and
acquitted."
The "Planter's Intelligencer" publishes the following from the
Vicksburg Sentinel of June 19, 1838.
"About 1 o'clock, we observed two men 'pummeling' one another in the
street, to the infinite amusement of a crowd. Presently a third hero
made his appearance in the arena, with Bowie knife in hand, and he
cried out, "Let me come at him!" Upon hearing this threat, one of the
pugilists 'took himself off,' our hero following at full speed.
Finding his pursuit was vain, our hero returned, when an attack was
commenced upon another individual. He was most cruelly beat, and cut
through the skull with a knife; it is feared the wounds will prove
mortal. The sufferer, we learn, is an inoffensive German."
From the "Mississippian," Nov. 9, 1838.
"On Tuesday evening last, 23d, an affray occurred at the town of
Tallahasse, in this county, between Hugh Roark and Captain Flack,
which resulted in the death of Roark. Roark went to bed, and Flack,
who was in the barroom below, observed to some persons there, that he
believed they had set up Roark to whip him; Roark, upon hearing his
name mentioned, got out of bed and came downstairs. Flack met and
stabbed him in the lower part of his abdomen with a knife, letting out
his bowels. Roark ran to the door, and received another stab in the
back. He lived until Thursday night, when he expired in great agony.
Flack was tried before a justice of the peace, and we understand was
only held to bail to appear at court in the event Roark should die."
From the "Grand Gulf Advertiser" Nov. 7, 1838.
"Attempt at Riot at Natchez.—The Courier says, that in
consequence of the discharge of certain individuals who had been
arraigned for the murder of a man named Medill, a mob of about 200
persons assembled on the night of the 1st instant, with the avowed
purpose of lynching them. But fortunately, the objects of their
vengeance had escaped from town. Foiled in their purpose, the rioters
repaired to the shantee where the murder was committed, and
precipitated it over the bluff. The military of the city were ordered
out to keep order."
From the "Natchez Free Trader."
"A violent attack was lately made on Captain Barrett, of the steamboat
Southerner, by three persons from Wilkinson co., Miss., whose names
are Carey, and one of the name of J.S. Towles. The only reason for the
outrage was, that Captain B. had the assurance to require of the
gentlemen, who were quarreling on board his boat, to keep order for
the peace and comfort of the other passengers. Towles drew a Bowie
knife upon the Captain; which the latter wrested from him. A pistol,
drawn by one of the Careys was also taken, and the assailant was
knocked overboard. Fortunately for him he was rescued from drowning.
The brave band then landed. On her return up the river, the Southerner
stopped at Fort Adams, and on her leaving that place, an armed party,
among whom were the Careys and Towles, fired into the boat, but
happily the shot missed a crowd of passengers on the hurricane deck."
From the "Mississippian," Dec. 18, 1838.
"Greet Spikes, a citizen of this county, was killed a few days ago,
between this place and Raymond, by a man named Pegram. It seems that
Pegram and Spikes had been carrying weapons for each other for some
time past. Pegram had threatened to take Spikes' life on first sight,
for the base treatment he had received at his hands.
"We have heard something of the particulars, but not enough to give
them at this time. Pegram had not been seen since."
The "Lynchburg Virginian," July 23, 1838, says:
"A fatal affray occurred a few days ago in Clinton, Mississippi. The
actors in it were a Mr. Parham, Mr. Shackleford, and a Mr. Henry.
Shackleford was killed on the spot, and Henry was slightly wounded by
a shot gun with which Parham was armed."
From the "Columbus (Ga.) Sentinel," Nov. 22, 1838.
"Butchery.—A Bowie knife slaughter took place a few days since in
Honesville, Miss. A Mr. Hobbs was the victim; Strother the butcher."
The "Vicksburg Sentinel," Sept. 28, 1837, says:
"It is only a few weeks since humanity was shocked by a most atrocious
outrage, inflicted by the Lynchers, on the person of a Mr. Saunderson
of Madison, co. in this state. They dragged this respectable planter
from the bosom of his family, and mutilated him in the most brutal
manner—maiming him most inhumanly, besides cutting off his nose and
ears and scarifying his body to the very ribs! We believe the subject
of this foul outrage still drags out a miserable existence—an object
of horror and of pity. Last week a club of Lynchers, amounting to four
or five individuals, as we have been credibly informed, broke into the
house of Mr. Scott of Wilkinson co., a respectable member of the bar,
forced him out, and hung him dead on the next tree. We have heard of
numerous minor outrages committed against the peace of society, and
the welfare and happiness of the country; but we mention these as the
most enormous that we have heard for some months.
"It now becomes our painful duty, to notice a most disgraceful outrage
committed by the Lynchers of Vicksburg, on last Sunday. The victim was
a Mr. Grace, formerly of the neighborhood of Warrenton, Va., but for
two years a resident of this city. He was detected in giving free
passes to slaves and brought to trial before Squire Maxey.
Unfortunately for the wretch, either through the want of law or
evidence, he could not be punished, and he was set at liberty by the
magistrate. The city marshal seeing that a few in the crowd were
disposed to lay violent hands on the prisoner in the event of his
escaping punishment by law, resolved to accompany him to his house.
The Lynch mob still followed, and the marshal finding the prisoner
could only be protected by hurrying him to jail, endeavored to effect
that object. The Lynchers, however, pursued the officer of the law,
dragged him from his horse, bruised him, and conveyed the prisoner to
the most convenient point of the city for carrying their blood-thirsty
designs into execution. We blush while we record the atrocious deed;
in this city, containing nearly 5,000 souls, in the broad light of
day, this aged wretch was stripped and flogged, we believe within
hearing of the lamentations and the shrieks of his afflicted wife and
children."
In an affray at Montgomery, Mississippi, July 1, 1838, Mr. A.L.
Herbert was killed by Dr. J.B. Harrington. See Grand Gulf Advertiser,
August 1, 1838.
The "Maryland Republican" of January 30, 1838, has the following:
"A street rencounter lately took place in Jackson, Miss., between Mr.
Robert McDonald and Mr. W.H. Lockhart, in which McDonald was shot with
a pistol and immediately expired. Lockhart was committed to prison."
The "Nashville Banner," June 22, 1838, has the following:
"On the 8th inst. Col. James M. Hulet was shot with a rifle without
any apparent provocation in Gallatin, Miss., by one Richard M. Jones."
From the "Huntsville Democrat," Dec. 8, 1838.
"The Aberdeen (Miss.) Advocate, of Saturday last, states that on the
morning of the day previous, (the 9th) a dispute arose between Mr.
Robert Smith and Mr. Alexander Eanes, both of Aberdeen, which resulted
in the death of Mr. Smith, who kept a boarding house, and was an
amiable man and a good citizen. In the course of the contradictory
words of the disputants, the lie was given by Eanes, upon which Smith
gathered up a piece of iron and threw it at Eanes, but which missed
him and lodged in the walls of the house. At this Eanes drew a large
dirk knife, and stabbed Smith in the abdomen, the knife penetrating
the vitals, and thus causing immediate death. Smith breathed only a
few seconds after the fatal thrust.
"Eanes immediately mounted his horse and rode off, but was pursued by
Mr. Hanes, who arrested and took him back, when he was put under guard
to await a trial before the proper authorities."
From the "Vicksburg Register," Nov. 17, 1838.
"On the 2d inst. an affray occurred between one Stephen Scarbrough and
A.W. Higbee of Grand Gulf, in which Scarbrough was stabbed with a
knife, which occasioned his death in a few hours. Higbee has been
arrested and committed for trial."
From the "Huntsville (Ala.) Democrat" Nov. 10, 1838.
"Life in the Southwest.—A friend in Louisiana writes, under date of
the 31st ult., that a fight took place a few days ago in Madison
parish, 60 miles below Lake Providence, between a Mr. Nevils and a Mr.
Harper, which terminated fatally. The police jury had ordered a road
on the right bank of the Mississippi, and the neighboring planters
were out with their forces to open it. For some offence, Nevils, the
superintendent of the operations, flogged two of Harper's negroes. The
next day the parties met on horseback, when Harper dismounted, and
proceeded to cowskin Nevils for the chastisement inflicted on the
negroes. Nevils immediately drew a pistol and shot his assailant dead
on the spot. Both were gentlemen of the highest respectability.
"An affray also came off recently, as the same correspondent writes
us, in Raymond, Hinds co., Miss., which for a serious one, was rather
amusing. The sheriff had a process to serve on a man of the name of
Bright, and, in consequence of some difficulty and intemperate
language, thought proper to commence the service by the application of
his cowskin to the defendant. Bright thereupon floored his adversary,
and, wresting his cowhide from him, applied it to its owner to the
extent of at least five hundred lashes, meanwhile threatening to shoot
the first bystander who attempted to interfere. The sheriff was
carried home in a state of insensibility, and his life has been
despaired of. The mayor of the place, however, issued his warrant, and
started three of the sheriff's deputies in pursuit of the delinquent,
but the latter, after keeping them at bay till they found it
impossible to arrest him, surrendered himself to the magistrate, by
whom he was bound over to the next Circuit Court. From the mayor's
office, his honor and the parties litigant proceeded to the tavern to
take a drink by way of ending hostilities. But the civil functionary
refused to sign articles of peace by touching glasses with Bright,
whereupon the latter made a furious assault upon him, and then turned
and flogged 'mine host' within an inch of his life because he
interfered. Satisfied with his day's work, Bright retired. Can we show
any such specimens of chivalry and refinement in Kentucky!"
From the "Grand Gulf (Miss.) Advertiser," June 27, 1837.
"DEATH BY VIOLENCE.—The moral atmosphere in our state appears to be
in a deleterious and sanguinary condition. Almost every exchange
paper which reaches us contains some inhuman and revolting case of
murder or death by violence. Not less than fifteen deaths by violence
have occurred, to our certain knowledge, within the past three
months. Such a state of things, in a country professing to be moral
and christian, is a disgrace to human nature and is well calculated,
to induce those abroad unacquainted with our general habits and
feelings, to regard the morals of our people in no very enviable
light; and does more to injure and weaken our political institutions
than years of pecuniary distress. The frequency of such events is a
burning disgrace to the morality, civilization, and refinement of
feeling to which we lay claim and so often boast in comparison with
the older states. And unless we set about and put an immediate and
effectual termination to such revolting scenes, we shall be compelled
to part with what all genuine southerners have ever regarded as their
richest inheritance, the proud appellation of the 'brave, high-minded
and chivalrous sons of the south.'
"This done, we should soon discover a change for the better—peace and
good order would prevail, and the ends of justice be effectually and
speedily attained, and then the people of this wealthy state would be
in a condition to bid defiance to the disgraceful reproaches which are
now daily heaped upon them by the religious and moral of other
states."
"The present white population of Mississippi is but little more than
half as great as that of Vermont, and yet more horrible crimes are
perpetrated by them EVERY MONTH, than have ever been perpetrated in
Vermont since it has been a state, now about half a century. Whoever
doubts it, let him get data and make his estimate, and he will find
that this is no random guess."
Louisiana became one of the United States in 1811. Its present white
population is about one hundred and fifteen thousand.
The extracts which follow furnish another illustration of the horrors
produced by passions blown up to fury in the furnace of arbitrary
power. We have just been looking over a broken file of Louisiana
papers, including the last six months of 1837, and the whole of 1838,
and find ourselves obliged to abandon our design of publishing even an
abstract of the scores and hundreds of affrays, murders,
assassinations, duels, lynchings, assaults, &c. which took place in
that state during that period. Those which have taken place in New
Orleans alone, during the last eighteen months, would, in detail, fill
a volume. Instead of inserting the details of the principal atrocities
in Louisiana, as in the states already noticed, we will furnish the
reader with the testimony of various editors of newspapers, and
others, residents of the state, which will perhaps as truly set forth
the actual state of society there, as could be done by a publication
of the outrages themselves.
From the "New Orleans Bee," of May 23, 1838.
"Contempt of human life.—In view of the crimes which are daily
committed, we are led to inquire whether it is owing to the
inefficiency of our laws, or to the manner in which those laws are
administered, that this frightful deluge of human blood flows through
our streets and our places of public resort.
"Whither will such contempt for the life of man lead us? The
unhealthiness of the climate mows down annually a part of our
population; the murderous steel despatches its proportion; and if
crime increases as it has, the latter will soon become the most
powerful agent in destroying life.
"We cannot but doubt the perfection of our criminal code, when we see
that almost every criminal eludes the law, either by boldly avowing
the crime, or by the tardiness with which legal prosecutions are
carried on, or, lastly, by the convenient application of bail in
criminal cases."
The "New Orleans Picayune" of July 30, 1837, says:
"It is with the most painful feelings that we daily hear of some
fatal duel. Yesterday we were told of the unhappy end of one of our
most influential and highly respectable merchants, who fell yesterday
morning at sunrise in a duel. As usual, the circumstances which led to
the meeting were trivial."
The New Orleans correspondent of the New York Express, in his letter
dated New Orleans, July 30, 1837, says:
"THIRTEEN DUELS have been fought in and near the city during the week;
five more were to take place this morning."
The "New Orleans Merchant" of March 20, 1838, says:
"Murder has been rife within the two or three weeks last past; and
what is worse, the authorities of those places where they occur are
perfectly regardless of the fact."
The "New Orleans Bee" of September 8, 1838, says:
"Not two months since, the miserable BARBA became a victim to one of
the most cold-blooded schemes of assassination that ever disgraced a
civilized community. Last Sunday evening an individual, Gonzales by
name, was seen in perfect health, in conversation with his friends. On
Monday morning his dead body was withdrawn from the Mississippi, near
the ferry of the first municipality, in a state of terrible
mutilation. To cap the climax of horror, on Friday morning, about half
past six o'clock, the coroner was called to hold an inquest over the
body of an individual, between Magazine and Tchoupitoulas streets. The
head was entirely severed from the body; the lower extremities had
likewise suffered amputation; the right foot was completely
dismembered from the leg, and the left knee nearly severed from the
thigh. Several stabs, wounds and bruises, were discovered on various
parts of the body, which of themselves were sufficient to produce
death."
The "Georgetown (South Carolina) Union" of May 20, 1837, has the
following extract from a New Orleans paper.
"A short time since, two men shot one another down in one of our bar
rooms, one of whom died instantly. A day or two after, one or two
infants were found murdered, there was every reason to believe, by
their own mothers. Last week we had to chronicle a brutal and bloody
murder, committed in the heart of our city: the very next day a
murder-trial was commenced in our criminal court: the day ensuing
this, we published the particulars of Hart's murder. The day after
that, Tibbetts was hung for attempting to commit a murder; the next
day again we had to publish a murder committed by two Spaniards at the
Lake—this was on Friday last. On Sunday we published the account of
another murder committed by the Italian, Gregorio. On Monday, another
murder was committed, and the murderer lodged in jail. On Tuesday
morning another man was stabbed and robbed, and is not likely to
recover, but the assassin escaped. The same day Reynolds, who killed
Barre, shot himself in prison. On Wednesday, another person, Mr.
Nicolet, blew out his brains. Yesterday, the unfortunate George
Clement destroyed himself in his cell; and in addition to this
dreadful catalogue we have to add that of the death of two, brothers,
who destroyed themselves through grief at the death of their mother;
and truly may we say that 'we know not what to-morrow will bring
forth.'"
The "Louisiana Advertiser," as quoted by the Salt River (Mo.) Journal
of May 25, 1837, says:
"Within the last ten or twelve days, three suicides, four murders, and
two executions, have occurred in the city!"
The "New Orleans Bee" of October 25, 1837, says:
"We remark with regret the frightful list of homicides that are
daily committed in New Orleans."
The "Planter's Banner" of September 30. 1838, published at Franklin,
Louisiana, after giving an account of an affray between a number of
planters, in which three were killed and a fourth mortally wounded,
says that "Davis (one of the murderers) was arrested by the
by-standers, but a justice of the peace came up and told them, he
did not think it right to keep a man 'tied in that manner,' and
'thought it best to turn him loose.' It was accordingly so done."
This occurred in the parish of Harrisonburg. The Banner closes the
account by saying:
"Our informant states that five white men and one negro have been
murdered in the parish of Madison, during the months of July and
August."
This justice of the peace, who bade the by-standers unloose the
murderer, mentioned above, has plenty of birds of his own feather
among the law officers of Louisiana. Two of the leading officers in
the New Orleans police took two witnesses, while undergoing legal
examination at Covington, near New Orleans, "carried them to a
bye-place, and lynched them, during which inquisitorial operation,
they divulged every thing to the officers, Messrs. Foyle and Crossman."
The preceding fact is published in the Maryland Republican of August
22, 1837.
Judge Canonge of New Orleans, in his address at the opening of the
criminal court, Nov. 4, 1837, published in the "Bee" of Nov. 8, in
remarking upon the prevalence of out-breaking crimes, says:
"Is it possible in a civilized country such crying abuses are
constantly encountered? How many individuals have given themselves
up to such culpable habits! Yet we find magistrates and juries
hesitating to expose crimes of the blackest dye to eternal contempt
and infamy, to the vengeance of the law.
"As a Louisianian parent, I reflect with terror that our beloved
children, reared to become one day honorable and useful citizens, may
be the victims of these votaries of vice and licentiousness. Without
some powerful and certain remedy, our streets will become butcheries
overflowing with the blood of our citizens."
The Editor of the "New Orleans Bee," in his paper of Oct. 21, 1837,
has a long editorial article, in which he argues for the virtual
legalizing of LYNCH LAW, as follows:
"We think then that in the circumstances in which we are placed, the
Legislature ought to sanction such measures as the situation of the
country render necessary, by giving to justice a convenient
latitude. There are occasions when the delays inseparable from the
administration of justice would be inimical to the public safety, and
when the most fatal consequences would be the result.
"It appears to us, that there is an urgent necessity to provide
against the inconveniences which result from popular judgment, and to
check the disposition for the speedy execution of justice resulting
from the unconstitutional principle of a pretended Lynch law, by
authorizing the parish court to take cognizance without delay, against
every free man who shall be convicted of a crime; from the accusations
arising from the mere provocations to the insurrection of the working
classes.
"All judicial sentences ought to be based upon law, and the terrible
privilege which the populace now have of punishing with death certain
crimes, ought to be consecrated by law, powerful interests would not
suffice in our view to excuse the interruption of social order, if the
public safety was not with us the supreme law.
"This is the reason that whilst we deplore the imperious necessity
which exists, we entreat the legislative power to give the sanction of
principle to what already exists in fact."
The Editor of the "New Orleans Bee," in his paper, Oct 25, 1837, says:
"We remark with regret the frightful list of homicides, whether
justifiable or not, that are daily committed in New Orleans. It is not
through any inherent vice of legal provision that such outrages are
perpetrated with impunity: it is rather in the neglect of the
application of the law which exists on this subject.
"We will confine our observation to the dangerous facilities afforded
by this code for the escape of the homicide. We are well aware that
the laws in question are intended for the distribution of equal
justice, yet we have too often witnessed the acquittal of delinquents
whom we can denominate by no other title than that of homicides, while
the simple affirmation of others has been admitted (in default of
testimony) who are themselves the authors of the deed, for which they
stand in judgment. The indiscriminate system of accepting bail is a
blot on our criminal legislation, and is one great reason why so many
violators of the law avoid its penalties. To this doubtless must be
ascribed the non-interference of the Attorney General. The law of
habeas corpus being subjected to the interpretation of every
magistrate, whether versed or not in criminal cases, a degree of
arbitrary and incorrect explanation necessarily results. How
frequently does it happen that the Mayor or Recorder decides upon the
gravest case without putting himself to the smallest trouble to inform
the Attorney General, who sometimes only hears of the affair when
investigation is no longer possible, or when the criminal has wisely
commuted his punishment into temporary or perpetual exile.
"That morality suffers by such practices, is beyond a doubt; yet
moderation and mercy are so beautiful in themselves, that we would
scarcely protest against indulgence, were it not well known that the
acceptance of bail is the safeguard of every delinquent who, through
wealth or connections, possesses influence enough to obtain it. Here
arbitrary construction glides amidst the confusion of testimony; there
it presumes upon the want of evidence, and from one cause or another
it is extremely rare, that a refusal to bail has delivered the accused
into the hands of justice. In criminal cases, the Court and Jury are
the proper tribunals to decide upon the reality of the crime, and the
palliating circumstances; yet it is not unfrequent for the public
voice to condemn as an odious assassin, the very individual who by the
acquittal of the judge, walks at large and scoffs at justice.
"It is time to restrict within its proper limits this pretended right
of personal protection; it is time to teach our population to abstain
from mutual murder upon slight provocation.—Duelling, Heaven knows,
is dreadful enough, and quite a sufficient means of gratifying private
aversion, and avenging insult. Frequent and serious brawls in our
cafes, streets and houses, every where attest the insufficiency or
misapplication of our legal code, or the want of energy in its organs.
To say that unbounded license is the insult of liberty is folly.
Liberty is the consequence of well regulated laws—without these,
Freedom can exist only in name, and the law which favors the escape of
the opulent and aristocratic from the penalties of retribution, but
consigns the poor and friendless to the chain-gang or the gallows, is
in fact the very essence of slavery!!"
The editor of the same paper says (Nov. 4, 1837.)
"Perhaps by an equitable, but strict application of that law, (the law
which forbids the wearing of deadly weapons concealed,) the effusion
of human blood might be stopt which now defiles our streets and our
coffee-houses as if they were shambles! Reckless disregard of the
life of man is rapidly gaining ground among us, and the habit of
seeing a man whom it is taken for granted was armed, murdered merely
for a gesture, may influence the opinion of a jury composed of
citizens, whom, LONG IMPUNITY TO HOMICIDES OF EVERY KIND has
persuaded, that the right of self-defence extends even to the taking
of life for gestures, more or less threatening. So many DAILY
instances of outbreaking passion which have thrown whole families into
the deepest affliction, teach us a terrible lesson."
From the "Columbus (Ga.) Sentinel," July 6, 1837.
"Wholesale Murders.—No less than three murders were committed in
New Orleans on Monday evening last. The first was that of a man in
Poydras, near the corner of Tehapitoulas. The murdered individual had
been suspected of a liason with another man's wife in the
neighbourhood, was caught in the act, followed to the above corner and
shot.
"The second was that of a man in Perdido street. Circumstances not
known.
"The third was that of a watchman, on the corner of Custom House and
Burgundy street, who was found dead yesterday morning, shot through
the heart. The deed was evidently committed on the opposite side from
where he was found, as the unfortunate man was tracked by his blood
across the street. In addition to being shot through the heart, two
wounds in his breast, supposed to have been done with a Bowie knife,
were discovered. No arrests have been made to our knowledge."
The editor of the "Charleston, (S.C.) Mercury" of April, 1837, makes
the following remarks.
"The energy of a Tacon is much needed to vivify the police of New
Orleans. In a single paper we find an account of the execution of one
man for robbery and intent to kill, of the arrest of another for
stabbing a man to death with a carving knife; and of a third found
murdered on the Levee on the previous Sunday morning. In the last
case, although the murderer was known, no steps had been taken for
his arrest; and to crown the whole, it is actually stated in so many
words, that the City guards are not permitted, according to their
instructions, to patrol the Levee after night, for fear of attacks
from persons employed in steamboats!"
The present white population of Louisiana is but little more than that
of Rhode Island, yet more appalling crime is committed in Louisiana
every day, than in Rhode Island during a year, notwithstanding the
tone of public morals is probably lower in the latter than in any
other New England state.
Tennessee became one of the United States in 1796. Its present white
population is about seven hundred thousand.
The details which follow, go to confirm the old truth, that the
exercise of arbitrary power tends to make men monsters. The following,
from the "Memphis (Tennessee) Enquirer," was published in the Virginia
Advocate, Jan. 26, 1838.
"Below will be found a detailed account of one of the most unnatural
and aggravated murders ever recorded. Col. Ward, the deceased, was a
man of high standing in the state, and very much esteemed by his
neighbors, and by all who knew him. The brothers concerned in this
'murder, most foul and unnatural,' were Lafayette, Chamberlayne,
Caesar, and Achilles Jones, (the nephews of Col. Ward.)
"The four brothers, all armed, went to the residence of Mr. A.G. Ward,
in Shelby co., on the evening of 22d instant. They were conducted into
the room in which Col. Ward was sitting, together with some two or
three ladies, his intended wife amongst the number. Upon their
entering the room, Col. Ward rose, and extended his hand to Lafayette.
He refused, saying he would shake hands with no such d——d rascal.
The rest answered in the same tone. Col. Ward remarked that they were
not in a proper place for a difficulty, if they sought one. Col. Ward
went from the room to the passage, and was followed by the brothers.
He said he was unarmed, but if they would lay down their arms, he
could whip the whole of them; or if they would place him on an equal
footing, he could whip the whole of them one by one. Caesar told
Chamberlayne to give the Col. one of his pistols, which he did, and
both went out into the yard, the other brothers following. While
standing a few paces from each other, Lafayette came up, and remarked
to the Col., 'If you spill my brother's blood, I will spill yours,'
about which time Chamberlayne's pistol fired, and immediately
Lafayette bursted a cap at him. The Colonel turned to Lafayette, and
said, 'Lafayette, you intend to kill,' and discharged his pistol at
him. The ball struck the pistol of Lafayette, and glanced into his
arm. By this time Albert Ward, being close by, and hearing the fuss,
came up to the assistance of the Colonel, when a scuffle amongst all
hands ensued. The Colonel stumbled and fell down—he received several
wounds from a large bowie knife; and, after being stabbed,
Chamberlayne jumped upon him, and stamped him several times. After the
scuffle, Caesar Jones was seen to put up a large bowie knife. Colonel
Ward said he was a dead man. By the assistance of Albert Ward, he
reached the house, distance about 15 or 20 yards, and in a few minutes
expired. On examination by the Coroner, it appeared that he had
received several wounds from pistols and knives. Albert Ward was also
badly bruised, not dangerously."
The "New Orleans Bee," Sept. 22, 1838, published the following from
the "Nashville (Tennessee) Whig."
"The Nashville Whig, of the 11th ult., says: Pleasant Watson, of De
Kalb county, and a Mr. Carmichael, of Alabama, were the principals in
an affray at Livingston, Overton county, last week, which terminated
in the death of the former. Watson made the assault with a dirk, and
Carmichael defended himself with a pistol, shooting his antagonist
through the body, a few inches below the heart. Watson was living at
the last account. The dispute grew out of a horse race."
The New Orleans Courier, April 7, 1837, has the following extract from
the "McMinersville (Tennessee) Gazette."
"On Saturday, the 8th instant, Colonel David L. Mitchell, the worthy
sheriff of White county, was most barbarously murdered by a man named
Joseph Little. Colonel Mitchell had a civil process against Little. He
went to Little's house for the purpose of arresting him. He found
Little armed with a rifle, pistols, &c. He commenced a conversation
with Little upon the impropriety of his resisting, and stated his
determination to take him, at the same time slowly advancing upon
Little, who discharged his rifle at him without effect. Mitchell then
attempted to jump in, to take hold of him when Little struck him over
the head with the barrel of his rifle, and literally mashed his skull
to pieces; and, as he lay prostrate on the earth, Little deliberately
pulled a large pistol from his belt, and placing the muzzle close to
Mitchell's head, he shot the ball through it. Little has made his
escape. There were three men near by when the murder was committed,
who made no attempt to arrest the murderer."
The following affray at Athens, Tennessee, from the Mississippian,
August 10, 1838.
"An unpleasant occurrence transpired at Athens on Monday. Captain
James Byrnes was stabbed four times, twice in the arm, and twice in
the side by A.R. Livingston. The wounds are said to be very severe,
and fears are entertained of their proving mortal. The affair
underwent an examination before Sylvester Nichols, Esq., by whom
Livingston was let to bail."
The "West Tennessean," Aug. 4, 1837, says—
"A duel was fought at Calhoun, Tenn., between G.W. Carter and J.C.
Sherley. They used yaugers at the distance of 20 yards. The former was
slightly wounded, and the latter quite dangerously."
June 23d, 1838, Benjamin Shipley, of Hamilton co., Tennessee, shot
Archibald McCallie. (Nashville Banner, July 16, 1838.)
June 23d, 1838, Levi Stunston, of Weakly co., Tennessee, killed
William Price, of said county, in an affray. (Nashville Banner, July
6, 1838.)
October 8, 1838, in an affray at Wolf's Ferry, Tennessee, Martin
Farley, Senior, was killed by John and Solomon Step. (Georgia
Telegraph, Nov 6, 1838..)
Feb. 14, 1838, John Manie was killed by William Doss at Decatur,
Tennessee. (Memphis Gazette, May 15, 1838.)
"From the Nashville Whig."
"Fatal Affray in Columbia, Tenn.—A fatal street encounter occurred
at that place, on the 3d inst., between Richard H. Hays, attorney at
law, and Wm. Polk, brother to the Hon. Jas. K. Polk. The parties met,
armed with pistols, and exchanged shots simultaneously. A buck-shot
pierced the brain of Hays, and he died early the next morning. The
quarrel grew out of a sportive remark of Hays', at dinner, at the
Columbia Inn, for which he offered an apology, not accepted, it seems,
as Polk went to Hays' office, the same evening, and chastised him with
a whip. This occurred on Friday, the fatal result took place on
Monday."
In a fight near Memphis, Tennessee, May 15, 1837, Mr. Jackson, of that
place, shot through the heart Mr. W.F. Gholson, son of the late Mr.
Gholson, of Virginia. (Raleigh Register, June 13, 1837.)
The following horrible outrage, committed in West Tennessee, not far
from Randolph, was published by the Georgetown (S.C.) Union, May 26,
1837, from the Louisville Journal.
"A feeble bodied man settled a few years ago on the Mississippi, a
short distance below Randolph, on the Tennessee side. He succeeded in
amassing property to the value of about $14,000, and, like most of the
settlers, made a business of selling wood to the boats. This he sold
at $2.50 a cord, while his neighbors asked $3. One of them came to
remonstrate against his underselling, and had a fight with his
brother-in-law Clark, in which he was beaten. He then went and
obtained legal process against Clark, and returned with a deputy
sheriff, attended by a posse of desperate villains. When they arrived
at Clark's house, he was seated among his children—they put two or
three balls through his body. Clark ran, was overtaken and knocked
down; in the midst of his cries for mercy, one of the villains fired a
pistol in his mouth, killing him instantly. They then required the
settler to sell his property to them, and leave the country. He,
fearing that they would otherwise take his life, sold them his
valuable property for $300, and departed with his family. The sheriff
was one of the purchasers."
The Baltimore American, Feb. 8, 1838, publishes the following from the
Nashville (Tennessee) Banner:
"A most atrocious murder was committed a few days ago at Lagrange, in
this state, on the body of Mr. John T. Foster, a respectable merchant
of that town. The perpetrators of this bloody act are E. Moody, Thomas
Moody, J.E. Douglass, W.R. Harris, and W.C. Harris. The circumstances
attending this horrible affair, are the following:—On the night
previous to the murder, a gang of villains, under pretence of wishing
to purchase goods, entered Mr. Foster's store, took him by force, and
rode him through the streets on a rail. The next morning, Mr. F. met
one of the party, and gave him a caning. For this just retaliation for
the outrage which had been committed on his person, he was pursued by
the persons alone named, while taking a walk with a friend, and
murdered in the open face of day."
The following presentment of a Tennessee Grand Jury, sufficiently
explains and comments on itself:
The Grand Jurors empanelled to inquire for the county of Shelby, would
separate without having discharged their duties, if they were to omit
to notice public evils which they have found their powers inadequate
to put in train for punishment. The evils referred to exist more
particularly in the town of Memphis.
The audacity and frequency with which outrages are committed, forbid
us, in justice to our consciences, to omit to use the powers we
possess, to bring them to the severe action of the law; and when we
find our powers inadequate, to draw upon them public attention, and
the rebuke of the good.
An infamous female publicly and grossly assaults a lady; therefore a
public meeting is called, the mayor of the town is placed in the
chair, resolutions are adopted, providing for the summary and lawless
punishment of the wretched woman. In the progress of the affair,
hundreds of citizens assemble at her house, and raze it to the
ground. The unfortunate creature, together with two or three men of
like character, are committed, in an open canoe or boat, without oar
or paddle, to the middle of the Mississippi river.
Such is a concise outline of the leading incidents of a recent
transaction in Memphis. It might be filled up by the detail of
individual exploits, which would give vivacity to the description; but
we forbear to mention them. We leave it to others to admire the
manliness of the transaction, and the courage displayed by a mob of
hundreds, in the various outrages upon the persons and property of
three or four individuals who fell under its vengeance.
The present white population of Tennessee is about the same with that
of Massachusetts, and yet more outbreaking crimes are committed in
Tennessee in a single month, than in Massachusetts during a whole
year; and this, too, notwithstanding the largest town in Tennessee has
but six thousand inhabitants; whereas, in Massachusetts, besides one
of eighty thousand, and two others of nearly twenty thousand each,
there are at least a dozen larger than the chief town in Tennessee,
which gives to the latter state an important advantage on the score of
morality, the country being so much more favorable to it than large
towns.
KENTUCKY.
Kentucky has been one of the United States since 1792. Its present
white population is about six hundred thousand.
The details which follow show still further that those who unite to
plunder of their rights one class of human beings, regard as sacred
the rights of no class.
The following affair at Maysville, Kentucky, is extracted from the
Maryland Republican, January 30, 1838.
"A fight came on at Maysville, Ky. on the 29th ultimo, in which a Mr.
Coulster was stabbed in the side and is dead; a Mr. Gibson was well
hacked with a knife; a Mr. Ferris was dangerously wounded in the head,
and another of the same name in the hip; a Mr. Shoemaker was severely
beaten, and several others seriously hurt in various ways."
The following is extracted from the N.C. Standard.
"A most bloody and shocking transaction took place in the little town
of Clinton, Hickman co. Ken. The circumstances are briefly as follows:
A special canvass for a representative from the county of Hickman, had
for some time been in progress. A gentleman by the name of Binford was
a candidate. The State Senator from the district, Judge James, took
some exceptions to the reputation of Binford, and intimated that if B.
should be elected, he (James) would resign rather than serve with such
a colleague. Hearing this, Binford went to the house of James to
demand an explanation. Mrs. James remarked, in a jest as Binford
thought, that if she was in the place of her husband she would resign
her seat in the Senate, and not serve with such a character. B. told
her that she was a woman, and could say what she pleased. She replied
that she was not in earnest. James then looked B. in the face and said
that, if his wife said so, it was the fact—'he was an infamous
scoundrel and d——d rascal.' He asked B. if he was armed, and on
being answered in the affirmative, he stepped into an adjoining room
to arm himself; He was prevented by the family from returning, and
Binford walked out. J. then told him from his piazza, that he would
meet him next day in Clinton.
"True to their appointment, the enraged parties met on the streets the
following day. James shot first, his ball passing through his
antagonist's liver, whose pistol fired immediately afterwards, and
missing J., the ball pierced the head of a stranger by the name of
Collins, who instantly fell and expired. After being shot, Binford
sprang upon J. with the fury of a wounded tiger, and would have taken
his life but for a second shot received through the back from Bartin
James, the brother of Thomas. Even after he received the last fatal
wound he struggled with his antagonist until death relaxed his grasp,
and he fell with the horrid exclamation, 'I am a dead man!'
"Judge James gave himself up to the authorities; and when the
informant of the editor left Clinton, Binford, and the unfortunate
stranger lay shrouded corpses together."
The "N.O. Bee" thus gives the conclusion of the matter:
"Judge James was tried and acquitted, the death of Binford being
regarded as an act of justifiable homicide."
From the "Flemingsburg Kentuckian," June 23,'38.
AFFRAY.—Thomas Binford, of Hickman county, Kentucky, recently attacked
a Mr. Gardner of Dresden, with a drawn knife, and cut his face pretty
badly. Gardner picked up a piece of iron and gave him a side-wipe
above the ear that brought him to terms. The skull was fractured about
two inches. Binford's brother was killed at Clinton, Kentucky, last
fall by Judge James.
The "Red River Whig" of September 15, 1838, says:—"A ruffian of the
name of Charles Gibson, attempted to murder a girl named Mary Green,
of Louisville, Ky. on the 23d ult. He cut her in six different places
with a Bowie knife. His object, as stated in a subsequent
investigation before the Police Court, was to cut her throat, which
she prevented by throwing up her arms."
From the "Louisville Advertiser," Dec. 17th, 1838:—"A startling
tragedy occurred in this city on Saturday evening last, in which A.H.
Meeks was instantly killed, John Rothwell mortally wounded, William
Holmes severely wounded, and Henry Oldham slightly, by the use of
Bowie knives, by Judge E.C. Wilkinson, and his brother, B.R.
Wilkinson, of Natchez, and J. Murdough, of Holly Springs, Mississippi.
It seems that Judge Wilkinson had ordered a coat at the shop of
Messrs. Varnum & Redding. The coat was made; the Judge, accompanied by
his brother and Mr. Murdough, went to the shop of Varnum & Redding,
tried on the coat, and was irritated because, as he believed, it did
not fit him. Mr. Redding undertook to convince him that he was in
error, and ventured to assure the Judge that the coat was well made.
The Judge instantly seized an iron poker, and commenced an attack on
Redding. The blow with the poker was partially warded off—Redding
grappled his assailant, when a companion of the Judge drew a Bowie
knife, and, but for the interposition and interference of the
unfortunate Meeks, a journeyman tailor, and a gentleman passing by at
the moment, Redding might have been assassinated in his own shop.
Shortly afterwards, Redding, Meeks, Rothwell, and Holmes went to the
Galt House. They sent up stairs for Judge Wilkinson, and he came down
into the bar room, when angry words were passed. The Judge went up
stairs again, and in a short time returned with his companions, all
armed with knives. Harsh language was again used. Meeks, felt called
on to state what he had seen of the conflict, and did so, and Murdough
gave him the d—d lie, for which Meeks struck him. On receiving the
blow with the whip, Murdough instantly plunged his Bowie knife into
the abdomen of Meeks, and killed him on the spot.
"At the same instant B.R. Wilkinson attempted to get at Redding, and
Holmes and Rothwell interfered, or joined in the affray. Holmes was
wounded, probably by B.R. Wilkinson; and the Judge, having left the
room for an instant, returned, and finding Rothwell contending with
his brother, or bending over him, he (the Judge) stabbed Rothwell in
the back, and inflicted a mortal wound.
"Judge Wilkinson, his brother, and J. Murdough, have been recently
tried and ACQUITTED."
From the "New Orleans Bee," Sept. 27, 1838.
"It appears from the statement of the Lexington Intelligencer, that
there has been for some time past, an enmity between the drivers of
the old and opposition lines of stages running from that city. On the
evening of the 13th an encounter took place at the Circus between two
of them, Powell and Cameron, and the latter was so much injured that
his life was in imminent danger. About 12 o'clock the same night,
several drivers of the old line rushed into Keizer's Hotel, where
Powell and other drivers of the opposition-line boarded, and a general
melee took place, in the course of which several pistols were
discharged, the ball of one of them passing through the head of
Crabster, an old line driver, and killing him on the spot. Crabster,
before he was shot, had discharged his own pistol which had burst into
fragments. Two or three drivers of the opposition were wounded with
buck shot, but not dangerously."
The "Mobile Advertiser" of September 15, 1838, copies the following
from the Louisville (Ky.) Journal.
"A Mr. Campbell was killed in Henderson county on the 31st ult. by a
Mr. Harrison. It appears, that there was an affray between the parties
some months ago, and that Harrison subsequently left home and returned
on the 31st in a trading boat. Campbell met him at the boat with a
loaded rifle and declared his determination to kill him, at the same
time asking him whether he had a rifle and expressing a desire to give
him a fair chance. Harrison affected to laugh at the whole matter and
invited Campbell into his boat to take a drink with him. Campbell
accepted the invitation, but, while he was in the act of drinking,
Harrison seized his rifle, fired it off, and laid Campbell dead by
striking him with the barrel of it."
The "Missouri Republican" of July 29, 1837 published the details which
follow from the Louisville Journal.
MOUNT STERLING, Ky. July 20, 1837.
"Gentlemen:—A most unfortunate and fatal occurrence transpired in our
town last evening, about 6 o'clock. Some of the most prominent friends
of Judge French had a meeting yesterday at Col. Young's, near this
place, and warm words ensued between Mr. Albert Thomas and Belvard
Peters, Esq., and a few blows were exchanged, and several of the
friends of each collected at the spot. Whilst the parties were thus
engaged. Mr. Wm. White, who was a friend of Mr. Peters, struck Mr.
Thomas, whereupon B.F. Thomas Esq. engaged in the combat on the side
of his brother and Mr. W. Roberts on the part of Peters—Mr. G.W.
Thomas taking part with his brothers. Albert Thomas had Peters down
and was taken off by a gentleman present, and whilst held by that
gentleman, he was struck by White; and B.F. Thomas having made some
remark White struck him. B.F. Thomas returned the blow, and having a
large knife, stabbed White, who nevertheless continued the contest,
and, it is said, broke Thomas's arm with a rock of a chair. Thomas
then inflicted some other stabs, of which White died in a few minutes.
Roberts was knocked down twice by Albert Thomas, and, I believe, is
much hurt. G.W. Thomas was somewhat hurt also. White and B.F. Thomas
had always been on friendly terms. You are acquainted with the Messrs.
Thomas. Mr. White was a much larger man than either of them, weighing
nearly 200 pounds, and in the prime of life. As you may very naturally
suppose, great excitement prevails here, and Mr. B.F. Thomas regrets
the fatal catastrophe as much as any one else, but believes from all
the circumstances that he was justifiable in what he did, although he
would be as far from doing such an act when cool and deliberate as any
man whatever."
The "New Orleans Bulletin" of Aug. 24, 1838, extracts the following
from the Louisville Journal.
"News has just reached us, that Thomas P. Moore, attacked the Senior
Editor of this paper in the yard of the Harrodsburg Springs. Mr. Moore
advanced upon Mr. Prentice with a drawn pistol and fired at him; Mr.
Prentice then fired, neither shot taking effect. Mr. Prentice drew a
second pistol, when Mr. Moore quailed and said he had no other arms;
whereupon Mr. Prentice from superabundant magnanimity spared the
miscreant's life."
From "The Floridian" of June 10, 1837. MURDER. Mr. Gillespie, a
respectable citizen aged 50, was murdered a few days since by a Mr.
Arnett, near Mumfordsville, Ky., which latter shot his victim twice
with a rifle.
The "Augusta (Ga.) Sentinel," May 11, 1838, has the following account
of murders in Kentucky:
"At Mill's Point, Kentucky, Dr. Thomas Rivers was shot one day last
week, from out of a window, by Lawyer Ferguson, both citizens of that
place, and both parties are represented to have stood high in the
estimation of the community in which they lived. The difficulty we
understand to have grown out of a law suit at issue between them."
Just as our paper was going to press, we learn that the brother of Dr.
Rivers, who had been sent for, had arrived, and immediately shot
Lawyer Ferguson. He at first shot him with a shot gun, upon his
retreat, which did not prove fatal; he then approached him immediately
with a pistol, and killed him on the spot."
The Right Rev. B.B. Smith, Bishop of the Episcopal diocese of
Kentucky, published about two years since an article in the Lexington
(Ky.) Intelligencer, entitled "Thoughts on the frequency of homicides
in the state of Kentucky." We conclude this head with a brief extract
from the testimony of the Bishop, contained in that article.
"The writer has never conversed with a traveled and enlightened
European or eastern man, who has not expressed the most undisguised
horror at the frequency of homicide and murder within our bounds, and
at the ease with which the homicide escapes from punishment.
"As to the frequency of these shocking occurrences, the writer has
some opportunity of being correctly impressed, by means of a yearly
tour through many counties of the State. He has also been particular
in making inquiries of our most distinguished legal and political
characters, and from some has derived conjectural estimates which were
truly alarming. A few have been of the opinion, that on an average one
murder a year may be charged to the account of every county in the
state, making the frightful aggregate of 850 human lives sacrificed to
revenge, or the victims of momentary passion, in the course of every
ten years.
"Others have placed the estimate much lower, and have thought that
thirty for the whole state, every year, would be found much nearer the
truth. An attempt has been made lately to obtain data more
satisfactory than conjecture, and circulars have been addressed to the
clerks of most of the counties, in order to arrive at as correct an
estimate as possible of the actual number of homicides during the
three years last past. It will be seen, however, that statistics thus
obtained, even from every county in the state, would necessarily be
imperfect, inasmuch as the records of the courts by no means show all
the cases, which occur, some escaping without any of the forms of a
legal examination, and there being many affrays which end only in
wounds, or where the parties are separated.
"From these returns, it appears that in 27 counties there have been,
within the last three years, of homicides of every grade, 35, but only
8 convictions in the same period, leaving 27 cases which have passed
wholly unpunished. During the same period there have been from
eighty-five counties, only eleven commitments to the state prison,
nine for manslaughter, and two for shooting with intent to kill, and
not an instance of capital punishment in the person of any white
offender. Thus an approximation is made to a general average, which
probably would not vary much from one in each county every three
years, or about 280 in ten years.
"It is believed that such a register of crime amongst a people
professing the protestant religion and speaking the English language,
is not to be found, with regard to any three-quarters of a million of
people, since the downfall of the feudal system. Compared with the
records of crime in Scotland, or the eastern states, the results are
ABSOLUTELY SHOCKING! It is believed there are more homicides, on an
average of two years, in any of our more populous counties, than in
the whole of several of our states, of equal or nearly equal white
population with Kentucky.
"The victims of these affrays are not always, by any means, the most
worthless of our population.
"It too often happens that the enlightened citizen, the devoted
lawyer, the affectionate husband, and precious father, are thus
instantaneously taken from their useful stations on earth, and
hurried, all unprepared, to their final account!
"The question, is again asked, what could have brought about, and can
perpetuate, this shocking state of things?"
As an illustration of the recklessness of life in Kentucky, and the
terrible paralysis of public sentiment, the bishop states the
following fact.
"A case of shocking homicide is remembered, where the guilty person
was acquitted by a sort of acclamation, and the next day was seen in
public, with two ladies hanging on his arm!"
Notwithstanding the frightful frequency of deadly affrays in Kentucky,
as is certified by the above testimony of Bishop Smith, there are
fewer, in proportion to the white population, than in any of the
states which have passed under review, unless Tennessee may be an
exception. The present white population of Kentucky is perhaps seventy
thousand more than that of Maine, and yet more public fatal affrays
have taken place in the former, within the last six months, than in
the latter during its entire existence as a state.
The seven slave states which we have already passed under review, are
just one half of the slave states and territories, included in the
American Union. Before proceeding to consider the condition of society
in the other slave states, we pause a moment to review the ground
already traversed.
The present entire white population of the states already considered,
is about two and a quarter millions; just about equal to the present
white population of the state of New York. If the amount of crime
resulting in loss of life, which is perpetrated by the white
population of those states upon the whites alone, be contrasted with
the amount perpetrated in the state of New York, by all classes,
upon all, we believe it will be found, that more of such crimes have
been committed in these states within the last 18 months, than have
occurred in the state of New York for half a century. But perhaps we
shall be told that in these seven states, there are scores of cities
and large towns, and that a majority of all these deadly affrays, &c.,
take place in them; to this we reply, that there are three times as
many cities and large towns in the state of New York, as in all those
states together, and that nearly all the capital crimes perpetrated in
the state take place in these cities and large villages. In the state
of New York, there are more than half a million of persons who live
in cities and villages of more than two thousand inhabitants, whereas
in Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and
Missouri, there are on the largest computation not more than one
hundred thousand persons, residing in cities and villages of more
than two thousand inhabitants, and the white population of these
places (which alone is included in the estimate of crime, and that too
inflicted upon whites only,) is probably not more than sixty-five
thousand.
But it will doubtless be pleaded in mitigation, that the cities and
large villages in those states are new; that they have not had
sufficient time thoroughly to organize their police, so as to make it
an effectual terror to evil doers; and further, that the rapid growth
of those places has so overloaded the authorities with all sorts of
responsibilities, that due attention to the preservation of the public
peace has been nearly impossible; and besides, they have had no
official experience to draw upon, as in the older cities, the offices
being generally filled by young men, as a necessary consequence of the
newness of the country, &c. To this we reply, that New Orleans is more
than a century old, and for half that period has been the centre of a
great trade; that St. Louis, Natchez, Mobile, Nashville, Louisville
and Lexington, are all half a century old, and each had arrived at
years of discretion, while yet the sites of Buffalo, Rochester,
Lockport, Canandaigua, Geneva, Auburn, Ithaca, Oswego, Syracuse, and
other large towns in Western New-York, were a wilderness. Further,
as a number of these places are larger than either of the former,
their growth must have been more rapid, and, consequently, they must
have encountered still greater obstacles in the organization of an
efficient police than those south western cities, with this exception,
THEY WERE NOT SETTLED BY SLAVEHOLDERS.
The absurdity of assigning the newness of the country, the
unrestrained habits of pioneer settlers, the recklessness of life
engendered by wars with the Indians, &c., as reasons sufficient to
account for the frightful amount of crime in the states under review,
is manifest from the fact, that Vermont is of the same age with
Kentucky; Ohio, ten years younger than Kentucky, and six years younger
than Tennessee; Indiana, five years younger than Louisiana; Illinois,
one year younger than Mississippi; Maine, of the same age with
Missouri, and two years younger than Alabama; and Michigan of the same
age with Arkansas. Now, let any one contrast the state of society in
Maine, Vermont, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan with that of
Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Missouri, Louisiana, Arkansas, and
Mississippi, and candidly ponder the result. It is impossible
satisfactorily to account for the immense disparity in crime, on any
other supposition than that the latter states were settled and are
inhabited almost exclusively by those who carried with them the
violence, impatience of legal restraint, love of domination, fiery
passions, idleness, and contempt of laborious industry, which are
engendered by habits of despotic sway, acquired by residence in
communities where such manners, habits and passions, mould society
into their own image.[43] The practical workings of this cause are
powerfully illustrated in those parts of the slave states where slaves
abound, when contrasted with those where very few are held. Who does
not know that there are fewer deadly affrays in proportion to the
white population—that law has more sway and that human life is less
insecure in East Tennessee, where there are very few slaves, than in
West Tennessee, where there are large numbers. This is true also of
northern and western Virginia, where few slaves are held, when
contrasted with eastern Virginia; where they abound; the same remark
applies to those parts of Kentucky and Missouri, where large numbers
of slaves are held, when contrasted with others where there are
comparatively few.
[Footnote 43: Bishop Smith of Kentucky, in his testimony respecting
homicides, which is quoted on a preceding pages, thus speaks of the
influence of slave-holding, as an exciting cause.
"Are not some of the indirect influences of a system, the existence of
which amongst us can never be sufficiently deplored, discoverable in
these affrays? Are not our young men more heady, violent and imperious
in consequence of their early habits of command? And are not our
taverns and other public places of resort, much more crowded with an
inflammable material, than if young men were brought up in the staid
and frugal habits of those who are constrained to earn their bread by
the sweat of their brow? * * * Is not intemperance more social, more
inflammatory, more pugnacious where a fancied superiority of
gentlemanly character is felt in consequence of exemption from severe
manual labor? Is there ever stabbing where there is not idleness and
strong drink?"
The Bishop also gives the following as another exciting cause; it is
however only the product of the preceding.
"Has not a public sentiment which we hear characterized as singularly
high-minded and honorable, and sensitively alive to every affront,
whether real or imaginary, but which strangers denominate rough and
ferocious, much to do in provoking these assaults, and then in
applauding instead of punishing the offender."
The Bishop says of the young men of Kentucky, that they "grow up
proud, impetuous, and reckless of all responsibility;" and adds, that
the practice of carrying deadly weapons is with them "NEARLY
UNIVERSAL."]
We see the same cause operating to a considerable extent in those
parts of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, settled mainly by slaveholders
and others, who were natives of slave states, in contrast with other
parts of these states settled almost exclusively by persons from free
states; that affrays and breaches of the peace are far more frequent
in the former than in the latter, is well known to all.
We now proceed to the remaining slave states. Those that have not yet
been considered, are Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North and South
Carolina, Georgia, and the territory of Florida. As Delaware has
hardly two thousand five hundred slaves, arbitrary power over human
beings is exercised by so few persons, that the turbulence infused
thereby into the public mind is but an inconsiderable element, quite
insufficient to inflame the passions, much less to cast the character
of the mass of the people; consequently, the state of society there,
and the general security of life is but little less than in New Jersey
and Pennsylvania, upon which states it borders on the north and east.
The same causes operate in a considerable measure, though to a much
less extent to Maryland and in Northern and Western Virginia. But in
lower Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, the
general state of society as it respects the successful triumph of
passion over law, and the consequent and universal insecurity of life
is, in the main, very similar to that of the states already
considered. In some portions of each of these states, human life has
probably as little real protection as in Arkansas, Mississippi and
Louisiana; but generally throughout the former states and sections,
the laws are not so absolutely powerless as in the latter three.
Deadly affrays, duels, murders, lynchings, &c., are, in proportion to
the white population, as frequent and as rarely punished in lower
Virginia as in Kentucky and Missouri; in North Carolina and South
Carolina as in Tennessee; and in Georgia and Florida as in Alabama.
To insert the criminal statistics of the remaining slave states in
detail, as those of the states already considered have been presented,
would, we find, fill more space than can well be spared. Instead of
this, we propose to exhibit the state of society in all the
slaveholding region bordering on the Atlantic, by the testimony of the
slaveholders themselves, corroborated by a few plain facts. Leaving
out of view Florida, where law is the most powerless, and Maryland
where probably it is the least so, we propose to select as a fair
illustration of the actual state of society in the Atlantic
slaveholding regions, North Carolina whose border is but 250 miles
from the free states of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and Georgia which
constitutes its south western boundary.
We will begin with GEORGIA. This state was settled more than a century
ago by a colony under General Oglethorpe. The colony was memorable for
its high toned morality. One of its first regulations was an absolute
prohibition of slavery in every form: but another generation arose,
the prohibition was abolished, a multitude of slaves were imported,
the exercise of unlimited power over them lashed up passion to the
spurning of all control, and now the dreadful state of society that
exists in Georgia, is revealed by the following testimony out of her
own mouth.
The editor of the Darien (Georgia) Telegraph, in his paper of November
6, 1838, published the following.
"Murderous Attack.—Between the hours of three and four o'clock, on
Saturday last, the editor of this paper was attacked by FOURTEEN armed
ruffians, and knocked down by repeated blows of bludgeons. All his
assailants were armed with pistols, dirks, and large clubs. Many of
them are known to us; but there is neither law nor justice to be had
in Darien! We are doomed to death by the employers of the assassins
who attacked us on Saturday, and no less than our blood will satisfy
them. The cause alleged for this unmanly, base, cowardly outrage, is
some expressions which occurred in an election squib, printed at this
office, and extensively circulated through the county, before the
election. The names of those who surrounded us, when the attack was
made, are, A. Lefils, jr. (son to the representative), Madison Thomas,
Francis Harrison, Thomas Hopkins, Alexander Blue, George Wing, James
Eilands, W.I. Perkins, A.J. Raymur: the others we cannot at present
recollect. The two first, LEFILS and THOMAS struck us at the same
time. Pistols were levelled at us in all directions. We can produce
the most respectable testimony of the truth of this statement."
The same number of the "Darien Telegraph," from which the preceding is
taken, contains a correspondence between six individuals, settling the
preliminaries of duels. The correspondence fills, with the exception
of a dozen lines, five columns of the paper. The parties were Col.
W. Whig Hazzard, commander of one of the Georgia regiments in the
recent Seminole campaign, Dr. T.F. Hazzard, a physician of St.
Simons, and Thomas Hazzard, Esq. a county magistrate, on the one side,
and Messrs. J.A. Willey, A.W. Willey, and H.B. Gould, Esqs. of
Darien, on the other. In their published correspondence the parties
call each other "liar," "mean rascal," "puppy," "villain," &c.
The magistrate, Thomas Hazzard, who accepts the challenge of J.A.
Willey, says, in one of his letters, "Being a magistrate, under a
solemn oath to do all in my power to keep the peace," &c., and yet
this personification of Georgia justice superscribes his letter as
follows: "To the Liar, Puppy, Fool, and Poltroon, Mr. John A. Willey"
The magistrate closes his letter thus:
"Here I am; call upon me for personal satisfaction (in propria
forma); and in the Farm Field, on St. Simon's Island, (Deo
juvante,) I will give you a full front of my body, and do all in my
power to satisfy your thirst for blood! And more, I will wager you
$100, to be planked on the scratch! that J.A. Willey will neither
kill or defeat T.F. Hazzard."
The following extract from the correspondence is a sufficient index of
slaveholding civilization.
"ARTICLES OF BATTLE BETWEEN JOHN A. WILLEY AND W. WHIG HAZZARD.
"Condition 1. The parties to fight on the same day, and at the same
place, (St. Simon's beach, near the lighthouse,) where the meeting
between T.F. Hazzard and J.A. Willey will take place.
"Condition 2. The parties to fight with broad-swords in the right hand,
and a dirk in the left.
"Condition 3. On the word "Charge," the parties to advance, and attack
with the broadsword, or close with the dirk.
"Condition 4. THE HEAD OF THE VANQUISHED TO BE CUT OFF BY THE VICTOR,
AND STUCK UPON A POLE ON THE FARM FIELD DAM, the original cause of
dispute.
"Condition 5. Neither party to object to each other's weapons; and if a
sword breaks, the contest to continue with the dirk.
"This Col. W. Whig Hazzard is one of the most prominent citizens in the
southern part of Georgia, and previously signalized himself, as we
learn from one of the letters in the correspondence, by "three
deliberate rounds in a duel."
The Macon (Georgia) Telegraph of October 9, 1838, contains the
following notice of two affrays in that place, in each of which an
individual was killed, one on Tuesday and the other on Saturday of the
same week. In publishing the case, the Macon editor remarks:
"We are compelled to remark on the inefficiency of our laws in
bringing to the bar of public justice, persons committing capital
offences. Under the present mode, a man has nothing more to do than to
leave the state, or step over to Texas, or some other place not
farther off, and he need entertain no fear of being apprehended. So
long as such a state of things is permitted to exist, just so long
will every man who has an enemy (and there are but few who have not)
be in constant danger of being shot down in the streets."
To these remarks of the Macon editor, who is in the centre of the
state, near the capital, the editor of the Darien Telegraph, two
hundred miles distant, responds as follows, in his paper of October
30. 1838.
"The remarks of our contemporary are not without cause. They apply,
with peculiar force, to this community. Murderers and rioters will
never stand in need of a sanctuary as long as Darien is what it is."
It is a coincidence which carries a comment with it, that in less than
a week after this Darien editor made these remarks, he was attacked in
the street by "fourteen gentlemen" armed with bludgeons, knives,
dirks, pistols, &c., and would doubtless have been butchered on the
spot if he had not been rescued.
We give the following statement at length as the chief perpetrator of
the outrages, Col. W.N. Bishop, was at the time a high functionary of
the State of Georgia, and, as we learn from the Macon Messenger, still
holds two public offices in the State, one of them from the direct
appointment of the governor.
From the "Georgia Messenger" of August 25, 1837.
"During the administration of WILSON LUMPKIN, WILLIAM N. BISHOP
received from his Excellency the appointment of Indian Agent, in the
place of William Springer. During that year (1834,) the said governor
gave the command of a company of men, 40 in number, to the said W.N.
Bishop, to be selected by him, and armed with the muskets of the
State. This band was organized for the special purpose of keeping the
Cherokees in subjection, and although it is a notorious fact that the
Cherokees in the neighborhood of Spring Place were peaceable and by no
means refractory, the said band were kept there, and seldom made any
excursion whatever out of the county of Murray. It is also a
notorious fact, that the said band, from the day of their
organization, never permitted a citizen of Murray county opposed to
the dominant party of Georgia, to exercise the right of suffrage at
any election whatever. From that period to the last of January
election, the said band appeared at the polls with the arms of the
State, rejecting every vote that "was not of the true stripe," as they
called it. That they frequently seized and dragged to the polls honest
citizens, and compelled them to vote contrary to their will.
"Such acts of arbitrary despotism were tolerated by the
administration. Appeals from the citizens of Murray county brought
them no relief—and incensed at such outrages, they determined on the
first Monday in January last, to turn out and elect such Judges of the
Inferior Court and county officers, as would be above the control of
Bishop, that he might thereby be prevented from packing such a jury as
he chose to try him for his brutal and unconstitutional outrages on
their rights. Accordingly on Sunday evening previous to the election,
about twenty citizens who lived a distance from the county site, came
in unarmed and unprepared for battle, intending to remain in town,
vote in the morning and return home. They were met by Bishop and his
State band, and asked by the former 'whether they were for peace or
war.' They unanimously responded, "we are for peace:' At that moment
Bishop ordered a fire, and instantly every musket of his band was
discharged on those citizens, 5 of whom were wounded, and others
escaped with bullet holes in their clothes. Not satisfied with the
outrage, they dragged an aged man from his wagon and beat him nearly
to death.
"In this way the voters were driven from Spring Place, and before day
light the next morning, the polls were opened by order of Bishop, and
soon after sun rise they were closed; Bishop having ascertained that
the band and Schley men had all voted. A runner was then dispatched to
Milledgeville, and received from Governor Schley commissions for those
self-made officers of Bishop's, two of whom have since runaway, and
the rest have been called on by the citizens of the county to resign,
being each members of Bishop's band, and doubtless runaways from other
States.
"After these outrages, Bishop apprehending an appeal to the judiciary
on the part of the injured citizens of Murray county, had a jury drawn
to suit him and appointed one of his band Clerk of the Superior Court.
For these acts, the Governor and officers of the Central Bank rewarded
him with an office in the Bank of the State, since which his own jury
found eleven true bills against him."
In the Milledgeville Federal Union of May 2, 1837, we find the
following presentment of the Grand Jury of Union County, Georgia,
which as it shows some relics of a moral sense, still lingering in the
state we insert.
Presentment of the Grand Jury of Union Co., March term, 1837.
"We would notice, as a subject of painful interest, the appointment of
Wm. N. Bishop to the high and responsible office of Teller, of the
Central Bank of the State of Georgia—an institution of such magnitude
as to merit and demand the most unslumbering vigilance of the freemen
of this State; as a portion of whom, we feel bound to express our
indignant reprehension of the promotion of such a character to one
of its most responsible posts—and do exceedingly regret the blindness
or depravity of those who can sanction such a measure.
"We request that our presentment be published in the Miners' Recorder
and Federal Union.
JOHN MARTIN, Foreman"
On motion of Henry L. Sims, Solicitor General, "Ordered by the court,
that the presentments of the Grand Jury, be published according to
their request." THOMAS HENRY, Clerk.
The same paper, four weeks after publishing the preceding facts,
contained the following: we give it in detail as the wretch who
enacted the tragedy was another public functionary of the state of
Georgia and acting in an official capacity.
"MURDER.—One of the most brutal and inhuman murders it has ever
fallen to our lot to notice, was lately committed in Cherokee county,
by Julius Bates, the son of the principal keeper of the Penitentiary,
upon an Indian.
"The circumstances as detailed to us by the most respectable men of
both parties, are these. At the last Superior Court of Cass county,
the unfortunate Indian was sentenced to the Penitentiary. Bates, as
one of the Penitentiary guard, was sent with another to carry him
and others, from other counties to Milledgeville. He started from
Cassville with the Indian ironed and bare footed; and walked him
within a quarter of a mile of Canton, the C.H. in Cherokee, a distance
of twenty-eight to thirty miles, over a very rough road in little more
than half the day. On arriving at a small creek near town, the Indian
[who had walked until the soles of his feet were off and those of his
heel turned back,] made signs to get water, Bates refused to let him,
and ordered him to go on: the Indian stopped and finally set down,
whereupon Bates dismounted and gathering a pine knot, commenced and
continued beating him and jirking him by a chain around his neck,
until the citizens of the village were drawn there by the severity of
the blows. The unfortunate creature was taken up to town and died in a
few hours.
"An inquest was held, and the jury found a verdict of murder by Bates.
A warrant was issued, but Bates had departed that morning in charge of
other prisoners taken from Canton, and the worthy officers of the
county desisted from his pursuit, 'because they apprehended he had
passed the limits of the county.' We understand that the warrant was
immediately sent to the Governor to have him arrested. Will it be
done? We shall see."
Having devoted so much space to a revelation of the state of society
among the slaveholders of Georgia, we will tax the reader's patience
with only a single illustration of the public sentiment—the degree of
actual legal protection enjoyed in the state of North Carolina.
North Carolina was settled about two centuries ago; its present white
population is about five hundred thousand.
Passing by the murders, affrays, &c. with which the North Carolina
papers abound, we insert the following as an illustration of the
public sentiment of North Carolina among 'gentlemen of property and
standing.'
The 'North Carolina Literary and Commercial Journal,' of January 20,
1838, published at Elizabeth City, devotes a column and a half to a
description of the lynching, tarring, feathering, ducking, riding on a
rail, pumping, &c., of a Mr. Charles Fife, a merchant of that city,
for the crime of 'trading with negroes.' The editor informs us that
this exploit of vandalism was performed very deliberately, at mid-day,
and by a number of the citizens, 'THE MOST RESPECTABLE IN THE CITY,'
&c. We proceed to give the reader an abridgement of the editor's
statement in his own words.—
"Such being the case, a number of the citizens, THE MOST RESPECTABLE
IN THIS CITY, collected, about ten days since, and after putting the
fellow on a rail, carried him through town with a duck and chicken
tied to him. He was taken down to the water and his head tarred and
feathered; and when they returned he was put under a pump, where for a
few minutes he underwent a little cooling. He was then told that he
must leave town by the next Saturday—if he did not he would be
visited again, and treated more in accordance with the principles of
the laws of Judge Lynch.
"On Saturday last, he was again visited, and as Fife had several of
his friends to assist him, some little scuffle ensued, when several
were knocked down, but nothing serious occurred. Fife was again
mounted on a rail and brought into town, but as he promised if they
would not trouble him he would leave town in a few days, he was set at
liberty. Several of our magistrates took no notice of the affair,
and rather seemed to tacitly acquiesce in the proceedings. The whole
subject every one supposed was ended, as Fife was to leave in a few
days, when WHAT WAS OUR ASTONISHMENT to hear that Mr. Charles R.
Kinney had visited Fife, advised him not to leave, and actually took
upon himself to examine witnesses, and came before the public as the
defender of Fife. The consequence was, that all the rioters were
summoned by the Sheriff to appear in the Court House and give bail for
their appearance at our next court. On Monday last the court opened at
12 o'clock, Judge Bailey presiding. Such an excitement we never
witnessed before in our town. A great many witnesses were examined,
which proved the character of Fife beyond a doubt. At one time rather
serious consequences were apprehended—high words were spoken, and
luckily a blow which was aimed at Mr. Kinney, was parried off, and we
are happy to say the court adjourned after ample securities being
given. The next day Fife was taken to jail for trading with negroes,
but has since been released on paying $100. The interference of Mr.
Kinney was wholly unnecessary; it was an assumption on his part which
properly belonged to our magistrates. Fife had agreed to go away, and
the matter would have been amicably settled but for him. We have no
unfriendly feelings towards Mr. Kinney: no personal animosities to
gratify: we have always considered him as one of our best lawyers. But
when he comes forth as the supporter of such a fellow as Fife, under
the plea that the laws have been violated—when he arraigns the acts
of thirty of the inhabitants of this place, it is high time for him to
reflect seriously on the consequences. The Penitentiary system is the
result of the refinement of the eighteenth century. As man advances in
the sciences, in the arts, in the intercourse of social and civilized
life, in the same proportion does crime and vice keep an equal pace,
and always makes demands on the wisdom of legislators. Now, what is
the Lynch law but the Penitentiary system carried out to its full
extent, with a little more steam power? or more properly, it is simply
thus: There are some scoundrels in society on whom the laws take no
effect; the most expeditious and short way is to let a majority decide
and give them JUSTICE."
Let the reader notice, 1st, that this outrage was perpetrated with
great deliberation, and after it was over, the victim was commanded to
leave town by the next week: when that cooling interval had passed,
the outrage was again deliberately repeated. 2d. It was perpetrated by
"thirty persons,' "the most respectable in the city." 3d. That at
the second lynching of Fife, several of his neighbors who had gathered
to defend him, (seeing that all the legal officers in the city had
refused to do it, thus violating their oaths of office,) were knocked
down, to which the editor adds, with the business air of a
professional butcher, "nothing serious occurred!" 4th. That not a
single magistrate in the city took the least notice either of the
barbarities inflicted upon Fife, or of the assaults upon his friends,
knocking them down, &c., but, as the editor informs us, all "seemed to
acquiesce in the proceedings." 5th. That this conduct of the
magistrates was well pleasing to the great mass of the citizens, is
plain, from the remark of the editor that "every one supposed that the
whole subject was ended," and from his wondering exclamation, "WHAT
WAS OUR ASTONISHMENT to hear that Mr. C.R. Kinney had actually took
upon him to examine witnesses," &c., and also from the editor's
declaration, "Such an excitement we never before witnessed in our
town." Excitement at what? Not because the laws had been most
impiously trampled down at noon-day by a conspiracy of thirty persons,
"the most respectable in the city;" not because a citizen had been
twice seized and publicly tortured for hours, without trial, and in
utter defiance of all authority; nay, verily! this was all
complacently acquiesced in; but because in this slaveholding Sodom
there was found a solitary Lot who dared to uplift his voice for law
and the right of trial by jury; this crime stirred up such an uproar
in that city of "most respectable" lynchers as was "never witnessed
before," and the noble lawyer who thus put every thing at stake in
invoking the majesty of law, would, it seems, have been knocked down,
even in the presence of the Court, if the blow had not been "parried."
6th. Mark the murderous threat of the editor—when he arraigns the
acts," (no matter how murderous) "of thirty citizens of this place,
it is high time for him to reflect seriously on the consequences."
7th. The open advocacy of "Lynch law" by a set argument, boldly
setting it above all codes, with which the editor closes his article,
reveals a public sentiment in the community which shows, that in North
Carolina, though society may still rally under the flag of
civilization, and insist on wrapping itself in its folds, barbarism is
none the less so in a stolen livery, and savages are savages still,
though tricked out with the gauze and tinsel of the stars and stripes.
It may be stated, in conclusion, that the North Carolina "Literary and
Commercial Journal," from which the article is taken, is a large
six-columned paper, edited by F.S. Proctor, Esq., a graduate of a
University, and of considerable literary note in the South.
Having drawn out this topic to so great a length, we waive all
comments, and only say to the reader, in conclusion, ponder these
things, and lay it to heart, that slaveholding "is justified of her
children." Verily, they have their reward! "With what measure ye mete
withal it shall be measured to you again." Those who combine to
trample on others, will trample on each other. The habit of
trampling upon one, begets a state of mind that will trample upon
all. Accustomed to wreak their vengeance on their slaves, indulgence
of passion becomes with slaveholders a second law of nature, and, when
excited even by their equals, their hot blood brooks neither restraint
nor delay; gratification is the first thought—prudence generally
comes too late, and the slaves see their masters fall a prey to each
other, the victims of those very passions which have been engendered
and infuriated by the practice of arbitrary rule over them. Surely
it need not be added, that those who thus tread down their equals,
must trample as in a wine-press their defenceless vassals. If, when in
passion, they seize those who are on their own level, and dash them
under their feet, with what a crushing vengeance will they leap upon
those who are always under their feet?