Hide Article Text (OCR)
Were the South to judge without passion or pre judice, she would at once confess that abolition ists are the only class of Northern citizens who do full justice to her character. ‘What is their object? To convince slaveholders of the sin of slavery, and prevail on them to abolish it. And on what assumptions do they proceed? On the assump tions, that their fellow citizens of the South are men, patriots, christians—that they are not too stupid to be made to understand their true interests; not so unmerciful that they cannot be moved to pity; not so reckless of a good name as to glory in their shame; not so seared in conscience, as to be insensible to the claims of justice; not so im pious that they cannot be impelled by the religion of Christ to give liberty and happiness to three millions of degraded beings whom hitherto they have regarded as their property. A deed like this would cover the South with enduring glory. Eng land freed 800,000 slaves, not of her own citizens, on her own sail, but the slaves of her colonial sub jects, thousands of miles from her shores. It was an act of justice, glorious, ever-to-be-remembered; but, the power was,on one side, interest and preju dice on the other. They, chiefly, did deed, who had no prejudice in themselves subdue, interest of their own to encounter. Should the South emancipate her slaves, it would be such a triumph of justice and self-denying Humanity, as the world has scarcely witnessed. ‘The grand spectacle would be presented, of a community of slaveholders rising up in the majesty of an enligh tened conscience, and, regardless of their own im mense pecuniary interest and a giant prejudice nur tured by the habits and educcation of centuries, voluntarily divesting themselves of what they had been accustomed to use as property—elevating to the rank of men, millions of beings whom they had been taught to regard as brutes! .To suppose her capable of such a deed, is to do the highest homage to her intelligence, her virtue and humanity. Why then are abolitionists de nounced by the South, as libellers of her charac ter? Is it an insult, to be thought humane? Is it an outrage, to be deemed capable of performing a great action? Does a man feel himself dishon ored, because men believe that his conscience, will not let Him sleep over the wrongs he has ‘com mitted? No, they are the libellers of the South, who tell us, that time is lost, money wasted, words are thrown away, in attempts to convince holders’ of their wickedness, to enlighten them on their true interests, to persude them to obey the dictates of justice and humanity. ‘They are the real enemies of the South, who bitterly exclaim, that the only way to get rid of slavery, is to let it work out its own cure. They regard their fellow citizens of the South as too low in the scale of humanity to be reached by argument or persua sion. Nothing but blood, say they in their hearts, will bring the slaveholder to his senses. That Abolitionists are correct in their opinions, we see no reason as yet to doubt. Facts are fre quently developed, which show that the conscience of the South is a stir, its humanity beginning to grow uneasy. How can it be otherwise? Can the slaveholder exclude the bright light shining upon him from every part of the earth? Can he steel his heart forever? Can he remain always an uninterested, uninformed spectator of a move ment which is agitating both worlds, and has al ready shaken the chains off from half a million of slaves, at his very door? Take three items. Unimportant in appearance, they indicate much. The New York Luminary says—‘a friend, late from the village of North East, Devil co., Mary land, called on us a day or two ago, and stated that the M. E. Church in that place are trying to live up to the Discipline, and enforce their opposi tion to slavery by turning all the slaveholders from the church.” In the Narrative of the Presbytery of South Carolina, we have this statement. “Some of our churches report encouraging circumstances with respect to the religious instruction of our negroes. We have no ministers who devote themselves entirely to this class of MEN, but ALL are BEGINNING to feel that they are the pastors of the servants as well as of the masters. Some in struct them orally in the Catechism—some preach to them— and as the result of this little attention, our galleries are mx eixmixe to be filled; and there are some applications for church membership from the sons of Africa.” A venerable gentleman of our acquaintance was informed by a resident of Louisiana, the other day, that the legislatire of that State would be called on, at its next session to pass a law, compelling churches to make some provision for the accom modation of slaves in their houses of worship. All these circumstances show, that the sound of Abolition has gone through the South, and so far from stifling exertion in behalf of the slave, it has aroused it to some purpose. But, just consider the last circumstance men tioned. Legislature passing laws to compel the Church to do its duty! Politicians more merciful than professors and preachers of Christ! What a deplorable state of religion this circumstance in dicates God service, by robbing Africa of her children. Peradventure he might have been made the happy instrument of “‘christianizing’’ many of the sons and daughters of the dreadfully benighted conti nent. As it is, he can aspire to no higher charac ter than that of a home-missionary. But to the extract. “Mr. Speaker, the next subject to which I ask your attention is Mr. Rives’ course upon the sub ject of Abolition petitions—He not only voted in favor of such ion, and thereby, in my opin ion, surrendered the whole ground, by admitting the friection of Congress in the matter; but in the debate he declared that he regarded slavery as “to moral, social, and political evil.” In the ac counts which were given at the time, by persons who were present when he made the remark, it is stated that he further said, that if he had the power he would abolish it immediately in Virginia. But this last remark is not reported in his corrected speech, and I will not insist that he made it, though bystanders were clear that he did. But consider ing the time, the place and the person by whom it was made, I cannot but regard the remark as highly reprehensible. When was it made? At a time when wild and mad fanaticism was rife in the land; and when it was catching at every pretext to war upon our dearest rights. Where was it made? In Congress—the very chosen arena of those de testable disturbers of our institutions. By whom was it made? By a Virginia Senator—a Senator representing slave-holding constituents. Who sent him to the Senate to pronounce phillipics upon our social institutions and play into the hands of mad fanatics? I take issue with him upon every pro position. I deny that slavery is a moral evil. It has been the reverse.Through its instrumentality, in a time more than a century, three millions of heathens have been christianized.(a). By means of it, three millions of human beings have been rescued from the grossest ignorance and supersti tion, and raised to the condition of rational crea tures. I have lately seen a letter from a Minister of the Gospel of Christ, attached to the Methodist Church, in which he describes the condition of the native African—and if half what he says of their pitiable ignorance, their groveling superstition and their galling slavery,(b) be true, then I agree with with him in saying that every slave-ship which approached the shores of Africa, was to them an instrument of mercy.(c) _ This is the effect on the negro. How has it morally affected the condition of the white man? Where do high moral virtues flourish more luxuriantly than in the slave-holding States. ' ~ I deny that slavery is a social evil. Where are exalted social virtues found purer than in the South? Where is man braver, or woman more lovely? Nor is it a political evil. ‘That most philosophical of statesmen, and wisest of men, Edmund Burke, long. 85 °, by a priori reasoning, came to the con clu that so high a regard for liberty could no where exist as in a country where domestic slavery was tolerated.(d¢) ‘The experience of the United States has confirmed the truth of his reasoning. But admit that Mr. Rives was right, and that I am wrong, yet was it a time, a place, an occasion for him to make the remark? Did he not know, that in making it, he was playing into the hand of those fanatics who are warring upon everything we hold dear? What was the consequence? Short ly thereafter we hear Mr. Webster making a speech in New York, and excusing himself for denounc ing our social institutions, by saying that he was only repeating the language of a Virginia Senator, uttered upon the floor of Congress.” (a) Christianized! when, as in South Carolina, one of the leading sects have ‘no ministers who devote themselves entirely to the slaves!’ when even ministers are only “BEGINNING to feel that they are” the pastors of their servants!” When the galleries are just “‘Becinnine to Be filled with slaves!” When, as in Louisiana, the legislature in 1839 has ‘to interfere to make churches provide seats in their meeting houses for slaves! When, as throughout the South, slaves are forbidden to read the Bible!!! Christianized! The rice swamp or cotton field, their church, with overseers for pastors, and the lash their daily lesson! 2) Slave is cruel pretty much in proportion to the civilization of the people among whom it exists. Make slavery profitable. And you make it infinitely cruel. The slave among savages is_ex posed to terrible excesses of passion on the part of his master, but is_not so continually ground down to the dust, as in civilized lands; because the sav age, idle, unenterprising, and a stranger to the art of money-making, demands no more labor from his slave than is necessary to minister to his unar tificial wants. Slavery in Africa, the Methodist preacher to the contrary notwithstanding, is a lighter burden than in America. Commander William Allen, R. N., in the Re cords of an Expedition up the Quatra with Lan der, says : “It is not domestic slavery that weighs so hea vily on the lower classes of the people, for that is extremely mild, perhaps more so than the treat ment of servants in other countries.” “They (the slaves) well know, that if they con duct themselves with propriety and fidelity, they will be treated with confidence and affection. ‘They frequently rise to the highest offices of the state, and yet are not looked on with a jealous eye by freemen. Neither do the individuals thus exalted think it any degradation to be known as slaves, whom ‘their masters might at any time strip off their dignities and send bound to the slave-market. Such severity, however, is seldom practised, ex cept as a punishment for the most flagrant abuse of confidence.” Wair are all attempt to rob American slavery of its pre-eminence, in atrocity and inhumanity! (ce) That man must have a callous heart, who can talk of the slave ship being an instrument of mercy to Africa, when he recollects the desolation, blood-shed, interminable quarrels, and innumera ble other frightful evils, which have resulted from the slave-trade. The horrid practice of slave-catching,” says, the author already quoted, ‘is the bane of this unhappy country, checking not ‘only popula tion, but every advance towards improvemnt, by blighting all the noble and generous feelings of hu man nature.”” Never can slavery in Africa be abol ished, until the slave-trade is annihilated. And this cannot be effected, till the slavery of civiliza tion is extinguished. The slavery of the United States is one of the strongest props to domestic sla very in Africa. “The first step,” save Mr. Allen,towards the abolition of slavery and the improvement of the condition of Africa, *‘must be the total discontin uance of the practice of slave-catching for expor tation.. While the acquisition of slaves is consid ered the only source of wealth, it is the most effec tual bar to any improvement in the condition of society. The inhabitants, not only of large cities, but of the most insignificant villages are kept in MR. BUFFUM AND INDIANA. It is curious to note the salutations bestowed on Mr. Buffum by our brother editors in Indiana. One of them, an instructor of the Democracy, has started an entirely new theory with regard to Abo litionism. He is a man doubtless of keen eye-sight, ‘and forms his opinions with exemplary caution. Listen! ' ‘We regret,’ he says, “the course he (Mr. Buffum) is pursuing, and take this opportunity to advise our democratic friends, that we are inclined to believe that Mr. Buffuin is a political federal whig lecturer, under the guise of an abolitionist. He identifies the welfare of the United States Bank (‘that noble institution,’ to use his own words) party, the high tariff party, in short the fed eral party and the abolition party. We are inclined to believe the appointment of abolition lecturers to traverse Ohio and Indiana, is part of a scheme countenanced by soutHERN with SLAVEHOLDERS, to secure the entire abolition vote to the whig can didate for President, in hopes of thus carrying these States. We intend to—but we'll keep an eye on their movements a little longer and see what shape things assume. We have seen already strange inconsistencies on the part of these politi cal abolitionists. Mr. Buffum comes to us, thus endorsed by a southern slaveholding whig paper.” [He quotes here the extract from the Louisville Journal.], ‘That must be a queer community, in which a man ventures to talk such nonsense; for stuff like this, (our brother of the Jeffersonian will pardon us,) is worthy of no better title. South ern whig slaveholders employing Abolitionists to lecture against slavery in Ohio and Indiana! Such a genius for speculation as is evinced by this gen tleman might achieve wonders under more favora ble circumstances. ‘Another editor ‘‘observes that the Society has delegated to this State’ one of ten lecturers ‘to enlist the sympathies of the people in favor of the mad schemes of Abolitionism.” Although,” he remarks, **We can have no objection to the discussion of this subject where it is disconnected from those disgraceful scenes which it has produced in other States, we can see no possible good which can re sult from it. On the contrary, what strong and warning evidence have we that it is productive of the very worst consequences to the peace, quiet and good order of any section in which it is agitat ed. Our state has heretofore been freed from the excitement and disgraceful outbreaks of this char acter, but the law-loving character of the people had better not be presumed upon too far.” That is—“so long as nobody among us will say anything against slavery, we will be peaceable, and law-loving. But, take care—presume not on our law-loving character. If, under a visionary idea that the constitution of the state will protect you when you choose to differ from us, you should utter_ your opinions in behalf of universal liberty, we shall be compelled to disgrace. our_state, by breaking its laws, and breaking, your heads!” Such is the kind warning given by the editor of the Indiana Sun. Now, good Mr. Sun, let us as sure you, that whether your people be low-loving or not, there are men who value too highly the freedom for which the fathers of our republic fought and bled, to be deterred from saying what they please on slavery, or on any other great ques tion, without first asking leave from the people of Indiana. A large class of American citizens have long since settled it in their own minds as a great truth, that the right of free speech is a right which none but a ruffian will assail, none but a dastard abandon. So, the sooner you cease from foolish and unmanly threats, the better, for the honor of your state and your own credit.
Newspaper Details
The Philanthropist
Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Tue, Dec 17, 1839
Page 6
Full Page
Clipped by
Eric K.
USA 27 Oct 2025
Other Publications Near Cincinnati, Ohio
Cincinnati Kentucky Times Star
Cincinnati Christian Age
Cincinnati Israelite
Cincinnati North Journal
Weekly Cincinnati Times
