AN ESSAY
ON THE SLAVERY AND COMMERCE
OF THE HUMAN SPECIES,
PARTICULARLY THE AFRICAN,
TRANSLATED FROM A LATIN DISSERTATION,
WHICH WAS HONOURED
WITH THE FIRST PRIZE
IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE,
FOR THE YEAR 1785,
WITH ADDITIONS.
Neque premendo alium me extulisse velim.-LIVY.
M.DCC.LXXXVI.
TO THE
RIGHT HONOURABLE
WILLIAM CHARLES COLYEAR,
EARL OF PORTMORE,
VISCOUNT MILSINTOWN.
MY LORD,
The dignity of the subject of this little Treatise, not any
persuasion of its merits as a literary composition,
encourages me to offer it to your Lordship's patronage. The
cause of freedom has always been found sufficient, in every
age and country, to attract the notice of the generous and
humane; and it is therefore, in a more peculiar manner,
worthy of the attention and favour of a personage, who
holds a distinguished rank in that illustrious island, the
very air of which has been determined, upon a late
investigation of its laws, to be an antidote against
slavery. I feel a satisfaction in the opportunity, which
the publication of this treatise affords me, of
acknowledging your Lordship's civilities, which can only be
equalled by the respect, with which I am,
Your Lordship's,
much obliged,
and obedient servant,
THOMAS CLARKSON.
Publisher's Commendations[119]
THE PREFACE.
As the subject of the following work has fortunately become
of late a topick of conversation, I cannot begin the
preface in a manner more satisfactory to the feelings of
the benevolent reader, than by giving an account of those
humane and worthy persons, who have endeavoured to draw
upon it that share of the publick attention which it has
obtained.
Among the well disposed individuals, of different nations
and ages, who have humanely exerted themselves to suppress
the abject personal slavery, introduced in the original
cultivation of the European colonies in the western
world, Bartholomew de las Casas, the pious bishop of
Chiapa, in the fifteenth century, seems to have been
the first. This amiable man, during his residence in
Spanish America, was so sensibly affected at the
treatment which the miserable Indians underwent that he
returned to Spain, to make a publick remonstrance
before the celebrated emperor Charles the fifth,
declaring, that heaven would one day call him to an account
for those cruelties, which he then had it in his power to
prevent. The speech which he made on the occasion, is now
extant, and is a most perfect picture of benevolence and
piety.
But his intreaties, by opposition of avarice, were rendered
ineffectual: and I do not find by any books which I have
read upon the subject, that any other person interfered
till the last century, when Morgan Godwyn, a
British clergyman, distinguished himself in the
cause.
The present age has also produced some zealous and able
opposers of the colonial slavery. For about the
middle of the present century, John Woolman and
Anthony Benezet, two respectable members of the
religious society called Quakers, devoted much of their
time to the subject. The former travelled through most
parts of North America on foot, to hold
conversations with the members of his own sect, on the
impiety of retaining those in a state of involuntary
servitude, who had never given them offence. The latter
kept a free school at Philadelphia, for the
education of black people. He took every opportunity of
pleading in their behalf. He published several treatises
against slavery,[001] and gave an hearty
proof of his attachment to the cause, by leaving the whole
of his fortune in support of that school, to which he had
so generously devoted his time and attention when alive.
Till this time it does not appear, that any bodies of men,
had collectively interested themselves in endeavouring to
remedy the evil. But in the year 1754, the religious
society, called Quakers, publickly testified their
sentiments upon the subject,[002] declaring, that
"to live in ease and plenty by the toil of those, whom
fraud and violence had put into their power, was neither
consistent with Christianity nor common justice."
Impressed with these sentiments, many of this society
immediately liberated their slaves; and though such a
measure appeared to be attended with considerable loss to
the benevolent individuals, who unconditionally presented
them with their freedom, yet they adopted it with pleasure:
nobly considering, that to possess a little, in an
honourable way, was better than to possess much, through
the medium of injustice. Their example was gradually
followed by the rest. A general emancipation of the slaves
in the possession of Quakers, at length took place; and so
effectually did they serve the cause which they had
undertaken, that they denied the claim of membership in
their religious community, to all such as should hereafter
oppose the suggestions of justice in this particular,
either by retaining slaves in their possession, or by being
in any manner concerned in the slave trade: and it is a
fact, that through the vast tract of North America, there
is not at this day a single slave in the possession of an
acknowledged Quaker.
But though this measure appeared, as has been observed
before, to be attended with considerable loss to the
benevolent individuals who adopted it, yet, as virtue
seldom fails of obtaining its reward, it became ultimately
beneficial. Most of the slaves, who were thus
unconditionally freed, returned without any solicitation to
their former masters, to serve them, at stated wages; as
free men. The work, which they now did, was found to better
done than before. It was found also, that, a greater
quantity was done in the same time. Hence less than the
former number of labourers was sufficient. From these, and
a variety of circumstances, it appeared, that their
plantations were considerably more profitable when worked
by free men, than when worked, as before, by slaves; and
that they derived therefore, contrary to their
expectations, a considerable advantage from their
benevolence.
Animated by the example of the Quakers, the members of
other sects began to deliberate about adopting the same
measure. Some of those of the church of England, of the
Roman Catholicks, and of the Presbyterians and
Independants, freed their slaves; and there happened but
one instance, where the matter was debated, where it was
not immediately put in force. This was in
Pennsylvania. It was agitated in the synod of the
Presbyterians there, to oblige their members to liberate
their slaves. The question was negatived by a majority of
but one person; and this opposition seemed to arise rather
from a dislike to the attempt of forcing such a measure
upon the members of that community, than from any other
consideration. I have the pleasure of being credibly
informed, that the manumission of slaves, or the employment
of free men in the plantations, is now daily gaining ground
in North America. Should slavery be abolished there, (and
it is an event, which, from these circumstances, we may
reasonably expect to be produced in time) let it be
remembered, that the Quakers will have had the merit of its
abolition.
Nor have their brethren here been less assiduous in the
cause. As there are happily no slaves in this country, so
they have not had the same opportunity of shewing their
benevolence by a general emancipation. They have not
however omitted to shew it as far as they have been able.
At their religious meetings they have regularly inquired if
any of their members are concerned in the iniquitous
African trade. They have appointed a committee for
obtaining every kind of information on the subject, with a
view to its suppression, and, about three or four years
ago, petitioned parliament on the occasion for their
interference and support. I am sorry to add, that their
benevolent application was ineffectual, and that the
reformation of an evil, productive of consequences equally
impolitick and immoral, and generally acknowledged to have
long disgraced our national character, is yet left to the
unsupported efforts of piety morality and justice, against
interest violence and oppression; and these, I blush to
acknowledge, too strongly countenanced by the legislative
authority of a country, the basis of whose government is
liberty.
Nothing can be more clearly shewn, than that an
inexhaustible mine of wealth is neglected in Africa,
for prosecution of this impious traffick; that, if proper
measures were taken, the revenue of this country might be
greatly improved, its naval strength increased, its
colonies in a more flourishing situation, the planters
richer, and a trade, which is now a scene of blood and
desolation, converted into one, which might be prosecuted
with advantage and honour.
Such have been the exertions of the Quakers in the cause of
humanity and virtue. They are still prosecuting, as far as
they are able, their benevolent design; and I should stop
here and praise them for thus continuing their humane
endeavours, but that I conceive it to be unnecessary. They
are acting consistently with the principles of religion.
They will find a reward in their own consciences; and they
will receive more real pleasure from a single reflection on
their conduct, than they can possibly experience from the
praises of an host of writers.
In giving this short account of those humane and worthy
persons, who have endeavoured to restore to their fellow
creatures the rights of nature, of which they had been
unjustly deprived, I would feel myself unjust, were I to
omit two zealous opposers of the colonial tyranny,
conspicuous at the present day.
The first is Mr. Granville Sharp. This Gentleman has
particularly distinguished himself in the cause of freedom.
It is a notorious fact, that, but a few years since, many
of the unfortunate black people, who had been brought from
the colonies into this country, were sold in the metropolis
to merchants and others, when their masters had no farther
occasion for their services; though it was always
understood that every person was free, as soon as he landed
on the British shore. In consequence of this notion, these
unfortunate black people, refused to go to the new masters,
to whom they were consigned. They were however seized, and
forcibly conveyed, under cover of the night, to ships then
lying in the Thames, to be retransported to the
colonies, and to be delivered again to the planters as
merchantable goods. The humane Mr. Sharpe, was the
means of putting a stop to this iniquitous traffick.
Whenever he gained information of people in such a
situation, he caused them to be brought on shore. At a
considerable expence he undertook their cause, and was
instrumental in obtaining the famous decree in the case of
Somersett, that as soon as any person whatever set
his foot in this country, he came under the protection of
the British laws, and was consequently free. Nor did
he interfere less honourably in that cruel and disgraceful
case, in the summer of the year 1781, when an hundred
and thirty two negroes, in their passage to the
colonies, were thrown into the sea alive, to defraud the
underwriters; but his pious endeavours were by no means
attended with the same success. To enumerate his many
laudable endeavours in the extirpation of tyranny and
oppression, would be to swell the preface into a volume:
suffice it to say, that he has written several books on the
subject, and one particularly, which he distinguishes by
the title of "A Limitation of Slavery."
The second is the Rev. James Ramsay. This gentleman
resided for many years in the West-Indies, in the
clerical office. He perused all the colonial codes of law,
with a view to find if there were any favourable clauses,
by which the grievances of slaves could be redressed; but
he was severely disappointed in his pursuits. He published
a treatise, since his return to England, called An Essay
on the Treatment and Conversion of African Slaves in the
British Sugar Colonies, which I recommend to the
perusal of the humane reader. This work reflects great
praise upon the author, since, in order to be of service to
this singularly oppressed part of the human species, he
compiled it at the expence of forfeiting that friendship,
which he had contracted with many in those parts, during a
series of years, and at the hazard, as I am credibly
informed, of suffering much, in his private property, as
well as of subjecting himself to the ill will and
persecution of numerous individuals.
This Essay on the Treatment and Conversion of African
Slaves, contains so many important truths on the
colonial slavery, and has come so home to the planters,
(being written by a person who has a thorough knowledge of
the subject) as to have occasioned a considerable alarm.
Within the last eight months, two publications have
expressly appeared against it. One of them is intitled
"Cursory Remarks on Mr. Ramsay's Essay;" the other
an "Apology for Negroe Slavery." On each of these I
am bound, as writing on the subject, to make a few remarks.
The cursory remarker insinuates, that Mr. Ramsay's
account of the treatment is greatly exaggerated, if not
wholly false. To this I shall make the following reply. I
have the honour of knowing several disinterested gentlemen,
who have been acquainted with the West Indian islands for
years. I call them disinterested, because they have neither
had a concern in the African trade, nor in the
colonial slavery: and I have heard these unanimously
assert, that Mr. Ramsay's account is so far from
being exaggerated, or taken from the most dreary pictures
that he could find, that it is absolutely below the truth;
that he must have omitted many instances of cruelty, which
he had seen himself; and that they only wondered, how he
could have written with so much moderation upon the
subject. They allow the Cursory Remarks to be
excellent as a composition, but declare that it is
perfectly devoid of truth.
But the cursory remarker does not depend so much on
the circumstances which he has advanced, (nor can he, since
they have no other existence than in his own, brain) as on
the instrument detraction. This he has used with the
utmost virulence through the whole of his publication,
artfully supposing, that if he could bring Mr.
Ramsay's reputation into dispute, his work would
fall of course, as of no authenticity. I submit this simple
question to the reader. When a writer, in attempting to
silence a publication, attacks the character of its author,
rather than the principles of the work itself, is it not a
proof that the work itself is unquestionable, and that this
writer is at a loss to find an argument against it?
But there is something so very ungenerous in this mode of
replication, as to require farther notice. For if this is
the mode to be adopted in literary disputes, what writer
can be safe? Or who is there, that will not be deterred
from taking up his pen in the cause of virtue? There are
circumstances in every person's life, which, if given to
the publick in a malevolent manner, and without
explanation, might essentially injure him in the eyes of
the world; though, were they explained, they would be even
reputable. The cursory remarker has adopted this
method of dispute; but Mr. Ramsay has explained
himself to the satisfaction of all parties, and has refuted
him in every point. The name of this cursory
remarker is Tobin: a name, which I feel myself
obliged to hand down with detestation, as far as I am able;
and with an hint to future writers, that they will do
themselves more credit, and serve more effectually the
cause which they undertake, if on such occasions they
attack the work, rather than the character of the writer,
who affords them a subject for their lucubrations.
Nor is this the only circumstance, which induces me to take
such particular notice of the Cursory Remarks. I
feel it incumbent upon me to rescue an injured person from
the cruel aspersions that have been thrown upon him, as I
have been repeatedly informed by those, who have the
pleasure of his acquaintance, that his character is
irreproachable. I am also interested myself. For if such
detraction is passed over in silence, my own reputation,
and not my work, may be attacked by an anonymous hireling
in the cause of slavery.
The Apology for Negroe Slavery is almost too
despicable a composition to merit a reply. I have only
therefore to observe, (as is frequently the case in a bad
cause, or where writers do not confine themselves to truth)
that the work refutes itself. This writer, speaking of the
slave-trade, asserts, that people are never kidnapped on
the coast of Africa. In speaking of the treatment of
slaves, he asserts again, that it is of the very mildest
nature, and that they live in the most comfortable and
happy manner imaginable. To prove each of his assertions,
he proposes the following regulations. That the
stealing of slaves from Africa should be
felony. That the premeditated murder of a slave by
any person on board, should come under the same
denomination. That when slaves arrive in the colonies,
lands should be allotted for their provisions, in
proportion to their number, or commissioners should see
that a sufficient quantity of sound wholesome
provisions is purchased. That they should not work on
Sundays and other holy-days. That extra
labour, or night-work, out of crop, should be
prohibited. That a limited number of stripes should
be inflicted upon them. That they should have
annually a suit of clothes. That old infirm slaves
should be properly cared for, &c.-Now it can
hardly be conceived, that if this author had tried to
injure his cause, or contradict himself, he could not have
done it in a more effectual manner, than by this proposal
of these salutary regulations. For to say that slaves are
honourably obtained on the coast; to say that their
treatment is of the mildest nature, and yet to propose the
above-mentioned regulations as necessary, is to refute
himself more clearly, than I confess myself to be able to
do it: and I have only to request, that the regulations
proposed by this writer, in the defence of slavery, may be
considered as so many proofs of the assertions contained in
my own work.
I shall close my account with an observation, which is of
great importance in the present case. Of all the
publications in favour of the slave-trade, or the
subsequent slavery in the colonies, there is not one, which
has not been written, either by a chaplain to the African
factories, or by a merchant, or by a planter, or by a
person whose interest has been connected in the cause which
he has taken upon him to defend. Of this description are
Mr. Tobin, and the Apologist for Negroe
Slavery. While on the other hand those, who have had as
competent a knowledge of the subject, but not the same
interest as themselves, have unanimously condemned it;
and many of them have written their sentiments upon it, at
the hazard of creating an innumerable host of enemies, and
of being subjected to the most malignant opposition. Now,
which of these are we to believe on the occasion? Are we to
believe those, who are parties concerned, who are
interested in the practice?-But the question does not admit
of a dispute.
Concerning my own work, it seems proper to observe, that
when, the original Latin Dissertation, as the title page
expresses, was honoured by the University of Cambridge with
the first of their annual prizes for the year 1785, I was
waited upon by some gentlemen of respectability and
consequence, who requested me to publish it in English. The
only objection which occurred to me was this; that having
been prevented, by an attention to other studies, from
obtaining that critical knowledge of my own language, which
was necessary for an English composition, I was fearful of
appearing before the publick eye: but that, as they
flattered me with the hope, that the publication of it
might be of use, I would certainly engage to publish it, if
they would allow me to postpone it for a little time, till
I was more in the habit of writing. They replied, that as
the publick attention was now excited to the case of the
unfortunate Africans, it would be serving the cause
with double the effect, if it were to be published within a
few months. This argument prevailed. Nothing but this
circumstance could have induced me to offer an English
composition to the inspection of an host of criticks: and I
trust therefore that this circumstance will plead much with
the benevolent reader, in favour of those faults, which he
may find in the present work.
Having thus promised to publish it, I was for some time
doubtful from which of the copies to translate. There were
two, the original, and an abridgement. The latter (as these
academical compositions are generally of a certain length)
was that which was sent down to Cambridge, and honoured
with the prize. I was determined however, upon consulting
with my friends, to translate from the former. This has
been faithfully done with but few[003] additions. The reader
will probably perceive the Latin idiom in several passages
of the work, though I have endeavoured, as far as I have
been able, to avoid it. And I am so sensible of the
disadvantages under which it must yet lie, as a
translation, that I wish I had written upon the subject,
without any reference at all to the original copy.
It will perhaps be asked, from what authority I have
collected those facts, which relate to the colonial
slavery. I reply, that I have had the means of the very
best of information on the subject; having the pleasure of
being acquainted with many, both in the naval and military
departments, as well as with several others, who have been
long acquainted with America and the
West-Indian islands. The facts therefore which I
have related, are compiled from the disinterested accounts
of these gentlemen, all of whom, I have the happiness to
say, have coincided, in the minutest manner, in their
descriptions. It mud be remarked too, that they were
compiled, not from what these gentlemen heard, while they
were resident in those parts, but from what they actually
saw. Nor has a single instance been taken from any
book whatever upon the subject, except that which is
mentioned in the 235th page; and this book was published in
France, in the year 1777, by authority.
I have now the pleasure to say, that the accounts of these
disinterested gentlemen, whom I consulted on the occasion,
are confirmed by all the books which I have ever perused
upon slavery, except those which have been written by
merchants, planters, &c. They are confirmed by
Sir Hans Sloane's Voyage to Barbadoes; Griffith
Hughes's History of the same island, printed 1750; an
Account of North America, by Thomas Jeffries, 1761;
all Benezet's works, &c. &c. and
particularly by Mr. Ramsay's Essay on the Treatment
and Conversion of the African Slaves in the British Sugar
Colonies; a work which is now firmly established; and, I
may add in a very extraordinary manner, in consequence of
the controversy which this gentleman has sustained with the
Cursory Remarker, by which several facts which were
mentioned in the original copy of my own work, before the
controversy began, and which had never appeared in any work
upon the subject, have been brought to light. Nor has it
received less support from a letter, published only last
week, from Capt. J.S. Smith, of the Royal Navy, to the Rev.
Mr. Hill; on the former of whom too high encomiums cannot
be bestowed, for standing forth in that noble and
disinterested manner, in behalf of an injured character.
I have now only to solicit the reader again, that he will
make a favourable allowance for the present work, not only
from those circumstances which I have mentioned, but from
the consideration, that only two months are allowed by the
University for these their annual compositions. Should he
however be unpropitious to my request, I must console
myself with the reflection, (a reflection that will always
afford me pleasure, even amidst the censures of the great,)
that by undertaking the cause of the unfortunate
Africans, I have undertaken, as far as my abilities
would permit, the cause of injured innocence.
London, June 1st 1786.
CONTENTS.
PART I.
The History of Slavery.
PART II.
The African Commerce or Slave-Trade.
PART III.
The Slavery of the Africans in the European Colonies.
Chap. I. Imaginary scene in
Africa.-Imaginary conversation with an African.-His ideas
of Christianity.-A Description of a body of slaves going
to the ships.-Their embarkation.
Chap. II. Their treatment on
board.-The number that annually perish in the
voyage.-Horrid instance at sea.-Their debarkation in the
colonies.-Horrid instance on the shore.
Chap. III. The condition of their
posterity in the colonies.-The lex nativitatis
explained.-Its injustice.
Chap. IV. The seasoning in the
colonies.-The number that annually die in the
seasoning.-The employment of the survivors.-The colonial
discipline.-Its tendency to produce cruelty.-Horrid
instance of this effect.-Immoderate labour, and its
consequences.-Want of food and its consequences.-Severity
and its consequences.-The forlorn situation of slaves.-An
appeal to the memory of Alfred.
Chap. V. The contents of the two
preceding Chapters denied by the purchasers.-Their first
argument refuted.-Their second refuted.-Their third
refuted.
Chap. VI. Three arguments, which they
bring in vindication of their treatment, refuted.
Chap. VII. The argument, that the
Africans are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, as
far as it relates to their genius, refuted.-The causes of
this apparent inferiority.-Short dissertation on African
genius.-Poetry of an African girl.
Chap. VIII. The argument, that they
are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, as far as
it relates to colour, &c. refuted.-Examination of the
divine writings in this particular.-Dissertation on the
colour.
Chap. IX. Other arguments of the
purchasers examined.-Their comparisons unjust.-Their
assertions, with respect to the happy situation of the
Africans in the colonies, without foundation.-Their
happiness examined with respect to manumission.-With
respect to holy-days.-Dances, &c.-An estimate made at
St. Domingo.
Chap. X. The right of the purchasers
over their slaves refuted upon their own
principles.
Chap. XI. Dreadful arguments against
this commerce and slavery of the human species.-How the
Deity seems already to punish us for this inhuman
violation of his laws.-Conclusion.
ERRATA.
For Dominique, (Footnote 107) read
Domingue.
N. B.
A Latin note has been inserted by mistake, under the
quotation of Diodorus Siculus (Footnote 017). The reader
will find the original Greek of the same signification,
in the same author, at page 49, Editio Stephani.
AN ESSAY
ON THE SLAVERY and COMMERCE
OF THE HUMAN SPECIES.
IN THREE PARTS.
PART I.
THE HISTORY OF SLAVERY.
When civilized, as well as barbarous nations, have been
found, through a long succession of ages, uniformly to
concur in the same customs, there seems to arise a
presumption, that such customs are not only eminently
useful, but are founded also on the principles of justice.
Such is the case with respect to Slavery: it has had
the concurrence of all the nations, which history has
recorded, and the repeated practice of ages from the
remotest antiquity, in its favour. Here then is an
argument, deduced from the general consent and agreement of
mankind, in favour of the proposed subject: but alas! when
we reflect that the people, thus reduced to a state of
servitude, have had the same feelings with ourselves; when
we reflect that they have had the same propensities to
pleasure, and the same aversions from pain; another
argument seems immediately to arise in opposition to the
former, deduced from our own feelings and that divine
sympathy, which nature has implanted in our breasts, for
the most useful and generous of purposes. To ascertain the
truth therefore, where two such opposite sources of
argument occur; where the force of custom pleads strongly
on the one hand, and the feelings of humanity on the other;
is a matter of much importance, as the dignity of human
nature is concerned, and the rights and liberties of
mankind will be involved in its discussion.
It will be necessary, before this point can be determined,
to consult the History of Slavery, and to lay before the
reader, in as concise a manner as possible, a general view
of it from its earliest appearance to the present day.
The first, whom we shall mention here to have been reduced
to a state of servitude, may be comprehended in that class,
which is usually denominated the Mercenary. It
consisted of free-born citizens, who, from the various
contingencies of fortune, had become so poor, as to have
recourse for their support to the service of the rich. Of
this kind were those, both among the Egyptians and the
Jews, who are recorded in the sacred writings.[004] The Grecian
Thetes[005] also were of this
description, as well as those among the Romans, from whom
the class receives its appellation, the
Mercenarii.[006]
We may observe of the above-mentioned, that their situation
was in many instances similar to that of our own servants.
There was an express contract between the parties; they
could, most of them, demand their discharge, if they were
ill used by their respective masters; and they were treated
therefore with more humanity than those, whom we usually
distinguish in our language by the appellation of
Slaves.
As this class of servants was composed of men, who had been
reduced to such a situation by the contingencies of
fortune, and not by their own misconduct; so there was
another among the ancients, composed entirely of those, who
had suffered the loss of liberty from their own imprudence.
To this class may be reduced the Grecian Prodigals,
who were detained in the service of their creditors, till
the fruits of their labour were equivalent to their debts;
the delinquents, who were sentenced to the oar; and
the German enthusiasts, as mentioned by Tacitus, who
were so immoderately charmed with gaming, as, when every
thing else was gone, to have staked their liberty and their
very selves. "The loser," says he, "goes into a voluntary
servitude, and though younger and stronger than the person
with whom he played, patiently suffers himself to be bound
and sold. Their perseverance in so bad a custom is stiled
honour. The slaves, thus obtained, are immediately
exchanged away in commerce, that the winner may get rid of
the scandal of his victory."
To enumerate other instances, would be unnecessary; it will
be sufficient to observe, that the servants of this class
were in a far more wretched situation, than those of the
former; their drudgery was more intense; their treatment
more severe; and there was no retreat at pleasure, from the
frowns and lashes of their despotick masters.
Having premised this, we may now proceed to a general
division of slavery, into voluntary and
involuntary. The voluntary will comprehend
the two classes, which we have already mentioned; for, in
the first instance, there was a contract, founded on
consent; and, in the second, there was a
choice of engaging or not in those practices, the
known consequences of which were servitude. The
involuntary; on the other hand, will comprehend
those, who were forced, without any such condition
or choice, into a situation, which as it tended to
degrade a part of the human species, and to class it with
the brutal, must have been, of all human situations, the
most wretched and insupportable. These are they, whom we
shall consider solely in the present work. We shall
therefore take our leave of the former, as they were
mentioned only, that we might state the question with
greater accuracy, and, be the better enabled to reduce it
to its proper limits.
The first that will be mentioned, of the
involuntary, were prisoners of war.[007] "It was a law,
established from time immemorial among the nations of
antiquity, to oblige those to undergo the severities of
servitude, whom victory had thrown into their hands."
Conformably with this, we find all the Eastern nations
unanimous in the practice. The same custom prevailed among
the people of the West; for as the Helots became the slaves
of the Spartans, from the right of conquest only, so
prisoners of war were reduced to the same situation by the
rest of the inhabitants of Greece. By the same principles
that actuated these, were the Romans also influenced. Their
History will confirm the fact: for how many cities are
recorded to have been taken; how many armies to have been
vanquished in the field, and the wretched survivors, in
both instances, to have been doomed to servitude? It
remains only now to observe, in shewing this custom to have
been universal, that all those nations which assisted in
overturning the Roman Empire, though many and various,
adopted the same measures; for we find it a general maxim
in their polity, that whoever should fall into their hands
as a prisoner of war, should immediately be reduced to the
condition of a slave.
It may here, perhaps, be not unworthy of remark, that the
involuntary were of greater antiquity than the
voluntary slaves. The latter are first mentioned in
the time of Pharaoh: they could have arisen only in a state
of society; when property, after its division, had become
so unequal, as to multiply the wants of individuals; and
when government, after its establishment, had given
security to the possessor by the punishment of crimes.
Whereas the former seem to be dated with more propriety
from the days of Nimrod; who gave rise probably to that
inseparable idea of victory and servitude,
which we find among the nations of antiquity, and which has
existed uniformly since, in one country or another, to the
present day.[008]
Add to this, that they might have arisen even in a state of
nature, and have been coequal with the quarrels of mankind.
But it was not victory alone, or any presupposed right,
founded in the damages of war, that afforded a pretence for
invading the liberties of mankind: the honourable light, in
which piracy was considered in the uncivilized ages
of the world, contributed not a little to the
slavery of the human species. Piracy had a very
early beginning. "The Grecians,"[009] says Thucydides, "in
their primitive state, as well as the contemporary
barbarians, who inhabited the sea coasts and islands, gave
themselves wholly to it; it was, in short, their only
profession and support." The writings of Homer are
sufficient of themselves to establish this account. They
shew it to have been a common practice at so early a period
as that of the Trojan war; and abound with many lively
descriptions of it; which, had they been as groundless as
they are beautiful, would have frequently spared the sigh
of the reader of sensibility and reflection.
The piracies, which were thus practised in the early ages,
may be considered as publick or private. In
the former, whole crews embarked for the benefit[010] of their respective
tribes. They made descents on the sea coasts, carried off
cattle, surprized whole villages, put many of the
inhabitants to the sword, and carried others into slavery.
In the latter, individuals only were concerned, and the
emolument was their own. These landed from their ships,
and, going up into the country, concealed themselves in the
woods and thickets; where they waited every opportunity of
catching the unfortunate shepherd or husbandman alone. In
this situation they sallied out upon him, dragged him on
board, conveyed him to a foreign market, and sold him for a
slave.
To this kind of piracy Ulysses alludes, in opposition to
the former, which he had been just before mentioning, in
his question to Eumoeus.
"Did pirates wait, till all thy friends were gone,
To catch thee singly with thy flocks alone;
Say, did they force thee from thy fleecy care,
And from thy fields transport and sell thee here?"[011]
But no picture, perhaps, of this mode of depredation, is
equal to that, with which Xenophon[012] presents us in the
simple narrative of a dance. He informs us that the Grecian
army had concluded a peace with the Paphlagonians, and that
they entertained their embassadors in consequence with a
banquet, and the exhibition of various feats of activity.
"When the Thracians," says he, "had performed the parts
allotted them in this entertainment, some Aenianian and
Magnetian soldiers rose up, and, accoutred in their proper
arms, exhibited that dance, which is called Karpoea.
The figure of it is thus. One of them, in the character of
an husbandman, is seen to till his land, and is observed,
as he drives his plough, to look frequently behind him, as
if apprehensive of danger. Another immediately appears in
fight, in the character of a robber. The husbandman, having
seen him previously advancing, snatches up his arms. A
battle ensues before the plough. The whole of this
performance is kept in perfect time with the musick of the
flute. At length the robber, having got the better of the
husbandman, binds him, and drives him off with his team.
Sometimes it happens that the husbandman subdues the
robber: in this case the scene is only reversed, as the
latter is then bound and driven, off by the former."
It is scarcely necessary to observe, that this dance was a
representation of the general manners of men, in the more
uncivilized ages of the world; shewing that the husbandman
and shepherd lived in continual alarm, and that there were
people in those ages, who derived their pleasures and
fortunes from kidnapping and enslaving their
fellow creatures.
We may now take notice of a circumstance in this narration,
which will lead us to a review of our first assertion on
this point, "that the honourable light, in which
piracy was considered in the times of barbarism,
contributed not a little to the slavery of the human
species." The robber is represented here as frequently
defeated in his attempts, and as reduced to that deplorable
situation, to which he was endeavouring to bring another.
This shews the frequent difficulty and danger of his
undertakings: people would not tamely resign their lives or
liberties, without a struggle. They were sometimes
prepared; were superior often, in many points of view, to
these invaders of their liberty; there were an hundred
accidental circumstances frequently in their favour. These
adventures therefore required all the skill, strength,
agility, valour, and every thing, in short, that may be
supposed to constitute heroism, to conduct them with
success. Upon this idea piratical expeditions first came
into repute, and their frequency afterwards, together with
the danger and fortitude, that were inseparably connected
with them, brought them into such credit among the
barbarous nations of antiquity, that of all human
professions, piracy was the most honourable.[013]
The notions then, which were thus annexed to piratical
expeditions, did not fail to produce those consequences,
which we have mentioned before. They afforded an
opportunity to the views of avarice and ambition, to
conceal themselves under the mask of virtue. They excited a
spirit of enterprize, of all others the most irresistible,
as it subsisted on the strongest principles of action,
emolument and honour. Thus could the vilest of passions be
gratified with impunity. People were robbed, stolen,
murdered, under the pretended idea that these were
reputable adventures: every enormity in short was
committed, and dressed up in the habiliments of honour.
But as the notions of men in the less barbarous ages, which
followed, became more corrected and refined, the practice
of piracy began gradually to disappear. It had hitherto
been supported on the grand columns of emolument and
honour. When the latter therefore was removed, it
received a considerable shock; but, alas! it had still a
pillar for its support! avarice, which exists in all
states, and which is ready to turn every invention to its
own ends, strained hard for its preservation. It had been
produced in the ages of barbarism; it had been pointed out
in those ages as lucrative, and under this notion it was
continued. People were still stolen; many were intercepted
(some, in their pursuits of pleasure, others, in the
discharge of their several occupations) by their own
countrymen; who previously laid in wait for them, and sold
them afterwards for slaves; while others seized by
merchants, who traded on the different coasts, were torn
from their friends and connections, and carried into
slavery. The merchants of Thessaly, if we can credit
Aristophanes[014] who never spared the
vices of the times, were particularly infamous for the
latter kind of depredation; the Athenians were notorious
for the former; for they had practised these robberies to
such an alarming degree of danger to individuals, that it
was found necessary to enact a law,[015] which punished
kidnappers with death.-But this is sufficient for our
present purpose; it will enable us to assert, that there
were two classes of involuntary slaves among the
ancients, "of those who were taken publickly in a state of
war, and of those who were privately stolen in a state of
innocence and peace." We may now add, that the children and
descendents of these composed a third.
It will be proper to say something here concerning the
situation of the unfortunate men, who were thus doomed to a
life of servitude. To enumerate their various employments,
and to describe the miseries which they endured in
consequence, either from the severity, or the long and
constant application of their labour, would exceed the
bounds we have proposed to the present work. We shall
confine ourselves to their personal treatment, as
depending on the power of their masters, and the protection
of the law. Their treatment, if considered in this light,
will equally excite our pity and abhorrence. They were
beaten, starved, tortured, murdered at discretion: they
were dead in a civil sense; they had neither name nor
tribe; were incapable of a judicial process; were in short
without appeal. Poor unfortunate men! to be deprived of all
possible protection! to suffer the bitterest of injuries
without the possibility of redress! to be condemned
unheard! to be murdered with impunity! to be considered as
dead in that state, the very members of which they were
supporting by their labours!
Yet such was their general situation: there were two places
however, where their condition, if considered in this point
of view, was more tolerable. The Ægyptian slave,
though perhaps of all others the greatest drudge, yet if he
had time to reach the temple[016] of Hercules,
found a certain retreat from the persecution of his master;
and he received additional comfort from the reflection,
that his life, whether he could reach it or not, could not
be taken with impunity. Wise and salutary law![017] how often must it have
curbed the insolence of power, and stopped those passions
in their progress, which had otherwise been destructive to
the slave!
But though the persons of slaves were thus greatly secured
in Ægypt, yet there was no place so favourable to
them as Athens. They were allowed a greater liberty of
speech;[018] they had their
convivial meetings, their amours, their hours of
relaxation, pleasantry, and mirth; they were treated, in
short, with so much humanity in general, as to occasion
that observation of Demosthenes, in his second Philippick,
"that the condition of a slave, at Athens, was preferable
to that of a free citizen, in many other countries." But if
any exception happened (which was sometimes the case) from
the general treatment described; if persecution took the
place of lenity, and made the fangs of servitude more
pointed than before,[019] they had then their
temple, like the Ægyptian, for refuge; where the
legislature was so attentive, as to examine their
complaints, and to order them, if they were founded in
justice, to be sold to another master. Nor was this all:
they had a privilege infinitely greater than the whole of
these. They were allowed an opportunity of working for
themselves, and if their diligence had procured them a sum
equivalent with their ransom, they could immediately, on
paying it down,[020] demand their freedom
for ever. This law was, of all others, the most important;
as the prospect of liberty, which it afforded, must have
been a continual source of the most pleasing reflections,
and have greatly sweetened the draught, even of the most
bitter slavery.
Thus then, to the eternal honour of Ægypt and Athens,
they were the only places that we can find, where slaves
were considered with any humanity at all. The rest of the
world seemed to vie with each other, in the debasement and
oppression of these unfortunate people. They used them with
as much severity as they chose; they measured their
treatment only by their own passion and caprice; and, by
leaving them on every occasion, without the possibility of
an appeal, they rendered their situation the most
melancholy and intolerable, that can possibly be conceived.
As we have mentioned the barbarous and inhuman treatment
that generally fell to the lot of slaves, it may not be
amiss to inquire into the various circumstances by which it
was produced.
The first circumstance, from whence it originated, was the
commerce: for if men could be considered as
possessions; if, like cattle, they could be
bought and sold, it will not be difficult to
suppose, that they could be held in the same consideration,
or treated in the same manner. The commerce therefore,
which was begun in the primitive ages of the world, by
classing them with the brutal species, and by habituating
the mind to consider the terms of brute and
slave as synonimous, soon caused them to be
viewed in a low and despicable light, and as greatly
inferiour to the human species. Hence proceeded that
treatment, which might not unreasonably be supposed to
arise from so low an estimation. They were tamed, like
beasts, by the stings of hunger and the lash, and their
education was directed to the same end, to make them
commodious instruments of labour for their possessors.
This treatment, which thus proceeded in the ages of
barbarism, from the low estimation, in which slaves were
unfortunately held from the circumstances of the commerce,
did not fail of producing, in the same instant, its
own effect. It depressed their minds; it numbed
their faculties; and, by preventing those sparks of genius
from blazing forth, which had otherwise been conspicuous;
it gave them the appearance of being endued with inferiour
capacities than the rest of mankind. This effect of the
treatment had made so considerable a progress, as to
have been a matter of observation in the days of Homer.
For half his senses Jove conveys away,
Whom once he dooms to see the servile day.[021]
Thus then did the commerce, by classing them
originally with brutes, and the consequent
treatment, by cramping their abilities, and
hindering them from becoming conspicuous, give to
these unfortunate people, at a very early period, the most
unfavourable appearance. The rising generations, who
received both the commerce and treatment from their
ancestors, and who had always been accustomed to behold
their effects, did not consider these effects
as incidental: they judged only from what they saw;
they believed the appearances to be real; and
hence arose the combined principle, that slaves were an
inferiour order of men, and perfectly void of
understanding. Upon this principle it was,
that the former treatment began to be fully confirmed and
established; and as this principle was handed down
and disseminated, so it became, in succeeding ages, an
excuse for any severity, that despotism might
suggest.
We may observe here, that as all nations had this excuse in
common, as arising from the circumstances
above-mentioned, so the Greeks first, and the Romans
afterwards, had an additional excuse, as arising
from their own vanity.
The former having conquered Troy, and having united
themselves under one common name and interest, began, from
that period, to distinguish the rest of the world by the
title of barbarians; inferring by such an
appellation, "that they were men who were only noble in
their own country; that they had no right, from their
nature, to authority or command; that, on the
contrary, so low were their capacities, they were
destined by nature to obey, and to live in a
state of perpetual drudgery and subjugation."[022] Conformable with this
opinion was the treatment, which was accordingly prescribed
to a barbarian. The philosopher Aristotle himself,
in the advice which he gave to his pupil Alexander, before
he went upon his Asiatick expedition, intreated him to "use
the Greeks, as it became a general, but the
barbarians, as it became a master; consider,
says he, the former as friends and
domesticks; but the latter, as brutes and
plants;"[023] inferring that the
Greeks, from the superiority of their capacities, had a
natural right to dominion, and that the rest of the
world, from the inferiority of their own, were to be
considered and treated as the irrational part of the
creation.
Now, if we consider that this was the treatment, which they
judged to be absolutely proper for people of this
description, and that their slaves were uniformly those,
whom they termed barbarians; being generally such,
as were either kidnapped from Barbary, or purchased
from the barbarian conquerors in their wars with one
another; we shall immediately see, with what an additional
excuse their own vanity had furnished them for the sallies
of caprice and passion.
To refute these cruel sentiments of the ancients, and to
shew that their slaves were by no means an inferiour order
of beings than themselves, may perhaps be considered as an
unnecessary task; particularly, as having shewn, that the
causes of this inferiour appearance were incidental,
arising, on the one hand, from the combined effects of the
treatment and commerce, and, on the other,
from vanity and pride, we seem to have
refuted them already. But we trust that some few
observations, in vindication of these unfortunate people,
will neither be unacceptable nor improper.
How then shall we begin the refutation? Shall we say with
Seneca, who saw many of the slaves in question, "What is a
knight, or a libertine, or a slave?
Are they not names, assumed either from injury or
ambition?" Or, shall we say with him on another
occasion, "Let us consider that he, whom we call our slave,
is born in the same manner as ourselves; that he enjoys the
same sky, with all its heavenly luminaries; that he
breathes, that he lives, in the same manner as ourselves,
and, in the same manner, that he expires." These
considerations, we confess, would furnish us with a
plentiful source of arguments in the case before us; but we
decline their assistance. How then shall we begin? Shall we
enumerate the many instances of fidelity, patience, or
valour, that are recorded of the servile race? Shall
we enumerate the many important services, that they
rendered both to the individuals and the community, under
whom they lived? Here would be a second source, from whence
we could collect sufficient materials to shew, that there
was no inferiority in their nature. But we decline to use
them. We shall content ourselves with some few instances,
that relate to the genius only: we shall mention the
names of those of a servile condition, whose
writings, having escaped the wreck of time, and having been
handed down even to the present age, are now to be seen, as
so many living monuments, that neither the Grecian, nor
Roman genius, was superiour to their own.
The first, whom we shall mention here, is the famous
Æsop. He was a Phrygian by birth, and lived in the
time of Croesus, king of Lydia, to whom he dedicated his
fables. The writings of this great man, in whatever light
we consider them, will be equally entitled to our
admiration. But we are well aware, that the very mention of
him as a writer of fables, may depreciate him in the eyes
of some. To such we shall propose a question, "Whether this
species of writing has not been more beneficial to mankind;
or whether it has not produced more important events, than
any other?"
With respect to the first consideration, it is evident that
these fables, as consisting of plain and simple
transactions, are particularly easy to be understood; as
conveyed in images, they please and seduce the mind; and,
as containing a moral, easily deducible on the side
of virtue; that they afford, at the same time, the most
weighty precepts of philosophy. Here then are the two grand
points of composition, "a manner of expression to be
apprehended by the lowest capacities, and, (what is
considered as a victory in the art) an happy conjunction of
utility and pleasure."[024] Hence Quintilian
recommends them, as singularly useful, and as admirably
adapted, to the puerile age; as a just gradation between
the language of the nurse and the preceptor, and as
furnishing maxims of prudence and virtue, at a time when
the speculative principles of philosophy are too difficult
to be understood. Hence also having been introduced by most
civilized nations into their system of education, they have
produced that general benefit, to which we at first
alluded. Nor have they been of less consequence in
maturity; but particularly to those of inferiour
capacities, or little erudition, whom they have frequently
served as a guide to conduct them in life, and as a medium,
through which an explanation might be made, on many and
important occasions.
With respect to the latter consideration, which is easily
deducible from hence, we shall only appeal to the wonderful
effect, which the fable, pronounced by Demosthenes against
Philip of Macedon, produced among his hearers; or to the
fable, which was spoken by Menenius Agrippa to the Roman
populace; by which an illiterate multitude were brought
back to their duty as citizens, when no other species of
oratory could prevail.
To these truly ingenious, and philosophical
works of Æsop, we shall add those of his imitator
Phoedrus, which in purity and elegance of style, are
inferiour to none. We shall add also the Lyrick
Poetry of Alcman, which is no servile
composition; the sublime Morals of Epictetus, and
the incomparable comedies of Terence.
Thus then does it appear, that the excuse which was
uniformly started in defence of the treatment of
slaves, had no foundation whatever either in truth or
justice. The instances that we have mentioned above, are
sufficient to shew, that there was no inferiority, either
in their nature, or their understandings: and at the
same time that they refute the principles of the ancients,
they afford a valuable lesson to those, who have been
accustomed to form too precipitate a judgment on the
abilities of men: for, alas! how often has secret
anguish depressed the spirits of those, whom they have
frequently censured, from their gloomy and dejected
appearance! and how often, on the other hand, has their
judgment resulted from their own vanity and
pride!
We proceed now to the consideration of the commerce:
in consequence of which, people, endued with the same
feelings and faculties as ourselves, were made subject to
the laws and limitations of possession.
This commerce of the human species was of a very early
date. It was founded on the idea that men were
property; and, as this idea was coeval with the
first order of involuntary slaves, it must have
arisen, (if the date, which we previously affixed to that
order, be right) in the first practices of barter. The
Story of Joseph, as recorded in the sacred writings, whom
his brothers sold from an envious suspicion of his future
greatness, is an ample testimony of the truth of this
conjecture. It shews that there were men, even at that
early period, who travelled up and down as merchants,
collecting not only balm, myrrh, spicery, and other wares,
but the human species also, for the purposes of traffick.
The instant determination of the brothers, on the first
sight of the merchants, to sell him, and the
immediate acquiescence of these, who purchased him for a
foreign market, prove that this commerce had been then
established, not only in that part of the country, where
this transaction happened, but in that also, whither the
merchants were then travelling with their camels, namely,
Ægypt: and they shew farther, that, as all customs
require time for their establishment, so it must have
existed in the ages, previous to that of Pharaoh; that is,
in those ages, in which we fixed the first date of
involuntary servitude. This commerce then, as
appears by the present instance, existed in the earliest
practices of barter, and had descended to the
Ægyptians, through as long a period of time, as was
sufficient to have made it, in the times alluded to, an
established custom. Thus was Ægypt, in those days,
the place of the greatest resort; the grand emporium of
trade, to which people were driving their merchandize, as
to a centre; and thus did it afford, among other
opportunities of traffick, the first market that is
recorded, for the sale of the human species.
This market, which was thus supplied by the constant
concourse of merchants, who resorted to it from various
parts, could not fail, by these means, to have been
considerable. It received, afterwards, an additional supply
from those piracies, which we mentioned to have existed in
the uncivilized ages of the world, and which, in fact, it
greatly promoted and encouraged; and it became, from these
united circumstances, so famous, as to have been known,
within a few centuries from the time of Pharaoh, both to
the Grecian colonies in Asia, and the Grecian islands.
Homer mentions Cyprus and Ægypt as the common markets
for slaves, about the times of the Trojan war. Thus
Antinous, offended with Ulysses, threatens to send him to
one of these places, if he does not instantly depart from
his table.[025] The same poet also, in
his hymn to Bacchus,[026] mentions them again,
but in a more unequivocal manner, as the common markets for
slaves. He takes occasion, in that hymn, to describe the
pirates method of scouring the coast, from the circumstance
of their having kidnapped Bacchus, as a noble youth, for
whom they expected an immense ransom. The captain of the
vessel, having dragged him on board, is represented as
addressing himself thus, to the steersman:
"Haul in the tackle, hoist aloft the sail,
Then take your helm, and watch the doubtful gale!
To mind the captive prey, be our's the care,
While you to Ægypt or to Cyprus
steer;
There shall he go, unless his friends he'll tell,
Whose ransom-gifts will pay us full as well."
It may not perhaps be considered as a digression, to
mention in few words, by itself, the wonderful concordance
of the writings of Moses and Homer with the case before us:
not that the former, from their divine authority, want
additional support, but because it cannot be unpleasant to
see them confirmed by a person, who, being one of the
earliest writers, and living in a very remote age, was the
first that could afford us any additional proof of the
circumstances above-mentioned. Ægypt is represented,
in the first book of the sacred writings, as a market for
slaves, and, in the [027]second, as famous for
the severity of its servitude. [028]The same line,
which we have already cited from Homer, conveys to us the
same ideas. It points it out as a market for the human
species, and by the epithet of "bitter Ægypt,"
([029]which epithet is
peculiarly annexed to it on this occasion) alludes in the
strongest manner to that severity and rigour, of which the
sacred historian transmitted us the first account.
But, to return. Though Ægypt was the first market
recorded for this species of traffick; and though
Ægypt, and Cyprus afterwards, were particularly
distinguished for it, in the times of the Trojan war; yet
they were not the only places, even at that period, where
men were bought and sold. The Odyssey of Homer shews that
it was then practised in many of the islands of the
Ægean sea; and the Iliad, that it had taken place
among those Grecians on the continent of Europe, who had
embarked from thence on the Trojan expedition. This appears
particularly at the end of the seventh book. A fleet is
described there, as having just arrived from Lemnos, with a
supply of wine for the Grecian camp. The merchants are
described also, as immediately exposing it to sale, and as
receiving in exchange, among other articles of barter,
"a number of slaves."
It will now be sufficient to observe, that, as other states
arose, and as circumstances contributed to make them known,
this custom is discovered to have existed among them; that
it travelled over all Asia; that it spread through the
Grecian and Roman world; was in use among the barbarous
nations, which overturned the Roman empire; and was
practised therefore, at the same period, throughout all
Europe.
This slavery and commerce, which had
continued for so long a time, and which was thus practised
in Europe at so late a period as that, which succeeded the
grand revolutions in the western world, began, as the
northern nations were settled in their conquests, to
decline, and, on their full establishment, were abolished.
A difference of opinion has arisen respecting the cause of
their abolition; some having asserted, that they were the
necessary consequences of the feudal system; while
others, superiour both in number and in argument, have
maintained that they were the natural effects of
Christianity. The mode of argument, which the former
adopt on this occasion, is as follows. "The multitude of
little states, which sprang up from one great one at this
Æra, occasioned infinite bickerings and matter for
contention. There was not a state or seignory, which did
not want all the hands they could muster, either to defend
their own right, or to dispute that of their neighbours.
Thus every man was taken into the service: whom they armed
they must trust: and there could be no trust but in free
men. Thus the barrier between the two natures was thrown
down, and slavery was no more heard of, in the
west."
That this was not the necessary consequence of such
a situation, is apparent. The political state of Greece, in
its early history, was the same as that of Europe, when
divided, by the feudal system, into an infinite number of
small and independent kingdoms. There was the same matter
therefore for contention, and the same call for all the
hands that could be mustered: the Grecians, in short, in
heroick, were in the same situation in these
respects as the feudal barons in the Gothick
times. Had this therefore been a necessary effect,
there had been a cessation of servitude in Greece, in those
ages, in which we have already shewn that it existed.
But with respect to Christianity, many and great are
the arguments, that it occasioned so desirable an event. It
taught, "that all men were originally equal; that the Deity
was no respecter of persons, and that, as all men were to
give an account of their actions hereafter, it was
necessary that they should be free." These doctrines could
not fail of having their proper influence on those, who
first embraced Christianity, from a
conviction of its truth; and on those of their
descendents afterwards, who, by engaging in the
crusades, and hazarding their lives and fortunes
there, shewed, at least, an attachment to that
religion. We find them accordingly actuated by these
principles: we have a positive proof, that the feudal
system had no share in the honour of suppressing
slavery, but that Christianity was the only cause;
for the greatest part of the charters which were
granted for the freedom of slaves in those times (many of
which are still extant) were granted, "pro amore Dei,
pro mercede animæ." They were founded, in short,
on religious considerations, "that they might procure the
favour of the Deity, which they conceived themselves to
have forfeited, by the subjugation of those, whom they
found to be the objects of the divine benevolence and
attention equally with themselves."
These considerations, which had thus their first origin in
Christianity, began to produce their effects, as the
different nations were converted; and procured that general
liberty at last, which, at the close of the twelfth
century, was conspicuous in the west of Europe. What a
glorious and important change! Those, who would have had
otherwise no hopes, but that their miseries would be
terminated by death, were then freed from their servile
condition; those, who, by the laws of war, would have had
otherwise an immediate prospect of servitude from the hands
of their imperious conquerors, were then exchanged;
a custom, which has happily descended to the present day.
Thus, "a numerous class of men, who formerly had no
political existence, and were employed merely as
instruments of labour, became useful citizens, and
contributed towards augmenting the force or riches of the
society, which adopted them as members;" and thus did the
greater part of the Europeans, by their conduct on this
occasion, assert not only liberty for themselves, but for
their fellow-creatures also.
But if men therefore, at a time when under the influence of
religion they exercised their serious thoughts, abolished
slavery, how impious must they appear, who revived it; and
what arguments will not present themselves against their
conduct![030] The Portuguese, within
two centuries after its suppression in Europe, in imitation
of those piracies, which we have shewn to have
existed in the uncivilized ages of the world, made
their descents on Africa, and committing depredations on
the coast,[031] first carried
the wretched inhabitants into slavery.
This practice, however trifling and partial it might appear
at first, soon became serious and general. A melancholy
instance of the depravity of human nature; as it shews,
that neither the laws nor religion of any country, however
excellent the forms of each, are sufficient to bind the
consciences of some; but that there are always men, of
every age, country, and persuasion, who are ready to
sacrifice their dearest principles at the shrine of gain.
Our own ancestors, together with the Spaniards, French, and
most of the maritime powers of Europe, soon followed the
piratical example; and thus did the Europeans, to
their eternal infamy, renew a custom, which their
own ancestors had so lately exploded, from a
conscientiousness of its impiety.
The unfortunate Africans, terrified at these repeated
depredations, fled in confusion from the coast, and sought,
in the interiour parts of the country, a retreat from the
persecution of their invaders. But, alas, they were
miserably disappointed! There are few retreats, that can
escape the penetrating eye of avarice. The Europeans still
pursued them; they entered their rivers; sailed up into the
heart of the country; surprized the unfortunate Africans
again; and carried them into slavery.
But this conduct, though successful at first, defeated
afterwards its own ends. It created a more general alarm,
and pointed out, at the same instant, the best method of
security from future depredations. The banks of the rivers
were accordingly deserted, as the coasts had been before;
and thus were the Christian invaders left without a
prospect of their prey.
In this situation however, expedients were not wanting.
They now formed to themselves the resolution of settling in
the country; of securing themselves by fortified ports; of
changing their system of force into that of pretended
liberality; and of opening, by every species of bribery and
corruption, a communication with the natives. These plans
were put into immediate execution. The Europeans erected
their forts;[032] landed their
merchandize; and endeavoured, by a peaceable deportment, by
presents, and by every appearance of munificence, to seduce
the attachment and confidence of the Africans. These
schemes had the desired effect. The gaudy trappings of
European art, not only caught their attention, but excited
their curiosity: they dazzled the eyes and bewitched the
senses, not only of those, to whom they were given, but of
those, to whom they were shewn. Thus followed a speedy
intercourse with each other, and a confidence, highly
favourable to the views of avarice or ambition.
It was now time for the Europeans to embrace the
opportunity, which this intercourse had thus afforded them,
of carrying their schemes into execution, and of fixing
them on such a permanent foundation, as should secure them
future success. They had already discovered, in the
different interviews obtained, the chiefs of the African
tribes. They paid their court therefore to these, and so
compleatly intoxicated their senses with the luxuries,
which they brought from home, as to be able to seduce them
to their designs. A treaty of peace and commerce was
immediately concluded: it was agreed, that the kings, on
their part, should, from this period, sentence prisoners
of war and convicts to European
servitude; and that the Europeans should supply them,
in return, with the luxuries of the north. This agreement
immediately took place; and thus begun that
commerce, which makes so considerable a figure at
the present day.
But happy had the Africans been, if those only, who had
been justly convicted of crimes, or taken in a just war,
had been sentenced to the severities of servitude! How many
of those miseries, which afterwards attended them, had been
never known; and how would their history have saved those
sighs and emotions of pity, which must now ever accompany
its perusal. The Europeans, on the establishment of their
western colonies, required a greater number of slaves than
a strict adherence to the treaty could produce. The princes
therefore had only the choice of relinquishing the
commerce, or of consenting to become unjust. They had long
experienced the emoluments of the trade; they had acquired
a taste for the luxuries it afforded; and they now beheld
an opportunity of gratifying it, but in a more extentive
manner. Avarice therefore, which was too powerful
for justice on this occasion, immediately turned the
scale: not only those, who were fairly convicted of
offences, were now sentenced to servitude, but even those
who were suspected. New crimes were invented, that
new punishments might succeed. Thus was every appearance
soon construed into reality; every shadow into a substance;
and often virtue into a crime.
Such also was the case with respect to prisoners of war.
Not only those were now delivered into slavery, who were
taken in a state of publick enmity and injustice, but those
also, who, conscious of no injury whatever, were taken in
the arbitrary skirmishes of these venal
sovereigns. War was now made, not as formerly, from the
motives of retaliation and defence, but for the sake of
obtaining prisoners alone, and the advantages resulting
from their sale. If a ship from Europe came but into sight,
it was now considered as a sufficient motive for a war, and
as a signal only for an instantaneous commencement of
hostilities.
But if the African kings could be capable of such
injustice, what vices are there, that their consciences
would restrain, or what enormities, that we might not
expect to be committed? When men once consent to be unjust,
they lose, at the same instant with their virtue, a
considerable portion of that sense of shame, which, till
then, had been found a successful protector against the
sallies of vice. From that awful period, almost every
expectation is forlorn: the heart is left unguarded: its
great protector is no more: the vices therefore, which so
long encompassed it in vain, obtain an easy victory: in
crouds they pour into the defenceless avenues, and take
possession of the soul: there is nothing now too vile for
them to meditate, too impious to perform. Such was the
situation of the despotick sovereigns of Africa. They had
once ventured to pass the bounds of virtue, and they soon
proceeded to enormity. This was particularly conspicuous in
that general conduct, which they uniformly observed, after
any unsuccessful conflict. Influenced only by the venal
motives of European traffick, they first made war upon the
neighbouring tribes, contrary to every principle of
justice; and if, by the flight of the enemy, or by other
contingencies, they were disappointed of their prey, they
made no hesitation of immediately turning their arms
against their own subjects. The first villages they came
to, were always marked on this occasion, as the first
objects of their avarice. They were immediately surrounded,
were afterwards set on fire, and the wretched inhabitants
seized, as they were escaping from the flames. These,
consisting of whole families, fathers, brothers, husbands,
wives, and children, were instantly driven in chains to the
merchants, and consigned to slavery.
To these calamities, which thus arose from the tyranny of
the kings, we may now subjoin those, which arose from the
avarice of private persons. Many were kidnapped by their
own countrymen, who, encouraged by the merchants of Europe,
previously lay in wait for them, and sold them afterwards
for slaves; while the seamen of the different ships, by
every possible artifice, enticed others on board, and
transported them to the regions of servitude.
As these practices are in full force at the present day, it
appears that there are four orders of involuntary
slaves on the African continent; of [033]convicts; of
prisoners of war; of those, who are publickly seized
by virtue of the authority of their prince; and of
those, who are privately kidnapped by individuals.
It remains only to observe on this head, that in the sale
and purchase of these the African commerce or Slave
Trade consists; that they are delivered to the
merchants of Europe in exchange for their various
commodities; that these transport them to their colonies in
the west, where their slavery takes place; and that
a fifth order arises there, composed of all such as are
born to the native Africans, after their transportation and
slavery have commenced.
Having thus explained as much of the history of modern
servitude, as is sufficient for the prosecution of our
design, we should have closed our account here, but that a
work, just published, has furnished us with a singular
anecdote of the colonists of a neighbouring nation, which
we cannot but relate. The learned [034]author, having
described the method which the Dutch colonists at the Cape
make use of to take the Hottentots and enslave them, takes
occasion, in many subsequent parts of the work, to mention
the dreadful effects of the practice of slavery; which, as
he justly remarks, "leads to all manner of misdemeanours
and wickedness. Pregnant women," says he, "and children in
their tenderest years, were not at this time, neither
indeed are they ever, exempt from the effects of the hatred
and spirit of vengeance constantly harboured by the
colonists, with respect to the [035]Boshies-man
nation; excepting such indeed as are marked out to be
carried away into bondage.
"Does a colonist at any time get sight of a Boshies-man, he
takes fire immediately, and spirits up his horse and dogs,
in order to hunt him with more ardour and fury than he
would a wolf, or any other wild beast? On an open plain, a
few colonists on horseback are always sure to get the
better of the greatest number of Boshies-men that can be
brought together; as the former always keep at the distance
of about an hundred, or an hundred and fifty paces (just as
they find it convenient) and charging their heavy fire-arms
with a very large kind of shot, jump off their horses, and
rest their pieces in their usual manner on their ramrods,
in order that they may shoot with the greater certainty; so
that the balls discharged by them will sometimes, as I have
been assured, go through the bodies of six, seven, or eight
of the enemy at a time, especially as these latter know no
better than to keep close together in a body."-
"And not only is the capture of the Hottentots considered
by them merely as a party of pleasure, but in cold blood
they destroy the bands which nature has knit between their
husbands, and their wives and children, &c."
With what horrour do these passages seem to strike us! What
indignation do they seem to raise in our breasts, when we
reflect, that a part of the human species are considered as
game, and that parties of pleasure are made
for their destruction! The lion does not imbrue his
claws in blood, unless called upon by hunger, or provoked
by interruption; whereas the merciless Dutch, more savage
than the brutes themselves, not only murder their
fellow-creatures without any provocation or necessity, but
even make a diversion of their sufferings, and enjoy their
pain.
PART II.
THE AFRICAN COMMERCE,
OR
SLAVE TRADE.
As we explained the History of Slavery in the first part of
this Essay, as far as it was necessary for our purpose, we
shall now take the question into consideration, which we
proposed at first as the subject of our inquiry, viz. how
far the commerce and slavery of the human species, as
revived by some of the nations of Europe in the persons of
the unfortunate Africans, and as revived, in a great
measure, on the principles of antiquity, are consistent
with the laws of nature, or the common notions of equity,
as established among men.
This question resolves itself into two separate parts for
discussion, into the African commerce (as explained in
the history of slavery) and the subsequent slavery
in the colonies, as founded on the equity of the
commerce. The former, of course, will be first
examined. For this purpose we shall inquire into the rise,
nature, and design of government. Such an inquiry will be
particularly useful in the present place; it will afford us
that general knowledge of subordination and liberty, which
is necessary in the case before us, and will be found, as
it were, a source, to which we may frequently refer for
many and valuable arguments.
It appears that mankind were originally free, and that they
possessed an equal right to the soil and produce of the
earth. For proof of this, we need only appeal to the
divine writings; to the golden age of the
poets, which, like other fables of the times, had its
origin in truth; and to the institution of the
Saturnalia, and of other similar festivals; all of
which are so many monuments of this original equality of
men. Hence then there was no rank, no distinction, no
superiour. Every man wandered where he chose, changing his
residence, as a spot attracted his fancy, or suited his
convenience, uncontrouled by his neighbour, unconnected
with any but his family. Hence also (as every thing was
common) he collected what he chose without injury, and
enjoyed without injury what he had collected. Such was the
first situation of mankind;[036] a state of
dissociation and independence.
In this dissociated state it is impossible that men could
have long continued. The dangers to which they must have
frequently been exposed, by the attacks of fierce and
rapacious beasts, by the proedatory attempts of their own
species, and by the disputes of contiguous and independent
families; these, together with their inability to defend,
themselves, on many such occasions, must have incited them
to unite. Hence then was society formed on the grand
principles of preservation and defence: and as these
principles began to operate, in the different parts of the
earth, where the different families had roamed, a great
number of these societies began to be formed and
established; which, taking to themselves particular names
from particular occurrences, began to be perfectly distinct
from one another.
As the individuals, of whom these societies were composed,
had associated only for their defence, so they experienced,
at first, no change in their condition. They were still
independent and free; they were still without discipline or
laws; they had every thing still in common; they pursued
the same, manner of life; wandering only, in herds,
as the earth gave them or refused them sustenance, and
doing, as a publick body, what they had been
accustomed to do as individuals before. This was the
exact situation of the Getæ and Scythians,[037] of the Lybians and
Goetulians[038] of the Italian
Aborigines,[039] and of the Huns and
Alans.[040] They had left their
original state of dissociation, and had stepped into
that, which has been just described. Thus was the second
situation of men a state of independent society.
Having thus joined themselves together, and having formed
themselves into several large and distinct bodies, they
could not fail of submitting soon to a more considerable
change. Their numbers must have rapidly increased, and
their societies, in process of time, have become so
populous, as frequently to have experienced the want of
subsistence, and many of the commotions and tumults of
intestine strife. For these inconveniences however there
were remedies to be found. Agriculture would furnish
them with that subsistence and support, which the earth,
from the rapid increase of its inhabitants, had become
unable spontaneously to produce. An assignation of
property would not only enforce an application, but
excite an emulation, to labour; and government would
at once afford a security to the acquisitions of the
industrious, and heal the intestine disorders of the
community, by the introduction of laws.
Such then were the remedies, that were gradually applied.
The societies, which had hitherto seen their
members, undistinguished either by authority or rank,
admitted now of magistratical pre-eminence. They were
divided into tribes; to every tribe was allotted a
particular district for its support, and to every
individual his particular spot. The Germans,[041] who consisted of many
and various nations, were exactly in this situation. They
had advanced a step beyond the Scythians, Goetulians, and
those, whom we described before; and thus was the third
situation of mankind a state of subordinate society.
As we have thus traced the situation of man from unbounded
liberty to subordination, it will be proper to carry our
inquiries farther, and to consider, who first obtained the
pre-eminence in these primoeval societies, and by
what particular methods it was obtained.
There were only two ways, by which such an event could have
been produced, by compulsion or consent. When
mankind first saw the necessity of government, it is
probable that many had conceived the desire of ruling. To
be placed in a new situation, to be taken from the common
herd, to be the first, distinguished among men, were
thoughts, that must have had their charms. Let us suppose
then, that these thoughts had worked so unusually on the
passions of any particular individual, as to have driven
him to the extravagant design of obtaining the preeminence
by force. How could his design have been accomplished? How
could he forcibly have usurped the jurisdiction at a time,
when, all being equally free, there was not a single
person, whose assistance he could command? Add to this,
that, in a state of universal liberty, force had been
repaid by force, and the attempt had been fatal to the
usurper.
As empire then could never have been gained at first
by compulsion, so it could only have been obtained
by consent; and as men were then going to make an
important sacrifice, for the sake of their mutual
happiness, so he alone could have obtained it, (not whose
ambition had greatly distinguished him from the
rest) but in whose wisdom, justice, prudence, and
virtue, the whole community could confide.
To confirm this reasoning, we shall appeal, as before, to
facts; and shall consult therefore the history of those
nations, which having just left their former state of
independent society, were the very people that
established subordination and government.
The commentaries of Cæsar afford us the following
accounts of the ancient Gauls. When any of their kings,
either by death, or deposition, made a vacancy in the regal
office, the whole nation was immediately convened for the
appointment of a successor. In these national conventions
were the regal offices conferred. Every individual had a
voice on the occasion, and every individual was free. The
person upon whom the general approbation appeared to fall,
was immediately advanced to pre-eminence in the state. He
was uniformly one, whose actions had made him eminent;
whose conduct had gained him previous applause; whose
valour the very assembly, that elected him, had themselves
witnessed in the field; whose prudence, wisdom and justice,
having rendered him signally serviceable, had endeared him
to his tribe. For this reason, their kingdoms were not
hereditary; the son did not always inherit the virtues of
the sire; and they were determined that he alone should
possess authority, in whose virtues they could confide. Nor
was this all. So sensible were they of the important
sacrifice they had made; so extremely jealous even of the
name of superiority and power, that they limited, by a
variety of laws, the authority of the very person, whom
they had just elected, from a confidence of his integrity;
Ambiorix himself confessing, "that his people had as much
power over him, as he could possibly have over his people."
The same custom, as appears from Tacitus, prevailed also
among the Germans. They had their national councils, like
the Gauls; in which the regal and ducal offices were
confirmed according to the majority of voices. They elected
also, on these occasions, those only, whom their virtue, by
repeated trial, had unequivocally distinguished from the
rest; and they limited their authority so far, as neither
to leave them the power of inflicting imprisonment or
stripes, nor of exercising any penal jurisdiction. But as
punishment was necessary in a state of civil society, "it
was permitted to the priests alone, that it might appear to
have been inflicted, by the order of the gods, and not by
any superiour authority in man."
The accounts which we have thus given of the ancient
Germans and Gauls, will be found also to be equally true of
those people, which had arrived at the same state of
subordinate society. We might appeal, for a testimony of
this, to the history of the Goths; to the history of the
Franks and Saxons; to, the history, in short, of all those
nations, from which the different governments, now
conspicuous in Europe, have undeniably sprung. And we might
appeal, as a farther proof, to the Americans, who are
represented by many of the moderns, from their own ocular
testimony, as observing the same customs at the present
day.
It remains only to observe, that as these customs prevailed
among the different nations described, in their early state
of subordinate society, and as they were moreover the
customs of their respective ancestors, it appears that they
must have been handed down, both by tradition and use, from
the first introduction of government.
We may now deduce those general maxims concerning
subordination, and liberty, which we
mentioned to have been essentially connected with the
subject, and which some, from speculation only, and without
any allusion to facts, have been bold enough to deny.
It appears first, that liberty is a natural,
and government an adventitious right, because
all men were originally free.
It appears secondly, that government is a contract[042] because, in these
primeval subordinate societies, we have seen it voluntarily
conferred on the one hand, and accepted on the other. We
have seen it subject to various restrictions. We have seen
its articles, which could then only be written by tradition
and use, as perfect and binding as those, which are now
committed to letters. We have seen it, in short, partaking
of the federal nature, as much as it could in a
state, which wanted the means of recording its
transactions.
It appear thirdly, that the grand object of the
contrast, is the happiness of the people;
because they gave the supremacy to him alone, who had been
conspicuous for the splendour of his abilities, or the
integrity of his life: that the power of the multitude
being directed by the wisdom and justice of
the prince, they might experience the most effectual
protection from injury, the highest advantages of society,
the greatest possible happiness.
Having now collected the materials that are necessary for
the prosecution of our design, we shall immediately enter
upon the discussion.
If any man had originally been endued with power, as with
other faculties, so that the rest of mankind had discovered
in themselves an innate necessity of obeying this
particular person; it is evident that he and his
descendants, from the superiority of their nature, would
have had a claim upon men for obedience, and a natural
right to command: but as the right to empire is
adventitious; as all were originally free; as nature
made every man's body and mind his own; it is
evident that no just man can be consigned to
slavery, without his own consent.
Neither can men, by the same principles, be considered as
lands, goods, or houses, among possessions. It is
necessary that all property should be inferiour to
its possessor. But how does the slave differ
from his master, but by chance? For though
the mark, with which the latter is pleased to brand him,
shews, at the first sight, the difference of their
fortune; what mark can be found in his
nature, that can warrant a distinction?
To this consideration we shall add the following, that if
men can justly become the property of each other, their
children, like the offspring of cattle, must inherit their
paternal lot. Now, as the actions of the father and
the child must be thus at the sole disposal of their common
master, it is evident, that the authority of the
one, as a parent, and the duty of the other,
as a child, must be instantly annihilated; rights
and obligations, which, as they are sounded in nature, are
implanted in our feelings, and are established by the voice
of God, must contain in their annihilation a solid argument
to prove, that there cannot be any property whatever
in the human species.
We may consider also, as a farther confirmation, that it is
impossible, in the nature of things, that liberty
can be bought or sold! It is neither
saleable, nor purchasable. For if any one man
can have an absolute property in the liberty of another,
or, in other words, if he, who is called a master,
can have a just right to command the actions of him,
who is called a slave, it is evident that the latter
cannot be accountable for those crimes, which the former
may order him to commit. Now as every reasonable being is
accountable for his actions, it is evident, that such a
right cannot justly exist, and that human liberty,
of course, is beyond the possibility either of sale
or purchase. Add to this, that, whenever you sell
the liberty of a man, you have the power only of alluding
to the body: the mind cannot be confined or
bound: it will be free, though its mansion be beset with
chains. But if, in every sale of the human species,
you are under the necessity of considering your slave in
this abstracted light; of alluding only to the body, and of
making no allusion to the mind; you are under the necessity
also of treating him, in the same moment, as a
brute, and of abusing therefore that nature, which
cannot otherwise be considered, than in the double capacity
of soul and body.
But some person, perhaps, will make an objection to one of
the former arguments. "If men, from superiority of
their nature, cannot be considered, like lands, goods, or
houses, among possessions, so neither can cattle: for being
endued with life, motion, and sensibility, they are
evidently superiour to these." But this objection
will receive its answer from those observations which have
been already made; and will discover the true reason, why
cattle are justly to be estimated as property. For first,
the right to empire over brutes, is natural, and not
adventitious, like the right to empire over men.
There are, secondly, many and evident signs of the
inferiority of their nature; and thirdly, their
liberty can be bought and sold, because, being void of
reason, they cannot be accountable for their
actions.
We might stop here for a considerable time, and deduce many
valuable lessons from the remarks that have been made, but
that such a circumstance might be considered as a
digression. There is one, however, which, as it is so
intimately connected with the subject, we cannot but
deduce. We are taught to treat men in a different manner
from brutes, because they are so manifestly superiour in
their nature; we are taught to treat brutes in a different
manner from stones, for the same reason; and thus, by
giving to every created thing its due respect, to answer
the views of Providence, which did not create a variety of
natures without a purpose or design.
But if these things are so, how evidently against reason,
nature, and every thing human and divine, must they act,
who not only force men into slavery, against their
own consent; but treat them altogether as
brutes, and make the natural liberty of man
an article of publick commerce! and by what arguments can
they possibly defend that commerce, which cannot be carried
on, in any single instance, without a flagrant violation of
the laws of nature and of God?
That we may the more accurately examine the arguments that
are advanced on this occasion, it will be proper to divide
the commerce into two parts; first, as it relates to
those who sell, and secondly, as it relates to those
who purchase, the human species into slavery.
To the former part of which, having given every previous
and necessary information in the history of servitude, we
shall immediately proceed.
Let us inquire first, by what particular right the
liberties of the harmless people are invaded by the
prince. "By the right of empire," it will be
answered; "because he possesses dominion and power by their
own approbation and consent." But subjects, though under
the dominion, are not the property, of the prince.
They cannot be considered as his possessions. Their
natures are both the same; they are both born in the
same manner; are subject to the same disorders; must apply
to the same remedies for a cure; are equally partakers of
the grave: an incidental distinction accompanies
them through life, and this-is all.
We may add to this, that though the prince possesses
dominion and power, by the consent and approbation of his
subjects, he possesses it only for the most salutary
ends. He may tyrannize, if he can: he may alter the
form of his government: he cannot, however, alter
its nature and end. These will be immutably
the same, though the whole system of its administration
should be changed; and he will be still bound to
defend the lives and properties of his subjects, and
to make them happy.
Does he defend those therefore, whom he invades at
discretion with the sword? Does he protect the property of
those, whose houses and effects he consigns at discretion
to the flames? Does he make those happy, whom he seizes, as
they are trying to escape the general devastation, and
compels with their wives and families to a wretched
servitude? He acts surely, as if the use of empire
consisted in violence and oppression; as if he, that was
most exalted, ought, of necessity, to be most unjust. Here
then the voice of nature and justice is
against him. He breaks that law of nature, which
ordains, "that no just man shall be given into slavery,
against his own consent:" he violates the first law
of justice, as established among men, "that no
person shall do harm to another without a previous and
sufficient provocation;" and he violates also the
sacred condition of empire, made with his ancestors,
and necessarily understood in every species of government,
"that, the power of the multitude being given up to the
wisdom and justice of the prince, they may experience, in
return, the most effectual protection from injury, the
highest advantages of society, the greatest possible
happiness."
But if kings then, to whom their own people have granted
dominion and power, are unable to invade the liberties of
their harmless subjects, without the highest
injustice; how can those private persons be
justified, who treacherously lie in wait for their
fellow-creatures, and sell them into slavery? What
arguments can they possibly bring in their defence? What
treaty of empire can they produce, by which their innocent
victims ever resigned to them the least portion of their
liberty? In vain will they plead the
antiquity of the custom: in vain will the
honourable light, in which piracy was
considered in the ages of barbarism, afford them an excuse.
Impious and abandoned men! ye invade the liberties of
those, who, (with respect to your impious selves) are in a
state of nature, in a state of original
dissociation, perfectly independent,
perfectly free.
It appears then, that the two orders of slaves, which have
been mentioned in the history of the African servitude, "of
those who are publickly seized by virtue of the authority
of their prince; and of those, who are privately kidnapped
by individuals," are collected by means of violence and
oppression; by means, repugnant to nature, the
principles of government, and the common notions of
equity, as established among men.
We come now to the third order of involuntary
slaves, "to convicts." The only argument that the sellers
advance here, is this, "that they have been found guilty of
offences, and that the punishment is just." But before the
equity of the sentence can be allowed two questions must be
decided, whether the punishment is proportioned to
the offence, and what is its particular object and
end?
To decide the first, we may previously observe, that the
African servitude comprehends banishment, a
deprivation of liberty, and many
corporal sufferings.
On banishment, the following observations will
suffice. Mankind have their local attachments. They
have a particular regard for the spot, in which they were
born and nurtured. Here it was, that they first drew their
infant-breath: here, that they were cherished and
supported: here, that they passed those scenes of
childhood, which, free from care and anxiety, are the
happiest in the life of man; scenes, which accompany them
through life; which throw themselves frequently into their
thoughts, and produce the most agreeable sensations. These
then are weighty considerations; and how great this regard
is, may be evidenced from our own feelings; from the
testimony of some, who, when remote from their country,
and, in the hour of danger and distress, have found their
thoughts unusually directed, by some impulse or other, to
their native spot; and from the example of others, who,
having braved the storms and adversities of life, either
repair to it for the remainder of their days, or desire
even to be conveyed to it, when existence is no more.
But separately from these their local, they have
also their personal attachments; their regard for
particular men. There are ties of blood; there are ties of
friendship. In the former case, they must of necessity be
attached: the constitution of their nature demands it. In
the latter, it is impossible to be otherwise, since
friendship is founded on an harmony of temper, on a
concordance of sentiments and manners, on habits of
confidence, and a mutual exchange of favours.
We may now mention, as perfectly distinct both from their
local and personal, the national
attachments of mankind, their regard for the whole body of
the people, among whom they were born and educated. This
regard is particularly conspicuous in the conduct of such,
as, being thus nationally connected, reside in
foreign parts. How anxiously do they meet together! how
much do they enjoy the fight of others of their countrymen,
whom fortune places in their way! what an eagerness do they
show to serve them, though not born on the same particular
spot, though not connected by consanguinity or friendship,
though unknown to them before! Neither is this affection
wonderful, since they are creatures of the same education;
of the same principles; of the same manners and habits;
cast, as it were, in the same mould; and marked with the
same impression.
If men therefore are thus separately attached to the
several objects described, it is evident that a separate
exclusion from either must afford them considerable pain.
What then must be their sufferings, to be forced for ever
from their country, which includes them all? Which contains
the spot, in which they were born and nurtured;
which contains their relations and friends;
which contains the whole body of the people, among
whom they were bred and educated. In these sufferings,
which arise to men, both in bidding, and in having bid,
adieu to all that they esteem as dear and valuable,
banishment consists in part; and we may agree
therefore with the ancients, without adding other
melancholy circumstances to the account, that it is no
inconsiderable punishment of itself.
With respect to the loss of liberty, which is
the second consideration in the punishment, it is evident
that men bear nothing worse; that there is nothing, that
they lay more at heart; and that they have shewn, by many
and memorable instances, that even death is to be
preferred. How many could be named here, who, having
suffered the loss of liberty, have put a
period to their existence! How many, that have willingly
undergone the hazard of their lives to destroy a tyrant!
How many, that have even gloried to perish in the attempt!
How many bloody and publick wars have been undertaken (not
to mention the numerous servile insurrections, with
which history is stained) for the cause of freedom!
But if nothing is dearer than liberty to men, with
which, the barren rock is able to afford its joys, and
without which, the glorious fun shines upon them but in
vain, and all the sweets and delicacies of life are
tasteless and unenjoyed; what punishment can be more severe
than the loss of so great a blessing? But if to this
deprivation of liberty, we add the agonizing
pangs of banishment; and if to the complicated
stings of both, we add the incessant stripes,
wounds, and miseries, which are undergone by
those, who are sold into this horrid servitude; what
crime can we possibly imagine to be so enormous, as to be
worthy of so great a punishment?
How contrary then to reason, justice, and nature, must
those act, who apply this, the severest of human
punishments, to the most insignificant offence! yet such is
the custom with the Africans: for, from the time, in which
the Europeans first intoxicated the African princes with
their foreign draughts, no crime has been committed, no
shadow of a crime devised, that has not immediately been
punished with servitude.
But for what purpose is the punishment applied? Is it
applied to amend the manners of the criminal, and thus
render him a better subject? No, for if you banish him, he
can no longer be a subject, and you can no longer therefore
be solicitous for his morals. Add to this, that if you
banish him to a place, where he is to experience the
hardships of want and hunger (so powerfully does hunger
compel men to the perpetration of crimes) you force him
rather to corrupt, than amend his manners, and to be
wicked, when he might otherwise be just.
Is it applied then, that others may be deterred from the
same proceedings, and that crimes may become less frequent?
No, but that avarice may be gratified; that the
prince may experience the emoluments of the sale: for,
horrid and melancholy thought! the more crimes his subjects
commit, the richer is he made; the more abandoned
the subject, the happier is the prince!
Neither can we allow that the punishment thus applied,
tends in any degree to answer publick happiness; for
if men can be sentenced to slavery, right or wrong; if
shadows can be turned into substances, and virtues into
crimes; it is evident that none can be happy, because none
can be secure.
But if the punishment is infinitely greater than the
offence, (which has been shewn before) and if it is
inflicted, neither to amend the criminal, nor to deter
others from the same proceedings, nor to advance, in any
degree, the happiness of the publick, it is scarce
necessary to observe, that it is totally unjust, since it
is repugnant to reason, the dictates of
nature, and the very principles of
government.
We come now to the fourth and last order of slaves, to
prisoners of war. As the sellers lay a
particular stress on this order of men, and infer much,
from its antiquity, in support of the justice of
their cause, we shall examine the principle, on which it
subsisted among the ancients. But as this principle was the
same among all nations, and as a citation from many of
their histories would not be less tedious than unnecessary,
we shall select the example of the Romans for the
consideration of the case.
The law, by which prisoners of war were said to be
sentenced to servitude, was the law of nations.[043] It was so called from
the universal concurrence of nations in the custom. It had
two points in view, the persons of the
captured, and their effects; both of which it
immediately sentenced, without any of the usual forms of
law, to be the property of the captors.
The principle, on which the law was established, was the
right of capture. When any of the contending parties
had overcome their opponents, and were about to destroy
them, the right was considered to commence; a right, which
the victors conceived themselves to have, to recall their
swords, and, from the consideration of having saved the
lives of the vanquished, when they could have taken them by
the laws of war, to commute blood for
service. Hence the Roman lawyer, Pomponius, deduces
the etymology of slave in the Roman language. "They
were called servi,[044], says he from the
following circumstance. It was usual with our commanders to
take them prisoners, and sell them: now this circumstance
implies, that they must have been previously
preserved, and hence the name." Such then was the
right of capture. It was a right, which the
circumstance of taking the vanquished, that is, of
preserving them alive, gave the conquerors to their
persons. By this right, as always including the idea of a
previous preservation from death, the vanquished were said
to be slaves;[045] and, "as all slaves,"
says Justinian, "are themselves in the power of others, and
of course can have nothing of their own, so their effects
followed the condition of their persons, and became the
property of the captors."
To examine this right, by which the vanquished were said to
be slaves, we shall use the words of a celebrated Roman
author, and apply them to the present case.[046] "If it is lawful,"
says he, "to deprive a man of his life, it is certainly not
inconsistent with nature to rob him;" to rob him of his
liberty. We admit the conclusion to be just, if the
supposition be the same: we allow, if men have a right to
commit that, which is considered as a greater crime, that
they have a right, at the same instant, to commit that,
which is considered as a less. But what shall we say to the
hypothesis? We deny it to be true. The voice of
nature is against it. It is not lawful to kill, but on
necessity. Had there been a necessity, where had the
wretched captive survived to be broken with chains and
servitude? The very act of saving his life is an argument
to prove, that no such necessity existed. The
conclusion is therefore false. The captors had no
right to the lives of the captured, and of course
none to their liberty: they had no right to their
blood, and of course none to their service.
Their right therefore had no foundation in justice. It was
founded on a principle, contrary to the law of nature, and
of course contrary to that law, which people, under
different governments, are bound to observe to one another.
It is scarce necessary to observe, as a farther testimony
of the injustice of the measure, that the Europeans, after
the introduction of Christianity, exploded this principle
of the ancients, as frivolous and false; that they spared
the lives of the vanquished, not from the sordid motives of
avarice, but from a conscientiousness, that homicide
could only be justified by necessity; that they
introduced an exchange of prisoners, and, by many
and wise regulations, deprived war of many of its former
horrours.
But the advocates for slavery, unable to defend themselves
against these arguments, have fled to other resources, and,
ignorant of history, have denied that the right of
capture was the true principle, on which slavery
subsisted among the ancients. They reason thus. "The
learned Grotius, and others, have considered slavery as the
just consequence of a private war, (supposing the war to be
just and the opponents in a state of nature), upon the
principles of reparation and punishment. Now
as the law of nature, which is the rule of conduct to
individuals in such a situation, is applicable to members
of a different community, there is reason to presume, that
these principles were applied by the ancients to their
prisoners of war; that their effects were
confiscated by the right of reparation, and their
persons by the right of punishment."-
But, such a presumption is false. The right of
capture was the only argument, that the ancients
adduced in their defence. Hence Polybius; "What must they,
(the Mantinenses) suffer, to receive the punishment they
deserve? Perhaps it will be said, that they must be
sold, when they are taken, with their wives and children
into slavery: But this is not to be considered as a
punishment, since even those suffer it, by the laws of war,
who have done nothing that is base." The truth is, that
both the offending and the offended parties,
whenever they were victorious, inflicted slavery alike. But
if the offending party inflicted slavery on the
persons of the vanquished, by what right did they inflict
it? It must be answered from the presumption
before-mentioned, "by the right of reparation, or of
punishment:" an answer plainly absurd and
contradictory, as it supposes the aggressor to have
a right, which the injured only could
possess.
Neither is the argument less fallacious than the
presumption, in applying these principles, which in a
publick war could belong to the publick only,
to the persons of the individuals that were taken.
This calls us again to the history of the ancients, and, as
the rights of reparation and punishment could extend to
those only, who had been injured, to select a particular
instance for the consideration of the case.
As the Romans had been injured without a previous
provocation by the conduct of Hannibal at Saguntum, we may
take the treaty into consideration, which they made with
the Carthaginians, when the latter, defeated at Zama, sued
for peace. It consisted of three articles.[047] By the first, the
Carthaginians were to be free, and to enjoy their own
constitution and laws. By the second, they were to pay a
considerable sum of money, as a reparation for the damages
and expence of war: and, by the third, they were to deliver
up their elephants and ships of war, and to be subject to
various restrictions, as a punishment. With these terms
they complied, and the war was finished.
Thus then did the Romans make that distinction between
private and publick war, which was necessary
to be made, and which the argument is fallacious in not
supposing. The treasury of the vanquished was marked as the
means of reparation; and as this treasury was
supplied, in a great measure, by the imposition of taxes,
and was, wholly, the property of the publick, so the
publick made the reparation that was due. The
elephants also, and ships of war, which were
marked as the means of punishment, were
publick property; and as they were considerable
instruments of security and defence to their possessors,
and of annoyance to an enemy, so their loss, added to the
restrictions of the treaty, operated as a great and
publick punishment. But with respect to the
Carthaginian prisoners, who had been taken in the war, they
were retained in servitude: not upon the principles
of reparation and punishment, because the
Romans had already received, by their own confession in the
treaty, a sufficient satisfaction: not upon these
principles, because they were inapplicable to
individuals: the legionary soldier in the service of
the injured, who took his prisoner, was not the person, to
whom the injury had been done, any more than the
soldier in the service of the aggressors, who was taken,
was the person, who had committed the offence: but
they were retained in servitude by the right of
capture; because, when both parties had sent their
military into the field to determine the dispute, it was at
the private choice of the legionary soldier
before-mentioned, whether he would spare the life of his
conquered opponent, when he was thought to be entitled to
take it, if he had chosen, by the laws of war.
To produce more instances, as an illustration of the
subject, or to go farther into the argument, would be to
trespass upon the patience, as well as understanding of the
reader. In a state of nature, where a man is
supposed to commit an injury, and to be unconnected with
the rest of the world, the act is private, and the
right, which the injured acquires, can extend only to
himself: but in a state of society, where any
member or members of a particular community give offence to
those of another, and they are patronized by the state, to
which they belong, the case is altered; the act becomes
immediately publick, and the publick alone
are to experience the consequences of their injustice. For
as no particular member of the community, if considered as
an individual, is guilty, except the person, by whom the
injury was done, it would be contrary to reason and
justice, to apply the principles of reparation and
punishment, which belong to the people as a
collective body, to any individual of the community, who
should happen to be taken. Now, as the principles of
reparation and punishment are thus
inapplicable to the prisoners, taken in a publick
war, and as the right of capture, as we have shewn
before, is insufficient to intitle the victors to the
service of the vanquished, it is evident that
slavery cannot justly exist at all, since there are
no other maxims, on which it can be founded, even in the
most equitable wars.
But if these things are so; if slavery cannot be defended
even in the most equitable wars, what arguments will
not be found against that servitude, which arises from
those, that are unjust? Which arises from those
African wars, that relate to the present subject? The
African princes, corrupted by the merchants of Europe, seek
every opportunity of quarrelling with one another. Every
spark is blown into a flame; and war is undertaken from no
other consideration, than that of procuring slaves:
while the Europeans, on the other hand, happy in the
quarrels which they have thus excited, supply them with
arms and ammunition for the accomplishment of their horrid
purpose. Thus has Africa, for the space of two hundred
years, been the scene of the most iniquitous and bloody
wars; and thus have many thousands of men, in the most
iniquitous manner, been sent into servitude.
We shall beg leave, before we proceed to the arguments of
the purchasers, to add the following observations to
the substance of the three preceding chapters.
As the two orders of men, of those who are privately
kidnapped by individuals, and of those who are publickly
seized by virtue of the authority of their prince, compose
together, at least,[048] nine tenths of the
African slaves, they cannot contain, upon a moderate
computation, less than ninety thousand men annually
transported: an immense number, but easily to be credited,
when we reflect that thousands are employed for the purpose
of stealing the unwary, and that these diabolical practices
are in force, so far has European injustice been
spread, at the distance of a thousand miles from the
factories on the coast. The slave merchants, among
whom a quantity of European goods is previously divided,
travel into the heart of the country to this amazing
distance. Some of them attend the various markets, that are
established through so large an extent of territory, to
purchase the kidnapped people, whom the
slave-hunters are continually bringing in; while the
rest, subdividing their merchandize among the petty
sovereigns with whom they deal, receive, by an immediate
exertion of fraud and violence, the stipulated number.
Now, will any man assert, in opposition to the arguments
before advanced, that out of this immense body of men, thus
annually collected and transported, there is even
one, over whom the original or subsequent seller can
have any power or right? Whoever asserts this, in the first
instance, must, contradict his own feelings, and must
consider himself as a just object of prey, whenever
any daring invader shall think it proper to attack
him. And, in the second instance, the very idea
which the African princes entertain of their villages, as
parks or reservoirs, stocked only for their
own convenience, and of their subjects, as wild
beasts, whom they may pursue and take at pleasure, is
so shocking, that it need only be mentioned, to be
instantly reprobated by the reader.
The order of slaves, which is next to the former in respect
to the number of people whom it contains, is that of
prisoners of war. This order, if the former statement be
true, is more inconsiderable than is generally imagined;
but whoever reflects on the prodigious slaughter that is
constantly made in every African skirmish, cannot be
otherwise than of this opinion: he will find, that where
ten are taken, he has every reason to presume that
an hundred perish. In some of these skirmishes,
though they have been begun for the express purpose of
procuring slaves, the conquerors have suffered but
few of the vanquished to escape the fury of the sword; and
there have not been wanting instances, where they have been
so incensed at the resistance they have found, that their
spirit of vengeance has entirely got the better of their
avarice, and they have murdered, in cool blood, every
individual, without discrimination, either of age or sex.
The following[049] is an account of one
of these skirmishes, as described by a person, who was
witness to the scene. "I was sent, with several others, in
a small sloop up the river Niger, to purchase slaves: we
had some free negroes with us in the practice; and as the
vessels are liable to frequent attacks from the negroes on
one side of the river, or the Moors on the other, they are
all armed. As we rode at anchor a long way up the river, we
observed a large number of negroes in huts by the river's
side, and for our own safety kept a wary eye on them. Early
next morning we saw from our masthead a numerous body
approaching, with apparently but little order, but in close
array. They approached very fast, and fell furiously on the
inhabitants of the town, who seemed to be quite
surprized, but nevertheless, as soon as they could
get together, fought stoutly. They had some fire-arms, but
made very little use of them, as they came directly to
close fighting with their spears, lances, and sabres. Many
of the invaders were mounted on small horses; and both
parties fought for about half an hour with the fiercest
animosity, exerting much more courage and perseverance than
I had ever before been witness to amongst them. The women
and children of the town clustered together to the water's
edge, running shrieking up and down with terrour, waiting
the event of the combat, till their party gave way and took
to the water, to endeavour to swim over to the Barbary
side. They were closely pursued even into the river by the
victors, who, though they came for the purpose of
getting slaves, gave no quarter, their cruelty
even prevailing over their avarice. They made no
prisoners, but put all to the sword without mercy. Horrible
indeed was the carnage of the vanquished on this occasion,
and as we were within two or three hundred yards of them,
their cries and shrieks affected us extremely. We had got
up our anchor at the beginning of the fray, and now stood
close in to the spot, where the victors having followed the
vanquished into the water, were continually dragging out
and murdering those, whom by reason of their wounds they
easily overtook. The very children, whom they took in great
numbers, did not escape the massacre. Enraged at their
barbarity, we fired our guns loaden with grape shot, and a
volley of small arms among them, which effectually checked
their ardour, and obliged them to retire to a distance from
the shore; from whence a few round cannon shot soon removed
them into the woods. The whole river was black over with
the heads of the fugitives, who were swimming for their
lives. These poor wretches, fearing us as much as
their conquerors, dived when we fired, and cried most
lamentably for mercy. Having now effectually favoured their
retreat, we stood backwards and forwards, and took up
several that were wounded and tired. All whose wounds had
disabled them from swimming, were either butchered or
drowned, before we got up to them. With a justice and
generosity, never I believe before heard of among
slavers, we gave those their liberty whom we had taken
up, setting them on shore on the Barbary side, among the
poor residue of their companions, who had survived the
slaughter of the morning."
We shall make but two remarks on this horrid instance of
African cruelty. It adds, first, a considerable weight to
the statements that have been made; and confirms, secondly,
the conclusions that were drawn in the preceding chapter.
For if we even allow the right of capture to be just, and
the principles of reparation and punishment to be
applicable to the individuals of a community, yet would the
former be unjust, and the latter inapplicable, in the
present case. Every African war is a robbery; and we may
add, to our former expression, when we said, "that thus
have many thousands of men, in the most iniquitous manner,
been sent into servitude," that we believe there are few of
this order, who are not as much the examples of injustice,
as the people that have been kidnapped; and who do not
additionally convey, when we consider them as prisoners of
war, an idea of the most complicated scene of murder.
The order of convicts, as it exists almost solely
among those princes, whose dominions are contiguous to the
European factories, is from this circumstance so
inconsiderable, when compared with either of the preceding,
that we should not have mentioned it again, but that we
were unwilling to omit any additional argument that
occurred against it.
It has been shewn already, that the punishment of slavery
is inflicted from no other motive, than that of gratifying
the avarice of the prince, a confederation so
detestable, as to be sufficient of itself to prove it to be
unjust; and that it is so disproportionate, from its
nature, to the offence, as to afford an additional
proof of its injustice. We shall add now, as a second
argument, its disproportion from its continuance:
and we shall derive a third from the consideration, that,
in civil society, every violation of the laws of the
community is an offence against the state.[050]
Let us suppose then an African prince, disdaining for once
the idea of emolument: let us suppose him for once inflamed
with the love of his country, and resolving to punish from
this principle alone, "that by exhibiting an example of
terrour, he may preserve that happiness of the
publick, which he is bound to secure and defend by the
very nature of his contract; or, in other words, that he
may answer the end of government." If actuated then by this
principle, he should adjudge slavery to an offender, as a
just punishment for his offence, for whose benefit must the
convict labour? If it be answered, "for the benefit of the
state," we allow that the punishment, in whatever light it
is considered, will be found to be equitable: but if it be
answered, "for the benefit of any individual whom he
pleases to appoint," we deny it to be just. The state[051] alone is considered to
have been injured, and as injuries cannot possibly be
transferred, the state alone can justly receive the
advantages of his labour. But if the African prince, when
he thus condemns him to labour for the benefit of an
unoffended individual, should at the same time
sentence him to become his property; that is, if he
should make the person and life of the convict at the
absolute disposal of him, for whom he has sentenced him to
labour; it is evident that, in addition to his former
injustice, he is usurping a power, which no ruler or rulers
of a state can possess, and which the great Creator of the
universe never yet gave to any order whatever of created
beings.
That this reasoning is true, and that civilized nations
have considered it as such, will be best testified by their
practice. We may appeal here to that slavery, which
is now adjudged to delinquents, as a punishment, among many
of the states of Europe. These delinquents are sentenced to
labour at the oar, to work in mines, and on
fortifications, to cut and clear rivers, to
make and repair roads, and to perform other works of
national utility. They are employed, in short, in the
publick work; because, as the crimes they have
committed are considered to have been crimes against the
publick, no individual can justly receive the emoluments of
their labour; and they are neither sold, nor made
capable of being transferred, because no government
whatsoever is invested with such a power.
Thus then may that slavery, in which only the idea of
labour is included, be perfectly equitable, and the
delinquent will always receive his punishment as a man;
whereas in that, which additionally includes the idea of
property, and to undergo which, the delinquent must
previously change his nature, and become a brute;
there is an inconsistency, which no arguments can
reconcile, and a contradiction to every principle of
nature, which a man need only to appeal to his own feelings
immediately to evince. And we will venture to assert, from
the united observations that have been made upon the
subject, in opposition to any arguments that may be
advanced, that there is scarcely one of those, who are
called African convicts, on whom the prince has a right to
inflict a punishment at all; and that there is no one
whatever, whom he has a power of sentencing to labour for
the benefit of an unoffended individual, and much less whom
he has a right to sell.
Having now fully examined the arguments of the
sellers,[052] and having made such
additional remarks as were necessary, we have only to add,
that we cannot sufficiently express our detestation at
their conduct. Were the reader coolly to reflect upon the
case of but one of the unfortunate men, who are
annually the victims of avarice, and consider his
situation in life, as a father, an husband, or a friend, we
are sure, that even on such a partial reflection, he must
experience considerable pain. What then must be his
feelings, when he is told, that, since the slave-trade
began, nine millions [053] of men have been
torn from their dearest connections, and sold into slavery.
If at this recital his indignation should arise, let him
consider it as the genuine production of nature; that she
recoiled at the horrid thought, and that she applied
instantly a torch to his breast to kindle his resentment;
and if, during his indignation, she should awaken the sigh
of sympathy, or seduce the tear of commiseration from his
eye, let him consider each as an additional argument
against the iniquity of the sellers.
It remains only now to examine by what arguments those, who
receive or purchase their fellow-creatures
into slavery, defend the commerce. Their first plea
is, "that they receive those with propriety, who are
convicted of crimes, because they are delivered into their
hands by their own magistrates." But what is this to
you receivers? Have the unfortunate convicts
been guilty of injury to you? Have they broken
your treaties? Have they plundered your
ships? Have they carried your wives and children
into slavery, that you should thus retaliate? Have
they offended you even by word or gesture?
But if the African convicts are innocent with respect to
you; if you have not even the shadow of a claim upon their
persons; by what right do you receive them? "By the laws of
the Africans," you will say; "by which it is positively
allowed."-But can laws alter the nature of vice?
They may give it a sanction perhaps: it will still be
immutably the same, and, though dressed in the outward
habiliments of honour, will still be
intrinsically base.
But alas! you do not only attempt to defend yourselves by
these arguments, but even dare to give your actions the
appearance of lenity, and assume merit from your
baseness! and how first ought you particularly to
blush, when you assert, "that prisoners of war are only
purchased from the hands of their conquerors, to deliver
them from death." Ridiculous defence! can the most
credulous believe it? You entice the Africans to war; you
foment their quarrels; you supply them with arms and
ammunition, and all-from the motives of benevolence.
Does a man set fire to an house, for the purpose of
rescuing the inhabitants from the flames? But if they are
only purchased, to deliver them from death; why,
when they are delivered into your hands, as protectors, do
you torture them with hunger? Why do you kill them with
fatigue? Why does the whip deform their bodies, or the
knife their limbs? Why do you sentence them to death? to a
death, infinitely more excruciating than that from which
you so kindly saved them? What answer do you make to this?
for if you had not humanely preserved them from the hands
of their conquerors, a quick death perhaps, and that in the
space of a moment, had freed them from their pain: but on
account of your favour and benevolence, it is
known, that they have lingered years in pain and agony, and
have been sentenced, at last, to a dreadful death for the
most insignificant offence.
Neither can we allow the other argument to be true, on
which you found your merit; "that you take them from their
country for their own convenience; because Africa, scorched
with incessant heat, and subject to the most violent rains
and tempests, is unwholesome, and unfit to be inhabited."
Preposterous men! do you thus judge from your own feelings?
Do you thus judge from your own constitution and frame? But
if you suppose that the Africans are incapable of enduring
their own climate, because you cannot endure it yourselves;
why do you receive them into slavery? Why do you not
measure them here by the same standard? For if you are
unable to bear hunger and thirst, chains and imprisonment,
wounds and torture, why do you not suppose them incapable
of enduring the same treatment? Thus then is your argument
turned against yourselves. But consider the answer which
the Scythians gave the Ægyptians, when they contended
about the antiquity of their original,[054] "That nature, when
she first distinguished countries by different degrees of
heat and cold, tempered the bodies of animals, at the same
instant, to endure the different situations: that as the
climate of Scythia was severer than that of Ægypt, so
were the bodies of the Scythians harder, and as capable of
enduring the severity of their atmosphere, as the
Ægyptians the temperateness of their own."
But you may say perhaps, that, though they are capable of
enduring their own climate, yet their situation is
frequently uncomfortable, and even wretched: that Africa is
infested with locusts, and insects of various kinds; that
they settle in swarms upon the trees, destroy the verdure,
consume the fruit, and deprive the inhabitants of their
food. But the same answer may be applied as before; "that
the same kind Providence, who tempered the body of the
animal, tempered also the body of the tree; that he gave it
a quality to recover the bite of the locust, which he sent;
and to reassume, in a short interval of time, its former
glory." And that such is the case experience has shewn: for
the very trees that have been infested, and stripped of
their bloom and verdure, so surprizingly quick is
vegetation, appear in a few days, as if an insect had been
utterly unknown.
We may add to these observations, from the testimony of
those who have written the History of Africa from their own
inspection, that no country is more luxurious in prospects,
none more fruitful, none more rich in herds and flocks, and
none, where the comforts of life, can be gained with so
little trouble.
But you say again, as a confirmation of these your former
arguments, (by which you would have it understood, that the
Africans themselves are sensible of the goodness of your
intentions) "that they do not appear to go with you against
their will." Impudent and base assertion! Why then do you
load them with chains? Why keep you your daily and nightly
watches? But alas, as a farther, though a more melancholy
proof, of the falsehood of your assertions, how many, when
on board your ships, have put a period to their existence?
How many have leaped into the sea? How many have pined to
death, that, even at the expence of their lives, they might
fly from your benevolence?
Do you call them obstinate then, because they refuse your
favours? Do you call them ungrateful, because they make you
this return? How much rather ought you receivers to blush!
How much rather ought you receivers to be considered as
abandoned and execrable; who, when you usurp the dominion
over those, who are as free and independent as yourselves,
break the first law of justice, which ordains, "that no
person shall do harm to another, without a previous
provocation;" who offend against the dictates of nature,
which commands, "that no just man shall be given or
received into slavery against his own consent;" and who
violate the very laws of the empire that you assume, by
consigning your subjects to misery.
Now, as a famous Heathen philosopher observes, from whose
mouth you shall be convicted,[055] "there is a
considerable difference, whether an injury is done, during
any perturbation of mind, which is generally short and
momentary; or whether it is done with any previous
meditation and design; for, those crimes, which proceed
from any sudden commotion of the mind, are less than those,
which are studied and prepared," how great and enormous are
your crimes to be considered, who plan your African voyages
at a time, when your reason is found, and your senses are
awake; who coolly and deliberately equip your vessels; and
who spend years, and even lives, in the traffick of
human liberty.
But if the arguments of those, who sell or
deliver men into slavery, (as we have shewn before)
and of those, who receive or purchase them,
(as we have now shewn) are wholly false; it is evident that
this commerce, is not only beyond the possibility of
defence, but is justly to be accounted wicked, and justly
impious, since it is contrary to the principles of
law and government, the dictates of
reason, the common maxims of equity, the laws
of nature, the admonitions of conscience,
and, in short, the whole doctrine of natural
religion.
PART III.
THE
SLAVERY of the AFRICANS
IN THE
EUROPEAN COLONIES.
Having confined ourselves wholly, in the second part of
this Essay, to the consideration of the commerce, we
shall now proceed to the consideration of the
slavery that is founded upon it. As this slavery
will be conspicuous in the treatment, which the
unfortunate Africans uniformly undergo, when they are put
into the hands of the receivers, we shall describe
the manner in which they are accustomed to be used from
this period.
To place this in the clearest, and most conspicuous point
of view, we shall throw a considerable part of our
information on this head into the form of a narrative: we
shall suppose ourselves, in short, on the continent of
Africa, and relate a scene, which, from its agreement with
unquestionable facts, might not unreasonably be presumed to
have been presented to our view, had we been really there.
And first, let us turn our eyes to the cloud of dust that
is before us. It seems to advance rapidly, and, accompanied
with dismal shrieks and yellings, to make the very air,
that is above it, tremble as it rolls along. What can
possibly be the cause? Let us inquire of that melancholy
African, who seems to walk dejected near the shore; whose
eyes are stedfastly fixed on the approaching object, and
whose heart, if we can judge from the appearance of his
countenance, must be greatly agitated.
"Alas!" says the unhappy African, "the cloud that you see
approaching, is a train of wretched slaves. They are going
to the ships behind you. They are destined for the English
colonies, and, if you will stay here but for a little time,
you will see them pass. They were last night drawn up upon
the plain which you see before you, where they were branded
upon the breast with an hot iron; and when they had
undergone the whole of the treatment which is customary on
these occasions, and which I am informed that you
Englishmen at home use to the cattle which you buy,
they were returned to their prison. As I have some dealings
with the members of the factory which you see at a little
distance, (though thanks to the Great Spirit, I never dealt
in the liberty of my fellow creatures) I gained
admittance there. I learned the history of some of the
unfortunate people, whom I saw confined, and will explain
to you, if my eye should catch them as they pass, the real
causes of their servitude."
Scarcely were these words spoken, when they came distinctly
into sight. They appeared to advance in a long column, but
in a very irregular manner. There were three only in the
front, and these were chained together. The rest that
followed seemed to be chained by pairs, but by pressing
forward, to avoid the lash of the drivers, the breadth of
the column began to be greatly extended, and ten or more
were observed abreast.
While we were making these remarks, the intelligent African
thus resumed his discourse. "The first three whom you
observe, at the head of the train, to be chained together,
are prisoners of war. As soon as the ships that are behind
you arrived, the news was dispatched into the inland
country; when one of the petty kings immediately assembled
his subjects, and attacked a neighbouring tribe. The
wretched people, though they were surprized, made a
formidable resistance, as they resolved, almost all of
them, rather to lose their lives, than survive their
liberty. The person whom you see in the middle, is the
father of the two young men, who are chained to him on each
side. His wife and two of his children were killed in the
attack, and his father being wounded, and, on account of
his age, incapable of servitude, was left bleeding
on the spot where this transaction happened."
"With respect to those who are now passing us, and are
immediately behind the former, I can give you no other
intelligence, than that some of them, to about the number
of thirty, were taken in the same skirmish. Their tribe was
said to have been numerous before the attack; these however
are all that are left alive. But with respect to the
unhappy man, who is now opposite to us, and whom you may
distinguish, as he is now looking back and wringing his
hands in despair, I can inform you with more precision. He
is an unfortunate convict. He lived only about five days
journey from the factory. He went out with his king to
hunt, and was one of his train; but, through too great an
anxiety to afford his royal master diversion, he roused the
game from the covert rather sooner than was expected. The
king, exasperated at this circumstance, immediately
sentenced him to slavery. His wife and children, fearing
lest the tyrant should extend the punishment to themselves,
which is not unusual, fled directly to the woods,
where they were all devoured."
"The people, whom you see close behind the unhappy convict,
form a numerous body, and reach a considerable way. They
speak a language, which no person in this part of Africa
can understand, and their features, as you perceive, are so
different from those of the rest, that they almost appear a
distinct race of men. From this circumstance I recollect
them. They are the subjects of a very distant prince, who
agreed with the slave merchants, for a quantity of
spirituous liquors, to furnish him with a stipulated
number of slaves. He accordingly surrounded, and set fire
to one of his own villages in the night, and seized these
people, who were unfortunately the inhabitants, as they
were escaping from the flames. I first saw them as the
merchants were driving them in, about two days ago. They
came in a large body, and were tied together at the neck
with leather thongs, which permitted them to walk at the
distance of about a yard from one another. Many of them
were loaden with elephants teeth, which had been purchased
at the same time. All of them had bags, made of skin, upon
their shoulders; for as they were to travel, in their way
from the great mountains, through barren sands and
inhospitable woods for many days together, they were
obliged to carry water and provisions with them.
Notwithstanding this, many of them perished, some by
hunger, but the greatest number by fatigue, as the place
from whence they came, is at such an amazing distance from
this, and the obstacles, from the nature of the country, so
great, that the journey could scarcely be completed in
seven moons."
When this relation was finished, and we had been looking
stedfastly for some time on the croud that was going by, we
lost sight of that peculiarity of feature, which we had
before remarked. We then discovered that the inhabitants of
the depopulated village had all of them passed us, and that
the part of the train, to which we were now opposite, was a
numerous body of kidnapped people. Here we indulged our
imagination. We thought we beheld in one of them a father,
in another an husband, and in another a son, each of whom
was forced from his various and tender connections, and
without even the opportunity of bidding them adieu. While
we were engaged in these and other melancholy reflections,
the whole body of slaves had entirely passed us. We turned
almost insensibly to look at them again, when we discovered
an unhappy man at the end of the train, who could scarcely
keep pace with the rest. His feet seemed to have suffered
much from long and constant travelling, for he was limping
painfully along.
"This man," resumes the African. "has travelled a
considerable way. He lived at a great distance from hence,
and had a large family, for whom he was daily to provide.
As he went out one night to a neighbouring spring, to
procure water for his thirsty children, he was kidnapped by
two slave hunters, who sold him in the morning to
some country merchants for a bar of iron. These
drove him with other slaves, procured almost in the same
manner, to the nearest market, where the English merchants,
to whom the train that has just now passed us belongs,
purchased him and two others, by means of their travelling
agents, for a pistol. His wife and children have
been long waiting for his return. But he is gone for ever
from their sight: and they must be now disconsolate, as
they must be certain by his delay, that he has fallen into
the hands of the Christians".
"And now, as I have mentioned the name of
Christians, a name, by which the Europeans
distinguish themselves from us, I could wish to be informed
of the meaning which such an appellation may convey. They
consider themselves as men, but us unfortunate
Africans, whom they term Heathens, as the
beasts that serve us. But ah! how different is the
fact! What is Christianity, but a system of
murder and oppression? The cries and yells of
the unfortunate people, who are now soon to embark for the
regions of servitude, have already pierced my heart. Have
you not heard me sigh, while we have been talking? Do you
not see the tears that now trickle down my cheeks? and yet
these hardened Christians are unable to be moved at
all: nay, they will scourge them amidst their groans, and
even smile, while they are torturing them to death. Happy,
happy Heathenism! which can detest the vices of
Christianity, and feel for the distresses of mankind."
"But" we reply, "You are totally mistaken:
Christianity is the most perfect and lovely of moral
systems. It blesses even the hand of persecution itself,
and returns good for evil. But the people against whom you
so justly declaim; are not Christians. They are
infidels. They are monsters. They are out of
the common course of nature. Their countrymen at home are
generous and brave. They support the sick, the lame, and
the blind. They fly to the succour of the distressed. They
have noble and stately buildings for the sole purpose of
benevolence. They are in short, of all nations, the most
remarkable for humanity and justice."
"But why then," replies the honest African, "do they suffer
this? Why is Africa a scene of blood and desolation? Why
are her children wrested from her, to administer to the
luxuries and greatness of those whom they never offended?
And why are these dismal cries in vain?"
"Alas!" we reply again, "can the cries and groans, with
which the air now trembles, be heard across this extensive
continent? Can the southern winds convey them to the ear of
Britain? If they could reach the generous Englishman at
home, they would pierce his heart, as they have already
pierced your own. He would sympathize with you in your
distress. He would be enraged at the conduct of his
countrymen, and resist their tyranny."-
But here a shriek unusually loud, accompanied with a
dreadful rattling of chains, interrupted the discourse. The
wretched Africans were just about to embark: they had
turned their face to their country, as if to take a last
adieu, and, with arms uplifted to the sky, were making the
very atmosphere resound with their prayers and
imprecations.
The foregoing scene, though it may be said to be imaginary,
is strictly consistent with fact. It is a scene, to which
the reader himself may have been witness, if he has ever
visited the place, where it is supposed to lie; as no
circumstance whatever has been inserted in it, for which
the fullest and most undeniable evidence cannot be
produced. We shall proceed now to describe, in general
terms, the treatment which the wretched Africans undergo,
from the time of their embarkation.
When the African slaves, who are collected from various
quarters, for the purposes of sale, are delivered over to
the receivers, they are conducted in the manner
above described to the ships. Their situation on board is
beyond all description: for here they are crouded, hundreds
of them together, into such a small compass, as would
scarcely be thought sufficient to accommodate twenty, if
considered as free men. This confinement soon
produces an effect, that may be easily imagined. It
generates a pestilential air, which, co-operating with, bad
provisions, occasions such a sickness and mortality among
them, that not less than twenty thousand[056] are generally taken
off in every yearly transportation.
Thus confined in a pestilential prison, and almost entirely
excluded from the chearful face of day, it remains for the
sickly survivors to linger out a miserable existence, till
the voyage is finished. But are no farther evils to be
expected in the interim particularly if we add to their
already wretched situation the indignities that are daily
offered them, and the regret which they must constantly
feel, at being for ever forced from their connexions? These
evils are but too apparent. Some of them have resolved,
and, notwithstanding the threats of the receivers,
have carried their resolves into execution, to starve
themselves to death. Others, when they have been brought
upon deck for air, if the least opportunity has offered,
have leaped into the sea, and terminated their miseries at
once. Others, in a fit of despair, have attempted to rise,
and regain their liberty. But here what a scene of
barbarity has constantly ensued. Some of them have been
instantly killed upon the spot; some have been taken from
the hold, have been bruised and mutilated in the most
barbarous and shocking manner, and have been returned
bleeding to their companions, as a sad example of
resistance; while others, tied to the ropes of the ship,
and mangled alternately with the whip and knife, have been
left in that horrid situation, till they have expired.
But this is not the only inhuman treatment which they are
frequently obliged to undergo; for if there should be any
necessity, from tempestuous weather, for lightening the
ship; or if it should be presumed on the voyage, that the
provisions will fall short before the port can be made,
they are, many of them, thrown into the sea, without any
compunction of mind on the part of the receivers,
and without any other regret for their loss, than that
which avarice inspires. Wretched survivors! what
must be their feelings at such a sight! how must they
tremble to think of that servitude which is approaching,
when the very dogs of the receivers have been
retained on board, and preferred to their unoffending
countrymen. But indeed so lightly are these unhappy people
esteemed, that their lives have been even taken away upon
speculation: there has been an instance, within the last
five years, of one hundred and thirty two of them
being thrown into the sea, because it was supposed that, by
this trick, their value could be recovered from the
insurers.[057]
But if the ship should arrive safe at its destined port, a
circumstance which does not always happen, (for some have
been blown up, and many lost) the wretched Africans do not
find an alleviation of their sorrow. Here they are again
exposed to sale. Here they are again subjected to the
inspection of other brutal receivers, who examine
and treat them with an inhumanity, at which even avarice
should blush. To this mortifying circumstance is added
another, that they are picked out, as the purchaser
pleases, without any consideration whether the wife is
separated from her husband, or the mother from her son: and
if these cruel instances of separation should happen; if
relations, when they find themselves about to be parted,
should cling together; or if filial, conjugal, or parental
affection, should detain them but a moment longer in each
other's arms, than these second receivers should
think sufficient, the lash instantly severs them from their
embraces.
We cannot close our account of the treatment, which the
wretched Africans undergo while in the hands of the
first receivers, without mentioning an instance of
wanton, barbarity, which happened some time ago;
particularly as it may be inserted with propriety in the
present place, and may give the reader a better idea of the
cruelties, to which they are continually exposed, than any
that he may have yet conceived. To avoid making a mistake,
we shall take the liberty that has been allowed us, and
transcribe it from a little manuscript account, with which
we have been favoured by a person of the strictest
integrity, and who was at that time in the place where the
transaction happened.[058] "Not long after,"
says he, (continuing his account) "the perpetrator of a
cruel murder, committed in open day light, in the most
publick part of a town, which was the seat of government,
escaped every other notice than the curses of a few of the
more humane witnesses of his barbarity. An officer of a
Guinea ship, who had the care of a number of new slaves,
and was returning from the sale-yard to the vessel
with such as remained unsold; observed a stout fellow among
them rather slow in his motions, which he therefore
quickened with his rattan. The slave soon afterwards fell
down, and was raised by the same application. Moving
forwards a few yards, he fell down again; and this being
taken as a proof of his sullen perverse spirit, the enraged
officer furiously repeated his blows, till he expired at
his feet. The brute coolly ordered some of the surviving
slaves to carry the dead body to the water's side, where,
without any ceremony or delay, being thrown into the sea,
the tragedy was supposed to have been immediately finished
by the not more inhuman sharks, with which the harbour then
abounded. These voracious fish were supposed to have
followed the vessels from the coast of Africa, in which ten
thousand slaves were imported in that one season, being
allured by the stench, and daily fed by the dead carcasses
thrown overboard on the voyage."
If the reader should observe here, that cattle are better
protected in this country, than slaves in the colonies, his
observation will be just. The beast which is driven to
market, is defended by law from the goad of the driver;
whereas the wretched African, though an human being, and
whose feelings receive of course a double poignancy from
the power of reflection, is unnoticed in this respect in
the colonial code, and may be goaded and beaten till he
expires.
We may now take our leave of the first receivers.
Their crime has been already estimated; and to reason
farther upon it, would be unnecessary. For where the
conduct of men is so manifestly impious, there can be no
need, either of a single argument or a reflection; as every
reader of sensibility will anticipate them in his own
feelings.
When the wretched Africans are thus put into the hands of
the second receivers, they are conveyed to the
plantations, where they are totally considered as
cattle, or beasts of labour; their very
children, if any should be born to them in that situation,
being previously destined to the condition of their
parents. But here a question arises, which, will interrupt
the thread of the narration for a little time, viz. how far
their descendants, who compose the fifth order of slaves,
are justly reduced to servitude, and upon what principles
the receivers defend their conduct.
Authors have been at great pains to inquire, why, in the
ancient servitude, the child has uniformly followed the
condition of the mother. But we conceive that they would
have saved themselves much trouble, and have done
themselves more credit, if instead of, endeavouring to
reconcile the custom with heathen notions, or their
own laboured conjectures, they had shewn its inconsistency
with reason and nature, and its repugnancy to common
justice. Suffice it to say, that the whole theory of the
ancients, with respect to the descendants slaves, may be
reduced to this principle, "that as the parents, by
becoming property, were wholly considered as
cattle, their children, like the progeny of
cattle, inherited their parental lot."
Such also is the excuse of the tyrannical receivers
before-mentioned. They allege, that they have purchased the
parents, that they can sell and dispose of them as they
please, that they possess them under the same laws and
limitations as their cattle, and that their children, like
the progeny of these, become their property by
birth.
But the absurdity of the argument will immediately appear.
It depends wholly on the supposition, that the parents are
brutes. If they are brutes, we shall
instantly cease to contend: if they are men, which
we think it not difficult to prove, the argument must
immediately fall, as we have already shewn that there
cannot justly be any property whatever in the
human species.
It has appeared also, in the second part of this Essay,
that as nature made, every man's body and mind his
own, so no just person can be reduced to slavery
against his own consent. Do the unfortunate
offspring ever consent to be slaves?-They are slaves
from their birth.-Are they guilty of crimes, that
they lose their freedom?-They are slaves when they cannot
speak.-Are their parents abandoned? The crimes of
the parents cannot justly extend to the children.
Thus then must the tyrannical receivers, who presume
to sentence the children of slaves to servitude, if they
mean to dispute upon the justice of their cause; either
allow them to have been brutes from their birth, or
to have been guilty of crimes at a time, when they were
incapable of offending the very King of Kings.
But to return to the narration. When the wretched Africans
are conveyed to the plantations, they are considered as
beasts of labour, and are put to their respective
work. Having led, in their own country, a life of indolence
and ease, where the earth brings forth spontaneously the
comforts of life, and spares frequently the toil and
trouble of cultivation, they can hardly be expected to
endure the drudgeries of servitude. Calculations are
accordingly made upon their lives. It is conjectured, that
if three in four survive what is called the
seasoning, the bargain is highly favourable. This
seasoning is said to expire, when the two first years of
their servitude are completed: It is the time which an
African must take to be so accustomed to the colony, as to
be able to endure the common labour of a plantation, and to
be put into the gang. At the end of this period the
calculations become verified, twenty thousand[059] of those, who are
annually imported, dying before the seasoning is over. This
is surely an horrid and awful consideration: and thus does
it appear, (and let it be remembered, that it is the lowest
calculation that has been ever made upon the subject) that
out of every annual supply that is shipped from the coast
of Africa, forty thousand lives[060] are regularly
expended, even before it can be said, that there is really
any additional stock for the colonies.
When the seasoning is over, and the survivors are thus
enabled to endure the usual task of slaves, they are
considered as real and substantial supplies. From this
period[061] therefore we shall
describe their situation.
They are summoned at five in the morning to begin their
work. This work may be divided into two kinds, the culture
of the fields, and the collection of grass for cattle. The
last is the most laborious and intolerable employment; as
the grass can only be collected blade by blade, and is to
be fetched frequently twice a day at a considerable
distance from the plantation. In these two occupations they
are jointly taken up, with no other intermission than that
of taking their subsistence twice, till nine at night. They
then separate for their respective huts, when they gather
sticks, prepare their supper, and attend their families.
This employs them till midnight, when they go to rest. Such
is their daily way of life for rather more than half the
year. They are sixteen hours, including two
intervals at meals, in the service of their masters: they
are employed three afterwards in their own necessary
concerns; five only remain for sleep, and their day
is finished.
During the remaining portion of the year, or the time of
crop, the nature, as well as the time of their employment,
is considerably changed. The whole gang is generally
divided into two or three bodies. One of these, besides the
ordinary labour of the day, is kept in turn at the mills,
that are constantly going, during the whole of the night.
This is a dreadful encroachment upon their time of rest,
which was before too short to permit them perfectly to
refresh their wearied limbs, and actually reduces their
sleep, as long as this season lasts, to about three hours
and an half a night, upon a moderate computation.[062] Those who can keep
their eyes open during their nightly labour, and are
willing to resist the drowsiness that is continually coming
upon them, are presently worn out; while some of those, who
are overcome, and who feed the mill between asleep and
awake, suffer, for thus obeying the calls of nature, by the
loss of a limb.[063] In this manner they
go on, with little or no respite from their work, till the
crop season is over, when the year (from the time of our
first description) is completed.
To support[064] a life of such
unparalleled drudgery, we should at least expect: to find,
that they were comfortably clothed, and plentifully fed.
But sad reverse! they have scarcely a covering to defend
themselves against the inclemency of the night. Their
provisions are frequently bad, and are always dealt out to
them with such a sparing hand, that the means of a bare
livelihood are not placed within the reach of four out of
five of these unhappy people. It is a fact, that many of
the disorders of slaves are contracted from eating the
vegetables, which their little spots produce, before they
are sufficiently ripe: a clear indication, that the calls
of hunger are frequently so pressing, as not to suffer them
to wait, till they can really enjoy them.
This, situation, of a want of the common necessaries of
life, added to that of hard and continual labour, must be
sufficiently painful of itself. How then must the pain be
sharpened, if it be accompanied with severity! if an
unfortunate slave does not come into the field exactly at
the appointed time, if, drooping with sickness or fatigue,
he appears to work unwillingly, or if the bundle of grass
that he has been collecting, appears too small in the eye
of the overseer, he is equally sure of experiencing the
whip. This instrument erases the skin, and cuts out small
portions of the flesh at almost every stroke; and is so
frequently applied, that the smack of it is all day long in
the ears of those, who are in the vicinity of the
plantations. This severity of masters, or managers, to
their slaves, which is considered only as common
discipline, is attended with bad effects. It enables them
to behold instances of cruelty without commiseration, and
to be guilty of them without remorse. Hence those many acts
of deliberate mutilation, that have taken place on the
slightest occasions: hence those many acts of inferiour,
though shocking, barbarity, that have taken place without
any occasion at all: the very slitting[065] of ears has been
considered as an operation, so perfectly devoid of pain, as
to have been performed for no other reason than that for
which a brand is set upon cattle, as a mark of
property.
But this is not the only effect, which this severity
produces: for while it hardens their hearts, and makes them
insensible of the misery of their fellow-creatures, it
begets a turn for wanton cruelty. As a proof of this, we
shall mention one, among the many instances that occur,
where ingenuity has been exerted in contriving modes of
torture. "An iron coffin, with holes in it, was kept by a
certain colonist, as an auxiliary to the lash. In this the
poor victim of the master's resentment was inclosed, and
placed sufficiently near a fire, to occasion extreme pain,
and consequently shrieks and groans, until the revenge of
the master was satiated, without any other inconvenience on
his part, than a temporary suspension of the slave's
labour. Had he been flogged to death, or his limbs
mutilated, the interest of the brutal tyrant would have
suffered a more irreparable loss.
"In mentioning, this instance, we do not mean to insinuate,
that it is common. We know that it was reprobated by many.
All that we would infer from it is, that where men are
habituated to a system of severity, they become wantonly
cruel, and that the mere toleration of such an
instrument of torture, in any country, is a clear
indication, that this wretched class of men do not there
enjoy the protection of any laws, that may be pretended to
have been enacted in their favour."
Such then is the general situation of the unfortunate
Africans. They are beaten and tortured at discretion. They
are badly clothed. They are miserably fed. Their drudgery
is intense and incessant and their rest short. For scarcely
are their heads reclined, scarcely have their bodies a
respite from the labour of the day, or the cruel hand of
the overseer, but they are summoned to renew their sorrows.
In this manner they go on from year to year, in a state of
the lowest degradation, without a single law to protect
them, without the possibility of redress, without a hope
that their situation will be changed, unless death should
terminate the scene.
Having described the general situation of these unfortunate
people, we shall now take notice of the common consequences
that are found to attend it, and relate them separately, as
they result either from long and painful labour, a
want of the common necessaries of life, or continual
severity.
Oppressed by a daily task of such immoderate labour as
human nature is utterly unable to perform, many of them run
away from their masters. They fly to the recesses of the
mountains, where they choose rather to live upon any thing
that the soil affords them, nay, the very soil itself, than
return to that happy situation, which is represented
by the receivers, as the condition of a slave.
It sometimes happens, that the manager of a mountain
plantation, falls in with one of these; he immediately
seizes him, and threatens to carry him to his former
master, unless he will consent to live on the mountain and
cultivate his ground. When his plantation is put in order,
he carries the delinquent home, abandons him to all the
suggestions of despotick rage, and accepts a reward for his
honesty. The unhappy wretch is chained, scourged,
tortured; and all this, because he obeyed the dictates of
nature, and wanted to be free. And who is there, that would
not have done the same thing, in the same situation? Who is
there, that has once known the charms of liberty; that
would not fly from despotism? And yet, by the impious laws
of the receivers, the absence[066] of six months from the
lash of tyranny is-death.
But this law is even mild, when compared with another
against the same offence, which was in force sometime ago,
and which we fear is even now in force, in some of those
colonies which this account of the treatment comprehends.
"Advertisements have frequently appeared there, offering a
reward for the apprehending of fugitive slaves either alive
or dead. The following instance was given us by a
person of unquestionable veracity, under whose own
observation it fell. As he was travelling in one of the
colonies alluded to, he observed some people in pursuit of
a poor wretch, who was seeking in the wilderness an asylum
from his labours. He heard the discharge of a gun, and soon
afterwards stopping at an house for refreshment, the head
of the fugitive, still reeking with blood, was brought in
and laid upon a table with exultation. The production of
such a trophy was the proof required by law to
entitle the heroes to their reward." Now reader determine
if you can, who were the most execrable; the rulers of the
state in authorizing murder, or the people in being bribed
to commit it.
This is one of the common consequences of that immoderate
share of labour, which is imposed upon them; nor is that,
which is the result of a scanty allowance of food, less to
be lamented. The wretched African is often so deeply
pierced by the excruciating fangs of hunger, as almost to
be driven to despair. What is he to do in such a trying
situation? Let him apply to the receivers. Alas! the
majesty of receivership is too sacred for the
appeal, and the intrusion would be fatal. Thus attacked on
the one hand, and shut out from every possibility of relief
on the other, he has only the choice of being starved, or
of relieving his necessities by taking a small portion of
the fruits of his own labour. Horrid crime! to be found
eating the cane, which probably his own hands have planted,
and to be eating it, because his necessities were pressing!
This crime however is of such a magnitude, as always to be
accompanied with the whip; and so unmercifully has it been
applied on such an occasion, as to have been the cause, in
wet weather, of the delinquent's death. But the smart of
the whip has not been the only pain that the wretched
Africans have experienced. Any thing that passion could
seize, and convert into an instrument of punishment, has
been used; and, horrid to relate! the very knife has not
been overlooked in the fit of phrenzy. Ears have been slit,
eyes have been beaten out, and bones have been broken; and
so frequently has this been the case, that it has been a
matter of constant lamentation with disinterested people,
who out of curiosity have attended the markets[067] to which these unhappy
people weekly resort, that they have not been able to turn
their eyes on any group of them whatever, but they have
beheld these inhuman marks of passion, despotism, and
caprice.
But these instances of barbarity have not been able to
deter them from similar proceedings. And indeed, how can it
be expected that they should? They have still the same
appetite to be satisfied as before, and to drive them to
desperation. They creep out clandestinely by night, and go
in search of food into their master's, or some neighbouring
plantation. But here they are almost equally sure of
suffering. The watchman, who will be punished himself, if
he neglects his duty, frequently seizes them in the fact.
No excuse or intreaty will avail; he must punish them for
an example, and he must punish them, not with a stick, nor
with a whip, but with a cutlass. Thus it happens, that
these unhappy slaves, if they are taken, are either sent
away mangled in a barbarous manner, or are killed upon the
spot.
We may now mention the consequences of the severity. The
wretched Africans, daily subjected to the lash, and
unmercifully whipt and beaten on every trifling occasion,
have been found to resist their opposers. Unpardonable
crime! that they should have the feelings of nature! that
their breasts should glow with resentment on an injury!
that they should be so far overcome, as to resist those,
whom they are under no obligations to obey, and
whose only title to their services consists in a
violation of the rights of men! What has been the
consequence?-But here let us spare the feelings of the
reader, (we wish we could spare our own) and let us only
say, without a recital of the cruelty, that they have
been murdered at the discretion of their masters. For
let the reader observe, that the life of an African is only
valued at a price, that would scarcely purchase an horse;
that the master has a power of murdering his slave, if he
pays but a trifling fine; and that the murder must be
attended with uncommon circumstances of horrour, if it even
produces an inquiry.
Immortal Alfred! father of our invaluable constitution!
parent of the civil blessings we enjoy! how ought thy laws
to excite our love and veneration, who hast forbidden us,
thy posterity, to tremble at the frown of tyrants! how
ought they to perpetuate thy name, as venerable, to the
remotest ages, who has secured, even to the meanest
servant, a fair and impartial trial! How much does nature
approve thy laws, as consistent with her own feelings,
while she absolutely turns pale, trembles, and recoils, at
the institutions of these receivers! Execrable men!
you do not murder the horse, on which you only ride; you do
not mutilate the cow, which only affords you her milk; you
do not torture the dog, which is but a partial servant of
your pleasures: but these unfortunate men, from whom, you
derive your very pleasures and your fortunes, you torture,
mutilate, murder at discretion! Sleep then you
receivers, if you can, while you scarcely allow
these unfortunate people to rest at all! feast if you can,
and indulge your genius, while you daily apply to these
unfortunate people the stings of severity and hunger! exult
in riches, at which even avarice ought to shudder, and,
which humanity must detest!
Some people may suppose, from the melancholy account that
has been given in the preceding chapter, that we have been
absolutely dealing in romance: that the scene exhibited is
rather a dreary picture of the imagination, than a
representation of fact. Would to heaven, for the honour of
human nature, that this were really the case! We wish we
could say, that we have no testimony to produce for any of
our assertions, and that our description of the general
treatment of slaves has been greatly exaggerated.
But the receivers, notwithstanding the ample and
disinterested evidence, that can be brought on the
occasion, do not admit the description to be true. They say
first, "that if the slavery were such as has been now
represented, no human being could possibly support it
long." Melancholy truth! the wretched Africans generally
perish in their prime. Let them reflect upon the prodigious
supplies that are annually required, and their
argument will be nothing less than a confession, that the
slavery has been justly depicted.
They appeal next to every man's own reason, and desire him
to think seriously, whether "self-interest will not always
restrain the master from acts of cruelty to the slave, and
whether such accounts therefore, as the foregoing, do not
contain within themselves, their own refutation." We
answer, "No." For if this restraining principle be as
powerful as it is imagined, why does not the general
conduct of men afford us a better picture? What is
imprudence, or what is vice, but a departure from every
man's own interest, and yet these are the characteristicks
of more than half the world?-
-But, to come more closely to the present case,
self-interest will be found but a weak barrier
against the sallies of passion: particularly where
it has been daily indulged in its greatest latitude, and
there are no laws to restrain its calamitous effects. If
the observation be true, that passion is a short madness,
then it is evident that self-interest, and every other
consideration, must be lost, so long as it continues. We
cannot have a stronger instance of this, than in a
circumstance related in the second part of this Essay,
"that though the Africans have gone to war for the express
purpose of procuring slaves, yet so great has been their
resentment at the resistance they have frequently found,
that their passion has entirely got the better of
their interest, and they have murdered all without
any discrimination, either of age or sex." Such may be
presumed to be the case with the no less savage
receivers. Impressed with the most haughty and
tyrannical notions, easily provoked, accustomed to indulge
their anger, and, above all, habituated to scenes of
cruelty, and unawed by the fear of laws, they will hardly
be found to be exempt from the common failings of human
nature, and to spare an unlucky slave, at a time when men
of cooler temper, and better regulated passions, are so
frequently blind to their own interest.
But if passion may be supposed to be generally more
than a ballance for interest, how must the scale be
turned in favour of the melancholy picture exhibited, when
we reflect that self-preservation additionally steps
in, and demands the most rigorous severity. For when
we consider that where there is one master, there
are fifty slaves; that the latter have been all
forcibly torn from their country, and are retained in their
present situation by violence; that they are perpetually at
war in their hearts with their oppressors, and are
continually cherishing the seeds of revenge; it is evident
that even avarice herself, however cool and
deliberate, however free from passion and caprice, must
sacrifice her own sordid feelings, and adopt a system of
tyranny and oppression, which it must be ruinous to pursue.
Thus then, if no picture had been drawn of the situation of
slaves, and it had been left solely to every man's sober
judgment to determine, what it might probably be, he would
conclude, that if the situation were justly described, the
page must be frequently stained with acts of uncommon
cruelty.
It remains only to make a reply to an objection, that is
usually advanced against particular instances of cruelty to
slaves, as recorded by various writers. It is said that
"some of these are so inconceivably, and beyond all example
inhuman, that their very excess above the common measure of
cruelty shews them at once exaggerated and incredible." But
their credibility shall be estimated by a supposition. Let
us suppose that the following instance had been recorded by
a writer of the highest reputation, "that the master of a
ship, bound to the western colonies with slaves, on a
presumption that many of them would die, selected an
hundred and thirty two of the most sickly, and
ordered them to be thrown into the sea, to recover their
value from the insurers, and, above all, that the fatal
order was put into execution." What would the reader have
thought on the occasion? Would he have believed the fact?
It would have surely staggered his faith; because he could
never have heard that any one man ever was, and
could never have supposed that any one man ever
could be, guilty of the murder of such a number of
his fellow creatures. But when he is informed that such a
fact as this came before a court[068] of justice in this
very country; that it happened within the last five years;
that hundreds can come forwards and say, that they heard
the melancholy evidence with tears; what bounds is he to
place to his belief? The great God, who looks down upon all
his creatures with the same impartial eye, seems to have
infatuated the parties concerned, that they might bring the
horrid circumstance to light, that it might be recorded in
the annals of a publick court, as an authentick specimen of
the treatment which the unfortunate Africans undergo, and
at the same time, as an argument to shew, that there is no
species of cruelty, that is recorded to have been exercised
upon these wretched people, so enormous that it may not
readily be believed.
If the treatment then, as before described, is confirmed by
reason, and the great credit that is due to disinterested
writers on the subject; if the unfortunate Africans are
used, as if their flesh were stone, and their vitals brass;
by what arguments do you receivers defend your
conduct?
You say that a great part of your savage treatment consists
in punishment for real offences, and frequently for such
offences, as all civilized nations have concurred in
punishing. The first charge that you exhibit against them
is specifick, it is that of theft. But how much
rather ought you receivers to blush, who reduce them
to such a situation! who reduce them to the dreadful
alternative, that they must either steal or
perish! How much rather ought you receivers
to be considered as robbers yourselves, who cause
these unfortunate people to be stolen! And how much
greater is your crime, who are robbers of human
liberty!
The next charge which you exhibit against them, is general,
it is that of rebellion; a crime of such a latitude,
that you can impose it upon almost every action, and of
such a nature, that you always annex to it the most
excruciating pain. But what a contradiction is this to
common sense! Have the wretched Africans formally resigned
their freedom? Have you any other claim upon their
obedience, than that of force? If then they are your
subjects, you violate the laws of government, by making
them unhappy. But if they are not your subjects, then, even
though they should resist your proceedings, they are not
rebellious.
But what do you say to that long catalogue of offences,
which you punish, and of which no people but yourselves
take cognizance at all? You say that the wisdom of
legislation has inserted it in the colonial laws, and that
you punish by authority. But do you allude to that
execrable code, that authorises murder? that tempts
an unoffended person to kill the slave, that abhors and
flies your service? that delegates a power, which no host
of men, which not all the world, can possess?-
Or,-What do you say to that daily unmerited severity, which
you consider only as common discipline? Here you say that
the Africans are vicious, that they are all of them
ill-disposed, that you must of necessity be severe. But can
they be well-disposed to their oppressors? In their own
country they were just, generous, hospitable: qualities,
which all the African historians allow them eminently to
possess. If then they are vicious, they must have
contracted many of their vices from yourselves; and as to
their own native vices, if any have been imported with
them, are they not amiable, when compared with yours?
Thus then do the excuses, which have been hitherto made by
the receivers, force a relation of such
circumstances, as makes their conduct totally inexcusable,
and, instead of diminishing at all, highly aggravates their
guilt.
We come now to that other system of reasoning, which is
always applied, when the former is confuted; "that the
Africans are an inferiour link of the chain of nature, and
are made for slavery."
This assertion is proved by two arguments; the first of
which was advanced also by the ancients, and is drawn from
the inferiority of their capacities.
Let us allow then for a moment, that they appear to have no
parts, that they appear to be void of understanding. And is
this wonderful, when, you receivers depress their
senses by hunger? Is this wonderful, when by incessant
labour, the continual application of the lash, and the most
inhuman treatment that imagination can devise, you
overwhelm their genius, and hinder it from breaking
forth?-No,-You confound their abilities by the severity of
their servitude: for as a spark of fire, if crushed by too
great a weight of incumbent fuel, cannot be blown into a
flame, but suddenly expires, so the human mind, if
depressed by rigorous servitude, cannot be excited to a
display of those faculties, which might otherwise have
shone with the brightest lustre.
Neither is it wonderful in another point of view. For what
is it that awakens the abilities of men, and distinguishes
them from the common herd? Is it not often the amiable hope
of becoming serviceable to individuals, or the state? Is it
not often the hope of riches, or of power? Is it not
frequently the hope of temporary honours, or a lasting
fame? These principles have all a wonderful effect upon the
mind. They call upon it to exert its faculties, and bring
those talents to the publick view, which had otherwise been
concealed. But the unfortunate Africans have no such
incitements as these, that they should shew their genius.
They have no hope of riches, power, honours, fame. They
have no hope but this, that their miseries will be soon
terminated by death.
And here we cannot but censure and expose the murmurings of
the unthinking and the gay; who, going on in a continual
round of pleasure and prosperity, repine at the will of
Providence, as exhibited in the shortness of human
duration. But let a weak and infirm old age overtake them:
let them experience calamities: let them feel but half the
miseries which the wretched Africans undergo, and they will
praise the goodness of Providence, who hath made them
mortal; who hath prescribed certain ordinary bounds to the
life of man; and who, by such a limitation, hath given all
men this comfortable hope, that however persecuted in life,
a time will come, in the common course of nature, when
their sufferings will have an end.
Such then is the nature of this servitude, that we can
hardly expect to find in those, who undergo it, even the
glimpse of genius. For if their minds are in a continual
state of depression, and if they have no expectations in
life to awaken their abilities, and make them eminent, we
cannot be surprized if a sullen gloomy stupidity should be
the leading mark in their character; or if they should
appear inferiour to those, who do not only enjoy the
invaluable blessings of freedom, but have every prospect
before their eyes, that can allure them to exert their
faculties. Now, if to these considerations we add, that the
wretched Africans are torn from their country in a state of
nature, and that in general, as long as their slavery
continues, every obstacle is placed in the way of their
improvement, we shall have a sufficient answer to any
argument that may be drawn from the inferiority of their
capacities.
It appears then, from the circumstances that have been
mentioned, that to form a true judgment of the abilities of
these unfortunate people, we must either take a general
view of them before their slavery commences, or confine our
attention to such, as, after it has commenced, have had any
opportunity given them of shewing their genius either in
arts or letters. If, upon such a fair and impartial view,
there should be any reason to suppose, that they are at all
inferiour to others in the same situation, the argument
will then gain some of that weight and importance, which it
wants at present.
In their own country, where we are to see them first, we
must expect that the prospect will be unfavourable. They
are mostly in a savage state. Their powers of mind are
limited to few objects. Their ideas are consequently few.
It appears, however, that they follow the same mode of
life, and exercise the same arts, as the ancestors of those
very Europeans, who boast of their great superiority, are
described to have done in the same uncultivated state. This
appears from the Nubian's Geography, the writings of Leo,
the Moor, and all the subsequent histories, which those,
who have visited the African continent, have written from
their own inspection. Hence three conclusions; that their
abilities are sufficient for their situation;-that they are
as great, as those of other people have been, in the same
stage of society;-and that they are as great as those of
any civilized people whatever, when the degree of the
barbarism of the one is drawn into a comparison with that
of the civilization of the other.
Let us now follow them to the colonies. They are carried
over in the unfavourable situation described. It is
observed here, that though their abilities cannot be
estimated high from a want of cultivation, they are yet
various, and that they vary in proportion as the nation,
from which they have been brought, has advanced more or
less in the scale of social life. This observation, which
is so frequently made, is of great importance: for if their
abilities expand in proportion to the improvement of their
state, it is a clear indication, that if they were equally
improved, they would be equally ingenious.
But here, before we consider any opportunities that may be
afforded them, let it be remembered that even their most
polished situation may be called barbarous, and that this
circumstance, should they appear less docile than others,
may be considered as a sufficient answer to any objection
that may be made to their capacities. Notwithstanding this,
when they are put to the mechanical arts, they do not
discover a want of ingenuity. They attain them in as short
a time as the Europeans, and arrive at a degree of
excellence equal to that of their teachers. This is a fact,
almost universally known, and affords us this proof, that
having learned with facility such of the mechanical arts,
as they have been taught, they are capable of attaining any
other, at least, of the same class, if they should receive
but the same instruction.
With respect to the liberal arts, their proficiency is
certainly less; but not less in proportion to their time
and opportunity of study; not less, because they are less
capable of attaining them, but because they have seldom or
ever an opportunity of learning them at all. It is yet
extraordinary that their talents appear, even in some of
these sciences, in which they are totally uninstructed.
Their abilities in musick are such, as to have been
generally noticed. They play frequently upon a variety of
instruments, without any other assistance than their own
ingenuity. They have also tunes of their own composition.
Some of these have been imported among us; are now in use;
and are admired for their sprightliness and ease, though
the ungenerous and prejudiced importer has concealed their
original.
Neither are their talents in poetry less conspicuous. Every
occurrence, if their spirits are not too greatly depressed,
is turned into a song. These songs are said to be
incoherent and nonsensical. But this proceeds principally
from two causes, an improper conjunction of words, arising
from an ignorance of the language in which they compose;
and a wildness of thought, arising from the different
manner, in which the organs of rude and civilized people
will be struck by the same object. And as to their want of
harmony and rhyme, which is the last objection, the
difference of pronunciation is the cause. Upon the whole,
as they are perfectly consistent with their own ideas, and
are strictly musical as pronounced by themselves, they
afford us as high a proof of their poetical powers, as the
works of the most acknowledged poets.
But where these impediments have been removed, where they
have received an education, and have known and pronounced
the language with propriety, these defects have vanished,
and their productions have been less objectionable. For a
proof of this, we appeal to the writings of an African
girl,[069] who made no
contemptible appearance in this species of composition. She
was kidnapped when only eight years old, and, in the year
1761, was transported to America, where she was sold with
other slaves. She had no school education there, but
receiving some little instruction from the family, with
whom she was so fortunate as to live, she obtained such a
knowledge of the English language within sixteen months
from the time of her arrival, as to be able to speak it and
read it to the astonishment of those who heard her. She
soon afterwards learned to write, and, having a great
inclination to learn the Latin tongue, she was indulged by
her master, and made a progress. Her Poetical works were
published with his permission, in the year 1773. They
contain thirty-eight pieces on different subjects. We shall
beg leave to make a short extract from two or three of
them, for the observation of the reader.
From an Hymn to the Evening. [070]
"Fill'd with the praise of him who gives the light,
And draws the sable curtains of the night,
Let placid slumbers sooth each weary mind,
At morn to wake more heav'nly and refin'd;
So shall the labours of the day begin,
More pure and guarded from the snares of sin.
- - &c. &c."
From an Hymn to the Morning.
"Aurora hail! and all the thousand dies,
That deck thy progress through the vaulted skies!
The morn awakes, and wide extends her rays,
On ev'ry leaf the gentle zephyr plays.
Harmonious lays the feather'd race resume,
Dart the bright eye, and shake the painted plume.
- - &c. &c."
From Thoughts on Imagination.
"Now here, now there, the roving fancy flies,
Till some lov'd object strikes her wand'ring eyes,
Whose silken fetters all the senses bind,
And soft captivity involves the mind.
"Imagination! who can sing thy force,
Or who describe the swiftness of thy course?
Soaring through air to find the bright abode,
Th' empyreal palace of the thund'ring God,
We on thy pinions can surpass the wind,
And leave the rolling universe behind:
From star to star the mental opticks rove,
Measure the skies, and range the realms above.
There in one view we grasp the mighty whole,
Or with new worlds amaze th' unbounded soul.
- - &c. &c."
Such is the poetry which we produce as a proof of our
assertions. How far it has succeeded, the reader may by
this time have determined in his own mind. We shall
therefore only beg leave to accompany it with this
observation, that if the authoress was designed for
slavery, (as the argument must confess) the greater
part of the inhabitants of Britain must lose their claim to
freedom.
To this poetry we shall only add, as a farther proof of
their abilities, the Prose compositions of Ignatius Sancho,
who received some little education. His letters are too
well known, to make any extract, or indeed any farther
mention of him, necessary. If other examples of African
genius should be required, suffice it to say, that they can
be produced in abundance; and that if we were allowed to
enumerate instances of African gratitude, patience,
fidelity, honour, as so many instances of good sense, and a
sound understanding, we fear that thousands of the
enlightened Europeans would have occasion to blush.
But an objection will be made here, that the two persons
whom we have particularized by name, are prodigies, and
that if we were to live for many years, we should scarcely
meet with two other Africans of the same description. But
we reply, that considering their situation as before
described, two persons, above mediocrity in the literary
way, are as many as can be expected within a certain period
of years; and farther, that if these are prodigies, they
are only such prodigies as every day would produce, if they
had the same opportunities of acquiring knowledge as other
people, and the same expectations in life to excite their
genius. This has been constantly and solemnly asserted by
the pious Benezet,[071] whom we have
mentioned before, as having devoted a considerable part of
his time to their instruction. This great man, for we
cannot but mention him with veneration, had a better
opportunity of knowing them than any person whatever, and
he always uniformly declared, that he could never find a
difference between their capacities and those of other
people; that they were as capable of reasoning as any
individual Europeans; that they were as capable of the
highest intellectual attainments; in short, that their
abilities were equal, and that they only wanted to be
equally cultivated, to afford specimens of as fine
productions.
Thus then does it appear from the testimony of this
venerable man, whose authority is sufficient of itself to
silence all objections against African capacity, and from
the instances that have been produced, and the observations
that have been made on the occasion, that if the minds of
the Africans were unbroken by slavery; if they had the same
expectations in life as other people, and the same
opportunities of improvement, they would be equal; in all
the various branches of science, to the Europeans, and that
the argument that states them "to be an inferiour link of
the chain of nature, and designed for servitude," as far as
it depends on the inferiority of their capacities,
is wholly malevolent and false.[072]
The second argument, by which it is attempted to be proved,
"that the Africans are an inferiour link of the chain of
nature, and are designed for slavery," is drawn from
colour, and from those other marks, which
distinguish them from the inhabitants of Europe.
To prove this with the greater facility, the
receivers divide in opinion. Some of them contend
that the Africans, from these circumstances, are the
descendants of Cain:[073] others, that they are
the posterity of Ham; and that as it was declared by divine
inspiration, that these should be servants to the rest of
the world, so they are designed for slavery; and that the
reducing of them to such a situation is only the
accomplishment of the will of heaven: while the rest,
considering them from the same circumstances as a totally
distinct species of men, conclude them to be an inferiour
link of the chain of nature, and deduce the inference
described.
To answer these arguments in the clearest and fullest
manner, we are under the necessity of making two
suppositions, first, that the scriptures are true;
secondly, that they are false.
If then the scriptures are true, it is evident that the
posterity of Cain were extinguished in the flood. Thus one
of the arguments is no more.
With respect to the curse of Ham, it appears also that it
was limited; that it did not extend to the posterity of all
his sons, but only to the descendants of him who was called
Canaan:[074] by which it was
foretold that the Canaanites, a part of the posterity of
Ham, should serve the posterity of Shem and Japhet. Now how
does it appear that these wretched Africans are the
descendants of Canaan?-By those marks, it will be said,
which distinguish them from the rest of the world.-But
where are these marks to be found in the divine writings?
In what page is it said, that the Canaanites were to be
known by their colour, their features, their
form, or the very hair of their heads, which
is brought into the account?-But alas! so far are the
divine writings from giving any such account, that they
shew the assertion to be false. They shew that the
descendants of Cush[075] were of the colour, to
which the advocates for slavery allude; and of course, that
there was no such limitation of colour to the posterity of
Canaan, or the inheritors of the curse.
Suppose we should now shew, upon the most undeniable
evidence,[076] that those of the
wretched Africans, who are singled out as inheriting the
curse, are the descendants of Cush or Phut; and that we
should shew farther, that but a single remnant of Canaan,
which was afterwards ruined, was ever in Africa at
all.-Here all is consternation.-
But unfortunately again for the argument, though
wonderfully for the confirmation that the scriptures are of
divine original, the whole prophecy has been completed. A
part of the descendants of Canaan were hewers of wood and
drawers of water, and became tributary and subject to the
Israelites, or the descendants of Shem. The Greeks
afterwards, as well as the Romans, who were both the
descendants of Japhet, not only subdued those who were
settled in Syria and Palestine, but pursued and conquered
all such as were then remaining. These were the Tyrians and
Carthaginians: the former of whom were ruined by Alexander
and the Greeks, the latter by Scipio and the Romans.
It appears then that the second argument is wholly
inapplicable and false: that it is false in its
application, because those, who were the objects of
the curse, were a totally distinct people: that it is false
in its proof, because no such distinguishing marks,
as have been specified, are to be found in the divine
writings: and that, if the proof could be made out, it
would be now inapplicable, as the curse has been
long completed.
With respect to the third argument, we must now suppose
that the scriptures are false; that mankind did not all
spring from the same original; that there are different
species of men. Now what must we justly conclude from such
a supposition? Must we conclude that one species is
inferiour to another, and that the inferiority depends upon
their colour, or their features, or their
form?-No-We must now consult the analogy of nature,
and the conclusion will be this: "that as she tempered the
bodies of the different species of men in a different
degree, to enable them to endure the respective climates of
their habitation, so she gave them a variety of colour and
appearance with a like benevolent design."
To sum up the whole. If the scriptures are true, it is
evident that the posterity of Cain are no more; that
the curse of Ham has been accomplished; and that, as
all men were derived from the same stock, so this variety
of appearance in men must either have proceeded from some
interposition of the Deity; or from a co-operation of
certain causes, which have an effect upon the human frame,
and have the power of changing it more or less from its
primitive appearance, as they happen to be more or less
numerous or powerful than those, which acted upon the frame
of man in the first seat of his habitation. If from the
interposition of the Deity, then we must conclude that he,
who bringeth good out of evil, produced it for their
convenience. If, from the co-operation of the causes before
related, what argument may not be found against any society
of men, who should happen to differ, in the points alluded
to, from ourselves?
If, on the other hand, the scriptures are false, then it is
evident, that there was neither such a person as
Cain, nor Ham, nor Canaan; and that
nature bestowed such colour, features, and form, upon the
different species of men, as were best adapted to their
situation.
Thus, on which ever supposition it is founded, the whole
argument must fall. And indeed it is impossible that it can
stand, even in the eye of common sense. For if you admit
the form of men as a justification of slavery, you
may subjugate your own brother: if features, then
you must quarrel with all the world: if colour,
where are you to stop? It is evident, that if you travel
from the equator to the northern pole, you will find a
regular gradation of colour from black to white. Now if you
can justly take him for your slave, who is of the deepest
die, what hinders you from taking him also, who only
differs from the former but by a shade. Thus you may
proceed, taking each in a regular succession to the poles.
But who are you, that thus take into slavery so many
people? Where do you live yourself? Do you live in
Spain, or in France, or in Britain? If
in either of these countries, take care lest the whiter
natives of the north should have a claim upon
yourself.-But the argument is too ridiculous to be farther
noticed.
Having now silenced the whole argument, we might
immediately proceed to the discussion of other points,
without even declaring our opinion as to which of the
suppositions may be right, on which it has been refuted;
but we do not think ourselves at liberty to do this. The
present age would rejoice to find that the scriptures had
no foundation, and would anxiously catch at the writings of
him, who should mention them in a doubtful manner. We shall
therefore declare our sentiments, by asserting that they
are true, and that all mankind, however various their
appearances are derived from the same stock.
To prove this, we shall not produce those innumerable
arguments, by which the scriptures have stood the test of
ages, but advert to a single fact. It is an universal law,
observable throughout the whole creation, that if two
animals of a different species propagate, their offspring
is unable to continue its own species. By this
admirable law, the different species are preserved
distinct; every possibility of confusion is prevented, and
the world is forbidden to be over-run by a race of
monsters. Now, if we apply this law to those of the human
kind, who are said to be of a distinct species from each
other, it immediately fails. The mulattoe is as
capable of continuing his own species as his father; a
clear and irrefragable proof, that the scripture[077] account of the
creation is true, and that "God, who hath made the world,
hath made of one blood[078] all the nations of men
that dwell on all the face of the earth."
But if this be the case, it will be said that mankind were
originally of one colour; and it will be asked at the same
time, what it is probable that the colour was, and how they
came to assume so various an appearance? To, each of these
we shall make that reply, which we conceive to be the most
rational.
As mankind were originally of the same stock, so it is
evident that they were originally of the same colour. But
how shall we attempt to ascertain it? Shall we
Englishmen say, that it was the same as that which
we now find to be peculiar to ourselves?-No-This would be a
vain and partial consideration, and would betray our
judgment to have arisen from that false fondness, which
habituates us to suppose, that every thing belonging to
ourselves is the perfectest and the best. Add to this, that
we should always be liable to a just reproof from every
inhabitant of the globe, whose colour was different from
our own; because he would justly say, that he had as good a
right to imagine that his own was the primitive colour, as
that of any other people.
How then shall we attempt to ascertain it? Shall we look
into the various climates of the earth, see the colour that
generally prevails in the inhabitants of each, and apply
the rule? This will be certainly free from partiality, and
will afford us a better prospect of success: for as every
particular district has its particular colour, so it is
evident that the complexion of Noah and his sons, from whom
the rest of the world were descended, was the same as that,
which is peculiar to the country, which was the seat of
their habitation. This, by such a mode of decision, will be
found a dark olive; a beautiful colour, and a just medium
between white and black. That this was the primitive
colour, is highly probable from the observations that have
been made; and, if admitted, will afford a valuable lesson
to the Europeans, to be cautious how they deride those of
the opposite complexion, as there is great reason to
presume, that the purest white[079] is as far removed
from the primitive colour as the deepest black.
We come now to the grand question, which is, that if
mankind were originally of this or any other colour, how
came it to pass, that they should wear so various an
appearance? We reply, as we have had occasion to say
before, either by the interposition of the Deity; or
by a co-operation of certain causes, which have an
effect upon the human frame, and have the power of changing
it more or less from its primitive appearance, as they are
more or less numerous or powerful than those, which acted
upon the frame of man in the first seat of his
habitation.
With respect to the Divine interposition, two epochs have
been assigned, when this difference of colour has been
imagined to have been so produced. The first is that, which
has been related, when the curse was pronounced on a branch
of the posterity of Ham. But this argument has been
already refuted; for if the particular colour alluded to
were assigned at this period, it was assigned to the
descendants of Canaan, to distinguish them from
those of his other brothers, and was therefore
limited to the former. But the descendants of
Cush,[080] as we have shewn
before, partook of the same colour; a clear proof, that it
was neither assigned to them on this occasion, nor at this
period.
The second epoch is that, when mankind were dispersed on
the building of Babel. It has been thought, that
both national features and colour might probably
have been given them at this time, because these would have
assisted the confusion of language, by causing them to
disperse into tribes, and would have united more firmly the
individuals of each, after the dispersion had taken place.
But this is improbable: first, because there is great
reason to presume that Moses, who has mentioned the
confusion of language, would have mentioned these
circumstances also, if they had actually contributed to
bring about so singular an event: secondly, because the
confusion of language was sufficient of itself to have
accomplished this; and we cannot suppose that the Deity
could have done any thing in vain: and thirdly, because, if
mankind had been dispersed, each tribe in its peculiar hue,
it is impossible to conceive, that they could have wandered
and settled in such a manner, as to exhibit that regular
gradation of colour from the equator to the poles, so
conspicuous at the present day.
These are the only periods, which there has been even the
shadow of a probability for assigning; and we may therefore
conclude that the preceding observations, together with
such circumstances as will appear in the present chapter,
will amount to a demonstration, that the difference of
colour was never caused by any interposition of the Deity,
and that it must have proceeded therefore from that
incidental co-operation of causes, which has been
before related.
What these causes are, it is out of the power of human
wisdom positively to assert: there are facts, however,
which, if properly weighed and put together, will throw
considerable light upon the subject. These we shall submit
to the perusal of the reader, and shall deduce from them
such inferences only, as almost every person must make in
his own mind, on their recital.
The first point, that occurs to be ascertained, is, "What
part of the skin is the seat of colour?" The old anatomists
usually divided the skin into two parts, or lamina; the
exteriour and thinnest, called by the Greeks
Epidermis, by the Romans Cuticula, and hence
by us Cuticle; and the interiour, called by the
former Derma, and by the latter Cutis, or
true skin. Hence they must necessarily have
supposed, that, as the true skin was in every
respect the same in all human subjects, however various
their external hue, so the seat of colour must have existed
in the Cuticle, or upper surface.
Malphigi, an eminent Italian physician, of the last
century, was the first person who discovered that the skin
was divided into three lamina, or parts; the
Cuticle, the true skin, and a certain
coagulated substance situated between both, which he
distinguished by the title of Mucosum Corpus; a
title retained by anatomists to the present day: which
coagulated substance adhered so firmly to the
Cuticle, as, in all former anatomical preparations,
to have come off with it, and, from this circumstance to
have led the ancient anatomists to believe, that there were
but two lamina, or divisible portions in the human skin.
This discovery was sufficient to ascertain the point in
question: for it appeared afterwards that the
Cuticle, when divided according to this discovery
from the other lamina, was semi-transparent; that the
cuticle of the blackest negroe was of the same transparency
and colour, as that of the purest white; and hence, the
true skins of both being invariably the same, that
the mucosum corpus was the seat of colour.
This has been farther confirmed by all subsequent
anatomical experiments, by which it appears, that, whatever
is the colour of this intermediate coagulated substance,
nearly the same is the apparent colour of the upper surface
of the skin. Neither can it be otherwise; for the
Cuticle, from its transparency, must necessarily
transmit the colour of the substance beneath it, in the
same manner, though not in the same degree, as the
cornea transmits the colour of the iris of
the eye. This transparency is a matter of ocular
demonstration in white people. It is conspicuous in every
blush; for no one can imagine, that the cuticle becomes
red, as often as this happens: nor is it less discoverable
in the veins, which are so easy to be discerned; for no one
can suppose, that the blue streaks, which he constantly
sees in the fairest complexions, are painted, as it were,
on the surface of the upper skin. From these, and a variety
of other observations,[081] no maxim is more true
in physiology, than that on the mucosum corpus depends
the colour of the human body; or, in other words, that
the mucosum corpus being of a different colour in
different inhabitants of the globe, and appearing through
the cuticle or upper surface of the skin, gives them that
various appearance, which strikes us so forcibly in
contemplating the human race.
As this can be incontrovertibly ascertained, it is evident,
that whatever causes cooperate in producing this different
appearance, they produce it by acting upon the mucosum
corpus, which, from the almost incredible manner in
which the cuticle[082] is perforated, is as
accessible as the cuticle itself. These causes are probably
those various qualities of things, which, combined with the
influence of the sun, contribute to form what we call
climate. For when any person considers, that the
mucous substance, before-mentioned, is found to vary in its
colour, as the climates vary from the equator to the
poles, his mind must be instantly struck with the
hypothesis, and he must adopt it without any hesitation, as
the genuine cause of the phænomenon.
This fact,[083] of the variation
of the mucous substance according to the situation of the
place, has been clearly ascertained in the numerous
anatomical experiments that have been made; in which,
subjects of all nations have come under consideration. The
natives of many of the kingdoms and isles of Asia,
are found to have their corpus mucosum black. Those
of Africa, situated near the line, of the same
colour. Those of the maritime parts of the same continent,
of a dusky brown, nearly approaching to it; and the colour
becomes lighter or darker in proportion as the distance
from the equator is either greater or less. The Europeans
are the fairest inhabitants of the world. Those situated in
the most southern regions of Europe, have in their
corpus mucosum a tinge of the dark hue of their
African neighbours: hence the epidemick complexion,
prevalent among them, is nearly of the colour of the
pickled Spanish olive; while in this country, and those
situated nearer the north pole, it appears to be nearly, if
not absolutely, white.
These are facts,[084] which anatomy has
established; and we acknowledge them to be such, that we
cannot divest ourselves of the idea, that climate
has a considerable share in producing a difference of
colour. Others, we know, have invented other hypotheses,
but all of them have been instantly refuted, as unable to
explain the difficulties for which they were advanced, and
as absolutely contrary to fact: and the inventors
themselves have been obliged, almost as soon as they have
proposed them, to acknowledge them deficient.
The only objection of any consequence, that has ever been
made to the hypothesis of climate, is this, that
people under the same parallels are not exactly of the same
colour. But this is no objection in fact: for it does
not follow that those countries, which are at an equal
distance from the equator, should have their climates the
same. Indeed nothing is more contrary to experience than
this. Climate depends upon a variety of accidents. High
mountains, in the neighbourhood of a place, make it cooler,
by chilling the air that is carried over them by the winds.
Large spreading succulent plants, if among the productions
of the soil, have the same effect: they afford agreeable
cooling shades, and a moist atmosphere from their continual
exhalations, by which the ardour of the sun is considerably
abated. While the soil, on the other hand, if of a sandy
nature, retains the heat in an uncommon degree, and makes
the summers considerably hotter than those which are found
to exist in the same latitude, where the soil is different.
To this proximity of what may be termed burning
sands, and to the sulphurous and metallick particles,
which are continually exhaling from the bowels of the
earth, is ascribed the different degree of blackness, by
which some African nations are distinguishable from
each other, though under the same parallels. To these
observations we may add, that though the inhabitants of the
same parallel are not exactly of the same hue, yet they
differ only by shades of the same colour; or, to speak with
more precision, that there are no two people, in such a
situation, one of whom is white, and the other black. To
sum up the whole-Suppose we were to take a common globe; to
begin at the equator; to paint every country along the
meridian line in succession from thence to the poles; and
to paint them with the same colour which prevails in the
respective inhabitants of each, we should see the black,
with which we had been obliged to begin, insensibly
changing to an olive, and the olive, through as many
intermediate colours, to a white: and if, on the other
hand, we should complete any one of the parallels according
to the same plan, we should see a difference perhaps in the
appearance of some of the countries through which it ran,
though the difference would consist wholly in shades of the
same colour.
The argument therefore, which is brought against the
hypothesis, is so far from being, an objection, that we
shall consider it one of the first arguments in its favour:
for if climate has really an influence on the
mucous substance of the body, it is evident, that we
must not only expect to see a gradation of colour in the
inhabitants from the equator to the poles, but also
different[085] shades of the same
colour in the inhabitants of the same parallel.
To this argument, we shall add one that is
incontrovertible, which is, that when the black
inhabitants of Africa are transplanted to
colder, or the white inhabitants of
Europe to hotter climates, their children,
born there, are of a different colour from
themselves; that is, lighter in the first, and darker
in the second instance.
As a proof of the first, we shall give the words of the
Abbé Raynal,[086] in his admired
publication. "The children," says he, "which they, (the
Africans) procreate in America, are not so
black as their parents were. After each generation the
difference becomes more palpable. It is possible, that
after a numerous succession of generations, the men come
from Africa would not be distinguished from those of
the country, into which they may have been transplanted."
This circumstance we have had the pleasure of hearing
confirmed by a variety of persons, who have been witnesses
of the fact; but particularly by many intelligent[087] Africans, who have
been parents themselves in America, and who have
declared that the difference is so palpable in the
northern provinces, that not only they themselves
have constantly observed it, but that they have heard it
observed by others.
Neither is this variation in the children from the colour
of their parents improbable. The children of the
blackest Africans are born white.[088] In this state they
continue for about a month, when they change to a pale
yellow. In process of time they become brown. Their skin
still continues to increase in darkness with their age,
till it becomes of a dirty, sallow black, and at length,
after a certain period of years, glossy and shining. Now,
if climate has any influence on the mucous substance
of the body, this variation in the children from the colour
of their parents is an event, which must be reasonably
expected: for being born white, and not having equally
powerful causes to act upon them in colder, as their
parents had in the hotter climates which they left, it must
necessarily follow, that the same affect cannot possibly be
produced.
Hence also, if the hypothesis be admitted, may be deduced
the reason, why even those children, who have been brought
from their country at an early age into colder regions,
have been observed[089] to be of a lighter
colour than those who have remained at home till they
arrived at a state of manhood. For having undergone some of
the changes which we mentioned to have attended their
countrymen from infancy to a certain age, and having been
taken away before the rest could be completed, these
farther changes, which would have taken place had they
remained at home, seem either to have been checked in their
progress, or weakened in their degree, by a colder climate.
We come now to the second and opposite case; for a proof of
which we shall appeal to the words of Dr. Mitchell,[090] in the Philosophical
Transactions. "The Spaniards who have inhabited
America under the torrid zone for any time, are
become as dark coloured as our native Indians of
Virginia, of which, I myself have been a
witness; and were they not to intermarry with the
Europeans, but lead the same rude and barbarous
lives with the Indians, it is very probable that, in
a succession of many generations, they would become as dark
in complexion."
To this instance we shall add one, which is mentioned by a
late writer,[091] who describing the
African coast, and the European settlements
there, has the following passage. "There are several other
small Portuguese settlements, and one of some note
at Mitomba, a river in Sierra Leon. The
people here called Portuguese, are principally
persons bred from a mixture of the first Portuguese
discoverers with the natives, and now become, in their
complexion and woolly quality of their hair,
perfect negroes, retaining however a smattering of
the Portuguese language."
These facts, with respect to the colonists of the
Europeans, are of the highest importance in the
present case, and deserve a serious attention. For when we
know to a certainty from whom they are descended; when we
know that they were, at the time of their transplantation,
of the same colour as those from whom they severally
sprung; and when, on the other hand, we are credibly
informed, that they have changed it for the native colour
of the place which they now inhabit; the evidence in
support of these facts is as great, as if a person, on the
removal of two or three families into another climate, had
determined to ascertain the circumstance; as if he had gone
with them and watched their children; as if he had
communicated his observations at his death to a successor;
as if his successor had prosecuted the plan, and thus an
uninterrupted chain of evidence had been kept up from their
first removal to any determined period of succeeding time.
But though these facts seem sufficient of themselves to
confirm our opinion, they are not the only facts which can
be adduced in its support. It can be shewn, that the
members of the very same family, when divided from
each other, and removed into different countries, have not
only changed their family complexion, but that they have
changed it to as many different colours as they have
gone into different regions of the world. We cannot
have, perhaps, a more striking instance of this, than in
the Jews. These people, are scattered over the face
of the whole earth. They have preserved themselves distinct
from the rest of the world by their religion; and, as they
never intermarry with any but those of their own sect, so
they have no mixture of blood in their veins, that they
should differ from each other: and yet nothing is more
true, than that the English Jew[092] is white, the
Portuguese swarthy, the Armenian olive, and
the Arabian copper; in short, that there appear to
be as many different species of Jews, as there are
countries in which they reside.
To these facts we shall add the following observation, that
if we can give credit to the ancient historians in general,
a change from the darkest black to the purest white must
have actually been accomplished. One instance, perhaps, may
be thought sufficient. Herodotus[093] relates, that the
Colchi were black, and that they had crisped
hair. These people were a detachment of the
Æthiopian army under Sesostris, who
followed him in his expedition, and settled in that part of
the world, where Colchis is usually represented to
have been situated. Had not the same author informed us of
this circumstance, we should have thought it strange, [094]
that a people of this
description should have been found in such a latitude. Now
as they were undoubtedly settled there, and as they were
neither so totally destroyed, nor made any such rapid
conquests, as that history should notice the event, there
is great reason to presume, that their descendants
continued in the same, or settled in the adjacent country;
from whence it will follow, that they must have changed
their complexion to that, which is observable in the
inhabitants of this particular region at the present day;
or, in other words, that the black inhabitant of
Colchis must have been changed into the fair
Circassian.[095]
As we have now shewn it to be highly probable, from the
facts which have been advanced, that climate is the cause
of the difference of colour which prevails in the different
inhabitants of the globe, we shall now shew its probability
from so similar an effect produced on the mucous
substance before-mentioned by so similar a cause, that
though the fact does not absolutely prove our conjecture to
be right, yet it will give us a very lively conception of
the manner, in which the phænomenon may be caused.
This probability may be shewn in the case of
freckles, which are to be seen in the face of
children, but of such only, as have the thinnest and most
transparent skins, and are occasioned by the rays of the
sun, striking forcibly on the mucous substance of
the face, and drying the accumulating fluid. This
accumulating fluid, or perspirable matter, is at first
colourless; but being exposed to violent heat, or dried,
becomes brown. Hence, the mucosum corpus being
tinged in various parts by this brown coagulated fluid, and
the parts so tinged appearing through the cuticle,
or upper surface of the skin, arises that spotted
appearance, observable in the case recited.
Now, if we were to conceive a black skin to be an
universal freckle, or the rays of the sun to act so
universally on the mucous substance of a person's
face, as to produce these spots so contiguous to each other
that they should unite, we should then see, in imagination,
a face similar to those, which are daily to be seen among
black people: and if we were to conceive his body to be
exposed or acted upon in the same manner, we should then
see his body assuming a similar appearance; and thus we
should see the whole man of a perfect black, or resembling
one of the naked inhabitants of the torrid zone. Now as the
feat of freckles and of blackness is the same; as their
appearance is similar; and as the cause of the first is the
ardour of the sun, it is therefore probable that the cause
of the second is the same: hence, if we substitute for the
word "sun," what is analogous to it, the word
climate, the same effect may be supposed to be
produced, and the conjecture to receive a sanction.
Nor is it unlikely that the hypothesis, which considers the
cause of freckles and of blackness as the same, may be
right. For if blackness is occasioned by the rays of the
sun striking forcibly and universally on the mucous
substance of the body, and drying the accumulating
fluid, we can account for the different degrees of it to be
found in the different inhabitants of the globe. For as the
quantity of perspirable fluid, and the force of the solar
rays is successively increased, as the climates are
successively warmer, from any given parallel to the line,
it follows that the fluid, with which the mucous
substance will be stained, will be successively thicker
and deeper coloured; and hence, as it appears through the
cuticle, the complexion successively darker; or, what
amounts to the same thing, there will be a difference of
colour in the inhabitants of every successive parallel.
From these, and the whole of the preceding observations on
the subject, we may conclude, that as all the inhabitants
of the earth cannot be otherwise than the children of the
same parents, and as the difference of their appearance
must have of course proceeded from incidental causes, these
causes are a combination of those qualities, which we call
climate; that the blackness of the Africans
is so far ingrafted in their constitution, in a course of
many generations, that their children wholly inherit it, if
brought up in the same spot, but that it is not so
absolutely interwoven in their nature, that it cannot be
removed, if they are born and settled in another; that
Noah and his sons were probably of an olive
complexion; that those of their descendants, who went
farther to the south, became of a deeper olive or
copper; while those, who went still farther, became
of a deeper copper or black; that those, on the
other hand, who travelled farther to the north, became less
olive or brown, while those who went still farther
than the former, became less brown or white; and
that if any man were to point out any one of the colours
which prevails in the human complexion, as likely to
furnish an argument, that the people of such a complexion
were of a different species from the rest, it is probable
that his own descendants, if removed to the climate to
which this complexion is peculiar, would, in the course of
a few generations, degenerate into the same colour.
Having now replied to the argument, "that the Africans are
an inferiour link of the chain of nature," as far as it
depended on their capacity and colour, we
shall now only take notice of an expression, which the
receivers before-mentioned are pleased to make use
of, "that they are made for slavery."
Had the Africans been made for slavery, or to become
the property of any society of men, it is clear, from the
observations that have been made in the second part of this
Essay, that they must have been created devoid of
reason: but this is contrary to fact. It is clear also,
that there must have been, many and evident signs of the
inferiority of their nature, and that this society
of men must have had a natural right to their
dominion: but this is equally false. No such signs of
inferiority are to be found in the one, and the
right to dominion in the other is incidental: for in
what volume of nature or religion is it written, that one
society of men should breed slaves for the benefit,
of another? Nor is it less evident that they would have
wanted many of those qualities which they have, and which
brutes have not: they would have wanted that spirit of
liberty, that sense of ignominy and shame,[096] which so frequently
drives them to the horrid extremity of finishing their own
existence. Nor would they have been endowed with a
contemplative power; for such a power would have
been unnecessary to people in such a situation; or rather,
its only use could have been to increase their pain. We
cannot suppose therefore that God has made an order of
beings, with such mental qualities and powers, for the sole
purpose of being used as beasts, or
instruments of labour. And here, what a dreadful
argument presents itself against you receivers? For
if they have no understandings as you confess, then is your
conduct impious, because, as they cannot perceive the
intention of your punishment, your severities cannot make
them better. But if, on the other hand, they have had
understandings, (which has evidently appeared) then is your
conduct equally impious, who, by destroying their faculties
by the severity of your discipline, have reduced men; who
had once the power of reason, to an equality with the brute
creation.
The reader may perhaps think, that the receivers
have by this time expended all their arguments, but their
store is not so easily exhausted. They are well aware that
justice, nature, and religion, will continue, as they have
ever uniformly done, to oppose their conduct. This has
driven them to exert their ingenuity, and has occasioned
that multiplicity of arguments to be found in the present
question.
These arguments are of a different complexion from the
former. They consist in comparing the state of
slaves with that of some of the classes of
free men, and in certain scenes of felicity, which
the former are said to enjoy.
It is affirmed that the punishments which the Africans
undergo, are less severe than the military; that their life
is happier than that of the English peasant; that they have
the advantages of manumission; that they have their little
spots of ground, their holy-days, their dances; in short,
that their life is a scene of festivity and mirth, and that
they are much happier in the colonies than in their own
country.
These representations, which have been made out with much
ingenuity and art, may have had their weight with the
unwary; but they will never pass with men of consideration
and sense, who are accustomed to estimate the probability
of things, before they admit them to be true. Indeed the
bare assertion, that their situation is even comfortable,
contains its own refutation, or at least leads us to
suspect that the person, who asserted it, has omitted some
important considerations in the account. Such we shall shew
to have been actually the case, and that the
representations of the receivers, when stripped of
their glossy ornaments, are but empty declamation.
It is said, first, of military punishments, that
they are more severe than those which the Africans
undergo. But this is a bare assertion without a proof. It
is not shewn even by those, who assert it, how the fact can
be made out. We are left therefore to draw the comparison
ourselves, and to fill up those important considerations,
which we have just said that the receivers had
omitted.
That military punishments are severe we confess, but we
deny that they are severer than those with which they are
compared. Where is the military man, whose ears have been
slit, whose limbs have been mutilated, or whose eyes have
been beaten out? But let us even allow, that their
punishments are equal in the degree of their severity:
still they must lose by comparison. The soldier is never
punished but after a fair and equitable trial, and the
decision of a military court; the unhappy African, at the
discretion of his Lord. The one knows what particular
conduct will constitute an offence;[097] the other has no such
information, as he is wholly at the disposal of passion and
caprice, which may impose upon any action, however
laudable, the appellation of a crime. The former has it of
course in his power to avoid a punishment; the latter is
never safe. The former is punished for a real, the latter,
often, for an imaginary fault.
Now will any person assert, on comparing the whole of those
circumstances together, which relate to their respective
punishments, that there can be any doubt, which of the two
are in the worst situation, as to their penal systems?
With respect to the declaration, that the life of an
African in the colonies is happier than that of an
English peasant, it is equally false. Indeed we can
scarcely withhold our indignation, when we consider, how
shamefully the situation of this latter class of men has
been misrepresented, to elevate the former to a state of
fictitious happiness. If the representations of the
receivers be true, it is evident that those of the
most approved writers, who have placed a considerable share
of happiness in the cottage, have been mistaken in
their opinion; and that those of the rich, who have been
heard to sigh, and envy the felicity of the peasant,
have been treacherous to their own sensations.
But which are we to believe on the occasion? Those, who
endeavour to dress vice in the habit of
virtue, or those, who derive their opinion from
their own feelings? The latter are surely to be believed;
and we may conclude therefore, that the horrid picture
which is given of the life of the peasant, has not
so just a foundation as the receivers would, lead us
to suppose. For has he no pleasure in the thought, that he
lives in his own country, and among his relations
and friends? That he is actually free, and that his
children will be the same? That he can never be sold
as a beast? That he can speak his mind without the fear
of the lash? That he cannot even be struck with
impunity? And that he partakes, equally with his
superiours, of the protection of the law?-Now, there
is no one of these advantages which the African
possesses, and no one, which the defenders of slavery take
into their account.
Of the other comparisons that are usually made, we may
observe in general, that, as they consist in comparing the
iniquitous practice of slavery with other iniquitous
practices in force among other nations, they can neither
raise it to the appearance of virtue, nor extenuate its
guilt. The things compared are in these instances both of
them evils alike. They call equally for redress,[098] and are equally
disgraceful to the governments which suffer them, if not
encourage them, to exist. To attempt therefore to justify
one species of iniquity by comparing it with another, is no
justification at all; and is so far from answering the
purpose, for which the comparison is intended, as to give
us reason to suspect, that the comparer has but
little notion either of equity or honour.
We come now to those scenes of felicity, which slaves are
said to enjoy. The first advantage which they are said to
experience, is that of manumission. But here the
advocates for slavery conceal an important circumstance.
They expatiate indeed on the charms of freedom, and contend
that it must be a blessing in the eyes of those, upon whom
it is conferred. We perfectly agree with them in this
particular. But they do not tell us that these advantages
are confined; that they are confined to some
favourite domestick; that not one in an
hundred enjoy them; and that they are never
extended to those, who are employed in the cultivation
of the field, as long as they can work. These are they,
who are most to be pitied, who are destined to
perpetual drudgery; and of whom no one
whatever has a chance of being freed from his
situation, till death either releases him at once, or age
renders him incapable of continuing his former labour. And
here let it be remarked, to the disgrace of the
receivers, that he is then made free, not-as a
reward for his past services, but, as his labour is
then of little or no value,-to save the tax.[099]
With the same artifice is mention also made of the little
spots, or gardens, as they are called, which slaves
are said to possess from the liberality of the
receivers. But people must not be led away by agreeable
and pleasant sounds. They must not suppose that these
gardens are made for flowers; or that they are
places of amusement, in which they can spend their
time in botanical researches and delights. Alas, they do
not furnish them with a theme for such pleasing pursuits
and speculations! They must be cultivated in those hours,
which ought to be appropriated to rest;[100] and they must be
cultivated, not for an amusement, but to make up, if it
be possible, the great deficiency in their weekly
allowance of provisions. Hence it appears, that the
receivers have no merit whatever in such an
appropriation of land to their unfortunate slaves: for they
are either under the necessity of doing this, or of
losing them by the jaws of famine. And it is a
notorious fact, that, with their weekly allowance, and the
produce of their spots together, it is often with the
greatest difficulty that they preserve a wretched
existence.
The third advantage which they are said to experience, is
that of holy-days, or days of respite from their
usual discipline and fatigue. This is certainly a great
indulgence, and ought to be recorded to the immortal honour
of the receivers. We wish we could express their
liberality in those handsome terms, in which it deserves to
be represented, or applaud them sufficiently for deviating
for once from the rigours of servile discipline. But we
confess, that we are unequal to the task, and must
therefore content ourselves with observing, that while the
horse has one day in seven to refresh his
limbs, the happy African[101] has but
one in fifty-two, as a relaxation from his
labours.
With respect to their dances, on which such a
particular stress has been generally laid, we fear that
people may have been as shamefully deceived, as in the
former instances. For from the manner in which these are
generally mentioned, we should almost be led to imagine,
that they had certain hours allowed them for the purpose of
joining in the dance, and that they had every comfort and
convenience, that people are generally supposed to enjoy on
such convivial occasions. But this is far from the case.
Reason informs us, that it can never be. If they wish for
such innocent recreations, they must enjoy them in the time
that is allotted them for sleep; and so far are these
dances from proceeding from any uncommon degree of
happiness, which excites them to convivial society, that
they proceed rather from an uncommon depression of spirits,
which makes them even sacrifice their rest,[102] for the sake of
experiencing for a moment a more joyful oblivion of their
cares. For suppose any one of the receivers, in the
middle of a dance, were to address his slaves in the
following manner: "Africans! I begin at last to feel
for your situation; and my conscience is severely hurt,
whenever I reflect that I have been reducing those to a
state of misery and pain, who have never given me offence.
You seem to be fond of these exercises, but yet you are
obliged to take them at such unseasonable hours, that they
impair your health, which is sufficiently broken by the
intolerable share of labour which I have hitherto imposed
upon you. I will therefore make you a proposal. Will you be
content to live in the colonies, and you shall have the
half of every week entirely to yourselves? or will you
choose to return to your miserable, wretched country?"-But
what is that which strikes their ears? Which makes them
motionless in an instant? Which interrupts the festive
scene?-their country?-transporting sound!-Behold! they are
now flying from the dance: you may see them running to the
shore, and, frantick as it were with joy, demanding with
open arms an instantaneous passage to their beloved native
plains.
Such are the colonial delights, by the
representation of which the receivers would persuade
us, that the Africans are taken from their country
to a region of conviviality and mirth; and that like those,
who leave their usual places of residence for a summer's
amusement, they are conveyed to the colonies-to
bathe,-to dance,-to keep holy-day,-to
be jovial.-But there is something so truly ridiculous
in the attempt to impose these scenes of felicity on the
publick, as scenes which fall to the lot of slaves, that
the receivers must have been driven to great
extremities, to hazard them to the eye of censure.
The last point that remains to be considered, is the
shameful assertion, that the Africans are much
happier in the colonies, than in their own country.
But in what does this superiour happiness consist? In those
real scenes, it must be replied, which have been just
mentioned; for these, by the confession of the receivers,
constitute the happiness they enjoy.-But it has been shewn
that these have been unfairly represented; and, were they
realized in the most extensive latitude, they would not
confirm the fact. For if, upon a recapitulation, it
consists in the pleasure of manumission, they surely
must have passed their lives in a much more comfortable
manner, who, like the Africans at home, have had no
occasion for such a benefit at all. But the
receivers, we presume, reason upon this principle,
that we never know the value of a blessing but by its loss.
This is generally true: but would any one of them make
himself a slave for years, that he might run the
chance of the pleasures of manumission? Or that he
might taste the charms of liberty with a greater
relish? Nor is the assertion less false in every other
consideration. For if their happiness consists in the few
holy-days, which in the colonies they are
permitted to enjoy, what must be their situation in
their own country, where the whole year is but one
continued holy-day, or cessation from discipline and
fatigue?-If in the possession of a mean and contracted
spot, what must be their situation, where a whole
region is their own, producing almost spontaneously the
comforts of life, and requiring for its cultivation none of
those hours, which should be appropriated to
sleep?-If in the pleasures of the colonial
dance, what must it be in their own country,
where they may dance for ever; where there is no stated
hour to interrupt their felicity, no intolerable labour
immediately to succeed their recreations, and no overseer
to receive them under the discipline of the lash?-If these
therefore are the only circumstances, by which the
assertion can be proved, we may venture to say, without
fear of opposition, that it can never be proved at all.
But these are not the only circumstances. It is said that
they are barbarous at home.-But do you receivers
civilize them?-Your unwillingness to convert them to
Christianity, because you suppose you must use them more
kindly when converted, is but a bad argument in favour of
the fact.
It is affirmed again, that their manner of life, and their
situation is such in their own country, that to say they
are happy is a jest. "But who are you, who pretend to
judge[103] of another man's
happiness? That state which each man, under the guidance of
his maker, forms for himself, and not one man for another?
To know what constitutes mine or your happiness, is the
sole prerogative of him who created us, and cast us in so
various and different moulds. Did your slaves ever complain
to you of their unhappiness, amidst their native woods and
desarts? Or, rather, let me ask, did they ever cease
complaining of their condition under you their lordly
masters? Where they see, indeed, the accommodations of
civil life, but see them all pass to others, themselves
unbenefited by them. Be so gracious then, ye petty tyrants
over human freedom, to let your slaves judge for
themselves, what it is which makes their own happiness, and
then see whether they do not place it in the return to
their own country, rather than in the contemplation of
your grandeur, of which their misery makes so large a
part."
But since you speak with so much confidence on the subject,
let us ask you receivers again, if you have ever
been informed by your unfortunate slaves, that they had no
connexions in the country from which they have forcibly
been torn away: or, if you will take upon you to assert,
that they never sigh, when they are alone; or that they
never relate to each other their tales of misery and woe.
But you judge of them, perhaps, in an happy moment, when
you are dealing out to them their provisions for the week;
and are but little aware, that, though the countenance may
be cheered with a momentary smile, the heart may be
exquisitely tortured. Were you to shew us, indeed, that
there are laws, subject to no evasion, by which you are
obliged to clothe and feed them in a comfortable manner;
were you to shew us that they are protected[104] at all; or that even
one in a thousand of those masters have
suffered death,[105] who have been guilty
of premeditated murder to their slaves, you would
have a better claim to our belief: but you can neither
produce the instances nor the laws. The people, of whom you
speak, are slaves, are your own property, are
wholly at your own disposal; and this idea is
sufficient to overturn your assertions of their happiness.
But we shall now mention a circumstance, which, in the
present case, will have more weight than all the arguments
which have hitherto been advanced. It is an opinion, which
the Africans universally entertain, that, as soon as
death shall release them from the hands of their
oppressors, they shall immediately be wafted back to their
native plains, there to exist again, to enjoy the sight of
their beloved countrymen, and to spend the whole of their
new existence in scenes of tranquillity and delight; and so
powerfully does this notion operate upon them, as to drive
them frequently to the horrid extremity of putting a period
to their lives. Now if these suicides are frequent, (which
no person can deny) what are they but a proof, that the
situation of those who destroy themselves must have been
insupportably wretched: and if the thought of returning to
their country after death, when they have experienced
the colonial joys, constitutes their supreme felicity,
what are they but a proof, that they think there is as much
difference between the two situations, as there is between
misery and delight?
Nor is the assertion of the receivers less liable to
a refutation in the instance of those, who terminate their
own existence, than of those, whom nature releases from
their persecutions. They die with a smile upon their face,
and their funerals are attended by a vast concourse of
their countrymen, with every possible demonstration of
joy.[106] But why this unusual
mirth, if their departed brother has left an happy place?
Or if he has been taken from the care of an indulgent
master, who consulted his pleasures, and administered to
his wants? But alas, it arises from hence, that he is
gone to his happy country: a circumstance, sufficient
of itself, to silence a myriad of those specious arguments,
which the imagination has been racked, and will always be
racked to produce, in favour of a system of tyranny and
oppression.
It remains only, that we should now conclude the chapter
with a fact, which will shew that the account, which we
have given of the situation of slaves, is strictly true,
and will refute at the same time all the arguments which
have hitherto been, and may yet be brought by the
receivers, to prove that their treatment is humane.
In one of the western colonies of the Europeans, [107]six hundred and fifty
thousand slaves were imported within an hundred years; at
the expiration of which time, their whole posterity were
found to amount to one hundred and forty thousand. This
fact will ascertain the treatment of itself. For how
shamefully must these unfortunate people have been
oppressed? What a dreadful havock must famine, fatigue, and
cruelty, have made among them, when we consider, that the
descendants of six hundred and fifty thousand people
in the prime of life, gradually imported within a century,
are less numerous than those, which only ten
thousand[108] would have produced in
the same period, under common advantages, and in a country
congenial to their constitutions?
But the receivers have probably great merit on the
occasion. Let us therefore set it down to their humanity.
Let us suppose for once, that this incredible waste of the
human species proceeds from a benevolent design; that,
sensible of the miseries of a servile state, they resolve
to wear out, as fast as they possibly can, their
unfortunate slaves, that their miseries may the sooner end,
and that a wretched posterity may be prevented from sharing
their parental condition. Now, whether this is the plan of
reasoning which the receivers adopt, we cannot take
upon us to decide; but true it is, that the effect produced
is exactly the same, as if they had reasoned wholly on this
benevolent principle.
We have now taken a survey of the treatment which the
unfortunate Africans undergo, when they are put into
the hands of the receivers. This treatment, by the
four first chapters of the present part of this Essay,
appears to be wholly insupportable, and to be such as no
human being can apply to another, without the imputation of
such crimes, as should make him tremble. But as many
arguments are usually advanced by those who have any
interest in the practice, by which they would either
exculpate the treatment, or diminish its severity, we
allotted the remaining chapters for their discussion. In
these we considered the probability of such a treatment
against the motives of interest; the credit that was to be
given to those disinterested writers on the subject, who
have recorded particular instances of barbarity; the
inferiority of the Africans to the human species;
the comparisons that are generally made with respect to
their situation; the positive scenes of felicity which they
are said to enjoy, and every other argument, in short, that
we have found to have ever been advanced in the defence of
slavery. These have been all considered, and we may venture
to pronounce, that, instead of answering the purpose for
which they were intended, they serve only to bring such
circumstances to light, as clearly shew, that if ingenuity
were racked to invent a situation, that would be the most
distressing and insupportable to the human race; it could
never invent one, that would suit the description better,
than the-colonial slavery.
If this then be the case, and if slaves, notwithstanding
all the arguments to the contrary, are exquisitely
miserable, we ask you receivers, by what right you
reduce them to so wretched a situation?
You reply, that you buy them; that your money
constitutes your right, and that, like all other
things which you purchase, they are wholly at your own
disposal.
Upon this principle alone it was, that we professed to view
your treatment, or examine your right, when we said, that
"the question[109] resolved itself into
two separate parts for discussion; into the African
commerce, as explained in the history of slavery, and the
subsequent slavery in the colonies, as founded on the
equity of the commerce." Now, since it appears that
this commerce, upon the fullest investigation, is contrary
to "the principles[110] of law and government,
the dictates of reason, the common maxims of equity, the
laws of nature, the admonitions of conscience, and, in
short, the whole doctrine of natural religion," it is
evident that the right, which is founded upon it,
must be the same; and that if those things only are lawful
in the sight of God, which are either virtuous in
themselves, or proceed from virtuous principles, you
have no right over them at all.
You yourselves also confess this. For when we ask you,
whether any human being has a right to sell you, you
immediately answer, No; as if nature revolted at the
thought, and as if it was so contradictory to your own
feelings, as not to require consideration. But who are you,
that have this exclusive charter of trading in the
liberties of mankind? When did nature, or rather the Author
of nature, make so partial a distinction between you and
them? When did He say, that you should have the privilege
of selling others, and that others should not have the
privilege of selling you?
Now since you confess, that no person whatever has a right
to dispose of you in this manner, you must confess also,
that those things are unlawful to be done to you, which are
usually done in consequence of the sale. Let us suppose
then, that in consequence of the commerce you were
forced into a ship; that you were conveyed to another
country; that you were sold there; that you were confined
to incessant labour; that you were pinched by continual
hunger and thirst; and subject to be whipped, cut, and
mangled at discretion, and all this at the hands of those,
whom you had never offended; would you not think that you
had a right to resist their treatment? Would you not resist
it with a safe conscience? And would you not be surprized,
if your resistance should be termed rebellion?-By the
former premises you must answer, yes.-Such then is the case
with the wretched Africans. They have a right to
resist your proceedings. They can resist them, and yet they
cannot justly be considered as rebellious. For though we
suppose them to have been guilty of crimes to one another;
though we suppose them to have been the most abandoned and
execrable of men, yet are they perfectly innocent with
respect to you receivers. You have no right to touch
even the hair of their heads without their own consent. It
is not your money, that can invest you with a right. Human
liberty can neither be bought nor sold. Every lash that you
give them is unjust. It is a lash against nature and
religion, and will surely stand recorded against you, since
they are all, with respect to your impious selves,
in a state of nature; in a state of original dissociation;
perfectly free.
Having now considered both the commerce and
slavery, it remains only to collect such arguments
as are scattered in different parts of the work, and to
make such additional remarks, as present themselves on the
subject.
And first, let us ask you, who have studied the law of
nature, and you, who are learned in the law of the land, if
all property must not be inferiour in its nature to its
possessor, or, in other words, (for it is a case, which
every person must bring home to his own breast) if you
suppose that any human being can have a property in
yourselves? Let us ask you appraisers, who
scientifically know the value of things, if any human
creature is equivalent only to any of the trinkets that you
wear, or at most, to any of the horses that you ride: or in
other words, if you have ever considered the most costly
things that you have valued, as equivalent to
yourselves? Let us ask you rationalists, if man, as a
reasonable being, is not accountable for his
actions, and let us put the same question to you, who have
studied the divine writings? Let us ask you parents, if
ever you thought that you possessed an authority as
such, or if ever you expected a duty from your sons;
and let us ask you sons, if ever you felt an impulse in
your own breasts to obey your parents. Now, if you
should all answer as we could wish, if you should all
answer consistently with reason, nature, and the revealed
voice of God, what a dreadful argument will present itself
against the commerce and slavery of the human species, when
we reflect, that no man whatever can be bought or reduced
to the situation of a slave, but he must instantly
become a brute, he must instantly be reduced to the value
of those things, which were made for his own use and
convenience; he must instantly cease to be accountable for
his actions, and his authority as a parent, and his duty as
a son, must be instantly no more.
Neither does it escape our notice, when we are speaking of
the fatal wound which every social duty must receive, how
considerably Christianity suffers by the conduct of you
receivers. For by prosecuting this impious commerce,
you keep the Africans in a state of perpetual
ferocity and barbarism; and by prosecuting it in such a
manner, as must represent your religion, as a system of
robbery and oppression, you not only oppose the propagation
of the gospel, as far as you are able yourselves, but throw
the most certain impediments in the way of others, who
might attempt the glorious and important task.
Such also is the effect, which the subsequent slavery in
the colonies must produce. For by your inhuman treatment of
the unfortunate Africans there, you create the same
insuperable impediments to a conversion. For how must they
detest the very name of Christians, when you
Christians are deformed by so many and dreadful
vices? How must they detest that system of religion, which
appears to resist the natural rights of men, and to give a
sanction to brutality and murder?
But, as we are now mentioning Christianity, we must pause
for a little time, to make a few remarks on the arguments
which are usually deduced from thence by the
receivers, in defence of their system of oppression.
For the reader may readily suppose, that, if they did not
hesitate to bring the Old Testament in support of
their barbarities, they would hardly let the New
escape them.
St. Paul, having converted Onesimus to the
Christian faith, who was a fugitive slave of
Philemon, sent him back to his master. This
circumstance has furnished the receivers with a
plea, that Christianity encourages slavery. But they have
not only strained the passages which they produce in
support of their assertions, but are ignorant of historical
facts. The benevolent apostle, in the letter which he wrote
to Philemon, the master of Onesimus,
addresses him to the following effect: "I send him back to
you, but not in his former capacity,[111] not now as a
servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved. In
this manner I beseech you to receive him, for though I
could enjoin you to do it, yet I had rather it
should be a matter of your own will, than of
necessity."
It appears that the same Onesimus, when he was sent
back, was no longer a slave, that he was a minister
of the gospel, that he was joined with Tychicus in
an ecclesiastical commission to the church of the
Colossians, and was afterwards bishop of
Ephesus. If language therefore has any meaning, and
if history has recorded a fact which may be believed, there
is no case more opposite to the doctrine of the
receivers, than this which they produce in its
support.
It is said again, that Christianity, among the many
important precepts which it contains, does not furnish us
with one for the abolition of slavery. But the reason is
obvious. Slavery at the time of the introduction of the
gospel was universally prevalent, and if Christianity had
abruptly declared, that the millions of slaves should have
been made free, who were then in the world, it would have
been universally rejected, as containing doctrines that
were dangerous, if not destructive, to society. In order
therefore that it might be universally received, it never
meddled, by any positive precept, with the civil
institutions of the times; but though it does not expressly
say, that "you shall neither buy, nor sell, nor possess a
slave," it is evident that, in its general tenour, it
sufficiently militates against the custom.
The first doctrine which it inculcates, is that of
brotherly love. It commands good will towards men.
It enjoins us to love our neighbours as ourselves, and to
do unto all men, as we would that they should do unto us.
And how can any man fulfil this scheme of universal
benevolence, who reduces an unfortunate person against
his will, to the most insupportable of all human
conditions; who considers him as his private
property, and treats him, not as a brother, nor as one
of the same parentage with himself, but as an animal of
the brute creation?
But the most important doctrine is that, by which we are
assured that mankind are to exist in a future state, and to
give an account of those actions, which they have severally
done in the flesh. This strikes at the very root of
slavery. For how can any man be justly called to an account
for his actions, whose actions are not at his own
disposal? This is the case with the proper[112] slave. His liberty is
absolutely bought and appropriated; and if the
purchase is just and equitable, he is under the
necessity of perpetrating any crime, which the
purchaser may order him to commit, or, in other words, of
ceasing to be accountable for his actions.
These doctrines therefore are sufficient to shew, that
slavery is incompatible, with the Christian system. The
Europeans considered them as such, when, at the
close of the twelfth century, they resisted, their
hereditary prejudices, and occasioned its abolition. Hence
one, among many other proofs, that Christianity was the
production of infinite wisdom; that though it did not take
such express cognizance of the wicked national institutions
of the times, as should hinder its reception, it should yet
contain such doctrines, as, when it should be fully
established, would be sufficient for the abolition of them
all.
Thus then is the argument of you receivers
ineffectual, and your conduct impious. For, by the
prosecution of this wicked slavery and commerce, you not
only oppose the propagation of that gospel which was
ordered to be preached unto every creature, and bring it
into contempt, but you oppose its tenets also: first,
because you violate that law of universal
benevolence, which was to take away those hateful
distinctions of Jew and Gentile, Greek
and Barbarian, bond and free, which prevailed
when the gospel was introduced; and secondly, because, as
every man is to give an account of his actions hereafter,
it is necessary that he should be free.
Another argument yet remains, which, though nature will
absolutely turn pale at the recital, cannot possibly be
omitted. In those wars, which are made for the sake of
procuring slaves, it is evident that the contest must be
generally obstinate, and that great numbers must be slain
on both sides, before the event can be determined. This we
may reasonably apprehend to be the case: and we have
shewn,[113] that there have not
been wanting instances, where the conquerors have been so
incensed at the resistance they have found, that their
spirit of vengeance has entirely got the better of their
avarice, and they have murdered, in cool blood, every
individual, without discrimination, either of age or sex.
From these and other circumstances, we thought we had
sufficient reason to conclude, that, where ten were
supposed to be taken, an hundred, including the
victors and vanquished, might be supposed to perish. Now,
as the annual exportation from Africa consists of an
hundred thousand men, and as the two orders, of those who
are privately kidnapped by individuals, and of those, who
are publickly seized by virtue of the authority of their
prince, compose together, at least, nine-tenths of the
African slaves, it follows, that about ten thousand
consist of convicts and prisoners of war. The last order is
the most numerous. Let us suppose then that only six
thousand of this order are annually sent into servitude,
and it will immediately appear that no less than
sixty-thousand people annually perish in those wars,
which are made only for the purpose of procuring slaves.
But that this number, which we believe to be by no means
exaggerated, may be free from all objection, we will
include those in the estimate, who die as they are
travelling to the ships. Many of these unfortunate people
have a journey of one thousand miles to perform on foot,
and are driven like sheep through inhospitable woods and
deserts, where they frequently die in great numbers, from
fatigue and want. Now if to those, who thus perish on the
African continent, by war and travelling, we subjoin
those,[114] who afterwards perish
on the voyage, and in the seasoning together, it will
appear that, in every yearly attempt to supply the
colonies, an hundred thousand must perish, even
before one useful individual can be obtained.
Gracious God! how wicked, how beyond all example impious,
must be that servitude, which cannot be carried on without
the continual murder of so many and innocent persons! What
punishment is not to be expected for such monstrous and
unparalleled barbarities! For if the blood of one man,
unjustly shed, cries with so loud a voice for the divine
vengeance, how shall the cries and groans of an hundred
thousand men, annually murdered, ascend the
celestial mansions, and bring down that punishment, which
such enormities deserve! But do we mention punishment? Do
we allude to that punishment, which shall be inflicted on
men as individuals, in a future life? Do we allude to that
awful day, which shall surely come, when the master shall
behold his murdered negroe face to face? When a train of
mutilated slaves shall be brought against him? When he
shall stand confounded and abashed? Or, do we allude to
that punishment, which may be inflicted on them here, as
members of a wicked community? For as a body politick, if
its members are ever so numerous, may be considered as an
whole, acting of itself, and by itself, in all affairs in
which it is concerned, so it is accountable, as such, for
its conduct; and as these kinds of polities have only their
existence here, so it is only in this world, that, as such,
they can be punished.
"Now, whether we consider the crime, with respect to the
individuals immediately concerned in this most barbarous
and cruel traffick, or whether we consider it as
patronized[115] and encouraged by the
laws of the land, it presents to our view an equal degree
of enormity. A crime, founded on a dreadful pre-eminence in
wickedness,-a crime, which being both of individuals and
the nation, must sometime draw down upon us the heaviest
judgment of Almighty God, who made of one blood all the
sons of men, and who gave to all equally a natural right to
liberty; and who, ruling all the kingdoms of the earth with
equal providential justice, cannot suffer such deliberate,
such monstrous iniquity, to pass long unpunished."[116]
But alas! he seems already to have interfered on the
occasion! The violent[117] and supernatural
agitations of all the elements, which, for a series of
years, have prevailed in those European settlements, where
the unfortunate Africans are retained in a state of
slavery, and which have brought unspeakable calamities on
the inhabitants, and publick losses on the states to which
they severally belong, are so many awful visitations of God
for this inhuman violation of his laws. And it is not
perhaps unworthy of remark, that as the subjects of
Great-Britain have two thirds of this impious commerce in
their own hands, so they have suffered[118] in the same
proportion, or more severely than the rest.
How far these misfortunes may appear to be acts of
providence, and to create an alarm to those who have been
accustomed to refer every effect to its apparent cause; who
have been habituated to stop there, and to overlook the
finger of God; because it is slightly covered under the
veil of secondary laws, we will not pretend to determine?
but this we will assert with confidence, that the
Europeans have richly deserved them all; that the
fear of sympathy, which can hardly be restrained on other
melancholy occasions, seems to forget to flow at the
relation of these; and that we can never, with any shadow
of justice, with prosperity to the undertakers of those,
whose success must be at the expence of the happiness of
millions of their fellow-creatures.
But this is sufficient. For if liberty is only an
adventitious right; if men are by no means superiour to
brutes; if every social duty is a curse; if cruelty is
highly to be esteemed; if murder is strictly honourable,
and Christianity is a lye; then it is evident, that the
African slavery may be pursued, without either the
remorse of conscience, or the imputation of a crime. But if
the contrary of this is true, which reason must immediately
evince, it is evident that no custom established among men
was ever more impious; since it is contrary to reason,
justice, nature, the principles of law and government, the
whole doctrine, in short, of natural religion, and the
revealed voice of God.
FINIS.
Footnotes:
[001]
A Description of Guinea, with an Inquiry into the Rise and
Progress of the Slave Trade, &c.-A Caution to Great
Britain and her Colonies, in a short Representation of the
calamitous State of the enslaved Negroes in the British
Dominions. Besides several smaller pieces.
[002]
They had censured the African Trade in the year
1727, but had taken no publick notice of the
colonial slavery till this time.
[003]
The instance of the Dutch colonists at the Cape, in
the first part of the Essay; the description of an African
battle, in the second; and the poetry of a negroe girl in
the third, are the only considerable additions that have
been made.
[004]
Genesis, Ch. 47. Leviticus XXV. v. 39, 40.
[005]
The Thetes appear very early in the Grecian
History.--kai tines auto kouroi epont'Ithakes exairetoi; he
eoi autou thentes te Dmoes(?) te; Od. Homer. D. 642. They
were afterwards so much in use that, "Murioi depou
apedidonto eautous ose douleuein kata sungraphen," till
Solon suppressed the custom in Athens.
[006]
The mention of these is frequent among the classics; they
were called in general mercenarii, from the
circumstances of their hire, as "quibus, non
malè præcipiunt, qui ita jubent uti, ut
mercenariis, operam exigendam, justa proebenda.
Cicero de off." But they are sometimes mentioned in the law
books by the name of liberi, from the circumstances
of their birth, to distinguish them from the
alieni, or foreigners, as Justinian. D. 7. 8. 4.-Id.
21. 1. 25. &c. &c. &c.
[007]
"Nomos en pasin anthropois aidios esin, otan polemounton
polis alo, ton elonton einai kai ta somata ton en te
poleis, kai ta chremata." Xenoph. Kyrou Paid. L. 7. fin.
[008]
"Proud Nimrod first the bloody chace began,
A mighty hunter, and his prey was man."
-POPE.
[009]
Thucydides. L. 1. sub initio.
[010]
Idem.-"the strongest," says he, "engaging in these
adventures, Kerdous tou spheterou auton eneka kai tois
asthenesi trophes."
[011]
Homer. Odyss. L. 15. 385.
[012]
Xenoph. Kyrou Anab. L. 6. sub initio.
[013]
ouk echontos po Aischynen toutou tou ergou pherontos de ti
kai Doxes mallon. Thucydides, L. 1. sub initio.
kai euklees touto oi Kilikes enomizon. Sextus
Empiricus.
ouk adoxon all'endoxon touto. Schol. &c. &c.
[014]
Aristoph. Plut. Act. 2. Scene 5.
[015]
Zenoph. Apomnemon, L. 1.
[016]
Herodotus. L. 2. 113.
[017]
"Apud Ægyptios, si quis servum sponte occiderat,
eum
morte damnari æque ac si liberum occidisset, jubebant
leges &c."
Diodorus Sic. L. 1.
[018]
"Atq id ne vos miremini, Homines servulos
Potare, amare, atq ad coenam condicere.
Licet hoc Athenis.
Plautus. Sticho."
[019]
"Be me kratison esin eis to Theseion
Dramein, ekei d'eos an eurombou prasin
menein" Aristoph. Horæ.
Kaka toiade paskousin oude prasin
Aitousin. Eupolis. poleis.
[020]
To this privilege Plautus alludes in his Casina,
where he introduces a slave, speaking in the following
manner. "Quid tu me verò libertate territas?
Quod si tu nolis, siliusque etiam tuus
Vobis invitis, atq amborum ingratiis,
Una libella liber possum fieri."
[021]
Homer. Odys. P. 322. In the latest edition of Homer, the
word, which we have translated senses, is
Aretae, or virtue, but the old and proper
reading is Noos, as appears from Plato de Legibus,
ch. 6, where he quotes it on a similar occasion.
[022]
Aristotle. Polit. Ch. 2. et inseq.
[023]
Ellesin hegemonikos, tois de Barbarois despotikos krasthar
kai ton men os philon kai oikeion epimeleisthai, tois de os
zoois he phytois prospheresthai. Plutarch. de Fortun.
Alexand. Orat. 1.
[024]
Omne tulit punctum, qui miscuit utile dulci. Horace.
[025]
me tacha pikren Aigypton kai Kypron idnai. Hom. Odyss. L.
17. 448.
[026]
L. 26.
[027]
Exodus. Ch. 1.
[028]
Vide note 1st. (Here shown as footnote 025).
[029]
This strikes us the more forcibly, as it is stiled
eurreiten and perikallea, "beautiful and
well watered," in all other passages where it is
mentioned, but this.
[030]
The following short history of the African servitude, is
taken from Astley's Collection of Voyages, and from the
united testimonies of Smyth, Adanson, Bosman, Moore, and
others, who were agents to the different factories
established there; who resided many years in the country;
and published their respective histories at their return.
These writers, if they are partial at all, may be
considered as favourable rather to their own countrymen,
than the unfortunate Africans.
[031]
We would not wish to be understood, that slavery was
unknown in Africa before the piratical expeditions
of the Portuguese, as it appears from the
Nubian's Geography, that both the slavery and
commerce had been established among the natives with one
another. We mean only to assert, that the Portuguese
were the first of the Europeans, who made their
piratical expeditions, and shewed the way to that
slavery, which now makes so disgraceful a figure in
the western colonies of the Europeans. In the term
"Europeans," wherever it shall occur in the remaining part
of this first dissertation, we include the
Portuguese, and those nations only, who
followed their example.
[032]
The Portuguese erected their first fort at
D'Elmina, in the year 1481, about forty years after
Alonzo Gonzales had pointed the Southern Africans out to
his countrymen as articles of commerce.
[033]
In the ancient servitude, we reckoned convicts among
the voluntary slaves, because they had it in their
power, by a virtuous conduct, to have avoided so melancholy
a situation; in the African, we include them in the
involuntary, because, as virtues are frequently
construed into crimes, from the venal motives of the
traffick, no person whatever possesses such a power
or choice.
[034]
Andrew Sparrman, M.D. professor of Physick at Stockholm,
fellow of the Royal Academy of Sciences in Sweden, and
inspector of its cabinet of natural history, whose voyage
was translated into English, and published in 1785.
[035]
Boshies-man, or wild Hottentot.
[036]
This conclusion concerning the dissociated state of
mankind, is confirmed by all the early writers, with whose
descriptions of primitive times no other conclusion is
reconcileable.
[037]
Justin. L. 2. C. 2.
[038]
Sallust. Bell. Jug.
[039]
Sallust. Bell. Catil.
[040]
Ammianus Marcellinus. L. 31. C. 2. et. inseq.
[041]
Agri pro Numero Cultorum ab universis per vicos occupantur,
quos mox inter se secundum dignationem partiuntur. Tacitus.
C. 26. de Mor. Germ.
[042]
The author has lately read a work, intitled Paley's Moral
and Political Philosophy, which, in this one respect,
favours those which have been hinted at, as it denies that
government was a contract. "No social compact was ever made
in fact,"-"it is to suppose it possible to call savages out
of caves and deserts, to deliberate upon topicks, which the
experience and studies, and the refinements of civil life
alone suggest. Therefore no government in the universe
begun from this original." But there are no grounds for so
absurd a supposition; for government, and of course the
social compact, does not appear to have been introduced at
the time, when families coming out of their caves and
deserts, or, in other words, quitting their former
dissociated state, joined themselves together. They
had lived a considerable time in society, like the
Lybians and Gætulians before-mentioned, and had felt
many of the disadvantages of a want of discipline and laws,
before government was introduced at all. The author of this
Essay, before he took into consideration the origin of
government, was determined, in a matter of such importance,
to be biassed by no opinion whatever, and much less to
indulge himself in speculation. He was determined solely to
adhere to fact, and, by looking into the accounts left us
of those governments which were in their infancy, and, of
course in the least complicated state, to attempt to
discover their foundation: he cannot say therefore, that
upon a very minute perusal of the excellent work before
quoted, he has been so far convinced, as to retract in the
least from his sentiments on this head, and to give up
maxims, which are drawn from historical facts, for those,
which are the result of speculation. He may observe here,
that whether government was a contract or not, it
will not affect the reasoning of the present Essay; since
where ever the contract is afterwards mentioned, it is
inferred only that its object was "the happiness of the
people," which is confessedly the end of government.
Notwithstanding this, he is under the necessity of
inserting this little note, though he almost feels himself
ungrateful in contradicting a work, which has afforded him
so much entertainment.
[043]
Jure Gentium servi nostri sunt, qui ab hostibus
capiuntur. Justinian, L. 1. 5. 5. 1.
[044]
Serverum appellatio ex eo fluxit, quod imperatores
nostri captivos vendere, ac per hoc servare, nec
occidere solent.
[045]
Nam sive victoribus jure captivitatis servissent,
&c. Justin, L. 4. 3. et passim apud scriptores
antiquos.
[046]
Neque est contra naturam spoliare eum, si possis, quem
honestum est necare. Cicero de officiis. L. 3. 6.
[047]
1. Ut liberi suis legibus viverent. Livy, L. 30. 37.
2. Decem millia talentum argenti descripta pensionibus
æquis in annos quinquaginta solverent. Ibid.
3. Et naves rostratas, præter decem triremes,
traderent, elephantosque, quos haberent domitos; neque
domarent alios; Bellum neve in Africa, neve extra Africam,
injussu P. R. gererent, &c. Ibid.
[048]
The total annual exportation from Africa, is estimated here
at 100,000 men, two thirds of whom are exported by the
British merchants alone. This estimate is less than that
which is usually made, and has been published. The author
has been informed by disinterested people, who were in most
of the West India islands during the late war, and who
conversed with many of the most intelligent of the negroes,
for the purpose of inquiring by what methods they had
originally been reduced to slavery, that they did not find
even two in twenty, who had been reduced to that situation,
by any other means than those mentioned above. The author,
desirous of a farther confirmation of this circumstance,
stopped the press till he had written to another friend,
who had resided twenty years in the West-Indies, and whose
opinion he had not yet asked. The following is an extract
from the answer. "I do not among many hundreds recollect to
have seen but one or two slaves, of those imported from
Africa, who had any scars to shew, that they had been in
war. They are generally such as are kidnapped, or sold by
their tyrants, after the destruction of a village. In
short, I am firmly of opinion, that crimes and war together
do not furnish one slave in an hundred of the numbers
introduced into the European colonies. Of consequence the
trade itself, were it possible to suppose convicts or
prisoners of war to be justly sentenced to servitude, is
accountable for ninety-nine in every hundred slaves, whom
it supplies. It an insult to the publick, to attempt to
palliate the method of procuring them."
[049]
The writer of the letter of which this is a faithful
extract, and who was known to the author of the present
Essay, was a long time on the African coast. He had once
the misfortune to be shipwrecked there, and to be taken by
the natives, who conveyed him and his companions a
considerable way up into the country. The hardships which
he underwent in the march, his treatment during his
captivity, the scenes to which he was witness, while he
resided among the inland Africans, as well as while in the
African trade, gave occasion to a series of very
interesting letters. These letters were sent to the author
of the present Essay, with liberty to make what use of them
he chose, by the gentleman to whom they were written.
[050]
Were this not the case, the government of a country could
have no right to take cognizance of crimes, and punish
them, but every individual, if injured, would have a right
to punish the aggressor with his own hand, which is
contrary to the notions of all civilized men, whether among
the ancients or the moderns.
[051]
This same notion is entertained even by the African
princes, who do not permit the person injured to revenge
his injury, or to receive the convict as his slave. But if
the very person who has been injured, does not
possess him, much less ought any other person whatsoever.
[052]
There are instances on the African continent, of
parents selling their children. As the slaves
of this description are so few, and are so irregularly
obtained, we did not think it worth our while to consider
them as forming an order; and, as God never gave the parent
a power over his child to make him miserable, we
trust that any farther mention of them will be unnecessary.
[053]
Abbè Raynal, Hist. Phil. vol. 4. P. 154.
[054]
Justin, L. 2. C. 1.
[055]
Cicero de Officiis. L. 1. C. 8.
[056]
It is universally allowed, that at least one fifth of the
exported negroes perish in the passage. This estimate is
made from the time in which they are put on board, to the
time when they are disposed of in the colonies. The French
are supposed to lose the greatest number in the voyage, but
particularly from this circumstance, because their slave
ships are in general so very large, that many of the slaves
that have been put on board sickly, die before the cargo
can be completed.
[057]
This instance happened in a ship, commanded by one
Collingwood. On the 29th of November, 1781, fifty-four of
them were thrown into the sea alive; on the 30th forty-two
more; and in about three days afterwards, twenty-six. Ten
others, who were brought upon the deck for the same
purpose, did not wait to be hand-cuffed, but bravely leaped
into the sea, and shared the fate of their companions. It
is a fact, that the people on board this ship had not been
put upon short allowance. The excuse which this execrable
wretch made on board for his conduct, was the following,
"that if the slaves, who were then sickly, had died a
natural death, the loss would have been the owners; but as
they were thrown alive into the sea, it would fall upon the
underwriters."
[058]
This gentleman is at present resident in England. The
author of this Essay applied to him for some information on
the treatment of slaves, so far as his own knowledge was
concerned. He was so obliging as to furnish him with the
written account alluded to, interspersed only with such
instances, as he himself could undertake to answer for. The
author, as he has never met with these instances before,
and as they are of such high authority, intends to
transcribe two or three of them, and insert them in the
fourth chapter. They will be found in inverted commas.
[059]
One third of the whole number imported, is often computed
to be lost in the seasoning, which, in round numbers, will
be 27000. The loss in the seasoning depends, in a great
measure, on two circumstances, viz. on the number of what
are called refuse slaves that are imported, and on the
quantity of new land in the colony. In the French windward
islands of Martinico, and Guadaloupe, which are cleared and
highly cultivated, and in our old small islands, one
fourth, including refuse slaves, is considered as a general
proportion. But in St. Domingo, where there is a great deal
of new land annually taken into culture, and in other
colonies in the same situation, the general proportion,
including refuse slaves, is found to be one third. This
therefore is a lower estimate than the former, and reduces
the number to about 23000. We may observe, that this is the
common estimate, but we have reduced it to 20000 to make it
free from all objection.
[060]
Including the number that perish on the voyage, and in the
seasoning. It is generally thought that not half the number
purchased can be considered as an additional stock, and of
course that 50,000 are consumed within the first two years
from their embarkation.
[061]
That part of the account, that has been hitherto given,
extends to all the Europeans and their colonists, who are
concerned in this horrid practice. But we are sorry that we
must now make a distinction, and confine the remaining
part, of it to the colonists of the British West India
islands, and to those of the southern provinces of North
America. As the employment of slaves is different in the
two parts of the world last mentioned, we shall content
ourselves with describing it, as it exists in one of them,
and we shall afterwards annex such treatment and such
consequences as are applicable to both. We have only to
add, that the reader must not consider our account as
universally, but only generally, true.
[062]
This computation is made on a supposition, that the gang is
divided into three bodies; we call it therefore moderate,
because the gang is frequently divided into two bodies,
which must therefore set up alternately every other
night.
[063]
An hand or arm being frequently ground off.
[064]
The reader will scarcely believe it, but it is a fact, that
a slave's annual allowance from his master, for provisions,
clothing, medicines when sick, &c. is limited, upon an
average, to thirty shillings.
[065]
"A boy having received six slaves as a present from his
father, immediately slit their ears, and for the following
reason, that as his father was a whimsical man, he might
claim them again, unless they were marked." We do not
mention this instance as a confirmation of the passage to
which it is annexed, but only to shew, how cautious we
ought to be in giving credit to what may be advanced in any
work written in defence of slavery, by any native of the
colonies: for being trained up to scenes of cruelty from
his cradle, he may, consistently with his own feelings,
represent that treatment as mild, at which we, who have
never been used to see them, should absolutely shudder.
[066]
In this case he is considered as a criminal against the
state. The marshal, an officer answering to our
sheriff, superintends his execution, and the master
receives the value of the slave from the publick treasury.
We may observe here, that in all cases where the delinquent
is a criminal of the state, he is executed, and his value
is received in the same manner; He is tried and condemned
by two or three justices of the peace, and without any
intervention of a jury.
[067]
Particularly in Jamaica. These observations were made by
disinterested people, who were there for three or four
years during the late war.
[068]
The action was brought by the owners against the
underwriters, to recover the value of the murdered
slaves. It was tried at Guildhall.
[069]
Phillis Wheatley, negro slave to Mr. John Wheatley, of
Boston, in New-England.
[070]
Lest it should be doubted whether these Poems are genuine,
we shall transcribe the names of those, who signed a
certificate of their authenticity.
His Excellency Thomas Hutchinson, Governor.
The Honourable Andrew Oliver, Lieutenant Governor.
The Hon. Thomas Hubbard
The Hon. John Erving
The Hon. James Pitts
The Hon. Harrison Gray
The Hon. James Bowdoin
John Hancock, Esq.
Joseph Green, Esq.
Richard Carey, Esq.
The Rev. Cha. Chauncy, D.D.
The Rev. Mather Byles, D.D.
The Rev. Ed. Pemberton, D.D.
The Rev. Andrew Elliot, D.D.
The Rev. Sam. Cooper, D.D.
The Rev. Samuel Mather
The Rev. John Moorhead
Mr. John Wheatley, her Master.
[071]
In the Preface.
[072]
As to Mr. Hume's assertions with respect to African
capacity, we have passed them over in silence, as they have
been so admirably refuted by the learned Dr. Beattie, in
his Essay on Truth, to which we refer the reader. The whole
of this admirable refutation extends from p. 458. to 464.
[073]
Genesis, ch. iv. 15.
[074]
Genesis, ch. ix. 25, 26, 27.
[075]
Jeremiah says, ch. xiii. 23, "Can the Æthiopian
change his colour, or the leopard his spots?" Now the word,
which is here translated Æthiopian, is in the
original Hebrew "the descendant of Cush," which
shews that this colour was not confined to the descendants
of Canaan, as the advocates for slavery assert.
[076]
It is very extraordinary that the advocates for slavery
should consider those Africans, whom they call negroes, as
the descendants of Canaan, when few historical facts
can be so well ascertained, as that out of the descendants
of the four sons of Ham, the descendants of Canaan were the
only people, (if we except the Carthaginians, who were a
colony of Canaan, and were afterwards ruined) who did not
settle in that quarter of the globe. Africa was
incontrovertibly peopled by the posterity of the three
other sons. We cannot shew this in a clearer manner, than
in the words of the learned Mr. Bryant, in his letter to
Mr. Granville Sharp on this subject.
"We learn from scripture, that Ham had four sons, Chus,
Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan, Gen. x. 5, 6.
Canaan occupied Palestine, and the country
called by his name: Mizraim, Egypt: but Phut
passed deep into Africa, and, I believe, most of the
nations in that part of the world are descended from him;
at least more than from any other person." Josephus
says, "that Phut was the founder of the nations in
Libya, and the people were from him called (phoutoi)
Phuti." Antiq. L. 1. c. 7. "By Lybia he
understands, as the Greeks did, Africa in
general: for the particular country called Lybia
Proper, was peopled by the Lubim, or
Lehabim, one of the branches from Mizraim,
(Labieim ex ou Libnes) Chron. Paschale, p. 29.
"The sons of Phut settled in Mauritania,
where was a country called Phutia, and a river of
the like denomination. Mauritaniæ Fluvius usque ad
præsens Tempus Phut dicitur, omnisq; circa eum
Regio Phutensis. Hieron. Tradit.
Hebroeæ.-Amnem, quem vocant Fut." Pliny, L. 5.
c. 1. Some of this family settled above Ægypt, near
Æthiopia, and were styled Troglodytæ. (phoud ex
ou troglodotai.) Syncellus, p. 47. Many of them passed
inland, and peopled the Mediterranean country."
"In process of time the sons of Chus also, (after
their expulsion from Egypt) made settlements upon the sea
coast of Africa, and came into Mauritania.
Hence we find traces of them also in the names of places,
such as Churis, Chusares, upon the coast: and a
river Chusa, and a city Cotta, together with
a promontory, Cotis, in Mauritania, all
denominated from Chus; who at different times, and
by different people, was called Chus, Cuth, Cosh,
and Cotis. The river Cusa is mentioned by
Pliny, Lib. 5. c. 1. and by Ptolomy."
"Many ages after these settlements, there was another
eruption of the Cushites into these parts, under the
name of Saracens and Moors, who over-ran
Africa, to the very extremity of Mount Atlas. They
passed over and conquered Spain to the north, and
they extended themselves southward, as I said in my
treatise, to the rivers Senegal and Gambia,
and as low as the Gold Coast. I mentioned this,
because I do not think that they proceeded much farther:
most of the nations to the south being, as I
imagine, of the race of Phut. The very country upon
the river Gambia on one side, is at this day called
Phuta, of which Bluet, in his history of
Juba Ben Solomon, gives an account."
[077]
When America was first discovered, it was thought by some,
that the scripture account of the creation was false, and
that there were different species of men, because they
could never suppose that people, in so rude a state as the
Americans, could have transported themselves to that
continent from any parts of the known world. This opinion
however was refuted by the celebrated Captain Cooke, who
shewed that the traject between the continents of Asia and
America, was as short as some, which people in as rude a
state have been actually known to pass. This affords an
excellent caution against an ill-judged and hasty censure
of the divine writings, because every difficulty which may
be started, cannot be instantly cleared up.
[078]
The divine writings, which assert that all men were derived
from the same stock, shew also, in the same instance
of Cush, (Footnote 075), that some of them had
changed their original complexion.
[079]
The following are the grand colours discernible in mankind,
between which there are many shades;
White } { Copper
} -Olive- {
Brown } { Black
[080]
See note, (Footnote 075). To this we may add, that the rest
of the descendants of Ham, as far as they can be
traced, are now also black, at well as many of the
descendants of Shem.
[081]
Diseases have a great effect upon the mucosum
corpus, but particularly the jaundice, which turns it
yellow. Hence, being transmitted through the cuticle, the
yellow appearance of the whole body. But this, even as a
matter of ocular demonstration, is not confined solely to
white people; negroes themselves, while affected with these
or other disorders, changing their black colour for that
which the disease has conveyed to the mucous
substance.
[082]
The cutaneous pores are so excessively small, that one
grain of sand, (according to Dr. Lewenhoeck's calculations)
would cover many hundreds of them.
[083]
We do not mean to insinuate that the same people have their
corpus mucosum sensibly vary, as often as they go
into another latitude, but that the fact is true only of
different people, who have been long established in
different latitudes.
[084]
We beg leave to return our thanks here to a gentleman,
eminent in the medical line, who furnished us with the
above-mentioned facts.
[085]
Suppose we were to see two nations, contiguous to each
other, of black and white inhabitants in the same parallel,
even this would be no objection, for many circumstances are
to be considered. A black people may have wandered into a
white, and a white people into a black latitude, and they
may not have been settled there a sufficient length of time
for such a change to have been accomplished in their
complexion, as that they should be like the old established
inhabitants of the parallel, into which they have lately
come.
[086]
Justamond's Abbe Raynal, v. 5. p. 193.
[087]
The author of this Essay made it his business to inquire of
the most intelligent of those, whom he could meet with in
London, as to the authenticity of the fact. All those from
America assured him that it was strictly true; those
from the West-Indies, that they had never observed it
there; but that they had found a sensible difference in
themselves since they came to England.
[088]
This circumstance, which always happens, shews that they
are descended from the same parents as ourselves; for had
they been a distinct species of men, and the blackness
entirely ingrafted in their constitution and frame, there
is great reason to presume, that their children would have
been born black.
[089]
This observation was communicated to us by the gentleman in
the medical line, to whom we returned our thanks for
certain anatomical facts.
[090]
Philos. Trans. No. 476. sect. 4.
[091]
Treatise upon the Trade from Great Britain to Africa, by an
African merchant.
[092]
We mean such only as are natives of the countries
which we mention, and whose ancestors have been settled
there for a certain period of time.
[093]
Herodotus. Euterpe. p. 80. Editio Stephani, printed 1570.
[094]
This circumstance confirms what we said in a former note,
(Footnote 085), that even if two nations were to be found
in the same parallel, one of whom was black, and the other
white, it would form no objection against the hypothesis of
climate, as one of them might have been new settlers from a
distant country.
[095]
Suppose, without the knowledge of any historian, they had
made such considerable conquests, as to have settled
themselves at the distance of 1000 miles in any one
direction from Colchis, still they must have changed
their colour. For had they gone in an Eastern or Western
direction, they must have been of the same colour as the
Circassians; if to the north, whiter; if to the
south, of a copper. There are no people within that
distance of Colchis, who are black.
[096]
There are a particular people among those transported from
Africa to the colonies, who immediately on receiving
punishment, destroy themselves. This is a fact which the
receivers are unable to contradict.
[097]
The articles of war are frequently read at the head of
every regiment in the service, stating those particular
actions which are to be considered as crimes.
[098]
We cannot omit here to mention one of the customs, which
has been often brought as a palliation of slavery, and
which prevailed but a little time ago, and we are doubtful
whether it does not prevail now, in the metropolis of this
country, of kidnapping men for the service of the
East-India Company. Every subject, as long as he behaves
well, has a right to the protection of government; and the
tacit permission of such a scene of iniquity, when it
becomes known, is as much a breach of duty in government,
as the conduct of those subjects, who, on other occasions,
would be termed, and punished as, rebellious.
[099]
The expences of every parish are defrayed by a poll-tax on
negroes, to save which they pretend to liberate those who
are past labour; but they still keep them employed in
repairing fences, or in doing some trifling work on a
scanty allowance. For to free a field-negroe, so
long as he can work, is a maxim, which, notwithstanding the
numerous boasted manumissions, no master ever thinks of
adopting in the colonies.
[100]
They must be cultivated always on a Sunday, and
frequently in those hours which should be appropriated to
sleep, or the wretched possessors must be inevitably
starved.
[101]
They are allowed in general three holy-days at Christmas,
but in Jamaica they have two also at Easter, and two at
Whitsuntide: so that on the largest scale, they have only
seven days in a year, or one day in fifty-two. But this is
on a supposition, that the receivers do not break in upon
the afternoons, which they are frequently too apt to do. If
it should be said that Sunday is an holy-day, it is not
true; it is so far an holy-day, that they do not work for
their masters; but such an holy-day, that if they do not
employ it in the cultivation of their little spots, they
must starved.
[102]
These dances are usually in the middle of the night; and so
desirous are these unfortunate people of obtaining but a
joyful hour, that they not only often give up their sleep,
but add to the labours of the day, by going several miles
to obtain it.
[103]
Bishop of Glocester's sermon, preached before the society
for the propagation of the gospel, at the anniversary
meeting, on the 21st of February, 1766.
[104]
There is a law, (but let the reader remark, that it
prevails but in one of the colonies), against
mutilation. It took its rise from the frequency of the
inhuman practice. But though a master cannot there chop off
the limb of a slave with an axe, he may yet work, starve,
and beat him to death with impunity.
[105]
Two instances are recorded by the receivers,
out of about fifty-thousand, where a white man has
suffered death for the murder of a negroe; but the
receivers do not tell us, that these suffered more because
they were the pests of society, than because the murder
of slaves was a crime.
[106]
A negroe-funeral is considered as a curious sight, and is
attended with singing, dancing, musick, and every
circumstance that can shew the attendants to be happy on
the occasion.
[107]
In 96 years, ending in 1774, 800,000 slaves had been
imported into the French part of St. Domingo, of which
there remained only 290,000 in 1774. Of this last number
only 140,000 were creoles, or natives of the island, i. e.
of 650,000 slaves, the whole posterity were 140,000.
Considerations sur la Colonie de St. Dominique,(See
errata-should be read as "St. Domingue") published
by authority in 1777.
[108]
Ten thousand people under fair advantages, and in a soil
congenial to their constitutions, and where the means of
subsistence are easy, should produce in a century 160,000.
This is the proportion in which the Americans increased;
and the Africans in their own country increase in the same,
if not in a greater proportion. Now as the climate of the
colonies is as favourable to their health as that of their
own country, the causes of the prodigious decrease in the
one, and increase in the other, will be more conspicuous.
[109]
See Part II Chapter I second paragraph.
[110]
See Part II Chapter IX last paragraph.
[111]
Epist. to Philemon.
[112]
The African slave is of this description; and we
could wish, in all our arguments on the present subject, to
be understood as having spoken only of proper
slaves. The slave who is condemned to the oar, to the
fortifications, and other publick works, is in a different
predicament. His liberty is not appropriated, and
therefore none of those consequences can be justly drawn,
which have been deduced in the present case.
[113]
See the description of an African battle (Footnote 049).
[114]
The lowest computation is 40,000, (Footnote 060).
[115]
The legislature has squandered away more money in the
prosecution of the slave trade, within twenty years, than
in any other trade whatever, having granted from the year
1750, to the year 1770, the sum of 300,000 pounds.
[116]
Sermon preached before the University of Cambridge, by the
Rev. Peter Peckard.
[117]
The first noted earthquake at Jamaica, happened June the
7th 1692, when Port Royal was totally sunk. This was
succeeded by one in the year 1697, and by another in the
year 1722, from which time to the present, these regions of
the globe seem to have been severely visited, but
particularly during the last six or seven years. See a
general account of the calamities, occasioned by the late
tremendous hurricanes and earthquakes in the West-Indian
islands, by Mr. Fowler.
[118]
The many ships of war belonging to the British navy, which
were lost with all their crews in these dreadful
hurricanes, will sufficiently prove the fact.
Publisher's Commendations
[119]
Books Printed and Sold by J. PHILLIPS,
ESSAY on the TREATMENT and CONVERSION of
AFRICAN SLAVES in the BRITISH Sugar Colonies.
By the Rev. J. RAMSAY, Vicar of Teston in
Kent, who resided many Years in the West-Indies.
In One Volume, Octavo. Price 5s bound,
or 4s in Boards.
An INQUIRY into the Effects of putting a Stop
to the African Slave Trade, and of granting Liberty
to the Slaves in the British Sugar Colonies.
By J. RAMSAY. Price 6d.
A REPLY to the Personal Invectives and Objections
contained in two Answers, published by
certain anonymous Persons, to an Essay on the
Treatment and Conversion of African Slaves, in
the British Colonies. By JAMES RAMSAY. Price 2s.
A LETTER from Capt. J.S. SMITH, to the
Rev. Mr. HILL, on the State of the Negroe Slaves;
to which are added an Introduction, and Remarks
on Free Negroes, &c. by J. RAMSAY. Price 6d.
THOUGHTS on the Slavery of the Negroes.
Price 4d.
The CASE of our Fellow-Creatures, the Oppressed
Africans, respectfully recommended to the serious
Consideration of the Legislature of Great-Britain,
by the People called Quakers. Price 2d.
A SERIOUS ADDRESS to the Rulers of America,
on the Inconsistency of their Conduct respecting
Slavery. Price 3d.
A CAUTION to GREAT BRITAIN and her
Colonies, in a short Representation of the calamitous
State of the enslaved Negroes in the British
Dominions. By ANTHONY BENEZET. Price 6d.
A Description of Guinea, its Situation, Produce,
and the general Disposition of its Inhabitants; with
an Inquiry into the Rise and Progress of the Slave
Trade, &c. By ANTHONY BENEZET. Bound 2s. 6d.
|