{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_69376/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_69376","id":"gutenberg_69376","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/69376","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: History - American","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Politics","Slavery -- United States"],"text":"TRANSCRIBER\u2019S NOTE\n\n  Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.\n\n  Some minor changes to the text are noted at the end of the book.\n\n\n\n\n                            ANTI-SLAVERY\n\n                             CATECHISM.\n\n\n                           BY MRS. CHILD,\n\n  _Author of \u2018An Appeal in favor of that class of Americans called\n  Africans,\u2019 the \u2018Evils of Slavery, and the Cure of Slavery,\u2019 \u2018Authentic\n  Anecdotes of American Slavery,\u2019 \u2018History of the Condition of Women,\u2019\n  \u2018The Oasis,\u2019 \u2018Frugal Housewife,\u2019 &c._\n\n\n                  \u201cOn the nation\u2019s naked heart\n                   Scatter the living coals of Truth.\u201d\n\n\n                           Second Edition.\n\n\n                            NEWBURYPORT:\n                    PUBLISHED BY CHARLES WHIPPLE.\n                                1839.\n\n\n\n\n       Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1835,\n                         By CHARLES WHIPPLE,\n    In the Clerk\u2019s Office of the District Court of Massachusetts.\n\n\n\n\nANTI-SLAVERY CATECHISM.\n\n\n_Question._ Why do you consider it a duty to preach and publish\nabolition doctrines?\n\n_Answer._ First, I consider it my duty as a Christian; for the system\nof slavery, as a whole, and in each one of its details, is in direct\nopposition to the precepts of the gospel. Secondly, I consider it\nmy duty as a conscientious citizen of this republic; for I believe\nslavery is prejudicial to the best interests of my country; and I\ndare not hope that God\u2019s blessing will rest upon us, if we persevere\nin our iniquity.\n\n_Q._ But the abolitionists are accused of showing the worst side of\nslavery. Is it not true that they seek to give an exaggerated idea of\nits evils?\n\n_A._ I believe every man, who candidly examines the subject, will\ncome to the conclusion, that every side appears to be the worst side.\nAllow me to give a brief statement of the case. Between two and\nthree millions of people are compelled to labor without wages. They\ngain nothing more by working ten hours than they would by working\none hour. It is not in human nature that they should be disposed to\nbe industrious under these circumstances. They try to do as little\nas possible. The chief part of the labor that is got out of their\nbones and sinews is obtained by fear of the whip. A peck of corn a\nweek is the usual allowance for the food of a slave. The planters\ngenerally estimate that a slave can be fed and clothed at an expense\nof from fifteen to twenty dollars a year. The following is the\nprinted testimony of Thomas Clay, of Georgia, himself a slave-holder,\nthough reputed to be an amiable, conscientious man: \u201cA peck of corn\nper week, if it be sound flint corn, is sufficient to sustain health\nand strength under moderate labor. But there is _often_ a defect\nin the quality, and the quantity is then insufficient. The present\neconomy of the slave system is to get all you can from the slave,\nand give in return as little as will barely support him in a working\ncondition. Even where there is not direct intention to abridge his\ncomforts, they are but little consulted; and the slave, seeing his\nmaster wholly engrossed by his own advantage, naturally adopts the\nsame selfish course, and, when not restrained by higher principles,\nbecomes deceitful and selfish.\u201d\n\n_Q._ If Mr. Thomas Clay is a good man, and really thinks slavery so\nbad in its effects, why does he not emancipate his own slaves?\n\n_A._ If you were to ask him, I suppose he would give an answer very\ncommon among planters. He would tell you that he could not do it\nbecause the laws of the State in which he lives impose such heavy\npenalties, that the process of emancipation is extremely difficult\nand expensive.\n\n_Q._ Who makes the laws of the Southern States?\n\n_A._ The slave-holders themselves. When I hear a man say that he\nwould gladly emancipate his slaves, if the _laws_ would allow it,\nit makes me think of an anecdote I have often heard. A little girl\nhad been ordered to perform some household work in the absence of\nher mother. When the parent returned, and saw that her orders had\nnot been obeyed, she said, \u201cMy child, why have you not done as I bid\nyou?\u201d The little girl replied, \u201cI should have been glad to do it,\nmother; but I could not. Don\u2019t you see I am tied?\u201d \u201cAnd pray who tied\nyou?\u201d inquired the mother. \u201cI tied myself,\u201d was the reply. Now this\nis plainly the case with the slave-holders. They make oppressive\nlaws, and persist in upholding those laws, and then say, \u201cI would do\nmy duty, if I could; but the _laws_ will not permit it.\u201d\n\n_Q._ Do the slaves have to work all the time?\n\n_A._ In some States the laws ordain that slaves shall not be\ncompelled to work _more_ than _fourteen_ hours a day, from September\nto March, nor more than _fifteen_ hours a day, from March to\nSeptember; and it is reasonable to conclude that there would have\nbeen no necessity for making such a law, unless some masters _did_\ncompel their slaves to toil beyond the specified hours. Convicts, who\nare imprisoned for crime, are not obliged to work more than ten hours\na day, and are better fed than the slaves. It is an extraordinary\nthing for a slave to be sent to the state prison for an offence.\nInstead of punishment, it would in fact be amelioration of his lot.\n\n_Q._ But I have been told that the slaves sometimes work for\nthemselves.\n\n_A._ When they happen to have kind masters, they are sometimes\nallowed a part of the time to earn something for themselves; but the\nlaws are extremely inefficient for the protection of property thus\nacquired. If a white man sees fit to seize the products of their\nindustry, the law in most cases affords no redress; because in slave\nStates a colored man is never allowed to give evidence against a\nwhite man, under any circumstances. Any note of hand, or written\ncontract with a slave is worth no more than a promissory note to a\ndog; because no slave can bring an action at law. In several of the\nStates, a slave is liable to punishment if it is ascertained that he\nhas acquired any property.\n\n_Q._ I have been told that masters are allowed to kill their slaves.\nCan this be true?\n\n_A._ The laws do indeed nominally consider the killing of a slave\nas murder; but no instance has ever been recorded of a white man\nexecuted for killing a slave. One law on this subject has the\nfollowing strange qualification: \u201cExcept said slave die of _moderate_\npunishment.\u201d As if any punishment, that occasioned death, _could_\nbe moderate! If a hundred blacks or mulattoes, either bond or free,\nshould see a slave murdered, it avails nothing against the murderer;\nbecause the laws of slave States do not allow a colored person, under\nany circumstances, to testify against a white man. The laws of South\nCarolina favor the master to such a degree, that when accused of\nmurdering a slave, he may be absolved simply upon _his own oath_,\nthat he did not commit the crime!\n\n_Q._ But I am told that white men are not unfrequently prosecuted for\ncruelty to slaves; and this looks as if the laws afforded the poor\ncreatures some protection.\n\n_A._ I have read not a few Reports of Cases in Southern Courts;\nand those reports did more than any thing else to make me an\nabolitionist. Prosecutions are always brought for the master\u2019s\ninterest\u2014never for the protection or redress of the slave. In\nMartin\u2019s Louisiana Reports, 1818, you will find the case of Jourdan\n_vs._ Patten. In this case a lady sued a neighboring proprietor\nfor the damage of putting out the only eye of one of her slaves.\nThe Supreme Court decided that the defendant should pay the lady\nthe sum of twelve hundred dollars; in consideration of which, the\nslave should be placed in _his_ possession. The lady received all\nthe money, as an indemnification for the loss of property; but the\npoor slave not only received no atonement for his sufferings, but\nwas actually given to the very man that had knocked his eye out!\nThis is a fair sample of the nature of all such prosecutions. In\nNott & McCord\u2019s South Carolina Reports, 1818, it is stated that a\nslave belonging to Mrs. E. Witsell, was shot through the head by two\nmen who were hunting runaway negroes. The lady commenced an action\nto recover the value of her slave. The judge told the jury that\ncircumstances _might_ exist to authorize the killing of a negro,\n_without the sanction of a magistrate, or even the order of a militia\nofficer_; but it was thought such circumstances were not connected\nwith _this_ case; the lady was therefore entitled to compensation\nfor injury done to her property. As for the poor slave himself, his\nparents, his wife, or his children, they were never once thought of\nin the matter.\n\n_Q._ But do you really believe they hunt negroes with dogs and guns,\nas some people say?\n\n_A._ There cannot be the slightest doubt of the fact. Dogs are\ntrained for that express purpose. The planters justify the practice,\nby saying it is absolutely necessary for their own safety; because\nrunaway negroes, who collect in the woods and swamps, will soon begin\nto commit depredations on the neighboring estates. Thus the evils\ninevitably growing out of this bad system are made use of to justify\nits cruelties. Free laborers would have no inducement to run away\nand hide in swamps. It would obviously be for their own interest to\nkeep at work. These negro hunts seem to be entered into with all the\nkeen excitement of sportsmen going out to hunt squirrels or hares. A\nletter written near Edenton, N.C. among other items of news, states:\n\u201cWe have had great negro shooting lately.\u201d A gentleman well known in\nthe literary world resided for some time in the family of a Georgia\nplanter; and he himself stated to me that three negro hunts took\nplace during the first nine months of his stay there. He said, that\none night hearing a noise below stairs, he hastened to ascertain the\ncause. \u201cThe gentlemen of the family were cleaning and loading their\nguns, trying their flints, and going through the usual preparations,\napparently for a deer hunt, as buck shot and bullets were in demand.\nThe children of the family had partaken of the general excitement,\nand arisen from their beds. As I entered the room, I could hear one\nof the youngest say, \u2018Why, pa, you wouldn\u2019t kill Ralph, would you?\u2019\n\u2018I would take him, and sell him, and get money for him,\u2019 said the\nnext of age. \u2018You will only lame him, so as to seize him, I suppose,\u2019\nsaid the mother. \u2018I would rather kill him than the best fat buck in\nthe country,\u2019 replied the father, as he rammed down the heavy charge.\nThe moonlight from the window glanced along the barrel of the piece,\nand caught the eye of the eldest boy. The reflected light kindled\nup his glance with something of an unnatural flash, but in vivid\nsympathy with the paternal look and attitude. The anticipated joy of\nvengeance seemed to be the predominating emotion.\u201d\n\n_Q._ If the laws are as you say, I should think the slaves did not\nstand a fair chance when they are _wrongfully_ accused.\n\n_A._ If you will examine Stroud\u2019s Compendium of the Slave Laws, you\nwill be convinced for yourself that what I say is true; and the\neffect is as you suppose. The poor slaves are completely in the power\nof their masters. The same men who accuse them are often their judges\nand executioners. In illustration of this, I will tell you a case\nthat occurred in Edenton, North Carolina. It was told by a woman who\nlived there at the time, and witnessed some of the executions. Many\nof the slaves in that place were skilful in mechanical trades. The\nplanters in the back country were very desirous to purchase some of\nthem; but their masters found it so profitable to let them out, that\nthey would not consent to sell them. Those who were anxious to buy,\nhit upon the following expedient to obtain their purpose: They wrote\nanonymous letters, charging these intelligent slaves with having\nprojected an insurrection. These letters were scattered about in\nEdenton, with the idea that the masters would be glad to sell such\ndangerous fellows; but instead of this, the poor innocent slaves were\ntried, convicted, and sentenced by their frightened owners; and a\nlarge number of them were put to death, upon no other evidence than\nanonymous letters.\n\n_Q._ It does not seem as if such things could take place in a\ncivilized country. Can you believe it?\n\n_A._ If you reflect a little upon human nature, I believe you will\nthink it perfectly natural that such abuses should exist, wherever\none human being has arbitrary power over another. You would not like\nto place yourself completely in the power even of the best man you\nknow; you would be afraid to have it depend entirely on his will how\nmuch work you should do in a day, what food you should eat, and what\nclothes you should wear, and how and when you should be punished.\nIt is not considered entirely safe for an aged parent to relinquish\nall his property, and trust entirely to the generosity of his own\nchildren; what then do you suppose the poor slave has to expect, when\nhe becomes too old and infirm to be profitable to his master?\n\n_Q._ But the Southerners are said to be very honorable, generous men.\n\n_A._ Our Southern brethren are just what any human beings would be\nunder similar circumstances. They are generous with the proceeds of\nother men\u2019s labor, for the same reason that the heir is prodigal of\nmoney, which another accumulates for him. He who can let out his\nneighbor, and his neighbor\u2019s wife and children, and receive all\ntheir wages, will naturally be more profuse than a man who depends\nentirely on his own exertions. Planters have heretofore generally\nconfessed that slavery is an evil, and many of them speak of its\ndetailed abuses with strong regret; but these abuses are merely the\nnecessary and inevitable results of the system they are helping to\nsupport; and they never can cure the abuses until they are willing to\nrenounce the system itself. I suppose that few planters would think\nof palliating the treatment Mrs. Salarie\u2019s slaves received; yet they\nare all helping to support a system under which such cruelties can\nbe committed with impunity. Perhaps very humane and amiable masters\ndo even more mischief than the desperately wicked; for they are\nalways quoted as palliations of the whole system; and they approach\nso _near_ to the right line, that they can more easily draw over\nkind-hearted people, who have not thought much upon the subject.\n\n_Q._ What is the history of Mrs. Salarie?\n\n_A._ She resided in New Orleans. On the 10th of April, 1834, her\nsplendid mansion took fire. During the midst of the conflagration,\na rumor arose among the crowd that there were slaves chained in the\nburning dwelling; but those who asked for the keys were reproved for\ninterfering with their neighbor\u2019s business. At last the doors were\nforced open by sailors and mechanics, that had collected around the\nspot; and a New Orleans paper thus describes the horrible scene that\npresented itself: \u201cSeven slaves more or less horribly mutilated, were\nseen, some chained to the floor, and some suspended by the neck to\nthe ceiling, with their limbs stretched and torn from one extremity\nto the other. Their bodies, from head to foot, were covered with\nscars and sores, and filled with wounds. One poor old man, upwards of\nsixty years of age, was chained hand and foot, and made fast to the\nfloor, in a kneeling position. His head bore the appearance of having\nbeen beaten until it was broken, and the worms were actually seen\nmaking a feast of his brains.\u201d\n\n_Q._ Every body must have thought her a very wicked woman. Did the\nslave-holders in the neighborhood pretend to justify her measures?\n\n_A._ I have no doubt that every humane person, that heard of the\nevent, expressed horror, and sincerely felt it. For several months\nprevious to the discovery, her neighbors had been in the habit of\nliving in apartments as far as possible from her house, on purpose to\navoid the shrieks and groans of her poor suffering slaves; yet during\nall that time no complaint was laid before the public authorities,\nand no investigation demanded! I suppose neighbors were afraid to say\nany thing, lest they should be accused of promoting discontent among\nthe negroes. Those who endeavor to keep human beings in the situation\nof beasts, are more afraid of them than they would be of beasts;\nbecause the human being has _reason_, which is always prone to offer\nresistance to tyranny. The consciousness of this makes slave-holders\nvery irritable when any one in the community takes part with an\nabused slave, or expresses the slightest pity for his sufferings.\n\n_Q._ Is it not for the master\u2019s interest to treat the slaves well?\n\n_A._ So it is for the interest of men to treat their horses and\ncattle well; and yet their passions not unfrequently make them forget\ntheir interests. Passive obedience is obtained from human beings with\nmore difficulty than from animals; and when the master _is_ provoked,\nthe poor slave is completely in his power, with scarcely the shadow\nof protection from the law. The law in no case recognises slaves as\nhuman beings; on the contrary, it expressly declares they \u201cshall\nbe deemed, sold, taken, and reputed to be _chattels personal_, in\nthe hands of their owners and possessors, their administrators and\nassigns, to all intents, constructions, and _purposes whatever_.\u201d An\nact of Maryland, for the settlement of estates, enumerates specific\narticles, such as \u201cslaves, working beasts, animals,\u201d &c. Where even\nthe _laws_ consider human beings as animals, it is not a matter of\nsurprise that they are generally treated no better than self-interest\nleads men to treat animals. You will likewise perceive that when\nthe slave becomes old, or diseased, or in any way unfit for labor,\nit is _not_ for the interest of his master to prolong his existence\nby rendering it comfortable. Then again that part of the system\nconnected with _overseers_, shows plainly that the self-interest of\nthe master cannot effectually secure good treatment to the slave.\nIf planters were to give overseers a stated salary, without regard\nto the amount of produce, the overseers (who are proverbially\nunprincipled men) would have no motive for consulting the interest of\ntheir employers\u2014it would be a matter of indifference to them whether\nmuch or little work were done. To obviate this difficulty, it is\ncustomary to give the overseer a certain _proportion_ of the profits\nof the plantation. Of course, it becomes his ruling desire to get the\ngreatest possible amount of work done. He does not care how much the\nsoil is exhausted, nor how much the negroes are broken down. If a\nslave says he is very ill, the overseer is unwilling to believe the\nstory, because he is reluctant to lose a day\u2019s labor. If the poor\ncreature droops under his allotted task, he must be stimulated by the\nwhip, because the overseer cannot spare an hour of his exertions. If\nthe \u201cslave dies under _moderate_ punishment,\u201d the master must furnish\na new laborer; and the loss falls on _him_, not on the overseer.\nIt is obviously natural for the latter personage to think more of\nhis own gains than of his employer\u2019s losses. Every body knows that\nmen are prone to drive hired horses with less mercy than their own;\nbecause they do not meet with any personal loss from injury done to\nthe beast, and their object is to get their money\u2019s worth of riding.\nIs it not a fearful thing for one human being to be placed towards\nanother in the same relation that a stable-horse is toward the man\nwho hires him? When planters are reminded of instances of cruelty,\ntoo well authenticated to be denied, they are prone to lay the blame\nupon overseers. Mr. Wirt, of Virginia, speaks of this class of men\nas \u201cthe lowest of the human race\u2014always cap in hand to the dons who\nemploy them, and furnishing materials for their pride, insolence,\nand love of dominion.\u201d If we had no such information concerning the\ncharacter of these men, we should naturally conclude that good people\nwould be averse to enter into such an employment. Yet overseers and\ndrivers are a necessary part of this bad system, because slaves\nare entirely deprived of the motives which induce free laborers\nto work; and since overseers must be employed, it is necessary to\nmake it for their interest to get as much work out of the slave as\npossible. The evils of slavery are necessary and inevitable parts\nof the system; and whether the planters reprobate them or not, they\ncannot possibly avoid them, except by relinquishing the system. The\nmaster and his subordinate agents _must_ have discretionary power to\npunish, because their poor human brutes, being deprived of salutary\nmotives to exertion, must be driven to it. The slave _must_ not be\nallowed to buy or sell, or make the most trifling contracts; because\nthe oppressed being would naturally avail himself of this privilege,\nand sell some of the cotton or tobacco, which he cultivates for\nhis master without wages. The laws _must_ punish them with great\nseverity; because the very nature of their condition is a constant\ntemptation to theft, falsehood, and murder. They _must_ be kept\nbrutally ignorant; because if they were otherwise, they could not be\nkept in slavery. Licentiousness _must_ be countenanced among them;\nbecause their master\u2019s interest is connected with their increase,\nand he might lose many good bargains if the laws did not allow him\nto sell a wife from her husband, or a husband from his wife. The law\n_must_ suppose a negro to be a slave, till he proves himself free;\nbecause runaway slaves would of course pretend that they were free.\nThey _must_ not be allowed to witness against a white man; for a\nslave may have had a wife or a child whipped to death by a white\nman\u2014and he may have many other good reasons for strong prejudice\nagainst white men. An unnatural system _must_ be sustained by\nunnatural means. Hence we find the same characteristic features in\nevery country where negro slavery has been allowed.\n\n_Q._ Some people think slavery as great a sin as the slave trade. Are\nyou of that opinion?\n\n_A._ There seems to me just the same difference as there is between\nthe thief and the man who pays him for stealing. What would you say\nof a man who buys a horse, knowing it to be stolen? The following\ncircumstance, which took place a short time before our Revolution,\nfurnishes a good commentary on this matter. A Philadelphia negro was\naccused of having stolen goods in his possession. He acknowledged\nthe fact, saying, \u201cMassa Justice, me know me got dem tings from Tom\ndere, and me tink Tom teal dem too; but what den, Massa? dey be only\na piccaninny knife, and a piccaninny corkscrew; one cost sixpence,\nand tudder a shilling; an me _pay Tom honestly for dem_, Massa.\u201d\n\u201cPretty story, truly!\u201d said his worship; \u201cyou knew they were stolen,\nand yet allege for excuse, you honestly paid for them. Don\u2019t you\nknow, Pompey, that the receiver is as bad as the thief? You must be\nseverely whipped, you black rascal.\u201d \u201cVery well, Massa, if de black\nrascal be whipt for buying tolen goods, me hope de white rascal be\nwhipt too, for same ting, when you catch him.\u201d \u201cTo be sure,\u201d replied\nthe Justice. \u201cWell den,\u201d says Pompey, \u201chere be Tom\u2019s Massa\u2014hold him\nfast, constable! He buy Tom, as I buy de piccaninny knife, and de\npiccaninny corkscrew. He know very well Tom be tolen from his old\nfadder and mudder; de knife and de corkscrew had neder.\u201d\n\nI do not see how we can escape from the conclusion that the\nslave-owner is an accomplice of the slave-trader. So long as a\nprofitable market is kept open, the article will be supplied, despite\nof difficulties and dangers. The only way to stop the trade, is to\nshut up the market; and this can be done only by the entire abolition\nof the system of slavery. When nobody will buy a man, nobody will be\ntempted to steal a man. Slavery never exists without having more or\nless of the slave-trade involved _in_ it. There is in the very heart\nof our land a slave-trade constantly carried on, and sanctioned by\nour laws, which is as disgraceful and cruel as the foreign slave\ntrade. The new slave States at the extreme South have not slaves\nenough, and the climate, together with the hard labor of the sugar\nplantations, kills them very fast. The old slave States have a\nsurplus of slaves, which they send off to supply these markets. About\nten thousand are annually exported from Virginia alone. Niles, in\nhis Register, vol. 35, page 4, says: \u201cDealing in slaves has become\na _large_ business. Establishments are made at several places in\nMaryland and Virginia, at which they are sold like cattle. These\nplaces are strongly built, and well supplied with _thumbscrews_,\n_gags_, _cow-skins_, _and other whips_, _often bloody_.\u201d In these\nsales no regard is paid to domestic ties. The newly married wife\nis torn shrieking from her husband, and the mother with her little\nones are sold in \u201c_separate_ lots to suit purchasers.\u201d A gentleman\nin Charleston, S. C., writes to his friend in New York: \u201cCuriosity\nsometimes leads me to the auction sales of the negroes. There I saw\nthe father looking with sullen contempt on the crowd, and expressing\nan indignation in his countenance that he dares not speak; and the\nmother pressing her infants closer to her bosom, exclaiming, in wild\nand simple earnestness, \u2018I can\u2019t leff my children! I won\u2019t leff my\nchildren!\u2019 But the hammer went on, reckless whether it united or\nsundered for ever. On another stand I saw a man apparently as white\nas myself exposed for sale.\u201d\n\n_Q._ I have heard some people say that the negroes do not care so\nmuch about such separations as we should suppose.\n\n_A._ There is no doubt that their degraded situation tends to blunt\nthe feelings, as well as to stultify the intellect; and it is a\nfearful thing to think what Christians have to answer for, who thus\nbrutalize immortal souls. But there are numerous instances to prove\nthat the poor creatures do often suffer the most agonizing sensations\nwhen torn from those they love. Near Palmyra, in Marion county,\nMissouri, two boys were sold to a slave-trader, who did not intend\nto leave the place until morning. During the night, the mother was\nkept chained in an out-house, that she might not make any effort to\nprevent the departure of her children. She managed to get loose from\nher fetters, seized an axe, cut off the heads of her sleeping boys,\nand then ended her own life by the same instrument.\n\nThe Missouri Intelligencer, a few months ago, gave an account of a\nslave named Michael, who was sold by his master to Mr. J. E. Fenton,\nby whom he was to be immediately shipped for the Southern markets.\nAt the mouth of the Ohio, he filed off his irons, and contrived to\nescape. He immediately returned to the place where his wife resided,\nand having armed himself, declared he never would be sent to the\nSouth, unless his wife was allowed to accompany him. He was finally\ntaken by stratagem, and lodged in jail for safe keeping. Finding that\nhis oppressors were determined to separate him from his beloved wife,\nhe committed suicide. I believe the attachments of slaves are even\nstronger than ours; for these ties constitute the only pleasure they\nare allowed to have. Hundreds of instances might be told, where they\nhave preferred death to separation.\n\n_Q._ I have been told they sometimes kidnapped free colored persons,\nto sell them as slaves. Is it so?\n\n_A._ It is unquestionably true that this is carried on to a\nconsiderable extent. More than twenty free colored children were\nkidnapped in the single city of Philadelphia, in 1825; and in 1827\ntwo were stolen in open day. It is a common thing to decoy the\nunsuspecting victims on board a vessel, or to some retired spot, and\nthen seize and bind them. A New York paper of 1829, says: \u201cBeware\nof kidnappers! It is well understood that there is at present in\nthis city, a gang of kidnappers, busily engaged in their vocation\nof stealing colored children for the Southern market.\u201d As the law\nsupposes every colored person to be a slave unless he can _prove_\nhimself free, and as no person of his own complexion is allowed to be\nevidence for him, the kidnappers have an easy time of it.\n\n_Q._ Some people say we ought to pity the masters as well as the\nslaves.\n\n_A._ I agree with them entirely. The masters are to be deeply pitied;\nbecause the long continuance of a wicked system has involved them\nin difficulties, and at the same time rendered them generally blind\nto the best means of getting rid of those difficulties. They are\nlikewise to be compassionated for the effects which early habits of\npower produce on their own characters. Mr. Jefferson, who lived in\nthe midst of slavery, says: \u201cThe whole commerce between master and\nslave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions; the\nmost unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submission\non the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it. The\nparent storms; the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath,\nputs on the same airs in a circle of smaller slaves, gives loose to\nthe worst of passions; and thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised\nin tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities.\nThe man must be a prodigy, who can retain his morals and manners\nundepraved in such circumstances.\u201d The general licentiousness\nproduced by this system can never be described without using language\ntoo gross to be addressed to a civilized community. Some idea of it\nmay be derived from the fact, that every female slave is completely\nin the power of her master, of his sons, of his overseers, and his\ndrivers. The law does not allow her to offer resistance to a white\nman, under any circumstances; and the state of public opinion is\nsuch that any pretensions to virtue on her part would be treated\nwith brutal ridicule. The slave is not allowed to have any right in\nhis wife and children. If his master\u2019s interest can be served by his\nkeeping three or four wives, or by his wife\u2019s having a succession of\nhusbands, he cannot dispute the commands of his owner. The wife, or\nthe husband, is sometimes sold, and sent thousands of miles from each\nother, and from their little ones, without the slightest hope of ever\nmeeting again. Under these circumstances, the man, or the woman, is\nsoon ordered to take another partner; because it is for the interest\nof the master that they should do so. It is a shameful fact that the\nlaws and customs of our country make it absolutely impossible for a\nlarge portion of our population to be virtuous, even if they wish to\nbe so. The wealth of Virginia is principally made by the breeding\nof slaves and horses; and persons unaccustomed to the system would\nbe shocked by the detail of well authenticated facts, which prove\nthat about as little regard is paid to decency in one case as the\nother. _Mulatto_ slaves bring a higher price than _black_ ones; hence\nlicentiousness in slave States becomes a profitable vice, instead of\nbeing expensive, as it is under other forms of society.\n\n_Q_. I have been told that a great many of the slaves have very light\ncomplexions. Is it so?\n\n_A._ In the old slave States, where the process of amalgamation\nhas been going on for a long time, this is remarkably the case. An\nold soldier, who lately visited the South, said he was not so much\nstruck by any circumstance, as by the great change that had taken\nplace in the complexion of the slaves since the Revolution. Now and\nthen I have seen in the southern papers advertisements for a runaway\nslave, \u201cwho passes himself for a white man.\u201d A Boston gentleman, who\ndislikes the abolitionists very much, visited Georgia a few years\nago. He told me that when he was walking with a planter one day, they\nmet a man driving a team, who had a perfectly fair complexion, with\nblue eyes and brown hair. The Bostonian remarked, \u201cThat must be an\nindependent fellow, to be driving a team in this part of the country,\nwhere it is considered so disgraceful for a white man to work.\u201d \u201cO,\nthat fellow is a slave,\u201d replied the Georgian. Almost every body\nhas heard of the recent case of Mary Gilmore, of Philadelphia, a\nperfectly white girl, of Irish parentage, who was taken up and tried\nas a runaway slave. A Missouri newspaper proves that a white man may,\nwithout a _mistake_, be adjudged a slave. \u201cA case of a slave sueing\nfor his freedom, was tried a few days since in Lincoln county, of\nwhich the following is a brief statement of particulars: A youth of\nabout ten years of age sued for his freedom on the ground that he\nwas a free white person. The court granted his petition to sue as\na pauper upon inspection of his person. Upon his trial before the\njury, he was examined by the jury and two learned physicians, all\nof whom concurred in the opinion that very little, if any, race of\nnegro blood could be discovered by any of the external appearances.\nAll the physiological marks of distinction, which characterize the\nAfrican descent, had disappeared. His skin was fair, his hair soft,\nstraight, fine and white, his eyes blue, but rather disposed to the\nhazel-nut color; nose prominent, the lips small, his head round and\nwell formed, forehead high and prominent, ears large, the tibia of\nthe leg straight, and feet hollow. Notwithstanding these evidences of\nhis claims, he was proved to be the descendant of a mulatto woman,\nand that his progenitors on the mother\u2019s side had been and still\nwere slaves: _consequently he was found to be a slave_.\u201d I have been\ntold of a young physician, who went into the far Southern States\nto settle, and there became in love with a very handsome and modest\ngirl, who lived at service. He married her; and about a year after\nthat event, a gentleman called at the house, and announced himself\nas Mr. J*******y, of Mobile. He said to Dr. W*****, \u201cSir, I have a\ntrifling affair of business to settle with you. You have married a\nslave of mine.\u201d The young physician resented this language; for he\nhad not entertained the slightest suspicion that the girl had any\nother than white ancestors since the flood. But Mr. J. furnished\nproofs of his claim, and Dr. W. knew very well that the laws of the\ncountry would uphold him in it. After considerable discussion, the\nbest bargain he could make was either to pay eight hundred dollars,\nor have his wife put up at auction. He consented to the first\nalternative, and his unwelcome visiter departed. When he had gone,\nDr. W. told his wife what had happened. The poor woman burst into\ntears and said, \u201cThat as Mr. J. _was her own father_, she had hoped\nthat when he heard she had found an honorable protector, he would\nhave left her in peace.\u201d\n\n_Q._ There can be no doubt that slavery is a bad system; but don\u2019t\nyou think it ought to be done away gradually? Ought not the slaves to\nbe fitted for freedom, before they are emancipated?\n\n_A._ The difficulty is, it is utterly impossible to fit them for\nfreedom while they remain slaves. The masters know very well that\ntheir vassals will be servile just in proportion as they are brutally\nignorant; hence all their legislation tends to keep them so. It is a\ndisgraceful fact, that in half of these United States the working men\nare expressly forbidden to learn to read or write. The law ordains\nthat twenty lashes shall be inflicted upon every slave found in an\nassembly met together for the purpose of \u201cmental instruction.\u201d Any\nwhite person who teaches a slave to read or write, or gives or sells\nhim any book (the Bible not excepted), is fined two hundred dollars;\nand any colored person who commits the same _crime_, is punished with\nthirty-nine lashes, or with imprisonment. The Rev. Charles C. Jones,\nof Georgia, said in one of his sermons: \u201cGenerally speaking, the\nslaves appear to us to be without God and without hope in the world\u2014a\n_nation of heathen in our very midst_. We cannot cry out against the\nPapists for withholding the Scriptures from the common people; for\nwe withhold the Bible from _our_ servants, and keep them in ignorance\nof it.\u201d A writer in the Observer, of Charleston, S. C. says: \u201cI\nhazard the assertion, that throughout the bounds of our synod,\nthere are at least one hundred thousand slaves, speaking the same\nlanguage as ourselves, who never _heard_ of the plan of salvation by\na Redeemer.\u201d The reason assigned for these oppressive laws is, that\n\u201cteaching slaves to read and write tends to excite dissatisfaction in\ntheir minds,\u201d and to produce insurrection. In Georgia, a white man is\nfined five hundred dollars for teaching a slave or free negro to read\nor write; and if a colored man attempts to teach the alphabet even to\nhis own child, he is liable to be fined or whipped, according to the\ndiscretion of the court. Such laws are necessary for the preservation\nof this detestable system; and while such laws exist, how can the\nslaves ever be better fitted for freedom? When the British government\ninsisted that female slaves should no longer be flogged naked in the\nColonies, the Jamaica legislature replied, that the practice could\nnot possibly be laid aside, \u201c_until_ the negro women acquired more of\nthe sense of shame, which distinguishes European females.\u201d Fitting\nmen for freedom by keeping them slaves, is like the Jamaica mode of\nmaking women modest by whipping them without clothing.\n\n_Q._ But don\u2019t you think it would be dangerous to turn the slaves at\nonce loose upon the community?\n\n_A._ The abolitionists never desired to have them turned loose.\nThey wish to have them governed by salutary laws, so regulated as\neffectually to protect both master and slave. They merely wish\nto have the power of punishment transferred from individuals to\nmagistrates; to have the sale of human beings cease; and to have\nthe stimulus of _wages_ applied, instead of the stimulus of the\n_whip_. The relation of master and laborer might still continue;\nbut under circumstances less irksome and degrading to both parties.\nEven that much abused animal the jackass can be made to travel more\nexpeditiously by suspending a bunch of turnips on a pole and keeping\nthem before his nose, than he can by the continual application of the\nwhip; and even when human beings are brutalized to the last degree,\nby the soul-destroying system of slavery, they have still sense\nenough left to be more willing to work two hours for twelve cents,\nthan to work one hour for nothing.\n\n_Q._ I should think this system, in the long run, must be an\nunprofitable one.\n\n_A._ It is admitted to be so. Southerners often declare that it takes\nsix slaves to do what is easily performed by half the number of free\nlaborers. Henry Clay says, \u201cIt is believed that slave-labor would no\nwhere be employed in the farming portions of the United States, if\nthe proprietors were not tempted to raise slaves by the high price of\nthe Southern market, which keeps it up in their own;\u201d and he says the\neffects of introducing slavery into Kentucky have been to keep them\nin the rear of their non-slave-holding neighbors, in agriculture,\nmanufactures, and general prosperity. General Washington, when\nwriting to Sir John Sinclair on the comparative value of the soil\nin Pennsylvania and Virginia, ascribes the very low price of land\nin Virginia to the existence of slavery among them. John Randolph\ndeclared that Virginia was so impoverished by slavery, that slaves\nwould soon be advertising for runaway masters. A distinguished writer\non political economy says: \u201cThe slave system inflicts an incalculable\namount of human suffering, for the sake of making a wholesale waste\nof labor and capital.\u201d\n\n_Q._ But the masters say the negroes would cut their throats, if they\nwere emancipated.\n\n_A._ It is safer to judge by uniform experience than by the\nassertions of the masters, who, even if they have no intention to\ndeceive, are very liable to be blinded by having been educated in\nthe midst of a bad system. Listen to facts on this subject. On the\n10th of October, 1811, the Congress of Chili decreed that every child\nborn after that day should be free. In April, 1812, the government\nof Buenos Ayres ordered that every child born after the 1st of\nJanuary, 1813, should be free. In 1821, the Congress of Colombia\nemancipated all slaves who had borne arms in favor of the Republic,\nand provided for the emancipation, in eighteen years, of the whole\nslave population, of 900,000. In September, 1829, the government of\nMexico granted immediate and entire emancipation to every slave. In\nall these instances, _not one case of insurrection or of bloodshed\nhas ever been heard of, as the result of emancipation_.\n\nIn St. Domingo no measures were taken gradually to fit the slaves\nfor freedom. They were suddenly emancipated during a civil war, and\narmed against British invaders. They at once ceased to be property,\nand were recognized as human beings. Col. Malefant, who resided on\nthe island, informs us, in his Historical and Political History of\nthe Colonies, that, \u201cafter this public act of emancipation, the\nnegroes remained quiet both in the south and west, and they continued\nto work upon all the plantations. The colony was flourishing. The\nwhites lived happily and in peace upon their estates, and the\nnegroes continued to work for them.\u201d General Lacroix, in his Memoirs\nof St. Domingo, speaking of the same period, says: \u201cThe colony\nmarched as by enchantment towards its ancient splendor; cultivation\nprospered; every day produced perceptible proofs of its progress.\u201d\nThis prosperous state of things lasted about eight years, and would\nperhaps have continued to the present day, had not Bonaparte, at the\ninstigation of the old French planters, sent an army to deprive the\nblacks of the freedom they had used so well. The enemies of abolition\nare always talking of the horrors of St. Domingo, as an argument to\nprove that emancipation is dangerous; but historical facts prove\nthat the effort to _restore slavery_ occasioned all the bloodshed in\nthat island; while _emancipation produced only the most peaceful and\nprosperous results_.\n\nIn June, 1794, Victor Hugo, a French republican general, retook\nGuadaloupe from the British, and immediately proclaimed freedom to\nall the slaves. They were 85,000 in number, and the whites only\n13,000. _No disasters occurred in consequence of this step._ More\nthan seven years after this, the Supreme Council of Guadaloupe, in\nan official document, alluding to the tranquillity which reigned\nthroughout the island, observed: \u201cWe shall have the satisfaction of\nhaving given an example, which will prove that _all classes of people\nmay live in perfect harmony with each other, under an administration\nwhich secures justice to all classes_.\u201d In 1802, Bonaparte sent a\npowerful French force, and again reduced the island to slavery, at\nthe cost of about 20,000 negro lives.\n\nIn July, 1828, thirty thousand Hottentots in Cape Colony were\nemancipated from their long and cruel bondage, and admitted by law to\nall the rights and privileges of the white colonists. Outrages were\npredicted, as the inevitable consequence of freeing human creatures\nso completely brutalized as the poor Hottentots; but all went on\npeaceably; and, as a gentleman facetiously remarked, \u201cHottentots as\nthey were, they worked much better for Mr. _Cash_, than they had ever\ndone for Mr. _Lash_.\u201d\n\n_Q._ But they say the British have had difficulties in their West\nIndies.\n\n_A._ The enemies of the cause have tried very hard to get up a\n\u201craw-head and bloody-bones\u201d story; but even if you take their own\naccounts, you will find that they have not been able to adduce any\ninstances of violence in support of their assertions. The real\nfacts are these: The measure was not carried in a manner entirely\nsatisfactory to the English abolitionists. Their knowledge of human\nnature, combined with the practical evidence afforded by history,\nled them to conclude that immediate and unqualified emancipation\nwas _safest_ for the master, as well as just to the slave; but\nthe planters raised such a hue and cry concerning bloodshed and\ninsurrection, that the British government determined to conciliate\nthem by a gradual abolition of slavery. It was ordained that the\nslaves should work six years longer without wages, under the name\nof _apprentices_; but no punishment could be inflicted without the\nspecial order of magistrates. The colonies had a right to dispense\nwith the apprenticeship system if they pleased; but out of the\nseventeen West India colonies, Antigua and Bermuda were the only\nones that chose to do so. The act of Parliament provided that each\napprentice should work for his master _forty and a half_ hours a\nweek, and have the rest of the time to himself. The masters were not\nsatisfied with this; and they tried, by a series of petty vexations,\nto coerce the apprentices into individual contracts to work _fifty_\nhours in a week. While the people had been slaves, they were always\nallowed _cooks_ to prepare their meals, a person to bring _water_\nto the gang during the hot hours, and _nurses_ to tend the little\nchildren while their mothers were at work in the field; but because\nthe Abolition Act did not expressly provide that these privileges\nshould be continued, the masters saw fit to take them away. Each\napprentice was obliged to quit his or her work, and go, sometimes a\ngreat distance, to the cabin to cook his meals, instead of having\nit served up in the field; and the time taken up in this operation\nwas to be made up out of the apprentices\u2019 own time. No water was\nallowed to be brought to quench their thirst; the aged and infirm,\ninstead of being left, as formerly, to superintend the children under\nthe shade, were ordered out into the burning fields; and mothers\nwere obliged to toil at the hoe with their infants strapped at their\nbacks. In addition to all these annoyances, the planters obtained a\nnew proclamation from the governor, by which they were authorized\nto require extra labor of the apprentices in times of emergency,\nor _whenever they should deem it necessary_, in the cultivation,\ngathering, or manufacture of the crop, provided they repaid them an\nequal time at _a convenient season of the year_. This was very much\nlike taking from a New England laborer the month of July, and paying\nit back to him in January. The negroes had behaved extremely well\nwhen emancipation was first proclaimed, and universally showed a\ndisposition to be orderly, submissive, and thankful; but this system\nof privation and injustice soon created discontent. They knew that\nthey were to receive no wages, however industrious they might be;\nand they were well aware that their masters no longer had a right\nto flog them. A bad stimulus to labor had been removed, without\nsupplying a good one in its place. In three of the colonies, the\napprentices refused to work on the terms required by their masters.\nIn Jamaica, a very small military force was sent into one parish, and\nonly on one occasion; but no violence was offered on either side; for\nthe apprentices confined themselves to _passive resistance_\u2014merely\nrefusing to work on the required terms. In St. Christophers,\ndifficulties of a similar kind occurred; but no outrage of any kind\nwas committed. In one fortnight all the trouble was at an end; and\nout of twenty thousand apprentices, only thirty were found to be\nabsent from their work; and some of these were supposed to be dead\nin the woods. In Demarara, the principal difficulty occurred. The\nlaborers assembled together, and marched round with a flag staff; but\nthe _worst_ thing they did was to beat a constable with their fists.\n_It is a solemn fact that a few fisty cuffs with a constable are the\nonly violence to persons or property, that has been attempted by the\neight hundred thousand slaves emancipated in the British Colonies!_\n\nEven the difficulties above enumerated (slight as they were, and\nunworthy to be named in connexion with such a great moral change)\nwere but temporary. The governor of Jamaica, after five months\u2019\ntrial of emancipation, declares, in his address to the Assembly,\n\u201cNot the slightest idea of any interruption of tranquillity exists\nin any quarter; and those preparations which I have felt it my duty\nto make, might, without the slightest danger, have been dispensed\nwith.\u201d By recent news, we learn that the planters finding the system\nof coercion was likely to be ruinous to their own interest, offered\nthe apprentices 2_s._ 6_d._ per day for extra work. The enemies of\nabolition prophesied that nothing would induce the negroes to work\nmore than they were actually compelled to by law, and that the crops\nwould perish for want of gathering. But the result proved otherwise.\nAs soon as _wages_ were offered, they came forward eagerly, and\noffered to do more work than the planters were willing to pay for. We\nhave the testimony of one of their magistrates, that as soon as this\nsystem was tried, \u201ctheir apparent indifference was every where thrown\noff, and their work carried on in a steady, persevering, and diligent\nmanner.\u201d\n\n_Q._ And how was it in Antigua and Bermuda, where they gave up\nthe apprenticeship system, and tried immediate and unqualified\nemancipation?\n\n_A._ In those colonies not the slightest difficulty, of any kind, has\noccurred. The Antigua journals declare, \u201cThe great doubt is solved;\nthe highest hopes of the negroes\u2019 friends are fulfilled. A whole\npeople, comprising thirty thousand souls, have passed from slavery\ninto freedom, not only without the slightest irregularity, but with\nthe solemn and decorous tranquillity of a Sabbath.\u201d The Christmas\nholidays were always seasons of alarm in the slave-colonies, and a\nmilitary force was always held in readiness; but the Christmas after\nemancipation, the customary guard was dispensed with. Up to the\npresent time, every thing remains perfectly tranquil in Antigua; and\na negro is at the head of the police in that island. The population\nconsists of 2,000 whites, 30,000 slaves, and 4,500 free blacks.\n\n_Q._ Yet people are always saying that free negroes cannot take care\nof themselves.\n\n_A._ It is because people are either very much prejudiced or very\nignorant on the subject. In the United States, colored persons have\nscarcely any chance to rise. They are despised, and abused, and\ndiscouraged, at every turn. In the slave States they are subject to\nlaws nearly as oppressive as those of the slave. They are whipped\nor imprisoned, if they try to learn to read or write; they are not\nallowed to testify in court; and there is a general disposition not\nto encourage them by giving them employment. In addition to this,\nthe planters are very desirous to expel them from the State, partly\nbecause they are jealous of their influence upon the slaves, and\npartly because those who have slaves to let out, naturally dislike\nthe competition of the free negroes. But if colored people are\nwell treated, and have the same inducements to industry as other\npeople, they work as well and behave as well. A few years ago the\nPennsylvanians were very much alarmed at the representations that\nwere made of the increase of pauperism from the ingress of free\nnegroes. A committee was appointed to examine into the subject, and\nit was ascertained that the colored people not only supported their\nown poor, but paid a considerable additional sum towards the support\nof white paupers.\n\n_Q._ I have heard people say that the slaves would not take their\nfreedom, if it were offered to them.\n\n_A._ I sincerely wish they would offer it. I should like to see the\nexperiment tried. If the slaves are so well satisfied with their\ncondition, why do they make such severe laws against running away?\nWhy are the patroles on duty all the time to shoot every negro who\ndoes not give an account of himself as soon as they call to him? Why,\nnotwithstanding all these pains and penalties, are their newspapers\nfull of advertisements for runaway slaves? If the free negroes are\nso much worse off than those in bondage, why is it that their laws\nbestow freedom on any slave, \u201cwho saves his master or mistress\u2019s\nlife, or performs any meritorious service to the State?\u201d That must\nbe a very bad country where the law stipulates that _meritorious_\nactions shall be rewarded by making a man more unhappy than he was\nbefore! Some months ago, I had a conversation with a woman, who\nwent from Boston to Tuscaloosa, in Alabama. She was the wife of a\nBaptist clergyman, professed to be a pious woman, and was considered\nas such. I found her an apologist for slavery, but was not aware\nat the time that she actually owned slaves. She maintained that\nfreedom was the greatest curse that could be bestowed on a slave; and\nwhen I attempted to put the case home to her conscience, she, for\nconsistency\u2019s sake, declared, that she should be quite as willing\nto die and leave her own little son in slavery, as to leave him a\nfree laborer at the North. She said if she had a hundred slaves, she\nshould treat them all kindly, and endeavor to make their condition\ncomfortable. I replied, \u201cI am willing to believe that you would do\nso, madam; but in case of your death, or of any pecuniary distress\nin the family, the poor slaves would be divided among heirs, or\nseized by creditors; and then who can tell into whose hands they\nmay fall? The condition of the slave depends on the character of\nthe master; and that is entirely a matter of _accident_\u201d. The pious\nwoman rejoined, \u201cOh, I should take care of that. If they were good,\nfaithful servants, they would find at my death that papers of\nmanumission had been duly prepared.\u201d \u201cBut you told me that freedom\nwas the greatest curse that could be bestowed upon a slave,\u201d replied\nI: \u201cNow is it possible, madam, that you would leave, as your dying\nlegacy to good and faithful servants, the greatest curse you could\nbestow?\u201d\n\n_Q._ Do you suppose they really believe what they say, when they\ndeclare that slaves are happier than freemen?\n\n_A._ I leave your own republican good sense to determine that\nquestion. Governor Giles of Virginia did not take that ground in his\naddress to the Legislature in 1827. Speaking of punishing free blacks\nby selling them as slaves, he says: \u201cSlavery must be admitted to be\na punishment of the highest order; and according to every just rule\nfor the apportionment of punishment to crimes, it would seem that _it\nought to be applied only to crime of the highest order_!\u201d\n\nBut even if it were true that the slaves were as happy and contented\nas slave-holders try to represent them\u2014what would it prove? It would\nmerely prove that they had fearfully brutalized immortal souls before\nthey _could_ be happy in such a situation. Edmund Burke said very\ntruly, \u201cIf you have made a _happy slave_, you have made a _degraded\nman_.\u201d\n\n_Q._ But how is it that some people, who really do not intend to\nmake false representations, bring back such favorable accounts of\nslavery, after they have visited at the South?\n\n_A._ It is because they go among rich, hospitable planters, and see\nfavorite household slaves. Of the poor wretches on the plantations,\nsubject to the tender mercies of an overseer, they know as little,\nas the guests of a Russian nobleman know of the miserable condition\nof his serfs. Their sympathies all go with the master. They ask\nquestions of the master, and not of the slave. Even if they tried to\ntalk with the latter, the poor creatures would be afraid to speak\nfreely, lest any expressions of discontent might be reported to the\nmaster, or the overseer. I should like to have you hear them talk as\nI have heard runaway slaves talk, when they knew they had a friend to\nlisten to them!\n\n_Q._ But do you think the suitable time has yet come to exert\nourselves on this subject?\n\n_A._ I will answer, as a similar question was lately answered by a\nlady who had been brought up in the midst of slavery: \u201cIf thou were\na slave, toiling in the fields of Carolina, I apprehend thou wouldst\nthink the time had _fully_ come.\u201d This explains the whole difficulty.\nWe do not put ourselves in the condition of the slave, and imagine\nwhat would be our feelings if we were in _his_ circumstances. We do\nnot obey the Scripture injunction, \u201cremember those that are in bonds,\n_as bound with them_.\u201d\n\nBut if we look at this question merely with a view to expediency,\nwithout reference to justice or mercy, when can we hope that a time\nwill come _more_ propitious to the discussion of this subject? The\nfact is, difficulties and dangers increase every day. In South\nCarolina and Louisiana, the blacks are already a majority. The annual\nincrease of the _slaves_, without including the free blacks, in\nthe United States, is now 62,000 annually. It is a fact worthy of\nconsideration, that the licentiousness of the white man increases\nthe colored race; but the vices of colored men or women can never\nincrease the white race; for the children of such connections are of\ncourse not white.\u2014These people are increasing in the midst of us in\nstartling ratio. If we pursue a kind and Christian course, we can\nidentify their interests with the rest of the community, and make\nthem our friends; but if we persevere in the course we have pursued,\ntheir feelings and interests _must_ be all in opposition to ours, and\nthere is great reason to fear the consequences.\n\n_Q._ Don\u2019t you think the Colonization Society is doing some good?\n\n_A._ Those who have examined into the subject, have so universally\ncome to the conclusion that Colonization is entirely ineffectual for\nthe abolition of slavery at any time, however remote, that it seems\nhardly worth while to waste words on that subject. I do not pretend\nto impeach the motives of benevolent individuals, who have been\nengaged in it; but there is no doubt that its _practical tendency_\nis to perpetuate slavery. John Randolph, and other slave-holders,\nhave advocated that Society, upon the avowed ground that by sending\noff an inconvenient surplus it would increase the price of the\nslaves left. In the new slave States, where they have not as yet an\n\u201cinconvenient surplus\u201d of slaves, they don\u2019t like the Colonization\nSociety; but the old slave States have been its warmest friends.\nThere is one brief objection to the idea of abolishing slavery by\nColonization: _it is impossible_. Even if it were desirable to remove\nthese valuable laborers from our soil, it could not be done, if the\nwhole Treasury and Navy of the United States were devoted to it. The\nColonization Society has been in operation about nineteen years; they\nhave had immense funds; and they have transported to Africa, during\nthat time, about three thousand colored persons, of which _not one\nthousand_ were manumitted slaves. Now the annual _increase_ of the\nslaves alone is 62,000; and the annual increase of the free blacks is\nabout 10,000. _In nineteen years the Colonizationists have not been\nable to carry off one sixtieth part of the increase of the slaves in\none year!_ This is worse than the old story of the frog, who jumped\nout of the well two feet every night, and fell back three feet every\nmorning. But even if the colored people _could_ be all carried out\nof the country, what is the South to do for laborers? They have been\nin the habit of excusing themselves, by saying that white men cannot\nwork in their climate, and by taking it for granted that black men\nwill not work for wages. If the climate is unsuitable for white\nlaborers, it is manifestly very impolitic to send off the black\nones. It would be far wiser to try the experiment they have tried in\nBermuda and Antigua. Labor is needed in all parts of our country;\nand it is worse than a childish game to be sending off ship-loads of\nlaborers to Africa, while we are bringing in ship-loads from Ireland,\nHolland, and Switzerland.\n\n_Q._ I have heard some people say they gave their money to the\nColonization Society merely as a missionary establishment.\n\n_A._ It would be well for those people to examine into the matter,\nand first ascertain whether it _is_ a missionary establishment. When\nwe send missions to India, the Sandwich Islands, &c., we send men\nbelieved to be pious and enlightened. For the probable influence\nof the emigrants carried out by the Colonization Society, let the\nSociety answer for itself. They assure us that the colored persons\ncolonized from the United States will \u201ccarry religion and the arts\ninto the heart of Africa.\u201d Yet Mr. Clay, Vice President of the\nSociety, says, \u201cOf all classes of our population the most vicious is\nthat of the free colored\u2014contaminated themselves, they extend their\nvices to all around them.\u201d And the African Repository, which is the\norgan of the Society, declares that \u201cthey are notoriously ignorant\u2014a\ncurse and a contagion wherever they reside.\u201d Now, are not these\nadmirable missionaries to send out to christianize Africa? It would\nbe wise to put them under better and more encouraging influences at\nhome, before we attempt to send them to enlighten heathen lands.\n\n_Q._ Some say that these people are naturally inferior to us; and\nthat the shape of their skulls proves it.\n\n_A._ If I believed that the colored people were naturally inferior to\nthe whites, I should say that was an additional reason why we ought\nto protect, instruct, and encourage them. No consistent republican\nwill say that a strong-minded man has a right to oppress those less\ngifted than himself. Slave-holders do not seem to think the negroes\nare so stupid as not to acquire knowledge, and make use of it, if\nthey could get a chance. If they do think so, why do their laws\nimpose such heavy penalties on all who attempt to give them any\neducation? Nobody thinks it necessary to forbid the promulgation\nof knowledge among monkeys. If you believe the colored race are\nnaturally inferior, I wish you would read the history of Toussaint\nL\u2019Ouverture, the Washington of St. Domingo. Though perfectly black,\nhe was unquestionably one of the greatest and best men of his age.\nI wish you would hear Mr. Williams of New York, and Mr. Douglass of\nPhiladelphia preach a few times, before you hastily decide concerning\nthe capacity of the colored race for intellectual improvement. As for\nthe shape of their skulls, I shall be well satisfied if our Southern\nbrethren will emancipate all the slaves who have _not_ what is called\nthe \u201cAfrican conformation.\u201d\n\n_Q._ What do you think about property in slaves?\n\n_A._ Let me reply to that question by asking others. If you were\ntaken by an Algerine pirate, and an Arab bought you, and paid\nhonestly for you, should you ever consider yourself the _property_ of\nthe Arab? Should you think your fellow-citizens ought so to consider\nyou? Can what is stolen in the beginning, be honest property in the\ntransmission? If you and your children had toiled hard for years, and\nreceived only a peck of corn a week for your services, should you not\nthink that some compensation was due to _you_?\n\n_Q._ These are hard questions; and I find it is hard to answer a good\nmany things, when we once get into the habit of imagining how we\nshould think and feel if we ourselves were the slaves. But what have\nthe North to do on this subject?\n\n_A._ They cannot help having a great deal to do with it, either for\ngood or for evil. They are citizens of this republic; and as such\ncannot but feel a painful interest in a subject which makes their\nbeloved country an object of derision to the civilized world. If the\nslaves should make any attempt to gain their freedom, we are bound\nto go with an armed force and rivet their chains. If a slave escapes\nfrom his master unto us, we are bound to deliver him up to the lash.\nThe people of Pennsylvania, living so near the slave States, have a\ngreat many of these painful scenes to encounter. A few months ago, an\nindustrious and pious colored man in Philadelphia was torn from his\nhome at midnight, and beaten in such a degree that the snow for some\ndistance was stained with his blood. His poor wife, who was devotedly\nattached to him, had an infant about eight or ten days old; but\nregardless of her situation, she plunged into the snow, and implored\nmercy for her husband. Her shrieks and entreaties were of no avail.\nThe citizens of Philadelphia could not help her, because the free\nStates are bound by law to give up runaway slaves. The evil might be\ncured by the extreme cheapness of labor, if the surplus population\nwere not drained off to supply _new_ slave States. But in order to\naccommodate slave-holders in this respect, Louisiana has been bought,\nand Florida bought, by revenues principally raised in the free\nStates; and now they want to purchase Texas likewise for an eternal\nslave market. Every time a member from the free States votes for the\nadmission of a slave state into the Union, he helps to increase the\npolitical power, which has always been wielded for the perpetuation\nof this abominable system. It is high time for the free States to\nbegin to reflect seriously, whether they ought any longer to give\ntheir money and their moral influence in support of this iniquity.\n\n_Q._ I did not know we were obliged to give up runaway slaves to\ntheir masters. Are you sure it is so?\n\n_A._ When masters _bring_ their slaves into the free States, or\n_send_ them, the slaves can legally take their freedom; but when\nthe slaves run away, we are obliged by law to give them up, let the\ncircumstances be what they may. Many conscientious people prefer to\nobey the law of God, which says, \u201cThou shalt not deliver unto his\nmaster the servant which hath escaped unto thee.\u201d\n\n_Q._ But would you at once give so many ignorant creatures political\npower, by making them voters?\n\n_A._ That would be for the wisdom of legislators to decide; and\nthey would probably decide that it would not be judicious to invest\nemancipated slaves with the elective franchise; for though it is not\ntheir fault that they have been kept brutally ignorant, it unfits\nthem for voters. At the present time, slaves _are_ represented in\nCongress. Every five slaves are counted equal to three freemen;\nwhich is just the same as if our farmers were allowed to count\nevery five of their oxen as three voters. This system gives the\nSouthern aristocracy great political power, entirely unchecked by\ndemocratic influence, which comes in as a counterpoise in States\nwhere the laboring class are allowed to vote. W. B. Seabrook, of\nSouth Carolina, has lately published an Essay on the management\nof slaves, in which he says: \u201cAn addition of $1,000,000 to the\nprivate fortune of Daniel Webster would not give to Massachusetts\nmore weight than she now possesses in the Federal Councils. On the\nother hand, every increase of slave property in South Carolina,\nis a fraction thrown into the scale by which _her representation\nin Congress is determined_.\u201d This country has been governed by a\nPresident forty-eight years. During forty of those years we have been\ngoverned by a slave-holder! The New England candidates each remained\nin office but four years; and the great middle section has never\ngiven a President. The Middle States are politically stronger than\nthe Northern, and are therefore more likely to act independently,\nand without reference to Southern support. Perhaps this may be the\nreason why those States, large and wealthy as they are, have never\ngiven a President to their country. Slave-holders are keen-sighted\npoliticians; and they are closely knit together by one common bond of\nsympathy on the subject of slavery. It is a common remark with them\nthat they never will vote for any man north of the Potomac.\n\n_Q._ You know that abolitionists are universally accused of wishing\nto promote the amalgamation of colored and white people.\n\n_A._ This is a false charge, got up by the enemies of the cause,\nand used as a bugbear to increase the prejudices of the community.\nBy the hue and cry that is raised on the subject, one would really\nsuppose that in this free country a certain set of men had power to\ncompel their neighbors to marry contrary to their own inclination.\nThe abolitionists have never, by example, writing, or conversation,\nendeavored to connect amalgamation with the subject of abolition.\nWhen their enemies insist upon urging this silly and unfounded\nobjection, they content themselves with replying, \u201cIf there be a\nnatural antipathy between the races, the antipathy will protect\nitself. If such marriages are contrary to the order of Providence,\nwe certainly may trust Providence to take care of the matter. It is\na poor compliment to the white young men to be so afraid that the\nmoment we allow the colored ones to be educated, the girls will all\nbe running after them.\u201d\n\nAt a town meeting in New Hampshire, one of the citizens rose to\nsay that he did not approve of admitting colored lads into the\nschool. \u201cIf you suffer these people to be educated,\u201d said he, \u201cthe\nfirst thing we shall know they will be marrying our daughters!\u201d\nAfter some other remarks, he concluded by saying, \u201cit is impossible\nfor the colored and white race to live together in a kind social\nrelation\u2014there is a natural antipathy\u2014they cannot be made to mix\nany better than oil and water.\u201d A plain farmer replied, \u201cI thought\nyou said just now, that you was afraid that they\u2019d marry our\n_darters_; if they won\u2019t mix any better than _ile_ and water, what\nare you afraid of?\u201d Any one who observes the infinite variety of\nshadings in the complexions of the colored people, will perceive\nthat amalgamation has for a long time been carried on. The only\njustification that the apologist for slavery can give is, that it is\nnot sanctioned by marriage. According to Southern laws every child\nmust follow the condition of its _mother_; that is, if the mother is\na slave, her offspring must be so likewise. If they would change one\nword, and say the child shall follow the condition of its _father_,\na large proportion of their slaves would be free at once; and the\nothers would soon become so, provided no new cargoes were in the mean\ntime smuggled in from Africa. In this subject, the truth is briefly\ntold in a juvenile couplet, viz.\n\n      \u201cBy universal emancipation,\n      We want to _stop_ amalgamation.\u201d\n\n_Q._ Is there any truth in the charge that you wish to break down all\ndistinctions of society, and introduce the negroes into our parlors?\n\n_A._ There is not the slightest truth in this charge. People have\npointed to an ignorant shoe-black, and asked me whether I would\ninvite him to visit my house. I answered, \u201cNo; I would not do so if\nhe were a white man; and I should not be likely to do it, merely\nbecause he was black.\u201d An educated person will not naturally like\nto associate with one who is grossly ignorant. It may be no merit\nin one that he is well-informed, and no fault of the other that he\nis ignorant; for these things may be the result of circumstances,\nover which the individual had no control; but such people will not\nchoose each other\u2019s society merely from want of sympathy. For these\nreasons, I would not select an ignorant man, of any complexion, for\nmy companion; but when you ask me whether that man\u2019s children shall\nhave as fair a chance as my own, to obtain an education, and rise in\nthe world, I should be ashamed of myself, both as a Christian and a\nrepublican, if I did not say, yes, with all my heart.\n\n_Q._ But do you believe that prejudice against color ever can be\novercome?\n\n_A._ Yes, I do; because I have faith that all things will pass away,\nwhich are not founded in reason and justice. In France and England,\nthis prejudice scarcely exists at all. Their noblemen would never\ndream of taking offence because a colored gentleman sat beside them\nin a stage-coach, or at the table of an hotel. Be assured, however,\nthat the abolitionists have not the slightest wish to force you to\ngive up this prejudice. If, after conscientious examination, you\nbelieve it to be right, cherish it; but do not adhere to it merely\nbecause your neighbors do. Look it in the face\u2014apply the golden\nrule\u2014and judge for yourself. The Mahometans really think they could\nnot eat at the same table with a Christian, without pollution; but I\nhave no doubt the time will come when this prejudice will be removed.\nThe old feudal nobles of England would not have thought it possible\nthat their descendants could live in a community, where they and\ntheir vassals were on a perfect civil equality; yet the apparent\nimpossibility has come to pass, with advantage to many, and injury\nto none. When we endeavor to conform to the spirit of the gospel,\nthere is never any danger that it will not lead us into the paths of\npeace.\n\n_Q._ But they say your measures are unconstitutional.\n\n_A._ Is it unconstitutional to talk, and write, and publish on any\nsubject? particularly one in which the welfare and character of the\ncountry are so deeply involved? This is all the abolitionists have\never done; it is all they have ever desired to do. Nobody disputes\nthat Congress has constitutional power to abolish slavery and the\nslave-trade in the District of Columbia. That District belongs in\ncommon to all the States, and each of them has an interest in the\nslaves there. The public prisons of that District, built _with the\nmoney of the whole people_ of the United States, are used for the\nbenefit of slave-traders, and the groaning victims of this detestable\ntraffic are kept confined within their walls. The keepers of these\nprisons, _paid with the money of the whole people_, act as jailers\nto these slave-traders, until their gang of human brutes can be\ncompleted. When we are acting as accomplices in all this, have we no\nright to petition for the abolition of slavery and the slave trade\n_there_? I do not see how any conscientious man can help believing it\nto be a solemn duty.\n\n_Q._ Is there any truth in the charge, that abolitionists have tried\nto excite insurrections among the slaves?\n\n_A._ This charge is destitute of the slightest foundation in\ntruth. The abolitionists have addressed facts and arguments to the\nslave-holders _only_. They have never sought for any communication\nwith the slaves; and if they did so, their principles would lead them\nto teach patience and submission, until their deliverance could be\naccomplished by peaceful measures. I believe the publications by the\nPeace Society do not contain so much in defence of non-resistance\nunder injury, as the publications of the abolitionists. If it should\nbe discovered that any member of an Anti-Slavery Society had tried\nto excite disaffection among the slaves, he would be immediately\nturned out of the Society, with strong expressions of disapprobation.\nThis false charge has been got up at the South merely to excite\nsympathy. A little while ago a paragraph went the rounds of the\nnewspapers, concerning an _abolitionist_ who had been overheard\ntrying to persuade a negro lad to run away, and offering to forge\nfree papers for him. It was afterwards ascertained that the man was\na _kidnapper_, and took this means of getting the boy into his own\npower, for the sake of selling him. Complaints are made that pictures\nof a man flogging slaves having been on some of the books sent to the\nSouth; and it is urged that negroes can understand these pictures,\nif they do not know their letters. In the first place, the books are\nsent to the masters. In the next place (as has been well observed),\nthe pictures represent a thing that is either true, or not true.\nIf it is not true, the negroes would look at the picture without\nbeing reminded of any thing _they_ had ever seen or known\u2014if told\nthat it represented a driver beating slaves, they would laugh at\nsuch Munchausen stories of things that never happened. On the other\nhand, if the representation is true, would the mere picture of a\nthing be more likely to excite them to insurrection than the thing\nitself? These stories of efforts to excite violence are mere spectres\nraised on purpose for the occasion. If you will take notice of the\ncharges brought against abolitionists, you will find that they are\nalways mere assertions, unsupported by quotations, or any species of\nevidence. When I have read the resolutions passed at public meetings\nagainst the abolitionists, I have smiled at the farce which those men\nhave been acting. In nearly all their resolutions, the abolitionists\ncould most cordially and conscientiously concur. The enemies of\nthe cause have in several cities gravely met together to declare\nthat they do not approve of attempts to promote insurrections. The\nabolitionists agree with them entirely. With the same ridiculous\ngravity, they make known to the world that they do not approve of any\nlegislative interference with the Southern States. The abolitionists\nhave never dreamed of any such interference. They merely wish to\n_induce the Southerners to legislate for themselves_; and they hope\nto do this by the universal dissemination of facts and arguments,\ncalculated to promote a _correct public sentiment_ on the subject of\nslavery. This is all they ever intended to do; and this they will\ndo, though earth and hell combine against their efforts. The men\nengaged in this cause are not working for themselves, but for God\u2014and\ntherefore they are strong.\n\n_Q._ But do you believe the Southerners ever can be persuaded?\n\n_A._ At all events, it is our duty to try. \u201cThus saith the Lord God,\nThou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or\nwhether they will forbear; neither be afraid of their words, though\nbriers and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions.\u201d\nIf public sentiment becomes universally reformed on this subject, it\ncannot fail to have a powerful influence. Slavery was abolished in\nthe British dominions entirely by moral influence. Parliament never\nwould have voted for the bill, the king never would have signed it,\nif an enlightened public sentiment had not made the step absolutely\nnecessary; and the public became enlightened by the exertions of\nbenevolent men, who were obliged to endure every form of obloquy\nand rage, before the good work was completed. The slave-holders are\nperfectly aware that the same causes will produce similar effects in\nthis country. One of the Southern editors has lately declared that\nwhat is most to be feared is, that these fanatical abolitionists\nwill make some people of morbid consciences believe that slavery\nreally _is_ wrong, and that it is their duty to relinquish it.\nAnother Southern newspaper complains that the worst effect of this\ndiscussion is, that it is causing good men to regard slave-holders\nwith abhorrence.\n\n_Q._ But if the system works so badly in every respect, why are\npeople so unwilling to give it up?\n\n_A._ Human nature is willing to endure much, rather than relinquish\nunbridled licentiousness and despotic control. The emperor of Russia,\nand the pachas of Egypt would be reluctant to abridge their own\npower, for the sake of introducing a system of things more conducive\nto the freedom, virtue and happiness of their subjects. They had\nrather live in constant fear of the poisoned bowl and the midnight\ndagger, than to give up the pleasant exercise of tyranny, to which\nthey have so long been accustomed. In addition to this feeling, so\ncommon to our nature, there are many conscientious people, who are\nterrified at the idea of emancipation. It has always been presented\nto them in the most frightful colors; and bad men are determined, if\npossible, to prevent the abolitionists from proving to such minds\nthat _the dangers of insurrection all belong to slavery, and would\ncease when slavery was abolished_.\n\nAt the North, the apologists of slavery are numerous and virulent,\nbecause their _interests_ are closely intertwined with the pernicious\nsystem. Inquire into the private history of many of the men, who\nhave called meetings against the abolitionists\u2014you will find that\nsome manufacture negro cloths for the South\u2014some have sons who sell\nthose cloths\u2014some have daughters married to slave-holders\u2014some have\nplantations and slaves mortgaged to them\u2014some have ships employed in\nSouthern commerce\u2014and some candidates for political offices would bow\nuntil their back-bones were broken, to obtain or preserve Southern\ninfluence. The Southerners understand all this perfectly well, and\ndespise our servility, even while they condescend to make use of it.\n\nOne great reason why the people of this country have not thought\nand felt right on this subject, is that all our books, newspapers,\nalmanacs and periodicals, have combined to represent the colored race\nas an inferior and degraded class, who never could be made good and\nuseful citizens. Ridicule and reproach have been abundantly heaped\nupon them; but their virtues and their sufferings have found few\nhistorians. The South has been well satisfied with such a public\nsentiment. It sends back no echo to disturb their consciences, and\nit effectually rivets the chain on the necks of their vassals. In\nthis department of service, the Colonization Society has been a most\nactive and zealous agent.\n\n_Q._ But some people say that all the mobs, and other violent\nproceedings, are to be attributed to the abolitionists.\n\n_A._ They might as well charge the same upon St. Paul, when his\nfearless preaching of the gospel brought him into such imminent\nperil, that his friends were obliged to \u201clet him down over the wall\nin a basket,\u201d to save his life. As well might St. Stephen have been\nblamed for the mob that stoned him to death. With the same justice\nmight William Penn have been called the cause of all the violent\npersecutions against the Quakers. When principles of truth are sent\nout in the midst of a perverse generation, they _always_ come \u201cnot to\nbring peace, but a sword.\u201d The abolitionists have offered violence\nto no man\u2014they have never attempted to stop the discussions of their\nopponents; but have, on the contrary, exerted themselves to obtain a\ncandid examination of the subject on all sides. They merely claim the\nprivilege of delivering peaceful addresses at orderly meetings, and\nof publishing what they believe to be facts, with an honest desire to\nhave them tested by the strictest ordeal of truth.\n\n_Q._ But do you think a foreigner ought to be allowed to lecture on\nthis subject?\n\n_A._ _We_ have some hundred missionaries abroad lecturing other\nnations\u2014preaching against systems most closely entwined with the\ngovernment and prejudices of the people. If good and conscientious\nmen leave ease, honor, and popularity behind them, to come here, and\nlabor among the poor and the despised, merely from zeal in a good\ncause, shall we refuse to hear what they have to say? If we insult,\nmob, and stone them, how could we consistently blame the Hindoos and\nSandwich Islanders for abusing _our_ missionaries? We sent out agents\nto England, to give her the benefit of our experience on the subject\nof temperance; ought _we_ not to be willing to receive the benefit of\nher experience on the subject of slavery? Let us candidly hear what\nthese men have to say. If it be contrary to reason and truth, reject\nit; if it be the truth, let us ponder it in our hearts.\n\n_Q._ But everybody says the discussion of slavery will lead to the\ndissolution of the Union.\n\n_A._ There must be something wrong in the Union, if the candid\ndiscussion of _any_ subject can dissolve it; and for the truth of\nthis remark, I appeal to your own good sense. If the South should\nbe injudicious enough to withdraw from the Union for the sake of\npreserving a moral pestilence in her borders, it is very certain that\nslavery cannot long continue after that event. None of the frontier\nStates could long keep their slaves, if we were not obliged by law\nto deliver up runaways; nor could they any longer rely upon the\nfree States, in cases of emergency, to support slavery by force of\narms. The union of these States has been continually disturbed and\nembittered by the existence of slavery; and the abolitionists would\nfain convince the whole country that it is best to cast away this\napple of discord. Their attachment to the Union is so strong, that\nthey would make any sacrifice of self-interest to preserve it; but\nthey never will consent to sacrifice honor and principle. \u201cDuties are\nours; events are God\u2019s!\u201d\n\n\n\n\n  TRANSCRIBER\u2019S NOTE\n\n  Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been\n  corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within\n  the text and consultation of external sources.\n\n  Some hyphens in words have been silently removed, some added,\n  when a predominant preference was found in the original book.\n\n  Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text,\n  and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.\n\n  Pg 13: \u2018cut off the the heads\u2019 replaced by \u2018cut off the heads\u2019.\n  Pg 15: \u2018Ths wife, or the\u2019 replaced by \u2018The wife, or the\u2019.\n  Pg 16: \u2018amagamation has been\u2019 replaced by \u2018amalgamation has been\u2019.\n  Pg 36: \u2018not not to bring peace\u2019 replaced by \u2018not to bring peace\u2019.","title":"Anti-slavery catechism","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":14657}