1.
TRACT I. THE Juſt Limitation of Slavery.
[1]THE opinion of the lords Hardwick and Talbot, which I laboured to refute in my Tract againſt Slavery in En⯑gland 1, (printed in 1769,) has ſince been effectually ſet aſide by a clear deter⯑mination, in the Court of King's-Bench 2, in favour of James Somerſett, a Ne⯑gro, againſt his former Maſter, C****** S******, eſq. in the year 1772.
[2]But it is not enough, that the Laws of England exclude Slavery merely from this iſland, whilſt the grand Enemy of man⯑kind triumphs in a toleration, throughout our Colonies, of the moſt monſtrous op⯑preſſion to which human nature can be ſubjected!
And yet this abominable wickedneſs has not wanted advocates, who, in a va⯑riety of late publications, have attempted to palliate the guilt, and have even ven⯑tured to appeal to Scripture for the ſup⯑port of their uncharitable pretenſions: ſo that I am laid under a double obliga⯑tion to anſwer them, becauſe it is not the cauſe of Liberty alone for which I now contend, but for that which I have ſtill much more at heart, the honour of the holy Scriptures, the principles of which are entirely oppoſite to the ſelfiſh and [3]uncharitable pretenſions of our American Slaveholders and African Traders.
A late anonymous writer, who calls himſelf "An African Merchant," re⯑marks, that,—‘By the Law of Moſes, the Iſraelites might purchaſe Slaves from the Heathens, and even their own people might become Slaves to their brethren.’ A Treatiſe on the Trade from Great-Britain to Africa, &c. by an African Merchant. P. 8 and 9.
Now, with reſpect to the firſt part of his obſervation, it is true, indeed, that the Iſraelites were expreſſly permitted to keep Bond-Servants, or Slaves, ‘of the Heathen, (or, more properly, of the Nations [...]) that were round about’ them, and of ‘the children of the ſtran⯑gers that ſojourned among’ them. (Levit. xxv. 44 to 46.) But we muſt re⯑member, that theſe Heathen, or ‘Na⯑tions [4]that were round about them;’ were an abandoned race of people, already Slaves and worſhippers of devils, and by them led to debaſe human nature, and to pollute themſelves with the moſt un⯑natural and abominable vices: ‘For in all theſe,’ (ſaid the Almighty,) ‘the nations are defiled which I caſt out before you: and the Land is defiled; THEREFORE I do viſit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itſelf vo⯑miteth out her inhabitants,’ &c. Again: ‘For all theſe abominations have the men of the land done which were before you, and the land is defi⯑led,’ &c. See Levit. xviii. And the "children of the ſtrangers," abovemen⯑tioned, were (probably) alſo of the ſame deteſtable nations of Paleſtine, the Amo⯑rites, Canaanites, &c. which were ex⯑preſſly doomed to deſtruction 3, and [5]that by the hand of the Iſraelites, who were commanded to ſhew them no pity 4.
But no doctrine muſt be drawn from theſe commands to execute God's vengeance upon the ſaid wicked ſtrangers, without conſidering, at the ſame time, that very contrary treatment of ſtrangers which was equally enjoined in the Law: for the Iſraelites were poſitively commanded not to vex or oppreſs a Stranger. ‘Thou [6]ſhalt love him as thyſelf,’ ſaid Moſes, by the expreſs command of God. ‘If a Stranger ſojourn with thee in your land, ye ſhall not vex’ (or oppreſs) ‘him. But the Stranger that dwelleth with you ſhall be unto you as one born among you, and thou ſhalt love him as thyſelf: for ye were Strangers in the land of Egypt.’ Levit. xix. 33.34. And again: ‘The Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty and a terrible, which regardeth not perſons nor taketh reward: he doth execute the judgement of the fatherleſs and widow, and loveth the Stranger, in giving him food and rai⯑ment. Love ye, therefore, the Stran⯑ger; for ye were Strangers in the land of Egypt.’ Deut. x. 17 to 19. In all theſe paſſages, and many others, the Iſ⯑raelites were reminded of their Bondage in Egypt: for ſo the almighty Deli⯑verer from Slavery warned his people [7]to limit and moderate the bondage, which the Law permitted, by the remembrance of their own former bondage in a foreign land, and by a remembrance alſo of his great mercy in delivering them from that bondage: and he expreſſly referred them to their own feelings, as they themſelves had experienced the intolerable yoke of Egyptian Tyranny! ‘Thou ſhalt not oppreſs a Stranger; for ye know the heart of a ſtranger, ſeeing ye were ſtrangers in the land of Egypt.’ Exod. xxiii. 9. And again: ‘Thou ſhalt remember that thou waſt a Bond-man in the land of Egypt, and the Lord thy God redeemed thee:’ Deut. xv. 15.
We muſt, therefore, neceſſarily con⯑clude, when theſe very oppoſite com⯑mands are conſidered, that the Heathen, or nations that were "ROUND ABOUT," or in the environs of the promiſed land, and alſo the children of the ſtrangers, that [8]dwelt among them, mentioned at the ſame time, whom the Iſraelites were per⯑mitted to retain in perpetual bondage, were not intended to be included and ranked under that general denomination of Strangers, to whom ſo much real af⯑fection, benevolence, and conſideration, are ſtrictly commanded, in the texts to which I have juſt now referred. And, conſequently, it muſt be allowed, that the particular nations, (the ſeven nations of Paleſtine, ſee Deut. vii. 1.) which were expreſſly devoted to deſtruction, were the only Strangers whom the Jews were permitted to hold in abſolute Slavery; ſo that the wicked practice of enſlaving the poor African Negroes would have been as unlawful, under the Jewiſh Diſpenſation, as it certainly is, now a-days, to Engliſhmen, and other ſub⯑jects of Great-Britain, that profeſs the Chriſtian Religion; in whoſe conſideration, ALL STRANGERS, from every [9]other part of the world, are, without doubt, entitled to be ranked, eſteemed, and beloved, as brethren, which I have elſewhere particularly demonſtrated; and which even the law of Moſes expreſſly commanded: — ‘But the ſtranger, that dwelleth with you, ſhall be unto you as one born among you, and THOU SHALT LOVE HIM AS THY⯑SELF; for ye were ſtrangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.’ Levit. xix. 33 and 34.
This excellent ſyſtem of benevolence to ſtrangers, which the Iſraelites were ſo ſtrictly enjoined to obſerve, cannot, I ap⯑prehend, be otherwiſe reconciled with the permiſſion to the Iſraelites of retaining in perpetual bondage the heathen that were round about them, and the children of the ſtrangers that ſojourned among them: for, if this permiſſion were to be ex⯑tended to ſtrangers in general, it would [10]ſubvert the expreſs command concerning brotherly love due to ſtrangers; becauſe a man cannot be ſaid to love the ſtranger as himſelf if he holds the ſtranger and his pro⯑geny in a perpetual involuntary ſervitude. The obſervation therefore of the African Merchant, that ‘THE ISRAELITES might purchaſe Slaves from the heathens,’ will by no means juſtify the enſlaving of mo⯑dern heathens, by Engliſhmen, or by any other nation now ſubſiſting. The Iſrael⯑ites, at that time, might not only purchaſe Slaves of thoſe particular heathen nations, but they might alſo drive out theſe hea⯑then; (I mean, theſe which were particu⯑larly named;) nay, even kill 5 and ex⯑tirpate them, and take poſſeſſion of their ci⯑ties, houſes, and lands. All theſe acts of violence might the Iſraelites do without ſin, though the like would juſtly be eſteemed [11] murder and robbery, if practiſed by any other nation, not under the like peculiar circumſtances: ſo that the example of the Iſraelites affords no excuſe for the uncha⯑ritable practices of the African Merchant and Weſt-India Planter! The Iſraelites had an expreſs commiſſion 6 to execute God's vengeance, without remorſe 7, upon ſeveral populous nations, which had ren⯑dered themſelves abominable in the ſight of [12]God, and therefore deſerved no conſider⯑ation; ſo that even mercy, in the Iſraelites, was a ſin 8, when it interfered with this poſitive command of God!
The commiſſion there given, however, was but temporary; and no other nation, [13]except God's peculiar people, was char⯑ged with the execution of it; and there⯑fore, though the Europeans have taken upon themſelves, for a long time paſt, to attack, deſtroy, drive out, diſpoſſeſs, and enſlave, the poor ignorant Heathen, in many diſtant parts of the world, and may, perhaps, plead cuſtom and preſcrip⯑tion (to their ſhame be it ſaid) for their actions, yet, as they cannot, like the Iſ⯑raelites, produce an authentic written commandment from God for ſuch proceed⯑ings, the offenders can no otherwiſe be eſteemed than as lawleſs robbers and op⯑preſſors, who have reaſon to expect a ſe⯑vere retribution from God for their tyran⯑ny and oppreſſion. It is unreaſonable, therefore, to ſuppoſe that the ſevere treat⯑ment of the ancient Heathen, by the Iſra⯑elites, under the diſpenſation of the Law, either in killing, diſpoſſeſſing, or enſlaving, them, ſhould juſtify our modern acts of [14] violence and oppreſſion, now that we profeſs obedience to the Goſpel of Peace.
And, with reſpect to the ſecond part of the African Merchant's obſervation, concerning the Iſraelites, (viz. that even ‘their own people might become Slaves to their brethren,’) I muſt remark, that he does not deal fairly by the Jewiſh Law, to quote that circumſtance, with⯑out mentioning, at the ſame time, ‘the Juſt Limitation’ to which it was ſub⯑ject, and the admirable proviſion, in the ſame Law, againſt the involuntary ſervi⯑tude of brethren; becauſe no Hebrew could be made a Slave without his own conſent, and even deſire, which was to be "plainly" and openly declared in a court of record: — ‘if the ſervant ſhall plainly ſay, I love my maſter, my wife, and my children, I will not go out free, then’ (ſays the text) ‘his maſter ſhall bring him unto the Judges,’ &c. (whereby [15]an acknowledgement in a court of re⯑cord is plainly implied,) ‘and his maſter ſhall bore his ear through with an aul; and he ſhall ſerve him for ever.’ Exod. xxi. 5.6. But, without that public ac⯑knowledgement of voluntary conſent before the Judges, the Hebrew maſter had no authority to bore the ſervant's ear 9 in token of bondage: and, in every other caſe, it was abſolutely unlawful for the Iſ⯑raelite to hold a Brother Iſraelite in Sla⯑very! The Law expreſſly declares, ‘If thy Brother, (that dwelleth) by thee, be waxen poor, and be ſold unto thee; thou ſhalt not compel him to ſerve as a bond ſervant: (but) as an hired ſervant; [16]and as a ſojourner he ſhall be with thee; (and) ſhall ſerve thee unto the year of jubilee: and (then) ſhall he depart from thee, (both) he and his chil⯑dren with him;’ &c. (and the reaſon of this command immediately follows;) "for they are my ſervants," (ſaid the Lord,) ‘which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt:’ (i. e. which God himſelf delivered from Slavery:) ‘they ſhall not be ſold as Bond-men: thou ſhalt not rule over him with rigour, but ſhalt fear thy God.’ Levit. xxv. 39 to 43. And again, in the 55th verſe, "For unto me" (ſaid the Lord) ‘the children of Iſrael are ſervants; they are my ſervants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.’
Thus it appears that the involuntary ſervitude of brethren is entirely inconſiſt⯑ent with the Jewiſh Law; which, there⯑fore, [17]is ſo far from juſtifying the African Merchant, that it abſolutely condemns him. But he is ſtill more miſtaken, when he inſinuates that Slavery is not inconſiſtent with the Goſpel. ‘Jeſus Chriſt, the Saviour of mankind and Founder of our religion,’ (ſays he,) ‘left the moral laws and civil rights of mankind upon their old foundations: his king⯑dom was not of this world, nor did he interfere with national laws: he did not repeal that of ſlaves, nor aſſert an univerſal freedom, except from ſin: with him bond and free were accepted, if they behaved righteouſly.’ &c. p. 9.
But how can a man be ſaid to ‘behave righteouſly,’ who ſells his brethren, or holds them in Slavery againſt their will? For, though, with Chriſt, ‘bond and free are accepted,’ yet it behoves the Afri⯑can Merchant very diligently to examine, whether he is not likely to forfeit his own [18]acceptance, if he does not moſt heartily repent of having enſlaved his brethren, and of having encouraged others to the ſame uncharitable practices, by miſinterpreting the holy Scriptures.
Under the Goſpel Diſpenſation, all man⯑kind are to be eſteemed our brethren. Chriſt commanded his diſciples to go and teach (or make diſciples of) all nations, " [...]." Matth. xxviii. 19. So that men of all nations (who, indeed, were brethren before, by natural deſcent from one common father) are now, undoubt⯑edly, capable of being doubly related to us, by a farther tie of of brotherhood, which the law of Moſes ſeemed to deny them, and of which the peculiar people of God (jealous of their own adoption) once thought them incapable; I mean, the ineſtimable privilege of becoming ſons, al⯑ſo, to one almighty Father, by adoption, as well as the Jews, and, conſequently, of [19]being our brethren, through Chriſt, by a ſpiritual, as well as a natural, relation⯑ſhip.
The promiſes of God, likewiſe, in eve⯑ry other part of the New Teſtament, are made to all mankind in general, with⯑out exception; ſo that a Negro, as well as any other man, is capable of becoming "an adopted ſon of God;" an ‘heir of God through Chriſt’ 10; a ‘temple of the Holy-Ghoſt’ 11; ‘an heir 12of [20]ſalvation;’ a partaker of the divine na⯑ture 13; "a joint-heir with Chriſt 14; and capable, alſo, of being joined to that glorious company of Saints, who ſhall one day "come with him to judge the world;" for "the Saints ſhall judge the world." 1 Cor. vi. 2.3. — And, therefore, how can any man, who calls himſelf a Chriſ⯑tian, preſume to retain, as a mere chattel, or private property, his fellow man and brother, who is equally capable with himſelf of attaining the high dignities abovementioned! Let Slaveholders be mindful of the approaching conſumma⯑tion of all earthly things, when, perhaps, they will ſee thouſands of thoſe men, who were formerly eſteemed mere chat⯑tels [21]and private property, coming 15 in the clouds 16, with their heavenly Maſter, to judge tyrants and oppreſſors, and to call them to account for their want of brotherly love!
The Ethiopians, or Negroes, received the Chriſtian faith much ſooner than the Europeans themſelves: their early con⯑verſion was foretold by the Pſalmiſt: [22](Pſalm lxviii. 31.) ‘Princes ſhall come out of Egypt,’ (or from Mizraim); "and Ethiopia" 17 (or Cuſh) ‘ſhall ſoon ſtretch out her hands unto God.’ And, accordingly, we find the Ethiopian Eunuch 18 particularly mentioned in Scripture among the firſt converts to [23]Chriſtianity: and that extraordinary exer⯑tion of the HOLY SPIRIT, in favour of the eunuch, was, perhaps, the foundation of the ancient Church of Habaſſi⯑nia 19, which, notwithſtanding all worldly diſadvantages, remains in ſome degree of purity to this day, as a laſting monument of Chriſtianity among the ſons of Ham, even in the moſt remote and inacceſſible part of Africa! 20 ‘[24]Certain it is, (ſay the learned Aſſembly of Divines,) that Ethiopia, according to this unqueſtionable prophecy,’ (Pſalms, lxviii. 31.) ‘was one of the firſt kingdoms that was converted to the Chriſtian faith; the occaſion and means whereof we read of Acts viii. 27, 28.’ &c.
The progreſs of the truth muſt have been very rapid in Africa, becauſe we read of a council of African and Numi⯑dian Biſhops, held at Carthage, ſo early as the year of Chriſt 215 21; (though our Anglo-Saxon anceſtors remained in the groſſeſt pagan darkneſs near 400 years afterwards;) and, in the year 240, a council of 99 Biſhops was aſſembled at [25]Lambeſa, an inland city of Africa, on the confines of Biledulgerid, againſt Privatus Biſhop of Lambeſa on a charge of Hereſie. 22 The fourth Council of Carthage in the year 253 was held by 66 Biſhops, concerning the Baptiſm of Infants. 23 And in the eighth Council at that place (anno 256) be⯑ſides 24 Prieſts, Deacons and Laymen, there were preſent 87 Biſhops. In another council of Carthage, about the year 308, no leſs than 270 Biſhops of the Sect of the Donatiſts 25 were pre⯑ſent; and in the year 394, at Baga, an inland City of Africa, 310 26 Biſhops were collected together, though the [26]ſame was long before the converſion of the Engliſh and Dutch, the great traders in African ſlaves; and though the Africans have, ſince, lamentably fallen back into groſs ignorance, yet we muſt not, on that account, look upon them in the ſame light that the Jews did upon "the children of the ſtrangers," whom they were permitted to hold in ſlavery (Levit. xxv. 45.) becauſe we cannot do ſo without becoming ſtrangers ourſelves to Chriſtianity; and haſtening our own apoſtacy, which ſeems already too near at hand. 27 We may la⯑ment [27]the fallen ſtate of our unhappy brethren, but we have no commiſſion [28]under the Goſpel to puniſh them for it, as the Iſraelites had to puniſh the [29] Heathens that were condemned in the law! Our endeavour ſhould be rather [30]to reſtore the Heathens to their loſt privileges, than to harden them in [31]their prejudices by tolerating amongſt us a greater degree of deſpotiſm and op⯑preſſion [32]than was ever permitted among the Jews, or even among the ancient [33] Heathens! for in one of our own anti⯑chriſtian colonies, even the murder of a negro ſlave, when under private puniſhment, is tolerated (ſee the 329th act of Barbadoes); and by the ſame diabolical act of aſſembly a man may ‘of wantonneſs, or of bloody minded⯑neſs, or cruel intention’ (it is expreſsly ſaid) "wilfully kill a negro, or other ſlave of his own," without any other penalty for it than a trifling fine of [34]£15 ſterling. (See remarks on this act in my tract againſt ſlavery in England, 28 p. 66 and 67.) Many inſtances of Weſt-India cruelty have fallen even within my own knowledge, and I have certain proofs of no leſs than three married women being violently torn away from their lawful huſbands, 29 even in London, by the order of their pretended proprietors! Another re⯑markable inſtance of tyranny, which [35]came within my own knowledge, was the advertizing a reward (in the Gazetteer of the 1ſt June, 1772) for apprehend⯑ing ‘an Eaſt-India black boy about 14 years of age, named Bob or Pompey:’ he was further diſtinguiſhed in the advertizement by having ‘round his neck a braſs collar, with a direction upon it to a houſe in Charlotte-ſtreet, Bloomſbury-ſquare.’ Thus the black Indian Pompey was manifeſtly treated with as little ceremony as a black name⯑ſake of the dog kind could be. I inquired after the author of this unlawful and ſhameful advertizement; and found, that he was a merchant even in the heart of the city of London, who ſhall be nameleſs; for I do not want to expoſe individuals, but only their crimes. Now if maſters are capable of ſuch monſtrous OPPRESSION, even here in England, where their brutality renders [36]them liable to ſevere penalties, how can we reaſonably reject the accounts of TYRANNY in America, howſoever hor⯑rid and inhuman, where the abominable plantation laws will permit a capricious or paſſionate maſter, with impunity, to deprive his wretched ſlave even of life.
I am frequently told, nevertheleſs, by intereſted perſons from the Weſt-Indies, how well the ſlaves are uſed; and that they are much happier than our own poor at home. But though I am willing to believe that ſome ſew worthy Weſt-Indians treat their ſlaves with humani⯑ty, yet it is, certainly, far from being the general caſe; and the miſery of our own poor will not be any excuſe for the oppreſſion of the poor elſewhere! When any of our own countrymen at home are miſerably poor, it is not always clear whether themſelves, or others, are to [37]be blamed: all we can know for cer⯑tain is, that it is the indiſpenſable duty of every man to relieve them according to his ability; and that the neglecting an opportunity of doing ſo, is as great an offence before God as if we had denied aſſiſtance to Chriſt himſelf in the ſame wretched condition; ſor ſo it is expreſsly laid down in Scripture, 30 [38]through the mercy of God towards the poor: but it is obvious to whom the miſery of a ſlave is to be attributed: for the guilty poſſeſſor will certainly be anſwerable to God for it; and every man, who endeavours to palliate and ſcreen ſuch oppreſſion, is undoubtedly a partaker of the guilt. The ſlave⯑holder deceives himſelf if he thinks he can really be a CHRISTIAN, and yet [39]hold ſuch property. Can he be ſaid to love his neighbour as himſelf? 31 Does he behave to others as he would they ſhould to him? ‘Ye have heard that it hath been ſaid, Thou ſhalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy; but I ſay unto you (ſaid our Lord himſelf) love your enemies, &c. That ye may be the children of your Father which is in Heaven: for he maketh his ſun to riſe on the evil, and on the good, and ſendeth rain on the juſt and on the unjuſt;’ (Matth. v. 44, 45) ſo that Heathens are by no means excluded from the benevolence of Chriſtians.
Thus Chriſt has enlarged the antient Jewiſh doctrine of loving our neighbours [40]as ourſelves; and has alſo taught us, by the parable of the good Samaritan, that all mankind, even our profeſſed ene⯑mies (ſuch as were the Samaritans to the Jews) muſt neceſſarily be eſteemed our neighbours whenever they ſtand in need of our charitable aſſiſtance; ſo that the ſame benevolence which was due from the Jew to his brethren of the houſe of Iſrael is indiſpenſably due, under the Goſpel, to OUR BRETHREN OF THE UNIVERSE, howſoever oppoſite in religi⯑ous or political opinions; for this is the apparent intention of the parable.
No nation therefore whatever, can now be lawfully excluded as ſtrangers, according to that uncharitable ſenſe of the word ſtranger, in which the Jews were apt to diſtinguiſh all other nations from themſelves; and, ſince all men are now to be eſteemed ‘brethren and [41]neighbours’ under the Goſpel, none of the Levitical laws relating to the bon⯑dage of ſtrangers are in the leaſt appli⯑cable to juſtify ſlavery among Chriſtians; though the ſame laws bind Chriſtians as well as Jews with reſpect to all the leſ⯑ſons of benevolence to ſtrangers, which are every where interſperſed therein; be⯑cauſe theſe are moral doctrines which never change, for they perfectly corre⯑ſpond with "the everlaſting Goſpel." (Rev. xiv. 6.) As for inſtance, ‘Thou ſhalt not oppreſs a Stranger, for ye know the heart of a Stranger, ſeeing ye were ſtrangers in the land of Egypt.’ Exod. xxiii. 9. This is an appeal to the feelings and ex⯑perience of the Jews who had them⯑ſelves endured a heavy bondage, ſo that it clearly correſponds with the "royal law" or "law of liberty" in the Goſpel. [42] "Thou ſhalt love thy neighbour as thyſelf." Gal. v. 14. or as our Lord himſelf has more fully expreſſed it. ‘All things whatſoever ye would that men ſhould do to you, do ye even ſo to them: for THIS IS THE LAW AND THE PRO⯑PHETS.’ Matth. vii. 12.
Again, ‘If a ſtranger ſojourn with thee in your land, ye ſhall not vex or (oppreſs him) (but) the ſtranger that dwelleth with you, ſhall be unto you as one born among you, and thou SHALT LOVE HIM "(viz. the ſtranger)" AS THYSELF; for ye were STRANGERS in the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God.’ (Levit. xix. 33.) Let every ſlaveholder conſider the importance of this command and the unchangeable dignity of him who gave it. "I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD"!—for [43] ‘the LORD YOUR GOD is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, a great God, a migh⯑ty, and a terrible, which regardeth not perſons’ (not the Maſters more than any ſlaves) ‘nor taketh reward. He doth execute the judgment of the fatherleſs and widow, and LOVETH THE STRAN⯑GER, in giving him food and raiment. LOVE YE therefore the ſtranger: for ye were ſtrangers in the land of Egypt.’ Deut. x. 17, 18, 19. And how can a man be ſaid to love the ſtranger, and much leſs to love him as himſelf (ſee the expreſs command above) who preſumes to vex and oppreſs him with a per⯑petual involuntary bondage? Is this obedience to that great rule of the Goſ⯑pel, which Chriſt has given us as the ſum of the law and the prophets? Would the American ſlaveholders reliſh that con⯑temptuous and cruel uſage with which they oppreſs their poor negroes; and [44]that the African 31 ſtrangers ſhould do even ſo to themſelves without the leaſt perſonal provocation or fault on their part, [45]viz. to be branded with a hot iron, in or⯑der to be known and ranked as the cattle and private property of their oppreſſors? Like the cattle alſo to be ignominouſly compelled by the whip of a driver to la⯑bour hard "without wages" or recom⯑pence? If the African merchants and American ſlaveholders can demonſtrate that they would not think themſelves in⯑jured by ſuch treatment from others, they may perhaps be free from the horrid guilt of unchriſtian oppreſſion and uncharitable⯑neſs, which muſt otherwiſe inevitably be imputed to them, becauſe their actions will not bear the teſt of that excellent rule of the Goſpel abovementioned, which Chriſt has laid down as the meaſure of our actions—‘All things whatſoever ye would that men ſhould do to you, do ye even ſo to them, for this is the law and the prophets.’ Math vii. 12. I muſt there⯑fore [46]once more repeat, what I have be⯑fore advanced, that the permiſſion for⯑merly granted to the Jews of holding heathens and ſtrangers in ſlavery is vir⯑tually repealed, or rather ſuperſeded by the Goſpel, notwithſtanding the contrary aſſertion of the African merchant, that Chriſt "did not repeal that of ſlaves"
The African merchant has alſo re⯑publiſhed the letters of his fellow ad⯑vocate Mercator, who profeſſes in the ſame manner to draw his authority "from Sacred hiſtory"—‘To the ſedate, to the reaſonable, to the Chriſtian read⯑ers (ſays he) I ſhall more fully ſet forth the lawfulneſs of the ſlave trade from the expreſs allowance of it in Holy writ:’ (ibid appendix: B. iv.) but the very firſt inſinuation concerning the origin of ſlave [...]y which follows this ſpecious addreſs to the ſedate &c. is founded on TWO falſe aſſertions [47]even in ONE ſentence, and therefore I can⯑not eſteem him worthy of any further notice than that of pointing out theſe proofs of his little regard to truth; ‘As to its origin (ſays he) it may poſſibly be derived from that ſentence expreſſed againſt Canaan (from whom the Africans, ſays he, are deſcended) by his father No⯑ah at the hour of his death. 32 Curſed be Canaan, a ſervant of ſervants ſhall he be to his brethren.’ But though the author afterwards allows that ‘both the origin of ſlavery and the colour of the Africans are incapable of poſitive proof,’ yet the futility of his inſinuation concerning the [48] deſcent of the Africans is not like the other two circumſtances ‘incapable of poſitive proof.’ For the Africans are not deſcended from Canaan, if we ex⯑cept the Carthaginians (a colony from the ſea coaſt of the land of Canaan who were a free people, and at one time ri⯑valled, even the Roman common wealth, in power. The Africans are principally deſcended from the three other ſons of Ham, viz. Cuſh, Miſraim, and Phut; and to prove this more at large I have ſub⯑joined to this tract a letter which I re⯑ceived (in anſwer to mine on the ſame ſubject) from a learned gentleman who has moſt carefully ſtudied the antiquities of the line of Ham: the inſinuation there⯑fore concerning the ‘ſentence expreſſed againſt Canaan’ can by no means juſtify the African ſlave trade, ſo that Mercator ſeems indeed to write like a mere trader, for the ſake of his iniquitous Traffic, [49]more than for the ſake of truth, not⯑withſtanding his profeſſions of regard for the Holy Scriptures.
If we carefully examine the Scrip⯑tures we ſhall find, that ſlavery and op⯑preſſion were ever abominable in the ſight of God; for though the Jews were permitted by the law of Moſes (on ac⯑count of the hardneſs of their hearts) to keep ſlaves, as I have remarked in my anſwer to the Reverend Mr. Thompſon on this ſubject (which is ſubjoined,) yet there was no inherent right of ſervice to be implied from this permiſſion, be⯑cauſe whenever the flave could eſcape he was eſteemed free; and it was ab⯑ſolutely unlawful for any man (who be⯑lieved the word of God) to deliver him up again to his maſter (ſee Deut. xxiii. 15, 16.) whereas in our co⯑lonies, (which in acts of OPPRESSION [50]may too juſtly be eſteemed antichriſtian) the ſlave who runs away is ‘deemed rebellious,’ and a reward of £ 50 is offered to thoſe who SHALL KILL or "bring in alive any rebellious ſlave" (ſee the 66th act of the laws of Jamaica.) By an act of Virginia (4 Ann, ch. 49 § 37 P. 227.) after proclamation is iſſued againſt ſlaves that ‘run away and lie out’ it is ‘LAWFUL for any perſon whatfoever to KILL and DESTROY SUCH SLAVES by ſuch ways and means as he, ſhe, or they SHALL THINK FIT, without accuſation or impeach⯑ment of any crime for the ſame,’ &c. See the remarks on theſe, and ſuch other diabolical acts of plantation aſſem⯑blies in pages 63 to 73, of my re⯑preſentation of the injuſtice and dan⯑gerous tendency of tolerating ſlavery in England. Printed in 1769.
By another act of Virginia, (12 [51]Geo. 1. chap. 4, § 8. P 368.) if a poor fellow is taken up as a runaway and committed to priſon, the goaler may let him out to hire, in order to pay the fees, even though he is not claimed, ‘and his maſter or owner (ſays the act) cannot be known;’ and in a following clauſe the goaler is ordered to ‘cauſe a ſtrong IRON COLLAR TO BE PUT ON THE NECK of ſuch negroe or runaway, with the letters (P. G.) ſtamped thereon;’ a moſt abominable affront to human na⯑ture! our ſpiritual enemy muſt have had a notorious influence with the plantation law makers to procure an act ſo contradictory to the laws of God, 33 [52]and in particular to that (laſt cited) from Deutrenomy, viz. ‘Thou ſhalt [53]not deliver unto his maſter the ſer⯑vant which is eſcaped from his maſter [54]unto thee; He ſhall dwell with thee, among you. in that place which he ſhall chooſe’ (that is manifeſtly as a free man) ‘in one of thy gates where it liketh him beſt; thou ſhalt not oppreſs him.’ Deut. xxiii. 15, 16. This is clearly a moral law, which muſt be ever binding as the will of God; becauſe the benevolent intention of it is apparent, and muſt ever remain the ſame: for [55]which reaſon I conclude that AN AC⯑TION of TROVER cannot lye for a ſlave; and that no man can lawfully be proſe⯑cuted for protecting a negroe, or any other ſlave whatever, that has ‘eſcaped from his maſter’ becauſe that would be puniſhing a man for doing his in⯑diſpenſable duty according to the laws of God: and if any law, cuſtom or prece⯑dent ſhould be alledged to the contrary it muſt neceſſarily be rejected as null and void; becauſe it is a maxim of the com⯑mon law of England, that ‘the inferior law muſt give place to the ſuperior, man's laws to God's laws.’ (attorney general Noy's maxims P. 19) And the learned author of the Doctor and Stu⯑dent aſſerts, that even Statute law ought to be accounted null and void, if it is ſet forth contrary to the laws of God. ‘ETIAM SI ALIQUOD STATUTUM ESSE EDITUM, CONTRA EOS NUL⯑LIUS [56]VIGORIS in legibus Angliae cenſe⯑ri debet, &c’— chap, vi.
The degree of ſervitude, which the Iſraelites were permitted to exact of their brethren, was mild and equitable, when compared with the ſervitude which (to our confuſion be it ſaid) is common among Chriſtians? I have al⯑ready quoted from Leviticus a ſpecimen of the limitation to the ſervitude of BRETHREN; but the Jews were not only reſtrained from oppreſſing their BRETHREN, but were alſo bound by the law to aſſiſt them generouſly and bounti⯑fully according to every man's ability, when they diſmiſſed them from their ſervice; which is a duty too ſeldom practiced among Chriſtians! (ſee Deut⯑renomy xv. 12.) ‘If thy brother an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be ſold unto thee, and ſerve thee ſix years; [57]then in the SEVENTH YEAR thou ſhalt let him GO FREE from thee. 34And when thou ſendeſt him out FREE from thee, thou ſhalt NOT LET HIM GO AWAY EMPTY: Thou ſhalt furniſh him LIBERALLY out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy wine preſs: (of that) wherewith the Lord thy God hath bleſſed thee, thou ſhalt give unto him. And thou ſhalt remember that THOU WAST A BONDMAN in the land of E⯑gypt, AND THE LORD THY GOD RE⯑DEEMED THEE: THEREFORE I com⯑mand thee this thing to day.’ Theſe are the very utmoſt limits of ſervitude that we might venture to exact of our bre⯑thren even if we were Jews! and how much more are we bound to obſerve every thing that is merciful in the law whilſt we pro⯑feſs Chriſtianity? What then muſt we think of ourſelves if we compare theſe Jewiſh [58]limitations with our Plantation laws! A bountiful recompence for the ſervice is plainly enjoined, whereas the whole ſub⯑ſtance perhaps, of the moſt wealthy Engliſh or Scotch ſlaveholders would not ſuffice to pay what is due, in ſtrict juſtice, to thoſe who have laboured in his ſervice, if the reward is to be proportioned to their ſufferings: but it ſhall one day be required of them—‘Your gold and ſilver is cankered; and the ruſt of them ſhall be a witneſs againſt you, and ſhall EAT YOUR FLESH AS IT WERE FIRE: Ye have heaped treaſure together for the laſt days. BEHOLD THE HIRE OF THE LABOURERS which have rea⯑ped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, CRIETH: and THE CRIES of them WHICH HAVE REAPED are eutered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth’ (or of ARMIES) James. v. 3 and 4.
[59]The ſlaveholder perhaps will ſay, that this text is not applicable to him, ſince he cannot be ſaid to have ‘kept back by fraud’ the hire of his labourers, becauſe he never made any agreement with them for wages, having bought their bodies of the ſlave dealer, and thereby made them his own private property; ſo that he has a right (he will ſay) to all their labour without wages. But this is a vain ex⯑cuſe for his oppreſſion, becauſe it is not ſo much the previous agreement as the LA⯑BOUR which renders wages due: for ‘THE LABOURER is worthy of HIS HIRE’ (Luke x. 7.) and the ſin which ‘CRIETH in the ears of the Lord of Sa⯑baoth’ is the uſing a poor man's LABOUR "WITHOUT WAGES;" ſo that whether there is an agreement for wages, or no a⯑greement, yet, if THE LABOUR is perfor⯑med, the wages are due; and thoſe, who keep them back, may be ſaid to build their houſe in unrighteouſneſs: as the prophet [60]Jeremiah has declared in the ſtrongeſt terms (Jer. xxii. 13.) ‘Wo unto him that buildeth his houſe by unrighteouſ⯑neſs, and his chambers by wrong; (that) USETH HIS NEIGHBOUR'S SERVICE WITHOUT WAGES, AND GIVETH HIM NOT FOR HIS WORK.’
And the holy Job, even before the law, declared his deteſtation of UNRE⯑WARDED SERVICE. ‘If my land (ſaid he) cry againſt me, or that the furrows like⯑wiſe thereof complain: IF I HAVE EAT⯑EN THE FRUITS THEREOF WITHOUT MONEY, or have cauſed the owners there⯑of to loſe there life: 35 let thiſtles [61]grow inſtead of wheat, and cockle in⯑ſtead of barley!’ Job. xxxi. 38.—40
The wiſe ſon of Sirach has alſo add⯑ed his teſtimony to the ſame doctrine ‘He that defraudeth the LABOURER of his hire is a bloodſheder.’ Eccleſiaſticus xxxiv. 22. The ſlaveholder will per⯑haps endeavour to evade theſe texts alſo, by alledging, that though, indeed, he ‘uſeth his neighbour's ſervice WITHOUT WAGES, yet he cannot be ſaid to give him nothing for his work,’ becauſe he is at the expence of providing him with food and cloathing 36 and there⯑fore this ſevere text is not applicable to him. But let ſuch a one remember (if he calls himſelf a Chriſtian) that Chris⯑tian maſters are abſolutely bound to have ſome regard to the intereſt of their ſer⯑vants, as well as to their own intereſt.
[62] ‘Maſters, give unto your SERVANTS that which is JUST AND EQUAL, know⯑ing that YE ALSO have a MASTER in heaven.’ Colloſs. iv. 1.
But ſlaveholders in general, have no idea of what is "JUST AND EQUAL" to be given to ſervants according to the Scriptures!
It is not a mere ſupport in food and neceſſaries, as a maſter feeds his horſe or his aſs to enable the creature to perform his labour: but as man is ſuperior to brutes, a further reward is "juſt and equal" to be given to the human ſervant. I have already ſufficiently proved that every man under the Goſpel is to be conſidered as our neighbour AND brother, and conſe⯑quently, whatever was "juſt and equal" "to be given by a Jew, to his neighbour, or Hebrew brother under the Old Teſta⯑ment, [63]the ſame muſt, neceſſarily, be conſidered as "juſt and equal," and abſo⯑lutely due from Chriſtians to men of all nations without diſtinction, whom we are bound to treat as brethren under the Goſpel in whatever capacity they ſerve us. Let the American ſlaveholder therefore remember, that even according to the Jewiſh law, (if he argues upon it as a CHRISTIAN ought to do) he is abſolute⯑ly indebted to each of his ſlaves for every days labour BEYOND the firſt ſix years OF HIS SERVITUDE. ‘In the SEVENTH year (ſaid the Lord by Moſes,) thou ſhalt let him GO FREE from thee. And when thou ſendeſt him out FREE from thee, thou SHALT NOT LET HIM GO AWAY EMPTY. Thou ſhalt furniſh him LI⯑BERALLY out of thy FLOCK, &c. wherewith the Lord thy God hath bleſs⯑ed thee, thou ſhalt give unto him’ &c.
[64]If this was the indiſpenſable duty even of Jews! how much more is it "JUST AND EQUAL to be obſerved by Chriſtian? The ſame command, when applied to the American planter, will in⯑clude a proper ſtock of plants for cul⯑tivation, as Sugar-Canes, Tobacco, In⯑digo, &c. as well as cattle and ſtores, to enable a poor man to maintain him⯑ſelf and family upon a ſmall farm, or lot of ſpare ground, lett, for a certain li⯑mited time, on reaſonable terms; and renewable on equitable conditions; which are the only true means of re⯑ducing the price of labour, and proviſions. Let not the planter grudge to part with his ſervant when he has ſerved a reaſon⯑able time in proportion to his price, (agreeable for, inſtance, to the regula⯑tions adopted by the Spaniards which I have already recommended to the Engliſh planters See Appendix 5.) for the word of God forbids any ſuch baſe reluctance. ‘It ſhall not [65]SEEM HARD UNTO THEE when thou ſendeſt HIM AWAY FREE from thee; for he hath been worth a double hired ſer⯑vant (to thee) in ſerving thee ſix years: and the Lord thy God ſhall bleſs thee in all that thou doeſt.’ Deut. xv. 18
The ſlaveholder perhaps will alledge that, though the Jews were bound to ſhew this benevolence to their brethren of Iſrael, yet the ſame laws do not bind the American planter, becauſe his ſlaves are for the moſt part heathens or (as ſome of the negroes are) Mahometans, and therefore he is not bound to conſider them as his brethren; being rather juſti⯑fied by the law, which permitted the Jews to keep heathen ſlaves, and ‘the children of the ſtrangers,’ in perpetual bondage &c. They ſhall be your bondmen for ever—ſee Leviticus xxv. 44, 45, and 46.—But I have already guarded againſt [66]this objection, in the former part of this tract; and it muſt clearly appear, by the ſeveral points ſince mentioned, that as Chriſtians, we muſt not preſume to look upon any man whatever in the ſame light that the Iſraelites once did upon "the children of the ſtrangers," whether they be black or white, Hea⯑thens or Mahometans.
If a Heathen, or a Mahometan, happens to fall into our hands, ſhall we confirm his prejudices by oppreſſion, inſtead of endeavouring to inſtruct him as a bro⯑ther? Surely the blood of ſuch a poor infidel muſt reſt on the guilty head of that nominal Chriſtian, who neglects the opportunity of adding to the num⯑ber of his brethren in the Faith! And therefore, let that man, who endeavours to deprive others of their juſt privileges as brethren, take heed leſt he ſhould there⯑by unhappily occaſion his own rejection [67]in the end, when that dreadful doom, which the uncharitable muſt expect will certainly be pronounced!—For then "the KING" (the King of King's) ‘ſhall anſwer, and ſay unto them,— Verily I ſay unto you,—In as much as ye have done (it) unto one of the leaſt of theſe MY BRETHREN,’ (for that glorious KING will eſteem even the meaneſt SLAVES as HIS BRETHREN, if they believe in him,) ‘ye have done (it) unto ME! DEPART FROM ME YE CURS [...]D into everlaſting Fire, pre⯑pared for the Devil and his Angels.’ ‘(Matt. xxv. 40, 41.) I know you not! (xxv. 12.)—I never knew you;—De⯑part from me ye that work iniquity!’ (Matt. vii. 23.)
Soli Deo Gloria et Gratia.
2.
APPENDIX (No. 1.)
An ESSAY on SLAVERY, Proving from SCRIPTURE its Inconſiſtency with HUMANITY and RELIGION; By GRANVILLE SHARP.
"With an introductory PREFACE," (by a Gentleman of the Law, in Weſt Jerſey) "containing the Sen⯑timents of the Monthly Reviewers on a Tract, by the Rev. T. Thompſon, in Favour of the Slave Trade."
BURLINGTON: WEST JERSEY, Printed, M.DCC.LXXIII.
LONDON: reprinted, 1776.
Preface by the American Editor.
[]‘THE following Eſſay, though wrote, as the Author ſignifies, in haſte, is thought to have ſuch merit as to deſerve a publication.—The copy was ſent to one of the Writer's particular friends, whether for his own peculiar ſa⯑tisfaction, or the preſs, is uncertain; but as the ſubject is Liberty, ſo it is expected the Freedom which is here taken, cannot juſtly give him offence, or be unaccepta⯑ble to the public.’
‘IT was deſigned to confute a piece wrote by Thomas Thompſon, M. A. ſome time fellow of C. C. C. entitled,’ ‘The Afri⯑can trade for Negro Slaves ſhewn to be conſiſtent with principles of humanity, and with the laws of revealed religion.’ 'Printed at Canterbury.'
‘IN order to ſhew that the Eſſay Writer has not miſrepreſented the text, nor is ſingle in his obſervations upon it, the ſen⯑timents of the Monthly Reviewers on that pamphlet in May, 1772, are here inſert⯑ed.’
"We muſt acknowledge," ſay they, ‘that the branch of trade here under conſidera⯑tion, [4]is a ſpecies of traffic which we have never been able to reconcile with the dic⯑tates of humanity, and much leſs with thoſe of religion. The principal argu⯑ment in its behalf ſeems to be, the neceſ⯑ſity of ſuch a reſcource, in order to carry on the works in our plantations, which, we are told, it is otherwiſe impoſſible to perform. But this, though the urgency of the caſe may be very great, is not by any means ſufficient to juſtify the prac⯑tice. There is a farther conſideration which has a plauſible appearance, and may be thought to carry ſome weight; it is, that the merchant only purchaſes thoſe who were ſlaves before, and poſſi⯑bly may, rather than otherwiſe, render their lituation more tolerable. But it is well known, that the lot of our Slaves, when moſt favourably conſidered, is very hard and miſerable; beſides which, ſuch a trade is taking the advantage of the ig⯑norance and brutality of unenlightened na⯑tions, who are encouraged to war with each other for this very purpoſe, and, it is to be feared, are ſometimes tempted to ſeize thoſe of their own tribes or families that they may obtain the hoped for ad⯑vantage: and it is owned, with regard to our merchants, that, upon occaſion, they obſerve the like practices, which are [5]thought to be allowable, becauſe they are done by way of repriſal for theft or damage committed by the natives. We were pleaſed, however, to meet with a pamphlet on the other ſide of the queſ⯑tion; and we entered upon its peruſal with the hopes of finding ſomewhat ad⯑vanced which might afford us ſatisfaction on this difficult point. The writer ap⯑pears to be a ſenſible man, and capable of diſcuſſing the argument; but the li⯑mits to which he is confined, rendered his performance rather ſuperficial. The plea he produces from the Jewiſh law is not, in our view of the matter, at all concluſive. The people of Iſrael were under a theocracy, in which the Supreme Being was in a peculiar ſenſe their King, and might therefore iſſue forth ſome or⯑ders for them, which it would not be warrantable for another people, who were in different circumſtances, to obſerve. Such, for inſtance, was the command given concerning the extirpation of the Canaanites, whom, the ſovereign Arbiter of life and death might, if he had pleaſed, have deſtroyed by plague or famine, or other of thoſe means which we term na⯑tural cauſes, and by which a wiſe Provi⯑dence fulfils its own purpoſes. But it would be unreaſonable to infer from the [6]manner in which the Iſraelites dealt with the people of Canaan, that any other na⯑tions have a right to purſue the ſame me⯑thod. Neither can we imagine that St. Paul's exhortation to ſervants or ſlaves, upon their converſion, to continue in the ſtate in which chriſtianity found them, affords any argument favourable to the practice here pleaded for. It is no more than ſaying, that Chriſtianity did not particularly enter into the regulations of civil ſociety at that time; that it taught perſons to be contented and diligent in their ſtations: but certainly it did not forbid them, in a proper and lawful way, if it was in their power, to render their circumſtances more comfortable. Upon the whole, we muſt own, that this little treatiſe is not convincing to us, though, as different perſons are differently affected by the ſame conſiderations, it may prove more ſatisfactory to others.’
'IN another place they obſerve,' ‘ſince we are all brethren, and God has given to all men a natural right to Liberty, we al⯑low of no Slavery among us, unleſs a per⯑ſon forfeits his freedom by his crimes.’
‘THAT Slavery is not conſiſtent with the Engliſh conſtitution, nor admiſſable in Great Britain, appears evidently by the late ſolemn determination, in the court of [7]King's Bench at Weſtminſter, in the caſe of James Somerſet, the Negro; and why it ſhould be revived and continued in the colonies, peopled by the deſcendents of Britain, and bleſſed with ſentiments as truly noble and free as any of their fellow ſubjects in the mother country, is not eaſi⯑ly conceived, nor can the diſtinction be well founded.’
'IF ‘natural rights, ſuch as life and Li⯑berty, receive no additional ſtrength from municipal laws, nor any human legiſtature has power to abridge or deſtroy them, un⯑leſs the owner commits ſome act that a⯑mounts to a forfeiture;’ a 'If ‘the natural Liberty of mankind conſiſts proper⯑ly in a power of acting as one thinks fit, without any reſtraint or controul unleſs by the law of nature; being a right inhe⯑rent in us by birth, and one of the Gifts of God to man at his creation, when he en⯑dued him with the faculty of free will:’ b ‘If an act of Parliament is controulable by the laws of God and nature; c and in its conſequences may be rendered void for abſurdity, or a manifeſt contradiction to common reaſon:’ d If ‘Chriſtianity is a part of the law of England;’ e and [8]'Chriſt expreſsly commands, ‘Whatſoever ye would that men ſhould do to you, do ye even ſo to them,’ ‘at the ſame time declaring,’ ‘for this is the law and the law and the prophets,’ a ‘And if our forefathers, who emigrated from Eng⯑land hither, brought with them all the rights, liberties, and privileges of the Britiſh conſtitution (which hath of late years been often aſſerted and repeatedly contended for by Americans) why is it that the poor ſooty African meets with ſo different a meaſure of juſtice in England and America, as to be adjudged free in the one, and in the other held in the moſt abject Slavery?’
‘WE are expreſsly reſtrained from mak⯑ing laws, "repugnant to," and directed to faſhion them, ‘as nearly as may be, agreeable to, the laws of England.’ Hence, and becauſe of its total inconſiſ⯑tency with the principles of the conſtitu⯑tion, neither in England or any of the Colonies, is there one law directly in fa⯑vour of, or enacting Slavery, but by a kind of ſide-wind, admitting its exiſtence, (though only founded on a barbarous cuſtom, originated by foreigners) attempt its regulation. How far the point liti⯑gated in James Somerſet's caſe, would [9]bear a ſober candid diſcuſſion before an impartial judicature in the Colonies, I cannot determine; but, for the credit of my country, ſhould hope it would meet with a like deciſion, that it might appear and be known, that Liberty in America, is not a partial privilege, but extends to every individual in it.’
'I MIGHT here, in the language of the famous JAMES OTIS, Eſq aſk, ‘Is it poſſible for a man to have a natural right to make a Slave of himſelf or his poſteri⯑ty? What man is or ever was born free, if every man is not? Can a father ſuper⯑ſede the laws of nature? Is not every man born as free by nature as his father? a There can be no preſcription old enough to ſuperſede the law of nature, and the grant of God Almighty, who has given to every man a natural right to be free. b The Coloniſts are by the law of na⯑ture free born, as indeed all men are, white or black. No better reaſon can be given for the enſlaving thoſe of any co⯑lour, than ſuch as Baron Monteſquieu has humourouſly aſſigned, as the foundation of that cruel Slavery exerciſed over the poor Ethiopeans; which threatens one day to reduce both Europe and America [10]to the ignorance and barbarity of the darkeſt ages. Does it follow that it is right to enſlave a man becauſe he is black? Will ſhort curled hair like wool, inſtead of chriſtians hair, as it is called by thoſe whoſe hearts are hard as the nether mill⯑ſtone, help the argument? Can any lo⯑gical inference in favour of Slavery, be drawn from a flat noſe‖ a long or a ſhort face? Nothing better can be ſaid in fa⯑vour of a trade that is the moſt ſhocking violation of the laws of nature; has a direct tendency to diminiſh every idea of the ineſtimable value of Liberty, and makes every dealer in it a tyrant, from the director of an African company, to the petty chapman in needles and pins, on the unhappy coaſt.’ a
‘To Thoſe who think Slavery founded in Scripture, a careful and attentive peruſal of the Sacred Writings would contribute more than any thing to eradicate the er⯑ror, they will not find even the name of Slave once mentioned therein, and applied to a ſervitude to be continued from parent to child in perpetuity, with approbation. —The term uſed on the occaſion in the ſacred text is Servant; and, upon a fair conſtruction of thoſe writings, there is no neceſſity, nor can the ſervice, conſiſtent [11]with the whole tenor of the Scripture, be extended further than the generation ſpo⯑ken of; it was never intended to include the poſterity.’
‘THF miſtaken proverb which prevailed in that early age,’ ‘The fathers had ea⯑ten four grapes, and the childrens teeth were ſet on edge,’ was rectified by the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who de⯑clared to the people, that ‘they ſhould not have occaſion to uſe that proverb any more;—Behold all ſouls are mine, as the ſoul of the father, ſo the ſoul of the ſon, the ſoul that ſinneth it ſhall die;—the ſon ſhall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither ſhall the father bear the iniquity of the ſon;—the righteouſneſs of the righteous ſhall be upon him, and the wickedneſs of the wicked ſhall be upon him.’ a ‘And the apoſtle Peter aſſures us, after the aſcenſion of our Saviour, that God is no reſpecter of perſons, but in every nation he that feareth him is ac⯑cepted of him.’ b ‘It is alſo remark⯑able, that at that time, an Ethiopian, ‘a man of great authority,’ c was ad⯑mitted to the freedom of a Chriſtian, whatever we may think of the colour now, as being unworthy of it.’
[12] ‘But admitting Slavery to be eſtabliſhed by Scripture, the command of the Sove⯑reign Ruler of the univerſe, whoſe eye takes in all things, and who, for good reaſons, beyond our comprehenſion, might juſtly create a perpetual Slavery to effect his own purpoſes, againſt the enemies of his choſen people in that day, cannot be pleaded now againſt any people on earth; it is not even pretended to in juſtification of Negro Slavery, nor can the ſons of Ethiopia, with any degree of clearneſs, be proved to have deſcended from any of thoſe nations who ſo came under the Di⯑vine diſpleaſure as to be brought into ſer⯑vitude; if they are, and thoſe denuncia⯑tions given in the Old Teſtament were perpetual, and continue in force, muſt we not look upon it meritorious to execute them fully upon all the offspring of that unhappy people upon whom they fell, without giving quarter to any?’
‘MANY who admit the indefenſibility of Slavery, conſidering the ſubject rather too ſuperficially, declare it would be im⯑politic to emancipate thoſe we are poſſeſſed of; and ſay, they generally behave ill when ſet at liberty. I believe very few of the advocates for freedom think that all ought to be manumitted, nay, think it would be unjuſt to turn out thoſe who [13]have ſpent their prime of life, and now require a ſupport; but many are in a fit capacity to do for themſelves and the public; as to theſe let every maſter or miſtreſs do their duty, and leave conſe⯑quences to the Diſpoſer of events, who, I believe, will always bleſs our actions in proportion to the purity of their ſpring. But many inſtances might be given of Negroes and Mulatoes, once in Slavery, who, after they have obtained their li⯑berty, (and ſometimes even in a ſtate of bondage) have given ſtriking proofs of their integrity, ingenuity, induſtry, ten⯑derneſs and nobility of mind; of which, if the limits of this little Piece permit⯑ed, I could mention many examples; and why inſtances of this kind are not more fre⯑quent, we may very naturally impute to the ſmallneſs of the number tried with freedom, and the ſervility and meanneſs of their education whilſt in Slavery. Let us never forget, that an equal if not a grea⯑ter proportion of our own colour behave worſe with all the advantages of birth, education and circumſtances; and we ſhall bluſh to oppoſe an equitable emanci⯑pation, by this or the like arguments.’
‘LIBERTY, the moſt manly and exalt⯑ing of the gifts of Heaven, conſiſts in a free and generous exerciſe of all the hu⯑man [14]man faculties as far as they are compati⯑ble with the good of ſociety to which we belong; and the moſt delicious part of the enjoyment of the ineſtimable bleſſing lies in a conſciouſneſs that we are free. This happy perſuaſion, when it meets with a noble nature, raiſes the ſoul, and rectifies the heart; it gives dignity to the countenance and animates every word and geſture; it elevates the mind above the little arts of deceit, makes it benevolent, open, ingenuous and juſt, and adds a new reliſh to every better ſentiment of huma⯑nity.’ a On the contrary, ‘Man is bereaved of half his virtues that day when he is caſt into bondage.’ b
‘THE end of the chriſtian diſpenſation, with which we are at preſent favoured, ap⯑pears in our Saviours words,’ ‘The ſpi⯑rit of the Lord is upon me, becauſe he hath anointed me to preach the goſpel to the poor; he hath ſent me to heal the bro⯑ken hearted; to preach deliverance to the captives; and recovery of ſight to the blind; to ſet at liberty them that are bruiſed; to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.’ c
‘THE Editor is united in opinion with the author of the Eſſay, that ſlavery is contra⯑ry to the laws of reaſon, and the principles [15]of revealed religion; and believes it alike inimical and impolitick in every ſtate and country;’ for as ‘righteouſneſs exalteth a nation, ſo ſin is a reproach to any people.’ ‘a Hence whatever violates the purity of equal juſtice, and the harmony of true li⯑berty, in time debaſes the mind, and ulti⯑mately draws down the diſpleaſure of that Almighty Being,’ who ‘is of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on ini⯑quity.’ b ‘Yet he is far from cenſuring thoſe who are not under the ſame convic⯑tions, and hopes to be underſtood with cha⯑rity and tenderneſs to all. Every one does not ſee alike the ſame propoſitions, who may be equally friends to truth, as our education and opportunities of knowledge are various as our faces. He will candidly confeſs to any one who ſhall kindly point it out: any error which in this inquiry hath fell from his pen. There can be but one beatific point of rectitude, but many paths leading to it, in which perſons differing in modes and non-eſſentials, may walk with freedom to their own opinions; we may much more innocently be under a miſtake, than continue in it after a hint given, which occaſions our adverting thereto; for it ſeems a duty to inveſtigate the way of [16]truth and juſtice with our utmoſt ability.’
‘A much more extenſive and perfect view of the ſubject under conſideration, has of late prevailed than formerly; and he be⯑lieves nothing is wanting but an impartial diſintereſted attention to make ſtill greater advances. Thus, by a gradual progreſſion, he hopes the name of Slavery will be eradi⯑cated by the general voice of mankind in this land of Liberty.’
‘THE mode of manumitting negroes in New-Jerſey is ſuch as appears terrific, and amounts almoſt to a prohibition, becauſe of its incumbering conſequences, which few prudent people chuſe to leave their fa⯑milies liable to. It is much eaſier in ſe⯑veral other colonies. In Pennſylvania a recognizance entered into in THIRTY POUNDS to indemnify the townſhip, is a compleat diſcharge. In Mariland; where Negroes are ſo numerous, I am informed, the maſter or miſtreſs may at pleaſure give Liberty to their ſlaves without the leaſt obligation, and be clear of any future burden. Both theſe are exceptionable, and may be improved. Proper diſtinctions are neceſſary; for as the freedom of all gratis might be unjuſt, not only to the publick but the Slave: ſo any clog upon the owner who gives up his right at an age when he cannot have received much or any advantage from the labour of the [17]individual, would be unreaſonable. The wiſdom of a legiſlature earneſtly diſpoſed to do good, will I hope be directed to ſur⯑mount every little difficulty in pointing out a ſcheme more equal and perfect, by ſteering a middle courſe; and proper care being kindly taken to aſſiſt and provide for the uſefulneſs of thoſe deſerving objects of benevolence, the approbation of Divine Providence will I doubt not, attend ſuch laudable endeavours, and crown them with ſucceſs.—That the legiſlative body of each province in America may give due atten⯑tion to this important engaging ſubject, and be bleſſed to frame and eſtabliſh a plan worthy of the united juriſprudence, wiſdom, and benevolence of the Guardians of Liberty, is the ſincere wiſh of’
AN ESSAY on SLAVERY, Proving from Scripture its inconſiſten⯑cy, with Humanity and Religion,
[18]A REVEREND author, Mr. Tho⯑mas Thompſon, M. A. has late⯑ly attempted to prove ‘that the Afri⯑can trade for Negroe Slaves is con⯑ſiſtent with the principles of humanity and revealed religion.’
FROM Leviticus xxv. 39 to 46, he draws his principle concluſion, viz. ‘that the buying and ſelling of Slaves is not con⯑trary to the law of nature, for (ſays [19]he) the Jewiſh conſtitutions were ſtrictly therewith conſiſtent in all points: and theſe are in certain caſes the rule by which is determined by learned lawyers and caſuiſts, what is, or is not, contrary to nature.’ I have not leiſure to follow this author me⯑thodically, but will, nevertheleſs, ex⯑amine his ground in a general way, in order to prevent any ill uſe that may be made of it againſt the important queſtion now depending before the judges. a
THE reverend Mr. Thompſon's pre⯑miſes are not true, for the Jewiſh con⯑ſtitutions were not "ſtrictly conſiſtent" with the law of nature in all points, as he ſuppoſes, and conſequently his prin⯑cipal concluſion thereupon is erroneous. Many things were formerly tolerated among the Iſraelites, merely through [20]the mercy and forbearance of God, in conſideration of their extreme frailty and inability, at that time, to bear a more perfect ſyſtem of law. Other laws there are in the five books (beſides the ceremonial laws now abrogated) which are merely municipal, being adapted to the peculiar polity of the Iſraelitiſh com⯑monwealth, on account of its ſituation in the midſt of the moſt barbarous na⯑tions, whom the Hebrews were at all times but too much inclined to immi⯑tate.
THE univerſal moral laws and thoſe of natural equity are, indeed, every where plentifully interſperſed among the peculiar laws abovementioned; but they may very eaſily be diſtinguiſhed by every ſincere Chriſtian, who examines them with a liberal mind, becauſe the benevolent purpoſe of the Divine Author [21]is always apparent in thoſe laws which are to be eternally binding; for ‘it is the reaſon of the law which conſti⯑tutes the life of the law,’ according to an allowed maxim of our own country, "Ratio Legis eſt anima Legis," (Jenk. Cent. 45.) And with reſpect to theſe moral and equitable laws, I will readily agree with the Reverend Mr. Thomp⯑ſon, that they are the beſt rule by which ‘learned judges and caſuiſts can deter⯑mine what is, or is not, contrary to nature.’
BUT I will now give a few examples of laws, which are in themſelves contra⯑ry to nature or natural equity, in order to ſhew that Mr. Thompſon's premiſes are totally falſe:
THE Iſraelites were expreſsly permitted by the law of Moſes to give a bill of di⯑vorce [22]to their wives whenever they pleaſed, and to marry other women; and the women who were put away, were alſo expreſsly permitted, by the Moſaic law, to marry again, during the lives of their for mer huſbands.
ALL which practices were manifeſt⯑ly contrary to the law of nature in its purity, though not perhaps to the nature of our corrupt affections and deſires; for Chriſt himſelf declared, that ‘from the beginning it was not ſo,’ Matt. xix 8, 9. and at the ſame time our Lord infor⯑med the Jews, that ‘Moſes, becauſe of the hardneſs of their hearts, ſuffered them to put away their wives.’
NEITHER was it according to the law of nature, that the Jews were permitted in their behaviour and dealings, to make a partial diſtinction between their [23] brethren of the houſe of Iſrael, and ſtrangers. This national partiality was not, indeed, either commanded or re⯑commended in their law—but it was clearly permitted or tolerated, and pro⯑bably, for the ſame reaſon as the laſt mentioned inſtance—‘thou ſhalt not lend upon uſury to thy brother,’ &c.—‘unto a ſtranger thou mayeſt lend upon uſury &c. Deut. xxiii. 19.—Again— of a foreigner thou mayeſt exact;’ (that is, whatſoever has been lent, as ap⯑pears by the preceding verſes) but that which is, ‘thine, with thy brother, thine hand ſhall releaſe,’ Deut. xv. 3
Now all theſe laws were "contrary to the law of nature" or "natural equi⯑ty," (whatever Mr. Thompſon, may think) and were certainly, annulled or rather ſuperſeded, as it were, by the more perfect doctrines of univerſal be⯑nevolence taught by Chriſt himſelf, who [24] "come not to deſtroy, but to fulfill the law."
IN the law of Moſes we alſo read, ‘Thou ſhalt not avenge or bear grudge againſt the children of thy people but thou ſhalt love thy neighbour as thy⯑ſelf,’ Leviticus xix. 18.
THE Jews, accordingly, thought themſelves ſufficiently juſtified, if they confined this glorious perfection of cha⯑rity, viz. the loving others as themſelves, to the perſons mentioned in the ſame verſe, viz. ‘the children of their own people;’ for they had no idea that ſo much love could poſſibly be due to any other ſort of neighbours or brethren. But Chriſt taught them by the parable of the good Samaritan, that all ſtrangers whatever even thoſe who are declared enemies, (as were the Samaritans to the Jews) are to be eſteemed our neigh⯑bours [25]or brethren, whenever they ſtand in need of our charitable aſſiſtance.
"THE Jewiſh inſtitution" indeed, as Mr. Thompſon remarks ‘permited the uſe of bondſervants,’ but did not per⯑mit the bondage of brethren: STRAN⯑GERS ONLY could be lawfully retain⯑ed as bondmen—"of the heathen," (or, more agreeable to the Hebrew words, [...] of the nations) ‘that are round about you; of them ſhall ye buy bond men and bond maids. More⯑over of the children of ſtrangers that do ſojourn among you, of them ſhall ye buy,’ &c.—‘They ſhall be your bondmen for ever.’ Levit, xxv 39 to 46.
THIS was the law, I muſt acknow⯑ledge, with reſpect to a ſtranger that was purchaſed; but with reſpect to a brother [26]or Hebrew of the ſeed of Abraham, it was far otherwiſe, as the ſame chapter teſtifies; (39th verſe) for, ‘if thy bro⯑ther that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be ſold unto thee; thou ſhalt not compel him to ſerve as a bondſervant: but as an hired ſervant, and as a ſo⯑journer he ſhall be with thee, and ſhall ſerve thee unto the year of ju⯑bilee. And then ſhall he depart from thee, both he and his children with him,’ &c. This was the utmoſt ſervitude that a Hebrew could lawfully exact from a⯑ny of his brethren of the houſe of Iſrael, unleſs the ſervant entered voluntarily into a perpetual ſervitude: and, let me add, that it is alſo, the very utmoſt ſervitude that can lawfully be admitted among chriſtians: becauſe we are bound as chriſtians to eſteem EVERY MAN as our brother, and as our neighbour, which I have already proved; ſo that this conſequence [27]which I have drawn, is abſolutely un⯑avoidable. The Jews indeed, who do not yet acknowlege the commands of Chriſt, may perhaps ſtill think them⯑ſelves juſtified by the law of Moſes, in making partial diſtinctions between their brethren of Iſrael, and other men? but it would be inexcuſable in chriſtians to do ſo! and therefore I conclude, that we certainly have no right to exceed the limits of ſervitude, which the Jews were bound to obſerve, whenever their poor brethren were ſold to them: and I ap⯑prehend that we muſt not venture even to go ſo far, becauſe the laws of brother⯑ly love are infinitely enlarged, and ex⯑tended by the goſpel of peace, which proclaims "good will towards men," without diſtinction; and becauſe we cannot be ſaid to ‘love our neighbours as ourſelves;’ or to do to others as we would they ſhould do unto us"—whilſt we [28]retain them againſt their will, in a deſ⯑picable ſervitude as ſlaves, and private property, or mere chattels!
THE glorious ſyſtem of the goſpel deſtroys all narrow, national partiality; and makes us citizens of the world, by obliging us to profeſs univerſal benevo⯑lence: but more eſpecially are we bound, as chriſtians, to commiſerate and aſſiſt to the utmoſt of our power all perſons in diſtreſs, or captivity; whatever ‘the worſhipful committee of the compa⯑ny of merchants trading to Africa,’ may think of it, or their advocate, the reverend Mr. Thompſon.
CHARITY, indeed, begins at home; and we ought moſt certainly to give the preference to our own countrymen, whenever we can do ſo without injuſ⯑tice; but we may ‘not do evil that [29]good may come;’ (though our ſtateſ⯑men, and their political deceivers may think otherwiſe) we muſt not, for the ſake of Old England, and its African trade, or for the ſuppoſed advantage, or imaginary neceſſities of our American colonies, lay aſide our chriſtian charity, which we owe to all the reſt of mankind: becauſe, whenever we do ſo, we certain⯑ly deſerve to be conſidered in no better light than as an overgrown ſociety of robbers, a mere banditti, who, per⯑haps, may love one another, but at the ſame time are at enmity with all the reſt of the world. Is this according to the law of nature?—For ſhame Mr. Thompſon!
I HAVE much more to communi⯑cate, but no more time to write:—if I had, I could draw from the ſcriptures [30]the moſt alarming examples of God's ſevere judgments upon the Jews, for tyrannizing over their brethren, and, expreſsly, for exceeding the limits of ſervitude juſt now mentioned. a I muſt find time however to adopt one obſerva⯑tion even from the reverend Mr. Thomp⯑ſon, (p. 11.) viz. ‘This ſubject will grow more ſerious upon our hands, when we conſider the buying and ſell⯑ing Negroes, not as a clandeſtine or piratical buſineſs, but as an open pub⯑lic trade, encouraged and promoted by acts of parliament; for ſo, if being contrary to religion it muſt be deemed A NATIONAL SIN; b and as ſuch may [31]have a conſequence that would be always to be dreaded.’ May God give us grace to repent of this abominable "NATIONAL SIN," before it is too late!
If I have vindicated the law of Mo⯑ſes, much eaſier can I vindicate the be⯑nevolent apoſtle Paul, from Mr. Thomp⯑ſon's inſinuations, with reſpect to ſlave⯑ry; for he did not entreat Philemon to take back his ſervant Oneſimus, ‘in his former capacity,’ as Mr. Thompſon has aſſerted, in order to render bond⯑age ‘conſiſtent with the principles of re⯑vealed religion,’—but St. Paul ſaid expreſly, ‘not now as a ſervant, but, [32]above a ſervant, a brother beloved,’ 21 &c. So that Mr. Thompſon has notori⯑ouſly wreſted St. Paul's words.
IN the other texts where St. Paul recommends ſubmiſſion to Servants, for conſcience-ſake, he at the ſame time enjoins the maſter to entertain ſuch a meaſure of brotherly love towards his ſervants, as muſt be entirely ſubverſive of the African trade, and Weſt-Indian [33]ſlavery. And though St. Paul, recom⯑mends chriſtian patience under ſervi⯑tude, yet, at the ſame time, he plain⯑ly inſinuates, that it is inconſiſtent with [34]chriſtianity, and the dignity of Chriſt's kingdom, that a chriſtian brother ſhould [35]be a Slave. ‘Can'ſt thou be made free?’(ſays he to the chriſtian ſervants) ‘chooſe it rather, for he that is called of the Lord, being a ſervant, is the freeman of the Lord; and, in like [36]manner, he that is called, being free, is the ſervant of Chriſt,’—‘Ye are bought with a price; BE NOT THERE⯑FORE THE SERVANTS OF MEN.’ The apoſtle, indeed, had juſt before [37]recommended to his diſciples to abide in the ſame calling, wherein they were called, and, "being ſervants, not to care for it:" That is, not to grieve on account of their temporal ſtate; (for if, inſtead of thus enjoining ſubmiſſion, he had abſolutely declared the iniquity of SLAVERY, tho' eſtabliſhed and au⯑thorized by the laws of temporal govern⯑ments, he would have occaſioned more [38] tumult than reformation among the multitude of SLAVES, more ſtriving for temporal than ſpiritual happineſs; yet it plainly appears, by the inſinua⯑tions, which immediately follow, that he thought it derogatory to the honour of chriſtianity, that men, who ‘are bought,’ with the ineſtimable price of Chriſt's blood, ſhould be eſteemed ſervants; that is, the Slaves, and pri⯑vate property of other men; and had chriſtianity been eſtabliſhed by tempo⯑ral authority, in thoſe countries where Paul preached, as it is at preſent in theſe kingdoms, we need not doubt but that he would have urged, nay, compelled the maſters, as he did Phile⯑mon, by the moſt preſſing arguments, to treat their quondam ſlaves, ‘NOT NOW AS SERVANTS, BUT ABOVE SERVANTS—AS BRETHREN BE⯑LOVED.’
AN ELEGY
On the miſerable STATE of an African SLAVE, by the celebrated and ingeni⯑ous William Shenstone, Eſq
[39]APPENDIX (No. 2.)
[]Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in Maryland, to his Friend in Lon⯑don.
‘BUT whether I ſhall go thither or return home, I am yet undeter⯑mined; indeed, no where ſhall I ſtay long from England, for I had much ra⯑ther enjoy the bare neceſſaries of life there, than the moſt affluent circumſtan⯑ces in this country of moſt wretched Sla⯑very; which alone would render the life of any humane man moſt miſerable. There are four things under the Sun, which I equally abhor and abominate, viz. Slavery (under which I comprehend all cruelty, oppreſſion and injuſtice) and licentiouſneſs, pride and impudence, all which abound here in a monſtrous de⯑gree.’
‘The puniſhments of the poor negroes and convicts, are beyond all conception, being entirely ſubject to the will of their [43]ſavage and brutal maſters, they are often puniſhed for not doing more than ſtrength and nature will admit of, and ſometimes becauſe they can't on every occaſion fall in with their wanton and capricious hu⯑mours. One common puniſhment, is to flea their backs with cow hides, or other inſtruments of barbarity, and then pour on hot rum, ſuperinduced with brine or pickle, rub'd in with a corn huſk, in the ſcorching heat of the Sun. For cer⯑tain, if your judges were ſenſible of the ſhocking treatment of the convicts here, they would hang every one of them, as an infinitely leſs puniſhment, and tranſ⯑port only thoſe, whoſe crimes deſerve the ſevereſt death. Better be hanged ſeven hundred times, than ſerve ſeven years here! and there is no redreſs, for magiſ⯑trates and all are equally intereſted and criminal. If I had a child, I had rather ſee him the humbleſt ſcavenger in the ſtreets of London, than the loftieſt ty⯑rant in America, with a thouſand ſlaves at his beck.’—
APPENDIX, (No. 3.)
[]A Letter from Granville Sharp, to Ja⯑cob Bryant, Eſq concerning the Deſcent of the Negroes.
‘I Have conceived a very high opinion of your abilities, by peruſing your learned account of Egypt, and the Shep⯑herd Kings, &c. and as you ſeem to have ſtudied, very particularly, the hiſtory of the Cuſeans and antient Arabians, you can (I apprehend) eaſily reſolve ſome doubts, relating thereto, which occurred to me on reading your book.’
‘I HAD always ſuppoſed that black men in general were deſcended from Cuſh, be⯑cauſe a diſtinction in colour from the reſt of mankind, ſeems to have been particu⯑larly attributed to his deſcendants, the Cu⯑ſhim, even to a proverb.’ ‘Can the Cuſhi (commonly rendered Ethiopian) change his Skin,’ &c. (Jeremiah, xiii. 23.) and [45] ‘therefore I concluded that all negroes as well Eaſt Indian as African, are en⯑titled to the general name of Cuſhim, as being, probably, deſcended from dif⯑ferent branches of the ſame ſtock, be⯑cauſe the proverb is equally applicable to both, with reſpect to their complection, tho' in many reſpects they are very dif⯑ferent. But in p. 254, of your learned work, where you are ſpeaking of the Cu⯑ſeans in general, you ſay, that they are ‘to be found within the tropics, almoſt as low as the Gold coaſt,’ &c. as if you apprehended, that the negroes on the Gold coaſt, and below it, were not de⯑ſcended from Cuſh.’
‘Now, Sir, I ſhall think myſelf greatly obliged, if you will be pleaſed to inform me, whether you really have any particu⯑lar reaſon to apprehend that the negroes on the coaſt of Guinea (from whence our plantations are moſt commonly ſupplied) are deſcended from any other ſtock? Or whether their deſcent can at all be traced?’
‘I AM far from having any particular eſteem for the negroes, but as I think myſelf obliged to conſider them as Men, I am certainly obliged, alſo, to uſe my beſt endeavours to prevent their being treated as beaſts, by our unchriſtian countrymen, who deny them the privileges of human Nature; and, in order to excuſe their [46]own brutality, will ſcarcely allow that negroes are human Beings.’
‘THE tracing their deſcent, therefore, is a point of ſome conſequence to the ſubject, in which I am now engaged for their defence.’ * * * *
APPENDIX (No. 4.)
[]Mr. Bryant's Anſwer to the foregoing Letter.
‘I MOST ſincerely wiſh you ſucceſs in your laudable purpoſe: and am very glad to find in theſe baſe times, that there is a perſon, who will ſtand up in defence of human nature; and not ſuffer it to be limited to a ſet of features and complexion. There is nothing, I believe, in my wri⯑tings, that can affect any argument, which you may think proper to urge in favour of thoſe, whom you would patro⯑nize. But to take away all embarraſ⯑ment, and uncertainty, I will give you my opinion upon the ſubject, which you have ſtated to me in your letter, in reſpect to the origin of the Nigritae or Negroes. You ſeem to think, that all, who are of that very deep tint, which is [48]obſervable in the natives upon the coaſt of Guinea, are the offspring of Chus: and all black men in general are of the ſame origin. To this I take the liberty to anſwer, that all the natives of Africa are more or leſs ſwart: and even among the negroes there are a great variety of tints, from a light copper colour to the darkeſt black. All the inhabitants of this vaſt continent are aſſuredly the ſons of Ham: but not equally deſcended from Chus. For though his poſterity was very dark, yet many of the collateral branches were of as deep a die: and Africa was peopled from Ham, by more families than one. It was poſſeſſed by ſome of them, as there is good grounds to ſur⯑miſe, before the Cuſhites came into Egypt. We learn from ſcripture, that Ham had four ſons, Chus, Mizraim, Phut and Ca⯑naan, Gen. x. v. 6. Canaan occupied Pa⯑leſtine, and the country called by his 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 foun⯑der of the nations in Libya,*and the [49]people were from him called, ( [...]) Phuti.’ By Libya he underſtands, as the Greeks did, Africa in general: for the particular country, called Libya proper, was peopled by the Lubim, or Lehabim, one of the branches from Mizraim, [...]. Chron. Paſchale, p. 29.’
‘THE ſons of Phut, ſettled in Maurita⯑nia, where was a country called Phutia, and a river of the like denomination. ‘Mauritaniae Fluvius uſque ad praeſens tempus Phut dicitur, omniſque circa eum regio Phutenſis. (Hierons. Tradit. Hebraeae.) — Amnem, quem vocant▪ Fut:’ (Pliny, lib. 5. c. i.)—Some of this family ſettled above Egypt, near Aethi⯑opia, and were ſtiled Troglodytae. [...] syncellus, p. 47. many of them paſſed inland, and peopled the Mediterranean country. In proceſs of time, (after their expulſion from Egypt,) the ſons of Chus 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 Cuſa, and a city Cotta, together with a promontory Cotis in Mauritania, all denominated from Chus; who at dif⯑ferent times and by different people was called Chus, Cuth, Coſh and Cotis. The river Cuſa is mentioned by Pliny, lib. 5. [50]c. 1. and by Ptolomey. Many ages after theſe ſettlements, there was another ir⯑ruption of the Cuſhites into theſe parts, under the name of Saracens * and Moors; who over ran Africa, to the very extre⯑mities 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 Sene⯑gal and Gambia, and as low as the Gold Coaſt. I mentioned this, becauſe I do not think, that they proceeded much far⯑ther: 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 of which Bluet, in his hiſtory of Juba Ben Solomon, gives an account.’
‘It is not poſſible to diſcriminate at this aera of time the ſeveral caſts among the black nations, but I ſhould think, that we may be pretty certain, that they were not all Cuſhim, or Cuſeans. The Negroes are woolly headed; and ſo were ſome of the Aethiopes or Cuſhim: but nothing can be inferred from this: for many of the latter had long hair, as we learn from He⯑rodotus, lib. 7. c. 70. [...]. We [51]find from Marcellmus, that the Egyp⯑tians were Criſpi, and had a tendency to woolly hair: ſo that this circumſtance can⯑not always be looked upon as a family characteriſtic.’
‘THIS, Sir, is my opinion concerning the people in queſtion, which I ſubmit to your conſideration, merely as matter of opinion: for I cannot pretend to ſpeak with certainty. It makes very little dif⯑ference in reſpect to the good cauſe, which your humanity prompts you to eſ⯑pouſe, whether the Nigritae are Phutians, or Cuſhites. They are certainly the ſons of Ham: and, what is more to the pur⯑poſe, they are the work manſhip of God▪ formed in his image with a living Soul; as well as ourſelves. Conſequently they deſerve better treatment, than they have generally experienced from thoſe, who look upon themſelves, as more enlighten⯑ed, and poſſeſſed of a greater degree of humanity. I join with you ſincerely in deteſting the cruel traffic: and am, with great truth, SIR,’
‘P. S. You are pleaſed to obſerve, that a diſtinction in colour from the reſt of man⯑kind [52]ſeems to have been particularly attri⯑buted to the deſcendants of the Cuſhim. They certainly were very dark: but ſo were all the ſons of Ham. And it is difficult to ſay, who were the darkeſt, as it was a circumſtance depending upon the ſituation of the people ſpoken of, and upon many occult cauſes. The ſame family in differ⯑ent parts varied from itſelf, as I have ſhewn from Herodotus. The ſacred writers ſpeak of the Cuſhi's complexion particularly, be⯑cauſe they were moſt acquainted with it, as being very near Shem. There were ſe⯑veral regions, called Cuſhan or Aethiopia, one of which was upon the confines of Judaea, near Amalec and Edom; but ſtill nearer to Midian. Hence the prophet Habbakuh ſays in a viſion,—‘I ſaw the tents of Cuſhan in affliction, and the cur⯑tains of Midian did tremble.’ C. iii. v. 7. Theſe were the Araba Cuſhitae; with whom the Iſraelites were moſt acquainted. Of the ſons of Phut, and of the Ludim, Lebabim, and other deſcendants of Ham, in Africa, they had probably little or no cognizance, excepting only the Mizraim, and the Aethiopians immediately above them to the ſouth of Syene. With theſe they were acquainted. Should it be in my power to give you any farther ſatisfac⯑tion, I ſhall be very proud of your com⯑mands. * * * * * *’
[53] ‘THE whole of what you mention, that all Moors, Negroes, and black perſons are from one common ſtock is moſt aſſuredly true, if you make the head of that family Ham, inſtead of Chus. One remove higher makes every thing ſtrictly conſonant to the truth.’
APPENDIX, (No. 5.)
[]The Regulations lately adopted by the Spaniards, at the Havanna, and ſome other Places, for the gradual enfran⯑chiſement of Slaves, are to the follow⯑ing Effect.
‘AS ſoon as a ſlave is landed, his name, price, &c. are regiſtered in a public regiſter; and the maſter is oblig⯑ed, by law, to allow him one working day, in every week, to himſelf, beſides Sundays; ſo that, if the ſlave chuſes to work for his maſter on that day, he receives the wages of a freeman for it; and whatever he gains by his labour, on that day, is ſo ſecured to him by law, that the maſter cannot de⯑prive him of it. This is certainly a con⯑ſiderable ſtep towards the aboliſhing abſo⯑lute ſlavery. As ſoon as the ſlave is able to purchaſe another working day, the maſ⯑ter is obliged to ſell it to him at a propor⯑tionable price, viz. one fifth part of his [55]original coſt; and ſo, likewiſe, the re⯑maining four days, at the ſame rate, as ſoon as the ſlave is able to redeem them; after which he is abſolutely free: This is ſuch encouragement to induſtry, that even the moſt indolent are tempted to exert themſelves. Men, who have thus work⯑ed out their freedom, are enured to the labour of the country, and are certainly the moſt uſeful ſubjects that a colony can acquire. Regulations might be formed upon the ſame plan to encourage the in⯑duſtry of ſlaves that are already imported into the colonies, which would teach them how to maintain themſelves, and be as uſeful, as well as leſs expenſive to the plan⯑ter. They would by ſuch means become members of ſociety, and have an intereſt in the welfare of the community; which would add greatly to the ſtrength and ſe⯑curity of each colony: whereas, at pre⯑ſent, many of the plantations are in conti⯑nual danger of being cut off by their ſlaves, a fate which they but too juſtly deſerve.’
APPENDIX, (No. 6.)
[]Extract of a Letter from the Author, to a Gentleman at Philadelphia.
‘—and ſurely there needs no argu⯑ment to demonſtrate the weakneſs and dan⯑ger of the more ſouthern colonies, from the immenſe multitude of ſlaves, that are forci⯑bly detained therein!’
‘THE congreſs have acted nobly in for⯑bidding the iniquitous importation of more ſlaves; but the buſineſs is but half done, 'till they have agreed upon ſome equitable and ſafe means of gradually enfranchiſing thoſe which remain. No time ſhould be loſt in forwarding this equitable meaſure; —and, to ſecure the affections of the ne⯑groes, aſſurances ſhould be immediately given of ſuch friendly intentions towards them, leſt any attack ſhould, in the mean while, be made in thoſe quarters, which [57]might encourage an inſurrection. I tremble for the probable conſequences of ſuch an event! for though domeſtic ſlavery, (which I deteſt from my heart) would thereby be aboliſhed, yet that effect would be wrought at the expence of public Liberty; and the tyranny and injuſtice of private individuals would ſeem, perhaps, to be too ſeverely puniſhed by that horrid carnage and im⯑placability, which uſually attend the con⯑flicts between maſters and ſlaves!’
‘LET private intereſt therefore give place to juſtice and right, which will moſt effec⯑tually adminiſter to the public ſafety.’
‘LET it be remembered that many of the negroes are natives of the colonies, and conſequently have a natural right to a free exiſtence therein, as well as the Land⯑holders themſelves. I ſhall not preſume to adviſe the mode of effecting this im⯑portant and neceſſary enfranchiſement, but will only offer a few hints in order to promote the conſideration and determina⯑tion of thoſe who are beſt able to judge of the matter.’
‘SUPPOSE the value of every ſlave now in the colonies, was to be fairly eſtimated, by juries appointed for that purpoſe, and the value to be entered, under their inſpection, (as a pecuniary debt due from each negroe to his maſter,) in a public regiſter for each diſtrict. Suppoſe alſo that the landholders, [58]who do not occupy all their grounds, were adviſed to divide what lands they can ſpare into compact little farms, with a ſmall wooden cottage to each, which ſhould be allotted to thoſe negroes only, who are natives of the colony, or elſe have been ſo long in it, that their diſpoſitions are ſufficiently known, whether or not they may ſafely be entruſt⯑ed with their liberty. Let ſuch negroes hold theſe ſmall portions of land by leaſes, for a certain term of years; and at equitable rents, to be paid in ſuch portions of the produce from time to time, as ſhall be thought moſt reaſonable, leaving the ten⯑ants a moderate gain, (beſides their neceſ⯑ſary ſubſiſtence) to encourage induſtry, and yet ſo as to yield the landlords a due profit from each portion of their eſtates, beſides an adequate allowance to reimburſe (within the limited time) not only the regiſtered price of their quondam ſlaves, but alſo whatever ſums they may have advanced to⯑wards the expence of building, of implements, of live ſtock, of ſeed, &c. &c. the amount of which ought to be added to the firſt debt and regiſtered, in like manner, before the leaſes are executed. By theſe means the landlords will loſe nothing of their wealth, and yet the moſt uſeful and worthieſt of the negroes will acquire a natural intereſt in the welfare and ſafety of the community, which will inſure their aſſiſtance againſt [59]any hoſtile attempt of the reſt. Other negroes, that are not capable of managing and ſhifting for themſelves, nor are fit to be truſted, all at once, with liberty, might be delivered over to the care and protection of a county committee, in order to avoid the baneful effects of private property in men; and might, by the ſaid committee, be let out, as hired ſervants, to ſuch perſons as would undertake the charge of them, to be paid (alſo in produce) towards the diſ⯑charge of the regiſtered debt for each man's original price; and the labourer himſelf in the mean while to be allow⯑ed one day in a week (beſide the Sun⯑day) for his own profit, or be paid for it according to the mode of the Spaniſh regulations, (which I before tranſ⯑mitted) that he may have an opportuni⯑ty to acquire a little property of his own, which will prepare his mind, as well as his circumſtances for freedom, by enabling him, as a member of the community to ſhift for himſelf at the time of his diſ⯑charge. By ſome ſuch regulations, as theſe, ſlavery might be changed into a condition, more nearly reſembling that of hired ſervants, as no maſter would be the abſolute proprietor of thoſe he employs, and yet all reaſonable advantages ariſing from their labour, would remain; which muſt occaſion a reciprocal improvement in the morality and humanity both of maſ⯑ters [60]and ſervants; and in proceſs of time, inſtead of wretched ſlaves, a new and uſe⯑ful order of men, at preſent unknown in America, (where every freeman cultivates his own ground only) would be eſtabliſhed amongſt you; I mean a hardy body of free peaſants, ſerving either as truſty ten⯑ants or farmers, to improve the eſtates of landed gentlemen, or elſe as laborious cot⯑tagers, who might be employed with in⯑finite advantage to the neighbourhood, wherever eſtabliſhed, eſpecially if they were encouraged by an allotment of a ſmall patch of land for a potatoe ground or garden, with a right of paſture for a little live ſtock upon ſome common field in the neighbourhood of their little cot⯑tages.—Landholders by this means would have their eſtates better peopled and im⯑proved, and yet avoid the guilt and dan⯑ger of oppreſſion. In the mean while, the hours of labour ſhould be uniformly regu⯑lated, to prevent the oppreſſion of avari⯑cious exactors, and the danger of diſcon⯑tent: and ſchools ſhould be opened in every diſtrict, to give the poor labourers and their children, ſome general ideas of morality and religious knowledge, which conſtitute the moſt effectual bond of peace. Theſe regulations I mention only by way of hint: you have the ſame earneſt regard [61]for the cauſe of general liberty, and the natural rights of mankind that I have, and much greater abilities to defend them, and to propoſe a more perfect ſyſtem than what is here ſuggeſted. Let me therefore intreat you to conſider this matter, and to forward, as ſoon as poſſible, ſome ſcheme of general enfranchiſement, becauſe Ame⯑rican liberty cannot be firmly eſtabliſhed 'till this is done.’
APPENDIX, (No. 7.)
[62]Extract from Mr. Morgan's Book, in⯑tituled, ‘A Plan for the Abolition of Slavery, in the Weſt Indies.’
—Page 12.—‘Nothing can be more oppoſite to every idea of juſtice and mo⯑rality than the preſent practice of buying ſlaves, to cultivate the Weſt Indian iſlands and the ſouthern provinces on the conti⯑nent of America; nor can any thing, I think, be eventually more fatal—***’
Page 13.—‘Yet ſomething, out of worldly prudence ought to be done;—for, as this evil has been violently introduced, contrary to the natural courſe of things and the conſtitution of the world, it will one day find a remedy even in its exceſs. Matters will be fatally brought to a criſis, and nature will vindicate her own laws, [63]and reſtore the credit of her equal and juſt adminiſtration, to the laſting puniſh⯑ment of thoſe who abuſed it. THIS WILL BE WHEN THE BLACKS OF THE SOUTH-THERN COLONIES ON THE CONTINENT OF AMERICA SHALL BE NUMEROUS ENOUGH TO THROW OFF AT ONCE THE YOKE OF TYRANNY TO REVENGE THEIR WRONGS IN THE BLOOD OF THEIR OP⯑PRESSORS, AND CARRY TERROR AND DESTRUCTION TO THE MORE NORTHERN SETTLEMENTS. Such a revolution can⯑not take place in the iſlands until this period, on account of the want of intel⯑ligence and communication between the ſlaves of one iſland and another and of the eaſy communication and mutual aſ⯑ſiſtance of whites. But an inſurrection on the continent, once communicated, will be an incitement in the iſlands, and a ſig⯑nal for a general and (but that every Engliſhman is alike concerned, and the planter not peculiarly criminal) A MERIT⯑ED CARNAGE.’
‘Nothing can be conceived MORE DE⯑STRUCTIVE, MORE INSATIATE, THAN THE WARS WHICH WILL FOLLOW THIS EVENT; they will be every where marked with THE MOST HORRIBLE CRUELTIES, and THE MOST FURIOUS REVENGE. The diſtinction of black and white, which we [64]have ſo unreaſonably made the marks of freedom and ſlavery, will then become the obvious colours of mutual hoſtility and revenge; and it ſeems likely that theſe wars MAY END TO THE DISADVANTAGE OF THE WHITES; becauſe the blacks, as will be preſently obſerved, will increaſe faſter, and becauſe their nature ſeems better able to bear the ſeverity of cold, than the whites can that of heat.’—&c.
APPENDIX, (No 8.)
[65]A Copy of what ‘is ſaid to be the ſubſtance of Lord Mansfield's ſpeech in the caſe of Somerſet and Knowles:’
ON Monday the 22d June, in Trinity term, 1772, the court of King's Bench, proceeded to give judgement in the Caſe of Somerſet and Knowles, upon the re⯑turn of the Habeas Corpus. LORD MANS⯑FIELD firſt ſtated the return; and then ſpoke to the following purport, which is taken from the ſecond edition of a Tract, printed in 1773, intituled, ‘Conſidera⯑tions on the Negroe Cauſe, ſo called, ad⯑dreſſed to the right honourable lord Mans⯑field, lord chief juſtice of the court of King's Bench, by SAMUEL ESTWICK, A. M. Aſſiſtant Agent for the iſland of Barbadoes.’ page vii. viz.
‘WE pay due attention to the opinion of Sir Philip Yorke and Mr. Talbot, in the year 1729, by which they pledged themſelves to the Britiſh planters for the [66]legal conſequences of bringing Negroe-ſlaves into this kingdom, or their being baptiz⯑ed; which opinion was repeated and re⯑cognized by lord Hardwicke, ſitting as chancellor, on the 19th of October, 1749, to the following effect: he ſaid,’ ‘that trover would lay for a negroe-ſlave: that a notion prevailed, that if a ſlave came into England, or became a Chriſtian, he there⯑by became emancipated; but there was no foundation in law for ſuch a notion: that when he and Lord Talbot were attorney and ſolicitor general, this notion of a ſlave becoming free by being baptized per⯑vailed ſo ſtrongly, that the planters induſ⯑triouſly prevented their becoming chriſ⯑tians: upon which their opinion was taken; and upon their beſt conſideration they were both clearly of opinion, that a ſlave did not in the leaſt alter his ſituation or ſtate to⯑wards his maſter or owner, either by be⯑ing chriſtened, or coming to England: that though the ſtatute of Charles II. had aboliſhed’ (homage ‡) ‘tenure ſo far, that no man could be a Villein regardant; yet if he would acknowledge himſelf a Villein engroſſed in any court of record, he [67]knew of no way by which he could be en⯑titled to his freedom, without the conſent of his maſter.’ ‘We feel the force of the inconveniences and conſequences that will follow the deciſion of this queſtion: yet all of us are ſo clearly of one opinion upon the only queſtion before us, that we think we ought to give judgment without adjourning the matter to be argued before all the judges, as uſual in the habeas cor⯑pus, and as we at firſt intimated an inten⯑tion of doing in this caſe. The only queſ⯑tion then is, Is the cauſe returned ſufficient for the remanding him? If not, he muſt be diſcharged. The cauſe returned is, the ſlave abſented himſelf and departed from his maſter's ſervice, and refuſed to return and ſerve him during his ſtay in England; whereupon, by his maſter's orders, he was put on board the ſhip by force, and there detained in ſecure cuſtody, to be carried out of the kingdom and ſold. So high an act of dominion muſt derive its autho⯑rity, if any ſuch it has, from the law of the kingdom where executed. A foreig⯑ner cannot be impriſoned here on the au⯑thority of any law exiſting in his own coun⯑try. The power of a maſter over his ſer⯑vant is different in all countries, more or leſs limited or extenſive, the exerciſe of of it therefore muſt always be regulated [68]by the laws of the place where exerciſed. The ſtate of ſlavery is of ſuch a nature, that it is incapable of being now intro⯑duced by courts of juſtice upon mere rea⯑ſoning, or inferences from any principles natural or political; it muſt take its riſe from poſitive law; the origin of it can in no country or age be traced back to any other ſource. Immemorial uſage preſerves the memory of poſitive law long after all traces of the occaſion, reaſon, authority, and time of its introduction, are loſt, and in A CASE SO ODIOUS AS THE CONDITION OF SLAVES MUST BE TAKEN STRICTLY. (Tracing the ſubject to natural princi⯑ples, the claim of ſlavery never can be ſup⯑ported.) ‡ THE POWER CLAIMED BY THIS RETURN WAS NEVER IN USE HERE: (or acknowledged by the law.) No maſter ever was allowed here to take a ſlave by force to be ſold abroad becauſe he had deſerted from his ſervice, or for any other reaſon whatever; WE CANNOT SAY, the cauſe ſet forth by this return IS ALLOW⯑ED [69]OR APPROVED OF BY THE LAWS OF THIS KINGDOM, and therefore the man muſt be diſcharged.’
Upon this Mr. Eſtwick has been pleaſed to obſerve as follows, ‘i muſt confeſs (ſays he) I have been greatly puzzled in endeavouring to reconcile this judgement with this ſtate of it, and with my comprehenſion,’ &c. But the writer quoted by the African merchant before mentioned, is not ſo modeſt in his cenſure of this judgement, nor ſo honeſt in his re⯑cital of it, as Mr Eſtwick, for he partially conceals the moſt material part of the learn⯑ed judge's ſpeech, becauſe it happens to make againſt his own wicked cauſe; and tells us by way of excuſe for ſo notorious and partial an omiſſion—that ‘the remain⯑der of the ſpeech is too vague to come into conſideration,’ &c. (p. 12.) Another anony⯑mous writer (author of a pamphlet, intitled ‘CANDID REFLECTIONS upon THE JUDGE⯑MENT lately awarded by the Court of King's Bench, in Weſtminſter Hall, on what is com⯑monly called the NEGROE CAUSE, by a Plan⯑ter,’) after comparing this JUDGEMENT of the King's Bench, with the opinions of the judges Holt and Powel, and thoſe of the attorney and ſolicitor general, York and Tal⯑bot, &c. is pleaſed to reflect thereupon as follows. ‘A point, (ſays he) upon which theſe great Oracles of the law have publiſhed [70]ſuch oppoſite ſentiments, ſeems as far as ever from being eſtabliſhed upon the ſolid ground of abſolute PRECISION. The planters of courſe have been left (ſays he) as much puzzled by this DELPHIC AMBIGUITY, as the ſages themſelves appear to have been, in forming their judgements upon the ſubject. The mat⯑ter having been CONFOUNDED in this GRAND UNCERTAINTY,’ &c. (p. 57.) But theſe heavy charges of the want of "PRECISION," of "DELPHIC AMBIGUITY," and of being ‘CONFOUNDED in GRAND UN⯑CERTAINTY,’ &c. are ſo far from being "CANDID REFLECTIONS," (as this author would have us believe them,) that even his own evidence on the proceeding page, clear⯑ly proves the falſehood and injuſtice of this cenſures; for he has there given us the EFFECT of that late judgment of the court of King's Bench, in THE CLEAREST TERMS, without the leaſt doubt or difficulty; ſo that the delphic ambiguity, of which he immediate⯑ly after complains, muſt be (even accord⯑ing to his own evidence,) a mere calumny!
After reciting the opinion of lord chief juſtice Holt, he immediately adds as follows.
‘Lord chief juſtice mansfield (ſays he) adds to this effect.’
‘That the laws of Great Britain do not authorize a maſter to reclaim his fugi⯑tive SLAVE, confine or tranſport him out of the kingdom. In other words;’ (ſays [71]he) ‘that a negroe ſlave, coming from the colonies into Great Britain becomes, ipſo facto, FREE.’
Thus, notwithſtanding the un-candid re⯑flections of this author about DELPHIC AM⯑BIGUITY, yet even he himſelf has without doubt or difficulty, declared THE certain and unavoidable EFFECT of the judgement de⯑livered by Lord Mansfield! That this au⯑thor (notwithſtanding his prejudices, and unjuſt cenſures about ambiguity) has real⯑ly ſtated the certain and unavoidable EFFECT of the ſaid judgment, will appear by the following remarks upon it.
APPENDIX, (No. 9.)
[72]Remarks on the Judgment of the Court of King's Bench, in the Caſe of Stewart and Somerſet. By Gran⯑ville Sharp.
THIS judgment will not appear doubt⯑ful and inexplicit, (as ſome have too haſtily eſteemed it) if the whole be taken together, and THE EFFECT of it be duly conſidered.
LORD Mansfield pronounced the ſenti⯑ments or judgment of the whole bench, and therefore if any thing was wrong, the blame ought not to reſt on him alone; ne⯑vertheleſs, if we fairly examine what was ſaid, we ſhall find no room for blame or cavil, His lordſhip ſaid, ‘WE pay due attention to the opinion of Sir Philip York and Mr. Talbot, in the year 1729,’
[73]Now the purport of that opinion was, that the maſter ‘may legally compel his ſlave to return to the plantations.’
LORD Mansfield modeſtly declined giving a direct contradiction, in expreſs words, to the opinion of two ſuch very eminent and learned lawyers; but choſe rather to con⯑demn it, tacitly, by the effect of the judg⯑ment, which he was about to pronounce; and therefore he merely recited the opinion without the leaſt comment, and proceeded to the determination of the court upon the caſe before them; which is clear and incon⯑trovertible with reſpect to the main point of the queſtion, viz. the power claimed by the maſter, of carrying away his ſlave by force.
‘The power claimed by this return, (ſaid the chief juſtice) was never in uſe here, or ac⯑knowledged by the law.’ Now it was cer⯑tainly the duty of the court to give judg⯑ment according to the known laws, and not to be influenced by any opinion whatſoever.
THEY acknowledged, indeed, the having "paid due attention" to the ſaid opinion; but as their determination was diametrically oppoſite to the aſſertions in that opinion, it is manifeſt, that the court did not think it grounded in law, according to which alone they were bound to determine. The con⯑cluſion of lord Mansfield's ſpeech contains [74]more ſubſtantial and unanſwerable reaſons for the judgment he was about to give, than the generality of his hearers, perhaps, were aware of; for he very ingeniouſly expreſſed in the ſmall compaſs of two ſhort ſentences, that the maſters claim was contrary to three principal foundations of the Engliſh law, viz. NATURE, USE, (or Cuſtom,) and the WRITTEN LAW; which laſt alſo includes two other foundations, viz. MAXIMS and STATUTES. With reſpect to the firſt, he ſaid —‘traceing the ſubject to NATURAL princi⯑ples, the claim of SLAVERY never can be ſupported.’ With reſpect to the ſecond, he ſaid,—‘The power claimed by this return, was never in USE here,’ and thirdly, that it was "never acknowledged by THE LAW."
THESE ſeem to have been the reaſons of the determination; and conſequently the court was obliged by the common law (which always favours LIBERTY) ‖ to diſ⯑charge the man from the unnatural and un⯑precedented claims of his maſter, which was accordingly done, ſo that the true meaning of this determination is rendered clear and incontrovertible, as well by the effect of it, as by the unanſwerable reaſons above men⯑tioned.
[75]THAT there is nothing doubtful or inexplicit in this judgement, delivered by lord Mansfield, will further appear by the following report of a caſe in the PREROGATIVE COURT, wherein this very determination on Somerſet's caſe, is expreſsly cited, and the EFFECT of it clearly and fully declared by a learned judge of that court. And the propriety of the ſaid judgment has very lately been ſtill fur⯑ther confirmed by a decree alſo in THE HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY, after a very learn⯑ed and ſolemn debate concerning the legality, or, illegality of ſlavery in England, wherein the merits of the queſtion on both ſides was fully examined and diſcuſſed. A ſhort ſtate of the Caſe, together with the ſubſtance of the decree will be found in Appendix, No. 11. The offence expreſſed in this latter Caſe was ſo flagrantly wicked in all its cir⯑cumſtances, and upon the whole, was ſo notorious a contempt of the laws and con⯑ſtitution of this kingdom, as well as of natu⯑ral right, and common honeſty, that all perſons, who have any regard for juſtice, muſt be moved with indignation againſt the authors of the miſchief, and muſt wiſh to ſee them corrected by ſome adequate and exempla⯑ry puniſhment, inſtead of a deciſion againſt them for the mere recovery of wages. In order therefore to prevent any unjuſt prejudice of well meaning people, againſt the manner of proceeding in this caſe for redreſs, it is ne⯑ceſſary [76]to remark, that the negroe did not 'apply for redreſs of theſe injuries,' till more than two years after they were committed, whereby he was deprived of the ſatisfaction to which THE HABEAS CORPUS ACT would otherwiſe have entitled him ‘IN ANY OF HIS MAJESTY'S COURTS OF RECORD,’ viz.—‘to recover his treble coſts, beſides damages, which damages ſo to be given, (lays the act) ſhall not be leſs than FIVE HUNDRED POUNDS,’ that is five hundred pounds from each offen⯑dor,—frm every individual concerned (and theſe ſeem, in the preſent caſe, to have been more than 4 or 5) that had either been 'ad⯑viſing aiding, or 'aſſiſting,' in ſo flagrant a breach of the peace; and they would like⯑wiſe have been ſubject to all the 'pains, pe⯑nalties, forfeitures, loſſes or diſſabilities ordained in THE STATUTE of PROVISION and PRAE⯑MUNIRE! See my ‘Repreſentation of the injuſtice, and dangerous tendency of tole⯑rating Slavery in England,’ printed in 1769, pages 25 to 29.
APPENDIX, (No. 10.)
[77]CASE, Prerogative Court, May 11th, 1773. CAY and CRICHTON.
—A. B. deceaſed, in 1769, among other effects, left behind him a negroe ſervant. CRICHTON, the executor, was called upon by CAY, to give in an inventory of the de⯑ceaſed's goods and chattels, which he accord⯑ingly did, but omitted the negroe.
This omiſſion was made a ground of excep⯑tion to the inventory, as being, therefore, not perfect.
UPON argument, it was ſaid by the coun⯑cil on behalf of Crichton, that by a very late caſe in the King's Bench, of Knowles [78]aand Somerſet, negroes were declared to be free in England, and conſequently, they could not be the ſubjects of property, or be con⯑ſidered as any part of a perſonal eſtate.
IT was anſwered, that the caſe above⯑mentioned was determined only in 1772; that A. B. died in 1769, at which time negrees were in ſome reſpects, conſidered as property, and therefore that he ought to have been included in the account,
THE judge (Dr. Hay,) ſaid that this court had no right to try any queſtion rela⯑ting to freedom and ſlavery; but as Negroes had been declared free by the court which had the proper juriſdiction, that determina⯑tion referred to them, as well at the pre⯑ceeding time, as at the preſent, and therefore directed, that article, in which the negroe was mentioned, to be ſtruck out of the ex⯑ceptive allegation.
APPENDIX, (No. 11.)
[79]High Court of Admiralty, before Sir Geo. Hay, Knt. L.L.D. June, 29, 1776.
CASE.
ROGERS, alias RIGGES againſt JONES.
- Dr. Wynne
- Dr. Bever
- Proctor Torriano.
- Dr. Harris
- Dr. Calvert
- Proctor Holman.
‘GEORGE ROGERS alias RIGGES, a negro about nineteen years of age, had been a ſervant to ſeveral gentlemen in England, and in the ſummer of 1766, [80]being then out of place, became ac⯑quainted with John Latter and John Seſſins, who contracted with Arthur Jones for the ſale of him; an aſſignment was accordingly drawn for that purpoſe, and ſigned by John Latter, by which Rogers was transferred to Meſſrs. Maſon and Jones, as a ſlave, for the ſum of twelve guineas.’
‘SOME time in Auguſt, 1766, after the ſale above mentioned, Rogers, under ſome falſe pretences, was carried on board the ſhip Britannia, then lying at Deptford, of which Meſſrs. Maſon and Jones were owners, was there detained againſt his will, and that hemight not eſcape, was carried down into the ſail room, by order of the chief mate, and the gratings were put upon him. In this confinement he was kept, till the ſhip ſet ſail, when he was releaſed, and ſuffer⯑ed to go about upon deck; but not being entered in the ſhip's books as a mariner, nor having any particular office, or wages aſſigned to him, he was ſet to work about the ſhip's duty in general till he was ap⯑pointed as an aſſiſtant to the cook, which office he executed ſometimes as aſſiſtant, and ſometimes as principal cook, during the whole voyage. The ſhip firſt ſailed to the coaſt of Africa, on the SLAVE TRADE, [81]and from thence to Porto Rico, where he was offered to ſale, by the captain of the Britannia, as a prime ſlave; but Rogers having found an opportunity of relating his ſtory to the Spaniſh merchants, they refuſed to purchaſe him; he therefore returned with the ſhip, in which he ſtill acted in his former capacity of aſſiſtant cook; and upon their arrival in the port of Lon⯑don, in May 1768, when the other ma⯑riners were paid and diſcharged, he was ſtill detained on board againſt his will.’
‘HERE he continued for ſome time, till he contrived to give the officers the ſlip, and by the aſſiſtance and advice of ſome friends, went to Doctors Commons, and ap⯑plied to Mr. Faulckner, a proctor, to put him in a way of recovering his wages, or ſome other recompence for his labour. Mr. Faulckner accordingly wrote to Arthur Jones, one of the owners, for that purpoſe; and Rogers being ap⯑pointed likewiſe to meet Jones at the proctor's office, was waiting at a pub⯑lic houſe, in Doctors Commons, till ſent for; when Jones, Seffins, and another man, came into the houſe, forced Ro⯑gers [82]into a coach, conveyed him back, and forced him on board another ſhip, where he was chained to the main⯑maſt, till he was releaſed by the deputy⯑marſhal of the High Court of Admiralty, with the aſſiſtance of Mr. Shea, one of his old maſters, and ſome other friends, who had obtained a warrant to take him out of his confinement.’
‘SEVERAL reaſons prevented his ap⯑plying for redreſs of theſe injuries, till the beginning of the year 1774, when Mr. Torriano was employed to commence an action againſt Arthur Jones, as one of the owners, for the purpoſe of recovering the uſual wages, or ſome other recompence in lieu there⯑of.’
‘AFTER the uſual proceedings, the cauſe was brought for hearing on June, 29, 1776; when the facts being all clearly proved as above ſtated, the prin⯑cipal queſtion was,—How far the plea of SLAVERY, ſet up by the defendant, could be admitted in bar of the demand of wages?’
‘IT was inſiſted on by the counſel on be⯑half of Rogers, that the kind of ſlavery, here ſpoken of, never had any exiſtence under the laws of England; and in ſupport of that, referred to the well known Caſe [83]of Knowles and Somerſet, before lord Mansfield; and likewiſe to a late one in the PREROGATIVE COURT, of Cay and Crichton.’
‘THE counſel for the defendant argu⯑ed, that, till the caſe of Somerſet, the law of England admitted ſlavery; and in ſupport of this, they quoted the au⯑thority of Lord Chief Juſtice Hale; and, in particular, the opinions of the Lords Talbot and Hardwick.’
THE Decree of the Court thereupon was, in ſubſtance, as follows.
‘THERE are two principal points in this cauſe; (ſaid the Judge)’
‘1ſt. Whether ſuch a ſervice is proved (as ſtated in the ſummary Petition) as to enti⯑tle the plaintiff to the wages demanded? and’
‘2dly. Whether the plea of ſlavery ſhall be a ſufficient bar to the claim?’
‘With regard to the FIRST, it appears by the fulleſt evidence, that the plaintiff had ſerv⯑ed on board the ſhip, either in the capacity of aſſiſtant to the cook, or as cook himſelf, during the greateſt part of the voyage, and conſequently was entitled to ſome recompence for his ſervices; but not being entered as a mariner in the ſhip's book, nor having any [84]ſtipulated wages aſſigned him, it being proba⯑ble that the owners meant to ſell him again in the Weſt Indies, he cannot be allowed any ſpe⯑cific ſum under the name of WAGES; but as be certainly performed the duty to which he was aſſigned, without any objection to his be⯑haviour in it, the maritime law clearly gives him a QUANTUM MERUIT. The cook's wages appear to have been £1. 5s. 6d. per Month, which is more than Rogers, maſt probably, could fairly deſerve. But upon in⯑ſpection of the mariners contract, it appears that there were ſeveral negroe boys in the ſame ſhip, in the quality of apprentices, who were allowed from 10s. to 17s. and 6d. per month;’ he ſignified his opinion therefore, that Rogers might fairly deſerve 15s. per month, which he accordingly decreed him, from the time of his being firſt carried on board.
‘With regard to the SECOND point, it was urged (ſaid the judge) that the plaintiff was a SLAVE, and conſequently was not entitled to any reward for his ſervice at all.’
‘The practice of buying and ſelling ſlaves (the learned judge remarked) was cer⯑tainly very common in England, before the caſe of SOMERSET, in the Court of King's Bench, 1772, but however it might have been the law of the Royal Ex⯑change,’ [85]he hoped, ‘it never was the law of England.’
‘The OPINIONS of lord Hardwicke, and lord Talbot, when Attorney and Solicitor general, have been quoted in ſupport of this practice, and have formerly given too much countenance to it, though they ſeemed origi⯑nally to have been only applied to the diffe⯑rence created by baptiſm.’
‘But by a late determination of one of the ableſt judges that ever preſided in this king⯑dom, theſe opinions have been held to be miſ⯑taken and unſound; and there can be no fur⯑ther doubt, that the claim of SLAVERY is not maintainable by the laws of England.’
‘The law therefore was the ſame before the time of the above opinions, as ſince; and, con⯑ſequently, refers to all ſales whatſoever of this nature; which are every one illegal: and therefore the pretended ſale in the preſent caſe, in 1766, was an abſolute nullity; and when the allegation, ſtating the ſale, was admitted on behalf of the owners, had Rogers appeared, under proteſt, upon this point of law, it would have been received in bar of the plea!’
‘The owners ſeem to have acted upon a miſtaken notion of their right; but as the claim of ſlavery is clearly againſt the law of this country, and as it appeared that Rogers [86] had always acted in ſome uſeful capacity dur⯑ing the whole time of his having been on board,’ the judge ſaid, he thought ‘him entitled to a QUANTUM MERUIT for his ſervice,’—which he accordingly fixed as above; and condemned the owners in coſts; which were immediately taxed to the amount of £81. 11s. 0d.
APPENDIX, (No. 12.)
[87]From the General Evening Poſt, No. 6033. June 13th, 1772.
To the Editor of the General Evening Poſt.
AS the great cauſe depending between Mr. Stuart, and Somerſet, the negro, is at preſent one of the principal topics of general converſation, by inſerting the fol⯑lowing you will afford a ſeaſonable and ra⯑tional entertainment to your readers. I am your's, &c.
Extract of a letter from a perſon in Mary⯑land, to his friend in Philadelphia.
‘I am ſo happy as to think as you do, with regard to trading in man, or keep⯑ing [88]him a ſlave. The cuſtom is wicked and iniquitous, neither conſiſtent with reaſon, or the laws of God or man. Poor unhappy ſlaves, particularly thoſe forced from their places of nativity, are moſt certainly deplorable objects of com⯑miſeration. I never bought more than two during twenty years reſidence here. One proved to be the ſon of an African Prince; he was a moſt comely youth: hav⯑ing obſerved his uncommon good parts, I ſent him to ſchool, and uſed him like a free man during his ſtay with me. The directors of the African Company having enquired, and offered a reward for him, I by a public act preſented the poor crea⯑ture with his freedom, gave him an order for the reward aforeſaid, and ſent him to London; from whence the following year he remitted me the ſame ſum he coſt me, and ſundry rich goods to the amount of three hundred pounds and upwards, and therewith a letter in his own native lan⯑guage, tranſlated by Dr. Deſaguillier, of Cambridge.’
‘The next I purchaſed was an unhap⯑py lad, kidnapped from his free pa⯑rents at the taking of Guadaloupe. During his ſtay with me he decayed or pined ſo much, and expreſſed ſo ſenſible a ſorrow of cruel ſeparation from his [89]aged parents, relations, and countrymen, that actuated by the unerring good provi⯑dence which directs us in all our good deeds, I likewiſe ſet this poor creature free, and ſent him to his native place. Providence again would not excuſe my being further rewarded, for performing this my duty as a Chriſtian. The truly honeſt father, from the produce of his plantations, has made me preſents to the amount of fifty pounds ſterling, with direction to draw upon him for the full coſt of the poor youth, which I do never intend, being more than paid by preſents’
‘I write this to convince you that the in⯑habitants of Africa are not ſuch ſenſeleſs brutiſh creatures as thoughtleſs authors repreſent them to be: they undoubtedly are capable of receiving inſtruction, and far out-do Chriſtians in many commend⯑able virtues. Poor creatures! their great⯑eſt unhappineſs is being acquainted with Chriſtians.’ ‡
[90] ‘The following is a letter from the Negro Prince, ſome time after he arrived at London, to his maſter in Maryland. Tranſlated by Dr. Deſaguillier, of Cambridge, 1743.’
From the great city, 3d moon after my releaſe.
‘O my kind merciful maſter, my good white brother, too good, a very good ſon of a good woman, and of a very good old man, created good old people by the GREAT SPIRIT, who made my country, thy poor (I ſhould ſay heretofore poor) moſt grate⯑ful black priſoner, now rendered rich by thy goodneſs and mercy, is now moſt dead, moſt drunk, moſt mad with joy! Why is he ſo? becauſe he is going to his good warm country, to his good old mo⯑ther, to his good old father, to his little ſiſter and his brother. In my good warm country all things are good, except the white people who live there, and come in flying houſes to take away poor black priſo⯑ners from their mothers, their fathers, their ſiſters and brothers, to kill them with hun⯑ger and filth, in the cellars of their flying⯑houſes, wherein if they do not die faſt [91]enough, and poor priſoners talk for bread and water, and want to feel the wind, and to ſee THE GREAT SPIRIT, to com⯑plain to him, to tell him all, or to ſee the trees of his good warm country once more for the laſt time, the King of the white people [prabably the negro meant the captain] orders the officer called Jack, to kill many of the black priſoners, with whips, with ropes, knives, axes and ſalt. The governor of thy flying houſe has been to ſhew that which is to carry me and him to my good warm country; I am glad, very glad indeed! He goes there with wine. Should he be ſick, (and white people ſeldom eſcape being ſo there,) be⯑cauſe of thee my kind merciful maſter, and good white brother, and becauſe he has been good to me, and is a very good white man too, I will nurſe him myſelf, my mother, my father, my little ſiſter, and my brother, ſhall be his brother, his mother, his father, and his ſiſter too; he ſhall have one large heap of ele⯑phants teeth and gold, for thee my kind merciful maſter, and kind brother, and one for himſelf alſo (but ſmaller.) He at preſent is my father, I eat at his houſe, and lie there too upon the bed thou pre⯑ſented me with. His woman is my mo⯑ther, [92]and kindly nurſes me, being very ſick of the ſea and fire made of black ſtones. I have received a great quantity of gold, beſides what thou did preſent me with by means of thy hand writing, to the people who are to ſend me to my country, ſome part whereof I have given to the governor of thy ſwimming-houſe, to be ſent to thee; had I an houſeful ſhould ſend the whole with equal plea⯑ſure; however, thou ſhalt ſee hereafter, that black people are not beaſts, and do know how to be grateful. After thou my kind merciful maſter and good white bro⯑ther left me in thy ſwiming-houſe, we, thy white people, and we thy grateful black priſoners, were by the GREAT SPIRIT, who was angry with us, ſent by the wind into an immenſe great river, where we had like to have been drowned, and where we could ſee neither ſun nor moon, for ſix days and nights. I was dying during one whole moon, the governor was my father, and gave me thoſe good things thou preſented me with on my bed, he lodged me in the little room thy carpenter built for me. Thou gave me more cloaths than I could carry, yet I was very cold; nothing avail⯑ed with poor black priſoner, till at laſt hav⯑ing THE GREAT SPIRIT to ſend me ſafe to thy houſe on ſhore, I thought I was carried [93]there, [this appears to have been a dream] where thou my good white brother did uſe me with wonted goodneſs, ſpake to THE GREAT SPIRIT, and TO HIS SON, that I might keep ſo during the voyage and af⯑terwards, which they have done for thy ſake; they will always do me good becauſe of thee my good white brother; therefore my kind merciful maſter, do not forget thy poor black priſoner. When thou doſt ſpeak to THE GREAT SPIRIT and TO HIS SON, I do know he will hear thee, I ſhall never be ſick more, for which I ſhall be thank⯑ful. Pray ſpeak for my good old mother, my good father, my little ſiſter, and my brother; I wiſh they may be healthy, to many very many moons, as many as the hairs on thy head; I love them all much, yet I think not ſo much as I do thee, I could die in my country for thee, could I do thee any kindneſs. Indeed THE GREAT SPIRIT well knows I mean no lie, ſhall always ſpeak to him for thy good, believe me my good white brother, thy poor black priſoner is not a liar.’
Dgiagola, ſon of Dgiagola, Prince of Foal, ‖Africa.
Appendix A INDEX OF Texts referred to in the foregoing Work.
[94][95]| GENESIS. | ||
| Chap. | Verſes. | Pages. |
| ix. | 28. | 47 n. |
| x. | 5, 6. | App. 48. |
| EXODUS. | ||
| xxi. | 2. | 57 n. |
| 5, 6. | 15. | |
| xxiii. | 9. | 7, 41. |
| xxxiv. | 11, 12. | 4 n. |
| LEVITICUS. | ||
| xviii. | 4, 12. | |
| xix. | 18. | App. 24. |
| 33, 34. | 6, 9, 42. | |
| xxv. | 44 to 46. | 3, 26, 65, |
| 39 to 43. | 16. | |
| 39 to 46. | App. 18, 25. | |
| NUMBERS. | ||
| xxxi. | 17. | 11 n. |
| xxxiii. | 55, 56. | 12 n. |
[96]
| DEUTERONOMY. | ||
| Chap. | Verſes. | Pages. |
| vii. | 1. | 8. |
| 2. | 11 n. | |
| 16. | 5, 11 n. | |
| 23, 24. | 5 n. | |
| ix. | 5. | 12 n. |
| x. | 17 to 19. | 6, 43. |
| xv. | 3. | App. 23. |
| 12. | 56. | |
| 12 to 14. | 63. | |
| 15. | 7. | |
| 18. | 65. | |
| xx. | 16. | 10 n. |
| xxiii. | 15, 16. | 49, 54. |
| 19. | App. 23. | |
| xxv. | 19. | 11. |
| II CHRONICLES. | ||
| xiv. | 9. | 22 n. |
| xvi. | 8. | 22. |
| JOB. | ||
| xxxi | 38 to 40. | 60, 61. |
| PSALMS. | ||
| lxviii. | 31. | 22, 24. |
| PROVERBS. | ||
| xiv. | 34. | App. 15. |
| JEREMIAM. | ||
| xiii. | 23. | App. 44. |
| xxii. | 13. | 60. |
| xxxi. | 29. | App. 11. |
| EZEKIEL. | ||
| xviii. | 3, 4, 20. | App. 11. |
| Chap. | Verſes. | Pages. |
| viii. | 7, 8. | 15 n. |
| HABAKKUK. | ||
| i. | 13. | App. 15. |
| iii. | 7. | App. 52. |
| ECCLESIASTICUS. | ||
| xxxiv. | 22. | 61. |
| MATTHEW. | ||
| v. | 44, 45. | 39. |
| vii. | 12. | 42, 45. |
| App. 8. | ||
| 23. | 67. | |
| xix. | 8, 9. | App. 22. |
| xxiv. | 30. | 21. |
| xxv. | 34 to 46. | 37, 38. |
| 40. | 21, 67. | |
| 12. | 67. | |
| xxviii. | 19. | 18. |
| LUKE. | ||
| iv. | 18. | App. 14. |
| x. | 7. | 59. |
| ACTS. | ||
| viii. | 27, 28. | 24. |
| 27. | App. 11. | |
| x. | 34. | App. 11. |
| ROMANS. | ||
| viii. | 17. | 20. |
| I CORINTHIANS. | ||
| iii. | 16, 17. | 19. |
| vi. | 19, 20. | 19. |
| vii. | 22, 23. | App. 35, 36. |
| GALATIANS. | ||
| Chap. | Verſes. | Pages. |
| iv. | 5, 6, 7. | 19. |
| v. | 14. | 42. |
| EPHESIANS. | ||
| iii. | 6. | 19. |
| COLOSSIANS. | ||
| iv. | 1. | 62. |
| 7, 9. | App. 35. | |
| I THESSALONIANS. | ||
| iii. | 13. | 21. |
| PHILEMON. | ||
| The Intention of the whole Epiſtle conſidered as far as it relates to Oneſimus. | App. 31 to 38. | |
| JAMES. | ||
| v. | 3, 4. | 58. |
| II PETER. | ||
| i. | 3, 4. | 20. |
| JUDE. | ||
| xiv. | 15. | 21. |
| REVELATIONS. | ||
| i. | 7. | 21. |
| xiv. | 6. | 41. |
Appendix B INDEX.
[99]- ADMIRALTY, report of a Determination againſt Slavery in the Admiralty Court before Sir George Hay, in the Caſe of Rogers, alias Rigges, againſt Jones, App. 75. 79.
- Africa, the Goſpel of Chriſt received there earlier than in Europe, 21. The antiquity and purity of the church of Habaſſinia, 23. Early councils aſ⯑ſembled there, 24. Lamentable apoſtaſy of the African church, the cauſe of the preſent barba⯑rous ignorance which now prevails there, 26. This Example cited by Abp. Sharp as a Warning to Britain, 44, note. All the inhabitants of, aſſuredly the deſcendants of Ham, App. 48.
- African Merchant, the juſtification of ſlavery from the Moſaic law, by a writer under that name, examined, 3. Prince, letter from, to his maſter in Maryland, App. 90.
- Africans, their deſcent inquired into, 48. See Ne⯑groes.
- America, a propoſal for the gradual enfranchifement of negro ſlaves there, App. 57.
- Ariſtotle, his argument in juſtification of ſlavery re⯑futed, 27, note.
- Barbadoes, the killing of negroes there, only puniſhed by a fine, 33.
- Beattie, Dr. his examination of Ariſtotle on the ſubject of ſlavery, and of Mr. Hume on the mental inferiority of negroes, 27, note.
- Benevolence, univerſal, the diſtinguiſhing characte⯑riſtic of Chriſtianity, App. 28.
- Biſhops, numerous Aſſemblies of them in the Ec⯑cleſiaſtical Synods of Africa, 24, 25.
- Blackwell, Dr. his definition of liberty, App. 13.
- Bond-ſervants among the Iſraelites, who might le⯑gally be made ſo, 3. The law of, repealed by the Goſpel, 46.
- Brethren, all mankind connected under the idea of, by our Chriſtian obligations, 40. It is inconſiſtent with Chriſtianity that any of them ſhould be ſlaves, App. 33.
- Bryant, Mr. his letter to the Author concerning the deſcent of the negroes, App. 47.
- Canaan, falſely reputed the Father of the African negroes, 47, 48.
- Candid Reflections upon the Judgement lately awarded by the Court of King's Bench, &c. on the Negroe Cauſe. The Author of a Book ſo entitled, con⯑victed of uncandid Reflections, App. 69 to 71.
- Cave, Dr. his Account of the great Eccleſiaſtical Synods in Africa cited, 24, 25.
- Cay and Crichton, report of the caſe of, in the Pre⯑rogative Court, App. 77.
- Charity, Chriſtian, is not to be partial in its objects, App. 28.
- [101] Chriſtianity, the benevolent ſpirit of, totally in⯑conſiſtent with the tyrannical claims of ſlave⯑holding, 17. Negroes, as well as the reſt of mankind, included under the Goſpel diſpenſation, 19. Connects all the human race under the idea of brethren, 40. None of the Levitical Laws can juſtify ſlavery under, 41.
- Chuſim, the uſual Name for Negroes in the Old Teſta⯑ment, 22. See alſo Letters on the Deſcent of the Negroes, App. 44. 47.
- Congreſs, American, their prohibition of the impor⯑tation of ſlaves, ſhould be followed by the gradual emancipation of thoſe now in the country, App. 56.
- Councils, Chriſtian, a liſt of thoſe held in Africa during the third and fourth centuries, 24.
- Dgiagola, Prince of Foat, releaſed from Slavery by his Maſter in Maryland, App. 88. His grateful Letter for that favour tranſlated by Dr. Deſaguillier, App. 90.
- Deſaguillier, ſee above.
- Elegy on the miſerable ſtate of an African ſlave, by Mr. Shenſtone, App. 39.
- Emancipation of ſlaves, in the Colonies, a com⯑parative view of the different modes of, App. 16. This work remains to be done by the American Congreſs, App. 56.
- Eſtwick, Mr. his report of the late Judgement in the Court of King's Benech by Lord Mansfield, in the Caſe of Somerſet and Knowles, App. 65. His own Remarks thereupon, App. 69. Anſwered by other Remarks on that Judgement, App. 72.
- [102] Ethiopians, received the Chriſtian faith before the Europeans, 21. Their deſcent traced, 22, note.
- Foot, a Region in Africa, probably the ſame that is called Phuta from Phut the Son of Ham, App. 93.
- Habaſſinia, Church of, remains a Monument of Chriſtianity among the Sons of Ham, 23.
- Habeas Corpus Act. Severity thereof againſt thoſe who attempt to carry away any perſon by force out of this Kingdom, App. 76.
- Ham, the common father of all the inhabitants of Africa, App. 48.
- Havanna, regulations adopted by the Spaniards there, for the gradual enfranchiſement of negroes, App. 54.
- Hay, Sir George. See Admiralty and Prerogative Court.
- Heathen, under the Moſaic law, who were implied by that term, 3. Were devoted to deſtruction for their abominable vices, 4. Diſtinguiſhed from ſtrangers, 5. The bondage they were doomed to, not to be excluded from the benevolence of Chriſtians, 39.
- Hume, Mr. his opinion of the mental inferiority of Negroes, controverted by Dr. Beattie, 28, note.
- Jews, were by the Moſaic law permitted to make bond ſervants or ſlaves of the Heathen, 3. And [103]why, 4. Were commanded to treat ſtrangers kindly, 6. Over whom their legal power of bondage extended, 8. Their national privileges not to be claimed by any other people, 10. The limitations under which they might hold their brethren in bondage, 14. Such bond brethren were to be generouſly aſſiſted on diſmiſſion, 56. Their conſtitutions not ſtrictly conſiſtent with the law of nature as aſſerted by Mr. Thompſon, App. 19. Inſtances of contrariety, App. 21.
- Infidelity of the preſent age, ſo many proofs of our growing apoſtaſy from the Chriſtian Religion, 26, note.
- King's Bench, report of a Determination in that Court before Lord Mansfield againſt Slavery, in the Caſe of Somerſet and Knowles, or Stewart, App. 65. Remarks on that Determination, ditto 69. A Defence of, ditto, ditto, 72.
- Labourer always worthy of his hire, 59.
- Law of England, both common and ſtatute, not to contradict the laws of God, 55.
- Letter, from an African prince to his maſter in Maryland, App. 90.
- Liberty, the univerſality of, aſſerted by Mr. Otis, App. 9. Definition of, App. 13.
- Lutholf, his account of the antiquity and purity of the church of Habaſſinia cited, 23, note.
- Mansfield, Lord, the ſubſtance of his ſpeech in the caſe of Somerſet and Knowles, App. 65. Remarks on it, App. 69. See King's Bench Court.
- [104] Maryland, account of the cruel treatment of the ne⯑groes and convict ſlaves there, App. 42.
- Maſon and Jones, App. 80.
- Mauritania, how firſt peopled, App. 49.
- Mercator, the pleas in behalf of ſlavery by the writer under this title, refuted, 47.
- Monthly Review, conſiderations on negroe ſlavery extracted from, 3.
- Morgan, Mr. extract from his Plan for the abolition of ſlavery in the Weſt Indies, App. 62.
- Moſaic law, how far, and on what account, ſlavery was tolerated under it, 3. The benevolent treat⯑ment of ſtrangers ſtrongly inculcated by, 6. Will not juſtify ſlavery under the Chriſtian diſpenſa⯑tion, 41. Is ſuperſeded by it, 46. Not ſtrictly conſiſtent with the law of nature, as aſſerted by Mr. Thompſon, App. 19. Inſtances of contrariety, App. 21.
- Negroes, the enſlaving of, not to be juſtified from the Moſaic law, 8. Are branded by their maſters with hot irons, 15, note. Are equally intitled to the promiſes of God in the Goſpel, with the reſt of mankind, 19. Received the Chriſtian faith before the Europeans, 21. Dr. Beattie's defence of, againſt the inſinuations of Mr. Hume, 28, note. Their murder compounded for by money in Bar⯑badoes, 33. One advertiſed for in London, and deſcribed by a braſs collar like a dog, 35. Are not treated according to the Chriſtian law of doing as we would be done by, 43. Are treated like cattle, 45. Not deſcended from Canaan, 47, 48. alſo App. 12. Rewards offered by our Colony laws for killing them when they run away, 50. Their different treatment in England and America inconſiſtent with reaſon, law, and religion, App. [105]7. Ought to be emancipated, App. 12. Exami⯑nation into the moſt prudent means of emancipa⯑tion, App. 16. Their cruel treatment in Maryland, App. 42. Queries reſpecting the deſcent of them, App. 44. Reply to, App. 47 Regulations adopted by the Spaniards for the enfranchiſement of, App. 54. A Propoſal for the gradual enfran⯑chiſement of the Britiſh American ſlaves, App. 57. May thus be converted into free peaſants, App. 60. Natural tendency of our retaining them in ſlavery, App. 62. Remarks on the judgement of the Court of King's Bench in the caſe of Somerſet, App. 72.
- Neighbours, all mankind intitled to be eſteemed ſo, under the Chriſtian diſpenſation, 40.
- Oneſimus, in what ſenſe he was recommended back to his former maſter Philemon by St. Paul, App. 31. Was then a miniſter of the Goſpel, App. 34, note. Became biſhop of Epheſus, App. 37, note.
- Otis, Mr. aſſerts the univerſality of liberty, App. 9.
- Paleſtine, the ſeven nations of, the only ſtrangers whom the Jews were permitted to hold in abſolute ſlavery, 8.
- Paul, St. his Exhortation to Slaves to continue in the State in which they were called, affords no Argu⯑ment for ſlavery, App. 6. Is vindicated from Mr. Thompſon's charge of juſtifying ſlavery, App. 31.
- Philemon. St. Paul's Epiſtle to him conſidered, App. 31—38. See Oncſimus.
- [106] Planters, American, their pleas for ſlavery invali⯑dated, 59.
- Prerogative Court, report of a Determination in that Court before Dr. Hay againſt Slavery, in the Caſe of Cay and Crichton, App. 75.77.
- Propoſal by the Author for the gradual enfranchiſe⯑ment of negroe ſlaves in America, App. 57.
- Reports of Determinations in the ſeveral Courts of Law againſt Slavery, viz. King's Bench, App. 65. Admiralty Court, ditto 79. Prerogative Court, ditto 77.
- Retribution, Law of, referred to, App. 30.
- Rogers, alias Rigges, againſt Jones, report of the caſe of, in the high court of Admiralty, App. 79.
- Saracens, query relating to their deſcent, App. 50, note.
- Servants, fugitive, how treated in the Britiſh Colo⯑nies, 50, 51. Compariſon between their caſe and that of negroe ſlaves, 52, note.
- Sharp, Abp. his warning to England by the example of God's Judgements againſt the Africans, 44, note.
- Shenſtone, Mr. his elegy on the miſerable ſtate of an African ſlave, App. 39.
- Slavery, is not to be juſtified by any of the Levi⯑tical laws under the Chriſtian diſpenſation, 41. Conſiderations on, from the Monthly Review, App. 3. No poſitive law in favour of, either in England or America, App. 8.
- Slaves, who might legally be made ſo by the Iſ⯑raelites, 3. Are branded with hot irons in the [107]Britiſh plantations, 15, note. The killing of them compounded for by act of aſſembly at Barbadoes, 33. One advertiſed for and deſcribed by a braſs collar like a dog, 35. The holders of, cannot be real chriſtians, 38. How treated on running away, by our American laws, 50. Examination into the moſt prudent means of emancipating, App. 16.
- Somerſet and Knowles. Caſe of, ſee King's Bench.
- Spaniards, regulations adopted by, for the gradual enfranchiſement of negroes, App. 54.
- Strangers, benevolence toward, ſtrongly enjoined by the Moſaic law, 6. 41. The parable of the good Samaritan teaches Chriſtians to conſider all men as neighbours, App. 24.
- Theophylact, Abp. his plea for ſlavery on the au⯑thority of St. Paul, refuted, App. 32, note.
- Thompſon, Rev. Mr. examination of his defence of the negroe ſlave trade, App. 18.
- Wages, always due for labour, 59. Are decreed by the high court of Admiralty to a negroe ſlave, App. 83.
(6) ‘Now, therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.’ Numbers xxxi. 17. This was the judgement againſt the Midianitiſh priſoners. The ſeven nations of Paleſtine were likewiſe ſubjected to the ſame condemnation. ‘Thou ſhalt ſmite them and utterly deſtroy them: thou ſhalt make no cove⯑nant with them, nor ſhew mercy unto them.’ Deut. vii. 2. And a reaſon for this condemnation was plain⯑ly delivered in the fourth verſe, to confirm the juſtice of it: ‘For they will turn away thy ſon from follow⯑ing me, that they may ſerve other gods.’
The Amalekites were alſo doomed to deſtruction in the like manner: ‘Thou ſhalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou ſhalt not forget it.’ Deut. xxv. 19.
(8) ‘But, if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then it ſhall come to paſs, that thoſe, which ye let remain of them, ſhall be pricks in your eyes and thorns in your ſides, and ſhall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell. Moreover, it ſhall come to paſs, that I ſhall do unto you as I thought to do unto them.’ Numb. xxxiii. 55 and 56. And the Iſraelites were expreſsly told, that it was not on their own account that this extraordinary authority was put into their hands, but on account of the abominable wick⯑edneſs of thoſe who poſſeſſed the promiſed land.—‘The land is defiled; therefore I do viſit the iniquity there⯑of upon it, and the land itſelf vomiteth out her inhabit⯑ants.’ Levit. xviii. 25.
"For all theſe abominations" (unnatural luſts, mentioned in the former part of the ſame chapter) ‘have the men of the land done which were before you; and the land is defiled.’ Levit. xviii. 27. And the Iſraelites were warned againſt preſumption, leſt ſuch extraordinary authority ſhould occaſion ſpiritual pride. ‘Not for thy righteouſneſs, or for the uprightneſs of thine heart, doſt thou go to poſſeſs the land, but for the wickedneſs of thoſe nations the Lord God doth drive them out from before thee,’ &c. Deut. ix. 5.
(15) — ‘at the coming of our Lord JESUS CHRIST with all his Saints.’ 1 Theſſ. iii. 13.
—‘And Enoch alſo, the ſeventh from Adam, pro⯑pheſied of theſe, ſaying, Behold, the Lord cometh, with ten thouſands of his ſaints, to execute judgement upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them, of all their ungodly deeds,’ &c. Jude, xiv. 15.
(16) — ‘and then ſhall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they ſhall ſee the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.’ Matt. xxiv. 30.
‘Behold, he cometh with clouds, and every eye ſhall ſee him: and they alſo which pierced him:’ Rev. i. 7. And thoſe men, alſo, who have worn out their brethren in ſlavery, may ſurely be ranked with the wretches that pierced their Lord. ‘— in as much as ye have done it unto one of the leaſt of theſe my brethren,’ (ſaid our Lord,) "ye have done it unto me." Matt. xxv. 40. (See the concluſion of my Tract on the Law of Liberty.)
(27) The alarming increaſe of infidelity, and the open declarations of Deiſts, Arians, Socinians, and others, who deny the Divinity of Chriſt, and of the Holy Ghoſt, are lamentable proofs of the growing apoſtacy! The African Church fell away by degrees in the ſame manner, till it was totally loſt in the moſt barbarous ignorance, (except in Habeſſinia) for even thoſe Africans who are free from idolatry, and profeſs to worſhip the true God, are, nevertheleſs, enſnared and enſlaved in the groſs errors of Mahometaniſm, to which a neglect of the neceſſary Faith in the Divinity of Chriſt, and of the Holy Ghoſt, has an apparent tendency! We have likewiſe a remarkable inſtance of infidelity, or at leaſt of a total neglect of Scripture authority and re⯑velation, in the attempt of two late writers to prove that Negroes are "an inferior ſpecies of men:" but the learned Dr. Beattie, in his Eſſay on Truth, has fully refuted the inſinuations of Mr. Hume, the firſt broacher of that uncharitable doctrine, as well as Ariſtotle's fu⯑tile attempt to juſtify ſlavery; ſo that Mr. Eſtwick's ſubſequent attempt, which was prompted only by the authority of Mr. Hume, needs no further confutation. ‘That I may not be thought a blind admirer of anti⯑quity, (ſays Dr. Beattie) I would here crave the read⯑er's indulgence for one ſhort digreſſion more, in order to put him in mind of an important error in morals, inferred from partial and inaccurate experience, by no leſs a perſon than Ariſtotle himſelf. He ar⯑gues, 'That men of little genius, and great bodily ſtrength, are by nature deſtined to ſerve, and thoſe of better capacity to command; and that the natives of Greece, and of ſome other countries, being natu⯑rally ſuperior in genius, have a natural right to em⯑pire; and that the reſt of mankind, being naturally ſtupid, are deſtined to labour and ſlavery,' (De Republ. lib. 1. cap. 5, 6.) This reaſoning is now, alas! of little advantage to Ariſtotle's countrymen, who have for many ages been doomed to that ſlavery, which, in his judgment, nature had deſtined them to impoſe on others; and many nations whom he would have con⯑ſigned to everlaſting ſtupidity, have ſhown themſelves equal in genius to the moſt exalted of human kind. It would have been more worthy of Ariſtotle, to have inferred man's natural and univerſal right to liberty, from that natural and univerſal paſſion with which men deſire it. He wanted, perhaps, to deviſe ſome excuſe for ſervitude; a practice which, to their eternal reproach, both Greeks and Romans tolerated even in the days of their glory.’
‘Mr. Hume argues nearly in the ſame manner in regard to the ſuperiority of white men over black. 'I am apt to ſuſpect,' ſays he, 'the negroes, and in general all the other ſpecies of men, (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any in⯑dividual eminent either in action or ſpeculation. No ingenious manufactures among them, no arts, no ſci⯑ences.—There are negro ſlaves diſperſed all over Europe, of which none ever diſcovered any ſymptoms of ingenuity.' (Hume's Eſſay on National Charac⯑ters.)—Theſe aſſertions are ſtrong; but I know not whether they have any thing elſe to recommend them. For, firſt, though true, they would not prove the point in queſtion, except it were alſo proved, that the Africans and Americans, even though arts and ſciences were introduced among them, would ſtill re⯑main unſuſceptible of cultivation. The inhabitants of Great Britain and France were as ſavage two thou⯑ſand years ago, as thoſe of Africa and America are at this day. To civilize a nation, is a work which it requires long time to accompliſh. And one may as well ſay of an infant, that he can never become a man, as of a nation now barbarous, that it never can be civi⯑lized. Secondly, of the facts here aſſerted, no man could have ſufficient evidence, except from a perſonal ac⯑quaintance with all the negroes that now are, or ever were, on the face of the earth. Thoſe people write no hiſtories; and all the reports of all the travellers that ever viſited them, will not amount to any thing like a proof of what is here affirmed. BUT, THIRD⯑LY, WE KNOW THAT THESE ASSERTIONS ARE NOT TRUE. The empires of Peru and Mexico could not have been governed, nor the metropolis of the latter built after ſo ſingular a manner, in the middle of a lake, without men eminent both for action and ſpecula⯑tion. Every body has heard of the magnificence, good government, and ingenuity, of the ancient Pe⯑ruvians. The Africans and Americans are known to have many ingenious manufactures and arts among them, which even Europeans would find it no eaſy matter to imitate. Sciences indeed they have none, becauſe they have no letters; but in oratory, ſome of them, particularly the Indians of the Five Nations, are ſaid to be greatly our ſuperiors. It will be readily allow⯑ed, that the condition of a ſlave is not favourable to genius of any kind; and yet, the negro ſlaves diſper⯑ſed over Europe, have often diſcovered ſymptoms of inge⯑nuity, notwithſtanding their unhappy circumſtances. They become excellent handicraftſmen, and practical muſicians, and indeed learn every thing their maſters are at pains to teach them, perfidy and debauchery not excepted. That a negro ſlave, who can neither read nor write, nor ſpeak any European language, who is not permitted to do any thing but what his maſter commands, and who has not a ſingle friend on earth, but is univerſally conſidered and treated as if he were of a ſpecies inferior to the human;—that ſuch a creature ſhould ſo diſtinſtuiſh himſelf among Europeans, as to be talked of through the world for a man of genius, is ſurely no reaſonable expectation. To ſuppoſe him of an inferior ſpecies, becauſe he does not thus diſtinguiſh himſelf, is juſt as rational, as to ſuppoſe any private European of an inferior ſpecies, becauſe he has not raiſed himſelf to the condition of royalty.’
‘Had the Europeans been deſtitute of the arts of writing, and working in iron, they might have re⯑mained to this day as barbarous as the natives of Africa and America. Nor is the invention of theſe arts to be aſcribed to our ſuperior capacity. The ge⯑nius of the inventor is not always to be eſtimated ac⯑cording to the importance of the invention. Gun⯑powder, and the mariner's compaſs, have produced wonderful revolutions in human affairs, and yet were accidental diſcoveries. Such, probably, were the firſt eſſays in writing, and working in iron. Suppoſe them the effects of contrivance; they were at leaſt contrived by a few individuals; and if they required a ſuperiority of underſtanding, or of ſpecies in the in⯑ventors, thoſe inventors, and their deſcendents, are the only perſons who can lay claim to the honour of that ſuperiority.’
‘That every practice and ſentiment is barbarous which is not according to the uſages of modern Eu⯑rope, ſeems to be a fundamental maxim with many of our critics and philoſophers. Their remarks often put us in mind of the fable of the man and the lion. If negroes and Indians were diſpoſed to recriminate; if a Lucian or a Voltaire from the coaſt of Guinea, or from the Five Nations, were to pay us a viſit; what a picture of European manners might he preſent to his countrymen at his return! Nor would carica⯑tura, or exaggeration, be neceſſary to render it hi⯑deous. A plain hiſtorical account of ſome of our moſt faſhionable duelliſts, gamblers, and adulterers, (to name no more) would exhibit ſpecimens of brutiſh barbarity and ſottiſh infatuation, ſuch as might vie with any that ever appeared in Kamſchatka, California, or the land of Hottentots.’
‘It is eaſy to ſee with what views ſome modern au⯑thors throw out theſe hints to prove the natural inferiori⯑ty of negroes. But let every friend to humanity pray, that they may be diſappointed. Britons are famous for generoſity; a virtue in which it is eaſy for them to excel both the Romans and the Greeks. Let it never be ſaid, that ſlavery is countenanced by the braveſt and moſt generous people on earth; by a people who are animated with that heroic paſſion, the love of liberty, beyond all nations ancient or modern; and the fame of whoſe toilſome, but unwearied, perſe⯑verance, in vindicating, at the expence of life and fortune, the ſacred rights of mankind, will ſtrike terror into the hearts of ſycophants and tyrants, and excite the admiration and gratitude of all good men, to the lateſt poſterity.’ Eſſay on Truth, P. 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463 and 464.
(31) The proſent deplorable ſlate of the African ſtrangers in general. ought to warn us of ſimilar ju [...]g⯑ments againſt the inhabitants of th [...]ſe kingdoms! My own Grandfather near a century ago (wanting only three years, viz in 16 [...]) warned our great national counſel of God's vengeance by this very example,
‘That AFRICA (ſays h [...]) which is not now more fruitful of monſters, than it was once of excellent⯑ly wiſe and learned men; that AFRICA which for⯑merly afforded us our Clemens, our Origen, our Ter⯑tu [...]ian, our Cyprian, our Auguſtine, and many other extraordinary lights in the church of God; that FA⯑MOUS AFRICA, in whoſe ſoil Chriſtianity did thrive ſo prodigiouſly, and could boaſt of ſo many jouriſhing churches, alas is now a wilderneſs. The wild boars have broken into the vineyard and eaten it up, and it brings forth nothing but briars and thorns: to uſe the words of the prophet. And who knows but GOD may ſuddenly make THIS CHURCH AND NATION, THIS OUR ENGLAND, which, Jeſhurun like, is waxed fat and grown proud, and has kicked againſt God, SUCH ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE VENGEANCE OF THIS KIND?’—See arch bp. Sharp's Sermons ſecond vol. 1ſt Serm. which was preached before the houſe of Commons, April 11. 1679. (Page 22)
(a) This ſingle circumſtance one would think a ſuf⯑ficient bar to the inferences drawn from this epiſtle, in favour of ſlavery, by the reverend Mr. Thompſon, and others; and yet even the learned Archbiſhop Theophy⯑lact ſeemed inclined to admit the ſame ſuppoſed right of the maſter. In the preface to his commentary on this epiſtle, where he gives a ſhort account of the uſe and purport of it, and of the doctrines which may be deduced from it, (he ſays) [...] Thirdly. That it is not fit, through pretence of piety, to draw away ſervants from maſters, that are unwilling to part with them." But though the apoſtle declared, indeed, to Philemon the maſter, (v. 14.) "without thy mind, would I do nothing;" &c. yet this by no means proves the right of the maſter, but only that the apoſtle, in love and courteſy to Philemon, deſired, that "the benefit," which he required of him, "ſhould not be as it were of neceſſity, but willingly," (ver. 14.) for the apoſtle's right to have retained Oneſimus, even without the maſter's conſent, is ſufficiently implied in a preceding verſe, (viz. 8.) "though I might be much bold in Chriſt, to enjoin, (or command) "thee that which is convenient. Yet, (ſaid the apoſtle,) "for LOVE's SAKE, I rather beſeech." &c. And a further reaſon for his not commanding, is alſo declared, viz. that he depended on the willing obedience of Phile⯑mon. "Having conſidence (ſaid he) in thy obedience, I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt alſo do more than I ſay." And yet that which he really did ſay, or re⯑quire in behalf of Oneſimus, was as ſtrong a recom⯑mendation to favour and ſuperior kindneſs as could be expreſſed. He required him to receive Oneſimus, "not now as a ſervant, but above a ſervant, as a BROTHER beloved," &c. (16 verſe.) that "if he hath wronged thee, or OWETH OUGHT," ( [...], in which expreſſion even the ſuppoſed debt of ſervice may be included,) "put that on my account," (ſaid the apoſtle, ver. 18.) which muſt be a complete diſcharge of all the maſter's temporal demands on Oneſimus; and therefore it is a ſtrange perverſion of the apoſtle's meaning to cite this epiſtle, in favour of ſlavery, when the whole tenor of it is in behalf of the ſlave! But there is ſtill a fur⯑ther obſervation neceſſary to be made, which puts the matter out of diſpute.
Theophylact, himſelf, allows that Oneſimus (at the very time he was ſent back,) was a miniſter of the goſpel, or a miniſter of preaching ( [...], ‡) which is an office of the ſacred miniſtry, not beneath the higheſt order in the church, for it was the principal employ⯑ment even of the apoſtle himſelf.
And this opinion of Theophylact, is corroborated by a variety of circumſtances. By the epiſtle to the Co⯑loſſians, it appears that Oneſimus was joined with Tychi⯑cus, (therein declared to be a miniſter,) ‖ in an eccleſiaſ⯑tical commiſſion from the apoſtle to the church of the Coloſſians, at the very time that he was ſent back to Philemon; § and it would ſurely have ill become the apoſtle to ſend back Oneſimus, then a miniſter of the goſpel, to ſerve his maſter Philemon, in his former capacity, (that is as a SLAVE) which is the doctrine preſumed in page 18, of the reverend Mr. Thompſon's tract; Mr. Thompſon, as a clergyman, ought to have conſidered, that this would not have been for the credit of the goſpel miniſtry. But Oneſimus was not only a miniſter, and preacher, but afterwards even a biſhop, which will by no means ſuit with Mr. Thompſon's doctrine. The learned biſhop Fell, teſtified from the authority of the ancients, that this Oneſimus was a biſhop. "Oneſimus" (ſays he in his commentary on Colloſſ. iv, 5.) "ſervant to Philemon, a chief man in Coloſſe. The antients ſay that he ſucceeded Timothy, in the BISHOPRICK of Ephe⯑ſus." And the great archbiſhop Uſher, makes expreſs mention of Oneſimus in that biſhoprick, from the au⯑thority both of Euſebius and Ignatius, (ſee his little tract de Epiſcoporum et Metropolitanorum Ori⯑gine, p. 9. ed. Lond. 1687.) So that though Paul mentions to Philemon the receiving ONESIMUS FOR EVER (that thou ſhouldeſt receive him FOREVER." ver. 15) yet it would be moſt unreaſonable to conceive that the apoſtle meant that he ſhould receive him FOR EVER AS A SLAVE! The ſeveral circumſtances I have mention⯑ed, demonſtrate the contrary.
- Citation Suggestion for this Object
- TextGrid Repository (2020). TEI. 5208 The just limitation of slavery in the laws of God compared with the unbounded claims of the African traders and British American slaveholders By Granville Sharp With a copious appendix. University of Oxford Text Archive. . https://hdl.handle.net/21.T11991/0000-001A-5F05-5