1%5I OBBABV OF CONGRESS 01 ^899 818 2 # pH8^ ■^^■^^-r COMPARISON OF /assmisii^ mi mum m Wa ^ BY WM. HAGADOEN, JR. New-York : PRINTED BY E. B. THOMAS, 13 SPRUCE ST. 1851. COMPARISON OF aaiiiiii m§ mmm BY WM. HAG ADORN, JE. 3Me^w-Yozk : FEINTED BY E. JB. THOMAS, 13 SPRUCE ST. 1851. Z^ /' A CONTRAST OF ;ritish and American SLAVEHir. Many Briti.^li subjocts, upon reading the title of this Pamphlet, would, we know, hold up tkeir hands in holy horror at the idea of torei's are, in fact Siaves." Then the poet might have exclaimed — " DinsuUe thyself as thou Tcilt- still, Slavery, thou'rt a bitter draught ! " And o/ter this, the poet might have added, " ' Slaves cannot breathe iu Englamd ' — without having to pay their masters roundly for the ' glorious privilege / ' " We have been told by Mr. Carlyle and other Englishmen, that English fi-eedom was the foundation of whatever is fi-ee orVdmirable * \V'3 use the term " Britain" fcv coavenienc? ; raeaaiag the whole " United Kingdom." 4 BETTISH AXD in American Institutions, and that thus to British Liberty we are in- debted for whatever of freedom we enjoy. There is some truth in this — a Httle, perhaps, even in the sense in wliich it was intended to be undci-stood, but much more in another seii<;e. It was not tlie American soH of freedom, but tlie British sort which drove our fa- thers from thoir native shores, to seek, over the tlien most perilous ocean, and in tlie more perilous \s-ildemess, for freedom of another sort — freedom of self-government — " freedom io woi-sliip God ! " It was the British sort of freedom which drove our fathers to the des- perate and bloody chances of the Revolution, and it is " the same sort " which has peopled our shores, and is still peopling them, with those prosperous beneficiaries of " British /reerfow " who love it as our fathers did ; and who show their love of it in the same war — bravinf,^ all perils, and sundering all ties to get rid of it I Tills " British freedom " is called here " O))] nession ! *' Oppression peopled our countiy — oppression foiced h.-r into independence, and oppression is still peopling hfr with the most daring and lilx-rtv-loving of the eai-tJi. And for all this is our country mainly indebted to '• Ihitish fi-eedom,"' or rather to those ideas of freedom which are so jieculiarh- British : We have no national ::)itipathies ; and are very far from ha\ intr any toward Englishmen. On the contrary, we have manv English friends whom we most warmly esteem. We do, indeed, think that uneducated Englishmen of the middle class ari; sometimes presuming, and sometimes a little suHj when thej meaM onlr to be dignified ; we do think them a little obsequious to those whom they own as su- perioi-s, an.l « little arrogant to tho^e whom th.-y Avish to look down on as inferiors; but even Englishmen of this rla^^v Imv*- peculiar r//-- /«('« as Avell as pecuhar weaknesses. And as tor the other classes ; the English working people — those who do not trv to be aristocratic — are naturally as fine a set of p(V»ple as there ar<' in the world ; \\hile the well-educated classes are perha|)s more truly .ducatt-d and rorintd than any other people. We //Xre the English jieoplc, but we do not like British Slavery. It seems to as that we hear the «iUcstiou — If it is slavery WQ object to, why do we not first oppose American slavery? 0fe reply — 1st. Because a necessity continues the syhtem here, wliich . • AMERICAlSr SLAVEEY. 5 necessity does not exist in Britain. 2d. Because American Slavery Ls not quite so bad as British. '• Slaves cannot breathe in En?lar.d," but they can breathe here; ay, and "eat, drink, and be merry," too; and we know some parts of the British empire where it is hard work often to be merry, for the want of that same eating and drinking. — 3d. We do not oppose American Shivery because, as one of the sov- ereign people of tliis country, we are pledged by a holy compact to support the institutions of the sister States of our Union, as theh' cit- izens are pledged in turn to support oicr State institutions. We (the American people) are pledged to support each other thus, as the one only means of securlnp our own liberties ; and much as it might gTat- ify European monarchists to see that pledge broken, and those liber- ties thus lost, yet we will keep that pledge even unto death f As we .speak, so do foiu' m.illions of brave men most earnestly anddeej)\y feci f And this is both a moral and physical force not to be prefiehed down by a. tew thousand Abolitionists, nor scared down by as many seces- sionists, nor put down by any other " ists ;" nor even scolded down by the Mrs. Grundy of the English press. Well, we have stated some reasons for not opposing the institutions of our sister States, but we know of no such reasons for not opposing British Slavery. We know of no compact by which we are bound to support British institutions, nor do the English people, apparently, feel bound to support ours. Indeed, just the contrary seems to be the case. We shall go on, therefore, with our remarks, and enquire, in the first place, who are the British Slaves, and then whether British Slavery really is Slavery, according to the universally received defini- tions of the term. Li order to get at a proper reply to the question, *' Who are the British Slaves ?" it is well, in the fii*st place, to inquire who are the British freemen , of whom the world hears so much ? We remember seeing an article in Blackwood's Magazine, some time since, which, speaking of public opinion, said, (we quote the words ;) "There is no such thin? as public opinion in America, for public oi>iniou is the work of reason, operating on the intelligent pcrrtfon^- of the people." Now, those who are not of this " portion " are, in Britain, three fourths of the people — we mean of the human flesh; for, according to 6 BRITISH AND * • Blackwood, their opinions are not part of the opinions of the "puljlic," and consequently -we are left to inter that the " lower classes" are not " people." The same article states that this Republic- is not a free country ; for, says Rlaokwo<:)(l, — •' In no coiinlry on earth will olies to the mercantile "portion C The British people did not picvisely do all these things themselves, but they employed their " populace " to do it. The popu- lace were thus kept out of mischief at home, too, beiug employed in fighting or in shouting for British " glory." The expeaK' was some eight huiidivd million pounds. The Ihitish y^cop/e loaned the money, but llity compel "the jtopulace" to pay them the yearly interest! — What a /?•eings perished in one year in Indi:\ for want of food, becau.se of certain monopolies h<-ld by the mercantile "portion;" and AMEEICATT BLAYERY. i more recently two millions, it is said, of the Irish " populace " have- shared the same fate, for similar reasons. In India, the free British " people " only hoiight up the grain, and the Hindoos, who received their two-pence a day when employed, not being able to pay fifty dol- lars a barrel for flour, went vrtthont It, that's all. And as for Ireland, the Irish populace had to pay tithes, (often more than the whole of a lit- tle farm's nett ^irodiice) and then to pay rent, and then taxes, direct and indirect, and the rates," &c., and, if anything to live on should not happen to be left over, why the " populace " must do as the Hin- doos did — juM (JO without! When we come to speak of British daves, we will speak more of this; but we are now speaking of the/rent we rau>t deduct foni- teen millions as the interest on the capital iuNCsted, we nmst deduct six millions for the yearly cost of buildings, machinery, and fuel ; we must deduct ten millions as the manufacturei-s' profit, and remunera- tion for risks ; we must deduct seven or eight millions for salaries to able and responsible clerks, agents, o\ ei"seers, ttc. and a.- nuichmoreto defray expenses and commissions of traiisj>ortations and sales. In fine» out of the seventy-five millions, if the lalwring operatives get thirty millions, they get a larger share than is generally supposed by thera- sehes, by their emjiloyers, or by the British statistic writers. But, supposing £30,000,000 to be thus di\ided among the 2,1 50,000 labor- hio- operatives, it will be seen at a glance that they get less than the £15 each. We have taken the readers time tumake this calculation ui order to show tliat our estimates were liberal. And they appear still more so v/hen it is remendiered that farm laborei-s get no more than factory operatives, exce]'t for >oiiie three \\(n'k> in liar\o^t time; and that they are necessarily much mure uftm out of employ, and lose more days from bad weather, because of their work being mostly out of doors. But we will throw aside all these considerations — wo AJlIERICAri SLAVERY. ' 9 will be as liberal as possible to the poor fellows, and allow tliem wliat we have said — £15 yearly each man. We are fully aware, be it understood, that in Britain there are ma- ny mecbanics who can earn almost as much as this iu a mouth. Wc know there are many, and we know how many. Of mechanics who can earn ai? much as American mechanics can, there are in all Britain about one hundred and forty thousand, or one fortieth of the working people. But it costs money to be even apprenticed to these trades in Britain — so much money, that not one farming or factory laborer iu a hundred can buy for his child admission into this patrician order, or give him the slight necessary education. By these and other means, these trades are rendered a sort of working aristocracy ; and we now are not speaking of any of the numerous grades of British aristocra- cy. We speak not of exclusives, but of the excluded. We speak of the " populace," or the Slaves. We speak of that great body of the working people of Britain, who, at the very viost, average £l 5 each per year for their labor. Tliese, numbering about five millions, re- ceive for their support, at most, £15,000,000 per year ; just about what the taxes come to, without the tithes^ dec. Let u-s now conisider what Is the amount of taxes paid in Britain, and who pays them. The British revenue is some fifty-five million pounds ; but in addition to this are the enormous poor rates, the par- ish and county assessments, etc., all of which amount to some twenty :milhons more. The agricultural product of Britain is about two hun- •dred and ten million pounds per annum, a tithe of which is twenty- one millions ; and this, added to the taxes above named, produces the handsome aggregate of ninety -six million pounds per annum. — Nor is this all. It is all that l^^ received, but far from being all that \<, paid. We will suppose a British merchant imports a certain arti- cle, which costs him a dollar, and which, but for the tariff, he would sell. for $1,12. But suppose there is a duty on the article of 50 cents. The article itself the merchant buys on credit, but the duty must be paid in cash ; which makes it proper for him to charge a higher rate of profit on the duty than on the balance of what the article costs him. In consequence of the duty, then, the cost to him being $1,50, he charges the jobber for the article $1,70. The jobber sells to thfe coun- 10 BRITISH AND try dealer for $2,00. The consumer probably gets it for $2,50. But if the consumer is poor — not able to be particular, or to buy except in the smallest quantities — the article will cost him ^3.50 in penny- worths. The averafje cost to consumers, then, Ave will say, is §3,00. If there had been no duty upon the article, the importer would have sold for $1,12 ; the jobber for about §1,2.5, and the consumer would have got it, on the average, as above, foi- Si, 75 instead of §3,00. So that the consumer ])ays the duty at last, and pays, too, several tra- dei-s' profits on the duty ! In the case we have supposed, (which is a fair average of imported articles in liiitain) the consumer /;«ys 1,2.5 more for the article in consequence of the tarift", though the govern- ment only receiver 50 cts. And this is true of every article which pays a duty, for, of coui-se, traders must have a profit on the cost of what tlicv buy and sell. Thus it is a certain and well known fact, that foi- every jiound sterling of revenue the Bi-itish Government re- ceives, at least two pounds are, on the average, paid by the consumer ; and a greater proportion than this is paid by the poor consumer, for he paj'R a much larger profit on the iiifeiior arUcles lie buys by the ounce, llian tlu' lielicr man pays on wliat he buys by the barrel. If we, however, estimate this 'profit on tlw duty liy Uic most njodt-rute standard, and add it to the other taxes, we will have the aggregate of £151,000,000 ! Of this more than a third goes to the government, about as much goes to the merchants, tradei-s and shop-keepei-s, as their fair profit on the cost and risk that the tariff causes them, and the balance pays the parish and ' tln^ county assessments, and sup- ports the poor and the church. One hundred and fifty-one miUion pounds sterling ! Let us stick a pin there 1 And yet we shall see that even this is far from biding alj. There are a thousand things jt);-oicr/rt/ l)y tlu^ tarift' which pay /*o duty to the GovernnKiut — being British or t'olonial products — but to protect which enormous duties are paid by the ]ieople. For instance suppose a production of (\anada is produced far cheaper in liussia, and to pro- tect the Canadian jnuductiim, the Government imposes a duty on the Kussian article. The people tlnis are obliged to get from Canada an article that, but for the tariff, they could get far cheaper fi*om Russia, They pay fifteen pounds, perhaps, for the same article they could have AMERICAN SLAVEEY. 11 bought for ten pounds. The additional five pounds is paid, (nni that, too, -with trader's profits on it) though the Government gete not a penny of it. And thus it is with a thousand articles, upon which millions on milhons of duties are indiuectly but unavoidably joa?W, but never received by Government — except as unrecorded tribute to the protective and colonial systems. Cut, though these duties amount to as much as the revenue, they are not so precisely estimated, and we leave them out of the account. If we were to tell the ichole truth on this subject, it would seem too monstrous for belief, though it is made palpable by the incontestible evidence of figures themselves. With these reasons for moderation, then, we put down the taxes paid by Britisli productive industry at £150,000,000. We say these taxes are paid by productive induhtry; and, though it is generally conceded that the producing classes do in fact pay all the taxes, yet' it is not so generally understood. We know that, in this city, though landlords pay the real estate taxes, yet tenants, in their high vfiTit.i, jiay those taxes to the landlord, and that with a profit on the Lindlord's added risk and outlay. We have just iseen, too, that in Britain, Lliough importers pay tlift revenue, yet that revenue I'eally comes from the consumers, and that with a profit to various tradeis for their added risk and outlay. A\\(\ as productive laborers form the great mass of consumers, so they of course pay the great mass of the taxes; particularly that portion which is paid as traders' profit, because their poverty compels them to purchase in small quantities, and at great disadvantage. All this is generally both conceded and under- stood. But what is conceded without being so generally under-stood is this — that all taxes come from productive labor, being necessarily de- ducted from what the laborer would receive if there were no taxes. — The uatioriB 2^''oduct is, of coiu-se, all the nation has to pay taxes z/iiif;^. And, though transfer and sale of products are productive lalxjr, too, in one sense, because highly useful ; yet sale is not product. We can, however, be better understood by citing facts than princi- ples. We will therefore cite an example based on statistical facts. — By a comparison of Parliamentary and census returns, we find that the average product of cultivated land in Britain is about £4. 3s per acre. Of this, on the average, one third is stated to be paid for rent, 12 BRITISH AXD one thii-d pays the farmer's profit, and the balance pays the expenses ■of cultivation. A comfortable farmer, then, with seventy-five acres of cultivated land, has, on the average, une hundred pounds for himself and family, one hundre«l pounds, to pay his rent with, and another hundred tor his other expenses. Now, by the statistics above referred to, we learn that there are about fifteen acres of cultivated land in Britain to each grown man engaged in agriculture. This Mould gi\e U6 five men for the seventy-fi\ e acres, one of whom, we will suppose, ?s the farmer hinisolf. Four laborei-s. then, on the average, are to be paid out of tlie remaining hundred pounds. But there are expenses of stock, seed, manure, repaire, lack- wood's pardon; we mean the country of the intelligent jm'f'On — tlie country of the :«ix millions of people, not of the twenty-three millions^ of '•'•populace!'''' •• I thank thee, Jew, for teaching me t)iat word ! " We may thank Blackwood for the distinction. We mean that coun- try which is owned and ruled by six milHons of freemen, but mainly supported and tilled by twenty -three million slaves I 14 BBITISH A>'D But this is digression. We have undertaken, not to call these un- fortunate people slaves, but to prove that they are so. Slavery L^ in- voluntaiy servitude. A\'e ha\e not yet shown how the ser^■itude of British labor is involuntary, except by inference, nor ha^'e we, as clearly as we intend to, shown that it is servitude. "NA'e have exhibited, as it ■wore, the rule by which to show that British laborers are made sub- ject servitors of the upper classes, by systems and laws fi-amed by the u}}per classes for that end. And we now design to prove that rule, as in arithmetic, by enquiring what those laborers would be ivithov.t those systems rind laws. We have seen from British statistic tables that British farms aver- age seventy-live acres ; that the yearly produce of such farms as'erages i'300; that of this, £100 (on the average) goes to the landlord, £100 to the farmer, £30 (the tenth of £300) to the church, £20 to the pa- rish and county; and there i- but £50 K-ft for form expense-.-, including labor. We have seen, too, that such farms have (on the averaije) at least three laborei-s, receiving, by a liberal estimate, £15 a year each, or £45 together — about one seventh of the whole product. ITie hb- erahty of this estimate will be understood by British emigi-ants, and may be seen b\ all — for it loaves only £5 for all other farm expenses. Now, su])pose we strike out one item of expense, and add it to the la- borer's wages. Take the £30 from mother Church, and gi\ e it to its rightful owners, they whose labor produced it. The three laborers woidd thea have 75, instead of 45 pounds to live on ; and the effect would be that poor-rates might bo abolished too.* And this would increase the wages to at least £90. So th;it, by this one stop alone, the wages of the British lal)orer might be doidtled ! Now, the Brit- ish Church is richly endowed, (wo do not mean with ( "hristian virtue, but with property) and wo do not think the cause of true religion in Britain woiUd fail, because of the poor keeping what belongs to them, so far as to procure l)*ttor food, clothing and education. * Phiianlhropic Dritish '•/"•o-.v/arfrj" nn'ii will ixclaiin against (mr wiiKt of charity for the poor. But these humane people well know lh:it poor rates are in I'acI deducted Ihiin the price of the poor inanV labor: and tliat a lar^e proportion i:" loiit in the cost of collec- tion aiid siip-rintendeiicc, and in pecidhtioii. It is XoiUwv mc-.m. to the poor ; but not to the humane ov. rseers, speculators, commis-'ioners &c. who handle the money. The lalwr- ers do, in fact, imij these poor rate? ; and they cret back, as charity, but a small pari of what is taken irom thuin by the law. AJitEEICxiX SLAVERY. 15 But suppose, in addition to this, that the laws of pvimog-euiture and entail, and the thousand contrivances for keeping up land monopoly and high rents were also abohshed. The farmer, in this case, would be able to spai'e still more to his laborers, and live better himself, too, tor the conseriuent reduction of rents. Yet all these changes, mo- mentous as they would h^ for the laborer, would not be so great as those Avhich might be efiected for him by reduction of the taritf, that indirect, yet greatest of all the taxes on British labor. If, as we ha\e shown, employers would be abk to pay their laborers twice as muck as noAv if tithes and poor rates were abolisiied, it is certainly moderate to suppose, if the other taxes on producti\-e labor were abolished also, the laborer would get three times as much as now, and the employers would get no less. Landlords might not ha^e so much to bu}- votos with, and the Church would not ha\-e so much for its non -working clergy, ritlsh labor- ei-s slaves who are also in this condition ? It may be said that the British laborer can work or not work, just as he pleases. Well, so can the negro ; and though the latter may be punished, his punish- ment will not quite equal that of the British laborer — starvation ! But again, it may be said the Britu^h laborer is free, simply l>ecaa yet ques- tioned that this is '• /«<''V?(//^'/7/ servitude," let the '200,000 annual emigrants to this port make answer ! Let the ghosts of the starved milhons answer ! And if the ''portions'' still pei-sist that this servitude is not involuntary, let them give their servitoi-s the right of suffrage, and see how long the ser\ itud<- we have shown would continue ! Give them the right of sutiVngc un.l what wuuld they do'; First, they woiM abolish tithes; and then poverty and poor laws together; then piimugeniture, enUiil, and aU high rent laws. Then tliey would abolish the colonial and protective systems; and then, nine-tenths of the army, kept up only to keep down the colonies and the " populace.'' AMERICAN SLAVERY. VJ Bi-itannia would lose the fflor]/ of holding in subjection nationji of uo- warUke Indians, and indignant, wide-scattered colonists ; but over her beauteous and happy islands would dawn the brighter glory of egval hberty — the effulgent halo of true freedom ! And the national debt 1 If the British slaves had the rigfit of suf- frage, what would they do with that? Would they repudiate? Oii, not at all. Repudiate ! No ! But, commencing with the miJJionaires, they would, perhaps, increase th< Income tra\\\n\\\ this tax should pay the interest ! "Oh!" say the stock-holders, "they'd be sure to do something like tliat ; so keep them dowTi ! " ^ "Impious heretics 1" exclaim the fat Bishops, "they wouH dr'prive Heaven of its tithes ; keep them down ! " " Base workmen ! " say the army and navy ofiicers, " thej'' would free the Colonies, and put an end to British gloiy ; keep them down ! " " Ignorant laborers 1 " say the wealthy, " they wotrld repeal high rent laws, and raise wages ; keep them down ! " " Jacobins ! " cry the tradesmen, " they would derange commei'ce ;. keep them down ! " " Oh, the low, dirty mob ! " says Mrs. (Trundy, " they'd CJt eveiy body's throat ; do keep them do\vn ! " And last comes Thomas Carlyle, and he says : " Idle rascals! make them work ! " Yet he seems to forget that the best way to mal-e a man v/oi-k, is to let him keep what by his labor he produces. But all these, and a miUion more of British •' pro-slavery" men, have not the power to "keep them down" foi-ever ! Judging from the pa&t, the fixadom of the Biitish laborer may be still delayed a century or two ; yet we hope that the time ^oill come when every British man will be a voter. And in twenty years ftom ihat time, every honest Briton will be 2^ freeman ! According to statistics, as we have seen, two-sevenths of the entire produce of British labor now go to the landlord or capitalist, two sev- enths to employers as their profit, two-sevenths to the Church and the Oovernment ; and but one seventh remains for that great d&ss whose labor creates it all ! But in twenty years after the right of suflrage is 1 8 BEITiyil AND ^vcn to that clas3 entire, a different story will be told by British statis- tics. Thtn, of the produce of Britisji labor, a fair, full ha//\\\\\ ]>ethe laborer's portion, and the other half -wiW be shared by the employer, the capitalist and the landlord. As fur the Church and the Govern- ment, the little tliat they will get, will support a purer church and a nobler government than those which are now upheld by the labor and misery of millions. Then will the Dritish laborer \>e free and prosper- ous ; ay, and industrious, too. " The lazy Iri.sh," whom Mr. Carlyle threatens to drive to work, in this coimtrj- are tempted to work ; and here they are " the industrious Irisli." Let a man kee2) what he pro- dui-es, and he needs no driving/ to work. When tliis time comes, of which we speak, then will be exposed the fallacy of that swindHng, ^^ pro-skive ri/^^ false pretence, that British laborei-s are poor because laud is scarce. For then, and not till then, will the twenty-eight mil- lion acres of British ivaste lands be culti\ ated, of which statistics tell. And then, when ''the populace" are interested in the result, and not till then, will tlie l>eauteous isles of Britain, all of them, l^e seen to " blossom like the rose.'' Wheiathis time comes, the laborer will learn that universal suffrage, and only that, can secure to poor, swindled, bamboozled, jwotected la- bor, all its rights. Then will the British laborer begin to be a free- man ; and his freedom will consist mainly in the suffrage-protected right to keep what, by his labor, he produces. Of this great right most British laborers are now, by unequal laAvs,* deprived, as are also the negroes; and they therefc>re, both alike, are slaves! Both alike are compelled — by laws* the making of which they have no voice in — to sc/'yc others by their labci. This servitude, being thus compelled, is, of com-se, " involuntar)/ servitude !" And tliis, in all English dic- tionaries, is the definition of that stern word " Slavkrv I " The .\>ierican Slaves. "VVc will commence this branch of oiu* subject by considering the ori- gin of American Sla\ery, fts such. Those Institutions bj- which the laboring population of Europe has been reduced to a condition of in- *Thc laic which made the ne^ro a Slave, is only the circuraatonco by which he was oriffin- alty made so, by his African captor, or the British slave-trader who brought him hero. TFor the traders who yir.s-t boufrht the slaves were British, and there are in this country, no laws which create fhiverj ; though it is here partly continued, as the least of two evils. Jimcrican Slavery is thus inherited from Britain, and partly continued only through humane necessity. AMEKICAN SLAVERY. 19 volantiu-y sorvitudo were created in those respective countries iu which that sorvilade exists ; and the shivery system!^ thus created are thas of course, of European origin. Ihit in this country the case is far dif- ferent. American Shivery can, indeed, scarcely be called an American Institution, tor it is not of American, but of African or of British origin. Th-i institutions of a portion of our country do, indeed, re- cognize the right of one class to the labor of another class, in return for substantial bcnetits conferred. Those institutions reco'jnize Sla- very, but th&y did not create it. And, in fact, so far are e\en those sectional institutions from having created Slavery, that they have in a. ■yreat measure abolished the Slavery to which the African race was subject befoi-e it -was introduced upon our shores. X slave in Africa is the absolute property of his master, but the local institutions of our country give him com}>arative freedom. A master in this country cannot inliict, useless cruelties upon his slave with impunity. In Afri- ca, the black despot who owns a slave does own him in reality — has absolute power over him. And, because of his own barbarous condi- tion, he uses that absolute poAver in the most frightful modes. He torturey his sla\es for his amusement ; and, when he wishes for food rather than for amusement, he cats them. Now, the most orthodox of British j)Julanfhropists must allow that, in this respect, " the pecu- liar institutions" of our Southern States have rendered the condition of the skv/o better rather than worse. And, if he is thoughtful and honest, that philanthropist will also allow that, so far, our institutions afford an agTeeable contrast to those of his own country. The insti- tutions of the one country make men slaves, while those of the other give him (in comparison to his former condition) freedom ! The negro was a slave m Africa ; his black master " ownmg " him in fact — '' body and bones." But in this countiy his slaveiy is com- paratively no slavery at all. Here he is not absolutely owied by his master — the latter's property in him consisting solely in his right to his lahar. American institutions found the negro most absolutely a slave ; and have made of him a fat, laughing, law-protected Chris- tian ! Of this position we intend to prove the correctness more at length. But it is most undeniably true that the negroes were brought into this country, Slaves, in the very fullest sense of the term, and that 20 BRITISH AXD here they aie comparatively free. The fact of their slavery they owe, (as do the British laborers) to "the pecxiliar institutions" of the por-t- sung " land of their fathers." The comparative //•ffd'o??? of the negroes they owe tsolutely does not exist a people on the earth whose condition is so favorable to morality in this respect, as is the condition of these very American Slaves. This leads us to speak of the social condition of these people. — The greatest of strictly social evils are, undoubtedly, those difficulties or impediments which various circumstances — pride, poverty, &c. — thi'ow in the way of marriage, and the rearing of healthy and hajjpy children. The fact that novelists almost universally rely on the reci- tal of such difficulties, as the one sole means of exciting an interest, is sufficient proof of this. Business difficulties may be also considered social evils, but even they can be considered so, only because they produce those very other difficulties of which we speak. But it is use- less to waste words in proving that which is the theory of all philos- ophy, and which is acknowledged by the common sense and experi- ence of all humanity. It is, then, both undeniable and undenied. that the greatest of all evils, strictly social, are the difficulties in the way of happy marriage, and the rearing of healthy and happy chil- dren ; and it is ecjually undeniable that it is the master's interest to allow no such difficulties to occur in the case of his slaves, and that no. apprehensions of want can exist to prevent the formation of these so- cial ties by the slaves. And thus it results, as an unavoidable con- clusion and fact, that the slaves are, in their domestic relations, among the very happiest people upon earth. There are, indeed, some ex- 24 Bi:iTISH AND ccptiofjs to this general rule ; for, as has been most eloqujully urged, slaves are sometimes sold, and families sundered. But for every mt^ such case among the slaves, there are twenty cases among the white people of cm- country, in wliich families arc sundered by the forma- tion of social or business relatioiLs. And if we compare their condi- tion in this respect, we shall find that forevery case among the negroes in which famihes are sundered, there are a /tw/trfrerf among the British laborere ; and tliat these cases among the latter ine\itably result from their condition. We must now turn to a brief consideration of the physical condi- tion of the slave ; and, in doing so, we will follow the plan in accord- ance with which we have considered his conchtiou in other respects. — We will speak of tJie princij^al physical evils incident to all people, and, by the slave's iininnnity or liability to those evils, we will judge of his physical coiulitiou. The first and greatest of physical e^^ls is, undoubtedly, ill health ; and, after that, physical suflFering from other ■causes — hanger and thirst, and exposure to heat and cold, &c. It would seeiQ lilmost i-idiiulous to adduce statistics to pro\-c the health of the slaves, or arguments to show that their condition i.- one which is calculated to render them health}-. That they are the healthiest portion of our whole population is a tact so univei-sally known, that, to offer proof of it, would sccni about Jis useless sis would a labored ai-gumeot :o prove that they are negroes. Their regular hours — the etfect of municipal or plantation regulations — their simple, plenteous, and always wholesome food, their regular habits of exercise in the open air, with the sufficient clothing and shelter which it is the mas- ter's pride and interest to furnish them with — all conspire to render them what they ai-e so will known to be — perha})s the very healthiest race of beings in the whole %\ orld. It is not only notoriously true, but it is theoretically imj)ossible that it should be otherwise. But there is one physical evil which some of theu pretended frii-nds assert they arc particalarly subject to, and o\er which whole hog'shcads of croco- diles tears have been shed — that dreadful cat-o'-nine-taiLs ! The au- thor of this book lived for a time, when a very young boy, where every family had its negro slaves ; yot he cannot remember that he ever saw a slave sick, or ever saw one whipped, or even struck; or ever saw one AMEEICAN SLAVERY. 2S industriously bu^y ; and he scarcely ever saw one who was not laugh - ' ing. And this is about the experience of our numerous southern ac- quaintJVi>:e. AVe ha\e often asked the question, and always received the same answer. Our informants had never seen a slave even struck by a white man. Two or three had heard of slaves being flogged in their neighborhood ; but it was for stealing — never for any thing else. We have never heard, or e\en read in Abolition pamphlets or news- papers any well authenticated account of cruel punishment for a slave's idleness or negligence. There are such cases, no doubt, some- times — perhaps a dozen every year, among three million slaves ; and of these the Abolition papers, with the aid of exaggeration and rep - etition, do make dreadful stories. But if the Abolition papers should seek for .such cases in the north with the same avidity, they Avould find ten times as many instances of cruel punishment inflicted by masters upon white apprentices and dependents. A month or two since, a woman in New York was clearly proved to have caused the death of e allowed to sufter much from either, while the proverbially robust health of the slaves is the be.st ©v idoac^ that they do not sufter in these respects. Excessive laboi-, also, may veiy properly 1>? considered a physical evil. In judging of the slave's condition in this respect, it is best to classify the slaves. That class which is engaged in agriculture com- prises about two-thirds of the able-bodied men. During about two hundred days in the year, these are actively employed on the planta- tions, working, according to circumstances, from seven to twelve houi-s a day ; though, even in the most hurried times, they ha\e generally a daily task given to them, which almost any white fermer would do in half the time. The balance of the year is comparatively unem- ployed. The remainder of the able-bodied men are servants, porters, or inferior mechanics, performing certainly not more than about haff the work that white men do in these capacities. The women are al- most entirely employed as domestics, and in the care of their masUa-'s children or their own. And as on all plantations tliese women are very numerous, and as their childi-en require scarcely any care at all, it necessarily results that they are three-fourths of the time Idle. The old people and the children grin and romp witli each other, and, dur- ing about one month in the year, perha})s, all hands join occasionally in husking corn, &c. Li line, taking them all ti»gcther, there are, perhaps, no other three milhoas of workiui/ p<:ople who do so little work. To sum \ip, then, as to the condition of the American Slave.-. ; we find that, while their social rank and mental acquirements are not so high as those of some other people, yet they are fully equal to the ave*-- age of their fellow-creatures so far as concerns their moral and religious state, their domestic happiness, and physical condition. AMERICAN SLAVERY. 21 Dr. Palcy, and almost all other philosopliei's who have written on human happiness, agree in this — that the nearest attainable state to perfect hnman happiness is a condition of regular but not immoderate la])or, in whicli man, with the fewest and simplest wants, finds those few and simple wants abundantly and securely supplied, both for him- self and for those he loves. And we really do not know any cia^is of human beings who come nearer to this standard of human happiness than do the American Slaves. Their Slavery originated in Africa, and only those modifications of it which make it happy, are of Amer- ican origin. That " peculiai' institution,'" so sneered at by professional philanthropists, tbund these slaves the destined food, or the absolute, unprotected property of savage masters ; 'and it has made of them— as we said before — " fat, happy, useful, law-protected Chi-istians." The Contrast. Having now considered the condition of the British and American Slaves separately, we will next briefly compare their riti>h ])apcTs teem, and in the fact that an immense proportion of the crimes committed in thLs country also are commit- ted by men of British birth, we may see the comparative results, in this respect, of the two systems of servitude we are considering. .\s to the comparati\e temjitations to the woincn of the American and British Slaves, let the reader retlect upon what he already knows of the needk-womcn of Lc>nd(>n, and the cities generally, and the still worse condition of woman in many of the Britisli rural districts, and in the factories, and on the beastly moral degradation of the mining districts generally. And then let the reader recur t<» what we have already said in the foregoing pages, as to the condition of American Slaves in this respect — the master's interest in the prevention of adul- teries, and the comparative universality of mari'iage which results fi-om this, and from the fact that the negro's wife and chikhcn are sure of a comfortable support, in good or l)ad times. And, when the reader has thus thought of the temjttations to morality, in this respect, on one side, and to itnmomiiO/ un the other, let him compare the two .96 he pleases. \^nd tliere is one criuit; — the \ery hlacke-t upon (.rime's dark cata- loguer^which, for ol)^ious reasons, never ((ccui-s among the negroes, but which is frightfully prevalent among the poor "jiopulace" of Bri- tain. We speak of Infanticide! Of the thousand iicwsjiapei-s sup- ])orted by the six millions of British freemen, we scarceh" ever see one which does not chronicle some new case of this dreadful crime among the twenty-three milKons of British Slaves. The little corpse — the hapless httle victim of the artful sla\ery systems vi' l?ritain — is, we are told, "found," though the des])erate, starving, and Merc/we guilty mother, is generall}- ne\er known. And this dread crime is commit- ted twenty times as often as even this evidence of its commission ever comes to light. No eye beholds it, save the all-seeing tuid all-pitying eye of God ! And that great, comprehensive glance beholds the crime's temptation too! Jt sees the grinding misery that caused the AMERICANS SLAVERY. 29 crime, and thf3 more dr«?adtul anguish which is its pnnishmeat. And that all-seeing eye. beholds, too, the cause of these great miseries and crimes — beholds it in tliat atroeions system of Slavery — the indi- rect robbery of unequal laws, made by the few to fortify their power, at the cost of right, of freedom, and even of life itself, to millions ! — Think oftener of this, oh, ye motley six millions of free and hajjpy Britons ! And you, " my Lords and liishops," think ye, too — oh, ):)ol- ished intellects and noble hearts — think, ye refined and pampered by that wealth, wrung by j^our artful laws from the weak grasp o( toiling misery — think, in the gorgeous pageant — think, in tlie paases of the revel — think — God sees it — all / ! As regards the comparative fiocial condition of the negro slave anci the inferior laborers of B)-itain, they are widely in that social happi- ness caiised by the negro's freedom from ciiixiety as to the welfare, the security and comfort of his wife and offspring. As to social pleasures, the negroes are as fond of music and dancing as the Briti.sh laborers are of beer oi' whiskey ; and as ihc. one passion is innocent, while the other is not ; so the effect of the one is to produce happ'.cess, and that of the other to produce degradation and misery. If what travellers say is to be rehed on, the British laborers are not peculiarly happy in their social relations. On the other hand, the negro slaves (whether it be that their tastes are superior, or because of their superior moral con- dition, or of their fi-eedom from anxiety for themselves and those they love) are represented always as being the most truly social of all hu- man beings. At all times, whether at work or in their cai'eless and most luxurious leisure, they are continually engaged in social pleasure of some kind — ^joking, dancing, singing or laughing — always content, social and gay. We must conclude, then, that, socially, the condition of the American Slaves is vastly preferable to that of the British la- borers. We will next compare the physical condition of the two classes. — n regard to health, we have seen that the negroes are equal, if not superior, to almost any other people ; while the laborb^ population of Britain are known to be necessarily far from a healthy people. — Even in the rural districts, the mere laborers and their families (be- cause of tiieir numerous privations) are far from enjoying such health *J() BRITISH AKD as that of the better class of farmers, and other people of higher con- ditiou in those same district*. And in the mining and manufacturing districts, (in which full half the British laborei-s work) they work too many hours a day in unhealthful eiuplujinenta or places. And pro- tracted labor of such kinds, accompanied with privation of wholesome air, &c. necessarily produces that ill-health from which British opera- tives in mines, factories, &c. do so notoriously and generally sufiFer. — We conld extract abundantly from British papers to show that they do thus generally suffer fi'om ill-health ; but almost every one has read these accounts. It is sufficient to remind our readcis of these well- known facts in order to con\ince them that British laborei-s, notori- ously and necessarily, are an unhealthy people, while American Slaves, as necessarily and notoriously, are jjerhaps the healthiest people in the world. Tn regard to punishment-', wc have seen that slave-whipping is gen- erally only for stealing ; and e^ ery one knows that steahng is punished more severely in Britain. As to severe flogglna; for idleness or negli- gence, we have seen it is very seldom resorted to with the slaves, and that it is contraiy to the master's interest that it should be. Our nu- merous southern acquaintances all tell us they never knew of such a case, but our British friends tell us a different storj- in regard to British apprentices — ay, and British wives too I To quote from a London pjiper, we learn that in many factories, "worn-out nature, sinking be- neath the task, is stimulated to fresh exertion by chasti5ement, some- times of the most barbarous kind," rer) does not ozon him, save while he works. The law-making Aristocracy — crafty as it is cruel — grasps the ^«-o/jfo\ but avoids the resjionsibilities of ownership. The labor's produce is cunningly appropriated, but " no- body owns " the laborer ! The negro's master (for his own profit, and reputation, too) is necessarily interested in him from his birth to his death. On the other hand, the British laborer has also a master, stern as fate, but who, indi\idually, cares nothing for him. " He has no mas- ter hut the law '. " And this is precisely the reason why, as we have seen, the negi-o is a /iojjpy slave, and the other is simply a slave, wai^- out the happiness ! ! The Moral. To American Abohtionists.-— Jii Britain, there are eight times b& many Slaves as in the South/ Their Slavery, too, is eight times as cruel. Emancipate ^^.fwi/ They need no permading, as the negroes 32 THE MORAL. do. The cost is only tlie passage money. It will cost no bloodshed ; nor will it peril that holy Union which (in the peace and freedom it frives ovu- country) is the main surety foi- your omi freedom, and for the hope of freedom to the world ! To British Aristocracy. — Your missionaries may sow their dragon's teeth of one sort in the South, and of another in the North, but the armed men our soil produces will strike for their country ! Itecall, then, your missionaries, and dry your philanthropic teal's ! Our coun- try, no doubt, is an example to your slaves you do not like ; but neither your tears nor your missionaries can destroy her 1 And a.s to other modes, remember Plattsburgh ! Send your armed " populace" here, and, when they can, they will desert 1 And we ha\ e no " Fugitive Slave " compact with Britain ! We will not return them ! And, if the number of emigrants, who leave you to avoid oppression, continues to increase as it has in the last ten yeare, in sixty years from now you will have not one laborer left in Britain, irom whose hard toil to draw your tithes, or pay your rent, or taxes. And the nmuber vjill increase, if emio-rants even ha\'e to bind themselves to a month's labor here to pay their passage. One only way exists to keep your laborers ; and you must come to it ! Give your laborers the right of suflVage, that they may destroy that Law which is their cruel master, and make/o;- theiyi- \elves a Law that shall be their servant ! In othor words : Emancipate yo^ Slaves, or our country's example and our country's ihips will do- lt for^ou! \ V»^<»»W»»> tOM—KIIKIW'WO'WWWWV-^''^ ^l^^^^l of cowGRE^^. 01^ 899 Si ^^' it lo.