This is shaking hands with iniquity, and covering sin with a silver veil. Our prejudice against the blacks is founded in sheer pride; and it originates in the circ.u.mstance that people of their color only, are universally allowed to be slaves. We made slavery, and slavery makes the prejudice. No christian, who questions his own conscience, can justify himself in indulging the feeling. The removal of this prejudice is not a matter of opinion--it is a matter of _duty_. We have no right to palliate a feeling, sinful in itself, and highly injurious to a large number of our fellow-beings. Let us no longer act upon the narrow-minded idea, that we must always continue to do wrong, because we have so long been in the habit of doing it. That there is no _necessity_ for the prejudice is shown by facts. In England, it exists to a much less degree than it does here. If a respectable colored person enters a church there, the pews are readily opened to him; if he appears at an inn, room is made for him at the table, and no laughter, or winking, reminds him that he belongs to an outcast race. A highly respectable English gentleman residing in this country has often remarked that nothing filled him with such utter astonishment as our prejudice with regard to color. There is now in old England a negro, with whose name, parentage, and history, I am well acquainted, who was sold into West Indian slavery by his New-England master; (I know _his_ name.) The unfortunate negro became free by the kindness of an individual, and has now a handsome little property and the command of a vessel. He must take care not to come into the ports of our Southern republics!--The anecdote of Prince Saunders is well known; but it will bear repeating. He called upon an American family, then residing in London. The fashionable breakfast hour was very late, and the family were still seated at the table. The lady fidgetted between the contending claims of politeness and prejudice. At last, when all but herself had risen from the table, she said, as if struck by a sudden thought, "Mr. Saunders, I forgot to ask if you had breakfasted." "I thank you, madam," replied the colored gentleman; "but I have engaged to breakfast with the Prince Regent this morning."

Mr. Wilberforce and Mr. Brougham have often been seen in the streets of London, walking arm in arm with people of color. The same thing is true of Brissot, La Fayette, and several other distinguished Frenchmen. In this city, I never but once saw such an instance: When the Philadelphia company were here last summer, I met one of the officers walking arm in arm with a fine-looking black musician. The circ.u.mstance gave me a good deal of respect for the white man; for I thought he must have kind feelings and correct principles, thus fearlessly to throw off a worse than idle prejudice.

In Brazil, people of color are lawyers, clergymen, merchants and military officers; and in the Portuguese, as well as the Spanish settlements, intermarriages bring no degradation. On the sh.o.r.es of the Levant, some of the wealthiest merchants are black. If we were accustomed to see intelligent and polished negroes, the prejudice would soon disappear. There is certainly no law of our nature which makes a _dark color_ repugnant to our feelings. We admire the swarthy beauties of Spain; and the finest forms of statuary are often preferred in bronze. If the whole world were allowed to vote on the question, there would probably be a plurality in favor of complexions decidedly dark.

Every body knows how much the Africans were amused at the sight of Mungo Park, and what an ugly misfortune they considered his pale color, prominent nose, and thin lips.

Ought we to be called Christians, if we allow a prejudice so absurd to prevent the improvement of a large portion of the human race, and interfere with what all civilized nations consider the most common rights of mankind? It cannot be that my enlightened and generous countrymen will sanction any thing so narrow-minded and so selfish.

Having found much fault with the Colonization Society, it is pleasant to believe that one portion of their enterprise affords a distant prospect of doing more good than evil. They now princ.i.p.ally seek to direct the public attention to the founding of a colony in Africa; and this may prove beneficial in process of time. If the colored emigrants were _educated_ before they went there, such a Colony would tend slowly, but certainly, to enlighten Africa, to raise the character of the negroes, to strengthen the increasing liberality of public opinion, and to check the diabolical slave-trade. If the Colonizationists will work zealously and judiciously in this department, pretend to do nothing more, and let others work in another and more efficient way, they will deserve the thanks of the country; but while it is believed that they do all the good which _can_ be done in this important cause, they will do more harm in America, than they can atone for in Africa.

Very different pictures are drawn of Liberia; one party represents it as thriving beyond description, the other insists that it will soon fall into ruin. It is but candid to suppose that the colony is going on as well as could possibly be expected, when we consider that the emigrants are almost universally ignorant and vicious, without property, and without habits of industry or enterprise. The colored people in our slave States must, almost without exception, be dest.i.tute of information; and in choosing negroes to send away, the masters would be very apt to select the most helpless and the most refractory. Hence the superintendents of Liberia have made reiterated complaints of being flooded with shiploads of "vagrants." These causes are powerful drawbacks. But the negroes in Liberia have schools and churches, and they have freedom, which, wherever it exists, is always striving to work its upward way.

There is a palpable contradiction in some of the statements of this Society.

"We are told that the Colonization Society is to civilize and evangelize Africa. '_Each emigrant_,' says Henry Clay, the ablest advocate which the Society has yet found, '_is a missionary_, carrying with him _credentials_ in the holy cause of civilization, religion and free inst.i.tutions!!'"

"Who are these emigrants--these _missionaries_?"

"The Free people of color. 'They, and they _only_,' says the African Repository, 'are QUALIFIED for colonizing Africa.'"

What are their _qualifications_? Let the Society answer in its own words:

"'Free blacks are a greater nuisance than even slaves themselves.'"--_African Repository_, vol. ii, p. 328.

"'A horde of miserable people--the objects of universal suspicion--subsisting by plunder.'"--_C. F. Mercer._

"'An anomalous race of beings, the most debased upon earth.'"--_African Repository_, vol. vii, p. 230.

"'Of all cla.s.ses of our population the most vicious is that of the free colored.'"--_Tenth Annual Report of Colonization Society._

An Education Society has been formed in connection with the Colonization Society, and their complaint is princ.i.p.ally that they cannot find proper subjects for instruction. Why cannot such subjects be found? Simply because our ferocious prejudices compel the colored children to grow up in ignorance and vicious companionship, and when we seek to educate them, we find their minds closed against the genial influence of knowledge.

When I heard of the Education Society, I did hope to find one instance of _sincere_, _thorough disinterested_ good-will for the blacks. But in the const.i.tution of that Society, I again find the selfish principle predominant. They pledge themselves to educate no colored persons unless they are solemnly bound to _quit the country_. The abolitionists are told that they must wait till the slaves are more fit for freedom. But if this system is pursued, when are they to be more fit for freedom?--Never--never--to the end of time.

Whatever other good the Colonization Society may do, it seems to me evident that they do not produce _any_ beneficial effect on the condition of colored people in America; and indirectly they produce much evil.

In a body so numerous as the Colonization Society, there is, of course, a great variety of character and opinions. I presume that many among them believe the ultimate tendency of the Society to be very different from what it really is. Some slave-owners encourage it because they think it cannot decrease slavery, and will keep back the inconvenient crisis when free labor will be cheaper than slave labor; others of the same cla.s.s join it because they really want to do some act of kindness to the unfortunate African race, and all the country insist upon it that this is the only way; some politicians in the free States countenance it from similar motives, and because less cautious measures might occasion a loss of Southern votes and influence; the time-serving cla.s.s--so numerous in every community,--who are always ready to flatter existing prejudices, and sail smoothly along the current of popular favor, join it, of course; but I am willing to believe that the largest proportion belong to it, because they have compa.s.sionate hearts, are fearful of injuring their Southern brethren, and really think there is no other way of doing so much good to the negroes. With this last-mentioned cla.s.s, I sympathize in feeling, but differ in opinion.

The Anti-Slavery Society was formed in January, 1832. Its objects are distinctly stated in the second Article of their const.i.tution, which is as follows:

"ART. 2. The objects of the Society shall be, to endeavor by all means sanctioned by law, humanity and religion, to effect the abolition of slavery in the United States; to improve the character and condition of the free people of color, to inform and correct public opinion in relation to their situation and rights, and obtain for them equal civil and political rights and privileges with the whites."

From this it will be seen that they think it a duty to give colored people all possible means of education, and instead of removing them away from the prejudice, to remove the prejudice away from them.

They lay it down as a maxim that immediate emanc.i.p.ation is the only just course, and the only safe policy. They say that slavery is a common evil, and therefore there is a common right to investigate it, and search for modes of relief. They say that New-England shares, and ever has shared, in this national sin, and is therefore bound to atone for the mischief, as far as it can be done.

The strongest reason why the Anti-Slavery Society wish for the emanc.i.p.ation of slaves, is because they think no other course can be pursued which does not, in its very nature, involve a constant violation of the laws of G.o.d. In the next place, they believe there is no other sure way of providing for the safety of the white population in the slave States. I know that many of the planters affect to laugh at the idea of fearing their slaves; but why are their laws framed with such cautious vigilance? Why must not negroes of different plantations communicate together? Why are they not allowed to be out in the evening, or to carry even a stick to defend themselves, in case of necessity?

In the Virginia Legislature a gentleman said, "It was high time for something to be done when men did not dare to open their own doors without pistols at their belts;" and Mr. Randolph has publicly declared that a planter was merely "a sentry at his own door."

Mr. Roane, of Virginia, asks,--"Is there an intelligent man who does not know that this _excess_ of slavery is increasing, and will continue to increase in a ratio which is alarming in the extreme, and must overwhelm our descendants in ruin? Why then should we shut our eyes and turn our backs upon the evil? Will delay render it less gigantic, or give us more Herculean strength to meet and subdue it at a future time? Oh, no--delay breeds danger--procrastination is the thief of time, and the refuge of sluggards."

It is very true that insurrection is perfect madness on the part of the slaves; for they are sure to be overpowered. But such madness has happened; and innocent women and children have fallen victims to it.

A few months ago, I was conversing with a very mild and judicious member of the Anti-Slavery Society, when a gentleman originally from the South came in. As he was an old acquaintance, and had been a long time resident in New-England, it was not deemed necessary, as a matter of courtesy, to drop the conversation. He soon became excited. "Whatever you may think, Mrs. Child," said he, "the slaves are a great deal happier than either of us; the less people know the more merry they are." I replied, "I heard you a short time since talking over your plans for educating your son; if knowledge brings wretchedness, why do you not keep him in happy ignorance?" "The fashion of the times requires some information," said he; "but why do you concern yourself about the negroes? Why don't you excite the horses to an insurrection, because they are obliged to work, and are whipped if they do not?" "One _horse_ does not whip another," said I; "and besides, I do not wish to promote insurrections. I would on the contrary, do all I could to prevent them."

"Perhaps you do not like the comparison between slaves and horses,"

rejoined he; "it is true, the horses have the advantage." I made no reply; for where such ground is a.s.sumed, what _can_ be said; besides, I did not then, and I do not now, believe that he expressed his real feelings. He was piqued, and spoke unadvisedly. This gentleman denied that the lot of the negroes was hard. He said they loved their masters, and their masters loved them; and in any cases of trouble or illness, a man's slaves were his best friends. I mentioned some undoubted instances of cruelty to slaves; he acknowledged that such instances might very rarely happen, but said that in general the masters were much more to be pitied than the negroes. A lady, who had been in South Carolina when an insurrection was apprehended, related several anecdotes concerning the alarm that prevailed there at the time: and added, "I often wish that none of my friends lived in a slave State." "Why should you be anxious?"

rejoined the Southern gentleman; "You know that they have built a strong citadel in the heart of the city, to which all the inhabitants can repair in case of insurrection." "So," said I, "they have built a _citadel_ to protect them from their happy, contented servants--a citadel against their _best friends_!" I could not but be amused at the contradictions that occurred during this conversation.

That emanc.i.p.ation has in several instances been effected with safety has been already shown. But allowing that there is some danger in discontinuing slavery, is there not likewise danger in continuing it?

In one case, the danger, if there were any, would soon be subdued; in the other, it is continually increasing.

The planter tells us that the slave is very happy, and bids us leave him as he is. If laughter is a sign of happiness, the Irishman, tumbling in the same mire as his pigs, is happy. The merely sensual man is no doubt merry and heedless; but who would call him happy? Is it not a fearful thing to keep immortal beings in a state like beasts? The more the senses are subjected to the moral and intellectual powers, the happier man is,--the more we learn to sacrifice the present to the future, the higher do we rise in the scale of existence. The negro may often enjoy himself, like the dog when he is not beaten, or the hog when he is not starved; but let not this be called _happiness_.

How far the slave laws are conducive to the enjoyment of those they govern, each individual can judge for himself. In the Southern papers, we continually see pictures of runaway negroes, and sometimes the advertis.e.m.e.nts identify them by scars, or by letters branded upon them.

Is it natural for men to run away from comfort and happiness, especially when any one who meets them may shoot them, like a dog! and when, whipping nearly unto death is authorized as the punishment? I forbear to describe how much more shocking slave-whipping is than any thing we are accustomed to see bestowed upon cattle.

But the advocates of slavery tell us, that on the negro's own account, it is best to keep him in slavery; that without a master to guide him and take care of him, he is a wretched being; that freedom is the greatest curse that can be bestowed upon him. Then why do their Legislatures grant it as a reward for "_meritorious services to the State_?" Why do benevolent masters bequeath the legacy of freedom, "in consideration of long and faithful service?" Why did Jefferson so earnestly, and so very humbly request the Legislature of Virginia to ratify the manumission of his five _favorite_ slaves?

Notwithstanding the disadvantageous position of free negroes in a community consisting of whites and slaves, it is evident that, even upon these terms, freedom is considered a blessing.

The Anti-Slavery Society agree with Harriet Martineau in saying, "Patience with the _men_, but no patience with the _principles_. As much patience as you please in enlightening those who are unaware of the abuses, but no patience with social crimes!"

The Colonization Society are always reminding us that the _master_ has rights as well as the slave: The Anti-Slavery Society urge us to remember that the _slave_ has rights as well as the master. I leave it for sober sense to determine which of these claims is in the greatest danger of being forgotten.

The abolitionists think it a duty to maintain at all times, and in all places, that slavery _ought_ to be abolished, and that it _can_ be abolished. When error is so often repeated it becomes very important to repeat the truth; especially as good men are apt to be quiet, and selfish men are p.r.o.ne to be active. They propose no _plan_--they leave that to the wisdom of Legislatures. But they never swerve from the _principle_ that slavery is both wicked and unnecessary.--Their object is to turn the public voice against this evil, by a plain exposition of facts.

Perhaps it may seem of little use for individuals to maintain any particular _principle_, while they do not attempt to prescribe the ways and means by which it can be carried into operation: But the voice of the public is mighty, either for good or evil; and that far-sounding echo is composed of single voices.

Schiller makes his Fiesco exclaim, "Spread out the thunder into its _single_ tones, and it becomes a lullaby for children; pour it forth in one quick peal and the royal sound shall move the heavens!"

If the work of abolition must necessarily be slow in its progress, so much the more need of beginning soon, and working vigorously. My life upon it, a safe remedy can be found for this evil, whenever we are sincerely desirous of doing justice for its own sake.

The Anti-Slavery Society is loudly accused of being seditious, fanatical, and likely to promote insurrections. It seems to be supposed, that they wish to send fire and sword into the South, and encourage the slaves to hunt down their masters. Slave-owners wish to have it viewed in this light, because they know the subject will not bear discussion; and men here, who give the tone to public opinion, have loudly repeated the charge--some from good motives, and some from bad. I once had a very strong prejudice against anti-slavery;--(I am ashamed to think _how_ strong--for mere prejudice should never be stubborn,) but a candid examination has convinced me, that I was in an error. I made the common mistake of taking things for granted, without stopping to investigate.

This Society do not wish to see any coercive or dangerous measures pursued. They wish for universal emanc.i.p.ation, because they believe it is the only way to _prevent_ insurrections. Almost every individual among them, is a strong friend to Peace Societies. They wish to move the public mind on this subject, in the same manner that it has been moved on other subjects: viz., by open, candid, fearless discussion. This is _all_ they want to do; and this they are determined to do, because they believe it to be an important duty. For a long time past, public sympathy has been earnestly directed in the wrong way; if it could be made to turn round, a most happy change would be produced. There are many people at the South who would be glad to have a safe method of emanc.i.p.ation discovered; but instead of encouraging _them_, all our presses, and pulpits, and books, and conversation, have been used to strengthen the hands of those who wish to perpetuate the "costly iniquity." Divine Providence _always_ opens the way for the removal of evils, individual or national, whenever man is sincerely willing to have them removed; it may be difficult to do right, but it is never impossible. Yet a majority of my countrymen do, in effect, hold the following language: "We know that this evil _cannot_ be cured; and we will speak and publish our opinion on every occasion: but you must not, for your lives, dare to a.s.sert that there is a possibility of our being mistaken."

If there were any apparent wish to get rid of this sin and disgrace, I believe the members of the Anti-Slavery Society would most heartily and courageously defend slave-owners from any risk they might incur in a sincere effort to do right. They would teach the negro that it is the Christian's duty meekly and patiently to _suffer_ wrong; but they dare not excuse the white man for continuing to _inflict_ the wrong.

They think it unfair that all arguments on this subject should be founded on the convenience and safety of the master _alone_. They wish to see the white man's claims have their due weight; but they insist that the negro's rights ought not to be thrown out of the balance.

At the time a large reward was offered for the capture of Mr. Garrison, on the ground that his paper excited insurrections, it is a fact, that he had never sent or caused to be sent, a single paper south of Mason and Dixon's line. He _afterwards_ sent papers to some of the leading politicians there; but they of course were not the ones to promote negro insurrections. "But," it has been answered, "the papers did find their way there." Are we then forbidden to publish our opinions upon an important subject, for fear _somebody_ will send them _somewhere_? Is slavery to remain a sealed book in this most communicative of all ages, and this most inquisitive of all countries? If so, we live under an actual censorship of the press. This is like what the Irishman said of our paved cities--tying down the stones, and letting the mad dogs run loose.

If insurrections do occur, they will no doubt be attributed to the Anti-Slavery Society. But we must not forget that there were insurrections in the West Indies long before the English abolitionists began their efforts; and that masters were murdered in this country, before the Anti-Slavery Society was thought of. Neither must we forget that the increased severity of the laws is very likely to goad an oppressed people to madness. The very cruelty of the laws against resistance under any circ.u.mstances, would be thought to justify a white man in rebellion, because it gives resistance the character of self-defence. "The law," says Blackstone, "respects the pa.s.sions of the human mind; and when external violence is offered to a man himself, or those to whom he bears a near connexion, makes it lawful in him to do himself that immediate justice, to which he is prompted by nature, and which no prudential motives are strong enough to restrain."

As it respects promoting insurrections by discussing this subject, it should be remembered that it is very rare for any colored person at the South to know how to read or write.

Furthermore, if there be any danger in the discussion, _our_ silence cannot arrest it; for the whole world is talking and writing about it.