North Branch democrat. (Tunkhannock, Pa.) 1854-1867, August 12, 1863, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    >IH—UII mi mm -in v in in" ■uiiiiim n ■■■ IMMMMIIIM ■ ■ "' -
(The Sinrfli Stanch
Z&Z Ar.VEY BIOKI JER, Proprietor.]
gurHj ftamtjr pmactai
A weekly Dcm^
Term*—l copy 1 year, (in advance) 51.50. If
not pain within six months, $2.00 will be charged
10 lines ort ( 1 1 i 1
less, make three \' Jour ! two .three i six ; one
one square iceek.i^weekslmo' th' mo'Ui mo'th year
1 Square 1,00 1,25? 2,25 ; 2,8"! 3.0o! 5,00
2 do. 2,01) 2.50; 3,255 350 4,50 6,00
3 do. 3,00 i 3,75? 4,75? 5,50j 7,00? 9,00
J Column. 4,00|
I do. 6.00! 7,00! 10,00; 12.00? 17.00; 25.00
I do. 8,00; 9,50; 14,00? 18,00?25,00?35,00
1 do. 10,00? 12,00? 17.00' 2*2,00? 28,1X1' 40,00
Business Cards of one square, with paper, 85.
of all kinds neatly executed, and at prices to suit
the times.
fusiness fiotirrs.
BACON STAND.—Nicholson, Pa. C. L
JACKSON, Proprietor. fvln49tf]
• Newton Centre, Ltiserne County Pa.
Tunkhaimock, Pa. Offioe in Stark's Brick
Block, Tioga street.
fice in Stark's Brick Block, Tioga St., Tunk
hannoek, Pa.
J LAM*, Office on Tioga street, Tunkhannock,
11. R. LITTLE. j. r>fcvriTT.
• Office on Bridge Street., next dvor tto the Pcrno
ornt Office, Tunkhannock, Pa.
Bridge street, opposite Wall's Hotel, Tunkhan
tiock Pa.
ED AT THE FALLS, WILL promptly attend
aJ! calls in the line of his profession—may be found
st Beemer's Hotel, when not professionally absent
Falls, Oct. 10, IS6I.
Would respectfully announce to (be citizens of Wy
cfcifgiAiutthey have located at Tunkhannock wh'er
hey will promptly attend to all ca lls in the line of
neii profession. May be found at his Drug Staro
when not professionally absent.
JM. CAREY, M, I>. (Graduate of the ;q
• M. Institute, Cincinnati) would respectfully
announce to tbe citizens of Wyoming and Luzerne
Counties, that be c .ntinues hi regularpractice in the
various departments of bis profession. May be found
•t his office or residence, when not professionally ab
Particular attention given to the treatment
Chronic Dlseas
entrtuoreland, Wyoming Co. Pa.—v2n2
THIS establishment uas recently been refitted and
furnished in the latest style Every attention
will be given to the comfort and convenience of those
who patronize the House.
T. B. WALL, Owner and Proprietor.
Tunkhannock, September 11, 1861.
Wm. 11. CORTRIGHT, Prop'r
HAVING resumed the proprietorship of the above
Htel, the undersigned will spare no effort to
render the house an agreeable place ot sojourn for
all who may favor it with their custom.
June, 3rd, 1863
JOHN NAYNARD, Proprietor.
HAY TNG taken the Hotel, in the Borough of
Tunkhannock, recently ocoupied by Riley
.Warner, the proprietor respectfully solicits a share ot
public patronage. The House has been thoroughly
Repaired, and the comforts and accomodations of a
irst class Hotel, will be found by all who may favor
t with their custom. September 11, 1861.
MGILMAN, has permanently located in Tunk
• bannock Borough, and respectfully tenders bis
jprofdwional services to the citizens of this place and
urroun.ling country.
OffLf*" 01566 OT6r Tutton ' B L * w offio *T Bear the Tos
Dec. 11, 1861.
Blanks!! Blanks : J!
~^ Uat *r i ' 8 :. CSn,ab, * ,8 > aDd ,e * al Blanks of all
j Statly and Correctly printed on good Paper,
®em£m %ttheoffice of th ® " North Branch
L"for satoit i ARMKRS ' AS A FERTILIZE
F G . rou ° d fixator in Q,uantitie§
t prices to suit purchasers, now for sale a
•esheppen ny y> Mlrimr J*
Bishop of the Diocese of Vermont
Of course, they sympathize warmly with
the poor, opprsst-c 1 African, and are gener
ously excited to hate 'he system of slavery
with all their heart. Then the eloquent
preacher chooses it for the favorite topic of
his oratory. The theine is well adopted to
rouse the feelings, and it is usually by no
means difficult to interest and gratify the
audiance, when the supposed sins of others,
which they are under no temptation to com
mit, are made the object of censure. In due
time, when the public mind is sufficiently
heated, the politician lays hold of the sub
ject, and makes the anti slavery movement
the watchword of part}'. And finally the
Press follows in the wake of the leaders, and
the fire is industriously fanned unt.l it be
comes a perfect blaze; while tho admiring
throng surround it with exultation, and fan
cy its lurid light to be from heaven, until
the flames begin to threaten their own secur
Such has been the perilous course of our
Northern sentiment on the subject of slave
ry. The great majority, in every communi
ty, are the creatures of habit, of association
and of impulse, and every allowance should
he made for those errors which aro commit
ted in ignorance, under a generous sympa
thy for what they suppose to be the rights
of man. I can not, however, make the same
apology for those who aro professedly pledg
ed to understand and inculcate the doctrines
of the Bible. On that class of our public in
structors, the present perilous crisis of the
nation casts a fearful responsibility. Sol
emnly hound by their sacred office to preach
the Word of God, and to follow Christ and
his apostles, as the heralds of " peace and
goodwill to men,'" they seem to me strangely
regardless, on this important subject, of their
highest obligations, But it is me to
judge them. To their own Master, let them
stand or fall.
I have promised, however, to notico the
various objections which have been raised in
the popular mind to the institution of South
ern slavery, and to these I shall now pro
Birston this list stand the propositions of
the far famed Declaration of Independence,
''thai all men a:e ceated equal; that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights ; that among these are
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
These statements are here called self-evi
dent truths. But with due respect to the
celebratek names which are appended to
thi3 document, I have never been able to
cjmprehcnd that they are " truths" at all.
In what respect are men u created equal,"
when every thoughtful person must be sens
ible that they are brought into the world
with all imaginable difference in bod}-, in
mind, and in every characteristic of their so
cial position ? Notwithstanding mankind
have all descended from one common parent,
yet we see them divided into distinct races,
so strongly marked, that infidel philoso
phers insist on the impossibility of their hav
ing the same ancestry. Where is the equal
ity in body between the child born, with the
hereditary taint ofscorfula or consumption,
and the infant filled with health and vigor?
Where is the equality in mind between one
who is endowed with talent and genius, and
another whose intellect borders on idiocy ?
Where is the equality in social position be
tween the son of the Esquimaux or Hotten
tot, and the heir of the American statesman
or British peer 1
Neither am I able to admit that all men
are endowed with the unalienable right to
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,
because it i 3 manifest that since " sin enter
ed into the world and death by sin," they
are all alienated , forfeited and lost, through
the consequences of transgressi on. Life is
alienated not only by the sentence of the
law, but by innumerable forms of violence
and accident. Liberty is alienated not only
by imbrisonment, but by the irresistible re
straints of social bondage to the will, the
temper, the prejudices, the customs, or the
interests of others ; so that there is hardly
an individual to be found, even in the most
favored community, who has really the liber
ty of word and action so confidently assert
ed as the unalienable right of all men. And
as regards tne " pursuit of happiness," alas !
what multitudes alienate their right to it,
boyond recovery, not only in the cells of the
penitentiary, but in the reckless indulgence
of their appetites and passions, in the dis
gust arising from ill chosen conjugal rela
tions, in their associations with the profligate
and the vile, in the pain and suffering of
sickness and poverty as the results of vice,
in the ruin of the gambler, the delirium of
the drunkard, the despair of the suicide, and
in every other form of moral contamination !
Jf it be said, however, that the equality
and unalienable rights of all men, so strong
ly asserted by this famous Declaration, are
only to be taken in a political sense, I am
willing to concede that this piay bo the prop
er interpretaion of its intended meaning, but
I can sot Bee how it removes the difficulty.
This statement is that " all meo arc created
equal," and that " the CREATOR has endow
ed them with these unalienable rights,"—
Certainly if the authors of this celebrated
document designed to speak only of political
rights and political equality, they should
not have thus referred them to the act of
creation, because it is perfectly obvious that.,
since the beginning of human government
men have been created with all imaginable
inequanlity, under slavery, under despotism ,
under aristocracy, under limited monarchy,
under every imaginable form of political
strife and political oppression. In no respect
whatever, that I can discover, has the Al
mighty sent our race into the world with
these imaginary rights, and this fanciful
equality. In his sight the whole world is
sinful, rebellious, and lying under the just
condemnation of his violated laws. Our
original rights, whatever they might have
been, are all forfeited and gone. And since
the fall, mankind have no lights to claim at
the hand of the Creator. Our whole depend
ence is on his mercy and compassion. And
be dispenses these according to his sover
eign will and pleasure, on no system of equal
ity that any human eye can discover, and
yet, as every Christian must believe, on the
eternal principles of perfect benevolence, in
union with impartial justice, and boundless
knowledge, and wisdom that can not err.
Where, then, I ask, did the authors of the
Declaration of Independence And their war
rant for such a statement ? It wa6 proba
bly jcdicious enough to call their proposi
tions " self evident truths," because it seems
manifest that no man can prove them. To
estimate aright the vast diversity among the
races of mankind, we may begin with our
own, the highly privileged Anglo-Saxon,
which now stands at the head, although our
ancestors were heathen barbarians only two
thousand years ago; From this we may go
down the descending scalo through the
Turks, the Chinese; the Tartars, the Japa
nese, tho Egyptians, the Hindoos, the Indi
an tribes, the Laplanders, the Ahyssinians,
the Africans, and how is it possible to imag
ine tnat God has made them all equal !
As truly might it be said that all the trees
of the forest are equal—that all the moun
tains, and seas, and rivers are equal—that
all the beasts of the fields are equal—that all
the birds of the air are equal. The Gets
rather establish tho very contrary. The
Deity seems to take pleasure in exhibiting a
marvelous wealth of power through the rich
variety of all his works, so that no two indi
viduals of any species can be found in all re
spects alike. And hence we behold a grand
system of order and GRADATION, from tho
thrones, dominions, principalities and pow
ers in heavenly places, rank below rank, to
man. And then wo aea the same system
throughout our earth displayed in the varie
ty of races, some higher, some tower in the
scale in the variety of governments, from
purr despotism to pure democracy— in the
variety of privilege and power among the
subjects of each government, some being
born to commanding authority and influence,
while others are destined to submit and
obey. Again, we behold the system contin
ued in the animal creation, from the lordly
lion down to the timid mole, from the eagle
to the humming bird, from the monsters ol
the deep to the sea-star in its shell. The
same plan meets us in the insect tribes.
Some swift and powerful, others Blow and
weak, some marshaled into a regular govern
ment—monarchy in the bee-hive, aristocracy
in the ant-hill, while others, like the flies,
havo no government at all. And in perfect
harmony with this divine arrangement, the
inanimate creation presents us with the
same vast variety. The canopy of heaven is
studded with orbs of light, all differing in
magnitude, all differing in radience, and all
yielding to the sovereign splendor of the sun.
The earth is clothed with the most profuse
diversity of vegetation, frcm the lofty palm
down to the humble moss. The miueral
kingdom shines with gold, silver, iron, cop
per, and precious stones, in all conceivable
forms and colors. From the mammoth cave
down to the minutest crystal—from moun
tains of granite down to the sand upon the
shore, all is varied, multiform, unequal, yet
each element has its specific use and beauty,
and the grand aggregate unites in the sub
lime bymn of praise to the wisdom, the good
ness, and the stupendous resources .of that
ineffable Power which produced the whole.
This brief and most inadequate sketch of
the order of creation may serve at least to
show that the manifest inequality in the
condition of mankind is no exception to the
rule, but is sustained by all analogy. It is
the will of God that it should be so, and no hu
man sagacity or effort can prevent it. And the
same principle exists in our political relations.
We may talk as we please of our equality in
political rights and privileges, but in point of
fact, there is no such thing. Amongst the
other civilized nations it is not even pretend
ed. None of the great galaxy of European
governments can have a better title to it than
England, yet who would be 60 absurd as to
claim political equality fn a land of monarchy,
of hereditary nobles, of time-honored aristoc
racy? The best approach to political cquali
ty is confessedly iiere, and .here only. Yet
even here, amidst the glories of our universal
suffrage, where is it to be found ? Political
equalitj , if it means any thing, must mean
that every man enjoys the same right to pol
itical office and honor ; because the policy of
any government cousists iu its system of ad
ministration, and hence it results, of necessi-
ty, that those who can not possibly be ad
mitted to share in this administration, hare
no political equality with thoso who can—
We do, indeed, say that the people arjt sov
ereign. But every one knows, full well, that
the comparative few who are qualified to take
the lead, by talent, by education, by natural
tact, and by a conjunction of favoring circum
stances. are practically ''soveroign over thepeo
pie. The man who carries a hod gives his
vote for a candidate. The candidate himself
can do no more so far as it concerns the
mere form of the election.
Are they therefore politically equal ?
Who formed the party to which tho candi
date belongs ? Who ruled the convention
by which his name was put upon tho list ?
Who arranged the orators for the occasion ?
Who subsidized the Press ? Had the poor
hodman any share in tho operation, any in
fluence, any voice whatever ? No more than
the hod which he carries. Can any human
power ever manufacture a candidate out of
him ? The notion would be preposterous
Where then Is his political equality ? Even
here, in our happy land of universal suffrage,
how does it appear that all men are b >rn
equal ?" Tho proposition is a sheer absurdi
ty. All men are bora unequal , in body, in
i mind, and social privileges. Their intellec
tual factulties are unequal. Their education
is unequal. Their associations are unequal.
Their opportunities are unequal. And their
freedom is as unreal as their equality. The
poor are compelled to serve the rich, and
tho rich are compelled to serve the poor by
paying for their services. The political party
is compelled to servo the leaders, and the
leaders are compelled to scheme and toil, in
order to serve tho party. The multitude are
dependent on the few who are endowed with
talents to govern. And the few are depen
dent on the multitude for the power, with
out which all government is impossible.—
From the top to tho button of the social fab
ric, the wholo is thus seen to bo inequality
aud mutual dependence. And hence, al
though they are free from that special kind
of sluvery which the Southern States main
tain ouer the posterity of Ham, yet they are
all, from the highest to the lowest, in bond
age quite as real, from which they can not
escape—the slavenj of circumstances, called
in the ordinary language of the world, NECES
1 have been, I fair, unreasonably tedious
in thus endeavoring to show why I utterly
discard these famous propositions of the
Declaration of Independence. It is because
lam aware of the strong hold which they
have gaiued over the ordinary uiind of the
nation. They are assumed by thousands
upon thousands, as if they were tho very doc
trines of divine truth. And they are made
the basis cf the hostile feeling against the
slavery of the South, notwithstanding their
total want of rationality. Yet Ido not won
der that such maxims should bo popular.—
They are admirably calculated to gratify the
pride and ambition so natural to the human
heart, and are therefore powerful incentives
in the work of political revolution. It was
for this purpose, I presume, that they were
introduced in that famous document, which
publicly cast off the allegiance of the colonies
to tho British crown. And the same doc
trines were proclaimed a few years later, in a
similar gervice, by the French Directory, in
the midst of a far more terrible revolution.—
Liberty, equality, and fraternity—the rights
of man, were then the watchwords of the
excited populace, while their insane leaders
published the decree of Atheism, and a noto
rious courtesan was enthroned as the goddess
of reason, and the guillotine daily massacred
the victims of democratic fury, till the streets
of Paris ran with blood.
I do not state this fact because I desire to
place the revolutions in the Colonies and in
Trance on the same foundation, with respect
to the spirit or the mode in which they were
conducted. God forbid that I should forget
the marked features of contrast between
them ! On tho one side, there was religious
reverence, strong piety, and pure disinterest
ed patriotism. On the other, there was the
madness of atheism, the brutality of ruffian
ism, and the "reign of terror" to all that was
good and true. In no one mark or character,
indeed, could I deem that there was any
comparison between thera, save in thi3 : that
the 3ame false assumption ot human equality
and human rights was adopted in both. Yet
how widely different was their result on the
question of uegro slavery ! The American
revolution produced no whatever on
that institution ; while the French revolution
roused the slaves of their colony in St. Do
mingo to a general insurrection, and a scene
of barbarous and cruel butchery succeeded,
to which the history of the world contains no
This brings me to the last remarks which
I haee to present on this famous Declaration.
And I respectfully ask my readers to consid
er them maturely.
First, then,it seems raanifes!, that when
the signers of this document assumed that
" nil men were born equal," they did not
take the negro race into account at alt. It
is unqnestionablo that the author, Mr. Jef
ferson, vii a slaveholder at the time, and
continuek so to his life's end. It is certain
that the great majority of the other signers
of the Declaration were slaveholders likewise
No one can be ignorant of the fart that slav
ery had been introduced into all the colo
onies long before, and continued to exi st long
after, in every State save one . Surely then
it can not be presumed that these able and
sagacious men intended to stultify them
selves by declaring that tas negro race had
risihts, which nevertheless they were not
ready to give them. And yet, it i 3 dvident,
that we must either impute this crying injus
tice to our revolutionary patriots, or suppose
that the case of the slaves was not contem
Nor is this a solitary example, for wc have
a complete parlallel to it in the preamble to
the Constitution, where the important phrase,
" We, tho people of the United States," must
be understood with the very same limitation.
Who were the people ? Undoubtedly the
free citizens who voted for tho Constitution.
Were the slaves couuted as a part of that
people ? By no means. Tho negro race had
uo voice, no vete, no influence whafeve rin
the matter. Thus, therefore, it seems per
fectly plain that both these instruments
must be understood acccordlng to the same
rule of interpretation. Tho slaves were not
included in the Declaration of Independence
for the same reason precisely that they were
not included amongst tho " people" who
adopted the Constitution of the United
Now it is the established maxiin of the
law, that every written document must be
understood according to the true intent of
the parties when it was executed. The lan
guage employed may be such that it admits
of a different sense ; but there can be only
on e just interpretation, and that is fired un
alterably by the apparent meaning of its au
thors at the time. On this ground alone,
therefore, 1 respectfully contend that the
Declaration of Independence has no claim
whatever to be considered in the controversy
of our day. I have stated, at some length,
my reasous tor rejecting us famous proposi
tions, as being totally fallacious and untena
ble. But even if thjy were ever so "self evi
dent," are capable of the most rigid demon
stration, the rule of law uterly forbids us to
appeal to them in a sense which they were
not designed to bear.
In the second place, however, it should be
remembered that the Declaration of Indepen
dence, whether true or false, whether it be
interpreted legally or illegally forms no part
of our present system. Asa great histori
cal document, it stands, and must ever stand,
prominent before the nations of the world.—
But it was put forth more than seven years
anterior to the Constitution. Its language
was not adopted in that Constitution aud i t
has uo place whatever in the obligatory law
uf tho Uuited States. When our orators,our
preachers, and our politicians, therefore,
take its propositions about human rights and
human equality, and set thetn up a3 tho su
preme law, overruling the Constitution and
the acts of Congress, which are the real law
of the land, I can not wonder enough at the
absurdity of the proceeding. And I doubt
whether the annals of civilized mankind can
furnish a stronger instance of unmitigated
Thirdly, and lastly, I am utterly opposed
to those popular propositions, not only be
cause I hold them to be altogether fallacious
and untrue, for the reasons already given,
but further, because their tendency is in di
rect contrariety to the precepts of the Gospel,
and the highest interests of the individual
man. For what is the unavoidable effect of
this doctrine of human equality ? Is it not
to nourish the spirit of pride, envy, and con
tention ? To set the servant against the
master, the poor against the rich, the weak
against the strong, the ignorant against the
educated? To loosen {ill the bonds and rela
tions ofsociety, and reduce the whole duty ot
subordination to the selfish cupidity of pe
cuniary interest, without an atom of respect
for age, for office, for law, for government,
for Providence or for the word of God ?
I do not deny, indeed, that this doctriue of
equality is a doctrine of power to
urge men forward in a constant struggle for
advancement. its natural operation is to
force the vast majority into a ceaseless coo
test with their circumstances, each discon
tented with his lot. so long as he sees any
one else above him, and toiling with unceas
ing effort to rise upon the social scale of
wealth and importance as fa3t and as far as
he can. Thera is no principle of stronger im
pulse to stimulate ambition in every depart
ment. Aud heuce arises its manitold influ
ence on the business, the enterprise, the
commerce, the manufactures the agriculture,
the amusements, the fashions and the politi
cal strifes of our Northern people, making
them all restless, all aspiring, and all deter
mined, impossible, to pass their rivals in the
race of selfish emulation.
But how doss it operate on the order, the
stability, and the ultimate prosperity of the
nation ? 11 JW doe 3it work on the steadfast
administration ot justice, the honor and puri
ty of our public officers, the quiet subordina
tion of the various classes in the community,
the fidelity and submission of domestics, the
obedience of children, aud tho relations of
family and home? Above all. how does it
harmonize with the great doctrines of the
Bible, that the Almighty Ruler appoints to
I every man his lot on earth, and borumanfis
him to he satisfied and thankful for his por
-1 tion—that we must submit ourselves to thus
ITEmvrs: fi1.30 PER, ATvrivrmwr
who have the rule over us—that ire should
obey the laws and honor the magistrates—
that the powers that be are ordained Of God,
and he that resisteth the power shall receive
condemnation—that we may oof covet the
property of others—that having food and' rai
ment, we should he therewith content— that
we must avoid strife, contention and railing
accusations, and follow peace and charity, and
good will, remembering that the service of
Christ is the only perfect freedom, and that
our true happiness depends not on the meas
ure of our earthly wealth, on social equaltiy,
on houor, our on or relative position in th#
coimnuuity, but on the fulfillment of our per
sonal duty according to our lot, in reliance on
H is blessing ?
I have no more to add, with respect to
this most popular dogma of human equality,
and shall therefore dismiss it, as fallacious in
itself, and only mischievous in its tendency.
As it is the stronghold of the ultra -abolition*
ist, I have devoted a large space to its exami
nation, aud trust that the conclusion is suffi
ciently plain. Happily it forms no part of
our Constitution or our laws. It never was
intended to apply to the question of negro
slavery. And it never can be so applied with*
out. a tot ul perversion of its historical mean*
ing. and an absolute contrariety to all tht
facts of humanity, and the clear instruction of
the Word of God.
The next objection to the Slavery of tho
Southern States, is its presumed cruelty , be
cause the refractory slave is punished with
corporal correction. But our Northern law
allows the same in the case of children and
apprentices. Such was the established sys
tem in the army and the navy, until very
( atel>'. The whipping-post was a fixed insti
tution in Eugland and Massachusetts, and its
discipl ne was administered even to free citi*
zeus during tho last century. Stripee, not
exceeding forty, were appointed to offenders
in Israel by diyine authority. The Saviour
himself used a scourge of small cords when
he drove the money-changers from the temple.
Are our random philanthropists raoae mercl-s
ful than Christ, and wiser than the Al
mighty ?
But it is said that the poor slaves are
treated with barbarity and doubtless it may
sometimes bs true, just as soldiers and sailors
and e'en wives an 1 children, are shamefully
abused amongst ourselves, in many instances.
It i 3 evident however, that the system of
slavery can not be specially liable to reproach
on this score, because every motive of inter
est us well as moral duty must be opposed to
it. The owner of the horse and the ox rare
ly treats his brute 3 with severity. Why
should he 1 The animals are hrs property
and he knows that they muct be kindly
and carefuliy used, if he would derive advan
tage from their labor. Much more mast the
master of the slave be expected to treat bint
with all fairness and affection, because here
'here are human feelings to be influenced, and
if the serrant be not contented and attaohed,
not only will he work unwillingly, but ha
may be converted into an enemy and an area -
ger. Wheu the master it a Christian, the
principles of the Gospel, as laid down by St.
Paul, will operate, of course, in favor of this
slave. But even when these are wanting, tha'
mo tives of interest and prudenoe remain.—
And hence I can not doubt that ths examples
of barbarity must be exceedingly lew, and
ought to be regarded, not as the general rula'
but as the rare exceptions. On the whole,
indeed, I see no reason to deny the statute
nt of our Southern friends, that their slaves
are the happiest laborers in the wbrld. their
wants are all provided for by their master*
Their families are sure of a home and mainte
nance for life. In sickness they are kindly
nursed. In old age they are affectionately
supported. They are relieved from allAmpe
tv for the future. Their religious privileges are
generously accorded to them. Their work is
light. Their holidays are numerous. And
hence the stroug affection which.they usual/
manifest toward their master, earnest
longing which many, who were persuaded to
become fugititives, have been known to ex
press,that they might be able to return.
The third objection is, that slavery mast be
a sin, because it leads to iiunorcUity . Bat
where is the evidence of this ? I dispute not
against the probability and even the certain
ty that there are instances of licentiousness
enough among slave holders, just as there are
amongst those who vilify them. It woald be
a difficult if not an impossiba task, however,
to prove that there is more imdictf'aljty
amongst the slaves themselves than exiats
amongst the lower class of freemen. In Sab
bath-breaking, profane cursiog and swearing,
drunkenness and quarrehng--.m brutal abuae
of wives and children, in rowdyiam and ob
scenity, in the vilest excesses of
prostitution—to say nothing of organised
bands of counterfeiters, thieves and burglsct
—I doubt whether there arn not more offen
ses against Christian morality committed in
the single city of New-York thjm can he fount
amongst th.) slave population of allibe fifteen
States together. The fact would rather seem
to be that the wholesome restraints of slevery,
as a general rale, must be, to e greet eg ton*
an effectual cheok upon the worst bind of Im
morality. And therefore this charge, so often
broguht against it, stands entirely unsupport
ed either by positive proof or by retiqjßp
The fourth objection is sdvanoed bye mul-
VHL.3, NO. ,1.