The voice of freedom. [volume], April 13, 1839, Image 1

About The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848

Image provided by: University of Vermont

                
THE
OF
FKEEBOM.
ALLEN & POLAND, Publishers. Published under the sanction of the Vermont Anti-Slavery Society. CHAUNCEY L. KNAPP, Editor.
VOLUME I. ItlOTPEIISK, VEB5MOHTT, APRIL 13, IS2J9. . IYI7JUUEK 1V
OF THE VEKMONT ANTI-SOCIETY.
FIFTH ANNUAL UtiFOKT
SLAVE HV
(concluded.)
In this short extract, the whole doctrine upon which the above
resolutions are based is exploded, and its sophistry clearly ex
posed. The argument of the President meets, moreover, the
strongest case which can be supposed, where that doctrine would
have any force, that of the admitted existence of " unconstitu
tional purpose " in the law makers, so that, granting his argu
ments to be sound, if Congress should, pass a law abolishing slave
ry in the District ot Columbia, the passage of such law being
clearly within its constitutional power, it would be no violation
pf the constitution, though done with the purpose of abolishing
slavery in the states,
Suppose that the design of the petitioners for the abolition of
slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia, be to ef
fect the overthrow of slavery in the states, that fact, if admitted,
does not decide the question whether slavery and the slave trade
jn the District of Columbia are not grievances which demand
redress, and which can constitutionally be remedied. But that
is the question which is presented by the petitions, and that
must be determined independently of the motives of the petitioners.
If slavery be an evil of itself, the object which a petitioner for its
abolition has in view, though wrong, cannot render it less an
evil, or make its abolition less a duty. The resolution seems,
moreover, to imply that if the abolition of slavery and the slave
trade in the District of Columbia be not agitated or carried into
. eflect "with a " view of destroying or overthrowiv g slavery in
the several states" such agitation or abolition would be proper,
thus making the inquiry as to the motives of the petitioners the
only question to be determined. If the principles of the resolu
tion, therefore, be carried out, we should arrive at this result,
that the abolition of slavery and the slave trade should be grant
ed to those who petition for the same with no view of disturbing
or overthrowing slavery in the states, and denied to those who
ask for it with such view! To dignify such nonsense with the
name of argument, would be an abuse of terms ; and to be grave
in the contemplation of such specimens of ratiocination " exceeds
all power of face."
The fourth of the above resolutions exhibits the same doc
trine as that we have been considering, in a different phase. It
asserts that " Congress has no right, in the exercise of its con
stitutional powers, to discriminate between the institutions of
different portions of the Union with a view of abolishing the one
and promoting the other." The principle of the resolution,
when stated without any disguise, is, that the Congress of the
United States has no right to give a preference to free, over slave
institutions, in its legislation. This proposition seems to be a
sort of corollary from the assumption in the resolution, that the
" Constitution rests on the broad principle of equality among the
members of the confederacy." This must certainly strike every
well-informed and reflecting mind as a strange proposition.
What equality is there in giving New York and Delaware the
same representation in the Senate ? or in giving those states an
equal vote for President when the people have failed to elect?
Or what equality is there in permitting the property of one por
tion of the Union to be represented in Congress, and not that of
the other? Whatever of equality or inequality there exists
among the members of this confederacy, is matter of compact,
nod not the result of general and unchangeable principle. The
Constitution does not, manifestly, rest upon an equality which
does not and never did exist, and which its provisions do not se
cure. If the Constitution rests upon any broad principles, they
are the principles of government asserted by the Declaration of
Independence, based upon the " inalienable rights " of man,
the great principles, in short, which lie at the foundation of pop
ular and free institutions, the right of every human being to
liberty, and the right and capacity of the people to govern them
selves. The preamble to the Constitution sets forth the objects
for which it was established, the sum of which is, " to secure the
blessings of liberty" to the people of the United Stales and their
"posterity." Now unless the Constitution binds Congress to
legislate in favor of slavery, if it have any regard for the great
nnd paramount objects for which the government was establish
ed, it is sacredly bound, by a proper regard to the spirit of the
Constitution, to exercise all the powers therein granted, for
the extension and perpetuation of free principles of government
and free institutions; and, above all, for the securing of liberty
to every human being within the limits of its jurisdiction. But
the Constitution contains no provisions by which Congress is
bound to legislate to sustain, extend or perpetuate the existence
of domestic slavery in the states, territories, or District of Colurri;
bia. Upon what just ground, then, can it be ur
gress ought not to give a preference, in the exer
nowledged powers, to free, over slave institution
thus bound, what a stupendous fraud is the Con
United btates upon the rights ot humantity!
lit ft i r i .
bundles oi nypocrisy aim cant are our Deciarati
dence and our Bills of Rights ! What arrant im
all be considered in the eyes of the world !
If, then, the institutions of the United States a
ally free institutions, Congress cannot establish o
other, within its acknowledged jurisdiction, with
violation of the spirit of that instrument, and wit
preference to such institutions over the free ones
tution. But Congress has, in violation of the fin
liberty, in violation of the Declaration of Independe?
violation of the God-piven rights of humanity, by its
lation, established slavery in the District of Columbia, and legal
ized there the horrible abuse of the slave trade, while it permits
slavery and all its horrid concomitants, wherever they have crept
into the territories of the nation, to exist and grow as fitting dec
orations for the sisterhood of the national family !
If we adopt the doctrine of the resolution in question as be
ing the true doctrine, it will then be seen that it either author
izes Congress to abolish slavery and the slave trade in the Dis
trict of Columbia, or prevents Congress from legislating for the
establishment or abolishment of either free or slave institutions
there. The proposition of the resolution is, that " Congress in
the exercise of its acknowledged powers, has no rfghtlo discrim
inate between the institutions o.f one portion of the states and an
other, with the view of abolishing the one and promoting the
other." Congress has an acknowledged constitutional power
over the subject of slavery in the District of Columbia; and if
Congress can establish the institution of slavery there without
any view of abolishing the free institutions of the non-slavehold-ing
states, it can also abolish it there without any view of over
throwing the slave institutions of the slaveholding slates. But
Congress has established slavery in the District of Columbia,
and if that was rightfully done, with the same right, it can abol
ish it there. If, on the other hand, Congress cannot establish
or abolish either free or slave institutions in the District of Co
lumbia, without necessarily having the view of promoting or
abolishing free or slave institutions in the states, then, accord
ing to the doctrine of the resolution, Congress can do nothing
rightfully in the establishment of either kind of institutions there
cannot legislate, in short, for slavery or against it for free
institutions or against them !
We come now to the fifth and last resolution, which being
the conclusion drawn from the propositions contained in the pre
ceding ones, if they have proved unsound, must fall with them.
It is surprising, however, that a body of men like those who pass
ed these resolutions, even if they had full confidence in theirsound
ness; should have been so far misled by their zeal as to have com
mitted so flagrant a violation of the Constitution as that perpetrated
by the passage of the last clause of this last resolutionby which ' ev
ery petition, memorial, resolution, proposition orpaper, touching or
f
I
I
I
I
'1
v
oU II Jl'lhs
relating in any way or 1 1 any extent whatever to slavery as aforesaid,
or 10 me aooiuion inereoi, snail, on presenuuion, wuuoumny uu
ther action thereon, be laid upon the table, without being debated
printed or referred." It surely could not have been necessary
in order to sustain the Constitution, to trample upon some of its
most salutary and beneficial provisions. Jf the doctrines of the
resolutions upon which we have been commenting were sound
and tenable, discussion would only have strengthened them, and
thev would have been an appropriate reply to the petitioners as
reasons for not granting the prayer of their petitions, after that
consideration of, and action upon them, which is necessary to
the preservation of the constitutional right of petition nnd of
speech', but can form no sort of justification lor the practical de
nial of the right of the petitioners to be heard, the condemnation
of them by the very resolutions which were not permitted to be
discussed, and the smothering of debate on the floor of Congress,
so essential to the promotion df pure legislation, the enlighten
ment of the public mind and the preservation of rights of a mi
nority. To assault the bulwarks of the Constitution, in the
name of the Constitution, is a method of preserving that instru
ment inviolate peculiar to those who consider slavery the " cor
ner stone of our republican edifice." Nothing can hardly be
imagined in legislation more despotic and inconsistent with pub
lic liberty than the measure in question. As well might the
majority of the House have established a rule that the minority
should not be heard upon any question in relation to the consti
tutionality of which their views might be different from those of
the majority.
Another strange feature of this resolution is, that it treats with
the same disrespect, and consigns to the same oblivion, the sol
emn acts of state legislatures touching the subject of slavery,
that it does the petitions of individuals. Until very recently,
nnd since it has been found necessary to appease the domineer
ing and lawless spirit of slavery, by yielding up the most sacred
immunities of the free to its insolence, the acts of the sove
reign members of the confederacy have been treated with great
respect: any expression of sentiment by them has been received
and considered by Congress with that attention due it as eman
ating from an authority too high to be slighted, and one which
constitutionally and from courtesy was entitled to be heard in
the national councils : but now, under the operation of this ex
traordinary resolution, no distinction is made between the sol
emn resolves of state legislatures and any other papers present
ed to Congress in which the word slavery happens to occur,
all are indiscriminately and contemptuously thrown upon the
table of the speaker, and stifled. In what this species of en
croachment upon the rights of the people and upon the author
ity and dignity of the states will end, if not timely resisted, it is
impossible to conjecture. It certainly evinces a lamentable de
generacy from the exalted and high-souled patriotism of our fa
thers, and betokens a startling willingness in those entrusted
with power, to yield up to party and sectional interests those
fundamental principles of popular freedom which constitute the
beneficence of our institutions, and without which they will be
come as powerless for human good as the aristocratic institutions
of the old world.
Since our last'1nnniversary, the abolition of the apprentice
ship system in the British West India Islands, has added an
other stupendous item of proof to those which already existed, of
the correctness of the doctrine of immediate emancipation. It
comes in as a giant auxiliary to carry forward the cause of ab
olition in this nation, and furnishes evidence of the practicabili
ty and safety of such u course too strong- to be resisted by the
most prejudiced and skeptical mind. The great proposition of
emancipation is there wrought out for the inspection of all who
willing to inquire ; prophecy has become history ; matter
of faith has become matter of fact. The success of the abolition
principle in those islands, where the apprenticeship system had
been adopted and which had been productive only of bitter
fruits, well calculated to result in evil, must be sufficient to con
vince every candid and ingenuous mind of the expediency and
safety of emancipation wherever slavery may exist. All those
horrible conjurations of the fancy which have haunted those
who have been arrayed against our cause, are dispelled by the
light reflected from the West Indian experiment ; the demon of
evil which has been said to possess the abolition cnterprize, is
now exorcised by the spirit and presence of light and truth and
all the horrors which have been thought to cluster around the
consummation of the anti-slavery principle in practice, have been
changed, as if by the wand of the magician, into chaplets cf
peace and adorning in the sun-light of experience.
When we reflect that in the British West India possessions
the number of whites is
slaves amount to 593,-
ce,
ere
n to 105,572, being an aver
hite, and an average of nine
ied, that the dangers which
attend emancipation in this
ater degree there than here,
if emancipation has been
equally if not more so here.
its effects throughout those
h the slaves were uncondi-
of the apprenticeship sys-
late number of the Human
society contains a mass of
perfectly irresistible, and
every man. i he evidence, it
wTiTcinilUUlirUU 111 Ule hands ot
is stated by the editor, justify the following conclusions :
1. " That abolition is safe in the worst possible case.
2. " That the colonics are prospering in their agriculture.
3. " That the planters conferred freedom because they were
" obliged to by public opinion abroad.
4. "That freedom, even thus unwillingly conferred, was ac
cepted as a precious boon by the slaves they were grateful to
" God and ready to work for their masters for pay.
5. "That the mass of the planters have endeavored, from the
" first, to get work out of the free laborers for as small wages as
" possible.
6. " That many of the attorneys and managers have refused
" fair wages and practised extortion, to depreciate the price of
"property, that they might profit thereby.
7. "That all the indisposition to labor which has been exhib
"ited is fully accounted for by these causes.
8. "That in spite of all, the abolition is working well for the
" honest of all parties."
It is not to be disguised that the present is a critical and mo
mentous period in the history of our cnterprize, requiring all the
energies, firmness and self-sacrificing devotion which the cause
can command to carry us safe through the crisis in which we
find ourselves. Slavery and its supporters are driven to the
wall the bulwarks of the citadel of oppression are assaulted on
every hand the countenance of the civilized world is turned
from them rthe noble philanthropy of other nations is affording
a practical refutation to the alleged impossibility of safely rcr
linquishing the terrible abuses of their system ; and in this con
juncture, all the interests of that system are taxed to their ut
most to provide a refuge for it, in which it may repose in safety.
The contest yaxes fiercer as it approaches the point which must
give victory to one side or the other. All the resources of slave
ry are called into active requisition to bring auxiliaries to its
success; and while its shouts of defiance become louder and its
threats of disunion more frequent, it offers the bribe of its votes
for high stations to those who bow most meekly the knee to its
mandates and most obsequiously defend its sullied reputation.
Accordingly we sen the leaders of the two great political parties
of the day striving for the meed of its approval, and while one
basely bows the knee to its dark spirit, the other more basely
kneels to ils worship. In this attitude of affairs the abolitionists
must be stern and inflexible unflinching, untiring, immovable
The struggle of despair in a powerful enemy is generally the
most terrible, and often, if not met with corresponding effort and
determination, achieves a triumph even in the hour ol overthrow
So it may be with slavery in this republic if abolitionists are not
true to their principles and do not show themselves equal to any
conflict, however terrific, in behalf ot freedom and outraged hu
man nature. The time has come, therefore, for them to take
such a stand as shall convince men of all parties that they can
no longer be trifled with- that the means which they possess to
vindicate their own rights and the interests of humanity will no
longer be left untouched and that those who wish for the ap
proval of freemen must not render themselves the bounden thralls
of slaveholders, Let but the people of the free states become
as harmonious in delence of the free princmles ol the Declara
lion of Independence as the people of the south are against them,
and those who strive for the alluring prizes of ambition will soon
cease to seek alter them by turning traitors to humanity and free
dom, and offering human sacrifice upon the altar of liberty. It
will be the fault of the abolitionists of this nation, if thepeo pie of
the free states do not become thus united, and do not thus, with
the inhabitants of other civilized nations, decree the downfall of
slavery wherever it may exist.
From the Philanthropist.
Colonization and the Colored People of Cincinnati.
At a large meeting of the colored citizens of Cincinnati, held
on the 26th ult. at the New Chapel, the following preamble' and
resolutions were adopted :
Whereas vigorous efforts are being made throughout the State,
to resuscitate the American Colonization Society :
And whereas, (fearing that the sentiments of our people may
not be generally known by the community, and may be conse
quently liable to misrepresentation.) we feel it a duty we owe to
our friends and the best interests of our people, to seek the ear
liest opportunity to reiterate before God, our country, and the
world, our unmitigated and unqualified opposition to the professed
designs and object of said Society; believing that its designs are
unjust, because it seeks to expatriate a portion of the citizens of
this country, from their homes and their firesides, merely be
cause the God ot JNature has made them of a complexion differ
ent from the variable and uncertain shade of white; and believ
ing also, that the said Society is unchristian and anti-republican
in its tendency, and consequently unworthy the patronage of
Christian and republican people, because it denies all possibility
of our elevation in this country, discourges all attempts to im
prove the moral and intellectual character of our people in this
country, fosters and sustains that prejudice, which they declare
to be invincible, by stigmatizing us as a wcrdiless and inferior
race; and lastly, (though by no means the least objection which
every true lover of his country would have against this Society,)
because it apologizes for the sin of slavery, and thereby so far as
influence operates, tends to the perpetuity of that accursed sys
tem, which every pure p'atriot, philanthropist and christian de
sires to see terminated :
And whereas, we do but reiterate the sentiments of our breth
ren from the Atlantic to the Pacific, when we declare that we
will never consent to emigrate to any other soil under Heaven,
though a perfect Eden.were offered to us, much less to that mod
ern Golgotha, Liberia, so long as the la'sT fink of the last chain
remains upon the last one of our brethren :
Therefore, Resolved, That we will never consent (by remov
ingf rorn this country) to become the instruments of slave-holders,
and their co-adjutor, the American Colonization Society, to fas
ten more permanently upon the necks of our brethren, the gall
ing youe ol bondage.
Resolved, That we regard the whole action and influence of
the scheme, as entirely at variance with the welfare of the col
ored people of this country, and we can adduce proof positive of
tneir unwillingness to leave the land ol their nativity.
Resolved, That our present opposition to the Colonization So
ciety is not the offspring of any momentary impulse, but had its
oirtn wiin tne scnerne liscn ; ana we do therefore deliberately
and unanimously enter our protest againt it, as beinp not onlv
opposed to the principles of republicanism, but also to those of
Christianity and humanity.
Resolved, I hat he who asserts that the free people of color of
the United States arc willing to emigrate to Africa, (provided
they had means) is either ignorant of their sentiments, or know
ingly misrepresents them ; nnd if he does, he deserves to be
classed among the enemies of the colored race.
Resolved, That in case the industrious free people of color re
move to Africa, the facts necessary to prove to honest minded
men their capability of taking care of themselves, would also be
removed ; and then, slavery could be fastened upon those of our
brethren who should remain, none dissenting.
Resolved, That the double dealing of the colonization scheme
is sufficiently manifest from the circumstance, of its affecting at
the North, to have for its object ultimately the abolition of sla
very, and, at the South, to expatriate the free people of color in
order to render slavery more profitable nnd secure.
Resolved, That the proceedings of this meeting be published
in papers friendly to the cause of humanity.
WILLIAM JL JOHNSON, Chairman.
A. J. GORDON, Secretary.
W. Daitnes, )
J. Tinsi.ey, Assistants.
J. MoitC'AN, )
From the Emancipator.
Mitigation of Slave Law.
It is a common allegation, and substantially endorsed by Mr.
Clay, in his celebrated defence of slavery, that the abolition
movements have bad the eflect of increasing the severity of the
laws in the slave States. We know of several fads to the con
trary of this. For one of them, we refer to the subjoined a
mendment of the law of Mississippi against negro-stealing, pas
sed at the recent session of the Legislature, and " approved Feb.
11, 1S39." It should be observed that the offence denominated
' negro-stealing," at the South, is not the stealing of a black
man from his country, his family and himself, and converting
him into a slave, but it is one man's taking the possession of said
kidnapped man from the hands of another who claims the own
ership. And l lie law is customarily construed so ns'to include
aiding and assisting such slave to become free. Tbo two citi
zens of Maine who allowed a Georgian slave logo in their ves
sel are indicted and claimed as guilty of this crime. From the
act below, which we copy from the Mississippian of March S, it
will be seen, that, heretofore, this high crime of assisting a fel
low man to liberty was punishable wjth DEATH. That is now
mitigated down, by "the spirit of the age," to the inure title
infliction of imprisonment for a long term of years.
",AN ACT to authorize the Governor of this State to commute
the punishment of death in certain cast s.
" Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of
Mississippi, That on the petition of any persons who may have
been, or who may hereafter be, convicted of negro-stealing, to
the Governor of the State of Mississippi, it shall be his duly, by
proclamation, to commute the punishment of death to hard labor
in the penitentiary of this State for a period not less than ten
nor more than twenty years."
So, if a Northern mechanic, podler, teacher, dentist, or other
visiter, should, like young M. of Massachusetts, in passing along
the road, in Mississippi, full in comrnny w ith nn intrlligrM
stranger, of dark complexion, traveling the same
way, and while engaged in conversation, uncon
scious of wrong or danger, be met bv one of the
ever vigilant centinels of the " institution," and be
arrested, and on this evidence convicted of the
crime of " negro-stealing," he will only have to en-,
dure " hard labor in the penitentiary, 'not less than
ten, nor more then twenty years." They won't
hang him now: although they go through the
forms of a capital trial, yet he shall be allowed this
" benefit of clergy."
Interestius Slave Case.
The following account of a slave case, recently
adjudged in Philadelphia, is taken from the Liber
ator of the 22d instant communicated in a letter
from James Mott, of Philadelphia, to the editor of
that paper.
In this city, those who have fled for life and lib
erty are frequently taken up, and by a summary
process before a judge, sent back in, chains to wear
the galling yoke of bondage ; and we have rea;
son to believe that sometimes those who are free
by slave law, are arrested. A case has recently
occurred, which excited more than usual interest,
and I will attempt to give a brief statement of it.
The case commenced about six weeks since, be
fore Hopkinson, U. S. Judge for the district.
Ruth Williams, of Prince George's county, Ma
ryland, claimed a man whom she callad Isaac, but
who is known in this city as Wm. Stansbury,
apparently about 45 years of age, of sober, indus
trious habits, having a wife and several children.
The claimant produced several witnesses, who
were cither connections or neighbors. They tes
tified that Isaac run away about 1S15, or 1816
not before 1815 and although they had not seen
hjm for more than 22 years, they knew him at
once ; he was the identical man ; that he had a
scar on the forehead produced by a burn, which
was now to be seen, and which made them more
sure. Some of these witnesses, on their cross-examination,
refused to answer certain questions;
and although they had no difficulty in remember
ing Isaac, whom they had not seen for more than
22 years, yet they could not pretend to recollect
other facts, which had occurred within a few
weeks, or even within 21 hours. It was elicited
by the cross-examination, that a depraved man,
known hero as a slave-hunter for many years,
named George F. Alberti, had written to the clai
mant describing the said Isaac precisely, and in
forming her what measures would be necessary
in order to get possession of him. He told her
what witnesses to send, and to what they must
testiiy that there must be no delay that the
man would now bring a good price. The wit
nesses were faithful in obeying Alberti's instruct
tions, and testified accordingly, This letter was,
as the counsel for the respondent called it, ' a mod
el of infamy.' The claimant was represented by
Edward D. Ingraham, who - has distinguished
himself in these unholy crusades 'against human
flesh. Isaac, as he was called, was most faithful
ly represented by David Paul Brown, who has
spent much time in this and similar cases, and is
always ready to act in such business, and always
refusing to receive ought like fee or reward.
While Brown was addressing the Judge on a
point of evidence, he spoke of the claimant as mas
ter. The adverse counsel said, ' mistress you
mean.' Brown replied' No, sir master is the
word, for I can't connect a woman with such a
claim as this,' The case was several times ad
journed from one week to another, in order to
give both parties nn opportunity to obtain their
proof. Several witnesses were examined on be
half of the respondent, who were mostly colored
men. The important noint of their evidence was
this fact, that in 1311, (previous to the date fixed
by the claimant of his having left his service) the
colored people of this city a-sisted, in a body, in,
building a fortification near Schuylkill river, as a
Jelence against the English, and the said Isaac
was associated with them in this work ; that they
knew him then and ever since by the name of
in. Stansbury.
I he claimant s witnesses alleged that the moth
er was now living in Washington, D. C. and was
a free woman. Stansbury's friends sent for her,
and she testified that the so called Isaac was not
her son. Sqme other evidence was elicited on
behalf of ihe respondent, but the above is the most
material. It is proper to say that the colored
witnesses gave their testimony, both in chief and
on cross-examination, in a manner that was very
creditable, and hundreds of others whose sympa-
ties brought them to the place, conducted with,
great propriety and decorum.
About a week since, the case was argued. D.
P. Brown spoke for two hours, in the presence of
a large audience of both sexes and all colors. ;
Nothing could have been more uncompromising
than his denunciations of slaveholding, slavehold
ers, and slave-catchers. The southern witnesses
were present, and were objects of mingled pity
and contempt. Brown said that from t' e spec-
mens exhibited on this pecasion, whether of intel
lect or morals, the colored people of this city had
no reason to dolT their caps to the citizens of the
South, and no overweening courtesy ought to in
duce him to disgrace the colored witnesses by a
comparison. Ingraham's speech in closing the
case was very abusive. He seemed to place his
reliance on the ground that the respondent's wit
nesses were not to he believed, because they were
of the same color and race as the alleged slave.
Yesterday the Judge gave his decision. The
court room was filled to overflowing the scene
was interesting and thrilling in the extreme. The
respondent, who had been in jail from the time of
his arrest, was seated within the bar, his wife by
his sid?, surrounded by five neat and healthy look;
ing children, the youngest seated in his lap not
knowing but that it would be tjie last time they
should see him, and that in a few minutes he.
might bo handcuffed before their eyes, and drag
ged' into interminable slavery. The anxiety of
the audience was intense. More than ftn hour
was occupied in reading the decision. As a legal
document, it evinced care and labor, nnd declared
the counsel was wrong in supposing that the testi
mony for the respondent must be rejected becausg
it came from persons of the same color apd race
as himself ; and if it were so, the same argumenf
might be applied to the testimony for the claimant
but law and justice forbid the application of sucjj