more
benevolent than the warmest friend of the negro would dare to hope; but
while we admit all this, we must not forget that there is in every
community a class of men, who will not be any better than the laws
compel them to be.
Captain Riley, in his Narrative, says: "Strange as it may seem to the
philanthropist, my free and proud-spirited countrymen still hold a
million and a half[T] of human beings in the most cruel bonds of
slavery; who are kept at hard labor, and smarting under the lash of
inhuman mercenary drivers; in many instances enduring the miseries of
hunger, thirst, imprisonment, cold, nakedness, and even tortures. This
is no picture of the imagination. For the honor of human nature, I wish
likenesses were nowhere to be found! I myself have witnessed such scenes
in different parts of my own country; and the bare recollection of them
now chills my blood with horror."
[Footnote T: There are now over two million.]
When the slave-owners talk of their gentleness and compassion, they are
witnesses in their own favor, and have strong motives for showing the
fairest side. But what do the laws themselves imply? Are enactments ever
made against exigencies which do not exist? If negroes have never been
scalded, burned, mutilated, &c., why are such crimes forbidden by an
express law, with the marvellous proviso, except said slave _die_ of
"_moderate_ punishment!" If a law sanctioning whipping to any extent,
incarceration at the discretion of the master, and the body loaded with
irons, is called a _restraining_ law, let me ask what crimes must have
been committed, to require _prohibition_, where so much is _allowed_?
The law which declares that slaves shall be compelled to labor _only_
fourteen or fifteen hours a day, has the following preamble: "Whereas
_many_ owners of slaves, managers, &c. _do_ confine them so closely to
hard labor that they have not sufficient time for natural rest," &c. Mr.
Pinckney, in a public argument, speaking of slaves murdered by severe
treatment, says: "The _frequency_ of the crime is no doubt owing to the
nature of the punishment." The reader will observe that I carefully
refrain from quoting the representations of party spirit, and refer to
_facts_ only for evidence.
Where the laws are made by the people, a majority of course approve
them; else they would soon be changed. It must therefore in candor be
admitted, that the _laws_ of a State speak the prevailing _sentiments_
of the i
|