et free? Is it to be by
purchase? and if so, is it proposed to pay the value of the slaves?
and how? Let it be shown that the purchase and transportation of
4,000,000 of Negroes to Africa will cost less than $2,400,000,000; or
to Central America less than $2,200,000,000. Let it be shown to be
expedient, practicable, or possible to do this; and even if done, let
it be shown to be a benefit to the slave or the master; a benefit
either to civilization or barbarism.
If none of these things can be shown, and I aver they cannot, then how
about the last startling alternative of robbing the slave-owner of his
property? of the freeing of the Negroes by servile insurrection and
civil war? What would be the cost in blood and treasure to effect
this? and the probable result of _such_ an effort at emancipation, on
the freedom and civilization of the world?
WHY ENGLAND ABOLISHED THE SLAVE TRADE,--HER DREAD OF OUR GREATNESS AND
POWER.
The truth is, the slave trade was abolished by British and Tory
influence, at about the time of the American Revolution, when slavery,
as an adjunct of colonial vassalage, could no longer subserve the
interests of British commerce. This was their first success in
circumventing us. Her complicity in the Cooley trade is an evidence of
this. She is willing to morally damn herself for purposes of
monarchical intrigue, in order to supplant us. Our agriculture and
commerce, and rapidly accumulating wealth and power, and republican
glory, are too much for her. Our example of success in freedom tempts
the loyalty of the most enlightened subjects of the British crown. The
fascinations of freedom beguile the ardent and noble aspirations of
the English democracy, and Britannia, with her antiquated and wrinkled
visage, shrinks abashed from the majestic presence of Freedom's
immortal and fadeless bloom!
This is the true cause of the present British Negro philanthropy, and
the occasion of her _assumed_ moral turpitude in elevating the heathen
barbarian of Africa to the primary plane of civilization, to the
protection of its laws, and the meliorations of its moral, political,
social, and religious institutions. It is because monarchy was
beginning to be odious in the eyes of the European democracy, when
contrasted with our antagonistical system of the divine right of the
people. It is her policy and her purpose to render our institutions
unstable by means of a suborned and venal press, and a band of
mercena
|