justly entitled to their freedom. If our
moral view of slavery is clear, he was _just_, as well as _generous_,
and wise as well as successful.

WASHINGTON REPROACHES THE EMANCIPATIONISTS.

It is well known how powerful the secret influence of the British and
Tory abolitionists was in this country immediately after the American
Revolution, as well as before and since that time; and that at about
that time, or soon after, the question was seriously entertained of
abolishing slavery in Virginia by legislation, as was done in other
States of the Union; and it was on account of the annoying
importunities of these _disinterested philanthropists_ (_?_), and the
apparent inclination of the people of the State of Virginia to
experiment in their theories, that Washington expressed his
willingness to see slavery abolished by legislative enactment. But in
what characteristic terms of manly reproach did he address the
Emancipation Society on the subject when he found their principles and
practices to be that "_the end justifies the means_." He says:

"_But when slaves, who are happy and contented with their present
masters, are tampered with and seduced to leave them; when masters are
taken unawares by these practices; when a conduct of this kind begets
discontent on one side, and resentment on the other; and when it
happens to fall on a man whose purse will not measure with that of the
Society, and he loses his property for want of means to defend it,--it
is oppression in such a case, *AND NOT HUMANITY IN ANY*, because it
introduces more evils than it can cure._"[6]

OUR FATHERS ON THE RIGHT OF SLAVERY.

It is not to be concealed, however, that some of the sages who framed
this Republic, in their zeal for freedom, overlooked the fact of
African barbarism, or failed to be explicit in their unpremeditated
enunciations of human freedom. Perhaps, however, they had more
astuteness than has been supposed by some. Perchance they considered
barbarity not humanity, but its opposite, and would have deemed it a
work of supererogation to explain that which natural history, the
history of the African ram for four thousand years, and common sense,
and common observation, had established as a self-evident
proposition; to wit, that equality was a _political_, and not a
social, nor moral, nor even physical condition; and that, especially,
neither equality nor freedom were to be construed to be the
prerogatives nor the right of barbarism.