Page images

the letter and spirit of these passages, such treatment of human beings is deserving of death, though in some of them the same treatment is threatened as the punishment of the greatest sins, which amounts to the same thing, because human slavery is the living death and destruction of its victims-while in most of the same passages public destruction or national death is threatened, as the Divine retaliatory punishment for the public or customary practice of the same treatment, as their context clearly shows. Divine retaliatory punishment threatened in the Scriptures is generally of a similar kind to the national or public sins threatened.

IX. I lastly argue that the practice of human slavery is the identical crime of “man-stealing," from the nature of the practice itself, or the light in which the law of nature places it, as the highest species of larceny or theft that can be committed. Larceny, or stealing, in its most comprehensive sense, is the taking and withholding from one human being by another, of anything that justly belongs to the former, and to which and to its use the stealer or thief knows he has no just or moral right; the scriptural descriptions of crimes being far more comprehensive than our common law definitions of them, so as to correspond with the law of Nature in its requirements. By the will and gift of God every human being is, under God, the sole and exclusive owner of himself, and of all his own just rights, faculties and acquisitions. All these the slaveholder takes from his slaves, without any leave or licence from them, and without any

, compensation or equivalent, for his own exclusive use and benefit

, just as the common thief steals common goods and chattels for his own exclusive use ; both of these kinds of thieves well knowing they

: have no moral or just right to the property stolen, as each would instantly see and acknowledge, were the crime practised upon himself. The slaveholder never pretends to take these things from third persons who are themselves left free, as the common thief does, and it is certain they are taken from the slaves without their leave. It is therefore larceny or stealing in fact, originating in the sin of covetousness, the same being the highest and most violent breach of the eighth and tenth commands of the decalogue, because

11 Yet she was carried away, she went into captivity: her young children also were dashed in pieces at the top of all the streets: and they cast lots for her honora. ble men, and all her great men were bound in chains.--Nab. iii. 10.

12 Whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty; and they that sell them say, Blessed be the Lor for I am rich: and their own shepherds pity them Rot.--Zech. zi. 5.

[ocr errors]

the articles stolen are the most precious and valuable that men possess in this world, as uniform and universal experience testifies. None of the scriptural accounts of the crime of man-stealing describe it as the stealing of one person from another whose lawful property he

was, but each of them, so far as it goes, describes it and its effects as the involuntary and forcible reduction of human beings to the condition of property, like other goods and chattels, and the use and treatment of them in that condition by means of criminal violence and fraud, exactly as slaves are now reduced to the same condition and subjected to the same use and treatment by the same criminal means. A careful examination and comparison of the numerous passages here quoted, will establish these facts clearly.

From the copious premises here quoted it is past all reasonable and honest doubt or controversy that human slavery is the same identical practice as the great crime of man-stealing, &c., so severely denounced and condemned in the Scriptures, that every slavetrader, purchaser, seller, slaveholder, and all persons engaged in the support of such slavery, such as slave overseers, and drivers, and persons engaged in the pursuit and capture of fugitive slaves, as well as those who legislate and otherwise act in favor of slavery, are deserving of the punishment of sure death by the Levitical or moral law, and that the communities and nations who tolerate and sanction the practice by law or custom, are obnoxious to the terrible retri. bution threatened as the punishment due to this great crime in the Scriptures.

Much quibbling is resorted to by the advocates of slavery on the subject of this alleged identity, on account of the pretended indefiniteness and obscurity with which the crime of “man-stealing," &c., is described in the Scriptures. But as I have already remarked, the scriptural descriptions are all more comprehensive than most human definitions are, so as to allow no chance for the guilty to escape. But it is necessary for me also to observe, that the scriptural descriptions of man-stealing, &c., are as plain as those of any other crime condemned in the Levitical law, and the identity of that crime with the practice of human slavery is as clearly exhibited in the Scriptures as the identity of murder, or any other crime condemned by that law, is with the crimes now supposed to be the same—so that if man-stealing, &c., be not the practice of slavery, so neither is the murder, mayhem, robbery, &c., described and condemned in the Scriptures, the same crimes which they are so currently supposed

to represent in modern times. To those possessing “an honest and a good heart" (Luke xviii. 15), uncontaminated by the influence of slavery, no identity will naturally appear plainer, than that of man-stealing and human slavery, the reason why no such difficulty is experienced in identifying other crimes with those condemned in the Scriptures being, that the moral vision of most men is not obscured by their influence. But we should remember that this is a fearful subject wilfully to misunderstand or misinterpret, because the Scriptures assure us that if men do not become better they cer tainly grow worse by the exhibition of the true Gospel. 2 Cor. ii 15, 16; iv. 3, 4, &c.

. I ought again to remark, in conclusion, that the customary cruelties, &c., which invariably attend the practice of human slavery, as absolutely necessary to its support and perpetuity, and therefore necessary incidents of the practice, are yet nowhere directly represented in the Scriptures as any part of the practice itself, which is both directly and indirectly described in the Scriptures as the conversion of human beings into property and nothing more.



Though plainly and severely as the practice of human slavery is thus condemned in the Scriptures, yet its advocates contend that the same practice is morally justified by them, thus making the word of God contradict itself, by first justifying and then condemning the same practice, at the same time and in the same code of laws!! But I have constantly observed that these advocates never attempt to point out and explain the specific distinction between these two cases, such for instance as those described in Ex. xxi. 2 and 16; the first of which is morally approved and justified because regulated by statute, while the other is morally condemned as one of the greatest crimes under the penalty of sure death. Nor do they ever attempt to settle the specific distinction between the acts described in Lev. xxv. 39, 47, and Deut. xxiv. 7, which are treated in the same manner in the Scriptures. They never tell us wherein

the case recorded in(Gen. xxvii. 12, 13, 23, 27) buying the ser-
vices of men for a limited period, differs from that recorded in
Gen. xxxvii. 27, 36, xlii. 21, 22, where Joseph was said
to be sold or stolen; though it is equally plain that the first
was approved, and the last condemned by God himself. They
never attempt to reconcile these passages as describing the same
subject, nor to point out the specific difference in their subjects,
probably on account of the utter confusion in which the attempt
would involve them. They never, in fact, mention the last quota-
tions if they can avoid it, but content themselves with naked asser-
tions that the first passages here quoted describe and justify the prac-
tice of human slavery. It becomes proper, therefore, to show at
some length, that this doctrine of theirs is founded and sustained
entirely on perversions of certain passages of the Scriptures, forged
by falsifications of their true meaning and intent. Perversions of
the Scriptures are a turning (perverto) of their true to a false mean-
ing, and are denounced all over the Scriptures as among the greatest
sins that men can commit, as indeed they necessarily must be, be-
cause they are attempts to make the Almighty say what He has not
said, and to mean what He did not mean, to the destruction of hu-
man duty, rights, and happiness. Abolitionists have sometimes been
severely censured for the moral severity with which they have con-
demned the pro-slavery perversions of the Scriptures, but let those
who may feel disposed to repeat this censure read the following
passages; Ps. cxix. 126 ; Isa. v. 20; Jer. xviii. 15, xxiii. 36;
Eze. v. 6, 8, xiii. 9–16, xxii. 26, 28, xxxiv. 18, 19; Mic. iii. 9;
Hab. i. 4; Zep.' iii. 4; Mal. ii. 7, 8; Matt. xv. 3, 6, 9; Mark
vii. 8; Acts xii. 10, xv. 1, 24 ; 2 Cor. ii. 17; Gal. i. 7;
Col. ii. 8; 1 Pet. i. 18; 2 Pet. ii. 1; iii. 16; Rev. xxii. 18,
19, and numerous other similar passages.
'It is proper here to add for the sake of perspicuity, that all the
doctrines of the Scriptures are properly divisible into two kinds,
namely: first, those which are matters of faith or belief only, and
secondly, those that are matters of faith and practice both; the for-
mer being so indistinctly and obscurely revealed, that we may
without any perversion or sin, honestly and innocently differ in
opinion as to their true meaning, because we never can attain to
absolute certainty with respect to many of their particulars; while
the latter are so distinctly and clearly revealed, as the rules of
our practice or practical duty, that there can be no honest or inno-

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


2 / freespeto


cent difference of opinion respecting them. Of the former kind are the doctrines of the Creation, the fall of man, the Nature of Christ, the nature of Inspiration, the nature of the future state, &c.; while of the latter kind are the rules of the Decalogue, the New Birth, the Law of Love, the Golden Rule, and all other practical precepts of the Scriptures. The same distinction is made among the rules composing the great Law of Nature, though it is less obvious than the former. It is everywhere contended by the friends of the slave, that the Bible doctrines in relation to human slavery and its abolition belong entirely to the latter class, being so plainly and perspicuously revealed in the Scriptures, as to admit of no honest difference of opinion respecting them. They assert that any essential difference from their own opinions on those plain subjects, are evidence of rather a perverted heart in their adversaries, than of the incorrectness of those opinions. It is hoped that the following pages will clearly exhibit the truth of this assertion.



The absurd pro-slavery pretence that the ipeople of Africa descended from Cain, and are included in the curse pronounced upon that murderer, would not be worth noticing were there not some few.persons in the world, apparently weak, and stupid, and perverted enough, seriously to imagine its truth, as there is hardly anything in the world too absurd to be without some believers. That these people descended from Adam is certain. But as we find from Gen. vii. 23, ix. 18, 19, and other passages, that they must have descended from Noah as well as from Adam, to settle the merits of this pretence we have only to ascertain whether Noah descended from Cain or not. From Gen. v. 3-32, we learn that Noah descended from Seth, another son of Adam, and a brother of Cain, a circumstance which renders it impossible for the latter to have had any descendants since the general deluge, or Noah's flood.

1 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth ; and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark. And the sons of Noah that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth ; and Ham is the father of Canaan. These are the three sons of

Noah : and of them was the whole earth overspread. Gen. vii. 23; ix. 18, 19. muth


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

prontiiae nel

« PreviousContinue »