Chapter I: Part 1

Transcriber’s Note:

Minor errors in punctuation and formatting have been silently corrected. Please see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation.

Please consult the end notes, as well, for the approach used in the rendering of Arabic, Greek, Coptic, Hebrew and Syriac text.

This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects. Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. Bold font is delimited by the ‘=’ character. Superscripted and subscripted characters are shown as ‘^2’ and ‘_{2}’ respectively. The rendering of certain characters in classical languages may not display correctly in your reader. Alignment in tables may also be compromised.

STUDIES ON SLAVERY,
In Easy Lessons.

COMPILED INTO EIGHT STUDIES, AND SUBDIVIDED INTO
SHORT LESSONS FOR THE CONVENIENCE
OF READERS.

BY JOHN FLETCHER,

OF LOUISIANA.

--------------

FIFTH THOUSAND.

NATCHEZ:
PUBLISHED BY JACKSON WARNER.

CHARLESTON: McCARTER & ALLEN.—NEW ORLEANS: JOHN BALL.
PHILADELPHIA: THOMAS, COWPERTHWAIT & CO.
1852.

-----------------------

ENTERED according to Act of Congress, in the year 1851, by
JACKSON WARNER,
sin the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the Southern District
of Mississippi.

PRINTED BY SMITH & PETERS,
Franklin Buildings, Sixth Street below Arch, Philadelphia.

--------------

PUBLISHER’S PREFACE.

This is a legitimate topic of general interest, and it assumes a preponderating importance to the people of the Southern American States, when the fact is taken into consideration that a general league against the institution of African slavery has been entered into and consummated between most of the civilized nations of the earth, and public opinion in many of the sister States of our own National Union has taken the same direction. The result is, to have arraigned the slaveholding States before the mighty bar of public opinion, on the charge of holding, as property, more than ten hundred millions of dollars’ worth of what does not belong to them, which is and never can be the property of man; and this charge embraces, within its scope, the crimes of theft, robbery, rapine, and cruelty.

The time has come when the South must enter her plea of defence, not because the accusers are foreign nations, of which it may justly be said, before their charges are entertained, “Physician, heal thyself,” but because our accusers are among our own brethren, bound to us by freedom’s holiest associations and religion’s most sacred ties.

The author of the “Studies on Slavery” has the double advantage of a full comprehension of the subject both in its Northern and Southern aspect. Born and educated in the former, and qualified by a long residence in the latter section of our Union, he is amply qualified to weigh the prejudices, the teachings, and the arguments of the one, against the facts, the justifications, the religious and political sanctions of the other.

Mr. Fletcher has not only marshalled into his line of impregnable defence the mandates and sanctions of the Sacred Writings concerning the slave institutions, but he has drawn powerful auxiliaries from the sources of ancient history. His exegesis of biblical passages, in the original languages in which they were communicated by inspiration to the world, shows his sound scholarship, as well as his reverence of the literal sense and specific meaning of God’s holy and unimpeachable standard and rule of life and action.

The author has also analyzed the fountain of Moral Philosophy, and detected the bitter waters of error so industriously infused by the eloquent and magical pens of such writers as Dr. Samuel Johnson, Dr. Paley, Dr. Channing, Dr. Wayland, Mr. Barnes, and others. He has confined himself to the moral and ethical bearings of the question, scarcely touching upon its political aspects,—a course calculated to render the book far more useful to the dispassionate seekers after truth, who may belong to different political sects.

Neither time nor labour has been spared in the authorship of the work; and it is believed that, while it is written with candour and calmness, it will be received by the people of the North as well as of the South as a sincere and enlightened endeavour to seek for truth, and thus allay the tumultuous and disorganizing fanaticism of those who have not had opportunity to study the subject, and are incapable of acting upon it with understanding and true decision.

PROEMIAL

Philosophy knows no obligation that binds one man to another without an equivalent. If one man could be subjected to another, who is not bound to render any thing in return, it would be subversive to good morals and political justice. Such a relation cannot exist, only so far as to reach the immediate death of the subjected. But it has been the error of some good men to suppose that slavery presented such a case. It has been their misfortune also to receive the following succedaneums as axioms in the search for truth:—

“All men are born equal.”

“The rights of men are inalienable.”

“No man has power to alienate a natural right.”

“No man can become property.”

“No man can own property in another.”

“The conscience is a distinct mental faculty.”

“The conscience infallibly distinguishes between right and wrong.”

“No man is under any obligation to obey any law when his conscience
dictates it to be wrong.”

“The conscience empowers any man to nullify any law; because the
conscience is a part and parcel of the Divine mind.”

“Slavery is wholly founded on force.”

“Slavery originates in the power of the strong over the weak.”

“Slavery disqualifies a man to fulfil the great object of his being.”

“The doctrines of the Bible forbid slavery.”

“There is no word, either in the Old or the New Testament, which
expresses the idea of slave or slavery.”

“Slavery places its subjects beyond moral and legal obligation:
therefore, it can never be a legal or moral relation.”

“Slavery is inconsistent with the moral nature of man.”

“To hold in slavery is inconsistent with the present state of morals
and religion.”

“Slavery is contrary to the will of God.”

“No man can hold a slave, and be a Christian.”

Averments of this order are quite numerous. Fanatics receive them; and some others do not distinguish them from truths.

At any age, and in any country, where such errors are generally adopted, and become the rules of political action, morals and religion are always in commotion, and in danger of shipwreck: for, although, where man has only approached so far towards civilization that even the enlightened can merely perceive them as rudimental, yet the great principles that influence human life, morality and religion, are, everywhere, and always have been the same.

-----------------------

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

STUDY I.

LESSON I.—Wayland’s definition of moral law, page 7 to 8; sin the
antecedent of slavery, 9; the abuse of slavery a sin, 10.

LESSON II.—Wayland on the elements of consciousness, 10 to 11; the
degeneracy of races, and slavery as the scriptural means of
reclamation, 12; object of punishment, 13.

LESSON III.—Wayland on conscience as a distinct faculty, 14, 15;
Channing, Barnes, and abolitionists generally on the same, 16, 17,
18.

LESSON IV.—Wayland on conscience as an independent faculty derived from
Shaftesbury, Hutchinson, and Reid, 18; combated by Archbishop
Seeker, 19; argument that conscience is neither a distinct faculty
nor infallible, 20 to 23.

LESSON V.—Wayland’s doctrine, that slavery sacrifices the slave’s
eternal happiness to the master’s temporal, refuted, 23 to 25; the
master’s interest and the slave’s moral improvement identical, 26,
27.

LESSON VI.—Wayland’s argument, that slavery is at variance with the laws
of God, examined, 27; its connection with productive labour and
national wealth considered, 28 to 32; Sismondi’s theory of labour
and capital, 32; Wayland on slavery as impoverishing soil refuted,
33, 34.

LESSON VII.—Wayland’s doctrine, that the moral principles of the Bible
are opposed to slavery, refuted, 34, 35; Secker’s authority, 36;
Wayland on slavery as a prohibition of gospel privileges and
matrimony controverted, 37 to 40; Luther and Melancthon quoted, 39;
African practice in regard to matrimony, 40; interest of masters to
promote permanent marriages among their slaves, 40 to 42.

LESSON VIII.—Wayland, Paley, Channing, and Barnes on the opinion that
the sacred writers abstained from condemning slavery on motives of
policy, 43 to 47.

LESSON IX.—Wayland’s doubts, caused by Prof. Taylor, 47 to 50; Wayland’s
assertion, that the inculcation of the duties of slaves is no
sanction of slavery, combated, 51, 52.

LESSON X.—Wayland’s assertion, that Scripture is opposed to slavery,
contrasted with the declarations of the Bible, 53; slavery a
desirable and ardently sought condition under certain
circumstances—historical proofs, 54 to 57.

LESSON XI.—Dr. Paley on slavery and the laws of nature, 57 to 61.

LESSON XII.—Paley on cruelty as an argument against slavery, 62;
Lander’s testimony respecting native cruelty in Africa, 63; Paley’s
slander on Jesus Christ and Paul and Peter repelled, 65 to 67.

LESSON XIII.—Slavery in ancient Britain, 67; Dr. Samuel Johnson’s
argument against negro slavery analyzed, and overthrown by arguments
drawn from the laws of nations and the laws of God, 68 to 82.

STUDY II.

LESSON I.—Relation of guardian and ward a Divine institution, 83 to 85.

LESSON II.—Slavery a Divine institution, and the reason why, 85 to 88.

LESSON III.—Slavery the school of adversity to reclaim wicked nations
and individuals—Scripture proofs, 89 to 91.

LESSON IV.—Albert Barnes on the slavery of the Israelites in Egypt
refuted, 92 to 96; his attempt by human reason to determine the will
of God, 97 to 99.

LESSON V.—Barnes’s examination of the Scripture argument on slavery, and
the scriptural account of slavery in the days of Abraham,
contrasted, 99 to 109.

LESSON VI.—The smiles of God on the institution of slavery proved from
the argument of Barnes against it, 110; ratio of slaves to whites,
and the relative increase in the United States, 111, 112.

LESSON VII.—The interest of the master and the direct laws of God
against the abuses of slavery coincident, 113, 114; Barnes’s cure
for slavery, 115.

LESSON VIII.—Barnes’s denial that Christ ever came in contact with
slavery compared with scriptural assertions, 116 to 119.

LESSON IX.—The admission of Barnes in regard to slaves escaping to the
Hebrew country, 119; his assertion, that the Hebrews were not a
nation of slaveholders, overthrown by Scripture testimony, 120, 121.

LESSON X.—Distribution by the Hebrews of captives taken in battle, 122,
123; Greek custom in regard to captives made in war, 124;
proof-texts from the Bible, 125.

LESSON XI.—The claim of Barnes to identity with the African race, 126;
his views on Paul’s injunction to sympathize with those in bonds
controverted, 127, 128.

LESSON XII.—Legend of Antioch, Margarita, and the Roman Præfect Olybius,
128 to 133; song of the slaves, 131, 132; letter of Olybius to the
Emperor Probus, manufactured from the language of Mr. Barnes, 133 to
135.

LESSON #XIII.—Barnes’s admissions of the existence of Hebrew and Roman
slavery, 136, 137.

LESSON XIV.—The denial of Barnes that slavery cannot be defended by
Bible arguments, 138; its influence on agriculture, commerce, arts,
and the African slave himself considered, _idem_; Sedgjo, the
African slave in Louisiana, 139, 140; the Periplus of Hanno, 140,
141; the testimony of the Landers on the depravity of native
Africans, 142 to 144; the Landers made slaves, 145; various
historical authorities on African and Moorish slavery, 145 to 155.

LESSON XV.—Authorities to prove African degradation continued, 155 to
158; slavery subservient to the religious conversion of African
slaves, 159, 160.

LESSON XVI.—Paul’s exhortations to slaves considered, 161, 162; God’s
sentence of four hundred years of slavery upon the Hebrews, 163.

LESSON XVII.—The assertion of Barnes, that a slave bought with money had
compensation commanded to be paid him by Scripture, controverted,
163, 164; Barnes’s declaration of the cunning of the Apostles in not
condemning slavery, 165, 166.

LESSON XVIII.—Argument that the injunctions of the Bible upon God’s
ancient people are in force and equally binding upon Christians now,
(Christians are the heirs of Abraham,) 160 to 169.

LESSON XIX.—Authorities quoted by Barnes, 169; numerous quotations from
Barnes on slavery, 170 to 174.

LESSON XX.—Wayland’s assertion, that, if the New Testament authorized
slavery, it would be the greatest of curses, adopted by Barnes, 174
to 176.

STUDY III.

LESSON I.—Works of Rev. Dr. Channing—his opinion that the worst errors
may arise from religious tendencies, 177, 178.

LESSON II.—Channing’s seven arguments, that a man cannot be held as
property, examined, 178, 179; his doctrine of conscience and
indestructible rights, 180 to 182.

LESSON III.—Examination of Channing’s seven arguments continued, 183 to
188.

LESSON IV.—That slavery, disease, and death are necessary effects of sin
proved by the chapter of curses, (Deut. xxviii.,) 188 to 193;
Channing’s standard of feeling or sense of duty controverted, 194,
195.

LESSON V.—Channing’s theory of man’s rights and his consciousness
examined, 195, 196; argument that slavery is the best condition for
the African race, 197 to 200; criticism on Channing’s use of the
words nature, conscience, law of nature, &c., 200 to 204.

LESSON VI.—Channing’s position, that the debasement of African slavery
arises from the enslavement of the race in America, controverted,
204 to 206; its influence on the master race, 206, 207.

LESSON VII.—Channing’s views of slavery, as conducive to licentiousness
and unrestrained cohabitation between masters and female slaves,
examined, 207 to 211; his views of the quality and brotherhood of
the races, 212 to 214.

LESSON VIII.—Channing on the relative productiveness of free and slave
labour, 215; his opinion that the admission of slave territory was
just cause for the dissolution of the Union, 217, 218; his deference
to the opinion of Europe, 218; labour and capital, the political
influence of slavery, 219 to 221.

LESSON IX.—Channing’s views of the scriptural argument in favour of
slavery overthrown, by a parallel between slavery and polygamy, 222
to 230.

LESSON X.—Channing adopting and endorsing Paley’s slander on the
integrity of Paul, 230 to 232.

LESSON XI.—Channing’s plan of emancipation and inflammatory counsels to
the free States, 232 to 235.

LESSON XII.—The zeal of abolitionism not according to knowledge, 235,
236; Channing’s opinion that the negro is one of the best races of
the human family, 237; Channing on West India emancipation and
Southern character, 237 to 239.

LESSON XIII.—Sympathy for those suffering punishment from God, for sin,
considered, 239 to 241; the deterioration of sin the inevitable
cause of slavery, 241 to 243.

LESSON XIV.—God’s government of the universe, and his declaration of the
right of man’s property in man, 243 to 246; God’s blessing on the
slave-owners, 247, 248.

LESSON XV.—Ham’s intermarriage with the race of Cain the cause of his
doom and that of his seed to perpetual servitude, 248 to 250; God
never entails a curse without sufficient cause, 250, 251; the mark
on Cain, 252 to 255.

STUDY IV.

LESSON I.—Extracts from Bower, 256; the Treuga Dei, 257, 258; Bishop
England quoted on the action and records of the Church, 259, 260.

LESSON II.—Establishment of Christianity by law, by Constantine, and the
rise of Mohammedanism, 261, 262; the schism of the Greek Church,
263, 264.

LESSON III.—Nature swarming with life, and life merging in distress and
death, 264, 265; sin the cause of slavery, and the latter as a
protection, 266, 267; slavery in China, 269.

LESSON IV.—Liberty of less value than life, 270; the Divine grant to
hold slaves, 271.

LESSON V.—Early church acts and documents approving and providing for
slavery, 272; the canons and the constitutions of the apostles, 272
to 274; constitution of Antoninus Pius respecting cruelty to slaves,
275; canons of the Council of Nice and the first appearance of
abolitionism in the world, 276, 277; St. Basil’s canonical writings,
278.

LESSON VI.—The invasion of Attila and the Pontiff Leo’s successful
intercession, 279, 280; Nero’s African slaves, and the white slaves
of the Roman Empire, 281.

LESSON VII.—Church rescripts for the freedom of slaves, and St.
Augustin’s mode of manumission in Africa, 282, 283; Pope Leo’s
letters, forbidding slaves to enter the priesthood, and protecting
the rights of masters, 284, 285; barbarian cruelty to slaves
ameliorated by Christianity, 286, 287; canons of the Council of
Agdle on slavery, 288; modes of becoming slaves, 289, 290.

LESSON VIII.—Muratori on the manumission of slaves in Rome, 291;
colonial and conditional slaves, 292; arming of slaves in defence of
Rome and the glutting of the slave-markets of the world, 293; canons
of the Fourth Council of Orleans, 294, 295; ditto Fifth Council of
Orleans, 296 to 299.

LESSON IX.—Bishop England’s account of slavery in England and Ireland in
remote ages, 299, 300; Pope Pelagius and the canons of the Third
Councils of Paris and Braga, 301, 302; articles of the Third Council
of Toledo, 302, 303.

LESSON X.—The venerable Bede’s account of the slave-trade of England,
A.D. 577, 304 to 306; Pope Gregory’s purchase of British youth, 306,
307; Gregory’s pastoral admonitions and epistles, 308 to 311.

LESSON XI.—Constantine’s edict that none but Christians could hold
slaves, 212, 213; Gregory’s letter to the Præfect of Sicily, 313 to
315; canons of the Fourth Councils of Orleans and Macon, 315, 316;
Gregory to the Bishop of Luna, and the laws of the empire on
slavery, 317, 318.

LESSON XII.—Gregory to the Bishop of Naples, 319, 320; the same to the
Bishop of Catania, 321.

LESSON XIII.—Justinian’s law to protect debtors against slavery, 323;
Gregory’s letters about a Syrian deeply in debt, 322; his letter of
emancipation to Montana and Thomas, 324, 325; Justinian’s law of
marriage between slaves and persons on different estates, 327, 328;
Gregory’s letter on the same subject, 329; his letter to the Bishop
of Syracuse on the same, 330, 331.

LESSON XIV.—Gregory’s deed of gift conveying the slave boy Acorimus to
Theodore the counsellor, 331, 332; his letter about a slave to the
Proctor Bonitus, 333: his document to reclaim runaway slaves, 333,
334; his various letters concerning slaves and the purchase of
Barbary slaves, 334 to 336.

LESSON XV.—Canons of the Councils of Toledo and Saragossa, 336 to 339;
laws of Ina, king of the West Saxons, and the judgments of Withred,
340 to 343.

LESSON XVI.—The canons of Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, King
Pepin, Council of Bavaria, Pope Adrian and Charlemagne, 343 to 349;
canon of the Council of Frankfort, 349, 350.

LESSON XVII.—Laws of Charlemagne on slavery, 350 to 353; canons of the
Council of Aix-la-Chapelle, 353; capitulary of the Emperor
Lotharius, 353 to 355.

LESSON XVIII.—Unconnected facts bearing on ancient slavery; prostitutes
made slaves; Sclavonian bondage; persecution of the Knights
Templars, 355 to 360.

LESSON XIX.—Derivation of the word _war_; Divine authority for wars, 361
to 365; the church claiming the right to declare offensive war under
two circumstances, 365; bull of Pope Gregory XI. against the
Florentines, 366, 367; Papal bulls against the Venitians and Henry
VIII. of England, 367 to 369; the American colonies at New Haven
decreeing the Indian tribes to slavery, 369, 370.

LESSON XX.—Ancient piracy and pirates, 370, 371; rise of the Vandals,
Goths, Huns, and Tartars, 372; the Northmen, 373 to 379.

LESSON XXI.—Condition of slavery in Europe, 379 to 381.

LESSON XXII.—Origin of the Sclavonians, 381; the descent of the Arabs
and Moors, 383, 384.

LESSON XXIII.—Africans generally slaves in their native country, 384;
African slavery to the Shemitic races foretold by prophecy, 385,
386; sketch of the life, doctrines, and conquests of Mohammed and
his successors, 386 to 390.

LESSON XXIV.—Slavery introduced into the world as a mercy in favour of
life, 390; duty and interest combine to incite the master to promote
religion and good morals in the slave, 391; slavery commanded by
reason and the laws of nature, 392.

STUDY V.

LESSON I.—Faith and observance of facts in the moral world the true
modes of learning God’s will, 393.

LESSON II.—The works of creation proofs of the Creator, 394 to 398.

LESSON III.—The question of the admission of evil into the economy of
God’s government on earth, and a denial that all men are born
equals, 398, 399; the five races of the human family, and the moral
necessity of command in some and subordination in others, 399 to
402.

LESSON IV.—Intellect correspondent to organization, 403; inquiry into
the nature of instinct by various philosophers, 403 to 405;
inexorable inequality of human condition in this world and the next,
406 to 408.

LESSON V.—The moral duty of loving our species defined, 409.

LESSON VI.—Men not equal physically, religiously, mentally, morally, or
politically, 410.

LESSON VII.—Justice and the rules of Christianity identical and
inseparable, 411, 412.

LESSON VIII.-The golden rule considered in relation to slavery, 413 to
416.

LESSON IX.—The unchangeableness of God, and human misery caused by a
general rebellion against his laws, 417 to 420.

LESSON X.—Christianity incompatible with savage life, 420, 421.

LESSON XI.—Gradation in intellect and condition no impediment to
Christianity, 421.

LESSON XII.—Christianity and slavery not antagonistic, 422.

LESSON XIII.—Christian humility inculcated, 423.

LESSON XIV.—The radiance of Christian hope equalizes all variety of
condition, 423, 424; sketch of the slave’s prospect of immortal
happiness, 426 to 428.

LESSON XV.—The feebleness of finite conceptions of infinity, 428, 429;
hope for the submissive, 430, 431; the requirement of God that the
strong should protect the weak, 432.

STUDY VI.

LESSON I.—Nature of sin; the primal transgression, 433, 434.

LESSON II.—The occupation and doom of Cain, 435, 436.

LESSON III.—The mark upon Cain, Mohammedan traditions, 437, 438;
proof-texts from Scripture, 439, 440.

LESSON IV.—The punishment of Cain did not lead him to reformation, 440;
Asiatic hyperbole in description, 441, 442.

LESSON V.—The cause of Cain’s degradation renewed upon Canaan, and his
masters named, 442, 443.

LESSON VI.—Proofs that the descendants of Ham inherited the curse of
Cain, and were black, as also were the Canaanites whom God’s chosen
people either exterminated or enslaved, 443 to 447.

LESSON VII.—The negro lineage of Ham established, 447 to 451.

LESSON VIII.—Signification of the name “Naamah” in Hebrew and Arabic,
451 to 455.

LESSON IX.—Variations in different languages of the names of Cain and
Naamah, also of other remarkable words, 456 to 458.

LESSON X.—The names and derivatives of the words Cain and Naamah found
only among the descendants of Ham, 459 to 464.

LESSON XI.—Proofs scriptural and historical that the descendants of Ham
were black, 464 to 470.

LESSON XII.—Biblical proofs that the Canaanites were black, 471 to 473.

LESSON XIII.—Scriptural testimony respecting the colour of the races of
the human family, 473 to 477.

LESSON XIV.—Jewish wars against the Ethiopian race; the Philistines
black, 478, 479; the origin of these wars the animosity between the
Shemitic and Hamitic races, 480; difference in the structure of the
bones and the hair between the antagonist races, 481; intermarriage
with the Hamitic by the Shemitic race a cause of God’s anger, 482;
the dispersion of the Canaanites by the Jewish conquest of
Palestine, 482.

LESSON XV.—Derivation and train of thought connected with the word Ham
in the Shemitic languages, 483 to 487; the Hebrew personal pronoun,
488 to 491; origin of the word Ethiopian, 493 to 495.

LESSON XVI.—Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, and Coptic derivations of the word
Ham, 495 to 502.

LESSON XVII.—Exegesis of the thirty-third chapter of Ecclesiasticus, 502
to 503; the providence of God manifested in placing deteriorated
races under the control of races less debased, 504, 505.

STUDY VII.

LESSON I.—Critical examination into the meaning of the Greek word
δουλος, _doulos_, _slave_, as used both by the sacred and classical
writers, 506.

LESSON II.—Abolition denunciation of the Bible, 507, 508; tendency to
mystery in the human mind; the God of Abraham and Moses, who gave
command how to treat slaves, to be trustingly worshipped, 508, 509.

LESSON III.—The meaning of δουλος as used by the Greek poets, 510;
Valckenaerus on the phonetic relation of Greek words to their
derivative, 511 to 514; the argument that δουλος could not have
meant an unconditional slave, refuted, 515, 516.

LESSON IV.—Extracts from Grecian historians, philosophers, and poets,
showing the classical sense in which they used the word δουλος and
its derivatives, 516 to 536.

LESSON V.—The use of the word δουλος by Thucydides, Herodotus, and
Xenophon, 536 to 546.

LESSON VI.—Extracts from Xenophon continued, 546 to 549.

LESSON VII.—Extracts from Xenophon’s Cyropædia, 549 to 554.

LESSON VIII.—Extracts from Herodotus of Halicarnassus, 554 to 558.

LESSON IX.—The Scriptural use of the word δουλος, 559 to 561.

LESSON X.—Scriptural extracts continued, 562 to 564.

LESSON XI.—The Greek word signifying _slave-stealers_ in 1 Tim. i. 5 to
11, 564 to 566; quotation from Xenophon in proof, 566; the appeal of
Mr. Barnes to the Dutch, 567; Greek words from _freeman_ and
_slave_, 568.

LESSON XII.—Paul on slave stealing, 569 to 572.

LESSON XIII.—Reasons for Paul’s instructions to Timothy and to Christian
slaves respecting slave-stealing and the duties of the servile
condition, 572 to 575.

LESSON XIV.—The use of the word δουλος by Jesus Christ, 576, 577.

LESSON XV.—Use of the word δουλος by Paul, Peter, Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John, 578 to 581.

LESSON XVI.—Origin of the English word _servant_ and its derivatives,
581; its use by the sacred writers and Grecian scholars, 582 to 585.

STUDY VIII.

LESSON I.—Hebrew orthography of the word by which we mean _slave_, 586
to 588; the corresponding word in the Arabic, Chaldaic, and Syriac
languages, 588 to 590.

LESSON II.—Tendency of the Shemitic languages to the rhetorical figure
prosopopœia, 590 to 594.

LESSON III.—Examples of the Hebrew word meaning _slave_, both as a noun
and a verb, 595 to 601.

LESSON IV.—Refutation of the assertion that the root of the Hebrew word
meaning _slave_ is also used in a sense signifying _worship_, 602 to
607.

LESSON V.—Further quotations from the sacred writers, showing the
meaning attached to the Hebrew word signifying _slave_ in the Old
Testament, 607 to 609.

LESSON VI.—Quotations from the sacred authors of the use of the Hebrew
verb signifying _to slave_, or _to be slaves_ to, 610, 611; identity
of welfare and interest between the slave and his master, 612, 613.

LESSON VII.—The two distinct eras in the Hebrew language; its
approximation to the Chaldaic and Persian in the second era, 613 to
615.

LESSON VIII.—Meaning attached to the Hebrew word signifying _slave_ by
Ezra, Nehemiah, Jeremiah, and other prophets, 616 to 618.

LESSON IX.—The use of the Hebrew word meaning slave in the book of
Genesis, and extract from the Rev. J.B. Stratton’s letter to the
author on the same, 618 to 620; the word _Eden_ in the Arabic, 620,
621; the Hebrew word meaning _tilleth_, 622.

LESSON X.—The laws of Moses in Deuteronomy respecting slavery, 623.

LESSON XI.—The Hebrew use of the word meaning _slaves_ in Samuel, and
many other books of the Bible, 624 to 627.

LESSON XII.—Declension of the Hebrew noun meaning _slave_, and the
conjugation and paradigms of the Hebrew verb signifying _to slave_,
628 to 637.

------------------------------------

STUDIES ON SLAVERY.

------------------------------------

Study I.

------------------

LESSON I.

“_The Elements of Moral Science: By_ FRANCIS WAYLAND, D.D., _President
of Brown University, and Professor of Moral Philosophy. Fortieth
Thousand. Boston, 1849._” Pp. 396.

THIS author informs us that he has been many years preparing the work, with a view to furnish his pupils with a text-book free from the errors of Paley. Like Paley, whom he evidently wishes to supersede, he has devoted a portion of his strength to the abolition of slavery. We propose to look into the book with an eye to that subject alone. President Wayland says:

P. 24. “Moral Law is a form of expression denoting an order of sequence established between the moral quality of actions and their results.”

Pp. 25, 26. “An order of sequence established, supposes, of necessity, an Establisher. Hence Moral Philosophy, as well as every other science, proceeds upon the supposition of the existence of a Universal Cause, the Creator of all things, who has made every thing as it is, and who has subjected all things to the relations which they sustain. And hence, as all relations, whether moral or physical, are the result of his enactment, an order of sequence once discovered in morals, is just as inviolable as an order of sequence in physics.

“Such being the fact, it is evident that the moral laws of God can never be varied by the institutions of man, any more than the physical laws. The results which God has connected with actions will inevitably occur, all the created power in the universe to the contrary notwithstanding.

“Yet men have always flattered themselves with the hope that they could violate the moral law and escape the consequences which God has established. The reason is obvious. In physics, the consequent follows the antecedent, often immediately, and most commonly after a stated and well-known interval. In morals, the result is frequently long delayed; the time of its occurrence is always uncertain:—Hence, ‘because the sentence against an evil work is not _speedily_ executed, therefore the hearts of the sons of men are fully set in them to do evil.’ But time, whether long or short, has neither _power_ nor _tendency_ to change the order of an established sequence. The time required for vegetation, in different orders of plants, may vary; but, yet, wheat will always produce wheat, and an acorn will always produce an oak. That such is the case in morals, a heathen poet has taught us. ‘_Raro, antecedentum scelestum deseruit pede pœna claudo_.’ HOR. lib. iii. car. 2.

“A higher authority has admonished us, ‘Be not deceived; God is not mocked; whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he reap.’ It is also to be remembered, that, in morals as well as in physics, the harvest is always more abundant than the seed from which it springs.”

To this doctrine we yield the highest approval.

The first obvious deduction from the lesson here advanced is, that the laws of God, as once revealed to man, never lose their high moral qualities nor their divine character, at any subsequent age of the world. The law, which God delivered to Moses from Mount Sinai, authorizing his chosen people to buy slaves, and hold them as an inheritance for their children after them, is, therefore, the law of God now. The action of the law may be suspended at a particular time or place, from a change of contingencies,—yet the law stands unaffected.

We hope no one doubts the accuracy of the doctrine thus fairly stated in these “Elements.” But we shall see how fatal it is to some portions of the author’s positions concerning slavery. And we propose to show how this doctrine, as connected with slavery, has been, and is elucidated in scripture. The twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy shows that the fruits of wickedness are all manner of curses, finally terminating in slavery or death.

Here, slavery, as a threatened punishment, distinctly looks back to a course of wickedness for its antecedent. The same idea is spread through the whole Scriptures: “Whosoever committeth sin, is the _servant_ of sin.” _John_ viii. 34. “I am carnal, sold under sin.” _Rom._ vii. 14. “Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves.” _Isa._ 1. 1. See, also, _Jer._ xiii. 22.

The biblical scholar will recollect a multitude of instances where this doctrine is clearly advanced, recognising sin as the antecedent of slavery.

Abraham was obedient to the voice of God. His conduct was the antecedent and the consequent was, God heaped upon him many blessings and among them, riches in various things,—“_male and female slaves_,” some of whom were “_born in his house_,” and some “_bought with his money_;” and God made a covenant with him, granting him, and his seed after him, the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession.

But this gift, as is the continuance of all other blessings, was accompanied with a condition, which is well explained in _Genesis_, xviii. 19: “For I know him, that he will command his children and _his household_ after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.”

Scholars will concede the fact that “_his household_” is a term by which his slaves are particularly included, over whom his government was extended; and, without its proper maintenance, the covenant so far on his part would be broken.

From the wording of the covenant it is evident that Abraham had slaves before the covenant was made, since it embraced regulations concerning slaves, but, in no instance, hints that the existence of slavery was adverse to the law of God, or that the holding of slaves, as slaves, was contrary to his will. The deduction is, that slavery exists in the world by Divine appointment; and that the act of owning slaves is in conformity with the moral law.

The doctrine, that sin is the antecedent of slavery, is further elucidated and made still more manifest by the recognition of the institution by the biblical writers, where they place sin and slavery in opposition to holiness and freedom:—thus, figuratively, making righteousness the antecedent of freedom. “Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” _Gal._ v. 1. “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” _John_ iii. 32.

The abuse of slavery, like the abuse of any thing else, is doubtless a great sin. Of the blessings God bestows on man, there is perhaps no one he does not abuse; and while we examine the laws of God, as presenting to the mind the vast field of cause and effect,—of antecedent and consequent,—we may be led to a reflection on the necessity of a conformity thereto, lest a long continuance of such abuses shall become the antecedent to future calamities and woes, either to ourselves or posterity; woes and calamities prefigured by those nations and tribes already under the infliction of slavery, as a just punishment of sin.

Thus far, we thank the Rev. Dr. Wayland for this fair _exposé_ of his views of the moral law of God; and if he will apply them now to the institution of slavery,—if he will unfetter his intellect from the manacles imposed on it by a defective education on that subject, and cut himself loose from the prejudices that his associations have gathered around him, we may yet have occasion to rejoice over him as one once an estray from the fold of truth, but now returned, “sitting in his right mind and clothed.” And will not Mr. Fuller and Professor Taylor rejoice with us!

------------------

LESSON II.

In those “Elements of Moral Science,” we find the following, p. 29:

“From what has been said, it may be seen that there exists, in the actions of men, an element which does not exist in the actions of brutes * * * * * * We can operate upon brutes only by fear of punishment, and hope of reward. We can operate upon man, not only in this manner, but also by an appeal to his consciousness of right and wrong; and by such means as may improve his moral nature. Hence, all modes of punishment, which treat men as we treat brutes, are as unphilosophical as they are thoughtless, cruel, and vindictive. Such are those systems of criminal jurisprudence which have in view nothing more than the infliction of pain upon the offender.”

It was unnecessary to inform us that man possesses higher mental endowments than the brute. But the main object of the author in the foregoing paragraph is his deduction; that, because we can operate on man by an appeal to his consciousness of right and wrong, therefore any other mode of governing him is wrong. This _consequent_ we fail to perceive. We also fail in the perception that his postulate is universally true: which we think should have been proved before he can claim assent to the deduction. If this our view be correct, we beg the reverend author to reflect how far he may have made himself obnoxious to the charge of sophistry!

If President Wayland intends, by the clause,—“and by such means as may improve his moral nature,”—to include _corporeal punishment_, then his mind was unprepared to grapple with the subject; for, in that case, the whole paragraph is obscure, without object, and senseless. We most readily agree that to govern man by appeals to his consciousness of right and wrong is highly proper where the mind is so well cultivated that no other government is required.

But, however unhappy may be the reflection, too large a proportion of the human family will not fall within that class. How often do we see among men, otherwise having some claim to be classed with the intelligent, those of acknowledged bad habits; habits which directly force the sufferer downward to poverty, disgrace, disease, imbecility, and death,—on whom argument addressed to their “consciousness of right and wrong,” “is water spilled on the ground.”

Children, whose ancestors have, for ages, ranked among the highly cultivated of the earth,—each generation surpassing its predecessor in knowledge, in science, and religion,—have been found to degenerate, oftener than otherwise, when trained solely by arguments addressed to their reason, and unaccompanied by physical compulsion.

What then are we to expect from man in a savage state, whose ancestors have been degenerating from generation to generation, through untold ages,—him, who has scarcely a feeling in common with civilized man, except such as is common to the mere animal,—him, whom deteriorating causes have reduced to the lowest grade above the brute?

Domberger spent twelve years in passing through the central parts of Africa, from north to south. He found the negroes, in a large district of country, in a state of total brutality. Their habits were those only of the wild brutes. They had no fixed residences. They lay down wherever they might be when disposed to sleep. They were not more gregarious than the wild goats. So far as he could discover, they had not a language even, by which to hold intercourse with each other. They possessed no power by which they were enabled to exhibit moral degradation, any more than the wild beasts.

Hanno, the Carthaginian navigator, in his Periplus, eight hundred years before the birth of Christ, gives a similar account of a race he calls Gætuli.

It is possible that man, in these extreme cases, where there is very little to unlearn, might sooner be regenerated, elevated to civilization, physical and mental power, than in other cases where there may be far more proof of mental capacity, but where the worst of intellectual and physical habits have stained soul and body with, perhaps, a more indelible degradation.

It would be a curious experiment, and add much to our knowledge of the races of man, to ascertain how many generations, under the most favourable treatment, it would require to produce an equal to Moses, or a David, a Newton, or the learned Dr. Wayland himself, (if such be possible,) from these specimens of man presented before us! And we now inquire, what course of treatment will you propose, as the most practical, to elevate such a race to civilization?

It appears to us God has decided that slavery is the most effectual.

“Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge.” _Isa._ v. 13. “And they forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashteroth. And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he delivered them into the hands of the spoilers that spoiled them, and he _sold_ them into the hands of their enemies round about.” _Judg._ ii. 13, 14. See also, iii. 6–8. “If his children forsake my law and walk not in my judgments: if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments: then will I visit their transgressions with the rod and their iniquity with stripes.” _Ps._ lxxxviii. 30–32. “He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be the servant (עֶבֶד _ebed_, _slave_) to the wise of heart.” _Prov._ ii. 29. “And her daughters shall go into captivity. Thus will I execute judgments in Egypt: and they shall know that I _am_ the Lord.” _Ezek._ xxx. 18. _See also the preceding part of the chapter._

It is highly probable that among savage tribes, punishment and the infliction of pain are often applied with no higher view than to torture the object of displeasure. But to us it seems remarkably unfortunate, in a student of moral and civil jurisprudence, to suggest that legal punishment, among civilized men, is ever awarded or ordered with any such feeling. If our education has given us a correct view of the subject, the man who inflicts pain even on the brute, solely on the account of such a feeling, instantly, so far as it is known, sinks to the grade of a savage; and much more explicitly when the object of revenge is his fellow man. On the contrary, when “the offender” has given unquestionable evidence of a depravity too deeply seated for any hope of regeneration, and the law orders his death, it selects that mode of execution which inflicts the least suffering, and which shall have also the greatest probable influence to deter others who may be downward bound in the road of moral deterioration. There never has been a code of laws among civilized nations, where the object of punishment was to inflict pain on the implicated; only so far as was thought necessary to influence a change of action for the better. The object of punishment invariably has been the improvement of society.

If the Rev. Dr. Wayland had been teaching legislation to savages, or, perhaps, their immediate descendants, his remarks, to which we allude, might have been in place. But may we inquire to what cause are _we_ indebted for them?

Permit us to inquire of the Doctor, where now are to be found the “systems of criminal jurisprudence” to which he alludes? Does he imagine that such system has some _likeness_ to the government of the civilized man over his slave? Or, in their government, does he propose to abolish corporeal punishment, because he may think that will destroy the institution itself? For “a servant (עָ֑בֶד _abed_, _a slave_) though he understand, he will not answer.” _Prov._ xxix. 19.

We cannot pass over the paragraph we have quoted, without expressing the most bitter regret to learn from Dr. Wayland’s own words, that he recognises the fact, without giving it reproval, that “we” punish “brutes” with no other view than to inflict pain. To _us_, such an idea is most repugnant and awful! And we hope—we pray Him who alone hath power to drag up from the deep darkness of degradation, that the minds of such men may be placed under the controlling influence of a rule that will compel to a higher sense of what is proper, and to a more clear perception of what is truth!

------------------

LESSON III.

The learned Doctor says:

P. 49. “By conscience, or moral sense, is meant that faculty by which we discern the moral quality of actions, and by which we are capable of certain affections in respect to this quality.

“By _faculty_ is meant _any particular part_ of our constitution, by which we become affected by the various qualities and relations of beings around us?” * * * “Now, that we do actually observe a moral quality in the actions of men, must, I think, be admitted. Every human being is conscious, that, from childhood, he has observed it.” * * * * *

P. 50. “The question would then seem reduced to this: Do we perceive this quality of actions by a single faculty, or by a combination of faculties? I think it must be evident from what has been already stated, that this is, in its nature, simple and ultimate, and _distinct from every other notion_.

“Now, if this be the case, it seems self-evident that we must have a _distinct_ and _separate faculty_, to make us acquainted with the existence of this _distinct_ and _separate quality_.”

And for proof, he adds: “This is the case in respect to all other distinct qualities: it is, surely, reasonable to suppose, that it would be the case in this.”

What! have we a distinct faculty by which we determine one thing to be red, and another distinct faculty by which we discover a thing to be black; another distinct faculty by which we judge a thing to be a cube, and another distinct faculty by which we determine it to be a triangle? Have we one distinct faculty by which we find a melon, and another by which we find a gourd? What! one distinct faculty by which we determine a professor of moral philosophy to be a correct teacher, and another by which we discover him to be a visionary?

This faculty of _moral sense_ puts us in mind of Dr. Testy’s description of the peculiar and distinct particles upon the tongue, which render a man a liar, a lunatic, or a linguist; a treacher, a tattler, or a teacher, and so on. His theory is that every mental and moral quality of a man has its distinct particle, or little pimple, upon the tongue, whereby the quality is developed; or, by the aid of which the man is enabled to make the quality manifest. Long practice in examining the tongues of sick people enabled him, he says, to make the discovery. We should like to know what acuminated elevation of the cuticle of the tongue represented “conscience or moral sense,” as a separate and distinct faculty!

Why does he not at once borrow support from the extravagancies of phrenology, and assert, according to the notions of its teachers, that, since the brain is divided into distinct organs for the exercise of each distinct faculty, therefore there must be a distinct faculty for the conception of each idea? There is surely an evident relation between this theory of the author and the doctrines of Gall; nor will the world fail to associate it with the phantasies of Mesmer.

But we ask the author and his pupils to apply to this theory the truism of Professor Dodd: “It is, at all times, a sufficient refutation of what purports to be a statement of facts, to show that the only kind of evidence by which the facts could possibly be sustained, does not exist.”

The theory by which the Doctor arrives at the conclusion that we possess a separate and distinct faculty for the perception of each separate and distinct quality, assimilates to that of a certain quack, who asserted that the human stomach was _mapped_ off, like Gall’s cranium, into distinct organs of digestion; one solely for beef-steak, one for mutton-chops, and another for plum-pudding!

It is a great point with certain of the higher class of abolition writers to establish the doctrine that man possesses a distinct mental power, which they call _conscience_, or _moral sense_, by which he is enabled to discover, of himself, and without the aid of study, teaching, or even inspiration, what is right and what is wrong.

The practice is, the child is taught by them that slavery is very wicked; that no slaveholder can be a good man; and much of such matter. Books are put into the hands of the schoolboy and the youth, inculcating similar lessons, fraught with lamentation and sympathy for the imaginary woes of the slave, and hatred and disgust towards the master; and when maturer years are his, he is asked if he does not feel that slavery is very wicked; and the professors of moral philosophy then inform him that he feels so because he possesses “a distinct mental faculty”—distinct from the judgment—which teaches those who cultivate it, infallibly, all that is right and wrong; that this conscience, or moral sense, is more to be relied on than the Bible—than the ancient inspirations of God!

Hence, Channing says:

“That same inward principle, which teaches a man what he is bound to do to others, teaches equally, and at the same instant, what others are bound to do to him.” * * * “His _conscience_, in revealing the moral law, does not reveal a law for himself only, but speaks as a universal legislator.” * * * “There is no deeper principle in human nature than the consciousness of right.” Vol. ii. p. 33.

And Barnes, on Slavery, says:

P. 381. “If the Bible could be shown to defend and countenance slavery as a good institution, it would make thousands of infidels; for there are multitudes of minds that will see more clearly that slavery is against all the laws which God has written on the human soul, than they would see, that a book, sanctioning such a system, had evidence of Divine origin.”

And this same author makes Dr. Wayland say:

P. 310. “Well may we ask, in the words of Dr. Wayland, (pp. 83, 84,) whether there was ever such a moral superstructure raised on such a foundation? The doctrine of purgatory from a verse of Maccabees; the doctrine of papacy from the saying of Christ to Peter; the establishment of the Inquisition from the obligation to extend the knowledge of religious truth, all seem nothing to it. If the religion of Christ allows such a license from such precepts as these, the New Testament would be the greatest curse that ever was inflicted on our race.”

This book, as quoted by Barnes, we have not seen.

Such is the doctrine of these theologians, growing out of the possession, as they imagine, of this _distinct moral faculty_, infallibly teaching them the truth touching the moral quality of the actions of men. And what is its effect upon their scarcely more wicked pupils? One of them, in a late speech in Congress, says:

“Sir, I must express the most energetic dissent from those who would justify modern slavery from the Levitical law. My _reason_ and _conscience_ revolt from those interpretations which

Torture the hallowed pages of the Bible,
To sanction crime, and robbery, and blood,
And, in oppression’s hateful service, libel
‘Both man and God!’”

The ignorant fanaticism, so proudly buoyant even in repose upon its ill-digested reason,—here so flippantly uttered,—to us bespeaks a dangerous man, (as far as he may have capacity,) in whatever station he may be found. The most hateful idolatry has never presented to the world a stronger proof of a distorted imagination giving vent to the rankest falsehood. It is to be deeply regretted that such intellects are ever permitted to have any influence upon the minds of the young. We deem it would be a fearful inquiry, to examine how far the strange assassinations, lately so common at the North, have been the direct result of that mental training of which we here see an example. We fear too little is thought of the quick transition from this erroneous theology to the darkened paths of man when enlightened alone by his own depraved heart.

The saying is true, however awful: He who rejects or dispels the plain meaning of the Bible, rejects our God, and is an idolater; and God alone can give bound to his wicked conceptions.

The foregoing extracts show us a specimen of the arguments and conclusions emanating from the doctrine that the conscience is a distinct mental power, and that it infallibly teaches what is right before God. We deem it quite objectionable—quite erroneous!

We present the proposition: The judgment is as singly employed in the decision of what is right and wrong, as it is in the conclusion that all the parts of a thing constitute the whole of it. True, the judgment, when in the exercise of determining what is right and wrong in regard to our own acts, has been named _conscience_. But it remains for that class of philosophers, who argue that man possesses a faculty of _clairvoyance_, to establish that man has also a sister faculty, which they call _conscience_, or _moral sense_; and that it exists as an independent mental power, distinct from judgment.

* * * * *

Most men live without reflection. They think of nothing but the objects of sense, of pressing want, and the means of relief. The wonderful works of nature create no wonder. A mine of sea-shells on the Andes excites no surprise. Of the analogies or dissimilarities between things, or their essential relations, the mind takes no notice. Even their intellectual powers exist almost without their cognisance. Their mental faculties are little improved or cultivated; and, as they are forced to the Gazetteer for the description of some distant locality, so they would be to their logic, before they could speak of their own mental functions.

The teaching of this doctrine, untrue as it is, may, therefore, be very harmful; as ill-informed individuals often form a very erroneous judgment about right and wrong, and, under the influence of its teachings, may come to think and believe that their conclusion concerning right and wrong is the product of their infallible guide, the _conscience_, or _moral sense_, and therefore past all doubt and beyond question; that their minds are under the influence and control of a _new_ and _spiritually higher law_ than the law of the land, or even the moral law as laid down in the Bible, when not in unison with their feelings. And we venture to prophesy, in case this doctrine shall gain general credence, that such will be the rocks on which multitudes will founder; for simple and ill-informed people may thus be led, and doubtless are, to do very wicked and mischievous acts, under the influence of this belief—a belief of their possessing this power, which no one ever did possess, unless inspired.