Forgot your password?
New user?
Document Actions
The Anti-Slavery History of the John Brown Year (HTML)
THE
ANTI-SLAVERY HISTORY
OF THE
JOHN-BROWN YEAR;
BEING THE
TWENTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE AMERICAN
ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY.
-------------------
NEW YORK:
AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY,
No. 5, BEEKMAN STREET.
1861.
ANNUAL REPORT
OF THE
American Anti-Slavery Society,
BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE,
FOR THE
YEAR ENDING MAY 1,1860.
NEW YORK:
AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY,
No. 5, BeekmanStreet.
1861.
BOSTON:
PRINTED BY PRENTISS AND DELAND,
No. 40, CONGRESS STREET.
[unnumbered blank page]
REPORT FOR 1859-60.
____________
Another year having reached its close, the Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society, according to their custom, present, with their account of the doings of the Society, a brief sketch of such noteworthy events of the past year as belong to the history of the Anti-Slavery movement.
kansas.
Our last Report mentioned the steps which the people of Kansas were then contemplating, to bring themselves regularly before Congress for admission to the Union. These have since been successively taken, as arranged at the last previous session of the Territorial Legislature. On the 6th of June delegates were chosen to meet in Convention, and frame a Constitution. The contest, at this election, was not, as heretofore, between Free-State men and avowed Pro-Slavery men; the Free-State sentiment being now so decisively in the ascendant as to leave no hope for open opposition to it; so parties fell into the same division as in the country at large, and took the same names,— Democrats and Republicans. The latter prevailed, choosing thirty-five of the fifty-two delegates, or more than two-thirds of the whole Convention. The Convention met at Wyandotte, on the 5th of July, and, after finishing its work to the acceptance of the great majority of its constituents, adjourned without day, on the 29th. The Constitution which it framed, is substantially the old Topeka Free-State Constitution. It provides that “there shall be no slavery in the State, and no involuntary
[page 4]
servitude, unless for the punishment of crime;that "the right of trial by jury shall be inviolate, and extend to persons of every condition;"—words evidently intended to include persons claimed as Fugitive Slaves; — and that "no citizen of the State shall be held to appear before the Supreme Court of the United States on an appeal from the Supreme Court of the State, but when appeals are taken on questions of interstate law, they shall only be through or from District Courts of the United States." The design of this last-mentioned provision, no doubt, is to put the State on the same ground which Wisconsin is understood to occupy, in relation to State Rights, and the independence and supremacy of the Judiciary of the State within its own boundaries. So far, the leaning of the new Constitution is in favor of Freedom. But in another particular that Republican majority of more than two to one, strong enough to do, if it would, whatsoever was right in its own eyes, had either too much prejudice, or too little courage and manliness to deal justly with the weak. It denied to colored men the right of suffrage. The Democratic minority signalized its truth to party instincts by a still baser proposition. One of its members introduced, and the rest, with several Republicans, voted for, a resolution that a Committee be appointed "to inquire into the expediency" of forbidding "negroes and mulattoes" to come into the State, making void all contracts with any who shall come in, subjecting to a fine of from twenty to five hundred dollars any person employing them, or otherWise encouraging them to remain, and appropriating the fines to the colonization of such of those already in, as may be willing to emigrate. Of course we can feel no surprise at such a proposition from such a source; rather have we to wonder at the gracious state of its propounders, that they were content to ask so little, and that instead of a prohibition of future immigration of colored persons, they did not demand the prompt and forcible expulsion of those already in the State, and especially of such of them as had been at all active in rescuing it from the clutches of Border Ruffianism, and securing it to (white) Freedom.
The Constitution was adopted in the Convention by a strict party vote, every Republican present voting for it, and every Democrat voting against it, and refusing to sign it. On the 4th of October, it was submitted to the people, and ratified by
[page 5]
about two-thirds of the popular vote, notwithstanding the strenuous opposition of the "Democracy." The Republicans also elected their Territorial Delegate to Congress, and two-thirds or more of the Territorial Legislature. On the 6th of December, the State organization was completed, by the choice of State Officers and a Representative to Congress. In this election, also, the Republicans prevailed by decisive majorities. For Governor, they chose charles robinson, and for Member of Congress, Martin F. Conway; the same men who were chosen to those offices respectively under the Topeka Constitution of 1855.
On the 29th of February, Mr. Parrot, Kansas Delegate in Congress, presented to the House of Representatives resolutions of the Territorial Legislature, asking admission to the Union; and, soon after, the Committee on Territories, to which they were referred, reported a bill in accordance with their request. Mr. Seward, on the 21st of February, introduced in the Senate a bill for the same purpose, and, on the 29th, made it the occasion for a long, carefully-considered and able speech, reviewing not only the Kansas question, but also the general subject of Slavery and its relations to the Federal Government; and showing plainly enough, by the tenor and spirit of his remarks, that he had not forgotten what is to be the great event of this year, in the political world. The House bill, after an earnest debate, continued at intervals through several weeks, during which its enemies labored hard to defeat it, was passed, on the 11th of April, by 134 yeas to 73nays. The Senate has not yet come to a vote on the question; and, controlled as it is, by the party which has from the first so violently and unscrupulously opposed the cause of Freedom, in Kansas, it seems very doubtful whether it will suffer the bill to go through at this sessions. Evident as it must be to all, that Kansas must come in as a Free State at last, an opportunity still remains; to subject her to the vexation of another half year's delay, and to disappoint her of the anticipated satisfaction of taking part in the approaching presidential election, and casting her vote against the corrupt and oppressive dynasty which she has such ample reason to abhor. And it seems almost too much to hope, that they who have struggled so long and desperately to give the Territory over to the despotic rule of the Slave-power, should be willing, in the fresh bitterness of fully-ascertained defeat, to yield grace-
[page 6]
fully, and permit their successful antagonists to enjoy, at once, the fruits of their victory. We have little doubt, however, that before the appearance of our next Report, Kansas will be a member of the Union.
In February, the Territorial Legislature again passed, by a large majority, the act abolishing Slavery in the Territory, which it will be remembered, failed, the year before, to become a law, through the Governor's neglect to return it with approval or veto. This time, he received it too early in the session to be able to shun responsibility by the same device, and was obliged to show his allegiance to his master by a direct veto of the bin. The principal reason which he assigned for the veto, was that the people of a Territory have no constitutional power to abolish Slavery, till they form a State government. The Legislature, unconvinced by his reasons, immediately passed the bill, over the veto, by much more than the necessary two-thirds vote. "The victory," said the Lawrence Republican, in announcing this result, "is at last won. Now let us see whether the Democracy in Congress will dare to pass a Slave-code." The attempt to do so is already making,—was begun, indeed, before this defiance was uttered. On the 23d of February, Mr. Brown, of Mississippi, introduced in the United States Senate a bill "to punish offences against Slave-property in Kansas," which was referred to the Committee on Territories. The prospect of its passage this year, if ever, is certainly not very bright, but its introduction shows that some of the champions of Slavery mean to keep up the fight yet, desperate as their cause may seem. But even if the bill should pass, it seems not likely to revive the courage and hopes of the Slave-holders, in regard to the establishment of Slavery in Kansas. The Jackson Mississippian, in publishing Mr. Brown’s speech in favor of his bill, adds this lugubrious comment, which doubtless speaks the general feeling of the South. "We very much fear, however, that 'the golden opportunity has been lost,' and that the adoption, at this late period, of what in Douglas parlance is termed a 'Slave-code,' will be like locking the stable-door after the exit of the stolen steed."
That the prohibition of Slavery by Territorial legislation was no needless form, is evident from the fact that it was strenuously opposed on the ground that the Territory contained half
[page 7]
a million dollars worth of Slave-property, which would be taken from the owners by that prohibition. Runaway Slaves were advertised, by their masters, within the most Anti-Slavery county of the Territory (Douglas), and rewards offered for returning them to bondage. In Leavenworth County, not long before the act was passed, a Slave was advertised for sale on execution for debt. Other tokens were given, from time to time, that President Buchanan's declaration, "Kansas is, to-day, by virtue of the Constitution, a Slave State as much as Georgia or South Carolina," was no mere "flourish of rhetoric."
In our last year's account of the affairs of Kansas, we spoke of the kidnapping of Dr. Doy and his son, with a number of colored persons; the enslavement of the latter, and the imprisonment of the white men, in Missouri, to await trial on the charge of Slave-stealing. Soon after that account was written, we learned that the young man had been released, no charge being sustained against him. The father was subsequently tried and convicted,—though so manifestly against law and evidence that it is said even the Missouri judge, who presided at the trial, regarded the verdict as illegal and unjust,—and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment in the State prison. Having appealed to the Supreme Court, he was committed to the jail, in St. Joseph, to await the decision upon his appeal. On the night of Saturday, July 23, ten or twelve men went over from Kansas, reached the jail—in the midst of a city of ten thousand inhabitants—about midnight, gained entrance by pretending to have brought a criminal to be confined, and, when within, drew their weapons, threatening the jailor with instant death if he should resist or give an alarm, took out the prisoner and returned safely with him to Kansas. A large reward has been offered for his rearrest, but we do not learn that any attempt has been made to earn it. After spending some time in Kansas, Dr. Doy has come to the East, where he appears in public, and goes about his private business, as occasion calls, with no attempt at concealment, and no apparent fear of molestation.
[page 8]
nebraska.
Last winter, the people of Nebraska, through their Legislature, attempted to exercise the power which, six years ago, it was pretended that the Kansas-Nebraska bill conferred upon them, of "regulating their domestic institutions in their own way." Their "way" was to pass an Act forbidding Slavery in the Territory. But that way did not accord with the views of the Territorial Governor, Black, whom the Slave-power, using the Federal Executive as its organ, had placed there to see that the interests of Slavery should receive no detriment. He therefore promptly returned the Act, with his veto, conveyed in a long, argumentative message, in which was announced what we take to be the latest discovery yet made in political science by the devotees of Pro-Slavery Democracy. The Governor admits that, according to the organic act, the people of Nebraska are "perfectly free to regulate their domestic institutions in their own way;" but he denies that the act of their Representatives, in the Legislature, is the act of the people. The members of the Legislature, his sagacity has found out, are not "the people," in contemplation of the organic act; and have no power to act for the people in this matter. There is no pretence that the Legislature has not acted in entire harmony with the wish of the people, having been duly authorized, by fair election, to act in the name and by authority of the people; but—they are not the people, and so cannot do the very work which the people chose them to do. In other words, the people can do a certain act, but cannot do it by the hands of their own chosen agents and instruments. Verily, the wisdom of Pro-Slavery Governors is "past finding out," and very "marvelous in our eyes." When a gang of Missourian invaders, by brute force, without a shadow of right, in defiance of the known wishes of a great majority of the people of Kansas, thrust themselves into the legislative hall and usurped the legislative power of that Territory; and then enacted into the forms of law some of the vilest abominations and blackest atrocities which ever defiled the pages of a statute book, — atrocities abhorred, repudiated, and loudly protested against by five-sixths of the people whom the usurpers falsely pretended to represent, — these enact-
[page 9]
ments were upheld by every official minion of Slavery in the land, from the President, in Washington, to his lowest underling, executive or judicial, in the Territory, as the strictly legal expression of the people's will, and as having all the sacredness and binding force of law; and whatsoever questioned their validity, was treason and rebellion. But when a Legislature, fairly and lawfully chosen by the free voice of the people of Nebraska, attempts to carry into effect the known and undenied wishes of the people, in an act demanded also by every consideration of justice, humanity, and enlightened policy, but hostile to the purposes of the Slave-power, the act is void, forsooth, because it is one which only the people can do, and the people's agents, chosen by them to do it in the people's name and by the people's authority, are not the people!
Projects for New Slave-States.
Our last Report mentioned the introduction into the Legislature of California, of a bill to divide the State, with the purpose, no doubt, on the part of the friends of the measure, to make a Slave State of the southern portion. Shortly afterward, we learned that the bill had passed both Houses, and wanted but the Governor's signature, to become a law. An attempt, in the lower House, to reconsider it, called out a long and warm discussion of the Slavery question, and was at last defeated by a vote of thirty-one to twenty-seven. Whether the Governor has since signed the bill we are not informed, but suppose he has, as it was expected that he would do so. The New-York Tribune, alluding to the subject, says, "As there does not seem to have been any recent popular agitation in the southern part of the State, having this division in view, the passage of this bill is probably a mere expedient of the Gwin-Buchanan Pro-Slavery politicians, a part of the same system of Pro-Slavery agitation with the proposed organization of the prospective Territory of Arizona. The projected acquisition of Sonora and Chihuahua, to be organized as Slave-holding Territories, and the recent recognition of Slavery as an institution entitled to the protection of law by the Territorial Legislature of New Mexico, are parts of the same scheme."
[page 10]
The Speaker of the House of Representatives, in New Mexico, last winter, introduced a bill to repeal the barbarous Pro-Slavery enactment of the previous session; but the House, preferring its Slave-code to its Speaker, rejected the bill without a dissenting voice, and requested him to resign his office. He resigned both that and his seat in the House. From this issue of the attempt to right the wrong of the former year, it would seem that "Popular Sovereignty," in New Mexico, means the sovereignty of the Slave-power. A letter, however, published last summer in the Vermont Watchman, from an old resident of the Territory, who has spent about twenty years there, intimates that the triumph of Slavery there is not due to pure Popular Sovereignty acting of its own motion; but to influences emanating from the high places of the land. The writer says he "was astonished at the passage of those stringent laws for the protection of property in Slaves," that he has "taken some trouble to learn how it was brought about;" and has "learned, through members of the Legislature who should know, that a letter was received from our Delegate in Congress, stating that, unless such laws were passed, his influence at Washington with 'the powers that be' would be at an end; and that all his efforts to secure anything for the protection of the Territory would be powerless. This, being with them a matter of life and death, had a tremendous effect." So we have here, if this witness may be trusted — and the Watchman vouches for him as trustworthy—another instance of the use of virtual bribery by the Federal Government, to promote the interests and extension of Slavery. We can the more easily believe the writer's statement, because of its intrinsic probability. Enough has been overwhelmingly proved against the Government, as now and for years past administered, to raise a strong presumption in favor of every charge of this kind which is brought against it.
Another scheme for adding to the number of Slave States, and thus increasing the weight of Slavery in the Senate, is the revival of an old project for forming a new State out of Northern Mississippi and so much of Tennessee and Kentucky as lies between the Tennessee and Mississippi Rivers. The proposed State would contain, it is said, about seven hundred thousand inhabitants. The scheme has been sanctioned by the Legisla-
[page 11]
ture of Tennessee, but we do not learn that those of Mississippi and Kentucky have yet taken action upon it, or whether it finds favor with the people of those States.
The formation of Slave States out of the Indian Territories south of Kansas continues to he agitated, a part of the plan in contemplation being the opening of the region to settlement by white men, but so as to ensure the keeping out of all who would be likely to favor Freedom. A letter from the Indian country, published in the St. Louis Democrat, says that "a secret political organization is formed in the South for the purpose of securing all the available territory to the Slave-power. Their efforts are just now directed to this vast and fertile country, known as the Indian Territory. Their plan is to induce the several nations to sectionize their respective domains, retaining a section for every man, woman, and child, and reserving the surplus for sale, with the understanding that no land is to be sold to northern emigrants, and that none but those who are 'sound on the goose'are to be allowed to settle in the country thus dedicated to Slavery. The secret society of propagandists already have active agents and emissaries among the civilized Indians, zealously laboring to carry out their schemes. I have good reason for believing that the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, the Superintendent, and the Indian Agents — all officers of the General Government—are conniving at, if not actually aiding in, these propagandist schemes. This new secret political organization boasts of being a power—of being strong in numbers, influence, and material means. There is a large fund to be applied to bribery." A letter from a Southerner in Kansas, published in the Charleston Mercury, with the remark that it points in the right direction, says, "it is conceded that Kansas will be a Free-soil, Black-Republican State, beyond question. * * * * * * We have about two thousand seven hundred southern men in Kansas still, and they intend emigrating South as soon as Kansas is admitted into the Union. We are connected with a southern organization, and, including all, we have about seventeen thousand men. The next theatre for action will be the Indian Territory south of Kansas, including Cherokee, Creek, and Choctaw nations. The South should prepare for this in time, and stand by her territorial rights. They are of the last importance to our colonization."
[page 12]
It is said that John Ross, head chief of the Cherokees, a large Slave-holder, and nearly white, secretly favors a territorial organization for the Cherokee country, opening it to settlement by the whites; but that the bitter opposition of a portion of the tribe, who fear that the Indians will lose their rights if the whites come in, deters him from advocating it openly. A letter from the Cherokee nation to the Fort Smith Times, written on the 30th of last March, represents that there is much excitement in the nation in regard to Slavery, that party-spirit runs high, and that there is even danger of civil war between the Pro-Slavery and Anti-Slavery parties.
The Federal Administration continues to betray its eagerness to "extend the area" over Mexico and Central America; for such, we believe, is the true meaning of its persistent endeavors to obtain power to work its own will in those regions, unchecked by the constitutional authority of Congress. Having failed in its attempt, last year, to wheedle out of Congress a virtual grant of power to make war, at its own pleasure, upon those weak republics, it is now seeking the same end by means of treaties with them; their weakness making it possible to gain their consent, while the strongly Pro-Slavery character of the Senate, with which rests the ratifying power, probably induces a hope that it will be more compliant than the other House. Treaties have accordingly been negotiated with Mexico and Nicaragua, by which rights of transit through their respective territories are granted; and it is provided that, if they are unable to protect the transit-routes, then, at their request, the United States shall employ force to protect them; and farther that "in the exceptional case of unforeseen or imminent danger to the lives and property of citizens of the United States, the forces of said Republic are authorized to act for their protection, without such consent having been previously obtained."As to when this "exceptional case" arises, the President and his subordinate army-officers are, of course, to judge; in other words, they are substantially empowered to make war at their own discretion. To these degrading stipulations, so incompatible with true national independence, a reluctant assent has, indeed, been extorted from feeble Nicaragua and distracted Mexico; but the ratification by the Senate still lingers. The Republican Senators unitedly oppose it, and without them, or at least a
[page 13]
part of them, though the majority may be ample for the ordinary purposes of legislation, it cannot reach the two-thirds required to ratify a treaty. The present prospect, therefore, seems to be that this year's attempt will succeed no better than that of last year.
Equally unpromising appears the outlook toward Cuba, on which the Slave-power still keeps its greedy eyes fixed. On the 8th of last December, Mr. Slidell gave notice, in the Senate, of a bill making an appropriation to facilitate negotiations for the acquisition of Cuba; but we do not learn that any farther progress has been made there in the matter. The American Ambassador to Spain has lately returned to Washington, having, it is said, negotiated a treaty with the Spanish Government whereby all the questions hitherto in issue between the two nations are adjusted, and the most amicable relations reestablished, thus removing all pretexts for hostile demonstrations or offensive demands in regard to Cuba. It is stated that the transfer of the island to a new sovereignty was not even proposed in the negotiation; the Spanish Government having previously announced that, after its decided refusals, such a proposition would be regarded as an intentional insult. Were not our zealous and redoubtable champions of "manifest destiny" as wanting in modesty and courtesy as in respect for the rights of others, we might hope that this would be the end, for our time, at least, of schemes to rob Spain of her colony, in order to give strength and permanence to the "domestic system" of robbery, by which colored Americans are plundered of freedom and manhood. But it is too wild a hope for any to indulge who know the characteristics of that species of rapacious animals.
From the tone of the southern press, the language of southern politicians, and such statements of fact as appear from time to time, the inference seems unavoidable that the project of reopening the African Slave-trade is persisted in and continues to gain strength at the South. The Southern Commercial Convention, held last May, in Vicksburg, Miss, voted for it by a large majority, and denounced, as unconstitutional, the law of
[page 14]
Congress declaring it piracy. Just after the Convention adjourned, a portion of its members formed an "African Labor-Supply Association," having for its object to convince the South, by publishing facts and arguments, and promoting a general discussion of the subject, that to obtain a supply of African labor is necessary, feasible, and right. A correspondence between Messrs. Yancey and Debow, two prominent friends of the movement, appeared last summer in the Montgomery, (Ala.) Advertiser, explaining and vindicating the purposes of the new Association. Mr. Yancey holds that the laws against the traffic grew out of an opinion once prevalent at the South, though wholly baseless, that Slavery is morally wrong, was founded in kidnapping, and is defensible, if at all, only because it cannot be got rid of; that they are, therefore, offensive to the South (in the light of the juster notions now entertained there), as fixing an undeserved reproach upon her institutions, and ought to be repealed; that the Federal Government has no right to act on Slavery, but to protect it; and that each State should be left to decide for itself as to permitting or forbidding the African Slave-trade. He pretty plainly intimates that all southern men whose views essentially differ from these, are thoroughly unsound on questions vital to southern rights and interests. Mr. Debow, if a little more charitable towards dissenters, is no less firm in the new faith. The South needs more labor; immigrants from Europe do not go there; the price of Slaves is getting very high. He does not wonder, then, that the South turns her eyes "to the fatherland of our present labor system;" and it is a fair subject of discussion whether that land shall not be made to contribute yet farther to the system's growth and strength. He proposes to enlist in the scheme those who hold few or no Slaves, commending it to them asa means of keeping labor from concentration in a few hands; while he hopes to reconcile the large Slave-holders to it, as a means of strengthening Slavery by broadening its base, so to speak, increasing the number of those interested in it; and at the same time as not likely to reduce the present price of Slaves, though it may prevent its rising. He is even sanguine enough to expect that "our northern brethren," who are "very practical and far-seeing,"
[page 15]
will come to favor the measure, for the sake of sharing the enlarged prosperity which it is sure to bring to the country.
The Yazoo (Miss.) Democrat says, "the only practical means of perpetuating our present system of labor is by importing Africans," and adds, "if the South believes that her necessities demand more labor, and she has not the courage to procure that labor at any hazard, then let her perish as ignominiously as her cowardice deserves." About the 1st of last June, the Black Oak (S. C.) Agricultural Society adopted resolutions requesting the Legislature of South Carolina, in view of "the great need of negro labor" at the South, and because "the planter is the best missionary to the African," to "take such steps as will induce a change of the unconstitutional and iniquitous law of the United States forbidding the introduction of the negro from Africa into the Southern States." A Washington correspondent of the New-York Tribune, writing on the 2d of June, affirms that "whatever the more conservative Democrats of the South may advise to the contrary, there is an interest in that party, bent upon forcing the repeal of all laws against the Slave-trade, as a practical issue, and in a living form." And a Washington letter of a few weeks later date, says, "from information recently received in this city, it appears that some of the southern representatives, while claiming to be opposed to reopening the African Slave-trade, are pledging themselves to introduce in Congress a bill repealing all the statutes upon the subject; leaving it, as they profess to desire, to the regulation of the several States."
Early in July last, A. H. Stephens, of Georgia, on retiring from the seat he has long filled in Congress, made a farewell speech to his constituents, reviewing the history of the Government during his Congressional career, and hinting at the present needs and duties of the South. After glancing at the series of important triumphs of Slavery, from the annexation of Texas to the Dred Scott decision,—triumphs, he claimed, "of justice, truth, and right,"—he went on to say that "we must expand our institutions;" or they cannot be maintained. "We can divide Texas into five Slave States, and get Chihuahua, Sonora, &c., if we have the Slave population; but it is as plain as anything that unless the number of African stock be increased, we have not the population, and might as well abandon the race
[page 16]
with our brethren of the North in the colonization of the Territories. * * * * * * Slave States cannot be made without Africans. I am not telling you to do it, but it is a serious question concerning our political and domestic policy; and * * * * * * it is useless to wage war about abstract rights, or to quarrel and accuse each other of unsoundness, unless we get more Africans. * * * * * * Negro Slavery is but in its infancy, it is a mere problem of our Government; our fathers didn't understand it. I grant that all the public men of the South were once against it; but they didn't understand it. It is for us to meet questions with the firmness which they did. The problem is yet unsolved."
In commenting upon this speech, the New-York Tribune truly says of its author, "he is one of the ablest and shrewdest of southern statesmen, a keen judge and a cautious expositor of the drift of public opinion and of the ideas that control, or soon will control, the public mind;" and alluding to his emphatic affirmation of the need of more Slaves, adds, "where this increase is to be found, Mr. Stephens does not explicitly declare. He does not mean to alarm the public by rashly and bluntly stating his conclusion; but prefers to leave it to make its own way into the mind. But it is plain what it is. The needed additions to the Slave population can be procured only from one source, the continent of Africa. In this we have the gist and signification of this important speech. It is as much in favor of the reopening of the African Slave-trade as if it said so in terms, and probably it is a great deal more effective."
The Mobile Register, edited by Johns Forsyth, late Minister to Mexico, in an article relating to this question, on the 12th of last July, alluded exultingly to the victories which Slavery has already won, and thus continued; "but one stronghold of its enemies remains to be carried, to complete its triumph and assure its welfare, — that is the existing prohibition of the African Slave-trade. * * * * * * We are decidedly of opinion that both the honor and the interests of these southern States require that the Federal Statutes against the African Slave-trade should be repealed, and that the treaty complications of our Government with other nations, aiming at its prohibition, should be withdrawn from. * * * * * * If the African Slave-
[page 17]
trade is wrong, and sinful, and infamous, the same is true not only of our interstate Slave-trade, but of Slavery itself. * * * * * * If the African Slave-trade is wicked and criminal now, it was so during all the time when our country was stocked with negroes from Africa. If it was sinful and infamous then, to bring Slaves from Africa, it was equally so to purchase and hold them, and the vice and infamy of the tenure have been transmitted to the present time, pervading the whole institution of Slavery at the South with crime, and branding every Slaveholder in the land with the mark of guilt and dishonor. Now is it consistent with the self-respect, the dignity, the honor of the southern people, to rest satisfied under the degrading stigma upon their most essential political institution, which these statutes against the Slave-trade imply? Should they continue to tamely acquiesce in those odious laws, and thus stand convicted, on their own tacit confession, of guilt * * * * * * equivalent to piracy? * * * * * * For our part, as a southern man, persuaded and convinced of the morality of Slavery, and devoted to it as the beneficent source and wholesome foundation of our civilization, we chafe with a scarcely repressible impatience under the degrading reflection which these Slave-trade statutes cast upon our institutions and our people. * * * * * * The reopening, or continued prohibition of the African Slave-trade is a question which properly belongs to the several Slave-holding States, and should be remitted to their determination, and they should insist on having the exclusive control over it."
The Register thinks "the time is not ripe for making this a political and party issue:" that "the mind of the South is as yet unprepared for it:" but it means to help prepare the southern mind, and ripen the time for it, by "developing and elucidating the question," in the fashion indicated by the extracts we have given. A few weeks after the publication of this article, the editor of the Register was elected to the Legislature of Alabama; being returned at the very head of his ticket. Such was the response of the people of his district, to this avowal of his sentiments.
John J. McRae, member of Congress from Mississippi, whose election was mentioned in our last Report, as having been boasted of by the Southern Citizen, as a popular expression for
[page 18]
the revival of the Foreign Slave-trade, wrote a letter, last summer, to the Secretary of the Interior, advocating that measure; announcing his belief that the people of Mississippi are in favor of it, and that the North will not refuse, "should the South unite in so just a demand;" and arguing that nothing would so allay the Slavery agitation and strengthen the bonds of Union as for the North to join in repealing all Federal laws against the traffic. The Mississippian, the leading organ of the dominant party in that State, in copying an announcement that several cargoes of Africans had been landed in the South, heads it, "Speed the Pirates," and introduces it thus: "May prosperous gales speed the honest pirates in their noble mission to augment the supply of southern labor, and to obey the injunction to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. The wants of the southern people, and the requirements of commerce, call loudly for more and cheaper negroes; and, thanks to the adventurous Slave-traders, they are coming." The same paper says that the agitation for the repeal of the Slave-trade law is confined to no political party nor class of our citizens, but is fast becoming the popular sentiment of the southern people. "The sooner," it adds, "our northern fellow-citizens are convinced of the fact, and make up their minds to accede to our just demand, the better for the peace and prosperity of our political Union.'' The Sea-coast (Miss.) Democrat, ofDecember 7, greets as "Good News" the intelligence that "a cargo of Africans is expected the latter part of this month;" wishes "the gentlemen engaged in the enterprise much success in their patriotic and humane undertaking;" and declares that if the Slaves arrive "they will be landed without any attempt at secrecy, the consignees trusting to the sentiment predominant in Mississippi for a triumphant acquittal, in the event of a prosecution." A Democratic Convention, held at Port Gibson, Claiborne County, on the 8th of August last, resolved that the law of Mississippi, forbidding the bringing of Slaves into the State from beyond the limits of the United States, "ought to be expunged from the statutes; as being an endorsement of Federal usurpation, a reflection upon the institution of Slavery, and contrary to sound southern policy;" and that "the Legislature ought to repeal it at its next regular session". The friends of repeal, however, we perceive, are not yet strong enough in the Legislature to carry
[page 19]
their point. A bill for that purpose was brought in, last winter, and, on the 26th of January, was indefinitely postponed by 66 ayes to 22 nays. But this by no means proves that so large a majority, or indeed any majority, or minority either, regards the traffic as wrong, or opposes it on other ground than present policy. For aught which appears, these ayes may all have come from men holding the opinions of Jefferson Davis, their United States Senator; who, addressing a Democratic State Convention, on the 6th of last July, declared that his "policy would be to maintain the existing law of Mississippi," but earnestly disclaimed “any coincidence of opinion with those who prate of the inhumanity and sinfulness of the trade. The interest of Mississippi, not of the African," he said, "dictates my conclusion. Her arm is, no doubt, strengthened by the presence of a due proportion of the servile caste, but it might be paralyzed by such an influx as would probably follow if the gates of the African Slave-market were thrown open. * * * * * * This conclusion, in relation to Mississippi, is based upon my view of her present condition, not upon any general theory. It is not supposed to be applicable to Texas, to New Mexico, or to any future acquisitions to be made south of the Bio Grande."
An instance of that accidental association of utterly incongruous ideas, which makes what is meant for sober earnest look like broad caricature, and provokes a smile in the midst of sadness or stern abhorrence, is seen in a notice, published last fall, in South Carolina, that "the citizens of Christ Church parish, near Charleston, have voted to have a grand Slave-trade barbecue, at that place, on the 20th of October, at which all the prominent advocates of the reopening in the State will be invited to attend." Early last summer, as we learn from the Savannah (Geo.) News, at a very large meeting of the people of Savannah and its vicinity, held to listen to an address on the reopening of the African Slave-trade, "Resolutions in favor of the repeal of all laws, State and Federal, against the importation of African Slaves, and recommending the opening of the trade, were adopted without a dissenting voice." A few weeks later, the Savannah Republican, which had all along treated the movement for the revival of the trade as of no serious moment, had an article conceding that the measure is gaining favor at the south, and stating, in support of that opinion, that
[page 20]
nine-tenths of the delegates in the Democratic Congressional Convention of that District went for the repeal of the laws against the Slave-trade, while every single aspirant for the nomination declared himself for the revival of the trade. Many who are not willing to be counted in favor of the actual revival of the trade, join in demanding the repeal of the laws against it, because they imply a moral condemnation of Slavery. Even the grand jury, who, last spring, indicted, in Savannah, some of the alleged participants in recent violations of those laws, took care to say that they did so unwillingly, and only because compelled by their oaths and the instructions of the Court. They published an emphatic protest against the laws, declaring that, while living under them, they "are freemen but in name," are "under a tyranny assupreme as that of the despotic governments of the Old World;" that "longer to yield to a sickly sentiment of pretended philanthropy and diseased mental aberration of (higher-law) fanatics, the tendency of which is to debase us in the estimation of civilized nations, is weak and unWise;" and that they "unhesitatingly advocate the repeal of all laws, as baneful in their effects, which directly or indirectly condemn the institution of Slavery, and those who have inherited or maintain, it."
Nor is it in words alone that the unholy traffic is advocated, and the laws forbidding it are condemned. The proofs are too strong to admit of reasonable doubt, that talk has more than begun to pass over into action. "A Native Southerner," writing from Washington to the New-York Tribune, on the 20th of August last, said that in conversation, at a recent meeting of politicians, "Mr. Douglas stated that there was not the shadow of doubt that the Slave-trade had been carried on quite extensively for a long time back, and that there had been more Slaves imported into the southern States, during the last year, than had ever been imported before in any one year, even when the Slave-trade was legal. It was his confident belief, that over fifteen thousand Slaves had been brought into this country during the past year. He had seen, with his own eyes, three hundred of those recently-imported, miserable beings, in a Slave-pen in Vicksburg, Miss., and also large numbers at Memphis, Tenn." The statement derives confirmation from the fact, that though the publication of it was complained of
[page 21]
as a breach of confidence (as we gather from the writer's subsequent apology, pleading ignorance of its confidential character), yet it has not been contradicted. Letters from Washington, in July and August, to the New-York Herald, from "a careful correspondent," so says the editor, "stated that large cargoes of imported 'savages'" had been lately landed on the Coast of Florida; that "there are said to exist depots of 'savages' in over twenty large cities or towns at the South, in some of which the initiated may find them, at times, to the number of several hundred;" that a trustworthy informant, who had visited such depots in Charleston, Memphis, and Columbus, "had seen altogether, in these three places, about nine hundred imported blacks," and said "it was notorious, throughout Georgia and Alabama, six weeks ago, that quite a fleet of Slavers was expected to land cargoes, within a month or two, in one of the Florida inlets, not far from Key West;" that " a gentleman of the most undoubted veracity," a Democratic Senator, had informed the writer of a boast "made to him by a person interested, whose name is known throughout the Union, that twelve vessels would discharge their living freight upon our shores within ninety days from the 1st of June last;" and had estimated the number of cargoes successfully transported into the interior, within eighteen months, at between sixty and seventy," by which "more than fifteen thousand" native Africans must have been added to "the Slave population of the South." The Tribune, having referred to these statements as "to be received with a good many grains of allowance," John C. Underwood, formerly of Virginia, writes to that journal that "a tour and sojourn of some weeks in the South has satisfied me that the 'careful correspondent' of the Herald, whose opinions you seem to distrust, is correct in his conclusions, and deserves the thanks of every friend of Freedom and humanity for the courage and fidelity of his disclosures. I have had ample evidences of the fact, that reopening the African Slave-trade is already a thing accomplished, and the traffic is brisk, and rapidly increasing. In fact, the most vital question of the day is not the opening of this trade, but its suppression. The arrival of cargoes of negroes, fresh from Africa, in our southern ports, is an event of frequent occurrence. Many of the public journals of that region are
[page 22]
supposed to be in the interest of the traders, and the publishers of others are prevented from announcing such arrivals by well-grounded fears that such action would expose themselves to the vengeance of the brutal and barbarous men engaged in this business." The St. Augustine (Fla.) Examiner, of July 21, gives an account of a case in Florida, in which the Federal authorities had notice of a Slaver's being off the coast, but, upon going to the region indicated, were told that the vessel (schooner Experiment), had landed her cargo near Jupiter's Inlet, six weeks before, and of course the "birds had flown.""We understand more are expected shortly," adds the Examiner, coolly taking it for granted that caution is needless, and censure uncalled for, in speaking of the business. The Pensacola (Fla.) Observer confirms, on the authority of Col. Blackburn, United States Marshal, a statement sent from Jacksonville, on the 16th of last July, that "a cargo of six hundred Africans has been landed on the Florida coast, near Smyrna;" and says, that "as soon as the landing was effected, the vessel was set on fire and abandoned to the elements." Alluding to a "hope" expressed by the Tallahassee Floridian, "that the parties guilty of such a high-handed violation of the law, may be arrested and dealt with to the fullest extent," the Observer asks how that "can be expected when the United States Marshal is denied the power and means of doing so? If this official," it continues, "was vested with sufficient power, and provided with ample means (as he applied for to the proper authorities), he would, perhaps, have been able to prevent such violation of the law; but as it is, with his limited power and want of means, it is almost impossible." Whether "the proper authorities" have given occasion for this complaint, we have no means of knowledge; but the probability seems to us decidedly in the affirmative.
The Memphis (Tenn.) Avalanche announced, nearly a year ago, that "three of the six native Africans brought here, a few days since, were sold, yesterday, at the mart of Mr. West, and brought, respectively, $750, $740, and $515. These negroes are a part of the cargo of the yacht Wanderer, landed some months since." We have heard of no attempt, by the Federal authorities, to bring to justice any of the parties to this publicly-proclaimed violation of the laws, or to restore the vic-
[page 23]
tims of it to the rights of which they have been — if the statute book speaks truth — piratically deprived. The Richmond (Texas) Reporter, of the 14th of last May, has this advertisement.
"FOR SALE. —Four hundred likely AFRICAN NEGROES, lately landed upon the Coast of Texas. Said negroes will be sold upon the most reasonable terms. For further information, inquire of C. K. C., Houston, or L. R. G., Galveston."
Among a company of Slaves which Charles Reemelin, of Ohio, saw on the railroad cars, in Alabama, a few weeks ago, "some," he says in a letter to the Cincinnati Commercial, "looked as if just imported from Africa." He adds that "the conductor frankly admitted that negroes, whom he could not mistake to be Slaves directly from Africa, did frequently come on their road; that two hundred such came the week previous, and that eight hundred more were contracted for."
The Washington correspondent of the New-York Tribune writes, on the 2d of June last, that "the pecuniary success which attended the speculation of the Wanderer, and the immunity of her owners, and the traffickers in human flesh who were associated with them, have conspired to encourage other enterprises of a like character, and more vessels have recently been procured for, and sent to, the Coast of Africa, than were ever concerned in this diabolical commerce before." Another correspondent of the same journal, on the 30th of September, just after a visit to Savannah, describes an interview with the notorious Lamar, owner of the Wanderer, who showed him one of the Africans of the Wanderer's cargo, as a sample of the importation; told him "the number already imported is large, greater numbers are needed, the disposition to import them is increasing, and the whole civilized world cannot prevent them from coming." He also declared his late importation to be "the kindest, gentlest, most affectionate and docile creatures in the world, and worth quite as much as Virginia niggers;" which, if true, goes rather strongly against the Slave-traders' pet theory, that the African race is vastly improved by the civilizing and Christianizing influences of American Slavery, and that consequently the African Slave-trade is the grandest and most beneficent of missionary enterprises.
[page 24]
It must not be supposed that the efforts making to turn a portion of the traffic directly to our own shores, have withdrawn from its other channels, in any perceptible degree, the American capital and enterprise heretofore employed in them. It still continues to be true, according to the testimony which reaches ns from various quarters, that, wherever the trade is carried on, it is done mainly under the American flag, and in vessels built and equipped in American ports. The New-York Herald, last summer, published an estimate that "from thirty to forty Slavers are fitted out, every year, in New York, Boston, Bristol, R. I, Portland, Me, and other eastern ports; but New York and Boston are the favorite ports, from the fact that the operations of the traders, in preparing and fitting out vessels, can be carried on with less risk of detection. Comparatively a limited number," it adds, "are captured on the Coast of Africa, and those that are so captured are taken by English cruisers, while a few fall into the hands of United States vessels." A New-York correspondent of the Charleston (S. C.) Mercury, alluding, on the 15th of August, to a former statement that a dozen or twenty Slavers leave New York annually, says, "facts which have recently come to my knowledge convince me that this is no exaggeration. * * * * * * It is not possible for any one person to know the whole extent of the business, but some general facts cannot be kept secret, and are well known to many. * * * * * I know of two ladies, now attracting adoration at a fashionable watering-place, who invested in a little venture of this kind not long ago, and, as a result, have augmented their banking accounts—one to the extent of $23,000, and the other $16,000. The headquarters of the traffic, in this city, are mainly in South, William, Broad, and Water Streets. Two vessels are now fitting out here for the business." And only a few days ago, the Herald claimed to have "information that no less than six vessels have left New York for the African coast within the past fortnight, all of which expect to hare negroes for their return cargoes." A writer on board the United States ship Portsmouth, on the African coast, says,—Dec. 20—"the few months' experience we have had on the coast has thoroughly convinced us that the whole Slave-coast is, we may say, lined with Slavers, who are generally from New York, from, the custom-house, bringing all the appliances of
[page 25]
the trade with them, and maneuvering about on the coast, under various pretences and disguises of legal traffic, until the favorable moment having arrived, the cargo is shipped, and a few hours finds them out of danger, on their way to the West Indies."
A letter to the New-York Journal of Commerce, dated St. Helena, Nov. 30, mentions a vessel — the Tavernier, "French built, but evidently fitted out in New York,"—which had just been taken with nearly sir hundred Slaves, in a most wretched condition, on board; and names five or six American vessels which had lately escaped the cruisers and left the coast "with full cargoes." One of these was "the bark Rebecca, which took out some of the emigrants, of the McDonough estate, to Monrovia, "under charter from the Colonization Society, and on her return voyage, had "gone from the Congo with nine hundred negroes,"—thus doing a "double share of "missionary" work; taking out a cargo of ready-made "missionaries," and bringing back one of raw material for the manufacture. A letter from Zanzibar, Sept. 8, states that "an American clipper ship took off twelve hundred negroes from the coast a few days since." In April, of last year, the bark Orion, of New York, was seized in the river Congo, as a suspected Slaver, and sent home for examination; her outfit and internal arrangement being such as to leave scarcely a doubt of her destination, which, moreover, was confessed by her captain, who died on the homeward passage. But, on examination, in June last, she was—of course, we might almost say—released for "insufficient evidence;" giving another illustration of what the Journal of Commerce said, not long ago, that "the captured Slaver, unless found with his cargo on board, is almost sure to escape in the courts." On the 30th of November, about five months after her discharge in New York, a British cruiser captured her on the African coast, with nearly nine hundred Slaves on board,—the first mate of the former voyage being now captain, — and surrendered her officers to an American cruiser, to be sent home for trial.
The famous Wanderer also figures in the Slave-trade operations of the past year. About the middle of last October, a Captain Martin stole her, so it was pretended, and went to sea without papers, intending to go to Africa for Slaves. Lamar, the owner, pursued a little way in a steamboat, but—probably
[page 26]
by preconcert — without success; for the theft had most likely been arranged between owner and thief, as a shrewd way of getting the vessel to sea without the trouble and risk of customhouse preliminaries, and of securing to the owner a pretext for reclaiming her without even the trifling cost of a sham purchase, should she fall into hands unfriendly to the cause of missions. The crew, it seems from subsequent events, knew nothing of her destination till they were out at sea, and most of them went on unwillingly after learning it. On the 22nd of November, when near the Canaries, the captain, taking four men with him in a boat, boarded a French vessel which they had met, to obtain a supply of provisions. The rest of the crew seized the opportunity to escape, set all sail, and steered for Boston, where they arrived on the 24th of December, bringing also with them two Portuguese women, whom the captain had decoyed on board at one of the Azores, and carried off with the intention of exchanging them in Africa for negroes. The crew surrendered the vessel at once to the United States authorities, and legal proceedings were commenced against her as a Slaver. She was also libelled by the crew for their wages, and by persons who furnished her with supplies, for their respective dues. Lamar, on hearing of her arrival, made a formal demand for her, offering, in support of his claim, the copy of an indictment in the United States Circuit Court for the District of Georgia, against the late master for piratically running away with her. The latest news we have of her is, that she has been restored to Lamar, on his giving bond in $ 5,940, to abide the decision of the Court in her case. If she is worth as has been said, more than three times that sum, this looks like a virtual abandonment of the charge of Slave-trading, and retention only of the claim for the seamen's wages and other expenses of the voyage.
The bark Emily is another vessel which, after being once seized as a suspected Slaver, was suffered to slip off to sea without a clearance. She was taken, last fall, on the African coast, and disappeared early in February, from the port of New York, whither she had been sent for trial. She went away, it is said, under the command of Captain Townsend, formerly of the Echo. "Perhaps," significantly remarks the New-York Tribune, of February 9, "the United States authorities, who had her in charge until very recently, may know something about her sud-
[page 27]
den and unannounced departure;" and says, also, it is stated that the United States officers, in New York, knew of Captain Townsend