safeguard it is to the freedom of all Englishmen, (with double emphasis upon the word), that we cannot let go this opportunity to give our humble opinion of its merits. It does appear to us, then, that there is no possible foundation for the rhetoric and flourish, that have been wasted on the subject; and that, if numbers are to be our criterion of judgment, the grant of King John-if it was a magna charta of any thing--was a magna charta of slavery. Through all its provisions their is a constant distinction between freemen and slaves; and the very first article declares, that it is to the former alone that the subscript liberties are con ceded. Concessimus etiam omnibus liberis regni nostri pro no'bis et heredibus nostris imperpetuum omnes libertates subscrip'tas.' Again, what a most abominable principle of servitude is implied in the following extract from the 4th article! It speaks of destroying and laying waste men, as if they were little superior to cabbage-stalks. Custos terre hujusmodi heredis qui infra etatem 'fuerit non capiat de terra heredis nisi rationabiles exitus et rationa'biles consuetudines et rationabilia servitia et hoc sine distruc' tione et vasto HOMINUM vel rerum.' Article 15th directs that, 'liber homo non amercietur pro parvo dilecto,' &c.; and that vil'lanus eodem,' &c. The expression-Nulli vendemus, nulli negabimus, aut differemus rectum vel justiam-is often quoted by itself, as if it applied to every individual in the nation; when, in fact, nothing is more evident, from the context, than that it was meant exclusively for freemen. The sentence, which immediately precedes it, begins with the words, Nullus liber homo capiatur' etc.; and the words libero homini' were omitted after Nulli' in the phrase alluded to, because their expression, just before, sufficiently indicated the class of persons, to which it had reference. It is somewhat singular, that these evident recognitions of slavery should have escaped the research of all the writers on English law; and that, in particular, so cautious a commentator as Judge Blackstone should have told us, among a number of other things, how, 'lastly, (which alone would have merited the title that it bears, of 'the great charter) it protected every individual in the free enjoy'ment of his life, his liberty, and his property;'* or that even Dr. Miller, whose treatise is, in many respects, so commendable, should have committed the great mistake of saying, it is probable that 'before the time of William the Conqueror, they (the privileges of 'freedom) were extended to the greater part, if not the whole, of the ancient vassals.' We certainly can find no warrant for these assertions. Vassalage of the most abject kind existed a long time after this period; and, we must think, that a great part of Englishmen no more owe their liberties to King John's magna charta, than to Koah's leather apron.

Those liberties, as we said above, are the gradual result of progressive civilization. And it yet remains to inquire, whether our

present system of negro slavery, which is said to resemble the ancient constitution of villanage, is ever likely to arrive at the same result. We have already taken it upon us to assert, that in no important particular, is the situation of negro slaves analogous to that of ancient villeins. Is there any resemblance of a contract, express, or implied, between the master and his slaves? Did the latter exercise the least volition in becoming bondmen? Will it be pretended, that, as in the feudal system, the lord and the vassals are mutually necessary to each other? Durst the master tell us, that they are tenants at will; attached to the soil; and transferable only with the land they occupy and cultivate? On the contrary, were they not forced into their situation? Are they not considered as things paid for? And may they not be transferred,-nay, are they not transferred, from one plantation to another, whenever it suits the sovereign will and pleasure of the master? What chance, in the name of sense, has any negro to become a proprietor of land, either by copyhold, or by any other hold? Have they the least particle of liberty to begin with? the least spot of ground to rest the fulcrum of their lever upon? As an additional disability, has it not been found necessary to prevent masters from throwing their worthless negroes upon the community, by imposing a tax upon manumission, nearly equal, in some places, to the price of a good slave? Are not slaves distinguished, we ask, by all these additional rivets, from the ancient villeins, with whom it is so much the fashion to compare them?-Nor are these all the distinctions. Villanage took its rise in an age, when men of all classes were little better than barbarians. The master was nearly as rude as the slave; and, when the former began to advance in civilization, the latter followed on with equal pace. In our own system, however, the two orders respectively, are almost at the extremes of barbarism and civilization. The slave looks up to his master as a god; the master looks down upon his slave as a beast; and, as long as the one is in the complete power of the other, we see no probability that they will ever regard each other as any thing like equals. The slave's mere physical peculiarity of having a black skin, has grown into a moral distinction, as palpable as that between white

and black.

One would think, that these distinctions are more than sufficient to disprove the similarity between villeins and negro slaves; and to make us give up all hopes for the latter, through, what the Jamaica Committee call, the progress of Society.' It is in vain to think of their making a 'progress,' till they have some start; and, if the masters intend to give them this start, they would have made preparation for doing so before this time. The truth is, that the whole current of their habits and of their imagined interests set against a system of liberation. The subject, we are persuaded, must be taken into other hands; and the only hands adequate to the task are those of Congress and Parliament. But there should be no precipitancy in the business. The real in

terests of the planters should not be infringed upon; and they ought to have a full and fair hearing, before the subject be meddled with at all. The object we have in view, is, as we said before, not to deprive planters of the negro's services; but to make those services voluntary to commute slaves into tenants, and masters into guardians. We wish the negroes to be considered as worthy of their hire; and we have no doubt, that, by adopting Christophe's plan of giving them a portion of the gross produce, they might be influenced to work quite as laboriously as they now do. Even if the present generation could not so much change their habits, as to labour from any other motive than compulsory punishment, the one which is to succeed might be prepared to do it. It is hard to teach old ideas how to shoot; but we may give almost any direction to young ones. We cannot pretend to give a detailed scheme for the undertaking; but we do not see why the introduction of Lancaster's System, would not accomplish a great part of the good, which we wish to do the negroes. It is certainly necessary, that they should understand the rights, which we would put into their hands; and it is quite as certain, in our own way of thinking, that the object might be accomplished, without jeopardizing the interests of their present masters. We are satisfied, at all events, that the first step, in any system, must be that of denying, that the negroes are lawfully held in their present condition.

Want of room has necessitated us to pursue this subject in too general and a desultory manner; and want of time has obliged us to throw our remarks together, with more haste than is consistent with their full and unambiguous expression. Our readers will observe, also, that a great deal of our reasoning has been directed more to the negroes in the West Indies, than to those in our own Southern States. Those who have watched the progress of the question will easily account for the fact. It is not to be disputed, that our own country set the world the example, not only in discussing the question of the slave-trade*—but in putting a stop to its prosecution. Here, however, our labours terminated; and, though there are in the United States, more than three times as many slaves, as in the British West Indies; yet the people of this country have, inversely, been thrice as neglectful of their lot, as the people of England. A coalition of able and influential men, in that country, have contrived, by means of extensive private correspondence, and by the assiduity, with which they have kept the subject in discussion, to draw before the public a complete developement of all the facts, relative to the system of West Indian slavery. It is to England, therefore, that we look for the first adoption of some wise plan to ameliorate that system. Little will probably be done, in this country; though even here, the subject is by no means entirely neglected. We ought, indeed,

*See our Number for May, p. 382-and the Memoirs of Anthony Benezet. Philadelphia. 1817.

to set the example. Our slaves are not only more numerous, but more fecund, than those in the British Colonies; and, if measures are not taken betimes to put them in the way of peaceable emancipation, it cannot be many centuries before they will emancipate themselves--with what sort of moderation, we need not describe. In Maryland, for instance, between the times of our first and second census, the whites increased about 5 per cent.-the blacks, 14 per cent.; in Virginia, the whites, 6,, per cent.-the blacks, 15 per cent.; in North Carolina, the whites, 11,7% per cent.-the blacks, 29,% per cent.; in South Carolina, the whites, 94 per cent.-the blacks, 344 per cent.;* and, in all these states, the increase of the blacks to the whites was as 24-to-912, not far from 3 to 1. Quâ haec spectant??

As we have once or twice hinted at the doings of the African Institution, perhaps we cannot better conclude this article, than by giving a slight sketch of what we consider as the character and views of that establishment. There is no doubt, that it has been the means of stricking out many new lights, and of obtaining much useful information, upon the subject of negro slavery, both in Africa, and in the West Indies: but it is as little doubtful, in our own minds, that, unless a part of its system is revolutionized, it will be the means of extensive mischief in one, if not in both, of these countries. Nothing is clearer, than that the English Parliament may do her Colonies infinite harm, by legislating upon an imperfect and partial exposition of their circumstances. By exaggerated, or false, accounts of abuses, or transgressions, a good measure by being hurried into adoption before its time; or may contain provisions for evils which do not exist, or which, if they do exist, are much less intolerable than the proposed remedy. These things had well nigh happened, in the case of the Registry Bill. Among other things, it was stated by the Reporter of the Institution, that, from 1808 to 1815, not less than 20,000 negroes had been smuggled into the British West Indies; a number, which, considering the bulk of the cargo, could never have escaped the vigilance of the navy, or of the custom-house; and yet from neither have we any accounts of even a single ship's load being detected! It was, also, one of the prominent topics of declamation, that an idle or loitering negro was liable to be taken up and sold-even, it was said, with his deed of manumission in his hand. To this charge the colonial writers have given the lie direct; and have challenged the Institution to make it good. We have no doubt, in fine, that Parliament was induced to throw out the Bill, chiefly because the Reporter was detected in such misrepresentations and falsehoods. Indeed, we do not see how much confidence can be placed in these periodical Reports. They consist, for the most part, of statements, picked out of a voluminous cor

* We have not included Georgia, because she was permitted to import slaves

respondence, and mixed up with a variety of reasoning, declamation, and abuse. It is in vain to expect the whole truth from them. The Directors publish nothing, of course, which is not conformable to their own views; and, indeed, it has lately been proved, before all the world, that they have suppressed letters which were written for publication, but which, unfortunately, did not contain the information they wanted.' The following letter, from Mr. Macaulay to Governor Ludlam, at Sierra Leone, will let our readers into the plan, which is pursued, relative to this subject. It was intended to be confidential; but like many other confidential letters, it has found its way into publication. It is printed as it was written.

'MY DEAR SIR,

'London, 4th Nov. 1807.

'A word in private respecting the African Institution. I cannot help regarding it as an important engine. We have many zealous friends in it, high in rank and influence, who, I am persuaded, are anxious to do what can be done, both for the colony and for Africa. Mr. Perceval and Mr. Canning are with us decidedly. Lord Castlereagh, with whom our business more immediately lies, is goodhumoured and complying, but his Secretary,

Caret in pencil. In the margin in pencil-and Mr. Wilberforce desires me to add, disposed from a point of honour to do the utmost for the Abolitionists.

Interlineations in the

original.

Words [will eagerly] defaced.

Words in italics underscored in the original.

I fear

A

Mr. Cook is hostile to the whole thing

A

may be disposed to

and [will eagerly] seize any circumstance which will put it in his power to do us mischief.

You will see how very important it is to be aware of this in your communications with government. Indeed, in all the ostensible letters you write, whether to Lord Castlereagh, the African Institution, or myself, it will be right to consider the effect of what you say on lukewarm friends, and in the hands of with

secret enemies, for such will unavoidably mix us. In such hands there

A

are truths which will be made to produce all the effect of falsehood, and instead of being used as they ought to be, as a spur, will be employed as checks to all exertion. I cannot mean, of course, that you should, in any degree, varnish your representations. I merely mean that you should not unnecessarily discourage the exertions of benevolence. People who do not know you, will suppose the case to be desperate where you seem to doubt; and your testimony, if convertible to an adverse purpose, would be formidable. Your own mind will suggest to you the guards, limitations, and exceptions, with which what I now say should be received.