The New-Jersey gazette — Burlington [N.J.], 1781-03-14 00:00:00, page 1

[Vol. IV.] THE [Numb. 168.)
NEW-JERSEY GAZETTE.
JF you are really what you pretend, I am sorry
to fee you so widely mistaken in the meaning of
the word, as to make use of your pen in fop
port of the most flagrant injuflice.
You fay rightly, " it mult be acknowledged that
all mankind are born equally free." This is however
going very far for one who means to support the prac
tice of keeping the children of llaves in a state of per
petual servitude ; because, whatever reasons may be
adduced for keeping the parent in slavery, yet the
child is born as free as its master.
But you fay that ' to promote the good of society, the
greateJi part of mankind are necessarily deprived of that
liberty to which they were born.” This I utterly de
ny in the general sense in which it is here expressed.
True it is, that every person who enters into society,
and who experts to share the advantages of it, mult
give up a part of his natural liberty in exchange for
the benefits of society : But how this voluntary and
partial dereliction, or the laws and cuttoms of most
societies with refpedt to wives and children, are to be
made use of in favour of absolute and perpetual sla
very, is what I confefs I do not underhand.
Begging the German Doctor's pardon for flighting
so great an authority, I mail proceed to examine the
fcveral origins of the right of slavery, as I find them
laid down by Ju&inian, who I think has stated them
the best of any writer I have met with, and who fays
(Inst. I, 3,4.) slavery is held to arise, iff, " Jure gen
tium," from a state of captivity in war. 2d, "Jure
civili," when one man fells himfelf to another. And,
3d, " Servi nafcuntur," the children,of acquired
Oaves, being " jure nature," by a kind of negative
birthright slaves also.
These then are the grand corner stones on which
the whole arguments in favour of slavery are built;
the not having seen this foundation fairly examined,
induced me to take up my pen —presuming that if the
foundation should be proved infufficient the whole
fuperftru&ure must fall.
r I lb?" therefore proceed to exsmin p t fa r c ~° "^±
in which one man is said to acquire a right to hold an
other in perpetual slavery, viz. by captivity in war.
This seems to be the palladium of your whole party,
for I find your predecessor impartial * alledging, that,
" if the usages of the nations of Africa juftity the fo
reign and domestic slavery of their captives, they can
be purehafed without iniquity." You assert, that
" if the custom of nations at war is the killing or fell
ing their captives, then buying is just and humane,"
and '' lawful" too, you fay " you have proved ;" as
I suppose " because qualified slavery is preferable to
death." Whitt you mean by qualified slavery, when
pleading in favour of absolute perpetual slavery, I con
fefs I cannot comprehend.
However, the validity of the whole must depend on
the following position, viz. That the conqueror has a
right to the life of his captive ; and having spared that,
bar a right to deal with him as he pleases : because, if
the captor has not a right to dispose of his prisoner,
no other can have a right to purchase, let the custom
or usage of savage nations in this refpett be what.it
may.
The position, that by the law of nature or nations
a man may kill his enemy, is untrue, when-taken ge
nera/^ he has only a right to kill him in particular
cafes-=in cases of absolute necefity —for his own pre
servation; And it is plain in this case, this absolute
necessity did not subsist, -since the victor did not ac
tually kill him, but made him 'prisoner.
War itfelf is juftifiable only on principles of felf
prefervation, and therefore it gives no other right
over prisoners but merely to disable them from doing
harm to us, by confining their persons; much less
can it giv&a right to kill, torture, or even to chflave
them, when the war ts at an end.
Since then the right of making slaves by captivity
depends on a supposed right of daughter, that foun
dation failing, the consequences drawn from it must
fail also, for I presume no lover of true justice will at
tempt to support a right founded oh a cuflom of savage
nations, when that custom appears evidently to have
injustice for its foundation.
2. The second instance in which one man is said to
acquire a property in another, is by civil compact,
where one man fells himfelf to another. This if only
meant of contrasts to serve or work for another during
life, in consideration of being furnifhed with the ne
cessaries or some of the conveniencies of it, may be
very just, and feemsto be authorized in what you very
improperly call " the law of perpetual slavery," Exod.
xxi. 6. Deut. xv. 17, but when applied to absolute
perpetual slavery is absurd, as might be easily shewn.
* See-New-Jersey Gazette, No. 159.
To “ A LOVER of true JUSTICE."
WEDNESDAY, March 14, 1781.
However, as this kind of traffic 13 little m'uA in our
day, and as the slavery against which I am contending
is eonfeffedly not of this kind, I shall fay no more of
it, but proceed to—
3. The last case, viz. that by birth, it being gene
rally said that the children of saves are slaves also. —
This you have fairly given up^ and deduce the right
of the master to the children /from another quarter.
Indeed, as this right is built 6, one or the other of the
former, if they fall, this must fail together with them.
If neither captivity, nor these of one's felf, can, by
the law of nature and reason reduce the parent to
slavery, much less can they reduce the offspring.
Here then you introduce a hewand unheard of claim;
you fay, " slavery by birth is not founded on being
born ofaflave, but because the time anddabour of the
mother, the food and raiment of the child belongs to
the master: Therefore, as such child has no parents
who can give it necellary support, itfelf is bound in
justice to make fatisfadion, ^ ble." To have made
good your argument you have added, by be
coming a save for life, am : -a.,.'ling she fame
fate on all its poflerity. Your - ole portion however
is to me both new and curiotvhaving always under
flood that ti^ child of a female Have was a Have mere
ly because its mother was so, however able and will
ing its free father might be to support it, and pay for
its nurture ; and that the child of a free woman was
free, because its mother was .0, notwithstanding its
father was a slave, and it obliged to the parish for
support.
Let us now confider a little he consequences of this
strange doctrine. On this principle the children of
every person (no matter how affluent his present cir
cumhauces) who through me fortune shall be reduced
to such a state of indigence a to be unable to provide
for his infant offspring, must ,;? true jtfhce, with their
whole poftwrity become flavor , to their fofter fathers :
Thus the children of every pauper, with their de
feendants to the latest generation, must be funk in per
petual and irremediable fla ry; for it matters not
whether they receive the ^d and raiment" from
the community at large , n an Individual, they
are equally" bound in jsyra. j make fatisfadion" in
the one ease as the other.
Let us now compare your calculation ofthe " ex
pence and trouble" with every day's experience, and
we shall find, if not more " than one in ten," yet that
there are numbers who will be " at the trouble and ex
pence ofbringing upchildren until" they are fourteen
years of age for less than one-third part of the money
you have mentioned ; nay, I have known instances of
it for one-lixth, and we have every day instances of
persons who will give a sum equal to the firft, for their
ferviecs from that Mme 'til they arrive at the age of
twenty-one years, and give them legal tuition and
freedoms into the bargain. Why then this pompous
calculation, except to gain a specious cover for perpe
tual slavery!
Let us next take a view of your authorities drawn
from scripture. And here I must observe that you
are conftantiy begging the question ; which however
I do not mean to grant, until you fairly prove that
where-ever the word servant is used in scripture,
it is meant to convey the idea of absolute and perpe
tual flavery,—That Abraham had children born in his
house, and servants purehafed with his money, 1 shall
not deny, but that the firft were slaves at all, or the
lalt slaves even for life, I conceive lies on you to prove;
and was that proved, I should contend that the tenure
of theirflavery was different from ours, as I find A
braham mentions them, Gen. xv. 3, as having a title
to become his heirs, and this too (as is allowed by
good writers on the fubjedt) such a title as he could
not defeat but by having issue of his own body.
As well might we Americans torture our British
prisoners under saws and harrows of iron, of hew
them to pieces in cold blood, and plead the command
of the Lord, and the practice of David and Samuel,
as keep the natives of Africa in slavery, and plead the
authority of scripture and the practice of Abraham.
And in this case " I answer, that if such treatment
<wouid be savage barbarity now, it was so then ; if pri
soners are entitled to better treatment now, they were
so then." But perhaps you would be willing to be
called a barbarian with holy Samuel and David.
That the case of Onefimus should be matter of so
much exultation to your party, is, I confefs, to. me
matter of Aftopifhmept, since granting that Onefimus
was a slave for life, or if you please, forever, (which
by the way you neither have proved nor can prove)
yet it is evident that Philemon, a Cbriflian, was not
permitted to keep him so. Read the 16th and 17th
verses of the epifile, and disbelieve what I have al
ferted if you can.
I shall now beg leave to turn my reader's attention
for a moment from you to your friend Impartial,
whole position I have already quoted, and therefore
mean only to draw a parallel, by faying, that “ if
the usages of the nations of America jaftify the road
ing of their captives, taken from us, alive, before a
flow fire, or burning them by lighted pine knots Huck
in various parts of their bodies, then they may be
frirchafed by us, and treated in the fame manner,
Without iniquity." Whole heart recoils not at the
horrid idea ! yet who fees not that if stands on the
fame foundation with the position of Impartial? In
deed, that it is in every part an exact parallel, ex
cept that this refpeds v^itc men, that black; this
the sons of America, that of Afried.
" But," lays he, " let us fnppofe our Negroes were
stolen from their country, divested of that natural li
berty given to them by Heaven) and reduced to vas
salage, it may be alked whether the whole ofthe guilt
devolves not on the perpetrators ofthe deed ? whether
any of the guilt devolves 011 those who have purehafed
of the posterity of the slaves, or inherit them by the
lift or will of parcn.s." 1 think I have fairly proved
that it th; firft pofichor of them da out cat them,
he could not pwilibiy becom.ro poffeued of them but
by injustice, and therefore could not convey a right
to another which he had not in himfelf; so that the
firft, or any aftcr-purchaler, could have no' better
right than the original polfafbr, be he captor, thief,
or what he might: Hence it follows, that if our fiaves
were unjultly obtained, it mult be unjust to bold them
in bondage. This, fays he, "we readily grant it
would be for the unjust importer of them, or the heirs
of the importer, who received them without paying
what is deemed an equivalent for the property."—
Pray Mr. Impartial, was y^u to purchase a horse from
a person who you knew had stolen him, and keep him
out of reach of the owner, admit you to pay an equi
v cent for the property, would this exonerate you from
all blame? Would " the whole of the guilt devolve
on the perpetrator of the deed ?" And is not this the
case exaftly.as you have stated it? " But," fay you,
" as the slaves are among us, &c." t This is general
ly the lad lubtcriugu, .rd perhaps the uefe; it ,in
sass faying that you hold your slaves by the fame te
nure that too many people do their religion, because
your fathers did so before you, without ever enquiring
into the right or wrong of the matter.
My design not being to enter into the fubje& of
emancipating the prefentrace of slaves among us, but
to drew that we neither have, nor can have a right to
detain them, I shall conclude, leaving the time and
manner of setting them free to the confcienges of the
holders of them—But firft permit me to address a
word to the humanity of their matters.
Do you then feel no compunction, or are you grown
deaf to the calls of nature and callous to the tender
feelings of the human heart; do you, I lay, feel.no
pompunftion at beholding, or can you with compo
lure fee the distresses of your slaves, when to 4'atisfy^
your avarice, or promote your convenience, the ten
der hufbahd is torn from the foft embraces of his af
fedionate wife, or the fond father from the fight of
his endearing, his beloved child, with this diftrefling
consideration, (added to that of the probability that
he shall never fee them more) that they are left to be
governed by the capricious will of—he knows not
who! and to be dealt with —he knows not how—
without friend — without property — without even
protection by the laws of the country— without any
thing he can leave them—without any thing he can
give them, except his parting blessing. Look, I be
seech you, for a moment on your wives—oh your
tender helpless babes —confider what would be you:
own feelings in such a situation, and let those feelings
plead in their behalf; for, whatever you may pre
tend, you do not, you cannot in your serious moments
believe, that your black complexioned, any more than
your red or black haired neighbours are void of the
like tender sensations. E.
LONDO N, October ^
MR. Wedderbarne has cost this c^ 1
price of two peerages. M ^ 1
have accepted the seals if Minifl.
him a peerage, but they did not t
that situation, and as being an Engliinman, deferveo
one ; but to make, way for Wedderburne, being a
Scotchman, and to do their dirty work in the upper
Ho'ufe, Mr. De Grey is made a Peer, and Sawney ex
alted to an Englilh peerage. How lorig will this per
secuted country bear to be ridden and trampled on
by a Scotch fatlion ?
The fcber, thinking part of mankind are exceed
ingly furprized at the appointment of the noble Earl
of Ref-heels to the Lieutenancy of)reland. At fo„CTI
- a moment as the present, when the temper ot the