Saint Paul weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1858-1859, 1859-07-16
Letter No. 2...-To the FOreign-Born Cit
iAens OF Minnesota.
SLAVERY: WHITE AND BLACK ANCIENT AND
MODERN.
EditOrs of the Ninnss0tidn a.;

DEAR SRs In my first letter | sought
to define the two great parties Of the day
Let US next examine the true nature of that
topic which constitutes the difference between
them: Slavery. /
We do not always comprehend the fun
meaning of words in daily use. Their very
familiarity disarms them of their complete sig
nificance How few of us, when using the
words "space" or eternity" pause to con-
template the full length and breadth of their
meaning. In the same manner, the word
slavery" from constant usage, fails to ex-
press to the mind all the abhorent nature of
the institution ITSELF What then is slavery
The Creator when He brought into being
the human race, implanted, in every member
fit, instincts, powers, faculties, the very
presence of which imply the right to their
free exercise. He gave to every individual
the. same rights; the right to life, the right to
freedom, the right to pursue his own concep-
tons of happiness, trammeled only by the re-
straints which nature imposes on itself Al
though mankind might afterwards, either for
common safety, or in obedience to a gregarious
instinct, come together and each sacrifice
portion OF his natural rights toward general
fund of public good, constituting what is call
ed society; yet, looking either to the nature of
man, or the principles of universal justice,
there is no way in which one man can become
the property and chattel of another in which
he can lose the ownership which nature has
given him of himself Man can have, under
God, and of right, no owner save himself
And it is the converse of this plain proposition
which slavery pretends to teach. Itattempts
to show, that from certain causes, a portion of
the human family have lost their distinctive
manhood, and have become the property, the
stock in trade, the personal estate of another.
Let US pause to examine the nature of the
causes which are claimed to produce such
strange results.
In the first place, slavery has, by its defend
ers, been most generally based upon the right
obtained by the victor in battle, who sparing
the life Of his captive, thereby acquires the
ownership of that life; or in other words, that
the captive ever afterwards holds his life in
trust for the benefit of him who spared it.
1t is not necessary to discuss this point Al
any length. Civilization has long since deci
ded that no such right exists. An advancing
public sentiment has stripped the contests o
nations OF many of their ancient horrors, ane
among others of this, the. most ancient and hor
r rl6le. Even the great barbarism, war, re
fuses longer to act as the prolific nurse Q
that greater barbarism, slavery. The soldie
may IN the heat of battle strike down his enc
, my; he may take that enemy prisoner; bu
5 in no Christian or civilized land is he permit
ted to subsequently deprive him of his life
much less, to subject him to perpetual bond
, age. Such practices are tolerated only anon
/, savages from whom intelligent humanity ca
S draw neither examples nor arguments.
In the second place, it is sometimes sougl
!, to justify slavery by comparing it to the col
S dition of apprentices, cor persons bound
e service for term of years." A few wore
J will, however, show that such comparisons a
q, specious. ..-.a.f
n In the case of the apprentice, his master
u entitled to nothing but his labor. He has !
~ . claim to his body or his offspring, and mol
4. even to his time after his allotted task is pc
Sc formed. Again, the apprentice for his lab
I'd receives an adequate consideration, eth