Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1861-03-21

|
practicable. A people may be so entirely
surrendered to the influence Of passion, and
so feebly Influenced by moral restraints,
that government which relied upon moral
restraint could not exist for a day. In this
case subordinate and inferior principle yet
remains-the principle of fear, and the
only resort is to government of force. -
These are precisely the facts incorporated
and acted upon in slavery, and their ad-
mission by such authorities as those quoted,
scatters to the wind the objection we are
considering.
II. Ii as said that slavery concerts men
into mere chadels, and so authorizes mas.
ters to traffic in human souls. This, as ev-
cry body knows, is one of the hackneyed
commonplaces of Abolitiopists, and may be
met by positive denial and contradiction.
We base this contradiction upon the follow
ing facts. u. The fundamental idea of
the objection does not enter into any proper
definition of slavery. Saysa master Tbeo
Logan, himself an anti.slavery man. "All
the ideas which necessarily enter into the
definition of slavery are deprivation of per-
soual liberty, obligation of service at the
discretion of another, and the transferable
character of the authority and claim of the
MASTER" Or. Hodge,. The essence OF
slavery is the masters right to use and con-
troll and dispose of the services Of his
slave. The master has, and claims, no
right over the soul of his slave; that belongs
and the master recognizes it, as belonging,
alone to God. No master regards, or treats
his slave as any other than human being,
and hence it is mere cant to talk of the
slaves being divested of human nature, or
even of his rights as responsible creature.
b. In all slave States, slaves are under a
regular system of laws, which, however un-
just they may sometimes be, do recognize
their character as accountable beings
Men do not arraign and try on evidence,
and punish on conviction either brutes or
mere things, and yet this is everywhere done
upon slaves who commit punishable crimes
1t is the Abolitionist, and not the slave
holder, that regards and pronouuces the
slave mere chattel or thing. The law of
South Carolina says: "Slaves shall be de-
livered, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged
in law to be chattels personal, in the hands
of their owners and possesscrs, and their
executors, administrators, and assiguees, to
all iptents, constructions and purposes what
ever" This and every other similar law,
teaches very different thing from what the
objection assumes. For it is clear to any
discerning mind that to declare man may
be held as "chattel PERSONAL is very
different thing from declaring that he is a
mere chattel. The law of no State pro.
nounces negro to be a mere thing or a
mere chattel, and hence does not divest
him of his human character, nor gives the
owner any property in his soul, but alone
allows him the right to control his services.
c. If the objector means to say that hold
ing the slave as property, necessarily in'
wolves the idea impliediu his objection, we
deny his position. Propertyis the right of
possession and use, and must, of necessity,
vary according to the nature of the objects
to which it attaches. A man has property
in his wife, in his children, in his domestic
animals, in his fields and in his forests
That is, be has right to possess and use
these several objects according to their ma
ture. When the idea of property in slaves
is analysed, it is found to be nothing more
than claim and control of service for a
term of years or for life. This claim is
transferable, since there is nothing in this
transfer inconsistent with the nature Of the
slave, nor does holding and treating him as
species of property, in any way rob the
slave of his humanity, or allow his master
to use him in way not corresponding with
his nature. The employment of this word
property, to describe the claim the master
has upon his slaves, has scripture founda'
ton. In Levitt. 25 AS, 46, the slave is
called "the possession" of his master, and
in Exod. 2l :2l shis money" and in the
10th commandment "thipg" not to be
coveted. If such use of terms does not
imply what the objection alleges, neither
does our calling the slave the property,
| "the chattel PERSONAL of his master, do it.
III. II is again objected that our system
of slarery compels negroes to serOe pitho"'
cages or compensation. To this we an
swer, that even if this were true it would
only be what is practiced by human gov.
ernments upon large scale. In times Of
war aud calamity, the citizens are often
compelled to serve a government without
adequate remuneration, showing that this
is right inherent in society, to be exer'
cised whenever occasion demands. Thus
it might be plead in justification of slave
ry. But We observe again that the objec-
ton is untrue. Our slaves do receive
wages and compensation. By law master
is required to feed, and clothe, and shelter
his slaves; to provide for them in infancy
and old age, in sickness and health, and to
care for their families, and this he is bound
to do at all times. If put into dollars and
cents, the actual value of food, clothing,
house room, attention to family, board Of
helpless children, doctor bills, and besides
large amount of leisure, uuoccupied time,
would amount to large compensation for
the negroes services. The form in which
this reward is paid, does not alter the char
acter of it. 1t is the same thing whether
the laborer is paid as much money as will
furnish the necessaries of life, or furnished
those necessaries at hand. The one is as
truly reward for labor as the other. Fur
| h. ,ot,,1 oo,,oon.,t,on