Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1873-11-04

But as preliminary to their consideration,
wish to advert briefly to some prominent facts
connected with the Introduction OF the African
race into our country, and to show by wnom
they have become disturbing element in our
political affairs.
I do this in no aggressive spirit, but for two
fold purpose:
lst To vindicate the Southern States, and
more especially Virginia, from all responsibility
for the African slave trade; and,
I'd. To show to our N Northern brethren that as
the responsibility oil bringing this evil upon the
people of the South rests in large measure, with
them, there is corresponding obligation on
them to give US efficient aid in getting rid of it.
have no wish or purpose to discuss the IN
sttution of slavery, in any OF its aspects, morals
religious, social or political. These matters all
belong to the past Slavery is dead dead and
buried beyond the possibility of resurrection: l
cheerfully recognize and accept the fact. and. in
behalf of coming generations. thank God that
they are relieved of its responsibilities. My pur
pose is to deal only with the living present and
the domain of impartial history.
When the late civil war closed, slavery exist
ed only in the Southern States and as the pref
udices of the civilized world had been strongly
enlisted against the institution, these prejudces
were naturally turned against the Southern
States as the only slave-holding CO "munities IN
our country. Few took the trouble to inquire
by whose agency slaves were brought into the
OOutQ0rn OCaCoS, ana at whose QOOr Lu0 TospOH-
sibility rested. The whole odium which at
tsched to the institution of slavery has thus been
unjustly thrown on the Southern States.
On this point, propose to
vINDIcATE THE TRUTH OF HISTORY,
and to show by irrefragable proof. that the re-
sponsibility for the slave trade rests, in much
larger measure, on the Northern States than on
the South
If there was sin incurred in the introduction
of African slaves into country, it was not the
sin of Virginia. So far as history or tradition
shows no Virginia ship was ever engaged in the
African slave trade. All that were occupied in
that nefarous traffic belong to foreign countries,
or were owned or employed by citizens of N New
Hampshire, Massachusetts,, Connecticut, Rhode
Island, or New York.
VIRGINIA OPPOSED TO THE SLAVE TRADE.
The history of Virginia presents an un broken
record of steadfast opposition to the African
slave trade. Before the Revolution, she sought,
in van by legislation. to arrest it; and the pre-
amble to the first constitution, prepared by
George Mason, and adopted on the 18th of June,
1776, three weeks before the Declaration Of In
dependence, in reciting the causes of complaint
against the British government assigns, as one
of the most prominent. that the King, by the
inhuman use of his negative refused permission
to exclude by law, the Introduction of negro
slaves" And the original draft of the Declara-
tioD of Independence; as prepared by Thomas
Jefferson contained still more emphatic de-
nunciation of the slave trade. It is expressed in
these words: He (the King has waged cruel
war against human nature itself, violating its
most sacred rights of life and liberty, in the per-
SONS of distant people, who never offended
him, captivating and carrying them into sla-
very, in another hemisphere, or to incur miser-
able death in their transportation thither. This
piratical warfare the opprobrium of l'.ideL poa0-
ers. is the warfare of the Christian King ofGreat
Britain. Determined to keep open q market
where men should be bought and sold, he has
prostituted his negative for suppressing every
legislative attempt to prohibit restrain this
execrable commerce y jeff Memoirs, vol. l, p
10
Two years after the Declaration of Indepen-
dence, viz: in 1778 Virginia passed act of
the most stringent character, prohi biting the in
PRODUCTION of slaves into her territory, and pre-
scribng severe penalties for its violation.-[Hen.
Stat. VOL g. p AL
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE NORTHERN STATES.
Again. when the proposition was made, in the
Federal convention of 1878 to allow the Afri-
can slave trade to be carried on until 1903,
while Massachusetts, New Hamshire and Con-
necticut voted for it, and Rhode Island and
New York refused to vote at all on the question,
George Mason, one of her most illustrious sons
in his letter to the Legislature. explaining why
he refused to approve and sign the constitution,
gave as one of his most prominent reasons, the
fact that 1t failed to place an immediate inter-
dict ON the african sLGve trade.
These indisputable historical facts furnish an
ample vindicaton of Virginia from all partici-
patton in the slave trade, which was commenced
and continued against her earnest and persis-
tent remOnstrance
SELFISH POLICY OF THE NORTH
The next prominent fact connected with this
subject to which wish to invite public atten-
ton. is, that while the Northern States have
manifested such an earnest desire to liberate the
slaves of the Southern people, not one of those
States has ever, by law, liberated single slave
oftheir own Their so-called emancipation laws
were all contingent and prospective. They did
not provide for the freedom of any slave then
in being but only for the liberation of such as
might be born within their respective bounda-
ries after dates prescribed in their several stat
utes; and even these after-bo slaves were
bound to serve as such until they attained the
age, in some cases, Oftwenty -one and In others,
of twenty-five years The effect, If not the pur-
pose of these laws, was to lnaugurate a who!e-
sale slave trade from the Northern to the South
that if actual emancipation should occur in the
future the loss would fall, as it has fallen, ex-
clusively on the people of the South.
The census of 1880 shows that even as late as
that period slaves were IN fact held ana report
ed as such in every Northern State, except Ver-
mont, which was not one of the original thirteen
States. Rhode Island passed her first emancipa-
ton law in 1774, Pennsylvania in 1880, New Jer-
sey and Connecticut in 1874. and New YORK IN
1883: but strange to say Massachusetts which
of late years has been so clam orous for emanci-
patton, Jagged far behind her Northern sisters
in the benefcent work of liberation. Slavery
continued to exist within her borders, under the
sanction of law, until 1896, and then it ceased to
exist, not by legislation specially directed to
that end but by retroactive decision of the Su-
preme court which purported to be founded on
the Massachusetts bill of rights, which had been
adopted twenty years before, but which had not
been so construed prior to the determination, in
1896, of the of Littleton Tuttle, reported
in 4th Mass, 127.
These historical facts establish two PROPOSE
tions
1st. That Virginia is guiltless of all active
participation in the slave trade.
2nd That the reproaches cast on the States
of the South, in regard to slavery, come with ill
grace from their Northern sisters.
Nav this brief retrospect teach to both Sec
tions
LESSON OF MUTUAL CHARITY AND FORBEAR-
ANCE,
and incline the hearts of the people of the North
to lend willing aid in relieving their Southern
brethren from an evil which they have been in
strumental in fastening on them.
Having thus placed Virginia in her true posi-
ton in regard to the save-trade I will now pro-
ceed to consider the following questions:
REMEDY FOR THE EVIL
l. Is the presence of the negro race in our
midst prejudicial to the best interests of our
country and if So
2. Is there any practicable means of removing
the evi2
In all ages and countries a homogeneous popu-
lation of the same race, with kindred interests,
feelings and habits has been justly regarded as
one of the strongest bonds of union and surest
sources of tranquility and strength We all re-
member how the whore country was startled a
few years ago by the announcement of the prop
our Union could not exist, one-half slave and
the other half free This dogma was founded