Year: 1861

Such is the testimony Of DR.. Claiming,
given in the year 1889. What would he
have thought and said II he had lived un-
til the year 1860, and seen this little
stream, over whose infant violence he la
mented, swelling into torrent and food
ing the land?


Do not these abolitionist philosophers
know that according to the laws of every
civilized country on earth man has prop
erty in his children and woman has


property in her husband? The statutes
OF the State of New York and Of every
other Northern State recognize and pro-


tect this property, and our courts ofjus.


tice have repeatedly assessed it's value


II man is killed on railroad his wife


may bring suit and recover damages for


the pecuniary loss she has suffered. If


one man entice away the daughter Of an


other, and marry her while she is still un-


der age, the father may bring a civil suit


for damages for the loss of that child's


services, and the pecuniary compensation


is the only redress the law provides


Thus the common law of Christendom


and the statutes of our own State recog-


nize property in man. In what does


that property consist? Simply in such


services as a man or child may proper.


ly be required to render. This is all that
the Levitical law, or any other law, means


when it says: "Your bondmen shall be
your possession or property, and an in.
heritance for your children" The prop.
erty consists not in the right to treat the
slave like brute, but simply in Legal
claim for such service as a man in that
position may properly be required to
render. And yet Abolitionists, in the
face of the divine law, persist in dcnounc
ing the very relation between master and
slave, "as modification, at least, of that


which exists between man and brutes -
This, however, is not the worst or most
prevalent form which their abusive spirit
assumes. Their mode of arguing the


question Of slaveholding, by pretended
: appeal to facts, is tissue of misrepre
sentation from beginning to end. Let


me illustrate my meaning by a parable
: case. Suppose undertake to prove the


wickedness of marriage as it exists in the
city of New York. In this discussion
, suppose the Bible is excluded, or at least
that it is not recognized as having exclu


sive jurisdiction in the decision of tn,


question. My first appeal is to the stat
ute law of the State.


show there enactments which nullif,
the law of God and make divorce a mar
ketable and cheap commodity. collec
the advertisements Of your daily papers
in which lawyers offer to procure the le
gal sepaltion of man and wife for stip
ulated price, to say nothing in this SACRED
place Of other advertisements which de
cency forbids me to quote Then l turr
to the records of our criminal courts, anC
!, find that every day some cruel HUSBAND
beats his wife, or some unnatural parent
murders his child, or some disconnected
wife or husband seeks the dissolution OF
the marriage bond. In the next place,
turn to the orphan assylums and hospit-
ais, and show there the miserable wrecks
of domestic tyranny, in wives deserted


and children MANNED by drunken parents
In the last place, I go through our streets
and into tenement houses, and count the
thousands Of ragged children who, amid
ignorance and filth, are training for the


prison and gallows. Summing all these
facts together. / put them forth as the


fruits Of marriage in the city of New
York, and proof that the relation itself
is sinful. III were novelist, and had
written a book to illustrate this same
doctrine, I would call this array of facts
"Key." In this key 1 say nothing
about the sweet charities and affections
that flourish in ten thousand homes, not
word about the multitude of honest


people, about the instructions and disci.
pline that are training children at ten
thousand firesides for usefulness here and
glory hereafter, all this l ignore, and


quote only the statute book, the newspa-
per, the records of criminal courts and
the miseries of the abodes of poverty


Now, what have I done? I have not
misstated or exaggerated single fact
And yet am not falsifer and slanderer


of the deepest die? Is there a virtuous


woman or an honest man in this city
whose cheeks would not burn with indig-


nation at my one sided and injurious
statements? Now, this is Just what abb


olitionism has done in regard to slave


holding.


This method of argument has contin-
ued until multitudes of honest Christian
people in this and other lands believe that


slaveholding is the sin of sins. the sum OF


all villainies. Let me illustrate this by


an incident in my own experience. A
few years since l took from the centre ia


BILE of Christian family in Scotland, by
whom had been most kindly entertained


a book entitled "Life and Manners in


America" On the blank Leaf was an in


scription, stating that the book had been


bestowed upon one Of the children of the


family as reward of diligence in an in


stitution of learning. The frontispiece


was a picture of man of fierce counte-


nance beating naked woman. The con-


tents of the book were professedly com


piled from Americans upon the subject OF


slavery. dare not quote in this place


the extracts which made in my memor


andum. 1t will be sufficient to say that
tbo boOly oceartc nc ,D1npbtaJ foot, tbot