Capt. Marryatt, Part I [pp. 253-276]

270 Capt. Marryall and his Dial. [APR1
flict between two races, distinguished by the indelible
mark of color, and mutually inflamed by the bitterest prejudices of caste? Wherever, from the paucity of the slave
population, no danger was incurred by ihe adoption of such
measures, provision was made for immediate, or gradual
emancipation. Slavery was retained only in those states,
where this unfortunate race bore a large proportion to the
whites, and where, consequently, the experiment of manumission would have been perilous. Our author himself
seems to have been sensible of the difficulties of any scheme
of abolition, unaccompanied by a provision for the deportation of the negroes. Speaking of the probability of a servile insurrection, he says: (first series, second vol., page
117,) "the intervention of a foreign power might bring it to
"pass; but it is to he hoped that England, at all events,
"will never be the party to foment a servile war. Let us
"not forget that for more than two centuries we have been
"particeps criminis, and should have been in as great difficulty
" as the Americans now are, had we had the negropopulation on
"ourown soil and not on distant islands, which could be legisla" ted for without affecting the condition of the manother country."
The fanatical philanthropist of England could, indeed,
lay claim to no extraordinary merit, when, at the distance
of three thousand miles, and without any sacrifice or danger on his part, he wrested from the West-Indian planter,
by an act of arbitrary legislation, the slave property, ac.
quired under the sanction of English laws, and, by the
same stroke, destroyed the value of land, and every other
possession in that quarter of the British dominions. In
his misguided zeal for the cause of humanity, he thinks
nothing of the invasion of the right of property; nothing
of the exile, misery and destitution, to which he has doomed the unfortunate colonist; nor does he perceive that it is
the incumbent force of the British government alone, which
prevents the repetition of the horrors of St. Domingo. The
compensation provided for by the English legislature, was
but a poor atonement for this enormous spoliation, and the
other injuries and losses, whichl have been its necessary
result. Let the capitalists and the aristocracy of Britain
beware, lest the chartists and radicals should profit by this
lesson, and, under pretexts equally specious, should one
day strip them of their honors and possessions. Yet this
act of emancipation, so clamorously demanded by the abolition party in that country, was delayed for many years,
by the difficulties, which environed the subject. On the
same principle it is, we presume, that the English governmnent has permitted thousands to remain in bondage at Cape
Town, and in the adjoining country; that domestic slavery
is undisturbed in the provinces of British India, and its
continuance secured by the obligation of treaties. With
what face then can an Englishman reproach us with having
violated our principles inr. the retention of slavery, when he
falls so far short of his own?
We do not enter here into the consideration of the moral
and political influences of slavery; not because we shrink
from the discussion, but simply because, in the limited
space assigned us, we cannot give it that full and thorough
examination which its importance demands. We believe
with many others, that the effect of this institution, on the
habits and character of the master, and on the genius of the
government, have been greatly misconceived by those who
maintain the expediency of abolition. We believe, too, that
the slave enjoys, generally, as much freedom as he is qualified to exercise with discretion; and that to release him
fiom his bonds, in his present degraded and demoralized
condition, would involve the infliction of unmixed, unmitigated evil upon him, no less than on the community at large.
It is, principally, in an economical point of view, that slavery
operates to the prejudice of the southern and south-western
states. How this subject is ultimately to be disposed of
remains hidden in the mists of futurity; b q~ wA 4otbt not,
that Providence, in its own good time, and by its own beneficent arrangements, will provide for the decision of a
question, which baffles the short sighted sagacity of man.
The institution of slavery, our author affirms, was retained here by deliberate design; and he produces a passage from the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, which was afterwards stricken out, he supposes, because its spirit and sentiments were incompatible with that
predetermined purpose. We have no doubt it was intended
to leave this subject, where it ought to be left, to the decision of the slave-owners themselves. As to the suppressed
passage, we see nothing in it inconsistent with the policy
and justice of permitting the rights of the master, so far as
slavery actually existed, to remain undisturbed. It charges,
in strong language, the encouragement of the African slavetrade, the introduction of negroes among us against our
consent, and the attempt to excite them to insurrection, as
grievances, which justified our revolt against the authority
of the British crown. We concur perfectly in these sentiments, nor can we perceive wherefore they should have
been expunged fiom the celebrated manifesto, which annouiiced to the world our reasons for abjuring allegiance to
the mother country. The act of making war on an unoffending people for the mercenary purposes of slave traffic,
is one thing: the toleration of slavery, where it already
prevails, is another and very different thing. The first is a
crime of the blackest dye, perpetrated with circumstances
of cruelty and horror, at which humanity shudders: the
last is the mere sanction of an institution actually existing,
which cannot be abolished without invading the principle of
private property, and endangering the pI)eae and safety of
the conmtmunity.
In his description of the condition and treatment of our
slaves, our author exhibits a greater apppearance of candor
than his wont, and indeed much more than the majority of
his countrymen. Though he has fallen into some inaccu,
racies, we do not deem them of sufficient importance to require a detailed refutation. That planters have sometimes
sold, or permitted to be sold, their illicit offspring by their
own slaves, is a melancholy and disgraceful truth. The
guilt of such men is aggravated by the fact, that there is no
obstacle to their emancipating the fruit of these degrading
amours; but, after all, is this much more criminal, than the
conduct of the debauchees, in all countries, who, without remorse, leave their illegitimate children to the tender mercies of chance? Such unnatural acts, when they do happen, we are sure, are always strongly condemned by the
moral sense of the great bulk of the slave-holders. We
have reason to believe, that our author's representation of
the severities, to which the negroes of the south-west are
subjected, is greatly exaggerated. If we are rightly informed, their general treatment in that quarter, with occasional exceptions, is indulgent and humane; though the
discipline is, certainly, stricter than in the Atlantic states.
Capt. Marryatt vindicates Virginia and the other eastern
slave states from the gratuitous aspersion of Mr. O'Connell, that they rear slaves, like cattle, for market; and acknowledges, that there is a general repugnance among proprietors to selling their negroes in the south-west, which
nothing but their own necessities or the misconduct of the
slaves can overcome. The testimony of such an unwilling
and prejudiced witness, will, we trust, put the slander of
the great agitator at rest forever.
The evil consequences resulting to the slaves from the
movements of that pestilent society, the abolitionists, and
the dangers which hang over the Union from the agitation
of the slavery question, are correctly depicted by our author. He is the first foreigner who seems to have fully
comprehended, that the federal government has no power
over the subject of emancipation, and that it falls exclu~}vely within the sphere of state authority. If would, by
270
Capt. Marrya.It and his Diary.
[APRILI