Cotton is King, and Pro-Slavery Arguments Part 24

FOOTNOTE:

[135] The _London Economist_, from which we copy, observes, that the figures in this table differ slightly from some other estimates, as must be the case in all computations that are not official, but that from examination it has reason to think them as near the truth as any practical object can require. The quant.i.ties consumed in each country include the direct imports from the producing countries, as well as the indirect imports, chiefly from England. The consumption on the Continent, for 1858, was not known. January 15, 1859, the date of publication of the _Economist_. The bales are estimated at 400 lbs.

each.

TABLE XII.

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF THE VALUE OF EXPORTS OF THE GROWTH, PRODUCE, AND MANUFACTURE OF THE UNITED STATES, FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1859; THE PRODUCTIONS OF THE NORTH AND OF THE SOUTH, RESPECTIVELY, BEING PLACED IN OPPOSITE COLUMNS; AND THE ARTICLES OF A MIXED ORIGIN BEING STATED SEPARATELY.--_Report on Com. and Nav._, 1859.

========================================================================= EXPORTS OF THE NORTH. EXPORTS OF THE SOUTH.

PRODUCT OF THE FOREST. PRODUCT OF THE FOREST.

Wood and its products, $7,829,666 Wood and its products, $2,210,884 Ashes, pot and pearl, 643,861 Tar and pitch 141,058 Ginseng, 54,204 Rosin and turpentine, 2,248,381 Skins and furs, 1,361,352 Spirits of turpentine, 1,306,035 PRODUCT OF AGRICULTURE. PRODUCT OF AGRICULTURE.

Animals and their products, 15,262,769 Animals and their products, 287,048 Wheat and wheat flour, 15,113,455 Wheat and wheat flour, 2,169,328 Indian corn and meal, 2,206,396 Indian corn and meal, 110,976 Other grains, biscuit, Biscuit or ship bread, 12,864 and vegetables, 2,226,585 Rice, 2,207,148 Hemp, and Clover seed, 546,060 Cotton, 161,434,923 Flax seed, 8,177 Tobacco, in leaf, 21,074,038 Hops, 53,016 Brown sugar, 196,935 ----------- ------------ $45,305,541 $193,399,618

ARTICLES OF MIXED ORIGIN.

Refined sugar, wax, chocolate, mola.s.ses, $ 550,937 Spirituous liquors, ale, porter, beer, cider, vinegar, linseed oil, 1,370,787 Household furniture, carriages, rail-road cars, etc. 1,722,797 Hats, fur, silk, palm leaf, saddlery, trunks, valises, 317,727 Tobacco, manufactured and snuff, 3,402,491 Gunpowder, leather, boots, shoes, cables, cordage, 2,011,931 Salt, lead, iron and its manufactures, 5,744,952 Copper and bra.s.s, and manufactures of, 1,048,246 Drugs and medicines, candles and soap, 1,933,973 Cotton fabrics of all kinds, 8,316,222 Other products of manufactures and mechanics, 3,852,910 Coal and ice, 818,117 Products not enumerated, 4,132,857 Gold and silver, in coin and bullion, 57,502,305 Products of the sea, being oil, fish, whalebone, etc. 4,462,974 ------------ $97,189,226 Add Northern exports, 45,305,541 Add Southern exports, 193,399,618 ------------ Total exports, $335,894,385 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPLANATORY NOTE.--The whole of the exports from the ports of Delaware, Baltimore, and New Orleans, are placed in the column of Northern exports, because there is no means of determining what proportion of them were from free or slave States, and it has been thought best to give this advantage to the North. Taking into the account only the heavier amounts, the exports from these ports foot up $11,287,898; of which near one-half consisted of provisions and lumber. The total imports for the year were $338,768,130. Of this $20,895,077 were re-exported, which, added to the domestic exports, makes the total exports $356,789,462, thus leaving a balance in our favor of $18,021,332.

[Ill.u.s.tration]

LIBERTY AND SLAVERY:

OR,

SLAVERY IN THE LIGHT OF MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

BY

ALBERT TAYLOR BLEDSOE, LL. D.,

PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA.

LIBERTY AND SLAVERY:

OR,

SLAVERY IN THE LIGHT OF MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY,

INTRODUCTION.

THIS work has, for the most part, been thought out for several years, and various portions of it reduced to writing. Though we have long cherished the design of preparing it for the press, yet other engagements, conspiring with a spirit of procrastination, have hitherto induced us to defer the execution of this design. Nor should we have prosecuted it, as we have done, during a large portion of our last summer vacation, and the leisure moments of the first two months of the present session of the University, but for the solicitation of two intelligent and highly-esteemed friends. In submitting the work, as it now is, to the judgment of the truth-loving and impartial reader, we beg leave to offer one or two preliminary remarks.

We have deemed it wise and proper to notice only the more decent, respectable, and celebrated among the abolitionists of the North. Those scurrilous writers, who deal in wholesale abuse of Southern character, we have deemed unworthy of notice. Their writings are, no doubt, adapted to the taste of their readers; but as it is certain that no educated gentleman will tolerate them, so we would not raise a finger to promote their downfall, nor to arrest their course toward the oblivion which so inevitably awaits them.

In replying to the others, we are conscious that we have often used strong language; for which, however, we have no apology to offer. We have dealt with their arguments and positions rather than with their motives and characters. If, in pursuing this course, we have often spoken strongly, we merely beg the reader to consider whether we have not also spoken justly. We have certainly not spoken without provocation. For even these men--the very lights and ornaments of abolitionism--have seldom condescended to argue the great question of Liberty and Slavery with us as with equals. On the contrary, they habitually address us as if nothing but a purblind ignorance of the very first elements of moral science could shield our minds against the force of their irresistible arguments. In the overflowing exuberance of their philanthropy, they take pity of our most lamentable moral darkness, and graciously condescend to teach us the very A B C of ethical philosophy!

Hence, if we have deemed it a duty to lay bare their pompous inanities, showing them to be no oracles, and to strip their pitiful sophisms of the guise of a profound philosophy, we trust that no impartial reader will take offense at such vindication of the South against her accusers and despisers.

In this vindication, we have been careful throughout to distinguish between the abolitionists, our accusers, and the great body of the people of the North. Against these we have said nothing, and we could say nothing; since for these we entertain the most profound respect. We have only a.s.sailed those by whom we have been a.s.sailed; and we have held each and every man responsible only for what he himself has said and done. We should, indeed, despise ourselves if we could be guilty of the monstrous injustice of denouncing a whole people on account of the sayings and doings of a portion of them. We had infinitely rather suffer such injustice--as we have so long done--than practice it toward others.

We cannot flatter ourselves, of course, that the following work is without errors. But these, whatever else may be thought of them, are not the errors of haste and inconsideration. For if we have felt deeply on the subject here discussed, we have also thought long, and patiently endeavored to guard our minds against fallacy. How far this effort has proved successful, it is the province of the candid and impartial reader alone to decide. If our arguments and views are unsound, we hope he will reject them. On the contrary, if they are correct and well-grounded, we hope he will concur with us in the conclusion, that the inst.i.tution of slavery, as it exists among us at the South, is founded in political justice, is in accordance with the will of G.o.d and the designs of his providence, and is conducive to the highest, purest, best interests of mankind.

CHAPTER I.

THE NATURE OF CIVIL LIBERTY.

The commonly-received definition of Civil Liberty.--Examination of the commonly-received definition of Civil Liberty.--No good law ever limits or abridges the Natural Liberty of Mankind.--The distinction between Rights and Liberty.--The Relation between the State of Nature and Civil Society.--Inherent and Inalienable Rights.--Conclusion of the First Chapter.

FEW subjects, if any, more forcibly demand our attention, by their intrinsic grandeur and importance, than the great doctrine of human liberty. Correct views concerning this are, indeed, so intimately connected with the most profound interests, as well as with the most exalted aspirations, of the human race, that any material departure therefrom must be fraught with evil to the living, as well as to millions yet unborn. They are so inseparably interwoven with all that is great and good and glorious in the destiny of man, that whosoever aims to form or to propagate such views should proceed with the utmost care, and, laying aside all prejudice and pa.s.sion, be guided by the voice of reason alone.

Hence it is to be regretted--deeply regretted--that the doctrine of liberty has so often been discussed with so little apparent care, with so little moral earnestness, with so little real energetic searching and longing after truth. Though its transcendent importance demands the best exertion of all our powers, yet has it been, for the most part, a theme for pa.s.sionate declamation, rather than of severe a.n.a.lysis or of protracted and patient investigation. In the warm praises of the philosopher, no less than in the glowing inspirations of the poet, it often stands before us as a vague and ill-defined _something_ which all men are required to worship, but which no man is bound to understand. It would seem, indeed, as if it were a mighty something not to be clearly seen, but only to be deeply felt. And felt it has been, too, by the ignorant as well as by the learned, by the simple as well as by the wise: felt as a fire in the blood, as a fever in the brain, and as a phantom in the imagination, rather than as a form of light and beauty in the intelligence. How often have the powers of darkness surrounded its throne, and desolation marked its path! How often from the altars of this _unknown idol_ has the blood of human victims streamed! Even here, in this glorious land of ours, how often do the _too-religious_ Americans seem to become deaf to the most appalling lessons of the past, while engaged in the frantic worship of this their tutelary deity! At this very moment, the highly favored land in which we live is convulsed from its centre to its circ.u.mference, by the agitations of these pious devotees of freedom; and how long ere scenes like those which called forth the celebrated exclamation of Madame Roland--"O Liberty, what crimes are perpetrated in thy name!" may be enacted among us, it is not possible for human sagacity or foresight to determine.

If no one would talk about liberty except those who had taken the pains to understand it, then would a perfect calm be restored, and peace once more bless a happy people. But there are so many who imagine they understand liberty as Falstaff knew the true prince, namely, by instinct, that all hope of such a consummation must be deferred until it may be shown that their instinct is a blind guide, and its oracles are false. Hence the necessity of a close study and of a clear a.n.a.lysis of the nature and conditions of civil liberty, in order to a distinct delineation of the great idol, which all men are so ready to worship, but which so few are willing to take the pains to understand. In the prosecution of such an inquiry, we intend to consult neither the pecuniary interests of the South nor the prejudices of the North; but calmly and immovably proceed to discuss, upon purely scientific principles, this great problem of our social existence and national prosperity, upon the solution of which the hopes and destinies of mankind in no inconsiderable measure depend. We intend no appeal to pa.s.sion or to sordid interest, but only to the reason of the wise and good. And if justice, or mercy, or truth, be found at war with the inst.i.tution of slavery, then, in the name of G.o.d, let slavery perish.

But however guilty, still let it be tried, condemned, and executed according to law, and not extinguished by a despotic and lawless power more terrific than itself.

-- I. _The commonly-received definition of civil liberty._

"Civil liberty," says Blackstone, "is no other than natural liberty so far restrained as is necessary and expedient for the general advantage."

This definition seems to have been borrowed from Locke, who says that, when a man enters into civil society, "he is to part with so much of his _natural liberty_, in providing for himself, as the good, prosperity, and safety of the society shall require." So, likewise, say Paley, Berlamaqui, Rutherforth, and a host of others. Indeed, among jurists and philosophers, such seems to be the commonly-received definition of civil liberty. It seems to have become a political maxim that civil liberty is no other than a certain portion of our natural liberty, which has been carved therefrom, and secured to us by the protection of the laws.

But is this a sound maxim? Has it been deduced from the nature of things, or is it merely a plausible show of words? Is it truth--solid and imperishable truth--or merely one of those fair semblances of truth, which, through the too hasty sanction of great names, have obtained a currency among men? The question is not what Blackstone, or Locke, or Paley may have thought, but what is truth? Let us examine this point, then, in order that our decision may be founded, not upon the authority of man, but, if possible, in the wisdom of G.o.d.

-- II. _Examination of the commonly-received definition of civil liberty._

Before we can determine whether such be the origin of civil liberty, we must first ascertain the character of that natural liberty out of which it is supposed to be reserved. What, then, is natural liberty? What is the nature of the material out of which our civil liberty is supposed to be fashioned by the art of the political sculptor? It is thus defined by Locke: "To understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider what state all men are naturally in; and that is a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, _within the bounds of the law of nature_, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man."[136] In perfect accordance with this definition, Blackstone says: "This natural liberty consists in a power of acting as one thinks fit, without any restraint or control, unless by the laws of nature, being a right inherent in us by birth, and one of the gifts of G.o.d to man at his creation, when he endowed him with the faculty of free-will." Such, according to Locke and Blackstone, is that natural liberty, which is limited and abridged, as they suppose, when we enter into the bonds of civil society.

Now mark its features: it is the gift of G.o.d to man at his creation; the very top and flower of his existence; that by which he is distinguished from the lower animals and raised to the rank of moral and accountable beings. Shall we sacrifice this divine gift, then, in order to secure the blessings of civil society? Shall we abridge or mutilate the image of G.o.d, stamped upon the soul at its creation, by which we are capable of knowing and obeying his law, in order to secure the aid and protection of man? Shall we barter away any portion of this our glorious birthright for any poor boon of man's devising? Yes, we are told--and why? Because, says Blackstone, "Legal obedience and conformity is infinitely more valuable than _the wild and savage liberty which is sacrificed to obtain it_."

But how is this? _Now_ this natural liberty is a thing of light, and _now_ it is a power of darkness. Now it is the gift of G.o.d, that moves within a sphere of light, and breathes an atmosphere of love; and anon, it is a wild and savage thing that carries terror in its train. It would be an angel of light, if it were not a power of darkness; and it would be a power of darkness, if it were not an angel of light. But as it is, it is both by turns, and neither long, but runs through its Protean changes, according to the exigencies of the flowing discourse of the learned author. Surely such inconsistency, so glaring and so portentous, and all exhibited on one and the same page, is no evidence that the genius of the great commentator was as steady and profound as it was elegant and cla.s.sical.