Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

not independent community. They were subject to the Jewish from the expostulation of Moses with Jehovah. (Num. xii. 21, 22.) nation as tributaries. So far from being distributed among the "The people among whom I am are six hundred thousand footIsraelites and their internal organization as a distinct people abolished, men, and thou hast said, I will give them flesh that they may eat they remained a separate, and in some respects, an independent a whole month; shall the flocks and the herds be slain for them to community for many centuries. When attacked by the Amorites. suffice them?" As these six hundred thousand were only the men they applied to the Israelites as confederates for aid—it was rendered," from twenty years old and upward, that were able to go forth to their enemies routed, and themselves left unmolested in their cities. (Josh. x. 6-18). Long afterwards, Saul slew some of them, and God sent upon Israel a three years' famine for it. David inquired of the Gibeonites, "What shall I do for you, and wherewith shall I make the atonement?" At their demand, he delivered up to them seven of Saul's descendants. (2 Sam. xxi. 1—9.) The whole transaction was a formal recognition of the Gibeonites as a distinct people. There is no intimation that they served either families or individuals of the Israelites, but only the "house of God," or the Tabernacle. This was established first at Gilgal, a day's journey from their cities; and then at Shiloh, nearly two days' journey from them; where it continued about 350 years. During this period the Gibeonites inhabited their ancient cities and territory. Only a few, comparatively, could have been absent at any one time in attendance on the Tabernacle. Wherever allusion is made to them in the history, the main body are spoken of as at home. It is preposterous to suppose that all the inhabitants of these four cities could find employment at the tabernacle. One of them "was a great city, as one of the royal cities;" so large, that a confederacy of five kings, apparently the most powerful in the land, was deemed necessary for its destruction. It is probable that the men were divided into classes, ministering in rotation-each class a few days or weeks at a time. As the priests, whose assistants they were, served by courses in rotation a week at a time; it is not improbable that their periods of service were so arranged as to correspond. This service was their national tribute to the Israelites, for the privilege of residence and protection under their government. No service seems to have been required of the females. As these Gibeonites were Canaanites, and as they had greatly exasperated the Israelites by impudent imposition and lying, we might assuredly expect that they would reduce them to the condition of chattels, if there were any case in which God permitted them to do so.

war" (Ex. i. 45, 46); the whole number of the Israelites could not have been less than three millions and a half. Flocks and herds to "suffice" all these for food, might surely be called "very much cattle." 5. They had their own form of Goverment, and preserved their tribe and family divisions, and their internal organization throughout, though still a province of Egypt, and tributary to it. (Ex. ii. 1; xii. 19, 21; vi. 14, 25; v. 19; iii. 16, 18.) 6. They had in a considerable measure, the disposal of their own time. (Ex. iii. 16, 18; xii. 6; ii. 9; and iv. 27, 29–31. They seem to have practised the fine arts. (Ex. xxxii. 4; xxxv. 22, 35.) 7. They were all armed. (Ex. xxxii. 27.) 8. They held their possessions independently, and the Egyptians seem to have regarded them as inviolable. No intimation is given that the Egyptians dispossessed them of their habitations, or took away their flocks, or herds, or crops, or implements of agriculture, or any article of property. 9. All the females seem to have known something of domestic refinements. They were familiar with instruments of music, and skilled in the working of fine fabrics. (Ex. xv. 20 xxxv. 25, 26;) and both males and females were able to read and write. (Deut. xi. 18-20; xvii. 19; xxvii. 3.) 10. Service seems to have been exacted from none but adult males. Nothing is said from which the bond service of females could be inferred; the hiding of Moses three months by his mother, and the payment of wages to her by Pharoah's daughter, go against such a supposition. (Ex. ii. 29.) 11. Their food was abundant and of great variety. So far from being fed upon a fixed allowance of a single article, and hastily prepared; "they sat by the flesh-pots," and "did eat bread to the full." (Ex. xvi. 3;) And their bread was prepared with leaven. (Ex. xii. 15, 39.) They ate "the fish freely, the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic." (Num. xi. 4, 5; xx. 5.) Probably but a small portion of the people were in the service of the Egyptians at any one time. The extent and variety of their own possessions, together with such a cultivation of their crops as would provide them with bread, and such care of their immense flocks and herds, as would secure their profitable increase, must have kept at home the main body of the nation. During the plague of darkness, God informs us that “ ALL the children of Israel had light in their dwellings." We infer that they were there to enjoy it. See also Ex. ix. 26. It seems impro"Forbable that the making of brick, the only service named during the latter part of their sojourn in Egypt, could have furnished permanent employment for the bulk of the nation. (See also Ex. iv. 29-31.) Besides, when Eastern nations employed tributaries, it in the use of the levy, requiring them to furnish a given quota, drafted off periodically, so that comparatively but a small portion of the nation would be absent at any one time. The adult males of the Israelites were probably divided into companies, which relieved each other at stated intervals of weeks or months. It might have been during one of these periodical furloughs from service that Aaron performed the journey to Horeb. (Ex. iv. 27.) At the least calculation this journey must have consumed eight weeks. Probably one-fifth part of the proceeds of their labour was required of the Israelites in common with the Egyptians. (Gen. xlvii. 24, 26.) Instead of taking it of their crops (Goshen being better for pasturage), they exacted it from them in brick making; and labour might have been exacted only from the poorer Israelites, the wealthly being able to pay their tribute in money. The fact that all the elders of Israel seem to have controlled their own time (See Ex. iv. 29; iii. 16; v. 20), favours the supposition. (Ex. iv. 27, 31.) Contrast this bondage of Egypt with American slavery. Have our slaves "flocks and herds, even very much cattle?" Do they live in commodious houses of their own, "sit by the flesh-pots," "eat fish freely," and "eat bread to the full?" Do they live in a separate community, in their distinct tribes, under their own rulers, in the exclusive occupation of an extensive tract of country for the culture of their crops, and for rearing immense herds of their own cattle-and all these held inviolable by their masters? Are our female slaves free from exactions of labour and liabilities of outrage? or, when employed, are they paid wages, as was the Israelitish woman by the king's daughter? Have they the disposal of their own time, and the means for cultivating social refinements, for practising the fine arts, and for personal improve

EGYPTIAN BONDAGE ANALYZED. Throughout the Mosaic system, God warns the Israelites against holding their servants in such a condition as they were held in by the Egyptians. How often are they pointed back to the grindings of their prison-house! What motives to the exercise of justice and kindness towards their servants, are held out to their fears in threatened judgments; to their hopes in promised good; and to all within them that could feel, by those oft repeated words of tenderness and terror!

ye were bondmen in the land of Egypt"-waking anew the memory of tears and anguish, and of the wrath that avenged them. But what was the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt? Of what rights were they plundered, and what did they retain ?

[ocr errors]

1. They were not dispersed among the families of Egypt, but formed a separate community. (Gen. xlvi. 34; Ex. viii. 22, 24; ix. 26; x. 23; xi. 7; iv. 29; ii. 9; xvi. 22; xvii. 5; vi. 14.) 2. They had the exclusive possession of the land of Goshen, "the best part of the land" of Egypt. (Gen. xlv. 18; xlvii. 6, 11, 27; Ex. viii. 22; ix. 26; xii. 4.) Goshen must have been at a considerable distance from those parts of Egypt inhabited by the Egyptians; so far at least as to prevent their contact with the Israelites, since the reason assigned for locating them in Goshen was, that "shepherds were an abomination to the Egyptians;" besides, their employments would naturally lead them out of the settled parts of Fgypt, to find a free range of pasturage for their immense flocks and herds. 3. They lived in permanent dwellings. These were houses, not tents. In Ex. xii. 7, 22, the two side posts, and the upper door posts, and the lintel of the houses are mentioned. Each family seems to have occupied a house by itself. (Acts vii. 20; Ex. xii. 4.) And judging from the regulation about the eating of the Passover, they could hardly have been small ones (Ex. xii. 4), probably contained separate apartments, as the entertainment of sojourners seems to have been a common usage (Ex. iii. 23; and also places for concealment. (Ex. ii. 2, 3; Acts vii. 20.) They appear to have been well apparelled. (Ex. xii. 11.) 4. They owned "flocks and herds," and "very much cattle." (Ex. xii. 4, 6, 32, 37, 38.) From the fact that " every man was commanded to kill either a lamb or a kid, one year old, for the Passover, before the people left Egypt, we infer that even the poorest of the Israelites owned a flock either of sheep or goats. Further, the immense multitude of their flocks and herds may be judged of

[ocr errors]

was as now,

ment?

THE ISRAELITES UNDER THE BONDAGE OF EGYPT, ENJOYED ALL THESE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES. True, "all the service wherein they made them serve was with rigor." But what was this when compared with the incessant toil of American slaves; the robbery of all their time and earnings, and even the "power to own anything, or acquire anything?" a "quart of corn a-day," the legal allowance of food! their only clothing for one half the year, "one shirt and one pair of pantaloons! two hours and a half only, for rest and refreshment in the twenty-four! their dwellings hovels, unfit for human residence, with but one apartment, where both sexes and all ages herd promiscuously at night, like the beasts of the field. Add to this, the ignorance, and degradation; the daily sunderings of kindred, the revelries of lust, the lacerations and baptisms of blood, sanctioned by law, and patronized by public sentiment. What was the bondage of Egypt when compared with this? And yet for her oppression of the poor, God smote her with plagues, and trampled her as the mire, till she passed away in his wrath, and the place that knew her in her pride knew her no more. Ah! "I have seen the afflictions of my people, and I have heard their groanings, and am come down to deliver them." HE DID COME, and Egypt sank a ruinous heap, and her blood closed over her. If such was God's retribution for the oppression of heathen Egypt, of how much sorer punishment shall a Christian people be thought worthy, who cloak with religion a system, in comparison with which the bondage of Egypt dwindles to nothing? Let those believe who can, that God commissioned his people to rob others of all their rights, while he denounced against them wrath to the uttermost, if they practised the far lighter oppression of Egypt-which robbed its victims of only the least and cheapest of their rights, and left the females unplundered even of these. What! Is God divided against himself? When he had just turned Egypt into a funeral pile; while his curse yet blazed upon her unburied dead, and his bolts still hissed amidst her slaughter, and the smoke of her torment went upwards because ROBBED THE POOR," did He license the VICTIMS of robbery to rob the poor of ALL? As Lawgiver, did he create a system tenfold more grinding than that for which he had just hurled Pharaoh headlong, and overwhelmed his princes and his hosts, till "hell was moved to meet them at their coming?"

she had 66

NOTICE.

THE ANTI-SLAVERY REPORTER,

Is published on the first of every month, at a cost of FIVE SHILLINGS per Annum, payable in advance, if ordered through the Anti-slavery Office, 27, NEW BROAD-STREET, LONDON. It may be supplied, also, through the usual Newsvendors.

We would respectfully suggest to our friends, that the present is a most suitable time to use their endeavours to add to the number of our Subscribers, as our next issue will be the first of a New Volume.

[ocr errors]

The Anti-Slavery Reporter.

LONDON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1st, 1846.

It is with sincere satisfaction that we record the gratifying fact, that the British district organization of the Evangelical Alliance recently formed at Manchester, has determined, by an almost unanimous vote, wholly to exclude slave-holders from its body. The terms in which it has expressed its decision are as follows:

"That whereas the Provisional Committee during their session at Birmingham, resolved that no slave-holder should be invited to attend the meeting which was to be held in London for the formation of the Evangelical Alliance, and whereas, it is known that some British subjects are holders of slaves:-The British Organization, in pursuance of the course adopted by the Provisional Committee, and upon mature deliberation on the whole case, but without pronouncing any judgment on the personal Christianity of slave-holders, AGREE TO DECLARE, THAT NO HOLDER OF A SLAVE SHALL BE DEEMED ELIGIBLE TO MEMBERSHIP."

The number of Christian gentlemen present at the formation of the British Organization representing all the leading denominations in this country was, as we are informed, about five hundred, of these only five dissented from the resolution when the vote was taken. This most gratifying fact cannot fail to tell with amazing force on the truly Christian sections of the church in the United States. We fully expect that the decision thus reached by the British Organization, will not only influence all who sanctioned it

by their vote in their private intercourse with Americans and other foreigners who may be implicated in the sin of slave-holding, but, will lead them to use every legitimate effort in public, to promote the entire and universal abolition of slavery. We confess that we augur great things from this decision-a decision not hastily adopted-a decision which we believe was concientiously arrived at, and which, while it will strike terror into the hearts of slaveholders, will pour the balm and the oil into the bleeding wounds of the poor oppressed slave.

That the decision will strengthen the anti-slavery cause in the United States we have no doubt. That section of the Abolitionists in that country, who do honour to the Christian name, and the various churches to which they belong, will hail with joy the determination of British Christians, represented by this organization, to have no religious intercourse with slave-holders. No doubt, the prejudices of many, perhaps most of the members of the Alliance, have been excited against the American Abolitionists generally, as though they were in league with infidelity, and opposed to the progress of the gospel in the world. experience on this subject, will enable them to distinguish between those who, in common with themselves, seek the abolition of slavery on Christian principles, and those whose hostility to slavery is founded on lower considerations. honestly and heartily with all who sincerely seek the abolition of We can co-operate slavery, provided they do not require of us anything which involves the compromise of principle, or the use of weapons other than those of heavenly temper.

A little

We have learnt, with satisfaction, that a gentleman otherwise estimable in character, but who was a slave-holder in certain mines worked by slaves in Brazil, has withdrawn from the Alliance. It would have been inconsistent in him to have continued his connection with that body, after the discussions which have taken place, and the light in which all slave-holding has been placed. We have, perhaps, as accurate information in reference to the state of the slaves in the Brazilian mines as the gentleman to whom we now allude, and we beg to state that the transactions of the company with which he is associated, in relation to them, have not been such as might have been reasonably expected from Englishmen professing the Christian name. For the most part, the poor Africans who toil in their mines, until a comparatively recent period, were the victims of the slave-trade; they were obtained by purchase for the company's use, and their general treatment has been no better than others of the same unhappy class. Let the records of the company be searched, and we are confident that the number of slaves purchased at various times, and the loss of life connected with the operations of the company, would startle some, if not all, of those gentlemen who receive dividends from this source. Let them come to the offices of the Antislavery Society, and they shall there have exhibited to them the instruments of torture in use to extort labour, or enforce submission from their slaves. We call upon them, then, as they value their reputation for humanity and religion, if they have not done it before, to use their best exertions, from this hour, to purge themselves from the guilt which cannot but attach to them, so them protest, at every meeting of the shareholders, against the long as they deprive a single human being of his liberty. Let continuance of slavery at their mines; let them not be diverted from their purpose by the pretended amelioration of the condition of their bondsmen, but do their duty, and discharge their conentire emancipation of their slaves. sciences by promoting, as far as in them lies, the immediate and

the REPORTER, we did the Reformed Presbyterians, as well as some In consequence of an error which crept into the last number of other denominations of Christians, an injustice. We stated in one of our leaders, that the recent proceedings of the Evangelical Alliance, and the discussions consequent thereupon, had led to the discovery that there yet remained among us ministers and members of the several denominations represented at the Alliance, who justified the institution of slavery, by an appeal to the sacred Scriptures. We said, "Among them will be found ministers and members of the Established Church, ministers and members of the Free Church of Scotland, ministers and members of the Wesleyan Society, and in fact of the several denominations represented during the sittings of the Alliance. We should have said, of the several leading denominations, so represented. We were quite aware that the Reformed Presbyterians stand honourably clear of all connection with slavery and slave-holders; and that we

know of no person connected with that body who brings disrepute upon it by the advocacy of such sentiments as we condemn. We cheerfully make this statement in reply to the appeal of Dr. John Paul, and hope shortly to give a complete list of the various denominations of Christians in the United States who have no connection whatever with that infamous institution or its abettors.

Whenever the Colonial Gazette pours forth its vulgar abuse on those whom this journal represents, we are always sure that some advantage has been gained by the anti-slavery cause. As soon, therefore, as we had read its recent coarse attack on the Executive Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society and its secretary, we began to inquire what could have evoked its spleen, and were not long in tracing it to its source.

That portion of the West India body, whose private interests the Gazette advocates, have for many years past exerted themselves to accomplish two grand objects. First, to bring the emancipated labourers of the British Colonies under their entire control, by the operation of stringent laws, administered by their agents and representatives; and, secondly, to reduce the value of labour to the lowest point by the introduction of large masses of immigrants at the public expense.

The Anti-Slavery Society has stood in the way of their projects; and, although it has not been able to control, in all cases, vicious legislation, nor to prevent all the mischiefs connected with the introduction of foreign labourers, it has been successful in obtaining either the disallowance or the modification of many bad laws; and of throwing some degree of protection around the immigrant as well as the creole population of the colonies.

The point which the society has most earnestly contested with the West India body, has not been whether they should have additional labourers, but whether, in order to supply them with such, the emancipated classes should pay, in the shape of heavy taxation, large bounties on their import. To the introduction of labourers, under proper regulations, at the expense of the planters, the society has never objected; but its Committee have thought it the height of injustice to compel the poor labourers, who have not long emerged from a state of bondage, to pay for the importation of foreigners to take the bread out of their mouths, and thereby to drive them to labour almost for nothing, or to starve. Against this abuse of legislation the Committee have earnestly protested. Another point of contest has been, whether the immigrants to be introduced into the colonies, should be perfectly free on their arrival -free to choose their employers and employments or be brought thither under indentures of service for three or five years. The law of 1838, which required that all contracts of service should be made in the colonies, under certain regulations, has been gradually relaxed in favour of planters, except in the case of Coolies and Africans. The struggle now is, whether these shall be indentured in their own countries, or on their arrival in the colonies. At this point we believe the Government has made its stand. They must come perfectly free and unshackled, and must remain free. A third point of contest has been the laws which should regulate the relations of master and servant in the colonies. The Anti-slavery Society has insisted that the royal ordinance of 1838, and the laws which were founded on it in the colonies, were sufficiently stringent, and equally protective of the employer and the employed. The West India body have thought otherwise, and have constantly sought its repeal. Above all they have endeavoured to wrest the power confided to the stipendiary magistrates by that order in council, and to transfer it to their agents; but hitherto they have not been entirely successful.

In these facts will be found the true cause of the bitter enmity of the West India body against the Anti-slavery Society, and its vulgar expression through the columns of the Colonial Gazette.

We know that the recent schemes of the West India body have not met with the success which they contemplated. They cannot have Africa as well as India placed at their disposal. As to India, they are almost sick of it already. The costliness of Coolie immigration, and the comparative worthlessness of its results, cause them to turn away from it with dislike; and hence it is that they are crying out so lustily for Africans. They will be disappointed in their expectations from that quarter. The Government never can, and never will allow them to resort to any but the British settlements for immigrants, for beyond these, free labourers are not to be found. The Gazette may complain as long as it will, the

Government never can stultify itself so far as to permit them to purchase the services of Africans from their chiefs. The laws which are in existence for the suppression of the slave-trade, will effectually prevent this. Besides, what an example would be set thereby to foreign powers, supposing it were legal to purchase Africans for the British Colonies; and what a stimulus would be given to the internal slave-traffic, with all its horrible accompaniments, were England once more to allow its subjects to buy Africans, even for the avowed purpose of making them free. Yet this is what the West India body want, though few of them have the courage to express it openly.

But the mortal offence of the Anti-slavery Committee will be found in its recommendation to Government to bring the resources of British India to bear on the products of slave-labour. They did this, because they felt assured that, under present circumstances, it would not be possible for Jamaica, Trinidad, or British Guiana, to compete successfully with Brazil and Cuba in the home markets, when the duties on sugar and other tropical productions shall be fully equalized. At present, there is not a resident proprietary body in the British colonies, nor capital, nor energy enough to develop their resources; whilst, at the same time, the resident population are subjected to an enormous taxation to bring in foreign labour, over which the planters cannot exercise the control of the slave-master. We should be delighted to find that they were able to undersell the produce of Cuba and Brazil; and would do all that could be legitimately done, to secure so great an end. It is, however, our painful conviction, that the West India body have done and are doing more to cripple their own power than other parties whatever.

any

We shall not notice the misrepresentations of the Colonial Gazette, but simply refer to the documents which appeared in the last REPORTER for their refutation.

By the last file of the Mauritius papers, we learn that the island has been thrown into some commotion, by an order from the Colonial Office to inquire into the alleged immoral practices of the immigrant Coolies. As might be expected, the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-slavery Society come in for a large share of abuse, their representations to the Colonial Minister having led to the inquiries which have been instituted. What the result may be it is impossible to conceive, as all will depend upon the fidelity with which the investigation is prosecuted; but we feel perfectly satisfied with the testimony which we have received, as to the fact of the unnatural crimes alleged against the Coolies, and of the absolute necessity of taking prompt and vigorous measures to prevent their recurrence. So long as the disproportion of the sexes remains what it is, we can only look for a repetition of the evils complained of. In our judgment, however, the only effectual cure will be found in the abandonment of Coolie immigration altogether.

In connection with this subject, we beg to call attention to the painful discoveries of a similar character which have been made in the parish of Trelawny, Jamaica, since the importation of Coolies has taken place to that island. The subject is noticed by the Falmouth Post, of the 20th of October last, referring to a highly important and respectable meeting of the parishioners of Trelawny, and to the general feeling which existed that it would be better to encourage immigration from Africa than from India, the Editor remarks:

"The above assertion, coupled with another that had been used by Mr. Constantine, respecting the immoral practices of the Coolies, led to a statement of a most serious character: it was this that on an estate in the parish of Westmoreland, unnatural offences were frequently committed by the Indians, and that in the course of time, these people would, if unchecked in their evil propensities, be the means of demoralizing the native peasantry. The charge thus brought forward emanated from Mr. Constantine, and was followed by an assurance from the Reverend Mr. Blyth, that on frequent occasions our female labourers were compelled to seek from their relatives and friends, protection from the vicious designs of the foreigners. And what said Mr. Salmon ? He corroborated all that had been advanced by Mr. Constantine; for he had heard from undoubted authority, that the people in question had actually been guilty of the crimes alleged against them. Now, the questions naturally arise-what will the authorities do? Will they institute such an investigation as will satisfy the inhabitants generally-or, will they, with culpable indifference,

permit vice of the highest order to be perpetrated without even a passing inquiry? On this subject, we shall, on a future occasion, offer a few remarks which, we doubt not, will meet with attention from the members of the Honourable House of Assembly."

Comment on such a subject as this is unnecessary. It is sufficient to refer to the facts stated to show the absolute necessity which exists of guarding the emancipated classes from the horrible contamination which must inevitably result from the importation of these sensual and idolatrous Hindoos.

Our readers will be deeply interested by the report of certain slave cases which have occupied the attention of the public both at New York and Boston. It is clear that the public mind in the free states is rapidly awakening to the enormities of slavery, and the duty of freemen to succour and defend the fugitive from bondage. We had obtained through our usual channels of information, an account of both the cases referred to, but the graphic manner in which that at New York is detailed by the correspondent of the Nonconformist, has induced us to transfer his account to our columns. It now appears that the laws ofthe empire state, protect the poor fugitive. This fact will be received throughout this country with joy. In the Boston case, the poor slave, by a gross violation of the law of Massachussetts, and in defiances of its authorities, was forcibly carried to sea and taken to New Orleans, whence he had escaped in a trading vessel to Boston. The parties most conspicuous in this infamous transaction were Mr. J. H. Pearson, a merchant of that city, and Capt. Hannum who navigated one of his trading vessels. A noble meeting was held in Fanueilhall, to express the opinion entertained by the public at large, on their conduct. The citizens of Massachussetts as well as New York will not allow their respective states to be made hunting grounds for the recovery of fugitive slaves. We honour them for this, and trust, that shortly there will not be a single free state in the Union whose laws will not be equally protective of the personal liberty of every man, whether white or black, who seeks shelter within their borders.

In the course of a few weeks, the Muchir Ahmed Bey, the reigning Prince of Tunis, it is expected, will visit this country. The distinguished services which his Highness has rendered to the cause of humanity, independently of hisrank, entitle him to an honourable reception. The Bey is the first Mahommedan prince who has abolished slavery and the slave-trade throughout his dominions. He may, therefore, be justly regarded as a benefactor of his race. To him the Abolitionists of every country owe a debt of respect and gratitude. Our columns will be found to contain an attack on his Highness the Bey, from the pen of the Constantinople correspondent of the Morning Chronicle. Coming from such a quarter, at the present time, it looks suspicious. We would hope, however, that the attack is the result of mis-information rather than of malice. sufficient to say that there is not one word of truth in it. But Mr. Richardson, whose letter we also give, has fully replied to it. Any extended remarks on the subject from us is thereby, rendered unnecessary.

It is

We have received, at the moment of our going to press, an important document, containing a copy of a petition for the abolition of slavery in the Danish colonies, which was presented at the Assembly of the Provincial Estates, held at Roskilde, on the 23rd of July last. The petition was signed by C. N. David, professor, N. F. S. Gruntvig, parish priest, D. G.. Monrad, M. A., Rafford, pastor, and Schow, professor. The debate, on the presentation of the petition, was terminated by an able speech in its favour from the president, Professor Clausen. The result was, the adoption of the following memorial to the King, "That his Majesty would lay before the States, at their next meeting, a project of law, based upon careful inquiry, for a complete emancipation of the slaves in the Danish West India Colonies." This memorial was passed by a majority of 37 votes to 19. We can only commend the example of the friends of the slave in Denmark to those of other countries implicated in Slavery. We hope to give further particulars in our next.

Poetry.

THE FLIGHT OF THE SLAVE. Low in the west the crescent moon Pours down her silvery light,

And twinkling stars come one by one,

To deck the brow of night:

The birds have ceased their evening song,
And calmly sunk to sleep;
And o'er the willow-fringed stream,
The winds of midnight sweep.

This is the hour-the holy hour,
When men forget their care,
For sleep, a balmy opiate, pours

Upon the dewy air;

And many a wretch, who wakes to weep, Doth now forget his tears :

And many a bright and blessed dream

The care-worn spirit cheers.

But now the wronged and hunted slave,
Whose heart for freedom yearns,
Doth gaze, with wild and anxious eye,

Where the North Star dimly burns;
And now, while others calmly sleep,
With hasty step he flees,
Trembling at every shadowy form,
And every sighing breeze.

His back is seamed with many a scar,
A brand his forehead bears,
And on his ankle, worn and sore,

The shackle's span appears;
But he has heard that freedom's star
Beams o'er a distant land,
Where even Afric's sable sons,

Their rights, as men, demand.

Hopes, strange and new, his bosom thrill,
And light his care-worn brow;

He seems to breathe the blessed air
Of freedom even now.

Though faint with hunger and with toil,
He presses on his way,

For well he knows, the morning light
Will wake the bloodhounds' bay.

He presses on--but morning dawns,
And freedom's star grows dim ;-
The birds awake their matin songs,-
But what are they to him?
All things around are glad and free,
And all are fair and bright,
But dearer, dearer far to him,
Were the shadows of the night.

And like a wild and hunted deer,
He seeks the darkest dell,
Where ancient pines and hemlocks grow,
And poisonous serpents dwell ;-
Where undisturbed the savage beast
Doth make his lonely den,-
Less feared by him, that flying slave,
Than homes of Christian men.

He crouches mid the tangled vines,
Concealed from every eye;

He hears the hungry panther scream,
And sees the wolf pass by;

He heeds them not a deadlier fear
Thrills every nerve with pain,
And more, far more than death, he dreads
The whip and galling chain.

Thus many a day he lies concealed,
And many a night he flies;
His only guide, that holy star,

Which beameth in the skies.
Nor dearer seemed to Israel's sons
The fire and pillar dim
Which guided all their wandering way,
Than seems that star to him.

The goal is won-the prize is gained!
The holy, priceless prize!

His foot is on Victoria's soil,

And o'er him freedom's skies,

Look up! thou worn and weary man!

Thy fetters now are riven,

Thy God hath kindly led thee on,

TO HIM let praise be given !

EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE.

BRITISH ORGANIZATION.

The following is a report of the Conference held at Manchester, on the fourth of November last.

SECOND DAY'S SITTING.

The Alliance commenced its sitting with devotional exercises, in the usual manner. Sir CULLING EARDLEY SMITH having taken the chair, afterwards opened the business by introducing the Rev. E. Bickersteth as the mover of a resolution on the admission of slave-holders.

The Rev. E. BICKERSTETH rose and moved the following resolution::-"That whereas the provisional committee, during its session at Birmingham, resolved that no slave-holder should be invited to attend the meeting, which was to be held in London for the formation of the Evangelical Alliance: and whereas it is known that some British subjects are holders of slaves, the British Organization, in pursuance of the course adopted by the provisional committee, and upon mature deliberation of the whole case, but without pronouncing any judgment on the personal Christianity of slave-holders, agrees to declare that no holder of a slave shall be eligible to its membership." He said he was one of those who thought they should not have entered into this subject, and he had felt great difficulty upon it. However, he was apprehensive the public could never now believe that with one heart they abominated slavery, unless they came to some distinct resolution. (Applause.) As love was the foundation of their brotherhood, he thought love to their brethren, especially in America, required them to strengthen those amongst them that were faithful. (Applause.) He had always been a supporter of Wilberforce, Buxton, and others, and he felt that this resolution was in harmony with the sentiments of those honoured men, and with their duty to God.

The Rev. J. H. HINTON said-There were many in the Alliance and out of it, that could not give up this question from conscience. Slavery might not be the greatest crime, but there was no crime which drew out the vital blood of Christianity so much for its support. The resolution might be said to be the introduction of a novel subject, but the terms of the resolution showed that the subject had been before introduced at Birmingham. It might be said why mention slave-holding, if there are no British slave-holders? He regretted to say that there were such men as British slave-holders. He had once thought not, but in the Surinam calendar he found the names of British proprietors-Englishmen who held shares in slave estates, who were as truly slave-holders as any men who ever held property under the old system of slavery. (Hear hear.) The speaker then alluded to share-holding in Brazilian Mining Companies. He did not wish this resolution to be understood as pronouncing an opinion against the personal Christianity of any one. For himself he could not think such Christianity was of the most vigorous character. As to American slavery, he thought they were not called upon to interfere with that here. The objects of this Alliance had no organic association with them, more than a Bible Society here had to do with a Bible Society in New Orleans. The fact of what they should have done here he thought would be a pregnant one enough when heard of there. They were not called upon now to say, whether they would admit foreign slave-holders to the Alliance-the question was not now before them-they had the subject in their hands, and would meet it when it arose. (Applause.)

SAMUEL FLETCHER, Esq., expressed his concurrence in the motion, and begged to suggest the propriety of its passing without further discussion. He was not afraid of any harm the expression of their sentiments could do, but he was afraid of the speeches. (Hear, hear.) The principle they were avowing could do no harm, but much that was said in its support might give pain to men whom they did not wish

to harm.

The Rev. Dr. KING expressed his conviction that though with varying shades of opinion they were assembled here, yet they were substantially one on this question (applause); and he believed they should not disagree in supplicating God to break the yoke of the oppressor, and allow the oppressed to go free. (Applause.) Slave-holding he thought they must acknowledge an appalling system; the more so, because it was shared in, to some extent, by men calling themselves Christians. But great regret had been expressed by excellent men that the subject had been introduced, and he had great regard for their opinions, though he did not concur with them. It seemed to him, then, that they had no alternative; they were in the position of aiding or discountenancing slavery; they must either do something to loosen or to rivet the fetters of the slave. (Cheers.) He thought, then, they had but one course-to pass this resolution; and in doing so, they would, doubtless, obtain the confidence and good opinion of every right-minded man in the kingdom. (Applause.)

The Rev. JOHN KELLY, of Liverpool, advocated the use of moderate and persuasive language, though he thought that they were substantially of one opinion on slavery. The chief difficulty in this question was, that it appeared to be a subject alien to the business of the meeting. He would not deny that he had had difficulty in coming to a conclusion on this point, and therefore he had great sympathy with those who objected to the discussion of the question. Their objection to slavery was, one thing, and their connection with slave-holders another; and this should be kept in view. The resolution he thought would meet the case: it was calm and dignified it showed that they had come to the opinion it expressed with a full conviction that on the whole it was the wisest course they could pursue; and he had an impression that with all the difficulties connected with this question, it was one which had been providentially thrown in their way, to save them from more serious ones hereafter. The Rev. Dr. BUNTING said, there was one word in the resolution which he should emphatically concur in, and that was the word "agree." He thought agreement was one of their most emphatic duties on this occasion; for they should not be justified in sacrificing this Alliance if it could be maintained. They all agreed in the principle of this resolution, and why should they disagree upon secondary points. For himself he thought it would have been better if the question of slavery had not been introduced (hear, hear); not that he was willing to give up one iota of his expressed opinions against slavery. He thought Mr. Hinton had very ably stated both sides of the argument, and had argued on both sides (a laugh);

therefore, he thought him one of the best friends of agreement. (Laughter.) He thought this debate should be a lesson to them, not to introduce extraneous matters. He was of opinion they should come to an immediate vote.

The Rev. Dr. HALLEY expressed his entire concurrence in the motion. He thought after the position he had taken in this town of saying, even in the opposition to the friends of free trade, that the introduction of slave-grown sugar into this country was a disgrace to us, he could not be mistaken as being an advocate of slavery. (Applause.) The idea of the greatest weight in his mind had been that, as they had no moral test for admission into the Alliance, they would keep as nearly to the scriptural point of their duties by keeping up a connection with their American brethren, as by withdrawing from such connection. At the same time he would not have them to withold the expression of the condemnation of slave-holding. (Hear, hear.)

Edward Foster, Esq., of Cambridge, made a few statements showing the interest he had taken in the abolition cause.

the course he had pursued at a public meeting in London. Rev. Mr. PRESTON made a few remarks justifying his appearance and

of the resolution.

Rev. Dr. BRYTH briefly addressed the meeting on the importance of speakers adhering to the question before them, and stating his approbation Rev. J. A. JAMES said, thanks to Wilberforce and Clarkson, we had put an end to slavery by law, and he rejoiced that to-day it remained for this association to put its brand upon the system. (Applause.) He denied, though he had come in for no little odium in connection with this question, that he was any renegade to his professions as a member of the Anti-slavery Society.

The Rev. Dr. VAUGHAN said, he meant to vote for the resolution. He came in upon Dr. Bunting's excellent suggestion-that of agreement. (Applause.) He contended, however, that what they might do here would have an important bearing upon the future meeting of the Alliance. (Hear, hear.)

introduction of the subject, but, after what he had heard, he agreed in Captain YOUNG said, his opinion had been decidedly against the what they had done; and he spelled the word agreement, he believed, in the way it was spelt by the rev. gentleman who had so pleasingly expatiated

on the matter.

The Rev. Mr. NELSON, of Belfast, stated that since the meeting in London he believed the British Evangelical Alliance would be found not to take the side of slave-holders. He appealed to the fact of the resolution being before them as a vindication of what he had said. head of a British slave, and there was not a diadem which became any monarch so well as Victoria. But he did regret that a love of money should have induced any British subject to engage in slave-holding in foreign countries.

Mr. STANFIELD, of Belfast, thanked God the sun did not rise on the

The Rev. W. W. EWBANK said he could cordially vote for the resolution. (Applause.)

The Rev. G. OSBORNE expresesed his dissent from the course pursued by the Conference, and strongly urged that no further action should be taken on the subject.

The Rev. Dr. CARLILE, of London, said that the resolution had his most unqualified concurrence. (Applause.) He was followed to the same effect by the Hon. and Rev. B. W. NOEL.

The Hon. A. KINNAIRD stated that he had some difficulty in acquiescing in the resolution.

IT. BLAIR, Esq., stated his full and hearty concurrence in the present

[blocks in formation]

I read in a late English newspaper, that the Rev. John Marsh, of this city, at a temperance meeting, held at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, during his late visit to your country, stated that slave-holders in our southern states were liable, if they liberated slaves, to be put into the Penitentiary! On speaking to Mr. Marsh on the subject, since his return, he acknowledged that he made the statement, and remarked, "Is not that the case? I always thought it was so. Every American delegate, I think, believed it; and so do most of the ministers in this city and vicinity." I expressed the most unfeigned surprise that American preachers should be so ignorant of the laws and usages of the slave-states, although I must think Mr. Marsh is mistaken somewhat in supposing they knew so little of the subject. It shows how little attention they have devoted to the subject, and what small dependence can be placed upon their agency in bringing about the abolition of slavery in this country.

between northern preachers and southern slave-holders. One of the late I impute this ignorance to the social and religious intimacy that exists Presidents of the "American Temperance Union" was a slave-holder, and one of the present Vice-Presidents of this Society, of which Mr. Marsh is the Secretary, is Judge O'Neale, of South Carolina, who sentenced John L. Brown to death for attempting to remove his betrothed wife, a slave, to a free state. So long as ministers of the gospel, and influential laymen, at the north, fellowship slave-holding ministers and church members of the south, as Christians, uniting with them as such in Temperance, Bible, Tract, and Missionary Societies, and Christian

« ZurückWeiter »