OCR Text |
Show 76 LIBERTY AND SLAVERY. "Would the gospel allow us," be also asks, "if it were in om· power, to reduce our fellow·citizens of our own color to slavery?" Certainly not. Nor do we propose to reduce "''Y one, either white or black, to a state of sla,·cry. It is an1azing to see with what an air of confidence such questions are propounded. Dr. Channing, no less than Dr. Wayland, seems to think they must carry home irresistible convictiorl to the heart and conscience of every man who is not irremediably blinded by the detestable institution of slavery. "Now, let every reader," says he, "ask himself this plain question: Could I, can I, be rightfully seized and made an article of property?" And we, too, say, Let every reader ask himself this plain question, and then, if he please, answer it in the negative. But what, then, should follow? \Vhy, if you please, he shoulu refuse to seize any other man or to make him an article of property. lie should be opposed to the crime of kidnapping. But if, from such an answer, be should conclude that the institution of sla,-ery is "e\·erywhcre and ahvays wrong," then surely, after what has been said, not another word is needed to expose the ineffable weakness and futility of the conclusion. ARGUMENTS OF ADOLITIONISTS. 77 This golden rule, this divine precept, requires us to conceive ourselves placed in the condition of our slaYcs, and then to ask ourselves, llow should we be treated by the master? in order to obtain a clear and impllrtial view of our duty to them. 'rhis it requires of us; and this we can most cheerfully perform. W c can conceive that we are poor, helpless, dependent beings, possessing the passions of men and the intellects of children. Wo can conceive that we arc by nature idle, improvident, and, without a protector and friend to guide and control us, utterly unable to take care of ourselves. And, having conceived all this, if we ask ourselves, llow should we be treated by the masters whom the law has placed over us, what is the response? Is it that they should tum us loose to shift fot· ourselves? Is it that they should ahaudon us to ourselves, only to fall a prey to indolence, and to the legion of vices and crimes which ever follow in its train? Is it that they should set us ft·cc, and expose us, without protection, to the merciless impositions of the wot-st portions of a stronger and more sagacious race? Is it, in one word, that we should he ft·cc from tl1e t!onliuion of men who, as a general thing, are humane and wise in their management of us, 7• |