OCR Text |
Show 38 NOTES ON think we shoulJ soon sec whether "that's it." As, ho·wcvcr, you arc not likely to do that in a. hurry, if the reader .":ill turn meanwhile to Appendix, E. 2, :wd read tho ::tuthontiCS there citcU, he will find that there is a limit to your authority, and a pretty Ucfinitc limit, too; that, while, on tl.lC one hand, your shvc is yours j01· certain purposes, viz., to labour for you1 "not with eye service, as n. man-plcascr, but in singleness of heart, fc:niug God;'' and, on the other hand, you arc his, for ccrta.in olher purposes, viz., to supply his physical anll moral necessities, yet, aside from these purposes, neither he ILaS any claim upon you, nor you upon him, but that you arc, both of you, the servants of a higher Master, and the subjects of a higher law. (Sec Note 11.) "Don't you know a sbvc can't be married? 'l'hcrc is uo Jaw in this countl"y for that; I can't holu :rou for my wife if he chooses to part us." ( -1.) Here arc two assertions, the first of which is untrue, if ~Iarybnd and Louisiuna arc a part of. "this country," for in the former, tho marringc of slaves is expressly recognized by statute, (sec Appendix, E. 7 ,) ''"d the courts of the ln.ttcr have deciU.cd in rcgurd to shwcs, (Grn.oD vs. LEWIS, G 1\Iurtin's Hop. 550,) tlw,t, "'Vith the consent of their master, tltcy may marry, and their moral power to agree to such a contract or connection as that of marriage, cannot be doubted; but whilst in a state of sl:wcry, it cannot produce any- civil effect, because slaves arc deprived of all civil rights. Emancipation gives to the slave his civil rights; and u. contract of marriage, legal and Vfflid, by the consent of tho master, and moral nsscnt of the s1a ve, from the moment of freedom, although dorma.nt during the slavery, produces all the e~~cts which result from such contract among free persons. .. '!'here is, moreover, a low of Maryland, (1777, chap. xH. sec. 11,) and I suppose, of course, t!Jough I have not exam~ l!NCT.l~ TOM'R CABI?>.~. 3D inC'd, th:1t there is a Rimilar law in all the .slave-lJOlcling Stu.tes, prohilJiting any minister from celebrating the maniagc of a slave, without leave of tl1c master or mistress, on penalty of 1-ifty pouncis, a prohibition which would be ridiculous, ditl the maniagc produce no legal effect upon the status of the sla\'e. · 'l1l1e other assert ion, "I can't ltolcl you for my wife, if he chooses to part us," is true, if by "bold" he meant "lire with;" but then the pauper in :Massachusetts is in tile same predic.-tment, or wtts, twenty years ago, (sec Appendix, F., BosToN and Hoxnun Y,) and I presume is still. He was so in Cambridge, some years after this, to my certain knowledge; n.nd I have no reason to suppose that there has Leon any ch:tnge since. And the scp:mltion in t!Jis latter case is worse than in the former, because more tant:Llizing, nnd because it comes at a. time when the man can least nerre himself to bear it,-at a time when he is sufl'ering under that ailliction, to a freemn.n the nwst trying of u.ll, the helplessness of utter poverty. But ''two wrongs do not make a. right," and I do not, therefore, bring forward the latter to justify the former-it must be justified, if it all, on very difi'ercnt grounds. ~~hat it can be justified, occusionally, I hare no doubt; but that the occasions arc very ru.re, I have jt1st as little. ~f1liC luw of the la.nd separates husband and wife on the conviction of either party for crime, and if the crime be a very heinous one, it separates them for life. Now the greatest crime that a slave, as suclt, can be guilty of, is insurrection, and next to it, nnd hardly less heinous, is thn.t of continued insubordim~ tion. Of the former of these, the 1a w of the land takes cognizance; tho latter is left, wisely, I think, to the discretion of the master; and if, when milder means have failed, he sells the slave, at length, into a more rigorous bondage, what law of God or m•n shall say him nay? |