and, if he does not work, may treat him as a flave with chains, imprisonment, or stripes. By a comparison of these laws, one with the other, we fee the difference between a freeman and a flave. The freeman cannot be taken, imprisoned, or diffeized of liberties or free cuftoms but by lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land: The flave, if difobedient, may be chained, imprisoned, or punished: a very great and a very effential difference. And where now is the law, that beftows on African flaves, when in England, thofe dear-bought and defervedly incommunicable privileges, derived to me from my ancestors, to which my birthright entitles me! The only authority alledged is that of 12 Car. II. cap. 24. "All tenures of lands by homage are hereby discharged, and all hereafter are to be in free and common foccage only." Here is not one word of foreign flaves. Villeinage, or the holding of lands by fellowfubjects on condition of obeying their lords, and following them to battle, is indeed annulled, and fervants muft in confequence be entitled to the rights of freemen. But does this invalidate my claim to my purchased negro's fervices, or do I hold him by a tenure different to that by which I hold all my other property? Certainly I do not, and I challenge the law to fhew me by what ftatute I a British merchant and citizen of London can be diffeized of property which Magna Charta enfures me, which I Edw. VI. cap. 3. explains my legal power over, and which no other subsequent statute has yet deprived me of: Till the legislature paffes an act with fuch unaccountable powers, I will defend my property of a negro, as I would that of my purse, against all invaders, and when the legiflature does adjudge my purchased flave to be no property, I will fubmit as I would to an earthquake or a peftilence. But if there is in Britons any regard for their own privileges, or for the crowned heads under whom their liberties were established, they can never lavish away their own birthright, never throw fuch contempt on the ancient inftitutions of the realm: Befides of late years, the Affiento,* whereby England was to fupply Spain with negroes, was ratified D In the Affiento treaty,, which was to continue in force from 1713 to 1743, is this remarkable claufe, fect. 17. "Affientists, when quitting the Indies, are to load at their choice the effects they, ratified by the crowns of Great Britain, Spain, and France. Can the Defender of the Faith be fuppofed to join with his moft Catholic Majefty, and fhall his most Christian Majefty lend his affiftance to, and ratify a folemn contract for a trade, illicit in its principles, dishonourable in the pursuit, and the chief article of it fubject to immediate lofs, if it touches an English port? Ancient cuftom and univerfal confent have undoubtedly established a law to the contrary, and the Africans must remain as they are, flaves by purchase, the real property of their masters, till they of their own free will present them with their freedom. Where slept the Pope's thunders, while these dominions were under his sway, that he never vindicated the universal right of freedom? How came it that no nation ever yet afferted fo natural a privilege, if it had from the first had religion and reafon for its foundation? How came it just before the paffing of that act in 1749, by which all subjects were free to trade from port Sallee in Barbary to the cape of Good Hope, that my Lord Chancellor Hardwicke should pledge himself to the future traders for the fecurity of their property, and repeat his and Lord Talbot's former opinion, that "flaves do not in the leaft alter their fituation or state towards their mafters or owners, either by being christened, or coming into England? Was this done to betray them into Westminster-hall, and then bereave them of a property which they thought established ? That great man could have no fuch intention, but undoubtedly, from the plain acts I have quoted, and other inftances, which his and Lord Talbot's fuperior knowledge might lay before them, gave that decifion which till now has never been controverted. Now Mahomet's doctrine is revived: "All men indiscriminately are proclaimed free, if they may have, and bring them in fecurity to Europe." It can hardly be fuppofed they should have no negroes, and if fo, and they were free on their arrival, how could they be faid to bring them in fecurity? If a contradiction in terms and a manifeft abfurdity attends the fuppofing them free, there can be no ftronger proof that they remain in ftatu quo, flaves as when abroad. †This guarantee was extremely neceffary, for if flaves did not remain in the fame state, what Governor in Africa could permit his caftle-flaves to affift a vessel in her paffage home, who had loft her failors by fickness or defertion? And muft not this be a great additional risk for a merchant to run befides those of the seas and trade? In short, their being free in England tends to destroy all confidence, and put an end to all intercourfe of kindness and affiftance among the traders, governors, and other British fubje&ts at home and abroad. they touch English ground." This wonderful discovery was reserved for this age of pure religion, wherein infidelity meets with applause and Christianity with ridicule: for this age of perfect liberty, wherein God and the King are illiberally abufed and affronted with impunity; for this of rigid virtue, wherein public diffipation engroffes the whole concern of life, and plunges its unhappy votaries into excess of vice and infamy; for this age of tender humanity, wherein the cries of the poor are unattended to, and infenfibility fupplies the place of wisdom. age How great and glorious muft Britain now be! not only free herself, but the cause of freedom to other men; to men, who may poffibly have forfeited their lives to the laws of their own country, though their fentence was commuted into flavery. Here indeed is excess of generosity: But hold! is there no allay? Are we confiftent with ourselves, and is our liberty as perfect in every other inftance? Afk the most useful set of men, the British failors. They may point you out the probability of the following difmal scene: A mate* comes home from the farthest part of Africa, with all his little property vested in a negroe, whom he has taught to cook his kettle, and intends that another voyage fhall repay his principal and his trouble, but an infernal prefs-gang feizes him the moment he fets foot on British ground, takes him from his present free eftate, throws a cloud over his future prospects, and he is fent perhaps for ever, or till worn out in the fervice, to the Eaft Indies, while his negroe is inftantly free to go where he pleases, not only unmolested, but protected against the juft demands of his owner. This is modern liberty! These are the glorious effects of removing the ancient landmarks, till the very boundaries of right and wrong are confused and undistinguishable! This is called ftate neceffity, the tyrant's plea, by which mankind have so frequently been injured. If ever ftate neceflity could be admitted as a plea, it might in this African cause, had it wanted fo flender a fupport, for if the African trade fails, farewell the Weft Indies, and with them farewell the glory of the British flag, and the ftrength of the British nation; but far be it from the London merchants to apply to D' 2 govern * In the beginning of last war mates were preffed, and were promifed that they should be preferred to masters, but numbers at the end of the war were ftill midshipmen. .. government to commit any arbitrary act, or make ufe of fo dangerous an expedient. They defire only their just rights and privileges, confirmed by Magna Charta, tranfmitted down to them and their heirs for ever, as British free-born fubjects; and should their grievances fail of meeting with due attention and redress, they have only the modern comfort, their pofterity must be ruined, but probably England may laft their time. MERCATOR. London, July 28, 1772. Mercator here feems not to have carried his arguments with refpect to the legality of flavery under either the British conftitution, or under the Chriftian difpenfation, as far as they will go; at least, he has not given all the authorities he might from the British laws, or the New Testament. As to our common law, that is univerfally allowed to arise from custom, and to prevail till contradicted by the ftatute law. The feudal ferfs were of various kinds. Under the Saxons they were abfolute flaves, as the Gibeonites were to the Ifraelites. Under the Normans they were admitted to a greater degree of freedom, or at least their service was changed from the flavish tenure of tilling the lands, as the Poles and Ruffians do to this day, to that of attending their lords in war. But whatever privileges they had feem to have arifen from the ease and. permiffion of their masters, and not from any pofitive law. But this subject requires a volume of itself, and has been amply difcuffed by Dr. Robertson. It remains only to be briefly obferved, that at all periods of the British nation, both before and fince the Conqueft, flavery was not illegal, but maintained in a ftricter or eafier manner, with a milder or harsher term, till Charles II. in the 12th year of his reign discharged all fuch tenures among the natives, but by not mentioning,. certainly left foreign flaves as he found them. As to the New Teftament, St. Paul fays, * "Let every man abide in the fame calling wherein he was called. Art thou called being a fervant? Care not for it, but if thou mayest be made free use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being a fervant, is the Lord's freeman; likewise also he that is called 1 Cor. vii. 20, &C, being ye the being free, is Chrift's fervant. Ye are bought with a price, be not fervants of men. Brethren, let every man wherein he is called, therein abide with God." Thefe verfes are thus expounded by the whole clafs of commentators. Remain in that ftate of life wherein God has placed you. Be not concerned, or think, if you are a flave, dedos, you will be lefs acceptable to God, or as if that condition was unworthy a Christian; therefore do not attempt to shake off the yoke of flavery under a pretence, that through Christianity all are free; but if by juft means you acquire your liberty, preferve it, that no mafter may have power over you to caufe you to fin; for you are fubject to Chrift, who paid down his life to redeem you from fin. Therein confifts the true Christian's liberty; therefore as I faid at firft, remain quietly in that ftate of life wherein God has placed you, as a duty you owe to him as well as to the community. Many other parts of Scripture mention bond and freemen, which distinction could not have been kept up, had liberty, civil liberty arifen from Chriftianity. St. Paul fays*, "By one fpirit we are all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free." And again †, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Chrift Jefus." And again, "Put on the new man, where there is: neither Greek nor Jew, circumcifion nor uncircumcifion, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free, but Chrift is all and in all." And again §,. "Whatsoever good thing any man doth, the fame fhall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free." St. John defcribing the day of judgment mentions "the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and every bondman and every free| man hiding themselves. In another place **, In another place **, "free and bond receive a mark." In another place they are enumerated with the kings, rich men and captains, which evidently fhews, they were one of the orders of mankind; and though loweft in the civil Polity, equal in all fpiritual concerns, fure of a reward after this life, when their great mafter began his dominion, if they behaved virtuously in the station allotted them on 1 Cor. xii. 13. **Rev. xiii. 16. earth. + Gal. iii. 28. + Rev. xix. 18. Col. iii. 11. § Eph. .vi. 8. I Rev. vi. 15. |