美國的奴隸制（Slavery in the United States）

非 洲黑人作為奴隸，一五二零年起由西班牙人帶到美洲。到一八六三年林肯宣布解放奴隸，三百多年來共有一千二百萬黑人從非洲被販到北美，二百多萬黑人在來美洲 的途中死亡。一六一九年，北美第一名黑奴由荷蘭人帶到美洲。一八六零年，美國有四百萬名黑奴，幾乎全在南方。黑奴沒有人的權利，一七八七年的憲法在統計人 口時，為了保持南北雙方在聯邦內的平衡，選舉時一名黑奴按五分之三選票計，不過這是奴隸主的權利。

一 七八七年的美國憲法是有史以來最好的成文法之一，這部憲法沒用種族限制公民參政，但把選舉權留給了各州。由於各州的傳統與習俗的差異，黑人和婦女在美國建 國之初沒有選舉權。直到南北戰爭時期，黑奴才獲得自由。國會於一八七零年，通過了憲法第十五條修正案，規定“合眾國或任何一州不得因種族、膚色或以前的奴 隸身份否認或剝奪公民的選舉權”。此後，黑人才獲得了公民的地位。但對他們的歧視通過種族隔離一直持續到二十世紀六十年代。

一 六一九年來到北美弗吉尼亞的非洲黑人，是契約奴隸，當時也有白人契約奴。契約奴在完成契約後，就自由了。從什麼時侯起，黑人開始淪為永久奴隸，到現在還不 清楚。從一六四零年代起，販賣到弗吉尼亞的非洲黑人就全都是永久奴隸了。北美第一部確認奴隸制永久性並延續到其子孫後代的法律，是一六六一年在弗吉尼亞通 過的。此後，各殖民地援引弗吉尼亞的成例，於是，非洲黑人的奴隸命運從踏上北美土地那一刻起就註定了。

一 六六二年，英王查理二世特許皇家非洲貿易公司向西印度群島和北美販奴。一七一三年，英王與西班牙達簽下協議，由皇家非洲公司壟斷南北美洲的奴隸進口，利潤 兩國王室各得百分之二十五。此後，英國每年向美洲輸入一萬五千名奴隸，其中四分之一到南美的西班牙殖民地，大多數到了北美英屬殖民地。販奴收入成了英國的 “國家利益”，奴隸貿易成了英國的皇家事業。

幾千年來，世界上一直有奴隸制存在。美國的奴隸制不同。大多數奴隸制，在政治上和道義上是被社會接受的，沒人對此質疑。但美國，從一開始，對奴隸制就有激烈的爭論。有些殖民地曾立法阻止奴隸制，但被英國政府廢棄。

一 七七六年，傑弗遜的《獨立宣言》手稿中，有一段譴責英國王室的向北美販奴的行為。原文中這樣寫道：“英國殘酷地發動了一場反人性戰爭。它強暴了一個遠方民 族的生命和自由權利，而他們從來沒有冒犯過它。這場戰爭拐騙和脅迫了他們，使他們不是在運送途中悲慘地死去，就是被送往地球的另一端充當奴隸。這場由邪惡 力量發動的海盜戰爭，是身為基督徒的大不列顛的英王所發動的戰爭。他決定打開這樣一個市場，在那裡，人類可以被買賣。他濫用了他的立法否決權，利用這個否 決權壓制了所有打算禁止和限制這種骯髒交易的立法嘗試。”手稿中的這一段文字。由於南卡羅萊納和喬治亞的反對，被刪除了。儘管《獨立宣言》是由傑弗遜起草 的，但《宣言》所表達的思想，卻為那些開國先賢們所共有，同時為這塊土地上的人民所共有。因此，對英國王室在北美推行奴隸制的憤怒也為他們所共有。

美 國奴隸制的一個特點是奴隸是黑人。因此，奴隸制問題就是種族問題。其它的奴隸制，沒有種族問題，只要奴隸制終結，和其有關的社會關係就隨之瓦解。美國不 同，美國奴隸是黑人。即便解放了奴隸，種族關係仍存在。黑人還是黑人。目光遠大的傑弗遜早就看到了這一點，因此他主張遷移黑人，要把黑人從美洲大陸遷往別 處。傑弗遜曾在弗吉尼亞州議會提出法案要求把黑人遷出美國，提案未被通過。一八一七年，美國成立“殖民協會”，傑弗遜和麥迪遜都是會員。協會通過贖買把黑 奴從美國移民至非洲的利比里亞。這種努力精神可嘉，但於奴隸制問題於事無補。

北 美的歐洲移民，對黑奴的態度也不一樣。部分歐洲移民認為黑奴與白人間的差別太大，他們智力低劣，感情缺乏，以致於美國的立國原則和理想不適合於他們。這是 種族主義理論，但人們感到，廢除奴隸制本身，仍無法解決問題。這種觀點，使得林肯這樣力主廢奴的人，對廢奴的後果也十分擔心。也不少歐洲移民認為黑人是 人，就有做人的權利和尊嚴，並且認為奴隸制有悖基督教教義。但大多數人覺得一大批種族不同又是奴隸的人的存在，會給社會諸方面造成麻煩，很多美國人不願給 自己找這些麻煩。這種考慮實際上是廢奴運動的主要因素。因此，在英國把蓄奴在北美制度化的那一天起，每一代美國人都面臨一個問題：奴隸制。

美 國獨立革命中，北方各州就開始了廢奴，南方各州也通過法律改善奴隸待遇。在弗吉尼亞，托馬斯·傑弗遜、喬治·華盛頓及詹姆士·麥迪遜等人公開主張廢奴，南 方也有人持同樣觀點。一七九三年，艾萊·惠特尼發明了軋花機，南方成為世界的“棉花王國”，任何廢奴主張從此成了泡影。北方諸州在其境內禁止奴隸制，於是 北方奴隸被賣到了南方，但避免了解放奴隸的難題。如何處理被剝奪了人權的幾百萬黑奴，從此不再是全國性問題，而只是南方的問題了。

到 了一八零零年代，美國的黑奴約占美國總人口的百分之二十。對奴隸制的爭論終於引起了衝突，為此英美兩國鬧得不可開交，最後兩國同意在一八零八年禁止奴隸貿 易。在一八一二年戰爭賠償中，英國歸還了在美國強占的所有財產，包括幾千名黑奴，因為黑奴已被全部釋放了，英國為此賠了二十五萬英鎊。讓英國感到冤枉的是 解放了奴隸還得賠款，原來國家之間，只有利益，沒有天理。

路 易斯安那購買案通過後，奴隸制問題又成了全國關注的焦點。法國和西班牙治下的路易斯安那地區，奴隸制合法。收購路易斯安那後，現狀沒改變。密蘇里州成立 時，奴隸制依然合法。當時紐約州眾議員詹姆斯?塔爾梅奇建議，要是密蘇里加入聯邦的話，必須加入一個條款，以保證密蘇里不再進口奴隸，已有奴隸的子女也要 在二十五歲後為成自由人。贊成者認為該提案合憲。因憲法規定，國會有權批准新州加入聯邦，國會也有權拒絕，除非它滿足國會的條件。重要的是，要是密蘇里加 入聯邦，蓄奴州在國會就會有更大的發言權。過去，一個蓄奴州加入聯邦，會有一個自由州同時加入聯邦，以保持國會的平衡。反對者認為，國會有權同意或反對一 個州加入聯邦，但無權附加條件。現存各州加入聯邦時是無條件的。如果現在國會有權提條件，那先後加入聯邦的州就不對等，合眾國就不是平等的聯邦。喬治亞州 的眾議員豪厄爾·科布對塔爾梅奇說，“你點燃的烈火，用盡海水也無法撲滅，只有鮮血才能熄滅。”眾院批准了帶有塔爾梅奇附加條件的密蘇里議案，但被參院否 決。第二年的國會再行討論，這時緬因州以自由州申請加入聯邦。新國會討論這個問題時，紐約州又有一位眾議員要求密蘇里同意在其境內永遠不蓄奴。眾院批准了 緬因加入聯邦，並交參院審核。參議院將無條件吸收密蘇里和緬因的申請案放在一起。伊利諾伊州參議員托馬斯提出了一個妥協案：他建議，讓密蘇里州蓄奴，但北 緯三十六度十分以北地區加入聯邦時永不蓄奴。這就是一八二零年的《密蘇里妥協案》。國會採納了該提案，門羅總統最初想否決這個議案，因國會無權在准州內廢 奴，為了避免內戰，他簽署了該議案。奴隸制已成了一觸即發的內戰導火線。

是 否在從墨西哥獲得的土地上蓄奴，在一八四九年墨西哥戰爭結束後，引起了極大的爭議。北方拒絕在新入聯邦的加利福尼亞和新墨西哥實行奴隸制。南方則稱，在那 里實行奴隸制是憲法賦予的權力。南方用脫離聯邦來威脅北方。亨利·克雷在一八五零年提出了一項妥協案。他說，聯邦是永恆的，是為後代而建的。南方無權脫離 聯邦。妥協案遭到了南北雙方和總統泰勒的反對。妥協案提出一周后，密西西比參議員傑弗遜?戴維斯闡明了立場。他說，該方案於南方不利，遣返逃奴法很難實 行。戴維斯說，北方要改變對南方的政策，北方必需承認南方的權利，其中一條就是南方人有權讓自己的奴隸進入美國領土。他認為，國家分裂責任在北方，北方企 圖控制南方，不制止這種趨勢的話，有一天，北方會強大到用修憲來取消奴隸制。戴維斯警告說，這是南方絕對不會接受的。三周后，南卡羅萊納的卡洪在參院發表 講話，他和戴維斯一樣反對克雷妥協案。一八五零年三月七日，卡洪在參院反對妥協案的講話後的第三天，六十八歲的韋伯斯特站了出來支持妥協案，他聲音很弱， 但講話擲地有聲，份量不減當年。為此，韋伯斯特失去了當選總統的機會。蓄奴主義者卡洪，於一八五零年三月三十一日去世，妥協的可能增大了。三周后，國會任 命的一個委員會完成了新的妥協草案：一、德克薩斯為蓄奴州；二、加利福尼亞為自由州；三、在從墨西哥得到的土地上不規定是否可以蓄奴；四、德克薩斯放棄對 新墨西哥東部的土地要求；五、聯邦政府承擔德克薩斯在合併前的所有債務，作為對德克薩斯的賠償。

一 八五零年七月九日，泰勒總統因病去世，副總統菲爾莫爾繼任。在蓄奴和新增領土問題上，菲爾莫爾堅信，只有妥協才能挽救合眾國。他毫無保留地支持妥協案，並 要求內閣全體辭職，新內閣成員都是聯邦的支持者，支持妥協案。一八五零年夏天，議員就各項提案分別投票。九月底，參眾兩院批准了妥協案的全部內容，經總統 簽字生效。妥協案被稱作是“火山口上的蓋子”，緩解了南方退出聯邦的危機，將內戰拖延了十一年。

一 八五四年，伊利諾斯參議員斯蒂芬·道格拉斯為了解決新州加入聯邦而造成的南北方權力失衡的困境，提出《堪薩斯—內布拉斯加提案》。提案建議改變一八二零年 設定的以北緯三十六度十分線為界的《密蘇里妥協案》，讓新入聯邦的州的居民自己選擇畜奴或自由。該提案徹底打破了美國在奴隸制問題上的平衡。道格拉斯說他 可以借着焚燒他模擬像的火光從華盛頓走到芝加哥。主張廢奴的北方人耽心奴隸制蔓延到北方，他們拿起武器來到堪薩斯，希望其成為自由州。為了確保其在聯邦中 的權力，南方人也來到堪薩斯，企圖用武力控制選舉，將其變為畜奴州。

一 八五五年三月三十日，堪薩斯進行了一次選舉。毗鄰的蓄奴州有很多人湧入堪薩斯。該州原先只有一千人的登記選民，但總票數竟然有六千三百二十張。幾乎所有州 議員都成了蓄奴派。廢奴派選民認為這是一次偽選舉。堪薩斯出現了兩個政治中心，蓄奴派在列康普頓，廢奴派在勞倫斯。蓄奴派指責廢奴派違法，聲稱要血洗勞倫 斯。州政府則採取了放任的態度。這種態度給勞倫斯帶來了災難性的後果。最終釀成了堪薩斯血案。《堪薩斯—內布拉斯加提案》成了內戰的主要導火線。

十 八世紀末，加勒比海地區發生的黑人起義及黑奴屠殺白人的事件，在美國南方引起了普遍的驚恐。一八三一年由塔特·特納領導的黑人起義在弗吉尼亞州爆發，起義 者在被鎮壓之前殺死了六十個白人。堪薩斯血案後。南方奴隸主強化了“黑人法規”，那是一些制約黑奴和自由黑人的行為的法律。南方對鼓吹廢奴的書刊進行郵 檢，使廢奴人士和對奴隸制有疑問的人，在南方無法生存，只得遷出南方。這些人離開後，南方就只剩下清一色的蓄奴主義者了。

一 八五九年十月十五日，約翰?布朗和兩個兒子及女婿在哈珀斯渡口舉行了反抗奴隸制的起義。很快布朗的起義就被政府鎮壓了下去。但布朗起義激化了美國國內有關 奴隸制的爭論。民主黨人說，這次起義是共和黨人精心策劃的。共和黨人否認，說起義是一個瘋子——布朗的個人行為，但布朗起義有正當理由：結束奴隸制。南方 報紙指控布朗，說起義是戰爭行為。許多南方人認為，所有北方人都該對起義負責。他們認為所有北方人都想在南方搞奴隸起義，南方人最擔心的就是奴隸起義。南 方採取了許多新措施以阻止類似事件發生，一些地方採取了軍管。奴隸主們威脅說，一旦發現有人造反，立即對他們採取鞭刑或者絞死他們。

由 於擔心奴隸造反，南方人更加團結了。奴隸主一直在談論讓南方各州脫離聯邦以確保他們的生活方式。但沒有奴隸的人反對分裂。布朗起義改變了這些人的想法。布 朗起義後，南方就剩下一種聲音了。布朗起義在南方的反響比北方還大，南方從中看到了北方的決心和勇氣，為此加快了獨立的步子。奴隸制是南方農業生產的支 柱，也是他們對《獨立宣言》的理解。“所有人生而平等”這句話中的所有人，實際上只是白人。布朗起義加快了內戰的腳步，是內戰的另一個導火線。

一 八五七年最高法院斯科特訴山弗特案的裁決是為內戰的另一個重要原因。該案判決黑奴不是美國公民，並以違憲為由廢除了《密蘇里妥協案》。斯科特是個黑奴，一 八三三年被主人賣給蓄奴州密蘇里州的一名的軍醫。斯科特曾隨艾默森在自由州伊利諾伊州和威斯康星自由聯邦領地的軍營里住過四年。後來斯科特隨從主人回到密 蘇里州。一八三四年艾默森去世後，根據其遺囑，斯科特成為主人遺孀的財產。一八四六年，斯科特向密蘇里州地方法院提出申訴，要求獲得人身自由。斯科特聲 稱，他曾在廢奴地區住過四年，身份應是自由人。據州際間尊重州法的原則以及密蘇里州“一旦自由，永遠自由”的州法，斯科特獲得自由人身份後回到密蘇里州， 還應該是自由人。經過漫長的訴訟，一八五七年最高法院對該案裁決，裁決從憲法高度維護了奴隸制，激化了南北矛盾，斷決了妥協的可能性。

美 國建國後，政治上靠的是主張州權的民主黨和主張聯邦權力的輝格黨間的平衡來維持。一八五六年共和黨誕生，平衡被打破了，伊利諾斯州的亞伯拉罕·林肯是其在 國會的聲音。林肯認為奴隸制是合眾國所有問題的根源，必須廢除。共和黨和林肯不想改變現狀，但他們要讓新入聯邦的州成為自由州。一八五六年大選，北方人賓 州民主黨人詹姆斯?布坎南當選總統，國會中共和黨仍占多數。

面 對強大的共和黨，南方人知道，若是不讓奴隸制進入新州的話，他們就無法在聯邦內與共和黨抗衡。他們建議征服古巴和中美州，使其成為畜奴州，以此來維持南北 平衡。北方人則認為，不徹底廢除奴隸制，奴隸制就會向新入聯邦的州蔓延。於是，一八六零年大選就成了關鍵，若是民主黨人尤其是北方的民主黨人當選的話，內 戰有可能延緩。但是，主張廢奴的林肯脫穎而出當選為總統。於是，內戰無法避免。儘管，林肯和華盛頓及傑弗遜一樣對奴隸制持反對態度，但他希望慢慢地廢除這 個制度。林肯廢奴是出於自由的理念，他極端歧視黑人。林肯當選總統後，南方各州相繼脫離聯邦，成立邦聯，美國分裂。在北方是叛亂，在南方是二次獨立。

內 戰不僅是美國歷史上的一個轉折點，而且是奴隸制度史上的最後一次大流血。這場雙方都豁出去了的戰爭，前後經過了四個腥風血雨的年頭，南北雙方一共有六十二 萬人喪生。而美國從獨立戰爭到越戰，死亡軍人總數只有六十四萬八千人。當時差不多每個家庭都失去了親人。失去了四分之一男性人口的南方，婦女們甚至改變對 男性的審美觀，因為四肢健全沒有傷疤的男人幾乎不存在。

戰 後，南方的經濟完全枯竭，土崩瓦解。無論南方人還是北方人、黑人還是白人蒙受了同樣的苦難。因為缺乏食品，南軍和北軍，四處掠奪，甚至犯下暴行。內戰徹底 改變了美國。北方的勝利，永遠解決了各州獨立的問題，最重要的是解決了長期以來讓美國政治不穩定的奴隸制問題，也為此付出了巨大代價。內戰中，北方耗費了 一百十六億美元，南方也差不多。內戰的絕大多數戰場在南方，南方因此遭到了巨大的破壞。數百座城鎮被摧毀，象亞特蘭大那樣的大城市，被北方軍完全摧毀。為 此，亞特蘭大人至今心有不甘。北方軍所經之地，農場被毀，房屋被燒，牲畜和農作物不是被搶就是被毀。南方的交通損毀更大，北軍摧毀了南方絕大多數鐵路，少 數未被北軍奪去的南方火車也是破壞嚴重無法使用。船隻被摧毀，道路、橋梁一片狼籍。南方已沒有能力進行重建。有錢人把錢都存放在南方邦聯的銀行里，戰後成 了廢紙。南方欠下的戰爭債務根本無法償還。四百萬解放了的奴隸自由了，但只有少數能自立，他們需要工作和培訓。

黑 人雖然在內戰中獲得了自由，但要到一八七零年，國會才通過了憲法第十五條修正案，正式給予黑人選舉權。各州在制訂州法時對黑人參選設置了種種障礙，黑人參 政在現實中很難。十九世紀末，南方各州制定了公民參選必須付人頭稅及通過文化考試的州法，使大多數黑人無法參選。一八九六年，最高法院在普萊西訴弗格森案 中認定種族“隔離”合法、和種族“平等”一樣都不違憲。接着，南方各州推出了各種種族隔離政策，公共設施、餐館、旅館、醫院、劇場、車站等，都以種族劃 線，白人、黑人各用各的，互不侵犯。直到二戰時種族隔離才有所改變。二十世紀六十年代，種族歧視和種族隔離才最後被廢除。

對 一個國家來說，一旦確立了它的立國原則，就會隨之產生與那些原則相應的生活生產方式與價值觀。一旦這些東西被確立，就很難改變。美國的憲法是所有成文法中 最好的之一，它利用社會中的各種對立的組織原則去平衡各個利益集團。但是，這一切仍無法改變十九世紀初，南放奴隸制這樣一種生活生產方式。為此，南北雙方 最終開戰，北方的勝利靠的是其雄厚的工業基礎和人力資源。但戰爭的殘酷，不亞於人類史上任何一次戰爭。美國從內戰中學會了如何避免內戰，南北戰爭很可能是 美國唯一的內戰。儘管，幾代美國人因為命運，恰好遇上了這場戰爭，很多人因此喪生。但是，當美國從這場戰爭走出來之後，開始走向了工業化，走上了成為世界 一流強國的道路。真正的美國從這場血腥的內戰中誕生。

Slavery and the Framing of the U.S. Constitution

The question of prohibiting the African slave-trade by a provision in the national Constitution caused much and warm debate in the convention that framed that instrument. A compromise was agreed to by the insertion of a clause (art. I., sec. 9, clause 1) in the Constitution, as follows: "The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight; but a tax, or duty, may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person." The idea of prohibiting the African slave-trade, then warmly advocated, was not new. In 1774 the Continental Congress, while releasing the colonies from other provisions of the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION , had expressly resolved " that no slave be imported into any of the United States." Delaware, by her constitution, and Virginia and Maryland by special laws, had prohibited the importation of slaves. Similar prohibitions were in force in all the more northern States; but they did not prevent the merchants of those States from carrying on the slave-trade elsewhere, and already some New England ships were engaged in a traffic from the African coast to Georgia and South Carolina. These States were forgetful of or indifferent to the pledges they had made through their delegates in the face of the world by their concurrence in the Declaration of Independence, and seemed fully determined to maintain not only the slave system of labor, but the nefarious slave-trade. North Carolina did not prohibit the traffic, but denounced the further importation of slaves into the State as " highly impolitic," and imposed a heavy duty on future importations.

On the demand of Henry Laurens, of South Carolina, who entered into the negotiations for a preliminary treaty of peace, at a late hour, a clause in the treaty (1782) was interlined, prohibiting, in the British evacuation, the " carrying away any negroes or other property of the inhabitants." So this treaty of peace, in which no word had, excepting indirectly, indicated the existence of slavery in the United States, made known to the world that men could be held as property.

The legislature of Connecticut, early in 1784, passed an act that no negro or mulatto child born within that State after March 1 that year should be held in servitude longer than until the age of twenty-five years.

Plantation Slaves in the South

In 1788 the captain of a vessel in Boston seized three colored persons, took them to the West Indies, and sold them there for slaves. This event caused the legislature of Massachusetts to pass a law to prevent the slave-trade in that State, and for granting relief to the families of such persons as may be kidnapped or decoyed from the commonwealth. The law subjected to a heavy penalty any person who should forcibly take or detain any negro for the purpose of transportation as a slave, and the owner of the vessel in which such kidnapped man should be carried away incurred, also, a heavy penalty. The insurance on the vessel was made void; and the relatives of the person kidnapped, if the latter were sold into slavery in a distant country, were allowed to prosecute for the crime.

On May 12, 1789, a tariff bill having been reported to Congress, and being under discussion on the question of its second reading, Parker, of Virginia, moved to insert a clause imposing a duty of $10 on every slave imported. " He was sorry," he said, " the Constitution prevented Congress from prohibiting the importation altogether. It was contrary to revolutionary principles, and ought not to be permitted." A warm debate ensued. It called forth the opposition of South Carolinians and Georgians particularly. Jackson, of Georgia, made a vehement speech in opposition, in the course of which he said he hoped the proposition would be withdrawn, and that if it should be brought forward again it would comprehend " the white slaves as well as the black imported from all the jails of Europe—wretches convicted of the most flagrant crimes, who were brought in and sold without any duty whatever." This was an allusion to the indentured white servants who were sold by the captains of vessels on their arrival here to pay the cost of their passage, a practice which had been put a stop to by the Revolutionary War, but partially revived. The motion was finally withdrawn.

The Nation Continues to Grapple with the Slavery Issue

In 1804 a provision was inserted into the act organizing the Territory of Orleans, that no slaves should be carried thither, except from some part of the United States, by citizens removing into the Territory as actual settlers, this permission not to extend to negroes introduced into the United States since 1798. The object of this provision was to guard against the effects of an act recently adopted by the legislature of South Carolina for reviving the slave-trade after a cessation of it, as to that State, for fifteen years, and of six years as to the whole Union. This was a consequence of the vast increase and profitableness of cotton culture, made so by Whitney's cotton-gin.

On Feb. 15, 1804, the legislature of New Jersey, by an almost unanimous vote, passed an act to abolish slavery in that State by securing freedom to all persons born there after July 4 next ensuing, the children of slave parents to become free, masculine at twenty-five years of age, feminine at twenty-one.

A Slave Cabin

The rapid extension of settlements in the Southwest after the War of 1812-15, and the great profits derived there from the cultivation of cotton, not only caused the revival of the African slave-trade, in spite of prohibitory laws, but it gave occasion to a rival domestic slave-trade, of which the national capital had become one of the centers, where it was carried on by professionalslave traders. They bought up the slaves of impoverished planters of Maryland and Virginia, and sold them at large profits in the cotton-growing districts of the South and West. This new traffic, which included many of the worst features of the African slave-trade, was severely denounced by John Randolph, of Virginia, as " heinous and abominable, inhuman and illegal." This opinion was founded on facts reported by a committee of inquiry. Gov. D. R. Williams, of South Carolina, denounced the traffic as " remorseless and cruel "; a " ceaseless dragging along the streets and highways of a crowd of suffering victims to minister to insatiable avarice," condemned alike by " enlightened humanity, wise policy, and the prayers of the just." The governor urged that it had a tendency to introduce slaves of all descriptions from other States, "defiling the delightful avocations of private life" " by the presence of convicts and male-factors." The legislature of South Carolina passed an act forbidding the introduction of slaves from other States. A similar act was passed by the Georgia legislature. This legislation was frequently resorted to on occasions of alarm, but the profitable extension of cotton cultivation and the demand for slave labor overcame all scruples. Within two years after its passage the prohibitory act of South Carolina was repealed. The inter-State slave-traffic was carried on extensively until slavery was abolished in 1863. A Richmond newspaper, in 1861, urging Virginia to join the Southern Confederacy, which had prohibited the traffic between them and States that would not join them, gave as a most urgent reason for such an act that, if it were not accomplished, the " Old Dominion " would lose this trade, amounting annually to from $13,000,000 to $20,000,000.

Interior of a Slave Cabin

When Admiral Cockburn began his marauding expedition on the American coast in the spring of 1813, he held out a promise of freedom to all slaves who should join his standard. Many were seduced on board his vessels, but found themselves wretchedly deceived. Intelligence of these movements reached the plantations farther south, and, in the summer of 1813, secret organizations were formed among the slaves to receive and cooperate with Cockburn's army of liberation, as they supposed it to be. One of these secret organizations met regularly on St. John's Island, near Charleston. Their leader was a man of great sagacity and influence, and their meetings were opened and closed by singing a hymn composed by that leader—a sort of parody of Hail Columbia. The following is the last of he three stanzas of the hymn alluded to:

.. Arise! arise ! shake off your chains!

Your cause is just, so Heaven ordains ;

To you shall freedom be proclaimed !
Raise your arms and bare your breasts,

Almighty God will do the rest.
Blow the clarion's warlike blast ;
Call every negro from his task ;
Wrest the scourge from Buckra's hand,

And drive each tyrant from the land !
Chorus.
" Firm, united let us be.
Resolved on death or liberty!

As a band of patriots joined,

Peace and plenty we shall find."

They held meetings every night, and had arranged a plan for the rising of all the slaves in Charleston when the British should appear. At one of the meetings the question, " What shall be done with the white people?" was warmly discussed. Some advocated their indiscriminate slaughter as the only security for liberty, and this seemed to be the prevailing opinion, when the leader and the author of the hymn came in and said: " Brethren, you know me. You know that I am ready to gain your liberty and mine. But not one needless drop of blood must be shed. I have a, master whom I love, and the man who takes his life must pass over my dead body." Had Cockburn been faithful to his promises to the negroes, and landed and declared freedom to the slaves of South Carolina, no doubt many thousands of colored people would have flocked to his standard. But he was content to fill his pockets by plundering and carrying on a petty slave-trade for his private gain.

Developing Conflict over American Slavery

On March 13, 1824, articles of convention between the United States and Great Britain were signed at London, by diplomatists appointed for the purpose, providing for the adoption of measures to suppress the African slave-trade. The first article provided that the commanders and commissioned officers of each of the two contracting powers, duly authorized to cruise on the coast of Africa, of America, and of the West Indies, for the suppression of the slave-traffic, were empowered, under certain restrictions, to detain, examine, capture, and deliver over for trial and adjudication by some competent tribunal, any ship or vessel concerned in the illicit traffic in slaves, and carrying the flag of either nation. This convention was signed by Richard Rush for the United States, and by W. Huskisson and Sir Stratford Canning for Great Britain.

On March 6, 1857, Roger B. Taney, chief-justice of the United States, and a majority of his associates in the Supreme Court, uttered an extra-judicial opinion, that any person who had been a slave, or was a descendant of a slave, could not enjoy the rights of citizenship in the United States. Five years afterwards (1862) Secretary Seward issued a passport to a man who had been a slave to travel abroad as " a citizen of the United States." Six years later still (July 20, 1868) the national Constitution was so amended that all persons, of whatever race or color, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. By the same amendment every civil right was given to every such person. And by a subsequent amendment (1869) it was decreed that " the rights of any of the citizens of the United States, or any State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude should not be abridged."

Scene in a Southern Slave Town

By a provision of the national Constitution the foreign slave-trade in the United States was abolished, and Congress declared it to be " piracy." Encouraged by the practical sympathy of the national government, the friends of the slave-labor system formed plans for its perpetuity, which practically disregarded the plain requirements of the fundamental law. They resolved to reopen the African slave-trade. Africans were kidnapped in their native country, brought across the sea, and landed on our shores as in colonial times, and placed in perpetual slavery. In Louisiana, leading citizens engaged in a scheme for legalizing the traffic, under the guise of what they called the African Labor-supply Association, of which James B. De Bow, editor of De Bow's Review, published in New Orleans, was president. His Review was the acknowledged organ of the slave-holders, and wielded extensive and powerful influence when the flames of the Civil War were kindling. In Georgia, negroes from Africa were landed and sold, and when a grand jury at Savannah was compelled by law to find several bills against persons engaged in the traffic, or charged with complicity in the slave-trade, they protested against the law they were compelled to support. " We feel humbled," they said, " as men, conscious that we are born freemen but in name, and that we are living, during the existence of such laws, under a tyranny as supreme as that of the despotic governments of the Old World. Heretofore the people of the South, firm in their consciousness of right and strength, have failed to place the stamp of condemnation upon such laws as reflect upon the institution of slavery, but have permitted, unrebuked, the influence of foreign opinion to prevail." The True Southron, published in Mississippi, suggested the " propriety of stimulating the zeal of the pulpit by founding a prize for the best sermon on free-trade in negroes." This proposition was approved, and pulpits exhibited zeal in the cause. James H. Thornwell, D.D., president of the Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Columbus, S. C., asserted his conviction that the African slave-trade formed the most worthy of all missionary societies. Southern legislatures and conventions openly discussed the subject of reopening the slave-trade. The Southern Commercial Convention, held in Vicksburg, Miss., May 11, 1859, resolved, by a vote of 47 to 16, that " all laws, State or federal, prohibiting the African slave-trade ought to be abolished." It was warmly advocated by several men who became Confederate leaders in theCivil War. The late JOHN SLIDELL, of Louisiana, urged in the United States Senate the propriety of withdrawing American cruisers from the coasts of Africa, that the slave-trade might not be interfered with by them. When, in the summer of 1858, it was known that the traffic was to be carried on actively by the African Labor-supply Association, the British cruisers in the Gulf of Mexico were unusually vigilant, and in the course of a few weeks boarded about fifty American vessels suspected of beingslavers. The influence of the slave-holders was brought to bear so powerfully upon the administration that the government protested against what it was pleased to call the " odious British doctrine of the right of search." The British government, for " prudential reasons," put a stop to the practice and laid the blame on the officers of the cruisers.

Plantation Scene

On April 7, 1862, a treaty was concluded between the United States and Great Britain for the suppression of the African slave-trade, and signed at the city of Washington, D. C. By it ships of the respective nations should have the right of search of suspected slave-ships; but that right was restricted to vessels of war authorized expressly for that object, and in no case to be exercised with respect to a vessel of the navy of either of the powers, but only as regards merchant vessels. Nothing was done under this treaty, as the emancipation proclamation and other circumstances made action unnecessary.