Читать книгу A Review of Uncle Tom's Cabin; or, An Essay on Slavery - A. Woodward - Страница 6

Table of Contents

Since the following chapters were prepared for the press, my attention was directed by a friend, to a letter published in a Northern paper, which detailed some shocking things, that the writer had seen and heard in the South; and also some severe strictures on the institution of domestic slavery in the Southern States, &c.

I have in the following work, related an anecdote of a young lawyer, who being asked how he could stand up before the court, and with unblushing audacity state falsehoods; he very promptly answered, "I was well paid; I received a large fee, and could therefore afford to lie." I infer from the class of letters referred to, that the writers are generally "well paid" for their services.

It has long been a practice of abolition editors in the Northern States, when they were likely to run short of matter, to employ some worthy brother, to travel South, and manufacture articles for their papers. Many of those articles are falsehoods; and most of them, if not all, are exaggerations.

No man who will consent to go south, and perform this dirty work, is capable of writing truth. And moreover, many of the letters published in abolition papers, purporting to have been written from some part of the South, were concocted by editors and others at home; the writers never having traveled fifty miles from their native villages. But some of them do travel South and write letters; and it is of but little consequence what they see, or what they hear; they have engaged to write letters, and letters they must write: letters too, of a certain character; and if they fail to find material in the South, it then devolves on them to manufacture it.

They have engaged to furnish food for the depraved appetites of a certain class of readers in the North; and furnish it they must, by some means. They truly, are an unlucky set of fellows, for I never yet heard of one of them, who was so fortunate as to find anything good or praiseworthy among Southern people. This is very strange indeed! They travel South with an understanding on the part of their employer, and with an intention on their part, to misrepresent the South, and to excite prejudice in Northern minds. How devoid of patriotism, truth and justice. The mischief done by these misrepresentations is inconceivable. If every abolitionist North of Mason and Dixon's line, were separately and individually asked, from whence he derived his opinions and prejudices in relation to Southern men, and Southern slavery, nine hundred and ninety-nine out of every thousand would answer, that they had learned all that they knew about slavery and slaveholders from the publication of abolitionists: not one in a thousand among them having ever seen a southern slave or his master. "Truth is stranger than fiction;" and it is also becoming more rare. No wonder people are misled, when the country is flooded with abolition papers and Uncle Tom's Cabin. No one can read such publications without being misled by them, unless he is, or has been, a resident of a slave State. It is thus that materials are furnished for abolition papers and such publications as Uncle Tom's Cabin; and it is thus that the public mind is poisoned, public morals vitiated, and honest but ignorant men led to say and do many things, which must, sooner or later, result in deplorable consequences, unless something can be brought to bear on the public mind that will counteract the evil. The writer hopes, through the blessing of God, that the following pages will prove an efficient antidote.

Southern people have their faults; they err in many things: and far be it from me, under such circumstances, to become their apologist. It is not as a defender of the South I appear before the public, but in defense of my country, North and South. We are all brethren; we are all citizens of the same heaven-favored country; and how residents of one part of it can spend their lives in vilifying, traducing, and misrepresenting those of another portion of it, is, to me, unaccountable. It is strange, indeed! I entreat my countrymen to reflect soberly on these things; and in the name of all that is sacred I entreat you, my abolition friends, to pause a while, in your mad career, and review the whole ground. It may be that some of you may yet see the error of your course. I cannot give you all up. I trust in God that you are not all given over to "hardness of heart and reprobacy of mind." A word to the reader. Pass on—hear me through—never mind my harsh expressions and uncouth language. Truth is not very palatable, to any of us, at all times. Crack the nut; it may be that you will find a kernel within that will reward you for your trouble.

False impressions have been made, and continue to be made by the writers alluded to above; sectional hatred is engendered, North and South; and if this incessant warfare continues, it will, at no very distant day, produce a dissolution of this Union. This result is inevitable if the present state of things continues. Has the agitation and discussion of the question of African slavery, in the free States, resulted in any good, or is it ever likely to result in any? I flatter myself that I have clearly shown, in the following pages, that hitherto its consequences have been evil and only evil, and that nothing but evil can grow out of it in future. I think that I have adduced historical facts which clearly and indisputably prove that northern agitation has served but to rivet the chains of slavery; that it has retarded emancipation; that it has augmented the evils and hardships of slavery; that it has inflicted injury on both masters and servants; that it has engendered sectional hatred which endangers the peace, prosperity, and perpetuity of the Union. Why, then, will abolitionists persist in a course so inconsistent; so contrary to reason; so opposed to truth, righteousness, and justice? They need not tell me that slavery is an evil; that slavery is a curse; that slavery is a hardship, and that it ought to be extinguished. I admit it; but this is not the question. On this head I have no controversy with them. The question is, whether their course of procedure is ever likely to remove or mitigate the evils of slavery. Are we prepared, in our efforts to remove the evils of slavery, to incur the risk of subjecting ourselves to calamities infinitely worse that African slavery itself? Or rather, is there the remotest probability, supposing the plans and schemes of abolitionists should be carried out, the Union dissolved, and the country plunged into civil war, that slavery would thereby be abolished in the southern States?

These are the questions at issue between the abolition party and the writer; and these are among the prominent questions discussed in the following pages. It is true that I have hastily glanced at slavery in all its bearings, but it was the fell spirit of abolitionism which first attracted my attention, and induced me to investigate the subject. It was its revolutionary designs and tendencies, its contempt of all law, human and Divine, that first impressed my mind with the necessity of prompt and efficient action on the part of the friends of our country. It was the unparalleled circulation of Uncle Tom's Cabin that aroused my fears, and excited in my mind apprehensions of danger. If such productions as Uncle Tom's Cabin are to give tone to public sentiment in the North, then assuredly are we in danger. Should Mrs. Stowe's vile aspersion of southern character, and her loose, reckless and wicked misrepresentations of the institution of slavery in the southern States ever become accredited in the northern section of the Union I fear the consequence. I sometimes survey the condition of my country with consternation and dismay, and tremble in prospect of what may yet occur. History records the rise and fall of nations. We read of revolutions, butcheries, and blood. We have flattered ourselves that our beloved country for ages to come, and probably forever, is destined to escape these calamities. But, O God! how mortifying the reflection that there are now, in our midst, religious fanatics and political demagogues, who for a little paltry gain or notoriety would plunge us into all these evils!

I have repeatedly, in the following pages charged the abolition faction with revolutionary designs and tendencies. Some may doubt the truth and justice of the charge; but I beg such persons to recollect that abolition writers and orators have, times without number, avowed an intention to overthrow this government; but it matters not what their avowed designs and intentions are, for their lawless and seditious course leads directly to that result. If they ever succeed in carrying out their plans and schemes we know that revolution and disunion will be the consequence. It was remarked by Mr. Frelinghuysen, of New York, on a certain occasion, that "abolitionists are seeking to destroy our happy Union." Chancellor Walworth says, "They are contemplating a violation of the rights of property secured by the Constitution, and pursuing measures which must lead to civil war."

The union of these States is based on what has been called the slavery compromise; and the Union would have never taken place, had not the right to hold slave property been secured to the slave states, by a provision in the Federal Constitution. Had not the free states relinquished all right to interfere with slavery in the slave states, no union of the slave and free states could ever have taken place. The right to hold slave property, and to manage, control, and dispose of that property in their own way, and at their own discretion, was secured to the slave states by a solemn contract between the slave and non-slaveholding states, and that contract binds every individual in this nation, North and South. Slave property then, is held under the protection of the supreme law of the nation, and any citizen invading the rights of the South, is guilty of a civil trespass. Hence, all interference with slavery by northern men, is a violation of the spirit, if not of the letter of that constitutional compact, which binds these states together. Any attempt by northern men, either direct or indirect, to dispossess the South of her slave property, or in any way to endanger or injuriously to affect their interests therein, is a violation of the supreme law of the nation. It is an act of bad faith—of gross injustice, and none but bigoted corrupt fanatics, and low political demagogues, would be guilty of so base an act.

It is clear then, that the slave states never will yield to the requisitions of abolitionists, and should that faction ever become the dominant party in the free states, dissolution of the Union will be a necessary consequence Intelligent men, who will persist in a course of conduct so unjust, so illegal, with a perfect knowledge of the probable consequences; are to all intents and purposes, as truly traitors to their country, as was Benedict Arnold; and as such, they should be viewed and treated. Mark my words, reader, I say, intelligent men, for nine out of every ten among those who have been seduced into the abolition net, are objects of pity, and not of contempt or indignation. Poor souls, they are ignorant; it is, I suppose, their misfortune and not their fault.

In order that I may be clearly understood, I will reiterate tho foregoing argument. Before the adoption of the Federal constitution, the states were to a great extent sovereign and independent, and of course were in a condition to settle terms on which to form a more perfect union. The North and the South, otherwise, the slave-holding and the non-slaveholding states met in convention to settle those terms. The North in convention conceded to the South the right to hold slave property; and the sole right of making all laws necessary for the regulation of slavery. It was thus, we see, by a solemn contract or agreement, that the South acquired exclusive right to control domestic slavery within her borders. What right then, have the citizens of free states, to intermeddle with it? They have none, as long as the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The union of these states is based on that instrument, and whenever we cease faithfully to observe its provisions, the Union must necessarily cease to exist. All interference then on the part of the North, endangering the rights or injuriously affecting the interests of the South in slave property, is a violation of the supreme law of the nation. I need not say more; the argument must be clear to every one; and I think the duty of all concerned equally clear.

Ralfe, referring to the adoption of the Federal Constitution, says, "It was no easy task to reconcile the local interests and discordant prepossessions of different sections of the United States, but it was accomplished by acts of concession." Madison says, "Mutual deference and concession were absolutely necessary," and that the Southern States never would have entered the Union, without concession as to slave property. And Governor Randolph informs us, "That the Southern States conceived their property in slaves to be secured by this arrangement?"

We are also informed by Patrick Henry, Chief Justice Tiglman, Chancellor Kent, Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, Justice Shaw, Chief Justice Parker, Edward Everett and others, that no union of these states ever could have taken place, had not the right to hold slave property, and the sole right to control that property been conceded to the southern States. And, Edward Everett, moreover, tells us that the northern States "deemed it a point of the highest policy, to enter with the slave states into the present Union." The reader will observe, that a majority of the authorities referred to, are northern men of the highest distinction.

I remarked in the preceding pages, that whoever invades the rights of the South in her slave property, violates the law of the land, and is guilty of a civil trespass; and I will now prove from the sacred record, that in opposing the civil laws of their country, they violate the laws of God, and consequently are guilty of a moral trespass. The primitive church of Christ was, under all circumstances, and at all times, subordinate to the civil authorities. They never stopped to inquire whether the laws were good or bad, just or unjust; their business was to obey the laws and not to find fault with them.

Christ and his apostles enjoined on their followers unreserved obedience and submission to the civil authorities. I need not here quote the language of our Saviour; it must be familiar to every Bible reader. I will, however, quote the remarks of St. Paul and St. Peter, on this topic. The former says, "Let every soul be subject to the higher powers." "Whosoever therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." He instructs Bishop Titus to put his flock "in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, and to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work." "To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, showing meekness unto all men." St. Peter says, "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of men for the Lord's sake; whether to the king as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers." There is neither precept nor precedent in the Bible, which will countenance opposition to the laws of our country. No, not one word in the sacred volume, that can be thus construed. Opposition and resistance to the civil authorities, is one of the many corruptions winch have crept into the church of Christ. Men "have become wise above what is written;" and truly as our Saviour said unto the ancient scribes and pharisees, "they shall receive the greater damnation."

What a marked contrast between Christ and his apostles, and the apostles of modern reform, alias abolitionists. How dare they professing Christianity to fly in the face of the laws of their country? How dare they resist the execution of those laws? How dares Mrs. Stowe inculcate disobedience and open resistance to her country's laws? Great God! shall our country ever be freed from the dark and damnable deeds of religious fanatics? Shall our country ever be freed from the curse of curses, religious ultraism, bigotry, and delusion? Let those who profess to be the followers of the meek and lowly Jesus—those who profess to take the Bible as their guide, cease from their unwarrantable and seditious opposition to the laws of their country; or otherwise let them renounce the Bible, lay aside their Christian garb, and appear before us in their true colors, that we may know who they are, what they are, whom they serve, and under what standard they are fighting. Throw off your masks, gentlemen; don't try to deceive us any longer; some of us understand you, and we intend to expose you, and hold you up to the public gaze, as long as the good Lord will vouchsafe to us health and strength sufficient to sit in our seats, and hold a pen in our hands. Your conduct is a reproach to the Christian name, a stigma on the Christian character.