perpetuity of the relation. But, when the most pious and
devoted men that the South has, and those professing to spend
their lives for the service of the slave, thus calmly, and without
any reprobation, contemplate this state of things as a state with
which Christianity does not call on them to interfere, what can
be expected of the world in general?
It is to be remarked, with regard to the sentiments of Mr.
Smylie's pamphlet, that they are endorsed in the Appendix by a
document in the name of two Presbyteries, which document,
though with less minuteness of investigation, takes the same
ground with Mr. Smylie. This Rev. James Smylie was one
who, in company with the Rev. John L. Montgomery, was
appointed by the synod of Mississippi, in 1839, to write or com-
pile a catechism for the instruction of the negroes.
Mr. Jones says, in his “History of the Religious Instruction
of the Negroes” (page 83): “The Rev. James Smylie and the
Rev. C. Blair are engaged in this good work (of enlightening the
negroes) systematically and constantly in Mississippi.” The
former clergyman is characterised as “an aged and indefatigable
father.” “His success in enlightening the negroes has been
very great. A large proportion of the negroes in his old church
can recite both Williston's and the Westminster Catechism very
accurately.” The writer really wishes that it were in her power
to make copious extracts from Mr. Smylie's pamphlet. A great
deal could be learned from it as to what style of mind, and habits
of thought, and modes of viewing religious subjects, are likely to
grow up under such an institution. The man is undoubtedly
and heartily sincere in his opinions, and appears to maintain
them with a most abounding and triumphant joyfulness, as the
very latest improvement in theological knowledge. We are
tempted to present a part of his Introduction, simply for the
light it gives us on the style of thinking which is to be found in
our south-western writers:
In presenting the following review to the public, the author was not entirely or
mainly influenced by a desire or hope to correct the views of the Chillicothe Pres-
bytery. He hoped the publication would be of essential service to others as well
as to the presbytery.
From his intercourse with religious societies of all denominations, in Missis-
sippi and Louisiana, he was aware that the abolition maxim, namely, that slavery
is in itself sinful, had gained on and entwined itself among the religious and
of many in the community, so far as not only to render them
unhappy, but to draw off the attention from the great and important duty of a
householder to his household. The eye of the mind, resting on slavery itself as a
corrupt fountain, from which, of necessity, nothing but corrupt streams could flow,
was incessantly employed in search of some plan by which, with safety, the foun-
tain could, in some future time, be entirely dried up; never reflecting, or dreaming,
that slavery, in itself considered, was an innoxious relation, and that the whole
error rested in the neglect of the relative duties of the relation.
If there be a consciousness of guilt resting on the mind, it is all the same, as to
the effect, whether the conscience is or is not right. Although the word of God
alone ought to be the guide of conscience, yet it is not always the case. Hence,
conscientious scruples sometimes exist for neglecting to do that which the word
of God condemns.
The Bornean who neglects to kill his father, and to eat him with his dates,
when he has become old, is sorely tortured by the wringings of a guilty conscience,
when his filial tenderness and sympathy have gained the ascendancy over his
apprehended duty of killing his parent. In like manner, many a slaveholder, whose
conscience is guided, not by the word of God, but by the doctrines of men, is
often suffering the lashes of a guilty conscience, even when he renders to his slave
“that which is just and equal,” according to the Scriptures, simply because he
does not emancipate his slave, irrespective of the benefit or injury done by such
an act.
“How beautiful upon the mountains,” in the apprehension of the reviewer,
“would be the feet of him that would bring” to the Bornean “the glad
tidings” that his conduct, in sparing the life of his tender and affectionate
parent, was no sin! * * * Equally beautiful and delightful, does the re-
viewer trust, will it be, to an honest, scrupulous, and conscientious slaveholder,
to learn, from the word of God, the glad tidings, that slavery itself is not sinful.
Released now from an incubus that paralysed his energies in discharge of duty
towards his slaves, he goes forth cheerfully to energetic action. It is not now as
formerly, when he viewed slavery as in itself sinful. He can now pray, with the
hope of being heard, that God will bless his exertions to train up his slaves “in
the nurture and admonition of the Lord;” whereas, before, he was retarded by
this consideration--“If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear
me.” Instead of hanging down his head, moping and brooding over his condi-
tion as formerly, without action, he raises his head, and moves on cheerfully in
the plain path of duty.
He is no more tempted to look askance at the word of God, and saying, “Hast
thou found me, O mine enemy,” come to “filch from me” my slaves, which,
“while not enriching” them, “leaves me poor indeed?” Instead of viewing the
word of God, as formerly, come with whips and scorpions to chastise him into
paradise, he feels that its “ways are ways of pleasantness, and its paths peace.”
Distinguishing now between the real word of God and what are only the doc-
trines and commandments of men, the mystery is solved, which was before
insolvable, namely, “The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart.”
If you should undertake to answer such a man by saying
that his argument proves too much, that neither Christ nor his
apostles bore any explicit testimony against the gladiatorial
shows and the sports of the arena, and therefore it would be
right to get them up in America, the probability seems to be
that he would heartily assent to it, and think, on the whole,
that it might be a good speculation. As a further specimen of
the free and easy facetiousness which seems to be a trait in
this production, see, on page 58, where the Latin motto
“Facilis descensus Averni, sed revocare,” &c., receives the
following quite free and truly Western translation, which, he
good-naturedly says is given for the benefit of those who do
not understand Latin: “It is easy to go to the devil, but the
devil to get back.”
Some uncharitable people might, perhaps, say that the
preachers of such doctrines are as likely as anybody to have
an experimental knowledge on this point. The idea of this
jovial old father instructing a class of black “Sams” and young
“Topsys” in the mysteries of the Assembly's Catechism is
truly
picturesque!
That Mr. Smylie's opinions on the subject of slavery have
been amply supported and carried out by leading clergymen in
every denomination, we might give volumes of quotations to
show.
A second head, however, is yet to be considered, with regard
to the influence of the Southern church and clergy.
It is well known that the Southern political community have
taken their stand upon the position that the institution of
slavery shall not be open to discussion. In many of the slave
States stringent laws exist, subjecting to fine and imprisonment,
and even death, any who speak or publish anything upon the
subject, except in its favour. They have not only done this
with regard to citizens of slave States, but they have shown
the strongest disposition to do it with regard to citizens of free
States; and when these discussions could not be repelled by
regular law, they have encouraged the use of illegal measures.
In the published letters and speeches of Horace Mann, the
following examples are given (p. 467). In 1831 the Legisla-
ture of Georgia offered five thousand dollars to any one who
would arrest and bring to trial and conviction, in Georgia, a
citizen of Massachusetts, named William Lloyd Garrison.
This law was approved by W. Lumpkin, Governor, Dec. 26,
1831. At a meeting of slave-holders held at Sterling, in the
same State, September 4, 1835, it was formally recommended
to the governor to offer, by proclamation, five thousand dollars
reward for the apprehension of any one of ten persons, citizens,
with one exception, of New York and Massachusetts, whose
February 1st, 1836, contained an offer of ten thousand dollars
for the arrest and kidnapping of the Rev. A. A. Phelps, of
New York. The Committee of Vigilance of the parish of East
Feliciana offered, in the Louisville Journal of Oct. 15, 1835,
fifty thousand dollars to any person who would deliver into
their hands Arthur Tappan of New York. At a public meet-
ing at Mount Meigs, Alabama, Aug. 13, 1836, the Hon.
Bedford Ginress in the chair, a reward of fifty thousand dollars
was offered for the apprehension of the same Arthur Tappan,
or of Le Roy Sunderland, a Methodist clergyman of New
York. Of course, as none of these persons could be seized
except in violation of the laws of the State where they were
citizens, this was offering a public reward for an act of felony.
Throughout all the Southern States associations were formed,
called Committees of Vigilance, for the taking of measures for
suppressing abolition opinions, and for the punishment by
Lynch law of suspected persons. At Charleston, South
Carolina, a mob of this description forced open the post-office,
and made a general inspection, at their pleasure, of its con-
tents; and whatever publication they found there which they
considered to be of a dangerous and anti-slavery tendency, they
made a public bonfire of, in the street. A large public meeting
was held, a few days afterwards, to complete the preparation
for excluding anti-slavery principles from publication, and for
ferreting out persons suspected of abolitionism, that they might
be subjected to Lynch law. Similar popular meetings were
held through the Southern and Western States. At one of
these, held in Clinton, Mississippi, in the year 1835, the fol-
lowing resolutions were passed:--
Resolved, That slavery through the South and West is not felt as an evil
moral or political, but it is recognised in reference to the actual, and not to any
Utopian condition of our slaves, as a blessing both to master and slave.
Resolved, That it is our decided opinion that any individual who dares to circu-
late, with a view to effectuate the designs of the abolitionists, any of the incendiary
tracts or newspapers now in a course of transmission to this country, is justly
worthy, in the sight of God and man, of immediate death; and we doubt not that
such would be the punishment of any such offender in any part of the State of
Mississippi where he may be found.
Resolved, That the clergy of the State of Mississippi be hereby recommended at
once to take a stand upon this subject; and that their further silence in relation
thereto, at this crisis, will, in our opinion, be subject to serious censure.
The treatment to which persons were exposed, when taken up
by any of these Vigilance Committees, as suspected of anti-
slavery sentiments, may be gathered from the following account.
The writer has a distinct recollection of the circumstances at the
present time, as the victim of this injustice was a member of the
seminary then under the care of her father.
Amos Dresser, now a missionary in Jamaica, was a theological student at Lane
Seminary, near Cincinnati. In the vacation (August 1835) he undertook to sell
Bibles in the State of Tennessee, with a view to raise means further to continue
his studies. Whilst there, he fell under suspicion of being an abolitionist, was
arrested by the Vigilance Committee whilst attending a religious meeting in the
neighbourhood of Nashville, the capital of the State, and, after an afternoon and
evening's inquisition, condemned to receive twenty lashes on his naked body.
The sentence was executed on him between eleven and twelve o'clock on Saturday
night, in the presence of most of the committee, and of an infuriated and blaspheming
mob. The Vigilance Committee (an unlawful association) consisted of sixty
persons. Of these, twenty-seven were members of churches; one, a religious
teacher; another, the elder who, but a few days before, in the Presbyterian
church, handed Mr. Dresser the bread and wine at the communion of the Lord's
Supper.
It will readily be seen that the principle involved in such pro-
ceedings as these involves more than the question of slavery.
The question was, in fact, this--Whether it is so important to
hold African slaves that it is proper to deprive free Americans
of the liberty of conscience, and liberty of speech, and liberty of
the press, in order to do it? It is easy to see that very serious
changes would be made in the government of a country by the
admission of this principle; because it is quite plain that, if all
these principles of our free government may be given up for one
thing, they may for another; and that its ultimate tendency is
to destroy entirely that freedom of opinion and thought which
is considered to be the distinguishing excellence of American
institutions.
The question now is, Did the church join with the world in
thinking the institution of slavery so important and desirable as
to lead them to look with approbation upon Lynch law and the
sacrifice of the rights of free inquiry? We answer the reader by
submitting the following facts and quotations.
At the large meeting which we have described above, in
Charleston, South Carolina, the Charleston Courier informs us
“that the clergy of all denominations attended in a body, lend-
ing their sanction to the pro
ceedings, and adding by their
presence to the impressive character of the scene.” There can
be no doubt that the presence of the clergy of all denominations,
in a body, at a meeting held for such a purpose, was an impressive
scene, truly!
At this meeting it was resolved--
That the thanks of this meeting are due to the reverend gentlemen of the clergy
in this city, who have so promptly and so effectually responded to public sentiment,
by suspending their schools in which the free coloured population were taught; and
that this meeting deem it a patriotic action, worthy of all praise, and proper to be
imitated by other teachers of similar schools throughout the State.
The question here arises, whether their Lord, at the day of
judgment, will comment on their actions in a similar strain.
The alarm of the Virginia slave-holders was not less; nor
were the clergy in the city of Richmond, the capital, less prompt
than the clergy in Charleston to respond to “public sentiment.”
Accordingly on the 29th of July, they assembled together and
resolved, unanimously--
That we earnestly deprecate the unwarrantable and highly improper inter-
ference of the people of any other State with the domestic relations of master
and slave.
That the example of our Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles, in not interfering
with the question of slavery, but uniformly recognising the relations of master and
servant, and giving full and affectionate instruction to both, is worthy of the
imitation of all ministers of the gospel.
That we will not patronise nor receive any pamphlet or newspaper of the anti-
slavery societies, and that we will discountenance the circulation of all such papers
in the community.
The Rev. J. C. Postell, a Methodist minister of South Carolina,
concludes a very violent letter to the Editor of “Zion's Watch-
man,” a Methodist anti-slavery paper published in New York,
in the following manner. The reader will see that this taunt is
an allusion to the offer of fifty thousand dollars for his body at
the South, which we have given before:
But, if you desire to educate the slaves, I will tell you how to raise the money
without editing “Zion's Watchman.” You and old Arthur Tappan come out to