Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

belong if the loss of actual property were alone taken into account, we think that in comparison with the restitution of unborn, and barely possible babies, to the heirs of their original owners, all rights to real property of any description, sink into absolute insignificance. Besides, neither Justice, nor Democracy requires any very nice regard from Congress to the rights of an Indian, or a Negro. Absolute justice, and democracy without alloy concern only the Anglo-Saxon white Slaveholder.

Your committee would recommend that the original claim of these petitioners to indemnification for the losses of their ancestors, be so far expanded on the basis of their title to unborn babies, as to include the surplus, which, on principles of vulgar justice would naturally belong to the Indians, and for which they may some day petition.

When Congress had heard this lucid report, being mostly from the North, they were entirely overcome by its logic, and promptly passed a bill granting the claim of the petitioners.

XLIII.

THE DOUGHFACE RELIEVED.

American Democracy prefers Involuntary to Voluntary Amalgamation.

A PROFESSED Democrat in a public house near the borders of the free states, was inveighing against the Abolitionists, and enumerating to the astonished by-standers their projects against liberty, and the evil things which they encouraged.

Said he: There is one practice which the Abolitionists advocate and sanction, which is most monstrous, I mean-Amalgamation. They are aiming to make this whole people a mongrel nation, in which neither a pure white nor a pure black can be found. To bring this about, they would legalize marriage between the two races. Now if this relation between the races were sanctioned by custom, that divinely implanted prejudice against the black color and the African, which from the foundation of the world the Deity designed should grace the moral character of the North American Anglo-Saxon, would soon disappear, and the affinities between white and black would become so strong as utterly to abolish marriages of whites with whites, and blacks with blacks. Then we

1

should see whole platoons of white ladies marching South in search of colored gentlemen, and regiments of white gentlemen ransacking every southern kitchen in quest of colored women. I need not say what violent heart-burnings, jealousies, and dissensions between North and South would burst forth when such things shall occur! But in addition to all this, we all know, on the testimony of distinguished ethnologists, that an antipathy so murderous naturally exists between the two races, that if both were free, they could not form one community without incessant war and bloodshed. Who does not see now that if the marriage tie were once legalized between them, this murderous antipathy would suddenly vanish in a perfect tohu vabohu of connubial felicity and universal amalgamation? I am tortured with awful apprehensions in view of these probable results.

Then a Slaveholder, sitting by, said to the Democrat: I am surprised to find such candor, and such an example of clear prophetic vision in a NonSlaveholder. But as you are a professed democrat, you are able to appreciate arguments tending to relieve the apprehensions you have just expressed, which ordinary men could not understand. One who is capable of following the fortunes of what now passes in America for Democracy, should be considered a man of most remarkable qualities, both of sense and resolution.

I think there is no danger of Amalgamation becoming general, for this reason: It is, at present, involuntary with one of the parties. If it were

voluntary with both, there would of course be less than there is under the involuntary system. But where this latter prevails, it genders a practice of concubinage such as existed among the patriarchs, and thus limits the entire institution of Amalgamation to the control of a few masters of families. Thus we, the order of Slaveholders, have a kind of monopoly in this business, which we enjoy for the benefit of the community. It is a privilege, you perceive, which should be allowed only to a fewto men of a patriarchal mould, if I may so speak. Do you not also perceive that we, as permanent guardians of so valuable a privilege are the best of democrats? We not only prevent its becoming general, but we multiply laborers at pleasure. A model Slaveholder, one who might have associated with the patriarchs on equal terms, never needs. go beyond his own plantation for laborers. They are mostly of home manufacture. We of course desire to keep this manufacture a monopoly, as we know how to carry it on with discretion. We, however, desire the People to give us all their unoccupied territory, as the business requires a very extensive field for the full development of all its perfections. There are latent beauties in it which none but Slaveholders can well understand.

Then the Democrat said: I feel very much relieved. I knew there was something terrible in Amalgamation beside the consequences of it, but I did not know what it was. I now perceive that it is the Amalgamation which is voluntary on both sides, which a good democrat should abhor; and

though Involuntary Amalgamation goes on at a more rapid rate than the other, it ends only in multiplying laborers that can be sold. They, therefore, who preside over the institution of Involuntary Amalgamation seem to me the best of democrats, because they save us from voluntary Amalgamation, and constantly augment the public wealth. Yes; the mingling of the races is not a bad thing on these conditions, and the more I think of it, the more it seems to me I should like to be a patriarch myself.

And if you were, said the Slaveholder, you would differ little from what you are, save in your privileges, and that your democracy would take on additional lustre.

So saying he left the house, and the bystanders gazed after him with reverence and admiration, as a being belonging to a higher sphere than them selves.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »