Front matter

LONDON: Printed for G. Nicol, Bookseller to His Majesty.

M.DCC.LXXXVIII.

A Pamphlet intitled a “Proposal for the Consideration of those, who interest themselves in the Abolition or Preservation of the Slave Trade, written by a Clergyman,” has given me the greatest pleasure. The anonymous author is through the whole guided by philanthropy and historical knowledge; and he has founded his proposals upon such principles as I find have been laid down by our ancestors of the middle ages, when employed in the abolition of a traffic, so highly important to them.

Human beings were of old the principal stock in trade, and the system of raising this valuable article for an extensive market had its source in that degree of civilization, which borders upon the savage state of human nature, and prevails on the conqueror, rather to sell his prisoners to foreign buyers, than to put them to the sword, a practice common to all barbarous nations.

Various as the claims and titles were, by which our ancestors came to their slaves, I have no doubt but that the same still prevail among the Africans, and will continue to prevail till the blessings of our sacred religion, the knowledge of common duties, and a fixed love for agriculture, arts, and manufactures, spread themselves among those millions, who at present are sunk into ignorance.

Before the Christian religion was universally received in Europe, slave-markets were regularly established at Rome⁠[1]⁠, at Bristol⁠[2]⁠, at Micklenburgk⁠[3]⁠, at Skonor⁠[4]⁠, and in the islands of Brenneyar⁠[5]⁠, near Gottenborgh. The history of this last market has been handed down to us in the Icelandic language, from which I shall translate the following account, as it throws no inconsiderable light upon the state of those times with respect to commerce and manners. “Hoskold, of Hoskoldstad,” says the author, “went to the islands of Brenneyar, it being esteemed the highest pleasure to attend an assembly crowded with the chiefs of every nation of whom we have any knowledge: for here the kings of Gothic race were obliged, according to a standing law, to meet every third year, for the purpose of establishing mutual peace throughout their dominions. The market was exceedingly numerous, and at the same time as splendid and attractive, every pause of business being filled with banquetting, interludes, plays, and a variety of other entertainments equally enchanting. One day as Hoskold took a walk with some of his attendants, he chanced to see a neat tent at a distance from the rest; curiosity induced him to go that way. Having come up to it, he met with a man at the door, cloathed in purple, with a Russian hat on his head. On enquiry, he found that his name was Gilli, the Russian.—Hoskold said, he had often heard his name, and that his fortune was superior to that of any other merchant; in consequence of which he expected to find every thing in his possession which he might wish to buy.—Gilli enquired what he wanted:—one of Hoskold’s attendants answered that he wanted to purchase a maid-slave, if he had any. Gilli replied, No doubt you intend to rally me, for you probably guess that I have not what you ask for; but in that you are perhaps mistaken. Hoskold having cast his eyes round the tent, observed it to be divided with a curtain suspended in the middle, which on being drawn up disclosed twelve women. Gilli on this invited Hoskold to approach, and take his choice. Hoskold accepted the invitation; and, after a close inspection, fixed on one, seated last of all next the tent, and of course less conspicuous,—notwithstanding the meanness of her dress, her beauty shone throughout so irresistibly, that Hoskold was immediately captivated with her charms, which convinced him of her illustrious descent. The price set on her amounted to the weight of three marks of silver. It seems to me, said Hoskold, that you place too high a value on her, in as much as this appears to be triple the price. Gilli acknowledged he was in the right, as he esteemed her beyond the rest; at the same time acquainting Hoskold, that if he gave her up, and chose any one of the rest, he should have one of them for one mark of silver. I will see, said Hoskold, the quantity of silver at present in my purse, which was hung on his girdle, then he called for the scales. Gilli seeing this, observed, that no imposition in this affair should be laid to his charge; on account of which he thought it but just to acquaint the intended purchaser, that the woman was subject to a remarkable defect. Hoskold was impatient to know what it might be. Gilli soon gratified him, in letting him know that she was dumb: and notwithstanding, continued the merchant, I have endeavoured by various means to induce her to speak, these have all proved ineffectual.—Hoskold again demanded the scales, and desired to see how much the purse contained. Gilli obeyed; and having weighed the silver, found it exactly to amount to three marks. Having closed the bargain, Hoskold took the female slave, and acknowledged, that Gilli throughout the whole had dealt with candour.”

In all the places aforesaid, human beings were however as often exchanged for horses, arms, and loaves of bread and meat, as sold for money. Thus Lullus, the archbishop of Mentz, asserts, that he saw a horse exchanged for a male slave⁠[6]⁠; and, according to Schannat, a female one was sold for a horse, a shield, and a spear⁠[7]⁠. But Saint Rembert, archbishop of Hambourgh, made a far better bargain, receiving from the heathen Danes a great number of their slaves for the horse he rode upon⁠[8]⁠. Nor were the slaves of higher value among the Goths; for Jornandes tells us, that they exchanged their slaves for a piece of bread and meat⁠[9]⁠. Among the Francs the price of a skilful slave was 10 skillings of gold, but in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, the regular price never exceeded one mark silver, i. e. one pound twelve shillings sterling⁠[10]⁠; and in Wales a slave was equal to a head of cattle⁠[11]⁠. As to the personal rights, a slave was every where sold with the same forms⁠[12] and solemnities as a horse, or any other beast; except in Denmark, where a proclamation before a court of law was ordered to precede the sale⁠[13]⁠. According to such principles, the same custom was paid for an imported slave as for an ox, viz. a saiga, or a penny, if the slave was to be sold⁠[14]⁠. The slaves being chained together, were brought to market, and sold in lots, each lot containing a number of slaves, which number was very various and uncertain⁠[15]⁠. Thus Saint Elegius, bishop of Noyons, bought often twenty, thirty, fifty, nay whole ship loads in such lots, consisting of men, women, and children, from Germany, Britain, Italy, and the Levant⁠[16]⁠. Helmold beheld at once in the market at Micklinburgk no less than seven thousand Danes exposed to sale⁠[17]⁠. And at that time certain merchants embraced only this branch of trade, which to them proved highly beneficial. Yet of all nations, none was more savage than the inhabitants of Verdun, who having emasculated the boys, sold them at an immense price to the Arabs, who were then settled in Spain⁠[18]⁠. The Slave Trade was otherwise the business of the Jews, particularly in France, which gave Agobard, the archbishop of Lyon, occasion to reproach the Christians in several of his sermons⁠[19] for permitting the Jews to traffick in slaves. On the other hand the Saracens raised an incredible number of slaves for the Venetians, who sold them publicly at Rome⁠[20]⁠. But this market being stopped, the Venetians bought Christian slaves on board the privateers infesting the Mediterranean, and brought them to their own market⁠[21]⁠. At length the Doge interfered, and at once put an end to this shameful traffic.

The Christian religion being at length received by the different nations of Europe, totally changed the ancient trade. On one side the precepts of Christianity were spread among barbarians, and the doctrine of equal rights, to which nature and a future life entitle all human beings, without the least exception, made the slave trade gradually to cease. On the other hand, the importation of slaves, and all traffic of this nature, was severely prohibited⁠[22]⁠; Besides, a doctrine was established by the clergy, that eternal salvation would be the surest reward for the emancipation of slaves⁠[23]⁠; nay, the Christian priests and confessors frequently obliged their penitents, who had no slaves in their own possession, to buy some and manumit them in the presence of the people assembled in the church⁠[24]⁠. The priests themselves set good examples, they purchased slaves, particularly youths of a good and promising appearance, received them into orders, and thus made them entirely free⁠[25]⁠.

Before we proceed to the abolition of the slave trade by law, I shall beg leave to observe, that slaves were among those things which our heathen ancestors offered to their numerous gods, and stained their altars with human blood; if we can believe Ditmarus of Merseburg, who charges the Danes with having in their great sacrifices used no fewer than ninety-nine slaves⁠[26]⁠. St. Bonifacius tells us, that the newly converted Germans sold their slaves to their infidel neighbours for the above-mentioned purpose, which at length was stopped by Gregory the second, who made the offender guilty of a capital offence⁠[27]⁠. Charloman ordered in the synod of Leptin, in the year 743, that a man, who sold his slave to an infidel, should be infamous; and excommunicated in the same manner as a murderer, if the slave thus sold was intended to fall a victim to the gods. And in Norway it was absolutely forbid to sell a slave out of the kingdom, unless he had committed an enormous crime⁠[28]⁠. With a view to promote the abolition of this savage custom, which proved to be fatal to persons of the most exquisite beauty⁠[29] and the most exalted character; it was wisely enacted, that the ceremonies of emancipation among the Christians should resemble the form of the heathen sacrifices, and engage in the same way the imagination both of the Christians and the heathens. Thus happily did the slaves obtain chance of liberty; thus were they often brought to the church, placed on the altar, and symbolically sacrificed to the true God⁠[30]⁠.

The national assemblies of the heathens commenced with the bloody worship; and the Christians passed a law, that on such occasions a slave should be made free, and the expence of the feast, at which he obtained his liberty, defrayed by the public⁠[31]⁠.

It had through ages been the custom of all the heathen nations, to exercise an arbitrary power over their new-born children, for it was left to their own pleasure, whether they chose to have the trouble of nursing these harmless beings, or destroy them⁠[32]⁠. The laws of nature, deeply engraved in the breasts of the human race could not always be suppressed, and an action abhorred even by the brutes, awaked feelings which at length brought mankind back to the dictates of reason. Many nations found it more advantageous, instead of depriving the poor infants of their lives, to sell them into slavery: thus were many lives preserved, and the parents had the gratification of seeing their unhappy offspring have a chance of aspiring to a better fortune.

The liberty of a mans selling into slavery his own children, was of course restrained to certain rules. They begun by enacting that the child, which was sold for a slave, should recover its liberty, by paying the sixth part of the purchase money to the master. And it was further ordered, that no such slave should be exported out of his native country. At length the duration of this kind of slavery was reduced to the certain term of seven years⁠[33]⁠, or as the Icelandic law more equitably ordered it, till the purchase money, and expences made on the slave, were reimbursed⁠[34]⁠. The learned lawyer Eusebe de Lauriere, observing that the ancient Germans were accustomed to sell their children, has stated, that they exercised the Roman Jus Vitæ et Necis⁠[35]⁠; though I agree with him herein⁠[36]⁠, yet I cannot forbear observing, that a very extraordinary reason might sometimes give birth to a trade which makes every heart ache. The ancients, wherever they lived, were perpetually harrassed, as well with domestic as foreign wars, and consequently experienced all those evils which arise from neglected agriculture, dreadful scarcity and famine. Therefore, if the parents did not chuse to see the dear fruits of their mutual love pining and starving before their eyes, they were obliged to sell their children to a purchaser, who had it in his power to preserve the lives of these unhappy victims, though at the expence of their liberty⁠[37]⁠.

From the scarcity, so frequent in these times, originated a law, which was passed by the republic of Iceland⁠[38]⁠, which had not the least respect to jus vitæ et necis. The law was, “that the children being unable of themselves to support their poor parents, should be obliged, in order to maintain them, to sell themselves into slavery;” which slavery, however, was to last no longer than the urgent necessity continued.

It is difficult to fix the certain æra when the emancipation of slaves was universally introduced in Europe; for though Bodin points out the year 1250, in his Book de Republica, yet we know that slavery lasted much longer in some countries. The abolition of the slave trade was a very serious object of the legislative power through more than four centuries, for we find no council of the middle age without one canon at least relative to this business. The civil government gave every support they could afford to so pious and so benevolent endeavours of the church; and both agreed, that the undertaking could only be accomplished by slow degrees. The steps adopted for this purpose were on one side, to forbid the exportation of slaves, to throw the slave trade into the hands of Christians, who ought to know their common duties, and to make some regulations concerning a humane treatment of the slaves. On the other hand, laws were passed, that opposed the home traffic, and rendered it as difficult as possible.

In the year 779, Charles the Great passed a law, that no slave should be exported out of his dominions⁠[39]⁠; and in the council at Reims, it was enacted, that the slave trade should only be carried on by Christians; and that a man who sold his slaves either to a Jew or a Heathen, should be excommunicated, and that the contract be void⁠[40]⁠. Kidnapping was however very frequent among the Christians, particularly in Nordalbingia (the present dukedoms of Schlesweg and Holstein) who used to force those Christians, who had fled to them from their Heathen neighbours, to re-enter the slavery, and suffer themselves to be resold to their former masters; till at length St. Anschar, archbishop of Hambourgh, prevailed⁠[41] on them to abolish this disgraceful custom, and to issue a law, “that whoever should be accused of kidnapping in time to come, should clear himself by the judgment of God (so the ordeal was then called) and should be excluded from the rights of producing witnesses, or taking his oath prescribed by the common law: a law which bordered very near upon that of the Jews (Exod. chap. xxi.); and he that stealeth a man, and sell him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.” What Charles the Great, and the synodes in different parts of Germany, France, and Italy, had enacted, with respect to the slave trade, was followed by other princes. For Canute the Great, king of England, passed a law, “that no Christian should be sold for exportation⁠[42]⁠;” by such means the foreign slave trade decreased, and could only be carried on by fraudulent means⁠[43]⁠, and by a description of persons, who were carefully watched by the bishops, whom a synode had authorized to enquire throughout their respective dioceses, “whether slaves were exported; whether a Christian were ever sold, either to a Jew or a Heathen; or, whether a Jew dealt in slaves who profess the Christian religion.” The famous market at Bristol⁠[44]⁠, where the slaves were imported from all parts of England, and there sold to Irish merchants, was much depressed and diminished by St. Wulfstan, whose example was imitated by the second synode of London, which enacted, “Nequis illud nefarium negotium, quod hactenus in Anglia solebant homines sicut bruta animalia venundari deinceps ulla tenus facere præsumat.” I find, however, remains of this inhuman trade still disgrace much later ages; and how could it be abolished, as long as the kings themselves sold their prisoners for money?⁠[45]⁠

Thus the Irish continued to buy slaves from England during the reign of king John⁠[46]⁠.

In Norway, few steps were taken towards the abolition of the slave trade before the year 1270⁠[47]⁠. The law, which till that time guided all civil business, was passed by king Hacon, who began his reign in the year 1222, and died in the year 1263. In this law much is spoken of the slaves, who seem to have been happier in Norway than in any other part of Europe; for the slave could obtain his liberty by a prescription of twenty years⁠[48]⁠, and the law guarded his life against the master, who, for having killed his slave, was liable to be punished as a murderer⁠[49]⁠. The slave who destroyed his infant child, was considered as one of the greatest offenders, but as they had no capital punishments in Norway at that time, the punishment was being sold for exportation. The slave had some property accruing from his own industry⁠[50]⁠, when not employed in his master’s service; a property which sometimes enabled a skilful slave to recover his liberty. The master of a slave could not refuse him his liberty, when offered the purchase money; nay, it was sufficient if half the sum was delivered⁠[51]⁠. The manumission prescribed in the said law is particularly curious: “If a slave takes land and settles, then shall he give an entertainment, called the Feast of Liberty, the expences of which shall be nine bushels of malt and a ram. A free-born man shall cut off the head of the ram, and the master shall unlock the collar⁠[52] surrounding the slave’s neck. If the master refuses to grant the slave leave of giving the feast of liberty, then shall the slave request it before two witnesses, and in their presence invite his master, with five friends of his. The slave then shall prepare the entertainment, and let the uppermost seat be ready to receive his master and mistress. Thus the slave shall recover his liberty, which recovery he shall prove by those who were present at the feast, against all attempts, which his master may pursue for the future.” Such was the state of slavery in Norway, when it was totally abolished in the year 1270, by king Magnus, called the Reformer of the Law.

The Danish law of King Eric Menved, who died in the Year 1319, shews, that slavery then was very common, notwithstanding the kings themselves had joined their efforts with the clergy, and aimed constantly at the destruction of it. According to the Scanish law, servitude was the certain fate of a criminal offender⁠[53]⁠; of a captive⁠[54]⁠; of the offspring of a female slave. The captives belonged to the king, and offenders were slaves to the public⁠[55]⁠. With respect to birth, the rule well known by the Romans, partus sequitur ventrem, was so carefully observed, that if a slave happened to be father of a child, whose mother was born free, the child had the strongest claim to liberty⁠[56]⁠: nay, that a free-born man who had married a woman not knowing her to be a slave, had right to sue for divorce, and marry another as he pleased⁠[57]⁠. During the slavery in Denmark, it resembled much the Roman slavery; and it is uncertain how or when the Danish slaves were emancipated.

The state of Slavery in Sweden fell and rose in the same degree as it did among her neighbours. In Upland, the servitude was abrogated by King Byrger in the year 1295; and King Eric Magnuson spread the blessing of liberty over the rest of that kingdom in the year 1335, for the purpose, as he said, of following God, who has rescued the whole mankind from Slavery⁠[58]⁠.

It was but late that Slavery was abolished in Scandinavia, yet I am happy to say, that the consequences were entirely different from those in most other countries. Every where but in Norway, Iceland, and Sweden, a new class of human beings called Glebæ adscripti arose, who were nothing more than Slaves, except that they could not be exchanged and sold as brutes, or without the land, with respect to which, they were considered as cattle. This description of people were likewise stiled Villani. Therefore, when the ancient laws and historians of the middle age speak of the abolition of slave trade, it is not to be understood as if all servitude ceased at once; that supposition is directly contrary to the testimony of a multitude of authentic records, and other faithful accounts. The truth is, that an absolute slavery was changed into a limited one, in which human beings were secured from the arbitrary disposal of a capricious master.

From the preceding extracts it appears, that Slavery is a necessary evil attending upon nations in a state of uncivilization and barbarism; and that very great efforts, for a continued length of time, are required to extirpate it. Europe would never have attempted, much less have effected, the happy alteration that has universally taken place within her own borders, unless she had first received the humane doctrines of Christianity. This however was the work of centuries, and of men who sacrificed their own ease to the good of mankind. And we may reasonably conclude, that without the knowledge of true morality, and of that philanthropy which is best taught by the Gospels, without a settled life employed in agriculture and arts, in science and manufactures, it is impossible for the inhabitants of the Gold Coast to live free from those evils which introduce Slavery, or what is worse, the horrid murders of their captives by the sword or the fire, to glut revenge, or appease superstition. It will not be an easy matter for all the states of Europe to agree in passing a general law for the abolition of the Slave Trade; but it will be still more difficult to prevent the African shores from reeking with the gore of young and old taken captive by an enemy, who, when the Slave Trade has ceased, will have no other effectual method of securing his dreaded foe⁠[59]⁠.

For these reasons it appears to me that the abolition of the Slave Trade is by no means adviseable, with a view to Christian duty and benevolence, as it also appears impracticable in the light of political interest. How can Europe, who divides her regards between philanthropy and commercial interest, see her plantations neglected and restored to their natural wildness for want of hands to cultivate them? can she give up with indifference those millions whom she might save from brutal tyrants, and place in a state of servitude comparatively happy?

I myself hate every branch of Slavery, yet I wish that of the Negroes to be still continued, under the eyes of government, whose duty it is to demand accounts of the treatment of the slaves during their voyage to the West Indies. Here let the purchasers be restrained in their bargains to a certain term of years, after which the slave to be free: in the mean time forbid the master to have power over the lives of his slaves, and give him not the smallest right to mutilate or torture them⁠[60]⁠. Let the master be obliged to indulge his slaves in certain leisure hours to attend the teachers of the gospel, who shall instruct them in the established religion; for here, I believe the missionaries will do more good than in Africa, at least this is the first object. Let the slaves have what the Romans call Peculium, a small property, to be cultivated when they are not employed in their masters service. Let the propagation of the slaves be encouraged by premiums to be divided between the parents and the master. Let all children of slaves born in a Christian country be free, and let them be educated at the public expence, as in the Foundling Hospital and the Workhouses. But if this be too much to attempt, let such children serve only a certain number of years, to repay their master the expence their support has brought upon him. By humane treatment, and assiduous instruction in divine and moral truths, the Danish missionaries, and the Moravian brethren, have been of great comfort and utility to the Danish Negroes: these slaves become virtuous by the aid of such preachers, and the hope of certain liberty, appears to influence their minds with such principles as are an ample recompence to themselves, and a source of unstained riches to the public.

FINIS.