Jefferson Davis to Martin Van Buren,* March 25, 1844

Warren County Mi.        

25th March 1844

M. Van Buren

        Ex President of the U. S.

Sir,

You will oblige me and many other democrats of this section of the country by giving your opinion on the following questions—

First, The annexation of "Texas" to the Territory of the United States

Second, The constitutional power of Congress over slavery in the District of Columbia

Third, The Tariff of 1828 and whether your vote on that bill was entirely the result of the instructions you received—

With great consideration

I am very truly yrs.

Jeffn. Davis

_______________

* Mr. Van Buren was a candidate for the presidential nomination at this time, and the Mississippi delegation to the Democratic Convention at Baltimore had been instructed for him.

SOURCE: Dunbar Rowland, Editor, Jefferson Davis, Constitutionalist: His Letters, Papers and Speeches, Volume 1, p. 12

Diary of Congressman Rutherford B. Hayes: January 10, 1866

Wilson, Chairman Judiciary [Committee], called up Kelley's bill, providing for universal suffrage (colored) in [the] District of Columbia. Several speeches [were] made. Judge Schofield, of Pennsylvania, made a shrewd and pithy speech. Judge Kelley delivered an offhand brilliant speech. Elocution and rhetoric have evidently been pet studies with him. A very effective, fine thing.

Evening. Caucus decided against the bill of Kelley, preferring qualified to universal suffrage. Universal suffrage is sound in principle. The radical element is right. I was pleased, however, that the despotism of the committees and the older members was rebuked. The Suffrage Bill ought not to have been pressed in advance of other and far more important business. The rights of the majority as against committees and leaders have gained. Much confusion and some feeling. Mr. Stevens quite angry; said he would vote against qualified suffrage; preferred no bill at all! The signs of harmony are more hopeful.

SOURCE: Charles Richard Williams, editor, Diary and Letters of Rutherford Birchard Hayes, Volume 3, p. 12-13

Speech of Senator Andrew Butler, March 2, 1854

I wish to say one or two words at this point of the debate, and to bring the attention of the Senate distinctly to the issue made by the senator from Wisconsin, (Mr. WALKER.) I understand, in any point of view in which this subject can be regarded, that if you obliterate or abolish what is called the Missouri Compromise line, you at least place upon an equality Nebraska, Utah, and New Mexico.

Now, northern gentlemen—I do not speak of the senator from Wisconsin particularly, but many gentlemen of the North—were reconciled to vote for the territorial governments given to Utah and New Mexico upon the ground that the Spanish law excluded slavery there. Suppose we ask to have the Missouri line obliterated, and give to the territorial government of Nebraska the right to determine this subject for themselves, and by that obliteration the old French law should be restored; would that not be fair? Gentlemen were willing to restore the old law when it excluded slavery and were willing to trust the territorial legislation under that law. But they are not willing to prohibit this Missouri restriction and confer upon the territorial legislature of Nebraska the power to regulate slavery when the old law, which it's said will be here revived, admits slavery. Congress, as the representative of sovereignty, has all the constitutional power over the subject; and, in parting with it to a territorial legislature, it appoints an administrator to discharge legislative functions, controllable by the constitution.

This, sir, is a fair and practical view of the subject. In Utah and New Mexico, the Mexican law, it was said, excluded slavery, and gentlemen then were willing to give exactly the same provisions to those Territories which are given in the bill under consideration. In Nebraska and Kansas, according to the view of the gentleman—I do not admit it, I do not believe one word of it—the French law is revived, and will establish slavery; and that being so, they are not willing to trust the people of these Territories at all upon the same subject. They are willing to make fish of one and flesh of another. I have not the least idea that the effect would be such as the gentleman supposes; but I am only showing the manner in which these issues are made. So long as the law is one way they are willing to go for one system; and when, in their opinion, it is another way, they are not willing to apply the same system. It is not fair to apply the same provisions in both cases.

Now, sir, I have not the least idea that, under the plenitude of the language of this bill, the territorial legislature may not act. The honorable senator from Connecticut [Mr. TOUCEY] put that in a very clear point of view. The truth is that both the Utah and New Mexico bills, and this bill, as I understand, are designed to make a blank leaf, and to give to the territorial legislature all the authority on the subject, whether there is French or Mexican law intervening. That is the fair meaning of it. Yet, though gentlemen were willing to give this power to a territorial government under Mexican law, they are not willing to give a territorial government the same power under the French law. Gentlemen cannot escape these two positions.

Sir, when I stand here as a southern man, I feel humiliated when I hear threats made that, unless we come to the terms of gentlemen, they will reopen this agitation until they expel us from every Territory of the Union, and even abolish the slave trade between the States. Sir, I am her to legislate to the best of my ability, in good faith, to preserve the institutions of the country; and yet I am threatened that if I do not do so and so the North will abolish slavery in the District of Columbia; and that they will assume a jurisdiction equal to their numerical power and strength; and that northern justice is not to be trusted. I do not believe one word of it.

But, sir, no man can stand up and read what I read in a paper this morning without indignation. It does not emanate, I know, from the gentleman who sits near me, [Mr. WALKER] for he has a heart incapable of it. But sir, I read this morning, what made my blood boil, that if this discussion went on and this bill were passed, the South should not only be prepared to give up all their power and surrender every inch of territory which they might claim for slavery, but that the scenes of San Domingo should be introduced, and their wives and daughters subjected to the lust of the black man. Sir, to such a state of things would the spirit of demonic agitation be reconciled. I read that statement in a New York paper to-day. I say to my neighbor, and senator from Wisconsin, who sits near me and for whom I have great respect, let him not make threats of that kind to me. I am willing to conduct this discussion in harmony, but when I am told that the scenes of San Domingo are to be opened to all the southern States, and our wives and daughters are to be subjected to the lust of the black man—my God! can it be that I sand in the Senate of the United States?

Mr. CASS. Will the honorable senator allow me to ask him if he does not give too much importance to these matters? Did not the very paper to which he refers abuse us all like pickpockets and rascals, over and over again? It does not speak for the North.

Mr. BUTLER.  I believe it.

Mr. CASS.  As a western man, I disavow its authority in toto.

Mr. BUTLER.  I know you do, sir. You are a statesman, and have the sentiments of a Christian, and look to events with the views of an American statesman, and I know that my neighbor from Wisconsin has no such idea. No statesman could utter such sentiments, or dare to carry them out. But when the threat is made, and I am required to legislate under duress, per minas, I do feel that it was unfortunately introduced. I say this in all kindness; for though my manner may be impetuous, I have nothing but a kind feeling towards those who differ from my honestly. I have thus far endeavored to control my language. I have used none except upon general topics, and I have used no language of personal resentment towards any one, believing it would defeat its end. I must say, however that these are not matters which are to be lightly passed over. Whatever may be the fate of this bill—and I do not much care what it may be—my deliberate judgment is, that if this discussion is conducted fairly, the North and South will be reconciled to return to the original principles on which this government was administered; and the sooner their differences are reconciled the better.

Now, what could the North gain by excluding us from these Territories? If two States should ever come into the union from them, it is very certain that not more than one of them could, in any possible event, be a slaveholding state; and I have not the least idea that even one would be. Perhaps some good people will go there, and carry with them their old negroes and a few personal servants. Now, who would go and disturb a poor old negro reposing happily under the government of a hereditary master? Who would disturb the relation existing between a good master and his personal servant, willing to live contented with those whose habits and principles and feelings he understood? None, sir, but a criminal agitator, and one who does not understand the responsibility of his position when he undertakes to agitate matters of this kind.

I shall make no unkind remarks in reference to the senator from Ohio. He has disavowed that he had any knowledge of the resolution which was so justly commented upon by my friend from North Carolina this morning. Sir, this is enough for me. I never ask of a senator on this floor anything but a disavowal. He has said so, and, I believe it; and that is enough. Allow me to say, however, although he may not have the design of putting the torch to the temple of this confederacy, and becoming the incendiary himself, yet there is a crassa negligentia which, in using fire, may burn it down by his agency, though without his consent. How did that document come here? Through his hands. Did he revise it? He has said not; yet a paper of that kind was presented in the Senate of the United States, and an extract from it made and published in an abolition paper. How did that abolition paper get that extract? Not from the senator, of course, for he says not.

Mr. President, these are topics which have always touched me more deeply than anything like sectional power. As far as I am concerned, I must say that I do not expect this bill is to give us of the South anything, but merely to accommodate something like the sentiment of the South. It will, however, I hope, reconcile both the North and the South; and when that desirable end can be effected, why should it not be? The honorable senator from Wisconsin objects to the application of this law to territory acquired from France. Was he not willing to apply it to territory acquired from Mexico? What difference is there, except that the previous law in once case excluded, and in the other admitted slavery? Now, I believe that, under the provisions of this bill, and of the Utah and New Mexico bills, there will be a perfect carté-blanche given to the territorial legislature to legislate as they may think proper. I am willing, as I have said before, to trust discretion, and honestly, and good faith of the people upon whom we devolve this power; but I can never consent that they can take it of themselves, or that it belongs to them without our delegating it; for I think they are our deputies—limited, controllable deputies—not squatter sovereigns.

I am willing to say that the people of the territories of Nebraska and Kansas shall be deputed by Congress to pass such laws as may be within their constitutional competency to pass, and nothing more. Is not that an honorable, fair, liberal trust to an intelligent people? I am willing to trust them. I have been willing to trust them in Utah and New Mexico, where the Mexican law prevailed, and I am willing to trust them in Nebraska and Kansas, where the French law, according to the ideas of the gentleman, may possibly be revived.

But the gentleman said that he would sooner cut off his right arm than allow this institution to be revived in these territories, under the operation of the Spanish law, as I understood him. Now, I am willing to trust the territorial Legislatures to that extent; not, I must say, because I concur in the proposition that that delegation, that deputization, that  lieutenancy of power which we confer on them shall not be controllable. I think that justice to myself requires that I should say that, if their action was flagrantly in violation of the constitution of the United States, I should insist upon its being controlled. I have said, however, as a southern man, that I am willing to make this advance towards restoring something like the harmony which once existed in this glorious republic. I do not believe it is anything but an advance to the sentiment of honor. I do not believe it is going to confer on the South any power. The North have the power, and we cannot take it from them; but if they had magnanimity with it, they would not use the language of reproach and threats and contumely. The belief that a deluded people cannot be informed is a mistake—that a tainted sentiment may not be saved from the putrefaction.

The senator has told us what dire consequences are to come in the future. Let them come. The sooner I know my fate under the threats which are made here the better for me. I shall not live, perhaps, to see the day when they will be fulfilled; but I have those dear to me who may be affected by them; and if I were upon my death-bed, I should inculcate upon them the necessity of standing true to the lessons of self-respect. I would tell every child, I would tell every relations I have, to perish sooner than to submit to the injustice which many seem disposed to heap upon them. But, sir, enough of this. I have not the least idea that the northern people, if fairly appealed to, would confirm the verdict indicated by some of their representatives. I have confidence in the public mind when it is fairly enlightened by intelligence and free discussion. I have read history, sir, and I know that any one who has peculiar notions, and cannot elevate his mind above the prevailing sentiment of the day, is not capable of understanding the distinctions of society. I am not one of those who are so partial as to make an ex parte decision. I had not the least idea of making this speech, Mr. President, but when I thought it fair, after what my neighbor [Mr. WALKER] had said, to say that much.

Mr. WALKER.  Mr. President, I fear that hereafter when this debate shall be read, great injustice will be done to me, unless the senator from South Carolina Corrects his remarks; and I ask him to do it.

Mr. BUTLER.  Not one word, as far as I think now.

Mr. WALKER.  But I will satisfy the senator that, in justice to me, he ought to do it.

Mr. BUTLER.  Certainly, then, I would do so.

Mr. WALKER.  Any one who will read the senator’s remarks as he has delivered them, without reading what I said, would come to the conclusion that I had threatened him and his southern colleagues in the Senate. Now, what did I let fall from my lips which sounded like it? I, in the kindest terms which I knew how to use, spoke in warning to the South. I spoke in warning of what I thought might arise, and what I endeavored to express my great deprecation of, and which, as I said, I would greatly deplore. Yet the senator’s speech will appear as charging me with having stood up here and threatened men that, if they passed this bill, slavery should be abolished in the District of Columbia, the internal slave-trade between the States should be abolished, and the Wilmot proviso set up in the Territories. I never made any such threat, or intimated for an instant that I would be an advocate of any such thing. That, however, will be the construction of the senator’s speech.

Mr. BUTLER.  Then allow me to put that right. I wish to be understood exactly in this way; that I expressly said I did not believe it of him, but that he was one of those who was beating the drum to make others fight.

Mr. WALKER.  No; you did not say that at all, nor intimate it.

Mr. BUTLER.  I said that the gentleman did not undertake to say that he would do the things which he mentioned; for I do not believe he would. I do not undertake to say that the North would do them; but he said that you might introduce such a state of things as would induce the North to do them. Is not that so?

Mr. WALKER.  I said, what I shall continue to say, that I fear the result of this agitation being opened again. I fear it for myself—

Mr. BUTLER.  I am not afraid of it.

Mr. WALKER.  I fear it for those who are disposed to stand by the peace which was made in 1850. Why, sir, what harm was being done to our southern friends at the opening of this session of Congress? What agitation existed? Who was proposing any agitation? I am not threatening the honorable senator; God forbid that I should I never threaten. I know he is the last man to be moved by threats. He need not have posted of that here, for I know it was well as he.

Let me state another fact, however, to show how necessary it is for him to revise his remarks. Who that will read them will not suppose that I, who am his nearest neighbor in the Senate, expressly stated that I was willing to sacrifice my right arm rather than establish slavery, when in fact, I was simply quoting the language of Mr. Clay himself a slaveholder.

Mr. BUTLER.  Did you not adopt it?

Mr. WALKER.  You do not ask it expressly, I know, but you do impliedly.

SOURCES:  The Congressional Globe, Vol. 23 (1854), p. 292-3; The Daily Union, Washington, D. C., Thursday Morning, March 23, 1854, p. 8

William T. Sherman to John Sherman, May 8, 1860

ALEXANDRIA, LA., May 8, 1860.

. . . There is one point which you concede to the Southern States, perfect liberty to prefer slavery if they choose; still, you hit the system as though you had feeling against it. I know it is difficult to maintain perfect impartiality. In all new cases, it is well you should adhere to your conviction to exclude slavery because you prefer free labor. That is your perfect right, and I was glad to see that you disavowed any intention to molest slavery in the district.

Now, so certain and inevitable is it that the physical and political power of this nation must pass into the hands of the free states, that I think you can well afford to take things easy, bear the buffets of a sinking dynasty, and even smile at their impotent threats. You ought not to expect the southern politicians to rest easy when they see and feel their crisis so long approaching, and so certain to come absolutely at hand. . .  But this year's presidential election will be a dangerous one; may actually result in Civil War, though I still cannot believe the South would actually secede in the event of the election of a Republican. . .

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 211-2

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: June 26, 1864

Hot and dry, but breezy.

A dispatch from Gen. Lee, 9 P.M. last evening, says nothing of moment occurred along the lines yesterday. Our loss in the unsuccessful attempt of Gen. Haygood [sic] to storm a portion of the enemy's works, on Friday, was 97 killed and wounded, and 200 missing

Gen. Hampton dispatches Gen. Lee that he attacked the enemy's cavalry in Charles City County, Friday, and drove them out of their intrenchments, pursuing them eight miles, nearly to Charles City Court House. The enemy left their killed and wounded on the ground, and strewn along the route. Gen. Lee says Gen. H. deserves much credit. The enemy (a portion of Sheridan's force) are still prevented from forming a junction with Grant.

Flour fell yesterday from $500 to $300 per barrel.

An official report shows that we lost no arms or ordnance stores of consequence at Staunton. Communications will be restored in that direction soon. The Valley and Western Virginia, being clear of the enemy, the fine crop of wheat can be gathered.

Beauregard is in disgrace, I am informed on pretty good authority; but while his humiliation is so qualified as not to be generally known, for fear of the resentment of his numerous friends, at the same time he is reticent, from patriotic motives, fearing to injure the cause.

It is stigmatized as an act of perfidy, that the Federal Government have brought here and caused to be slaughtered, some 1600 out of 1900 volunteers from the District of Columbia, who were to serve only 30 days in defense of the Federal city. At the same time our government is keeping in the service, at hard labor on the fortifications, Custis Lee's brigade of clerks, who were assured, when volunteering, that they never would be called out except to defend the fortifications of the city, built by negroes!

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 2, p. 238-9

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: Dr. Francis Wayland, October 20, 1838

We wonder if this learned divine has ever undertaken to convince men that their “responsibilities were limited” in regard to the removal of any other nuisance than slavery. We have not seen any portion of his "limitations," except that relating to slavery. Whether he has treated on them as to any other sin, we do not know. But what possessed him to think men needed reminding of the limitations of their obligations? Are they prone to works of supererogation? Are they apt to be rampant in the exercise of that “charity,” which “seeketh not her own,” to transcend the bounds of their duty? Is it necessary, in order to a proper husbanding of their sympathies, that they be warned and admonished against their too prodigal lavishment upon their fellow-men? Is it to be predicated of fallen, depraved men, that they will be likely to overrun their obligations? Need they be guarded against an extravagance like this? Need ministers of the gospel tax their ingenuity in a behalf like this? Generally this class of men have been engaged, on what they call in court “the other side;” in enforcing human obligations, and in setting forth and urging on men's consciences their terrible responsibilities—to remove from their minds and hearts erroneous notions of their limitation?. and of their own freedom from obligation.

We take it nothing can be clearer and more reasonable than the universal obligation to do to others as we would that they should do to us — and to do likewise for others. If we were slaves, does any doctor doubt we should desire our neighbors, if we had any, to try to rescue us? If our house was a-fire, should not we want our neighbors to help put the fire out? If we were in the water, going to the bottom, could we bear it that neighbors should go indifferently by, and let us sink — that they should merely pity us — in the abstract? The slavery case is exceedingly plain. Slavery is the creature of tolerance — of public sufferance. Southern slavery exists in northern sufferance. The North is the seat of American sufferance. It is the theatre of moral influence for this nation. There is no such influence in the South — that is, no reforming influence except by negative operation. What is the moral influence of New Orleans on the nation? What of Charleston, or Mobile, or St. Louis, or Richmond, or any of the states or people of which these are the capitals? What religious or moral enterprise ever originated, or advanced in any of these places or people? They no more influence the country, than gamblers, drunkards, thieves, religiously influence the church. The church influences them for good or for evil, according to her faithfulness or unfaithfulness in her Master's service. The North influences the South in the matter of slavery. Yea, the North acts with the South in slaveholding. They directly and professedly uphold the system wherever they have occasion. They tolerate it in the District of Columbia. They directly sustain it in the territories. They allow the slave trade between the states. They conspired with the South in the constitution, that the foreign trade in slaves should not be interrupted by Congress for twenty years. They voted that Arkansas should come into the Union, with a constitution guarding slavery with a two-edged sword, giving the slaveholder a veto upon an emancipating legislature, and the legislature a check upon the repentant slaveholder. They have voted to admit a system that forbids and discourages repentance of the sin of slaveholding, and makes it desperate. All this has been done solemnly and with deliberation, and in legislative form — and the whole nation has tacitly allowed those of its people who chose, to hold slaves. It has never been disreputable, but highly the contrary, to hold slaves in this country. Is not a nation answerable for the vices and crimes which are reputable and popular within its borders? If a nation has any moral influence, any moral standard, is it not responsible for what that standard does not condemn? Has not this nation cast all its presidential votes for two men, guilty at the very moment of the election and all their days before and since, of the crime of slaveholding — Andrew Jackson, a slaveholder and a slave driver, and voted for twice by a majority of the electoral suffrage of this nation, north and south — and Henry Clay, a slaveholder and a notorious compromiser in the service of the infernal system, voted for by the rest of the nation. Jackson chosen by northern men against Adams a northern man. And then a northern man abandoned by northern men, one and the same party, in favor of Clay, a southern slaveholder[.]

We have nothing to do with abolishing slavery, says the Doctor Wayland, either as citizens of the United States, or as men. Our responsibilities for its removal are all limited away. On the very face of our case, it is palpable and grossly evident, we say, that the northern people have at least as much to do with its abolition as the people of the south. They have at least as much to do with its continuation. They are as directly engaged in it. They have the control of it in the national councils wherever it exists within congressional jurisdiction. It is the North, and not the South, that prevents a legislative abolition of it in the District of Columbia. Slavery in the national district is a northern institution, and not a southern. It is the “peculiar institution” there of the North, and not of the South. Is it not so? We declare then, that, as citizens and as men, we at the North have something to do with the abolition of American slavery — ay, that we have every thing to do with it. We can abolish it, and we alone can. We ought to abolish it, and we alone ought to do it, as appears at first impartial glance.

“I think it evident,” says Dr. Wayland, “that as citizens of the United States, we have no power whatever either to abolish slavery in the southern states, or to do any thing of which the direct intention is to abolish it.” We do not perceive the propriety of the Doctor's language when he talks of a thing having an intention. Slaves have intentions, and the Doctor and his friends call them things—but how a thing to be done can have an intention — a “direct intention,” as the Doctcr says, is beyond our slight learning. Perhaps the Doctor meant tendency by intention — and meant to say that we could not do any thing the direct tendency of which is the abolition of southern slavery. That is to say, we, as citizens of the United States, may not vote in Congress against slaveholding in the District of Columbia, or in the territories, or against the slave trade between the states. We may not receive petitions in behalf of those objects — we may not petition Congress — we may not talk against slaveholding — or write against it — or pray against it — or sympathize with our fellow-men in slavery; because each and every one of these acts has a direct tendency to abolish slavery in the southern states. Slavery in the land is a system, a whole system, a custom, a crime, and but one crime wherever committed. It is not warrantable in one place, and not in another. It is not lawful in one state, and not in another. It is one entire, individual, undivided matter of fact every where in the land, as much as murder is —  and if it is denounced and condemned in the District of Columbia by Congress, it is as fatal to it, in the whole country, as if denounced in South Carolina by Congress, or any where else — more fatal to it. A blow struck against it, as existing in that district, would be a blow at the head of it, and it would be mortal, — not one having a direct tendency to kill the system — or a direct intention, as the Doctor hath it, — but a blow destructive in itself. It would fix the brand of infamy on every slaveholder's front throughout the nation. It would render him infamous even in the eyes of Americans. Dr. Wayland could set no limits to his infamy. It would seal him a criminal with the broad seal of the nation, the E pluribus unum. Who would vote for him for President then — who would send him ambassador to London — who put him in Speaker of the House — President of the Senate — Chief Justice of the United States? Who would shake hands with him at the capitol? Now he is first in office, first in honor. Slaveholding is passport to every distinction. We ask Dr. Wayland and his aid-de-camp Major Mordecai Noachus, if a vote by Congress on our petitions, abolishing slavery in the district, and making it capital to enslave a man there, as they would do if they made it penal at all, would not give the system the death blow in the South, even if abolitionists had done nothing to kill it elsewhere. Would not that single enactment do it? Self-evidently it would. Have we not a right, as citizens of the United States, to do this? The Doctor says no. We say, ay.

But not to follow this self-immolated man any farther now, we will say that we need not get a vote from Congress against slavery in order to its abolition there and every where. Congress! what is it? The mere dregs and precipitations, the settlings and sediments of the nation. It is as soulless as a corporation. It has no soul, no mind, no principle, no opinion. It is an echo, and that not always a true one. It is a mere catastrophe—an upshot. It will only mutter the word abolition, after it has become an old story through the country. We have struck slavery its death blow already. We need not contend with the Doctor about the power. “One thing you have done,” said an eminent judge to us, “you have driven the South to come out and declare directly in favor of slavery. Heretofore they have pretended to lament it, as an evil. Now they declare it is a blessing, and a righteous institution.” Have we not, said we, driven them to join the issue, before the world, in favor of slaveholding? “You have,” said the judge. Must they not maintain it before the world, said we, to save the institution from going down? “They must,” he replied. Can they maintain it? said we. “No,” said he, — and yet the judge is not an abolitionist.

We need not contend with this Wayland and wayward President for the power, as citizens or as men, to beat down southern slaveholding. We have exercised the power already, and the South knows it. We have waked the nation to discuss the demerits of the system and the question of the negro man's humanity; and they are discussing it, and amid the flash and fervor of the agitation the foul system dies. It can no more endure it, than owls can noon, or bats sunshine, or ghosts day-break. While Wayland is groping about in his metaphysics to get hold of some puzzle to embarrass us about the power, we will have exercised it to the full, and cleared the land of slavery. Then where will the Doctor find a market for his “limitations?” Slavery is a dead man already, unless Orator Rhett, and Professor Dew, and Colonel McDuffie, and General Hamilton, and doctor this, that and the other one, can maintain the precious creature in the argument, and get the verdict of an enlightened and purged christianity in its favor. To this conclusion it has already come. The question is stated — the issue joined — the pleadings closed — all demurring and abating and delaying past by. And now for the trial. Now, Slavery, hold thine own. The Doctor's question of our having the power comes too late.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 39-44 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of October 20, 1838.

George G. Thompson: Fast Day, April 9, 1835

In these days of slavish servility and malignant prejudices, we are presented occasionally with some beautiful specimens of christian obedience and courage. One of these is seen in the opening of the North Bennett-street Methodist meeting-house, in Boston, to the advocates for the honor of God, the salvation of our country, and the freedom of enslaved millions in our midst. As the pen of the historian, in after years, shall trace the rise, progress and glorious triumph of the abolition cause, he will delight to record and posterity will delight to read, the fact that when all other pulpits were dumb, all other churches closed, on the subject of slavery, in Boston, the boasted “CRADLE OF LIBERTY,” — there was one pulpit that would speak out, one church that would throw open its doors in behalf of the down trodden victims of American tyranny, and that was the pulpit and the church above alluded to. The primitive spirit of Methodism is beginning to revive with all its holy zeal and courage, and it will not falter until the Methodist churches are purged from the pollution of slavery, and the last slave in the land stands forth a redeemed and regenerated being.

On Fast Day morning, 9th inst. Mr. Thompson gave a very powerful discourse from the pulpit of the Bennett street meeting-house. The house was thronged to excess at an early hour; and although the crowded auditory had to wait for the appearance of Mr. Thompson, an hour beyond the time appointed for the meeting, (he having had the erroneous impression that the services commenced at 11, instead of 10 o'clock,) yet their attention was rivetted to the end. It is difficult to report Mr. T’s address. We can only present the following skeleton of his lecture.

Mr. Thompson took for his text the 28th chapter of Isaiah, exclusive of the two last verses. He stated that he had made choice of the chapter just read, because of its full, significant, and emphatic bearing upon that grave and interesting topic, to which it was expected he would that day draw the attention of his hearers. The text contained all that was necessary to illustrate the importance of attention to the subject of slavery, and explain the duties connected with that subject. It pointed out the consequences flowing from a faithful discharge of those duties, and moreover, directed us to the means by which we were to bring others to a sense of their sins, and the discharge of their obligations. Thus was the subject in its length and its breadth, brought before us. Founding our remarks upon the word of God, and carefully drawing our directions thence, we should be kept from falling into error, touching our faith and practice.

To whom was this chapter addressed?

The chapter was manifestly addressed, not to the profane, ungodly, and openly irreligious, but to those who professed to serve God — persons scrupulously attentive to the externals of piety. “Declare unto MY PEOPLE their TRANSGREssions — unto the House of JAcoB their sINs.” — unto those who seek me daily, who delight to know my ways, who ask of me the ordinances of justice, who take delight in approaching to God, who fast often, who afflict their souls, who bow down their heads as bulrushes, who spread sackcloth and ashes under them. Shew unto these their transgressions and their sins.

What were the sins of this people?

1. In the day of their fast they found pleasure. It was not a day of inward mortification — of penitent prostration of soul — but of pharisaical and self-complacent attention to outward forms and ceremonies, the observance of which obtained for them amongst men the reputation of superior sanctity.

2. On that day they exacted all their labors. While appearing to serve God, they were robbing the poor — multiplying tasks — growing rich by the labor of their slaves at home.

3. They fasted for strife, and debate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness. Their fasts were too frequently mere political observances — for political ends. To promote the ends of war — animosity — sectarianism — controversy and strife. In a word, these outwardly holy and sanctimonious Jews were HYPocRITEs, SLAVEHoLDERS, OPPRESSoRs, wARLIKE PoliticiaNs, neglectors of the great MoRAL and social duties.

What were this people to do?

1. Loose the bands of wickedness. Dissolve every unrighteous connection. Have no fellowship with sin or sinners, &c.

2. Undo the heavy burdens. Remove every unjust restriction, taxation and disability, &c.

3. Let the oppressed go free. Set at liberty all held in slavery. All innocent captives, &c.

4. Break every yoke. Release from servitude all held by unjust contracts. Abandon compulsory labor.

5. Feed the hungry.

6. Succor the friendless and homeless.

7. Put away pride and prejudice.

8. Refrain from injurious speech.

What effects were to follow!

1. Joy, peace, light, comfort. “Then shall thy light break forth as the morning. What could be more beautiful than the figure here employed? Light-morning light-reviving light-increasing light — strengthening light — welcome light. Light after darkness. Joy after sorrow. The light of morning to the languishing patient The light of morning to the tempest-tost mariner ! The light of the morning to the sleepless captive.

2. Restoration. “Thine health shall spring forth speedily. Bishop Lowth hath rendered the passage, ‘Thy wounds shall speedily be healed over.’ And Dr. Clarke, ‘the scar of thy wounds shall be speedily removed.’”

3. Reputation. “Thy righteousness shall go before thee.” Thy justice shall be made manifest. Thy integrity shall appear to men. The world shall admire thy righteous conduct.

4. Defence. “The glory of the Lord shall be thy rereward [sic].” Or according to Lowth's translation — “The glory of Jehovah shall bring up thy rear.”

5. The spirit of prayer — and the answer of prayer. “Then shalt thou call, and the Lord shall answer; thou shalt cry, and he shall say, “Here I am” — or, “Lo, I am here.”

6. Brightness and light where all had been obscurity and darkness. “Then shall thy light rise in the obscurity, and thy darkness be as the noon day.”

7. Divine direction. “The Lord shall guide thee continually.” By his Word, his Spirit, his Providence.

8. Fertility, culture, beauty, order, freshness, fragrance. “Thou shalt be like a watered garden.”

9. Health, purity, perpetuity, abundance. “Like a spring of water whose waters fail not.”

10. The reparation of national dilapidations. “They that be of thee shall BUILD THE olD wAsTE PLACEs. Thou shalt RAIsE UP THE FounDATIONs of MANY GENERATIONs. Thou shalt be called the repairer of the breach, the restorer of paths to dwell in. Or, according to Lowth, “And they that spring from thee shall build the ancient ruins. The foundations of old times they shall raise up. And thou shalt be called, the repairer, of the broken mounds — the restorer of paths to be frequented by inhabitants.’

Thus, all the desolations of war and wickedness shall be repaired.

Here are promised to a just and obedient people — Light, Health, Glory, Reputation, Defence, Direction, the Spirit of Prayer, the Answer to Prayer, Restoration, Fertility, Beauty and Perpetuity.

To give the subject a present and practical bearing, he should consider generally the nature and advantages of national penitence.

I. The scriptural manifestations of a genuine national repentance.

True penitence did not consist in profession, outward prostration, dejection of countenance, bodily austerities, grievous penances, abounding ordinances, or splendid benevolent enterprises. All these might exist with Slavery, Oppression, Uncharitableness, Persecution, Proscription, and Prejudice. True repentance was a living, active principle, producing righteousness in the life-the abandonment of every wicked way. God detested external humiliations and sacrifices when they were unaccompanied by poverty of soul and practical piety.

Did this nation give forth those proofs of penitence which the scriptures required? Was there not slavery, oppression, the yoke, the putting forth of the finger, and the speaking of vanity, abroad over the whole nation — and amongst professing christians, too, notwithstanding the schools, colleges, churches, Missionary Societies, Bible Societies, and other institutions that had been multiplied without number? Were the fasts of this people such as God had chosen Look at the slave regions of the land How black the gloom! How death-like the stillness! How deep the guilt! How awful the curse resting upon them! Look over the entire face of the country. The general and state governments utterly paralyzed. The churches thoroughly corrupted. The people in guilty indifference. The ministers of religion almost universally dumb — or openly and wickedly vindicating oppression. Mr. Thompson then went on to specify at length the acts necessary to prove the genuine penitence of the nation.

Individuals should emancipate their slaves. The general Government should be forced by the voice of the people to purge the District of Columbia. The States should legislate in accordance with the principles of the constitution and the requirements of the text.

The churches ought to act. Let the churches preach emancipation — warn slaveholders — put them under church discipline — bear with them for a time, and if fruit be not borne, put them out of the church, which they defile by their soul-trafficking pursuits.

II. The distinguished and abounding blessings secured to a truly penitent and obedient nation.

Under this division, Mr. Thompson dwelt largely upon the safety and advantages of immediate emancipation, and illustrated those portions of the text which speak of the blessings consequent upon the adoption of a righteous, merciful and truly obedient course of conduct.

1. The spread of knowledge.

2. The dissemination of the scriptures.

3. The acquisition of national character.

4 Restoration of fertility to a now almost exhausted soil.

5. Augmentation of the wants of the population, and the consequent increased demand for the manufactures of the country.

6. A pouring out the spirit of prayer.

7. A blessing upon the various enterprises to advance the kingdom of Christ at home and abroad.

These, and a multitude of blessings of an infinitely various character, would be the portion of this nation, if the commands of God's word were obeyed, and the oppressed set free.

III. The imperative duty of such as desire to advance the blessedness and prosperity of their country in church and state, by bringing the people to true repentance.

“Cry aloud, spare not, &c.”

These words implied the adoption of all proper means of exhibiting, clearly and universally, the transgressions of the people. These means should be open, bold, unsparing, effectual. The drowsiness, deafness, indifference, avarice, and blindness of the people required a fearless and unsparing denunciation of sin.

Not only was it our duty to show the folly, inexpediency, unprofitableness, and impolicy of slavery, but the transgression and the SIN of slavery.

Much fault was in the present day found with the measures of certain Abolitionists, because their measures were strong, bold, and unsparing. Let it be remembered, that crying “aloud” was God's method — God's command.

Finally — God's promises were invariably connected with obedience to certain commands, having reference either to the outward conduct or the dispositions of the heart. In the case in question, if the duties prescribed were not performed, instead of the blessings promised, their opposites would be our lot. Instead of light, there would be darkness. Instead of reputation, dishonor and infamy. Instead of light and comfort, horror and shame, Instead of moral and physical fertility, all would be barrenness. Instead of advancement, decay. Instead of strength, weakness. Instead of guidance, perplexity. Instead of salvation, dishonor and destruction.

SOURCES: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 52-7; “Fast Day,” The Liberator, Boston, Massachusetts, Saturday, April 18, 1835, p. 3

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: Constitutionality of Slavery, September 8, 1838

The second “unprovided-for difficulty” of the Keene Sentinel, in the way of the anti-slavery movement is, that “slaves are property.” We deny that they are property, or that they can be made so. We will not argue this, for it is self-evident. A man cannot be a subject of human ownership; neither can he be the owner of humanity. There is a clear and eternal incompetancy on both sides, — on the one to own man, and on the other to be owned by man. A man cannot alienate his right to liberty and to himself, — still less can it be taken from him. He cannot part with his duty to be free — his obligation to liberty, any more than his right. He is under obligation to God and humanity and his own immortality, to retain his manhood and to exercise it. He cannot become the property of another, any more than he can part with his human nature. It would be utterly repugnant to all the purposes of his creation. He is bound to perform a part, which is totally incompatible with his being owned by any body but himself; which requires that he keep himself free. He can't be property, any more than he can be a horse, or a literal ass. We commend our brethren of the Sentinel to the eighth Psalm, as a divine authority touching the nature and destination of man. He can't be property — he can't be appropriated. His mighty nature cannot be coped by the grasp of ownership. Can the Messrs. Sentinel be appropriated? We put it sternly to them, in behalf of their, and our own, and the slave's common nature, — for we feel that it is all outraged by their terrible allegation. Can the editors of the Sentinel become property? the goods and chattels, rights and hereditaments of an owner? If they can't, no man can. If any man can, they can. Can the Hon. Mr. Prentiss, with all his interesting qualities and relations, by any diabolical jugglery, be converted into a slave, so as to belong to one of his fallen, depraved fellow-men? Can he suppose the idea? Is he susceptible of this transmutation? He is, if any body is. Can he be transferred, by virtue of a few cries and raps of a glib-tongued auctioneer? Could a pedler sell him, from his tin cart? Could he knock him off, bag and baggage, to the boldest bidder? Let us try it. No disrespect to our esteemed senior. — We test his allegation, that a man is property. If one man can be, any man can — himself, or his stately townsman, Major-General Wilson, who would most oddly become the auction platform. If a man can be property, he can be sold. If any man can be, every man can — Mr. Prentiss, Gen. Wilson, Rev. Mr. Barstow — every man. Let us try to vendue the Sentinel. Advertise him, if you please, in the Keene paper. On the day, produce him — bring him on — let his personal symmetries be examined and descanted on — his sacred person handled by the sacrilegious man-jockey, — let him be ordered to shift positions, and assume attitudes, and display to the callous multitude his form and proportions — his points, as the horse-jockey would say. How would all this comport with the high sense of personal honor, wont to be entertained by the Sentinel? How would he not encounter a thousand deaths rather than submit to it? How his proud spirit, instinct with manhood, would burst and soar away from the scene! Who bids? an able-bodied, capable, fine, healthy, submissive, contented Boy, about fifty — sound wind and limb — sold positively for no fault — a field hand — come of real stock, — faithful, can trust him with gold untold — will nobody start him? — shall we have a bid? — will nobody bid for the boy? Now we demand of our respected brother, whose honor is as sacred in our regard as in his own, what he thinks of the chattelism of a slave, — for we indignantly lay it down as an immovable principle that the Hon. John Prentiss is as legitimate a subject of property and of sale, as any the lowest of his race.

We dispose of the position that “slaves are property,” by utterly and indignantly denying the possibility of it. We will rescue our brethren of the Sentinel from the imputation of this murderous idea, by erasing the semicolon after “property,” and making but one sentence of the second “difficulty,” turning it into an opinion that “slaves are property by the constitution and the laws;” throwing the infamy on to the old framers of the constitution, and all of us who have lived under it, with power to amend or nullify it. It would sink the whole of us. Constitution and laws! Is the Sentinel of opinion that a constitution could be framed by men, or by existences in the shape of men, that, instead of protecting human liberty and rights, should annihilate them? A constitution to enslave men! What would you say of a British constitution, that enslaved a British subject? Would you not scout the idea of it — of the British possibility of it? and can it be done here, and was it done here by revolutionary sages, who could not brook the restraints of British liberty? A constitution, that should provide for the enslavement of a man, would be a legal abortion. The bare engrossing of it would nullify it. It would perish by spontaneous annulment and nullification. It could not survive its ordination — nor could its infamous framers. We deny that an enslaved man is property by the constitution, and we might deny that any man can be enslaved under our constitution, and consequently, that he could be chattelized, if a slave were admitted to be property. Things may be appropriated — persons may not. They are self-evidently not susceptible of appropriation or ownership. By the constitution every body is spoken of as a person — no mention is made of human things. If a slave is alluded to, in that instrument, as a possible existence in point of fact, it is under the name of “person.” “Three fifths of all other Persons” — “migration or importation of persons” — “no person held to service.” These are the only instances in it where allusion is made to slaves, — and it no more, in those allusions, sanctions enslaving, than it does “piracies and felonies on the high seas,” which it also expressly recognizes, as they say of slavery. So it says “person,” where it solemnly asserts that “no person can be deprived of liberty or property, but by due process of law.” This clause prohibits the slightest approaches to enslaving, or holding in slavery, which is continued enslaving. No person's property can be taken from him; not his life even; infinitely less his Liberty, without due legal process. It is idle to say, that the framers of the constitution, or. those who adopted it and acted under it, did not mean to save the colored man from slavery, by this clause. In law they are to be held to mean so, because they said so. The intent of the framers is now to be gathered from what they said in the instrument itself — not their colloquies at the time or before or after — but what they put down in imperishable black and white. It is what they inscribed on the parchment for all time, that they legally intended, and there we are to go to get at their intent. If the words are obscure and ambiguous, we may gather their intent by aid of concomitant circumstances, &c. But there is no ambiguity here. The clearest words and best understood and most trimly defined of any we have, here set forth the essential doctrine, (without which a community of thieves and pirates could scarcely be kept together,) that life, liberty and property are sacred. Enslave man and leave him these three, and you may do it, maugre this clause of the constitution. However, you must leave him, by virtue of other clauses, a few other incidentals, such as compulsory process for calling in all witnesses for him, of whatever color; the inviolate right to be secure in person, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures; right of trial by jury in all cases over twenty dollars' value; the free exercise of religion, of speech, of the press, of peaceable assembly and of petition; the civil rights of republican government, which is guarantied to him in every state in this Union; the privileges and immunities of citizens in every state; in short, you must allow him a string of franchises, enumerated accidentally in that part of the old compact, called the preamble, viz., justice, domestic tranquillity, common defence, general welfare, and, finally, the blessings of liberty to himself and to his posterity; — moreover you may add, in repetition, — for in securing these breath-of-life sort of rights, people run a little into superfluity of words — you may add the unsuspendible privilege of habeas corpus — the old writ of liberty; — and perfect exemption from all attainder, or enslaving a man's children on his account. We will mention one more — that is the uninfringible right to keep and bear arms. All these and many other rights and immunities, "too numerous to be mentioned,” are secured to him by adamantine provisions in the constitution, and if you can chattelize him under them, so that Austin Woolfolk can trade in him, at your capital, or Wade Hampton or the American Board, can buy him and use him up in their service, or Doctor Ezra Styles Ely speculate in his soul and body, then your doctrine, Messrs. Sentinel, is sound, that he is recognized as property by the constitution.

We claim some exceptions, however, in case we cannot overthrow slavery in the slave states, by force of the national constitution. We cannot allow you to enslave any body in old Virginia. Look at her law paramount in our caption, declaring the Birth-Right, Inalienable Liberty Of All Men. In Maryland the right is constitutionally set forth a little stronger. You must not enslave a man in Maryland, — and we can't allow you to lay a finger on his liberties in the district of Columbia, because the constitutions of Virginia and Maryland are still paramount law there, by congressional adoption, at the acceptance of the cessions. And if he runs away from the district or a territory, or either of those two states, we can't allow you to arrest him and send him back.

We ask our legal friends, who think lightly of this “fanaticism,” to look into this constitutional and legal matter of slaveholding. We would like especially, that some of the neighbors of the Sentinel would give some exposition, during the coming convention, of the lawfulness of enslaving people in this country. We ask the Keene lawyers how this is. We want “the opinion of the court.”

For ourselves we venture the opinion, in light of what glimmerings of law scintillate about our vision, that holding a man in slavery is a violation of the law of this land, and of every part of it, not excepting our gory-fingered sister Arkansas, or our carnage-dripping sister Alabama, the haunt of christian enterprise from New England and the worn-out slave states in the north. A constitution that can avail to protect republican liberty to a single member of this community, inviolably secures it to every man, and condemns and prohibits slavery. It cannot otherwise be. Slavery is a mere matter of fact — in the face of the constitution — in the face of each state constitution — in the face of every court of justice which soundly administers the law of any state — in face of every thing, but a tyrant public sentiment, and a diabolical American practice.

The enslaved of the country are as much entitled to their liberty as any of us, by the law as it is. They have a right to throw off all violation of it by force, if they cannot otherwise. Nay, it is their duty to do so, if they can, — for it is not injury merely, that they are submitting to — not wrongs. They are rendered incapable of suffering injury — incompetent to endure wrong. The accursed system, that preys upon them, makes things of them — exterminates their very natures. This they may not submit to. They ought to prevent it, at every expense. They ought to resist it, as the Christian should the devil, for it wars upon the nature of man, and devours his immortality. If they could heave off the system by an instantaneous and universal effort, they ought to do it Individually we wish they could do it, and that they would do it. We may be wrong in this opinion — but we entertain it. If our white brethren at the South were slaves, we should wish them instantaneous deliverance by insurrection, if this would bring it to them. We wish our colored brethren the same. We do not value the bodily lives of the present white generation there a straw, compared to the horrible thraldom, in which they hold the colored people, and we value their lives as highly as we do the colored people's. But insurrection can't effect it. It must be done by the abolitionists. They must annihilate the system by force of their principles, and as fast as possible. And they must increase their speed. Men will have to groan and pant in absolute brutality, with their high and eternal natures bound down and strangled amid the folds of this enslaving devil, until we throw it off. To the work then, and Heaven abandon the tardy! If you wish to save your white brethren and yourselves, we commend you to this work, in sharp earnest We tell you, once for all, there is no time to be Inst!

There is no end to the theme — there must be to this article. We deny the truth and existence of the Sentinel's two difficulties, and if, in fact, they both existed, our movement “provides for them.” The people collectively have the power to declare slavery a crime in the slave states. Congress has the power to do what amounts to the same thing — by direct action. They can declare it criminal in the capital, and how long would it be esteemed innocent elsewhere? They can punish enslaving in the district, and the man-traffic between the states as piracy. Lex talionis would enslave the perpetrators — but that would be devilish, and ought not to be inflicted. But if hanging is lawful in any case, it is in this.

If the people collectively and Congress have no legal power over the slavery of the slave states, abolitionists have the power, ample and adequate, and they will “provide for the difficulty.”

The constitution and the laws do not recognize the slaves as property. We call for the proof. The Sentinel avers it. Let them point us to the spot where. And could they do this, the abolitionists have the power (consult rule of three for the time it will take) to change and redeem both the constitution and the laws, and transmute this property back again to humanity.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 15-21 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of September 8, 1838.

George Thompson: Lecture at Lowell, Massachusetts, October 5, 1834

On Sunday evening, October 5th, GeoRGE THOMPsoN, Esq. the abolitionitst, delivered a lecture on Slavery in the Town Hall, Lowell. The spacious room was filled some time before the commencement of the proceedings, and when Mr. Thompson began his lecture, there were upwards of one thousand persons present. The meeting was opened with singing and prayer.

The following is a faint sketch of Mr. Thompson's discourse, which occupied an hour and three quarters in the delivery.

He (the lecturer) felt truly grateful for the present very favorable opportunity of discussing before an American audience, the merits and bearings of a question, which, more than any other that could agitate their minds, was connected with the honor, happiness, and prosperity of the people of this land. He besought a kind, patient, and attentive hearing. He asked no favor for his doctrines, his arguments, or his opinions. Let these be subjected to the severest ordeal. Let them be tested by reason, truth and scripture, and if they squared not with the dictates and requirements of these, let them be repudiated. The West Indies had already witnessed the operation of the great measure, which the justice and humanity of the British Nation had obtained for the slave. All eyes were now turned towards the United States of America, to see if that land of Liberty, of Republicanism, of Bibles, of Missions, of Temperance Societies, and Revivals, would direct her matchless energies to the blessed work of enfranchising her slaves, and elevating her entire colored population.

As a feeble and unworthy instrument in the hand of Him, without whom there was neither wisdom, nor strength, nor goodness, he (Mr. T.) had come amongst them to tell of the conflicts and triumphs he had witnessed in his native land, and to encourage, and, if possible, aid his brethern here in the accomplishment of a similarly great and glorious object. His was no sectarian or political embassay. Higher and broader principles than those of politics or party animated and sustained him. He came not to uphold the dogmas of a faction, or to expound the charter of human rights according to the latitude, longitude, clime, or color. As a citizen of the world, he claimed brotherhood with all mankind. The medium through which he contemplated the varied tribes of this peopled earth, was one which blended all hues, and brought out only the proud and awful distinctive mark of one common nature — “the image of God.” He honored that ‘image in whomsoever he found it, and would labor lest a prize so glorious should be lost, lest a being so capable should be wretched here and forever. Such were the views he cherished, and the principles he maintained, and he hoped he should be enabled to discuss them with temper and christian charity. He knew that men were all compounded of the same common elements — all sinful, erring and guilty; and, therefore, it became not any human being to assume the tone of innocence or infallibility, but to address himself to others as their fellow sinner, and be grateful to God, if divine grace had caused him in any degree to differ from the rest. He deemed such feelings perfectly consistent with a fearless denunciation of vicious principles and oppressive practices. Towards sin in every form, no mercy should be shown. A war of extermination should be waged with the works of the devil, under all their manifold and delusive appearances, and that man was the truest and kindest friend of the sinner, who, with a bold and unsparing hand, dragged forth to light and condemnation the abomination that would have ruined his soul.

After this introduction, the lecturer took a compendious view of slavery as its exists in the Southern States. He spoke of it as reducing man to the condition of a thing — a chattel personal — a marketable brute — the property and fee simple of his fellow-man — consigning the helpless victim to bondage, wretchedness, ignorance and crime here, and ruining his soul forever and ever. The lecturer next proceeded to speak of the prevailing prejudice against the free people of color, and attributed it principally to an antichristian and guilty feeling of pride. That this prejudice did not originate in a natural repugnance to color, was evident from the fact, that while the colored person remained in a state of civil and intellectual degradation, no indisposition was shown to the nearest physical approach. It was only when the colored person attempted to rise in intellect or station to a level with the white, that the hatred and prejudice appeared. He (Mr. T.) solemnly and affectionately exhorted all who heard him to renounce their cruel and unholy antipathies. This prejudice was an offence against God. The controversy was not with him who wore the colored skin, but with the being who had formed him with it. Who was bold enough to stand before God, and vindicate the prejudice which dishonored and defaced the image and superscription of the Deity, as stamped upon his creature man?

Such was the state of things in these christian States. What was the remedy? The immediate emancipation of the whites from prejudice, and the blacks from slavery. Mercy implored it. Justice demanded it. Reason dictated it. Religion required it. Necessity urged it.

Fear cried, “No! The danger of immediate emancipation!”

Prejudice exclaimed, “You want to amalgamate the races — to break the cast to lift the blacks into our ranks. It must not be!”

A misguided Patriotism spread the alarm, “The Union is in danger!”

Interest muttered, “You will ruin our manufactures you will destroy our commerce — you will beggar the planter!”

Despotism vociferated, “Let my victims alone! Rob me not of my dominion!” and a

Mistaken philanthrophy would set on foot a piecemeal reformation, and recommend gradualism for the special benefit of the pining slave.

Whom, then, should they obey? He boldly answered, God; who required that men should “cease to do evil.” But that he might not be accused of dealing only in abstract views of this question, he would take up the various objections to immediate emancipation, and endeavor to show that in the eye of reason and selfishness too, they were groundless and absurd.

Mr. Thompson proceeded to prove the safety, practicability and advantages of immediate emancipation. It would be impossible to do justice to this part of the lecture in this brief notice.

The question was frequently asked, “Why should New England interfere in the slave-system of the South?” Because, said Mr. T., the slaves are your fellow-men — they are your neighbors, and you are commanded to love them as yourselves, and to remember them in bonds as bound with them. They are your fellow-citizens — declared to be so by your glorious Declaration of Independence. You supply the South, and therefore are connected with this trade of blood. You consume the produce of the South, and thus effectually promote the cause of oppression there. You are taxed to maintain the Slavery of the South. You are in the habit of giving up the slaves of the South who seek refuge amongst you. Your colored citizens are liable to be seized and sold, if they go to the South. You live under the same Constitution as the South, and are therefore bound to amend that constitution, if it be at present unjust in any of its parts. Your Congress has supreme control over the District of Columbia, Arkansas, and Florida, and you ought, therefore, to call for the immediate extinction of Slavery in these places. You exert a powerful influence over the South and the States generally. You are able to control the destinies of the shaves in this country. You are responsible to God for the employment of your moral energies. Come, then, to the work. First, let the question be fairly discussed amongst you. Do not be afraid to entertain it. Sooner or later, you must grapple with it. The speedier the better. Discard your prejudices. Give up your pre-conceived opinions, and bring to the consideration of this great subject, open and impartial minds, a tender regard for the interests of your fellowman, — a sincere and enlightened desire for your country's true honor and greatness, and a deep sense of your accountability to God.

Mr. Thompson next addressed the ladies present, and urged the necessity of their engaging in this work of mercy. It was not a political, but a moral and religious question. All were called upon to labor in the cause — all were able to do so. While some preached and lectured on the subject, others could distribute tracts, collect contributions, and converse with their friends. The principles of justice and truth would thus be diffused — prejudice and ignorance would give way, and an amount of influence finally created, sufficient to purge the stain of slavery forever from the land.

Mr. Thompson was listened to throughout with the most profound attention, and every appearance of deep interest. The Rev. Messrs. Rand, Twining, and Pease, were present. At the conclusion of the lecture, the last named gentleman gave out a hymn suited to the occasion, which was sung by the choir, and after a benediction had been pronounced, the audience separated.

SOURCE: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 1-5

Hopkins Holsey to Howell Cobb, December 31, 1847

Athens, Ga., Dec. 31st, 1847.

Dr. Sir: I avail myself of a leisure moment to reply to your communication of the¹ ——. Your favor in sending to this office the National Intelligencer is duly appreciated, in as much as the editor of the Union admits that his reports of the proceedings of Congress, thus far, have not been accurate. I find this to be the case particularly in regard to Mr. Giddings's instructions to the Judiciary Committee relative to the slave trade in the District of Columbia. These instructions as reported in the Intelligencer open up the whole question of property in slaves; and the double vote of Mr. Winthrop, in first deciding the tie vote against the South, and afterwards upon the correction of the Journal repeating his position, is peculiarly unfortunate for the Southern Whigs. It is also an unlucky omen for them that Northern Democrats were the only members from the non-slaveholding states, voting against the agitation of the question. In the other wing of the Capitol a similar mishap seems to have befallen them almost at the same time upon the movement of John P. Hale on the same subject, in the disposition of which I observe all the Northern democratic Senators voting with the entire South to lay the question of reception on the table, and all the Northern Whigs voting against it.

Previous to this conclusive demonstration by the Northern Democrats in both Houses came the resolutions by Mr. Dickinson of New York, which assume the same ground taken by Mr. Dallas in Pennsylvania last summer. Satisfactory as this position must be to us in all respects (leaving out the absolute monomania of the Calhoun faction) it becomes us to ascertain, before we adopt it as the basis of our action in the next campaign, whether the Northern Democracy will rally to its support? This is the all important preliminary question to be decided before we can properly solve that other question, whether we should take the basis of Mr. Buchanan or Mr. Dallas. I perceive in your letter the expression of a belief that our Northern friends will come to the support of Dallas and Dickinson and Cass ground. By the bye, this is the first and most gratifying intimation that we have here of Gen. Cass's position. Resuming the question which of these two propositions, leaving the matter to be settled by the Territories or adopting the Missouri basis, will best unite the Northern Democracy, I can only say at this distance you have a better opportunity of judging than I can possibly have as to the actual state of things North. If our friends there are of the opinion that they can stand better upon one of these propositions than the other, of course we should let them have their own way. They are certainly better judges than we can be of what they may be able to effect. It is needless to say to you that the Southern Democrats will be satisfied with either position.

You will however agree with me that great caution should be observed by us in weighing the evidences of the state of Northern feeling. Buchanan, Dallas, Cass are all for the Presidency; and may not the fact that Mr. Buchanan having broken ground on the Missouri basis have operated upon the other two to vary their positions from his, and thus mislead us? Both of the latter have numerous friends who will adhere to their positions, and could we be assured they were sufficiently numerous to give tone to the Northern Democracy, the question would be settled. But I apprehend that the surer data of conjecture on our part should be laid deeper in the nature of things than the mere personal or immediate political attachments to individuals, however prominent they may be.

Upon a survey of the whole ground, I must express to you my strong apprehension that our Northern friends can not be brought to any other position with half the strength that they would rally to the Missouri basis. You will perceive that I treat it alone as a practical question. Let me now assign you a few reasons. First, the Herkimer men in New York will not yield to Mr. Dickinson's or Dallas's ground. Their pride, their passions, are all enlisted against it. Secondly, the Democrats of New Hampshire occupy the same ground as the Radicals of New York. If we adopt the Missouri basis may we not yet hope that both of these States will yet be saved? The ground of my hopes may be found in Clingman's speech. It is difficult to convince our Northern friends that Congress has not the complete control of this question. You know how they stood in relation to the constitutional power over the District. The Missouri basis will enable them to retain their constitutional prepossessions and yet to seek refuge from an unjust, unequal or destructive exercise of the power.

The South on the other hand may retain its constitutional opinions and yet yield to the Missouri basis for the sake of peace and harmony. This idea that constitutional questions may not be compromised is all fallacious. In Mr. Jefferson's letter to Mr. Cartwright on the powers of the state and federal governments, speaking of questions of this nature he says, “if they can neither be avoided or compromised,” etc.

There is however another and more conclusive view in favor of occupying the compromise ground to which I ask your attention. Henry Clay holds the card in his hand which he is yet to play upon this subject. He will wait for us to shew our hands. If he finds we have adopted Mr. Dickinson's ground — he will himself trump us with the Missouri Compromise, and win the game m spite of us! Clingman's speech shews how easily it could be done. Mr. Clay is the father (if I mistake not) of that Compromise. He will rally his party to it and kill us with the word Union. We might struggle in vain. The Democratic party of Georgia is already committed, in the convention of last spring. Our press, with but one exception, are committed also. Virginia is committed, South Carolina even is now committed by a unanimous vote to abide the Missouri line. Leading politicians all through the South are committed. We can not war against a position which we have already sanctioned." If the issue should be formed by the two parties in this manner, Mr. Clay would sweep through the non-slaveholding States with irresistible power, and find none but a partial check, at least in the South. I am therefore of the opinion that, strengthened as the Compromise has been by the recent developments in the South, and strong as it must be in the nature of things North, that we should never relinquish it. We must occupy it in the Baltimore Convention or the Whigs will, and kill us off at the South with our men weapons. You will have observed also in the recent democratic meeting at the Museum in Philadelphia that the Missouri line was adopted. This is at least evidence of the state of feeling and opinion among our Northern friends. It was unanimously adopted.

The Herkimer men will send delegates to the convention. So will the Conservatives. Both delegations should be admitted. The Ultras will eventually find so strong a current against them, that they would fain compromise. But if that word is not to be known in the Convention, they will return home enemies to the party. This will probably be the case with the N. Hampshire delegation also. It may also be the case with Maine and Rhode Island. Besides, the Compromise is so intimately blended with the idea of preserving the Union that hosts of men of all parties, North and South, will follow the banner upon which it may be inscribed. If we do not write it upon ours, the Whigs will upon theirs, and we must fall under its influence.

P. S. — The Ultras, North, says that Dallas's proposition virtually excludes Union. That's their feeling—we must respect it, though erroneous. Exclusion either way would weaken the bonds of Union, and thus our own shaft would recoil upon us.

_______________

¹ Blank in the original.

SOURCE: Ulrich Bonnell Phillips, Editor, The Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1911, Volume 2: The Correspondence of Robert Toombs, Alexander H. Stephens, and Howell Cobb, p. 91-4

The Confederate Sequestration Act, August 30, 1861

AN ACT for the sequestration of the estates, property, and effects of alien enemies, and for the indemnity of citizens of the Confederate States and persons aiding the same in the existing war with the United States.

Whereas, the Government and people of the United States have departed from the usages of civilized warfare in confiscating and destroying the property of the people of the Confederate States of all kinds, whether used for military purposes or not; and

Whereas, our only protection against such wrongs is to be found in such measures of retaliation as will ultimately indemnify our own citizens for their losses, and restrain the wanton excesses of our enemies: Therefore,

Be it enacted by the Congress of the Confederate States of America, That all and every the lands, tenements and hereditaments, goods and chattels, rights and credits within these Confederate States, and every right and interest therein held, owned, possessed, or enjoyed by or for any alien enemy since the twenty-first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, except such debts due to an alien enemy as may have been paid into the treasury of any one of the Confederate States prior to the passage of this law, be, and the same are hereby, sequestrated by the Confederate States of America, and shall be held for the full indemnity of any true and loyal citizen or resident of these Confederate States, or other person aiding said Confederate States in the prosecution of the present war between said Confederate States and the United States of America, and for which he may suffer any loss or injury under the act of the United States to which this act is retaliatory, or under any other act of the United States, or of any State thereof authorizing the seizure, condemnation, or confiscation of the property of citizens or residents of the Confederate States, or other person aiding said Confederate States, and the same shall be seized and disposed of as provided for in this act: Provided, however, When the estate, property, or rights to be affected by this act were, or are, within some State of this Confederacy, which has become such since said twenty-first day of May, then this act shall operate upon and as to such estate, property, or rights, and all persons claiming the same from and after the day such State so became a member of this Confederacy, and not before: Provided further, That the provisions of the act shall not extend to the stocks or other public securities of the Confederate Government, or of any of the States of this Confederacy held or owned by any alien enemy, or to any debt, obligation, or sum due from the Confederate Government, or any of the States, to such alien enemy: And provided also, That the provisions of this act shall not embrace the property of citizens or residents of either of the States of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, or Missouri, or of the District of Columbia, or the Territories of New Mexico, Arizona, or the Indian Territory south of Kansas, except such of said citizens or residents as shall commit actual hostilities against the Confederate States, or aid and abet the United States in the existing war against the Confederate States.

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That it is, and shall be, the duty of each and every citizen of these Confederate States speedily to give information to the officers charged with the execution of this law of any and every lands, tenements and hereditaments, goods and chattels, rights and credits within this Confederacy, and of every right and interest therein held, owned, possessed, or enjoyed by or for any alien enemy as aforesaid.

SEC. 3. Be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of every attorney, agent, former partner, trustee, or other person holding or controlling any such lands, tenements or hereditaments, goods or chattels, rights or credits, or any interest therein of or for any such alien enemy, speedily to inform the receiver, hereinafter provided to be appointed, of the same and to render an account thereof, and so far as is practicable to place the same in the hands of such receiver; whereupon such persons shall be fully acquitted of all responsibility for property and effects so reported and turned over. And any such person willfully failing to give such information and render such account shall be guilty of a high misdemeanor, and upon indictment and conviction shall be fined in a sum not exceeding $5,000 and imprisoned not longer than six months, said fine and imprisonment to be determined by the court trying the case, and shall further be liable to be sued by said Confederate States and subjected to pay double the value of the estate, property, or effects of the alien enemy held by him or subject to his control.

SEC. 4. It shall be the duty of the several judges of this Confederacy to give this act specially in charge to the grand juries of these Confederate States, and it shall be their duty at each sitting well and truly to inquire and report all lands, tenements and hereditaments, goods and chattels, rights and credits, and every interest therein within the jurisdiction of said grand jury held by or for any alien enemy, and it shall be the duty of the several receivers, appointed under this act, to take a copy of such report and to proceed in obtaining the possession and control of all such property and effects reported and to institute proceedings for the sequestration thereof in the manner hereinafter provided.

SEC. 5. Be it further enacted, That each judge of this Confederacy shall as early as practicable appoint a receiver for each section of the State for which he holds a court, and shall require him before entering upon the duties of his office to give a bond in such penalty as may be prescribed by the judge, with good and sufficient security, to be approved by the judge, conditioned that he will diligently and faithfully discharge the duties imposed upon him by law. And said officer shall hold his office at the pleasure of the judge of the district or section for which he is appointed, and shall be removed for incompetency, or inefficiency, or infidelity in the discharge of his trust And should the duties of any such receiver at any time appear to the judge to be greater than can be efficiently performed by him, then it shall be the duty of the judge to divide the district or section into one or more other receivers' districts, according to the necessities of the ease, and to appoint a receiver for each of said newly created districts. And every such receiver shall also, before entering upon the duties of his office, make oath in writing before the judge of the district or section for which he is appointed, diligently, well, and truly to execute the duties of his office.

SEC. 6. Be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the several receivers aforesaid to take the possession, control, and management of all lands, tenements and hereditaments, goods and chattels, rights and credits of each and every alien enemy within the section for which he acts. And to this end he is empowered and required, whenever necessary for accomplishing the purposes of this act, to sue for and recover the same in the name of said Confederate States, allowing, in the recovery of credits, such delays as may have been, or may be, prescribed in any State as to the collection of debts therein during the war. And the form and mode of action, whether the matter be of jurisdiction in law or equity, shall be by petition to the court, setting forth, as best he can, the estate, property, right, or thing sought to be recovered, with the name of the person holding, exercising supervision over, in possession of, or controlling the same, as the case may be, and praying a sequestration thereof. Notice shall thereupon be forthwith issued by the clerk of the court, or by the receiver, to such person, with a copy of the petition, and the same shall be served by the marshal or his deputy and returned to the court as other mesne process in law cases; whereupon the cause shall be docketed and stand for trial in the court according to the usual course of its business, and the court or judge shall at any time make all orders of seizure that may seem necessary to secure the subject-matter of the suit from danger of loss, injury, destruction, or waste, and may, pending the cause, make orders of sale in cases that may seem to such judge or court necessary to preserve any property sued for from perishing or waste: Provided, That in any case when the Confederate judge shall find it to be consistent with the safe-keeping of the property so sequestered to leave the same in the hands and under the control of any debtor or person in whose hands the real estate and slaves were seized, who may be in possession of the said property or credits, he shall order the same to remain in the hands and under the control of said debtor or person in whose hands the real estate and slaves were seized, requiring in every such ease such security for the safe-keeping of the property and credits as he may deem sufficient for the purpose aforesaid, and to abide by such further orders as the court may make in the premises. But this proviso shall not apply to bank or other corporation stock, or dividends due, or which may be due thereon, or to rents on real estate in cities. And no debtor or other person shall be entitled to the benefit of this proviso unless he has first paid into the hands of the receiver all interests or net profits which may have accrued since the twenty-first of May, eighteen hundred and sixty-one; and in all cases coming under this proviso, such debtor shall be bound to pay over annually to the receiver all interest which may accrue as the same falls due; and the person in whose hands any other property may be left shall be bound to account for, and pay over annually to the receiver, the net income or profits of said property, and on failure of such debtor or other person to pay over such interest, net income, or profits as the same falls due, the receiver may demand and recover the debt or property. And wherever, after ten days' notice to any debtor or person in whose hands property or debts may be left, of all application for further security, it shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the court that the securities of such debtor or person are not ample, the court may, on the failure of the party to give sufficient additional security, render judgment against all the parties on the bond for the recovery of the debt or property: Provided further, That said court may, whenever, in the opinion of the judge thereof, the public exigencies may require it, order the money due as aforesaid to be demanded by the receiver, and if upon demand of the receiver, made in conformity to a decretal order of the court requiring said receiver to collect any debts for the payment of which security may have been given under the provisions of this act, the debtor or his security shall fail to pay the same, then upon ten days' notice to said debtor and his security, given by said receiver, of a motion to be made in said court for judgment for the amount so secured, said court, at the next term thereof, may proceed to render judgment against said principal and security, or against the party served with such notice, for the sum so secured, with interest thereon, in the name of said receiver, and to issue execution therefor.

SEC. 7. Any person in the possession and control of the subject-matter of any such suit, or claiming any interest therein, may, by order of the court, be admitted as a defendant and be allowed to defend to the extent of the interest propounded by him; but no person shall be heard in defense until he shall file a plea, verified by affidavit and signed by him, setting forth that no alien enemy has any interest in the right which he asserts, or for which he litigates, either directly or indirectly, by trust, open or secret, and that he litigates solely for himself or for some citizen of the Confederate States whom he legally represents; and when the defense is conducted for or on account of another, in whole or part, the plea shall set forth the name and residence of such other person, and the relation that the defendant bears to him in the litigation. If the cause involves matter which should be tried by a jury according to the course of the common law, the defendant shall be entitled to a jury trial. If it involves matters of equity jurisdiction the court shall proceed according to its usual mode of procedure in such cases; and the several courts of this Confederacy may from time to time establish rules of procedure under this act, not inconsistent with the act or other laws of these Confederate States.

SEC. 8. Be it further enacted, That the clerk of the court shall, at the request of the receiver, from time to time issue writs of garnishment, directed to one or more persons, commanding them to appear at the then sitting or at any future term of the court, and to answer under oath what property or effects of any alien enemy he had at the service of the process, or since has had under his possession or control belonging to or held for an alien enemy, or in what sum if any he is or was at the time of service of the garnishment, or since has been, indebted to any alien enemy; and the court shall have power to condemn the property or effects or debts, according to the answer, and to make such rules and orders for the bringing in of third persons claiming or disclosed by the answer to have an interest in the litigation as to it shall seem proper; but in no case shall any one be heard in respect thereto until he shall by sworn plea set forth substantially the matters before required of parties pleading. And the decree or judgment of the court rendered in conformity to this act shall forever protect the garnishee in respect to the matter involved. And in all cases of garnishment under this act the receiver may test the truth of the garnishee's answer by filing a statement, under oath, that he believes the answer to be untrue, specifying the particulars in which he believes the garnishee has, by omission or commission, not answered truly, whereupon the court shall cause an issue to be made between the receiver and garnishee, and judgment rendered as upon the trial of other issues. And in all cases of litigation under this act the receiver may propound interrogatories to the adverse party touching any matter involved in the litigation, a copy of which shall be served on the opposite party or his attorney, and which shall be answered under oath within thirty days of such service; and upon failure so to answer the court shall make such disposition of the cause as shall to it seem most promotive of justice, or should it deem answers to the interrogatories necessary in order to secure a discovery, the court shall imprison the party in default until full answers shall be made.

SEC. 9. It shall be the duty of the district attorney of the Confederate States diligently to prosecute all causes instituted under this act, and he shall receive as a compensation therefor 2 per cent. upon and from the fruits of all litigation instituted under this act: Provided, That no matter shall be called litigated except a defendant be admitted by the court and a proper plea be filed.

SEC. 10. Be it further enacted, That each receiver appointed under this act shall, at least every six months, and as much oftener as he may be required by the court, render a true and perfect account of all matters in his hands or under his control under the law, and shall make and state just and perfect accounts and settlements under oath of his collections of moneys and disbursements under this law, stating accounts and making settlements of all matters separately, in the same way as if he were administrator of several estates of deceased persons by separate appointments. And the settlements and decrees shall be for each case or estate separately, so that the transaction in respect to each alien enemy's property may be kept recorded and preserved separately. No settlement as above provided shall, however, be made until judgment or decree of sequestration shall have passed; but the court may at any time pending litigation require an account of matters in litigation and in the possession of the receiver, and may make such orders touching the same as shall protect the interest of the parties concerned.

SEC. 11. When the accounts of any receiver shall be filed respecting any matter which has passed sequestration, the court shall appoint a day for settlement, and notice thereof shall be published consecutively for four weeks in some newspaper near the place of holding the court, and the clerk of the court shall send a copy of such newspaper to the district attorney of the Confederate States for the court where the matter is to be heard, and it shall be the duty of said district attorney to attend the settlement and represent the Government and to see that a full, true, and just settlement is made. The several settlements preceding the final one shall be interlocutory only, and may be impeached at the final settlements, which latter shall be conclusive, unless reversed or impeached within two years for fraud.

SEC. 12. Be it further enacted, That the court having jurisdiction of the matter shall, whenever sufficient cause is shown therefor, direct the sale of any personal property, other than slaves, sequestered under this act, on such terms as to it shall seem best, and such sale shall pass the title of the person as whose property the same has been sequestered.

SEC. 13. All settlements of accounts of receivers for sequestered property shall be recorded and a copy thereof shall be forwarded by the clerk of the court to the Treasurer of the Confederate States within ten days after the decree, interlocutory or final, has been passed; and all balances found against the receiver shall by him be paid over into the court, subject to the order of the Treasurer of the Confederate States, and upon the failure of the receiver for five days to pay over the same execution shall issue therefor, and he shall be liable to attachment by the court and to suit upon his bond. And any one embezzling any money under this act shall be liable to indictment, and on conviction shall be confined at hard labor for not less than six months nor more than five years, in the discretion of the court, and fined in double the amount embezzled.

SEC. 14. Be it further enacted, That the President of the Confederate States shall, by and with the advice and consent of Congress, or of the Senate if the appointment be made under the permanent Government, appoint three discreet commissioners, learned in the law, who shall hold at the seat of Government two terms each year, upon notice given, who shall sit so long as the business before them shall require, whose duty it shall be, under such rules as they may adopt, to hear and adjudge such claims as may be brought before them by any one aiding this Confederacy in the present war against the United States, who shall allege that he has been put to loss under the act of the United States in retaliation of which this act is passed, or under any other act of the United States, or of any State thereof, authorizing the seizure, condemnation, or confiscation of the property of any citizen or resident of the Confederate States, or other person aiding said Confederate States in the present war with the United States, and the finding of such commissioners in favor of any such claim shall be prima facie evidence of the correctness of the demand, and whenever Congress shall pass the claim, the same shall be paid from any money in the Treasury derived from sequestration under this act: Provided, That said Board of Commissioners shall not continue beyond the organization of the Court of Claims provided for by the Constitution, to which Court of Claims the duties herein provided to be discharged by commissioners shall belong upon the organization of said court. The salaries of said commissioners shall be at the rate of $2,500 per annum, and shall be paid from the Treasury of the Confederacy. And it shall be the duty of the Attorney-General or his assistant to represent the interests of this Government in all cases arising under this act before said Board of Commissioners.

SEC. 15. Be it further enacted, That all expenses incurred in proceedings under this act shall be paid from the sequestered fund, and the judges, in settling accounts with receivers, shall make to them proper allowances of compensation, taking 2½ per cent. on receipts, and the same amount on expenditures, as reasonable compensation in all cases. The fees of the officers of court shall be such as are allowed by law for similar services in other cases, to be paid, however, only from the sequestered fund: Provided, That all sums realized by any receiver in one year for his services exceeding $5,000 shall be paid into the Confederate Treasury for the use of the Confederacy.

SEC. 16. Be it further enacted, That the Attorney-General shall prescribe such uniform rules of proceeding under this law, not herein otherwise provided for, as shall meet the necessities of the case.

SEC. 17. Be it further enacted, That appeals may lie from any final decision of the court under this law, in the same manner and within the same time as is now or hereafter may be by law prescribed for appeals in other civil cases.

SEC. 18. Be it further enacted, That the word “person” in this law includes all private corporations, and in all cases when corporations become parties and this law requires an oath to be made it shall be made by some officer of such corporation.

SEC. 19. Be it further enacted, That the courts are vested with jurisdiction and required by this act to settle all partnerships heretofore existing between a citizen and one who is an alien enemy; to separate the interest of the alien enemy, and to sequestrate it; and shall also sever all joint rights when an alien enemy is concerned, and sequestrate the interest of such alien enemy.

SEC. 20. Be it further enacted, That in all cases of administration of any matter or thing under this act, the court having jurisdiction may make such orders touching the preservation of the property or effects under the direction or control of the receiver, not inconsistent with the foregoing provisions, as to it shall seem proper. And the receiver may at any time ask and have the instructions of the court, or judge, respecting his conduct in the disposition or management of any property or effects under his control.

SEC. 21. That the Treasury notes of this Confederacy shall be receivable in payment of all purchases of property or effects sold under this act.

SEC. 22. Be it further enacted, That nothing in this act shall be construed to destroy or impair the lien or other rights of any creditor, a citizen or resident of either of the Confederate States, or of any other person, a citizen or resident of any country, State, or Territory with which this Confederacy is in friendship, and which person is not in actual hostility to this Confederacy. And any lien or debt claimed against any alien enemy, within the meaning of this act, shall be propounded and filed in the court in which the proceedings of sequestration are had within twelve months from the institution of such proceedings for sequestration; and the court shall cause all proper parties to be made and notices to be given, and shall hear and determine the respective rights of all parties concerned: Provided, however, That no sales or payments over of money shall be delayed for or by reason of such rights or proceedings; but any money realized by the receiver, whether paid into the court or Treasury, or still in the receiver's hands, shall stand in lieu of that which produced said money, and be held to answer the demands of the creditors aforesaid, in the same manner as that which produced such money was. And all claims not propounded and filed as aforesaid, within twelve months as aforesaid, shall cease to exist against the estate, property, or effects sequestrated, or the proceeds thereof.

Approved August 30, 1861.

SOURCE: The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Series IV, Volume 1 (Serial No. 127), 586-92