the fact that in many respects the Africans have not been brought to the high standard which has been attained by those of European blood, yet when we contrast their condition now with what it was when they became slaves to the white men, our only wonder is, that they have been made to advance so rapidly from the depths of barbarism to a comparative state of civilisation. It must be borne in mind that the Africans in their native land have neither the same habits nor the same tastes as the Europeans. Seventy millions of them are said to be to-day the slaves of cruel and savage masters of their own race. They have no marriage ties which assimilate to that which is common in Christian nations, nor is chastity a quality which is held in high esteem. In short, they are now, and have been during the period of their entire history, the most brutal barbarians. It could scarcely be hoped that their descendants in the New World would have emerged wholly from the condition of their ancestors, and have adopted all the customs of Christian communities. Nor is it fair under the circumstances that they should be held to practise the virtues of fidelity and chastity, by the same rigid laws which are enforced by the highly civilised and Christian populations of New York, London, Paris, or Vienna.

But there is still another important consideration, which is opposed to the enfranchisement of the slave,

even if it were possible; that is, a due regard to the interests of the millions of the white race who now reside, and whose destiny has been cast in the Slave States. What would be the condition of the free white labourers in the midst of these millions of freed Africans who from being capital would be converted into competitors for the stinted pittance which capital would bestow for labour? The free-born mechanic and farm labourer would be reduced to the alternative of competing with the African upon equal terms. Suppose that which it is impossible to believe, that the free whites would submit tranquilly to the galling and revolting association, is there a philanthropic friend to the free labourers of his own race who would wish to reduce them to a condition so humiliating? The standard value of labour would be that which unscrupulous capital would stipulate with the ignorant and indolent African. Free white labour would be powerless to defend itself against injustice, because there would be an ever-ready substitute of African labour, which capital could employ during the rare intervals in which intelligent labour might vainly seek to secure a proper reward and acknowledgement for its toil.

The rich man could fly from the contaminating association. The poor from necessity would be bound to the soil. Upon the rich would fall the present

pecuniary sacrifice, but upon the poor

would rest the perpetual record and presence of the wrong.

I have here assumed what I know to be an impossible contingency. An overwhelming military force may liberate the slaves-armed invaders from the North may destroy the value of the slave to his owner and to mankind-John Browns may kindle the torch of servile insurrections; and the Southerner may live to see his dwelling in flames and his hearthstone made desolate; but all the power of their enemies cannot induce the freemen of the South, of any rank, condition, or occupation, to adopt the freed Africans as their fellow-citizens, nor to tolerate any change in their relative conditions that would remove the barriers, social or political, which now separate the

races.

But why should not good men consider the subject of slavery as it exists in the Southern States without allowing themselves to be influenced by unfounded prejudices or sectional animosities, and look only to the results which it has achieved? Though they may be opposed to slavery in the abstract, is it more than just that the Slave States should have the benefit of that inexorable necessity which, without any agency on their part, left them no alternative consistent with their safety but to adopt and perpetuate the institution of slavery? This conceded, examine and decide if the Southern States have not properly employed it in

the interest of mankind, and with a due regard to the comfort and happiness of those who were thus placed under their charge and direction. If still there exist doubts, compare that system of labour with the systems of so-called free labour, which civilised nations have adopted in order to achieve similar results. No friend of the Slave States would fear the decision of any impartial, just, and intelligent tribunal.

LETTER IX.

Influence of Public Opinion-Origin of the Anti-Slavery Sentiment in England-Failure of schemes to destroy the value of Slave Labour in America-Revolting Inhumanity of the systems instituted to supersede Slave Labour-Comparison of the Slavery System with those proposed as Substitutes-Subjugation of India by England-A trial by the Moral Law.

THERE has been no period in the past when the policies of governments have been so much moulded by the general public sentiment of mankind as at the present epoch. Electricity and steam have brought countries once remote from each other into almost immediate contact; and the commerce which has been thus stimulated between the nations of the earth has brought about a mutual dependence which renders the productions of each important to the others. The facilities offered by rapid and constant communication are alike mediums for the transmission of truth and falsehood. Unfortunately, the latter travels with a celerity to which the former rarely attains. Upon the establishment of the Republic of America in the last century, with its boundless and inexhaustible resources, certain timid adherents of the monarchical school imagined that they saw danger to all existing governments which were based on the right divine,' if the experiment should prove a suc