back and right arm." (Petersburg (Va.) Intelligencer, May 22, 1838. Advertised by Nicholas Edmunds.) "Was committed to jail, a negro man says his name is Josiah, his back very much scarred by the whip and branded on the thigh and hips, in three or four places, thus: (J. M.) The rim of his right ear has been bit or cut off." (Clinton Gazette, July 23, 1836. Signed, J. L. Jolley, Sheriff of Clin ton Co., Mi.)

"Ran away, my man Fountainhas holes in his ears, a scar on the right side of his forehead-has been shot in the hind parts of his legs-is marked on the back with the whip." (Georgia Messenger, July 27, 1837. Advertised by Mr. Robert Beasley, Macon.)

The specimens which follow are explained by an extract from a narrative of Sarah M. Grimke, (daughter of the late Judge Grimke, of the Superior Court of South Carolina, and sister of the late Hon. Thomas S. Grimke,) of her personal observations respecting slavery. She testifies concerning a mulatto woman, 18 or 20 years old, a slave in one of the first families of South Carolina, who often ran away:

"A heavy iron collar, with three long prongs projecting from it, was placed round her neck, and a sound and strong front tooth was extracted, to serve as a mark to describe her in case of escape."

"Ran away, Myal, 23 years old, one of his fore teeth out." (Nashville (Tenn.) Daily Republican, April 30, 1838. Advertised by Egbert A. Raworth.)

"Brought to jail, John, 23 years old, one fore tooth out." (Macon (Ga.) Telegraph, Dec. 25, 1837. Signed, Benjamin Russell, Deputy Sheriff, Bibb Co., Ga.)

"Committed to the Charleston Workhouse, Tom, two of his upper front teeth out, about 30 years of age." (Charleston (S. C.) Courier,

Oct. 17, 1837. Signed, F. Wisner, Master of the Workhouse.)

"Ran away, Henry, about 23 years old, has one of his upper front teeth out." (Milledgeville (Ga.) Journal, May 22, 1837. Advertised by Geo. W. Barnes.)

"Committed to jail, Elizabeth Steward, 17 or 18 years old, one of her front teeth out." (Baltimore Chronicle, Oct. 6, 1837. Signed by D. Herring, Warden of Baltimore jail.)

There are hundreds upon bundreds of these several classes of advertisements in the newspapers of the slave states. We have ourselves seen a hundred of one class; and they from papers issued, the greater part of them, during a single year.

Testimony like this can not be gainsayed. For here we have the very words and signatures of the masters who thus publish their cruelty to the world. Now, when we consider that these advertisements appear constantly in journals edited by respectable men, and widely circulated in the southern communities, of what cruelties are we forced to deem them the index? The fact that such advertisements, even a few of them, should be allowed or could be made without overwhelming their authors with shame and contempt, would be decisive. What then shall we say when these advertisements are almost as numerous as those for the sale of any kind of merchandise ?*

Gov. H. says

"A bad master-he who over-works

his slaves, provides illy for them, or treats

* That our readers may see that we have not selected the worst specimens of advertisements, we give the following from a North Carolina paper: "Ten silver dollars reward will be paid for apMoses, who ran away this morning; or I prehending and delivering to me my man will give five times the sum to any person who will make due proof of his being killed, and never ask a question to know by whom it was done." This is signed by a clerk of one of the counties in North Carolina.

them with undue severity-loses the esteem and respect of his fellow citizens to as great an extent, as he would for the violation of any of his social and most of his moral obligations."-p. 12.

But what says John Randolph of Roanoke, in a speech in Congress?

"Ambition has its cover-sluts in the

pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious war; but what are the trophies of avarice? The handcuff, the manacle,

the blood-stained cowhide! What man

is worse received in society for being a hard master? Who denies the hand of a sister or daughter to such monsters ?"

We might bring forward witnesses in great numbers to testify to horrible instances of individual cruelty, such as flogging till the whole back was a mass of raw and mangled flesh; and flogging till life was extinct; and this with impunity. But we have said enough on this part of the subject; and our taste as well as our hearts shrink from such loathsome details.

Gov. H. compares the flogging of slaves to the birching of boys in school!! (pp. 13, 14.) What unparalleled impudence is this! This Gov. H. knows that the birch is one thing, and the "blood-stained cowhide," as John Randolph calls it, is entirely another. He knows, that to compare a flogging on the bare body that leaves scars by which the man or woman can be described for years, with such an application of the rod as is ever made by parents or teachers, is an outrage on truth. Let Gov. H. make the case his own. Let an application of one of these cow-hide floggings be made on the naked back of himself, or his son, or his daughter, and it would, we think, correct his wayward faculty of comparison.

We pass to another topic-violation of domestic ties the forcible separation of families, of husbands and wives, parents and children, by slavery. On this topic Gov. H.

says

"On the whole, notwithstanding the migratory character of our population, I believe there are more families among

our slaves who have lived and died together, without losing a single member from their circle, except by the process of nature, and in the enjoyment of constant, uninterrupted communion, than have flourished in the same space of time and among the same number of civilized people in modern times.”—p. 15.

Respecting this assertion, we have to say-first, that to separate families without any hope of reunion or revisit or communication, by force of law, is a very different thing from a separation of families by the voluntary departure of some of their members from home, to seek their education or fortune, and pursue their happiness in other parts of the country or world. Then in a free community the fundamental domestic relation, that of husband and wife, not only is not sundered except by crime, but is forbidden by law to be sundered; while by slavery, that fundamental and tender relation is violated as often, perhaps, as any other. Yet, waiving the unfairness and fallacy of the assertion, we pronounce it, and will prove it, false.

The nature of the case proves that the domestic ties of slaves must be often forcibly sundered. Slaves are taken for debt and sold again. When estates are settled by process of law, or when sheriffs' sales occur, almost necessarily families (the different members of which, and very often the husband and wife, are owned by different persons) are torn asunder. This occurs with peculiar frequency in times of pecuniary embarrassment.*

But we will not dwell on this kind of argument when we have so much positive and direct testimony. Gov. H. says

"It is and always has been an object of prime consideration with our slave

"The times are truly alarming here. Many plantations are entirely stripped of negroes and horses by the marshal or sheriff." (From a letter to a member of Congress from a friend in Mississippi, published in the "Washington Globe,' June, 1837.)

holders to keep families together. Ne groes are themselves both perverse and comparatively indifferent about this matter. It is a singular trait, that they almost invariably prefer forming connexions with slaves belonging to other masters, and at some distance. It is therefore impossible to prevent separations sometimes, by the removal of one owner, his death or failure, and dispersion of his property. In all such cases, however, every reasonable effort is made to keep the parties together, if they desire it."— p. 15.

Now, on the contrary, there is abundant proof that many slaveholders, especially in the northern slave states, make it a prime object to breed slaves for market, as they would hogs or horses. We blush to speak it of our countrymen. But such is the loathsome fact.

Mr. Gholson of Virginia, in his speech in the legislature of that state, Jan. 18, 1831, (see Richmond Whig,) says that

"The owner of brood-mares has a reasonable right to their product; and the owner of female slaves to their increase. It is on the justice and inviolability of this maxim (partus sequitur ventrem) that the master foregoes the service of the female slave, has her nursed and attended during the period of her gestation, and raises the helpless and infant offspring. The value of the property justifies the expense; and I do not hesitate to say, that in its increase consists much of our wealth."

Prof. Dew, President of the University of William and Mary, Virginia, in his review of the debate in the Virginia legislature, 1831-2, p. 49, says

up

"From all information we can obtain, we have no hesitation in saying, that wards of six thousand slaves are yearly exported (from Virginia) to other states." Again, p. 120. "A full equivalent being thus left in the place of the slave, this emigration becomes an advantage to the state, and does not check the black population as much as at first view we might imagine; because it furnishes every inducement to the master to attend to the negroes, to encourage breeding, and to cause the greatest number possible to be

raised."

Hon. Thomas Mann Randolph of Virginia, formerly governor of that

state, in his speech before the legislature in 1832, while speaking of the number of slaves annually sold from Virginia to the more southern slave states, said

"The exportation has averaged eight thousand five hundred for the last twenty years. It is a practice and an increasing practice in parts of Virginia to rear slaves for market."

The following is from Niles's Weekly Register, published at Baltimore, Md., Vol. 35, p. 4.

"Dealing in slaves has become a large eral places in Maryland and Virginia, at business; establishments are made in sevwhich they are sold like cattle; these places of deposit are strongly built, and well supplied with thumb-screws and gags, and ornamented with cow-skins and other whips oftentimes bloody."

The editor of the Virginia Times, a political paper published at Wheeling, Va. somewhere about the year 1836, says

"We have heard intelligent men estimate the number of slaves exported from Virginia within the last twelve months at one hundred and twenty thousandeach slave averaging at least $600, making an aggregate of $72,000,000. Of the number of slaves exported, not more than one third have been sold, (the others having been carried by their owners, who have removed,) which would leave in the state the sum of $24,000,000 arising from the sale of the slaves."

The Maryville (Tenn.) Intelligencer, some time in the early part of the year 1836, says—

"Sixty thousand slaves passed through a little western town for the southern market during the year 1835."

The Natchez (Miss.) Courier says that the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas, imported two hundred and fifty thousand slaves from the more northern states in the year 1836.

Lest it should be said that these facts do not certainly prove the separation of families, we add the following testimony. Prof. Andrews, formerly of the University of North Carolina, in his work on "Slavery and the Slave Trade," page 147, in

relating a conversation with a slavetrader whom he met near Washington City, says he inquired

"Do you often buy the wife without the husband? Yes, very often; and frequently, too, they sell me the mother, while they keep the children. I have often known them take away the infant from the mother's breast, and keep it, while they sold her!"

The Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky, in the address from which we have before quoted, say—

"Brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, parents and children, are torn asunder, and permitted to see each other no more. These acts are daily occurring in the midst of us. The shrieks and the agony, often witnessed on such occasions, proclaim with a trumpet-tongue the iniquity of our system. There is not a neighborhood where these heart-rending scenes are not displayed. There is not a village or road that does not behold the sad proces sion of manacled outcasts, whose mournful countenances tell that they are exiled by force from all that their hearts hold dear."

But the most impressive testimony on this point, is of a kind which we have already adduced in treating of another part of the subject, viz. advertisements in the Southern journals; of which there are many like the following:

"One hundred and twenty negroes for sale. The subscriber has just arrived from Petersburg, Va., with one hundred and twenty likely young negroes of both sexes, and every description, which he offers for sale on the most reasonable

terms.

"The lot now on hand consists of ploughboys, several likely and well qualified house servants of both sexes, several women with children, small girls suitable for nurses, and several small boys without their mothers. Benjamin Davis. Hamburg, S. C., Sept. 28, 1838." (This is a standing advertisement in the Charleston (S. C.) papers.)

From the Richmond (Va.) Inquirer, Sept. 8, 1837.

"Ran away from the subscriber, Ben. He ran off without any known

cause, and I suppose is aiming to go to his wife, who was carried from the neighborhood last winter.

JOHN HUNT."

From the Norfolk (Va.) Beacon, March 31, 1838.

"The subscriber will give $20 for the apprehension of his negro woman Maria, who ran away about 12 months since. She is known to be lurking in or about Chuckatuch, in the county of Nansemond, where she has a husband and formerly be. longed. PETER O'NEILL."

From the Georgian, Jan. 29, 1838. "A reward of $5 will be paid for the apprehension of his negro woman Diana. Diana's age is from 45 to 50. She formerly belonged to Mr. Nath. Law, of Liberty County, where her husband still lives. will endeavor to go there, perhaps. D. O. BYRNE." From the Richmond (Va.) Inquirer, Feb. 1838.

66

She

$50 reward. Ran away from the subscriber his negro man, Pauladore, commonly called Paul. I understand Gen. R. Y. Hayne* has purchased his wife and children from H. L. Pinckney, Esq., and has them now on his plantation at Goose Creek, where, no doubt, the fellow is frequently lurking. T. DAVIS."

"Stop the runaway!-$25 reward. Ran away from the Eagle Tavern, a negro fellow named Nat. He is no doubt attempting to follow his wife, who was lately sold to a speculator named Redmond. The above reward will be paid by Mrs. Downman of Sussex County, Va."

What must we think of a system which thus violates the divinely ordained domestic constitution? What must we think of a system which involves such brutal indifference to the sundered ties and bleeding affections of husbands and wives, parents and children? And what must we think of this Gov. Hammond, who

Formerly Governor of South Carolina, and United States Senator.