-
Title
-
Garland address, The Independent Monitor, 10 Mar 1860
-
Description
-
A proslavery address by Professor Garland. This is the first of three in a series of public lectures. The Independent Monitor, a Tuscaloosa newspaper, carried the text of each address.
-
transcript of
-
On Wednesday evening, the 29th ult., Dr. L. G. Garland, President of the State University, delivered the 1st of a series of lectures, on the subject of African Slavery, as it is exists in the Southern States of the American Union. The Hall of the Young Men's Christian Association was about two thirds filled. Astonishing it was not crowded.
The lecturer came to the Hall, from a bed of sickness, where he had been confined for several days, unwilling to disappoint the subscribers to the course. Notwithstanding his feebleness he was able to lecture for about one hour, during which time he enchained the attention of his auditory.
He began by stating that he had projected the course of lectures in order the he might do more than he was otherwise able to do for the Ladies' benevolent Society, upon whose treasury unusually heavy drafts have been made during the past winter, in consequence of the severity of the weather, and the scarcity and high prices of provisions; remaking that if any should feel disappointed in regar to the excellency of either the wisdom or the speech of the lectures, it might be a matter of consolation to them, to know that the money would be appropriated to a charitable object.
After stating the position of hostility assumed by the opponents of slavery - defining their view of its sinfulness, he remarked that if their view was just and right in principle, the institution was a stench in the nostrils of both God and man. Waiving a defense of the institution upon the ground of Constitutional provision and protection, he would go aback of the Constitution, and show that upon abstract principles, slavery was not wrong and then, as it subsists in the concrete amongst us, it was not wrong.
First, was slavery wrong, abstractly? What is slavery? Evidently that resulting from or involved in the relation of master and slave. Philologically, master meant chief director, either in regard to men or business. The term master, derived from majis, major, and from the teutonic, ster, to steer, signified a chief director, and was applicable to one who chiefly directs in any capacity. The term slave, derived generally by philologists from sclavi, sclavonians, because of the subjugation of that people by the Venetians, has never been satisfactorily settled, as to its derivation. Used as correlative to master, the meaning of the term master determines that of slave. Therefore, if master means director, of course slave used in correlation to master will signify one directed; and the abstract question is, is such a relation - that of one directing and governing and one submitting and yielding to such direction and government - legitimate? To deny the legitimacy of the abstract principle will not only abolish the relation of master and slave as understood in application to the institution under consideration, but many other relations universally admitted essential to political, social and domestic organism. Abstractly, then, by the severest test of reasoning, the relation is not wrong. But in candor and fairness it should be admitted that a thing might be, in the abstract right, and yet as subsisting in concrete form, wrong. - (Just here, the Lecturer by elaborating a little, might have bought the subsequent part of his lecture more powerfully to bear. Elucidating the position assumed, that what is abstractly right, might be, in the concrete, wrong, by a few familiar illustrations, the audience, unused to the methods of reasoning pursued, would have been prepared to see how naturally, from the foundation laid in the above argument, subsequent reasoning arose, and the uniqueness of the argument as a whole would have been clear.) The question then is, is slavery as established by the Law of Alabama wrong? Turning to the Code of Alabama, the master is found to be invested by law with a right to the "time, labor, and services, of his slave." The law does not ignore the personality of the slave. - As a person - a human being, he is legislated for - protected against abuse and cruelty from either master, overseer or others. He is regarded in his domestic relations, and has provision made against cruel separation from those who are bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh. The oft repeated allegation by our enemies, that the slave is a mere chattel, like an ox or a mule, is thus proven false.
As to the marriage relation, it is even among whites, not a religious, but a civil institution. The services of a minister of the gospel are only incidental, and not essential to the integrity of the marriage contract. A simple contract, attested by a due number of witnesses, makes any marriage, within the law prescribing the conditions of the parties, valid. Now the regulation of this institution among slaves, being left to the masters in no wise prevents or abolishes it. Indeed it is left right where it may most effectually and judiciously be regarded and conserved. - The facts are, that marriage, with all its formalities, is observed, and domestic environments, complete and systematic, on plantations generally, by which each plantation is an aggregation or community of families, are ordained and provided for by masters, both for interest and per force of moral sentiment.
But can the law of reciprocity be fulfilled in this relation - the golden rule "do unto others as you have them do unto you?" Certainly. But let there be a proper apprehension of this rule. It does not require that I should do unto another what I might wish, (were our conditions reversed) him to do unto me. Were I a beggar at the door of a rich man I might desire him to divide his fortune equally with me. But does that render it my duty to divide my fortune equally with any beggar that may chance to ask alms at my door? The absurdity of such an interpretation is evident. The rule is evidently that I should do what is fit and right - that is, do to another what would be right for him, to do to me were our positions in our relation reversed. THat being so the gold rule may be fully complied with in the relation of master and slave - "masters giving unto their slaves that which is just and equal." The unfair way our enemies have of putting this question is, "how would you like to be enslaved? - to be subjected to daily labor, and have another wholly to direct and govern you." This question implies that from a superior condition the negro has been reduced to that in which he now lives; and our brethren of the North speak in regard to this institution in a manner which would be appropriate if we had enveigled or captured a bevy of black angels, in their pursuit of an earthly paradise, and reduced them to a condition of abject, cruel servitude and slavery; whilst the fact is, the negro has through slavery been taken up from a condition of grossest barbarity and ignorance, made serviceable to himself and to the world, and elevated and improved socially, morally, intellectually and physically.
In regard to the religious interests of the slave, they were consulted by masters; and to provide for them is a special and chief object of the various churches. The lecturer could at least speak confidently in regard to the denomination to which it was his honor to belong. The Methodist Church in Alabama provides about forty-five experienced and judicious ministers exclusively to this work; and missions embracing, generally, from eight to twelve plantations, served by men wholly devoted to that particular work, realize a fuller share of religious instruction than any other laboring population on the globe. In the South Carolina Conference, there are about the same number of Methodist itinerant preachers exclusively devoted to this work, as in the Alabama Conference; thus attesting that we are not faithless in this delicate and responsible trust. The lecturer would not justify any of the abuses of the institution. That the institution had been abused by many was granted; but the very use of the term abuse in this connection implied that it was susceptible of use An abuse of it was, logically, no ground upon which to preducate of the institution wrong, per se. It was not only the moral, religious and political duty of the master to elevate and enlighten his slaves, but also his interest. From many department of labor the slave was excluded because of a want of requisite knowledge and skill. Increasing his enlightenment as far as compatible with his social and intellectual status, he becomes the more profitable. And the same law obtains in relation to his moral culture. The more trustworthy, the more valuable, and hence to secure to the slave correct moral principles is to afford checks and guards which secure wealth and preserve fortune. The allegation that we did not render a due remuneration to ourselves for their labor, is untrue. It is a fact that those who are mere laborers, throughout the world, have a simple struggle to live. Their life amounts to just that. But with us, during the years of infancy and youth, the slave has his provision sure, though during these years he is a positive expense - of no profit whatsoever. The average life of man is thirty years, out of that thirty, fifteen may be deemed as the time in which efficient service is rendered. - Then we have besides the abundance of clothing and food - and other provisions for comfort - during the time of this efficient service, fifteen years in which a gratuitous provision is made. In old age the slave is provided for. His portion is always sure. The fear of starvation - of suffering otherwise - preventing marriage among laborers elsewhere in numberless cases, is unknown among southern slaves. The idea of their posterity, lacking what is necessary, never enters their minds.
The lecturer, on next Wednesday night, will justify the institution upon the highest moral principles and from the word of God. Let no one fail, who can attend, to realize the benefit of these valuable lectuers.
-
Rights Holder
-
Alabama Department of Archives and History
