The Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin

by Harriet Beecher Stowe

rises here to defend slavery on principle.

  The following lines from the will of this eccentric man show

  that this clear sense of justice, which is a gift of superior

  natures, at last produced some appropriate fruits in practice:--

  I give to my slaves their freedom, to which my conscience tells me they are

  ustly entitled. It has a long time been a matter of the deepest regret to me, that

  the circumstances under which I inherited them, and the obstacles thrown in the

  way by the laws of the land, have prevented my emancipating them in my life-

  time, which it is my full intention to do in case I can accomplish it.

  The influence on such minds as these of that kind of theologi-

  cal teaching which prevails in the majority of the pulpits at the

  South, and which justifies slavery directly from the Bible, cannot

  be sufficiently regretted. Such men are shocked to find their

  spiritual teachers less conscientious than themselves; and if the

  Biblical argument succeeds in bewildering them, it produces

  scepticism with regard to the Bible itself. Professor Stowe

  states that, during his residence in Ohio, he visited at the house

  of a gentleman who had once been a Virginian planter, and

  during the first years of his life was an avowed sceptic. He

  stated that his scepticism was entirely referable to this one cause

  --that his minister had constructed a scriptural argument in

  defence of slavery which he was unable to answer, and that his

  moral sense was so shocked by the idea that the Bible defended

  such an atrocious system, that he became an entire unbeliever,

  and so continued until he came under the ministration of a

  clergyman in Ohio, who succeeded in presenting to him the

  true scriptural view of the subject. He immediately threw aside

  his scepticism and became a member of a Christian church.

  So we hear the Baltimore Sun, a paper in a slave State, and

  no way suspected of leaning towards abolitionism, thus scornfully

  disposing of the scriptural argument:--

  Messrs. Burgess, Taylor, and Co., Sun Iron Building, send us a copy of a work

  of imposing exterior, a handsome work of nearly six hundred pages, from the pen

  of the Rev. Josiah Priest, A.M., and published by Rev. W. S. Brown, M.D., at

  Glasgow, Kentucky, the copy before us conveying the assurance that it is the

  “fifth edition, stereotyped.” And we have no doubt it is; and the fiftieth edition

  may be published, but it will amount to nothing, for there is nothing in it. The

  book comprises the usually quoted facts associated with the history of slavery, as

  recorded in the Scriptures, accompanied by the opinions and arguments of another man in relation thereto. And this sort of thing may go on to the end of time.

  It can accomplish nothing towards the perpetuation of slavery. The book is

  called “Bible Defence of Slavery; and Origin, Fortunes, and History of the Negro

  Race.” Bible defence of slavery! There is no such thing as a Bible defence of

  slavery at the present day. Slavery in the United States is a social institution,

  originating in the convenience and cupidity of our ancestors, existing by State

  laws, and recognised to a certain extent--for the recovery of slave property--by

  the constitution. And nobody would pretend that, if it were inexpedient and

  unprofitable for any man or any State to continue to hold slaves, they would be

  bound to do so on the ground of a “Bible defence” of it. Slavery is recorded in

  the Bible, and approved, with many degrading characteristics. War is recorded

  in the Bible, and approved, under what seems to us the extreme of cruelty. But

  are slavery and war to endure for ever because we find them in the Bible? or are

  they to cease at once and for ever because the Bible inculcates peace and brother-

  hood?

  The book before us exhibits great research, but is obnoxious to severe criticism,

  on account of its gratuitous assumptions. The writer is constantly assuming

  this, that, and the other. In a work of this sort a “doubtless” this, and “no

  doubt” the other, and “such is our belief,” with respect to important premises,

  will not be acceptable to the intelligent reader. Many of the positions assumed

  are ludicrous; and the fancy of the writer runs to exuberance in putting words

  and speeches into the mouths of the ancients, predicated upon the brief record of

  Scripture history. The argument from the curse of Ham is not worth the paper

  it is written upon. It is just equivalent to that of Blackwood's Magazine, we

  remember examining some years since, in reference to the admission of Rothschild

  to Parliament. The writer maintained the religious obligation of the Christian public to perpetuate the political disabilities of the Jews because it would be re-

  sisting the Divine will to remove them, in view of the “curse” which the afore-

  said Christian Pharisee understood to be levelled against the sons of Abraham.

  Admitting that God has cursed both the Jewish race and the descendants of Ham,

  He is able to fulfil His purpose, though the “rest of mankind” should in all things

  act up to the benevolent precepts of the “Divine law.” Man may very safely

  cultivate the highest principles of the Christian dispensation, and leave God to

  work out the fulfilment of His curse.

  According to the same book and the same logic, all mankind being under a

  “curse,” none of us ought to work out any alleviation for ourselves, and we are

  sinning heinously in harnessing steam to the performance of manual labour, cut-

  ting wheat by McCormick's diablerie, and laying hold of the lightning to carry

  our messages for us, instead of footing it ourselves, as our father Adam did. With

  a little more common sense, and much less of the uncommon sort, we should

  better understand Scripture, the institutions under which we live, the several

  rights of our fellow-citizens in all sections of the country, and the good, sound,

  practical, social relations which ought to contribute infinitely more than they do

  to the happiness of mankind.

  If the reader wishes to know what kind of preaching it is

  that St. Clare alludes to, when he says he can learn what is

  quite as much to the purpose from the Picayune, and that such

  scriptural expositions of their peculiar relations don't edify him

  much, he is referred to the following extract from a sermon

  preached in New Orleans, by the Rev. Theophilus Clapp. Let

  our reader now imagine that he sees St. Clare seated in the front

  slip, waggishly taking notes of the following specimen of ethics

  and humanity:--

  Let all Christian teachers show our servants the importance of being submissive,

  obedient, industrious, honest, and faithful to the interests of their masters. Let

  their minds be filled with sweet anticipations of rest eternal beyond the grave.

  Let them be trained to direct their views to that fascinating and glorious futurity

  where the sins, sorrows, and troubles of earth will be contemplated under the

  aspect of means indispensable to our everlasting progress in knowledge, virtue, and

  happiness. I would say to every slave in the United States, “You should realise

  that a wise, kind, and merciful Providence has appointed for you your condition
<
br />   in life; and, all things considered, you could not be more eligibly situated. The

  burden of your care, toils, and responsibilities is much lighter than that which

  God has imposed on your master. The most enlightened philanthropists, with

  unlimited resources, could not place you in a situation more favourable to your

  present and everlasting welfare than that which you now occupy. You have

  your troubles; so have all. Remember how evaneseent are the pleasures and

  joys of human life.

  But, as Mr. Clapp will not, perhaps, be accepted as a repre-

  sentation of orthodoxy, let him be supposed to listen to the

  following declarations of the Rev. James Smylie, a clergyman of

  great influence in the Presbyterian Church, in a tract upon

  slavery, which he states in the introduction to have been written

  with particular reference to removing the conscientious scruples

  of religious people in Mississippi and Louisiana with regard to

  its propriety.

  If I believed, or was of opinion, that it was the legitimate tendency of the

  gospel to abolish slavery, how would I approach a man, possessing as many slaves

  as Abraham had, and tell him I wished to obtain his permission to preach to his

  slaves?

  Suppose the man to be ignorant of the gospel, and that he would inquire of

  me what was my object; I would tell him candidly (and every minister ought to

  be candid) that I wished to preach the gospel, because its legitimate tendency is

  to make his slaves honest, trusty, and faithful; not serving “with eye-service, as

  men-pleasers,” “not purloining, but showing all good fidelity.” “And is this,”

  he would ask, “really the tendency of the gospel?” I would answer, “Yes.”

  Then I might expect that a man who had a thousand slaves, if he believed me,

  would not only permit me to preach to his slaves, but would do more. He would

  be willing to build me a house, furnish me a garden, and ample provision for a

  support; because he would conclude, verily that this preacher would be worth more

  to him than a dozen overseers. But suppose, them, he would tell me that he under-

  stood the tendency of the gospel was to abolish slavery, and inquire of me if that

  was the fact. Ah! this is the rub. He has now cornered me. What shall I

  say? Shall I, like a dishonest man, twist and dodge, and shift and turn, to evade

  an answer? No; I must, Kentuckian like, come out broad, flat-footed, and tell

  him that abolition is the tendency of the gospel. What am I now to calculate

  upon? I have told the man that it is the tendency of the gospel to make him so

  poor as to oblige him to take hold of the maul and wedge himself; he must

  catch, curry, and saddle his own horse; he must black his own brogans (for he

  will not be able to buy boots). His wife must go herself to the wash-tub, take

  hold of the scrubbing-broom, wash the pots, and cook all that she and her rail-

  mauler will eat.

  Query.--Is it to be expected that a master, ignorant heretofore of the tendency

  of the gospel, would fall so desperately in love with it, from knowledge of its ten-

  dency, that he would encourage the preaching of it among his slaves? Verily,

  NO.

  But suppose, when he put the last question to me as to its tendency, I could and would, without a twist or quibble, tell him plainly and candidly that it was a

  slander on the gospel to say that emancipation or abolition was its legitimate ten-

  dency. I would tell him that the commandments of some men, and not the com-

  mandments of God, made slavery a sin.--Smylie on Slavery, p. 71.

  One can imagine the expression of countenance and tone of

  voice with which St. Clare would receive such expositions of the

  gospel. It is to be remarked that this tract does not contain

  the opinions of one man only, but that it has in its appendix a

  letter from two ecclesiastical bodies of the Presbyterian Church,

  substantially endorsing its sentiments.

  Can any one wonder that a man like St. Clare should put

  such questions as these?

  “Is what you hear at church religion? Is that which can

  bend and turn, and descend and ascend, to fit every crooked

  phase of selfish, worldly society, religion? Is that religion

  which is less scrupulous, less generous, less just, less considerate

  for man, than even my own ungodly, worldly, blinded nature?

  No! When I look for a religion, I must look for something

  above me, and not something beneath.”

  The character of St. Clare was drawn by the writer with

  enthusiasm and with hope. Will this hope never be realised?

  Will those men at the South, to whom God has given the power

  to perceive and the heart to feel the unutterable wrong and

  injustice of slavery, always remain silent and inactive? What

  nobler ambition to a Southern man than to deliver his country

  from this disgrace? From the South must the deliverer arise.

  How long shall he delay? There is a crown brighter than any

  earthly ambition has ever worn--there is a laurel which will not

  fade: it is prepared and waiting for that hero who shall rise up

  for liberty at the South, and free that noble and beautiful

  country from the burden and disgrace of slavery.

  CHAPTER X.

  LEGREE.

  As St. Clare and the Shelbys are the representatives of one class

  of masters, so Legree is the representative of another; and, as

  all good masters are not as enlightened, as generous, and as

  considerate, as St. Clare and Mr. Shelby, or as careful and

  successful in religious training as Mrs. Shelby, so all bad mas-

  ters do not unite the personal ugliness, the coarseness and

  profaneness, of Legree.

  Legree is introduced not for the sake of vilifying masters as a

  class, but for the sake of bringing to the minds of honourable

  Southern men, who are masters, a very important feature in the

  system of slavery, upon which, perhaps, they have never re-

  flected. It is this: that no Southern law requires any test of CHARACTER from the man to whom the absolute power of master

  is granted.

  In the second part of this book it will be shown that the legal

  power of the master amounts to an absolute despotism over

  body and soul, and that there is no protection for the slave's life

  or limb, his family relations, his conscience, nay, more, his

  eternal interests, but the CHARACTER of the master.

  Rev. Charles C. Jones, of Georgia, in addressing masters,

  tells them that they have the power to open the kingdom of

  heaven, or to shut it, to their slaves (Religious Instruction of the

  Negroes, p. 158); and a South Carolinian, in a recent article in

  Frazer's Magazine, apparently in a very serious spirit, thus

  acknowledges the fact of this awful power: “Yes, we would

  have the whole South to feel that the soul of the slave is in some

  sense in the master's keeping, and to be charged against him

  hereafter.”

  Now, it is respectfully submitted to men of this high class,

  who are the law-makers, whether this awful power to bind and

  to loose, to open and to shut the kingdom of heaven, ought

  to be intrusted to every man in the community, without any
/>
  other qualification than that of property to buy. Let this

  gentleman of South Carolina cast his eyes around the world.

  Let him travel for one week through any district of country

  either in the South or the North, and ask himself how many of

  the men whom he meets are fit to be trusted with this power,--

  how many are fit to be trusted with their own souls, much less

  with those of others?

  Now, in all the theory of government as it is managed in our

  country, just in proportion to the extent of power is the strict-

  ness with which qualification for the proper exercise of it is

  demanded. The physician may not meddle with the body, to

  prescribe for its ailments, without a certificate that he is properly

  qualified. The judge may not decide on the laws which relate

  to property, without a long course of training, and most

  abundant preparation. It is only this office of MASTER, which

  contains the power to bind and to loose, and to open and shut

  the kingdom of heaven, and involves responsibility for the soul

  as well as the body, that is thrown out to every hand, and com-

  mitted without inquiry to any man of any character. A man

  may have made all his property by piracy upon the high seas,

  as we have represented in the case of Legree, and there is no

  law whatever to prevent his investing that property in acquiring

  this absolute control over the souls and bodies of his fellow-

  beings. To the half-maniac drunkard, to the man notorious

  for hardness and cruelty, to the man sunk entirely below public

  opinion, to the bitter infidel and blasphemer, the law confides

  this power, just as freely as to the most honourable and religious

  man on earth. And yet, men who make and uphold these laws

  think they are guiltless before God, because, individually, they

  do not perpetrate the wrongs which they allow others to per-

  petrate!

  To the Pirate Legree the law gives a power which no

  man of woman born, save One, ever was good enough to

  exercise.

  Are there such men as Legree? Let any one go into the

  low districts and dens of New York, let them go into some of

  the lanes and alleys of London, and will they not there see