The Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin

by Harriet Beecher Stowe

  to prevent his buying as many more negroes as he chooses, and

  going over the same scene with any one of them at a future time,

  if only he profit by the information which has been so explicitly

  conveyed to him in this decision, that he must take care and stop

  his tortures short of the point of death--a matter about which,

  as the history of the Inquisition shows, men, by careful practice,

  can be able to judge with considerable precision. Probably,

  also, the next time, he will not be so foolish as to send out and

  request the attendance of two white witnesses, even though

  they may be so complacently interested in the proceeding

  as to spend the whole day in witnessing them without effort at

  prevention.

  Slavery, as defined in American law, is no more capable of

  being regulated in its administration by principles of humanity

  than the torture system of the Inquisition. Every act of hu-

  manity of every individual owner is an illogical result from the

  legal definition; and the reason why the slave-code of America

  is more atrocious than any ever before exhibited under the sun,

  is that the Anglo-Saxon race are a more coldly and strictly logical

  race, and have an unflinching courage to meet the consequences

  of every premise which they lay down, and to work out an

  accursed principle, with mathematical accuracy, to its most

  accursed results. The decisions in American law-books show

  nothing so much as this severe, unflinching accuracy of logic.

  It is often and evidently, not because judges are inhuman or

  partial, but because they are logical and truthful, that they an-

  nounce from the bench, in the calmest manner, decisions which

  one would think might make the earth shudder, and the sun turn

  pale.

  The French and the Spanish nations are, by constitution, more

  impulsive, passionate, and poetic, than logical; hence it will be

  found that while there may be more instances of individual bar-

  barity, as might be expected among impulsive and passionate

  people, there is in their slave-code more exhibition of humanity.

  The code of the State of Louisiana contains more really humane

  provisions, were there any means of enforcing them, than that

  of any other state in the Union.

  It is believed that there is no code of laws in the world which

  contains such a perfect cabinet crystallisation of every tear and

  every drop of blood which can be wrung from humanity, so

  accurately, elegantly, and scientifically arranged, as the slave-

  code of America. It is a case of elegant surgical instruments

  for the work of dissecting the living human heart; every instru-

  ment wrought with exactest temper and polish, and adapted

  with exquisite care, and labelled with the name of the nerve or

  artery or muscle which it is designed to sever. The instruments

  of the anatomist are instruments of earthly steel and wood, de-

  signed to operate at most on perishable and corruptible matter;

  but these are instruments of keener temper, and more ethereal

  workmanship, designed in the most precise and scientific manner

  to DESTROY THE IMMORTAL SOUL, and carefully and gradually

  to reduce man from the high position of a free agent, a social,

  religious, accountable being, down to the condition of the brute,

  or of inanimate matter.

  * The following is Judge Field's statement of the punishment:--

  [qt]The negro was tied to a tree and whipped with switches. When Souther

  became fatigued with the labour of whipping, he called upon a negro man of his,

  and made him cob Sam with a shingle. He also made a negro woman of his help

  to cob him. And, after cobbing and whipping, he applied fire to the body of the

  slave. * * * * He then caused him to be washed down with hot water, in

  which pods of red pepper had been steeped. The negro was also tied to a log

  and to the bed-post with ropes, which choked him, and he was kicked and

  stamped by Souther. This sort of punishment was continued and repeated until

  the negro died under its infliction.[/qt]

  CHAPTER IV.

  PROTECTIVE STATUTES.

  Apprentices protected. Outlawry. Melodrama of Prue in the Swamp. Harry

  the Carpenter, a Romance of Real Life.

  But the question now occurs, Are there not protective

  statutes, the avowed object of which is the protection of the life

  and limb of the slave? We answer, there are; and these pro-

  tective statutes are some of the most remarkable pieces of legis-

  lation extant.

  That they were dictated by a spirit of humanity, charity,

  which hopeth all things, would lead us to hope; but no news-

  paper stories of bloody murders and shocking outrages convey

  to the mind so dreadful a picture of the numbness of public

  sentiment caused by slavery as these so-called protective sta-

  tutes. The author copies the following from the statutes of

  North Carolina. Section 3rd of the Act passed in 1798 runs

  thus:--

  Whereas by another Act of the Assembly, passed in 1774, the killing of a slave,

  however wanton, cruel, and deliberate, is only punishable in the first instance by

  imprisonment, and paying the value thereof to the owner, which distinction of

  criminality between the murder of a white person and one who is equally a human

  creature, but merely of a different complexion, is disgraceful to humanity,

  and degrading in the highest degree to the laws and principles of a

  free, Christian, and enlightened country; Be it enacted, &c., That if

  any person shall hereafter be guilty of wilfully and maliciously killing a slave

  such offender shall, upon the first conviction thereof, be adjudged guilty of mur-

  der, and shall suffer the same punishment as if he had killed a free man: Pro-

  vided always, this Act shall not extended to the person killing a slave outlawed

  by virtue of any Act of Assembly of this State, or to any slave in the act of

  resistance to his lawful owner or master, or to any slave dying under moderate

  correction.

  A law with a like proviso, except the outlawry clause, exists

  in Tennessee. See Caruthers and Nicholson's Compilation, 1836,

  p. 676.

  The language of the constitution of Georgia, art. iv, sec. 12,

  is as follows:

  Any person who shall maliciously dismember, or deprive a slave of life, shall

  suffer such punishment as would be inflicted in case the like offence had been

  committed on a free white person, and on the like proof, except in case of insur-

  rection by such slave, and unless such death should happen by accident in giving

  such slave moderate correction.

  -- Let now any Englishman or New Englander imagine that

  such laws with regard to apprentices had ever been proposed in

  Parliament or State Legislature under the head of protective acts; --laws which in so many words permit the killing of the subject

  in three cases, and those comprising all the acts which would

  generally occur under the law; namely, if the slave resist, if he be

  outlawed, or if he die under moderate correction.

  What rule in the world will ever prove correction immoderate,

  if
the fact that the subject dies under it is not held as proof?

  How many such “accidents” would have to happen in Old

  England or New England, before Parliament or Legislature would

  hear from such a protective law?

  “But,” some one may ask, “what is the outlawry spoken of

  in this Act? The question is pertinent, and must be answered.

  The author has copied the following from the Revised Statutes

  of North Carolina, chap. cxi, sec. 22. It may be remarked in

  passing that the preamble to this law presents rather a new view

  of slavery to those who have formed their ideas from certain

  pictures of blissful contentment and Arcadian repose, which have

  been much in vogue of late.

  Whereas, many times slaves run away and lie out, hid and lurking in swamps,

  woods, and other obscure places, killing cattle and hogs, and committing other

  injuries to the inhabitants of this State; in all such cases, upon intelligence of

  any slave or slaves lying out as aforesaid, any two justices of the peace for the

  county wherein such slave or slaves is or are supposed to lurk or do mischief,

  shall, and they are hereby empowered and required to issue proclamation against

  such slave or slaves (reciting his or their names, and the name or names of the

  owner or owners, if known), thereby requiring him or them, and every of them,

  forthwith to surrender him or themselves; and also to empower and require the

  sheriff of the said county to take such power with him as he shall think fit and

  necessary for going in search and pursuit of, and effectually apprehending, such

  outlying slave or slaves; which proclamation shall be published at the door of

  the court-house, and at such other places as said justices shall direct. And if any

  slave or slaves, against whom proclamation hath been thus issued stay out, and

  do not immediately return home, it shall be lawful for any person or persons

  whatsoever to kill and destroy such slave or slaves by such ways and means as he

  shall think fit, without accusation or impeachment of any crime for the same.

  What ways and means have been thought fit, in actual experi-

  ence, for the destruction of the slave? What was done with the

  negro McIntosh, in the streets of St. Louis, in open daylight, and

  endorsed at the next sitting of the Supreme Court of the State,

  as transcending the sphere of law, because it was “an act of the

  majority of her most respectable citizens?”* If these things

  are done in the green tree, what will be done in the dry? If

  these things have once been done in the open streets of St. Louis,

  by “a majority of her most respectable citizens,” what will be

  done in the lonely swamps of North Carolina, by men of the

  stamp of Souther and Legree?

  This passage of the Revised Statutes of North Carolina is more

  terribly suggestive to the imagination than any particulars into

  which the author of “Uncle Tom's Cabin” has thought fit to enter.

  Let us suppose a little melodrama quite possible to have occurred

  under this Act of the Legislature. Suppose some luckless

  Prue or Peg, as in the case we have just quoted, in State v. Mann, getting tired of the discipline of whipping, breaks from

  the overseer, clears the dogs, and gets into the swamp, and

  there “lies out,” as the Act above graphically says. The

  Act which we are considering says that many slaves do this,

  and doubtless they have their own best reasons for it. We all

  know what fascinating places to “lie out” in these Southern

  swamps are. What with alligators and mocassin snakes, mud

  and water, and poisonous vines, one would be apt to think the

  situation not particularly eligible; but still Prue “lies out”

  there. Perhaps in the night some husband or brother goes to

  see her, taking a hog or some animal of the plantation stock,

  which he has ventured his life in killing, that she may not perish

  with hunger. Master overseeer walks up to master proprietor,

  and reports the accident; master proprietor mounts his horse,

  and assembles to his aid two justices of the peace.

  In the intervals between drinking brandy and smoking cigars

  a proclamation is duly drawn up, summoning the contumacious

  Prue to surrender, and requiring sheriff of said county to take

  such power as he shall think fit to go in search and pursuit of

  said slave; which proclamation, for Prue's further enlightenment,

  is solemnly published at the door of the court-house, and “at

  such other places as said justices shall direct.”† Let us suppose,

  now, that Prue, given over to hardness of heart and blindness of

  mind, pays no attention to all these means of grace, put forth to

  draw her to the protective shadow of the patriarchal roof. Sup-

  pose, further, as a final effort of long-suffering, and to leave her

  utterly without excuse, the worthy magistrate rides forth in full

  force--man, horse, dog, and gun--to the very verge of the

  swamp, and there proclaims aloud the merciful mandate. Sup-

  pose that, hearing the yelping of the dogs and the proclamation

  of the sheriffs mingled together, and the shouts of Loker, Marks,

  Sambo and Quimbo, and other such posse, black and white, as a

  sheriff can generally summon on such a hunt, this very ignorant

  and contumacious Prue only runs deeper into the swamp, and

  continues obstinately “lying out,” as aforesaid; now she is by

  Act of the Assembly outlawed, and, in the astounding words of

  the Act, “it shall be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever

  to kill and destroy her, by such ways and means as he shall think

  fit, without accusation or impeachment of any crime for the

  same.” What awful possibilities rise to the imagination under

  the fearfully suggestive clause, “by such ways and means as he shall

  think fit!” Such ways and means as any man shall think fit,

  of any character, of any degree of fiendish barbarity!! Such a

  permission to kill even a dog, by “any ways and means which

  anybody should think fit,” never ought to stand on the law-books

  of a Christian nation; and yet this stands against one bearing

  that same humanity which Jesus Christ bore--against one, perhaps,

  who, though blinded, darkened, and ignorant, he will not be

  ashamed to own, when he shall come in the glory of his Father,

  and all his holy angels with him!

  That this law has not been a dead letter there is sufficient

  proof. In 1836 the following proclamation and advertisement

  appeared in the “Newbern (N. C.) Spectator.”

  Whereas complaint hath been this day made to us, two of the justices of the

  peace for the said county, by William D. Cobb, of Jones County, that two negro

  slaves belonging to him, named Ben (commonly known by the name of Ben Fox),

  and Rigdon, have absented themselves from their said master's service, and are

  lurking about in the Counties of Lenoir and Jones, committing acts of felony;

  these are, in the name of the State, to command the said slaves forthwith to sur-

  render themselves and turn home to their said master. And we do hereby also

  require the sheriff of said County of Lenoir to make diligent search a
nd pursuit

  after the above-mentioned slaves. * * * And we do hereby, by virtue of an Act

  of Assembly of this State concerning servants and slaves, intimate and declare,

  if the said slaves do not surrender themselves and return home to their master

  immediately after the publication of these presents, that any person may kill or

  destroy said slaves by such means as he or they may think fit, without accusation

  or impeachment of any crime or offence for so doing, or without incurring any

  penalty or forfeiture thereby.

  Given under our hands and seals, this 12th of November, 1836.

  B. Coleman, J. P. [Seal.]

  Jas. Jones, J. P. [Seal.]

  200 Dollars Reward.--Ran away from the subscriber, about three years ago,

  a certain negro man, named Ben, commonly known by the name of Ben Fox;

  also one other negro, by the name of Rigdon, who ran away on the 8th of this

  month.

  I will give the reward of 100 dollars for each of the above negroes, to be

  delivered to me, or confined in the jail of Lenoir or Jones County, or for the

  killing of them, so that I can see them.

  Nov. 12, 1836.

  W. D. Cobb.

  That this Act was not a dead letter, also, was plainly implied

  in the protective Act first quoted. If slaves were not, as a

  matter of fact, ever outlawed, why does the Act formally re-

  cognise such a class?--“provided that this Act shall not

  extend to the killing of any slave outlawed by any Act of the

  Assembly.” This language sufficiently indicates the existence

  of the custom.

  Further than this, the statute-book of 1821 contained two

  Acts: the first of which provides that all masters in certain

  counties, who have had slaves killed in consequence of outlawry,

  shall have a claim on the treasury of the State for their value,

  unless cruel treatment of the slave be proved on the part of the

  master: the second Act extends the benefits of the latter pro-

  vision to all the counties in the State.*

  Finally, there is evidence that this Act of outlawry was

  executed so recently as the year 1850, the year in which

  “Uncle Tom's Cabin” was written. See the following from the

  Wilmington Journal of December 13, 1850:--