Page images

the Moors in what they get, several of them being rich, and many have carried considerable sums out of the country, to the truth of which we are all witnesses. Several captives keep their mules, and some their servants; and yet this is called insupportable slavery among Turks and Moors. But we found this, as well as many other things in this country, strangely misrepresented."1 Listening to such words, I seem to hear the apologies for slavery among ourselves.

Candor compels the admission that these authorities - which, with those who do not place freedom above all price, seem to take the sting from slavery—are not without support from other sources. Colonel Keatinge, who, as member of a diplomatic mission from England, visited Morocco in 1785, says of this evil there, that "it is very slightly inflicted," and "as to any labor undergone, it does not deserve the name ";2 while Mr. Lempriere, who was in the same country not long afterwards, adds: "To the disgrace of Europe, the Moors treat their slaves with humanity."3 In Tripoli, we are told, by a person for ten years resident, that the same gentleness prevailed. "It is a great alleviation to our feelings on their account," says the writer, speaking of the slaves," to see them easy and well-dressed; and so far from wearing chains, as captives do in most other places, they are here perfectly at liberty."4 We have already seen the testimony of General Eaton with regard to slavery in Tunis; while Mr. Noah, one of his successors in the consulate of the United States at that place, says:

1 Braithwaite's Revolutions in Morocco, p. 353.

2 Keatinge's Travels, p. 250. Quarterly Review, Vol. XV. p. 146. See also Chénier's Present State of Morocco, Vol. I. p. 192, Vol. II. p. 369.

3 Lempriere's Tour, p. 290. See also pp. 3, 147, 190, 279.

4 Narrative of a Ten Years' Residence at Tripoli, p. 241.

"In Tunis, from my observation, the slaves are not severely treated; and many of them have made money." 1 And Mr. Shaler, speaking of the chief seat of Christian slavery, says: "In short, there were slaves who left Algiers with regret."2 How singularly present apologies for our slavery echo these voices from the Barbary States!

A French writer of more recent date asserts, with some vehemence, and with the authority of an eye-witness, that the white slaves at Algiers were not exposed to the miseries which they represented. I do not know that he vindicates their slavery, but, like Captain Braithwaite, he evidently regards many of them as better off than they would be at home. According to him, they were well clad and well fed, much better than free Christians there, - precisely as it is said that our slaves are much better off than free negroes. The youngest and most comely were taken as pages by the Dey. Others were employed in the barracks; others in the galleys: but even here there was a chapel, as in the time of Cervantes, for the free exercise of the Christian religion. Those who happened to be artisans, as carpenters, locksmiths, and calkers, were let to the owners of vessels; others were employed on the public works; while others still were allowed the privilege of keeping a shop, where their profits were sometimes so large as to enable them at the end of a year to purchase their ransom. But these were often known to become indifferent to freedom, preferring Algiers to their own country. Slaves of private persons were sometimes employed in the family of their master, where their treatment necessarily depended much upon his character. If he was 2 Sketches of Algiers, p. 77.

1 Travels, p. 368.

gentle and humane, their lot was fortunate; they were regarded as children of the house. If he was harsh and selfish, then the iron of slavery did indeed enter their souls. Many were bought to be sold again for profit into distant parts of the country, where they were doomed to exhausting labor; in which event their condition was most grievous. But special care was bestowed upon those who became ill, not so much, it is said, from humanity as through fear of losing them.1 This whole story seems to be told of us, rather than of others.


WHATEVER deductions may be made from familiar stories of White Slavery, allowing that it was mitigated by the genial influence of Mahometanism,— that the captives were well clad and well fed, much better than free Christians there, that they were permitted opportunities of Christian worship, — that they were often treated with lenity and affectionate care, that they were sometimes advanced to posts of responsibility and honor, and that they were known, in contentment or stolidity, to become indifferent to freedom, -still the institution or custom is hardly less hateful. Slavery, in all its forms, even under mildest influences, is a wrong and a curse. No accidental gentleness of the master can make it otherwise. Against it reason, experience, the heart of man, all cry out. "Disguise thyself as thou wilt, still, Slavery, still thou art a bitter

[ocr errors]

1 Histoire d'Alger: Description de ce Royaume, etc., de ses Forces de Terre et de Mer, Mœurs et Costumes des Habitans, des Mores, des Arabes, des Juifs, des Chrétiens, de ses Lois, etc. (Paris, 1830), Chap. XXVII.




draught; and though thousands in all ages have been made to drink of thee, thou art no less bitter on that account." 1 Algerine Slavery was a violation of the Law of Nature and of God. It was a usurpation of rights not granted to man.

"O execrable son, so to aspire

Above his brethren, to himself assuming
Authority usurped, from God not given!
He gave us only over beast, fish, fowl
Dominion absolute; that right we hold
By his donation; but man over men
He made not lord, such title to himself
Reserving, human left from human free.” 2

Such a God-defying relation could not fail to accumulate disaster upon all in any way parties to it; for injustice and wrong are fatal alike to doer and sufferer. Notoriously in Algiers it exerted a most pernicious influence on master as well as slave. The slave was crushed and degraded, his intelligence abased, even his love of freedom extinguished. The master, accustomed from childhood to revolting inequalities of condition, was exalted into a mood of unconscious arrogance and self-confidence inconsistent with the virtues of a pure and upright character. Unlimited power is apt to stretch towards license; and the wives and daughters of white slaves were often pressed to be the concubines of Algerine masters.3

1 Sterne, Sentimental Journey: The Passport: The Hotel at Paris. 2 Paradise Lost, Book XII. 64-71.

8 Noah's Travels, pp. 248, 253. Quarterly Review, Vol. XV. p. 168. Among the concubines of a prince of Morocco were two slaves of the age of fifteen, one English and the other French. (Lempriere's Tour, p. 147.) The fate of "one Mrs. Shaw, an Irish woman," is given in words hardly polite enough to be quoted. She was swept into the harem of Muley Ismael, who "forced her to turn Moor; .. but soon after, having taken a dislike to her, he gave her to a soldier." — Braithwaite's Morocco, p. 191.

It is well, then, that it has passed away. The Barbary States seem less barbarous, when we no longer discern this cruel oppression.


THE story of slavery in the Barbary States is not yet. all told. While they received white slaves from sea, captured by corsairs, they also, time immemorial, imported black slaves out of the South. Over the vast, illimitable sea of sand, absorbing their southern border, traversed by camels, those "ships of the desert," were brought these unfortunate beings, as merchandise, with gold-dust and ivory, doomed often to insufferable torment, while cruel thirst parched the lips, and tears vainly moistened the eyes. They also were ravished from home, and, like their white brethren from the North, compelled to taste of slavery.

In numbers they far exceeded their white peers. But for long years no pen or voice pleaded their cause; nor did the Christian nations, professing a religion which teaches universal humanity without respect of persons, and sends the precious sympathies of neighborhood to all who suffer, even at the farthest pole, ever interfere in their behalf. The navy of Great Britain, by the throat of its artillery, argued the freedom of all fellow-Christians, without distinction of nation, but heeded not the slavery of others, brethren in bonds, Mahometans or idolaters, children of the same Father in heaven. Lord Exmouth did but half his work. Confining the stipulation to the abolition of Christian slavery, this Abolitionist made a discrimination, which, whether founded on religion or color, was self

« PreviousContinue »