‘  legislation has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner shall himself commit some act that amounts to a forfeiture.’ Has the negro committed such offence? Above all, has his infant child forfeited its unalienable right Surely it can be no act of the innocent child. Yet you must prove the forfeiture, or no human legislation can deprive that child of its freedom. Its black skin constitutes the forfeiture! What! throw the responsibility upon God! Charge the common Father of the white and the black, He, who is no respecter of persons, with plundering His unoffending children of all which makes the boon of existence desirable; their personal liberty! ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’1 In this general and unqualified declaration, on the 4th of July, 1776, all the people of the United States, without distinction of color, were proclaimed free, by the delegates of the people of those states assembled in their highest sovereign capacity. For more than half a century we have openly violated that solemn declaration. 3. Because it renders nugatory the otherwise beneficial example of our free institutions, and exposes us to the scorn and reproach of the liberal and enlightened of other nations.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
The conflict with slavery
Zzz Missing head
A chapter of history.
Thomas Carlyle on the slave question.
The Anti-slavery Convention of 1833 .
Reform and politics
Peculiar institutions of Massachusetts .
The inner life.
Dora Greenwell .
The Society of Friends
John Woolman 's Journal.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.