for constructing general propositions, this worship of abstract ideas, if I may so express myself, which constitutes the besetting sin of very many of the associations which have sprung up recently. Because some people are exceedingly good and benevolent, perfectibility is possible. Because some men are not so active and energetic, when working alone as when united into an association, all men should be herded together in associations. Because the white and the black man have one generic name, from that name are deduced the most absolute and sweeping propositions.

But in the event of the whites multiplying to such an extent as to fill up all the occupations of society, to become the sole operatives and agricultural laborers every where, what will be the condition of the blacks? They would be gradually deprived of their little possessions, which would become more and more valuable with the increasing density of the population. The whites would have the means to purchase them, and the blacks would be unable to resist the temptation to sell. Or if we suppose that a considerable number continued in the employments in which they were engaged before their emancipation, what still are their prospects? The accounts which we have of the abject condition of the lower classes in Europe, are enough to sicken the heart, and almost to cause minds which are not powerfully fortified by reflection, to despair of the cause of humanity. A. vigorous writer, in the Boston Quarterly Review for 1840, on surveying the deplorable condition to which the white laborer is doomed by the operation of the inexorable laws of population, concludes that it is idle to talk of the evils of slavery, when American slaves are placed in a far more eligible condition than any class of European laborers; that there are certain mischiefs in the social organization of every free community as now constituted, and that it is incumbent upon all enlightened men and lovers of humanity to probe the mischief to the root. And he proposes, that the property of all deceased persons should fall to the state to be distributed among the population. The views which this writer took of the condition of the lower classes was, for the most part, correct; but the remedy he proposes would be utterly powerless. If, however, there is among all intelligent observers, such an unanimous opinion as to the abject condition of the white laborer, when the population has attained a certain density, what must be the condition of the African, when he is placed in close and death-like encounter with beings so greatly his superior? If that period were suddenly to come upon us now, the most extraordinary revolution would take place in the opinions of philanthropists. They would take ground precisely opposite to that which they now occupy. They would cry out against the cruelty and injustice which would be done to the blacks by emancipating them; they would, if true to their principles, inculcate the duty of maintaining a guardianship, the yoke of which would then be so easy and so desirable to bear.

The probability is, that the same fate which has overtaken the Indian race would be that of the negroes. The process of extinction would be more gradual; but it would be sure. The Ethiopian disappeared before the march of civilization in Egypt, Cyrene, and Carthage. And the more thorough civilization of the United States would assuredly bring about the same result.

It is evident, then, that difficulties of the greatest magnitude surround this question. Now, there are few obstacles which a powerful and enlightened people cannot overcome, if it can be made to see them clearly. But long familiarity with the institution of slavery, is apt to beget partial and indistinct views among slaveholders, as well as among abolitionists. I do not suppose there is any danger that the blacks will ever gain the ascendency. They never succeeded in expelling the whites who founded so many commonwealths on the Barbary coast. On the contrary, they were themselves driven to the wall. And what has been the fortune of communities founded by an Asiatic race, will be the fortune of those which have been founded by the Anglo-Norman race in the United States. Insurrections would take place among the liberated blacks. And they would be quelled. But humanity recoils from contemplating the stern an inexorable justice, which would have to be dealt out in so terrible an emergency.

Two alternatives seem to present themselves: to transport the African race bodily to some other country, or to retain them in their present condition. The first would be literally a gigantic undertaking; or rather, we may regard it as an impracticable one. Independently of the violent shock given to every species of industry, by the sudden withdrawal of such a multitude of laborers, the expense would surpass the resources of the slave states, even if those resources were unaffected by the deduction of such an immense mass of labor from the soil. The mere cost of removal would completely exhaust them. To transport a number sufficient to keep down the annual increase, and to continue this plan until the country were emptied, would be beyond the ability of the southern states. The Moors of Spain, and the Huguenots of France, were expelled, not removed. And the expulsion in neither instance was anything like complete. The Moors and Huguenots had effects to take with them, to enable them to begin life again. The first had a kindred race on the neighboring shores of the Mediterranean, who were glad to receive them. The second were welcomed in every protestant community throughout the globe. The state incurred no expense. It lost a body of valuable citizens; but the laws of population soon filled up the void. These cases differ widely from the present. Not that the analogy fails in every particular, but that when we sum up the difficulties on both sides, they are incomparably greater in one case than in the other.

If then it is impossible to melt the two races into one; if to transport one of them is impracticable, and to emancipate it would be an act of injustice and inhumanity, there is but one alternative: to retain the institution of slavery. We are never masters of the circumstances under which we were born. We may desire a change in every one of them. But the wise and inscrutable decrees of Providence have ordered otherwise, and we can in no way fall in with its designs so completely, as by accommodating ourselves to difficulties which cannot be surmounted; in other words, by acting up to the rule of right, in every situation in which we may be placed, and this not merely where our duties are plain, but where they lead us over a dark and difficult way. To attempt to beat down an institution, because we were not consulted as to its establishment, is to arrogate an authority which does not belong to us. But we may convert that institution into an instrument of good. We may apply to it the same rules of justice and humanity which are applicable to every other part of the economy of society.

The men of the south find themselves born under an institution which they had no hand in creating-which their fathers did not assist in building up, but vehemently protested against when it was introduced by the mother country. Their course is plain. If it cannot be removed, to employ the same judgment and discretion in the management of it, as are due to every other institution which is placed beyond their control. The relation of parent and child is the most extensive and important which exists. The relation is different in degree, but not in kind, from that of master and slave. Parents, by harshness and severity, may, and probably in great numbers of instances actually do, cause the fairest and gentlest virtues to wither in the blossom, when, by tender and judicious treatment, they may have reared men and women, who would have been ornaments to society. And although all our exertions to produce a diferent conduct may be of no avail, although we may not even have the right to intermeddle with the private relations of others, yet the duty of parents to act otherwise, stands as firm and unalterable as ever, and this notwithstanding the innumerable crosses to which they are subject in the management of their household. Precisely the same is the case with the master. Great numbers of parents, in all parts of the world, are compelled to make use of the labor of their children, in tillage, in manufactures, in every species of employment. A very large proportion, in densely peopled countries, do actually task them to occupations, the recital of which makes us shudder. And if this be an evil inseparable from the density of the population, so that all efforts to extirpate it will be ineffectual, it affords another example of those uncontrollable circumstances under which we were involuntarily born; but one which far surpasses in magnitude the institution of slavery as it has hitherto existed in the United States.

CHAPTER VII.

THE JUDICIAL POWER.

MONTESQUIEU has said, that the judiciary is the weakest of the three departments of the government. There are few general maxims which do not admit of some limitation-there is hardly one which does not demand this limitation in order to be true. The observation of Montesquieu is perfectly correct, in reference to some particular forms of government. In hereditary monarchy, where the executive is a self-existing authority, from which all appointments flow; in an aristocracy, where the legislative and executive authority is condensed in a body of nobles, the judicial power is necessarily feeble. But in a democratic republic, where the legislative and executive power is strictly bounded on all sides, the judicial may become a very imposing department. Its relative if not its absolute strength is then increased, for while the other two departments have been deprived of some of their most important attributes, the judicial power retains very nearly the same position and character which it before held. It even seems to possess a disproportionate share of importance, which is probably the reason why some of the state constitutions of America have substituted the tenure of a term of years, in the place of a tenure for life. By so doing, the great principle of responsibility is applied to all the departments indiscriminately. As the power of impeaching the chief magistrate, and of punishing in some way equally effectual the various administrative officers of the government, is not deemed a sufficient reason why they should hold their places for life, it has not been deemed sufficient with regard to the judges.