The census of 1810 indicated 1,191,364 slaves, and 186,446 free colored; an increase in the slaves of 33.40 as against 27.96 in the previous ten years; of the whole colored, 37.58 against 32.23. To account for this enlarged increase, it must be remembered that Louisiana had been purchased with slaves and colored, and that Africans were continually imported up to 1808. The increase of whites, owing to immigration, was 24 per cent. greater than that of slaves, and 14 less than that of the free blacks. In this ten years, the whites gained very slightly upon the slaves, and the whole colored population gained upon the whites. In the slave States the free colored gained 1 per cent. The slaves gained also, and, from a little less, had become a little more than one-third. The increase of blacks in New England, exceeded 7 per cent., being a loss of 2 per cent. Their increase in slave States was nearly 35 per cent.-a gain of 1 to 2 per cent. The proportion of slaves to whites is still highest in South Carolina, 47.3, having gained 5 per cent. Louisiana stands next, 45.3; then come Mississippi, Georgia and Virginia.

The census of 1820* showed 1,543,688 slaves, and 238,197 free colored, and increase in the slaves of 29.57, being nearly 2 per cent. more than the increase of the ten years ending 1800. The whole colored increase was 29.33 per cent. against 37.58; free colored, 27.75 against 72 per cent. The white population gained 1 per cent. on colored, the same on slaves; the free colored gained one-tenth of 1 per cent. The falling away of the increase of slaves was owing to many elopements of this class during the war, &c. In the slave States the free colored had remained stationary, and the slaves had gained nearly 1 per cent; the whole colored had gained on the whites per cent., nearly. The increase of blacks in New England was still about 7 per cent.; at the South, 30 per cent. The proportion of blacks in South Carolina remains highest, 51.4, having gained 4 per cent. In Louisiana, 45 per cent.; Georgia and Mississippi, 43 per cent. The free blacks to whole population, have declined in Louisiana, Missouri and Georgia, an average of near 2 per cent., but increased in all the other slave States except Delaware; in no instance, however, more than 1 per cent., and in some instances, a mere fraction.

The census of 1830 included 2,009,043 slaves, and 319,599 free, an increase in the slaves of 30.75, being an augmented increase of 1 per cent.-in the whole colored 31.37; also an increased increase of 2 percent.†

* 1820 is compared with 1810, so as not to allow the calculations to be affected by the purchase of Louisiana.

The returns are corrected for two months, as the census was taken in a different month.

The white population gained slightly on the colored, and the colored on the slaves. The free colored in slave States increased one-tenth of 1 per cent.; the slaves gained per cent., and the whole colored had again gained on the whites. The blacks have actually lost 16 in New England, whereas at the South they have gained 527,533, or about one-third of the original number. The proportion of slaves has, in ten years, increased 3 per cent. in South Carolina. In Mississippi, 5 per cent, and are 48.1 of the whole population. In Louisiana they were 50.8, an increase of 5 per cent. The free blacks increased in Maryland, District of Columbia and Delaware, 2 to 3 per cent.; in Kentucky, 1 per cent. In other States, trifling losses or gains.*

By the census of 1840, it appeared there were 2,487,350 slaves, and 386,348 free colored persons in the United States, an increase in slaves, in ten years, of 23.81; of free colored, 20.88; a decline in the increase of this population of 13.97 and 6.94 per cent. Professor Tucker argues a very great error somewhere. Though free blacks have emigrated to British provinces, and slaves have been carried to Texas, the numbers were not sufficient to affect, in any degree, the result. The whites have hence gained largely upon the colored, supposing the returns correct, and the free colored have diminished in their ratio of increase. The latter have declined, in proportion, in the slave States, as also have the slaves; the last, in extent, more than one-half per cent. The proportion of slaves has increased in South Carolina, and is still largest. In Mississippi it is fifty-two per cent.; in Louisiana it appears to have lost two per cent., being now less than half. In the southern States, the free blacks have ceased to increase, with the same ratio; the proportion in Louisiana remains largest, being seven per cent. of the whole population. Virginia comes next. The blacks of New England increased six per cent. in ten years; those of the slave States, twenty-six per cent.! By this census it appears that every State returned slaves, except Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts and Michigan. By the last census, Massachusetts and Vermont only were excepted.

We have thus traced the progress of slavery in the United States, from the first introduction of the institution down to the completion of the census of 1840. The decennial enumeration to be taken the present year, 1850, and hereafter, will show something like the following, supposing the ratio of increase of slaves and free blacks to be preserved:

It is possible the free blacks may increase in a greater, and the slaves in a less ratio, without affecting the sum total of increase of the two classes. A diminution in the increase of slaves may result from frequent emancipation, from emigration from the country-but this must be very inconsiderable, or from a lower degree of productiveness, the result of lower physical comfort, diminished valuation and less industrial uses, etc. We see no reason to allow much for the operation of these causes within the next half century, and may safely estimate ten millions of blacks and colored in the country at the close of it.

It is also clear, from our investigations, that no State, or class of States, can be more responsible than another, for the introduction and extension of the institution of slavery in the Union. The results show, too, that, in a condition of freedom, the blacks of New England have been situated most unpropitiously, as indicated in their trifling increase of numbers-unless we suppose they have passed southward, as general emancipation was expected, or took place in this quarter. Taking the whole Union into account, whatever the merits or demerits of the institution of slavery, ours is but a small share of responsibility for its continuance, and none for its introduction.

The history of slavery carries us back to the origin of society itself. It was found in the earliest advanced nations of antiquity. To attribute its derivation to war is absurd; for, admitting servus to be derived from the Latin servare (to preserve a captive), slavery, we know, was old before Rome had been founded. Perhaps the most curious and ridiculous position is that taken in the Encyclopedia Britannica, that it originated among the antediluvian giants, whose name implied assaulters of others. Nimrod, according to the same authority, was one of its authors-since the Bible tells us he was a mighty hunter before the Lord! To such stuff are authors driven in maintaining their favorite theories.

The fact is, that, immediately after the deluge, we have a decree of God, himself, condemning the children of Ham to perpetual servitude, using the very Hebrew word which translators render slave. After a few generations, slavery is referred to as a well-established institutionfor Abraham, the patriarch, had 318 slaves (Gen., xiv). The laws of God strictly regulated this relation, in all its aspects, and his own peculiar people were commanded to buy slaves from the heathen, and not

to steal them, and instructed how to treat them after they were bought, &c.*

It is said that the heathen, taking advantage of this mild slavery, tolerated by God, established a much worse kind among themselves. However this may be, and it is not improbable, many of the Jews, also, abused the institution, as they did other laws; we may well affirm that slavery presents no worse aspect in the civilized nations of the present day, than it did among the Hebrews.

In Homer, one of the oldest historians extant, there is abundant evidence that all captives were considered slaves; and Ulysses relates his escape from a Phenician, who had doomed him to Lybian slavery. Thus have we the slave trade at that early period. Philip of Macedon sold the captive Thebans, in which example he was followed by his son, Alexander the Great. In Athens, during the most polished ages, slavery was a well established order, although, it is said, that slaves were treated with more leniency than among other nations. In Rome and Sparta the worst features were exhibited. The Spartans butchered their slaves, when, by reason of great numbers, they would likely become dangerous. Camillus, one of the most accomplished generals of the Roman Republic, sold his Etrurian captives to pay the Roman ladies for the jewels they had presented to Apollo. Tabius sold 30,000 citizens of Tarentum to the highest bidder. Julius Cæsar did the same with 53,000 captives. Even debtors were allowed, by the twelve tables, to become the slaves of their creditors. So numerous were the slaves owned by the rich patricians, that Isidorus, who was almost a cotemporary with our Savior, left to his heirs 4,116 slaves; and Augustus put 20,000, of the same class, on board the corn ships. Though many laws were enacted by Augustus and other patriotic emperors, says the British Encyclopedia, to diminish the power of creditors over their insolvent debtors-though the influence of the mild spirit of Christianity tended much to meliorate the condition of slaves, even under Pagan masters, and though the emperor, Hadrian, made it capital to kill a slave without a just reason, yet this commerce prevailed for many ages, universally, in the empire, after the conversion of Constantine to the religion of Christ. It was not completely abolished, even in the reign of Justinian; and, in many countries, which had been once provinces of the empire, it continued long after the empire had fallen to pieces.

Dr. Cartwright once told us, that one of the crimes denounced in the Bible, is denominated by a term which means, literally, slave stealers (abolitionists). We forget in what connection the term is used; perhaps in reference to Tyre.

Among the ancient Germans, gamesters often became slaves from play, and slavery is said to have existed extensively, though in a mild form, according to Tacitus. In England, in the age of Alfred the Great (tenth century), purchases of men, horses and oxen, are mentioned in the same statute. In 1574, Queen Elizabeth issued a commission to inquire into the condition of her bond men and women in Cornwall, etc., with a view of compounding with them for their freedom. The colliers and salters of Scotland were not manumitted until the close of the eighteenth century. These men could be transferred by written deed from proprietor to proprietor, and were in no respect privileged without such deed.

We have not mentioned Egypt, where Joseph was sold to slayery, and where, in that condition, the Israelites existed 400 years. The Scythians established slavery throughout their northern wilds. Babylon, Tyre, and all the countries around Palestine, had slavery as one of their institutions. The "wrath of Achilles" was a quarrel about a slave. In early Grecian republics, slavery seemed to be an indispensable element. The slave markets of Rome were filled with men of every complexion and every clime." After the conquest of the Normans, slaves were exported from England into Ireland, until the Irish themselves decreed their emancipation. On the Baltic, the Germans conducted the slave trade, and the Russians supplied slaves to Constantinople by way of the Dnieper. Even the word slave is derived from the Sclavonic tribes, who were reduced to slavery in their wars with the Germans. The Jews purchased slaves in France for the Saracens. The Arabians are said to have pawned their children to the Italian monarchs. The Venetians purchased slaves at Rome for the Arabs of Spain and Sicily. In the time of the crusades, three slaves were the price of a war horse. In the countless battles of the Moors and Christians, the captives were indiscriminately enslaved in the worse form. Christians regarded it a pious work, and the infidels retaliated through the pirates of Barbary.

On the discovery of America, the native Indians were imported into Spain as slaves. All the rivers of the country were penetrated for this commerce, which was effected through fraud and force. Even Columbus sent five hundred such slaves to be sold at Seville. This traffic is said to have continued two centuries. The New Englanders enslaved the Pequods, the Waldrans and the Annon Indians, and they even sought Indian slaves from the southern provinces. The colonists were supplied with white servants from England, by a class of men called "spirits," who deluded them away and sold them in England, as

*

See Thornton's "Slavery" and the authorities there cited, p. 21.