Slavery in Maryland briefly consideredCarey, John L.
History
Slavery in Maryland briefly considered
Carey, John L.
Slavery -- Maryland
The relation of master and slave implies the extremes of control on
the one hand, and obedience on the other; some intermediate forms of
which extend throughout all society. Whether the relation be proper
or not, must depend mainly on the greater or less disparity between
the two classes, and the circumstances which mark their connection. If
the masters be of one race, and the slaves of another; if they be of
different complexions; if the former be characterized by great strength
of will and capacity of understanding, while the latter are weak in
both; it is inevitable, if these two races must dwell together in one
community, that the one should occupy the position of masters and the
other that of slaves. They could not hold intercourse together on any
other terms. If the inferior race should prove fierce and intractable,
like our aboriginal Indians, they must disappear as the master power
approaches; if they are docile and gentle, like the negroes, they may
live in domestic servitude, and thrive in that condition. It may be
remarked that the negro is the only race that has ever been able to
abide in contact with the Anglo-Saxon.
II. _Of Rights._[1]
It may be asked, have not all enslaved people a right to freedom? To
which it may be answered that _rights_ are connected with _duties_; or,
to go back to the other definition, the will and the understanding of
a man, the strength of the one and the capacity of the other, combined
together, constitute the measure of his rights, inasmuch as they are
the measure of the sphere which he fills.
Freedom involves certain responsibilities, which, if a man can not
meet, he is not free. Besides, _Freedom_ is a relative thing--a thing
of degrees. How much of external restraint must be thrown off to
constitute _Freedom_? No one can say; it can not be defined by specific
limits.
If we go to talking of _abstract rights_, we shall discourse very
vaguely and to little purpose. The phrase itself is unmeaning; for
rights can be considered only as pertaining to _persons_. Thus they can
not be abstract at all.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account