The Anti-Slavery Crusade | Page 4

order were
divided among themselves and became half pro-slavery and half
anti-slavery.
Greek experience and Greek literature were likewise drawn into the
controversy. The Greeks themselves had set the example of arguing
both for and against slavery. Their practice and their prevailing
teaching, however, gave support to this institution. They clearly
enunciated the doctrine that there is a natural division among human
beings; that some are born to command and others to obey; that it is
natural to some men to be masters and to others to be slaves; that each
of these classes should fulfill the destiny which nature assigns. The
Greeks also recognized a difference between races and held that some
were by nature fitted to serve as slaves, and others to command as
masters. The defenders of American slavery therefore found among the

writings of the Greeks their chief arguments already stated in classic
form.
Though the Romans added little to the theory of the fundamental
problem involved, their history proved rich in practical experience.
There were times, in parts of the Roman Empire, when personal slavery
either did not exist or was limited and insignificant in extent. But the
institution grew with Roman wars and conquests. In rural districts,
slave labor displaced free labor, and in the cities servants multiplied
with the concentration of wealth. The size and character of the slave
population eventually became a perpetual menace to the State.
Insurrections proved formidable, and every slave came to be looked
upon as an enemy to the public. It is generally conceded that the
extension of slavery was a primary cause of the decline and fall of
Rome. In the American controversy, therefore, the lesson to be drawn
from Roman experience was utilized to support the cause of free labor.
After the Middle Ages, in which slavery under the modified form of
feudalism ran its course, there was a reversion to the ancient classical
controversy. The issue became clearly defined in the hands of the
English and French philosophers of the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries. In place of the time-honored doctrine that the masses of
mankind are by nature subject to the few who are born to rule, the
contradictory dogma that all men are by nature free and equal was
clearly enunciated. According to this later view, it is of the very nature
of spirit, or personality, to be free. All men are endowed with personal
qualities of will and choice and a conscious sense of right and wrong.
To subject these native faculties to an alien force is to make war upon
human nature. Slavery and despotism are, therefore, in their nature but
a species of warfare. They involve the forcing of men to act in violation
of their true selves. The older doctrine makes government a matter of
force. The strong command the weak, or the rich exercise lordship over
the poor. The new doctrine makes of government an achievement of
adult citizens who agree among themselves as to what is fit and proper
for the good of the State and who freely observe the rules adopted and
apply force only to the abnormal, the delinquent, and the defective.
Between the upholders of these contradictory views of human nature
there always has been and there always must be perpetual warfare.
Their difference is such as to admit of no compromise; no middle

ground is possible. The conflict is indeed irresistible. The chief interest
in the American crusade against slavery arises from its relation to this
general world conflict between liberty and despotism.
The Athenians could be democrats and at the same time could uphold
and defend the institution of slavery. They were committed to the
doctrine that the masses of the people were slaves by nature. By
definition, they made slaves creatures void of will and personality, and
they conveniently ignored them in matters of state. But Americans
living in States founded in the era of the Declaration of Independence
could not be good democrats and at the same time uphold and defend
the institution of slavery, for the Declaration gives the lie to all such
assumptions of human inequality by accepting the cardinal axiom that
all men are created equal and are endowed with certain inalienable
rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The
doctrine of equality had been developed in Europe without special
reference to questions of distinct race or color. But the terms, which are
universal and as broad as humanity in their denotation, came to be
applied to black men as well as to white men. Massachusetts embodied
in her state constitution in 1780 the words, "All men are born free and
equal," and the courts ruled that these words in the state constitution
had the effect of liberating the slaves and of giving to them the