A LETTER FROM THE BAPTIST BOARD OF FOREIGN MISSIONS IN AMERICA, IN ANSWER TO ONE FROM THE BOARD OF BAPTIST MINISTERS IN AND NEAR LONDON, DATED DECEMBER 31, 1833.

(See our last Number, p. 534.)

Baptist Missionary Rooms,
Boston, Sept. 1, 1834.

Dear Brethren,

Your communication, dated London, December 31, 1833, was received some time since, by one of the officers of the Baptist General Convention; but as the Convention, to which it was chiefly addressed, will not convene till April, 1835, the communication was, after some delay, presented to the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions, as the executive organ of the Convention. The board referred it to a Committee, and we now communicate to you a copy of their Report, and of the Resolutions adopted by the board.[A] We commend them to your candour, with a confident belief that you will do justice to the views and feelings of the board, encompassed as they are by difficulties which cannot be fully understood by persons in other countries.

It may assist you to form a more correct opinion of the whole subject, if we allude to a few of the circumstances which make slavery, in this country, a matter of peculiar difficulty, and which, consequently, require those who would promote the real welfare of the coloured race, to act with great caution.

In the first place, the political organization of the United States is widely different from that of England; and this difference makes it impossible to adopt here a course similar to that which the British Parliament have adopted in reference to slavery in the West Indies. This country is not one State, with an unrestricted Legislature, but a confederacy of States, united by a Constitution, in which certain powers are granted to the National Government; and all other powers are reserved by the States. Among these reserved powers is the regulation of slavery. Congress have no power to interfere with the slaves in the respective States; and an Act of Congress to emancipate the slaves in those States would be as wholly null and void, as an Act of the British Parliament for the same purpose. The Legislatures of the respective States cannot interfere with the legislation of each other. In some of the States, where laws forbidding emancipation exist, the minority cannot, if disposed, give freedom to their slaves. You perceive, then, that the National Government, and the people of the Northern States, have no power, nor right, to adopt any direct measures, in reference to the emancipation of the slaves in the Southern States. The slave-holders themselves are the only men who can act definitively on this subject; and the only proper and useful influence which the friends of emancipation in other States can use, consists in argument and entreaty. The existence of our union, and its manifold blessings, depends on a faithful adherence to the principles and spirit of our constitution, on this and on all other points.

This view of the case exonerates the nation, as such, and the States in which no slaves are found, from the charge of upholding slavery. It is due, moreover, to the republic, to remember, that slavery was introduced into this country long before the colonies became independent States. The slave trade was encouraged by the Government of Great Britain, and slaves were brought into the colonies against the wishes of the colonists, and the repeated Acts of some of the Colonial Legislatures. These Acts were negatived by the King of England; and in the Declaration of Independence, as originally drawn by Mr. Jefferson, it was stated, among the grievances which produced the Revolution, that the King of England had steadily resisted the efforts of the colonists to prevent the introduction of slaves. Soon after the Revolution, several of the States took measures to free themselves from slavery. In 1787, Congress adopted an Act, by which it was provided, that slavery should never be permitted in any of the States to be formed in the immense territory north-west of the Ohio; in which territory, the great States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, have since been formed. There are now thirteen out of the twenty-four States, in which slavery may be said to be extinct. Maryland is taking measures to free herself from slavery. Kentucky and Virginia will, it is believed, follow the example. We state these facts to show, that the republic did not originate slavery here; and that she has done much to remove it altogether from her bosom. She took measures earlier than any other country for the suppression of the slave trade, and she is now zealously labouring to accomplish the entire extinction of that abominable traffic.

Since then, from the character of our political institutions, the emancipation of the slaves is impossible, except with the free consent of the masters; it is necessary to approach them with calm and affectionate argument. They claim to be better acquainted with the real condition and the true interests of the negro, than other persons can be. Multitudes among them freely acknowledge and lament the evils of slavery, and earnestly desire their removal, in some way consistent with the welfare of the slave himself, and with the safety of the whites. Some persons among them, it is true, are not convinced that slavery is wrong in principle; just as many good men in England, half a century since, believed the slave-trade to be just and right. Such individuals must be convinced, before they will act.

In the next place, the number and character of the slaves form an appalling difficulty. It is not believed by many of the sincere friends of the slaves, that their immediate emancipation would be conducive to their own real welfare, or consistent with the safety of the whites. To let them loose, without any provision for the young, the feeble, and the aged, would be inhuman cruelty. Slaves, who have regarded labour as an irksome task, can have little idea of liberty, except as an exemption from toil. To liberate them, without some arrangement for their subsistence, would produce starvation, or impel them to acts of lawless violence. Emancipation must, therefore, as those friends of the slaves contend, be gradual and prospective. The British Parliament have not decreed an immediate emancipation, in the West Indies; thus recognizing the principle, that the slaves must be prepared for freedom by moral and intellectual culture. But this preparation must be commenced and conducted by the masters; and they must, of course, become the willing and zealous friends of emancipation, before it can be accomplished.

We have thus shown, that the slaves in this country cannot be emancipated, except by the free consent of the masters; and that they cannot be prepared for freedom, without the voluntary and energetic co-operation of the masters. For both these reasons, it is necessary to adopt a kind and conciliating course of conduct towards the slave-holders. The British Parliament might assume a peremptory tone towards the slave-holders in the West Indies; because the power of Parliament is not restricted like that of the American Congress; and because the situation of the slaves in the West Indies renders the preliminary preparation less necessary to the safety of the white population. In the British West Indies, the slaves are dispersed among eighteen or twenty islands, where the military and naval power of the mother country might be easily applied to quell insurrections. In the United States, there are above two millions of slaves, spread over a part only of the surface of the Union, with no large military force to overawe them, and no obstacle to a rapid combination of insurgents. We presume, that the people in England would feel somewhat differently on the subject of emancipation, if the slaves were among themselves, and the perils of this moral volcano were constantly impending over their own heads.

Besides these general considerations, there is one which affects the duty of the Baptist General Convention. There is now a pleasing degree of union among the multiplying thousands of Baptists throughout the land. Brethren, from all parts of the country, unite in our General Convention, and co-operate in sending the gospel to the heathen. Our southern brethren are liberal and zealous in the promotion of every holy enterprise for the extension of the gospel. They are, generally, both minister and people, slave-holders; not because they all think slavery right, but because it was firmly rooted long before they were born, and because they believe that slavery cannot be instantly abolished. We are confident, that a great portion of our brethren at the south would rejoice to see any practicable scheme devised for relieving the country from slavery.

We have the best evidence, that our slave-holding brethren are Christians, sincere followers of the Lord Jesus. In every other part of their conduct, they adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour. We cannot, therefore, feel that it is right to use language or adopt measures which might tend to break the ties that unite them to us in our General Convention, and in numerous other benevolent societies; and to array brother against brother, church against church, and association against association, in a contest about slavery.

We have presented these considerations, dear brethren, as among the reasons which compel us to believe, that it is not the duty of the Baptist General Convention, or of the Board of Missions, to interfere with the subject of slavery. It ought, indeed, to be discussed at all proper times, and in all suitable modes. We believe, that the progress of public opinion in reference to slavery, is very rapid; and we are quite sure, that it cannot be accelerated by any interference, which our southern brethren would regard as an invasion of their political rights, or as an impeachment of their Christian character.

Most earnestly praying that the Father of Lights will illuminate our path, and guide us all to the adoption of such measures as shall advance His glory, and secure the temporal and eternal happiness of all men, we are, dear brethren, your affectionate fellow-servants.

Lucius Bolles,
Cor. Sec.