sound yet more strange-we agree with him. The Americans are not a polite people. Those of the north are cold, but sincere; those of the south warmer, heartier; but, of course, not so steady in their kindness. They are, in truth, a kind, friendly people-but not a polite people. The New Englanders are like the Scotch: the Southerners, like the Irish.

"CAP. 12. RELIGION."-Our author deserves great credit for the temper of this chapter. It is the language of a Christian. We would make large extracts, but we do not like to mutilate it; and have no room for the whole. "In few countries, if any, is publick worship more generally attended, than in the United States, p. 163. "Instances of openly avowed Deism, are rare." Ib. There are seventy-eight places of worship in the city of New York; fifteen of which are Episcopalian. They are the most numerous there, p. 144. He heard a Unitarian* preach before Congress, in the House of Representatives: and the next week, an Episcopal clergyman, in his own church, denounce the divine vengeance upon the whole nation therefor, p. 172. He mentions also a Presbyterian sermon, which attributes the yellow fever among the people of New York, to their having elected a Jew to the office of High Sheriff, 173-such is toleration in America. But more-our traveller does not seem to know that a test oath, declaring a belief in the Christian religion, is adminstered in some of the states. In Maryland, they have nearly abolished it. We know of a D.D. (Doctor Mason-he preached, we are told, in Saint Paul's, many years ago) who lately, on becoming the president of a literary institution, delivered a farewell sermon, in which he declared, in so many words, that keeping company with devils was less dangerous than with Unitarians. Having said this, he went off to Philadelphia, and "put up" with a leading Unitarian preacher there, (Mr Taylor.) So the story goes; and we have good reason to believe it.

CAP3. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, are set apart for a particular account of the EPISCOPALIANS, CATHOLICS, FRIENDS,

METHODISTS, and SHAKERS, (a people, whose principles are non-intercourse between the sexes; community of property; and hard work.) They are five good solid chapters; but not much after our taste. We hate short theological discussions. He forgets to mention, or did not know, perhaps, that one of the two Philadelphia mobs arose out of the circumstances mentioned by him, p. 195:-among the Catholicks. They fought in the churchyard: many women as well as men were injured seriously; and some, they say, were killed outright. It was confined nearly, if not quite altogether, to the Irish-like the Baltimore mob, in its commencement. In America, there are no patriots, like the Irish; none so jealous of liberty. In one case, (that of the Baltimore mob,) they took possession of the town-did murder one old man, (a revolutionary general,) and left half a dozen others for dead; by way of shewing their affection for the American government, whom these men had been calling to account, for the war with Great Britain.

"CAP. 18. THE INDIANS."-This chapter is devoted, like most of the others, to anecdote and speculation; judiciously intermixed with facts, that are wanted. But our author has fallen into a strange error: 243. We can tell him-after all his reasoning, on the subject-very modestly, though-that he does not understand what he is talking about. The American government will not permit-and have not permitted for many years-anybody to purchase lands of the Indian-anybody, but themselves, we should say. The Indian title, for a long time has been extinguished everywhere; as it was in Pennsylvania, by William Penn himself-in the regular course of business: a few beads: a little powder and shot: a quantity of red cloth-in exchange for what?-for whole empires-empires

Where, since there walked the Everlasting God,

No living foot hath been.

Another process of the American government-who deserve the blame, because they might know the truth, if

they would-is this. Their advance population; the frontier forlorn hope; are always the worst men of New England, or their descendants; the most adventurous and unprincipled of their whole population. These fellows press upon the inheritance of the red men, on every side. Game, of course, becomes rare: the lands, of course, become useless to the red men: they desire to sell. In steps the American government-forbidding competition -and buys up the whole at one sweep: -for what?-why, to retail out again, to their advance population-who, if they cheated the Indians each for himself, would not get it, after all, so cheaply as they now do. Another process is this. The frontier people pick a quarrel with the Indians, who are seldom foolish enough to do it for themselves. No declaration of war follows; no ceremony; but, forth goes GeneralJackson-orgeneral somebody else; wasting and firing the whole country. A truce follows: a ceding of the conquered country-for the protection of the whites-and a short peace is concluded.

Still, however, the notion that prevails here, is ridiculous. The American government have made, and are making stupendous exertions, for the safety and improvement of the red men. As for what Mr John D. Hunter (who knows nothing at all of the Indian History-or the designs of the American government) may say about "his countrymen being the worst enemies of his plan," it is 'all trumpery and stuff. He has no plan at all: He never had any: He never will have any. He is a shrewd, sensible fellow -nothing more: His achievements, wonderful as they are, have been those of accident-never of design. He has been ridiculously misunderstood and over-rated in this country: He is without any solid information upon any subject; and we know him to be surprisingly ignorant of those very things, which the people here, who are so fond of being deceived, that they are always ready to deceive themselves, under any pretence-believe him to be profoundly acquainted with. We speak now of the Indian History: sufferings and power the policy and views of the American government: the process of amelioration. We know him well; and we undertake to say positively,

that, up to the day of his departure from London, he had no plan of his own, and was ready to adopt the suggestion of anybody; the plan of anybody; nay, more-we undertake to say, also, that the American government, will go heart in hand, with him, or anybody else, who will produce anything like a digested, rational plan, for the protection of the Indians: that Mr Owen of Lanark-enthusiastick and visionary though he be, in the extent of his views-will find there all the encouragement which he can desire; that Mr Hunter, if he go among the red men again-which we think very improbable-will be more likely to adopt their mode of living, than to persuade any one of them to adopt his. Why? Because he goes alone: to make himself intelligible, he must use their language: to avoid suspicion, he must cease to be a white man: dress like them: eat like them: live like them: to acquire influence, he must excel-which he does not in the race

in the use of the rifle—and in everything which they regard with veneration. We say these things, because we know the man: because we regard him for what he is: because we believe that he might be of singular service to the red men, if he would go about the work deliberately, with a full knowledge of all the difficulties; and, because we have heard rather too much gossipping about his magnificent views, and philanthropy, towards the red men

for whom, by the way, he cares about one half as much as we do: He knows less of them, as a whole, than we do (we love modesty, but we love truth better:) and has done less for them, than Washington Irving, in his Knickerbocker.

Our traveller, by the way, questions the authenticity of Hunter's Narrative, p. 362. We have no reason to doubt on the subject. We have heard him talk better, than that book is written; and have seen him write better. The manuscript was correctednot written-by a New Yorker. In a late edition, Mr Hunter has added a few pages, which we know to be his. But for a few flashes of absurd poetry, some ridiculous pomp, like the tone of his conversation, among women-some allusions to the "towering wilderness -a good place to fatten hogs in "—all of which, by the way, are very like

the poetry of our traveller himself it is rather above the level of the book. We believe, however, that he is the child of some Indian woman, by some Yankee trader. Such children are not uncommon in America.

We take upon ourselves to say, concerning the Indians; 1st, that little is known of them in America, and less here; 2dly, that they have never been the aggressors; never broken a fair treaty; 3dly, that, whenever they have been treated with common decency, (as by William Penn,)or, with common humanity, (as by the French,) they have always been faithful and friendly; that, whenever a treaty has been such, as the law of nations would not justify them in breaking-the whites themselves, have gone about their business in the woods, and on the frontiers, without any sort of apprehension, thereby proving their reliance on the Indian faith; 4thly, That no people, ancient or modern, have ever exhibited more grandeur of soul-more virtue of every kind, and that none have been so deplorably oppressed, belied, and wronged, in every possible way. 5thly, That a parallel, for every individual, or national instance, of sublime and awful courage, fortitude, or patriotism, love of liberty, or heroism, of any kind, recorded of the Spartans, the Jews, or of any other people, may be found in the history of the red men. 6thly, That wars have been excited among them, age after age, to obtain their lands; in some cases, by our own colonial governors to obtain slaves, who were actually sold in the West Indies: that the law of nations has never been regarded, in dealing with them: that their ambassadors have been seized, imprisoned, and butchered, a dozen at a time, when America was ours: that war has never been declared against them: that Philip of Mount Hope, was not one whit inferior to Philip of Macedon, in foresight and political sagacity. 7thly, That the things, for which they are chiefly reproached their scalping and mode of warfare, were introduced by ourselves encouraged by ourselves or may be justified by our entrenchments, discipline, stratagem, generalship; and, in fact, by our whole art of war; and, lastly, that, although the red men have no historians, no writers, nobody to bear witness for them,

record their wrongs, and rebuke their calumniators; that, notwithstanding this, enough may be found in the writings of the white men-their oppressors, task-masters-and mortal enemies, to prove all that we have undertaken to prove.

"CAP. 19, 20, 21, 22. SLAVERY, SLAVE TRADE; FREE BLACKS; COLONIZATION SOCIETY."-We recommend these four chapters, to the people of America; and, with our commentaries, to the people of Great Britain. The information is valuable; and the remarks judicious. Nevertheless, we have a few observations, once for all, to make upon the subject of slavery, in the United States of America. It is universally misunderstood here. It is one of two subjects upon which we should speak-all the writers of Great Britain, we mean-very cautiously, and very sparingly. The wickedness of the Americans, in holding so many of their fellow-creatures in bondage-their inconsistency, and their ingratitude, as they say, to the people of Great Britain-are favourite themes of late, with everybody. But, as usual, those who know least of the matter, make the most noise.

As for their ingratitude, we do hope never to hear it spoken of again. They have never obtained anything from us

anything but by hard knocks: We drove the first Americans from us, by religious persecution: we never spent a guinea upon them, as colonies: we derived prodigious advantages from them, "two millions a year," says Chatham-(the great Chatham)—we monopolized their trade: we supplied them with slaves: we fought none of their battles: they fought ours continually, suffered for us continually : not only defended themselves, but helped us in driving the French out of America and the West Indies: conquered large territories for us in every direction: furnished us with seamen, (10,000 in the war of 1756,) and our West Indies with food: captured Louisburg without our assistancethe only valuable conquest of ours in the long French war, which was concluded by the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle -a conquest, in fact, "which gave peace to Europe; and proved an equivalent for all the successes of the French upon the continent of Europe.". Need we go any further? If need be,

we can, from the day when the "fathers" landed in Plymouth, up to this hour; and prove that we have done nothing for them; they, much for us -that they are under no sort of obligation to us, except for what has been accidental; and that we have been under great obligations to them: "The first Americans were transported felons and convicts," it has been said. It is untrue. The first Americans were extraordinary men, men of education; such men as no other country can trace its population to. The convicts and felons were but few, and confined to a few states.

So with slavery. The Americans are to blame, greatly to blame; but not in the way supposed. They deserve to be reproached. 1st, Because two of the original states refused to euter the confederacy, unless with permission to hold slaves. 2dly, Because they have never done all that might have been done-all that should have been done, to make an end of slavery among themselves, (we do not much blame them, by the way, for refusing a reciprocal search.) 3dly, Because their practice and preaching are wickedly and obstinately contradictory; aud 4thly, Because they have, within a few years, laid the foundation for eternal slavery, warfare, and bloodshed, in the new territories.

But, in their behalf it may be urged, that, even while they were colonies, they strove, continually, to prevent the introduction of slaves, by our people; that they petitioned our government against the trade; and passed laws half a century before we did, for the abolition of it: that they have gone on, year after year, from one step to another, until they have made it piracy; that a great minority of the people are solemnly and conscientiously set against it; that, in consequence of their vehement opposition to certain late proceedings, in the new territories, a civil war was talked of, and a separation predicted; that wise and good men-those who have taken all pains to understand the subject-are really at a loss how to proceed respecting the black population of America; that more has been done against, and less for slavery, by the Americans, than by any other people, among whom, or among whose colonies, men have been kept in bondage; that slaVOL. XVI.

very is milder there than anywhere else; that when a plausible mode is discovered of setting themselves free from slaves and slavery, they will adopt it, as they always have, with great zeal, in one part of the population; and with singular disinterestedness, in the other.

And for ourselves--let us be wary in our boasting. But for us, there would be no slaves in America, at this hour: We talk of the air of England - English ground-that a slave cannot breathe one, or tread the other, without undergoing a transfiguration. All this may be beautiful poetry, but, in our minds, it is a tremendous sarcasm. Look at our colonies; at our East Indian possessions; at what we have done for slavery in every quarter of the globe. We boast of our "negro Somerset" case. The very case proves that the right of holding a slave in England, was, but a little time ago, a doubtful and serious question, in our courts of law. Beside, Massachusetts had given a like decision some time before. We are unspeakably grieved and shocked, on seeing a runaway negro wench offered for sale, in the American papers; yet, up to the year 1770, when the case of Somerset was decided, similar advertisements were frequently met with in the Lon.don papers.

66

And what is more-although it is fashionable to talk against negro slavery; and profitable, we have no doubt: and although we would go as far as anybody, to prevent people from stealing their fellow-creatures-or ill treating them-under any circumstances: we do aver that all the writers upon the subject, without one exception, have been only furnishing arguments against themselves: that what is urged by them does not apply to slavery, as it is; but only to that, which never was, namely, absolute slavery-where not only the life and liberty, but even the moral faculties have been, hypothetically, held in thraldom :-that, nevertheless, if war, and the usages of war, be lawful-then, that worst of slavery is also lawful: and that such slavery as does exist in America is justifiable by the practice of all nations; the laws of all nations-the principles of subordination throughout all nature; and, strange as it may seem, in substance, by the principles and practice 4 N

of English law, itself.-We say this deliberately; and undertake to shew it, on any suitable occasion.

But, leaving these doctrines for the present we would ask, what is to be done to get rid of the slave population, and overcome the evils of slavery, in the United States ?--The idea of colonization is absurd: our traveller's notions on that point are correct. Gradual emancipation has done well in the New England states; and in New York. It would have done well everywhere fifty years ago. But now-the blacks are too numerous-the policy of it is very questionable. The free negroes produce infinite mischief among the slaves. Sudden emancipation of the whole, at once, is impossible; and, if it could be done, were the height of madness. Amalgamation-(by marriage)-never will take place. It might, but for the odour of the negro, which, in truth, is insupportably offensive. The wisest and best men are divided on the subject. One party, at the head of whom is Robert Goodloe Harper a good and great man-a statesman (well known here,)are averse to emancipation; and encouragers of colonization-if it can be effected. But it cannot be. All the shipping of the United States, at the end of a few years, would not be able to transport the natural increase of the slaves.-On the other side, a variety of opinions are entertained. But only one planthe plan of Daniel Raymond (author of a capital work on political economy) is at all plausible.-(Robert Walsh, by the way, has also some good notions on the subject.)-Raymond's doctrine is founded upon three facts, capable of proof:-i. e. - 1st, the whole white population increase faster than the whole coloured population: 2dly, the slave population increases faster than the whites: 3dly, the free coloured population not so fast as the whites: On these grounds, he urges this course of policy:-1st, the discouragement of slave emigration to the slave states: 2dly, the encouragement of manumission, in every possible way and, 3dly, the encouragement of emigration to the West India Islands, which, he believes-and we are of the same belief-will soon be under the dominion of the blacks altogether. This plan is the best; and only wants to appear so, for universal encouragement, in the United States.

As for the talk of English writers and English travellers, about American prejudice admitting the whole truth of what they say-it is, to say the least of it, exquisitely ridiculous. Black men are treated well here, just now because they are curiosities; because it is the fashion-(partly as a fashion; partly in rebuke of the Americans; and partly to shew the superiority of the English to national prejudice)-because the black men are attentive here to personal cleanliness; because the climate is not very warm; and because their colour is not a badge of inferiority. But how was it fifty years ago?-directly the reverse. How is it now, in the British dominions abroad?-directly the reverse: nayhow is it, now, in England, towards those white men who do wear any badge of inferiority?—The blacks of America are treated as well as the white men of this country, who are born and brought up in a state of servitude: and when they emerge from their condition, in America, they have to encounter as little prejudice as the servants and labourers-equally ignorant, of Great Britain. Colour is of no consequence. The serving class of people, in all countries, whatever may be their colour, are always regarded with prejudice. The coloured people of America are all of the serving class. Let us take an example or two from the speculations and philippics of our English philosophers, on the subject of national prejudice. We love to be wiser than other men. We love to catch people tripping in their heroicks. Our traveller, for instance, would not speak freely with a white English tavern-keeper-p. 54; and yet he wonders at the reserve of the Americans toward black people, who, in their country, are far below the tavern-keepers:-A woman who marries her own white footman; and a man who marries his own white servant, in England-no matter how good, wise, or handsome such footman or servant may be-will forfeit their cast-will be excluded from society; and avoided even by their own kindred and yet, we are amazed at the unnatural prejudice of the Americans towards those who marry blacks and mulattoes. Mr Faux is quite scandalised, on account of the treatment which the negroes receive-bond or free-from the white men of America; yet Mr Faux reproaches the peo