It is a noble work which he has undertaken-one which can not fail, if successful, to raise Western Virginia, in a few years, to the high state of prosperity which our author admires in the old free states. In climate, soil, and mineral wealth, Virginia, west of the Blue Ridge, surpasses any equal extent of territory in New England-indeed, it is larger than Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, united. We, therefore, earnestly desire that the friends of freedom in Virginia may place before their fellow-citizens the proofs of the repugnance of slavery to the principles of reciprocity, to the law of marriage, to the duties of parent and child, to the rights of conscience, to all social obligations, to that free exercise of our powers in the pursuit of happiness which is the birthright of all, without distinction of color, and notwithstanding any human laws to the contrary. In this way, by enlightening the public conscience and bringing all good men to execrate the system of slavery, not only as impolitic, but as unjust, they may accomplish their end more speedily than will be possible under a sense of mere prudential considerations. We have also another reason for this desire, in the belief that the abolition of slavery will be effected on a plan more or less humane and benign, according to the view which is taken of its moral character. If slavery shall be abolished simply from motives of public policy, the welfare of the emancipated slave will be little regarded. But if the measure shall be taken as an act of justice to the slave, his interest will be consulted in the manner of executing it.

In regard to the scheme for the removal of slavery proposed by Dr. R., we have several things to say on several distinct features of the plan. The scheme contemplates the abolition of slavery in West Virginia only, leaving the institution untouched east of the Blue Ridge. This,

Dr. R. considers a practicable measure, and a reasonable demand on the part of the West. We have, however, no expectation that this will ever be conceded by East Virginia. The conflict of interests between the two divisions of the state is the same, which has, on a larger scale, distracted the councils, embarrassed the legislation, and threatened the stability of our federal government-growing out of the irreconcilable diversity and opposition between the interests of free and slave labor. No system of legisla tion can be framed which shall foster both equally, or protect one without oppressing the other. The moment, therefore, that West Virginia shall obtain the majority in the Legisla ture, East Virginia will find her peculiar interests unsafe. Favors to slavery will then be meted out in the same stinted measure with which the East has hitherto meted to the internal improvements of the West. This the East will not bear, so long as she is opposed to the abolition of slavery throughout the entire state. If she is as wise as her celebrity for statesmanship authorizes us to believe, she will allow West Virginia to be erected into a separate state, rather than concede to her the right of prohibiting slavery west of the Blue Ridge, and of establishing the white basis of representation for the whole state. The moment it is seen that the political power of the state is about to pass out of her hands, she will think her own side of the mountain quite extensive enough for "the mother of Presidents." We are, hence, of the opinion that West Virginia will not become free territory while she continues a part of the state of Virginia, unless it be by a general act extending to the whole commonwealth. What prospect there is of a transfer of the balance of power in 1850, from the east to the west side of the mountain, we do not pretend to say, but Dr. Ruffner seems to expect the change at that

time. In that event, West Virginia will be able to dictate her own terms to the East, and the East will in vain oppose the removal of slavery. Her course in that juncture will depend on the degree of tenacity with which she will then hold on to the institution. If it shall have ceased to be profitable, she will join with the West in an act of general abolition; but if a market for her slaves is still open, she will probably prefer a division of the state to the removal of slavery, even from West Virginia. We feel quite certain that she will never give her voluntary consent to a law for the abolition of slavery in any part of her territory, until she is prepared to banish the evil from the whole state.

It is manifest not only from particular expressions, but from the whole course of his argument, that Dr. Ruffner considers slavery to be a greater curse to East Virginia than to the West-as much greater as the number of her slaves exceeds that of the West. And most of the reasons which he gives in proof of the policy of removing slavery from West Virginia, apply with equal or superior force to the policy of the East. He declares expressly, that if it were not for the market abroad, the slaves of the East would be "a worthless drug," and that their impoverished country can not sustain the increase or even the " present stock of negroes.' He is also of the opinion, that the policy of the new slave states will, at no remote day, close the door against the importation of any more slaves, and that then the ruin of Virginia will be completed. These considerations seem to us sufficiently decisive of the true policy of East as well as of West Virginia. The catastrophe of a general bankruptcy can not long be averted, except by the adoption of measures for the removal of slavery from the state. To this the friends of freedom on both sides of the Blue Ridge should address themselves-demanding a

law for the abolition of slavery in the whole state-and diffusing information on the subject by the press and in every practicable way. We should like to see another argument from the pen of Dr. Ruffner, equally able with this, and addressed to the citizens of East Virginia: showing the madness of postponing to a fu ture day the abolition of slavery— and the happy consequences of immediate action.

It

The scheme of Dr. R. proposes the gradual extinction of slavery by the emancipation of those only who shall be born after a certain day. All who shall be born previous to that date, with the existing generation of slaves, are to remain in bondage for life. This is the principal feature of the plan and one which deserves our serious consideration. Any scheme which insures the extinction of slavery, though at a day ever so distant, is to be hailed as better than perpetual bondage. was on a plan substantially like that proposed by Dr. R. that several of our states were delivered from the institution of slavery. We rejoice in the result, however much we may regret that a system of emancipation more accordant with humanity, justice, and the soundest public policy, had not been preferred. We rejoice at this movement in West Virginia, and wish success to the undertaking. Yet we think we can show, to the satisfaction of unprejudiced minds, the preferableness of immediate emancipation, extending to the whole slave population. What advantage is it expected will be gained by Dr. Ruffner's scheme? We will first reply to this question, and then exhibit the superior advantages of our own plan.

Dr. R. evidently aims at "saving the rights and interests of the slaveholders;" and his scheme has the merit of effectually providing against any pecuniary sacrifice, not voluntarily incurred. The owners are permitted to sell their slaves, and

even to export the freeborn children under five years of age, provided the slaves of the same negro family are exported with them. Those freeborn children who are not exported before the age of five years, owe service to their masters until they reach an age not exceed ing twenty-five years. Their labor during this period will defray the expense of raising them, with enough, at a fair estimate of wages, to pay their market value. The master therefore receives a fair equivalent for his slave, even if his absurd claim of property in the unborn off spring of his slaves, be admitted. This scheme commends itself on this account to the selfishness of the slaveholder. He can not hear with patience of a project of immediate emancipation, which shall strip him at a blow of the ownership of his slaves. But this arises, as we suppose, out of a narrow view of the subject. Immediate emancipation would in fact enrich Virginia in a short period, beyond the present market value of all her slaves. The rise in the value of land and other property; the impulse given to all kinds of productive industry; the influx of population and capital; would very soon place a country of such peculiar natural advantages in the first rank. The proprietors of the soil would be especially benefit ted. A slaveholder who now realizes an annual income from his plantation, above the expenses of cultivation, of one thousand dollars, would be made no poorer by emancipating his slaves and employing them on wages, as free laborers, if his net income were no less; and he would be richer, if the income were augmented. His plantation would then command as high a price in market, without the stock of slaves, as it now commands with the slaves upon it. And the demand would be much brisker from the fact, that young men of enterprise from the north would come into the

market as purchasers. This they would undoubtedly do if slavery were wholly abolished, because that would place them upon an equal footing with all other citizens. Their political influence, their social privileges, and their command of labor, would be the same as the native inhabitants themselves enjoy. No system of gradual emancipation can offer the same inducements to buy real estate and settle in Virginia. Slavery would still remain. Free labor would still be disreputable, and have still to compete in the market with unpaid toil. Northern men would be reluctant to face the grim visage of slavery, for a gen eration to come, and to suffer for that period the evils inseparable from its existence. This is a consideration of great importance in determining the effect of emancipation upon the value of real estate in Virginia. There is no other state in the union, to which there would be an equal rush of population, the moment slavery should be abolished.

There is only one class of slaveholders whose pecuniary interest would suffer by an act of immedi ate emancipation-and that class is probably not numerous-embracing those who own but little or no land. A rise of value in the soil would not accrue to their benefit, and they might suffer a total loss of the market value of their slaves. Most of them, however, have other and more legitimate property on which to depend, or they are capable of self-support by some lucrative employment; and in the worst case, the act of emancipation would enrich the poor slaves to the extent in which it would impoverish their masters. On the whole, therefore, humanity would gain by this act of public justice and of general policy. The community at large would be benefitted to a degree surpassing incomparably the misfortunes of the few. But in our apprehension, the act of emancipation should provide

at the common expense for the relief of those who can show that the measure falls with unequal severity upon them, or that it leaves them without other means of support. The state can afford to make a liberal provision for extreme cases. A debt created by so beneficial a measure, would soon be liquidated by the consequent increase of the public revenue.

There is for the same reason some ground of argument in favor of an appropriation by the federal government, for the relief of this class of slaveholders in any state where slavery may be abolished. The measure would be beneficial to the whole country, and not to the emancipating state alone. The moment the slaves become their own masters, they will become customers, buying as fast as they can earn the means, the manufactures of the free states, to ornament their persons and cabins, and to promote their comfort and convenience. It would not be many years before every negro family would want the farming implements, the culinary utensils, the time-pieces, and the cotton fabrics of New England. It is a great annual loss to the North that the laborers of the South are consumers of the products of her industry only to a very trifling extent. Emancipation would open in the space of a few years, we have no doubt, a most important market for our manufactures. Nor is this the only advantage which would accrue to us. The measure would save the country from all the hazards and expenses of a servile war; would render us invincible by foreign powers; and would so harmonize the interests of the states, that the legislation of the general government would be less fluctuating.

We should more easily agree upon the permanent policy of the country, and the bitterness of party strife would be less likely to distract our councils. Emancipation

would also open the business of the South to the enterprising young men of the free states. Slavery excludes them from several of the most lucrative branches of industry -the cotton, sugar, and rice cultivation. Were slavery abolished throughout the country, many northern men would buy the new lands of the southwest and of Texas, and employ the emancipated slaves in these branches of agriculture. Others would resort to the "old dominion," and soon her hills would be covered with flocks, and her worn out plantations smile in all the luxuriance of the valley of the Connecticut. We speak of the advantage to our own sons, inseparably connected with the abolition of slavery, by opening to them these new fields of enterprise; but the advantage to the South herself from this accession of population can not be overlooked. While the South would gain most by the measure, the North would be immensely ben. efitted, and for this benefit we acknowledge her obligation to pay an equivalent, by sharing in the burden. of emancipation.

We do not, however, regard the refusal of the general government to make appropriations to this object, as a valid reason for the con tinued existence of slavery. The several states in which it exists can well afford to assume the whole burden of indemnity for private losses. Several of our states have already abolished slavery within their own jurisdiction, without any aid from the national treasury. Equality requires that the other slave states should do so too. And if emanci pation can not be effected at once, without affecting injuriously the interests of a small minority, it would be unreasonable to forego on that account a measure of such vast and palpable public interest. It is sel dom that fundamental changes can be made in society, without incidental evils; yet this fact should.

not be allowed to put a stop to public improvements.

We claim that immediate emancipation is a measure of precisely this character. However heavy the pecuniary loss attending it, there are advantages to be secured for which a far greater sacrifice might reasonably be made; and these advantages would accrue to every class of persons without distinction. It is important to the general interest, that the system of emancipation should satisfy the reasonable expectations of all classes, and make it the interest of all to maintain public order and tranquillity. The scheme of Dr. R. would exasperate the discontent of the existing body of slaves. The man born yesterday, will see no reason why he should be enslaved for life, while another born to-day, is educated and trained to be free at the age of twenty-five. Nor would he cheerfully submit to such a distinction. His discontent would endanger the security and peace of society. A whole generation of slaves would not consent to die off quietly with no struggle to be free. All that idleness, negligence, waste and theft can do to injure the masters, would be done. An expensive police would be required to restrain them from crime, and to prevent their escaping into the free states. No efficient

measures of mental and moral improvement, even in respect to the children to be emancipated, could be put into operation. Instead of a simple code of laws for the government and protection of a homogeneous people, a most complex system of legislation would be required, for the different classes-the enslaved and the free.

Now contrast this state of things with the security and peace, the industry and thrift, the moral and in tellectual improvement, consequent upon an act of immediate emancipation. With the emancipated people, the day of freedom is a day of

The day itself, when it came, was celebrated by the freed people in the most becoming manner. In Barbados, it was set apart by proclamation of the Gover nor, as a day of devout thanksgiving and praise to Almighty God for the happy termination of slavery. The Goverthe cathedral, an immense building, which nor himself attended divine service in was crowded in every part of its spacious area, galleries and aisles, with a most attentive assemblage of people of all colors and conditions. Several clergymen offi ciated; and one of them, at the opening of the services, read most appropriately the fifty-eighth chapter of Isaiah. Ima gine for a moment the effect in such an audience, on such an occasion, where were many hundreds of emancipated slaves, of words like these:-'Is not this the fast that I have chosen, to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the heavy and that ye break every yoke? The burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, sermon by the bishop was, as might have been expected on such an occasion, interesting and impressive. He spoke with great effect of the unexpected progress of freedom, from island to island, from colony to colony, until, with a solitary exception, upon that day the stain of slavery was obliterated forever from every British possession. The progress of education, the gradual reformation of morals, and the increasing thirst for religious instruction, were all dwelt upon with great force, and the glory of all ascribed as was most fit, to the great Giver of every good and perfect gift."

"The close of the day was not less auspicious. Nothing was seen that could lemnity of the day. There were no danmar the decent and truly impressive soces, no merry-making of any sort; not a solitary drunkard, not a gun fired, nor even was a shout heard to welcome in the new-born liberty. The only groups we saw were going to or returning from the different chapels and churches; except in a few instances, where families might be seen reading or singing hymns at their own dwellings."-W. R. Hayes, Esq., in Thome and Kimball's Tour, pp. 8, 9.