considerable part of a state. But the sordid appetite. exists, or such inhuman means would not be employed to gratify it.

We are told, however, that it is not extension, it is only diffusion, that is to be the effect.

I confess that I do not well understand the distinction. The diffusion of slaves, is an extension of the system of slavery, with all its odious features; and if it were true, (as it certainly is not,) that their numbers would not be increased by it, still, it would be at least impolitic. But for what purpose is this diffusion to be encouraged? To disperse and weaken and dilute the morbid and dangerous matter, says one. To better the condition of the slaves, by spreading them over a large surface, says another. A third tells us, that we cannot justly refuse to permit a man to remove with his family. A fourth comes directly to the question of interest, and his reason is, that land in the state of Missouri has been bought by individuals upon the faith of its being a slave state, and if we prohibit slavery there, these lands will fall in value. And in the rear of all these, comes an appeal to the public interest, in the shape of a suggestion, that slavery must be permitted in order to maintain the price of the public lands.

I would ask gentlemen seriously to examine their hearts, and see if they are not deceiving themselves—I am sure they mean not to deceive others. Do they remember the arguments by which the slave trade was. so long and so obstinately defended in England? The triumph of humanity there is quite recent, and the contest is a monument of the zeal and ingenuity that may be enlisted in a cause, which we all agree to have been utterly indefensible, and which no man, having a respect for himself, would now have the hardihood to attempt to defend. The arguments, then employed, I am sorry to say, have too much resemblance to those which are urged upon this question of expediency. The debates in parliament, the memorials from Bristol and Liyerpool, the representations

of West India merchants, and ship owners, and owners of West India plantations, were filled with statements of the importance of the traffic to the navigation and trade, and revenue, and colonies, and all the other great interests of the kingdom. Yes, sir, and they undertook to strengthen their argument by gravely asserting, that the African slave was really rescued from much greater misery, by putting him on board a slave ship, and carrying him in irons, (if he happened to survive,) to the place destined for his perpetual imprisonment. These things are familiar to every body, and they are now treated as they deserve to be.

But it is only diffusion that is desired! Is this a reasonable desire? Little more than thirty years have elapsed since the constitution was adopted. Two states of this union, (South Carolina and Georgia,) then insisted upon reserving, for twenty years, the privilege of supplying themselves with slaves from abroad, and refused to come into the union unless Congress were prohibited, during that time, from preventing importation. Congress were accordingly prohibited, and scarcely ten years have elapsed since the prohibition ceased. Can they reasonably ask already to be permitted to diffuse what they were then so anxious to possess? Are they so soon overburdened? It cannot be, for the illicit trade is still carried on, and that would end at once if there were not a demand and a market.

I may be told, and told with truth, that the other slaveholding states are not exposed to the same remark. Of Virginia, especially, it gives me pleasure to be able to speak on this subject, with sincere respect. While yet a colony, she remonstrated against the introduction of slaves. One of the earliest acts of her government, after her independence, put an end to the trade. And it has always been understood to her honor, that in the convention, her voice and her most strenuous exertions were employed in favor of the immediate abolition of the traffic. Still sir, with respect to any, or all the slave-holding states, I may be allowed to ask, is diffu

sion now necessary? I think it is not. Look at the present price of slaves. Does that indicate an actual increase of their numbers to such an amount as to require diffusion? I am informed by a gentleman, upon whose accuracy I place great reliance, that from the adoption of the constitution to the present time, the price has been regularly advancing. I do not mean to say that it is as high now as it was a year ago. It was then, like every thing else, affected by speculation. But taking average periods, say of five or six years, there has been a regular and constant advance, manifesting a demand at least equal to the supply.

Take another and a larger view. Look at the extent of territory, occupied entirely by freemen, and that which is occupied by freemen and by slaves. You will find, that at the time of the last census, in 1810, four hundred and forty-four thousand and seventy square miles were inhabited by two million, three hundred and thirty-three thousand, three hundred and thirty-six free persons, and one million, one hundred and thirtyeight thousand, three hundred and sixty slaves; giving a total of three million, four hundred and seventy-one thousand, six hundred and ninety-six. At the same period, three million, six hundred and fifty thousand, one hundred and one free persons had for their portion three hundred and twelve thousand, seven hundred and thirty-six square miles. Such was then the comparative extent and population of the free states, and of the slave-holding states and territories; the latter with fewer inhabitants by almost two hundred thousand, possessing above one hundred and thirty thousand square miles of land more than the former-a tract of country equal in size to the two largest states in the union. The population, in the free states, we know increases with greater rapidity than in the slave-holding states. At the present time it is not to be doubted, that the disparity is greater than it was in 1810, and more unfavorable to the free inhabitants. In making the distribution of future comforts, we ought to have at least an

equal eye to the latter, and they, I think from this statement, are most likely soon to want room to diffuse.

If it were not dwelling too long upon this part of the subject, I would ask gentlemen to look also at the comparative statement of the population to the square mile, in the free states, and in the slave-holding states. They will find it in Dr. Seybert's work, (page 45.) If I mistake not, the average of the former was, twentyseven, fifty-six, and of the latter, fifteen, thirty-six, applying the computation to the states contained in his table. These facts sufficiently answer the question, whether the diffusion of the slave population is now

necessary.

I am fully convinced, however, that this idea of diffusion, (as distinguished from extension,) which is at present so great a favorite, is altogether founded in error. If the amount of the slave population were fixed, and it could not be increased, it would no doubt be correct to say, that in spreading it over a larger surface, you only diffused it. But this is certainly not the case. We need not recur for proof or illustration to the laws that govern population. Our own experience unhappily shows, that this evil has a great capacity to increase; and its present magnitude is such as to occasion the most serious anxiety. In 1790, there were in the United States, six hundred and ninety-four thousand, two hundred and eighty slaves; in 1800, there were eight hundred and eighty-nine thousand, eight hundred and eighty one; and in 1810, one million, one hundred and sixty-five thousand, four hundred and forty-one. This is a gloomy picture. The arguments of gentlemen on the opposite side admit that an increase will take place, for they are founded upon the belief that the time must arrive when the slaves will be so multiplied as to become dangerous to their possessors. There are indeed no limits to the increase of population, black or white, slave or free, but those which depend upon the means of subsistence. By enlarging the space, generally speaking, you increase the quantity of food, and of course you increase the num

bers of the people. Our own illustrious Franklin, with his usual sagacity, long ago discovered this important truth. "Was the face of the earth," he says, " vacant of other plants, it might be gradually sowed and overspread with one kind only, as for instance, with fennel; and were it empty of other inhabitants, it might, in a few ages, be replenished with one nation only, as for instance, with Englishmen." If this does not exactly happen, it is only because in their march, they are met and resisted by other plants and by other peogle, struggling, like themselves for the means of subsistence.

By enlarging the limits for slavery, you are thus preparing the means for its indefinite increase and extension, and the result will be, to keep the present slave-holding states supplied to their wishes with this description of population, and to enable them to throw off the surplus, with all its productive power, on the west, as long as the country shall be able and willing to receive them. To what extent you will, in this way, increase the slave population, it is impossible to calculate; but that you will increase it there can be no doubt, and it is equally certain that the increase will be at the expense of the free population.

The same gentleman, to whom I have several times referred before, (Mr. Clay,) insists that this will not be the case. He says, that the ratio of increase of slave population shows, that its activity is now at the maximum; and as this implies the existence of the most favorable circumstances, you cannot, by any change, accelerate the increase. He therefore infers, that if from twenty slaves in an old state, you take two, and transfer them to a new one, it is an actual diminution in the state from which they are taken to that amount, and putting the two states together, you simply change the place but not alter the quantity. Supposing the fact to be, as it is here assumed to be, that the activity of increase is now at its maximum, it af fords a most conclusive argument against the necessity of diffusion. It proves that there is ample room, and