145, chap. 44.]
These reactionary results were not obtained without some opposition.
The governing element of some States divided on the question. The
opinions of this class were well expressed in the discussion between
Chancellor Harper and J.B. O'Neal of the South Carolina bar. The
former said that of the many Negroes whom he had known to be capable
of reading, he had never seen one read anything but the Bible. He
thought that they imposed this task upon themselves as a matter
of duty. Because of the Negroes' "defective comprehension and the
laborious nature of this employment to them"[1] he considered such
reading an inefficient method of religious instruction. He, therefore,
supported the oppressive measures of the South. The other member
of the bar maintained that men could not reflect as Christians and
justify the position that slaves should not be permitted to read the
Bible. "It is in vain," added he, "to say there is danger in it. The
best slaves of the State are those who can and do read the Scriptures.
Again, who is it that teaches your slaves to read? It is generally
done by the children of the owners. Who would tolerate an indictment
against his son or daughter for teaching a slave to read? Such laws
look to me as rather cowardly.
Pages:
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222