102 SLAVERY been enacted which terminated for ever the long and bitter agitation beginning with the contest about the admission of Missouri to the Union. This declared that "from and after the passage of this act there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the territories of the United States now existing, or which may at any time hereafter be formed or acquired by the United States, otherwise than in the punishment of crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." On June 23, 1864, all laws for the rendition of fugitive slaves to their masters were repealed. On Jan. 31, 1865, the final vote was taken in congress sub- mitting to the states for their approval and ratification the following amendment to the constitution: "Article XIII. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punish- ment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction." On Dec. 18, 1865, the secretary of state issued his proclamation declaring that this amendment had been approved by the legislatures of Illinois, Rhode Island, Michigan, Maryland, New York, West Virginia, Maine, Kansas, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Vir- ginia, Ohio, Missouri, Nevada, Indiana, Loui- siana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Vermont, Tennes- see, Arkansas, Connecticut, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia in all, 27 of the 36 states and was consequently adopted. The assassination of President Lincoln put an end to any very se- rious thoughts of making provision for com- pensation for losses of slaves; and the four- teenth amendment to the constitution, ratified by a majority of the states in 1867-'8, absolute- ly forbade compensation being made either by the United States or by any state. Thus ter- minated for ever in the United States the sys- tem of bondage which had been its chief re- proach in the eyes of the world and of its own people ; which from the outset had been the principal source of solicitude to its statesmen ; and the southern defenders of which finally assailed the life of the nation with a power and persistency from which it barely escaped, after losses and sacrifices such as few peoples in mod- ern times have been called upon to suffer. The abolition of slavery has rendered the laws of the several states concerning it of little prac- ti--;il interest, but a few points may be men- tioned. The slave was a chattel, for an injury to whom the master might recover damages as for an injury to a beast. Nevertheless he was recognized as a person, so far as to be made amenable to the criminal code, and was pun- ishable as such. The master had a power of ilHi-iplirii.' <>vr him which did not extend to liml), and for any excess in punishment he might be criminally responsible, as he might for excessive violence to a child or appren- tice. The police laws of the state were at the master's service for disciplinary purpose!, and -triiiLvnt iv.rulati'.i:- uviv made in his interest. The slave had no legal family relations, and any that should be voluntarily formed might be changed at the will of the master, by sale or otherwise. Slaves might be emancipated by the master, by deed or will, under state regula- tions ; but in some of the states the laws were adverse to emancipation, and interposed various obstacles. Whatever was acquired by the slave belonged to his master, and it was therefore legally impossible for the slave to purchase his freedom; nevertheless masters frequently re- ceived from their slaves sums which they had accumulated by extra services, and gave them freedom in return. The general doctrine of the courts was that the master by voluntarily taking his slave into a free state gave him his freedom, and this rule was supposed to be applicable to the free territories of the United States until the decision of the supreme court in the case of Dred Scott in 1857, which de- nied the constitutional power of congress to prohibit the holding of persons in slavery in the territories. Near the same time the doc- trine that a master might lawfully hold his slaves in passing through the free states found able advocates among lawyers. Slaves were not allowed legal rights in courts, though per- sons held as slaves but claiming to be free might bring actions to recover their free- dom. Slaves might be witnesses for or against each other where crimes were charged, but were not allowed to be witnesses against white persons. In general the teaching of slaves to read and write was prohibited, as tending to render them discontented with their condition. Prima facie in slave states all colored persons were slaves. Since the abolition of slavery persons living together as husband and wife, and continuing to do so, have been recognized in law as being legally married ; but until they had voluntarily assumed that relation after be- coming free, they were at liberty to marry oth- ers without incurring legal penalty. The col- onization of emancipated American slaves in Africa was undertaken in 1820, when the colony of Liberia was founded. (See COLONIZATION SOCIETY.) The colony of Sierra Leone was founded by England in 1787, being composed of American slaves who had joined her flag un- der promises of freedom. (See SIERRA LEONE.) The following are some of the most impor- tant modern works on the subject of slavery : Thomas Clarkson, "History of the Abolition of the Slave Trade " (London, 1808) ; George Stroud, "Laws relative to Slavery" (Philadel- phia, 1827); William Blair, "An Inquiry into the State of Slavery among the Romans " (Ed- inburgh, 1832) ; L. M. Child, " Appeal in behalf of that Class of Americans called Africans" (Boston, 1833); Theodore Weld, "American Slavery as It Is" (New York, 1835); William Jay, "A View of the Action of the Federal Government on Slavery" (New York, 1838); David Trumbull, " Cuba, with Notices of Por- to Rico and the Slave Trade " (London, 1840) ; Richard Hildreth, "Despotism in America"
