[Footnote 152: Paradise Lost, book xii. 64-71.]
[Footnote 153: Noah's Travels, p. 248, 253; Quarterly Review, vol. xv. p. 168. Among the concubines of a prince of Morocco were two slaves of the age of fifteen, one of English, and the other of French extraction. Lemprière's Tour, p. 147. There is an account of the fate of "one Mrs. Shaw, an Irish woman," in words hardly polite enough to be quoted. She was swept into the harem of Muley Ishmael, who "forced her to turn Moor;" "but soon after, having taken a dislike to her, he gave her to a soldier."--Braithwaite's Morocco, p. 191.]
It is well, then, that it has passed away! The Barbary States seem less barbarous, when we no longer discern this cruel oppression!
But the story of slavery there is not yet all told. While the Barbary States received white slaves by sea, stolen by corsairs, they also, from time immemorial, imported black slaves from the south. Over the vast, illimitable sea of sand, in which is absorbed their southern border,--traversed by camels, those "ships of the desert,"--were brought those unfortunate beings, as merchandise, with gold dust and ivory, doomed often to insufferable torments, while cruel thirst parched the lips, and tears vainly moistened the eyes. They also were ravished from their homes, and, like their white brethren from the north, compelled to taste of slavery. In numbers they have far surpassed their Christian peers. But for long years no pen or voice pleaded their cause; nor did the Christian nations--professing a religion which teaches universal humanity, without respect of persons, and sends the precious sympathies of neighborhood to all who suffer, even at the farthest pole--ever interfere in any way in their behalf. The navy of Great Britain, by the throats of their artillery, argued the freedom of all _fellow-Christians_, without distinction of _nation_; but they heeded not the slavery of other brethren in bonds--Mohammedans or idolaters, children of the same Father in heaven. Lord Exmouth did but half his work. In confining the stipulation to the abolition of Christian slavery only, this Abolitionist made a discrimination, which, whether founded on religion or color, was selfish and unchristian. Here, again, was the same inconsistency which darkened the conduct of Charles the Fifth, and has constantly recurred throughout the history of this outrage. Forgetful of the Brotherhood of the Race, Christian powers have deemed the slavery of blacks just and proper, while the slavery of whites has been branded as unjust and sinful.