2
Personal Slavery Established, By the Suffrages of Custom and Right Reason: Being a Full Answer To the Gloomy and Visionary Reveries, of All the Fanatical and Enthusiastical Writers on that Subject (Philadelphia, [1773]); selection from pp. 18–19.
Anonymous
Personal Slavery Established (1773) satirized Hume’s account of Africans. In a footnote to his essay “Of National Characters,” Hume wrote:
I am apt to suspect the negroes, and in general all the other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the whites, such as the ancient GERMANS, the present TARTARS, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are NEGROE slaves dispersed all over EUROPE, of which none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; tho’ low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In JAMAICA indeed they talk of one negroe as a man of parts and learning; but ’tis likely he is admired for very slender accomplishments, like a parrot, who speaks a few words plainly (Essays, pp. 629–30).
This footnote was known and often quoted in colonial American writings. In 1773, it was the subject of debate in Philadelphia. Hume’s footnote was quoted in full and with approval by Richard Nisbet in his pamphlet, Slavery Nor Forbidden by Scripture. Or a Defence of the West-India Planters, from the Aspersions thrown out against them, by the author of a pamphlet, entitled, ‘An Address to the Inhabitants of the British settlements in America, upon Slave-Keeping’ (1773). Nisbet’s piece aimed to answer an earlier pamphlet by Benjamin Rush (1745–1813). The debate continued in Personal Slavery Established (1773), a selection from which is reprinted below. Here, an anonymous writer ridiculed Nisbet’s use of Hume. See Lester B. Scherer, “A New Look at Personal Slavery Established” William and Mary Quarterly, ser. 3, vol. 30 (1973), pp. 645–52. On Hume on race see John Immerwahr, “Hume’s Revised Racism,” Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 53 (1992), pp. 481–6; Robert Palter, “Hume and Prejudice,” Hume Studies, vol. 21 (1995), pp. 3–23; Richard H. Popkin, “Hume’s Racism,” The Philosophical Forum, vol. 9 (1977–78), pp. 211–26; Mark G. Spencer, David Hume and Eighteenth-Century America, pp. 73–4.
___________________________________
The author of the Defence asserts that there are four or five different species of men, — with submission, I will limit them to four, viz. 1st, Europeans, 2d, Assiaticks, 3d, Americans, and 4th, Africans, and retracting the word species, substitute genus, which is more expressive of my idea as being a general term, by which I would distinguish the last as only a species of that genus, though utterly devoid of reason. Carrying this idea a little further, I would yet subdivide the Africans into five classes, arranging them in the order as they approach nearest to reason, as 1st, Negroes, 2d, Ourang Outangs, 3d, Apes, 4th, Baboons, and, 5th, Monkeys. The opinion of their irrationality is so well supported by facts, that to those acquainted with them, I need advance very little on the subject; but to remove every scruple from the sceptic, a little undeniable evidence may not be improper. — There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white; nor ever any individual eminent either in action or speculation that was not rather inclining to the fair. Africa, except a small part of it, inhabited by those of our own colour, is totally overrun with Barbarism — nay such is the contaminating influence of black, that I fear I need not except even the whites among them. Perhaps this observation may assist us in accounting for the few appearances of Barbarism we now and then discover among the whites in our southern colonies and islands, where blacks bear so large a proportion to their number. But to proceed from this short digression, Africa has no kingdoms of any eminence, but chiefly consists of petty monarchies, excepting Bildulgerid, Ethiopia, Nubia, Abissinia, Morocco, and many others that are rather large.