Though piracy and slavery existed in this regency for centuries, they
have disappeared with the advancing light of civilization. The
former was abolished in 1816, when three thousand Christian captives
(slaves) were released in one day; the latter was abolished in 1845,
and on the 23d of January, 1846, Ahmed Bey, then upon the throne,
addressed a letter to the resident consuls, in which he employed
language to this effect: “We are all fellow-creatures of God, and as
such have no right to enslave each other. I have long felt that
human slavery is cruel, and have exerted myself for its eradication,
and have given orders to my governors and deputies in all my
provinces that no human being be henceforth recognized as a
slave.”
That the actual Bey entertains similar sentiments I have ample proof.
During our interview with him, after some expressions on my part in
favor of constitutional liberty, he replied: “I desire to extend the
liberties of my subjects as fast as they are able to receive them;”
and he closed his remarks by saying, as if for a delicate home
thrust on me: “I see not how any just discrimination can be made in
regard to these liberties on the ground of color or race; the
privileges enjoyed should rather depend upon the intelligence and
character of the subjects.”
I now have the honor to lay before the department a more full,
elaborate and authoritative statement of Tunisian sentiment in
regard to the great question that agitates our country. It is a
letter, already printed and circulated in the Arabic language, from
one of the most respected and worthy men in this regency. It
explains slavery from a Moslem point of view, quoting from the Koran
and its acknowledged expounders, and showing from what motives the
proclamation for the abolition of slavery was finally issued. In
writing this letter, General Heussein, who has travelled extensively
in Europe and is an accurate observer, had distinctly before him
here the terrible evils consequent upon centuries of slavery. He saw
here labor degraded by having been for so long a time regarded as
the special and appropriate business of slaves; the public
conscience deadened by familiarity with injustice and wrong; the
principles of liberty uprooted, and supplanted by those of slavery,
and the country impoverished to a fearful extent. With such a sad
picture before him, he speaks his honest convictions as a Mussulman
and as a man, and in the name of humanity exhorts Americans not to
harbor an institution which produces such results.
This letter comes with the highest sanctions of the country, and the
appeal which is made at the conclusion, to Americans, is but the
utterance of a common
[Page 340]
sentiment in this region. General Heussein’s negro Bona, who was
pounced upon at Paris by a chivalrous southerner, still serves as
his confidential companion; and should the general visit America, as
he hopes to do at the conclusion of our pro-slavery rebellion, the
question is asked whether Bona would be protected in his rights as a
gentleman in the grand opera saloons of America, as he was at
Paris.
Translation of a letter on Tunisian slavery,
addressed to Mr. Amos Perry, consul of
the United States of America at Tunis, first printed in the
Arabic language and circulated in pamphlet form in the
regency of Tunis by General Heussein,
president of the municipal council of the city of Tunis and
major general.
Djoumada Ethannia,
1281 of
the Hegira— (November, 1864,
A. C.)
Sir: I have been honored with a letter
from you in which you state, that coming from a country where
liberty and slavery for a long time existed and flourished side
by side, and where they are at present involved in a death
struggle for supremacy, you find many facts in the history of
Tunis calculated to throw light on the legitimate influence of
these two antagonistic principles. You ask me to explain
Tunisian slavery, and to state what influence it has exerted on
our institutions, and whether our people regret its abolition or
rejoice thereat. You further wish to know whether our experience
is favorable to servile and unpaid labor, or to that which is
free and paid, and which the Tunisian government prefers as the
basis of its social fabric, freedom or slavery.
1. Here is my reply. And I will first speak of slavery as
modified by our laws and of the causes which led to its
abolition in this regency.
Our government, like all Mussulman governments, is a theocracy,
and its administration is consequently based upon laws which are
in their nature both civil and religious. The Mussulman religion
tolerates or permits slavery; and this it does because slavery
is an institution anterior to the three revealed religions,
Mosaic, Christian, and Mohammedan. In the time of Jacob, the
Israel of God, the robber was doomed to suffer slavery for one
year as a punishment for his crime. Our religion substituted for
the year of bondage cutting off the hand at the wrist. But it
must be remarked that our religion authorizes slavery only on
such conditions and under such laws as are very strict and
difficult to be observed. One of these conditions is, never to
injure or tyrannize over a slave. Nay, a slave who is
ill-treated is declared thereby free. The words of the Prophets
are: “Every slave ill-treated is free ipso
facto.” There are in our religious books innumerable
precepts enjoining upon masters the exercise of benevolence
toward their slaves; and the last words of our Prophet, on whom
may the grace, of God rest, were these: “I commend to you prayer
and your slaves.” He used to say also: “The men whom you possess
are your brethren; it is God who has subjected them to you. Now
he who has one of his brethren under his subjection should let
him eat the bread of which he partakes, and should clothe him as
he clothes himself, and should not over-work him.” Oman Ben
Alkatab, the second of the Califs, used to go every day where
slaves were employed, and when he found any of them over-tasked,
he diminished their tasks; nay, more, he went every Saturday to
where beasts of burden were found, and if any of them appeared
to him over-loaded, he ordered that their burdens be
lightened.
It is a fact that our legislator infused into our laws the spirit
of liberty, profiting from the least circumstance to favor
personal freedom. Thus, if a master, by chance, let drop a word
declaring one limb (for example, the arm) of his slave to be
free, the law declares the whole body thereby freed from
bondage. One of the eight objects for which expiatory alms are
to be employed, as explained in the Koran, is the ransom of
slaves. Thus we are bound to employ a part of our contributions
for charity in purchasing slaves, with a view to their freedom.
To be released from an oath inconsiderately taken, to atone for
the crime of homicide and for the non-observance of a fast, and
to be exonerated from the izhar,* the freeing of
slaves is the prescribed means. Now, if the freeing of slaves
had not been regarded by our lawgiver as a meritorious act, he
would not have devoted to it the expiatory offerings otherwise
given to the poor. Another proof of the liberal tendency of our
laws is the recompense offered
[Page 341]
to those who free their slaves. Thus it is
written: “If a Mussulman free a Mussulman slave, God shall
redeem from the fire of hell as many limbs in the body of the
former as there are in the body of the latter.”
Now, since all these conditions and laws were difficult to be
observed when our faith was yet lively and vigorous, how much
more difficult must they be in these latter times, when our
faith is chilled and our zeal repressed. And the enslavement of
negroes, who are so different from the whites in their instincts
and character, rendered the observance of these rules still more
difficult. In fact, quarrels often occurred here between negroes
and their masters, which had no other cause than the natural
repugnance and antipathy that exist between the two races; and
these quarrels were a source of unhappiness to slaves and of
offence to masters, often giving occasion for the latter to
violate the laws enacted for the well-being of the former.
Slavery becoming worse with time, at length attracted the
attention of the Tunisian government, which finally advised, as
a radical remedy for the existing evils, the complete abolition
of slavery in the regency; for when a master could no longer
treat his slave with the kindness prescribed by our laws, the
slave had to be either sold or freed from bondage. The former
course was scarcely a remedy; since the slave sold only changed
masters, and the evil was likely to be repeated. The latter
course was effectual and final, and hence its adoption by our
government. The act of emancipation occurred in the month of
Moharram, 1262 of the Hegira, (A. C. 1845,) during the reign of
Ashmed Bey, of blessed memory. This prince addressed a letter to
the religious tribunals on that occasion, in which he says: “It
has been proved to us in a manner beyond question that our
people are incapable of holding negroes as slaves in accordance
with the conditions prescribed by our laws. We have, therefore,
deemed it necessary, in order to ameliorate the condition of
these unfortunate beings, to abolish slavery altogether. We have
been influenced in adopting this measure by some political
considerations,” &c.
The political considerations here alluded to can be interpreted
in different ways; but in my opinion our lamented sovereign had
in mind the principles demonstrated by the great political
economists of our age, that those countries where free labor
exists, to the exclusion of that which is servile and forced,
are thereby rendered more prosperous and happy. One of our
distinjguished writers and religious dignitaries, in a document
issued to induce all those under his charge to comply with the
requisitions of our late sovereign, employed the following
language:
“O, generous souls, hearts full of compassion, your law is on the
side of liberty; holding men as slaves is a misfortune and a
disgrace; but God, who is the author of our being, can change
the order of things, making slaves masters and masters
slaves.”
2. Another of your inquiries relates to the influence of slavery
on our institutions and to the sentiments entertained by our
people in regard to its abolition.
Since the holding of men in slavery was found to be neither
necessary to supply the common wants of life, nor needful to the
well-being of society, such a practice was, in general,
abandoned here without pain, if not cheerfully; and now, after
nearly twenty years of experience, I am satisfied that this
change is not regretted. And why should persons well to do in
life, who have at heart the well-being of their fellow-creatures
and the improvement of their country, regret liberating their
slaves, when they can have in their stead the service of free
men? And here the satisfaction of such persons was enhanced by
their religious convictions that they would be rewarded before
God in the final abode. But if there were persons who at first
were disturbed by the abolition of slavery on account of changes
introduced in their mode of service, or by reason of their
selfishness and avarice leading them to prefer what was present
and near to what was future and remote, these persons were at
length consoled and satisfied, learning by experience the
advantages of free and paid labor over that which is servile and
unpaid—advantages which are appreciable alike in the light of
reason and of general experience. Those who had employed slaves
and could not afford to employ free servants readily returned to
the order of nature, which is the best, doing their work with
their own hands, so as to have the least possible need of their
fellow-creatures. Indeed, when a person gets used to being
served by others, he often becomes incapable of performing even
the simplest duties of life; for man is more a slave of custom
and habit than a follower of instinct. To gratify various wants
of his existence, he is obliged to depend somewhat upon those
around him; but in proportion as he is thus dependent, it is
difficult for him to be gratified, and those things for which he
is most dependent on others are most difficult for him to
get.
Mankind may be divided in respect to labor into four classes. The
first class comprises those who attend to their own business in
person, working, and in general putting forth their utmost
efforts. They perform the largest amount of labor. The second
class comprises those who are out at service and are paid
stipulated wages. Not putting forth, in general, their utmost
efforts, they perform a smaller amount of labor, and though
invaluable to society, are as a whole inferior to the first
class. The third class comprises those who work by compulsion
and without pay. To this class belong slaves and bondmen. Their
inducements to labor being small, their amount of service is
also small, and their rank as a producing class is very
inferior. The fourth class comprises those who work neither for
themselves nor for other people. They are the lazy and idle,
whom God hates. Regarding labor as the part of slaves
[Page 342]
and slavish people,
they would shun the very suspicion of belonging to such a class.
Yet these persons, who stand lowest in the scale of the
political economist and in the divine order, may not be lost
beyond remedy. They may be benefited by seeing those of more
intelligence and elevated station performing the offices which
they regard with disdain. The idle and lazy need to be urged and
encouraged by persons of influence and authority to pursue the
path of usefulness. Man is more disposed by nature and the light
of reason to love and do good than to approve and do evil. He is
prompted to evil by his lower or animal instincts; but as a man,
or rather as a reasonable being, he aspires to that which is
good, and when he finds a physician skilful in overcoming the
infirmities of his nature, he is put in the best moral
condition. It is when men are thus treated and helped that
general prosperity is secured; mutual assistance is afforded in
the various occupations of life; all hands are employed for a
common good; the sources of wealth are developed, and the
country is enriched. It is thus that those countries are more
prosperous where liberty exists to the exclusion of slavery,
than where slavery exists to the injury of liberty and labor.
The cause of this difference seems to me clear. The amount of
labor voluntarily performed by free men is far greater than can
be forced from wretched slaves, and is at the same time
infinitely more satisfactory and advantageous to society.
3. It is my belief also that as liberty, unharmed by slavery,
exerts an influence favorable to the material prosperity of a
country, so it serves to elevate the character and sentiments of
the people. There can be no permanent prosperity without
justice, and justice results from freedom. If freedom be
destroyed tyranny takes its place, disregarding the claims of
justice and injuring the best interests of society. There can be
no doubt that the prevalence of freedom tends to the elevation
of the character of men, by leading them to reflect and reason
in regard to general principles and their application in life.
Men breathing the spirit of freedom are elevated and ennobled
thereby, and are less likely to contract certain bad habits,
such as vulgarity of manners, vanity, pride, and the like
passions which often predominate in slave masters; for by
habitually dealing with slaves these latter persons often become
haughty in spirit and imperious and overbearing in manner. Nay,
they often learn to regard other men, especially if they are
black, as they regard their cattle. Slaves seem to them scarcely
elevated above the brute creation.
In illustration of what I have here said, I will state an
incident of which I was a witness. During the carnival of 1856,
I went to the grand opera at Paris with a young negro. I had
been in the saloon but a short time when an American gentleman
sprang upon my companion, and, trying to seize him by his
clothes, cried out with rage, “What is this negro doing in the
saloon where we are? When has a slave ever been permitted to
take rank with his masters?” The poor negro, not understanding
what the American was saying, was astonished, stupefied at the
scene. I immediately approached and said to the American, “Be
calm, my friend; we are in Paris, and not at Richmond.”
Meanwhile, attracted by the noise, one of the guardians of the
theatre hastened to the scene and informed the American that
French laws give no preference to gentlemen on the ground of
color or race, but much honor to character. In fine, the poor
negro was delivered from the clutches of the American, not by
the clearness of his white cravat and yellow gloves, but by the
splendor of truth and the justice of freedom.
4. To return to our subject: The Tunisian government, deeming it
needful for the harmony of society that slavery should be
abolished, enacted the law of emancipation, regardless of the
prophecies of those who maintained that slaves did not wish for
their freedom, and that if emancipated they would prefer to
return to a state of bondage. The poet says:
“Sore eyes shun the light of day.”
‘‘To the sick, pure water often has a bad
taste.”
But the instances of freedmen repenting that they were not again
slaves occurred only immediately after the act of emancipation,
when these poor creatures were thrown suddenly upon the world
like cattle loosed from their stalls. They were ignorant and
quite unprepared for the exigencies of their new life of
freedom. But now that they have had experience, we find none of
them with the slightest inclination to return to a life of
slavery.
But passing by this objection, that falls to the ground of
itself, I turn, in connclusion, to address myself to the people
of your country.
O, inhabitants of America, ye are like that nation of whom Omar
Ben Elaas, the friend of our Prophet, on whom be the grace and
blessing of God, said: “They are the most compassionate people
in times of war and domestic trouble; the quickest to recover
from misfortunes; repulsed, they return to the charge; to the
poor, the orphans, and the feeble, they are most charitable; and
against the tyranny of kings they are most valiant.” Such is the
story of your character; and since God has permitted you to
enjoy full personal liberty and to manage your civil and
political affairs yourselves, while many other people are
deprived of such distinguished privileges and blessings, it
would not tarnish the lustre of your crown to grant to your
slaves, as an act of gratitude for the favors God has bestowed
on you, such civil rights as are not denied to the humblest and
meanest of your citizens. You are too far advanced in
civilization to imitate the example of those who, with bandaged
eyes, ever turn in the same circle under the pretext of
following in the footsteps of their fathers. Humanity invites
you to eradicate from your Constitution all that can give
countenance to the principle
[Page 343]
of slavery. Pity the slave. God loves the
merciful among his worshippers. Be then ye merciful to those
upon earth, that He who is in heaven may be merciful to you.
In concluding this letter, Monsieur La Consieur General, permit
me to express my profoundest regrets for the war that afflicts
and saddens your land, and my tenderest sympathies for the
slaves there doomed to suffer.
You will please accept the assurance of my distinguished
consideration.
Written with his perishable hand by the poor before the mercy
seat of his God,
GL. HEUSSEIN, Major General and
President of the Municipal Council of
Tunis.
Mr. Amos Perry,
Consul of the United States of America at
Tunis.
