It has been repeatedly stated that Mr. Carroll, of Baltimore, the former president of the Colonization Society, was the owner of 1,000 slaves. The newspapers, in announcing the death of Mr. Pollock, of North Carolina, remarked that he had left 1,500 slaves. In the account of Mr. Madison's funeral, it was mentioned that he was followed to the grave by 100 of his slaves, and it is probable that the women and children were not included. The following article, from the Gospel Messenger for August, 1842, gives us some idea of the feudal vassalage prevailing on the estates of some of your lordly planters. "A noble deed.—Dr. Mercer, of Adams county, Mississippi, has lately erected, at his own expense, and for the advantage of his vast plantation, and the people on his lands, a neat church and parsonage house, at the cost of over $30,000. He pays the salary of the minister, $1,200 a year, besides his meat and bread. On Bishop Otey's late visit to that congregation, he and Mr. Deacon, the incumbent, baptized in one day one hundred and eight children and ten adults, all belonging to the plantation."

At the North a farmer hires as many men as his work requires; at the South the laborers cannot be separated from the women and children. These are property, and must be owned by somebody. Now when we take this last circumstance into consideration, and at the same time recollect that the very value of the slaves debars the poor from owning them—and connect these two facts with the character of the cultivation in which slave labor is employed; we must be ready to admit that those who do employ this species of labor, cannot on an average hold less than ten slaves, including able-bodied men, their wives and children. It appears by the census, that of the slave population, the two sexes are almost exactly equal in number; and that there are two children under ten years of age, for every male slave over that age. Hence, if a planter employs only three men, we may take it for granted that his slave family consists of at least 12 souls, viz.: 3 men, 3 women, and 6 children. We of course estimate the number of children too low, since there will be some over ten years of age. It thus appears that the average number of slaves we assign to each slaveholder is probably far below the truth; but we purposely avoid even the approach to exaggeration. Now the number of slaves in the United States by the last census, was 2,487,113; of course according to our estimate of ten slaves to one master, there can be only 248,711 slaveholders.

The number of white males over 20 years of age in the slave states and territories was1,016,307
Deduct Slaveholders, viz.248,711
————
And we have the number we are now addressing767,596

We are not forgetful that our enumeration must embrace some who are the sons of slaveholders, and who are therefore interested in upholding the system,—but we are fully convinced that our estimate of the number of slaveholders is far beyond the truth, and that we may therefore safely throw out of account the very moderate number of slaveholders' sons above 20 years of age, and not themselves possessing slaves.

Here then, fellow-citizens, you see your strength. You have a majority of 518,885 over the slaveholders; and now we repeat, that with a numerical majority of more than half a million, slavery lives or dies at your behest.

We know that this result is so startling and unexpected, that you will scarcely credit the testimony of figures themselves. It is so commonly taken for granted, that every white man at the South is a slaveholder, that many will doubtingly inquire, where are these non-slaveholding citizens to be found? We answer, everywhere. Is poverty of rare occurrence in any country? Has it ever happened that the mass of any people were rich enough to keep, for their own convenience, such expensive laborers—as southern slaves? Slavery moreover is monopolizing in its tendency, and leads to the accumulation of property in few hands. It is also to be observed, that the high price of slaves, and the character of the cultivation in which they are employed, both conspire to concentrate this class of laborers on particular spots, and in the hands of large proprietors. Now the census shows that in some districts the slaves are collected in vast numbers, while in others they are necessarily few. Thus, for instance, in Georgetown district, S. Carolina, there are about 7.5 slaves to every white man, woman and child, in the district. Now if from the white population in this district we exclude all but the slaveholders themselves, the average number of slaves held by them would probably exceed one hundred. On the other hand, we find all through the slave States, many districts where the slaves bear a very small proportion to the whites, and where, of course, the non-slaveholders must form a vast and overwhelming majority. A few instances must suffice.

The whites are to the slaves inBrook Co., Va., as 85 to 1
" " "Yancy Co., N. Car.,22 to 1
" " "Union Co., Ga.,35 to 1
" " "De Kalb Co., Ala.,16 to 1
" " "Fentress Co., Tenn.,43 to 1
" " "Morgan Co., Ky., [1]74 to 1
" " "Taney Co., Mo.,80 to 1
" " "Searcy Co., Ark.,311 to 1

[ [1] Mr. Nicholas, in a speech in the Kentucky Legislature in 1837, objected to calling a convention to alter the Constitution, because in such a convention he believed the abolition of slavery would be agitated; and he reminded the house, that in the State "the slaveholders do not stand in the ratio of more than one to six or seven." Of course slavery is maintained in Kentucky, through the consent of the non-slaveholders.

There is not a State or Territory in the Union in which you, fellow-citizens, have not an overwhelming majority over the slaveholders; and the majority is probably the greatest in those in which the slaves are the most numerous, because in such they are chiefly concentrated on large plantations.

It has been the policy of the slaveholders to keep entirely out of sight their own numerical inferiority, and to speak and act as if their interests were those of the whole community. They are the nobility of the south, and they find it expedient to forget that there are any commoners. Hence with them slavery is the institution of the south, while it is in fact the institution of only a portion of the people of the south. It is their craft to magnify and extol the importance and advantages of their institution; and hence we are told by Gov. McDuffie, that slavery "is the CORNER STONE of our republican institutions." To defend this corner stone from the assaults of truth and reason, he audaciously proposed to the legislature, that abolitionists should be punished "with death without benefit of clergy." This gentleman, like most demagogues, while professing great zeal for the People, whose interests were for the most part adverse to slavery, was in fact looking to his own aggrandizement. He was, at the very time he uttered these absurd and murderous sentiments, a great planter, and his large "force" was said to have raised in 1836, no less than 122,500 lbs. of cotton. [2] In the same spirit, and with the same design, the Report of a Committee of the South Carolina Legislature, made in 1842, speaks of slavery "as an ancient domestic institution, cherished in the hearts of the people at the south, the eradication of which would demolish our whole system of policy, domestic, social, and political."