The Journal of Negro History, Volume 4, 1919

"The Colored American, we are glad to see, has reappeared in the field, under the conduct of our enterprising and talented Brother Ray. It will maintain a very handsome rank among the antislavery periodicals, and we hope will be well sustained and kept up by both, colored and uncolored patronage.

"It must be a matter of pride to our colored friends, as it is to us, that they are already able to vindicate the claims our enterprise has always made in their behalf,—to an equal intellectual rank in this heterogeneous (but 'homogeneous') community.

"It is no longer necessary for abolitionists to contend against the blunder of pro-slavery,—that the colored people are inferior to the whites; for these people are practically demonstrating its falseness. They have men enough in action now, to maintain the anti-slavery enterprise, and to win their liberty, and that of their enslaved brethren,—if every white abolitionist were drawn from the field: McCune Smith, and Cornish, and Wright and Ray and a host of others,—not to mention our eloquent brother, Remond, of Maine, and Brother Lewis who is the stay and staff of field antislavery in New Hampshire.

"The people of such men as these cannot be held in slavery. They have got their pens drawn and tried their voices, and they are seen to be the pens and voices of human genius; and they will neither lay down the one, nor will they hush the other, till their brethren are free.

"The Calhouns and Clays may display their vain oratory and metaphysics, but they tremble when they behold the colored man is in the intellectual field. The time is at hand, when this terrible denunciation shall thunder in their own race."[574 - Penn, The Afro-American Press, pp. 39-40.]

The Christian Witness said the following:

"The Colored American. Returning from the country, we are glad to find upon our table several copies of this excellent paper, which has waked up with renewed strength and beauty. It is now under the exclusive control of Charles B. Ray, a gentleman in every manner competent to the duties devolving upon him in the station he occupies. Our colored friends generally, and all those who can do so, would bestow their patronage worthily by giving it to The Colored American."[575 - Ibid., p. 41.]

As to the sort of editor Charles B. Ray was, we can best observe by reading two of his striking editorials on Prejudice and This Country, our only Home.

Prejudice

"'Prejudice,' said a noble man, 'is an aristocratic hatred of humble life.'

"Prejudice, of every character, and existing against whom it may, is hatred. It is a fruit of our corrupt nature, and has its being in the depravity of the human heart. It is sin.

"To hate a man, for any consideration whatever, is murderous; and to hate him, in any degree, is, in the same degree murderous; and to hate a man for no cause whatever, magnifies the evil. 'Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer,' says Holy Writ.

"There is a kind of aristocracy in our country, as in nearly all others, a looking down with disdain upon humble life and a disregard of it. Still, we hear little about prejudice against any class among us, excepting against color, or against the colored population of this Union, which so monopolizes this state of feeling in our country that we hear less of it in its operations upon others, than in other countries. It is the only sense in which there is equality; here, the democratic principle is adopted and all come together as equals, and unite the rich and the poor, the high and the low, in an equal right to hate the colored man; and its operations upon the mind and character are cruel and disastrous, as it is murderous and wicked in itself. One needs to feel it, and to wither under its effects, to know it: and the colored men of the United States, wherever found, and in whatever circumstances, are living epistles, which may be read by all men in proof of all that is paralyzing to enterprise, destructive to ambition, ruinous to character, crushing to mind, and painful to the soul, in the monster, Prejudice. For it is found equally malignant, active, and strong—associated with the mechanical arts, in the work-shop, in the mercantile houses, in the commercial affairs of the country, in the halls of learning, in the temple of God; and in the highways and hedges. It almost possesses ubiquity; it is every where, doing its deleterious work wherever one of the proscribed class lives and moves.

"Yet prejudice against color, prevalent as it is in the minds of one class of our community against another, is unnatural, though habitual. If it were natural, children would manifest it with the first signs of consciousness; but with them, all are alike affectionate and beloved. They have not the feeling, because it is a creature of education and habit.

"While we write, there are now playing at our right, a few steps away, a colored and white child, with all the affection and harmony of feeling, as though prejudice had always been unknown.

"Prejudice overlooks all that is noble and grand in man's being. It forgets that, housed in a dark complexion is, equally alike with the whites, all that is lofty in mind and noble in soul, that there lies an equal immortality. It reaches to grade mind and soul, either by the texture of the hair, or the form of the features, or the color of the skin. This is an education fostered by prejudice; consequently, an education almost universally prevalent in our country; an education, too, subverting the principles of our humanity, and turning away the dictates of our noble being from what is important, to meaner things.[576 - Penn, The Afro-American Press, pp. 42-43.]

"This Country, our only Home

"When we say, 'our home,' we refer to the colored community. When we say, 'our only home,' we speak in a general sense, and do not suppose but in individual cases some may, and will take up a residence under another government, and perhaps in some other quarter of the globe. We are disposed to say something upon this subject now, in refutation of certain positions that have been assumed by a class of men, as the American people are too well aware, and to the reproach of the Christian church and the Christian religion, too, viz.: that we never can rise here, and that no power whatsoever is sufficient to correct the American spirit, and equalize the laws in reference to our people, so as to give them power and influence in this country.

"If we cannot be an elevated people here, in a country the resort of almost all nations to improve their condition; a country of which we are native, constituent members; our native home, (as we shall attempt to show) and where there are more means available to bring the people into power and influence, and more territory to extend to them than in any other country; also the spirit and genius of whose institution we so well understand, being completely Americanized, as it will be found most of our people are,—we say, if we can not be raised up in this country, we are at great loss to know where, all things considered, we can be.

"If the Colored Americans are citizens of this country, it follows, of course, that, in the broadest sense, this country is our home. If we are not citizens of this country, then we cannot see of what country we are, or can be, citizens; for Blackstone who is quoted, we believe, as the standard of civil law, tells us that the strongest claim to citizenship is birthplace. We understand him to say, that in whatever country or place you may be born of that country or place you are, in the highest sense, a citizen; in fine, this appears to us to be too self-evident to require argument to prove it.

"Now, probably three-fourths of the present colored people are American born, and therefore American citizens. Suppose we should remove to some other country, and claim a foothold there, could we not be rejected on the ground that we were not of them, because not born among them? Even in Africa, identity of complexion would be nothing, neither would it weigh anything because our ancestry was of that country; the fact of our not having been born there would be sufficient ground for any civil power to refuse us citizenship. If this principle were carried out, it would be seen that we could not be even a cosmopolite, but must be of nowhere, and of no section of the globe. This is so absurd that it is as clear as day that we must revert to the country which gave us birth, as being, in the highest sense, citizens of it.

"These points, it appears to us, are true, indisputably true. We are satisfied as to our claims as citizens here, and as to this being the virtual and destined home of colored Americans.

"We reflect upon this subject now, on account of the frequent agitations, introduced among us, in reference to our emigrating to some other country, each of which, embodies more or less of the colonizing principle, and all of which are of bad tendency, throwing our people into an unsettled state; and turning away our attention in this country, to uncertain things under another government, and evidently putting us back. All such agitations introduced among us, with a view to our emigrating, ought to be frowned upon by us, and we ought to teach the people that they may as well come here and agitate the emigration of the Jays, the Rings, the Adamses, the Otises, the Hancocks, et al., as to agitate our removal. We are all alike constituents of the same government, and members of the same rising family. Although we come up much more slowly, our rise is to be none the less sure. This subject is pressed upon us, because we not infrequently meet some of our brethren in this unsettled state of mind, who, though by no means colonizationists yet adopt the colonization motto, and say they can not see how or when we are going to rise here. Perhaps, if we looked only to the selfishness of man, and to him as absolute, we should think so, too. But while we know that God lives and governs, and always will; that He is just, and has declared that righteousness shall prevail; and that one day with Him is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day; we believe that, despite all corruption and caste, we shall yet be elevated with the American people here.

"It appears to us most conclusive, that our destinies in this country are for the better, not for the worse, in view of the many schemes introduced to our notice for emigrating to other countries having failed; thus teaching us that our rights, hopes, and prospects, are in this country; and it is a waste of time and of power to look for them under another government; and also, that God, in His providence, is instructing us to remain at home, where are all our interests and claims and to adopt proper measures and pursue them, and we yet shall participate in all the immunities and privileges the American nation holds out to her citizens, and be happy. We are also strongly American in our character and disposition.

"We believe, therefore, in view of all the facts, that it is our duty and privilege to claim an equal place among the American people; to identify ourselves with American interests, and to exert all the power and influence we have, to break down all the disabilities under which we labor, and thus look to become a happy people in this extensive country."[577 - Penn, The Afro-American Press, pp. 43-46.]

Ray rendered equally as valuable services to the Negroes as a promoter of the Underground Railroad. In fact he was approaching the climax of his career when the Underground Railroad became an efficient agency in offering relief to the large number of Negro slaves who found themselves reduced to the plane of beasts in the rapidly growing cotton kingdom. One of the striking cases in which he figured was that of the escape of the Weims family, so well known for the almost unparalleled deliverance from bondage of the entire family with one exception.

Exactly how the freedom of these slaves was obtained appears to better effect in the language of Ray himself. "But I must say a word about the younger girl, the price of whom they held as high as we gave for Catherine. We proposed another method for her freedom and carried it out, in which the mother acted a good part, as she could; we proposed to run her off. I was written to, to know whether a draft for three hundred dollars would be forwarded, conditioned upon the appearance of Ann Maria in my house or hands—the sum being appropriated to compensate the one who should deliver her safely in the North. I answered, of course, in the affirmative."[578 - From papers in the possession of Ray's family.]

The escape of Ann Maria, as proposed by this new plan, can best be explained by the correspondence between Mr. Ray and Mr. Bigelow in Washington, who, writing according to a method often adopted in those days in order the more effectually to secure concealment, designates Ann Maria as the parcel sent.[579 - These letters are in the possession of the author.] The letter reads thus:

    "Washington, D. C., Nov. 17, 1855.

"Rev. Chas. B. Ray,

"Dear Sir: I have a friend passing through the city on his way to New York, and I mean to avail myself of his kindness to send to your lady the little parcel she has been so long expecting. You can name it to her, and I now suggest that as soon as you find it convenient, you send me by express the wrapper and covering in which the valuables are packed, for I have another similar parcel to send and shall find these things exactly convenient for that purpose. My friend intends to leave here on Monday morning, with his own conveyance, taking it leisurely, and may not reach New York before about Thursday, but of this I speak more exactly before I close. I need not suggest to you how anxious I shall be to get the earliest news of the arrival of the package without breakage or injury."

Also he adds as follows:

    "Washington, D. C., November 22, 1855.

"Rev. Chas. B. Ray,

"Dear Sir:

"My last letter will lead you to expect to see the boy Joe to-day but it was afterwards calculated that he will not arrive till sometime to-morrow. I am requested for the gratification of Joe's mother that you will be pleased on his arrival and before he changes his sex, to have his daguerrotype taken for her use. It will make up a part of the Record."

Mr. Ray's narration continues thus:

"Accordingly, one afternoon upon arriving home I found, sitting on the sofa at my home, a little boy about ten years old in appearance and looking rather feminine. I knew at once who it was, that it was Ann Maria. Upon her arrival I was to take her to Mr. Tappan, in whose hands the balance of the money was placed. This I did, and the little boy Joe was taken to her uncle or to where he could obtain her and finally reached Canada."

The following incident has often been told in Mr. Ray's family. "One summer morning, a loud rap with the knocker at the front door arrested the attention and the door being opened, a man entered, who after asking, 'Does the Rev. Mr. Ray live here?' and receiving an affirmative answer, whistled as a signal to attract the notice of his comrades, then cried out, 'Come on, boys!' and forthwith fourteen men in all entered, quite alarming the inmates of the house on seeing such a train of fugitives."

In the midst of these busy days Mr. Ray also served as a minister. For twenty years he was the pastor of the Bethesda Congregational Church in New York City where many learned to wait upon his ministry. He lived until 1886, long enough to enjoy some of that liberty for which he so patiently toiled. His more valuable services to his race, however, were rendered during the period prior to the Civil War. Although in the midst of this struggle of the subsequent period there came forward men who towered higher in the public opinion than he did, the valuable work which he did as an abolitionist, and an editor, should not be neglected.

    M. N. Work

THE SLAVE IN UPPER CANADA[580 - This paper has appeared in Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, May, 1919.]

The dictum of Lord Chief Justice Holt: "As soon as a slave enters England he becomes free"[581 - Per Hargrave arguendo, Somerset v. Stewart (1772), Lofft 1, at p. 4; the speech in the State Trials Report was never actually delivered.] was succeeded by the decision of the Court of King's Bench to the same effect in the celebrated case of Somerset v. Stewart[582 - (1772) Lofft 1; (1772) 20 St. Trials 1.] where Lord Mansfield is reported to have said: "The air of England has long been too pure for a slave and every man is free who breathes it."[583 - These words are not in Lofft or in the State Trials but will be found in Campbell's Lives of the Chief Justices, Vol. II, p. 419, where the words are added: "Every man who comes into England is entitled to the protection of the English law, whatever oppression he may heretofore have suffered and whatever may be the colour of his skin. 'Quamvis ille niger, quamvis tu candidus esses'" and certainly Vergil's verse was never used on a nobler occasion or to nobler purpose. Verg. E. 2, 19.William Cowper in The Task, written 1783-1785, imitated this in his well-known lines:"Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungsReceive our air, that moment they are free.They touch our country and their shackles fall."]

James Somerest,[584 - I use the spelling in Lofft; the State Trials and Lord Campbell have "Somersett" and "Steuart."] a Negro slave of Charles Stewart in Jamaica, had been brought by his master to England "to attend and abide with him and to carry him back as soon as his business should be transacted." The Negro refused to go back, whereupon he was put in irons and taken on board the ship Ann and Mary lying in the Thames and bound for Jamaica. Lord Mansfield granted a writ of habeas corpus requiring Captain Knowles to produce Somerset before him with the cause of the detainer. On the motion, the cause being stated as above indicated, Lord Mansfield referred the matter to the Full Court of King's Bench; whereupon, on June 22, 1772, judgment was given for the Negro. The basis of the decision, the theme of the argument, was that the only kind of slavery known to English law was villeinage, that the Statute of Tenures (1660) (12 Car. 11, c. 24) expressly abolished villeins regardant to a manor and by implication villeins in gross. The reasons for the decision would hardly stand fire at the present day. The investigation of Paul Vinogradoff and others have conclusively established that there was not a real difference in status between the so-called villein regardant and villein in gross, and that in any case the villein was not properly a slave but rather a serf.[585 - See, e. g., Vinogradoff, Villeinage in England, passim; Hallam's Middle Ages (ed. 1827), Vol. 3, p. 256; Pollock & Maitland, History of English Law, Vol. 1, pp. 395 sqq. Holdsworth's History of English Law, Vol. 2, pp. 33, 63, 131; Vol. 3, pp. 167, 377-393.] Moreover, the Statute of Tenures deals solely with tenure and not with status.

But what seems to have been taken for granted, namely that slavery, personal slavery, had never existed in England and that the only unfree person was the villein, who, by the way was real property, is certainly not correct. Slaves were known in England as mere personal goods and chattels, bought and sold, at least as late as the middle of the twelfth century.[586 - See Pollock & Maitland's History Eng. Law, Vol. 1, pp. 1-13, 395, 415; Holdworth's Hist. Eng. Law, Vol. 2, pp. 17, 27, 30-33, 131, 160, 216.] However weak the reasons given for the decision, its authority has never been questioned and it is good law. But it is good law for England, for even in the Somerset case it was admitted that a concurrence of unhappy circumstances had rendered slavery necessary[587 - "So spake the fiend and with necessity,The tyrant's plea, excused his devilish deeds."Paradise Lost, Bk. 4, ll. 393, 394.Milton a true lover of freedom well knew the peril of an argument based upon supposed necessity. Necessity is generally but another name for greed or worse.] in the American colonies: and Parliament had recognized the right of property in slaves there.[588 - E. g., the Statute of (1732) 5 Geo. II, C. 7, enacted, sec. 4, "that from and after the said 29th. September, 1732, the Houses, Lands, Negroes and other Hereditaments and real Estates situate or being within any of the said (British) Plantations (in America) shall be liable" to be sold under execution. Note that the Negroes are "Hereditaments and Real Estate."]

When Canada was conquered in 1760, slavery existed in that country. There were not only Panis[589 - The name Pani or Panis, Anglicized into Pawnee, was used generally in Canada as synonymous with "Indian Slave" because these slaves were usually taken from the Pawnee tribe. Those who would further pursue this matter will find material in the Wisconsin Historical Collections, Vol. XVIII, p. 103 (note); Lafontaine, L'Esclavage in Canada cited in the above; Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, Vol. XXVII, p. 613 (n); Vol. XXX, pp. 402, 596. Vol. XXXV, p. 548; Vol. XXXVII, p. 541. From Vol. XXX, p. 546, we learn that Dr. Anthon, father of Prof. Anthon of Classical Text-book fame, had a "Panie Wench" who when the family had the smallpox "had them very severe" along with Dr. Anthon's little girl and his "aeltest boy" "whoever they got all safe over it and are not disfigured."Dr. Kingsford in his History of Canada, Vol. V, p. 30 (n), cites from the Documents of the Montreal Historical Society, Vol. I, p. 5, an "ordonnance au sujet des Nègres et des sauvages appelés panis, du 15 avril 1709" by "Jacques Raudot, Intendant." "Nous sous le bon plaisir de Sa Majesté ordonnons, que tous les Panis et Nègres qui ont été achetés et qui le seront dans la suite, appartiendront en pleine proprieté a ceux qui les ont achetés comme étant leurs esclaves." "We with the consent of His Majesty enact that all the Panis and Negroes who heretofore have been or who hereafter shall be bought shall be the absolute property as their slaves of those who bought them." This ordinance is quoted (Mich. Hist. Coll., XII, p. 511), and its language ascribed to a (nonexistent) "wise and humane statute of Upper Canada of May 31, 1798"—a curious mistake, perhaps in copying or printing.There does not seem to have been any distinction in status or rights or anything but race between the Panis and the other slaves. I do not know of an account of the numbers of slaves in Canada at the time; in Detroit, March 31, 1779, there were 60 male and 78 female slaves in a population of about 2,550 (Mich. Hist. Coll., X, p. 326); Nov. 1, 1780, 79 male and 96 female slaves in a somewhat smaller population (Mich. Hist. Coll., XIII, p. 53); in 1778, 127 in a population of 2,144 (Mich. Hist. Coll., IX, p. 469); 85 in 1773, 179 in 1782 (Mich. Hist. Coll., VII, p. 524); 78 male and 101 female (Mich. Hist. Coll., XIII, p. 54). The Ordinance of Congress July 13, 1787, forbidding slavery "northwest of the Ohio River" (passed with but one dissenting voice, that of a Delegate from New York) was quite disregarded in Detroit (Mich. Hist. Coll., I, 415); and indeed Detroit and the neighboring country remained British (de facto) until August, 1796, and part of Upper Canada from 1791 till that date.] or Indian Slaves, but also Negro slaves. These were not enfranchised by the conqueror, but retained their servile status. When the united empire loyalists came to this northern land after the acknowledgment by Britain of the independence of the revolted colonies, some of them brought their slaves with them: and the Parliament of Great Britain in 1790 passed an Act authorizing any "subject of … the United States of America" to bring into Canada "any negroes" free of duty having first obtained a license from the Lieutenant Governor.[590 - This Act (1790) 30 Geo. III, c. 27, was intended to encourage "new settlers in His Majesty's Colonies and Plantations in America" and applied to all "subjects of the United States." It allowed an importation into any of the Bahama, Bermuda or Somers Islands, the Province of Quebec (then including all Canada), Nova Scotia and every other British territory in North America. It allowed the importation by such American subjects of "negros, household furniture, utensils of husbandry or cloathing free of duty," the "household furniture, utensils of husbandry and cloathing" not to exceed in value £50 for every white person in the family and £2 for each negro, any sale of negro or goods within a year of the importation to be void.]

An immense territory formerly Canada was erected into a Government or Province of Quebec by Royal Proclamation in 1763 and the limits of the province were extended by the Quebec Act in 1774.[591 - The Royal Proclamation is dated 7th October, 1763; it will be found in Shortt & Doughty, Documents relating to the Constitutional History of Canada published by the Archives of Canada, Ottawa, 1907, pp. 119 sqq. The Proclamation fixes the western boundary of the (Province or) Government at a line drawn from the south end of Lake Nipissing to where the present international boundary crosses the River St. Lawrence.The Quebec Act is (1774) 14 Geo. III, C. 83. It extends Quebec south to the Ohio and west to the Mississippi; Shortt & Doughty, pp. 401 sqq.] This province was divided into two provinces, Upper Canada and Lower Canada in 1791.[592 - The division of the Province of Quebec into two provinces, i. e., Upper Canada and Lower Canada, was effected by the Royal Prerogative, Sec. 31 George III, c. 31, the celebrated Canada of Constitutional Act. The Message sent to Parliament expressing the Royal intention is to be found copied in the Ont. Arch. Reports for 1906, p. 158. After the passing of the Canada Act, an Order in Council was passed August 24, 1791 (Ont. Arch. Rep., 1906, pp. 158 et seq.), dividing the Province of Quebec into two provinces and under the provisions of sec. 48 of the act directing a royal warrant to authorize the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Quebec or the person administering the government there, to fix and declare such day as he shall judge most advisable for the commencement of the effect of the legislation in the new provinces not later than December 31, 1791. Lord Dorchester (Sir Guy Carleton) was appointed, September 12, 1791, Captain General and Governor-in-Chief of both provinces and he received a Royal warrant empowering him to fix a day for the legislation becoming effective in the new provinces (Ont. Arch. Rep., 1906, p. 168). In the absence of Dorchester, General Alured Clarke, Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Quebec, issued November 18, 1791, a proclamation fixing Monday, December 26, 1791, as the day for the commencement of the said legislation (Ont. Arch. Rep., 1906, pp. 169-171). Accordingly technically and in law, the new province was formed by Order in Council, August 24, 1791, but there was no change in administration until December 26, 1791.] At this time the whole country was under the French Canadian law in civil matters. The law of England had been introduced into the old Government of the Province of Quebec by the Royal Proclamation of 1763; but the former French Canadian law had been reintroduced in 1774 by the Quebec Act in matters of property and civil rights, leaving the English criminal law in full force. The law, civil and criminal, had been modified in certain details (not of importance here) by Ordinances of the Governor and Council of Quebec.

The very first act of the first Parliament of Upper Canada reintroduced the English civil law.[593 - The first session of the First Parliament of Upper Canada was held at Newark (now Niagara-on-the-Lake) September 17 to October 15, 1792; the statute referred to is (1792) 32 Geo. III, c. 1 (U. C.).] This did not destroy slavery, nor did it ameliorate the condition of the slave. Rather the reverse, for as the English law did not, like the civil law of Rome and the systems founded on it, recognize the status of the slave at all, when it was forced by grim fact to acknowledge slavery it had no room for the slave except as a mere piece of property. Instead of giving him rights like those of the "servus," he was deprived of all rights, marital, parental, proprietary, even the right to live. In the English law and systems founded on it, the slave had no rights which the master was bound to respect.[594 - Everyone will remember the words of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States in the celebrated Dred Scott case. In Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1856 (19 How. 354, pp. 404, 405), Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, speaking of the view taken of the Negro when the Constitution was framed, says: "They were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race and whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them" (p. 407). "They had no more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order … and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic" (p. 411). "All of them had been brought here as articles of merchandise."This repulsive subject now chiefly of historical interest is treated at large in such works as Cobb's Law of Slavery, Philadelphia, 1858; Hurd's Law of Freedom and Bondage, Boston, 1858; Von Holst's Const. Hist. U. S. (1750-1833), Chicago, 1877; the judgments of all the Judges in the Dred Scott case are well worth reading, especially that of Mr. Justice Curtis.]

The first Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada was Col. John Graves Simcoe. He hated slavery and had spoken against it in the House of Commons in England. Arriving in Upper Canada in the summer of 1792, he was soon made fully aware that the horrors of slavery were not unknown in his new Province. The following is a report of a meeting of his Executive Council:

"At the Council Chamber, Navy Hall, in the County of Lincoln, Wednesday, March 21st, 1793.