has abolished the imprisonment of poor
debtors at the caprice of their creditors has provided means for
discharging, after a short imprisonment, persons held in prison for
fines which they have no means of paying. Indeed, what can be more
unequal or unjust than to hold a poor man a prisoner for life for an
offence which a rich man is allowed to expiate by a small part of his
superfluous wealth? But this is one, among many other barbarisms, which
the existence of slavery in the District of Columbia, by preventing any
systematic revision of the laws, has entailed upon the capital of our
model democracy. There was, as I have stated, no means by which Sayres
and myself could be discharged from prison except by paying our fines
(which was totally out of the question), or by obtaining a presidential
pardon, which, for a long time, seemed equally hopeless. There was,
indeed, a peculiarity about our case, such as might afford a plausible
excuse for not extending to us any relief. Under the law of 1796, the
sums imposed upon us as fines were to go one half to the owners of the
slaves, and the other half to the District; and it was alleged, that
although the President might remit the latter half, he could not the
other.

That same Mr. Radcliff whom I have already had occasion to mention
volunteered his services--for a consideration--to get over this
difficulty. In consequence of a handsome fee which he received, he
undertook to obtain the consent of the owners of the slaves to our
discharge. But, having pocketed the money, he made, so far as I could
find, very little progress in the business, not having secured above
five or six signers. In answer to my repeated applications, he at length
proposed that my wife and youngest daughter should come on to
"Washington to do the business which he had undertaken, and for which he
had secured a handsome payment in advance. They came on accordingly,
and, by personal application, succeeded in obtaining, in all, the
signatures of twenty-one out of forty-one, the whole number. The
reception which they met with from different parties was very different,
showing that there is among slave-holders as much variety of character
as among other people. Some signed with alacrity, saying that, as no
slaves had been lost, I had been kept in jail too long already. Others
required much urging. Others positively refused. Some even added
insults. Young Francis Dodge, of Georgetown, would not sign, though my