btTictuTes 0T\ rVFri'ca^-) S 
 
 aver 
 
 / 
 
 7 
 
 bcLTnuel CrotWrs. 
 
Class L 443 
 Book JI14l 
 
.STRICTUIiE>S 
 
 AIFlEIKBAil SIL-^^iaiS'ir^ 
 
 BV SAMUEIi CKOTIIERS' 
 
 PCBUSHED BV THE ABOLITION SOCIEIY oF FAINT VAlLEY. 
 
 i/). Telegraph Oilice— Rossville, Butler County, Ohio, 
 Fruited by Taylor ffebster. 
 
 1833, 
 
 
 • » . • 
 
 ^.-.^ 4. 
 
 Mc, 
 
The Executive Committee of the Abolition Society of Pamt Valley, 
 having met at Greenfield, May 4, 1833 — and having heard, in part, a man- 
 uscript by Rev. Samuel Ckothers, containmg Strictures on African 
 Slavery, requested him to publish the same — and ordered the Treasurer 
 to defray the expense of publication. 
 
 JOSEPH T. IRWJN. Rec. Sec. 
 
STRICTURES ON SliAVERY. 
 
 Modern writers on the subject of Slavery, speak of it as of very remote^ 
 antiquity. They tell us, it existed before the flood,- and this is the usual 
 ^introduction to the bold assertion, that it prevailed in the families of the 
 patriarchs, was licensed by the law of God given by Moses, and winked 
 at by our Lord and his Apostles. They generally express their hatred of 
 it, as inconsistent with purity of morals, and the interests of any commu- 
 nity in which it is tolerated. But they assign various reasons for its be- 
 ing permitted, as they suppose, in every period of the church. Some of 
 them assure us, that under the patriarchs it was exceedingly mild. Oth- 
 ers tell us that, owing to its previous existence among believers and pa- 
 gans, Mo.?es could not abolish it, although he vvas fully sensible of its 
 evils. Many of them insist, that the apostles refrained from opposition to 
 it, from a prudent resolution not to give offence. The only reason we 
 have seen assigned, as sufficient to account for its being tolerated under 
 both dispensations is, the hardness of our hearts. 
 
 Our Lord tells his hearers, that the ordinance respecting divorce, (Deut 
 xxiv. 1.) was given on account of the hardness of their hearts — i. e. it 
 was a statute for the relief of unfortunate females, who had fallen into the 
 hands of hard-hearted husbands. From this, some of the apologists for 
 slavery infer, that it was found necessary to indulge men in some sin, he- 
 cause their hearts are hard or uncked. 
 
 That the practice of depriving men of their freedom, (and, we might 
 add, of their lives and property,) existed in the world very early, we have 
 no doubt. We could believe this, without any other proof than the simple 
 fact, that this world always has been inhabited by enemies to God,. and ha- 
 ters of one another. But that the church has always been polluted with 
 this sin as it now is, or that it is countenanced by the word of God, we 
 cannot believe. In the following pages, we shall endeavor briefly to. 
 shew, that African slavery was introduced into the church by the Pope; 
 that its 7nost able advocates have failed in their appeals to the Scriptures; 
 that our churches arc polluted with this sin, and their cleansing is neces- 
 sary to save them f, 0711 ruin; that the argument drawn fro?n the example 
 of the Antediluvians is absurd; and that the plea that Abraham was a 
 slaveholder, is false and slanderous. 
 
 1. African Slavery was introduced into the Christian Church by the 
 Pope of Rome. 
 
 Christians universally take pleasure in tracing their virtuous practices 
 (o the example of our Lord, or his apostles, or the church m the purest 
 times of reformation. How, then, shall we account for tlie prevailing 
 shyness of the question, with whom did the oppression of the Africans 
 originate? The humiliating truth is, African slavery in the clnistiaa 
 
church, is the child of the "Motlier of Abominations/' This is proved 
 by scripture prophecy, by h'story, and by the fact lliat tlie whole defence 
 of slavery is Popish, both in its origin and spirit. 
 
 1. It is proved hy script tire prophecy. [Rev. 17 & 18.] — Tlie apostle 
 John, when in the Fsle of Patmo3,saw in vision a cliurch so corriipled, as 
 to become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and 
 a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. Upon her forehead a name 
 was written, lilystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots^ and 
 abominations of the earth. He heard a voice from heaven sayino- 
 come out of her my people, that yc be not lyartalcrs of her sins, and that 
 ye receive not of her 2>lagites, And in the list of her sins, vve find it dis- 
 tinctly noticed, that she made merchandize of slaves and souls of men. 
 Rev. xviii. 13, Thus the question, as regards the guilt of the church of 
 Rome, is decided by the paramount authority; and we are furnished with 
 a clue in our historical inquiries. We are instructed to look, in the histo- 
 ry of that church, for the tratiic in bodies and souls of men, about the 
 time when Great Babylon became a habitation of devils, and so Clihy 
 that the children of God must come out of her, to escape her sins and 
 her plagues. 
 
 2. It is proved by history. "Before the period of the reformation, the 
 Pope had, in the most audacious marmer, declared himself the sovereign 
 of the whole world. All Iho parts of it which were inhabited by those 
 who were not christians, he accounted to be inhabited by nobody; and if 
 christians look it into their heads to possess any of those countries, he 
 gave them full liberty to make war upon the inhabitants without any pro- 
 vocation, and to treat thorn with no more humanity tjian they would have 
 treated beasts. The countries, if conquered, were to be parcelled out ac- 
 cording to the Pope's pleasure; and dreadful was the situation of that 
 prince who refused to obey the will of the pontiff. In consequence of 
 this extraordinary authority, which the Pope had a.ssuined, he at last 
 granted to the king of Portugal all the countries to the eastward of Cape 
 Non, in Africa; and to the king of Spain, all the countries to the west- 
 ward of it. In this was completed the character ol Antichrist, sitting »;. 
 the temple of God, shewing himself as God. He had long before as- 
 sumed the supremacy belonging to the Deity himself, in spiritual matters; 
 and now he assumed the same supremacy in worldly matters also — giving 
 the extreme regions of the earth to whom he pleased." 
 
 [Reformation — BucPs Theological Dictionary. 
 
 Pagans had long, prior to this event, mamlained that captives, taken in 
 war, might be reduced to slavery, and held as no men, as dead men, and 
 beasts. There was nothing in paganism, to put such a principle to the 
 blush. But that slave making is a christian business, and tliat those who 
 are not christians are nobody, and tliat it is tlie privilege of christians to 
 make war upon thern and treat them as beasts; was a discovery reserved 
 for the "son of perdition." Truly, the world had never seen him in all 
 his frightfulness, until he exhibited himself in the temple as G'or/, distrib- 
 uting, among his favorite sons, heathen countries, with all their inhabi- 
 tants — just as some mighty man of wealth would divide his well-stocked 
 farms among his children. About fifty years before the reformation, we 
 
see the king of Portugal, under protection of the Roman Pontiffs, taking 
 possession of several islands and havens on the coast of Africa, for the 
 purpose of obtaining slaves by force and barter. Thus "Great Babylon'' 
 was fulfilling the prediction, (Rev. xviii. 13.) and filling up the cup of 
 her iniquity, and preparing herself for that terrible destruction, over which 
 "heaven, and ti'.e holy apostles and prophels," are called upon to rejoice. 
 [See Africa— New Edinburgh Encyclopedia. Also, Report of the Colo- 
 nization Society, A. D. 1832. 
 
 It was not difficult in such an age as that immediately preceding the 
 reformation, to reconcile both the church and the world to such a work 
 as slave making. It bid fair to be profitable ; it was represented as a pious 
 undertaking, essentially necessary to the propagation of the true religion; 
 the end sanctified the deed; the Pope had authorized it; and more than 
 fifty years afterwards, even Luther thought that if he doubted the Pope's 
 infallibility, the earth would swallow him alive. AVhen the Portuguese 
 took possession of Angola, on the western coast of Africa, to obtain 
 slaves, they solicited the court of Rome for a large supply of priests and 
 missionaries. The historian says, '-the prospect of so rich a harvest, in- 
 duced great numbers of all religious orders, but especially of the Jesuits, 
 to volunteer as labourers." The result was, the work of proselyting and 
 kidnapping went hand in hand, and was carried on with great success. In 
 the neighbourhood of San Paulo de Loando, the Jesuils, with old father 
 Anthony at their head, had under their oversight 12,000 slaves, labouring 
 on Hums and gardens. They boasted, that in ten years from the year 
 1 580, they had converted and baptized 20,000 souls. How many had 
 been slaughtered in slave making wars during that period — and how many 
 had been shipped off for other slave markets — we are not told. In the 
 neighboring province of Congo, the number of exjx)rted slaves amounted, 
 during the same length of time, to about 160,000. — [See Angola, &c. 
 New Edin. Encyc. 
 
 The history of South America, and the neighboring islands, discloses 
 the same system of iniquity. "Before Columbus set sail on his second 
 voyage, it was deemed necessary to obtain a grant from the Pope, who, as 
 the head of the church, and vice-gerent of the Almighty, claimed domin- 
 ion over all the kingdoms of the earth. Accordingly, his holiness grant- 
 ed, with great form and solemnity, to Ferdinand and Isabella, and their 
 successors, forever, all the countries inhabited by infidels, which they had 
 discovered, or might discover, but did not undenake to bound or de- 
 scribe them, as he was ignorant not only of their situation, but e^en of 
 their existence. To prevent, however, this grant from interfering with 
 one previously made to the crown of Portugal, he directed that a line 
 should be supposed lo be drav.-n one hundred leagues westward of the 
 Azores, from pole to pole, and all the unknown countries east of this line, 
 were given to the Portuguese — and those west, to the Spaniards. The 
 consideration of the grant was, the propagation of Christianity among the 
 heathen nations in the western regions, which Ferdinand engaged to do. 
 Accordingly, father Boyle, and several other friars, accompanied Colum- 
 bus in his second voyage, to instruct the nations in Christianity." Ten 
 years after tlie discovery of the continent, two expeditions were fitted on?, 
 for the purpose of .effecting pcrrnaneni selllenienl?. "These adventurers 
 
were insfrucled to acquaint i\\e natives with the primary arficles of Chris- 
 tianity, and particularly to inform them oi i\\Q svpreme jurisdiction of the 
 Pope, anil ot the grant which he had made of their country, to the kinw 
 of Spain — and then to require them to embrace Christianity, and to ac- 
 knowledge the authority of tlie Spanish sove?eign. And in case the na- 
 tives did not comply with these requirements, tiiey were tokl it would he 
 lawful to attack them with fire and sword, extcrnjinate them, and reduce 
 their wives and children to serviludc." The account given of the bap- 
 lism of Alahuelpa, one of the Incas, exhibits the spirit of these slave ma- 
 king missionaries. At his first intervievsr with Pizarro and his armed 
 force, the chaplain, through the interpreter, explained to him some of tiie 
 mysteries of Christianity, the power of the Pope, and his grant to the 
 king of Spain; and concluded by requinng him to acknowledge the Pope 
 and the christian religion, and submit to the king of Castile; and in case 
 he refused, he denounced war agamst him in the name of his sovereiorn. 
 The monarch, indignant and astonished at such impudence, wished to 
 know where he obtained his autliority. "In this book," said father Vel- 
 vinde, reaching to him his breviary. The Inca took it in his hand, and 
 turning over the leaves, aad raising it to his ear, observed, "this book is si- 
 lent — it tells me notiivng;"'^ and threw it on the ground in a contemptu- 
 ous manner. Tlie monk, turning to his countrymen in a rage, exclaimed, 
 "To arms, christians! — to arms! T'ue wordof God is insulted. Avenge 
 this profanation on these impious dogs." Immediately the martial music 
 struck up; the engines of death were made ready; und in a few minutes 
 four thousand Peruvians were lying dead. The wretched monarch was 
 seized and imprisoned; and after paying the immense sum of gold re- 
 quired as the price of his ransom, he was condemned by a mock trial to 
 be burnt. 'J'he Priests urged him to be baptized, and die a christian. 
 But "the only argument that had any influence was, that of mitigating 
 his punishment; and on the promise of being strangled, instead of being 
 consumed by a slow fire, he consented to be baptized by the hand of one 
 of his murderers, who exercised the iioly functions of piiest." By force 
 and fraud, they were very successful in ihe work of proselyting. In a few 
 years, upwards of 4,000,030 of Mexicans were baptized. One ecclesias- 
 tic baptized five thousand in one day — -and stopped only when he became 
 so exhausted as to be unable to lift up his hands. 
 
 It does not appear that a profession of Christianity secured to the na- 
 tives any thing like aflection. The treatment which the converts receiv- 
 ed at the hands of the Jesuits, was extremely cruel. In the year 1G68, 
 we see them labouring as slaves under the oversight of the Jesuits, in re- 
 building Santa Fe--and in the following year, five hundred of them were 
 employed on the fortifications and Cathedral of Buenos Ayres. From 
 the first, the Spanish adventurers reduced the natives to servitude. 
 "Every nhere they were seized upon, and compelled to follow the armies, 
 to carry their baggage, to work in the mines, to cultivate the earth, to 
 carry burdens, fur tlie want of domestic animals, and to perform all meni- 
 al and laborious services. Whether employed in mines, in agriculture, or 
 oilier situations, they were required to perform tasks much beyond tlieir 
 abilities; and being unaccustomed to regular labour, thousands sunk un- 
 der accumulated burdens and hardships, to which they were subjected by 
 
their unfeeling and rapacious masters. Their nalive spirit was bioken, 
 they became humbled and degraded, and the race was viipidly wasting 
 away It is slated bv Robertson and olhcis, that in the space of farteen 
 vears after the Spaniards landed, the Indians in Hispaniola were reduced 
 from 1 ,000,000 to 60,000. At lengtii, the Africans were found to be 
 more capable ol' enduring oppression; and under the protection of papal 
 infallibility, they were imported in great numbers— and thus the natives 
 were saved from extirpation.— [See histories of South America, by a citi- 
 zen of the U. States, Robertson and others. 
 
 Such is the true origin of African slavery among christians. For a con- 
 siderable time, the infallibility of the Pope was suOlcicnt to sustain it. 
 But at length, as the light of the Reformation increased, something else 
 was found necessary to quiet the world. Accordingly, the Jesuits and 
 ut her Popish authors, laboured hard to prove from the Bible, that the 
 slave trade and slavery, in some form, were of divine origin, and had been 
 cherished by divine enactments, and tlie example of the most distinguish- 
 ed worthies, almost from the beginning. And if the Pope of Rome, 
 ever relaxes his gravity, and indulges m merriment, it must be when he 
 sees Protestant divines', with ail their hatred of Popery, so fairly duped by 
 Popish writers, as to copy iheir notions and arguments into books for 
 Sabbath Schools and Colleges, and Theological Seminaries — representing 
 slavery as mysterious in its origin, and venerable for its antiquity, prac- 
 tised by the patriarchs, legalized by the law giver at Mount Sinai, and 
 tolerated in the christian churches by our Lord and his apostles. 
 
 But how did it happen, that while Protestants professed to rrject. In a 
 mass, the abominations of Popery, they retained the sin of slave holding? 
 In answering this question, we must not lose sight of -tiie influence of 
 mcn^s lusts in blinding their understandings, and stupitying their con- 
 sciences. But there are other considerations. We here see one fruit of 
 that unhallowed alliance of Church and State. Protestant churches 
 might have cleansed themselves from this sin, had they not become har- 
 lots, by leaning, in imitation of the "mother of harlots," on the arm of 
 kings and emperors, instead of the arm of their Jiusband. Wiien Protes- 
 tant rulers engaged in the slave trade, they had the church in their keep- 
 ing. It was a time of no missionary enterprize, and of course of but little 
 concern about either the bodies or souls of the heathen. The tralhc was 
 managed with an adroitness worthy of a better cause. Its horrors were 
 carefuHy corcealcd from those who were most likely to be disturbed. 
 Tlieir frightful cargoes of men, women, and children, were shipped to the 
 islands or distant plantations. 'J'ho great body of christians were con- 
 tending with a host of enemies, and were so harassed vvitli persecution, 
 that they did not hear llie great cry on the wastes of Afr'ca, nor the wait- 
 ings ot die niiddli; passage. So irnpcrfeclly were themselves freed from 
 the trammels of Popery, that few of them tliought of inquiring whether 
 the Pope was infaUil)le, when he cheered his blood hounds to the work, 
 with the assurance that it vv-ould be acceptable in the sight of heaven. In 
 the mean lime, had any scruples been ftlt in any department of the 
 fhurch, il would have refiuired something like the spirit of martyrdom, to 
 enter the lists with those terrible expounders of scripture— the towers 
 
 rilAT Bt'. 
 
When once any gross sin has obtained a quiei place in (he church, it is 
 not difficult to account for its continuance there. It is God's arranoe- 
 nient, that such a sin shall operate as a niftral pestilence on the whole 
 community. Thus he chastises the whole body for gross unfaithfulne^^a 
 in the exercise of discipline — and makes the purity of the church the con- 
 cern of every member. To cleanse (he church from an old and gross 
 sin is, without special, divine help, a hopeless undertaking. The Jewish 
 rulers winked at the sin of trampling on their Sabbaths, and of slave 
 making, or refusing to let their brethren go free in the seventh year, and 
 thus in a few years those sins were established in the church. They held 
 on in one of (hem, during four hundred and ninety years, in defiance of 
 all (he threatenings sent them by Jeremiah and other prophets. Nothing 
 could rouse them to the work -of cleansing (he sanctuary, till it was burn" 
 to ashes, and themselves punished with a captivitv of seventy years. 
 Lev. xxvi. 35— 43. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 21. Gen. xxxiv. 12—22. The 
 high places remained undisturbed during some of the first reformations 
 after the days of Solomon. The result was, these nuisances became 
 sacred in the eyes of many subsequent reformers. Jl is mentioned as a 
 stain on their memories — hoicbeit the high places were not taken away. 
 
 3. The whole defence of African Slavery is Popish, both in its ori- 
 gin and spirit. We assert, fearless of successful contradiction, that prior 
 to the existence of the slave trade, no christian of piety and intelligence, 
 ever undertook to expound the law of God given by Moses, as authori 
 zing involuntary, hereditary, and perpetual slavery. The blasphemies of 
 the Pope on this subject, have been palmed on the world as the old divin- 
 ity — as the doctrines which God revealed from heaven. Nor is it strange 
 that the cheat has never been detected, when we advert to the fact, that 
 the most popular writers on slavery have attempted little else than to re- 
 tail the current notions of Theologians. Any one, who has consulted 
 the Bamberg Commentary, and Jalin on Archaiology, and Calmet's Dic- 
 tionary, and a few other distinguished Roman Catholic authors, has seen 
 the sum of all that has been advanced on the subject, since the day that 
 the Pope decided that heathens were nobody, and encouraged christians 
 to make war upon and oppress them. As illustrations of the above re- 
 mark, we shall lay before our readers the following extracts. The first is 
 from Jahn, a distinguished papist, and the file leader of modern apologists 
 for slave holding. Jahn .says : 
 
 "The number in a family was very much increased, by the slaves that 
 were altachcl to it. It is probable that some of the patriarchs, as was 
 sometimes the case at a later period, with individuals in Greece and Ita- 
 ly, possessed many thousands of them. Slavery existed and prevailed be- 
 fore the deluge. Gen. ix. 25. Moses therefore, although he saw the 
 evils of slavery, was not in a condition to abolish it; and it would not 
 have been wise for him (o have made the attempt. He accordingly per- 
 nntted the Hebrews to possess foreigners, both male and female, in the 
 character of slaves. The Canaanites could not be held in slavery. For 
 ihem, under existing circumstances, slavery was regarded as too great a 
 privilege, or rather it would have subjected the Jews to too great a hazard. 
 Such was the bad faith of the Canaanites, the greatness of then number, 
 &,c. &c." 
 
 i 
 
Tli6 following is a sample of the piofourid veneration of Proteslant 
 writers, for the opinions of a Papist on slavery; and their care not to de- 
 viate a hair's breadth from Iiis ideas. It is taken from "An introduction 
 to the critical siiidy and knowledge of the Scriptures," by T. H. Home, 
 a distinguished divine of the Church of England. This work is so pop- 
 ular, that it has been adopted as a text book in Universities and Theologi- 
 cal Seminaries. Mr. Home says — 
 
 "Slavery is of very remote antiquity. It existed before the flood ; (Gen. 
 ix. 25) — and when Moses gave his law to the Jews, finding it already es- 
 tablished, though he could not ab(jlisu it, yet iia enacted various saluta- 
 ry laws and regulations. The Israelites might indeed have Hebrew ser- 
 vants or slaves, as well as alien born persons, but these were to be civ- 
 cumcised, and required to worship the only true God, (Gen. xvii, r3-r—17.) 
 with the exception of the Ganaani'^es, fcc.'" 
 
 The following is from Biblical Antiquities — a work prepared for the 
 use of Sabbath School Teachers, by Rev. J. W, Nevin, a Presbyterian, 
 and instructor of students, in one of our Theological Seminaries. Mr. 
 Nevin says — 
 
 "Slavery seems to have existed before the flood. Noah speaks of it as 
 a thing well known. Among the ancient patria'chs, it was very coramen. 
 The servants, of whom we hear in the history of their times, wore propeiv 
 ly slaves, who might be bought and sold without any regard to their own 
 will. Some of the richer shepherds, like Abraham and Job, appear to 
 have had thousands of them belonging to their households, &.c." There 
 are some things in tliese extracts, worthy of particular notice. 
 
 The doctrine that Moses, though sensible of the evils of slave hold- 
 ing, legalized it, because he found it already existing among pagans, and 
 in Abraha!n''s family, carries in its forehead the image of its father. It is 
 mortifying in the extreme, to see it gravely handed out by Protestants as 
 Bible Theology. But we are neither offended nor surprised, to see it in 
 the writings of a Roman Catholic. There it is all natural, and just what 
 we would expect. 
 
 The authority which he nscribes to Moses, and the discretionary pow- 
 ers with which he invests hiin, would suit the meridian of Rome. Pope 
 Gregory IGlh, in his late Circular to the Bishops, deplores the prevalence 
 of the absurd and horrible doctrine of liberty of conscience; and, among 
 the remedies, he calls upon the clergy to invoka the V'irgin, and St. Pe- 
 te'', o'^<i St. Paul, to preserve the Church. We need not, therefore, bo 
 surprised, to find an author, m the same communion, not once recogni- 
 zing God as the author of the Sinai covenant, or as it is usually called, 
 the law of Moses. From his confidence in saihls, and his implicit faith 
 in the exploits of the great men at Rome, it was very natural for him to 
 consider Moses as fully competent to the work of making a religion foe 
 the old testament church, Moses is left t© struggle alone, with his ha- 
 tred of slavery on the one hand, and its prevalence among pagans, and 
 Abralianfi's family on the other — and it would seom, that he made a bad 
 businessof it at last. Though sensible of its evils, he incorporated it 
 with the law of the church, and thus made it a part of the religion of 
 God's children ! 
 
 'i'he inconsistency which he ascribes to Mo5es, does not surprise U3, 
 
t2 
 
 tlirdusli the writings of tlie Roman Catiiolirs up to the commencement of 
 the slave trade, and no farther. We find it in the Bamberg synopsis. The 
 authors of this work were full blooded papists. They tell us, that John 
 Calvin was a liar and blasphemer. Yet there appears to be a brotherly 
 imion of sentiment, so far as slavery is concerned, between them and 
 protestant writers, on the same side. They insist that a man's servants or 
 slaves, under the Jewish law, were his property: and direct us to Aristo- 
 tle on Ethics, for proof.* In their exposition of the command to Abra- 
 ham, to- circumcise h\i bought servants, they take it for granted that they 
 were paoan slaves, and give a very religious reason for the circumcision 
 of such filthy beings. '"Thus the whole family of Abraham wera dedica- 
 ted to God, and the worship of God, and faitn, and salvation, propagated 
 to many, if not in love and freely, at least by fear and coercion — for that 
 was an age and a law not of sons but of servants." The truth is, this 
 notioa of the Jews being authorized to circumcise pagan slaves, is one of 
 the foul slanders on the old testament, by which papists endeavored to 
 eustain the Pope in making the slave trade a divine institution. To re- 
 concile protestants and the world, to a business so diabolical as that of 
 making property of human beings, they represented it as a very pious af- 
 fair, fromwhicii great good would accrue to the souls of the poor hea- 
 then. They would have us believe that it originated in heaven. It is 
 remarkable that, for many years, they never thought of making slaves of 
 any but pagans. But, at length, some of tlie enslaved Africans were 
 converted." There was no difficulty in retaining the converts themselves 
 in bondage. They were relieved by this sage xemdivk— Christianity was 
 not intended to change the civil relations of men. But the question 
 was, how could their children be held in slavery? The Bamberg synopsis 
 removes the whole difficulty, by the profound maxim— '-the birth follows 
 
 the belly!" , , . . 
 
 The fact is worthy of particular notice, that the principle of making 
 
 sljives of captives taken in war, never was applicable to any other purpose 
 than defence of the slave trade. The writings of papists since the com- 
 mencement of that iniquity, are full of il ; and it more frequently occurs 
 in expositions of the Bible by protestants, than any other mode of making 
 slaves. Let no one say, that it is because that principle so frequently oc- 
 curs in the scriptures. We hope to shew, in the proper place, that not- 
 withstanding the efforts that have been made for tljree hundred years past, 
 the most capable of the apologists for slavery, hav'C not been able to lay 
 their fingers on a single text, which looks like a warrant for dooming cap- 
 tives to slavery. Besides, they bring forward this principle, when it con- 
 tradicts the very letter of the text they are expounding. We could name 
 more than one protestant divine of eminence, who expound the permis- 
 sion (Lev. XXV. 44.) to buy bondmen of the heathen, by bringing forward 
 slavery by captivity 'J'hcy also mention it as a probability, that Abraham 
 obtained his servants by captivity; though Moses says expressly, that he 
 bought them with money. Such writers, whether they know it or not, 
 are just imitating papists who wrote after the commencement of the slave 
 trade. Arguments to support the principle of making slaves of pagan 
 
 ♦It is remarkable that they never quote, in support of slavery, any cbristiao 
 who lived prior to the alave trade. 
 
caplivog, were then in groat demand. Any one could sot", tliat nnlc?s it 
 could be proved that there was a divine warrant for enslaving the Afri- 
 cans, by making war upon tliem ni their own country, all who captured 
 them, and all who bought and sold them, and all who seized their oflspring, 
 deserved, in the sight of both God and man, to be pnt to death. Accord- 
 ingly, when popish authors approached the principle of^ slavery by captiv- 
 ity, they mustered all their force. They saw that on their success or 
 failure there depended the life or death of the whole slave question. 'J'hey 
 introduce this principle again and again, and dwell on it. ^ Protestant di- 
 vines, who profess to hate the slave trade, do the same thing from mere 
 imitation, and because they really do uot know what they are about. It 
 would be diverting, if it excited no pity, nor indignation, to witness the 
 mysterious and awful solemnity with which they approach this subject— 
 slavery by captimty . Mr. Uorne, with perfect gravity, remarks — this is 
 supposed to have been the first origin of slavery. It was certainly the 
 first. People had tirst to catch their neighbours, then sell them, then 
 seize their oflspring. 
 
 It ought, likewise, never to be lost sight of, that the slave trade was 
 originally, zealously defended as authorized by the scriptures, by those 
 who defended slave holding as scriptural. This is so far from needing 
 proof, that it is a mere truism. How could any man believe that the Bi- 
 ble authorized him to hold the Africans in slavery, unless he also believed 
 that It authorized him to catch them. Those who defend the one, and 
 condemn the other, do not know what they are douig. It is true, that in 
 the present day, with more than enough of slaves on hands, and with the 
 horrors of St. Domingo, and the scenes of Southampton before our eyes, 
 it not onlj costs us nothing, but it sorts with our worldly interest, to hate 
 and denounce the slave trade. But in the days of our great grandfathers, 
 when an increase of slaves appeared likely to increase their wealth, there 
 was consistency on this subject. Papists and protestants avowed and de- 
 fended it as their faitii, that those who captured and transported the Af- 
 ricans, and those who bought and sold them, and those wlio seized their 
 offspring in the cradle, were sailing under the same flag, and had the same 
 charter for their trade. Tiiey were careful, in their expositions of the 
 scriptures, to lay down principles which would cover every branch of the 
 concern. They were particular in pouiting out three ways, in which a 
 christian might righteously enslave a pagan. 
 
 1. By captivity. If a pagan was concjuered in battle by a christian, 
 he forfeited his liberty forever. lie was justly, in the .sight of God, the 
 slave of the captor. This was the encouiagement for christians to enlist 
 in the slave trade, and in slave making wars. 
 
 2, By purchase. A pagan forever lost his freedom by being bought, 
 no matter who sold him. This was the encouragement to repair to the 
 coast when the slave ship arrived, and buy and sell the cargo from one to 
 another. 
 
 5. By birth. A child forfeited its liberty simply by being born, provi- 
 ded its mother was a sla^e. This was the warrant for kidnapping all the 
 infants born during the middle passage, and after the arrival at tiie planta- 
 tions. 
 
 Within the recollection of many now living, professed christians could 
 appeal to the Bible, with equal solemnity, fur the justification of the slave 
 
14 
 
 nade and slave liolding. VVJien il ^vas lieard ihaf the sliip had arrivf'd 
 with anotiier fine cargo of bodies fvom Africa, the plauler would hurry 
 to the coast, fie would select a body not too much damaged bv the pas- 
 sage, and one that was likely to outlive ihe giie.f of separation from kin 
 drcd and country; and at the moment of counting down the money to 
 tlie captain, he would quiet his conscience by quoting his text, and the 
 captain would quote it loo; and they would smile on each other, and both 
 agree that it was excellent proof But at length we discovered, tliat we 
 hud slaves enough on hands, and rather more than enough. Any in- 
 crease would crowd us too much, and endanger our lives. We therefore 
 vesolved, that if any mar. should bring us any more, we would hang 
 liim. It might have been expected of slave makers, that they would 
 clelend their partners with the Bible while they needed them — and liand 
 them over to the gallows as soon as tliey could do without them. 
 
 In a late popular work, the author has inserted, in his views of the 
 Jewish law, the doctrine of the perpetual slavery of captive strangers— 
 but he has omitted the proof. Probably the doctnne itself, will he left 
 out of the next edition. We do not now need it, having abandoned the 
 slave trade. It would be a gratuitous and very awkward business, for di- 
 vines to be torturing texts to justif,- that which we have proi ounced a sin, 
 punishable with death. The business of all who volunteer in favour of 
 slavery in future will be, to prove that there is no sin in holding the few 
 ue have on hands; or, that all who are bought with our money, are our 
 lawful property; and, that all men are born slaves, whose predecessors 
 had the misfortune to fall into the hand.-? of those thieves wliom we have 
 lesolved to hang for their villany. 
 
 It accords wiih the selfishness and cruelty of the slave holding spirit, 
 tljat, when you entreat a slave holder to break the yoke, and let the op- 
 pressed go free, he talks of tlie loss he would sustain, and insists that the 
 community must indemnify him. Yet it would move bis indignation, 
 were every villain in the United States to talk of bringing in his bill, and 
 drawing on tiic public treasury, for the 'lamages he would sustain by be- 
 coming an honest man. He himself never would brook the idea of a 
 pension for those v/ho weie thrown out of employment, by the abolition 
 of the slave trade. This is the more inconsistent, as we had been in the 
 liabit of paying them for the Alricans they orought us, and of assuring 
 tliem from the Bible, tlial they were engaged in a lawful calling. 
 
 II. The most able advocates for slavery, have failed in their appeals 
 to the Scriptures. 
 
 We have said, that those divines, who in their expositions of the scrip- 
 lures, talk so much about invohmtary, hereditary, or perpetual slavery, and 
 especially slavery by cajitivity, being scriptural, arc imitating popish wri- 
 fois, and do not know what they are about. We are sure this will he 
 pronounced censorious and false. We shall be told, that it was the over- 
 whelming evidence of scripture, which produced the conviction, in Ihe 
 minds of those gieat and good men, that slavery, in all its iorms, was a 
 divine institution. Let us then examine the overwhelming evidence. We 
 cannot notice all the texti; wo have heard quoted. At present, we can 
 only examine those adduced by some one of the most capable aiid popu- 
 
lar authors, We cai\not think of a more fair selection than Mr. llonic. 
 He has devoted a chapter of seven pages to the subject ot' slaves and ser- 
 vants] and has occupied one section with pointing out the various waya 
 in which slaves might be obtained; and has carefully noted down the 
 scripture proof. He has availed himself of all the discoveries of papists 
 on this subject, as is evident from the manner in which he has retaiie^i 
 their ideas. He lias had all the help to be obtained from protestant wri- 
 ters. Besides, he has studied the Bible himself. He has published fot?r 
 large volumes for the assistance of young men "in the critical study and 
 knowledge of the scriptures." So high is the estimation in which his 
 works are held, that they have been adopted as text books in Colleges 
 and Theological Seminaries. Where he has failed, it is not probable that 
 any man has succesde I. We must add, however, tiiat it would be doing 
 Mr. Home great injustice, m our humble opinion, to judge of the rest of 
 his writings from what he has written in defence of slavery. 
 
 We cannot but notice, brielly, in this place, the general character of this 
 chapter, witlj that of the notes on slavery. God is not once distinctly re- 
 cognized as the author of the law given at Sinai. Treading in the foot- 
 steps of Jahn and other papists, he represents Moses as hating slavery, yet 
 mcorporating it with the religion of the church, from motives of expedi- 
 ency.^ We arc told, that Aulediluvians, and Patriarchs, and Israelites, 
 and Greeks, and Romans, and Turks, were slave holders. The Israelites 
 had five different ways of depriving their neighbors of their freedom. But 
 we are assured, that slavery among them was generally mild and salutary, 
 both to the body and soul. He tells us, "it ca.-^rtat be denied, that the 
 situation of slaves was much more tolerable among the Hebrews, than 
 among other nations, especially the Greeks and Runi;uis." From which, 
 it is presumed, we may infer, tbnt the religion of the former was more tol- 
 erable than that of ihe latter. Yet even that ought to be proved, if wa 
 must believe that Moses made it, and bottomed it on the Jesuitical prin- 
 ciple, that sin and holiness are mere matters of expediency. He gives us 
 a pleasing account of the spirit of the Otionian empire, where "rich peo- 
 ple, when childless, purcrhasod young slaves, to educate them in their o>vh 
 raith, and sometimes adopted them for their own children, and whert-. 
 -slaves sometimes attained to the highest honors. [Dr. Priestly, who way 
 a warm admirer of Mahomet, and wrote a large volume for the purpose of 
 exnibiting the beauties of xMahomctanism, in contrast with christianitv, 
 vvould have been charmed to -see his favorite so fairly eclipse Moses.j lie 
 iK^ewisc notices Josei.h and D.iniel, as insiances of Hebrew slaves, out of 
 their own country, becoming vice-roys and governors. He- mentions, at 
 so, one instance, to shew that slaves had, sometimes, similar good fortune 
 «n the holy land. But our young men in the Seminaries, must not think 
 that the Hebrews were the most devilish people in the world. He .shew.s 
 that the Greeks and Romans v/ere worse. Among them, "olaves were 
 held, for no men, f(tr dead men, for bcasls—nay, were in a ninch worse 
 atate than any cattle whatever.'" Ho cxhibita (he mastert^ as scoursmt' 
 and cruelly torturing them, for the ^lighteiit and moat f ri vial offences -" 
 brandiiig them with braudmg nous in their handa and foreheads, to kecr> 
 ttietn trom running away-'-and, when c.\asperated by any real or nppre- 
 hended injury, naiimg them to (he cro5£, and makung Ihcm die a linger- 
 
16 
 
 ing and most miseiablo death! We once found some difficulty in believ- 
 ing the account, given by a traveller, of the imagery of a certain church 
 in Europe. The pulpit was hung round witli the pictures of saints; and 
 among others were to be seen, in bold relief, St. Balaam, and the animal 
 that rebuked his madness. But tlie sight of sued a group of saints, would 
 have as harmless an effect on the devotion of a congregation, as the sight 
 of such a collection of slave holders would have on the morals of our 
 youths in Colleges and Theological Seminaries. 
 
 In the following soclion, he ])ointsout five ways in which the Jews were 
 authorized to turn their neighbors into property. Surely they must have 
 been a rich people. 
 
 "Slaves were acquired by various ways, viz: I. By captivity, which 
 is supposed to have been the first origin of slavery. (Gen. xiv. 14. Deut. 
 XX. 14, and xxi. 10 — 1 I.) 2. By debt, when persons being poor, were 
 sold for payment of their debts. (2 Kings, iv. 1. Matt, xxviii. 25.) 
 3. By committing theft, without (he power of making restitution: (Ex. 
 xxii. 23. Nell. v. 4 — 5.) And 4th. By birth, when persons were born 
 of married slaves. These are termed born in the house, [Gen. xiv. 14. 
 and XV. 3. and xvii. 23. and xxi. 10.] home born; [Jer. ii. 14.] and the 
 children and sons of handmaids. [Ps. Ixxxvi. 16. and cxvi. isy 
 
 We can say sincerely and truly, that we have never seen a more perti- 
 nent collection of texts to prove the lawfulness of slave holdmg. We 
 have noticed carefully, for about seven years, the appeals to the Bible on 
 this subject. The result has been a settled conviction, that every attempt 
 to use the word of God in defence of involuntary, hereditary, and perpet- 
 ual slavery, must lead to nonsense, or heresy, or infidelity. It is the ar- 
 rangement of heaven, that no man can speak truth and good sense, in at- 
 temptmg to make God's will the abettor of any gross sin. The thing to 
 be proved being unreasonable and wicked, every argument and mode of 
 reasoning which can be enlisted for its support, must be of a kindred 
 spirit. That Mr. Ilorne, with all his talents and acquirements, and means 
 of intbrm aion, has not been more successful than others on the same side 
 of the question, will, we think, appear from an analysis of his proofs. 
 
 I. "i?^ captimttj .'''' The first text quoted, is Gen. xiv. 14. And when 
 Abraham heard fJiat his brother Lot icas taken captive, he armed his 
 trained servants, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pur- 
 sued than to Dan. We have too much respect for Mr. Home's under- 
 standing, to suppose, that the circumstance of these young men having 
 been bom in his house, is reterred to as proof, that Abraham made them 
 slaves by captivity. Nor must we suppose that he quotes this text, as 
 proof that their parents were made slaves by captivity. He contends that 
 tiiere were four other ways of slave making. Besides, it appears from the 
 tesfimonyof Moses, (Gen. xvii. 13.) that the patriarch bought his servants 
 Tvith money. It is evident that Lot being taken captive by the enemy 
 whom Abraham was about to pursue, is the point referred to- This is 
 the proof that God's people, in old times, with his approbation, made 
 slaves of captivQs! In the same way he might have proved, tiiat Abraham 
 and his household were wicked., and sinners before the Lord exceedingly; 
 for by turning to Gen. xiii. 13. he would have found this charge brought 
 figainst the men of Sodom. But this plan of cJiarging on the church of 
 
17 
 
 God the wickedness of her neighbors, is not original. It is precisely the • 
 course which infidels have been pursuing, time out of mind. Theapolo- 
 gists for slavery, arc certainly not chargeable with being oi;c?- nice about 
 precedents. Sonielimes they plead that pagans, among the Greeks and 
 Romans, had slaves. Sometimes they remind us, that "the great whore" 
 (Rev. xviii. 13.) traded in slaves and souls of men. And Mr. Horno 
 brings forward the example of those invaders whom Abraham chastised. 
 Such an argument remmds us of one which was frequently used by some 
 hard faced professors, at the commencement of the present war with in- 
 temperance. They often quoted the example of Nabal, and the Levite, 
 and Benhadnd and others, who were distinguished for nothing but drun- 
 kenness and meanness, to prove that the scriptures allow a christian to 
 drink till his heart is merry. 
 
 Another text adduced as proof, that making slaves of captives was agree- 
 able to the law of God is, [Deut. xx. 14.] where direction is given to the 
 Jewish armies, in cases where the warriors in a besieged city were to be cut 
 on'. But the n-omcn and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in 
 the city, even all the S2)oil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou 
 shall eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given 
 thee. Here is truly an affecting spectacle — a city, in which every wife is a 
 widow, and every child is fatherless. What shall be done with them.-' 
 The Genius of Slavery, snys — make slaves of them and their offspring 
 forever. Make them work all their lives without wages, or sell them, 
 and live on the proceeds. Slave holders contend that this is the spirit, if 
 not the letter of the statute. We attempt in vain, to ascertain by what 
 process they would make this appear. Perhaps they infer it from the 
 fact, that the Israelites are allowed to eat the spoil, and take the captives 
 home. Still this will not make them slaves, unless iibe assumed that the 
 holy land was one of those regions where starvation or slavery were the 
 only alternatives for the vi'ldow and her fatherless child. But this wo uld 
 betray gross ignorance of tiie Jewish law. Who does not know, that a , 
 tythe was collected every third year, to support strangers and widows, an^ 
 fatherless children, as well as Levitcs; and that the law secured to thern 
 a share in every harvest and every vintage, besides the privilege of step-, 
 ping into any man's field or vineyard, to eat when hungry? Perhaps they 
 build their argument on the assumption that, in the text, the women and 
 little ones are reckoned as part of the spoil. If there were christian can- 
 nibals in the world, they would insist that this is correct; and if they 
 gjicceeded in proving it, slave holders would be left in the lurch. The 
 text would then be neither more nor less, than a command to eat the cap- 
 lives; and the slave holder would not have even the privilege of "snacks," 
 unless he would quit the trade of man stealer, and turn man eater. We 
 cannot guess how they work the passage into a proof of slavery, by captiv- 
 ity. We feel pretty coniident, that Mr. Home does not know, and that 
 ho never enquired. He saw it quoted by Jahn and other Roman Catho- 
 lics; and he faithfully copied it, as he has most of his other ideas on 
 slavery. A niomenl''s attention to the Jewish law, will settle this matter. 
 The following (juotation, shews that the soldier who v/ouid seize the wo- 
 men and liltic ones to doom them to slavery, must do it with the light- 
 enuigs of Sinai flashing in his face. Yc shall not. ujjUci any tvidoic ov 
 
18 
 
 failierUss child, ij thou affiict them in any wise, and they cry at tltun-. 
 to me, I loill surely hear their cry, and my wrath shall wax hot, and I 
 wi/l kill you iinth the stvord; and your toives shall be loidows, and your 
 children fatherless. Ex. xxii. 22 — 24. 
 
 Mr. Home likewise quotes Deut. xxi. 10 — 11, where permission is 
 given to Israelitish soldiers not to enslave, but to marry any of the cap- 
 lives to whom they might have a desire — especially if they saw among 
 them a beautiful woman. This would be a peitinent quotation to justify 
 the selection of a beautiful captive as a companion for life. But how any 
 man could imagine that it would justify the enslaving of captives, is the 
 mystery. 
 
 2. '"'•By debt, when persons being poor, were sold for payment of their 
 debts. Matt, xviii. 25. 2 Kings, iv. 1. It seems he would have us be- 
 lieve, that in the holy land the divine law left no alternative for the unfor 
 lunate debtor, but the horrors of slavery. This is not all. They tell us, 
 that the children of slaves were doomed to a life of bondage. Can any 
 man think of a land whore such is the poor man's fate, without associating 
 the idea of a region beyond the reach of mercy.'' We confess that such a 
 Jaw would perfectly comport with the theory of the Israelites being fur- 
 nished with five ways of turning their neighbors into cash. Indeed it 
 would seem reasonable, that a man who, with so many facilities for ma- 
 king money, could not pay his honest debts, should be severely punished. 
 Still we would expect some saving clause in favour of those who were too 
 old or infirm to chase their neighbors, or conquer them in battle. But let 
 us hear our author''s proof. He quotes Matt, xviii. 25. where the kingdom 
 of heaven is compared to a certain king who, when his debtor had nothing 
 to pay, commanded him to be sold, and his wife and children, and all that 
 he had, and payment to be made. To work this text into a proof that 
 the law of Moses allowed poor debtors to be sold, it is evidently assumed 
 that those things to which allusion is made by inspired writers, for the il- 
 lustration of truth and duty, must be such as the law approved. Let us 
 apply this principle. When allusion is made to the unjust steward, or to 
 a judge who feared not God, neither regarded man, it shews that the 
 law given at Sinai required stewards to be unjust, and judges neither to 
 fear God nor regard man! 
 
 But perhaps Mr. Home is more happy in his reference to 2 liings, iv. 
 1. We here enter our solemn protest against all attempts to fix the mean- 
 ing of the law, by appeals to the practice or vvickedness of the church, or 
 to any thing else than the law itself. But it is an outrage on the feel- 
 ings of every sober reader of the bible, to bring forward the morals of the 
 ten tribes in the days of Ahab and Jezebel, as a sair.ple of the morality of 
 God's covenant at Sinai, Let us examine the text. Now there cried a 
 certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets, vnto Elisha, say- 
 ing, thy servant, my husband, is dead; and the creditor is come to tale 
 unto him my two .sons to be bondmen. TJio simple fact of her husband 
 fearing the Lord, would account to Elisha for his being poor, and dying 
 in debt. Jeroboam, to perfect his schism, had removed the Levites from 
 the priesthood, and put in their room those who would be more convenient 
 tools in wickedness. Under the influence of the same spirit, Ahab and 
 Jezebel had driven every son of the prophets from Iiis post, and compelled 
 
19 
 
 them lo hide in dens and caves of the earth. The result was, this wo- 
 man's husband had died poor, and in debt; and in the spirit of the timeSj 
 the creditor is come to seize her children for bondmen. A reference to 
 such a state of things, makes us feel as Gen, Eaton did, when he saw a 
 gallows erected at the door of a Turk to hang his little son, because the 
 father was too poor to pay his tax. He exclaimed, "God, I thank thee 
 that my children are Americans," But, it seems, an apologist for slave 
 holding is made of sterner stuff. This is not the first time we have seen 
 this state of things referrel to, in justification of slavery: nor is it the first 
 time we have seen it brought forward as a sample of the morality of the 
 Sinai covenant. According to Mr. Home's reasoning, the Jewish law re- 
 quired that if any prophet, or son of the prophets, manifested any fear of 
 the Lord, he was to be driven from his post; and if, in consequence, he 
 died insolvent, his fatherless children were to be placked from their widow- 
 ed mother, and sold for bondmen. It does appear, that the faculties of a 
 giant will become spell-bound, the moment he turns advocate for slavery. 
 If Jeroboam, in his efforts to wean the ten tribes from the altar at Jerusa- 
 lem, could have found a prophet willing to give such an interpretation of 
 the law which regulated religion there, he would have made him Prime 
 Minister. Jezebel would have fed such a man at her own table. 
 
 We here assert, fearless of contradiction by any unbiassed reader of the 
 Bible, that except the permission common to Jewish and Christian pa- 
 rents in all countries, to sell (in the scriptural sense of the word,) or indent 
 their children, or wards, during minority, for a term of six years, there is 
 not a statute in all the Jewish law which authorized one man to sell ano- 
 ther. In every case, the person sold is himself the seller. Perhaps the 
 following may be considered an exception. 
 
 3. "By committing theft without the power of making restitution. Ex. 
 xxii. 23. Neh. v. 4 — 5." It appears that a thief was to make restitu- 
 tion: if /tc have nothing, then he shall he sold for his theft. Nothing is 
 said about the duration of his servitude; that probably depended on the 
 time necessary to make restitution. Ex. xxii, 23. is an unfortunate text 
 for the slave holder. It establishes two facts. I. That the lawgiver con- 
 sidered liberty the natural right of man — to be forfeited by crime in a spe- 
 cified case only. 2, That to appropriate to our own use that which is our 
 neighbours — in other words, to sieal, was a sin, to be punished by the 
 judges. But the text is here quoted, to prove, that to appropriate to their 
 own use, by force or fiaud, the person and services, and just wages of 
 their neighbors, was a practice licensed by the God of Heaven. He might, 
 with equal propriety, have undertaken to prove, that they v/ere allowed to 
 murder one another, by appealing to the statute which required the ma- 
 gistrate to put the murderer to death. 
 
 We suspect the printer must have put Neh. v. 4 — 5. under the wrong 
 head. But it does no honour to a theologian, to quote it any where in 
 justification of slavery, or as a sample of the purity of a divine law. It is 
 an appeal to the conduct of some scandalous professors. On reference 
 to the passage, it appears that complaint had been made by some Jews 
 against brethren who, taking advantage of their circumstances, had exact- 
 ed usury, and compelled them to bring in bondage their sons and daugh- 
 ters. Nehemiah tells us, / was very angry ichen I heard their cry, and 
 
20 
 
 these words: He rebuked the nobles and rulers, and set a great assembly 
 against them. lie ehamed thorn, by reminding them of the reproach of 
 the heathen, their enemies; and they held their peace, and had nothing to 
 ansirer. He then called the priests, and took an oath of them, that they 
 would cease from their wickedness, and make restitution. Also, I shook 
 my lap and said, so God shake out every man from his house, and from 
 his labour, that performeth not this promise; even thus he be shaken out 
 and emptied. And all the eongregation said, Amen, and praised the 
 Lord. And the people did according to this promise. All that we can 
 gather from this passage is, that in the dajs of Nehemiah, some members 
 of the church had smned, by bringing their fellow men into bondage of 
 some kind; and Nehemiah, by faithful dealing, and threatening them 
 with excommunication, brought them to repentance, and a solemn pro- 
 mise of amendment. How this proves thai slave holding was not sinful, 
 but agreeable to the law of God, we cannot see. Are "all those sins for 
 which discipline has been exercised, to be classed with christian virtues? 
 
 4. By birth, when persons were born of married sktvcs. These are 
 termed born in the house. Gen. xiv. 14 and ].">; iii. and 17—23: and 
 xxi. 10." We shall make no remarks on Gen. xiv. 14. at present; as we 
 intend to notice it particularly in the history of Abraham. 
 
 The second text quoted in support of slavery by birth, is Gen. xv. 3. 
 "And Abraham said, behold to me thou bast given no seed ; and lo, one 
 born in my house is mine heir." We shall notice this text also, again. 
 At present we rernaik, that Mr. Home knows, that the phrase "one born 
 in my house," is not the one so translated in the other texts quoted. He 
 knows that it is literally rendered "a son of my house." It is the same 
 which is translated (Eccles. ii. 7.) '^servants born in my house." It seems 
 that in these piping times for slavery, we cannot have even a Hebrew 
 Grammar, without a hint in its favour. Professor Stuart, to enable us to 
 understand a note in Syntax, quotes Eccles. ii. 7, and lets us know that 
 the proper translation is, / had slaves. We once heard the phrase, a 
 son of the Ao?<5e, ciuoted in conversation, as an argument for slavery; 
 and to make it satisfactory, we were assured that it is an idiom. There 
 is a wonderful charm in a learned term. A schoolmaster once quieted the 
 fears of a whole neigliborhood, respecting a great light in the novtb, by in- 
 forming them that it was a phenomenon. Does "a son of the house," re- 
 ally mean one born in the house, and tied to it as a slave? Does "a son 
 of thunder," mean one born in a thunderstorm? We think the phrase in 
 question, means one who is devoted to some service in, or oversight of, 
 the house. Where he drew his first breath, or on what terms he serves, 
 would be another question. So Abraham explains it in reference to Ele- 
 azer. He speaks of him as his steward, and as the probable heir of his 
 estate. We shall have but little to say against the cundition of the Afri- 
 cans in the United States, when we see them exalted lo the station of 
 stewards; and, next to the sons, the heirs of their master's wealth. 
 
 We think [Gen. xvii. 23.] if it proves any thing, will prove too much 
 for Mr. Home. "Abraham took Islwnael his son, and all that were born 
 in his hou.'^c, and all that were bought with his money, every male among 
 ihe men of his house, and circumcised, &c." Abraham did so, because 
 God had commanded him to circumcise not only his servants, but all born 
 
21 
 
 in Jiis house. In this last clause, every Jew found the warrant to circum- 
 cise his cliildren. But if it means persons born slaves, it wiil appear that 
 under the old testament, none had a right to circunicis^ion but servants, 
 and those who were born slaves. 
 
 But the most pleasant quotation of all, is Gen. xxi. 10. "Wherefore 
 she said unto Abraham, cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the 
 son of this bondwoman shall not be iieir with my son even Isaac.-' It 
 would please us exceedingly, if all slave holders m the United States 
 would exercise this kind of discipline, when their slaves become saucy- 
 turn them out, and deny them the privilege of serving any longer. U is 
 in this way they manage saucy servants in Britain and Ohio. There 
 would be no necessity in this country, of taking measures to disinherit 
 them. 
 
 To prove that children of married slaves, were slaves also, he quotes 
 Jer. ii. 14. "Is Israel a servant? is he a home born slave.!"' Here our 
 translators have inserted the word slave, and have changed the meaning 
 of the text, in attempting to make it plain. The phrase, "a home born 
 slave" is, in the original, the same which in other places is rendered, sim- 
 ply, "born in the house." The allusion is to the command to Abraham 
 to circumcise his bought servants, and all born in his house. The spirit 
 of the text is this: Is Israel in covenant with God? Has he been admit- 
 ted to the seal of the righteousnet^s of faitli? Why then is he spoiled? 
 The text has no allusion to slaves. 
 
 But we do not recollect of ever seeing a more disgusting enbrt,than 
 his atteir.pt to draw an argument in favour of slavery, from the jihrase, 
 "sons or children of handmaids." The texts are. Psalms Ixxxvi. IG. "O 
 turn unto me and have raercv; give strength to thy servant, and save the 
 son of thy handmaid." Again, Psalms cxvi. 16. "O Lord, truly lam 
 thy servani," &lc. Here, it appears, David acknowledges that his mother 
 was the Lord's handmaid; therefore," i^'c. 4'c. Sfc. When we see such a 
 man as Mr. Home, chained to the slave holding system, and prostituting 
 his fine talents, and perverting the word of God to its defence, it makes 
 one feel as Jeremiah did, when he exclaimed, "Mv bowels, my bowels! I 
 am pained to the very heart." From infancy we have been accustomed to 
 hear such texls quoted, in justiiication of slavery. To make tliem satis- 
 factory, we were assured that it was the opinion of the most approved di- 
 vines, that it is not sinful. It appears, however, that an approved dicine 
 does not, necessarily, mean one who found his faith in the bible, or proves 
 it from the bible. It does not, necessarily, mean any thing more tiinn one 
 who, by readinjj J aim, and Markii Medulla, and Turrctine, and llidgely, 
 &,c. &LC. has acquired a complete set or system of notions. One of these 
 approved divines, can tell you in five minutes what the doctrine of the 
 bible is, on any subject you can name, without the trouble of looking at 
 a bible. He has only to turn to his system ; and, if he there finds the doc- 
 trine in question, or a loop to hang it on, he will assure you it is tiie doc- 
 trine of the bible— /o?* it accords with thescrifiineitts of the inotit appraised 
 divines. Thus these approved divines, kee[) us in the horn book, on the 
 subject of slavery, and many other imporlant subjects. 
 
 It is easy to conceive how Papists could be satisfied with such bible 
 proofs as those which we have just noticed. As we said before, shyness of 
 
^2 
 
 the bible is part of their religion. Besides, any deficiency of texts, would 
 he more than made up by the authority of the Pope, who never makes 
 mislaUea, excepting when he runs foul of some of his own infallible de- 
 cisions. Nor is it hard to imagine how Protestants are so easily satisfied. 
 The truth is, we received the slave trade and slavery, with the doctrine 
 that they are divine institnti(»ns, and the texts to prove it, from the hands 
 of Papists, without examination. Besides, when men have once com- 
 menced tlie indulgence of their lusts with any gross sin, they are not apt 
 to be nice about the scripture proof 
 
 in. Slavery has polluted our churches, and its removalis necessary 
 to save them from ruin. 
 
 1. Afriuan Slavkry has brought with it into Protestant 
 Churches, a kujiber of the filthiest of the Popish maxims, and 
 
 MAS given birth TO OTHERS AVIIICH A PaPIST WOULD BE ASHAMED OF. 
 
 Our children, from the time they are capable of learning any thing, are fa- 
 miliar \«\\\i piotcs frauds, and the maxim, "the end sanctifies the deed." 
 'I'hey hear such things, in some form, from every slave holder who attempts 
 to defend his conduct. The very spirit and sum of his defence are, die 
 evils he is averting from his country, and the Africans, and his own fami- 
 ly, and himself, and the good be is doing on all hands, by holding his fel- 
 low men in bondage. 
 
 "Tl)e Lord does not expect sinners to repent, provided it would be ac- 
 companied with great inconvenience or expense." What else does that 
 man say, who acknowledges slavery to be sinful in principle, and perhaps 
 expres-ses his fears that, if persevered in, it will bring ruin on his country — 
 yet excuses hin)^elf, by bringing forward a host of difficulties which would 
 follow emancipation. According to this man's morality, every old sinner 
 may hold on in his wickedness, and he will grow innocent as he grows 
 grey; for reformation from any old sin must be difficult, and the difficulty 
 daily increases, and it may be very expensive when there is occasion for 
 restitution. Nay, it would seem, that Martyrs, who parted with life rather 
 than sin against God, may have been well meaning people, but had very 
 little wisdom. The truth is, that slave holders who use such an apology, 
 are just doing as every man once did, who has gone to hell from under the 
 light of the j^ospel. They are going on in sin, and quieting their con- 
 sciences with resolutions to repent when they shall come to the convenient 
 place. 
 
 "'i'he Lord does not require sinners to repent at all, provided they will 
 give up their wicked practices." Few persons undertake to talk about 
 the sin of slave Iiolding, without hearing the retort, "You had better be 
 preaching in flivour of the Colonization Society, than be raising distur- 
 bance, by telling us of our sin, and insisting on repentance." Yet, on 
 every other subject, they will acknowledge and contend for it as an arti- 
 cle of their faith, that no reformation without repentance will avert the 
 divine displeasure. 
 
 "The Africans are too depraved and vvicked to enjoy freedom in this 
 country." If we may believe slave holder.?, they are lazy thieves, liars, 
 swearers, sabbath breakers, drunkards, and murderers. Yet they would 
 make useful missionaries. All that is wanting in Liberia, is an increase 
 of their number, to evangelize Afiica, 
 
23 
 
 The name of penances and indulgences, is odious nniong proleslants. 
 But it is only the name that is universally liated. I\Iany a slave holder 
 has cleared scores with his conscience, both for the past and fuluie, by a 
 contribution to a Colonization Society. From the moment some men put 
 down their names as annual contributors, (o some project for gettin<T rid 
 of slavery without much inconvenience, you cannot reach their con- 
 sciences. Every entreaty to break off their sin, by reiientance and vvorka 
 of righteousness, will be answered with the plea, that they are assisting 
 the colonization cause. Some lake a cheaper course still. They call up 
 their ignorant slaves, and propose the alternative of ending their days in 
 slavery, or being torn from their families and friends, and put ashore on 
 tlie coast of Africa. In most cases, from love of kindred and country, 
 and ignorance of Liberia, and want of confidence in the statements of 
 white people, they will prefer to die in their present condition. From 
 that moment, the master feels no remorse. As long as he lives, he will 
 recur to this circumstance for comfort, in moments of disquietude. Per- 
 haps he will put it in the newspapers as a triuni pliant riftiUttion of all 
 the arguments against slave holding, and as proof that emancipators are 
 distuibers of the peace. Such a man can obtain indulgences chea{xir 
 than ever Tetzel sold them, 
 
 *'There is no sin in slave holding, if we do not sell our slaves." The 
 contempt of some slave holders for a negro trader, is equalled only oy the 
 self-complacency which they feel when they mention that they never sold 
 a human being, excepting, perhaps, some wicked ones. The amount of 
 it at least is, they have had all the guilt and profits of the sin to tJjern- 
 selves. They forget, however, the influence of their example on their 
 children. They forget that they may be obliged to sell their slaves, 
 should they be involved in debt; and that by dying slave holders, they 
 will put it in the power of another to do if, before they are cold in their 
 graves. We seldom hear of a more melancholy circumstance, than that 
 of a professor of religion on his death bed, calling some of his neighbors 
 to his bed side to bear witness, that though he owns slaves, he never sold 
 one. Why does he not call some one to bear witness, that he never sold 
 horses? He has too r«uch sense. He knows that there is as much re- 
 ligion in selling property as in holding it in our own hands. But in pros- 
 pect of the judgment, his fears are roused by the recollection, that he has 
 turned aside the stranger from his rights, and, like a drowning man, he 
 catches at a straw. 
 
 "There is no sin in holding slaves, provided we use them well.'' It is 
 a very common opinion, that the manner in which we transgress God's 
 law and injure our neighbours, is to decide whether it be sinful. Lord 
 Chesterfield is not alone in the opinion, that in many cases the manner is 
 every thing. 'J'he bold highwayman takes his stand by the road side with 
 considerable self-com})iacency, when he reflects with conlemjit on the 
 chicken-hearted creatures who steal in the dark, when people are asleep. 
 The latter, in the mean 'time, blesses himself when he remembeis, that he 
 never endangered any bndy^s life by his calling. We have drunkards too, 
 who get drunk moderately and decently. Nobody sees them lounging in 
 the hlthy grocery, or lying about the still-house. It is lemaikable that 
 every man, in every branch of the en^ilaving concern, approve^ hi^ ou'u 
 
24 
 
 wav, and condemns his neighbour's. Those monsters who spend their 
 days in prowling around tlic shores of Africa, keep up their spirits, and 
 cheer each other over their cans, by cursing the hypocrites who, in chris- 
 tian countries, with their bibles in their hands, can steal little infants in 
 their cradles. The great man on the slave farm, when going the round of 
 liis traps in the morning, to see how many infants have been caught since 
 sun down, will mention it as a consoling reflection, that we have passed a 
 law to hang tiiose wicked men, who seize and enslave the poor unoffend- 
 ing Africans in tlieir own country. Those who have learned not to build 
 their hopes entirely on the wickedness of their neighbours, and are taking 
 no measures to increase the number of their slaves, have otiier ways of 
 mana'nn"^ their consciences. It is sometimes serious work, when they 
 look i-ound on the widows and orplians on whose tears tliey are thriving. 
 But they remember what those amiable divines, the Jesuits, have told us, 
 of the embarrassment of Moses on this subject, and the prudent course 
 pursueJ by the apostles — ^and then the reflection, "I use my slaves well," 
 puis every thing right. There is a wonderful charm in this apology. It 
 seems the highest judicatories of some of the most respectable church- 
 es have fell its wizzard influence. They utterly refuse to recommend 
 the exercise of discipline, for cleansing the sanctuary; yet they know, 
 that no church, composed m part of nominal professors, ever was cleansed 
 from an old sin without the exercise of discipline. As a substitute, they 
 condemn the principle, and then give some grave direction about the prac- 
 tice- noticing, particularly, feeding and clothing, and good usage. Thus 
 the people take up the idea that, after all, sin, when properly regulated, is 
 not so bad a thing as some weak professors are apt to suppose. We 
 have heard this apology, "I use my slaves well," more frequently than 
 any other. Probably there is not a slaveholder on earth, wlio does not 
 use it. Some of them are so well pleased with it, that they use no other. 
 We sometimes hear it in circumstances rather unfavorable to gravity. A 
 few years ago, a respectable southcn slave holder, at a certain meeting in 
 Philadelphia, undertook to cure a few of his backwoods brethren of tlieir 
 oi)position to slave holding. Ills argument consisted wholly of a detail 
 of liis mild treatment of black people. It must bs confessed, that his 
 Jiearers were not capable of doing him justice; for, unfortunately, in a 
 little while, he became so affected with a sense of his goodness to the 
 poor black wretches, that it choked his utterance. We have heard this 
 apology from men whose slaves were in another stale, in tiie hands of 
 overseers, of whose treatment they knew nothing, and could know no- 
 thincT, except as the overseers were pleased to inform them by letter. In 
 some'of our slave states, they are so much in the habit of defending them- 
 selves by asserting that their slaves would not have their freedom as a 
 "ift, that they frecfuently make the same assertion, in the state of Ohio, 
 when in pursuit of runaways. 
 
 "It is neither necessary nor proper for common people to read the scrip- 
 tures." This maxim is enforced by severe penalties in many of our slave 
 slates, and warmly advocated by many professed christians, so far as co- 
 loured people are concerned. It is a remarkable fact, that with all the op- 
 position of Protestants and Papists to each other, they can shal^e hands 
 over the work of stripping the Afiicans of their freedom, or depriving them 
 
25 
 
 of tlie means of salvation. This is not singular. The Pharisees and 
 Saddiicees were sworn enemies, but there was one cause which always 
 united ttiem. 
 
 "Some things, sinful in principle, are christian in practice; in other 
 words, it is christian-like to practise sin." This is avowed by multitudes 
 of slaveholders. Thoy seem to want language to express their hatred of 
 the principle of slavery. But they frequently get relief by the sweeping 
 assertion, that it is the greatest curse ever permitted to light on any na- 
 tion. But with the same breath, they will justify their practice by ap- 
 pealing to the history of Abraham, or the law of Moses,, or the writings of 
 the Apostles. For ourselves, we must say, that we do not know a 
 worse heresy. Nor do we believe that the boldest infidel ever said a 
 more malignant thing against God or the bible, than this charge of his 
 having licensed things sinful in principle, and ruinous in their effects. We 
 all look with horror at the impudence of our apostate father, when he at- 
 tempts to throw the blame of his rebellion on his maker, by telling him 
 to his face — "the woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me 
 of the tree, and I did eat." But some men can incorporate with their 
 theology that which, in the first rebel, was the mere raving of despair. 
 
 The history of the Jesuits does not furnish more contemptible trim- 
 mers than those christians would be, who would copy the spirit and con- 
 duct ascribed by Papists to Moses, at the giving of the covenant at Sinai. 
 What character more infamous than that of the minister, who graduates 
 the purity of his gospel and his life, by the state of morals in his congre- 
 gation and neighborliood. How far ministers fall under this censure who 
 ha;e become slaveholders, and by their example teach others to be slave- 
 holders, and in the mean time whine about their consciences and their ha- 
 tred of slavery, and their unfortunate situation, we leave themselves to 
 judge, ilow they feel when they look round on the strangers, and wid- 
 ows, and fatherless children, on whose misery they are thriving, we do 
 not know, and we never wish to know by experience. If they do at all 
 reflect seriously on the day of retribution, and the doom of the oppressor, 
 ihey must have feelings which no one can envy. One thing we do know. 
 'J'o say that the word of God will bear them through, and that they are 
 pursuing tlie course marked out by Moses and the Apostles, and Jesus 
 Christ, IS adding blasphemy to iniquity. You may ascribe it to weakness, 
 if you please— but, when we hear men charge God with legalizing, in his 
 word, tlie practice of any thing which is, in principle, a sin, it makes us 
 think of those who fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, 
 and look upward. The morality of our churches, under the influence of 
 the slave holding spirit, is becoming rotten lo the core. 
 
 2. That our slave holding churckes are polluted, and must be 
 cleansed, if they would escape destruction, appears from the 
 TVPE OF THE LEPROUS Hou&E. Lcv. xiv. 33—53. Many of the truths 
 of the gospel, are exhibited in the old testament in types and shadows. 
 It is scarcely necessary to say, that God is as true to threatenings and 
 promises, and predictions, thus delivered, as to any others. In this way 
 tliat prediciion was delivered, which was fulfilled at the Saviour's cruci- 
 tixion — a hone of him shall not be broken. Moses, in his farewell ad- 
 dress, charges Israel — "Take heed in the plague of leprosy, that thou ob- 
 
 4 
 
26 
 
 serve diligently, and do according to all that the Priests and Levites shall 
 teach you; as I commanded them, so ye shall do. Remember what the 
 Lord thy God did unto Miriam by the way, after that ye were come forth 
 out of Egypt." Deut. xxiv. 8. 9. Miriam murmured against Moses, 
 because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married, and refused to 
 submit to him as a prophet. For this sin, she was smitten with leprosy, 
 and became white as snow, and was shut out of the camp as unclean, sev- 
 en days. All the directions respecting this plague, and the way of clean- 
 sing, were intended to shew the evil nature and ellccis of sin — and to point 
 out the only way of salvation. 
 
 But among the Israelites, houses, as well as persons, were visited with 
 leprosies. They seem to have been extraordinary plagues, so far as re- 
 gards houses, peculiar to that people; and appear to have been intended 
 as types of a polluted church. Let us examine Lev. xiv. 33—53: "If 
 hollow streaks, greenish or reddish, lower than the wall," were seen in 
 the walls of the house, the priest was to shut it up seven days. On the 
 seventh day, if the plague were spread in the walls, the stones were to be 
 removed, and the house scraped lolthin round about, and the dust and 
 stones carried to an unclean place without the city. If afler the house 
 was repaired and plastered, the plague was still visible, the priest was to 
 pronounce it "a fretting leprosy" — it was past cure. The whole estab- 
 lishment was to be broken down, and all the materials carried out of the 
 city to a place devoted to the reception of filth. But even where the lep- 
 rosy did not prove to be of ihe fretting kind, he that entered it from the 
 time it was first shut up, was to be considered unclean till even. He 
 that had eaten or lain in the house was to ^rash his clothes. An atone- 
 ment was to be made for the house. Jt must be cleansed with blood and 
 cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop. Applying the instructions of this 
 type to a church polluted with slave holding, we learn the following par- 
 ticulars. 
 
 1. Every thing in a slave holding church is defiled. We 
 sometimes hear men who, from their birth, have been eating and sleeping 
 in a slave holding churcli, assert that they never were polluted, mentally 
 or otherwise, with this sin. They might be sincere — but it could not be 
 true. There is, indeed, a cleansing provided; and he who has been wash- 
 ed, and has experienced the virtue of the true blood, and scarlet wool and 
 hyssop, can say / am cleansed. But he who asserts that he never needed 
 cleansing, asserts what no man acquainted with his bible will believe — 
 because it cannot be true. We dare not believe that any of God's types 
 were slanders. Types arc as true as words. You cannot lay your hand 
 on a clean thing, in a church which has been three hundred years in a 
 grossly polluted state. The means of instruction are defiled. The ves- 
 sels remaining in a leprous house after the leprosy was discovered, were 
 unclean. Lev. xiv. 86. And every open vessel, in a house defiled by a 
 dead body, was unclean seven days. Numb. xix. 15. Our translation of 
 the scriptures, bears the marks of the church's defilement. The transla- 
 tors were very honest, eminently learned, and pious men. We cannot 
 account for their success in producing a translation so nearly perfect, 
 without supposing that they were divinely assisted. But God was true 
 to his word. He has in a few instances left them to themselves, so far 
 
27 
 
 as to shew to all succeeding generations, tliat the type of a leprous house 
 was not an unmeaning thing. They commenced their work after the 
 reign of Queen Elizabeth. And they have in some cases shewn, that 
 then- minds had been polluted in regard to servitude, by the sin of their 
 times. They have in one case inserted the word slave, and more than 
 once the word servant, without warrant from the original, where it alters 
 the sense of the text. They have rendered the Hebrew word for a servant 
 variously — bondman, and bond servant, and servant — from a mistaken 
 notion, that the scriptures approved all the variety of servitude which ex- 
 isted in their day. The Greek words, despotes and kurios, are both 
 translated master, though the latter means the master of a voluntary ser- 
 vant — the former a despot, or slave holder; as is evident from the fact, 
 that the despot is never recognized as a church member, or addressed as 
 a believer. 
 
 Our commentaries, our books for theological seminaries, and sabbath 
 schools, are deliled. The authors generally express their disapprobation 
 of slavery. Some of them are at a loss for words to express their abhor- 
 rence of it. Yet they speak of it as practised by Abraham, and licensed 
 by the law given at Smai, and winked at by the apostles. Any one who 
 will notice how the mind of the great and good Dr. Scott, labours in his 
 exposition of Ex. xxi. czn tell whether the church, when he was born, was 
 a leprous house. 
 
 2. Nothing short of recourse to the atonement and the blooi> 
 of sprinkling, will cleanse our slave holding churches. evcn 
 when the plague had disappeared from the walls of the house, it was un- 
 clean, until cleansed by an atonement, and with blood, and scarlet wool, 
 and hyssop. There is an horrible thing in Israel, when ministers of the 
 gospel cry out against urging our churches to repent, and apply to the 
 high priest to cleanse us. They ought to know better, than to suppose 
 that we may make colonization, or emancipation, a substitute. The aban- 
 donment of gross sm from selfish motives, accompanied with refusal to 
 repent, will not avert the judgments of heaven from a nation, much less 
 cleanse and save a guilty church. It is not the presence of the Africans 
 that pollutes us. IVe rejoice indeed, to hear of any of them obtaining 
 their freedom. But we ought to tremble at the very thought of their 
 leaving us in our present impenitent state. In all probability, it would 
 seal our destruction. The man who would then call upon us to repent, 
 would be marked as a troubler of Israel. What would have been thought 
 of the Israelite who, because tlie greenish or reddish streaks had disappear- 
 ed from the wall, would have opposed an application for an atonement and 
 cleansing. We say then, preach colonization, if you please; and urge 
 emancipation as a duty which God requires, and one of the evidences of sor- 
 row for sin, but let nothing be a substitute for repentance, and recourse to 
 the blood of sprinkling. 
 
 3. God will break down our churches unless we put away the 
 SLAVE HOLDING ABOMINATION. He has Said it, and he will do it. He 
 has given us ample pledges of his faithfulness to his threatenings, in the 
 type of the leprous iiouse. He twice broke down his temple at Jerusa- 
 lem, on account of gross pollution. The last was its final ruin. For 
 nearly eighteen hundred years, the very spot where it once stood, has 
 been an unclean place, trodden under foot of all nations. 
 
28 
 
 He has pledged his faithfulness that he will break down, by terrible 
 judgments, the church in which African slavery originated. In tbe book 
 of Revelation, he calls upon his children to escape from it, lest they per- 
 ish in Its ruins. He declares that he has abandoned it as a habitation of 
 devils. He will pour out his plegues upon it till it is broken down, and 
 cast into the unclean place. Let it never be forgotten, that one of his pro- 
 minent grounds of controversy with that establishment is, the sin of ma- 
 king merchandize of "slaves and souls of men." 
 
 We fear the sin of slave holding has become, in many of our churches, 
 "a fretting leprosy" — incurable. The slave trade and slave holding, have 
 become unpopular, only as they have been found to be unprofitable. 
 There appears to be no repentance towards God. Ours is not a sin of 
 ignorance. We have light on this subject, as the light of the noon day. 
 One of two things, however, will take place — there will be either a great 
 crashing of churches; or leprous professors will be brought to raise the 
 cry, unclean, unclean. 
 
 IV, The argument drawn from the example of the Antediluviaiis is 
 absurd. 
 
 Sin is a deceitful thing. Every man, however honest and manly en 
 every other subject, will be more or less deceitful whenever he engages in 
 the defence of any gross sin. We see this in thfe manner in which the 
 apologists for slavery approach the subject, and endeavor to draw an ar- 
 gument from Antediluvian practice. They seem to "name it filled with 
 solemn awol" Let us hear them. "Slavery existed and prevailed be- 
 fore the deluge. Gen. ix.25." Jahn. 
 
 "Slavery is of very remote antiquity. It existed before the flood. Gen. 
 IX. 25." Home. 
 
 "Slavery seems to have existed before the flood. Noah speaks of it as 
 a thing well known." Nevin. 
 
 Instead of tracing it as they would drunkenness or murder, to the lusts 
 of wicked men, they introduce it as venerable for its age, and of some 
 mysterious origin. We have seen several learned theories to account for 
 its existence. They carefully avoid the question, whether the good or the 
 bad men before the flood, were the slave holders, excepting an insinua- 
 tion that they were such men as Abraham and Moses, and all the old tes- 
 tament believers. It is amusing to notice the blunder into which Jahn 
 and, after him, Home, have fallen, in selecting a text to prove that slave 
 holding is older than the flood. Any thing that Moses has said about 
 violence, when he is expressly giving us the character of the old world, 
 and assigning the reason for its destruction, would have spoiled their the- 
 ory as to the morality of slavery. They therefore both quote Gen. ix- 
 25 — Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his breth- 
 ren. It seems that Noah, after the flood, predicted that Canaan, at some 
 future day, would be a servant of servants. This is the proof that slave- 
 ry existed before the flood! Mr. Nevin remarks — "Noah speaks of it 
 (slavery) as a thing well known." He prudently quotes no text. And 
 nine-tenths of children in the sabbath school, will conclude that he found 
 it in some of the writings of Noah on Antediluvian slavery. Here we 
 are furnished with another sweeping principle for the interpretation of 
 
U9 
 
 '^ciipture. When a prophet predicts any tiling, (the dissolution of llie 
 world for example,) we must remember, tlmt it was sometliing well known 
 in his day, or which took place before the flood. We have never yet seen, 
 and we never expect to see, the man who will undertake to make the bi- 
 ble justify slavery, without advancing principles which lead directly to in- 
 fidelity or nonsense. 
 
 But we join issue with those advocates of slavery. We say it did ex- 
 ist before the flood. For the proof, we refer to Genesis vi. Moses tells 
 us, more than once, that </tc earth icas filed unth violence — and that it 
 was this sin which brought destruction on the old world. VVe are not told 
 whether violence, as regards liberty, or life, or property, was most preva- 
 lent. No exception is made, and the man \vho makes any, must do it 
 without booh. They are charged with all that is covered by a fair inter- 
 pretation of the word violence. Other sins prevailed. "A// Jlesh had 
 corrupted his way upon the earth; the wickedness of man was great; eve- 
 ry imagination of the thought of his heart was onhj evil continually.'^^ 
 But the '■'■violence which covered the earth,'''' is assigned, once and again, 
 as the special reason for the vvorld's destruction . With the exception of 
 a smgle family, the law of God, respecting tlieir neighbours rights, seems 
 to have been universally disregarded. Power had become the law of the 
 land. Men were renowned, just in proportion as they could sport with 
 the lives, liberty, or property, of those around them. As God has been 
 pleased to admonish future generations, by pomting out the process by 
 which this state of things was brought about, it is surely worthy our at- 
 tention. 
 
 1. '^'■There were giants in the earth in those days'''' — i, e. monsters in 
 iniquity, or men of gigantic stature and great muscular strength, like him 
 of Gath. Such meu, when violence was the road to honor and wealth, 
 would be distinguished among the murderers, and man stealers, and slave- 
 holders, and robbers of their day. The trade of violence would be car- 
 ried on with a high hand. 
 
 2. There were others who, though of common stature, were giants in 
 wickedness. These were the children of pious fathers and wicked moth- 
 ers. Jhe sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair: 
 and they took them wives of all which they chose. When the sons of 
 God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children unto 
 them, the same became men which were of old {time) men of renown. " The 
 sons and daughteis of God,'* and the "sons and daughters of men," are 
 the names by which the church was distinguished from the world. "The 
 sons of God" has, from time immemorial, been the distinguishing title of 
 believers. God had early taught his people, by the excommunication of 
 Cain, that they should keep themselves separate from the world. But in 
 the profligacy of the times, the family of God began to amalgamate with 
 the world. It marks the degeneracy of the times, that among piotessors ot 
 religion, a fair face was considered the paramount qualification for a com- 
 panion in the tribulation and patience of a pious life. The daughters of 
 men were pretty; and the fair faced syrens began to allure the sons of 
 God into their camps. Probably the daughters of God sometimes mar- 
 ried the sons of men. But as the pietv of children greatly depend, under 
 God, on the mother, such marriages were not, in their rcsuhs, so uniform- 
 
30 
 
 ly disastrous to the interests of religion. Instances are frequent, of pray- 
 ing mothers rearing pious families, while the father was dissipated and 
 wicked. But an instance of a pious family of children, whose mother is a 
 wicked woman, is of rare occurrence. Hence, only the marriage of the 
 sons of God with the daughters of men, is noticed as hastening a state of 
 universal violence. The children in such a house, would receive more 
 instruction, be better fitted for active life, and for filling high stations, 
 than those whose fathers were besotted with sin. But the mother, hav- 
 ing been familiar, in her father's house, with deeds of blood, with theft, 
 and kidnapping, and robbery, and slave holding, would give the educa- 
 tion of the children just the finish necessary to make them men of re- 
 nown in villainy. The Prophet Ezekiel describes the training which 
 cluldren would receive from such a mother. What is thy mother? "A 
 lioness. She lay down among lions; she nourished her whelps among 
 young lions. And she brought up one of her whelps, ii became a young 
 lion, and it learned to catch the prey; it devoured men, &c. Then she 
 took another of her young whelps, and made him a young lion. And he 
 went up and down among the lions, he became a young lion, and learned 
 to catch the prey, and devoured men." When the houses of professors, 
 instead of being lights to the world, and nurseries for the church, become 
 dens for training young whelps to catch men, violence will soon covei the 
 earth. The apostle Jude tells us, that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, 
 prophesied to these sons of violence, saying — "Behold the Lord cometh 
 with ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment, (^"c." But it was 
 like preaching to wandering stars, or raging waves of the sea. Men, who 
 for the gain of violence, have learned to spurn the authority of God, 
 and trample on their neighbours rights, are very hopeless hearers. They 
 requited him with hard speeches, and murmurings, and complainings; and 
 endeavoured to frighten him with great swelling words. At last God com- 
 missioned Noah to tell them, that his '■'■spirit tooidd not always strive — 
 that the end of alljlesh rcas come.'''' In the mean time, he gave them an 
 hundred and twenty years to make up their minds. Noah, a preacher of 
 righteousness, whilst engaged in preparing an ark for the safety of his 
 own family, warned and entreated them to cease from their wickedness. 
 But it was all in vain. They continued to eat, and drink, and marry, and 
 Jiold on in the trade of violence, till the flood came, and swept them all 
 away. We would suppose, that the tongue of the grand accuser himself 
 would falter, were he to undertake to say, in a sabbath school, that the 
 Antediluvians were the first slave holders, and the patriarchs the next. 
 Yet good men have done it; and we thus account for it — they were born 
 in a leprous house, and have never been cleansed; and they did it igno- 
 rantly and in unbelief. 
 
 V, TJie plea thai Abraham was a slave holder, is false and slander- 
 
 ous. 
 
 1 . Abraham was not a slave holder. 
 
 Slave holders and their apologists, are fond of appealing to the history 
 of Abraham. These appeals would be less shocking, were they not so 
 frequently accompanied with unequivocal acknowledgments, that the 
 practice in question is sinful in principle. This would be tolerable in a 
 
31 
 
 stranger, or avowed enemy lo religion; but from a professed christian, it 
 is extremely unpleasant. It is generally adtnitted, tlrat a saved sinner 
 would hate sin, if you were to blot from his memory every consideration 
 but the simple fact, that it is offensive in the sight of God. We therefore, 
 do not profess to understand the religion of that man who clings to the 
 practice of any thing confessedly sinful in principle, and pleads, as his 
 apology, that others have done so before him. 
 
 Let us examine the proof which is to defend the bold position, that the 
 flilher of the faithful was a slaveholder. It is admitted on all hands, 
 that he had servants (of some kind) hovghtivith his money. Gen, xvii. 18. 
 After all the efforts made for more than three hundred years, this is all 
 they have proved. All they tell us about the manner in which he bought 
 them, his motives, and the nature and extent of his povver over them, is 
 mere assumption. Yet they assert these things with as much precision 
 and confidence, as if they were matters of divine record. It is a singular 
 fact, that the imagination of man has not been able to contrive a way in 
 which the patiiarch could become a slave holder, without the adoption of 
 some principle which is either shocking or disgusting. 
 
 We naturally inquire, of whom did he buy his servants.^ Did they vol- 
 untarily sell their servicss? Or were they sold by some person claiming 
 the power to dispose of human beings as properly? Slave holders per ; 
 ceive, that their cause is lost, the moment they admit that they sold 
 themselves. They tell us, that Abraham bought them of men stealers or 
 slave holders; and they insist on the privilege of being believed without 
 proof They seem to suppose, that it is impossi'jle to draw the Patriarch's 
 portrait, unless one of them be permitted to sit for the picture. We must 
 not, they think, explain the phrase, "servants bought with money,'" by a 
 reference to other passages in scripture wliere it is explained, but by re- 
 ference to the practice among them. In our slave regions, when they com- 
 mence house keeping, so as to hold a reputable standing in church and 
 state, they buy a few slaves; and thus, in a few years, they have servants 
 born in their houses, as Abraham had. Thus, then, they resemble a great 
 and good man, in one of his features at least; and probably it is the only 
 one which some of them ever admired. 
 
 If it was thus the man, who is eminently styled the friend of God, 
 commenced business in the land of promise, he must have invested a vast 
 amount of capital in brood slaves. We see him at one time, heading 
 three hundred and eighteen active young men, born in his house. One 
 author tells the children in the sabbaih school, he had several thou- 
 sands ot slaves. It makes us sliudder to think of his imjirudcnce in risk- 
 ing his own life, and that of his beautiful Sarah, among such droves of 
 slaves, in a strange country, surrounded by so many rude and warlike 
 tribes. It distresses us to liiink of the trouble he must have hail in keep- 
 ing the wretches from running away, and in preventing them from steal- 
 ing his cattle, and in securing the hars and bolts of his door at night. 
 There is another much greater ditliculty. The morals of the patriarch 
 must have improved very little by quitting his kindred and country— if, in 
 full view of the fact, that God destroyed the old world for disregarding 
 their neighbours rigiifs, ho could engage in the system of violence on a 
 ■ scale, perhaps, unprecedented in the history of the world. But there is 
 
32 
 
 no end to difficulties. How shall we acquit him of partnership with the 
 man stealer? Surely he did not encourage, directly or indirectly, a crime 
 which was punished witii death by the Jewish law, and one against which, 
 in our day, the civilized world has risen up as one man. How did he 
 buy his slaves? Or how did he get them? Did he hire some scape gal- 
 lows to kidnap his neighbours' children? Or did the thievmg creatures 
 first do the stealing, and then Abraham pay them for their trouble, by 
 buying their stolen ware.'' You may call these thieves, soldiers, if you 
 please. An army of soldiers going to war to get slaves, is just a great 
 number of man stealers banded together, to do business on a large tscale. 
 Was Abraham an accessory before or after the fact.!' In a civil court, it 
 would make but little difTerence — and, in the court of heaven, perhaps 
 none at all. But the advocates lor slavery greatly prefer the latter. Their 
 account of the matter is this. Abraham found the poor creatures de- 
 prived of their liberty; and knowing that they would be slaves at any 
 rate, he bought them, not to restore to them their freedom, but to keep 
 them for his own use. They insist that if there was any guilt in the bu- 
 siness, it lay exclusively on the head of the rr-an from whom he bought 
 them. Such casuistry reminds us of a story, in old Dilworth's spelling 
 book, of two thieves, who undertook to steiil bacon in partnership. That 
 they might be able to assert their innocence with a good conscience, (even 
 thieves will talk about tl)eir consciences,) the one brought the bacon 
 away — the other received, and put it under his cloak. Accordingly, 
 when arraigned for theft, they both stoutly maintained that they were in- 
 jiocent; the one protesting that the property was not in his possession — 
 the other, that he did not take it away. The object of the author of this 
 story was, to fortify the minds of lut.e children at school, against the sin 
 of stealing, by mspiring them with hatred of this detestable apology. Lit- 
 tle did the old man think, that the world, instead of hating, would become 
 enamoured with it, and use it to justify trafficking in human beings; and 
 that they would try to persuade the little children, that it was precisely 
 the morality with which Abraham went to heaven. 
 
 But we have omitted one circumstance, to which they attach great im- 
 portance, when apologizing for the patriarch and for themselves. They 
 sav, he did not purchase immediately from the kidnappers. That would 
 be too bad. The slaves had passed through several hands before he 
 bought them. Let us suppose then, that instead of two, there had been 
 fifty thieves concerned in stealing the bacon — suppose that it had passed 
 through the hands of all of them; and that the man with whom it was 
 iound, had rested his defence on such a plea. Should such a man, in 
 any of our courts, escape justice, there are kw of our towns in which the 
 little boys would permit so worthy a citizen to leave, without some appro- 
 priate honors. 
 
 But we have omitted the best thing of all — his intentions. Abraham, 
 we are told, was a man of the very best intentions. He found the poor 
 creatures in the hands of the cruel slave holders, and he bought them for 
 iiis own use, purely, that they might have a good master, and enjoy the 
 privilege of pious instruction. Thus, if they can't make hirn a good 
 christian, ihey are willing to make him a papist. Here we have one of 
 the filthiest of ail the popish maxims, viz; the e:id sanctifies the deed, 
 
33 
 
 brought in to eke out slave holding morality. It is a curious fact, that 
 slavery is purely popish in its origin, and uniformly defended on popish 
 principles. Yet we are greatly mistaken, if even the great man at Romp 
 would not be ashamed of a proselyte, who was ushered into his presence 
 with such a eulogy as this— "Here, holy father, is one of the brightest or- 
 naments of your religion. To give you his excellent character in a few 
 words— he is a man of the best intentions,- and he uses them as pick-locks 
 to get at liis neighbour's properly." 
 
 It is amusing to hear the privilege of the slaves, as regards religious in- 
 struction, brought forward to balance the sin of holding them in bondage; 
 especially in a country where rulers are making it ])enal to instruct them. 
 Tiie writer of these remarks, sjjcnt nearly twenty years in a slave region; 
 and was more or less acquainted with, perhaps, some hundred slave hold- 
 ing families. He has heard this apology from the Ii])3 of some of the 
 worst men he ever knew. Tiiey seemed lo become eloquent when they 
 talked of the blessedness of those AfricLuis who had been stolen from their 
 own pagan country, and brought to this happy christian land. He avers, 
 that in every family possessed of any considerable number of slaves, so 
 far as his knowledge extended, either all, or some of the slaves, were una- 
 ble to read the bible; grossly ignorant of the christian religion; in the ha- 
 bit of absenting themselves from family worship, and the house of God; 
 and living, uncontrouled by their masters, in the open profanation of the 
 sabbath. The apology from both ministers and people was— it is impos- 
 sible for a master to train his slaves to the knowledge and practice of reli- 
 gion. Nor is it believed that this was, m a single instance, a deliberate 
 falsehood. It is the sober truth; and it is easily accounted for. An ig- 
 norant American never hates Mahometanism, till he has an Arab master. 
 A stupid African never feels so strong an aversion to Christianity, as when 
 he finds himself stripped of his dearest rights, and in chains, nvettcd upon 
 him by the hands of a christian. Slaves throughout <he world, are men; 
 and they have common sense enough to know, that religion, to be worth 
 any thing, must make its possessor an honest man. 'i'hey, therefore, 
 spurn the proposal with indignation, when a man, who is thriving by rob- 
 bing his neighbors, offers to take them by the hand, and lead them to hea- 
 ven. That minister in the south who, by marriage, has become the owner 
 of hundreds of slaves, and has it blazoned among the churches as an evi- 
 dence of his heavenly mindedness — that he takes no stipend, but expends 
 his whole ministerial labours among his own slaves, is just telling the 
 world that he has played the fool with his ministry. Vv'e have no doubt 
 that, with his bible and cowskin, he can make his congregation understand 
 what he means by one text — servants he obedient to your nia^ters.^ Ac- 
 count for It as you will, slaveholders tell the truth when they say, it is im- 
 possible for them to train their slaves to the knowledge and practice of 
 religion. Js it not strange, then, that they do not see, tiiat ihe system of 
 slavery is in itself a system of imquiiy? And is it not passing strange, 
 
 * It has been said in his defence, that he employs an overseer, and attends to 
 notliing tiimseir, liut preaching. That is, he preaches to his congregation per- 
 sonally, and cowsliins them by proxy ; and if an overseer docs it, he wiU du it 
 faithfuily. 
 
34 
 
 tliat they should attempt to stultify the patriarch Abra/iam, "by insisting 
 that he lield his neighbours in boHdage, for the sake of attempting an im- 
 possibility? The plain truth is — to reconcile us to their claims of kin- 
 dred with Abraham, they seem to think it necessary, that they should 
 make him a finished villain. And truly , if we must believe all that they 
 say of him, we shall have no objections to their claims being allowed. 
 2 . The servants whom Abraham bought with vioney^ were voluntary 
 servants. 
 
 We now appeal to the word of God, the supreme j adge in all religious 
 controversies, and the onlj infallible interpreter of scripture phrases. Our 
 position is — servants bought with money, means, in scripture language, 
 persons who voluntarily sold their services wholly, or in part. 
 
 1. We prove this by the scriptural use of the phrase. As the subject 
 under discussion, is the nature of servitude in the patriarchal age, it will 
 be proper to attend particularly to the liistory of the patriarchs. It will . 
 be coming still nearer the point, if we enquire what kind of servants were 
 bought by those descendants of Abraham, who most nearly resembled 
 him m piety. Pious children, for ages, would revere his memory; and in 
 the regulation of all their concerns, scrupulously regard the example of 
 so venerable an ancestor. Happily for our purpose, his great grandson 
 Joseph, who appears to have inherited much of his spirit, bought a vast 
 number of servants. He purchased all the inhabitants of Egypt as ser- 
 vants for his master. Joseph said unto the people, behold I have bought 
 you this day, and your land, for Pharaoh. All the inhabitants of the 
 kindred cities which lined the river Nile, and of the innumerable towns 
 and villages which studded the land of Egypt, were Pharaoh's bought 
 servants! According to the slave holder''s mode of interpretation, they 
 were his slaves. Every bone, sinew, and muscle, every body and soul 
 throughout that vast empire, was his property,- and at any time could be 
 sold with his hogs and cattle, and turned into money. A slave holder 
 would exclaim — what a happy monarch!* 
 
 But it is a fact, acknowledged more than once in the chapter from 
 which we quote, (Gen. 47.) that Joseph bought all the Egyptians as ser- 
 vants for Pharaoh. Slave holders insist, that the phrase "servants bought 
 with money," means slaves. It is by this phrase, without any other 
 proof, they undertake to fix on Abraham the charge of slave holding. 
 And it is by quoting this phrase, used in the life of the patriarch, that 
 they would prove the lawfulness of depriving a man of his freedom, and 
 making him work all his life without wages. We here join issue with 
 them. On the meaning of this phrase, let the question in debate stand or 
 fall. We here notice a remarkable instance of the corrupting influence of 
 slavery. The learned and pious Mr. Poole, seems to take for granted, 
 that Joseph made them slaves. He js exceedingly puzzled in the inter- 
 
 *Cervantes, in his history of the famous knight of the lions, to make the squire 
 ridiculous, makes him in'^ist, that his master should reward his services with the 
 government of an island near the coast of Africa, so that he could ship off his 
 black subjects, and turn them into cash. The Poet hardly suspected that the same 
 notions of morality which would make Sancho Panza a laughintif stock, would, 
 la spite of his sneers at the Pope's morality, be admired by philosopher--, and de- 
 .("•erided by grave divint'sas worthy of Joseph and Abraham. 
 
35 
 
 pretalion of verse Slst: "As for the people he removed them to cities, 
 from one end of the borders of Egypt, even to the other." lie suppo- 
 ses this removal was necessary to wear out the remembrance of iheir pat- 
 rimonial lands, and their grief for the loss of them, and to prevent insur- 
 rections, &LC. But he had still greater difficulty in apolbgizmg for Jo- 
 seph. And he resorts to the usual cant — he treated his slaves well. He 
 says — "If any should think that Joseph dealt hardly with them, and made 
 an ill use of their necessity^ he will see how moderately and mercifully he 
 deals with them."^ Now any man, who will not use the slave holders 
 spectacles, will find no difficulty in understanding the passage, when he 
 looks at the context. While the seven years famine was raging, and the 
 money and all the substance of the people had been expended, they came 
 tO' Joseph and said, "buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land 
 will be servants unto Pharaoh." Accordingly, iVom one end of the land 
 to the other, he removed the people into cities where the corn was stored 
 up, that food might be distributed with convenience and economy. To- 
 ward the close of the famine, when the people were about to return to 
 their farms, he said — "Lo here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land, 
 and it shall come to pass, that ye sliall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, 
 and four parts shall be yours."" VV"e have now settled two points. One 
 is, that servants bought with money, means, in the history of the patri- 
 archs, persons who sold their services. The other is this — the man who 
 bought of his neighbour one-fifth of the annual produce of his field, is 
 said to have bought that man. That Abraham^s bought servants were 
 those who, for money, engaged voluntarily to give him an annual portion 
 of their labours in the field, or in attending his cattle, or otherwise. 
 
 2. From his uniformly jttst and pious character. The inspired histo- 
 rian has been careful to exhibit him in his public character, in his inter- 
 course with his neighbors, and in his management of his household. 
 
 1 . Abraham was famous as a pious prophet of the true religion. Like 
 all the patriarchs, he was also priest and king in his family. He is spoken 
 of as a mighty prince, and wo see kings carefully courting alliances with 
 him. But it is as prophet, that h@ particularly shines. Luther is not 
 more famous in Christendom, than Abraham was among the nations of 
 the East as a prophet of the true God, and an opposer of the corruptions 
 and abominations of his d^y. The Egyptians admired, and imitated him 
 in the rite of circumcision. The Persians, "in their ancient accounts, 
 call the book which contains their sacred religion, the book of Abraham. 
 They call their religion Kish Abraham, or the religion of Abraham.'''' So 
 Protestants frequently caH tiieir religion, the religion of Luther. We 
 see the estimation in whicb his principles and character were held by Mel- 
 chizedeck, when he publicly blessed him. 
 
 2. God speaks of him as remarkably devoted to the instruction of 
 his family and dependents, and signally blessed in his labours. "I 
 know him that he will command his children and household after him, 
 and they shall keep the ways of the Lord to do justice and judgment." 
 Gen. xviii. 19. 
 
 3. He was eminently a son of peace, and made great worldly sacri- 
 fices to promote peace in the earth. It does not appear that he ever 
 engaged in war, or that he ever was in a battle in his life, except once. 
 
3G 
 
 Some slave making warriors had invaded the country, and taken captive 
 his nephew, and some of his neighbours; and he pursued and rescued 
 them. In this successful expedition, the combined forces of four confed- 
 erate kings 'vere at his mercy; but he did not brmg home a single cap- 
 tive or slave; nor would he appropriate to his own use so much as a 
 thread of the spoil. 
 
 As if the inspired historian intended to put to shame all insinuations 
 that the Patriarch would deprive others of their rights, he records several 
 instances of his relinquishing his own for the sake of peace, and the cred- 
 it of religion. His servants had diggeJ the famous well of Beersheba. 
 According to the custom of the times, it was his property; and a good 
 well was, ill that country, very precious property. But some of the ser- 
 vants [subjects] of Abimelech, king of Gerar, violently took it away. He 
 had surficient power to chastise them, and shew his neighbors that he was 
 a man of spirit, who was not to be trifled with. But he was not a man of 
 strife, and it was his religion to make sacrifices for the sake of peace. 
 Abimelech would not have heard of it, but for the following circumstance: 
 Having observed that CtocI loas with Abraham in all that he did, the 
 king, with his characteristic meanness, came with Phicol, his chief cap- 
 tain, to intreat him to enter into a covenant of friendsliip with him and 
 his son, and his son's son. Abraham mentioned to him the cir- 
 cumstance of the well. The reply was— "I wot not who hath done this 
 thing; neither didst thou tell ine, neither heard I of it but to-day. Gen. 
 xxi. 22—26. 
 
 On one occasion, there was a strife between the herdsmen of Abra- 
 liam"'s cattle, and the herdsmen- of Lot's cattle. This state of things, al- 
 ways afflicting to the soul of the Patriarch, was peculiarly so now, as there 
 were lookers on. "The Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the 
 land. And Abraham said unto Lot, let there be no strife I pray thee be- 
 tween me and thee, and between my herdsmen and thy herdsmen, for we 
 are brethren. Is not the whole land before thee? Separate thyself I 
 pray thee from me. If thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the 
 right; or if thou go to the right hand, then I will go to the left." Gen. 
 xiii. 5. 
 
 4. Lithe most minute accounts given us of Ahrahayn^s house, on occa' 
 sions when he ivas entertaining strangers, 6fc. we see nothing icMch 
 looks like slavery. It is the more necessary to notice this, on account of 
 statements made in our most popular works on biblical antiquities. In a 
 work published for the use of sabbath schools, we are told that Abraham 
 nad several thousands of slaves, and no other kind of servants. Let us 
 see whether there were slaves in his house, on one of those occasions most 
 likely to make them visible. See Gen. xviii. It seems that in the plains 
 of Mamte, while Abraham was sitting in his tent door, in the heat of the 
 day, "he lifted up his eyes and looked, and lo three men stood by him; 
 and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bow- 
 ed himself toward the ground, and said, my Lord, if now I have found fa- 
 vour in thy sight, pass not away 1 pray thee from thy servant. Let a little 
 water 1 pray you be fetched, and wash your feel, and rest yourselves under 
 the tree; and I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; 
 after that ye shall pass on ; for therefore are ye come lo your servant. And 
 they said, so do as thou hast said." 
 
When dinner is to be speedily prepared for strangers who hnvc unex- 
 pectedly arrived, we expect to see slaves in motion, frrm the kitchen to 
 the parlour, especially as they are so numerous. But we are told — "Abra- 
 ham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said make ready quickly three 
 mer.sures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth. — 
 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good, 
 and gave it unto a young man; and ire hasted to dress it." 
 
 It surprises us to see Abrahaui and Sarah, and the young man wlio kill- 
 ed and dressed the calt^, do all the work— especially, in a house where 
 slaves could be counted by the thousand. But surely, we will see some 
 of them in then- livery, around the table, when the guests are to be at- 
 tended at dinner. But — •"Abraham took butter and n)ilk, and the calf 
 which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them un- 
 der the tree, and they did eat." 
 
 We see in all this, nothing but the hospitality and plainness becoming 
 an eminently pious man. 
 
 5. Abraham u-as careful in all his intercourse inth the u^orld,to shew 
 thot he owed his riches to the blessing of God, on honest indvstry. When 
 he took from the four kings the plunder, consisting of all the goods of 
 Sodom and Gomorrah, and ail their victuals, the king of Sodom urged 
 Jiim to keep them as his own. According to the custom of the times, it 
 was his lawful prize. But he would not have so much as a shoe latchet — 
 "lest thou shouldst say I have made Abraham rich.*' Gen. xiv. 23. 
 
 With the same object in view, he would not accept, as a present, from 
 the hands of a prince, a burying place for Sarah, lie would buy it. Nor 
 would he take advantage of the friendship of the seller, or llie technicali- 
 ti2s of bargain making, to pay for it in the cheap currency of the neigh- 
 borhood. His religion had made him an honest man. ^'■IXe weighed to 
 Ephron the silver which he had named in the audience of the sons of 
 Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current money with the merchant. 
 Gen. xxiii. 16. 
 
 6. The heavenly mindedness ascribed to him, forbids the idea, of his 
 being a slave 7naker. We are told, that he lived as one who considered 
 himself "a stranger and pilgrim on the earth — who desired a better coun- 
 try, that is a heavenly." lie would not build for himself a house or city, 
 but "sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling 
 in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs of the same promise; for he 
 looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. 
 lleb. xi. 9." We think that the character which the scriptures give of 
 Abraham, justifies us in sayinf,^, that his bought servants were not slaves. 
 We feel like submitting the question to the decision of any man who has 
 not sworn fealty to his lusts. The history of the patriarch clearly fur- 
 nishes the following fads respecting his servants. 
 
 1. Abraham brought them from Harnn. It does not appear that he 
 bought any after he came into the land of Canaan — perhaps Hagar should 
 be excepted. We here take occasion to remark, that Abraham never sold 
 a human being; nor was the lawfulness of doing so, admitted by any of 
 his family. Sarah never thought of selling Hagar when slie became trou- 
 blesome. The only way of getting rid of her, was to turn licr out of 
 doors, as they do troublesome servants, in countries where slavery is un- 
 
38 
 
 known. Moj^ps tells us [Gen. xii. 5.] tLat the souls which Abraham 
 hrou^'ht unto Canaan, were those whom he and' Sarah and Lot', had got- 
 ten in IJaran. The three hundred and eighteen young men, whom he 
 commanded in his heroic expedition against the four kings, were proba- 
 bly their children. 
 
 2. Ahrahani's servants locrc hif converts to the true religion. This is 
 not conjecture. It appears [Gen. xii. 5.] they had been obtained by the- 
 jomt labours of Abraham, Sarah, and Lot. Moses tells us expressly, that 
 the souls which they brought with them into the land of Canaan, were 
 souls which they had made (gotten) in Haran. The original word is Osa. 
 It is known that after leaving Urr of the Chaldees, he spent considerable 
 time in Haran, until the death of his father Terab. Ouring that time he 
 and his pious wife and nephew, made many souls. A commentator, who 
 says tl>ey were their children, must have spoken without thinking. Abra- 
 ham had no children at that time;, and Lot could not have thousands. It 
 IS distressing to read the comments on this passage, by some of the wisest 
 and best men who had the misfortune to write, after the church had be^ 
 come a lepious house. Even the venerable Poole,, gives the following ss 
 the probable meaning — "gotten, i. e. procured either by conquest or pur- 
 chase, or any other lawful and usual' way." A fine hint for a slave hold- 
 er. They were slaves, obtained by trading with kidnappers, or secured, 
 m war expeditions, by Abraham, bravely supported by Sarah and Lot. 
 We think this would not be a very lady like employment for Sarah, nor a 
 very pious one for Abraham. Tiie apologists for slavery, and they alone, 
 are responsil)le for any levity, or ludicrous effect, produced by looking 
 their principles fairly in the face. An inspired apostle recomme»ds to 
 christian wives, the example of Sarah, in her modest and hirmbre deport- 
 ment towards her husband. But it seems, they cannot understand her 
 history, or have her example fully before them, unless they occasionally 
 view her mounted on her war horse, heroically sustaining her husband and 
 captain in the field af battle, and in his desperate charges on the villages 
 in Haran, for the purpose of obtaining slaves to take with them to the 
 promised land. (She would need heJp in that new eountry.) But to un- 
 derstand Moses, it is not necessary that we should consult our systems of 
 theology or morals, and much less our lusts. The only way of ascer- 
 taining what any writer means, is by attending to what he says. 
 
 The word Osa, signifies to finish or give character to a person or thing. 
 It is used [Gen. ii. 2.] to signify the finishing of God's creation. It ex- 
 presses (Gen. V. 1.) God's work in fashioning the man whom he had crea- 
 ted, according to his own image and likeness. It is used (Ezek. xviii. 
 31.) to express the work of regeneration, or restoring, in a sinner, the lost 
 image of his maker. In the passage before us, it expresses the instru- 
 mentality of a prophet, and his pious wife, and nephew, in the conversion 
 of the souls whom they brought with them from Haran, It shocks us to 
 hear of Abraham and his family making souls. We had assigned them 
 the very different employment of stealing souKs. But it does not so af- 
 fect us, to hear of an apostle begetting souls, or of an evangelist saving 
 .9o«/.y, or of souls being created in Christ, through \he instrumentality of 
 ministers of the gospel. Perhaps some critic, should he think it worth 
 while to tiiumph over us, will produce texts where Osa is used, without 
 
39 
 
 any reference to conversion ; and then suggest a doubt whether any of 
 those servants were converted through the instrumentality of tiie patriarcli 
 and his Iriends. But if he is acquainted with his_ bible, he can also pro- 
 duce texts wl 
 used, withoi 
 er any nnan 
 
 man vulgate translates the phrase "souls that they had gotten," animas 
 quas fecerunt— 6-owZa- which they had made. 'J'he Chaldee expounds if, 
 '•souls that they had instructed or turned from idolatry and taught in the 
 true religion." The Bamberg synopsis will have it, that they were slaves, 
 obtained by conquest or purchase, but expressly admits that "the Hebrews 
 had a tradition that Abraham brought over many men, and Sarah many 
 women, from intidelity to ihe knowledge and worship of the true God; 
 and thus made them spiritually." It appears to be a fact, that in this 
 light they had been viewed by their children in every age. But when the 
 Pope found it necessary to pipe all hands to the work of defending the 
 slave trade, a great revolution was etl'ecled. Sarah was converted into a 
 warrior, and Abraham reduced to the level of a negro trader, merely to 
 keep slave makers in counienance. Surely it comports better with his 
 character to suppose, that he spent his time in liaran in making known 
 the way of salvation, than to suppose that he was employed in storming 
 the towns and hamlets around, for the purpose of obtaining slaves. 
 
 2. Ahrahani's servants were partakers of tlic aanie faith and hope with 
 their master. On this point, we have decisive testimony. God speaks of 
 them as persons "who kept the ways of the Lord to do justice and judg- 
 ment." Their piety is also evident from the fact, that when circumcision 
 was set up in the Patriarch's family, they were all adjudged suitable sub- 
 jects for "the seal of the righteousness of faith." The notion has prevail- 
 ed to some extent, and the Jesuits were the authors of it, that mere con- 
 nexion with faithful Abraham, was a sufficient qualitication, without any 
 personal piety. This has given rise to some strange cases of conscience. 
 JSome years since, a slave holder was much troubled in mind about not 
 having his negro men and women baptized, it was not pretended that 
 they had any piety. On the contrary, his reply to the charge of holding 
 them in bondage for the sake of gain was, "they are a mere expense; and 
 rot them, they are so lazy and wicked, that no body can have any peace 
 with them." Still he thought, the standing of their master ought to enti- 
 tle them to sc?me church privileges. As iiaplisin had come in the room 
 of circumcision — and as Abraham's slaves were circumcised, on account 
 of the faith of their master, it bore heavily on his mind that he was not 
 walking in the footsteps of the father of the faithful, unless he had his ne- 
 groes baptized. 
 
 The command to Abraham to circumcise all in his house, whom he bad 
 bought with his money, was evidently predicated on the fact previously 
 acknowledged, that they /cept the tcays of the Lord. We never meet pre- 
 cisely the same command again. 
 
 3. Abraham and his servants came together to the land, of Canaan^ 
 from a regard to their mutual interest and comfort. It is not pleasant 
 to be a stranger in a strange land. It would ligiiteu the rdtriarch''3 dif- 
 ficulties to have the socieiy of aoine hundreds, who were partakers of the 
 
40 
 
 same faith, and endeared to him liy the circumstance of his having been 
 the instrmncnt of their conversion to God. To them, it would be dis- 
 tressing to be left behind. He was a niiyhty prince, an eminent prophet, 
 and the spiritual father of them and many of their children. And when 
 he was gone, who would instruct them and iheir little ones, and save 
 them from that darkness ,vhich, like the shadow of death, brooded over 
 Urr of the Chaldees, and was fast gathering over the whole world? But 
 the separation was unnecessarj'. He needed servants to till the ground, 
 and attend his cattle, and he was able liberally to reward their labours. 
 They, OK the other hand, needed instruction, prolection, and employ- 
 ment. The command to leave bis idolatrous kindred and country, did not 
 forbid him to take pious Lot. Nor would it hinder him from taking any 
 number as his household, who were sincere worshippeis of the true God. 
 He who has witnessed the separation of a pious and successful minister 
 from an atfectionate people, can fancy the scene, when it was known 
 among the people that he had received a command to go forward. We 
 can almost see thesn gathering around his tent, utterly refusing to be left 
 behind. "Entreat us not to leave thee or return from following after 
 thee; for whither thou goest, we will go; and where thou lodgest we will 
 lodge; thy people shall be our people, and thy God our God; where thou 
 <liest, will we die, and there will we be buried; the Lord do so to us, and 
 more also, if aught but death part us." ff Abraham and Lot possessed 
 the spirit manitested by Moses to Hobab, we can imagine the reply, "We 
 are journeying unto the land of which the Lord said 1 will give it you. 
 Come ye with us, and we will do you good; for the Lord hath spoken 
 good concerning Abraham. And it shall be if you go with us, yea, it 
 shall be that what goodness the Lord shall do unto us, the same will we 
 do unto you." Such a view of the relationship between Abraham and his 
 servants, will, we think, throw light on some of those pleasant scexies be- 
 tween him and them, after they had grown grey together in the pronused 
 land. But no man ever received any help in the study of the bible, froin 
 any thing he bad seen of slavery, or from any book written to prove that 
 the father of the faithful was a slave holder. 
 
 3. The scrccuits (so •called by our translators of the bible,) born in 
 AbrahavCs house iccre tioi slaves. It is assumed by the apcdogists for 
 slavery, and by some of those writers on Jewish and biblical antiquities, 
 who profess the greatest abhorrence of the principle of slave holding, that 
 the cJiildren of those servants wlioin Abraham brought willi him from Ha- 
 ran, were born slaves. ''Abraham had servants born in his house," is the 
 •confounding argument in favour of dooming African infants to perpetual 
 slavery. But surely we can dispose of this matter in a moment, by just 
 looking at it. Was ibis indeed ilie character of ^A**/. Atirakatn? VVas it 
 thus he requited the atlection of the good people who followed all the way 
 from Harani* Did he, the moment they were settled in Canaan, convert 
 their tents into so iriany baby-lraps? Did he spend his life in making pro- 
 perty of human beings.^ — the very sin which has roused all nations agaiust 
 the slave trade? The man who, wiien he hears the ones of a new-born 
 ■infant in his kitchen, or some out cabin, bolts in and seizes, and makes it 
 his properly, is as finished a kidnapper as he who skulks around the shores 
 of Afrxa, In thc.si^hi of heaven, they are botii man stealers. The oa- 
 
41 
 
 ly difference is, the one catches human beings in Africa — the other catch- 
 es them on his own premises. When we hear such insinuations against 
 Abraham, it exciies in our bosoms a most strange mixture of merriment, 
 and horror, and pity, and indignation, and contempt. Yet all this, and 
 more, is asserted oi the friend of God. Let us hear the proof: 
 
 1. They refer us to the case of Eleazer. Gen. xv. All that we can 
 gather from this passage respecting him is, that he was originally from Da- 
 mascus, that he was a son of Abraham's house, (or born in his house,) that 
 he was the steward, and that the Patriarch, in the prospect of dying 
 childless, had designated him as his heir. And this is the evidence that 
 he was born a slave!! People are apt to see things which engross their 
 aflbctions. Theologians who can see, in this passage, a proof of involun- 
 tary, hereditary, or perpetual slavery, remind us of the line lady who, when 
 looking at the moon througli a telescope, fancied that she saw a beautiful 
 new fashioned cap. 
 
 2. They likewise quote Gen. xiv. 14. We cannot now detect all the 
 purposes for wliich we have seen or heard this text quoted. We have al- 
 ready noticed two. One is, to prove that it is lawful to make slaves of 
 captives. The other, that it is right to enslave those who" are born in 
 our house. "When Abraham heard that his brother was taken captive, he 
 armed his trained servants born in his liouse, three hundred and eighteen, 
 and pursued them to Dan." f'ew will pretend, that the training here spo- 
 ken of was of the military kind. That would blow up the slave holders 
 theory. It would be absurd to talk of a master spending his time, and 
 hazarding his life, in drilling his slaves to the use of arms It is true, that 
 the prowess which the Patriarch displayed on this occasion, shews that he 
 had all the talents necessary for being as great a nuisance in his own 
 neighborhood, and as extensive a curse to mankind, as Alexander or Cae- 
 sar. But this is the only instance in which he meddled with arms. The 
 work of a prophet or instructor, was the business of liis life. The idea 
 of such a man appearing ordinarily at the head of some hundreds of train- 
 ed warriors, might suit the views of a Jesuit or Mahometan; but it is ut- 
 terly inadmissible among sober christians. Moses conveys no such idea. 
 He tells us they were trained or instructed ones. VVe have God's testimo- 
 ny that he trained his household in the ways of the Lord; but not a parti- 
 cle of evidence that he trained them to the trade of war. It appears, then, 
 that they were what would have been called, in the new testament, his 
 disciples— -the pious young men who were under his instruction. It ap- 
 pears also, that they had been born in his house. 
 
 But the more important inquiry is— wliere is the evidence that these 
 young men were slaves? He must have "optics sharp," who can see it. 
 I here would be no impropriety in callmg them servants, in the sense in 
 which the dependants or subjects of a prince are servants. But Moses 
 does not call them servants. Our translators have been careful, by having 
 the word servants put in Italic, to let us know that it is a mere supple- 
 ment ot their own. They did it no doubt fur the same reason that, in 
 another place, they have inserted the word slave; i. e. to make their text 
 plain And thev weTe permitted to do it, to shew all future generations 
 that they coinn^enced their work after the reign of that "bright Occident ^ 
 
 6 ° '^ • 
 
al star," Queen Elizabeth. The origirjal text, says noihing about either 
 slaves or servants. 
 
 The text says, that "he armed his disciples [or instructed ones] bom in 
 his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued, &,c.*' And 
 this is the evidence that he made property of the infants born on his pre- 
 mises. Lei us suppose a parallel case. During our last war, the nephew 
 of one of our ministers on the frontier, was taken captive by the Indians. 
 His uncle on hearing it, armed a company of the pious young men Lorn 
 in his congregation, and pursued and rescued him. On the aitpearanceof 
 this statement in the newspaper, a man who had been troubled in his 
 conscience about holding his fellow men in slavery, undertook to comfort 
 himself, and quiet his neighbours, by proving that the minister must have 
 been in the habit of kidnapping all the children born in his congregation ; 
 and that the young men, who fought so bravely for him, must have been 
 some of the poor creatures whom he had doomed to slavery from their 
 birth. This would be counted very crazy logic. His family and neigh- 
 bours, would think seriously of confining hirn. Yet the poor man was 
 just using the very argument which had been so successfully ejuployed for 
 three hundred years, from the pulpit and the press, to prove that Abraham 
 was a slave holder. 
 
 Every view which Moses gives us of Abraham, and the children of those 
 pious people who followed him from Haran, is pleasant. There appears 
 to have been a mutual confidence, a community of interest, and just such 
 affection as might be expected between the man of God and the chil- 
 dren under his care. Let us examine more particularly the passage before 
 us. 
 
 While Abraham and his people were living peacefully in thepliin of 
 Mamre, ihey were roused by the arrival of a runner, with news that Am- 
 raphel, king of Shinar; Arioch, king of Ellasar; Chederlaomer, king of 
 Elam; and Tidal, king of nations, had invaded the country — that in a 
 battle fought in the vale of Siddim, they had completely routed the five 
 kings around Sodom, and were returning home with all the goods of So- 
 dom and Gomorrah, and alt their victuals, and that Lot, his brother's 
 son, was among the captives. We would expect so peaceful a man as 
 Abraham, who had never been in a battle in his life, to set down over- 
 whelmed with the heavy tidings. But his energies were roused. He re- 
 solved immediately on an enterprize which, for brilliancy, has few paral- 
 lels in the history of military exploits. He armed 318 of his instructed 
 young men, who had been born in his house, and pursued the enemy. The 
 fathers of these young men would, no doubt, have cheerfully hazarded 
 their lives for him. But they were too old. He must have active men, 
 in the prime of life, who could keep up with him in a hot pursuit of sever- 
 al days and nights. It seems that his kind neighbours, Aneo, Esehol, and 
 Mamre, on hearing that bad news had reached Alram the lithrew, has- 
 tened to his tent and joined him. With a little delay, they could have 
 brought considerable forces to his aid. But no time must be lost. The 
 enemy already had considerable start, and would soon be beyond pursuit. 
 He had three hundred and eighteen fine young men who, from their in- 
 fancy, had loved him as their teacher and fosier-father; all of whom 
 would risk their lives for hiin . Aud God Almighty, who brought him to that 
 
43 
 
 land, in all dangers and troubles; was his shield and exceeding great re- 
 vjard. He pursued them, and passed safely. Isaiah xli. 3. The enemy 
 were overtaken in the night time; and by a disposition of his force, which 
 would have done honor to a veteran in warfare, he attacked them in dif- 
 ferent quarters at the same time, and "smote them, and pursued them 
 unto Hobak, and brought back all the goods, and also brought back again 
 his brother liOt, and his goods, and the women also, and the people." Ha- 
 ving been flimiliar with appeals to the example of Abraham, to prove that 
 It is right to make slaves of captives because we conquered them, and of 
 infants because they were caught on our premises, we naturally expect to 
 see him return home with droves of slaves, and more plunder than his 318 
 young men can carry. But, it seems, we had entirely mistaken his cha- 
 racter. He did not take a single captive — much less did he think of ma- 
 king any of them slaves. He compelled them to give up the souls and the 
 goods they had stolen, and then sent them home to their families. But 
 surely he was too good a man to be more particular than his neighbours. 
 He will at least take all the goods as his own. The custom of the times, 
 and the opinion of the neighbours, would justify him; and the king of So- 
 dom is urgent that he should do so. Abraham was not one of those slip- 
 pery professors, who can regulate their religion by the opinion of their 
 neighbours, when it sorts with their covetousness, or by the custom or law 
 of the land. He would let them know, that he would not undertake to 
 dictate to the three men who went with him; but as to himself, "1 have 
 lifted up my hands unto the Lord most high God, the possessor of heaven 
 and earth, that 1 will not take from a thread to a shoe latchet, and that I 
 will not take any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldst say I have made 
 Abraham rich; save only that which the young men have eaten, and the 
 portion of the men which went with me, Anen, Esehol, and Mamre; let 
 ihem take their portion." This was that Abraham; and such were the 
 young men born in his house. No wonder Melchizedeck, though king of 
 Salem, and priest of the most high God, did not consider it a stoop from 
 his dignity, to meet such a man with bread and wine, and bless him, 
 saying — "Blessed be Abraham of the most high God, possessor of heaven 
 and earth; and blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine 
 enemies into thine hands." 
 
 We have purposely avoided any analysis of the Sinai covenant respect- 
 ing servitude, excepting so far as it was made necessary by the appeals 
 of Mr. Home and others. We have also avoided remarks on principles 
 inculcated under the words servants and slaves, in Biblical Antiquities, 
 and the Dictionary of the Bible, and other popular works lately published, 
 for the purpose of forming the morals of our children in Sabbath Schools. 
 We believe that they are at this moment poisoning the fountain of in- 
 struction, and ruining the moral health of the rising generation. But they 
 require attention which our present limits forbid, in the mean time, we 
 challenge the host of apologists for slavery, to produce a divine statute, or 
 any text of scripture, which authorized any man to vse his neighbovr'^s 
 service withonl wages, and not give him for his work. Jer. xxii. 13. Mr. 
 Home, and all who have attempted it, have failed. 
 
44 
 
 VI. Slave holders and their apologists, have done more towards hring- 
 ing the old testament, and particularly the laui of Moses, into contempt, 
 than all the infidels of this, or any other age. 
 
 The standing of a negro trader is, in any country, very low. In spite 
 of custom and their Justs, men every where look down with contempt up- 
 on the man who spends his earthly term in trafficking in immortal "beings. 
 If we teach our children that patriarchs were such men; that the old les- 
 taraeiit church was a great society, licensed to carry on such traffick; and 
 that the religion by which they were governed, rose no higher in moralilv 
 than the laws which regulate a slave farm, what can we expect as the re- 
 sult? Our children will either have very little sense, or they will have ve- 
 ry little respect for any thing connected with the religion of old times, and 
 feel strong temptation to say with the poet's devil — "farthest from it is 
 best." Account for it as you will, the law and the prophets are, to a 
 great extent, laid aside as useless, or worse than useless. The sentiment 
 is prevalent, that the law which God gave by Moses, was a rough system, 
 fit only for the government of a rough people, in the barbarous ages — that 
 it is unintelligible, or that its n janing is arbitrary — and that it inculcated 
 somethings very inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel. You can 
 hear professors of religion tell ^ow their sensibilities are shocked, even by 
 the devotional exeicises of o J testament saints. Something very like 
 contempt is often manifested, when the Jewish law, or the Jeieish reli- 
 gion, is mentioned. That old Jewish hiblc is, with many, the contemptu- 
 ous name of all scriptures given before the coming of Christ, whenever 
 they are named, excepting when they are appealed to, in behalf of slavery. 
 All this, in full view of the fact that God was the author of them, and that 
 they are the means which he, a* this moment, uses, in making men holy, 
 and preparing them for heaven. 
 
 The appalling fact is, we have abused the law of Moses, till we almost 
 hate it as we do the Africans. We treat it as inca ble of being injured. 
 For centuries, we have been prostituting it to the support of one of the 
 most horrible systems of oppression, on which the sun has ever shone. Is 
 it strange, then, that there should be a general shyness of it i' He must 
 think but little who does not perceive, that if all that is said of it by the 
 advocates of slavery be true, it must be a very unsafe companion for one 
 who wishes to get to heaven — of very little use to a man who wishes to 
 spend his days in walking in the footsteps of the Son of God. Is it 
 strange, that it has become the scoff of fools? Place the best man on 
 earth in the pillory, and write rogue on his back, and every idle boy in 
 the streets will shout and throw stones at him. The public mind will be 
 affected by appeals to the Jewish law, for the justification of any gross sin, 
 just as the mind of the rabble were aftected, in relation to the Saviour, by 
 the conduct of the high priest. Every attentive reader of the Evange- 
 lists, has noticed the great contrast between the respect paid to him at the 
 commencement, and the treatment he received toward the close of his 
 mock trial. Even the Roman veterans, who were led out to take him, 
 ■when Jesus was pointed out, hesitated, and went backward. The bold- 
 est of the rabble stood in awe of him, and kept their distance. But the 
 moment the high priest rent his garment, and pronounced him guilty of 
 blasphemy, the scene was changed. Any ruffian could then approach 
 
45 
 
 and insult him. Then did they spit in Ms face, and buffeted him, and 
 others smote him n-ith the palms of their hands. 
 
 The reckless manner in which authors, ever since the church has he- 
 come polluted with slavery, write on biblical and Jewish antiquities, shews 
 that we are far ^one in want of regard for the old testament things. We 
 generally find the customs of Moses, and paganism, and the wickedness 
 of Jews, all mingled together, so that none but a first rate biblical scholar 
 can distinguish them. The result is — in most cases, the young reader 
 swallows down poison and all, under the delusion that he is drinking in 
 the instruction of the old testament. We select, as an illustration of this 
 remark, a paragraph from "Jewish Antiquities," by the highly esteemed 
 Wm. Brown, D. D. 
 
 In vol. 2. page 315, under the head of "Jewish mode of warfare," hesays: 
 "But the most careless reader of scripture must have noticed the horrors 
 to which the besieged were sometimes reduced, and the difference of 
 treatment as to captives in ancient and modern times; for independent of 
 that severity which God enjoined with respect to the Canaanites, to pun- 
 ish them for their profligacy, and insure th& future safety and morals of 
 Israel, we find the conquerors setting their feet on the necks of their ene- 
 mies, cutting off the heads of some, the no s and ears of others, and the 
 hands and feet of others, puttmg tliem undi r saws and harrows of iron, 
 and making them pass througli the brick kiln, whilst they emasculated 
 the seed royal to prevent their aspiring to the throne. Even the fair sex 
 were most shamefully abused — for some were exposed to a brutal sol- 
 diery; mothers were destroyed with their children; children were dashed 
 against the stones; and women with child ripped up; whilst those of rank 
 were wantonly stripped naked, to walk in that state exposed to every in- 
 clemency of the weather, and often reduced to hard labour, like the mean- 
 est slaves," &c. 
 
 We venture to say ihat a more frightful picture never was presented to 
 the eye of man. About twenty texts of scripture are quoted in the mar- 
 gin as proofs. Not a word is dropped to shew how much of this was the 
 work of a brutal, pagan soldiery. The young reader is left to suppose, 
 that an army of Israelites could go through all this high-handed wicked- 
 ness, and when tried by the Jewish law, receive the plaudit— well done. 
 Tlie reader will perhaps be surprised to hear, that excepting the text in 
 which the symbolical actions of Joshua on a particular occasion are no- 
 ticed, and another which records David's cruel treatment of the Ammon- 
 ites, in the same season of hardness of heart m which he behaved so shame- 
 fully to the house of Uriah, nearly all the other texts quoted have refer- 
 ence, not to the Jewish, but to the pagan mode of warfare.' We may be 
 told, that as such brutal treatment of females, &c. was practised by pa- 
 gan armies, and as these things are noticed in the bible, it was right to put 
 them down among Jewish antiquities, lender the head of "Jewish mode of 
 warfare." If so — the fair way of writing anj man's history, is by detail- 
 ing the wickedness of his neighbors. According to the principle on 
 which Jewish Antiquities are generally written, we ought never to censure 
 Hume and other infidel historians. They never charged christians wiili 
 any thing too bad for pagans. When such a man as Dr. Brown could 
 write thus, what must be the state of public opinion? When we read our 
 

 46 
 
 modern productions on the life of Abraham and the law of Moses, it re- 
 quires an effort to shake off the impression that there is a combination, 
 in the church and out of it, to establish slavery, though it should be on 
 the ruins of all regard for the bible, and the God of Israel. Shall I not 
 visit for these thingsl saith the Lord — and shall not my sovl be avenged 
 on such a nation as this? 
 
 FINIS. 
 
f 
 
 . ' i^Ja'i2 
 
I