t gives no rights to American States.
In later times the Canaanites were devoted to destruction for their
sins. The Hebrews were the agents appointed by Jehovah to this work of
retribution. It was not, however, accomplished in their entire
extermination. In the case of the Gibeonites it was formally commuted to
servitude, and other nations occupying the promised land were made
tributary. Thus the curse upon Canaan was fulfilled by _authorized
executioners_ of divine justice.

What light does the whole history now throw upon slavery? It is plain
the curse was a judicial act of God concerning Canaan. It follows that
conquest with extermination or servitude was a judgment of God, which he
appointed his chosen people to execute. It follows further, that those,
who, without his commission, reduce to bondage men who are not
descendants of Canaan, do inflict a curse on those whom he has not
cursed; and thus virtually assume his most awful prerogative as the
Judge of guilty nations.

We then inquire whether the States of the South have received warrant
for enslaving any portion of mankind. Has God _given_ them the African
race as property? Where is the commission? The argument fails to justify
modern slavery for the same reason identically that it fails to justify
offensive war and conquest. God has not given the right--has neither
proclaimed the curse, nor commissioned the agent of the curse. Christian
States in America seize it, and lay it upon those whom he has not
cursed. The passage of his word which has been considered affords them
no sanction.

We proceed to another passage. It is supposed by many to be an
incontrovertible defence of modern slavery, that the Hebrews were
authorized to buy bondmen and bondmaids of the heathen round about them.
Let us candidly examine this defence.

Why were the Hebrews authorized by God in express terms to buy servants,
and possess them as their "money?" Evidently _because they did not
otherwise have this authority_. Human beings, as we have seen, were not
"given" in the grant of property. They do not, therefore, fall within
the scope of the general laws of property. If they had so fallen, the
special statutes, by which the Hebrews purchased them, would have been
as gratuitous as special enactments for buying animals, trees, and
minerals. _Of all nations they only have possessed this right; for they
only received it by special bestowment._ The rest of mankind have ever
been prohibite