erfluous to say this, when it had been so
frequently asserted that it was sanctioned both by the Jewish and the
Christian dispensations. With respect to the Jews he would observe, that
there was no such thing as perpetual slavery among them. Their slaves
were of two kinds, those of their own nation, and those from the country
round about them. The former were to be set free on the seventh year;
and the rest, of whatever nation, on the fiftieth, or on the year of
Jubilee. With respect to the Christian dispensation, it was a libel to
say that it countenanced such a traffic. It opposed it both in its
spirit and in its principle; nay, it opposed it positively, for it
classed men-stealers, or slave traders, among the murderers of fathers
and mothers, and the most profane criminals upon earth.

The antiquity of slavery in Africa, which the noble lord had glanced at,
afforded, he said, no argument for its continuance. Such a mode of
defence would prevent for ever the removal of any evil; it would justify
the practice of the Chinese, who exposed their infants in the streets to
perish; it would also justify piracy, for that practice existed long
before we knew anything of the African Slave Trade.

He then combatted the argument, that we did a kindness to the Africans
by taking them from their homes; and concluded, by stating to their
lordships, that, if they refused to sanction the resolution, they would
establish these principles, "that though individuals might not rob and
murder, yet that nations might--that though individuals incurred the
penalties of death by such practices, yet that bodies of men might
commit them with impunity for the purposes of lucre;--and that for such
purposes they were not only to be permitted, but encouraged."

The Lord Chancellor (Erskine) confessed that he was not satisfied with
his own conduct on this subject. He acknowledged, with deep contrition,
that, during the time he was a member of the other House, he had not
once attended when this great question was discussed.

In the West Indies he could say, personally, that the slaves were well
treated, where he had an opportunity of seeing them. But no judgment was
to be formed there with respect to the evils complained of; they must be
appreciated as they existed in the trade. Of these he had also been an
eye-witness. It was on this account that he felt contrition for not
having attended the House on this subject, for there were some cruelties
in