t was before the daring genius of Columbus
pierced the night of ages, and opened to one world the sources
of power, wealth and knowledge; to another, all unutterable
woes;--such it is at this day: it is the law written by the
finger of God on the heart of man; and by that law, unchangeable
and eternal, while men despise fraud, and loathe rapine, and
abhor blood, they shall reject with indignation the wild and
guilty fantasy, that man can hold property in man! In vain you
appeal to treaties, to covenants between nations. The covenants
of the Almighty, whether the old or the new, denounce such
unholy pretensions. To those laws did they of old refer, who
maintained the African trade. Such treaties did they cite, and
not untruly; for by one shameful compact, you bartered the
glories of Blenheim for the traffic in blood. Yet, in despite of
law and of treaties, that infernal traffic is now destroyed, and
its votaries put to death like other pirates. How came this
change to pass? Not assuredly by parliament leading the way; but
the country at length awoke; the indignation of the people was
kindled; it descended in thunder, and smote the traffic, and
scattered its guilty profits to the winds. Now, then, let the
planters beware--let their assemblies beware--let the government
at home beware--let the parliament beware! the same country is
once more awake,--awake to the condition of negro slavery; the
same indignation kindles in the bosom of the same people; the
same cloud is gathering that annihilated the slave trade; and,
if it shall descend again, they, on whom its crash shall fall,
will not be destroyed before I have warned them; but I pray that
their destruction may turn away from us the more terrible
judgments of God!'

Is this the language of fanaticism? Is Henry Brougham a madman?

The following extracts must close the evidence in support of my third
allegation, that the Colonization Society disregards the fundamental
principle of human liberty and equality, that man cannot hold _property_
in man:

'Let me ask, who can wish under existing circumstances that the
constitution should be altered, when it must bring with it a
_violation of property_--and when that violation of private
property must engender such hostility of feelings, and elicit
such bitter vituperation? The whole Union would f