at many of them
had deserted the colonization society on some peculiar or personal
grounds, not involving the principles of the cause. He was prepared
to show, however, that by whomsoever supported, the principles of the
abolitionists were essentially wrong, and that their practice was
still worse. He had not access to the voluminous documents brought
forward by Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson had, indeed, that evening, on
this platform, publicly offered him access to them. Had that offer
been made at the beginning of the discussion, instead of the end of
it, or during the four or five days we spent in Glasgow before it
commenced, it might have been turned to some advantage. But as it
was, the audience would know how to appreciate it; and he must rely
solely upon memory, when he stated the principles promulgated by
abolitionists; though at the same time he pledged himself that his
statements not only were intended to be, but were, substantially
correct and entirely candid. The abolitionists held, then, in the
first place, as a fundamental truth, that every human being had an
instant right to be free, irrespective of consequences to himself and
others; consequently that it was the duty of masters to set free their
slaves instantly, and irrespective of all consequences; and of course,
sinful to exercise the powers of a master for one moment, or for any
purpose. This was, in substance, the great principle on which the
abolitionists acted--a principle which he was now prepared to
question. He had, on a former occasion, shown that there were only two
parties responsible for the existence of slavery, namely, individual
slave-holders, and slave-holding communities. He would now attempt to
prove, that, as applied to either of these, this principle was not
only false, but that it was a mere figment, and calculated to produce
tremendous evil. Let them first attend to what the abolitionists say
to the individual slave-holder. Perhaps the person addressed was an
inhabitant of Louisiana; where, if it is not directly contrary to
law, to manumit a slave--the law refuses to recognize the act. Was he
to be told then that he should turn off his slaves, the young and
helpless along with the old and the infirm, with the certain knowledge
that so soon as they left his plantation, they would commence a career
of trouble and sorrow most likely to end in their being seized,
imprisoned, fined, and again enslaved. Mr. Thompson had mentioned, in
nearl