required of them nor embraced in the presept. And do the law an the prophets require him to emanci pate his slave? We have already proven that there is neither precept nor example in the Bible to teach him that it would be an act of justice or humanity for him to do so, nor has he cause to believe that it would be an act of benevolence to expose his slave to such eruel treatment as the Free Blacks of Ohio received at the hands of the Abolitionists of that State, and then, like them, to be driven to the frozen peaks of Canada, to perish in the snow.* The law and the prophets require him to protect his slave from the hand of injury and cruelty-to impose a reasonable task of labour on him, and no more--to provide for his wants and to render his condition comfortable, by removing from his mind that burthen of care and anxiety for the necessaries of life, under which millions of the labouring class of freemen are doomed to groan-to admonish him of his moral obligations and to use all the means in his power to have him taught his duty to his Maker and having done this, he has done all that the law and the prophets require; he has obeyed the precept of the Saviour; and then, like Abraham the father of the faithful and the friend of God and man, he may bequeath his servants to his Isaac and ascend to Paradise.

And why, may we ask, should such a master whom

* The remnant of the Black Colony of Ohio may now be found in Canada, a poor, friendless, wretched, wandering tribe of human beings To the idleness and cen ousness is attributed the cause of their lands being taken from them and their bish meut. be it so And it, in such a country as Ohio, the negro without a master, couldnot overcome his natural propensity for idleness and licentiousness, į- it robabt that he would in Africa? And does not this prove that he is better off with, than wiki out a master! Why then seek his emancipation—and why reproach the Almighty ter in stating Bondage, specialty for the melioration of his condition?

F

the law and the prophets approve; whom the Saviour and his apostles hail as an heir of the heaveny inheritance; why should such a master be upbraid d as "a monster, who in art and wickedness exceeds the Prince of darkness?" And why should his slave be told, it matters not what is written in the Law and the Prophets, nor what the Saviour and his apostles may have said about slavery, "your master, who claims your child as his property and nurtures and detains it in slavery, is equally a man theif with the negro stealer on the coast of Guinea." Whence the authority for such outrageous declarations? Has another STAR indeed appeared in the EAST, ominious of a more merciful dispensation to the slave, than that which was seen in Betlehem of Judea?-and moving alternately o'er the dwellings of TAPPAN and GARRISON and thence in its marvelous revolutions pursuing BEMAN on his holy embassy across the Deep with his " image of Jesus the price of his slaves in his pocket,"* have the Angels of heaven proclaimed with louder acclamations of joy than saluted the Shepherds of Israel, LO!!! THESE, THESE are the friends of the slave, and not the Saviour and his Apostles? Frail human y-thou must be prone to the most appalling presump ion, when thy children measure arms with JEHOVAH, and extol their benevolence above the standard of his mercy.

* 'I he Rev. Dr Nathan S. S. Beman in one of his Philippics against slavery remarked, that "slave-owners sold the image of Jesus in their poor slaves and carried the price in their pockets." Before he left Georgia, he sold his poor slaves and rocketed the price and it is said that if ever he did an act that was more acceptable to his maker, he certainly never did one that was so acceptable to his slaves. He is gone to Europe to negociate an alliance in the holy warfare against slavery. Quer is he to see aid of his Britannic Majesty, or of the Forte, or of both? As the Cito. man Court affords sprits quite congenial to his benevolent purposes, he will doubtless meet with a gracious reception there.

If by presenting our argument in this point of view, we should unfortunately trespass on the sensibility of those who would suggest a happier method to illustrate the absurd and impious opinions of our most deadly foes, we cannot help it; we have not been favoured with the counsel of such friends, nor do we know that justice and truth would have permitted us to heed their adiaouitions. There is such a thing as charity, and it is said that in the measure of its long suffering and kindness, "it beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things ;" that "it envieta not, vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not benave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, rejoiceth not in iniquity." We admire the apostles inimitable picture of the virtue, and would be extremely happy to believe that we possessed it in all the loveliness of its true character; but that charity which "envieth" the prospry of ct ers-that "vaunteth itself" above all virtuat is so "puffed up" as to exalt itself above God and is holy precepts-that "behaveth itself so unseemly as to curse those whom the Saviour and his apostles have blessse hat seeketh her own" prosperity and happiness with such intense desire, as to forget the poverty and wretchedness of those around it-hat is so "easily provoked" as to excite others to wrath and vengeance for no caus-so "thinketh evil" of its neighbor as not to discover one virtue in his heart so"rejoiceth in iniquity" as to be comforted with nothing less than the tears and blood of the innoce-from such charity, "good Lord deliver us; " nd if that be its voice which bids us "bear all these things

with meekness and patience"believe" that they were indited with the purest motives-" hope," that they are the effusions of pious hearts-nd "endure" them as a burthen not too grievous to be borne;" if this be Heaven-born charity, never did our Fathers hear its voice, and nover do we desire to hear it; for its longsuffering is REBELLION, and its kindness, DEATH.

That the institution of Bondage was written with the finger of God and sanctioned by the Saviour and his Apostles, is a fact as clearly proven in the Bible as the creation of the world; and he who affirms that

it is an unjust, cruel institution," is either ignorant of the Scriptures or guilty of the most appalling presumption. God is not unjust; he cannot be cruel; nor is injustice and cruelty marked in the institutions of his word or the dispensations of his providence. He created man a pere, intelligent spirit, free to choose good ar evil. The latter was unhappily his choice, and that choice constituted him an heir of mortality, entailing, en his posterity its numberless ills. It was then that the compassionate eye of his Creator was specially directed to his condition; and when he beheld his posterity already oppressed with the cares of poverty and want-"when the children and sucklings swooned in the streets; when they cried for bread, and no man gave it unto them," then did he institute Bondage as the means of affording protection and succour to those who were destitute of both; not to augment the miseries of the poor, but to save them from greater calamities; not as a license for injustice and cruelty, for MERcy, with her own right hand indited its Laws, and JusTICE, with the beal of Heaven stampt its penalties.—

That the institution has been abused and its laws most cru ly violated in many instances, we do not deny; but this is neither the proof of its injustice and cruelty, nor of the accountability of its author for its abuses. For if its abuses be received as evidences of its injustice and cruelty, the same may be said of Christianity whose history is marked with darker features of moral depravity than bondage itself-and if God be accountable for the abuses of one, he is equally accountable for the abuses of the other; and if accountable for both," then is the just God, whose justice" is said to be "the habitation of his throne;"" whose mercy is great unto the heavens and who has reserved the unjust and cruel man unto the day of Judgment to be punished "--then is that just and merciful Being the author of that injustice and cruelty, which he is bound by his holy word to punish in the day of judgment. It is not true-God is not the author of the injustice and oruelty which is marked in the history of slavery. To man belongs the guilt, the guilt of having violated the laws of a merciful institution, which, with all its abuses has proven a blessing to millions of the human race and afforded protection and succour to millions of oth ers, who would otherwise have fallen victims to the sword or famine.

Bondage was originally a compact between the master and the slave, based upon the principie of mutual benefit and sanctioned by the Law of Sinai. The morality of that law we have defended against the insidious attacks of the A olition Priesthood, but we find another law imposing bondage on the posterity of man, which, though stampt with the