most cases, where the negro man is found a slave, that some uncontrollable circumstance at first necessitated the purchase of the black man as a slave — thus securing, without sin, the servitude of millions. Africa herself, in all ages, has stood ready with her billions of slaves, to tempt the cupidity of men in their purchase, selling their own race for the merest trifle a head — this has always been done by their chiefs. In this, who is to blame? The negro is too ignorant and imbecile to be charged with sin, in the proper sense of the word, on this account; and the purchasers, what else could they do but take them when offered, as their condition in life could not be made worse by the transfer, but far better? Thus the Divine Providence, in an arbitrary manner, has taken care to accomplish its own judicial appointment of the negro race to slavery.
Abolitionists, in their opposition to the principle of negro slavery, contend that, as the Supreme Being dealt severely in the way of judgment, with the Egyptians, for refusing to let the Hebrews go free from their condition of bondage in that country; it is made clear, therefore, as they believe, that he is not pleased with the practice which enslaves the black race. But, between the two cases there appears to be no parallel — no likeness of condition — on which account, though God punished and rebuked the Egyptians for their behavior toward the Hebrews in that affair, yet this furnishes no reason why we are to believe that, therefore, negro slavery is against his will.
The Hebrews were sent from the land of Canaan
