cy, and pofitive abfurdity. If Somerfet is protected by the law of England in the enjoyment of his perfon and property, how, in appeal to common fenfe, can Mr. Steuart's right in him remain exactly in the fame ftate as before? Yes, it may be said, he has a right to the perpetual fervice of him; for this is no more than the same state of fubjection for life, which every apprentice submits to for the fpace of seven years, or fometimes for a longer time." But by what mode or method does Mr. Steuart acquire this perpetual right to his fervice? There is no indenture of apprenticeship on the part of Somerfet to him: there is no written contract of any fort or kind whatever, there is no parole agreement between them, to enforce this right of fervice. How is it to be maintained then? If by the purchase of him, property is the offspring of purchase; and, as fuch, Mr. Steuart claims him. If he is not his property, he has otherwife no right in him, nor to his fervices; and, again, if he is his property, who fhall diffeife him thereof?

ग

As

As I began, my Lord, with making a diftinction between flavery and property, and have perfifted in their legal difference relatively to the ftate and condition of Negroes, fome farther explanation on this point may perhaps be looked for and required of me. I am fenfible it may objectively be faid, that in every kind of flavery there is an included degree of property, more or less limited or extended; and that this kind of property therefore in Negroes is but an accumulated degree of flavery fo that the diftinction I have made is a distinction without a difference, and a mere contentiousness about words. Now, although I admit the truth of this objection in part, I muft deny, in the whole, its application to the principles of my argument. Slavery, my Lord, is that state of fubjection, which mankind, by force or otherwise, acquire the one over the other. In every fociety therefore where this state of fubjection prevails, the object and subject of thofe laws neceffary for the regulation thereof are, what? buman nature itself.

Let

Let it be confidered then whether human nature is either the object or fubject of the laws of England, refpecting the state and condition of Negroes. I beg leave, my Lord, to affert, that the appeal I have already made to thofe laws maintains the contrary matter of fact, with the undeniable proof of felf-evidence. But, my Lord,

it may again be urged, that authority, however respectable, is not the test of truth; and therefore, fays the difputant, fhew me the reason, the Cur, the Quare, the Quamobrem, of thefe laws. To this, my Lord, in the language and poftulate of the Greek Philofopher, I reply; that, as matter of fact is the Aos w sw of my argument, beyond this, it is not incumbent on me to extend my enquiries. However, my Lord, as a research of this nature is perhaps founded upon no impertinent or unmeaning curiofity, fo the fuggestions even of fancy and imagination may not be here undeferving your Lordship's attention. It being evidently the will, it is to be prefumed, till the contrary

I

contrary appears, that it was the effect allo of the wisdom of parliament, that Negroes under the law fhould not be confidered as human beings; and therefore I am led to furmife that this determination of the Legislature might have arifen from one or the other of two motives or confiderations: the one phyfical, the other political. With refpect then to the phyfical motive, your Lordship need not be told how much the origin of Negroes, the cause of that remarkable difference in complexion from the rest of mankind, and the woolly covering of their heads fo fimilar to the fleece of sheep, have puzzled and perplexed the Naturalifts of all countries for ages paft.. It was a fubject of the deepeft reflection to the great and learned Mr. Boyle; and what could engage his divine abilities, without fatisfaction either to himself or others, is likely to remain among thofe arcana of nature that are not to be revealed to human understanding. But, although these phænomena in nature are not to be accounted

for,

for, and therefore admit of no principle of law inferible from them; yet their very incomprehenfiblenefs, when compared with other circumftances more known and better understood, may ferve to this end, as fo many leffer weights in the fcales of greater probability. Now, my Lord, it is an opinion univerfally received, that human nature is univerfally the fame: but I should. apprehend that this was a propofition rather taken for granted, than admitted to be proved; for although the proper study of mankind is man, and therefore the univerfality of fuch an opinion is prima facie evidence of its truth; yet, it is to be observed, that, of all other ftudies, the fcience of man has been leaft of all cultivated and improved. Man only, who examines all Nature elfe, ftands unexamined by himself. If we look into the vegetable and mineral kingdoms of this world, we fhall perceive a fcrutiny made in them the most nice, accurate, and comprehenfive; we fhall find thefe grand divifions of nature

arranged