[Footnote A:  The other was Professor Hutcheson, before mentioned in p. 56.]

From this time, or from about the year 1776, to about the year 1782, I am to put down three other coadjutors, whose labours seem to have come in a right season for the promotion of the cause.

The first of these was Dr. ROBERTSON.  In his History of America he laid open many facts relative to this subject.  He showed himself a warm friend both of the Indians and Africans.  He lost no opportunity of condemning that trade, which brought the latter into bondage:  “a trade,” says he, “which is no less repugnant to the feelings of humanity than to the principles of religion.”  And in his Charles the Fifth, he showed in a manner that was clear, and never to be controverted, that Christianity was the great cause in the twelfth century of extirpating slavery from the west of Europe.  By the establishment of this fact, he rendered important services to the oppressed Africans.  For if Christianity, when it began to be felt in the heart, dictated the abolition of slavery, it certainly became those who lived in a Christian country, and who professed the Christian religion, to put an end to this cruel trade.

The second was the Abbe Raynal.  This author gave an account of the laws, government, and religion of Africa, of the produce of it, of the manners of its inhabitants, of the trade in slaves, of the manner of procuring these, with several other particulars relating to the subject.  And at the end of his account, fearing lest the good advice he had given for making the condition of the slaves more comfortable should be construed into an approbation of such a traffic, he employed several pages in showing its utter inconsistency with sound policy, justice, reason, humanity, and religion.

“I will not here,” says he, “so far debase myself as to enlarge the ignominious list of those writers who devote their abilities to justify by policy what morality condemns.  In an age where so many errors are boldly laid open, it would be unpardonable to conceal any truth that is interesting to humanity.  If whatever I have hitherto advanced hath seemingly tended only to alleviate the burden of slavery, the reason is, that it was first necessary to give some comfort to those unhappy beings whom we cannot set free, and convince their oppressors that they were cruel, to the prejudice of their real interests.  But, in the mean time, till some considerable revolution shall make the evidence of this great truth felt, it may not be improper to pursue this subject further.  I shall then first prove that there is no reason of state which can authorize slavery.  I shall not be afraid to cite to the tribunal of reason and justice those governments which tolerate this cruelty, or which even are not ashamed to make it the basis of their power.”

And a little further on he observes—­“Will it be said that he, who wants to make me a slave, does me no injury; but that he only makes use of his rights?  Where are those rights?  Who hath stamped upon them so sacred a character as to silence mine?”