Before I proceed farther with the respective duties of masters and servants, I beg leave to present some solemn thoughts, for the consideration of Christian slaveholders.  I have endeavored to show, that the holding of slaves is not sinful, per se; but if slaveholders fail to discharge the duties enjoined on them, the Divine Being will hold them accountable for their dereliction of duty.  Such is the deceitfulness of our hearts, and such the proneness of our corrupt natures to wander from the path of duty, that it is necessary for us at all times to scrutinize well, the motives which prompt us to act, and to test all our actions by the only standard of truth, the Holy Scriptures.  Our Saviour tells us, that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.  Not that the possession and enjoyment of riches is necessarily sinful; but if those who have wealth, fail as good stewards, to use it according to the requisitions of the Bible, then are they guilty in the sight of God.  So it is with slavery.  Slaveholding is not necessarily sinful, but if slaveholders fail to discharge the duties enjoined on them in the New Testament; then are they guilty in the sight of God.  And here lies the difficulty; when we point out to a rich man his duty, his corrupt and avaricious heart interposes and says, no; you would rob me of my goods, you would damage my pecuniary interests; I cannot, I will not yield to your requisitions.  We sometimes encounter the same difficulty with slaveholders.  They sometimes imagine that duty and interest, are antagonistic principles.  They imagine, that if they discharge their duty to the slaves, their pecuniary interests will suffer thereby; and for this reason, I have sometimes thought, that it might be as difficult for a slaveholder to enter the kingdom of heaven, as for a rich man.  “The love of money, the root of all evil,” stands in the way in both cases.  If duty and our worldly interest could always run in the same channel, then should we find it no difficult task to be Christians; but as they are sometimes opposing forces, antagonistic principles, the contest is difficult, and the result sometimes doubtful.[3] Duty, commands the rich man to feed the hungry and clothe the naked; but the rich man says, nay, Lord, my goods are my own; I procured them by honest labor, and must I now appropriate them to feeding the hungry and clothing the naked?  What right have they to enjoy the fruits of my labor?  Your requisition Lord, is unreasonable.  I cannot, I will not comply.  Duty, says to the slaveholder, “Give unto your servants that which is just and equal, forbearing threatening;” but the slaveholder says, nay Lord, my slave is my own property, I purchased him with my own money, and what right have you to dictate to me, how I shall treat my slave?  Is he not my own, have I not the right to feed, clothe, work, and otherwise treat him, as seemeth good in mine own eyes; and who has the right to interfere?  A compliance with your unreasonable demands will materially affect my pecuniary interests.  My object is to amass wealth, to hoard up silver and gold; and I shall therefore so manage my affairs as to accomplish this object.