complexion, but such as is occasioned by the climate, or different way of living.  The plea of private property, therefore, cannot, by any means, justify a private commitment of any person whatsoever to prison, because of the apparent danger and tendency of such innovation.  This dangerous practice of concealing in prison was attempted in the case of Jonathan Strong; for the door-keeper of the P——­lt——­y C——­pt——­r (or some person who acted for him) absolutely refused, for two days, to permit this poor injured Negro to be seen or spoke with, though a person went on purpose, both those days, to demand the same.—­All laws ought to be founded upon the principle of “doing as one would be done by;” and indeed this principle seems to be the very basis of the English constitution; for what precaution could possibly be more effectual for that purpose, than the right we enjoy of being judged by our Peers, creditable persons of the vicinage; especially, as we may likewise claim the right of excepting against any particular juryman, who might be suspected of partiality.

This law breathes the pure spirit of liberty, equity, and social love; being calculated to maintain that consideration and mutual regard which one person ought to have for another, howsoever unequal in rank or station.

But when any part of the community, under the pretence of private property, is deprived of this common privilege, it is a violation of civil liberty, which is entirely inconsistent with the social principles of a free state.

True liberty protects the labourer as well as his Lord; preserves the dignity of human nature, and seldom fails to render a province rich and populous; whereas, on the other hand, a toleration of slavery is the highest breach of social virtue, and not only tends to depopulation, but too often renders the minds of both masters and slaves utterly depraved and inhuman, by the hateful extremes of exaltation and depression.

If such a toleration should ever be generally admitted in England, (which God forbid) we shall no longer deserve to be esteemed a civilized people; because, when the customs of uncivilized nations, and the uncivilized customs which disgrace our own colonies, are become so familiar as to be permitted amongst us with impunity, we ourselves must insensibly degenerate to the same degree of baseness with those from whom such bad customs were derived; and may, too soon, have the mortification to see the hateful extremes of tyranny and slavery fostered under every roof.

Then must the happy medium of a well regulated liberty be necessarily compelled to find shelter in some more civilized country:  where social virtue, and that divine precept, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,” are better understood.

An attempt to prove the dangerous tendency, injustice, and disgrace of tolerating slavery amongst Englishmen, would, in any former age, have been esteemed as superfluous and ridiculous, as if a man should undertake, in a formal manner, to prove, that darkness is not light.