I am not a friend of "oppression" any more than the gentleman; but I trust that had I lived in Israel, I should never have thought of being more humane than my Maker.' "I then proceeded to say that (as before remarked to you) we are not warranted by the Bible to make men slaves when we please; nor, if slavery exists, are we commanded to adopt the rules and regulations of Hebrew slavery.
"But we do learn from the Bible that property in man is not in itself sinful,--not even to say of a man, 'He is my money.' "Were it intrinsically wrong, God would not have legislated about it in such ways; for granting, if you please, the untenable distinction about his 'not appointing' slavery, but 'finding it in existence' and legislating for it, what necessity could there have been for making such a law as that relating to the boring of the ear, rather than giving the slave his wife and children and suffering them all to go free?
"No, Mr.North," said I, continuing our conversation, "I cannot oppose the relation of master and slave as in itself sinful; for then I become more righteous than God.

But I must inquire whether it is right, in each given case, to reduce men to bondage: shall that be, for example, the mode in which prisoners of war shall be disposed of?
or a subjugated people?
or criminals?
or, in certain cases, debtors?
In doing so, there is no intrinsic sin; the act itself, under the circumstances, may be exceedingly sinful; but the relation of ownership is not necessarily a sin.

This, I hold, is all that can be deduced from the Bible in favor of slavery: The relation is not in itself sinful." "But," said Mr.North, "we sinned in stealing these people from Africa; all sin should be immediately forsaken; therefore, set the slaves free at once." I replied, "Let us apply that principle.

You and I, and a large company of passengers, are in a British ship, approaching our coast.

We find out, all at once, that the crew and half of the passengers stole the ship.