ief? The great God, who looks down
upon all his creatures with the same impartial eye, seems to have
infatuated the parties concerned, that they might bring the horrid
circumstance to light, that it might be recorded in the annals of a
publick court, as an authentick specimen of the treatment which the
unfortunate Africans undergo, and at the same time, as an argument to
shew, that there is no species of cruelty, that is recorded to have been
exercised upon these wretched people, so enormous that it may not
_readily be believed_.


       *        *        *        *        *


FOOTNOTES


[Footnote 068: The action was brought by the owners against the
underwriters, to recover the value of the _murdered_ slaves. It was
tried at Guildhall.]


       *        *        *        *        *



CHAP. VI.

If the treatment then, as before described, is confirmed by reason, and
the great credit that is due to disinterested writers on the subject; if
the unfortunate Africans are used, as if their flesh were stone, and
their vitals brass; by what arguments do you _receivers_ defend
your conduct?

You say that a great part of your savage treatment consists in
punishment for real offences, and frequently for such offences, as all
civilized nations have concurred in punishing. The first charge that you
exhibit against them is specifick, it is that of _theft_. But how
much rather ought you _receivers_ to blush, who reduce them to such
a situation! who reduce them to the dreadful alternative, that they must
either _steal_ or _perish_! How much rather ought you _receivers_
to be considered as _robbers_ yourselves, who cause these
unfortunate people to be _stolen_! And how much greater is
your crime, who are _robbers of human liberty_!

The next charge which you exhibit against them, is general, it is that
of _rebellion_; a crime of such a latitude, that you can impose it
upon almost every action, and of such a nature, that you always annex to
it the most excruciating pain. But what a contradiction is this to
common sense! Have t