The person, who seems to have noticed the subject next was Dr. Primatt. In
his "Dissertation on the Duty of Mercy, and on the Sin of Cruelty to
Brute-animals," he takes occasion to advert to the subject of the African
Slave-trade. "It has pleased God," says he, "to cover some men with white
skins and others with black; but as there is neither merit nor demerit in
complexion, the white man, notwithstanding the barbarity of custom and
prejudice, can have no right by virtue of his colour to enslave and
tyrannize over the black man. For whether a man be white or black, such he
is by God's appointment, and, abstractedly considered, is neither a subject
for pride, nor an object of contempt."

After Dr. Primatt, we come to baron Montesquieu. "Slavery," says he, "is
not good in itself. It is neither useful to the master nor to the slave.
Not to the slave, because he can do nothing from virtuous motives. Not to
the master, because he contracts among his slaves all sorts of bad habits,
and accustoms himself to the neglect of all the moral virtues. He becomes
haughty, passionate, obdurate, vindictive, voluptuous, and cruel." And with
respect to this particular species of slavery he proceeds to say, "it is
impossible to allow the Negros are men, because, if we allow them to be
men, it will begin to be believed that we ourselves are not Christians."

Hutcheson, in his System of Moral Philosophy, endeavours to show that he,
who detains another by force in slavery, can make no good title to him, and
adds, "Strange that in any nation where a sense of liberty prevails, and
where the Christian religion is professed, custom and high prospect of gain
can so stupefy the consciences of men and all sense of natural justice,
that they can hear such computations made about the value of their
fellow-men and their liberty without abhorrence and indignation!"

Foster, in his Discourses on Natural Religion and Social Virtue, calls the