SIXTH SECTION.
Proofs from the Scriptures, that the curse of Noah upon the race of Ham, as a judicial act, is indorsed by the law of Moses — Comparative view of all the orders of servants among the Jews, as the hired Hebrew servant, the bought Hebrew servant, the voluntary Hebrew servant, and the Negro or Canaanite slave — Remarks on the subject of the strangers, of whom the Jews might take usury, and of whom they might not take usury — Respecting who the strangers were, who they should not enslave, or use as bondmen — A seeming contradiction in the law on this subject reconciled — Perpetual slaves to be bought of the Negro heathen of old Canaan, as directed by the law — Strictures on Abolitionist opinions, respecting the meaning of the law relative to servants — Character of Noah and Lot rescued from abolitionist aspersions — Strictures on the opinions of abolitionists, respecting the word buy, as applied to the purchase of bondmen, in the law of Moses, with other matters of their setting forth — Difference between the condition of Hebrew servants and their Canaanite slaves, with respect to the jubilees, and other matters — Proofs that the Hebrews bought and sold Negro slaves under the sanction of the law; even going to Africa for that purpose — Enslaving of the persons of the Amalekites under the eye of Moses — Slaves of the patriarchs bought with money — A curious query of abolitionists answered, with many other matters.
As remarked at the close of the foregoing section, It will be our endeavor in the following to ascertain whether, in the law of Moses, the judicial act of God against the race of Ham, as announced by Noah, was indorsed, and acted upon accordingly, by the Hebrews.
To do this, it will not be necessary to prove, in this
