"proteſtants" againſt the whole ſyſtem; their example was powerleſs in that day and generation. The words and thoughts of a Williams, an Eliot, and a Sewall, fell unheeded and unnoticed on the ears and hearts of the magiſtrates and people of their time, as the acorn fell two centuries ago in the foreſts by which they were ſurrounded.[1]
V.
But the humane efforts of Roger Williams and John Eliot to abate the ſeverity of judgment againſt captives, and mitigate the horrors of ſlavery in Maſſachuſetts, hardly amounted to a poſitive proteſt againſt the inſtitution itſelf. In their time there was no public opinion againſt ſlavery, and probably very little exerciſe of private judgment againſt it. Even among the Quakers the inner light had not yet discloſed its enormity, or awakened tender conſciences to its utter wickedneſs.
There were two ſignal exceptions to the general
- ↑ In this ſentence, as originally printed in the Hiſtorical Magazine, a "Dudley" was included among thoſe indicated as having been in advance of their contemporaries on this ſubject. The reference was to Paul Dudley, who was the author of a tract, publiſhed in 1731, entitled, "An Eſſay on the Merchandiſe of Slaves and Souls of Men. With an Application to the Church of Rome." This title, and references to the tract by others, gave us the impreſſion that it was againſt Slavery; but an opportunity recently enjoyed of examining the tract itſelf, showed the miſtake. It is altogether "an Application to the Church of Rome,"—in fact, "an oration againſt Popery," of which Maſſachuſetts had a much greater horror than of ſlavery.
