view of Mary Prince, or the unmeasured encomiums of their friends, I am
willing to believe them to be, on the whole, fair, perhaps favourable,
specimens of colonial character. Let them even be rated, if you will, in
the very highest and most benevolent class of slave-holders; and, laying
everything else entirely out of view, let Mr. Wood's conduct in this
affair be tried exclusively by the facts established beyond dispute, and
by his own statement of the case in his letter to Mr. Taylor. But then, I
ask, if the very _best_ and _mildest_ of your slave-owners can act as Mr.
Wood is proved to have acted, what is to be expected of persons whose
mildness, or equity, or common humanity no one will dare to vouch for? If
such things are done in the green tree, what will be done in the dry?--And
what else then can Colonial Slavery possibly be, even in its best estate,
but a system incurably evil and iniquitous?--I require no other data--I
need add no further comment.]

The case affords a most instructive illustration of the true spirit of the
slave system, and of the pretensions of the slave-holders to assert, not
merely their claims to a "vested right" in the _labour_ of their bondmen,
but to an indefeasible property in them as their "absolute chattels." It
furnishes a striking practical comment on the assertions of the West
Indians that self-interest is a sufficient check to the indulgence of
vindictive feelings in the master; for here is a case where a man (a
_respectable_ and _benevolent_ man as his friends aver,) prefers losing
entirely the full price of the slave, for the mere satisfaction of
preventing a poor black woman from returning home to her husband! If the
pleasure of thwarting the benevolent wishes of the Anti-Slavery Society in
behalf of the deserted negro, be an additional motive with Mr. Wood, it
will not much mend his wretched plea.

* * * * *