92
children by their slave women. He also furnished her with something for her and the child to eat in their perambulations. Instead of preventing her flight he assisted her by laying the youth, as well as the bread and water, on her shoulders. That she was a domestic servant we don't deny. She was privileged to go where she liked, so far as Abraham was concerned. If the Slaveholders would act upon this principle, slavery would soon be abolished by the exit of the Slaves, until such exit would become altogether unnecessary. They again assure us Paul sent back Onesimus, a Slave, to Philemon, a Slaveholder.—1st. It is with them to prove Onesimus was a Slave. It is one thing to make an assertion, and quite another to prove it. Many persons don't like to take things for granted.—2. Having assumed the ground they must show Philemon was a Slaveholder. To many it would no doubt seem, to prove the former would be to demonstrate the latter, but it does not necessarily follow. This they have never done, for this reason—they can't. But the accumulated evidence from the passage is on the side of freedom. This eminent Apostle says, "Whom I would have retained." It seems he had power to have kept him had he been disposed; from whence did he derive this power? "Thou shalt not turn back the servant that escapeth unto thee," &c. By this law Paul could have retained him; he says to Philemon, "Receive
