Page:Copley 1844 A History of Slavery and its Abolition 2nd Ed.djvu/225

Rh established: no English law did sanction the bringing of slaves into England; but the latter idea was unfounded: British liberty belongs to men as men, not as professing christians. However, while that sentiment prevailed, the negroes were anxious, as soon as they arrived in England, to obtain baptism, and, if possible, got such persons as godfathers, or witnesses of their baptism, as were likely to plead their cause, maintain their freedom, and resist any forcible attempt to send them out of the kingdom. As this resistance increased, the planters and others were greatly perplexed, being unwilling to lose their slaves, and afraid to run the risk of either taking them away by force, or appealing to a public tribunal for a decision. They applied to the Attorney and Solicitor-General for the time being, and obtained their opinion, that a slave coming from the West Indies to Great Britain or Ireland, either with or without his master, did not become free, nor could baptism bestow freedom upon him, or in any way affect his temporal condition or his master's right. They also concluded that a master might legally compel his slave to return to the plantations. This was in the year 1729. The planters and merchants, emboldened by this decision, of course made it as public as possible, and adopted every means to render it effectual. The London papers abounded with advertisements of slaves who had absconded, with descriptions of their persons, and rewards offered for their apprehension; and sometimes they were advertised for sale by auction, either by themselves, or together with horses,