But if these things are so, how evidently against reason, nature, and every thing human and divine, must they act, who not only force men into _slavery_, against their own _consent_; but treat them altogether as _brutes_, and make the _natural liberty_ of man an article of publick commerce! and by what arguments can they possibly defend that commerce, which cannot be carried on, in any single instance, without a flagrant violation of the laws of nature and of God? * * * * * CHAP. V. That we may the more accurately examine the arguments that are advanced on this occasion, it will be proper to divide the _commerce_ into two parts; first, as it relates to those who _sell_, and secondly, as it relates to those who _purchase_, the _human species_ into slavery. To the former part of which, having given every previous and necessary information in the history of servitude, we shall immediately proceed. Let us inquire first, by what particular right the _liberties_ of the harmless people are invaded by the _prince_. "By the _right of empire_," it will be answered; "because he possesses dominion and power by their own approbation and consent." But subjects, though under the dominion, are not the _property_, of the prince. They cannot be considered as his _possessions_. Their _natures_ are both the same; they are both born in the same manner; are subject to the same disorders; must apply to the same remedies for a cure; are equally partakers of the grave: an _incidental_ distinction accompanies them through life, and this--is all. We may add to this, that though the prince possesses dominion and power, by the consent and approbation of his subjects, he possesses it only for the most _salutary_ ends. He may tyrannize, if he can: he may alter the _form_ of his government: he cannot, however, alter its _nature_ and _end_. These will be immutably the same, though the whole system of its administration should be changed; and he will be still bound to _defend_ the lives and properties of his subjects, and to make them _happy_.