entertained sentiments opposed to the slavery of the blacks, did then take occasion publicly to remonstrate against the inconsistency of contending for their own liberty, and, at the same time, depriving other people of theirs. Pamphlets and newspaper essays appeared on the subject; it often entered into the conversation of reflecting people; and many who had, without remorse, been the purchasers of slaves, condemned themselves, and retracted their former opinion. The Quakers were zealous against slavery and the slave-trade; and by their means the writings of Anthony Benezet of Philadelphia, John Woolman of New Jersey, and others were spread through the country. Nathaniel Appleton and James Swan, merchants of Boston, and Dr. Benjamin Rush, of Philadelphia, distinguished themselves as writers on the side of liberty. Those on the other side generally concealed their names; but their arguments were not suffered to rest long without an answer. The controversy began about the year 1766, and was renewed at various times till 1773, when it was warmly agitated, and became a subject of forensic disputation at the public commencement at Harvard College." p. 201. [24] Vol. ii, p. 30. [25] Lectures by Members of the Mass. Historical Society on the Early History of Massachusetts, p. 216. [26] Mr. George H. Moore, in his elaborate work, "Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts," expresses a doubt whether slavery legally came to an end in Massachusetts at the period stated above; and perhaps not before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution. He says: "It would not be the least remarkable of the circumstances connected with this strange and eventful history, that though _virtually_ abolished before, the actual prohibition of slavery in Massachusetts, as well as Kentucky, should be accomplished by the votes of South Carolina and Georgia." p. 242. [27] Dr. Belknap says the clause "all men are born free and equal" was inserted in the Declaration of Rights of Massachusetts "not merely as a moral and political truth, but with a particular view to establish the liberation of the negroes on a general principle, and so it was understood by the people at large; but some doubted whether it was sufficient"--p. 203. That some persons had this result in view is probable; but contemporaneous records and acts of the citizens do not justify the statement that "so it was understood by the people at large." Dr. Belknap was living in New Hampshire at the time, and did not come to Boston till 1786. The construction put upon the clause, by the Supreme Court, was evidently a happy afterthought; and was inspired by that _public opinion_ to which Dr. Belknap himself, in his reply to Judge Tucker, ascribes the extinction of slavery.