Granville Sharp, in 1767, published in London a protest against slavery, in which he declared there could be no reasonable pretense for holding either negroes or Indians in slavery. In discussing the bringing about of a state of slavery through contract he declared that “in such a case there would still remain a great suspicion that some undue advantage had been taken of the Indians’ ignorance concerning the nature of such a bond.” Slavery he declared a “shameless prostitution and infringement on the common and natural rights of mankind.” Every inhabitant of the king’s realm, regardless of color, he declared to be the king’s subject, and asserted that no one, therefore, had a moral or legal right to enslave any such subject.[1232] If color were a basis for slavery, he argued, then in a short time any Englishman might be enslaved since there was but little difference between the complexion of a northern Indian and a white man.[1233] Anthony Benezet, about 1750, began to express his opposition to slavery in the almanacs and newspapers of the day. After three separate publications dealing with slavery in general, he issued in 1784 a book entitled “Some Observations on the Situation, Disposition and Character of the Indian Natives of this Continent.” In this he refers to the kindness, hospitality and generosity of the Indians toward the English in the early days of trade, and laments the fact that “the adventurers from a thirst of gain overreached the natives”, so that the latter “saw some of their friends and relatives treacherously entrapped and carried away to be sold as slaves”.[1234]