But suppose even that our measures were calculated to _increase_ the evils of slavery. _The measures adopted by Moses, and sanctioned by God, increased the burdens of the Israelites._ Were they, therefore, _inexpedient_? And yet, if _our_ measures produce a similar effect, O then! they are very inexpedient indeed. The truth is, when we look at Moses and his measures, we look at them in connection with the emancipation of the Israelites. The _ultimate_ and glorious success of the measures proves their wisdom and expediency. But when Anti-Slavery measures are looked at _now_, we see them long _before the end is accomplished_. We see, according to thy account, the burdens increased; but we do not yet see the triumphant march through the Red Sea, nor do we hear the song of joy and thanksgiving which ascended from Israel’s redeemed host. But canst thou not give us twenty years to complete our work? Clarkson, thy much admired model, worked twenty years; and the benevolent Colonization Society has been in operation twenty years. Just give us as long a time, or half that time, and then thou wilt be a far better judge of the expediency or inexpediency of our measures. Then thou wilt be able to look at them in connection with their success or their failure, and instead of writing a book on thy opinions and my opinions, thou canst write a _history_. I cannot agree with thee in the sentiment, that the station of a nursery maid makes it inexpedient for her to turn reprover of the master who employs her. This is the doctrine of _modern aristocracy_, not of primitive christianity; for ecclesiastical history informs us that, in the first ages of christianity, kings were converted through the faithful and solemn rebukes of their slaves and captives. I have myself been reproved by a _slave_, and I thanked her, and still thank her for it. Think how this doctrine robs the nursery maid of her responsibility, and shields the master from reproof; for it may be that she alone has seen him ill-treat his wife. Now it appears to me, so far from her station forbidding all interference to modify the character and conduct of her employer, that that station peculiarly qualifies her for the difficult and delicate task, because nursery maids often know secrets of oppression, which no other persons are fully acquainted with. For my part, I believe it is _now the duty of the slaves of the South to rebuke their masters_ for their robbery, oppression and crime; and so far from believing that such ‘reproof would do no good, but only evil,’ I think it would be attended by the happiest results in the main, though I doubt not it would occasion some instances of severe personal suffering. No station or character can destroy individual responsibility, in the matter of reproving sin. I feel that a slave has a right to rebuke me, and so has the vilest sinner; and the sincere, humble christian will be thankful for rebuke, let it come from whom it may.