consequently _it is impossible_ that either of them could be, or could have been, the progenitor of the negro, at or since the flood, for each race exists now, the one white and the other black; and then, as it is impossible to believe that the negro was created at or since the flood, therefore, he must have been in the ark. This being so, now let us see what God said to Noah in proof of this position. He told Noah that he intended to destroy the world by a flood, but that he intended to save him and his wife, and his three sons and their wives. These were all God intended to _save_, for _they_ had _souls_ and _beasts have not_. God told him he must prepare an ark, into which besides his family, he must also take of _every beast_ after his kind, and all cattle after their kind, and of every creeping thing that creepeth on the earth, and every fowl after his kind, and every bird after his sort, and food for their support. Thus did Noah, and thus by God's command he entered the Ark with his family. God promised Noah to _save_ him and his family--but God did not promise to _save_ the _beasts_, etc., although he preserved them in the ark; but, _besides this preservation_, Noah and his family were to be _saved_--why, we will see presently. Then, Ham, not being the father of the negro, the negro must have come out of the ark with the beasts, and _as one_, for he was _not one of Noah's family_ that entered it. This is inevitable, and can not be shaken by all the reasonings of men on earth to the contrary. Now, unless it can be shown that, from Noah back to Adam and Eve, that in some way this kinky-headed and black-skinned negro is the progeny of Adam and Eve, and which we know can not be done, then _again_ it follows, indubitably, that the negro is not a _human_ being--not being of Adam's race. This point we will now examine and settle, and then account for the negro being here.