If A can prove, however conclusively, that he may of right enslave B, why may not B snatch the same argument and prove equally t
hat he may enslave A? You say A is white and B is black. It is colour, then; the lighter having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule you are to be slave to the first man you meet with a fairer skin than your own. You do not mean colour exactly? You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule you are to be slave to the first man you meet with an intellect superior to your own.
But, say you, it is a question of interest, and if you make it your interest you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest he has the right to enslave you.
<span>Tubman used logos most effectively. She told the group facts about the risks of returning to the plantation, explaining the risks for all involved. She explained that they would have to choose between freedom and death. She wanted them to know that returning wasn't an option.</span>
