Itisnotsodifficulttointroduceslaveryintoastatewherelibertyisestablished；becausesucharevolutionmightbebroughtaboutbyforce，and，forthereasonsandviolence，whichmakeeverythinggivewayabove-mentioned，Imustconclude，thattheconsequencesofsucharevolutionwouldtendtoextinguish，oratleast，withoutthegreatestindustry:butweresuchprecaution，greatlytochecktheprogressofprecautionsproperlytaken；wereslaveryreducedtoatemporaryandconditionalservice，andputunderproperregulations；itmightprove，ofallothers，themostexcellentexpedientforrenderingthelowerclassesofapeoplehappyandflourishing；andforpreventingthatabusiveprocreation，fromwhichthegreatmiserytowhichtheyareexposedatpresentchieflyproceeds。Butaseverymodificationofslaveryisquitecontrarytothespiritofmoderntimes，Ishallcarrysuchspeculationsnofarther。ThusmuchI
havethoughtitnecessarytoobserve，bytheway，onlyforthesakeofsomeprincipleswhichIshallhaveoccasionafterwardstoapplytoourownoeconomyforwhere-everanynotableadvantageisfoundaccompanyingslavery，itisthedutyofamodernstatesmantofalluponamethodofprofitingbyit，withoutwoundingthespiritofEuropeanliberty。Andthishemayaccomplishinathousandways，bytheaidofgoodlaws，calculatedforcuttingofffromthelowerclassesofapeopleanyinteresttheycanhaveininvolvingthemselvesinwantandmisery，openingtothematthesametimeaneasyprogresstowardseaseandprosperity。
Herefollowsanexpositionoftheprinciples，fromwhichI
wasledtosay，inaformerchapter，thatthefailureoftheslavishformoffeudalgovernment，andtheextensiontherebygiventocivilanddomesticliberty，werethesourcefromwhichthewholesystemofmodernpolicyhassprung。
Underthefeudalform，thehigherclasseswereperhapsmorefreethanatpresent，butthelowerclasseswereeitherslaves，orunderamostserviledependence，which，astotheconsequenceofinterruptingtheprogressofprivateindustry，isentirelythesamething。