Now what must we justly conclude from such a supposition?
Must we conclude that one species is inferiour to another, and that the inferiority depends upon their _colour_, or their _features_, or their _form_ ?--No--We must now consult the analogy of nature, and the conclusion will be this: "that as she tempered the bodies of the different species of men in a different degree, to enable them to endure the respective climates of their habitation, so she gave them a variety of colour and appearance with a like benevolent design." To sum up the whole.

If the scriptures are true, it is evident that the posterity of _Cain_ are no more; that the curse of _Ham_ has been accomplished; and that, as all men were derived from the same stock, so this variety of appearance in men must either have proceeded from some interposition of the Deity; or from a co-operation of certain causes, which have an effect upon the human frame, and have the power of changing it more or less from its primitive appearance, as they happen to be more or less numerous or powerful than those, which acted upon the frame of man in the first seat of his habitation.

If from the interposition of the Deity, then we must conclude that he, who bringeth good out of evil, produced it for their convenience.

If, from the co-operation of the causes before related, what argument may not be found against any society of men, who should happen to differ, in the points alluded to, from ourselves?
If, on the other hand, the scriptures are false, then it is evident, that there was neither such a person as _Cain_, nor _Ham_, nor _Canaan_; and that nature bestowed such colour, features, and form, upon the different species of men, as were best adapted to their situation.
Thus, on which ever supposition it is founded, the whole argument must fall.

And indeed it is impossible that it can stand, even in the eye of common sense.