Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

SECTION III.

A system of perpetual slavery was recognized and regulated by the Mosaic civil code substantially the same with the system in the American Southern States: nor was such slavery deemed inconsistent with the holiness symbolized in the Ritual law of Moses.

ALTOGETHER, aside from the law of temporary servitude to the Hebrew, there was in the civil code of Moses the recognition of a system of perpetual servitude, just as clearly and distinctly, though in less detail, as in the laws of Virginia, or Kentucky, or South Carolina. And by precisely the same logical and critical process by which it is proved that the civil laws of Moses did not recognize and regulate perpetual servitude, any one may undertake to prove, just as clearly, that slavery never existed by law in Virginia or South Carolina.

For, in addition to all that has been shown to the effect that Moses found perpetual slavery already established arnong the Hebrews, just as certainly as the statesmen who made the State constitutions of Virginia and South Carolina after the American Revolution found slavery already established among the people of those States, it is scarcely conceivable how language could more explicitly set forth the idea of permanent servitude, as a part of the social system in the Hebrew commonwealth. "Both thy bond

the public of one of its members; second, it was taking away a man's liberty, the liberty of a free-born Israelite; third, it was driving a man out from the inheritance of the land, and bidding him go serve other gods.-(Henry, Com., Deut. 24: 7.)

"To steal away a free man or an Hebrew, and to reduce him to the state of servitude, was death. The Jews do not think that the stealing of a man of any other nation deserves death, but only the theft of a free Hebrew."-(Cruden, Con. on "Steal.")

men and thy bondmaids shall be of the heathen which are round about you: of them shall ye BUY BONDMEN and bondmaids. And they shall be your POSSESSION (property), and ye shall take them as AN INHERITANCE for your children after you to INHERIT THEM FOR A POSSESSION; they shall be bondmen forever."

your

"For he (the slave) is his money." And his appointed valuation is fixed: "If the ox shall push a man-servant: he (the owner) shall give their master thirty shekels of silver." "If his master have given him a wife, and she have borne him sons and daughters: the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself."

Can any language be found in the slave code of Virginia or South Carolina more clearly and distinctly setting forth the right of a master in his slave as property than this? or language setting forth more clearly the principle that the children shall follow the condition of the mother than this? or that the rights of the master may, in certain cases, contravene and supersede the slaves' family rights, and cause separation of families? *

It will be found, furthermore, in studying the principles of this slave-code, that almost all its fundamental

* That the interpretation put upon these passages in the discourse is the almost universal interpretation of accredited commentators, might readily be shown by actual citations from all commentaries of established repute in the Church. But the very brief space that can be allotted here to such citations, permits only representative specimens, thus:

[ocr errors]

HENRY" But the Jews might purchase bondmen of the heathen nations that were round about them, and might claim a dominion over them, and entail them upon their families as an inheritance; for the year of jubilee should give no discharge to them." (Hen., Com., Levit. 25: 39.)

BP. PATRICK "Thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant." "As a slave which they bought of other nations or took in wars; over whom they had an absolute dominion (as they had over their goods and cattle), and might bequeath them and their

points are precisely the same with the slave-codes of the American Southern States, however the latter may, in the detailed application of these principles, be found differing from the former; and however much ignorance and false

children to their sons and posterity forever (v. 45-6); or sell them and bond their children at pleasure."-Pat., Com., Levit. 25: 39.) "A slave who was not an

[ocr errors]

If a man smite his servant." Israelite but a Gentile."

"For his smiting with a rod, not with a sword, was a sign that he intended only to correct him, but not to kill him. And, besides, no man could be thought to be willing to lose his own goods, as such servants were."-(Pat., Com., Ex. 21: 20.)

"He is his money." His death was a loss to his master, who, therefore, might well be judged not to have any intention to kill him, and was sufficiently punished by losing the benefit of his services.-Pat., Com., Ex. 21: 21.)

COMP. COM.-"The Israelites might purchase bondmen of the heathen nations around them (except of the seven nations who were to be destroyed), and might claim a dominion over them, and entail them on their families as an inheritance, for the year of Jubilee should give no discharge to them. Thus negroes only are used as slaves, how much to the credit of Christianity I shall not say.(Com. on Lev. 25: 39-55.)

GILL-" And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children," &c. Which they might leave them at their death to inherit, as they did their estates and lands. "To inherit them for a possession," as their property, as anything else that was bequeathed to them, as NEGROES NOW ARE in our plantations abroad. "They shall be your bondmen forever." "And not be released at the Year of Jubilee, nor before, nor after," &c.-(Gill's Com., Lev. 25: 45–6.) And with Gill's definition of " possession" here agrees exactly Bishop Patrick's-"They shall be your possession." your proper goods, and continue with you as your lands do."

"Become

"They might have the same power and dominion over them that they had over their lands, goods, or cattle."

"Bondmen forever. Not have benefit of the Year of Jubilee, but be your slaves as long as they live."

"An inheritance for your children after you." To whom they might bequeath the very bodies of them and their children.(Pat. on Lev. 25: 46.)

Even the Encyclopædia Britannica says, in discussing Hebrew slavery:

“It is, indeed, evident, from numberless passages of Scripture,

hood have caricatured them. And indeed, in some material points the slave-code of the American Southern States is even more restrictive of the principles of slavery and the power of the master than either the Mosaic code or the Roman code of Justinian, which develops the law of slavery as it existed in the time of the Apostles and subsequently.

1. The Mosaic laws involve the principle that beside being a person, the slave is also a chattel, property—“ possession"-"inheritance"-"money." Thus, " for he (the slave) is his money," is assigned as the reason why the master, unintentionally, by lawful chastisement, causing his death, shall not suffer punishment (Ex. 21: 21). In the enumeration of the tenth commandment, as Bishop Patrick suggests, the slave seems to be represented as the master's "principal goods" next to his realty. The value of the slave is fixed at "thirty shekels of silver," in determining the compensation for his loss by the carelessness of a neighbor (Ex. 21: 32). The slave passed as a part of the inheritance to a man's children (Lev. 25: 45), and became the children's property, "possession." In no code of the American Southern States can stronger and clearer lan

that the domestics, which our translators call servants, were, in their day, universally considered as the most valuable part of their master's property, and classed with his flocks and herds."

"That the practice of buying and selling servants, thus early begun amongst the Patriarchs, descended to their posterity, is known to every attentive reader of the Bible. It was expressly authorized by the Jewish law, in which are many directions how such servants were to be treated."

If these facts are, as they are presumed to be, well known to "every attentive reader of the Bible," how long will professed ministers of the Gospel retain the public confidence for themselves and religion, who, "doting about strifes of words," attempt the charlatanry of persuading the masses of the people that the language of the Bible does not mean what the most trusted scholarship and the common sense of men unite in saying it does mean?

guage be found setting forth the notion that slaves are at the same time persons and property. Nor is it easy to conceive how language could more clearly convey that idea.

2. The Mosaic law recognized the rights of the master as paramount, even when coming in conflict with the rights of the husband and father of a slave-wife and children. "He shall go out by himself, the wife and her children shall be her master's." And the children of the slavemother followed the condition of the mother. Thus Solomon, describing his efforts after happiness from the acquisition of vast possessions, says, "I got me servants and maidens, and had servants born in my house: also I had great possessions of great and small cattle" (Eccl. 2: 7).

3. On the other hand, the Mosaic code protected the slave as a person, just as the codes of all Southern States do. The wilful murder of a slave, under both the ancient and the modern codes, was punished just as any other murder (Lev. 24: 17). "He that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. So (Ex. 21: 20), "If he die under his hand he shall surely be punished" (even when smitten with a rod in the ordinary mode of chastisement). In the code of Moses is to be found, indeed, an incidental provision which is found neither in the Justinian nor the American code. In order to protect the slave against cruel usage, Moses' law enacted that, in case of any cruelty to a slave, betokening more than ordinary chastisement with the rod.

-as the loss of an eye or a tooth-the slave shall go free. In the American, as in the Justinian code, the provision is that in such case the slave shall be taken from the cruel master and sold to one who is more merciful. Cruelty to his slaves by a master is, in the American code, an indictable offence.

4. In accordance with the general provisions of the

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »