to be taken prisoners of war, and sold for slaves, so a Hebrew slave who had been ransomed from a gentile, might be sold by him who ransomed him to one of his own nation, and the price of his redemption was "reckoned from the year that he was sold, unto the year of jubilee."* The Hebrews were also allowed to hold slaves whom they purchased from the surrounding nations, who should be "their possession, and an inheritance for their children after them." All the prisoners of war also that were taken by the Hebrews, were slaves. "When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it. And it shall be, if it make an answer of peace,-that all the people that shall be found therein shall be tributaries unto thee and shall serve thee. But if it make war against thee, then thou shalt beseige it, and shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword, but the women and the little ones shalt thou take unto thyself." In these seven ways, slavery might originate among the Hebrews. And it is worthy to be distinctly remarked, that with the exception of those slaves that were purchased from surrounding nations, and those who were taken in war, it was a state of servitude originating with the consent of the servant, or growing out of his fault. It was also a servi

*Lev. 25: 50. † Lev. 25: 45. Deut. 20: 14. and Numbers, 31: 18-35.

tude greatly modified by very many important mitigations. Every where the Jewish law is most scrupulously protective of the person of the slave, while it allows for the master's peculiar relation, on the ground that the servant is "his money." While it recognizes the right of the master to the possession of the servant, it recognizes no rights that are inconsistent with the high nature of his being, but is itself the guardian of every right, founded on his obligations as a moral and responsible agent, to God or his fellow men. As in the patriarchal, so it was in the Mosaic age: the slave passed under the bonds of God's covenant, was consecrated by his master to God, and was educated in his fear. The law guarded his person from severity, in some cases by the death of the master, and in others by his own immediate freedom. He enjoyed all religious rites and privileges, not excepting the sabbath, the year of jubilee, the annual festivals, the new moons, the day of atonement, and other seasons of appointed rest. He had a sure and certain support, and was entitled to all affection and kindness. Every where God admonished the Hebrews against treating their slaves as they themselves had been treated in Egypt, and as slaves were generally treated in surrounding countries. In addition to this, let it be borne in mind, that no Hebrew, could by the laws of Moses, be a slave for a longer term than six years, unless by intermarrying with his master's servants, or for other causes, he chose to remain in servitude; and

at the end of the six years, he was to be sent out liberally furnished. A female Hebrew servant also, frequently became the wife of her master, or the wife of his son; and in that event was entitled to all the privileges of honourable matrimony, or a lawful daughter. I cannot help thinking, that the system of servitude under the laws of Moses, so far as it regarded slaves who were themselves Hebrews, was not unlike the system of apprenticeship in Great Britian, and in this country, where a child is bound out for a term of years, and at the end of that period the parent receives a stipulated compensation for his services.

The two most revolting features of slavery among this people are recorded in the following paragraphs. "If a man smite his servant or his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall surely be punished;" and the punishment was death. "Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished, for he is his money." The reason of this law I suppose to be this. If the servant survived a number of days, it could not be so clearly proved that the punishment occasioned his death, as to justify the death of the master. It might rather be charitably presumed, that he died from some other cause. There would not be conclusive evidence of deliberate malice. The pecuniary interest which the master had in his servant was a presumption in his favour, and the law would not condemn unless on the strongest testimony. And was not this

right; and are not, ought not all penal laws to be construed as favourably as possible to the accused? The other paragraph is this. "Of thy bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you. Of them shall ye buy bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover, of the children of the strangers, that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they beget in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a posses sion; they shall be your bond-men forever." It seems difficult to deny that this feature of slavery existed among the Jews until the final destruction of their city. The language of the passage is that of injunction, but it implies nothing more than that the Hebrews were permitted to procure slaves of the surrounding nations, and hold them in perpetual bondage. No considerate man supposes that they were required to do this, and that the Hebrew who neglected to do it was living in sin. We have two remarks to submit in relation to this general permission. The first is, that the kind of servitude to which foreign slaves were subjected was in all respects the same with the servitude of the Hebrews themselves, except that it was perpetual. They were protected by the laws; were circumcised, and introduced to all the blessings and promises of God's peculiar people. But there is another remark. The condition of

the Hebrews was a peculiar condition. The nations with which they were surrounded, were nations whom for their total apostacy from the worship of the true God, their degraded idolatry, their unnatural cruelty and pollution, the Hebrews were required to exterminate. There was one condition on which they were relieved from the execution of this decree. It was that the Canaanites submitted to their invaders, renounced their idolatry, and became Hebrews. Their conquerors were the ministers of the divine justice, commanded to execute this sentence, and to relax its rigour so far as their enemies submitted to their government and their religion. The right to destroy carried with it the right to enslave; while the slaves purchased their lives by the voluntary surrender of their liberty.

I cannot think that I have set the slavery of the Hebrews in too fair colours. I have not designed to do so. Most certainly, it was a very different thing from what it was in the surrounding nations. Look at the contrast, and see the influence of the Bible upon slavery, even at that early age of the world. Slavery there was among the Hebrews, but few of its evils. The entire dispensation of the Jews made at once a bold and decided invasion upon its abuses and eradicated them. And yet it is a fact equally clear, that it left the relation between master and servant untouched, and instead of denouncing slavery as a crime, is offended only with its abuses.