6. _We infer that servants were voluntary, from the fact that there is no instance of an Israelitish master ever_ SELLING _a servant_. Abraham had thousands of servants, but appears never to have sold one. Isaac "grew until he became very great," and had "great store of servants."
Jacob"s youth was spent in the family of Laban, where he lived a servant twenty-one years. Afterward he had a large number of servants.
When Joseph sent for Jacob to come into Egypt, the words are, "thou and thy children, and thy children"s children, and thy flocks and thy herds, and ALL THAT THOU HAST." Jacob took his flocks and herds but _no servants_. Gen xlv. 10; xlvii. 6; xlvii. 1. His servants doubtless, served under their _own contracts_, and when Jacob went into Egypt, they _chose_ to stay in their own country.
The government might sell _thieves_, if they had no property, until their services had made good the injury, and paid the legal fine. Ex.
xxii. 3. But _masters_ seem to have had no power to sell their _servants_--the reason is obvious. To give the master a _right_ to sell his servant, would annihilate the servant"s right of choice in his own disposal; but says the objector, To give the master a right to _buy_ a servant, equally annihilates the servant"s _right of choice_. Answer. It is one thing to have a right to buy a man, and a very different thing to have a right to buy him of _another_ man.
Though there is no instance of a servant being bought of his, or her master, yet there are instances of young females being bought of their _fathers_. But their purchase as _servants_ was their betrothal as WIVES. Exodus xxi. 7, 8. "_If a man sell his daughter to be a maid-servant, she shall not go out as the men-servants do. If she please not her master_ WHO HATH BETROTHED HER TO HIMSELF, _he shall let her be redeemed_[A]."
[Footnote A: The comment of Maimonides on this pa.s.sage is as follows: "A Hebrew handmaid might not be sold but to one who laid himself under obligations, to espouse her to himself or to his son, when she was fit to be betrothed."--_Maimonides--Hilcoth--Obedim_, Ch. IV. Sec. XI.
Jarchi, on the same pa.s.sage, says, "He is bound to espouse her and take her to be his wife for the _money of her purchase_ is the money of her _espousals_." ]
7. _We infer that the Hebrew servant was voluntary in_ COMMENCING _his service, because he was pre-eminently so_ IN CONTINUING _it_. If, at the year of release, it was the servant"s _choice_ to remain with his master, so did the law guard his free will, that it required his ear to be bored by the judges of the land, thus making it impossible for the servant to be held in an involuntary condition. Yea, so far was his _free choice_ protected, that his master was compelled to keep him, however much he might wish to get rid of him.
8. _The method prescribed for procuring servants, recognized their choice, and was an appeal to it_. The Israelites were commanded to offer them a suitable _inducement_, and then leave them to decide. They might neither seize by _force_, nor frighten them by _threats_, nor wheedle them by false pretenses, nor _borrow_ them, nor _beg_ them; but they were commanded to BUY them[A]; that is, they were to recognize the _right_ of the individuals to their own services--their right to _dispose_ of them, and their right to _refuse all offers_. They might, if they pleased, refuse all applications, and thus oblige those who made them, _to do their own work_. Suppose all, with one accord, _refused_ to become servants, what provision did the Mosaic law make for such an emergency? NONE.
[Footnote A: The case of thieves, whose services were sold until they had earned enough to make rest.i.tution to the person wronged, and to pay the legal penalty, _stands by itself_, and has no relation to the condition of servants.]
9. _Various incidental expressions throughout the Bible, corroborate the idea that servants became such by virtue of their own contract_. Job xli. 4. is an ill.u.s.tration, "_Will he_ (Leviathan) _make a_ COVENANT _with thee? wilt thou take him for a_ SERVANT _forever?_"
10. _The transaction which made the Egyptians the_ SERVANTS OF PHAROAH, _shows entire voluntariness throughout_. It is detailed in Gen. xlvii.
18-26. Of their own accord, they came to Joseph and said, "We have not aught left but our _bodies_ and our lands; _buy_ us;" then in the 25th verse, _"Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my Lord, and we will be servants to Pharaoh._"
11. _We argue that the condition of servants was an_ OPTIONAL _one from the fact that_ RICH _strangers did not become servants._ Indeed, so far were they from becoming servants themselves, that _they bought and held Jewish servants._ Lev. xxv. 47.
12. _The sacrifices and offerings which_ ALL _were required to present, were to be made_ VOLUNTARILY. Lev. i. 2, 3.
13. _Mention is often made of persons becoming servants where they were manifestly and pre-eminently_ VOLUNTARY. The case of the Prophet Elisha is one. 1 Kings xix. 21; 2 Kings iii. 11. Elijah was his _master_. The original word, translated master, is the same that is so rendered in almost every instance where masters are spoken of throughout the Mosaic and patriarchal systems. It is translated _master_ eighty-five times in our English version. Moses was the servant of Jethro. Exodus iii. 1.
Joshua was the servant of Moses. Numbers xi. 28. Jacob was the servant of Laban. Genesis xxix, 18-27.
IV. WERE THE SERVANTS FORCED TO WORK WITHOUT PAY?
Having already shown that the servants became and continued such _of their own accord_, it would be no small marvel if they _chose_ to work without pay. Their becoming servants, pre-supposes _compensation_ as a motive.
That they _were paid_ for their labor, we argue,
1. _Because, while Israel was under the Mosaic system, G.o.d rebuked in thunder, the sin of using the labor of others without wages. "Wo unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness, and his chambers by wrong; that useth his neighbor"s service without wages, and giveth him not for his work._" Jer. xxii. 13. Here G.o.d testifies that to use the service of others without wages is "unrighteousness," and He commissions his "wo" to burn upon the doer of the "wrong." This "wo" was a permanent safeguard of the _Mosaic system_. The Hebrew word _Rea_, here translated _neighbor_, does not mean one man, or cla.s.s of men, in distinction from others, but _any one with whom we have to do_--all descriptions of persons, not merely servants and heathen, but even those who prosecute us in lawsuits, and enemies while in the act of fighting us--"_As when a man riseth against his_ NEIGHBOR _and slayeth him._" Deut. xxii. 26.
"_Go not forth hastily to strive, lest thou know not what to do in the end thereof, when thy_ NEIGHBOR _hath put thee to shame._" Prov. xxv. 8.
"_Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy_ NEIGHBOR." Exod. xx.
16. "_If any man come presumptuously upon his NEIGHBOR to slay him with guile_." Exod. xxi. 14. In these, and in scores of similar cases, _Rea_ is the original word.
2. _We have the testimony of G.o.d, that in our duty to our fellow men,_ ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS _hang upon this command, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself._" Our Saviour, in giving this command, quoted _verbatim_ one of the laws of the Mosaic system. Lev. xix. 18. In the 34th verse of the same chapter, Moses commands obedience to this law in all the treatment of strangers, "_The stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and_ THOU SHALT LOVE HIM AS THYSELF." If it be loving others _as_ ourselves, to make them work for us without pay; to rob them of food and clothing, as well as wages, would be a stranger ill.u.s.tration still of the law of love!
Super-disinterested benevolence! And if it be doing to others as we would have them do to us, to make them work for _our own_ good alone, Paul should be called to order for his hard sayings against human nature, especially for that libellous matter in Ephes. v. 29, "_No man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it_."
3. _As persons became servants_ FROM POVERTY, _we argue that they were compensated, since they frequently owned property, and sometimes a large amount_. Ziba, the servant of Mephibosheth, gave David a princely present, "An hundred loaves of bread, and an hundred bunches of raisins, and an hundred of summer fruits, and a bottle of wine." 2 Sam. xvi. 1.
The extent of his possessions can be inferred from the fact, that though the father of fifteen sons, he still employed twenty servants, of whom he was the master.
A case is stated in Leviticus xxv. 47-55, where a servant, reduced to poverty, sells himself; and it is declared that afterward he may be _redeemed_, either by his kindred, or by HIMSELF. As he was forced to sell himself from sheer poverty he must not only have acquired property _after_ he became a servant, but a considerable sum.
If it had not been common for servants to possess, and acquire property, over which they had the exclusive control, Gehazi, the servant of Elisha, would hardly have ventured to take a large sum of money, (nearly $3000[A]) from Naaman, (2 Kings v. 22, 23.) As it was procured by deceit, he was anxious to conceal the means used in getting it; but if the Israelitish servants, like our slaves, could "own nothing, nor acquire any thing," to embark in such an enterprise would have been consummate stupidity. The fact of having in his possession two talents of silver, would of itself convict him of theft[B]. But since the possession and use of property by servants, was common under the Mosaic system, he might have it, and invest or use it, without attracting special attention. And that consideration alone would have been a strong motive to the act. His master, while he rebukes him for using such means to get the money, not only does not take it from him, but seems to expect that he would invest it in real estate, and cattle, and would procure servants with it. 2 Kings v. 26. In 1 Sam. ix. 8, we find the servant of Saul having money, and relieving his master in an emergency.
Arza, the servant of Elah, was the _owner of a house_. That it was s.p.a.cious and somewhat magnificent, would be a natural inference from the fact that it was a resort of the king. 1 Kings xvi. 9. The case of the Gibeonites, who, after they became servants, still occupied their cities, and remained, in many respects, a distinct people for centuries; and that of the 150,000 Canaanites, the _servants_ of Solomon, who worked out their tribute of bond-service in levies, periodically relieving each other, while preparing the materials for the temple, are additional ill.u.s.trations of independence in the acquisition and ownership of property.
[Footnote A: Though we have not sufficient data to decide with accuracy upon the _relative_ value of that sum, _then_ and _now_, yet we have enough to warrant us in saying that two talents of silver had far more value _then_ than three thousand dollars have _now_.]
[Footnote B: Whoever heard of the slaves in our southern states stealing a large amount of money? They "_know how to take care of themselves_"
quite too well for that. When they steal, they are careful to do it on such a _small_ scale, or in the taking of _such things_ as will make detection difficult. No doubt they steal now and then a little, and a gaping marvel would it be if they did not. Why should they not follow in the footsteps of their masters and mistresses? Dull scholars indeed! if, after so many lessons from _proficients_ in the art, who drive the business by _wholesale_, they should not occasionally copy their betters, fall into the _fashion_, and try their hand in a small way, at a practice which is the _only permanent and universal_ business carried on around them! Ign.o.ble truly! never to feel the stirrings of high impulse, prompting them to imitate the eminent pattern set before them in the daily vocation of "Honorables" and "Excellencies," and to emulate the ill.u.s.trious examples of Doctor of Divinity and _Right_ and _Very Reverends_! Hear President Jefferson"s testimony. In his notes of Virginia, speaking of slaves, he says, "That disposition to theft with which they (the slaves) have been branded, must be ascribed to their _situation_, and not to any special depravity of the moral sense. It is a problem which I give the master to solve, whether the religious precepts against the violation of property were not framed for HIM as well as for his slave--and whether the slave may not as justifiably take a little from one who has taken ALL from him, as he may _slay_ one who would slay him" See Jefferson"s Notes on Virginia, pp. 207-8]
4. _Heirship_--Servants frequently inherited their master"s property; especially if he had no sons, or if they had dishonored the family. This seems to have been a general usage.
The cases of Eliezer, the servant of Abraham; Ziba, the servant of Mephibosheth, Jarha an Egyptian, the servant of Sheshan, and the husband of his daughter; 1 Chron. ii. 34, 35, and of the _husbandmen_ who said of their master"s son, "_this is the_ HEIR, let us kill him, _and_ the INHERITANCE WILL BE OURS." Mark xii. 7, are ill.u.s.trations. Also the declaration in Prov. xvii. 2--"_A wise servant shall have rule over a son that causeth shame, and_ SHALL HAVE PART OF THE INHERITANCE AMONG THE BRETHREN." This pa.s.sage seems to give _servants_ precedence as heirs, even over the _wives_ and _daughters_ of their masters. Did masters hold by force, and _plunder of earnings_, a cla.s.s of persons, from which, in frequent contingencies, they selected both heirs for their property, and husbands for their daughters?
5. ALL _were required to present offerings and sacrifices_. Deut. xvi.
15, 17. 2 Chron. xv. 9-11. Numb. ix. 13.
Servants must have had permanently, the means of _acquiring_ property to meet these expenditures.
6. _Those Hebrew servants who went out at the seventh year, were provided by law with a large stock of provisions and cattle_. Deut. xv.
11-14. "_Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy wine press, of that wherewith the Lord thy G.o.d hath blessed thee, thou shalt give him_[A]." If it be objected, that no mention is made of the servants from the strangers, receiving a like bountiful supply, we answer, neither did the most honorable cla.s.s of the _Israelitish_ servants, the free-holders; and for the same reason, _they did not go out in the seventh year_, but continued until the jubilee. If the fact that no mention is made of the Gentile servants receiving such a _gratuity_ proves that they were robbed of their _earnings_; it proves that the most valued cla.s.s of _Hebrew_ servants were robbed of theirs also, a conclusion too stubborn for even pro-slavery masticators, however unscrupulous.
[Footnote A: The comment of Maimonides on this pa.s.sage is as follows--""Thou shalt furnish him liberally," &c. That is to say, "_Loading ye shall load him._" likewise every one of his family, with as much as he can take with him in abundant benefits. And if it be avariciously asked, How much must I give him? I say unto _you, not less than thirty shekels_, which is the valuation of a servant, as declared in Exodus xxi. 32"--Maimonides, Hilcoth, Obedim, Chapter ii. Section 3.]
7. _The servants were_ BOUGHT. _In other words, they received compensation for their services in advance_. Having shown, under a previous head, that servants _sold themselves_, and of course received the compensation for themselves, (except in cases where parents hired out the time of their children until they became of age[B],) a mere reference to the fact in this place is all that is required for the purposes of this argument.
[Footnote B: Among the Israelites, girls became of age at twelve, and boys at thirteen years.]
8. _We infer that servants were paid, because we find masters at one time having a large number of servants, and afterwards none, without any intimation that they were sold._ The wages of servants would enable them to set up in business for themselves. Jacob, after being the servant of Laban for twenty-one years, became thus an independent herdsman, and was the master of many servants. Gen. x.x.x. 43, and x.x.xii. 15. But all these servants had left him before he went down into Egypt, having doubtless acquired enough to commence business for themselves. Gen. xlv. 10, 11, and xlvi. 1-7, 32.
9. _G.o.d"s testimony to the character of Abraham._ Genesis xviii. 19.
_"For I know him that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep_ THE WAY OF THE LORD TO DO JUSTICE AND JUDGMENT." We have here G.o.d"s testimony, that Abraham taught his servants "the way of the Lord." What was the "way of the Lord"
respecting the payment of wages where service was rendered? "_Wo unto him that useth his neighbor"s service without wages_!" Jer. xxii. 13.
"_Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal_." Col.
iv. 1. _"Render unto all their_ DUES." ROM. xiii. 7. _"The laborer is worthy of his hire."_ Luke x. 7. How did Abraham teach his servants to _"do justice"_ to others? By doing _injustice to them?_ Did he exhort them to "render to all their dues" by keeping back _their own_? Did he teach them that "the laborer was worthy of his hire" by robbing them of _theirs_? Did he beget in them a reverence for the eighth commandment by pilfering all their time and labor? Did he teach them "not to defraud"
others "in any matter" by denying _them_ "what was just and equal?" If each of Abraham"s pupils under such a catechism did not become a very _Aristides_ in justice, then an ill.u.s.trious example, patriarchal dignity, and _practical_ lessons, can make but slow headway against human perverseness!
10. _Specific precepts of the Mosaic law enforcing general principles._ Out of many, we select the following:
(1.) _"Thou shall not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn,"_ or literally, _while he thresheth._ Deut. xxv. 4. Here is a general principle applied to a familiar case. The ox representing all domestic animals. Isaiah x.x.x. 24. A _particular_ kind of service--_all_ kinds; and a law requiring an abundant provision for the wants of an animal ministering to man in a _certain_ way,--_a general principle of treatment covering all times, modes, and instrumentalities of service._ The object of the law was, not merely to enjoin tenderness towards brutes, but to inculcate the duty of _rewarding those who serve us_, showing that they who labor for others, are ent.i.tled to what is just and equal in return; and if such care is enjoined, by G.o.d, not merely for the ample sustenance, but for the _present enjoyment of a brute_, what would be a meet return for the services of _man_? MAN, with his varied wants, exalted nature and immortal destiny! Paul tells us expressly, that the principle which we have named, lies at the bottom of the statute. See 1 Corinthians ix. 9, 10--_"For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth G.o.d take care for oxen? Or saith he it altogether for OUR sakes? that he that ploweth should plow in_ HOPE, _and that he that thresheth in hope should be_ PARTAKER OF HIS HOPE."
(2.) "_If thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee, then thou shalt relieve him._ YEA, THOUGH HE BE A STRANGER OR a SOJOURNER, _that he may live with thee. Take thou no usury of him, or increase, but fear thy G.o.d. Thou shalt not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him thy victuals for increase._" Lev. xxv. 35-37. Or, in other words, "relief at your hands is his right, and your duty--you shall not take advantage of his necessities, but cheerfully supply them." Now, we ask, by what process of pro-slavery legerdemain, this benevolent regulation can be made to be in _keeping_ with the doctrine of WORK WITHOUT PAY?
Did G.o.d declare the poor stranger ent.i.tled to RELIEF, and in the same breath, _authorize_ them to _"use his services without wages_;" force him to work, and ROB HIM OF ALL HIS EARNINGS? Judge ye.
V.--WERE MASTERS THE PROPRIETORS OF SERVANTS AS THEIR LEGAL PROPERTY?