losophy of Slavery,” drawing their philosophy from the domestic system of the Romans, borrow the principles of barbarism and heathenism as regards the position of the servant, but they forget to extend those principles to the position of the wife and son.
The last of the Ten Commandments which we continue to use instead of the Two, shews us what was the general state of the society for which the code was framed, and fixes the real position of the slave in the household. “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighhour’s.” We see that the wife is as completely a subject of property and a part of a man’s estate as a manservant or a maidservant. And when this is seen, all thought of degradation as attaching to the condition of the slave is at an end. His lot under a bad lord might be hard, and so under a bad lord might be the lot of the wife. “The institution of slavery,” says one of its eulogists, “operates by contrast and comparison.” It is most true: and there would be no contrast or comparison when a man’s bondservant stood on the same footing as the heir of his house or the wife of his bosom.
In the Southern States of America the murder of a slave, which was formerly punishable by a fine only, is now by law a capital offence. With regard to personal injuries, the laws of the different States vary. But it seems that both with regard to murder and with regard to personal injuries the laws are practically void. Slaves are murdered, but nobody is hanged.
