Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1850-02-27

my o"o'i oo Hout I'ooseSo'oH' 1hu yC
shall take them as an inheritance for your
children after you, to inherit them for a
possession they shall be your bondmen
forever''
This law does not enact, what apparent
ly it would seem to express, that he Of whom
Hebrew might buy slave must be hea-
then 1t enac,s that hea,hens might be
bought, and that none but healhens should
be bought as slaves, by the Hebrews.
have shown that Dr. Wayland's suppo-
s,iou, that by the law in Deuteronomy,
every one was forbidden to deliver up fu-
gi,ive from labor, would work great inus-
tice TO the individual who had by purchase
acquired right TO service for term of
years, under the enactments which pro-
vide for Hebrew servi,ude. The proprie-
tor under those laws however could not
be subjected to loss of more than six
years service. But in the case before US,
the proprietor acquires right which lasts
during his lifetime, and descends to his pos
,erity. The application Of Dr.. Wayland's
theory here, is liable to the same objection,
and in still greater degree than in the for
mer case.
Besides, the form Of enactment, s'Thou
shalt not deliver unto his master the servant
which is escaped from his master unto thee ::
he shall dwell with thee, euen among YOU"
lis not appropriate to the case which would
arise from heather bond-servant's escape
from Hebrew master. He would be COM
PEELED TO take refuge with some one Of the
Hebrew families il order to make good his
tile to liberty, according to the supposed
construction Of the law in question:; for if
he neg ected to do this and continued a
vagrant, and while in that condition his
owner could seize him, he would be his a.
gain, since no one had violated the suppos-
ed law delivering him to bis master. No
one would have the right to deliver him
from his master, since no one had delivered
him TO his master In this case the fugitive
alone is the wrong doer, for he has not
yet 60. out from under the previous law
which makes good the claim to possession
and service. He has escaped, it is true,
from his master, but he has not escaped
'.unto thee,' that is, unto some one indiv-
dual or family Of the Hebrews: for The con-
struclion commended for necessarily makes
''theen in this passage mean individually,
because in no other view could it confer
exemption from seizure by the owner
But the succeeding parts of the enactment fix
on the word ''lhee" in the clause, ''he shall
dwell with thee," a collective, as distinguish
ed from an individual meaning. 1t defines
thee" to mean the whole Hebrew nation
as located on their several possessions
throughout the whole national domain. ''He
shall dwell with lhee," means, as the fol-
lowing words show, he shall dwell s'among
you" He shall dwell among you, sin lha.
place which he shall choose, in one of thy
gates, where i. like,h him best''
Since then the expression, "he shall dwell
with thee" does not enjoin that any ind-
vidual shall receive fugitive servant into
his family, either as member or in any
capacity whatever, but that the whole He
brew nation, both as a nation aud as indi-
viduals, should permit him to dwell among
them in that place which he should choose;
since it does not enjoin on individuals lha,
they should protect him, but only that they
should not Cypress him i. clearly leaves
the servant whose master is an Hebrew, un-
screened from the full force of the previous
ly enacted laws on servitude.
Again, since this law imposes no obliga-
ton on Hebrews as individuals to protect
a fugitive servant from seizure by his mas
ter, but on the contrary imposes on them
obligations which are inconsistent with the
idea Of personal protection since it oblges
them TO allow him the most unresllained
liberty in choosing his place of residence
throughout the length and breadth of the
land, a servant who is in a condition to
need secreting from the power of his mas
ter, is not the servant for whose benefit the
law was intended. But every servant whose
master is an Hebrew, does need such pro-
lection in order to secure his freedom, there
fore it is not the servants of Hebrew mas
,ers that are intended to be benefited by
this law.
If the servant whose master is an Hebre W
can, on escaping from his master, claim no
family or household protection under this
law, suppose he tries TO avail himself, to the
full extent, of the benefits which the law in
express terms confers. Upon the suppo-
sition that The law is applicable to him, and
suits his case, he may be taking an extended
survey of the country with view TO MAX
ing an enlightened selection of place for
his future residence, and while so engaged,
his master may come upon him and save him
from all further trouble in this particular,
by choosing for him as to where he shall
reside. Or suppose him to be already set
lied sin that place which he shall choose
in one of the gates where it Iikelh him
BEST" still the more easily would his mas
ter find him out, and take h.a into his pos
session again.
When i, is remembered that the land ST
Palestine was less in superficial extent than
the least Of the slave-holding States of our