North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1852, 1851-09-20

The right of the master to sell his coed Tor bono
scrvantl Is recognised by that provision of the Law
which prohibits the selling of Jewish servant a.
the eved 10. bond servan IS sold" and also in tha
clause Of Deut, xxi, 10, IA, which forbids maste
70 sen q female slave or captive whom he has mar
RED and repudiated. Here it is said the master
q shall not make merchandise of her because he ha
handled her." The right to reclaim fugitive
slave ALSO is quite as clear In the only two cases
mentioned in the Old Testament where slaves hao
escaped they were sent back, as in the case of Ha
gar by the Lord himself, or taken by the master
as in the of the servants of Shimei, q Kings
H. 80 4O.) The provision contained in Deut, XIII
IL and 16, "Thou shalt not deliver unto his master
the servant which is escaped from his master tc
thee" evidently can only refer to slaves escaped
from the heather nations round about. 10 ap
ply it to slaves owned by Jews" says Mr.. Graham
would not only conflict with the text, but involve
the whole law in the absurdity of granting an alb
solute property in the eved Tor bond servant) by
one act and abrogating it by another" 80.
Some detached portions of Scripture, requiring
the Jews " to open their mouth for the durns to
break every yoke" and those of similar puFport
which are found principally in the prophecies have
been seized upon by the aboltionsts as abrogating
or abolishing the law of slavery. The context to
all these passages will convince any one that they
have reference to slavery other than the slavery
of sin; and in those which have such q reference
the kind of slavery is specified. 1t was that in
which the Jewish servants were held, after the time
when they were entitled to their freedom had ar
rived. In jeremiah, xxxiv, 8 to 16, we have full
explanation of this sinful slavery which was re
proved and forbidden, and at the same time, a rec
ogniton of the unreproved existence of the ordina-
ry institution of slavery at that late day. The
Jews were then commanded, at certain intervals to
" let their man servants and maid servants, being
Hebrews go free, according to the provisions of the
-
them again to bondage and kept them unjusty in
subsection, that they were threatened with the
sword of pestence and famine Not a word is
said about freeing their regular bond servants of
whom they at that time possessed great numbers,
and whose existence the text itself indicates by its
specifying the Hebrea0 servants subjects for man
omission. Such was the relation, says Mr.. Ora
ham, of master and slave, according to the Jew
ish law. The relation, as we'll the law, contin-
ued to the time of our Saviour" : =
The law, as has been shown, defined the slave to
be perpetual property, and, such, gave the mas
ter the authority to compel his service by necessary
to recapture him if he fled, and to dis
pose of him by gift or devise, or sale, as other
property" In what particular let US ask, does that
system differ from that now in existence in our
southern States excepting indeed that by our laws
greater protection is afforded to the slave, greater
privileges extended to him, and more perma-
nent provision for his support is made for him?
Mr.. Graham concludes the first part of his sub
Jet in the following words: " The question wheth-
the relation of master and slave is sinful has now
been abundantly answered-at least to all who be-
ieve in the Bible, and accord to its Author the
privilege of explaining His own law. 1t cannot be
an offence against God for it is acknowledged as a
lawful relation in the first table of the Decalogue
which comprises all the duties we owe to God
neither is it necessarily offence against man for
IN the second table, comprising all the duties we
owe to man, it is also recognised. We cannot sup
pose that in laws for the Jews or for the world God
could introduce countenance what is in itself sin
Jul 1t remains for us to examine the New Tesla
nent and learn whether it forbids this relation
among Christians"
As, however, we have already occupied as much
Dom as you can spare in a single number, we will
close examination of this very able discourse
or the present. and resume it, if acceptable, next
Sunday. Fl.
New York, August Z, 1851.