Ashtabula weekly telegraph. [volume] (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1853-1873, 1861-02-09

Of six years. So the law decided. But heath
en- might contract for a longer period, even fol
life, or until the universal jubilee, which was
once in fifty years. Hence, bis term Of contract
not expiring during the life Of the master, be
become possession aud inheritance for the
children.
Had Mr.. Van DYKE applied HE property
definition to Hebrew servitude, and not to slav.
cry, and said that the money. or possession or
inheritance consisted in such services as a man
may properly be required 10 render" he would
have been nearer the truth, and escaped the re.
buke Of the slave code.
He who lawfully held a servant, was entitled
to his services-his services were his property
his wages possession, and dying, the services
OF that servant became the dover of his chill
dren. This exposition is scriptural and natur-
al, and does not involve God and bis people in
"chattel slavery" But that Hebrew servitude
and American slavery differ in their fundamental
principles, and are consequently different sys-
tens, entirely unlike each other, is 80 palpable
and evident, that even the Rev Doctor Ra.
phall, in his great sermon in New York. on
"Ihe National Fast Day." makes the following
remarkable concession, although he is trying TO
viDdicate slaveholding on Bible grounds. He
says, speaking Of the humanity Of the old tes-
lament system
This indeed the great distinction rh,eb N, Bb,e ,,
Of &aTeTy dcTiUes from s diviRc The saue s pyE
SON IN WHOM THE DIGNITY NATURE j. To ne RE
SPECIFIED RIGHTS. Whereas ne HEArHyy yfyv on
SLAVERY, WHICH PREVAILED RoNE and sheh am sorTv
to say, ADOPTED sOUTH, reduces the SLare 20
THING, AND THING CAN HAVE NO RIGHTS"
So then, the Roman and American view of
slavery is The HEATHEN VIEW, which reduces the
slave to a thing therefore, the Roman and
American view is anti Bible anti Old Testament,
and anti Hebrew servinde. This concession
deals death-blow to all claims set up for mer.
can slavery based on the Old Testament unless
it can be shown that Bible and heather views
do not essentially differ, although the Bible pro-
claims and demands the rights of men, while
heathens deny and refuse them Hence, DR.
Raphall virtually admits what Abolitionists
claim, viz American slavery has no foundation
in the Scriptures because it is the heathen
view Of slavery !
Having considered the meaning Of those
words and phrases most relied upon TO prove
the existance of Old Testament slavery, and
shown beyond successful contradiction that
they furnish no rroof whatever, of 'chattel
slavery now invite attention to some general
facts and principles, establishing my position.
FIRST. Abraham is claimed as a slavehold.
er, because he bad servants who we're bought
with his money and born in his house. We
hnd on one OCCASION Abraham arming 3lS
trdiHrd servants to rescue Lot who had been
taken prisoner by certain kings Now, if he
could arm 3l8, then his servants must have
numbered in all, counting families, some 1900
or 1000 souls. Does any man believe that these
servants, we're slaves,-hought up, and born 10
| his house In Gen. 10: 5, we are told Abra.
ham left Haran, with Sarai, his wife, and Lot.
| his brothers son and the souls they had gotten
in Haran.' Now these souls. were the servants
| they had gotten in Haran. The Jerusalem Tar
gnm and Chaldee Parnphrase say all the souls
tohich he had subdued unto the iGtc' And when
we read 1913 trained servants. the Hebrew
reads 'catecbised servants These servants,
therefore. were prosetytes. who believed in bra
hams God and Religion. When Abraham
left Haran. they voluntarily went with him.
| lie had paid them consideration for their SER
vices,-they were converts to his religion, and
now cheerfully follow him, as bis servants and
subjects but not as slaves. To suppose that
he armed a gang of 3l8 slaves, and pursued an
enemy, is sufficiently absurd without refutation
They must have differed very essentially from
modern 'chattels' or the old patriarch might have
found his troop marching in quick time hack
to Haran, long before he reached the battlefield
But as subjects and servants. worsbppers Of
the same God and united to him by a common
SECOND. The Jews, themselves. we're
once in bondage, or as some say slavery
By looking into theircondtion, we may bet.
ter understand the use of terms aud the
difference between slavery and servitude.
While in Egypt, they are said to he in the
house of bondage they were Pharaoh's
bondmen, Their lives made bitter with
hard bondage, e,-they were under task.
masters and their condition is represented
as hard Oppressive and 'grievouS' Ger.
tainIV He6reU Serritude was no worse unless
God sanctioned in Canaan the oppression
he condemned in Egypt. But was Eyp-
tian bondage 'chat'el slavery'-werG the
Jews slaues-lSt. The Jews were not scat
tered among the Egyptian famiies-2j.
They O,Dncd the land of Goshen, the very
best land in Egypt. and occupied it for a
possesson-3d. They owned hocks and
herds and much cattle-4th. They lived in
permanent houses and were well fed and
clOthed-5th. They were all we'll armed
9th. They worshipped their God without
restraint.
Does this look like American Slavery
If Hebrew servitude imposed not hing worse
then, it was infinitely preferable to Amer
ican Slavery Yet this was such bondage
as G cd condemned, and for the practice oI
which, the Egyptians were utterly over
thrown. If American slavery is not sinful
then defy any man to prove that there
was anything wrong in Egyptian bondage;
unless what was wrong in the dark ages OI
the world, is all right in the nineteenth cen
tury.
Iu order to test the claim of American
Slavery, to divine sanction, now pro-
pose to compare the two systems-HebreW
Serv,ude and American Slavery.
FIRST. The Hebrews, or Jews, obtained
their servants, by purchase, unless captive'
taken in war. The Hebrew code contains
no record warranting the conclusion, tha
criminals were punished by bondage. Steal
ing and kidnapping men. was punished will
death. Hence the only means of obtsiDiD DI
servants was TO buy them. This purchas
was a mWtuaI, voluntary transaction. ]
servants we're bought of the third perso
and carried by force, or against their 10i
into serVitnde, it would be oppression, or
effect, stealing or kidnapping II stealth
is taking without liberty what don't belon