The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-04-11
49,.

So long as the slaves were few in number and
were not Christians. the necessity for legislation
defining the slave class vas not felt; but SO soon
as the slave trade became more active and slaves
began to receive Christian baptism. the old Gus
tomary test in regard to this matter. that OF inf
deity or heathenism, would no longer suffice. 1t
is noteworthy that the colonists of thatday were
too conscientious to cut the knot Of the difficulty
by denying Christian baptism to any one seeking
it. They considered 1t their prime duty to lead
the heather to the knowledge of Christ. 1t is
evident, indeed, that thor consciences were
greatly troubled over the question of the effect
OF Christian baptism upon the slave status.
The colonial legislatures, the homo govern
ment, and the Bishop OF London were APP
pealed to for counsel In the dilemma. Tho
answers received from all OF these authorities
were to the effect that the status Of the slave
was not changed by Christian baptism or CONVEX
sion. The test, then. OF the slave status was,
necessarily, fixed by legislation. The Virginia
statutes declared all servants brought into the
country by land or sea, who were not Christians
In their native country ut the time that they
were purchased or procured. nor free In Eng
land, or some other Christian country. to be
slaves. An exception was made of Turks and
Moors in amity with the King of England.
This statute, taken together with the enacted
EuIC, otloftuf cbt bhob ~ u ihb
must follow the status OF the mother. fixed the
main lines of the position Of the slave class be-
fore the law. At the Same time heavy penal
ties were attached to the marriage or cohabita-
ton of white women with slaves. OF course
1t soon became necessary that the legal posi-
ton of the slaves should be more precisely de-
fined. The legislation of Virginia set the pre-
cedents. This legislation provided that the
slave could have no standing in tho ordinary
courts, either as party or witness; that n slave
could own no property; that a slave owed obe-
dience to the master, who might force him to
labor and chastise him. even to the extreme of
80 injuring the slave that no might die in conse-
quence thereof, without mourning the penalties
OF felony; that the slave could be sold or inher-
tied as personal property. and that, as we have
said, the offspring Of the female slave belonged
to the master owning her at the time
of its birth. The wilful killing of a slave by
any one, even the master, was accounted
murder, and extraordinary tribunals were
constituted for the protection of his person.
The Virginia Code OF 1908 even contained
regulations which indicate that the trend OF
thought and of legislation at that ~juncture was
toward attaching the slave to the soil. which
would have been q step upward in a course that.
II persistently followed, would have trans
formed the slave into u serf. The still prevail.
ing rules, however. which allowed the slave to
DO seized and sold for the debts Of the master
and regulated the inheritance of slaves accord.
Ing to the law governing the descent of personal
property, seem to have completely neutralized
that bcnefcent tendency before the middle OF
the eighteenth century had been reached. On
the whole, 1t certainly does not appear that a cen
fury of lawmaking upon the subject had ameli.
GRATED tho condition OF the slaves.