to treat him gently, as they did those who let out their service for wages, for a certain time, and then were at their own disposal again." And shall serve thee unto the year of Jubilee. "Beyond which time it was not lawful to keep him in service; for in the very beginning of this year, all such servants were dismissed."

Verse 41. And then shall he depart from thee, both he and his children with him. "His master to whom he was sold might keep him till the Jubilee, whereas he that was sold by the court of judgment might go free, if he pleased, in the seventh year of release." (Exod. 21: 2.)

Verse 42. For they are my servants which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt. "A good reason why they should not be treated like slaves, because they were all redeemed by God out of the slavery of Egypt into a state of perfect liberty."

Verse 44. Both thy bondmen and thy bondmaids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen. "If they would have any slaves, they were to be such of other nations as were sold to them or were taken

by them in their wars. Whence the very name of mancipia came, as the Roman lawyers tell us, quasi manu capti, and the name of servus also, which signifies one who was saved when he might have been killed."

Verse 45. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy. "Whether they were perfect proselytes by circumcision or only proselytes of the gate, their children were not exempted from being made slaves, if they sold them to the Hebrews."

And of the families that are with you, which they begat in your land. "If any of their family or kindred, as the Seventy translate it, had begat children in Judea, and would sell them, the Jews might make a purchase of them.”

They shall be your possession. "Become your proper goods and continue with you, as your lands do, unless they have their liberty granted to them. And the first sort of proselytes obtained it three ways; either by purchasing it themselves or by their friends; or by being dismissed by their master, by a writing under his hand; or in the case mentioned in Exod. 21: 26, when the loss of an eye or a tooth by the master's severity serve only for examples of other maims, which procured such a servant his liberty. But the second sort of proselytes did not obtain their liberty, if we may believe the Hebrew

doctors, by this last means, but only by the two first. And the year of Jubilee gave no servants of either sort their liberty."

Verse 46. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you. "To whom they might bequeath the very bodies of them and their children."

To inherit them for a possession. "That they might have the same power and dominion over them that they had over their lands, goods, or cattle."

They shall be your bondmen forever. "Not have the benefit of the year of Jubilee, but be your slaves as long as they live; unless they, by any of the means before mentioned, obtain their liberty."

I have thus shown, clearly and distinctly, that according to this learned commentator, who was particularly conversant with the writings of the Jews, the slaves of the heathen races, notwithstanding they were proselytes, were not set free in the year of Jubilee, that privilege being entirely confined to the posterity of Jacob, the chosen people. And next I shall set before you the judgment of Bishop Patrick upon that other text, which is equally misrepresented by the teachers of ultra-abolitionism.

Deut. 23: 15. Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee. "The Hebrew doctors understand this of a servant of another nation who was become a Jew; whom his master, if he went to dwell out of Judea, might not carry along with him against his will; and if he fled from him when he had carried him, he might not be delivered to him, but suffered to dwell in the land of Israel. Which they understand also of a servant that fled from his master out of any of the countries of the Gentiles into the land of Israel, which was to be a safe refuge to him.” (See Selden, lib. vi.)

The latter part of the above is the explanation given in the Bible View of Slavery, where it is shown that the distorted interpretation of the ultra-abolitionist is a sheer absurdity.

And now I come to the other favorite text about man-stealing. Deut. 247. If any man be found stealing any of his brethren the children of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him or selleth him, then that thief shall die.

The comment of Bishop Patrick refers to a similar law in ancient Athens, by which if any one stole a man, "death should be his punishment, as Xenophon reports it. And he was accounted a man

stealer, who, not only by force or by fraud, carried away a freeman and sold him for a slave, or suppressed him; but he who inveigled away another man's servant, and persuaded him to run away, or concealed such a fugitive. (As Sam. Petitus observes, out of Pollux and others, lib. vii. Leges Atticas, tit. 5. p. 533.) Which makes me think," continues our commentator, "not only he that stole one of his brethren of the children of Israel, but he that stole a proselyte of any sort, or the servant of a stranger, was liable to the punishment mentioned in this law of Moses."

I commend this passage, my Right Reverend Brother, to your special attention, because it has a double application against the doctrine of the ultra-abolitionist. By that doctrine we are told that, according to the Mosaic law, the deadly sin of man-stealing was committed by those who first brought the savage negro from the slave-coast of Africa, and continues to attach to the slave-owner of the present day, whose title is no better than the original. And by the same doctrine we are assured, that it is laudable and virtuous to induce a slave to run away from his master, and to conceal the fugitive, if necessary to insure his escape. But Bishop Patrick repudiates both these assumptions, showing, with respect to the first, that the law of Moses forbade the stealing of an Israelite, and said nothing of the heathen barbarian; and, with respect to the second, that he who inveigled a proselyte, being a bond-servant, and "persuaded him to run away from his master, or concealed such a fugitive," was so far from the performance of a meritorious action, that he was "liable to the punishment" mentioned in this very law. If Bishop Patrick had foreseen the reckless style in which our ultra-abolitionists pervert this text at the present day, he could hardly have written a more apposite condemnation.

Let us now pass on to the texts in the New Testament, and examine what the same commentary pronounces concerning them. And here we have it arranged in the manner of a paraphrase.

Eph. 6:5:"Servants be obedient to them that are your masters, (though they be only so,) according to the flesh, (the spirit being immediately subject to God alone,) with fear (of displeasing them) and trembling (lest you should justly incur their anger, serving them) in singleness of your heart, as (knowing that in thus serving them you do service) unto Christ, (who requires this of you, whose Gospel you will credit by your sincere obedience to your masters for his sake,

Tit. 2:2, and whose doctrine you will blaspheme by your disobedi ence, under pretense of any Christian liberty, from the observance of your duty to them. 1 Tim. 6:1, 2. 9. "And, ye masters, do the same things to them, (show the like good-will to and concern for them,) forbearing threatening, (remitting oft the evils which you threaten to them,) knowing that your Master also is in heaven."

Colos. 2: 22: "Servants, obey in all (lawful) things (those who are) your masters according to the flesh." Verse 25. But he (of you) that doeth wrong (to his master) shall receive (of the Lord, punishment) for the wrong which he hath done, and there is no respect of persons with him.”

Ch. 3:1: “Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven, (who, with what measure ye mete to others, will mete to you again, Matt. 7: 2, and deal with you, his servants, as you deal with yours.) "~ In the annotation on verse 25 of the second chapter, the commentator saith as follows, viz.:

Verse 25, Respect of persons. "Christ, in judging men at the last day, will have no respect to the quality or external condition of any man's person; but whether he be bond or free, he shall receive recompense for the good that he hath done, in obedience to him, whether he be master or servant, he shall be punished for the wrong that he did in those relations. It being certain, from the second chapter, that the Judaizers were got into the Church of Colosse, and that many of them denied that the Jews ought to be servants to any, and the Essenes judging all servitude unlawful, this might be the reason why here, and Titus 2, the Apostle is so large in charging this duty on servants."

In the preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to Philemon, the commentator proceeds as follows:

"First, no Christian, though of the meanest sort, is to be contemned. Christianity makes the vilest servant both profitable and worthy to be highly loved and honored by persons in the highest dignity, Onesimus being by the Apostle styled his son, and his bowels."

"Secondly. Christianity doth not impair the power of masters over their servants, or give any authority to them who convert them to use them as their servants, without leave granted from their masters."

"Thirdly. Servants ought to make satisfaction for any wrong or injury they have done to their masters."

66

Fourthly. There is an affection due from the master to a profitable servant."

These extracts are abundantly sufficient to prove the substantial accordance of Patrick, Lowth, and Whitby, with all that has gone before.