debt, by captivity, by birth, by marriage to a slave, or by sale as punishment for crime.1 Children follow the condition of their mother; and all slaves are inherited as a part of the estate of a deceased master. The agrestic slaves (such as are attached to the soil), are subject to the laws of ancestral real property; while the domestics, attached to the person, pass under the laws regulating personal property.2

The Hindoo law gave the master unlimited powers over his slaves. "It makes no provision for the protection of the slave from the cruelty and ill-treatment of an unfeeling master, nor defines the master's power over the person of his slave. It allows to the slave no right of property even in his own acquisitions, except by the indulgence of his master."3

The modes of enfranchisement, by this law, were various. Among others, the preservation of the master's life; or the bearing to him a son, by a female slave, operated as a manumission.^

When India passed under Mussulman rule, the Mohammedan law of slavery became engrafted upon that of India, and, until the possession by Britain, was the paramount law.

The Mohammedan law recognized but two legitimate sources of slavery, viz.: captive infidels, and their descendants; these are subject to all the laws of contract, sale, and inheritance, as other property. They cannot marry without the consent of their masters; they cannot testify as witnesses; they cannot be parties to a suit; they are ineligible to all offices of profit and trust; nor can they contract, or acquire, or inherit property.

1 Adam, on Slavery in India, 14, citing Colebrooke's Digest of Hindoo Law, vol. ii, pp. 340, 346, 368; Menu's Institutes of Hindoo Law, ch. viii, v. 415; Wallon, de l'Esclavage, &c., tom. i, p. 30.

2 Ibid.

* Colebrooke, quoted by Adam, p. 17; Wallon, de l'Esclavage, &c., tom. 4 Adam, on Slavery in India, 17, 19.

i, 33.

The master's control over the slave is very great; and his murder subjects the master to no punishment. If another person kills him, his master may commute the punishment for a pecuniary compensation.

This description of slaves cannot be emancipated. There are other or qualified slaves who, under certain circumstances, such as bearing children to the master, become free.1

When India, through the agency of the East India Company, passed under British rule, it became a matter of grave concern, how far the laws of Britain should be substituted for the native regulations. After various provisions, looking wisely to the adoption of laws "suitable to the genius of the people," it was finally established, in 1793, that, "In suits regarding succession, inheritance, marriage, and caste, and all religious usages and institutions, the Mohammedan law, with reference to Mohammedans, and the Hindoo law, with regard to Hindoos, are to be considered the general rules by which the Judges are to form their decisions." Under this provision, it was held that the Hindoo and Mohammedan laws of slavery were established, as to those coming under their respective influence; and these laws were enforced by the British East India Court, from the date of this regulation (1793) until the nominal abolition of slavery by the East India Company."

Slavery in British India, however, was not confined entirely to those so declared by the Hindoo and Mohammedan law. There were slaves, made so originally and directly under the law of the British Government.

1 This summary of the Mohammedan law is extracted from Macnaghten's Principles and Precedents of Mohammedan Law, as cited by Adam, on Slavery in India, pp. 20, et seq., 41, 63, et seq.; see also Buchanan's Travels in Mysore, &c., vol. ii, 495.

2 See Adam, on Slavery in India, 24–27; Harrington's Analysis of the Laws and Regulations, vol. i, p. 1, et seq.; Macnaghten's Hindoo Law, vol. i, p. 113.

Thus, in 1772, certain bands of robbers, termed Decoits, infesting the public roads, upon conviction, were to be executed publicly; "and the family of the criminal shall become the slaves of the state, and be disposed of for the general benefit and convenience of the people, according to the discretion of the government." Thus, by the Hindoo law, men were enslaved for their own crimes; by the British law, for the crimes of their parents. This law was repealed in 1793.

The servile class in India are very nearly the color of the African negro. There are, however, distinguishing characteristics, showing them to be of different races. The negro proper, however, has found his way to India, and is there, as he is everywhere, in a state of slavery. The East India Company early discovered his adaptation to the labor of this hot climate, and worked their most extensive plantations of the nutmeg and clove by African labor. And even at the time that British cruisers were hovering on the western coast of Africa, more effectually to prevent the African slave-trade, on the eastern coast a similar trade was being prosecuted, within their knowledge and to their own dominions, declared by an order of the Vice-President in Council, on 9th September, 1817, to be "of a nature and tendency scarcely less objectionable than the trade which has been carried on between the western coast of Africa and the West India Islands." Prohibitory regulations were afterwards adopted, the effect of which, according to Mr. Chaplin's Report, was to "increase the price, without putting a stop to the traffic." Mr. Adam, an

Adam, on Slavery in India, 38; Colebrooke's Digest of the Regulations, Supplement, p. 7, 114; Harrington's Analysis, vol. i, p. 308. 2 Adam, on Slavery in India, 40.

3 Harrington's Analysis, vol. iii, p. 755; Adam, on Slavery in India, 78, 149.

4 Report, pp. 150, 151; Adam, 149.

eyewitness, gives it as his opinion, that the trade had not entirely ceased in 1840.1

Slaves cannot be valuable where free labor demands only about four cents per day for wages; and, hence, we are not astonished to find the prices of slaves varying from eleven shillings to £2 58. The treatment of the slaves in British India was generally mild. "The slave is a favorite and confidential servant rather than an abject drudge. The mildness and equanimity of the Indian's temper (or his apathy and slowness, if this better describe the general disposition of the people), contribute to insure good treatment to the slave." The food and raiment allowed them were scanty, but fully equal to that of the free laborers of that class. In India, as in all Eastern countries, many of the slaves are eunuchs.

The East India Company have lately abolished slavery within their dominions. This was necessarily merely nominal. The slaves remain with their old ma

receiving as wages what they formerly received as food and raiment. Their actual servile condition remains unchanged. The number of them, in 1840, was estimated at about one million.5

1 Slavery in India, 151.

3 Mr. Colebrooke's official paper of 1812.

2 Adam, 107.

4 Buchanan's Travels in Mysore, &c., vol. ii, 370, 491. 5 Adam, 129.

CHAPTER IV.

SLAVERY IN THE EAST.

AMONG the earliest records of the Assyrian Empire, we find the model of that system of slavery which distinguishes all oriental nations. Tradition ascribes to Queen Semiramis the introduction of the barbarous custom of making eunuchs of slaves. The Zendavesta, the most ancient of their records, and containing the pretended revelations of Zoroaster, recognizes four classes or castes: the priests, the warriors, the agriculturists, and the artisans. Infidels and negroes (les fils des ténèbres), taken captive in war, were reduced to slavery.1

The Medes and Persians, the successors to the religion of Zoroaster, exhibit oriental slavery in its full perfection. The number of domestic slaves attending the person and the various household duties was very great. The sources of slavery were chiefly captives taken in war, and children purchased either from their parents or from slave-dealers. The merchants of Phenicia and of Greece made them one of the articles of commerce. Hence the slaves were very numerous at Tyre and in the Phenician cities. The satrap of Babylon and of the Assyrian country, furnished annually to the Persians five hundred young eunuchs. And in the expedition against Ionia, the most beautiful children were reserved and condemned to this condition. The fidelity of the eunuchs made them, according to Herodotus,

2

'Rees's Cyclopædia, Art. Zendavesta; Wallon, de l'Esclavage dans l'Antiquité, tom. i, 45, 47.

2 Wallon, de l'Esclavage dans l'Antiquité, tom. i, 47. In speaking of the