But I affirm that this is done in Greece and at Carthage, and in our own country, in Apulia.'

The slave could not appear as a suitor in the courts, except in the single case of a suit for his liberty, when he appeared by a guardian.' He was sometimes permitted to testify in the courts, but always under torture—a proceeding which shocks our sense of justice and humanity, but was approved and defended by the orators of that time. Neither age nor sex was a protection against this cruelty, and if the master refused to permit it, he was himself subjected to punishment.3 Though deprived by law of any right of property, still the slave was allowed by usage his peculium."

Wherever in Greece slaves were private property, they were the subject of sale. They frequently constituted a part of the dowry of a daughter upon her marriage."

The manual labor was almost entirely performed by slaves. The working of the mines, of the oars of the vessels, of the fields, of the machinery, was chiefly performed by them. It is said, that, when from old age they became useless, they were abandoned in their misery; but I have not been satisfied, from the evidence, that this allegation is well founded."

It is unquestionably true, that the laws governing slavery were more rigid than the practices of the community. Wallon, speaking on this subject, says, “Mais la loi est moins puissante que les mœurs, et les mœurs grossières encore, n'étaient point communément cruelles." It is also true, that generally the slaves were

1 Plautus, Casina; Wallon, tom. i, 290.

2 Wallon, tom. i, 324.

Wallon, Ibid.; Plato, De Leg. xi, 937; Plautus, Truculentus, Act. IV, Sc. iii: Dem. in Onet, i, 874.

4 Wallon, tom. i, 293; Plautus, Aulul. III, Sc. v, 422.

5 Clytemnestra's dowry; in Iphigenia in Aulis; Eurip. Becker's Charicles, 280.

7 Wallon, tom. i, 332.

8 Histoire de l'Esclavage, &c., tom. i, 81, 291, 334.

coarse and vulgar, incapable of noble feelings, their chief praise being their freedom from crime.1

For offences committed by the slave, corporal punishments alone were inflicted. If the offence was worthy of death, it could be inflicted only by process of law, and not by the friends, as the avengers of blood, nor by the master."

Manumission of the slave was allowed in all the Grecian states. The effect of this manumission differed according to the manner and circumstances attending it. The manumitted slave, at Sparta, did not become a citizen thereby, nor was he even entitled to the privileges of a Perioikus without a special grant for this purpose, from a Perioikic township. At Athens he came under a double tutelage. He occupied, in the state, the position of a metic, or alien resident. As to his former master, he became his client, and lived under his patronage. His condition was intermediate the slave and the citizen, tending rather to the former. In order to become a citizen, he must be adopted by the vote of an assembly of at least six thousand citizens.“

It is supposed, by some, that the slave could force the master to manumit him upon the payment of a certain price. The authorities cited in favor of this view, are not sufficient to warrant this conclusion, in the silence of so many other writers."

'Becker's Charicles, Exc. Sc. vii, p. 279.

2 Becker's Charicles, Exc. Sc. vii, p. 278, gives a full description of the various fetters and machines used. Wallon, i, 316, et seq.; Eurip. Hec. 287, 288.

3 Grote's Hist. vol. ii, 379; Dion. Chrysos. Orat. xxxvi, p. 448, b.

4 Wallon, i, 345, 350. There is some doubt whether even then he was entitled to the full privileges of citizenship; 351-2. The privilege seems to have been voted so freely and frequently as to have been a matter of complaint; 353. See also Smith's Dict. "Libertus."

5 Plautus. The expression of Olympio, "Why do you frighten me about liberty? Even though you should oppose it, and your son as well, against your will and in spite of you both, for a single penny, I can become free." Act II, Sc. v.; Dion. Chrysos. xv, 240, 241.

CHAPTER VI.

SLAVERY AMONG THE ROMANS.

In the earlier days of Rome, during the reign of her kings, and the beginning of the republic, slavery, though it existed, occupied an unimportant place in the political and domestic economy. The Romans, in this heroic age, were a rude, martial people, their greatest wealth being their land (hence locuples, a rich man), their source of revenue their flocks (pascua), and their very name for money (pecunia), having cattle for its root. In their organization, however, were elements whose fruits must eventually be slavery. These elements were their spirit of conquest, the unlimited paternal power, and generally that devotion to and tendency towards the development of the principle of "power," which formed the basis of all her institutions, and the secret of her unparalleled In these, we find the fruitful sources of that slavery which, in the later days of the republic, and under the emperors, held in bondage so large a portion of the subjects of the Roman power. We will consider more minutely these sources.

success.

And first of the paternal power. This was without parallel among civilized nations. "Nulli enim alii sunt

'Plin. Nat. Hist. xviii, 3; South. Quart. Rev. vol. xiv, Oct. 1848, art. 4, p. 391, Slavery among the Romans. This article is supposed to be from the pen of Judge Campbell of the Supreme Court of the United States. From the known ability and accuracy of its author, I have not hesitated to use it freely in the preparation of this sketch.

homines qui talem in liberos habeant potestatem, qualem nos habemus." The potestas vitæ et necis, the power to expose the infant without liability to punishment, the power to sell into slavery, these were the legitimate elements of the paternal power. It was not until the days of Constantine, that the exposure and abandonment of infants became penal; and a decree of Diocletian contains the first formal denial of the power of sale, though Troplong suggests, that the influence of Christianity had rendered the usage obsolete before that time. Children thus sold became absolute slaves, without the power of redemption, either in the parent or themselves. It was otherwise of children exposed. The preserver held them subject to reclamation. Many instances are given of such reclamations.^

Another internal source of slavery was the power of the debtor, either to sell himself directly into slavery, or to pledge his body (nexus) for the payment of his debt. In default of payment, he was, after a certain time of imprisonment, taken for three successive days before the prætor, and payment demanded. He was then ordered to be sold, out of the city, and became what was called addictus. Though the debtor thus lost his liberty, he was not in precisely the same situation with an ordinary slave. He could not be killed by his master, but might claim the protection of the law as a freeman; could inherit property, and retain his name. lex pertinet; addictus legem habet. nemo habet, nisi liber, prænomen, nomen, cognomen, tribum, habet hæc addictus." And again, the slave when manumitted, became a "libertinus." The addictus

1 Gaius Inst. Com. i, 55.

"Ad servum nulla Propria liberi, quæ

2 Influence du Chr. sur le droit civil, pt. ii, ch. ii.

3 Wallon, Esclav. dans l'Antiq. tom. ii, p. 21.

4 Plin. Epist. x; Suet. De Illustr. Gram. 21; Wallon, as above.

5 Wallon, ii, 23; Becker's "Gallus," 201.

6 Quinctil. vii, 3, 27; Arnold's Hist. of Rome, ch. xxvi, p. 224.

became a citizen (ingenuus). The slave, without the consent of his master, could not obtain his liberty. The addictus solvendo, by redeeming his price, could demand his release.1

The purchaser took with the debtor, all that belonged to him, and hence his children, unless previously emancipated from the paternal power, went into slavery together with their father. This power of the creditor over the debtor, caused frequent disturbances, and was much weakened by the Licinian laws. Its final abrogation happened in this wise: A young man, Caius Publilius, of extreme youth and beauty, surrendered his person for his father's debt, to one Papirius, a cruel usurer. He, excited with lust, approached the youth with impure discourses; and then by threats, and finally by stripes, endeavored to compel his assent. With the marks of the scourge upon him, the young man rushed into the street. A large concourse of people gathered around him in the forum, and from thence in a body went to the Senate-house. The consuls called the Senate, and as each senator went in he was shown the lacerated youth and told the tale of cruelty. The consequence was, a law abolishing this penalty upon the insolvent debtor.3

Another internal source of slavery was the penalty for violating various laws. The person who withdrew himself from the census, or who avoided military service, the open robber, and the free female who maintained sexual intercourse with a slave, severally forfeited their freedom. After the battle of Cannæ, the dictator, pressed by the necessity, offered liberty to all such as

1 Ibid. Wallon, ii, 24, 25.

3 Livy, Bk. VIII, 28.

2 Arnold's Hist. ch. xxvi.

◄ So. Quart. Rev. xiv, 393; Wallon, ii, 31, 32; Gaius, iii, 189. The latter was by senatus-consultum Claudianum. For its provisions, see Smith's Dictionary. The master of the slave might relieve her of the penalty by consenting to the cohabitation.