unto us, on a change of relations.
It is needless to repeat the discussion of this topic in a former lecture.
Suffice it to say, that the master is not required to give to his slave (any more than the parent is required to give to his child) whatever he might wish, but whatever justice and equity claim for him, that is, whatever is right or good in itself; or, if you please, accord to him all his natural and acquired rights, as a slave.
For this is precisely that, and no more, to which the master would be entitled on a change of relations.
We now meet the question-What are the rights of the slave?
The duties of the master are reciprocal of these.
Those who believe, witt Channing
, that the relation they sustain as masters assumes that their slaves have no rights, we may consider are beyond the reach of reason.
If the master owes any duties to his slave, it is because the rights of the slave entitle him to the benefit of the faithful performance of these duties on the part of his master.
No point is more fully settled in Scripture than this: masters are held to a strict accountability to God for the faithful performance of certain duties to their slaves.
puts it beyond all dispute that “the master stands to his bond-servant, one bought with his money or born in his house, in a relation widely different from that which he sustains to the hired ”