#
º
:º
:...:
º
sº
º
}
* :º:
º:
&
º:
- %
§ º §:
ſº §º ºf:
: ~ º- : º #: º:
º - sº
#º º
sº §§
º: jº ::::::::
::::::::::: º sº
is:
§
§ §
c º:
º º º
§ §º º §º:
-- tº: ºś ; §
---> 㺠W- º º
º º : º º sº
ºś ---
ºº::
º - sº
tº: *ºtºiº º § -
ºś rºtºtº Yºº
sº 㺠£º sº §
º § gº: §
º ######"º #º -
: d º
#º
º
sº tºº
ºść
ſº
:
º §:
º §:*: : º:
º º:
§ §
º § sº §º
§:ãº
sº
:
§:
ºº:: sº
v º: sº §
§
sº §
§§ #####
º: - % sº
º
ſº
º
tº:
#:
º:
º:
º
º #
º
º
% º
º
sº
ºº
Fº:
§: º
º: ãº
§§§
sº.
§§§
º
ºf gº
sº
º
Ǻ
sº
º
3º
#.
º
º: ; -
sº
#.
º
ğ
sº flººs-g.
º
º
sº
Wº:
º
§:
º º
§
º
#.-
i
;
º
§ §
*ś º - § §§ º ëſº
ºś
º §§
Fº ºº::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
§
- Fº gº ºš § w §§
º: º
::::::: º
- §: # § #: -:
§ : i. § .
º º
º:
§
§
# #
§::::::::::::::
§
§ -
§§
§
§
º
gº §
§ ſº º:
º: º
º § fº
º
-- §
t
: º w
㺠º: º º: §
:
§ ;
º
§§
º
º:
- º: º
§
ſº # §
..º. ºğ
§§
§§
ğ
º
§
§§
§
º:
&
§
§
.
:
;
§
§
#####
§
º
§
:º º
§
º §
§º
§: ;
§
§:
§:
º
#º;
# º
º;
º;
fº
º
§
*
º§
#
º-
#-
§
#
§º
#º
º
º:
º:
:
ń.
º
#
º
;
º
º
º:
#:
º
i#
#
§
§
.
$43
ãº. ;§
§ §§§
§ #
§§
§ §
§
§
†:
&
§
§
§§
sº
§: -
§§
§§
§§
#

{{!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!！!!
ººººº.
Júſſiſſiſſilſ||
!}.3
§§
:Etſ; Eſé
E#Eſ||
EÏE}}|&#32
EſſłE
EļļE
！ſ: №
Eºſ; Eſ;
EĶEſ
&3
Éſ
|||ſ||
[[III
Ell
ſālſ!
Ķī
IIIIIIIIIIII
Ķ
[[||||||
----~--~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~*~*~*~*****
：：=≡≡≡≡
żae----
||||
fffſ
Ø
|
ÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÏÏĪĪİ
H!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ÌÍÎÏÏĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪİIĮĮįš
<！--*--~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~*~~.~*~*****************.**…***...********
ſiiiiiiiiiiiii
%， №№F5→！--<！:-）--~~~~ ~~~~*~*~** --~~~~<！--*****~~~~*~*=~~~=*************
Ē
SSRſ
SNR)
&&ź%
Daeae
ſſſſſſ
ſºſ
§§
ȚĘ
№：№！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！!！
|
§§
{$.
Ķ
ſſſſſſſſ||
--~~~~;~~::~~
---.-.--. .--._.--.---><!-- *:
ſ§№jËŒŒC）!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!№， №aeae!!!!!!!!！
\，
№j
İſ
ĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪ
|
IIIII]]|[[Iſ][I
،
ÎîÏï[[ſ][III]
№x， …“…--~~~~“ --~~--~~~~.~~~~………
ÎÏÏĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪİ
~~~:~~~~::~~~~ ~~~~ ****--~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ -…--~~~~--~~~~--~
!!!!!!!!!
(№º!!！№º！！！！！！
IIIIIIIIIII|[}][H[[[[
{{!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ēļ
ÎîÏïĪī
ÎÎÏÏĪĪİ
:-） * x^*x*…*…*..*…
%!!
!!!!!!!!!!！
ĒģE
|#§§：{
mi
ñ
fill
4.
tºº
lºſſ
ññ.
º
fºr:
ſº
º
72.
&
º
ñ
º
-T-E
†i
; º
Riiſºmºl
cº
Fº
ĒĶĒ
#
~========~:



















































































ºlºr ºf ſº wºrn wºn tºº.
etian adua palma
et casus alies visua nail-
Wing.
Ma-ilu.


Ż...” &.* *…”
§
THE
LAWS OF THE HEBREWS,
RELATING TO THE
POOR AND THE STRANGER,
“MISCHNA-HATHORA” :
OF THE
R A B B I. M. A. IMO N ID E S :
NOW FIRST TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH By
JAMES W. PEPPERCORN.E.
“Et multa praecepta de Eleemosynis, etiam, antiquissima habent.”—
Scaliger, Elench. Trihaer: ch. 28.
With an Introduction upon the “Rights of Necessity;” an Ac-
count of the Life and Writings of Maimonides:—remarks upon the
Fertility of the Holy Land; and illustrative Notes.
L ON DO N:
PELHAM RICHARDSON, 23, CORNHILI.
-msmº,
1840.

é-
PUBLISHED BY PELHAM RICHARDSON, 23, CORNHILL.
In 8vo. Price 12s. with numerous Wood-Engravings, comprising a
View of Cordova, the birth-place of Maimonides—Mount Tabor—
Solomon before the Idols—the Vision of Jeremiah—View of Monte-
Fiascone—the Spies—Vespasian's Medal—Boaz and Ruth—the Palm-
tree–Roman Aqueduct—Stoning of Stephen—Slave Vessels—Artaar-
eraces taking Wine—Roman Sarcophagus in the British Museum, &c.
THE
LAWS OF THE HEBREWs,
RELATING TO THE
POOR AND THE STRANGER,
“MISCHNA-HATHORA º,
R A B B I MA IMO N IDES :
NOW FIRST TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH BY
•º - JAMES W. PEPPERCORNE,
With an Introduction upon the “Rights of Necessity;” an Ac-
count of the Life and Writings of Maimonides, and of the Origin of
the Judaic Code of Law: Remarks upon the Fertility of the Holy-
Land, the face of the Country, the Soil, the Character of the In-
habitants, &c., and Notes upon the Staple productions of Palestine :
Slaves, Gleaning, Tables of Money and of Weights, Idolatry,
Sepulture, Marriage, Proselytes, Courts of Law, the Sabbath,
Cutheans, the Ant, Threshing, the Locust, the Lion, the Hyke,
Vows, Rains, &c. - *
“Et multa praecepta de Eleemosynis etiam, antiquissima habent.”—
Scaliger, Elench. Trihaer: ch. 28.
A Latin Version was published at Oxford about two Centuries ago, by the
learned Prideaux, who described this work of the “Celebratissimus juriscon-
sultus Judaeus”—as a simple, perspicuous, and elegant Digest of Eleemosynary
Law ; and as being of peeuliar interest to the Student of the Common Law of
England. The work of Prideaux is extremely rare, no copy being found in the
British Museum, nor in any Public Library in London. This is the first com-
plete English translation. - -
389890
In 8vo. with Woodcuts, price 2s. 6d.
THE
RIGHTS OF NECESSITY,
AND THE
TREATMENT OF THE NECESSITOUS
- BY VARIOUS NATIONS ;
WITH STATISTICAL DETAILS RELATING TO
CRIME, POPULATION, &c.
(Being the Introduction to the preceding Work, and a portion of the Notes.)
Upon 4to tinted post, price 2s. 6d.
A S E R I E S OF T W E N T Y - F O U R.
WOOD CUTS,
TAKEN FROM THF,
“LAws OF THE HEBREws RELATING TO THE POOR."
Containing a view of Cordova, the birth-place of Maimonides;
Solomon before the Idols; Mount-Tabor; the Palm-tree; Slave-
vessels, &c., as enumerated in the preceding page.
The following portions of the Work, may he had in separate Tracts, viz —
I. The Life and Writings of Maimonides; and an Account of the Origin of the
Judaic Code of Law ; containing also a Summary of the contents of the Mischna
—the Articles of the Hebrew faith—remarks upon the Gemaras, Talmuds, Tar-
gums—upon School-education, &c. 8vo 1s. 6d. with an Engraving after Ro-
Öerts, of Cordova, (the Birth-place of Maimonides.) its, Bridge and Roman
Gate-way.
Moses Maimonides solidae atque ingentis doctrinae vir.—
- - CAs AUBON, Ex. 16. Cont. Bar.
“The justly celebrated EGYPTIAN Mosks, whose fame had not only filled the
Synagogues of Egypt, but all the world; and whose works will be admired as
long as they are understood.”—GERRANs, on Benjamin of Tudela, p. 13.
“A Mose usque ad Mosem, non extitit qualis Moses!”--PRover B.
II. Testimonies to the Fertility of Ancient Palestine: with incidental remarks
upon the Country, the soil, the character of the Inhabitants, the Aspersions of
Voltaire, &c.;-comprehending also the Statements and Opinions of Writers and
Travellers from Moses, Strabo, Tacitus, &c., to the times of Rauwolff, Volney,
and Lamartine. 8vo. 3s. 6d. with 18 woed-engravings.
“A land of wheat, and barley, and vines, of fig-trees, and pomegranates, a
Hand of olives, and of honey.”—DEUT. viii.
“Rari imbres, uber solum. Exuberant fruges nostrum ad morem, procterque
'eas, balsamum et palmae.”—TACITUs, Hist, v. 6.
“Un coin non pas de terre, mais de cailloux—ume petite contrée déserte et
misérable—un désert oil 1’on ne boit que d'eau saumātre, oil l'on manque deviv-
res—oil en été il n'y a seulement d'eau a boire.”—VoITAIRE,
3
The following are some of the recent Notices of the above Works :-
“AMong the few really learned men whom the Jewish nation has produced
Rabbi Moseh Ben Maimon, (commonly called Maimonides by us,) holds a pre-
eminent place. His Bab Moseh and other works evince him to have been imbued
both with the Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy. His Mischnical labours are
alone sufficient to convey him with honour down to the remotest ages of the
world. No one who has investigated the reasons which must have induced the
Mosaic Polity, can produce so equitable a system of laws whether ancient or mo-
dern, as those of the great legislator, ou tochontos andros, as Longinus calls him.
. . . . This work merits deep attention. . . . . The introductory dissertation is
deeply learned and of inestimable value.”—CHURCH of ENGLAND QUAT. RE-
v1Ew, JULY, 1839.
“If the Meeting wished for further information upon the subject, he would
refer them to a little publication that had lately appeared, called the “Rights of
Necessity and the Treatment of the Necessitous by various nations.” He ad-
mired it for the matter, for the labour which the author had bestowed in conden-
sing into a narrow and convenient space facts and arguments which were of ex-
treme importance, and which ought to be deeply impressed on every man's mind.
He would defy any man, whatever his powers of argument might be, to refute the
Statements and reasonings of that work. It presented a clear and convincing
statement of rights which he hoped they would be able to defend.”—SPEECH OF
LoRD STANHoPE, AT FREEMAsons HALL, JUNE-24, 1839. (SEE TIMEs NEws-
PAPER.) *
“THESE Pamphlets possess intrinsic excellencies. Valuable in themselves,
they are still more so at the present, as they are especially adapted to the times
in which we live. Our Legislators cannot do better than carefully read and
study “The Laws of the Hebrews in reference to the Poor and the Stranger.”
It beautifully exhibits the benevolence and mercy of the Divine Lawgiver, and
shows how careful he was to secure the well-being and comfort of the suffering
poor. Let not the Christian under a higher and more heavenly dispensation,
substitute mere profession for good works, or amid anxiety for correctness of
oreed, forget that “pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this,
to visit the fatherless and widows in their afflictions,” and to keep himself un-
spotted from the world.
This is the first translated edition of the “Laws of the Hebrews,” and is there-
fore only now rendered accessible to the English reader.
, Without standing pledged to all the sentiments of the editor in his notes, we
cordially recommend these publications, and trust they will meet with an extensive
circulation.”—PREACHER’s MAGAZINE, MAY, 1839.
- *
“THEY display considerable erudition: and are embellished with numerous
wood-engravings.”—TAIT's EDINBURGH MAGAZINE.
“SIR. Richard Phillips cannot acknowledge in terms of sufficient thankfulness,
the obliging attention of Mr. J. W. Peppercorne in addressing to him a copy of
his Tracts; especially of the exposition of Maimonides of the Laws of Moses,
relative to the Poor, Gleaning &c. If the literature of the 1000-years of which
the age of Maimonides was the middle period, contained ten such tracts as his on
those subjects, they would rescue it from its character of darkness: and even the
barbarous logic of the schools would be forgiven, if it had produced much of such
fruit.”—ExTRACT FROM A LETTER of SIR. RICHARD PHILLIPs, DATED “DE-
voNSHIRE PLACE, BRIGHTon, OctoBER. 31. 1838.”
“THIs is a work which we consider to be of the highest value, not only from
the great difficulty as well as importance of the subject, but from the talent and
research which the work embodies. The author has traced, through a learned
examination of the Hebrew laws and of the code and customs of almost every
nation, a recognised claim of relief to the poor, which has been accorded in many
countries in far greater liberality than in England. The author of this pamphlet,
whom we are proud to claim as nearly allied to one of the principal families in
Monmouth, has established a case in favour of the poor, which will attract the
4
eternal gratitude not only of them, but of all who see so far below the surface as
to know, that the well-being of the poor is the basis of that of every other class.
He has rendered signal service in bringing to bear on this subject a mass of au-
thority, learning, and talent rarely possessed; and which must very soon draw
general and earnest attention to a most important topic. He has ensured this
result, not only by the commanding power of his work over the attention of think- .
ing men, but by the interest which the facts and illustrations adduced by him
must excite in the mere reader for amusement. Such is the power of concentra-
tion possessed by the writer that, as our excellent contemporary The Churchman
observes, in a volume of rivetting interest, not exceeding 90 pages, more learning
is embodied than is often found in 20 folios.”—MonMoUTHSHIRE BEAcon,
JUNE, 1839.
“A WoRK on the Hebrew laws relating to the poor, and containing an intro-
duction to those laws, in which more learning is embodied than is often found in
twenty folios. The laws and practices of nations are examined: the history of
the rights of the poor is given not only from the sacred books, our own records
and statutes, but, we may also say, the archives of the world. Keen and just
remarks are made upon our present poor-laws; and the assertions are corroborated
by accurate statistical tables. Their positive contradiction to the law of God,
their direct opposition both to the spirit of the Mosaic and Christian dispensations,
and their real impolicy, are shown by evidences and by arguments which defy a
refutation.
The writer, deeply entering into the history of the laws in favour of the poor,
brings instances from every quarter of the globe—from the cultivated nation and
the wild savage alike—from times gone by and the present period, in proof that
the right of sustenance and liberty which the poor indefeasibly have in common
ith the rich, has continued to be recognized from immemorial ages. The re-
cognition of it is a principle implanted by God in man, and the laws by which it
was enforced, formed, doubtless, a part of the earliest divine communications,
and passed from land to land with the peregrinations of the race.
This excellent work may be had under the title of The Laws of the Hebrews
relating to the Poor and the Stranger; with the addition of an able life of Mai-
monides, and a talented treatise on the fertility of the Holy Land. Since the
time of Prideaux, Pocock, and Surenhusius, the writings of Maimonides (Rabbi
Moseh Ben Maimon, often abbreviated to Rambam,) have been much appreciated
by Christian scholars: the sense by which they are governed affords a bold and
striking contrast to the general productions of the Jews; and the keen criticism
which they continually present, entitles them to a careful consideration. The
treatise which has been translated here, offers an excellent model for modern legis-
lation. We hope that the translator will proceed to selections from the Mischnah.”
—CHURCHMAN MAGAZINE, MAY, 1839.
“At once curious, of much research, useful, and of the best possible intentions.
The application of the annexed paragraph is admirable. . . . . These extracts
constitute not a fiftieth fraction of the valuable and curious portion of a pamphlet,
well deserving the attention of the public.”—TRUE SUN.
“You have rendered a most important service to the world by the publication
of your work on the “Rights of Necessity,” which I consider an invaluable col-
lection of facts, authorities, and arguments, and by its having brought within a
small compass the results of your extensive and laborious researches. The sub-
ject is of the highest interest, and is treated in a manner which I quite approve;
so that I thought it my duty to call attention to it at a recent Public-Meeting
where I presided, and to bear my humble testimony to its merits. It ought to
be studied by the legislators of every country, as it establishes the only secure
foundation of prosperity and social order, and it will I trust have a very extensive
circulation.”—ExTRACT FROM A LETTER FROM EARL STANHoPE, DATED
CHEven ING NEAR SEVENOAKs, JULY, 6, 1839.
London. Pelham Richardson, 23, Cornhill.
INTRODUCTION.
THE
RIGHTS OF NEC ES SITY,
AND
THE TREATMENT OF
T H E N E C E S S IT O U S
BY WARIO US NATIONS.
-------- - - - ---- -------- - - - -
Woe! therefore unto him, whoever he may be, that treateth the Poor with ig-
nominy | Woe! unto him, I say. Rather be unto the Poor as a Father, both in
pity and in consolation; for is it not written, (Job xxix)—“I was a, Father to
the Poor.”—MAIMONIDEs, cH. x. § 5.
CONTENTS.
1. Dedication.
2. Introduction.
the Necessitous, &c.
The Rights of Necessity, and the Treatment of
3. The Life of Maimonides, and the Origin of the Judaic Code of
Law.
4. The Laws of the Hebrews relating to the Poor and the Stranger.
5. Testimonies to the fertility, &c. of ancient Palestine.
6. Notes, Nos. 1 to 49, viz.:-
1. Precepts of the Law.
2. Slaves and Scourging.
3. Cutheans.
4. Truma and Tithe.
5. The Almond-tree.
6. The Pomegranite Tree.
7. The Palm-tree.
8. Madder, Saffron, and Mushrooms.
9. The Fig.
10. The Ant.
11. Gizbarim.
12. Vines and Wine.
13. Proselytes.
14. Threshing.
15. Evening-Sacrifice.
16. Hebrew-Weights, and Measures.
17. The Locust.
18. Anise and Cummin.
19. The Law from Sinai.
20. The Corner. -
21. Gleaning.
22. Aris and Chachir.
23. Ceteph and Neteph.
24. Observance of festivals.
25. Forgotten Sheaf.
26.
27.
. Months and Weeks.
. Hebrew Money.
. Doctor of the City.
. Marriage.
. Evil-Eye.
The Wine-Press.
The Olive-tree.
The Lion.
. The Hyke.
. Stripes of Rebellion.
Vows.
. The Temple.
. Aqueducts.
. Nethenims,
. Kupha and Tamchoi.
. The Cabbala.
. Collectors and Courts of Law.
. Sepulture.
. “Tsedekah” Alms or Righteous-
IICSS,
. Idolatry.
. The Conclave of the Silent.
. Chamaniah.
. The Sabbath.
. Rains-the first and the latter.
The Reader is requested to correct the following ERRATA
in the “Rights of Necessity”; viz.—
P. 10 Line 30. For pauperio read pauperis.
P. 22. Note in French full of errors,
P. 25. Line 20. For 125, read 12.5.
P. 29. Last line but one, dele the words and hereby.
P. 30. Last line but one, insert the word of before the 7.
P. 31. Last line but three, for 75.466, read 7,566.
TO THE
RIGHT HonorABLE THE EARL STANHOPE, F. R. S.
THE STRENUOUS OPPONENT OF THE NEW-FANGLED DOCTRINES
OF
POLITICAL-ECONOMISTS,
AND OF THEIR HEARTILESS AND SORDID SCHEMES FOR
DEGRADING AND CRUSHING
THE POOR. ;
AND FOR CONVERTING ENGLISH LABOURERS INTO
MACHINES OR PACKHORSES,
To BE EMPLOYED IN THE CREATION of “SURPLUs-PRODUCE :”
THIs TRANSLATION OF
THE HUMANE “ LAWS OF THE HEBREWS,” Fort THE
succoup of THEIR Poor,
IS,
wiTH HIs LoRDSHIP's PERMISSION,
RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED,
BY
HIs LoRDSHIP’s obedienT HUMBLE SERVANT,
56, Walcott-Place,
January, 1840. - J. watts PEPPERCORNE.
THE RIGHTS OF NECESSITY:
AND
THE TREATMENT OF THE NECESSITOUS
BY WARIOUS NATIONS:
INTRODUCTORY TO THE
“LAWS OF THE HEBREWS, RELATING TO THE POOR.”
“Dies me deficiet, si vellem paupertatis causam defendere.”—TULL.
C'est un animal, (le pauvre) qui a bien de la peine a marcher! C'est une
espece de ver, sujet a 6tre foulé aux pieds par ses semblables qui Sont munis
de bons Souliers I”—CALEPIN
PRovision for the poor and helpless is the first axiom of all reli-
gions, of all wise legislation, of all the good feelings of the heart.
(Sir R. Phillips.) Sophocles said, (OEdip. Tyrann.)—Man's noblest
duty is to assist the wretched. Demosthenes, (Phill. 4.)—The
Laborious in their decay should be treated as the parents of the State.
A provision for the poor, promptly and efficiently afforded by law,
Dr. Johnson deemed to be a good test of civilization. Relief of the
necessitous results from the principles of society : it forms indeed,
the very foundation of the compact establishing socialsunion : by
which compact, the powers and privileges of uncivilized life have
been superseded, excepting in extreme cases, by the Laws of society.
The justice and the necessity of such a provision have been recognized
in all climes, through all ages, wherever civilization has spread a ray
of light.
The chief object here, however, is not to enquire into the humanity,
the good policy, and the justice of recognizing and maintaining the
Rights of Necessity; but, rather, to ascertain to what extent those
Rights are, either absolutely or virtually, protected by human laws;
and whether they may be deemed to be inherent in every human
being, by the eternal Law of Nature : which Law, coeval with man-
kind and dictated by God himself, is binding over all the globe, in
all countries, and at all times. (Blacks. “Comm...”). An examination
of the subject will unquestionably prove, that it would be but a su-
perficial and vulgar notion to imagine, that wherever man has tacitly
abandoned his right to the possession of things in common; and
2 THE RIGHTS
has consented to regulate his conduct in ordinary cases, by the will
and decrees of the community, expressed by the recognized organ of
that community,+that he has consequently abjured in extraordinary
cases, the rights inalienably vested in him by the immutable Law of
Nature.* Cases do constantly occur in the best organized commu-
nities, in which, human ordinances yield by common consent, to the
Law of Natureſ: proving that Law to be, (in the words of Locke,)—
An eternal rule to all men, to legislators as well as to others. The
pre-eminence and immutability of that Law, are thus forcibly asserted
by Cicero:—“Huic legi mec abrogari fas est: neque derogari ex hac
aliquid licet: neque tota abrogari potest. Nec vero aut per Senatum,
aut per populum solvi hac lege possumus: meque est quaerendus ex-
planator, aut interpres ejus alius. Nec erit alia lex Romoe, alia
Athenis, alia nunc, alia posthac ; sed et omnes gentes, et omni tem-
pore, una lex et sempeterna et immutabilis continebit; unusque erit
communis quasi magister et imperator omnium Deus, ille legis hujus
inventor, disceptator, lator : cui quinon parebit, ipse se fugiet, ac
naturam hominis aspermabitur ; atque hoc ipso luet maximas poenas,
etiamsi cetera supplicia, quae putantur effugerit.” (De Repub. Lib.
3.)—Which may be thus translated:—This Law (of Nature) cannot
be abrogated in whole or in part, nor can it be in the slightest degree
impaired : neither by the Senate nor by the whole people. It re-
quires not an expositor: it is self-explanatory. It is not one thing
at Rome, another at Athens: one thing now, another thing hereafter.
It is one, eternal, and immutable: obligatory upon all, in every time
and place: since God who is its author, expounder, and publisher, is
the Lord of all. Whoever therefore, violates this Law, offends against
himself, and is a contemmer of human nature. He shall be amenable
to severe penalties, though he should evade that which is usually
denominated punishment.
No earthly power, then, can annul or dispense with the laws im-
posed upon man and upon society, by the Sovereign Lord of all. A
high law authority has declared that “Whatever the Legislature
doth shall be holden for naught whenever it shall enact that which is
contrary to the rights of nature, or the principles of the Constitution.”
To submit to earthly laws in violation of the Laws of our Creator,
would be a dereliction of duty, which nothing but complete infirmity
of body or mind, can justify or extenuate. As is justly observed by
Plato, God has placed us in a post that we are not to quit without
his permission. Existence is the donation of a Creator, all-just and
all-wise, who has placed us in the world to observe his precepts, by
the cultivation and active employment of the abilities he has bestowed
upon us ; and He has so ordained it, that the Laws of Sociability to
which we are subjected, cannot be completely obeyed, unless each
* “ Human laws are measures in respect of men whose actions they must direct,
“howbeit such measures they are, as have also their higher rules to be mea-
“sured by ; which rules are two, the Law of God, and the Law of Nature;
“so that laws human must be made according to the general laws of nature, and
“without contradiction to any positive law of Scripture, otherwise they are ill
“made.”—Hooker's Eccl. Pol. Lib. 3.
O F NECESSITY. 3
individual employs his physical and mental powers to preserve and
prolong his existence; whilst his continual endeavours ought to be
for self-improvement. Neglect of self-preservation is a crime against
our Creator, as well as against our fellow-creatures: and says Puf-
endorff, it is not possible to conceive that human society can hold
together, if the preservation of the individuals composing that society
shall be regarded and treated as a matter of indifference.
Founded, then, upon the fundamental principles of society, and
upon the immutable law of nature, is the right of all to maintenance
and protection in the land in which God has placed them, as long as
food and raiment and shelter can be found. Those social regulations
which place in abeyance the rights of nature, were consented to, (as
Paley shows,) under a supposition and expectation that each indivi-
dual of the community would benefit by the change; that the public
weal would be advanced ; and under the indispensable condition that
every one should be assured of, at the least, the means of subsistence.
Otherwise, the change must have been illusive, obnoxious to reason
and equity: since it would be the resigning of positive rights, and a
certain maintenance, for comparative impotence and possible des-
titution. It would be the sacrifice of a greater for a lesser good,
and thus reverse the first principles of the social contract, —the indis-
pensable, the fundamental condition of that contract.
For it is not to be assumed, that Poverty and Want are the certain
characteristicks of a state of nature; or even of the early and imper-
fect association of mankind. Many are the authorities disproving
such an assumption. Even the Esquimaux have “plenty of provi-
sions,” as we are assured by Captains Ross and Parry. The same
may be said of the Laplanders, (“Clark's Scandinavia,” p. 425,)
Sommière speaking of the Montenegrins, says:—I am convinced
they live well, though temperately. In Java there is no pauperism :
nor at Loo-Choo, are either poverty or want discernible. (Ensor,
“On the Poor”) The natives of Australia, nearly as they seem to
approach the animal creation in respect to mental capacity, never-
theless do not suffer from want : whilst at the Sandwich Islands,
the “Cherub” and “Racoon" with a crew of 120 men, were, on the
instant, supplied with a week's provision, for which the Chief refused
to receive payment. In Alfred's time there were few or no poor in
England : and Fortescue speaking of the English people, in the time
of Henry VI, says, (“De Laud. Ll. Angl.”)—They are fed in great
abundance, with all sorts of flesh and fish, of which they have plenty
every where: they are clothed throughout in good woollens, every
one according to his rank, having all things that conduce to make
life easy and happy.—It would be to question the justice and good-
ness of our Creator to imagine the contrary. As Dr. Paley remarks,
the world is filled with plenteousness for the sustenance and comfort
of all;—no matter how great the population may be, whom He sends
into it. It seems indeed most consonant to reason, and history, and
religion to believe, that except in extraordinary cases, men exempt
from social ties, are always able to sustain themselves in abundance,
however rude their way of living, or blunt and vicious their moral
4 THE RIGHTS
*
feeling; and that to some vital defect in the social constitution must
be ascribed that anomalous condition, wherein the labour of the com-
munity is inadequate to the abundant support of all.
Dr. Paley thus argues upon the justice and the reasonableness, of
ensuring a certain provision for the destitute members of the body
politic.—The poor have a claim, he argues, founded in the law of
nature, which may be thus explained –All things were originally
common; and a separation was agreed to, upon the expectation and
condition, that every one should have left a sufficiency for his sub-
sistence, or should possess the means of procuring such sufficiency.
When the partition of property is rigidly maintained in opposition
to the claims of indigence and distress, it is maintained in opposi-
tion to the intention of those who established the partition; and to
the will of Him, who is the Supreme Proprietor of every thing, and
who has filled the world with plenteousness, for the sustenance and
comfort of all whom he sends into it.—lt is then a partition, tacitly
or virtually consented to, in order that a social union might be
formed, without which, our way of living would be derogatory to the
dignity of human nature, and would have a strong and increasing
tendency to degenerate to the mode of existence of the lower crea-
tion : whilst those Absolute Rights of personal security and liberty,
essential to the tranquillity and enjoyment of human existence, would
be incessantly exposed to violation by fraud, dissension, or force.
And it must be evident, that the compact for entering into society
contemplated, not less but more perfect security, for these absolute
rights of each individual: the preservation of which is, indeed, the
main object for which communities are formed, and governments es-
tablished. Society, says Seneca, has the effect of assuaging the pangs
of bodily disease, and of mental distress: and that such are also the
objects contemplated by a social organization, cannot be questioned.
“Haec (Societas) morborum impetus arcuit, senectuti adminicula
prospexit, solatia contra dolores dedit: hoec fortes nos facit, quod
licet centra fortunam advocare. Hanc tolle, et Unitatem Generis
Humani, qua vita sustinetur, scindes.” (Soneca de benef, Lib. 4. 18.)
As to one of those absolute rights, the right of personal liberty,
Blackstone explains it to consist in the “power of locomotion, of
changing situation, or moving one's person to whatsoever place
one's own inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint,
unless by due course of law”—meaning, doubtless, by the words
due course of law, the verdict of a Jury, passed upon one who has
been legally tried and found guilty of a criminal act. It is material
to notice this proviso: since a misconception might induce a belief,
that the statute of a legislature illegally infringing upon the personal
liberty, or the other absolute rights of individuals, could be construed
into due course of law. “The confinement of the person, in any
wise,” adds Blackstone, “is an imprisonment.” As respects the
* Of the legal fact, that “Confinement of the person, is imprisonment,” those
who eulogize the workhouse system for “silencing” distress, appear to be
lamentably ignorant ; that cruel system so long and so justly denounced as a pest
OF NECESSITY. 5
right of personal security, we are told upon the authority of Black-
stone, that the law not only regards life and member, and protects
every man in the enjoyment of them, but also furnishes him with
every thing necessary for their support. “For there is no man,”
adds Blackstone, “so indigent or wretched but he may demand * a
supply, sufficient for all the necessities of life, by means of the several
Statutes enacted for the relief of the Poor.”
The qualifying remark of Blackstone, which seems to imply that
the legal claim of the destitute is dependant upon, or restricted to
the Statutory Law, leads to the conclusion that this claim was recog-
nized, not until wide-spread destitution had, during the reigns im-
mediately succeeding the period of the Union of the Houses of York
and Lancaster, imperatively demanded an organized system of relief.
But in fact, that claim or right had been fully recognized from the
earliest period of the Commonwealth; and had, by the Common-Law
of England, ever been asserted and protected. It may be said, that
there never was a time, when a legal provision for the destitute did
to morals, industry, and happiness; “destroying,” says Blackstone, “all en-
dearing family connexions, the only felicity of the indigent.” The 2nd Report of
the Poor Law Commissioners declares this despotic, degrading, demoralizing,
and illegal confinement of the person to be the “basis and governing principle”
of their system,-their “main reliance for the discouragement of pauperism,”—
of the “correctness and efficacy of which, they feel no doubt.” That, “basis and
governing principle,” comprising moreover, the revolting severance of husband
from wife—of parents from their children—in direct and flagrant violation of the
rights of humanity, of the laws of the realm, and of the doctrines and commands
of the Christian religion. To assert that such a System is “correct” exhibits
ignorance as well as want of feeling; but of its wonderful “efficaciousness,” in
terrifying the distressed from applying for relief, there can be but one opinion.
Many a poor person has committed theft, rather tº:an apply to a Workhouse.
Sir R. Heron speaking of a workhouse at Lincoln, affirmed, that bolts and chains
were applied to young girls, and to men 70 years old, for venial offences. Re-
cently (Jan. 1839.) at the Greenwich Sessions, a governess of the workhouse was
convicted of beating pauper orphans with a bar of iron—of compelling them on
account of their playing together, to stand upon a table, the whole night long,
with their hands over their heads,-and of teaching and encouraging them to steal
for her benefit. Mr. Colquhoun the magistrate, declared some workhouses to
be abodes of misery, which defy all comparison of human wretchedness. Ill-
treatment in them, has driven lumatics into a state of confirmed raging madness.
in the Norwich Workhouse the deaths in 1805 were 1 in 5. But whether ill or
well conducted, the principle is equally execrable. “The matter, my Lords,
resolves itself into this,” most truly remarked the Bishop of Exeter, (April, 1837.)
—“the poor man if advanced in years and enfeebled, must, when once he enters
the Workhouse, remain there for the rest of his life; and so long as he receives
relief, he is subjected to a severe and rigorous imprisonment.”
“There dwell the most forlorn of human kind,
Immured though unaccused, condemn’d untried,
Cruelly spared, and hopeless of escape l’—CowPEB.
* This was in by-gone times ; of the Poor Law Amendment Act, Lord Stanley
said, -“Ostensibly the Bill gave relief to the destitute; but it gave no right to
ask for relief, and none to obtain relief even upon the fullest proof of destitu-
tion.” The working of the Bill has proved the correctness of Lord Stanley's
remark; Guardians and Overseers can, and do with impunity, trifle with and
torture the famishing.
6 THE RIGHTS
not exist in England; and long before the age of Elizabeth was
“charity interwoven with the Constitution.”
The eleemosyna regis, or King's Alms, was a penny directed by
Ethelred, to be paid for every plough in England, for the mainte-
nance of the poor; (Ll. Æthel : C. I.) and the Constitution of Athel-
stan, defines the mode in which the poor are ordered to be sustained.
(Ll. Æthelst: Cons. 3,) The “Mirroir des justices,” written before
the period of the Norman Conquest, declares that it was one of the
first Constitutions of the ancient Kings, that the Poor were to be
sustained by Parsons, by Rectors of the Church, and by the parish-
ioners, so that none of them die for want of sustenance. (Ch. 1 § 3.)
Subsequently to the Conquest, the Canons of the Church direct that
the Poor be sustained by the Tithes, to one-third of which they were
of right entitled. (Canon 24. Elfric. &c.) Donations to the Church
were ever—in perpetuam eleemosynam. That subsequent Canons of
the Church, (time of Henry I, &c.) recognized that which had always
been the Law of the Land, is shown by the several Statutes made in
succeeding Parliaments, to prevent the misapplication of the funds
specially raised for the destitute. In 1326 the Commons petitioned
that the rents of the Church might not be carried out of the King-
dom, whereby the people who had greatly increased, were deprived
of the alms of the Church to which they were entitled. (Rot. Parl.
Tom. 2. 1 Edwd. 3.) The 15th Rich. 2. ch. 6, 12., (confirmed by
the 4th Henry, 4. ch. 12.) declares that in all Appropriations, then
extensively possessed by the Abbeys and Priories, (and since the
dissolution of the Monasteries, usurped by the laity,”) it is the duty
of the Bishop, to prevent the retention by the monasticks, of the
share devoted to the poor; which share was in effect a poor rate,
entrusted to the custody of the Church. f
* In England and Wales there are 10,639 parishes and 7597 lay-impropri-
ators, patrons of that number of benefices ; that is to say, the laity appropriate
to themselves the Great-tithes of 7597 benefices, (being more than two-thirds of
the whole number,) whilst the clergy are especially maligned on account of the
tithe-system 1 The Duke of Devonshire has the Great-tithes of 20 parishes in
Ireland.
ºf The Statute against Pluralities. 21 Hen. 8. Ch. 13, recites that it is—“For
the more quiet and vertuous increase and mainteynance of Divine Service, the
preaching and teaching the word of God, with godly and good example giving,
the better discharge of Curats, the mainteynance of hospitalitie, the reliefe of
poore people, the increase of devotion, and good opinion of the lay-fee toward the
spiritual persons, &c.” Origen says—“Opus habemus ut fideles simus pariter
et prudentes ad dispensandos ecclesiae reditus’’ &c.—It behoveth us to be discreet
and faithful in our distribution of ecclesiastical goods. For it is not sufficient for
us simply to give away the goods of the Church, so to keep ourselves clear from
devouring or stealing of them ; but we must wisely consider every man's necessity.
St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Bernard, St. Gregory, and Wickliffe confirm
this view ; as also the Injunctions of Edward VI. (Sect. 18.) and those of
Elizabeth (Sect. 15.) By the Judaic-Law a portion of the produce of the fields
was set apart as a Tithe-of-the-Poor; and there was an Officer, the Doctor of
the City, whose especial duty it was to distribute the Alms of the Poor. (Vide
Notes 4. and 30,) So amongst the early Christians, there was the praeses sacro-
rum. Justyn Martyr, who lived in the 3rd Century particularly mentions
OF NECESSITY. 7
It is not, therefore, upon the comparatively modern statutes of
Henry 8th and his children, that the destitute are forced solely to
depend. Those Statutes were rather a confirmation of the ancient
Law ; and by means of various systematic regulations, which the exi-
gencies of the time, (or perhaps more correctly, the innovations
upon the Constitution,) loudly demanded, they aimed at rendering
more efficient, that which had ever been the law, although fallen
into partial desuetude, consequent upon the former general ease and
comfort of the poorer classes. We have the authority of Asser,
Bishop of Man, the contemporary biographer of Alfred the Great,
that there were during his reign scarcely any poor in the Kingdom,
long as it had been scourged by invasions and internal dissension.
The ease and happiness of the people in the reign of Henry VI. have
been previously noticed; and Sir Wm. Dugdale asserts in his
“Monasticon’’ that while the Monasteries enjoyed their ancient
possessions, there was no occasion for an Act of Legislature for the
relief of the poor, so amply did the ecclesiastics generally afford
succour to the destitute.* In this opinion Blackstone, Smith, and
Colquhoun coincide. Certain it is, that in the next age nearly a
dozen Acts were passed upon the subject of the poor whose increase
and destitution became alarming ; whilst laws the most ferocious
were passed, to prevent even starving creatures from asking alms.
(Wide 1 Edw. 6. c 3, and others.) “Pauper ubique jacet,”—was the
exclamation of Queen Elizabeth, when, in her progresses through
the kingdom, she was forced to witness the increasing distress and
destitution of the people.
To pretend, however, that the Rights vested in every man by na-.
ture, are in effect maintained and protected by society, would be
mockery, if solely on account of the want of a sufficiency of food or
raiment, life should, in a land of plenty, be rendered insupportable.
For Society to permit either directly or indirectly, of so grievous a
wrong as extremity of suffering, would be a privation of right, repug-
nant to the dictates of truth and justice,—subversive of the compact
the collection of Alms after Divine Service . . . “lastly the collections are depo-
sited with the priest to succour the widows, the fatherless, the sick, prisoners,
strangers, and the poor : for the chief priest, (presaes sacrorum) is the Curator
of the poor.” Apol. ad Ant. Casar.
The primitive institution of tithe in Christendom bore a strong resemblance to
the doctrine and practice of the Hebrew Church. Spelman is facetious upon the
subject. “Tithes must not be contemned because they were used by the Church
of Rome: if the pottage of the ministers, (2 Kings, 4, 38,) has been abused with
Roman Colloquintida, purge the infection, but take not their pottage from them.”
(Wide Note 4, “Truma and Tithe.”)
* Among the principal motives for the foundation of monasteries and other reli-
gious houses, the Act of the Parliament of Carlisle in 1306-7, enumerates hos-
pitality, the maintenance of the sick and infirm, almsgiving, and the other works
of charity. (Hist. Rev. of the Poor Laws.) There were in many monasteries, a
Nosocomium, for the sick; a Ptochotrophium, for the poor; a Xenodochium, for
strangers; a Geronto.comium, for the aged poor; an Ergastrium, a dispensa-
tory; a Valetudinarium, an infirmary; and the Eleemosynarium or almonry,
common to all monastic establishments.
8 THE RIGHTS
of society,+ abhorrent to the feelings of humanity,+and a flagrant
breach of duty towards the Creator, by whose immediate donation
life is enjoyed. Quarles regards such inattention to the wants of hu-
manity in the same light, viz,-as an absolute wrong inflicted upon
the helpless. “Not to give to the poor, is to take from him : not to
feed the hungry, is to the utmost of thy power to kill him. To avoid
both sacrilege and murder, be charitable!”—which is to the effect of
the declaration of Solomon, (Eccl. 34. xxii.)—“The bread of the
needy is his life: he that defraudeth him thereof, is a man of blood.”
And so St. Ambrose:– “It is the bread of the hungry which you de-
tain: it is the raiment of the naked which you lock up.” Had Quar-
les substituted “homicide” for “murder,” he would have been
supported, not only by reason, and justice, and Scripture; but abso-
lutely by written law. Paulus the lawyer said, Should one ask for
relief, be denied, and die, it is homicide in the person refusing. (Petit
Leges Att. 144) Eusebius addressing himself to the Clergy as
“Stewards of the Poor,” (so denominated by St. Augustine,) says,
“If thou dost possess anything more than extreme necessity doth re-
quire, and do not help the needy, thou art a thief, and a robber.”
And says Maimonides, “Whoever seeth the Poor asking alms, and
shutteth his eyes against him, and doth not relieve him, transgres-
seth the negative precept; for it is written, (Deut. 15.) “Thou
shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor
brother.” (“Laws of the Hebrews” &c. Ch. 7 $ 2)
In England, however, every man has or had the power, (according
to the forementioned quotation from Blackstone's Commentaries,)
of procuring food by a legal proceeding, should he, by any chance or
misfortune, become indigent. Blackstone indeed, declares it to be
“impossible that the most needy stranger should ever be reduced to
the necessity of thieving to support nature :” and therefore, unites
with Hale, in declaring that the Law of England regards as a cri-
minal thieving, the taking of food by force, even in a case of ex-
tremity. And unquestionably, as long as that power continues to
be fully enjoyed, so long ought the plea of necessity to be disregarded,
and an unlawful taking to be visited with condign punishment.
That the assertions, however, of Blaekstone and of Hale, qualified as
they are as to Statutory law, are not in accordance with other high
authorities, is evident from the following passage in the “ Law
Tracts,” (p. 55) of one, whom Pope calls, “The greatest and
wisest of mankind,”—Lord Bacon. “ The law,” says Lord Bacon,
“chargeth no man with default where the Act is compulsory and
“not voluntary, and where there is not consent and election; and
“therefore, if either there be an impossibility for a man to do other-
“wise, or so great a perturbation of the judgment and the reason, as,
“in presumption of law, man's nature cannot overcome, such neces-
“sity carrieth a privilege in itself. Necessity is of three sorts:
“necessity of conservation of life; necessity of obedience; and necessity
“ of the act of God, or of a stranger :—First, of Conservation of Life;
“if a man steal viands to satisfy his present hunger, this is no felony
“nor larceny.” -
OF NECESSITY. 9
Now the Poor were not unprovided for, in the time cf Lord Bacon :-
the Statutes of Henry if not of Elizabeth had, for a while at least,
been in operation: and consequently, with as much reason might
Bacon have qualified his expressions then, as Hale and Blackstone sub-
sequently. There is, nevertheless, not the slightest qualification put by
Lord Bacon upon the Rights of Necessity, on account of the existence
of certain Statutes. And, indeed, such a qualification as appears to
be implied in the doctrines of Hale and Blackstone, seems not alto-
gether equitable or reasonable: since a Parliamentary Statute may be
in effect, a dead letter. The Parliament may command the perishing
to be fed and clothed: but if by certain stratagems, by chicanery,
evasion, or delay; or by ignominious treatment; or by the tyrannical
imposition of cruel, unnatural, or degrading conditions, those who
are appointed to carry the law into effect, do thus virtually deny
relief to the perishing, then is the Statutory Law virtually abro-
gated and of no effect: and it would be the height of injustice to
inflict punishment, merely on the ground of the bare existence in the
Statute-Book, of an inoperative law.
At this distance of time, and with so little information upon the
subject, it must be difficult to decide with certainty upon the Laws
of the Hebrews relative to the Rights of Necessity. According to
Selden, however, in no case could the taking of the goods of another,
without the intervention of the magistrate, be regarded as less than
theft. And yet it is clear from Matthew, (Ch. 12) and from Deute-
ronomy, (Ch. 5.) that it was lawful in cases of hunger, to pull and
to eat the ears of standing Corn; and to gather (but not to carry
away,) the grapes and olives growing in a vineyard, or in an olive-
yard. The Pharisees found no fault with Christ's disciples, for hav-
ing taken the ears; but, in their fanaticism or hypocrisy, affected
to believe that the Sabbath had been profaned by an act of labour.
Josephus remarks, (“Antiq. of the Jews”) that it would be inhuman
and unjust to regard such acts as unlawful.—Nor let those, says he,
that gather the grapes and carry them to the wine-press, restrain those
whom they meet, from eating of them : for it is unjust, out of envy,
to hinder those that desire it, from partaking of the good things
that come into the world according to God's will ; and this, while
the season is at the height, and is hastening away as it pleases God.
Nay if some out of bashfulness, are unwilling to touch these fruits,
let them be encouraged.—Even the Ox was not muzzled, whilst tread-
ing out the corn: and can it be, that the Laws of so feeling and con-
scientious a people, would regard as larceny—“the taking of viands
to satisfy present hunger.” Our Saviour reminds the Pharisees that
David and his companions, being an hungered, entered into the house
of God, and did eat the shew-bread ;-to eat which, was a flagrant
breach of law and sanctity, in any but the Priests: necessity, how-
ever, in this case, was deemed to be full justification. (Pufen. Jib. 2.6.)
Notwithstanding, however, these well-known facts, Selden maintains
that the Laws of the Hebrews did not allow of extreme necessity be-
ing a justification for the taking from the goods of others, of a suffi-
ciency to preserve existence: a position, by no means reconcileable
b
10 THE RIGHTS
with the foregoing facts, nor with the doctrine laid down by Solomon,
in that remarkable passage in Proverbs, (Ch. 6. 30.) which Black-
stone has so perfidiously garbled, and the sense of which he has so
flagrantly perverted in his “Commentaries.” (Book. 4. ch. 2.) “Men
do not depsise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hun-
gry :” this verse being manifestly distinct from that which follows,
and which evidently refers to a man stealing from other motives than
those of necessity. But, practising a gross imposition upon the reader,
Blackstone thus pretends to quote the words of Solomon : “If a
thief steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry, he shall restore
sevenfold, and shall give all the substance of his house.” The words
of Selden, (“De jure Nat. and Gent.”—Lib.6. Cap. 6.) are, “Ex-
trema igitur necessitas non fuit, quo minus alieni inde surreptio, ex
jure naturali, pro furti seu rapinae scelere, apud Ebraeos haberetur.”
Selden assigns his reasons for believing that by the Law of the He-
brews, illegal invasion of the property of another, could not in any
case be justified: and those reasons are not dissimilar to the reasons
assigned by Hale, (whose doctrine is followed by Blackstone,) when
he declares, (“Pleas of the Crown,” Ch. 9.) that the English Law
will not justify such an act; because, by collections for the poor, and
by the power of the civil magistrate, adequate provision is made for
cases of necessity; or in the words of Blackstone, because —“Cha-
rity is reduced to a system, and interwoven in our very constitution.”
The poor amongst the Israelites, observes Selden, even in cases of
extremity, were not to take the property of another; but, were to
apply either to the private or to the public Collectors of Alms: the
legal provision established by the Laws of the Hebrews rendering,
(as in the case of the Common Law of England,) an infraction of
social rights needless, and therefore unwarrantable. “Accedente sem-
per,” says Selden, “non pauperio viautarbitrio, sed sententia forensi,
quae rogeret quoties quis id quod sibi praestandum, denegaret.”
Pufendorff assuming the opinion of Selden to be correct, re-
marks, that it is no wonder the Poor among the Hebrews, however
necessitous, were forbidden under penalties to appropriate to them-
selves the goods of others: since there was a legal and abundant
provision raised for them : whence, he continues—“the Stealing of
what was another's, though upon extreme necessity, passed in that
state for theft or rapine.” But, he adds, supposing under another
government the like good provision is not made for persons in want;
are they to perish with famine P The provision for the Hebrew poor
was indeed, (as will be seen from the work of Maimonides,) most
abundant: and God having commanded that the poor should, as a
matter of right and not of favor, be clothed and fed, the Judaic Law
obeys the divine command, and expressly prohibits the giver from
exacting from the indigent receiver, even Thanks; or from permitting
any, the most distant appearance of humiliation. “For all these
gifts belonging to the Poor,” says Maimonides, “no thanks are in
any wise due to the owner of the field, as though he had performed
an act of benevolence; but the poor shall come and shall receive
them, even though against the will of the owner. Yea, even though
OF NECESSITY, 11
that owner be the poorest man in Israel, yet shall those Gifts be
taken out of his hands.” (Ch. 1. § 8.) The Judaic Law deemed the
relieving of the miserable, to be simply an act of justice: (Pastoret,
tom. 2,) and required not only their relief from impending want, but
also aid “ to enable them to maintain themselves for the future.
(Deut. 15.) In order, moreover, to throw impediments in the way of
the unfeeling and sordid, estates sold or mortgaged were required,
by the bold political scheme of the Jubilee, to be periodically restored
to the original proprietors or their children, “that there be no poor
among you.”t (See “Testimonies” &c. pp. 43 and 65.) Moreover,
such was the humanity and generosity of the Hebrew Law, that it
required artifice to be used to induce the bashful to accept relief, and
aimed at restoring the poor even to their former comforts:—“If in
his prosperity, he hath been accustomed to ride upon horseback,
having a servant running before him, and if he is now reduced
to poverty; let him be furnished with a horse upon which he may
ride, and with a servant who may run before him, for it is said,
(Deut. 15.)—' But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and
shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need in that which he wanteth,’”
(“Laws of the Hebrews,” &c. Ch. 7. § 3.)
But without rendering ourselves dependant upon written wisdom,
in so vital a matter as that of self-preservation in cases of extremity,
we have common sense and reason to guide to a right comprehension
and decision. There is the universal feeling, and as it were, instinct
of mankind, to guide and direct. “Reason tells us,” says Locke,
“that all men have a right to their subsistence, and consequently to
meat and drink, and such other things as nature affords for their
preservation. We know that God hath not left one man, so much
to the mercy of another, that he may starve him if he please. God,
the Lord and Father of all, has given no one of his children such a
property in his peculiar portion of the things of this world, but that
he has given his needy brother a right to the surplusage of his goods,
* Somewhat different are the rules of other Laws. Not only is no such aid af-
forded under certain other laws: but, credat Judaeus 1—let the Hebrew versed in
the merciful laws of his own nation, believe it, if he can l—the relief due to mi-
sery and destitution is, with remarkable ingenuity converted into a Loan /
A loan—which subjects the fortunate object of charity, just emerging from an
abyss of misery and woe, to have his future earnings charitably confiscated; and
himself judiciously and economically trampled into the very dust again, on ac-
count of his own previous miserable destitution, or of that of his wife, or of his
children l (Wide the mean and merciless Clauses 58, and 59, of the Pauper-Act.)
“They, (the poor,) are not in the habit of applying themselves for relief by way
of loan: they apply for relief, and a loan is tendered.” (Mr. Lewin's Evidence;
Lords' Committee, 1838.)
+ Sir R. Phillips in a letter to the writer, dated Oct. 1838, remarks, that he had
“often read, with deep interest, the wise providential provisions of the Laws of
Moses, in regard to the Poor; and he would be content to refer all the title of
Moses to inspiration, to the superhuman perfection of that scheme of social polity,
which, in the happy year of the Jubilee, restored to every family its landed en-
dowments. This alone was a security for national permanence : if the insanity
of conquest had not led the tyrants of Assyria, Persia, Egypt &c., to covet the
shadow of that substance which conquerors never can enjoy.”
12 THE RIGHTS.
so that it cannot be denied him.” It must be apparent, indeed, to
the most thoughtless, that life is immediately derived from a superin-
tending providence; and knowing that, the admission follows, that
“Every man has,” (in the words of Blackstone,) “a right to
demand relief,” when life is at stake. It must be the inalienable
right of the needy in all times, and all places: few will be found to
side with the school of Political Economists, in its crafty evasion
of the position,--
“That souls have no discriminating hue,
Alike important in their Maker's view "
Does not Municipal Law, moreover, instantly yield to reason and
natural law, in other extreme cases 2 Does not natural law and justice,
in other insurmountable contingences, maintain predominant and in-
contestable superiority over all human law P When the flames threaten
to extend to our own house, was the natural right to break into and
pull down a neighbour's house, ever disputed 3 Acts, which under
ordinary circumstances, would subject the perpetrator to the punish-
ment of a burglar. And when shipwreck becomes imminent, was a
man ever made responsible, under any human law, for the merchan-
dize of others thrown overboard, with the intention of saving the
lives of the passengers ? Would the punishment of theft be inflicted
upon him, who, when food begins to fail upon the wide sea, seizes
in common upon the remaining provision ? “Si quando,” says the
Civil-Law, (Digest. Lib. 14.) “ea (cibaria) defecerint in navi-
gationem, quod quisque haberet in commune conferrit,” The Civil-
Law expressly exempts such cases of intense fear and suffering, from
the cognizance of ordinary law: our own admirable English Laws
deem it to be superfluous to point out cases of exemption, which
it is assumed, the natural sense and justice of mankind will ever spon-
taneously recognize, as being within the intendment of all human law.
There is an account extant, (and similar accounts have been not un-
frequently related,) of Seven Englishmen, who, in an open boat at the
mercy of the waves, and reduced to the hast extremity for want of
food, resolved to decide by lot, who should be killed to serve as food
for the rest. The poor creature upon whom the kit fell, suffered
himself to be strangled without resistance: and the remaining Six
for awhile quenched their thirst and appeased their hunger, by drink-
ing human blood and feeding upon human flesh. Providentially
reaching land in safety, the matter was brought into a Court of Law:
when the Court instantly declared this to be a ease of extremity,
tacitly exempted from municipal law.
Again, respecting cases of Self-defence. Self-preservation being
the first law of nature, the right to self-defence, where danger is
imminent, can never be nullified by the laws of society. In every
land, rude or civilized, that primeval right is recognized as a rule of
action, paramount to all subsequent edicts or regulations. So by the
Law of England, even Homicide if committed se defendendo, or in
order to preserve either life or limb, is accounted guiltless; the rea-
son of extenuation in this case, and in that of seizing upon another's
provision when suffering from extreme destitution, being identically
OF NECESSITY. 13
the same, viz: That whatever is done to preserve life or limb, is an
involuntary act, or done upon the highest necessity and compulsion.
And an involuntary act, as it has no claim to merit, so neither, says
Blackstone, can it induce any guilt. In a case of necessity, more-
over, there is no vitious will, and it is the vitious will combined with
*lawful action, which only can constitute a crime. Although ab-
stractedly, considered, actions may be unlawful; yet, when com-
mitted as it were through unavoidable compulsion, and under circum-
stances in which the excited feelings of human nature are irresistible,
they are by Natural Law, and by the customs and laws of rude and
of civilized nations, accounted guiltless. (“Blackstone Comm.”)
The purport of one branch of the celebrated defence of Miló Was,
that he who kills another in self-defence, violates no law ; but, on
the contrary, fulfils that primary law of nature, self-preservation;
consequently, acts conformably to the laws expressed or implied,
of every community. The public welfare demands that life should
be respected, as of supreme importance; consequently, it is in the
intendment of law, that where the necessity seems manifest, violence
may, without the intervention of executive authority, be forcibly
and offensively repelled, even to the death of the aggressor.
Thus, breaches of the peace, the breaking into, or the pulling
down of a neighbour's house, are justifiable; and even Homicide itself
is, by the law of England, accounted guiltless, when motives of self-
preservation irresistibly impel to their commission. Would it not,
then, be partial and absurd in the highest degree, for the law to
admit the right of self-preservation, even to the killing of an aggres-
sor—to admit the right of slaying a fellow-being for food, upon the
high seas—to admit the right to break into and pull down a neigh-
bour's house, in a case of fire; and to refuse to recognize the right
of self-preservation when it makes, in a case of necessity, that com-
paratively infinitely insignificant demand of some small portion of
the superfluity of another
Blackstone affecting with Hale, to believe the Law of England to
be more merciless, than the Law of any other civilized State, chooses
silently to disregard the high authority of Lord Bacon, which abso-
lutely and unequivocally refutes his unsupported assertions. He,
indeed, who scrupled not to misquote the Scriptures, in order to
adapt them to his own iniquitous deductions, would feel little com-
punction at suppressing the knowledge which he must have pos-
sessed, of the high legal authorities directly disproving his assump-
tions.
According to Staundford, it was the English Law, That—To stead
victuals to preserve life was not felony. This, adds Staundford, has
become obsolete; because it is supposed that the Poor Laws prevent
any such extremity. Merely obsolete, be it remarked; and for this rea-
son—That a case of extremity could not arise. But if it should come
to pass, that the Laws presumed to be inforce for the relief of the Poor
should be so amended, as to throw insuperable obstacles in the way of
the indigent—if they should be so amended as to require the sacrifiee of
personal liberty, of those absolute rights, which Blackstone declares,
14 THE RIGHTS
no human legislature has power to destroyor to abridge,”—as to convert
the expected relief into a matter of debt, punishable by subsequent
confiscation,--as to demand as a condition of relief, the suppression
of the best affections of human nature, if it should come to pass that
amended Poor Laws, of so execrable a character should be in force,
pretending to relieve, but virtually denying relief, even in cases of
extremity;-Is the English Law, as laid down by Lord Bacon and
others, then to be deemed obsolete Pf"
This declaration of Staundford, which accords with the law as
laid down by Lord Bacon, is fully confirmed by that ancient Law-
book of unquestioned authority, the “Mirroir des Justices;” a
work, frequently referred to and quoted by Blackstone, upon other
occasions; but studiously concealed by him from view, when bent
upon disputing the right of the famishing poor, to save themselves
from utter destruction,-even should the mutilated law prove too
weak a defence against the sordid and cruel stratagems of avarice,
chicanery, and persecution. The “Mirroir” says, (Ch. 4. § 16)—
“If poor people to avoyd famine take victuals to sustaine their lives,
or clothes that they dye not of cold, (so that they perish if they
keepe not themselves from death;) they are not to be adjudged to
death, if it were not in their power to have bought their victuals and
clothes; for as much as they are warranted so to doe by the Law of
nature.”; (See also 12th Rich. 2.-4th Hen. IV.-Foster in Bur,
Rep. 450.)
* Upon a motion of the Bishop of Exeter, Lord Melbourne is reported to have
said, in allusion to the incarceration of the poor in that “one establishment,
proved,” (says the Chronicle, May, 28, 1838,) “to be as flexible and efficient, as
it is simple and economical,”—relative to this very fearible instrument of oppres-
sion, this inflexible Lord remarked, that “he would recommend to the Commis-
sioners as a general rule, that not only should not the inmates of a workhouse
be allowed to go out on Sunday, but that they should not be allowed to go out
at all !” Alas ! the bow is sometimes drawn too tight !—
But sounds prophetic, are too rough to suit
Ears long accustomed to the pleasing lute! .
Lord Melbourne, when advocating stringent measures against the vulgar desti-
tute, should recollect the pretty lines of Horace,—
facili sevitia negat,
- Quoe poscente magis gaudeat eripil
—neatly expressed by Despreaux,
Quimollement resiste, et par un doux caprice,
Quelquefois le refuse, afin qu'on le ravisse !
f Amendment and Reform are terms of mystification, found to be very service-
able in the operation of throwing dust into the eyes of the unreflecting. Com-
menting upon the confiscation of the Abbeys by Henry 8th, Lord Coke remarks,
(4 Inst. 44.) “your pretence of putting downe Abbays, was to amend that which
was amisse in them. &c. . . . see how that was amisse was amended, for all the
godly pretences ! It is amended as the devil amended his dam's legge, (as it is in
the proverb,) when he should have set it right, he brake it quite in pieces. The
monkes gave too little almesse... but now where £20 was given yearly to the poore
in more than 100 places. in Ingland, is not one meles meat given I This is a
faire amendment!” -
£ At Worship-street, Police-Office, a father and son in a most distressing state
of destitution, were charged with stealing two pairs of trowsers. Upon searching
the room occupied by the prisoners it was found to be without any, the slightest
OF NECESSITY. 15
The Law-Book, also, which goes by the name of Britton, (com-
piled in the time of Edward 1st) is frequently upon other matters
referred to by Blackstone, in his “Commentaries:” but upon a vital
point, this legal authority is also cautiously passed over unnoticed.
Strange oblivion I since that work affords incontrovertible evi-
dence, that the doctrine of Blackstone is as unwarranted by ancient
law, as it is untenable in reason and justice. The passage from
“Britton” in the original Norman-French, is as follows: (Ch. 10.)—
“Sunt tenus burgessours trestous ceux, que felonisement en temps
de pees debrusent esglisses ou autur mesous, ou murs ou portes de
mos cytes, ou de nos burghes: hors pris enfauntz dedans age, et
poures, que, pur feyn, entret pur ascun vitaille de meindre value
q'de aii. deners, et hors pris fous nastres, et gens arrages, et autres
que seuent nule felonie faire.” Which passage has been thus trans-
lated:—Those are to be deemed burglars, who feloniously, in time of
peace, break into churches, or houses, or through walls, or doors of
our cities, or our boroughs: with erception of children under age, and
of poor people, who, for hunger, enter to take any sort of victuals of
less value than 12 pence :” (and be it noticed that 12 pence in the
reign of Edward l. when Britton compiled this work would purchase
an ox :) and eacept idiots and mad people, and others that cannot com-
mit felony.” 4.
Notwithstanding, then, the assertions of Hale and Blackstone, it
is apparent that the Law of England ever was and ever must be, in
merciful accordance with humanity and justice, and with the doc-
trines of revealed religion.* And, indeed, in opposition to the dicta
of these two law authorities, it has never ceased to be the common
sentiment of theologians, that in cases of necessity it is not theft to
take food belonging to others. So amongst the Lacedemonians,
according to the laws of Lycurgus, in a case of necessity, a man was
justified in making use of the slaves, the cattle, or the provisions of
others. And, says Grotius, We are not to justify the act, under
a plea that the owner ought to be bound by the Law of Charity :
but because, in such cases, the primitive community of property
reverts to the necessitous. Man, says Euripedes, possesses nothing
as his own: he is but the administrator of the goods of heaven.
His property in worldly things is but an usufruct, says Seneca,
(Consol. ad Marc. Cap. w/ and Philo. (Treatise upon the Cherubins.)
And further, Necessity, says Seneca, is superior to all law ; and
—“ quicquid coegit, defendit”—justifies whatever it compels.
To the same effect are the arguments of Pufendorff: excepting
that he attaches more weight to the Imperfect Law or Obligation of
article of furniture. The poor creature had a wife and six children: in the room
was a substitute for a bed for the younger children, consisting of dried potatoe
pealings The magistrate discharged the prisoners. (Morning-Post. Jan.'
29, 1839.)
* Wide postea; Ordinances, in violation of Natural Law, or of the Laws of
God, are not Laws, but Corruptions; consequently void in themselves, by what-
ever authority enacted. Moreover, it has, no matter by what means, long been
held as a maxim of English Law, that Christianity is a part and parcel thereof.
16 THE RIGHTS
Charity.* Whoever, says he, has faith in God, cannot reasonably
doubt, that being absolute Lord over our life, which He has granted
for our enjoyment, He cannot have imposed upon his creatures,
Laws so inviolable, that they can never in the slightest degree in-
fringe upon them, even when death must be the consequence of a
strict adherence (Lib. 2 Ch. 6.) And he proceeds to remark, that
human institutions being established for the safety, or the well-being
of man, must have respect to the frailty of human nature, and to the
invincible instinct which urges every created being, to avoid whatever
seems to threaten destruction. Consequently, cases of necessity
must form tacit exceptions to all laws: laws being no longer obli-
gatory, when some evil destructive of our nature, is impending; or a
trial of such severity, as to overpower the ordinary fortitude of the
human mind. The objection,--That the direst necessity will not force
a wise and virtuous man voluntarily to commit a dishonest act, since
(in the words of Cicero, De Offic. Lib, 3) “suum cuique incommodum
ferendum est potius, quam de alterius commodis detrahendum ;”
—this objection, Pufendorff treats with the inattention it merits;
merely remarking, that a man may enact the part of a very fine phi-
losopher, whilst happily reposing at his ease.
In all human institutions, says Velthuysen, (“ De principiis justi
&c, p. 100. et seq.) extreme Necessity forms a tacit exception: in
such a case the natural right of all over all things, regains its original
force. It is not that misfortune creates a new right: it is the mag-
nitude of the danger which annihilates the condition under which
the common right had been abandoned.—An argument, not incon-
sistent with religion, reason, justice, and good policy, like the strained
conception of Cicero ; who, indeed, expressly denies that a wise man
can be justified, even though famishing with want, in taking with-
out permission, even a bare sufficiency from the superfluity of
another; his argument being, that... “non enim mihiest vita mea
utilior, quam animi talis adfectis, neminem ut violem commodi mei
gratia.” (De Offic. Lib. 3. C. 6.) It is palpable sophistry to con-
found necessity with personal convenience or advantage. Extreme
and extraordinary cases are not mensurable by ordinary rules: and
dangerous must it be to theorize in matters such as these.t
It is laid down by Hobbes, (“Da Cive, Cap, 1.)—That the first
* The duty of charity is but an imperfect obligation. But in Ewtreme
Necessity, the nature of this obligation is changed; so that beneficence may be
rigorously exacted, as though due by virtue of a perfect right; that is to say, the
assistance of a Magistrate may be required; or if the exigency be great, the
things necessary may be seized, either secretly or by open force. . . . If there-
fore a mean and merciless mind is insensible to human sympathy, if the
inhumanity of the rich is not to be softened by entreaty, are the destitute to die
of hunger ? Certainly not; but since the rich savage, will not voluntarily dis-
charge the duties of humanity, it is just that he should lose at the same time,
both his property and his title to gratitude. (Pufend. Lib: 2. 6, 6)
§ Speculators, trace their Utopian schemes upon Paper. Fools read and
believe them. . All are babbling about general happiness, and presently the people
have aot bread to eat; then comes a revolution I-Such is usually the fruit of all
these fine theories l—Nap. Buonaparte.
Ö F NECESSITY. 17
foundation of Natural Law, consists in the preservation of life and
limb. Whence he deduces, that as it would be vain to have a right
to the end, without a right to the means, every one may legitimately
use every means to ensure his preservation. And it follows, he adds,
that by Natural Law, every man is permitted in the last resort, to
determine for himself whether the means he contemplates be neces-
sary for self-preservation.
Moreover, to render any law obligatory, it is indispensable that
Means, Occasion, and Power, be present: neither of which can be
said to be possessed by one whose faculties are annihilated by the
agony of his situation. To extinguish self-love and the desire of
existence, does unquestionably exceed the power of the human mind.
And yet, in defiance of these almost self-evident truths, in de-
fiance of good policy, and of right reason,-in defiance of the first
principles of justice and humanity,+in defiance of the Law of
England, the Laws of Nature and of (tod, has Mr. Malthus made
the ruthless suggestion, that the poor should—“be rigidly denied all
parish assistance, and be told that the laws of nature had doomed
him and his family to starve”! And like the so-called Economists of
the present day, regarding man as brute-matter or as an animal of
voracious habits, rather than as a moral agent, has Mr. Malthus, (in
the very teeth of those innumerable Scriptural precepts which he
had been ordained to teach,) impiously presumed to assert, that—
“They (the poor) have no right to the smallest portion of food : and
in fact have no business to be where they are.” (Malthus on Po-
pulation.) And this, notwithstanding the Scriptures declare that
there always must be poor, that the poor “shall never cease out of
the land;” and which therefore, “ command that the hand shall be
opened wide unto the poor and the needy in the land.” In vain you
object the heartlessness and inconsistency of such heresies,—
Their still-refuted quirks they still repeat,
New-raised objections with new quibbles meet.
To urge to oppression and extermination of the poor, after the
fashion of Mr. Malthus and the Political Economists, implies in effect
disbelief of the Scriptures ; to expect to compel the Poor to “cease
out of the land,” even by means of expulsion and exile, (termed emi-
gration, (*) and by the aid of despotic and nefarious tests, is but to re-
* While scourged by famine from the pinching land,
The mournful pauper leads his starving band 1
“Emigration,” said, Lord Brougham, “should be looked upon as a sovereign
remedy for the distresses of Ireland, and should by all possible and safe means
be encouraged to the utmost.” (Wide Morning Chronicle, April 25th, 1837.)
Transport the people together with their distresses, and unquestionably you
remove the distresses; you cut off the limb because your empiricism is incapable
of effecting a cure!, Hustle the poor out of the land of their birth, and you may
safely affirm that they are not there to complain: and you may about as safely
affirm, that the producing causes of poverty remaining, precisely the same number
of wretched beings will in due time appear, to occupy the vacancies of those
whom you have, with economical and philosophical sagacity, transported ſ—“In
countries, sending their children to found Colonies, it has been found that such
drain instead of diminishing, augments the population of the mother country:
- C
18 THE RIGHTS
semble the rustic waiting upon the bank,+for the river to run dry
6 & g e º gº at ille
Labitur et labetur, in omne volubilis aevum !”
—and to maintain that the scheme of humanity compels to such op-
pression, is to distrust and impugn the justice, the foresight, and the
goodness of the All-Wise. (*) To fabricators of political chimeras,
and the frightful waste of human life in Ireland does not retard the multiplication
of the people.” (Dr. Doyle.) How sovereign a remedy for Irish distress :
The Emigrants, however, were not likely to be troublesome a second time. The
Medieal Report of the Quebec Emigrant Hospital declares, that—“The Emi-
grants, obliged frequently to be out all night in the streets and on wharfs, cause
most distressing spectacles, many of them dying in the streets l’’ Those trouble-
some things, therefore, which constitute surplus-population, must never think of
being troubled with that old complaint, the maladie-de-pays / The little tiger of
Juvenal wished to return home :—
“Suspirat longo non visam tempore matrem,
“Et casulam, et notos tristis desiderat haedos;”
—and the dying Grecian, in the moment of victory,
“Dulces moriens reminiscitur Argos;––
but the young tiger and the Argive had never heard of “ dietary scales,” such as
those are blessed with, who dare to dislike the transatlantic lands of milk and
honey. The high walls and sight-denying windows of an Union-Workhouse,_
instead of the “casula;”—and the Bridgewater gruel and skilly, (Wide Evidence,
958, before the Lords, 1838,) as a wholesome succedaneum for the “milk-bringing
kids,” are efficient flewibie instruments for banishing the troublesome symptoms of
a maladie-de-pays '
Concerning the very sea sworthy vessels in which deluded Emigrants are packed
off, vide particulars in the Newspapers of December, 1838, relative to the
“Asia,” Emigrant Ship, obliged to put into the Hamoaze, Devonport, in a leaky
state; the Emigrants, many of them in a very sickly state, being placed in a hulk,
whilst the thorough repairs found necessary were being completed in the Queen's
Dock. The boatswain reperted her rotten ; a statement contradicted by the
“Authorities.” She was furnished, nevertheless, with an entire new set of
tree-nails, amounting to near 10,000, &c., &c.; and even then, it was uncertain
whether the Secretary of State would suffer her to proceed upon her voyage.
The shipwrecks of other Emigrant vessels, and the frightful sufferings and loss
of life off the Coast of France and elsewhere, must be fresh in recollection.
It was proved in evidence, (Jan. 1839,) before the Magistrates of Bow-street,
that a poor woman had had her only child transported to the Cape of Good
Hope (under the name of “Emigration,”) against the will of her afflicted
mother; who, in her anguish of mind, exclaimed that she would rather have
begged through the world, than have had her child relentlessly torn from her
She fell upon her knees before the Magistrates, imploring to have her child
restored. With the callousness and cruelty too natural to parish hirelings, these
hirelings, instead of commiserating the unhappy mother and instantly proceeding
to effect the restoration of the child to its parent, told her, adding insult to
injury, that they were willing to transport her also Blackstone, indeed, declared
that “no person on earth, except the Authority of Parliament can send any
subject of England out of the land against his will, no, not even a criminal:”
but Blackstone wrote before the commencement of the crusade against Poverty.
Moreover, there are various ways of overcoming an obstinate will: there is the
“silencing” plan of the Rev. Mr. Whately, after-mentioned: and, in the words of
the Marquis Clanricarde, there is “ the putting of the destitute poor upon that
system of living by which it was just possible to keep body and soul together,”
—most effectual modes of extracting voluntary consent.
* “In general the basest servility to wealth and power, distinguishes the school
(of Political Economists :) and to assist the rich in oppressing the poor with
QF NECESSITY, 19
such as thºse overweening Economists, well might the Satirist ex-
claim, L
Reform thy creed, and with an humbled mind,
Confess that Heaven is neither deaf nor blind!
In merciless unison with the exterminating tenets of the writer
upon “Population,” the whole of whose tyrannic doctrines he osten-
tatiously extolled, has the present generation witnessed a high Func-
tionary engaged in denouncing all institutions, having for their ob-
ject the relief and aid of the forlorn and destitute. Eulogizing both
Malthus and his new-fangled doctrines, this functionary has ventur d
to affirm, moreover, that—“All legal provision for the poor in what-
ever shape and under whatever name, is wrong,”—(*) and then, under
the not very erudite pretence that those Rights, which every writer
upon Law admits to be imperishable and inalienable, under the very
curious assumption that those Absolute Rights have been created by
a Parliament, has this same functionary affirmed, that—“The Poor
have no right to relief, other than what is given by Act of Parliament;
and of course that which the Parliament can give, the Parliament can
take away.” Ensor remarks that the most rapacious generally prove
to be the most heartless: the most unworthy and (cleverly perhaps,
self-made,) the greatest of pensioners, will frequently in histrionic
exhibitions, assume the mask of austere economy, when the laborious
and helpless cry for pity and relief. (f) And so in the Odyssey,
greater effect and more plausibility, appears to be the main object and end of its
sophistical or wicked dogmas.” (Sir R. Phillips.) Their nostrums are tender,
modest, and methodical. Devoid of all unseemly self-sufficiency, they beg to be
allowed to regard the rest of the human race as corporeal machinery or as a bel-
luine class of carniverous habits, intruders in a land by providence exclusively
destined to beings of vast intellectual caliber, like themselves; who, alone fruges
consumere nati, and in cute curanda ever most diligently occupied, must suffer
disagreeable privations, if a wholesome check be not imposed upon the introduc-
tion into and continuance in this crowded world, of beings of a grade so immea-
surably inferior to their own. As long, however, as the locomotive instruments
in question, can augment the general produce, the only regulation required is,
to prevent their ignorantly retaining the smallest portion of that produce for their
own vulgar use. “Obsequium ventris istis perniciosius est.” Attention to bo-
dily wants upon the part of things like these, is most mischievous and insolent /
“There is a party amongst us, distinguished in what is called the science
of Political Economy, who wish to substitute the corn of Poland for our
own. Their principle is, that you ought always to buy where you can buy
cheapest. Wealth is the only object of their speculation: nor do they much
consider the two or three millions of people who may be reduced to utter beggary,
in the course of their operations. This they call—Diverting capital into another
channel ! Their reasonings lie so much in abstract terms, their speculations
deal so much by the gross, that they have the same insensibility about the suffer-
ings of a people, that a General has &c. (Lord J. Russell, to the Farmers of
Huntingdon, 1822.) -
* There was nothing original in this : Peter had said the same long before.
“A plague of your Jehosaphats,” cried Peter, “the greatest fault in our Con-
stitution is the provision made for the poor—except, perhaps, that made for
some others l’ Joseph ANDREws.
† “As for the niggard, his instruments are evil:
He plotteth mischievous devices:
To entangle the humble with lying words;
And to defeat the assertions of the poor in judgment l”
Lowth's Isaiah, 32. 7.
20 THE RIGHT &
“Thou woulds’t not grant the poor a grain of salt
“From thy own board, who at another's, fed
“So nobly—”
Now the Poor have, as is demonstrated by the writers upon Natural
Law, an innate right wholly independent of Acts of Parliament: and
assuredly were it otherwise, the power of a Parliament to resume, is
not necessarily consequential upon the power of a Parliament to be-
stow. In many cases such a notion would imply belief in impossibi-
lities: it would be absurd. In others, it might with as much pro-
priety be contended, that a free gift could be resumed at any future
time, at the will of the donor. In this particular case, the gift, as
... it is improperly termed, was no gift at all: it was the mere recogni-
tion in Statutes of a Parliament, of one of those Absolute Rights of
man, which the Law of Nature had previously rendered indefeisible,
—not to be destroyed, not even to be abridged, (as Blackstone shows,)
by any earthly power. Its recognition by a fallible heterogeneous
Parliament,
Where flails of oratory thrash the floor,
That yields them chaff and dust, if nothing more;
or by any human legislature, conferred not the slightest additional
validity upon this right: and therefore neither very learned nor very
rational can it be, to pretend that the Parliament can take away that,
which it would be purely a work of supererogation in any Parlia-
ment to affect to grant. The declaration of Blackstone upon this
point is clear and decisive ; and one would have thought that no
lawyer would have been ignorant of the fact. “Those rights which
God and nature have established, called therefore natural rights,
such as are life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws, to be
more effectually invested in every man than they are ; neither do they
receive any additional strength when declared by the municipal laws
to be inviolable. On the contrary, no human legislature has power to
abridge or destroy them, unless the owner shall himself commit some
act that amounts to a forfeiture.” (Int, $ 2.) And concerning the
force of the Natural Law which confers those Rights, the learned
Hooker remarks, that—“Laws human must be made according to the
general laws of nature, and without contradiction to any positive
Law of Scripture;”—whilst Locke declares, that—“The Law of
Nature stands an eternal rule to all men : to legislators as well as to
others.” Whatever human laws are at variance with the laws of
nature, are void in themselves: and very aptly to the subject, does
Noyes, in his celebrated “Marims of English Law” allude to this
possible illegality of human ordinances. “If a Statute were made
directly contrary to the Law of God; as, for instance, if it were
enacted that no one should give alms to any object in ever so neces-
sitous a condition, such an act would be void. (*) And thus may we
appreciate the wit and profundity of the ad captandum assertion, that,
—º
* Such was the Statute, (27 Hen. 8. cap. 25.) which enacts that “no person
shall make any open or common dole, nor shall give any money in alms, but to
OF NECESSITY. 21
—“The Pocrbave no right other than what is given by Act of Par-
liament, and what the Parliament can give, the Parliament can take
away.”
In equally strong terms do other high authorities contemptuously
reject the idle conceit of omnipotence of Parliament: (*) and condemn
the inhumanity and folly of those, who, from marrow-minded huckster-
like considerations, would relax the bonds of society, outrage the
best feelings of human nature, and drive the necessitous to acts of
violence, desperation, and revenge. The preservation of mankind
being, says Locke, the fundamental law of nature, no human sanction
can be good or valid against it. And, because a Parliament may
have embodied in a municipal law, that “fundamental law of
nature,” is it very sagacious to pretend that a Parliament can annul
or impair laws, which (as Locke shows,)—“stand an eternal rule to
all men, to legislators as well as to others.” . The preservation of
every member of the body politick, is a debt due from the State —
The State, says Montesquieu, owes to every one, proper nourishment,
convenient clothing, and a kind of life not incompatible with health. (t)
the common boxes and gatherings in every parish, on pain of forfeiting 10 times
as much.” The same by 23. Ed. 3., repealed in the time of Ed. 6. In the
reign of Henry 7, Empson and Dudley were hanged, for enforcing an Act of Par-
liament which was not law, but a “corruption.” -
* Nobly did the present Lord Chief Justice Denman, vindicate the pre-
eminence of the Law, attempted to be overborne by a réformed Parliament and a
Whig Attorney-General, under the idle and arrogant plea, of privilege ºf Par-
liament. “I am not aware,” said Lord Denman, (Stockdale v. Hansard,
Feb. 1837,) “ of the existence, in this country, of any body whatever which can
“privilege any servant of theirs to publish libels on any individual. Whatever
“ arrangements may be made between the House of Commons and any pub-
“ lishers whom they may employ, I am of opinion, that the person who publishes
“ that in his shop, and especially for money, which can be injurious and possibly
“ ruinous to any one of his Majesty's subjects, must, if challenged, answer in a
. . Court of Justice for that Libel. I wish to say so emphatically and distinctly ;
“ because I think, that if, on the first opportunity that arose in a Court of
... Justice on such a question, the point were to be left unsatisfactorily explained,
“ the Judge who sat there, might become an accomplice in the destruction of
“ the liberties of his country, and expose every individual who lived in it, to a
“ tyranny to which no man ought to submit.” This was a common-sense and
constitutional estimate of “Omnipotence of Parliament:” the fearful menace of
an interdict from a Whig Attorney-General, and a Secretary of State, great as
would be its terrors, could not make that law, which was grossly illegal and a
gross perversion of justice and reason. “Wherever violence is used and injury
ãone, though by hands appointed to administer justice, it is still violence and
injury, however coloured under the name, pretences, and forms of law.”—
(£ocke on Government.) The said Attorney-General has recently (Jan. 1839)
warned the Chief-Justice, that he shall find it necessary to inflict upon the Court,
during two whole days, his two years collection of arguments to prove—that
violence and injury are no longer violence and injury, when—perpetrated by a
House of Commons /
# The State does not always satisfy its obligations. A Committee of the
House of Commons reported in 1834, that—“The sufferings of the hand-loom
weavers are not only not exaggerated, but they have for many years continued to an
extent and intensity scarcely to be credited or conceived; and have been borne
with a degree of patience unexampled.” Five years have elapsed, and still there
22 THE RIGHTS
This reasonable claim upon the State, though denied to suffering
humanity, by—
Potent quacks, long versed in human ill,
Who first insult the victim whom they kill,
has been by public sanction universally recognized, in all climes,
through all ages, wherever civilization has spread a single ray of light.
There are but few human beings even individually to be found, to
contend that the distressed and helpless should be condemned to
sink unrelieved into the grave; the perishing victims of disease and
want; and, innocent of all crime, wretched outcasts in a land
asserted to be overflowing with wealth : (*) amidst perfect refinements,
amidst the “splendour of arts and sciences, amidst the doctrines and
enforcements of Christianly love,” amidst the most ardent professions
of humanity and piety (t) Even in Hindoostan the wretched victims
of a frantic superstition are scarcely worse treated. Mrs. Graham
says, (“Residence in India,”)—“When a man becomes infirm, or
has a dangerous illness, if his relations have the slightestinterest in his
death, they take him to the banks of the river, set his feet in the
water, and stuffing his eyes and mouth with mud, leave him to
perish ; which he seldom does without a hard struggle.”
In allusion to the indescribable miseries of the poor of Ireland,
where no Parliament has interfered to protect the right of all to their
existence, (f) the common gift of God; and where the heartless heresy
has prevailed, that—“all legal provision is wrong,”—where, con-
sequently, the miserable natives are doomed to stave off the gnawings
of hunger by draff and sea weed, “ and frequently to perish in num-
bers” (according to the Report of a Committee of the House of
Commons) “from absolute want,” — in allusion to the frightful
sufferings of these Irish poor, driven by those sufferings to become
the servile tools of demagogues, and upon whom, says the German
Historian, Raumer, the very beasts of the field look down with scorn—
in allusion to these a writer in the Quarterly Review, thus apostro-
phised the sordid philosophers, who desired to see equal insensibility
to human woe, authorized and enforced in England, also, by Act of
sufferings, bespeaking a state of things so miserably at variance with the just and
rational doctrine of Montesquieu, continue unmitigated, or rather, augmented in
intensity. Concerning the sufferings of other classes see the latter part of
“Note 2.”—800,000 hand-loom weavers are said to be subsisting upon wages
which give them, upon an average, less than 4d. a day !
* “It cannot be questioned that there is in this country, sufficient expenditure
upon unproductive luxuries, to supply every reasonable want of the poor.
Enough' is spent in spirituous liquors to maintain all the poor in the land, with-
out the levying of a single rate.”—Rev. T. Dale.
t “Et apres avoir parcoura tous les pays, vous reviendrez, sachant qu'il u’y
a nulle part un pauvre petit coin de terre ou votre femme en travail puisse
enfanter son premier n'e; oil vouse puissiez reposer apres votre labeur; oil,
arrivé au dernier terme, was enfants puissent enfouer vos os, comme dans un lieu
qui soit a vous.”
# Some “Statute” was made, in 1838, for constructing a certain number of
Xºlour. in Ireland; called by some, an Act for the relief of the Irish
(20?”. -
OF NECESSITY. 23
Parliament:—Ye, who full-fed, observes the Reviewer, with every
luxury, lift up your eyes and hands with indignation, at the atrocity
of the White-feet; say, what would be your feeling, what your
conduct, if your share of the blessings of civilization, order, and a
paternal government, amounted to no more than a leaky shed for
shelter, rotten straw to lie upon, a tarpaulin for a covering to you
and fifteen others, and what dry potatoes you could beg or steal, to
stave off the gnawings of famine ! The wonder surely is, not that
men become monsters under such circumstances,—that they make
war upon the world and the world's law which neglects and
oppresses them,--that being left to the destitution of the savage,
they exhibit his disposition, adopt his system of self-preservation,
and disregard the first principles of society No! the wonder is,
that philosophers are found, audacious enough to maintain that such
suffering should remain unrelieved (*)
That sufferers from extreme want must be urged by an irresistible
impulse to disregard the first principles of society, and be driven to
the commission of crime, has ever been manifest to all but Political
Economists. In the minds of these, insensibility and profligacy
must be the invariable concomitant of poverty; (t) by these, the poor
are classed as convicted criminals upon the sole evidence of their
destitution : (i) and even when the injustice of such assumptions is
—-
* Dr. Powell, in his evidence before the Irish Commissioners, says, speaking
of his own parish,_“I am quite sure many scores of sick perish every year for
“ want of proper sustenance. Our diseases themselves are evidently caused by
“cold, hunger, and nakedness The poor man on regaining his appetite, finds
“nothing to eat : a little food would restore him, but he sinks for want of it.”
(p. 296.) Dr. Walsh, says, “I have frequently found the sick lying on the
“bare damp ground, without any covering ; straw being considered a luxury
“which the pig only, who pays the rent, has the right to enjoy.”—(p. 303.)
In the dearth of proper food, the substitutes resorted to are various. They
“lie in bed all day to stifle the hunger.” Unwholesome shell-fish, weeds,
especially the wild-mustard or “pressagh,”—a coarse plant which grows amongst
the corn, and which “turns their skin to a yellow colour,” (p. 362) and boiled
nettles, are commonly eaten in lieu of, or to eke out an insufficient stock of
potatoes. They bleed the cattle, and eat the boiled blood. (p. 379.)
f To those calumniators of the poor, whose ideas of the habits, feelings, and
propensities of the labouring classes are derived, not from observation of facts,
but from the misrepresentation of theoretical ignorance and malignity, the opinion
of Sir Anthony Carlisle, will be novel. “I am of opinion,” said Sir Anthony,
“ that the natural affections of the industrious classes are more pure, more sin-
“ cere, and more active than those of the educated classes. I have witnessed
“sacrifices on the part of people in the lowest condition of life, which I never
“ saw among people artificially brought up from early life : the habits of simu-
“lation and dissimulation in our manners, are totally different from the in-
“stinctive feeling and natural affections cherished among uneducated children
“ and parents: the yearnings of those classes after their progeny, and their filial
“ affections, disparage the heartless manners and cold morals, which too often
“ prevail in fashionable life.”
† “Crimes,” said, Burke, “are the acts of individuals and not of classes: to
class men under general descriptions, in order to proscribe and punish them in
the lump for a presumed delinquency, is compendious : but, instead of being
law, is an act of unnatural rebellion against the legal dominion of reason and
justice.”
24 THE RIGHTS
made manifest, yet, rather than tolerate isolated cases of fraud or
improvidence, these remorseless sophists would plunge myriads into
the most desperate state of wretchedness, perpetuate vagrancy and
crime, Lendanger the peace and property of all classes,—stimulate to
incendiarism, (*) and risk the wholesale destruction of life, con-
demning the rich,
Vigilare exanimem, noctesque diesque,
Formidare malos fures, incendia, servos
To watch half-dead with fear, and feel at hand,
The peasant's vengeance, and the lighted brand 1
and condemning the poor to elect between death from want, or vio-
lent seizure of the property of others. Lord Hale has long since
said, -“Where there are many very poor, the rich cannot long or
safely remain rich.” Can it be politick to put in force a system by
which the very poor are to be treated with ignominy and insulting
cruelty; wives severed from their husbands, and children from their
parents, under the heartless new-fangled plea of classification ; de-
prived of their own cottages and fire-sides to herd with misery and
vice in a Lazar-house; (f) driving them to disregard, as the Reviewer
remarks, the first principles of society, or, to disregard the eternal
laws of God and nature, and suffer themselves and children to waste
by inches into the grave. “Skin for skin, yea all that a man hath,
will he give for his hfe.” (Job. 2. 24.)
Fortescue speaking of France, says (“On Monarchy,”)—“Whence
it seemeth that poverty hath been the whole or chief cause of all such
risings of the people.” Disaffection and turbulence are the usual
results of relentless treatment of the poor. Dion Cassius says (Lib.
xxxix. c, 0.) that distress frequently forced the people to insurrec-
tion. Cicero speaks of those—“Quos fames magis quam fama com-
* The Newspaper press has long teemed with accounts of the flagrant and
insane acts of incendiaries. The following are recent instances:—Incendiarism
at Lavenham. On Saturday evening, a barley-stack, from fourteen acres,
and a large clover-stack, on the farm of Mr. Abbott, were fired, apparently
in opposite directions; the whole of the former and greater part of the latter
being consumed. We regret to add that some of the labourers expressed
their gratification at the flames. (Times, Dec. 13th, 1838.) Again, Man-
chester, Dec. 11th, 1838. A fire broke out in the extensive Cotton-mill of
Mr. Jowett, of Ashton-under-Line, on Saturday night, by which one half of the
building and its machinery was totally destroyed; and nearly 400 people have
been thrown out of employment by it. The fire is supposed to be the work of
an incendiary. The ravages of the fire were evidently looked upon with satis-
faction by a large concourse of people, who, when asked, refused, with brutal
oaths, to assist at the Engines. 3.
f “Better is the life of a poor man in a mean cottage, than delicate fare in
another man's house.” (Eccl. xxix. 22.)—The Laws of England declare. that
husband and wife are inseparable, A regular marriage conformable to natural
Law and to the constitution of civil life, comprizes the engagement of the wife to
be constantly with her husband. Upon the observance of this sacred rule depend
the most essential ties of social life, and it is only for the expiation of crimes
against society, or of those of one against the other, that the law will permit of the
infraction of this rule. “A woman marrying a man who is settled in another
parish, changes her own settlement, the Law not permitting the separation of
husband and wife.” (Blackstone Comm.)
OF NECESSITY, 25
movit.” It is, indeed, poverty insulted and trampled upon, that has
been the immediate or indirect cause of political convulsions gene-
rally—in ancient Rome, in modern Italy,–in France, both ancient
and modern. Want and crime are almost inseparable : and it is the
general remark that with the spread of distress, keeps pace the
increase of wickedness. “Give me not poverty lest I steal,” said
the wise man : and we learn upon the authority of Pastoret, (“Loir
Civiles,” p. 3.) that of 900 criminals condemned annually in France
before the Revolution, 700 were absolutely destitute.(*) The commi-
* That poverty is the chief cause of crime seems self-evident—the annals of
crime sufficiently attest the fact. In 1803, the whole number of Commitments
in England and Wales was 3950,—in 1819, 14274,-in 1826, 17921,–in 1830,
18675,-in 1832, 20829,-in 1837,23612. Poverty is punished with the work-
house, and the Poor in general consider a workhouse and a prison, as synonimous.
Poverty therefore is not only exposed to temptation, but it begets desperation;
want and desperation combined, beget every description of crime. It would be
fatuity to expect morality and honesty amongst a people continually borne down
by want and misery. The Tables shewing from Official Returns the number of
criminal offenders in each County of England and Wales, in the year 1837,
exhibit an increase of 2628 offenders, or 125 per cent., as compared with
the year 1836. The analysis of this increase, shows it to be chiefly confined
to offences of the least atrocious character. Of offences against the person,
there has been a decrease of 12 per cent. but of offences committed by simple
theft or fraud, the increase has amounted to nearly 17 per cent. " In sheep-steal-
ing there has been a considerable increase in each of the last two years. In Simple
Larceny alone the increase exceeds 18 per cent.—the convictions being in 1835,
10184: in 1836, 10416: in 1837, 12379. The number of Executions in 1837
is far below that of any previous year upon record. Eight persons only were
executed, all convicted of murders of an atrocious character: but the sentences
of imprisonment for 6 months and under, amounted to 10258, being 2187
more than in the year 1835, and 1874 more than in the year 1836. The follow-
ing is a Summary of the offences in England and Wales, in 1837;-viz.
Offences against the person, including murder, manslaughter, assaults, &c. 1719
Offences against property committed with violence g * & . 1400
Offences against property committed without violence . g e . 18,884
Malicious offences against property . $º e tº sº º . 114
Forgery and offences against the currency . e tº . 456
Other offences not included in the above classes, being for the most part .
Riot, Breach of the Peace, and Pound-breach . g wº tº ... 1039
Total, 23,612
In 1837, eight persons were executed in all England and Wales, whilst in the
reign of Elizabeth, according to Strype, (“Annals,”) in Somersetshire alone in
one year 40 were executed, 37 flogged, and 183 discharged; and all on account
of offences occasioned by distress. r
That easy solution of every political evil, increase of population, will not suc-
ceed in this case : the most doting dreamer about this very dubious matter, will
scarcely fancy that in one year the population of England and Wales has increased
12 per cent! En passant, increase of population with diminution of the means of
existence, is a novelty in the history of nations. Hume, quoting Strype, remarks
(vol. iv. p. 327) that the universal feeling was “a diminution of the former plen-
ty, and a decay of people.” Later facts exhibit similar effects. When provi-
sions are dear the deaths are more, as the following Table will show :-
d
26 THE RIGHTS
seration and relief of distress manifestly redouble the security of the
rich : Necker said, (“Adminis. des Finances”) that the protection of
the people at large, and the defence in particular of the Poor, is an
Wheat p. Qr. average Deaths.
1801 . & tº . s. 118. 3 . & & . 55965
1804 . * g ... s. 60. 1 . & * . 44794
1807 . g & ... s. 73.3 . e { } . 48.108
1810 . § . s. 106. 2 . e . 54864
In the dear years of 1801 and 1810, the mortality exceeded by 84 per cent. the
cheaper years of 1804 and 1807. Ensor remarks that a dear year, unless at-
tended with extraordinary wages from some extraordinary demand, is always an
immoral year. Increase of Population does not account for the increased de-
generacy of the people: nor does it account for the increase of paupers. There
are other facts beside the following to controvert also this new fangled conception.
The following is however the result of an examination of the poor accounts of the
township of Leeds, Yorkshire, where, and in many other towns, the population
has inordinately increased at the expence of the country parts.
Population Paupers
1801 º * e . 30,669 . tº * > . 566
1811 . . . . 35,951 . . . . 599
1821 tº * & . 48,603 . & & . 1,110
1831 & . 71,602 . * tº . 1806
The inferences from this statement are obvious. Between 1801 and 1811, taxation
was not so great, the Debt was less, the poor therefore had better means of exis-
tence, and the paupers increased in a less ratio than the population. Between
1811 and 1831, the Debt was vastly increased; taxation became heavier; gold
payments of a debt contracted in paper, were attempted; the poor suffered from
severe pressure and want of employment; and the paupers increased threefold
ºmore than the population. (Ensor.) In most other times and places an increas-
ing population has been regarded as a blessing; and not as a curse, as it appears to
be viewed by Political Economists. The antipathy to plenty of people has sprung
up even since the time of Blackstone, for Blackstone deemed the imposing “res-
traints upon marriage, especially amongst the labouring class, to be evidently de-
trimental to the public, by hindering the increase of the people.” The Clergy-
man mentioned in the “Annual Register” for 1769 (p. 73) was a sincere adhe-
rent to the doctrine of Blackstone; on a benefice of 65l he contrived to have two
wives and twenty eight children; – Some who deny that increase of crime can be
ascribed to want and misery, make the discovery, that ignorance is the true cause.
By ignorance these persons mean, want of what is termed education; but
since for the last 20 or 30 years, the school educating of the poorer classes
has been extended to an incredible degree, a calculation will at once refute the
notion that increase of crime is to be ascribed to this species of ignorance. It
was said in 1835, that in the State of New York, 500,000 children out of
2,000,000, were at public schools at a cost per annum of 240,000l., whilst crime
was increasing. In Connecticut nearly one-third part of the population were
schooling, whilst crimes were multiplying to a frightful extent. From these facts,
the “Journal of Education ” drew the conclusion, that—“if knowledge cannot
be accused of causing this increase, at least it has not prevented it:” adding that
the only ascertained effect of intellectual education on crime, is, to substitute fraud
for force—the cunning of civilized, for the violence of savage life.—According to
an Essay on the Moral Statistics of France, presented to the Academy of Sciences,
the minimum of crime is to be found in the uneducated departments, the Wes-
term and Central provinces: and the maximum in Corsica, in Alsace, and in the
South-eastern provinces, where nearly half the population can read. (See some
remarks upon education in the “Life of Maimonides.”) In point of fact, it is not
the trash dealt out in national or many other schools, that can be called know-
ledge, or that can, under the absurd denomination of education, be expected to
diminish crime; the teaching of moral and religious duties must, to be effectual,
OF NECE$$ITY. 27
efficacious mode of augmenting the strength and prosperity of a
State. That which was imaginary in the time of Montaigne, has be-
come a horrid reality in these days. Montaigne tells us, (“Essais
Liv. 1. ch. 30) that when the Americans who visited France in the time
of Charles 9th were asked,—What, amongst the things they had seen,
had most surprized them They answered—We think it very strange
that whilst one set of people are fed with every luxury, the others,
famishing, should become beggars at their doors;– mendians a leurs
portes, decharnés defaim et de pauvreté : et trouvaient etrange comme
ces hommes ici necessiteur, pouvoient souffrir une telle injustice, qu'ils
ne prissent les autres a la gorge, ou missent le feu a leurs maisons.
Omitting all consideration of justice or humanity, can it be politick
to render the obtaining of food sufficient for the bare preservation of
existence, so degrading, so insulting, so painful, as to incite to cri-
minal violence,—to vindictive acts of incendiarism, of which England
is, for the first time in the history of the country, exhibiting insane
and shocking examples, –as to impel the destitute to flagrant breaches
of the laws of society,+and to generate malevolence and disaffection
amongst a large proportion of the population leading to the enter-
taining of feelings the very reverse of apprehension or regret at the
prospect of anarchy and devastation f Can it be politick “to beat the
people to pieces, and to grind the faces of the Poor,” (Isaiah), whilst
insidiously raising up insuperable impediments in the way of procu-
be managed in a manner very different to the operations, joint stock or otherwise,
of the grocer and the tallow-chandler | The Clergy at their Ordination solemnly un-
dertake “to instruct the people committed to their charge,” and declare that “they
will be ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away all erroneous and
strange doctrines contrary to God’s word; and to use private and public admoni-
tions and exhortations, as well to the sick as to the whole.” It is this species of
instruction combined with the instruction of the domestic fire-side, rather than
the spurious wares purveyed,— *
“By public hackneys in the schooling trade,”
which can alone be expected to prevent increase of crime; and even that can
be of little avail, where the common necessaries of life are wanting. — Coke
prophecied that when workhouses were established, neither beggar nor pauper
would be seen; the tables of crime for 1837, show, that if not seen, they are
Jelt. The vulgar tyrants of the workhouse know well how to make their
prison a flexible instrument of torture, a bugbear to terrify distress; whilst
Commissioners of Poor Laws declare this cruel instrument to be, their “main
reliance for the discouragement of pauperism l” The natural result is seen in the
Statistics of Crime since the passing of the Pauper-Act in 1834 The Rev. Mr.
Whately did not disguise the matter. This Reverend gentleman acknowledged
that he proceeded by a very plain route, to “silence” the famishing !—“Incidental
paupers could not be provided with work especially in the time of frost and snow;
and these were”—relieved, think you, in their necessities by this Minister of the
Gospel? Not so, indeed! These were, not relieved, but—“silenced by the offer
of the Workhouse ! ”—No wonder that this excellent pastor dispauperized, (as
the Commissioners termed it,) the Parish of Cookham in Berkshire . And no
wonder that his evidence was highly prized and commended; yet evidence more
vulgarly unfeeling and presumptuous never before insulted the public eye. Mr.
Sclater, (Chairman of the Basingstoke Union,) not professing to be a Christian
Minister, but being a man of feeling and a gentleman, affirmed, from the expe-
rience he had had throughout 37 parishes, that the “silencing” plan was—“not
only objectionable, but execrable.”
28 THE RIGHTS
ring relief, - the bare right to relief not being even nominally re-
cognized,—and to deprive the suffering poor of the power of appeal
to the local magistracy specially appointed to bring justice to the
doors of all.(*) Lord Wynford, in allusion to this dangerous cur-
tailment of the authority of the resident magistracy, this abrogation
of a salutary controlling power, exclaimed, - “I am struck with
horror, to think that the poor of this country should be placed at the
mercy of a central Board of Commissioners I’’. It would have been
wise in those who thus tyrannically despoiled the poor of the power
of obtaining justice or redress, even in their extreme destitution, to
have first bethought themselves of the possible and probable conse-
quences of thus virtually denying justice to those to whom delay
must be fatal. To command in words relief to be given, whilst de-
liberately and designedly making provision that those commands may
with impunity be set at nought, (and by the very persons interested
in setting them at nought,) is to add mockery to chicane and cruelty.
If there be no accessible and competent power to redress injury, at
that time when redress can alone be afforded, then is the bond of
society dissevered, and its individual members impelled, in the words
of the Quarterly Review, to disregard the first principles of the so-
cial union. “Want of a common judge with authority, (to appeal
to,) puts all men,” says Locke, “in a state of nature: force, without
right, upon a man's person makes a state of war, both where there
is and is not a common judge.” Time was when the state of war or
violence, alluded to by Locke, was deemed in the highest degree in-
jurious and perilous to the State :-" Nihilest enim exitiosius civita-
tibus, nihil tam contrarium juri et legibus, nihil minus civile quam
composità republicá, quidquam agi per vim.” (Cicero de leg. 3. 18.)
Every rightly-constituted mind must feel, that the Creator never
can permit of such self-abandonment, as would peril that life which
is His immediate gift. Hence it follows, that as man cannot be per-
mitted to abandon his own life, neither can he be permitted so to
submit himself to the will or order or law of others, as to invest them
with a power, actively or passively, of causing his destruction. The
peace and safety of society, indeed, require that none should suffer
extremity of want: humanity, justice, the fundamental principles
of society require above all things, proper, certain, and adequate
relief to be at all times within the reach of each of its members.
“Hoc maxime officii est, ut quosque maxime opis indigeat, ita ei
potissimum opitulari.” (Cic. de off. Lib. 1.) With very sufficient
reason, then, does Montesquieu declare, that to relieve the destitute
* “The magistrates tell us they can do nothing: the overseers tell us they can
do nothing, and we believe them : we know not where to apply for relief. We
have looked out for work, in vain; we have gone here and there, and can find
none ! But we must live. If we would consent to be starved ourselves, we must
not let our wives and children starve: this would not be right. We, therefore,
humbly entreat that you will visit our parish, and that, without delay, for hun-
ger, cold, and want, will not admit of delay : and we implore you to judge, as
between man and man, and as between yourselves and God, whether wé do not
require and deserve relief.”—Letter from the Paupers of Bledlow, in Buck-
inghamshire, to the Poor-Law-Commissioners.
OF NECESSITY. 29
is a primary and eternal obligation upon every state. The State, says
Montesquieu, owes to every one proper nourishment, convenient cloth-
ing, and a kind of life not incompatible with health. And that the
poor should not be made the victims of plausible chicanery and sor-
did sophistry, the Korān distinctly designates the proper clothing
and nourishment to be—not the gruel, nor the rich compound called
“Skilly,” of Union Workhouses, but—such food as ye yourselves eat,
and such raiment as ye yourselves are clothed with. The Judaic-Law
also, foreseeing the subterfuges and insidious stratagems that would
be employed to evade law and justice, declares that the simple fact of
a man being necessitous, shall entitle him to instant relief. “It is
because he is in want that thou art commanded to give unto him.”
(“Laws of the Hebrews,” Ch. 7.) And again, -“If a poor man who
is not known applieth, saying. —‘ I am an hungered, I pray thee
give me that I may eat;’—he shall not be examined to learn whether
he be a deceiver, but food shall be instantly given to him.” Imme-
diate and generous relief of the necessitous, without evasion, without
delay, and above all without inhuman and iniquitous “tests,” to to-
lerate the application of which must stamp with indelible disgrace,
any social community pretending to civilization : (*) such relief as
the benevolent Laws of the Hebrews conscientiously afforded, is what
right reason as well as humanity must ever dictate. “Reason,” says
Locke, “tells us that all men have a right to their subsistence, and
such other things as nature affords for their preservation :” and sub-
sequent pages will show that this Right has been either virtually or
absolutely recognized by the civilized and the uncivilized, from
England to Ethiopia—from the scattered and frozen natives of Green-
land, to the swarming sun-burnt multitudes of China.
And yet, labouring under a foolish and glaring error as to the
rights conferred by the eternal Laws of Nature—blind or callous to
the dictates of justice, humanity, and good policy:—and singularly
oblivious of those Scriptures which “with the dull service of the lip,”
he professed to teach;—Scriptures which denounce those who conceive
* “The members of the Board were very sage, and indeed, philosophical men;
and when they came to turn their attention to the workhouse, they found out
at once, what ordinary minds would never have conceived,—That the paupers,
liked it ! It was a regular place of public entertainment—a tavern where there was
nothing to pay—a public breakfast, dinner, tea, and supper, all the year round !
So they established the rule that all poor people should have the alternative—
(for they would compel nobody, not they !) of being starved by a gradual process
in the house, or by a quick one out of it. (Wide “Cirencester Dietary”) They
made a great many provident and humane regulations—undertook to divorce poor
married people without a suit in Doctors Commons—and instead of compelling
a man to support his family, they took his family away from him, and made him
a bachelor / They were long-headed men | Relief they declared inseparable from the
workhouse and the gruel; and that frightened people !” (Oliver Twist) And this
frightening of people and feeding upon gruel, had the beneficial effect of re-
ducing either the rates, or the population; especially when persevered in,
as at Bridgewater, notwithstanding the remonstrances of the medical men, that
diarrhoea was thereby and hereby produced, readering the whole workhouse infec-
tious and dangerous to human life. (See the Evidence before the Lords, 1838.)
30 TIHE RIGHTS
mischief, speak lies, and bring forth iniquity, and in whose doings there
is no justice,—Scriptures which threaten “woe unto them that decree
unrighteous decrees, to turn aside the needy from judgment, and to
take away the Right of the Poor,”—and which command that the
Poor be treated in the most considerate manner, solemnly repeating
again and again that signal vengeance shall be hurled upon those
who neglect or oppress them —under some delusion himself, or
criminally bent upon the deluding of others, did the obdurate Mal-
thus seriously recommend, that the poor should be told that their
fate in this world was to “starve;” that they “ had no right to the
smallest portion of food,” (*) and indeed, “ had no business to be where
* That these cruel and visionary conceits were intended eventually to be car-
ried into full effect, there is little doubt. “With respect to the gradual abolition”
said the Edinburgh Review, (Jan. 1820,) “it must be observed that the pre-
sent redundant population of the country has been entirely produced by the poor
laws,” &c. Mr. Ricardo said, “that while the present laws are in force, it is
in the natural order of things, that the fund for the maintenance of the poor should
progressively increase till it has absorbed all the net revenue of the Country.”—
In the Debate in 1834 upon the “Amendment Act,” Lord Brougham the intro-
ducer of it, observed,—“I shall say nothing at present of repealing the Poor
Law itself,” I shall, for the present, assume that the Statute of Elizabeth; (which
he had termed the accursed Statute of Elizabeth) “cannot now be dealt with.”
(Wide antea, p. 19.) His opinion of the left-handed dealings with this Statute, is
thus given by a lawyer entitled to far more attention than Lord Brougham :—
“The farther any subsequent plans for maintaining the poor have departed from
this institution, the more impracticable, and even pernicious their visionary at-
tempts have proved.” (Blackstone.) A warning to the cold calculating visionaries
of the present day !—Mr. Ensor considers it to be a vulgar error to suppose that
the Poor-rates have disproportionably increased, as compared with the increased
expenditure of the Country, the increased number of enclosures or abstraction
of land from the poor, the increased number of insolvents, the increased expense
of litigation connected with settlements, &c. The notion of Mr. Ricardo of the
Poor absorbing the met revenue of the Country, was also entertained and ex-
pressed by Lord Brougham when introducing the Amendment Act; but in their
calculations, neither the one nor the other allowed for the monstrous fraud long
practised, of paying as poor-rate, sums which were in fact the wages of labour.
This was computed by Lord Castlereigh to have been 15s. in every 20s. charged as
Poor-rate 1 Lord Abinger, (then Mr. Scarlett) computed that £500,000 was
the annual expense of litigation connected with settlements alone. Ensor ad-
duces various facts to prove, that it was the enhanced price of necessaries and
fraudulent mismanagement rather than the excessive increase of the poor, that had
augmented the Poor-rates. In the Parish of Eastwood, says Burns, (“Hist.
Disquis.”) 24 Poor cost in 1793, £74; in 1811, the cost of 48 Poor was £253,
(instead of £148;) whilst from Davenant (Vol. 1, p. 41) it appears that the Poor-
Rates in 1660 were £665,362, and nearly a century later the year's average of
1748-9-50 was but £690,000. The increase of the poor, then, during these 90
years was inconsiderable. In the Charity-Workhouse at Edinburgh, in 1812 the
expenditure was £1598 upon 1402 poor; in 1817 &4965 upon 1881 poor ;—
showing that the charges for management of the poor had by some means been
trebled, whilst the poor had increased about one-third. There have been in
other countries besides Spain, those fortunate Intendants mentioned by Gil Blas,
who grow rich by managing the affairs of the poor / It is in Evidence before a
Committee of the House of Commons, that the 7 millions raised for the Poor in
1815, little more than 5 millions were in effect expended upon them.
OF NECESSITY. 31
they are,”—that there was “no seat for them at Nature's board "(*)
—these monstrous assertions being made not ironically, but ap-
parently under some vague conception, that souls do possess a
discriminating hue, even in their Maker's eyes,— and under the
impious presumption that those must be the especially proscribed of
their Creator, who chance to be defiled with the “toga sordidula,”
—the “foeda et scissa lacerna : ” and not only proscribed by their
Creator, but themselves to be branded as proscribing their Creator! —
. . haec Janus(f) summus ab imo,
Perdocet; haec recinunt juvenes dictata senesque,
Loevo suspensi loculos tabulamque lacerto
* Intent upon making “the poor to cease,” and thus to succeed in contradicting
the Scriptures, the Rev. Mr. Malthus, introduced the leprosy which has become
so alarmingly contagious amongst his philosophical abettors, the economical
empirics of modern times :— -
When nations are to perish in their sins,
'Tis in the Church, the leprosy begins !
Mr. Malthus could not conceive a state of poverty, unassociated with profligacy
and crime ! but would Mr. Malthus have denied, even in his necessity, to a
public-spirited character such as Mr. Steyner, the smallest portion of food It is
related in the Monthly Review, (O. S. Vol. 65.) that the proprietors of the salt-
pits at Droitwich, prohibited the sinking of new pits, till R. Steyner Esq. dis-
covered and sunk pits on his own ground in 1690. He was sued by the corpora-
tion; and defended himself at the expence of about £6000. The monopoly was
destroyed, and the price of salt reduced from 2s. to 4d. This gentleman by his
expences at law, lived to receive parish-allowance.
+ Horat, Ep. Lib. 1. Ep. 1. “Janus” a Political Economist. “Thus teach the
Economists of every grade; young and old, all harp upon the same string, with
their tracts upon redundant population and surplus produce half out of the poc-
ket.”—This matter of increased and “redundant’’ population, (previously alluded
to, in the Note at p. 26) appears not quite so certain as “Economists” find it ex-
pedient and convenient to assume it to be. To tyros in the mysterious science of
Political Economy it must appear an inexplicable enigma, that with increased bur-
dens the people should increase ! And that this increase should have manifested
itself under a “redundant” and alarming aspect, not until the 18th or 19th Cen-
tury | The effect upon the duration of life of the dearness of food has been alluded
to in the forementioned Note. It is peculiarly strange, also, that with increased
population, the number of houses should decrease / And yet so it is: statutes
were enforced in the reign of Charles the 1st. against depopulating and pulling
down houses : and they proved lucrative statutes for a needy king. Sir An-
thony Roper “was fined in the Star Chamber for depopulations :#4000; to the
relator £100; to the parson of his parish £100; and to the poor of the same
parish £100; he is enjoymed also to repair those houses he had demolished, within
two years; to let his farms at reasonable rates; and if he should die in the interim,
yet he is obliged to have these things performed, and not to come forth of person
till he hath given security for the true performance of every part of this censure.”
(Strafford's Letters, 1634.) Notwithstanding the enforcement of these statutes, it
appears that from 1690 to 1811, the houses in five counties have decreased above
18000, (Ensor.) viz. –
In the year 1690 In 1811
Houses in Cambridgeshire . 18,629 . e . 17,232
Hunting on hire . 8,713 . . . . 75,466
Norfolk º e e g 56,579 & º º 57,766
Rutlandshire . . . 3,660 . . . 3,325
Suffolk . tº & . 47,537 . e . 37,227
32 THE RIGHTS
Such, also, was the malignant accusation in the time of Juvenal: they
who chance to be poor must e'en be unbelievers and unbelieved
& 4 - contemmere fulmina pauper
“Creditur, atque Dis ignoscentibus ipsis:”
The plebs et infima multitudo may swear by all the immortal
powers: but the Economists will nevertheless declare them to be
not the less, objects of discredit and scorn; worthy only of being
feelingly assured, that Nature which had thoughtlessly given them
existence, had, nevertheless, found it to be her disagreeable duty to
doom them and their families to starve, because, (in the words of
the Protest of the House of Lords) “they were unable by the hardest
labour, to provide necessaries for their wives and children,”—and
were, therefore, pennyless (*)
& 4 - et genus et virtus nisi cum re, vilior algă est l”
It is Southey, who exclaims,
Aye, idleness the rich folks never fail to find some reason,
Why the poor deserve their miseries 1
Demosthenes said, - It is but reasonable that we should feel more
indignant at the misconduct of the rich, than of those whom des-
titution has driven into crime; — but Demosthemes lived in times of
darkriess; the rule now is, that—
In tatter'd clothes small vices do appear,
Robes and fur’d gowns hide all !
Cruelly and ignominiously were those treated in the reign of
Edward the 6th. who chanced to be moneyless: but branding with
a hot iron, and whipping, were not worse than absolute starvation
for want of a “seat at nature's board:” or for objecting to imprison-
ment in a work-house, severed from wife and children, deprived, as
13lackstone remarks, “ of all endearing family connexions, the only
felicity of the indigent.” The Preamble to an Act of the First Par-
liament of Edward the 6th, declares, that—“forasmuch as idleness
and vagabondry is the mother of all thefts and robberies,”—the idle
for three days shall be made slave for two years, to the informer
against him, the said slave being first branded with a red-hot iron
on the breast, with the letter V ; and during the two years, he shall
be fed with bread and water and refuse-meat, and caused to work by
beating, chaining, &c.; if he run away, to be a slave for life, being
branded in the cheek with the letter S.—Bread and water and refuse-
meat, were however, better than the no meat at all of sordid Econo-
mists and Quakers.(t)
* “Because this Bill is unjust and cruel to the Poor. It imprisons in Work-
houses for not working, those who cannot procure employment, and others for
not maintaining their families, who cannot, by the hardest labour, obtain wages
sufficient to provide necessaries for their wives and children ; although the want
of employment, and the low rate of wages, have been occasioned by the impolicy
and negligence of the government.” (Protest of the Lords, 1834.)
+ A poor woman almost double from age, applied to Alderman Ansley at the
Town Hall, Southwark, (March 12th 1838,) for assistance. Her husband was
OF NECESSITY. 33
But whilst the right of the poor, to be raised above the level of
the beasts of the field, is indisputable: to an equality which would
lead to a levelling of all distinctions in society, they have no claim.
The distinctions of rank and honour are of infinite advantage to all
classes : it would bespeak mere envy, ignorance, or folly, to desire
their extirpation. There always have been, and always must be,
hewers of wood and drawers of water: there always have been poor,
and the Scriptures declare that they shall never cease out of the land:
but these are not on account of their laborious, or less fortunate
stations of, life to be subjected, when incapable of labour or in a
moment of necessity, to ignominious treatment, and mental torture,
to restraint and hardships, and degradation, such as of themselves
constitute the punishment of convicted criminals. Nor are the poor
without an all-sufficient cause, to impose a tax upon the industry
and property of their neighbours. It is but a species of larceny to
abuse the right to support from others, whenever improvidence,
intemperance, or sloth, produce their natural consequences. To
draw upon the common funds, in order to avoid drawing upon one's
own personal exertions, is to commit the meanest of frauds upon
society. With sufficient reason does the Judaic Law denounce so
unprincipled an abuse of an inheritance, intended only for the succour
of the disabled and unfortunate. “Until the end of time shall it be,
that to avoid becoming dependant upon created beings, and burthen-
some unto the Church, the most frugal mode of living shall be adop-
ted, and difficulties be encountered ; for thus teach the wise men, say-
ing, Let thy sabbath be as a day of work, rather than become de-
pendant upon created beings. And albeit a man be wise and respect-
able, yet, if he be reduced to poverty, he shall not disdain manual
arts, however unworthy of him, so that he avoid dependance upon
others.-He who unconstrained by necessity, receiveth alms, is a de-
ceiver of the people, and his life shall not be extended to old age,
without his being compelled by real necessity to seek for succour;
he may be likened to that accursed one, (Jer. 17,)—That trusteth in
man.” (Maimonides Ch. 10. § 18. 19.) And thus St. Paul to the
upwards of 87, and had been bed-ridden for 4 years. The Alderman most hu-
manely sent Kinsey, the officer, to enquire into the case of these two poor old
helpless creatures, who had been deprived of their trifling stipend of 3s a week,
from the Parish of St. Olive, and were now starving. The officer found the old
man lying in some rags ; and so emaciated that his bones were protruding through
his skin: he had the appearance of a living spectre. The paid overseer, a Quaker,
would neither furnish the slightest relief, nor condescend to take notice of the be-
nevolent message sent to him by the Alderman. If such be the conduct of Qua-
kers, no wonder association with them was shunned. The “Monthly Review "
(IV. 31.) mentions that no Quaker could be taken as apprentice by the Currier's
Society, on pain of forfeiting £100. (See other remarks upon the Quakers, Note
2. p. 75.) At Worship-street the same day, an emaciated woman, Elizabeth
Smith, with 4 children in a deplorable state, was brought before the magistrate,
having been turned out of Shoreditch workhouse, without reason assigned, and
found by a policeman upon the step of a doorway, at 1 o'clock in the morning.
And let it be borne in mind, that these barbarities are perpetrated in a land, where
Blackstone declared that in his time, it was “impossible that the most needy
stranger should ever be reduced to the necessity of thieving, to support nature.”
€
34 THE RIGHTS
Thessalonians, (2 Thess. 3. viii.)—“Neither did we eat any man's
bread for naught; but wrought with labour and travail, might and
day, that we might not be chargeable to any.” Amongst the Athe-
nians the utmost industry was practised: it was illegal to entertain
an idle servant, and the Athenian maxim, (Eurip. apud Stob.) declared
an indolent to be a bad citizen. (Ensor.)
With regard to the actual treatment of the necessitous in various
countries, some few notices will not be out of place. As respects Eng-
land, it is remarked in the Quarterly Review, (No, 109.) that the
general impression appears to have been, that England stood alone
among nations, in the provision which her laws had made against
destitution : whilst in fact, the principle of those laws had ever been
inforced by all really civilized communities. Dr. Paley may have
aided in giving currency to the mistaken notion, as to the total neg-
lect of the poor in other states and in other ages, by the assertion in
his “Essays upon Charity,” that—“The legal provisions for the poor
which obtain in this country, were unknown and unthought of by the
most polished nations of antiquity.” If to be matchless in arms, and
unrivalled to the present day in eloquence and learning : if, as Ensor
observes, (“On the Poor,”) to enjoy a pre-eminence in the arts which
has commanded admiration in every age, and “justified spoliation
in this,”—if to be thus supreme in arts and arms, does constitute a
polished people, surely Dr. Paley in his assertion has strangely erred.
For thus polished were the Athenians; a people assuredly not defi-
cient in practical humanity towards the poor. So large indeed was
the bounty of the Grecians generally, that Menander, (Apud Stobacum
Serm. 60) complains that the means provided for the relief of the poor,
were more than adequate to their wants. And as to the Athenians
in particular, Demosthenes said, (Phill. 4.) — “No Athenian can
be so cruel as to repine at the relief of the indigent. The labourers
in their decay should be treated as the parents of the State l’’ And
they were thus treated. CEschines says generally, there were funds
to maintain the indigent : and Plutarch confirms the statement.
It was evident also from CEschines (“In Timarchum,”) and from Plu-
tarch, (Vit. Solon.) as well as from Lysias, that the right of the poor
to support from the State, was unequivocally recognized by the
Athenian Law. In Lysias, a poor man applies in presence of the
Senate for relief; and the only ground of opposition is the allega-
tion made, that his circumstances were good and that, he rode upon
horseback! Equestrianism, is assuredly presumptive evidence against
the existence of want; but it appears from the work of Maimonides,
(Ch. 7. § 3.) that in Palestine at least, the indigent might sometimes
be found upon horseback! At Buenos-Ayres also, so trifling used to
be the value of a horse, that a man miserably poor, might be found
begging upon horseback. (Month. Mag. Aug. 1821.)
The enlightened sympathies of the present race of Economists, who
have made the cheap and sage discovery that Hospitals, and every
other institution, affording aid to the distressed, are foolish and mis-
chievous, were certainly—“unknown and unthought of" by the not
less enlightened Athenians: for besides other provision for the poor,
OF NECESSITY. 35
there were also Hospitals, called Ptokea ; for strangers, called Xeno-
dokia ; and for the sick, called Nozokomeia : whilst the Prytanoeum
afforded a refuge for the old. It may be objected, that with this
benevolent consideration for the indigent, was combined, in cer-
tain cases, unspeakable cruelty. We may be reminded, says the
“Church of England Quarterly Review,” of the compendious mode
adopted by the States of Greece to get rid of their weak or deformed
population. It must be admitted, that, by law, in certain cases
children might be exposed in desert places to the chance of perishing;
whilst those children of Sparta, to whom nature had denied the
means of being serviceable to the community, by not having endued
them with a sufficient measure of health and strength, were made
the victims of an inexorable policy. But, even here there was no
slow starvation. The classical example of legal murder, whatever it
may be worth, must be conceded: but we meet with no loss of the
affections,—no lingering piece-meal dropping of the human frame
by inches into the tomb. Children were killed outright; cast into
a deep cavern of the earth, near Mount Taygetus. Those laws,
written in blood though they were, never contemplated treating
human beings worse than dumb beasts. They did not immure them
in some legal cage, and, keeping them apart from friends and kindred,
turn cruelty into a science;—see them, day by day, and hour by
hour, pine, waste into the all-embracing arms of death; and, in im-
pious mockery of the common sense of mankind, call their refined
equivocation with the fiend by the blessed term of charity / Even in
Greece, the custom of cold-blooded murder was not universal. So
far from it, the illiterate Thebes scorned to recognise the laws of
Lycurgus or to anticipate the theories of Malthus. The citizens
who were not able to provide for their children, were enjoined to
carry them,-not to the mount, but to the magistrates, who were
obliged by law to take charge of their maintenance. It was the
same with Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, who com-
manded, that, on poor parents presenting their children to the
magistrates, these should immediately relieve and assist them. (Petit
Leg. Att. p. 61.-Ensor.)
A claim to be classed amongst “polished” nations of antiquity,
might, perhaps, by Dr. Paley have been refused to the Chinese : but
he would not argue that because to this day they retain their pri-
meval laws, language, and religion, they are not, therefore, entitled
to be considered of the highest “Antiquity.” It is admitted, that
they were a scientific nation, twelve centuries before the Christian
AEra: and that at that period, they were acquainted with Dialling.
(Deleuze Eudoxus, p. 143.) And whilst the people of Europe were
so far advanced in the refinements of dress, as to be clad in woollen
as coarse as blankets, and adorned with wooden skewers for pins;
the Chinese common people were wearing silks, and the ladies
dressed out in every variety of costly trinkets. It is generally ad-
mitted that we owe the invention of the Mariners’ Compass to the
Chinese; according to Klaproth, the knowledge of it was com-
municated to the Arabs by the Chinese, and introduced into Europe
36 THE RIGHTS
by the Crusades. In China, for many centuries past every junk
has possessed a Compass. The sugar-cane was cultivated in China,
2000 years ago: and the earliest Crinese histories claim the year,
2200 B.C. Fohee, reigned in China in 2953 B.C.: and Eclipses
were there observed 2830 years before the Christian AEra— 300
years before the birth of Abraham, and 1000 years before the
Exodus of the Jews. There exists a map of China, made 1000
years before Christ; and it accords with surveys made by the
Jesuits, in A. D. 1700. The Chinese are then, assuredly en-
titled to be termed a nation of antiquity ; and if devoid of the re-
quisite polish, they are well entitled to be termed a civilized nation,
by those who admit with Dr. Johnson, that—“the true test of the
civilization of any state, lies in the fact of a provision being made for
its destitute poor.” Not only is there in China a provision made for
the old and indigent, but it is a long-established, legislative provision
in force to the present day. And according to Duhalde, and to Sir
G. Staunton, Tai-Vou, 1617 years before Christ, ordered that every
town should support the aged out of the Common-treasury ! And this,
too, in the most populous country upon the face of the globe . With
a population of between 143 and 146 millions! Amongst an infatu-
ated race, the mention of whose fearfully prolific atmosphere, produ-
ces emotions the most distressing in the minds of redundant-popula-
tion—philosophers.(*) Let these, however, upon the authority of Mr.
* On the 15th Feb. 1839, certain “Delegates” from the noxious cotton-factory
towns, desirous of substituting (in the words of Lord J. Russell, see the Note at
p. 19 preceding)—“the corn of Poland and Russia for our own”—“not much
considering the two or three millions of people who may be reduced to utter
beggary in the course of their operations:” and laudably anxious about—
“diverting capital into ??–their own factories; these “Delegates,” above all
things most intensely solicitous, of course, about procuring cheap bread for
the poor, petitioned Parliament against the Corn-laws, in the true politico-
economic style. In their Petition they have set at rest all doubts as to the extent
of-" the rapidly increasing population of the United Kingdom,”—informing
Parliament upon most weighty authority, that such increase is— “computed to
exceed 1000 a-day! !” (Wide the Notes at pp. 25 and 30, on “Redundant-
population; ” and be it here noticed for the information of those who rely upon
“Population-returns,” as evidence of excess of population, that it has been
proved from the Registers of Baptisms and Burials, that the apparent Increase in
1811 — 21–31 arose from previous grossly incorrect under returns.) They,
moreover, "made known to Parliament their extraordinary discovery, that “the
territory of Great Britain and Ireland is of limited eatent " And upon the
strength of these and other equally marvellous discoveries, they seem to deem it
impossible that the Parliament can refuse to-" substitute the corn of Poland
and of Russia for our own l’” They should first pray for a commission to
enquire whether the Chinese do not “restrict the people to the food raised
from their own soil:” in England it is not a new restriction, for in the reign
of Edward 4th (in 1463) grain was not importable until exceeding a certain
price. Recent statements relative to the operation of the Corn Law, warrant
the assertion, that the Cotton Factories are by many, regarded as the chief
sinews of the State “To the rapid advances made in industry, intelligence,
and wealth by the manufacturing and commercial classes,” (singular species
of advances !) —“to them.”—(said that same Mr. P. Thompson, concerning
whose love of free-trade in children, see P. 77. of Notes,)—“ you owe
your wealth and power and station among the nations of the world,—to them
OF NECHSSITY. 37
Barrow (“Travels” p. 401.) yield unwilling credence to the fact,
that in China, swarming with human beings, a seat is found at na-
you owed the means by which you fought the battles of this country, and con-
tended against the united world in arms, for upwards of 15 years!” (Debate,
House of Commons, Feb. 19th, 1839.) It is vaunted, that 1,500,000 persons
depend for support upon the cotton-manufacture—that the capital employed in it
amounts to 20 millions—and that from 1770 to 1814, England had the monopoly
of this cotton-trade. It is for this species of sickly greatness that corn in
England is required to be so reduced in price, as to throw land out of
cultivation,-labourers out of employment—and to render a dense population
(already “redundant,”) the hungry helpless dependants upon foreign countries
for their daily bread / That such dependance has produced fearful consequences
we learn from the history of this country: and Hume particularly alludes to the
misery occasioned in the reign of James 1st, by occasional cessations of im-
portation from the Baltic and France. It is for equally shallow and selfish reasons
that corn of foreign countries is to be so raised in price that the natives, un-
advanced in “intelligence,” and far too obtuse to be sensible of the finesse of the
“President of the Board of Trade,”—shall be huckstered into abandoning their
“premature growth of manufactures,” and be forced indirectly to succumb to the
manufacturing monopoly of England. For stage-effect much is said about cheap-
bread for the poor; but, as with the traitor Judas, “He said this, not that he
cared for the poor (" Much is said about the Polish-loaf and the French-loaf,
whilst no hint is dropped that cheap-bread, means only cheap-wages; the lowest
possible remuneration of labour being the whole and sole aim of Mr. Thompson’s
factory-divinities, whilst no hint is dropped that the object of a free-trade in corn
is to transfer the profits of the farmer and landlord to bloated manufacturers,
- —to enable trade's unfeeling train,
“To usurp the land and dispossess the swain:”
and to degrade the farming labourers into the miserable factory-slaves described
at P. 75 of the Notes. By men of such “advanced intelligence” as Mr.
Thompson and his manufacturing constituents, old-fashioned doctrines are con-
sidered obsolete, trite, and contemptible; and therefore it would be vain to
say to him or them,-
“That trade's proud empire hastes to swift decay,
As ocean sweeps the laboured mole away;
While self-dependant power can time defy,
As rocks resist the billows and the sky.” .
Legitimate commerce may possess the humanising influence ascribed to it, and be
the means of diffusing the advantages of civilization : but, can it be otherwise
than a heavy calamity for any State, to be infested by an insatiable class of
manufacturers, already inordinately aggrandized and insolent with wealth,-yet
seeking out new schemes of speculation, urged on in their convulsive career by
the bombast and blandishments of a “President of the Board of Trade 2° Can it
be otherwise than a heavy calamity, to have the sober operations of trade and
commerce deranged by exporting speculators, whose reckless contention to supply
foreign markets precedes the demand of those markets, injuriously interfering
with native industry, and by a false system of credit occasioning dangerous fluc-
tuations of prices 2 To command as they do, almost one-half of the total exports
of the Kingdom satisfieth not the leviathans of the cotton-trade, the clamourers
after “ free-trade,”—the present disinterested agitators against a duty upon
foreign corns. In 1831, there were exported of cotton-manufacture, twist, and
yarn, about $ºsition of yards, of the value of £16,000,000, (increased in
1838 to £24,000,000,) whilst the value of the total exports of the United
Kingdom, in native produce and manufactures was but £37,000,000. Such is
their cupidity, they nevertheless mendaciously complain of a decay of their
own trade, and of the “rapid and premature growth of manufactures in
foreign countries:” although, in 1791, only 28 million pounds of cotton-wool were
imported into England,--in 1833, 287 million pounds, and in 1838, 1,238,000

38 THE RIGHTS
ture's board for every man, and—that “there are no beggars, no pau-
pers of any description :” a statement essentially confirmed by Mr.
bags or about 370 million pounds: and whilst every year sees an increase in the
number of their child-destroying factories. Yet, upon false or shallow pretexts of
this character, they imperiously demand that protecting duties shall be no longer
afforded to the agriculture of the country; a protection which they represent
to be injurious to the “general wealth and capital,” and to occasion (in M'Cul-
lock phraseology) “violent oscillations” in the price of corn. But they must
know well, although they suppress the fact, that the fluctuations in other pro-
ducts and manufactures have been far greater than the fluctuations in the
price of corn; and it must bespeak lamentable ignorance if they know not that
the fluctuations in both one and the other, have resulted from causes totally un-
connected with the operation of the corn-laws. Mark the prices of 1819 and
1830 ; viz. –
1819 1830
£. s. d. £. s. d.
Iron, per ton 9 0 0 5 8 O
Lead I 6 0 0 1 4 10
Cotton Prints 0 18 0 0 8 6
Silk 3 8 0 1 10 0
Wool 2 13 0 0 17 6
Moreover, by Bishop Fleetwood (in his “Preciosum”) it is made apparent that
far greater have been the “ oscillations” when importation was free, than when
subjected to modern Corn-Laws. In allusion to those periods, Burke remarks
that “the price of provisions fluctuated dreadfully :” and we know that between
1440 and 1560 depreciation in the price of corn caused tillage to be abandoned to
so great an extent, that it became expedient to enforce various enactments for its
encouragement. It does not comport with the speculative projects of “expor-
ting manufacturers,” to consider that since 1770, the various expences of farming
have risen in England, 52 per cent., and in Scotland, 70 per cent. : the expence
of cultivating a farm of 100 acres, including rent, tithes, rates, and direct taxes,
being in 1790 about £410, and in 1823 about £900. Nor will such as these
consider that arable land maintains a larger proportion of labourers than pasture
land, every 60 quarters of grain employing one extra hand; so that a million
acres of arable land employ 16,600 labourers more than pasture land; and that
without protection, or comparative exemption from taxation corn-land can no lon-
ger be cultivated at a profit. In his History of Henry 7, Lord Bacon expressly
terms it “depopulating pasturage,”—“pasture easily farmed by a few herdsmen :”
whilst he says of arable land, that it maintains “many people and families” Even
now in France the arable land to the pasture is as 50 to 13: whilst in England
it is so reduced as to be but as 34 to 42. No wonder that at certain periods of
the year there is found to be (what is called,) a “redundant” population of
labourers; although between March and October 100,000 Irishmen annually
cross the Channel to perform the requisite agricultural work. The farms in
France, moreover, continue to be small, containing each from 20 to 60 acres,
and are consequently properly cultivated, enabling the mass of the people to be
comfortable and well-provided for ; whilst in England, (even with such protection
to agriculture as a duty upon foreign corn affords,) small farmers have almost
become extinct, and the size of farms has increased from an average of 60 acres
(in 1760) to 225 acres, and in some counties to 360 acres. The natural conse-
quence has been the imperfect cultivation of the soil, and a general decline in
agricultural improvements. All this the agitating manufacturers care not for:
“ Wealth, (in the words of Lord J. Russell at p. 19) is the only object of
their speculation:” the sophistry and “liberality” of the M*Culloch school, their
only authority; and therefore they dogmatically affirm that with regard to home
and foreign trade, “the rate of profit is the only test of their respective advanta-
geousness,”—“the self-interest of the parties concerned, the only safe principle to
OF NECESSITY, 39
Ellis, (“China” p. 323.) who bears testimony to the ease and well-
being of the middle classes, and to the universal diffusion of the un-
sophisticated comforts of life.
go by in such matters:” and (in the words of M*Culloch) that “it is clear as
the sun at noon-day, that the Englishman who eats only bread made of Polish
wheat, gives the same encouragement to the industry of his countrymen that he
would give, were he to consume nothing not immediately produced at home !”
They know that Adam Smith speaking common sense, declared it to be “more
for the public advantage that capital should be employed in the home-trade, than
in foreign trade;” they know that the home markets consume 200 million of
manufactured goods: but, paradoxical mystifications serve to confound the intel-
lect and to make black appear white, and they therefore hypotheticate ad infinitum,
and argue in ten thousand different ways, that the “prevention of importation oc-
casions an, obvious sacrifice of 100, out of every 400 quarters consumed !” The
patriotism of mill owners is not disturbed by the alarming fact, that owing to the
poverty of farmers, the stock of wheat in hand at the time of harvest has fallen
below five weeks consumption : whilst there never used to be less in the country
than was adequate for six or twelve months consumption ; and whilst from 1697
to 1755 the eaſports of wheat ran from 50,000 to a million of quarters per
annum,_the imports during the whole of that period not having amounted to the
average exports of one of those years, and England not having imported solely,
until 1793, the first year of the war against France. To all this, would they but
retort, “Convincing proof that the population is increasing at the rate of
1000 a-day—that Great Britain and Ireland are of limited eartent—that a
trade in corn is essential to the community—and that we must have Russian
and Polish wheat:” treating as an absurdity the notion, that neither Polish
nor any other wheat, even for a day's consumption, could be had, save with
superabundant harvests abroad, and the kind permission of foreign powers. It
suits not mill-owners, (who have contrived to be in proportion to their enormous
gains comparatively exempt from either state or parish taxes,) to make the calcu-
lation that the Debt of England, in proportion to its amount and the population,
falls upon each individual seven times as heavily as that of Holland and Belgium;
four times as heavily as that of France : and forty times as heavily as that of Russia
upon each inhabitant of those several States: huckster-like they demand licence to
buy with their cotton-goods wherever they can buy cheapest: and in their love of
lucre would be content that Russian serfs should obtain their custom, in preference
to their own fellow-subjects. “Has taxation nothing to do with the price of
corn ?” asked Sir Robert Peel: “is it the fault of the agriculturists?” For
exporting manufacturers, however, it is sufficient to know, that wheat at Odessa
and Dantzic averages but 28s 6d. a quarter; no matter whether it be proved that
a price of 50s. will not in England repay even the freehold farmer. To idolators
of “capital,” and “free trade,” such as these,the desolation of Phoenicia, of Tyre,
and of Carthage, –the fate of Venice, of Genoa, the Hanse-towns, Holland, &c.
teach no lesson of moderation; by such pompous worshippers of evanescent
national glitter, only derision and contempt are bestowed upon that long enduring,
immutable nation,--that China which has already maintained its independence,
government, and distinct national character through an indefinite number of ages;
—where, compared with the cultivation of the land, all other pursuits are deemed
mean and subordinate, where earporting manufacturers are not and never have
been tolerated,—where exist the largest and most populous cities in the world,—
where the fostering of native industry enables two-thirds of the population to be
engaged in agriculture, instead of the one-third as in England,-where education,
virtue, learning, are specially honored and encouraged; and two-thirds, at least,
of the people qualified to read and write, where a wall has been built 1500 miles
long, the greatest monument of human industry in existence, and a canal formed
900 miles long, already having endured some thousands of years! All these mat-
ters are of minor importance compared with the exporting of cotton goods; and
as cotton goods cannot be made cheap enough to compete with foreigners, without
40 THE RIGHT3
But the Chinese, the Hebrews, and the Athenians, are not the
only nations whose Laws may be cited in refutation of the assertion
wages being beaten down to the lowest limits of subsistence; and as wages cannot
be farther lowered without producing absolute starvation, unless the price of corn
be beaten down to the Continental price,—therefore say these patriots, (in the
words of Lord J. Russell)—Let us buy where we can buy cheapest-no matter
whether 2 or 3 millions of people be reduced to utter beggary in the course of
the operation,-- this is but diverting capital into another channel 2 They have
already beaten down wages from 30s (in 1798) for weaving a 6-quarter piece of 24
yds., to 5s. in 1830; they have already (as Marshall shows,) lowered the price
of labour in cotton-spinning 70 per cent since 1812; even this is insufficient,
and therefore English Agriculture must perish, and farmers become cotton-
spinners' slaves, in order that exporting manufacturers may monopolize the whole
export trade of the country, instead of the one-half which they already usurp.
Those, to whom this insatiable class of manufacturers prefer their petition, will it
is to be hoped, be ever mindful of the present state of the Maremma di Roma,
once amongst the most fertile and populous districts in the world; now ever to
remain a monument of the devastating effects of unrestrained cupidity. In
this tract of 490 square miles (313,600 acres) near Rome, from various causes,
the rents became such that the occupiers of small farms were gradually ex-
tinguished: the small well-cultivated farms of these, being united and let to large
farming Capitalists. These in the course of a very few years found themselves
incapable of obtaining remunerating prices,—the land became gradually worse and
worse cultivated : even for that rich soil the population became “redundant,”—
and in another generation the whole of this once prodigiously fertile tract became,
and has ever since continued waste; and is now proverbially so unhealthy as to be
unfit for human habitations, extending its contagious effects even to Rome itself.
Of the nefarious arts and barbarities to which the agitators will have recourse,
rather than be frustrated in their mercenary schemes, the present cruel combina-
tion affords indubitable evidence. Without a day’s notice they hesitate not to
stop 60 or 70 mills, thereby throwing thousands out of employment, and hazard-
ing the tranquillity of the country, the lives and the property of all; in the well-
grounded persuasion that by this species of merciless intimidation, they shall
afford to a recreant administration sufficient pretext for apostacy upon the subject
of the Corn-Laws. This climax of manufacturing cruelty and iniquity may at length
exhibit in all its hideous deformity, the nature of that powerful and dangerous
engine acquired by the lords of the factories, by means of what Mr. P. Thompson
terms “intelligence;” and others term a “false system of credit,” and “commer-
cial speculation 1* a system which has enabled them to reverse the description by
Virgil of ancient Italy,–
Terra potens armis atque ubere glebae,
and by overthrowing one class after another of domestic manufactures, to form
overgorged towns of degenerate and demoralized men, women, and children, of
which it may be truly said, - -
At every draught large and more large they grow,
A bloated mass of rank unwieldy woe!
Should these proceedings awaken the agricultural class to the state of the poor-
assessments, and to the comparative exemption of the manufacturers, they will
not be without their use. In the time of Elizabeth, houses and land were the
visible signs of wealth : and consequently upon them only were assessments
made. By some strange oversight this mode of assessment has continued to the
present day, although “commercial speculation” and national embarrassments
have for ages made them the lowest tests of property. Pſ instead of a rate of 7 or
8 millions assessed upon 50 millions, the assessments had been properly extended
to the 200 millions of income and property, and had not suffered the “exporting
manufacturers” to escape, the clamour of the economists would never have pre-
vailed in the making of an “Amendment-Act.” This just and neeessary amend-
ment in the mode of assessment would at once reduce the proportion of the poor-
rates from 15 to 3% or 4 per cent.
o F NEGESSITY. 41
of Dr. Paley ; for to the present day, according to Mr. Senior, the
right of the Poor to be rescued from destitution by means of a public
fund, exists in Norway, Sweden, Russia, Denmark, Mecklenburg,
Prussia, Wurtemburg, Bavaria, the Canton of Berne, and Saxony:
and provision for their relief is largely made from the public funds of
Holland, the Hanseatic Towns, Belgium, France, Portugal, the Sar-
dinian States, Frankfort, Austria, Venice, Greece, and Turkey.
Even the frozen Greenlander has a blood as warm, and a nature per-
haps more sympathizing, than some polished nations known to the
present age. “If there be any among them,” says Egede, “who
cannot work or procure a livelihood, they do not let them starve, but
admit them freely to their tables: in which they confound us Chris-
tians, who suffer so many poor and distressed mortals to perish for
want.”
According to Voltaire, amongst the ancient Romans charitable
institutions for the sick or the poor did not exist. But although
hospitals were unknown, ancient Rome contained 327 granaries of
amazing extent, from which the necessitous were supplied; an in-
stitution, if it may be so termed, which Voltaire pronounces to have
been far more noble and politic than the other. At all events, none
were allowed to pine in want, nor were the citizens under any ap-
prehension for their families: supported in their necessities, as they
are said to have been, first by the republic, and afterwards by the
emperors.(*)
In modern Rome there are said to be as many charitable establish-
ments of various kinds, as ancient Rome possessed of triumphal
arches, and other monuments of conquest. Judging from certain
passages in Cicero, (de Offic. Lib, i. C. 14.) Romans were to be
found of a disposition imprudently generous :—“Videndum est enim
primum, ne obsit benignitas et is ipsis quibus benigne videbitur fieri
et ceteris; deinde &c.”; and again, “Quibenigniores voluntesse quam
res patitur, primum in eo peccant quod injuriosi sunt in proximos.”
This is in the spirit of the Judaic-Law, (Maimonides, Ch. 7. § 11.)
—“If any one be so generous as to give greater alms than his means
allow, or to avoid the shame of refusal shall reduce himself to straits,
in order that he may give Alms to the Collectors; from such a man
it is forbidden either to exact or to ask Alms. If any Collector by
solicitation endeavour to excite shame in such an one, future ven-
geance shall fall upon him, as it is said, (Jer. C. 30.) “And I will
visit with punishment all who oppress them.’”
The Law of Muhammed established a legal provision for the Poor:
and the same Law forbad the inhuman severance of mother from
* From transient donations of money, land, and provisions, there was a regular
distribution to every Roman who chose to apply, of five modii (or 130 lbs,) of
grain. (Tuscul. Quoest. Lib. iii. c. 48.) Caesar reduced the pauper list from
320,000, to 150,000. (Suet. Lib. i. 43.) Trajan made large distributions to the
poor; as did also Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. Constantine, the first Christian
Emperor, was not equally solicitous about the poor; although with Theodosius,
not altogether mindless of their necessities. Justinian exhibited a total want of
feeling towards them. (Ensor.)
G
42 T H E RIG IIT3
child, even though both were slaves. Amongst the Muhammedans
Alms are of two sorts, legal and voluntary. Legal alms are of in-
dispensable obligation, being commanded by the law : voluntary alms
are left to discretion and generosity. The Koran frequently com-
mands the giving of alms. The Khalif, Omar Ebn Abd'alaziz used
to say, That prayer carries us half-way to God, fasting brings us
to the door of his palace, and alms-giving procures admission. Ha-
san, the son of Ali and grandson of Muhammed, is recorded, thrice
in his life to have divided his substance equally between himself and
the poor, and twice to have given away all he had.—(D'Herbel. Bibl.
Orient. p. 5.) Alms are to be given of five things: viz.-of cattle, of
money, of corn, of fruits, and of wares sold. The usual portion is
one in 40, or 2% per cent : in some cases, a fifth part ought to be
given; and at the end of the fast of Ramadan, every Musselman is requi-
red to give in alms, for himself and for every one of his family, a Sea
of wheat, barley, dates, raisins, rice, or other provisions. (Sale's Ko-
ran.) By the Muhammedan law also, escheats do not fall to the
Sovereign; they are never, says Sir W. Jones, (Al Sirajiyyah,) ap-
propriated to his use, but fall into a fund for the relief of the Poor.
“Take Zakat” (i. e. Alms for the Poor, imposed by law : distin-
guished from voluntary alms,) “from rich Musselmen, and bestow
it,” said Muhammed, “upon the Poor.” And by the Hedaya, (Vol.
1, p. 339.) it would seem that the provision assigned for the indigent,
was 4lbs of wheat, or 81bs of barley, or of dates each day. Ali-Bey
says (“Travels in Morocco,”) that the “charitable tithes are equal
to 2% per cent.” This is a contribution fived by law. Poor Mus-
selmen, then, are better treated in those uncivilized regions than the
poor highly-civilized Irish, 2,300,000 of whom, out of a total popu-
lation of 8,000,000 are beggars, wholly dependant upon casual cha-
rity: and whose miserable destitution is such, that the German
historian, Raumer, expresses his surprise, “that the whole nation
does not go over to England and steal, in order to enjoy a new and
happier existence,”—in the hulks or at Botany-Bay! (*) The Mus-
* Mr. Yates, M. P. for Carlow, declares that to the present day these ill-used
beings are to be seen, scooping, like beavers, an abode out of the sides of barren
hills, with only the sand to lie on, and the sods of heath to cover them. The fol-
lowing are passages from Raumer's account of his journey through Ireland : —
“I went to Killarney, and hastened to Ross Castle, in order to enjoy the
“prospect of the picturesque mountains and lakes. I returned to Dublin by way
“of Limerick, through fertile tracts, tedious bogs, and barren heaths, the rain
“pouring down all the time. You must be content with this dry enumeration.
“My mind is filled with one thought—I can entertain no other—it is that of the
‘‘inexpressible wretchedness of so many thousands. To form an idea of it, you
“must see these houses—not houses, but huts—not huts, but hovels, mostly
“without windows or apertures; the same entrance—the same narrow space for
“men and hogs, the latter lively, sleek, and well fed, the former covered with rags,
“ or rather hung with fragments of rags in a manner which it is impossible to
“conceive. If I except the respectable people in the towns, I did not see upon
“ thousands of Irish, a whole coat, a whole shirt, or any other part of their
“dress, but all in tatters.--The children with their black hair and dark eyes, so
“gay and playful in their tatters—created in the image of God—are in a few
“years, by the fault of man and the government, so worn out, without advantage
OF NEC ES$1'i Y, 43
selmen have no need to steal in order to procure a subsistence: nor
do the laws and customs of this uncivilized race, permit their citizens
to—“perish in vast numbers, of absolute want,”—as is reported of the
poor Irish, by a Committee of the House of Commons! Muhammed
commanded that even Slaves should not be regarded as Surplus-
population ; nor be confined in Union-holds, upon measured driblets
of coarse food “Give them,” said Muhammed, “ such food as ye
!yourselves eat, and such raiment as ye yourselves are clothed with :
and afflict not the servants of your God!”(t) w
And says the Judaic-Law, (Maimonides, Ch. 7.) “It is because
he is in want that thou art commanded to give unto him — If
the poor tarry with thee during the night, a couch to sleep on shall
be found for him, and a coverlet to place under his head, in place of
a pillow ; together with oil and pulse. If he tarry with thee upon the
Sabbath-day, let him then receive food, sufficient for three repasts,
and oil, and pulse, and fish, and pot-herbs; and if he be a known
person, let him be treated according to his station.” The same
Chapter also commands, that relief shall be afforded without delay,+
“he shall not be examined, to learn whether he be a deceiver, but
food shall be instantly given to him.” No bandying about from one
coarse and callous overseer to another, from London to Woolwich,
and from Woolwich twice again to London, — (*) no “testing ”
“to themselves or others, that the very beasts of the field might look down on
“ them with scorn. All the blame is thrown on agitators, and discontent pro-
“duced by artificial means. Absurd . Every falling hut causes agitation, and
“every tattered pair of breeches a sans-culotte. Since I have seen Ireland, I
“admire the patience and moderation of the people, that they do not (what would
“be more excusable in them than in distinguished revolutionists, authors, jour-
“nalists, Benthamites, baptized and unbaptized Jews,) drive out the devil through
“Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.”—(Raumer's Travels in England, &c.)
f Very different to the food we ourselves eat, is the food of the famishing Irish,
before they perish of absolute want. The Rev. Mr. Cotter, Rector of Temple-
trive, Cork, says, “I recollect"a case which may give some idea of the state of
“the Irish poor. One evening, whilst some poor women, to whom I used of an
“evening to give a little soup, were waiting in the yard, the cabbage-stumps
“thrown out of the kitchen, were lying about: the pigs and fowls had picked
“ them bare : I saw, myself, six or seven of the poor creatures turn their faces
“towards the wall, and eat the stumps the pigs had left 1" (Evidence before the
Irish Commissioners, July, 1835.) Very different, too, the food we ourselves
eat, to the fatal gruel, upon which the unfortunate poor were condemned to
perish in the Bridgewater Work-house ! (Wide Note p. 45.)
* An inquest was held on the 27th October, 1837, at the “King and Queen,”
Hare Street, Bethnal Green, on view of the body of Charlotte Leonard, aged 71.
It appeared in evidence, that the poor old creature had been bandied about from
parish to parish, under various pretexts, until brought to death's door; and
when incapable of swallowing, was admitted to the workhouse ! The Jury re-
turned a verdict, “That the deceased died from want, occasioned by the gross
negligence of the parochial authorities of St. Matthew, Bethnal Green, and of St.
Luke's Middlesex;”—Appalling evidence of the correctness of the assertions of
declamatory theorists! “Here in England,” said the Rev. Mr. Horne, “no ca-
lamity whatever can befal a poor man or his family; the generous solicitude of
Christian benevolence has provided for the mitigation of human suffering in every
varied form.” (Sermon preached before the Lord Mayor, at St. Lawrence Jewry.)
And Blackstone tells us, that in England,-‘‘it is impossible that the most needy
44 THE RIGHTS
his starvation by imprisonment in a workhouse, severed from
wife and children.(*) “It is an affirmative precept,” says Mai-
stranger should ever be reduced to the necessity of thieving to support nature.”
Whatever it may have been previous to 1834, since that year, the possibility of
death from destitution has been too frequently made awfully apparent l—Peter,
also decided that providential solicitude had found means of alleviating human
suffering in all its varied forms / “How can any man complain of hunger,” said
Peter, “in a country where such excellent salads may be had in every field 2 Or
of thirst, where every river produces such delicious potations? And as for cold, and
nakedness, they are evils introduced by luxury and custom. A man, naturally
wants clothes, no more than a horse or any other animal l’’ (Joseph Andrews)
The Christian benevolence of the Commissioners is pleasingly exemplified in the
following kind-hearted order:— “That the Masters of Workhouses shall, under
no circumstances, permit the smallest present to be received by any pauper in-
mates, from any of their family or friends !” The intestinal sagacity of Peter, and
the Commissioners, qualifies them for determining that the generous solicitude
of Christian benevolence is, almost invariably, very foolishly misplaced.
*The memorial of the Churchwardens, &c. of Wilmslow in Cheshire, addressed
to the Commissioners in December, 1838, shows that it is not an uncommon oc-
currence to place the pauper husband in one workhouse ; the pauper wife in
another; and the pauper children in another: thereby having caused (in an in-
stance cited by the Guardians), an expenditure to the Union of £1 6s. per week;
instead of the 2s. 6d. a week, out-door relief before allowed to the miserable and
cruelly treated family. This agrees with the statement of the Rev. Mr. Townsend,
“that the poor cost three times as much when collected, as when in their own
cottages, and do not half the work.” (Travels in Spain). The produce of labour,
in the House of Correction in Middlesex, according to Mr. Beaumont, is the 46th
part of the expence: and the cost of each prisoner in Millbank Penitentiary,
amounts, it is said, to £100 a-year. (Ensor.) The erection of Bethlehem
Hospital cost £100,000, and it accommodates 200 patients. The Guardians of
St. George's, Southwark, practically illustrated these points, in 1838; and ex-
posed the fallacies and misrepresentations contained in Reports made to the
Secretary of State, upon the subject of the comparative costs of the poor since the
passing of the “Amendment Act.” That children are assuredly not much benefitted,
by inhuman severance from famishing parents, placed at the mercy of the
hirelings of a workhouse, the following extract will prove;—“The cases of cruelty
as charged (in the Greenwich º: consists in having made the pauper children
for trivial offences, stand upon a table the whole of a night, with one hand held up
over their heads, and depriving them of their breakfast, dinner, and supper l’”
(Morning Post, Jan. 14, 39.) It was proved in evidence that not only were these
cruelties perpetrated, but the children were beaten with an iron bar, and “educated ”
to commit thefts for the benefit of the Governess of the Workhouse ! With re-
gard to personal confinement, we are told by Blackstone, that no man can “be
imprisoned except by process from the Courts of Judicature,” &c.; and that
“To bereave a man of life, or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accu-
sation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at
once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole Kingdom; but confine-
ment of the person, by secretly hurrying him to goal, where his sufferings are
unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dan-
gerous engine of arbitrary government "-To imagine or to assert that work-
houses are not essentially gaols, bespeaks an infantine simplicity of mind, or pro-
ficiency in the vulgar science of equivocation l—
“That giant building, that high bounding wall,
Those gates and locks, and all those signs of power,
It is a prison with a milder name:”
and that cruel is the treatment and great the suffering of the prisoners, cannot be
doubted by those who consider the discipline and the avowed objects of these places.
Such must be the inevitable result; although as Blackstone points out, the suffer-
OF NECESSITY. 45
monides, (Ch. 7. § 1,) “That alms be given to the poor of Israel,
according to their wants, and to the means of the giver.” And this
relief to the poor, was compulsory upon all : it was a legislative pro-
vision : and defaulters in the payment of rates, were liable to have
their goods distrained upon, and themselves scourged with the stripes
of rebellion,-that is to say, in the severest mode permitted by Law.
“If any one refuseth to bestow alms, or if he giveth less than becom-
eth him, the Synedrim shall use compulsion, and shall inflict upon
him the Stripes of Rebellion, (Wide Note 2,) until he giveth that
which he hath been adjudged to give. They shall also, in his pre-
sence, take from his goods as much as he ought to give, and they
shall retain it as a pledge for the alms : yea, though it be upon the
Sabbath-eve.” (Ch. 7, § 10.)
Selden thus enumerates the various contributions to which the
poor of Palestine were entitled :-" Eorum quoe pauperibus ex lege
sacrá, seu Ebroeis civili debebuntur, genus faciunt septemplex. Pri-
mum est Angulus : 2, Spicelegium :(*) 3, Racematio : 4, Acini
decidui : 5, Quod per oblivionem relinquitur : 6, Decima pauperis : 7,
Eleemosyna.” (“Selden de Jure” &c. Lib. 6, 6.) It is the rules and
ordinances relating to these several contributions to the Poor, which
are most minutely treated of in the Work of Maimonides; from which
Work, indeed, Selden (and Blackstone and others after him,) appears
to derive his chief information relative to the rights of the poor, under
the Hebrew Law.
—p
ings of the prisoners are unknown or soon forgotten. Blackstone alludes
more particularly to the mental sufferings of prisoners; of their physical suf-
ferings, and of the fatal diseases induced by improper food in Workhouses, the
case of the paupers in the Bridgewater Workhouse affords dreadful example.
The evidence, upon oath, of the medical men, relative to the diarrhoea that raged
in the Bridgewater Workhouse in 1836, proves, as summed up by Mr. Bowen,
1st. That in their opinion the disease was produced by the Gruel,
2nd. That it was kept up by the same cause, until, from the number of persons
attacked, and the crowded state of the house, it became infectious.
3rd. That the ravages of the disease were weekly reported ; and that although
the Death-book in which these ravages were registered, was always open to the
guardians, the Gruel was still administered
4th. That while some of the sufferers were sent away from the workhouse for
change of air, others were being constantly sent in, against the frequent remon-
strances of the attending surgeon; and that many who were so sent in after such
remonstrance died. —Evidence before the Lords, 1838; Questions 985 to 1004,
&c. (See the preceding remarks upon Workhouses, at the Notes pp. 4. 29.)
* The exactness of the regulations relative to gleaning, under the Hebrew law,
as laid down by Maimonides, and the generous latitude allowed to the poor glean-
ers, are remarkable. (Wide Ch. 4, “Laws of the Hebrews.”) In the Common
Pleas, (Steel v. Houghton, Trinity Term, 1788,) the Lord Chief Justice gave it
as his opinion, that no right to glean existed by the Common Law of England.
His arguments were, however, ably and feelingly controverted by Justice Gould.
Lord Hale, 100 years before this trial, affirmed, that this right of the poor had
ever existed by the general custom of England. Under the Hebrew Law, it was
not simply a custom enjoyed by sufferance, but a strict legal right. (Wide Note 21
“ Gleaning.”) The Act of 1786 for enclosing the Common Lands of Basingstoke,
expressly recognizes the right of gleaning; and maintains that right by imposing
penalties upon the putting in of cattle, within a certain number of days after the
carrying of the crop.
46 THE RIGHTS
This Work of Maimonides clearly shows, that by the Judaic-Code,
a Poor-Law conscientiously founded upon the precepts of the Bible
was established; and in particular cases was enforced against stran-
gers, as well as against the local inhabitants: —“Whosoever tarrieth
in a city during thirty days, shall be compelled in common with other
inhabitants of the city, to give Alms of the Chest: if he remaineth
three months, he shall be compelled to give Alms of the Basket: if
he remaineth during six months, he shall be compelled to give Alms
for Garments, with which alms, garments are prepared for the poor
of the city: if he remaineth during nine months, he shall be com-
pelled to give Alms for Burials, with which alms, the poor of the city
are buried, and all things needful for their funeral prepared.” (Mai-
monides, Ch, 9, § 12.) In all probability this Law seldom required to
be coercively executed, the provision for the poor being so ample,
that according to J. Scaliger, (Vide p. 31 of “Testimonies,”) true He-
brews had no need to beg. Nor, like the Chinese, had they any
beggars amongst them: the richer Jews ever affording timely assis-
tance to the necessitous. They acted in obedience to their religion
and laws, which declared it to be their “bounden duty to be more
scrupulously observant of the Precepts relating to Alms, than of all
other Affirmative Precepts: for Alms are the sign of the just seed of
Abraham, our Father, according as it is said, (Gen. 18,) ‘For I know
him that he will command his children and his household after him,
and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to practise Alms.” Nor
can the Kingdom of Israel be made strong, nor can true religion be
established except by Alms, as it is said, (Isaiah 54.)—By Alms shalt
thou be established.” (Maim. Ch. 10 $ 1.) Practical humanity towards
the destitute was to be expected from a conscientious people, no
individual amongst whom would pass by even a beast that had fallen,
without attempting to afford it succour. (“Joseph. Antiq.” iv. 8)
Whoever saw a beast tottering or lying under the weight of his bur-
den, was bound to help him : nor durst he desist, until the owner
himself seeing it past relief, abandoned it. Even when the beast
belonged to an enemy, this humanity to the brute creation, was felt
as a duty incumbent upon all. Indeed, throughout his Laws, Moses
manifests towards animals a spirit of humanity and sensibility, to
imitate which in some degree, would not derogate from the charac-
ter of certain Christian communities of the present day.
That the provisions both of the Judaic and of the Muhammedan
Law for the relief of the destitute, strictly accord with the doctrines
promulgated by Locke and by Montesquieu, is therefore apparent.
Thornton says of the Turks,—“They are the most humane and cha-
ritable of all the people upon earth.” Mr. Hobhouse says, (“Travels”
p. 535.) that physicians are publicly entertained in all the considera-
ble towns of Turkey, at a salary of 1000 or 1500 piastres a year.
Mr. Thornton mentions public physicians at Yassy and Bucharest.
Tournefort says, “There are no beggars to be seen in Turkey;
because they take care to prevent the unfortunate from falling into
indigence. They are, moreover, careful to relieve persons bashfully
ashamed of their poverty. They visit the houses of the afflicted :
OF NECESSITY. 47
and at the doors of the Mosque all may be relieved. The diseased,
and they who have the pestilence, are succoured by their neighbour's
purse.” The bashfulness of the poor Incredible and ridiculous as
this would appear to those benevolently occupied in the invention of
new “tests,” of human misery; who scoff at honesty in poverty,
and disbelieve in virtue; credulous only of deception, insincerity, and
vice ;(*) yet is the idle notion that the poor will sometimes starve
without complaint, supported by the work of Maimonides. “If there
be a Poor man who refuseth to receive Alms, artifice must be em-
ployed, and under the name of a gift or a loan, let him be relieved.”
(Ch. 7 $9) Amongst the poor as amongst other classes, modest merit
will be found to court the shade, and to pine uncomplaining, whilst
unfeeling pretension stalks unabashed abroad. That the “bashful
poor,” (pauvres honteua) will sometimes die rather than beg, is shown
in the Evidence taken before the Commissioners for enquiring into
the state of the Irish poor. (t)
Colonel Symes, in treating of the Birman Empire, says, (“Emb :
to Ava,” Vol. ii., 389.)—“A common beggar is nowhere to be seen :
every individual is certain of receiving subsistence, which, if he can-
not procure by his own labour, is provided for him by others.”
This agrees with the statement of Marco-Polo, who says, that at
Cambala, “bread is never denied to any one who asks it: and there
is no day on which are not given away 20,000 crowns in rice, millet,
and panike,” To the same effect Marco-Polo speaks of the King of
Mangi, that he regarded the poor, and adopted 20,000 pauper
children annually, who, under his protection were reared to manhood.
(Ensor on the Poor.)
Dr. Clarke tells us that the Serfs of Russia, when old, are of right
supported by the owner of the Estate.—Akbar, in his Institutes,
(“Ayeen Akberry,”) ordered that ten seers of grain should be paid
for every begah of cultivated land in the empire; such contribution
being devoted principally to the relief of the indigent. “Giving to
the poor,” (says Sir W. Jones,) “is among the six prescribed acts of
* “Quelques lecteurs demanderont ce que je trouve desi beau dans l'action d’
Alexandre. Infortunés I C'est qu'Alexandre croyait a la vertu : c’est qu'il y
croyait sur satete, sur sa propre vie; c'est que sa grande ame etait faite, pour y
croire.” (Emile, Liv. 2.) Human infirmity cannot believe in the existence of
that in others which itself is unable to feel or to conceive ; and so with the in-
ventors of tests :”—
. What contradicts my sense, I hate to see,
And never can believe
+ The Rev. Mr. Gibson mentions the following case;—“The wife and family of
“a man who had been respectable, died here of want a short time since. They
“ could not get anything to eat at times more than once in 2 days l They died
“rather than beg | I did not hear of the extremity of their distress, ’till too late
“to save them.” Mr. King said that he knew many poor people to subsist during
summer on cabbage and salt, without a single potatoe; and yet such was their
delicacy, that if any person entered their cabins while devouring this miserable sub-
stitute for food, they sought to screen it, lest their indigence should be made
ublic ;-
p And homeless near a thousand homes I stood,
And near a thousand tables pined and wanted food
48 THE RIGHTS
the first-born class: in consequence, the Buniyas or merchants, dis-
tribute alms to every wanting person who passes their doors.” And
so the Judaic Law: “If a poor man wander about thy threshold, it
is not required that he should be largely supplied; a small gift, how-
ever, if it be but one Carica, shall be bestowed; since it is forbidden
to send away empty, the poor who ask for alms. For it is said,
(Ps. 74,)—' O let not the oppressed return ashamed: let the poor
and needy praise thy name !’” (Maimonides, Ch. 7. § 7.) The
charity of the Parsees to the poor, the widow, and the fatherless, is
well known. The Brahmins collect one-tenth for the poor.
Sir W. Temple observes, that in the country of the Incas one-
fourth of the property of the State was reserved for the poor: and
Garcilasso de la Vega says that in the time of the Incas, beggars
were unknown ; all those who could not support themselves, being
maintained by the public.
Of the Africans, Poyart says, (“Histoire d'Afrique”)—that the
people in different places call the Europeans “shut hands;” because
they give, only that they may receive in return. The Persians are
commanded by the Saddir, to feed the poor; and even to let the
very dogs have a mouthful.
In Ethiopia, according to Herodotus, there was a gratuitous or-
dinary, where all might satisfy their wants. (Lib. 3. 18.) It was
called, the Table of the Sun : probably, says Vossius, from the general
good which it dispensed, like as the Sun dispenses life and vigour to
all the world. Of a character similar to this Ethiopian institution,
is that of “Holy-Cross,” near Winchester: at which hospital, every
traveller who knocks at the door, may claim a manchet of white bread,
and a cup of beer. (*) Polybius and Strabo both notice the Poor-
*In this hospital, founded by Bishop Blois, in 1132, the inmates were and still
are allowed each, daily, 3 lbs. 4 oz. of wheat, a gallon and half of beer, pottage,
called mortel, and a dish of fish or flesh. Dr. Milner observes, that here,
probably, is the last remaining vestige of “old English hospitality,” any tra.
veller knocking at the gate and asking relief, being supplied with bread and beer.
In the “Hundred Men's Hall,” 100 of the poor of Winchester were also daily
supplied with a loaf of bread, 3 quarts of beer, and two messes for dinner: some.
what different to the after-mentioned “Cirencester Dietary,” prescribed by the
Commissioners under the Amendment Act / Compare this Dietary with the
allowance of “Holy Cross 1” One pound of potatoes for dinner-the food of
hogs; but, with the addition of nearly one-third of a pound of Bacon on Sunday,
—being in the proportion of about one twenty-secondth part of a pound for each
day of the year ! Beer is what the Commissioners would term too “ sumptuous;”
but in the reign of Richard 2nd, offenders were punished, by being “compelled
to fast a fortnight on bread and beer!” (White's History of Selborne.) The
state of the English, as described by Fortescue in the time of Henry 6th, has
already been alluded to ; (p. 3) speaking of the French at the same period, he
says, contemptuously,– “They do not eat flesh, except it be the fat of bacon,
and that in very small quantities of other sorts, either boiled or roasted they do
not so much as taste, unless it be of the inwards and offals of sheep and bullocks,
and the like,” &c. Those very small quantities of bacon, could hardly have been
so small, as the proportion per diem of one twenty-secondth part of a pound,
munificently allowed by the Cirencester Dietary 7 The 24th, Henry 8. c. 3.
which regulates the price of meat, incidentally remarks, that beef, pork, mutton,
and veal, were at that period, “The food of the poorer sort 1" What is now
OF NECES SITY. 49
Laws of the Rhodians. At Delphi also, there was a regular dis-
tribution of corn, doubtless chiefly for the relief of the indigent.
Turner says, (Embassy, &c. P. 330.) “No human being can
suffer want at Teshoo-Loombo; ” and say the Tonquinese,_A man in
want is the creditor of the man who enjoys.-In Iceland, according
to Sir G. Mackenzie, people who pay 2 Rix-dollars to the public re-
venue, sometimes pay 50 or 60 towards the maintenance of the dis-
tressed poor.—In Norway, the destitute are confided to the less
opulent peasantry, who receive a pension for their maintenance.
(Ensor.) The Norwegians do not, like the novelist Fielding, and
like Fielding's numerous followers in these days, kindly regard the
“poor as a very great burthen and even a nuisance;” nor like “ven mine”
the food of the poorer sort, these Dietaries have exposed to the world; the very
words applied by Fortescue to the poor of France, have now become applicable
to the poor of England; who, most assuredly do not now eat—“beef, pork,
mutton, and veal,”—either boiled or roasted ' And hundreds of thousands are
there, who would be most grateful for the punishment of being compelled to
—“fast a fortnight upon bread and beer.”
The following is the inhuman Dietary of Cirencester:—

Breakfast Dinner Supper
Dietary for the able-bodied. | |Pota- wº-
- - Bread Gruel * toes. Soup Bread|Cheese
OZ ps. .." b. Tº. oz. oz.
#. sund, ſº | | | | | | | |
wºn Monday : T * - ;
Nº. tº ſº. TTTTTT
wºn Wednesday : T ; - + :
Nº. mº, ſîſ T.T.T.
#:- riday º - ; - } tº- † }
*- | * TTT ;
(Infirm persons, and those above 70 years of age, to be allowed one ounce of tea;
with milk, seven ounces of sugar, and three and a half ounces of butter, instead
of gruel, weekly; and Tuesday and Friday, men fourteen omnº, and ſº
twelve ounces of stiet, or rice-pudding instead of potatoes. Shildren undº..."
years of age to be dieted at discretion; after ten to be dieted as women; Sick,
according to the orders of the medical officer. Refractory, to be allowed sixteen
ounces of bread, with * diem.)
5
0 THE RIGHTS
as they were regarded in the time of the Rev. J. Moore.(*) That cler-
gyman published, in 1653, a Sermon entitled, “The crying sin of
England of not caring for the poor; ” in which, remarking upon the
mischief and injustice of enclosing Common-lands, he alludes to one
pretext of those who seemed bent upon shutting out the poor from
every inch of land,-" who join house to house, and field to field, 'till
there be no place” for them: (t) and which pretext, like the miserable
pretexts of the present day, was, that “The poor increase like fleas
and lice, and these vermine will eat us up unless we enclose.” (i) It
* A paper laid before a Committee of the House of Commons, in 1831, gave
the following particulars, viz.:-
Solid food per week.
lbs. oz.
Independant Labourers earned the value of . . 7 10
Paupers received exclusive of soup, &c. . & . 9 7
Paupers, under the Commissioners’ Dietaries, ex- 6 14
clusive of gruel, and potatoes, now have & :
Soldiers, received o © * > º 10 8
Committed persons in gaol . e º g . 12 11
Convicts º º º e º º . 15 0
Transports º s º e º te - 20 10
† Bills of inclosure, or (what they too frequently are) bills to enable the rich to
appropriate to themselves the lion's share of Common Lands, amounted to nearly
a thousand between 1756 and 1781. (Howlett, in “Month. Rev.” vol. Ixxiv.) It
is calculated that 5 millions of acres have been enclosed in the last 190 years, by
about 4200 Acts of Parliament, at a cost of nearly £10 per acre for fees and ex-
penses of obtaining the Acts.
# “One of the inhabitants being hot upon such inclosure in a town, gave this
reason why they must do it, viz.:-The poor increase like fleas and lice, and these
vermine will eat us up unless we inclose, . . . . Not to care for the poor, argues
not love to God, nor love to Christ, 1 Joh. 3, 17. He that hath the world's good,
and seeth his brother hath need, and Śhutteth up his bowels of compassion, how
dwells the love of God in him 2 . . . . These worldlings are the unprofitable bur-
dens of the earth, in whom there is no charity, liberality, hospitality, nor human-
ity ; such are greedy gripes, which by their inclosure, would have no poor to live
with them nor by them, but delight to converse with beasts: and to this purpose
turn Corne into Grass, and men into beasts . . . . Here let us notice that it was
a reprobate Judas, That cared not for the Poor, who is gone to his own place,
Acts 1–25, which is the place where all misers and churles must go —Depart from
me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For
I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat, &c. Observe here, Fire prepared.
It is the proper peculiar place of such as care not for the poor . . . . Here remem-
her we again that it is a damned Dives that cared not for a poor Lazarus,
and that it was one of those crying sins that brought fire and brimstone
upon Sodom and Gomorrha—even this, the not strengthening of the hands of the
poor and needy. If then it be that so great terrours and torments, remain for
them that relieve not the poor, what will become of them that oppress the poor?
What will be the end of these Make-beggars 2 If they be a cursed people, if fire,
prepared fire, everlasting fire with the Devil and his Angels, be their portion
that do not give bread, drink, clothing to the hungry, thirsty, naked,—into what
fire shall they be cast, what torments shall they have, that rob the poor; Mich.
3. 2. They pull off their skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones.
To rob a man of his clothes and leave him naked, is cruelty; to pull off a man's
skin is more than inhumanity; and yet there is a degree further; they take not
only skin, but flesh too.”—(The Crying Sin of England, of not caring for the
Poor ; wherein Inclosure, viz. such as doth unpeople townes, and uncorn fielde,
is arraigned, convicted, and condemned by the Word of God, 1653.)
OF NECESSITY. 5 I
was in 1653, that this abusive language was used : in 1834, Chan-
cellor. Brougham gave utterance to its kind counterpart. Nor do
they, in Norway, throw every possible impediment, politically and
systematically in the way of relief, so that the poor, suffering under
the severest privations, might be compelled to abandon all hope of
Succour, degraded, ashamed, and spirit-broken
- ——“With the loss of all
That can ennoble man, and make frail life
y >
Short as it is, supportable !
A legal provision for the destitute poor, is directly recognized in
the Capitularies of Charlemagne,—“Mendici per regionem mon per-
mittantur. Suos quoeque civitas pauperes alito.” At the same period
our own Saxon kings directed in their Ordinances, that the poor be
sustained by parsons, rectors, and their fellow parishioners, that none
die for want of sustenance. In modern France, the poor have a share
of the Octroi, or Town-customs; also a share of all theatrical and
exhibition receipts, There are no insulting and oppressive gaols,
called workhouses, says Sir R. Phillips; and no pass-carts. The poor
are content: while there are very few beggars, with a clergy ever
active in collecting, and honest in distribution. The institution called
“L’hotel-Dieu,” God's house of hospitality, is of very ancient date in
France; in these foundations, the poor and infirm are relieved, and
destitute children are also supported and educated, until capable of
providing for themselves. In Paris there are twelve “bureauz de
bienfaisance,” one for each arrondissement. These bureaua relieve the
poor by means of subventions paid over to them by the city of Paris:
and of the legacies and other donations of the charitable. The chief
endowment, however, consists of the City funds, or poor-rate. The
Hospitals are charged with the superintendance of these bureaua ;
by them is a census of the poor taken every three years, and relief is
administered by them. %
In short, in the words of Mr. Justice Ruggles, “In all climes,
through all ages, wherever civilization has spread a single ray of
light,” has the principle been implanted, anterior to all human laws,
that the poor have a firm inalienable right to maintenance; such
maintenance consisting, in the words of Montesquieu, of —“proper
nourishment, convenient clothing, and a kind of life not incompatible
with health: ” and assuredly, exempt from all insulting or degrading
conditions, or ignominious treatment. It appears that every State
in the world entitled to be termed “civilized,” whatever its form of go-
vernment, says the Quarterly-Review, whether Monarchical or Re-
'publican, possesses institutions established by positive legal enact-
ments for preventing destitution, by affording a certain relief to those
who are on the verge of it: even Siberia has its Poor-Law.(*)
* During the middle ages hospitality was enforced by statutes. “Quicumque
hospitivenienti lectum aut focum negaverit, trium solidorum inlatione mulctetur.”
(Leg. Burg.)—“ Si quis homini aliquo pergenti in itimere mansionem vetaverit
sexaginta solidos componet in publico.”(Capitul. 6. 82.) The laws of the Slavi,
ordained, that “ the moveables of an inhospitable person should be confiscated
and his house burnt.” They even allowed the landlord to steal for the support of
his guests:—“Quod noctu faratus fueris, cras appone, hospitibus.” (Rer.
Mecleburg : Jià. 8.)
52 THE RIGHTS
It would be superfluous to multiply instances of the considerate
treatment of the Poor by various nations; or to accumulate authorities
upon the subject of the Rights of Necessity. Of the Work of Mai-
monides, entitled, the “Laws of the Hebrews, relating to the Poor
and the Stranger,” it remains to be stated, that it is comprised in
the “Jad Chazekah,” (or “Yad Hachazakah,”) the Strong Hand, of
that celebrated Rabbi. The “Yad” was written in Hebrew, and
first appeared in the year 1177, in Egypt; and as stated in the ac-
companying “Life of Maimonides,” it is distributed into fourteen
Books, subdivided into 89 distinct Treatises, the “Laws relating to
the Poor,” forming one of those Treatises. In various countries and
at various times, some of these Treatises have been separately trans-
lated into Latin: few into English. Indeed it is doubtful whether
there has appeared a complete literal English version of any one of
those Tracts, excepting that upon “Penitence,” translated by Skin-
ner. Under the title of “ Dona Pauperum,” a translation into Latin
of the second and third chapters of the “Laws relating to the Poor,”
was made by Dan. Laudius, in 1705: previously to which, in 1679, a
complete Latin version with the Hebrew text, was published at Ox-
ford by the learned Prideaux, under the title, “R. Moses Maimonides
de jure pauperis et peregrini apud Judaeos.” It does not appear, how-
ever, that any English translation of this Tract has hitherto been
made : although the subject of it can be deemed scarcely less in-
teresting or less important, than curious and elaborate researches
into the Jewish rites and ceremonials; concerning which matters, so
many ponderous volumes in all languages have been compiled.
There have been those, observes Selden, (“ De success. ad Leg.
JEbrae :”) who, whilst displaying a pomp of words about Hebrew
points, and roots, and ceremonies, were little versed in the Hebrew
ejusdem sententioc receptoe ab ejusdem magistris ad posteros trans-
Inissoe, negliguntur.” And yet, of all known laws, the most ancient
and venerable, says Sir W. Jones, are those of the Jews. In the
present age, when such fearful innovations are made upon the
ancient and venerable Laws of England, even upon the very fun-
damentals of the Constitution: when Laws of vital importance are
virtually abrogated; laws, which even during centuries of civil strife and
anarchy had compassionately regarded the poorer members of society,
—the “Constitutions” of the Jews for the relief of their poor, may
perchance afford matter for reflection. If it be demanded—What
have Christians to do with the Judaic Law P—let it be remembered
that St. Paul termed the Hebrew Scriptures,-the Oracles of God.
“What advantage then hath the Jew? Much every way: chiefly,
because that unto them were committed the Oracles of God.”
(Rom. 3.) And although the Christian dispensation may have re-
lieved us from adhering to the ceremonials of the Mosaic Law, it by
no means exonerates us from the duties therein inculcated. In vain
is it attemped by wire-drawn distinctions, to question the present
authority of the Old Testament. To affirm that the New Testament
is of divine authority, and to refuse equal authority to the Law and
OF NECESSITY. 53
the Prophets, is not the less a denial of the authority of Christ; since
our Saviour pronounces them to be—“the Word of God, which can-
not be broken,” (John 10)— and quotes them repeatedly as of divine
origin, making especial allusion to the Psalms, to the writings of
Moses, and to those of the Prophets. (Matt. 22. Luke 24.) True it
is, that in some times and places, the real Statutes of Moses have
been exchanged for mere Rabbinical regulations and reveries, ori-
ginating apparently in excessive scrupulousness, or in pedantry and
ignorant misconception. That charge cannot, however, be made
against the “Laws of the Hebrews’ as digested by Maimonides;
strictly, compassionately, and conscientiously founded, as they are,
upon the unequivocal and oft-repeated precepts of the Old Testament.
Should the consideration of those “Laws” tend, in any case, to mi-
tigate harsh and inexorable ordinances, which might justly, in the words
of St. Paul, be termed “implacable and unmerciful, bespeaking little
natural affection ”—the odious conception of “despiteful inventors of
evil things,” (Rom. 1,) this Translation of the Tract of Maimonides
will have been of some utility to the cause of humanity. Assuredly,
if in the time of the poet Cowper, sufficient reason existed for refer-
ring to the Hebrews, as imparting a mournful lesson to the people of
other countries and of England especially: there is not less reason
in these days for making a similar reference, although upon different
grounds;–
Oh Israel! of all nations most undone,
Thy diadem displaced, thy sceptre gone !
Cry aloud thou, that sittest in the dust,
Cry to the proud, the cruel, the unjust 1
Knock at the gates of nations, rouse their fears,
Say wrath is coming and the storm appears 1
But raise the shrillest cry in British ears 1
The Latin version of Prideaux has long since become so rare, that
no copy is found in the British Museum, nor in any of the public
libraries of London. It was dedicated to Baron Heneage Finch, the
famous lawyer, and at that time Lord Chancellor of England.: and
in his dedication, Prideaux declares that he would not present to so
distinguished a patron, any Rabbinical compilation, unless the pro-
duction of a writer held, and justly so, in great estimation; and he
assures the Chancellor, that the perusal of the work would prove,
that into whatever disrepute other Rabbinical writers may have fallen,
no contemptuous epithets could ever be justly applied to the labours
of Maimonides; a Rabbi, whom he terms “ celebratissimus juriscon-
sultus Judæus—sapientissimus Judaeus, summis animi dotibus instructus.”
In allusion to the “Jaws relating to the Poor,” Prideaux further
remarks, that if we trace the origin of the English municipal laws, we
shall discover that many of those laws have their remote foundation
in the Mosaic Code (Notes, p. 85.); and that our early kings, duly
appreciating the value and importance of the Sacred-writings, seldom
comprised in their code any laws which were not originally inforce
amongst the Hebrews. (See Note 21 upon “ Gleaning.”) Prideaux
congratulates himself, that in giving to the world his Latin transla-
tion from the Hebrew, he has brought to light a Tract hitherto lost in
54 THE RIGHTS
the obscurity of an unknown tongue; — “ew obscuris ignota: linguæ
latebris in lucem producta.” An English version, now that even the
Latin Version of Prideaux is scarcely extant, may tend to throw still
more light upon the labours of Maimonides: even though Latin con-
tinue to be, as it would seem by the expression of Prideaux to
have been in his time, so very vulgar a tongue.(*)
The Abbé Fleury, in alluding to the literary compositions of the
Hebrews remarks, that neither exordium nor transition are had re-
course to ; and that historical facts judiciously selected, are, for the
most part, simply and clearly related, without argument or comment.
With similar clearness and precision are their laws also compiled,
and with agreeable conciseness their maxims of morality; in a manner
well calculated to make a strong and lasting impression. Such con-
ciseness and perspicuity are found particularly in the juridical Tracts
of Maimonides; and, says Prideaux, so easy and elegant is his style,
so comprehensive and clear his method, that his “Jad Chazekah '’
will not suffer in a comparison either with the Roman Civil Code, or
with the Code of any other nation. (See the Account of his Life,
pp. 10, 15, 38.) Seldom are any reasons alleged in support of the
principle of the law; although not unfrequently, reference is made to
Scripture as decisive of the justice and necessity of some particular
regulation. Where any obscurity in the law appears to require par-
ticular exposition, Maimonides generally employs a mode of interroga-
tion, in elucidation of the difficulty; a mode adopted apparently from
the Mischna, wherein expositions of the Law, by question and an-
swer, are very generally given.
In the present English version, the chief object has been to produce
a close literal translation of the expressions employed : and wherever
any supplementary words have been introduced in order to afford a
more clear comprehension of the text, the additions have been desig-
nated by Italic letters.
The illustrative notes (following the “Testimonies”) will, it is
hoped, explain the more intricate passages of the Text; and throw
some light upon the Judaic Laws and Customs incidentally alluded
to by Maimonides.
(*)His opinion of this Tract of Maimonides is thus expressed by Sir R. Phillips,
in a letter dated “Brighton, October, 1838,” (from which an extract has been
given in a preceding Note, at P. ll) viz; — “Sir Richard Phillips cannot ac-
knowledge in terms of sufficient thankfulness, the obliging attention of Mr. Pep-
percorne in addressing to him a copy of his Tracts; especially of the exposition of
Maimonides of the laws of Moses, relative to the poor, gleaning, &c. If the lite-
rature of the 1000 years of which the age of Maimonides was the middle period,
contained ten such tracts as his on those subjects, they would rescue it from its
character of darkness; and even the barbarous logic of the schools would be for-
given, if it had produced much of such fruit. The work has no fault, but its sub-
servience to the despotism of syllogism, which on some points draws the author
into fantastic conclusions.”
4 & J.
& G g *
* * > * >
$ 4 tº
* * * * * *
|
||
| |
|
|
|
|
º
*




SO ME A C C O U NT
OF THE
LIFE AND W RITING S
OF
MAIMO N IDES,
THE CELEBRATED JEWISH RABBI;
AND OF THE
O R. I G IN
OF THE
JUDAIC CODE OF LAW.
PREFIxED. To THE “LAws of THE HEBREws, RELATING To THE
Poor AND THE STRANGER,”
BY R. MOSES MAIMONIDES.
With a View of Cordova, the Birth-place of Maimonides.
LONDON :
PRINTED BY J. H. STARIE, 59, MUSEUM STREET.
SOME ACCOUNT
L H F E A N D W R IT IN G S
M A H M O N ID ES
AND OF THE
ORIGIN OF THE JUDAIC CODE OF LAW.
“Men, well-endow’d, of honourable parts,
Design'd by nature wise, but self-made fools,
All these, and more like these, were bred at schools.”
TYRocINIUM.
Moses MAIMONIDEs, or Moses the son of Maimon, the cele-
brated Jewish Rabbi, was born at Cordova, in Spain, in the
year 1131. Whether the pedigree of his family could, as was
said, be traced so high as to the house of David, can be but of
little moment: his more immediate ancestry, were, however,
“illustrious,” if not by courtesy, at least in the more really
noble sense of the word; and six of them were distinguished
by the title of “Wise.” Buxtorf quotes his own saying, thus:
— Ego Moses filius, Majemonis judicis, filii Josephi sapientis,
filii Isaact judicis, filii Josephi judicis, filii Obadia judicis, filii
Salamonis, filii R. Obadia judicis, &c. Maimonides was perfectly
skilled in the Hebrew, Arabic, Chaldee, Turkish, Median, and
other languages—a number of languages, to be versed in the
iv. LIFE AND WHITINGS
mere sound and structure of which, is, but too frequently,
adduced as evidence of profound erudition: —
“For he that is but able to express
No sense at all in several languages,
Will pass for learneder than he that knows
To speak the strongest reason in his own.”
But, besides this mere elementary aid in the acquiring of
knowledge, Maimonides was deeply versed in philosophy,
mathematics, and Jewish jurisprudence; and for knowledge
and practice of the medical art he attained the highest repu-
tation. His transcendent abilities gained him the titles of
“Eagle of the Doctors,” and “Lumen Captivitatis: ” and his
name became famous throughout Spain, France, Germany,
Italy, and Egypt. The least of his titles was that of “Rabbi,”
a title in after-ages applied to all who could make any pretence
to learning. “The Scribes and Pharisees,” said our Saviour,
“love to be called of men ‘ Rabbi, Rabbi !’” In the Jewish
writings, Maimonides is frequently designated by the name of
“Rambam,” the letters of which name are taken from the
words—Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon; and he is not unfrequently
called “Moses Egyptius.”
Determined that in his person no proof should be afforded
of the truth of the ancient saying: —
“Wedlock's an ill men eagerly embrace.”
It is related that the father of Maimonides had deliberately
resolved not to encounter the perils of matrimony; or, as
Juvenal has it: —
& 8 to fondly poke
His awkward nose into the marriage yoke.”
Like the brother of Dryden, eulogized by the poet for his
sound judgment, he had made up his mind that, to the end
of life, he would remain: –
“Lord of himself, uncumbered with a wife,
Where, for a year—a month—perhaps a night,
Long penitence succeeds a short delight,”
OF MIAI MONIDES. V
Despite of this resolution, he however eventually imbibed the
common delusion, and was induced to take pity upon slighted
womankind. Peradventure, his conscience tormented him
when he reflected upon the dissention, the profligacy, the
cruelty, possibly the utter disorganization of civilized society,
which might follow the general adoption of his own pusilla-
nimous and selfish example: peradventure he had (no uncom-
mon change 1) changed his mind However it might be,
before he confessed the error of his ways, an awful tale was
bruited abroad, that an apparition, which he at first slighted,
pertinaciously continued to haunt him, night after night, com-
manding him — happy command 1 — to solicit the hand of
the daughter of a butcher in a neighbouring town. At length,
most conscientiously convinced of the impropriety of his mor-
bid apprehensions and aversions, he is said to have obeyed,
with a tender and contrite heart, the supernatural vision, and
to have successfully courted the butcher's daughter It would
seem that the father of Maimonides found no reason to regret
this timely penitence, since, upon the death of his first wife,
who redeemed the life of her son, Maimonides, by the sacri-
fice of her own in giving him birth, he resolved a second time
to show to Cordova how erroneous the peevish assertion, that
“Minds are so hardly match'd, that even the first,
Though pair’d by Heaven, in Paradise were curs'd.”
And the father of Maimonides, perchance, under the influence
of another agreeable apparition, commenced a second court-
ship, which he expeditiously terminated as successfully as
the first.
Very contradictory are the histories of the early life of
Maimonides. We have seen that he never possessed the
advantage of a mother's solicitude and love : the moment of
his birth was the moment of his mother's death. The Rabbi
Gedaliah declares, that in his youth, he exhibited not the
slightest inclination for study, and that his father was so exas-
vi LIFE AND WEITINGS
perated at his indolence, obtuseness, and inattention, that he
at length expelled him from his dwelling, upbraiding him
with being filius lanionis. He further declares that Maimo-
mides then betook himself to the Synagogue, where his whole
time was spent, living and sleeping under its roof; that, after
a while, dreading the displeasure of his father, he fled to a
certain city, where the Rabbi Joseph F. Megas taught, under
whom he made an astonishing progress; that, after many
years' exile, anxious to revisit his native town, he returned to
Cordova, and, incognito, delivered a discourse upon the Sab-
bath, which charmed and electrified the people. Seizing the
occasion of making himself known to his father, who was
one of the audience, a perfect reconciliation was effected.
R. Gedaliah has also a tradition that Maimonides and his
preceptor, in dread of the Roman prefects, concealed them-
selves in a cave for twelve years, devoting the whole of the
time to the study of the Mosaic Law.
Such is the account given by the Rabbi Gedaliah, appa-
rently unwilling that so famous a character as Maimonides
should descend to posterity without a due share of those
remarkable or romantic incidents which are usually appended
to the early years of those who have afterwards become dis-
tinguished. We have, however, the more authentic statement
of Abraham Zacchuth, for believing that it was not a cave
and its appurtenances which inspired Maimonides, but rather
the wholesome example, the rational precepts, and the watch-
ful care of his father, aided by his preceptor, the Rabbi,
Megas.
His fame, his probity, and his learning, did not, however,
exempt him from envy and jealousy, peculiarly malignant, in
consequence of his independent opinions, and his connexion
with Averrhoes, the Arabian philosopher. For, although
Maimonides strenuously asserted the divine wisdom exhibited
in the Mosaic dispensation, and was deeply versed in Talma-
OF MAIMONIDES. vii
dic lore, he, nevertheless, entertained and expressed, a very
decided opinion against the truth, and the utility of those
heterogeneous compounds, the Gemaras. In a letter to his
disciple R. Josephus, he writes, – “Cave, ne tempus tuwm teras,
in eagositione et operosa considerateone Gemarae : ego, enim, in
illis multum temporis perdidi, et parum utilitatis hausi.”—[Bux-
torf Vit. Maim.]
Now, the votaries of the Talmud, and the Cabbala, form
the great body of the Jewish nation throughout the world.
There is, indeed, a small sect of Jews denominated “Caraites,”
(i. e. Textualists,) who, rejecting traditions, maintain the suf-
ficiency of the Scripture, in its literal sense alone. No wonder,
therefore, that with so large a body of opponents, the plain
expression of his opinions should have raised up against Mai-
monides, a host of bitter enemies. He, not an incompetent
judge, had, after studious examination and mature deliberation
frankly expressed his doubts not of the infallibility only, but
even of the bare utility of those incongruous farragos, the
Gemaras: his blind and vindictive opponents, hereupon de-
nounce him as a criminal to be visited by pains and penalties,
the heaviest to which their church could condemn a malicious
or unprincipled offender. The storm was attempted, unsuc-
cessfully at first, to be raised by a bigoted faction at Marseilles.
Want of success, tended only to augment their religious viru-
lence; and they eventually succeeded in exciting the French,
the Spanish, the German, the Italian, the Asiatic, and the
African Jews, all to condemn his Works to the flames, and
their author to the pains of Excommunication, Even those
who dared to study his Works, were to be visited with the same
confuting pains and penalties; and Excommunication, in tole-
rant times and places, was not quite a nominal punishment!
There were, however, some enlightened men of his
nation, (and the great David Kimchi, a Translation of whose
Commentary upon Zachariah, was published in Feb. 1837, by
viii LIFE AND W RITINGS
the Rev. Mr. Mc. Caul,-was at their head,) who, sensible of
his distinguished merits, boldly stood forward to stem the tor-
rent: and so successfully, that they eventually procured sen-
tence of Excommunication against his enemies. Great was
the contention, and of forty years duration, the confusion and
schism that these proceedings occasioned: and so irksome
became the position of Maimonides, that he at length aban-
doned his native land, and succeeded in escaping to Egypt.
Here, in order to support himself, he is said, to have at
first become a trader in precious stones; experiencing great
kindness from a Moslem, whose generosity and humanity,
were far greater than ever his name was long. Whilst he
needed protection and support, Maimonides ever found a gen-
erous protector in Alkadi Al Phadel Abdol Rakem Ebn Ali
Al Baissani. Subsequently, he established a college at Alex-
andria, to which pupils resorted from all parts of the world.
The reputation of his extraordinary attainments, soon reached
the ears of Saladin, the Sultan of Egypt, who appointed him
to be one of his physicians: and people from the highest to the
lowest rank, eagerly sought his counsel and advice. To a
Rabbi, proposing to pay him a visit to discuss some difficult
theories, Maimonides thus writes;–“I live in Egypt at the
distance of nearly two Sabbath-day journeys from Al-Cairo,
where the Sultan resides. On him the duties of my appoint-
ment demand regular attendance every morning. If there be
nothing amiss at court I return home towards noon; and
almost famished for want of food, at my return, I find the ap-
proaches to my house crowded with Gentiles and Jews, men
of all ranks impatiently awaiting my return. As soon as I
have taken refreshment I examine my patients; until I become
so overpowered with the fatigue of speaking and prescribing,
that my speech almost fails me, before I can conclude.”
In his “Chronicon,” the Rabbi Gedaliah relates a story,
concerning a species of wager, between Maimonides during
{} F M AIXVION IDES. - ix
his sojourn in Egypt, and some of the learned men of the land.
It was the custom, says he, for the Sultan upon certain days,
to admit into his royal presence, the seven men, who were the
most learned of his dominions, in the seven liberal arts of
Grammar, Dialectick, Rhetorick, Arithmetick, Geometry,
Astrology, and Music. Well knowing that in most of these
arts, Maimonides greatly outshone the learned men of Egypt,
the Sultan was uncertain to which degree Maimonides was
entitled. Perceiving the doubts existing in the mind of the
Sultan, and led away by envious and malignant feelings, his
rivals were determined to deny the superiority of Maimonides:
and they proposed to the Sultan a trial of skill and learning,
to be exhibited in the discovery and employment of an anti-
dote for a certain poison which each was to swallow in the
royal presence. Of course it was planned that Maimonides
should be the first to swallow the draught. Upon the day
appointed, therefore, they all appeared before the Sultan and
his Court; and, having previously taken an antidote which
he had prepared, Maimonides, without hesitation, swallowed
the poison eagerly handed to him by his antagonists. He
then instantly returned home to repeat the antidote. Dis-
appointed in their too sanguine expectations of the instan-
taneous effects of the potion, his rivals were now compelled,
each in his turn, to follow the example of Maimonides; and,
ere they had emptied their several cups, they fell dead at
the feet of the Sultan.
Although, in Spain, Maimonides had been compelled to
practise outward forms of Mahommedism, he had no sooner
landed in Egypt than he openly returned to that faith, which
he had been constrained to abjure in his native land: and,
notwithstanding the difference in their religious tenets, he
was ever regarded and treated, both by the Sultan and his
people, with respect and honour. From some writing in an
old manuscript copy of the Pentateuch, found in the library
of Salamon Sasoun, Rabbi Asarias believes, that, for a short
- C
X LIFE AND WHITINGS
period, Maimonides quitted Egypt, and went to Burgundy;
under a conviction that it had been revealed to him that he
should discover in Burgundy, the “Book of the Law of God,”
written in the hand-writing of Ezra; and it is said that his
search was successful.
We shall presently see the opinions of Casaubon, Scaliger,
Sir W. Drummond, and others, of the character and abilities
of Maimonides. Gibbon calls him “the wise, the humane
y
Maimonides;” and in high terms is he spoken of by Gene-
brardus, Grotius, Petavius, Vossius, and Buxtorf. Claverin-
gius declares that his abilities were such as innate genius
could alone confer. He says, “Tale ingenium, quamvis indus-
tria et crebra evereitatione augeri et perfici potest, nulla tamen
arte nullisque conatibus acquiretur, cum singulare sit donum quod
natura seu potius Deus, bonorum omnium largitor, hominibus qui-
busdam benigne indulsit.” And he proceeds to compare the
style of the writings of Maimonides with that of Cicero in
his “De Officiis,” and of Aristotle in his “Philosophy.”
Maimonides is eulogized as a man of uncommon and
splendid abilities, by L. Compeigne Deveil, who terms him,
“Ingenio vir acerrimo ae splendido et doctrinae prope singulari : ”
and, indeed, by the learned, both amongst Jews and Chris-
tians, was he, notwithstanding the utter disrepute into which
Rabbinical writers were fallen, ever held in very high esti-
mation. Sir William Drummond terms him the most learned
of the Rabbins; and Casaubon says of him, “Moses Maimo-
nides solidae atque ingentis doctrinae vir de quo videdrid mihi posse
were dicere quod Plinius olim de Diodoro Siculo—Primum illum
inter suos desiisse nugari.” (Ex. 16, contra Bar.) So elaborate
and skilful were his interpretations of the obscurities and
difficulties of the Judaic Law, that his reputation and weight
amongst his own nation, were second only to those of the Great
Legislator himself. Indeed, by the suffrage of the whole Jewish
nation, he was recognized as a Second Founder of their Law;
UF MAIMONIDES. xi.
and it became a common saying that “A Mose, usque ad Mosem
non eatitit qualis Moses!”
One of the reasons advanced by the Rev. Mr. Gerrans,
for believing that Benjamin of Tudela comfortably composed
the greater part of his perilous travels at his own fire-side, is
that he has made no mention of Maimonides; and yet Mai-
monides flourished at Cairo at the very time that Benjamin de-
clares he was traversing Egypt ' This omission, observes Mr.
Gerrans, whether it proceed from party-spirit or from igno-
rance, either renders the author contemptible, or excites sus-
picion against his Work in the minds of all those “who are
acquainted with the merit of the justly celebrated Egyptian
Moses, whose fame had not only filled the Synagogues of
Egypt, but all the world; and whose Works will be admired
as long as they are understood.”
It is said that Maimonides wrote many things in Greek,
and that he frequently quoted from Aristotle, Plato, and
Galen. Amongst other medical works, he published the
Aphorisms of Hippocrates and of Galen, with his own com-
ments and explanations. In the Bodleian Library are others
of his medical works; in one of which (Cat. MSS. No. 4579)
he is styled, the Son of the Servant of God; and in the
Colbert Library (No. 1707) is a work which he dedicated to
the Sultan of Egypt, upon “Certain Medicaments” wherein
he is called “Moses Ben Abdallae Israelitae, Cordubensis.”
In the Royal Library at Paris may be seen a work of his
upon Asthma. I have, says R. Gedaliah, seen many of his
medical works translated into Latin. -
But the principal work of this great man, (and which
he wrote at the age of fifty,) is that which he intitled “More
Nevochim,” (i. e., Doctor Perpleworum, or a Guide to the
Perplexed:) the design being to illustrate and explain the
Law and the Prophets. It was originally written in Arabic,
xii LIFE AND WRITINGS
with Hebrew letters — not an unusual practice — and was
translated, under the inspection of Maimonides, from the
Arabic into Hebrew, by R. Aben Tybbon. The original
Arabic manuscript is thought to have been in the possession
of Dr. Pocock at the time that he published his “Porta
Mosis: ” a Latin version was published at Bazil in 1629 by
the Younger Buxtorf. This work was held in the highest
estimation by Christians as well as by the people of his own
Creed. Jos. Scaliger, writing to Casaubon, declares that,
“‘More Nevochim’ non potest satis laudari.” And C. Scaliger,
writing to Ubertus, terms it, “Liber plenus bonde frugis,
abstruste eruditionis et Theologis Christianis apprime necessarius.”
In a letter to Richard Thompson (who had sent him a Copy
of the work), he writes, “Scite igitur pluris mihi esse librum
quam si isometron chrusoun mississes.” That it was a work to
be advantageously studied by Christian divines was, also, the
confirmed opinion of Bishop Aug. Justinianus, who himself
published at Paris an edition, which he dedicated to Pouche,
Archbishop of Sens; and in his dedication, he thus charac-
terizes the work, “‘ More Nevochim’ opus same recondita et
minime trivialis doctrinae, in quo, multa rationibus demonstrantur
Philosophicis, plurima adducuntur qua, mire conducunt et faciunt,
ad intelligentiam Sacrorum Librorum.”
“More Nevochim” contains philosophical dissertations, ex-
hibiting great penetration and judgment, and confuting many
of the sophistical and mischievous fallacies of the ancients. It
is charged however, with being not wholly exempt from un-
profitable conceits; and Heidigger declares, that in it, Maimo-
mides maintains that Adam was created, both male and female ;
consequently, that Adam and Eve were but one ! An opinion,
maintained indeed by many Rabbies subsequently, and espe-
cially by Manasseh Ben Israel, the learned Rabbi of the 17th
Century. As regards Maimonides however, the charge is de-
clared by Van Dale, to be unfounded, and the mistake to have
arisen from an incorrect quotation. - - -
OF MAIMION IDES. xiii
Another writer (Arnauld, Réflew. sur Mallebrauche,) objects,
that in this work, Maimonides has maintained that brutes have
a kind of Free-will. If we grant them this, How, he demands,
are we to avoid the absurd conclusion, that they are capable
of Good and Evil, and consequently subject with ourselves,
to Future Rewards and Punishments. The words as quoted
from the Latin version, seem by no means to bear the inter-
pretation put upon them by Mons. Arnauld; “Omnia pariter
animantia irrationalia moventur voluntate sua ; ” and the deduc-
tion drawn, seems directly at variance with the intention of
Maimonides, expressed by the word irrationalia. Cicero indeed,
in his “Tusculan Disputations,” (4.6.) makes the following
remark; — “Voluntas est quae quid cum ratione desiderat; ” but
Maimonides speaks of a Voluntas, in conjunction with “ani-
mantia irrationalia.” With about as much show of reason,
therefore, might it be said, that Solomon had intended to endow
brutes with powers of ratiocination, because, in Ecclesiastes,
(iii. 18. et seq.) he declares, that the sons of men may see that
they themselves are beasts; for “that which befalleth the sons
of men, befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as
the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea they have all one breath;
so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast.” Had it
been indisputable, moreover, that Maimonides intended to as-
sert, that brutes were endowed with reason, it would argue
little against his character for probity, penetration, and wisdom;
unless we mean also, to call in question the characters of Valla,
Cittadinus, Pasquier, Montagne, Vossius, and Charron; all
modern and esteemed writers, who seem to entertain some
such anomalous conceit.
The Atomical philosophy, is another subject remarked upon
by Maimonides, in his “More Nevochim; ” and he gives an
account of a Sect of Oriental Atomists, styled the “Speakers,”
who sagaciously combined the system of Atoms, with that of a
Vacuum; but whose Atomies being all alike, and without di-
mension, differed materially from those of Leucippus and his
xiv LIFE AN ID W RITINGS
followers. Maimonides combats their arguments, and shows
that their conceits compelled them to deny, that One body moves
more quickly than another, and that the—Diagonal of a square
is longer than any one of the Sides! Out of this last quandary,
these dexterous atomists readily extricate themselves, by very
solemnly denying, even the evistence of square figures ' And
as to motive powers, they modestly admit, that our ever mis-
chievous senses are always conspiring to practice upon us the
grossest of deceptions; that all is, in fact, a lusus naturae to the
cheated visual organs; and that rational beings must rely
solely upon ratiocination, for the discovery of truth ! — and
they might have added, - of folly! Something like a schism,
had arisen among these profound sophists, upon the very ab-
struse and weighty question propounded, as to where was the
Seat of learning in a learned man 2 Whether it learnedly resi-
ded in one single atomy of his learned totality ? Or, whether
in every learned individual unit, of the infinite multi-
tude 2
Of rather more importance, than these subtle profundities,
are the arguments of Maimonides, upon the subject of the
Good and the Evil of this world, and his refutation of the so-
phistical fallacies employed upon this subject. Even Aristotle
countenanced the opinion, so injurious to the Deity, that there
is a larger amount of Evil than of Good in nature. (Metaph.
Lib. l. c. 4.) And this opinion Maimonides refutes with
great force of argument, accompanying his arguments with
many beautiful illustrations and remarks. He says, that such
notions are very apt to be indulged in, by the superficial and
the ignorant; and not unfrequently indeed, by those who
make great pretence to sense and wisdom. Accordingly, that
we find amongst the songs and poems of the heathem, these and
such like sayings; how miraculous, if good continue but for a
short season / But of what long continuance, and how numberless
are the ills of life / He classes under Three Heads the Evils to
which mankind is obnoxious. I.-Those that result from man's
OF MIA IMO N IDES. XV
form and constitution. II. —Those that result from the ma-
chinations of man against man. III.-Those brought upon
each individual by his own irregular desires. “Otez la force,
la Sante, le bon temoignage de soi, tous les biens de cette vie, sont
dans l'opinion ; otez les douleurs du corps, & les remords de la
conscience, tous nos maua sont imaginaires.” (Rousseau Em. Liv.
2.) If for “Good” and “Evil,” Aristotle had substituted
“Enjoyment” and “Suffering,” few would be disposed to
question the position; for—“toujours plus de souffrances que
de jouissances ; voila la difference commune a tous.”
It was however his work, “Jad Chazekah,” (i.e. the Strong
hand,) also called “Mischna Hathora,” (i. e. the Reception of
the Law,) and by himself, “Lex Secunda,” written a few years
previously, which established the fame of Maimonides as a
Jurist. This Work, the labour of 12 years, may, says Prideaux,
in point of elegance and perspicuity of style, as well as method-
ical arrangement, fairly vie with the Roman Civil-Code, or
with any code of law extant. It presents a complete Pandect
of Judaic Civil and Canon Law, illustrated with his own intel-
ligent Commentaries. Comprised in 14 Books, subdivided
into 89 Tracts, (of which, the “Laws relating to the Poor,”
forms one,) it may be regarded as a Compendium of whatever
is worthy of notice in the Talmuds; and it affords an expo-
sition of all the rights, customs, or traditions, observed under
the Laws of the Hebrews. The work first appeared in Egypt
about the year 1177; and many editions were published at
Venice; that in four volumes Small-Folio of the year 1574, being
the most prized.
The “Commentaries upon the Mischna” (or Peruschim,)
he commenced, at the age of twenty-three, at Cordova, and
completed afterwards in Egypt. His Letter upon the “Resur-
rection of the Dead,” he wrote at the age of fifty-five.
It is the “Confession of Faith,” which Maimonides drew
xvi LIFE AND WIRITINGS
up at the close of the 11th century, to which modern Jews
still adhere. This was as follows, viz.:- -
1. —I believe, with a true and perfect faith, that God is
the Creator, (whose name be blessed ') Governor, and Maker,
of all creatures, and that he has wrought all things, worketh,
and shall work for ever.
2. — I believe, with perfect faith, that the Creator (whose
name be blessed ') is one : and that such a unity as is in him
can be found in none other; and that he alone has been our
God, is, and for ever shall be.
3. – I believe, with perfect faith, that the Creator (whose
name be blessed !) is not corporeal, nor to be comprehended
with any bodily properties: and that there is no bodily essence
which can be likened unto him. -
4.—I believe, with perfect faith, the Creator (whose
name be blessed ') to be the first and the last, and that
nothing was before him, and he shall abide the last for ever.
5. – I believe, with perfect faith, that the Creator (whose
name be blessed !) is to be worshipped, and none else.
6–1 believe, with perfect faith, that all the words of the
prophets are true. -
7. —I believe, with perfect faith, that the prophecies of
Moses our master (may he rest in peace l) are true; that he
was the father and chief of all wise men, who lived before
him or ever shall live after him.
8. —I believe, with perfect faith, that all the law, which
at this day is found in our hands, was delivered by God
himself to our master Moses—(God's peace be with him 1)
QF MAIMO N IDES. xvii
9. — I believe, with perfect faith, that the same law is
never to be changed, nor any other given to us of God
(whose name be blessed for ever).
10. – I believe, with perfect faith, that God (whose name
be blessed () understandeth all the thoughts and words of
men, as it is written in the Prophets, “He fashioneth their
hearts alike; he understandeth all their works.”
11. – I believe, with perfect faith, that God will recom-
pense good, to those who keep his commandments; and will
punish those who transgress them.
12. – I believe, with perfect faith, that the Messiah is yet
to come: and though he retard his coming, yet will I wait
for him till he appears.
13. – I believe, with perfect faith, that the dead shall be
restored to life, when it shall seem fit to God the Creator,
(whose name be blessed and memory celebrated, world with-
out end Amen l)—[Butler's Hor. Bibl. p. 95.]
Various are the accounts concerning his latter years.
Some say that, at the age of seventy, he determined to visit
the Holy Land, where he fell sick, and died; and that he
was buried in Upper Galilee. Upon his coffin was inscribed,
in Hebrew characters, “Selectissimus omnium hominum. /* to
which some kind wit added, “Excommunicatus anathemati-
zatus et hareticus /* Others say that he died in Egypt,
having solemnly enjoined his friends to inter his remains in
the Holy Land: that, upon the way, these friends were
attacked by robbers, and that, abandoning the coffin, the
recreant bearers fled for their lives. Disappointed at finding
no booty, the robbers, they say, determined to throw the
coffin into the sea: that they made many vain attempts;
but the coffin still most marvellously resisted; and even the
D -
xviii LIFE AND WEITINGS
united force of thirty of the strongest of the band was of no
avail ' Thus miraculously defeated, the robbers, they say,
became exceedingly alarmed; and at length, conscious of the
interposition of a superior power, they one and all exclaimed
—“Surely this must be a holy man l’” Now, inspired with
a new devotion, they repented of their iniquities, and took
charge of the coffin; and, joined by its former supporters,
the united body proceeded to Palestine. “And,” says S.
Schullas, “the corpse of Maimonides at length found a rest-
ing-place in Tiberias.”—[Buxtorf. vit. Maim.]
However this may be, it seems undoubted that, after
having spent a long and most useful life, he died at about the
age of seventy-three, in the 1204th year of the Christian
AEra. During three years did the people at large, Egyptians,
as well as Jews of every Country, bewail his loss; and they
called the year in which it took place, “Lamentum lamen-
tabile /* *
But whilst due honor is awarded to the Son, let not the
merit of the Parent be undervalued. In contradiction of
the tale of Gedaliah, we have sufficient cause for believing
that the Father of Maimonides did not neglect his motherless
child: on the contrary, that he was of that considerate and
conscientious turn of mind, that, with the Poet Cowper, he
felt that God and nature never intended the health and
morals of his offspring to be endangered by exile from the
parental roof: at that critical period too, when only the affec-
tion and watchfulness of a parent, can afford adequate protec-
tion against impending dangers and temptations:–
“For youth is facile, and its yielding will,
Receives with fatal ease, the imprint of ill!”
the son of Maimon was therefore brought up under his
parent's eye. The Father of Maimonides must have desired
to see his Son more than superficially versed in the know-
OF MAIMONIDES. xix
ledge of words and things; and he must have perceived that
the generality of Schools are calculated rather to engender
vice and vanity, than to encourage genius, and to stimulate
to virtue. He must have felt that the mere acquisition of
a knowledge of languages, a knowledge of words, and of the
logic of the schools, were not the only food with which the
growing mind of his Son ought to be nourished: and, finding,
probably: —
“That such was all the mental food purvey'd,
By public hackneys in the schooling trade.”
he must have seen the necessity of watching over him at home :
he therefore became a “Father, friend, and tutor all in one.”
He must have desired to preserve in his Son that ingenuous-
ness, which undepraved nature ever bestows: have dreaded the
decay or loss, of filial frankness; have feared that love and
confidence, might be chilled or alienated by banishment to
another's roof; and not being a slave to mere custom, nor a
blind follower of senseless precedents, he disdained, abjectly
to abandon to chance and uncertainty, that which God and
nature, and his own welfare, seemed so evidently to have dele-
gated, as a sacred and inalienable charge, to him alone:—
“Why hire a lodging, in a house unknown,
For one whose tenderest thoughts, all hover round your own.”
He could perceive, neither wisdom nor humanity, in the dan-
gerous practice of allowing children, of various and adverse
dispositions to herd in numbers together: their disparity of
age disregarded, and themselves abandoned wholly to their
own follies and chimeras and little sordid games; excepting for
the intervals during which they are subjected to the odious or
monotonous drill of stipendiaries—mén, sometimes negligent,
or austere—possessed of learning sometimes, without sensibilty
or wisdom, -sometimes though themselves possessing certain
powers of mind, yet without the talent, or the judgment, or
the desire to communicate that knowledge with advantage to
XX LIFE AND WRITINGS
others: —sometimes without that nice sense of honour, –that
perfect freedom from servility,+that elevation and purity and
independence of mind,-the want of which inevitably pro-
duces effects, the most deplorable and fatal, upon the unformed
character of those who look up to them as infallible guides.
Well might the Poet feel surprise and indignation, that heed-
less or infatuated parents still continued,—
“Knowing as they must,
“That those Menageries all fail their trust,
“To send their sons, to scout and scamper there,
“While colts and puppies cost us so much care
3 y
If we believe that man to be the best educated, who is best
able to endure the Good and Evil of human life; if we believe
that with the acquisition of the rudiments of languages and
of mythology, pupils in schools too frequently acquire imper-
ceptibly the rudiments of servility, effeminacy, and vanity;-
lingua melior, sed frigida bello
Deatera,
if we believe that for one man of solid sense and worth, the
schools produce vainglorious multitudes of dunces and cox-
combs,-sparkling men of dress, rather than men of sparkling
wit, with a sportive taste for modern taverns rather than for
ancient classics, if such be our convictions, we may, perhaps,
comprehend why Rousseau termed the Colleges and Schools
of his day, -“risibles etablissemens”— and why Cowper taunt-
ingly exclaimed,—
“And Public Schools, ’tis public folly feeds !”
It was the opinion of Rousseau that a child would be edu-
cated by a judicious parent, even of limited capacity, better
than by the most skilful of masters: since zeal is better able to
supply the place of talent, than talent the place of zeal. And
when we are told by Plutarch, that Cato the Censor, who
governed Rome with such glory, himself brought up his son
O F M AIMION I DES. xxi
from the cradle, and that, with so much care and assiduity,
that he would quit every business except public business to be
present when the nurse, (and the mother was the nurse) washed
and rubbed him; when we read in Suetonius that Augustus,
master of that world, which he had conquered and which he
himself governed, taught his grandchildren, the Elements of
the Sciences, to write and to swim, and had them always about
him: it is not less, – “risible,” — to hear, that in an “enlight-
ened” aera, affairs of such vast import, functions of such deep
moment, duties, of such overbearing weight, unfortunately
utterly preclude the practicability of domestic education:-
“Hence Catilines in every soil abound,
But where is Brutus, where is Cato found!
Speaking of the Jews, Voltaire asserts, that, “Loin d’avoir
des ecole publiques, pour l'instruction, de la jeunesse, leur langue
MANQUAIT MEME DE TERME, pour exprimer cette institution.”
If there were no Schools for the Jewish youth, then indeed,
was it from necessity that Maimonides was educated under the
parental roof: but this assertion is directly at variance with the
statements of all those, who may be supposed to be quite as
well acquainted with the Judaic laws and customs, as was
Voltaire. Josephus says, “Our principal care is to educate
our children well: and we think it the most necessary busi-
ness of our whole life to observe the laws that have been
given us, and to preserve those rules of piety that have been
delivered down to us.”
Abendana corroborates the statement of Josephus; and
declares, that no considerable number of their nation settled
at any time or place, into a standing community, without ap-
pointing public teachers and public schools. “The necessity,”
he continues, “as well as usefulness of schools, for the instruction
of youth, is so manifest, that in the opinion of our Doctors,
mankind could scarcely subsist without them; because, other-
wise, men could neither preserve the dignity of their nature,
xxii LIFE AND WRITINGS
nor have anything but their outward shape to distinguish them
from brutes.”
Whether either public or private schools, as usually consti-
tuted and conducted in our times, have the tendency to endow
their pupils with the dignity or virtue, which Abendana anti-
cipated, we have already questioned. Under different circum-
stances, and in a less sophisticated and artificial state of society,
different might be the result. Of the value of Voltaire's assertion,
we can, however, now form an estimate: and we shall presently
find, that this school-less nation, derive their voluminous bodies
of laws, almost solely from the Professors of Colleges and
Schools, of which it had an unprecedented number, both in
Judea and in Babylonia!
In ancient times, says Abendana, we have evidence that
the School of the Prophets, over which Elisha presided, was
so well attended, that application was made to him for
enlarging the buildings (2 Kings, vi.). And in modern times
it is deemed to be the bounden duty of every master of a
family, who cannot take advantage of a public school, to
maintain a master at his own home, until his children, by
their proficiency in learning, have qualified themselves for
the duties of life: and neglect in respect of education ren-
dered the parent subject to an amathema.
But to return from this digression. — Safe under a
parent's roof, the Son of Maimon contracted none of the
follies and defilements of Schools: his mental powers, exempt
from the enfeebling effects of the tyranny of elder pupils,
and the austerities of tutors, grew with more than the –
“mere schoolboy's lean and tardy growth”—and the evidence
which he so early gave of industry, probity, and profound
erudition, sufficiently justified the determination, and repaid
the exertions of his judicious and conscientious parent.
OF MAIMONIDES. xxiii
It was to the Mischma, the acknowledged Corpus Juris
Judaici, with its ponderous Commentaries, that the legal
talents of Maimonides were especially directed. Now, the
Judaic Code of Laws, like the Municipal Law of England,
and like most other Codes, is of a twofold character. The
English Municipal Law, is divided into the Lea non Scripta
—“ the Unwritten,” or “Oral,” or “Common Law; ” and
the Lea Scripta — the variegated loads of “Written,” or
“Statute Law.” The Jus Judaicum, also, was either Origi-
narium, or Ab Originario ortum ; but there is this difference
between the Judaic Law and the English Law — that the
Originarium, or “Written Law,” of the Hebrews was pre-
cedent to their “Oral Law; ” whilst the “Written Law” of
England is subsequent to, and was, until this age of Doc-
trinaires, of “centralization,” and of Gallic innovations, in a
great degree subsidiary to, the “Oral” or “Common Law.”
“Monsieur,” says a French writer, “il n'y a pas en Europe
aujourd'hui d'autres principes d'organization, d'autres maximes
d'administration que les principes et les marimes françaises.”—
[Journ, des Debats, 11 Dec. 1836.] And truly we see and
feel that the noble principles of Anglo-Saxon polity have been
gradually and dexterously attenuated and dissipated by suc-
cessive bands of hucksters of French and Norman wares
It was, according to Sallust, by similar stealthy gradations,
and foreign, fraudulent innovations, that the Roman Com-
monwealth was “sublimated,” and eventually enslaved:—
“Quomodo rempublicam kabuerint, (MAJones) quantamque reli-
querint; et ut PAULATIM immutata, ea pulcherruma, pessuma
ac flagitiosissima facta /*
The “Written Law” of the Hebrews, is that which is con-
tained in the Pentateuch: and this, the Hebrew Jurists dis-
tribute into Sir hundred and thirteen Precepts; whereof 365
are termed “Negative,” because they prohibit that which is
wrong; and the remaining 248, commanding that which is
required to be done, are termed “Affirmative.” (See Note I.)
xxiv. LIFE AND WHITINGS
According to Rabbinical Anatomy, the 248 “Affirmative
Precepts” correspond in number with the Members of the
Human-body: whilst the “Negative Precepts” happily agree
with the number of veins or smaller vessels. Mr. Crool
(“Restoration of Israel”) has also pointed out the curious cor-
respondence sagaciously discovered between these “Precepts,”
and the number of the letters of the “Decalogue.”—“These
two Tables (of the Decalogue) contain" says he, “the whole
Law : for in the Ten Commandments there are 613 Letters,
and each Letter stands for one Command: and in the whole
Law-of-Moses there are 613 Commandments: and such was
the power of these Two Tables, that it contained the complete
Law-of-Moses. Thus far is it proved that a perfect God gave
a perfect Law.”
Setting aside fantastical conceits, we may observe, that
these “Precepts” form the foundation of the JUDAIC-Code;
and that they, especially, have the force and authority of Law.
But, since these alone, could not comprehend every individual
accident, under every change of circumstances, supplemental
and explanatory laws, in course of time, were needed: and
there arose, – “the Constitutions of the Prophets, and of the
Wise men;” -- “the Decrees of the Synedrim:”—“the De-
cisions of the Judges:”—the “Interpretations of the Doctors;”
(like the Rescripts of the Emperors, and the Responsa pruden-
tum of the Civil Law:)—all of which were, as occasion requir-
ed, added from time to time, to the “WRITTEN LAw,” and
these it was, which constituted the-“Jus ab originario ortum,”
or “ORAL LAW.” Of these, the-“Constitutions of Mo-
SEs FROM SINAI,” frequently adverted to by Talmudical Wri-
ters, are deemed of Supreme authority, as having been received
from God, upon Mount Sinai, at the same time with the Law
itself. Next in authority, are those that were decreed by the
Prophets; and last of all, are those of the “Wisemen,” in their
several ages.
OF AIAI MONIDES. XXY
However precarious and diversified may appear the
sources of the Judaic-Code, there are other Codes not the less .
authentic, nor the less generally esteemed, on account of the
number and variety of their sources. The Roman CANoN-
LAw, of great weight and authority for many ages, throughout
Christendom, takes its origin from the “Reports” and “Say-
ings ’’ of the Primitive-Fathers; and is made up of an infinite
diversity of materials, taken partly from Scripture, partly from
the Decrees of General Councils and of Provincial Councils, and
partly from the Decretal Epistles and Bulles of the Holy See.
There are the “Concordia Discordantium,” the “Decretalia,”
the “Extravagantes Johannis,”
and the “Extravagantes com-
munes” — there are the “Clementine-Constitutions, ’’ and
the “Legatine-Constitutions,” and the “Provincial Consti-
tutions.”
And the Civil LAw, which, although it made the
majestic discovery that “Imperator solus et conditor et interpres
25
legis existimatur; ” and lays down that other exalted doctrine,
that, “Sacrilegii instar est, rescripto principis obviari,” never-
theless, does even this Code, to the present day, direct the
proceedings of some of the English Courts-of-Justice: and
this Imperial-Code, extensive and paramount as was its juris-
diction, is not without its distracting variety of sources. There
were the “Twelve Tables,” the “Statutes of the Senate,” the
“Edicts of the “Praetor,” the “Responsa prudentum,” the
“Rescripts” of the Emperors, the “Institutes,” “Pandects,”
and “Novels: ”—a mass of voluminous comments that were
computed, says Taylor, to have been many camels’ loads.
But, notwithstanding this questionable origin of the Civil-Law,
Blackstone, of course, declares himself thoroughly persuaded
of the general excellence of its rules, and of the usual equity
of its decisions: albeit he refrains from charging the Barons
with “bigotry and superstition,” for their insensibility to its
E
xxvi LIFE AND WRITINGS
beauties, and for rejecting it, with the indignant exclamation,
“Nolumus leges Angliae mutari!”
I)uring the Forty years that Moses survived the promulga-
tion of the Law, he taught the Israelites how that Law was to
be observed, and how applied, in every case and controversy,
submitted to his judgment: if any difficulty appeared, he it
was who removed it: if any Precept was found obscure, he it
was who decided the construction to be put upon it: and
when a proneness to violate the law became apparent, he it
was who determined a mode of repression. Transmitted from
Moses to Joshua — from. Joshua to the Elders who succeeded
him—and from them to the Prophets—all these “Decisions,”
“Interpretations,” and “Constitutions,” of Moses, retained in
the memory of the Israelites, descended to their posterity as
certain rules of Law. And thus it was with the CoMMON-
LAW-OF-ENGLAND, which, being a collection of unwritten
maxims and customs, was handed down to posterity by “tra-
dition, use, and experience.” For in the earlier times of the
Saxons, both in England and upon the Continent, laws as well
as learning were committed to memory, “Leges sola memoria
et usu retinebant,” says Spelman.
After the death of Moses, if any difficulty or doubt arose,
either as to the mode of administering rites, or as to cases of
law, it was, as directed by Moses, referred to the decision of
the High Pries; or rather to that of a prophet, if any there
were in Israel: and his decree was appended to the other tra-
ditions. Such was the invariable practice up to the period of
the Captivity-of-Babylon.
Protracted exile, and deprivation of their ancient laws,
having, during the Captivity, in a great degree obliterated
their Traditions from the memory of the people, it was decreed
that a Great-Synagogue, to consist of 120 of the most enlight-
ened men of the nation, should be summoned to consider of
OF MAIMONIDES. xxvii
the means of preserving the Traditions from total oblivion.
At this synagogue, the Traditions yet extant in various parts,
were collected and methodized: and by this means was the
ORAL-LAw preserved; many new “Constitutions” and “In-
terpretations,” which the time and occasion seemed to demand,
being now added to it.
At the Sessions-of-the-Wisemen, which succeeded the disso-
lution of the Synagogue, the same mode of augmentation con-
tinued to prevail: until, upon the first total destruction of the
Temple, and the consequent extinction, amongst the Israelites,
of the Spirit-of-Prophecy, and of the Oracle, (hitherto ex-
pounded through the Urim and Thummim of the High-
Priest;) no infallible Judge remained to resolve doubts and
difficulties. These were now deemed to be subject to the
decision of the majority of Suffrages in the Synedrim.
Unless, indeed, a man arose, such as Simeon the Just,
Hillel, Gamaliel, and the like, whose transcendent skill in
Mosaic jurisprudence stamped his opinions with such authority,
as to warrant their reception, as authentic and indisputable
interpretations of the law. In such cases, his Decisions, as
well as those of the Wisemen, and of the Synedrim, were also,
in the same manner, as the Constitutions of the Prophets, added
to the Judaic-Law: and as the Sect of Pharisees, who carried
their superstitious veneration for traditions to an impious
height, was now dominant, the various appendices were as
strictly and reverentially observed, as the Law itself.
The more effectually and the more widely to promulgate
these doctrines and decisions, and the more certainly to hand
them down unimpaired to posterity, Colleges were established;
in which the Judaic-Law was taught (as was the Justinian-
Code formerly in English Colleges), with the utmost zeal and
diligence; principally, by the Chiefs of the Synedrim, and of
the highest Courts of the Nation. In these Colleges, as legal
xxviii LIFE AN E W RITINGS
questions and controversies arose, new “Determinations” and
“Interpretations” were continually generated ; especially un-
der Hillel, who, in the Reign of Herod, not many years before
the Nativity, was the President and Ruler of the College of
Jerusalem. Upon him was the title of “Rabbin” first be-
stowed;— a title ever after continued to the Chief-Ruler of
the Synedrim. Hillel (the 2d of that name) was also a
Teacher of great fame, who is said to have brought up above
a Thousand Scholars to a knowledge of the Law. Thirty of
these Scholars were of such eminence, as to be thought wor-
thy of having the Schechinah or Divine Glory, to rest upon
them: and for thirty it was said the Sun would stand still /
The most eminent among them, was Jonathan-Ben-Uzziel,
the author of the Targum upon the Prophets: and with him
was contemporary Onkelos, the Author of the famous Targum
upon the Law.
In allusion to some of these extravagant sayings of the
Rabbins, it is explained by Abendana, that they are frequently
to be interpreted not literally, but figuratively and parabolically.
The same assertion is made by Sir William Drummond, who,
indeed, thus attempts to explain the very passage from Joshua
(Ch. 10.), to which allusion is made, in speaking of the abilities
of the pupils of Hillel, to cause the Sun to stand still. Sir Wm.
Drummond considers the narrative of Joshua’s having com-
manded the Sun to stand still upon Gibeon, and the Moon in
the valley of Ajalon, to be an astronomical allegory. He pre-
tends that the ancient Jews, like other nations of antiquity,
had their esoteric, and their eacoteric doctrines; and that the
former were concealed under types and symbols, in great part
incomprehensible to their descendants. As the sagacious
Hudibras observed, -
- “ This, we among ourselves may speak;
“But to the wicked or the weak,
“We must be cautious to declare
“Perfection—truths.”
{) F M AIMO N IDES. xxix
Both the 14th. and the 49th. chapters of Genesis, he believes
to be couched under astronomical symbols; and asserts that
faith and reason allow us to believe, that allegorical illustrations
were sometimes veiled by the Sacred Penmen under the guise
of recorded facts. The 14th. of Genesis, and the 10th. of
Joshua, he considers different versions of the same astronomical
historiés; which the Greeks have again related after their own
facetious manner. Now the year of Moses, is said to be proved
by M. Goguet, to have consisted of only 360 days; 53 days
being wanting, therefore, to complete the year. This was well
known to the Priests of Egypt: and Plutarch, when he states
that the 5 days were intercalated by the Egyptians, relates,
that upon each of those days, they believed a Deity to be born.
This may be supposed to have given rise to the history of the
Five-Kings in Genesis; and amongst the Greeks, also, this
celebrated Intercalation gave rise to many figurative tales.
The omission of the 5 days, and the consequent disorder in
the computation of the year, may therefore, be presumed to be
symbolised by the Rebellion of the Five-Kings. -
Then with regard to the Sun's standing still, there is this
explanation attempted. Gibeon is thought to be derived from
an Hebrew word, signifying the Cope, or Vault of Heaven;
whilst Ajalon signifies a Ram, (in allusion to “Aries” in the
Zodiack.) The Egyptians, did not, as is shown by Bailly,
Dupuis, and others, admit the 5 intercalated days, as making
part of the year; and the course, therefore, both of the solar
and of the lunar years must have been held to be suspended
during the period of the intercalation; and consequently, the
Sun and the Moon might be figuratively described, as arrested
in their course. (Rt. Hon. Sir W. Drummond, CEdip. Jud.)
To return from this digression: — About the time of
Hillel, in consequence of the troubles at Jerusalem, the
Great-Synedrim was translated from Jerusalem to the School
XXX LIFE AND WRITINGS
of Jabne, or Jamnia. And here, R. Simeon the 2nd, the son
of R. Gamaliel, began to preside in the Year of the World,
3810, and, of Christ, 50: which was eighteen years before the
Destruction of the Temple. Five years after this, R. Simeon
became one of the Ten eminent Martyrs, says Abendana, who
suffered for constancy to their religion.
Many other Rabbins succeeded, who occasionally made
exuberant additions to the ORAL-LAw: one of whom, R.
Meyer, was a Proselyte to the Jewish faith. One of the
descendants of this Rabbi was, probably, that Christian Meyer,
a learned Jew, who, after having held the office of a Rabbi
at Hamburgh, embraced Christianity, and published a work
at Amsterdam in 1723, impugning the correctness of the
Versions published of the “Mishna,” asserting that there were
material alterations and interpolations in those versions. Im-
putations of a somewhat similar nature, had been cast upon the
Jewish Writings, two centuries before by one Pfepfercorn, a
Convert, or rather a mercenary Apostate, from the Jewish
faith. This Pfepfercorn attempted to persuade the Emperor
Maximilian, that all the Jewish Books ought to be burned
because they were replete with fables and blasphemies (Bas-
nage Hist. p. 730). Pfepfercorn's conversion and zeal were,
however, regarded with much suspicion: and he was, upon
very sufficient grounds, soon after accused of having formed
the atrocious design of obtaining possession, under mendacious
pretences, of the whole of the Judaic Writings, in order to
oblige his countrymen to redeem them upon any extravagant
terms that the faithless renegade might please to dictate.
Being subsequently arrested, he made a full confession of his
perfidy, and villainy. (In the British Museum is a Quarto
Volume published at Augsberg, in 1509, the author being
“Joh. Pfefferkorn; ” it is entitled, “Ich bin aim Buchlinn der
Jaden veindt est mein namen : ” the production, doubtless, of
the same apostate.”) s
OF MAHMON IDEğ. xxxi
Abendana gives a copious account of the various learned
Heads-of-Colleges, some of whom (as Jarchi, Rector of the
School of Nahardea) attained the dignity of “Prince of the
Captivity.” Many of them were renowned for their mystical,
cabalistical, and allegorical fictions and comments, upon the
Mosaic Dispensations. R. Nathan, the Babylonian, wrote a
Treatise, entitled “Pirke Avoth,” so highly esteemed, as com-
bining a large body of the Moral Apophthegms, and Pious
Sayings of the Fathers of the Jewish Church, that it was
deemed worthy of insertion in the body of the “Talmud.”
At length, in the reign of Antonirus Pius, in the Year of
the World 3910, and of Christ 153, R. Juda, commonly styled
“Rabbina Hokkadosh’ (our holy Doctor) was raised to the
twofold dignity of Ruler of the Synagogue, and President of
the Synedrim. He, perceiving that the Jewish people, at one
time exposed to the cruel slaughter of Vespasian; at another,
to the savage edicts, and wantonly disgusting tyrannies of
Adrian, could not profitably apply themselves to the Study of
the Law; and justly apprehensive, lest in the midst of per-
secution, afflictions, and exile, the remembrance of Oral Tra-
ditions, now augmented to a very large bulk, should not be
preserved, and handed down unimpaired to posterity, deter-
mined to digest and reduce the whole to writing. Com-
mencing, therefore, from the period in which the Great Syna-
gogue was established by Ezra, he collected and methodized
all the “Constitutions,” “Interpretations,” and “Decisions,”
hitherto recognized by the bulk of the Nation, and carefully
digested them into that ancient Code of Judaic-Law which he
termed the MISNA, or MischNA.
This great and valued Compilation was completed about
the year of Christ 218, according to Abendana: about the
year 150 according to Lardner and Prideaux. It is distributed
into Six General-Heads, called “Sedarim,” (i. e. Orders or
Classes.) . *-
xxxii LIFE AND WRITINGS
The First “Head,” called “ZERAHIM,” comprises ll
Books; the 2nd of which Books, entitled “Peah,” (i. e. a
Corner) treats of the obligation to leave parts, or corners of the
fields, for the benefit of the Poor. The subject of this Book
is fully treated of in the present Tract of Maimonides. This
First “Head” comprises, generally, all the laws concerning
fruits, herbs, seeds;–and consequently treats of Tithes, of the
Sabbatical year, of the Priests’ oblations, and of the First-
fruits. -
The Second “Head,” called “MoED,” treats of the laws
relating to Festivals, and their rites; and contains 12 Books.
The Third “Head,” entitled “NASHIN,” treats of the
Laws pertaining to Women; and contains 7 Books, treating
of Marriages, Dowries, Divorces, Incontinence, &c.
The Fourth “Head,” entitled “NEzich.IN,” treats of the
injuries done by man or beast, the punishment of offenders,
and the reparation due. It comprises 10 Books, of which the
5th. is Makkoth. This Book treats of the 40 stripes, and of
the mode of their infliction; it explains the ground upon which
the Rabbins determined that one stripe was to be deducted
from the 40, ordained by Deut. xxv. 3. (see Note 2.)
The Fifth “Head,” entitled “ Kodas HIM,” treats of the
Laws pertaining to Sacrifices, Oblations, and Religious cere-
monies in general; and contains 11 Books; the 8th. of which,
“Kerittoth,” explains the nature of that punishment, which is
called in the Law, “the being cut off from his people.”
The Sixth, and last general, “Head,” treats of the Laws
pertaining to Pollutions, and Purifications: and comprises
12 Books. . . . . . .
Upon its publication to the world, the Misch.NA was re-
ceived with enthusiastic applause; and was universally recog-
OF MAIMONIDES. xxxiii
hised, both in the Land of Israel, and in Babylonia, as an
authentic body of the whole Jewish Law.
Being delivered in Aphorisms, and short sentences, it was,
alas ! soon thought to need some larger explications; and
which explications, says Abendana, with proper and useful
comments and instances, it did, within a short time after its pub-
lication, receive, through the singular industry of several learned
and eminent men
That the industry of these eminent men, was surpassingly
great, as well as singular, we shall presently see. As there had
formerly been the TANNAIM, or Mischnical Doctors, out of
whose doctrines and traditions, the MISCHNA had been com-
piled; so did there now arise the AMORAIM, or Gemarical
Doctors, whose very singular illustrations, opinions, and doc-
trines, were subsequently to form the GEMARAs; a body of
men, charged with being the most learned and elaborate
triflers, that ever brought discredit upon the Republic of
Letters: —
“For mystic learning, wondrous able,
“In magic, talisman, and Cabal,
“Deep-sighted in intelligences,
“Ideas, atoms, influences.”
With unexampled assiduity did they seek after, or invent,
obscurities and ambiguities, which continually furnished pre-
texts for new Expositions and Illustrations; the art of clouding
texts, in themselves clear, having proved ever less difficult,
than that of elucidating passages, the words or the sense of
which, might be really involved in obscurity: —
“Hence comment after comment, spun as fine,
“As bloated spiders draw the flimsy line !”
- F
xxxiv. LIFE AND W RITINGS
The chief Schools in which the singular industry, mentioned
by Abendana, was exhibited, and where the eminently learned
men made it, “their business to cull out such or such propo-
sitions, and to debate them among themselves, in order to fix
a true, and certain sense upon them,” were those of Babylon,
Nahardea, Sippara, Sorana, and Pombeditha, in Babylonia;
Jerusalem, Nars, Tiberias, and Jabne, (or Jamnia,) in Judea.
And yet Voltaire discovered that the Jews never possessed any
Schools, nor had even a word in their tongue, to eagress the
meaning of the word ' The Schools of Sorana, and of Pombe-
ditha, are said to have existed for 800 years.
Abandoning the Scripture text, to illustrate and to explain
which, the Doctors and Wisemen of the Schools, had hitherto
laboured, successive generations of Gemarici devoted, now,
their whole attention to the exposition of the text of the Mischna:
and the industry and cavillation, (far greater than those of the
dozen and one sagacious commentators upon a passage in
Ulpians' Laws) were such, that Expositions, Illustrations, and
Commentaries, multiplied with such amazing rapidity, and to
such a portentous degree, that they eventually swelled into a
monstrous chaotic mass, which was dignified by the name of
“GEMARA.” This Gemara, (the word signifying in Hebrew,
Supplement or Compliment,) was then regarded as a completion
of the whole traditionary doctrine of law and religion, and was
added to the “Mischna:” the two together forming the
“TALMUD; ” a “complete system,” says Abendana, “of all
our learning, and a comprehensive rule of all our practices.”
The blunder therefore, of Enfield, (Hist, of Philos.) where he
speaks of the MischNA, as the First-Talmud, is evident.
Notwithstanding the uncertain paternity of this incongruous
body of opinions, there were not wanting those, who gave a
preference to the “GEMARA,” over the “MischNA,” and even
over the “WRITTEN-LAw.” It was said by some, that the
“WRITTEN-LAw” was like Water; the “Misch NA” like Wine;
OF MAIMONIDES. XXXV
and the “GEMARA,” like Hippocrass, or Spiced Wine ! The
“Words-of-the-Scribes,” said these supporters of the Gemara,
are lovely above the “Words-of-the-Law:” for the “Words-of-
the-Law,” are weighty and light; but the “Words-of-the-
Scribes,” are all weighty! -
It was by R. Johannus, President of the Synedrim, and
Rector of the School of Jerusalem, in the year 230, that the
minor chaos of Comments and facetiae, was collected from the
Israelitish Schools; and now, being added to the Mischna,
the two together were termed, (by Antiphrasis, peradventure,
as lucus from lua,) the “JERUSALEM TALMUD : ” the word
“ Talmud” signifying, learning or wisdom. This “ Talmud.”
was printed at Venice, and at Cracow: its Commentaries
extending to a portion only, of the Mischna, it will not com-
pare, in point of bulk, with that of Babylon.
From the Schools of Babylonia, also, a similar collection
was, in after times, made. But, as upon the desolation of
Palestine, the study of the Law was chiefly prosecuted in
Babylon, the Colleges there were far more numerous; and
far more ingenious and prolific, were the imaginations of the
Babylonish professors. To collect and methodise all the Dis-
putations, Interpretations, Elucidations, Commentaries, and
Conceits of the Babylonian Gemarici, was consequently, a
labour neither of one man, nor of a single age | The first
attempt was made (A. D. 367.) by the Rabbi Ase, elected at
the age of 14, to be Rector of the School of Sora or Sorana;
a teacher, described as being eminently pious and learned.
R. Ase laboured during 60 years, upon the rank unwieldy
work; and after arranging thirty-five Books, died in 427,
leaving the completion to his successors.
For 73 years longer, did Rabbi after Rabbi, with undi-
minished zeal, successively continue their unprofitable appli-
cation; until, at length, after the lapse of 133 years (about
xxxvi LIFE AND WHITINGS
A.D. 500), the Rabbi Abina, the 6th in succession to Ase,
placed the finishing stroke to this Second “Talmud.”
Denominated, from the name of the Province in which
it was first compiled, the “BABYLONIAN TALMUD," this
Second Talmud is as insuperable to the Student on account
of its style and composition as on account of its prodigious
bulk. Composed in a dialect neither Chaldaic nor Hebrew,
but a barbarous commixture of both of these, and of other
dialects; jumbled together in defiance of all the rules of
composition, or of grammar; it affords a second specimen
of a Babylonish Confusion-of-Languages 1–
“It was a party-coloured dress,
Of patch'd and piebald languages;
Which made some think, when it did gabble,
They’d heard three labourers of Babel;
Or Cerberus himself pronounce
7 x >
A leash of languages at once
Abounding, moreover, in fantastic trifles and Rabbinical
reveries, it must appear almost incredible that any sane
men could exhibit such acumen; and such ardour in the
invention of those unintelligible comments—in those nice
scrupulosities — and those ludicrous chimaeras, which they
have solemnly published to the world ! -
As specimens of these reveries, the accounts of the
“LEv1ATHAN,” and of the bird “BAR-JUCHNE,” not less
wondrous, have been cited. At the same time we are bound
to remark, that the Rabbins assert, that some of their extra-
vaganzas are to be regarded, not literally, but figuratively,
and as parabolical histories or mystical expositions — with
design, as Abendana has it, “to instruct us in some useful
precept of morality, which hath ever been the known practice
of Oriental nations.”
OF MAIMONIDES. xxxvil
“LEVIATHAN’’ is the name of a certain inhabitant of the
ocean. Rabbi Sephra says, “Once when I was in a ship,
we saw a fish with elegant horns, having this inscription upon
them, ‘ I am a very small specimen of the creatures that inhabit
the deep.’” This little fish measured three hundred leagues
in length." In one mouthful was it swallowed up by the
* Leviathan /*
“BAR-JUCHNE” is a Rabbinical bird, probably first cousin
to the preceding little fish ! Some faint conjecture of its mag-
nitude may be formed by attending to this unquestioned fact;
—That her extended wings invariably occasion total eclipses of the
Sun / Once, when, from a lamentable accident, a choice egg
fell from her little nest, it annihilated 315 noble cedars, and
fatally inundated 69 populous villages
But, without pretending to controvert these prodigious
truisms, it must be admitted that in those marvellous compila-
tions, the Gemaras, prodigiously great are the scrupulosities,
and controversial tact, exhibited upon prodigiously little things:
—inextricable the perplexities created in matters of perfect
simplicity: — numberless the awful ambiguities discovered or
invented where all was plain and perspicuous before, albeit
infinitely insignificant: — whilst so abstruse are the emenda.
tions, that what was clear before, is now, with wonderful solem-
nity and skill, rendered insuperably obscure:
Philosophers who darken, and put out,
Eternal truth, by everlasting doubt.
No wonder that by all these sagacious operations, the JURIs
JUDAICI THESAURUs became so utterly unintelligible, that to
discover what was Law, or what right reason, was as difficult as
to discover the Seat of Paradise or of the Magnetic Pole.
Nor is a much more felicitous result to be anticipated from
the study of the “Jerusalem Talmud,” before described: illu-
xxxviii LIFE AND WRITINGS
mined and adorned as it is, by similar opaque elucidations, and
graceless decorations. Its confusion and its perplexities com-
pared with those of the other Talmud, are in tolerably fair
proportion to its smaller bulk.
Thus obscured and defiled, the Judaic Law became for a
long series of years, neglected, despised, and indeed inacces-
sible. All hope of its recovery from the dreary abyss, into
which the singularly industrious men had plunged it, seemed
to have been long abandoned; when, at length, after the lapse
of six centuries, MAIMONIDEs arose. He, after dispersing the
hitherto impenetrable darkness, in which the MISCHNA had so
long lain concealed, with Herculean boldness, then assailed
during 12 long years, its monstrous twin-progeny the GEMARAs;
(his opinion of which we have already seen.) This double-
tongued monster eventually overcome, the Judaic-Law emerged
to light; purified of the rhapsodies and reveries, hitherto
polluting it. Its difficulties and doubts he lessened or removed;
and the whole of the laws, he digested into a succinct and
intelligible form. For simplicity, elegance, and perspicuity
of style, as well as for methodical arrangement, it has already
been remarked that the DIGEST of MAIMONIDEs is allowed by
Claveringius and Prideaux, to vie with the Roman Civil-Code
and with every other legal Code in their age extant.
THE
LAWS OF THE HEBREWS,
RELATING TO THE
Poor AND THE STRANGER:
FROM THE
“MISCHNA-HATHORA ’’
OF THE
R A B B I. M. M. A.I.M O N IDE S.
“Moses Maimonides solidae atque ingentis doctrinae vir.”
CASAUBon Ex. xvi. con BAR.
ERRATA.
In the “Life of Maimonides”
P. viii. Line 12. For ever, read even.
P. xxx. Line 32. For Jaden read Juden.
In the “Laws of the Hebrews”
P. 40. § 6. For fourth-part, read tenth-part.
P. 60. § 13. For found, read food. -
P. 65. § 1. The figures (34) referring to the Notes should be (44)
In the “Notes'’
P. 145. Line 3. For Latinus read Catinus.
Th E
LAWS OF THE HEBREWS,
RELATING TO THE
POOR AND THE STRANGER.
*mºmºsºsºmºsºmsºmº.
C H A PTE R. I.
Precepts relating to the “Corner.” — the Punishment of Transgres-
sors—Gifts belonging to the Poor in a vineyard—in Corn-crops—
in Trees— meaning of the word “Stranger.” — time of Gleaning in
Vineyards—in Olive-yards — these Gifts due by Law only in the
Land of Israel — extent of the “Corner.”
WHoever reapeth his field, shall not reap the whole
of it, but shall leave a part of the crop, at the end
of the field, for the Poor: according to the words,
“Thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field.”
(Lev. Ch. 19.) And this is the law, whether the crop
be reaped, or plucked up by the root: that which is
left is called the “Corner.” (Note 20.)
2. As in the Field, so also with Trees when their
fruit is gathered, he shall leave a part for the Poor :
if he transgress, by reaping the whole of the field, or
by gathering the whole of the fruit of the tree, he shall
separate a part from that which is reaped, or from that
which is gathered, and give it to the Poor; this dona-
9
*
tion being an Affirmative-Precept (1). For it is said,
“Thou shalt leave it for the poor, and the stranger.”
And although he may have ground it into meal, and
have kneaded it, and have baked it into loaves, yet
out of it, shall he give to the Poor, the portion of
the “Corner.”
3. If the whole of the crop which he hath reaped,
be spoiled, or be consumed by fire, before he should
have given the “Corner,” then shall he be scourged;
since he transgressed the Negative-Precept, and is un-
able now to observe the Affirmative-Precept therein
contained, and into which it had become transferred (2).
4. So also with regard to the Gleanings, when a
man reapeth, or when he gathereth into sheaves, he
shall not pick up the ears which had fallen at the time
of reaping; but he shall leave them for the Poor; ac-
cording to the words, - “Thou shalt not gather the
gleanings of thy harvest.”—But if he shall have trans-
gressed, by gathering them, even though he may have
ground them, and have baked them, yet shall he give
them to the Poor, according to the words, - “Thou
shalt leave them for the poor and the stranger.” — If
after he hath gathered them, and before he hath given
them to the Poor, they be spoiled, or be consumed by
fire, he shall be scourged.
5. So also, concerning “Fallen Grapes,” which in
the time of Vintage, may have been broken off; and so
also of the “Small Bunches,” according to the words,
—“Thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, nor gather the
fallen grapes, but thou shalt leave them for the poor and
stranger.” (Lev. Ch. 19.) So also of him who is gather-
ing up the Sheaves of his field: if he forget one of them,
3
he shall not take it away ; according to the words, –
“If thou hast forgot a sheaf in thy field, thou shalt
not go again to fetch it.” If he transgress by taking
it away, even though he have ground it, and have baked
it, yet shall he give it to the poor; for it is said, “It
shall be for the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow.”
This is an Affirmative-Precept, since it is manifest, that
all the forementioned precepts, may be Negative, and
become Affirmative ; and he who obeyeth not the Affir-
mative-Precepts, therein comprised, shall be scourged.
6. And, as the Law concerning “Things-left-
2
through-Forgetfulness,” is applicable to Sheaves, so
also is it applicable to Standing-corn; and whatever
part of a crop be forgotten, and be left un-reaped, be-
longeth to the Poor. And as this Law is applicable to
Corn, and crops of that nature, so also is it applicable
to all sorts of Trees, according to the words (Deut. Ch.
24.), “When thou beatest thine Olive-tree, thou shalt
not go over the boughs again ; it shall be for the
Stranger, for the Fatherless, and for the Widow.”
And such is the Precept relative to other trees.
7. Thus is it manifestly shown to thee, that in a
Vineyard there are Four Gifts for the Poor; – Fallen-
Grapes; Small-Bunches; the Corner; and That-
which-is-left-through-Forgetfulness. In Corn, there
are Three Gifts; The Gleanings; That-which-is-left-
through-Forgetfulness; and the Corner. And in
Trees, two Gifts : — That-which -is-left-through-For-
getfulness; and the Corner.
8. For all these Gifts belonging to the Poor, no
thanks are in any wise due to the Owner of the Field,
as though he had performed an act of benevolence ;
4
but the Poor shall come, and shall receive them, even
though against the will of the Owner; yea, even though
that Owner be the poorest man in Israel, yet shall those
Gifts be taken out of his hands.
9. In treating of the “Gifts-of-the-Poor,” by the
word “Stranger,” is to be understood, only he who is
a Proselyte-of-Justice; for thus it is said of the
“Second-Tithe ” (Deut. Ch. 14.); “The Levite and
the Stranger shall come.” Now, as the Levite is under
the Covenant, so also is the Stranger. Nevertheless
poor Gentiles shall not be excluded from these Gifts,
but for the sake of peace, they shall come and shall
receive a share promiscuously with the Poor of Is-
rael (3).
10. It is said, concerning the Gifts-of-the-Poor,
“Thou shalt leave them for the Poor, and for the
Stranger: ” that is to say, as long as the Poor seek
for them ; but if the Poor desist from their search, or
make a long circuit after them, then shall every man
be entitled to that which is left; since these Gifts are
not a Holy-thing, like unto the Truma (4), nor is the
Owner obliged to give the value to the Poor; because
it is not said, that he shall “give to,” but that he
shall “ leave for ” the Poor. Nor is it commanded to
leave them for the beasts and the birds, but for the
Poor; yet, behold no poor are to be seen.
11. When is it, that all men are entitled to the
Gleanings? Resp. After the Second-gleaners have
entered; and having gleaned after the First-gleaners
have departed. When are all men entitled to the
“Fallen-Grapes,” and to the “Small-Bunches " ?
Resp. Whatever is left after the Poor have entered the
..)
Vineyard and have departed, belongethin common to
all. When are all men entitled to Olives-left-through-
Forgetfulness? Resp. In the land of Israel, whatever
is forgotten at the top of the Olive-tree, belongeth to
all men, from the beginning of the month Chesleu (28),
which is the time of the Second-rains in the longer-year;
but, to the heaps of Olives, left under the tree through
Forgetfulness, all men are entitled, as soon as the
Poor cease to search after them (49).
12. As long as it is lawful for the Poor to take away
Olives left-through-Forgetfulness, upon the ground
under the Trees, let them take them away : yea, even
though all men have become entitled to those left
upon the top of the tree through Forgetfulness; as
long as they are entitled to take away those left upon
the top of the tree through Forgetfulness, they shall
take them away; even though nothing now remain,
left through Forgetfulness, under the tree.
13. Those Gifts-of-the-Poor, which are in a field
where there are no Poor who can take charge of them,
belong to the Owner of the field: even though the
Poor may not yet have ceased to go about in search of
their Gifts.
14. All these Gifts-of-the-Poor, like the “Truma.”
and “Tithe,” are due, by Law, only in the Land of
Israel: for thus saith the Scripture, “When ye reap
the harvest of your land: ” and again, “When thou
cuttest down thine harvest in thy field.” Albeit, it is
declared in the Talmud, that even out of the Land of
Israel, is the corner due, according to the Statutes of
the Wise Men ; but it seemeth to me that the same
Law should extend to all the Gifts-of-the-Poor; and
6
that thus, according to the same Statutes, they ought
all of them to be deemed to be due out of the Land
of Israel.
15. What is the measure of the “Corner ?”
(20) Resp. The Law hath not fixed any determi-
nate measure : if only one ear be left, the letter of
the Law will have been obeyed: but, according to
the Statutes of the Wise-Men, the “Corner’’ ought
not to be less than One-sixtieth part, whether in or out
of the land of Israel. Over and above this one-sixtieth
part let there be an addition made according to the
extent of the field, to the multitude of poor, and to
the blessing upon the Seed. For instance, if the
field be very small, One-sixtieth part of it would yield
but little to the Poor; let some addition to the
measure be on that account made ; and so, also, if
there be many Poor, let an addition be made : and
if little be sown, and much be gathered, let an
addition be also made, on account of the blessing.
And whoso addeth to the extent of the “Corner,” to
him shall reward be given : but there is no limit to
this addition.
CHAPTER II.
Things liable to the Law of the “Corner’— Saffron, madder, and
mushrooms, exempt—and Figs—Circumstances under which Land
becomes exempt—The case of a Gentile become Proselyte—
a “Corner” not having been left in the Field or upon the Tree,
the gathered crop liable —The situation of the “Corner’—
When the Poor are to have the “Corner’— Mode of division in
crops and on trees — Hours of the day for taking the “Corner”
—Treatment of turbulent Poor—The Rich have no right to the
“Corner.”
WHATEveR is used as food, if its nourishment be
derived from the Earth; if it require care to be taken
of it; if the whole of it be gathered at one time;
and if it be carried under shelter for preservation ;
is subject to the Law of the Corner—according to
the words, “When ye reap the Harvest of your Land,
thou shalt not wholly reap the Corners of thy field.”
2. Whatever is similar in its harvesting, in these
five particulars, is also subject to the Law of the
Corner; such as corn, pulse, pods, nuts, almonds,
pomegranates, grapes, olives, and dates (5, 6, 7); and
all crops of a similar nature, be they dry or be they
fresh. Saffron and madder (8) are exempt, because
they are not articles of food. So also are mush-
rooms and other fungi (8); because they derive not
their nourishment from the earth, after the manner
8
of other produce. So also that which is common
to all is exempt, because it is open to all, and there
is no one to preserve it. So also are Figs exempt
(9); because they are not all gathered together, but
upon one tree one may be ripe to-day, and another
not for many days. So also are pot-herbs exempt,
because they are not carried in for preservation.
Onions (8) and leaks, however, are subject to the Law
of the Corner; because they are dried, and are carried
in for preservation. So also are seed-onions, because
they are left in the ground for seed : together with
all such like plants.
3. Every piece of land is subject to the Law of
the “Corner,” even although it be common to several
partners; for it is said, “When you gather the har-
vest of your land’—that is to say, even though it
belongeth to many.
4. If it be a field which the Gentiles have reaped
for themselves, or which thieves have reaped, or which
Ants (10) have devoured, or which winds or which
beasts have laid waste ; then it is exempt from the
“Corner,” because it is the crop which is subject
to the “Corner.”
5. If a man reapeth the half of his field, and
thieves reap the remainder, then is that field exempt
from the Corner; since it was the half reaped by
the thieves which was liable: but if thieves reap the
first half, and the owner then cometh and reapeth the
other half, he shall grant the Corner according to the
portion which he has reaped. If he reapeth one-half
and afterwards selleth the other half, the buyer shall
grant the Corner for the whole field; if he reaneth
9
half, and dedicateth the other half, he who re-
deemeth it of the Treasurer-of-the-Temple (11) shall
grant the Corner for the whole field. If he reapeth
the first half and dedicateth it, he shall leave out
of the remainder, a Corner, sufficient for the whole
field.
6. He who gathereth grapes from his Vineyard,
to sell them in the Market, purposing to leave the
remainder for the Wine-press, wherein they may be
trodden out; if he hath gathered for the Market dis-
persedly, here and there, then shall he grant the
Corner from that which he may gather for the Wine-
press; in proportion only to the quantity left for the
Press. If he gathereth for the Market from one
part only, then shall the Corner be granted to the
remainder, and in quantity sufficient for the whole
Vineyard ; since he who gathereth from any one
part is not like unto him, who casually gathereth a
little from this part, and a little from that; in which
latter case, he is exempt from the Law of the Corner.
Thus also, whosoever gathereth the ears here and
there, and carrieth them home—even though in this
way he gathereth his whole field; he is exempt from
the Law of Gleanings; of Things-left-through-Forget-
fulness; and of the Corner (12).
7. If a man reap the whole of his field before it
become ripe, and before it have arrived even at the
Third-degree of maturity, then is that field exempt;
but if it hath arrived at the Third-degree of maturity,
it is liable. So with the fruits of trees; if they
have ripened to the Third-degree of maturity, they...
are liable.
C
10
8. If a man dedicate his field, whilst the crop is
upon it, and if he afterwards redeem it, whilst yet
the crop remaineth ; that field shall be liable to the
Corner: but if he redeem it, after it hath been reaped
by the Treasurer-of-the-Temple, it is exempt. Since
at the time at which it became liable to the Corner it
was a Sacred-thing, and as such exempt.
9. If a foreigner reapeth his field and afterward
becometh a Proselyte (13), then is that field exempt
from the Law of the Corner—from that of Gleanings
—and from that of Things-left-through-Forgetfulness;
even though the last Law should be applicable only
at the time when the sheaves are made.
10. Labourers who are Gentiles, are not to be
employed in reaping, because they have no expe-
rience in those things, which relate to the Laws of
Gleanings, and of the Corner. If they are employed
and they reap the whole field, yet shall that field be
liable to the Corner. *
ll. If the owner reap the whole of his field the
Corners not being left, then shall he grant to the
Poor the portion of the Corner out of the Ears. He
needeth not first to tithe it ; since he may, possibly
tive to them the greater part of the crop, under
he name of the Corner; in which case it would be
exempt from Tithe ; but if he shall have threshed it
out (14), but have not winnowed it, he shall grant
the Corner before he tithe it. If he shall have
th reshed it out, and have winnowed it with shovel
and fan, and have finished all the work relating to it,
be: shall first tithe it; and out of the part tithed,
#e: shall give to the Poor, the portion of the Cor-
| 1
ner, adequate to the field. So also with regard
to Trees.
12. The Corner shall be left only at the end of
the field (20); in order that the place granted to
them may be known to the Poor, and known also
to passers-by. Thus shall no suspicion attach to the
Poor ; and thus shall fraud be prevented. No man
can then deliberately proceed to reap the whole field,
saying to those who observe him reaping the end of
the field, “I will leave it at the beginning of the
field.” Were it otherwise, a man might watch for
the moment when all were absent, in order then
to leave the Corner and to give it to a poor kins-
man. If he transgresseth and leaveth the Corner at
the beginning or at the middle of the Field, such
shall then be deemed a “Corner; ” but he must
also leave at the end of the Field as much Corner
as is sufficient for that part of the Field which was
over and above the Corner first separated.
13. If the owner should have already given the
Corner to the Poor, and the Poor should say to
him, “Grant us rather from that part; ” — if this
other part be granted to them, both parts shall be
deemed the Corner. So also, if the Owner of the
field shall have marked out the Corner, and shall
say, “Lo, this part is the Corner, and also this
part; ” or even if he merely sayeth, “Lo, this part is
the Corner and this; ” then are both those parts the
Corner.
14. Labourers are forbidden to reap the whole
of a field; they are required to leave at the end .0.
part nearly adequate unto the quantity of the Cornér: :::::
©
f
12
The poor, however, have no right to the Corner,
until the Owner shall have made his purposed divi-
sion: wherefore it is to be deemed an act of theft
on the part of the Poor, to touch the Corner which
they may see at the end of the field, until it is
known to be such according to the intention of the
Owner. *
15. The Corner of corn, of pulse, and of other
similar crops, which are reaped; and also the Corner
of the Vineyard and of Trees, shall be given up,
whilst it yet remaineth upon the land. The poor
shall pluck it up with their hands, but they shall
not reap it with sickles, nor make use of hatchets,
lest by chance they should wound one another. If
the Poor desire to divide it amongst themselves, then
shall it be divided : but should Ninety and nine
declare for a division, and one only declare for taking
what each can get, the voice of that one shall be
listened to, as he speaketh in accordance with the
Precept.
16. Since the Poor cannot, without great danger,
be allowed to seize upon the Corner of the Vine, or
of the Palm, hanging on high ; the owner is required
to gather the grapes and the dates and to divide them
amongst the Poor. If, however, the whole of the Poor
desire to take what each can obtain, so let it be ; but
should Ninety and nine declare for taking what each
can get, and one only for a division, the voice of that
one shall be listened to, because he speaketh in
accordance with the Precept. It then becometh the
duty of the Owner to undertake the gathering, and to
::::make the partition. -
13
17. Three times in each day shall the Corner of
the field be divided amongst the Poor, or be left for
their acceptance: to wit, in the morning; at mid-day;
and at the hour of Evening-Sacrifice. Thus shall
there be an appointed time at which all may be
present: and at that time only shall the Poor be
permitted to take the contents of the Corner. Where-
fore is it not ordained at one time of the day? Resp.
Because there may be Poor who are suckling children,
and thus stand in need of food in the early morning:
there may be Poor-children, who cannot rise early in
the morning, nor come to the field until it be mid-day;
there may be aged people, who cannot come until the
hour of Evening-Sacrifice.(15)
18. If a Poor person taketh part of a Corner to
himself, and scattereth that which he hath gathered over
the other part; or if he place himself amongst it, or if
he throweth his robe over it, let him be removed and
forced to depart; and if he hath received anything, let
it be taken out of his hands, and bestowed upon other
of the Poor.
19. If any one taketh a Corner and sayeth, “Lo,
this is for N. N. (a poor person); and if he who thus
taketh it, be himself a Poor person, on that account
he acquireth no right for himself, but he shall yield
up the Corner to the first Poor person that he may meet.
20. If an Owner relinquisheth the Corner to certain
Poor, standing in his sight, and there cometh from
behind him another Poor person to accept a share,
then shall this Poor person acquire a right to it; since
neither to the Gleaning, nor to the Thing-left-through-
Forgetfulness, nor to the Corner, nor to Money-found, Q
is a right acquired, until such things arewithin the hānī;
CHAPTER III.
“Corner of One Field not to be left in another—what constitutes
separate fields—in cases of Hills—where Crops are sown among
Trees—Crops sown in Beds—how many “Corners” due where
different Crops are raised in One field—regulation with regard to
Seed of the same Species, but different in Colour—the partition
of a crop between Brothers—when a Crop is sold in Lots, how
many “Corners” due—when the Crop of a tree is divided in Lots
—the “Corner” due upon Olive-trees—in Vineyards.
THE Corner for one field shall not be left in a field
adjoining; for instance, if a man hath two fields,
he shall not wholly reap the one, and leave in the
other sufficient Corner for both : for it is said, “Thou
shalt not wholly reap the Corners of thy field.” A
separate Corner shall therefore be left for each ; and
if any one leave a Corner in one field, instead of in
that which is adjoining, it shall not be deemed a
rightful Corner.
2. If in the middle of a field, sown with but one
sort of seed, there be a River, though perchance not
flowing from one side to the other side; or if there be
a permanent Canal of water of such a width, that the
Crop on both sides cannot be reaped by the same stroke
of the sickle, then shall such field be regarded as two
15
fields, and the Owner thereof shall grant a Corner on
one side for one field, and on the other side for the
other field.
3. So shall it be, if the field be intersected by a
private path, of the width of four Cubits; or by a
public Way of the width of sixteen Cubits. So also
when a private path, though narrower than four Cubits;
or a public Way though narrower than sixteen Cubits;
if they be permanent, during Summer and Winter;
but if not permanent through Winter, then shall such
field be deemed to be but as one field
4. A field is to be deemed to be two fields, when
divided by uncultivated land, which is neither sown
nor ploughed; and also when divided by fresh land,
which hath never been sown. Also when there shall
intervene a crop different from that of the rest of the
field; for instance, if there be wheat on this side, and
wheat on that, with barley intervening. Or if a
man reap that which was in the middle, though it may
not have reached the third degree of maturity, and
plough up the part thus cleared ; then shall that field
be deemed to be two fields, even if there be but the
width of three ridges to each, and though the space be
less than is requisite for the fourth-part of a Cabus of
seed (16). In what case are these things said? Resp.
When the field is small; for instance, fifty Cubits in
length, and two or less in width: but not if it be
larger, and if no uncultivated nor fresh land, divide it
into two ; unless it be of such extent, as to require a
fourth-part of a Cabus of seed. Albeit, when there is
a different sort of seed, the field is to be deemed to be
divided into two.
| 6
5. If that middle part of the field, be devoured
by Locusts (17), or be destroyed by Ants (10), and
be again ploughed up, that part shall be deemed to
have divided the field into two. -
6. If a man sow with seed a Mountain of an uné-
ven surface, consisting of many high hillocks, and of
many hollows, insomuch that it cannot all be ploughed
nor all be sown together, but the higher parts must be
sown by themselves and the lower parts by themselves,
nevertheless shall it be deemed to be but one field: and
one Corner for the whole Mountain shall be left in the
part last reaped.
7. But if the slopes of the Hillocks be more than
ten Cubits in height, a Corner shall be given for each
Hillock. Yet if the tops of the ears in the rows be in-
termingled, one Corner sufficeth for the whole; but if
the slopes be less than ten Cubits in height, although
the tops be not intermingled, yet shall one Corner be
given for the whole of them. If there be a rocky vein
passing through the whole field, requiring the plough
to be lifted over it on this side, and to be replaced on
the other, then shall the field be deemed to be divided
into two ; not however if the obstruction be any thing
less than such a rocky vein.
8. If a man sow a field in which there are trees,
with many spaces amongst them : yet, if those spaces
are not so near to one another, as that the ears become
intermingled, one Corner sufficeth for the whole field;
for assuredly it is but one field, disunited by the
treeS.
9. In what case are these things said 2 Resp.
Whenever any ten trees are within a space requiring
17
only a Sea of seed (16): but if the ten trees are within
a space, requiring more than a Sea of seed, then shall
a Corner be granted not for the Trees, but for each
Area; since the trees must then be far apart.
10. If a man sow different beds; to wit, beds of
Onions amongst Olive-trees; he shall give but one
Corner for the whole of the Onions, albeit the Olive-
trees separate them, and distribute them into distinct
beds.
11. If a whole field sown with one sort of seed, be
after awhile parched-up, here and there, and be then
plóughed over again, leaving only the green parts,
which would thus be separated from one another in
different beds: should the custom of the place be, to
sow that sort of seed in beds, after the manner of
Anise or Mustard (18), a Corner shall be left for
each bed : since passers-by would say, that many beds
have been sown. But if it be wheat, or pulse, or
such seed as it is customary to sow throughout a field,
one Corner only, shall be granted for the whole.
12. In what case is this said? Resp. When it
is the sides which have been ploughed over again,
leaving the Green in the middle ; but if it be Green
on either side and parched-up in the middle, then
shall Corners be left, one for the Green-part, and
one for the part parched-up.
13. If a man sow a field with onions, or with beans,
or with peas, or with other crops of this description,
purposing to carry to market, a part of the crop
in its green state, and to leave the remainder to be
harvested in his barn in its ripe state; he is bound.
to leave a Corner for that which was sold in its gréeij;
D
| S
state, and also for that which was harvested in its
ripe state.
14. One Corner only, is required for a field sown
with one sort of seed ; even though the crop be
harvested into two Barns: but if it be sown with
two sorts of seed, even though it be harvested into one
Barn, a distinct Corner shall be given for each sort.
15. If seed of the same sort, but different in
colour, be sown, and be harvested into one Barn ;
for instance two sorts of wheat or two sorts of barley ;
one Corner only shall be given : but if harvested
into two Barns, two Corners shall be given. This
Tradition is from Moses on Mount-Sinai (19).
- 16. If Brothers make a partition of a field, they
shall give two Corners; if they afterwards agree to
unite, they shall give but one Corner. If partners
reap the half of a field and then divide it, he who
receiveth the half cut-down, is not accountable for
the whole Corner;and he who receiveth the half with
its standing crop shall be accountable only for the
half he receiveth. If however they come to an
Agreement, and again unite, and as partners, reap
the other half; each of them shall separate a Corner
(20) from his portion of the standing-crop; for the
portion of his partner, in the standing-crop, but not
for the half of the field which had been reaped.
17. If a man hath a field, only one-half of which
hath reached the third degree of maturity, and if he
commence the reaping of one-half of that half; and
if afterwards, the whole of the field shall reach the
third degree of maturity, and he then reap the whole
:::gſ: the first half the Corner for the middle shall be
19
separated from the first part, and from the middle
for the first and last parts (20).
18. If a man selleth his whole field in several
Lots, to as many men, each buyer shall give a Corner
for his Lot: but if after the commencement of the
reaping, the Owner shall sell half and reserve the
other half, he shall give a Corner sufficient for the
whole field : since having commenced the reaping,
he is liable for the whole. If however, before he
commence the reaping he selleth one-half, the buyer
shall give a Corner for his half, and the Owner a
Corner for the remainder.
19. Nothing divideth into two a field planted
with trees, except a high wall intersecting it : but
if the wall passeth under only the lower parts of the
trees, whilst above it the branches and leaves in-
termingle, or spread over the top of wall ; then is
this field but one, and but one Corner, shall be given
for the whole.
20. If two, persons buy a tree, they shall give
but one Corner for it: but if one buy the North-side,
and the other the South-side of the tree, each shall
give a distinct Corner. ‘.
21. With regard to Pulse, if it be within such a
space that men standing on opposite Sides are able
to see one another, then shall the whole be deemed to
be one field, and one Corner shall be given for the
whole. If, however, from either Side, the sight will
reach only to the Middle, Corners shall be given from
each of the Sides; or from the one Side for the Middle,
or from the Middle for the one Side; but not from one
Side for the other Side (20).
20
22. With regard to Olive-trees, whatsoever there
may be in any one quarter of the four quarters of the
City (for example, whatsoever there may be in the
Eastern or in the Western quarter :) shall be deemed
to be but one field: and one Corner shall be given for
the whole.
23. A man who, here and there, partially gathereth
from his Vineyard, in order that the vines may be
thinned, and that sufficient space for the growth of
the remaining bunches may be afforded; such a man
is called a “Thinner.” We have already explained
that he who gathereth his vintage from One part is
not a Thinner; wherefore he shall give from that
which remaineth, a Corner sufficient for the whole;
even though he gathereth for the Market. But if
he thinneth in order to sell in the Market, he shall
not give a Corner for that which, in thinning, he hath
gathered. Albeit if he thin the Vines for the use of
his household, he shall give out of that which he
hath left for the Wine-Press, one Corner adequate to
the whole.
CHAPTER IV.
What constitutes the Gleanings — When the Wind scatters the
Corn—the Gleanings not to be covered—Corn found in Ants'
nests — Nothing to be done to deter the Poor from Gleaning—
what constitutes the Gleanings of a Vineyard.
WHAT are the Gleanings? Resp. That which falleth
from the Sickle at the time of reaping; or that which
falleth from the Hand of the reaper in grasping the
ears of corn : provided it be not more than Two ears
that fall; if Three fall together, they belong to the
Owner of the field; but that which falleth from the
back part of the Sickle, or from the back part of the
Hand, be it only one ear, is not to be deemed to be
Gleanings (21).
2. If a man gathereth his crop with his Hand,
without making use of a Sickle, that which falleth from
his Hand is not Gleanings: but if he plucketh-up that
which it is customary to pluck-up, whatever falleth
from his Hand is Gleanings. If he reap or pluck-up
that which it is customary to pluck-up, and if, after
reaping enough to fill his arm — or if, after plucking-
up enough to fill his hand—a thorn prick him, and
a part falleth from his hand, that part belongeth to
the owner of the field. sº
3. If the reaper leaveth one ear standing, whilst
around it all hath been reaped; and if such ear touch
other standing-ears adjoining, so that it may be reaped
with them ; then doth it belong to the owner of the
field. If it do not so touch, it belongeth to the
Poor.
4. If there be Two ears left, one by the side of the
other, the Innermost of which can be reaped with the
corn yet standing, by the same stroke of the Sickle; whilst
the Outermost, though it cannot be reaped with the
other part of the crop, may be reaped with the Inner-
most ; then shall the Innermost be exempted, and it
shall exempt the Outermost. In all other cases it
shall, though not yet cut down, be regarded as an ear
fallen from the Sickle. Ears amongst the Straw belong
to the Owner.
5. If the wind scatter the Sheaves, and mingle the
corn cut-down with the Gleanings, let the measure of
the field be taken, so that the quantity of Gleanings
in it may be ascertained, and let it be given to the
Poor. But what is that quantity? Resp. Four Cabi
of Corn for every space which requireth a Corus of
seed (16). -
6. If the Gleanings fall upon the ground, and be
not collected by the Poor; and if the Owner come
and heap up his crop upon that spot, what is to be
done 2 Resp. The whole heap shall be moved to
another place, and all the ears which touch the ground
are the property of the Poor; since we cannot know,
which of them were Gleanings. Whatever is doubtful
concerning the Gifts of the Poor, belongeth to the
Poor (21); for it is said, “Thou shalt leave,” i e.
23
“Thou shalt place before them, of that which is
thine.” -
7. But why not calculate the quantity adequate for
Gleanings, and give it to the Poor 2 Resp. Because
the transgressor, who hath covered over the Glean-
ings, ought to be mulcted : Yea, though he may have
acted through error; even though the Gleanings be
barley and it be wheat that häth been heaped upon it;
even though he may have sent for the Poor and they
have not come ; even though it hath been done
without the knowledge of the Owner; nevertheless,
all the ears which touch the ground belong to the
Poor.
8. If it should be needful to manure the land,
before the Gleanings of it have been gathered; if, by
the omission, the loss to the Owner would be greater
than the loss to the Poor of the Gleanings, then is it
lawful to manure it. But if the loss of the Gleanings
be the greater, it shall not be manured. To collect
the Gleanings and to lay them by the side of the hedge,
until the Poor arrive to receive them, Lo! This would
be real charity!
9. With regard to grains of corn found in the re-
ceptacles of ants, should those receptacles be in the
middle of the crop, the grains are the owner's property;
because the Poor have no gifts in the middle of the
field. But if they be upon a spot already reaped, then
do they belong to the Poor: for perchance the ants col-
lected them out of the Gleanings; and even though
they be black, let it not be said, “These are grains of
the last year:” since whenever it is doubtful whether
they be Gleanings, they are Gleanings (10).
24
10. If an ear out of the Gleanings be mixed with
the heap of the Owner, let the Owner take two ears,
and say over one of them, “If this Ear be Gleanings,
it shall be for the Poor; if it be not Gleanings, behold
the Tithe to which this ear is liable, shall be assigned
in this second ear,” and then, repeating the same words
over the second ear, one shall be for the Poor, and the
other for Tithe.
No one shall engage a Labourer, upon the condition
that the Labourer's Son shall glean after him; but
Labourers who undertake to till the land for a certain
portion of its produce (22); or who hire the field upon
the condition of yielding a certain portion of its produce
to the owner; or who may have sold their crop to be
reaped by others; the sons of these may glean after
them ; and the Labourer may even bring his wife and
children to Glean after him ; even though he may have
been hired, upon the condition of receiving as his wages
one-half, or the third part, or the fourth part, of the
crop.
12. He who refuseth the Gleanings to the Poor;
or refuseth to one and giveth permission to another;
or aideth one in preference to another ; that man is a
defrauder of the Poor. -
13. It is forbidden to place in a field a Lion (33) or
other wild beast, so that the Poor may see it and take
to flight. If there be Poor there who ought not to take
the Gleanings, let the Owner expel them, if he can, by
force; but if he cannot, for the sake of peace, let them
be suffered to remain.
14. If a man make the Gleanings public (11),
(common to all) when the greater part of the crop is
25
already cut down, it is not common to all ; for, the
greater part being down, the Owner hath no longer
any right over it.
15. What is a Fallen-Grape 2 Resp.–It is one
grape or two grapes which have parted from the
bunch at the time of Vintage; but three grapes
falling at once shall not be deemed to be Fallen-
Grapes.
16. If a bunch, cut off during the vintage, become
entangled in the leaves and fall upon the ground;
that which may break off, is not to be deemed to be
Fallen-Grapes; but if the bunch be purposely thrown
upon the ground, although one half of it be found,
upon removal, to be broken off, yet shall it be
deemed to be Fallen-Grapes; even though the whole
bunch be thus broken, it shall be deemed to be
Fallen-Grapes. He who placeth a basket under the
vine, at the time of gathering, surely he is a defrauder
of the Poor. -
17. What is a Small-bunch It is one that is not
close and thick: a bunch without smaller dependent
bunches, and the grapes of which do not hang one
under the other like icicles, but hang separately: if
it be swelled out with smaller bunches, though not
dependent like icicles, it belongeth to the Owner.
Wherever doubt existeth it belongeth to the poor.
18. What is it to have smaller dependent bunches
(23) 2 Resp.–It is when smaller bunches one over
the other are joined to the grape-stalk: What is it
to hang in the manner of an icicle (23)2 Resp.–
It is when the grapes hang dependent from the grape-
stalk. But unless all the grapes can be taken within
E
26
the palm of the hand, it shall not be deemed a Small-
Bunch. But wherefore is a Small-Bunch termed
“Olel?” Resp.–Because compared with the other
bunches it is as “Olel,” i. e. as a boy to a man. -
19. The Owner of the Vineyard is not bound to
gather the Small-Bunches and to give them to the
Poor: let the Poor themselves gather them. Where
there is a single grape, it is to be deemed to be a
Small-Bunch.
20. If there be a bunch hanging from a shoot,
and if where the shoot unites to the stem there be
a Small-bunch; the Small-Bunch belongeth to the
Owner, if he gather it with the Bunch ; if not, it
belongeth to the Poor. -
21. If a Vine produceth none but Small-Bunches
the whole belongeth to the Poor; for it is said, “and
thou shalt not Glean thy Vineyard; ” i. e. even
though there be none but Small-Bunches. The Law,
however, of Fallen-Grapes and Small-Bunches, applieth
only to a Vineyard.
22. The Poor are not to receive the Fallen-Grapes,
nor the Small-Bunches, until the Owner of the Vine-
yard hath commenced his Vintage; according to the
words, “When thou gatherest the Grapes of thy
Vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterwards.” What
quantity is to be gathered, before the Poor are to
Glean. Resp.–Three bunches if they be sufficient
to make a Rebiita of Wine (16).
23. If a man dedicate his Vineyard, before the
Small-Bunches have appeared, the Small-Bunches
belong not to the Poor; if he dedicate it after the
appearance of the Small-Bunches, they belong to the
27
Poor; and the Poor shall give to the Sanctuary the
value of their after-increase.
24. If a man prune the vine-shoots, after the
appearance of the Small-Bunches, let him prune
according to custom, removing those having bunches
and those having Small-Bunches (12).
25. If the crop of a Vineyard be sold by a
Gentile to an Israelite, it is liable to the Small-
Bunches. If an Israelite and a Gentile be partners
in a Vineyard, the part belonging to the Israelite is
liable to the Small-Bunches: that belonging to the
Gentile is exempt.
26. If a Levite receiveth the tithe of fruit which
was not ready for tithing, and findeth amongst it
Small-Bunches, he shall give them to the Poor. But
if those Small-Bunches were cut off with the other
bunches, he may then make of them the Truma of
Tithes in lieu of separating it out of the Tithes
received at another place (4).
27. If a man hath five vines, and gathereth their
grapes to be eaten by his household, he is exempt
from the Law of Fallen-Grapes, of Things-left-through-
Forgetfulness, of the Corner, and of the Fourth-Year;
but he is liable to that of the Small-Bunches: if
however he gather their grapes for the purpose of
making them into wine, he is, unless he leave a part,
liable to all these laws (24).
CHAPTER V.
What constitutes a “ Thing-left-through-forgetfulness”— if for-
gotten whilst reaping by night— Of small parcels of corn for-
gotten—Two Vines or two heaps of Olives are liable to the Law;
but not three— Sheaves above a certain size not liable — A
remarkable Olive or other Tree is exempt—The liability of things
devoted to Public Use.
WITH regard to the Sheaf, if the Labourers have
forgotten it, but if it be not forgotten by the owner
of the field: if the owner have forgotten it, but if
the Labourers have not: if both he and they have
forgotten it, but there be others passing by who see
them at the time they had forgotten it, it is not a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness : since a Sheaf is not
to be deemed a thing left through forgetfulness, until
all men have forgotten it; and even though a Sheaf
be concealed, yet, if left through forgetfulness, it is
then a Thing-left:through-Forgetfulness.
2. If the Owner of the field is in the City, and
shall say, “I know that the labourers have forgotten
a Sheaf which is in the place N :” and if they have so
forgotten yet is it a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness:
but if he is in the field and thus say, and if the Sheaf
be forgotten, then it is not a Thing-left-through-For-
getfulness; for that only which from the beginning,
29
hath been left left in the field through the forgetfulness
of all, is a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness (25); but
although in the city it is remembered, if at last, it is
neglected through forgetfulness, it is to be deemed a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness : for it is said,
“When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field; ”
not indeed in the city.
3. If the Poor stand before a sheaf, or if they hide
it amongst the straw ; and if the owner of the field,
remember the straw, or if he shall have had the sheaf
in his hand, intending to carry it into the city, and
shall have put it down in the field, and have then for-
gotten it, it is not a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness.
But if he have carried it from one place to another,
even though he may have placed it at the side of a sieve,
or of a heap, or of a pack-horse, or of some implement,
and have then forgotten it, then it is a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness.
4. If a man take up a sheaf to carry it into the city,
and if he place it upon another Sheaf, and forget both
of them (25); if he shall have remembered the upper-
most, before he again seeth it, the undermost is not a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness; if he hath not remem-
bered the uppermost, the undermost is a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness,
5. If a strong wind have carried away some Sheaves
into a neighbouring field, and one Sheaf be then for-
gotten, it is not a Thing-left-through-forgetfulness, for
it is said, “Thine harvest in thy field.” Albeit, if the
wind scatter the Sheaves in the owner's field, and one
be forgotten, then it is a Thing-left-through-Forget-
fulness. -
30
6. If a man take up a First, and a Second, and a
Third Sheaf, and forget the Fourth, if there be there
Six Sheaves, the Fourth is not a Thing-left-through-
Forgetfulness, until he shall have taken up the Fifth ;
but if there be only Five, when sufficient time shall
have expired, to allow of his taking up the Fifth, the
Fourth is a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness.
7. If two Sheaves lie amongst others, and if one of
them be forgotten, it is not a Thing-left-through-For-
getfulness, until all those are taken away, which lie
round about it.
8. With regard to Leeks, Garlic, Onions, and their
like, although they be concealed under ground, the
Law of Things-left-through-Forgetfulness applieth to
them. If a man reap by night, and forget part of the
crop, or if he gather into Sheaves by night, and forget
a sheaf; even if a blind man thus forget, yet is the Law
applicable to such cases. But if it be the intention of
the blind man, or of the man reaping by night, merely
to take away the finer ears, in such case the Law doth
not apply. If any one say, “Behold ! I undertake to
reap, upon the condition of taking away whatever I
may forget; ” yet shall he be bound by the Law, since
all agreements contrary to the Law are void.
9. If a man mow his unripe crop for the feeding
of cattle; if he gather it in small bundles, and do not
make it into Sheaves; if he pull up garlic or onions in
small bundles, to sell them at market, and do not make
them into Sheaves to lay up in a Barn ; in such cases
the Law is not applicable.
10. If a reaper commence his reaping at the
beginning of the Row and forget a part, both before
31
him and behind him ; that which is behind him, is a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness; but that which is
before him is not so ; since it is said, “Thou shalt not
go again to fetch it; ” so that until it hath been passed-
by, and left behind, it is not to be deemed a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness.
11. If two men commence reaping in the middle
of a Row, one towards the North, and the other towards
the South, and forget a part behind them, and a part
before them ; that which they have forgotten, is a
Thing-left-through-forgetfulness : since that which is
before either of them, must be behind his companion
(25). Albeit a Sheaf forgotten by them, at the spot
where they began reaping, is not a Thing-left-through-
Forgetfulness; since it formeth a part of the Rows
which run from East to West, and therefore it is to be
presumed, was not forgotten. And so of the Rows of
Sheaves when carried into the Barn : if two men begin
at the middle of a Row, and forget a Sheaf behind, and
therefore between them both, it is not a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness; since it is in the middle of the
Row which runs from West to East, from which none
have yet been carried; and it is therefore to be pre-
sumed that the Sheaf hath not been forgotten.
12. In the case of a reaper gathering the Corn into
many bundles bearing the denomination of “Sheaves,”
and who, in removing them from one place unto an-
other, and from the second place, unto a third place,
and thence into the barn, forgetteth a sheaf during
the time of removing it from place to place ; if he
should have removed them to the place where all
work relating to them is finished, and should forget
&
32 \!
one, to that one the Law of Things-left-through-
Forgetfulness is applicable. If however it be forgotten
during the removing of them into the barn, from the
place where all work relating to them is finished, the
Law is not applicable: and if it be forgotten in the
removing of them to a place where all work relating
to them is not finished, then the Law is not applicable.
But if it be forgotten, upon the removing of them
into the barn from a place where all work relating to
them is not finished, then the Law is applicable.
13. What is the place where all work relating to
the Sheaves is finished (25) 2 Resp.–It is the place
where it is intended to collect all the sheaves together
and to thresh them out; or where they are to be
made into a rick, which is the barn : and the place
where all the work is not completed is that where
the sheaves are got together to be made into larger
bundles, so that they may be the more easily removed
to another place.
14. Two of these bundles, separated from one
another may be a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness;
three however are not to be so considered. Two sheaves
separated from one another may be a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness; but three are not to be so con-
sidered. *
15. Two heaps of Olives or of Pulse, separated
from one another, may be a Thing-left-through-For-
getfulness; three however are not to be so considered.
Two bundles of green Flax may be a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness: three however are not to be so
considered.
16. Two Wines, and so also, two of other trees
33
separated from one another, may be a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness; three however are not so to
be considered: for it is said, “Thou shalt leave
them for the Poor and Stranger,” i. e. if there be
two ; one being, indeed, for the Poor, and one for the
Stranger. - g
17. If for the most part Single Sheaves contain
a Cabus of seed, and there chance to be one amongst
them forgotten, containing four Cabi, it is a Thing-
left-through-Forgetfulnes; if it containeth more than
four Cabi, it is not a Thing-left-through-Forgetful-
ness. And so, if single sheaves contain in general
two Cabi, and there chance to be one amongst them
forgotten, containing eight Cabi, it is not a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness (16).
18. If there be a Sheaf forgotten, containing two
Sea of seed, it is not a Thing-left-through-Forget-
fulness (for it is said, “When thou hast forgot a
sheaf in the field,” not a Heap); not though all the
other Sheaves contain Two Sea: but if there be Two"
Sheaves forgotten, the two together containing Two
Sea, then are these a Thing-left-through-Forgetful-
ness; and I conceive that they are a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness, even though in the Two there
be more than Two Sea of seed (16).
19. If there be forgotten some Standing-Corn
containing as much as Two Sea of seed, it is not a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness: and if it containeth
not Two Sea of seed, let the slender ears be regarded
as though they were thick and long; and the blighted
ears as though they were full; and if then there
F
34
would be sufficient to produce Two Sea, it shall be
adjudged to contain that quantity; wherefore, though
forgotten, it shall not be deemed a Thing-left-through-
Forgetfulness. --
20. If a Sea of wheat pulled-up, and a Sea of
wheat not-pulled up, be forgotten, they shall not be
joined (so as to be ea empt from the Law), but both
are to be deemed a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness.
So it is with Leeks and Onions, and the fruit of
Trees, if a part in the ground and a part pulled up
be forgotten, and if the Two parts together contain
Two Sea, they shall not be joined, but both shall be
deemed a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness.
21. If a Sheaf be forgotten, which is lying near
some standing-corn not forgotten, the Sheaf is not
a Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness; for it is said,
“When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field,
and hast forgot a sheaf in the Field.” If the
Sheaf hath round about it, corn cut-down, it is a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness; and so if Standing
Corn be forgotten, which is near to other Standing
Corn, not forgotten, even though it be but one ear yet
doth it exempt that which was forgotten, and the
owner may take it for himself. But if there be a
Sheaf or Standing-Corn forgotten, near to a Sheaf not
forgotten, albeit it contain Two Sea of Seed, it doth
not liberate the former ; but that which hath been left
through Forgetfulness belongeth to the Poor.
22. If a Tree be forgotten, even though it contain
several Sea of fruit; or if two Trees be forgotten,
they are Things-left-through-Forgetfulness: Three,
however, are not so to be considered.
*
35
23. In what case are these things said? Resp.–
Where a Tree planted amongst other Trees is not
well-known, nor remarkable on account of the place
where it stands, as being near to a Wine-press, (26.)
or to a Gap in a Wall; nor remarkable on account
of great productiveness; nor remarkable on account
of a well-known Name, such as a Shapacnensian or a
Basanensian Olive-tree, (27) or other sorts famous
for their productiveness. In either of these three
cases, it shall not be a Thing-left-through-Forgetful-
ness, for it is said, “If thou hast forgot a Sheaf in
the field,” i. e. a Sheaf which thou hast wholly for-
gotten, so that in nowise can it be recalled to thy re-
membrance, except thou return and see it. Where-
fore that which thou mayest afterwards remember
without returning to it, is exempt; since it is well-
known and remarkable.
24. If a particular impression hath been made on
the mind by any one Tree, such Tree is to be deemed a
remarkable and well-known tree ; if it standeth near
a Date-tree, the Date-tree rendereth it remarkable; if
there be two Netophaean Olive-trees (27,) standing
near one another, each rendereth the other remarkable:
but if the whole field be of Netophaean Olives, and
one or two of them be forgotten, the Law relating to
Things-left-through-Forgetfulness is applicable. In
what case are these things said 2 Resp. – When no
part of the fruit of the remarkable Tree hath yet been
gathered; but if a beginning hath been made, and a
part hath been forgotten then is the Law applicable,
even though the tree be remarkable; provided the
remainder of the fruit be less than two Seas. If
36
however there be two Seas left, it is not a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness; unless, as before explained, the
whole tree be forgotten.
25. If an Olive-tree standeth alone in the middle
of a Row, having three Rows of Olive-trees sur-
rounding it at three points (25); although there
be not more than Two Trees in each Row; yet
shall not that Tree, if forgotten, be a Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness : since the Rows conceal it.
But wherefore is this said only of the Olive-tree ?
Resp.–Because in those times it was rare in the
Land of Israel.
26. In the case of Sheaves, what is a Thing-
left-through -Forgetfulness 2 Resp.–Any Sheaf that
the hand cannot again reach to take it up. In a
Vineyard, when a Vine or Vines are passed-by, and
the fruit thereof is forgotten: with regard to the
Palm-tree, when the Gatherer hath descended from
the Tree: with regard to all other Trees, when the
Gatherer hath turned away and departed from them.
In what case are these things said 2 Resp.–When
no one hath begun to gather fruit from the Trees :
but if a beginning hath been made, and a part be
forgotten, they are not to be deemed Things-left-
through-Forgetfulness, until the fruit of all surround-
ing trees hath been gathered.
27. If a man maketh-public his Vineyard, and
then riseth up early in the morning, in order to
obtain possession of it for himself; at the Vintage
he is liable to the Fallen-Grapes, and to the Small-
Clusters, and to Things-left-through-Forgetfulness,
and to the Corner; for I conceive this to be “thy”
37
field, and “thy” vineyard (according to the meaning
of Scripture), it never having been the property of
another. But if he acquire a right over something
made-public in the field of another, then is that
thing exempt from all the above laws : We have
explained that it is exempt from Tithe in either
CaSC.
CHAPTER VI.
Concerning the Tithe-of-the-Poor — Of the Order of Succession in
Truma and Tithes — Of the Sabbath-Year — The Poor may
demand their Tithe in the Field—The Quantity they are entitled
to—The Wants of Poor Women to be First Supplied—The Tithe
and Gifts of the Poor not liable to Ordinary Claims — Captives
are not to be redeemed with the Tithes-of-the-Poor.
THERE is yet a Sixth Gift belonging to the Poor out
of the seed of the Earth; namely Tithe, which the
Israelites are bound to give to the Poor; and it is cal-
led the Tithe-of-the-Poor. The following is the order
of the Trumae and of the Tithe.
2. After the harvesting of the Seed of the earth,
and the gathering of the fruit of the Tree, and the
completion of the work thereto relating, One-fiftieth
part shall be separated and be called the Great Truma.
This shall be given to the Priest according to the Law,
(Deut. ch. xviii. v. 4.) “The first-fruit also of thy
Corn, of thy Wine, and of thine Oil, and of the first
of thy fleece of thy sheep, shalt thou give him.”
Then shall be separated from the remainder, One-
tenth part, which is called the First-Tithe: this shall
be given to the Levite: concerning which it is said in
the Law, (Num. ch. xviii. v. 24.) “But the tithes of
39
the Children of Israel which they offer as an heave-
offering unto the Lord, I have given to the Levites to
inherit: therefore I have said unto them “among the
children of Israel they shall have no inheritance,’ and
again, ‘I have given the children of Levi all the tenth
in Israel.’” -
3. And afterwards another Tenth-part shall be
separated from the remainder, and this is called the
Second-Tithe. This shall be for the Owner, who
shall eat it at Jerusalem; concerning this it is said
(Lev. xxvii. 31) “And if a man will at all redeem
aught of his Tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part
thereof.” And it is also said (Deut. xiv.) “Thou
shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed, and thou
shalt eat before the Lord thy God, in the place which
He shall choose to place his name there’’ (24).
4. This then is the order of separation to be made
in the first, the second, and the fourth years, of the
Heptaeterid; but in the third and the sixth years of
the Heptaeterid (28) after the separation of the First-
Tithe, they shall separate from the remainder, other
Tithe to be given to the Poor; and this is termed the
Tithe-of-the-Poor. In these two years there shall be
no Second-Tithe, but in place of it, Tithe of the Poor.
Of this it is said (Deut. xiv.) “At the end of three
years thou shalt bring forth all the Tithe of thine
increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy
gates. And the Levite, and the stranger, and the
fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates,
shall come, and shall eat, and be satisfied.” And con-
cerning these, it is also said (Deut. xxvi.) “When thou
hast made an end of tithing all the Tithes of thine
40
increase the third year, which is the year of tithing,
and hast given it unto the Levite, the stranger, the
fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat within
thy gates and be filled.”
5. In the sabbath-year all things are in Common.
At that period there shall be, neither Truma, nor Tithe,
neither First, nor Second, nor Tithe-of-the-Poor; but,
out of the Land of Israel, where the Sabbath of the
soil is not observed, the following shall be separated;
viz., in the Land of Egypt, and of Ammon, and of
Moab, the First-Tithe, and the Tithe-of-the Poor (4):
since those regions are nigh unto the Land of Israel,
and the Poor of Israel may thereby be supported during
the Sabbath-year. For by the constitution of Moses-out-
of-Sinai (19), the Israelites in the Land of Ammon,
and of Moab, are bound to separate the Tithe-of-the-
Poor, during the Sabbath-year; but in the Land of
Babylonia, during the Sabbath-year, the Second-Tithe
shall be separated, according to the usual order of
years. -
6. Out of the First-Tithe, which the Levite
receiveth, he is required to separate a Fourth-part, and
to give it to the Priests; this is termed the Truma-of-
Tithes, of which it is said (Numb. Ch. 18. v. 26.),
“Thus speak unto the Levites, and say unto them,
When ye take of the children of Israel the Tithes which
I have given you from them, for your inheritance, then
ye shall offer up a heave-offering of it for the Lord;
even a tenth part of the Tithe’” (4).
7. The Owner of a field, if the Poor go to him,
and if he have there (in the field,) the Tithe-of-the-
Poor, is bound, out of that Tithe, to give to each of
41
the Poor who apply to him, enough to satisfy them;
according to the words (Deut. Ch. 14.), “They shall
come, and shall eat, and be satisfied.”
8. What is the quantity that is to satisfy them 2
Resp. – If the tithe be of Wheat, not less than half a
Cabus shall be given; if it be of Barley, not less than a
Cabus shall be given ; if it be of Spelt, not less than a
Cabus shall be given; if it be of Lenten-figs (9), not less
than a Cabus shall be given; if it be of Cake-figs (9), not
less than the weight of Twenty-five Sicli (29) shall be
given; if it be of wine, not less than Half-a-Logus (16)
'shall be given; if it be of Oil, not less than a quarter-
part of a Logus shall be given; if it be of Rice, a
quarter-part of a Cabus shall be given. But if it be of
Olives, a pound-weight shall be given, which weight
is Thirty-five denarii; if it be of Pulse, three Cabi; if
of Nuts, ten Nuts ; if of Peaches, five of them : if of
Pomegranates, two; if of Citrons, one; if of any other
sort of fruit, not less shall be given, than may be sold
for such a Sum, as will buy food sufficient for Two
meals (10).
9. If, however, the Owner's means be slender, and
the Poor be so numerous, that he cannot give to each
of them according to this measure, let him bring forth
the whole of the Tithe, and placing it in view, let the
Poor divide it amongst themselves.
10. If the Tithe-of-the-Poor be distributed in the
Barn, the Owner shall not receive thanks for it, as
though for a benefit conferred; but the Poor shall come,
and shall receive it, even against the Owner's will;
yea, though the Owner be one of the poorest men in
Israel, they shall take it out of his hands (4). But if
G *
42
the Owner distribute it at his house, thanks shall be
given to him, as for a benefit conferred ; and he may
grant it to whomsoever of the Poor it may please him.
ll. If the Owner have the Tithe in his Barn, and
wish to give it to a Poor kinsman, or to a friend, it is
lawful for him to separate one-half, and to give it to
him ; but the other half he shall give to every poor-
person who may apply to him, according to the quan-
tity before-mentioned.
12. In what case is it said, that the Poor shall not
receive less than will satisfy them. Resp.– When the
Tithes are in the field: but if the Owner have the Tithes
at his house, he shall divide them amongst all the Poor
who apply to him, even though the quantity allotted to
each, be no more than one Olive ; since it is not com-
manded, that he shall give to the Poor until they be
satisfied, unless it be in the field only; for there the
poor man is unable to find any other person who may
relieve his wants: for it is said, “That they may eat
within thy gates, and be filled ” (4).
13. If a Man and a Woman solicit relief, the
Woman shall be first attended to, and after she hath
departed, the man. If it be father and son, or a man
and his neighbour; or two Brothers, or two friends,
one of whom is poor, the one shall give to the other,
those Tithes-of-the-Poor which he holds. .
14. If two Poor persons take a field, to till it in
consideration of a certain portion of its produce, they
shall separate, each from his own portion, the Tithe-of-
the-Poor, and give it, the one to the other.
15. He who takes a field to reap it, shall be prohi-
bited from taking the Gleanings, a Thing-left-through-
43
Forgetfulness, the Corner, and the Tithe-of-the-Poor.
Under what circumstances 2 Resp. —Whenever he
hath taken a field to reap it, upon the condition that
he shall have a portion of the whole field; for example,
if he is to receive a third or a fourth-part, instead of
wages. But if the Owner of the Field say to him,
thy portion shall be a third-part only of that which
thou reapest, or a fourth-part only of that which thou
reapest, then hath he no right whatever to it, until he
shall have reaped the field; but during the time of his
reaping, he is one of the Pocr, and hath therefore a
right to the Gleanings, to that which is left-through-
Forgetfulness, and to the Corner, but the Tithe-of-the-
Poor he shall not receive, since that is not separated
until the reaping is completed; and, Behold, that being
completed, he hath become entitled to his portion.
16. He who selleth his field, the land and its crop,
and afterwards himself becometh one of the Poor, hath
a right to the Gleanings, to That-which-is-left-through-
Forgetfulness, to the Corner, and to the Tithe-of-the-
Poor, which it may contain; but he who buyeth it, is
forbidden to take them, even though he may not yet
have paid the price; even though he hath borrowed
the money, to effect the purchase, nevertheless is he
forbidden to take the Gifts of the Poor.
17. Out of the Tithe-of-the-Poor, a debt shall
not be paid, nor recompense be made for benefits;
albeit, out of it something may be given as voluntary
benevolence; but it is required, that it be made known
to him to whom it is given, that it hath been taken
out of the Tithes-of-the-Poor. Captives, moreover
shall not be redeemed with it, nor shall it be laid out
44
upon Nuptial-feasts, nor shall aught be taken out of it,
not even alms. It may, however, be given to a
Doctor-of-the-City (30), that thanks may thereby be
received. Out of the Land of Israel, into a foreign
land, it shall not be carried ; for it is said, “And lay
it up within thy Gates; ” and again, “That they may
eat within thy Gates, and be filled.”
CHAPTER VII.
Of the Right of the Poor to Alms — All the wants of the Poor are
to be relieved — Wives and Husbands are to be found for them
— the Hungry are to be fed without examination or delay — the
bashful Poor to be relieved by artifice — the Goods of him refu-
sing Alms, shall be taken in Pledge — how General donations are
to be construed.
It is an Affirmative Precept, that Alms are to be given
to the Poor of Israel, according to the wants of the
Poor, and to the means of the Giver ; for it is said,
(Deut. Ch. 15.) “Thou shalt open thy hand wide
unto him ; ” and it is also said, (Lev. Ch. 25.) “And
if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with
thee, then thou shalt relieve him ; yea though he be a
Stranger, or a Sojourner; that he may live with thee.”
2. Whoever seeth the Poor asking Alms, and
shutteth his eyes against him, and doth not relieve him,
transgresseth the Negative Precept (1); for it is written,
(Deut. Ch. 15.) “Thou shalt not harden thine heart,
nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother.”
3. It is because he is in want, that thou art com-
manded to give unto him : if he standeth in need of
garments, let him be clothed; if of household things
let him be supplied with them : if of a wife let a wife
46
be betrothed unto him ; and in case of a woman let a
husband be betrothed unto her (31). And, moreover,
if in his prosperity, he hath been accustomed to ride
on horseback, having a Servant running before him,
and if he is now reduced to poverty, let him be fur-
nished with a Horse, upon which he may ride, and
with a Servant, who may run before him ; for it is said
(Deut. Ch. 15.) “But thou shalt open thine hand
wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for
his need in that which he wanteth.” But it is com-
manded thee only to relieve his need : not to enrich
him with dainties.
4. If an Orphan solicit to have a Wife betrothed
unto him, let him first be led home, and let a Couch
and necessary household-goods, be prepared for him ;
and then let a Wife be betrothed unto him (31).
5. When a poor man beseecheth to have his indi-
gence relieved, if the means of the Giver be insuffi-
cient, he is required to give according to his means;
but how much is that ? Resp : He who giveth a fifth-
part of his means, obeyeth the Precept in the highest
degree; he who giveth a tenth-part of his means,
obeyeth the Precept in a medium degree; he who
giveth less than a tenth-part is a man of an evil-eye
(32). No one, however, shall ever refuse yearly to
give the third-part of a Siclus: whoever giveth less
than this, obeyeth not the Precept: even though he is
poor, and is supported by Alms, yet is he required to
give Alms to other Poor.
6. If a Poor man who is not known, applieth
saying, “I am an hungered, I pray thee give me that I
may eat,” he shall not be examined, to learn whether
47
he be a deceiver, but food shall be instantly given to
him : if he be naked, and pray to be clothed, then let
him be examined, to learn whether he be a deceiver.
If however he be a known person, let him be forthwith
clothed, according to his station, and let not any inqui-
ries be made concerning him.
7. Together with the Poor of Israel, food and raiment
is also, for the sake of peace, to be afforded to Gentiles
(3). If a Poor man wander about thy threshold, it is
not required that he should be largely supplied ; a
small gift, however, if it be but one Carica, shall be
bestowed; since it is forbidden to send away empty,
the Poor who ask for Alms; for it is said, (Ps. 74.)
“O let not the oppressed return ashamed ; let the
poor and needy praise thy name.”
8. To the Poor, wandering from place to place,
not less shall be given, than such a piece of bread as
may be bought for an obolus, when four Sea of Wheat
sell for a Siclus (29). If the Poor tarry with thee
during the night, a couch to sleep on shall be found
for him, and a coverlet to place under his head, in
place of a pillow (34); together with Oil and Pulse.
If he tarry with thee upon the sabbath-day, let him
then receive food sufficient for Three repasts, and Oil,
and Pulse, and Fish, and Potherbs ; and if he be a
known person, let him be treated according to his
station.
9. If there be a Poor man who refuseth to receive
Alms, artifice must be employed, and under the name
of a Gift, or of a Loan, let him be relieved. If any
rich man starve himself, and his eye be such (i. e. evil)
(32), that in the midst of his superfluities, he reduceth
48
himself to want, and he will neither eat nor drink of
his own ; to such a man no solicitude is due.
10. If any one refuseth to bestow Alms, or if he
giveth less than becometh him, the Synedrim shall use
compulsion, and shall inflict upon him the Stripes of
Rebellion (35), until he giveth that which he hath been
adjudged to give. They shall also in his presence take
from his goods, as much as he ought to give, and they
shall retain it as a pledge for the Alms; yea even
though it be upon the Sabbath-eve(2.)
11. If any one be so generous, as to give greater
Alms, than his means allow : or to avoid the shame of
refusal shall reduce himself to straits, in order that he
may give Alms to the Collectors, from such a man is it
forbidden either to exact, or to ask for Alms : and if any
Collector by solicitation, endeavour to excite shame in
such an one, future vengeance shall fall upon him, as
it is said, (Jer. Ch. 30.) “And I will visit with punish-
ment all who oppress them.”
12. Alms, even for the redemption of Captives,
shall not be exacted of Orphans, albeit they may pos-
sess abundant means; but, if the Judge ordaineth it,
in order to signalize them, then it is lawful. The
Collectors may, also, receive Alms from Servants,
Women, and Boys, but it shall be something of small
amount, for if much were to be accepted, presumption
might arise, that it had been acquired by theft or by
force. How much is this small quantity that they are
required to give 2 Resp.–In all things, according to
the substance of their Masters, and in proportion to
their own means.
13. The poor who are neighbours, are to be
49
regarded before all others : the Poor of one's own
family are to be regarded before the Poor of one's
own city: and the Poor of one's own City before
the Poor of another City; for it is said (Deut. xv.)
“Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy Brother,
to thy Poor, and to thy Needy, in thy land.”
14. If any one depart with his gains to another
City, the people of which city require of him a
Gift of Alms, let him give to the Poor of that City.
But if there be more than one, upon whom this
demand for Alms is made, they shall make a division
of Alms; but, upon their return, they shall carry
them back to support the Poor of their own City.
And if there be there a Doctor-of-the-City, to him
they shall give them, that he may so distribute them
as to him may seem meet.
15. If a man sayeth, “Give Two hundred Denarii
for the use of the Synagogue,” or, “Give a Book-
of-the-Law for the use of the Synagogue,” it shall
be given to the Synagogue which he was wont to
frequent; and if he was wont to frequent Two Syna-
gogues, the same shall be given to each. If he
sayeth, “Give Two-hundred Denarii to the Poor,”
they shall be given to the Poor of that City.
CHAPTER VIII.
A Promise of Alms as sacred as a Vow — whether Alms to be Pub-
lickly accepted from Gentiles — of the Offerings of Gentiles
towards the Repair of the Temple — the Redemption of Captives
of primary importance — but not to be redeemed at an Exorbitant
rate — of Captives who have Apostatised— those who have sold
themselves may be only Twice redeemed — the Scale of prefe-
rence to be observed in Almsgiving.
ALMs are comprised under the head of Vows; where-
fore if any one say, “Behold, I give a Shekel for
Alms,” or, “Behold, this Shekel is Alms,” he is
bound forthwith to give it to the Poor, and if he
delayeth, he transgresseth the Negative Precept (Deut.
xxiii.) “Thou shalt not slack to pay it; ” for surely
it is in his power instantly to give it, if but the
Poor be present. If no Poor be there, he shall
set it apart, and lay it by, until he meet with them :
but if he hath made it a condition that he shall
not give it, until he meeteth with a poor person,
it is not incumbent upon him to set it apart. If
at the time of making a Vow of Alms, he hath made
it a condition that the Collectors shall be permitted
to commute it, or to convert it into gold; or if,
wpon that same condition, he shall have given it of
5 | **s
his own accord, then shall it be lawful for them
so to commute it (36).
2. He who is pledged to a Vow of Alms is bound
by an obligation, similar to that of other Vows; for
instance, if any one sayeth, “Behold, this Shekel is
as this” (that second one being alms), then is it alms;
or, if any one setteth apart a Shekel, saying, “Behold,
this Shekel is Alms,” and then, taking a Second
Shekel, shall say, “And this,” the Second, though
not so expressed, is Alms.
3. He who maketh a Vow of Alms, without know-
ing how much he hath vowed, is bound to give
until he say, “I did not mean so much.”
4. It is the same thing, whether a man having
set a Shekel apart, say, “Behold, this Shekel is
Alms ; ” or whether he say, “Behold, I give a
Shekel for Alms.” It is lawful for a man to exchange
the Shekel, that he hath vowed ; although so to
do is prohibited, after it hath been within the hands
of the Collectors. It is not lawful for the Col-
lectors to exchange the smaller coin for Denarii,
unless there be no Poor present, whom they can
relieve ; then may they make an exchange, albeit
not with themselves.
5. If, by the retaining of the money in the hands
of the Collector, any advantage accrue to the Poor;
as should it have the effect of inducing others to
be liberal; then it is lawful for the Collector to
exchange that money of the Poor, and again to give
it in change; since Alms are not like unto Holy-
things which it is prohibited to make use of
52
6. If any one make an offering to the Synagogue
of a Candelabra, or of a Lamp, it is not lawful to
exchange it, unless for a thing ordained by the Law;
in that case it is lawful, even though the name of
the person to whom it belonged be not yet so obli-
terated, but that it may be said, “This Candelabra,”
or “This Lamp, belongeth to N.” But if the name
be entirely obliterated, it is lawful to exchange it
even for an indifferent thing.
7. In what case are these things said 2 Resp.—
When he who maketh the Offering is an Israelite;
but if he be a Gentile, it shall not be exchanged,
even for a thing ordained by the Law, until the
name of the Owner be obliterated; lest, perchance,
the Gentile say, “I consecrated a thing to the use
of the Synagogue of the Jews, and they have sold
it for their own profit.”
8. If a Gentile make an Offering towards the
reparation of the Temple, for such purpose it shall
not be accepted ; albeit if it hath been accepted it
is not to be returned : unless it be any remarkable
Offering such as a Beam, or a Stone, These must
be returned, since the Gentiles are to have nothing
remarkable in the Sanctuary ; for it is said (Ezra
iv.), “Ye have nothing to do with us, to build an
house unto our God’” (37). For the use of the
Synagogue, a Gentile's gift may be accepted, if the
Gentile sayeth, “l have consecrated this according
to the intentions of the Israelites:” but, if he saith
not this, it shall be put aside by itself; for, per-
chance, his mind was against God. Nothing, how-
ever, shall be received of Gentiles, for the building
53
of the Wall of Jerusalem, nor for the repair of the
Aqueducts (38); for, it is said (Neh. ii.) “But ye
have no portion, nor right, nor memorial, in Jeru-
salem.”
9. The Israelites are forbidden to receive Alms
of the Gentiles, in public ; unless they cannot subsist
upon the Alms of their Brethren, nor accept privately
of the Gentiles. If a King, or a Prince of the
Gentiles, send money to the Israelites for Alms, for
the sake of preserving peace with his kingdom, it
shall not be returned to him; but it shall be accepted
and be given to the Gentile Poor, privately, that
the King hear not of it.
10. The Redemption of Captives is to be con-
sidered, before the feeding, or the clothing, of the
Poor: there being no precept of such importance
as that relating to the Redemption of Captives: for
Captives may be numbered amongst the Hungry,
the Thirsty, the Naked, and those in peril of their
lives. He, therefore, who shutteth his eyes against
the Redemption of Captives, transgresseth the Nega-
tive Precept (Deut. xv.), “Thou shalt not harden
thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor
brother; ” and also this (Lev. xix.), “Neither shalt
thou stand against the blood of thy Neighbour; ”
and this (Lev. xxv.), “And shalt not rule with
rigour over him, in thy sight.” Such an one is,
moreover, a violator of the Affirmative Precept (Deut.
xv.), “But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto
him; ” and “That thy Brother may live with thee; ”
and also this, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself; ” and (Prov. xxiv.) “If thou forbear to
54
deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those
that are ready to be slain ; ” and many more similar
precepts. For there is no command so frequent as
that relating to the Redemption of Captives.
11. If the people of a City collect money for
the purpose of erecting a Synagogue, and something,
authorized by the Law, and deemed to be a more
desirable work, unexpectedly occur to them, they may
lay out the money upon it; but, if they have pre-
pared the Stones and the Beams, they shall not sell
them for the sake of any thing authorized by the
Law, the Redemption of Captives alone excepted.
Even though the stone hath been brought and hewn,
and the beams have been squared, and all things
have been prepared for the building, yet shall all
be sold for the Redemption of Captives. But if
the Synagogue be erected, it shall not be sold; let
it be completed, and let collections be then made
from the Congregation, for the Work of Redemp-
tion.
12. Captives are not to be redeemed at an unrea-
sonable cost, lest enemies then pursue for the sake
of capture, and the safety of society be endangered;
nor, for the same reason shall Captives be aided to
escape, and lest the enemy confine them under closer
custody, and treat them with greater severity.
13. If any one selleth himself and his children to
the Gentiles (2); or, if he be hired by them, and his
children be taken away; or if he be held by them in a
bond of debt; it is commanded to redeem them for the
First time, and for the Second time, but not for the
Third time. Albeit the Sons shall be redeemed after
55
the death of their Parent; but if they seek to slay
him, he shall be redeemed out of their hands, yea,
after many times.
14. If a servant be captured, after having been
baptized in a Continued-state-of-servitude (13), and
after having promised obedience to the Precepts, he
shall be redeemed, as would be a captive Israelite.
If a Captive apostatize from his Religion, though it
be but in a single precept (for instance, if he eat
of that which hath died of itself, for provocation-
sake; or commit any similar crime); it is forbidden
to redeem him.
15. A Woman is to be fed, and clothed, and
brought out of the house of captivity, before a man;
since man is accustomed to wander, but woman is
not, and her feeling of modesty is more acute.
16. If an Orphan-youth, and an Orphan-maid apply
to be betrothed, the maiden shall be betrothed before
the youth ; since the modesty of women is greater.
And to her shall be given not less, in pure silver,
than the sum of Six Denarii and one quarter; and,
if any thing be in the Alms-Chest, for her worth-
sake, shall it be given to her (31).
I7. If there be in sight many Poor or many Cap-
tives, and there be not in the Alms-Chest, enough to
feed, or to clothe, or to redeem, the whole of them ;
then shall a Priest be preferred to a Levite; a Levite
to an Israelite; an Israelite to an Uninitiated; an
Uninitiated to One of uncertain paternity; One of
uncertain paternity to a Foundling; a Foundling to
One of illegitimate birth; One of illegitimate birth to
a Nethinim (39); a Nethinim to a Proselyte ; since
56
a Nethinim is brought-up with us in the Sanctuary;
but a Proselyte is to be preferred to a Freed-man,
because this last is of the number of the accursed.
18. In what case are these things said 2 Resp.–
When both are of equal wisdom; but if the High-
Priest be an illiterate man, and he who is of illegitimate
birth be a learned man, the learned man, is to be
preferred; and whosoever is of greater wisdom, is to
be preferred to his companion of lesser wisdom ; but
if one of them be the master, or the father, (of the
person redeeming,) even though there be one of greater
wisdom, yet is the master or the father, to be preferred
to him of greater wisdom.
CHAPTER IX.
Collectors of Alms to be appointed in every City—Kupha, or Alms-
of-the-Chest—Tamchoi, or Alms-of-the-Basket—Distributions to
be made to the Poor every Sabbath-eve, and upon Fast-days —
The number of Collectors requisite in collecting Alms — Regu-
lations in making collections—Of those who are Rateable—A
Man in Want shall not be driven to a Forced Sale of his Goods
—The Rich shall not refund that which they received in a
moment of Want—The Overplus of Collections shall be given
to the Poor.
IN every city inhabited by Israelites, Collectors-of-
Alms are to be appointed, known and trusty men;
who are to go amongst the Public to receive from
every one Alms, according to his means, or according
to the stated assessment; and upon every Sabbath-
eve shall they distribute the Money, and give to
each of the Poor, food sufficient for Seven days;
and this is called Kupha, i. e. the-Alms-of-the-
Chest (40). - -
2. Thus also are to be appointed, Collectors,
who are to receive daily from every house, pieces
of bread - or other sorts of food; or even fruit or
money, from every one, disposed voluntarily to
give them at the time; and in the evening the
Collections shall be distributed amongst the Poor,
I
58
each of them receiving food sufficient for the day.
This is called “Tamchoi,” i. e. “The Alms-of-the-
Basket ’’ (40).
3. Never, since the commencement of time, have
we seen or heard, of any Congregation of Israelites,
in which there hath not been the Chest-for-Alms; but,
with regard to the Basket, it is the custom to have it
in some places, and not in others. However, it is
now the custom in every place, for Collectors to make
daily Collections, distributing those Collections upon
every Sabbath-Eve.
4. Upon Fast-days, Israelites are bound to distri-
bute food to the Poor. If upon any Fast-day, after
taking their meals, the people go to rest without
making such distributions, they are like unto Shed-
ders-of-blood, of whom it is said by the Prophet, in
the Cabbala, (41.) “It was full of judgment; Alms-
givers (44) lodged in it; but now murderers.” (Isaiah
c. i.) In what case are these things said 2 Resp.–
When bread is not given together with fruit, such as
dates and grapes, to eat with the bread: but if it be
money and wheat, that they keep back, they are not
then like unto Shedders-of-blood.
5. Alms-of-the-Chest are to be collected by not
less than two persons: for the Church never estab-
lished an office relating to pecuniary matters, that
could be discharged by less than Two (42). To
One however, may be confided the money of the
Chest, but it is to be distributed by not less than
Three; since it may be likened unto a pecuniary
suit; to each of the Poor, enough being given, to
supply the wants of the week. Alms-of-the-Basket
59
*
being however, of uncertain amount, are to be col-
lected by Three ; and also by Three are they to
be distributed. -
6. Alms-of-the-Basket are collected daily; Alms-
of-the-Chest upon every Sabbath-eve. Alms-of-the-
Basket are for the Poor of the whole world : Alms-
of-the-Chest for the Poor only of that City.
7. The Inhabitants of the City may convert
Alms-of-the-Chest into Alms-of-the-Basket; and
Alms-of-the-Basket into Alms-of-the-Chest. They
may also exchange them if they please, for any
thing needful for the Church, even though at the
time of Collection, no such intention was declared.
And if in that City there be a Doctor of renown,
upon whose judgment in the distribution to the
Poor, all confide, he is permitted to commute them
for any thing; that he may deem to be needful
for the Church (30).
8. The Collectors-of-Alms ought not to separate
from one another, in the Market-place, unless it be
for one to go to the Gate to collect, and the other to
the Shops. -
9. If the Collector of the Alms-of-the-Chest, findeth
Money in the Market-Place, he shall not lay it by in
his own purse, but he shall place it in the Eleemosynary
Chest; and upon his return home, he may take it
again.
10. If one of the Collectors give to the other, a
Mina in change, and be repaid in the Market-Place, he
shall not lay it by in his own purse, but he shall put
it into the Eleemosynary Chest, and upon his return
home, he may take it again. The Collectors shall not,
60
both together, count the Money of the Chest ; but
both separately, so as to avoid suspicion; for it is said,
(Numb. Ch. 32.) “Ye shall be guiltless before the
Lord, and before Israel.”
11. The Collectors-of-Alms, if there be not present
any Poor requiring relief, may exchange with others,
but not with themselves, the small coin for Denarii.
The Collectors-of-the-Basket, if there be not present
any Poor requiring relief, may sell the contents to
others, but not to themselves. An account of Alms
is not to be required of Collectors, neither is an
account of Sacred-Things required of the Treasurer-
of-the-Temple (11) : for, it is said (2 Kings, xxii.)
“Howbeit there was no reckoning made with them,
of the money that was delivered into their hand,
because they dealt faithfully.”
12. Whosoever tarrieth in a City during Thirty
days, shall be compelled, in common with other inha-
bitants of the City, to give Alms-of-the-Chest : if he
remaineth during Three Months, he shall be com-
pelled to give Alms-of-the-Basket: if he remaineth
during Six Months, he shall be compelled to give
Alms-for-Garments, with which Alms, garments are
prepared for the Poor of the City : if he remaineth
during Nine Months, he shall be compelled to give
Alms-for-Burials, with which Alms, the Poor of the
City are buried, and all things needful for their burial
prepared (43).
13. Whoever hath found sufficient for Two meals,
is prohibited from accepting anything out of the Elee-
mosynary Basket: Whoever hath sufficient for Four-
teen meals, shall accept nothing out of the Eleemosy-
6]
nary Chest. Whoever possesseth Two-hundred Zuzi,
(29), even though he carry on no business by means
of them, is prohibited from accepting either the Glean-
ings, or the Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness, or the
Corner, or the Tithes-of-the-Poor. But, if he pos-
sesseth Two hundred, lacking one Denarius, albeit a
thousand presents have at that very time been be-
stowed upon him, he is intitled to receive those Gifts-
of-the-Poor. If he hath in his hand money sufficient
to make up the above number, but which money is
due for a debt, or is pledged as a dowry for his Wife,
(31), yet hath he a right to accept them.
14. If a Poor person be in want, who possesseth a
House and Household Goods, albeit they be of gold
or of silver, he shall not be compelled to sell his
House nor his Goods; but he may accept the Gifts-
of-the-Poor; and it is a Precept that they be given to
him (20). In what case is this said? Resp.–When
his Household-goods are vessels needful for his food
or drink, or when they are articles of apparel, or are
bed-clothes, or their like ; but if these golden or these
silver things be such as a Syringe, or a Pestle, or
vessels of a different description, he shall sell them,
and buy others of a less cost. In what case is this
said 2 Resp.–When he is not yet reduced to the
condition of soliciting Alms of the People. But,
whoever shall have solicited Alms, shall be compelled
to sell his Household-goods of such a description, and
to buy others of less cost; he may then accept
Alms.
15. If the Master of a Family go from City to
City, exhausting, during his journey, all his money,
62
and not having wherewith to buy him food; then is
he intitled to accept the Gleanings, the Thing-left-
through-Forgetfulness, the Corner, and the Tithes-of-
the-Poor, as well as to participate in the Gifts of
Alms ; and when he again returneth home, he is
not bound to make restitution. For, assuredly, at
that time he was poor; and he must therefore be
likened to the Poor man who hath grown rich, and
is not bound to make restitution.
16. If a Poor man possesseth Houses, Fields, and
Vineyards, to sell which in the winter-time would be
selling at too low a price, whilst, by reserving them
until the summer-season, they might be sold at a fair
price, he shall not be compelled to sell them, but relief
shall be granted to him out of the Tithes-of-the-Poor,
even to the value of half of his property; he shall not
be driven to part with his property at a season when it
is scarcely saleable.
17. If, when others are buying at a high price, he,
because he is reduced to straits and is borne down by
poverty, cannot meet with a purchaser, except at a
low price; he shall not be forced to sell his property,
but he shall be supported out of the Tithes-of-the-
Poor. He shall wait until he is enabled to sell at a
fair price; when every one knoweth that it is not
want that compelleth him to sell.
18. If a collection is made, to relieve the wants of
a Poor person, and there be collected more than he
may need ; yet shall that which remaineth over and
above his wants belong to him; for the overplus of
the Poor belongeth to the Poor; the overplus of Cap-
tives belongeth to the Captives; and the overplus for
63
the burial of the dead, even to the dead, such overplus
of each of the dead belonging to his heirs (43).
19. If a Poor man giveth a Pruta (29) to the
Basket, or a Pruta to the Chest, it shall be accepted
of him ; if he refuseth to contribute, no compulsion
shall be used; and if, when new garments are given
to him, he giveth up his old garments, they shall be
accepted; if he giveth them not, no compulsion shall
be used.
CHAPTER X.
The Precepts relating to Alms, superior to every affirmative Precept
—The hard-hearted towards the Poor to be classed amongst
Idolaters—The Poor are to be Consoled, as well as Relieved —
The Degrees of Merit in Alms-deeds—The Support of Adult
Children to be Classed amongst Alms-deeds — The increase of
Servants to be sedulously avoided—Every exertion to be made
and difficulty to be encountered rather than to become a Depen-
dant upon others—But Refusal of Relief in case of Extremity to
be regarded as an act of Suicide.
It is our bounden duty to be more scrupulously obser-
vant of the Precepts relating to Alms, than of all
other Affirmative Precepts: for Alms are the sign
of the just seed of Abraham, our Father, according
as it is said, (Gen. ch. xviii. 19.) “For I know him
that he will command his children and his household
after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord,
to practise Alms.” Nor can the Kingdom of Israel
be made strong, nor can true Religion be established
unless by Alms, as it is said, (Isaiah liv. 14), “ By
Alms shalt thou be established ”: Nor can the Israelites
be redeemed from Captivity, unless by the merit of
Alms, as it is said (Isaiah i. 27), “Zion shall be re-
deemed with judgment, and her converts by Alms.”
(34).
2. No one by his liberality in Alms shall be made
irretrievably poor, nor by his bounty be brought into
65
difficulty and distress, for it is said (Isaiah xxxii.
17), “And the work of Alms shall be peace.” To
him who is compassionate, others shall be com-
passionate, as it is said (Deut. xiii.), “And shew
thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and
multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy Fathers.”
Whoever is hard-hearted, and pitiless, is of a dubious
race, since want of pity exists only amongst the
Gentiles, according as it is said (by Jeremiah), “They
are cruel and will not shew mercy.” Whereas all
Israelites, and those associated with them (13) are
like unto Brothers, for it is said (Deut. xvi), “Ye
are the Children of the Lord your God; ” and if
Brother feeleth not compassion for Brother, where
shall Pity be found? To whom shall the Poor of
Israel lift up their eyes? To the Gentiles, who hate
them and persecute them 2 Alas ! the eyes of these
are bent only upon their own fraternity.
3. Whoever shutteth his eyes against Alms is
termed “Impious,” and is to be likened unto him
who worshippeth the Planets and the Stars (45); of
the worship of which it is said (Deut. xiii), “Certain
men, the children of Belial, are gone out from
among you.” And of him who shutteth his eyes
against Alms it is said (Deut. xv.), “Beware that
there be not a thought in thy impious heart.” He
is also called “wicked; ” as (Prov. xii.) “The tender
mercies of the wicked are cruel : ” and, also, a
“Sinner,” as in the words (Deut. xv.) “And he
cry unto the Lord against thee, and it be sin unto
thee.” But the Holy and Blessed is ever present
K
66
at the prayers of the Poor; as it is said, “The
cry of the Poor thou shalt hear.” Wherefore it is
well that ye hearken unto their cry, since a covenant
hath been made with them, in these words (Ex. xxii.)
—“And when he crieth unto me, I will hear; for I
am gracious.”
4. If any one giveth Alms to the Poor with a
malevolent countenance and downcast looks, albeit
he may give a thousand pieces of gold, yet hath he
destroyed and wholly obliterated the merit of the
action. Let him, then, give with a benignant and
cheerful countenance, offering words of consolation
to the afflicted Poor, as it is written (Job xxx.): —
“Did I not weep for him that was in trouble 2
“Was not my soul grieved for the Poor 2’”
And let him address words of pity and condolence,
as it is written, “And I caused the widow’s heart to
sing for joy.”
5. If a Poor man applieth to thee, and thou hast
nothing in thy hand that thou canst bestow upon him,
thou shalt console him with thy words; for it is for-
bidden to upbraid the Poor, or harshly to address him,
since his spirit is dejected, and his heart is broken :
for it is written (Ps. li.), “A broken and contrite
heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” And again
(Isaiah lvii.) : — g --
“I dwell in the high and holy place,
“With him also of a contrite and humble spirit;
“To revive the spirit of the humble,
“And to revive the heart of the contrite.”
Woe, therefore, unto him, whoever he may be, who
treateth the Poor with ignominyl Woe! unto him,
f
6,
I say ! Rather be un, to the Poor as a Father, both
in pity and consolation ; for, is it not written (Job
xxix.), “I was a Father to the Poor.”
6. He who influenceth others to give Alms, shall
have a greater reward than he who simply giveth;
for it is said, “And the work of Alms shall be
peace.” Concerning the Collectors of Alms, and
others like unto them, it is said (Dan. xii.) : —
“And they that be wise,
“Shall shine as the brightness of the firmament:
“And they that turn many unto Alms,
“As the Stars for ever and ever !” (44)
7. There are Eight Degrees in Alms-deeds, one
rising above the other in merit ; the highest of which
consisteth in yielding support to him who is cast
down, either by means of gifts, or by loan, or by
commerce, or by procuring for him traffic with others.
Thus his hand becometh strengthened, exempt from
the necessity of soliciting succour from any created
being. Is it not written (Lev. xxv.) “And if thy
brother be waxen poor and fallen into decay, thou
shalt relieve him ; yea, though he be a Stranger,
or a Sojourner; that he may live with thee: ” which
is the same as though it were said, “Strengthen
him, that he sink not, weighed down by penury
and want.”
8. Next in Degree to this, is the Giving of Alms
to the Poor in such manner that the Giver knoweth
not to whom he giveth, nor the Poor, from whom
he receiveth. Of the observance of this Precept,
we have an example in the Conclave-of-the-Silent
(46), held in the Temple, where the charitable laid
68
down their Alms in silence; by means of which,
Poor children of upright parents were in silence sup-
ported. The next in Degree is the sending of Alms
to the Alms-Chest (40); albeit no one placeth Alms
in the Alms-Chest unless he feeleth assured that those
who have the care of it are faithful and prudent
men, incapable of improper administration, and like
unto Rabbi Channaniah, the son of Tardio (47).
9. The next in Degree is when the Giver knoweth
to whom he giveth, but the Poor know not from
whom they receive. Thus act the Primary Wise-
men, who walk about Secretly, throwing money in
at the doors of the Poor. When those who ilave
the management of the Alms improperly administer
them, this is a judicious practice, and a meritorious
mode of Almsgiving.
10. The next in Degree is when the Poor know
from whom they receive, but the Giver knoweth not
to whom he giveth. Thus do the Primary Wise-
men give, who are accustomed to wrap up money
in fine linen, throwing it behind them, so that the
Poor may be relieved, without feeling shame.
11. The next in Degree is when any one, before
he hath been solicited to give, giveth with his own
hand to the Poor.
12. The next in Degree, is when any one giveth
to the Poor, after solicitation.
13. The next in Degree, is when any one, with
a kind countenance, giveth to the Poor less than
his means allow him to give.
14. The next in Degree, is when any one giveth,
after much molestation.
69
15. The Primary Wise-men are accustomed, before
prayers, always to give a Pruta to the Poor; and
then to pray, as it is said (Ps. xvii.), “Under the
favour of Alms I will behold thy face.” (44)
16. If any one supporteth his adult children after
he is exempt from supporting them, in order that
his Sons may become versed in the Doctrines of
the Law, and that his Daughters may be taught
good manners, and thus avoid reproach ; and so,
if a Child supporteth his Father or his Mother; such
acts are comprised under the head of Alms : they
are, moreover, great acts of charity, since kindred
are entitled to the first consideration. Whosoever
supporteth the Poor and the Orphan with meat and
drink from his own table, him, when he calleth
upon the Lord, will the Lord hearken unto, and
be satisfied with ; for it is said (Isaiah lviii.), “Then
shalt thou call, and the Lord will answer.”
17. It is taught by the Wise-men, that the Poor
and the Orphan are to be employed in Domestic
affairs, in preference to Servants: for, being Sons
of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, their well-being
must be consulted, and not that of the posterity
Cham. Whosoever increaseth the number of Ser-
vants, increaseth the sin and the iniquity of the
World; but he who giveth employment to the Poor,
continually augmenteth his own deserts and good
deeds (2). -
18. Until the end of time shall it be, that, to
avoid becoming dependent upon Created Beings, and
burthensome unto the Church, the most frugal mode
of living shall be adopted, and difficulties be encoun-
70
tered; for, thus teach the Wise-men, saying, “Let
thy Sabbath be as a day of work, rather than become
dependent upon Created Beings” (48). And, albeit a
man be wise and respectable, yet, if he be reduced
to Poverty, he shall not disdain manual arts, how-
ever unworthy of him, so that he avoid dependence
upon others. It were even better for him to flay
the carcasses of beasts, than to proclaim himself to
the People as one of the Primary Wise-men, or as
a Priest, in want of food. There have been amongst
the Primary Wise-men, those who were Hewers-of-
wood, and Drawers-of-water in the Gardens, who
were Carriers of timber, who were Workers in iron,
and Makers of charcoal, and who neither solicited
Alms of the Church, nor would they accept of Alms,
even when spontaneously offered.
19. He who, unconstrained by necessity, receiveth
Alms, is a Deceiver of the people, and his life shall
not be extended to old age, without his being com-
pelled by real necessity to seek for succour; he may
be likened unto that accursed one (Jer. xvii.), “That
trusteth in man.” But whosoever, through pride of
heart, refuseth aid when urged by want, and with life
dependent upon Alms, such as the aged, the sick,
and the afflicted, such an one is guilty of Homicide
and of Suicide; and, for his self-torment, sin and
iniquity only shall be heaped upon his head. He
who standeth in need of Alms, and yet rather than
become a burthen to the Church, suffereth affliction,
and hardship, and sorrow, the life of such an one
shall not extend to old age, until he shall have it
71
in his power to afford support to others. Of him,
and of all like unto him, it is written (Jer. xvii.),
6 & Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord l’”
FINIS.
TESTIMONIES
TO
T H E FER TILITY OF
ANCIENT PALESTINE,
AND
I L L U S T R A TIVE NOTES
L A W S OF T H E H E B R E W S
RELATING TO THE
POOR AND THE STRANGER.
“Rari imbres, uber solum. Exuberant fruges nostrum ad morem: praeterque
eas, balsamum et palmce.”—TAcITUs, HIST. v.
y p
TESTIMONIES
TO THE
FERTILITY OF THE HOLY LAND
AND
INCIDENTAL REMARKS
UPON THE
CHARACTER OF ITS FORMER INHABITANTS.
Nº. S º - %3E
|Nº.4% Aft
º § --- ſºft
& R Nº. § %
º N º
|
§
º
%
ºº,jAſ
*;
MOUNT TABOR, WITH A WILD DATE-PALM.
The consummating hour is come !
Alas, for Solyma!
How is she desolate,
She, that was great among the nations, fallen
SOUTHEY.
The character of the soil of the Holy-Land, as well as that of
the people, who for a series of ages defended it against aggressors
and preserved it in cultivation, have been depicted, in very different
colours, by different writers. The face of the country and the
soil have been represented by some, as so repulsive and sterile, as
to be unfit for social life : whilst others, both in past and present
times, describe it as having been productive, in a high degree, of

ii - ON THE FERTILITY
every thing needful for the sustenance and comfort of its inha-
bitants : —
“Fertile of corn, the glebe, of oil and wine:
“With herds the pastures throng'd, with flocks the hills.”
The most prominent of those, who have laboured to prove the
Promised Land to be utterly destitute of the means of providing
for the wants and conveniences of man, has been Voltaire; and,
as his assertions, if incapable of refutation, would seem to exhibit
as a fiction the Work of Maimonides, abounding as it does, in
remarks which imply, that the country to which they relate was.
in a high state of cultivation and of civilization, those assertions,
if founded in error, are more especially to be contradicted. For
although Voltaire has been characterized as a man —
“Skilful alike to seem devout and just,
“And stab religion with a sly side-thrust,”
he was also a man of such varied attainments, and of; such
wonderful powers of mind, that his opinions and statements, must
ever be intitled to great consideration.
To enable Voltaire to indulge in waspish witticisms upon the
Mosaic account of the recovery of the Holy-Land by the Israelites,
the half-dozen vague remarks of St. Jerome, (who had, quarrelled
with the Bishop of Jerusalem,) were opportunely brought to light,
and a pitiful attempt is then made to corroborate those splenetic
effusions of the Saint, by introducing to the reader's notice certain
authorities, which might, possibly, have had great weight, had
they not chanced to be nameless, and their dogmatisms to be
strangely at variance with the accounts of travellers who had a
name, and who were never suspected of a morbid appetite for
raillery and detraction, nor for a flippant eagerness to convert
into matter of derision, subjects, which even unlettered savages
have deemed it most conducive to the well-being of mankind, to
treat with gravity and decorum. On the contrary, of Voltaire
it has been said, with some reason, that—
“The Scripture was his jest-book, whence he drew
“Bon-mots, to gall the Christian and the Jew.”
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. iii
No wonder, then, that Palestine, and all belonging to it, was a
topic upon which he delighted to expend a large portion of his
abundant stock of gibes and jeers. -
Of philosophers, as they call themselves, of this stamp, it has
been said, that destroying, overthrowing, trampling under foot,
all that men have learned to hold in respect, they deprive the
afflicted of their last and only consolation in misery—the powerful,
wanton, and cruel, of the chief restraints upon their caprice and
passions—they eradicate from the inmost recesses of the heart
the fear and the remorse of crime, weaken or blot out the love
of virtue and the aspirations after eternity, and then revel in
self-gratulations at being the generous discoverers of truth, and
the benificent enlighteners of a benighted world.
If the land of Canaan has not been “a land of wheat, and
barley, and vines, of fig-trees, and pomegranates, a land of olives
and of honey,” (Deut. viii.), then, indeed, must it have been an
idle labour to treat of the right of the poor inhabitants, to a
participation in products, which must have been little more than
the fruit of an inventive brain: if this land be faithfully described
as having been a “coin non pas de terre, mais de cailloua,” it
must have been little less than a poetic fiction of the prophet
Joel, to describe the march and fell havoc of locusts, laying waste
a region which never yet consisted of aught but sands and flint-
stone—“un désert out l’on ne boit que de l'eau saumatre, ou l'on
manque de vivres—une petite contrée, déserte et misérable: ” and it
must have been something little short of infatuation which led the
famishing inhabitants to regard the visits of locusts as a scourge
from heaven, when it ought to have been evident, that they were
considerately sent as a substitute for other human food, which
this desert waste inhospitably refused We shall see (Note 17)
that roasted locusts continue, to this day, to form an agreeable
repast for their Arabian neighbours. The chief problem, therefore,
for the witty Frenchman to have solved, would have been, “What
was the particular species of locust which, in former times, fed
and fattened upon sand, and flint-stones, and de l’eau sau.
mâtre P’’ .
iv. ON THE FIERTILITY
If, however, this universal genius has made as egregious a
blunder with regard to the soil, capabilities, and productions of
Palestine, as he has with regard to other matters, not forgetting
“Mr. Tull's System of Agriculture,” which, metaphysician, divine,
and agriculturist, as he was, he had “essayé,” and found to be
“abominable” — and which abominable system has proved so profit-
able, as to have superseded the lazy, wasteful, “Broadcast” method,
in every part of England and America in which a sensible farmer
is to be found:—if the acceptable sneers of his friends, the “gens
de toute nation,” have led him to make a trifling mistake, his
mistake, and their falsifications, ought, in justification of the Works
of Maimonides, to be pointed out.
Voltaire knew as much of Judea as of “Mr. Tull's System
of Husbandry :” he had never been in the land which he so vividly
describes, and he thanks God for it! — “Je n'ai jamais été en
Judée, Dieu merci! ”— and possibly was not less thankful, that
anonymous friends could accommodate him with an apt description
of the Terra incognita –“ J'ai vu des gens de toute nation qui
en sont révenus.” Wonderful unanimity in literati, generally so
quarrelsome ! Pity that they did not assure us, that their well-
digested opinions as to the soil and capabilities of a country,
were by no means so worthless, as were those of their philosophic
patron upon the subject of the abominable system of Mr. Tull !
Happily for a sarcastic humour, these agricultural incognitos unani-
mously agreed, that the situation of Jerusalem was “horrible !”—
y
“que tout le pays d'alentour est pierreux; ”—“que les montagnes
and that it was idle and absurd to fancy, that this
sorry tract could ever have been productive and populous!
$ 9
sont pelées:
“In every varied scene
“The good old man found matter for his spleen . "
With regard to the rockiness of the country, it is to be hoped
that these ingenious travellers, had made themselves acquainted
with the nature of the soil, in some of the most valuable portions
of Italy and France; as their agricultural acquisitions must then
have enabled them to hint to their philosophic patron, that stony
mountains are sometimes of inestimable worth — that poets and
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. v
naturalists have spoken of “mountains, reddened with grapes,”
of “hills distilling wine : ” and it might have been recounted
that in England, farmers, before their fields could again be made
productive, have been obliged to cart back upon their land, the
flints and stones, which, at so much expense and labour they had
industriously cleared away. As to the many horrors of Jerusalem,
strange to relate, Lamartine, (one of the most recent travellers .
to the Holy-Land,) found the “horrible situation of Jerusalem’’
to have undergone a wondrous metamorphosis since the days of
Voltaire Instead of a dreary waste and the gloominess of the
grave, Lamartine declares that, as regards picturesque beauty, from
Sion may be enjoyed “the most beautiful view in all Palestine: ”
and, in illustration of the various other correct and learned com.
mentaries upon the sterility of Judea, the observations of Julian,
Ant. Martyr, Volney, Tacitus, Abulfeda, Sandys, Maundrell,
Dr. Shaw, Rauwolff, Carne, Clarke, and others, will be apposite.
These writers and travellers describe the Holy-Land as rich in
corn, and wine, and honey, “adorned with beautiful mountains and
luxuriant valleys, . . . . covered with trees and flowers, . . . . the
rocks producing excellent waters, . . . . and no part empty of
delight and profit.” -
How singularly fortunate, for purposed witticisms, that the
nameless “gens de toute nation,” travelled exempt from these optical
delusions,—and that they were unanimous in describing the Country
as the Offal, - the fag-end of nature's works! “Ils parlent tous,
comme parlait St. Jerome, qui peint cette contrée comme le rebut de
la nature l’’. . . . “Un désert, un pays Sablonneux, hērissé de mon-
tagnes!” It is said, by Sandys, of the Jews once inhabiting Pales-
tine, that they had, to their cost, become so well versed in the art
of sorrowing, as to be hired by the Greeks, for furnishing a supply
of grief at funerals! Had we not been too sensible of the meekness,
candour, and caution, with which philosophers engage in the search
after truth, we should almost be tempted to suppose, that these gens
de toute nation had been hired, to furnish a due supply of defamatory
matter, against Palestine, its soil, its products, and its people !
As a sort of corroborative proof that Palestine was irreclaimable,
vi ON THE FERTILITY
even under a great agricultural genius, we are exultingly informed
—“Savez vous bien que si le Grand-Turc m'offrait aujourd’hui la
seigneurie de Jerusalem, je m'en voudrais pas! ” Logical argumen-
tation 1 — Convincing evidence that this land, which he had never
seen, must be too barren even to feed a philosopher Ugly, how-
ever, as it is feigned to be, it could scarcely have been worse in some
respects, than the district in which the logician himself was con-
demned to reside, and which is declared, in the same page, to have
consisted “ of four thousand drunkards, twelve attorneys, two men
of sense, and four thousand ugly women ’’
However, let us hear, whether impartial travellers warrant the
belief, that corn, and wine, and olives, were produced, and in abun-
dance and perfection, in Palestine; and consequently that means must
have existed of relieving the poor, as described by Maimonides, if
benevolence, and charity, existed in the breasts of the Inhabitants.
It will then be seen, whether all the reviling against Palestine, and
the Israelites, may not, upon a candid examination of facts,
“Be proved at last, tho’ told in witty strains,
“An idle waste of philosophic pains.”
And first, with regard to the “horrible” situation of Jerusalem;
let us hear the dreary description given by Lamartine, in his late
Pilgrimage to the Holy Land: —
“I, the feeble poet of an age of silence and decay, had I desired
“a residence at Jerusalem, would have selected precisely the spot
“which David selected upon Sion. Here, is the most beautiful view
“in all Judea, Palestine, or Galilee. To the left, lies Jerusalem,
“with its temple and its edifices, over which the eyes of the King,
“ or of the poet, might rove at large. Before him, fertile gardens
“ descending in steep declivities, lead to the bed of that torrent, in
“the roar, and foam of which, he must have delighted. Lower
“down, the valley opens, and extends itself: fig-trees, pomegranates
“ and olives, overshadowing it. Here the eye reposes upon the once
“verdant, and watered Valley of Jehosophat: a large opening in the
“Eastern hills conducts it, from steep to steep, from height to height,
“from undulation to undulation, even to the basin of the Dead-Sea.
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. vii.
“This Sea is not however what imagination has pourtrayed it—a
“ petrified watery expanse with a dull and colourless horizon! It.
“resembles, as seen from Jerusalem, one of the most beautiful lakes
“of Italy, or of Switzerland, and its tranquil waters seem reposing
“beneath the shadow of the lofty mountains of Arabia, and the
“sparkling ridges of the distant mountains of Judea. Such is the
“view from Sion.” (Vol. 2. pp. 18. 21.) Verily,–la, situation en
est horrible !
Better testimony than that of these gens de toute nation, — war-
rants the assertion that, although within the confines of Palestine,
there was much waste land, it was, upon the whole, not misérable et
déserte, –bnt exceedingly productive, Is England to be termed,
misérable et deserte, – because Surry abounds in barren heaths, and
Cumberland and Westmorland in sterile mountains 2 Palestine was
productive by virtue of its soil, and rendered still more produc-
tive by virtue of the hardiness and industry of its inhabitants.
In countries where rain falls periodically, and where the crops
are dependant, upon artificial irrigation, the industry; moreover,
of the inhabitants is generally found to surpass that which the
people of moister climates, feel called upon to exhibit. And then,
Hebrew husbandmen were not timid, dependant, servile creatures,
liable to be driven from their farms, whenever the landlord might be
pleased to eject them. They had no fear that heartless, or ava-
ricious landowners, might be mean and tyrannical enough to turn
them adrift at a moment's notice, revoltingly setting at defiance the
dictates of common humanity and justice; (Wide App. E)—the He-
brews had sense and foresight, and political wisdom enough, to
maintain the hereditary possession of their farms, notwithstanding,
that they formed a nation, which M. Voltaire has discovered to have
been,”—“la nation la plus méprisable aux yeux de la politique.”
Contemptible or not, such was the nature of their political liberty,
that nothing but foreign invasion or tyranny, could deprive them, or
their children, of the patrimony of their fathers! An independent
class of hereditary Jewish farmers such as these, subject to no
Christian landlords, either Scotch or Irish, living under a liberal
constitution, which could not prevent their “clearing the land;”
meaning thereby, the constitutional expulsion of the indigent, and
viii ON THE FERTILITY
helpless, and aged, clear off and out of the land which gave them
birth, at any, even the most inclement season of the year; (Vide
App. E.) a class of husbandmen, whose civil polity, could well
afford to be deemed la plus méprisable, – in the opinion of Voltaire;
whilst it protected the helpless and indigent, from the extortion,
wantonness, and cruelty, of the rapacious and powerful: which, in-
stead of constitutionally granting to the poor when famishing with
cold and hunger, the valuable right of being immured in an Union-
gaol, gave them in their necessities a legal right to relief without the
gentle medium of Commissionership law, and workhouse Dietaries;
(Wide App. D) a contemptible constitution, which sympathized with
the wants of those who were weighed down by misfortune and
distress, and by the direct interposition of the civil power, (See
Maimonides, vii. 10) relieved their necessities, and showed compas-
sion for their sufferings ;—a constitution which did not first affect
implicit belief in the doctrines of the Mosaic-Law, and then with
audacious hypocrisy set at nought the precepts there so explicitly
enjoined:—a contemptible constitution which knew no such term
as that of “beggar; ” and which never with high-minded gene-
rosity, measured out the ounces of gruel and soup to its poorer
members with more admirable scrupulosity than the wash is admi-
nistered in the pig-stye (Wide App. D.):—
“What then The beasts are still the lightest charge,
For the starved poor have maws so devilish large l’”
on the contrary, this contemptible constitution was, in all sincerity,
founded upon the belief that it is to blaspheme God to suppose that
he created men to be miserable; to be immured at the mercy of
their fellow-men ; to hunger, and thirst, and perish with cold, if
obstinately averse to ignominious confinement, forcibly severed from
wife and children, and humanely deprived of all prospect of ever
again having aught but a gaol for a home ! For all this, the political
constitution of the Hebrews, might be very méprisable; it neverthe-
less formed an independent class of husbandmen who were themselves
the lords as well as the tillers of the soil, and who had every
incentive to improve their farms, and to leave not an inch of soil un-
cultivated And thus it was; Ancient Palestine, inhabited by an
industrious, hardy, valiant, and free people, and blessed with a
of THE HOLY LAND, ETC. ix
climate, noted for a peculiar softness, and serenity, not perceivable
even on the European side of the Archipelago, was cultivated like a
garden, and maintained a vast and hardy population. The aspira-
tion of David, was for an exuberance, by no means exceeding the
bounds of probability, when in the Psalms, he entreats; —
“That our garners may be full, and plentedus, with all
manner of stock : that our sheep may bring forth thousands,
and tens of thousands in our streets!”
“That our oren may be strong to labour, that there be no
decay: no leading into captivity, and no complaining in our
streets/’’ -
On the West, this petite contrée, misérable et déserte—enjoys the
refreshing breeze of the Mediterranean : and high mountains break
off the cold air from the North, as well as the scorching winds of
Africa on the South. In summer, heavy dews compensate for that
scarcity of rain, which Voltaire laments, and when Carne encamped
one night near Hermon, the tents, in the morning, plainly indicated
that, whatever Voltaire might insinuate, the dew of Hermon, was
no fable. •
As to its being so petite a country as Voltaire disparagingly
describes it, it was even in extent, not so very contemptible. The
Roman and Grecian Republics, were neither of them at one period, so
considerable even as Palestine-Proper. But Palestine-Proper, bounded
by the Jordan, did not constitute the whole of the Israelitish Terri-
tories. The Euphrates is termed by Ovid (Fast. 2.464.), “Aquae
Palestinae"; and there is sufficient reason for believing, that only
by the Euphrates was the Land of the Israelites actually bounded.
As to the Maps of Palestine, travellers seldom venturing across the
Jordan (deeming it indeed a daring feat, even to obtain a glimpse of
that River), the vast extent between the Jordan and the Euphrates,
is usually filled up according to the fancy or caprice of the designer.
Michaelis, in opposition to Burckhardt and others, thinks that it ad-
mits of little doubt, that Mount-Gilead properly so called, was at no
great distance from the Euphrates: whilst the Land of Gilead probably
extended to its banks. The 1st Book of Chronicles (Ch. 5), ex-
pressly says, that “Reuben's posterity dwell eastward as far as the
X ON THE FERTILITY
Euphrates, because the herds had multiplied exceedingly in the land
of Gilead.” The city Kirjathana, apportioned to this tribe
(Numb. 32.), lay probably, only one day's journey from Palmyra;
which celebrated city was itself not far distant from the Eu-
phrates.
Had Palestine been as sterile and as petite, as these gens de toute
nation, pretend to have discovered it to be, Moses, in designing to
introduce into it his vast multitude of followers, and to mould them
into an independent State, the main reliance of which was to be
placed upon agriculture, would have proved himself, not only an im-
postor, but an egregious blockhead; and that, even his revilers are
not wont to account to him. Incessantly ravaged by pilfering vin-
dictive hordes: devastated by long ages of despotism and oppression;
laid waste by “Holy-Wars”: impoverished and desolated by mono-
polies and fiscal extortion, it would, indeed, be surprising were it not
now to present, in many parts, an appearance of unimprovable ste-
rility. Assyrians, Chaldaeans, Syrians, Grecians, Romans, Saracens
and Christians, Englishmen and Frenchmen, – all have made the
Holy-Land, the frightful scene of strife, persecution, rapacity, and
bloodshed . And is it surprising that it now looks desolate :
Moreover, this was not so much a corn-country, as a country of
vineyards, and fruit-trees : and it is apparent, that the consequences
of devastation to a country of this description, must necessarily be
far more injurious, than to a country of corn-lands. In all human
probability, a country of fruit-trees, once desolated, will remain, as
is the case with a great part of Arabia, a desert for ages, or for ever;
whilst a corn-country laid waste, may, under renewed cultivation, be
restored to its former state. These fatal consequences seem to have
been foreseen by Moses, who prohibited the destruction of fruit-trees,
even in time of war. (See Notes 7 and 27 .) “Are the trees men,”
said Moses, “that thou should'st war against them, or besiege them?”
And therefore when the Moabites were to be exterminated, Elisha
was careful to give, in that particular case, an express divine per-
mission, for the fruit-trees to be cut down. The Caliph Abubcker
(Un. Hist. 19th Part.) was not insensible to the sound policy, as
well as humanity, of this law of Moses; and it was one of his inva-
riable commands to his Generals, never to suffer a palm-tree to be
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xi
cut down. In one of his wars, Mohammed not through ignorance,
but possibly in a moment of ungovernable fury, if prophets indeed,
ever swell with rage : —
Tantaene animis caelestibus irae :
in a moment of uncontrolled passion, did this politic leader, com-
mand the date-trees to be cut down, belonging to the Beni-Nadr, a
tribe of Jews. But he quickly perceived his error: and was saga-
cious and skilful enough, to cause it afterwards to be believed, that
he had received a revelation from heaven, expressly to authorize the
deed . It is not all Eastern potentates that exhibit the humanity of
the Caliph, or the misgivings of the crafty prophet; and in the wars
of the East it has long been too common and effectual a mode, of
distressing an enemy and depopulatiug his dominions, to cut down
the male palm trees, if time be wanting to destroy the whole grove.
Nor could much forbearance be anticipated from the civilized free-
booters, who, in various ages, have conspired to rob, murder, and
exterminate inoffensive nations. So when the Portuguese attacked
the Isle of Paté, near the Coast of Melinda, - “the King of Ambasa
being killed in battle, the city was taken, and the palm-trees which
grew around it were cut down.” (Lobo.)
For ages past has the Holy-Land been treated as a legitimate
spot for plunder and extortion. Sandys in speaking of Gaza re-
marks that the inhabitants dare not till the ground to the best
advantage, lest they should be suspected of being wealthy: the mere
suspicion of which, entitled them to be unceremoniously relieved of
any noxious superfluities that might render them uneasy. Whilst
he was visiting the town, there came there a captain with 200
Spahis, in particular want of 30,000 dollars: and who therefore
proceeded in a summary and effectual way to minister to the una-
voidable necessities of himself and his mercenaries, notwithstanding
that the inhabitants had concealed under ground their valuables and
even their corn. Sandys did not represent the country as being in
appearance very repulsive | Leaving Gaza, he describes the route
as being through the pleasantest valley that ever eye beheld; having
on the right, a ridge of high mountains, whereon stands Hebron;
and on the left, the Mediterranean, bordered with a ridge of moun-
xii on THE FERTILITY
tains—“between which, lies a Champagne about twenty miles over,
full of flowery hills, with groves of olives, und other fruits.” And
yet, he adds, – “this rich bottom is inhabited only by some barba-
rous Moors, who till no more than will feed them, because the place
is often infested by armies, before they go into the field, who plunder
the towns and passengers' "
In short, the inhabitants of Palestine can have no property, per-
sonal or real; — until late years, the Sultan ruled and ravaged with
sword and fire; and, now, a greater tyrant, the Pasha of Egypt,
arrogates to himself the right to every inch of land; and to the pro-
perty and the lives of all ! In such a state of insecurity and bondage,
no wonder that there prevails what is called an indisposition to hold
landed property; an indisposition, which has necessarily proved
fatal to agriculture. To be forced to sow and to reap, musket in
hand, exhibits a sort of “protection to agriculture,” not by any
means tending to restore the tillage of this devastated land. Even
in the present day, does grinding oppression pervade every corner;
and in Syria, and its vicinity, by means of every species of impost,
extortion, and monopoly, (especially of silk,) did Mahomet-Ali, in
1834, rifle the country of, it is said, nearly 2% millions of pounds
sterling !
As long as Palestine was well cultivated, an acre of land near
Jerusalem, (its produce being grapes and olives,) must assuredly
have been more profitable and productive, than an acre of corn-land;
the produce of land adapted to vines, and olives, being far more
valuable than that of the richest corn-land. Strabo, indeed, per-
ceiving no corn in the immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem,
represents the district as unfruitful ; although Abulfeda, better
versed in Eastern agriculture, represents this identical spot as being
the most fertile in Palestine. For not only did the ancient inhabi-
tants draw produce from the plains, but the very rocks and moun-
tains, they forced into cultivation. And despite of the country
being—“un pays Sablonneux hérissé de montagnes,” — bristling
with mountains—and these mountains, – “des montagnes pelées.”
as bare as a scalded pig- this contemptible people, who, Voltaire
is careful to tell us, never were — ni physiciens, ni géometres, ni,
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xiii
astronomes, ’’ — but who, nevertheless, proved themselves good
farmers and gardeners, brave in time of war, — sober, kind, and
compassionate in time of peace, — who never assumed the title of
“ philosophe,”
“Of temper as envenomed as an asp;
“Censorious, – and their every word a wasp !”
• — but who were not the less useful, and industrious members of
society—this indefatigable people, contrived however to discover a
garden-mould even in this —“pays sablonneur”— and, with it, they
formed the sides of the – montagnes pelées — into beds, and bor-
ders; preserving the soil by means of numerous dwarf-walls; a form
of culture, says Maundrell, of which evident traces are to be seen,
in all the mountains of Palestine !
This assertion of Voltaire that the Jews were never—ni physi-
ciens, ni géometres, ni astronomes,” is much upon a par with his as-
sertions relative to the character of the soil of their country. It is
contradicted by half-a-dozen, or more passages, in the Bible itself:
(Exod. xxi. 19.- Isaiah i. 6. — Jer, viii. 22, and xlvi, 11. —Eccles.
xxxviii. 27. —Neh. iii. 8. — Luke viii, 43.) and the 2nd Book of
Chronicles (chap. 16.) declares that — Asa consulted not only Phy-
sicians, but Apothecaries. Whether these physicians of King Asa,
did, as is conjectured, kill or cure by means of spells and charms; or,
according to the approved practice of these times, by means of 2000
pills in a fortnight, or of Homaeopathic invisibilities, affects not the
argument. There were physicians; and if equally unprincipled and
sanguinary, with modern dispensers of gamboge, and modern phle-
botomists, it must excite regret, that the increased age of the world
brings no increase of wisdom and honesty. But even had it been
otherwise as regards their medical proficiency, it might not be a
stronger proof of want of science than of the possession of a share of
good sense, and the consequent exemption from those ills, which
have their greatest partiality for the indolent and intemperate. For
“The first Physicians, by debauch were made;
“Excess began, and sloth sustains the trade.”
Voltaire testifies more in favour of the Jews, than he intended, in-
xiv ON THE FERTILITY
pretending that they had no physicians. But in more modern times,
Maimonides himself, was one of the first physicians of his age—the
special friend and medical adviser of the King-of-Egypt; (see The
Account of his Life, p. 8.) and, in the present day, many can vouch
for the equal ingenuity of Jewish-Doctors, with Christian Doctors,
in effectually removing one complaint by the scientific substitution
of another,
If the Jews were little versed in Astronomy and Geometry, they
were in much the same predicament with the vast majority of the
present generation of Christians: and if we are to credit the state-
ment of the present Vice-President of the Astronomical Society,
even in England, Astronomy has not long since outgrown its in-
fancy. For, says Mr. Baily, in alluding to the “Correspondence of
the first Astronomer-Royal,” (The Rev. John Flamsteed,) — “it
throws light on the whole of Flamsteed’s labours in the infancy, as
it may be called, of the Science of Astronomy:” and Flamsteed lived
in the 17th Century!
But the Israelites pretended to no proficiency in such knowledge:
although, perhaps not more ignorant, even in those distant ages, of
the practical parts of Astronomy, than even in these late times, are
the majority amongst our ingenious selves, with all the – wisdom
of our ancestors—to aid and illumine our already enlightened minds.
It was, as Michaelis observes, upon Agriculture alone, (taken in
its most extensive sense, so as to comprehend the culture of vine-
yards, olive-grounds, and gardens,) that Moses was judicious enough
to lay the foundation of the Israelitish polity; and in Agriculture the
Israelites excelled. This was a sort of knowledge, of more utility to
mankind than much of that speculative sort called learning and sci-
ence: frequently a vain, frivolous, or curious, rather than an useful
study. Had they been addicted to these, every man would not have
been, as he was, a good and valiant soldier, as well as a clever hus-
bandman; quot cives, tot milites: and quickly would Palestine have
been reduced to what it now is. Gideon was threshing Corn, when
he was called to save his country: Saul was driving oxen when he
received the news of the danger to which Jabesh-Gilead was exposed:
David was keeping sheep, when he was sent for to be anointed King:
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. Xy
and Elisha was called to be a Prophet, as he drove one of his
father's twelve ploughs: so that valour and intellectual acquire-
ments, and poetic talent, were by no means incompatible with their
rural lives. The judgment of Cicero was not inferior to that of
Mons. Voltaire: and Cicero says, –“Of all recreations, of all means
that are used to support and advance the fortunes of a family, hardly
any is more elegantly delightful, than Agriculture, or more worthy
of a man of taste, spirit, and liberality: ” besides which, he adds—
“tum maxime se commendat quod patriae et hominum generi uni-
verso salutaris sit.” (De Senect.)
There are great authorities, in support of the opinion, that unre-
strained passion for music, versification, rhetoric, metaphysics, mathe-
matics, and such-like studies of a curious and learned nature, too fre-
quently engenders indolence and effeminacy, selfishness and self-suffi-
ciency, in their admirers, who — nugari soliti Graece—with exalted
motions of their own genius and talents, are apt to become pusillani-
mous and narrow-minded, insensible to public spirit and to the spirit
of independence, and so absorbed in the imaginary importance of
their own labours and studies, as to become unconscious of human
sympathies, indifferent to human sufferings, and oftentimes, so
churlish, so conceited, or so infantine, as to merit commiseration
rather than admiration.
There was a time, Horace remarks, when the Romans despised
the curious literature of the Greeks; and, attentive rather to the
utile et honestum sedulously applied themselves to agriculture, to
the study of the Law, and to the art of war:—
“Romae, dulce diu fuit, et solemne, reclusá
“Manè domo vigilare, clienta promere jura;
“Majores audire, minori dicere, per quae
“Crescere res posset, minui damnosa libido.”
The Jews, indeed, were still more grave, conscientious, and aus-
tere; morality, and the service of God, being their chief study: and
because they treated as an abomination, the impious and ridiculous
fables of the Greeks, and their painting and sculpture, as the fruits
of idleness and vanity, they were to be accounted the enemies of all
xvi ON THE FERTILITY
mankind . They live separate from every body else, says Apollonius,
having nothing in common with us, neither altar, offerings, prayers,
7207” sacrifices. They are at a greater distance from us, than the in-
habitants of Susa, Bactria, and India.
If the Jews are to be accounted savages, because they were not
versed in all the curious niceties of Astronomy, Geometry, and
Physic, how high in the scale of civilization are we to place that
classical people who manufactured Gods by dozens — who revered
the abominable ceremonies of Bacchus, of Cybele, and of Ceres; and
whose refined and discriminating taste, dwelt with ecstacy upon the
barbarities and impurities of the Theatre, and of the Circus! Men
will always differ in their ideas of civilization, says Sir Wm. Jones,
each measuring it by the habits and prejudices of his own country,
but neither astronomy, geometry, nor physic, are enumerated by that
most enlightened of the sons of men, (as he used to be termed by Dr.
Johnson,) as the just measure of perfect society. Courtesy and ur-
banity, a love of poetry and eloquence, and the practice of exalted
virtues, gave to those who could justly lay claim to them, a far
stronger title to civilization : and ignorance, or contempt of curious
arts, and of speculative sciences, could not derogate from that title.
If the inhabitants of Palestine could not participate in this high cha-
racter, given by Sir Wm. Jones to their neighbours, the Arabians,
they exhibited, however, one test of civilization, which, even in our
days, cannot be exhibited by some communities, possessing, in their
own complacent imaginations, claims to a very high degree of civili-
zation. The work of Maimonides, will prove, that a legislative
provision for the indigent, was a fundamental principle of the Israel-
itish polity; and the high authority of Dr. Johnson has established
that principle, as a good test of civilization.
The Israelites, says the Abbé Fleury, employed their citizens in
labour; inspired them with a love of their country; unanimity
among themselves, and obedience to the laws; and it would be far
easier, he observes, to make conscientious and useful members of
society, of shepherds and ploughmen, such as these, than of theolo-
gians, geometricians, astronomers, philosophers, and the like studious,
self-sufficient, and tender literati ! -
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xvii
However, granting that the Jews were little skilled in the virtues
of calomel, and of Morrison's pills, had never dreamed of the Geor-
gium-Sidus, and were as little versed in geometry, as are parlia-
mentary civil-engineers, did the sublime poet of the Henriade mean
to deny to them the possession of poetic genius P Did he forget that
Isaiah once lived, and that the works of the sweet singer of Israel
are yet extant P Hear, then, the sentiments of Dr. Lowth, who was
not ill-qualified to appreciate the beauties of language, and who,
although silent upon the manifold charms of the Henriade, thus
speaks of the powers of Isaiah: —“I believe it may with truth be
affirmed, that there is no poem of its kind extant in any language,
in which the subject is so well laid out, and so happily conducted,
with such a richness of invention, with such variety of images, per-
sons, and distinct actions; with such rapidity and ease of transition,
in so small a compass, as in this Ode of Isaiah.” (Note to ch. 13.)
And Lamartine, forgetful of the charms of physic and of geo-
metry, thus poured out his soul, as he stood upon the Hill of
Sion : —“This is Sion the palace, the tomb of David' — the
seat of his inspiration, of his joys, of his life, of his repose ! A
spot doubly sacred to me, who have so often felt my heart touched,
and my thoughts rapt by the sweet Singer of Israel! the first poet
of sentiment! the king of lyrics! Never have human fibres vibrated
to harmonies so deep, so penetrating, so solemn ! Never has the
imagination of poet been set so high, never has its expression been
so true!. Never has the soul of man expanded itself before man
and before God, in tones and sentiments so tender, so sympathetic,
and so heartfelt! All the most secret murmurs of the human heart
found their voice, and their note, on the lips, and the harp of this
minstrel !” -
The assertion, however, of Voltaire, of the continued ignorance
of the Jews even in medicine and mathematics, is not entirely
supported by facts; for, in the ninth century (says Enfield), the
Jews began to make themselves acquainted with the sciences of the
Arabs: in particular they eacelled in the study of medicine. —
(Vol. ii. p. 234.) In the twelfth century, lived Abraham Ben Ezra,
whom De Rossie styles one of the greatest men of his nation and
D
xviii ON THE FERTILITY
age : and asserts, that “he was an able philosopher, physician,
astronomer, mathematician, grammarian, and poet; and that he was
so well versed in Hebrew, Chaldaic, Arabic, and other languages,
that he composed in them all with great facility.” Solomon Ben
Isaac Jarki, ranked among the illustrious Rabbis of the twelfth
century, was born in 1104, at Troyes, in Champagne. He travelled
through Germany, Italy, Greece, Palestine, Egypt, Persia, and Mus-
covy; he was well versed in physic and astronomy, and was master
of many languages. Don Solomon, a Portuguese Jew, was as
much distinguished for his knowledge in philosophy as for his skill
in military affairs. In 1190, such were his acknowledged talents
and merit, that he was appointed General-in-Chief of the Portu-
guese armies. And in recent times we have seen a Jew, the Aide-
de-Camp of one of the most renowned and successful generals of
any age or country, General Washington. Josephus was a Jew,
and therefore only to be derided by Voltaire, when he urges (Ant.
b. 1, c. 4) that one reason for the prolongation of the lives of the
patriarchs was, the good use they made of their astronomical and
geometrical discoveries: their calculations being incapable of verifi-
cation during a short life-time.
Voltaire, however, to be consistent, should have been the last
to charge it as a defect in the Jews, to be unacquainted with the
mathematical sciences, since he himself has somewhere said, “J'ai
toujours remarqué que la géométrie laisse l’ésprit ou elle le trouve.”
Other competent authorities might be cited in support of the opinion,
that—ignorance of geometry, implies rather an enlarged and philo-
sophic mind, than the reverse. A great genius cannot be a mathe-
matician (says Joseph Scaliger): a dull and patient intellect, such
should be your geometers. “Lourd comme un géométre,” is a
current proverb in the most mathematical nation of Europe. “The
mathematician is either a beggar, a dunce, or a visionary; or the
three in one;” was long an adage in the European schools: and it
is said to have been the opinion of Wolf, the philologer, that—The
more capable a mind was for mathematics, the more incapable was
it for the other noblest sciences.” (Quat. Rev.) There might, more-
over, have been other rational grounds for rejecting too intimate an
acquaintance, in those times, with the sciences of Astronomy and
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xix
Geometry, which Voltaire, notwithstanding his acknowledged can-
dour, and his amiable anxiety to do justice to the Hebrew character,
may chance to have overlooked. The tendency of mathematical
study to lead to credulity or to scepticism, has always been apparent:
and St. Ambrose (Offic. i. 26) declares that, “to cultivate astronomy
and geometry, is to abandon the cause of salvation, and to follow that
of error.” Bayle, Warburton, and others, have expressed opinions
not very dissimilar: opinions which, in an aera of liberality, are
termed “prejudices” against the pursuit of science. Some such
prejudices, however, appear to be entertained even in these days: and
in his “Bridgewater Treatise, on Astronomy and General Physics,”
the Rev. Mr. Whewell, in reference to the Mechanical philosophers
and mathematicians of recent times, has the following remark: —
“We have no reason whatever to expect from their speculations any
help, when we ascend to the First Cause and Supreme Ruler of the
Universe. But we might perhaps go farther, and assert that they
are in some respects less likely than men employed in other pursuits,
to make any clear advance towards such a subject of speculation.”
With regard to medicine, it was not a tendency only to mis-
chievous errors, that was apprehended, but defection from the
Hebrew faith, and the absolute commission of sin. Since even
Solomon was seduced to the worship of idols, how needful must it
have been to guard against the most distant approach of temptation.
For Solomon went after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians; and
after Milcom, the abomitiation of the Ammonites—I Kings xi,

XX ON THE FERTILITY
Let it be acknowledged, however, that it is not in early and dark
ages only, that charms and incantations, spells and amulets, have
been the materia medica of “Physicians”: in modern times medical
practice has been mixed up with so much mystery, idolatry, and
childish whims and superstitions, that the profession might with
reason be regarded as a mischievous abomination. Gill quotes the
Rabbins as entertaining a very ill opinion of physicians, deeming
the worthiest of the tribe to be worthy only of hell; and as advising
faithful Jews not to live in a city where the chief man was a physi-
cian. The study of Astrology was regarded by famous ancient
physicians, and indeed by comparatively modern practitioners, as an
essential part of Medical education, principally with the view of
determining the proper days for administering medicine. Sir Tho-
mas Brown sums up the days astrologically excluded as unfit; the
recognition of them would be fatal to the sages who feed upon
“Morrison's pills” since little more than a fourth of the year
would be left for the administration of pills, even from “No. 1,” to
“No. 4.” Sir Thomas, himself a physician, objects to this ; but
with all solemnity, observes, that a “sober and regulated “Astrology’
in medicine, was not to be rejected ' " The fact probably was, that
among the Hebrews, the priests from their acquaintance with dis-
eases, involving ceremonial uncleanness, were consulted in serious
cases of illness : whilst the people consulted their own common
sense in other cases (See Pict. Bible.).
Enough, however, in reference to the charge against the Israelites,
of Ignorance of the Sciences: now to revert to the subject digressed
from. The land of Palestine is unquestionably of a very mountain-
ous character: but the mountains were not all,—des montagnes pélées,
—as bare as a scalded pig / Since upon many even of the loftiest,
there was a depth of good soil, amply repaying the immense labour
of forming it into terraces rising one above another, as they did, from
the base to the summit.
Voltaire would not tell us, that in a country of this description,
broken into hills and valleys, there are, moreover, advantages, which
are denied to a country of one uniform level. Hills afford a far
more extensive surface, than would be comprised in a plain within
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxi
the same boundaries: and then, at different heights and exposures
upon those hills, variety of climate, commanding variety of produce
is enjoyed. Were nature assisted by art, says Volney, the fruits of
the most distant countries might be produced within the distance of
twenty leagues. The Arabs have a poetical saying that the Saunin,
the ancient Hermon, bears—winter on his head, – spring on his
shoulders,-and autumn in his bosom,--while summer lies sleeping
at his feet. Moore in his Lalla Rookh, appropriates the idea:—
“Sainted Lebanon
Whose head in wintry grandeur towers,
And whitens with eternal sleet;
While summer, in a vale of flowers,
Is sleeping rosy at his feet!”
Hills and rocks and montagnes pélées, unquestionably there were
and are: “The hills stand about Jerusalem;” (Ps. cxxv.) but Dr.
Clarke tells us, that those hills and rocks were entirely covered with
plantations of fig-trees, of vines, and olives: not a single spot seemed
to be neglected. Among the standing crops he noticed millet, cotton,
linseed, tobacco, and occasionally, small fields of barley. A sight of
this territory can alone, he avers, convey an adequate idea of its sur-
prising produce : it is, he declares, still the garden of the East,
rejoicing in the abundance of its wealth / Under a beneficent govern-
ment, the produce of the Holy-Land would in his opinion exceed all
computation. Its perennial harvest; the salubrity of its air; its
limpid springs; its rivers, lakes, and matchless plains; its hills and
vales; all these various advantages, with the serenity of the climate,
mark this ill-treated land as indeed—a field which the Lord had
blest: God had given it of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the
earth, and plenty of corn and wine. But denunciations went forth,
and thus said the Almighty to the “mountains of Israel, and to the
hills, and to the rivers, and to the valleys, Behold I, even I, will
bring a sword upon you; I will destroy your high places, I will
make the land more desolate than the wilderness towards Diblath.”
Ezek. vi.) -
Is it not passing strange that Olives and Figs, in great abundance
and of great superiority, -that Dates of the finest flavour, – that
xxii ON THE FRRTILITY
Vines and Wine of celebrity, and that honey of raisins in vast abund-
ance, and honey of dates, should be produced in a country, which
was, – un coin non pas de terre, mais de cailloua, – une petite contrée
déserte et misérable, un désert off l’on manque de vivres / From the
very earliest periods, Palestine was noted for the fineness of its Figs :
it was a Land of fig-trees, (Deut. viii.) and the most recent travellers
in those parts represent, the – coin de cailloua, – to furnish supplies
of figs, of a quality not to be surpassed by those of any country of
Europe. (See Joliffe's Letters from Palestine: and Note 9 on the
Fig.) The fig-tree, also, as well as the vine, produces there, three
crops of fruit in the year; the first ripening at the end of June,
called the Boccore; the second, the—Kermez, or Summer-fig; and
the Winter-fig. Jeremiah's very good figs were like the “Boccore,”
or First-ripe figs ;—“One basket had very good figs, even like the
figs that are first ripe; and the other basket had very naughty figs,
which could not be eaten, they were so bad!”
Were we to listen to the splenetick tales of St. Jerome and
Voltaire, we should be led to suppose, that so deplorable a tract of
land as Judea, if capable of producing figs at all, would certainly
have produced none but the very naughtiest'
Strangel that in so ill-favored a land the Wine and the Vines,
too, should have been of such renown, as to be sought after by

OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxiii
neighbouring nations (See Note 12 on the Vine.). How ridiculous
must appear the Paraphrase of Onkelos on the 49th Chapter of
Genesis (V. xi. 12.), if we are to give credence to the exaggerations
of Voltaire and St. Jerome. That Chapter describes the patrimony
of Judah; and the Paraphrase of Onkelos promises, that “Of fine
purple shall be his raiment; splendid and of various hues shall be his
tabernacle; his mountains shall be reddened with grapes; his hills
shall distil his wines; and his fields shall be whitened with corn, and
with his flocks of sheep.” And the mountains might justly be said
to be reddened with grapes; since the country was famous for its
Vineyards; and the Vines, as admitted by Bochart and other tra-
vellers, yielded a triple produce every year. The wines of Sibnah,
and of Heshbon in particular, were in high repute with the great
men and princes of the neighbouring countries: and scions of the
vines used to be sent into foreign lands. Isaiah, in his “Oracle
concerning Damascus” (Ch. 17.), alludes to this practice: —
When thou shalt have planted pleasant plants,
And shalt have set shoots, from a foreign soil,
Even in the day of possession,
Shall the harvest be taken away !
Alexander Trallianus speaks in high terms of the wine of Sarepta,
also: and Reland (Palaestina, Lib. xiv. 7.) also praises it: “Celebre
est vinum Sarephthinium quod Tyrium videtur Plinius appellare, a
loco vicino magis moto.” And these writers, instead of calling the
land which produced these fine wines, a scorched and sandy desert,
describe it as peculiarly fertile! The fruitful Sarepta, is the decep-
tious compliment paid by Corippus (Lib. 3.), in speaking of the
wines of that district: –
tº º et dulcia Bacchi
“Munera, qu Sarepta feraw, quae Gaza crearat.”
This was a wine which might have vied with the famous Muscadel,
of Monte-Fiascone, the taste of which proved fatal to the devout
German bishop (See J. Cobbett’s “Letters from Italy.”). He, good
Prelate, had not studied the writings of Isaiah fruitlessly; and with
peculiar satisfaction did he recollect that the Divine favor and pro-
tection were not unfrequently exemplified, by the abundance and
xxiv. ON THE FERTILITY
delicacy of the liquid produce of fine vineyards, such as Voltaire
would persuade us, never could have existed in rocky Palestine ! —
“And Jehovah, God of hosts' shall make
“For all the people in this mountain,
“A feast of delicacies, a feast of old wines,
“Of delicacies exquisitely rich, of old wines perfectly refined.”
Piously convinced of the strength of his claim to such an exemplifi-
cation of the Divine favor, the good bishop upon his pilgrimages to
Rome, used to send forward his Courier, devoutly enjoining him, to
write up the significant word “Est” (there is,), wherever he found
that a wise and merciful Providence had designed for its deserving
servant, — “ A feast of old wines; of delicacies exquisitely rich, of
old wines perfectly refined.” Arrived at Monte-Fiascone, the zea-
lous Courier fell into religious eestacies with its far-famed Muscadel;
and, in holy anxiety to make a just impression upon the episcopal
devotee, he joyously inscribed upon the wall. — Est 1 Est Est
Pass we over in silence, however, the deplorable consequences which
ensued upon the arrival of the good Prelate | He never quitted the
Inn alive: and in a neighbouring church hangs his epitaph, com-
memorative of the occasional depth and strength of episcopal devotion
and thirst : —
EST / EST / EST?
Et propter mimium Est/
Mortuus Est/
2s, º, * *
$º ss
Rºs
MONTE-FIAscone NEAR FLORENCE.

OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. XXV
The anniversary of the melancholy and severe loss the church hereby
sustained, used to be solemnized by the pouring upon his grave, of
a cask of the famed and fatal Muscadel: a practice subsequently
interdicted by the Pope, as indecorous to the Church, and derogatory
to the character of the many prelatical asceticks, who, so frequently,
“Refine themselves to soul, to curb the sense,
And make almost a sin of abstinence 1 °
The vines of Sorek were also famous, as those of Eschol, near the
same river, still continue to be. Volney and Doubdan both speak of the
superiority of the grapes about Bethlehem, and of the excellent white
wine still made there. The latter traveller discovered in that repul-
sive neighbourhood, “a delightful valley full of aromatic herbs and
rose-bushes, and planted with vines which appeared to be of a choice
kind:” and he was told that the clusters frequently weighed ten or
twelve pounds. And yet, large as are such clusters, they weigh
scarcely half as much as the clusters produced in the neighbourhood
of Damascus, where they are known to weigh frequently from twenty-
five pounds to a quarter of a Cwt. To talk to philosophers about
the Vine-branch cut down by the Spies, near the Brook of Eschol,
and which had upon it one cluster which required two men to carry
it upon a staff,-would expose one merely to be pitied or derided as
weak and credulous! But addressing less profound, less pert and
prejudiced readers, it may be asserted, That in England, but an
imperfect notion can be entertained of the enormous size to which
the vine attains in a congenial soil and climate. Strabo declares
that vines at Margiana were so big, that their stems could scarcely
be compassed by the arms of two men; and that they produced
bunches of grapes two cubits (or a yard) in dimensions. Columella
states, that Seneca had a vine which produced two thousand clusters
in one year. Even this was far inferior to the vine noticed by M.
Rozet, in the North-Court of the Citadel of Oran (Algiers); the
branches of which form a trellis covering a space of about forty-nine
feet long by twenty-six wide : this vine bore, in 1831, three thou-
sand bunches, averaging 21bs. each. Theophrastus mentions a vine
that grew so large, that a statue of Jupiter was made of it: and also
relates, that the Temple of Jupiter, at Metapontus, was supported
E
xxvi ON THE FERTILITY
by twenty vine columns. The stairs of the Temple of Diana at
Ephesus were all furnished from one single vine of Cyprus: there
are the great doors of the Cathedral of Ravenna, made of vine-tree
planks: and at the seat of the Duke of Montmorency, at Ecouen,
near Paris, is a table of no trifling dimensions, made wholly of vine-
wood. But even in England, clusters of grapes of no contemptible
size, have, by artificial heat, aided by every mode of forcing, been
occasionally produced. The Duke of Portland had upwards of a
hundred kinds of vines at his seat at Welbeck: and in 1781, he sent
to the Marquis of Rockingham, a cluster weighing 19%lbs. Philo-
sophers may ridicule the account of the Spies having discovered a
cluster of grapes, in that petite contrée déserte et misérable, which
required to be suspended on a staff: the Duke of Portland, how-
ever, could have told them, that he found it needful to adopt the
plan of the Spies, in having even his cluster conveyed to Wentworth
House.
And they came unto the brook of Eschol, and cut down from thence
a branch with one cluster of grapes, and they bare it between two
upon a staff; and they brought of the pomegranites, and of the figs —
Numb. xiii. 23.
The garden of Geddin, situate on the borders of Mount Sharon,
and protected by its chief, extends, says Mariti, several miles in a
spacious valley, abounding with excellent fruits, such as olives,
almonds, peaches, apricots, and figs.— Vines, and figs, and olives,

OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxvii
then, this wretched and beggarly country, - of Voltaire's imagi-
nation, — did unquestionably possess, and, mirabile dictu ! beggarly
as it was, it had not the happiness of possessing beggars. It had
no beggars in it: and it would puzzle even such as Voltaire to dis-
cover the term “beggar,” or even any term of corresponding sense,
in one single instance in the Pentateuch, or indeed in any part of
the Old Testament. The verb “to beg,” can alone be found, and
that only once, where the enemies of David (Ps. cix. 10) imprecate
curses upon his head. If so very méprisable auw yeur de la poli-
tique; if so miserable the face of the country, as to be entitled,
nature's outcast, the fag-end of the worst of her works, how singular
that under these comfortless circumstances, the Israelitish Common-
wealth was not disgraced with those despised paupers and beggars,
who, in favoured countries, amongst pampered millions, and under
Reformed Constitutions, are found in ignorance and vice, in disease
and misery, to be scattered throughout the covetous yet wasteful
land! — (See “Mammon,” s. 4.— On the present predominance of
Covetousness in Britain.) Strange that in so paltry and repulsive
a spot, condemned to such contemptible institutions, no trace is
visible of those exquisitely precise “Dietaries,” so miraculously
adapted to suit the digestive powers of all, strong and weak, old and
young, male and female: those Dietaries, so evidently framed upon
a generous and an evangelical interpretation of that precept in the
Bible (Deut. xv.) wherein the Creator of the poor and of the rich,
explicitly declares that the “Poor shall never cease out of the land:
therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide
unto thy brother, thy poor, and thy needy, in the land:” those
“Dietaries,” which have so piously and liberally construed this
divine command to signify the gradual emaciation of the poor
upon one single pound of potatoes, for their whole dinner, their pig-
stye dinner, upon five days in the week!—llb. of potatoes, unac-
companied by a morsel of meat, or of bread, or a drop of beer! with
one huge ounce of cheese, plenty of water, and not quite half-a-
pound of bread, for their cheerful supper! With nearly one-third
of a pound of bacon, in addition to the generous pound of potatoes,
for their Sunday dinner: making sixteen pounds of salt bacon PER
ANNUM or one-Twenty-SECONDTH part of a pound for each day of
their happy lives | And of fresh meat during the 365 days of the
xxviii ON THE FERTILITY
year, precisely as much as might chance to fall from the skies upon
each of those days —(See the “Cirencester Dietary,” App. D.)--
“Beneath their heartless scheme, belying heaven,
Lurk searchless cunning, cruelty, and death!”
Strange that in sterile Palestine, no trace appears of penal tor-
ments, of insensate cruelties, of silent and elaborate arts of gradual
extermination, of wanton defiance of Scriptural precept, such as
some fertile and opulent countries disgracefully exhibit; no trace of
those well-regulated and well-fortified Pauper-holds, where the inno-
cent and virtuous are, for the encouragement of piety and morality,
doomed to associate with the most licentious and abandoned—the
husband to be severed from her whom he had sworn, before God
and man, that he would cling to and cherish to the last moment of
his days; the parent to be savagely torn from those whom God and
nature had told him it was his most sacred and inalienable duty to
watch over, to teach, to guide, and to protect: and, one and all, to
have every tie of home and family remorselessly torn asunder, and
every hope rudely blasted
“Life, hope, and heaven, alike o'ercast—
The future desolate as the past!”
Strange that under a polity so méprisable, and in so poverty-
stricken a country, such Christianly ordinances were never required,
to “test” pauperism; to deter from soliciting relief, and to terrify
the feeble, the timid, the aged, the broken-hearted; to domineer
over the ignorant and imbecile: to evade and palter with the wants
of the resolute; to insult, contaminate, and outrage the virtuous;
to degrade, corrupt, and brutalize all : and to make the murder of
famishing children, by their distracted parents, a frequent and horri-
ble reality! — * -
“And when I left that dismal place,
“The felon's mark was on my face!
“The felon's rage was in my blood,
“And madness mingled with my mood l’’
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxix
Strange that this so contemptible a nation was not wholly com-
posed of beggars and paupers | The first, starving and reckless
vagrants over a desert land, où l’on manque de vivers: the last occa-
sionally transported for the crime of being poor, or safely encaged in
Union Pauper-holds, prohibited from worshipping their Creator in
the sacred edifices which the Institutions and Laws of the Country
have established, and declared it to be the bounden duty of all
religiously to attend | Strangeſ that revolting “Amendments,”
such as these, were never, amongst this “peuple ignorant et barbare,”
deemed humane and enlightened expedients for harassing those
desolate and helpless objects, who, the Scriptures declare, shall
never cease out of the land/
& & Yet God above is just; —
“Vengeance is His — and richly He'll repay !
“Each tear down trampled sorrow's cheek that rolls,
“Shall turn to fire, and scorch their tyrant souls l’’
Far from such heartless oppression, such moral and political turpi-
tude as this: such testing of poverty, by the gentle alternative of
incarceration side by side with the vilest dregs of society: —the
Judaic-Law expressly commands, that “If a poor man who is not
known, applieth saying, “I am an hungred. I pray thee give me
that I may eat,” he shall not be examined, to learn whether he be a
deceiver, but food shall be instantly given to him; if he be naked,
and pray to be clothed, then let him be examined, to learn whether
he be a deceiver” (Laws of the Heb. Ch. 7. S. 6.).
Voltaire ironically remarks, that if the Law of the Jews, “n’etait
pas divine, elle paraitrait une loi de Sauvages qui commencent á s'as-
sembler en corps de peuple.” Whatever it may seem to “philoso-
phers” of this stamp, we now see the manner in which the savage
law of this peuple ignorant et barbare, compassionately and gene-
rously relieved the wants of the poor. This benighted people,
without the faintest notion of a Social-compact, was far distant
from that point of perfect civilization, which requires measured
driblets of soup-wash, gruel, and potatoes, to insult the poor, and
to disgrace the nation | The law of these savages commanded the
&XX ON THE FERTILITY
hungry to be fed, without enquiry, without evasion, without delay:
and yet, no beggars were to be found! But in foreign lands; in
civilized communities; under the tender mercies of patrons of the
fine-arts; under conquerors of the world, who rendered it a capital
crime for a Jew to set foot in Jerusalem, or even to view it at a
distance (Tert. Ap. c. 21.); then, indeed, were these people, whom
kind sympathies and efficient laws, founded upon Divine command,
had religiously protected from want in their native land, frequently
driven to the cruel alternative of either begging or starving ! This
alternative, however, they were not condemned to, as long as any
of their own persuasion were to be found, capable of affording relief
to their oppressed and needy brethren: for their charity to the poor
was not nominal they were not “covenant-breakers, without na-
tural affection, implacable, unmerciful” (Rom. i.). They did not
condemn the destitute to slow starvation upon one lb. of potatoes
for dinner / when the Law of God had solemnly commanded them
to open their hands wide unto the poor: — when the Prophets had
proclaimed it to be the will of God, that heart and hand should be
opened wide unto the needy: — had proclaimed that the souls
would be cut off, of all those who had forsaken the poor, who had
turned the needy out of the way, who had plucked the fatherless
from the breast, or whose hardness of heart was such, that the poor
of the earth hid themselves together | The inhabitants of this land
of sands, and flintstones, and brackish water, acted in accordance
with the commands of God: they were not “Haters of God, des-
piteful, proud, inventors of evil things” (Rom. i.) : nor were they
easy in conscience, whilst chattering passages from Scripture on the
Sabbath-day, and acting in contumacious and contumelious defi-
ance of them, upon every other day in the week : —
“For tis not what we do, but say,
| 22
In love and preaching, that must sway
“Pure religion,” said St. James (i. 27.), is, “to visit the father-
less and the widows, in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspot-
ted from the world.” Moses, said Josephus (Cont. Apion. B. 2. 17),
did not make religion a virtue, but the practice of virtues was indis-
pensable to religion : “for all our actions and studies, and all our
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. XXXI
words, have a reference to piety towards God; ” or in the words of
the poet, —
“To live uprightly, then, is sure the best,
“To save ourselves, and not to damn the rest!”
The religion of the Hebrews, of this peuple ignorant et barbare,
induced them to be considerate towards the poor; and their Munici-
pal Law, founded upon the Divine Law, commanded them to be boun-
tiful as well as compassionate. In conscientious reverence for the
Word of God, that Law denounced curses against him, who should
treat the poor with ignominy (Maim. Ch. x. $ 5.) : and conceiving
that no true believer could oppress, or neglect the destitute, it
treated as impostors, those who were inattentive to their claims:
“Whoever is hard-hearted and pitiless, is of a dubious race; since
want of pity exists only amongst the Gentiles, according as it is
said (by Jeremiah,) ‘They are cruel and will not show mercy’
(Maim. C. 10. P. 65.). That law, indeed, as Josephus points out
(Con. Apion. ii. 30.), is so anxious for the inculcation of humanity
and gentleness, that it has regard even to the lower class of animals,
and will not tolerate harshness towards even them; “and if any of
them come to our houses, like supplicants, we are forbidden to
slay them.”
Detestable, then, as was this land— ignorant et barbare, as were
the people — lois de sauvages, as were its laws — meprisables, as
were its institutions—bristling, as it was, with montagnes pélées;
it had none of these newly-discovered implacable and unmerciful
inventions, for exterminating poverty and the poor together — for
breaking the covenant between rich and poor — and yet it had
no beggars 1 Even in late times, it is said by J. Scaliger, that true
Hebrews never have need to beg: “Veri Judaei non mendicant:
propter to philalelon eorum, quod divites non patiuntur tenuiores
mendicare aut esurire; et multa præcepta de Eleemosynis, etiam,
antiquissima habent” (Elench. Trihaer. C. 28.). The rich amongst
the Jews, could not endure that their poorer brethren should hunger
or beg : and as Scaliger remarks, undoubtedly they had and have
extremely ancient precepts relating to Alms, (for they are as ancient
as the Pentateuch,) the which are embodied in the accompanying
xxxii ON THE FERTILITY
Work of Maimonides, upon the “Laws relating to the Poor.”
Under the classic sway of aristocratic demagogues, of financial
plunderers, of heroic manslayers who trampled upon their laws, and
struck medals to commemorate their own enormities in rapine,
slaughter, and devastation; —
S
º § 4's
#5;Sº . ar-
ſº
#" ºg
§§ S
%& N
zzº-
And she being desolate,
Shall sit upon the ground ! Is, iii. 26,
MEDAL STRUCK BY VESPASIAN, TO COMMEMORATE THE SACKING
OF JERU SALEM.
exposed to the obduracy, the sober sensualities, and the infidel
covetousness of Roman traitors and tyrants, nothing could protect
them : and we find from Juvenal (Sat. 6.), that then, plundered as
they were, they were forced to become beggars : —
“Arcanam Judaea tremens mendicat in aurem,
“Interpres legum Solymarum
.32
“Without her badge, a Jewess next appears,
“And, trembling, begs a trifle in her ears.”
And Martial ( 12.57.) also alludes to the practice as not uncommon
in his time, and as one of the many annoyances of cities:
“Nec turba cessat entheata Bellonoe;
“Nec fasciato naufragus loquax trunco,
“A matre doctus necrogare Judaeus.”
Some notion of the exactions and oppressions the Jews had to
endure, may be gained by the perusal of the politic epistle of Deme-
trius to his Brother Jonathan, when the latter was suspected of an


OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxxiii
disposition to league with Alexander (Joseph B. 13. c. 2.) Deme-
trius offered to free the Jews from all their tributes, some of which
are mentioned as follow:—The tax upon salt,-the crown gold and
crown tax, — the one-third part of the fruits of the field, – the one-
half of the fruits of the trees, – the poll-tax from every inhabitant,
—the tithes and taxes of Jerusalem, - the exactions upon the sab-
bath and festivals, — the labour from the beasts of the Jews, – the
curtailment of pay to Jewish Soldiers, – the ten thousand drachmae
from the Temple, &c.
This land once without beggars — this now pillaged land—this
petite contree misérable et déserte, appeared to Dr. Shaw, “ver-
dant and cheerful; the woods abounding with the gall-oak, and
strewed all over with anemonies, ranunculuses, colchicas, and man-
drakes: ” the plains in some parts distinguished, he says, by beau-
tiful beds of tulips, frutillaries, and other plants of the same class.
And all over the country is plenty of game of all kinds; as teal, snipes,
woodcocks, francoleens, partridges, antelopes, hares, and rabbits'
Petite contrée miserable et déserte Whether these antelopes,
hares, and birds, were of some particular species, living upon sand,
and — de l’eau saundtre — we are not informed; but miserable as the
land might be, we are told by Dr. Shaw, that the diversions of haw-
king, and of the chace, are not, by any means, rare; and that,
whenever the Turks, or the Arabs travel, they take with them half-
a-dozen of hawks, and of shagged greyhounds to hunt the game,
which had been invisible to the searching eyes of the –gens detoutes
nations 1 Equally cheerful and verdant did the land appear to Mr.
Carne, at a much later period: and even Mount Carmel did not seem
to him exactly — bristling with bare rocks / On the contrary, -
how credulous is man! how misled by illusions! he fancied it—“co-
vered with trees and flowers,” and the view, as so rich and verdant,
that were the land diligently cultivated, he declares it would again
become, as it once was, – “Like the Garden of God”: – -
“The earliest ray of the golden day
On that hallowed spot was cast!
And the evening sun, as he left the world,
Looked kindly on that spot last.”
Mount Carmel, is fertile and woody, says D'Anville; and its pastures
feed horses of a race highly esteemed, maintained by an Emir, long
F
xxxix ON THE FERTILITY
established in this Canton. It was indeed, the remarkable fertility
of this region, distinguished as the scene of Elijah's contest with the
prophets of Baal, which suggested the name;—“Carmel,” signifying,
“the garden of God.” And a large garden it was: for Mount
Carmel, is a ridge nearly semicircular, and about 40 miles in extent,
jutting at its northern extremity into the sea, south of Ptolemais or
Acre. To the North-East of Carmel, rises Mount Tabor, of an ob-
long form, isolated in the centre of an extensive plain, with a level
summit about a mile in circuit : so formidable a position, that its
top was fortified by Josephus, during the war with the Romans.—
(See Woodcut) From this elevation is beheld an immensity of
plains, interspersed with hamlets, fortresses, and ruins. The build-
ings on the summit were destroyed in 1290, by the Sultan of Egypt
(Macmichael.). All the beauty of Tabor that man could disfigure,
is defaced, says Mariti; immense ruins upon its summit are now
the only remains of a once magnificent city; and Carmel is the
habitation of wild beasts.
The montagnes pelées about Jerusalem, were found by Rauwolff,
to produce delicate and fragrant herbage : and he witnessed feeding
upon them, vast numbers of sheep, famed for their sweet and tender
flesh, and with those large fat tails, which in former times (Lev. C.
9.), used to be burnt in the Sin-Offerings. Detestable as was the
spot, he also found there a great variety of trees, and shrubs: — the
Lentiscus, (whence the Mastick is obtained,) the Arbutus, the Ilea,
a sort of Willow called Sassaf s (by Theophrastus, Elaeagnus ; the
Olive, the Palm, the W.hite-mulberry, the Sumach, and the Styraw:
the Spartium, the Lycium, (in Hebrew, Hadhadd, the juice of which
is used by Apothecaries; and of which David makes mention: ) in
great abundance; also the St. John's Bread, (called by the inhabi-
tants Charnubi— Silique by the Latins—Keratid and Keratonia
by the Greeks :) also Turpentine-trees, (called Botin, and Albotin.)
of which the Israelites formed their tents (Nehem. 8), during the
great feast of Tabernacles; and Barberry-trees 1 and all this beauti-
ful variety of trees and shrubs, in a country, where, in Summer, il
n'y avait seulement de l’eau a boire / Hecataeus too, who had been
brought up with Alexander the Great, also speaks of the diversity of
Shrubs, and mentions that the country was, not une terre de caillour,
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. XXXV.
but, very fruitful and well-peopled: an excellent province that bore
all kinds of good fruit! (Joseph. con. Apion 1049.) Hecataeus hap-
pily felt no desire to distort facts; he had no scheme of raillery and
sarcasm to support, no bon-mots to invent, and therefore speaks
without prejudice : — not, -
“Like old Voltaire, who placed his greatest glory,
In cooking up an entertaining story !”
In this desert-land, the trees grew to no inconsiderable size, and
the Oaks of Basan were especially renowned, The Cedars of Liba-
nus and the Oaks of Basan, are frequently in the Sacred Writings,
used in a figurative sense, for Kings, Princes, and Potentates. Thus
Isaiah (C. 2.) denounces vengeance against,-
All the Cedars of Lebanon, the high and the exalted,
And against all the Oaks of Basan'
(Travellers formerly reckoned up 30 or 40 Cedars, remaining upon
Lebanon: afterwards decreased to 17 and a dozen. Now, there
are said to remain but 7, one of them being above 12 yards in
girth. The Arabs of every tribe entertain for these trees the
highest veneration: the tradition being, that they are the relic of
the identical trees, which Solomon desired to consecrate to the
ornament of the Temple.)
Lamartine found the country in the neighbourhood of Joppa, by
no means as “bald as a scalded pig’’; and Joppa (now Jaffa,), is
but 30 miles north-west of Jerusalem, from which it is visible; Jaffa
being seated on a hill, in the midst of a delightful plain : —“Il est
“impossible de décrire la nouveauté, et la magnificence devègeta-
“tion, qui se déploie des deux cotés de cette route, en quittant Jaffa.
“A droite et à gauche c'est une forêt variée detousles arbres fruitiers,
“ et detous les arbustes à fleurs de l’Orient.” And in another part
of his “Pilgrimage” are the following remarks, strangely at vari-
ance with the pictures drawn by “faithless, prejudiced, and ignorant”
writers, who had almost induced Lamartine to imagine that, at great
risk and expense, he was to be gratified with the sight of “un coin
non pas de terre, mais de caillour l’” “Une petite contrée déserte et
misérable tº “Un désert ou l'on ne boit que de l'eau saumatre 1.
Ou l’on manque de vivrest and where in summer, il n'y avait seule-
xxxvi ON THE FERTILITY
ment de l’eau a boire " " When we had reached the other side of
this hill, says Lamartine, the Land of Canaan displayed itself before
our eyes. Deep, grand, and agreeable was the impression. It was
not that naked, rocky, sterile country: that mere ridge of low bar-
ren mountains, that some faithless, prejudiced, and ignorant writers
and travellers, have depicted; travellers, who perchance, of the
extensive and varied domains of the Twelve Tribes had visited,
the rocky route between Jaffa and Jerusalem' Misled by such as
these, I anticipated only that which they had pretended to depict :
a contracted narrow land— devoid of horizon — devoid of vallies —
devoid of plains — devoid of trees — devoid of water . Its beauties
consisting of some desolate, grey, and rocky hills, fit defiles, wherein
the Arabian freebooter might plunder the defenceless | Such may
be the route from Jerusalem to Jaffa ; such is not the character of
the Land of Judea . At least, as my eyes have exhibited it to my
mind: viewing it from the heights bordering upon the plain of
Ptolemais—viewing it, on the opposite side of the hills of Zebulon,
and of the hills of Nazareth — viewing it from the foot of the dewy
Mount Hermon, and of Mount Carmel — viewing it, as we traversed
its whole extent, from Tyre and Sidon to the Lake of Tiberias —
from Mount Tabor to the mountains of Samaria and of Naplouse,
(Sechem)—and from the hills of Samaria to the walls of Sion.
First, overlooking the plain of Zebulon : We are placed between
two slight undulations of land, scarcely entitled to be called hills;
the bed between them being the path which has been worn by the
tread of camels during four thousand years! On either side, the
rounded slope is shaded, here and there, by groups of evergreen
shrubs: a little more distant are various trees, with their knotted
trunks and luxuriant foliage; many amongst them being evergreen
oaks, with the Carob-tree, the Turpentine-tree, the Plane, and the
Sycamore. Of other trees, some have the foliage of the Pine, and
of the Cedar: others, more beautiful, resemble willows in the colour
of the bark, the gracefulness of foliage, and its delicate hue, but
incomparably surpassing them in height, and girth, and in the
spreading of their limbs. Round their colossal trunks, caravans
assemble, in friendly encampment, with camels and baggage, beneath
the shade. . . . . . . In the light black soil, wheat, barley, and maize
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxxvii
are, with little cultivation, raised in constant succession; or else
spring up forests of thorny bushes, Jericho-roses, wild Pomegranates,
and enormous thistles, whose stems out-top the camel's head! —
Extraordinary produce for une coin non pas de terre, mais de cailloua /
Very strange that “wheat, barley, and maize,” should grow almost
without cultivation, in a land where it would rather seem, that
perennial famine, such as drove Elimelech to the land of Moab, must
incessantly desolate the land 1 Voltaire would doubtless assure us
that Elimelech's was absolutely a case of starvation, in a “ désert,
ou l’on manque de vivres 1’’ It then, however, becomes an enigma
how sufficient corn can, even in the present day, be raised in this
desert, to allow of its being exported, as it is, from Jaffa to Con-
stantinople! And still more of an enigma that in that poverty-
stricken land the farmers should have permitted the poor to glean in
their fields: and that, so soon after the death of the starved Elime-
lech, his daughter-in-law, Ruth, should be found gleaning in barley-
fields! (See Note 21.—On Gleaning.)
Then said Boaz unto Ruth, Hearest thou not, my daughter Go not
to glean in another field, neither go from hence, but abide here, fast by
my maidens.—RUTH ii. 8.
To return to Lamartine:—Speaking of the Lake of Genazereth,
he describes it as being longer and finer than any of the Lakes
of Cumberland and Westmoreland; although yielding perhaps in

xxxviii ON THE FERTILITY
majesty, to the stupendous features of Loch Lomond – “Most
repulsive land l’—“Ils parlent tous, comme parlait St. Jérome, qui
peinte cette contrée comme le rebut de la nature ” With regard to
the Jordan, it was remarked in a previous page, that this River, so
frequently described as a sluggish, turbid stream, had been seen but
by few travellers: but we have now the authentic account of Lamar-
time, who thus details his visit to this calumniated River :—“Those
“travellers had not been able to attain the River; and, seeing from
“a distance one vast sea of sand, they could not fancy that a cool,
“deep, shady, and delicious Oasis was hollowed between the plat-
“forms of this monotonous desert, investing the murmuring bed of
“the Jordan, with curtains of verdure that the Thames itself might
“envy. We had before our eyes one of the loveliest valleys that
“ever man beheld. There were groves of tall, slender shrubs, whose
“branches fell like plumes over their numerous trunks. The stream,
“apparently of considerable depth, might be from a hundred to a
“hundred-and-twenty feet wide: and its course was as rapid as that
“of the Rhone at Geneva. Its waters are of a pale blue colour,
“slightly tinged with the mixture of the grey earth over which it
“flows.”
Dr. Shaw also tells a very different tale to that of St. Jerome;
for to him the soil appeared rich and productive: and he remarks
that the Cotton of the plains of Ramah, Esdraelon, and Zebulon, is,
even now, held in greater estimation than that grown near Sidon
and Tripoli. He declares that it is not— “possible for pulse or
grain of any kind, to be richer or better tasted, than that which is
commonly sold at Jerusalem.” Strange produce for a country, oil
l'on manque de vivres, – smothered in sand, and bristling with bare
rocks, and scarped mountains! “Ultima Syriarum est Palaestina,”
said Amm. Marcellinus, (Lib. 14.) “cultis abundans terris et nitidis,
et civitates habens quasdam egregias.” To the same purport is the
testimony of Tacitus, the most creditable of the classic writers. He
declares Palestine to be as fertile as Italy, and adds, (Hist. 5, 6.)
—“rari imbres, uber Solum. Eauberant fruges nostrum ad morem,
praeterque eas, Balsamum et Palmae.”
This “balsamum,” to which Tacitus alludes, was the famous
balsam-shrub, whose balm (now Balm-of-Gilead) was so precious a
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xxxix
drug in the eyes of the Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians; but Vol-
taire, perchance, felt an objection to acknowledge that so precious a
shrub was a native of, and almost peculiar to, the land of Judea, and
that the plain of Jericho was particularly celebrated for this costly
resin. The true Balm-of-Gilead, (Balsamum Judaicum,) is said to
exude from incisions made in the Amyris Gileadensis; (or Amyris
Opobalsamum;) turbid, and yellow at first, it afterwards becomes of
a clear gold-colour, having a penetrating odour, and a bitter astrin-
gent flavour.
Too painful, however, would have been an acknowledgment by
Voltaire, that this land of sand, and flintstones, and brackish water,
produced a drug, the wholesale price of which is even now thirty
shillings an ounce. It cannot be that Voltaire was ignorant of the
utter groundlessness of the remarks of the petulant Saint; it cannot
be that he was ignorant, that even up to the time of Josephus,
Palestine in general, and Jericho in particular, continued famous for
its olives, its palms, and its balsam-trees. It was in the neighbour-
hood of Jericho that Alexander the Great is said to have witnessed,
with so much interest, the dropping of the balsam. Pliny bears
testimony (Lib. 5. 17.) to the fertility of the neighbourhood of this
calumniated Jericho; and Strabo, whose authority Voltaire would
scarcely dispute, expressly says, (Lib. 16.) — “Hierichus campus à
“montană quádam circumdatus, quae in amphitheatri speciem ad
“ipsum declinat. Ibiest palmetum, habens et alias feraces arbores,
“sed plures palmas : ad stadia centum extenditur irriguum totum ac
“villis frequens. Illic etiam visitur Herodis regia, et balsami virida-
“rium.” Wellwatered, and studded with villages! And yet the crude
narratives of des gens de toutes nations, – are to invalidate the testi-
mony of such writers as Strabo, Tacitus, Marcellinus, and Horace!
For even by Horace, (Ep. 2. 2. 184.) are these statements con-
firmed; and too happy did the high-born spendthrifts of his days,
deem themselves, to be sent over in command of that, — land of
flintstones and rocky mountains ! This was very wellunderstood by the
courtiers of Augustus: and in fact, the place was proverbial in the
time of Horace, for its rich produce : —
“— cessare, et ludere et angi
“Praeferat, Herodis palmetis pinguibus; –
xl ON THE FERTILITY
the one brother preferred lounging, frolics, and perfume, even to the
rich palm-tree groves of Herodium ! a spot, (says the French Com-
mentator upon this passage,) which was,—Agris Judaeae fertilissimis,
et Jerechuntinis palmis, e quibus opimus redit proventus.” Jericho,
indeed, was the “City of Palm-trees” (See Note 7), and miserable as
the country might be, it possessed undeniably these invaluable and
elegant trees in the greatest abundance : —
; º #! |
º
º
º
| | (
º º
|
|
|
|
*!i |
&
º
wº
ºf SWF
º § : 3.
---%º-
-Y.rsº§§%º% -
º-.º:*
| t-#§|
|Pº
ſ
º
{{\\ c º ſ:
\\ ;| l |
Žº Tº %|| #3 º |
º º º § º j,
|
i ºr º |
º
%
- § - - º
;: Xºs "Sº §§§
§§§
§º S §§§ § Q
- Sº
N §§ Sº
§§§
§ §4%
º &
Z.
º º yº
* * P ... " -- º
lºſſº, 2
I iſ vº, Aº
ſ & tºº w
º º Nº §º Sw
*{ ºf “ſº º
D lº'º.
ſº %:
E. : * º % § º º;%
F=\ºſ ſº º
*=== | Wº%
#=|º.
_-_E.Exe--- § §º ſº ; º
- º 23%, | ſº
sº-ºº: § tº: ! A. lººp
& Mill; §
#Tºº)
jº
£2.
4 & etiam ardua Palma
“Nascitur; et casus abies visura marinos,
Virg.
The gens de toutes nations, the learned pundits who possessed the
confidence of Voltaire, discovered that Jerusalem was seated in a
spot that horrified their feelings! “La situation en est horrible!”
It produced no such hideous effects upon the nerves of Dr. Shaw.















































































































OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xli.
He, very sedately observes, that the parts about Jerusalem “being
described as rocky, and mountainous, have therefore been supposed
to be barren : but this is far from “being the case.” And he pro-
ceeds to observe that corn, wine, and oil, together with milk, and
honey, were the food of the early ages: that the plenty of wine is
alone wanting even now, (and wanting it will be as long as Mussul-
men abstain from wine;) and that judging from the goodness of the
little yet made at Jerusalem and Hebron, it is evident that the mon-
tagnes pelées, might still be as valuable as formerly. Although little
wine is now made in the country, on account of the religious anti-
pathies of the Mahomedans, Rosenmüller remarks that there yet
exist mumbers of vineyards. He says, that besides the large quan-
tities of grapes and raisins, which are daily sent to the markets of
Jerusalem and to neighbouring places, Hebron alone in the first half
of the 18th Century, annually sent to Egypt three hundred camel-
loads (i. e. nearly three hundred thousand pounds) of grape-juice,
(or honey of raisins.)
Frequent mention is made in the Hebrew Writings, of the abun-
dance of Honey produced in the Holy-Land: and no one denies that
it was honey of some sort, which mainly contributed to the subsis-
tence of the Baptist in the desert. Besides the honey of raisins,
above mentioned, there was also the honey of bees, and the honey of
the locust-tree, and especially that of the Palm-tree. In speaking of
the “Locust,” (Note 17.) the remarks of Rauwolff are cited, in con-
firmation of the notion that the Baptist, in all probability, subsisted
both on the Honey of Bees, and the Honey of trees. There is the
“Charnubi,” as it is called by the natives, the “Carob,” or “ St.
John's Bread,”(Ceratonia,) which produces a great quantity of sweet
pulpy pods, commonly eaten by the people; and the Hymenaea, or
“Honey-Locust,” a fine spreading tree, producing fleshy pods, con-
taining a sweet farinaceous pulp, which might be termed a honey.
St. John might have had, and in all probability did have, recourse
to these for food : and the latter tree is still found near the cave and
fountain where the Baptist exercised his austerities. The friars
there, say, that some of those old Locust-trees are the identical trees
which yielded him sustenance: the fruit continues to this day to be
gathered by the pilgrims, as a sacred memorial of the murdered as-
- G
xlii ON THE FRRTILITY.
cetick. In these trees, the wild-bees are fond of building their
nests: and possibly therefore St. John found both kinds of honey
upon the same tree. But it is the Honey of the Palm, which the
Hebrew Writers generally understand by the word Davush, in our
translations called Honey. In the 2d Chronicles (31. 5.) mention is
made of the First-fruits of “corn, wine, oil, and honey :” but as nei-
ther the First-fruits nor Tithes of the produce of Bees, were ever
offered, it must have been other Honey that is here intended. In
Deuteronomy, too, (8.8.) the productions of the Land of Palestine,
are enumerated, concluding with, olives, oil, and honey : and in
Ch. xxxii. 13., there is the expression, — honey out of the rock. In
these and other passages, the Chaldaic Paraphrase of Jonathan de-
termines the Honey, to be the Honey of dates, which grew in the
rocky soil of Judea. And thus, also, the Rabbis interpret, —- “A
land flowing with milk and honey,” to signify, - a country whose
fruits were rich as milk and producing honey. The “Debs,” or
date-honey was, indeed, a common article of commerce : and the fol-
lowing is amongst the articles inscribed with their prices, upon the
ancient Stone (now in the British Museum) found at Stratonicea, in
Asia-Minor (See Note 27. on the “Olive,”); —
“Mellis fonicini + Octo”:
signifying, that eight denarii for each Seatarius, was then the price
of the “Mel Phaenicinum,” the Debs, or date-honey, of Arabia and
Egypt. This désert affreuw did also produce the honey-of-bees:
and Josephus states that the great plain adjoining the Dead-Sea,
which from its saltness was unfit for cattle, corn, olives, or vines,
was particularly useful for the nourishment of bees, which were fond
of resorting to it for their supplies. Sugar-canes were also culti-
vated to some extent.
“Perhaps,” says Maundrell, “there is no spot of ground in
“the whole country, that was not formerly improved to the pro-
“duction of something ministering to the sustenance of human life.
“Even the most rocky parts served for the plantation of vines and
“olives, which delight to extract, the one its fatness, and the other
“its sprightly juice, chiefly out of such dry and flinty places.” –
“And,” he adds “there is no place upon earth more fruitful even at
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xliii
“present, than the plain country and the valleys, either for the pro-
“duction of corn, or of pasturage for cattle.” Very different this
story to that of the “gens de toutes nations,” who had providentially
discovered that the land was “un coin non pas de terre mais de cail-
dour,” and who all so happily agreed with St. Jerome, in one of his
splenetick moods, in describing this “land of corn, and vines, and
“fig trees, and pomegranates, – this land of olives and of honey,”
to be le rebut de la nature.
Surely it was known to Voltaire, that unless this most repulsive
land had been peculiarly productive: unless, indeed, the returns to
the farmer had been such, as by Michaelis they are stated to have
been, namely, thirty-fold, or something near that return, the Israel-
ites might have found it impracticable to comply with the demands
made upon them for the public-service: perhaps he had forgotten
that those demands amounted to three tenths of the produce : an
impost, says Michaelis, the burden of which, none but a very
fruitful country could have borne. And yet, however great the
burdens imposed, and although cases did occur of sufferers selling
themselves to servitude, no family could be left in irretrievable des-
titution. The “Jubilee" protected them ; and when Voltaire
indulged his spleen in assertions about the contemptible polity of the
Israelites, and about their being “un people ignorant et barbare,”
it would have been well had he pointed out any nation, modern or
ancient, which had conceived, much less carried into complete effect,
the bold political scheme of a “Jubilee,” to furnish a remedy, in
some degree, for the force and fraud of the powerful and covetous;
and to prevent the permanent accumulation of lands and wealth in
few hands. And let it here be noticed, that the servitude above
alluded to, was not the servitude of a slave: the person sold, as
Locke observes (See Note 2 on “Slaves,”), was not under an abso-
lute, arbitrary, despotical power. Whence, however, can an example
be adduced, of a people, and without a beggar amongst them (See
p. 27, preceding,), whose liberty and property were so effectually
protected from fraud and violence, as were those of the Israelites,
si ignorants et barbares /
The grand Sabbatical year, the “Jubilee,” was no idle parade,
no raree-show : it was a year of general release of all slaves, captives,
i
xliv ON THE FERTILITY
and prisoners; and all estates that had been pledged or sold, were
then transferred to the original proprietors or their representatives.
The 25th C. of Leviticus (v. 10.) says, “And ye shall hallow the
“50th year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land, unto all
“the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a Jubilee unto you ; and ye
“shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return
“every man unto his family.” Amongst the mischiefs of Usury,
Lord Bacon enumerates that of its bringing “the treasure of a realm
9
or state into a few hands:” and he proceeds to argue that a State
ever flourishes the more, the more equally the wealth of that State is
distributed. The “Jubilee” had the effect of maintaining or restor-
ing, comparatively, an equality amongst the people: an equality, the
destruction of which, has, in modern times, afforded indubitable
evidence that its effects are, gradually but surely to enfeeble, to
intimidate, to cripple, States which had once been amongst the most
opulent and powerful,-
“The first in danger, as the first in fame!”
Was it a sign of ignorance and barbarity, of a “politique méprisable”
to conceive and execute a scheme which thus tended to preserve
internal tranquillity, to ensure attachment to country, and to prevent
political depravity, degeneracy, and decrepitude : It would be so
regarded by those, who, wiser than Lord Bacon, ridicule the notion
that great inequality of wealth in a country can be injurious, even
could they conceive it practicable, by any honest means, to prevent
that inequality: who, far from lamenting these inevitable conse-
quences of usury, laud to the skies the modern schemes of anticipat-
ing the revenues of generations unborn, by a system of loan and
usury; clearly perceiving that such anticipation is a source of great
internal strength to a State—that the argument of Blackstone is
futile, when he pretends that—“the land, the trade, and the per-
sonal industry of individuals, are diminished in their true value, just
so much as they are pledged to answer”; who are positively certain
that — the greater the debt, the greater the blessing; and that the
more irretrievably a nation is sunk in bankruptcy, the more admirable
the scheme of government, and the greater the cause for satisfaction
and delight to those, whose land and property and industry are in
eternal pawn to state creditors' With such as these, doubtless the
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xlv.
“Jubilee" of the Jews would be regarded as, “une loi de sauvages
qui commencent à s'assembler en corps de peuple.”
In addition to all this testimony adduced from foreigners of every
nation,-des gens des toutes nations, relative to the productive steri-
lity of Palestine, of the malheureur désert, there was also a native
writer, who seems to have slightly differed from the singularly unani-
mous literati, - qui parlaient tous comme parlait St. Jerome 1
Abulfeda, was the King of Hama, in Syria, and he expressly treats
of the Geography of those parts. His eyes as well as information,
led him to represent Palestine, in even the 13th Century, as a “fruit-
ful Country,”—forming the most fertile part of Syria! To the same
effect is the testimony of Antoninus Martyr, a citizen of Placentia,
who (in the 6th Century,) travelled to Palestine; he declares the
Canton of Nazareth to be equal to Egypt, in corn and fruits: abound-
ing in wine, and oil, and honey. He observed about Jerusalem every
sign of ease and plenty; — Vineyards, and plantations of fruit-trees:
and throughout the country, hospitals, monasteries, and fine edifices.
Nor could Galilee, being the scene of John of Gischala's lucrative
exploits, have been exceedingly barren or unproductive. John was
not inferior in craft and covetousness to the monopolists of modern
times: he would, indeed, have been a senseless oaf to select, un
coin, non pas de terre mais de cailloua, for his extortionate feats.
Unquestionably he discovered that this contemptible spot could pro-
duce oil and olives, in too great abundance to be contemned by him:
and he was not slow in procuring from Josephus, (then in command,)
the exclusive privilege of supplying Oil to the borders. (See
“Olive,” Note 27.) In Solomon's time, too, there must have
been some few fertile spots in this—désert, ou l'on manque de vivres,
—since Solomon gave 20,000 baths of oil, yearly, to the Tyrian
hewers of timber in Lebanon, (1 Chron.), and apparently an equal
quantity to the King of Tyre himself—(1 Kings.) So free-think-
ing a gentleman, as Voltaire, would spurn as credulous and infantine,
the unvarnished statements of Josephus, of “Josephe, l’exaggerateur”;
others, however, might desire to know, that he, who was the Gover-
nor of Galilee, expressly describes that district as being universally
productive, And full of the plantations of trees of all sorts; no part of
it lies waste; and the cities and villages were —very thick, and so full
xlvi on THE FRETILITY -
of people, by reason of the richness of the soil, that the smaller towns
contained a population of 15,000 / The Country of Samaria, Jose-
phus also describes, as equally fertile : not, indeed, naturally
watered by many streams, but deriving from the periodical rains,
sufficient moisture for the wants of agriculture. Such also is the
sweetness of the waters (the “de l’eau saumatre,”), and the succu-
lency and goodness of the pastures, that the cattle yield an unusual
quantity of milk. It was, on these grounds, that upon the division
of the Land of Canaan, the lot of Benjamin was the narrowest of
all;-“ by reason of the goodness of the land, for it included Jericho
and the City of Jerusalem.” (Book 5. Ch. 1. —Bell. Jud. B, 3, C.
3.) But, there was another writer who testifies to the fertility of
Judaea, of whose life Voltaire has been himself, the panegyrist; and
seeing that this man, though with many good qualities, was a sworn
foe to Jews and Christians, and to all the Sacred-Writings; how
comes it that he has been overlooked, whilst a Saint has been quoted,
as if, in the opinion of Voltaire, a Saint could speak sense or truth !
Julian-the-Apostate had fought and conquered upon the Banks of
the Rhine, and the Banks of the Euphrates: he had seen various
countries besides Palestine; and his opinions concerning the charac-
ter of the country might have shown to Voltaire that there are other
calumnious fables besides those, “fables des Chrétiens ses ennemis,
qui etaient toutes calomnieuses.” -
Allowing, however, that Voltaire might have had some grounds
for not placing implicit reliance upon the description given by Jose-
phus, what was there that he could possibly object to in Rauwolff,
whose account of his Travels had been published a hundred-and-
twenty-one years before the birth of Voltaire Rauwolff was a
plain-spoken, candid man, an impartial narrator, and a good natu-
ralist, whose faithfulness and judgment have never been impeached.
And Rauwolff says of this—coin non pas de terre, mais de cailloua,
that — “it hath fertile valleys, hills, fields, and gardens, richly
adorned with fountains and trees, so that it was very well chosen to
be the worldly paradise.” Rauwolff was a German: so that we
have Romans, Hebrews, Arabians, Germans, Italians, French, En-
glish—gens de toutes nations—all bearing testimony to the correct-
ness of the Mosaic account of Palestine! And against their com-
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xlvii
bined testimony, we have a few splenetick, unconnected remarks of
St. Jerome, the witticisms of the Baron de Broukana, and the “On
dit,” of Frederick III, who, we are told, publicly said, “en voyant
ce détestable pays, que Moyse était bien malavisé d'y méner sa com-
pagnie de lépreux : que n'allait-il a Náples P” Volney came too
late into the world to have an opportunity of divesting the mind of
“the Searcher after truth,” of its doubtless unwilling and far
from malevolent hostility and aversion to the Holy-Land. This was
peculiarly unfortunate: for, though Rauwolff, undefiled with a mor-
bid appetency for flouting witticisms and polished ribaldry, might
have been an object of derision for his gravity and insipidity, Volney
would assuredly have been a writer after Voltaire's own heart! And
yet, Volney by no means corroborates our philosopher's discoveries,
as to the detestable character of the country, its miserable sandy hills
and plains, and endless heaps of stones and rocks! Volney charac-
terizes the country generally as fertile, and the soil of many parts
as, even in his time, black and fat: retaining, during the sultry
periods, moisture sufficient for the growth of grain, vegetables, and
fruits. And these were all produced in great abundance: nor would
it be, even now, impracticable to find a very abundant remuneration
for a priesthood—heaps of fruit and vessels of wine such as used to
be voluntarily offered in ancient times:—
| " ". - º
| || ||sº *
| || Wºl
º %| ||7
ſº".
§ º i
iš. §
º
Žº
º t
l
At the end of three years thon shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine
increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates.
DEUT. xiv. 28,

xlviii ON THE FERTILITY
Volney's remarks upon the excellent quality of the white-wine of
Bethlehem, have before been noticed. In that neighbourhood also,
he was struck with the fineness of the Olives and the Sesamum.
Voltaire very deliberately assures us that in this desert land—l'on
manque de vivres, and that in summer, water was not to be had : or, if to
be had, it was, de l'eau saumatre. However, if the poor creatures,
the peuple ignorant et barbare, whom or whose ancestors Moses had so
cruelly seduced into the land, were without water, and without other
food, at all events they had plenty of fish : and how could Voltaire
overlook his popular authority, St. Jérome, who declares that it was
brought in such vast quantities to Jerusalem, that one of the gates
was, on that account, called the “Fish-gate.” Had the piercing
eyes of Voltaire overlooked this passage, in his favoured author: and
had he never heard of the opinion of Galen as to the peculiar whole-
someness of this fish 2 milk, too, there was, if water was deficient in
this detestable spot: and in the opinion of Dr. Shaw, peculiarly rich
and delicious milk it was, from cattle pasturing upon mountains
clothed with—“a delicate short grass mingled with thyme, and rose-
mary, and various aromatic herbs.”
But notwithstanding the dogmatic denial of Voltaire, Palestine
was not so very deplorably deficient in water: at all events of a
sufficiency for the purposes of agriculture. (See Note 49.—On
“Rains.”) In Northern as well as in Eastern climates, there are
sultry periods when the earth suffers greatly from drought: it would
be folly, therefore, to suppose that Palestine would be exempt from
that to which countries of the same latitude are invariably sub-
ject:-
“Still the same burning sun' No cloud in heaven'
The hot air quivers, and the sultry mist
Floats o'er the desert, with a show
Of distant waters mocking their distress!” — SouTHEY.
Jeremiah (e. xiv.) minutely details the distress and sufferings of
such a drought when, “The ground was chapt: ” the ploughmen
laid themselves down in despair: the parched hind abandoned its
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. xlix
calf: and the wild asses upon the mountain-top, with fire in their
eyes, snuffed up the air like dragons. Such a drought is beautifully
described by Tasso, in his account of the sufferings of the Christian
army under the walls of Jerusalem :—
“The leaves grew wan upon the wither'd sprays;
The grass and growing herb all parched were;
Earth cleft in rifts, in floods each stream decays,
And barren clouds with lightning bright appear.
Still was the air, the rack nor came nor went;
But o'er the land, with lukewarm breathing, flies
The southern wind, from sunburnt Afric sent,
Which, thick and warm, his interrupted blast
Upon their bosoms, throats, and faces, cast !”
This, Voltaire would fain persuade us, was far from being a rare
visitation: but so common as to be regarded rather as that which in
“Logic” would be termed the essential or specific difference, distin-
guishing this detestable country from all other countries under the
sun Taking for his text, St. Jerome, so prodigue d’injures quand
il était contredit, Voltaire dwells with especial delight upon the fear-
ful scarcity of water in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. Now,
whatever Jerusalem may be at the present time, Voltaire knew well
that it was abundantly supplied with water, until ruffians of every
clime and colour arrived to plunder its inhabitants, to trample upon
their rights, and to rase their edifices to the ground. But the “Foun-
tain of Siloam ” is not yet dry: and St. Jerome himself affirms that
the valley through which its waters run, was thereby made, a very
delightful retreat. It could have been no small quantity of water,
of de l'eau saumdtre, that the myriads commanded to assemble perio-
dically in Jerusalem must have needed. Indeed, Abendana states
that, amongst the officers attached to the Temple, there was one
who was called the “Overseer of the Waters,” in and about Jeru-
salem, whose business it was, “to provide that the wells and cisterns
be kept in good order, that so there might be plenty of water to
supply the necessities of the Temple, and of such as were obliged to
present themselves in Jerusalem three times in the year.” (See Note
24.—On “Festivals.”) .
l on THE FERTILITY
Solomon declares that water was to be found in his days: and
speaking of the gardens in which he appears to have taken great
delight, he says: — * .
“I made me pools of water,
“To water with them the grove flourishing with trees:
And these very pools (under the name of Solomon's pools), and also
the aqueducts, are described by Maundrell, Carne, and others, as
they remain to this day. In a valley not far from Bethlehem, says
Dr. Rauwolff, they show to this day a large orchard full of Citron,
Lemon, Orange, Pomegranate, Fig, and other Trees: “which King
Solomon did plant in his days, with ponds, canals, and other water-
works, very pleasantly prepared, as he saith himself, in the Second
Chapter of Ecclesiastes.” This seems to have been the place indi-
cated by Josephus (Book 8, c. 7), when he says that it was the
custom of the King, cloathed in white, to ride early in the morning, in
his chariot, to a place called Hetten, 100 furlongs from Jerusalem,
where he had a garden, with water pools and works, very pleasant and
rich. Whether these pools, were pools of de l’eau saumātre, we are
not informed: it could hardly have been brackish water, however,
which Hezekiah brought to the city: —“And how Hezekiah made a
pool, and a conduit, and brought water into the city” (2 Kings, xx.
20): “he also stopped the Upper Water-course of Gihon, and
brought it straight down to the west side of the city of David.”
Without an artificial supply of this nature, an English Voltaire
might, with about as much justice, declaim against the climate of
England: and because the Water-Works of London had stopped
their supplies, aver (and in one sense he might be right), that Lon-
don was “le rebut de la nature l’’ and that in summer, “il n'y a
pas seulement d'eau a boire l’’
The tricks of the Ravenna vintners were trifles, compared with the
imposition that Voltaire would lead us to believe, must have been
practised upon Solomon : who fancied, poor man, that he was
mourishing his trees with water, and in a country, too, where in
summer, “il n'y a pas seulement d'eau a boire!”—much less where-
with to water gardens !- -
“Callidus imposuit nuper mihi Caupo Ravennae,
“Cum peterem mistum, vendidit ille merum.”
of THE HOLY LAND, ETC. li
“By a Ravenna vintner once betrayed,
“So much, for wine-and-water mired, I paid;
“But, when I thought the purchas'd liquor mine,
“The rascal fobbed me off with only wine !”
Such, and far worse tricks than these, would Voltaire persuade us
must have been practised in the, coin non pas de terre, mais de cail-
loua / If water was so invaluable at Ravenna, what must it not
have been in Judeal and how exactly does Martial describe the
frightful scarcity, if we make but one trivial alteration in his verse:—
Sit cisterna mihi, quam vinea malo Judaea,
Cum possum multo vendere pluris aquam .
Lodged in Judea, (water sells so dear,)
A cistern to ten thousand vineyards I prefer!
In Exodus, (Ch. 21,) it is ordained,—That the man who does not
cover his cistern, shall, if an ox or an ass, fall into it and be drowned,
pay its value to the owner, and take the carcase for his own use.
Voltaire would lead us to believe, that these cisterns must have been
constructed from roguish motives:—no water, even if water could be
found, could ever be preserved in that hot and sandy soil, - conse-
quently, that these cisterns were all of them, as dry as that into
which Joseph was cast by his brethren:—And the pit was empty,
there was no water in it / But Voltaire had not heard, that close to
this supposed identical pit, called by the natives Gib Youssouff, or
“Joseph’s pit,” Dr. Richardson found a large Khan, for the accom-
modation of travellers, and “a well of very excellent water | * Malte-
Brun states, (Vol. 2. p. 150.) that throughout Judea, are to be found
the remains of cisterns, in which the rain-water used to be collected;
and traces of the canals by which those waters were distributed on
the fields.-" These labours,” he adds, “necessarily created a pro-
digious fertility under an ardent sun, where a little water was the
only requisite to revive the vegetable world.”
The Aqueducts also, which Hezekiah constructed, were they, too,
formed with sinister designs Had they seldom or never any wa-
ter to moisten their parched channels 2 Constructed, perchance,
from commendable motives, such as led the late Lord Castlereigh,
lii O N THE FERTILITY
in his inscrutable wisdom, to propose to employ English labourers in
digging holes one day,+To fill them up the neat / a mode of adding
to the, “Wealth of Nations” which had escaped the sagacity of
Adam Smith ! The 7th, 8th and 9th Sections of the 8th Chapter,
(“Laws of the Hebrews, &c.”) show how scrupulously the Israel-
ites adhered to the rules laid down by Zerubbabel, and the rest of
the Elders, (Ezra 4-3) with regard to the rebuilding of the Temple :
and how firmly they rejected all aid from Gentiles, either directly or
indirectly, pursuant to the directions of Nehemiah, (Ch. 2. 20.) who
expressly denied to all but Israelites, any portion, right, or memorial,
in Jerusalem. Even to receive Alms from Gentiles, unless impelled
by dire necessity, is strictly forbidden : no wonder that donations for
rebuilding the walls, or for repairing the Aqueducts, were steadfastly
refused.
Maundrell has a short account of the ruined Aqueduct that once
conveyed the water from Solomon's pools to Jerusalem. It was
formed of large blocks of a coarse sort of marble, let into each other,
with a fillet round the cavity to prevent leakage; the blocks being
joined together by so firm a cement, that it was easier to break,
than to separate them. For greater security, this range of stone-
pipes which ran along on the surface of the ground, was covered
with a case of smaller stones, laid over the inner range in a strong
cement. This Aqueduct, formerly 5 or 6 leagues in length, has
been so destroyed by the Turks that few fragments remain. It was
to the Aqueduct of the Upper Pool, that Isaiah went to meet Ahaz:
—“at the end of the Aqueduct of the Upper Pool, at the causeway
“ of the fuller's field.” From a passage in Josephus, (De. Bell.
Jud. B. 2. C. 9.) it appears that Pilate, amongst his other outrage.
ous insults to the Jews, thought proper to rob the Temple of the
“Corban,” or Sacred-treasure, for the purpose of constructing an
Aqueduct, whereby he brought water to Jerusalem from the distance
of 400 furlongs: and, because the Jews expressed their indignation
at his thievish acts of despotism, he, according to the legitimate
mode, persecuted and robbed them the more; and by means of dis-
guised mercenaries, sent into the crowd armed with bludgeons, he
effectually silenced all complaints, by having the complainants
beaten to death, and trampled under foot. “Now the Jews were
OF THE HOLY LAND, ETC. liii
so sadly beaten, that many of them perished by the stripes they
received, and many of them perished as trodden to death; by
which means the multitude were astonished at the calamity of those
that were slain, and held their peace.” Seeing then that these
Aqueducts were constructed with so much care and at so great an
expense, Voltaire would surely allow that, occasionally at least,
these Aqueducts were channels for water; although where could be
the source of supply in a country where in summer, il n'y avait
seulement d'eau ä boire, must remain a mystery ! Judging from
some of the similes employed by Isaiah, that Prophet had found
that the Aqueducts did sometimes contain water. In promising the
favor of God to the Israelites, he declares that their children —
Shall spring up as the grass among the waters;
As the willows beside the Aqueducts'
There was much to admire in the Aqueducts of Old Rome: and
indeed, among its remains, the grandeur of the Commonwealth shows

liv ON THE FERTILITY
itself, as Addison remarks, chiefly in Temples, Aqueducts and Bridges:
but it will require something more than the unsupported dictum of
Voltaire, or of the Baron de Broukana, to persuade us that such
Aqueducts as those of Judea were built solely for show, or pictu-
resque effect. When Voltaire pretended to believe St. Jerome,
that in summer, il n'y avait seulement d'eau a boire, and that at
other times there was nothing, but, de l’eau saumātre, he ought to
have condescended to give his exposition of the motive for con-
structing Aqueducts, in that petite contrée, misérable et déserte / It
is recorded, that at the siege of Jerusalem, the Aqueducts and the
city-sewers were crowded as the last refuge of the hopeless. In
them, 2,000 dead were found, and the living were dragged thence
to slaughter. Voltaire would hardly tell us, that the Jews, relying
upon the Prophecies concerning that awful moment, anticipated the
utility of Aqueducts as a refuge from the truculent Romans !
Josephus, in retorting upon Apion, for his misrepresentations,
exaggerations, and inventions, thus plainly speaks his mind:—
(Com. Ap. B. 2.) “Some things that he hath added are very frigid
“and contemptible, and for the greatest part of what he says, it is
“very scurrilous, and to speak no more than the plain truth, it shows
“him to be a very unlearned person, (in these matters), and what he
“lays together, looks like the work of a man of very bad morals, and
“ of one no better in his whole life than a mountebank.” And he adds
his surprise that any one, unless possessed of “an ass's heart, or a
dog's impudence” should have propagated such palpable calumnies.
Whether these caustic remarks are applicable to some of those,
who, in recent times, have delighted to tread in the steps of Apion,
will be questioned: but after the testimony of so many gens de toutes
nations, we may assert that, notwithstanding the ingenuity and
sarcasm of Voltaire;—the wit’s eccentric range of his friend, the
Baron de Broukana;—notwithstanding the petulant assertions of St.
Jerome, admitted to have been—prodigue d'injures quand il était
contredit; the ignorance and the misrepresentations of others, perfect
faith may continue to be reposed in the Scriptural account of Pales-
time; and admit, that before the country was pillaged and trampled
upon by tyrant Romans; ravaged by implacable and insatiable hordes
ON THE FERTILITY ly
—r-
of brigands and barbarians of every creed and clime; – its valiant,
hardy, industrious, and conscientious population, expelled or extir-
pated; before these unceasing acts of ruthless oppression, extortion,
and devastation, this calumniated land, this desert affreua, rivalled or
surpassed even Egypt in fertility and productiveness, and in the .
abundance and superiority of its Vines and Wines, its Wheat and
Barley, its Oil and Olives, its Figs and Palms, and Pomegranates;
—and that, regarding as rancorous and fabulous inventions, the dis-
torted tales of Voltaire about—une petite contrée déserte et misérable
—un malheureur désert oil l’on ne boit que de l'eau saumātre — un coin
non pas de terre, mais de caillouw-un désert affreur où l’on manque de
vivres—we may rely with confidence upon the fidelity of the des-
cription in the Pentateuch; and rest persuaded, that the expositions
and commentaries of Maimonides upon the Mosaical Precepts, were
duly adapted and perfectly applicable to a land such as was Palestine:
—“A good land; a land of brooks of water, of fountains and depths
“that spring out of valleys and hills: A land of wheat and barley,
“ and vines, and fig-trees, and pomegranates: a land of oil-olive, and
“honey; a land wherein thou shalt eat bread without scarceness, thou
“shalt not lack anything in it: — a land of hills and valleys, that
“drinketh water of the rain of heaven l’’

N 0 T E s.
NotE 1.-- Precepts of the Law.
Of the 613 Precepts mentioned at p. 23, of the “Life of Mai-
monides, &c.”, the “Laws relating to the Poor,” comprise Thirteen;
Seven being Affirmative, and Sir Negative. They are as follow,
VIZ.--
1. To leave the Corner.
2. No one shall wholly reap the Corner.
3. To leave the Gleanings.
4. No one is to glean his land.
These Four Precepts are founded upon the following Verses of
the 12th and 23d Chapters of Leviticus; viz. And when ye reap the
harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field,
neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest.—And thou shalt
not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy
vineyard: thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger. I am the
Lord thy God.
5. To leave the Small-bunches of the Vine.
6. No one to Glean his Vine.
7. To leave the Fallen-grapes of the Vineyard.
8. No one to collect the Fallen-grapes of his Vineyard.
These Four Precepts are founded upon the following Verses of the
23rd. Chapter of Leviticus, and the 24th. Chapter of Deuteronomy.
— And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make
clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither
shalt thou gather any gleanings of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them
unto the poor and stranger. I am the Lord your God.— When thou
gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it after-
wards: it shall be for the Stranger, for the fatherless, and for the
widow.
9. To abandon a thing left through forgetfulness.
10. No one to return to take a thing left through forgetfulness.
Founded upon the following Verse of Deuteronomy, (Chap. xxiv.
19v.) — When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast
forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall
be for the stranger, for the fatherless, and for the widow : that the
Lord thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands.
11. To separate Tithes for the Poor.
hwii
Founded upon the following verses of Deuteronomy Ch. 14, v. 28, 29.
At the end of three years, thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine
increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates. –And the
Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee, ) and the
stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates,
shall come, and shall eat, and be satisfied, that the Lord thy God may
bless thee in all the work of thy hand, which thou doest.
12. To bestow Alms according to one’s means.
13. No one to harden his heart against the poor.
Founded upon the following verses of Deuteronomy Ch. 15, v. 7 to 11.
If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of
thy gates in thy land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not
harden thy heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother.— For
the poor shall never cease out of the land, therefore I command thee,
saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor,
and to thy needy in thy land.
To illustrate these Negative and Affirmative Precepts, it may be
remarked, that it is a precept of the Law, that the Dam sitting upon
the nest, shall not be taken with the young. (Deut. xxii. 6, 7.) If
this Negative Precept be violated, the transgressor still has the op-
portunity of escaping the penalty of the bastinado, provided he com-
plys with the Affirmative Precept, which commands that he shall—
“in any wise let the dam go.” If from any accident she die in his
hand, both Affirmative and Negative Precepts are violated, and
punishment cannot be escaped. Some would think that this com-
mand of not taking the dam and her young, was merely a humane
direction, for the prevention of anything having even the appearance
of inhumanity or want of feeling : Nonne has discovered, that it is
figurative, and meant as a prohibition against marrying both a captive
mother and her daughter! -

lviii
NotE 2. — Scourging and Slaves.
| A crº -- * } ſºft
º ºg º
£º º ñº
§ ºf .3.
º §º W. . .º.
§ §.' hiſ
y % d
.2%;
2:3. , ,
*- : * * *
º%
*Asº's
“Chains are the portion of revolted man,
“Stripes, and a dungeon I and his body
“Serves the triple purpose!”
Until Shaw and Bruce discovered a tribe of Arabs upon the
African Coast, who were Lion-eaters, it had ever been regarded as
the peculiar province of the Lion to eat man! (See Note 33, “Lion.”)
With regard to the Scourge and the Slave's back, it continues to be
the peculiar province of the latter, to adapt itself to the former.
This seems to have been the opinion of the Poet, quoted in the
motto; and it would therefore be to subvert the legitimate union of
things, to treat separately of an active and a passive so intimately
allied.
In the 1st Chapter, (S. 3, 4.) Maimonides declares a Scourging,
to be the punishment due to him, whose crop may have been des-
troyed by fire, after it had been reaped, and before the “Corner.”
had been apportioned to the Poor. “Scourging,” was one of the
four Punishments appointed by the Mosaic-Law, for crimes less than
Capital : the other three being, Imprisonment, Restitution in gene-
ral, and Restitution in kind.
Scourging was inflicted with small rods, or with thongs: the
criminal being tied to a post 1% Cubits high. The Judges being assem-
bled, the senior Judge read from Deuteronomy, (Ch. 28.) “If thou
wilt not keep and do all the words of the Law, then shall the Lord
make thy plagues wonderful.” The second Judge numbered the
stripes, and the third Judge directed the executioner. The Scourg-
ing being concluded, the senior Judge recited from Psalm 78, “Yet
he being merciful, forgave them their iniquity.” In atrocious cases,
to proportion the punishment to the crime, plummets of lead, or




























lix
thorns, were attached to the thongs: which were then called “Scor-
pions.” So in 1st Kings, (12 Ch.) the would-be tyrant Rehoboam,
threatened his subjects, that whereas “his father had chastised them
“only with Whips, but he would chastise them with Scorpions.”
Corporal as well as capital punishments were, in after-times,
usually inflicted and executed by the King's Life-guards, who were
called Tabbachim, or Tormentors. It was into the hands of the
“Tormentors,” that the miscreant debtor was delivered. (Matt.
C. 18.) .
It is said in the Mischna, that prior to a Capital-Punishment,
proclamation was made by the Public-Cryer, before the prisoner, in
these words: — “Quicumque noverit aliquid de ejus innocentiá,
“veniat et doceat de eo’’: — On which passage, the Gemara of
Babylon adds, that “Before the death of Jesus, this proclamation
was made for forty days: but no defence could be found.” Dr.
Lowth denies that, after the condemnation of Christ, any such rule
was observed: although the Mischna declares such to have been
the law, at the time : one remarkable instance amongst others pre-
dicted by the Prophet, of the illegality and injustice of the proceed-
ings in the case of our Saviour.
So generally, by the Mosaic-law, was Scourging, the corporal
punishment, that in the Biblical-books written before the Captivity,
and especially in the Proverbs-of-Solomon, the term beat is fre-
quently used, when corporal punishment is intended. This also
was the usual punishment, subsequent to the Captivity, as late as to
the time of Josephus; and the Apostle Paul, in his “Epistle to the
Corinthians,” affirms that his persecutors five times subjected him
to this servile treatment.
From Deuteronomy, (Ch. 25.) it is apparent that the delinquent
suffered in a recumbent position: but the Military Authorities of
this Country, so far depart from the Scriptural custom, as to order
the Drum-Majors to haul their victims up to a triangle; there to
have a sensible interpretation of that passage which declares, that
the “Wicked shall be flogged.”
Modern Expositors of Military Antiquities, take the liberty, also,
of departing in other minor particulars from the plain, unequivocal
precepts of the Bible. The Law says: — “Forty stripes may he
“give him, but not exceed : lest if he should exceed, and beat him
“above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile
“unto thee.” And therefore, as the Stripes were inflicted with a
scourge of three lashes, thirteen blows inflicted thirty-nine stripes;
a number, according to the Decrees of the Rabbis, never to be ex-
ceeded. Buxtorf says, that even this lighter punishment was never
inflicted but in the presence of the Judge, in order that the culprit,
should not be vindictively punished.
The gentle, discriminating corrective of the Lash has been, for a
considerable number of years, a favourite upon English ground.
Eloquent have been the denunciations against its use, and we have
heard it loftily asserted, - “That one lash degrades as much as a
thousand.” The Judaic-Law whipped those who were niggardly
lx
towards the poor, and the consequence was that beggars were un-
known in Judea, until the myrmidons and taxgatherers from Rome,
abrogated that law and pilfered the people. (See “Testimonies,”
&c. p. 31.) In England, it has long been the taste, to whip the
beggars, instead of whipping those who made them such : and that
truculent monster, Henry VIII., having intense antipathy to protracted
organs of hearing, not only whipped those who had been made poor,
by his sacrilegious thefts and havoc, but, curtailed their ears/ direct-
ing merely that, — “the upper parte of the grystel of the ryght eare
be cleane cut of /* Henry, being a very active ruffian, entertained
peculiar aversion to idleness, as well as to beggars. Flogging, and
the cutting off of ears, he had doubtless discovered to be highly pro-
vocative of agility. He therefore (23d Hen. VIII.) enacted,—by and
with the consent of his own fawning minions, who mocked the
nation with the name of “representatives,”—that every “stronge
and valyant begger and vagabonde” shall be whipped for his “vagabuncy
and idelnesse”; and then proceeds in true legislative style to ordain,
that those “apprehended and taken of suspicions of idelnesse shall be
brought before the newte justice of peace, and upon due examinations
and profe of his sayde loytrynge in idelnesse and vayabuncy, shall be
eftsoones not only whypped agayne, but also shal have the upper parte
of the grystel of his ryght eare clean cut of.”
That legislation even though omnipotent, which should exhibit an
aversion to the grystel of the ryghte eare, would in the present times
be looked upon with rather a curious eye; and perhaps the day may
come, when the other vile implement of mutilation and the Factory-
thong, will be regarded with equal curiosity. Not long since, said
the Newspapers, a sale of Ordnance-Stores took place in the Tower
of London; and amongst the broken and worn-out implements-of-
war, consisting of old drums, rusty firelocks, swords and carbines, old
coats, trowsers, &c., which lay indiscriminately in a heap in one of
the warehouses, on the Tower-Wharf, was discovered, a curious
weapon, having a long, well-worn wooden-handle, with an iron-ring
or ferule at the top, from which sprung nine thongs or cords, well
twisted and knotted. The irregular form of the instrument, and the
probable purpose to which it had been applied, elicited many curious
observations: but when, at length, one of the discharged marines
took up the weapon, and pronounced it to be a Cat-o-nine-tails, of
the same description as those now used in the British Army, loud
and indignant exclamations of, “Kick it into the river— burn it,”
burst from the assembled crowd. It was, however, eventually
allowed to be carried off by a dealer in Marine-stores, who predicted
that his grand-children would make much money by it, at some
future time; when it would be bought for the British Museum, as a
relic of these barbarous times—for the English people, said he, will
not much longer permit of their fellow-men being excoriated and
cut-up by such a murderous weapon
It has been said that “Place” so hardens, blinds, and warps the
consciences of public men, –
“That they can mock the fools that trust them:”
great pity that it should be so, if only for the sake of the poor soldiers,
Ixi
who are “degraded,” with considerably more than “one lash /* If
“Place” will harden and blind, the loss of place may soften and illumine;
and then may we again have enlightened proofs afforded of the humanity
and sound policy of the opinion of the Prussian General, Von Groll-
man, who, in alluding to this punishment of flogging inflicted upon
the English soldier, observes, that “by completely severing him
from society, by degrading him with exquisitely cruel inflictions, he
has been brutalized, and reduced to derive satisfaction solely from
coarse and sensual employments, and from the lowest animal indul-
gences.” At present, it would be inconvenient and unseasonable, to
act in accordance with this sound opinion of the Prussian General;
and therefore the ingenious cat still bleeds the ranks. Slaves in the
West-Indies, when flogged at all, are flogged under the merciful
limitation of the Mosaic-Law : “Forty stripes may he give him but
not exceed, lest thy brother should seem vile unto thee.” Soldiers
in the English army, are whipped according to will and pleasure, as
prescribed by the Horse-Guard Code 1 And yet the directions con-
tained in the 25th Chapt. of Deuteronomy, are very explicit: and
are very clearly indicative of the Divine Will, as to the maximum of
severity in corporal punishment. Von Grollman, not a mean au-
thority, bears testimony to the validity of the grounds of objection
urged in Deuteronomy: his arguments, however, are of about as
much avail as would have been arguments against, — clean cutting
off the grystel of the ryght eare, in the time of the Wife-Killer.
There is danger that this obstinacy against reason and humanity
may be imputed to cruelty of disposition, as well as to infirmity of
judgment: it will assuredly be charged as the inveterate unfeeling
obstinacy
“Of heroes, whose infirm and baby minds,
- - “Are gratified with mischief!”
It is moreover, mischief of a serious and murderous character, that
this passion for flagellation sometimes occasions; as the following
relation will show:—
An Inquest was held in November 1835, on the body of Thomas
Ramsay, a Private of the Royal-Marines, who died in the Military-
Hospital at Woolwich ; and a Verdict returned — “That Thomas
“Ramsay came by his death in consequence of a locked-jaw arising
“from the punishment received, in pursuance of the sentence of a
“Court-Martial held upon him.”—This victim was condemned, on
account of inebriety, or some petty crime, to receive 150 lashes!
134 of which were inflicted by the hands of Four drummers (This
multiplied by 9, the number of Thongs to each “Cat,” will amount
to 1206 stripes instead of the 40 of the Hebrew-Code; and to
which only is even the West-Indian Slave subject.) He was then
taken down, reeking with blood, the Surgeon considering that a
larger number might perchance hazard that life, which the torture
already inflicted, was after the lapse of a few days, thus prematurely,
and for so trivial a fault, so barbarously to destroy: incontestably
proving that the doctrine of Blackstone, – that whenever any laws
direct the destruction of life or limb, for light and trivial causes, such
laws are tyrannical,—that this doctrine has long since become obsolete.
lxii
The Jury upon examining the gory corpse, of this victim of a most
savage mode of correction, found the back almost flayed by deep and
jagged gashes; as far as the incrustations of blood and matter would
allow of their observation. Five or six “Cats” were exhibited. They
were formed of nine lashes of strong cord, each lash securely knotted;
and indelibly stained with human blood | Saunderson, a very amia-
ble and disciplined drummer, pointed out the “Cat” he had used in
this atrocious business, adding with exquisite sang-froid: — “I al-
“ways uses that when I gets it, because it swings better than some:
“I knows it by the knot at the handle and a place where I fits my
“finger well, to hold it tight!” This was one of the four gentle
drummers doomed successively to inflict the 150 mine-tail stripes
upon their bleeding comrade : 134 were, however, found adequate
to send the mutilated being to an untimely grave : —
“Whilst their stretch'd ears drink in the wretch's cries,
“And Nine-tail-Cats fill all their vengeful eyes!”
The Rabbinical Expositors, however, less humane than the Jewish
Lawgiver, do in some degree countenance the Code of the Horse-
Guards: for the “Stripes of Rebellion” were occasionally very heavy
and very numerous; by no means limited to the number of 40.
This crime of “Contumacious Rebellion” against the Law and the
Prophets, was not, however, a trivial crime like that of Thomas
Ramsay, but a crime of the deepest dye; and as such, visited with
the heaviest punishment, both in, and out of the land of Israel. If
the culprit had violated an Affirmative-Precept of the Law, or a De-
cree of the Wise-Men: and deaf to all admonition, persisted in his
contumacious rebellion, he was then pronounced —“Contumacious or
rebellious against God and the Law;” and the people attacked him
with sticks and staves and stones. – Witnesses having been sub-
orned against Stephen, he was accused of blasphemy: and the wit-
nesses executed the sentence of stoning.
--~~~~ ſº
~ , ,
j"ſº
r iń º
§
And he kneeled down, and cried with a ſoud voice, —
Lord, lay not this sin to their charge Acts vii. 60.

lxiii
If the crime was against the Law he might be flogged to death : if
it was but disobedience to the Decrees of the Wise-Men, he was
flogged until he repented and promised obedience.
The “Stripes of Rebellion,” says Maimonides, (Ch. 7, 14.) shall
be inflicted upon every one who giveth not sufficient Alms for the
Poor; and a seizure shall be made of his Goods, even upon the Sab-
bath-eve ; sufficient evidence that inattention and cruelty to the Poor,
was not merely nominally a crime of the deepest dye. Under or-
dinary circumstances, the preparation for the Sabbath was an excuse
for negligence: but, says the Rabbi S. Jarchi, (Bava-Bathra) no
excuse was allowed for neglecting the poor.
“Scourging” was a mode of punishment highly approved of by
the Roman-Law. The lettered Romans sometimes lashed criminals
to death, there being no limitation to the ferocious passion for flagel-
lation. This however, will not bear comparison with the murderous
lashing, perpetrated in English Factories upon young girls, as well
as boys: Jane Croft, aged 10, was cut to death in August, 1832, by
an English factory-thong ! (See the Woodcut in a following page.)
The Rescript of Hadrian, upon removing Land-marks, directs that
the culprit shall suffer banishment, imprisonment, or scourging, ac-
cording to the degree of guilt : but for the “Scourging,” instead of
the Triangle, a Wheel was made use of, for safely resisting the
writhings and struggles of the victim. Horace shows us, that his
servants had sometimes to undergo this refined and impartial mode
of torture : —
“Non furtum feci, nec fugi, -si mihi dicat
“Servus : — Habes pretium; loris non ureris, Aio.”
Thevenot relates, that one of the punishments inflicted by the
Turks is bastinading; that is, scourging the soles of the feet or
buttocks, with switches. The criminal’s feet are held up by two
men, and fastened to a wooden instrument, whilst two others lay-on
the blows, sometimes to the number of 3 or 400; causing total inca-
pacity of walking for several months. In the other mode of chas-
tisement, the criminal is laid upon the face, and 5 or 600 lashes are
inflicted over his drawers: causing such a dreadful bruising and
mutilating, that the knife is obliged to be used to remove the morti-
fied flesh, and prevent a gangrene, Which of these two civilized
Countries, have set the example to the other; Turkey to England,
or England to Turkey Or is the example drawn from the admired
practice of the civilized Russians ? According to Dr. Clarke, their
fondness for flagellation is extreme : “The Emperor of Russia canes
“the first of his grandees: princes and nobles came their slaves:
“and the slaves their wives and daughters. Ere the Sun dawns in
“Russia, flagellation begins: and throughout this vast Empire cud-
“gels are going, in every department of its population, from morn-
“ing until night.” The Cudgel and Cat, however, are two essen-
tially different implements: a few blows from a broom-stick, widely
different from being placed,—
“Under dissection of the knotted scourge l’”
China has been aptly said to be governed by the stick. In
* : *
HXIV
Persia also, those who are adepts in beating carpets, are highly
regarded, and in great request for threshing people of all grades:
the prime-minister, down to the kitchen-slave, When Felix was
exported by the Romans, to pilfer the Jews and Syrians, he,
also, became partial to the lash and the cudgel; but whether he
changed his operators often enough to cause the Lock-jaw to carry
off his victims, history saith not. At the tumults at Caesarea, when
the Jews and Syrians disputed as to whom the city belonged, Felix,
says Josephus, used to catch the Combatants on either side, and to
castigate them after the mode, deprecated, upon peculiar occasions,
as degrading and diabolical; and upon other very peculiar occasions,
eloquently upheld by the pseudo-politicians of modern days!
“The age of virtuous politics is past,
“And we are deep in that of cold pretence.
“Patriots are grown too shrewd, to be sincere !”
The consideration of the unfortunate objects, so legitimately
allied to the Scourge, naturally follows. The 8th Chapter of Mai-
monides (Sec. 10 to 18) treats of the “Redemption of Captives”
and of those whom destitution has compelled to sell themselves for
Slaves 1 and the 10th Chapter (Sec. 17.) contains directions respect-
ing “Servants,” the increasing the number of whom, Maimonides
declares to be, an increasing of the sin and iniquity of the world: whilst
the employing of the Poor in domestic offices, is a continual augmenta-
tion of good deeds. This, Voltaire would allow, did not argue great
stolidity; for the vast multitude of slaves, which luxury and effemi-
macy introduced among the Romans, is generally allowed to have
been one of the chief causes of the ruin of that overgrown empire.
In by-gone times “Slavery” was universal in Europe, but in no
country, so rife, according to Froissart, (Liv. 2, c. 74.) as in Eng-
land. Eadmer says that a law was passed in 1106, against the
wicked sale of men in open market, like brute beasts; yet was this law
defied, and until the 13th Century, (Henry’s England Vol. 3, c. 6.)
men, women and children, are said to have been sold here, both for
domestic and foreign use. Indeed, Slaves were named as a com-
modity of known value. (Ensor on the Poor.) The words of Magna
Charta imply it: “Nullus liber homo.” But, says Selden, the
villeins in the time of the Saxons although wholly at the will of the
Lord, were not ill-used: and the Laws of Edward the Confessor,
commanded the Lords so to “demean themselves, towards their men,
“that they neither incur guilt against God, nor offence against the
“King.” In other words;—to respect them as the King's subjects
and as their own fellow-beings.
Every one knows, says Puffendorf, that among the ancient He-
brews, those who had nothing to live upon, were bound to sell them-
selves, or were liable to be sold, as slaves. Christ alludes to the prac-
tice, (Matt. xviii. 25.) in his Parable of the Debtor and the Debtor's
servant :- “But forasmuch as he had not wherewith to pay, his lord
“commanded him to be sold, and his wife and children, and all that
“he had, and payment to be made.” Puffendorf, however, ought to
have added that in Leviticus, (Chap. 25) it is expressly declared that
Ixw
the service of such debtors shall not be that of bond-slaves: —“And
if thy brother that dwelleth by thee, be waxen poor, and be sold
unto thee, thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bond-slave: but
as a hired servant, &c.”—“I confess,” says Locke, “that we find
“among the Jews, as well as other nations, that men did sell them-
“selves; but it is plain, this was only to drudgery, not to slavery :
“for it is evident, the person sold was not under an absolute, arbi-
“trary, despotical power. The master was obliged, at a certain
“time, to let him go free out of his service.” That certain time,
alluded to by Locke, was the time of the Jubilee, if not an earlier
period (see p. 43 of “Testimonies, &c.”): for this—peuple ignorant
et barbare, as Voltaire pretends to consider them, who formed—la
nation la plus méprisable aur yeur de la politique, possessed public
spirit and judgment, sufficient to conceive and execute the bold
political scheme of a Jubilee, for thwarting the crafty, the covetous,
and the tyrannical; and for maintaining or restoring that compa-
rative equality amongst the people, the utter absence of which has
been a source of disquietude and intestine commotion, amongst
highly enlightened nations, far removed from being, in their own
estimation, les plus méprisables aur yeua de la politique. -
The practice of selling human beings is, also, in cases of desti-
tution, common to this day in India. Parents in distress dispose of
their children to those who are able to maintain them, and thus are
the lives of parent and child preserved. In the years 1833-4, Bun-
dlecund was visited by famine to so dreadful an extent, that children
were exchanged for sia, seers (ten pounds) of grain. Treated with
kindness, and made sensible of the interest taken in their welfare,
these purchased servants, or slaves, are led to love, respect, and
regard, with the warmth of filial affection, those who have shown
consideration for their situation. Viewed in the light of servants,
they become invaluable : they have no wrongs, no hardships to
complain of, nor do they desire to be let loose upon the world.
Very different the feelings of the Pauper in an Union-hold : his
freedom had not been sold: he had not stipulated to be cooped-up
by hireling overseers, subjected to the ignominious treatment of a
culprit, and fed with the food of swine! “Let him be sent to the
workhouse,” said Lord Brougham, “and he would contrive to find
work to liberate himself.” He is sent to the workhouse: and the
natural consequence follows. Instead of the respect and affection
of the poor Indian, his feelings are those of indignation and revenge:
his hate
“Is quenchless as his wrongs; he laughs to scorn
“The vain and bitter mockery of words,
“Feeling the horror of the tyrant's deeds:
“And unrestrained but by the arm of power,
“That knows and dreads his enmity!”
Chardin says, “En Orient on paye ses dettes avec ses esclaves, car
ils sont des principaux meubles; et en plusieurs lieux on les paye
aussi de ses enfans.”
The Judaic Law is particular in its directions relating to Cap-
K
lxvi
tives:—“The redemption of Captives is to be considered, before the
feeding, or the clothing, of the Poor: there being no precept of such
importance, as that relating to the redemption of Captives; since
Captives may be numbered amongst the hungry, the thirsty, the ma-
ked, and those in peril of their lives.” (Maimonides, Ch. 8.310.)—
And again—“Captives are not to be redeemed at an unreasonable
“cost, lest enemies then pursue for the sake of capture, and the
“safety of society be endangered; mor, for the same reason shall
“Captives be aided to escape, and lest the enemy confine them
“under closer custody, and treat them with greater severity.”
—“A woman is to be fed, clothed, and brought out of the house of
“captivity before a man; since man is accustomed to wander, but
“woman is not, and her feeling of modesty is more acute.” (Mai-
monides, Ch. 8. § 12. 15.) - -
The Mahomedan-Law, following the example of the Judaic-Law
in this, as in many other matters, is merciful and kind to those
reduced to slavery : by no means copying Aristotle, who kindly
classifies Slaves with Animals and Plants / The Hedaya, (Vol. i.
418.) says: — “They are your brethren whom God has placed in
“your hands: wherefore, give them such food as ye yourselves eat,
“ and such raiment as ye yourselves are clothed with; and afflict not
“the servants of your God.” Gentle and generous even to Slaves,
the Mahomedan-Law, like the Judaic-Law, might be expected to be,
as it is, the kind protector of the poor. “Take,” said Mahomet,
“Zakat, (i. e. Alms for the poor, imposed by law, distinguished from
“Voluntary Alms,) from the rich Mussulmans, and bestow it upon
“the poor.” Ali Bey says, (Trav. in Morocco.) “The charitable
“ tithes are equal to two-and-a-half per Cent. per Ann. on all that a
“Mussulman possesses except sheep and goats, for which only one-
“ per Cent, is paid. These alms are given to the poor; but they are
“ paid generally, and without nice calculation, as every heart sensi-
“ble of the misfortunes of the poor, contributes in a proportion
“much beyond that fixed by law.” And by the Hedaya, (Vol. 1. p.
339.) it would seem that the provision assigned for the indigent,
was 4 lbs of wheat, or 8 lbs of barley, or of dates, each day. The
Law of Mahomet, also, prohibited the severing of the mother from
the child, even should they both be slaves; a prohibition, which
would be gratefully acknowledged by some free people, who suffer
most inhuman separation under other Laws.
Voltaire pretends, that it was in consequence of mankind having
become accustomed to the degradation of slavery, that Epictetus ex-
pressed no astonishment at being himself the slave of a tyrant's freed-
man / Under the name of slave, was Epictetus any thing more than
a servant—the servus of the Romans, or the doulos of the Greeks
If not, there was nothing in his worldly position to excite surprise,
even in the noble mind of Epictetus: since he was well aware that
the merest zanies have, in every age and nation, been seen to lord it
over those, who were infinitely their superiors in the possession of
every quality entitled to command esteem, respect, and honour.
As the kinds of servitude and slavery have been various in various
lxvii
times and places, so the modes by which slavery has been intro-
duced have been various. It was long the custom between African
Musselmen and Europeans to pillage every vessel belonging to each
other, that had the misfortune to fall in the way. They pounced
upon one another, like beasts of prey, and made slaves of all who
escaped from slaughter. But it was reserved for an aera of Chris-
tianity, and for civilized, refined nations, to drive a traffic, more than
usually lucrative, loathsome, and flagitious, in the muscles and bones
of man / Treaties and protocols, elaborate and innumerable, have been
generously and ingeniously prepared for the suppression of this
diabolical species of piracy: and its commission is now treated
fTreatied ?) with such amazing severity, that it is confidently ex-
pected to be partially suppressed before many centuries shall elapse.
Man-stealing was classed, by the Judaic-law, amongst capital-crimes
of the deepest die: it was not denounced merely, as atrocious and
impious, but it was punished, as the act of an atheist and assassin.
Mr. Watts, the British Consul at Pernambuco, writing to Lord
Palmerston, under date of the 17th March, 1836, states, perhaps not
very grammatically, that,- “Such is the notorious laxity of the
“Government, and the strong incitements to the cupidity of lucre,
“that the illicit traffic in slaves is prosecuted with entire impunity,
“all along the whole coast of Brazil.” Even in the Thames itself
are Slave-vessels fitted out. The following paragraph appeared in
the Journals of the day:- “Our attention has been called to a vessel
“now lying in the West-India Export-Dock. She is a suspicious-
“looking craft, schooner-rigged; and it is the opinion of nautical
“men, that she is fitting out as a slaver.” (Morning Post, Oct. 11,
1837.) . Of certain pretenders to humanity, subtle adepts in dissi-
mulation and knavery, it was said, `, . . . . . . . . . .
“They blamed and protested!—but joined in the plan;
They shared in the plunder, but pitied the man!”
The efficiency of the measures taken to abolish this fiend-like
traffic, may be conjectured from the following extract from a letter,
dated, “ Cape of Good-Hope, Jan. 1837.”—“The scene on board
“this ship was harrowing in the extreme. One hundred had died
“from sickness out of the eight hundred; another hundred were lying
“nearly lifeless on deck, in all the agony of despair; the remaining
“six hundred were so cramped from the close manner in which they
“were packed (like herrings in a barrel), the time they had been on
“ their voyage, and the cold they had endured in rounding the Cape
“in a state of nudity, that the utmost exertions of the English sailors,
“favoured by a hot sun, could scarcely straighten them.”
“The Leveret, 10-gun brig, has been fired into by a slaver at
“Mozambique; and, because she resented the insult, the fort of
“Mozambique opened its fire, put the shot through her, and obliged
“her to strike her colours! What will the English people say to
“this? The traffic is not lessened; it has increased. Thousands
“are taken from the coast, and the vessels that were once Spanish,
“Brazilian, French, and Dutch, are now covered by the flag of
“Portugal.”

lxviii
And on the 11th of January 1837, Lieut. Price, of Monmouth,
with the Gig and Pinnace, of H. M. S. “Scout,” most gallantly
attacked, with thirteen men, boarded, and captured, in the river
Bonney, upon the African Coast, two Portuguese Slave-vessels,
manned with sixty-three seamen ; the ruthless piratical ruffians in
command of the one, having with murderous cruelty, pressed be-
ɺx=ºs
* =?
tº:
And merchants, (miscreants / ) rich in cargoes of despair,
Who drive a loathsome traffic, guage, and span,
And sell the muscles and the bones of mian |
-ºr-
tween its decks 576 poor kidnapped negroes. One hundred and
ten only, were delivered from the other vessel, 490 having been
hastily landed, when the terrified blood-guilty crew witnessed the
daring achievement of Lieutenant Price, in his attack and capture of
the first.
And what was the exemplary punishment of these lawless, ferocious
pirates ? Literally none! The mere confiscation of the vessel of
their assassin-like employers, being the only notice taken of this, the
most atrocious of any kind of piracy

lxix
Selden quotes Maimonides, and the Babylonian Gemara, in support
of his assertion that—Extreme destitution could alone justify a man
in selling himself as a slave or servant: — “Fas non est cuiquam
“vendere seipsum, ut pretium abscondat, autut merces sibi, aut vasa
“inde emat:aut ut creditori debitum solvat; sed duntaxat ut habeat
“ quod comedat. Neque fas est cuiquam seipsum vendere, quamdiu
“quidquam omnino, etiam vestis superfuerit.” (Lib. 6. 7.) Nor
were these sales to be publicly made, to become the talk of the city,
but privately — “ataue ita ut venditi seu addicti, dignitas conserva-
retur:”— A servant also of this description, whether a Hebrew or a
Proselyte, was not to be treated—“Cum duritia,”—says Selden,-
“aut ita soevire, ut in servos aliarum gentium fieri assolebat”: — his
was the servitude of an hired servant—he was to be treated with
lenity, and the services required, were to be such only as would not
be derogatory to a free-man.
This assertion, however, of Selden, that a Debtor could not sell
Himself, or be sold, merely ut creditori debitum solvat, seems opposed
to the exposition given of the Mosaic-Law, by others: the general
notion being, that the insolvent debtor was subject to be sold as a
bond-servant. This bond-service amongst the Israelites, or slavery,
as it has been usually called, (for the word Servant, in Scripture
generally signifies a slave,) affixed, however, no degradation or dis-
grace to the unfortunate debtor: and with the exception of his being
compellable to labour with reasonable industry for his master, it did
not deprive him of any fraction of his rights as a man and a citizen.
Such then, we may concede to have been the consequences of debt,
in the dark ages of Judaism: in the present enlightened aera, imprison-
ment for life and the ruin of the debtor's family, are the kind and
legitimate succedanea for the more terrific name of slavery. In ancient
times, – in pagan ages, incarceration for debt, was deemed impo-
litic and barbarous: the laws of Athens and of Rome prohibited it:
and our own Alfred sent one of his judges to jail for having suffered
a man to be imprisoned for debt. (Mirroir c. v. 1) A Creditor, says
Selden, (Hist. Disc. c. 39.) had the debtor's goods: if these were
insufficient, then the moiety or the whole, of his lands: when all
were gone, the Arms, (which were accounted as the Nether-millstone,
or stock of maintenance,) were last of all seized: and then, the party
was accounted undone, and cast upon the charity of his friends for his
sustenance.—But he was not locked up in jail: a burthen to himself
and to society:—
“Shut from the common air, and common use
“Of his own limbs 5 y
Afterwards the fashion arose of treating as culprits and felons,
those who through misfortune, or their own or other frauds, were
incapable of performing their pecuniary engagements: and in the
year 1512 it is presumed by Hume, (upon the authority of an Act of
Parliament,) that there could not have been less than 60,000 prisoners
for debt, in the various gaols of the Kingdom.
The “increasing intelligence” of the age, we are assured, will
eventually destroy this barbarous custom. The intelligence of the
bºx
age would seem to have increased in a very contradictory manner,
since the time of Solon; for Solon prohibited imprisonment for
debt, which up to his time had been in vogue at Athens. A similar
prohibition was in force at Rome, under the Petilian-Law. And
according to Diodorus, Bocchoris, King of Egypt, who must have
lived in times of heathen darkness, denied to Creditors any power
over the personal liberty of Debtors, empowering them to seize only
upon their Debtors’ goods. Intelligence, which has been increasing
since the age of Alfred, of Solon, and of Bocchoris, must doubtless,
in due time, aided by the excessively ardent and active exertions of
a Whig-Attorney-General, remove this stigma from a people, which
assumes to be perfectly civilised, wonderfully enlightened, and in a
state of unexampled refinement 1 ~
There is this difference between the two punishments, (if punish-
ment be intended,) that the Bond-service of the Israelites, gradually
extinguished the debt, without cruelty, and demoralization, and ruin
to the debtor and his family: whilst Incarceration leaves its victim
degraded, depraved, disabled and desperate : —
Eradicates him 1 tears him from his hold
Upon the endearments of domestic life:
Nips his fruitfulness, and use ; and dooms him
To barrenness, and solitude, and tears |
Such are the usual consequences of this irrational and vicious system:
we see the impotent victim of a partial, impolitic, and oppressive law,
more wretched than any slave— stretched upon straw — possibly
wasting away with the jail-fever, or under the emaciating agonies of
his own apprehensions and reflections; his only occupation,--
“To wear out time in numbering too and fro,
“The studs that thick emboss his iron door,”
and to reflect with aching heart, upon the miseries and temptations
to which his helpless wife and family are hourly subjected. “Mihi
“liber esse non videtur, quinon aliquando nihil agit,” says Cicero:
(De Orat. Lib. 2.) He who has never a leisure moment cannot be said
to be free. The truth of this is acutely felt by those miserable beings
in Cotton Factories, whom Dr. Kay has accurately depicted as sub-
jected to the prolonged toil of brutes: the miserable debtor con-
demned to excess of leisure, in the midst of the vice and villainy of a
jail, feels that something besides leisure, is essential to the posses-
sion of freedom.
The institution of the Sabbath was chiefly for the purpose of
affording a day of relaxation to slaves and servants; no relaxation,
however, does it bring to the debtor-slave : the Sabbath and the
week days are to him, equally, days of imanity, of anguish, of shame,
and of indignation. “Nam ut quod alii liceat, tibi non licere, ali-
“quid fortasse naturalis, aut pudoris aut indignatione habeat,” says
Livy: To see oneself deprived of that liberty which is accorded to
others, must naturally be a subject both of shame and indignation/
Happy would it be for the poor debtor, were shame and indig-
nation all that he has to endure in his imprisonment: it is torture of
the most agonizing description, that this inhuman, impious regula-
lxxi
tion too frequently inflicts. To cite one out of the multitude of
unheeded and forgotten tragedies: —
In April 1836 an Inquest was held in Whitecross-Street-Prison,
upon the body of Samuel Smith, aged 37, formerly an industrious
and reputable baker, incarcerated for a debt contracted with a Miller.
Deprived of liberty,+and of the power of affording relief or comfort
to his distracted wife, he was plunged into a state of fearful despon-
dency, aggravated soon after to an insupportable degree, by an account
of the sudden death of his broken-hearted wife, and the utter desti-
tution of his two children. He rapidly fell into a state of utter
stupor, and after languishing a short time, a most deplorable object,
he died in gaol | And yet this poor man had ever maintained an un-
impeachable character and such was his attachment to his family,
that severance from them preyed upon his mind; and he finally
became one amongst the many hecatombs of victims offered up to
this worse than Draco's laws! Again: “In the matter of the
petition of Richard Allen, – this insolvent, upwards of 80 years of
age, applied to be discharged, and was not opposed. The case pre-
sented a melancholy instance of the system of imprisonment for debt.
The petitioner was assisted into the box, and, without a single inter-
rogatory being put to him, ordered to be sworn to his schedule, which
contained but one solitary debt of £11, of which £6 was for law costs:
the remaining £5 was for the rent of a cottage at Ealing, due to a
female named Nichols. The cottage, as he alleged in his schedule,
he had rented 47 years.” .
The tortured and enslaved English Debtor is not only robbed of
the air of heaven, but scarcely a garment is left him, which he can
call his own. Even a captive is allowed his corporal liberty: and
inhuman in every land, would it be deemed, to detain in endless
confinement the captive made a slave. But the barbarity of some
nations is such, says Pufendorf, that they treat man, not as a human
creature but as an inanimate chattel, and impound him, in a manner
that they would be ashamed to impound the horse or the ox. The
Hebrew slave not only breathed an untainted atmosphere, and enjoyed
the right of locomotion, but he could and did, during his servitude
acquire property sufficient even to purchase his freedom. (Lev. xxv.
49.) Ziba, the servant of Saul, besides possessing property, had 15
Sons and 20 Servants. (2 Sam. ix. 10.) Moreover by the Jewish
Law ill-treatment of a slave entitled him to freedom: and if a master
(Exod. xxi. 26.) by a blow, deprived him of an eye or a tooth, he
immediately became free. And amongst the Greeks there was a Law
which permitted slaves, who were harshly treated by their masters, to
demand to be sold to others of more humanity. The Emperor
Antoninus Pius passed a Law to much the same effect. Thus was
there some security against the rigours of slavery: and thus did self-
interest urge the master to humanity, if not to kindness. The
Hebrew servant or slave, was daily lessening his debt: not in con-
finement in a close prison, his health and strength of body and mind,
impaired by vicious association, indolence and a mephitic atmosphere:
not like prisoners for debt in England, and paupers in an Union-hold:-
bºxii
“Men — young, and sinewy, and strong,
Condemn’d to see, day after day,
Their moments creep along
. In sloth —for they have nought to do !”
He enjoyed the vital gales of heaven, preserved his health, and the
free use of his limbs; nor had he to endure the afflicting idea that
the life which God had given him had become a curse to himself,
and an incumbrance to society. A slave, if dutiful and industrious,
may, moreover, gain the affections of his master, whose interest it
must be to render his condition easy and comfortable—a conside-
ration which ought, for humanity's sake, to have been well weighed
by those acutely-feeling “Cosmopolites, qui vont chercher au loin
des devoirs qu'ils dedaignent de remplir autour d’euw,”—whose expan-
sive benevolence wandered into all the islands of the West Indies,
careless or oblivious of the woe and misery pervading their own
native land, the miseries of imprisoned debtors, the woes and the
benighted ignorance of the 360,000 children—not fat and full-fed,
like the negroes of the West Indies—but pining in disease and
bodily and mental deformity — neglected and depraved slaves in the
brutalizing and murderous factories of their native land! “Tel
philosophe aime les Tartares, pour etre dispensé d'aimer ses voisins ! ”
It may well be a question whether it be more conducive to the
well-being of individuals, or to the morals and happiness of society,
that tens of thousands of debtors should be ever pining in idleness,
vice, and wretchedness; than that, under the name of slavery, they
should be employed, in body and mind, for the benefit of the com-
munity; and with the certainty, at a year of Jubilee (see p. 43.
of “Testimonies, &c.”) of having their debt extinguished, and their
liberty restored. Slavery in prison may, perchance, be as bad as
slavery in the open air : by names and declamation we are too
prone to be deceived. Perry, who wrote an “Account of Russia,”
in 1714, observes that the Czar had ordained, that none should in
future be called slave, but simply subject. They were not the less
effectually enslaved, he observes, notwithstanding the change of
name !
Perfect servitude, say Grotius and Pufendorf, consists in the
obligation for life, to serve a master, who is bound to find the slave
food and necessaries: and say they, subjection to another, thus
understood and confined within natural bounds, is not exceedingly
hard in itself. Many are the half-starved journeymen who would
be glad to have a certain home and adequate food and necessaries,
in return for their labour; even if deprived of the enviable state of
liberty enjoyed by the tens of thousands, whom Dr. Kay has de-
scribed as confined to pestilential rooms—breathing dust and filaments.
of cotton—banished from the grateful air—subjected to the incessant
toil of an animal– domestic comforts unknown—sunk in sensual sloth.
and licentiousness—enfeebled by meagre and innutritious diet — and
the victims of dissipation / (Wide Dr. Kay,+ On the Condition of the
Artizans of the Steam-Factories : — written before he became an
“Assistant-Commissioner” under the Pauper-Act.) In a Comedy of
tº s º
* * * * *
lxx til
Plautus, a slave refuses the liberty tendered him by his master, upon
the ground that his life is secure from want; and Posidonius relates
that many were the people, sensible of their impotency, who volun-
tarily entered into servitude. (Grotius, 2.5. 27.) The statements
of Grotius and Pufendorf, that a state of nominal freedom may exist,
fraught with more misery than a state of perfect servitude, as defined
by them, are ridiculed by Voltaire. Where is the wretched tatterde-
malion, he exclaims, fed upon brown bread, (Voltaire never dreamed
that the wretchedest of mortals, could be condemned, to something
even worse than brown-bread,— potatoes, the food of hogs,) with a
bed of Straw, littered over a hut half open to the weather, — where
is a mortal to be found, even so wretched as this, who would not
reject with horror, a proposition to enslave himself, in order to be
better-fed, better-clothed, and better-sheltered from the weather
Nowhere / and that settles the question, says Voltaire. It by no
means proves, however, that perfect servitude, may not be preferable
in every respect to imperfect liberty, such as vast numbers of people
are condemned to, in the existing state of society — liberty, which is
accompanied with the protracted, never-ending, servile toil of the
mill-horse—with the food of hogs, meagre and innutritious—devoid
of all domestic comforts and insensible to domestic decency — with
a mind either sunk in supine inaction from the impracticability of
finding time for improvement; or, sunk in brutal ignorance and
brutal sensuality, without physical or intellectual strength to resist
the seductions of appetite — liberty which is accompanied with
banishment from the grateful air, and the cheering influences of the
light of heaven—which is pent up in cottages separated by narrow,
wnpaved, pestilential streets, in an atmosphere loaded with the smoke
and eahalations of overgrown cities; and accompanied with many
other comforts, to which the purchased slave of either Indies — of
Rome, of Greece, or of Palestine, was never yet subjected. But,
The alternative of slavery or misery, is by no means a necessary con-
dition of human nature, — says Voltaire. Nothing more true: but
where perfect misery exists in company with what is termed perfect
freedom, it may be well to moderate excessive eloquence and indig-
nant declamation against slavery and despotism abroad; and to
examine the mote in one's own eye, before exhibiting extreme and
impertinent officiousness in searching for the motes in the eyes of
others.
It is not difficult to deal in exclamations against despotism and
slavery : but it is difficult to ensure to a people, rational freedom,
exempt from excess of toil, discomforts and disquietudes, which ren-
der life a misery rather than a blessing: it is difficult to devise ade-
quate and equitable means for alleviating the misfortunes and miseries
which press upon people in humble life; for protecting from fraud,
oppression, and want, those who are born to labour for their lives;
and for aiding those who are sinking through ignorance, feebleness,
or distress. Whilst we rail, in unmeasured terms against despotism:
and slavery abroad, let it not be forgotten, that no little benefit has
L
lxxiv.
been derived from a system of apprenticeship, at home, which rather
closely approximates to a state of slavery. -
“Frequens etiam in Anglia est aliud servitutis genus,” says Sir
Thomas Smith, “quod (apprentiethood) tiro dicitur : sed pactionibus
“hoc constat, et ad tempus contrahitur, et, quamdiu manet obligatio,
“vera est Servitus,” And he proceeds to remark, (Angl. Descrip.
Lib, 3. 10.) that whatever the apprentice earneth, his time and his
labour, wholly belong to his master; who, he might have added, is
also empowered to inflict even corporal punishment upon his vicious
or negligent apprentice. The binding is for 7 years, each freeman
being, upon admission, sworn not to take an apprentice for a less
term ; and the apprentice is compelled to covenant, to serve his
master faithfully, to avoid particular specified acts of immorality, and
also not to contract matrimony within the term. (See 2nd. Rep;
Commrs. on Munic. Corpor.)
The Hebrew nation has been termed by Voltaire — La nation la
plus méprisable aur yeua de la politique ; –with what pretence has
been elsewhere noticed. (“Testimonies &c.”) Had Voltaire lived
in a Steam-factory age, he, with even all his animosity towards the
Hebrew nation, would hardly have doubted, that the perfect servitude
of that, peuple ignorant et barbare--would be ardently coveted by
those, who in the Factories of a free land, enjoy that tranquillity and
health, that comfort, and above all other delights, that enlightened
state of liberty, so ably and feelingly depicted by Assistant-Commis-
sioner Dr. Kay! Would even Voltaire doubt whether the 360.000
children, stated by Lord Ashley to be immured in English Steam-
Factories, would hesitate in preferring the healthful servitude of the
Hebrew loi de sauvages, to their own perfect liberty—to acquire de-
formed limbs and diseased bodies in pestilential rooms: perfect liberty
to the incessant toil of an animal: perfect liberty — to meagre innu-
tritious food; perfect liberty — to inhale moral and physical poison,
corrupting to the mind and enervating to the body: perfect liberty—
at the age of 12 or 15, to work from 6 o'clock on one morning to 4
o'clock on the newt afternoon, with rest for their meals, and one hour
at midnight ! perfect liberty -— under the age of 10 years, to work more
than 12 hours a day: (– whilst under Spanish tyranny, it is made
penal to work a slave for a single hour, until he be 17 years of age :
and whilst the “Emancipation Act” protects the West-India Slave
from working more than 45 hours in the week!)—and finally, perfect
liberty—to gain a profit for its master, which is death to the child?
Montesquieu, indeed, has laid it down—“That the State owes
to every one, proper nourishment, convenient clothing, and a kind
of life not incompatible with health:” but not only is the food of
the factory-slave improper, meagre, and innutritious; but his kind
of life, far from being compatible with health, is, says Dr. Farre,
death to the child ! - • -
What have been the atrocities, the unutterable abominations
perpetrated in these factories, before the Factories-Regulation-Act
was passed, it would be disgusting and frightful to detail: what are
some of the enormities still perpetrated in defiance of that Act,
lxxv
become occasionally public: and in the beginning of June, 1836,
informations were laid before the magistrates of Dewsbury, (Yorkshire)
against the owners of eight extensive factories in and near Batley.
Against one set of mill-tyrants, the charge was, that they had
worked five boys between twelve and fifteen years of age, from six
o'clock on Friday morning till four o'clock on Saturday afternoon;
without allowing them any rest except at meal-times, and one hour
at midnight! It used to be said that— -
“He who allows oppression, shares the crime !”
We may talk of civilization, freedom, and humanity; but the laws
of Savages would not tolerate oppression such as this: and Pagan
nations would deem themselves dishonoured, could even beasts be,
with impunity, harassed in the way that these factory children are
harassed. “If a man,” say the Gentoo-Laws (Halhed), “evacts
labour from a bullock that is hungry, or thirsty, or fatigued, or obliges
him to labour out of season, the magistrate shall fine him 250 Puns
of Cowries.” Not only were these children compelled to labour out
of season, hungry, and fatigued, but their labour, far from being in
the open air of heaven, was in a shoddy-hole (as the dungeon is
termed, where woollen-rags are torn-up); where the atmosphere is
so impure as to render it necessary for the workmen constantly to
wear handkerchiefs across the mouth, to keep the minute particles
of dust and fuz out of the lungs: —
“O, comfortless existence hemm'd around
With woes which, who that suffers, would not kneel,
And beg for exile or the pangs of death P” -
The mercenary defendants, like hybrid Quakers, had the mendacious
audacity to affirm that these wretched children had been mercifully
allowed four hours! for rest, but had declined going to bed! The
magistrates, not putting implicit faith in this Quaker-affirmation,
(Conscientious creatures' they never take oaths!) fined the covetous
inexorable monsters £20. Of kind friends such as these, justly may
it be said—
“Religion, virtue, reason, common sense,
“Pronounce thy quaker-form a false pretence;
“A mere disguise, in which a devil lurks,
“Who yet betrays his secret, by his works l’’
At the same time, Seven other Factories were variously fined, for
“Night-working”—for employing children under ten years of age,
for more than twelve hours a day /– and for keeping false time-
books, to deceive the Inspectors' Had these Quaker-friends never
read the Scriptures! Had they never read the denunciations against
mercenary tyranny! Or, having read, do they, from avaricious long-
ings, and with Tartuffe chicane, treat the Scriptures, to all practical
purposes, with utter though silent disregard; and without joining
the Freethinkers’ “brutal roar,” discreetly and soberly—
“Swallow the two grand nostrums they dispense,
“That Scripture lies, and blasphemy is sense !”
Had these Quaker-friends never heard of the exclamation of Job t
—“What is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained, when
lxxvi
God taketh away his soul!” It is the poor factory-slave who suffers
by the Quaker gains: devoid of moral dignity or intellectual strength
to resist the seduction of lucre, he is ever ready to sell himself to
those, who are not backward in trucking their own souls for a few
extra bales of cotton |
“And having truck'd thy soul, brought home the fee,
“To tempt the poor to sell himself to thee!”
To class them all in the same infamous category because some greedy,
guilty, money-adoring Quakers thus atheistically set at defiance all
Law human and divine, would be unjust and slanderous; but it
must be admitted, that far too many of them, under specious hypo-
critical assumptions, and a sober exterior, conceal most despicable
human, or inhuman exemplifications of the sly conceited trickster
depicted by Dryden: of the –
“Fox full fraught in seeming sanctity,
That feared an oath, but like the devil would lie,
That look'd like Lent, and had the holy leer,
And durst not sin before he said his prayer l’’
We speak with execration of the cart-whip of the West-Indies,
but the cruelties of the factory-whip are studiously witheld from our
view. “Sir,” said Mr. Sadler, addressing the Speaker of the House
of Commons, “children are beaten with thongs, prepared for the
purpose ! Yes, the females of this country, no matter whether
children or adults, – I hardly know which is the more disgusting
outrage, are beaten upon the face, arms, and bosom, -beaten in
your free market for labour, as you term it, like slaves. Here are
the instruments.” (The Hon. Member exhibited some black, heavy,
leathern thongs — one of them fixed in a sort of handle, the smack
of which, upon the table, resounded through the House.) Murder-
ous have been the effects of these weapons, in the hands of iron-
hearted miscreamts; and at Bradford is a
MONUMENT,
M. S.
J A N E C R o FT,
AET. 10,
August 25, 1832.
A Martyr to the Thong.
erected by voluntary contribution to the memory of one of the victims
of the Factory-thong !





lxxvii
These helpless, wretched, and demoralized children, are worked
longer than the law permits in the case of adult criminals and felons,
whose labour constitutes their punishment: these and the Slave of
the West Indies, are protected by law from the emaciating cruelties
of English factories. However, by the 4th WILL. IV., (c. 103.,)
manufacturers were at length to be placed under something a little
more nearly approaching, humane restraint: their unheard-of atro-
cities upon helpless infancy were attempted to be, at last, something
more than nominally repressed. The instantaneous repression of
even these atrocities was not, however, permitted by this Act: the
deformed and wretched children were to be gradually redeemed from
the grossest demoralization and infamy! After the 1st of March,
1834, no child who had not completed its eleventh year! was to
work more than eight hours a day: after the 1st of March, 1835,
the same restriction was to be applied to children under twelve years
of age : and, as of course the capabilities of childhood decreased with
the course of time, after the 1st March 1836, the same restriction
was to be enforced in protection of children under thirteen years of
age. Humane gradations ! And yet after Dr. Farre had told the
assembled Commons that — “legislation is equally necessary for the
“prevention of death, in any mode in which it can be prematurely
“inflicted, and certainly this (meaning factory-homicide and infanti-
“cide,) must be viewed as a most cruel mode of inflicting it; ”—after
all the most eminent physicians and surgeons of London, Dr. Blum-
dell, Sir A. Carlisle, Sir B. Brodie, Dr. Roget, Sir G. Tuthill, Sir C.
Bell, Sir A. Cooper, Mr. Green, Mr. Key, Mr. Travers, Mr. Guthrie,
—after all these eminent men had expressed their horror at the atro-
cious cruelties thus committed against childhood:— after Dr. Farre
had declared that — “in English Factories every thing which is
“valuable in manhood is sacrificed to an inferior advantage in child-
“hood: that such advantage is purchased at the price of Infanticide /
“The profit thus gained is Death to the child!”—After all this
positive and conclusive evidence of previously unheard-of cruelties
and enormities —after Commissioners had been appointed, at great
expence to the nation, and had reported their opinion of the absolute
necessity of, at least such protection as this Act thus tardily pro-
mised:— and after the Parliament had coincided in the views of the
Commissioners the evidence laid before whom, detailed particulars
almost incredible of oppression and torture, — after all this, there
stepped from his Curule, to nullify the Act, Mr. P. Thompson,
a member of that reform-administration, which had restricted
the labour of the West India Slave to forty-five hours a week.
For this Reforming Minister, at a certain critical moment was duti-
fully memorialised by certain tender Steam-Mill-owners; and there-
upon, after having had 2 years for meditation, did this ministerial
Reformer determine to reform the Act 1 Ever open to conviction,
he admired the benevolent sympathy exhibited in favor of unpro-
tected children by their masters; and was convinced by the argu-
ments of those masters, that the protection of the children would be
grievously injurious to — the children! Deceptious, indeed, must
lxxviii
have been the tongues: like the poison of asps, must have been the
lips, of Cotton-masters who could thus charm and impose upon, a;
Minister! “Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues
they have used deceit: the poison of asps is under their lips. De-
struction and misery are in their ways. There is no fear of God
before their eyes.” (Rom. Ch. 3.) But however great the misery
and destruction resulting from the deceit and poison infused into
ministerial ears, forthwith does Mr. P. Thomson, supported and
encouraged by sundry legislators of various political feeling, or
rather, want of feeling —
Bless'd, rather cursed, with hearts that would not feel,
Kept snug in caskets of close-hammered steel !
backed by these legislators, and labouring under the influence of the
charm, does Mr. Thompson with that charm inoculate the Legislature,
which most readily proceeds to stultify itself by nullifying its own
deliberate act passed after long, and careful, and most costly enquiries:
and thus again were children of 13 years of age condemned to that
open sepulchre, that misery and destruction, from which the Parliament
had too long been endeavouring to deliver them This, then, is the
ministerial manner, in which white slaves are handled, in the land of
reform: whilst under Spanish corruption, black slaves are protected
by a Royal Ordonnance dated Aranjuez, May 1786, from doing
any work, until they are 17 years of age
The abominations of Steam-Mill-Slavery are too deep-seated, and .
too foully and closely adherent to the Steam-system, to be destroyed
by any palliatives: and yet that miserable palliative which at length
prohibits the working of children under twelve years of age, more
than nine hours a day, could be gained only after years of exertion,
and at an expence of thousands to the nation. It is to the corrup-
tion, depravity, and impurity of the Steam-Mills, with all the mental
and physical deformities which they engender, that the miserable
offspring of those who have been kindly admitted to the Union
Pauper-holds, are to be introduced. Dr. James P. Kay, before he
became an “Assistant-Commissioner,” under the Pauper-Law-Act,
thus described some of the cruel and loathsome sufferings, to which
emaciated children, male and female, were there condemned. In his
work, entitled, “The moral and physical condition of the Working
Classes employed in the Cotton-manufacture,” he states that “The
“ population is crowded into one dense mass, in cottages separated by
“narrow, unpaved, and almost pestilential streets; in an atmosphere,
“loaded with the smoke and exhalations of a large manufacturing city.
“The operatives are congregated in rooms and workshops during 12
“hours of the day, in an enervating heated atmosphere, which is fre-
“quently loaded with dust or filaments of cotton, or impure from
“constant respiration. - *
“Hence besides the negative results, the total abstraction of
“every moral and 'intellectual stimulus, the absence of variety,
“banishment from the grateful air, , and the cheering influences of
“light, the physical energies are exhausted by incessant toil, and
“imperfect nutrition. Having been subjected to the prolonged
lxxix
“labour of an animal, his physical energy wasted, his mind in supine
“inaction, the artisan has neither moral dignity, nor intellectual nor
“organic strength, to resist the seductions of appetite. Domestic
“economy is neglected, domestic comforts are unknown. Himself,
“impotent of all the distinguishing aims of his species, he sinks into
“sensual sloth, or revels in more degrading licentiousness. His
“house is ill-furnished, uncleanly, often ill ventilated, perhaps damp;
“his food from want of forethought and domestic economy, is mea-
“gre and innutritious; he is debilitated and hypochondriachal, and
“falls the victim of dissipation.”
Did the Slavery of plantations, or the Slavery of the Hebrews,
ever approach in point of degradation, demoralization, impiety, and
brutality, to the slavery of these Cotton-mills! To which Dr. Kay,
in his new character of “Assistant-Commissioner,” is now benefi-
cently engaged in exporting under the name of immigration—the
children of the poor labourers of the South, who have been forced to
submit to be severed from their wives and children, to entitle themselves
to the miserable driblets of gruel and cheese, and soup-wash, and the
generous llb. of potatoes for dinner, of the Pauper-holds,--to entitle
themselves to the manifold blessings of the “Circencester Dietary,”
—to the 11b. of potatoes for dinner, unaccompanied by a morsel of
meat, or of bread, or a drop of beer with one huge ounce of cheese,
plenty of water, and not quite half a pound of bread, for their cheer-
ful supper with nearly one third of a lb. of bacon, in addition to the
sumptuous pound of potatoes, for their Sunday dinner: making six-
teen pounds of salt-bacon Per Annum ! or ONE-TwenTY-SEconDTH
part of a lb. for each day of their happy lives | And of fresh-meat,
during the 365 days of the year, precisely as much as might chance
to fall from the skies upon each of those days Heureuse la nation
- franche / If there be any meaning in the excla-
mation of Isaiah, “What mean ye, that ye beat my people to pieces

lxxx
and grind the faces of the poor!”—surely this is that grinding of
the faces of the poor / It exhibits assuredly, a rapid progress to a
“coarser-food” system—to the “Dietary” of the pig-stye
“Beneath their heartless scheme, belying heaven,
“Lurk searchless cunning, cruelty, and death!”
Can potatoes and water for five days in the week, be interpreted to
signify the proper nourishment, of which Montesquieu speaks; or the
meat and drink which Locke alludes to, when he declares that—
“Reason tells us that all men have a right to their subsistence, and
consequently to meat and drink, and such other things as nature affords
for their preservation.”
Are the Pauper-Dietaries—some of which do, indeed, grant a few
ounces of some sort of animal food, three times, instead of the once
a week of the “Cirencester Dietary” — are these Dietaries any sign
of the superiority of English-Law over the Judaic-Law, or even over
the barbarous Law of Mahomedans ? The Hedaya commands that
even Slaves shall be treated as human beings, rather than as cooped-
up swine: and, in the passage before quoted, this Code of the unen-
lightened Mahomedans commands, that there be given, not to the
innocent poor only, but even to slaves — Such food as ye yourselves
eat, and such raiment as ye yourselves are clothed with ; and afflict
not the servants of your God / And says the Judaic-Law (Maim.
ch. vii. § 3)—“It is because he is in want that thou art commanded
to give unto him : if he standeth in need of garments, let him be
clothed: if of household things, let him be supplied with them; ”
and, says Maimonides — Woe unto him, whoever he be, that treateth .
the poor with ignominy / If, indeed, for the meat and drink claimed
for all mankind by Locke, or the proper nourishment which Montes-
quieu declares that the State owes to every one, is to be understood
pig’s-meat, when the Poor are in question — if those Poor are, on
account of their poverty, to be locked-up, according to the recom-
mendation of Lord Brougham, in Workhouses; and severed from
their families and friends — destroying, says Blackstone (not
Brougham), all endearing family connea ions, the only felicity of the
indigent, then is it no longer an ironical expression of Calepin, to
declare that the poor man is – Un animal, qui a bien de la peine à
marcher: c’est une espece de ver, sujet a €tre foulé auw pieds parses
sembables qui sont munis de bons souliers: supplication is, then, the
only hope of the indigent, and substituting the word pig for dog, he
can but exclaim in the words of Statius—“After all I am not a pig 1
I am a man as well as thyself!”
But perchance, we may misinterpret the benevolent intentions of
the Commissioners’ “Dietaries.” In prescribing the abstemious diet
of swine's food, the “demoralised,” ignorant, corrupted pauper, is,
perhaps, to be effectually deterred from falling into that disgusting
state of sensuality, into which unrefined and vulgar minds are apt to
descend, ignorantly thinking that in solo vivendi causa palato est!
Happily the well considered regimen of the Pauper-holds gives little
encouragement to sensuality so coarse and vulgar as this. And
thus we are told by Galen, (Lib. 6.) that with their Slaves, it was
lxxxi
the custom of the Athenians to punish the Member offending; if
the slave was a glutton, his stomach was condemned to suffer; if he
was a tell-tale, his tongue was cut out. The diet of potatoes and an
ounce of cheese, will effectually restrain all gluttonous propensities—
all desire to live for the sake of the palate ; and,-indocti, inculti,
deditique somno, as it is in the servile nature of paupers to be, they
will be utterly discouraged from the vice of being — dediti ventri /
“Ye elvish markt, abortive, rooting hogs! .
“Ye that were seal’d in your nativities -
“The slaves of nature!” . . . . . . .
Far more efficient for the suppression of sensuality are English
Dietaries, than those of Australia ; felons there, convicted of the
blackest crimes against Society, are entitled by law, to Ten Pounds of
good wheaten flour, (not bread) Per Week; 2 oz. of soap / 2 oz. of
salt, and, not one-twenty-secondth part of one pound of salt-bacon
per day, but— Seven Pounds of good salt, or fresh beef, per week!
Well might the Poet exclaim— . . . .
º “All crimes are safe, but hated poverty:
“This, only this, the rigid law pursues,
• “This, only this, provokes the snarling muse !” -
Whether the Australian Dietary of felons,—or the Cirencester Diet-
ary for the suppression of voracity and sensuality,+ or the Maho.
medan Dietary of 4lb. of wheat or 8lb. of dates a day, -or the
Judaic Dietary of wheat, figs and wine, would be the most in accord-
ance with the Divine command, “Thou shalt open thine hand wide
“unto thy poor and thy needy,” it would be invidious to conjecture:
sufficient be it for the ignorant to learn, that wiser heads than their
own, with Dr. Kay, in his state of transformation as “Assistant
Commissioner,” have accurately guaged the abdominal capabilities,
and scientifically reduced to one invariable. “Scale,” the digestive
powers of the people of every part of England—of the feeble and
the strong—of the hale and vigorous and the declining and the
aged—of people of every age and of every temperament! Heureuse
la nation Francaise d’etre si franche / -
How gratifying in theory, the noble doctrine, that—
“Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs .
“Receive our air, that moment they are free l’’
The lungs of the mutilated and brutalized victims of the Factory, do
not, alas! receive our air: they respire cotton-fuz, and that in Shoddy-
holes / And thus they linger, in freedom, through an animal and
guilty existence. In the empoisoned Factory-dens, “Avarice never
hides her head.” Animated pieces of machinery can alone do her
greedy bidding: and all but the lowest animal propensities would
prove an obstacle in the way of her unholy gains. Therefore it is
that Slavery, impure and debasing, must be strenuously upheld in
suffocating Factory “Shoddy-holes: ” and, with deep dissimulation,
indignantly denounced in the open sugar plantations of the West-
Indies! - . . . . . " ! -
And yet, very many are the instances in the West-Indies of
manumitted slaves imploring to be again admitted into servitude, and
with it to the rights and privileges they once enjoyed. “A very fine
MI
lxxxii
“coloured woman in Antigua,” says Mr. Coleridge, “who had been
“manumitted from her youth, came to Capt. Lyons, on whose estate
“she had formerly been a slave, and entreated him to cancel, if pos-
“sible, her manumission, and receive her again as a slave.” Whether
the emancipated Negro will not have cause to rue the day that his
occasional wrongs were studiously exaggerated: whilst his general
easy mode of living, his abundance of all the necessaries of life, the
medical attention which he received in all his ailments, his happy
ignorance of “Farmers of the Poor,” and “Commissioners of Poor-
Laws,” with their concomitant treadmill-remedies for poverty,+were
all artfully, deceitfully, and hypocritically kept from view, will not
long be problematical.
Slaves, says Mr. P. Lord, (“Algiers, with notices, &c.” 1835,) are
not treated with severity in Barbary: they are seldom beaten, unless
for some particular offence, insomuch that a strong affection not un-
frequently subsists between them and their masters. Many of them
obtain their liberty after eight or ten years servitude; for the more
conscientious Moslems consider them as servants, and purchase them
for about the same sum that they would pay in wages to a servant
during the above period. Every Negro is entitled to purchase his
freedom, for which purpose he is generally allowed a certain number of
hours for his own advantage, and great numbers of them are emancipated
upon the death of their masters. Very different then, the treatment
of Slaves by Algerines and Africans to that by civilized Athenians,
who used their Slaves at their discretion — beat, pinched, starved,
tormented, them even to death, without appeal; and all the inheritance
the slaves could leave their children, was the legacy of their parents'
miseries, and a condition of life much upon a par with that of beasts.
(Potter, Arch. Graec.)
In Barbary, therefore, the Slaves appear to be viewed in much the
same light, in which the Hebrew Slave or Servant, was viewed under
the Mosaic-Code. This servitude of the Hebrews was essentially
different to the servitude in some countries, of prisoners taken in a
Bellum justum,- a war between two supreme powers, – over whom
their masters exerted entire dominion, founding this claim upon their
right to kill those, whom they had taken captive. And very diffe-
rent from that most scandalous degradation of human nature, sup-
ported by the authority of Aristotle, who declares that Slaves were
to be classed with animals and plants: a classification readily adopted
at various times, in various places. A copious supply of these two-
footed plants, were the arrogant Romans resolved to possess: since
they insolently asserted, - eventually to their grievous cost, — that
nature intended surrounding nations,— the “ or BAPBARo1,” as the
Grecians would have termed them,--to be their slaves | A barba-
rian and a slave are by nature, the same / says Aristotle: Born to
breathe cotton-fuz in shoddy-holes, are English infants / think the
Quakers and other Cotton-tyrants, of the infernal Cotton-factories 1
Pliny relates, (Hist. Nat. 7. 56.) that the Lacedemonians were
the introducers of Slavery into the world : and Herodotus, (Lib. 6.)
asserts, that when the Pelagians seized upon the Isle of Lemnos,
slavery was not known amongst the Grecian States. To discover
lxxxiii
when or by whom first introduced into the world, few will fruitlessly
concern themselves: but there was one mode of establishing Slavery,
in vogue amongst the ancient Germans, which, if in vogue among
modern Britons, might be attended with some trifling benefit to
society. It might purge from the land some few of those intelligent,
gentlemanly adepts at Club-houses and elsewhere, who so nobly
spend the day and night in the utile if not the honestum of legerde-
main at whist, and in the exhibition of the clever and useful accom-
plishment of Sauter la coupe at cards. The German gamblers, after
they had played away all their property, used, as Tacitus relates, to
throw the dice for their own corporal liberty. “Aleam (quod mirere)
sobrii inter seria exercent, tanta ludendi perdendive temeritate, ut,
quum omnia defecerunt, eatremo ac novissimo jactu de libertate et de
corpore contendant.” (German. 24. 3.)
Plutarch (Vit. Caton.) furnishes an amiable example of the man-
ner in which even high-minded Romans could sometimes treat their
two-footed plants. When his slaves grew old and unfit for labour,
notwithstanding their perfect fidelity, and their having spent their
youth and strength in toiling for him, the great Cato, - the Censor
Cato, - would not be at the charge of maintaining them, but either
turned them adrift, to provide for themselves, or left them to be all
but starved in his own family Cato, indeed, made little difference
between old slaves, and old wagons and horses | In his old age,
when a passion for hoarding had overcome his feelings of justice
and humanity, he tenderly teaches that the master of a family should
sell his old oxen, and old wagons and implements of husbandry : —
that he should sell such of his two-footed plants as are old and infirm,
as well as all other worn-out or useless things! How valuable, in the
present day, would this great Censor be, as a pamphleteering auxili-
ary of the Pauper Law With what cool and learned contempt would
he treat those bigotted cavillers against “Amendments,” who with
selfish and sinister views, presume to declaim against the legal, or
rather Parliamentary separation of man and wife, whom an higher
authority than any “Parliament” or Parliamentary Commissioner,
has commanded that no man shall put asunder; presume to declaim
also against the Workhouse rules of clipping short the long hair of
the Women / Is not, say they, the needlessly long hair of women,
the moment they become poor, — as much a surplus produce, as the
wool upon sheep, or the bristles upon swine!
But, admitting that human hair may with propriety become a mer-
cantile commodity, let us not forget that to pilfer the heads of even
pauper females, of their natural ornament and covering, is a gross
and brutal indignity. And for so asserting we have the authority of
Scripture; for amongst other denunciations of the Prophet Isaiah,
he threatens, parabolically, that which, even in those remote ages,
was considered the most ignominious of outrages,that the beards and
the heads should be shaven close, (Ch. vii., Lowth's Vers.) : —
“In that day Jehovah shall shave by the hired razor,
“By the people beyond the river, by the king of Assyria,
“The head and the hair of the feet,
“And even the beard itself shall be destroyed.”
ixxxiv.
An insuperable aversion to long hair upon the servile heads of
those, who, when aged, infirm, or helpless, are regarded by Cato
and such as he, as degraded and contemptible, was not entertained
by the Hebrew—peuple ignorant et barbare / Such aversion, how-
ever, is not peculiar to the gaolers who, with the hired razor in hand,
hold dominion over the Pauper-holds: for amongst the classical Athe-
nians it was accounted an insufferable piece of impudence, for a slave
to imitate the freeman, in anything, either in dress or in behaviour.
Therefore in those cities where it was the custom for the Citizens to
wear long flowing locks, it was an unpardonable crime for the Slave to
be other than close-cropped: and thus Aristophanes (Avibus,) speak-
ing proverbially of one who presumes to ape his betters, observes,—
“Epeita deta doulos oon komen echeis /* r
Then you, disdaining your own state, affect
To wear long hair like freemen! — .
How different the feelings of the virtuous Plutarch Disgusted with
the callousness of heart of Cato, he remarks, quite in the spirit of
the Mosaic-Law, that a good man will take care, even of his horses
and dogs, when they are aged and past service. For his own part,
he would not, he says, sell even an old oa, that had laboured for him!
Much less would he, to make a paltry saving, remove from his usual
place, and condemn to coarser food, a man grown old in his service
Plutarch, Cato, Dr. Kay, and Commissioners of Poor-Laws, belong
to different categories of beings!
Cato, however, affords by no means a fair example of the manner
in which the Romans generally treated their Slaves. His love of
money, in his advanced years, incited him to acts which, at an ear-
lier period, he had condemned as culpable in the highest degree:
and he who prided himself upon dining off a dish of turnips cooked
with his own hands, was, in after years, found to take up the lash,
and to lay it lustily upon any Slave who might chance to spoil a
dish of cookery ! Plutarch in speaking of the times of Coriolanus,
observes that the Slaves were then treated with great moderation :
they worked and ate with their masters. It was even deemed a
great punishment for a slave who had committed a fault, to be forced
to carry about the neighbourhood that piece of wood with which the
thill of a wagon was supported. For he who was thus exposed to
the derision of the family, and of other inhabitants of the place, en-
tirely lost his credit: and from the name of the piece of timber,
Furca, was ignominiously styled, Furcifer. -
. The classification of Slaves with animals and plants, was not
peculiar to Aristotle; but, generally, a decided preference was given
to the bestial, rather than to the unprofitable vegetable classification.
Sesostris, when he embellished Egypt with a hundred temples, pro-
hibited the employment of any of his subjects upon the works: and
was careful to promulgate to the world that these superb erections
were completed by captives-slaves, whom he, with Aristotle, and
political economists, classed amongst beasts of burthen. (Diod,
Sic. Lib. 1.)
bºxxv
And is it, then, pretended that the Judaic-Code of Law will suf-
fer in the comparison, with Laws which class the human figure with
animals and plants—which torture and massacre Helots by thou-
sands, as a useful rural sport, (Potter, Arch. Graeca,)—which tole-
rate Factory-cruelties—which enforce, in cases of debt, incarceration
productive of the tragic scene witnessed in the case of the poor
miller *— which dissect the soldier convicted of a trivial offence, in .
the manner that Ramsay was dissected, so that Lock-jaw ensued —
which condemn the innocent poor to be immured in a Pauper-hold,
with 1 lb. of swine's food for dinner, and to be severed from wife
and children to entitle him to that food! -
The Judaic-Code of Law was scrupulously established upon the
doctrines of the Old-Testament, and that Code is the source, almost
forgotten, whence many of the ancient Municipal Laws of England
derive their origin. So sincere, indeed, was the devotion of our
early legislators, and so indispensable did it appear, according to
their pious convictions, to establish the Social-corapact in strict
accordance with their religious doctrines and tenets, that they con-
sistently, wisely, and conscientiously, appealed to the scriptural
commands as the only safe and just rule both for human guidance
and for the government of their Commonwealth. Alfred, whom few
will deny to have been a wise, as well as a valiant and religious
prince, by way of preamble to his Laws, makes a solemn recital of
the Decalogue, and of the Apostolical constitutions, as found in the
Acts of the Apostles: (Spelman, Life of Alfred, p. 98.) and that
ancient Law–Book, of indisputable authority, the “Mirroir des jus-
tices * commences with the Books of the Old and New Testaments:
—“ and we found, That the Law is nothing else but Rules, delivered
by our holy predecessors in the Holy Scriptures, for the saving of
soules from perpetuall dammation, notwithstanding that the same
were disused by false Judges.” (Mirroir, Preamble.) And althoºch.
prejudice, corruption, infidelity, fraud and violence, have now at length
obliterated from the Laws of England, the greater part of those an-
cient legal monuments, recognised as certain rules of action in by-
gone ages, vestiges yet remain to attest the justice, sincerity, and
piety, of our ancestors. (Vide, “Dedication ”— Sir W. Jones, On
the Law of Bailments—Blackstone's Comm. passim.)
*In a previous page it is said, that Alfred imprisoned a judge for imprison-
ing a man for debt. The following are passages from the “Mirroir”;—“He
(Alfred) judged Rutwood to prison, because he imprisoned Olde for the King's
debt.”—“He hanged the Suitors of Cirencester, because they kept a man so
“ long in prison that he dyed in prison, who would have acquitted himselfe
“ by Forraigners that he offended not feloniously.” (Mirroir, pp. 243. 244)
—“Contracts are vicious ; (1.) Sometimes by intermixture of offence,” &c.
—“ as if I contract with you, that if I doe not such a thing, it shall be law-
“full for you or another, to kill me, or to wound me, or to imprison me, or
“ of usury, that you shall not demand of C. for 100, 1, or other thing,” &c.
(Ch. 2, § 27.)—“ The new Statute of Debts is contrary to Law, as it appear-
“eth in the Chapter of Contracts; for every imprisonment of the body of a
“man is an offence,” &c. (Ch. 5, § 7.)
lxxxvi
That, however, which nobly distinguishes the Judaic-Code, from
most other Codes of Law, and entitles it to especial aettntion and
respect, are its peculiar “Constitutions” for the maintenance of the
Poor, the protection and succour of the feeble, as well as its sympa-
thy and humane consideration for every breathing creature: “Con-
stitutions,” which for their extreme generosity towards suffering
humanity, (“Testimonies,” &c. p. 71.) and for the conscientious and
bountiful minuteness with which they embody the divine commands,
(Vide, especially Ch. 7 of Maimonides on “Laws relating to the
Poor,” &c.) so emphatically promulgated throughout the “Oracles of
God,” (Romans 3,) demand the respectful notice of every Christian,
whose religious professions extend beyond the routine of ceremonial
observances, and verbal humiliations—whose devotional exhibitions
are not essentially those described by the Poet: —
“He wore them, as fine trappings for a show,
“A praying, synagogue-frequenting beau!
The Digest by Maimonides, of the “Laws relating to the Poor and
the Stranger,” now, after the lapse of Seven Centuries, presented
in an English dress, will show that these commendations upon the
Judaic-Law, by no means exaggerate the justice, the wisdom, the
sound policy, the conscientiousness, the benevolence, the generosity,
of its ordinances.
In conclusion, it may be asserted, that the comparison of the
various fancies in various ages, for torturing the bodies of the weaker
portion of mankind, is not unfavourable to the—politique méprisable,
du peuple ignorant et barbare—the contemptible polity of the Hebrews:
but whether we contemplate the clean cuting off the grystel of the
zyght eare, by the sanguinary ruffian, Henry, - the cool and qua-
ker barbarities of the English Steam-Mill” — the “Scorpion” and
bastinado of the unenlightened Hebrews, Romans, and Mahomedans
—the nine-tail-cat of the enlightened and highly-civilized English F-
the dungeon of the English-debtor — the Factory-thong — the
piratical fiend-like stealing of the poor Negro — the “Shoddy-hole”
of the Factory-child” — the two-footed plants of Aristotle — the
* In a debate in the House of Commons, (March 1837) it was asserted
that the Quakers had joined in the conspiracy to wrest Texas from Mexico,
in punishment for the Abolition of Negro Slavery there ! The time may
come when sober hypocrisy, formal and fair-spoken dastardy, exclusive deal-
ing, stiff-necked disdain of all other religious sects, and drab-coloured cove-
tousness, will be regarded as excessive effrontery, instead of excessive piety'
# The administration of which is sometimes commanded, “not to be hur-
ried, but most impressively inflicted ' " (Wide Debate H. Com. June 1, 1837.
f The fate of the Weavers in England, (about a million in number,) is
little better ; labouring for 14 or 15 hours a day in damp cellars, at wages
which give them per day for food and clothing, two-pence farthing ! A
statement, corroborated by the “Report of the Committee of the House of
Commons,” (Aug. 4, 1834) which states that the sufferings of the hand-loom
weavers are “not only not exaggerated, but that they have for years, continued
to an extent and intensity scarcely to be credited or conceived, and have been
borne with a degree of patience unexampled.” (Champion, Oct, 30, 1837.
lxxxvii
Pauper-hold, the severing of man and wife, and the swine's food, of the
Pauper-Law–or the various modes of punishment and torture now
obsolete — we must admit the correctness of the words of the Motto,
that -
- “Chains are the portion of revolted man,
“Stripes and a dungeon and his body
“Serves the triple purpose !”
NotE 3.- Cutheans.
The Hebrew word “Cuthim " here translated Gentiles, properly
signifies Samaritans : but it is said that in the first Editions of the
Work, Maimonides had written “Gentiles, ’’ which he afterwards
altered to “Cutheans,” (or Samaritans,) on account of the notice
taken of the expression by the Inquisition.
Cutha is supposed to be the Chaldee name for “Cush,” which
in its original application, appears to have referred to the tract of
Country better known as Susiana, and now as Khusistan. Josephus
agrees that Geographically it was part of Persia, though bordering
upon Assyria-Proper. (Pict. Bib.) It was to Cutha, or Chutah, that
Salmanasser transferred the population of Samaria, replacing it with
the people of Cutha. “And the King of Assyria brought men from
Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and
from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead
of the children of Israel: and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in
the cities thereof.” (2 Kings 17.) The whole of these new settlers
were ignominiously termed Cuthites, by the Jews: and by the Rab-
bins, are derided as being “proselytes of lions,” because until they
had been harassed by the lions sent amongst them, “they feared not
the Lord.”
These Cutheans appear to have been held, deservedly, in supreme
contempt by the Jews. They were a timeserving, recreant race,
that claimed a close affinity to the Jews, when they were in pros-
perity; but vowed they were in no way related to them, when they
saw them in danger of being oppressed and plundered. When they
saw the Jews in prosperity, said Josephus (B. 9. c. 14.) they affected
an intimate relationship with them : “but when they see them fall-
ing into low condition, they say they are no way related to them, and
that the Jews have no right to expect any kindness or marks of kin-
dred from them, but they declare that they are sojourners, that come
from other countries.” There were, however, good Samaritans
amongst them, as well as bad : as we know upon the highest au-
thority.
A rooted animosity continued to exist between the people of Sama-
ria and the Israelites, the former, (who sometimes pretended to claim
a descent from Jacob,) being ever opprobriously termed “Cutheans.”
Violent were the disputes between the people of Samaria and the
people of Judea, relative to the rebuilding of the Temple: and the
term Cuthean became a term of such infamy, as to be equalled only
by the modern term of reproach, of being as bad as Beelzebub The
Samaritans, moreover, recognized only the Pentateuch as the Written-
Law: another prolific source of animosity.
lxxxviii
NoTE 4. — Truma and Tithe.
}\ } & Sº, NS
#º sº
- *
N ºº:
§§
: ºssº
º - º-r Sºrea
ºš ºsºvº
- . . . " **- - aa-, ºw §§
S--... " - * , … "
*--- *- - - - º º
“And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for
an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the ta-
bernacle of the congregation. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Thus
speak unto the Levites, and say unto them, when ye take of the children of
Israel the tithes, which I have given you from them for your inheritance,
then ye shall offer up an heave offering of it for the Lord, even a tenth part
of the tithe. — And ye shall give thereof the Lord's heave-offering to Aaron
the priest.”— Numb, xviii.
DIoDoRUs relates (xx. 24.), that the Carthaginians, though an
independent state, sent Tithes to Tyre, which was out of their
own territories. The Canaanites gave Tithes to their gods: and
amongst the people occupying Palestine, prior to the Mosaic-AFra,
the payment of Tithes was common. Nevertheless, the earliest men-
tion of Tithes is generally said to be that of Abraham and Melchize-
dec (Gen. xiv.); this was prior, to the period of the promulgation of
the Law. For says Origen, priesthood before the Law, was insti-
tuted by the natural wisdom of mankind. “Erant nihilominus ea
tempestate sacerdotes, nec dum adhuc a lege ordinati sed naturali
sapientiã hoc requirente et perficiente.” (L. xi. in Job, p. 2.) So
that, says St. Jerome, the Gentiles received not priesthood from the
Jews, but the Jews from the Gentiles. (Ep. ad Evagrium, Tom. iii. 38.)
Various fanciful conceits have been sagaciously propounded, as
reasons for the Tenth portion having been selected in the appropria-
tion to the priesthood. Ten is said to be the most perfect of num-
bers, all others being comprised in it. Spelman observes “two rea-
sons thereof, one mysticall, the other politicall.” And he proceeds
very mystically to assure his readers, that Plato and the Pythago-
reans attributed great mysteries to numbers; and that St. Augustine
and St. Jerome throughout their works “continually observe great
secrets therein.” St. Augustine, indeed, would appear to have been







lxxxix.
as greatly horrified at the power of Numbers, as were the most whim-
sical of the cabalistical dreamers; and he argues that parts of
Scripture are ill understood, from ignorance of the virtue and power
of Numbers. The number X is the Alpha and Omega, says Bartho-
lomaeus, and therefore—“representat merito ipsum Christum qui est
principium et finis.” It is the Number, says Spelman, “wherewith
the progresse of numeration running as it were circularly, always
endeth and beginneth again.”—“It is the foot and base whereon al
of them are founded, and it containeth not only all dimensions, but
all the reasons of Arithmetic, Geometry, and Music. * Philo-Judoeus
undertakes to demonstrate that this mystical number comprises within
it, all single numbers, together with their differences, analogies, per-
fections, and species / “Omnia genera numerorum, rationum, ex-
numeris collectarum, proportionum, harmoniarum rursus et concen-
tuum.” After various erudite comparisons and deductions, Sir H.
Spelman concludes that the number “X” hath “both the image of
God, in signification of his nature, and the inscription of his name
(X for Christus), in the frame of the character | * A quaint expli-
cation of the doctrine of Coke, that “ Dismes sont choses spirituels,
et due de jure divino / " Again, the Tenth of any series of accidents, is
the fullest and greatest / The testimony of Ovid relating to the Waves/
is conclusive upon this point:—“Vastius insurgens decima ruit im-
petus undae :—the whole force of the tenth wave rising more hugely
than the rest rushed into the ship !” And since Valerius Flaccus sup-
ports Ovid in his conceit of the force of the tenth wave, “Decima tu-
mor coeduusundoe,”—and since the Ancients commonly used the words
decimus, decumanus, to express the greatest things, since in the
measurement of fields that of the greatest extent, was decumanum
limitem, - the chief gate of the camp, decumanam portem — the
greatest shields, decumana scuta,—since decimare and evdecimare
signified, To cull out the choicest things, since the Romans admired
so intensely the secret virtues of this number X, as to canonize it
among their Gods by the name of Decuma,—can we, knowing all
this, reasonably doubt that this number X is the number, as St.
Augustine declares, (Serm. 15,) of perfection and righteousness 2
That it contains all the reasons of arithmetic, geometry and music 2
And that it is well entitled to the musical honors of the following
musical verses — -
Exprimit antiquis hoec Christum litera scriptis;
Exprimit et partem quam petit ille sacram |
Ergo citus Christi quoe sunt, dato mumera Christo,
Caesaris accipiat Caesar; uterque suum.
This X of old exprest Christ's holy name,
And eke the sacred tenth which he doth claim ;
Give then to Christ what’s Christ's, without delay,
Give Caesar Caesar's due, and both their pay !
Under the Mosaic Dispensation, there were, including the Tithes,
24 kinds of Levitical and Priestly allowances, as specified by the
Rabbi Bechai, R. Chaskani, and Jarchi, in their comments on Num-
bers and Genesis, and by the Talmud. (Cholin. 133. f. 2,) For the
N
XC.
Two Tithes and the First-fruits, the deduction from the produce of
their fields was, according to Scaliger and Selden, nearer one fifth
than one tenth. Selden thus states the case, (His. c. 2. § 4).
6000—Supposed produce in bushels for one year;
100—Paid for the First-fruits of the Threshing-floor.
5900—Remain, out of which he paid
590–as the First-Tithe to the Levites; one-tenth of which, (or 59)
2. called the Tithe-of-the-Tithes was paid by the Levites to the
Priests.
5310—Remained; out of which, one-tenth, or
531—was paid as Second-Tithe.
4779—therefore remained for the husbandman; he having conse-
quently paid 1121 Bushels, or more than one-sixth part of
the whole crop.
—Maimonides accurately describes the division of Tithes. Instead
of the one-sixtieth part set aside by Selden for the First-fruits, Mai-
monides fixes the amount at one-fiftieth part, which is called, he says,
(Ch. 6 $ 2) the Great Truma, or Teruma Gedolah : taken from all the
first-fruits of the earth, pursuant to the Law. (Deut. 18.) The Law,
does not determine the precise proportion of the first-fruits: the gener-
ous gave one-fortieth part: some one-fiftieth ; but the Statutes of
the Wisemen ordain that it shall never be less than one-sixtieth
part. And thus too by Ezekiel, (Ch. 45)—“This is the obla-
tion that ye shall offer : the sixth part of an Ephah of an Omer of
Wheat;”—(the Omer containing 10 Ephahs.) “Then,” says Mai-
monides, “shall be separated from the remainder, one-tenth part,
which is called the First-Tithe: this shall be given to the Levite;”
&c. “And afterwards another tenth-part shall be separated from
the remainder, and this is called the Second-Tithe.” This “Second
Tithe,” Moses in his Laws seems to pre-suppose as well-known; its
grant would seem therefore to have been a settled custom previous
to his aera. “This Tithe shall be for the owner,” says Maimonides,
“who shall eat it at Jerusalem :” it having been commanded (Deut.
14.) that this Tithe should be eaten before the Lord, in the place
where he should choose to place his name. Therefore, before the
erection of the Temple at Jerusalem, it was eaten wherever the Ta-
bernacle chanced to be placed. (Maim : Tract. de Dec. Secund. C. 2.)
It was out of the First-Tithe, that the priests’ portion was taken.
This was one-tenth part, termed, says Maimondes, the “Truma of
Tithe,” the Law relating to which, is in the 18th Ch. of Numbers.
Besides the “Great-Truma,” the “First-Tithe,” the “Truma-of-
Tithes,” and the “Second-Tithe,” there was also the “Poor-Tithe :”
which, according to Maimonides, was to be set aside only upon the
3d and 6th years of the Heptaeterid; i. e. Twice within the compass
of the Sabbatical-year. This Tithe-of-the-Poor is founded upon
Deut. 14, which commands that—“At the end of three years thou
shalt bring forth all the Tithe of thine increase the same year, and
shalt lay it up within thy gates: and the Levite, and the stranger,
and the fatherless and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall
come, and shall eat, and be satisfied.” Under this regulation, poor
xci.
people going into the field where the Poor-Tithe is lying, could
claim as much as was sufficient to satisfy them : and the question
was therefore, What is that quantity ? A question resolved by
Maimonides at Ch. 6, § 8.—There are sundry abstruse disputations as
to whether this Tithe-of-the-Poor, was paid in addition to the Second-
Tithe ; or whether it was the same appropriation, upon different
years, under a different ºilº Josephus, (Ch. 8.) seems to
consider the Poor-Tithe as a distinct species of Tithe: and this
seems to be the view taken in Tobit, (Ch. 1.) where Three several
Tenths are enumerated : “The first-tenth part of all increase I gave to
the Sons of Aaron, who ministered at Jerusalem : another Tenth-
part I sold away, and went and spent it every year at Jerusalem :
and one-third I gave to them to whom it was meet.” Maimonides
distinctly states that in the two years of Tithe-of-the-Poor, “there
shall be no Second-Tithe, but in place of it Tithe-of-the-Poor:” (Ch.
6. § 4.) and it seems more generally agreed that the Tithe-of-the-
Poor was not of a different species, but merely of a different denomi-
nation to the Second-Tithe. According to Maimonides, the appro-
priation of Second-Tithe and Tithe-of-the-Poor was as follows, com-
puting from the Sabbath-year:—
1st and 2nd Year tº . Second-Tithe.
3rd gº Tithe-of-the-Poor.
4th and 5th — * . Second-Tithe.
6th . Tithe-of-the-Poor.
On the Seventh, the Sabbath-year, all was in common, and conse-
quently there was neither First, nor Second-Tithe, nor Tithe-of-the
Poor, in the Land of Israel. Out of the Land of Israel, however,
where the Sabbath of the soil was not observed, the Truma and
Tithe, were due in the Seventh, as well as in the intermediate years.
Some contrariety of opinion existed with regard to the Second-Tithe,
and Tithe-of-the-Poor, during that year: (vide Tract. Misn. Yadaim
C. 4. 3.) it is agreed, however, by the Wisemen, that in Egypt and
in the Land of Ammon and of Moab from their proximity to the
Land of Israel, the Tithe-of-the-Poor ought to be separated. In
Babylonia the Second-Tithe was to be separated in the Sabbath-
year.—According to the Judaic-code, Truma and Tithe were not due
upon the produce of the land, until that produce was perfectly pre-
pared for food, or otherwise in a finished state. With regard to corn,
it was not deemed to be titheable until it had been threshed and
winnowed : with regard to olives, not until the oil was expressed:
with regard to grapes, not until the wine was made. This explains
the meaning of the passage, (Ch. 4. § 6.) where mention is made of
produce not in a titheable state ; termed “Tabal.” x-
Note 5.—The Almond.
THE Almond is mentioned as one of the fruits, to a tithe of which
the poor of Israel were entitled. The tree was called, “Shaked,”
watchfulness, from its being one of the first trees to blossom in the
spring. It is a native of Barbary and of Syria; where, and in ad-
xcii.
jacent countries, it continues to be largely cultivated. The distilled
oil of either variety, is well known to be virulently active: and the
symptoms attendant upon a poisoning by it, are, in some respects,
peculiar. It was the almond, the palm-tree, sheaves of corn, and
bunches of grapes, which were represented upon the Shekels, after
the return from the Captivity. Almonds were known to Hippocrates,
Theophrastus, and other ancient authors : but it is inferred, that they
were not cultivated in Italy, in the time of Cato; since he calls them
Nuces Graeca.-In speaking of the hieroglyphics of Egypt, the word
above mentioned, Shakeed, is quoted by Mr. Goodhugh as exemplifying
in a striking manner, the practice of placing an object for an idea
having the same sound. “Jeremiah what seest thou? and I said, I
see the rod of an almond-tree. Then said the Lord, thou hast well
seen, for I will hasten my word concerning it.” (1 Jer.) In the trans-
lation there is no visible connection between an almond-tree, and
the action implied, (of hastening;) but in the original, Sakeed or Shakeed
is an almond-tree, and Shaked is “to hasten,” being the root of the
former word, and having the same radical letters; thus establishing
the resemblance between the figure (or hieroglyphic) and the action
to be performed, or the idea to be expressed.
Note 6. —The Pomegranite.
Two pomegranites are pronounced by Maimonides, to be the
quantity, which the law contemplated for each necessitous person,
claiming a portion of tithes in the field. The finest pomegranites
are called by the Persians, “badana,” or seedless, and are imported
into India, from Caubul and Candahar, where the fruit grows in per-
fection. The plant was common in Judaea; beautiful in fruit and in
flower, the inspired writers naturally adopted it in their similitudes:—
“Like the slice of a pomegranite,
“Are thy cheeks amidst thy tresses.”
—Moses was commanded to, fix embroidered pomegranites, with
golden balls between each, at the bottom of the high-priest's robe,
or ephod. (28 Ea. 33.) Sir W. Drummond, conceives the pome-
granite to have been an emblem of the fired stars.—It was customary
to mix the juice with wine ; “I would cause thee to drink of spiced
wine, of the juice of my pomegranite.” (Song of Solomon.) The
tree is a native of the south of Europe, Arabia, Japan, and is much
cultivated in India and Ceylon; it blossoms luxuriantly in this
country, but does not usually perfect its fruit. The double-flowering
kind make a beautiful show in the gardens, continuing in flower
during several months. The dwarf species is commonly used in the
West Indies, for the forming of hedges: seldom rising more than
five or six feet in height, and flowering during the greater part of
the year. Concerning the medical properties of the fruit, consult
Ainslie, (Mat. Ind.) Celsus, (Lib. 4. 17.) and Majendie. The rind
of the fruit is a powerful astringent, used in medicine; and in Ger-
many for the preparation of a red-leather. In the Nomenclature of
colours, the blossom of the pomegranite, (called by Pliny, Balaustine
flowers,) furnishes the “color puniceus:” a fine bright red or car-
xciii.
mine, as in the “Lobelia fulgens.” Virgil speaks of the colour, but
never of the fruit;-
“Puniceis humilis quantum saliunca rosetis;” (Ecl. 5.)
“Puniceis invecta rotis Aurora rubebit;”(OEn lib. 12.)
—not precisely the morning tinge of Butler,-
“Like a lobster boiled, the morn
“From black to red, began to turn "
—The Pomegranite-tree, (pomum granatum) was first brought to
Rome from Carthage, in the days of Sylla : Pliny calls it the
“Punicum malum.” In France and Italy it thrives: and near
Toulon, Arthur Young noticed pomegranites in the hedges, with fruit
as large as nonpareils. On account of its beauty, it is selected by
Shakespeare, for the haunt of the nightingale;—
“It was the nightingale and not the lark,
“That pierc'd the fearful hollow of thine ear;
“Nightly she sings on yon pomegranite tree.”
It was the rule amongst Roman fashionables, to eat the becoafico,
whole; but, of another bird, which from the pomegranite colour
(“phoeniceus” or “puniceus”) of its wings, was called, “Phoenicop-
terus,” only the tongue might legitimately be eaten. Being a scarce
and costly bird, it was necessarily deemed indispensable at the tables
of such high-minded characters as Caligula, Vitellius, and Helio-
gabalus. Martial puns upon this bird:— -
“Dat mihi penna rubens nomen sed lingua gulosis
“Nostra sapit; quid si garrula lingua foret?” (Ep. 68.)
Hakewell says, “he blended together the livers of giltheads, the
brains of pheasants, and of peacocks, tongues of phenicopters, and
the melts of lampres.” Pity that he did not add the beccafico and
the whitebait to so rare a philter.
Note 7.—Dates and Palm Tree.
MAIMONIDEs frequently makes mention of the Palm-tree, no
doubt that species, (“Phoenix Dactylifera”) the produce of which,
was Dates. From this word “ Phoinia” of the ancient Greeks,
“Phaenicia,” which was a land of Palm-trees, doubtless took the
name. The fruit formed a principal part of the food of the in-
habitants of the desert; and upon it the Israelites chiefly subsisted
in the wilderness of Shur:—“And they came to Elim, where
“were twelve wells of water, and three score and ten Palm-trees:
“ and they encamped there by the waters.” No wonder, therefore,
that the Palm-tree was next in estimation to the Vine, and the
Olive. The “seventy Palm-trees,” Dr. Shaw found increased to a
grove of a couple of thousand : sheltered by which, is “ Hummum-
Mousa,” the Bath of Moses, held by the inhabitants of El-Tor, in
great veneration. It is said, indeed, that the presence of the Date-
Palm is an unerring sign of water: the weary Israelites rejoiced not
without reason, when they found the seventy Palm-trees. The
neighbourhood of the supposed Elim, on the route to Sinai, con-
tinues to be noted for a copious supply of water; and says Burck-
xciv.
hardt, for abundance of Date-trees, Tamarisks, and Acacias.—A
Palm-grove is a really beautiful object, and requires as much atten-
tion as a vineyard. The trees are planted in a quincuna, at distances
from each other of four or five yards. The situation selected is upon
the banks of some stream ; and the more abundant the supply of
water, the finer the fruit. The water is drawn to each tree by small
channels: and about each root is formed a little bason, puddled
round with clay. The most magnificent Palm-groves occur in the
region “Bledel-Jerreed,” in Barbary. Their extent may be judged
of, from the fact mentioned by El Hadgee Shabeeny, that the fruit
of one plantation alone, is not unfrequently sold for 1000 dollars.
Their produce, 1500 camels' loads of Dates, or 4500 quintals, in
clusters weighing thirty or forty pounds each. (Pict. Bib.) In
the Zaara, forests of Date-trees are found, many leagues in circum-
ference. Of all the sorts, the Babylonian or royal Dates, were most
highly prized. According to tradition, they grew but in one hort-
yard or plantation, at Babylon: and were dedicated to the royal
tables only. Pliny enumerates forty-nine kinds of Dates : white,
black, brown, and of all shapes and sizes. One species, the
“Lotus,” is supposed, says Philips, to be the enchanting fruit, which
turned the brains of the companions of Ulysses. The plant was
seducing to others besides the ship-mates of Ulysses; and according
to Pliny, “Alexandri milites, palmis viridibus strangulati sunt.”
Egypt is famous as a Date-growing country : the tax on Date trees
is, at present, one of the most considerable articles in the revenue of
the confiscating Mehemet Ali. The leaves as well as the fruit of
the Palm, used to be in request : being the first materials upon
which the Easterns used to write, the Jewish Scriptures are thought
to have been originally committed to them. Pilgrims from Palestine
used to bring home a consecrated Palm-branch : hence the name of
Palmer :-
“The faded Palm-branch in his hand,
Shewed pilgrim from the Holy Land.”
Upon the description of timber used for the cross, elaborate and pro-
found have been the disquisitions, Lipsius contends, that it was
wholly of oak : others, that it was of a variety of woods, Palm tree
wood forming the cross-pieces:—
“Pes cedrus est, truncus cuprissus, oliva supremum,
Palmaque transversum, Christi sunt in cruce lignum.”
—The sexual distinction, as well as the methods of fecundating the
fruit of the Palm, were known from the earliest times; as appears
from Herodotus, Theophrastus, and others;–
“Vivunt in venerem frondes; nemus omne per altum
“ Felix arbor amat; nutant ad mutua palmoe
“Foedera.”—(Claudian )
“There the straight palm-tree stoopeth in the calm,
“To kiss his spouse, the loyal female palm,”
Strabo relates that the Persians had a poem, celebrating the 360
uses of the Palm ; Plutarch says the same of the Babylonians. So
XCV.
of the Cocoa-palm, it is said in our days that a ship may be built,
fitted out with masts, sails,<-and cordage, and victualled with
bread, water,-wine,—sugar, vinegar, and oil 1–At Muscat, an
estate is said to be worth 2,000 or 4,000 date-trees, according to the
number it possesses. A tree is valued at from 7 to 10 dollars: its
annual produce at from 1 to 1; dollars. Burckhardt mentions that
in many parts of Arabia, the inhabitants are almost wholly dependant
upon the palm-tree for their subsistence. Among other preparations
they make the dates into a solid paste called adjoue. The Arabs
have a saying, that a good housewife will supply her lord for a
month with a dish of dates each day differently dressed. (Con-
cerning the Honey of Dates, see Testimonies, p. 41.)—Every part
of the Date-tree becomes, at times, the food of the Arabs: the
leaves, the flowers, the fruit, the sap or milk, the inner substance of
the trunk : and the bruised stones become the food of sheep and
camels. Of the leaves they make mats: and of the filaments of
the stumps, ropes and sails. The timber is of a close hard grain,
and of wonderful durability. From the number and excellence of
the Palms of Arabia, Ovid (Met. 10.478.) designates the inhabitants
by the epithet of palmiferi Arabes : Pliny speaks of Nemata pal-
migera.-In the time of Horace, (Sat. 2,) besoms used to be made of
its leaves and twigs:—
“Ten' lapides varios lutulenta radere palmä.”
—To this day, the leaves of the dwarf-palm are imported from
Spain, Portugal, and Italy, for the making of flag-brooms. Martial
(14. 82.) has a passage of similar import:-
“In pretio scopas testatur palma fuisse.”
—The story of Phaenia is thought to have been borrowed from this
tree. Pliny in describing the species of palm called “Syagrus,” says
—“mirum de ea accepimus, cum Phaenice ave, quae putatur ex
“hujus Palma argumento, nomen accepisse, iterum mori, et renasci
“ex seipsá.” The Abbe Mariti, in his “Voyages,” has the following
“passage (Vol 2. 315.)—“On ne connoitaucun arbre quiait la durée
“du Palmier. Bravant toutes les intempéries de l'air, il conserve
“sa premiere vigueur pendant plusieurs siecles, tellement que les
“naturels ne se rappellent pas d’avoir vu dessécher un Palmier, a
“moins qu'il n'ait étè frappé de quelqu' instrument. Quand cela
“arrive, on coupe l'arbre jusqu' à sa racine, on le brule sur la place,
“et on couvre ses cendres d’une forte couche de terre ; bientôt
“s'éleve du milieu, un rejeton qui croit et se fortifie en très peu
“ d’années. Comme le Bible donne quelquefois au Palmier le nom de
“ Phoenix, je serois porté a croire que l’histoire fabuleux de l'oiseau
“Arabe, qui renåit de sa cendre, est tirée du renouvellement de cet
“arbre.” Kaempfer also draws a parallel between the history of
the tree and that of the bird. The Greeks applied the name Phoenia,
both to the bird and to the tree : a name which they learned from
Egypt, where the Phoenix was an hieroglyphical representation of the
Sun. The “seventy” have used this word in their translation of
Job, (29. 18.) which from them is rendered thus:–
xcvi.
Then I said, 1 shall die in my nest;
And I shall multiply my days as the Palm :
My root was spread out by the waters,
And the dew lay all night upon my branch.
—Many of the Palm species, by tapping, yield a juice called Toddy;
which, boiled down, becomes a coarse brown sugar, called Juggery.
—The juice of the fruit of the “Saguaster major,” has been used to
poison wells. The trunks of the War-palm, (“Ceroxylon acidicolu,”)
is generally covered two inches thick with wax and rosin : Sago is
made from the pith of other sorts. One tree will yield from three
to four cwt. : the dark red from the East Indies, selling at from £5.
to £5. 15s. the cwt.—Palm trees throw up a number of suckers from
the root, forming, by their upward spreading, an ever-green bower.
It seems to have been under a cool shelter of this description, that
the Prophetess Deborah held her School between Ramah and Beth-el.
Growing to a height of 150 feet, they are amongst the most lofty
and long-lived of plants: justly, therefore, claiming the name of
“Tree.” And yet, botanically they are but perennial herbaceous
plants : Palms agreeing with plants rather than with trees in their
mode of growth. The trunk is formed of successive circular crowns
of leaves, springing directly from the root : and the circles thus
growing one above another, the vertical increase of the plant is
almost without end. Each circle of leaves is independant of its
predecessor, and has its own cluster of vessels. The tops sending
off leaves, like human fingers, originated the name, “palma :”
whence the diminutive “palmula,” a Date. The “Areca-Catechu,”
(the Madi of the Brahmins) affords a graceful specimen of its pecu-
liar growth. (See the Wood-Cut, at p. 40 of “Testimonies.”)—
From the Palm-tree, a strong Date-wine continues to be made in the
East. This is supposed to be the strong-drink, so frequently men-
tioned in the Scriptures as peculiarly inebriating ; the “Sicera” of
both Testaments. Pliny speaks of the Eastern Wines being chiefly
made from the Palm-tree :—“Fiunt (vina) ete pomis :—primumque
e palmis, quo Parthi et Indi utuntur, et Oriens totus.” There was
a sort of Palms, which Pliny calls “Cariotoe,” from “Karos,” sig-
nifying Stupefaction ; and in Hebrew, the wine has its name from
its remarkably inebriating qualities. “Palmesia” and “palmeum
vinum,” Pliny also calls this wine; and alludes to its being familiar
to the Romans, “quoe, a palmd ună forte ematá palmesia appel-
lantur.” Celsus fails not occasionally to prescribe a diet of Dates;
“Palmulas, pomaque, et similia, primo cibo melius assumit :”
Milton says:—
“Fruits of Palm-tree pleasantest to thirst
And hunger both.”
-—The Palm being the emblem of Victory and pre-eminence, the
“Tunica palmata,” was assumed by each successive Emperor, though
his pre-eminent and victorious acts should have consisted in making
horses and asses into consuls; in fiddling over his own incendiary
fires; or in fighting and vanquishing the Sea. According to Plu-
tarch, the Palm has been thus universally recognized on account of
that peculiar property in its wood, which enables it to withstand force
xcvii.
and pressure to a remarkable degree. Alciatus, in his Epigrams, con-
firms the opinion of Plutarch :—
“Nititur in pondus palma, et consurgit in altum ;
“Quoque magis premitur, hoc magé tollit onus.”
Amongst the ancient Hebrews, it appears to have been a Solar sym-
bol. A French writer observes, “Le palmier fut consacré aux
“mouvemens célestes, et surtout à la révolution annuelle du Soleil:
“on lui attribuait autant de proprietés, que l'année a de jours.” In
the Zodiac of Dendera, Virgo is drawn with a palm-branch in her
hand.—It was the Palm-tree, that had some share in fulfilling the
prophecy, that Babylon should “become a heap of ruins, a dwelling
place for dragons: where the owls shall dwell, and the satyrs dance.”
By means of these trees which abounded in that country, it is
said that Cyrus erected a number of Towers higher than the walls :
and after many desperate attempts, eventually carried the place by
assault. About Jericho, also, the tree was so abundant that the
place obtained the name of the “City of Palm-trees.” (See “Testi-
monies” p. 39.) Dr. Shaw relates, that many remained there at the
beginning of the last century; the neighbourhood, indeed, affording
every facility for watering them, the climate warm, and the soil
sandy, such as they delight to grow in. Rapid in growth, tall, ver-
dant, and fragrant, many are the allusions to it made by the Sacred
Writers:—“The righteous shall flourish like the Palm-tree,” says
the Psalmist: and Mahomed, in one of his sayings, beautifully com-
pares the upright and generous man to the Palm-tree : “He stands
erect before his Lord : in his every action he follows the impulse
received from above ; and his whole life is devoted to the welfare of
his fellow-creatures.” Linnoeus says, “A female date-bearing Palm
“flowered many years at Berlin, without producing fruit: until the
“Berlin people procured, by post, some blossoms of a male-tree then
“flowering at Leipsic.” M. Geoffrey cites a story from “Jovicus
Pontanus” relative to two Palm-trees, the one a male, the other a
female, growing in the wood of Otranto at a distance of fifteen
leagues apart: and until the female outgrew the other forest-trees,
so as to be able to see her husband at Brindisi, she never bore fruit !
—Near Elete in Spain, is a wood of two hundred thousand date-bearing
Palms. Some ship loads of their branches blanched in mats, are sent
yearly to Genoa and other parts of Italy, for the procession of Palm
Sunday.—Selinus in Sicily, (not Cilicia, now Terra de li Pulci,) was
also in the time of Virgil, noted for its Palm-trees, (OEn. 3. 705.)
“Teque datis linquo ventis, palmosa Selinus:”
—the Town has disappeared, but the place still abounds with Palm-
trees and parsley, “Selinon,” whence its name.
Note. 8.—Madder, Saffron, Mushrooms, and Onions.
ONLY those crops which furnished food for man were liable to
the Law of the “Corner;” they being, moreover, crops growing
upon the land. (“Laws of the Hebrews,” Ch. 2.) Mushrooms and
O -
xcviii.
other fungi were therefore exempt; because, says the Talmud, they
derive not their nourishment from the earth, but live either upon
air or upon certain watery juices of diseased trees. (Bartenora, ad
Peah, Cap. 1.) Saffron and Madder, not being articles of food, were
also exempt, although extensively cultivated in those parts. The
Madder (rubia tinctorum) is a perennial plant, native of Germany,
Italy and the South. It used to be employed in medicine: now its
use is chiefly confined to Dyers. Without it, Dyers and Calico-prin-
ters could scarcely carry on their trade. It continues to be cultivated
in parts of England, growing wild in the Southern counties. In
former times not only was enough grown for home-consumption,
but great quantities were exported: now, it suits traders to import
it from Holland at a loss of tens of thousands of pounds to the
Country, although it might be cultivated to better advantage here
than in Holland. And so, if traders were allowed full license to im-
poverish the country, they would make the people send money to
buy their bread in Russia and Poland, rather than of English farmers.
The States of Zealand judieiously restrict their people to particular
modes of manufacturing Madder, in order to maintain, unimpaired,
the high character acquired by the country for this produce. How
indignant would be the outcry of free-trade schemers against such
interference with the people’s “liberty”!—There is a variety of mad-
der, called Alizari, largely cultivated around Smyrna, which yields a
much finer dye, than that of Europe. To this the superiority of the
Greek and Turkish reds, is chiefly to be ascribed. Madder, with silk,
continues to be the staple produce of Palestine and Syria.—Saffron,
also, not being an article of diet, was exempt from the Law of the
“Corner.” Saffron takes its name from the Zafferan, (or Zahafe-
ran) of the Arabians. It was highly valued by the Hebrews, who
called it “Carcom :” and with them the colour seems to have been
as great a favorite as with Virgil. Its deep yellow has furnished the
nomenclature of colours with the term croceus; and the plant itself
continues to be regarded as a medicine by some medical men, whose
patients, however, are thought to derive greater benefit from that
which is liberally adulterated after the Eastern mode; made more of
smoked beef, than of the stigmata or chives of the flower. Formerly,
Saffron was grown in many of the counties of England; now, chiefly
confined to that tract of land that lies at the foot of the Gogmagog
hills near Saffron-Walden, which town takes its name from this cir-
cumstance; the plant having been introduced there in the time of
Edward 3rd. The Cilician physicians who attended Anthony and
Cleopatra, recommended Saffron to clear the complexion; by the
Romans it was in vogue as a perfume; after steeping in wine, it
used to be sprinkled over the theatres. In modern times it forms a
portion of that vile nostrum, the “American soothing-syrup,” and
permitted to be puffed in the newspapers as a real blessing to mothers /
Atrocious criminals who, for lucre poison their fellow-creatures with
a deleterious mixture of syrup of saffron, saltpetre, and laudanum,
would with reason, in other lands, be nailed by the ear to the doors
of their shops. Here, with impunity they publish their flagitious
xcix.
falsehoods, and incite to the commission of infanticide; whilst minor
transgressions are punished with exile and confiscation of property.
—In large doses, saffron is said to produce involuntary and immode-
rate laughter. In Poland, the people use it, says Etmuller, as a
condiment, in doses of an ounce at a time. Boerhaave describes it
to have the property of dissolving the blood, and enumerates its other
properties thus, “Haec planta est cordialis, aromatica, pectoralis,
anodyna, hypnotica, alexiterica et aperiens !” Well might it be said
to Boerhaave, in the words of the poet;
“Nec poteris croci dotes numerare, nec usus.”
Upon Tmolus, in Phrygia, it grew in such quantities as to perfume
the air :—
“Nonne vides croceos ut Tmolus odores, India mittit ebur,”—Georg. 1.
Garments dyed with saffron were termed crocota and crocotula and
the dyers themselves crocotarii. Virgil speaks of the Misletoe em-
bracing the round branches of the oak, “croceo faetu :” and more
than once, in the same words, of Aurora leaving her golden bed :—
“Tithoni croceum linquens Aurora cubile,”
Amongst his list of wonders, Pliny speaks of a mongrel beast found
in Ethiopia, which, from its yellow colour he calls the “Crocotta.”
—The common Meadow-saffron (“colchicum autumnale”) is a very
different plant from the dyers’ saffron. It has a bulbous-root in-
tensely acrimonious: seldom employed in England, such being the
uncertainty and danger attending its use. The sensible qualities of
the fresh root vary with the place of growth, and the season of the
year. In autumn it is almost inert; in the beginning of summer
highly acrid. In France this is a favorite drug, described as acting
upon some persons, in paroxysms of the gout, almost as a charm : it
is supposed to be the active ingredient in the noted quack-medicine
termed the “Eau medicinale.” The Colchicum, the Cevadilla, and
the White-hellebore are the three plants, in which Pelletier discovered
the new vegetable alkali, Veratrine. A few grains of this will cause
instantaneous death : whilst the root of the Crocus sativus, has been
proposed to be made into bread in times of scarcity.—The structure
of the Colchicum is produced by Paley, in illustration of the com-
pensatory system of nature. The blossom rises out of the ground in
the most forlorn condition, without a sheath, a fence, a calyx, or
even a leaf for protection ; and that, not in the spring, not to be
visited by summer suns, but under all the disadvantages of the de-
clining year. To guard against the effects of frost, it is provided
that the process of ripening the seed, shall be performed at a depth
of 10 or 12 inches under ground : the seeds in the spring raising
themselves to the surface.-Onions and leeks were subject to the Law
of the Corner : (Maimonides ch. 2 $ 2.) as well as seed-onions, (in
the Hebrew, Mothers of onions.) Although the Israelites had come
from a country where onions were held in veneration, they were not
deterred from devouring the scented divinities. They adored them,
indeed, only as culinary objects of worship ; and raised them as
C.
kitchen-gods in large quantities. The matives of Palestine continue
to entertain extreme fondness for them; and many proverbs betoken
a similar attachment upon the part of the Arabs.
Note 9—The Fig.
PALESTINE was, from the earliest periods, noted for its figs: it was
a “land of fig trees: ” (Deut. 8.) and notwithstanding Voltaire declares
the country to be “un desert ou l’on manque de vivres,” figs are still
produced in that “coin de cailloux,” that are not to be surpassed by
those of any country in Europe. (See “Joliffe's Letters from Pales-
tine.”) The fig, the vine, the olive, and the pomegranite are the fruit
trees the earliest noticed as cultivated by mankind; they were all
produced in perfection in Palestine.—Figs, with saffron and madder,
were exempted from the “Law-of-the-Corner,” for the reasons men-
tioned by Maimonides, (“ Laws of the Hebrews,” &c. Ch. 2;) and
in Ch. 6. § 8, he specifies the quantity of figs due to each necessitous
person for tithe. Maimonides alludes to figs in two different states:
the Carica, and the Palathe. The “Carica,” (from Caria in Asia-
Minor,) was a kind of dry fig, a lenten fig ; the “Palathe,” figs
pounded into a solid mass with Walnuts and Almonds, having much
the appearance of brawn, and forming to the present day, a common
sweetmeat for the middling classes in Asia Minor. Dr. Chandler,
referring to the Eastern practice of stringing dried figs like beads,
doubts the correctness of the bible-translators in using the words,
“Cakes of figs.” Abigail when she went to propitiate David, loaded
her asses with an acceptable present of eatables; viz. 200 loaves,
2 bottles (skins) of wine, 5 sheep ready dressed, 5 measures of
parched corn, 100 clusters of raisins, and 200 cakes of figs. Now it
seems by no means improbable that the ancient Hebrews practised
each of the different modes of preserving the crops of their Figgeries
and consequently that the emendation of Dr. Chandler might not be
right, even admitting the conjectures of others to be wrong —
“Sirs,” cries the umpire, “Cease your pother,
“The creature’s neither one nor t'other ”
Dr. Chandler thinks that instead of “cakes of figs,” we ought to
read “strings of figs,” but surely a dried strung fig would make but
a harsh cataplasm, in so tender a case as that of King Hezekiah’s boil.
“Take a lump of figs,” said Isaiah to the terrified king : “and they
took and laid it on the boil and he recovered.” The harsh dry figs
of Dr. Chandler could not have been more acceptable in the royal
emergency, than a portion of a moist lump of figs, such as are now
imported from the Levant : whilst a portion of pounded pulp would
have been more emollient than either. In Samuel (l. xxx.) where
the same expression, “a cake of figs,” is used, the Hebrew word
(pelach) implies the action of cutting. But neither dried figs, nor figs
pressed together require any cutting : whilst to a “cake of figs,” in a
pounded mass, cutting was indispensable. It is curious that King
Hezekiah’s cataplasm continues to this day to be generally employed
to promote the suppuration of tumours.--Dr. Shaw, (“Travels in the
ci.
Holy Land,”) describes the fig tree as producing in the year, three
crops of fruit; the first the “Boccore,” ripening about the latter end
of June; the second, the “Kermez,” or summer-fig, which seldom
ripens before August ; and the third, the winter-fig. “ No sooner,”
says he, “doth the Boccore or early-fig draw near to perfection in
June, than the Kermez begins to be formed, though it rarely ripens
before August, about which time the same tree throws out its third
crop.” This succession of crops distinguishes the Fig-tree from all
other fruit-trees. It was the “Boccore,” or early-fig, which was the
delicate morsel. Jeremiah's very good figs were like the first ripe figs
—“One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first
ripe ; and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be
eaten they were so bad.” The Prophet Micah illustrating the dif-
ficulty of meeting with good men, compares them to the first ripe
figs : —
Woe is me ! for I am become
As the gatherers of late figs, as the gleaners of the vintage
There is no cluster to eat
My soul desireth the first ripe fig /
The good man is perished from the land 1
And there is none upright among men
Denouncing the drunkards of Ephraim, Isaiah (ch. 28) likens their
fate to that of the first ripe fig, no sooner perceived by the passer-by
than plucked and swallowed :-
They shall be trodden under foot,
The proud crowns of the drunkards of Ephraim |
And the fading flower of their glorious beauty,
Shall be as the early fruit before the summer,<
No sooner seen, than plucked and swallowed 1 ''
It is frequently applied by the Prophets to express a desirable object
by none, says Lowth, more elegantly than by Hosea, (Ch. 9.)—
“Like grapes in the wilderness, I found Israel;
“Like the first ripe fig in his prime, I saw your fathers.”
The time of the ripening of the early fig marked the black season of
the undertaker :—
— dum ficus prima calorque
Designatorem decoret lictoribus atris. (Juv.)
Mr. Ray calls the green figs of Italy a most delicate fruit, “ compara-,
ble for the taste to the best marmalade.” Very different to the
fatua marisca of Martial, (7, xxiv) a large peculiarly unsavory sort
of fig. And so thought the Anonymous author who likened ma-.
trimony to figs; –
Oh, matrimony / thou art like to Jeremiah's figs ;
The good, are very good indeed! The bad, not fit for pigs:
To Ladies of a certain age, figs, according to Pliny are a sine-qua-non:
he declares that they invigorate, restore an appearance of youthful-
ness, and, although not capable of absolutely supplying the place of
certain invaluable pigments, nevertheless obliterate many an unwel-
come wrinkle. Possibly it was for these rare qualities that Cleopatra
cii.
had so great a partiality for them; it was in a basket of figs that her
asp arrived to summon her elsewhere. Certainly it was not for such
reasons, or on account of their being esteemed too luxurious, that
Lycurgus, intent upon repressing luxury and sensuality, decreed that
figs, with cheese, wine and flour, should form the repast of his iron-
hearted people. Nor could it have been for such a reason, that the
Law of Athens prohibited the exportation of figs from Attica: a law,
which we all know, generated the vile race of “Sykophantai.” Pliny
also relates that a wine used to be made out of figs, much in the
manner that date-wine was made : —“ Fit et sycites e fico, quem
alii palmiprimum vocant: ” probably the Sukites oinos of Dioscorides.
The tree is said to possess the property of decomposing animal food:
fresh meat hung in it for a night becoming as tender as if kept
for a week in the common manner. Pliny believes the dry fig to
be unwholesome:—“Stomachum laedunt, sic.coe fici.” Arbuthnot pro-
nounces them great subduers of acrimony: whilst Celsus prescribes
in certain cases — “piper cum ficu contusum.” – God, say the
Commentators upon the Koran, vows by the Fig and the olive, on ac-
count of their great virtues: and therefore the 95th. Ch. of the Koran,
entitled “the Fig,” commences with an invocation, —“By the fig,
and the olive, and Mount Sinai.” &c. The wood of the Fig-tree, and
of the Sycamore was much used in former times by carvers. In his
Satire upon Idolatry, Horace introduces the Carpenter manufacturing
a deity out of a log of the wild-fig-tree :-
“Olim truncus eram ficulnus, inutile lignum :
“Cum faber incertus Scammum faceretne Priapum,
“Maluit esse Deum. -
“The Iron of anguish entered into his soul, rending it as the Wild fig
rends the marble floor ’’ says Calidasa in one of his Eastern poems.—
The wild-fig-tree was not without its use. Pliny, Tournefort, and others
have detailed accounts of the singular mode employed in the Levant, for
increasing and ripening the produce of the fig by means of a kind of
gnat generated in the earliest fruit of the wild fig. (Colonel Thackery
speaks of the maturation of figs in Provence being hastened by prick-
ing them at the open end with a straw dipped in olive-oil.) In
most of the Islands of the Archipelago they have the wild-fig, there
called “Ornos,” (from the old Greek “Erinos;” in Latin “Caprificus;”)
as well as the garden-fig: the wild sort bearing three kinds of fruit,
“Formites,”—“Cratiteres,” and, “Orni: ” indispensable in the caprift-
cation of the garden-fig. By the inoculating process trees are made to
yield ten times their former produce Tournefort says, that in the
Islands of the Archipelago one of their fig trees generally produces 2
Cwt 80 lbs weight of figs. The process was well known to all the
ancient writers on husbandry; and the husbanding or dressing of the
fig-tree, by means of the gnats of the wild-fig-tree, was termed by
the Romans “Caprificatio.” Palladius has the passage, “Nunc capri-
ficandae sunt arbores fici.” The gnats that performed the operation
are called by Pliny, “ficarii culices :” by Linnoeus, “cynips psenes.”
Notwithstanding the utility of the fig-tree, the word ficulnus also
ignified sorry, good for nothing : as in the proverb “ficulnum prae-
ciii.
sidium;” although the durability of the fig-tree-wood, and the value of
the fruit, were generally recognized. And so also Caprificus signified
vain glory, as in Perseus (Sat. 1. xxv.) Hasselquist declares that he
saw in Egypt, coffins of fig-tree wood 2000 years old, in a sound
state. What we call “Bush harrows” appear also to have been
made of the branches of the fig-tree. Cato speaks of “ficarii crates.”
(48) “Ficitas,” was the fig harvest, as “Olivitas,” was that of Olives,
and “Vindemia” that of Grapes or the vintage. Sheltered spots
appear to have been selected in Italy, for their figgeries: Varro de-
clares (1. xli) that “in locis frigidis, ficeta fieri non possunt.” It loves
says Columella, (e. 21) “ loca aprica, calculosa, glareosa interdum,
et saxosa;” but according to Pliny (17. xxvi) it flourishes in watery
lands, such as would destroy the Apple-tree; “ficus arbor ipsa
riguis alitur, pomum vero ejus marcessit.”—The fig-tree lives to a
very great age ; and at Lambeth Palace were some trees of the
white Marseilles kind, said to have been planted by Cardinal Pole.
At Tarring, formerly a market town, and now an antique little village
distant a quarter of a mile from the sea, near Worthing, is an
orchard of standard fig-trees, for two or more centuries held by suc-
cessive generations of one family: forming their chief support. The
present owner, Henry Pilling, is obliged to combine shoe-mending
with caprification, and both together scarcely serve to keep the wolf
from the door. The figgery contains nearly an acre of ground, and
many of the trees date beyond the memory of the present family.
Before the intense frost of 1838, it contained about 100 trees; a
larger figgery than that inherited from his father by the divine Ulysses.
Laertes could muster up only “50 purple figs” for his princely son.
Never before had one single tree sunk under the inclemency of the
weather. This year so fatal to gardeners cut-off 47 of the oldest.
Of the more ancient trees remaining, some are recorded to be the
original plants introduced by Archbishop Becket, the remains of
whose palace adjoins the figgery, It is said, however, by some, that
the fig was not introduced into England until 1548. In 1837 this
fig-garden produced 1000 dozens of fruit, many of the figs weighing
5} oz. each. Some dozens used to be sent annually to Geo. 3, ;
and the book at the garden states that in 1835, Sir Michael Stuart
ordered 5 dozen for the Princess Victoria. From the irregularity in
the ripening of the crop of the fig-tree, it was exempt from the Law
of the “Corner,” says Maimonides; (Ch. 2. § 2.) “because they are
not all gathered together, but upon one tree one may be ripe to day,
and another not for many days.” In this garden the crop is daily
ripening throughout August and September; and during those months
many are the nobility supplied with the fruit. The princesses Au-
gusta and Sophia have for many years been customers, with Bishops
and Lords of every grade. In July 1838, “William Ossoo Quan-
tamissah, and John Ossoo Ansah, princes of Ashantee,” paid a royal
visit.—To the contemptuous action of the fingers, the Italians have
given the name of a “fico,” and copying them, we also have made a
verb of the word :—
civ.
“When Pistol lies, do this,
“And fig me like the bragging Spaniard l’’
If certain ancient sages are to be credited, the fig could not have
been held in such proverbial contempt, in the time of the Punic war :
for they assure us that it was the hankering of the Romans after the
fine figs growing in the neighbourhood of Carthage, that originated
the third Punic war ! The determination to rase Carthage to the
ground, may have had something to do with the Carthaginian figs :
for in vain did Cato continue to sum-up his orations with “delenda
est Carthago,” until he exhibited to the assembled Senate, the early
fig gathered at Carthage three days before, (convincing proof of the
virtual proximity of the rival states); and then said a punster, “a fig
for Carthage ”—The anecdote about Dr. Kennicott's fig was well
known at Oxford. Dr. Kemnicott was extremely fond of figs, and
seeing a fine one upon the tree, (said to have been planted in the
Botanic Garden by Dr. Pocock, in 1648), he wrote upon a label—
“Dr. Kennicott's fig,” and tied it to the fruit. One charming
morning, however, just as the fruit had become perfectly ripe, fig
and label both disappeared ; and there stared in the face of the
learned epicure, another label worded,—“A fig for Dr. Kennicott /’’
The wild Olive, and the Fig, were the Tyburn-trees of the Athe-
nians. Timon's fig-tree was a treasure to him; and before he cut
it down, he kindly gave due notice to his Athenian friends to use all
convenient speed to gratify themselves by hanging in his garden
“that whoso please
“To stop affliction, let him take his haste,
“Come hither, ere my tree hath felt the axe,
“And hang himself;”—
The Athenian seems to have regarded the human race in a most fe-
lonious light: longing for a New-Drop before his parlour window.
The Civil-law, indeed, does say that it is “a comfortable sight to the
“relations and friends of the deceased” to see the murderer upon
the gibbet—“solatio sit cognatis interemptorum &c.;” but Timon
was not scrupulous as to the characters to hang upon his fig-tree :
of trifling import who or what they were as long as they furnished
an interesting exhibition, exciting convulsions of laughter such as
Chrysippus died of, at the sight of an ass eating figs off a silver
platter. It was unusual in those days for animals of that class to
feed off plate 1 Judas also hanged himself upon a Sycamore or Fig-
tree. The spot was pointed out to Sandys upon Mount Olivet ; and
nearer the summit the place where Christ cursed the Fig-tree. Many
Fig-trees still grow upon the Mount.—There is a little bird which
feeds upon the fig, which peculiarly excited the gastronomic propen-
sities of the Romans. It resembles the nightingale; living upon figs
and grapes, they called it the “ficedula.” A Street in Rome, was
called by the same name; (Plaut. Capt. 1. 2, 60.) probably on ac-
count of dealers in this delicacy frequenting it. The Italians call it
the “Beccafico :” and, in their passion for it, laudably emulating the
propensities of their ancestors, they must needs have their “ Beccafi-
cata;” which word being interpreted, signifieth in common parlance,
CW.
“a great fig-pecker jollification.” “Beccañcatas” exist in modern
times; we hear from Gazettes, of the mighty members of Exe-
cutive Governments proceeding upon hungry pilgrimages to Black-
wall, in search of White-bait-beccaficatas / It was not until recently,
that the becoafico (“Sylvia Hippolais,” Lesser Petty Chaps of
Selby's Ornithology) was discovered in the figgery at Tarring ; al-
though probably an annual visitor for some hundreds of years. For
the last two or three years it has been a profitable part of the produce.
of the garden; many dozen having been taken in 1838, and sold at
3s. 6d. a dozen. Under the date of August 1835, is an order in the
book at the Figgery, from one who is “a peer,” viz.:-" A fig bird to
be sent to the Earl of Essex, 9, Belgrave Square.” This could not
have been, in the words of Pope “a dev’lish dear” order; whatever
may be the orders of Lord Holland, who is by no means satisfied
with one single “fig-bird” from Tarring, for the banquets at Hol-
land-House. Three shillings and sirpence a dozen must be a great
reduction of price since the time alluded to by Pope ;-
When Beccaficos sold so dev’lish dear,
To one that was or would have been a Peer |
Juvenal does not forget this species of sensuality, in his diatribes
upon Roman wantonness. It seems, that in obedience to the pre-
cepts of the profound Apicius, this bird used to be eaten whole: al-
though to eat any other than the hinder parts of other birds, was
deemed to be so flagrant an exposure of vulgarity, as deservedly to
occasion the expulsion of the delinquent from the Roman beau monde.
How promising then must be that aspiring youth, who—“nondum
omni dente renato,”—has so industriously profited from the example
of gray-headed epicurism, as to be able,
— “radere tubera terroe,
Boletum condire, et, eodem jure natantes
Mergere ficedulas !”
Has learned to pickle mushrooms, and like him,
To souse the beccaficos, till they swim l’’
—The bloated livers of white geese which had been cruelly crammed
with figs, was another charming Roman delicacy. Nasidienus, ridi-
culously acting the extravagant, is made by Horace to place one of
these monstrously enlarged livers before his friend Moecenas:
“Pinguibus et ficis pastum jecur anseris albi.”
Hog's liver enlarged by a similar process was called from the
cramming materials, Ficatum. Being one of the articles enumerated
upon the inscription of Stratoniceia, for the regulation of prices, it
would appear to have been not an uncommon article of food;
“Ficati optimi ital po unum + sedecim :”
i.e. 16 denarii the Italian pound. From this word and the Greek
“Sukoton,” are derived the Italian and modern Greek words, figato
and sukoti, used now to signify liver in general.
P
xvi.
NoTE 10. The Ant.
AN investigation into the right of ownership in the heaps of grain,
that the pilfering Ant may have absconded with, savours a little of
scrupulosity. That these insects swarmed in destructive numbers in
Palestine, seems probable from the coupling, by Maimonides, of their
devastations with those of locusts: (c. iii, s. 5.) and possibly the con-
tents of their underground granaries when discovered in any number,
would not be unacceptable to the poor. And we may fancy the in-
sect to have been of no very ordinary size, judging from the story of
the Spies : men of ordinary stature, who being discovered by the
more gigantic race of the sons of Anak, these latter were heard con-
temptuously to exclaim—“There are Pismires in the vineyards, like
unto men. (Numb. xiii.) .
Be that as it may, we cannot but admire the spirit of benevolence
which breathes throughout the passage (chap. iv,) relating to the re-
ceptacles of Ants. Wherever there is a doubt, let that doubt, says
Maimonides, be construed in favour of the poor : relax the law in his
behalf, rather than strain a harsh and avaricious interpretation against
him. Let him not only fully and freely enjoy his right to the glean-
ings of the fields and vineyards, but cheerfully award to him what-
ever may be afterwards discovered, if, by the remotest probability, it
can have been abstracted from his rightful portion. Happy would it
be for the indigent, were the same spirit of benevolence to pervade
the legislative acts of other nations: happy, if pity and forbearance,
if but a cold admission of possible innocence and misfortune, charac-
terised the spirit of other poor-laws l—Trite as may appear the quo-
tation, one cannot speak of the Ant in reference to scriptural precepts
without calling to mind that beautiful passage, which conveys so for-
cible an exhortation to exertion and perseverance in life:—
“Go to the Ant, thou sluggard, consider her ways, and be wise, which, hav-
ing no guide, overseer or ruler, provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth
her food in the harvest. How long wilt thou sleep, O sluggard 2 When wilt
thou arise out of thy sleep? Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of
the hands to sleep ! So shall thy poverty come like one that travelleth, and thy
want like an armed man.” (Prov. vi.)
Although in the sense of the Sacred-writer, these little insects are
not conscious of any superior controlling intelligence, they are not
wholly without “overseers and rulers,” according to Virgil, who
declares that idleness receives signal castigation :-
& 4
Pars agnmina cogunt,
Castigantgue moras : opere omnis semita fervet.”
—thus “translated into English verse, by Thomas Phaer, Esquire,
Anno, 1557 :”— -
“Their booties home they bring, and some the kernels great of graine
With might of shoulders shove, and some behind survey the traine
Correcting some for slouth, with chearing forth the work it heats, –
The wayes are worne with weight, and every path of labour sweats.”
In all ages has the Ant been cited as a model of industry and fore-
cvii.
sight: and Juvenal, in his compliments to the female sex, (sat. vi.) is
pleased to declare its example not wholly thrown away :—
“Prospiciunt aliguando viri: frigusque, famemgue
Formica tandem quidam expavere magistra:”
But as to the women, this ill-bred Roman most ungallantly declares
that not one of them can live within the bounds of her condition;
possessing not one fraction of the sense and foresight of that little
insect!—Not only may Ants be referred to as exhibiting a pattern of
co-operation, industry, foresight, social order, and unanimity, but also
of parental affection; although, their community is of that
anomalous description, that the pains of labour are felt only by the
aristocratic portion. After performing the duties of accoucheurs, ne-
glecting their own safety, the only care of “the mobile vulgus,” is to
carry the young in time of danger, to a safe asylum. They are
seen conveying away their progeny, themselves in a state of
tremor and distraction, such as was never exceeded, save by Fa-
ther Æneas, tottering under his aged burden amongst the flames of
Troy —Cicero seems to endow the Ant with almost intellectual fa-
culties:—“In formica non modo sensus, sed etiam mens, ratio, me-
moria:” (N. D. 3. 9.) Pliny gives it credit for “ratio, memoria,
cura:” and declares that it works by night as well as by day; “ope-
rantur et noctu, plená lună.” He also asserts that Ants afford the
only example of irrational creatures mindful of burying their dead:
“Sepeliuntur inter se viventium solae, praeter hominem.” (Lib.
11., 30.) Virgil, however, considers that bees also attend to the last
funeral rites: he says, (Georg. Lib. IV.)
—“ Tum corpora luce carentum
“Exportant tectis, et tristia funera ducunt.”
Amongst so many good qualities, pity is it, that stubbornness must
be imputed to this meritorious little thing; but stubborn and untrac-
table it assuredly is, notwithstanding the praises of Cicero; the
Italians have made it proverbially so :—
“Formica di sorbo che non esce per bussare.”
Phocylides says of the Ant, “Phulon d'oligon telethei polumok-
thon,” a little but most laborious race ; something in the spirit of
Agur: “The Ants are a people not strong, yet they prepare their
meat in the summer.” They not only guard against winter, but
also against poverty in old age, of which they are very fearful, accord-
ing to Horace :-
“Inopi metuens formica senectae.”
It is to this passage from the Proverbs, that Horace seems to al-
lude, (Sat. lib. i.) in his picture of the wretched miser, “Congestis
undique saccis inhians,” and who, though odious to his fellow citi-
zens, had the conceit and impudence to cry out :-
“Populus me sibilat; at mihi plaudo ipse domi.”
Ray says that if you put blue flowers into an Ant-hill, they will
be stained red : because the ants drop upon them their stinging li-
cviii.
quor, which has the effect of oil-of-vitriol. This is, doubtless, that
“acidum formicarum” which certain medical geniuses prescribe to
their childless patients. Unless travellers in New South Wales be
followers of the noble Munchausen, that certainly is the land for these
infusion-of-Ant-doctors. There it is not uncommon to see the Black
Ant thickly covering an extent of more than an acre of ground ! The
pathways here, are widely different from those of Virgil's petty Italian
ants :-
“Angustum formica terens iter.”
It is well for them, and for the Indian Ants, that no Malthus is to
be found in their commonwealth ! 80,000 eggs in twenty-four hours
(‘Phil. Trans.” 1781,) would madden less callous alarmists than even
this prophet of evil The Indian Ants are agriculturists, and form
gardens adjoining their nurseries, (Konig on the ‘East Indian Ter-
mites,') where they raise a species of microscopical mushrooms. Bees
as well as Ants, afford in warm climates demonstrations of power, in-
credible to people of the northern zones. Pliny relates that in some
districts of Crete, Bees were so troublesome as to effect the expul-
sion of the inhabitants. Ancient writers mention sieges, in which
the assailants were repelled by means of swarms of bees. “In Bee's
Creek” says Mungo Park, “the bees came out in immense numbers,
and attacked men and beasts at the same time :” this attack costing
the traveller six of his asses. At the Cape farmers collect Ants by
bushels, for fattening their poultry. In Australia also, the variety
of Ants is great; some, says Cunningham, very large and inflicting a
bite as painful as the sting of a hornet. The White Ants are espe-
cially destructive to timber, both in its green state and when worked
up into posts. It cannot be said of these, as of European Ants:—
“It nigrum campis agnmen;”
for they are sickly-looking, and colourless; and so offensive to them
is the light of the sun, that when they have completed their ravages
on one tree, they construct an archway of earth, to shelter them in
their assault upon the next! Other species erect hills, or nests of a
conical shape, and so large, that navigators have described them as
the huts of the half-brute natives. So, also, in Senegal, where the
number and magnitude of the hills give them the appearance of a
native village. Such is the strength and height of their conical
dwellings, says Mr. Smeatham, (“Phil. Trans. 1781,) that the wild
bulls stand centinels on the top, whilst the rest of the herd is rumi-
nating below. , Well, therefore, may an Ant with such a home, cry
out to the foul-feeding fly:—
“Mori contractam quum te cogunt frigora,
Me copiosa recipit incolumem domus.”
The Africans, (sans culottes as they are,) eat the aristocratic class
roasting them like coffee; like Gay's querulous turkey, esteeming
them as a delicate and wholesome food —
“Fear not; like me with freedom eat :
An ant is most delightful meat ''
cix.
In India, such are their numbers and voracity, that towns aban-
doned by tae natives, have not the vestige of a post remaining, at the
end of a few months. The labourers among them are not a quarter of
an inch in length; their structures ten or twelve feet high. Allowing
six feet to be the height of man, these structures may thus be
considered (relatively to the length of the insect and the height of
man,) as nearly five times the height of the greatest of the Egyptian
pyramids !—There is one use to which the African ant-hills have
been applied, which it would puzzle most of us to conjecture. In his
admirable ‘African Sketches,' Mr. Pringle gives the following account
of one of his achievements:- But my chef d’auvre, at this time,
was the construction of an Oven; which I contrived to scoop out of
a huge Ant-hill, that chanced to stand under an old Mimosa-tree, at
the head of my garden. After being properly plastered and paved
within, it proved an excellent oven, and served all the hamlet, (at
Glen-Lynden, near the Cape,) to bake their household-bread in for a
couple of years:–
This fine white household bread, (of Margaret's baking)
Comes from an oven, too, of my own making;
Scoop'd from an ant-hill ! Did I ask before,
If you would taste this brawn of forest-boar 2
—At a recent Meeting of the Entomological Society, Dr. Bostock
mentioned the appearance of a new species of small Ant which
threatens to be as great a domestic plague to the metropolis, as is
another vulgar insect. This minute tormentor attacks provisions and
every thing in its way. It has, in some houses, proved so noxious
as to cause the occupiers to quit; no effectual mode of eradicating
it, being yet discovered.
NoTE 1 1. Gizbarin.
THE Gizbarin were the Treasurers of the Temple; three in num-
ber. Subordinate to the Seven Immarcalin, they had charge of all
Sacred-things. Their duties are more particularly specified by Mai-
monides in his Tract Kele Hamikdash; (Cap. iv. § 18) and in his
Commentary upon the Tract Shekalim, of the Gemara. (Cap. v. § 2.)
They received the price of redemption—the second-tithe—superin-
tended the expenditure, and generally, had the management of all
business relating to the Temple. The passage in the 2 Kings, xxii—
“Howbeit there was no reckoning made with them, of the money
that was delivered into their hand, because they dealt faithfully :”
this passage being applied to the Gizbarin and to the Collectors
of Alms, from neither of these functionaries was any account of re-
ceipts or expenditure required.
CX.
NoTE 12. Wine and Vines.
ſ
ſ
--- •ºr - g
- Lºº
The Vine is a common name including many species. To dis-
tinguish the true vine, Moses calls it the “wine-vine.” Some of the
sorts growing in Palestine were poisonous, as appears by the story
related among the miraculous acts of Elisha (2 Kings.) The hoary
night-shade, the “Solanum incanum,” is called by the Arabs “Aneb-
el-dib,” i. e. “wolf-grapes.” Hasselquist says that “this poisonous
weed is there common in vineyards: it has a shrubby stalk like that
to the vine.” From some such poisonous fruit of the grape kind has
Moses (Deut. 32.) taken those poetical images by which the supposed
future degeneracy and misery of the Israelites is depicted;—
“Their Vine is from the vine of Sodom
“And from the fields of Gomorrah :
“Their grapes are grapes of gall,
“Their clusters are bitter :
“Their wine is the poison of dragons
“And the cruel venom of aspics.”
That Palestine was renowned for its wines and its vineyards has
already been shown. (“Testimonies” &c. p. 23.) The vineyards were
commonly planted on the south side of a hill or mountain, the larger
stones being gathered out, and the space walled round or hedged with
thorns. (Is. 1. vi.-Ps. 80–Matt. 21. xxxiii.) Ordinary land is suited
to the vine. It is a remark of Arthur Young, that the vineyards of
France, forming so large a proportion of the cultivated land, occupy
only that which would be valueless for other purposes:–
No soil like poverty for growth divine,
As leanest land supplies the richest wine !
A good vineyard consisted of a thousand vines, and produced a
rent of 100 Silverlings or Shekels of Silver. (Is. 7, xxiii.) It required
200 more to pay the dressers, (Cant. 8. 11.) The working in the

cxi.
ineyards was sometimes accounted a base, as it was a laborious task.
(2 Kings, 25, xii. Cant. 1, vi. Is. 41.)—The great reliance placed by
the inhabitants of Palestine upon the produce of the vine, is evinced
by the denunciations of the prophetic writers so frequently directed
against the vineyards —“Surely,” says Isaiah, “before the vintage,
when the bud is perfect—
And the blossom is become a swelling grape,
He shall cut off the shoots, with pruning hooks :
And the rapacious bird shall summer upon it :
And every wild beast of the earth shall winter upon it.
—and in the Psalms,
He destroyed their vines with hail,
And their Sycamore-trees with frost ;
He gave up their cattle also to the hail,
And their flocks to hot thunderbolts. (Ps. 78.)
The wines of Sibnah and of Heshbon have already been alluded to,
as well as the practice of procuring scions of those vines for foreign
countries. Sorek and Eschol also were noted for their wines: the
latter district continues to be famous for its grapes, according to
Doubdan. He describes a delightful valley full of aromatic herbs
and rosebushes, and planted with vines to appearance of a choice
kind. He was assured that clusters frequently weighed 10 or 12lbs :
which agrees with a statement made by a merchant to Reland.—In
many parts, Dr. Shaw observed that the cultivation of the vine had
been much neglected of late years; the culture of tobacco having
been substituted.—The vine is still to be found in many parts of
Asiatic Turkey, in a perfectly wild state, climbing up the highest
trees. The same is related by Pliny of the vines in Italy, which
out-topped the highest poplars; for which reason it was part of the
bargain of the grape-gatherers, that in the case of a slip, the funeral-
fire and the tomb, should be furnished at the cost of their employers.
In the Temple at Jerusalem, above and round the gate which led
from the Porch to the Holy-place, arose a richly carved Vine. The
branches, tendrils, and leaves were of the finest gold; the stalks of
the branches were in length, equal to the height of the human figure;
the bunches consisting of costly jewels. Herod first placed it there;
rich Jews from time to time added to its embellishment; one contri-
buting a new grape, another a leaf, or perhaps even a bunch of the
same precious metal. It would seem that it was with this gorgeous
Vine in sight, that Jesus remarked to his disciples,<-“I am the true
vine !”—Amongst the Hebrews the Vine was accounted the most
noble of plants, and a type of all that was excellent, powerful, fruit-
ful, and fortunate. Many therefore are the similitudes from the
Vine employed by the Sacred-Writers. (Jer. 2, xxi. Ezek. 19, x.
Ps. 80, ix.) God was the dresser of the vineyard; Israel was the
vineyard and the vine. (Is. 5. l.—27. Hos. 10. 1.) The blessings
bestowed upon the just are likened by Isaiah, “to Wines on the Lees
well-refined:” (i.e. vines kept long on the lees.) The Hebrew word
translated “lees,” signifies literally the “Preservers;” and we learn
cxii.
from Sir Edward Barry, who has treated of the Wines of the Ancients,
that the keeping of wine upon the lees for a time after fermentation,
greatly augments its strength and flavor. This explains the Allegory
of Jeremiah:-
Moab hath been at ease from his youth,
And he hath settled upon his lees:
Nor hath he been drawn off from vessel to vessel,
Neither hath he gone into captivity;
Wherefore his taste remaineth in him,
And his flavour is not changed.
—The Egyptian law-givers decried wine as an invention of the evil-
deity; they allowed, however, of the juice of the grape before fermenta-
tion. The few vineyards that Egypt possessed, were adequate therefore
for the supply of persons of high rank with must or fresh grape-juice;
and accordingly we read that Pharaoh partook of this; (Gen. 40—xi.)
but neither must nor grapes could be imported in sufficient quantity
for general use.— Maimonides alludes to the “Wine-Press” used in
Palestine. (Ch. 5 § 23.) Probably this was not the Press itself, but
rather that which the Romans called “Lacus;” the large open
place, or vessel, which by a conduit or spout, received the must from
the Wine-Press. In hot countries it was under ground, or in a cave
hewed out of the side of a rock, lest the heat should sour the Must.
Bacchus is described as hollowing the rock, for the forming of this
dake :-
He pierced the rock, and with the sharpen'd tool
Of steel well temper’d, scoop'd its inmost depth;
Then smooth'd the front, and form'd the dark recess,
In just dimensions for the foaming lake.
The wine-presses in Persia, says Chardin, are formed by making
hollow places in the ground, lined with mason's-work. And near
Tours, in France, where the land is hilly, with much rock in the hills,
the caves in which the vignerons carry on the process of wine-making
are hewed out of the rocks, precisely as is described by Chardin.—A
Press might be moveable, and would not then render a tree growing
near it particularly conspicuous or remarkable, as alluded to by
Maimonides; (Ch. 5 § xxiv.) but a cave, such as those described by
Chardin, which had existed in the same spot in the hills possibly for
centuries, would be a mark known to every neighbour for miles
around. Besides the use of some sort of press in the making of wine,
there was also a common custom of treading it out. Isaiah, in his
“Oracle concerning the ruin of Moab,” (Ch. xvi.) declares that the
joyful harvest-home shall cease, and the wine shall no longer be
trodden out :—
And in the vineyards they shall not sing, they shall not shout;
In the vats, the treader shall not tread out the wine;
An end is put to the shouting !
—A remarkable object, though of temporary duration, in the vine-
yards of Palestine, was the small hut, erected during the summer
season. A little hut (says Harmer) covered with boughs, straw,
cxiii,
turf, or the like materials, for a shelter from the heat by day and
the cold and dews by night, used to be erected for the watchman
that guarded the vineyard, during the short season of the ripening
of the fruit. A constant watch, says Hasselquist, was required, to
defend the vines during the vintage from the foxes and jackalls, which
sometimes destroy whole vineyards and gardens of cucumbers.-The
solitary and desolate state of the land is likened by Isaiah (ch. 1), to
the hut erected in a vineyard :—
And the daughter of Sion is left, as a shed in a vineyard,
As a lodge in a garden of cucumbers; as a city taken by siege :
The vat and the tower erected in the vineyards, are mentioned in
Mark xii. :—“A certain man planted a vineyard and set an hedge
about it, and digged a place for the wine-fat, and built a tower, and
let it out to husbandmen.” In the route between Jerusalem and
the convent of St. Elias, several of these small square towers were
noticed by Mr. Buckingham in the midst of the vineyards.-In the
East and in many parts of France where wood is scarce, the dressing
and pruning of the vines afford a supply of fuel : where the scarcity
is great, they with roots &c. supply the place of wood. Women and
children were employed to collect, and lay up these things in store.
So in Isaiah, (ch. xxvii) the favourite vineyard is thus doomed to be
blasted and consumed :-
When her boughs are withered, they shall be broken;
Women shall come and set them in a blaze. +
The Countess of Blessington speaking of Avignon says, (“Idler in
Italy,”)—“The Country abounds in vineyards, and their produce
serves the double purpose of warming externally as well as internally;
the stems and branches of the vine being used for firing.”—In the
south of France and in Spain, the prunings of the vine are especially
reserved for the preparing of the livivium; into which in a boiling
state the bunches are dipped, for the purpose of making them into
“frail,” or “basket-raisins.” Ray says that the bunches are left in
the boiling lye for about half a minute, then washed in a vessel of
clean cold water, and dried, first in the shade, and then in the sum.
“Raisins of the sun” are dried upon the vine; the foot-stalk of the
bunch being cut only half asunder: in Spain, however, they are said
to be dipped in the same manner as the “basket-raisins.” At Mont-
pellier they use vine-cuttings and grape-stalks in the manufacture of
verdigris, for which that town is famous; the grape-stalks (soaked
in wine,) and the copper-plates being laid alternately in a large
earthen pot, having a little sourish wine in the bottom.—Chardin
says, that at Casbin in Persia, they turn their cattle into the vine-
yards after the vintage, to brouse on the vines. He speaks of vines
in that country, so large that he could hardly compass the trunks of
them with his arms : and Malte-Brun (vol. 2. p. 148,) relates that
vine-stocks are to be seen in Galilee, a foot and a half in diameter.
(Concerning other remarkable vines see p. 23, preceding, of “Tes-
timonies” &c.)—It has been shewn at Note 1 that amongst other
Precepts, it is commanded that the Gleanings, the Small-bunches, and
Q.
cxiv.
the Fallen-grapes be left for the Poor ; and Maimonides (ch. iv.) en-
ters minutely into a description of these several donations to the Poor.
Bartenora in his Commentary upon “Peah,” (a Corner—the 2nd
Book of Zerahim in the Mischma,) particularly resolves the two ques-
tions contained in § 18 of ch. 4. The word Ceteph, there translated
“smaller dependent bunches,” properly signifies the “shoulder :”
whilst Neteph, translated to be a bunch hanging “in the manner of
an icicle,” signifies “The dropping of the eaves of a house :” in Latin
“Stillicidium.” If a bunch have neither Ceteph nor Neteph, yet, if
it be so large that it cannot be held within the hand, it is not to be
deemed a “ small cluster.” A story is told of a fine bunch of grapes
having, doubtless, both Ceteph and Neteph, which was sent as a pre-
sent to an anchorite of the desert. He, frugal man, deeming it a
luxury that his conscience ought not to permit him to indulge in,
sent it forward to a neighbouring hermit. Similar scruples were en-
tertained by this abstemious gentleman, who again sent it upon its
pilgrimage to a third ; and successively, the luscious temptation
went the round of all the holy men of the desert, eventually finding
its way back again to him who first exhibited this command over the
senses. (Bartenora in Com. ad Peah. cap. 7.)—In the 4th. ch. §
xxvii, Maimonides alludes to the “Law of the Fourth-year.” It was
unlawful to eat the fruit for the three years first after the planting of
trees: “three years shall it be as uncircumcised unto you :” (Lev.
19, xxiii.) and the fruit of the Fourth-year was, as well as the Second-
Tithe, to be eaten at Jerusalem, as explained by Maimonides in his
Tract upon “Second-Tithe and Trees of the Fourth-year.”
NotE 13. Proselytes and Strangers.
PRoseLYTEs among the Jews were such persons, (not of the natu-
ral posterity of Abraham,) as were converted from the idolatrous
worship of Paganism, to the profession of the Jewish religion. There
were “Proselytes-of-Justice,” and “Proselytes-of-the-Gate,” or “of-
habitation.” The latter did not oblige themselves to circumcision,
or to any other ceremony of the Law. They were permitted to wor-
ship the God of Israel in the Outer-Court of the Temple, called the
“Court of the Gentiles.” Of this number were Cornelius the Cen-
turion, and Nebuzarradin general of Nebuchadnezzar's army. They
were obliged to renounce idolatry, and to worship God according to
the Law-of-Nature, which Law was reduced to seven articles, called
the “Seven Precepts of the sons of Noah :” and to which it was
held that all men were obliged to conform, however they might ob-
ject to the Law-of-Moses. “Proselytes-of-the-Gate” were so called,
because upon observance of these precepts they were permitted to
dwell within the gates. “Proselytes-of-Justice,” were such as took
upon them to observe the whole Jewish-Law.—In ch. 8. § xIv,
Maimonides alludes to the baptism of servants: baptism, circumci-
sion, and the taking of the Covenant, being indispensable to a Pro-
selyte. According to the usual form of baptism, a slave or servant
at the time of becoming a Proselyte, obtained his freedom. (See
CXV.
remarks upon Slaves, p. lxix, Note 2.) But if his master intended
to retain him in servitude, it was the law that he should lean over
the convert whilst in the water, nor should he suffer him to rise, un-
til certain words indicative of his Continuance-in-servitude, had been
pronounced. It is this Continuance-in-servitude notwithstanding
conversion, which is alluded to by Maimonides (cap. viii ş 14.) as
not debarring the captive Proselyte from the rights of captive Israe-
lites. (The several laws and regulations relating to Proselytes, are
fully treated of by Maimonides in his Tract, Issure-Biah, cap. xiii.
xiv.)—Amongst the Romans, freedom was given to the slave by
the Praetor : who, with a rod or switch called the “Vindicta,” touched
the head of the slave. Thence the word “Vindicta” was taken to
signify Liberty itself-The Gentoo mode of freeing a slave, according
to Halhed, was this:—The slave filling a pitcher of water and putting
therein Berengearook, (rice that has been cleansed without boiling,)
and flowers, and Doob, (a small salad,) and placing the pitcher upon
his shoulder, shall stand near his master ; and the master putting
the pitcher upon the slave's head, shall then break the pitcher, so
that the water, rice, flowers, and Doob may fall upon the slave's bo-
dy. The master shall then thrice pronounce the words,-" I have
made you free ;” whereupon, the slave taking some steps towards
the east, becomes free.—There are two descriptions of “Strangers,”
specified by Moses: one of which is conjectured to have meant—A
foreigner, who had no house of his own; and the other,-One who
had no land.—Levites, therefore, possessing no land, might have been
termed Strangers. The distinction, however, appears not to have
been strictly observed ; and less so in the Historical Books of Scrip-
ture. Maimonides expressly states (Ch. 1. § ix) that by the word
“Stranger,” he is to be understood as designating a Proselyte-of-Jus-
tice. (See his other remarks upon Proselytes, Ch. 2. § ix)—It has
been said, that the charitable Laws of the Hebrews extended only to
the Poor and the Stranger of the Hebrew fraternity. Selden denies
the assertion, as it is also denied by Maimonides; although the rea-
son given by Maimonides, (Ch. 1. § ix) differs from that assigned
by Selden on the faith of Josephus. It was “for humanity’s sake”
that the Gentile Poor were relieved according to Josephus; who him-
self (Archaeol. Lib. IV Ch. 8.) relates that he was a witness to the
equal consideration that they enjoyed. Not indeed altogether by
virtue of the Sacred-Law, but under their own ordinances: and, says
Josephus, those charitable donations to Gentile Poor, were termed
“xenia” or hospitable gifts. (Selden, Lib. VI ch. 6.) Such was the
benevolent interpretation put upon the words of Scripture, (Ps.
cxlv)—The Lord is good to all, and his mercy is over all his
works | An interpretation which extended even to the lower creation,
as alluded to at P. xxxi. of “Testimonies &c.”
NotE 14. Threshing and Mills.
According to Dr. Lowth there were four modes of Threshing, in
vogue amongst the people of Palestine : viz. By means of the Flail or
cxvi.
Staff—the Drag—the Wain—and the Treading-of-cattle. The Staff
or Flail was used for the “infirmiora semina,” the grain that was
too tender to be treated in the other methods. The Drag consisted
of a sort of frame of strong planks, made rough at the bottom by
means of stones or iron: it was drawn by horses or oxen over the
corn-sheaves when spread over the floor, the driver sitting upon it.
Kaempfer (Aman: Ezot : fig. 3) has given a print representing the
manner of using this instrument. Isaiah (Ch. xxv) compares the
slaughtering of the people of Moab, to corn threshed by this
instrument:—
And Moab shall be threshed in his place,
As the straw is threshed under the wheels of the car.
The Wain differed little from the former, except inasmuch as it had
wheels with iron teeth, or edges like a saw. Niebuhr (Voy: en Ara-
bie) has a print of such a machine, as at present made use of in Egypt.
This instrument, also, is alluded to by Isaiah (Ch. xli) in charac-
terizing the vengeance of the Almighty :—
Behold, I have made thee a threshing-wain /
A new corn-drag armed with pointed teeth !
Thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small :
And reduce the hills to chaff
The last method is well known : the Law of Moses forbids—“the
ox to be muzzled, when he treadeth out the corn.” These several
modes are thus particularized by Isaiah, (Ch. xxviii:)—
The dill is not beaten out with the corn-drag,
Nor is the wheel of the wain made to turn upon the cummin ;
But the dill is beaten out with the staff,
And the cummin with the flail :
But the bread-corn with the threshing-wain.
—Dr. Russell says, that at Aleppo beef is pretty good at all seasons,
but particularly excellent in summer; because, to this day, the in-
habitants sacredly adhere to the ancient custom of allowing the ox
while threshing, to eat as much as he will. In the account of the
Mission to Malabar, we are told that the people there have a proverb
to this effect, What an ox threshes, is his profit. — By the peo-
ple of the East, it is deemed mean and cruel to debar even a slave
from tasting of the food which he has under his eyes and hands.
(Wide P. 29, of the Introduction,-" On the Rights of Necessity.”)
Job, depicting a monster of avarice and hard-heartedness, (Ch.
xxiv) describes him as tantalizing his impotent victim with the
sight of an abundance in which he is denied the slightest participation:
and as a recompense for unremitting toil, dooming him to be depri-
ved of a home, pent-up in some workhouse estranged from all he
holds dear:—
The hungry carry his sheaves |
Immured in workhouses they prepare his oil,
They tread his wine-presses and yet they thirst
By the Talmud the right of the labourer to a share in the fruit of his
labour is expressly recognized:—“The workman may lawfully eat of
cxvii.
what he works among : in the vintage he may eat of grapes; when
gathering figs he may partake of them ; and in harvest he may eat
the ears of corn. Of gourds and dates he may eat the value of a de-
narius.” (See also the passage from Josephus, at P. 9. of the Intro-
duction, on the “Rights of Necessity.”)—In threshing their corn,
says Niebuhr, the Arabians lay the sheaves in a certain order, and
lead over them two oxen dragging a large stone. Not unlike the
mode practised in Egypt, where a level spot is fixed upon, the corn
being carried thither in sheaves upon asses or dromedaries. The
Moors and Arabs, says Dr. Shaw, continue to tread out their corn
after the primitive custom of the East : tying by the neck three or
four beeves or mules, and whipping them round about the neddars:
(as they call the Threshing-floors, the Lybica arae of Horace.)—
After “Threshing” followed winnowing. The “Van” for winnowing
used by the ancients, was similar to the instrument still made use of
in parts of England: like to a shovel with a long handle. With this,
the mixed corn and chaff was tossed-up in a current of air, that the
wind might blow away the chaff. The wrath of God, in its effects
is likened by Isaiah to a van : the van of perdition or emptiness, (as
Kimchi has explained it,) which shall leave nothing behind; all
shall perish,-
“He cometh to toss the nations with the van of perdition 2''
—The grain thus obtained, was generally reduced to meal by the
Hand-mill; similar to the Querns used in Scotland and Lapland.
These are the primaeval mills of the world.—It was the work of
slaves to grind the corn; so Isaiah (Ch. 47.) forebodes that such
will be the fate of the virgin daughters of Babylon :-
Descend and sit in the dust, O Virgin daughter of Babylon,
Take the mill and grind the corn 1
Water-mills, says Dr. Lowth, were not invented till a little before
the time of Augustus; (see the Greek epigram of Antipater;) wind-
mills, not until long after. The grinding with hand-mills was not
only the work of slaves, but it was accounted the hardest work : and
indeed, a severe punishment. “Hominem pistrino dignum,” says
Terence : in the East it was the work of the female slaves. Pennant
found women at this work, in Scotland. So in Exodus, (Ch. xi.)
—“The maid-servant that is behind the mill :” and in Homer,-
A woman next, then lab’ring at the mill
Hard by, where all his num’rous mills he kept,
Gave him the sign propitious from within.
—And in Matthew (Ch. xxiv)—“Two women shall be grinding at
“the mill; the one shall be taken, the other left.”—It is the same
to this day: Chardin and Shaw both observe that—Women alone
are employed to grind corn.—It is extremely laborious, and esteemed
the lowest employment in the house.—All the first-born in the land
of Egypt were to suffer death, from the first-born of the throne, un-
to the first-born of the maid-servant that is behind the mill.—Samson
cxviii.
was made to grind in the prison-house, (Judges xvi.) as being the
most debasing employment for a man,—
O glorious strength !
Put to the labour of a beast, debased
Lower than bondslave l’’
—A creditor was prohibited from taking the upper or the nether
stone of the mill, they being indispensable to the preparation of every
meal: and the prohibition was accompanied with the strong expres-
sion, (Deut. xxiv.)—“He taketh a man’s life to pledge.”—(See
also p. 69, of “Testimonies” &c.)
4 &
Note 15. Evening Sacrifice.
THE Hebrew word here translated “Evening-Sacrifice,” signifies
properly, Oblation, Gift, and especially the Sacred Meal-Offering :
which offering made twice in the day, at Morning and Evening-
Sacrifice, the word was at length employed to signify the Sacrifice
itself, as in I Kings xviii. and also to signify the time of Evening-
Sacrifice, as in Daniel ix. There were particular regulations rela-
tive to the time of killing the Paschal-Lamb : but, with the exception
of the one day preceding that Festival, the Evening-Sacrifice was
killed at the 8+ hour and offered-up at the 9% hour i. e. at # p. 2, and
# p. 3 of our computation of time. This last hour was the period
fixed by the humane Laws of the Hebrews for the third time of glean-
ing in the day.
NoTE 16. Measures, &c.
SEEDs and Kernels are sometimes the regulators of weights; as
the weight of a nutmeg or of so many black pepper-corns. The
Hebrews calculate their measure from Hen's eggs. In India the
paddy-weight is used, being that of the grains of rough rice, each of
which is equal to about two-fifths of a grain ; and the gulivindum-
weight, is that of a jumble-bead, equal to about one and 5-16ths of a
grain. Our own measures were originally taken from corns of wheat,
whence the lowest denomination of weights is called a grain ; and
we have the measure of 3 Barley-corns to an Inch. Henry 1st. com-
manded the Ulna or ancient Ell (the modern Yard) to be of the
exact length of his own arm. The following Table exhibits most of
the Hebrew measures alluded to by Maimonides:
6 Ova or eggs equal One Logus (about 9 oz.)
4 Logus . . . . Cabus (about 2 lbs. or pts. and 4 oz.)
3 Cabus . . . . Hinnus
2 Hinnus . . . . Sea
3 Sea . . . . Epha
10 Sea . . . . Omer (about 4 lbs, and 4-5th oz.)
10 Epha . . . . Corus or Chomer
4 Omer tº dº . Mikve
The Rebiita mentioned in Ch. iv. § 22 is the fourth-part of a Logus :
the Siclus mentioned in Ch. vi. § 8 is about # an oz. . and the Roman
denarius mentioned in the same chapter (being the same as the Attic
Drachm) is about the one-eighth of an oz.
cxix.
Note 17. The Locust.
The locusts have no king; yet go they forth, all of them, by bands. Prov. 30.
Maimonides provides for the ploughing-up and re-sowing of land
devastated by Locusts. (Ch. iii. § 5.)—The Hebrews had many names
for the insect, being acquainted with several species unknown in
Europe. Modern travellers corroborate the Scriptural accounts of
its tremendous ravages:—
He spake 1 and the Locusts came !
And did eat up all the herb in their land,
And devoured the fruit of their growth !
The Chronicon of Hermannus details the ravages of a vast swarm of
locusts, that came pouring into Germany in 873, so close and com-
pact, that for two months they occasionally and to the extent of a
mile obscured the rays of the sun : or in the words of the Prophet
Joel,-The sun and moon were dark, and the stars withdrew their
shining. Pliny, Cyril, and Jerome confirm the correctness of the
other portions of the sublime description by this Prophet, of the ra-
vages of Locusts : of the noise of their wings being so loud as to be
heard at a distance of several miles, and resembling the wind driving
the flames before it: —“like the noise of a flame of fire that devour-
eth the stubble :” and of the disposition and regularity of their march,
—“the appearance is as the appearance of horsemen,” &c.—Hircanus
relates that about the year 125, Africa was ravaged by vast swarms
of Locusts, which were at length driven by the wind into the sea.
Afterwards cast upon the sands, a noisome effluvia was emitted, oc-
casioning a pestilential fever: and it is said not fewer than 800,000
persons about Libya, Cyrene, and other neighbouring parts became
its victims :—
And charged with putrid verdure, breathe a gross
And mortal nuisance into all the air.
But indeed, the annals of most of the warm countries are interspersed
with accounts of its devastations. All the vineyards in Algiers were
destroyed by a plague of Locusts in 1723–4, and since that time, if
we are to believe authors, the quality of the grape is much deteriora-
ted.—Hanway speaks of the prodigious clouds within view, as he
sailed up the Volga to Astrachan. The motion of the boat was im-
peded by their dense masses in the river, clinging together in clus-

CXX.
ters of three feet diameter. , They can live for some time under wa-
ter, and when driven on shore their wings quickly dry : few are drown-
ed. The most prolific of living things, it happily exists but for a
year. In the “Revelations,” (Ch. ix) much of the character and
habit of the Locust is forcibly and correctly depicted : its motion is
alluded to by the Psalmist, (Ps. cix)— r
I am gone ! Like the shadow when it declineth :
I am tossed up and down, as the Locust .
Happily Europe has of late years been exempt from this terrific
scourge, to which no mound, no bulwark, no height of walls oppose
an obstacle. Whilst other animals in general tremble at the sight of
man, Locusts will face and attack him :—
With helmet heads and dragon-scales adorn’d,
The mighty myriads now securely scorn’d,
Would mock the majesty of man’s high birth,
Despise his bulwarks, and unpeople earth !
—Great as is the devastation of the Locust, it scarcely surpasses that
of the caterpillars which occasionally visit Australia. Cunningham
relates, that like the Locusts they cover every thing, advancing in an
orderly and a compact body. Before them may be seen verdant
meadows: in their rear a bare red desert. Rivulets are but a mo-
mentary interruption : they drop on the water, float obliquely to the
opposite bank, and recommence the work of destruction.—The word
unclean applied in the Mosaic-Law to animals, is no epithet of degra-
dation: it merely designates those animals, the eating of which it
was, for moral and political reasons, desirable that the Israelites
should abstain from. Of the customs of the Canaanites, or Phaeni-
cians, Moses entertained a just abhorrence which he studied to im-
part to his people. Justin (Lib. xix 1.) has a passage, denoting
that the Carthaginians like the Gypsies of the present day, were in
the habit of feasting upon,-" the flesh obscene of dog :” a custom
derived doubtless from their Canaanitish ancestors: and according to
Dr. Shaw and Abulfeda there are nations on the coast of Africa still
indulging in the same luxury:—
“—— quoniam vacuis committere venis,
** Nil nisi lene decet !”
The bestiality being of Canaanitish origin, this alone constituted
reason sufficient for placing dogs upon the unclean list : where locusts
also would probably have appeared, but for the necessity of permit-
ting the use of them in times of famine. When the fields are laid
waste, the insect itself is frequently the only antidote to the distress
its ravages occasion. Insects, serpents, worms &c. are prohibited :
but an exception is made of those winged-insects, which besides four
walking-legs have also two longer springing-legs : (pedes saltatorii :)
these are declared clean in all their four stages of existence.—Selden
very naively tells us upon the authority of Moses Mikotzi and of
Maimonides, that Locusts are not required to be prepared for the
dinner-table with all the forms and ceremonies attending the killing
of sheep and cattle –“ Non opus est ut adhibeantur ritus macta-
cxxi.
tionis piscibus et locustis: collectio eorum licitos eos facit.”—That
the practice of cooking and eating Locusts is common in the coun-
tries subject to this scourge, is well authenticated and well-known.
Clenard in a letter from Fez, (A. D. 1540) asserts that he saw wag-
gon-loads of Locusts taken into that city for food : and Kerstenius
in his Notes on Matthew, says he was informed by his Arabic master,
that about the Jordan the inhabitants pluck off their wings and feet,
and hang up the rest until they grow warm and ferment | They then
feast upon them, and find them little inferior to the,—
Candiduli divina tomacula porci :
The sacred sausage of a silv’ry sow !
Dr. Sparman declares (“Voyage to the Cape,”) that roasted Locusts
are regarded by some tribes of Hottentots not only as food, but as a
delicacy : perhaps as much to be coveted as was the garum, sold for
its weight in silver amongst the Romans, although made from the
putrid entrails of mackerel and the sciaena-umbra : or as the diseased
liver of pigs and white geese,_
Quibus assis,languidus in cubitum jam se conviva reponet:
—all of them savoury dishes to people of genius and gusto, and of
which the French would tastefully say, “L'appetit vient en man-
eant :”—
£ As if increase of appetite had grown by what it fed on 1
The Hottentots, says Sparman, make ample amends for their devas-
tations, by “falling foul on the animals themselves;” devouring them
in such quantities that in the space of a few days these gourmands
become visibly fatter in condition.—In Southern Asia, Locusts are a
common dish ; but Ludolff (“Dissert. de Locust.”) who had them
served up in an approved style, was in daily apprehension lest his
people should propose a trial of them by himself: he could not ex-
claim with Eve,_
The pleasant savoury smell so quicken’d appetite,
That I methought could not but taste it !
Hasselquist relates that Locusts are a favourite dish with the Ara-
bians: they grind them in hand-mills when corn is scarce, and bake
them into cakes as brown as ginger-bread.—The veracity of “Clas-
sical” Historians must never be questioned: and therefore none will
question the very singular account of the Locust-eaters, the “Acrido-
phagi” handed down for the edification of posterity by Diodorus
Siculus. These Ethiopians, by stratagems detailed by the Sicilian
(Lib. 3. xxxix.) intercepted the Locusts driven by the winds from the
desert: and as pilchards are pickled upon the Cornish coast, so were
these Locusts pickled for domestic use. As was the “Lotus” to the
“Lotophagi” mentioned by Homer, so was this salted entremets to
the “Acridophagi,”—
Which whoso tastes, insatiate riots in the sweet repast.
Such only was the food the country afforded: fish or fowl, flocks or
herds, there were none. But alas ! the lives of these Locust-eaters
were of short duration, and inconceivably uncomfortable their close :
R
Cxxii.
since the Historian relates, that pickled Locusts occasion a malady
at once excruciating and singular in the extreme :—
Kindle a fiery boil upon the skin, and putrify the flesh of blooming health !
The disease broke out in the breast, rapidly extending to the whole
frame. Foul winged vermin of every ugly form were engendered in
the body, forcing their way through the wounds which, in his agony,
the victim was incessantly tearing with his nails: and in such num-
bers as to defy their destruction. So that the skin of the vermiparous
Ethiop became, as he perished, as porous as a sponge l—It has been
disputed whether the Locusts the Baptist fed upon, were the insects
or the fruit of a tree: (concerning which see P. 41. of “Testimonies
&c.”) it may be that he subsisted upon both.-There is a remarkable
passage in Ecclesiasticus, (xii. 5,) where Solomon, describing the last
imbecile moments of old age, says, according to our translation : “the
Grasshopper shall be a burden;”—but it is generally admitted, that
the words should be rendered—“The locust shall burden itself.” To
this insect the Preacher compares the—“lean and slippered Panta-
loon :”—and in the “Collection of Gems in the Florentine Gallery’
(Pl. 96,) is a striking representation of an old man with his “shrunk
shank,” under the emaciated figure of a Locust, tottering along, as
upright as he can carry a kind of yoke, with a basket at each end.
From this exact likeness, says Dr. Smith, without doubt arose the
fable of Tithonus, who, living to extreme old age, was at last turned
into a Grasshopper.
NoTE 18. Anise and Cummin.
MAIMONIDEs points out (Ch. 3. § xi.) that these plants and mus-
tard were sown in small beds, as they still are by careful gardeners
of the present day. The Cumin (Cuminum Cyminum) is a native of
Egypt. Judging from its etymology, this plant must have possessed
virtues of a transcendent nature in days of yore. In Malta they grow
large quantities both of this which they call “cumino aigro” or
hot cumin ; and of the Anise which they call “cumino dulce.”—Anise,
the “Pimpinella Anisum” of botanists, grows wild in Palestine, Crete,
and other places of the East; it has a fine aromatic smell. The
Pharisaical hypocrites in the time of Christ, were scrupulous in out-
ward observances: they were exquisitely nice “in the dull service of
the lip :” they were rigid in paying “ty the of Anise and of Cum-
min ;” and such was the sum total of their virtue and piety.
NoTE 19. Constitutions of Moses from Sinai.
MAIMONIDEs alludes (ch. 3. § 15) to a particular regulation as
being established, not under any law of the Pentateuch, but under a
tradition originally orally received by Moses on Mount Sinai, (Exod.
xxxi) distinct from the Two Tables of the Law; which indeed are
said to be by that Oral-Law more fully explained. (See p. 24 of
the “Life of Maimonides,” preceding.) This Oral-Law is reputed
to be comprised in the Mischna : and concerning it, Maimonides has
treated fully in his Preface to the Seder-Zeraim, (1st. Book of the
cxxiii.
Mischna,) translated into Latin by Dr. Pocock in his “Porta Mosis.”
—The Decalogue which was to be portable, was written on tablets:
—“tables of stone, written with the finger of God.” (Exod. xxxi.)
In primeval times, the practice was general of recording facts on pil-
lars and tablets of stone. Goguet remarks that the columns erected
by Osiris, Bacchus, Sesostris, and Hercules, to perpetuate the re-
membrance of their respective expeditions, were particularly famous.
Ancient inscriptions on the surface of perpendicular rocks are found
in Asia, of such antiquity that their letters or characters are utterly
unknown. The ancient Babylonians are thought to have registered
on bricks their astronomical discoveries. In the time of Demosthenes
there still existed at Athens, a law of Theseus inscribed on a Stone-
pillar. In China, the most ancient monuments of literature were
inscribed on large and hard stones. Hamilton, after detailing the
particulars of the attack upon the Island of Amoy in 1645, states
that the account is engraved in large China characters on the face of
a rock at the entrance of the harbour. (“Acct. of East Indies.”)
NoTE 20. The Corner.
According to the law as laid down by Maimonides, (Ch. 1. § 15)
the portion of the crop left for the poor did not consist of the “cor-
ners of thy field,” (Lev. xii) in the commoa acceptation of the word:
but merely of a certain portion to be left standing “at the end of the
field,” after the rest had been reaped or plucked-up. There was not
only a Corner to be left in the fields, but in the vines, and in other
trees: in pulse, pods, nuts, almonds, pomegranites, olives, and dates.
(Ch. 2. § 11) Travellers say, that in the present day the harvest in
Palestine is entirely plucked-up by the roots, in the manner that the
Poor were required to gather their portion of the “Corner.” (Ch. 2.
§ xv) Straw is there too valuable to allow of any portion being
wasted by the use of the sickle. Barley, says Dr. Russell, is more
usually plucked-up, than cut down. Neither grass nor oats being
grown, straw is the chief food of horses; as it was in the time of
Solomon (1 Kings), and continues to be to this day in Arabia and
Barbary.—The directions relating to the Law of the “Corner” are
most minute and explicit : showing that not only were Tithes paid
in kind, but that the poor were in a great degree relieved by dona-
tions in kind : a regulation beneficial alike to the husbandman and
to the poor.
Note 21. Gleaning.
IT is an express divine command more than once repeated, that
the Gleanings of the harvest and of the vintage shall, of right, belong
to the Poor: (Lev. xii & xxiii—Deut. xxiv) and most conscientiously
is that command obeyed, and strictly and reverentially enforced by the
Hebrew-Law. (See the Note at p. 45 of the Introduction) The 4th
Ch. of Maimonides minutely defines the meaning of the term glean-
ings, and endeavours to prevent fraudulent practices in regard to
those gleanings, by a clear decision upon all probable contingences.
cxxiv.
—In England there are two words signifying this right or custom :
leasing being the word in general use in Yorkshire and other parts,
where indeed the word gleaning would be unintelligible. The ety-
mology of these terms, seems to show that the right or custom itself
was common both in Germany and in France. According to Min-
shew,-To Glean is derived from the French Glainer, quasi Graner,
i.e. colligere grana. To Lease is from the Teutonic Ahrlesen, the
Belgic being Arenlesen ; words compounded of Ahr, an ear of corn—
and Lesen, to gather. From Ahr proceeds Ahrish, used in many
parts of England to signify stubble. Leasing, then, appears to be
derived from the Germans: Gleaning from the Normans. The cus-
tom of Gleaning is not common throughout England only, but it
may be said throughout the universe, from time immemorial. The
Work of Maimonides shows, that under the Hebrew-Law it was not
a custom enjoyed by sufferance, but a strict legal right : and such is
the view taken of that law by Selden, who avers that the actual pro-
perty of the Gleanings was vested in the Poor. And thus a crop
cannot be made public, divested of its liability to the Poor. (Ch. 4. §
14) Of so sacred a nature were gleanings reputed, as to be exempted
from Tithes. (Selden Hist. of Tithes.) Nelson says, “The precept
of not gathering their land clean, but that something should be left
to the poor to glean, was a secondary offering to God himself.”
Bishop Atterbury says, “The orphan and the widow are members
of the same common family, and have a right to be supported out of
the incomes of it, as the poor Jews had to gather the gleanings of
the rich man’s harvest.”—The Eastern Pars leave the dates shaken
down by the wind, for the destitute and travellers. (Ouseley's Or.
Geog.) The right of the poor amongst the Arabs to glean, appears
to be admitted by Mahomet in the Koran : after extolling the divine
goodness in the production of corn, dates, pomegranites, olives, he
adds:—Enjoy these fruits : but in harvest and vintage give to the
poor their right: yet go not too far this way, for God loves not
squanderers. (Ch. vi.) In the Gentoo-Laws it is said, “It were
better for a Brahmin who could not maintain himself, to glean ears
and grains after harvest from the field of any person whatever :
gleaning whole ears would be better than accepting a present, and
picking up single grains would be still more laudable.” By the cus-
tom of Melun and Estampes, farmers are forbidden to put cattle in the
fields, or, upon pain of confiscation, to prevent in any way the gleaning
of the fields, for 24 hours at the least after the carrying of the crop.
As to the custom of England, there can be little doubt that the poor
have enjoyed the right of gleaning from the most remote periods of
antiquity: “a humane custom,” says Blackstone, “seemingly bor-
rowed from the Mosaical Law.”—There are those in modern times
to whom, such is their acuteness of intellect, no law or custom how-
ever venerable by age and confirmed by immemorial usage, is sup-
portable. Philosophic minds such as these, with talents to refine
and reform and amend even the Scriptures themselves, denounce the
command of God,—“to leave the gleanings for the poor and the
CXXV,
stranger,”—as inevitably leading to “idleness, immorality, pilfering,
and a looseness of disposition l’’ Blackstone treats of this custom,
thus impiously arraigned, as being, in law, of dubious validity: by
others it is asserted that the laws of this country, (required to be
ever in conformity with the Law of God,) give to the poor as perfect
a right to the gleanings, as they give to the farmer his right to the
crop. By the judgment, however, of the Court of Common Pleas
(Steel v Houghton, 1788) this right of the poor is denied, and the
doctrine of Blackstone that entry upon another man’s land for such
a purpose would be justifiable trespass, set at nought : if indeed
the dictum of Lord Loughborough is to be deemed of more weight
than that dictum which he was pleased to term extrajudicial of Lord
Hale, who, at the Norfolk Assizes of 1668, asserted that the Law
gives license to the poor to glean, by the general custom of England.
It would be out of place to notice here at large the singular argu-
ments of Lord Loughborough against the validity of this custom :
ably and feelingly refuted as they were by Mr. Justice Gould. If it
be inconsistent with “the exclusive enjoyment of property,” for the
poor to gather-up the derelict ears of corn which would otherwise be
lost to the community, how is it that the Chief-Justice would ac-
count for the interposition of the State against the wanton mis-
management of their property by private individuals: of its interpo-
sition by imposing regulations upon those who are disposing of their
own produce and the fruits of their own labour ; of its interposition
in permitting the hunting of badgers and foxes upon another man’s
land: of its interposition in empowering the Clergy to take a tenth
of the produce, &c. If the “nature of property imports exclusive
enjoyment,” there can be no such thing in law as Common-Rights—
common of pasture, or right of feeding one's beasts on another's land
—common of piscary, or right of fishing in another man's waters—
common of turbary, or right of digging turf in another man’s field:
and other rights-of-common strangely lost sight of by the Lord Chief-
Justice. But in point of fact, this right of the poor to the derelict
ears of corn is good in law ; and says Justice Hewet, (4 Burr. 1927)
“The right of leasing does appear in our books: but it must be un-
der proper circumstances and restrictions.” Those circumstances
and restrictions were thus stated in the notices affixed in the town
and neighbourhood of Dorking in 1835 : viz.: “The Landowners,
Farmers, and Agriculturists of the Parish of Dorking in Surry, do
hereby give notice to the Parishioners, labourers and others, that they
will not permit any person to glean or lease any corn, before the pro-
duce of the Land is taken from the Field.”
NoTE 22. Aris and Chachir
Ir was not an uncommon practice for a husbandman to hold land
under the agreement of receiving a certain proportion of its pro-
duce, the landlord paying all the expences of cultivation. Such an
one was termed in Hebrew, Aris. The Chachir was one who held
cxxvi.
land upon the condition of yielding a certain portion of the produce
to the landlord, whether the crop was such as to be a gain or a loss.
Similar agreements are common in France and elsewhere.
NotE 23. Ceteph and Neteph.
THESE terms, applied to particular bunches of grapes in Ch. iv.
§ 18, have been explained in the latter part of “Note 12, The Vine”
NotE 24. Observance of Fast-days at Jerusalem.
IT has already been stated in the Note upon “Truma and Tithe,”
that the Second-Tithe was to be eaten at Jerusalem. (Deut. xiv.)
So also was the crop of Fruit-trees upon the Fourth-year from the
time of planting; it being moreover illegal to make use of the pro-
duce of the three first years. The crop of the Fourth-year was
sacred, and was to be eaten according to the directions relating to
the Second-Tithe, “in the place where the Lord should choose to
place his name.” The Temple being eventually erected at Jeru-
salem, it was there that the fasts and festivals were required to be
kept, and the Second-Tithe &c. to be consumed:—
“Our feet shall stand in thy gates, O Jerusalem
Jerusalem is built as a City, that is at unity in itself ;
For thither the tribes go up, even the tribes of the Lord;
To testify unto Israel, to give thanks unto the name of the Lord.”
(Ps. cxxii.)
NoTE 25. Of Things Forgotten.
THE Babylonian Talmud (Tract, Bava Metzia fol. 11) thus
explains the regulation laid down by Maimonides in Ch. 5. § 2 : —
That which has been forgotten in the field from the beginning, is a
Thing-left-through-Forgetfulness : but if it has once occurred to the
memory and been subsequently forgotten, it is not a Thing &c.
Much may be seen in the Talmud upon this subject. (Tract. Sota, fol.
45.-Comment. Rasi in tract. Bava Metzia, &c.)—Bartenora in his
Commentary upon the Tract Peah, (Cap. v. § 8.) explains that the
place where the corn is threshed out is to be deemed in law, a Barn :
this will explain the apparent obscurity of the passages in Ch. v. §
12, 13, &c. If the corn is heaped together in the field, with the
intention of there threshing it out, the field is to be considered as
the place where all work relating to the sheaves is finished, and is
therefore, quasi a Barn. (Vide also the Mischna, Tract upon Tithes,
Cap. 1. § 5.)—In treating of Forgotten-sheaves, it is not to be sup-
posed that the Hebrew word translated Sheaf, had regard to such a
parcel of reaped corn as is understood by the English word Sheaf;
it would be strange indeed if such a parcel should be overlooked, or
be blown from one field into another, as contemplated in Ch. v. § 5.
The word manipulus of the Vulgate, would appear more nearly to
designate the Hebrew-Sheaf. -
cxxvii.
NoTE 26. Wine-Press.
See the latter part of “Note 12, The Vine.”
NoTE 27. The Olive.
IN the Mischna (Tract Peah, Cap 7.) the Rabbi Jose makes, in
favour of the Olive-tree, a peculiar exemption from the Law-of-Things-
forgotten : and Maimonides states as the reason for this exemption,
that at the time at which the Mischna was compiled, Olive-trees were
rare in Palestine, in consequence of the ravages committed by
Adrian. This exemption, however, did not continue in force when
Olive-trees became more common. Maimonides alludes particularly
to the Olives of Bashan and of Netopha. Notwithstanding successive
devastations of the country, the Olive-tree yet vindicates its paternal
soil, and is preserved to this day upon the “Mount of Olives.” Dr.
Clarke found there a grove of aged trees, of amazing growth, loaded
with fruit. Gethsemane, (the word signifying an Oil-press,) the
village upon the Mount, Maundrell described in his time as abound-
ing in aged Olive-trees, firmly believed to be the identical trees of
our Saviour's time. The same is related by Lamartine in 1832 :—
“Il reste non loin de la grotte de Gethsemani, un petit coin de terre ombragé
encore par sept Oliviers, que les traditions populaires assignent comme les
mémes arbres sous lesquels Jésus se coucha et pleura. Ces Oliviers, en effet,
portent réellement sur leur troncs et sur leurs immenses racines, la date des dix-
huit siècles qui se sont écoulés depuis cette grande nuit. Cestroncs sont
énormes, et formés comme tous ceux des vieux Oliviers, d'un grand nombre de
tiges qui semblent s'être incorporées à l'arbre, sous la même écorce, et forment
comme unfaisceau de colonnes accouplées. Leurs rameaux sont presque des-
Séchés, mais portent cependant encore quelques Olives.”—
Now, although Titus destroyed all the trees within 100 furlongs of
the walls of Jerusalem, these Olive-trees may yet be the shoots from
the ancient stools: since it is peculiar to the Olive-tree to enjoy
a species of immortality, a fresh shoot ever springing up from the
parent root. And so from the root of the Olive-tree at Athens, the
tree of the Goddess revived again after the temple had been burnt to
the ground by Xerxes. Pliny declares that the Vine will live at
least 600 years: Evelyn grants 1000 to the oak. The Olive is said
to rival the Oak in longevity: and considering the hardness and
closeness of its grain, we have little reason to distrust the testimony
of those, who assert that the original trunk will outlive many genera-
tions of mankind. A French writer (Rondelet, “Art de Batir”)
SayS,- -
“Les anciens faisaient usage du bois d’Olivier pour relier la magonnerie des
murs de remparts, parceque cette espece de bois se conserve long-temps dans
le mortier, et qu’elle n'est pas sujette à se tourmenter.”
If we are to give credit to the oft-repeated assertion of travellers,
that the few aged cedars on Lebanon, are the remaining identical
trees planted by Solomon, no great stretch of imagination is required
for believing that Olive-trees, dating from the earliest period of the
Christian aera, may yet exist. The longevity of the Olive is such,
says Maria Graham, (“Three months near Rome”) that it has become
cxxviii.
a common saying at Rome, “If you desire a lasting inheritance
for your children's children, plant an Olive.” An old hollow tree
near Gerecomio, a few years ago yielded 240 English quarts of oil :
though its empty shell seemed barely to have hold enough in the
ground, to secure it against mountain storms.-The mode of collecting
the fruit is by shaking and beating the trees, as alluded to by Isaiah :
and we see by the quotation from Deuteronomy made by Maimonides,
(Ch. 1. § vi) that whatever was overlooked in the first beating, fell
to the lot of the poor. From a passage in Pliny it seems that in
some countries, there was a Law prohibiting the beating of Olive-
trees;– “Oleum ne stringito, neve verberato.”—Isaiah foretelling
the future desolate state of Damascus, declares that the inhabitants
shall be so exterminated, as to be comparable only to the scattered
ears after the harvest; or to the few berries left upon the tree-top
after the beating of the Olive-tree :—
A gleaming shall be left in it, as the shaking of the olive tree;
Two or three berries, on the top of the uppermost bough ;
Four or five on the straggling fruitful branches.
And again : (Ch. xxiv)—
Yea thus shall it be, in the very centre of the Land, in the midst of the people :
As the shaking of the Olive, as the gleaning when the vintage is finished.
—The Olive branch was a usual Scripture-emblem for a child :—
“Thy children like Olive-branches round about thy table !”—as the
Psalmist beautifully expresses it.(Ps. cxxviii)—It was the Olive also,
which suggested to Homer the beautiful Simile applied to Euphorbus
falling under the strokes of Menelaus ; a Simile so much admired
by Pythagoras, that he set the verses to music and used to sing
them accompanying himself upon the harp:—
“As the young Olive, in some sylvan scene,
Crown'd by fresh fountains with eternal green,
Lifts the gay head, in snowy flow'rets fair,
And plays and dances to the gentle air;
When, lo! a whirlwind from high heaven invades
The tender plant, and withers all its shades :
It lies uprooted from its genial bed,
A lovely ruin, now defac'd and dead l’’
—The Olive also suggested the common adage applied to doltish ob-
stinacy, —“Nil intra est oleam : nil extra estin nuce duri.” (Hor. Ep.)
—The Olive continues to this day to be a profitable object of culti-
vation in Palestine : the fruit and the oil being indeed equal to any
in the Levant. Solomon gave 20,000 Baths of oil yearly to the Ty.
rian hewers of timber in Lebanon; (1 Chron.) and apparently an
equal quantity to the King of Tyre himself. (1 Kings) Itformed with
the Vine, the Date, and the Fig, (treated of in the preceding Notes,)
one of the great sources of wealth and comfort to the people. In
the time of Ezekiel it formed one of the articles of export :--
Judah and the land of Israel, they were thy merchants,
They traded in thy market, wheat of Minnith and Pannag,
And honey, and oil and balm.
cxxix
The adaptation of plants to the nature of the soil, appears to have
been well-understood by Moses, and by the introduction of this gift.
of nature, the seemingly barren spots and stony places,—the mon-
tagnes pelées * of Voltaire, were rendered not only useful but pecu-
liarly productive and valuable.—Dr. Clarke when at Nablous, (Shec.
hem) noticed the large olive-plantations near the gates, the reposing-
place for the Egyptian caravans. These caravans are described as re-
sembling, to this day, those which in the time of Reuben and Judah
travelled this identical route,_" with their Camels bearing spicery and
balm and myrrh.”—(Gen. xxxvii) Dr. Clarke witnessed a company of
Ishmaelites coming from Gilead quite willing, had the opportunity
offered, to purchase another Joseph of his brethren.—Jotham ap-
pears to have valued the Olive as the King of trees: and it appears
to have been held in equal esteem by the Romans. Columella says,
—“Olea prima omnium arborum est.” In our days it forms the
chief article of food of the Levantine sailors, who with a sufficiency
of Garlic and Olives think themselves in Elysium ; and in former
days a common sort of oil was in such general use amongst the
lower class, as to occasion the price to be fixed, as is seen upon the
Stone from Stratoniceia.(*) This common sort of oil called Cibarum,
was made from the refuse of the Olives, and is thus mentioned upon
the Stone:—“Olei cibari + duodecim;” signifying xii denarii for
each Seatarius of this common oil.–Cato calls the Olive-harvest
Oleitas: the crop, Olivitas: so Columella—“largissimae olivitates.”
The “Olive-yard” is called by Plautus—“Olivina;” by Cicero,
“Olivetum:”—“Quid de vitibus, olivetis que dicam” (Cic. N. D. 2.
lxii.)—The vales about Aleppo still abound in Olive-groves: but the
most noted are those of Barbary, said to be so extensive that one
may travel from the rising to the setting of the Sun, beneath their
shade.—It has already been remarked, that the great principle of the
Hebrew Law-giver was to establish a Commonwealth upon a purely
agricultural basis: so that commerce and social intercourse with the
neighbouring idolatrous nations might be prohibited. To detach his
people from the flesh-pots and idols of Egypt, was therefore of chief
importance: and a change from the nomade and pastoral character
of the people became essential. A prohibition against the use of
fat, (Lev. Ch. vii) necessarily led to the use of olive-oil, which indeed,
eventually became almost a necessary of life: whilst in Egypt, ac-
cording to Strabo, olives could not be grown. Oil was ordered to
accompany every meal-offering: and it would bave been a high
breach of faith to use oil not the produce of the Holy-Land. (See
the account in Josephus of the monopoly of oil, obtained by John of
* The inscribed Stone of Stratoniceia in Asia Minor, has been previously al-
luded to in the Note “Fig,” and at p. xlii of “Testimonies &c.” It was deposited
by the Earl of Oxford, about the year 1709, in the British Museum ; where it
remained unpublished the greater part of a century. It consists of a Decree fol-
lowed by a List of Articles of provision in common use, with the prices annexed
by order of the reigning Emperor. It contains denunciations against forestallers,
and condemns to death provision-dealers exceeding the fixed maximum prices.
T
CXXX,
Gischala.) The wine and oil, permitted and commanded to be made
use of, in the Chosen Land, (both of them great luxuries unknown
to Egypt,) formed one of the means judiciously and successfully
employed by the inspired law-giver, to produce attachment to their
own country, and abhorrence for the practices and customs of neigh-
bouring idolatrous lands.—To this day, in Italy, oil and olives form a
material ingredient even of the most frugal repasts: as it was in the
days of Horace:—
“Me pascunt olivae, me cichorea, levesque malvae.”
The Roman feast, both of rich and poor, appears to have commenced
with eggs, and to have ended with apples or olives. Horace alludes
to this desire for, and affectation of simplicity amongst opulent
epicures :— - - -
“Wilibus ovis, nigrisque est oleis hodie locus.”
Thus, in our days, do we find in Bond-street the sea-weed, to subsist
upon which cruel fate condemns the famishing Irish :-this very sea-
weed sold by the lb. weight to the affluent, under the name of
“Laver!” (Ulva lactuca.)—Most people know, says the Quarterly
Review, that a roast leg of mutton with Laver served in the sauce-
pan, is a dish of high merit.—Apples, however, were the more usual
finish of the Roman feasts: whence the expression “ab ovo usque ad
mala,” signified from the “beginning to the end” of the feast:
“Integram famam ad ovum affero,” says Cicero.—It is elsewhere
stated that in their compassionate feelings for the indigent, the Jews
granted a tithe or portion of their crops to the poor, in addition to
the “gleanings” and “corner” and “things-forgotten:” unless under
particular circumstances, olives sufficient for two meals, were the
tithe which each proprietor or farmer was required to distribute to
every poor man in his neighbourhood. Such was the benignant in-
terpretation put by the Jews upon the passage : “They shall come,
and shall eat, and be satisfied.”—The celebrated Omphacian Oil
(“oleum omphacium” of Pliny) is said to have been extracted from
green olives:—concerning the “Strigmenta” (the “gloios” of the
Greeks) and Strigmenta-merchants, consult Val. Max. (9. 14.) So
indispensable was oil and ointment to the wrestler, that it was a
common Metonymy to use the word “Oleum” for “Palaestra;” so
Catullus (lxi. 64,) “Ego eram decus olei.”—The love of ointments
and perfumes, and wrestling, occasioned periodical calls upon the
Roman purse, and the “Unguentarium,” or ointment-tax, helped to
maintain the Roman national faith. Juvenal (Sat. 3. lxvii) alludes
to the effeminate practice:— i
“Rusticus ille tuus trechedipna, Quirine,
“Et ceromatico fert nicetaria collo.”
“Ceroma” was a mixture of oil, clay, and bees’-wax, with which the
wrestlers were profusely besmeared about the neck and breasts by
the Aliptes, or anointers. The love of ointments was carried to so
ridiculous an excess that Juvenal exclaims,
cxxxi.
“But tell me yet: this thing thus daub’d and oil’d,
Thus poulticed, plaister’d, baked by turns and boil’d ;
Thus with pomatums, ointments lacker'd o'er,
Is it a face, Ursidius, or a sore ?”
—The anointing with oil was to a certain extent, however, a luxury
in which all classes indulged; and thus, in enumerating the delights
of his country-house, Horace does not forget the favourite Venafrian
oil:—
“— Ungor olivo,
“Non quo fraudatis immundus Natta lucernis.”
--Seneca relates that the Lacedemonians banished the sellers of
ointments.—In many cases of disease it was formerly the practice to
anoint the body with oil; a ready mode of exciting the action of the
skin. In sacred writ it is said—“Let the sick be anointed with oil
and be saved;” and, in our times, this is a common practice amongst
the Caffres, who besmear the body with lard, or oil, thereby escaping
infection, whilst the yellow-fever rages around. The Esquimaux
tribes, who regale on seal-oil, are never attacked; and when the
plague raged in London, tallow-melters and butchers remained
exempt. The same observation was made by Mr. Baldwin, Consul
at Smyrna; the oil-porters were never infected. And by anointing
the body with oil, the nurses of the Hospitals at Smyrna escaped the
contagion. Dr. Fothergill cured a case of typhus fever by the same
mode: and doubtless many are the cases in which, but for the love
of new-fangled remedies in Pharmacy as well as in Politics, it might
be said in the words of Scripture, “Let the sick be anointed with
oil, and be saved.”
NoTE 28. Weeks and Months.
THE Septenary division of time has been, from the earliest ages,
uniformly observed throughout the Eastern world. The Israelites,
Egyptians, Assyrians, Indians, Arabians, and Persians, all made use
of a division of time of seven days. Amongst the Hebrews, however,
there were two other sorts of weeks, besides the primary division of
Seven days. There were Weeks of years computed from one Sab-
batical year to another, and consisting of 7 years: and there were
Weeks of seven times seven years, computed from one Jubilee to
another. The Heptaetered alluded to in Ch. 6. § iv, of course ap-
plies to the Weeks of years. The Hebrew word Yamin, rendered
Days in the English Bible, is as often employed to signify Years as
Days.-With regard to Months, the month “Chesleu” mentioned in
Ch. 1. § xi as the time of the Second-rains, is, in the Judaic Calen-
dar, the 3d month of Autumn; the first being Tisri ; and the 2nd
Marcheshvan. Lunar months cannot be exactly reduced to Solar :
and therefore it must be understood with some latitude, when these
three autumnal months are said to answer to our September, Octo-
ber and November. .
NoTE 29. Money.
Money is represented to be the common measure or standard of
cxxxii.
value of all other things: but as the value of money is ever fluctua-
ting, no definite notion is conveyed by the name of a Coin as used
at different periods, even though the weight and purity of such Coin
be known. We may say that 12 pence make a shilling now, as it
did in the reign of Edward 1st: but in the time of Edward 1st, 12
pence would purchase an Ox, whilst it will now purchase not quite
2 lbs of beef. (Wide Introduction, p. 15) And whilst in the year
1043 a Quarter of wheat cost but one Six-pence, 80 years later it
cost 40 Six-pences. Seventy years later still, a Gallon of Red wine
cost 8 pence, and a Gallon of White wine 6 pence: so that the land,
as the Historian remarked—“ was filled with drink and drunkards.”
(Annales Burtonenses.) Forty shillings of the reign of Henry 6th
was fully equal to Sir times forty shillings or £12 of the reign of
Anne : and Blackstone calculated that £12 of the time of Anne
(1707) was equivalent to £20 of the period at which he then wrote:
At various times, also, the Circulating Medium has been debased and
its current value arbitrarily changed : (*) but it is the value of a Pound,
* The fluctuations of prices above alluded to have been trivial, compared with
the far greater, the rapid fluctuations, the convulsions and wide-spread ruin oc-
casioned in modern times by the introduction of a Paper-medium, a counterfeit
money (as it was termed by Hume) supplanting the legitimate coin, the real
money of the realm. Within the last 15 years, frightful evidence has been exhi-
bited in England of the incalculable mischief and extreme danger to the State, of
having permitted of this usurpation of the Royal Prerogative of making money.
Speaking of the ruinous fluctuations occasioned by the paper-money, Sir R. Peel
remarked that—“the rapidity with which these changes followed each other,
defeated all private arrangement, and overwhelmed the labourer with want and
misery.” (Hansard Deb. Vol. xl.) When the Bank of Minchin at Gosport
broke, it was related that the distress and agony all over the county of Hamp-
shire, were as great as if a dead corpse had been lying in every third house !
But the panics and the bankruptcies, demoralizing and ruinous as they have been
in this country, have been comparatively of small magnitude, when considered in
reference to the paper-enorm, ties of the American States. (Wide the fluctuations
mentioned at p. 38 of the Introduction.) More than once have the Americans
been upon the point of proving the truth of the saying of William Pitt that their
—“boasted independence would be a mere phantom, should they adopt the En-
glish Banking system.” Addressing his fellow-citizens at New York in July,
1839, Mr. Calhoun, the Senator, reprobating “an uncertain vacillating currency
under the control of private cupidity,” declared his conviction that it would “raise
a storm to scatter property like leaves before a tornado.” On the 29th Jan. 1820,
the Senate of Pennsylvania reported that a-‘‘distress unexampled in our country
since the period of its independence, prevails throughout the Commonwealth :”
a distress exhibiting itself under the varied forms of “ruinous sacrifices of
landed property at sheriff’s sales, lands and houses being sold at less than a half,
a third, or a fourth of their former value, thereby depriving of their homes and
of the fruits of laborious years, a vast number of our farmers, driving them into
the uncultivated forests of the West &c.,-forced sales of merchandize, goods,
stock, at prices far below the cost of production,-numerous bankruptcies and
pecuniary embarrassments, a general scarcity of money throughout the country,
.—a general suspension of labour; rendering thousands destitute and reducing
them to the eatremity of poverty and despair, an almost entire cessation of the
usual circulation of commodities, and consequent stagmation of busingss, usu-
rious extortions, whereby Banking Corporations &c. possess themselves of the
products of industry without granting an equivalent, the overflowing of the
prisons with insolvent debtors, most of them confined for trifling sums, law-
cxxxiii.
as Bishop Fleetwood remarks, that is truly a Pound, and not its
mere name. If therefore it be scarcely possible to determine the
relative value of the same denomination of Coin in our own country
for only 600 years back, how little chance can there be of correctly
ascertaining the true value of foreign money, current in far countries,
suits, vexatious losses from depreciation and fluctuation, and a general inability
to provide for family expenses,” &c., &c. This brief statement affords but a
mere outline of distress and ruin indescribable, proceeding, (as was demonstrated
by the Pennsylvanian Senate,) from the iniquities of the Paper-money makers,
assisted by a repeal of Usury-Laws :-" the extent of the mischief defies scru-
tiny and surpasses the power of calculation,-the Banks have become like the
Scorpions among the children of Israel—perfect beasts of prey.”—In 1822, in
Market-Street, Philadelphia, houses of four stories, with marble-steps and cop-
per spouts, costing from 10 to 20,000 dollars in the building, and which used to
let for a thousand dollars a year each, were, in great numbers sold for a Dollar
a piece—to avoid the Ground-rent And Mr. Gouge of Philadelphia, in his
Work entitled “The Curse of Paper-money,” declares that the expenditure on
account of the poor of Philadelphia, (where scarcely a beggar or a pauper used
to be seen,) exceeded the expenditure on the same account at Liverpool : one
more evidence that Paupers may be created by other means than their own
improvidence and profligacy, and that decimation of the poor by means of an
“Amendment-Act,” may not be the most effectual means of “silencing distress.”
The paper-money struggle still proceeds in America: two years ago the whole
of the Banks simultaneously stopped payment, no unusual practice :—whilst the
present President like his predecessor, seems resolved that the Article of the
* Constitution of the United-States,” which vests in Congress the power to coin
money, shall no longer be a fiction.—In England there seems little prospect of a
restoration to the Crown of this inestimable Prerogative, now arbitrarily usurped,
to the great detriment of the nation, (as was stated in a “Letter to the King,”
by Lord Liverpool,) by any and every class of men,_by needy knaves as by
people of substance and integrity. , “It is certain,” said Lord Liverpool, “that
this paper-currency has supplanted the Gold Coins, usurped their functions, and
driven a great part of them out of circulation—it may prove, in its consequences,
dangerous to the credit of the Kingdom.” Such was the danger to the “credit
of the Kingdom,” that Mr. Huskisson, one of the Ministry, affirmed that in 1822
the country was—“within forty-eight hours of barter.” And in 1839 many
are the schemes for recovering back the Gold coins supplanted by a paper-cur-
rency and driven, -not out of circulation, but out of the Kingdom : whilst those
wsurious practices reprobated by the Senate of Pennsylvania seem upon the eve
of becoming general in England also. The Bank of England already openly
demands 6 per Cent. Interest upon its Loans : (Aug. 1839) and on the 19th
July 1839, on the motion of the Whig Lord Lansdowne the “Bills of Exchange”
Bill was read a third time and passed: the mischievous object of which Bill is
to effect that great and dangerous innovation upon the ancient Laws of this
realm, of legalising the practice of Usury. Commenting upon this Act for the
encouragement of Usury and Extortion, (2 & 3 Victoria Cap. xxxvii.) the
“Morning Herald” truly remarked,—“whenever the laws against Usury are
relaxed in any country, there we may rest assured that the spirit of wasteful
expenditure reigns paramount in the habits of her citizens—and that the spirit of
gambling in its most dangerous forms pervades her Commercial transactions.”
As a specimen of the “wasteful expenditure” of the republican bankrupts, it is
recorded that the furniture of a single parlour possessed by, (certainly not honestly
belonging to) one of them in Baltimore, cost 40,000 dollars; and as a specimen of
commercial gambling we may refer to their recent cotton and land speculations,
and of their paying 5 and 6 per Cent Interest per Month upon such transactions.
It is notorious that the same parcel of land and cotton would change hands at an
enormous rise of price, several times in the course of one day.
cxxxiv.
and at a more remote period of time. The Table therefore of the
relative value of the several denominations of Hebrew money can of
itself be little worth : whilst it must be manifestly impossible to de-
termine, with any degree of precision, the relative value of Hebrew
money with our own coins, the value of which has materially fluctu-
ated even within the last 50 years. And even supposing (a very
great improbability) that Arbuthnot had correctly laid down the
value of Hebrew money at the time he wrote, his calculation can by
no means apply to the present day, and may be most egregiously
erroneous 20 years hence. The following however is a table of the
Hebrew money accordingto Dr. Arbuthnot :—
£. s. d.
Gerah . . . . . . . . . . . • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 1. 2687
10 Bekah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 1 1. 687
20 2 Shekel. . . . . . . . & Q & Q & © e º e º º is ſº º Gº º 0 2 3, 337
1200 | 120 50 |Maneh or Mina. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 14 0
60000 |6000|3000|601|Talent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .342 3

9
Solidus Aureus, or Sextula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 12 0
Siclus aureus, or Gold Shekel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 16 6
Talent of gold. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5475 0 0
The Jewish Drachma, about . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 7 3
The Shekel was not coined metal but as its name imports in Hebrew,
a given weight. Moses makes no mention of coins, but merely of silver
weighed-out. It was not until after the time of Alexander-the-Great,
that the Hebrews began to coin money : the privilege of coining
was first granted to Simon Maccabaeus by Antiochus Sidetes. The
Sycee Silver in the Museum of the East India House, affords a spe-
cimen of the character of money of this primitive description.—The
Hebrew Zus, the Roman Denarius, and the Attic Drachm, were
nominally of about the same value ; in weight about the 8th part of
an Oz; about one-fourth of the value of the Shekel, or 7d. The
200 Zuzi, therefore, mentioned by Maimonides in Ch. 9 $ xiii were
equivalent to about £6 5s. The Siclus-Aureus or Gold Shekel, esti-
mated by Arbuthnot to be equivalent to about 36s, is estimated by
others at not one-half of that value.—The As was about the value of
3d : the Assarium, a farthing or mite. The Pruta, (Ch. 9 $ xix)
was a coin of the smallest value: about the 192d part of the Roman
Denarius.
NoTE 30. Doctor of the City.
THE Doctor of the City is alluded to by Maimonides in Ch. 6 $xvii.
and in succeeding Chapters. It was a dignity conferred preparatory
to that of Rabbi. The Hebrew word properly signifies a colleague;
i. e. the colleague of him who conferred the promotion. The Rabbi
Nathan explains that Doctor of the City signifies, A man of pro-
CXXXV.
found knowledge so well versed in the Law, that the elders and chief
people of the City have recourse to him for advice in difficulties, rea
lating either to the administration of civil or ecclesiastical affairs.
Rabbi Solomon says much the same. (Comm. ad Tract. Tal. Bab.
Megillam Fol. xxvii Col. 2.) To the Doctor of the City was especially
confided the distribution of Alms to the Poor: and to him it was
permitted to make Commutations that would be unlawful on the
part of others. (Wide Maimonides Ch. 9 S. vii.)
NoTE 31.—Marriage.
Still she retains the potent spell,
To make man's life a heaven or hell!
THE “betrothing ” mentioned in the 3rd and 4th Sections (Ch.
vii.) was not a bare affiancing of two “Paupers;” it was no empty
custom ; but the substantial practice of raising a marriage portion
for those, who were too poor to endow a wife out of their own
means. For by the Judaic Code, nuptials were not deemed to be
legitimately completed, until a marriage-portion had been settled on
the wife; in order that after the death of the husband, or in the
event of a divorce, she might have wherewithal to subsist upon.—
The words of the Mischna are, “If any man endow a virgin with
“less than 200 Zuzi; or a widow with less than a Mina, he shall be
“regarded as an Adulterer.” (Cetuboth, ch. V. Sect. 1.)—Among
the Arabs we find that the Husbands give a bond to their Wives for
a specific sum, which they denominate “Makar”; and concerning
which, Mahomet prescribes a variety of regulations in the case of a
divorce. And so amongst the ancient Germans, according to Taci-
tus-“dotem, non uxor marito sed uxori maritus, offert.”—By the
inhabitants of Palestine, the notion of Bacon, that unmarried or
childless men were most productive of meritorious works; and that

cxxxvi.
because they had avoided matrimony, they would, both in affection
and means marry and endow the public, such a notion must have been
regarded, as singularly stiange and fantastic. To the Hebrews, the
Scriptural precept, Increase and multiply,–conveyed no symbolical
signification; it was not by them explained-away by new-fangled
conceits about surplus-population, and the tendency of mankind to
increase beyond the means of production : by them it was considered
“evidently detrimental to the State to impose restraints upon mar-
riage.” And it was not the rich Israelites only, whose eyes were
ever directed to heaven for a wife and heirs:—
“By blind desire, by headlong passion driven
“For wife and heirs we daily weary Heaven:
“Yet still 'tis heaven’s prerogative to know
“If heirs or wife will bring us weal or woe.”
—the poor, too, attached little value to such notions as that—“a
wife and children are impediments to great enterprizes;” believing
rather with Blackstone that to hinder marriage, is detrimental not
only to the State, but, -“to religion and morality, by encouraging
licentiousness and debauchery among the single of both sexes;
thereby destroying one end of society and government, which is,
concubitu prohibere vago.” (See other remarks upon Marriage at
p. 24. of the “Introduction, &c.” and in the Note at p. 5.)—It ap-
pears from the passage in Maimonides before cited, that if the poor,
amongst other wants, should blindly stand in need of a wife, why
then suffer he must the consequences, and a wife was to be betrothed
unto him ; and in the case of a woman a husband was to be found
for her. To prohibit marriage on account of poverty, was justly re-
garded as a flagrant violation of the Laws of Nature and of God. To
betroth it has been said, was not synonimous with contracting a
marriage; if the mere discovery of a woman to be his wife, were all
that the poor man required, poor as he might be, he as well as the
rich man, would ask leave to decline the royal mode of a vicarious
selection made according to the taste of another. The poor man
however, having discovered a suitable partner, his great difficulty
would be to discover such an endowment for her, as the Law re-
quired before the nuptials could be legally solemnized. The Law,
therefore, having prohibited marriage until the wife had been ade-
quately endowed, and yet humanely considering that the poor had
as valid a title as the rich to,-
fondly poke
His awkward nose into the marriage yoke,
it was ordained that the marriage portion should be provided by
others. And so amongst the Parsees, “When a poor man’s child-
ren,” says Mrs. Graham, “are old enough to be married, the chief
“merchants subscribe sufficient to portion the child: in cases of
“sickness they support the individuals or the family, and maintain
“all the widows and the fatherless.” Voltaire is disposed to sneer
at the Hebrews because their laws and customs led them to hold
celibacy in horror : “Les Juifs,” says Voltaire, “ont regardé comme
cxxxvii.
leurs deux grands devoirs, des enfants et de l'am gent.” Certain it is
that neither the lugubrious forebodings of a Malthus nor the biting
wit of the Satirist, would have deterred them from encountering the
perils of Matrimony. In vain would Juvenal have exclaimed,—
Heavens ! wilt thou tamely drag the galling chain,
While hemp is to be bought, while knives remain
While windows woo thee so divinely high,
And Tiber and the AEmilian Bridge are nigh .
—Even the helpless orphan was to be encouraged to take a Wife:
and Maimonides proceeds to observe, that if such an one solicit to
have a wife betrothed to him, he is first to be furnished with all ne-
cessary household goods, and a marriage-portion is then to be pro-
vided for his wife. Odious as were the Jews to the Emperor Adrian,
he yet coincided in this their opinion of the good effects of marriage:
and we are told by Pufendorff that he diminished the punishment of
criminals in proportion to the number of their children. And so
Stoboeus (“De laude nuptiarum”) declares that the Lacedemonians
entertained peculiar aversion to bachelors. And not without reason,
if we agree with Voltaire that, “Le marriage rend l’homme plus
vertueux et plus sage. Mariez vos soldats ils ne deserteront plus.
Un soldat celebataire n'est souvent qu'un vagabond ā qui il serait
égal de servir le Roi de Naples et le Roi de Maroc. Plus vous auriez
d’hommes mariés, moins ily aura de crime. Voyez les régistres affreux
de vos greffes criminels; vous y trouvez cent garcons dependus ou
de roués, contre un pére de famille.”—From the encouragement
given to it, in Palestine Marriage could not have been particularly
expensive; but in Persia, according to Chardin, only men of Estate
dare venture upon matrimony lest its costliness prove their ruin.—
From the preceding remarks it would appear, that by the Hebrew as
by the Gentoo Laws, a Wife was entitled to hold property of her
own, exempt from the controul of her husband. The Gentoo Laws
enumerate a variety of modes by which a woman may acquire pro-
perty, to be at her own disposal: and we find by Halhed, that a
husband was required to allow interest to his wife, when he, with the
kindest intentions, thought proper to appropriate her goods to his own
use.—“If a man,” says the Code, “in a friendly manner hath ap-
“plied to his own use anything of the separate-property of his wife,
“on returning it, he shall give interest together with the princi-
“pal.”—There were in the laws of the Israelites certain peculiarities
relative to Marriage, the most singular of which is that which has
been termed the Levirate-Law : in obedience to which, when a Man
died without issue, his brother was obliged to marry the widow he
left: with this express view, that the first son should be ascribed,
not to the natural father, but to his deceased brother. This has been
denominated Levirate-Marriage, from the word “Levir,” an old
Latin word found only in the Vulgate and Pandects, and explained
by Festus to signify a husband's brother. This Law was in force an-
tecedent to the age of Moses: and it would appear, judging from the
story of Judah and Tamar, (Gen. xxxviii.) that the Mosaic statute
U
cxxxviii.
greatly mitigated its severity. Must, in matters of love and marriage,
is indeed a hard and fearful word; and a wise and good legislator
such as Moses, could scarcely have desired the continuance of such
a law: inveterate prejudices, however, and points of honour will ever
frustrate the best intentions. It is remarkable that the Mongols
have (according to Du-Halde) a similar law: arising apparently from
the practice of polygamy amongst the rich. Amongst the Israelites
of the present day, Levirate-marriages have entirely ceased : frequently
in the marriage-contracts of the poorer classes, it is stipulated that
whatever rights might be claimed for the bride under Deut. ch. xxv.
shall be abandoned. But, the Levitical precepts upon the subject of
marriage amongst relations, are, for the main part, Law with us to
this day; and form an important and interesting part of the Mosaic
Jurisprudence.
NotR 32.-Evil Eye.
Upon more than one occasion Maimonides employs the expression
of a “Man of an evil eye.” (Ch. vii. § 5.—Ch. x. § 4.) This was
a common phraseology amongst the Jews; meaning thereby a man
of a covetous, ill-natured disposition; whilst the kind and open-
hearted were termed, Men of a good or bountiful eye. So in Deut.
xv.–“And thy eye be evil against thy poor brother :” in the Vulgate
translated, “et malignus sit oculus tuus in fratrem tuum quiegens.”
Again in Proverbs Ch. xxii. and xxiii.-“Eat thou not the bread of
him that hath an evil eye.”—“He that hath a bountiful eye shall be
blessed; for he giveth of his bread to the Poor.” See also Ch. xxviii. and
Eccles. Ch. xiv. “He that hasteth to be rich hath an evil eye, and consi-
dereth not that poverty shall come upon him.”—Amongst Rabbinical
writers this mode of expression was common. In the Mischna (Tract
de Trumis) it is said, “This is the measure of Trumoe: a good eye gives
one part out of 40; a bad eye one in 60.” So in the New Testament, by
the context it is clear that the expression of-ophthalmos aplous in
Matt. vi. and of —ophthalmos poneeros in others of the Evangelists,
had in the Greek the same signification as the Hebrew phraseology.
“Is thine eye evil, because I am good f" (Matt. Ch. vi.) “Thefts,
covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evileye, blasphemy,
pride, foolishmess.”—The evil eye is a mischief particularly dreaded by
the Algerine Arabs : and for a stranger to express particular admira-
tion of any child, a horse, or any part of their possessions, raises in them
the greatest apprehension of injury to the possessor. The superstitious
dread of an evil eye so generally felt in Italy, originates, I imagine,
(says Lady Blessington,) in the disagreeable impression produced in
this sensitive people by a repulsive aspect. Possibly from this mode
of expression, originated the more modern superstition of the necessity
of wearing amulets to keep off the “Mal’ occhio,” (the evil eye ;) a
superstition described as being very common about Naples.
cxxxix.
Nore 33.-The Lion.
- - *** . == - º: T = Tº
Mount, mount for the hunting—with musket and spear,
Call our friends to the field, for the Lion is near !
Call Arend and Ekhard and Groepe to the Spoor;
Call Muller and Coetzer and Lucas Wan Tuur !
In the gorge of the glen lie the bones of my steed,
And the hoofs of a heifer of fatherland’s breed!
But mount, my brave boys | If your rifles prove true,
We'll soon make the spoiler his ravages rue.—PRINGLE.
IT has been said that in proportion as human population extends,
do ferocious beasts decrease and become degenerate : in Palestine,
however, the rule would seem to be reversed. When the country
was thickly peopled, the banks of the Jordan reverberated with the
roar of the Lion : now all is wild and desolate, and the royal beast
has disappeared. In Turkey and Persia, also, they are said to be far
less numerous now, than formerly. They are said rarely to roam to
the west of the Euphrates. The Hebrews had seven words to signify
the Lion at different periods of its life.—1. Geer or Gor, a Whelp.
2. Cephir, a young Lion. 3. Ariel, a young vigorous Lion. 4. Sha-
chal, a Lion in the strength of his age. 5. Shachaz, a full grown
powerful Lion. 6. Lebia, an old Lion. 7. Laish, a decrepit old Lion.
Some places took their names from the Lion, as Lebaoth and Beth-
Lebaoth. (Josh. xv. & xix.) Lions are yet found in Mesopotamia
and Babylonia; as they were formerly in Syria. Q. Curtius (viii. 1.)
relates, that Lysimachus hunting in Syria, single-handed killed a
huge Lion, in the conflict having his shoulder torn to the bone. It

cxl.
was deemed a feat in Alexander the Great, to slay with a spear, the
Lion which assailed him when hunting. Samson, when—the young
lion roared against him at Timnath, (Judges xiv.) unprovided with
any weapon,-Rent him, as he would have rent a Kid.—In Ch. iv.
Maimonides indicates that fraudulent practices towards the Poor
were not wholly unknown. Generosity and impartiality towards the
indigent were strictly enjoined in respect to the gleanings: and every
act tending to deter the poor from collecting them, condemned as
disgraceful, fraudulent, and tyrannical. The placing of a Lion in the
field, appears (Ch. iv. § 13.) to have been one of the arts employed
to terrify the poor, and to enable the sordid owner of the field to
usurp that, which the Law had distinctly asserted to be their indefei-
sible right and patrimony: a practice which shows that in Palestine,
as in other parts, the Lion used to be, to a certain degree, domesti-
cated. In his tract, also, concerning Proselytes, (Issure Biah, cap. xiii)
Maimonides alludes to the practice of exposing an enemy to Lions.
Lions were found amongst the thickets that covered the banks of the
Jordan: driven by the inundations from their coverts they became
the terror of the inhabitants.--The apparent dignity of his mature
and his invincible courage have, in all ages, pointed out the Lion as
a fit emblem of regality. Seemingly upon this account did Judah,
the most powerful Tribe, assume, according to all tradition, the Lion
as its Standard. In the different stages of its strength, this Tribe is
compared to a Lion’s whelp—to a full-grown lion—and to a nursing
lioness, the fiercest of all:—
“A lion's whelp is Judah!
“From the prey, my son, thou hast ascended.
“He couched, lying down like a strong lion,
“And like a lioness! Who shall arouse him 2’’
Sir W. Drummond, however, in his “Addipus Judaicus” pretends
that we are not to construe these particulars concerning the various
Tribes, in a literal sense. As is remarked at p. xxviii. of the “Life
of Maimonides,” he pretends that the ancient Hebrews, like other
nations of antiquity, had their esoteric and ecoteric doctrines: the
former concealed under types and symbols, for the most part inex-
plicable to their descendants. The Standard-of-Judah he believes,
with Kircher, to have been an astronomical symbol, whereby the sign
of “Leo’’ was indicated.—“Thou art he ” says the text (Gen. xlix.)
“whom thy brethren shall praise.” While Taurus was the first of
the signs, the summer-solstice took place when the sun was in Leo :
and at that season of his highest elevation, the Sun was held in the
greatest honor. The annual festival of the Egyptians upon this oc-
casion, is mentioned by several authors: and among others by Helio-
dorus. (Lib. ix.)—“Thy hand shall be on the neck of all thy enemies.”
The Sun in Leo was adored by the Egyptians as the King, Osiris :
by the Syrians as the Lord, Adonis: by the Tyrians, as Melech-arets,
King of the Earth; and by the Greeks, as Hercules, Vanquisher of
the Nemean Lion.—“Thy father's children shall bow down before thee.”
The sun being at its greatest altitude in Leo, the brothers of Judah
cxli.
are said to bow down before him. In the Indian sphere, in the
second decan of the sign Leo, a man is represented with a crown on
his head and a lance in his hand. Such is the conception of Sir W.
Drummond.—The ordinary voice of the Lion is a tremendous roar.
This he gives vent to, 5 or 6 times a day; especially when hungry,
and previous to a fall of rain; and, in his native solitudes, re-echoed
from the neighbouring mountains, it has no slight resemblance, to the
sound of distant thunder. Pringle in his “African Sketches * de-
tails the occurrences of the first night after the arrival of his colony
at Glen-Lynden, near the Cape :—
“Having appointed our watch for the night we had retired to rest, and ex-
cepting our sentinels, were all buried in sleep; when about midnight we were
suddenly roused by the roar of a Lion close to our tents. It was so loud and
tremendous, that for a moment I actually thought a Thunder-storm had burst
upon us. But the peculiar expression of the sound—the voice of fury as well as
of power—instantly undeceived me. The uncertainty as to the quarter whence
the voice had issued, was occasioned partly perhaps by the peculiar mode this
animal often has, of placing his mouth near the ground when he roars;–so that
the voice rolls, as it were, like a breaker along the earth.”
Virgil, possibly, was not very familiar with this terrific roar; unless
it be for the versification that he employs (AEn. Lib. vii.) a word
signifying rather, the braying of an Ass, than the roaring of a
lion :-
Hinc exaudirigemitus, iroegue Leonum
Vincla recusantum, et sera sub nocte rudentum.
Many of his fierce heroes are likened to the savage Gaetulian Lion,
the attitudes and aspect of which he appears to have been better ac-
quainted with :-
“Gaudet hians immane, comosque arrexit, et hoeret
“Wisceribus super accumbens; lavit improbateter
“Ora cruor ’’—
Naturalists tell us that rising from this position of “Visceribus super
accumbens’’—he will spring at a bound a distance of 20 or 25 feet.
The “tergum immane leonis '' worn á la Hercule was the fashionable
surtout for warriors; Æneas commiserating the misfortunes of his
friend Salius, presents him with such a skin, villis onerosum and
adorned unguibus aureis.-Nebuchadnezzar marching against Judea
is finely compared by Jeremiah to a Lion coming up from the swel-
lings of Jordan. And Isaiah (Ch xxxi.) likens the anger of God, to
the terrific roar of the Lion; and (Ch. v.) to the fury of an ene-
my:-
“Like as the Lion growleth, even the young Lion over his prey;
Though the whole company of shepherds be called together against him,
At their voice, he will not be terrified,
Nor at their tumult, will he be humbled.”
—a comparison, says Lowth, exactly in the spirit and manner, and
very nearly approaching to the expression of Homer, *.
As the bold Lion, mountain-bred, now long
Famish'd, with courage and with hunger stung
Attempts the thronged fold; him nought appals,
cxlii.
Though dogs, and armed shepherds, stand in guard
Collected ; he, nathless, undaunted springs -
O'er the high fence, and rends the trembling prey.
The story of N. Brabantinus relative to the voracity of the Lions of
Media and Persia, has been alluded to in the Note upon the Cutheans,
—the proselytes of lions. He says, “Leones vastaverunt magnam
partem populi quem Salmanasser miserat.”—(See 2 Kings, ch. xvii.)
—“They feared not the Lord, therefore the Lord sent Lions amongst
them which slew them.” This however was in accordance with the
recognized order of things, it being, as Bruce observes, the peculiar
province of the lion to eat man. No wonder, therefore, that the
learned men of Oxford regarded Dr, Shaw with amazement, when
he asserted that the Welled-Sidi-Boogannim (a tribe of Arabs be-
tween Tunis and Algiers) had subverted this legitimate order of
things, and that the men were in the habit of eating the Lions / But
although the terror of the critical brows of the Academicians, had
alarmed Dr. Shaw to such a degree, that in his Narrative he dared
not mention this anomaly, (merely hinting at it in the Appendix,)
there can now be little doubt that Lion-steaks are broiled in Africa,
as are beef-steaks at Oxford : and in the Tents of the Welled-Sidi-
Boogannim, Bruce was introduced to the dish upon three different
occasions. Indeed by the institution of their founder, this tribe of
Arabs are obliged to live upon Lion's flesh for their daily food, as far
as they can procure it; with this, says Bruce, they strictly comply :
and in consideration of the utility of this their vow, they are exempted
from the payment of tribute either to Tunis, or to Algiers. By this
vow and this exemption they have become exceedingly rich, are ex-
cellent horsemen, and undaunted hunters. All this, Mr. Peter Pin-
dar declares to be only one of the many marvellous discoveries, never
unfolded by nature, but to Bruce her favorite son; and Peter thus
compliments these Arabs upon their vigorous stomachs :-
Nor happy in a stomach form'd of steel,
On roaring Lions have I made a meal!
Lord Lindsay in his recent “Letters on Palestine, &c.” supports
Peter in his doubt as to the possibility of a lion's becoming butcher's
meat :–“The officer spoke highly of his own achievements in the
chase, of having killed (and eaten ſ) a Lion, &c. A Lion he told us,
would never attack a woman,-
'Tis said that a Lion will turn and flee
From a maid in the pride of her purity.
And so Marmot relates that the Lions near the towns of Barbary,
sensible of the power of man, have lost their courage : and will allow
themselves to be pursued not only by maids, but by children :-"en
se laissant poursuivre par des femmes ou par des enfans qui leur font
à coups de báton, quitter prise, et låcher indignement leur proie.”
NoTE 34.—Hyke.
THE upper garment of the Israelites (Simla) was, says Michaelis,
cxliii.
(Comm. Vol. 2.) a large square piece of cloth used for a coverlet by
night. Dr. Shaw has given an exact description of it, under its
modern Arabic name, Hyke. It serves by day as a complete dress
for the Arab, and constitutes his sole bed-furniture by night. He
spreads out his large girdle, says Niebuhr, and forms with it an un-
der-bed; and then with the Hyke that he throws across his shoulders,
he covers his whole body and his face, and sleeps naked between the
two, in content. It is frequently alluded to in Scripture, (Gen. ix.
23. Earod. xii. 34. Deut. xxii. 17.) Deprecating the practice of usury,
Moses forbids the retaining of the Hyke after the setting of the sun,
—“If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt
deliver it to him by that the sun goeth down. For that is his covering
only, it is his raiment for his skin : wherein shall he sleep P” (Eaod.
xxii. 26.) So with Argyfrew amongst the ancient Britons. By Argy-
frew is meant clothes, arms, or the implements of a lawful calling :
and Argyfrew could not be taken from a man, under any circum-
stances, not even in payment of a Fine. (Coll. Cambrica, Triad, liii.)
Niebuhr relates (Vol. 1. p. 369.) that it was one single nights' ex-
posure to the cold, without properly protecting his head and face
with some covering as the Arabs are wont, that occasioned the death
of Mr. Von Haven.
Note 35.—Stripes of Rebellion.
See NotE 2, on “Scourging &c.”
NoTE 36.-Vows.
THE commencement of the 8th Chapter of Maimonides treats of
the sacred nature of Alms promised to the Poor. “Alms,” says
Maimonides, “are comprised under the head of Vows :” and a Vow,
if legal, was of that sacred nature in the estimation of the Hebrews,
as to be scarcely revocable under any circumstances. It was, how-
ever, essential that the vow be actually expressed by word of mouth :
and in Deut. xxiii. Numb. xxx. and Psalm lxvi, it is declared that—
That which is gone out of the lips is to be kept and performed. The
Vows most commonly made were those 1st. of Dedication, or Con-
secration : and 2nd. of Engagement, or of Self-interdiction. Con-
cerning the Vows of Nazaritism and Cherem consult “Michael. Comm.
Vol. 2. cxlv.–vi. By thus comprising Alms under the head of
Vows, the most powerful motives operated to excite benevolence to-
wards the indigent: and it is impossible to peruse the commence-
ment of the 8th Ch. of Maimonides, without perceiving that the ob-
ligations of their Law must have been observed by the Hebrews, in
a manner more than usually strict and conscientious.
NoTE 37.—Temple.
The objections of their great Law-Giver to all communication
with Gentiles, who were supposed in general to entertain idolatrous
cxliv.
notions, were strictly adhered to by the Hebrews : nor could it be
fairly charged upon them as an act of bigotry, to exclude from the
Temple of their God, offerings made by those whose tenets were
odious and profane in the eyes of the Hebrews. It is clear, however
(Ch. viii. § 8.) that the rejection of such offerings was made in a
manner the least offensive that circumstances would admit of. Mai-
monides particularly prohibits the acceptance of a Beam or a Stone in
any way remarkable: from which it would appear that a custom ex-
isted of making offerings of that description. In the Temple erected
by Herod were, certainly, stones of remarkable bulk ; some of them
being, according to Josephus, 45 cubits in length, 5 cubits in width,
and 6 in breadth. Luke alludes to there being “goodly stones’ in
this Temple ; and the attention of our Saviour was particularly called
to them:—“Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings
are here !”
NoTE 38.—Aqueducts.
OFFERINGs for the repair of the Aqueducts, were strictly prohibited.
(Ch. viii. § 8.) See remarks upon these Aqueducts at p. lii, of
“Testimonies, &c.” preceding.
NoTE 3.9.—Nethinims.
IN his enumeration of the 10 classes of people which returned
from captivity, and subsequently constituted the Hebrew Church,
Maimonides mentions the Nethinims. (Ch. viii. § 17.) The de-
grees of preference, however, as laid down by Maimonides, do
not accord with those of the Mischna as contained in the Tract
“Kodashim” (C. iv. § 2.) Concerning the “Uninitiated,” Maimoni-
des has treated at large in the Tract Issure-Biah (c. xix. $. 5); and
concerning Proselytes see NoTE xiii. The Nethinims were descen-
dants of the Gibeonites whom Joshua appointed as hewers of wood
and drawers of water to the Temple. (Josh. c. ix. 27.) They were
called Nethinims from an Hebrew word signifying, given to, or dedi-
cated to. The Freed-men were reputed accursed, under the male-
diction contained in Genesis ix. 25.
NoTE 40.—Kupha and Tamchoi.
e=#=s
Isāš
The Emerald Dish at Genoa, called the Sacred-Catino.
THE Ninth Chapter declares that Collections are to be made for
the Poor, both of money and of food. The collection in money was
compulsory—‘‘ according to the stated assessment;” that in food







cxlv.
voluntary. “Locus in quo repomebanter mummi, Arca vocabatur: in
quo alimenta, Scutella.” (Selden Lib. vi. 6.) The helpless poor re-
quiring support day by day, were relieved from the Tamchai, (or Lati-
nus) the Scutella of Selden : those in a somewhat better situation from
the Kupha. The donations to the Tamchoi being voluntary andindeter-
minate in quantity, three Collectors were appointed to receive them ; the
Alms of the Chest imposed by the Synedrim, being of fixed amount, two
Collectors were deemed sufficient. Precisely similar to this Hebrew
practice, has been the practice in England in former times. And by
an Act of the 23rd. of Henry VIII., collections of broken-victuals
were ordained by law. —“Item that 2 or 3 tymes in every weke, 2
or 3 of every parysh shal appoynt certaine of ye sayd pore people to
collecte and gather broken meates and fragments and the refuse
drynke of evere housholder which shall be distributed evenly amonge
the pore people as they by theyre discrecyons shall thymke good.”
And the said Act then proceeds to order that no person shall give
any ready money in alms, otherwise than to the “Common bowes,
and common gatherynges in every citye.”—At the present day there
is in Dublin a large house (once a nobleman's) called the “Mondi-
city:” a house of beggars. From this house begging-carts dragged
by women proceed, daily from house to house to collect broken-vic-
tuals. The manner of collection is, however, disgusting ; all sorts
of nauseous fragments are thrust down a hopper at the top of the
cart, to be intermingled with that which is good ; and it is said that
out of 70 cwt. of garbage and food collected upon this Irish plan,
about 9 cwt. only, can, upon the average be permitted to be used as
human food.
NoTE 41. The Cabbala.
THE word Cabbala as used by Maimonides (Ch. ix. § 4.) and by
Talmudical writers in general, seems to signify merely, the Writings
of the Prophets. And thus the Author of Halicoth-O. am says, (Lib.
2. c. 1.)—“The words of the prophets are not otherwise called than
the words of the Cabbala : because the prophets received from the
Holy Spirit each prophecy, according to the reason of time, things,
and persons.” The same signification is put upon the word in the
Mischna; (Tract. Taanith ch. xi. § 1.)—“In the Cabbala it is said,
—Rend your heart and not your garments :” a passage taken from
the eloquent appeal of Joel. (ch. 2. v. xiii.) In the Jerusalem Tal-
mud, also, (Tract Horaoth, fol. 1. col. iv.) it is said, “And of him
it is expressly written in the Cabbala—Thine eyes did see my sub-
stance " this passage being taken from the czXxix. Psalm. The
Commentator upon this passage expressly says, “The prophets and
the holy writings are termed Cabbala.” It is well known, however,
that by the word “ Cabbala,” is generally understood some secret
doctrine of the Hebrews, comprising certain mystical interpretations
of scripture and metaphysical speculations concerning the Deity :
but by the Hebrews themselves the word is used to signify—The
customs, constitutions, and interpretations of the law traditionally
X.
cxlvi.
received : (from the Hebrew word Kibbel,—he receives :) the Pro-
phets, as they aver, having received them from the Elders, the
Elders from Joshua, and Joshua from Moses. (See the Life of
Maimonides,” p. xxvi.)
Note 42.-Magistrates and Courts of Law.
THE Collectors of Alms whose duties are defined by Maimonides
in Ch. ix, appear to have been regarded in the light of Magistrates:
they were, moreover, not only empowered to collect, but also to their
discretion and humanity was confided the trust of relieving the indi-
gent. Bartenora, commenting upon the words of the Mischna, (in
Shekalim c. v. § 2) declares that no magisterial office can be dis-
charged by less than two, because in Exodus (c. xxiii. v. 5.) the
plural pronoun, they, is made use of, in reference to ecclesiastical
matters: and Alms were reputed such. Alms-of-the-Chest, there-
fore, “are to be collected,” says Maimonides, “by not less than two
persons.” Pecuniary matters, however, being never decided by less
than three judges, it required three to determine Eleemosynary
distributions, which were “likened unto a pecuniary suit.” (Ch. ix.
§ 5.)—We may apply to the Juridical Courts of the Hebrews, almost
the words that Blackstone employs to point out the precautions
taken by our own Great Alfred to bring justice home to every man’s
door, “by constituting as many courts of judicature, as there are
manors and townships in the Kingdom :” so that disputes were set-
tled and injuries redressed in a cheap, plain, and expeditious mode,
by the decisions of the neighbours. These minor courts communi-
cated with others of larger jurisdiction: ascending gradually from
the lowest, to Courts of supreme power. Almost in so many words
is it said of Moses, (Earod. Ch. xviii) that he appointed honorable
and impartial men to be judges in courts of various grades of juris-
diction, who—“judged the people at all seasons; the hard causes
they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged them-
selves.” And thus in Mexico, before Spanish freebooters carried
corruption, desolation, and death amongst a contented and inoffen-
sive people, each town and province had courts for the decision of
causes: unless where the intricacy or magnitude of the subject in
litigation demanded the determination of the Supreme Court of the
empire, consisting of 12 judges. Peru also was judiciously orga-
nized, with apparently the same desirable objects in view, immediate
justice easily accessible to all: there were various divisions of juris-
diction, each division having its separate magistrate, with a proper
degree of subordination from the lowest to the highest court.-Mi-
chaelis calculates that without including the tribe of Levi, there were
at one time amongst the Israelites, w
Judges of tens. . . . . 60355.
Do. of hundreds. . . 6035.
Do. of thousands. . 603.
In all 66,993.
exlvii.
NotE 43.-Sepulture.
Tºſſ w ſº f º
ſº
|}
-
º
The silver cord being loosened, and the golden bowl broken, the pitcher being
broken at the fountain, and the wheel at the cistern, man goeth to his long home,
and the mourners go about the streets Eccles. xii. 5.
Accord ING to the notions of many ancient writers, all men are, by
the Law of Nature, entitled to Sepulture. Nature common to all
mankind demands the burial of the dead, says Elian. (Var. Hist. Lib.
xii.) It is the Law of the human race, says Euripides: and say
Claudien and Isidorus–T)enial of the rites of Sepulture is insulting
to humanity, and a violation of justice. Cicero, Lactantius, Valerius
Maximus, Quintilien, Seneca, Philo-Judaeus, Tacitus, Ulpien, all
pronounce the performance of the last duties to the dead, to be
evidence of a pious, humane, and charitable mind. Lactantius de-
clares neglect of those rites as being useless or unimportant, to
bespeak a species of wisdom or sagacity of a ruthless and impious
description. When the Canadian Indians were urged to abandon to
adventurers their native lands,--"What!” they replied; “Shall we
say to the bones of our fathers, Arise, and go with us into a foreign
land "-The ancient Christians regarded the duty of Sepulture, as
so peculiarly incumbent upon the living, that to discharge it, even
the consecrated vessels of the Church were, if need be, to be broken-
down and melted : the Burial of the dead, the Relief of the poor, and

cxlviii.
the Ransom of captives, appearing to their unsophisticated minds,
equally to demand appropriation of church-property. That the
ancient Hebrews were as deeply sensible of the importance of this
duty, the Work of Maimonides will abundantly demonstrate : and
in its humane regard for the dead, the Civil Code agrees with the
Judaic Code. Even to the worst of malefactors, the Laws both of
Rome and of Judea allowed decent burial.(*) In a rescript of the
Emperors Diocletian and Maximian, it is declared, (Cod. Lib. iii.)—
“Obnoxios criminum digno supplicio subjectus, sepultura tradi mon
vetamus :” and it has long been matter of doubt with Theologians,
whether it be decent or humane, or consistent with civilized life or
the belief of the soul's immortality, to exhibit the human corpse for
days together, exposed on high to the sport of the elements and to
the gaze of the idle and unfeeling; under the supposition that an ex-
posure shocking to humanity and abhorrent to the feelings of the
pious and humane, may serve as an hideous caution to others.
Familiarity, however, with such exhibitions, will not serve to prevent
other atrocities; and in Scotland first, and in England afterwards,
the tolerating in dissection-rooms of scientific indignities to the dead,
at one time raised up a tribe of satanic ruffians, capable not only of
dragging at midnight the newly-buried corpse from its resting-place,
but who, assassins in the face of day, would strangle the living, to
furnish murdered “subjects” for the purposes of “science "(t)—By
the Laws of Attica, sojourners in a town were required to pay, be-
* The Poor, then, are sometimes treated under Amendment-Acts, worse than
malefactors : but not without the expression of indignant feelings upon the part
of the humane and just. At a Meeting in the Town-Hall, Morpeth, on the 6th
March 1837, the following Resolution proposed by the Mayor of Morpeth, was
passed, viz.:-‘‘ 'That this Meeting considers the Resolution lately agreed to by
the Guardians of the Morpeth Union, (that deceased persons receiving parochial
relief shall not have the accustomed decencies of Christian burial,) to evince a
brutal and heathenish spirit, and to be a violent outrage upon the solemn feelings
of a Christian community: and that it is the wish and opinion of the Rate payers
of this township, that a pall, with a sufficient number of cloaks and hat-bands, be
provided by this township for the use of paupers.” Mr. Dewdney of Portsea, in
Nov. 1837, related that—“A corpse was sent in the summer of 1837, by a horse
and cart from Fareham Workhouse to Hambledon for burial. The man who was
paid to take it, having some pigs to carry home, took them also in the cart.
Passing through a brook, the cart broke down, and corpse and pigs tumbled into
the stream. Arrived at Hambledon the coffin was opened, and towels or some-
thing of that sort taken out to be sent back ; after which the corpse was interred.
These, (said Mr. Dewdney,) are the necessary consequences of a system which
treats the poor as so many head of cattle, to be kept while alive and interred
when dead, at the least expence possible.”—With respect to Ireland, the Com-
missioners appointed to enquire into the state of the Irish Poor reported that
they were—“frequently reduced before their death, to such a state of destitution,
that their bodies have been lying for many days in the cellars and garrets, in a
state of putrefaction, for want of coffins to bury them in.”
t'. A poor woman, residing in the same neighbourhood (Kensington,) applied
to the Guardians for a coffin to bury her child in, the Vicar and Church-Wardens
having agreed to forego their usual fees; when the Guardians told her to bring her
child to the Union-house, when they would send it to some dissecting-room,
which would save the expence of a coffin.”—Times Dec. 9. 1837.
cxlix.
sides the usual taxes, Tribute called “Metoikion :” and defaulters
were exposed to sale by the “Poletai,”—the officers concerned in
the Public Revenue. Plutarch relates, that Xenocrates the Philoso-
pher was saved from this fate by being rescued by Lycurgus:
Diogenes Laertius was absolutely sold, though afterwards redeemed
by Demetrius. Sojourners amongst the Hebrews, were also required
to pay certain imposts in aid of the poor, as enumerated by Maimo-
nides. (c. ix. § 12.) Those who had been residents during three-
quarters of a year, were to contribute to the Burial-fund for the
Poor.—So with the Athenians, it was not the rich only, whose in-
terment was attended to ; the Demarchi were commanded, under a
heavy penalty, to solemnize the funerals of the Poor and even of
slaves. (Demost. in Macart.)—The ancient Hebrews, like other
humane and civilized people, were religiously scrupulous relative to
the rites of Sepulture : denial of which, was naturally accounted a
punishment, to which mone but, those legally convicted of extreme
moral turpitude could be subjected. And amongst the Greeks and
the Romans, the most awful of all imprecations was, to call upon the
Gods to refuse human burial. Shipwreck was, therefore, the most
terrible form of death ; and Ovid, his miserable life being a burden
to himself, prays only that he may be preserved from a watery
grave :—
“Dimitte naufragium, mors mihi mumus erit.”
—Amongst the Egyptians, there was a law, says Diodorus Siculus,
that no man should be permitted to borrow, unless he pledged him-
self to his Creditor, to deliver-up as a security, the embalmed corpse
of his parent ; and the Debtor, if he died without redeeming the
Corpse, was denied the Rites of Sepulture.—At Athens, indeed, the
Creditor, could claim the dead body of his Debtor; and Cimon was
unable to redeem the corpse of Miltiades. In England, too, Credi-
tors are permitted the shocking licence to seize upon the corpse of
their Debtor, and to prevent or to protract those last solemn rites, to
deny which even barbarous nations would regard as an impious indig-
nity.—By so religious a people as the Hebrews, obscene, and impious
treatment of the dead, such as this, would have been viewed as an
unpardonable atrocity: when the Psalmist endeavours to describe the
most revolting act of oppression and malice, he exhibits the remains
of the dead dragged from the tomb, and scattered over the earth
like the loose sticks and faggots cut down by the woodman –
“Our bones are scattered at the mouth of the grave,
“As when one cutteth and cleareth wood upon the earth !”
—To deny to the dead sepulchral rites, was regarded as degrading
mankind to a level with the beasts of the field—to bury them with
the “burial of an ass!” It was an indignity to which only great delin-
quents were condemned: and thus Jeremiah, in denouncing vengeance
against Jehoiakim, for his covetousness and tyranny, declares that he
shall be buried with “the burial of an ass,” and be cast out of the
Gates of Jerusalem into the Common-Sewer l—David highly com-
mended the men of Jabesh-Gilead for having rescued the bones of
cl.
their King from under the enemy's wall, and for carefully committing
them to the family vault. The Law of England, however, is not so
particular about the bones of the King or the people, as of their
shroud. To steal the shroud from the grave, is felony : to leave
the shroud and steal the body, is a misdemeanour.—In the earliest
ages of the Hebrew commonwealth, it was the custom to dispose of
the corpse by burial; and such also was the custom, subsequent to
the return from the Captivity. But during the period extending from
the time of King Asa to the Captivity, the burning of the corpse
was regarded as the most honourable treatment to the dead. The
body was laid on a couch and consumed with quantities of aromatic
substances: the ashes were then collected in a suitable urn or case,
and deposited in the Sepulchre. (2 Chron. xvi. 14.)
Mors sola fatetur,
Quantula sint hominum corpuscula
Roman Sarcophagus, in the British Museum.
—And thus it was with Hector's bones:—
The snowy bones his friends and brothers place
(With tears collected,) in a golden vase;
The golden vase in purple palls they roll’d,
Of softest texture, and inwrought with gold.
–Places of sepulture were left indeterminate: they were in the fields,
upon the highways, in gardens, and upon the sides of mountains.
But unless under peculiar circumstances the cemetries of most an-
cient nations were excluded from the precincts of their cities. Cicero
has the following passage in his “Epistles:”—“Locum sepulturoe
intra urbem ut darent, impetrari non potui :”—-and in his Treatise
“De Legibus” he says: —“Hominem mortuum in urbe ne sepelito.”

cli.
In Rome very few families possessed the privilege of having Mau-
soleums erected in the city; the law of the 12 Tables having expressly
prohibited it.—Samuel and Joab were interred in their own houses;
Aaron, Eleazer, and Joshua, upon the mountains: Saul and Deborah
under trees: Manassah and Amon in the garden of Uzzah. The
sepulchres of the common people of Jerusalem are said to have been
in the Valley of Kedron, or Jehosophat; to be buried in Jerusalem
was an honor conferred only upon Kings. Lamartine thus describes
the appearance of the Valley of Jehosophat:—
“L’aspect de la vallée de Josaphat est conforme à la destination que les idées
chrétiennes lui assignent. Elle ressemble à un waste sépulchre, trop Étroit ce-
pendant pour les flots du genre humain qui doivent s'y accumuler. Dominée de
toutes parts elle même par des monumens funebres, encaissée à son extrémité
méridionale dans le rocher de Silhoa, tout percé de caves sepulchrales comme
une ruche de la mort; ombragée d'un cóté par les noires collines du Mont des
Offenses; de l'autre par les remparts du temple ecroulé ; ce futun lieu naturel-
lement imprégné d’une sainte horreur, destiné de bonne heure à devener les ge-
monies d’une grande ville, et ou l’imagination des prophetes dut placer sans
efforts les scenes de mort, de resurrection, et de jugement.”
—It was not, however, merely the valley of Jehosophat, but the
whole mountainous elevation surrounding Jerusalem on its southern
side, which has been formed into one vast cemetery. “The Sepulchres
of the Patriarchs,” were excavated in the mountain facing that part
of Jerusalem where the Temple formerly stood; they are the sepul-
chres of Jehosaphat, of Ahsalom, the Cave of St. James, and the
sepulchre of Zechariah. To form the sepulchres of Absalom and of
Zechariah, the solid substance of the mountain has been cut away;
and two monuments of prodigious magnitude appear in the area,
each seemingly constructed of a single stone and adorned with
columns which appear to support the edifice, but of which they, in
fact, form an integral part; the whole of each mausoleum consisting
but of one single block:—
Thou so sepulchred, in such pomp doth lie,
That kings for such a tomb, might wish to die
—These lasting monuments of the dead will, in all probability,
endure as long as the mountains themselves: although tombs in
general are but ephemeral memorials, sometimes of vanity, some-
times of piety : and, says Juvenal, the mere roots of the fig-tree
will strike through the marble, and —“ their memory dies;” and to
shatter which, “valent sterilis mala rebora ficus:”—
“For like the mouldering tenants, tombs decay,
“And with the dust they hide, are swept away.”
Far from exhibiting any symptoms of mouldering away, these mau-
soleums continue, to this moment, as square and fresh, as upon the
last day of the chiselling of the workmen. The same is related by
Laborde of the tombs and temples of Petra.—Persons of high rank
in Judoea were generally buried in large Sepulchral Vaults hewn out
in the rock. In the Vision of Isaiah, (C. wwii.) the extreme vanity
of Shebna, studious of having a conspicuous sepulchre on high in
the mountain, is thus denounced —
clii.
“O thou, that hewest out thy sepulchre on high,
“That gravest in the rock an habitation for thyself
“Behold ! Jehovah will cast thee out,
“Casting thee violently out, and will surely cover thee (’’
—Chardin describes monuments of great antiquity in Persia, called
Naksi Rustam, illustrative of Shebna's pompous design. They con-
sist of sepulchres hewn out of a high rock near the top of the
mountain; the face of the rock fronting the valley below being
adorned in relievo and forming a splendid entrance to the tomb.
Thus high in the rocky defiles of Petra, remain also, to this day, the
tombs of the Edomites. (See the Travels of Irby and Mangles, and
of Leon de la Laborde.) Of all the ruins of Petra, the mausoleums
and sepulchres are among the most remarkable. Their vast number
indicate the former power and opulence of this now desolate tract
of rocks. Along the borders of stupendous cliffs, vast detached
masses of rock have been wrought into sepulchres, their interior
being excavated into chambers; while the exterior has been cut from
the live rock into the forms of towers, with pilasters and successive
bands of frieze and entablature, wings, recesses, figures of animals
and columns. (Captains Irby and Mangles, “Travels.”) Tombs
present themselves, not only in every avenue to the city and upon
every precipice that surrounds it, but even intermixed with its public
and domestic edifices; the natural features of the defile grew more
and more imposing at every step, and the excavations and sculpture
more frequent on both sides, till it presented at last a continued
street of tombs. Now all is desolation :-" Thy terribleness hath
deceived thee, and the pride of thine heart, O thou ! that dwellest
in the clefts of the rock, that holdest the height of the hill; though
thou shouldst make thy nest as high as the eagle, I will bring thee
down from thence, saith the Lord.” (Jerem. alia.) And at Olerdola,
in Spain, upon the side of a rocky mountain are seen the simple and
singular sepulchral excavations of some remote period.
Restos de antiguas sepulturas en la ciudad de olerdola.



cliii.
—Maundrell doubts whether the Sepulchres at Jerusalem, designated
as the “Tombs of the Kings of Judah,” are correctly so de-
nominated : their magnificence, however, is such, that, if not con-
structed for Kings, they must have been constructed by Kings: he
says—
—“Whoever was buried here, this is certain, that the place itself discovers so
great an expence both of labour and treasure, that we may well suppose it to
have been the work of Kings. You approach through an entrance cut out of the
rock, which admits you into an open court of about forty paces square, cut down
into the rock with which it is encompassed, instead of with walls. On the south
is a portico hewn likewise out of the natural rock. This has an Architrave run-
ning along its front, with sculptured fruits and flowers still discernible, but by
time much defaced. At the end of the portico, you descend to the passage into
the Sepulchres. The door is now so obstructed with stones and rubbish, as to
be difficult of access. But within, you arrive in a large fair room, cut,out of the
natural rock. Its sides and ceiling are so exactly squared, and its angles so just,
that no Architect with levels and plummets could build a room more regular;
and the whole is so firm and entire, that it may be called,—A chamber hollowed
out of one piece of marble. From this room you pass into six more, one within
another, all of the same fabric with the first. In every one of these rooms, ex-
cept the first, were coffins of stone placed in niches in the sides of the chambers.
They had been at first covered with handsome lids, and carved with garlands;
but now, most of them were broken to pieces by sacrilegious hands.”—
Thevenot describes similar caves in Egypt, excavated in the rocks
which formerly served as cemeteries for the dead. Outwardly they
are irregular, but all square within : the walls of the chambers are
adorned with hieroglyphicks,—Sandys on his route from Acre,
visited the Ruins of Sarepta; beyond which he discovered the Caves
hewn out of the rocks, which in the Book of Joshua are called
“Meara,” i. e. The caves of the Sidonians.—At Doganlu in Asia
Minor, Mr. Leake examined various ancient sepulchral caves, hol-
lowed out of the rocks and formed into chambers, with windows or
apertures, (similar to those of Judaic Sepulchres) and galleries, and
having various ancient inscriptions, one of which over a splendid
monument seems to point it out as the Sepulchre of Midas, (Midai
Fanaktei.) Close to this magnificent relic of Phrygian art, (says
Leake,) is a very large sepulchral chamber, with a portico of 2 co-
lumns excavated out of the same reddish sandstone in which the
great monument and various other tombs are formed.—Amongst the
splendid ruins of Palmyra are many Sepulchres: they are ranged on
each side of a hollow way, and extend more than a mile. They are
all square towers, four or five stories high. But though alike in
form, they differ greatly in magnitude and splendour. Their exterior
is of common stone; but the floors and partitions are of marble.
There is a walk across the whole building, just in the middle; and
the space on each hand is subdivided into six partitions, by thick
walls. The space between the partitions, is wide enough to receive
the largest corpse; and in these niches there are six or seven, piled
upon one another.—It was customary to whiten the sepulchres an-
nually, on the 15th Adar, a month before the feast of the Passover:
so that being thus conspicuous, no legal defilement interfering with
the observance of the festival might be contracted. It was probably
Y
cliv.
with some of these whited sepulchres in view, that Christ denounced
the Pharisaical hypocrites:—“for ye are like unto whited sepulchres,
which appear, indeed, beautiful without, but are within full of dead-
men's bones and of all uncleanness.”—The Mahometans have a like
custom of whitening their Sepulchres a short time before the Fast of
Ramadan.—Not the Hebrews only, but the greater part of the Hea-
then world deemed themselves polluted by the contact of a dead body.
Hence the Celestial Gods could not endure the sight of a corpse.
1)iana (in Euripides,) professes it unlawful for her even to cast her
eyes upon the dead body of Hippolytus, her favorite :-
Farewell ! for tºwere in me a sinful act
To view the dead; or to defile mine eyes
With the sad sight of an expiring soul |
The Jewish Doctors, however, in allusion to the Law of Leviticus
(Ch. xxi) prohibiting the priests from being defiled by the dead, ex-
plain it with this restriction —That if they discover a corpse unburied,
they may not only approach it, but with their own hands are they
required to inhume it.—“It is written,” says St. Paul, (Gal. iii)—
“Cursed is every man that hangeth on a tree.” The Jews held, also,
as accursed, the tree itself on which a malefactor had been executed,
or on which he had been hanged after having been put to death by
stoning. And thus Maimonides, in another Treatise says, that the
wood upon which any one has hung, must be buried with the crimi-
mal : and the stone, or the sword, or the cord, which may have
killed him. Agreeably to which, Theodoret (Hist. Eccl. 1. xvii) in
his account of the finding of the Cross by Helena, says that the
three crosses were buried in the earth near the place of our Lord's
Sepulchre.—Voltaire, observes, “Vous ne voyez ni à Rome, ni dans
le reste de l’Italie, aucun de ces abominables cimetières entourer les
églises: l'infection ne s'y trouve pas a côté de la magnificence et les
vivants n'y marchent point sur les morts. Cette horreur n'est souf-
ferte que dans des pays ou l'asservissement aux plus indigmes usages,
laisse subsister un reste de barbarie, qui fait honte à l’humanité.”
It will require something more than the bare assertions of such a
writer as Voltaire, to convince the people of England that it argues
a subjection to unworthy prejudices, or that it bespeaks a want
of civilization, to inter the dead in those spots which have ever been
held inviolable as spots the most sacred upon earth, where every
object tends to inspire devotion and awe :—
The Church-yard yews round which his fathers sleep,
All rouse reflection's sadly pleasing train;
And oft he looks, and weeps, and looks again :
But for this practice, the word Glebe, would, probably, never have
been heard of. A passage from Cicero (“De Legg.” Lib. 2. avii.)
throws light upon the matter —“Nam priusquam in os injecta gleba
“est, locus ille ubi crematum est corpus, nihil habet religionis.”
A cemetery of “Pere la Chaise” may be very picturesque, amusing,
and pretty, and such new fangled-devices may be profitable as joint-
clv.
stock concerns : but never, to the end of time, will an incongruous
array of pompous cenotaphs and fantastic tombs constructed under
such circumstances, give rise to those devout feelings, those heart-
felt sympathies, and those exquisite conceptions which dictated the
“Elegy written in a Country Church-yard /*
Beneath those rugged elms, that yew-tree's shade,
Where heaves the earth in many a mouldering heap;
Each in his narrow cell for ever laid,
The rude forefathers of the hamlet sleep !
To burial in Churches there may be reasonable objections: a practice
expressly prohibited by the 50th Canon of the Council-of-Brague,
held in 563.−In the erection of the funeral pile, no curious niceties
were to be indulged in. Cicero quotes Solon for his authority, in
declaring that the sides of the pyre were not to be made even with
the hatchet:—“Hoc plus inquit, (Solon) ne facito rogum ascia me
polito.” Another law of the xii Tables relating to funerals, Lambinus
and other Scholiasts interpret in such a way, as would lead us to
believe, that in former times the razor was an indispensable in-
strument, even for the fair sex :—“Mulieres genas me radunto, neve
“lessum funeris ergo habento”—which being interpreted, signifies,
say these pundits;– “Let not women at funerals, apply depilatories
“ to their faces, nor make too much of the Irish O hone !” Amongst
the Hebrews, there were women who made a trade of crying at
funerals, joining the mournful sound of flutes with their voices: a
ceremony still kept up amongst the native Irish, between whose
customs and those of the ancient Hebrews, there is, says Fleury, a
striking similarity.—Although the pyre and the tomb were generally
resorted to by the Romans, the burning of the bodies of infants who
had not yet cut their teeth, was regarded as an act of the highest.
impiety: and thus Juvenal,—
“Terrá clauditur infans, et minor igne rogi.”
Cicero says that it was not usual to weep for infants who died so.
young, and Plutarch endeavours to moderate the grief of his wife at
the death of their child, by a reference to custom: but says Juvenal,-
As nature bids, we sigh when some bright maid
Is, ere her spousals, to the pyre conveyed :
Some babe, by fate’s inexorable doom
Just shown on earth, then hurried to the tomb
The place set apart for the interment of infants, was called Sug-
grundarium. Amongst the savages of Australia, also, children are
buried in the earth : whilst warriors and those of advanced years
are burnt. Children at the breast, these brutes of human form
cast alive into the graves of their mothers.-Amongst the Romans
when hope had vanished and the soul seemed escaping from the
body, it was the custom to kiss the dying person, and to embrace
his body until he expired. Thus Suetonius relates that Augustus
expired in the kisses of Livia: Joseph fell upon the neck of his
father Jacob when he lay upon his death-bed, and kissed him.—
Plutarch tells a story of a magpie, which became dumb upon hearing
clvi.
the funeral trumpets; but, as though the solemnity had excited
meditation, after a time she struck up the identical tunes, and to the
admiration of the people hit off every shake and turn 1 (“De Anim.
solert.”) Ovid alludes to this practice of using trumpets at the
funerals of the rich : “Cantabat moestis tibia funeribus.”—In cer-
tain cases the dead were by the Greeks, deemed to have lost their
title to funeral rites. Traitors and Tyrants were denied burial, as
were also those spiritless creatures who would tamely see their
country laid prostrate by foreign or domestic tyranny, rather than
expose to the remotest danger their own caitiff limbs. Hector ex-
claims,
— for by the Gods who flies,
Who dares but linger, by this hand he dies;
No weeping sister his cold eye shall close,
No friendly hand his funeral pyre compose l
Who stops to plunder in this signal hour,
The birds shall tear him, and the dogs devour !
Those who had committed suicide, or sacrilege, or had been struck
dead by lightning, were also denied funeral rites. In what, says
Madame Deshoulières, does the greatness of those Greeks and
Romans consist, whose voluntary deaths have followed misfortune or
disgrace?—
Il est plus grand, plus difficile
De souffrir le malheur, que de s'en délivrer
“Platon,” says Montaigne, “en ses lois, ordonne sepulture igno-
minieuse à celui qui a privé son plus proche ami, savoir est soi-
même, de la vie.” Amongst the Hebrews, as amongst the Pagans,
the honour of Sepulture was denied to those who had committed
suicide. (Puff. Lib. 11.) Heinous criminals became food for birds
and beasts of prey :—
The Vulture snuffs from far the tainted gale,
And hurrying where the putrid scents exhale,
From gibbets and from graves the carcass tears,
And to her young the loathsome dainty bears.
—“Let the dead be interred,”—was one of the commands of Ce-
crop's Laws. To restrain vanity, it was, by the Laws of Solon,
ordered that no tomb should consist of more work than ten men
could complete in three days : nor was it permitted to adorn a tomb
with statues —“Ne quis sepulchrum faceret operosius quam quod
decem homines efficerint triduo :”—
Some have amused the dull sad years of life
With schemes of monumental fame: and sought
By pyramids and mausolean pomp,
Short-lived themselves, to immortalize their bones 1
According to Plato, a sepulchral monument was never to occupy the
time of more than five men during five days : and it was expressly
prohibited to convert land in cultivation, to the purposes of a ceme-
tery:—“Vetat ex agro culto, eove qui coli possit, ullam partem
sumi sepulchro.”—To such excess did the Athenians carry their
clvii.
attention to the interment of soldiers killed in battle, that the ten
Admirals who gained the victory at Arginusae, were put to death on
account of their not having collected after the battle, the whole of
the corpses floating upon the waves; and this, notwithstanding it
was alleged, that an impending tempest would have hazarded the
safety of the whole fleet, had they longer delayed their return.—
Before quitting the subject of the dead and their burial, it may be
convenient here to refer to that passage in Maimonides, (Ch. x. $.
18.) which declares that it is better to b:come even a flayer of car-
casses, than needlessly to subsist upon Alms, and be thereby reduced
to dependance. Rousseau could not have apprehended greater evils
from dependance and the “fiend, discretion,” than seem to be implied
in this passage. Whilst Maimonides declares it to be an heinous
sin, when life is at stake to reject alms from feelings of pride or
despair; he yet declares it to be an unpardonable fraud upon society
to accept of Alms, unless compelled by the most urgent need.
However respected may theretofore have been the mode of life of
him who has become unfortunately reduced to want, yet is the most
ignoble employment to be followed, rather than become dependant
upon others for subsistence. That an occupation the most odious
and offensive has been pointed out by Maimonides, must be ap-
parent to all who consider how dreaded by the people of Judaea, was
the touch of a corpse.—But whilst the sight of death and the grave
inspired the Hebrews with religious awe and dread, they failed not
to set the highest value upon the bodies of the living. Under ex-
treme provocation, even when forcibly attacked, a solemn purgation
was ordained to evince their regret and horror at the shedding of
human blood. For those who had accidentally become the cause of
the loss of human life, certain Cities of Refuge were appointed,
where security from the Avenger might be enjoyed, until time had
removed the deep stain which attached to him, by whom the blood
of man had been shed.—From this humane superstition, (as some
have termed it,) seems to have been derived the Law of Deodands,
of our own country. In its tenderness for life and limb, the Law of
England in cases of homicide, will never allow of an absolute freedom
from guilt: and in accidents, whatever personal chattel is the im-
mediate occasion of the death of any human creature, becomes
forfeit. When High-Almoners were in vogue, it became their duty
to distribute such forfeits in Alms to the indigent.— A severe
punishment is, in like cases, inflicted by the Mosaical law : it is
ordained in Exodus, (ch. xxi.) that—“If an ox gore a man that he
die, the ox shall be stoned and his flesh shall not be eaten.”—And
according to Fleta, a well in which a man had been drowned, was by
ancient law required to be filled-up : so among the Athenians, what-
ever was the cause of a man's death, by falling upon him, was
earterminated, or cast out of the dominions of the Republic.
NotE 44.—“Tsedekah :” Alms, or, Righteousness.
It has long been a subject of disputation whether the Hebrew word
clviii.
Tsedekah, frequently made use of in the Old Testament, is correctly
translated, Alms; or as the English version generally has it, Right-
eousness. Michaelis, in his “Commentaries upon the Mosaic Laws,”
(Art. 156.) notices the inadvertency of Luther upon this same dis-
putable point: he says that the word translated Righteousness by
Luther, (Deut, xxiv. 13) is by “The lxx” translated Alms : and in
his German version of the Bible, Michaelis has followed “The lxx;”
because the term righteousness or good deed, is not only in Arabic,
Syriac, Chaldee, and Rabbinical-Hebrew the usual word for Alms,
but occurs in that sense in the Hebrew Bible. And this special sig-
nification is more suitable to the sense of the passage than the general
term, righteousness:– “In any case thou shalt deliver him the pledge
again when the sun goeth down, that he may sleep in his own rai-
ment, and bless thee; and it shall be righteousness unto thee before
the Lord thy God.” (Deut. xxiv. 13.) By Maimonides, also, in his
several quotations from Scripture, (Ch. x) the word Alms is generally
substituted for the words Righteousness and Judgment of the En-
glish version. And Talmudical Commentators agree with Maimoni-
des in this signification of the word, “Tsedekah.” Prideaux, on the
contrary, asserts that the primary signification of this word, is that
which has been attached to it by the English Translators: and he
makes the following assertion in reference to the signification attached
to the word, by the Talmudical writers:—“cum vero eo tempore,
quo Talmudici Constitutiones suas de Eleemosynis tradiderunt, Lingua
Hebraea vocem non suppeditaret, quae eas proprie significaret; ob
defectum, quem tum, utpote post excisas Hierosolymas dissipatamgue
Gentem, passus fuerat, vocem “Tsedekah” ob convenientiam, quae
inter Eleemosynarum largitionem et justitiam intercedit, ad eas sig-
nificandas assumebant, (Justum enim est pauperibus succurrere, mari-
mum que viri justi insigne est.) et hinc primum obtinuit apud Ju-
daeos, ut haec vox aeque “Eleemosynas' ac ‘ Justitiam’ significaret.”
Surely, however, it must be a question whether a man such as Mai-
monides, of strict integrity, of acknowledged learning, and deeply
versed in Hebrew Laws, customs, and language, would have fallen
into error in a matter relating to Hebrew philology. That he should
have wilfully distorted the meaning of the Scripture, as insinuated
by Prideaux, and that, solely to supply himself with a few additional
quotations in support of his Precepts relating to Alms, seems quite
incredible. Prideaux does however, indulge in such an insinuation:—
“Maimonides, autem, vel quod hoc non adverteret, vel potius quod
proposito inserviret suo eos Sacrae Scripturae textus, in quibus justitia,
per vocem Tsedekah expressa aut laudatur aut nobis exercenda
recommendatum, quasi pro largiendis Eleemosynis facerent huc
adducit.”—Dr. Lowth supports Prideaux against Maimonides and
Michaelis ; although certainly in the following passage from Isaiah,
(Ch. v.) the word “Alms,” would appear to be far more significant
than the word “Righteousness:”—
And he looked for judgment, but behold tyranny
And for righteousness, but behold the cry of the oppressed.
clix.
Again in Ch. 1 Dr. Lowth makes the Prophet declare, that Zion's
captives shall be redeemed in righteousness: which the Dr. explains
to mean,--' by the truth and faithfulness of God in performing his
promises.” Maimonides, however, quoting the same passage, says,
(Ch. x $ 1.)—“Nor can the Israelites be redeemed from Captivity,
unless by the merit of Alms, as it is said, (Is. 1. 27.)—Zion shall be
redeemed with judgment and her converts by Alms.” (See, also, Is.
xxxii. 16.-Gen. Ch. xviii. 19.)—In the Douay version, the word
Justice is used for Righteousness —“For I tell you that unless your
justice abounds more than that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you
shall not enter into the kingdom of God:” by no means an improve-
ment upon the passage in the authorized version:—“For I say unto
you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of
the Scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the king-
dom of heaven.”
NotE 45.—Idolatry.
For Solomon went after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians; and after
Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites—l Kings xi.
IN Chapter x (§ 3.) Maimonides denounces uncharitableness to-
wards the poor : nor could he more strongly or more unequivocally
pronounce condemnation, than by denouncing it as upon a par with
impiety and idolatry. He who was callous to the miseries of the
Poor, was subject, says Maimonides, to the reproach of being called
a “Son of Belial;” an unsympathizing wretch, of such stubborn
insensibility and iniquity, that neither human nor divine appeals could
move his iron heart, nor oppose an obstacle to his inveterate depravity.
—Assuredly with the Hebrews, it never became a question, as to

clx.
which was most wise and humane:—Whether to relieve the indigent
Or to suffer them to perish in the midst of plenty —Modern writers
have, however, been found thus foully to libel the upright and hu-
mane :-" The question whether or not it is really wise and humane
in Society to undertake the care and relief of the indigent, is one on
which able, upright, and benevolent men have come to opposite con-
clusions !” A veritable “Son of Belial” would such a libeller have
been proclaimed under the Jewish law; notwithstanding his claim of
alliance with a “Society for the diffusion of useful knowledge :”—
Belial came next ; than whom a Spirit more lewd
Fell not from heaven : or more gross to love vice for itself!
According to the Rabbis, “Sons of Belial,” or Of Impiety, are—
Those who have shaken from their necks the yoke of God. Not
only are those who are hard-hearted towards the Poor re-
garded as “Sons of Belial :” but they are declared to be as impious
as Idolaters or, “Worshippers of the Stars and Planets:” terms,
which, in the Jewish writings, appear to have been synonimous with
Idolaters : and thus Maimonides terms his Treatise upon Idolatry,–
“The Laws relating to the worship of the Stars and Planets.”—The
Idolatry of ancient Syria and of the neighbouring nations, was how-
ever, by no means confined to the worship of the “Stars and Planets :”
although from the earliest ages the worship of the host of heaven,
was the established and universal religion of the East. Afterwards
the idolatry of the world became divided between the Sabians, who
were worshippers of images: and the Magians who were worshippers
of fire: both sects originating doubtless in the prevalent notion, that
the meanness, folly, and feebleness of man, required a Mediator
between him and his God. This indeed appears to have been a ge-
neral opinion amongst most nations in the early periods of their
history. From Planet-worship to Image-worship, the transition was
easy.—The stupid superstition of bowing-down before—“stout sub-
stantial gods of wood and stone”—was, at one time, an universal
delusion; from the days of Moses until the Captivity, the mania for
something tangible and substantial seems to have urged to the wor-
ship of a multitudinous variety of Gods. Ezekiel in his “Vision,”
details the superstitions observed under the very roof of the Temple:—
“And he brought me to the door of the Court; and behold, a hole in the wall.
Then, said he, Son of man dig now in the wall : and when I had digged,
behold a door; And he said, Go in ; behold the wicked abominations that they
do here. So I went in and saw. And behold ! every form of creeping things
and abominable beasts, and all the Idols of the house of Israel pourtrayed upon
the wall round about ! And he brought me to the door of the Lord's House.
And behold ! there sat women weeping for Tammuz : (a deity of the Phaenicians.)
Then said he, Turn thee yet again, O Son of man 1 And behold ! at the Tem-
ple of the Lord, between the Porch and the Altar, five and twenty men; their
backs toward the Temple and their faces toward the East ! And they worshipped
the Sun.”— . . . . . .
Of all the Kings from Jeroboam to Hoshea, there was not one wholly
free from the sin of Image-worship, or of Idolatry: but Josiah, we
are told (2, Kings, xxiii.) abolished all idolatrous worship —
clxi.
“Moreover the workers with familiar spirits, and the wizards, and the images,
and the idols, and all the abominations that were spied in the land of Judah and
in Jerusalem, did Josiah put away.”—
Even Solomon, whose first and only wish had been for wisdom and
Knowledge, became an Apostate from his religion : and like the
weakest of mortals fell down before Ashtoreth, Chemosh, and Milcom:
a divine trio imported from the various male and female deities of
his neighbours.—In the Mosaic-Law, Idolatry occupied the first place
in the list of crimes. By that Code it was a crime not only against
God, but against the fundamental laws of the state : not dissimilar
to what in modern times is termed, High-treason. In this it differs
from Image-worship ; which although a crime against God, was not
a crime against the State. Even Aaron set up a Golden-Calf; under
the similitude of which the Israelites had so longing a desire to wor-
ship the God who had brought them up out of the Land of Egypt.
And in later times, Jeroboam, fearful of a defection amongst the
Tribes if suffered to go up to keep the festivals according to custom
in Jerusalem : and desirous no doubt, of preventing the wealth of
his Kingdom from being carried away to be expended there amongst
a rival Tribe, set up a couple of Golden-Calves, one at each extremity
of his Kingdom; proclaiming,-“Behold thy Gods, O Israel ! which
brought thee up out of Egypt." Propense his heart to idols this
worship of the Calves, (*) called—“The sin of Jeroboam, the son of
Nebat”—continued under the Kings of the Ten Tribes until the As-
syrian Captivity:—
“Cured of the golden Calves, their fathers' sin,
“They set up self, that idol-god within l’”
The punishment for worshipping strange Gods, was stoning to death:
but not unless the worship was according to the mode in which those
Gods were commonly worshipped. Peor and Mercury were worship-
ped in two very different fashions: and it was not a Capital crime to
worship Peor by throwing stones at him, according to this awful mode
of worshipping Mercury: but, to throw stones at Mercury, though
merely to show contempt of his divinity, was deemed to be a criminal
act, since others might be thereby misled and seduced into sin. When
a whole city became guilty of Idolatry, it was deemed to be in a state
of rebellion against the Government, and condemned to be treated
according to the Laws of War:—
“That City shall be burnt with fire and all the spoil thereof, every whit: and it
shall be a heap for ever; it shall not be built again. And there shall cleave nought
of the cursed thing to thine hand.” -
—Controversy has run high upon the subject of “Jephtha's Vow :”
endless have been the profound disputations as to whether he did, or
did not, actually sacrifice his daughter. Lowth decides that he did
not. It is, however, indisputable that Idolaters did exist in the Land,
who offered up human sacrifices to Idols: and that the expression—
“making their sons pass through the fire to Moloch,”—could by no
* The worship of the Calves appears to have been derived from the Egyptian
Apis : Jeroboam had resided in Egypt.
Z
clxii.
means be explained-away to signify, “dedicating their Sons to Moloch
and making them pass through two Sacrificial fires.” Passages in
Ezek. xvi-Deut. xii—Jer. vii and xix—Lev. xx:—seem decisive
upon that point: were there not David's unequivocal assertions, Ps.
CW1 :-
Yea they sacrificed their sons and daughters to devils
And shed innocent blood | g
Even the blood of their sons and of their daughters,
Whom they sacrificed unto the Idols of Canaan
And the land was polluted with blood
—This Moloch, (according to Kimchi,) had the head of a bull, and
seven cells of fire in its body: the prototype of Saturn at Carthage, as
described by Diodorus. The children to be immolated, were placed
on the divinity’s arms. Moloch or Rea, was a type, says Drummond,
of the Solar-Heat or Light diffused through the planetary system :
and the error of the Sabaists consisted in worshipping as material
bodies, these types or emblems which were derived from the Egyp-
tians. It was against them, and against those amongst the Israelites
who imitated them, that the priests and prophets of Judea inveighed.
The Sabaists held that the Celestial-bodies were conscious and intel-
ligent beings, moving through space; and in all their courses, by
powers, properties, and qualities existing in themselves, preserved
order and regularity. To these material powers and properties, they
offered Homage: under the delusion that matter governed itself by
its own laws; thereby denying all participation to a Spiritual Direc-
tor and Preserver. The Tabernacles of these Sabaists seem to have
been types of the material universe :—
Thus dream they : and contrive to save a God
The encumbrance of his own concerns, and spare
The great artificer of all that moves,
The pain of vigilance and care
As too laborious and severe a task .
—By the two most learned Jews who have written in Greek, (Jose-
phus and Philo,) and by others it is asserted that the Israelites,
whilst performing their religious ceremonies, were surrounded with
the Emblems of Sabaism, and with various memorials of the very
idolatry against which the Prophets inveighed. The Sun, the Moon,
the xii Signs of the Zodiac, the Two Hemispheres, the Planets, the
Solar-light, are said all to have been typified in the Tabernacle: could
it be surprising that the common people, in their ignorance, were
incapable of distinguishing emblems from reality. In most nations
of antiquity, termed idolatrous, the religion of the Sage, was distinct
from that of the populace : there were the esoteric and the eacoteric
doctrines. (See the Life of Maimonides. p. xxviii.) The Greeks and
Romans, each had their Mythologies: but the hymn ascribed to Or-
pheus, and sung at the Eleusinian-Mysteries, declares that—” God
is one alone, and self-existent : all-seeing, he is seen by mone.” And
Epictetus alludes to one only God —God has created me, God is
within me, and ever with me: shall I dishonour God by low ideas,
unjust deeds, obscene desires?—“Estne dei sedes, nisi terra, et pontus,
clxiii.
et aer P’’—says Statius. And Ovid declares that it is God only, who
is adored under the image of a God:—“colitur pro Jove, forma
Jovis.” It is he who prays to images, that makes them into Gods:
not the sculptor, says Martial : (Lib. viii Ep. xxiv)—
Qui finxit sacros auro vel marmore vultus,
Non facit ille Deos: qui rogat, ille facit.
Marcus Aurelius, although he speaks in some of his writings of a .
plurality of Gods, is evidently impressed with the belief of but one
eternal Lord of all:—“My soul is an emanation of the deity : my
children, my body, my mind, all proceed and have their being from
God.”—As the maintenance of the worship of the one true God was
a fundamental object of the Mosaic polity, Idolatry (as before stated,)
was the highest of crimes. The Sacred-Writers are therefore large
and eloquent upon the subject: they treat it with great severity, and
in the strongest light set forth its absurdity. But, says Dr. Lowth,
the passage in Isaiah (Ch. xliv) far exceeds, in force of argument,
energy of expression, and elegance of composition, any tiing ever
written upon the subject of Idolatry. First, the Smith is introduced
commencing the arduous work of God-making, by cutting off a
piece of iron :
“He worketh it in the coals, and with hammers he formeth it !”
Next comes the Carpenter, who cuts down cedar and pine for the
manufacture ; and them,-
“He stretcheth his line, and marketh out the form of the God, with red ochre;”
And having sundry pieces of the God to spare, with some of the divine
superfluity,–
“He heateth the oven and baketh bread: and he taketh thereof and warmeth
himself. -
“He dresseth flesh, and eateth : he roasteth meat, and his hunger is satisfied ;
“He also warmeth himself, and sayeth, Aha! I have enjoyed the fire '’
In the ludicrous way, Horace in some degree imitates this admirable
sketch of the abstruse art of divinity-making :-
Olim, truncus eram ficulnus, inutile lignum;
Cum faber, incertus scammum faceretne Priapum,_
Maluit esse Deum !
–In later times, by the Israelites Idolatry was held in the greatest
abhorrence: and in the time of the Maccabees so strictly was the Sab-
bath observed, that whole armies suffered themselves to be massacred,
rather than violate it by standing on their defence. So zealous were
they, for their religion, and so faithful to their oaths whether of Al-
legiance or Confederacy, as to suffer with the utmost courage and
constancy the most sanguinary persecutions and butcheries, rather
than violate their vows. It has been doubted whether in number, in
constancy, or in suffering, the Hebrew Martyrs can be eclipsed by
those of any other nation or religion.
NoTE 46. Conclave of the Silent.
THE first Court, (encompassing the other Courts of the Temple,)
was called the “Court of the Gentiles;” because thus far only, might
clxiv.
Gentiles enter. The second Court called “The Court of the Israe-
lites,” was divided into two parts, one of which was called the
“Court of the Women. In this “Court of the Women” was placed
the Chests for receiving the voluntary contributions of the people and
in it was the “Conclave of the Silent.” That part of the Area where
the Chests were placed, was the “Treasury” mentioned by Mark.
Concerning the “Conclave of the Silent,” thus says the Mischna:
—“There were Two Conclaves in the Sanctuary, one of which was
called the Conclave of the Silent, and the other the Conclave of Wases.
In the Conclave of the Silent, bashful Sinners deposited their Alms
in Silence, and in silence were the Poor by these Alms relieved.” It
was situated in the “Court of the Women,” that being the only
Court open to all Israelites; and in which, consequently, donations
might be made unobserved.
NoTE 47.-Chananiah.
CHANANIAH was a most faithful Collector of Alms: and on that
account deservedly celebrated by Talmudical writers. The Babilo-
nian Talmud speaks of him in the highest terms. (“Avodah-Zarah,”
fol. lxxvii)
NoTE 48.-The Sabbath.
THERE is a passage in Maimonides, (Ch. x. § xviii) which might
lead to a supposition that cases might arise in which the Laws of the
Hebrews would sanction a profanation of the Sabbath:—“The indi-
gent are taught, that in order to avoid dependance, the Sabbath shall
the made as a week-day.” Now the meaning of this passage is, not
that the Sabbath shall be converted into a day of labour; but that
frugality was to be observed, as well upon the Sabbath as upon the
week-day, by those whose necessities were upon the point of render-
ing them a burthen to their brethren. In point of fact, profanation
of the Sabbath, of the—tou Kosmou genesion,-the world’s birth day,
as Philo calls it, was a capital crime : but with the Hebrews as with
the primitive Christians it was no profanation to make the Sabbath a
day of joy and of gladness, and to a certain extent of feasting: to—
“Serve the Lord in gladness and come before his presence with a
song.” The cheerful enjoyment of hallowed days was ever deemed
consistent with genuine piety : however different may be the sour.
conceits of those termed in modern times, – “Sabbath-Saints.”
Saints, indeed, whose pretensions to exclusive sanctimoniousness are
seldom any obstacle to their own Sabbath gratifications —
And the lyre and the harp, the tabor and the pipe,
And wine are in their feasts :
But the work of Jehovah they regard not.
—However puritanical may be their exclamations against the innocent
gratifications of others, yet, as Peter Pindar says,
clxv.
Dropping pious qualms, religious doubts,
Their ladies must enjoy their Sunday routs |
Poor and rich amongst the Hebrews were subject to the same law :
if elsewhere, the rich and sanctified will, after their fashion, profane
the Sabbath, their example must be expected to be contagious:—
If apostolic gravity be free
To play the fool on Sunday,+Why not we ?
But, says Maimonides, although joy and gladness and harmless gra-
tifications may be becoming in those whose means will allow of them,
the poor must contentedly submit to privations, even upon the Sab-
bath, rather than become dependant upon others: they must strictly
refrain from all gratifications as well upon the Sabbath as upon the
week-day; and it was in this respect, that Maimonides declares that
—to them the Sabbath must be as a week-day.—It was on account of
their strict observance of the Sabbath, that Seneca upbraided the
Hebrews with spending the seventh part of their time in Sloth. Ta-
citus, Juvenal, and Persius taunted them with their “recutita sabbata.”
With regard to modern observances of the Sabbath amongst the
Hebrews, sundry entertaining fables are recounted; the greater part
of them, in all probability, upon a par with the story of the Jew of
Magdeburg, and as veracious and as amusing as other tales and
TOIſla IICCS,
NoTE 49.—First and Latter Rains.
IN the Holy-Land there are two rainy seasons in the year, fre-
quently alluded-to in Scripture, and called the “First-rain” and the
“Latter-rain.” The “first” is supposed to fall in Autumn about
September or October, which was the beginning of the Civil Year
of the Hebrews : this was after Seed-time : of vital importance to the
husbandman, whose fate depended upon the forward state of the
crop before the winter. Six months later, about the Month Abib
(or March,) fell the “latter” rain: this filled the ears now at the
point of maturity: the harvest being generally about the middle of
our Spring. The Barley-harvest commenced about the middle of the
month Abib or Nisan : the name itself signifying “Green ears” or
“Ripe fruit:” probably the ears of wheat were green, whilst the bar-
ley was ripe. On the 15th of this month was gathered the sheaf of
the barley first-fruits; the harvest them began. The Wheat-harvest
was later. (Earod. ix. 32.) During the harvest-time the weather is
the most settled of any period of the year: and Jeremiah (Ch. v.)
accounts it a blessing of God to inhabit so favoured a country, A
country where God giveth rain, both the former, and the latter, in
due season, and reserveth the appointed weeks of harvest.—There are
copious dews: but no rain, not a cloud to be seen, from April to Sep-
tember. “Rari imbres,” said Tacitus many centuries ago.—The
Arabians still retain the former distribution of the year into Six sea-
sons:—“Seed-time and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and
winter.” (Gen. viii. 22.) Seed-time extends-from the middle of Octo-
ber to the middle of December; Winter, to the middle of February,
clxvi.
Cold, from that point to the middle of April; Harvest, to the middle
of June ; Summer, to the middle of August; Heat, to the middle of
October.—Great is the confusion amongst Talmudical writers about
the time of the falling of these Rains: their distinctions and divi-
sions may be learnt from Bartenora, (Comm. ad Peah cap. viii Ś 1)—
and Maimonides (Comm. ad Misch. tract. Peah. cap. viii.)—The
want of either of the Rains, falling as they do at so critical a period,
was necessarily productive of such afflicting consequences to a nation
of husbandmen, (such as were the ancient Hebrews,) that the pro-
phetic threats of visiting the earth with drought may readily be sup-
posed to have struck terror into the minds of all. See Deut. xi. 14–
Job xxix. 23.−Prov. xvi. 15.—Jer. iii. 3. and v. 24.—Hos. vi. 3.--
Joel ii. 23.—Zach. x. 1.)—Jeremiah vividly depicts the frightful
effects of such a drought (Ch. xiv.)—Rich and poor cried out in an-
guish, for—“ the ground was chapt: there was no rain in the
earth”—the ploughmen laid themselves down in despair—the parched
hind abandoned its calf—and the wild asses upon the mountain-tops,
with fire in their eyes “snuffed-up the air like dragons.” (See other
remarks in the “Testimonies &c.” p. 50.)—The pious and just are
promised (Deut. xi. 13) that they shall have rain in due season,-the
“first rain and the latter rain,”—That they may gather-in their corn,
and their wine, and their olives. In the Proverbs (xvi. 15.) the fa-
vour of a King is likened to “a cloud of the latter rain.”—In some
years the “latter” rain pours down for three or four days and nights
without intermission; in such torrents, and with such vehemence as
if threatening to lay the whole earth under water.—Maimonides
alludes (Ch. 1. § xi.) to this “latter” rain, as serving to designate
the period at which all men, poor or otherwise, are entitled to the
forgotten Olives.
LoNDoN : J. H. STARIE, PRINTER, 59, MUSEUM STREET.

t
******~~~~----...- :---




















































































f:
#
º
§§
§§
§
*::::::::#;
- º
tºº
ºù §:
º-
gº
§
§§
§
§:
sº
ºf §
;
º:
jº
§ # ;
§ §
ºś
§ º
§
;
;
A.
§
º
º
º
*~
sº-
º
§
§:
º
º
§ §
§
§
§