Bartoleme Las Casas [pp. 829-851]

Bartolemne Las Casas.
tives by land and sea. Every war undertaken by a civilized nation, and
declared in the usual forms, with the
solemn religious ceremonies, was held
to be a just war. It was an appeal
to the God of armies, as an umpire
or judge; it was the ordeal by battle.
When a victory was won, it was held
by the victors a divine decision in
their favor; the vanquished were
deemed criminals before high heaven;
and as a punishment they were put
to death. When the prisoners were
too numerous for a general massacre,
they were led captive to colonize
some vacant territory, and to work
for their masters. These victims
did not feel grateful to their enemies
for their clemency; but poured forth
their thanks to Providence for his
mercy. Their offspring continued
in slavery; for the sins of the father
were visited on the children to the
third and fourth generations, for ever.
Even in the course of time, when
they intermixed in blood, language,
and religion with the descendants of
their conquerors, they were often held
to servitude. This was the theory
and the practice under it; but subject to many exceptions.. Exchange
of prisoners was sometimes effected;
some were ransomed; some were released. At the date of the discovery
of America, Spain had been at war
with the Saracen for seven centuries;
it was not only a just war, but a holy
crusade. When captures were made
on either side, slaughter ensued without compunction; but not invariably.
Both armies and navies were acting
on religious conviction; but both
were better civilized, the infidel being deemed the more refined of the
two. It is true, the old and young,
the infirm and diseased, who were
poor, were slain or pitched overboard;
while the rich and the strongwere held
for slaves or for ransom. When a parent learned that his child or relation
was spared, only enslaved, he felt the
joy with which an American mother
on the border hears the news that her
little girl has not been scalped by the
Camanches when captured.
In Europe, therefore, slavery was
deemed a mitigation of the horrors
of war: an evil inflicted by the hand
of Providence, but a lesser evil. No
one spoke or wrote against the institution; whoever had dared would
have been considered not much better than a brute. Perhaps a few
Moslem fanatics desired more Christian blood-letting; perhaps a few
Christian fanatics wished a little
more of the fluid from the arteries
of Moors. Yet in no period of the
world's history was it held just to
retain slaves not captured in a just
war. In Jerusalem, they were returned to the neighboring nations
when acquired in private piratical
forays. This was the Hebrew law.
The law of Moses forbade man-stealing, mentioned in Isaiah, and repeated by Saint Paul in Timothy; but
man-stealing meant no more than any
other stealing of movable property.
In Athens, the same morality was
recognized. Aristotle laid it down
in his "Politics" that barbarians
could not be held in servitude unless
taken in a just war. Rome borrowed her international code from
Greece, as she borrowed everything
else intellectual. On the revival of
learning in the west, the Roman civil
law was introduced through the
.continent of Europe. The justice
of war, the property acquired under it, the moral power to enslave,
when, where, and in what cases,
was elaborately taught at the universities. Its principles were as
well understood in the canon law
as in the civil law; teachers in ethical philosophy also expounded the
doctrine which prevailed in every
tribunal or' judicature. They all
845