honour and quality, it was deemed a signal affront;
and Domitian is said to have punished Metius Pompo-
sianus for having called two of his slaves by the illus-
trious names of Hannibal and Magi. And the Athe-
nians enacted a law, that no man should presume to
call any of his servants by the names of Harmodius
and Aristogiton, two famous patriots, that with cou-
rage and resolution opposed the tyranny of the sons
of Pisistratus. At the same place, there was a law,
whereby the Athenians were restrained from calling
any of their slaves by the names derived from the
solemn games.
Yet there have been exceptions to
this general rule; for Nemea the minstrel, derived his
name from the Nemean games. According to the in-
formation we receive from Strabo, slaves were chiefly.
named after their native countries. The most common
names in Attica were Geta and Davus, from the Getes
and Daci: the names of slaves also seldom consisted
of more than two syllables, the reason assigned for this
was, that such names were readily pronounced; and on
this account Oppian advises to give dogs short names.

"Let hounds, which are designed for games and sports,
Have names imposed, that easy be and short;
Lest, at the huntsman's call, they trace in vain,
And run, with open cry, confusedly o'er the plain.”

Hence it was common for slaves, who had obtained their freedom, to change their servile names for others, which had more syllables. Above all things, especial care was taken that slaves should not bear arms, which, as their number was almost twenty times as great as that of the citizens, might have been attended with danger to the public.

To proceed with this subject, would be to draw the portraiture of the degradation and misery of Africa's injured children at this day; with this aggravation of the crimes committed against humanity, that the Athenians were Gentiles, but the oppressors of the Africans are men educated in the principles of the Christian religion-men professing to be the followers of Him,

who laid it down as an unerring guide in human conduct, to do unto others as we, in similar situations, would be done unto. There is one circnmstance, however, in which the slaves of the pagan master had the advantage of the poor Africans of modern times: they were permitted to get riches for themselves, paying only a small tribute to their masters; and if they could procure as much as would pay for their ransom, their masters could not prevent their purchasing their liberty, as is obvious from the words of Plautus, who introduces a slave speaking after this manner:

"Pray Sir, good words, since nor you, nor yet your son,
Can me my liberty deny, although

You pour out threatnings with such rigorous awe,
For, if I please, one pound can me release,

And purchase freedom."

I shall conclude this part of my subject by showing one more feature of similitude in the portraiture of the Pagan, compared with that of the modern slave dealer, as it is given us by Homer

"The Grecian chiefs, by bartering of their ware,
Their choice provisions and their wine prepare;
Some brass exchange-some iron-some beasts hides—
Some SLAVES OF WAR.'

But it is due to genuine Christianity to add, that in the early ages of the promulgation of the gospel, its professors acted agreeably to the golden rule laid down by their great Master, and treated those, who were thus placed at their uncontrolled disposal, with abundance of mildness and gentleness; esteeming barbarous and unnatural usage to be inconsistent with the benevolent nature of their religious profession, and they deemed it both unreasonable and unchristian, that persons endued with the same powers and faculties, the same feelings, tempers and inclinations with themselves, should be treated with no more kindness, and even with greater cruelty, than those creatures that are without reason, and destitute of the capacity of reflecting on their own condition; their perception being limited to their present feelings.

The Athenian Magistrates

Were distinguished into three classes, designated after the different methods of their selection. Such as received their dignity from the people, met together in lawful assembly, who gave their votes by holding up their hands, were called on that account Chirotoneti. Those who owed their promotion to lots, were called Chleroti. These lots were drawn by the Thesmothetæ, in the temple of Theseus. No person was permitted to try his fortune by the lots, who had not first been approved by the people; who reserved to themselves a power to appoint whom they pleased, without referring to the decision of the lots; and in this manner Aristides was nominated to the office of Archon. The manner of casting the lots was this, the name of every candidate, inscribed on a table of brass, being put into an urn, together with beans of different colours, the choice fell on those persons whose tablets were drawn out with white beans. If any man threw more than one tablet into the urn, he suffered capital punishment. The Æreti were a sort of subordinate officers, appointed by particular tribes or boroughs, to certain duties, such as surveying the public works, &c.

According to the institutions of Solon, no person was capable of being a magistrate, who was not possessed of a considerable estate; but Aristides brought it about, that the poorer sort were admitted to a share in the government, and every free denizen was capable of being proposed as a candidate for the highest preferments; yet such was the modesty of the commons, that they left the chief offices, and such as were of most importance to the welfare of the state, to persons of superior rank, aspiring no higher than to the management of subordinate concerns: but ultimately the people appear to have been deprived of this privilege. Plutarch, in his life of Phocion, mentions. same who were incapable of a share in the government on account of their poverty. Upon the whole, it seems

probable, that according to the prevalence of the aristocratic or democratic faction, the commons were admitted to public offices, or excluded from them.

But even at those times, when no man's quality or condition could preclude his having a share in the government, yet his conduct in life might; for if any man's life was known to be vicious and disorderly, he was thought unworthy of the meanest office, for they deemed it improbable, that a person who did not conduct himself reputably in a private capacity, should conduct himself with more propriety in a public situation; or that he, who had neglected his own concerns, or mismanaged them, should be capable of undertaking public business, and of managing the affairs of the commonwealth. Therefore, before any man was admitted to a public employment, he was obliged to give an account of himself and his past life before certain judges in the forum, which was the place appointed for such investigations. Nor was this alone thought sufficient, for though they past this trial with credit, yet in the next general assembly after their election, they were again brought to the test, when if any thing really objectionable in their moral conduct was brought against them, they were deprived of their honours; and whoever had the misfortune of being thus disqualified after his election, was excluded from the public assembly, and from making orations to the people. But the man who attempted to enter on the magistracy whilst unable to pay his debts, was considered as guilty of a capital offence; so scrupulously jealous were the Athenians of those who were to fill places of public trust and honour.

When their offices expired, the magistrates were obliged to give an account of their management to the notaries, and other persons appointed for that purpose; and if any man had neglected to do this, or had not undergone the probation just cited, the people were forbidden, by an express law, to present him with a crown, which was the usual reward of those who had

merited the esteem of their countrymen, by the just and prudent discharge of their public functions. Also, till their accounts were passed, they were not permitted to become candidates for any other post of honour, or to travel into any foreign country, or to dispose of their estates, or any part of them, whether by will, or by consecrating them to sacred purposes, or in any way whatever, but the whole was to remain entire; and in case they should be found to have embezzled the public treasures, the city might not lose by them. The time limited for bringing forward complaints of this kind was thirty days, which once past, the magistrate was free from any further trouble.

If any person, against whom a complaint was preferred, refused to appear at the time appointed, he was summoned to defend himself before the senate of five hundred, where, if he did not make his appearance, he was punished with infamy. This was the method of examining into the conduct of magistrates, after the term of their office was expired; but they were not exempted from being brought to trial during their magistracy. It being customary for the nine Archons, in the regular assemblies of the people, to propound this question, "are the magistrates faithful in the discharge of their several duties." If on this, any accusation was brought forward, the crier then proclaimed, that such as thought the accusation just, should lift up their hands; after this, the rest of the assembly, to whom the magistrate appeared innocent, held up their hands; then the number on each side being taken, the majority decided the question. The day, on which the magistrates entered on their office, was the first of Hecatombæon, the first month in the Athenian calendar. It was a solemn festival, which was celebrated with all the expressions of mirth and joy usual on festive occasions; also, sacrifices were offered to the gods by the senators, and most of the other magistrates, and prayers offered up for the prosperity of the city, in the chapel of Jupiter and Minerva the counsellors.