[21] Cf. Post, Afrikanische Jurisprudenz, i. 89 sq.; Mademba, in Steinmetz, Rechtsverhältnisse, p. 83 (natives of the Sansanding States); Nicole, ibid. p. 119 (Diakité-Sarracolese); Baskerville, ibid. p. 194 (Waganda); Desoignies, ibid. p. 278 (Malala); Dale, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxv. 230 (Wabondei); Ellis, History of Madagascar, i. 193.
In descriptions of slave-holding savages it is often said that a master has absolute power over his slave. But even in such instances, when details are scrutinised, it frequently appears that custom or public opinion does not allow a person to treat his slave just as he pleases. We have noticed above that in many cases the master is expressly denied the right of killing him at his own discretion.[22] More commonly than one would imagine the master has not even an unlimited right to sell his slave. Among some peoples he may sell at will such slaves only as have been captured in war or purchased, not such as have been born in the house.[23] In several instances a slave, and especially a domestic slave, cannot be sold unless he has been guilty of some crime or misdemeanour.[24] Among the Banaka and Bapuku in the Cameroons the master may chastise or send away a slave who has behaved badly, but is not allowed to sell him.[25] There are, moreover, instances in which the master is entitled not to all the services of his slave, but only to a limited portion of them. In some parts of Africa the slave is obliged to work for his master on certain days of the week or a certain number of hours, but has the rest of his time free.[26] In the highlands of Palembang, Sumatra, a slave may carry on trade and hire himself out as a day labourer on his own behalf, and when he works in the field one-half of his harvesting belongs to him and the other half to his master.[27] Where the slave is allowed to possess property of his own he may in some cases,[28] though not in all,[29] buy his freedom; and debtor-slaves are as a rule entitled to regain their liberty by paying off the debt.[30] Many peoples even permit a dissatisfied slave to change his master. Among the Washambala, if a person does not fulfil his duties towards any of his slaves, the latter has a right to complain of him to the chief, and should the accusation prove true the chief buys the slave of his master for an ox and two cows, and keeps him for himself.[31] Among other peoples a slave, in order to get a new master, has only to cause a slight damage to somebody’s property, or to commit some other trifling offence, in which case he must be given up to the person he “injured.”[32] It is astonishing to notice how readily, in many African countries, slaves are allowed by custom to rid themselves of tyrannical or neglectful masters.[33] The Barea and Bazes have a law according to which a slave becomes free by simply leaving his lord.[34] Among the Manipuris, in Further India, if a slave flies from one master and selects for himself another, it is presumed that he has been badly treated by the first one, and the fugitive can consequently not be reclaimed.[35]
[22] Supra, [p. 422 sq.]
[23] Post, Afrikanische Jurisprudenz, i. 95 sqq.
[24] Ibid. i. 96 sq. Tellier, in Steinmetz, Rechtsverhältnisse, p. 169 (Kreis Kita). Lang, ibid. p. 241 (Washambala).
[25] Steinmetz, Rechtsvershältnisse, p. 43.
[26] Post, Afrikanische Jurisprudenz, i. 101. Mademba, in Steinmetz, Rechtsverhältnisse, p. 83 (natives of the Sansanding States). Nicole, ibid. p. 118 (Diakité-Sarracolese). Tellier, ibid. p. 169 sqq. (Kreis Kita).
[27] Glimpses of the Eastern Archipelago, p. 106.
[28] Post, Afrikanische Jurisprudenz, i. 111 sq.
[29] Ibid. i. 111 sq. Tellier, in Steinmetz, Rechtsverhältnisse, p. 170 (Kreis Kita), Senfft, ibid. p. 442 (Marshall Islanders).