It must not be thought that the houses were gifts. It was not the purpose to instill the idea that this work was one of charity. Instead each head of a family was made to understand that he must pay for the home, and this was done in as simple a manner as possible, so it would be appreciated and understood.
Individual effort was stimulated on the part of the different workers. As fast as the members of a worker's family arrived, they were installed in houses, and then began a new system of providing for their keep. Hitherto, they had boarded at the expense of the common fund; but now this was gradually changed, and they were informed that each family must provide its own food, and that those who did so would receive a larger number of coins.
This resulted in each one trying to find some new direction in which they could get the coins. It is curious how this new phase of living brought out traits common to humanity everywhere. Some more eager than others, and having less honesty than the common run of natives, sought to get their sustenance by resorting to trickery and thievery.
In their native state this was not considered a crime. It was commendable, unless detected. But by constant talk, on the part of the Professor, and by example, he instilled into the policemen, which[p. 108] he had installed, the principles of honesty. He awarded those who were vigilant, and the result was that they were most acute to detect the rogues.
The first thief was caught the day after John's party had gone. He was immediately brought before the Professor. The arrest of a thief was such a new proceeding that the workers could not be kept at work, and the Professor suggested that they should all be present at the trial.
The inquiry was conducted with decorum, Harry being appointed to prosecute him, and George to defend the prisoner. George did it vigorously, too, but it was a plain and palpable case, and he was found guilty. This proceeding was another entirely new manner of treating an offender, and the people marveled at the attempt to defend the thief.
The Professor saw the cause of the wonderment, and said: "We do not defend the wrong, but we believe that each man who is charged with a crime should be permitted to defend himself. If he does not know how to properly defend himself, then it is our duty to see that he is protected in all his rights, for he is not a criminal until it is proven."
"He has tried to explain why he took the goods, but you know what he has said was not true, and he must be punished for it. He must work two moons without getting any of the coins, and if he repeats the crime, he must work until he restores the value of the goods taken, so that each one will know that a thief cannot take things from another without paying for it."
The incident for a long time deterred anyone from repeating the offense. It was an object lesson, because it instilled a respect for a law which was fair to all.