scrupulously careful to avoid them. She would not have taken from
the baby-house a trinket, or an article of food from the kitchen,
without leave, on any account. At the same time, she had learned
the slave theory that as they are never paid for their labor,
they have a right to any thing which their labor has purchased,
OF WHICH THEY HAVE NEED. Consequently if a slave is not provided
with food sufficient for his wants, he supplies himself.
The pigs and chickens, vegetables and fruits, or any thing else
which he can handily obtain, he helps himself to, as though they were
his own, and never burdens his conscience with the sin of stealing.
A slave, who had obtained his freedom, once remarked in a public meeting,
that when he was a boy, he was OBLIGED to steal, or TAKE food,
as he called it, in order to live, because so little was provided for him.
"But now," said he, while his face shone with a consciousness
of honesty and honor, "I wouldn't take a cent's worth from any man;
no, not for my right hand."

So, you see, that this principle of appropriating what the labor
of her own hands had earned, when necessity demanded it,
was that upon which Tidy was to act. She never needed to steal food,
nor even luxuries, for she always had enough; nor money, because,
for her limited wants, she always had enough of that. But now,
when she was going a journey, and wanted to look especially nice,
she felt very glad to have the dress prepared so fitting for the occasion;
and she did not feel a single misgiving of conscience about taking it
when she got ready to use it. Whether this was just right or not,
I shall leave an open question for you to decide in your own minds.
It will bear thought and discussion, and will be quite a profitable
subject for you to consider.