merchant, appears to have given to such aliens encouragements in trade
and manufacture not usual in that age; and most of their disabilities
were probably rather moral or imaginary than real and daily causes of
grievance. The great and paramount distinction was between the
freeman and the slave. No slave could be admitted as a witness,
except by torture; as for him there was no voice in the state, so for
him there was no tenderness in the law. But though the slave might
not avenge himself on the master, the system of slavery avenged itself
on the state. The advantages to the intellect of the free citizens
resulting from the existence of a class maintained to relieve them
from the drudgeries of life, were dearly purchased by the constant
insecurity of their political repose. The capital of the rich could
never be directed to the most productive of all channels--the labour
of free competition. The noble did not employ citizens--he purchased
slaves. Thus the commonwealth derived the least possible advantage
from his wealth; it did not flow through the heart of the republic,
employing the idle and feeding the poor. As a necessary consequence,
the inequalities of fortune were sternly visible and deeply felt. The
rich man had no connexion with the poor man--the poor man hated him
for a wealth of which he did not (as in states where slavery does not
exist) share the blessings--purchasing by labour the advantages of
fortune. Hence the distinction of classes defied the harmonizing
effects of popular legislation. The rich were exposed to unjust and
constant exactions; and society was ever liable to be disorganized by
attacks upon property. There was an eternal struggle between the
jealousies of the populace and the fears of the wealthy; and many of
the disorders which modern historians inconsiderately ascribe to the
institutions of freedom were in reality the growth of the existence of
slavery.