1834.!l On Slavery in Southern India. 252 



as this particular description of slaves exist only in Mussulman 

 families under the Madras Presidency, seems the only code 

 there applicable to them. But the sale of agrestic slaves is 

 common. They may be sold for the debts of their master ; but 

 in the Tamil country, the removal of them from their village, 

 ^md consequently from their families, would be contrary to 

 ancient usage or Indian common law ; and hence the practice of 

 transferring them with the land when it is sold, which, though 

 not necessary in law, is in the Tamil country almost invariably the 

 practice. On the western side of the peninsula, on the other 

 hand, the people, except immediately on the sea coast, are no where 

 congregated in villages. Each land-lord there is resident on his 

 own estate, and the slaves may be removed from one estate to 

 another, however distant. I have long considered it desirable, as 

 regards the slaves on the western coast, that the Goveinment of 

 Madras should pass enactments similar to those contained in the 

 Bombay code, which provide that infants shall not be separated 

 from the mother until a certain age; and, I think, also prohibit the 

 separation of the wife from her husband. 



There is no enactment of the British Government, under the 

 Madras Presidency, either to hinder or to promote the mr-numission 

 of slaves. Children bought as domestic slaves, under the Hindoo 

 law, may purchase back their freedom ; but I have already stated 

 that, on attaining maturity, it is usually conferred on them without 

 purchase; and that, whatever may be the text of the Mussulman 

 law, the conversion of such children to the Mussulman faith, by 

 their Mussulman masters, renders restoration to their families im- 

 possible ; nor, under the indulgent treatment of the males, is it 

 perhaps desired by them. Their female domestic slaves are seldom 

 jnade free ; but if they have children by their master, such progeny 

 is free ; and the children of a male domestic Mussulman slave, 

 married to a free woman, would I think be exempted from bondage. 

 With regard to agrestic slaves, 1 never heard of any instance of 

 manumission. In the Tamil country they occasionally desert their 

 masters, and thus acquire their freedom ; otherwise their children 

 are doomed to hereditaty bondage. 



During the 22 years that I resided in India, or since 1808, no 

 material changes have taken place in the condition of the slaves, in 

 the territories subject to Madras. 



I am not aware that any measure has been adopted by the Go- 

 vernment at Madras, either to abolish or ameliorate the state of slavery 

 on that part of the continent of India which is subject to their domi- 



