OBJECTION IV. “If thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee, thou shalt not compel him to serve as a BOND-SERVANT, but as an HIRED-SERVANT, and as a sojourner shall he be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubilee.”  Lev. xxv. 39, 40.

From the fact that only one class of the servants is called hired, it is sagely inferred that servants of the other class were not paid for their labor.  That is, that while God thundered anathemas against those who “used their neighbor’s service without wages,” he granted a special indulgence to his chosen people to seize persons, force them to work, and rob them of earnings, provided always, in selecting their victims, they spared “the gentlemen of property and standing,” and pounced only upon the strangers and the common people.  The inference that “hired” is synonimous with paid, and that those servants not called “hired” were not paid for their labor, is a mere assumption.

The meaning of the English verb to hire, is, as every one knows, to procure for a temporary use at a curtain price—­to engage a person to temporary service for wages.  That is also the meaning of the Hebrew word “Saukar.” Temporary service, and generally for a specific object, is inseparable from its meaning.  It is never used when the procurement of permanent service, for a long period, is spoken of.  Now, we ask, would permanent servants, those who constituted an integral and stationary part of the family, have been designated by the same term that marks temporary servants?  The every-day distinctions made on this subject, are as familiar as table-talk.  In many families, the domestics perform only such labor, as every day brings along with it—­the regular work.  Whatever is occasional merely, as the washing of a family, is done by persons hired expressly for the purpose.  In such families, the familiar distinction between the two classes, is “servants,” or “domestics,” and “hired help,” (not paid help.) Both classes are paid.  One is permanent, the other occasional and temporary, and therefore in this case called “hired.”  To suppose a servant robbed of his earnings, because when spoken of, he is not called a hired servant, is profound induction!  If I employ a man at twelve dollars a month to work my farm, he is my "hired" man, but if, instead of giving him so much a month, I give him such a portion of the crop, or in other words, if he works my farm "on shares," he is no longer my hired man.  Every farmer knows that that designation is not applied to him.  Yet he works the same farm, in the same way, at the same times, and with the same teams and tools; and does the same amount of work in the year, and perhaps clears twenty dollars a month, instead