The right to life was generally conceded all slaves regardless of color. At least one colony, New Hampshire, 1708, in an act guaranteeing this right, included Indian slaves by specific mention.[947] This and other rights could be protected by appeal to the courts. If not otherwise provided for, the mode of trial used by the colonists themselves was employed in the case of Indian slaves, negroes and free Indians.[948] Special legislation concerning the trial of slaves was enacted by all the English colonies. It has been said that for an Indian to gain his point in an English court, unless his case was an extremely strong one, was a rare occurrence.[949] Whether the statement is generally true in the case of either free or slave Indians, might be difficult to decide. Doubtless the Indian slave supported by his master possessed a better chance of obtaining justice than the free Indian. Since a slave was owned body and soul, and therefore had no right to life except as the same might be conceded by his owner and the authorities, it may be said that whatever legal rights he had were granted for the protection of the slave owners in their property rights and for the general safety of the community, rather than because of any special consideration of justice toward the slave himself. Virginia, in 1692, provided special courts for the trial of slaves.[950] The provisions regarding these courts were changed from time to time. By the act of 1765 it was provided that the justices be given a standing commission of oyer and terminer empowering them to try without a jury all criminal offenses committed by slaves in their respective counties.[951] In accordance with these provisions one finds the Earl of Dunmore issuing a commission in 1772 to certain justices in the county of the present state of West Virginia, authorizing them to serve as a court for the trial of negro and Indian slaves.[952] The Massachusetts general court provided, 1647, that one or more of the magistrates, according to agreement among themselves, should hold a court every quarter to hear and determine all cases civil and criminal, except those involving capital punishment, which might concern Indians, and that minor offenses should be tried by the sachems themselves.[953] At the first general court held on Martha’s Vineyard, June 18, 1672, it was ordered that an Indian should have liberty in any case to appeal from such courts as they held among themselves to the quarter court, and from the quarter court to the general court.[954] A New Jersey act of 1713 provided for the trial of any negro, Indian or mulatto slave accused of committing murder, rape, etc., by a justice and five freeholders. But if the owner of such slave should desire a jury, the privilege might be allowed him. He also had the right to challenge jurors as in other cases of like nature.[955] The act was repealed in 1768.[956]