[960] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 369. By this act nothing was awarded the owner if the slave was executed for murder. [961] Bacon, _Laws of Maryland_. Other Maryland acts of 1737, 1740, 1744, 1747, 1751, 1754, 1757, and 1762, required that the full adjudged value be paid the owner of any slave executed by law. Bacon, _op. cit._ [962] Massachusetts, 1703, _Acts and Resolves_, i, p 535; Rhode Island, 1704, _Rhode Island Historical Society Collections_, vii, p. 230; 1750, _Records of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations_, v, p. 320; and 1770. _Rhode Island Laws_, edition of 1772, pp. 24, 25; Block Island, 1709, Livermore, _A History of Block Island from its Discovery_, etc., p. 61; New Hampshire, 1714, _Laws of New Hampshire_, edition of 1771, p. 52. Connecticut, in 1750, forbade Indian slaves being abroad after nine o’clock at night without the owner’s permission. _Acts and Laws of Connecticut_, edition of 1750, p. 230. New York City, in 1713, stated the latest time at which Indian slaves could be away from home without their masters’ permission as one hour after sunset. _Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York_, iii, p. 177; and 1751, _Ibid._, iv, p. 87. Rhode Island, 1667, forbade any Indian to walk about in the night time. Livermore, _op cit._, 61. New Jersey, 1713, forbade any negro, Indian or mulatto slave to go five miles from home without his master’s permission. Nevill, _op. cit._, i, p. 21. [963] Massachusetts, during King Philip’s War, Baylies, _op. cit._, pt. iii, p. 189; Block Island, 1675, Livermore, _op. cit._, p. 60; New Hampshire, 1689, _Laws of New Hampshire_, edition of 1904. i, p. 288 (The act referred simply to Indians without specifying bond or free); the city of Albany, 1686, Munsell, _Annals of Albany_, viii, 296; New York City, 1683, _Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York_, i, 134; Pennsylvania, 1721, _The Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania_, iii, p. 254. [964] Massachusetts, 1693, _Acts and Resolves_, i, p. 156; New York, 1715, _New York Colonial Laws_, edition of 1894, i, pp. 157, 519; New Jersey, 1682 and 1713, Leaming and Spicer, _Grants and Concessions_, p. 254; Nevill, _op. cit._, i, p. 18. [965] Winsor, _The Memorial History of Boston_, ii, p. 485. [966] Moore, _Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts_, p. 191. [967] _Connecticut Colonial Records_, i, p. 349; Stiles, _The History and Genealogies of Ancient Winsor_, i, p. 434. [968] Watson, _Annals and Occurrences of New York City and State_, p. 158. [969] Weise, _The History of the City of Albany_, p. 209. [970] Dunlap, _History of the New Netherlands_, etc., ii, appendix, p. clxiii. [971] The slave code of South Carolina was more elaborate than that of any other colony. But the various laws relating to trial and punishment of slaves make no mention of Indian slaves, though as has been seen, Indian slaves were more numerous in that colony than elsewhere.