It is evident that the captives here allowed to be made were to be slaves, from what follows on the same subject, in the same book, xxi. 10–15: When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thy hands, and thou hast taken them captive, and seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldst have her to thy wife: then thou shalt bring her home to thy house, and she shall shave her head and pare her nails: and she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thy house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that, thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money: thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.” Thus the fact is proved, that if he had not thus made her his wife, she would have been his slave and an article of merchandise. ------------------ LESSON XI. In the introductory part of Mr. Barnes’s book, he makes some remarks in the nature of an apology for his undertaking to examine the subject of slavery. Page 20, he says— “Belonging to the same _race_ with those who are held in bondage. We have a right, _nay_, we are bound to express the sympathies of brotherhood, and ‘to remember those who are in bonds as bound with them.’” We were not aware of any fact relating to Mr. Barnes’s descent; nor did we before know from what race he was descended. We were truly much surprised at this avowal, and endeavoured to imagine that he had used the word in some general and indefinite sense, as some do when they say animal _race_, and human _race_. But on examining his use of the word, page 20: “How is a foreign _race_, with so different a complexion, and in reference to which, so deep-seated prejudices and aversions exist, in every part of the land, to be disposed of if they become free?”—and page 27: “And the struggles which gave liberty to millions of the Anglo-saxon _race_ did not loosen one rivet from the fetter of an African;” page 83: “The Hebrews were not essentially distinguished from the Egyptians, as the Africans are from their masters in this land, by colour;” and page 86: “They were a foreign _race_, as the African _race_ is with us;” and page 96: “There are in the United States now, according to the census of 1840, 2,486,465 of a foreign _race_ held in bondage;” and page 97: “It would have been as just for the Egyptians to retain the Hebrews in bondage as it is for white Americans to retain the African race;”—we were forced to conclude that the author understood his language and its meaning.