The word _ama_, rendered _maid-servant_, _bond-maid_, _maid_, _hand-maid_, and the word _shiphhah_ with similar renderings, are applied to Hagar, Ruth, Hannah, Abigail, Bilhah and Zilpah, and evidently mean no more than our English word servant in its usual acceptation. Those women were not slaves, they were free women. It has been very properly remarked that if _chattel_ slavery existed among the Hebrews at any time it is not a little surprising that the language contains no word which expresses the relation. Some have endeavored to force into the word translated _servant_ &c., the idea of slavery because it is said that Abraham had servants "bought with money." But from the ancient use of the word _buy_ or _bought_ we are not to infer that the persons bought became slaves. Wives were procured in the times of the patriarchs by _purchase_. Boaz said--"Moreover Ruth, the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be my wife." The same word (_kanithi_) is used here to express the manner in which Boaz obtained his wife, that is used in Gen. to show how a part of Abraham's servants were obtained. But the beautiful _Ruth_ was not a _slave_. Jacob purchased his beloved Rachel, and less beloved Leah, but those wives and mothers of the twelve patriarchs could not have been _slaves_. Had they been chattels, why, then, according to an essential feature of the American slave code, the twelve patriarchs would all have been born in the same condition. _Partus sequitur ventrem._ A Hebrew might sell himself on a limited time, and he might be bought by a wealthy neighbor, but no one, I believe, has ever pretended that he became a SLAVE thereby. The contract was voluntary. The employer bought the services of his fellow, and paid in _advance_ for the same, not to a third person, but to the servant himself. God is said to have purchased (_kanitha_) his people; Ps., 75: 2. Hence from the scriptural use of the word buy, or bought, we are not authorized to infer that the persons purchased became slaves. Such an inference would do violence to the holy word. The true state of the matter in respect to Abraham, and his case is mainly relied upon, was without a doubt this. Abraham, being a wise, wealthy and good man, gathered around him many devoted friends who, upon his removal to a distant location, desired to accompany him, to receive the benefits of his friendship and counsels, live under his patriarchship, as he was a prince, (see Gen., 23: 6,) and enjoy the protection of his power. Some of these may have been involved in pecuniary embarrassments or obligations of service to other persons, which made it necessary for the benevolent patriarch to release them by paying them in advance for many years of service.