A French writer of more recent date asserts with some vehemence, and with the authority of an eye witness, that the Christian slaves at Algiers were not exposed to the miseries which they represented. I do not know that he vindicates their slavery, but, like Captain Braithwaite, he evidently regards many of them as better off than they would be at home. According to him, they were well clad and well fed, _much better than the free Christians there_. The youngest and most comely were taken as pages by the Dey. Others were employed in the barracks; others in the galleys; but even here there was a chapel, as in the time of Cervantes, for the free exercise of the Christian religion. Those who happened to be artisans, as carpenters, locksmiths, and calkers, were let to the owners of vessels. Others were employed on the public works; while others still were allowed the privilege of keeping a shop, in which their profits were sometimes so large as to enable them at the end of a year to purchase their ransom. But these were often known to become indifferent to freedom, and to prefer Algiers to their own country. The slaves of private persons were sometimes employed in the family of their master, where their treatment necessarily depended much upon his character. If he were gentle and humane, their lot was fortunate; they were regarded as children of the house. If he were harsh and selfish, then the iron of slavery did, indeed, enter their souls. Many were bought to be sold again for profit into distant parts of the country, where they were doomed to exhausting labor; in which event their condition was most grievous. But special care was bestowed upon all who became ill--not so much, it is admitted, from humanity as through fear of losing them.[151] [Footnote 151: _Histoire d'Alger: Description de ce Royaume, etc., de ses Forces de Terre et de Mer, Moeurs et Costumes des Habitans, des Mores, des Arabes, des Juifs, des Chrétiens, de ses Lois, etcs._ (Paris, 1830,) chap. 27.]