from their tormentors. The noise thus caused attracted the attention of a body of the garrison, who were patrolling near the spot, and these, imagining that the slaves were rising in revolt, fell on them, and without pausing for a moment to ascertain the truth of their suspicions, slew upwards of 150 of the poor defenceless creatures before discovering their error. So also we find it recorded at a period somewhat later than that at which we have arrived, viz., during the siege of Malta, that some hesitation having been shown by the slaves in exposing themselves during their pioneering labours to a fire more than ordinarily deadly, the Grand-Master directed some to be hanged, and others to have their ears cut off.[1] We also find an English knight, named Massinberg, brought before the council in the year 1534 for having without cause drawn his sword and killed four galley slaves. Upon being called on for his defence, this turbulent Briton replied—"In killing the four slaves I did well, but in not having at the same time killed our old and imbecile Grand-Master, I confess I did badly.” The Grand-Master referred to was Peter Du Pont, and the defence was not considered satisfactory; we find, therefore, that Massinberg was deprived of his commandery, and stripped of his habit for a period of two days. That such a crime should have been dealt with in this manner shows that the insolence towards the Grand-Master was more thought of than the murder of the four slaves.
Having touched upon the question of slavery as it existed amongst the fraternity up to the time of which we are speaking, it may be well to complete the subject, although what remains refers to a later period of history. By degrees a system sprang up of not simply retaining the slaves for the service of the Order, but also of selling any number that might be demanded. The truth was, that eventually the convent of St. John became neither more nor less than a vast slave mart. The evil began at Rhodes; but it did not reach its full development until after
- ↑ The contemporary chroniclers record this as having been done “pour encourager lea autres.” The writer has more than once seen a claim made as to the original authorship of this phrase at a far later date than that now alluded to, which was in the latter part of the sixteenth century. Doubtless the quaint expression was even then no novelty.
