ustom to permit
assigned servants to receive a share in the increase of stock;
allotments of land had been separated to their exclusive use; they had
been suffered to trade upon their own account. These arrangements were
calculated to stimulate industry, but they also generated disputes, and
led to petty theft. Thus reduced to an absolute dependance upon the
liberality of their masters, they had no reward but as a boon: many of
whom, however, evaded the regulations, and paid their servants the
ordinary wages of free men.

No rule can be devised, that is not liable to objection. The men were
discontented with a service, in which money was refused them: it was
illegally possessed, and therefore rapidly spent in debauchery and
drunkenness. The settlers usually allowed some luxuries; but these,
discretionally given, were a tax to the liberal, often more onerous than
reasonable wages. Domestic servants, and those entrusted with important
concerns, were paid by all, from the Governor downwards, and that while
regulations were promulgated against such violations of order.[163] It
was doubtless not at his direction, but at his cost!

A decision at Sydney, explained the nature of the claim for wages
granted by former regulations of government. A female, at the close
of a long servitude, sued her master for arrears: the judge advocate
declared "his court one of equity and right," not of law; that
the spirit of public orders, not their letter, was the rule of judgment;
that the allowance of money required by the crown, was intended to
secure the plaintiff certain comforts: those comforts she had already
enjoyed, and thus her claim in equity had been already satisfied (1823).
The wages of a man servant were stopped by the magistrates, because he
had been accused of stealing from his master (1821)!

The right of a master in the services of his assigned servant, was
incidentally raised in the celebrated case of Jane New. She arrived in
Van Diemen's Land under a sentence of transportation, and, according to
the prevailing custom, was assigned to her husband; who was allowed, by
Governor Arthur, to remove her to New South Wales: she was charged there
with a capital felony, and death was recorded against her. The
prosecutrix, Madle. Senns, a French mantua-maker, gave her evidence by
an interpreter: afterwards, it was discovered, that the conviction was
erroneous, both _in substance_ and _in law_: released on the
recommendation of the