Yahya said that Malik said, "The best of what has been heard about a sharecropper stipulating on the owner of the property the inclusion of some slave workers, is that there is no harm in that if they are workers that come with the property. They are like the property. There is no profit in them for the share-cropper except to lighten some of his burden. If they did not come with the property, his toil would be harder. It is like share-cropping land with a spring or land with a watering trough. You will not find anyone who receives the same share for share-cropping two lands which are equal in property and yield, when one property has a constant plentiful spring and the other has a watering trough, because of the lightness of working land with a spring, and the hardship of working land with a watering trough."

Malik added, "That is what is done in our community."

Malik said, "A share-cropper cannot employ workers from the property in other work, and he cannot make that a stipulation with the one who gives him the share-cropping contract. Nor is it permitted to one who share-crops to stipulate on the owner of the property inclusion of slaves for use in the garden who are not in it when he makes the share-cropping contract."

"Nor must the owner of the property stipulate on the one who uses his property for share-cropping that he take any of the slaves of the property and remove him from the property. The share-cropping of property is based on the state which it is currently in."

"If the owner of the property wants to remove one of the slaves of the property, he removes him before the share-cropping, or if he wants to put someone into the property, he does it before the share-cropping. Then he grants the share-cropping contract after that if he wishes. If any of the slaves die or go off or become ill, the owner of the property must replace them."