Free Negro Heads of Families in the United States in 1830 – Together with a Brief Treatment of the...

7/29/2019 Free Negro Heads of Families in the United States in 1830 Together with a Brief Treatment of the Free Negro b

1/58

Free Negro Heads of Families in theUnited States in 1830

together with aBRIEF TREATMENT OFTHE FREE NEGRO

BYC A R T E R G . W O O D S O N , P h . D .

E D I T O R OF T H E J O U R N A L O F N E G R O H I S T O R Y , A U T H O R O F A C E N T U R Y O FN E G R O M I G R A T IO N , T H E E D U C A T I O N O F T H E N E G R O P R I O R T O 1 8 6 1 ,

T H E H I S T O R Y O F T H E N E G R O C H U R C H , T H E N E G R O I N O U RH I S T O R Y , T H E M I N D O P T H E N E G R O A S R E F L E C T E D

I N L E T T E R S W R I T T E N D U R I N G T H E C R I S I S ,1 8 0 0 - 1 8 6 0 , A N D N E G R O O R AT O RS

A N D T H E I R O R A T I O N S

T H E A S S O C I A T I O N F O R T H E S T U D Y O F N E G R O L I F E A N D H I S T O R Y , I N C .W A S H I N G T O N , D . C .


2/58

Copyright 1925By the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, Inc.


3/58

F O R E W O R DThis report is the second of a series of documentary studies of the freeNegro provided for by a gra nt w hich the D irecto r of th e Associat ion for th e

Study of Negro Life and His tory obta ined f rom the Laura SpelmanRockefel ler M em orial in 1921. I t ha s been an expensive un de rta ki ng b ot hw ith respect to the research req uire d an d th e cost of pub licat ion . I t isearnest ly hoped that i t wil l have suff icient value to jus t i fy the philanthropy and the painstaking effor t which i t represents .The aim of this report , l ike that on Free Negro Owners of Slaves in theUnited States in 1830, is to promote the fur ther s tudy of a neglected aspectof our his tory . As s ta ted elsewhere, m ost of thes e f ree N egroes " h a v ebeen forgotten, for persons supposedly well-informed in history are surpr ised to learn today that about a half mil l ion, a lmost one-seventh of theNegroes of this cou ntry , were f ree pr ior to th e em anc ipat io n in 1865. I t ishardly bel ieved that a considerable number of Negroes were owners ofs laves themselves , and in some cases control led large plantat ions ."As an in t roduct ion to th is s tudy of the despised group the au thordeem ed it wise to pub lish the se sta tistic s from th e census of 1830. Th esefacts are ear ly enough to guide one in the s tudy of the Negro in thepatr iarchal s lavery per iod and late enough to give an index to the s i tuat iondur ing th e fo llowing centu ry wh en the ins t i tu t ion becoming a m ere sy s temof exploi tat ion ten de d to debase also th e f ree N egro . In 1830, m oreover ,the f ree Negroes had about reached their highest mark as a dis t inct c lass .As the author has s tated elsewhere, the react ion which set in ear l ier in thecentury res tr icted their f reedom and in many cases expelled them from theSou th. Th is census , the n, evid ently rep orts th e nam es of a larger num be rof representat ive f ree Negroes than any other census pr ior to their debasem en t to a lower s ta tu s or their m igrat io n from th e So uth. Th is t re kreached i ts highest poin t betwee n 1830 an d 1835. M ost of th e f reeNegroes in the North in 1830, therefore, had been there for some years .These fac ts were ex t rac ted f rom the manuscr ip t schedules re turned bythose who took t he census of th e Un ited St ate s in 1830. After theEditor had first copied the record of one state to acquaint himself indetai l w ith th e information given in these census rep orts , th e s tat is t ic swere the n copied un de r his direct ion by thr ee persons . One of th emhas had the advantage of two years ' normal t raining af ter f inishinghigh, school, and two of th em ha ve c om pleted college courses a t H ow ardUn ivers i ty and a t the U nivers i ty of M ichigan . T he m at t er th us co llectedwas then ver if ied by Mr. Alrutheus A. Taylor , an alumnus of Michiganand a Harvard Mas ter of Ar ts in His tory and Economics , employed asAssociate Invest igator of the Associat ion for the Study of Negro Life andHis tory . F ur t he r veri fica t ion was m ade by th e Ed i tor .

C A R T E R G . W O O D S O NWASHINGTON, D . C .

September, 1925. iii


4/58

C O N T E N T SP A G E

I . INTRODUCTIONI . T h e Origin of th e Fre e Ne gro vI I . Pre ve nt in g the Increas e of the Free Negroes xivI I I . T he Fre e Neg ro before the Law xxiIV . Econ om ic Ach ievem ent xxxiiiV. Social D istin ctio ns xlvI I . HEADS O F FREE NEGRO FAMILIES BY STATES 1-192A l a b a m a 1Arkansas 2Connec t icut 2De laware 7D istr ic t of Co lum bia 16Flor ida 21Georgia 21Illinois 23

Ind iana 24K e n t u c k y 2 6Louisiana 30Maine 39M a r y l a n d 4 0Massachuse t t s 67M ichigan Te r r i tory 73Mississippi 73Missour i 73New Ham psh i r e 74New Jersey 74New Yo rk 84N or th Carol ina 110Ohio 123Pennsylvania 130Rh od e I s land 153So uth Caro l ina 155Tennessee. 159Vermont 162Virginia 163

I I I . INDEX 193

IV


5/58

I N T R O D U C T I O NI . T H E O R I G I N O F T H E F R E E N E G R O

Inasmuch as the Cons t i tu t ion of the Uni ted Sta tes provided tha trepresenta t ion in the House of Representa t ives should be appor t ionedaccording to the populat ion including al l f ree persons except Indians nottaxed and three-fif ths of all other persons, the census records of theNegroes, although differing a l i t t le from those of the other elements of thepopu lat ion, were general ly m ad e. T he d at a w ith respect to th e s lave an dfree colored populat ion increased from census to census in the proport ionas th e schedules becam e m ore elab ora te . By 1850, mo reover , th e s ta t is tics retu rne d for th e f ree colored po pu lat io n were ab ou t as m uc h detai ledas those for w hites . How ever , fewer inquir ies were m ad e w ith respect toth e s lave pop ulat ion . M ost of these dis t inc t ions in tak ing the censuspassed away with the abolition of slavery.1Prior to 1790, i t was almost impossible to figure out exactly how manyNegroes were s laves an d how ma ny were free. In fact , we do no t ye t kno whow m any Negroes were ac tua l ly imp or ted as s laves . Accord ing toCarey , the to ta l num ber up to 1808 aggregated abou t 340 ,000. O thersbel ieved th a t there were brou ght in prob ably as m an y as 400 ,000. B et te res t imates are impossible here because of the var iat ion in the annualim por tat ion as a resul t of m an y influences . F ro m 1760 to 1770, the re wasa decided increase in th e nu m be r bro ug ht in . F ro m 1770 to 1790, how ever ,when the spirit of freedom was strong as a result of the struggle for ther ights of man dur ing the Amer ican Revolu t ion , th is number decreased .After i t was decided by the framers of the Const i tut ion in 1787 that thes lave tra de should be proh ibi ted af ter 1808, several of th e So uth ern St ate s ,fee l ing tha t they were dependent upon s lave labor , impor ted as many asposs ib le dur ing the per iod imm edia te ly preceding th a t da te . Th ere were757,881 Negroes in the United States in 1790 and 59,557 of these were free.Some of the Negroes ear ly reported as s laves , however , never had sucha s ta tus . A t leas t a few of th e first Negroes bro ug ht to this co un try w ereindentured servants l ike white persons of this class imported here duringth e beginn ings of th e colonies. J . H . Russe ll expresses thi s opinio n in hisFree Negro in Virginia.2 Such Negroes , l ike th e whi te indentu red servan ts ,became free at the expiration of their term of service, took up land, and insome cases became employers of indentured servants and s laveholdersthemselves. I t is h ighly probable th a t one of the tw en ty Negroes bro ugh t

1 Unless otherwise stated the population statistics herein mentioned are taken from the corresponding decennial reports of the Bureau of the Census.2 Russell, The Free Negro in Virginia, 16-41; see also The Journal of Negro History, VIII , 247-283.


6/58

v i FR EE NEGRO HEADS OF FAM ILIESto Jam es tow n in 1619 beca m e a s laveholder .3 T he higher s ta tu s of thefree Negro is well a t tes ted by the fact that a l though the colonies hadspecial enactments protect ing s lave property and providing special codesand t r ibunals for th is e lement of the popula t ion , they a t the same t imerecognized free per son s of color. After the m iddle of th e ce ntu ry , how ever,it was difficult for an African immigrant to escape being reduced to slavery.The per iod in which i t was poss ible for Negroes to come as servants andla ter acquire f reedom terminated near the end of the seventeenth century .The free Negro populat ion thereaf ter found recrui ts only from childrenborn of f ree Negro parents , mulat to chi ldren born of f ree Negro mothers ,mulat to chi ldren born of white servants or f ree white women, chi ldren off ree Negro and Indian mixed parentage , and manumit ted s laves .Of the chi ldren born of f ree Negro parents there was a s teady increase.This , of course, depended to some extent upon the increase of the numberof Neg roes of th is s ta tus . D ur in g th e seven teenth centu ry there were notmany free Negroes in the colonies , and when the change in the at t i tude ofth e w hites redu ced th e n um be r of f ree Negro recrui ts f rom th e s lavepopulat ion, there was not much of a prospect for an unusual increase in thenu m be r of children bo rn of f ree Ne gro pa re nt s . Y et , as there was observedthe Roman law to the effect that the child followed the condition of themother , this source of increase was the s teady factor .The ch i ldren of whi te men by f ree Negro mothers cont r ibu ted much tothe increase in this pop ulat io n. Com ing from Eur op e w itho ut their wives ,some white men, fol lowing the promptings of their nature, cohabited withInd ian and Negro wom en. Such m others , too , m ight be mo re incl ined toproduce offspr ing when supported and protected by the fathers , and evidence of thi s is no t w an ting . T he his tory of th e colonies, especial ly th a tof Virginia an d M ary lan d, gives num erou s ins tan ces of thi s sor t.4 In thecourse of t ime, however , lus tful white men found i t more convenient topurchase s lave women whom they could compel to appease the i r an imalpass ions .There were a lso mula t to ch i ldren born of whi te women servants andfree white w om en. In th e absence of social dis t inct ions with respect torace , th e dis t inct ion as to econom ic condit ion ob taine d. T he whiteservant woman or f ree white woman, suffer ing from the same poverty anddiscr iminat ion as Negro women during the ear ly colonial per iod, intermingled with Negro men who were sometimes in a bet ter posi t ion to suppo rt th em th a n m en of their own race . Th is custo m end ured for generations in spite of penalties which often meant the imposition of a f ine, thereduction to servi tude of the responsible parents , and the apprenticeshipor servitude of the offspring.5

3 Ibid., I, 233-237.4 See Russell, The Free Negro in Virginia, 16-41; and Wright, The Free Negro in Maryland,1-93.5 See Russell's and W right's w orks as cited in note 4. See also W oodson's Beginnings of Miscegenation, passim.


7/58

T H E OR I GI N OF T H E FR E E NE GR O viiChildren born of f ree Negro and Indian parentage also became a cont r ibu t ing fac tor . Ex act ly how m uch , however , can never be de termin edunt i l the ex ten t of the miscegenat ion be tw een the N egroes an d the Ind ian s

has been scientifically s tud ied. I t is kno wn , how ever , th a t some Ind ian sdid settle among free Negroes and there were cases of Negro fugitive slaveswho were welcomed by the India ns . No t ice ha d to be tak en of th istende ncy , for such offspring often bec am e a bu rd en to th e pub lic . T he ywere bound out as apprentices as in the case of f ree mulat to chi ldren.Even dur ing the apprent icesh ip , however , they were a lways regarded asfree Negro populat ion, a l though their l iber ty was decidedly res tr ictedbecause they had no vis ible means of support .6In view of th e fact th a t we find the situ at io n of tod ay so different fromthat of the ear ly colonial per iod we should probably support these assertions w ith cases in eviden ce ta ke n from th e law s of th e colonies. I nMaryland, for example, the preamble of the law covering the case s tatesthus exact ly what the s i tua t ion was : "And forasmuch as d ivers f reebornEnglish women, forgetful of their free condition, and to the disgrace of ournat ion, do intermarry with negro s laves , by which also divers sui ts mayarise, touching the issue of such women, and a great damage doth befal l

the master of such negroes , for preservat ion whereof for deterr ing suchfree-born women from such shameful matches , be it enacted: T h a t w h a t s o ever f ree-born woman shal l intermarry with any s lave, f rom and af ter thelas t day of the present assembly, shal l serve the master of such s laveduring th e life of he r hu sb an d; an d th a t a l l th e issues of such free-bornwom en, so m arr ied, shall be s laves as the ir fathe rs w ere ." " A n d be i tfur ther ena cte d: T h a t all th e issues of English, or other f ree-born women,tha t have a l ready marr ied negroes , sha l l serve the mas ter of the i r parents ,t i l l they be thir ty years of age and no longer ."According to A. J . Calhoun, however , a l l p lanters of Maryland did notmanifes t so much i re because of th is cus tom among indentured servants ."P lan te r s , " s aid he , " som et ime s mar r i ed wh i te wom en se rvan t s to Negroesin order to t ransform t he Negroes an d the ir offspring into s laves ."7 T hi swas in violat ion of the ancient unwrit ten law that the chi ldren of a f reewo ma n, th e father being a slave, follow the s ta tu s of their m oth er a nd are f ree.Th is custo m gave r ise to an inte res t in g case. " Ir is h N ell ," one of th eservants sen t to Maryland by Lord Bal t imore , was so ld by h im to ap lan te r who ha d come f rom E ngla nd . Fol lowing the cus tom of o the rm as ters who held whi te women as serv ants , th e p lan ter soon m arr ied h er to aNegro nam ed But ler to produ ce s laves . U pon hear ing th is , Ba l t imo re usedhis inf luence to have the law repealed; but the abrogation of i t was cons trued by the Court of Appeals not to have any effect on the s tatus of heroffspr ing almost a century later , when Will iam and Mary Butler sued for6 To get an idea of the extent of this race admixture, read "The Relations of Negroes andIndians in Massachusetts" in The Journal of Negro History, V, 45-62.7 Calhoun, A Social History of the American Family, p. 94.


8/58

viii FR EE NEGR O HEADS OF FAM ILIESthe ir f reedom on the grou nd th a t they descended from this wh ite wo m an.The Provincial Court had granted them freedom; but in this decis ion theCourt of Appeals reversed the lower t r ibunal on the ground that "Ir ishNell" was a s lave before the measure repeal ing the act had been passed.This case came up again in 1787 when Mary, the daughter of Wil l iam andM ary B ut ler , pe t i t ioned th e Sta te for f reedom. Bo th t r ibunals thendecided to grant this pet i t ion.8T h e ac t of repe al of 1681, therefore, is self-explana tory. T h e pream bler e a d s : "Forasmuch as , d ivers f ree-born English, or white women, somet imes by the ins t igat ion, procurement or connivance of their masters ,mistresses, or dames, and always to the satisfaction of their lascivious andlustful desires, and to the disgrace not only of the English, but also of many-other Chr is t ian na t ions , do in termarry wi th Negroes and s laves , by whichmeans, divers inconveniences , controvers ies , and sui ts may ar ise , touchingth e issue or childre n of suc h free-born wo m en aforesaid; for th e pre ve ntio nwhereof for the future. Be it enacted: That i f the marr iage of any woman-servant with any s lave shal l take place by the procurement of permiss ionof th e m aster , such w om an and her issue shal l be f ree." I t ena cted apenalty by f ine on the master or mis tress and on the person joining thepart ies in marr iage.9The effect of this law was merely to prevent masters f rom prost i tut ingw hite wo me n to an economic purp ose. I t d id no t pre ve nt th e miscegena t io n of th e two races . M cC orm ac say s: "M ing lin g of the races inMaryland continued during the eighteenth century, in spi te of al l lawsaga inst i t . Pr ev en ting marr iage s of wh ite serv ant s with slaves only led toa greater social evil , which caused a reaction of public sentiment againstthe servant . M as te rs an d socie ty in genera l were burde ned w i th the careof i l legi t imate mulat to chi ldren, and i t became necessary to f rame lawsco m pel i ng th e gui lty par t ies to re imburse the mas ters for the ma in tenanceof these un for tun ate waifs ."10 T o rem edy this laws were passed in 1715an d 1717 to reduce to the s t at us of a serva nt for seven years any w hite m anor w hite w om an wh o coha bited with an y Ne gro, free or s lave. Th eirchi ldren were made servants for thir ty-one years , a black thus concernedwas reduced to s lavery for life, and t he m ainte nan ce of the ba sta rd chi ldrenof wom en serv an ts wa s m ad e inc um be nt upo n m aste rs . If th e father of anillegitimate child could be discovered, he would have to support hisoffspring. If no t, thi s d u ty fell up on th e m oth er w ho ha d to discharge it byservi tu de or otherwise.11 A s w ha t ha d been done to pre ven t the adm ixtu re w as no t suff icient, th e M ary lan d G eneral Assembly took fur theract ion in 1728, making the provis ions more stringent.12

8 Ha rris and M cHe nry R eports, I, p p. 374, 376; II , pp . 26, 38, 214, 233.9 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, VI, pp . 249-250.10 McCormac, White Servitude in Maryland, p. 70.11 Act of Assembly, Oct., 1727.12 This law provided:"Whereas by the act of assembly relating to servants and slaves, there is no provision made


9/58

TH E ORIGIN OF TH E FR EE NEGRO ixVirginia , which faced th e same problem , did no t lag far behin d M ary la nd .In 1630 the Governor and Council in Court ordered Hugh Davis to besoundly whipped before an assembly of Negroes and others for abusing

himself to the dishonor of God and shame of a Christian by defiling hisbody in lying with a Negro, a gui l t which he was to acknowledge nextS ab ba th da y. In 1662 th e colony imp osed dou ble fines for fornica tionwith a Negro, but did not res tr ict intermarr iage unti l 1691.13 The wordsof the prea m ble give th e reasons for this act ion , saying : " A n d for t heprevention of that abominable rnixture and spurious issue which hereaf termay increase in this dominion, as well by negroes , mulat toes , and Indiansintermarrying with English, or other white women, as by their unlawfulaccompanying wi th one another , Be it enacted by the authoritie aforesaid,and it is hereby enacted, That for the t ime to come, whatsoever Engl ish orother white man or woman being free shal l intermarry with a negro,mula t to , o r Indian man or woman bond or f ree sha l l wi th in three monthsaf ter such marr iage be banished and removed from this dominion forever ,and that the jus t ices of each respect ive countie within this dominion makeit their per t icular care, that this act be put in effectual l execution."

If any free English woman should have a bastard chi ld by any Negro ormulat to , she should pay the sum of f i f teen pounds s ter l ing, within onemonth af ter such bastard chi ld should be born, to the church wardens ofthe parish where she should be delivered of such child, and in default ofsuch payment she should be taken into the possess ion of the said churchwardens and disposed of for f ive years; and such bastard child should bebound out as a servant by the church wardens unti l he or she should at tainthe age of thir ty years , and in case such English woman that should havesuch bastard chi ld be a servant , she should be sold by the church wardens(after her t ime is expired that she ought by law to serve her master) forfive years , and the money she should be sold for divided as before appointed, and the child should serve as aforesaid.14I t was fur ther provide d in 1753 th a t if an y wom an serv an t should h av ea bastard chi ld by a Negro or mulat to , over and above the year 's servicefor the punishment of free mulatto women, having bastard children by negroes and other slaves,nor is there any provision made in the said act for the punishment of free negro women, havingbastard children by white men; and forasmuch a s such copulations are as unn atura l and inordinateas between white women and negro men, or other slaves."Be it enacted, That from and after the end of this present session of assembly, that all suchfree mulatto women, having bastard children, either within or after the time of their service, (andtheir issue), shall be subject to the same penalties th at white women and the ir issue are, for havingmulatto bastards, by the act, entitled. An act relating to servants and slaves."And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, by and with the advice and consent aforesaid.That from and after the end of this present session of assembly, that all free negro women, havingbastard children by white men, (and their issue), shall be subject to the same penalties that whitewomen are, by the act aforesaid, for having bastards by negro men.Dorsey, The General Public Statutory Law and Public Local Law of State of Maryland, from1692-1839, p. 79.13 Bullagh, Wh ite Servitude in the Colony of Virginia, pp. 72, 73.

14 Hening, The Statutes at Large, I, pp. 146, 552; II, 170; III, pp. 86-88, 252.


10/58

X FR EE NEGRO HEADS OF FAM ILIESdue to her master or owner , she should immediate ly upon the expira t ion ofher t ime , to her then present maste r , or owner , pay down to the churchwardens of the par ish wherein such chi ld should be born, for the use of thesaid parish, f if teen pounds current money of Virginia, or be sold for f iveye ars to th e use aforesaid; an d if a f ree C hr is t ia n white wom an shouldha ve such b as tar d chi ld by a Ne gro, or m ul at to , for every such offence, sheshould within one m o nt h af ter her del ivery of such ba sta rd chi ld pa y tothe church wardens for the t ime being, of the par ish wherein such chi ldshould be born , for the use of the sa id par ish, f ifteen po un ds cu rrent m oneyof Virginia, or be by th em sold for f ive ye ars to th e use aforesaid; an d inboth the sa id cases, the church wardens should bind the sa id chi ld to be aservant unt i l i t should be of thir ty-one years of age.And for a fur ther prevent ion of tha t "abominable mixture , and thespur ious issue, which may hereaf ter increase in this his majesty 's colonyand dominion as wel l by Engl i sh , and other whi te men and women, in te r mar rying wi th Negroes or mula t toes , as by the i r unlawful coi t ion wi ththem" i t was enac ted tha t wha t soeve r Engl i sh , o r o the r whi t e man orwoman, be ing f ree , should in te rmar ry wi th a Negro, or mula t to man orwoman bond or f ree , should by judgment of the county cour t be commi t ted to pr i son and there remain dur ing the space of s ix months , wi thoutbai l or main-pr ize , and should forfe i t and pay ten pounds current money ofVirginia , to th e use of th e par is h as aforesaid. I t was fur ther en acted th atno minister of the Church of England, or other minister or person whatsoever , w i th in th a t colony an d dominion, should thereaf te r presu m e to m ar rya whi te man wi th a Negro, or mula t to woman, or to mar ry a whi te womanwi th a Neg ro or m ul a t t o ma n, up on pa in of forfei ting and pa yin g for everysuch marr iage the sum of ten thousand pounds of tobacco.15 I t developed,however , th a t these laws did no t m ee t a ll r equi remen ts ,16for there were

in sub sequ ent yea rs so m an y i l legi t imate chi ldren bo rn of such m otherstha t they became a publ ic charge and had to be bound out.17In making more s t r ingent regula t ions for se rvants and s laves . Nor thCarol ina provided in 1715 that i f a white servant woman had a chi ld by aNegro, mula t to or Indian , she must se rve her maste r two years ext ra andshould pay to the church wardens immedia te ly on the expi ra t ion of tha tt ime six pounds for the use of the parish or be sold four years for the useaforesaid.18 A clerg ym an found gu ilty of officiating a t such a mar riag e15 Hening, Statues at Large, VI, pp. 360-362.16 Meade, Old Churches and Families of Virginia, I, p. 366.17 According to Russell, in 1727 it was ordered th at Dav id James, a free N egro boy, be bound t oM r. Jam es Isdel "w ho is to teach him to read y e bible distinctly also ye trade of a gunsm ith th at hecarry him to ye Clark's office and take Ind entu re to th at pur po se.' ' By the Warwick Coim ty courtit was "order ed th at Malacai, a mulatto boy, son of m ulatto Betty be, by the Church Wardens ofthis Parish bound to Tho m as Hobd ay to learn the art of a planter according to law." By order ofthe Norfolk C oun ty court, abo ut 1770, a free Negro was bou nd ou t " to learn the trad e of a tan ne r."Russell, Free Negro in Virginia, pp. 138-139.18 Bassett, Slavery and Servitude in North Carolina, p. 83.


11/58

THE ORIGIN OF THE F R E E N E G R O xishould be f ined f if ty po un ds . Th is law, acco rding to John Spencer Basse t t ,d id not succeed in prevent ing such unions . Two minis te r s were indic tedwi thin two years for performing such a mar r i age ce remony . "In one casethe sui t was dropped , in the other case the clergyman went before the ChiefJus t ice and confessed as it seems of his own accord . . . . In 1727 a w h i t ew o m a n was indic ted in the Genera l Cou r t because she had left her h u s b a n dan d was cohabi t ing with a negro s lave. . . . So far as general loosenesswas concerned this law of 1715 had no force ." 19By the law of 1741, therefore , the colony endeavored to p r e v e n t w h a t theGenera l Assembly ca l led " tha t abominable mixture and spur ious issue,which hereafter may increase in t h i s gove rnment , by whi te men andwomen in te rmar rying wi th Indians , Negroes , mustees , or m u l a t t o e s . " I twas enac ted tha t if any man or woman, being f ree , should intermarry withan Indian, Negro, mustee or m u l a t t o man or w o m a n , or any pe r son ofmixed blood, to the th i rd genera t ion, bond or free, he should, by j u d g m e n tof the county court , forfeit and pay the sum of f i f ty pounds, proclamationmoney , to the use of the par ish.20 It was a lso provided tha t if any w h i t eservant woman should dur ing the t ime of her servi tude be del ivered of achi ld, begot ten by any Negro , mula t to or Indian , such se rvant , over andabove the t ime she was by th i s act to serve her m a s t e r or owner for suchoffence, should be sold by the church wardens of the par i sh , for two yea r s ,after the t ime by i nden ture or otherwise had expired.21The miscegenat ion of the whi tes and blacks extended so widely tha t itbecame a m a t t e r of concern to the colonies far ther nor th where the Negropopula t ion was not cons iderable. Seeking also to preven t t h i s " spur iousmixt i ssue" Massachuse t t s enac ted in 1705 t h a t a Negro or m u l a t t o mancommit t ing fornicat ion with an " E n g l i s h w o m a n , or a w o m a n of any o t h e rChr is t ian na t ion," should be sold out of the province . "An Engl i sh man,or man of any other Chr is t ian na t ion commit t ing fornica t ion wi th a N e g r oor mula t to woman," shou ld be whipped, and the woman sold out of theprovince . None of her majes ty ' s Engl i sh or Scot t i sh subjec ts , nor of anyother Chr is t ian na t ion wi th in tha t province , should cont rac t mat r imonywith any Negro or m u l a t to , u n d e r a pena l ty imposed on the person jo in ingt h e m in marr iage . No mas te r shou ld imreasonab ly deny mar r i age to hisNegro with one of the same na t ion, any law, usage or cus tom to thecont ra ry notwithstanding.22

There was m u c h of such contac t be tween the whi te se rvan t s and theNegroes in Pennsylvania , where the n u m b e r of the la t ter great ly increaseddur ing the f irst quarter of the nine teen th cen tu ry . Tu rne r says a whi teservant was indic ted for this offence in Sussex County in 1677 and a t r a c t19 Ibid., pp. 58-59. See also Natural History of North Carolina, p. 48; and Hawk's History ofNorth Carolina, II, pp. 126-127.20 Potter, Revised Laws of North Carolina, I, p. 130.21 Ibid., I, p. 157.22 Massachusetts Charters, etc., p. 747; Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, VI, p. 262.


12/58

xii FR EE NEGRO HEADS OF FAM ILIESof land there bore the nam e of " M u la t t o H al l . " ^ Accord ing to the samewriter , Ch ester C ou nt y seemed to hav e a large nu m be r of these cases andla id down the pr inc ip le tha t such admixture should be prohib i ted .

Refer r ing to a whi te man, a communi ty compla ined tha t "hee cont raryto his M ast ers Co nsen t h a th . . . got w th chi ld a cer taine m olato woom anCal led Sw ar t an na ." " D a v id Lewis Co ns tab le of Hav er ford Re turn ed aNeg ro m an of h i s And a wh i te wom an fo r hav ing a Bas ta rd Ch i lde . . .the N egroe said she In t i sed h im a nd promised h im to m arry h i m : she be ingexamined, Confest the same: the Court ordered that she shal l receiveTwenty-one lashes on her bare Backe . . . and the Court ordered thenegroe never more to meddle wi th any whi te woman more uppon paine ofhis l ife." 24Advert is ing for Richard Molson in Philadelphia in 1720, his mastersa id : "He is in company wi th a whi te woman named Mary , who is supposed now goes for his wife, and a white man named Garret t Choise, andJa n e his wife, which said w hite people are serva nts to some neighbors of t hesa id R ichard T i lghman ." 25 In 1722 a woman was punished for abet t ing ac landes t ine m arr iage be tween a w hi te wo man and a Neg ro . In th ePennsylvania Gazette, June 1, 1749, appeared the notice of the departure ofIsaac Cromwel l , a mula t to , who ran away wi th an Engl ish servant womanna m ed A nne Greene .26The Assembly, therefore, upon a pet i t ion from inhabitants inveighingaga inst thi s custo m enacted a pro hib i tory law in 1725. Th is law provide dthat no minis ter , pas tor or magis t ra te or o ther person whatsoever whoaccording to the laws of that province usual ly joined people in marr iageshould upon any pre tence whatever jo in in marr iage any Negro wi th anyw hi te person on the pe na l ty of one hu nd red pound s . And i t was fur therenacted tha t i f any whi te man or woman should cohabi t o r dwel l wi th anyNegro under pretence of being marr ied, such white man or woman shouldbe put out to service as above directed unti l they come to the age of thir ty-one ye ars ; and if an y free Negro ma n or w om an should in te rm arry w i th awhite man or woman, such Negro should become a s lave during l i fe to besold by order of the justice of the quarter sessions of the respective county;and if any free Negro man or woman should commit fornicat ion or adulterywith any white man or woman, such Negro or Negroes should be sold as aservant for seven years and the white man or woman should be punishedas the law directs in cases of adultery or fornication.27This law seemed to have very li t t le effect on the miscegenation of theraces in cer tain par ts . In C hester Co un ty, according to the records of1780, mulat toes const i tuted one f i f th of the Negro populat ion. 28 Further-

2 3 T u r n e r , The Negro in Pennsylvania, p p . 2 9 - 3 0 .24 Ibid., p. 30 .25The American Weekly Mercury (Phi lade lphia) , Augus t 20 , 1720.26 The Pennsylvania Gazette, June 1 , 1749.27Statutes at Large, IV, p . 62 .28 T u r n e r , The Negro in Pennsylvania, p . 3 1 .


13/58

TH E ORIGIN OF TH E FR EE NEGRO xiiimore, th a t very yea r wh en the S tat e of Pe nn sylv ania h ad grow n sufficientlyl iberal to provide for gradu al em anc ipat io n the law ag ainst the mingling ofthe races was repealed. M ixed m arr iages therea f ter becam e com mo n asthe whites and the blacks in the l ight of the American Revolut ion real izedliberty in its full meaning.Thomas Branagan sa id in 1805: "There are many, very many b lackswho . . . begin t o feel them selve s con sequ entia l, . . . will no t be sa tisfied unless they get white women for wives, and are likewise exceedinglyimpe r t inent to wh i te people in low c i rcumstances . . . . I so lemnly swear ,I have seen more whi te women marr ied to , and de luded through the ar t sof seduction by negroes in one year in Philadelphia, than for eight yearsI was vis i ting (West Indies an d the South ern State s) . I know a black ma nwho seduced a young white girl . . . who soon after married him, anddied w ith a broken hea r t . On her dea th he said th a t he would no t disgrace himself to have a negro wife and acted accordingly, for he soon afterma rr ied a wh ite wo m an. . . . T here are pe rha ps hu nd red s of w hite wo m enthus fascinated by black men in this ci ty , and there are thousands ofblack children by th em at pr ese nt ." 29A react ion against this custom thereaf ter set in during the f i rs t decadeof the nineteenth century, when fugit ives in the rough were rushing to thatSta te , and cu lminated in an ac tua l cam paign agains t i t by 1820. T h a tyear a pe t i t ion f rom Greene County sa id tha t many Negroes had se t t ledin Pennsylvania and had been ab le to seduce in to marr iage " the minorchildren of the white inhabitants ." 30 This county, therefore, asked thatthese m arr iages be m ade an offence against th e laws of th e Sta te . Such amarriage was the cause of a r iot in Columbia in 1834 and in 1838 themembers of the Const i tut ional Convention engaged in a heated discuss ionof the custom.31 Pet i t ions were frequently sent to the legis lature askingth at this adm ixtur e be penal ized by law, b ut no such act ion w as ever t ak en .Relying upon public opinion, however , the advocates of racial integr i typract ical ly succeeded. M arr iag es of w hites an d blacks eve ntua l ly becam eso odious that they led to disturbances as in the case of the riot of 1849,one of the causes of which was that a white man was living with a Negrowife.32 Th is w as alm ost ineffective, how ever, in th e pr ev en tio n of rac eadm ixture . Cland est ine interm ingling w ent on an d tend ed to increase inenorm ous pro po rtion s. T he conclusive proof of thi s is th a t in 1860mula t toes cons t i tu ted one th i rd of the Negro popula t ion of Pennsylvania .

In some of the slave States i t later became a capital offence for a Negrom an to cohabi t wi th a whi te wo man . Ab dy who toured th is cou ntry f rom1833 to 1834, however , do ub ted th a t such laws were enforced. " A m a n ,"29 Branagan, Serious Remonstrances, pp . 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 75, 102; Somerset Whig, March12, 1818, and Union Times, August 15, 1834.30 Journal of Senate, 1820-1821, p. 213; and American Daily Advertiser, January 23, 1821.31 Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1838, X, p. 230.32The Spirit of the Times, October 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 19, 1849.


14/58

xiv FR EE NEG RO HEADS OF FAM ILIESsaid he, " w a s han ged no t long ago for this cr ime a t Ne w Orleans . T h epa rtn er of his gui l this m as ter ' s dau ghte r end eav ored to save his life , byavow ing tha t she alone wa s to blam e. She died shor t ly af ter his execution."33W ith th e w hi te m an an d th e Ne gro w om an th e s i tuat ion was differen t . A s is ter of P resid ent M adiso n once said to th e Re vere nd G eorgeBou rne , the n a Pre sby ter ian min is ter in Vi rg in ia : " W e So uthern l ad iesare com pl imented w i th the n am e of w ives ; b u t w e are on ly the mis tresses of sera glios." T h e m as ter s of th e female slaves, how ever, wereno t alwa ys th e only persons of loose m orals . M an y wom en of color werealso p ro st i t ute d to the purpo ses of yo un g w hi te m en 34 and overseers.35Goodel l reports a wel l -authent icated account of a respectable " Chris t ianlad y " at the S outh , who ke pt a ha nd som e m ul at t o female for the use of h ergenteel son, as a m eth od of dete rr ing him , as she said , " fro m indiscr iniinateand vulgar indulgences ." 36 Harr ie t Mar t ineau d i scovered a young whi teman who, on vis i t ing a Southern lady, became insanely enamored of herintel l igent quadr oon ma id. H e sough t to pur cha se her b ut the ownerrefused to sell the s lave because of her un usu al w orth . Th e you ng wh i teman persisted in trying to effect this purchase and finally informed herowner th a t he could no t Uve w i thou t th i s a t t ra c t iv e s lave . The reupo n thewhite lady sold the woman of color to sat isfy the lust of her friend.37The accompUshment of this task of prevent ing the increase of the freeN egro es, there fore , wa s no t easy . In t h e first place, so m an y persons ofcolor had risen to posit ions of usefulness among progressive people and hadformed connect ions wi th them that dras t ic act ion was both inexpedientan d und esi rable. Ex cep t ions to the ha rd an d fas t rules of cas te were of tenm ad e to rel ieve th e peop le of color. T h e m isceg ena tion of the races in theSo uth an d especially in large ci ties l ike Ch arles ton an d New Orleans , moreover , had gone to the extent that f rom these centers eventual ly went , asthey do now, a large number of quadroons and octoroons,38 who elsewherecrossed over to the other race.

I I . P R E V E N T I N G T H E I N C R E A S E O F T H E F R E E N E G R O E SPersons who professed seriously to consider the future of slavery,therefore, saw that miscegenat ion and especial ly the general cohabi tat ionof wh i te m en w ith thei r female s laves int rodu ced a m ula t to race whosenumbers would become dangerous, i f the affect ions of thei r whi te parentswere pe rm it te d to rend er th em free.1 T he Am ericans of the future wouldthe reb y becom e a race of mixed bree ds ra the r th an cont inue as a whi te

33 Abdy, North America, I, p. 160.34 Child, Anti-slavery Catechism, p. 17; 2 How ard, Mississippi Reports, p. 837.35Kemble, Georgian Plantation, pp . 140, 162, 199, 208-2 10; Olm sted, Seaboard S tates, pp.699-600; Rhodes, United States, I, pp. 341-343.36Goodell, Slave Code, pp. 111-112.37 Harriet Martineau, Views of Slavery and Emancipation, p. 13.38 Featherstonaugh, Excursion, p. 141; Buckingham, Slave States, I, p. 358.1 Harriet Mart^ineau, Views of Slavery and Emancipation, p. 10.


15/58

PREV ENTIN G TH E INCREASE OF TH E FR EE NEGROES xvan d a black po pu latio n. As th e lust of white perso ns for tho se of colorwas too s t rong to pre ve nt this miscegenat ion, the l iber ty of em an cipa t ingtheir mulat to offspring was res t r icted in the s lave States but that of sel l ing them remained.2The se laws eve ntua l ly , therefore, ha d thei r desi red effect. T he y werenever intended to prevent the miscegenat ion of the races but to debase to ast i l l lower status the offspring of the blacks who in spite of public opinionmigh t inte rm ar ry w i th the poor wh i te wom en. T he y were designed, also,to leave women of color wi thout protect ion against whi te men, who mightuse them for convenience, whereas whi te women and black men wouldgradua l ly grow sep ara te an d dis t inc t in thei r social relat ion s . A l thou ghthereafter the offspring of blacks and whites did not diminish, instead ofbeing gradual ly ass imilated to the type of the Caucasian they tended toconsti tute a peculiar class commonly called people of color, having a highersocial status than that of the blacks but finally classified with al l otherpersons of African blood as Negroes.Kept as a dis t inct c lass , too, there could be more easi ly observedfurther reasons for the suppression of free Negroes in slaveholding States.The more seriously the whites thought of the possibil i t ies of this class, themore fearful they became of thei r holding " tumultuous and unlawfulmeet ings" out of which might come secret plots , dangerous combinat ionsan d conspiracies culm inat ing in insu rrec t iona ry efforts . Y et al th ou gh th ewh i tes m ade special laws to pro hibi t the free Neg roes from st i rr ing up th eslaves, the master class found i t difficult to counteract their influence.Thereafter , then, the effort was di rected toward prevent ing manumission.Prior to this change of at t i tude a master might l iberate a s lave whenever he fel t so disposed. T he Negro un de r such ci rcum stance s ob taine dhis freedom just as eas i ly as an indentured servant became free at theexp iration of his te rm . N o official could inte rfe re ther ew ith , for it w as am at te r which concerned only the m as ter and s lave. Such Negroes becamea part of the body pol i t ic and were regarded as capable of making andenforcing contracts .But even this res t r icted recrui t ing of the free Negro populat ion proceeded fas ter than some of th e colonis ts desi red. M anu m ission wa s soonobjected to as a dan ger in this respect . W hile Ne groes there after s t il lobtained thei r f reedom by las t wi l l and tes tament , and by deed, thelegis lature also exercised this r ight and determined the condi t ion underwhich the individual might do so.To res t r ict th is pr ivi lege the courts had to develop the idea that therecould be no such thin g as pr iv ate m anum ission, al th oug h such ha d b een freque nt ly indulged in by m aste rs durin g the ear l ier period. M anu m ission be came a m at te r of the sovereign power of the s tate . T he m ast er could no t ofhis own authori ty make wi th the s lave a contract by which he could obtain

2 Hart , Slavery and Ab olition, p. 182; Censuses of the United States.


16/58

xvi F E E E NEGRO HEADS OF FAM ILIEShis f reedom, for th e s lave was no t a person in this case empow ered to m ak ean agree m ent bind ing a t law. Th e slave was me rely pro pe r ty and could notbe given life an d pe rson ali ty except by an act of th e legislature . Th e law making body then became the cour t for decision of such matters , as inVirginia in 1662 when by special act of the legislature this procedure inm anu m ission beca m e a law. Oth er colonies developed a m anum issionlaw somewhat of the same order .In th e course of t im e, the n, th e s t a t u s of th e Ne gro was deba sed. Fo rth is social divergen ce several reason s m ay be given. In th e f irst place, theNegro as an independent planter or s laveholder was not so acceptable asthe white indentured servant , who a few years removed f rom his infer iorsta tus easi ly lost his ident i ty among the more highly favored whitesbelonging to the same race . Th e Ne gro 's color served as a badge toremind the public of his ignoble posit ion, which, in the course of t ime,tend ed to a t ta ch itse lf to this pa r t icu lar race . As the agr icu l tural coloniesbegan to feel more dependent upon slave labor , they regarded the presenceof th e free N egro as an un favo rable influence on th e slave. M anu m ission,therefore, which had at f irst gone forward with l i t t le restr iction, tended todecl ine . Neg roes who becam e free thereaf ter were th us reward ed by theirmasters because of unusually faithful service or by the colony or Statebecause of some heroic deed productive of public good.Before thi s policy w ith resp ect to the free N egro could be wo rked ou t,how ever , there cam e eloqu ent pro tests in their favor. Alfonso Sand oval ,the Spanish Jesui t of Havana , and the Germantown Fr iends thus spoke outfor em ancipa t ion . Some Pu r i ta ns of New Eng land a lso took th is h ighground in spi te of the fact that their countrymen in that sect ion engaged inthe carrying t rade were considerably increasing their for tunes by the s lavetraff ic . T h ey cont inue d the ir oppo si t ion, too , even wh en such was f rowneddown upon by Bri t ish merchants prof i t ing by the t raf f ic much more thanth e N ew E ng lan d slave trade rs . Th e effect of their pro test on m an um ission, how ever, w as largely local. Th ese religious bodies st irred u p th emajor i ty of their communicants to the point that they f reed their ownslaves to clear their conscience of what they considered a guil t in the l ightof th e revela t ion of Ho ly W ri t . B u t in th e s t r ic t ly com mercia l and agr icul tu ral cente rs of th e colonies this pro test h ad l i t t le weight . To carry outthe pr inciple which they had learned to espouse, however , some of thesemoved toward the f ront ier where they could promote l iberal inst i tut ions.In th i s way the Emanc ipa t ing Bap t i s t s migra t ed to the mounta ins o fKentucky just before the end of the e ighteenth century, and the Quakersof the uplands of Virginia and North Carol ina to the Northwest Terr i torytw o ge ne rat ion s lat er. Suc h effective service in behalf of th e freedo m ofth e Neg ro was rendered, by th e M etho dists f rom the t im e of their verybeginn ing in this cou ntry th a t the sect was a t firs t considered ant i -s la very .The Presbyterians also in their struggle for religious freedom likewise


17/58

PREVENTING THE INCREASE OF THE FREE NEGROES xv i iadvocated the removal of the res traints f rom manumiss ion and the gradualemancipation of the slaves.3During this very per iod, moreover , there had been set to work cer tainforces which effected a chang e in th e st a tu s of th e slave. T his wa s thenascent social com pac t doc tr ine of th e A m erican Re volu t ion. M enreading the philosophy of John Locke to find an excuse for declaring theindependence of the colonies began to assert that all men are created freeand equal and endowed with cer tain inal ienable r ights , among which arelife, l iber ty , and the pu rsui t of hap piness . T he pa tr io ts were un ab le toharmonize this doc tr ine w ith s laveholding. Ne eding th e sup po rt of th eNegro in maintaining the independence of this country, too, several of theStates, influenced by men who actually believed in equality for all regardless of race or color, contrived to emancipate those Negroes who were thenheld as slaves. T his actio n wa s first ta k en by V erm on t, in con struin gits declaration of r ights in 1777 as guaranteeing freedom to all persons atthe age of m at ur i ty an d later abolishing s lavery al tog ethe r . Virginiaremoved restraints upon manumission in 1782, and by an act of 1783 shegave to every Negro who fought or served as a free man in the war a pledgeof protect ion of th e Sta te in th e enjoym ent of the f reedom h e ha d helped togain. By 1783, the ins t i tu t ion of s lavery was proh ibi ted in M assa chu set tsand New H am pshire . Pen nsylva nia provided for gradua l em ancipat ionin 1780 and Con necticu t and Rho de Is lan d in 1784. I t was proh ibi tedfrom development in the Northwest Terr i tory by the Ordinance of 1787,and by gradu al process i t came to an end in Ne w York an d N ew Jersey.4

This impetus given manumiss ion by the r ights of man movement of theRev olut ionary Wa r, how ever , soon m et organized res is tance. Set t leddown to the solut ion of the problem of readjustment af ter the war , someraised the quest ion as to what should be done with the rapidly increasingfree Negro pop ulat ion . W hile persons h ad conceded their n at ur al r ight tobe free, they had never thought of incorporat ing such a large number ofthem into th e body polit ic . As m ost persons the n viewed th e quest ion,one of two things ha d to be done . E ith er the free Negroes wou ld ha ve tobe removed from this country when l iberated or manumiss ion would haveto be proh ibi ted. Leg is latures and even the Congress of the U nite dStates were memorialized to provide a place of asylum for the free Negropopula t ion . A ntho ny Benezet , Th om as Bra nag an , Granvi l le Sha rp , andother f r iends of the Negro had advocated their colonizat ion on the westerndomain near Ca nada . N ot a few persons adv ocated the dep or ta t ion of thefree Negro to some dis tant port ion of the Western Hemisphere or toAfrica. As no feasible pla n of colon ization was th en in sight, the St ate swith a large Negro populat ion ei ther res tr icted manumiss ion or providedthat the s laves l iberated should be banished.3 Woodson, The History of the Negro Church, 23-39.4 Woodson, A Century of Negro Migration, 1-9; and The Education of the Negro prior to 1861,

Chapter III .2


18/58

xviii FR E E NEG RO HEAD S OF FAM ILIESThe free Negro populat ion under such c ircumstances comparat ivelydecl ined. To geth er w ith th e ant i- f ree Neg ro sent im ent and the lawma king banish me nt an a t t en da nt condi t ion of manum iss ion , the change

in the economic aspect of s lavery as a result of the industrial revolutionfur ther ag grav a ted the s i tua t io n . By the mul t ip l ica t ion of mechanica lapplian ces the weav ing of c loth ha d been faci l i ta ted. T he pr ice beingcorrespondingly reduced had made an increas ing demand for cot ton f ibre ,which necess i ta ted an expansion of s lavery by the extens ion of the planta t ion sys tem, and thus checked manumiss ion.In the North, however , where the act of emancipat ion had a lready beenaccomplished, the free Negro population increased in spite of public sentim ent to th e cont ra ry . This eman cipa t ion in the N or th ern S ta tes , however , did not mean an immediate change in the s ta tus of the whole Negropo pula t ion. W ith th e exception of V erm on t an d M assach uset ts , s laveswere reported from all of the States and territories in 1790, althoughfreedom was th e no rm al condit ion in mo st N ort he rn com mu nit ies . As theliberalizing influences of the American Revolution had done so much foremancipat ion, however , the Sta tes nor th of Maryland were essent ia l ly f reefrom the time of the third census in 1810.The unusual effect of the American Revolution on the change of thestatus of the Negro is clearly eAddent by the fact that between 1790 and1800 the free Negro population increased 82.2 per cent and between 1800an d 1810, 71.9 per cent . W hen th e react ion resul t ing f rom th e industr ia lrevolut ion set in, the manumiss ions decreased as a general rule so thatbetw een 1810 an d 1820 the increase wa s only 25.3 per cen t ; bu t b etween1820 an d 1830, 36.8 per cen t. T he increase by 1840 wa s only 20.9 percen t. I t dro pp ed to 12.5 pe r cen t in 1850 an d stil l lower to 12.3 per centin 1860.

This tendency of the f ree Negro populat ion to remain a lmost cons tantfrom 1840 to 1860 is be t ter exp lained by con tras t ing therew ith th e increasein th e nu m be r of s laves f rom deca de to decade. W hereas the increase inthe free Negro population between 1790 and 1810 exceeded that for s lavesand the proport ion f ree in the Negro populat ion rose f rom 7.9 per cent in1790 to 13.5 per cent in 1810, the per cent of decennial increase of theslave population exceeded that of the free in 1820 although it was a l i t t leless th an t h a t of th e free in 1830. T hr ou gh ou t the thre e succeedingdecades the d ecennial increase in the s lave po pu lat ion so far exceeded th atof the free as to leave no question as to the trend of the Negro populationin this co un try. One reason for the pro bab ly unex pected increase in th efree Neg ro po pu lat ion b etwe en 1820 an d 1830 was doubtless th e increas ingnumber of fugi t ives who made their escape f rom bondage when s lavery asa result of the industrial revolution developed all of the horrors of a systemprim ari ly inten ded for hu m an exploi ta t ion. An other reason was theult imate working out of gradual emancipat ion in the Sta tes of New Jersey,


19/58

PR E VE N T I NG T H E INC R E ASE OF T H E FR E E NE GR OE S xixPen nsylv ania, and New Yo rk. T he extension of th e area of th e censusenumerat ion was another fac tor .Whatever increase there had been , however , was la rge ly na tura l byexcess of bir th s over death s . Fr eq ue nt as were th e cases of s laves run ningaway from their masters , there is no direct evidence that this decidedlyaugmented the number of f ree persons of color in the Northern States .Furthermore, there was li t t le increase from foreign lands, for only 7,011free Negroes were reported in 1860 as born abroad and 3,700 or more thanone half of these were in the State of New York.5Giving more accurate information with respect to the effect of manumissions on the increase of free Negro population, the census reports do notencourage the belief th a t this was considerable. One s tat is t ic ia n h asf igured out that there were 1,467 manumiss ions the year preceding thecensus of 1850 w hen the re we re rep orte d 1,011 as beco m ing fugitive. T h enumber of manumiss ions reported for 1860 was approximately 3,000 andthe nu m be r becom ing fugitive 803. Ac cording to th e census of 1860 the rewere probably 20 ,000 manumiss ions dur ing the decade immedia te lypreceding.Observing this tendency, the managers of the census of 1860 especiallyemphasized the dispar i ty between the free Negro populat ion and the s lave.I t was made clear that the lat ter was decidedly outs tr ipping the former,there being no proof that the f ree populat ion was being supplemented verym uch by access ions f rom the s lave elem ent . In the deca de betw een 1840and 1850, the percentage increase of the s lave populat ion was more thandouble and in the decade following nearly double that of the free Negro.Com men t ing upon th is , the au tho r of the Com pendium of the SeventhCensus pointed out "the decl ining rat io of the increase of the f ree Negroin every sec t ion ," which in New England " is now a lmos t no th ing ," and inthe Southern States "only one fourth as great as between 1800 and 1810."The author also noted with some interes t that the rate of increase of the"fre e colored " had be en gr adu ally declining for several dec ade s " t o 1860when the increase throu gho ut the U ni ted Sta tes was bu t 1 per cent pera n n u m ." 6

Accounting for this decline in the rate of increase in the free element inthe Negro populat ion, so far below the rate of s lave populat ion, the reporton Negro populat ion in the United States f rom 1790 to 1915 explains that"the free colored were somewhat older , and on that account natural lysubject to a higher mortal i ty rate , and somewhat less normally dis tr ibutedby sex, and, therefore, probably character ized by a mari tal condit ion lessfavorable to rap id n at u ra l increa se. A m on g th e free colored a t eac h of th efive censuses 1820 to 1860 there were fewer males than females, while inthe s lave populat ion, on the other hand, at each of these censuses thenu m ber of m ales exceeded th e nu m be r of females. In 1850, how ever, th e

5 Negro Population in the United States, 1790-1915, p. 54.6 Ibid., 54.


20/58

X X FREE NEGRO HEADS OF FAMILIESslave population of over 3,000,000 was so evenly divided by sex that theexcess of m ales over females am ou nt ed to less th a n 1 in 4,000 p op ula tion .In this year the sex ratio in the free colored population was 924 males to1,000 females, the relative deficiency of males being practically confined toth e pop ulat io n 15 yea rs of age and o ver ; in th e s lave pop ulat ion i t w as1,000 m ales to 1,000 fem ales; in 1860 th e ra ti o was 922 m ales to 1,000females in the free colored, and 1,006 males to 1,000 females in the slavepop ulat io n. T he dispa r i ty of nu m ber s betw een the sexes was th us in bothyea rs muc h grea ter in th e free colored pop ula t ion ." 7T he distri bu tion of thi s po pu lati on is of some int ere st. Of th e freeNegro population in 1790, 53.8 per cent was in the South Atlantic division,.8 per cent in the East South Central divis ion, and 45.4 per cent in theN or th . In 1810, 51.9 per cent of th e free N egro po pu lat ion was in th eSouth Atlantic division, 1.8 per cent in the East South Central division,4.1 per cent in the West South Central divis ion, and 42.3 per cent in theN or th . In 1830, 47.9 per cent of this po pula t ion was in th e South A tlant icdivision, 3.6 per cent in the East South Central division, 5.3 per cent in theW est So uth Cen tral division, an d 43.2 per cent in th e N or th . By 1860 th edis tr ibut ion was 44.6 per cent in the South Atlant ic divis ion, 4 .4 per centin the East South Central divis ion, 3 .9 per cent in the West South Centraldivis ion, 46.2 per cent in the North, and .9 per cent in the West .

D I S T R I B U T I O N O P T H E F R E E N E G R O P O P U L A T I O N I N 1 83 0M ain e 1,190 Ge orgia 2,486N e w H a m p sh i r e 604 A l ab am a 1 ,572M ass ach use t t s 7 ,048 Miss i ss ippi 519Rh od e I s lan d 3 ,561 Lou is iana 16,710C o n n e c t i c u t 8,047 Tennessee 4 ,555V e r m o n t 8 8 1 K e n t u c k y 4 ,9 1 7Ne w Yo rk 44,870 Ohio 9 ,568Ne w Jersey 18,303 In di an a 3 ,628Pe nn syl van ia 37 ,930 I l l inoi s 1 ,637De law are 15 ,865 M issour i 569M ar y l an d 52 , 938 Mi ch i gan 261Virgin ia 47 ,348 Ar kan sas 141N or th CaroUn a 19,543 Flor ida 844So uth Caro l ina 7 ,921 Dis t r i c t of Colu mb ia 6 ,152

In the North where most of the free Negroes were found, they lived inth e ci t ies . T he pro port io nate ly large pop ulat io n of this element in NewYo rk, Philad elphia, an d Bosto n fur ther elucidates this poin t . In 1790,the 3,262 Negroes of New York City const i tuted a l i t t le more than onete nt h of thi s po pu latio n. W here as 2,184 of the se were slaves, 1,078 we refree. The repor t tha t year f rom Phi ladelphia showed the Negro populati on of 1,630 w ith 210 slave an d 1,420 free. T h e 761 N egro es re po rte dfrom B oston were all f ree. Balt im ore, a l though a So uthern ci ty , bu tinfluenced doubtless by the commercial connections with free centers atthat t ime, had a Negro populat ion of 1,578. 1,255 of these were slave and

7 Ibid., 5 5 .


21/58

TH E FR EE NEGRO BEFOR E TH E LAW xxi323 f ree. In 1830 no table changes h ad ta k en place in th e ur ba n f reeNegro pop ulat ion . Th ere were a t th a t t im e 1,875 Neg roes in B osto n;14,083 in New Yo rk C i ty ; and 9 ,796 in P hi lade lphia . In Ba l t imore th a tyear the re were 14,790 free N egro es; in C har le ston 2,106; an d in N ewOrleans 11,906.

I I I . T H E F R E E N E G R O B E F O R E T H E L A WTh e free N egro in th e colonies wa s no m inally , an d in som e cases actua lly,as m uch a p ar t of th e bo dy pol i tic as wa s th e f ree w hite m an . W h at fewdifferences there were became more apparent in those par ts where therewere many poor whites emerging f rom indentured servi tude and, therefore ,

f inding i t easier to associa te with Negroes than with their former masters .Cer ta in incidents of color which marked the Negro as member of a decidedly different race , how ever , gradu al ly bro ug ht into colonial cus tom an dlaw some distinctions from which this class suffered until the more l iberala t t i tude resul t ing f rom the s t ruggle for the r ights of man dur ing theAm erican Re volu t ion. T h e sta tu s of th e free Ne gro did no t ma ter ia l lychange for the worse thereaf ter unt i l the ' twent ies and ' thi r t ies of thenine teenth century when prac t ica l ly a l l of the Southern and Middle S ta tesand a few communit ies in the North began to rest r ic t and, in some cases,to debase the f ree Negro to a s ta tus next to that of the s lave.Th e t ransi t io n, however , requ ired some t im e. T he feeling aga inst th eNegro in M ary lan d, for exam ple , did no t develop rapid ly. A lthou gh th eintermarr iage of the races was prohibi ted there in 1663 1 and the measurewas m ade more s t r ingen t by oth er acts in 1681 2 and 1717,3 the free Negroescould apparently vote and hold office there, for they were not legallydepr ived of this r ight unt i l 1810.5 Virginia ear ly endeavored to preventthe miscegenat ion of the whites and blacks,5 depr ived . the l a t t e r o f t heright to hold office in 1705,6 and prohibi ted them f rom vot ing in 1723.7 I nNorth Carol ina , the s i tuat ion was more favorable to the f ree Negro,a l though the colony prohibi ted the in te rmar r iage of the races in 1723 and1741.8 Th e Negroes were perm i t ted to vote the re unt i l 1835.

During the colonial per iod, too, we f ind that the f ree Negro in Pennsylvania was subject to some of the regulat ions made for Negro slaves in them at te r of t r ia l s and punish m ents .9 Prior to 1700, free Negroes were tr iedin the sam e cou r ts in which w hite m en were t r ied. Th ereaf ter , t h ey w erebrought before specia l cour ts only, a l though the law should have been

1 Hurd, The Law of Freedom and Bondage, I, 249.2 Ibid., 250.3 Ibid., 253.4 Kilty, Laws of Maryland, III, p. xxxxviii.5 Hening, StatiUes at Large, I, 146, 552.6 Ibid., III, 258, 441.7 Ibid., IV, 133.8 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, I, 295.9 Turner The Negro in Pennsylvania, 17-23.


22/58

xxii FR E E NEG RO HEAD S OF FAMILIESlegally applied to Negroes r a the r t han to free Negroes, but custom wouldh a v e it as it worked out. Dist inc t ions , too, were made in the penal t ies formurder , a r son, burgla ry or rape , all of which were punishable by dea th inthe case of the Negro, whereas in the case of the whi te man up to the yea r1718, he would suffer death only if gui l ty of murder .1 0 To preven tvagrancy as a resul t of the increase in num ber s , the r e was enac ted in 1726 alaw for binding out able-bodied Negroes who did not work.11 Tha t sameyear special penalt ies were imposed for harbor ing slaves, for the inter mix tu re of the races, for f requent ing t ippl ing-houses, for carrying arms, andfor assembling in companies. 12 The free Negro in that colony could nott ravel f rom place to place w i thou t a p a s s ; and if his freedom was quest ioned, the b u r d e n of proof was on his side.13

The s i tua t ion was b e t t e r in New Y o r k t h a n in Pennsylvania . It didnot seem necessary to enac t there so many precau t iona ry measure s assome other colonies passed. By the t ime of 1712 when the slave insurrect ion of that year f r ightened the people of the ci ty and colony, however,the feeling against the Negro was intensified, and especially so in 1741when several plots and conflagrations in the city were charged to slaves.14Yet mos t of the rest r ic t ions in the colonial laws of New York referred toNegroes held as s laves ra ther than to those who were free; but wi th theincrease of race prejudice, the latter suffered from the same discr iminat ions.In Connec t icut , as in New York, there did not develop immediate lysufficient racial distinction to proscr ibe the free Negro r igidly althoughslavery was recognized and pro tec t ed by the Genera l Cour t of that colony.The same may be said in the case of Massachuse t t s , in spi te of the fact thatthe S ta te prohibi ted t rading wi th Negroes , mula t toes and Ind ians in1698,15 rest r ic ted the emanc ipa t ion of mula t toes and Negroes in 1703 16t ha t t hey migh t not become chargeable , and prohibi ted the i r in te rmar r iagewi th the whi tes in 1705.17 W i t h the except ion of cer ta in regulat ions for ther e t u r n of fugit ives and the like, free Negroes were not general ly dis turbedin the en joyment of the fruits of their labor in New England, a l though theywere not actual ly accepted as equa ls of the whi tes .Dur ing the colonial period there arose in cer ta in com m unit ies some fearas to wha t migh t happen in case of too many f i rearms in the h a n d s of freeNegroes whose contac t wi th the slaves was unres t r ic ted . Th ey weretherefore eliminated from the mili t ia a l together or, as in Virginia, forexample , in 1755 and 1757,18 the f ree mulat toes, Negroes and Ind ians

10 Statutes at Large, II , 7 7 -7 9 , 2 3 3 -2 3 6 .11 Ibid., IV, 6 1 - 6 4 .12 Ibid., 62.13 Ibid., 5 9 - 6 4 .14 H u r d , Law of Freedom and Bondage, I, 2 7 7 - 2 8 1 .15 Laws of Mass., 1698, c. 6.16 Ibid., 1703, c. 2.17 Ibid., 1705, c. 6.18 H e n i n g , Statutes at Large, V, 17; VI, 33; and VII , 93.


23/58

TH E FR EE NEGRO BEFO RE TH E LAW xxuibelonging to the m il i tia were required to ap pe ar w itho ut arm s. Th esemeasures , however , were decidedly modif ied and some of them repealedal together during the per iod of the l iberal a t t i tude of the patr iots of theAm erican Re volut io n. A t fi rs t the re wa s a dis incl inat ion to enl is t Neg roesas soldiers in some of the colonies, and the Council of War decided not toaccept them . W hen th ey got into a s tra i t du r ing th e awful ordeal of thes truggle, however , the colonies chan ged their a t t i tu de . 1 9 Some of themenacted laws granting freedom to al l Negroes who would don the colors ,and cowardly masters were of ten wil l ing to have their Negroes go to thefront in their places on the same cond it ion. R un aw ay s laves , pre ten din gto be free, were sometimes accepted as soldiers.

T his was a new da y for th e free Ne gro . Som e of th e N egr o soldiers inthe American Revolut ion served in special uni ts whereas the major i ty ofthe m w ent in to the ran ks s ide by s ide w i th the whi te com panions . Virg in iaauthorized a more l iberal manumiss ion of s laves in 1782, and proclaimedfree al l Negroes who had enl is ted with the promise of manumiss ion andha d served faithfully. R ho de Isla nd raised a reg im ent of slaves in 1778.New Hampshire l iberated her s laves , enl is ted Negroes , and gave to thosewho served thre e years th e sam e bo un ty offered oth ers . Co nne cticut didl ikewise in rais ing a Negro regiment in 1781 and Maryland undertook toraise 750 Ne gro troop s th e sam e year .20 Slavery was ins tant ly abolished insome Sta tes . In o thers , i t passed aw ay by gradu al em ancipa t ion .Thus encouraged, the f ree Negroes decidedly increased during thisper iod; and there came, too, a change in the at t i tude toward this class .Th e very increase, how ever , was one reas on w hy th is did no t long continu e.Set t l ing down to the problem of working out government in this country,the whites soon forgot the very dis t inct ions against which they had so longfought , and incorpora ted them in to the i r Sta te cons t i tu t ions as they la terincorpora ted them in to the Federa l Cons t i tu t ion in compromis ing wi th theless l iberal Sta tes on s lavery. T he re develope d in thos e Sta tes in wh ichthe free Negroes were numerous a feeling that the rights and privileges ofthis class should differ from those of w hit e pe rson s. T he Sta tes te nd ed ,then, to res tr ict the f ree Negroes to protect the personal r ights of thewhites , an d to pre ve nt servile insurre ct ion. Fin al ly , an effor t was m ad e tostop th e grow th of th e free Neg ro class or to get r id of i t alto ge the r. T h eregulat ions with respect to the f ree Negroes thereaf ter , therefore, tendedto become almost identical with those of the s laves .Most of the States had res tr ict ions having a direct bear ing on earning asubsis tence. S tat ut es were ena cted to pre ve nt loafing an d vag ran cy .The chi ldren of indigent f ree Negroes were apprenticed to mechanicaltrad es in some of th e St ate s. If a free Neg ro refused to w ork an d b eca m ea public charge, there was usually some way for disposing of him by sellinghim into servi tude for a cer tain per iod or into permanent s lavery.

19 Journal of Negro History, I, 119-127.20Ibid.,I, 119-130.


24/58

xxiv FR EE NEG RO HEAD S OF FAMILIESThe r igh t of locomotion of the free Negroes was generally restricted.Whi le they remained at home among their neighbors , their f reedom wasnot ques t ioned; but in going from place to place, they were usual ly sus

pected and often imprisoned as fugitive slaves. If the vict im claimed tobe free, the b u r d e n of proof was on his side. In some cases when movingbeyo nd their neigh borhood the y were reduce d to the necessity of obtainingpasses very much like those issued to the slaves, but here they needed more.In host i le communit ies , they were compelled to secure f rom their manu-mi t t e r , or from a local official, papers to the effect t h a t th ey were registeredas free. As such certif icates could be easily counterfeited, free Negroes int r ans i t th rough the country were subjec ted to all sor ts of invest igat ion.T h e p e n a l t y for counterfeiting such papers varied from heavy fines toimpr i sonmen t .The free Negro, moreover , gradually los t the r igh t of assembly . It wasear ly repor ted tha t the Negro as sembl ies were " tumul tuous and rebe l l ious" and legislation to this effect may be found in the ear ly s ta tu tes ofthe colonies providing for the flogging of Negroes found in such meetings .La te r , the penalty applied, especial ly to free Negroes, was t h a t of beingfined an d imp risoned. Ho wev er , this did not general ly apply to theassembly of Negroes for m o r a l and spiritual uplift on Sundays .Some of these laws enacted by the States af ter the reaction reflect thespir i t of the t imes . In 1805 Maryland prohibi ted Negroes f rom sel l ingcorn , wheat or tobacco .21 In 1806, the Sta te penal ized the immigra t ion offree Negroes. 22 Negro evidence against a white man was prohib i ted in1809, and in 181023 the race was disfranchised. In 1825, instea d of merelyimprisoning free Negroes for cer tain cr imes, they were to be whipped, imprisoned, and then banished under the pena l ty of being sold as slaves fora te rm.2 4 Virginia prohibi ted the coming of free Negroes into the St a t e in1793,25 requi red them to be registered in 1800,26 prohibi ted them fromcarrying arms without l icense at the session of the legislature in 1805-6,27a n d in 1820 prov ided tha t they migh t be hired out to pay their taxes.28North Caro l ina , which in 1777 had already proscribed free Negroes aswitnesses except in sui ts against each other , saw reason in 1786 to enact alaw against the e n t e r t a i n m e n t of slaves by free Negroes, and the in ter mar r i age of slaves with free Negroes except with the consent of the mastersconcerned.29 By a law of 1812, Negroes could not be mustered in to themili t ia except as musicians .30 In 1826, there followed an act which

21 H u r d , Law of Freedom and Bondage, 20.22 lUd., 20.23K i l t y , Laws of Maryland, Vol. Ill, p. xxxvi i i .24Ibid., 21.25S h e p a r d , Statutes of Virginia, I, 239.26 Ibid., I, 300, 417.27 Ibid., 11, 274.2 8 H u r d , Law of Freedom and Bondage, II, 8.2 9 Ibid., II , 83.30Ibid., II , 85.


25/58

TH E FR EE NEGRO BEFO RE TH E LAW xxvrestricted the right of free Negroes to trade in certain articles and to peddlebeyon d their cou nty w itho ut a l icense. T h a t same year , the com ing offree Negroes into the State was prohibi ted under the severe penal ty of$500.31As South Caro l ina wi th the except ion of Char les ton had never beenvery l iberal toward the free Negro, there was not any possibi l i ty of muchchange du ring this perio d. Ge orgia found it nece ssary in 1808 to prov idefor binding out free persons of color "roving about the country in idlenessand d issapat ion ." 32 The State provided for guardians of f ree Negroes in1810 and prohibited the immigration of others of this class in 1818.33Florida prohibi ted the immigrat ion of f ree Negroes in 1826, res tr icted thefranchise to whites in 1827,34 and in the genera l "b lack code" fo l lowed theregu lations of Ge orgia. Te nnes see req uire d th e reg istra tion of freeNegroes in 1806, forbade them to retail spirituous liquors in 1813, andprohib i ted the interm arr iag e betwee n the two races in 1822.35 K e n t u c k y ,enact ing in 1808 a measure to prevent the coming of f ree Negroes to thatState and another measure against conspiracies of insurrect ion in 1810,tended to take over the "b lack code" of o ther reac t ionary Sta tes . 3 6Farther south and west in the s laveholding terr i tor ies , where there wasa much smaller free Negro population, i t was not sufficient for the States ofAlabama and Mississippi to follow the fortunes of the seaboard slave Statesin l imit ing the franchise to th e wh ites an d th e l ike. E nd eav orin g to keepthe free Negroes out al together , these States added such other provis ionsas their development of the s tr ict ly s laveholding States required; and thenumber of f ree Negroes being thus kept down, the problem did not becomeacute in those quarters .3 7 In Lousiana where, under foreign control , thereha d been an unu sua l race ad m ixtu re with the f ree N egro on th e basis ofsocial equ ality , a different con dition ob tain ed . In spite of th e rigo roust rea tm en t to which the s laveholding reg ime subjec ted th e b lacks , when th a tterr i to ry becam e a pa r t of th e U nite d Sta tes , exceptions to th e laws appliedto free Negroes generally had to be made in the case of those whose equalr ights and pr ivi leges were guara ntee d in the purc hase t r ea ty of Louis iana in1803. Ye t, we find Louis iana prev entin g th e intro du ction of f ree Ne groesin 1807,38 and restricting suffrage to whites in i ts Constitution of 1812.That same year , however , in the midst of the second war with England, i tauth orize d a m il i tary corps of f ree me n of color com m and ed by wh ites . In1815, another act a l lowed a police corps of f ree blacks in Natchitoches . ' '

31 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II, 86.32Cobb's Digest, 985.33 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II, 102.34 Ibid., II, 191.35 Meig's and Cooper's Code, sections 2714, 2652, 4924^4927.36Little's Digest, 501 and c. 235.'37 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II, 142-153.38 Steele and McCampbell, Ark. Dig., 1835, p. 268.39 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II, 159.


26/58

xxvi FR EE NEGRO HEADS OF FAM ILIESBy this t ime, moreover , the States to the north were solving thepro blem in va riou s w ay s. In D elaw are, acco rding to a law of 1787, amanumitted slave could not vote or hold office nor give evidence against a

white man, nor enjoy any other r ights of f ree men other than to holdpro pe rty a nd to o btain redress in law and eq uity for any injury to his or herperson or pro per ty 4 0 In 1807, Delaware prohibited free Negroes fromcoming into the State to res ide, forbade intermarr iage of the races , andauthorized the sale of free Negroes guilty of larceny. 4 1 The Negroes inPennsylvania, on the contrary, were nominally given al l r ights of f ree menin the year of 1780 when the act of the gradual emancipation of the slaveswas passed. T h a t year the old laws were abolished and al l res tr ict ionsap pare nt ly passed aw ay. For the next genera t ion there seemed to hav ebeen li t t le change, for as late as 1820 the State enacted a law to prevent thekid na pp ing of free Negroes.42 In 1798 New Jersey prohibi ted the immigration of free Negroes without a certif icate and prevented free Negroeswithin that State f rom going from county to county without such a docu-men t .4 3 In New York, where gradual emancipat ion was provided for in1799, the s i tuat ion with respect to the r ights of the f ree Negro was aboutthe same as in New Jersey. A lthoug h the Sta te ena cted a law against th ekidnapping of slaves in 1808, the second constitution of that State, whichextended free manhood suffrage to the whites, barred Negroes unless theyha d p ro pe rty of the val ue of $250.44 Co nn ectic ut disfranchised the freeNegro in its constitution of 1818 45 and so did Rhode Island in 1822.46In the States formed out of the Northwest Terr i tory where s lavery wasgradually el iminated by the s ixth ar t ic le of the Ordinance of 1787, therefollowed other measures which had to do with the restriction of the freeNe gro. Th is was especial ly t ru e when the y began to seek th a t coun try asan asy lum from the oppression in th e So uth . Ohio, for thi s reason , foundit necessary to begin as early as 1803 to make distinctions between the tworaces. By its f irst constitution, the elective franchise was restricted tow hite perso ns. A t th e session of th e first legislature conven ed u nd er th iscon st i tut ion, no free black was to be pe rm it te d to res ide in the S tat e excepthe ha d a cer ti ficate of f reedom. Th ose rem aining in the com m onw ealthhad to obtain such a document without which they could not be hired byany employer .47 At the session of 1806-7, no free Negro could come intoth e S tate w itho ut giving a bon d no t to become a public charg e. By th esam e act , he could no t give evidence again st a w hite person.48 At the

40 Delaware, Laws of, 884.41 Delaware Laws, IV, 108.42 Turner, The Negro in Pennsylvania, 109-120.43 Patterson's Laws, 307 Rev. Laws, 369, Sec. 1.44 See Second Constitution of New York.45 Constituiion of Connecticut of 1818, Art. 6, Sec. 2.46 Public Laws, 1822, p. 90.47 Laws of Ohio, II, 63.48 lbid., V, 53.


27/58

TH E FR EE NEG RO BEF OR E TH E LAW xxviisession of 1818-19, however, there was some effort made to protect theNegroes agains t k idnapping tha t those ac tua l ly f ree might en joy tha ts ta tus .4 9 Indiana prohibi ted the Negro from being a witness in a case inwhich a white man was concerned, proscr ibed the intermarr iage of theraces,50 required a bond of f ree Negroes enter ing the State ,5 1 and la ter bythe const i tut ion of 1851 deprived the Negro of the r ight to vote and toserve in th e m ilit ia. I l l inois, in i ts f irst con stitu tion , res trict ed th e righ t offranchise to white persons, in 1819 required a certificate of free Negroesenter ing the State ,5 2 in 1829 exacted a bond of those desiring to settle, andforbade the intermarr iage of the races the same year . 5 3These res tr ict ions were made s t i l l more r igid and others of the mostcruel sor t were enacted during the cr i t ical per iod of the twenties andthir t ies . As s lavery in consequence of the ind ustr ia l revolut ion becam e anintolerable system of exploi tat ion, Negroes here and there arose in servi leinsurrect ion. Th is fear was intensif ied by the D en m ark Vesey Pl ot inCharles ton, South Carol ina, in 1822, by the Walker Appeal publishedbroadcast to s laves in 1828 urging them to r ise against their masters , andby N at Tu rn er 's Insu rrec t ion in Virginia in 1831. W hen the news of thesemovements was noised abroad, i t s t ruck terror to the very hear ts of thes laveholders , forcing many of them to the posi t ion of going armed amongtheir s laves and exercis ing every precaution against the f ree Negroes .T h e action of the vario.us S ta tes du ring this crisis is i l lum ina ting . I nthe m idst of this exci tem ent , th ey resor ted to fur ther legis lation. A t thesession of the legislature of 1831-32, M ar yl an d e nd eav ore d to get r id of freeNegroes by a law providing for the removal of free persons of color toLiberia. A t the sam e tim e it also forbade th e im m igr atio n of free Ne groesinto the State , and imposed many disabi l i t ies on the res ident f ree peopleof color so as to force the m t o go to Lib eria.54 At the session of 1835-36,Maryland made the pr in t ing of papers ca lcu la ted to exci te and crea te

49 On the 14th January, 1839, a pet i t ion for reUef from certain legal disabi l i t ies , f rom coloredi nhab i t an t s o f O h i o , w as p r e sen t ed t o t he popular branch of the l egi s la ture , and i t s re jec t ion wasmo ved by G eorge H. Floo d. Th is re jec t ion was no t a denia l of the praye r , b ut an expulsion of thepetition itself, as an i n t r u de r i n t o t he house . "T h e ques t i on p r e sen t ed f or ou r dec i s i on , " s a i d oneof t he m em ber s , " i s s i m p l y t h i sSha l l hum an be i ngs , w ho a r e bound by eve r y enac t m en t upon ours t a t u t e book , be permitted to request the l egi s la ture to modi fy or sof ten the l aws under which theyl i v e ? "

Mr. Flood 's mot ion was los t by a major i ty of only four v o t e s ; b u t t h i s t r i u m p h of h u m a n i t yw as a s t r an s i en t a s i t w as m eagr e . Th e next day , t he H ouse , by a l a r ge m a j o r i t y , r e so l ved " T h a tt he b l acks and m ul a t t oe s w ho m ay be r e s i den t s w i t h i n t h i s s t a t e , have no cons t i t u t i ona l r i gh t t op r e sen t t he i r pe t i t i ons t o t he G ene r a l A ssem bl y f o r any pu r pose w ha t soeve r , and t ha t any r e cept ion of such pe t i t ions on the par t of the Genera l Assembly i s a mere ac t of pr iv i l ege or pol icy ,and not imposed by any expressed or impl ied power of the cons t i tu t ion . " Sl av er y and the InternalSlave Trade, 261- 262 .

50 Revised Statutes, I , 361 .51 Revised Statutes, 1852, c. 92.52 Session Laws, March 30, 1819, p . 354.53 Revised Statutes, 1856, p. 737.54 Laws of Maryland, 1831, c . 323.


28/58

xxviii FR E E NEG RO HEA DS OF FAMILIESdiscontentment among people of color a felony and a high offense againstthe supr

Date post:	04-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	-the-drop-squad-public-library-
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Free Negro Heads of Families in the United States in 1830 – Together with a Brief Treatment of the...

Documents