CHAPTER XX

TOWN SLAVES

Southern households in town as well as in country were commonly large, and

the dwellings and grounds of the well-to-do were spacious. The dearth of

gas and plumbing and the lack of electric light and central heating made

for heavy chores in the drawing of water, the replenishment of fuel and the

care of lamps. The gathering of vegetables from the kitchen garden, the

dressing of poultry and the baking of relays' of hot breads at meal times

likewise amplified the culinary routine. Maids of all work were therefore

seldom employed. Comfortable circumstances required at least a cook and

a housemaid, to which might be added as means permitted a laundress, a

children's nurse, a seamstress, a milkmaid, a butler, a gardener and a

coachman. While few but the rich had such ample staffs as this, none but

the poor were devoid of domestics, and the ratio of servitors to the gross

population was large. The repugnance of white laborers toward menial

employment, furthermore, conspired with the traditional predilection of

householders for negroes in a lasting tenure for their intimate services

and gave the slaves a virtual monopoly of this calling. A census of

Charleston in 1848,[94] for example, enumerated 5272 slave domestics as

compared with 113 white and 27 free colored servants. The slaves were more

numerous than the free also in the semi-domestic employments of coachmen

and porters, and among the dray-men and the coopers and the unskilled

laborers in addition.

[Footnote 94: J.L. Dawson and H.W. DeSaussure, _Census of Charleston for

1848_ (Charleston, 1849), pp. 31-36. The city's population then comprised

some 20,000 whites, a like number of slaves, and about 3,500 free persons

of color. The statistics of occupations are summarized in the accompanying

table.]

MANUAL OCCUPATIONS IN CHARLESTON, 1848

Slaves | Free Negroes| Whites

Men | Women Men |Women Men |Women

Domestic servants 1,888 | 3,384 9 | 28 13 | 100

Cooks and

confectioners 7 | 12 18 | 18 ... | 5

Nurses and midwives ...| 2 ... | 10 ... | 5

Laundresses ...| 33 ... | 45 ... | ...

Seamstresses and

mantua makers ... | 24 ... | 196 ... | 125

Milliners ... | ... ... | 7 ... | 44

Fruiterers, hucksters

and pedlers ... | 18 6 | 5 46 | 18

Gardeners 3 | ... ...| ... 5 | 1

Coachmen 15 | ... 4 | ... 2 | ...

Draymen 67 | ... 11 | ... 13 | ...

Porters 35 | ... 5 | ... 8 | ...

Wharfingers and

stevedores 2 | ... 1 | ... 21 | ...

Pilots and sailors 50 | ... 1 | ... 176 | ...

Fishermen 11 | ... 14 | ... 10 | ...

Carpenters 120 | ... 27 | ... 119 | ...

Masons and

bricklayers 68 | ... 10 | ... 60 | ...

Painters and

plasterers 16 | ... 4 | ... 18 | ...

Tinners 3 | ... 1 | ... 10 | ...

Ship carpenters

and joiners 51 | ... 6 | ... 52 | ...

Coopers 61 | ... 2 | ... 20 | ...

Coach makers and

wheelwrights 3 | ... 1 | ... 26 | ...

Cabinet makers 8 | ... ... | ... 26 | ...

Upholsterers 1 | ... 1 | ... 10 | ...

Gun, copper and

locksmiths 2 | ... 1 | ... 16 | ...

Blacksmiths and

horseshoers 40 | ... 4 | ... 51 | ...

Millwrights ... | ... 5 | ... 4 | ...

Boot and shoemakers 6 | ... 17 | ... 30 | ...

Saddle and harness

makers 2 | ... 1 | ... 29 | ...

Tailors and cap makers 36 | ... 42 | 6 68 | 6

Butchers 5 | ... 1 | ... 10 | ...

Millers ... | ... 1 | ... 14 | ...

Bakers 39 | ... 1 | ... 35 | 1

Barbers and hairdressers 4 | ... 14 | ... ... | 6

Cigarmakers 5 | ... 1 | ... 10 | ...

Bookbinders 3 | ... ... | ... 10 | ...

Printers 5 | ... ... | ... 65 | ...

Other mechanics [A] 45 | ... 2 | ... 182 | ...

Apprentices 43 | 8 14 | 7 55 | 5

Unclassified, unskilled

laborers 838 | 378 19 | 2 192 | ...

Superannuated 38 | 54 1 | 5 ... | ...

[Footnote A: The slaves and free negroes in this group were designated

merely as mechanics. The whites were classified as follows: 3 joiners,

1 plumber, 8 gas fitters, 7 bell hangers, 1 paper hanger, 6 carvers and

gilders, 9 sail makers, 5 riggers, 1 bottler, 8 sugar makers, 43 engineers,

10 machinists, 6 boilermakers, 7 stone cutters, 4 piano and organ builders,

23 silversmiths, 15 watchmakers, 3 hair braiders, 1 engraver, 1 cutler, 3

molders, 3 pump and block makers, 2 turners, 2 wigmakers, 1 basketmaker, 1

bleacher, 4 dyers, and 4 journeymen.

In addition there were enumerated of whites in non-mechanical employments

in which the negroes did not participate, 7 omnibus drivers and 16

barkeepers.]

On the other hand, although Charleston excelled every other city in the

proportion of slaves in its population, free laborers predominated in all

the other industrial groups, though but slightly in the cases of the masons

and carpenters. The whites, furthermore, heavily outnumbered the free

negroes in virtually all the trades but that of barbering which they

shunned. Among women workers the free colored ranked first as seamstresses,

washerwomen, nurses and cooks, with white women competing strongly in the

sewing trades alone. A census of Savannah in the same year shows a similar

predominance of whites in all the male trades but that of the barbers, in

which there were counted five free negroes, one slave and no whites.[2]

From such statistics two conclusions are clear: first, that the repulsion

of the whites was not against manual work but against menial service;

second, that the presence of the slaves in the town trades was mainly due

to the presence of their fellows as domestics.

[Footnote 2: Joseph Bancroft, _Census of the City of Savannah_ (Savannah,

1848).]

Most of the slave mechanics and out-of-door laborers were the husbands and

sons of the cooks and chambermaids, dwelling with them on their masters'

premises, where the back yard with its crooning women and romping

vari-colored children was as characteristic a feature as on the

plantations. Town slavery, indeed, had a strong tone of domesticity, and

the masters were often paternalistically inclined. It was a townsman, for

example, who wrote the following to a neighbor: "As my boy Reuben has

formed an attachment to one of your girls and wants her for a wife, this

is to let you know that I am perfectly willing that he should, with your

consent, marry her. His character is good; he is honest, faithful and

industrious." The patriarchal relations of the country, however, which

depended much upon the isolation of the groups, could hardly prevail in

similar degree where the slaves of many masters intermingled. Even for

the care of the sick there was doubtless fairly frequent recourse to such

establishments as the "Surgical Infirmary for Negroes" at Augusta which

advertised its facilities in 1854,[3] though the more common practice, of

course, was for slave patients in town as well as country to be nursed

at home. A characteristic note in this connection was written by a young

Georgia townswoman: "No one is going to church today but myself, as we have

a little negro very sick and Mama deems it necessary to remain at home to

attend to him."[4]

[Footnote 3: _Southern Business Directory_ (Charleston, 1854), I, 289,

advertisement. The building was described as having accommodations for

fifty or sixty patients. The charge for board, lodging and nursing was $10

per month, and for surgical operations and medical attendance "the usual

rates of city practice."]

[Footnote 4: Mary E. Harden to Mrs. Howell Cobb, Athens, Ga., Nov. 13,

1853. MS. in possession of Mrs. A.S. Erwin, Athens, Ga.]

The town régime was not so conducive to lifelong adjustments of masters

and slaves except as regards domestic service; for whereas a planter could

always expand his operations in response to an increase of his field hands

and could usually provide employment at home for any artizan he might

produce, a lawyer, a banker or a merchant had little choice but to hire

out or sell any slave who proved a superfluity or a misfit in his domestic

establishment. On the other hand a building contractor with an expanding

business could not await the raising of children but must buy or hire

masons and carpenters where he could find them.

Some of the master craftsmen owned their staffs. Thus William Elfe, a

Charleston cabinet maker at the close of the colonial period, had title to

four sawyers, five joiners and a painter, and he managed to keep some of

their wives and children in his possession also by having a farm on the

further side of the harbor for their residence and employment.[5] William

Rouse, a Charleston leather worker who closed his business in 1825 when

the supply of tan bark ran short, had for sale four tanners, a currier and

seven shoemakers, with, however, no women or children;[6] and the seven

slaves of William Brockelbank, a plastering contractor of the same city,

sold after his death in 1850, comprised but one woman and no children.[7]

Likewise when the rope walk of Smith, Dorsey and Co. at New Orleans was

offered for sale in 1820, fourteen slave operatives were included without

mention of their families.[8]

[Footnote 5: MS. account book of William Elfe, in the Charleston Library.]

[Footnote 6: Charleston _City Gazette_, Jan. 5, 1826, advertisement.]

[Footnote 7: Charleston _Mercury_, quoted in the Augusta _Chronicle_, Dec.

5, 1850. This news item owed its publication to the "handsome prices"

realized. A plasterer 28 years old brought $2,135; another, 30, $1,805; a

third, 24, $1775; a fourth, 24, $1,100; and a fifth, 20, $730.]

[Footnote 8: _Louisiana Advertiser_ (New Orleans), May 13, 1820,

advertisement.]

Far more frequently such laborers were taken on hire. The following are

typical of a multitude of newspaper advertisements: Michael Grantland at

Richmond offered "good wages" for the year 1799 by piece or month for six

or eight negro coopers.[9] At the same time Edward Rumsey was calling for

strong negro men of good character at $100 per year at his iron works in

Botetourt County, Virginia, and inviting free laboring men also to take

employment with him.[10] In 1808 Daniel Weisinger and Company wanted three

or four negro men to work in their factory at Frankfort, Kentucky, saying

"they will be taught weaving, and liberal wages will be paid for their

services."[11] George W. Evans at Augusta in 1818 "Wanted to hire, eight or

ten white or black men for the purpose of cutting wood."[12] A citizen of

Charleston in 1821 called for eight good black carpenters on weekly or

monthly wages, and in 1825 a blacksmith and wheel-wright of the same city

offered to take black apprentices.[13] In many cases whites and blacks

worked together in the same employ, as in a boat-building yard on the Flint

River in 1836,[14] and in a cotton mill at Athens, Georgia, in 1839.[15]

[Footnote 9: _Virginia Gazette_ (Richmond), Nov. 20, 1798.]

[Footnote 10: Winchester, Va., _Gazette_, Jan. 30, 1799.]

[Footnote 11: The _Palladium_ (Frankfort, Ky.), Dec. 1, 1808.]

[Footnote 12: Augusta, Ga., _Chronicle_, Aug. 1, 1818.]

[Footnote 13: Charleston _City Gazette_, Feb. 22, 1825.]

[Footnote 14: _Federal Union_ (Milledgeville, Ga.), Mch. 18, 1836,

reprinted in _Plantation and Frontier_, II, 356.]

[Footnote 15: J.S. Buckingham, _The Slave States of America_ (London,

[1842]), II, 112.]

In some cases the lessor of slaves procured an obligation of complete

insurance from the lessee. An instance of this was a contract between

James Murray of Wilmington in 1743, when he was departing for a sojourn in

Scotland, and his neighbor James Hazel. The latter was to take the three

negroes Glasgow, Kelso and Berwick for three years at an annual hire of £21

sterling for the lot. If death or flight among them should prevent Hazel

from returning any of the slaves at the end of the term he was to reimburse

Murray at full value scheduled in the lease, receiving in turn a bill of

sale for any runaway. Furthermore if any of the slaves were permanently

injured by willful abuse at the hands of Hazel's overseer, Murray was to be

paid for the damage.[16] Leases of this type, however, were exceptional.

As a rule the owners appear to have carried all risks except in regard to

willful injury, and the courts generally so adjudged it where the contracts

of hire had no stipulations in the premises.[17] When the Georgia supreme

court awarded the owner a full year's hire of a slave who had died in the

midst of his term the decision was complained of as an innovation "signally

oppressive to the poorer classes of our citizens--the large majority--who

are compelled to hire servants."[18]

[Footnote 16: Nina M. Tiffany ed., _Letters of James Murray, Loyalist_

(Boston, 1901), pp. 67-69.]

[Footnote 17: J.D. Wheeler, _The Law of Slavery_ (New York, 1837), pp.

152-155.]

[Footnote 18: Editorial in the _Federal Union_ (Milledgeville, Ga.), Dec.

12, 1854.]

The main supply of slaves for hire was probably comprised of the husbands

and sons, and sometimes the daughters, of the cooks and housemaids of the

merchants, lawyers and the like whose need of servants was limited but who

in many cases made a point of owning their slaves in families. On the other

hand, many townsmen whose capital was scant or whose need was temporary

used hired slaves even for their kitchen work; and sometimes the filling of

the demand involved the transfer of a slave from one town to another. Thus

an innkeeper of Clarkesville, a summer resort in the Georgia mountains,

published in the distant newspapers of Athens and Augusta in 1838 his

offer of liberal wages for a first rate cook.[19] This hiring of domestics

brought periodic embarrassments to those who depended upon them. A Virginia

clergyman who found his wife and himself doing their own chores "in the

interval between the hegira of the old hirelings and the coming of the

new"[20] was not alone in his plight. At the same season, a Richmond editor

wrote: "The negro hiring days have come, the most woeful of the year! So

housekeepers think who do not own their own servants; and even this class

is but a little better off than the rest, for all darkeydom must have

holiday this week, and while their masters and mistresses are making fires

and cooking victuals or attending to other menial duties the negroes are

promenading the streets decked in their finest clothes."[21] Even the

tobacco factories, which were constantly among the largest employers of

hired slaves, were closed for lack of laborers from Christmas day until

well into January.[22]

[Footnote 19: _Southern Banner_ (Athens, Ga.), June 21, 1838, advertisement

ordering its own republication in the Augusta _Constitutionalist_.]

[Footnote 20: T.C. Johnson, _Life of Robert L. Dabney_ (Richmond, 1905), p.

120.]

[Footnote 21: Richmond _Whig_, quoted in the _Atlanta Intelligencer_, Jan.

5, 1859.]

[Footnote 22: Robert Russell, _North America_ (Edinburgh, 1857), p. 151.]

That the bargain of hire sometimes involved the consent of more than two

parties is suggested by a New Year's colloquy overheard by Robert Russell

on a Richmond street: "I was rather amused at the efforts of a market

gardener to hire a young woman as a domestic servant. The price her owner

put upon her services was not objected to by him, but they could not agree

about other terms. The grand obstacle was that she would not consent to

work in the garden, even when she had nothing else to do. After taking an

hour's walk in another part of town I again met the two at the old bargain.

Stepping towards them, I now learned that she was pleading for other

privileges--her friends and favourites must be allowed to visit her.[23]

At length she agreed to go and visit her proposed home and see how things

looked." That the scruples of proprietors occasionally prevented the

placing of slaves is indicated by a letter of a Georgia woman anent her

girl Betty and a free negro woman, Matilda: "I cannot agree for Betty to

be hired to Matilda--her character is too bad. I know her of old; she is a

drunkard, and is said to be bad in every respect. I would object her being

hired to any colored person no matter what their character was; and if she

cannot get into a respectable family I had rather she came home, and if she

can't work out put her to spinning and weaving. Her relations here beg she

may not be permitted to go to Matilda. She would not be worth a cent at the

end of the year."[24]

The coördination of demand and supply was facilitated in some towns by

brokers. Thus J. de Bellievre of Baton Rouge maintained throughout 1826 a

notice in the local _Weekly Messenger_ of "Servants to hire by the day or

month," including both artizans and domestics; and in the Nashville city

directory of 1860 Van B. Holman advertised his business as an agent for the

hiring of negroes as well as for the sale and rental of real estate.

[Footnote 23: _Ibid_.]

[Footnote 24: Letter of Mrs. S.R. Cobb, Cowpens, Ga., Jan. 9 1843, to

her daughter-in-law at Athens. MS. in the possession of Mrs. A.S. Erwin,

Athens, Ga.]

Slave wages, generally quoted for the year and most frequently for

unskilled able-bodied hands, ranged materially higher, of course, in the

cotton belt than in the upper South. Women usually brought about half

the wages of men, though they were sometimes let merely for the keep of

themselves and their children. In middle Georgia the wages of prime men

ranged about $100 in the first decade of the nineteenth century, dropped to

$60 or $75 during the war of 1812, and then rose to near $150 by 1818. The

panic of the next year sent them down again; and in the 'twenties they

commonly ranged between $100 and $125. Flush times then raised them in

such wise that the contractors digging a canal on the Georgia coast found

themselves obliged in 1838 to offer $18 per month together with the

customary weekly rations of three and a half pounds of bacon and ten quarts

of corn and also the services of a staff physician as a sort of substitute

for life and health insurance.[25] The beginning of the distressful

'forties eased the market so that the town of Milledgeville could get its

street gang on a scale of $125;[26] at the middle of the decade slaveowners

were willing to take almost any wages offered; and in its final year the

Georgia Railroad paid only $70 to $75 for section hands. In 1850, however,

this rate leaped to $100 and $110, and caused a partial substitution of

white laborers for the hired slaves;[27] but the brevity of any relief

procured by this recourse is suggested by a news item from Chattanooga in

1852 reporting that the commonest labor commanded a dollar a day, that

mechanics were all engaged far in advance, that much building was perforce

being postponed, and that all persons who might be seeking employment were

urged to answer the city's call.[28] By 1854 the continuing advance began

to discommode rural employers likewise. A Norfolk newspaper of the time

reported that the current wages of $150 for ordinary hands and $225 for

the best laborers, together with life insurance for the full value of

the slaves, were so high that prudent farmers were curtailing their

operations.[29] At the beginning of 1856 the wages in the Virginia tobacco

factories advanced some fifteen per cent. over the rates of the preceding

year;[30] and shortly afterward several of these establishments took refuge

in the employment of white women for their lighter processes.[31] In 1860

there was a culmination of this rise of slave wages throughout the South,

contemporaneous with that of their purchase prices. First-rate hands

were engaged by the Petersburg tobacco factories at $225;[32] and in

northwestern Louisiana the prime field hands in a parcel of slaves hired

for the year brought from $300 to $360 each, and a blacksmith $430.[33] The

general average then prevalent for prime unskilled slaves, however, was

probably not much above two hundred dollars. While the purchase price of

slaves was wellnigh quadrupled in the three score years of the nineteenth

century, slave wages were little more than doubled, for these were of

course controlled not by the fluctuating hopes and fears of what the

distant future might bring but by the sober prospect of the work at hand.

[Footnote 25: Advertisement in the Savannah newspapers, reprinted in J.S.

Buckingham, _Slave States_ (London, 1842), I, 137.]

[Footnote 26: MS. minutes of the board of aldermen, in the town hall at

Milledgeville, Ga. Item dated Feb. 23, 1841.]

[Footnote 27: Georgia Railroad Company _Report_ for 1850, p. 13.]

[Footnote 28: Chattanooga _Advertiser_, quoted in the Augusta _Chronicle_,

June 6, 1852.]

[Footnote 29: Norfolk _Argus_, quoted in _Southern Banner_ (Athens, Ga.),

Jan. 12, 1854.]

[Footnote 30: Richmond _Dispatch_, Jan., 1856, quoted in G.M. Weston, _Who

are and who may be Slaves in the U.S._ (caption).]

[Footnote 31: _Hunt's Merchants' Magazine_, XL, 522.]

[Footnote 32: Petersburg _Democrat_, quoted by the Atlanta _Intelligencer_,

Jan., 1860.]

[Footnote 33: _DeBow's Review_, XXIX, 374.]

The proprietors of slaves for hire appear to have been generally as much

concerned with questions of their moral and physical welfare as with the

wages to be received, for no wage would compensate for the debilitation of

the slave or his conversion into an inveterate runaway. The hirers in their

turn had the problem, growing more intense with the advance of costs, of

procuring full work without resorting to such rigor of discipline as

would disquiet the owners of their employees. The tobacco factories found

solution in piece work with bonus for excess over the required stint. At

Richmond in the middle 'fifties this was commonly yielding the slaves from

two to five dollars a month for their own uses; and these establishments,

along with all other slave employers, suspended work for more than a week

at the Christmas season.[34]

[Footnote 34: Robert Russell, _North America_, p. 152.]

The hiring of slaves from one citizen to another did not meet all the needs

of the town industry, for there were many occupations in which the regular

supervision of labor was impracticable. Hucksters must trudge the streets

alone; and market women sit solitary in their stalls. If slaves were to

follow such callings at all, and if other slaves were to utilize their

talents in keeping cobbler and blacksmith shops and the like for public

patronage,[35] they must be vested with fairly full control of their own

activities. To enable them to compete with whites and free negroes in the

trades requiring isolated and occasional work their masters early and

increasingly fell into the habit of hiring many slaves to the slaves

themselves, granting to each a large degree of industrial freedom in return

for a stipulated weekly wage. The rates of hire varied, of course, with the

slave's capabilities and the conditions of business in their trades. The

practice brought friction sometimes between slaves and owners when wages

were in default. An instance of this was published in a Charleston

advertisement of 1800 announcing the auction of a young carpenter and

saying as the reason of the sale that he had absconded because of a deficit

in his wages.[36] Whether the sale was merely by way of punishment or

was because the proprietor could not give personal supervision to the

carpenter's work the record fails to say. The practice also injured the

interests of white competitors in the same trades, who sometimes bitterly

complained;[37] it occasionally put pressure upon the slaves to fill

out their wages by theft; and it gave rise in some degree to a public

apprehension that the liberty of movement might be perverted to purposes of

conspiracy. The law came to frown upon it everywhere; but the device was

too great a public and private convenience to be suppressed.

[Footnote 35: _E. g_., "For sale: a strong, healthy Mulatto Man, about

24 years of age, by trade a blacksmith, and has had the management of a

blacksmith shop for upwards of two years" Advertisement in the Alexandria,

Va., _Times and Advertiser_, Sept. 26, 1797.]

[Footnote 36: Charleston _City Gazette_, May 12, 1800.]

[Footnote 37: _E. g., Plantation and Frontier_, II, 367.]

To procure the enforcement of such laws a vigilance committee was proposed

at Natchez in 1824;[38] but if it was created it had no lasting effect.

With the same purpose newspaper campaigns were waged from time to time.

Thus in the spring of 1859 the _Bulletin_ of Columbia, South Carolina, said

editorially: "Despite the laws of the land forbidding under penalty the

hiring of their time by slaves, it is much to be regretted that the

pernicious practice still exists," and it censured the citizens who were

consciously and constantly violating a law enacted in the public interest.

The nearby Darlington _Flag_ endorsed this and proposed in remedy that

the town police and the rural patrols consider void all tickets issued by

masters authorizing their slaves to pass and repass at large, that all

slaves found hiring their time be arrested and punished, and that their

owners be indicted as by law provided. The editor then ranged further.

"There is another evil of no less magnitude," said he, "and perhaps the

foundation of the one complained of. It is that of transferring slave labor

from its legitimate field, the cultivation of the soil, into that of the

mechanic arts.... Negro mechanics are an ebony aristocracy into which

slaves seek to enter by teasing their masters for permission to learn a

trade. Masters are too often seduced by the prospect of gain to yield their

assent, and when their slaves have acquired a trade are forced to the

violation of the law to realize their promised gain. We should therefore

have a law to prevent slave mechanics going off their masters' premises to

work. Let such a law be passed, and ... there will no longer be need of a

law to prohibit slaves hiring their own time," The _Southern Watchman_ of

Athens, Georgia, reprinted all of this in turn, along with a subscriber's

communication entitled "free slaves." There were more negroes enjoying

virtual freedom in the town of Athens, this writer said, than there were

_bona fide_ free negroes in any ten counties of the district. "Everyone who

is at all acquainted with the character of the slave race knows that they

have great ideas of liberty, and in order to get the enjoyment of it they

make large offers for their time. And everyone who knows anything of the

negro knows that he won't work unless he is obliged to.... The negro thus

set free, in nine cases out of ten, idles away half of his time or gambles

away what he does make, and then relies on his ingenuity in stealing to

meet the demands pay day inevitably brings forth; and this is the way our

towns are converted into dens of rogues and thieves."[39]

[Footnote 38: Natchez _Mississippian_, quoted in _Le Courrier de la

Louisiane_ (New Orleans), Aug. 25, 1854.]

[Footnote 39: _Southern Watchman_ (Athens, Ga.), Apr. 20, 1859.]

These arguments had been answered long before by a citizen of Charleston.

The clamor, said he, was intended not so much to guard the community

against theft and insurrection as to diminish the competition of slaves

with white mechanics. The strict enforcement of the law would almost

wholly deprive the public of the services of jobbing slaves, which were

indispensable under existing circumstances. Let the statute therefore be

left in the obscurity of the lawyers' bookshelves, he concluded, to be

brought forth only in case of an emergency.[40] And so such laws were left

to sleep, despite the plaints of self-styled reformers.

[Footnote 40: Letter to the editor in the Charleston _City Gazette_, Nov.

1, 1825. To similar effect was an editorial in the Augusta _Chronicle_,

Oct. 16, 1851.]

That self-hire may often have led to self-purchase is suggested by an

illuminating letter of Billy Procter, a slave at Americus, Georgia, in 1854

to Colonel John B. Lamar of whom something has been seen in a foregoing

chapter. The letter, presumably in the slave's own hand, runs as follows:

"As my owner, Mr. Chapman, has determined to dispose of all his Painters, I

would prefer to have you buy me to any other man. And I am anxious to get

you to do so if you will. You know me very well yourself, but as I wish

you to be fully satisfied I beg to refer you to Mr. Nathan C. Monroe, Dr.

Strohecker and Mr. Bogg. I am in distress at this time, and will be until I

hear from you what you will do. I can be bought for $1000--and I think that

you might get me for 50 Dolls less if you try, though that is Mr. Chapman's

price. Now Mas John, I want to be plain and honest with you. If you will

buy me I will pay you $600 per year untill this money is paid, or at any

rate will pay for myself in two years.... I am fearfull that if you do not

buy me, there is no telling where I may have to go, and Mr. C. wants me to

go where I would be satisfied,--I promise to serve you faithfully, and I

know that I am as sound and healthy as anyone you could find. You will

confer a great favour, sir, by Granting my request, and I would be

very glad to hear from you in regard to the matter at your earliest

convenience."[41]

[Footnote 41: MS. in the possession of Mrs. A.S. Erwin, Athens, Ga.,

printed in _Plantation and Frontier_, II, 41. The writer must have been

well advanced in years or else highly optimistic. Otherwise he could not

have expected to earn his purchase price within two years.]

The hiring of slaves by one citizen to another prevailed to some extent

in country as well as town, and the hiring of them to themselves was

particularly notable in the forest labors of gathering turpentine and

splitting shingles[42]; but slave hire in both its forms was predominantly

an urban resort. On the whole, whereas the plantation system cherished

slavery as a wellnigh fundamental condition, town industry could tolerate

it only by modifying its features to make labor more flexibly responsive to

the sharply distinctive urban needs.

[Footnote 42: Olmsted, _Seaboard Slave States_, pp. 153-155.]

As to routine control, urban proprietors were less complete masters even

of slaves in their own employ than were those in the country. For example,

Morgan Brown of Clarksville, Tennessee, had occasion to publish the

following notice: "Whereas my negroes have been much in the habit of

working at night for such persons as will employ them, to the great injury

of their health and morals, I therefore forbid all persons employing them

without my special permission in writing. I also forbid trading with them,

buying from or selling to them, without my written permit stating the

article they may buy or sell. The law will be strictly enforced against

transgressors, without respect to persons[43]."

[Footnote 43: _Town Gazette and Farmers' Register_ (Clarksville, Tenn.),

Aug. 9, 1819, reprinted in _Plantation and Frontier_, II, 45, 46.]

When broils occurred in which slaves were involved, the masters were likely

to find themselves champions rather than judges. This may be illustrated by

two cases tried before the town commissioners of Milledgeville, Georgia,

in 1831. In the first of these Edward Gary was ordered to bring before the

board his slave Nathan to answer a charge of assault upon Richard Mayhorn,

a member of the town patrol, and show why punishment should not be

inflicted. On the day set Cary appeared without the negro and made a

counter charge supported by testimony that Mayhorn had exceeded his

authority under the patrol ordinance. The prosecution of the slave was

thereupon dropped, and the patrolman was dismissed from the town's employ.

The second case was upon a patrol charge against a negro named Hubbard,

whose master or whose master's attorney was one Wiggins, reciting an

assault upon Billy Woodliff, a slave apparently of Seaborn Jones. Billy

being sworn related that Hubbard had come to the door of his blacksmith

shop and "abused and bruised him with a rock." Other evidence revealed that

Hubbard's grievance lay in Billy's having taken his wife from him. "The

testimony having been concluded, Mr. Wiggins addressed the board in a

speech containing some lengthy, strengthy and depthy argument: whereupon

the board ordered that the negro man Hubbard receive from the marshall ten

lashes, moderately laid on, and be discharged."[44] Even in the maintenance

of household discipline masters were fain to apply chastisement vicariously

by having the town marshal whip their offending servants for a small fee.

[Footnote 44: MS. archives in the town hall at Milledgeville, Ga., selected

items from which are printed in the American Historical Association

_Report_ for 1903, I, 468, 469.]

The variety in complexion, status and attainment among town slaves led to a

somewhat elaborate gradation of colored society. One stratum comprised the

fairly numerous quadroons and mulattoes along with certain exceptional

blacks. The men among these had a pride of place as butlers and coachmen,

painters and carpenters; the women fitted themselves trimly with the

cast-off silks and muslins of their mistresses, walked with mincing tread,

and spoke in quiet tones with impressive nicety of grammar. This element

was a conscious aristocracy of its kind, but its members were more or less

irked by the knowledge that no matter how great their merits they could not

cross the boundary into white society. The bulk of the real negroes on the

other hand, with an occasional mulatto among them, went their own way, the

women frankly indulging a native predilection for gaudy colors, carrying

their burdens on their heads, arms akimbo, and laying as great store in

their kerchief turbans as their paler cousins did in their beflowered

bonnets. The men of this class wore their shreds and patches with an

easy swing, doffed their wool hats to white men as they passed, called

themselves niggers or darkies as a matter of course, took the joys and

sorrows of the day as they came, improvised words to the music of their

work, and customarily murdered the Queen's English, all with a true if

humble nonchalance and a freedom from carking care.

The differentiation of slave types was nevertheless little more than

rudimentary; for most of those who were lowliest on work days assumed

a grandiloquence of manner when they donned their holiday clothes. The

gayeties of the colored population were most impressive to visitors from

afar. Thus Adam Hodgson wrote of a spring Sunday at Charleston in 1820: "I

was pleased to see the slaves apparently enjoying themselves on this day in

their best attire, and was amused with their manners towards each other.

They generally use Sir and Madam in addressing each other, and make the

most formal and particular inquiries after each other's families."[45] J.S.

Buckingham wrote at Richmond fifteen years afterward: "On Sundays, when the

slaves and servants are all at liberty after dinner, they move about in

every thoroughfare, and are generally more gaily dressed than the whites.

The females wear white muslin and light silk gowns, with caps, bonnets,

ribbons and feathers; some carry reticules on the arm and many are seen

with parasols, while nearly all of them carry a white pocket-handkerchief

before them in the most fashionable style. The young men among the

slaves wear white trousers, black stocks, broad-brimmed hats, and carry

walking-sticks; and from the bowings, curtseying and greetings in the

highway one might almost imagine one's self to be at Hayti and think that

the coloured people had got possession of the town and held sway, while the

whites were living among them by sufferance."[46] Olmsted in his turn found

the holiday dress of the slaves in many cases better than the whites,[47]

and said their Christmas festivities were Saturnalia. The town ordinances,

while commonly strict in regard to the police of slaves for the rest of the

year, frequently gave special countenance to negro dances and other festive

assemblies at Christmas tide.

[Footnote 45: Adam Hodgson, _Letters from North America_, I, 97.]

[Footnote 46: J.S. Buckingham, _Slave States_, II, 427.]

[Footnote 47: _Seaboard Slave States_, pp. 101, 103. Cf. also _DeBow's

Review_, XII, 692, and XXVIII, 194-199.]

Even in work-a-day seasons the laxity of control gave rise to occasional

complaint. Thus the acting mayor of New Orleans recited in 1813, among

matters needing correction, that loitering slaves were thronging the grog

shops every evening and that negro dances were lasting far into the night,

in spite of the prohibitions of the law.[48] A citizen of Charleston

protested in 1835 against another and more characteristic form of

dissipation. "There are," said he, "sometimes every evening in the week,

funerals of negroes accompanied by three or four hundred negroes ... who

disturb all the inhabitants in the neighborhood of burying grounds in Pitt

street near Boundary street. It appears to be a jubilee for every slave in

the city. They are seen eagerly pressing to the place from all quarters,

and such is frequently the crowd and noise made by them that carriages

cannot safely be driven that way."[49]

[Footnote 48: _Plantation and Frontier_, II, 153.]

[Footnote 49: Letter of a citizen in the _Southern Patriot_, quoted in H.M.

Henry, _Police Control of the Slave in South Carolina_ (Emory, Va., 1914),

p. 144.]

The operations of urban constables and police courts are exemplified in

some official statistics of Charleston. In the year ending September 1,

1837, the slave arrests, numbering 768 in all, were followed in 138 cases

by prompt magisterial discharge, by fines in 309 cases, and by punishment

in the workhouse or by remandment for trial on criminal charges in 264

of the remainder. The mayor said in summary: "Of the 573 slaves fined or

committed to the workhouse nearly the whole were arrested for being out at

night without tickets or being found in the dram shops or other unlawful

places. The fines imposed did not in general exceed $1, and where corporal

punishment was inflicted it was always moderate. It is worthy to remark

that of the 460 cases reported by the marshals for prosecution but 22 were

prosecuted, the penalties having been voluntarily paid in 303 cases, and in

118 cases having been remitted, thus preventing by a previous examination

421 suits." Arrests of colored freemen in the same period numbered 78, of

which 27 were followed by discharge, 36 by fine or whipping, 5 by sentence

to the workhouse, and 10 by remandment.

In the second year following, the slave and free negro arrests for being

"out after the beating of the tattoo without tickets, fighting and rioting

in the streets, following military companies, walking on the battery

contrary to law, bathing horses at forbidden places, theft, or other

violation of the city and state laws" advanced for some unexplained reason

to an aggregate of 1424. Of those taken into custody 274 were discharged

after examination, 330 were punished in the workhouse, 33 were prosecuted

or delivered to warrant, 26 were fined or committed until the fines were

paid, for 398 the penalties were paid by their owners or guardians, 115

were runaways who were duly returned to their masters or otherwise disposed

of according to law, and the remaining 252 were delivered on their owners'

orders.[50]

[Footnote 50: Official reports quoted in H.M. Henry, _The Police Control of

Slaves in South Carolina_, pp. 49, 50.]

At an earlier period a South Carolina law had required the public whipping

of negro offenders at prominent points on the city streets, but

complaints of this as distressing to the inhabitants[51] had brought its

discontinuance. For the punishment of misdemeanants under sentences to hard

labor a treadmill was instituted in the workhouse;[52] and the ensuing

substitution of labor for the lash met warm official commendation.[53]

[Footnote 51: _Columbian Herald_ (Charleston), June 26, 1788.]

[Footnote 52: Charleston _City Gazette_, Feb. 2, 1826.]

[Footnote 53: Grand jury presentments, _ibid_., May 15, 1826.]

In church affairs the two races adhered to the same faiths, but their

worship tended slowly to segregate. A few negroes habitually participated

with the whites in the Catholic and Episcopal rituals, or listened to the

long and logical sermons of the Presbyterians. Larger numbers occupied the

pews appointed for their kind in the churches of the Methodist and Baptist

whites, where the more ebullient exercises comported better with their own

tastes. But even here there was often a feeling of irksome restraint. The

white preacher in fear of committing an indiscretion in the hearing of

the negroes must watch his words though that were fatal to his impromptu

eloquence; the whites in the congregation must maintain their dignity when

dignity was in conflict with exaltation; the blacks must repress their own

manifestations the most severely of all, to escape rebuke for unseemly

conduct.[54] An obvious means of relief lay in the founding of separate

congregations to which the white ministers occasionally preached and in

which white laymen often sat, but where the pulpit and pews were commonly

filled by blacks alone. There the sable exhorter might indulge his peculiar

talent for "'rousements" and the prayer leader might beseech the Almighty

in tones to reach His ears though afar off. There the sisters might sway

and croon to the cadence of sermon and prayer, and the brethren spur the

spokesman to still greater efforts by their well timed ejaculations. There

not only would the quaint melody of the negro "spirituals" swell instead of

the more sophisticated airs of the hymn book, but every successful sermon

would be a symphony and every prayer a masterpiece of concerted rhythm.

[Footnote 54: A Methodist preacher wrote of an episode at Wilmington: "On

one occasion I took a summary process with a certain black woman who in

their love-feast, with many extravagant gestures, cried out that she was

'young King Jesus,' I bade her take her seat, and then publicly read her

out of membership, stating that we would not have such wild fanatics

among us, meantime letting them all know that such expressions were even

blasphemous. Poor Aunt Katy felt it deeply, repented, and in a month I took

her back again. The effect was beneficial, and she became a rational

and consistent member of the church." Joseph Travis, _Autobiography_

(Nashville, 1855), pp. 71, 72.]

In some cases the withdrawal of the blacks had the full character of

secession. An example in this line had been set in Philadelphia when

some of the negroes who had been attending white churches of various

denominations were prompted by the antipathy of the whites and by the

ambition of the colored leaders to found, in 1791, an African church with

a negro minister. In the course of a few years this was divided into

congregations of the several sects. Among these the Methodists prospered

to such degree that in 1816 they launched the African Methodist Episcopal

Church, with congregations in Baltimore and other neighboring cities

included within its jurisdiction.[55] Richard Allen as its first bishop

soon entered into communication with Morris Brown and other colored

Methodists of Charleston who were aggrieved at this time by the loss of

their autonomy. In former years the several thousand colored Methodists,

who outnumbered by tenfold the whites in the congregations there, had

enjoyed a quarterly conference of their own, with the custody of their

collections and with control over the church trials of colored members; but

on the ground of abuses these privileges were cancelled in 1815. A secret

agitation then ensued which led on the one hand to the increase of the

negro Methodists by some two thousand souls, and on the other to the visit

of two of their leaders to Philadelphia where they were formally ordained

for Charleston pastorates. When affairs were thus ripened, a dispute as

to the custody of one of their burial grounds precipitated their intended

stroke in 1818. Nearly all the colored class leaders gave up their papers

simultaneously, and more than three-quarters of their six thousand

fellows withdrew their membership from the white Methodist churches. "The

galleries, hitherto crowded, were almost completely deserted," wrote a

contemporary, "and it was a vacancy that could be _felt_. The absence of

their responses and hearty songs were really felt to be a loss to those so

long accustomed to hear them.... The schismatics combined, and after

great exertion succeeded in erecting a neat church building.... Their

organization was called the African Church," and one of its ministers was

constituted bishop. Its career, however, was to be short lived, for the

city authorities promptly proceeded against them, first by arresting a

number of participants at one of their meetings but dismissing them with a

warning that their conduct was violative of a statute of 1800 prohibiting

the assemblage of slaves and free negroes for mental instruction without

the presence of white persons; next by refusing, on the grounds that both

power and willingness were lacking, a plea by the colored preachers for a

special dispensation; and finally by the seizure of all the attendants at

another of their meetings and the sentencing of the bishop and a dozen

exhorters, some to a month's imprisonment or departure from the state,

others to ten lashes or ten dollars' fine. The church nevertheless

continued in existence until 1822 when in consequence of the discovery of a

plot for insurrection among the Charleston negroes the city government had

the church building demolished. Morris Brown moved to Philadelphia, where

he afterward became bishop of the African Church, and the whole Charleston

project was ended.[56] The bulk of the blacks returned to the white

congregations, where they soon overflowed the galleries and even the

"boxes" which were assigned them at the rear on the main floors. Some of

the older negroes by special privilege then took seats forward in the main

body of the churches, and others not so esteemed followed their example in

such numbers that the whites were cramped for room. After complaints on

this score had failed for several years to bring remedy, a crisis came

in Bethel Church on a Sunday in 1833 when Dr. Capers was to preach. More

whites came than could be seated the forward-sitting negroes refused

to vacate their seats for them; and a committee of young white members

forcibly ejected these blacks At a "love-feast" shortly afterward one of

the preachers criticized the action of the committee thereby giving the

younger element of the whites great umbrage. Efforts at reconciliation

failing, nine of the young men were expelled from membership, whereupon

a hundred and fifty others followed them into a new organization which

entered affiliation with the schismatic Methodist Protestant Church.[57]

Race relations in the orthodox congregations were doubtless thereafter more

placid.

[Footnote 55: E.R. Turner, _The Negro in Pennsylvania_ (Washington, 1911),

pp. 134-136.]

[Footnote 56: Charleston _Courier_, June 9, 1818; Charleston _City

Gazette_, quoted in the _Louisiana Gazette_ (New Orleans), July 10, 1818;

J.L.E.W. Shecut, _Medical and Philosophical Essays_ (Charleston, 1819),

p. 34; C.F. Deems ed., _Annals of Southern Methodism for 1856_ (Nashville

[1857]), pp. 212-214, 232; H.M. Henry, _Police Control of the Slave in

South Carolina_, p. 142.]

[Footnote 57: C.F. Deems ed., _Annals of Southern Methodism for 1856_, pp.

215-217.]

In most of the permanent segregations the colored preachers were ordained

and their congregations instituted under the patronage of the whites.

At Savannah as early as 1802 the freedom of the slave Henry Francis was

purchased by subscription, and he was ordained by white ministers at the

African Baptist Church. After a sermon by the Reverend Jesse Peter of

Augusta, the candidate "underwent a public examination respecting his faith

in the leading doctrines of Christianity, his call to the sacred ministry

and his ideas of church government. Giving entire satisfaction on these

important points, he kneeled down, when the ordination prayer with

imposition of hands was made by Andrew Bryant The ordained ministers

present then gave the right hand of fellowship to Mr. Francis, who was

forthwith presented with a Bible and a solemn charge to faithfulness by Mr.

Holcombe."[58] The Methodists were probably not far behind the Baptists in

this policy. The Presbyterians and Episcopalians, with much smaller numbers

of negro co-religionists to care for, followed the same trend in later

decades. Thus the presbytery of Charleston provided in 1850, at a cost of

$7,700, a separate house of worship for its negro members, the congregation

to be identified officially with the Second Presbyterian Church of the

city. The building had a T shape, the transepts appropriated to the use of

white persons. The Sunday school of about 180 pupils had twenty or thirty

white men and women as its teaching staff.[59]

[Footnote 58: Henry Holcombe ed., _The Georgia Analytical Repository_ (a

Baptist magazine of Savannah, 1802), I, 20, 21. For further data concerning

Francis and other colored Baptists of his time see the _Journal of Negro

History_, I, 60-92.]

[Footnote 59: J.H. Thornwell, D.D., _The Rights and Duties of Masters: a

sermon preached at the dedication of a church erected at Charleston, S.C.

for the benefit and instruction of the colored population_ (Charleston,

1850).]

Such arrangements were not free from objection, however, as the

Episcopalians of Charleston learned about this time. To relieve the

congestion of the negro pews in St. Michael's and St. Philip's, a separate

congregation was organized with a few whites included in its membership.

While it was yet occupying temporary quarters in Temperance Hall, a mob

demolished Calvary Church which was being built for its accommodation. When

the proprietor of Temperance Hall refused the further use of his premises

the congregation dispersed. The mob's action was said to be in protest

against the doings of the "bands" or burial societies among the Calvary

negroes.[60]

[Footnote 60: _Public Proceedings relating to Calvary Church and the

Religious Instruction of Slaves_ (Charleston, 1850).]

The separate religious integration of the negroes both slave and free was

obstructed by the recurrent fear of the whites that it might be perverted

to insurrectionary purposes. Thus when at Richmond in 1823 ninety-two free

negroes petitioned the Virginia legislature on behalf of themselves and

several hundred slaves, reciting that the Baptist churches used by the

whites had not enough room to permit their attendance and asking sanction

for the creation of a "Baptist African Church," the legislature withheld

its permission. In 1841, however, this purpose was in effect accomplished

when it was found that a negro church would not be in violation of the law

provided it had a white pastor. At that time the First Baptist Church

of Richmond, having outgrown its quarters, erected a new building to

accommodate its white members and left its old one to the negroes. The

latter were thereupon organized as the African Church with a white minister

and with the choice of its deacons vested in a white committee. In 1855,

when this congregation had grown to three thousand members, the

Ebenezer church was established as an offshoot, with a similar plan of

government.[61]

[Footnote 61: J.B. Earnest, _The Religious Development of the Negro in

Virginia_ (Charlottesville, 1914), pp. 72-83. For the similar trend of

church segregation in the Northern cities see J.W. Cromwell, _The Negro in

American History_ (Washington, 1914). pp. 61-70.]

At Baltimore there were in 1835 ten colored congregations, with slave and

free membership intermingled, several of which had colored ministers;[62]

and by 1847 the number of churches had increased to thirteen or more,

ten of which were Methodist.[63] In 1860 there were two or more colored

congregations at Norfolk; at Savannah three colored churches were paying

salaries of $800 to $1000 to their colored ministers,[64] and in Atlanta

a subscription was in progress for the enlargement of the negro church

building to relieve its congestion.[65] By this time a visitor in virtually

any Southern city might have witnessed such a scene as William H. Russell

described at Montgomery:[66] "As I was walking ... I perceived a crowd

of very well-dressed negroes, men and women, in front of a plain brick

building which I was informed was their Baptist meeting-house, into which

white people rarely or never intrude. These were domestic servants, or

persons employed in stores, and their general appearance indicated much

comfort and even luxury. I doubted if they all were slaves. One of my

companions went up to a woman in a straw hat, with bright red and green

ribbon trimmings and artificial flowers, a gaudy Paisley shawl, and

a rainbow-like gown blown out over her yellow boots by a prodigious

crinoline, and asked her 'Whom do you belong to?' She replied, 'I b'long to

Massa Smith, sar.'"

[Footnote 62: _Niles' Register_, XLIX, 72.]

[Footnote 63: J.R. Brackett, _The Negro in Maryland_, p. 206.]

[Footnote 64: D.R. Hundley, _Social Relations in our Southern States_ (New

York, 1860), pp. 350, 351.]

[Footnote 65: Atlanta _Intelligencer_, July 13, 1859, editorial commending

the purpose.]

[Footnote 66: W.H. Russell, _My Diary North and South_ (Boston, 1863), p.

167.]

American Negro Slavery A Survey of the Supply, Employment and Control of Negro Labor as Determined by the Plantation Regime · 第 20 / 23 章