+Methods of Employment+
Since the English never made long journeys of exploration into the
interior, as the Spanish and French did in the earliest days of their
occupation of America, their use of Indian slaves as hunters, fishermen
and guides was relatively limited. With the forming of settlements
and the growth of institutional life this use became more prominent.
In Carolina it appears that the Indian slaves were occupied chiefly
in hunting and fishing for their masters, whereas the greater part of
the harder field work was left to the negroes[876]. The Indians were
expert hunters, and as the woods abounded in game, such a hunter “was
of great service in a plantation, and could furnish a family with more
provisions than they could consume”.[877] In New England, also, there
is occasional mention of Indian slaves used as guides.[878] It seems
probable, however, that this service was more largely confined to the
south where Indian slaves were less expensive and more easily procured
than in the north, for such an occupation offered more opportunity for
escape than any other.
In New England the Indians retained in the colonies as slaves after
the Pequot and King Philip Wars were chiefly women and children. In
the early history of Massachusetts some of the leading families in
wealth and importance unable to obtain other help, employed Indians as
cooks.[879] After the wars in question the Indian slaves were put to
the same use by both Massachusetts and Connecticut.[880]
The colonial newspapers of New England attribute much domestic ability
to the Indian slaves advertised in their columns: “An Indian woman
who is a very good cook, and can wash, iron and sew”;[881] “A likely
Indian wench about nineteen years of age fit for any business in town
or country”;[882] “An Indian woman ... fit for all manner of household
work either in town or country, can sew, wash, brew, bake, spin and
milk cows”;[883] “A lusty Carolina Indian woman fit for any daily
service”.[884] The newspapers of the middle colonies furnish a similar
record: “A young Spanish Indian woman, fit for all manner of household
business”;[885] “An Indian woman and her child ... she washes, irons
and starches very well, and is a good cook”.[886]
The agricultural system of New England was not favorable to the use
of slaves in the fields, yet there are occasional glimpses of Indian
slaves employed in agricultural pursuits. In the account book of
Lieutenant Stephen Longfellow, 1710, appears the item: “Bouston one day
to plant”. Bouston was his Indian slave.[887] It has been considered
probable, judging from the number of negro and Indian slaves in Rhode
Island, that both were an important factor in developing the stock
farming of the colony.[888] The newspaper advertisements of the day
offer some information on this point: “A Carolina Indian man fit for
any service within doors or without”;[889] “An Indian boy about sixteen
years old, fit for either sea or land service”;[890] “An Indian man ...
fit for any service”;[891] “A Survanam Indian man, twenty-five years
of age, who has been in the country thirteen years, fit for service in
either country or town, and who can mow well”.[892]
In all the southern colonies Indian slaves worked in the fields side
by side with the negroes up to the time of the Revolution.[893] The
discovery, about 1693, of rice as a profitable staple for export, made
necessary a large supply of labor in South Carolina; hence along with
the negroes so largely imported to meet the demand, the Indian slaves
worked also as the plantation system grew. In South Carolina, Governor
Moore employed some of his Indian slaves in tilling his fields.[894]
The instances of Indian slaves employed by their owners in manual
occupations are more numerous in New England than elsewhere. The
newspapers furnish instances like the following: “An Indian lad about
eighteen years old, a cooper by trade”[895] “... can do anything at
the carpenter’s trade”;[896] “An Indian lad ... he can work at the
weaver’s trade”.[897] Similar advertisements are found in the New York
papers: “An Indian man ... a good carpenter, wheelwright, cooper and
butcher”.[898]
Such instances are to be found even in the south.[899] The training of
Indian slaves to skilled labor was not generally considered politic,
however, since it interfered with the coming to the colonies of white
craftsmen who were so much desired. In 1743 or 1744, a committee in
South Carolina, appointed to consider the most effectual means of
increasing immigration to the province, included in the bill which it
originated, a clause prohibiting the bringing up of negroes and other
slaves to those mechanical trades in which white persons are usually
employed.[900]
Indian slaves were made a source of income to their owners by hiring
them out to work in the same way as negroes and indentured white
servants. The colonial laws in some instances made provision for
such use. A South Carolina law of 1712 permitted an owner to hire
out his slaves by the year or for a shorter time, and receive their
earnings.[901] The provision was repeated in acts of 1735[902] and
1740.[903] Maryland, in 1753, provided that masters of ships might hire
servants or slaves from their owners.[904] New York City, in 1731, made
provision for owners hiring out negro and Indian slaves.[905] Since the
custom was common in its application to other servile classes, one may
believe that it was followed in other colonies besides those which made
legal provision regarding it.
The use of Indian slaves in military operations was not infrequent.
In the New England wars Captain Church employed Indian captives
against the enemy, a plan which he found serviceable on several
occasions.[906] This use of Indian as well as negro slaves for military
purposes was advocated in 1666 in a narrative addressed to the Duke of
Albemarle.[907]
In the intercolonial wars both negro and Indian slaves were captured
by the French from the English army. In French records dealing with
occurrences in Canada, under date of November 11, 1747, “four negroes
and a Panis who were captured from the English during the war ...” are
mentioned.[908] Still another possible proof of the use of Indian
slaves by the English army is found in the Articles of Peace drawn up
at Niagara, July 18, 1764. They contain the following: “Article 2nd.
That any English who may be prisoners or deserters, and any negroes,
Panis, or other slaves who are British property, shall be delivered
up within a month to the commandant of Detroit, and that the Hurons
use all possible endeavors to get those who are in the hands of the
neighboring nations, engaging never to entertain any deserters,
fugitives or slaves, but should any fly to them for protection, they
are to deliver them up to the next commanding officer.”[909]
That such slaves were put to practical use in the military preparations
of the colonies, is seen in the New York City ordinances of 1693 and
1694 which provided that all persons, and all negro and Indian slaves
that were not listed, should work on the fortifications.[910] Such
a town action was not unusual. In 1638, the townsmen of Hartford,
Connecticut, voted to levy on the cattle and slaves of the townspeople
when needed for public service.[911]
South Carolina on different occasions offered inducements for slaves to
serve in the war. Some of these acts mentioned Indian slaves. In 1704,
an act was passed “for raising and enlisting such slaves as shall be
thought serviceable to this province in time of alarms”. It provided
for making a list of all negro, mulatto and Indian slaves in the
province fit for service. The masters of the slaves were to be notified
of such listing and given a chance to show cause why it should not be
done. In case the slaves were called upon for service, the master must
furnish weapons according to specifications. If the slave were maimed
or killed in the service, the owner should be compensated out of the
public treasury.[912]
To provide still further for the use of slaves in war, it was decreed
by a South Carolina act of 1719 that the captains, lieutenants, and
ensigns of the militia companies should form a list of negro, mulatto,
mustee and Indian slaves from sixteen to sixty years of age fit for
military service. Owners were given a chance to show why such slaves
should not serve. These slaves when enlisted were to be armed and
equipped by the captain of the division, or they might be armed by
their owners, the latter to be compensated for loss or damage to their
arms. A fine of £20 was fixed for neglect of any owner to send his
slave in time of alarm to the usual place of rendezvous of the various
divisions. Any officer neglecting to carry out the terms of the act was
to be fined £5. A slave serving in war was to be allowed £10 reward if,
on the testimony of a white person, he could prove that he had killed
one of the enemy in time of invasion. The owner was to be indemnified
from the public funds for a slave killed or wounded.[913]
In 1778, when Washington proposed to enlist slaves in the battalions
raised by the State of Rhode Island, the assembly voted that every able
bodied negro, mulatto or Indian man slave in the state might enlist in
either battalion to serve during the continuance of the war. Such slave
was to receive all the bounties, wages and encouragements allowed by
the Continental Congress to any soldier enlisting in the service, and
in addition was immediately to be set free.[914]
It is noticeable that in this legislation regarding the use of slaves
in war, no provision was made for their military training. Such
training would require too much time, and besides being a loss to
the owners, might prove dangerous to the colony if the slaves were
sufficiently numerous. Maryland recognized this fact and in 1715 voted
to exclude slaves from such training.[915]
Just as the Spanish and the French made diplomatic and military use
of their Indian slaves by returning them to their own tribes and
thus winning friendship and peace, so the English followed the same
practice. In 1715, in order to secure the aid of the Tuscarora, the
assembly of South Carolina voted that, for every one of these allies
killed in actual warfare by the enemy, a Tuscarora slave then in
servitude among the whites should be given them for the loss, and that
to every Tuscarora taking an Indian enemy captive, a slave of his
nation should similarly be assigned as a reward.[916]