From Interstate - Journal of International Affairs VOL. 2014/2015 NO. 1 The Concept of Property and Ownership in the Antebellum American South: Slaves, Slaveholders, Theft, Conflict and the Law
By John Wood
Interstate - Journal of International Affairs 2015, Vol. 2014/2015 No. 1 | pg. 1/3 | »
The role of personal property in our lives is one that to a very great extent we take for granted. We, in a crowded country such as the UK, all clearly understand that some things are ‘ours’, some things ‘others’ and some things ‘public’, most people in Western society have a fully developed conception of ownership and property from an early age. For slaves, condemned by law to be treated as property due to being the descendants of black Africans imported in the pre-revolutionary period,1 and their white masters, as those who owned other human beings as property for agricultural and domestic labour, this conception of ownership must have been more complex. For the master, was ownership of the slave the same to him as the ownership of livestock to a farmer today, or did the rational status of the slave make it something else? For the slave, did his or her status as chattel property change his or her conceptions of ownership? Following current trends in historiography, can, for the slave, the act of claiming ownership or property be seen as a customary matter evolved over time between him and the master, or was it an act of rebellion? The evidence suggests that both these ideas were true at the same time.
This project seeks to explore the concept of property for slaves and slaveholders in the antebellum period (1783-1860), through a comparison of the legal, customary and normative concepts of ownership of these groups to synthesise what property and ownership actually meant for the people of the region in this period. Property can be defined in the physical sense, but also has a metaphysical component. In this essay, some of the conflicting conceptions of property and ownership for the various groups of the Old South can be seen, and they are very different to our own.
In the first section, the study of philosophy of property and ownership as relating to slavery and the South will be explored to try and find a ‘platonic ideal’ of property rights and law in the South. In the second section, the perception of the slaves towards property will be investigated using, primarily, the testimonies of the Federal Writers Project, a part of the Roosevelt Administration’s efforts to provide government sponsored work to ameliorate the Depression. The third section investigates the thoughts of the slaveholder class on ownership, most particularly through the ample source material provided by slaveholder’s diaries and the edited collection Advice Among Masters, as they are in some ways the link between the radically different conceptions of property of the legal and customary spheres.
The philosophical justification of the ideas of ownership and property within the Constitution and laws of the United States relies to a great extent on the works of the philosopher John Locke. It was in the formulation of the Constitution of the United States by Thomas Jefferson that ideas, proposed in Locke’s Two Treaties of Government, were first tested, and from this the basis of the conception of property and ownership in the United States emerge. James Huston characterises the importance of the concept of property at the time of the Revolution as ‘at times appearing to be a monomania.’2 As an overview of Locke’s idea of the role of property and ownership, he suggests in the Second Treatise that things that exist ‘in the state of nature’ (for our purpose the undeveloped land of the continental US) become property through the work put into them and so the value added to them. This can either take the form of our personal labours3 or through the value we place upon items through investing our money in them.4
It is in the common protection of this property, according to Locke, that a society forms a government, and when that government no longer protects property those who are under it have the right and duty to overthrow and replace it with one that will.5 Liberty and property were thus linked in the nascent political class of the United States from the outset.6 For an examination of this idea in the wider context of 19th century American history, the ideas both of how Lockean property rights impacted US expansionism and its attitude towards other races, both Walter La Feber’s The American Age, Volume one, and Michael Hunt’s Ideology and US Foreign Policy are excellent starting points.
The founding fathers, particularly Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, were some of the first to consider the philosophical implication of slavery and property within the new nation, and also suffer discomfort with the results. They could not reconcile the legitimacy of slave ownership with Locke’s theory of ownership. Samuel Adams, the cousin of the second president and revolutionary polemicist sums up the ambiguity well:
Men therefore, in society having property, they have such a right to the goods, which by the law of the community are theirs, that no body [sic] hath the right to take any part of their substance from them without their consent.7
Patrick Henry also commented on the relation of property rights with regard to slavery:
‘What is the inference when you enumerate the rights which you are to enjoy? That those not enumerated are relinquished? … To talk of it as a thing subsequent, not as one of your inalienable rights, is leaving it up to the casual opinion of the Congress… [to] … liberate every one of your slaves, if they please: and this may be done by men with no common interest with you… …The majority of the congress is in the north and the Slaves to the South. In this situation I see great jeopardy’.8
In this it can be seen that from the beginning it was understood that there was a tension between the theory of ownership and the custom that made the law. Locke had posed that by his own labour a man was made, and the customs of society could not take what was his except by his consent. Slaves were not considered their own property, and they certainly had not been given, or could be given, the right to decide their status.9 The law they had, rather than their ideal conception, was that descended though English common law, and blended through the individual states legal systems.10 The de facto definition was a circular one; property was an object of personal possession that the law protected, yet possession was secured by the right to property.11 It was Samuel Adams’ ‘society’ rather than Lockean ‘natural right’ which governed the concept of property.
Jefferson was intellectually an abolitionist; his Notes on the State of Virginia speak for emancipation.12 But it would seem that over time his view on the ownership of slaves, especially after becoming President, became one of grudging acceptance.13,14 He believed that since slavery - though morally wrong was a legacy of English rule,15 the greater evil was the ‘tyranny of the majority’ over the rights of the slaveholding minority in the South,16 thus rationalising the status quo and placing societal norms once again at the centre of the debate over ownership of human beings. Hamilton also had a deep concern as to the nature of slavery as valid property; in The Farmer Refuted,17 using the Bible and the Declaration of Independence as his keystones for an argument that the principle of liberty and ‘natural law’ were ‘a gift of the beneficent creator to the whole human race… conformable to the constitution of man’.18 From this we can infer that Hamilton placed human rights above those of property rights in cases where they conflict, as the first conception of rights was universal, the second derived from society.19 Or to phrase it another way, Lockean protection of the self as a property right was meaningless if it could not be universalised.
This was where the debate on the nature of slaves as property rested until the 1850s. At this time, the differing application of the Lockean nature of property was once again taken up as a point of issue in the pro-slavery versus abolitionist debate. At this point the philosophical nature of slave ownership was refined, and given its clearest philosophical form by the former professor of Law at the University of South Carolina, Francis Lieber, in 1857:
‘Properly speaking… the slave himself is not property but his labour is. Property involves the idea of a free disposal over the thing owned… we possess no such right over the slave and have never claimed it. We own the labour of the slave and this cannot be done without keeping the person performing the labour, thus owned, in bondage’.20
From this perspective the slave as property had a duty of labour and obedience to his master, as the master is the protector of the slave and provides him with a comfortable subsistence. Thus a Hobbesian approach is used to bypass the perennial problem of Locke’s idea of the self as property, and this also is the explicit formulation of the southern paternalist paradigm.21
The role of the law in slavery was in some ways as rarefied as the concept of property within the philosophical sphere. Slaveholding elites did not pass slave codes to control their own slaves, whom; of course, they already held power over and could practice the ideal methods to keep in line. Instead, slaveholding elites passed laws to ensure compliance on their neighbour’s slaves, the dangerous alien faces of the next plantation. The various slave codes of the States which emerged through the colonial period provided that the rights of the slave under the law did not extend to ownership or inheritance of any property,22 save that which was given by their master to them:
‘Our slaves can do nothing in their own right ; can hold no property ; can neither buy, sell, barter, or dispose of any thing[sic], without express permission from the master or overseer ; so that every thing [sic] that they can possess or do is, in legal contemplation, on the authority of the master’.23 (Virginia, Civil Code Article 1405).
Or that of the Louisiana Civil Code (article 135):
A slave is in absolute bondage; he has no civil right, and can hold no property, except at the will and pleasure of his master; and his master is his guardian and protector; and all his rights and acquisitions and services are in the hands of his master. A slave is a rational being, endowed with volition and understanding like the rest of mankind, and whatever he lawfully acquires, and gains possession of, by finding, or otherwise, is the acquirement and possession of the master.24
An elaborative example of this can be seen in a judgement when the State of Louisiana judged that any property found by the slave (in this case a small sum of money), but not known to the master, which was then taken from the slave by a third (free, white) party counted as theft from that slave’s master.25
When taken to its extreme, this situation of denial of any the extremity of a slave’s lack of property under the law seems radically different from any modern perceptions. Under the Louisiana Civil Code a slave was not considered to ‘possess their own blood’, the reasoning being that should one of their relatives (through the matrilineal line as this precluded the legal notion of fatherhood) ever be free and then accumulate any goods or wealth; then there was the possibility should they die intestate, that the slave could become the rightful heir.26 From this, we can draw a key point of this legal position on slavery. If a slave is not in possession of their ‘blood’, as the code puts it, then it becomes very hard to claim that there is any recognition of the slave as a social being. Thus under civil law the slave becomes an atomised being of labour, any family is regarded only as a matter of pedigree.
The great issues for the legislators working in the South were how to reconcile the fact that the slave, although capable of adding value to property, should not own it, and for the slave owners to reconcile the legal framework with the everyday normative and customary situations they faced. It would seem that under the law the nature of the slave as property was actually contextual, as in certain, usually negative, conditions the slave would transcend their role as property and once again be seen as a person.27 For the slave the Lockean concept of labour became one defined by its negation. A slave could not own a horse, but by his labour he could steal one. If the slave was caught he would be tried as a person rather than property (should they not be subjected to summary justice). The seemingly monolithic prohibitions on the slaves’ rights break down at this point. Within the sphere of civil law the slave is property, without possession of legal volition or reason, whilst for the criminal sphere the slave is a person, though his rights and responsibilities are subsumed to those of the master. This dual nature can be seen in relation to our question through the case of The Parish of St. Landry v. George (a slave). In this case of 1831, George had been found guilty of taking various small items from several local whites, but in punishment he was to be given ’39 lashes, and well given’, as well as wearing an ‘iron collar of 5lbs weight, with three prongs put around the neck,’ for one year. The master in addition to this personal culpability of the slave had to pay reparations and damages, as well as court costs.28Continued on Next Page »
Books
Ashworth, J., Slavery, capitalism and politics in the Antebellum South, Volume One, (CUP, 1995, Cambridge)
Davis, C. T., & Gates, H. L., The Slave’s Narrative, (OUP, 1985, Oxford)
Elkins, S. M., Slavery 3rd Edition (Chicago UP, Chicago, 1976)
Fogel, R. W., & Engerman, S. L., Time on the Cross: The economics of American Negro Slavery, (Wildwood House, 1974, London)
Genovese, E. D., The political economy of Slavery: Studies in the economy and society of the Slave south, 2nd Edition, (Wesleyan University Press, 1989)
Gilmore, T. (Ed.), Revisiting Blassingame’s The Slave community: the scholars respond, (Greenwood, 1978, London)
Gross, A. J., Double Character: Slavery and mastery in the Antebellum Courtroom, (Princeton UP, 2000, Oxford)
Halpern, R. & De Largo, E., (Editors), Slavery and Emancipation, (Blackwell, Oxford, 2002)
Harris, J. W. Editor, Society and Culture in the Slave South, (Routledge, London, 1992)
Huston, J. L., Calculating the Value of the Union: Slavery, Property rights, and the economic causes of the Civil war, (North Carolina UP, 2003, London)
Kolchin, P., American Slavery, (Penguin, London 1993)
Kolchin, P., Unfree Labour: American Slavery and Russian Serfdom, (Belknapp, London, 1987)
Morris, T. D., Southern Slavery and the Law 1619-1860, (North Carolina UP, 1996, London)
Parish, P. J., Slavery: History and Historians, (Harper & Row, New York, 1989)
Wahl, J. B., The Bondsman’s Burden: An economic analysis of the Common Law of Southern Slavery, (CUP, 1998, Cambridge)
Articles
Blassingame, J. W., ‘Using the Testimony of Ex-slaves: Approaches and Problems’, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 473-493.
Chan, M. D., ‘Alexander Hamilton on Slavery’, The Review of Politics, Vol. 66, No. 2, pp. 207-231
Crowther, E. R., ‘Holy Honour: sacred and secular in the Old South’, Journal of Southern History, Vol. 58, No. 4, pp.619-636
Flanigan, D. J., ‘Criminal procedure in Slave trials in the Antebellum South’, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 537-564
Forret, J., ‘Slaves, poor whites and the Underground economy of the rural Carolinas’, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 70, No. 4, pp. 783-824
Foster, G. M., ‘Guilt over Slavery: a historiographical analysis’, The Journal of Sothern History, Vol. 56, No.4, pp. 665-694
Franklin, J. H., ‘Slaves virtually free in Ante-bellum North Carolina’, The Journal of Negro History, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 284-310
Gorman, R. M., ‘Blazing the way: the WPA Library service demonstration Project in South Carolina’ Libraries and Culture, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 427- 455.
Jefferson, T. and Magnis, N. E., ‘Thomas Jefferson and Slavery: An analysis of His racist thinking as revealed by his writings and behaviour’, Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 491-509
Lichtenstein, A., ‘’That disposition to theft, with which they have been branded’: Moral economy, Slave management and the law’, Journal of Social History, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 413-440
Loewenburg, R. J., ‘John Locke and the antebellum defence of Slavery’, Political Theory, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 266-291
Lyman, J. L., ‘Jefferson and Negro slavery’, The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 10-27
Morgan, P. D., ‘The ownership of Property by Slaves in the Mid –Nineteenth-century Low country’, The Journal of Sothern History, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 399-420
Palmer, V. V., ‘The customs of Slavery: The war without arms’, The American Journal of Legal History, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 177-218
Rosenstone, R. A., ‘The Federal (Mostly Non-) Writers Project: A review of A study in Government Patronage of the Arts by Monty Penkower’, American History, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 400-404.
Schwartz, P. J., ‘Jefferson and the Wolf: The sage of Monticello Confronts the Law of slavery’, OAH Magazine of History, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 18-22
Schweninger, L., ‘Slave independence in South Carolina, 1780-1865’, The South Carolina Historical Magazine, Vol. 93, No. 2, pp. 101-125
Soapes, T. F., ‘The Federal Writers Project Slave Interviews: Useful Data or misleading Source?’, The Oral History Review, Vol. 5, pp. 33-38
Thompson, J. C., ‘Towards a more humane oppression: Florida’s slave codes, 1821-1861’, The Florida Historical Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 3, pp. 324-338
Van Woodward, C., ‘History from Slave Sources’, The American Historical Review, Vol. 79, No. 2, pp. 470 – 481
Yetman, N. R., ‘Ex-Slave interviews and the Historiography of Slavery’, American Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 181-210.
Primary Sources
Blassingame, J. W., Slave Testimony: Two centuries of letters, speeches, interviews and autobiographies, (Louisiana State UP, 1977, Baton Rouge)
Breeden, J. O. (Ed.), Advice among Masters: the ideal in Slave management in the Old South, (Greenwood Press, 1980, London)
De Saussure, N. B., Old Plantation Days: Being recollections of Southern Life before the war, (Duffield & Co. 1909, New York)
Douglass, F., Narrative of the Life of Fredrick Douglass, an American Slave, written by himself, (American Anti-Slavery Office, 1847, Boston)
Goodell, W., The American Slave Code in theory and Practice: Its distinctive features shown by its Statutes, Judicial decisions and illustrative facts, (The American Anti-Slavery Society, 1858, New York)
Hammond, J. H. & Bleser, C. (Ed.), Secret and Sacred: The Diaries of James Henry Hammond, A Southern Slaveholder, (OUP, 1988, Oxford)
Jefferson, T., Notes on the state of Virginia with an Appendix, Third American Edition, (Furman and Loudon, 1801, New York)
Kembal, F. A., Journal of a residence on a Georgia Plantation in 1838-1839, (Harper & Bros., 1863, New York)
Locke, J. Second Treatise of Government (London, first published 1690)
Morgan, K., Slavery in America, a Reader and Guide, (Edinburgh UP, 2005, Edinburgh)
Parsons, C. G., An insider view of Slavery: or a tour amongst the planters, (John P. Jewett & Co., 1855, Boston)
Rose, W. L. (Ed.), A Documentary History of Slavery in North America, (OUP, 1976, Oxford)
Stroud, G. M., A sketch of the laws relating to Slavery in the several States of the United States of America, (Kimber and Sharpless, Philadelphia, 1827)
Wheeler, J. D., A practical treatise on the laws of Slavery: being a compilation of all decisions made on that subject in the various courts of the United States and the State Courts, (Benjamin Levy, New Orleans, 1837)
Slave testimonies available from http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/snhtml/snhome.html The Library of Congress’ collection of the former Slave’s narratives collected from 1936-8, sorted by State and volume with relevant slave biographical information (age at time of interview and place of residence at time of interview, if known).
Georgia Narratives, Vol. IV, Part 1
Rev. W.B. Allen, 78, Columbus
Rachel Adams, 78, Putman Co.
Celestia Avery, 75, Troupe Co.
Georgia Baker, 87, Crawfordville
Jasper Battle, 80, Crawfordville
Mississippi Narratives, Vol. IX
Gus Clark, 85
Dora Frank, 81, Jackson
Pet Franks, 92, Monroe Co.
Prince Johnson, ‘at least 86’, Clarksdale
Clare Young, 89, Monroe Co.
Virginia Narratives, Vol. XVII
Charles Crawley, ‘More than 80’, Petersburg
Candis Goodwin, 80, Cape Charles
Mariah Hines, 102, Norfolk
Simon Stokes, 100, Gloucester Co.
Richard Slaughter, 87, Hampton Roads.
North Carolina Narratives, Vol. XI, Part 1
Cornelia Andrews, 87, Smithfield
Charity Austin, 83, Raleigh
John Bectom, 74, Fayetteville
Fanny Cannady, 79, Durham Co.
Harriet Ann Davies, 80, Raleigh
Rev. Squire Dowd, 82, Raleigh
Frank Freeman, 76, Raleigh
Sarah Gudger, 121 (claimed but not proven to have been born before 1820), Asheville
Hector Hamilton, 90
Essex Henry, 83, Wake Co.
Internet Sources
Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy - Locke’s political theory http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/#Pro
A racial demographic profile of the United states in 1860 http://www.civilwarhome.com/population1860.htm
Historical records of the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama, rulings upon manumission http://www.lib.auburn.edu/archive/aghy/manumission/creswell.htm
Endnotes
- Or more rarely Black African and Native American, as the attempted enslavement of the Native American s in the 17th and 18th centuries had been largely unsuccessful.
- Huston, J. L., Calculating the Value of the Union: Slavery, Property rights, and the economic causes of the Civil war, (North Carolina UP, 2003, London), p. 7
- Seen as a philosophical justification for the Westward Expansion throughout the nineteenth century, The Native Americans were not using the land (in the traditional conception of the whites) so it could be claimed by the labour of the settlers.
- In that by placing a subjective value upon what was there, but not previously valued, they have been invested with the product of our labour.
- The above discourse is a summary of paragraphs 27-43 of Locke, J. Second Treatise of Government (London, first published 1690), with criticism from the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/#Pro
- The discipline of legal history has not been in vogue for much of the twentieth century due to the decline of the statist paradigm after the First World War, and before this time there was little interest in the legacy of slavery, but there has been some resurgence in recent years, see for example Palmer, V. V., ‘The customs of Slavery: The war without arms’, The American Journal of Legal History, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 177-218, or Flanigan, D. J., ‘Criminal procedure in Slave trials in the Antebellum South’, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 537-56. Much of the contemporary discussion of the role Locke played in the pro and anti-slavery debates such as Loewenburg, R. J., ‘John Locke and the antebellum defence of Slavery’, Political Theory, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 266-291, presupposes prior detailed knowledge of Locke, so for the benefit of the historian it is elaborated here.
- Adams, S., Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. 2:299, quoted in Huston, Calculating the Value of the Union, p. 12
- Patrick Henry, History of the Virginia Federative convention, quoted in Lyman, J. L., ‘Jefferson and Negro slavery’, The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 13-14
- This problem was given its most explicit form on the eve of the Civil War. In The executors of the Creswell Estate vs. Walker, (1861) It was judged that a slave given the option of choosing his legal master upon the death of his previous one, or choosing manumission was judged legally incapable on grounds of capacity to choose his own freedom over slavery.
- See Gross, A. J., Double Character: Slavery and mastery in the Antebellum Courtroom, (Princeton UP, 2000, Oxford), introduction, for the different evolutions of the slave as a person and the slave as property through the criminal and civil courts respectively.
- Huston, Calculating the Value of the Union, p. 13
- Jefferson, T., Notes on the state of Virginia with an Appendix, Third American Edition, (Furman and Loudon, 1801, New York), pp. 125 – 133, exemplars in this text of his thought before his term as President include describing Slavery as ‘this Blot upon our country’, and ending the passage with ‘[may] the minds of our citizens be ripening for a complete emancipation of human nature’ (p. 133).
- Thomas Jefferson’s legacy with respect to slavery has been debated at length throughout the twentieth century, and this will probably continue. From the founding of the NAACP to the present there has been a conflict over the traditional hagiography of the founding fathers when their status was combined with that of slaveholder. See for example Lyman, J. L., ‘Jefferson and Negro slavery’, The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 10-27, or Jefferson, T. and Magnis, N. E., ‘Thomas Jefferson and Slavery: An analysis of His racist thinking as revealed by his writings and behaviour’, Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 491-509 and Schwartz, P. J., ‘Jefferson and the Wolf: The sage of Monticello Confronts the Law of slavery’, OAH Magazine of History, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 18-22, for good examples of the ‘anti’ and ‘pro’ Jefferson camps.
- This may be due to the contradictions of his political theory in that he was certainly a racist, thinking that white and black people may not have shared monogenesis, and unable to reconcile the expansion in state power necessary for the dismantling of the slave system, with his fundamental views of the ‘yeoman’ state. Ashworth, J., Slavery, capitalism and politics in the Antebellum South, Volume One, (CUP, 1995, Cambridge), pp. 37-40
- Jefferson speaking of George III:-
‘Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this exorable commerce.’
Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Federal Edition, Vol. 2, pp. 210-212, quoted in Lyman, ‘Jefferson and Negro slavery’, p. 17
- In Jefferson’s second inaugural address on his pervious opposition to slavery:-
‘All too well bear in mind that this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and their violation be oppressive’.
Lyman, J. L., ‘Jefferson and Negro slavery’, p. 18
- Alexander Hamilton, ‘The Farmer Refuted’ in The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. 1 pages 88-134
- Alexander Hamilton, ‘The Farmer Refuted’ quoted in Chan, M. D., ‘Alexander Hamilton on Slavery’, The Review of Politics, Vol. 66, No. 2, p. 215
- Ibid. p. 219
- Morris, T. D., Southern Slavery and the Law 1619-1860, (North Carolina UP, 1996, London)
- Within the political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan, writing 50 years before Locke, the dangers of the ‘state of nature’ mean that in exchange for the preservation of one’s life, one must be willing to utterly sacrifice one’s freedom to the terms of the protector, as it is the only solution to the constant risk of death.
- With the historical exception of the States of Massachusetts and Connecticut, but in the antebellum period either slavery had been abolished (the former) or was rare as to be effectively unnoticed (the later). Wheeler, J. D., A practical treatise on the laws of Slavery: being a compilation of all decisions made on that subject in the various courts of the United States and the State Courts, (Benjamin Levy, New Orleans, 1837), p. 6
- Ibid., p. 7
- Ibid.
- Ibid. Also mentioned in Stroud, G. M., A sketch of the laws relating to Slavery in the several States of the United States of America, (Kimber and Sharpless, Philadelphia, 1827), p. 237
- Ibid, p. 238.
- ‘The Slave , who is but a ‘chattel’ on all other occasions, with not one solitary attribute of personality accorded to him becomes ‘a person’ whenever he is to be punished! He is the only being in the universe to whom is denied all self-direction and free agency, but who is, nevertheless, held responsible for his conduct… he is under the control of law, though unprotected by law and can know law only as an enemy, and not as a friend.’[italics in original] Goodell, W., The American Slave Code in theory and Practice: Its distinctive features shown by its Statutes, Judicial decisions and illustrative facts, (The American Anti-Slavery Society, 1858, New York), p. 125
- Phillips, U. B., The revised Statutes of Louisiana, (New Orleans, 1856), pp.51, Parish of St. Landry v. George (a slave), quoted in Morris, T. D., Southern Slavery and the Law 1619-1860, (North Carolina UP, 1996, London), pp. 226-7
- Many of the original titles, often cut down in newer editions to conform to modern style include a sub title similar to ‘Written from a statement of facts made by himself’ or ‘Written by a friend, as recounted to him by Brother [insert name here]’. Davis, C. T., & Gates, H. L., The Slave’s Narrative, (OUP, 1985, Oxford), p. 152
- James Olney in ‘’I was born’: Slave narratives, Their status as autobiography and literature’ in Davis, C. T., & Gates, H. L., The Slave’s Narrative, (OUP, 1985, Oxford),pp. 148-175, describes an emergence from the 1830s of a standard template that these autobiographical accounts were almost expected to obey, ranging from the teleological nature of the incidents which memory emphasises lead to the slave’s escape, to the very formatting of the text and supporting sources throughout the work, suggesting this was an publishing industry sector of the times equivalent to the formulaic cowboy novels of the early 20th century, or the noir detective novels of the 40s and 50s. This does not however mean that what is included is not true, as noted by Blassingame in Slave Testimony very few of these narratives were challenged by the Southern white community, introduction, pp. xxiii-xxvii
- The key points of paternalism are the inherent superiority of the whites to blacks, due to their ‘childlike’ nature, which he describes as ‘Samboism’, this gave the whites a ‘duty of care and education’ towards their slaves, and so the slaves the responsibility to work for their masters as a reward for this. See Elkins, Slavery, Chapters 3 and 4.
- Elkins, S. M., Slavery 3rd Edition., (Chicago UP, Chicago, 1976), See the footnotes between pp. 14-18 for the discussion of the UB Phillips paternalistic paradigm (as described in his book American Negro Slavery, published 1918) being the dominant one for the whole of the period from 1920 and not ‘seriously challenged’ until at least 1944, with the release of Hofstadter, R., ‘U B Phillips and the Plantation Legend’, Journal of Negro History, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 109-24, thus dominating the working framework of the FWP writers. For a flavour of American Negro Slavery, ‘In the actual regime severity was clearly the exception, and kindliness the rule’, p. 306
- Yetman, N. R., ‘Ex-Slave interviews and the Historiography of Slavery’, American Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2, p. 188
- Shown throughout the narratives in that there are a great many occasions when it is said that only slaves on other plantations were beaten or whipped, and there is hardly ever a personal tale of stealing from the master, despite reports of it happening being common in general.
- Blassingame, J. W., ‘Using the Testimony of Ex-slaves: Approaches and Problems’, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 473-493, and also serving as the lynchpin of the discussion in Gilmore, T., Revisiting Blassingame’s The Slave community: the scholars respond, (Greenwood, 1978, London)
- Between 1982-8 three important articles were published stressing the importance of contextualising slave resistance within the wider southern community including Kolchin, P., ‘Re-evaluating the Antebellum slave community: a comparative perspective’, Journal of American History, Vol. 70, and Shore, L., ‘The poverty of tragedy in American historical writing’, South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 85.
- Gorman, R. M., ‘Blazing the way: the WPA Library service demonstration Project in South Carolina’ Libraries and Culture, Vol. 32, No. 4, p. 428. This was due to the effects of the depression being more severe on agriculture than many other sectors of the economy.
- See the narrative of Clare Young, 89, Monroe Co. Mississippi Narratives for an archetypal example of this.
‘What does I think about slavery? I tells you I wish it was back. Us was a lot better off in them days dan we is now. If’un Yankees had lef’ us ‘lone we’d be a lot happier. We wouldn’t be on ‘leif [poor relief] en’ old age pension these last years. An’ Jennie May I b’leive… … woulda been the Missus’ smartest gal and stayed at the big house lak I did.’
- Kolchin, P., American Slavery, (Penguin, London 1993), p. 141, As an example within the narratives see Harriet Ann Davies, ‘I was nothing but a child, but I know, and remember, I was treated kindly’ (though she stresses she was a mulatto so is possibly somewhat atypical), or Frank Freeman ‘[Master] would not let his slave boys work until they were 13’, this however can be countered by Sarah Gudger ‘If’n children too young to ho’ they be pullin’ weeds[sic]’
- Fogel, R. W., & Engerman, S. L., Time on the Cross: The economics of American Negro Slavery, (Wildwood House, 1974, London), pp. 125-6, though all of the figures of Fogel et al must be treated with some scepticism, see Evans, R. J., In defence of History, chapter 2 where Time on the Cross is used as the case study for controversial historical techniques.
- Just as an overview of one of the narrative volumes (South Carolina, part 2), out of 30 randomly selected narratives, 5 of the slaves were owned by something other than a professional planter, with a blacksmith, two doctors and two clergymen, which is statistically different from the population at large, where 7 in every 8 slaves where held on larger plantations (20+ slaves), whilst our ratio is 1 to 6 rather than 1 to 8. Kolchin, P., American Slavery, p. 99-101
- There are many other examples of this throughout the various narratives, such as in Mariah Hines, describing clothing distribution, John Bectom describing the yearly shoe allowance, and Prince Johnson, who noted that all food was prepared communally except on Sundays.
- Both Celestia Avery and Della Briscoe speak of autumn ‘quilting’ where by all the female slaves would travel from house to house, at each one ensuring that the family had enough warm clothes and blankets for the winter by helping finish any the mistress had not already before winter came, thus to some extent creating a sense of communal ownership, as all families contributed to the security of the others.
- Kolchin, P., Unfree Labour: American Slavery and Russian Serfdom, (Belknapp, London, 1987), p. 210
- Rev. Squire Dowd stole honey from the master whilst tasked as a house boy, Charity Austen stole an egg each day when she was in charge of looking after hens, John Bectom mentions ‘Sometimes slaves would steal the marster’s chickens and hogs and got to another plantation to have them cooked.’ Candis Goodwin volunteered as a teen to watch the master’s children just so she could get ‘jam un’ biscuits … Ef’n dey don’t give me none I jes’ teks some’. Rosa Barnwell, upon gaining a new master harsher than the old, ‘we was never allowed a piece of meat, unless sometime [we] should take a pig on [our] own account’, Blassingame, Slave Testimony, p. 698.
- Douglass, F., Narrative of the Life of Fredrick Douglass, an American Slave, written by himself, (American Anti-Slavery Office, 1847, Boston), p. 16
- Other examples in the narrative include Dora Franks who would steal on behalf of a slave who ran away during the war and only came out upon emancipation. For more on slave theft as a social study see Lichtenstein, A., ‘’That disposition to theft, with which they have been branded’: Moral economy, Slave management and the law’, Journal of Social History, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 413-440, who, following Genovese’s Marxist perspective thinks that the role of slave theft was an effort by the slave to redefine the boundaries of paternalism.
- Douglass, Narrative of the life of Fredrick Douglass, p. 52
- Fredrick Douglass in a later version of his autobiography (1855 rather than 1847 above), on the same section of slave theft. Quoted in Morgan, K., Slavery in America: A Reader and Guide, (Edinburgh UP, 2005, Edinburgh). Kolchin suggests that this is an issue with the contemporary biographies which distorts their legacy, in that so many of the accounts were written by runaways from slave elites, such as Douglass, who had suffered sudden loss in status, and that this was also what gave them the literacy and articulation to record their experience, for comments on the nature of the morality of necessity would certainly be unusual for a field hand. Kolchin, P., Unfree Labour: American Slavery and Russian Serfdom, (Belknapp, London, 1987), p. 318
- Forret, J., ‘Slaves, poor whites and the Underground economy of the rural Carolinas’, The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 70, No. 4, pp. 783-824
- Articles here include Philip D. Morgan, "Work and Culture: The Task System and the World of Low country Blacks, 1700 to 1880," William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 3, Betty Wood, '"White Society' and the 'Informal' Slave Economies of Low country Georgia, c. 1763-1830," Slavery and Abolition, Vol. 11, and Lawrence T. McDonnell, "Money Knows No Master: Market Relations and the American Slave Community," in Winfred B. Moore Jr., Joseph F. Tripp, and Lyon G. Tyler Jr., eds., Developing Dixie: Modernization in a Traditional Society (Westport, Conn., 1988)
- Those narratives given by Gus Clark, 85, Pet Franks, 92, Monroe Co., Prince Johnson, ‘at least 86’, Clarksdale, and Clare Young, 89, Monroe Co.
- These were Rev. W. B. Allen, Georgia Baker and Celestia Avery, though Rev. Allen’s description is of his father, who was a blacksmith and so a much more valuable slave, usually given some leeway compared to normal slave convention. See Harris, J. W. Editor, Society and Culture in the Slave South, (Routledge, London, 1992), pp. 83 which shows that Blacksmiths were sold with between a 50-60% premium compared to the average labourer.
- Charles Crawley implies this when he says:-
‘Poor white folks like slaves had to get a pass … to sell anything an’ go places or do an’thin’ … dey had to go to sum Big white man like Colonel Allen [his master]’
Also James L. Bradley, of Arkansas, ‘I used to sleep three or four hours, then awake and work for myself the rest of the night... I used to go out with the hoe and plant little patches of corn… and tobacco. With my first money I bought a pig’. Blassingame, J. W., Slave Testimony: Two centuries of letters, speeches, interviews and autobiographies, (Louisiana State UP, 1977, Baton Rouge), p. 688
- When comparing the two sections the Upper South has a white to slave ratio of 4:1 (Virginia) and at least 2:1 (North Carolina), whereas the Deep South has more generally a ratio of 1.1:1 (Alabama, Georgia or Florida) or even 1:1.4 (South Carolina or Mississippi). Where the population of slaves equals or exceeds the number of whites the policing of their activity would inevitably become harder, so it may be that the slaveholders preferred an open market for trade by the slaves that could be regulated to a black market which is mentioned elsewhere and by definition could not be controlled by the slaveholder class. See http://www.civilwarhome.com/population1860.htm
- Palmer, V. V., ‘The customs of Slavery: The war without arms’, The American Journal of Legal History, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 177-218
- De Saussure, N. B., Old Plantation Days: Being recollections of Southern Life before the war, (Duffield & Co. 1909, New York), pp. 78-9
- Fitzhugh, G., Cannibals All!, quoted in Halpern, R. & De Largo, E., (Editors), Slavery and Emancipation, (Blackwell, Oxford, 2002), pp. 152 There were many other proponents of a racial difference as the basis of justified paternalism such as Josiah Nott as a proponent of polygenesis and Samuel Cartwright and his ideas of mental illness among slaves, most famously Drapetomania. All of these authors tried to portray a scientific need for the enslavement of blacks based on racial inferiority.
- See Foster, G. M., ‘Guilt over Slavery: a historiographical analysis’, The Journal of Sothern History, Vol. 56, No.4, pp. 665-694
- Chaplin, T. B., Manuscript Diary entry of May 3rd 1845, South Carolina Historical Association, quoted in Rose, W. L. (Ed.), A Documentary History of Slavery in North America, (OUP, 1976, Oxford), pp. 374. For context the sale was of 8 young males and 2 females, in 1845 worth around $5000 (calculated from values given by Hammond), quite a debt for living expenses at the time. This is also the man who in an undated entry from after the Civil War said, ‘It was a trying time then. But could I or anyone foreseen [sic] how things would be in 19 years when every Negro was set free by force of war… In truth the Negros did not care about us as much as us about them’.
- Diary entries of 31/3/1841 and 3/4/1841 respectively, quoted in Hammond, J. H. & Bleser, C. (Ed.), Secret and Sacred: The Diaries of James Henry Hammond, A Southern Slaveholder, (OUP, 1988, Oxford), pp. 49-52. Though it must also be noted that Hammond was a cold man when reading through his diaries and from a sense of superiority disliked not only ‘local society’ but his brother, Washington political society, doctors, horse racing and many other people and topics.
- Ibid, p. 102
- Genovese, E. D., The political economy of Slavery: Studies in the economy and society of the Slave south, 2nd Edition, (Wesleyan University Press, 1989), Chapter 1
- Parsons, C. G., An insider view of Slavery: or a tour amongst the planters, (John P. Jewett & Co., 1855, Boston), p. 125
- There are however some historians who stress that throughout the antebellum period the notion of paternalism was in fact strengthening rather than a paper tiger. Crowther, E. R., ‘Holy Honour: sacred and secular in the Old South’, Journal of Southern History, Vol. 58, No. 4, pp.628-31 suggests that the internal reforming tendencies of religion were helping the condition of the slaves and strengthening paternalism in a reaction to criticism from Northern churches.
- See Breeden, J. O. (Ed.), Advice among Masters: the ideal in Slave management in the Old South, (Greenwood Press, 1980, London), pp. 114-144
- Ibid. Elaborative quotes from this sometimes heated debate include ‘Every planter knows there are some slaves who will barter an individual food allowance away for a little liquor or tobacco… and steal for their improvidence’, pp. 91. From the other side of the argument, ‘Many planters argue that negroes would be happier if their food was cooked for them. [Personal experience shows] the reverse… The simplicity of the negroes’ diet, the very quiet, happy lazy way he has of enjoying his victuals has much to do with his admirable digestion and health’, p. 107.
- Ibid. Such arguments by a planter that it was kinder to deny their slaves all opportunities for commerce as, ‘the negroes are prevented from acquiring habits of trading in farm produce, which invariably leads to stealing, followed by whipping, trouble to the master and a [greater] discontent on the part of the slave,’ p. 271. Another example stresses;-
‘The system of encouraging slaves to the performance of reasonable labour by giving them crops… is one fraught with evil; nothing but evil, and that continually… it opens a strong temptation to theft… [makes] him vain and arrogant… independent that he will at last come to exhibit it at home… money is power’, pp. 273-4
- Ibid. ‘No negro with a full stocked poultry house, a crop advancing, or a few tubs unsold [referring to the craft of cooperage] will ever run away’, p. 266.
- Ibid, ‘A human being, the horizon of whose life is never illuminated by the cheerful beams of hope, is devoid of any inducements to praiseworthy actions… and must be driven by fear of punishment… such a one… will be fit only to be constantly under the eye of the overseer’, p.261
Save Citation » (Works with EndNote, ProCite, & Reference Manager)
APA 6th
Wood, J. (2015). "The Concept of Property and Ownership in the Antebellum American South: Slaves, Slaveholders, Theft, Conflict and the Law." Interstate - Journal of International Affairs, 2014/2015(1). Retrieved from http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1072
MLA
Wood, John. "The Concept of Property and Ownership in the Antebellum American South: Slaves, Slaveholders, Theft, Conflict and the Law." Interstate - Journal of International Affairs 2014/2015.1 (2015). <http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1072>
Chicago 16th
Wood, John. 2015. The Concept of Property and Ownership in the Antebellum American South: Slaves, Slaveholders, Theft, Conflict and the Law. Interstate - Journal of International Affairs 2014/2015 (1), http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1072
Harvard
WOOD, J. 2015. The Concept of Property and Ownership in the Antebellum American South: Slaves, Slaveholders, Theft, Conflict and the Law. Interstate - Journal of International Affairs [Online], 2014/2015. Available: http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1072
Suggested Reading from Inquiries Journal
Solomon Northup’s Twelve Years a Slave (1853) provides a comprehensive first-hand account of slavery that both corroborates and challenges Eugene Genovese’s argument in his later analysis of the... MORE»
Resistance to oppression is often found in the most unlikely of places. This article investigates the significance that families and partnerships played in fostering the emotional support necessary to sustain enslaved peoples... MORE»
For many decades, scholars have debated the importance of religion in helping slaves cope with the horrible experience of slavery in the antebellum South. However, the way they treated the subject differs and the conclusions they reached are varied. From the early 1920s through the 1960s, the accent was put on the variety of religious... MORE»
There is ample evidence of sexual relations, from rapes to what appear to be relatively symbiotic romantic partnerships, between white slave masters and black women in the Antebellum South. Much rarer were sexual relations... MORE»
Latest in History
2022, Vol. 14 No. 02
India was ruled by the Timurid-Mughal dynasty from 1526 to 1857. This period is mainly recognised for its art and architecture. The Timurid-Mughals also promoted knowledge and scholarship. Two of the Mughal emperors, Babur and Jahangir, wrote their... Read Article »
2022, Vol. 14 No. 02
The causes of the First World War remains a historiographical topic of contention more than 100 years on from the start of the conflict. With the passing of the centenary in 2014, a new wave of publications has expanded the scope and depth of historians... Read Article »
2021, Vol. 13 No. 11
The Sino-Vietnamese War remains one of the most peculiar military engagements during the Cold War. Conventional wisdom would hold that it was a proxy war in the vein of the United States’ war in Vietnam or the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan... Read Article »
2021, Vol. 13 No. 11
While the Cold War is popularly regarded as a war of ideological conflict, to consider it solely as such does the long-winded tension a great disservice. In actuality, the Cold War manifested itself in numerous areas of life, including the various... Read Article »
2021, Vol. 13 No. 11
This article analyzes the role of musical works in the United States during World War II. It chronologically examines how the social and therapeutic functions of music evolved due to the developments of the war. This article uses the lyrics of wartime... Read Article »
2021, Vol. 13 No. 10
Early medieval Irish society operated on an elaborate power structure formalized by law, practiced through social interaction, and maintained by tacit exploitation of the lower orders. This paper investigates the materialization of class hierarchies... Read Article »
2021, Vol. 13 No. 05
Some scholars of American history suggest the institution of slavery was dying out on the eve of the Civil War, implying the Civil War was fought over more generic, philosophical states' rights principles rather than slavery itself. Economic evidence... Read Article »
|