«Индийское рабство в колониальные времена в современных границах Соединенных Штатов»

[712] Manuscript Council Records of Massachusetts, xxxi, No. 148.

[713] Acts and Resolves, xii, p. 602.

[714] Arnold, History of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, i, p. 271.

[715] Durfee, Gleanings from the Judicial History of Rhode Island, p. 131, in Rhode Island Historical Tracts, No. 18.

[716] Arnold, op. cit., i, p. 423.

[717] The code provided that, in case an Indian should fail to give the satisfaction required in case of conviction, the court might sentence him to serve the injured party as a slave, or to be shipped out of the country in exchange for negroes. Connecticut Colonial Records, i, p. 532.

[718] Hildreth, The History of the United States, i, p. 372.

[719] Orcutt, The History of the old Town of Derby, Connecticut, p. lvii.

[720] Plymouth Colony Records, ix, p. 71; Connecticut Colonial Records, i, p. 532.

[721] Moore’s article in Historical Magazine, x, p. 189.

[722] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 352.

[723] Ibid., vii, p. 371.

[724] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 385.

[725] Ibid., vii, p. 397. The act decreed that “all negroes and Indians (free Indians in amity with this government, and negroes, mulattoes, mustizoes, who are now free, excepted), mulattoes or mustizoes who now are or shall hereafter be, in this Province, and all their issue and offspring, born or to be born, shall be, and they are hereby declared to be, and remain forever hereafter, absolute slaves and shall follow the condition of the mother.”

[726] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 460.

[727] Ibid., iv, p. 133.

[728] Stroud, A Sketch of the Laws relating to Slavery, etc., p. 2.

[729] Ibid.

[730] Archives of Maryland, xiii, p. 546.

[731] Maxcy, The Laws of Maryland, etc., i, p. 115; Bacon, Laws of Maryland.

[732] Colonial Laws of New York, edition of 1894, i, p. 598; Trott, Laws of the British Plantations in America, etc., p. 273.

[733] Moore, in Historical Magazine, x, p. 189. The Reverend John Davenport, in a letter to the younger Winthrop, June, 1666, spoke of the baptism of slaves “born in the house.” Historical Magazine, x, p. 59. The instance of Mr. Maverick of Noddle’s Island attempting to breed slaves is another example of the general custom of the time of holding the children of slave women as slaves. Littleton v. Tuttle, in Massachusetts Reports, iv, p. 128; Cushing, Reports, x, p. 410. Felt, in Statistical Association Collections, i, p. 586. Palfrey, History of New England, ii, p. 30, states that no person was ever born into legal slavery in Massachusetts. See also Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, pp. 24–25, and Steiner, op. cit., pp. 18–19.

[734] Pirate v. Dalby, 1786 (Pennsylvania), in 1 Dallas, second edition, p. 167; Wilson et al. v. Hinkley et al., 1787 (Connecticut), in Kirby, p. 202; The State v. Van Waggoner, 1797 (New Jersey), in 1 Halstead, p. 374; Jenkins v. Tom, 1792 (Virginia), in 1 Washington, p. 123; Coleman v. Dick, 1793 (Virginia), in 1 Washington, p. 233; Hudgins v. Wright, 1806 (Virginia), in 1 Hening and Munford, second edition, p. 134; Pallas et al. v. Hill et al., 1807 (Virginia), in 2 Hening and Munford, second edition, p. 149; Gregory v. Baugh, 1831 (Virginia), in 2 Leigh, p. 665.

[735] Wheeler, op. cit., p. 20; 2 Leigh, p. 665.

[736] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 31.

[737] Ibid., pp. 31–32.

[738] Hurd, The Law of Freedom and Bondage in the United States, i, pp. 249, 257, 260, 262, 265, 266, 268, 269, 275, 276, 283, 288, 295–297, 310; Ballagh, op. cit., p. 35.

[739] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 35. Indian slavery in Virginia was not, then, actually in existence until so decreed by the laws of 1670, 1676 and 1682. Hening, op. cit., ii, pp. 280, 283, 346, 404.

[740] Ballagh, op. cit., pp. 27–37. The status of servitude had distinct recognition in statute law as follows: Virginia, 1619; Massachusetts, 1630–1636; Maryland, 1637; Connecticut, 1643; Rhode Island, 1647; North Carolina, 1665; Pennsylvania, 1682; Georgia, 1732. Ballagh, op. cit., p. 36.

[741] Bartram, Retrographs, p. 42.

[742] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 352. The act was repeated in 1722. Ibid., vii, p. 371.

[743] Hurd, op. cit., i, p. 225. Not until 1772 did the highest English court declare the common law of England incompatible with slavery, and neither recognizing nor permitting its existence in England. The decision had no relation to the colonies.

[744] Wheeler, op. cit., p. 15. Had there been any objection raised by the mother country to the enslavement of Indians on the ground of illegality, the colonists could have fallen back on the recognized right of enslaving captives in war. By a legal fiction the Indians could at any time have been considered in a state of war, their lands confiscated and their persons seized and held for disposal at the pleasure of the whites. Such was the legal argument used by England in justification of enslaving the African negroes.

[745] For a discussion of the neglect to define the Indians’ rights in the various letters patent and charters, see the Eighteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, pt. ii, p. 550.

[746] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 3, i, p. 27, contains a bill of sale of an Indian man, given by Governor John Winthrop of Massachusetts to John Mainford of Barbadoes.

[747] As typical examples of this kind of advertisement, see Boston Gazette, December 15, 1718; Pennsylvania Gazette, March 7, 1732; New England Weekly Journal, March 5, 1733; Boston News Letter, August 20, 1711; January 5, 1719; December 28, 1720.

[748] Boston News Letter, July 2, 1711; October 11, 1708; October 6, 1737; February 11, 1717; November 22, 1708; May 24, 1714; Boston Gazette or Weekly Journal, November 15, 1748; New England Weekly Journal, February 24, 1729.

[749] Stiles, A History of the City of Brooklyn, etc., i, p. 233; New York Mercury, June 12, 1758.

[750] Early Records of Portsmouth, p. 434; Currier, History of Newbury, p. 254.

[751] Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, ii, p. 252; Winsor, The Memorial History of Boston, i, p. 489.

[752] See South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, vii, p. 169, (1691); x, p. 85, (1694); v, p. 98, (1710); v, p. 164, (1730); vi, p. 173, (1732); v, p. 105, (1734); vi, p. 117, (1735); v, p. 218, (1753); v, p. 113, (1765); viii, p. 214, (1769); vi, p. 25, (1802).

[753] Charleston Year Book, 1900, p. 42 (appendix), cites a will in New London, Connecticut (1711) disposing of Indian slaves. Schuyler, Colonial New York, ii, p. 293, cites the will of Arient Schuyler, December, 1724, bequeathing to each of his two daughters an Indian slave woman. February 7, 1690, South Carolina passed a law that slaves should descend by inheritance like any other property. The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 343.

[754] See Weeden, Economic History of New England, i, p. 292.

[755] See Early Records of Providence, Rhode Island, xvi, p. 244.

[756] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 343.

[757] Bacon, Laws of Maryland, etc. Both these laws related to slaves in general, and did not specify either negro or Indian slaves.

[758] Mason, A Brief History of the Pequot War, etc., in Orr, op. cit., p. 39.

[759] Mayhew, op. cit., p. 26.

[760] Coffin, A Sketch of the History of Newbury, etc., p. 153.

[761] This was the first newspaper in the colonies.

[762] Boston News Letter, August 6; August 13; August 20, 1711.

[763] Ibid., August 6, 1711.

[764] Ibid., April 7, 1718; May 23, 1745; July 4, 1751; Boston Gazette and Weekly Journal, November 1, 1743; New York Gazette, July 23; August 6; August 20, 1733; February 13, 1739; Boston News Letter, October 30, 1760; November 6, 1760; November 28, 1760.

[765] Boston News Letter, March 2, 1732; October 4, 1739; June 28, 1750; New England Weekly Journal, October 16, 1727; New England Courant, August 19, 1723; Pennsylvania Mercury, August 28, 1729; Pennsylvania Journal, June 18, 1767; New York Gazette, June 24; July 8; July 15; July 29; August 12; August 26, 1734; New York Weekly Mercury, October 27, 1740; November 3; November 10, 1740; May 30; June 13, 1757.

[766] Boston News Letter, October 7, 1742; August 23, 1744; New York Mercury, June 12, June 19, June 26, July 3, 1758.

[767] Boston News Letter, November 10, 1748; Boston Post Boy, July 25, 1743.

[768] Boston Post Boy, July 6, 1752; July 18, 1753; Boston Gazette, August 1, 1749.

[769] Boston Post Boy, May 2, 1743; July 2, 1750; August 6, 1750; New England Courant, June 17, 1723; Boston Weekly Mercury, October 2, 1735; New York Weekly Mercury, August 16, 1756.

[770] Boston Post Boy, February 11, 1745; April 15, 1751.

[771] Boston Post Boy, December 5, 1748.

[772] Pennsylvania Gazette, October 5, 1738.

[773] Pennsylvania Mercury, July 30, 1730.

[774] Boston News Letter, August 6; August 13; August 20, 1711; American Weekly Mercury, May 24, 1726; New York Weekly Mercury, June 12; June 19; June 26; July 3, 1758. Boston Gazette, April 7, 1718.

[775] Boston News Letter, September 10, 1711.

[776] Connecticut Colonial Records, iv, p. 40.

[777] Nevill, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, pp. 18, 22.

[778] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 343.

[779] Messages from the Governors of New York State, i, p. 116.

[780] Weise, The History of the City of Albany, etc., p. 209.

[781] The Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania, iv, p. 62.

[782] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 217.

[783] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 343.

[784] Drake, The Book of the Indians, etc., ninth edition, pp. 60–70; Winthrop, Journal, i, p. 267; ii, p. 8, in Original Narratives of Early American History.

[785] Lechford, Note Book kept in Boston, Massachusetts Bay, from 1638 to 1641, p. 434.

[786] O’Callaghan, Calendar of Historical Manuscripts, pt. ii, p. 433.

[787] North Carolina Colonial Records, ii, pp. 315, 534, 536, 570, 674; iii, p. 218; xi, pp. 10, 23.

[788] Plymouth Colony Records, ix, pp. 6–7. This was the first fugitive slave law in America.

[789] Hazard, Historical Collections, etc., ii, p. 63; Plymouth Colony Records, ix, p. 71. See full text of the resolution, p. 207.

[790] Plymouth Colony Records, ix, p. 64; Brodhead, History of the State of New York, revised edition, i, p. 429.

[791] Plymouth Colony Records, ix, p. 64.

[792] Ibid., x, p. 348; Shurtleff, op. cit., iv, pt. ii, p. 473; Hurd, The Law of Freedom and Bondage in the United States, i, p. 269.

[793] New York Colonial Documents, v, pp. 793, 796.

[794] Pennsylvania Archives, series 1, xii, p. 280.

[795] Baylies, An Historical Memoir of the Colony of New Plymouth, ii, pt. iv, p. 39.

[796] North Carolina Colonial Records, ii, p. 2.

[797] Massachusetts Manuscript Records, vol. xxx.

[798] Records of the Court of Assistants of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, i, p. 259.

[799] North Carolina Colonial Records, xii, pp. 138–139, 302.

[800] Ibid., ii, pp. 95, 97, 113–114.

[801] Ballagh, A History of Slavery in Virginia, pp. 39–40.

[802] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, pp. 343–344.

[803] Hewat, op. cit., i, p. 314.

[804] McCrady, Slavery in the Province of South Carolina, in Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 1895, p. 645.

[805] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 397.

[806] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, ii, p. 207. The act of 1704, seeking to correct any misinterpretation of a former tax act, specifies white servants among the property serving as a basis for taxation, but does not mention slaves. Ibid., ii, p. 264.

[807] Williamson, The History of North Carolina, i, p. 122.

[808] Raper, North Carolina, A Study in English Colonial Government, p. 147.

[809] William and Mary College Quarterly, viii, p. 160. At first only free white persons were tithables. The law of 1645 provided for a tax on tithables and tithable persons. Hening, op. cit., i, p. 306.

[810] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 35.

[811] Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 454.

[812] Ibid., ii, p. 84.

[813] Ibid., ii, p. 170.

[814] Ibid., p. 296.

[815] Ibid., ii, p. 492.

[816] Ibid., ii, p. 283. The act doubtless referred to Indians imported from the West Indies or Spanish South America.

[817] Ibid., ii, p. 346.

[818] Hening, op. cit., i, pp. 396, 471.

[819] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 63.

[820] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 133.

[821] Ibid., v, p. 432; Ballagh, op. cit., p. 67.

[822] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 72. A curious case shows the owner of an Indian slave in Bristol Parish, Virginia, petitioning the vestry of the parish, 1730, to grant that such Indian slave might be exempted from the parish levy as he was sick and unable to work. The petition was granted. Vestry Book and Register of Bristol Parish, Virginia, 1720–1789, p. 49.

[823] Acts and Resolves, i, p. 92.

[824] Ibid., i, p. 167.

[825] Ibid., i, p. 214.

[826] Ibid., i, pp. 240, 258.

[827] Ibid., i, pp. 278, 302.

[828] Ibid., i, pp. 337, 359.

[829] Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, p. 62; Douglas, The Financial History of Massachusetts, etc., p. 31.

[830] The laws are given in Acts and Resolves, i, ii, iii, and iv.

[831] See laws of 1707 and 1718.

[832] See laws of 1695 and 1707.

[833] Moore, op. cit., p. 64; Sewall’s Diary, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 5, vii, p. 87; Coffin, A Sketch of the History of Newbury, etc., p. 188.

[834] Laws of 1758 and 1777 in The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, iv, pp. 116, 365. These laws serve as examples of the various tax acts.

[835] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, iii, p. 77.

[836] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, pp. 682–683.

[837] Ibid., ii, pp. 877, 881.

[838] Baird, History of Rye, p. 202.

[839] Ibid., p. 182.

[840] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, ii, p. 153.

[841] Ibid., iii, p. 196.

[842] Ibid., iii, p. 196.

[843] South Carolina Public Records, xviii, 1736–1737; B. P. R. O., S. C., B. T., viii, p. 37.

[844] The Centennial of Incorporation of Charleston, South Carolina, p. 210.

[845] By the terms of the act this duty was to continue three years. Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 193; Virginia Historical Society Collections, new series, vi, p. 10. All enactments which increased the duties were vetoed by the crown.

[846] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 482; Letters of Governor Spotswood, in Virginia Historical Society Collections, new series, i, p. 52; Ballagh, op. cit., p. 14.

[847] Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, iv, p. 134. Exceptions were sometimes made to this law. During the Yamasee War in South Carolina, many of the planters left the colony. Several ladies came to Rhode Island bringing with them their Indian slaves. On their petition, the assembly voted, June 13, 1715, to relieve them from the import duties on their slaves. Arnold, op. cit., ii, p. 55; Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, iv, p. 186. A similar instance occurred in August of the same year. Arnold, op. cit., ii, p. 57; Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, iv, p. 197.

[848] Laws of New Hampshire, edition of 1711, p. 53. Since New Hampshire did not afford as ready a market for the sale of the southern Indians, because of its small population, the duty was doubtless more nearly prohibitive than in the case of Rhode Island.

[849] Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, ii, pp. 433, et seq.; Pennsylvania Historical Society Memoirs, i, p. 389; Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of the Province of Pennsylvania, ii, pp. 112, 114; Pennsylvania Colonial Records, ii, pp. 550, 553. A special officer was appointed to have charge of this matter of imported Indians and negroes, and given special directions regarding the duties of his office. The act was repealed by the crown, February 20, 1714. Pennsylvania Colonial Records, ii, p. 546.

[850] Allinson, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, p. 31. By the terms of the act, the duty was to continue seven years, beginning June 1, 1714.

[851] New Jersey Archives, first series, xv, p. 30.

[852] Ibid., first series, xv, p. 351.

[853] Ibid., first series, xv, pp. 384, 385.

[854] Allinson, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, p. 315.

[855] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 14.

[856] Pennsylvania, January 12, 1706, passed an act for the purpose of meeting government expenses. Negroes were enumerated among the commodities on which duties were laid. No mention was made of Indians. Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, ii, p. 280.

[857] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, pp. 484, 487.

[858] Ibid., i, p. 588.

[859] Ibid., i, p. 1013.

[860] Ibid., i, p. 677. On October 11, 1709, the act was amended with regard to its enforcement. Ibid., i, p. 736.

[861] Ibid., i, p. 803.

[862] Ibid., i, p. 899.

[863] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, p. 1012.

[864] Ibid., ii, pp. 255, 310.

[865] Ibid., ii, p. 772.

[866] Ibid., ii, p. 877.

[867] Ibid., ii, p. 1048.

[868] Ibid., ii, p. 1049.

[869] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, ii, p. 1049. The act also provided technical arrangements for settling disputes regarding the ages of the slaves, the exemption from duty if the slave should die within a period of thirty days after arrival, the receipt issued for such duty by the treasurer, and precautions to prevent smuggling.

[870] Ibid., iii, p. 2.

[871] Ibid., iii, p. 32.

[872] Ibid., iii, p. 88.

[873] Ibid., iii and iv. New York, like Virginia, sought to avoid the veto of the home government to these laws by giving them a short term of existence, usually one year. And generally New York was more successful than Virginia. But the home government was not always satisfied by such provisions as is witnessed by the Privy Council’s rejection of the act of 1735 levying a duty on negro and Indian slaves, New York Colonial Documents, vi, p. 33.

[874] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, ii, p. 201. Duties were also levied by the act upon skins and furs.

[875] Indian Book, 1710–1718, in Columbia, South Carolina, Historical Commission Department, i, p. 19.

[876] Hawks, History of North Carolina, etc., second edition, ii, p. 229; Brickell, The Natural History of North Carolina, etc., p. 42.

[877] Hewat, op. cit., i, p. 128; Schaper, Sectionalism in South Carolina, p. 283.

[878] Cotton Mather kept an Indian prisoner to serve as a guide. Magnalia, edition of 1820, ii, p. 507.

[879] Lyford, History of Concord, New Hampshire, from the Original Grant, etc., ii, p. 1051; Goodwin, The Pilgrim Republic, p. 191.

[880] One of these Indians who became a slave in the family of Mr. Richard Calicott of Dorchester, was afterward the tutor of John Eliot when the latter was learning the Indian language in preparation for his missionary work. Winslow, The Glorious Progresse of the Gospel among the Indians of New England, etc., in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series, 3, iv, p. 90; Tooker, Cockenoe-de-Long-Island, p. 12.

[881] Boston Gazette or Weekly Journal, November 15, 1748.

[882] New England Weekly Journal, March 5, 1733.

[883] Boston News Letter, January 5, 1719.

[884] Boston News Letter, November 15, 1708.

[885] Pennsylvania Gazette, March 7 and March 16, 1732.

[886] American Weekly Mercury, April 10, 1729. In 1715, Massachusetts granted an exception to the law against the importation of Indian slaves to a gentleman from South Carolina, so that his Indian slave attendant might accompany his family to Massachusetts. Acts and Resolves, ix, p. 412.

[887] Ewell, The Story of Byfield, p. 88.

[888] Channing, The Narragansett Planters, p. 10, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, iv.

[889] Boston News Letter, March 11, 1717.

[890] Boston News Letter, April 12, 1714.

[891] Boston News Letter, May 24, 1714.

[892] Boston News Letter, June 18 and June 25, 1724.

[893] Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1897–1898, p. 233.

[894] Hewat, op. cit., i, p. 157.

[895] Boston News Letter, March 21, 1715.

[896] Boston News Letter, July 23, 1716.

[897] Boston Post Boy, May 2, 1743.

[898] New York Gazette, June 24, 1734.

[899] Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina, etc., p. 172.

[900] Public Records of South Carolina, xxi, 1743–1744, p. 333; B. P. R. O., S. C., B. T., vol. xiii, H., p. 36.

[901] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 363.

[902] Ibid., vii, p. 393.

[903] Ibid., vii, p. 409.

[904] Bacon, Laws of Maryland.

[905] Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, iv, p. 85.

[906] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 3, iv, p. 188.

[907] Calendar of State Papers, colonial series, v, p. 361.

[908] Northrup, Slavery in New York, in New York State Library Bulletin, History, 1900, No. 4. The French considered these slaves as spoils of war which became the property of the captors exactly as if they were guns or any other implements. They were sent to “Montinisco” (Martinique) and sold there for the benefit of the planters.

[909] Northrup, op. cit., in New York State Library Bulletin, History, May, 1900, No. 4.

[910] Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, i, pp. 329, 354.

[911] Porter, Historical Notes of Connecticut, No. 2, p. 13.

[912] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 347.

[913] Ibid., iii, p. 109. South Carolina, however, did not favor the traders using their Indian slaves to wage war without the authority of the colonial government. Among the instructions given the traders was this one: “You shall not permit or allow any of your slaves to go to war on any pretence whatever.” Indian Book, 1710–1718, Columbia, South Carolina Historical Commission Department, i, p. 19.

[914] Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, viii, pp. 359–361.

[915] Bacon, Laws of Maryland.

[916] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, ii, p. 636.

[917] Usher, History of the Town of Medford, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, etc., p. 352; Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, 1885–1887, new series, iv, p. 214; Field, Provincial Courts of New Jersey, pp. 130–131; Washburn, Historical Sketches of Leicester, p. 51.

[918] It is recorded of the Rev. Peter Thacher of Milton, Massachusetts, in 1679, that he beat his Indian slave severely for letting his daughter, Theodora, fall on her head. Earle, Customs and Fashions in Old New England, p. 84; Sheldon, History of Deerfield, ii, p. 888.

[919] Boston Gazette, April 7, 1718.

[920] Boston News Letter, October 4, 1739.

[921] Boston News Letter, May 23, 1745.

[922] Boston News Letter, October 30, 1760.

[923] Boston Post Boy, July 6, 1752.

[924] Boston Weekly Mercury, October 2, 1735.

[925] American Weekly Mercury, August 28, 1729.

[926] American Weekly Mercury, May 24, 1726.

[927] Hawks, History of North Carolina, etc., second edition, ii, p. 577.

[928] The Rev. Peter Fontaine advocated intermarriage with the Indians as a means of promoting their Christianization and civilization. Colonel Byrd favored the plan also. Meade, Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia, i, pp. 82, 283–285.

[929] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 87. The act also forbade the marriage of free whites and mulattoes or negroes bond or free. Banishment was the punishment for such a marriage.

[930] Bruce, The Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, ii, p. 38.

[931] Trott, Laws of the British Plantations in America, etc., p. 100.

[932] Martin, The Public Acts of the General Assembly of North Carolina, i, pp. 45–46.

[933] Archives of Maryland, xiii, pp. 546–549.

[934] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 5, vi, p. 143.

[935] Weeden, Economic and Social History of New England, i, p. 403.

[936] Bruce, The Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, ii, p. 130, says of the Indian slaves of Virginia: “The regulations established for the management of such slaves were practically the same as those in operation for the control of Africans. They were brought within the scope of every measure adopted for the protection of the negro slaves, and morally as well as materially stood precisely upon the same footing in the view of the law.” McCrady, Slavery in the Province of South Carolina, in Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1895, p. 642, states: “In South Carolina from 1690 onward, all acts concerning slaves apply to Indians as well as negroes.”

[937] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 252.

[938] Bassett, Slavery and Servitude in the Colony of North Carolina, p. 29, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xiv.

[939] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 357.

[940] Ibid., vii, pp. 375–376.

[941] Ibid., vii, p. 389.

[942] Bassett, op. cit., pp. 29–30, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xiv.

[943] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 298.

[944] Ibid., iv, p. 327.

[945] Maxcy, Laws of Maryland, i, p. 140.

[946] Hurd, The Law of Freedom and Bondage in the United States, p. 281. This act does not specifically mention Indian slaves.

[947] Laws of New Hampshire, edition of 1771, p. 101.

[948] Bruce, The Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, i, p. 673.

[949] Drake, The Book of the Indians, ninth edition, bk. iii, p. 16.

[950] Chitwood, Justice in Colonial Virginia, p. 99, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xxxiii.

[951] Hening, op. cit., viii, pp. 137–138.

[952] Aler, History of Martinsberg and Berkeley Counties, West Virginia, pp. 200, 201.

[953] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 3, iv, p. 48. A Spanish Indian slave was tried and acquitted by the Court of Assistants of Massachusetts Bay, in 1676. Records of the Court of Assistants of Massachusetts Bay, i, p. 15. Sewall mentions Indians (probably free Indians) tried, condemned and executed for crimes in Massachusetts in 1709. Sewall’s Diary, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 5, vi, pp. 264, 265.

[954] Hough, Papers relating to the Island of Nantucket, etc., p. 50.

[955] Nevill, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, i, p. 19.

[956] Allinson, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, p. 309. Another act passed in 1768 provided for the trial in specified courts of slaves convicted of certain crimes. Indian slaves were not directly mentioned. Allinson, op. cit., p. 308; New Jersey Archives, series 1, xvii, p. 486; xxvi, p. 163.

[957] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, p. 766.

[958] Ibid., ii, pp. 684–685.

[959] Nevill, op. cit., i, p. 21. The act was repealed, May 10, 1768. Allinson, op. cit., p. 309.

[960] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 369. By this act nothing was awarded the owner if the slave was executed for murder.

[961] Bacon, Laws of Maryland. Other Maryland acts of 1737, 1740, 1744, 1747, 1751, 1754, 1757, and 1762, required that the full adjudged value be paid the owner of any slave executed by law. Bacon, op. cit.

[962] Massachusetts, 1703, Acts and Resolves, i, p 535; Rhode Island, 1704, Rhode Island Historical Society Collections, vii, p. 230; 1750, Records of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, v, p. 320; and 1770. Rhode Island Laws, edition of 1772, pp. 24, 25; Block Island, 1709, Livermore, A History of Block Island from its Discovery, etc., p. 61; New Hampshire, 1714, Laws of New Hampshire, edition of 1771, p. 52. Connecticut, in 1750, forbade Indian slaves being abroad after nine o’clock at night without the owner’s permission. Acts and Laws of Connecticut, edition of 1750, p. 230. New York City, in 1713, stated the latest time at which Indian slaves could be away from home without their masters’ permission as one hour after sunset. Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, iii, p. 177; and 1751, Ibid., iv, p. 87. Rhode Island, 1667, forbade any Indian to walk about in the night time. Livermore, op cit., 61. New Jersey, 1713, forbade any negro, Indian or mulatto slave to go five miles from home without his master’s permission. Nevill, op. cit., i, p. 21.

[963] Massachusetts, during King Philip’s War, Baylies, op. cit., pt. iii, p. 189; Block Island, 1675, Livermore, op. cit., p. 60; New Hampshire, 1689, Laws of New Hampshire, edition of 1904. i, p. 288 (The act referred simply to Indians without specifying bond or free); the city of Albany, 1686, Munsell, Annals of Albany, viii, 296; New York City, 1683, Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, i, 134; Pennsylvania, 1721, The Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania, iii, p. 254.

[964] Massachusetts, 1693, Acts and Resolves, i, p. 156; New York, 1715, New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, pp. 157, 519; New Jersey, 1682 and 1713, Leaming and Spicer, Grants and Concessions, p. 254; Nevill, op. cit., i, p. 18.

[965] Winsor, The Memorial History of Boston, ii, p. 485.

[966] Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, p. 191.

[967] Connecticut Colonial Records, i, p. 349; Stiles, The History and Genealogies of Ancient Winsor, i, p. 434.

[968] Watson, Annals and Occurrences of New York City and State, p. 158.

[969] Weise, The History of the City of Albany, p. 209.

[970] Dunlap, History of the New Netherlands, etc., ii, appendix, p. clxiii.

[971] The slave code of South Carolina was more elaborate than that of any other colony. But the various laws relating to trial and punishment of slaves make no mention of Indian slaves, though as has been seen, Indian slaves were more numerous in that colony than elsewhere.

[972] Martin, The Public Acts of the General Assembly of North Carolina, 1715–1803, i, p. 50.

[973] Nevill, op. cit., i, p. 19.

[974] Allinson, op. cit., p. 308. By the terms of the act, the court could, if it thought best, inflict punishment other than death for some of these crimes.

[975] Winthrop, Journal, in Original Narratives of Early American History, i, p. 226.

[976] New England Courant, June 17, 1723; Pennsylvania Gazette, October 12, 1738; American Weekly Mercury, August 28, 1729, and August 6, 1730; New England Weekly Journal, December 2, 1728. These marks may, in some instances, have been tattooed for decorative purposes. The South Carolina acts of 1712 decreed branding as punishment for specified crimes committed by “slaves.” The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, pp. 359–360, 374, 376, 377.

[977] Martin, The Public Acts of the General Assembly of North Carolina, 1715–1803, i, p. 50.

[978] The Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania, iii, p. 254.

[979] Ibid., v, p. 109.

[980] Nevill, op. cit., i, p. 22.

[981] Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, i, p. 92.

[982] Ibid., i, p. 134.

[983] Ibid., iii, p. 30.

[984] Ibid., iv, p. 50. The whipping was to be given, if desired, by the master or owner of the slave.

[985] Ibid., iii, p. 177.

[986] Ibid., iv, p. 87.

[987] Ibid., iv, p. 88.

[988] Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, iv, p. 89.

[989] Ibid., vi, p. 157.

[990] Ibid., vi, p. 177. The city ordinances were usually continued one year and were then renewed. In this way the ordinances mentioned were in many cases continued into the Revolutionary period. The records of the early eighteenth century show the frequent punishment of “slaves, negroes and Indians” for being out too late at night, collecting in too large groups, noisy reveling and gambling. On such occasion the owner of the slaves was fined. Watson, Annals and Occurrences of New York City and State, etc., p 162.

[991] Acts and Laws of Connecticut, edition of 1750, p. 240.

[992] Ibid., p. 230.

[993] Acts and Resolves, i, p. 156.

[994] The Medford Historical Register, iii, 1900, No. 3, p. 121. The master also was to be fined for his negligence.

[995] Livermore, A History of Block Island from its Discovery, etc., p. 61.

[996] The South Carolina act of 1690 provided various sorts of mutilation for any slave convicted of specified crimes. The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, pp. 359–360.

[997] Martin, The Public Acts of the General Assembly of North Carolina, 1715–1803, i, p. 50.

[998] Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, series 2, xiii, p. 252.

[999] Laws of New Hampshire, edition of 1904, i, p. 117.

[1000] Weise, The History of the City of Albany, p. 209.

[1001] New York Colonial Manuscripts, Instructions, etc., 1660, quoted in Baird, History of Rye, p. 185.

[1002] The instructions to Governor Dongan, 1686; Andros, 1688; Sloughter, 1689; Fletcher, 1691–1699; Bellomont, 1709, of New York; Cornbury of New Jersey, 1702, are cases in point.

[1003] Morgan Godwyn, writing to Governor Berkeley of general religious conditions in Virginia, says: “All things concerning the church and religion were left to the mercy of the people. And, last of all, to propagate Christianity among the heathen, whether natives or slaves brought from other ports, although (as must piously be supposed) it were the only end of God’s discovering these countries to us, yet is that lookt upon by our new race of Christians, so idle and ridiculous, so utterly needless and unnecessary, that no man can forfeit his judgment more than by any proposed looking or tending that way.” Tiffany, History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States, p. 33.

[1004] Incorporated June 16, 1701.

[1005] Humphreys, An Historical Account of the Incorporated Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, p. 90.

[1006] South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, v, p. 26. The Society ordered the secretary to lay the matter before the Bishop of London and ask his lordship’s advice regarding such abuse.

[1007] Ibid., v, p. 37.

[1008] Ibid., v, p. 47.

[1009] Ibid., v, p. 98. Mr. Thomas was appointed in 1702 the first missionary of the Society in South Carolina.

[1010] Hawkins, Historical Notices of the Missions of the Church of England in the North American Colonies, pp. 50, 73.

[1011] Letter of Le Jau, February 18, 1708–1709, to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. Humphreys, op. cit., pp. 83, 84.

[1012] Letter of Le Jau, June 13, 1710, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1013] Letter of Le Jau, February 20–21, 1711, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1014] Letter of Le Jau, September 5 and 18, 1711, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1015] Letter of Le Jau, December 11, 1712, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1016] Letter of Le Jau, October 20, 1709, to the S. P. G[. F. P.

[1017] Letter of Haskell, March 12, 1711, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1018] Letter of Haskell, September 4, 1711, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1019] Records of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, vol. xxiii, bk. vii.

[1020] Letter of Dunn, April 21, 1707, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1021] Letter of Sharpe, June 23, 1712, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1022] Letter of Neau, July 4, 1704, to the S. P. G. F P.

[1023] Letter of Neau, August 29, 1704, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1024] Letter of Chuardens, July 15, 1726, to the S. P. G. F. P.

[1025] Kennet, An Account of the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, etc., p. 61.

[1026] Ibid., p 61.

[1027] Journal of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, vol. i, April 19, 1705–1706.

[1028] Perry, Historical Collections relating to the American Colonial Church, i, p. 344; Meade, Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia, i, p. 265.

[1029] Poore, The Federal and State Constitutions. Colonial Charters, etc., ii, pp. 1407, 1408.

[1030] Trott, Laws of the British Plantations in America, etc., p. 17.

[1031] Ramage, Local Government and Free Schools in South Carolina, p. 12, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, i.

[1032] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, pp. 364–365.

[1033] Hening, op. cit., i, p. 410.

[1034] William and Mary College Quarterly, vi, p. 215; Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 155.

[1035] Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 260.

[1036] Ibid., ii, p. 283.

[1037] Ibid., ii, p. 491. The testimony of the Reverend Hugh Jones, chaplain of the Virginia assembly, shows that the colonists, even after such legislative action, did not approve of the baptizing of Indians and negroes as they thought it made them proud and not so good servants. Jones, however, declared that these objections could be easily refuted “if the persons be sensible, good and understand English, and have been taught (or are willing to learn) the principles of Christianity and if they be kept to the observance of it afterward, for Christianizing encourages and orders them to become more humble and better servants and not worse than when they were heathen.” Jones, The Present State of Virginia, in Sabin’s Reprints, No. 5, p. 70.

[1038] Trott, Laws of the British Plantations in America, etc., p. 142.

[1039] The parish register of St. Peters, New Kent County, Virginia, 1680–1787. pp. 53 and 64, mentions the deaths of two Indian slaves in 1722 and 1723, but records no births or marriages.

[1040] Archives of Maryland, xiii, p. 505.

[1041] Ibid., xix, p. 32.

[1042] Bacon, Laws of Maryland.

[1043] Ibid.

[1044] Trott, op. cit., p. 257.

[1045] Morgan, Slavery in New York, in Historic New York, i, p. 8.

[1046] New York Colonial Documents, iii, p. 415.

[1047] Brodhead, op. cit., first edition, ii, p. 486. This act merely confirmed previous legislation in 1680.

[1048] Ibid., first edition, ii, p. 509. This confirmed the legislation of the previous year.

[1049] Ibid., first edition, ii, p. 510.

[1050] New York Colonial Documents, iv, p. 510.

[1051] Morgan, op. cit., in Historic New York, ii, p. 20; Laws of New York, edition of 1752, p. 69.

[1052] Morgan, op. cit., in Historic New York, ii, p. 20.

[1053] Bolton, History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the County of Westchester, p. 228.

[1054] Ibid., p. 250.

[1055] Ibid., p. 264. The slaves in New York, as in other colonies, did not favor giving up their Sundays to religious instruction and observances, for they preferred to hunt and fish on this, the only day which they had to themselves. Ibid., pp. 62–63.

[1056] Shurtleff, Records of the Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay, v, p. 136.

[1057] Mayhew, Indian Converts, p. 194.

[1058] Ibid., pp. 202, 222, 257.

[1059] Plymouth Colony Records, ii, pp. 103–104; Medford Historical Register, iii, No. 3, p. 121.

[1060] Ewell, The Story of Byfield, p. 88.

[1061] Perry, Historical Collections relating to the American Episcopal Church, ii, p. 231.

[1062] Journal of the American Irish Historical Society, iii, p. 57.

[1063] Johnston, Slavery in Rhode Island, in Rhode Island Historical Society Publications, 1894, ii, p. 120.

[1064] Hurd, op. cit., i, p. 272; Steiner, op. cit., p. 16, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xvi.

[1065] Cobb, An Historical Sketch of Slavery from the Earliest Periods, p. clii.

[1066] Coffin, History of Newbury, p. 336, cites instances in Newbury in 1687 and 1702. Orcutt, The History of the old Town of Derby, Connecticut, p. lvii, mentions a deed of manumission in Connecticut in 1688, given to Tobie, an Indian captive of King Philip’s War. Smith, History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, p. 219, refers to the conditional manumission of an Indian slave, three years old, born in the family. Cotton Mather, also, promised to free an Indian slave at the close of four years of service. Diary, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 7, vii, p. 203.

[1067] A Virginia act of 1782 provided for the freeing of a slave by an instrument in writing submitted by the owner. A copy of this instrument attested by the clerk of the county court was to be given to the manumitted slave. Any master neglecting to give such a copy to the slave in question was liable to a fine of £10. Hening, op. cit., xi, p. 39. Maryland by an act of 1752 declared that owners under ordinary circumstances had the right to free slaves. Two witnesses were required for the act, which must be in writing. Bacon, Laws of Maryland. These acts were intended primarily to apply to negro slaves.

[1068] Indian Book, 1710–1718, Columbia, South Carolina, Historical Commission Department, i, p. 19.

[1069] Plymouth Colony Records, iv, p. 173. By the terms of the order, the value of the land was to be expended for defraying the charges of printing the book “New England’s Memorial.”

[1070] Baker, History of Montville, Connecticut, p. 77. This woman was given by the colonial government to Captain James Avery who sold her to Mr. Charles Hill who in turn traded her to Uncas.

[1071] Mayhew, Indian Converts, p. 120.

[1072] Orcutt, The History of the old Town of Derby, Connecticut, p. vii.

[1073] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 352.

[1074] Ibid., vii, p. 371.

[1075] Ibid., vii, p. 385.

[1076] Ibid., vii, pp. 397–398.

[1077] Hening, op. cit., iv, p. 132.

[1078] Martin, The Public Acts of the General Assembly of North Carolina, i, p. 66; Dillon, Oddities in Colonial Legislation, p. 233.

[1079] Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 155.

[1080] Baylies, op. cit., ii, pt. iv, p. 4; Freeman, The History of Cape Cod, ii, p. 72.

[1081] Massachusetts Manuscript Records, vol. xxx.

[1082] Plymouth Colony Records, vi, p. 15.

[1083] Ibid., vi, p. 15.

[1084] Acts and Resolves, ix, p. 376.

[1085] Baylies, op. cit., ii, pt. iv, p. 109.

[1086] Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 280.

[1087] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, p. 764.

[1088] Nevill, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey, i, p. 23.

[1089] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 384.

[1090] Ibid., vii, p. 396.

[1091] Martin, The Public Acts of the General Assembly of North Carolina, i, p. 66; Dillon, op. cit., p. 233.

[1092] Connecticut Colonial Records, iii, pp. 375–376.

[1093] Ibid., iii, p. 408.

[1094] Ibid., v, p. 233.

[1095] Connecticut Colonial Records, xvi, p. 415.

[1096] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, p. 765.

[1097] Ibid., i, p. 922.

[1098] Nevill, op. cit., i, p. 25.

[1099] Allinson, op. cit., p. 316.

[1100] Brain, The Redemption of the Red Man, p. 2, believes that the entire Indian population of the territory now occupied by the United States never exceeded 300,000 souls. Bancroft, History of the United States of America from the Discovery of the Continent, edition of 1878, ii, p. 408, estimates the number east of the Mississippi River and south of the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes at not far from 180,000 at the time of the discovery. To the various tribes of the Algonquin race he assigns 90,000; the eastern Sioux, 3000; the Iroquois including their southern kindred, 17,000; the Catawba, 3,000; the Cherokee, 12,000; the Chickasaw, Choctaw and Muskohgee, 50,000; the Uchee, 1000, and the Natchez, 4,000.

[1101] Sylvester, op. cit., ii, p. 54.

[1102] Palfrey, op. cit., iii, p. 137.

[1103] Thomas, The Indians of North America in Historic Times, p. 60.

[1104] Parkman, A Half Century of Conflict, ii, p. 286.

[1105] Year Book of the Society of Colonial Wars in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1898, p. 110.

[1106] Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantations, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 4, iii, p. 325.

[1107] Winthrop, Journal, i, pt. iii, p. 119, in Original Narratives of Early American History.

[1108] Denton, A Brief Description of New York, etc., in Gowan, Bibliotheca Americana, p. 7.

[1109] Oldmixon, The British Empire in America, etc., i, p. 125.

[1110] Oldmixon, op. cit., i, p. 141.

[1111] Arnold, History of Rhode Island, i, pp. 421–422.

[1112] Ferris, A History of the Original Settlements on the Delaware from its Discovery by Hudson to the Colonization under William Penn, etc., p. 83.

[1113] Archdale, op. cit., in Carroll, op. cit., ii, p. 89.

[1114] Ibid., ii, pp. 89, 519.

[1115] Ibid., ii, p. 89.

[1116] Letter of Mr. Thomas, missionary of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, 1706, in South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, v, p. 42.

[1117] Douglass, A Summary, Historical and Political, etc., i, p. 175.

[1118] Updike, History of the Episcopal Church in Narragansett, Rhode Island, p. 177.

[1119] Oldmixon, op. cit., i, pp. 187, 189.

[1120] Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, edition of 1787, p. 153.

[1121] Ibid., edition of 1787, pp. 154, 155.

[1122] Letter of Samuel Thomas, missionary in South Carolina of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, 1706, in South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine, 1904, v, p. 42; Letter of Henry Laurens, 1780, in Moore, Materials for History printed from Original Manuscripts with Notes and Illustrations, p. 187.

[1123] Archdale, op. cit., in Carroll, op. cit., ii, pp. 88–89.

[1124] Ibid., ii, p. 89.

[1125] It is perhaps true that the Indians of the territory occupied by the English colonists of America possessed certain inherent characteristics which made them less desirable as servants or slaves than those used by the Spaniards in Mexico and South America, and that they had less fear and dread of the whites than the Indians farther south.

[1126] Mason, A Brief History of the Pequot War, etc., in Orr, op. cit., p. 39.

[1127] Mayhew, Indian Converts, p. 26.

[1128] Daniels, History of the Town of Oxford, Massachusetts, p. 44.

[1129] Dorr, The Narragansetts, in Rhode Island Historical Society Collections, vii, p. 210; Wood, New England’s Prospect, Prince Society edition, p. 73.

[1130] Dorr, op. cit., in Rhode Island Historical Society Collections, vii, p. 233.

[1131] Force, Tracts and other Papers relating principally to the Origin, Settlement and Progress of the Colonies in North America, etc., i, p. 10.

[1132] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 343. Other acts were passed by South Carolina in 1712, 1735, 1740, 1743, and 1783, relating to slave conspiracies and uprisings. The omission in these acts of direct reference to Indian slaves is probably due to the fact that negro slaves were in the majority.

[1133] Ibid., iii, p. 196.

[1134] Acts and Resolves, i, p. 535.

[1135] Acts and Laws of Connecticut, edition of 1769, p. 185; Dillon, Oddities in Colonial Legislation, p. 242.

[1136] New York Colonial Laws, edition of 1894, i, p. 631. New York passed other laws in 1712 and 1730 relating to the uprisings and conspiracy of slaves.

[1137] Watson, Annals of Philadelphia, i, p. 62.

[1138] See above, pp. 233–240.

[1139] Acts and Resolves, i. p. 698.

[1140] Connecticut Colonial Records, v, p. 233.

[1141] Laws of New Hampshire, edition of 1771, p. 53.

[1142] Records of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, iv, pp. 193–194.

[1143] Report of a French Protestant Refugee in Boston, 1687, Fisher’s translation, p. 20.

[1144] Winsor, The Memorial History of Boston, i, p. 489.

[1145] Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 143. For a petition, October 25, 1711, to Governor Spotswood for such a permit to employ an Indian man and woman, see Calendar of Virginia State Papers, i, p. 150.

[1146] Winthrop, Journal, i, p. 260, in Original Narratives of Early American History.

[1147] Hazard, Historical Collections, etc., ii, p. 188.

[1148] Morton, The New English Canaan, in Force’s Tracts, ii, p. 48.

[1149] Peabody, Life of Cotton Mather, p. 223.

[1150] Sewall’s Diary, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 5, vii, p. 30.

[1151] Drake, The Book of the Indians, ninth edition, ii, p. 111.

[1152] Winsor, The Memorial History of Boston, i, p. 489.

[1153] Plymouth Colony Records, xi, p. 59.

[1154] Gookin, op. cit., in American Antiquarian Society Collections, 1836, ii, p. 434.

[1155] Weeden, Economic and Social History of New England, i, p. 433, 435, 443, 447.

[1156] Professional and Industrial History of Suffolk County, Massachusetts, iii, p. 398.

[1157] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, first series, ix, p. 201. We are told that only by being “flagellated” were these Indians made to perform their labor according to their contracts.

[1158] Steiner, History of the Plantation of Menunkatuck, p. 72.

[1159] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 1, ix, p. 78.

[1160] Updike, History of the Episcopal Church in Narragansett, etc., p. 177.

[1161] Records of the Town of Southampton, Long Island, bk. ii, pp. 56–59, 72.

[1162] Love, Samson Occom and the Christian Indians of New England, p. 5; New England’s First Fruits, in Sabin’s Reprints, quarto edition, No. vii, p. 6.

[1163] Bruce, Institutional History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, i, p. 5.

[1164] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 1, ix, p. 78.

[1165] Updike, op. cit., p. 177.

[1166] Plymouth Colony Records, xi, p. 237.

[1167] Southold Town Records, p. 154.

[1168] Weeden, op. cit., i, p. 292.

[1169] The inventory of the estate of Samuel Gorton of Providence shows that he possessed apprenticed Indian servants. The Early Records of the Town of Providence, xvi, pp. 243, 244.

[1170] Walker, History of the First Church in Hartford, p. 255.

[1171] New Jersey Archives, series 1, xx, p. 111; xxvi, p. 458.

[1172] Baird, History of Rye, p. 192.

[1173] Hening, op. cit., i, p. 410.

[1174] The so called “redemptioners.”

[1175] Several hundred Scotchmen taken prisoners by Cromwell were sent to Boston. Morton, New England’s Memorial, p. 86.

[1176] In New Netherland many girls from the almshouses of Holland served as indentured servants. Van Rensselaer, History of the City of New York in the Seventeenth Century, i, p. 466.

[1177] Such a request was sent to the Virginia Company in 1620. Abstracts of the Proceedings of the Virginia Company of London, i, p. 92.

[1178] Penn offered on certain conditions fifty acres of land to every servant who came with the first adventurers, and made adequate provisions in the Charter of Laws for the servants’ protection against being cheated or abused in any way by dishonest masters. For a discussion of indentured servants in Pennsylvania, see Bolles, Pennsylvania, Province and State, ii, pp. 173–182; Diffenderffer, German Immigration into Pennsylvania, pt. iii; Pennsylvania Magazine of History, xxx, p. 436; xxxi, p. 83; Historical Addresses and Papers of Lancaster Historical Society, x, p. 331; Pennsylvania Colonial Records, i, iii, iv, vi, vii, ix, x, xi. In 1676, the Duke of York provided for the government, protection, and final dismissal of bond servants in Delaware. Pennsylvania German Society Proceedings, x, pp. 223–224.

[1179] In 1671, Governor Berkeley estimated that 1500 white servants were arriving annually, and at that time out of a total population of 40,000, six thousand were indentured servants. Tucker, Life of Jefferson, i, p. 14; Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 515. In the time of Governor Hamilton of Pennsylvania, it was estimated that there were 60,000 imported white servants in the province. Scharf and Westcott, History of Philadelphia, i, p. 190. The German immigrants more than met the demand for servants in Pennsylvania. Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania were the three great servant importing colonies.

[1180] For Connecticut, see Steiner, History of Slavery in Connecticut, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xi; for New Hampshire, Sanborn, New Hampshire; for New Jersey, New Jersey Archives, series 2, i, p. 436; for Maryland, McCormac, White Servitude in Maryland, 1634–1820, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xxii; for Virginia, Ballagh, White Servitude in the Colony of Virginia, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xiii; for North Carolina, Bassett, Slavery and Servitude in North Carolina, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xiv; for South Carolina, McCrady, Slavery in the Province of South Carolina, 1670–1770, in Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1895, and Schaper, Sectionalism in South Carolina; for Georgia, Colonial Records of Georgia, i, pp. 54, 259.

[1181] Weeden, op. cit., i, p. 153; Coffin, A Sketch of the History of Newbury, etc., p. 337.

[1182] Sewall’s Diary, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 5, v, p. 14.

[1183] Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, p. 65.

[1184] Publications of the Ipswich Historical Society, x, p. 29; Waters, Ipswich in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, p. 217.

[1185] Bodge, Soldiers in King Philip’s War, p. 480; Waters, op. cit., p. 217.

[1186] Earle, Customs and Fashions in Old New England, p. 84.

[1187] Essex Institute Historical Collections, i. p. 14.

[1188] Felt, Annals of Salem, second edition, ii, p. 416.

[1189] Currier, History of Newbury, p. 254; Coffin, op. cit., p. 188.

[1190] Coffin, op. cit., p. 336.

[1191] Coffin, op. cit., p. 336.

[1192] Currier, op. cit., p. 255.

[1193] Essex Institute Historical Collections, x, p. 79.

[1194] Ibid., i, p. 14.

[1195] Ibid., x, p. 79.

[1196] Ibid., xxxiv, p. 64.

[1197] Ewell, The Story of Byfield, p. 65.

[1198] Mather’s Diary in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 7, vii, p. 579.

[1199] Bliss, Side Glimpses from the Old Meeting House, p. 16.

[1200] Staples, Annals of Providence, second edition, p. 171; Rhode Island Historical Society Publications, i, p. 235; Richman, op. cit., ii, p. 192.

[1201] The Early Records of the Town of Portsmouth, p. 433.

[1202] Dorr, The Narragansetts, in Rhode Island Historical Society Collections, vii, p. 233.

[1203] Weeden, Early Rhode Island, p. 143.

[1204] Dorr, op. cit., in Rhode Island Historical Society Collections, vii, p. 233.

[1205] Weeden, op. cit., p. 144.

[1206] The Early Records of the Town of Providence, xvi, p. 244.

[1207] It should be noted that the Connecticut bondmen or slaves were often called “servants” down to about 1700. Adams and Stiles, History of Ancient Wethersfield, i, p. 700; Caulkins, History of New London, p. 271; Charleston Year Book, 1900, p. 42. (Appendix.)

[1208] Adams and Stiles, op. cit., i, p. 700.

[1209] Orcutt, op. cit., p. lvii.

[1210] New Jersey Archives, series 1, xxiii, p. 20.

[1211] Ibid., series 1, xxiii, p. 29.

[1212] Ibid., series 1, xxiii, p. 37.

[1213] Ibid., series 1, xxiii, p. 62.

[1214] New Jersey Archives, series i, xxiii, p. 65.

[1215] Ibid., series 1, xxiii, p. 67.

[1216] Ibid., series 1, xxiii, 472. In these New Jersey inventories, the Indian slaves were regarded as personal estate.

[1217] William and Mary College Quarterly, vi, p. 214. The “lbs.” refer to tobacco, the medium of purchase in early Virginia.

[1218] William and Mary College Quarterly, vi, p. 214. This is the deed which has already been referred to as having been set aside by the House of Burgesses. Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 155. Cf. above, p. 270.

[1219] Hawks, History of North Carolina, ii, p. 577.

[1220] North Carolina Historical and Genealogical Register, iii, p. 270.

[1221] Williamson, History of North Carolina, i, p. 289.

[1222] North Carolina Colonial Records, ii, p. 52.

[1223] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, iii, p. 77.

[1224] Mississippi Provincial Archives, French Domination, Correspondance Générale, v, 1710–1715.

[1225] Report on Canadian Archives, 1905, i, p. 523; Margry, op. cit., iv, p. 544.

[1226] It is doubtful whether any definite knowledge of the enslavement of Indians existed in England. The public criticism of the play and opera “Incle and Yarico,” which dealt with the capture of two Indian girls in America and their subsequent sale in Barbadoes, because the first scene was laid in America, tends to show a general ignorance on the subject. This play written by Coleman and told in story by Steele in “The Spectator,” No. 11, March 13, 1710, is supposed to have been founded on fact. The event is described in Ligon, History of Barbadoes, p. 55. The play is given in Inchbald, British Theatre.

[1227] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 4, vi, p. 214.

[1228] Massachusetts Manuscript Records, xxx, No. 173; Plymouth Colony Records, x, pp. 451–453; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, vi, p. 297 and xxxii, p. 299; Winsor, The Memorial History of Boston, i, p. 322.

[1229] Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, p. 90. In 1700, Sewall had published a protest against slavery in general in the form of a tract: The Selling of Joseph, a Memorial. The tract did not mention Indian slavery. Moore, op. cit., pp. 83–87; Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, 1863–1864, pp. 161–165.

[1230] Sandiford, The Mystery of Iniquity, etc., p. 19.

[1231] Ibid., p. 96.

[1232] Sharp, Extract from a Representation of the Injustice, etc., p. 15.

[1233] Ibid., p. 13.

[1234] Benezet, Some Observations on the Situation, Disposition, etc., p. 9. In a footnote he refers to Hunt’s kidnapping act.

[1235] Records of the Friends’ Yearly Meeting of Pennsylvania and the Jersies, p. 211; Michener, A Retrospect of Early Quakerism, etc., pp. 260, 341. According to custom the action of the Yearly Meeting was at once made known to the various Quarterly Meetings within its jurisdiction by extracts from its minutes. Such extracts recorded in the minutes of the various Quarterly Meetings for the year 1719 contain exactly the same expression: “And to avoid giving them occasion of discontent, it is desired that Friends do not buy or sell Indian slaves.”

[1236] After 1719 the records show the opposition of the Yearly Meeting to have been expressed against slavery in general, and no mention is made of Indian slaves, though the records sometimes read: “negroes and other slaves.” For the action of the Yearly Meeting at various times up to the time of the abolition of slavery in Pennsylvania in 1780, see Pennsylvania Historical Society Memoirs, i, p. 392 et seq.; Sharpless, A History of Quaker Government in Pennsylvania, ii, p. 224 et seq.; American Society of Church Publications, v. ii, (article by Allen C. Thomas); Michener, A Retrospect of Early Quakerism, etc.; Pennsylvania Magazine of History, xiii, pp. 265 et seq.

[1237] Williamson, The History of the State of Maine, etc., i, p. 539.

[1238] Cf. above, pp. 173–174.

[1239] Cotton Mather, Magnalia, edition of 1820, ii, p. 507; Diary, in Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 7, vii, pp. 22, 203; Increase Mather, Ibid., series 7, viii, p. 232; The Reverend Mr. Brown of Haverhill (1723), Chase, History of Haverhill, pp. 239, 248; The Reverend Mr. Thacher of Milton (1674), Earle, Customs and Fashions in Old New England, p. 84; the Reverend Mr. Callicott of Dorchester, Tooker, Cockenoe-de-Long Island, p. 12; John Winthrop, Records of the Court of Assistants, Colony of Massachusetts Bay, 1630–1692, ii, p. 91; Daniel Gookin, New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii, p. 272; Governor Berkeley of Virginia, William and Mary College Quarterly, vi, p. 214; Colonel Pollock, acting governor of North Carolina, North Carolina Colonial Records, ii, p. 52; Governor West of South Carolina, Hewat, op cit., i, p. 74; and Governor Moore of South Carolina, Hewat, op. cit., i, p. 140, are important cases in point.

[1240] Sylvester, op. cit., i, p. 293; Drake, Book of the Indians, ninth edition, bk. ii, p. 107.

[1241] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 4, vi, p. 95.

[1242] Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, series 4, vi, pp. 195–196.

[1243] Ibid., series 4, vi, p. 65.

[1244] Hening, op. cit., ii, p. 267.

[1245] Ballagh, A History of Slavery in Virginia, p. 50.

[1246] Hening, op. cit., iii, p. 468.

[1247] Tucker, A Dissertation on Slavery, p. 35; Wheeler, A Practical Treatise of the Law of Slavery, p. 19.

[1248] See Ballagh, op. cit., p. 50, for a discussion of the disappearance of this act. Not until 1806 was it discovered that the act of 1705 was a repetition of that of 1691.

[1249] Ballagh, op. cit., p. 51; 1 Washington, pp. 123 (Jenkins v. Tom), 233 (Coleman v. Dick.)

[1250] Wheeler, op. cit., p. 19, (Hudgins v. Wright).

[1251] 2 Hening and Munford, p. 149 (Pallas v. Hill); James, English Institutions and the American Indians, p. 47, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xii.

[1252] Wheeler, op. cit., p. 18.

[1253] If this interpretation of the acts of 1691 and 1705 be the true one, then they belong in the same class with the acts of the northern colonies which were passed at the time of the Tuscarora War for the purpose of putting an end to the importation of Indians, but which did not aim to put an end to the status of slavery as applied to Indians.

[1254] The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, vii, p. 397. By previous acts of 1712, 1722 and 1735; South Carolina had specified who were to be slaves. Ibid., vii, p. 352; vii, p. 371; vii, p. 385.

[1255] 3 Spears, p. 128 (The State v. Harden, 1832): 1 Richardson, p. 324 (Nelson v. Whetmore, 1844).

[1256] O’Neall, The Negro Law of South Carolina, p. 5.

[1257] Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, i, p. 243.

[1258] Laws and Acts made from the First Settlement of Her Majesties Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations by the General Assembly of said Colony, etc., edition of 1705, p. 54; Updike, History of the Narragansett Church, p. 171; Staples, Annals of the Town of Providence, second edition, p. 171.

[1259] New York Colonial Documents, xiii, p. 537; Brodhead, op. cit., first edition, ii, p. 331.

[1260] Brodhead, op. cit., first edition, ii, p. 331; Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, i, p. 80.

[1261] Brodhead, op. cit., first edition, ii, p. 486.

[1262] Ibid., first edition, ii, p. 509.

[1263] Ibid., first edition, ii, p. 510.

[1264] O’Callaghan, Calendar of Historical Manuscripts, etc., pt. ii, p. 279.

[1265] Ibid., pt. ii, p. 314. July 20, 1703, Thomas Newton, mariner, made deposition that he purchased this slave at Jamaica. Ibid., ii, p. 314.

[1266] New York Colonial Documents, v, p. 342.

[1267] New York Colonial Documents, v, pp. 342, 357. The Lords of Trade regarded Hunter’s action favorably, and on August 27, 1712, recommended to her majesty to grant a pardon to the Spanish Indians then in prison for engaging in the conspiracy.

[1268] Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, v, p. 176.

[1269] Coffin, A Sketch of the History of Newbury, etc., p. 337, contains a receipt for the sale of a Spanish Indian boy in 1718.

Transcriber’s Notes

Новое оригинальное оформление обложки, включенное в эту электронную книгу, передано в общественное достояние.

Очевидные опечатки были молча исправления.

В сноске 252 номер последней страницы обрезаем во всех доступных сканах.