The Great Stain

by Noel Rae

  Le Jau was not the only white witness to the brutality of slave owners. In his Journal, Charles Wesley, one of the founders of Methodism, wrote that “Colonel Lynch cut off the legs of a poor Negro, and he kills several of them every year by his barbarities. Mr. Hill, a dancing-master in Charleston, whipped a female slave so long that she fell down at his feet, in appearance dead; but when, with the help of a physician, she was so far recovered as to show signs of life, he repeated the whipping with equal rigour, and concluded the punishment by dropping scalding wax upon her flesh. Her only crime was over-filling a tea-cup.” And Olaudah Equiano, who since his sudden purchase by the captain of the Industrious Bee had spent much of his life at sea, described how in 1764 the ship on which he served as supercargo arrived in Georgia, where, “one Sunday night, as I was with some Negroes in their master’s yard, in the town of Savannah, it happened that their master, one Dr. Perkins, who was a very severe and cruel man, came in drunk; and not liking to see any strange Negroes in his yard, he and a ruffian of a white man he had in his service beset me in an instant … they beat and mangled me in a shameful manner, leaving me near dead. I lost so much blood from the wounds I received that I lay quite motionless, and was so benumbed that I could not feel anything for many hours. Early in the morning they took me away to the jail” where, fortunately, he was found by his ship’s captain, who had been searching for him. “He soon got me out of jail to his lodgings, and immediately sent for the best doctors in the place, who at first declared it as their opinion that I could not recover. My captain on this went to all the lawyers in the town for their advice, but they told him they could do nothing for me as I was a Negro.”

  Before Stono, South Carolina already had some pretty severe laws for “the better ordering and governing Negroes and other slaves,” and for preventing the “disorders, rapines and inhumanity to which they are naturally prone and inclined.” After Stono, it seemed clear that these laws had not gone far enough, and so the Assembly debated and passed an act “for the better keeping slaves in due order and subjection.” Among the more than fifty other clauses: if any slave was caught off a plantation without a ticket of leave and refused to “undergo the examination of any white person, it shall be lawful for any such white person to pursue, apprehend, and moderately correct such slave; and if any such slave shall assault and strike such white person, such slave may be lawfully killed.” Also any slave who shall “endeavour to delude or entice any slave to run away and leave this Province, every such slave and slaves, and his and their accomplices, aiders and abettors shall, upon conviction as aforesaid, suffer death.” Also “if any slave, free Negro, mulatto, Indian or mustizo [part white, part Indian] shall willfully and maliciously burn or destroy any sack of rice, corn or other grain,” or “any tar kiln, barrels of pitch, tar, turpentine, or rosin,” or “shall feloniously steal, take or carry away any slave, being the property of another,” then all such persons “shall suffer death as a felon.” Also “for that as it is absolutely necessary to the safety of this Province that all due care be taken to restrain the wanderings and meetings of Negroes and other slaves at all times, and more especially on Saturday nights, Sundays, and other holidays, and their using and … keeping of drums, horns or other loud instruments, which may call together or give sign or notice to one another of their wicked designs and purposes,” then “whatsoever master, owner or overseer” who permitted such activities “shall forfeit ten pounds, current money.” Also “whereas many of the slaves in this Province wear clothes much above the condition of slaves, for the procuring whereof they use sinister and evil methods,” they were henceforth to wear only “Negro duffels, kerseys,” and other cheap clothing; and any constable who found a slave wearing “any sort of garment or apparel whatsoever finer than or of greater value than Negro cloths, duffels, coarse kerseys” and so on, “could seize and take away the same to his own use, benefit and behoof.”

  There was more: “To the end that owners of slaves may not be tempted to conceal the crimes of their slaves to the prejudice of the public,” any slave condemned to death would be appraised before execution “at any sum not exceeding two hundred pounds,” the money to be paid to the owner by the public treasurer. “And whereas several owners of slaves have permitted them to keep canoes, and to breed and raise horses, neat cattle and hogs, and to traffic and barter in several parts of this Province … by which means they have not only an opportunity of receiving and concealing stolen goods, but to plot and confederate together, and form conspiracies dangerous to the peace and safety of the whole Province …” all such activities were banned and all such property confiscated. And “whereas the having of slaves taught to write, or suffering them to be employed in writing, may be attended with great inconveniences,” any person “who shall hereafter teach, or cause any slave or slaves to be taught to write … shall for every such offence forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds current money.” Next to last: “And whereas many disobedient and evil-minded Negroes and other slaves, being the property of his Majesty’s subjects of this Province, have lately deserted the service of their owners, and have fled to St. Augustine and other places in Florida in hopes of being there received and protected; and whereas many other slaves have attempted to follow the same evil and pernicious example,” therefore any white person or Indian “who shall, on the south side of the Savannah River, take and secure, and shall from thence bring to the work-house in Charlestown any Negroes or other slaves,” would be rewarded according to the following scale: “For each grown man slave brought alive, the sum of fifty pounds; for every grown woman or boy slave above the age of twelve years brought alive, the sum of twenty pounds; for every Negro child under the age of twelve years, brought alive, the sum of five pounds; for every scalp of a grown Negro slave, with the two ears, twenty pounds.”

  Perhaps as a sop to their consciences, and also to ensure approval from the London government, which reviewed all colonial laws, legislators added some clauses that would appear to benefit their slaves. Thus any owner who made a slave work on a Sunday could be fined ten pounds, which sounds benevolent except for the loophole: “works of absolute necessity and the necessary occasions of the family only excepted.” Also, “if any Negro or other slave who shall be employed in the lawful business or service of his master … shall be beaten, bruised, maimed or disabled by any person not having sufficient cause or lawful authority for so doing,” then the offender would be fined forty shillings; however, this money would go not to the slave who had been unlawfully beaten and bruised but “to the use of the [white] poor of that parish in which such offense shall be committed.” Also, if any owner “shall deny, neglect or refuse to allow such slave or slaves under his or her charge sufficient clothing, covering or food, it shall and may be lawful for any person or persons”—i.e. white person or persons—“on behalf of such slave or slaves to make complaint to the next neighboring justice” who could then order relief for such slave or slaves. Also, if any owner or overseer “shall work or put to labor any such slave or slaves more than fifteen hours in four and twenty hours, from the 25th day of March to the 25th day of September, or more than fourteen hours in four and twenty hours from the 25th day of September to the 25th day of March, every such person shall forfeit a sum not exceeding twenty pounds.”

  Most notable among these apparent reforms was Clause XXXVII:

  “And whereas cruelty is not only highly unbecoming those who profess themselves Christians, but is odious in the eyes of all men who have any sense of virtue or humanity; therefore to restrain and prevent barbarity being exercised towards slaves, Be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, That … if any person shall, on a sudden heat or passion, or by undue correction, kill his own slave, or the slave of another person, he shall forfeit the sum of three hundred and fifty pounds, current money. And in case any person or persons shall, willfully cut out the tongue, put out the eye, castrate, or cruelly scald, burn or deprive any slave of any limb or member, or shall inflict any other cr
uel punishment, other than by whipping or beating … every such person shall, for every such offense, forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds, current money.”

  South Carolinians were not slow to congratulate themselves on the fair and humane nature of their slave laws. Thirty years later, in a report to London, Governor William Bull, son of the man who had come upon the Stono insurgents, favorably mentioned “a particular system of laws adapted to the condition of slaves, called our Negro Act, passed in 1740, calculated to punish offending and to protect abused slaves.” Thanks to the “happy temperament of justice and mercy in our Negro Acts, and the general humanity of the masters, the state of slavery is as comfortable in this province as such a state can be.” Admittedly, “monsters of cruelty sometimes appear,” but these were “punished and abhorred.” Bull gave no examples of this happening, nor did he mention that since slaves could not testify in court against whites, the only way to convict an owner of abusing a slave was for one of his overseers, or one of his neighbors, to give evidence against him, hardly something likely to happen.

  GEORGIA

  Another result of the Stono Insurrection was to confirm General Oglethorpe in his determination to keep Georgia free of Negro slaves. The only colony to be supported financially by the British government, Georgia was to be a charity venture where debtors and other “miserable wretches lately relieved out of jail” could make a new start in life. New settlers were given a grant of land, but they would have to clear and work it themselves, or with the help of indentured white servants or transported white convicts. But no slaves, because, as Oglethorpe explained, “wherever Negroes are, though never so few, the white men grow idle.” Moreover, “it would be impossible to prevent them deserting to the Spaniards, our near neighbours, who give freedom, land and protection to all runaway Negroes.” And even if they didn’t desert “the great number of Negroes, near forty thousand in Carolina, would be either an assistance to the invader or a prize worth near eight hundred thousand Pounds Sterling.” Also, as a humanitarian, he deplored the fact that introducing slavery would “occasion the misery of thousands in Africa, by setting men upon using arts to buy and bring into perpetual slavery the poor people who now live free there.”

  But although the Scots who settled at Darien, and the German Pietists at Ebenezer, proved by their example that white people could cultivate the land despite the hot climate, that was not what others, especially the speculators, wanted to believe; and in August, 1735, Patrick Tailfer and several other malcontents bypassed Oglethorpe and addressed this petition to the Trustees in London:

  “Honoured Sirs: We whose names are underwritten beg leave to lay the ensuing particulars before you: We, all having land in your colony of Georgia and having come here chiefly with a design to settle upon and improve our land, find that it is next to an impossibility to do it without the use of Negroes. For in the first place, most part of our white servants not being used to so hot a climate can’t bear the scorching rays of the sun in the summer when they are at work in the woods without falling into distempers which render them useless for almost one half of the year. Secondly, there is a great deal of difference betwixt the expense of white servants and of Negroes, for Negroes can endure this climate almost without any clothes, only a cap, jacket, and pair of trousers made of some coarse woolen stuff in the winter, and one pair of shoes; whereas white men must be clothed as Europeans and proportionable to the season all the year throughout. And then as to their diet, the charge of maintaining Negroes is much less than of white men, for the first live in good plight and health upon salt, Indian corn and potatoes, which they raise themselves with no expense to the master but the seed, and have nothing to drink but water; whereas white men must be fed with flesh meat, bread and other victuals suitable to the European diet which they have been used to and bred up with from their infancy, and must likewise have beer or other strong liquors in due quantities for their drink, otherwise they turn feeble and languid and are not capable to perform their work …”

  Convicted felons, who were transported for life to Georgia rather than be hanged in England, were of little help, being “hardened abandoned wretches, perfectly skilled in all manner of villainy … continually stealing and embezzling our goods and, which is of worse consequence, forming plots and treasonable designs.” Also, it was easy for them to run way and pass for free whites, “whereas Negroes would always be known and taken into custody.”

  James Oglethorpe, the strong-willed English general who was the first governor of Georgia. For the new colony to succeed as a refuge for the “worthy [white] poor,” Oglethorpe banned strong drink and slavery; the first ban broke down almost at once, and the second soon after his return to England in 1743.

  Tailfer and the petitioners were also careful to explain that they did not propose employing Negroes in any of the skilled trades, which would be reserved for white artisans, “but only in cutting down trees and stumps, hoeing, trenching and fencing the ground and all other ways of clearing the land, making turpentine and tar, beating of rice &c.”

  When this petition was rejected, Tailfer and his faction appealed directly to Parliament: “It is experience, seven long years’ experience, that has confirmed us of the impossibility of white men being able to work here and live. Consider the difference of the climate, think how unfit a British constitution is to undergo hard labor in a country twenty-three Degrees to the South of England … How shocking must it be even to a person of the least humanity, to see his own countrymen, perhaps his own townsmen, laboring in the corn or rice field, broiling in the sun, pale and fainting under the excessive heat, and instances there have been of their dying on the spot! How terrible must such a sight be to any man who has the least grain of compassion within him! How must it make his heart flow with sorrow to see the misery of his fellow creatures!”

  But now let the reader of the petition “turn his eyes round to the Negroes in the same fields. There he will see the reverse. He will see the utmost vigours exerted in every act. They go through their work with pleasure. They welcome the rising sun with their songs and when in his meridian their spirits are at their highest. They are far more happy here than in their own country. There they are abject slaves, their lives and whatever else they have are every hour in the hands of some petty tyrant. Here, it is true, they are the property of particular men, but their lives are in no danger. They are sure of being fed and clothed, it being in their master’s interest to take the utmost care of them …”

  So long as Oglethorpe was in charge, there was no slavery in Georgia, but he returned to England for good in 1743, and by 1750 the ban had been revoked. Before leaving, he took advantage of the War of Jenkins’ Ear to launch an attack on Fort Mose, the small but heavily fortified village near St. Augustine which was home to about a hundred former slaves who had escaped from South Carolina. More formally known as the Pueblo de Gracia Real de Santa Teresa de Mose, the fort was a strategic outpost where the Spanish governor had invited them to settle, rightly calculating that if the English were ever to attack, the runaways could be counted on to fight to the last, not out of gratitude but to avoid being re-enslaved. Father de Leon, a Spanish Franciscan, was chaplain and Captain Francisco Menendez, a Mandingo, was military commander. When Oglethorpe attacked he greatly outnumbered the garrison, who then retreated to St. Augustine. During the siege that followed a joint force of Spanish soldiers, Indian allies and free blacks commanded by Captain Menendez sallied forth and made a surprise counter-attack on Mose, now occupied by Oglethorpe’s troops, killing seventy-five of them in hand to hand fighting. This action contributed greatly to Oglethorpe’s decision to abandon the whole campaign. In his official report, Governor Montiano particularly commended the “patriotism, courage and steadiness of the troops, militia, and free Negroes.”

  Fort Mose (Fuerte Negro, the small rectangle to the far right), a city on a hill for fugitive slaves who managed to reach Spanish Florida, where slavery had long been banned. On arrival they were rec
ruited into the Spanish army and stationed at this fort near St. Augustine. When Oglethorpe attacked Florida in 1740 some of his heaviest losses came at Fort Mose where Captain Menendez, a former slave from Angola, and his black soldiers repulsed a large force of British regulars.

  The following summer it was Governor Montiano’s turn to attack the English colonies. His force, wrote Oglethorpe, included “a regiment of Negroes. The Negro commanders were clothed in lace, bore the same rank as the white officers, and with equal freedom and familiarity walked and conversed with their comrades and chief. Such an example might justly have alarmed Carolina.” Even more alarming was the Spanish plan to “send out Negroes of all languages to recruit the slaves of the English plantation and offer them freedom and land in the territory of Florida under the protection of the laws of the King of Spain.” This time, however, it was the Spanish who were repulsed, and not long afterward the war petered out.