diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67473-0.txt | 9313 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67473-0.zip | bin | 164320 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67473-h.zip | bin | 293632 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67473-h/67473-h.htm | 14732 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67473-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 93321 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67473-h/images/u-texas-seal.jpg | bin | 13388 -> 0 bytes |
9 files changed, 17 insertions, 24045 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4ebd765 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #67473 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/67473) diff --git a/old/67473-0.txt b/old/67473-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 7a58932..0000000 --- a/old/67473-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9313 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Negro in Tennessee, 1790-1865, by -Caleb Perry Patterson - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The Negro in Tennessee, 1790-1865 - University of Texas Bulletin, No. 2205: February 1, 1922. - -Author: Caleb Perry Patterson - -Release Date: February 22, 2022 [eBook #67473] - -Language: English - -Produced by: Charlene Taylor and the Online Distributed Proofreading - Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from - images generously made available by The Internet - Archive/American Libraries.) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEGRO IN TENNESSEE, -1790-1865 *** - - - - - - -Publications of the University of Texas - - -Publications Committee: - - FREDERIC DUNCALF - G. C. BUTTE - KILLIS CAMPBELL - F. W. GRAFF - J. L. HENDERSON - E. J. MATHEWS - H. J. MULLER - A. E. TROMBLY - HAL C. WEAVER - -The University publishes bulletins four times a month, so numbered that -the first two digits of the number show the year of issue, the last two -the position in the yearly series. (For example, No. 2201 is the first -bulletin of the year 1922.) These comprise the official publications -of the University, publications on humanistic and scientific subjects, -bulletins prepared by the Bureau of Extension, by the Bureau of Economic -Geology and Technology, and other bulletins of general educational -interest. With the exception of special numbers, any bulletin will be -sent to a citizen of Texas free on request. All communications about -University publications should be addressed to University Publications, -University of Texas, Austin. - - - - - University of Texas Bulletin - No. 2205: February 1, 1922 - - THE NEGRO IN TENNESSEE, 1790-1865 - - BY - CALEB PERRY PATTERSON - Adjunct Professor of Government in the University of Texas - - [Illustration] - - PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY FOUR TIMES A MONTH, AND ENTERED AS - SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POSTOFFICE AT AUSTIN, TEXAS, - UNDER THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912 - - - - - The benefits of education and of useful knowledge, generally - diffused through a community, are essential to the preservation - of a free government. - - Sam Houston - - Cultivated mind is the guardian genius of democracy.... It - is the only dictator that freemen acknowledge and the only - security that freemen desire. - - Mirabeau B. Lamar - - - - - -CONTENTS - - - Preface 7-8 - - I. Introduction of Slavery into Tennessee 9-24 - - I. The status of the negro in North Carolina, 1693-1790 12-21 - - A. Privileges 12-18 - - B. Restrictions 18-21 - - II. The status of the negro in the Franklin State, 1785-1788 22-23 - - III. The status of the negro in the Southwest Territory, - 1790-1796 23-24 - - II. The Status of the Slave in Tennessee, 1796-1865 25-58 - - I. The Privileges of Slaves 25-30 - - A. Hunting 25-26 - - B. Travel 26 - - C. Suits for freedom 26-28 - - D. Trial by Jury 28-30 - - II. Disabilities of Slaves 30-33 - - III. Relations of Master and Society 34-38 - - A. Liabilities of the master to society 34-36 - - 1. For his own acts 34-35 - - 2. For the acts of his slaves 35-36 - - B. Liabilities of society to the master 36-38 - - IV. The Patrol System 38-41 - - V. Special Problems of Slave Government 41-52 - - A. The runaway 41-43 - - B. Importation of slaves 43-44 - - C. The stealing of slaves 44-45 - - D. Trading with slaves 46-49 - - E. Insurrections 49-50 - - F. Unlawful assembly of slaves 50-51 - - G. Punishment of slaves 51-52 - - VI. Title of Slaves 52-55 - - VII. The Law of Increase 55-56 - - VIII. The Legal Status of the Slave 56-58 - - III. Economics of Slavery in Tennessee 59-79 - - I. Slavery an Expression of the Soil 59-64 - - II. The Management of the Plantation 64-72 - - III. Was Slavery Profitable in Tennessee? 72-79 - - IV. Anti-Slavery Societies 80-101 - - I. The Tennessee Manumission Society 80-89 - - II. The Humane Protecting Society 89 - - III. The Emancipation Labor Society 89-91 - - IV. The Moral, Religious Manumission Society of West - Tennessee 91-94 - - V. The Tennessee Colonization Society 94-101 - - V. The Religious and Social Aspects of Slavery 102-152 - - I. The Methodists 104-125 - - II. The Baptists 125-131 - - III. Cumberland Presbyterians 131-136 - - IV. The Friends 136-139 - - V. The Presbyterians 139-148 - - VI. The Episcopalians 148-152 - - VI. The Legal Status of the Free Negro 153-175 - - I. The Establishment of a Policy 153-160 - - A. The policy of North Carolina 153 - - B. The policy of Tennessee in 1831 153 - - C. Changes in the policy from 1831 to 1865 153-160 - - II. System of Registration of Free Negroes 161-162 - - III. Protection of Free Negroes 162 - - IV. Suffrage for Free Negroes 162-173 - - A. In North Carolina 162-164 - - B. In the Convention of 1796 164-167 - - C. From 1796 to 1834 167-168 - - D. Its abolition by the Convention of 1834 168-173 - - V. Limitations upon the freedom of free negroes 173 - - VI. The Status of the Free Negro 174-175 - - VII. Abolition 176-198 - - I. Private Abolition 176-180 - - A. Methods 176-179 - - (1) By Deed. - - (2) By Will. - - (3) By Bill of Sale. - - (4) By Implication. - - (5) By Effect of Foreign Laws. - - B. Extent of Emancipation in Tennessee 179-180 - - II. Anti-slavery Leaders 180-185 - - III. Abolition Literature 185-187 - - IV. Petitions to the Legislature for Abolition 187-189 - - V. Abolition in the Convention of 1834 189-195 - - VI. Abolition Sentiment after 1834 195-198 - - VIII. Conclusions 199-202 - - IX. Bibliography 202-209 - - X. Appendices 209-213 - - A. Anti-Slavery Societies of Tennessee 209 - - B. Tennessee Colonization Society 209 - - C. Anti-Slavery Leaders in Tennessee 210 - - D. List of Emigrants 210-211 - - E. Vice-President of American Colonization Society from - Tennessee 211 - - F. Comparative List of Manumission Societies and Members - in the United States 211 - - G. Slave and Free Negro Population in Tennessee 212 - - H. Comparative Value of Land and Slaves in the Three - Divisions of Tennessee, 1859 212 - - I. Approximate Value of Property, Slaves, Land, and - Cotton in Tennessee, 1859 212 - - J. Classification of Slaveholders in Tennessee and the - United States, on the basis of number of slaves - held, 1860 213 - - - - -PREFACE - - -This work was undertaken to discover the exact status of the negro in -one of the border states. An effort has been made to give definite -information as to the legal, social, economic, and religious condition of -the negro from his introduction into slavery in Colonial Western North -Carolina to the abolition of slavery in Tennessee in 1865. - -The study reveals the struggles of the slave from a status of servitude -under the common law through the institution of slavery regulated by -an extensive slave-code into the final condition of an almost helpless -citizen with a responsibility for which he was only partially prepared. - -The status of the free negro is also established in his relations to both -the slave and the whites. It was rather disappointing to find that the -free negro was more disadvantageously situated than the slave. He never -attained either civil or political equality, although he exercised the -suffrage until 1834. He was subject to a special code different from -either the slave code or the regular code. - -It is clear, however, that the negro, whether slave or free, was making -progress. He was receiving an industrial training without which he -could never have sustained himself without help, when freedom came. His -training for active participation in the body politic was negligible. He -was taught the lesson of being obedient to law. - -A constructive part of the study is the disclosure of a large body -of loyal friends of the negro in all his stages of development. -These consisted of not only the abolitionists, the Friends, and the -anti-slavery forces generally, but of more conservative individuals who -saw that the negro could be fitted for freedom only by a gradual process. -The courts of the state deserve special mention in this connection. - -The study has been a difficult one to make because of the scarcity of -the sources and the deplorable condition of those that were available. -The county records of Tennessee have either been burned, thrown away, -or thrown together in heaps in the basement of county court houses. -The state archives are in the attic of the Tennessee Capitol, covered -with dust, and are practically inaccessible for any thorough study. -The statutes of the state, records of courts, reports of anti-slavery -societies, church minutes, petitions, slave codes, periodicals, travels, -reminiscences, and newspapers are the principal sources consulted. A -goodly number of general, state, and church histories and biographies -proved useful for general information. - -The work was begun under the direction of Professors Jernegan and Dodd -of the University of Chicago, and continued under the guidance of -Professor Albert Bushnell Hart of Harvard, Professor U. B. Phillips -of the University of Michigan, and Professor William A. Dunning of -Columbia University. Professor B. B. Kendrick of Columbia University was -especially helpful in organizing the material. But for the stimulating -and sympathetic assistance of these men, the study could not have been -completed. The author alone is responsible for any errors of fact and the -conclusions. - - CALEB PERRY PATTERSON. - - The University of Texas, Austin, Texas. - - - - -CHAPTER I - -INTRODUCTION - - -The introduction of slavery into Tennessee was a part of the westward -movement of colonization. It had passed the experimental stage of its -development in North Carolina before Tennessee acquired an independent -political existence.[1] Its economic, social, and legal aspects had -largely been determined before Tennessee was even settled.[2] As a system -of labor, it had proved a valuable adjunct to the sturdy pioneers in -converting the wilderness of North Carolina into a growing community -that began immediately to look forward to statehood.[3] As a social -institution, it had been left primarily to the regulation of custom. -As a problem of government, an elaborate code had been enacted for its -control. Its establishment and regulation in North Carolina prior to 1790 -constitute, therefore, the genesis of this study. - -Negro slaves were brought into North Carolina in 1663 by Virginia -immigrants who planted a settlement on the Albemarle River.[4] A group of -more thrifty Virginians, with a large number of slaves, settled in the -central part of the state about the middle of the eighteenth century.[5] -A number of small farmers came to the western part of the state with -their slaves at about the same time.[6] It is impossible to state the -exact number of slaves owned by these early settlers. - -The opportuneness of these settlements is shown by a number of -conditions. The contest between negro slavery and white servitude had -been settled in favor of slavery. The Tuscorora Indians, the implacable -enemies of negroes, were driven out of the colony in 1772. The moral -evils of slavery had not appeared.[7] The English government in 1663, by -chartering the Royal African Company to engage in the slave trade, became -interested in the development of slavery, and, thereafter, discouraged -the importation of indented servants into the colonies in order that -this company might have a larger market for slaves.[8] It was early -recognized that the industrial life of the colonies offered practically -no place to the white servant at the expiration of his indenture. He was -not financially able to purchase land and white servants or negro slaves, -necessary to farming, nor could he find employment in the villages and -small towns, because they were not sufficiently industrialized at this -time to offer such opportunities. - -These influences produced a rapid increase in the slave population of -the colonies. In 1709, Rev. John Adams, a missionary, reported 800 -slaves in North Carolina.[9] In 1717, there were 1,100 slaves out of a -taxable population of 2,000.[10] Governor Burrington stated that there -were 6,000 in 1730.[11] The census of 1754 showed a population of 9,128 -slaves. In 1756, there were 10,800 negro taxables and as the ratio of -taxable negroes (those of the age of twelve and above) to the total negro -population was about ten to eighteen, there must have been, at this time, -approximately 20,000 slaves in the colony. There were 39,000 in 1767.[12] - -It is probable that the first slave was brought into Tennessee in 1766. -There are court records which show that slaves were a part of an estate -in Washington County in 1788. When John Sevier moved to Nolachucky in -1788, he owned slaves. James Robertson brought a “negro fellow” to -Nashville in 1779. John Donelson was accompanied by negroes on his famous -voyage to Nashville in the winter of 1779-80.[13] A court record, dated -November, 1788, at Jonesboro, Tennessee, shows that Andrew Jackson owned -a slave when he was only twenty-one years of age.[14] On the sixth of -September, 1794, a negro belonging to Peter Turner was stolen by the -Indians near the Sumner Court House.[15] Miss Jane Thomas, who came -with her parents to Nashville in 1804, tells an interesting story of a -prominent negro, who was highly regarded by the whites.[16] There was -also in Nashville in 1805, a famous “Black Bob” who ran a tavern. So it -is seen that slaves accompanied the westward movement into Tennessee, and -that some of them became rather prominent free negroes. In 1796, when the -census of the Southwest Territory was taken to ascertain if it contained -sufficient inhabitants to be admitted into the Union as a state, it had -a population of 77,262, of which 10,613 were slaves.[17] The population -of East Tennessee was 65,339, of which twelve and one-half per cent were -slaves. The population of West Tennessee (now Middle Tennessee) was -11,824, of which twenty per cent were slaves.[18] - -The legal basis of slavery developed contemporary with the expansion -of settlement toward the western part of the colony. The famous law -of 1741 is regarded as the basis of the slave code of North Carolina, -although the Act of 1715 marks the beginning of slave legislation in -this colony. The laws of North Carolina were, in 1790, made the legal -basis of the government of the Southwest Territory,[19] which became -the State of Tennessee in 1796. These laws constitute the beginnings of -the slave code of Tennessee. The common law status of the negro was, -in this introductory period, gradually changed to a statutory basis. -This development took, primarily, the form of granting privileges to, -and placing restrictions upon, the negro. There were three political -organizations that participated in this development: North Carolina, the -State of Franklin, and the Southwest Territory. - - -I. THE STATUS OF THE NEGRO IN NORTH CAROLINA FROM 1693-1790 - - -A. PRIVILEGES— - -1. _Hunting_: Slaves were permitted to hunt on their masters’ -plantations, but, by the Act of 1729, were prohibited from hunting -elsewhere unless they were accompanied by a white man.[20] If the slaves -violated this restriction, the master paid a fine of twenty shillings to -the owner of the land on which the slaves were hunting. Slaves were not -permitted to be armed in any way, or hunt anywhere, unless they held a -certificate from their master, granting this privilege. Any citizen could -seize an armed slave and deliver him to a constable whose duty it was -to administer twenty lashes on the slave’s naked back. The master was -charged a fee on recovering such a slave.[21] - -The master was permitted to send a slave on business missions, or to -designate one slave to hunt on his plantation, to care for his stock, or -to kill game for his family; but this could only be done by the master’s -securing, from the Chairman of the County Court, a permit which specified -the slave that was granted such privileges. This was an ineffectual -regulation, and in 1753, the master was required to give bond to the -County Court, with good security, to guarantee the county against damages -that might be done by a slave enjoying any special privileges.[22] Such -permission was granted only during the time of cultivation or harvesting -of crops. - -This act empowered the justices of the county courts to district their -counties and appoint three freeholders as searchers in each district, -who, under a very strict oath,[23] were to disarm the slaves of their -district. These persons were exempted from services as constables, -jurors, on the roads, and in the militia, and from the payment of county -and parish taxes.[24] This legislation laid the foundation for the patrol -system of North Carolina and Tennessee. - -Slaves were especially prohibited from killing wild deer, either on -their own initiative or by command of their masters or overseers.[25] -For violation of this inhibition, they suffered punishment in the first -instance, and their masters or overseers in the second. This prohibition -was constantly strengthened by later legislation.[26] These restrictions -were intended to prevent damages to crops, and to limit the opportunities -of the slaves to run away and organize insurrections. By these acts, -masters were made very largely responsible for the peace and welfare of -the community. - -2. _Travel_: The slave was permitted to travel, in the daytime, “the -most usual and accustomed road”; but he subjected himself to a whipping, -not exceeding forty lashes, if he violated this restriction.[27] He was -not permitted to travel at night or visit the quarters of other slaves. -He was subject to forty lashes, and the visited slave twenty lashes, -for violation of this regulation. Masters, however, were not prohibited -from sending their slaves on business missions with written permits. In -1741, an exception to the above regulation was made for negroes wearing -liveries.[28] - -3. _Possession of Property_: Slaves at first were permitted, not by -law but by custom, to own horses, hogs, cattle, sheep, poultry and -to cultivate small areas for their own use. They frequently acquired -sufficient property to buy themselves. They were protected from -professional traders by law.[29] It soon developed, however, that this -privilege increased their disposition to steal, and multiplied their -opportunities of contact with outsiders. The accessibility of plantations -by means of creeks, bays, and rivers stimulated illicit trade. This -situation finally caused them to be prohibited by law from owning -property.[30] - -4. _Protection_: The Locke Constitution of 1669 for the Carolinas stated -that “Every freeman of Carolina shall have absolute power and authority -over his slaves, of what opinion or religion soever.”[31] This was done -to counteract the theory that a Christian could not be a slave. This -established the government of the master over the slave. The master -became the agent of the government in the control of his slaves, and it -became the government’s duty to see that its agents dealt humanely with -the slaves. The governors of North Carolina tried in vain to secure the -passage of laws that would offer the proper protection to slaves.[32] -In 1754, Governor Dobbs made an unsuccessful effort to accomplish this -result.[33] In 1773, William Hooper secured the passage of a bill to -prevent the wilful and malicious killing of slaves, but the Governor -vetoed it because “it was inconsistent with His Majesty’s instruction to -pass it, as it does not reserve the fines imposed by it pursuant to their -instruction.”[34] In 1774 it was made a criminal offense to be guilty of -willingly and maliciously killing a slave. The penalty for first offense -was twelve months’ imprisonment, and death without benefit of clergy for -the second offense.[35] - -5. _Trial of Slaves_: A special court was established for the trial of -slaves. In 1741, a court of two or more justices of the peace and four -freeholders, who were slaveholders, was empowered to try all manner -of crimes and offenses committed by slaves.[36] Negroes, mulattoes, -and Indians, bond or free, could be witnesses. The chairman of the -court always charged the witness before the examination to tell the -truth.[37] The master of the slave could appear at his trial and defend -him before the court.[38] In 1783, a single justice was constituted a -court for the trial of non-capital offenses.[39] For capital offenses, -four slaveholders remained a part of the court as provided by the Act of -1741. This difference in the mode of the trial of the two classes of -offenses is evidently due to economic influences. - -Since this court was not one of the regular courts, it sat at any time -and thus prevented the master from suffering excessive loss of the -slave’s time between terms of court. This court had rather free procedure -and broad jurisdiction.[40] - -6. _Witness_: The slave was permitted to be a witness in the trial of -other slaves, free negroes, and mulattoes.[41] He was not permitted to -give testimony in court in a case to which a white man was a party.[42] -His paganism was a partial basis for denying him this privilege.[43] His -moral depravity and social prejudice were, undoubtedly, the main forces -in making this restriction a universal law of slavery. - -The slave was cautioned against false swearing because he generally had -little regard for his word. If he was convicted of false swearing, one -ear was nailed to the pillory for one hour and then cut off. The other -ear was treated in the same way; and to complete this inhuman punishment, -the slave was given thirty-nine lashes on his back.[44] - -7. _Manumission_: Manumission was the door of escape from slavery that -was constantly open to the slave. At common law, a master could free -his slaves on the basis of any agreement that he might make with them. -The owner of a slave could dispose of him like any other piece of -property. The spirit of manumission was so promoted by the churches and -by the doctrine of natural rights of the American Revolution that the -State, in self defense, placed a limitation on the common law method of -manumission.[45] After 1777, slaves could be freed only on a basis of -meritorious service, of which the county court was the judge.[46] Slaves -freed by any other method could be resold into slavery by the court. - -The “pernicious practice” of manumitting slaves at common law -continued,[47] and the county court began to resell such negroes into -slavery. The power of the court to give valid title in such sales was -doubted, and the legislature was forced by special act to guarantee the -validity of the sale of illegally liberated slaves, made by the county -courts.[48] The preamble to this measure states that “many negroes are -now going at large, to the terror of the good people of this state.”[49] -This law was weak in that the power of apprehending illegally liberated -slaves was optional in freeholders only. In 1788, the state gave any -freeman the power to inform a justice of the peace of any such slave, and -required such justice to issue to the sheriff a warrant for the arrest -of the slave.[50] This legislation indicates a growth of the manumission -movement in the face of legal restrictions, and, also, registers a -protest against the conservative forces of society. - -8. _Suffrage_: It does not appear that the slave ever possessed the -right of suffrage. The free negro, however, voted throughout the period -of colonial history in North Carolina. The Declaration of Rights of -North Carolina, adopted December 17, 1776, gave the franchise to “all -freemen.”[51] The Constitution of the State, adopted the next day, gave -the franchise to “all freemen” with certain qualifications as to age, -residence, property, and taxes.[52] This constitution remained in force -until 1835, during which time the free negro voted in North Carolina. - - -B. RESTRICTIONS— - -1. _Marriage_: The slave never acquired legal marriage. It was generally -held that the slave regarded marriage lightly, and that, therefore, the -separation of husband and wife was not a serious matter. This philosophy -was largely true, but, at the same time, it fitted into the economics of -slavery very advantageously. - -It is not to be inferred from the above that the slave did not have -formal marriage. He was usually married with considerable ceremony by -either his own minister or a white clergyman. Special preparation was -generally made for the wedding, which frequently took place in the -dining-room of the master’s mansion. It may well be contended that this -religious sanction was more sacred to the slave, who was of a very -religious nature, and, therefore, more binding than a civil marriage -would have been. - -Slaves were forbidden to intermarry with free negroes or mulattoes, -except by the written permission of the master, attested by two justices -of the peace.[53] Marriage of negroes, bond or free, with white persons -was prohibited.[54] The white person of such a marriage, and the minister -who performed the marriage rite, were fined fifty pounds each.[55] - -2. _Social and Economic Relations_: The slave’s relations with the -outside world were carefully guarded because they might lead to runaways, -marriages, or insurrections. No free negro or mulatto was permitted -to entertain a slave in his home “during the Sabbath, or in the night -between sunset and sunrise.”[56] The penalty for violating this act was -twenty shillings for the first offense, and forty shillings for each -succeeding offense. If the offender could not pay his fine, he was forced -to work it out. A free negro or mulatto was prohibited from marrying or -cohabiting with a slave unless the master’s consent, attested by two -justices, was obtained.[57] The free negro or mulatto, and not the slave, -was fined, for violation of this act, ten pounds or one year’s service -for the master. No master of a vessel was permitted to entertain a slave -on board, who did not hold a pass from his master or a justice of the -peace.[58] Such harboring of a slave indicated either an illicit trade -relation, or an intention of stealing the slave. For violation of this -act, the master of the vessel was fined five pounds for the first, and -ten pounds for each succeeding, offense. - -Traffic with slaves was a very difficult matter to control. At first, a -person trading with a slave was required to pay treble for the article -purchased, and six pounds proclamation money.[59] Finally, traffic with -slaves was permitted only on the basis of a written permission from the -master, describing the article for sale. A person convicted for violation -of this law was fined ten pounds, and the slave received not exceeding -thirty-nine lashes.[60] If such a person did not have sufficient property -to satisfy the fine, he was committed to jail. Traffic with slaves became -more difficult to regulate as the slavery system expanded. - -The slave was not permitted to engage his services to anyone, nor -could the master hire him out. For violation of this regulation, the -slave might be taken in charge by a magistrate or free-holder and set -to work for the county, for the benefit of the poor, for a period -not exceeding twenty days; “any law, usage or custom to the contrary -notwithstanding.”[61] - -It is noticed that these restrictions pertained primarily to the -relations of the slaves with free negroes, Indians, traders, and poor -whites, who were as a rule more or less inclined to disturb the order -of the plantation. Their association with the whites in the home and at -church was a matter of unwritten law. The domestic servants were more -intimately associated with the whites and were frequently cultured.[62] -There was very little effort on the part of the masters, in the early -stages of the development of slavery, to teach or christianize the -slaves. Many of them, however, learned to read, and joined churches, but -they were not permitted to have separate church organizations.[63] - -3. _The Runaway_: The runaway was one of the most difficult problems -of slave government. The wild life of the slave in Africa, and the -hardships of frontier American slavery naturally created a disposition in -the slave to run away from his master’s plantation. Organized bands of -slave-stealers, poor whites, and free negroes constantly took advantage -of this attitude of the slave. This was one method by which the slave -could, at least temporarily, break the bonds of slavery; and he did not -always find life more severe in the camp than on the plantation. - -Runaways, aside from the economic loss to the slave-owners involved, -might congregate and start an insurrection. Any outside contact made -possible conspiracies, and created a real danger to the community. It -was, therefore, a heavy fine for anyone to harbor a slave; and it was the -duty of all citizens to arrest runaways.[64] The law against the aiding -and harboring of runaways was made more severe by increasing the fine for -its violation. Finally, to promote the escape of a slave from the colony -became a felony and might involve the loss of life.[65] - -This law also gave to the justices of the peace the power, by -proclamation, to outlaw any runaway who was in hiding, committing -injuries to the inhabitants of the community. It was then lawful for any -one to kill such a slave.[66] Any runaway who was caught was forced to -wear a yoke around his neck until he gave sufficient evidence of good -behavior.[67] - -Sheriffs and constables were strictly charged with the safe keeping of -all runaways who were committed to their care. If they negligently or -wilfully permitted any to escape, they were liable for damages to the -master at common law with costs.[68] To encourage the police officials -to execute the law, they were exempted from the payment of all public, -county, and parish levies for their own persons. The keepers of ferries -were required to give immediate passage to officers charged with -conducting runaways.[69] - -No feature of the slave code shows more progressively the attitude of the -whites toward the negro than the law on runaways. As the slaves developed -the means for evading the law, it was made increasingly rigid. White -men could be sold into temporary servitude to pay fines for persuading -the slave to run away.[70] Anyone convicted for attempting to steal -and convey a slave out of the colony was required to pay the owner -twenty-five pounds. If he could not pay this fine he was forced to serve -the master for five years.[71] The idea in these laws is not necessarily -harshness to the slave, but rather the security of the bondage of the -slave. - - -II. THE STATUS OF THE NEGRO IN THE STATE OF FRANKLIN FROM 1785 TO 1788 - -The State of Franklin[72] was included in the western part of North -Carolina, which later became the Southwest Territory and the State -of Tennessee. The independent action of its people is significant, -therefore, not only as an expression of their own position on slavery, -but also as a prophecy of the attitude of the state of Tennessee. - -The constitution proposed by the Greenville Convention, November 14, -1785, established a liberal suffrage.[73] Section 4 of this constitution -states that “Every free male inhabitant in this state six months -immediately preceding the day of election, shall participate in electing -all officers chosen by the people, in the county where he resides.”[74] -The Declaration of Rights uses the terms “freeman,” “the people,” -and “every man,” synonymously. There was no property or religious -qualification for the suffrage. The slave, by emancipation, would have -voted under this constitution on the same basis as other citizens. This -constitution was finally rejected and that of North Carolina with few -changes was adopted.[75] The above proposal is interesting as a typical -frontier attitude on the suffrage question. - -North Carolina never recognized the independence of the Franklin State. -There were two factions in North Carolina politics on this question.[76] -One of these, led by John Sevier, the Governor of Franklin, advocated -independence; and the other, led by John Tipton, demanded the downfall of -Franklin. The Tipton faction won, and the Franklin State came to an end -in 1788. - - -III. THE STATUS OF THE NEGRO IN THE SOUTHWEST TERRITORY FROM 1790 TO 1796 - -The western part of North Carolina continued to demand a separate -political existence, and in February, 1790, it was ceded to the National -Government by North Carolina. The Act of Cession provided that “the -laws in force and in use in the State of North Carolina at this time, -shall be and continue in full force within the territory hereby ceded -until the same shall be repealed or otherwise altered by the legislative -authority of the said territory”; and also, “that no regulations made or -to be made by congress shall tend to emancipate slaves.”[77] The cession -was accepted by Congress April 2, 1790, on the above condition;[78] -and when Congress, on May 26, 1790, organized the government for the -Southwest Territory, it mentioned the conditions laid down in the Act of -Cession.[79] - -The provisions of the Act of Cession show how slavery, as it had -developed in North Carolina by 1790, was transplanted and legalized in -the territory that became Tennessee in 1796. There is no recorded protest -on the part of the people of the territory. The contract between the -National Government, North Carolina, and the Southwest Territory, shows -that the economic importance of slavery was already recognized. - -The legislation of the Territory on slavery consists of one act, relating -to the negro’s participation in court procedure. Negroes, whether bond -or free, were permitted to be witnesses for and against each other, but -denied this privilege in cases to which a white man was a party. Persons -of mixed blood, descended from negroes or Indians, inclusive of the third -generation, suffered a similar restriction. No person of mixed blood to -any degree whatever, who had been held in slavery, could be a witness -against a white person within twelve months of his liberation.[80] - -This preliminary study suggests the general lines along which the -institution of slavery developed in the succeeding decades. The social -and religious phases of the negro’s life were given less attention than -the economic and legal. His common law status was constantly changing to -a statutory basis. He was exchanging the status of a servant at common -law for that of a mere chattel at statute law. His place in judicial -procedure was determined. It was in this connection that racial prejudice -made its appearance. The foundation for a comprehensive patrol system -was established. The state asserted its right to limit manumission. -Free negroes had not become sufficiently numerous by 1796 to call for -the serious consideration that they later received. Consequently, there -was a relatively small amount of legislation concerning them prior to -this date. Some restrictions, however, were made on their relations with -the slave and on the process of manumission. On the whole, it may be -concluded that there had been laid a fairly secure foundation, for the -status of both the slave and the free negro, which future events only -modified. - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] Tennessee belonged to Virginia from 1607 to 1663, to Carolina from -1663 to 1693, and to North Carolina from 1693 to 1790. Garrett, W. R., -and Goodpasture, A. V., History of Tennessee, p. 14. - -[2] The first settlements in Tennessee were made in 1769 and 1772. Ibid., -pp. 49-52. - -[3] The settlements of western North Carolina became the State of -Franklin in 1785, the Southwest Territory in 1790, and the State of -Tennessee in 1796. Ibid., pp. 91, 105, and 127. - -[4] Doyle, J. A., The English Colonies in America, I, 331. - -[5] Bassett, John Spencer, Johns Hopkins University Studies, Vol. 14, p. -18. - -[6] Ibid., p. 19. - -[7] Doyle, I, 389. - -[8] Colonial Entry Book, No. lxxxii, p. 129. (Quoted by Doyle, I, 386.) - -[9] Bassett, Op. Cit., p. 20. - -[10] N. C. Col. Records, II, 17. - -[11] Ibid., V, 320. - -[12] Ibid., VII, 5391. - -[13] Hale, W. J., and Merritt, D. L., History of Tennessee, II, 292. - -[14] “A bill of sale from Micajah to Andrew Jackson, Esquire, for a -negro woman named Nancy about eighteen or twenty years of age was proven -in open court by the oath of David Allison, a subscribing witness, -and ordered to be recorded.” Record of the Court of Pleas and Quarter -Sessions, Jonesboro, Tennessee, for November Term, 1788. - -[15] Haywood, John, The Civil and Political History of the State of -Tennessee, 406. - -[16] (He) “was a very prominent negro. He had a garden, and supplied a -great many people with vegetables. His oldest daughter married Graham, a -barber. She had a big wedding and invited all the prominent white people -in town, and they all went. He was a very respectable, upright, humble -negro. General Andrew Jackson attended the wedding, and Dr. McNairy -danced the reel with the bride.” Hale and Merritt, II, 293. - -[17] Ramsey, J. G. M., The Annals of Tennessee, 648. - -[18] Hale and Merritt, II, 294. - -[19] Iredell, James, Laws of State of North Carolina, p. 85. - -[20] Acts of G. A. of N. C., 1729, Ch. 5, Sec. 7. - -[21] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 40. - -[22] Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Secs. 2-3. - -[23] This oath read: “I, A. B., do swear that I will, as searcher -for guns, swords, and other weapons among the slaves of my district, -faithfully, and as privately as I can, discharge the trust reposed in me, -as the law directs, to the best of my power. So help me God.” Acts of -1753, Ch. VI, Sec. 4. - -[24] Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Sec. 6. - -[25] Acts of 1738, Ch. X, Secs. 1-3. - -[26] Acts of 1745, Ch. 3, Sec. 3; Acts of 1768, Ch. 13, Sec. 2; Acts of -1784, Ch. 33, Sec. 2. - -[27] Acts of 1729, Ch. 5, Sec. 8. - -[28] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 43. - -[29] Anyone trading with slaves “without the license or consent in -writing under the head of his or her or their master or owner ... shall -forfeit treble the value of the thing bought, sold, or traded, trucked or -borrowed or lent.” Acts of 1715, Ch. 46, Sec. 10. - -[30] No slave was “permitted, on any pretense whatever, to raise any -horses, cattle or hogs; and all horses, cattle and hogs that, six months -from the date thereof, shall belong to any slave, or of any slave’s work -in this government, shall be seized and sold by the church wardens of the -Parish where such horses, cattle or hogs shall be, and the profit thereof -be applied, one-half to the use of the said Parish and the other half to -the Informer.” Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 44; see also Acts of 1779, Ch. -5, Sec. 6. - -[31] Acts of 1741, Ch. 31, Sec. 2. - -[32] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 48. - -[33] Ibid., Sec. 51. - -[34] Ibid., Sec. 52. - -[35] Acts of 1774, Ch. 31, Sec. 2. - -[36] Acts of 1741, Sec. 48, Ch. 24. - -[37] Ibid., Sec. 51. - -[38] Ibid., Sec. 52. - -[39] Acts of 1783, Ch. 14, Sec. 2. - -[40] It was directed “to take for evidence the confession of the -offender, the oath of one or more credible witnesses, or such testimony -of negroes, mulattoes or Indians, bond or free, with pregnant -circumstances as to them shall seem convincing, without solemnity of -jury; and the offender being then found guilty, to pass such judgment -upon the offender, according to their discretion, as the nature of the -offense may require; and on such judgment to award execution.” Acts of -1741, Ch. 24, Secs. 48-52. - -[41] Ibid., Sec. 48. - -[42] “All negroes, mulattoes, bond or free, to the third generation, -and Indian servants and slaves, shall be deemed to be taken as persons -incapable in law to be witnesses in any case whatsoever, except against -each other.” Acts of 1746, Ch. 2, Sec. 50. - -[43] Bassett, Op. Cit., p. 30. - -[44] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 50. - -[45] The preamble to this act reads: “Whereas the evil and pernicious -practice of freeing slaves in this state, ought at this alarming and -critical time to be guarded against by every friend and well-wisher to -his country.” Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 1. - -[46] Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 2. - -[47] “Whereas before the passing of the said act, and since the sixteenth -day of April, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-five, divers -evil-minded persons, intending to disturb the public peace, did liberate -and set free their slaves, notwithstanding the same was expressly -contrary to the laws of this state.” Acts of 1779, Ch. 12, Sec. 1. - -[48] Acts of 1779, Ch. 12, Sec. 2. - -[49] Ibid., Sec. 3. - -[50] Acts of 1788, Ch. 20, Sec. 1. - -[51] Declaration of Rights of North Carolina, Sec. 6. - -[52] Constitution of 1776 of N. C., Secs. 7, 8, and 9. - -[53] Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 3. - -[54] Acts of 1741, Ch. 1, Sec. 13. - -[55] Ibid., Sec. 14. - -[56] Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 2. - -[57] Ibid., Sec. 3. - -[58] Ibid., Ch. 1, Sec. 1. - -[59] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 14. - -[60] Acts of 1788, Ch. 7, Secs. 1-2. - -[61] Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 5. - -[62] Brickell, John, Natural History of North Carolina, 272. - -[63] Acts of 1715, Ch. 46, Sec. 18. - -[64] Ibid., Secs. 6-8. - -[65] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Secs. 25-33. - -[66] Ibid., Sec. 43. - -[67] Ibid., Sec. 46. - -[68] Brickell, Op. Cit., 270. - -[69] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 36. - -[70] Ibid., Sec. 37. - -[71] Ibid., Sec. 25. - -[72] Earlier historians used the name Frankland (the land of the free), -but letters from officials of the state indicate that it was named after -Benjamin Franklin. See footnote p. 263, Vol. I, McMaster, John B., -History of the United States. - -[73] A copy of this constitution is now in the State Archives. - -[74] Ramsey, J. G. M., Annals of Tennessee, 327. - -[75] American Historical Magazine, I, 63. - -[76] Phelan, James, History of Tennessee, 299. - -[77] Scott, I, 437. - -[78] I Stat. U. S., 106; Scott, I, 439. - -[79] This act states that the territory “for the purposes of temporary -government, shall be one district, the inhabitants of which shall enjoy -all privileges, benefits, and advantages set forth in the Ordinance of -the late Congress for the government of the Territory of the United -States northwest of the River Ohio, and that the government of the -said Territory shall be similar to that which is now exercised in the -Territory northwest of the Ohio; except so far as it is otherwise -provided in the conditions expressed in an Act of Congress of the present -session, entitled, ‘An Act to Accept a Cession of Western Territory.’” -Hurd, John Cadman, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II, 90. - -[80] Acts of the Southwest Territory for 1794, Ch. I, Sec. 32. See also -Scott, I, 471; and Meigs and Cooper’s Code of 1858, Secs. 3808-3809. - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE SLAVE IN TENNESSEE - - -Tennessee inherited from North Carolina a liberal policy toward the -slave, a policy which was fittingly expressed by Chief Justice Taylor in -the following words: - - It would be a subject of regret to every thinking person, if - courts of Justice were restrained, by any austere rule of - judicature, from keeping pace with the march of benignant - policy and provident humanity, which for many years has - characterized every legislative act relative to the protection - of slaves, and which Christianity, by the mild diffusion of its - light and influence, has contributed to promote.[1] - -It will be seen throughout the study of the slave code that the slave -in Tennessee enjoyed a privileged status, that he was more than a mere -chattel, and that his disabilities, characteristic of slavery in many of -the states, were considerably modified. - - -I. THE PRIVILEGES OF SLAVES— - - -A. _Hunting._ - -At the request of the master, the county courts permitted one slave on -each plantation to hunt with a gun during the cultivation or harvesting -of crops. They issued to such a slave a certificate, describing him and -granting this privilege, and requested him, when he hunted, to carry it -with him to prevent his arrest for being unlawfully armed. The master -was financially responsible for any damage done by such a slave.[2] The -courts more fully granted authority to the slaves to hunt with dogs, and -were limited in such matters only by the degree of responsibility that -the master would assume. Slaves were whipped not exceeding thirty lashes -if they were caught hunting unlawfully.[3] The slave was not allowed to -hunt at night by fire-light with a gun. If he was duly convicted, before -a justice of the peace, of violating this restriction, his owner was -fined fifteen dollars.[4] - - -B. _Travel._ - -The travel of slaves in their immediate community was regulated by a -system of passes issued by the masters or their representatives. No -slave, except a domestic servant, was supposed to leave his master’s -premises without a pass, explaining the cause of his absence.[5] No stage -driver, captain of a steamboat, or railroad conductor could receive a -slave passenger for an extended journey unless he produced a pass from a -county clerk, giving instructions for such a journey and a description of -the slave.[6] One could be imprisoned six months and fined five hundred -dollars for violating this regulation, unless he could prove that the -transportation of the slave took place without his knowledge. The slave -in such instances, if he was discovered, was arrested, placed in the -nearest jail, and advertised as a runaway.[7] - - -C. _Suits for Freedom._ - -1. _Of the Action._ The proper action at law to be taken by a slave in -a suit for his freedom was trespass, false imprisonment, or assault and -battery.[8] Judge Catron, in the case of Harris v. Clarissa, held that -a female and her children, being held in slavery, could institute joint -action to establish their freedom.[9] The defendant would in such suits -claim that the plaintiff was his slave. In such cases, the slave did not -sue the master, the court merely tried the fact, whether the plaintiff -was a slave.[10] - -2. _Of the Evidence._ In a suit for freedom, the _onus probandi rested -upon the plaintiff_. What evidence was admitted? How could a slave prove -that he was free if there were no court records to show that the State -had assented to his freedom? How could he prove that he was descended -from free parents and that he was being held in false imprisonment? -Judge Crabb, in the case of Vaughan v. Phebe, answered these questions -by saying that “He may, perhaps, procure testimony that he, or some -ancestor, was for some time in the enjoyment of freedom; that he has -acted as a freeman; that he has been received as a freeman into society; -and very soon will find himself under the necessity of increasing in -proportion to the distance he has to travel into time past, for want of -other evidence, to use hearsay; that he, or his ancestor was commonly -called a freeman, or commonly reputed a freeman, or, in other words, -evidence of common reputation.” - -The courts of Tennessee in their consideration of suits by slaves -for their freedom gave unmistakable evidence that they realized the -seriousness of adding another negro voter to the body politic. Free -negroes voted in Tennessee until 1834.[11] This made the matter of -manumitting a slave have far reaching consequences. Judge Crabb, in -Vaughan v. Phebe, pointed out very forcibly the results to the slave and -society that attended the freeing of a slave.[12] - -3. _Of the Damages._ A negro held in slavery beyond the agreed time of -emancipation could maintain an action of trespass for his wages, after he -had established his freedom. He could recover wages for the time the suit -for freedom was pending and also the cost of the suit.[13] - -4. _Of the Judgment._ The judgment in favor of the freedom of a maternal -ancestor of a plaintiff was received by the Tennessee courts as evidence -in a suit for freedom to show the basis of the right claimed. Judge -Crabb, in admitting the records of a previous trial as evidence, said: -“We consider the solemn verdict of a jury, with proofs produced to them -many years ago, and with the judgment of the court upon it, fully as good -evidence, to say the least of it, of what was considered the truth in -those days.”[14] - -It sometimes happened that defendants in suits for freedom would send the -plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of the court in which the suit had been -instituted. To prevent this, an act was passed, requiring defendant to -give security that the plaintiff would not be removed from the limits of -the county.[15] “The powers of a court of chancery were more than those -of a court of law,” said Judge Green in the case of Sylvia and Phillis v. -Covey, holding that a suit for freedom in chancery could be maintained -regardless of the change of venue.[16] - - -D. _Trial of Slaves._ - -The most ordinary court for the trial of slaves was composed of justices -and freeholders, who were slaveholders.[17] Their crimes were usually -separated into corporal and capital, and a single justice was generally -permitted to try the misdemeanors.[18] - -The first effort at legislation in Tennessee on the trial of slaves was -an attempt in 1799 to establish trial by jury of twelve freeholders, -unrelated to the owner of the slave by either affinity or consanguinity. -Free legal counsel for slaves whose masters were unknown or outside of -the state was proposed. This measure passed the House of Representatives, -but was defeated by the Senate on the third reading.[19] This failure -only delayed the accomplishment of the object of this bill. - -Three justices and nine freeholders, who were slaveholders, were -in 1815 empowered to try slaves for all offences.[20] In 1819, the -freeholders were increased to twelve.[21] By 1825, the jury might -contain non-slaveholders, if twelve slaveholders could not be secured. -Their verdict, however, was invalid, if it could be shown that the -non-slaveholders divided the jury.[22] The owner by this act had the -right of appeal to the circuit court in case of conviction, by giving -bond in the sum of twice the value of the slave for his appearance at -the next term of court. In 1831, right of appeal was limited to capital -cases.[23] - -By act of 1835, the trial of slaves was completely reconstructed. -Special courts for the trial of slaves were abolished. Right of appeal -from justice’s court was established in all cases. The circuit court -was given exclusive original jurisdiction of all offences punishable by -death. No slave was to be tried by a jury until an indictment had been -found against him by a grand jury in the regular way. The State provided -counsel for the slave if the master did not. Section 11 of this measure -reads: “All persons who would be competent jurors to serve on the trial -of a free person, shall be competent jurors on the trial of any slave or -slaves.”[24] By this piece of humanitarian legislation, Tennessee became -one of the five slave states which granted the slave trial by jury.[25] - -By this act, the attorney employed by the State for the slave could sue -the master for his fee. This provision was repealed in 1838, and the -county became liable for the cost of the suit, unless the prosecution -appeared frivolous or malicious, in which case the prosecutor paid the -cost of trial.[26] - -Toward the close of the second quarter of the nineteenth century, there -were some changes made in the legal procedure adopted in 1835. The right -of appeal in all cases from the justice’s court was restored to the -master by an act of 1848.[27] The state in 1858 reverted to a former -method of indictment of the slave.[28] Five creditable persons could file -an accusation of insurrection or conspiracy to kill against a slave, and -the judge of the circuit court could empower the jury to try the slave -without waiting for a regular term of the court. These changes in the -slave’s legal status were the delayed response of legal institutions to -the movements in politics, economics, and religion in vogue in the early -thirties.[29] - - -II. DISABILITIES OF SLAVES— - -A. _To make a Contract._ The slave could not make a legal contract except -for his freedom or with his master’s consent. The slave in such contracts -was regarded as the agent of the master.[30] The courts, however, would -enforce a contract made by a slave with his masters for his freedom. In -the case of Porter v. Blackmore, the supreme court of the state held that -such a contract established a vested right to freedom, and that “no one -but the State can take advantage of it, not even the owner or master, -after the right is once vested. A court of chancery, if the right is once -vested, will interpose to prevent its defeat.”[31] - -B. _To Take Property by Devise, Descent, or Purchase._ The slave was -regarded as personal property in Tennessee and what he owned belonged to -the master.[32] He could not receive property by inheritance or donation, -nor buy, sell, or dispose of anything, unless his master consented.[33] -Washington Turner, a free negro, died in 1853, leaving his estate to his -wife and children. The children were the issue of a slave mother. Judge -McKinney, in a case involving the will of Turner, said: “It is clear that -the children of the testator being slaves, with no rights of freedom, -present or prospective, are incapable in law of taking any benefit under -the will.”[34] A slave while in a state of inchoate freedom could lay -claim to either personal or real property.[35] Judge Catron maintained -that it was inconsistent with the liberal slave code of the State not -to consider a slave’s rights to property in connection with a claim to -freedom.[36] - -C. _To Be a Witness._ The slave never acquired the right of being a -witness against a white man.[37] The denial of this right was based -on the slave’s light regard for his word, his ignorance, and racial -prejudice. His paganism was also a factor.[38] - -The slave gradually acquired a stronger position in cases in which the -white man was not a party. By 1784, he could be a witness in cases where -other slaves were being tried.[39] By 1813, he could testify against -free persons of color born in slavery.[40] By 1839, his testimony was -permitted in cases where persons of mixed blood were tried.[41] This -increased capacity of the slave as a witness resulted from efforts to -restrict his relations with free negroes and mulattoes. Illicit trade -relations were difficult to prevent, especially in liquors. - -D. _To Be a Party in a Suit._ There were only two instances in which a -slave could be a party to a suit. He could sue for his freedom and for -property interests which a grant of freedom involved.[42] In Stephenson -v. Harrison, Judge Caruthers held that “No other suit but for freedom, in -which may be embraced claim to property, can be brought by slaves, while -they are such, except where rights may be endangered, which are connected -with a certain grant of freedom to take effect in the future. And this -being that kind of case, the slaves have a standing in court.”[43] It is -observed that in such cases the court for the time being, regarded the -slave as being in a state of inchoate freedom. - -There was no reason why the slave needed to be a party to a suit. He -owned nothing. He could not recover anything. He could be whipped for -anything that he did. The master did not want to kill him. If he did not -want him, he could sell him. Under such circumstances, it would have -been a mere mockery for the slave to be a party to a suit. - -E. _To Contract Matrimony._ There was no process of law involved in the -marriage of slaves with each other or their separation. Their marriage -with mulattoes or with free negroes was a matter of statutory regulation. -In the case of Andrews v. Page, it was held that “Slaves were not married -to each other without the consent of their owners, as a general rule. By -the act of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 3, a free negro or mulatto was prohibited -from intermarrying with a slave, without the consent of his or her -master, had in writing.”[44] When the master for his slave agreed to a -marriage with a free negro or mulatto, it was regarded by the courts as a -contract.[45] - -If a free negro woman was married to a slave, their children were free. -The issue of a free woman of color followed the condition of their -mother, and were born free. This principle was carried so far that when -a female slave was to be emancipated by the concession of the master and -assent of the State, but was to be held subject to service for a definite -time, and a child was born to her after such emancipation but during such -subjection to service, it was held that the child was freeborn. - -While it cannot be said that the marriage relation between slaves was a -contractual one at law, it had the sanction of an unwritten law that the -state respected. In the case of Andrews v. Page, the court held that it -was - - “established beyond controversy that there were circumstances - under which the courts of this State recognized the relation - of husband and wife and the ties of consanguinity, as existing - among slaves, as well as among free persons, and free persons - of color; and we hold that a marriage between slaves, with the - consent of their owners, whether contracted in common law form - or celebrated under the statute, always was a valid marriage - in this state, and that the issue of such marriages were not - illegitimate.”[46] - - -III. RELATION OF THE MASTER AND SOCIETY— - - -A. _Liabilities of the Master to Society._ - - -1. _For His Own Acts._ - -The master was responsible to society for the treatment of his slaves. -He was required to feed, clothe, and house them.[47] It was his duty -to furnish them competent medical aid.[48] If an employer of a slave -was unable to pay for medical attention, the master was liable. He -was expected to superintend the trials of his slaves to see that -they received justice. In capital cases, he was allowed thirty-five -challenges.[49] He could give bail for their appearance at court and -prosecute writs of error for them.[50] - -There is considerable evidence that the slaves of Tennessee were rather -well treated. Rev. William Dickey, writing from Bloomingburgh, Ohio, July -23, 1845, stated that the negroes were clean, well-fed, and clothed and -that considerable attention was given their minds.[51] Judge Catron, -in the case of Loftin v. Espy, refused to let a family of slaves be -separated to satisfy a debt against an estate, and, in rendering the -decree, he said: - - The servants and slaves constitute a part of the family, - entitled to, and receiving, if they be worthy, the affections - of the master to a great extent; this disposition towards this - unfortunate class of people it is the policy of the country to - promote and encourage; without it, good conduct on the part - of the slave, and benevolent and humane treatment on the part - of the master is not to be expected.... Nothing can be more - abhorrent to these poor people, or to the feelings of every - benevolent individual, than to see a large family of slaves - sold at sheriff’s sale; the infant children, father, and mother - to different bidders.[52] - - -2. _For the Acts of His Slaves._ - -a. _For Contracts Made by the Slave._ The law of principal and agent, -as adopted by the common law, did not apply to master and slave in all -instances, but in the ordinary domestic relations it was generally held -that the master could do business through the agency of his slaves and -that he was bound by their acts in such cases. The rule separating the -two types of cases seems to have been that, where skill and mentality -were requisite for the performance of the task, the law would not imply a -contract on the part of the master.[53] - -b. _For Negligence of the Slave Resulting in Injury to Others._ The -master was not liable for the negligence of his slaves in the performance -of unauthorized acts, but was responsible for the faithful performance -of their duties when they were acting as tradesmen or carriers under his -authority. - -c. _For Torts and Crimes Committed by Slaves._ The master was responsible -for damage done by slaves carrying guns with his permission.[54] He -was subject to indictment and fine at the discretion of the court for -permitting a slave to practice medicine or heal the sick.[55] He was -liable for at least a fifty-dollar fine for permitting his slave to sell -spiritous liquors.[56] He was held responsible for the slave’s acts even -if a state of inchoate freedom existed. “The master,” said Judge Green, -“by failing to petition the county court and give bond according to law, -remains liable to all the penalties of the law as though he had never -consented to his freedom. In view of the law, the negro is not a freeman -until the State, through the proper tribunal, consents to his freedom. - -“Until that is done the master may be indicted for permitting him to act -as a freeman, and is liable to all the other consequences that would have -existed if he had not consented to the defendant’s freedom.”[57] - - -B. _Liabilities of Society to the Master for Abusing His Slave._ - -1. _For Beating or Harboring Him._ It was a criminal offense for anyone -to abuse wantonly the slave of another. Any such person was subject to -indictment in the circuit court, under the same rules and subject to -the same penalties as if the offense had been committed against a white -person.[58] Enticing a slave to absent himself from his owner subjected -one to a forfeiture of fifty dollars to be recovered as an action of debt -by the owner of the slave. It was a fine of one hundred pounds to harbor -a slave and cause a loss of service to the master.[59] If a master of a -vessel entertained on board a slave without a permit from the owner or a -justice of the Peace, he was liable to a fine of $12.50 for the first -offense, and $25 for each succeeding offense.[60] It was finally made -a penitentiary offense to harbor a slave with intent to steal him or -carry him beyond the borders of the state.[61] Also, one was subject to -imprisonment for a term of not less than three nor more than ten years -for deliberately harboring a runaway.[62] - -2. _For Maiming or Killing Him._ Any person, wilfully or maliciously -killing a slave, was guilty of murder and suffered death without benefit -of clergy. If the slave did not belong to the offender, “his goods, -chattels, lands and tenements” could be sold to pay for the slave.[63] -Killing a slave without malice was manslaughter. In the case of Fields v. -The State of Tennessee, the court said, “that law which says thou shalt -not kill, protects the slave; and he is within its very letter. Law, -reason, Christianity and common humanity all point out one way.”[64] No -individual had the right to become the avenger of the violated law.[65] - -3. _For Trading with Him._ No one was permitted to trade with a slave -unless he had a permit. The slave was permitted to sell articles of -his own manufacture without a permit. Any one who violated this act -was subject to a fine of not less than five nor more than ten dollars -to be recovered before any justice of the peace of the county in which -the offense was committed. One-half of the fine was paid to the master -of the slave.[66] If the offender was a free person of color born in -slavery, the slave could be a witness in the case.[67] - -4. _For Using Improper Language Before Him or Permitting Him to -Visit Your Home._ To inflame the mind of any slave or incite him to -insurrection by using improper language in his presence subjected one, -on conviction, to a fine of ten dollars to be recovered as an action of -debt before any court having jurisdiction. The fine was equally divided -between the county and the person instituting suit.[68] It was equally a -violation of the law to permit slaves to assemble at one’s residence or -negro houses.[69] - - -IV. THE PATROL SYSTEM— - -A. _Searchers._ By act of 1753, searchers were appointed by the county -courts to visit slave quarters four times a year in search of guns.[70] -Only reliable persons could be searchers. By 1779, they were required to -search for guns once a month.[71] These officers were the beginning of -the patrol system in Tennessee. - -B. _Patrols._ In 1806, the searchers were converted into patrols and a -very elaborate system of police was devised. Captains of militia were -empowered to appoint patrols for the counties, determine their number -and the frequency of their ridings.[72] Commissioners of the towns were -directed to appoint patrols for the towns, whether incorporated or -unincorporated.[73] In 1817, justices of the peace were given the power -to suggest the appointment of patrols to captains of militia in their -districts.[74] In 1831, they were empowered to appoint patrols for their -district in case captains of militia neglected to do so.[75] In 1856, -masters, mistresses, and overseers were made patrols over their own -premises.[76] - -Patrols were paid from the county treasury. A tax was levied on the -taxable slaves for this purpose.[77] The patrol swore to his account -before a justice of the peace, who carried the account to the county -court, which decided how much the patrolman should receive.[78] By act of -1856, patrols were allowed $1.00 per night or day for their services.[79] -If the masters or mistresses served as patrols, they received nothing for -their services.[80] - -Patrol service was obligatory upon all citizens. Anyone refusing to serve -as a patrol was fined $5.00 for each refusal.[81] A person serving as a -patrolman for three months was exempted from musters, road-working, and -jury service for twelve months.[82] They were paid $5.00 for every slave -they returned to his master. - -The powers and duties of patrols were rather extensive. Once each month, -they were to search for guns and other weapons and turn such as they -found over to the county court or return the same to the owner.[83] -They searched all suspected places for slaves without permission of the -owners. They could punish, with fifteen stripes on the bare back, any -negro, bond or free, that they found away from home, without a pass from -his master.[84] - -The patrols sometimes abused their powers. In 1859, the supreme court -held that - - “It is of great importance to society that these police - regulations connected with the institution of slavery, should - be firmly maintained; the well-being and safety of both master - and slave demand it. The institution and support of the night - watch and patrol on some plan are indispensable to good order, - and the subordination of slaves, and the best interest of their - owners. But the authority conferred for these important objects - must not be abused by those upon whom it is conferred, as it - sometimes is by reckless persons. If they exceed the bounds of - moderation in the injury inflicted and transcend the limits - prescribed by law for the office of patrol, if it be found that - they were not entitled to that justification, then they will be - liable under a verdict to that effect.”[85] - -Proper pass regulations were an important feature of the patrol system. -This is shown in the case of Jones v. Allen. A slave attended a -corn-shucking without a pass. In the course of the festivities the slave -was killed. The master of the slave brought suit for damages equal to the -value of the slave against the man who gave the husking. The lower court -gave damages to the master on the ground that the slave should not have -been permitted to remain at the husking without a pass. The supreme court -reversed the case, holding that it was customary for slaves to attend -such gatherings without passes if a white man was superintending them.[86] - -C. _Sheriffs and Constables._ It was the business of sheriffs and -constables to apprehend runaway slaves, place them in jail, and advertise -them that they might be returned to their owners. They assisted in the -enforcement of the powers of the patrols, who were really a part of -the police system of the state. The patrol system was supposed to be -maintained by the taxation of slaves, but since it involved also the -general system of police of the state, it was to some extent a burden -upon the general public. - -Slavery created a real problem of government. “For reasons of policy -and necessity,” said Judge McKinney in 1858, “it has been found -indispensable, in every slaveholding community, to provide various police -and patrol regulations, giving to white persons, other than the owner, -the right, and making it the duty, under certain circumstances, to -exercise a control over other slaves. The safety of the community, the -protection of the person and property of individuals, and the safety of -the owner’s property in his slaves, alike demand the enactment of such -laws.”[87] - -The constant fear of insurrections, the ever-present runaway, and the -carelessness of masters in granting passes were the main reasons why -society maintained such a rigid system of control. Of course, the -interests of the owners of slaves were conserved by such a system. - - -V. SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF SLAVE GOVERNMENT— - - -A. _The Runaway._ - -The runaway was a great source of worry and expense to the master and -somewhat of a terror to the community. The police system of slavery was -never able to prevent runaways. If a runaway were caught outside the -limits of a corporation, he was taken before a justice of the peace and -asked for his master’s name. If he refused to give this information, he -was placed in jail and advertised by a placard on the courthouse door -and in the newspapers.[88] If the slave was not claimed within twelve -months, the sheriff of the county, on thirty days’ notice, sold him at -the courthouse to the highest bidder, the net proceeds of the sale going -to the county. The county court gave title of the slave to the purchaser. - -The county jailer, with the consent of the county court or two of the -justices of the peace, could hire out a runaway to either a private -individual or an incorporated town.[89] To release the county from -obligation, he placed around the negro’s neck a collar, on which was -stamped “P. G.”[90] The wages of the slave went into the county treasury -to be disposed of by the county court. - -If an incorporated town or city hired the runaway, it gave bond to the -sheriff of the county for double the value of the slave. This was the -bond of the corporation to the State of Tennessee for the safekeeping, -good treatment, and delivery of the slave to the owner or jailer at -the completion of the contract. The wages of the slave went to the -county.[91] The corporation made a very careful description of the slave -to use in case of escape. - -A runaway arrested in an incorporated city was taken by a patrolman -or policeman to the police-station. He was released to his owner on -payment of one dollar. If he was not called for, he was hired to the city -authorities, advertised and sold at public auction to the highest bidder. -The proceeds of the sale went to the city and the city authorities made a -deed of sale to the purchaser. - -After 1819, the runaway could no longer be outlawed and killed by anyone -who had the opportunity.[92] By act of 1825, a runaway was advertised -one year before he was sold at public auction. If the owner, within two -years from the date of sale, proved that the slave was his, he could -recover the net proceeds of the sale or the slave himself by paying the -purchaser the amount paid for the slave.[93] Any one who arrested a -runaway and delivered him to the owner or jailer, was entitled to the sum -of five dollars for his services.[94] After 1831, it was not required -by law to make a proclamation concerning a runaway at church “on the -Lord’s day.”[95] By act of 1844, sheriffs were given authority to hire -out a runaway in their custody to municipal authorities, who, however, -were required to execute bond twice the value of the slave for proper -treatment of him.[96] It seems that sheriffs, constables, and patrolmen -abused the power given them by act of 1831, relative to the arrest of -runaways for which they received five dollars. Masters were subject to -useless fees for the arrest of slaves who were not runaways. In 1852, -the arrest and confinement of slaves in county jails in the towns and -vicinities of their masters was forbidden.[97] - - -B. _Importation of Slaves._ - -North Carolina, by act of 1786, placed a duty of fifty shillings on -slaves under seven years of age and over forty; five pounds between the -ages of seven and twelve, and thirty and forty; and ten pounds on ages -between twelve and thirty.[98] This regulation became ineffective when -North Carolina ratified the constitution in 1790. The importation of -slaves into Tennessee as merchandise was prohibited in 1812.[99] This -act did not prohibit people from moving to the state with their slaves, -nor did it prevent citizens from bringing into the state slaves which -they had acquired by descent, devise, marriage, or purchase. Persons, -moving into the state with their slaves, were required within twenty days -to take oath before a justice of the peace that they were not violating -the spirit of the law.[100] Such persons were required to deliver to a -justice of the peace an inventory of their slaves, giving their number, -age and description. This inventory was filed in the office of the county -court clerk. The slaves of any one violating this act were seized and -sold to the highest bidder at public auction.[101] By act of 1815, such -slaves were advertised twenty days before date of sale.[102] - -The permanent law of importation was the act of 1826. It retained the -features of the above acts and in addition forbade the importation into -the state for any purpose convict slaves from territories or states -whose laws transmuted the crimes of such slaves upon their removal.[103] -Any one violating this act was ordered before a justice of the peace, -who might require him to give bond with two good securities for his -appearance with the slaves at the next term of the circuit court. If he -were convicted of violating this act, his slaves were sold at public -auction to the highest bidder.[104] It is to be noticed, however, that a -professional slave-dealer could afford to lose a few slaves occasionally, -because he paid only the transportation for convict slaves and received -from five hundred to eight hundred dollars for each slave that he -successfully smuggled through. - -There was no change in the laws of importation until 1855. The act passed -in that year permitted the importation of slaves other than convicts as -articles of merchandise, and thus replaced the acts of 1815 and 1826 in -this respect.[105] This indicates a revolution on this subject. West -Tennessee, the black belt part of the state, began to be settled in -1819 and was being put into cultivation in the second quarter of the -nineteenth century. The abolition forces in the state were defeated in -the constitutional convention of 1834.[106] The demand for slaves had -increased as is shown by the increase in price from $584 in 1836 to -$854.65 in 1859.[107] The old Whig areas had become Democratic by the -early fifties, and Middle and West Tennessee were pro-slavery. The press -and the churches had become more favorable in their attitude toward -slavery. - - -C. _The Stealing of Slaves._ - -Slaves were constantly stolen by individuals and organizations of -professional slave thieves. This was one of the most difficult problems -of slave government, and demanded very rigid laws for its regulation. By -act of 1799, a person stealing a slave, a free negro, or mulatto, for -his own use or to sell was guilty of a felony and suffered death without -benefit of clergy.[108] The penalty for this offence in 1835 was reduced -to not less than three nor more than ten years in the penitentiary.[109] -The penalty was the same for harboring a slave with intent to steal him, -or for persuading a slave to leave his master.[110] - -The following advertisement from a religious magazine shows how society -was aroused at times on the stealing of slaves and how it proposed to -recover them: - - A more heart-rending act of villainy has rarely been committed - than the following: on Monday, the 30th of May last, three - children, viz., Elizabeth, ten years of age, Martha, eight, - and a small boy, name forgotten, all bright mulattoes, were - violently taken from the arms of their mother, Elizabeth Price, - a free woman of color, living in Fayette County, Tennessee. - Strong suspicion rests upon two men, gone from thence to the - state of Missouri; and it is ardently hoped that the citizens - of that state will interest themselves in the apprehension of - the robbers and the restoration of the children. A handsome - subscription has been raised in the neighborhood to reward any - person who may restore them. Editors of papers, and especially - such as are in and contiguous to the state of Missouri, are - requested to give the above an insertion.[111] - -One of the greatest organizations in the South for the stealing of -negroes had its headquarters in West Tennessee and was managed by John -A. Murrell. This organization consisted of 450 persons and operated -throughout the Mississippi Valley. This organization was in collusion -with slaves. It stole the same slaves repeatedly and sold them sometimes -to their own masters. Murrell’s last stealing was two slaves from Rev. -John Hennig, of Madison County, Tennessee. He was caught in 1835, tried, -convicted, and sentenced for the maximum term of ten years in the state -penitentiary.[112] - - -D. _Trading With Slaves._ - -The foundation for the regulation of traffic with slaves was laid by -the acts of 1741 and 1787, passed by the Colony and State of North -Carolina.[113] In 1799, all traffic with slaves was forbidden unless -they had a permit from their masters, designating time and place of the -proposed transaction.[114] It was a ten dollar fine to be convicted -of violating this regulation. If a slave forged a pass as a basis for -such a transaction, he was corporally punished at the discretion of a -justice of the peace. Trading with slaves was made a more serious matter -in 1803.[115] The pass by this act was required to specify the articles -to be traded. Any one violating it was punishable by a fine of not less -than ten nor more than fifty dollars. In 1806, it was made unlawful for -a white person, free negro, or mulatto to be found in the company of a -slave for any purpose without the consent of the owner.[116] In 1813, the -restrictions on trading with slaves were made more lenient. The fine for -trading in violation of the law was reduced to not less than five nor -more than ten dollars and slaves might trade articles of their own make -without passes from their masters.[117] - -The liquor traffic was the most difficult part of trading with slaves to -regulate. The North Carolina code left whiskey in the same category with -other articles, but in 1813 Tennessee made it punishable by a fine of not -less than five nor more than ten dollars to sell it to slaves.[118] If a -person was convicted of violating this regulation and could not pay his -fine, he went to jail until he could pay it with cost. By act of 1829, -a slave was given from three to ten lashes for having whiskey in his -possession and from five to ten for selling it to another slave.[119] -Any merchant, tavern-keeper, distiller, or any other person, who sold -whiskey to a slave without permit from his master, was guilty of a -misdemeanor, and, on being convicted, was subject to a fine of fifty -dollars.[120] - -The laws regulating this traffic became increasingly strict. By act of -1832, a dealer in order to secure a license to sell whiskey was required -to take an oath not to sell a slave unless he had a written permit from -his master.[121] Clerks in liquor houses, not considering themselves -dealers, continued to sell whiskey to slaves; so in 1846, the oath was -modified to include sales within the knowledge of the person receiving -the license.[122] In 1842, the punishment for selling whiskey to slaves -or letting a free negro be intoxicated on one’s premises was made -imprisonment for a period of not exceeding thirty days.[123] - -The policy of the state toward the liquor traffic with slaves was -forcibly expressed by Judge Caruthers in the case of Jennings v. the -State, as follows: - - Under no circumstances, not even in the presence, or by - permission in writing or otherwise, can spirits be sold or - delivered to a slave for his own use, but only for the use - of the master, and even in that case, the owner or master - must be present or send a written order, specifying that it - is for himself, and the quantity to be sent.... A general or - indefinite order, such as those exhibited in this case, is of - no avail. An order can cover only a single transaction, and - then it is exhausted.[124] - -It is noticed that this law applied to everybody and not merely to -licensed liquor dealers. - -The laws on traffic with slaves finally concluded: “Any person who sells, -loans, or delivers to any slave, except for his master or owner, and -then only in such owner or master’s presence, or upon his written order, -any liquor, gun, or weapon ... is guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be -fined not less than fifty dollars, and imprisoned in the county jail at -the discretion of the court.”[125] Judge Caruthers, commenting on this -law, said: “This is intended to cut up the offense by the roots, and -prescribes a penalty calculated to deter those that milder punishment had -been found insufficient to restrain from the injury or destruction of -their neighbor’s property.”[126] - -Municipalities usually supplemented the laws of the state with special -regulations of their own. The Board of Commissioners of Nashville, June -7, 1805, - - Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the town sergeant to - inspect each slave he may discover trading in town, and require - of them a permit from their master or mistress, or the person - under whose care they are, specifying the commodity which they - may have for sale. And if such slave has no permit, the town - sergeant shall immediately seize on the commodity he may have - for sale, and take it with the slave before some justice of - the peace, and make oath that such slave had transgressed the - by-laws for the regulation of the town in the manner above - described. The town sergeant shall then immediately expose - to sale such commodity to the highest bidder for cash at the - market house; one-half of the amount of such sales to go to the - use of the town, and the other half to the use of the sergeant - for his services.[127] - -Traffic with slaves was very important for several reasons. The slave had -very little sense of value, in the first place. He frequently exchanged -the most valuable farm products for a pittance in order to obtain money -with which to gamble or buy whiskey. The liquor traffic still more -vitally touched the life of the plantation. An intoxicated slave was -not only incapacitated, but he was inclined to raise trouble with other -slaves. This might end in slaves being killed or an insurrection. Again, -the element of society that engaged in the liquor traffic with slaves -was usually the poor whites, free negroes, or mulattoes, who were opposed -to slavery and did not hesitate to propagate ideas of insurrection and -freedom among slaves. The best way to keep slaves happy and contented -and, consequently, efficient, was to have complete severance of relations -between them and outsiders. Finally, it is noticed that traffic with -slaves, in all its ramifications, seriously endangered property interests. - - -E. _Insurrections._ - -No one was permitted to speak disrespectfully of the owner in a slave’s -presence, or to use language of an insurrectionary nature.[128] Words in -favor of emancipation, rebellion, or conspiracy came under this head. The -penalty was a fine of $10, one-half to the county and the other to the -reporter. - -A person knowingly aiding in circulating any printed matter that fostered -discontent or insubordination among slaves or free persons of color, -was guilty of felony, and might suffer an imprisonment of ten years for -first offense and twenty for the second.[129] The same punishment was -prescribed for addresses, or sermons of an inflammatory nature. - -There were only two instances of threatened insurrection in the slave -history of Tennessee. The first one of these occurred in 1831, and was -nipped in the bud by information secured from a female slave.[130] It -resulted in a petition being sent to the legislature signed by 108 -people, asking for a better patrol system. The second was planned in -1857, and seems to have included the states of Kentucky, Tennessee, -Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas.[131] The scheme was discovered -in November of 1857 among the slaves employed at the Cumberland Iron -Works in Tennessee just before they were ready to execute it. One -account says, “more than sixty slaves in the Iron Works were implicated, -and nine were hung, four by the decision of the court and five by a mob.” -The Missouri Democrat of December 4 states that “For the past month, the -Journals from different Southern states have been filled with numberless -alarms respecting contemplated risings of the negro population. In -Tennessee, in Missouri, in Virginia, and in Alabama, so imminent has been -the danger that the most severe measures have been adopted to prevent -their congregating or visiting after night, to suppress their customary -attendance at neighborhood preachings and to keep a vigilant watch -upon all their movements, by an efficient patrolling system. This is -assuredly a most lamentable condition for the slave states, for nothing -causes such terror upon the plantations as the bare suspicion of these -insurrections.”[132] - - -F. _The Assembly of Slaves._ - -All slave gatherings on the master’s plantation were exclusively under -his control, as he was responsible for the results. It was considered -dangerous to society, however, for slaves to collect miscellaneously. -By act of 1803, it was made a ten-dollar fine for any one to permit the -slaves of another to congregate on his premises without passes from their -master.[133] To aid the justices of the peace in enforcing this act, -the fine was equally divided between the county and the reporter of its -violation. There was so much zeal shown in the enforcement of this act -that the fine was reduced in 1813 to not less than five nor more than ten -dollars.[134] - -The insurrections over the country in the early thirties and rumors -of an insurrection in Tennessee in 1831, combined with the abolition -propaganda, gave added significance to the meetings of slaves. It -now became necessary to punish slaves for participating in unlawful -assemblies as well as to fine those permitting them. - -The act of 1831 empowered justices of the peace, constables and patrols -to disperse such meetings and to inflict twenty-five lashes upon the -slaves engaged, if necessary. The fine for permitting unlawful assemblies -was now left to the discretion of the court.[135] The amount of -litigation likely to result from the enforcement of this measure made it -necessary to define the terms unlawful assembly.[136] - - -G. _Punishment of Slaves_— - -1. _Offenses Punishable by Stripes._ Trading without permits from their -masters or forging passes was punishable by stripes by act of 1799. The -number of stripes was left to the discretion of the justice but was -not to exceed thirty-nine.[137] In 1806, riots, unlawful assemblies, -trespasses, seditious speeches, insulting language to whites, were made -offenses punishable by stripes at the discretion of the justice.[138] -By act of 1813, the slave was whipped for selling any article not made -by himself.[139] The number of stripes was not less than five, nor more -than thirty. He was punished for selling whiskey or keeping it at some -other place than his own home. This offense was punishable by not less -than three nor more than ten lashes.[140] It is interesting to notice -the leniency in the punishment for selling this particular article. -Conspiracy, which was punishable by death alone in the act 1741, might -by act of 1831 be punished by whipping, pillory, or imprisonment.[141] -Death still remained a proper punishment for this offense, but one of the -others-could be substituted at the discretion of the justice, depending -on the character and extent of the conspiracy. By act of 1844, the -runaway could be worked on the streets of an incorporated town and his -wages went to the poor.[142] - -2. _Capital Offenses._ By act of 1741, killing of horses, hogs, or -cattle without a permit from the master was punishable by death for -second offense.[143] In 1819, murder, arson, rape, burglary, and robbery -were made capital offenses and punishment in all other cases was not to -extend to life or limb.[144] By this act the suffering of death by being -outlawed as a runaway was abolished. By act of 1835, intent to commit -rape upon a white woman was punishable by hanging.[145] The burning of a -barn, a bridge, or a house with intent to kill was a capital offense.[146] - -3. _Offenses Punishable at the Discretion of the Jury._ The burning of -barns, houses, bridges, steamboats, manufacturing plants, and valuable -buildings or property of any kind were offenses for which the jury could -punish at their discretion, provided such punishment did not extend to -life or limb. All offenses of slaves for which there was not a specific -punishment fixed by law were left to the discretion of the jury.[147] The -cutting off of ears, standing in the pillory, and branding were some of -the older punishments for which whipping came to be a substitute. - - -VI. TITLE TO SLAVES— - -A. _By Deed._ There was no statutory restriction upon the sale or -transfer of slaves from one person to another.[148] Secret and fraudulent -transfers became so numerous that sales of slaves and deeds of gifts were -in 1784 required to be in writing attested by at least one creditible -witness and recorded within nine months thereafter.[149] By an act -of 1801, such transfers were no longer required to be recorded if -possession accompanied the sale or gift.[150] In the case of Davis v. -Mitchell, Judge Green charged the jury that “a deed registered is only -necessary where possession does not accompany gift or sale.”[151] A bill -of sale of slaves by a person indebted, who still retained possession of -the slaves, after the execution of the bill of sale, was void against -creditors, although a valuable consideration was received. A conveyance -of personality presupposed a transfer of possession.[152] - -B. _By Devise._ The transfer of slaves by will followed the same -procedure as real estate. A will, valid in either law or equity, had to -be in the handwriting of the deceased and signed by him or some other -person in his presence representing him and by two witnesses. Such a -devise was in fee simple unless an estate of less dignity was definitely -conveyed.[153] If the deceased left no will, the slaves became the -property of the widow for life, the widow being required to give bond -to the county that such slaves with their increase would be returned -at her death to the administrators of her deceased husband’s estate. -In absence of the wife, the slaves were equally distributed among the -children.[154] By act of 1796, half bloods were inherited equally with -full brothers and sisters. In the absence of such brothers and sisters, -the law of distribution was followed among the collateral heirs.[155] By -act of 1819, foreigners who had settled in Tennessee and had not been -naturalized inherited in the same manner as natural born citizens.[156] - -C. _By Parol Contract, and Gifts to Children in Consideration of -Marriage._ Conveyance of slaves was required to be in writing and -properly attested by witnesses. There could be no transfer of title -by parol and no deed of gift was recognized unless it was proved and -registered.[157] By act of 1805, the transfer of slaves in consideration -of marriage, to be valid against creditors, had to be acknowledged by the -grantor or proved by two credible witnesses and recorded in the county of -the grantor within nine months.[158] - -D. _By Statute of Limitation._ In Tennessee, three years of adverse -possession invested the title of a slave in the possessor by virtue of -the statute of limitation.[159] By the statute of limitation, a gift -of parol, which is absolutely void, would, after the lapse of three -years’ possession, convey title.[160] Judge Green in Davis v. Mitchell, -held that an infant might hold adverse possession of a slave, either by -himself or through a guardian, and that three years of such possession -invested the title of the slave in him.[161] Three years of uninterrupted -possession not only invested title, but the right to convey that -title.[162] - -E. _By Statute of Frauds and Fraudulent Conveyances._ All gifts, grants, -loans, alienations or conveyances made with fraudulent purposes were -valid only between the parties making them and their heirs, assigns, -and administrators, and in no way barred the action of creditors.[163] -A conveyance of goods or chattels, without a valuable consideration, -was considered fraudulent, unless it was made by a will duly proved -and recorded or a deed acknowledged and proved. By act of 1805, such -recording had to be done within nine months to be valid against creditors -or future purchasers.[164] In Tennessee the want of possession was only -prima facie evidence of fraud, and might be explained.[165] If a father -represented a slave to be his son’s delivered possession and permitted -possession to continue during the lifetime of the son, who also claimed -the slave as his own, it was a gift. The acknowledgment of the son -that the slave belonged to the father would not bar the claim of the -widow.[166] - -F. _By Prescription._ Prescription passed the title and possession of -slaves in Tennessee.[167] In the case of Andrews v. Hartsfield, Judge -Green held that a bona fide loan of slaves by a father to a married -daughter for five years subjected the slaves to sale for the debts of her -husband.[168] - - -VII. THE LAW OF INCREASE— - -A. _As to Condition of Increase._ Tennessee adopted the rule of nature, -pertaining to human creatures, in declaring that the condition of the -mother should be that of the child. Children born of a mother emancipated -at a future date received their freedom with the mother. In the case -of Harris v. Clarissa, who was to receive her freedom at the age of -twenty, Judge Catron, speaking of the condition of her children born -after the bequest of her freedom, said: “Had she been a slave forever, -their condition would have been the same, she being a slave for years, -their condition could not be worse. The child before born is a part -of the mother, and its condition the same; birth does not alter its -rights.”[169] Children born of a mother conditionally manumitted were -held to be slaves.[170] - -B. _As to the Ownership of the Increase._ Tennessee held that there was -only one title to mother and child. If a negro woman were devised to -one person for life, with the remainder to another, and during the life -estate, she gave birth to children, they belonged not to the tenant for -life, but to the remainder man.[171] The first legatee held only a -particular interest, while the second held absolute title.[172] If the -first devisee received an absolute estate, the increase went to him.[173] -The term increase was usually qualified by the word “future” in order to -restrict its application to only the issue after the bequest of freedom -to the mother.[174] - - -VIII. THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE SLAVE— - -What, then, in conclusion, was the legal status of the slave? Was he a -chattel? Or was he a responsible person? By the civil law, the slave was -a chattel; by the common law he was a person. Both of these systems of -jurisprudence were combined into a compromise that actually represented -the legal status of the slave in Tennessee. The slave was both a chattel -and a person. - -A. _As a Chattel._ The slave was personal property. He, therefore, could -neither own property, nor make a commercial contract. He had neither -civil marriage nor political rights. His movements in the community -were under the control of his master. He could not be a party to a law -suit in ordinary matters. He had no control over his time or labor. His -punishments were usually whipping. Like a chattel, he was an article of -merchandise to be sold to the highest bidder. He had no control over his -children at law, and could not be a witness against a white man. - -B. _As a Person._ The slave was emancipated and given his full rights -at law. He could be a party to a suit for his freedom and for property -that his freedom involved. He could represent his master as agent. His -marriage, while not a civil one, was held binding by the courts. The -children of a recognized marriage were not illegitimate, and took the -legal status of the mother. He could make a binding contract with his -master for his freedom. He was held responsible at law for murder. His -intellectual and moral qualities were recognized at times. He eventually -acquired the right of trial by jury. - -This compromise legal basis of slavery in Tennessee was well stated by -Judge Nelson in the case of Andrews v. Page, as follows: - - While the institution of slavery existed it was generally held - in the slaveholding states that the marriage of slaves was - utterly null and void; because of the paramount ownership in - them as property, their incapacity to make a contract, and the - incompatibility of the duties and obligations of husband and - wife with relation to slavery.... But we are not aware that - this doctrine ever was distinctly and explicitly recognized in - this state.[175] - -In another connection in the same case, Judge Nelson said: - - The numerous authorities above cited show that slaves, although - regarded as property and subject to many restrictions, never - were considered by the courts of this state as standing - on the same footing as horses, cattle, and other personal - property.[176] - -Judge McKinney, in Jones v. Allen, said: - - We are not to forget, nor are we to suppose, that it was lost - sight of by the legislature, that, under our modified system of - slavery, slaves are not mere chattels, but are regarded in the - two-fold character of persons and property; that is, as persons - they are considered by our laws as accountable moral agents, - possessed of volition and locomotion, and that certain rights - have been conferred upon them by positive law and judicial - determination, and other privileges and indulgences have been - conceded to them by the universal consent of their owners. By - uniform and universal usage, they are constituted the agents of - their owners, and are sent on their business without written - authority; and in like manner they are sent to perform those - neighborly good offices common in every community. They are not - at all times in the service of their owners, and are allowed - by universal sufferance, at night, on Sundays, holidays, and - other occasions, to go abroad, to attend church, to visit - those to whom they are related by nature, though the relation - may not be recognized by municipal law; and to exercise other - innocent enjoyments without its ever entering the mind of any - good citizen to demand written authority of them. The simple - truth is, such indulgences have been so long and so uniformly - tolerated that public sentiment upon the subject has acquired - almost the force of positive law.[177] - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] State v. Hale, 2 Hawks, 585 (1823). - -[2] Meigs and Cooper’s Code of 1858, Secs. 2603-9. - -[3] M. & C, Secs. 2610-11. - -[4] Ibid., Secs. 2612-13. - -[5] Ibid., Sec. 2603. - -[6] Acts of 1833. Ch. 3. Sec. 1. - -[7] M. & C, Secs. 2666-68. - -[8] Stewart v. Miller, 1 Meigs, 174 (1838). - -[9] Harris v. Clarissa, 6 Yerger, 227 (1834); Blackmore v. Negro Phill, 7 -Yerger, 452 (1835). - -[10] Matilda v. Crenshaw, 4 Yerger, 299 (1833). - -[11] Vaughan v. Phebe, I Martin & Yerger, 1 (1827). - -[12] “Freedom in this country,” said Judge Crabb, “is not a mere name—a -cheat with which the few gull the many. It is something substantial. It -embraces within its comprehensive grasp, all the useful rights of man; -and it makes itself manifest by many privileges, immunities, external -public acts. It is not confined in its operation to privacy, or to -the domestic circle. It walks abroad in its operations—transfers its -possessor, even if he be black, or mulatto, or copper colored, from -the kitchen and the cotton field, to the court house and the election -ground, makes him talk of Magna Charta and the constitution; in some -states renders him a politician—brings him acquainted with the leading -citizens—busies himself in the political canvass for office—takes him -to the ballot box; and, above all, secures to him the enviable and -inestimable privilege of trial by jury. Can it be said, that there is -nothing of a public nature in a right, that thus, from its necessary -operation, places a man in many respects on an equality with the richest, -and the greatest, and the best in the land, and brings him in contact -with the whole community?” Vaughan v. Phebe, 1 Martin & Yerger, 1 (1827). - -[13] Matilda v. Crenshaw, 1 (1827). - -[14] Vaughan v. Phebe, 1 Martin & Yerger, 1 (1827). - -[15] Acts of 1817, Ch. 103, Sec. 1. - -[16] Sylvia and Phillis v. Covey, 4 Yerger, 27 (1883). - -[17] Acts of 1715, Ch. 19, Sec. 9; Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 48. - -[18] Acts of 1783, Ch. 14, Sec. 2. - -[19] Manuscripts in State Archives. - -[20] Acts of 1815, Ch. 138, Sec. 1. - -[21] Acts of 1819, Ch. 35, Sec. 2. - -[22] Acts of 1825, Ch. 24, Sec. 1. - -[23] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 6. - -[24] Acts of 1835, Ch. 9, Secs. 9-11. - -[25] Kentucky, Maryland, Georgia, and Alabama were the other four. See -footnote, Wheeler, Op. Cit., 213. - -[26] Acts of 1838, Ch. 133, Sec. 1. - -[27] Acts of 1848, Ch. 50, Sec. 1. - -[28] Acts of 1858, Ch. 86, Secs. 1-2. - -[29] Infra, pp. 59-79; 102-152. - -[30] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 190. - -[31] Porter v. Blackmore, 2 Caldwell, 555 (1865); see also 5 Caldwell, -209; 3 Heiskell, 662; and 10 Lea, 663. - -[32] Judge Catron held that “what is earned by the slave belongs to -the master by the common law, the civil law, and the recognized rules -of property in the slaveholding states of this Union.” University v. -Cambreling, Yerger, 86 (1834). - -[33] Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 4. - -[34] Turner v. Fisher, 4 Sneed, 210 (1856). - -[35] Judge Green held that “A slave is not in the condition of a horse -or an ox. His liberty is restrained, it is true, and his owner controls -his actions and claims his services. But he is made of the image of the -Creator. He has mental capacities, and an immortal principle in his -nature, that constitutes him equal to his owner but for the accidental -position in which fortune has placed him. The owner has acquired -conventional rights to him, but the laws under which he is held as a -slave have not and can not extinguish his high-born nature nor deprive -him of many rights which are inherent in man. Thus while he is a slave, -he can make a contract for his freedom, and by the same will he can take -personal or real estate.” Ford v. Ford, 7 Humphrey, 95-96 (1846). Cf. -Miller v. Miller, 5 Heiskell, 734 (1871). - -[36] Stephenson v. Harrison, 3 Head, 733 (1859). - -[37] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 194. - -[38] Supra, 16. - -[39] Acts of 1794, Ch. 1, Sec. 32. - -[40] Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 5. - -[41] Acts of 1839, Ch. 7, Sec. 1. - -[42] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 197. - -[43] Stephenson v. Harrison, 3 Head, 733 (1859). - -[44] Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 665 (1870). - -[45] Haitsell v. George, 3 Humphrey, 255 (1842). - -[46] Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 666 (1870). - -[47] Act of 1753, Ch. 6, Sec. 10. - -[48] M. & C., Secs. 2563-64. - -[49] Acts of 1825, Ch. 24, Sec. 2. - -[50] Ibid., Secs. 3-5. - -[51] Thomas, T. Ebenezer, Anti-Slavery Correspondence, 71. The letter -reads as follows: “Has the anti-slavery cause injured the condition -of the slaves? Surely not. In my late journey through Kentucky and -Tennessee, I did not see one dirty, ragged negro. The squads of little -negroes I used to see naked as the pigs and calves with which they -gamboled in the same grove, were now clad like human beings in shirts and -pants or slips, and many of them had straw hats, such as my own little -boys put on; nor did I; see, as formerly, boys and girls waiting at the -table, in a state of stark nudity.” - -“I was happy to acknowledge that a great change had taken place since I -was conversant about Nashville, fifty-five years ago, when negroes were -naked and ignorant. I said I was pleased to see so much attention paid to -their bodies and their minds, and I wished that the people of Tennessee -might go ahead of the people in Ohio in good offices to the negro. God -speed you, dear friends, in this work.” - -[52] Loftin v. Espy, 4 Yerger, 92 (1833). - -[53] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 225; University v. Cambreling, 6 Yerger, 79 -(1834); Craig v. Leiper, 2 Yerger, 193 (1828); Pinson and Hawkins v. -Ivey, 1 Yerger, 303 (1830). - -[54] Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 40; Acts of 1753, Ch. 6, Sec. 2. - -[55] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 3. - -[56] Acts of 1835, Ch. 57, Sec. 2. - -[57] James v. State, 9 Humphrey, 310 (1848). - -[58] Acts of 1813, Ch. 56, Sec. 1. - -[59] Acts of 1779, Ch. 11, Sec. 4. - -[60] Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 1. - -[61] Acts of 1835, Ch. 58, Sec. 1. - -[62] Ibid., Ch. 65, Sec. 2. - -[63] Acts of 1799, Ch. 9, Sec. 2. - -[64] Fields v. The State of Tennessee, 1 Yerger, 156 (1829). - -[65] “If a slave commits a criminal offense while in the services of the -hirer,” said Judge McKinney, “it would be sufficient cause to discharge -him. And if the hirer desires to have him punished for such offense the -law has pointed out the mode, and he has the right to pursue it, but he -has no right to become himself the avenger of the violated law, much less -to depute another person in his stead. And for a battery committed on the -slave under such circumstances, the owner may well maintain an action -against the wrong-doer, in which the jury would be justified in giving -exemplary damages in a proper case.” James v. Carper, 4 Sneed, 404 (1857). - -[66] Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 3. - -[67] Ibid., Sec. 5. - -[68] Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 11. - -[69] Ibid., Sec. 3. - -[70] Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Sec. 4. - -[71] Acts of 1779, Ch. 7, Sec. 3. - -[72] Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 5. - -[73] Ibid., Secs. 6-7. - -[74] Acts of 1817, Ch. 184, Sec. 3. - -[75] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 2. - -[76] Acts of 1858, Ch. 3, Sec. 1. - -[77] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 10. - -[78] M. & C., Secs. 2577-2580. - -[79] Acts of 1856, Ch. 30, Secs. 1-4. - -[80] M. & C., Sec. 2576. - -[81] Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 8. - -[82] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 10. - -[83] M. & C., Sec. 2575. - -[84] M. & C., Sec. 2576. - -[85] Tomlinson v. Doerall, 2 Head, 542 (1859). - -[86] Jones v. Allen, 1 Head, 627 (1858). - -[87] Jones v. Allen, 1 Head, 636 (1858). - -[88] M. & C., Secs. 2581-3. - -[89] Ibid., Sec. 2586. - -[90] P. G. was an abbreviation for public jail. - -[91] M. & C, Secs. 2596-8. - -[92] Acts of 1819, Ch. 35, Sec. 1. - -[93] Acts of 1825, Ch. 79, Secs. 1-2. - -[94] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 8. - -[95] Ibid., Sec. 9. - -[96] Acts of 1844, Ch. 129, Sec. 1. - -[97] Acts of 1852, Ch. 117, Sec. 2. - -[98] Acts of 1786, Ch. 5, Sec. 1. - -[99] Acts of 1812, Ch. 88, Sec. 1. - -[100] This oath reads: “I, A. B., do solemnly swear or affirm that I have -removed myself and slaves to the State of Tennessee, with the full and -sole view of becoming a citizen thereof, and that I have not brought my -slave or slaves to this state with any view to the security of the same -against any rebellion or apprehension of rebellion. So help me God.” Acts -of 1812, Ch. 88, Sec. 2. - -[101] Acts of 1812, Ch. 88, Sec. 3. - -[102] Acts of 1815, Ch. 65, Sec. 1. - -[103] Acts of 1826, Ch. 22, Sec. 2. - -[104] Acts of 1826, Ch. 22, Sec. 3. - -[105] Acts of 1855, Ch. 64, Sec. 1. - -[106] Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1834, 87-147. - -[107] Comptroller’s Report to General Assembly, 1859-60, 17. - -[108] Acts of 1799, Ch. 11, Sec. 2. - -[109] Acts of 1835, Ch. 58, Sec. 1. - -[110] Ibid., Sec. 2. - -[111] Christian Advocate and Journal, Bolivar, July 4, 1831. - -[112] Quarterly Anti-Slavery Magazine, II, 105-6. - -[113] Supra, pp. 18-19. - -[114] Acts of 1799, Ch. 28, Sec. 1. - -[115] Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 4. - -[116] Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 4. - -[117] Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 3. - -[118] Ibid., Sec. 1. - -[119] Acts of 1829, Ch. 74, Secs. 1-2. - -[120] Acts of 1829, Ch. 74, Sec. 4. - -[121] Acts of 1832, Ch. 34, Sec. 2. - -[122] Acts of 1846, Ch. 90, Sec. 3. - -[123] Acts of 1842, Ch. 141, Sec. 1. - -[124] Jennings v. the State, 3 Head, 519-520 (1859). - -[125] M. & C., Sec. 4865. - -[126] Jennings v. State, 3 Head, 522 (1859). - -[127] Tennessee Gazette and Mero District, Vol. 5, No. 22, July 3, 1805. - -[128] Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 1. - -[129] Acts of 1836, Ch. 44, Sec. 2. - -[130] Niles Register, Vol. 41, pp. 340-1. - -[131] 24th and 25th Annual Report of American Anti-Slavery Society, -1857-58, 76-78. - -[132] 24th and 25th Annual Reports of American Anti-Slavery Society, -1857-58, p. 78. - -[133] Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 3. - -[134] Acts of 1812, Ch. 135, Sec. 1. - -[135] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 1. - -[136] Unlawful assemblies was defined by the act of 1831 as being “all -assemblages of slaves in unusual numbers, or at suspicious times and -places not expressly authorized by their owners.” - -[137] Acts of 1799, Ch. 28, Sec. 1. - -[138] Acts of 1801, Ch. 32, Sec. 3. - -[139] Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 6. - -[140] Acts of 1829, Ch. 74, Sec. 1. - -[141] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 4. - -[142] Acts of 1844, Ch. 129, Sec. 1. - -[143] Acts of 1741, Ch. 8, Sec. 10. - -[144] Acts of 1819, Ch. 35, Sec. 1. - -[145] Acts of 1835, Ch. 19, Sec. 10. - -[146] M. & C., Secs. 2625-28. - -[147] Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 4. - -[148] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 41. - -[149] Acts of 1784, Ch. 10, Sec. 7. - -[150] Acts of 1801, Ch. 2, Sec. 11. - -[151] Davis v. Mitchell, 5 Yerger, 281 (1833); See also Cains and Wife v. -Marley, 2 Yerger, 582 (1831); and Battle v. Stone, 4 Yerger, 168 (1833). - -[152] Ragan v. Kennedy, I Overton, 91 (1804). - -[153] Acts of 1784, Ch. 22, Sec. 11. - -[154] Ibid., Ch. 10, Sec. 4. - -[155] Acts of 1796, Ch. 14, Sec. 1. - -[156] Acts of 1819, Ch. 36, Sec. 1. - -[157] Young v. Pate, 4 Yerger, 164 (1833). - -[158] Acts of 1805, Ch. 16, Sec. 2. - -[159] Acts of 1715, Ch. 27, Sec. 5. - -[160] Hardeson v. Hays, 4 Yerger, 507 (1833); Kegler v. Miles, 1 Martin & -Yerger, 426 (1825); Partee v. Badget, 4 Yerger, 174 (1833). - -[161] Davis v. Mitchell, 5 Yerger, 281 (1833). - -[162] Kegler v. Miles, 1 Martin & Yerger, 426 (1825). - -[163] Acts of 1801, Ch. 25, Sec. 2. - -[164] Acts of 1805, Ch. 16, Sec. 2. - -[165] Callen v. Thompson, 3 Yerger, 475 (1832). - -[166] Hooper’s Administratrix v. Hooper, 1 Overton, 187 (1801). - -[167] Acts of 1801, Ch. 25, Sec. 2. - -[168] Andrews v. Hartsfield. 3 Yerger, 39 (1832); see also Peters v. -Chores, 4 Yerger, 176 (1833). - -[169] Harris v. Clarissa, 6 Yerger, 227 (1834). - -[170] Hope v. Johnson, 2 Yerger, 123 (1826). - -[171] Preston v. McGaughery, 1 Cook, 115 (1812). - -[172] Caines and Wife v. Marley, 2 Yerger, 586 (1831). - -[173] Smith v. Bell and Wife, 1 Martin & Yerger, 302 (1827). - -[174] Wheeler, Op. Cit., 225. - -[175] Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 661 (1868). - -[176] Ibid., 662. - -[177] Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 662-3 (1868). - - - - -CHAPTER III - -ECONOMICS OF SLAVERY IN TENNESSEE - - -I. SLAVERY AN EXPRESSION OF THE SOIL. - -Someone has said, “The rocks determine our politics.” The rocks make the -soil, which in turn determines the agricultural products that a section -can produce with profit, and, hence, the labor system. Slavery nowhere in -the United States reflected physiographic features more distinctly than -in Tennessee. The three sections of the state have always differed very -largely in their agriculture, in their sympathy with various sections -of the country, and in their politics. In fact, there are almost three -peoples and three civilizations in Tennessee. Physiography has been the -biggest factor in the differentiation. The human response to the soil -is very clearly shown. The differences in the sections of the state on -the subject of slavery were due mainly to geography, since differences -in climate were not sufficiently marked to promote or create any special -attitude of mind toward slavery. - -East Tennessee remained throughout the slavery regime mainly a section -of small farmers. It was only the river valleys of the French Broad, -the Watauga, the Holston, and the Tennessee that yielded with advantage -to agriculture. These valleys were mostly of limestone formation, and -produced a loamy soil that was very fertile. - -The counties[1] in these river valleys produced considerable quantities -of wheat and corn, but very little cotton. In 1850 East Tennessee -produced one bale of cotton, ten hogsheads of tobacco, 1,813,338 bushels -of wheat, and 10,998,654 bushels of corn.[2] In 1840, the counties -containing the largest number of slaves were Knox, numbering 1934; -Hawkins, 1499; Jefferson, 1282; and McMinn, 1241. There were six -counties with slightly over one thousand each, six in the six hundred -column, and the others ranged from 150 to 450 each. In 1860 there were -four counties in East Tennessee with 2000 slaves in each. In the same -year, there were 27,560 slaves in East Tennessee.[3] - -In 1856 there were only 28 farms in East Tennessee containing one -thousand acres or more. There were 164 containing from 500 to 1000 acres, -1,173 having from 100 to 500 acres, 7,117 having 50 to 100 acres, and -6,920 containing less than fifty acres. There were only 192 farms which -contained more than 500 acres. It is seen from these figures that East -Tennessee was populated essentially by small farmers who raised wheat and -corn and live stock.[4] - -In 1840 there were 19,915 slaves in East Tennessee, valued at -$10,813,845.[5] In 1850 there were 22,187 valued at $11,248,809; and -in 1860 there were 27,560 slaves valued at $23,536,240.[6] There were -in 1856 only 4,784 slaveholders in East Tennessee. Of these, one held -between 200 and 300 slaves, 3 between 70 and 100, 4 between 50 and 70, -12 between 40 and 50, and only 718 owned more than ten slaves, and 1207 -owned only one; 719 owned two slaves. Practically half the slaveholders -of East Tennessee owned either one or two slaves. The average price of -land per acre in East Tennessee was $4.62, slightly more than half of -what it was for middle and West Tennessee.[7] The value of the slave in -1859 ranged from $563 in Johnson County, which is in the northeastern -part of the state, in the mountains, to $953 in Blount County, which is -bordered by the Tennessee River and is traversed by some of its branches. - -Middle Tennessee was more adapted to the slavery system than East -Tennessee. It contained the rich Central Basin, traversed by the -Cumberland River, and also portions of the valley of the Tennessee. -Slavery was profitable in Middle Tennessee, especially for the -cultivation of tobacco and cotton. Middle Tennessee in 1856 raised 19,621 -bales of cotton and 4,511 hogsheads of tobacco. It produced 1,825,423 -bushels of wheat and 21,968,114 bushels of corn.[8] The big cotton -counties were Lincoln, producing 2,558 bales; Williamson, 3,167 bales; -Maury, 4,623 bales; and Rutherford, 4,623 bales. All these counties are -in the Central Basin. The big tobacco counties were Robertson, producing -1083 hogsheads, Smith, 1050 hogsheads, and Williamson, 1179 hogsheads. - -There were 74 farms in Middle Tennessee, containing more than one -thousand acres each and 299 farms having between 500 and 1000 acres each. -The counties having plantations of more than 500 acres were Wilson, with -24, Davidson, 27, Bedford, 33, Montgomery, 23, Williamson, 49, Lincoln, -50, Rutherford, 52, and Giles, 60. Most of these counties are located in -the Central Basin, and have a rich, loamy soil. The response was the big -plantation and a dense slave population. - -The slave population of Middle Tennessee, increased from 106,640 in 1840, -to 131,666 in 1850 and to 148,028 by 1860. Land was very valuable in the -cotton and tobacco counties, ranging in value from $13.54 in Giles County -to $18.84 per acre in Williamson. The slave in Giles County was worth -$797 while in Williamson County he was valued at $855. Both of these -counties were rural and produced cotton. The average value of land for -this section was only $8.82 per acre while the average value of slaves -was $838. The total value of slaves in Middle Tennessee in 1860 was -$126,488,926. - -There were 18,524 slaveholders in Middle Tennessee in 1856; of this -number, 14,145 held less than ten slaves; only one owned more than 300 -slaves; about four thousand held only one slave. There were practically -no large slaveholders in Middle Tennessee. - -West Tennessee along the Mississippi River was a part of the Black Belt, -and was more suitable for the production of cotton than either of the -other two divisions of the state. There were 13,536 slaveholders in -West Tennessee in 1856.[9] West Tennessee had larger slaveholders in -proportion to the total number than either of the other divisions of -the state. In East Tennessee those who owned one slave were one-fourth -of the total number of slaveholders; in Middle Tennessee about the same -proportion prevailed; and in West Tennessee this ratio was reduced to -1:5. In East Tennessee there was only one person owning more than one -hundred slaves; in Middle Tennessee there were twenty-five; in West -Tennessee there were eighty-five. - -The plantations in West Tennessee were larger and more numerous, in spite -of the fact that West Tennessee was not settled before 1820. Fayette -County had 74 plantations containing between 500 and 1000 acres each, and -15 containing more than 1000 acres each. Fayette County in 1860 contained -15,473 slaves, all of whom had been acquired since 1830.[10] Shelby had -a slave population of 16,953, which had been acquired since 1830. Some -of the most productive parts of the Black Belt in West Tennessee, such -as Lake County, were not in cultivation by 1860. The counties along the -divide between the Mississippi and Tennessee rivers were very poor, and -therefore not suitable for the production of cotton in large quantities. -Counties like Hardin, Henderson, McNairy, Chester, Decatur, Carroll, -Weakley, and Gibson were cultivated by small farmers, many of whom owned -no slaves at all, while others owned only one or two slaves. In these -counties, farmers worked their crops by themselves, or by the side of -their slaves. - -The leading crops of West Tennessee were cotton, corn, wheat, and -tobacco. Cotton was the chief crop, and tobacco was raised in only -the poorer counties, like Benton, Carroll, Weakley, Gibson, Haywood, -and Lauderdale. Fayette and Shelby were the big cotton counties. -West Tennessee produced in 1856 four times as much cotton as Middle -Tennessee, and 3,144 hogsheads of tobacco against 4,511 produced by -Middle Tennessee.[11] - -Taking the state as a whole, it was never more than a state of small -farmers. The plantation system as it existed in Mississippi or South -Carolina never prevailed in Tennessee. The soils of Tennessee were not -sufficiently productive to make slavery profitable on a large scale. It -was more profitable to own from one to half a dozen slaves and work with -them than to have an overseer. Of the 33,864 slaveholders in the state in -1850, 26,512 owned less than ten slaves each, and 18,198 owned less than -five each. There were only 22 persons in the state who owned more than -one hundred slaves. By 1856 this number had increased to one hundred and -six. - -The distribution of the slaves over the state was determined by the -crops raised. In East Tennessee the ratio of slaves to whites was about -1 to 12; in Middle Tennessee, 1 to 3; and in West Tennessee, 3 to 5. In -no county in East Tennessee was the ratio greater than 1 to 6, while in -several counties it was 1 to 60, and in two-thirds of them it ranged from -1 to 20, to 1 to 60.[12] This, of course, was a matter of the soil. These -factors reflected themselves in social life, education, religion, and -politics. Slavery produced aristocracy and classes of society wherever -it appeared. It made for the private school in education, Whiggery in -politics, and the southern division among the Protestant churches that -split. East Tennessee in Andrew Jackson’s time was the democratic part -of the state. West Tennessee, the seat of the Black Belt, was the home -of the Whig aristocracy. When the Whigs became Democrats in the decade -between 1850 and 1860, the free farmers and small slaveholders, Democrats -of East Tennessee, became Unionists and later Republicans. This same -formula worked out over the entire state. There are Republican islands in -Democratic sections, and Democratic islands in Republican sections. East -Tennessee remained loyal to the Methodist Church, and West Tennessee went -into the Methodist Church, South. These divisions were not peculiar alone -to the three grand divisions of the state, but are found in the various -counties. - -For instance, in the Presidential elections of 1844 between Clay and -Polk, Tennessee went for Clay. The big Democratic counties of today were -Whig then. Fayette’s vote was 1217 to 1060 in favor of Clay; Shelby’s, -1828 to 1607 in favor of Clay; Madison’s, 1562 to 737 in favor of Clay; -Gibson’s, 1423 to 688 in favor of Clay. These counties are now the big -Democratic counties of West Tennessee. They stood the same way in 1848 on -the election between Taylor and Cass. They voted overwhelmingly for the -Whig candidate for Governor in 1847.[13] - -Present Republican counties of East Tennessee went Democratic. -Washington, 1225 to 881 in favor of Polk; Sullivan, 1533 to 350 in -favor of Polk; Greene, 1701 to 1031 in favor of Polk. The same line-up -expressed itself in 1847 and in the Presidential election of 1848.[14] - -There are certain counties in West Tennessee today that are quite as -overwhelmingly Republican as any in East Tennessee. These counties are in -full sympathy with the point of view of the North in politics and toward -life generally. The northern branches of the churches, together with -their schools, are found in these counties. They prefer school teachers -from the North and send their children to northern colleges. The human -response to the soil that determined their attitude toward slavery is -mainly responsible for these results. It was this force that made poor -whites out of some and slaveholders out of others. - - -II. THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PLANTATION. - -Plantation life in Tennessee was more humane than is generally supposed. -Great care was taken in establishing the negro quarters. There were -several reasons for this, not especially peculiar to Tennessee. Health -is an indispensable factor in the life of an efficient laborer. It saved -or reduced the expense of medical attention. Sanitary quarters for the -negroes produced contentment and thus lessened the problem of government. -They prevented the spread of disease, and a consequent heavy death rate. -They diminished crime among the slaves and on the whole made a good -reputation for the master. Respect for the master was no inconsiderable -force in the proper functioning of a plantation. The slaveholders -discussed these subjects in the agricultural fairs and read papers on how -to build proper slave quarters. - -In an issue of the Practical Farmer and Mechanic, published -at Somerville, Tennessee, the county seat of the most densely -slave-populated county in the state, are given the following instructions -relative to the establishment of the plantation buildings: - - In the selection of his farm, he (the master) should have an - eye to health, convenience of water, and a soil with such a - substratum as to retain manures. His home should be neat but - not costly—erected on an elevated situation—with a sufficient - number of shade trees to impart health and comfort to its - inmates. His negro quarters should be placed a convenient - distance from his dwelling on a dry, airy ridge—raised two - feet from the ground—so they can be thoroughly ventilated - underneath, and placed at distances apart of at least fifty - yards to ensure health. In this construction, they should be - sufficiently spacious so as not to crowd the family intended to - occupy them—with brick chimneys and large fire-places to impart - warmth to every part of the room. More diseases and loss of - time on plantations are engendered from crowded negro cabins - than from almost any other cause. The successful planter should - therefore have an especial eye to the comfort of his negroes, - in not permitting them to be overcrowded in their sleeping - quarters.[15] - -This was an ideal that was regarded as a model. There was pride among -masters as to the character and appearance of their plantations. In a -description of a plantation in Haywood County, the following elaborate -set of buildings is given: dwelling-house, kitchen, washhouse, -storehouse, office, smokehouse, servants’ houses about the dwelling of -the master, weaving, ice, and poultry houses, gin house, grist mill, -flouring mill, wheat granary, stables, corn crib, overseer’s house, -seven double negro cabins, thirty-six feet by fourteen, with large brick -chimneys, closets, and other conveniences, all of which buildings are -annually whitewashed.[16] If one family was to occupy the cabin, it was -usually about 16 feet by 20 feet in its dimensions.[17] An effort was -made to locate cabins among shade trees. If this condition was not met, -trees were planted. Comfortable housing of the slaves was one of the real -problems of slave management, and it seems that an honest effort in most -cases was made to solve it. Proper bedding with plenty of blankets was -furnished in the winter, and close attention was given to the food of -the slaves. Weekly allowances were usually made, yet some fed in common. -Five pounds of good, clean bacon, one quart of molasses, a sufficiency -of bread and coffee with sugar were usually distributed to each slave on -some designated night each week. Family rations were put together. Single -hands received their rations separately, and then united in squads and -masses. Some woman was detailed to cook their meat or make their coffee. -The bread was cooked in the bakery for the entire plantation. - -Two suits of cotton for spring and summer; two suits of woolen for -winter; four pairs of shoes, and three hats made up the clothing -allowance. The slave was encouraged to be neat in his dress. - -The slaves were supposed to go to work by sunrise. They rested from -one to two hours at noon and then worked until night. In summer, the -plan frequently was to work from sunrise to 8:00 o’clock a.m., then -breakfast, work until 12:00 o’clock at noon, rest two hours, and then -work until night. They always quit work at noon on Saturday to prepare -for Sunday. - -Various plans were used to stimulate the slaves to work. One of the -most effective was “task week.” The negroes varied among themselves -considerably as to the rapidity with which they could perform their -labor. It was this very fact that constituted the basis of the “task” -system. According to this system, a slave could work for himself or play -when he had finished his assigned task. Some masters permitted the slaves -to cultivate a few acres for themselves. - -Prompt attention in case of sickness was a vastly important matter among -slaves. Masters, mistresses, and overseers usually knew a great many home -remedies which, if given in time, would suffice for a large number of -complaints. A good amount of red pepper was used in the vegetables. This -was supposed to stimulate the system, prevent sore throat, and render the -system less liable to chills and fevers. - -Good plantation management contained a number of additional interesting -features. A weekly dance was an event to be looked forward to. For the -master and mistress to chaperon these occasions made a strong impression -on the slaves. Family prayers in which the slaves participated had a -bracing effect on the negro’s character. It was wise to have an employed -preacher for the slaves. Religion appealed to the negro’s character, and -it was a psychological factor in his control. - -One of the most interesting features of plantation life was the raising -of poultry by the old slaves who were incapacitated for hard work. An -old negro man, giving most zealous attention to his brood, his negro -assistants careful to please him in every detail, and the “happy -family,” consisting of everything from a bob white and turkey gobbler -to a mockingbird, made one of the most beautiful pictures of plantation -life.[18] - -The duties of the master was a subject that was kept before the community -even if economic interests were not sufficient to control such matters. -J. P. Williams, in a prize essay on plantations and their management, -urged that the master should give his personal attention to his negroes. -He thought that such supervision would not only pay in financial returns -but would largely solve the problem of discontent and insubordination -frequently due to mistreatment of slaves by an overseer.[19] - -The master’s relation to the overseer was an important factor in the -management of the plantation. It was a good policy to pay any overseer -well. This gave the master the right to demand his entire time, and -usually ended in efficiency and satisfactory relations of overseer to -both master and slaves. - -“An employer,” said Jas. C. Lusby, in a paper read before the -Agricultural and Mechanical Society of Fayette County, September 2, 1855, -“should never ask a negro any questions whatever about the business of -the plantation, or the condition of the crops; nor say anything in the -presence of the negroes about the overseer, for they are always ready to -catch any word that may be dropped, and use it if possible to cause a -disturbance between the master and the overseer.”[20] It seems that there -was a common practice among masters to have one or two trusties among the -negroes to act as spies upon the overseer. “Negroes,” said Lusby, “in -two-thirds of the cases, are the cause of employers and overseers falling -out.”[21] The successful planter was one who gave sufficient time and -thought to the management of his farm to enable him to be his own judge -as to the character and efficiency of his overseer. - -The overseer was the most important factor in the management of the -large plantation. His indifference toward the interests of either master -or slaves broke down the system, because there was perfect unity of -interests inherent in the system, and the successful overseer recognized -this ideal. It was the business of the overseer to be present at the -beginning of every important work, not merely because he was paid to do -so, but because the negroes always took advantage of his absence. It was -his business to ring a bell or blow a horn in the morning for breakfast, -because it was unsafe to entrust this duty to a negro driver for the -reason that it was almost impossible to find a negro sufficiently regular -in his habits to be reliable. If the breakfast hour was a failure, the -entire day’s work was seriously damaged. - -The overseer had to see that the negroes were up by four o’clock in the -winter and about half past three in the spring and summer. This gave -time to prepare victuals, arrange clothes and shoes, to see that horses -and mules were properly fed, that crib doors were shut, that fires were -built for the children, and that everybody was ready to go to work by -daylight.[22] - -The overseer accompanied the slaves to the field and saw that the day’s -work was properly begun. He could then return to his house for breakfast. -Following breakfast, he was free to make a general inspection of the -plantation. He inspected the cabins to see that they were neatly kept, -that the clothes of the negroes were washed, that the negro nurses -were properly looking after the children, that the common bakery, -boot-and-shoe shop, carpenters, mechanics, and tailors were efficiently -functioning. - -He inspected fences, ditches, gates, and stock occasionally. He visited -the cabins two or three times a week at night to see that the negroes -were at home and that no strange negroes were on the premises. The nature -of the negro was to gad about, and to keep improper hours. It was the -duty of the overseer to prevent this. He had to look after the farming -implements, and, after the crops were harvested, to gather up the tools -of the plantation and have them repaired and properly housed during the -winter. - -The overseer had constantly to plan work two or three weeks in advance -to have the greatest success. He had to keep in close touch with the -master, especially concerning work after the crops were finished. “I -consider it to be the duty of the overseer,” said Lusby, “to do anything -that the employer wishes him to do, right or wrong.” - -Lusby advocated that an overseer should be a model of personal -appearance. He should keep himself close-shaven, wear good clothes, “hold -his head up equal to his employer, ride a good, sprightly horse, and have -one of the hands to attend to him, and saddle him in the morning.”[23] An -overseer was rated by the slaves very largely according to the manner in -which he conducted himself. His personal conduct was a determining factor -in the degree of control that he was able to exercise. This factor either -made or undid all his efforts. - -An overseer who was a success in the employment of a master was usually -able to buy land and negroes for himself in a few years. In an address -given at an agricultural fair in Jackson, Tennessee, in 1855, an account -is given of a planter in Haywood County, who had had only four overseers -from 1838 to 1855. One of these in six years, with a large family, -accumulated nineteen hundred dollars which he invested in lands and -negroes in Texas, and was soon doing well. Another accumulated in seven -years more than two thousand dollars, and was ready to go to Arkansas -and invest his capital in lands and negroes. The other two had similar -success.[24] - -The slaves in Tennessee undoubtedly were, on the whole, humanely treated. -Rev. Arthur Howard says in his history of the Episcopal Church in -Tennessee that “it is impossible to deny that the negroes of the South -were happier, and better cared for, physically and morally, under the -system of slavery existing in the South, than they have been at any -time since they obtained their freedom and were suddenly, without any -training, endowed with the right of citizenship.”[25] - -Rev. J. N. Pendleton, of the Baptist Church, said: - - I take great pleasure in testifying that slavery in Kentucky - and Tennessee, and I was not acquainted with it elsewhere, was - of the mild type. When I went North, nothing surprised me more - than to see laborers at work in the rain and snow. In such - weather, slaves in Kentucky and Tennessee would have been under - shelter.[26] - - -III. WAS SLAVERY PROFITABLE IN TENNESSEE? - -There is a great deal of evidence that slavery was profitable, and some -that it was not. Slavery increased very rapidly in the first two decades -of the history of the state. From 1790 to 1800 there was an increase -of 297.54 per cent, and from 1800 to 1810 an increase of 229.31 per -cent.[27] Slave population increased only 79.06 per cent in the next -decade, and only 244.19 per cent from 1820 to 1860. This decrease in -percentage from 1820 to 1860 is in face of the fact that West Tennessee, -the Black Belt part of the state, was settled and populated during this -period. This evidently means that slavery was not making much progress in -East and Middle Tennessee. - -Slaves increased in value very rapidly in Tennessee from 1790 to about -1836. They were worth only $100 each in 1790, but by 1836 they were -valued at $584.[28] They decreased in value to $413.72 by 1846. They -reached the 1836 mark again in 1854, and by 1860 were valued, for -purposes of taxation, at $900.[29] This valuation was largely controlled -by the price of cotton. The average price of cotton for the decade ending -1830 was 13.3 cents per pound; for the decade ending 1840, 12.4 cents; -for the decade ending 1850, 8.2 cents; and for the five years ending -1855, 9.6 cents.[30] The values and prices of Tennessee slaves and cotton -only roughly corresponded to those of the United States at the same time. -In 1792, the average value of a slave in the United States was $300, and -in 1835 it was $900, and $600 in 1844.[31] Upland cotton was worth 17½ -cents per pound in New York City in 1835 and 7½ cents in 1844. It was -generally held that a difference of one cent a pound in the price of -cotton made a difference of $100 in the price of slaves, but this could -not apply to the above prices. - -Slavery was undoubtedly very profitable in Middle and West Tennessee. -F. A. Michaux in travelling from Nashville to Knoxville in 1802 says: -“Between Nashville and Fort Blount (above Nashville on the Cumberland -River about sixty miles) the plantations, although isolated in the woods -always, are nevertheless, upon the road, within two or three miles of -each other. The inhabitants live in comfortable log houses; the major -part keep negroes, and appear to live happy and in abundance.”[32] He -says West Tennessee (Cumberland), now Middle Tennessee, produced a -very fine grade of cotton and that manufacture was encouraged by the -legislature.[33] “Emigrants to Tennessee,” he continues, “by at least the -third year have gone over to the cotton crop.” He says that a man and -his wife could, aside from raising sufficient Indian corn for sustenance -“cultivate four acres (of cotton) with the greatest ease.” This would -yield a net produce of two hundred and twelve dollars. “This light -sketch,” he says, “demonstrates with what facility a poor family may -acquire speedily, in West Tennessee, a certain degree of independence, -particularly after having been settled five or six years, as they procure -the means of purchasing one or two negroes, and of annually increasing -this number.”[34] - -Lilly Buttrick, travelling in Tennessee from 1812 to 1819, speaks of -stopping with an Indian slave owner by the name of Talbot, who lived on -the bank of the Tennessee. “This man,” he says, “was said to be very -rich, in land, cattle, and negro slaves, and also to have large sums of -money in the bank.”[35] - -The culture of cotton was profitable from the very beginning of the -state down to 1860. As early as July, 1797, Mr. Miller of the firm of -Miller and Whitney, proposed to his partner that they send an agent to -Knoxville, “where we were informed that cotton was valuable,” and to -Nashville and the Cumberland settlements to gather information concerning -the culture of cotton in those parts and the mode of cleaning it.[36] -As soon as the people of these frontier settlements learned that the -cotton gin was a success, they held public meetings and petitioned the -legislature of Tennessee to buy the patent rights of Miller and Whitney -to the saw-gin within the limits of Tennessee. Andrew Jackson presided at -some of these meetings.[37] In accordance with the wishes of the people, -the legislature purchased the patent rights for the gin within the -limits of Tennessee in 1803, and the state began to encourage the growth -of cotton. “Cotton production in this state,” says Hammond, “with the -exception of a few years in the 40’s, continued to increase at a uniform -rate until the outbreak of the Civil War.”[38] - -A. D. Murphrey, a North Carolinian, travelling through West Tennessee -in 1822, and writing to his friend, Thomas Ruffin, left the following -account of the soil and the profits in farming in West Tennessee: “Since -I wrote you last I have been through nearly one-half of the Chickashaw -Purchase, and if I was disappointed as to old Tennessee, I was still -more as to the Purchase; but my disappointment was of another kind. I -have never seen such a beautiful country before, nor one where industry -can be so well rewarded. It is very much like Mecklenburg and Cararrus -were, I expect, a hundred years ago, in their appearance; but there is -a fertility in its poorest soil that I have seen nowhere else. Except -the swamp, there is really no poor land, if we are to judge from its -production; for on the poorest ridges that I have seen, six and eight -barrels of corn, or 1000 pounds of cotton is the ordinary crop. What -is there called good land brings upon an average 10 barrels of corn or -1300 pounds of cotton to the acre; and one hand will tend more land than -two in any part of North Carolina west of Raleigh. I have just left the -house of a Mr. Morgan on Sandy River, who is now working his second crop -and works four hands. He has prepared 80 acres of this ground since -Xmas, 1821 (this was July, 1822), and his crop of corn, without severe -disaster, will be 1000 barrels.... The soil is rich, black land, varying -in depth from four to ten inches; then comes a good clay—not a stone or -pebble to be seen.”[39] - -The Nashville Banner in 1833, in a discussion on the prosperity of -Tennessee, boasted that “the profits alone” on the crop of cotton, in the -present year, “will pay the whole aggregate debt of Tennessee and leave a -large balance in favor of the country.”[40] - -In the reports made to the Comptroller, and inventories given in the -proceedings of the county and district fairs, there are numerous -examples of individuals who, with a few slaves, purchased lands, cleared -and stocked them, and made big money in farming. The following is a -detailed account of what a Middle Tennessee planter did, who in 1838 had -twenty-two negroes, only fifteen of whom were field hands: “He cleared -nine hundred acres of land ... made all his improvements, consisting of a -dwelling house, kitchen, washhouse, storehouse, office, smokehouse, the -necessary negro houses for servants’ houses about his dwelling, weaving, -ice and poultry houses, a gin house forty by sixty feet, a building forty -feet square with driving power attached,” from which was propelled the -following machinery: a flouring mill which ground and bolted from seventy -to eighty bushels of wheat per day, a corn mill which ground from ninety -to one hundred bushels of corn per day, a knife that cut food for his -stock, a corn sheller, a wheat thresher, with a 300-bushel capacity per -day for wheat and 200 bushels for rye, a saw mill that cut from one to -two thousand feet of lumber per day; “barns, stables, cribs, overseer’s -home, negro cabins, and outhouses.”[41] This planter furnished the -flour for his family and negroes and sold a surplus to cotton planters -sufficient to pay the cost of his machinery and the salary of his -overseer. He raised all the live stock that the plantation needed, and -sold immense quantities of horses, mules, cattle, sheep, and swine. - -His capital increased at the rate of 169 per cent per annum, yet “he -never made a speculation of any kind whatever during all this time of -prosperity, to buy and sell again. He lived generously, while some of -his friends charged him with extravagance in many things. His farming -interest did it all, under its own progression, and is entitled as a -pursuit or business, after the support of himself and family, which -under the peculiar visitations of Providence, added necessarily to his -expenses, to all the credit.”[42] - -This planter was active in politics, and acted as administrator of -the estates of several of his friends. He managed his plantation so -successfully that he never gave cause for a change of overseers, nor -did he have any trouble with his slaves. He was a type of the Middle -Tennessee planters. - -This planter was Mark C. Cockrill. He was famous for the grade of wool -that he grew. He exhibited a wool at the World’s Fair in London that for -its texture, quality, and fineness excelled the wool from Saxony, from -which the best English broadcloths have been made. He returned with the -premium, certificates, and medals to be still further rewarded by the -legislature of his own state with a gold medal for his enterprise and the -prosperity he had brought to the wool-growers of the state.[43] - -There were equally famous public-spirited cotton planters of West -Tennessee, Pope, Holmes, Poynor, and Bond, planters of Fayette County and -Shelby County, at this same World’s Fair, who changed the classification -and commercial character of American cottons. They were able to place -Tennessee cotton next to the Georgia Sea Island, giving it the highest -grade of upland cotton. This meant considerable wealth to Tennessee. -Both Pope and Holmes received medals at the fair. These planters, in -coöperation with David Park, a cotton factor of Memphis, distributed -among several factories of the East a large amount of Tennessee cotton -to be experimented with, in order to test its superior grade. This -gave Tennessee cotton a great reputation, and made Memphis a joint -distributing-point for the sale of cotton. Cotton began to come up the -Mississippi to Memphis to be distributed over the entire world. This was -the beginning of the movement that has finally made Memphis the greatest -inland cotton market in the world. - -Comparing these cotton planters with the Middle Tennessee planter -referred to above, James C. Coggesball, the author of this paper, says, -“I must certainly be permitted to speak as to the circumstances of -several whose success surpasses his in a four-fold extent.” “And just -here,” he says, “permit me to add as my opinion that there is not to -be found a location in the United States where a farming community, -taking them as a body, is as independent and intelligent as they are in -the western district. The public days at the county seats exhibit but -few scenes of impropriety emanating from them, while the sheriff’s and -constable’s advertisements seldom have reference to their estates.”[44] - -The planters of Tennessee realized that slavery was profitable, and were -jealous of all forces that threatened its existence. They knew that -the cotton system depended on slave labor. The slaveholding sections -of the state were the strong supporters of colonization societies, not -in the sense of anti-slavery, but as a protection to slavery. “The -existence of colored freedom in the midst of a slave population,” said -their petitions, “has a tendency to impair the value and utility of that -description.” It will cause “those who might have considered bondage as -one of the decrees of Fate, or provisions of superior power, imposed upon -their sable race, where all were placed in a like condition ... to view -with jealousy and discontent the elevation of some of their own family -to a grade so far above their reach.”[45] This memorial suggested the -expediency of abolishing colored freedom, which was actually attempted in -the later fifties. - -“The farmer should remember,” said Coggesball, “that he has not merely -farmers’ duties to attend to, but that, as a slaveholder, and as a member -of society, he has personal and political rights to watch over and -protect. Will he look at the assembled combinations that are against him; -at the encroachments upon his homestead, who are advancing with torch -in hand and fanatic cry of freedom, even at the price of extermination -of the white race of slaveholders? And see that they are headed by the -pulpit, composed of its three thousand clergy, with the anti-Christ -motive of a Judas Iscariot marked upon their physiognomy, and instigated -by the price of thirty shekels of silver, from England’s commercial -schemers, swearing in their fanatical zeal that the Bible itself is not -the Word of God, they recognize in the establishment and the sustaining -of this relation, and reading their homilies on the other side of Mason -and Dixon’s line, to the mob collections from the purlieus of their -cities, who, like themselves aspire to the distinction given to the -Beecher family, by some way, who lately discovered that in this world -there were three distinct classes of people, to-wit: the saint, the -sinner, and the Beecher family.” - -As the pressure became more intense, the planters became more intolerant -of any discussion on the slavery question. The conclusion of Coggesball’s -discussion gives the frame of mind that most of the slaveholders had -acquired by 1860. “For myself,” he said, “my relation to slavery is one -that I allow no man, even my neighbor, who is a non-slaveholder, to -counsel me respecting. So sinister and heartless has the northern public -become, they but elucidate the fact that there is no tyranny like that -of the full-blooded fanatic. I have no missionary ground in my heart for -them to reach; my duty is a responsible one. God and my country recognize -it, and I care not what others think of me respecting it. I believe that -slavery is a blessing to the slave in the largest extent, produced by the -wisdom of God, and retained as such by his overruling providence, and -that the Christian slaveholder is the true friend of the black man.”[46] - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] Knox, Bledsoe, Bradley, Granger, Greene, Hawkins, McMinn, Monroe, -Roane, and Hamilton were counties noted for their production of corn and -wheat. - -[2] Comptroller’s Report for 1850, p. 44. - -[3] Census of 1850, Population I, p. 63. - -[4] Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44. - -[5] Comptroller’s Report for 1857-8, p. 165. - -[6] Comptroller’s Report for 1859-60, p. 22. - -[7] Comptroller’s Report for 1859, p. 30. - -[8] Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44. - -[9] Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44. - -[10] Tenth Census, I, Population, p. 63. - -[11] Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44. - -[12] Martin, A. E., Tennessee Historical Magazine, I, No. 4, p. 279. - -[13] Whig Almanac for 1844. - -[14] Whig Almanac for 1848. - -[15] The Practical Farmer and Mechanic, October 6, 1857. - -[16] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 431. - -[17] De Bow’s Review, XVII, 423. - -[18] The following is a description of “a master in Haywood County, -who, having the Shanghai mania, raised one year over eight hundred of -them, under the careful attention and supervision of an old man, who -had numbered his three score years, and was very infirm, but who, after -proper preparation in the several coops and houses, with suitable places -as depositories for their food, took great pleasure in his charge, and, -with the negroes assisting him, it was pleasing to see the delight -he manifested in the care of his brood, and with what pride he would -discourse on their good qualities to his respective visitors. Upwards of -one hundred pair were given away, and from the sales of others at five -dollars the pair, the old negro’s labor contributed to the income of the -farm more than two hundred dollars. To suppress the romantic suggestions -that his rural pursuits in his retirement might lead to, he would exhibit -his ‘happy family’ uncaged to his visitors, when he pointed to the fowl, -the duck, the turkey, the pea-fowl, the pigeon, the partridge, the dove, -the jaybird, the squirrel, the rabbit, the red bird, the woodpecker, the -humming and mocking bird, as they occupied their respective places in -the forest before his dwelling, and frequently several of them might be -seen eating together, feeling instinctively conscious, from habit long -indulged, that they had a protector over them, that prevented their being -wantonly destroyed.” - -Comptroller’s Report 1855-6, p. 432. - -[19] “He should see,” said Williams, “that their cabins are kept clean -and free from all kinds of filth, and that their hours of retiring should -be regular and at an early period of the night. Their food should be -nourishing and well cooked, with plenty of vegetables in heat of summer. - -“He should have his negroes comfortably clad, winter and summer, and see -that their persons as well as their clothing are kept clean and nice, and -that they are not driven out in unsuitable weather (which is too often -the case by over-bearing overseers), if he expects them to enjoy health -or live to an age to be profitable to their masters. He should attend to -their morals and instruct them himself, or employ others to do so, as -regards their duties and obligations to their master and their Creator—so -they may thoroughly understand the full nature of vice and crime, and -their consequent punishment here and hereafter. These instructions will -make them better servants by teaching them their true and relative -positions, and prevent cases of insubordination which so often arise from -ignorance and neglect. Let their treatment be mild and humane, at the -same time stern and uncompromising in the punishment of offenses.”—The -Practical Farmer and Mechanic, October 6, 1857. - -[20] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 525. - -[21] Ibid., p. 526. - -[22] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 527. - -[23] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 527. - -[24] Ibid., p. 431. - -[25] Howard, Rev. Arthur, History of the Church in the Diocese of -Tennessee, p. 177. - -[26] Pendleton, J. N., Reminiscences of a Long Life, p. 127. - -[27] Statistical Abstract of U. S., 1906, p. 32. - -[28] Comptroller’s Report for 1857-8, p. 165. - -[29] Comptroller’s Report for 1859-60, p. 22. - -[30] Stirling, James, Letters from the Slave States, p. 305. - -[31] Political Science Quarterly, XX, p. 267. - -[32] Thwaites, III, 257. - -[33] Ibid., 277. - -[34] Ibid., 278. - -[35] Thwaites, VIII, 73. - -[36] American Historical Review, October, 1897 (Letter of Phineas Miller -to Eli Whitney, July 21, 1797). - -[37] Aurora and General Advertiser, September 3, 1802. - -[38] Hammond, M. B., The Cotton Industry, p. 70. - -[39] Publications of the North Carolina Historical Commission, I, p. 245. - -[40] Nashville Banner, November 16, 1833. - -[41] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 432. - -[42] Ibid., p. 433. - -[43] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 434. - -[44] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 435. - -[45] Memorial from the Colonization Society of Tennessee, 1832 (State -Archives). - -[46] Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 439. - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETIES - - -The attitude of the people of Tennessee toward the negro expressed -itself not only in legislation and judicial decision, but also in -organized societies, such as manumission and colonization societies, in -the churches and in an abolition literature that is unique in American -history. It is the purpose of this chapter to give the organization and -work of the manumission and colonization societies. - -The abolition forces made a determined effort to abolish slavery in the -constitutional convention of 1796, and, failing in this, they straightway -decided to establish anti-slavery societies. There is some doubt as to -when the first manumission society was organized in Tennessee. It is -clear that an effort was made to organize such a society in 1797. The -Knoxville Gazette of January 23, 1797, published a letter from Thomas -Embree in which it is stated that a number of the citizens of Washington -and Greene counties were to meet in March, 1797 and organize abolition -societies patterned after those of Philadelphia, Baltimore, Richmond, and -Winchester.[1] The purpose of the society was to work for a more liberal -basis of emancipation and for complete abolition as soon as the slaves -by education could be prepared for it. Joshua W. Caldwell, author of -The Constitutional History of Tennessee, claims that either a Tennessee -Manumission Society was organized in 1809, or that the one mentioned -above was still in existence.[2] It is not corroborated by historical -evidence that there was organized a manumission society in Tennessee in -either 1797 or 1809. - -There was a preliminary organization of an anti-slavery society in -December, 1814, at the home of Elihu Swain, the father-in-law of Charles -Osborn, who was the moving spirit of the organization. Rachel Swain, -later Rachel Davis, a daughter of Elihu Swain, said she was present at -the organizing of the society.[3] The temporary organization was made -permanent at the first session of the society, held at Lost Creek meeting -house, Jefferson County, Tennessee, February 25, 1815.[4] - -At this first meeting, the society was given the name of the Tennessee -Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, and a constitution was -adopted. The constitution consisted of a preamble and four articles.[5] -The motto of the society was, “That freedom is the natural right of -all men,” and each member displayed a placard to this effect in some -conspicuous place in his home. The society went at once into politics by -pledging its members to vote for only those candidates for office in the -state government who favored emancipation. - -There were several anti-slavery societies organized in Tennessee during -this same year. They soon discovered the unity of their purpose and -decided in 1815 to federate. For this purpose, these societies held a -general convention at Lost Creek Meeting House of Friends[6] in Greene -County, November 21, 1815, and organized the Tennessee Manumission -Society on a federated basis. There were twenty-two branches of this -society.[7] By 1827, there were twenty-five anti-slavery societies in -Tennessee, and 130 in the United States. Of this number, one hundred and -six were in the Southern States, Tennessee ranking second in the list.[8] -The Tennessee society numbered one thousand members.[9] Its officers were -a president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer. At the suggestion -of Mr. Elihu Embree, a committee of inspection was provided to censor -the publications of the society.[10] The dues of this society were 12½ -cents per year.[11] - -The qualifications for membership were republicanism, patriotism, -abolitionism, and morality. The society held its annual meetings at Lost -Creek Meeting House. Its work consisted in memorializing legislatures -and congresses, protecting runaway negroes, fostering the spirit of -manumission, addressing the churches on slaveholding and opposing the -domestic and foreign slave trade.[12] - -The society repeatedly memorialized Congress on the subject of slavery. -These memorials prayed the abolition of slavery in the District of -Columbia, the prohibition of the interstate slave trade and separation -of families, the proscription of slavery in the territories, and finally -the abolition of slavery in the United States.[13] These petitions -were presented by Tennessee congressmen, and referred to the judiciary -committee, which never reported on them.[14] - -In 1821, the society petitioned the state legislature to grant easier -terms for manumission, to establish a plan of gradual emancipation, -to urge upon those owning slaves to teach them the Scriptures, and to -prohibit “the inhuman practice of separating husbands and wives, within -the limits of this state.”[15] - -The legislative committee to which this memorial was referred dealt with -it frankly. It advocated easier terms for manumission, but desired to -restrict them to the emancipation of the young, healthy slave in order to -prevent avaricious masters from freeing the aged slaves who would become -a charge to society. It believed that the state should devise a policy -for freeing the slaves unborn, and recommended the passing of a law, -prohibiting the separation of husband and wife. The committee reported -unanimously, but the senate laid its report on the table.[16] - -James Jones, president of the society, stated at its eighth annual -meeting that the objects of the society should be: First, to obtain the -support of the people to the abolition propaganda because the people -rule; second, to establish as many branches as possible to obtain -this end; third, to recommend to all friends of humanity to use their -suffrage to place men in the legislature who would support gradual -emancipation.[17] - -At the tenth annual meeting of the society, a memorial was addressed to -the churches of Tennessee which showed the inconsistency of religion and -slavery and bitterly arraigned society for the crime of slavery. This -criticism of the church, society, and government in this petition was -the strongest condemnation of slavery made by the society during its -existence.[18] - -The minutes of the eleventh annual meeting in 1825 show that the society -was still active. There were at this time twenty-two branches, eleven of -which reported a membership of 570.[19] This meeting was well attended -and appointed a committee, consisting of James Jones, Thomas Hodge, Jr., -and Thomas Doane to begin the publication of a quarterly journal to be -called the manumission journal. Thomas Hodge, Jr. was made editor of the -journal, which was to be published at Greenville, Tennessee. The society -drafted memorials to Congress and to the churches of the United States, -and appointed James Lundy as delegate to the Annual Convention of the -American Abolition Societies in Philadelphia.[20] - -Interest in the society seems to have begun to wane after 1825. The -convention in 1826 was not well attended. Only ten branches were -represented at this meeting.[21] The state was beginning to be alarmed -at the increased number of free negroes resulting from emancipation and -immigration. - -The thirteenth meeting in 1827 was a rather important one. It sent -the usual memorials to Congress, legislature of Tennessee, and to the -churches of the country.[22] It made expulsion a penalty for aiding -slaves to escape. The branch organizations were to try those accused of -misconduct. This regulation indicates pernicious activities on the part -of some members of the society. - -This meeting was noted for an address made by Thomas Doane in which he -made a very serious criticism of slavery. He said: - - Slavery is unfriendly to a genuine course of agriculture, - turning in most cases the fair and fertile face of nature into - barren sterility. It is the bane of manufacturing enterprise - and internal improvements; injurious to mechanical prosperity; - oppressive and degrading to the poor and laboring classes of - the white population that live in its vicinity; the death - of religion; and finally, it is a volcano in disguise, and - dangerous to the safety and happiness of any government on - earth when it is tolerated.[23] - -This convention also appointed a committee of which James Jones was -chairman to prepare a report to the American Convention. Jones, in this -report, expressed primarily his own feelings and showed his earnestness -as one of the greatest anti-slavery leaders of his time. He urged -religious and benevolent societies and all friends of freedom throughout -the Union to join in petitioning Congress to abolish slavery in the -District of Columbia and to use its power of regulating interstate -commerce to suppress the interstate slave traffic. “It is time,” he said, -“for people to be aroused to their duty, and ask their rulers to abolish -such things in plain, explicit terms.”[24] - -Jones not only saw the injury that slavery was causing to society, -socially, economically, and politically, but he also foresaw what the -final catastrophe would be unless some constructive policy of abolition -was instituted for the nation. He said in a letter in 1830 to Benjamin -Lundy: “For if Congress will not listen to the voice of humanity until -destruction cometh, I wish posterity to know that some among us now are -desirous to have justice done.”[25] - -Several branches of the society were active in creating sentiment for -emancipation by means of public meetings, addresses, and memorials to -various organizations. The Jefferson Branch, located in Jefferson County, -the seat of the state society, led the work in the local societies. In -1821, in an address delivered before the Jefferson Society, the speaker -took the following optimistic attitude toward manumission: - - When we compare the public sentiment relative to slavery at - this period, with what it was, even a few years ago, have we - not reason to hope that a propitious epoch is now at hand - for benevolent humanity to exert itself in the cause of the - afflicted innocence? Is not the evil which avarice and cupidity - have drawn around our senses, gradually vanishing? Is not the - monster of cruelty beheld more generally in his native form? - We hail the increase of this sentiment as the beginning of - auspicious consequence both to ourselves and the unfortunate - sons of Africa. We hope that the sentiment will spread until - we become a willing people to forsake our iniquity, and let - the sufferers go; not by a miraculous interposition do we look - for it to be accomplished with precipitation; but by such - means as deliberate counsel and the direction of Providence - may dictate, to be conformable with Justice to those who claim - their services, and to the circumstances of those in servitude, - by alleviating their wretched condition, and instilling into - their minds such instruction as may prepare them for assuming - their proper rank and station among rational beings, when the - universal principles of propriety, justice, and equity, shall - sanction it.[26] - -It has already been pointed out that interest in manumission began to -wane in 1825. In 1827, the annual convention of the state society was -poorly attended. No records of its life and activities after 1830 have -been found.[27] A definite change of policy toward the free negro was -being formulated during this period and it found expression in the -Exclusion Act of 1831. This change of policy of the state meant the death -of manumission as an organized movement. - -There were also some independent anti-slavery societies in the state. -November 21, 1820, the Humane Protecting Society was organized in -Greene County. Its purpose was to extend the rights of man to all, -irrespective of race and color, and protect those “unlawfully oppressed.” -The qualifications for membership were good moral character, friendship -toward the government of the United States, and agreement to pay ten -cents on the hundred dollar’s worth of one’s unencumbered estate as -dues.[28] - -In 1826, there was organized at Nashoba, Shelby County, West Tennessee, -the Emancipating Labor Society, by Miss Frances Wright of Scotland. In -1825, she bought eight tracts of land, aggregating 1,940 acres, lying on -both sides of Wolf River, in the vicinity of Germantown and Ridgeway, -paying $6,000 for the land.[29] The society was managed by a board of -trustees under certain restrictions.[30] - -Admission to the society was to be strictly individual, except in case -of children under fourteen years of age, who might be admitted with one -or both parents, reared and educated until twenty years of age, and -emancipated at twenty-one. The society planned to buy slaves from those -people who wished to emancipate their slaves but who felt that they -could not sustain such expense. The society did not buy old men, women, -and children; but would take them and support them. In 1827, Miss Wright -presented the society with eight slaves and the work of a family of -females.[31] - -The economics of the scheme were typical of the communistic philosophers -of the period. The slaves were charged with the capital invested on which -they were expected to pay six per cent interest; the farm equipment, -consisting of farming implements and live stock, was loaned them on the -condition that they constantly replace the same from their earnings. -One-half of the produce of the plantation was placed to their credit, and -purchased by the society at the market price. They shared equally with -the society the proceeds derived from the sale of all live stock raised -on the plantation. By a system of weekly accounts of income and expenses, -they knew their financial status at the end of each week. As soon as any -slave had a credit equal to what the society had paid for him, he was -emancipated. If he wanted to leave the state for Hayti or Liberia, he was -given the privilege of remaining in the society until he had sufficient -means to pay his transportation to one of these colonies.[32] - -The character of the management of this society is very interesting. -The slaves were not put under an overseer and lashed to work, but were -directed in their work as if they were free laborers. The idea was to -make men and women who would voluntarily develop habitual industry under -advice and encouragement, rather than to exact labor from them by a -decree of force. They were to be fitted for a state of freedom by being -developed into self-governing men and women, and responsibility was -substituted for discipline just as rapidly as self-initiative could be -developed. - -The negroes were fed, clothed, and housed. Those who showed any interest -in acquiring information were taught. A constant aim of the organization -was to improve their habits and conduct. The organization’s chief -purpose was to develop humanity, rather than to net the society any -pecuniary gain.[33] The society was not a success because of Miss -Wright’s absence in Europe and the impracticability of the plan. The -trustees resigned in 1831. Miss Wright emancipated the slaves and sent -them to Hayti. The trustees redeeded the plantation to Miss Wright in -1832. The estate became involved in court and some minor points remained -in controversy as late as 1886.[34] - -A fourth anti-slavery society was the Moral Religious, Manumission -Society of West Tennessee, which was organized December 18, 1824, at -Columbia, Maury County, Tennessee.[35] The spirit of this society is well -known in the following extract from the preamble of its constitution: - - We, the undersigned, having fully considered the subject of - Tyranny and Slavery as practiced by individuals on their - brethren in our neighborhood, and elsewhere in America; and - being fully convinced that it exceeds any other crime in - magnitude: - - 1st. In motive—being moved thereto by the “world, flesh and the - devil,” or with pride and laziness. - - 2nd. In the execution, it is cruel and unjust. - - 3rd. In the consequences, ignorance, hardness of heart and - inhumanity are produced. This ignorance of right and wrong is - manifested in the words and actions of tyrant and slave and all - of those who approve of the practice in others. They go forth - in practical infidelity and irreligion, which tend to destroy - the blessings of Christianity and republicanism as they exist - in this otherwise happy land.[36] - -This society limited its membership to fifteen, none of whom could be -slaveholders.[37] Any additional membership constituted a branch society. -The officers of the society consisted of a board of directors, one -of whom was designated as chairman. Majority vote of the membership -determined the policy of the society on any question. No levy for funds -was made on the membership, but its revenues consisted of contributions -and donations. The directors were trustees of such funds. The society -met quarterly at the Republican Meeting House about six miles from -Columbia, Maury County, Tennessee.[38] One of these quarterly meetings -was held on the Fourth of July, and was regarded as the annual meeting -of the society. The constitution was rather elaborate, consisting of -twelve articles, and could be amended by the consent of two-thirds of -its members.[39] The policy of the society was not so radical in method -as might have been expected from the general tenor of its documents. -The constitution in articles 6 and 7 states that the acceptance of -Christianity would destroy in the tyrant “the will to enslave” and would -therefore eliminate personal slavery. It was the will of “men of talents” -to tyrannize that had to be controlled, and argument was the leading -means to use to accomplish this purpose. The society, therefore, proposed -to circulate copies of “The Genius of Universal Emancipation” through -their several communities, the state, and the nation, to issue addresses, -to petition churches and legislative bodies, and to preach the Gospel of -humanity to slaveholders. - -This society issued in 1824 a memorial to the Methodist Episcopal -Conference which met that year at Columbia, Tennessee. The conference -agreed to the anti-slavery spirit of the memorial and to a coöperation -with the society in the realization of its aims.[40] March 22, 1825, -the society at its thirtieth quarterly meeting sent an address to the -Manumission Societies of America, making suggestions for the celebration -of Fourth of July, 1826, as Jubilee Day.[41] - -The Moral, Religious Manumission Society sent an address to the American -Convention in 1826 that was too radical for publication.[42] The society -seems to have been dissolved about 1827.[43] - -The manumission societies came to realize that the state would not -tolerate a large element of free negroes within its borders. They saw -that their success was conditioned on the colonization of the free -negroes as rapidly as they were emancipated. The Tennessee Manumission -Society in its memorial of 1816 to the churches of the United States -advocated in regard to free negroes, “that a colony be laid off for -their reception as they became free.”[44] The Presbyterian Synod of -Tennessee in session at the Nashville church the following year, adopted -resolutions favoring colonization, and congratulated the society for -its efforts in this direction.[45] A colonization society seems to have -been organized in 1822, but there is no evidence of its continued -existence.[46] The Tennessee Manumission Society, in its report to the -American Convention for the year 1823, suggested that Congress make -an appropriation for the purchase of a parcel of land on the American -continent for the colonization of free negroes.[47] In 1825, the -legislature of Tennessee advised its senators and representatives in -Congress to use their influence in promoting a scheme of colonization of -the free people of color.[48] In this same year, James Jones, president -of the Tennessee Manumission Society, wrote Benjamin Lundy that he was -much gratified at the progress being made to colonize the free people -of color in the Haytian Republic,[49] and he quotes the resolution of -the Tennessee Manumission Society, favoring the Haytian Republic as -a rendezvous for free negroes.[50] Two years later, the legislature -of Tennessee, in response to memorials and petitions of manumission -societies and churches again instructed the Tennessee representatives -in Congress to give their aid to the government of the United States in -carrying into effect a plan of colonizing the free people of color.[51] -From 1816 to 1829, there was constant agitation in Tennessee for a -colonization society. - -In 1829 the American Colonization Society worked out a plan for state -societies. The state societies were to be auxiliaries to the national -society, and were themselves to be a confederacy of county societies -which in turn were to be composed of town and district societies. The -town and district societies were to hold regular annual meetings and -send delegates to the annual meeting of the state society, which was to -be represented at the annual meeting of the national society.[52] In -accordance with this plan Mr. Josiah F. Polk, agent for the American -Colonization Society for the states of Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee, and -Alabama, on December 21, 1829, organized, at Nashville, the Tennessee -Colonization Society, consisting of sixteen members. A president and -one vice-president were elected. The membership soon increased to -seventy-three and a fund of one hundred dollars was collected.[53] - -The society held its first meeting on January 1, 1830, and elected a -complete set of officers. Rev. Philip Lindsey, D.D., president of the -University of Nashville, was made president of the society; R. H. McEwen, -recording secretary; Henry A. Wise, corresponding secretary; and Orville -Ewing, treasurer. Six vice-presidents and a board of six managers, -consisting of prominent citizens, were elected.[54] The society at this -time numbered about one hundred and twenty members[55] and contained -twenty auxiliaries.[56] These auxiliaries had a large membership, and -a list of strong officers of the most prominent people of the state. -Andrew Jackson was much interested in colonization. He was vice-president -of the American Colonization Society from 1819 to 1822.[57] Polk, in -reporting on his work to the American Colonization Society, in 1829, -said that much might be expected from the Tennessee Society.[58] Henry -A. Wise, who was secretary of the Tennessee Colonization Society, made -a very flattering report of its work to the national society in 1830. -“We may expect,” said the African Repository, “benefits of the most -important character, from the energy and liberality of the citizens of -Tennessee. It cannot be forgotten that the legislature of this state was -among the first to express its approbation of our scheme, as meriting -the countenance and aid of the National Government.”[59] “Believing as -I do,” said a Tennessee correspondent of the African Repository, “that -under Providence it is the only feasible and judicious plan to ameliorate -the condition of the free people of color in these states, and that it -is a cause in which patriotism and humanity, are largely embarked, I -shall do all I can to aid its progress; and I hear, with pleasure, of its -continued prosperity.”[60] Polk, in his report of 1830, states that “The -colored population is considered by the people of Tennessee and Alabama -in general, as an immense evil to the country—but the free part of it, by -all, as the greatest of all evils.”[61] A correspondent of the African -Repository from Tennessee stated in 1831 that “the colonization movement -had many friends in Tennessee and that they were determined to make every -possible effort to aid the good cause.”[62] - -The society at its meeting on November 8, 1831, appointed a committee -of seven to solicit funds to defray the expenses of sending free -negroes to Liberia. A committee of three was appointed to memorialize -the legislature of Tennessee to make an appropriation for the aid of -the society.[63] The legislature appointed a committee on colonization -to consider the petition of the society, and, on September 30, 1833, -passed two resolutions, requesting this committee to investigate the -expediency of asking Congress for an annual appropriation of $100,000 -and the general assembly for $5,000 to aid in colonizing free negroes in -Liberia.[64] In response to this request, the legislature in 1833 passed -a law, giving ten dollars to the state society for every free negro sent -to Liberia, provided that not more than $500 was expended in any one -year.[65] - -The society held its annual meeting in the Hall of Representatives at the -State Capitol, October 14, 1833, and was addressed by James G. Birney, -of Alabama, agent of the American Colonization Society. “We admire this -institution,” said the Nashville Banner, “and feel the utmost veneration -and respect for the humane motives of its founders, and for those who are -engaged in promoting its objects. It would afford us unfeigned pleasure -to see all its generous designs crowned with complete success.”[66] - -The petitions received by the legislature in 1832 and 1833 from the State -Colonization Society and its auxiliaries contain the leading reasons -advanced by these societies for colonization. The memorialists said: - - We take it to be self-evident general proposition, that the - benefits of government, should be extended alike to all - its citizens; we are compelled, however, by our peculiar - circumstances, to violate this general principle, by - withholding from that class of citizens, the exercise of many - political rights. They are excluded from the ordinary means of - education, on the ground of prejudices which are quite natural, - and which will probably never be removed. Nor is it at all - likely for the same reasons, that they will be suffered to - participate to any great extent if at all, in the benefits of - an enlarged system of common schools, when carried into effect - in our State; they must therefore of necessity remain ignorant, - and by consequence vicious. - - Their intercourse, and association with certain classes of - our white population is calculated to produce, and does - produce, in the estimation of your memorialists, serious - evils to the country. But the preceding considerations are - light, and trivial, when compared with the injury sustained - by the slaveholder, from this class of persons, as must be - obvious to every member of your honorable body; Nor should - the eminent danger to our social and political condition, by - their presence, be overlooked, which arises from the fact, that - there neither does, or can exist, between them, and our white - population, any common bond of patriotism or private regard.[67] - -The Colonization Society had an intermittent career. A sentiment for -colonization, however, persisted in Tennessee to 1860, but it did not -remain organized. “There is something in this position of the cause -of Tennessee,” said the African Repository in 1846, “which we cannot -understand. There are many friends of colonization in the state. We -have applications from many of the colored people for transportation to -Liberia. Many slaves have been manumitted for the purpose of being sent -there, and yet little or no money can be raised for the advancement of -the enterprise.”[68] The next year the Repository stated that “We are -gratified to perceive that Tennessee is beginning to awake on the subject -of African colonization. Between eighty and one hundred free people of -color are now preparing to emigrate from that state to Liberia. They -wish to go in the vessel that leaves New Orleans in December next; and -the means to take them will probably be raised in the state. A writer in -the Record proposes to be one of fifty who will give one hundred dollars -each to purchase territory to be called Tennessee in Africa.”[69] The -average expense of sending a free negro to Liberia and supporting him for -six months was $50. Shortly after the meeting of 1846, the “Rothschild” -sailed from New Orleans with emigrants from Tennessee for Liberia. - -A minister of the Gospel in Tennessee, writing to the Repository in 1847, -advocated colonization for substantially the following reasons: - - 1. It means ultimately the complete removal of the negro. - - 2. It benefits the negro by placing him in an environment that - erects no barriers to his development. - - 3. It affords the Christian an opportunity to give up his - slaves. - - 4. It lays claim to the noblest feelings of the patriot, and - of the whole-souled philanthropist. Its tendency is good, only - good, and that continually. If it has not accomplished all that - its friends desire, what agency has? - -West Tennessee was more interested in colonization than either East or -Middle Tennessee. In fact, colonization was largely anti-free-negro -rather than anti-slavery, especially so in West Tennessee, where it -was regarded as a means of eliminating the free negro from among the -slaves. West Tennessee was not nearly so anti-slavery in sentiment -as East Tennessee. There was organized a separate colonization -society at Memphis, June 12, 1848, largely through the efforts of the -Presbyterian Church. It adopted a constitution of six articles, and -elected a president, vice-president, secretary, treasurer, and twelve -directors who constituted a board of managers. It was an auxiliary of -the American Colonization Society. It was to accomplish its object “by -the contribution of money to the Parent Society by the dissemination of -intelligence concerning the operations, objects, and prosperity of the -colonization enterprise.”[70] A campaign was waged in Memphis for funds -to support the society.[71] - -The Tennessee Colonization Society was incorporated on February 8, 1850. -Philip Lindsey, president of the University of Nashville, was made its -president. It now became a corporation and a body politic. It could sue -and be sued, and was permitted to receive gifts of money, goods, and real -estate, provided the total value of such gifts did not exceed $10,000 in -any one year. It used its own seal.[72] - -In 1852, Frederick P. Stanton, of Tennessee, in an address before the -American Colonization Society, advocated the removal of the free negroes -to Africa. He believed this step would eliminate sectionalism and largely -solve the problem of the runaway which, he thought, was mainly due to the -influence of the free negro over the slave. He was also apprehensive of -the political influence which the free negroes might come to have.[73] He -maintained that the national government could remove the negroes as well -as the Indians.[74] - -Senator John Bell, of Tennessee, in a letter to James R. Doolittle, -October 18, 1859, advocated the acquisition by Congress of some territory -south of the United States to be set aside as an asylum for emancipated -negroes. He believed that such a settlement of the problem would be a -“concordant” between the North and the South.[75] - -In 1860, Hon. N. G. Taylor, of Tennessee, in an address before the -American Colonization Society, advocated the colonization of the free -blacks for moral and commercial reasons. He believed that the negro -should be returned to his native home and that Africa colonized by -American negroes would naturally become a great commercial ally of the -United States.[76] - -It is seen from the arguments of these distinguished Tennesseans that -colonization of the free blacks was to them a pro-slavery, rather than -an anti-slavery, movement. It was pro-slavery in that it made for the -security of slavery, but it was anti-slavery in that, in Tennessee after -1831, emancipation could take place only on the condition of removal from -the state. The prophecy that the negroes would receive the franchise is -interesting in the light of what actually happened. Undoubtedly, the -removal of the free blacks from the United States would have lessened -friction between the North and the South. - -The colonization movement in Tennessee was a failure either as an -abolition or as a colonizing agency. There were only 287 free negroes -sent to Liberia from Tennessee from 1820 to 1866.[77] A few went to -Hayti. Manumission was able to number only 7,300 free negroes in the -state in 1860. Of course, free negroes were constantly leaving the state, -especially after 1831, but not in any considerable number. The greatest -good that came from these movements was the fostering of a humanitarian -spirit toward the negro. - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] The Knoxville Gazette, January 23, 1797. - -[2] American Historical Review, V, 599. - -[3] Indiana Historical Society Publication, Vol. 12, p. 236. - -[4] Publication of Vanderbilt Southern Historical Society, No. 2, p. 11. - -[5] “We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, having met for the purpose -of taking into consideration the case of the people of color held in -bondage in an highly favored land, are of opinion that their case calls -aloud for the attention and sympathy of Columbia’s free born sons, and -for their exertions in endeavoring, by means calculated to promote and -preserve the good of government to procure for that oppressed part of the -community that inestimable jewel, _freedom_, the distinguishing glory -of our country; without which all other enjoyments of life must become -insignificant. - -“And while we highly esteem the incomparable Constitution of our -country, for maintaining this great truth ‘That freedom is the natural -right of all men, we desire that the feelings of our countrymen may be -awakened, and they stimulated to use every lawful exertion in their -power to advance that glorious day wherein all may enjoy their natural -birthright.’ As we conceive this the way to ensure to our country the -blessings of heaven, we think it expedient to form into a society, to be -known by the name of the “Tennessee Society for Promoting the Manumission -of Slaves” and adopt the following: - - CONSTITUTION - - Article I - - Each member to have an advertisement in the most conspicuous - part of his house, in the following words, viz.: _Freedom_ is - the _natural_ right of _all men_; _I therefore acknowledge - myself a member of the Tennessee Society for Promoting the - Manumission of Slaves_. - - Article II - - That no member vote for governor, or any legislator, unless we - believe him to be in favor of emancipation. - - Article III - - That we convene twelve times a year at Lost Creek - meeting-house; the first on the 11th of the 3rd month next; - which meeting shall proceed to appoint a president, clerk and - treasurer, who shall continue in office for twelve months. - - Article IV - - The requisite qualifications of our members are true republican - principle, patriotic, and in favor of emancipation; and that no - immoral character be admitted into the society as a member.”—P. - of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 12. - -[6] The Friends were the moving spirit in the organization of these early -societies. - -[7] The Genius of Universal Emancipation, IV, 184. - -[8] These societies were distributed as follows: 8 in Virginia; 11 in -Maryland; 2 in Delaware; 2 in District of Columbia; 8 in Kentucky; -25 in Tennessee, and 50 in North Carolina. Poole, William Frederick, -Anti-Slavery Opinion before 1800, p. 72. - -[9] The Genius, October 13, 1827. - -[10] P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 13. - -[11] Article 2, Constitution of the Tennessee Manumission Society. - -[12] Temple, O. P., East Tennessee and the Civil War, 109ff. - -[13] Annals of Congress, 17th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 642 and 709; the -18th Congress, 1st Session, p. 931. - -[14] The Genius, I, 142; Ibid., IV, 66. - -[15] Ibid., I, 173-4. - -[16] This is one of the most important documents in the history of -slavery in Tennessee. The committee reported, “that they have had that -subject (slavery) under examination, and on the first proposition -contained in said petition, to-wit: allowing masters, convinced of the -impropriety of holding the man of color in slavery, to emancipate such, -on terms not involving masters or their estates, provided such slave -offered for emancipation is in a situation to provide for him or herself, -express it as their opinion that it is consistent with the rights of -freemen, guaranteed by the Constitution, to have, and exercise the power -of yielding obedience to the dictates of conscience and humanity. - -“That in all cases where chance or fortune has given the citizen -dominion over any part of the human race, no matter of what hue and -whose reflection has taught him to consider an exercise of that dominion -inhuman, unconstitutional, or against the religion of his country, ought -to be permitted to remove that yoke without the trammels at present -imposed by law. - -“Your committee beg leave to state that, while they feel disposed to -amend the law and guarantee the right, they wish it not to be perverted -to the use of the unfeeling and avaricious, who, to rid themselves of the -burden of supporting the aged slave whose life has been devoted to the -service of such a master would seize the opportunity of casting such on -the public for support. - -“Your committee beg leave further to state that very few cases have -occurred where slaves freed in the State of Tennessee have become a -county charge. - -“Your committee, therefore, recommend an amendment, granting the prayer -of the petition, so far as respects the young healthy slave, not likely -to become a county charge. - -“On the second point, your committee are of opinion that it is worthy the -consideration of the legislature, to examine into the policy of providing -for the emancipation of those yet unborn.... Liberty to the slave has -occupied the research of the moral and philosophical statesmen of our own -and other countries; a research into this principle extends wide into the -evil, whose root is perhaps dangerously entwined with the liberty of the -only free governments. On a subject so interesting, it cannot be improper -to inquire; therefore, as a question of policy, it is recommended to the -sober consideration of the General Assembly. - -“Your committee also advise a provision by law, if the same be -practicable, to prevent, as far as possible, the separating husband and -wife.”—The Genius, I, 71-2. - -[17] The Genius, II, 24. - -[18] This memorial was as follows: - -“The Manumission Society of Tennessee wish to address you again on the -important subject of slavery. In calling your attention to this subject, -in which we feel a most serious concern, we wish to use that sincerity -and candor which become friends travelling through a world of error and -sin, in which they are to make preparation for eternity. We therefore -beg you to pause a moment, and let us compare the principles of slavery, -as it exists among us, with the holy religion we profess, and the divine -precepts of our common Lord. What is our religion? Our Divine Master has -told us, that the most prominent features were, to love the Lord our God, -with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love our neighbors -as ourselves. And it is also written in His holy book, as a rule of duty, -to honor all and to abound in love one to another. We are also there -taught to consider the whole human race as one family, descended from -the same original parent; and that God made of one blood all nations who -dwell upon the earth. We are also taught, that as all mankind are equally -free, for one man to deprive another of liberty and to keep him in that -condition, is an enormous crime. And he that stealeth a man and selleth -him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death. -Exodus, XXI, 16. The man stealer is enrolled by the apostle amongst the -other notorious criminals. Tim., I, 10. - -“Now let us ask what slavery is, as it stands between Africa, America, -and the Supreme Judge of Nations. Is it not injustice, cruelty, robbery, -and murder, reduced to a practical system? The dreadful answer is, that -hosts of the disembodied spirits of unoffending Africans have taken their -flight to eternity from the dark holds of American slave ships, and their -last quivering groans have descended on high to call for vengeance on -the murderous deed, that stained the earth and ocean with their blood. -When we ask what slavery is, we are answered by the civil wars existing -in Africa—by the thousands slain by the bands of their brethren—by the -captive’s last look of anguish at his native shore—and by the blood and -groans of the sufferers on the seas—by the sighs of men driven like -herds of cattle to market—by the tears that furrow the woe-worn cheek of -sorrow, as oppression moulders down the African’s system.” The Genius, -IV, 73-4. - -[19] The branches were: The Greene Branch, Maryville, Bethesda, Hickory -Valley, Nolachucky, Washington, French Broad, Dumplin Creek, Jefferson -Creek, Holston, Sullivan, Powell Valley, Knoxville, Colter’s Station, -Turkey Creek, Chestoody. The Genius, IV, 204. - -[20] The Genius, IV, 185. - -[21] Ibid., VI, 160. - -[22] Ibid., VII, 194. - -[23] The Genius, VIII, 93. - -[24] Minutes of American Convention for 1828, p. 27. - -[25] The Genius, XI, 3. - -[26] The Genius, I, 173. - -[27] Tennessee History Magazine, I, 272. - -[28] The Genius, IV, 69. - -[29] Goodspeed, 802. Cf. The Genius, VI, 177, which gives the following -trustees: George Flower, James Richardson, Frances Wright, Camilla -Wright, and Richardson Whitbey. - -[30] Goodspeed, 802. The trustees consisted of General Lafayette, William -McClure, Robert Owen, Camille Wright, Cadwallader, D. Flanary, and James -Richardson, who, together with their successors were to hold these lands -in perpetual trust for the negro race, and were subject to the following -limitations: - -(1) A school for colored children was always to be maintained. - -(2) All slaves emancipated from the society were to be sent out of the -United States. - -(3) The Trustees were never to let their number fall below five, three of -whom should constitute a quorum. - -(4) Coadjutors, with unanimous consent of trustees, might be appointed, -if they had lived six months on the lands of Nashoba. - -[31] Goodspeed, 803. - -[32] The Genius, VI, 177. - -[33] The Genius, V, 366. - -[34] Goodspeed, 821. - -[35] The Genius, IV, 77. - -[36] Ibid., 76. - -[37] Ibid., 77. - -[38] The Genius, IV, 143. - -[39] Ibid., 77. - -[40] Goodspeed, 670. - -[41] The following recommendations were made in substance: - -1. That all the manumission societies in the United States proclaim it as -the Christian American Jubilee. - -2. That the different societies encourage the keeping of the day, as a -Jubilee, by publishing essays, songs, etc., showing the utility thereof. - -3. That those societies celebrate the Fourth of July, next, with -preaching, prayer, and singing as a Christian Jubilee. - -4. That those who are sensible of the evil of slavery, form themselves -into Christian Manumission Societies, excluding slaveholders from their -number. - -5. That they send forth missionaries to preach the acceptable year of the -Lord to slaveholders. - -6. That all these societies establish a correspondence with each other -through the Genius of Universal Emancipation. The Genius, IV, 143. - -[42] Minutes of the American Convention for 1826, p. 48. - -[43] Tennessee History Magazine, I, 276. - -[44] Niles Register, XIV, 321. - -[45] “We wish you, therefore, to know, that within our bounds the public -sentiment appears clearly and decidedly in your favor, and that the -more vigorously and perseveringly you combine and extend your exertions -on the plan you have adopted, the more you are likely to be crowned -with the approbation of the people as well as with the higher rewards -of doing good. While, then the heralds of salvation go forth in the -name and strength of their Divine Master, to preach the Gospel to every -creature, we ardently wish that your exertions and the best influence of -all philanthropists may be united, to ameliorate the condition of human -society, and especially of its most degraded classes, till liberty, -religion, and happiness shall be the enjoyment of the whole family of -man.” Tenth Annual Report of American Colonization Society, 67-8. - -[46] Fifth Annual Report of American Colonization Society, 119. - -[47] Minutes of the American Convention for 1825, p. 18; Eighth Annual -Report of American Society for Colonization of the Free People of Color, -p. 39. - -[48] Eighth Annual Report of American Society for Colonization of the -Free People of Color, p. 29. - -[49] The Genius, IV, 66. - -[50] Ibid., 67. - -[51] Tenth Annual Report of American Colonization Society of the Free -People of Color, 1827, 61-2. - -[52] Twelfth Annual Meeting of American Colonization Society, 1829, 65. - -[53] African Repository, VI, 75. - -[54] American Colonization Society Report, VI, 178. - -[55] African Repository. VI, 75; Ibid., V, 378. - -[56] American Colonization Society Report, VI, 178; Auxiliaries at -Bolivar, Somerville, Memphis, Covington, Jackson, Paris, Clarksville, -Columbia, Shelbyville, Winchester, Murfreesboro, Gallatin, Knoxville, -Marysville, New Market, Jonesboro, and Kingsport. - -[57] Tenth Annual Report for American Society for Colonizing the Free -People of Color, 1829, p. 61. - -[58] African Repository, VI, 76. - -[59] African Repository, V, 378. - -[60] Ibid., 379. - -[61] Ibid., VI, 276. - -[62] Ibid., VII, 145. - -[63] Ibid., 313. - -[64] Ibid., IX, 282; Niles Register, Vol. 45, p. 182. - -[65] Acts of 1833, Ch. 64, Sec. 1. - -[66] The Nashville Banner, October 15, 1833. - -[67] Petitions to the Legislature, 1832-33. State Archives. - -[68] African Repository, XXII, 39. - -[69] Ibid., XXV, 28. - -[70] Constitution of the Society, Art. 2; African Repository. XXIV, 272. - -[71] African Repository, XXIV, 288. - -[72] Acts of 1850, Ch. 130, Secs. 5 and 8. - -[73] He quoted from “the celebrated Texas letter of Robt. J. Walker -published in 1844,” which estimated “that according to the rate of -increase from 1790 to 1840, there would be in the six states of New York, -Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois alone, no less than -400,000 free blacks in 1853; 800,000 in 1865; and 1,600,000 in 1890. The -number of free blacks in the slave states is even greater than in the -free states.” This great number of free blacks will have a powerful moral -influence for good or evil upon every interest in the country. - -“I refrain from pursuing the subject further. I will not look to that -dark but not distant future, when in some of the largest of the free -states, this population shall have grown powerful in numbers, demanding -the elective franchise, and when perhaps political parties, in the frenzy -of their excitement shall bid for their influence and make them a power -in the State. They may hold the balance of power in these larger States, -and through them in the Union. With all their capacity for mischief, -through the mistaken sympathy they are calculated to inspire for the -slave of the South, it is impossible to estimate the amount of discord -and of injury they must inevitably produce among the states.” - -[74] Annual Report of American Colonization Society for 1852, 62-65. - -[75] American Historical Magazine, IX, 275. - -[76] “For, sir,” said he, “the day is not far distant, when, instead of -scores of tons, there will be hundreds and thousands of tons, floating -from the shores of Africa to every country upon the face of the habitable -globe. Your report tells us that the agriculture of Liberia is already -in a flourishing condition, and that manufactures, to some extent, are -springing up in the country.” Annual Report of American Colonization -Society for 1860, 28-9. - -[77] Annual Report of the American Colonization Society for 1867, p. 56. - - - - -CHAPTER V - -RELIGIOUS AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SLAVERY - - -The Protestant churches in America approached the question of -Christianizing the negro very cautiously. There were several reasons for -this attitude.[1] It was generally believed that paganism was the basis -of slavery, that a Christian slave was a paradox, that Christianizing the -slave would destroy his humble qualities and lessen his economic value, -that it would add an element in the cost of maintaining the institution, -that an idea of equality prevailed in the slave’s attending church and -participating in communion with the master, and that this idea would -add to the difficulty of governing him. Of course, there was the social -relation that came into the problem that was very obnoxious. It was -unpleasant to commune with a freshly imported brother from Africa; even a -Stowe, or a Garrison would likely have hesitated. - -The church, being a human institution, could not disregard its -environment. It worked its way out of all the complexities of the -situation, its position varying somewhat as to section and as to sect. -With the exception of the Friends, there was very little difference -in the attitude of the Protestants toward slavery, until after the -Revolution. They were, in general, anti-slavery in sentiment, were -willing to baptize slaves and receive them into the church. The Friends -in this early period were the only religious body in America that saw any -inconsistency in Christians holding slaves.[2] There were a great many -slave communicants in all the churches prior to the Revolution.[3] - -The general background can be made a bit more specific for Tennessee -by particular reference to the relation of the churches to slavery in -Colonial North Carolina since this was the parent state of Tennessee. -The Lord Proprietors in the Fundamental Constitution of 1663 declared -that conversion did not free nor enfranchise the negro.[4] This provision -was kept in the new constitution of 1698.[5] It is noticeable here -that this was primarily a political question—a question of freedom and -suffrage—a question of state, not of church. The state was declaring -its right to state the effect of conversion on the slave. It is well to -note this point in the beginning, because the splits and schisms in the -various churches in the period immediately preceding the Civil War came -up over this point. James Adams, a clergyman, of the Episcopal Church -of North Carolina, declared in 1709 that the masters would “by no means -permit (their slaves) to be baptized, having a false notion that a -Christian slave is by law free.”[6] - -This attitude of the slaveholders did not last long in North Carolina, -because Rev. Marsden in 1735 speaks of baptizing at Cape Fear “about -1300 men, women, and children, besides some negro slaves.”[7] In 1742 a -missionary speaks of baptizing nine negro slaves.[8] Through a series of -missionary reports, it is noticeable that, as the idea becomes fixed, -that baptism does not free the slaves nor give them the suffrage, the -number of baptized blacks increases. In 1765, a report speaks of 40 -blacks that were baptized[9]; another report, 46;[10] and a third, -51.[11] In 1771 a report states that 65 were taken into the church and -in 1772 a Rev. Taylor states that in thirteen months he had baptized 174 -whites and 168 blacks. - -The attitude of the Protestant churches on slavery depended very largely -on the strength of their organic connection with the South. All the -churches that were strong in the South preserved a compromise policy so -long as it was possible. The Congregational and Unitarian churches, being -Northern only, could without friction readily become anti-slavery. The -Episcopal church was primarily a Southern church and was made up of the -slaveocracy of the South. It remained more indifferent toward slavery -than any of the other churches.[12] It is my purpose now to make a study -of the anti-slavery activities of these churches in Tennessee in the -order of the effectiveness of their work. - - -I. THE METHODISTS. - -Methodism came to America in 1766.[13] There were two wings of it -from the beginning. Wesleyan Methodism in Maryland and New York was -anti-slavery, while Whitefield Methodism in Georgia was pro-slavery.[14] -Methodism spread rapidly from these centers and became national in its -organization by 1773, when the first General Conference was held at -Philadelphia.[15] - -The anti-slavery history of Methodism may be divided into the following -periods: 1766-1784, a period in which there was a growth of anti-slavery -feeling in the church that reached a high water mark in 1784; from 1784 -to 1816, a period of reaction, culminating in the compromise law of 1816; -from 1816 to 1836, a period of practically no change in legislation, -although the church in the North was becoming more anti-slavery in -sentiment, and in the South, more pro-slavery; from 1836 to 1844, a -period of conflict with 1840 as the date of the greatest compromise; from -1844 to 1860, the period of two branches of Methodism. - -A brief characterization of these periods forms a fitting background for -the anti-slavery history of Tennessee Methodists: - -A. From 1776 to 1784. This was a period of little dissension on the -slavery question.[16] It was characterized by an increasing anti-slavery -feeling, expressing itself first in 1780[17] and more effectively in -1784, when the Baltimore Conference enacted a general code of regulations -for both laymen and preachers, prohibiting “the buying or selling -the bodies and souls of men, women or children with the intention of -enslaving them,”[18] and requiring abolition of the slaves of its members -within one or two years. This was to be done, however, conformably to the -laws of the various states. This was the high water mark of anti-slavery -Methodism. - -B. From 1784 to 1816. This period is marked by concession to -slaveholders, finally ending in the adoption in 1808 of the policy of -letting the annual conferences regulate slavery.[19] The church here -definitely recognized that it could not enforce requirements upon -its members in violation of the civil laws of the states. This really -amounted to a split in the church on this question, because it meant the -establishment of two policies, one conformable to the free states of the -North, and the other to the slave states of the South. This change in the -policy of the church was a victory for the slaveholders. - -C. From 1816 to 1836. The conference of 1816 adopted the famous -compromise law by which slaveholders in free states could not be officers -in the church. This prohibition did not apply to the slave states.[20] -The conference of 1836 with absolutely no dissent expressed a determined -opposition to abolition.[21] - -D. From 1836 to 1844. During this period the anti-slavery forces were -organizing to break the grip of the slaveocracy of the church. In 1840, -the pro-slavery forces registered their greatest victory in the history -of the struggle. The result was the secession of 1842 and the formation -of the Wesleyan Methodist Church of America at Utica, New York in 1843, -with a non-slaveholding membership.[22] It was now seen that the church -could no longer pursue a compromise policy. The annual conferences -began to adopt resolutions condemning either anti-slavery fanatics or -slaveholding thieves. It was now impossible for officers of the church to -be administrators in sections of the country with which their views on -slavery did not agree. - -E. From 1845 to 1860. It was early seen that the General Conference of -1844 would likely divide on the question of slavery. The contest of 1844 -related to Bishop Andrews, whose wife was a slaveholder, and ended in -the passing of the Finley Resolution by the decisive vote of 110 to 68, -deposing Bishop Andrews from the Episcopacy,[23] although he had violated -no law of the church.[24] The Southern delegates attempted in vain to -have this action of the conference interpreted as merely advisory in -character.[25] - -The general conference of the church finally agreed to its reorganization -under two general conferences. This plan was accepted almost unanimously, -and led to the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, at -the convention of the delegates of the Southern Methodist churches in -Louisville, Kentucky, in 1845.[26] - -The purpose of this brief sketch of the anti-slavery history of Methodism -in general is, first, to give a reflection of Tennessee Methodism, which, -like that in the nation generally, was divided on the slavery question; -and, secondly, to form a background for a comparative study of Tennessee -Methodists in particular. - -The Methodists were among the pioneers of Tennessee, when it was -customary to attend church with the shot-pouch well filled and the rifle -in trim. Among their pioneer preachers were Jeremiah Lambert, who came -to Holston circuit in 1783, Rev. Benjamin Ogden, who in 1786 carried -Methodism to John Donelson’s settlement on the Cumberland, and Rev. John -McGee, who arrived in Tennessee in 1798.[27] The Methodists were leaders -in the famous revivals from 1800 to 1810.[28] - -In 1797, one-fourth of the membership of the Methodist church was -negroes. Of the 11,280 negroes in the church in 1797, 10,824 were in -the Southern States. There were 42 slaves in the Methodist church in -Tennessee in 1797.[29] - -The Tennessee Methodists were a part of the Kentucky conference until -1801, and were strongly anti-slavery, because only the mountainous -portion of these states was settled at this time. In 1801, Tennessee -became a part of the Western Conference, and remained so until 1812. -It was in the first meeting of this conference in 1808 that Tennessee -Methodists first expressed themselves on the question of slavery.[30] - -It will be remembered that the General Conference of 1808 gave the annual -conference the power to legislate on the question of slavery.[31] In -accordance with this plan, the Western Conference, which met at Liberty -Hill, near Nashville, Tennessee, in 1808, took the most drastic action -against slaveholding to be found in the annals of Methodism. This -conference instructed the Quarterly Conference to summon before them -all persons speculating in slaves and expel from the church those found -guilty. It further declared that any member of the church “who should -buy or sell a slave unjustly, inhumanly, or covetously,” was subject -to excommunication.[32] This rule of the conference prevailed until -1812.[33] Some of the presiding elders and circuit riders were even more -strongly anti-slavery than was the conference. Rev. James Axley and Rev. -Enoch Moore refused to license slaveholders to preach, or even to grant -them the privilege of exhorting or leading in prayer. They denounced -slaveholders as thieves and robbers. - -The Tennessee Conference, which was a division of the Western Conference, -held its first annual meeting at Fountain Head, Tennessee, in 1812. -This conference made some interesting changes in the regulations for -slaveholders that remind one of the compromise policy of the general -conferences.[34] The phrase, “unjustly, inhumanly, and covetously,” used -by the conference of 1808 with reference to the buying and selling of -slaves, was changed to “justice and mercy.” The slaves of officers of the -church were to be emancipated when practicable.[35] - -An elaborate system of trial for violations was established. The -quarterly conference was made the court of first instance. If the -president of this conference differed from the majority, he could refer -the case to the annual conference, or the accused could appeal his -case to the annual conference. At this conference, a slaveholder made -application to preach, but he was not admitted to the ministry until he -had given security that he would emancipate his slaves as soon as it was -practicable.[36] - -The conferences of 1813 and 1814 did not raise the question of slavery, -but in 1815, the conference held at Bethlehem Meeting House in Wilson -County, Tennessee, adopted a policy with the laws of the states. This was -simply a recognition of the fact that the church should not undertake to -control civil matters. The committee on slavery made the following report: - - We most sincerely believe, and declare it as our opinion, that - slavery is a moral evil. But as the laws of our country do not - admit of emancipation without a special act of the Legislature, - in some places, nor admit of the slave so liberated to enjoy - freedom, we cannot adopt any rule by which we can compel our - members to liberate their slaves; and as the nature of cases in - buying and selling are various and complex, we do not think it - possible to devise any rule sufficiently specific to meet them. - But to go as far as we can, consistent with the laws of our - country and the nature of things, to do away with the evil, and - remove the curse from the Church of God, it is the resolution - of this conference that the following resolutions shall be - adopted: - - “1. If any member of our Society shall buy or sell a slave - or slaves in order to make gain, or shall sell to any person - who buys to sell again for that purpose, such member shall be - called to an account as the Discipline directs, and expelled - from our Church; nevertheless, the above rule does not affect - any person in our Society, if he or she make it appear that - they bought or sold to keep man and wife, parents and children, - together. - - “2. No person, traveling or local, shall be eligible to - the office of a deacon in our church, unless he assures us - sentimentally, in person or by letter, that he disapproves - slavery and declares his willingness and intention to execute, - whenever it is practicable, a legal emancipation of such slave - or slaves, conformably to the laws of the State in which he - lives.”[37] - -This report was adopted and ordered to be copied into the Steward’s Book -of the Circuit. - -The Conference of 1817 dealt very extensively with slavery.[38] It -made provision for the buying and selling of slaves. It prohibited -the selling of slaves into perpetual bondage on penalty of forfeiture -of membership in the church. The quarterly conference was given the -power to regulate the term of slavery for which a member of the church -could sell his slave. The preacher of each congregation was empowered -to appoint a committee of three to judge of the length of service -that slaves purchased by members could be required to render. All of -these requirements were conditioned on practicability, the consent of -the state, violation of justice and mercy, and assumption of financial -responsibility against charge of emancipated slaves. The conditions -of the execution of these regulations show what a travesty the whole -procedure was. - -The case of Hardy M. Cryer, which came before the conference of 1817, -illustrates the difficulty that the church faced in trying to enforce -its policy. Mr. Cryer was secretary of the conference of 1817. He had -failed to emancipate his slaves according to a promise made the previous -conference. He had in the meantime bought a negro boy. He was able to -make satisfactory explanation of his conduct to the conference, and was -appointed elder. In other words, he was able to show the conference that -his conduct had been consistent with “justice and mercy” and that its -requirements as to emancipation were “impracticable.”[39] - -One of the most eminent of Tennessee historians made the following -comment on the action of the church in the conference of 1817: - - Such was the legislation of a body of ministers with reference - to a subject over which they had no control, provided the laws - themselves did not admit of emancipation, which they themselves - assumed to be the fact. Hence, the adoption of a proviso which - in every case, taking things as they were, either nullified the - rule or made it easy for a member or a minister to retain his - slaves; for whenever he determined to own slaves it was easy - to make it appear that it was in accordance with justice and - mercy to retain those already in possession, or that under the - law it was impracticable to set them free. Such legislation - would seem to be sufficiently absurd, but it is amazing that - an intelligent body of men should gravely attempt to compel a - preacher or member to emancipate a slave at an expiration of a - term of years after having surrendered ownership and control - of same. The only theory conceivable that can relieve the - conference of the accomplishment of a solemn mockery is the - supposition that they, having confidence in the justice of - the future, must have believed themselves to be anticipating - civil legislation—that the legal emancipation of the slave was - an event which the immediate future must produce. However, - the attitude of the conference on this subject is of great - historical value, bringing into clear relief, as it does, the - strong conviction of the Methodist body of Christians that - slavery was a great moral evil, the existence of which was - deplorable, and to be opposed by every means attached to which - there was any hope of its gradual abolishment.[40] - -The conference of 1818, which met at Nashville, repealed the regulations -of the conference of 1817, and decided that the “printed rules on -slavery, in the form of discipline” was full and sufficient on that -subject.[41] - -The conference of 1819 also met at Nashville and decided “that no man -who is known to hold slaves is to be admitted to the office of deacon -or elder.”[42] Peter Burum and Gilbert D. Taylor, who were recommended -for admission to the ministry, were rejected by this conference because -they were slaveholders.[43] Several applicants for deacon’s orders were -rejected for the same reason. - -The conference of 1819 witnessed a determined contest between the -pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces, caused by an accusation made by -Peter Cartwright,[44] that a number of ministers in the state were -“living in constant violation of the discipline of the church.”[45] Felix -Grundy and Andrew Jackson represented the two factions. “The discussion -of the subject of slavery,” said Peter Cartwright, “worked up some bad -feeling, and as we had at this conference to elect our delegates to the -general conference which was to hold its session in Baltimore in May, -1820, these slaveholding preachers determined to form a ticket to exclude -every one of us who were for the Methodist Discipline as it was, and is -to this day. As soon as we found out their plans we formed an opposite -ticket, excluding all advocates of slavery, and we elected every man on -the ticket.”[46] - -Sixteen local preachers filed the following protest against the action of -the conference in refusing to admit slaveholders to the office of deacon -or elder: - - We deprecate the course taken as oppressively severe in itself - and ruinous in its consequences, and we disapprove of the - principle as contrary to and in violation of the order and - discipline of our church. We, therefore, do most solemnly, and - in the fear of God, as members of this conference, enter our - protest against the proceedings of the conference as it related - to the above-mentioned course and principle.[47] - -This protest was supported by the slaveholders, and laid before the -general conference in 1820, but no definite action was ever taken on -it.[48] - -The period from 1819 to 1824 was a transition period to some extent. -There was no important action by any of the conferences during this -period. Rev. John Johnson in 1820 proposed that the church recognize -slavery as a municipal institution and try to humanize it.[49] This was -the position that most of the churches had already taken on slavery. The -struggle over slavery in Missouri revealed the earnestness of the forces -on both sides. Anti-slavery leaders began to leave the state. Among the -Methodists were Wesley Harrison, an influential layman, who went to Ohio; -James Axley, a presiding elder; and Enoch Moore, a strong anti-slavery -preacher.[50] It was in this period, says McFerrin, that “the church came -to a standstill, and was in a measure paralyzed and powerless for good. -As a means of averting greater evils, and saving the church if possible, -colonization and emancipation societies were formed, and it was believed -by many that such organizations did a great deal to prevent a serious -rupture in the church till the storm passed over.”[51] - -The conference of 1824, in response to a memorial on slavery presented -by the Moral and Religious Manumission Society of West Tennessee, -declared “that slavery is an evil to be deplored and that it should -be counteracted by every judicious and religious exertion.”[52] It -is noticed that while slavery was condemned as an evil, it was to be -handled “judiciously.” What did “judiciously” mean in the eyes of the -slaveholders? “This resolution,” says McFerrin, “was proposed by -two members, who themselves or their parents were slaveholders.”[53] -Evidently, this was a modified attitude of the church. “What a -misfortune,” says McFerrin, “that this sentiment had not always obtained, -treating the matter in a religious manner, and not intermeddling with it -as a civil question.”[54] - -From 1824 to 1834 was a period of growth of pro-slavery sentiment in -Tennessee. Anti-slavery workers from all denominations left the state. -Manumission societies died. The colonization movement was a failure. -Abolition literature was discontinued. Exclusion policy was adopted in -1831.[55] Slaveholders began to advocate preaching to the slaves, and -made heavy contributions for this purpose. Separate negro churches were -established after the master ceased to be suspicious of the preachers, -and missions were established among the slaves at the expense of the -masters. “Owners of large plantations,” says Harrison, “coming to the -knowledge of this change in the disposition of the Methodist preachers, -and finding many of them following the example of the illustrious bishop, -then Mr. Capers, and seeing the good effects produced by the preaching -to the negroes on the plantations of their neighbors, ultimately gave -their consent to permit their slaves to hear the gospel from the lips of -capable white missionaries.”[56] - -The Methodist Church had always had slave members in it. In 1791, -there were 12,844; in 1803, there were 22,453, most of whom were in -the South.[57] In 1824, there were 1749 negro members in the Methodist -church in Tennessee; in 1840, there were 8,820; and in 1846, there were -18,122.[58] Following the lead of the missionary movement to slaves begun -by Bishop Capers in 1829,[59] the Tennessee annual conference of 1832 -established two missions to which were sent Thomas M. King and Gilbert -D. Taylor. By the close of 1832 these missions numbered 190 members.[60] -Missionary work among the slaves in Tennessee expanded conservatively -until 1844. By 1839, Tennessee had nine missions with 2,316 members and -ten missionaries, and was paying $2,700 to missions among the slaves.[61] - -Some very strong preachers developed among the slaves. Probably the -greatest negro preacher in all Methodism, if not in all Christendom, -was Pompey. He was probably a native of Africa, and in his youth was a -slave of Rev. N. Moore, brother-in-law of Bishop McKendree. He traveled -as a servant with Rev. Moore, and at one of his revivals was converted. -He then became interested in the Gospel, and soon learned to read. He -gave close attention to his master’s sermons and sometimes suggested -improvements. “He ventured to tell his master one day,” says Rev. H. -H. Montgomery, “that he felt, or believed, he could have made a better -sermon than he did the day before. ‘Pomp, do you think you could preach?’ -‘Yes, master, I have felt and thought a great deal about it.’ ‘Then, -Pompey, you shall preach tomorrow.’ He preached the next day and his -master thought so well of the sermon that he set Pompey free.”[62] - -Pompey studied the Scriptures very closely, and became able to quote -freely from them. He was a very popular preacher to both whites and -blacks. He preached in both Tennessee and Mississippi. Rev. Montgomery -gives the following account of his preaching: - - The first time I remember to have seen him was in the - Christmas holidays of 1832. The weather was very cold, but - the congregation was so large that old “Center” church could - not hold the people by one-half. So they adjourned to the - campground, where the vast congregation listened attentively to - an evangelical and powerful sermon for an hour from him. I was - a boy of thirteen years, but a very deep impression was made - on my mind. He related the circumstances of his awakening, - repentance, and conversion. There seemed to be scarcely one - that was not weeping. And when he described the simplicity - of that faith by which he received pardon and salvation, and - the great change of heart and feeling which he realized, and - everything was new—so new that he could hardly realize that it - was Pompey, till he looked at his hands and felt of his wool, - and found it was Pompey’s skin and Pompey’s wool, but it was - Pompey with a new heart—there was a burst of glory and praise - that went up from many of that congregation.[63] - -There were, in the state, other negro preachers of unusual ability, among -them Emanuel Mark of Fayette County. He was given a pass by his master to -preach anywhere. He preached to both white and black. Silas Phillips of -La Grange, Tennessee, was another remarkable negro preacher. Simeon Hunt -was also a negro preacher of wonderful eloquence.[64] - -After the defeat of the anti-slavery forces in 1834, it was recognized -that slavery was a fixed institution in society, and that it would -require violence to overthrow it. The Methodists had gradually been -reaching this conclusion. It was easy for them, therefore, to adopt a -slightly different attitude toward it. Their position was well phrased -by Dr. A. L. P. Green, who said he favored the institution, “when it -was properly controlled, and regarded it as a blessing to the slave. -He believed the negro incompetent and unfitted for self-government, -and hence a wise, good master was a necessity.”[65] The Methodists -were forced either to adopt this attitude or see the slaveholders -withdraw their slaves to churches whose attitude toward slavery was -more favorable. The missionary spirit of the church saw that the -slaves offered a great field for domestic missions, and the Christian -slaveholder came to be regarded as a blessing.[66] - -The eleven delegates from the three conferences in Tennessee—Holston, -Tennessee, and Memphis—to the general conference in 1844, sharing the -above feeling, voted solidly against the Finley Resolution. These -annual conferences at their next meeting sustained the action of their -delegates. The Holston conference said, “That our delegates to the last -General convention merit the warmest expression of our thanks, for their -prudent, yet firm, course in sustaining the interests of our beloved -Methodism in the South.”[67] The Tennessee conference said, “That we do -most cordially approve the course of our delegates, in the late general -conference.”[68] The Memphis conference said, “That we do heartily -approve the entire course pursued by our delegates at the late general -conference.”[69] These resolutions also demanded that the convention at -Louisville establish a coördinate branch of Methodism under a general -conference in accordance with the plan adopted by the conference of 1844, -“and, in so doing,” they said, “we positively disavow secession, but -declare ourselves, by the act of the general conference, a coördinate -branch of the Methodist Episcopal Church.”[70] - -Tennessee Methodists sent twenty-two delegates to the Louisville -convention of 1845.[71] They voted for the following resolution, which -the conference adopted without a dissenting vote, as its interpretation -of the law of the church on slavery: - - That under the provisional exception of the general rule (or - law) of the church, on the subject of slavery, the simple - holding of slaves, or mere ownership of slave property - in states or territories where the laws do not admit of - emancipation and permit the liberated slave to enjoy freedom, - constitutes no legal barrier to the election or ordination of - ministers to the various grades of office known in the ministry - of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and cannot, therefore, be - considered as operating any forfeiture of rights, in view of - such election and ordination.[72] - -After the organization of the Southern branch of Methodism, strong -efforts were made along the border conferences to induce them to go -with the Northern branch. The Holston Conference, which included East -Tennessee, with only one dissenting vote, resolved to cast its lot with -the new organization. This one dissenter later joined the M. E. Church, -South.[73] There was no question of loyalty in the other conferences. -There were Methodists throughout the state who still adhered to the “Old -Church.” Even in West Tennessee, in certain counties there were strong -organizations of the “Old Church” that still persist. - -The Southern Methodists increased their activities among the slaves -after 1845. The slaveholders were now assured that no insurrectionary -doctrines would be taught to their slaves. “Masters and mistresses, -even little children,” says Harrison, “helped with the work.”[74] In -1846, the Southern Methodists had 29 missions in Tennessee with 7,100 -members in charge of 34 missionaries who received $7,762;[75] in 1863 -there were 41 missions with 5,947 members in charge of 39 missionaries -receiving $11,748.46.[76] The difference in the attitude of the Methodist -slaveholders after the organization of the Southern church is shown by -the fact that from 1829 to 1844 Tennessee Methodist spent $23,208.01 on -slave missions, but from 1844 to 1864 they spent $213,736.62.[77] The -Southern Methodists numbered 18,122 negro members in 1846;[78] 18,045 -in 1848;[79] 18,940 in 1850;[80] 18,748 in 1842; 19,239 in 1860.[81] -From 1860 to 1864 there was a gradual loss of negro membership, due, of -course, to the various influences and tendencies of the war period.[82] -Some of the conferences did not meet regularly during the war, and some -met in other states. The statistics are incomplete and inaccurate.[83] - -The interpretation of the laws of the church on slavery remained -unchanged to 1858. In that year, the General Conference of the M. E. -Church, South, met in the House of Representatives at Nashville, with -151 accredited delegates. This conference declared “that slavery is not -a subject of ecclesiastical legislation. It is not the province of the -church to deal with civil institutions in her legislative capacity.... -We have surrendered to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and holding -ourselves to be debtors to the wise and the unwise, the bond and the -free. We can now preach Christ alike to master and the servant, secure in -the confidence and affection of the one and the other.... The salvation -of the colored race in our midst, as far as human instrumentality can -secure it, is the primary duty of the southern church.”[84] They struck -from their Discipline at this meeting by a vote of 140 to 8 the rule -forbidding “the buying and selling of men, women, and children, with -intention to enslave them.”[85] - -The social side of the relations of the two races in their religious life -is very interesting. The two races came very close together. The negroes -were called together by a horn or a bell once a day for family prayer in -which the master, mistress, and the children participated. Sometimes the -master conducted the services, and sometimes a slave would do it. Slaves -sang at these services, and frequently became so religious as to embrace -their master and mistress before the close of service. In their religious -life, slaves became little children indeed. - -On Sunday as a rule, the slaves attended church with the white folks. -They either sat in the galleries or had a special portion of the church -set apart for them. They were given the communion after the white people -had been served. There was usually in the afternoon on Sunday a special -service for the slaves, conducted by the pastor of the church, and there -was generally a separate business meeting for the slaves. At these -separate services, the slaves practically had charge. Their own leaders, -exhorters, and preachers were merely directed by the white pastor. It -was in these meetings that they received their greatest training and had -their truest religious experience.[86] - -Few men knew the negro so well as the Methodist preacher, or did so much -to elevate his character. He presided at their church trials, of which -one of their number was secretary. He was the general umpire to whom all -their church difficulties were referred. He baptized them, married them, -visited them in their cabins, comforted them in their distress, prayed -with them when on beds of sickness, was their counsellor, friend, and -spiritual guide, and he preached their funerals when they died.[87] - -The Methodist people did more for the negro than any other denomination, -whether for abolition or for their general improvement. Peter Cartwright -once said that the Methodist Episcopal Church had “been the cause of -the emancipation of more slaves in these United States than all other -religious denominations put together.”[88] “It is a notorious fact,” -said Cartwright, “that all the preachers from the slaveholding states -denounced slavery as a moral evil; but asked of the General Conference -mercy and forbearance on account of the civil disabilities they labored -under so that we got along tolerably smooth. I do not recollect a single -Methodist preacher at that day that justified slavery.... Methodist -preachers in those days made it a matter of conscience not to hold -their fellow creatures in bondage, if it was practicable to emancipate -them, conformably to the laws of the state in which they lived. -Methodism increased and spread, and many Methodist preachers, taken from -comparative poverty, not able to own a negro, and who preached loudly -against it, improved and became popular among slaveholding families, -and became personally interested in slave property. They then began to -apologize for the evil; then to justify it, on legal principles; then on -Bible principles.”[89] - - -II. THE BAPTISTS. - -The Baptists were among the original settlers in Tennessee. They were -strong in North Carolina by 1750,[90] and by 1780 were coming into -Tennessee from both Virginia and North Carolina in great numbers.[91] -They settled in the Holston country and on Boone’s Creek, but they -were not so numerous in these early days as the Presbyterians and -Methodists.[92] In 1784 there were 400 Baptists in Tennessee; 900 in -1792, and 11,325 in 1812. - -The Baptists were anti-slavery in the early period of American history, -just as were the Methodists. 1783 the Baptists said: - - It is the duty of every master of a family to give his slaves - liberty to attend the worship of God in his family, and - likewise it is his duty to convince them of their duty; and - then to leave them to their own choice.[93] - -In 1789 John Leland proposed the following resolution in the Triennial -Convention, which was adopted: - - Resolved, That slavery is a violent deprivation of the rights - of nature, and inconsistent with a republican government, and - therefore recommend it to our brethren, to make use of every - legal measure to extirpate this horrid evil from the land; and - pray Almighty God that our honorable legislature may have it in - their power to proclaim the great Jubilee consistent with the - principles of good policy.[94] - -This protest, while very strong in its declaration, was ineffective. The -Baptists were no exception to mankind as to slaveholding. The Baptists -became slaveholders in large numbers, and adopted the policy that it was -the work of the church to mitigate slavery into a humane institution.[95] - -The Baptists were more successful in adding negroes to the church than -any other denomination. There are more negroes in the Baptist church -today than in all other churches combined. One out of every five Southern -negroes is a Baptist.[96] In 1813, there were 40,000 negro Baptists, -mostly in the South, among whom were a great many negro preachers and -exhorters.[97] - -Among the attractive features of the Baptist faith to the negroes were -immersion, the congregational form of government, which gave them -participation in church meetings, the liberality of the Baptists in -permitting them to preach, and the Baptist method of communion, which did -not discriminate against them.[98] These advantages of Baptism[99] caused -negroes to withdraw from other churches.[100] - -The Baptists despite the advantages that a form of local church -government gave them in handling the slavery question, were not able -to prevent its frequent discussion. It was not so difficult for the -individual congregations to settle the matter by a majority vote and -select a preacher whose views agreed with the majority. But it was -inevitable that the forces that finally united the Southern Methodists -would produce the same effect upon the Southern Baptists. The Southern -Baptists were among the largest slaveholders of the South, and in due -time came to be defenders of slavery, while Northern Baptists became -increasingly anti-slavery.[101] - -That separation was inevitable was evident to many of the leaders, -although both Northern and Southern Baptists tried to relegate slavery -to the background. Rev. Richard Fuller was one of the first to see this -impending division in the church, and he hastened to take steps to -prevent it. He tried to distinguish between the church as an organization -and its membership. In the Triennial Convention of 1844 he secured the -adoption of a resolution to the effect that as a church they should -disclaim all sanction of slavery or anti-slavery, either expressed or -implied, but that as individuals they should have the freedom both to -express and to promote their views on these subjects in a Christian -manner and spirit.[102] - -This was apparently a happy solution of the question, a philosophical way -to handle the problem, but slavery would not down. The incident that most -of all precipitated the organization of the Southern Baptist Convention -was the attitude of the Board of Foreign Missions of the church. This -board, apparently on its own initiative, adopted in 1844 a resolution to -the effect that, - - In the thirty years in which the board has existed, no - slaveholder, to our knowledge, has applied to be a missionary. - And as we send out no domestics, or servants, such an event as - a missionary taking slaves with him, were it morally right, - could not, in accordance with all our past arrangements and - present plans, possibly occur. If, however, anyone should offer - himself as a missionary, having slaves, and should insist on - retaining them as his property, we can never be a party to any - arrangements which would imply approbation of slavery. - -The American Baptist Home Missionary Society in April, 1845, found itself -in the same predicament that the Foreign Missionary Society was facing. -This board said: “We declare it expedient that members shall hereafter -act in separate organizations, at the South and at the North, in -promoting the objects which were originally contemplated by the society.” - -This announcement of policy was regarded by the Southern Baptists -as a violation of the rights of the convention of the church. This -policy was soon put into effect by the rejection of Rev. James E. -Reeves, a slaveholder and applicant to become a missionary.[103] This -was a challenge that was immediately accepted. The Southern Baptists -said: “This is forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles.... We will -never interfere with what is Caesar’s. We will not compromise what is -God’s.”[104] - -The Southern Baptist Convention was organized at Augusta, Georgia, in -the summer of 1845. There were 377 delegates present. They said that “a -painful division has taken place in the missionary operations of the -American Baptists.... They differ in no article of the faith. They are -guided by the same principles of gospel order.”[105] - -The Tennessee Baptists were, like the Baptists as a whole, divided on the -question of slavery. In general, the attitude of the National Triennial -Convention down to 1845 reflects the opinion of Tennessee Baptists. There -are no local histories nor any minutes of local bodies that give us any -insight into the particular feelings of different groups of Baptists in -Tennessee. Tennessee Baptists went with the Southern Convention in 1845, -but there were anti-slavery Baptists scattered throughout the state. - -One of the most noted of the anti-slavery Baptists in Tennessee was -Professor J. M. Pendleton, of Union University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee -(now at Jackson, Tennessee). Professor Pendleton was born in Virginia in -1811. He moved to Kentucky in 1817 and to Tennessee in 1857. He was in -1858 professor of theology at Union, and joint editor with Rev. A. C. -Dayton of the Tennessee Baptist, published at Nashville, and was one of -the editors of the Southern Baptist Review.[106] - -In 1858, Dr. Dawson, editor of the Alabama Baptist, accused him of -being an abolitionist. He was brought before the board of trustees of -Union. Professor Pendleton explained the charge in the following way: “I -suppose he (Dawson) made no distinction between an ‘Abolitionist’ and -‘Emancipationist.’ The latter was in favor of doing away with slavery -gradually, according to state constitution and law; the former believed -slavery to be a sin in itself, calling for immediate abolition without -regard to consequences. I was an Emancipationist ... but I was never for -a moment an Abolitionist.”[107] He frankly stated his views before the -board, and was acquitted.[108] - -The Southern Baptists made special effort to evangelize the slaves after -their separate organization was accomplished. “This department of our -labor,” says the report of 1845, “is increasing in interest every year. -Whenever it is practicable, the missionaries of the board hold separate -services for the special benefit of the slaves. And all bear favorable -testimony to the happy influence of the Gospel upon the hearts and lives -of that people. Their owners are becoming more and more awake to their -special wants. Some are erecting houses of worship on their plantations, -others are making liberal donations to sustain the ministry among -them.”[109] The general proposition of the convention to any local church -was that it would pay half the expense of a mission among the negroes if -the church would pay the other half. In 1855, the Baptists had missions -at Rogersville, Knoxville, Chattanooga, Cumberland Mountains, Huntingdon, -and Memphis.[110] - -The convention of 1859 said: - - Our slaves, too, demand our attention. They form part of our - families, speak our language, are easy of access, and are - impressible beyond any other people. They number more than - three and a half million, and out of this multitude scarcely - more than three or four hundred thousand are professed - Christians.[111] - -The character of the slave converts as given by Rev. Pendleton, seemed -to justify the efforts of the church. He said, “I saw among them in the -days of slavery as pious Christians as I ever saw anywhere. They attended -church, occupied the place assigned them in the meeting-house, and -partook of the Lord’s Supper with their white brethren.”[112] - -The special training that the negroes received in the Baptist church -largely prepared them to establish and manage their own churches. “The -first negro Baptist church in Tennessee,” says Pius, “was the Mt. -Lebanon Baptist Church, organized at Columbia, October 20, 1843.”[113] -This church now has a membership of 200 and property worth $15,000. In -1853, Spruce Street Baptist Church was built at Nashville. Beal Street -Church at Memphis was also one of the early negro churches. - - -III. CUMBERLAND PRESBYTERIANS. - -The Cumberland Presbyterians present the interesting situation of -a church originating in a slave state after slavery was rather -substantially established. This church was organized in Tennessee in -1810 in the log cabin of Samuel McAdoo. Samuel McAdoo, Finis Ewing, -and Samuel King, all ordained ministers of the Presbyterian church, -were the constituent founders of the first Presbytery.[114] Of these -three cofounders, Ewing was a slaveholder, but he soon emancipated his -slaves.[115] - -One would expect this church, born of the environment of slavery, to be -rather mild in its opposition to slavery, if, indeed, not pro-slavery, -but, as a matter of fact, it was strongly anti-slavery. Ewing, after -freeing his slaves, boldly preached against “the traffic in human flesh.” -He said: - - But where shall we begin? Oh! is it indeed true that in this - enlightened age, there are so many palpable evils in the church - that it is difficult to know where to commence enumerating - them? The first evil which I shall mention is a traffic in - human flesh and human souls. It is true that many professors - of religion, and, I fear, some of my Cumberland brethren, do - not scruple to sell for life their fellow-beings, some of whom - are brethren in the Lord. And what is worse, they are not - scrupulous to whom they sell, provided they can obtain a better - price. Sometimes husbands and wives, parents and children, - are thus separated, and I doubt not their cries reach the - ears of the Lord of Sabbath.... Others who constitute a part - of the visible Church half feed, half clothe, and oppress the - servants. Indeed, they seem by their conduct toward them, not - to consider them fellow-beings. And it is to be feared that - many of them are taking no pains at all to give their servants - religious instruction of any kind, and especially are they - making no efforts to teach them or cause them to be taught to - read that Book which testifies of Jesus, whilst others permit, - perhaps require, their servants to work, cook, etc., while the - white people are praying around the family altar.[116] - -He says again, “I have determined not to hold, nor to give, nor to sell, -nor to buy any slave for life. Mainly from the influence of that passage -of God’s word which says, ‘Masters, give unto your servants that which is -just and equal.’” - -Samuel McAdoo, one of the three founders of the church, and a Cumberland -preacher, was a most outspoken opponent of slavery. He did not want -his family through marriage or inheritance or otherwise to become -connected with it. To accomplish this he joined the contingent of -anti-slavery leaders that Tennessee contributed to the Northwest. He -moved to Illinois, where he could preach his convictions without fear and -trembling.[117] - -Some of the early Cumberland preachers, who were very conscientious on -the subject of slavery, wanted to free their slaves, but they did not -believe they could be self-sustaining and independent members of society. -Rev. Ephriam McLean was one of these who decided that he would perform -the experiment of giving his slaves a chance to demonstrate that they -could be self-supporting. He gave his slaves the use of a farm, farming -implements, and live stock adequate for their purposes, and set them free -to work for themselves. In a few years idleness and drunkenness brought -them to suffering, and they begged him to take them back. He did so.[118] - -Rev. Robert Donnel, a Cumberland minister, inherited slaves. He taught -his slaves the Scriptures and called them to family prayer daily. He -wanted to free his slaves, but they did not wish freedom, because they -did not want to go to Liberia. The free states at the North did not want -them. He could not drive them to Africa. The state would not let him free -them unless he sent them outside of it, so he did not know how to dispose -of them.[119] - -Southern anti-slavery men would buy the slaves of their own brothers to -keep them from being sold separately to pay their debts. Such men would -intend to emancipate these slaves, but they would soon discover that the -slaves had rather die than be sent to Canada or Africa. They remained -slaveholders because they had a real interest in negroes. In 1855, Dr. -Beard, a leading Cumberland Presbyterian minister, said, “the longer I -live the more deeply I regret that I ever became involved in it. My heart -always hated it, and now loathes it more and more every day.”[120] - -Not only were the leading ministers in the Church anti-slavery, but -the literature of the Church denounced slavery, and the legislation of -the Southern States. The Revivalist, a Cumberland paper published at -Nashville from 1830 to 1836, speaking of legislation of South Carolina -upon slavery, said: “Such acts are foul blots upon the records of a free -people, which our posterity will blush to behold. They are not only -unjust and cruel but actually impolitic.” - -“The extensive slaveholder,” said the Revivalist, “is at too great -a remove from the slave to learn the workings of his mind and the -feelings of his heart. There is no contact of feeling, no interchange -of sympathies between most Southern planters and their servants. They -govern, control, and direct their slaves by proxy; and too many masters -are dependent upon their representatives of heartless overseers for a -knowledge of the character and disposition of their own slaves. Southern -planters, who govern by proxy, are, therefore, unprepared to do justice -to the African character.”[121] - -The Revivalist exhorted slaveholders to teach their slaves to read and to -give them moral and religious instruction. This, it said, “will not only -make better men of them but better servants.”[122] - -The Cumberland Presbyterian, of Nashville, mother organ of the Church, -said in 1835: “We proclaim it abroad we do not own slaves. We never -shall. We long to see the black man free and happy, and thousands -of Christians who now hold them in bondage entertain the same -sentiments.”[123] - -It will be shown in the chapter on abolition that a change of attitude -toward slavery followed the action of the Convention of 1834. The -Cumberland Presbyterian Church was no exception to this rule. The action -of a Pennsylvania Synod in 1847 precipitated the issue. This Synod -met and rescinded its action at a previous session declaring that the -relation between it and American slavery to be such as to require “no -action thereon,” and adopted the resolution, “That the system of slavery -in the United States is contrary to the principles of the Gospel, hinders -the progress thereof, and ought to be abolished.”[124] - -The General Assembly of the Church of 1848, which met at Memphis, -appointed a committee to review the action of the Pennsylvania Synod. -This committee in its report regretted the action of the Synod and -disapproved “any attempt by jurisdiction of the church to agitate the -exciting subject of slavery,” closing with the observation that “the -tendency of such resolutions, if persisted in, we believe is to gender -strife, produce distraction in the church, and thereby hinder the -progress of the Gospel.”[125] - -The General Assembly of 1851, which met at Pittsburg, received six -memorials on slavery from Ohio and Pennsylvania with about one hundred -and fifty signatures.[126] The committee to whom these memorials were -referred made the following report, which was adopted: - - The Church of God is a spiritual body, whose jurisdiction - extends only to matters of faith and morals. She has no power - to legislate upon subjects on which Christ and his apostles did - not legislate, nor to establish terms of union, where they have - given no express warrant. Your committee, therefore, believe - that this question on which you are asked by the memorialists - to take action, is one which belongs rather to civil than - ecclesiastical legislation; and we are all fully persuaded that - legislation on that subject in any of the judicatories of the - church, instead of mitigating the evils connected with slavery, - will only have a tendency to alienate feeling between brethren; - to engender strife and animosities in your church; and tend, - ultimately to a separation between brethren who hold a common - faith, an event leading to the most disastrous results, and one - which we believe ought to be deprecated by every true patriot - and Christian. - - But your committee believe that members of the church holding - slaves should regard them as rational and accountable beings, - and treat them as such, affording them as far as possible the - means of grace. - - Finally, your committee would recommend the adoption of the - following resolutions: - - 1. That inasmuch as the Cumberland Presbyterian Church was - originally organized and has since existed and prospered under - the conceded principle that slavery was not and should not be - regarded as a bar to communion; we, therefore, believe that it - should not now be so regarded. - - 2. That, having entire confidence in the honesty and sincerity - of the memorialists and cherishing the tenderest regard for - their feelings and opinions, it is the conviction of this - General Assembly that the agitation of this question which - has already torn asunder other branches of the church, can be - productive of no real benefit to master or slave. We would, - therefore, in the fear of God, and with the utmost solicitude - for the peace and welfare of the churches under our care, - advise a spirit of mutual forbearance and brotherly love; - and, instead of censure and proscription, that we endeavor to - cultivate a fraternal feeling one toward another.[127] - -This platform remained the orthodox position of the Church to the -abolition of slavery. The Cumberland Church was primarily a Southern -church, and, therefore, never divided on the question. It would have -suffered very little loss of either membership or property by a division. - -The Cumberland Church, it appears, took the most sensible position on the -slavery question of any of the churches in Tennessee. It always preached -abolition and ultimate freedom as the final solution of the problem, -but, at no time did it overlook the entire set of facts connected with -the institution. It recognized that slavery had been forced on the -forefathers, that it had become the central institution of Southern -society, that, therefore, it would be violent revolution to abolish -the institution at one stroke of the pen. It appreciated the fact that -only a small part of the slave population was ready for freedom and a -responsible place in the body politic. The Cumberland Presbyterians -believed that slavery was an evil, but denied responsibility for it. They -thought that slavery was an educating institution, that the rights of the -slave should be restored to him as fast as his evolution would permit, -but that in this process the welfare of society as a whole was the major -consideration. - - -IV. THE FRIENDS. - -The Quakers led decidedly in the movement of abolition. As early as 1770 -in their annual meeting attention was called to the treatment of the -slave and to “the iniquitous practice of importing negroes.”[128] In 1772 -it was decided in their annual meeting that no Friend should buy a slave -of any other person than a Friend in unity. This regulation might be -violated if it was to unite husband and wife or mother and children, or -for other reasons if approved by monthly meeting.[129] Advance was made -again in 1774 and in 1775 when the yearly meeting decided “That Friends -in unity shall neither buy nor sell a negro without the consent of the -monthly meeting to which they belong.”[130] In 1776 the Friends reached -complete abolition.[131] The yearly meeting advised with unanimity that -the members of the Friends’ Society “clear their hands” of the slaves -as rapidly as possible. By the close of the Revolution the Friends were -practically rid of slaves. In the year 1787 there was not a slave in the -possession of an acknowledged Quaker.[132] They never recanted on this -proposition. - -The attitude of the Southern Quakers was at first amelioration of the -condition of the slave. They were interested in the physical condition -of the negro, possibly as much for economic reasons as for altruistic -motives.[133] In North Carolina, where the immediate background of -Tennessee Quakerism is found, the question of slavery was slow in rising, -but soon thereafter became a very stubborn question.[134] The yearly -meetings of 1758 and 1770 took decidedly hostile attitude toward the -buying and selling of slaves, and demanded that those that were inherited -be treated well.[135] - -The Quakers in North Carolina worked personally among the Friends for -abolition and as an organization they petitioned the Legislature of the -State to modify its laws in the direction of justice and mercy. They -protested bitterly against free negroes, who had been given their freedom -by conscientious masters, being taken to other states and sold into -slavery.[136] - -The harshness of North Carolina law created a modified Quakerism not to -be found elsewhere. The yearly meeting created agents to take charge -of slaves that masters wanted to manumit, and look after them. By this -method they proposed to give virtual freedom to the slaves when legal -freedom was not recognized by the state.[137] This practice continued to -the Civil War. - -The Friends in Tennessee not only refrained from owning slaves -themselves, but by manumission societies, by petitions to legislatures, -and by abolition literature, sought to abolish slavery. Reference is -made in a previous chapter to the work of such men as Embree, Osborn, -and Lundy, who, if they had remained in Tennessee with all the Friends, -instead of going to Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, might have helped to -bring about a different result. Charles Osborn, who was the leader in -organizing the Tennessee Manumission Society, and who moved to Ohio and -began publishing the Philanthropist, an anti-slavery paper, later moved -to Indiana, whither he was followed by Jesse Wills and John Underhill, -Friends who had helped to organize manumission societies in Tennessee. -The Emancipator, Embree’s publication, referring to these emigrations to -the North, said: - - Thousands of first-rate citizens, men remarkable for their - piety and virtue, have within twenty years past removed from - this and other slave states, to Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, - that their eyes may be hid from seeing the cruel oppressor - lacerate the back of his slaves, and that their ears may not - hear the bitter cries of the oppressed. I have often regretted - the loss of so much virtue from these slave states, which held - too little before. Could all those who have removed from slave - states on that account, to even the single state of Ohio, have - been induced to remove to, and settle in Tennessee with their - high toned love for universal liberty and aversion to slavery, - I think that Tennessee would ere this have begun to sparkle - among the true stars of liberty.[138] - -From about 1809 to 1834, the Friends in Tennessee were regularly -petitioning the Legislature of the State. Their petitions usually asked -for the abolition of slavery, if possible; if not, to mitigate the evil -“of separating husbands, wives, and children.”[139] They believed that -the elimination of this practice would make the slaves more virtuous and -increase their respect for the marriage relation. They petitioned against -the domestic slave trade as they saw this was increasing the grip of -slavery on the state. - -The Friends were the most vigilant anti-slavery workers in the State. If -all the Protestant churches had been as devoted to the cause of freedom -in the early days of the State before there were many slaves in the state -and before West Tennessee was settled, the story of the Convention of -1834 would likely be different. The Friends like the other religionists -had to succumb to the superior pro-slavery forces that always controlled -the state government. - - -V. THE PRESBYTERIANS. - -The Presbyterians were the first denomination to cross the frontier line -into Tennessee. Rev. Charles Cummings and Rev. John Rhea, both of this -church, were the first preachers in Tennessee.[140] “It was the custom -of Mr. Cummings on Sunday morning,” says Goodspeed, “to dress himself -neatly, put on his shot pouch, shoulder his rifle, mount his horse, and -ride to church, where he would meet his congregation, each man with his -rifle in his hand.” In 1778 Samuel Doak was called to the congregations, -Concord and Hopewell, in what is now Sullivan County. Rev. Doak in 1785 -chartered Martin Academy, first educational institution west of the -Alleghanies. In 1775 Abingdon Presbytery was founded, and it became the -gateway of Presbyterianism to the other portions of the State. Thos. B. -Craighead and Rev. William McGee, brother of the Methodist John McGee, -were also among the early ministers of this denomination.[141] - -The Presbyterians, like all the denominations that were national, could -not in the very nature of things remain a unit on the slavery question. -The question came up in various synods in 1774, 1780, and 1787, when the -synods of New York and Philadelphia declared in favor of training the -slaves for freedom.[142] - -The question reached the General Assembly in 1793 and 1795, when it was -decided that as there were differences of opinion relative to slavery -among the members of the church, “notwithstanding which they live in -charity and peace according to the doctrine and practice of the apostles, -it is hereby recommended to all conscientious persons, and especially to -those whom it immediately respects, to do the same.”[143] - -At this same assembly, a committee made a strong recommendation, urging -religious education of the slave. The assembly rejected the report of the -committee, and said they “have taken every step which they deem expedient -or wise to encourage emancipation, and to render the state of those who -are in slavery as mild and tolerable as possible.”[144] The assembly -referred the members of the church to its action of 1787 and 1793 for its -position on slavery. - -This action settled the question for 20 years. It came before the -assembly again in 1815, due to the action of the Synod of Ohio. This -assembly urged religious education and the use of prudent measures to -prevent the slave traffic.[145] The assembly of 1816 asked that masters -who were members of the church present the children of parents in -servitude for baptism.[146] - -The sale of a slave member of the church provoked rather drastic action -by the Assembly of 1818,[147] but in the same proceedings it expressed -its sympathy for those upon whom slavery had been entailed as “a great -and most virtuous part of the community abhor slavery, and wish its -extermination as sincerely as any others.” - -The Assembly of 1825 said: - - We notice with pleasure the enlightened attention which has - been paid to the religious instruction and evangelization of - the unhappy slaves and free people of color of our country in - some regions of our church.... No more honored name can be - conferred on a minister of Jesus Christ than that of Apostle to - the American Slaves; and no service can be more pleasing to the - God of Heaven or more useful to our beloved country than that - which this title designates. - -The slavery question came up again in 1836 when the church was pretty -well divided. There was a majority report which recommended taking -no action, and a minority report which strongly opposed slavery. -The majority report was accepted by the assembly.[148] Twenty-eight -members protested this action of the assembly. The Presbyterians had an -anti-slavery element all along that they could not control. This element -separated from the church in 1821 and called itself the Associated -Reformed Presbyterian Church.[149] There was a second element, calling -itself the New School, that based its action very largely on slavery. -This element kept up an anti-slavery propaganda, repeating in 1846 and in -1849, the slavery declaration of 1818. The southern and more conservative -element was able to control the assembly, and in 1853 the New School -element withdrew from the church.[150] This was the last division in the -church until the guns fired on Fort Sumter. - -The attitude of the Tennessee Presbyterians on slavery was well expressed -by the Synod of Tennessee in 1817, in an address to the American -Colonization Society. This memorial, after congratulating the society -upon its purpose, said: - - We wish you, therefore, to know, that within our bounds - the public sentiment appears clearly and decidedly in your - favor.... We ardently wish that your exertions and the best - influence of all philanthropists may be united, to meliorate - the condition of human society, and especially of its most - degraded classes, till liberty, religion, and happiness shall - be the enjoyment of the whole family of man.[151] - -There were several very prominent anti-slavery Presbyterian leaders -in Tennessee, among both the laymen and the clergymen. Judge S. J. W. -Lucky was a prominent example of a layman who was an active anti-slavery -worker. Hon. John Blair, who was a ruling elder and representative of -his district in Congress for twelve years, became convinced that slavery -was wrong, and offered to give a bill of sale of his slaves to Dr. David -Nelson. He was unable to see any practical way out of slavery.[152] - -Among the ministers were three who did valuable service in the cause -of freedom. Rev. John Rankin’s work as an anti-slavery leader has been -noticed in another connection. He was one of the pioneers in the cause. -Rev. Dr. David Nelson, a native of Washington County, and brother-in-law -of Chief Justice James W. Frederick, was one of the most determined -anti-slavery men in the country.[153] He had to be saved from a mob for -proposing to his congregation to take a subscription with which to buy -and colonize slaves. He was eloquent in promoting colonization.[154] Rev. -E. T. Brantley, a West Tennessee Presbyterian minister, said of him: -“He cordially disapproved of slavery. He found no justification of it -anywhere. All look forward to the extinction of slavery.... If the North -could be aware of the progress of anti-slavery sentiment at the South, -particularly among Christians, they would think the day of emancipation -had already dawned.”[155] Rev. Dr. Ross, of Tennessee, was one of the -most able leaders in Presbyterianism in the South. He was the spokesman -of Southern Presbyterianism in the general assembly, which met at Buffalo -in May, 1853. It was in this assembly that the committee on slavery -recommended that a committee consisting of one member from each of the -synods of Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, and Virginia, be appointed to -investigate the slaveholding members of the church on the following -points, and report to the next general assembly: - - 1. The number of slaveholders in connection with the churches, - and the number of slaves held by them. - - 2. The extent to which slaves are held, from an unavoidable - necessity imposed by the laws of the States, the obligation of - guardianship, and the demands of humanity. - - 3. Whether the Southern churches regard the sacredness of - the marriage relation as it exists among the slaves; whether - baptism is duly administered to the children of the slaves - professing Christianity; and, in general, to what extent, and - in what manner, provision is made for the religious well-being - of the enslaved.[156] - -Dr. Ross warmly opposed this action, asserting emphatically that the -South never submitted to a scrutiny. He proposed a substitute motion -to the effect that “a committee from each of the Northern synods ... be -appointed to report to the next general assembly on the following points: - - 1. The number of Northern church members who traffic with - slaveholders, and are seeking to make money by selling them - negro clothing, handcuffs, and cowhides. - - 2. How many Northern church members are concerned, directly or - indirectly, in building and fitting out ships for the African - slave trade, and the slave-trade between the States? - - 3. How many Northern church members have sent orders to New - Orleans and other Southern cities, to have slaves sold, to pay - debts coming to them from the South? (See Uncle Tom’s Cabin.) - - 4. How many Northern church members buy the cotton, sugar, - rice, tobacco, oranges, pineapple, figs, ginger, cocoa, melons, - and a thousand other things, raised by slave labor? - - 5. How many Northern church members have intermarried with - slaveholders, and have become slaveholders themselves, or enjoy - the wealth made by the blood of the slaves, especially if there - be any Northern ministers of the Gospel in such a predicament? - - 6. How many Northern church members are descendants of the men - who kidnapped negroes in Africa, and brought them to Virginia - and New England, in former years? - - 7. What is the aggregate and individual wealth of church - members thus descended, and what action is best to compel - them to disgorge this blood-stained wealth, or to make them - give dollar for dollar in equalizing the loss of the South by - emancipation? - - 8. How many Northern church members, ministers especially, have - advocated murder in resistance to the laws of the land. - - 9. How many Northern church members own stock in underground - railroads, running off fugitive slaves, and Sabbath-breaking - railroads and canals? - - 10. That a special committee be sent up Red River, to ascertain - whether Legree, who whipped Uncle Tom to death (and a Northern - gentleman), be not still in connection with some Northern - church, in good and regular standing. - - 11. How many Northern church members attend meetings - of Spiritual Roppers, are Bloomers, or Woman’s Rights - Conventionalists? - - 12. How many are cruel husbands? - - 13. How many are henpecked husbands?”[157] - -Dr. Ross said: “He did not desire discussion on this subject, but still -he had no opposition to make if others wished to discuss it. As a -citizen of the state of Tennessee, a state which partakes of the fire of -the South and the prudence of the North, he was perfectly calm on the -subject.[158] He said again, “If anyone would present him with a handsome -copy of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, he would keep it on his center-table, and show -it to all his visitors.”[159] - -The Presbyterians had a large number of slaves as members, but in their -reports there is no distinction made between whites and blacks. “In -many places,” says Rev. James H. McNeilly, “separate houses of worship -were provided for them, and in a great many churches large galleries -with comfortable seats were assigned to them. Often the planters on -large plantations built neat and commodious chapels for them, and in -these chapels the planter and his family frequently worshipped with -their servants. In the cities and towns the white people gave up their -churches to the negroes for afternoon service.” Dr. McNeilly says: “I -remember that in 1855 the Presbyterian General Assembly met in the First -Presbyterian Church at Nashville, Tenn. Dr. Edgar, the pastor, gave some -of the Northern commissioners opportunity to see and preach to some of -the negro congregations. These ministers were surprised to see the fine -dressing, the happy faces, the apparent devotion of the people, and were -much gratified to find the evidence of the interest of the churches in -the spiritual welfare of the slaves.” - -“In the spring of 1860,” says Dr. McNeilly, “I was licensed to preach by -the Presbytery of Nashville and spent nearly six months in preaching in -two counties of Middle Tennessee. The members of my congregation owned a -considerable number of slaves, to whom I preached regularly every Sabbath -afternoon, although most of them were members of Methodist and Baptist -churches.”[160] - -The Presbyterians were profoundly interested in the welfare of the -slaves. In the Synods of Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, -and West Tennessee, “it is,” says Harrison, “the practice of a number -of ministers to preach to the negroes separately once on the Sabbath -or during the week.”[161] There were Sabbath Schools also, and, with -few exceptions, a number of negroes formed a portion of every Sabbath -congregation. - -The Presbyterians did not let the negroes preach as much as the Baptists -and Methodists did. These denominations had real preachers with their -congregations, but the Presbyterian conception of the character of -a preacher practically excluded the negro. They had, however, negro -exhorters. In fact, the negroes did not want a preacher they could -understand. Even a white preacher, if he tried to simplify his language -to suit them, would become unpopular with them. They liked big words, and -would always praise the Lord when a high-sounding word was used. Rev. -McNeilly tells of a young theologian who began his sermon to the negroes -thus, “Primarily we must postulate the existence of a duty.” After a -short pause, some old colored patriarch fervently responded, “Yaas, Lord, -dat’s so. Bless de Lord.”[162] - -The Tennessee Presbyterians voted against the Spring Resolutions in the -general assembly at Philadelphia, and participated in the convention -at Atlanta in August, 1861, which adopted among other resolutions, the -following: “Our connection with the non-slaveholding states, it cannot be -denied, was a great hindrance to the systematic performance of the work -of evangelization of the slave population. It is true that the northern -portion of the Presbyterian Church professed to be conservative, but -their opposition to our social economy was constantly increasing.”[163] -The synods of Memphis and Nashville, together with various Presbyteries, -participated in the convention at Augusta, Georgia, in December, 1861, -which organized the Southern Presbyterian Church. Tennessee has remained -a strong center of Southern Presbyterianism to the present. - - -VI. THE EPISCOPALIANS. - -The Episcopal Church from the beginning of its work in America stressed -the improvement of the condition of the slaves. The Society for the -Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts was incorporated under William -III, in 1701, and on investigation it was decided that the work in -America “consisted of three great homilies: the care and instruction of -our people settled in the colonies, the conversion of the Indian savages, -and the conversion of the negroes.” Rev. Samuel Thomas, the first -missionary, who was sent to North Carolina in 1702, reported that “he had -taken much pains also in instructing the negroes and learned twenty of -them to read.”[164] The Episcopal Church, like the Presbyterian, did not -report as a rule separate statistics for colored members of the church. -In 1817 there were 828 colored members in the Episcopal churches at -Charleston.[165] In 1822 there were 200 colored children in their Sunday -Schools.[166] - -The Episcopal Church had a sort of philosophical attitude toward the -negroes. It was never the church of feeling, like the Methodists and -Baptists. In 1823 Rev. Dr. Dalcho of the Episcopal Church at Charleston -issued a pamphlet entitled, “Practical Considerations, Founded on the -Scriptures, Relative to the Slave Population of South Carolina.” The -church was vitally interested in the welfare of the slave throughout the -South. - -The Episcopal Church did not establish itself in Tennessee until -anti-slavery feeling was on the wane. The first Episcopal Church in -Tennessee was established at Franklin, Williamson County, August 25, -1827, by Rev. James H. Otey.[167] He began to preach occasionally at -Columbia and Nashville, and by 1830 there were two additional clergy. In -this same year, on July 1, the first convention of the church was held at -Nashville, and in this year the Diocese of Tennessee was formed. There -were about fifty communicants at this time in Tennessee.[168] - -The church grew very slowly. The state was still in a frontier condition. -The inhabitants were democratic, and were already members for the most -part of the Methodist and Baptist churches. What aristocracy there was -belonged to the Presbyterian Church. There was no American bishop in the -Episcopal Church to consecrate candidates for the ministry. They were -forced to go to England for the laying-on of hands. Again, the War of -1812 had further intensified the prejudice against the English church. - -Rev. Otey was a persistent worker, and after his consecration in 1834 -he began to lay the foundation for educational and religious expansion -of this church. Mercer Hall, a school for boys, was opened in his home -in 1836. Columbia Female Institute was founded in the same year, and -preparations were begun to found a university the same year, but were not -successful until 1857, when the University of the South was established -in the Cumberland Mountains about ten miles from Winchester at Sewanee, -Tenn. Bishop Otey became its first president. - -By 1844 there were thirteen resident clergymen in the state besides Rev. -Otey. The number of communicants had grown from 117 in 1834 to 400.[169] -In 1860, the last year of the Journal of the Convention for the South -until after the war, there were 27 members of the clergy, 26 parishes, -and 1500 communicants. - -The Episcopal Church in Tennessee was practically synonymous with Bishop -Otey, who directed and controlled its policy. He owned a plantation out -from Memphis and a number of slaves. He was a typical Southern, Christian -slaveholder. He believed that patriarchal slavery was a great institution -for the negro. He felt that the North misunderstood the institution, -and was in its agitation doing irreparable damage to the nation and the -South. Writing to the Northern clergymen, May 17, 1861, he said: - - As to your coming South, let me just here state, for all, that - you wholly misapprehend the spirit of our people. We ask not - one thing of the North which has not been secured to us by the - Constitution and laws since they were established and enacted, - and which has been granted to us until within a few years past. - We demand no sacrifice nor the surrender of Northern rights - and privileges. The party that elected Mr. Lincoln proclaimed - uncompromising hostility to the institution of slavery—an - institution which existed here, and has done so from its - beginning, in its patriarchal character. We feel ourselves - under the most solemn obligations to take care of, and to - provide for, these people who cannot provide for themselves. - Nearly every free-soil state has prohibited them from settling - in their territory. Where are they to go? - -Here the bishop is seen as a defender of Southern institutions and -ideals, yet he was loyal to the Union as an old Whig just as long as he -could be. He wrote letters to members of the cabinet, begging caution and -consideration. But when he felt that the South had been unnecessarily -attacked, he fully identified himself and the Tennessee Episcopalians -with the cause of the South. Writing to his daughter, May 24, 1861, he -said, “And now, my dear child, you ask me if I think the cause of the -South just, and that God will favor us and defends us. I answer, in very -deed, I do.”[170] - -When his slaves were set free in 1862, he called them into his parlor and -gave them a father’s advice. He said: “I do not regret the departure of -my servants, except Lavinia and Nora (children of eight and seven years -of age); I pity them—I have endeavored to treat them always humanely. -They had as comfortable rooms, and as many necessary comforts as myself. -If they can do better by leaving me, they are free to do so.”[171] - -It is undoubtedly true that the general spirit of frontier life was -against slavery. It was always opposed to convention and privilege. In -the early period of Tennessee politics when the anti-slavery feeling was -strongest, frontier conditions prevailed. These pioneers, in the period -from 1790 to 1834, were fighting for the suffrage, representation, and -the right to hold office. These privileges were enjoyed only by property -holders. Under such conditions, opposition to slaveholders, who primarily -stood for privilege, was inevitable. The anti-slavery attitude of the -churches was partly a result of these conditions as well as of religious -sentiment. These people could express themselves through churches and -independent societies more freely than through politics, which was -generally dominated by slaveholders. - -In estimating the work of the churches as a whole, one is compelled to -acknowledge the value of their services to the negro. Practically all -of the outstanding anti-slavery leaders were prominent churchmen. The -anti-slavery literature of the early period was published under the -inspiration of the church. The churches constantly advocated manumission -to the masters, and sought easier terms from the legislature for -emancipation. They preached against the slave traffic and the inhuman -practice of separating families. Their influence also softened the -character of the slave code in both its make-up and administration. In -the later forties and fifties when the negroes came into the churches in -increased numbers, their field of service was increased. There was almost -as large a percentage of slaves belonging to the churches in 1860 as -there is of negroes in the church today.[172] - -The church was given a freer hand with the slaves, missions were -established, church houses were built, and many of the slaves learned to -read under the guidance of the church. Their characters were improved. -The influence of the churches was always directed toward better living -conditions, better food and clothing, and better treatment generally. -Their influences were felt directly by the negroes as well as indirectly -through Christian masters. - -The individual churches in Tennessee differed considerably in their -attitude toward slavery in the early period. In the order of their -degree of hostility to slavery, the Friends should have first place, -the Methodists second, Cumberland Presbyterians third, Baptists fourth, -Presbyterians fifth, and Episcopalians sixth. From point of service, -the Methodists should rank first, and the Baptists second. These two -churches represented the masses of the slaveholders and contained the -majority of the slaves that belonged to the church. It is difficult to -estimate the work of the Baptists because there are no records of their -local associations or their individual congregations. Through biographies -and actions of Tennessee delegations to the Southern Convention after -1845, one can find convincing evidence that Tennessee Baptists did a -valuable work for the negro. The sources for the study of the Methodists -are much more abundant. It appears, therefore, that their work assumed -larger proportions than that of any other denomination. “High and low -alike,” says Harrison, “entered into this noble work. There was no phase -of it too humble, no duty connected with it too unpleasant to deter the -most earnest and painstaking effort. Bishop McTyeire, of the Methodist -Episcopal Church, South, declared that during a long ministerial life -there was nothing connected with it in which he took more pride and -satisfaction than the remembrance of the more than three hundred services -he had preached to negro congregations.”[173] - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] Jernegan, M. W., Slavery and Conversion in the Colonies, pp. 516-7. - -[2] Ibid., p. 576. - -[3] Ibid., p. 514. - -[4] Col. Recs., I, 204. - -[5] Ibid., 857. - -[6] Ibid., 720. - -[7] Ibid., IV, 13. - -[8] Ibid., 794. - -[9] Ibid., VII, 126. - -[10] Ibid., 424. - -[11] Ibid., 705. - -[12] Matlock, L. C., The Anti-slavery Struggle and Triumph in the -Methodist Episcopal Church, 17. - -[13] American Church History, XI, 1. - -[14] Tyerman, L., Life of Whitefield, II, 272. Whitefield is reported as -having said: “I should think myself highly favored if I could purchase -a good number of slaves in order to make their lives more comfortable -and lay a foundation for bringing up their posterity in the nature and -admonition of the Lord.” He died owning 75 slaves. American Church -History, XI, 5. - -[15] Jernegan, op. cit., 515. - -[16] Matlock, op. cit., 17. - -[17] Minutes of the Methodist Episcopal Conferences, 1773-1813, I, 5-6. - -[18] The first paragraph of this law shows the general tenor of these -regulations: - -1. Every member of our society who has slaves in his possession shall, -within twelve months after notice given to him by the Assistant (which -the assistants are required immediately, and without any delay, to give -to their respective circuits), legally execute and record an instrument -whereby he emancipates and sets free every slave in his possession who -is between the ages of forty and forty-five immediately, or at farthest -when they arrive at the age of forty-five; and every slave who is between -the ages of twenty-five and forty immediately, or at farthest at the -explication of five years from the date of said instrument; every slave -who is between the ages of twenty-one and twenty-five immediately or at -farthest when they arrive at the age of thirty; and every slave under -the age of twenty as soon as they arrive at the age of twenty-five at -farthest; and every infant born in slavery after the above-mentioned -rules are complied with immediately on its birth. McTyeire, Holland M., -History of Methodism, II, pp. 375-378. - -[19] Minutes of the General Conferences, 1796-1844, pp. 40-1; Journal of -the General Conference of 1800, pp. 37-44; American Church History, XI, 7. - -[20] Journal of the General Conference of 1816, p. 170. - -[21] “Resolved, by the delegates of the Annual Conferences in General -Conference assembled, That they are decidedly opposed to modern -abolition, and wholly disclaim any right, wish, or intention, to -interfere in the civil and political relation between master and slave -as it exists in the slaveholding states of this Union.” Journal of the -General Conference of 1836, pp. 446-7. - -[22] Journal of the General Conference of 1840, p. 136. - -[23] The Finley Resolution was: “Whereas, the discipline of one church -forbids the doing anything calculated to destroy an itinerant general -superintendency; and, whereas, Bishop Andrew has become connected with -slavery by marriage and otherwise, and this having drawn after it -circumstances which, in the estimation of the General Conference, will -greatly embarrass the exercise of his office as an itinerant general -superintendent, if not in some places entirely prevent it; therefore, -Resolved that it is the sense of this General Conference that he desist -from the exercise of this office so long as this impediment exists.” -Journal of General Conference of 1844, p. 85. - -[24] Bedford, A. H., History of the Organization of the Methodist -Episcopal Church, South, p. 207. - -[25] Journal of the General Conference of 1844, p. 85. - -[26] Bedford, pp. 418-503; see also Wightman, W. M., Life of William -Capers, pp. 398-425; Smith, G. G., Life and Letters of James Osgood -Andrew, pp. 336-385. - -[27] Garrett and Goodpasture, p. 156; Goodspeed, p. 647. - -[28] Ibid., p. 157. - -[29] Harrison, W. P., The Gospel Among the Slaves, p. 61. - -[30] McFerrin, J. B., History of Methodism in Tennessee, I, pp. 26, -470, 523; Vol. II, pp. 132, 159, 262; see also McTyeire, p. 462; and -Goodspeed, pp. 664, 667. - -Note: The minutes of the Annual Conference of the Methodists in Tennessee -were burned with the Methodist Publishing House in Nashville, February, -1872. The publishing house has never been able to find another copy. -McFerrin’s History of Methodism in Tennessee, which contains copious -quotations from these minutes, is the only available source. - -[31] Supra, p. 105. - -[32] Asbury, Thomas, Journal of Rev. Francis Asbury, Vol. 3, p. 290; -Cartwright, Peter, Fifty Years as a Presiding Elder, pp. 53ff.; -Goodspeed, pp. 663-667; Temple, O. P., East Tennessee and Civil War, pp. -97ff. - -[33] Goodspeed, p. 667. - -[34] Supra, p. 106. - -[35] McFerrin, II, 261, 283; Goodspeed, pp. 667, 668. - -[36] McFerrin, II, 261. - -[37] McFerrin, II, 401. - -[38] The Code of 1817 is as follows: - -“If a local elder, deacon, or preacher, in our Church, shall -purchase a slave or slaves, he shall lay his case before the -Quarterly-Meeting Conference of his circuit as soon as practicable, -which Quarterly-Meeting Conference shall say how long such slave or -slaves serve as a remuneration to the purchaser; and on the decision of -the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, touching the time the slave or slaves -shall serve, the purchaser shall, without delay, enter into a written -obligation to the Quarterly-Meeting Conference to emancipate such slave -or slaves at the expiration of the term of servitude, _if the law of the -State_ will admit; and such obligation shall be entered on the Journals -of the Quarterly-Meeting Conference. But should the laws of the State -continue rigidly to oppose the emancipation of slaves, so that their -freedom, as above contemplated, should prove impracticable, during the -term and at the end of the slave’s or slaves’ servitude, as determined -by the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, he, the said elder, deacon, or -preacher, shall, at the end of the time of servitude, again lay his -case before the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, which Quarterly-Meeting -Conference shall determine it according to the then existing slave -rule of the Annual Conference to which he belongs; and should the said -elder, deacon, or preacher, be dissatisfied with the decision of the -Quarterly-Meeting Conference, he shall be allowed an appeal to the -ensuing Annual Conference, provided he then signifies his intention of so -appealing. - -“2. If a private member in our society buy a slave or slaves, the -preacher who has charge of the circuit shall summon a committee, of which -he shall be president, or at least three disinterested male members from -the class of which he or she is a member; and if a committee cannot be -elected from the class to which the slave purchaser belongs, in such -case the preacher may make up the committee from a neighboring class or -classes, which committee shall determine the length of time such slave or -slaves shall serve as a compensation to the purchaser, and immediately -on the determination of the committee, touching the slave’s or slaves’ -time of servitude, he or she, the purchaser, shall bind himself or -herself in a written obligation to the church to have the emancipation -of such slave or slaves, at the expiration of the given time, recorded -as soon as practicable, _if the laws of the States in which he or she -live will admit of emancipation_; and such obligation shall be filed -among the papers of the Quarterly-Meeting Conference of the circuit in -which he or she lives. _But should the laws of the State in which the -purchaser lives render it impracticable to emancipate said slave or -slaves_, during the time of servitude fixed by the committee for said -slave or slaves, the preacher having charge of the circuit or station -shall call a second committee at the end of the time of servitude who -shall determine the case according to the then existing slave rule of -the Annual Conference to which he or she belongs; and if he or she -feel him or herself aggrieved, he or she shall be allowed an appeal to -the ensuing Quarterly-Meeting Conference of his or her circuit. In all -cases relative either to preachers or private members, the colored or -bond-children born of slaves purchased, after their purchase and during -the time of their bondage, male and female, shall be free at the age of -twenty-five, _if the law admit of emancipation_; _and if not, the case -of those born of purchased slaves in bondage to said elder, deacon, or -preacher_, shall be _cognizable_ by the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, -and in the case of those born of purchased slaves in bondage to private -members, shall be cognizable by a committee of the above-mentioned kind, -which Quarterly-Meeting Conference and committee shall decide in such -case as the then existing slave rule shall or may direct; _provided_, -nevertheless, the above rules be not so construed as to oblige an elder, -deacon, preacher, or private member, to give security for the good -behaviour and maintenance of the slave or slaves emancipated, should the -court require it. If an elder, deacon, preacher, or private member, among -us, shall sell a slave or slaves _into perpetual bondage, they shall -thereby forfeit their membership_ in our church. Therefore, in case an -elder, deacon, or preacher sell a slave or slaves, _he shall first submit -the case to the Quarterly-Meeting Conference_ of which he is a member, -and said Quarterly-Meeting Conference shall say for what term of years he -shall sell his slave, or slaves, which term being fixed, the seller shall -immediately record his, her, or their emancipation in the county court; -and a private member selling a slave or slaves shall first acquaint the -preacher having the charge of the circuit with his design, who shall -summon a committee of the above-mentioned kind, of which he, the said -preacher, shall be President. Said Committee shall say, for what term of -years, he, she, or they shall sell his, her or their slave or slaves, and -the seller shall be required immediately to record the emancipation of -such slave or slaves in the county court. An elder, deacon, preacher, or -private member among us, refusing to comply with the above rules, shall -be dealt with as in other cases of immorality, and expelled.” McFerrin, -II, 462-466. - -[39] McFerrin, II, p. 467. - -[40] Goodspeed, p. 669. - -[41] McFerrin, III, 19-20. - -[42] Ibid., p. 161. - -[43] Goodspeed, p. 670. - -[44] Ibid., p. 669; Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, the Backwoods -Preacher, p. 195. - -[45] Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, p. 195. - -[46] Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, p. 196. - -[47] Goodspeed, pp. 669-670. - -[48] McFerrin, II, 195. - -[49] He proposed the following program for the church on slavery: - -1. That every householder in our church shall provide a comfortable -house, with sufficient bed and bedding, for every slave in his possession. - -2. That each slave shall be clothed in decent apparel in summer and warm -clothing in winter, and shall have plenty of good and wholesome food, and -time to eat it. - -3. That every slave over ... years of age shall be taught to read the -Holy Scriptures. - -4. That every slave over ... years of age shall be permitted to attend -the worship of God ... times in every ... - -5. That every slave shall attend family worship twice a day. - -6. That every slave shall be allowed one hour for reading in every ... - -7. That no master shall inflict more than ... stripes for any one -offense, nor any stripes on any one who is over ... years of age. - -8. That no slave shall be compelled to marry against his will. - -9. No master shall suffer man and wife, parent and child, to be parted -without their consent when it is in his power—he being the owner of -one—to prevent it by buying or selling at a fair price. - -10. On any complaint being made against a member for violation of these -rules let the preacher appoint a committee of ... to investigate the -facts and report to the society. - -11. Any member violating or refusing to comply with the above rules shall -be dealt with as in other cases of immorality.—Recollections of Rev. John -Johnson and His House, An Autobiography, 305-6. - -[50] McFerrin, II, 95. - -[51] Ibid., 494. - -[52] Ibid., 261; Goodspeed, 668. - -[53] McFerrin, III, 271. - -[54] Infra, pp. 153-5. - -[55] Harrison, p. 151. - -[56] Ibid., pp. 61-2; Wightman, pp. 288-302. - -[57] Goodspeed, p. 676. - -[58] Harrison, p. 155. - -[59] Ibid., p. 161. - -[60] Harrison, p. 194. - -[61] Ibid., p. 195. - -[62] McFerrin, III, 387. - -[63] McFerrin, III, 389-90. - -[64] Harrison, 338-343. - -[65] Green, Wm. M., Life of A. L. P. Green, 167. - -[66] Bedford, pp. 214-5; 301. - -[67] Bedford, p. 601. - -[68] Ibid., p. 603. - -[69] Ibid., p. 605. - -[70] Ibid., p. 600. - -[71] Bedford, p. 423. - -[72] Ibid., p. 449. - -[73] These resolutions show the frame of mind of these people: - -“Whereas, the long-continued agitation on the subject of slavery -and abolition in the Methodist Episcopal Church did, at the General -Conference of said church, held in the city of New York, in May, 1844, -result in the adoption of certain measures by that body which seriously -threatened a disruption of the Church; and to avert this calamity, said -General Conference did devise and adopt a plan contemplating the peaceful -separation of the South and the North; and constituting the conferences -in the slaveholding States, the sole judges of the necessity for such -separation; and, whereas, the conferences in the slaveholding States, in -the exercise of the right accorded to them by the General Conference, -did, by their representatives in convention at Louisville, Ky., in May -last, decide that separation was necessary, and proceeded to organize -themselves into a separate and distinct ecclesiastical connection, under -the style and title of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, basing -their claim to a legitimate relation to the Methodist Episcopal Church -in the United States upon their unwavering adherence to the Plan of -Separation adopted by the General Conference of said church in 1844, and -their devotion to the doctrines, discipline, and usages of the church as -they received them from their fathers. - -And as the Plan of Separation provides that the conferences bordering on -the geographical lines of separation shall decide their relation by the -votes of the majority ... and also that ministers of every grade shall -make their election North or South without censure—therefore, - -1. Resolved, That we now proceed to determine the question of our -ecclesiastical relation by the vote of the conference. - -2. That we, the members of the Holston Annual Conference, claiming -all the rights, powers, and privileges of an Annual Conference of the -Methodist Church in the United States, do hereby make an election with, -and adhere to, the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. - -3. That while we thus declare our adherence to the Methodist Episcopal -Church, South, we repudiate the idea of secession in any schismatic -or offensive sense of the phrase, as we neither give up nor surrender -anything which we have received as constituting any part of Methodism, -and adhere to the Southern ecclesiastical organization. Plan of -Separation, adopted by the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal -Church at its session in New York in May, 1844. - -4. That we are satisfied with our Book of Discipline as it is on the -subject of slavery, as recorded in that book; and that we will not -tolerate any change whatever, except such verbal and unimportant -alterations as may, in the judgment of the General Conference, facilitate -the work in which we are engaged, and promote uniformity and harmony in -our administration. - -5. That the journals of our present session, as well as all our -official business, be henceforth conformed in style and title to our -ecclesiastical relation. - -6. That it is our desire to cultivate and maintain fraternal relations -with our brethren of the North. And we do most sincerely deprecate the -continuance of paper warfare either by editors or correspondents, in our -official church papers, and devoutly pray for the speedy return of peace -and harmony in the Church, both North and South. - -7. That the Holston Annual Conference most heartily commend the course -of our beloved Bishops, Saule and Andrew, during the recent agitations -which have resulted in the territorial and jurisdictional separation of -the Methodist Episcopal Church, and that we tender them our thanks for -their steady adherence to principle and the best interests of the slave -population.”—Bedford, pp. 500-503. - -[74] Harrison, 302. - -[75] Ibid., 318. - -[76] Harrison, 324. - -[77] Ibid., 326. - -[78] Minutes of the Annual Conferences of M. E. Church, South, I, -1845-1859, 16-25. - -[79] Ibid., 167, 172, 181. - -[80] Ibid., 273, 290, 295. - -[81] Ibid., 385, 392, 403. - -[82] Ibid., II, 214, 218, 223. - -[83] Minutes of the Annual Conference of M. E. Church, South, II, -1845-1859, 214, 218, 203. - -[84] American Church History, XI, pp. 66-7. - -[85] 26th Annual Report of American Anti-slavery Society, 1859, 115. - -[86] McTyeire, III, 536. - -[87] Milburn, W. H., Ten Years of a Preacher’s Life, 337. - -[88] Cartwright, Fifty Years a Presiding Elder, p. 24. - -[89] Cartwright, Autobiography, p. 157. - -[90] Col. Recs., III, p. 48. - -[91] Garrett and Goodpasture, p. 156. - -[92] Newman, A. H., History of Baptist Churches in United States, p. 338. - -[93] Briggs, Charles A., American Presbyterianism, pp. 59-60. - -[94] Newman, p. 305. - -[95] Ibid., p. 338. - -[96] Pius, N. H., An Outline of Baptist History, p. 131. - -[97] Harrison, pp. 65, 91. - -[98] Col. Recs. VIII, 164. - -[99] Buckley, James M., History of Methodism, I, 373, 375. - -[100] Harrison, 58. - -[101] Riley, B. F., History of the Baptists in Southern States East of -the Mississippi, p. 199. - -[102] Ibid., p. 201. - -[103] Riley, p. 205. - -[104] Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1845, pp. 18, 19. - -[105] Riley, p. 211. - -[106] Pendleton, J. M., Reminiscences of a Long Life, p. 112. - -[107] Ibid., 113. - -[108] Professor Pendleton remained at Union University during the war and -was a loyal unionist. He preached on Sunday and worked on the farm during -the week. He constantly expected to be taken from his home and hanged. He -always prepared at night a method of escape, yet he, despite proposals -by the citizens of the community to hang him, never had to execute -his plans. He lived in constant fear until the Army of the Cumberland -occupied Murfreesboro in 1863.—Pendleton, op. cit., 127. - -[109] Proceedings of Southern Baptist Convention, 1845, p. 35. - -[110] Ibid., p. 28. - -[111] Proceedings of Southern Baptist Convention, 1859-60, p. 89. - -[112] Pendleton, p. 127. - -[113] Pius, p. 61. - -[114] Garrett and Goodpasture, 160. - -[115] McDonald, B. W., History of Cumberland Presbyterian Church, p. 411. - -[116] Cossitt, Franceway Ranna, The Life of Rev. Finis Ewing, p. 273. - -[117] McDonald, p. 411. - -[118] Letters furnished by Hon. F. E. McLean (Quoted by McDonald, 412). - -[119] McDonald, p. 412. - -[120] Diary of Beard, A. J., July 11, 1855. - -[121] McDonald, p. 414. - -[122] Ibid., 415. - -[123] The Cumberland Presbyterian, August 19, 1835. - -[124] McDonald, p. 417. - -[125] Minutes of the Assembly of 1848, pp. 12, 13. - -[126] Minutes of the Assembly of 1851, p. 16. - -[127] Minutes of the Assembly of 1851, pp. 56, 57. This committee -consisted of LeRoy Woods, Ind., A. J. Beard, Ky., J. J. Meek, Miss., N. -P. Modrall, Tenn., J. H. Coulter, Ohio, S. E. Hudson, Penn., and J. C. -Henson, Ind. - -[128] Weeks, S. B., Southern Quakers and Slavery, p. 199 (Baltimore, -1896). - -[129] Ibid., p. 207. - -[130] Ibid., 207-8. - -[131] Ibid., 208. - -[132] American Church History, XII, 245. - -[133] Weeks, 201. - -[134] Ibid., 206. - -[135] Ibid., 207. - -[136] Weeks, 221. - -[137] Ibid., 225. - -[138] Hoss, E. E., Elihu Embree, Abolitionist, p. 11. - -[139] Petition of Society of Friends, 1817 (Archives of State). This -petition was signed by Elihu Embree and nine other Friends. - -[140] Goodspeed, p. 645. - -[141] Goodspeed, p. 646. - -[142] Gillet, E. H., History of Presbyterian Church in United States of -America, I, 201. These synods said: - -“We do highly approve of the general principles in favor of universal -liberty that prevail in America, and of the interest which many of the -states have taken in promoting the abolition of slavery. Yet, inasmuch -as men, introduced from a servile state to a participation of all the -privileges of civil society, without a proper education, and without -previous habits of industry, may be, in some respects, dangerous to the -community; therefore, they earnestly recommend it to all the members -belonging to their communion to give those persons, who are at present -held in servitude, such good education as may prepare them for the -better enjoyment of freedom. And they moreover recommend that masters, -whenever they find servants disposed to make a proper improvement of that -privilege, would give them some share of property to begin with, or grant -them sufficient time and sufficient means of procuring, by industry, -their own liberty; and at a moderate rate, that they may thereby be -brought into society with those habits of industry that may render them -useful citizens; and, finally, they recommend it to all the people under -their care, to use the most prudent measures consistent with the interest -and the state of civil society in the parts where they live, to procure -eventually the final abolition of slavery in America.” - -[143] Minutes of the Assembly of 1795, Quoted by Gillet, I, 284. - -[144] Ibid., p. 285. The committee reported that “a neglect of this -(religious education) is inconsistent with the character of a Christian -master, but the observance might prevent, in great part, what is really -the moral evil attending slavery—namely, allowing precious souls under -the charge of masters to perish for lack of knowledge.” - -[145] Gillet, I, 453. The assembly urged religious education on the -slaves “that they may be prepared for the exercise and enjoyment -of liberty when God in his providence may open a door for their -emancipation.” As to buying and selling of slaves, it recommended -“Presbyteries and Sessions under their care to make use of all prudent -measures to prevent such shameful and unrighteous conduct.” - -[146] Ibid., II, pp. 239-41. The assembly said: “We consider the -voluntary enslaving of one part of the human race by another, as a gross -violation of the most precious and sacred rights of human nature, as -utterly inconsistent with the laws of God, which requires us to love our -neighbors as ourselves, and as totally irreconcilable with the spirit -and principles of the gospel of Christ, which enjoins that all things -whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” - -[147] Gillet, II, 241. - -[148] Ibid., 242. See also Fourth Annual Report of American Anti-slavery -Society, 1837, p. 62; and Patton, Jacob Harris, Popular History of the -Presbyterian Church, p. 444. - -[149] Thompson, R. E., History of Presbyterian Churches in the United -States, p. 123. - -[150] Thirteenth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery -Society, 1827, pp. 67-8. - -[151] Tenth Annual Report of American Colonization Society, 1827, pp. -67-8. - -[152] Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892, 119-120. - -[153] Methodist Quarterly Review, lxiii, 132. - -[154] Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892, 120. - -[155] Thirteenth Annual Report of the American and Foreign Anti-slavery -Society, 1853, p. 80. - -[156] Ibid., p. 71. - -[157] Thirteenth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery -Society, 1853, pp. 73-4. - -[158] Ibid., pp. 67-8. - -[159] Ibid., p. 82. - -[160] McNeilly, James H., Religion and Slavery, p. 42. - -[161] Harrison, p. 91. - -[162] Ibid., p. 92. - -[163] Goodspeed, p. 683. - -[164] Harrison, p. 40. - -[165] Ibid., 67. - -[166] Ibid., 73. - -[167] Goodspeed, p. 694. - -[168] Ibid., p. 697. - -[169] Ibid., p. 698. - -[170] Memoirs of Rt. James H. Otey, p. 94. - -[171] _Memoirs of Rt. James H. Otey_, p. 93. - -[172] Harrison, 304. - -[173] Harrison, 304. - - - - -CHAPTER VI - -LEGAL STATUS OF THE FREE NEGRO - - -I. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A POLICY. - - -A. _The Policy of North Carolina._ - -The original policy of North Carolina towards manumission was that the -owner of slaves could free them by deed, will, or contract. He was -at liberty to renounce his title to them absolutely or in a modified -manner, if he thought proper.[1] In 1777, the state asserted its control -over emancipation by conferring on the county courts the power to grant -petitions for freedom on a basis of meritorious services.[2] The reasons -for this change were that it was thought necessary to protect the public -against being charged for the maintenance of manumitted slaves, and that -free negroes were a menace to the body politic. - - -B. _The Policy of Tennessee to 1831._ - -This policy worked a hardship in practice because it limited the courts -to cases of meritorious services. It frequently separated families -because all members were seldom entitled to freedom at the same time. In -1801, Tennessee removed the limited jurisdiction of the courts by giving -them practically plenary power over manumission.[3] The only restriction -on the courts was that they sustain the policy of the state. Of course, -the legislature could by special act grant freedom in any particular -case. This was the policy of Tennessee to 1831. - - -C. _Changes in the Policy._ - -There were several factors that produced the change of 1831. The number -of free negroes had increased from 361 in 1801 to 4,555 in 1831.[4] -Since free negroes voted at this time, this meant that they were a -factor in politics. Manumission societies had been active during -this period, and had created opposition to free negroes. Abolition -literature had flourished. The cotton industry had developed by virtue -of the settlement of West Tennessee, a portion of the Black Belt. -Fear of servile insurrections had increased. There had been Gabriel’s -insurrection in Virginia in 1800; the Vessey insurrection in South -Carolina in 1822; the Nat Turner insurrection in Virginia in 1831; and -an attempt at insurrection in Tennessee at the same time.[5] The liberal -policy of the state prior to 1831 had caused an influx of free negroes -from other states. The governor, in a message to the legislature in 1815, -stated that fifty free negroes had come into the state that year from -Virginia and as many more were expected the next year.[6] - -In 1831, the legislature forbade “any free person of color (whether he -be born free, or emancipated, agreeably to the laws in force and use, -either now, or at any other time, in any state within the United States -or elsewhere), to remove himself to this state and to reside therein, and -remain therein twenty days.”[7] - -If a free negro was convicted of entering the state in violation of this -act, he was subject to a fine of not less than ten nor more than fifty -dollars and an imprisonment of one or two years, at the discretion of -the judge. If he did not remove from the state within thirty days after -the expiration of the term of imprisonment, he was again subject to -indictment as before, and upon conviction was imprisoned for double the -maximum time for first offense. No pecuniary fine was attached in the -second instance. - -There were only two ways by which a free negro could legally enter -the state after 1831. This, of course, is barring special act of the -legislature. If a free negro and a slave of another state were married, -and the owner of the slave decided to move to Tennessee, he was permitted -to bring the free negro along with the slave, by giving a bond of $500 to -the county in which he chose to reside, guaranteeing that the free negro -would keep the peace and would not become a charge to the county.[8] -If a free negro of another state married a slave of Tennessee with the -master’s consent, he was permitted to come into the state if the master -of the slave would make bond to the county for his good conduct.[9] The -state, however, reserved the right to order such free negroes to remove, -if their conduct proved unsatisfactory. If they refused to do so, they -were subject to the punishment provided by the Act of 1831.[10] - -Emancipation was prohibited except on the express condition that such -slave or slaves shall be immediately removed from the state.[11] The -owner was required to give bond with good security in value equal to -that of the emancipated slave, guaranteeing to send the negro out of the -state and to provide sufficient funds to pay his transportation charges -to Africa and support him for six months. Only age and disease exempted -slaves from the operation of this act.[12] - -Chief Justice Nicholson in discussing this change of policy said: - - The policy of the state on the subject of emancipation was - marked by great liberality until the year 1831, when the public - mind began first to be agitated by discussions in the Northern - states of the question of abolishing slavery.... A more rigid - policy commenced in 1831, when it was enacted, that no slaves - should be emancipated except upon the condition of removal from - the State. This policy was based upon the belief that the peace - of the State would be endangered by an increase of the number - of free colored persons.[13] - -Judge Catron said: “The policy of the act of 1831 is not to permit a free -negro to come into the state from abroad; and secondly not to permit a -slave, freed by our laws, to be manumitted upon any other condition than -that of being forthwith transported from the state, to which, by the -first section, he dare not return.” - -He justified the restrictions on emancipation by saying it meant -“adopting into the body politic a new member; a vastly important measure -in every community, and especially in ours, where the majority of free -men over twenty-one years of age govern the balance of the people -together with themselves; where the free negro’s vote at the polls is as -of high value as that of any man.... The highest act of sovereignty a -government can perform is to adopt a new member, with all the privileges -and duties of citizenship. To permit an individual to do this at pleasure -would be wholly inadmissible.”[14] - -Judge Catron said the reasons for the policy of exclusion were fear of -rebellion among the slaves incited by free negroes, the immoral influence -of free negroes among slaves, the injustice of forcing free negroes upon -either the slave or free states, and, finally, justice to the negro. He -said: - - All the slaveholding states, it is believed, as well as many - non-slaveholding, like ourselves, have adopted the policy of - exclusion. The consequence is the free negro cannot find a home - that promises even safety in the United States and assuredly - none that promises comfort.[15] - -Judge Nelson, speaking of this change in policy, said: - - Before the unjust, unwarrantable, unconstitutional, and - impertinent interference of enthusiasts and intermeddlers in - other states with this domestic relation, rendered it necessary - for the State to guard against the effect of their incendiary - publications, and to tighten the bonds of slavery by defensive - legislation, against persistent and untiring efforts to produce - insurrection, the uniform course of decision in the State was - shaped with a view to ameliorate the condition of the slave, - and to protect him against the tyranny and cruelty of the - master and other persons.[16] - -The act of 1831 did not accomplish its intended purpose. It was passed -largely in the interest of colonization. It also failed to consider those -slaves who had made contracts for their freedom prior to its passage, but -who had not obtained the consent of the state, and those who had been -freed by will, but whose masters were not yet deceased. The disabilities -were removed from these two classes of slaves by the act of 1833, which -excepted them from the operation of the act of 1831.[17] This policy -was further modified in 1842, when the state again placed the problem -of emancipation entirely in the hands of the county courts.[18] Judge -McKinney held that this act empowered the county court “to adjudge -whether or not it would be consistent with the interest and policy of -the state to permit any manumitted slave or free persons of color to -reside in this state,” and that their decisions were “not subject to -the supervision and control of the superior judicial tribunals.”[19] He -maintained that the courts were acting as administrative agents of the -state and that the matter was wholly political and not judicial.[20] - -This meant that the policy of exclusion was considerably modified. Any -slave on manumission had the privilege of petitioning the county court to -be permitted to remain in the state. The conditions that had to be met by -the slaves were: “First, proof of good character; second, that it would -violate the feelings of humanity to remove the applicant; third, a bond -with satisfactory security for good behavior.”[21] - -This liberal change in the policy adopted in 1831 was soon eliminated. In -1849, the state reverted to the policy of exclusion. The discretionary -power granted to the county courts in 1842 was taken away and -emancipation was prohibited “except upon the terms and conditions -imposed by the act of 1831, Ch. 102.”[22] Judge Caruthers, explaining -this shifting policy of the legislature, said: - - It is a vexed and perplexing question, upon which public - opinion, acting upon the representatives of the people, has - been subject to much vibration between sympathy and humanity - for the slave and the safety and well-being of society. Hence, - the frequent changes in our legislation on the subject.[23] - -Masters continued to emancipate their slaves regardless of this -prohibition. A class of negroes grew up that were neither slave nor free. -They were free from their masters, but the state had not consented to -their emancipation and continued residence within its borders. In 1852, -the county courts were instructed to appoint trustees for these negroes. -These trustees hired them out, and used their wages to support the -negroes.[24] The negroes preferred to remain in a state of semi-slavery -than to go to Africa. This act was really an admission that the policy of -exclusion was failing and it also made provision for continued evasion. - -The weaknesses of the measure were remedied in 1854 and a more rigid -policy of exclusion was adopted. If the masters did not provide the means -to send the manumitted slaves to Africa, such slaves were hired out by -the clerks of the county courts until sufficient funds were raised and -turned into the state treasury. The governor was then required to provide -for their transportation to Africa.[25] This act abolished the exclusive -jurisdiction of the county courts over emancipation, and permitted the -slave to file his petition for freedom in any court. He could appeal his -case to a higher court if he desired. - -This act established the policy pursued by the state until the Civil -War. Judge Caruthers, speaking of the difficulty of establishing a -satisfactory policy, said: - - The struggle has been to devise some plan which would be just - to the slave, and not inconsistent with the interests of - society—that would sustain his right to liberty, and at the - same time save the community from the evils of a free negro - population. - - This, it is believed, has been more effectually accomplished by - the late act than at any time before.... We regard this as the - most wise and judicious plan which has been yet devised; and, - with some amendments, it should become the settled policy of - the state.[26] - -The free negro continued to be regarded as a menace to society. In 1858, -a bill was introduced into the legislature to banish all free negroes -from the state, but the better element of the state defeated its passage. -Judge Catron, who had been a member of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, -and who was now a member of the Supreme Court of the United States, -speaking of this measure, said: - - This bill proposes to commit an outrage, to perpetrate an - oppression and cruelty, and it is idle to mince words to soften - the fact. This people who were born free and lived as free - persons, will preach rebellion everywhere that they may be - driven to by this unjust law, whether it be amongst us here in - Tennessee or South of us on the cotton and sugar plantations, - or in the abolition meetings of the free states. Nor will the - women be the least effective in preaching a crusade, when - begging money in the North, to relieve their children, left - behind in this State, in bondage. We are told it is a popular - measure. Where is it popular? In what nook or corner of the - State are the principles of humanity so deplorably deficient - that a majority of the whole inhabitants would commit an - outrage not committed in a Christian country of which history - gives any account.... Numbers of the people sought to be - enslaved or driven out are members of our various churches, and - in full communion. That these great bodies of Christian men and - women will quietly stand by and see their humble co-workers - sold on the block to the negro-trader is not to be expected; - nor will any set of men be supported, morally, or politically, - who are the authors of such a law.[27] - -Since colonization had failed, and efforts at banishment had been -defeated, the only remaining alternative that would dispose of the free -negro was re-enslavement. In this same year, provision was made for the -voluntary re-enslavement of the free negro. Any free negro eighteen years -of age might convey himself into slavery by filing a petition to this -effect in the circuit or chancery court, signed by himself and witnessed -by two persons. The petition named the master selected. After due -publication, the petitioner and the master appeared in court and asked -the granting of the petition. If the court granted the petition, it named -a commission of three men to value the slave. The future master paid -one-tenth of this value to the county to be added to the public school -fund. The master by giving bond to the court, guaranteeing that the negro -would never become a charge to any county in the state, received title to -the slave.[28] - -Voluntary re-enslavement did not accomplish the results desired by its -friends. So in the session of 1859-60, an attempt was made to force free -negroes into slavery. This measure was known as the “Free Negro Bill.” It -provided that all free negroes, except certain minors, who did not leave -the state by May 1, 1861, would be sold into slavery, the supporters -of this bill contending that the free negro had no rights except those -given him by statutes, which could be repealed. The opponents of the -bill maintained that the vested “rights of the negro could not be taken -from him because it would be an impairment of contract and that the -legislature could not touch his natural rights.”[29] The bill was finally -defeated after a prolonged contest. - - -II. REGISTRATION OF FREE NEGROES. - -In the first decade of the history of the state, there was no notice -taken of the movements of free negroes. They enjoyed complete freedom -in their going and coming in the community. But as their numbers and -importance increased the state began to want to know about their -movements. In 1806, provision was made for the registration of the free -negroes of the state by the county court clerks. This was a sort of Dooms -Day Book of free negroes. A minute description, including age, name, -color, and record of any scars on hand, face, or head, was made of them. -It was also noted by what court of authority they were emancipated, or -whether they were born free. Two copies of each registration were made, -certified by the county court clerk and attested by a justice of the -peace.[30] One of these was filed in the clerk’s office, and the other -was given the free negro. - -In 1807, this registration certificate was made the passport for the -free negro in changing counties. If he chose permanently to reside in a -new county, he was required to have this certificate duplicated. If he -were caught without it, he was arrested and put in jail unless he made -bond. If he lost it, and could not find record of his registration, he -was required to produce evidence of his emancipation or free birth. If -he failed in this, he was sold as a runaway by the county court.[31] -As poorly as county records were kept, as difficult as it was for the -negro to preserve such a record, and as abundant as kidnappers and -slave-stealers were, the free negro constantly faced the possibility of -losing his freedom. - -By act of 1825, free negroes coming from other states were required to -bring their registration papers with them and have them recorded in some -court of record in the county in which they chose to reside.[32] - -The registration policy was given further significance in 1842 by an -act which required all registration certificates to be renewed every -three years.[33] At the time of each renewal, an inquisition was made -into the negro’s character and conduct. If the county court saw fit, it -could refuse to renew the registration certificate. This compelled the -free negro to leave the state within twenty days, except for sickness or -unavoidable hindrance. If he refused to leave the state, within twenty -days, he became subject to the penalties of the act of 1831.[34] This -system of registration was not only a severe restriction upon the travel -of the free negro, but it gave chances in its workings for considerable -collusion of corrupt officials with agents of the slave traders. - - -III. PROTECTION OF FREE NEGROES. - -It was a $500 fine to bring into the state a free negro convict and sell -him as a slave. Such a person was also subject to an imprisonment for not -exceeding six months.[35] Knowingly to steal and sell any free negro was -a penitentiary offense and was punishable by not less than five nor more -than fifteen years in the state prison.[36] - -The children of free negroes were not permitted to remain destitute and -suffer. The county courts engaged their services to suitable persons in -the best and wisest terms, if their parents did not support them.[37] - - -IV. THE SUFFRAGE FOR FREE NEGROES. - - -A. _The Suffrage for Free Negroes in North Carolina._ - -The historical background for negro suffrage in Tennessee is found in -the laws and practices of colonial North Carolina. The charter that -established the Assembly in North Carolina empowered the proprietors -to govern the province “with the advice, assent and approbation of the -Freemen of the said Province.”[38] The next paragraph of this charter -refers to the “assemblies of free holders.”[39] There is no exclusion on -the basis of color in either of these references. “In 1703, servants, -negroes, aliens, Jews and common sailors voted for members of the General -Assembly.” The act of 1715 made it lawful for “the inhabitants and free -men in each precinct ... to choose two freeholders ... to sit and vote in -the said Assembly.”[40] It is noticed here that the terms, inhabitants, -free men, and freeholders, included free negroes. Hence, to exclude them, -the act specifically stated that no negro, mulatto, or Indian could vote -for members of the Assembly. This act remained the basis of suffrage to -1835. - -Efforts were made by the royal governors to restrict the suffrage to -freeholders. They repeatedly received royal instructions to this effect, -but the law of 1715 prevailed, and freemen continued to vote.[41] - -In 1735, a new basis for the suffrage was established. Freemen were -disfranchised, but the suffrage was indiscriminately given to freeholders -who owned fifty acres of land.[42] The exclusion of negroes, mulattoes, -and Indians prevalent in the act of 1715, was abolished. Land-holding and -not color was the basis of the suffrage. The only additional change in -the suffrage qualification before the Revolution was made by the act of -1751, which required freeholders to be twenty-one years of age in order -to vote.[43] - -The North Carolina constitution of 1776 granted the franchise to all -free men without regard to race or color with the single limitation -of residence.[44] This was the franchise law that was extended to the -Southwest Territory by the Act of Cession of 1790, which stated, “that -the laws in force and use in the state of North Carolina at the time -of passing the act, shall be, and continue in full force until the same -shall be repealed, or otherwise altered by the legislative authority of -the said Territory.”[45] Congress accepted the Territory on the above -condition.[46] The suffrage was not changed by the legislature of the -Southwest Territory. - -The basis of the suffrage remained unchanged from the establishment of -the Constitution of North Carolina in 1776 to the establishment of the -Constitution of Tennessee in 1796. However, the Revolutionary State of -Franklin, which flourished in western North Carolina from 1784 to 1788, -proposed a constitution that gave the suffrage “to every free male -inhabitant” who was twenty-one years old.[47] This is significant because -it was an independent expression of the people in the territory that -later became Tennessee. - - -B. _Suffrage in the Convention of 1796._ - -Several propositions relative to suffrage were made in the Convention of -1796. February 1, Mr. Henderson, delegate from Hawkins County, moved that -the first section in Article III be made to read, “All citizens of this -state, possessing of a freehold in their own right, and all persons who -have done duty in the militia, shall be entitled to vote at any election, -in the county where the freehold lies, or where he resides.”[48] This -motion failed but it is noticed that the suffrage is not based on color. -If the motion had prevailed, it would have disfranchised all freemen, -both white and black, who had not done military service. Mr. Outlaw, -of Jefferson County, moved that “all persons liable by law to militia -duty should be allowed to vote.”[49] If this motion had prevailed, it -would have given all freemen the suffrage with no limitation, because -by Section 26, the freemen were liable to militia duty. The Convention -finally gave the suffrage to all freemen. Article III, Section 1, of -the Constitution of 1796, declared that “all freemen of the age of -twenty-one years and upwards, possessing a freehold in the county where -they may vote, and being inhabitants of this state, and all freemen who -have been inhabitants of any one county within the state for a period of -six months immediately preceding the date of election, shall be entitled -to vote for members of the general assembly, for the county in which they -respectively reside.”[50] - -It is worth noticing in this connection that, while the suffrage was -given to all freemen, representation in the legislature was based on the -number of free whites. The constitution declared that “representation -shall be regulated according to numbers, to be apportioned to each -county by law, upon such ratio, as that the number of senators and -representatives ... shall not exceed thirty-nine until the number of -free white persons shall be two hundred thousand.”[51] The convention in -its various discussions used the terms, “freemen,” “freeholders,” “all -citizens,” “all persons,” and “free white persons.” This clearly shows -that the convention was carefully discriminating between these terms -when it used them. Why did the convention use “free white persons” as -the basis of representation? It knew that the term, “freemen,” would -give representation to free negroes. The Constitution of the United -States gave representation to three-fifths of the slaves. The Kentucky -constitution of 1799 stated that, “In all elections for representatives -every free male citizen (negroes, mulattoes and Indians excepted) shall -enjoy the right of election.”[52] It is distinctly shown here that it was -understood that “free male citizen” included “free negro.” Hence, if he -is not to be enfranchised, he must be excepted. Why would this term be so -well understood in Kentucky and not in Tennessee? - -Again, it must not be overlooked that the constitution of 1796 in -Tennessee was drafted by a committee of very able statesmen, among whom -were such distinguished men as Andrew Jackson, William Cocke, Joseph -Anderson, William Blount, W. C. C. Claiborne, and John Rhea.[53] Andrew -Jackson was a very prominent leader in the Convention; William Cocke -had participated in founding the Franklin State, and was, also, one -of the founders of the Transylvania Republic, twice a Senator of the -United States from Tennessee, and a leader in the Mississippi Territory. -Joseph Anderson was one of the territorial Judges for sixteen years, -United States Senator and Comptroller of the Treasury of the United -States. William Blount had been governor of the Southwest Territory. -William C. C. Claiborne was Judge of the Superior Court of the State, the -successor of Andrew Jackson in Congress, first Governor of the territory -of Mississippi, Governor of Louisiana, and United States senator-elect -at the time of his death. John Rhea was for eighteen years a member of -Congress. It is unreasonable to suppose that these men together with -their colleagues did not know the meaning of the word “freemen” in the -Constitution of 1796.[54] They certainly knew that the free negro had -been voting in Colonial North Carolina, that he continued to vote under -her constitution of 1776, and that he would vote in Tennessee as he -had been doing before the separation from North Carolina unless he was -disfranchised. - -The contention of this thesis is that the free negro was intentionally -and deliberately enfranchised by the Convention of 1796. The proof may be -summarized as follows: 1st, that the terms “freemen” and “freeholders” -were the subject of discussion throughout Colonial North Carolina -with thorough understanding as to their meaning; 2nd, that the act of -1715 specifically excepted the negro from the term “freemen,” thus -disfranchising him; 4th, that the act of 1735 re-enfranchised him; 5th, -that the North Carolina constitution of 1776 enfranchised him; 6th, -that the convention of 1796 in Tennessee used the terms “freemen,” -“freeholders,” and “free white persons,” showing that it must have -knowingly used these terms; 7th, that these terms were carefully used in -contemporary constitutions; and 8th, that it is inconceivable that the -able and experienced statesmen that framed the Tennessee Constitution -were not conversant with these terms. - - -C. _Suffrage from 1796 to 1834._ - -From 1796 to 1834 there was a complete revolution in the attitude of -Tennessee people toward the negro. This has already been pointed out in -the discussion of the churches, manumission societies, and the policy -of exclusion adopted in 1831. Attention has already been called to the -growing economic importance of slavery in the period and the consequent -opposition to the free negro. - -The political influence of the free negro was also a factor in this -change. From 1810 to 1820 there was an increase of 108 per cent in free -negroes and 266 per cent increase in the period from 1820 to 1830. In -1830, there were twenty counties containing almost one hundred free -negroes each; five, two hundred each; four, two hundred and fifty each; -three, three hundred each; two, four hundred each; and one containing -about five hundred. The greatest number of free negroes in any one -county was in Davidson County, and it was a delegate from this county -that made the motion in the convention of 1834 to disfranchise the free -negro. There were at this time about six hundred free negroes in Davidson -County, and there were 471 in 1830 and 794 in 1840.[55] - -Hon. John Petit, United States Senator from Indiana, said on the floor -of the Senate, May 25, 1854, in the debate on the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, -that “Old Cave Johnson, an honored and respectable gentleman, formerly -Postmaster-General, and for a long time a member of the other house, told -me, with his own lips, that the first time he was elected to Congress -from Tennessee, it was by the vote of free negroes, and he was an iron -manufacturer, and had a large number of free negroes, as well as slaves, -in his employ. I well recollect the number he stated. One hundred and -forty-five free negroes in his employ, went to the ballot box, and -elected him to Congress the first time he was elected.”[56] Charles -Sumner said he heard John Bell make the same confession with regard to -his election.[57] It is further claimed that, during political campaigns -in Tennessee, “The opposing candidates for the nonce, oblivious of social -distinction and intent only on catching votes, hobnobbed with the men and -swung corners all with dusky damsels at election balls.”[58] The fact -that the Constitutional Convention of 1834 by resolution excluded the -free negro from voting on ratification of the constitution shows that -his vote was a factor in close elections. Judge Catron in the case of -Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs said: “The free negro’s vote at the polls is of -as high value as that of any man.”[59] - - -D. _Suffrage in the Convention of 1834._ - -The contest over disfranchising the free negro in the convention of -1834 presents the final phase of the suffrage problem. Amendments to -the constitution of 1796, favoring and opposing negro suffrage, were -introduced in the convention and by June 26 were being debated in the -committee of the whole. One of the strongest advocates of suffrage for -the negro was Mr. Cahall, who said he was “unwilling to disfranchise -any man black or white, who had enjoyed the right of suffrage under the -present constitution.”[60] - -Mr. Cahall’s position was as follows: first, he would let the free -negroes then in the state continue to vote; second, he believed that -an unqualified suffrage for free negroes would make the state an -asylum for free negroes; third, he contended that the suffrage was a -conventional and not a natural right. He said that our government was a -“constitutional and not a natural one.”[61] - -Mr. Allen, June 27, speaking of the third article of the constitution, in -the committee of the whole, said: “I am against inserting the word white -before the word freeman, in this clause of the constitution, because it -goes to exclude a description of persons from the right of voting, that -has exercised it for thirty-eight years under the present constitution, -without any evil ever having grown out of it.” - -On June 27, the following resolution was introduced into the committee of -the whole: - - That every free male person of color, being an inhabitant six - months previous to the day of election, of any county in this - State six months immediately preceding the election, shall be - entitled to vote in said county in which he has so resided, for - Governor, members of Congress, members of General Assembly, and - other officers. - -Mr. Purdy introduced the following amendment to the above motion: - - That every free man of color possessing in his own right in - the county in which he may reside and propose to vote, a - freehold or personal property of $200, on which he has paid - a tax that has been assessed at least six months previous to - the day of election, and being an inhabitant of this State at - least twelve months previous to the day of election, shall - be entitled to vote for members to the General Assembly for - the county or district in which he shall reside provided no - free person emigrating to this State after the adoption of - this Constitution, shall be entitled to exercise the right of - suffrage.[62] - -This amendment was rejected. - -Mr. Marr offered the following amendment to the motion: - - That no person, who is not a citizen of the United States and - of this State, has a right in any election in this State. - -This motion was laid on the table, and the original resolution was -adopted by the committee of the whole. June the 28th, Mr. Marr, delegate -from Weakley and Obion counties, introduced the following resolutions: - - Resolved, that free persons of color, including mulattoes, - mustees, and Indians were not parties to our political compact, - nor were they represented in the Convention which formed the - evidence of the compact, under which the free people of the - State, and of the United States, are associated for civil - government. Nor, are they recognized by our political fabrics - as subjects of our naturalization laws; but on the contrary, - are, by the Constitution and laws of the United States, - prohibited from being brought to the United States, either - as property, or as being within the scope and meaning of our - provision relating to naturalization and citizenship and hence - their supposed claim to the exercise of the great right of - free suffrage is and, shall be, not only not recognized, but - prohibited. Resolved that all free white men of the age of - twenty-one and upwards, who are natural born citizens of this - State, or of any one of the United States, and all who have - been naturalized and admitted to the rights and privileges - as citizens of the United States by our laws, and who, being - inhabitants of this State, and who have a fixed or known - residence in the county or election district, six months - immediately preceding the day of election, shall be entitled to - vote for members of either house of the General Assembly, in - and for the county or district in which they may reside.[63] - -These resolutions were referred to the committee of the whole. - -July 1, Mr. Loving, in the committee of the whole, said: - - That when this question was first taken up by the committee he - then believed he should content himself with giving his silent - vote, and he remained of that opinion until he ascertained - that the friends of free persons of color, were much more - numerous than he had first supposed; he was truly astonished - and regretted to see old members, yes, Mr. Chairman, old gray - headed gentlemen in plaintive and importuning language, - contending for a proposition to let free negroes, mulattoes, - etc., exercise the highest right and privilege in a free - government—that of the right of suffrage. He would have - supposed that those old members could ere this have seen the - impolicy of such a course as he was gratified to see that there - were some, who had long since condemned that feature on our - constitution and who were now ready and even ably contending - with him to expunge that odious and very objectionable feature - from the constitution. - -Mr. Loving’s arguments against the suffrage for free negroes were about -as follows: - - 1. He objected to making the suffrage a natural right, an - inalienable and inherent right. He said it did not belong to - the state of society, but grew out of the body politic. - - 2. He said that he knew of free colored men of respectability, - probity, and merit, but that particular cases of merit did not - justify a policy of letting free negroes vote. - - 3. He said some gentlemen contended that Tennessee should let - them vote because North Carolina did. He pointed out in this - connection that North Carolina and Tennessee were the only - states in the Union that let the negroes vote, and that North - Carolina was calling a convention that would disfranchise them. - - 4. He thought that the suffrage, being a conventional right, - should be in the hands of those who possess the greatest degree - of moral and intellectual cultivation. - - 5. He pointed out that the same argument that was being made in - behalf of the free negroes would give the suffrage to women and - children. - - 6. He did not think that because some negroes fought for - American Independence in 1776, they were entitled to the - suffrage.[64] - -July 15, Mr. Marr opposed giving the free negro the suffrage for the -following reasons: - - 1. He did not think the convention of 1796 intended to give him - the suffrage, and he opposed it now for that reason. - - 2. He maintained that black and white men could not live - together on terms of equality; they must separate or one rule - the other. - - 3. He contended that Tennessee did not have the power to - emancipate her slaves; the Constitution of the United States - prevented it. - - 4. He concluded that the voice of the people, the admonitions - of prudence and the want of power, all directed that this - convention should not give, nor attempt to give, negroes, - mulattoes, or Indians the suffrage.[65] - -Mr. Newton Cannon of Williamson County, who was chairman of the committee -of the whole, reported the constitution in its first form to the -convention, July 25, 1834. Article II, Section 1, said: - - Every free man of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, - being a citizen of the United States, and an inhabitant of the - county of this state wherein he may offer his vote, six months - immediately preceding the day of election, shall be entitled - to vote for members of the General Assembly and other civil - officers, for the county in which he may reside.[66] - -It is noticed that at this time the forces for suffrage for the free -negro had won. - -The constitution was now reported as a whole to the convention, which -began to consider it in detail. By July 31, Article III, Section 1, -was reached. Mr. Robert Weakley, delegate from Davidson County, moved -that the word, “white,” be inserted after the word “free” in Article -III, Section 1. This motion was carried by a vote of 33 to 23.[67] Mr. -Mathew Stephenson of Washington County moved “that no freeman who is now -a resident of this state and who has heretofore exercised the right of -voting shall hereafter be debarred from that privilege.” This motion -failed by a vote of 34 to 22.[68] A change of six votes on the first -motion would have given the free negro the suffrage. The liberal forces -in Tennessee politics at this date were stronger than history has usually -acknowledged. - - -V. LIMITATIONS UPON THE FREEDOM OF FREE NEGROES. - -The free negro was forbidden to entertain a slave in his home at night -or during the Sabbath. For violation of this restriction, he was fined -$2.50 for the first and $5.00 for each succeeding offense.[69] This fine -was increased to $20 in 1806.[70] If he could not pay these fines, he was -hired out by the constable of his district until his wages amounted to -the fines and all costs. - -There was no restriction on marriage between free negroes, but a free -negro could not marry a slave without the master’s consent, given in -writing and attested by two justices of the peace. He was fined $25 for -an illegal marriage with a slave, and, if he could not pay the fine, he -was forced to serve the master of the slave for one year.[71] - -It was a misdemeanor for a free negro to keep a tippling house, and -subjected him to not less than a fifty dollar fine. He was also forbidden -to sell, give, or loan a slave a gun, pistol, or sword without the -consent of the owner of the slave.[72] He could not associate with slaves -except with the permission of their owners.[73] - -The free negro was required to carry a copy of his registration with -him wherever he went. He could be suspected at any time or might be -stolen. His registration certificate was his surest guarantee of personal -freedom. In the mere matter of travelling in the community, he was -constantly subject to this limitation. If he crossed county lines, the -certificate was absolutely required.[74] - - -VI. THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE FREE NEGRO. - -What, then, was the legal status of the free negro? He was only a -quasi-free man. He could sue and be sued. He could make a contract and -inherit property. He enjoyed legal marriage. He could buy and sell. He -could not be a witness against a white man. He could not vote after -1834. He was ineligible for office. He was a sort of inmate on parole. -His conduct was frequently guaranteed by bond. He enjoyed certain -privileges and immunities, which the state might take away from him -if it saw fit. He was not a citizen in the sense in which the term is -used in the Constitution of the United States, and, therefore, was not -entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the several states. -Judge Green, speaking of the free negro’s rights in the case of the State -v. Claiborne, said: “The laws have never allowed the enjoyment of equal -rights, or the immunities of the free white citizen.”[75] - -He had no place in society, socially or economically. He could not -associate with the whites. He could keep the company of slaves only -by permission. His own class was so small that his opportunities were -very limited there. Poverty, ignorance, oppression, discrimination, and -hostility of both slave and white man made his position in actual life -much worse than his legal status. In the industrial world there was no -place for him. The labor was done by slaves. There was no factory work -for him. He could farm if he could rent or buy land. He was usually not -wanted in the community. - - The black man, in the United States, said Judge Catron, is - degraded by his color, and sinks into vice and worthlessness - from want of motive to virtuous and elevated conduct. The - black man in these states may have the power of volition. He - may go and come when it pleases him, without a domestic master - to control the actions of his person; but to be politically - free, to be the peer and equal to the white man, to enjoy the - offices, trusts, and privileges our institutions confer on the - white men, is hopeless now and ever. The slave who receives - the protection and care of a tolerable master holds a condition - here superior to the negro who is freed from domestic slavery. - He is a reproach and a by-word with the slave himself, who - taunts his fellow slave by telling him “he is as worthless as - a free negro.” The consequence is inevitable. The free black - man lives amongst us without motive and without hope. He seeks - no avocation; is surrounded with necessities, is sunk in - degradation; crime can sink him no deeper, and he commits it, - of course. This is not only true of the free negro residing - in the slaveholding states of the Union. In non-slaveholding - states of this Union the people are less accustomed to the - squalid and disgusting wretchedness of the negro, have less - sympathy for him, earn their means of subsistence with their - own hands, and are more economical in parting with them - than he for whom the slave labors, for which he is entitled - the proceeds and of which the free negro is generally the - participant, and but too often in the character of the receiver - of stolen goods. Nothing can be more untrue than that the - free negro is more respectable as a member of society in the - non-slaveholding states than in the slaveholding states. In - each he is a degraded outcast, and his fancied freedom a - delusion. With us the slave ranks him in character and comfort, - nor is there a fair motive to absolve him from his duties - incident to domestic slavery if he is to continue amongst us. - Generally, and almost universally, society suffers and the - negro suffers by manumission.[76] - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] Wheeler, p. 279. - -[2] Acts of North Carolina, 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 2. - -[3] Acts of 1801, Ch. 27, Sec. 1. - -[4] U. S. Census, 1870, I, Population, 62. - -[5] The Genius, II, 136; The Western Freeman, Shelbyville, Tennessee, -Sept. 6, 1831. - -[6] Hale and Merrit, II, 296. - -[7] Acts of 1831, Ch. 102, Sec. 1. - -[8] M. & C., Sec. 2711. - -[9] Ibid., Sec. 2712. - -[10] Ibid., Sec. 2703. - -[11] Acts of 1831, Ch. 102, Sec. 2. - -[12] M. & C., Secs. 2704-6. - -[13] Jameson v. McCoy, 5 Humphrey, 118 (1871). - -[14] Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 129 (1834). - -[15] Ibid., 130. - -[16] Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 660 (1870). - -[17] Acts of 1833, Ch. 81, Secs. 1-2. - -[18] Acts of 1842, Ch. 191, Sec. 1. - -[19] The Case of F. Gray, 9 Humphrey, 515 (1848). - -[20] Ibid., 516. - -[21] Ibid., 515. - -[22] Acts of 1849, Ch. 107, Sec. 1. - -[23] Bridge Water v. Pride, 1 Sneed, 197 (1863). - -[24] Acts of 1852, Ch. 300, Sec. 3. - -[25] Acts of 1854, Ch. 50, Sec. 1. - -[26] Boon v. Lancaster, 1 Sneed, 583-4 (1854). - -[27] Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the American Anti-Slavery Society, -1861, pp. 215-6. - -[28] Acts of 1858, Ch. 45, Secs. 1-4. - -[29] Hale and Merritt, II, 300-301. - -[30] Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 1. - -[31] Acts of 1807, Ch. 100, Sec. 1. - -[32] Acts of 1825, Ch. 79, Sec. 3. - -[33] Acts of 1842, Ch. 191, Sec. 5. - -[34] Acts of 1831, Ch. 102, Sec. 1. - -[35] Acts of 1826, Ch. 22, Sec. 6. - -[36] Acts of 1829, Ch. 23, Sec. 21. - -[37] Acts of 1852, Ch. 158, Sec. 1. - -[38] McDonald, William, Select Charters Illustrative of American History, -1606-1775, 122, S. 5. - -[39] McDonald, Op Cit., 123, Sec. 6. - -[40] Col. Recs. of North Carolina, I, 639; State Recs. of N. C., XXIV, 14. - -[41] Ibid., III, 93, 560. - -[42] Ibid., IV, 106; Davis, James, Laws of North Carolina, 79. - -[43] Davis, 177-180. - -[44] North Carolina Constitution of 1776, Secs, 7, 8, and 9; Col. Recs., -XXIII, 881. - -[45] U. S. Statutes at Large, I, 108. - -[46] Ibid., First Congress, 1790; Chap. VI, Sec. II, pp. 106-9. - -[47] Constitution of Frankland, Sec. 4; Ramsey, J. G. M., Annals of -Tennessee, p. 327. - -[48] Journal of the Convention of 1796, p. 21. - -[49] Ibid., p. 22. - -[50] Constitution of 1796, Art. III, Sec. 1; see also Journal of the -Convention of 1796, p. 16. - -[51] Ibid., Art. I, Sec. 1. - -[52] Kentucky Constitution of 1799, Art. 2, Sec. 8. - -[53] Journal of the Convention of 1796, pp. 5-6. - -[54] Caldwell, Joshua W., Constitutional History of Tennessee, 132. - -[55] U. S. Census, 1870, I, Population, p. 12. - -[56] Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 33d Congress, 1805; 2nd Session, -38th Congress, 284. - -[57] The Works of Charles Sumner, X, 192. - -[58] Buxton, Rev. Jarvis Bury, Reminiscences of the Bench and -Fayetteville Bar, p. 93. - -[59] Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 126 (1834). - -[60] Nashville Republican, July 10, 1834. - -[61] Nashville Republican and State Gazette, July 1, 1834. - -[62] Nashville Republican and State Gazette, June 28, 1834. - -[63] Journal of the Convention of 1834, p. 107. - -[64] Nashville Republican and State Gazette, July 5, 1834. - -[65] Nashville Republican and State Gazette, July 15, 1834. - -[66] Journal of the Convention of 1834, p. 171. - -[67] Ibid., p. 28. - -[68] Ibid., p. 209. - -[69] Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 2. - -[70] Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 4. - -[71] Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 3. - -[72] Acts of 1835, Ch. 58, Sec. 2. - -[73] Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 4. - -[74] Acts of 1807, Ch. 100, Sec. 1. - -[75] State v. Claiborne, 1 Meigs, 337 (1858). - -[76] Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 131 (1834). - - - - -CHAPTER VII - -ABOLITION - - -There was throughout the period of slavery in Tennessee a determined -minority that favored its abolition. This minority was not confined to -the non-slaveholders, but as late as 1834 slaveholders hoped that some -method of abolition would finally be devised. This abolition sentiment -expressed itself in various ways. - - -I. PRIVATE ABOLITION. - - -A. METHODS. - - -(1) _By Deed._ - -There were three steps in the process of emancipation by any method. -Two of these were taken by the owner and one by the state. The owner -renounced his right of property in the slave and then gave bond with -good security for his conduct and maintenance. To complete the process -of emancipation, the state’s consent was necessary. This was given -exclusively by the county courts until 1829,[1] when the Legislature gave -the chancery courts jurisdiction of cases involving wills.[2] After 1854, -a petition for emancipation could be filed in any court of record.[3] -Of course, the legislature by virtue of its plenary power could and did -grant petitions for freedom throughout the period of slavery.[4] The -county court could not consider a petition for emancipation unless nine -or a majority of the court were present and the consent of two-thirds of -those present was necessary to grant the petition.[5] The clerk of the -court made a record of the emancipation and gave the slave a copy.[6] - -One way by which the master could relinquish his property rights in the -slave was by deed. A deed of freedom to a slave was valid only between -him and the owner or his representatives. It did not operate against -the claim of creditors. A deed of emancipation had to be witnessed and -recorded before it was binding upon the master.[7] Judge Catron, speaking -of a deed of manumission, in the case of Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, said: - - It is binding on the representatives of the divisor in the one - case, and the grantor in the other, and communicates a right - to the slave; but it is an imperfect right, until the state, - the community of which such emancipated person is to become - a member, assents to the contract between the master and the - slave.[8] - - -(2) _By Will._ - -A bequest of freedom by will was binding between the master or his -representative and the slave, but, until 1829, the slave could -not institute suit to complete the process of freedom in case the -representative of the master failed to take such action. Administrators -of estates took advantage of this weakness of the law. The result was -that either such a negro, being helpless, was reduced to slavery again, -or was left in a state of semi-freedom. In 1829, the state gave the -chancery courts jurisdiction of such cases and gave such a negro the -privilege of bringing suit for his freedom through his next friend.[9] -Children born of a mother who had been emancipated by will but who did -not receive her freedom until the expiration of a term of years received -their freedom at the same time the mother received hers.[10] - - -(3) _By Contract._ - -The slave could enter into a contract with his master for his freedom and -the courts would enforce such a contract.[11] This contract might be by -parol.[12] A contract between purchaser and seller to the effect that a -slave be emancipated at a certain date was binding between the owner and -the slave, and invested the slave with the right to complete the process -of freedom after 1829. Such a contract did not weaken the claim of -creditors, nor did it compel the state to grant the freedom of the slave. -The obtaining of the state’s consent, while conditioned on the initiate -step of the master, was entirely a separate procedure. - - -(4) _By Bill of Sale._ - -The owner could sell a slave to an individual or a society, who wanted -to emancipate him. Slaves frequently bought themselves. A free negro -sometimes bought husband or wife and children, and then petitioned the -state to free them. All bills of the sale of slaves had to be in writing -and attested by at least one creditable witness. If the bill of sale was -contested, two witnesses were required.[13] Philanthropic individuals -and societies could have emancipated a great many slaves, if the state -had not made its consent a necessary part of such manumission. When -one considers how the benevolence of slave owners or the generosity of -societies might have flooded a community with stupid, ignorant, and -vicious negroes, he can easily see why society asserted the right to -regulate the ownership of this kind of property. - - -(5) _By Implication._ - -If the master by his acts or treatment of a slave, or in conversation -with another, indicated that he meant to give a slave his freedom, the -courts would recognize this as a basis for a suit for freedom.[14] The -institution of a suit against a slave was an implication of his freedom, -otherwise the bequest had no effect.[15] - - -(6) _By the Effect of Foreign Laws._ - -If a slave owner of Tennessee moved to a free state with his slaves to -reside permanently, this would indicate his intention to free them. If -on entering such a state with his slaves, he agreed to free them at -a certain future date, this would give the slaves a cause for a suit -of freedom if he should later decide to return to Tennessee before -the expiration of the time set for their emancipation.[16] Of course, -Tennessee laws permitted a free negro to adopt a master and convey -himself into slavery, but this was voluntary on his part.[17] - - -B. THE EXTENT OF EMANCIPATION IN TENNESSEE. - -It is seldom credited to southern slaveholders that they gave up as -much property as the records show that they did. The slaveholding -states practiced real abolition while New England and the other great -abolition sections of the country were agitators of abolition rather -than practitioners of it. None of their legislation shook the shackles -from a single slave, according to eminent authority,[18] but merely -abolished slavery that did not exist; that is, these acts said slaves -yet unborn would be free at birth, or at certain age. This was not -abolishing slavery by freeing those actually held in slavery. As a matter -of fact, those held in slavery at the time of the passing of these acts -were retained as slaves until they died, or were sold to Southerners. Of -course, all over the country there was abolition by private individuals, -but the point is, the Southern slaveholders were the real abolitionists. -They actually gave up their property, and turned loose their slaves. -There were 7,300 free negroes in Tennessee in 1860. Considering the fact -that hundreds of free negroes went to Liberia, Haiti, Canada, and the -free states, from Tennessee, and that hundreds of free negroes died in -the period from 1796 to 1860, it is safe to say that, at $1000 each, -more than ten million dollars’ worth of property was surrendered by the -abolitionists of Tennessee. It was largely the small farmer slaveholders -that made this sacrifice for their convictions. - - -II. ANTI-SLAVERY LEADERS. - -Tennessee made a substantial contribution to the anti-slavery leadership -of the nation. There were two groups of these men. One of them left the -state for a larger field of activity, and might be called Separatists, -while the members of the other group remained at home and fought in the -ranks. These might be called Puritans. Jesse Mills, Elihu Swain, John -Underhill, Jesse Lockhart, Rev. John Roy, Peter Cartwright, Charles -Osborn, and Rev. John Rankin are examples of those who left the state for -abolition centers.[19] - -Rev. John Roy was a Methodist preacher who rode Green circuit in -Tennessee. He was a man of considerable ability, strong feeling, full -of courage, with an iron will. He was strongly anti-slavery in his -sentiment, and for this reason moved to Indiana, where he died in 1837 in -his 69th year.[20] - -Peter Cartwright was one of the greatest preachers of Methodism. He was -a native Virginian, but entered the Western Conference in 1804. He gave -a great part of his life to the services of the church in Tennessee. He -was a man of great humor and wit, and was a fighter against slavery. -He finally decided that his labors would be more appreciated in an -anti-slavery state, and moved to Illinois in 1824. He became increasingly -bitter against slaveholders in his old age, and as a delegate from -Illinois to the Methodist Conference in 1844, he voted for the division -of the church. - -Charles Osborn was one of the greatest of these leaders who left the -state. He was born in North Carolina, August 21, 1795. At the age of -19, he moved with his parents to Tennessee, where he became a Quaker -minister. In December, 1814 he organized the manumission movement in -Tennessee, and was its leader until 1816, when he moved to Ohio, where -he did his greatest work.[21] George Washington Julian makes Osborn the -undoubted leader in the abolition movement of the Northwest, of which -Ohio was the center and one of the two centers of the abolition movement -in the nation. Osborn laid the foundation for his work in his new field, -for which Tennessee had prepared him by environment and previous service, -by establishing at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, in 1817, the Philanthropist, -which Julian regards as the first anti-slavery publication in the United -States.[22] In 1818, Osborn removed to Indiana, where he lived the -remainder of his life. - -Rev. John Rankin was possibly the greatest of those leaders who saw -fit to leave the State to find an environment more in harmony with -his attitude toward slavery. He was a Presbyterian minister, “who was -destined, during the three decades preceding the Civil War, to occupy a -position of first importance among the anti-slavery workers of the United -States. In 1825, he published his famous _Letters on Slavery_, which went -through many editions and exerted a very great influence. Many western -men have called him the ‘father of abolition,’ and it was not an uncommon -thing in the thirties to hear him spoken of as ‘the Martin Luther of -the Cause’.”[23] Rev. Rankin said that in his early boyhood a majority -of the people of East Tennessee were abolitionists.[24] The first issue -of the Emancipator, referring to the loss of anti-slavery leadership in -Tennessee, said, - - Thousands of first-rate citizens, men remarkable for their - piety and virtue, have within twenty years past, removed from - this and other slave states to Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, that - their eyes may be hid from seeing the cruel oppressor lacerate - the back of his slaves, and that their ears may not hear the - bitter cries of the oppressed. I have often regretted the loss - of so much virtue from these slave states, which held too - little before. Could all those who have removed from slave - states on that account, to even the single state of Ohio, have - been induced to remove to, and settle in Tennessee, with their - high-toned love for universal liberty and aversion to slavery, - I think that Tennessee would ere this have begun to sparkle - among the true stars of liberty.[25] - -James Jones, Samuel Doak, Mr. R. G. Williams, Rev. Philip Lindsey, and -Elihu Embree were the most eminent of the group of leaders in abolition -who chose to stand their ground and fight straight from the shoulder. -James Jones was another member of the Society of Friends, who were -really the leaders in the anti-slavery movement in Tennessee. Jones was -thoroughly devoted to the cause of abolition, wrote several addresses -for the Tennessee Manumission Society, and was for several years its -president. His untimely death in 1830 was a serious loss to the cause -of humanity and undoubtedly was the death of the Tennessee Manumission -Society. Benjamin Lundy paid the following tribute to him at his death: - - A great man has fallen, one of the brightest stars in the - galaxy of American philanthropists has set, has set to rise - no more, James Jones, President of the Manumission Society - of Tennessee—the steady, ardent and persevering friend of - universal emancipation, is numbered among the dead.... No - language can impress upon the mind an adequate idea of his many - virtues. Suffice it to say that few men living can fill the - station that he held, with equal honor and usefulness. Long - shall the poor oppressed African mourn for his irreparable - loss.[26] - -Rev. Samuel Doak was the leader of that strong and able Presbyterian -contingent that came from North Carolina into Tennessee in the last -quarter of the eighteenth century. He was also the leading educator of -the State in his day.[27] He was a graduate of Princeton, and founded -in Tennessee the first institution of learning in the Mississippi -Valley.[28] He was a prominent abolitionist from 1800 to 1830, and from -1818 he taught immediate abolition. Among his pupils was Sam Houston, who -opposed secession, John Rankin, and Rev. Jesse Lockhart, who preached and -lectured on abolition in Southern Ohio.[29] - -Dr. Philip Lindsey, who was President of the University of Nashville from -1825 to 1850, was the leader in organizing the Tennessee Colonization -Society. He was its president for a number of years and was connected -with it until his death. His educational leadership gave the colonization -movement a prestige and influence that could not have come through any -other channel. The University of Nashville in this period was the leading -educational institution of the State, if not of the South.[30] - -Mr. R. G. Williams was one of the anti-slavery leaders who helped to -make Maryville, in East Tennessee, the seat of Maryville Seminary, now -Maryville College, one of the great anti-slavery centers of the nation, -a forerunner of Oberlin in Ohio. “We are rejoiced to know,” said The -Emancipator of New York, “that in East Tennessee and directly in the very -center of the slaveholding country, among the fastnesses of the American -Alps, God has secured a little Spartan band of devoted abolitionists of -the best stamp, whom neither death nor danger can turn,”[31] and a later -issue of The Emancipator, quoting the letter of a student of Maryville -College, said, “We take the liberty to uphold and defend our sentiments, -whether it is agreeable or not to the selfishness of the slaveholder. -We would thankfully receive any communication on the subject. We have -some friends in the country around, among whom we have the privilege -of distributing without fear a considerable number of pamphlets. About -thirty students in the Theological Seminary at this place are preparing -for the ministry, of whom twelve are abolitionists.” This same issue, -quoting a letter of Mr. R. G. Williams, said: “We could form a good -Anti-slavery Society in this part of the state, but we choose to work -in an unorganized manner a while yet, before we set ourselves up as a -target, notwithstanding the strict laws of Tennessee. We meet through the -country and discuss the merits of abolition and colonization; the former -is ably defended by Rev. T. S. Kendall, pastor of the Seceder Church in -this county (Blount), and several others.”[32] - -The most eminent anti-slavery leader in the state was Elihu Embree. He -was a Quaker, son of Thomas and Esther Embree, of Pennsylvania, born -November 11, 1782. He moved to Tennessee at an early age, and became -an iron manufacturer in East Tennessee. He early espoused the cause of -freedom, and began at Jonesboro, Tennessee, in 1819, the publication -of the Manumission Intelligencer as the mouth-piece of the manumission -societies of Tennessee. He continued this publication until his untimely -death in 1820. - -Embree was a radical, outspoken, and uncompromising abolitionist. He -was the leader of the Society of Friends in their work for abolition -in Tennessee. Embree’s writing and lecturing on abolition did more to -advertise the state as an abolition center in the twenties than the work -of all the others combined. In Garrison’s Life, by his children, there is -an account of the work of Embree, “to whom,” it says, “must be accorded -the honor of publishing the first periodical in America of which the one -avowed object was opposition to slavery.”[33] Mr. Embree said he “spent -several thousand dollars ... in some small degree abolishing, and in -endeavoring to facilitate the general abolition of slavery.”[34] - -Embree had owned seven or eight slaves, but in discussing his connection -with slavery, he said: - - “I repent that I ever owned one. And indeed the crime is of - such a hue, that the time may yet come, that a man who has, in - a single instance, gone astray thus far, may never be able - in his life time to regain public confidence; and should this - change of public sentiment take place in my day, and render - me disqualified to act in the promotion of this glorious - cause, I hope to acquiesce in, and be resigned to suffer the - just judgment, and be more humble under a sense of my past - misconduct; meanwhile I shall doubtless have the pleasure of - rejoicing at seeing this stigma on our religious professions, - and scar upon our national escutcheon, eradicated by men of - clean hands.”[35] - - -III. ABOLITION LITERATURE. - -The first issue of the Manumission Intelligencer was published in March, -1819, at Jonesboro, Tennessee. It was a weekly at first, and, in this -form, about fifty issues were published, eight or ten copies of which -are in the possession of various individuals in Washington County. -In 1820, Embree changed the paper to a monthly octavo and called it -The Emancipator.[36] Due to Embree’s death, December 12, 1820, The -Emancipator was forced to discontinue, after a very prosperous existence -of eight months, during which time a subscription list of 2000 had been -secured.[37] The numbers issued were bound in one volume of one hundred -and twenty pages, a copy of which is in the possession of Esq. Thomas J. -Wilson, who married Mr. Embree’s daughter. - -Embree said that the purpose of “This paper is especially designed by the -editor to advocate the _abolition of slavery_, and to be a repository of -tracts on that interesting and important subject. It will contain all -the necessary information that the editor can obtain of the progress of -the abolition of slavery of the descendants of Africa, together with a -concise history of their introduction into slavery, collected from the -best authority.”[38] - -Mr. Embree, in discussing the progress of abolition in Tennessee and his -publication, said: - - Twenty years ago, the cause of abolition was so unpopular in - Tennessee that it was at the risk of a man’s life that he - interfered or assisted in establishing the liberty of a person - of color that was held in slavery, though held contrary to - law. The lives of some of my intimate acquaintances, I well - recollect to have been threatened, who had felt it their - duty to aid some out of their unlawful thralldom. And it was - sufficient in those times to procure a man the general hatred - of his neighbors, although he never even succeeded, and the - case made plain that the poor negro was not lawfully a slave. - But by little and little, times are much changed here, until - societies of respectable citizens have arisen to plead the - cause of abolition; and instead of it being a disgrace to a man - to be a member of these societies, it is rather a mark of the - goodness of his heart, and redounds to his honor. I have no - hesitation in believing that less than twenty years ago a man - would have been mobbed, and the printing office torn down for - printing and publishing anything like the Emancipator; whereas - it now meets the approbation of thousands, and is patronized - perhaps at least equal to any other paper in the State.[39] - -There was a very close connection between Embree’s publication and -those of Lundy and Garrison. Lundy was a contributor to Osborn’s -Philanthropist, published at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, and made two trips to -see Osborn about becoming connected with his publication. The contest -over the admission of Missouri attracted Lundy’s interest, and before -this matter was settled, Osborn had sold his paper. Meanwhile, Embree -had established at Jonesboro, Tennessee, The Emancipator. Lundy now -abandoned the idea of an anti-slavery journal, but, on learning of -Embree’s death in 1820, he decided that the anti-slavery forces must have -an organ. In July, 1821, at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, he issued the first -number of The Genius of Universal Emancipation. Lindsay Swift, in his -life of Garrison, said: “It was the legitimate successor in spirit of -Elihu Embree’s Emancipator, started the year previous in Tennessee.”[40] -Lundy published only eight numbers of The Genius in Ohio, when he was -persuaded by Embree’s friends to remove The Genius to Tennessee and -publish it on Embree’s press.[41] He, accordingly, bought Embree’s press -and the subscription list to his Emancipator, and published The Genius in -Tennessee for nearly three years.[42] Lundy in a letter, dated March 16, -1823, said: “My paper circulates well. If any person had told me when I -commenced that I should be as successful under all my disadvantages as I -have been, I could not have believed him.”[43] - -Tennessee is really the mother of abolition literature in the United -States. She was the original home of The Manumission Intelligencer and -The Emancipator, became the seat of The Genius of Universal Emancipation, -and sent out Osborn who established The Philanthropist in Ohio. Of -course, Lundy was the inspiration of Garrison, who decided to establish -The Liberator after his association with Lundy, and this publication -is just as truly a continuation of The Genius as it was the prolonged -life of The Emancipator. Instead of assigning first place to the work of -Garrison, as Johnson’s Life of Garrison, Greeley’s History of American -Conflict, Wilson’s History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, and -Von Holst’s Constitutional and Political History of the United States do, -it seems that this pioneer work of Embree really made possible the work -of Lundy and Garrison. - - -IV. PETITIONS TO THE LEGISLATURE FOR ABOLITION. - -From 1815 to 1834, the legislature was constantly petitioned by the -abolitionists of the state. These petitions prayed for easier conditions -of emancipation, better treatment of slaves, prevention of separation -of husband and wife, prohibition of the entrance of slaves into the -state, and some plan of disestablishment of slavery. The Scriptures, the -Constitution of the United States, the Bill of Rights, Declaration of -Independence, and the laws of nature were usually made the basis of these -petitions. - -In 1817, one of the most suggestive of these petitions was presented. -This petition proposed that the courts be empowered in granting petitions -for freedom to require the master to “give to those he is discharging a -lease on lands for years, free of rent, charge and taxes, with provisions -adequate for the first year, with a limited portion of stock and -articles of husbandry.”[44] “For years,” it states, “we have seen monied -aristocracies rising in our land; and wealth attaching reverence, and -creating distinction; in proportion as these evils shall increase, will -men’s consciences be seared and their minds turned against the rights and -liberties of those, who constitute an essential part of their wealth.” -It also called attention to the need for additional protection for free -negroes, and suggested that it be made a felony to steal and sell a free -negro into slavery. It also pointed out that the young free negroes with -neither father nor mother alive or free should be attached to suitable -persons, preferably their emancipators, to be “reared to habits of -industry, and prepared for the duties of life.”[45] This petition was -signed by eighty-eight citizens, among whom was Jno. H. Eaton, later -Andrew Jackson’s Secretary of War. - -In 1815, there was a petition presented to the legislature, signed by -four hundred and four citizens, of whom twenty-two were slaveholders, -asking that a general plan for disestablishing slavery be enacted. -There were thirty-six petitions, signed by 2153 persons, presented to -the legislature in 1817,[46] and twenty-one petitions signed by 2253 -persons in 1819.[47] The Manumission Society of Tennessee presented a -petition to the legislature in 1819, asking that the children of slaves -be emancipated at a certain age, that slaves capable of supporting -themselves be manumitted without the assumption of heavy obligations by -their masters, and that the “inhuman and barbarous practice of trading in -slaves be prohibited.” - -These petitions became more numerous in the later twenties. In 1825, -there were 497 petitions presented to the legislature; in 1827, there -were 2818, and 1328 in 1829. These petitions were signed by hundreds. -In addition to these circulated petitions, there were many individual -requests for the permission to emancipate entire families without -security, or with permission for the negroes to remain in the state. - - -V. ABOLITION IN THE CONVENTION OF 1834. - -“It is supposed,” said the Nashville Republican, February 20, 1834, “that -efforts will be made to insert a provision for the gradual abolition of -slavery, and perhaps the colonization of our colored population. Upon the -propriety of this step we shall not at present decide. Much would depend -upon the nature of the provision, whether well adapted to our present -and future condition. The legislature of Tennessee has already taken up -the cause of colonization, and made, perhaps, as liberal provision for -it as our finances permitted. The nature of things, the march of public -opinion, the voice of religion, all have said that American slavery must -have an end. What shall be the legislative measures to that effect, and -where they shall begin, are questions for prudence to determine.”[48] - -In accordance with this prophecy, as soon as the convention was -organized, petitions were presented, proposing the following amendment to -the constitution: - - All slaves born within the limits of the state of Tennessee - from and after the first day of January, 1835, shall be free, - together with their issue, upon the said slaves, so born, as - aforesaid, arriving at the age of twenty-one years, and upon - condition that within one year after their so arriving at the - age of twenty-one years, they, together with their issue, - remove without the limits of the state of Tennessee, and never - return to reside therein—and that any slave or slaves who - reside without the limits of the state of Tennessee, on or - after the first day of January, 1835, and who may afterwards be - brought within the limit of the said state to reside, or who - remain within the said limits for a term of more than sixty - days under any pretence whatever, such slave or slaves shall - be free, and all slaves who shall have attained the said age - of twenty-one years, and who shall not have removed without - the limits of said state within 12 months thereafter, shall - be hired out by some authority, prescribed by the legislature - for one, two, or three years, and the proceeds of their labor, - appropriated for defraying the expense of removing them to - Liberia, in Africa, or to such places without the limits of - the United States as may be considered suitable for their - reception, and for providing for their substance for twelve - months after their arrival at their new home.[49] - -The convention, despite the efforts of a determined minority, well backed -by its constituency, steadily refused to consider these memorials on -slavery. They were at first merely read and laid on the table. On May -30, Mr. Stephenson, of Washington County, moved the appointment of a -committee of thirteen, one from each congressional district, to whom the -memorials should be referred, and who should report to the convention -a plan for the disestablishment of slavery. This motion was lost on -June 2.[50] June 6, Mr. Allen, of Sumner County, moved the appointment -of a committee of three, one from each division of the state, to draft -resolutions, giving reasons why the convention refused to consider the -petitions of the memorialists. After vain attempts to amend the motion, -it prevailed. The president of the convention appointed a committee of -three, consisting of Messrs. Allen, John A. McKinney, and Huntsman.[51] -Mr. Fogg of Davidson County, was substituted on the committee for Mr. -Allen, and Mr. McKinney was made chairman. On motion of Mr. McKinney, the -memorial on slavery was turned over to the committee. - -June 19, the committee reported through its chairman, Mr. John A. -McKinney. The report is very clever in its arguments and significant -for its admissions and professions. It was really a polite apology for -slavery. It gave the following as the main reasons that the convention -refused to consider the memorials on slavery: - - 1. That if Tennessee were to say that the children of all - slaves born after a specified time would become free at a - certain age, it would mean either that these slaves would be - sold to other slave states before they became free, or that - their masters would go there with them.[52] - - 2. That such congregating of slaves would aggravate their - situation and tend toward a servile war.[53] - - 3. “That in Tennessee, slaves are treated with as much humanity - as in any part of the world, where slavery exists. Here they - are well clothed and fed, and the labor they have to perform is - not grievous nor burdensome.”[54] - - 4. That the slaves of Tennessee do not want to leave the state - and that, if their wishes are respected, the prayers of the - memorialists will not be granted. - -This report admits that slavery is a great evil and utters the following -prophecy of its abolition: “The ministers of our holy religion will -knock at the door of the hearts of the owners of slaves, telling every -one of them to let his bondsman and his bondswoman go free, and to send -them back to the land of their forefathers, and the voice of these holy -men will be heard and obeyed, and even those who lend a deaf ear to the -admonitions in the hour of death, will, on a bed of sickness and at the -approach of death, make provision for the emancipation of their slaves, -and for their transportation to their home on the coast of Africa.”[55] -This report was adopted by the convention by a vote of 44 to 10. - -Mathew Stephenson, of Washington County, supported by John McGoughey, -Richard Bradshaw, and James Gillespey, prepared a protest to the -committee’s report in which they said: - - We believe that the importance of the subject, deeply - involving the interest and safety of the State, both in a - political and moral point of view, together with the number - and respectability of the memorialists, merited from this - convention a more respectful notice and consideration, than - merely to appoint a committee of three, with instructions to - give reasons why the convention would not take up and consider - the matter.[56] - -This protest from members of the Convention was supported by petitions -from the anti-slavery forces in the state. A petition from the citizens -of Jefferson called attention to some of the weaknesses of the report -of the committee of three, such as the admission of the great evil of -slavery, its subversiveness of republican institutions, the selling of -slaves to the more southern slaveholding states, the pitiable condition -of the free negroes, which was equally applicable to white men, and the -fallacy of the argument that Tennessee would ever be more favorable to -emancipation. - -The protest of this committee, re-enforced by these “loud and reiterated -calls, for at least some prospective relief from the evils” of slavery, -persuaded the convention to make a more detailed analysis of the -memorials of slavery in order to make its position clear to the people of -the state. On July 9, a motion was adopted to re-commit the memorials on -slavery to the committee of three for a second report. - -The second report of the Committee of three showed that there were 1804 -signatures to the memorials and that only 105 of these were designated -as slaveholders.[57] The report admitted that there might be some -signatures of slaveholders not so designated, but that such a number -was likely inconsiderable. The report showed that the slaveholding -petitioners did not represent the owners of five hundred slaves, and -probably not of half that number, while the owners of one hundred and -fifty thousand slaves were unrepresented by the memorialists. - -The memorialists represented the counties of Washington, Greene, -Jefferson, Cocke, Sevier, Blount, McMinn, Monroe, Knox, Rhea, Roane, -Overton, Bedford, Lincoln, Maury, and Robertson, distributed as -follows: two hundred and seventy-three in Washington; three hundred -and seventy-eight in Greene; thirty-three in Maury; sixty-seven in -Overton; twenty-four in Robertson; one hundred and five in Lincoln; one -hundred and thirty-nine in Bedford; and smaller numbers in the other -nine counties from which the petitions were presented.[58] The number -of memorialists was rather small as compared with the five hundred -and fifty thousand population of the state, and was almost entirely -unrepresentative of the slaveocracy of the state. - -The committee further showed that almost all the petitions presented a -plan of emancipation. About one-half of the memorialists asked that all -slave children born after 1835 be made free, and that all slaves in the -state be made free by 1855. They asked that all negroes be sent out of -the state. The other memorials asked that all the slaves be emancipated -by 1866 and colonized. - -The committee thought, “to assert that the hundred and fifty thousand -slaves now in this state, together with their increase, could be -emancipated and colonized in the short term of twenty-one or even -thirty-two years, with the aid of means at the command of the State, -is a proposition so full of absurdity, that no person in his sober -senses, who had taken any time to reflect on the subject, would possibly -maintain.”[59] - -This report was followed by another protest, July 21, made by a committee -consisting of Mathew Stephenson, Richard Bradshaw, and John McGoughey, -to the effect that the memorialists were not fairly treated by the -convention, and that the committee of three rather labored in its report -to ridicule their petitions instead of answering them by proposing some -constructive plan of abolition. - -Mr. Joseph Kincaid protested against the reference made in the second -report of the committee to the free negro. The report stated that, -“Unenviable as is the condition of the slave, unlovely as is slavery in -all its aspects, bitter as the draught may be that the slave is doomed to -drink, nevertheless, his condition is better than the condition of the -free man of color, in the midst of a community of white men with whom -he has no common interest, no fellow-feeling, no equality.”[60] “From -the above conclusions, which the committee arrived at in their report, -it would seem,” said Mr. Kincaid, “that they hold slavery to be a more -enviable situation, than that of freedom under the above circumstances: -Therefore, it would seem to follow, that those colored people, who are -now free, should be subjected to slavery, in order to better their -condition—and that slavery should be rendered perpetual.”[61] - -Despite the persistent efforts of a small though respectable minority in -behalf of abolition, it cannot be said that the convention at any stage -of its proceedings evinced any pronounced anti-slavery attitude. It was -more anti-negro than anti-slavery. It deplored the existence of slavery, -and indicated that in the course of time colonization might eliminate -slavery. In anticipation of a possible compensated emancipation, the -convention inserted a clause in the constitution by a vote of 30 to -27, forbidding the legislature to abolish slavery without the consent -of the owners and without paying them a money equivalent for the -slaves emancipated. It was later attempted to place a constitutional -prohibition on compensated emancipation, but it failed by a vote of 3 to -20.[62] - - -VI. ABOLITION SENTIMENT AFTER 1834. - -There continued to be anti-slavery forces in the state as long as slavery -existed. In 1835, there was organized at Rock Creek, in East Tennessee, -an abolition society that advocated immediate abolition. It was one -of three abolition societies at this time in the entire South, the -other two being in Virginia and Kentucky. This society lasted only two -years.[63] In 1836, fifty-five citizens of Rhea County sent a petition -to the legislature, protesting against a law that the legislature had -passed making it a penitentiary offence to receive abolition literature. -This protest states, “that said law is too bloody, too tyrannical and -too despotic to govern a free people which we profess to be in practice -and should be in theory.” The petitioners further state that they are -“opposed to the manner in which such law has curtailed our most sacred -privileges, the free communication of thought upon any subject provided -we tell the truth.”[64] The Maryville Intelligencer, issued at the seat -of Maryville College, published reports of the synods of the Presbyterian -Church, yet the editor remarked that “this publication, we must remember, -is after a law making it penal in Tennessee to receive any anti-slavery -paper or pamphlet, yes, making it a penitentiary offense to receive -this very report of the Kentucky Synod.”[65] Hon. John M. Lea made one -of the last anti-slavery addresses in Tennessee before the Apprentices’ -Union at Nashville in 1841.[66] In 1849, the Jonesboro Whig said: “In -Tennessee, the residence of James K. Polk, especially in East Tennessee, -anti-slavery sentiments are strong and decided.” The Knoxville Tribune -at this same time was publishing a series of papers on abolition, -advocating the calling of a constitutional convention to amend the -constitution to “open the way for the full and final redemption of the -state.”[67] - -A correspondent from Tennessee in the New York Observer, writing on -abolition in the state, said in 1849: - - The question is being a good deal agitated, and fully - discussed. Many who own slaves oppose the institution, and - non-slaveholders almost to a man. In my neighborhood of some - five miles square, there are about eighty families, and a - number of them own slaves, and there is but one advocate of - slavery. A slaveholder said, “It is of no use to avoid the - question any longer. The sooner it is settled the better, for - God has declared that right shall prevail, and slavery must - end.” Another individual who occupies a high station in society - said, “Agitate the question and anti-slavery will prevail.” - I might produce hundreds, yes, thousands of expressions of - opinion equally strong and decisive. The great difficulty seems - to be as to the means of getting rid of the evil.[68] - -While there was this anti-slavery minority expressing itself in an -intermittent way after 1834, the great majority of the state was -thoroughly pro-slavery. In 1835, Rev. Amos Dresser, an active member -of the Abolition Society of Ohio, was arrested in Nashville for -publishing and circulating pamphlets among the slaves to incite them -to insurrection. The Committee of Vigilance and Safety, consisting of -sixty-two citizens, tried him and found him guilty. He was sentenced to -receive twenty stripes on his bare back and to leave the city within -twenty-four hours. He received the flogging, and did not wait for the -expiration of the twenty-four hours.[69] - -Public meetings were generally held, denouncing such insurrectionists -and their accomplices. It was reported that Arthur Tappan and others of -New York City had furnished funds to aid the circulation of abolition -literature in the state. At one of these meetings held by the Committee -of Vigilance and Safety, the merchants of Tennessee were requested to -boycott Arthur Tappan and Company and all other abolitionists. These -incidents were largely responsible for the Act of 1836 mentioned above -and the Gag Resolution in Andrew Jackson’s administration. In the debate -in the Senate on the Calhoun Resolution, both of the senators from -Tennessee, Hugh Lawson White and Felix Grundy, defended the flogging -of Rev. Dresser. Senator Grundy advocated a “summary disposal of such -abolitionists.”[70] - -Tennessee was never a unit on the slavery question. There were scattered -groups of abolitionists throughout the state as long as slavery existed, -while East Tennessee was almost solidly anti-slavery. The contest over -slavery in the convention of 1834, in the churches, and in politics -created divisions among the people of the state that have had a permanent -influence upon the life of the state. - -It is singularly true, however, that Tennessee did finally abolish -slavery by popular vote. She was the only one of the Confederate States -that was excepted from President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation of -1863[71] and that abolished slavery by its own act. There was an attempt -to hold a convention of Union men in Nashville in the fall of 1864, but -the Confederate army in the vicinity of Nashville made it unsafe for -the convention to meet. It did meet January 8, 1865, and on the ninth -recommended that Article II, Section 31, of the Constitution of 1834, -to the effect that “the General Assembly shall have no power to pass -laws for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of their owner -or owners,” be abrogated and that slavery be abolished forever, and the -legislature be forbidden to re-establish property in man. These proposed -constitutional changes were submitted to popular vote of the Union men, -February 22, 1865, and Andrew Johnson as military governor of Tennessee -announced that the amendments had been adopted and that “the shackles -have been formally stricken from the limbs of more than 275,000 slaves in -the state.”[72] - -“The amended constitution of the State of Tennessee adopted on the 22nd -of February, 1865,” said Judge Shackelford in 1865, “prohibits slavery -or voluntary servitude, in the State of Tennessee, and it has forever -ceased to exist.”[73] It is clear, then, that his amendment was not the -ratification of President Lincoln’s Proclamation, which did not apply to -Tennessee, but was itself the act of emancipation by which the slaves of -Tennessee ceased to be property and became free men. - - -FOOTNOTES - -[1] Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 2. - -[2] Acts of 1829, Ch. 29, Sec. 1. A special legislative grant was -requisite for a valid emancipation in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, -and Mississippi. See James’ Dig., 398, Act of 1820; Prince’s Dig., 456, -Act of 1801; Toulman’s Dig., 632; Mississippi Rev. Code, 386. In North -Carolina and Tennessee, the courts granted emancipation—Haywood’s Manual, -525; Act of 1801, Ch. 27. In Kentucky, Missouri, Virginia, and Maryland, -the master exercised this power under rules and regulations established -by the statutes of these states. 2 Litt. and Swi., 1155; 2 Missouri Laws, -744; 1 Rev. Code of Virginia, 433; Maryland Laws, Act of 1809, Ch. 171. - -[3] Acts of 1854, Ch. 50, Sec. 1. - -[4] Petitions in State Archives. - -[5] Acts of 1801, Ch. 27, Sec. 3. - -[6] Ibid., Sec. 4. - -[7] Acts of 1784, Ch. 10, Sec. 7. - -[8] Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 119 (1834). - -[9] Acts of 1829, Ch. 29, Sec. 1. - -[10] Harris v. Clarissa, 6 Yerger, 227 (1834). - -[11] Acts of 1833, Ch. 81, Sec. 2. - -[12] Lewis v. Simonton, 8 Humphrey, 189 (1847). - -[13] Acts of 1784, Ch. 10, Sec. 7. - -[14] Lewis v. Simonton, 8 Humphrey, 189 (1847). - -[15] Wheeler, p. 385. - -[16] Ibid., p. 335. - -[17] Supra, p. 160. - -[18] Phillips, Ulrich Bonnel, American Negro Slavery, p. 120. - -[19] Nile’s Weekly Register, Vol. 14, pp. 321ff. - -[20] McFerrin, I, 150. - -[21] Southern History Association Publications, II, 108. - -[22] Indiana Historical Society Publications, Vol. 2, pp. 233ff. - -[23] Tennessee History Magazine, Vol. 1, p. 264. - -[24] Indiana Historical Society Publications, Vol. 2, p. 246. - -[25] Hoss, E. E., P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 11. - -[26] The Genius, II, 2. - -[27] Southern History Association Publications, II, 103. - -[28] Phelan, p. 233. - -[29] Southern History Association Publications, II, 104. - -[30] The Emancipator, March 8, 1838, p. 175. - -[31] Ibid., March 16, 1838, p. 178. - -[32] The Emancipator, March 16, 1838, p. 178. - -[33] Garrison’s Garrison, I, 88. - -[34] P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 8. - -[35] P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 22. - -[36] Temple, O. P., p. 91. - -[37] Weeks, S. R., Southern Quakers and Slavery, p. 239; see also Martin, -A. E., Tennessee History Magazine, Vol. I, p. 267. - -[38] Hoss, E. E., P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 7. - -[39] S. H. A. P., II, p. 104. - -[40] Swift, Lindsay, Life of Garrison, p. 60. - -[41] Earl, Thomas, Life of Benjamin Lundy, pp. 16-20. - -[42] Temple, p. 91. - -[43] Earl, p. 21. - -[44] Petitions of 1817, State Archives. - -[45] Petitions of 1815, State Archives. - -[46] Petitions of 1817, State Archives. - -[47] Petitions of 1819, State Archives. - -[48] The Nashville Republican, February 20, 1834. - -[49] Petitions of 1834, State Archives. - -[50] Journal of the Convention, p. 72. - -[51] Ibid., p. 89. - -[52] Journal of the Convention, p. 89. - -[53] Ibid., p. 90. - -[54] Ibid., p. 91. - -[55] Journal of the Convention, p. 93. - -[56] Ibid., p. 102. - -[57] Ibid., p. 125. - -[58] Journal of the Convention, p. 126. - -[59] Ibid., p. 127. - -[60] Journal of the Convention, p. 89. - -[61] Ibid., p. 225. - -[62] Ibid., p. 201; Constitution of 1834, Art. II, Sec. 31. - -[63] The Liberator, July 25, 1835; American Anti-Slavery Almanac, -December, 1836, p. 47. - -[64] Petitions of 1836, State Archives. - -[65] Quarterly Anti-slavery Magazine, II, 364. - -[66] Hale and Merritt, II, 300. - -[67] Ninth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, -1849, p. 52. - -[68] Hale and Merritt, II, 299. - -[69] Ibid., p. 300. - -[70] Fifth Annual Report of American Anti-slavery Society, 1838, pp. -72-73. - -[71] Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 658 (1870). - -[72] Acts of 1865, pp. IX-XIII. - -[73] Nelson v. Smithfeter, 2 Caldwell, 14 (1865). See also Graves v. -Keaton, 3 Caldwell, 14 (1866); Wharton v. The State, 5 Caldwell, 3 -(1867); Bedford v. Williams, 3 Caldwell, 210 (1867). - - - - -CHAPTER VIII - -CONCLUSIONS - - -The periods in the development of slavery in Tennessee are rather well -defined. The institution made no remarkable progress before 1790. Its -growth was slow and gradual. There were no special forces contributing -to its development. Only the mountainous part of the state was being -settled, and the cotton industry had not developed. The pioneers were -not in thought or manner of living favorable to slavery. They either -did their work single-handed, or combined with their neighbors in the -performance of the heavier phases of it. Slavery was not a controlling -factor, in a pioneer life characterized largely by hunting, fishing, -trading, and small farming. It was more or less a useless luxury, which -only the more fortunately situated could afford. Whatever progress -slavery made during this period was due to purely natural forces and -conditions. There were only 3,417 slaves in the state in 1790, and their -value was less than $100 each. - -From 1790 to 1835, slavery expanded very rapidly. In the first decade -of this period, the slave population increased 297.54 per cent; in the -second, 227.84 per cent; in the third, 79.87 per cent; and in the fourth, -76.76 per cent. There were 183,059 slaves in the state in 1840. Frontier -conditions were largely supplanted by a more prosperous society. Cotton -became the chief agricultural product of the state. West Tennessee, -the part of the state especially adapted to the production of cotton, -was settled during this period. Tobacco was profitably grown in Middle -Tennessee, with the aid of slave labor. The river valleys of East -Tennessee became cotton producing areas. Slavery in this period proved -to be a profitable labor system in by far the larger portion of the -state. This period is especially characterized by the growing economic -importance of slavery and the weakening of the abolition sentiment. The -slave was worth about $550 in 1835. The state reversed its policy toward -the free negro in 1831, disfranchised him in 1834, and refused in the -convention of 1834 even to consider abolition. - -From 1835 to 1855, there was practically one opinion in the state on -the slavery question. There was a dissenting minority, but it was so -inconsiderable as to be almost negligible. The prevailing opinion -was that abolition was impracticable. The slaves were not regarded -as being able to sustain themselves. They were not prepared for the -duties of citizenship. The state was not financially able to purchase -them and colonize them. It was held that any policy the state might -adopt would in its execution require the coöperation of the other -slaveholding states. The more seriously the problem was attacked, the -larger the proportions which it assumed. Slavery appeared from every -angle to be a permanent institution. This conclusion led to a policy of -safeguarding its interests, and improving the condition of the slaves. -Legislation restricting emancipation, preventing influx of free negroes, -and establishing voluntary enslavement was enacted. The change in the -attitude of the churches during this period enabled them to have more -influence over the slaveholders and to establish closer relations with -the slaves. The churches constantly insisted upon a humane treatment of -the slaves. - -There are several outstanding features of Tennessee slavery that deserve -special emphasis. The state, until the early thirties, may be ranked -along with Ohio and New England as an abolition center. Tennessee had -more abolition societies in 1825 than any other state in the Union except -North Carolina. In 1840, there were 5,524 free negroes in the state. -Maryville College, at Maryville, Tennessee, was a center of abolition -propaganda. Union University, at Murfreesboro, Tennessee, numbered active -abolitionists in its faculty. The state was the birth-place of the first -out-right abolition paper published in the United States, and it became -the connecting-link between Lundy and Garrison. The state sent a number -of anti-slavery leaders into Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. The Tennessee -churches were uniformly anti-slavery until they saw they were losing -their membership and were being ostracized from the proper contact -with the slaves. As long as slavery existed in the state, manumission -continued, despite legal restriction, as an expression of an active -anti-slavery sentiment. - -The slave’s legal status in Tennessee was exceptionably favorable. The -law guaranteed to him shelter, food, clothing, and medical attention. -It protected him against the violence of his master and of society. It -prevented avaricious masters from emancipating him when he ceased to be -productive and gave him the right to institute suit for his freedom. -It permitted him to contract for his freedom against administrators -of estates who were seeking to hold him in slavery. It furnished free -counsel for his defense when his interests were in jeopardy. It also gave -him trial by the same jury that the white man had. - -The patrol system was an elaborate system of government for a non-citizen -class. It was, however, a government of law. Its administrative agents -included searchers, patrols, magistrates, sheriffs, constables, masters -and mistresses. Every citizen was subject to patrol duty. These agents -enforced a code that reduced almost every activity and relation of -the slave to a basis of law. The patrol system was characterized by a -careful consideration of the slave’s weaknesses and, with its patriarchal -supervision, gave him a respect for authority that partially prepared -him to be a citizen in a government of law. It is singularly true that -Tennessee negroes today enjoy a greater participation in politics than -any other Southern negroes. The background for this status and friendly -attitude is to be found in the ante-bellum politics of the state. - -The finest expression of Tennessee’s attitude toward the negro slave is -found in the genuinely humane treatment accorded him. He was well fed, -clothed, and housed. The evils of the absentee landlord system with its -overseer and slave-driver were never prevalent. The small farmer was -considerate of his welfare. The churches constantly sought to improve -his condition. They reached him indirectly through their services. Their -influence manifested itself in charity, in marriage ceremonies, at the -sick-bed, in manumission societies, in the halls of legislation, and -in the benevolent philosophy of the Christian judge. Efforts at harsh -legislation were either defeated at the time or modified later by more -considered enactments. It has been abundantly shown, however, that it -was the courts of Tennessee that constituted the bulwark of protection -for the slave. They dealt with him not as a chattel but as a man. The -slave code became in their hands an opportunity and a means to humanize -the institution. They could not annul the law of slavery, but they did -largely abolish it in fact by their interpretation of it. - -The condition of the free negro was never promising. He was largely -always subject to certain legal restrictions. The system of registration -adopted in 1806, the exclusion act of 1831, and his disfranchisement -in 1834 were expressions of an increasing hostility toward him. He was -always a possible avenue through which the abolitionists might reach the -slave. This made him a menace to society. His association, therefore, -with slaves was forbidden by law. He was practically a social outcast. -The slaves regarded him as worthless. Finally, provision was made for his -re-enslavement. - - - - -BIBLIOGRAPHY - - -A. Sources. - -I. Records. - - 1. Colonial Papers 1661. - - 2. Colonial Entry Book No. 73. - - 3. Colonial Records of North Carolina, I-X (1662-1776). - - 4. State Records of North Carolina, XI-XXVI (1776-1790). - - 5. Journal of the Legislative Council of the Southwest - Territory (1794-1796). - - 6. Journal of the House of Representatives of the Southwest - Territory (1794-1795). - - 7. Annals of Congress, 17th Congress, 1st Session. - - 8. Annals of Tennessee, Ramsey, J. G. M., Philadelphia, 1860. - - 9. Whig Almanac for the years 1836, 1844, and 1848. - - 10. American Anti-slavery Almanac for 1836. - - 11. Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 33rd Congress; and 2nd - Session, 38th Congress. - -II. Documents. - - 1. The Constitution of North Carolina, 1776. - - 2. The Constitution of Franklin, 1785. - - 3. The Constitution of the United States, 1787. - - 4. The Constitution of Kentucky, 1799. - - 5. The Constitution of Tennessee, 1796. - - 6. The Constitution of Tennessee, 1834. - - 7. The Constitution of Tennessee, 1870. - - 8. Thorpe, Francis Newton, Federal and State Constitutions, 7 - vols., Washington, 1909. - - 9. MacDonald, William, Select Charters Illustrative of American - History, New York, 1904. - - 10. United States Census of 1850, I, Population. - - 11. Statistical Abstract of United States, 1906. - - 12. United States Statutes at Large, I. - - 13. United States Census of 1870, I, Population. - - 14. Colonial and State Statutes of North Carolina, Colonial - Records, Vols. XXIII-XXV (1715-1790). - - 15. Statutes of the Southwest Territory, 1790-1795. - - 16. Acts of Tennessee. - - a. Public Acts. - - 1st Sess. (1799), 1st Sess. (1801), 1st Sess. (1803), 1st Sess. - (1806), 1st Sess. (1807), 1st Sess. (1813), 1st Sess. (1815), - 1st Sess. (1817), 1st Sess. (1819), 1st Sess. (1821), 1st Sess. - (1823), 1st Sess. (1825), Extra Sess. (1826), 1st Sess. (1827), - 1st Sess. (1829), 1st Sess. (1831), 1st Sess. (1832), 1st Sess. - (1833), 1st Sess. (1835-6), 1st Sess. (1837-8), 1st Sess. - (1839), 1st Sess. (1839), 1st Sess. (1842), 1st Sess. (1843-4), - 1st Sess. (1846), 1st Sess. (1847-8), 1st Sess. (1849-50), 1st - Sess. (1851-2), 1st Sess. (1853-4), 1st Sess. (1855-6), 1st - Sess. (1857-8), 1st Sess. (1861), 1st Sess. (1865). - - b. Private Acts. - - Called Sess. (1824), 1st Sess. (1833). - -III. General Slave Treatises. - - 1. Dobb, T. R. R., Inquiry into the Law of Negro Slavery in the - United States, Philadelphia, 1858. - - 2. Goodell, William, The American Slave Code in Theory and - Practice, New York, 1853. - - 3. Hurd, John Codman, Laws of Freedom and Bondage, 2 Vols., - Boston, 1858-1862. - - 4. Straud, George M., Sketch of the Laws Relating to Slavery, - Philadelphia, 1856. - - 5. Wheeler, Jacob D., A Practical Treatise on the Law of - Slavery, New York, 1837. - -IV. North Carolina Codes. - - 1. Davis, James, Laws of North Carolina (this is really an - edition of Swann’s Laws), New Berne, 1752. - - 2. Iredell, James, Laws of North Carolina, Edenton, 1791. - - 3. Swann, Samuel, Laws of North Carolina, New Berne, 1752. - -V. Codes of Tennessee. - - 1. Caruthers, R. L., Laws of Tennessee, Nashville, 1810. - - 2. Caruthers, R. L., and Nicholson, A. O. P., Statutes of - Tennessee (1786-1836). - - 3. Haywood, John, Laws of Tennessee, Nashville, 1810. - - 4. Haywood, John, and Cobb, Robt. L., Laws of Tennessee, - Nashville, 1831. - - 5. Meigs, Return J., and Cooper, William F., Code of Tennessee, - Nashville, 1858. - - 6. Nicholson, A. O. P., Laws of Tennessee, Nashville, 1846. - - 7. Scott, Edward, Laws of Tennessee (1715-1820). - -VI. Court Reports of North Carolina and Tennessee. - - 1. Caldwell, Thomas H., 7 Vols. (1860-1870), Columbia, Mo., - 1906. - - 2. Hawks, Francis L., 3 Vols. (1821-1825), Winston, N. C., 1897. - - 3. Head, John W., 3 Vols. (1858-1859), Columbia, Mo., 1906. - - 4. Heiskell, Joseph B., 12 Vols. (1870-1874), Louisville, Ky., - 1903. - - 5. Humphrey, West H., 11 Vols. (1839-1851), Louisville, Ky., - 1903. - - 6. Lea, Benjamin J., 16 Vols. (1878-1886), Louisville, Ky., - 1902. - - 7. Martin, John H., and Yerger, George S., 1 Vol. (1827-1828), - Louisville, Ky., 1903. - - 8. Meigs, Return J., 1 Vol. (1838-1839), Louisville, Ky., 1903. - - 9. Sneed, John L. T., 5 Vols. (1853-1858), Columbia, Mo., 1906. - - 10. Yerger, George S., 10 Vols. (1818-1837), Columbia, Mo., - 1912. - -VII. Reports of the Comptroller to the General Assembly for the years -1850, 1855-6, 1856, 1857-8, and 1859-60. - -VIII. Reports, Proceedings, and Minutes. - - 1. Minutes of the American Convention for the years 1822, 1823, - 1825, 1827, 1829, 1830, 1848, 1852, 1860, and 1867 (1818-1867). - - 2. Minutes of the General Methodist Conferences, 1773-1844. - - 3. Minutes of the General Conferences of the Methodist Church - South, 1845-1865. - - 4. Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodists in - Tennessee, 1813-1865 (Quoted in McFerrin, History of Methodism - in Tennessee). - - 5. Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1845-1865. - - 6. Minutes of the Cumberland Presbyterian Assembly, 1811-1865. - - 7. Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, - 1795-1865. - - 8. The Fifth and Twenty-seventh Annual Reports of the American - Anti-slavery Society. - - 9. The Ninth and Thirteenth Annual Reports of the American and - Foreign Anti-slavery Society for the years 1849 ad 1853. - -IX. Periodicals. - - The Genius of Universal Emancipation, Vols. I, II, IV, V, VI, - VII, VIII. - - American Historical Magazine, II, IX, XXI. - - Publications of Vanderbilt Southern Historical Society, No. 2. - - Indiana Historical Society Publications, Vol. 2. - - The Tennessee History Magazine, Vols. 1, 2, and 4. - - Quarterly Anti-Slavery Magazine, Vols. 1, 2, and 4. - - Niles Register, Vols. 1-75 (1811-1849), Washington, Baltimore, - and Philadelphia. - - De Bow, J. D. B., Commercial Review of the South and West, 39 - Vols. (1846-1870), New Orleans. - - African Repository, Vols. V, VI, VII, IX, XXII, XXIII. XXIV, - XXV. - - American Historical Review, Vols. III, V. - - Publications of North Carolina Historical Commission, I. - - Political Science Quarterly, Vols. IX, XX. - - Southern History Association Publications, II. - - Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892. - - Methodist Quarterly Review, Vols. LVII and LXIII. - - The Liberator, July 25, 1835. - - The Emancipator (New York), March 8 and 16, 1838. - -X. Newspapers. - - The Aurora and General Advertiser, Memphis, September 3, 1802. - - Nashville Banner, Nashville, October 15 and November 16, 1833. - - The Knoxville Gazette, Knoxville, January 23, 1797. - - Christian Advocate and Journal, Bolivar, 1831. - - Tennessee Gazette and Mero District, Nashville, November 22, - 1805. - - The Practical Farmer and Mechanic, Somerville, 1857. - - Nashville Republican and State Gazette, Nashville, July 1, 5, - 10, 15, 28, 1834. - - The Western Freeman, Shelbyville, September 6, 1831. - - The Charleston Mercury, Charleston, S. C., April 30, 1861. - - Memphis Avalanche and Memphis Appeal, Memphis, May 9, 10, and - 11, 1861. - - Randolph Recorder, Vol. I, Covington, 1834. - - Memphis Enquirer, Vols. I and II, Memphis, 1836-1837. - - The Weekly American Eagle, Vols. II-V, Memphis, 1843-1847. - - The Memphis Daily Eagle, Vols. III-VII, 1846-1850. Memphis. - - The Tri-Weekly Memphis Enquirer, IV, 1846, Memphis. - - Memphis Daily Appeal, V, 1855, Memphis. - -XI. Petitions in the State Archives at Nashville in Manuscript covering -period 1809-1834. - -XII. Personal Writings and Reminiscences. - - 1. Cartwright, Peter, Autobiography, Edited by W. P. - Strickland, New York, 1892-1897. - - 2. Jefferson, Thomas, Writings, Edited by P. L. Ford, 10 Vols., - New York, 1892-1897. - - 3. Johnson, Rev. John and His House, Recollections, An - Autobiography, Edited by Mrs. Susannah Johnson, Nashville, 1869. - - 4. Otey, Rt. Rev. James H., Memoirs, Edited by W. M. Green, New - York, 1885. - - 5. Pendleton, James Madison. Reminiscences of a Long Life, - Louisville, 1891. - - 6. Sumner, Charles, Works, 15 Vols., Boston. 1874-1883. - - 7. Stirling, James, Letters from the Slave States, London, 1857. - - 8. Thomas, Thomas Ebenezer, Correspondence Mainly Relative - to the Anti-slavery Conflict in Ohio, especially in the - Presbyterian Church, Dayton, 1909. - - -B. Secondary Works. - -I. State Histories. - - 1. Caldwell, Joshua W., Constitutional History of Tennessee, - Cincinnati, 1895. - - 2. Caldwell, Joshua W., The Bench and Bar of Tennessee, - Knoxville, 1898. - - 3. Garret, W. R., and Goodpasture, A. V., History of Tennessee, - Nashville, 1900. - - 4. Goodspeed, History of Tennessee, Nashville, 1886. - - 5. Hale, William T., and Merrit, Dixon L., History of - Tennessee, Vol. 2, Chicago and New York, 1913. - - 6. Phelan, James, History of Tennessee, Boston, 1888. - - 7. Putnam, A. W., History of Middle Tennessee, Nashville, 1859. - - 8. Temple, Oliver P., East Tennessee and the Civil War, - Cincinnati, 1899. - -II. General Histories. - - 1. Adams, Alice D., Neglected Period of Anti-slavery in - America, 1808-1831, Boston, 1908. - - 2. Brickell, John, Natural History of North Carolina, Dublin, - 1911. - - 3. Doyle, J. A., The English Colonies in America, 5 Vols., New - York, 1888. - - 4. Hammond, M. B., The Cotton Industry, New York, 1897. - - 5. Ingraham, J. H., The Sunny South, Philadelphia, 1860. - - 6. Lecky, W. E. H., History of England in the Eighteenth - Century, 8 Vols., London, 1878-1890. - - 7. May, Sir Thomas Erskine, Constitutional History of England, - 3 Vols., New York, 1910. - - 8. Phillips, Ulrich Bonnel, American Negro Slavery, New York, - 1918. - - 9. Poole, William Frederick, Anti-slavery Opinions before 1800, - Cincinnati, 1873. - - 10. Rhodes, James Ford, History of the United States, 8 Vols., - New York, 1900-1919. - - 11. Roosevelt, Theodore, The Winning of the West, 4 Vols. - (Statesman Edition), New York, 1904. - -III. Biography. - - 1. Cartwright, Peter, Fifty Years a Presiding Elder, - Cincinnati, 1871. - - 2. Cossit, Franceway Ranna, The Life and Times of Rev. Finis - Ewing, Louisville, 1853. - - 3. Du Bose, Horace M., Life of Francis Asbury, Nashville, 1909. - - 4. Earl, Thomas, Life of Benjamin Lundy, Philadelphia, 1847. - - 5. Garrison, Wendell Phillips and J. F., The Life of William - Loyd Garrison, New York, 1885. - - 6. Green, Wm., Life and Letters of Rev. A. L. P. Green, - Nashville, 1877. - - 7. Milburn, W. H., Ten Years of a Preacher’s Life, Nashville, - 1859. - - 8. Paine, Robert, Life and Times of William McKendree, - Nashville, 1869. - - 9. Parton, James, Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, 2 Vols., - Boston, 1867. - - 10. Smith, G. G., The Life and Letters of James Osgood Andrew, - Nashville, 1883. - - 11. Swift, Lindsay, Life of Garrison, Philadelphia, 1911. - - 12. Tyerman, L., Life of Whitefield, New York, 1873. - - 13. Wightman, W. M., Life of William Capers, Nashville, 1859. - -IV. Church History. - - 1. American Church History Series, XI, XII, New York, 1894. - - 2. Bedford, A. H., History of the Organization of the Methodist - Episcopal Church, South, Nashville, 1871. - - 3. Briggs, Charles A., American Presbyterianism, New York, 1885. - - 4. Buckley, James M., History of Methodism, 2 Vols., New York - and London, 1898. - - 5. Curtis, George L., Manual of Methodist Episcopal Church - History, New York, 1840. - - 6. Emory, John, History of the Discipline of the Methodist - Episcopal Church, New York, 1840. - - 7. Finley, J. B., Sketch of Western Methodism, Cincinnati, 1854. - - 8. Gillet, E. H., History of Presbyterian Church in the United - States of America, Philadelphia, I and II, no date. - - 9. Harrison, W. P., The Gospel among the Slaves, Nashville, - 1893. - - 10. Matlock, L. C, The Anti-slavery Struggle and Triumph in the - Methodist Episcopal Church, New York, 1881. - - 11. Matlock, L. C., The History of American Slavery and - Methodism, 1780-1849, New York, 1849. - - 12. McConnell, S. D., History of American Episcopal Church, New - York, 1897. - - 13. McDonald, B. W., History of Cumberland Presbyterian Church, - Nashville, 1888. - - 14. McFerrin, J. B., History of Methodism in Tennessee, 3 - Vols., Nashville, 1869. - - 15. McNeilly, James H., Religion and Slavery, Nashville, 1911. - - 16. McTyeire, H. N., History of Methodism, Nashville, 1904. - - 17. Newman, A. H., History of Baptist Churches in the United - States, New York, 1894. - - 18. Patton, Jacob Harris, Popular History of the Presbyterian - Church, New York, 1900. - - 19. Pius, N. H., An Outline of Baptist History, Nashville, 1911. - - 20. Price, R. N., Holston Methodism, 5 Vols., Nashville, 1912. - - 21. Riley, B. F., History of the Baptists in Southern States - East of the Mississippi, Philadelphia, 1898. - - 22. Thompson, Robert Ellis, History of Presbyterian Churches in - the United States, New York, 1895. - - 23. Weeks, S. B., Southern Quakers and Slavery, Baltimore, 1896. - - - - -APPENDICES - - -A. ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETIES OF TENNESSEE. - -I. Tennessee Manumission Society 1815. - - County Branches: Blount, Greene, Washington, Jefferson, Knox. - - Local Branches: Bethesda, Beaver Creek, Carter’s Station, - Chestooy, Dumplin Creek, French Broad, Hickory Creek, Holston, - Knoxville, Little River, Maryville, Middle Creek, Mount Gilead, - Nolachucky, Powell’s Valley, Stock Creek. Turkey Creek, and - Rock Creek. - -II. Humane Protection Society of Tennessee, 1821. - -III. Moral, Religious Manumission Society of Tennessee, 1821. - -IV. Emancipating Labor Society, 1826. - - -B. TENNESSEE COLONIZATION SOCIETY, 1829. - - Branches: Bolivar, Somerville, Memphis, Covington, Jackson, - Paris, Clarksville, Columbia, Shelbyville, Winchester, - Murfreesboro, Gallatin, Knoxville, Marysville, New Market, - Jonesboro, Kingsport, Rutherford, Franklin. - - -C. ANTI-SLAVERY LEADERS IN TENNESSEE - - Anderson, Robert - Brazelton, Santy - Boyd, James - Brooks, Stephen - Buckhart, George - Caldwell, James - Cain, Joseph - Callen, Archibald - Campbell, Alexander - Canaday, John - Cartwright, Peter - Coppock, Aaron - Coulson, John - Cowan, Andrew - Criswell, Andrew - Cummings, James - Daily, Hiram - Dalzel, David - Earnest, Lawrence - Earnest, Wesley - Embree, Elihu - Embree, Elijah - Frazier, Abner - Galbraith, James - Garrett, William - Gray, Asa - Hackney, Aaron - Hammer, Aaron - Hammer, Isaac - Hammer, Elisha - Harrison, Isaiah - Harris, John - Hodge, Thomas - Hooks, John - Houston, James - Huffaker, Justice - Kerr, John - Kendall, T. S. - Kennedy, James - Lee, William - Lee, Ephriam - Leeper, Allen - Lindsey, Philip - Lockhart, Jesse - Logan, Alexander - Lundy, Benjamin - Malcum, William - Mainess, Samuel - Marshall, John - Maulsby, David - McCampbell, James - McClellan, James - McCarkle, Francis - McKeen, Thomas H. - Deadrick, David - Doak, Samuel - Dean, Thomas - Eggleston, Elijah - Newman, Joseph - Osborn, Charles - Osborn. J. - Pardae, John - Pickering, Ellis - Pickering, Enos - Rankin, John - Rencan, Thomas - Roberts, William - Roy, Rev. John - Jones, James - Jones, Isaac - Jones, Isaiah - Jones, Thomas - Johnson, Josiah - Smith, Isaac - Snoddy, William - Stanfield, David - Swain, Elihu - Swain, John - Swan, John - Tuckers, Joseph - Underhill, Richard - Underhill, Jesse - McNees, Samuel - Milliken, William - Moore, John - Morgan, John - Wilkins, J. H. - Williams, John - Williams, Richard - Willis, Jesse - Wills, George - Wilson, P. N. - Woods, W. W. - Yerkley, Henry - - -D. LIST OF EMIGRANTS TO LIBERIA FROM TENNESSEE, 1820-1866. - - Ship Date No. of Emigrants - - Ship Harriet January, 1829 2 - Brig Liberia December, 1823 13 - Ship Roanoke December, 1832 1 - Brig Ajax May, 1833 5 - Schooner Oriental May, 1837 34 - Brig Rudolph Gronning February, 1841 10 - Barque Union May, 1841 10 - Ship Mariposa June, 1842 84 - Barque Rothschild January, 1846 25 - Schooner D. C. Foster March, 1850 35 - Liberia Packet December, 1850 15 - Brig Alida February, 1851 18 - Liberia Packet December, 1851 25 - Brig Julia Ford January, 1852 13 - Brig Zebra December, 1852 28 - Bark Adeline June, 1853 96 - Brig General Pierce December, 1853 85 - Ship Sophia Walker May, 1854 28 - Brig Harp June, 1854 21 - Brig General Pierce December, 1854 17 - Bark Cora. May, 1855 13 - Bark Cora November, 1855 31 - Ship Elvira Owen May, 1856 42 - Ship M. C. Stephens December, 1856 13 - Ship M. C. Stephens May, 1857 23 - Ship M. C. Stephens November, 1859 21 - Ship M. C. Stephens May, 1860 8 - Golconda November, 1866 144 - - -E. VICE-PRESIDENTS OF AMERICAN COLONIZATION SOCIETY FROM TENNESSEE. - - Andrew Jackson. 1819-1822 - Rt. Rev. Bishop Otey. 1840-1863 - Rev. Dr. Edgar. 1845-1861 - Rev. P. Lindsley, D.D. 1845-1854 - Bishop Soule, D.D. 1848-1867 - Hon. Frederick P. Stanton. 1851-1858 - Hon. John Bell. 1861-1868 - - -F. COMPARATIVE LIST OF MANUMISSION SOCIETIES AND MEMBERS IN UNITED STATES. - - Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New York 4 300 - Pennsylvania (East) 4 400 - Pennsylvania (West) 12 500 - Delaware 2 100 - Maryland 11 500 - District of Columbia 2 100 - Virginia 8 250 - Ohio 4 300 - Kentucky 8 200 - Tennessee 25 1,000 - North Carolina 50 3,000 - --- ----- - 130 6,625 - -Exclusive of ten or twelve societies in Illinois. Observe that 106 of -these societies were in slaveholding states. - - -G. SLAVE AND FREE NEGRO POPULATION IN TENNESSEE FROM 1790-1860. - - 1790. 3,417 361 - 1800. 13,584 309 - 1810. 44,734 1,318 - 1820. 80,105 2,739 - 1830. 141,647 4,511 - 1840. 183,059 5,524 - 1850. 239,439 6,442 - 1860. 275,719 7,300 - - -H. COMPARATIVE VALUE OF LAND AND SLAVES IN THE THREE DIVISIONS OF -TENNESSEE, 1859. - - Land Town Lots Slaves - - East Tennessee $ 46,127,012 $ 3,044,802 $ 10,470,926 - Mid. Tennessee 114,053,549 5,832,718 55,850,579 - West Tennessee 52,640,432 20,893,338 44,638,752 - ----------- ---------- ---------- - 212,820,993 29,770,858 110,960,257 - - Other - Property Aggregate - - East Tennessee $ 4,333,845 $ 64,186,514 - Mid. Tennessee 13,229,968 188,867,004 - West Tennessee 5,030,225 124,155,123 - ---------- ----------- - 22,594,038 377,208,641 - - -I. APPROXIMATE VALUE OF PROPERTY, SLAVES, LAND, AND COTTON IN TENNESSEE. - - Year Property Slaves Per Acre Per Lb. - Land Cotton - - 1836. $117,845,136 $584.00 $4.00 $.17½ - 1838. 125,013,756 540.00 3.82 .13½ - 1840. 122,957,624 543.00 3.84 .09 - 1842. 118,847,672 509.00 3.56 .08 - 1844. 109,178,121 420.00 3.35 .07½ - 1846. 113,176,959 413.72 3.03 .05½ - 1848. 129,510,043 467.44 3.06 .09½ - 1850. 159,558,183 506.93 3.25 .12 - 1852. 186,621,119 547.26 3.84 .11 - 1854. 219,011,047 605.52 4.60 .12 - 1856. 260,319,611 689.00 5.49 .12½ - 1858. 320,398,012 792.23 7.04 .14 - 1859. 377,208,641 854.65 8.19 .15 - - -J. CLASSIFICATION OF SLAVE HOLDERS IN TENNESSEE AND THE UNITED STATES, -1860. - - Holders of Tennessee United States - 1 7,820 76,670 - 2 4,738 45,934 - 3 3,609 34,747 - 4 3,012 28,907 - 5 2,536 24,225 - 6 2,066 20,600 - 7 1,783 17,235 - 8 1,565 14,852 - 9 1,260 12,511 - 10 to 15 3,779 40,367 - 15 to 20 1,744 21,315 - 20 to 30 1,623 20,789 - 30 to 40 643 9,648 - 40 to 50 284 5,179 - 50 to 70 219 5,217 - 70 to 100 116 3,149 - 100 to 200 40 1,980 - 200 to 300 6 224 - 300 to 500 1 74 - 500 to 1000 0 13 - 1000 and over 0 1 - -These figures are for the United States, exclusive of territories and -District of Columbia. - - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEGRO IN TENNESSEE, -1790-1865 *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/67473-0.zip b/old/67473-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b032231..0000000 --- a/old/67473-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/67473-h.zip b/old/67473-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f9cf8e7..0000000 --- a/old/67473-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/67473-h/67473-h.htm b/old/67473-h/67473-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 8515023..0000000 --- a/old/67473-h/67473-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,14732 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Negro in Tennessee, 1790-1865, by Caleb Perry Patterson. - </title> - - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - -<style type="text/css"> - -a { - text-decoration: none; -} - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -h1,h2,h3,h4,h5 { - text-align: center; - clear: both; -} - -h1 { - margin-top: 2em; -} - -h2.nobreak { - page-break-before: avoid; -} - -hr.chap { - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - clear: both; - width: 65%; - margin-left: 17.5%; - margin-right: 17.5%; -} - -div.chapter { - page-break-before: always; -} - -ul { - list-style-type: none; - text-align: left; -} - -li { - margin-top: .5em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -p { - margin-top: 0.5em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: 0.5em; - text-indent: 1em; -} - -table { - margin: 1em auto 1em auto; - max-width: 40em; - border-collapse: collapse; -} - -th { - padding-left: 0.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - font-weight: normal; -} - -td { - padding-left: 2.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - vertical-align: top; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.tdr { - text-align: right; -} - -.tdpg { - vertical-align: bottom; - text-align: right; -} - -.total { - border-top: thin solid black; - text-align: right; -} - -td span.fraction { - padding-right: 1em; -} - -.blockquote { - margin: 1.5em 10%; -} - -.bold { - font-weight: bold; -} - -.center { - text-align: center; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - -.fm { - margin: auto; - max-width: 35em; -} - -.footnotes { - margin-top: 1em; - border: dashed 1px; -} - -.footnote { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; - font-size: 0.9em; -} - -.footnote .label { - position: absolute; - right: 84%; - text-align: right; -} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: none; -} - -.hanging p { - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.larger { - font-size: 150%; -} - -.noindent, .hanging .noindent { - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.pagenum { - position: absolute; - right: 4%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; - font-style: normal; -} - -.right { - text-align: right; -} - -.smaller { - font-size: 80%; -} - -.smcap { - font-variant: small-caps; - font-style: normal; -} - -.allsmcap { - font-variant: small-caps; - font-style: normal; - text-transform: lowercase; -} - -.tb { - margin-top: 2em; -} - -.titlepage { - text-align: center; - margin-top: 3em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.x-ebookmaker img { - max-width: 100%; - width: auto; - height: auto; -} - -.x-ebookmaker .blockquote { - margin: 1.5em 5%; -} - </style> - </head> -<body> -<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Negro in Tennessee, 1790-1865, by Caleb Perry Patterson</p> -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online -at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you -are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this eBook. -</div> - -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: The Negro in Tennessee, 1790-1865</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em;'>University of Texas Bulletin, No. 2205: February 1, 1922.</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: Caleb Perry Patterson</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: February 22, 2022 [eBook #67473]</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p> - <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: Charlene Taylor and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)</p> -<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEGRO IN TENNESSEE, 1790-1865 ***</div> - -<div class="fm"> - -<p class="center larger">Publications of the University of Texas</p> - -<p class="center">Publications Committee:</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 25em;"> - -<ul> -<li><span class="smcap">Frederic Duncalf</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">G. C. Butte</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">Killis Campbell</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">F. W. Graff</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">J. L. Henderson</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">E. J. Mathews</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">H. J. Muller</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">A. E. Trombly</span></li> -<li><span class="smcap">Hal C. Weaver</span></li> -</ul> - -</div> - -<p>The University publishes bulletins four times a month, -so numbered that the first two digits of the number show -the year of issue, the last two the position in the yearly -series. (For example, No. 2201 is the first bulletin of the -year 1922.) These comprise the official publications of the -University, publications on humanistic and scientific subjects, -bulletins prepared by the Bureau of Extension, by the -Bureau of Economic Geology and Technology, and other bulletins -of general educational interest. With the exception -of special numbers, any bulletin will be sent to a citizen of -Texas free on request. All communications about University -publications should be addressed to University Publications, -University of Texas, Austin.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_1"></a>[1]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage">University of Texas Bulletin<br /> -<span class="smaller">No. 2205: February 1, 1922</span></p> - -<h1>THE NEGRO IN TENNESSEE, 1790-1865</h1> - -<p class="titlepage larger"><span class="smaller">BY</span><br /> -CALEB PERRY PATTERSON<br /> -<span class="smaller">Adjunct Professor of Government in the University of Texas</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter titlepage" style="width: 200px;"> -<img src="images/u-texas-seal.jpg" width="200" height="200" alt="Seal of the University of Texas" /> -</div> - -<p class="titlepage">PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY FOUR TIMES A MONTH, AND ENTERED AS<br /> -SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POSTOFFICE AT AUSTIN, TEXAS,<br /> -UNDER THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_2"></a>[2]</span></p> - -<div class="fm"> - -<p>The benefits of education and of -useful knowledge, generally diffused -through a community, are essential -to the preservation of a free government.</p> - -<p class="right">Sam Houston</p> - -<p class="tb">Cultivated mind is the guardian -genius of democracy.... It is the -only dictator that freemen acknowledge -and the only security that freemen -desire.</p> - -<p class="right">Mirabeau B. Lamar</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_3"></a>[3]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak">CONTENTS</h2> - -</div> - -<table summary="Contents"> - <tr> - <td colspan="5">Preface</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#PREFACE">7-8</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">I.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Introduction of Slavery into Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_I">9-24</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">The status of the negro in North Carolina, 1693-1790</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_12">12-21</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">Privileges</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_12">12-18</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">Restrictions</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_18">18-21</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">The status of the negro in the Franklin State, 1785-1788</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_22">22-23</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">III.</td> - <td colspan="3">The status of the negro in the Southwest Territory, 1790-1796</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_23">23-24</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">II.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">The Status of the Slave in Tennessee, 1796-1865</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_II">25-58</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Privileges of Slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_25">25-30</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">Hunting</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_25">25-26</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">Travel</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_26">26</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">C.</td> - <td colspan="2">Suits for freedom</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_26">26-28</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">D.</td> - <td colspan="2">Trial by Jury</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_28">28-30</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">Disabilities of Slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_30">30-33</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">III.</td> - <td colspan="3">Relations of Master and Society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_34">34-38</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">Liabilities of the master to society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_34">34-36</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">1.</td> - <td>For his own acts</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_34">34-35</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">2.</td> - <td>For the acts of his slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_35">35-36</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">Liabilities of society to the master</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_36">36-38</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Patrol System</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_38">38-41</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">V.</td> - <td colspan="3">Special Problems of Slave Government</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_41">41-52</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">The runaway</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_41">41-43</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">Importation of slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_43">43-44</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">C.</td> - <td colspan="2">The stealing of slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_44">44-45</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">D.</td> - <td colspan="2">Trading with slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_46">46-49</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">E.</td> - <td colspan="2">Insurrections</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_49">49-50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">F.</td> - <td colspan="2">Unlawful assembly of slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_50">50-51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">G.</td> - <td colspan="2">Punishment of slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_51">51-52</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">VI.</td> - <td colspan="3">Title of Slaves</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_52">52-55</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">VII.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Law of Increase</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_55">55-56</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">VIII.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Legal Status of the Slave</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_56">56-58</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">III.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Economics of Slavery in Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_III">59-79</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">Slavery an Expression of the Soil</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_59">59-64</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Management of the Plantation</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_64">64-72</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">III.</td> - <td colspan="3">Was Slavery Profitable in Tennessee?</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_72">72-79</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">IV.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Anti-Slavery Societies</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_IV">80-101</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Tennessee Manumission Society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_80">80-89</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Humane Protecting Society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_89">89</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_4"></a>[4]</span>III.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Emancipation Labor Society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_89">89-91</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Moral, Religious Manumission Society of West Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_91">91-94</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">V.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Tennessee Colonization Society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_94">94-101</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">V.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">The Religious and Social Aspects of Slavery</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_V">102-152</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Methodists</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_104">104-125</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Baptists</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_125">125-131</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">III.</td> - <td colspan="3">Cumberland Presbyterians</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_131">131-136</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Friends</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_136">136-139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">V.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Presbyterians</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_139">139-148</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">VI.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Episcopalians</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_148">148-152</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">VI.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">The Legal Status of the Free Negro</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VI">153-175</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Establishment of a Policy</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_153">153-160</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">The policy of North Carolina</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_153">153</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">The policy of Tennessee in 1831</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_153">153</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">C.</td> - <td colspan="2">Changes in the policy from 1831 to 1865</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_153">153-160</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">System of Registration of Free Negroes</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_161">161-162</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">III.</td> - <td colspan="3">Protection of Free Negroes</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_162">162</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td> - <td colspan="3">Suffrage for Free Negroes</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_162">162-173</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">In North Carolina</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_162">162-164</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">In the Convention of 1796</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_164">164-167</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">C.</td> - <td colspan="2">From 1796 to 1834</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_167">167-168</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">D.</td> - <td colspan="2">Its abolition by the Convention of 1834</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_168">168-173</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">V.</td> - <td colspan="3">Limitations upon the freedom of free negroes</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_173">173</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">VI.</td> - <td colspan="3">The Status of the Free Negro</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_174">174-175</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">VII.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Abolition</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VII">176-198</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">Private Abolition</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_176">176-180</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="2">Methods</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_176">176-179</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">(1)</td> - <td>By Deed.</td> - <td class="tdpg"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">(2)</td> - <td>By Will.</td> - <td class="tdpg"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">(3)</td> - <td>By Bill of Sale.</td> - <td class="tdpg"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">(4)</td> - <td>By Implication.</td> - <td class="tdpg"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">(5)</td> - <td>By Effect of Foreign Laws.</td> - <td class="tdpg"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr"></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="2">Extent of Emancipation in Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_179">179-180</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">II.</td> - <td colspan="3">Anti-slavery Leaders</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_180">180-185</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">III.</td> - <td colspan="3">Abolition Literature</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_185">185-187</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">IV.</td> - <td colspan="3">Petitions to the Legislature for Abolition</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_187">187-189</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">V.</td> - <td colspan="3">Abolition in the Convention of 1834</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_189">189-195</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">VI.</td> - <td colspan="3">Abolition Sentiment after 1834</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_195">195-198</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">VIII.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Conclusions</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VIII">199-202</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">IX.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Bibliography</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#BIBLIOGRAPHY">202-209</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_5"></a>[5]</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr bold">X.</td> - <td colspan="4" class="bold">Appendices</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#APPENDICES">209-213</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">A.</td> - <td colspan="3">Anti-Slavery Societies of Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_209">209</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">B.</td> - <td colspan="3">Tennessee Colonization Society</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_209">209</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">C.</td> - <td colspan="3">Anti-Slavery Leaders in Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_210">210</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">D.</td> - <td colspan="3">List of Emigrants</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_210">210-211</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">E.</td> - <td colspan="3">Vice-President of American Colonization Society from Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_211">211</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">F.</td> - <td colspan="3">Comparative List of Manumission Societies and Members in the United States</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_211">211</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">G.</td> - <td colspan="3">Slave and Free Negro Population in Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_212">212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">H.</td> - <td colspan="3">Comparative Value of Land and Slaves in the Three Divisions of Tennessee, 1859</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_212">212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">I.</td> - <td colspan="3">Approximate Value of Property, Slaves, Land, and Cotton in Tennessee, 1859</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_212">212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">J.</td> - <td colspan="3">Classification of Slaveholders in Tennessee and the United States, on the basis of number of slaves held, 1860</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#Page_213">213</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_6"></a>[6]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_7"></a>[7]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PREFACE">PREFACE</h2> - -</div> - -<p>This work was undertaken to discover the exact status -of the negro in one of the border states. An effort has -been made to give definite information as to the legal, social, -economic, and religious condition of the negro from his introduction -into slavery in Colonial Western North Carolina -to the abolition of slavery in Tennessee in 1865.</p> - -<p>The study reveals the struggles of the slave from a status -of servitude under the common law through the institution -of slavery regulated by an extensive slave-code into the -final condition of an almost helpless citizen with a responsibility -for which he was only partially prepared.</p> - -<p>The status of the free negro is also established in his relations -to both the slave and the whites. It was rather disappointing -to find that the free negro was more disadvantageously -situated than the slave. He never attained either -civil or political equality, although he exercised the suffrage -until 1834. He was subject to a special code different -from either the slave code or the regular code.</p> - -<p>It is clear, however, that the negro, whether slave or free, -was making progress. He was receiving an industrial -training without which he could never have sustained himself -without help, when freedom came. His training for -active participation in the body politic was negligible. He -was taught the lesson of being obedient to law.</p> - -<p>A constructive part of the study is the disclosure of a -large body of loyal friends of the negro in all his stages of -development. These consisted of not only the abolitionists, -the Friends, and the anti-slavery forces generally, but of -more conservative individuals who saw that the negro could -be fitted for freedom only by a gradual process. The courts -of the state deserve special mention in this connection.</p> - -<p>The study has been a difficult one to make because of the -scarcity of the sources and the deplorable condition of those -that were available. The county records of Tennessee have -either been burned, thrown away, or thrown together in -heaps in the basement of county court houses. The state<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_8"></a>[8]</span> -archives are in the attic of the Tennessee Capitol, covered -with dust, and are practically inaccessible for any thorough -study. The statutes of the state, records of courts, reports -of anti-slavery societies, church minutes, petitions, slave -codes, periodicals, travels, reminiscences, and newspapers -are the principal sources consulted. A goodly number of -general, state, and church histories and biographies proved -useful for general information.</p> - -<p>The work was begun under the direction of Professors -Jernegan and Dodd of the University of Chicago, and continued -under the guidance of Professor Albert Bushnell Hart -of Harvard, Professor U. B. Phillips of the University of -Michigan, and Professor William A. Dunning of Columbia -University. Professor B. B. Kendrick of Columbia University -was especially helpful in organizing the material. -But for the stimulating and sympathetic assistance of these -men, the study could not have been completed. The author -alone is responsible for any errors of fact and the conclusions.</p> - -<p class="right"><span class="smcap">Caleb Perry Patterson.</span></p> - -<p>The University of Texas, Austin, Texas.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_9"></a>[9]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_I">CHAPTER I<br /> -<span class="smcap">Introduction</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>The introduction of slavery into Tennessee was a part of -the westward movement of colonization. It had passed the -experimental stage of its development in North Carolina -before Tennessee acquired an independent political existence.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> -Its economic, social, and legal aspects had largely -been determined before Tennessee was even settled.<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> As a -system of labor, it had proved a valuable adjunct to the -sturdy pioneers in converting the wilderness of North Carolina -into a growing community that began immediately to -look forward to statehood.<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> As a social institution, it had -been left primarily to the regulation of custom. As a problem -of government, an elaborate code had been enacted for -its control. Its establishment and regulation in North Carolina -prior to 1790 constitute, therefore, the genesis of this -study.</p> - -<p>Negro slaves were brought into North Carolina in 1663 -by Virginia immigrants who planted a settlement on the -Albemarle River.<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> A group of more thrifty Virginians, -with a large number of slaves, settled in the central part of -the state about the middle of the eighteenth century.<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> A -number of small farmers came to the western part of the -state with their slaves at about the same time.<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> It is impossible<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_10"></a>[10]</span> -to state the exact number of slaves owned by these -early settlers.</p> - -<p>The opportuneness of these settlements is shown by a -number of conditions. The contest between negro slavery -and white servitude had been settled in favor of slavery. -The Tuscorora Indians, the implacable enemies of negroes, -were driven out of the colony in 1772. The moral evils of -slavery had not appeared.<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> The English government in -1663, by chartering the Royal African Company to engage -in the slave trade, became interested in the development of -slavery, and, thereafter, discouraged the importation of -indented servants into the colonies in order that this company -might have a larger market for slaves.<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> It was early -recognized that the industrial life of the colonies offered -practically no place to the white servant at the expiration -of his indenture. He was not financially able to purchase -land and white servants or negro slaves, necessary to farming, -nor could he find employment in the villages and small -towns, because they were not sufficiently industrialized at -this time to offer such opportunities.</p> - -<p>These influences produced a rapid increase in the slave -population of the colonies. In 1709, Rev. John Adams, a -missionary, reported 800 slaves in North Carolina.<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> In -1717, there were 1,100 slaves out of a taxable population of -2,000.<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> Governor Burrington stated that there were 6,000 -in 1730.<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> The census of 1754 showed a population of 9,128 -slaves. In 1756, there were 10,800 negro taxables and as -the ratio of taxable negroes (those of the age of twelve -and above) to the total negro population was about ten to -eighteen, there must have been, at this time, approximately -20,000 slaves in the colony. There were 39,000 in 1767.<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_11"></a>[11]</span></p> - -<p>It is probable that the first slave was brought into Tennessee -in 1766. There are court records which show that -slaves were a part of an estate in Washington County in -1788. When John Sevier moved to Nolachucky in 1788, -he owned slaves. James Robertson brought a “negro fellow” -to Nashville in 1779. John Donelson was accompanied -by negroes on his famous voyage to Nashville in the -winter of 1779-80.<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> A court record, dated November, 1788, -at Jonesboro, Tennessee, shows that Andrew Jackson owned -a slave when he was only twenty-one years of age.<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> On the -sixth of September, 1794, a negro belonging to Peter Turner -was stolen by the Indians near the Sumner Court House.<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> -Miss Jane Thomas, who came with her parents to Nashville -in 1804, tells an interesting story of a prominent negro, who -was highly regarded by the whites.<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> There was also in -Nashville in 1805, a famous “Black Bob” who ran a tavern. -So it is seen that slaves accompanied the westward movement -into Tennessee, and that some of them became rather -prominent free negroes. In 1796, when the census of the -Southwest Territory was taken to ascertain if it contained -sufficient inhabitants to be admitted into the Union as a -state, it had a population of 77,262, of which 10,613 were -slaves.<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> The population of East Tennessee was 65,339, -of which twelve and one-half per cent were slaves. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_12"></a>[12]</span> -population of West Tennessee (now Middle Tennessee) was -11,824, of which twenty per cent were slaves.<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p> - -<p>The legal basis of slavery developed contemporary with -the expansion of settlement toward the western part of the -colony. The famous law of 1741 is regarded as the basis -of the slave code of North Carolina, although the Act of -1715 marks the beginning of slave legislation in this colony. -The laws of North Carolina were, in 1790, made the legal -basis of the government of the Southwest Territory,<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> which -became the State of Tennessee in 1796. These laws constitute -the beginnings of the slave code of Tennessee. The common -law status of the negro was, in this introductory period, -gradually changed to a statutory basis. This development -took, primarily, the form of granting privileges to, and placing -restrictions upon, the negro. There were three political -organizations that participated in this development: North -Carolina, the State of Franklin, and the Southwest Territory.</p> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">The Status of the Negro in North Carolina from -1693-1790</span></h3> - -<h4>A. <span class="allsmcap">PRIVILEGES</span>—</h4> - -<p>1. <i>Hunting</i>: Slaves were permitted to hunt on their -masters’ plantations, but, by the Act of 1729, were prohibited -from hunting elsewhere unless they were accompanied -by a white man.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> If the slaves violated this restriction, the -master paid a fine of twenty shillings to the owner of the -land on which the slaves were hunting. Slaves were not -permitted to be armed in any way, or hunt anywhere, unless -they held a certificate from their master, granting this -privilege. Any citizen could seize an armed slave and deliver -him to a constable whose duty it was to administer -twenty lashes on the slave’s naked back. The master was -charged a fee on recovering such a slave.<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_13"></a>[13]</span></p> - -<p>The master was permitted to send a slave on business -missions, or to designate one slave to hunt on his plantation, -to care for his stock, or to kill game for his family; but this -could only be done by the master’s securing, from the Chairman -of the County Court, a permit which specified the slave -that was granted such privileges. This was an ineffectual -regulation, and in 1753, the master was required to give -bond to the County Court, with good security, to guarantee -the county against damages that might be done by a slave -enjoying any special privileges.<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> Such permission was -granted only during the time of cultivation or harvesting -of crops.</p> - -<p>This act empowered the justices of the county courts to -district their counties and appoint three freeholders as -searchers in each district, who, under a very strict oath,<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> -were to disarm the slaves of their district. These persons -were exempted from services as constables, jurors, on the -roads, and in the militia, and from the payment of county -and parish taxes.<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> This legislation laid the foundation -for the patrol system of North Carolina and Tennessee.</p> - -<p>Slaves were especially prohibited from killing wild deer, -either on their own initiative or by command of their -masters or overseers.<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> For violation of this inhibition, -they suffered punishment in the first instance, and their -masters or overseers in the second. This prohibition was -constantly strengthened by later legislation.<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> These restrictions -were intended to prevent damages to crops, and to -limit the opportunities of the slaves to run away and -organize insurrections. By these acts, masters were made<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_14"></a>[14]</span> -very largely responsible for the peace and welfare of the -community.</p> - -<p>2. <i>Travel</i>: The slave was permitted to travel, in the -daytime, “the most usual and accustomed road”; but he subjected -himself to a whipping, not exceeding forty lashes, if -he violated this restriction.<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> He was not permitted to -travel at night or visit the quarters of other slaves. He was -subject to forty lashes, and the visited slave twenty lashes, -for violation of this regulation. Masters, however, were -not prohibited from sending their slaves on business missions -with written permits. In 1741, an exception to the -above regulation was made for negroes wearing liveries.<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p>3. <i>Possession of Property</i>: Slaves at first were permitted, -not by law but by custom, to own horses, hogs, cattle, -sheep, poultry and to cultivate small areas for their own -use. They frequently acquired sufficient property to buy -themselves. They were protected from professional traders -by law.<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> It soon developed, however, that this privilege -increased their disposition to steal, and multiplied their -opportunities of contact with outsiders. The accessibility -of plantations by means of creeks, bays, and rivers stimulated -illicit trade. This situation finally caused them to -be prohibited by law from owning property.<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<p>4. <i>Protection</i>: The Locke Constitution of 1669 for the -Carolinas stated that “Every freeman of Carolina shall have -absolute power and authority over his slaves, of what opinion<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_15"></a>[15]</span> -or religion soever.”<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> This was done to counteract the -theory that a Christian could not be a slave. This established -the government of the master over the slave. The -master became the agent of the government in the control -of his slaves, and it became the government’s duty to see -that its agents dealt humanely with the slaves. The governors -of North Carolina tried in vain to secure the passage -of laws that would offer the proper protection to slaves.<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> -In 1754, Governor Dobbs made an unsuccessful effort to -accomplish this result.<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> In 1773, William Hooper secured -the passage of a bill to prevent the wilful and malicious -killing of slaves, but the Governor vetoed it because “it was -inconsistent with His Majesty’s instruction to pass it, as it -does not reserve the fines imposed by it pursuant to their -instruction.”<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> In 1774 it was made a criminal offense to be -guilty of willingly and maliciously killing a slave. The -penalty for first offense was twelve months’ imprisonment, -and death without benefit of clergy for the second offense.<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - -<p>5. <i>Trial of Slaves</i>: A special court was established for -the trial of slaves. In 1741, a court of two or more justices -of the peace and four freeholders, who were slaveholders, -was empowered to try all manner of crimes and offenses -committed by slaves.<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> Negroes, mulattoes, and Indians, -bond or free, could be witnesses. The chairman of the -court always charged the witness before the examination to -tell the truth.<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> The master of the slave could appear at his -trial and defend him before the court.<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> In 1783, a single -justice was constituted a court for the trial of non-capital -offenses.<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> For capital offenses, four slaveholders remained -a part of the court as provided by the Act of 1741.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_16"></a>[16]</span> -This difference in the mode of the trial of the two classes of -offenses is evidently due to economic influences.</p> - -<p>Since this court was not one of the regular courts, it sat -at any time and thus prevented the master from suffering -excessive loss of the slave’s time between terms of court. -This court had rather free procedure and broad jurisdiction.<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> - -<p>6. <i>Witness</i>: The slave was permitted to be a witness in -the trial of other slaves, free negroes, and mulattoes.<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> He -was not permitted to give testimony in court in a case to -which a white man was a party.<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> His paganism was a -partial basis for denying him this privilege.<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> His moral -depravity and social prejudice were, undoubtedly, the main -forces in making this restriction a universal law of slavery.</p> - -<p>The slave was cautioned against false swearing because -he generally had little regard for his word. If he was convicted -of false swearing, one ear was nailed to the pillory -for one hour and then cut off. The other ear was treated -in the same way; and to complete this inhuman punishment, -the slave was given thirty-nine lashes on his back.<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a></p> - -<p>7. <i>Manumission</i>: Manumission was the door of escape -from slavery that was constantly open to the slave. At -common law, a master could free his slaves on the basis of -any agreement that he might make with them. The owner<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17"></a>[17]</span> -of a slave could dispose of him like any other piece of property. -The spirit of manumission was so promoted by the -churches and by the doctrine of natural rights of the American -Revolution that the State, in self defense, placed a -limitation on the common law method of manumission.<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> -After 1777, slaves could be freed only on a basis of meritorious -service, of which the county court was the judge.<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> -Slaves freed by any other method could be resold into slavery -by the court.</p> - -<p>The “pernicious practice” of manumitting slaves at common -law continued,<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> and the county court began to resell -such negroes into slavery. The power of the court to give -valid title in such sales was doubted, and the legislature was -forced by special act to guarantee the validity of the sale -of illegally liberated slaves, made by the county courts.<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> -The preamble to this measure states that “many negroes -are now going at large, to the terror of the good people of -this state.”<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> This law was weak in that the power of apprehending -illegally liberated slaves was optional in freeholders -only. In 1788, the state gave any freeman the -power to inform a justice of the peace of any such slave, -and required such justice to issue to the sheriff a warrant -for the arrest of the slave.<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> This legislation indicates a -growth of the manumission movement in the face of legal -restrictions, and, also, registers a protest against the conservative -forces of society.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18"></a>[18]</span></p> - -<p>8. <i>Suffrage</i>: It does not appear that the slave ever possessed -the right of suffrage. The free negro, however, -voted throughout the period of colonial history in North -Carolina. The Declaration of Rights of North Carolina, -adopted December 17, 1776, gave the franchise to “all freemen.”<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -The Constitution of the State, adopted the next -day, gave the franchise to “all freemen” with certain qualifications -as to age, residence, property, and taxes.<a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> This -constitution remained in force until 1835, during which time -the free negro voted in North Carolina.</p> - -<h4>B. <span class="allsmcap">RESTRICTIONS</span>—</h4> - -<p>1. <i>Marriage</i>: The slave never acquired legal marriage. -It was generally held that the slave regarded marriage -lightly, and that, therefore, the separation of husband and -wife was not a serious matter. This philosophy was largely -true, but, at the same time, it fitted into the economics of -slavery very advantageously.</p> - -<p>It is not to be inferred from the above that the slave did -not have formal marriage. He was usually married with -considerable ceremony by either his own minister or a -white clergyman. Special preparation was generally made -for the wedding, which frequently took place in the dining-room -of the master’s mansion. It may well be contended -that this religious sanction was more sacred to the slave, -who was of a very religious nature, and, therefore, more -binding than a civil marriage would have been.</p> - -<p>Slaves were forbidden to intermarry with free negroes or -mulattoes, except by the written permission of the master, -attested by two justices of the peace.<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> Marriage of negroes, -bond or free, with white persons was prohibited.<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> -The white person of such a marriage, and the minister who -performed the marriage rite, were fined fifty pounds each.<a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p> - -<p>2. <i>Social and Economic Relations</i>: The slave’s relations<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19"></a>[19]</span> -with the outside world were carefully guarded because they -might lead to runaways, marriages, or insurrections. No -free negro or mulatto was permitted to entertain a slave in -his home “during the Sabbath, or in the night between sunset -and sunrise.”<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> The penalty for violating this act was -twenty shillings for the first offense, and forty shillings for -each succeeding offense. If the offender could not pay his -fine, he was forced to work it out. A free negro or mulatto -was prohibited from marrying or cohabiting with a slave -unless the master’s consent, attested by two justices, was -obtained.<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> The free negro or mulatto, and not the slave, -was fined, for violation of this act, ten pounds or one year’s -service for the master. No master of a vessel was permitted -to entertain a slave on board, who did not hold a pass from -his master or a justice of the peace.<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> Such harboring of a -slave indicated either an illicit trade relation, or an intention -of stealing the slave. For violation of this act, the master -of the vessel was fined five pounds for the first, and ten -pounds for each succeeding, offense.</p> - -<p>Traffic with slaves was a very difficult matter to control. -At first, a person trading with a slave was required to pay -treble for the article purchased, and six pounds proclamation -money.<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> Finally, traffic with slaves was permitted -only on the basis of a written permission from the master, -describing the article for sale. A person convicted for violation -of this law was fined ten pounds, and the slave received -not exceeding thirty-nine lashes.<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> If such a person -did not have sufficient property to satisfy the fine, he was -committed to jail. Traffic with slaves became more difficult -to regulate as the slavery system expanded.</p> - -<p>The slave was not permitted to engage his services to -anyone, nor could the master hire him out. For violation of -this regulation, the slave might be taken in charge by a -magistrate or free-holder and set to work for the county,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20"></a>[20]</span> -for the benefit of the poor, for a period not exceeding twenty -days; “any law, usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.”<a id="FNanchor_61" href="#Footnote_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a></p> - -<p>It is noticed that these restrictions pertained primarily -to the relations of the slaves with free negroes, Indians, -traders, and poor whites, who were as a rule more or less inclined -to disturb the order of the plantation. Their association -with the whites in the home and at church was a matter -of unwritten law. The domestic servants were more -intimately associated with the whites and were frequently -cultured.<a id="FNanchor_62" href="#Footnote_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> There was very little effort on the part of the -masters, in the early stages of the development of slavery, -to teach or christianize the slaves. Many of them, however, -learned to read, and joined churches, but they were not -permitted to have separate church organizations.<a id="FNanchor_63" href="#Footnote_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a></p> - -<p>3. <i>The Runaway</i>: The runaway was one of the most -difficult problems of slave government. The wild life of the -slave in Africa, and the hardships of frontier American slavery -naturally created a disposition in the slave to run away -from his master’s plantation. Organized bands of slave-stealers, -poor whites, and free negroes constantly took advantage -of this attitude of the slave. This was one method -by which the slave could, at least temporarily, break the -bonds of slavery; and he did not always find life more severe -in the camp than on the plantation.</p> - -<p>Runaways, aside from the economic loss to the slave-owners -involved, might congregate and start an insurrection. -Any outside contact made possible conspiracies, and -created a real danger to the community. It was, therefore, -a heavy fine for anyone to harbor a slave; and it was the -duty of all citizens to arrest runaways.<a id="FNanchor_64" href="#Footnote_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> The law against -the aiding and harboring of runaways was made more -severe by increasing the fine for its violation. Finally, to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21"></a>[21]</span> -promote the escape of a slave from the colony became a -felony and might involve the loss of life.<a id="FNanchor_65" href="#Footnote_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p> - -<p>This law also gave to the justices of the peace the power, -by proclamation, to outlaw any runaway who was in hiding, -committing injuries to the inhabitants of the community. -It was then lawful for any one to kill such a slave.<a id="FNanchor_66" href="#Footnote_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> Any -runaway who was caught was forced to wear a yoke around -his neck until he gave sufficient evidence of good behavior.<a id="FNanchor_67" href="#Footnote_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a></p> - -<p>Sheriffs and constables were strictly charged with the safe -keeping of all runaways who were committed to their care. -If they negligently or wilfully permitted any to escape, -they were liable for damages to the master at common law -with costs.<a id="FNanchor_68" href="#Footnote_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> To encourage the police officials to execute the -law, they were exempted from the payment of all public, -county, and parish levies for their own persons. The -keepers of ferries were required to give immediate passage -to officers charged with conducting runaways.<a id="FNanchor_69" href="#Footnote_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a></p> - -<p>No feature of the slave code shows more progressively the -attitude of the whites toward the negro than the law on -runaways. As the slaves developed the means for evading -the law, it was made increasingly rigid. White men could -be sold into temporary servitude to pay fines for persuading -the slave to run away.<a id="FNanchor_70" href="#Footnote_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> Anyone convicted for attempting -to steal and convey a slave out of the colony was required -to pay the owner twenty-five pounds. If he could not pay -this fine he was forced to serve the master for five years.<a id="FNanchor_71" href="#Footnote_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> -The idea in these laws is not necessarily harshness to the -slave, but rather the security of the bondage of the slave.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22"></a>[22]</span></p> - -<h3>II. <span class="smcap">The Status of the Negro in the State of Franklin -from 1785 to 1788</span></h3> - -<p>The State of Franklin<a id="FNanchor_72" href="#Footnote_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> was included in the western part -of North Carolina, which later became the Southwest Territory -and the State of Tennessee. The independent action -of its people is significant, therefore, not only as an expression -of their own position on slavery, but also as a prophecy -of the attitude of the state of Tennessee.</p> - -<p>The constitution proposed by the Greenville Convention, -November 14, 1785, established a liberal suffrage.<a id="FNanchor_73" href="#Footnote_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> Section -4 of this constitution states that “Every free male -inhabitant in this state six months immediately preceding -the day of election, shall participate in electing all officers -chosen by the people, in the county where he resides.”<a id="FNanchor_74" href="#Footnote_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> -The Declaration of Rights uses the terms “freeman,” “the -people,” and “every man,” synonymously. There was no -property or religious qualification for the suffrage. The -slave, by emancipation, would have voted under this constitution -on the same basis as other citizens. This constitution -was finally rejected and that of North Carolina with -few changes was adopted.<a id="FNanchor_75" href="#Footnote_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> The above proposal is interesting -as a typical frontier attitude on the suffrage question.</p> - -<p>North Carolina never recognized the independence of the -Franklin State. There were two factions in North Carolina -politics on this question.<a id="FNanchor_76" href="#Footnote_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> One of these, led by John -Sevier, the Governor of Franklin, advocated independence; -and the other, led by John Tipton, demanded the downfall -of Franklin. The Tipton faction won, and the Franklin -State came to an end in 1788.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23"></a>[23]</span></p> - -<h3>III. <span class="smcap">The Status of the Negro in the Southwest Territory -from 1790 to 1796</span></h3> - -<p>The western part of North Carolina continued to demand -a separate political existence, and in February, 1790, it was -ceded to the National Government by North Carolina. The -Act of Cession provided that “the laws in force and in use -in the State of North Carolina at this time, shall be and -continue in full force within the territory hereby ceded -until the same shall be repealed or otherwise altered by the -legislative authority of the said territory”; and also, “that -no regulations made or to be made by congress shall tend to -emancipate slaves.”<a id="FNanchor_77" href="#Footnote_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> The cession was accepted by Congress -April 2, 1790, on the above condition;<a id="FNanchor_78" href="#Footnote_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> and when -Congress, on May 26, 1790, organized the government for -the Southwest Territory, it mentioned the conditions laid -down in the Act of Cession.<a id="FNanchor_79" href="#Footnote_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a></p> - -<p>The provisions of the Act of Cession show how slavery, -as it had developed in North Carolina by 1790, was transplanted -and legalized in the territory that became Tennessee -in 1796. There is no recorded protest on the part of the -people of the territory. The contract between the National -Government, North Carolina, and the Southwest Territory, -shows that the economic importance of slavery was already -recognized.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24"></a>[24]</span></p> - -<p>The legislation of the Territory on slavery consists of one -act, relating to the negro’s participation in court procedure. -Negroes, whether bond or free, were permitted to be witnesses -for and against each other, but denied this privilege -in cases to which a white man was a party. Persons of -mixed blood, descended from negroes or Indians, inclusive -of the third generation, suffered a similar restriction. No -person of mixed blood to any degree whatever, who had -been held in slavery, could be a witness against a white -person within twelve months of his liberation.<a id="FNanchor_80" href="#Footnote_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a></p> - -<p>This preliminary study suggests the general lines along -which the institution of slavery developed in the succeeding -decades. The social and religious phases of the negro’s life -were given less attention than the economic and legal. His -common law status was constantly changing to a statutory -basis. He was exchanging the status of a servant at common -law for that of a mere chattel at statute law. His -place in judicial procedure was determined. It was in this -connection that racial prejudice made its appearance. The -foundation for a comprehensive patrol system was established. -The state asserted its right to limit manumission. -Free negroes had not become sufficiently numerous by 1796 -to call for the serious consideration that they later received. -Consequently, there was a relatively small amount of legislation -concerning them prior to this date. Some restrictions, -however, were made on their relations with the slave -and on the process of manumission. On the whole, it may -be concluded that there had been laid a fairly secure foundation, -for the status of both the slave and the free negro, -which future events only modified.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> Tennessee belonged to Virginia from 1607 to 1663, to Carolina -from 1663 to 1693, and to North Carolina from 1693 to 1790. Garrett, -W. R., and Goodpasture, A. V., History of Tennessee, p. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> The first settlements in Tennessee were made in 1769 and 1772. -Ibid., pp. 49-52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> The settlements of western North Carolina became the State of -Franklin in 1785, the Southwest Territory in 1790, and the State of -Tennessee in 1796. Ibid., pp. 91, 105, and 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> Doyle, J. A., The English Colonies in America, I, 331.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> Bassett, John Spencer, Johns Hopkins University Studies, Vol. 14, -p. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> Ibid., p. 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> Doyle, I, 389.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> Colonial Entry Book, No. lxxxii, p. 129. (Quoted by Doyle, I, -386.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> Bassett, Op. Cit., p. 20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> N. C. Col. Records, II, 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> Ibid., V, 320.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> Ibid., VII, 5391.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> Hale, W. J., and Merritt, D. L., History of Tennessee, II, 292.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> “A bill of sale from Micajah to Andrew Jackson, Esquire, for a -negro woman named Nancy about eighteen or twenty years of age -was proven in open court by the oath of David Allison, a subscribing -witness, and ordered to be recorded.” Record of the Court of Pleas -and Quarter Sessions, Jonesboro, Tennessee, for November Term, -1788.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> Haywood, John, The Civil and Political History of the State of -Tennessee, 406.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> (He) “was a very prominent negro. He had a garden, and supplied -a great many people with vegetables. His oldest daughter married -Graham, a barber. She had a big wedding and invited all the -prominent white people in town, and they all went. He was a very -respectable, upright, humble negro. General Andrew Jackson attended -the wedding, and Dr. McNairy danced the reel with the bride.” -Hale and Merritt, II, 293.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Ramsey, J. G. M., The Annals of Tennessee, 648.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> Hale and Merritt, II, 294.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> Iredell, James, Laws of State of North Carolina, p. 85.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> Acts of G. A. of N. C., 1729, Ch. 5, Sec. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Secs. 2-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> This oath read: “I, A. B., do swear that I will, as searcher for -guns, swords, and other weapons among the slaves of my district, -faithfully, and as privately as I can, discharge the trust reposed in -me, as the law directs, to the best of my power. So help me God.” -Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> Acts of 1738, Ch. X, Secs. 1-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> Acts of 1745, Ch. 3, Sec. 3; Acts of 1768, Ch. 13, Sec. 2; Acts of -1784, Ch. 33, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> Acts of 1729, Ch. 5, Sec. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> Anyone trading with slaves “without the license or consent in -writing under the head of his or her or their master or owner ... -shall forfeit treble the value of the thing bought, sold, or traded, -trucked or borrowed or lent.” Acts of 1715, Ch. 46, Sec. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> No slave was “permitted, on any pretense whatever, to raise -any horses, cattle or hogs; and all horses, cattle and hogs that, six -months from the date thereof, shall belong to any slave, or of any -slave’s work in this government, shall be seized and sold by the -church wardens of the Parish where such horses, cattle or hogs shall -be, and the profit thereof be applied, one-half to the use of the said -Parish and the other half to the Informer.” Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, -Sec. 44; see also Acts of 1779, Ch. 5, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 31, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> Ibid., Sec. 51.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> Ibid., Sec. 52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> Acts of 1774, Ch. 31, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> Acts of 1741, Sec. 48, Ch. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> Ibid., Sec. 51.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> Ibid., Sec. 52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> Acts of 1783, Ch. 14, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> It was directed “to take for evidence the confession of the offender, -the oath of one or more credible witnesses, or such testimony -of negroes, mulattoes or Indians, bond or free, with pregnant circumstances -as to them shall seem convincing, without solemnity of -jury; and the offender being then found guilty, to pass such judgment -upon the offender, according to their discretion, as the nature -of the offense may require; and on such judgment to award execution.” -Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Secs. 48-52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> Ibid., Sec. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> “All negroes, mulattoes, bond or free, to the third generation, -and Indian servants and slaves, shall be deemed to be taken as persons -incapable in law to be witnesses in any case whatsoever, except -against each other.” Acts of 1746, Ch. 2, Sec. 50.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Bassett, Op. Cit., p. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 50.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> The preamble to this act reads: “Whereas the evil and pernicious -practice of freeing slaves in this state, ought at this alarming and -critical time to be guarded against by every friend and well-wisher to -his country.” Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> “Whereas before the passing of the said act, and since the sixteenth -day of April, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-five, -divers evil-minded persons, intending to disturb the public peace, did -liberate and set free their slaves, notwithstanding the same was expressly -contrary to the laws of this state.” Acts of 1779, Ch. 12, -Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> Acts of 1779, Ch. 12, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> Ibid., Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> Acts of 1788, Ch. 20, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> Declaration of Rights of North Carolina, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> Constitution of 1776 of N. C., Secs. 7, 8, and 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 1, Sec. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> Ibid., Sec. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> Ibid., Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> Ibid., Ch. 1, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> Acts of 1788, Ch. 7, Secs. 1-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_61" href="#FNanchor_61" class="label">[61]</a> Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_62" href="#FNanchor_62" class="label">[62]</a> Brickell, John, Natural History of North Carolina, 272.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_63" href="#FNanchor_63" class="label">[63]</a> Acts of 1715, Ch. 46, Sec. 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_64" href="#FNanchor_64" class="label">[64]</a> Ibid., Secs. 6-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_65" href="#FNanchor_65" class="label">[65]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Secs. 25-33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_66" href="#FNanchor_66" class="label">[66]</a> Ibid., Sec. 43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_67" href="#FNanchor_67" class="label">[67]</a> Ibid., Sec. 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_68" href="#FNanchor_68" class="label">[68]</a> Brickell, Op. Cit., 270.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_69" href="#FNanchor_69" class="label">[69]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 36.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_70" href="#FNanchor_70" class="label">[70]</a> Ibid., Sec. 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_71" href="#FNanchor_71" class="label">[71]</a> Ibid., Sec. 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_72" href="#FNanchor_72" class="label">[72]</a> Earlier historians used the name Frankland (the land of the -free), but letters from officials of the state indicate that it was named -after Benjamin Franklin. See footnote p. 263, Vol. I, McMaster, -John B., History of the United States.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_73" href="#FNanchor_73" class="label">[73]</a> A copy of this constitution is now in the State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_74" href="#FNanchor_74" class="label">[74]</a> Ramsey, J. G. M., Annals of Tennessee, 327.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_75" href="#FNanchor_75" class="label">[75]</a> American Historical Magazine, I, 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_76" href="#FNanchor_76" class="label">[76]</a> Phelan, James, History of Tennessee, 299.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_77" href="#FNanchor_77" class="label">[77]</a> Scott, I, 437.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_78" href="#FNanchor_78" class="label">[78]</a> I Stat. U. S., 106; Scott, I, 439.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_79" href="#FNanchor_79" class="label">[79]</a> This act states that the territory “for the purposes of temporary -government, shall be one district, the inhabitants of which shall enjoy -all privileges, benefits, and advantages set forth in the Ordinance of -the late Congress for the government of the Territory of the United -States northwest of the River Ohio, and that the government of the -said Territory shall be similar to that which is now exercised in the -Territory northwest of the Ohio; except so far as it is otherwise -provided in the conditions expressed in an Act of Congress of the -present session, entitled, ‘An Act to Accept a Cession of Western -Territory.’” Hurd, John Cadman, Law of Freedom and Bondage, -II, 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_80" href="#FNanchor_80" class="label">[80]</a> Acts of the Southwest Territory for 1794, Ch. I, Sec. 32. See -also Scott, I, 471; and Meigs and Cooper’s Code of 1858, Secs. 3808-3809.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25"></a>[25]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_II">CHAPTER II<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Legal Status of the Slave in Tennessee</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>Tennessee inherited from North Carolina a liberal policy -toward the slave, a policy which was fittingly expressed by -Chief Justice Taylor in the following words:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>It would be a subject of regret to every thinking -person, if courts of Justice were restrained, by any -austere rule of judicature, from keeping pace with -the march of benignant policy and provident humanity, -which for many years has characterized -every legislative act relative to the protection of -slaves, and which Christianity, by the mild diffusion -of its light and influence, has contributed to -promote.<a id="FNanchor_81" href="#Footnote_81" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>It will be seen throughout the study of the slave code that -the slave in Tennessee enjoyed a privileged status, that he -was more than a mere chattel, and that his disabilities, -characteristic of slavery in many of the states, were considerably -modified.</p> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">The Privileges of Slaves</span>—</h3> - -<h4>A. <i>Hunting.</i></h4> - -<p>At the request of the master, the county -courts permitted one slave on each plantation to hunt with -a gun during the cultivation or harvesting of crops. They -issued to such a slave a certificate, describing him and granting -this privilege, and requested him, when he hunted, to -carry it with him to prevent his arrest for being unlawfully -armed. The master was financially responsible for any -damage done by such a slave.<a id="FNanchor_82" href="#Footnote_82" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> The courts more fully -granted authority to the slaves to hunt with dogs, and were -limited in such matters only by the degree of responsibility -that the master would assume. Slaves were whipped not -exceeding thirty lashes if they were caught hunting<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26"></a>[26]</span> -unlawfully.<a id="FNanchor_83" href="#Footnote_83" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> The slave was not allowed to hunt at night by fire-light -with a gun. If he was duly convicted, before a justice -of the peace, of violating this restriction, his owner was -fined fifteen dollars.<a id="FNanchor_84" href="#Footnote_84" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<h4>B. <i>Travel.</i></h4> - -<p>The travel of slaves in their immediate -community was regulated by a system of passes issued by -the masters or their representatives. No slave, except a -domestic servant, was supposed to leave his master’s premises -without a pass, explaining the cause of his absence.<a id="FNanchor_85" href="#Footnote_85" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> -No stage driver, captain of a steamboat, or railroad conductor -could receive a slave passenger for an extended -journey unless he produced a pass from a county clerk, -giving instructions for such a journey and a description -of the slave.<a id="FNanchor_86" href="#Footnote_86" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> One could be imprisoned six months and -fined five hundred dollars for violating this regulation, unless -he could prove that the transportation of the slave took -place without his knowledge. The slave in such instances, -if he was discovered, was arrested, placed in the nearest -jail, and advertised as a runaway.<a id="FNanchor_87" href="#Footnote_87" class="fnanchor">[7]</a></p> - -<h4>C. <i>Suits for Freedom.</i></h4> - -<p>1. <i>Of the Action.</i> The proper action at law to be taken -by a slave in a suit for his freedom was trespass, false imprisonment, -or assault and battery.<a id="FNanchor_88" href="#Footnote_88" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> Judge Catron, in the -case of Harris v. Clarissa, held that a female and her children, -being held in slavery, could institute joint action to -establish their freedom.<a id="FNanchor_89" href="#Footnote_89" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> The defendant would in such suits -claim that the plaintiff was his slave. In such cases, the -slave did not sue the master, the court merely tried the -fact, whether the plaintiff was a slave.<a id="FNanchor_90" href="#Footnote_90" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27"></a>[27]</span></p> - -<p>2. <i>Of the Evidence.</i> In a suit for freedom, the <i>onus -probandi rested upon the plaintiff</i>. What evidence was -admitted? How could a slave prove that he was free if -there were no court records to show that the State had assented -to his freedom? How could he prove that he was -descended from free parents and that he was being held in -false imprisonment? Judge Crabb, in the case of Vaughan -v. Phebe, answered these questions by saying that “He may, -perhaps, procure testimony that he, or some ancestor, was -for some time in the enjoyment of freedom; that he has -acted as a freeman; that he has been received as a freeman -into society; and very soon will find himself under the necessity -of increasing in proportion to the distance he has -to travel into time past, for want of other evidence, to use -hearsay; that he, or his ancestor was commonly called a -freeman, or commonly reputed a freeman, or, in other -words, evidence of common reputation.”</p> - -<p>The courts of Tennessee in their consideration of suits by -slaves for their freedom gave unmistakable evidence that -they realized the seriousness of adding another negro voter -to the body politic. Free negroes voted in Tennessee until -1834.<a id="FNanchor_91" href="#Footnote_91" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> This made the matter of manumitting a slave have -far reaching consequences. Judge Crabb, in Vaughan v. -Phebe, pointed out very forcibly the results to the slave and -society that attended the freeing of a slave.<a id="FNanchor_92" href="#Footnote_92" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28"></a>[28]</span></p> - -<p>3. <i>Of the Damages.</i> A negro held in slavery beyond the -agreed time of emancipation could maintain an action of -trespass for his wages, after he had established his freedom. -He could recover wages for the time the suit for freedom -was pending and also the cost of the suit.<a id="FNanchor_93" href="#Footnote_93" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p> - -<p>4. <i>Of the Judgment.</i> The judgment in favor of the freedom -of a maternal ancestor of a plaintiff was received by -the Tennessee courts as evidence in a suit for freedom to -show the basis of the right claimed. Judge Crabb, in admitting -the records of a previous trial as evidence, said: -“We consider the solemn verdict of a jury, with proofs produced -to them many years ago, and with the judgment of -the court upon it, fully as good evidence, to say the least of -it, of what was considered the truth in those days.”<a id="FNanchor_94" href="#Footnote_94" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<p>It sometimes happened that defendants in suits for freedom -would send the plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of the -court in which the suit had been instituted. To prevent -this, an act was passed, requiring defendant to give security -that the plaintiff would not be removed from the limits of -the county.<a id="FNanchor_95" href="#Footnote_95" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> “The powers of a court of chancery were -more than those of a court of law,” said Judge Green in the -case of Sylvia and Phillis v. Covey, holding that a suit for -freedom in chancery could be maintained regardless of the -change of venue.<a id="FNanchor_96" href="#Footnote_96" class="fnanchor">[16]</a></p> - -<h4>D. <i>Trial of Slaves.</i></h4> - -<p>The most ordinary court for the -trial of slaves was composed of justices and freeholders, -who were slaveholders.<a id="FNanchor_97" href="#Footnote_97" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> Their crimes were usually separated<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29"></a>[29]</span> -into corporal and capital, and a single justice was -generally permitted to try the misdemeanors.<a id="FNanchor_98" href="#Footnote_98" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p> - -<p>The first effort at legislation in Tennessee on the trial -of slaves was an attempt in 1799 to establish trial by jury -of twelve freeholders, unrelated to the owner of the slave -by either affinity or consanguinity. Free legal counsel for -slaves whose masters were unknown or outside of the state -was proposed. This measure passed the House of Representatives, -but was defeated by the Senate on the third -reading.<a id="FNanchor_99" href="#Footnote_99" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> This failure only delayed the accomplishment -of the object of this bill.</p> - -<p>Three justices and nine freeholders, who were slaveholders, -were in 1815 empowered to try slaves for all offences.<a id="FNanchor_100" href="#Footnote_100" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> -In 1819, the freeholders were increased to -twelve.<a id="FNanchor_101" href="#Footnote_101" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> By 1825, the jury might contain non-slaveholders, -if twelve slaveholders could not be secured. Their -verdict, however, was invalid, if it could be shown that the -non-slaveholders divided the jury.<a id="FNanchor_102" href="#Footnote_102" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> The owner by this act -had the right of appeal to the circuit court in case of conviction, -by giving bond in the sum of twice the value of the -slave for his appearance at the next term of court. In -1831, right of appeal was limited to capital cases.<a id="FNanchor_103" href="#Footnote_103" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> - -<p>By act of 1835, the trial of slaves was completely reconstructed. -Special courts for the trial of slaves were abolished. -Right of appeal from justice’s court was established -in all cases. The circuit court was given exclusive original -jurisdiction of all offences punishable by death. No slave -was to be tried by a jury until an indictment had been -found against him by a grand jury in the regular way. -The State provided counsel for the slave if the master did -not. Section 11 of this measure reads: “All persons who -would be competent jurors to serve on the trial of a free -person, shall be competent jurors on the trial of any slave<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30"></a>[30]</span> -or slaves.”<a id="FNanchor_104" href="#Footnote_104" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> By this piece of humanitarian legislation, -Tennessee became one of the five slave states which granted -the slave trial by jury.<a id="FNanchor_105" href="#Footnote_105" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -<p>By this act, the attorney employed by the State for the -slave could sue the master for his fee. This provision was -repealed in 1838, and the county became liable for the cost -of the suit, unless the prosecution appeared frivolous or -malicious, in which case the prosecutor paid the cost of -trial.<a id="FNanchor_106" href="#Footnote_106" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -<p>Toward the close of the second quarter of the nineteenth -century, there were some changes made in the legal procedure -adopted in 1835. The right of appeal in all cases -from the justice’s court was restored to the master by an -act of 1848.<a id="FNanchor_107" href="#Footnote_107" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> The state in 1858 reverted to a former -method of indictment of the slave.<a id="FNanchor_108" href="#Footnote_108" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> Five creditable persons -could file an accusation of insurrection or conspiracy -to kill against a slave, and the judge of the circuit court -could empower the jury to try the slave without waiting for -a regular term of the court. These changes in the slave’s -legal status were the delayed response of legal institutions -to the movements in politics, economics, and religion in -vogue in the early thirties.<a id="FNanchor_109" href="#Footnote_109" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></p> - -<h3>II. <span class="smcap">Disabilities of Slaves</span>—</h3> - -<p>A. <i>To make a Contract.</i> The slave could not make a -legal contract except for his freedom or with his master’s -consent. The slave in such contracts was regarded as the -agent of the master.<a id="FNanchor_110" href="#Footnote_110" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> The courts, however, would enforce -a contract made by a slave with his masters for his freedom. -In the case of Porter v. Blackmore, the supreme court of -the state held that such a contract established a vested right<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31"></a>[31]</span> -to freedom, and that “no one but the State can take advantage -of it, not even the owner or master, after the right -is once vested. A court of chancery, if the right is once -vested, will interpose to prevent its defeat.”<a id="FNanchor_111" href="#Footnote_111" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p> - -<p>B. <i>To Take Property by Devise, Descent, or Purchase.</i> -The slave was regarded as personal property in Tennessee -and what he owned belonged to the master.<a id="FNanchor_112" href="#Footnote_112" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> He could not -receive property by inheritance or donation, nor buy, sell, -or dispose of anything, unless his master consented.<a id="FNanchor_113" href="#Footnote_113" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> -Washington Turner, a free negro, died in 1853, leaving his -estate to his wife and children. The children were the -issue of a slave mother. Judge McKinney, in a case involving -the will of Turner, said: “It is clear that the children -of the testator being slaves, with no rights of freedom, present -or prospective, are incapable in law of taking any benefit -under the will.”<a id="FNanchor_114" href="#Footnote_114" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> A slave while in a state of inchoate -freedom could lay claim to either personal or real property.<a id="FNanchor_115" href="#Footnote_115" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> -Judge Catron maintained that it was inconsistent with the -liberal slave code of the State not to consider a slave’s -rights to property in connection with a claim to freedom.<a id="FNanchor_116" href="#Footnote_116" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32"></a>[32]</span></p> - -<p>C. <i>To Be a Witness.</i> The slave never acquired the right -of being a witness against a white man.<a id="FNanchor_117" href="#Footnote_117" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> The denial of -this right was based on the slave’s light regard for his -word, his ignorance, and racial prejudice. His paganism -was also a factor.<a id="FNanchor_118" href="#Footnote_118" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p> - -<p>The slave gradually acquired a stronger position in cases -in which the white man was not a party. By 1784, he could -be a witness in cases where other slaves were being tried.<a id="FNanchor_119" href="#Footnote_119" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> -By 1813, he could testify against free persons of color born -in slavery.<a id="FNanchor_120" href="#Footnote_120" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> By 1839, his testimony was permitted in cases -where persons of mixed blood were tried.<a id="FNanchor_121" href="#Footnote_121" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> This increased -capacity of the slave as a witness resulted from efforts to -restrict his relations with free negroes and mulattoes. -Illicit trade relations were difficult to prevent, especially in -liquors.</p> - -<p>D. <i>To Be a Party in a Suit.</i> There were only two instances -in which a slave could be a party to a suit. He -could sue for his freedom and for property interests which -a grant of freedom involved.<a id="FNanchor_122" href="#Footnote_122" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> In Stephenson v. Harrison, -Judge Caruthers held that “No other suit but for freedom, -in which may be embraced claim to property, can be brought -by slaves, while they are such, except where rights may be -endangered, which are connected with a certain grant of -freedom to take effect in the future. And this being that -kind of case, the slaves have a standing in court.”<a id="FNanchor_123" href="#Footnote_123" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> It is -observed that in such cases the court for the time being, regarded -the slave as being in a state of inchoate freedom.</p> - -<p>There was no reason why the slave needed to be a party to -a suit. He owned nothing. He could not recover anything. -He could be whipped for anything that he did. The -master did not want to kill him. If he did not want him, -he could sell him. Under such circumstances, it would<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33"></a>[33]</span> -have been a mere mockery for the slave to be a party to a -suit.</p> - -<p>E. <i>To Contract Matrimony.</i> There was no process of -law involved in the marriage of slaves with each other or -their separation. Their marriage with mulattoes or with -free negroes was a matter of statutory regulation. In the -case of Andrews v. Page, it was held that “Slaves were not -married to each other without the consent of their owners, -as a general rule. By the act of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 3, a free -negro or mulatto was prohibited from intermarrying with -a slave, without the consent of his or her master, had in -writing.”<a id="FNanchor_124" href="#Footnote_124" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> When the master for his slave agreed to a marriage -with a free negro or mulatto, it was regarded by the -courts as a contract.<a id="FNanchor_125" href="#Footnote_125" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></p> - -<p>If a free negro woman was married to a slave, their children -were free. The issue of a free woman of color followed -the condition of their mother, and were born free. -This principle was carried so far that when a female slave -was to be emancipated by the concession of the master and -assent of the State, but was to be held subject to service for -a definite time, and a child was born to her after such emancipation -but during such subjection to service, it was held -that the child was freeborn.</p> - -<p>While it cannot be said that the marriage relation between -slaves was a contractual one at law, it had the sanction of -an unwritten law that the state respected. In the case of -Andrews v. Page, the court held that it was</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“established beyond controversy that there were -circumstances under which the courts of this State -recognized the relation of husband and wife and -the ties of consanguinity, as existing among slaves, -as well as among free persons, and free persons of -color; and we hold that a marriage between slaves, -with the consent of their owners, whether contracted -in common law form or celebrated under -the statute, always was a valid marriage in this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34"></a>[34]</span> -state, and that the issue of such marriages were not -illegitimate.”<a id="FNanchor_126" href="#Footnote_126" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p> - -</div> - -<h3>III. <span class="smcap">Relation of the Master and Society</span>—</h3> - -<h4>A. <i>Liabilities of the Master to Society.</i></h4> - -<h5>1. <i>For His Own Acts.</i></h5> - -<p>The master was responsible to -society for the treatment of his slaves. He was required -to feed, clothe, and house them.<a id="FNanchor_127" href="#Footnote_127" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> It was his duty to furnish -them competent medical aid.<a id="FNanchor_128" href="#Footnote_128" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> If an employer of a slave -was unable to pay for medical attention, the master was -liable. He was expected to superintend the trials of his -slaves to see that they received justice. In capital cases, -he was allowed thirty-five challenges.<a id="FNanchor_129" href="#Footnote_129" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> He could give bail -for their appearance at court and prosecute writs of error -for them.<a id="FNanchor_130" href="#Footnote_130" class="fnanchor">[50]</a></p> - -<p>There is considerable evidence that the slaves of Tennessee -were rather well treated. Rev. William Dickey, -writing from Bloomingburgh, Ohio, July 23, 1845, stated -that the negroes were clean, well-fed, and clothed and that -considerable attention was given their minds.<a id="FNanchor_131" href="#Footnote_131" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> Judge<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35"></a>[35]</span> -Catron, in the case of Loftin v. Espy, refused to let a family -of slaves be separated to satisfy a debt against an estate, -and, in rendering the decree, he said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The servants and slaves constitute a part of the -family, entitled to, and receiving, if they be worthy, -the affections of the master to a great extent; this -disposition towards this unfortunate class of people -it is the policy of the country to promote and -encourage; without it, good conduct on the part of -the slave, and benevolent and humane treatment -on the part of the master is not to be expected.... -Nothing can be more abhorrent to these poor people, -or to the feelings of every benevolent individual, -than to see a large family of slaves sold at -sheriff’s sale; the infant children, father, and -mother to different bidders.<a id="FNanchor_132" href="#Footnote_132" class="fnanchor">[52]</a></p> - -</div> - -<h5>2. <i>For the Acts of His Slaves.</i></h5> - -<p>a. <i>For Contracts Made by the Slave.</i> The law of -principal and agent, as adopted by the common law, did not -apply to master and slave in all instances, but in the ordinary -domestic relations it was generally held that the master -could do business through the agency of his slaves and that -he was bound by their acts in such cases. The rule separating -the two types of cases seems to have been that, where -skill and mentality were requisite for the performance of -the task, the law would not imply a contract on the part of -the master.<a id="FNanchor_133" href="#Footnote_133" class="fnanchor">[53]</a></p> - -<p>b. <i>For Negligence of the Slave Resulting in Injury -to Others.</i> The master was not liable for the negligence of -his slaves in the performance of unauthorized acts, but was -responsible for the faithful performance of their duties -when they were acting as tradesmen or carriers under his -authority.</p> - -<p>c. <i>For Torts and Crimes Committed by Slaves.</i> The -master was responsible for damage done by slaves carrying<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36"></a>[36]</span> -guns with his permission.<a id="FNanchor_134" href="#Footnote_134" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> He was subject to indictment -and fine at the discretion of the court for permitting a slave -to practice medicine or heal the sick.<a id="FNanchor_135" href="#Footnote_135" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> He was liable for -at least a fifty-dollar fine for permitting his slave to sell -spiritous liquors.<a id="FNanchor_136" href="#Footnote_136" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> He was held responsible for the slave’s -acts even if a state of inchoate freedom existed. “The -master,” said Judge Green, “by failing to petition the county -court and give bond according to law, remains liable to all -the penalties of the law as though he had never consented -to his freedom. In view of the law, the negro is not a freeman -until the State, through the proper tribunal, consents -to his freedom.</p> - -<p>“Until that is done the master may be indicted for permitting -him to act as a freeman, and is liable to all the -other consequences that would have existed if he had not -consented to the defendant’s freedom.”<a id="FNanchor_137" href="#Footnote_137" class="fnanchor">[57]</a></p> - -<h4>B. <i>Liabilities of Society to the Master for Abusing His -Slave.</i></h4> - -<p>1. <i>For Beating or Harboring Him.</i> It was a criminal -offense for anyone to abuse wantonly the slave of another. -Any such person was subject to indictment in the circuit -court, under the same rules and subject to the same penalties -as if the offense had been committed against a white person.<a id="FNanchor_138" href="#Footnote_138" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> -Enticing a slave to absent himself from his owner -subjected one to a forfeiture of fifty dollars to be recovered -as an action of debt by the owner of the slave. It was a -fine of one hundred pounds to harbor a slave and cause a -loss of service to the master.<a id="FNanchor_139" href="#Footnote_139" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> If a master of a vessel entertained -on board a slave without a permit from the owner -or a justice of the Peace, he was liable to a fine of $12.50<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37"></a>[37]</span> -for the first offense, and $25 for each succeeding offense.<a id="FNanchor_140" href="#Footnote_140" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> -It was finally made a penitentiary offense to harbor a slave -with intent to steal him or carry him beyond the borders of -the state.<a id="FNanchor_141" href="#Footnote_141" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> Also, one was subject to imprisonment for a -term of not less than three nor more than ten years for deliberately -harboring a runaway.<a id="FNanchor_142" href="#Footnote_142" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p> - -<p>2. <i>For Maiming or Killing Him.</i> Any person, wilfully -or maliciously killing a slave, was guilty of murder -and suffered death without benefit of clergy. If the slave did -not belong to the offender, “his goods, chattels, lands and -tenements” could be sold to pay for the slave.<a id="FNanchor_143" href="#Footnote_143" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> Killing a -slave without malice was manslaughter. In the case of -Fields v. The State of Tennessee, the court said, “that law -which says thou shalt not kill, protects the slave; and he is -within its very letter. Law, reason, Christianity and common -humanity all point out one way.”<a id="FNanchor_144" href="#Footnote_144" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> No individual had -the right to become the avenger of the violated law.<a id="FNanchor_145" href="#Footnote_145" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p> - -<p>3. <i>For Trading with Him.</i> No one was permitted to -trade with a slave unless he had a permit. The slave was -permitted to sell articles of his own manufacture without a -permit. Any one who violated this act was subject to a -fine of not less than five nor more than ten dollars to be -recovered before any justice of the peace of the county in -which the offense was committed. One-half of the fine was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38"></a>[38]</span> -paid to the master of the slave.<a id="FNanchor_146" href="#Footnote_146" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> If the offender was a -free person of color born in slavery, the slave could be a -witness in the case.<a id="FNanchor_147" href="#Footnote_147" class="fnanchor">[67]</a></p> - -<p>4. <i>For Using Improper Language Before Him or Permitting -Him to Visit Your Home.</i> To inflame the mind of -any slave or incite him to insurrection by using improper -language in his presence subjected one, on conviction, to a -fine of ten dollars to be recovered as an action of debt before -any court having jurisdiction. The fine was equally -divided between the county and the person instituting suit.<a id="FNanchor_148" href="#Footnote_148" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> -It was equally a violation of the law to permit slaves to -assemble at one’s residence or negro houses.<a id="FNanchor_149" href="#Footnote_149" class="fnanchor">[69]</a></p> - -<h3>IV. <span class="smcap">The Patrol System</span>—</h3> - -<p>A. <i>Searchers.</i> By act of 1753, searchers were appointed -by the county courts to visit slave quarters four times a -year in search of guns.<a id="FNanchor_150" href="#Footnote_150" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> Only reliable persons could be -searchers. By 1779, they were required to search for guns -once a month.<a id="FNanchor_151" href="#Footnote_151" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> These officers were the beginning of the -patrol system in Tennessee.</p> - -<p>B. <i>Patrols.</i> In 1806, the searchers were converted into -patrols and a very elaborate system of police was devised. -Captains of militia were empowered to appoint patrols for -the counties, determine their number and the frequency of -their ridings.<a id="FNanchor_152" href="#Footnote_152" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> Commissioners of the towns were directed -to appoint patrols for the towns, whether incorporated or -unincorporated.<a id="FNanchor_153" href="#Footnote_153" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> In 1817, justices of the peace were given -the power to suggest the appointment of patrols to captains -of militia in their districts.<a id="FNanchor_154" href="#Footnote_154" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> In 1831, they were empowered -to appoint patrols for their district in case captains of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39"></a>[39]</span> -militia neglected to do so.<a id="FNanchor_155" href="#Footnote_155" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> In 1856, masters, mistresses, -and overseers were made patrols over their own premises.<a id="FNanchor_156" href="#Footnote_156" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p> - -<p>Patrols were paid from the county treasury. A tax was -levied on the taxable slaves for this purpose.<a id="FNanchor_157" href="#Footnote_157" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> The patrol -swore to his account before a justice of the peace, who carried -the account to the county court, which decided how -much the patrolman should receive.<a id="FNanchor_158" href="#Footnote_158" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> By act of 1856, -patrols were allowed $1.00 per night or day for their services.<a id="FNanchor_159" href="#Footnote_159" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> -If the masters or mistresses served as patrols, they -received nothing for their services.<a id="FNanchor_160" href="#Footnote_160" class="fnanchor">[80]</a></p> - -<p>Patrol service was obligatory upon all citizens. Anyone -refusing to serve as a patrol was fined $5.00 for each refusal.<a id="FNanchor_161" href="#Footnote_161" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> -A person serving as a patrolman for three months -was exempted from musters, road-working, and jury service -for twelve months.<a id="FNanchor_162" href="#Footnote_162" class="fnanchor">[82]</a> They were paid $5.00 for every slave -they returned to his master.</p> - -<p>The powers and duties of patrols were rather extensive. -Once each month, they were to search for guns and other -weapons and turn such as they found over to the county -court or return the same to the owner.<a id="FNanchor_163" href="#Footnote_163" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> They searched -all suspected places for slaves without permission of the -owners. They could punish, with fifteen stripes on the bare -back, any negro, bond or free, that they found away from -home, without a pass from his master.<a id="FNanchor_164" href="#Footnote_164" class="fnanchor">[84]</a></p> - -<p>The patrols sometimes abused their powers. In 1859, -the supreme court held that</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“It is of great importance to society that these -police regulations connected with the institution -of slavery, should be firmly maintained; the well-being -and safety of both master and slave demand<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40"></a>[40]</span> -it. The institution and support of the night watch -and patrol on some plan are indispensable to good -order, and the subordination of slaves, and the best -interest of their owners. But the authority conferred -for these important objects must not be -abused by those upon whom it is conferred, as it -sometimes is by reckless persons. If they exceed -the bounds of moderation in the injury inflicted -and transcend the limits prescribed by law for the -office of patrol, if it be found that they were not -entitled to that justification, then they will be -liable under a verdict to that effect.”<a id="FNanchor_165" href="#Footnote_165" class="fnanchor">[85]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Proper pass regulations were an important feature of -the patrol system. This is shown in the case of Jones v. -Allen. A slave attended a corn-shucking without a pass. -In the course of the festivities the slave was killed. The -master of the slave brought suit for damages equal to the -value of the slave against the man who gave the husking. -The lower court gave damages to the master on the ground -that the slave should not have been permitted to remain at -the husking without a pass. The supreme court reversed -the case, holding that it was customary for slaves to attend -such gatherings without passes if a white man was superintending -them.<a id="FNanchor_166" href="#Footnote_166" class="fnanchor">[86]</a></p> - -<p>C. <i>Sheriffs and Constables.</i> It was the business of -sheriffs and constables to apprehend runaway slaves, place -them in jail, and advertise them that they might be returned -to their owners. They assisted in the enforcement of the -powers of the patrols, who were really a part of the police -system of the state. The patrol system was supposed to be -maintained by the taxation of slaves, but since it involved -also the general system of police of the state, it was to some -extent a burden upon the general public.</p> - -<p>Slavery created a real problem of government. “For -reasons of policy and necessity,” said Judge McKinney in -1858, “it has been found indispensable, in every slaveholding -community, to provide various police and patrol regulations, -giving to white persons, other than the owner, the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41"></a>[41]</span> -right, and making it the duty, under certain circumstances, -to exercise a control over other slaves. The safety of the -community, the protection of the person and property of -individuals, and the safety of the owner’s property in his -slaves, alike demand the enactment of such laws.”<a id="FNanchor_167" href="#Footnote_167" class="fnanchor">[87]</a></p> - -<p>The constant fear of insurrections, the ever-present runaway, -and the carelessness of masters in granting passes -were the main reasons why society maintained such a rigid -system of control. Of course, the interests of the owners -of slaves were conserved by such a system.</p> - -<h3>V. <span class="smcap">Special Problems of Slave Government</span>—</h3> - -<h4>A. <i>The Runaway.</i></h4> - -<p>The runaway was a great source of -worry and expense to the master and somewhat of a terror -to the community. The police system of slavery was never -able to prevent runaways. If a runaway were caught outside -the limits of a corporation, he was taken before a -justice of the peace and asked for his master’s name. If he -refused to give this information, he was placed in jail and -advertised by a placard on the courthouse door and in the -newspapers.<a id="FNanchor_168" href="#Footnote_168" class="fnanchor">[88]</a> If the slave was not claimed within twelve -months, the sheriff of the county, on thirty days’ notice, -sold him at the courthouse to the highest bidder, the net -proceeds of the sale going to the county. The county court -gave title of the slave to the purchaser.</p> - -<p>The county jailer, with the consent of the county court -or two of the justices of the peace, could hire out a runaway -to either a private individual or an incorporated -town.<a id="FNanchor_169" href="#Footnote_169" class="fnanchor">[89]</a> To release the county from obligation, he placed -around the negro’s neck a collar, on which was stamped -“P. G.”<a id="FNanchor_170" href="#Footnote_170" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> The wages of the slave went into the county -treasury to be disposed of by the county court.</p> - -<p>If an incorporated town or city hired the runaway, it -gave bond to the sheriff of the county for double the value -of the slave. This was the bond of the corporation to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42"></a>[42]</span> -State of Tennessee for the safekeeping, good treatment, and -delivery of the slave to the owner or jailer at the completion -of the contract. The wages of the slave went to the -county.<a id="FNanchor_171" href="#Footnote_171" class="fnanchor">[91]</a> The corporation made a very careful description -of the slave to use in case of escape.</p> - -<p>A runaway arrested in an incorporated city was taken by -a patrolman or policeman to the police-station. He was -released to his owner on payment of one dollar. If he was -not called for, he was hired to the city authorities, advertised -and sold at public auction to the highest bidder. The proceeds -of the sale went to the city and the city authorities -made a deed of sale to the purchaser.</p> - -<p>After 1819, the runaway could no longer be outlawed and -killed by anyone who had the opportunity.<a id="FNanchor_172" href="#Footnote_172" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> By act of -1825, a runaway was advertised one year before he was -sold at public auction. If the owner, within two years from -the date of sale, proved that the slave was his, he could recover -the net proceeds of the sale or the slave himself by -paying the purchaser the amount paid for the slave.<a id="FNanchor_173" href="#Footnote_173" class="fnanchor">[93]</a> Any -one who arrested a runaway and delivered him to the owner -or jailer, was entitled to the sum of five dollars for his services.<a id="FNanchor_174" href="#Footnote_174" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> -After 1831, it was not required by law to make a -proclamation concerning a runaway at church “on the -Lord’s day.”<a id="FNanchor_175" href="#Footnote_175" class="fnanchor">[95]</a> By act of 1844, sheriffs were given authority -to hire out a runaway in their custody to municipal authorities, -who, however, were required to execute bond twice -the value of the slave for proper treatment of him.<a id="FNanchor_176" href="#Footnote_176" class="fnanchor">[96]</a> It -seems that sheriffs, constables, and patrolmen abused the -power given them by act of 1831, relative to the arrest of -runaways for which they received five dollars. Masters -were subject to useless fees for the arrest of slaves who -were not runaways. In 1852, the arrest and confinement<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43"></a>[43]</span> -of slaves in county jails in the towns and vicinities of their -masters was forbidden.<a id="FNanchor_177" href="#Footnote_177" class="fnanchor">[97]</a></p> - -<h4>B. <i>Importation of Slaves.</i></h4> - -<p>North Carolina, by act of -1786, placed a duty of fifty shillings on slaves under seven -years of age and over forty; five pounds between the ages -of seven and twelve, and thirty and forty; and ten pounds -on ages between twelve and thirty.<a id="FNanchor_178" href="#Footnote_178" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> This regulation became -ineffective when North Carolina ratified the constitution -in 1790. The importation of slaves into Tennessee as -merchandise was prohibited in 1812.<a id="FNanchor_179" href="#Footnote_179" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> This act did not -prohibit people from moving to the state with their slaves, -nor did it prevent citizens from bringing into the state -slaves which they had acquired by descent, devise, marriage, -or purchase. Persons, moving into the state with their -slaves, were required within twenty days to take oath before -a justice of the peace that they were not violating the -spirit of the law.<a id="FNanchor_180" href="#Footnote_180" class="fnanchor">[100]</a> Such persons were required to deliver -to a justice of the peace an inventory of their slaves, giving -their number, age and description. This inventory was filed -in the office of the county court clerk. The slaves of any -one violating this act were seized and sold to the highest -bidder at public auction.<a id="FNanchor_181" href="#Footnote_181" class="fnanchor">[101]</a> By act of 1815, such slaves were -advertised twenty days before date of sale.<a id="FNanchor_182" href="#Footnote_182" class="fnanchor">[102]</a></p> - -<p>The permanent law of importation was the act of 1826. -It retained the features of the above acts and in addition -forbade the importation into the state for any purpose convict -slaves from territories or states whose laws transmuted -the crimes of such slaves upon their removal.<a id="FNanchor_183" href="#Footnote_183" class="fnanchor">[103]</a> Any one<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44"></a>[44]</span> -violating this act was ordered before a justice of the peace, -who might require him to give bond with two good securities -for his appearance with the slaves at the next term of the -circuit court. If he were convicted of violating this act, his -slaves were sold at public auction to the highest bidder.<a id="FNanchor_184" href="#Footnote_184" class="fnanchor">[104]</a> -It is to be noticed, however, that a professional slave-dealer -could afford to lose a few slaves occasionally, because he paid -only the transportation for convict slaves and received from -five hundred to eight hundred dollars for each slave that he -successfully smuggled through.</p> - -<p>There was no change in the laws of importation until 1855. -The act passed in that year permitted the importation of -slaves other than convicts as articles of merchandise, and -thus replaced the acts of 1815 and 1826 in this respect.<a id="FNanchor_185" href="#Footnote_185" class="fnanchor">[105]</a> -This indicates a revolution on this subject. West Tennessee, -the black belt part of the state, began to be settled in -1819 and was being put into cultivation in the second quarter -of the nineteenth century. The abolition forces in the state -were defeated in the constitutional convention of 1834.<a id="FNanchor_186" href="#Footnote_186" class="fnanchor">[106]</a> -The demand for slaves had increased as is shown by the increase -in price from $584 in 1836 to $854.65 in 1859.<a id="FNanchor_187" href="#Footnote_187" class="fnanchor">[107]</a> The -old Whig areas had become Democratic by the early fifties, -and Middle and West Tennessee were pro-slavery. The -press and the churches had become more favorable in their -attitude toward slavery.</p> - -<h4>C. <i>The Stealing of Slaves.</i></h4> - -<p>Slaves were constantly -stolen by individuals and organizations of professional slave -thieves. This was one of the most difficult problems of -slave government, and demanded very rigid laws for its -regulation. By act of 1799, a person stealing a slave, a -free negro, or mulatto, for his own use or to sell was guilty -of a felony and suffered death without benefit of clergy.<a id="FNanchor_188" href="#Footnote_188" class="fnanchor">[108]</a> -The penalty for this offence in 1835 was reduced to not less<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45"></a>[45]</span> -than three nor more than ten years in the penitentiary.<a id="FNanchor_189" href="#Footnote_189" class="fnanchor">[109]</a> -The penalty was the same for harboring a slave with intent -to steal him, or for persuading a slave to leave his master.<a id="FNanchor_190" href="#Footnote_190" class="fnanchor">[110]</a></p> - -<p>The following advertisement from a religious magazine -shows how society was aroused at times on the stealing of -slaves and how it proposed to recover them:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>A more heart-rending act of villainy has rarely -been committed than the following: on Monday, -the 30th of May last, three children, viz., Elizabeth, -ten years of age, Martha, eight, and a small boy, -name forgotten, all bright mulattoes, were violently -taken from the arms of their mother, Elizabeth -Price, a free woman of color, living in Fayette -County, Tennessee. Strong suspicion rests upon -two men, gone from thence to the state of Missouri; -and it is ardently hoped that the citizens -of that state will interest themselves in the apprehension -of the robbers and the restoration of the -children. A handsome subscription has been raised -in the neighborhood to reward any person who -may restore them. Editors of papers, and especially -such as are in and contiguous to the state of -Missouri, are requested to give the above an insertion.<a id="FNanchor_191" href="#Footnote_191" class="fnanchor">[111]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>One of the greatest organizations in the South for the -stealing of negroes had its headquarters in West Tennessee -and was managed by John A. Murrell. This organization -consisted of 450 persons and operated throughout the Mississippi -Valley. This organization was in collusion with -slaves. It stole the same slaves repeatedly and sold them -sometimes to their own masters. Murrell’s last stealing -was two slaves from Rev. John Hennig, of Madison County, -Tennessee. He was caught in 1835, tried, convicted, and -sentenced for the maximum term of ten years in the state -penitentiary.<a id="FNanchor_192" href="#Footnote_192" class="fnanchor">[112]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46"></a>[46]</span></p> - -<h4>D. <i>Trading With Slaves.</i></h4> - -<p>The foundation for the regulation -of traffic with slaves was laid by the acts of 1741 -and 1787, passed by the Colony and State of North Carolina.<a id="FNanchor_193" href="#Footnote_193" class="fnanchor">[113]</a> -In 1799, all traffic with slaves was forbidden unless -they had a permit from their masters, designating time -and place of the proposed transaction.<a id="FNanchor_194" href="#Footnote_194" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> It was a ten dollar -fine to be convicted of violating this regulation. If a -slave forged a pass as a basis for such a transaction, he -was corporally punished at the discretion of a justice of the -peace. Trading with slaves was made a more serious matter -in 1803.<a id="FNanchor_195" href="#Footnote_195" class="fnanchor">[115]</a> The pass by this act was required to specify -the articles to be traded. Any one violating it was punishable -by a fine of not less than ten nor more than fifty dollars. -In 1806, it was made unlawful for a white person, -free negro, or mulatto to be found in the company of a -slave for any purpose without the consent of the owner.<a id="FNanchor_196" href="#Footnote_196" class="fnanchor">[116]</a> -In 1813, the restrictions on trading with slaves were made -more lenient. The fine for trading in violation of the law -was reduced to not less than five nor more than ten dollars -and slaves might trade articles of their own make without -passes from their masters.<a id="FNanchor_197" href="#Footnote_197" class="fnanchor">[117]</a></p> - -<p>The liquor traffic was the most difficult part of trading -with slaves to regulate. The North Carolina code left whiskey -in the same category with other articles, but in 1813 -Tennessee made it punishable by a fine of not less than five -nor more than ten dollars to sell it to slaves.<a id="FNanchor_198" href="#Footnote_198" class="fnanchor">[118]</a> If a person -was convicted of violating this regulation and could not -pay his fine, he went to jail until he could pay it with cost. -By act of 1829, a slave was given from three to ten lashes -for having whiskey in his possession and from five to ten -for selling it to another slave.<a id="FNanchor_199" href="#Footnote_199" class="fnanchor">[119]</a> Any merchant, tavern-keeper, -distiller, or any other person, who sold whiskey<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47"></a>[47]</span> -to a slave without permit from his master, was guilty of a -misdemeanor, and, on being convicted, was subject to a -fine of fifty dollars.<a id="FNanchor_200" href="#Footnote_200" class="fnanchor">[120]</a></p> - -<p>The laws regulating this traffic became increasingly -strict. By act of 1832, a dealer in order to secure a license -to sell whiskey was required to take an oath not to sell a -slave unless he had a written permit from his master.<a id="FNanchor_201" href="#Footnote_201" class="fnanchor">[121]</a> -Clerks in liquor houses, not considering themselves dealers, -continued to sell whiskey to slaves; so in 1846, the oath was -modified to include sales within the knowledge of the person -receiving the license.<a id="FNanchor_202" href="#Footnote_202" class="fnanchor">[122]</a> In 1842, the punishment for selling -whiskey to slaves or letting a free negro be intoxicated on -one’s premises was made imprisonment for a period of not -exceeding thirty days.<a id="FNanchor_203" href="#Footnote_203" class="fnanchor">[123]</a></p> - -<p>The policy of the state toward the liquor traffic with slaves -was forcibly expressed by Judge Caruthers in the case of -Jennings v. the State, as follows:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Under no circumstances, not even in the presence, -or by permission in writing or otherwise, can -spirits be sold or delivered to a slave for his own -use, but only for the use of the master, and even -in that case, the owner or master must be present -or send a written order, specifying that it is for -himself, and the quantity to be sent.... A general -or indefinite order, such as those exhibited in this -case, is of no avail. An order can cover only a -single transaction, and then it is exhausted.<a id="FNanchor_204" href="#Footnote_204" class="fnanchor">[124]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>It is noticed that this law applied to everybody and not -merely to licensed liquor dealers.</p> - -<p>The laws on traffic with slaves finally concluded: “Any -person who sells, loans, or delivers to any slave, except for -his master or owner, and then only in such owner or master’s -presence, or upon his written order, any liquor, gun,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48"></a>[48]</span> -or weapon ... is guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be fined -not less than fifty dollars, and imprisoned in the county jail -at the discretion of the court.”<a id="FNanchor_205" href="#Footnote_205" class="fnanchor">[125]</a> Judge Caruthers, commenting -on this law, said: “This is intended to cut up the -offense by the roots, and prescribes a penalty calculated to -deter those that milder punishment had been found insufficient -to restrain from the injury or destruction of their -neighbor’s property.”<a id="FNanchor_206" href="#Footnote_206" class="fnanchor">[126]</a></p> - -<p>Municipalities usually supplemented the laws of the state -with special regulations of their own. The Board of Commissioners -of Nashville, June 7, 1805,</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the town -sergeant to inspect each slave he may discover -trading in town, and require of them a permit -from their master or mistress, or the person under -whose care they are, specifying the commodity -which they may have for sale. And if such slave -has no permit, the town sergeant shall immediately -seize on the commodity he may have for sale, and -take it with the slave before some justice of the -peace, and make oath that such slave had transgressed -the by-laws for the regulation of the town -in the manner above described. The town sergeant -shall then immediately expose to sale such -commodity to the highest bidder for cash at the -market house; one-half of the amount of such -sales to go to the use of the town, and the other -half to the use of the sergeant for his services.<a id="FNanchor_207" href="#Footnote_207" class="fnanchor">[127]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Traffic with slaves was very important for several reasons. -The slave had very little sense of value, in the first -place. He frequently exchanged the most valuable farm -products for a pittance in order to obtain money with which -to gamble or buy whiskey. The liquor traffic still more -vitally touched the life of the plantation. An intoxicated -slave was not only incapacitated, but he was inclined to raise -trouble with other slaves. This might end in slaves being -killed or an insurrection. Again, the element of society<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49"></a>[49]</span> -that engaged in the liquor traffic with slaves was usually -the poor whites, free negroes, or mulattoes, who were opposed -to slavery and did not hesitate to propagate ideas of -insurrection and freedom among slaves. The best way to -keep slaves happy and contented and, consequently, efficient, -was to have complete severance of relations between them -and outsiders. Finally, it is noticed that traffic with slaves, -in all its ramifications, seriously endangered property interests.</p> - -<h4>E. <i>Insurrections.</i></h4> - -<p>No one was permitted to speak disrespectfully -of the owner in a slave’s presence, or to use language -of an insurrectionary nature.<a id="FNanchor_208" href="#Footnote_208" class="fnanchor">[128]</a> Words in favor of -emancipation, rebellion, or conspiracy came under this head. -The penalty was a fine of $10, one-half to the county and -the other to the reporter.</p> - -<p>A person knowingly aiding in circulating any printed -matter that fostered discontent or insubordination among -slaves or free persons of color, was guilty of felony, and -might suffer an imprisonment of ten years for first offense -and twenty for the second.<a id="FNanchor_209" href="#Footnote_209" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> The same punishment was -prescribed for addresses, or sermons of an inflammatory -nature.</p> - -<p>There were only two instances of threatened insurrection -in the slave history of Tennessee. The first one of these -occurred in 1831, and was nipped in the bud by information -secured from a female slave.<a id="FNanchor_210" href="#Footnote_210" class="fnanchor">[130]</a> It resulted in a petition -being sent to the legislature signed by 108 people, asking -for a better patrol system. The second was planned in -1857, and seems to have included the states of Kentucky, -Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas.<a id="FNanchor_211" href="#Footnote_211" class="fnanchor">[131]</a> -The scheme was discovered in November of 1857 among the -slaves employed at the Cumberland Iron Works in Tennessee -just before they were ready to execute it. One account<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50"></a>[50]</span> -says, “more than sixty slaves in the Iron Works were implicated, -and nine were hung, four by the decision of the -court and five by a mob.” The Missouri Democrat of December -4 states that “For the past month, the Journals from -different Southern states have been filled with numberless -alarms respecting contemplated risings of the negro population. -In Tennessee, in Missouri, in Virginia, and in -Alabama, so imminent has been the danger that the most -severe measures have been adopted to prevent their congregating -or visiting after night, to suppress their customary -attendance at neighborhood preachings and to keep a vigilant -watch upon all their movements, by an efficient patrolling -system. This is assuredly a most lamentable condition -for the slave states, for nothing causes such terror -upon the plantations as the bare suspicion of these insurrections.”<a id="FNanchor_212" href="#Footnote_212" class="fnanchor">[132]</a></p> - -<h4>F. <i>The Assembly of Slaves.</i></h4> - -<p>All slave gatherings on -the master’s plantation were exclusively under his control, -as he was responsible for the results. It was considered -dangerous to society, however, for slaves to collect miscellaneously. -By act of 1803, it was made a ten-dollar fine -for any one to permit the slaves of another to congregate -on his premises without passes from their master.<a id="FNanchor_213" href="#Footnote_213" class="fnanchor">[133]</a> To -aid the justices of the peace in enforcing this act, the fine -was equally divided between the county and the reporter of -its violation. There was so much zeal shown in the enforcement -of this act that the fine was reduced in 1813 to not less -than five nor more than ten dollars.<a id="FNanchor_214" href="#Footnote_214" class="fnanchor">[134]</a></p> - -<p>The insurrections over the country in the early thirties -and rumors of an insurrection in Tennessee in 1831, combined -with the abolition propaganda, gave added significance -to the meetings of slaves. It now became necessary -to punish slaves for participating in unlawful assemblies -as well as to fine those permitting them.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51"></a>[51]</span></p> - -<p>The act of 1831 empowered justices of the peace, constables -and patrols to disperse such meetings and to inflict -twenty-five lashes upon the slaves engaged, if necessary. -The fine for permitting unlawful assemblies was now left -to the discretion of the court.<a id="FNanchor_215" href="#Footnote_215" class="fnanchor">[135]</a> The amount of litigation -likely to result from the enforcement of this measure made -it necessary to define the terms unlawful assembly.<a id="FNanchor_216" href="#Footnote_216" class="fnanchor">[136]</a></p> - -<h4>G. <i>Punishment of Slaves</i>—</h4> - -<p>1. <i>Offenses Punishable by Stripes.</i> Trading without -permits from their masters or forging passes was punishable -by stripes by act of 1799. The number of stripes was -left to the discretion of the justice but was not to exceed -thirty-nine.<a id="FNanchor_217" href="#Footnote_217" class="fnanchor">[137]</a> In 1806, riots, unlawful assemblies, trespasses, -seditious speeches, insulting language to whites, -were made offenses punishable by stripes at the discretion -of the justice.<a id="FNanchor_218" href="#Footnote_218" class="fnanchor">[138]</a> By act of 1813, the slave was whipped for -selling any article not made by himself.<a id="FNanchor_219" href="#Footnote_219" class="fnanchor">[139]</a> The number of -stripes was not less than five, nor more than thirty. He -was punished for selling whiskey or keeping it at some -other place than his own home. This offense was punishable -by not less than three nor more than ten lashes.<a id="FNanchor_220" href="#Footnote_220" class="fnanchor">[140]</a> It -is interesting to notice the leniency in the punishment for -selling this particular article. Conspiracy, which was punishable -by death alone in the act 1741, might by act of 1831 -be punished by whipping, pillory, or imprisonment.<a id="FNanchor_221" href="#Footnote_221" class="fnanchor">[141]</a> -Death still remained a proper punishment for this offense, -but one of the others-could be substituted at the discretion -of the justice, depending on the character and extent of the -conspiracy. By act of 1844, the runaway could be worked<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52"></a>[52]</span> -on the streets of an incorporated town and his wages went to -the poor.<a id="FNanchor_222" href="#Footnote_222" class="fnanchor">[142]</a></p> - -<p>2. <i>Capital Offenses.</i> By act of 1741, killing of horses, -hogs, or cattle without a permit from the master was punishable -by death for second offense.<a id="FNanchor_223" href="#Footnote_223" class="fnanchor">[143]</a> In 1819, murder, -arson, rape, burglary, and robbery were made capital offenses -and punishment in all other cases was not to extend -to life or limb.<a id="FNanchor_224" href="#Footnote_224" class="fnanchor">[144]</a> By this act the suffering of death by -being outlawed as a runaway was abolished. By act of -1835, intent to commit rape upon a white woman was punishable -by hanging.<a id="FNanchor_225" href="#Footnote_225" class="fnanchor">[145]</a> The burning of a barn, a bridge, or -a house with intent to kill was a capital offense.<a id="FNanchor_226" href="#Footnote_226" class="fnanchor">[146]</a></p> - -<p>3. <i>Offenses Punishable at the Discretion of the Jury.</i> -The burning of barns, houses, bridges, steamboats, manufacturing -plants, and valuable buildings or property of any -kind were offenses for which the jury could punish at their -discretion, provided such punishment did not extend to life -or limb. All offenses of slaves for which there was not a -specific punishment fixed by law were left to the discretion -of the jury.<a id="FNanchor_227" href="#Footnote_227" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> The cutting off of ears, standing in the pillory, -and branding were some of the older punishments for -which whipping came to be a substitute.</p> - -<h3>VI. <span class="smcap">Title to Slaves</span>—</h3> - -<p>A. <i>By Deed.</i> There was no statutory restriction upon -the sale or transfer of slaves from one person to another.<a id="FNanchor_228" href="#Footnote_228" class="fnanchor">[148]</a> -Secret and fraudulent transfers became so numerous that -sales of slaves and deeds of gifts were in 1784 required to -be in writing attested by at least one creditible witness and -recorded within nine months thereafter.<a id="FNanchor_229" href="#Footnote_229" class="fnanchor">[149]</a> By an act of -1801, such transfers were no longer required to be recorded<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53"></a>[53]</span> -if possession accompanied the sale or gift.<a id="FNanchor_230" href="#Footnote_230" class="fnanchor">[150]</a> In the case -of Davis v. Mitchell, Judge Green charged the jury that “a -deed registered is only necessary where possession does not -accompany gift or sale.”<a id="FNanchor_231" href="#Footnote_231" class="fnanchor">[151]</a> A bill of sale of slaves by a person -indebted, who still retained possession of the slaves, -after the execution of the bill of sale, was void against -creditors, although a valuable consideration was received. -A conveyance of personality presupposed a transfer of possession.<a id="FNanchor_232" href="#Footnote_232" class="fnanchor">[152]</a></p> - -<p>B. <i>By Devise.</i> The transfer of slaves by will followed -the same procedure as real estate. A will, valid in either -law or equity, had to be in the handwriting of the deceased -and signed by him or some other person in his presence -representing him and by two witnesses. Such a devise was -in fee simple unless an estate of less dignity was definitely -conveyed.<a id="FNanchor_233" href="#Footnote_233" class="fnanchor">[153]</a> If the deceased left no will, the slaves became -the property of the widow for life, the widow being required -to give bond to the county that such slaves with their increase -would be returned at her death to the administrators -of her deceased husband’s estate. In absence of the wife, -the slaves were equally distributed among the children.<a id="FNanchor_234" href="#Footnote_234" class="fnanchor">[154]</a> -By act of 1796, half bloods were inherited equally with full -brothers and sisters. In the absence of such brothers and -sisters, the law of distribution was followed among the collateral -heirs.<a id="FNanchor_235" href="#Footnote_235" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> By act of 1819, foreigners who had settled -in Tennessee and had not been naturalized inherited in the -same manner as natural born citizens.<a id="FNanchor_236" href="#Footnote_236" class="fnanchor">[156]</a></p> - -<p>C. <i>By Parol Contract, and Gifts to Children in Consideration -of Marriage.</i> Conveyance of slaves was required to -be in writing and properly attested by witnesses. There<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54"></a>[54]</span> -could be no transfer of title by parol and no deed of gift -was recognized unless it was proved and registered.<a id="FNanchor_237" href="#Footnote_237" class="fnanchor">[157]</a> By -act of 1805, the transfer of slaves in consideration of marriage, -to be valid against creditors, had to be acknowledged -by the grantor or proved by two credible witnesses and recorded -in the county of the grantor within nine months.<a id="FNanchor_238" href="#Footnote_238" class="fnanchor">[158]</a></p> - -<p>D. <i>By Statute of Limitation.</i> In Tennessee, three years -of adverse possession invested the title of a slave in the possessor -by virtue of the statute of limitation.<a id="FNanchor_239" href="#Footnote_239" class="fnanchor">[159]</a> By the -statute of limitation, a gift of parol, which is absolutely void, -would, after the lapse of three years’ possession, convey -title.<a id="FNanchor_240" href="#Footnote_240" class="fnanchor">[160]</a> Judge Green in Davis v. Mitchell, held that an infant -might hold adverse possession of a slave, either by -himself or through a guardian, and that three years of such -possession invested the title of the slave in him.<a id="FNanchor_241" href="#Footnote_241" class="fnanchor">[161]</a> Three -years of uninterrupted possession not only invested title, -but the right to convey that title.<a id="FNanchor_242" href="#Footnote_242" class="fnanchor">[162]</a></p> - -<p>E. <i>By Statute of Frauds and Fraudulent Conveyances.</i> -All gifts, grants, loans, alienations or conveyances made -with fraudulent purposes were valid only between the parties -making them and their heirs, assigns, and administrators, -and in no way barred the action of creditors.<a id="FNanchor_243" href="#Footnote_243" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> A -conveyance of goods or chattels, without a valuable consideration, -was considered fraudulent, unless it was made by -a will duly proved and recorded or a deed acknowledged -and proved. By act of 1805, such recording had to be done -within nine months to be valid against creditors or future -purchasers.<a id="FNanchor_244" href="#Footnote_244" class="fnanchor">[164]</a> In Tennessee the want of possession was -only prima facie evidence of fraud, and might be explained.<a id="FNanchor_245" href="#Footnote_245" class="fnanchor">[165]</a> -If a father represented a slave to be his son’s<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55"></a>[55]</span> -delivered possession and permitted possession to continue -during the lifetime of the son, who also claimed the slave -as his own, it was a gift. The acknowledgment of the son -that the slave belonged to the father would not bar the -claim of the widow.<a id="FNanchor_246" href="#Footnote_246" class="fnanchor">[166]</a></p> - -<p>F. <i>By Prescription.</i> Prescription passed the title and -possession of slaves in Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_247" href="#Footnote_247" class="fnanchor">[167]</a> In the case of Andrews -v. Hartsfield, Judge Green held that a bona fide loan of -slaves by a father to a married daughter for five years subjected -the slaves to sale for the debts of her husband.<a id="FNanchor_248" href="#Footnote_248" class="fnanchor">[168]</a></p> - -<h3>VII. <span class="smcap">The Law of Increase</span>—</h3> - -<p>A. <i>As to Condition of Increase.</i> Tennessee adopted the -rule of nature, pertaining to human creatures, in declaring -that the condition of the mother should be that of the child. -Children born of a mother emancipated at a future date received -their freedom with the mother. In the case of Harris -v. Clarissa, who was to receive her freedom at the age -of twenty, Judge Catron, speaking of the condition of her -children born after the bequest of her freedom, said: “Had -she been a slave forever, their condition would have been -the same, she being a slave for years, their condition could -not be worse. The child before born is a part of the mother, -and its condition the same; birth does not alter its -rights.”<a id="FNanchor_249" href="#Footnote_249" class="fnanchor">[169]</a> Children born of a mother conditionally manumitted -were held to be slaves.<a id="FNanchor_250" href="#Footnote_250" class="fnanchor">[170]</a></p> - -<p>B. <i>As to the Ownership of the Increase.</i> Tennessee held -that there was only one title to mother and child. If a -negro woman were devised to one person for life, with the -remainder to another, and during the life estate, she gave -birth to children, they belonged not to the tenant for life, -but to the remainder man.<a id="FNanchor_251" href="#Footnote_251" class="fnanchor">[171]</a> The first legatee held only a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56"></a>[56]</span> -particular interest, while the second held absolute title.<a id="FNanchor_252" href="#Footnote_252" class="fnanchor">[172]</a> -If the first devisee received an absolute estate, the increase -went to him.<a id="FNanchor_253" href="#Footnote_253" class="fnanchor">[173]</a> The term increase was usually qualified -by the word “future” in order to restrict its application to -only the issue after the bequest of freedom to the mother.<a id="FNanchor_254" href="#Footnote_254" class="fnanchor">[174]</a></p> - -<h3>VIII. <span class="smcap">The Legal Status of the Slave</span>—</h3> - -<p>What, then, in conclusion, was the legal status of the -slave? Was he a chattel? Or was he a responsible person? -By the civil law, the slave was a chattel; by the -common law he was a person. Both of these systems of -jurisprudence were combined into a compromise that actually -represented the legal status of the slave in Tennessee. -The slave was both a chattel and a person.</p> - -<p>A. <i>As a Chattel.</i> The slave was personal property. -He, therefore, could neither own property, nor make a -commercial contract. He had neither civil marriage nor -political rights. His movements in the community were -under the control of his master. He could not be a party -to a law suit in ordinary matters. He had no control over -his time or labor. His punishments were usually whipping. -Like a chattel, he was an article of merchandise -to be sold to the highest bidder. He had no control over -his children at law, and could not be a witness against a -white man.</p> - -<p>B. <i>As a Person.</i> The slave was emancipated and given -his full rights at law. He could be a party to a suit for his -freedom and for property that his freedom involved. He -could represent his master as agent. His marriage, while -not a civil one, was held binding by the courts. The children -of a recognized marriage were not illegitimate, and -took the legal status of the mother. He could make a binding -contract with his master for his freedom. He was held -responsible at law for murder. His intellectual and moral -qualities were recognized at times. He eventually acquired -the right of trial by jury.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57"></a>[57]</span></p> - -<p>This compromise legal basis of slavery in Tennessee was -well stated by Judge Nelson in the case of Andrews v. Page, -as follows:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>While the institution of slavery existed it was -generally held in the slaveholding states that the -marriage of slaves was utterly null and void; because -of the paramount ownership in them as -property, their incapacity to make a contract, and -the incompatibility of the duties and obligations -of husband and wife with relation to slavery.... -But we are not aware that this doctrine ever was -distinctly and explicitly recognized in this state.<a id="FNanchor_255" href="#Footnote_255" class="fnanchor">[175]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>In another connection in the same case, Judge Nelson -said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The numerous authorities above cited show that -slaves, although regarded as property and subject -to many restrictions, never were considered by the -courts of this state as standing on the same footing -as horses, cattle, and other personal property.<a id="FNanchor_256" href="#Footnote_256" class="fnanchor">[176]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Judge McKinney, in Jones v. Allen, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We are not to forget, nor are we to suppose, -that it was lost sight of by the legislature, that, -under our modified system of slavery, slaves are -not mere chattels, but are regarded in the two-fold -character of persons and property; that is, as persons -they are considered by our laws as accountable -moral agents, possessed of volition and locomotion, -and that certain rights have been conferred -upon them by positive law and judicial determination, -and other privileges and indulgences -have been conceded to them by the universal consent -of their owners. By uniform and universal -usage, they are constituted the agents of their -owners, and are sent on their business without -written authority; and in like manner they are -sent to perform those neighborly good offices common -in every community. They are not at all times -in the service of their owners, and are allowed by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58"></a>[58]</span> -universal sufferance, at night, on Sundays, holidays, -and other occasions, to go abroad, to attend -church, to visit those to whom they are related by -nature, though the relation may not be recognized -by municipal law; and to exercise other innocent -enjoyments without its ever entering the mind of -any good citizen to demand written authority of -them. The simple truth is, such indulgences have -been so long and so uniformly tolerated that public -sentiment upon the subject has acquired almost -the force of positive law.<a id="FNanchor_257" href="#Footnote_257" class="fnanchor">[177]</a></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_81" href="#FNanchor_81" class="label">[1]</a> State v. Hale, 2 Hawks, 585 (1823).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_82" href="#FNanchor_82" class="label">[2]</a> Meigs and Cooper’s Code of 1858, Secs. 2603-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_83" href="#FNanchor_83" class="label">[3]</a> M. & C, Secs. 2610-11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_84" href="#FNanchor_84" class="label">[4]</a> Ibid., Secs. 2612-13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_85" href="#FNanchor_85" class="label">[5]</a> Ibid., Sec. 2603.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_86" href="#FNanchor_86" class="label">[6]</a> Acts of 1833. Ch. 3. Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_87" href="#FNanchor_87" class="label">[7]</a> M. & C, Secs. 2666-68.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_88" href="#FNanchor_88" class="label">[8]</a> Stewart v. Miller, 1 Meigs, 174 (1838).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_89" href="#FNanchor_89" class="label">[9]</a> Harris v. Clarissa, 6 Yerger, 227 (1834); Blackmore v. Negro -Phill, 7 Yerger, 452 (1835).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_90" href="#FNanchor_90" class="label">[10]</a> Matilda v. Crenshaw, 4 Yerger, 299 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_91" href="#FNanchor_91" class="label">[11]</a> Vaughan v. Phebe, I Martin & Yerger, 1 (1827).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_92" href="#FNanchor_92" class="label">[12]</a> “Freedom in this country,” said Judge Crabb, “is not a mere -name—a cheat with which the few gull the many. It is something -substantial. It embraces within its comprehensive grasp, all the useful -rights of man; and it makes itself manifest by many privileges, -immunities, external public acts. It is not confined in its operation -to privacy, or to the domestic circle. It walks abroad in its operations—transfers -its possessor, even if he be black, or mulatto, or -copper colored, from the kitchen and the cotton field, to the court -house and the election ground, makes him talk of Magna Charta and -the constitution; in some states renders him a politician—brings -him acquainted with the leading citizens—busies himself in the political -canvass for office—takes him to the ballot box; and, above all, -secures to him the enviable and inestimable privilege of trial by jury. -Can it be said, that there is nothing of a public nature in a right, that -thus, from its necessary operation, places a man in many respects on -an equality with the richest, and the greatest, and the best in the land, -and brings him in contact with the whole community?” Vaughan v. -Phebe, 1 Martin & Yerger, 1 (1827).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_93" href="#FNanchor_93" class="label">[13]</a> Matilda v. Crenshaw, 1 (1827).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_94" href="#FNanchor_94" class="label">[14]</a> Vaughan v. Phebe, 1 Martin & Yerger, 1 (1827).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_95" href="#FNanchor_95" class="label">[15]</a> Acts of 1817, Ch. 103, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_96" href="#FNanchor_96" class="label">[16]</a> Sylvia and Phillis v. Covey, 4 Yerger, 27 (1883).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_97" href="#FNanchor_97" class="label">[17]</a> Acts of 1715, Ch. 19, Sec. 9; Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_98" href="#FNanchor_98" class="label">[18]</a> Acts of 1783, Ch. 14, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_99" href="#FNanchor_99" class="label">[19]</a> Manuscripts in State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_100" href="#FNanchor_100" class="label">[20]</a> Acts of 1815, Ch. 138, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_101" href="#FNanchor_101" class="label">[21]</a> Acts of 1819, Ch. 35, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_102" href="#FNanchor_102" class="label">[22]</a> Acts of 1825, Ch. 24, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_103" href="#FNanchor_103" class="label">[23]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_104" href="#FNanchor_104" class="label">[24]</a> Acts of 1835, Ch. 9, Secs. 9-11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_105" href="#FNanchor_105" class="label">[25]</a> Kentucky, Maryland, Georgia, and Alabama were the other four. -See footnote, Wheeler, Op. Cit., 213.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_106" href="#FNanchor_106" class="label">[26]</a> Acts of 1838, Ch. 133, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_107" href="#FNanchor_107" class="label">[27]</a> Acts of 1848, Ch. 50, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_108" href="#FNanchor_108" class="label">[28]</a> Acts of 1858, Ch. 86, Secs. 1-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_109" href="#FNanchor_109" class="label">[29]</a> Infra, pp. <a href="#Page_59">59-79</a>; <a href="#Page_102">102-152</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_110" href="#FNanchor_110" class="label">[30]</a> Wheeler, Op. Cit., 190.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_111" href="#FNanchor_111" class="label">[31]</a> Porter v. Blackmore, 2 Caldwell, 555 (1865); see also 5 Caldwell, -209; 3 Heiskell, 662; and 10 Lea, 663.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_112" href="#FNanchor_112" class="label">[32]</a> Judge Catron held that “what is earned by the slave belongs to -the master by the common law, the civil law, and the recognized rules -of property in the slaveholding states of this Union.” University v. -Cambreling, Yerger, 86 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_113" href="#FNanchor_113" class="label">[33]</a> Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_114" href="#FNanchor_114" class="label">[34]</a> Turner v. Fisher, 4 Sneed, 210 (1856).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_115" href="#FNanchor_115" class="label">[35]</a> Judge Green held that “A slave is not in the condition of a horse -or an ox. His liberty is restrained, it is true, and his owner controls -his actions and claims his services. But he is made of the image of -the Creator. He has mental capacities, and an immortal principle in -his nature, that constitutes him equal to his owner but for the accidental -position in which fortune has placed him. The owner has -acquired conventional rights to him, but the laws under which he is -held as a slave have not and can not extinguish his high-born nature -nor deprive him of many rights which are inherent in man. Thus -while he is a slave, he can make a contract for his freedom, and by -the same will he can take personal or real estate.” Ford v. Ford, -7 Humphrey, 95-96 (1846). Cf. Miller v. Miller, 5 Heiskell, 734 -(1871).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_116" href="#FNanchor_116" class="label">[36]</a> Stephenson v. Harrison, 3 Head, 733 (1859).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_117" href="#FNanchor_117" class="label">[37]</a> Wheeler, Op. Cit., 194.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_118" href="#FNanchor_118" class="label">[38]</a> Supra, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_119" href="#FNanchor_119" class="label">[39]</a> Acts of 1794, Ch. 1, Sec. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_120" href="#FNanchor_120" class="label">[40]</a> Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_121" href="#FNanchor_121" class="label">[41]</a> Acts of 1839, Ch. 7, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_122" href="#FNanchor_122" class="label">[42]</a> Wheeler, Op. Cit., 197.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_123" href="#FNanchor_123" class="label">[43]</a> Stephenson v. Harrison, 3 Head, 733 (1859).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_124" href="#FNanchor_124" class="label">[44]</a> Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 665 (1870).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_125" href="#FNanchor_125" class="label">[45]</a> Haitsell v. George, 3 Humphrey, 255 (1842).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_126" href="#FNanchor_126" class="label">[46]</a> Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 666 (1870).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_127" href="#FNanchor_127" class="label">[47]</a> Act of 1753, Ch. 6, Sec. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_128" href="#FNanchor_128" class="label">[48]</a> M. & C., Secs. 2563-64.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_129" href="#FNanchor_129" class="label">[49]</a> Acts of 1825, Ch. 24, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_130" href="#FNanchor_130" class="label">[50]</a> Ibid., Secs. 3-5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_131" href="#FNanchor_131" class="label">[51]</a> Thomas, T. Ebenezer, Anti-Slavery Correspondence, 71. The letter -reads as follows: “Has the anti-slavery cause injured the condition -of the slaves? Surely not. In my late journey through Kentucky -and Tennessee, I did not see one dirty, ragged negro. The -squads of little negroes I used to see naked as the pigs and calves -with which they gamboled in the same grove, were now clad like -human beings in shirts and pants or slips, and many of them had -straw hats, such as my own little boys put on; nor did I; see, as formerly, -boys and girls waiting at the table, in a state of stark nudity.”</p> - -<p>“I was happy to acknowledge that a great change had taken place -since I was conversant about Nashville, fifty-five years ago, when -negroes were naked and ignorant. I said I was pleased to see so -much attention paid to their bodies and their minds, and I wished -that the people of Tennessee might go ahead of the people in Ohio -in good offices to the negro. God speed you, dear friends, in this -work.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_132" href="#FNanchor_132" class="label">[52]</a> Loftin v. Espy, 4 Yerger, 92 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_133" href="#FNanchor_133" class="label">[53]</a> Wheeler, Op. Cit., 225; University v. Cambreling, 6 Yerger, 79 -(1834); Craig v. Leiper, 2 Yerger, 193 (1828); Pinson and Hawkins -v. Ivey, 1 Yerger, 303 (1830).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_134" href="#FNanchor_134" class="label">[54]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 24, Sec. 40; Acts of 1753, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_135" href="#FNanchor_135" class="label">[55]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_136" href="#FNanchor_136" class="label">[56]</a> Acts of 1835, Ch. 57, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_137" href="#FNanchor_137" class="label">[57]</a> James v. State, 9 Humphrey, 310 (1848).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_138" href="#FNanchor_138" class="label">[58]</a> Acts of 1813, Ch. 56, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_139" href="#FNanchor_139" class="label">[59]</a> Acts of 1779, Ch. 11, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_140" href="#FNanchor_140" class="label">[60]</a> Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_141" href="#FNanchor_141" class="label">[61]</a> Acts of 1835, Ch. 58, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_142" href="#FNanchor_142" class="label">[62]</a> Ibid., Ch. 65, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_143" href="#FNanchor_143" class="label">[63]</a> Acts of 1799, Ch. 9, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_144" href="#FNanchor_144" class="label">[64]</a> Fields v. The State of Tennessee, 1 Yerger, 156 (1829).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_145" href="#FNanchor_145" class="label">[65]</a> “If a slave commits a criminal offense while in the services of -the hirer,” said Judge McKinney, “it would be sufficient cause to -discharge him. And if the hirer desires to have him punished for -such offense the law has pointed out the mode, and he has the right -to pursue it, but he has no right to become himself the avenger of -the violated law, much less to depute another person in his stead. -And for a battery committed on the slave under such circumstances, -the owner may well maintain an action against the wrong-doer, in -which the jury would be justified in giving exemplary damages in a -proper case.” James v. Carper, 4 Sneed, 404 (1857).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_146" href="#FNanchor_146" class="label">[66]</a> Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_147" href="#FNanchor_147" class="label">[67]</a> Ibid., Sec. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_148" href="#FNanchor_148" class="label">[68]</a> Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_149" href="#FNanchor_149" class="label">[69]</a> Ibid., Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_150" href="#FNanchor_150" class="label">[70]</a> Acts of 1753, Ch. VI, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_151" href="#FNanchor_151" class="label">[71]</a> Acts of 1779, Ch. 7, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_152" href="#FNanchor_152" class="label">[72]</a> Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_153" href="#FNanchor_153" class="label">[73]</a> Ibid., Secs. 6-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_154" href="#FNanchor_154" class="label">[74]</a> Acts of 1817, Ch. 184, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_155" href="#FNanchor_155" class="label">[75]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_156" href="#FNanchor_156" class="label">[76]</a> Acts of 1858, Ch. 3, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_157" href="#FNanchor_157" class="label">[77]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_158" href="#FNanchor_158" class="label">[78]</a> M. & C., Secs. 2577-2580.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_159" href="#FNanchor_159" class="label">[79]</a> Acts of 1856, Ch. 30, Secs. 1-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_160" href="#FNanchor_160" class="label">[80]</a> M. & C., Sec. 2576.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_161" href="#FNanchor_161" class="label">[81]</a> Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_162" href="#FNanchor_162" class="label">[82]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_163" href="#FNanchor_163" class="label">[83]</a> M. & C., Sec. 2575.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_164" href="#FNanchor_164" class="label">[84]</a> M. & C., Sec. 2576.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_165" href="#FNanchor_165" class="label">[85]</a> Tomlinson v. Doerall, 2 Head, 542 (1859).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_166" href="#FNanchor_166" class="label">[86]</a> Jones v. Allen, 1 Head, 627 (1858).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_167" href="#FNanchor_167" class="label">[87]</a> Jones v. Allen, 1 Head, 636 (1858).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_168" href="#FNanchor_168" class="label">[88]</a> M. & C., Secs. 2581-3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_169" href="#FNanchor_169" class="label">[89]</a> Ibid., Sec. 2586.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_170" href="#FNanchor_170" class="label">[90]</a> P. G. was an abbreviation for public jail.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_171" href="#FNanchor_171" class="label">[91]</a> M. & C, Secs. 2596-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_172" href="#FNanchor_172" class="label">[92]</a> Acts of 1819, Ch. 35, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_173" href="#FNanchor_173" class="label">[93]</a> Acts of 1825, Ch. 79, Secs. 1-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_174" href="#FNanchor_174" class="label">[94]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_175" href="#FNanchor_175" class="label">[95]</a> Ibid., Sec. 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_176" href="#FNanchor_176" class="label">[96]</a> Acts of 1844, Ch. 129, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_177" href="#FNanchor_177" class="label">[97]</a> Acts of 1852, Ch. 117, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_178" href="#FNanchor_178" class="label">[98]</a> Acts of 1786, Ch. 5, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_179" href="#FNanchor_179" class="label">[99]</a> Acts of 1812, Ch. 88, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_180" href="#FNanchor_180" class="label">[100]</a> This oath reads: “I, A. B., do solemnly swear or affirm that I -have removed myself and slaves to the State of Tennessee, with the -full and sole view of becoming a citizen thereof, and that I have not -brought my slave or slaves to this state with any view to the security -of the same against any rebellion or apprehension of rebellion. So -help me God.” Acts of 1812, Ch. 88, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_181" href="#FNanchor_181" class="label">[101]</a> Acts of 1812, Ch. 88, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_182" href="#FNanchor_182" class="label">[102]</a> Acts of 1815, Ch. 65, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_183" href="#FNanchor_183" class="label">[103]</a> Acts of 1826, Ch. 22, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_184" href="#FNanchor_184" class="label">[104]</a> Acts of 1826, Ch. 22, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_185" href="#FNanchor_185" class="label">[105]</a> Acts of 1855, Ch. 64, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_186" href="#FNanchor_186" class="label">[106]</a> Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1834, 87-147.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_187" href="#FNanchor_187" class="label">[107]</a> Comptroller’s Report to General Assembly, 1859-60, 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_188" href="#FNanchor_188" class="label">[108]</a> Acts of 1799, Ch. 11, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_189" href="#FNanchor_189" class="label">[109]</a> Acts of 1835, Ch. 58, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_190" href="#FNanchor_190" class="label">[110]</a> Ibid., Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_191" href="#FNanchor_191" class="label">[111]</a> Christian Advocate and Journal, Bolivar, July 4, 1831.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_192" href="#FNanchor_192" class="label">[112]</a> Quarterly Anti-Slavery Magazine, II, 105-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_193" href="#FNanchor_193" class="label">[113]</a> Supra, pp. <a href="#Page_18">18-19</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_194" href="#FNanchor_194" class="label">[114]</a> Acts of 1799, Ch. 28, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_195" href="#FNanchor_195" class="label">[115]</a> Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_196" href="#FNanchor_196" class="label">[116]</a> Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_197" href="#FNanchor_197" class="label">[117]</a> Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_198" href="#FNanchor_198" class="label">[118]</a> Ibid., Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_199" href="#FNanchor_199" class="label">[119]</a> Acts of 1829, Ch. 74, Secs. 1-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_200" href="#FNanchor_200" class="label">[120]</a> Acts of 1829, Ch. 74, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_201" href="#FNanchor_201" class="label">[121]</a> Acts of 1832, Ch. 34, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_202" href="#FNanchor_202" class="label">[122]</a> Acts of 1846, Ch. 90, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_203" href="#FNanchor_203" class="label">[123]</a> Acts of 1842, Ch. 141, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_204" href="#FNanchor_204" class="label">[124]</a> Jennings v. the State, 3 Head, 519-520 (1859).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_205" href="#FNanchor_205" class="label">[125]</a> M. & C., Sec. 4865.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_206" href="#FNanchor_206" class="label">[126]</a> Jennings v. State, 3 Head, 522 (1859).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_207" href="#FNanchor_207" class="label">[127]</a> Tennessee Gazette and Mero District, Vol. 5, No. 22, July 3, 1805.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_208" href="#FNanchor_208" class="label">[128]</a> Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_209" href="#FNanchor_209" class="label">[129]</a> Acts of 1836, Ch. 44, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_210" href="#FNanchor_210" class="label">[130]</a> Niles Register, Vol. 41, pp. 340-1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_211" href="#FNanchor_211" class="label">[131]</a> 24th and 25th Annual Report of American Anti-Slavery Society, -1857-58, 76-78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_212" href="#FNanchor_212" class="label">[132]</a> 24th and 25th Annual Reports of American Anti-Slavery Society, -1857-58, p. 78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_213" href="#FNanchor_213" class="label">[133]</a> Acts of 1803, Ch. 13, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_214" href="#FNanchor_214" class="label">[134]</a> Acts of 1812, Ch. 135, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_215" href="#FNanchor_215" class="label">[135]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_216" href="#FNanchor_216" class="label">[136]</a> Unlawful assemblies was defined by the act of 1831 as being -“all assemblages of slaves in unusual numbers, or at suspicious times -and places not expressly authorized by their owners.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_217" href="#FNanchor_217" class="label">[137]</a> Acts of 1799, Ch. 28, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_218" href="#FNanchor_218" class="label">[138]</a> Acts of 1801, Ch. 32, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_219" href="#FNanchor_219" class="label">[139]</a> Acts of 1813, Ch. 135, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_220" href="#FNanchor_220" class="label">[140]</a> Acts of 1829, Ch. 74, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_221" href="#FNanchor_221" class="label">[141]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_222" href="#FNanchor_222" class="label">[142]</a> Acts of 1844, Ch. 129, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_223" href="#FNanchor_223" class="label">[143]</a> Acts of 1741, Ch. 8, Sec. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_224" href="#FNanchor_224" class="label">[144]</a> Acts of 1819, Ch. 35, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_225" href="#FNanchor_225" class="label">[145]</a> Acts of 1835, Ch. 19, Sec. 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_226" href="#FNanchor_226" class="label">[146]</a> M. & C., Secs. 2625-28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_227" href="#FNanchor_227" class="label">[147]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 103, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_228" href="#FNanchor_228" class="label">[148]</a> Wheeler, Op. Cit., 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_229" href="#FNanchor_229" class="label">[149]</a> Acts of 1784, Ch. 10, Sec. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_230" href="#FNanchor_230" class="label">[150]</a> Acts of 1801, Ch. 2, Sec. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_231" href="#FNanchor_231" class="label">[151]</a> Davis v. Mitchell, 5 Yerger, 281 (1833); See also Cains and -Wife v. Marley, 2 Yerger, 582 (1831); and Battle v. Stone, 4 Yerger, -168 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_232" href="#FNanchor_232" class="label">[152]</a> Ragan v. Kennedy, I Overton, 91 (1804).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_233" href="#FNanchor_233" class="label">[153]</a> Acts of 1784, Ch. 22, Sec. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_234" href="#FNanchor_234" class="label">[154]</a> Ibid., Ch. 10, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_235" href="#FNanchor_235" class="label">[155]</a> Acts of 1796, Ch. 14, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_236" href="#FNanchor_236" class="label">[156]</a> Acts of 1819, Ch. 36, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_237" href="#FNanchor_237" class="label">[157]</a> Young v. Pate, 4 Yerger, 164 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_238" href="#FNanchor_238" class="label">[158]</a> Acts of 1805, Ch. 16, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_239" href="#FNanchor_239" class="label">[159]</a> Acts of 1715, Ch. 27, Sec. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_240" href="#FNanchor_240" class="label">[160]</a> Hardeson v. Hays, 4 Yerger, 507 (1833); Kegler v. Miles, 1 -Martin & Yerger, 426 (1825); Partee v. Badget, 4 Yerger, 174 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_241" href="#FNanchor_241" class="label">[161]</a> Davis v. Mitchell, 5 Yerger, 281 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_242" href="#FNanchor_242" class="label">[162]</a> Kegler v. Miles, 1 Martin & Yerger, 426 (1825).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_243" href="#FNanchor_243" class="label">[163]</a> Acts of 1801, Ch. 25, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_244" href="#FNanchor_244" class="label">[164]</a> Acts of 1805, Ch. 16, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_245" href="#FNanchor_245" class="label">[165]</a> Callen v. Thompson, 3 Yerger, 475 (1832).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_246" href="#FNanchor_246" class="label">[166]</a> Hooper’s Administratrix v. Hooper, 1 Overton, 187 (1801).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_247" href="#FNanchor_247" class="label">[167]</a> Acts of 1801, Ch. 25, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_248" href="#FNanchor_248" class="label">[168]</a> Andrews v. Hartsfield. 3 Yerger, 39 (1832); see also Peters v. -Chores, 4 Yerger, 176 (1833).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_249" href="#FNanchor_249" class="label">[169]</a> Harris v. Clarissa, 6 Yerger, 227 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_250" href="#FNanchor_250" class="label">[170]</a> Hope v. Johnson, 2 Yerger, 123 (1826).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_251" href="#FNanchor_251" class="label">[171]</a> Preston v. McGaughery, 1 Cook, 115 (1812).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_252" href="#FNanchor_252" class="label">[172]</a> Caines and Wife v. Marley, 2 Yerger, 586 (1831).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_253" href="#FNanchor_253" class="label">[173]</a> Smith v. Bell and Wife, 1 Martin & Yerger, 302 (1827).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_254" href="#FNanchor_254" class="label">[174]</a> Wheeler, Op. Cit., 225.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_255" href="#FNanchor_255" class="label">[175]</a> Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 661 (1868).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_256" href="#FNanchor_256" class="label">[176]</a> Ibid., 662.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_257" href="#FNanchor_257" class="label">[177]</a> Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 662-3 (1868).</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59"></a>[59]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_III">CHAPTER III<br /> -<span class="smcap">Economics of Slavery in Tennessee</span></h2> - -</div> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">Slavery an Expression of the Soil.</span></h3> - -<p>Someone has said, “The rocks determine our politics.” -The rocks make the soil, which in turn determines the agricultural -products that a section can produce with profit, -and, hence, the labor system. Slavery nowhere in the -United States reflected physiographic features more distinctly -than in Tennessee. The three sections of the state -have always differed very largely in their agriculture, in -their sympathy with various sections of the country, and in -their politics. In fact, there are almost three peoples and -three civilizations in Tennessee. Physiography has been -the biggest factor in the differentiation. The human response -to the soil is very clearly shown. The differences -in the sections of the state on the subject of slavery were -due mainly to geography, since differences in climate were -not sufficiently marked to promote or create any special attitude -of mind toward slavery.</p> - -<p>East Tennessee remained throughout the slavery regime -mainly a section of small farmers. It was only the river -valleys of the French Broad, the Watauga, the Holston, and -the Tennessee that yielded with advantage to agriculture. -These valleys were mostly of limestone formation, and produced -a loamy soil that was very fertile.</p> - -<p>The counties<a id="FNanchor_258" href="#Footnote_258" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> in these river valleys produced considerable -quantities of wheat and corn, but very little cotton. In 1850 -East Tennessee produced one bale of cotton, ten hogsheads -of tobacco, 1,813,338 bushels of wheat, and 10,998,654 bushels -of corn.<a id="FNanchor_259" href="#Footnote_259" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> In 1840, the counties containing the largest -number of slaves were Knox, numbering 1934; Hawkins,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60"></a>[60]</span> -1499; Jefferson, 1282; and McMinn, 1241. There were six -counties with slightly over one thousand each, six in the -six hundred column, and the others ranged from 150 to -450 each. In 1860 there were four counties in East Tennessee -with 2000 slaves in each. In the same year, there -were 27,560 slaves in East Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_260" href="#Footnote_260" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p> - -<p>In 1856 there were only 28 farms in East Tennessee containing -one thousand acres or more. There were 164 containing -from 500 to 1000 acres, 1,173 having from 100 to -500 acres, 7,117 having 50 to 100 acres, and 6,920 containing -less than fifty acres. There were only 192 farms which -contained more than 500 acres. It is seen from these figures -that East Tennessee was populated essentially by small farmers -who raised wheat and corn and live stock.<a id="FNanchor_261" href="#Footnote_261" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<p>In 1840 there were 19,915 slaves in East Tennessee, valued -at $10,813,845.<a id="FNanchor_262" href="#Footnote_262" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> In 1850 there were 22,187 valued at -$11,248,809; and in 1860 there were 27,560 slaves valued at -$23,536,240.<a id="FNanchor_263" href="#Footnote_263" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> There were in 1856 only 4,784 slaveholders -in East Tennessee. Of these, one held between 200 and -300 slaves, 3 between 70 and 100, 4 between 50 and 70, -12 between 40 and 50, and only 718 owned more than ten -slaves, and 1207 owned only one; 719 owned two slaves. -Practically half the slaveholders of East Tennessee owned -either one or two slaves. The average price of land per acre -in East Tennessee was $4.62, slightly more than half of what -it was for middle and West Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_264" href="#Footnote_264" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> The value of the -slave in 1859 ranged from $563 in Johnson County, which -is in the northeastern part of the state, in the mountains, -to $953 in Blount County, which is bordered by the Tennessee -River and is traversed by some of its branches.</p> - -<p>Middle Tennessee was more adapted to the slavery system -than East Tennessee. It contained the rich Central -Basin, traversed by the Cumberland River, and also portions -of the valley of the Tennessee. Slavery was profitable<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61"></a>[61]</span> -in Middle Tennessee, especially for the cultivation of tobacco -and cotton. Middle Tennessee in 1856 raised 19,621 -bales of cotton and 4,511 hogsheads of tobacco. It produced -1,825,423 bushels of wheat and 21,968,114 bushels of -corn.<a id="FNanchor_265" href="#Footnote_265" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> The big cotton counties were Lincoln, producing -2,558 bales; Williamson, 3,167 bales; Maury, 4,623 bales; -and Rutherford, 4,623 bales. All these counties are in the -Central Basin. The big tobacco counties were Robertson, -producing 1083 hogsheads, Smith, 1050 hogsheads, and Williamson, -1179 hogsheads.</p> - -<p>There were 74 farms in Middle Tennessee, containing -more than one thousand acres each and 299 farms having -between 500 and 1000 acres each. The counties having -plantations of more than 500 acres were Wilson, with 24, -Davidson, 27, Bedford, 33, Montgomery, 23, Williamson, -49, Lincoln, 50, Rutherford, 52, and Giles, 60. Most of -these counties are located in the Central Basin, and have -a rich, loamy soil. The response was the big plantation -and a dense slave population.</p> - -<p>The slave population of Middle Tennessee, increased from -106,640 in 1840, to 131,666 in 1850 and to 148,028 by 1860. -Land was very valuable in the cotton and tobacco counties, -ranging in value from $13.54 in Giles County to $18.84 per -acre in Williamson. The slave in Giles County was worth -$797 while in Williamson County he was valued at $855. -Both of these counties were rural and produced cotton. The -average value of land for this section was only $8.82 per -acre while the average value of slaves was $838. The total -value of slaves in Middle Tennessee in 1860 was $126,488,926.</p> - -<p>There were 18,524 slaveholders in Middle Tennessee in -1856; of this number, 14,145 held less than ten slaves; only -one owned more than 300 slaves; about four thousand held -only one slave. There were practically no large slaveholders -in Middle Tennessee.</p> - -<p>West Tennessee along the Mississippi River was a part of -the Black Belt, and was more suitable for the production<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62"></a>[62]</span> -of cotton than either of the other two divisions of the state. -There were 13,536 slaveholders in West Tennessee in 1856.<a id="FNanchor_266" href="#Footnote_266" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> -West Tennessee had larger slaveholders in proportion to -the total number than either of the other divisions of the -state. In East Tennessee those who owned one slave were -one-fourth of the total number of slaveholders; in Middle -Tennessee about the same proportion prevailed; and in West -Tennessee this ratio was reduced to 1:5. In East Tennessee -there was only one person owning more than one hundred -slaves; in Middle Tennessee there were twenty-five; in -West Tennessee there were eighty-five.</p> - -<p>The plantations in West Tennessee were larger and more -numerous, in spite of the fact that West Tennessee was not -settled before 1820. Fayette County had 74 plantations -containing between 500 and 1000 acres each, and 15 containing -more than 1000 acres each. Fayette County in 1860 -contained 15,473 slaves, all of whom had been acquired since -1830.<a id="FNanchor_267" href="#Footnote_267" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> Shelby had a slave population of 16,953, which had -been acquired since 1830. Some of the most productive parts -of the Black Belt in West Tennessee, such as Lake County, -were not in cultivation by 1860. The counties along the -divide between the Mississippi and Tennessee rivers were -very poor, and therefore not suitable for the production of -cotton in large quantities. Counties like Hardin, Henderson, -McNairy, Chester, Decatur, Carroll, Weakley, and Gibson -were cultivated by small farmers, many of whom owned -no slaves at all, while others owned only one or two slaves. -In these counties, farmers worked their crops by themselves, -or by the side of their slaves.</p> - -<p>The leading crops of West Tennessee were cotton, corn, -wheat, and tobacco. Cotton was the chief crop, and tobacco -was raised in only the poorer counties, like Benton, -Carroll, Weakley, Gibson, Haywood, and Lauderdale. Fayette -and Shelby were the big cotton counties. West Tennessee -produced in 1856 four times as much cotton as Middle<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63"></a>[63]</span> -Tennessee, and 3,144 hogsheads of tobacco against 4,511 -produced by Middle Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_268" href="#Footnote_268" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p> - -<p>Taking the state as a whole, it was never more than a -state of small farmers. The plantation system as it existed -in Mississippi or South Carolina never prevailed in Tennessee. -The soils of Tennessee were not sufficiently productive -to make slavery profitable on a large scale. It was -more profitable to own from one to half a dozen slaves and -work with them than to have an overseer. Of the 33,864 -slaveholders in the state in 1850, 26,512 owned less than -ten slaves each, and 18,198 owned less than five each. There -were only 22 persons in the state who owned more than one -hundred slaves. By 1856 this number had increased to one -hundred and six.</p> - -<p>The distribution of the slaves over the state was determined -by the crops raised. In East Tennessee the ratio of -slaves to whites was about 1 to 12; in Middle Tennessee, -1 to 3; and in West Tennessee, 3 to 5. In no county in East -Tennessee was the ratio greater than 1 to 6, while in several -counties it was 1 to 60, and in two-thirds of them it ranged -from 1 to 20, to 1 to 60.<a id="FNanchor_269" href="#Footnote_269" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> This, of course, was a matter of -the soil. These factors reflected themselves in social life, -education, religion, and politics. Slavery produced aristocracy -and classes of society wherever it appeared. It -made for the private school in education, Whiggery in politics, -and the southern division among the Protestant -churches that split. East Tennessee in Andrew Jackson’s -time was the democratic part of the state. West Tennessee, -the seat of the Black Belt, was the home of the Whig -aristocracy. When the Whigs became Democrats in the -decade between 1850 and 1860, the free farmers and small -slaveholders, Democrats of East Tennessee, became Unionists -and later Republicans. This same formula worked -out over the entire state. There are Republican islands -in Democratic sections, and Democratic islands in Republican<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64"></a>[64]</span> -sections. East Tennessee remained loyal to the Methodist -Church, and West Tennessee went into the Methodist -Church, South. These divisions were not peculiar alone to -the three grand divisions of the state, but are found in the -various counties.</p> - -<p>For instance, in the Presidential elections of 1844 between -Clay and Polk, Tennessee went for Clay. The big Democratic -counties of today were Whig then. Fayette’s vote -was 1217 to 1060 in favor of Clay; Shelby’s, 1828 to 1607 in -favor of Clay; Madison’s, 1562 to 737 in favor of Clay; Gibson’s, -1423 to 688 in favor of Clay. These counties are now -the big Democratic counties of West Tennessee. They stood -the same way in 1848 on the election between Taylor and -Cass. They voted overwhelmingly for the Whig candidate -for Governor in 1847.<a id="FNanchor_270" href="#Footnote_270" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p> - -<p>Present Republican counties of East Tennessee went Democratic. -Washington, 1225 to 881 in favor of Polk; Sullivan, -1533 to 350 in favor of Polk; Greene, 1701 to 1031 in -favor of Polk. The same line-up expressed itself in 1847 -and in the Presidential election of 1848.<a id="FNanchor_271" href="#Footnote_271" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<p>There are certain counties in West Tennessee today that -are quite as overwhelmingly Republican as any in East Tennessee. -These counties are in full sympathy with the point -of view of the North in politics and toward life generally. -The northern branches of the churches, together with their -schools, are found in these counties. They prefer school -teachers from the North and send their children to northern -colleges. The human response to the soil that determined -their attitude toward slavery is mainly responsible for -these results. It was this force that made poor whites out -of some and slaveholders out of others.</p> - -<h3>II. <span class="smcap">The Management of the Plantation.</span></h3> - -<p>Plantation life in Tennessee was more humane than is -generally supposed. Great care was taken in establishing -the negro quarters. There were several reasons for this,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_65"></a>[65]</span> -not especially peculiar to Tennessee. Health is an indispensable -factor in the life of an efficient laborer. It saved -or reduced the expense of medical attention. Sanitary -quarters for the negroes produced contentment and thus -lessened the problem of government. They prevented the -spread of disease, and a consequent heavy death rate. They -diminished crime among the slaves and on the whole made a -good reputation for the master. Respect for the master -was no inconsiderable force in the proper functioning of a -plantation. The slaveholders discussed these subjects in -the agricultural fairs and read papers on how to build -proper slave quarters.</p> - -<p>In an issue of the Practical Farmer and Mechanic, published -at Somerville, Tennessee, the county seat of the most -densely slave-populated county in the state, are given the -following instructions relative to the establishment of the -plantation buildings:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>In the selection of his farm, he (the master) -should have an eye to health, convenience of water, -and a soil with such a substratum as to retain -manures. His home should be neat but not costly—erected -on an elevated situation—with a sufficient -number of shade trees to impart health and -comfort to its inmates. His negro quarters should -be placed a convenient distance from his dwelling -on a dry, airy ridge—raised two feet from the -ground—so they can be thoroughly ventilated underneath, -and placed at distances apart of at least -fifty yards to ensure health. In this construction, -they should be sufficiently spacious so as not to -crowd the family intended to occupy them—with -brick chimneys and large fire-places to impart -warmth to every part of the room. More diseases -and loss of time on plantations are engendered -from crowded negro cabins than from almost any -other cause. The successful planter should therefore -have an especial eye to the comfort of his -negroes, in not permitting them to be overcrowded -in their sleeping quarters.<a id="FNanchor_272" href="#Footnote_272" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_66"></a>[66]</span></p> - -<p>This was an ideal that was regarded as a model. There -was pride among masters as to the character and appearance -of their plantations. In a description of a plantation -in Haywood County, the following elaborate set of buildings -is given: dwelling-house, kitchen, washhouse, storehouse, -office, smokehouse, servants’ houses about the dwelling of -the master, weaving, ice, and poultry houses, gin house, -grist mill, flouring mill, wheat granary, stables, corn crib, -overseer’s house, seven double negro cabins, thirty-six feet -by fourteen, with large brick chimneys, closets, and other -conveniences, all of which buildings are annually whitewashed.<a id="FNanchor_273" href="#Footnote_273" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> -If one family was to occupy the cabin, it was -usually about 16 feet by 20 feet in its dimensions.<a id="FNanchor_274" href="#Footnote_274" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> An -effort was made to locate cabins among shade trees. If -this condition was not met, trees were planted. Comfortable -housing of the slaves was one of the real problems of -slave management, and it seems that an honest effort in -most cases was made to solve it. Proper bedding with plenty -of blankets was furnished in the winter, and close attention -was given to the food of the slaves. Weekly allowances -were usually made, yet some fed in common. Five pounds -of good, clean bacon, one quart of molasses, a sufficiency of -bread and coffee with sugar were usually distributed to -each slave on some designated night each week. Family rations -were put together. Single hands received their rations -separately, and then united in squads and masses. -Some woman was detailed to cook their meat or make their -coffee. The bread was cooked in the bakery for the entire -plantation.</p> - -<p>Two suits of cotton for spring and summer; two suits of -woolen for winter; four pairs of shoes, and three hats made -up the clothing allowance. The slave was encouraged to be -neat in his dress.</p> - -<p>The slaves were supposed to go to work by sunrise. They -rested from one to two hours at noon and then worked until -night. In summer, the plan frequently was to work from<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67"></a>[67]</span> -sunrise to 8:00 o’clock a.m., then breakfast, work until 12:00 -o’clock at noon, rest two hours, and then work until night. -They always quit work at noon on Saturday to prepare for -Sunday.</p> - -<p>Various plans were used to stimulate the slaves to work. -One of the most effective was “task week.” The negroes -varied among themselves considerably as to the rapidity -with which they could perform their labor. It was this -very fact that constituted the basis of the “task” system. -According to this system, a slave could work for himself -or play when he had finished his assigned task. Some masters -permitted the slaves to cultivate a few acres for themselves.</p> - -<p>Prompt attention in case of sickness was a vastly important -matter among slaves. Masters, mistresses, and overseers -usually knew a great many home remedies which, if -given in time, would suffice for a large number of complaints. -A good amount of red pepper was used in the vegetables. -This was supposed to stimulate the system, prevent -sore throat, and render the system less liable to chills -and fevers.</p> - -<p>Good plantation management contained a number of additional -interesting features. A weekly dance was an event -to be looked forward to. For the master and mistress to -chaperon these occasions made a strong impression on the -slaves. Family prayers in which the slaves participated -had a bracing effect on the negro’s character. It was wise -to have an employed preacher for the slaves. Religion appealed -to the negro’s character, and it was a psychological -factor in his control.</p> - -<p>One of the most interesting features of plantation life -was the raising of poultry by the old slaves who were incapacitated -for hard work. An old negro man, giving most -zealous attention to his brood, his negro assistants careful -to please him in every detail, and the “happy family,” consisting -of everything from a bob white and turkey gobbler<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68"></a>[68]</span> -to a mockingbird, made one of the most beautiful pictures of -plantation life.<a id="FNanchor_275" href="#Footnote_275" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p> - -<p>The duties of the master was a subject that was kept before -the community even if economic interests were not -sufficient to control such matters. J. P. Williams, in a -prize essay on plantations and their management, urged -that the master should give his personal attention to his -negroes. He thought that such supervision would not -only pay in financial returns but would largely solve the -problem of discontent and insubordination frequently due -to mistreatment of slaves by an overseer.<a id="FNanchor_276" href="#Footnote_276" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69"></a>[69]</span></p> - -<p>The master’s relation to the overseer was an important -factor in the management of the plantation. It was a -good policy to pay any overseer well. This gave the master -the right to demand his entire time, and usually ended in -efficiency and satisfactory relations of overseer to both -master and slaves.</p> - -<p>“An employer,” said Jas. C. Lusby, in a paper read before -the Agricultural and Mechanical Society of Fayette County, -September 2, 1855, “should never ask a negro any questions -whatever about the business of the plantation, or the -condition of the crops; nor say anything in the presence -of the negroes about the overseer, for they are always ready -to catch any word that may be dropped, and use it if possible -to cause a disturbance between the master and the -overseer.”<a id="FNanchor_277" href="#Footnote_277" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> It seems that there was a common practice -among masters to have one or two trusties among the negroes -to act as spies upon the overseer. “Negroes,” said -Lusby, “in two-thirds of the cases, are the cause of employers -and overseers falling out.”<a id="FNanchor_278" href="#Footnote_278" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> The successful planter -was one who gave sufficient time and thought to the management -of his farm to enable him to be his own judge -as to the character and efficiency of his overseer.</p> - -<p>The overseer was the most important factor in the management -of the large plantation. His indifference toward -the interests of either master or slaves broke down the -system, because there was perfect unity of interests inherent -in the system, and the successful overseer recognized -this ideal. It was the business of the overseer to be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70"></a>[70]</span> -present at the beginning of every important work, not -merely because he was paid to do so, but because the negroes -always took advantage of his absence. It was his -business to ring a bell or blow a horn in the morning for -breakfast, because it was unsafe to entrust this duty to a -negro driver for the reason that it was almost impossible -to find a negro sufficiently regular in his habits to be reliable. -If the breakfast hour was a failure, the entire day’s -work was seriously damaged.</p> - -<p>The overseer had to see that the negroes were up by four -o’clock in the winter and about half past three in the spring -and summer. This gave time to prepare victuals, arrange -clothes and shoes, to see that horses and mules were properly -fed, that crib doors were shut, that fires were built -for the children, and that everybody was ready to go to -work by daylight.<a id="FNanchor_279" href="#Footnote_279" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p> - -<p>The overseer accompanied the slaves to the field and saw -that the day’s work was properly begun. He could then -return to his house for breakfast. Following breakfast, -he was free to make a general inspection of the plantation. -He inspected the cabins to see that they were neatly kept, -that the clothes of the negroes were washed, that the negro -nurses were properly looking after the children, that the -common bakery, boot-and-shoe shop, carpenters, mechanics, -and tailors were efficiently functioning.</p> - -<p>He inspected fences, ditches, gates, and stock occasionally. -He visited the cabins two or three times a week at -night to see that the negroes were at home and that no -strange negroes were on the premises. The nature of the -negro was to gad about, and to keep improper hours. It -was the duty of the overseer to prevent this. He had to -look after the farming implements, and, after the crops -were harvested, to gather up the tools of the plantation -and have them repaired and properly housed during the -winter.</p> - -<p>The overseer had constantly to plan work two or three -weeks in advance to have the greatest success. He had to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71"></a>[71]</span> -keep in close touch with the master, especially concerning -work after the crops were finished. “I consider it to be -the duty of the overseer,” said Lusby, “to do anything that -the employer wishes him to do, right or wrong.”</p> - -<p>Lusby advocated that an overseer should be a model of -personal appearance. He should keep himself close-shaven, -wear good clothes, “hold his head up equal to his employer, -ride a good, sprightly horse, and have one of the hands -to attend to him, and saddle him in the morning.”<a id="FNanchor_280" href="#Footnote_280" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> An -overseer was rated by the slaves very largely according to -the manner in which he conducted himself. His personal -conduct was a determining factor in the degree of control -that he was able to exercise. This factor either made or -undid all his efforts.</p> - -<p>An overseer who was a success in the employment of a -master was usually able to buy land and negroes for himself -in a few years. In an address given at an agricultural -fair in Jackson, Tennessee, in 1855, an account is given -of a planter in Haywood County, who had had only four -overseers from 1838 to 1855. One of these in six years, -with a large family, accumulated nineteen hundred dollars -which he invested in lands and negroes in Texas, and -was soon doing well. Another accumulated in seven years -more than two thousand dollars, and was ready to go to -Arkansas and invest his capital in lands and negroes. The -other two had similar success.<a id="FNanchor_281" href="#Footnote_281" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p> - -<p>The slaves in Tennessee undoubtedly were, on the whole, -humanely treated. Rev. Arthur Howard says in his history -of the Episcopal Church in Tennessee that “it is impossible -to deny that the negroes of the South were happier, -and better cared for, physically and morally, under the -system of slavery existing in the South, than they have been -at any time since they obtained their freedom and were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_72"></a>[72]</span> -suddenly, without any training, endowed with the right of -citizenship.”<a id="FNanchor_282" href="#Footnote_282" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -<p>Rev. J. N. Pendleton, of the Baptist Church, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>I take great pleasure in testifying that slavery -in Kentucky and Tennessee, and I was not acquainted -with it elsewhere, was of the mild type. -When I went North, nothing surprised me more -than to see laborers at work in the rain and snow. -In such weather, slaves in Kentucky and Tennessee -would have been under shelter.<a id="FNanchor_283" href="#Footnote_283" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -</div> - -<h3>III. <span class="smcap">Was Slavery Profitable in Tennessee?</span></h3> - -<p>There is a great deal of evidence that slavery was profitable, -and some that it was not. Slavery increased very -rapidly in the first two decades of the history of the state. -From 1790 to 1800 there was an increase of 297.54 per -cent, and from 1800 to 1810 an increase of 229.31 per -cent.<a id="FNanchor_284" href="#Footnote_284" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> Slave population increased only 79.06 per cent -in the next decade, and only 244.19 per cent from 1820 to -1860. This decrease in percentage from 1820 to 1860 is -in face of the fact that West Tennessee, the Black Belt -part of the state, was settled and populated during this -period. This evidently means that slavery was not making -much progress in East and Middle Tennessee.</p> - -<p>Slaves increased in value very rapidly in Tennessee from -1790 to about 1836. They were worth only $100 each in -1790, but by 1836 they were valued at $584.<a id="FNanchor_285" href="#Footnote_285" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> They decreased -in value to $413.72 by 1846. They reached the 1836 -mark again in 1854, and by 1860 were valued, for purposes -of taxation, at $900.<a id="FNanchor_286" href="#Footnote_286" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> This valuation was largely controlled -by the price of cotton. The average price of cotton for the -decade ending 1830 was 13.3 cents per pound; for the -decade ending 1840, 12.4 cents; for the decade ending 1850,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_73"></a>[73]</span> -8.2 cents; and for the five years ending 1855, 9.6 cents.<a id="FNanchor_287" href="#Footnote_287" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> -The values and prices of Tennessee slaves and cotton only -roughly corresponded to those of the United States at the -same time. In 1792, the average value of a slave in the -United States was $300, and in 1835 it was $900, and $600 -in 1844.<a id="FNanchor_288" href="#Footnote_288" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> Upland cotton was worth 17½ cents per pound -in New York City in 1835 and 7½ cents in 1844. It was -generally held that a difference of one cent a pound in the -price of cotton made a difference of $100 in the price of -slaves, but this could not apply to the above prices.</p> - -<p>Slavery was undoubtedly very profitable in Middle and -West Tennessee. F. A. Michaux in travelling from Nashville -to Knoxville in 1802 says: “Between Nashville and -Fort Blount (above Nashville on the Cumberland River -about sixty miles) the plantations, although isolated in the -woods always, are nevertheless, upon the road, within two -or three miles of each other. The inhabitants live in comfortable -log houses; the major part keep negroes, and appear -to live happy and in abundance.”<a id="FNanchor_289" href="#Footnote_289" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> He says West Tennessee -(Cumberland), now Middle Tennessee, produced a -very fine grade of cotton and that manufacture was encouraged -by the legislature.<a id="FNanchor_290" href="#Footnote_290" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> “Emigrants to Tennessee,” -he continues, “by at least the third year have gone over to -the cotton crop.” He says that a man and his wife could, -aside from raising sufficient Indian corn for sustenance -“cultivate four acres (of cotton) with the greatest ease.” -This would yield a net produce of two hundred and twelve -dollars. “This light sketch,” he says, “demonstrates with -what facility a poor family may acquire speedily, in West -Tennessee, a certain degree of independence, particularly -after having been settled five or six years, as they procure -the means of purchasing one or two negroes, and of annually -increasing this number.”<a id="FNanchor_291" href="#Footnote_291" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></p> - -<p>Lilly Buttrick, travelling in Tennessee from 1812 to 1819,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74"></a>[74]</span> -speaks of stopping with an Indian slave owner by the name -of Talbot, who lived on the bank of the Tennessee. “This -man,” he says, “was said to be very rich, in land, cattle, and -negro slaves, and also to have large sums of money in the -bank.”<a id="FNanchor_292" href="#Footnote_292" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - -<p>The culture of cotton was profitable from the very beginning -of the state down to 1860. As early as July, 1797, -Mr. Miller of the firm of Miller and Whitney, proposed to -his partner that they send an agent to Knoxville, “where -we were informed that cotton was valuable,” and to Nashville -and the Cumberland settlements to gather information -concerning the culture of cotton in those parts and the mode -of cleaning it.<a id="FNanchor_293" href="#Footnote_293" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> As soon as the people of these frontier -settlements learned that the cotton gin was a success, they -held public meetings and petitioned the legislature of Tennessee -to buy the patent rights of Miller and Whitney to -the saw-gin within the limits of Tennessee. Andrew Jackson -presided at some of these meetings.<a id="FNanchor_294" href="#Footnote_294" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> In accordance -with the wishes of the people, the legislature purchased the -patent rights for the gin within the limits of Tennessee in -1803, and the state began to encourage the growth of cotton. -“Cotton production in this state,” says Hammond, -“with the exception of a few years in the 40’s, continued to -increase at a uniform rate until the outbreak of the Civil -War.”<a id="FNanchor_295" href="#Footnote_295" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p> - -<p>A. D. Murphrey, a North Carolinian, travelling through -West Tennessee in 1822, and writing to his friend, Thomas -Ruffin, left the following account of the soil and the profits -in farming in West Tennessee: “Since I wrote you last I -have been through nearly one-half of the Chickashaw Purchase, -and if I was disappointed as to old Tennessee, I was -still more as to the Purchase; but my disappointment was -of another kind. I have never seen such a beautiful country -before, nor one where industry can be so well rewarded.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75"></a>[75]</span> -It is very much like Mecklenburg and Cararrus were, I expect, -a hundred years ago, in their appearance; but there is -a fertility in its poorest soil that I have seen nowhere else. -Except the swamp, there is really no poor land, if we are to -judge from its production; for on the poorest ridges that -I have seen, six and eight barrels of corn, or 1000 pounds -of cotton is the ordinary crop. What is there called good -land brings upon an average 10 barrels of corn or 1300 -pounds of cotton to the acre; and one hand will tend more -land than two in any part of North Carolina west of Raleigh. -I have just left the house of a Mr. Morgan on -Sandy River, who is now working his second crop and -works four hands. He has prepared 80 acres of this ground -since Xmas, 1821 (this was July, 1822), and his crop of -corn, without severe disaster, will be 1000 barrels.... -The soil is rich, black land, varying in depth from four to -ten inches; then comes a good clay—not a stone or pebble -to be seen.”<a id="FNanchor_296" href="#Footnote_296" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -<p>The Nashville Banner in 1833, in a discussion on the -prosperity of Tennessee, boasted that “the profits alone” -on the crop of cotton, in the present year, “will pay the -whole aggregate debt of Tennessee and leave a large balance -in favor of the country.”<a id="FNanchor_297" href="#Footnote_297" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> - -<p>In the reports made to the Comptroller, and inventories -given in the proceedings of the county and district fairs, -there are numerous examples of individuals who, with a -few slaves, purchased lands, cleared and stocked them, and -made big money in farming. The following is a detailed -account of what a Middle Tennessee planter did, who in -1838 had twenty-two negroes, only fifteen of whom were -field hands: “He cleared nine hundred acres of land ... -made all his improvements, consisting of a dwelling house, -kitchen, washhouse, storehouse, office, smokehouse, the necessary -negro houses for servants’ houses about his dwelling, -weaving, ice and poultry houses, a gin house forty -by sixty feet, a building forty feet square with driving<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76"></a>[76]</span> -power attached,” from which was propelled the following -machinery: a flouring mill which ground and bolted from -seventy to eighty bushels of wheat per day, a corn mill which -ground from ninety to one hundred bushels of corn per day, -a knife that cut food for his stock, a corn sheller, a wheat -thresher, with a 300-bushel capacity per day for wheat and -200 bushels for rye, a saw mill that cut from one to two -thousand feet of lumber per day; “barns, stables, cribs, -overseer’s home, negro cabins, and outhouses.”<a id="FNanchor_298" href="#Footnote_298" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> This -planter furnished the flour for his family and negroes and -sold a surplus to cotton planters sufficient to pay the cost -of his machinery and the salary of his overseer. He raised -all the live stock that the plantation needed, and sold immense -quantities of horses, mules, cattle, sheep, and swine.</p> - -<p>His capital increased at the rate of 169 per cent per annum, -yet “he never made a speculation of any kind whatever -during all this time of prosperity, to buy and sell -again. He lived generously, while some of his friends -charged him with extravagance in many things. His farming -interest did it all, under its own progression, and is -entitled as a pursuit or business, after the support of himself -and family, which under the peculiar visitations of -Providence, added necessarily to his expenses, to all the -credit.”<a id="FNanchor_299" href="#Footnote_299" class="fnanchor">[42]</a></p> - -<p>This planter was active in politics, and acted as administrator -of the estates of several of his friends. He managed -his plantation so successfully that he never gave cause -for a change of overseers, nor did he have any trouble with -his slaves. He was a type of the Middle Tennessee planters.</p> - -<p>This planter was Mark C. Cockrill. He was famous for -the grade of wool that he grew. He exhibited a wool at the -World’s Fair in London that for its texture, quality, and -fineness excelled the wool from Saxony, from which the -best English broadcloths have been made. He returned<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77"></a>[77]</span> -with the premium, certificates, and medals to be still further -rewarded by the legislature of his own state with a -gold medal for his enterprise and the prosperity he had -brought to the wool-growers of the state.<a id="FNanchor_300" href="#Footnote_300" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></p> - -<p>There were equally famous public-spirited cotton planters -of West Tennessee, Pope, Holmes, Poynor, and Bond, -planters of Fayette County and Shelby County, at this -same World’s Fair, who changed the classification and -commercial character of American cottons. They were able -to place Tennessee cotton next to the Georgia Sea Island, -giving it the highest grade of upland cotton. This meant -considerable wealth to Tennessee. Both Pope and Holmes -received medals at the fair. These planters, in coöperation -with David Park, a cotton factor of Memphis, distributed -among several factories of the East a large amount of -Tennessee cotton to be experimented with, in order to test -its superior grade. This gave Tennessee cotton a great -reputation, and made Memphis a joint distributing-point -for the sale of cotton. Cotton began to come up the Mississippi -to Memphis to be distributed over the entire world. -This was the beginning of the movement that has finally -made Memphis the greatest inland cotton market in the -world.</p> - -<p>Comparing these cotton planters with the Middle Tennessee -planter referred to above, James C. Coggesball, the -author of this paper, says, “I must certainly be permitted to -speak as to the circumstances of several whose success surpasses -his in a four-fold extent.” “And just here,” he -says, “permit me to add as my opinion that there is not to -be found a location in the United States where a farming -community, taking them as a body, is as independent and -intelligent as they are in the western district. The public -days at the county seats exhibit but few scenes of impropriety -emanating from them, while the sheriff’s and constable’s -advertisements seldom have reference to their -estates.”<a id="FNanchor_301" href="#Footnote_301" class="fnanchor">[44]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78"></a>[78]</span></p> - -<p>The planters of Tennessee realized that slavery was profitable, -and were jealous of all forces that threatened its existence. -They knew that the cotton system depended on -slave labor. The slaveholding sections of the state were the -strong supporters of colonization societies, not in the sense -of anti-slavery, but as a protection to slavery. “The existence -of colored freedom in the midst of a slave population,” -said their petitions, “has a tendency to impair the -value and utility of that description.” It will cause “those -who might have considered bondage as one of the decrees -of Fate, or provisions of superior power, imposed upon their -sable race, where all were placed in a like condition ... -to view with jealousy and discontent the elevation of some -of their own family to a grade so far above their reach.”<a id="FNanchor_302" href="#Footnote_302" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> -This memorial suggested the expediency of abolishing colored -freedom, which was actually attempted in the later -fifties.</p> - -<p>“The farmer should remember,” said Coggesball, “that -he has not merely farmers’ duties to attend to, but that, -as a slaveholder, and as a member of society, he has personal -and political rights to watch over and protect. Will -he look at the assembled combinations that are against him; -at the encroachments upon his homestead, who are advancing -with torch in hand and fanatic cry of freedom, even -at the price of extermination of the white race of slaveholders? -And see that they are headed by the pulpit, composed -of its three thousand clergy, with the anti-Christ motive -of a Judas Iscariot marked upon their physiognomy, -and instigated by the price of thirty shekels of silver, from -England’s commercial schemers, swearing in their fanatical -zeal that the Bible itself is not the Word of God, they recognize -in the establishment and the sustaining of this relation, -and reading their homilies on the other side of -Mason and Dixon’s line, to the mob collections from the -purlieus of their cities, who, like themselves aspire to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79"></a>[79]</span> -distinction given to the Beecher family, by some way, who -lately discovered that in this world there were three distinct -classes of people, to-wit: the saint, the sinner, and the -Beecher family.”</p> - -<p>As the pressure became more intense, the planters became -more intolerant of any discussion on the slavery question. -The conclusion of Coggesball’s discussion gives the -frame of mind that most of the slaveholders had acquired -by 1860. “For myself,” he said, “my relation to slavery is -one that I allow no man, even my neighbor, who is a non-slaveholder, -to counsel me respecting. So sinister and -heartless has the northern public become, they but elucidate -the fact that there is no tyranny like that of the full-blooded -fanatic. I have no missionary ground in my heart for them -to reach; my duty is a responsible one. God and my country -recognize it, and I care not what others think of me respecting -it. I believe that slavery is a blessing to the slave -in the largest extent, produced by the wisdom of God, and -retained as such by his overruling providence, and that the -Christian slaveholder is the true friend of the black man.”<a id="FNanchor_303" href="#Footnote_303" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_258" href="#FNanchor_258" class="label">[1]</a> Knox, Bledsoe, Bradley, Granger, Greene, Hawkins, McMinn, Monroe, -Roane, and Hamilton were counties noted for their production of -corn and wheat.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_259" href="#FNanchor_259" class="label">[2]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1850, p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_260" href="#FNanchor_260" class="label">[3]</a> Census of 1850, Population I, p. 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_261" href="#FNanchor_261" class="label">[4]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_262" href="#FNanchor_262" class="label">[5]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1857-8, p. 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_263" href="#FNanchor_263" class="label">[6]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1859-60, p. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_264" href="#FNanchor_264" class="label">[7]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1859, p. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_265" href="#FNanchor_265" class="label">[8]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_266" href="#FNanchor_266" class="label">[9]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_267" href="#FNanchor_267" class="label">[10]</a> Tenth Census, I, Population, p. 63.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_268" href="#FNanchor_268" class="label">[11]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1856, p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_269" href="#FNanchor_269" class="label">[12]</a> Martin, A. E., Tennessee Historical Magazine, I, No. 4, p. 279.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_270" href="#FNanchor_270" class="label">[13]</a> Whig Almanac for 1844.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_271" href="#FNanchor_271" class="label">[14]</a> Whig Almanac for 1848.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_272" href="#FNanchor_272" class="label">[15]</a> The Practical Farmer and Mechanic, October 6, 1857.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_273" href="#FNanchor_273" class="label">[16]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 431.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_274" href="#FNanchor_274" class="label">[17]</a> De Bow’s Review, XVII, 423.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_275" href="#FNanchor_275" class="label">[18]</a> The following is a description of “a master in Haywood County, -who, having the Shanghai mania, raised one year over eight hundred -of them, under the careful attention and supervision of an old man, -who had numbered his three score years, and was very infirm, but -who, after proper preparation in the several coops and houses, with -suitable places as depositories for their food, took great pleasure in -his charge, and, with the negroes assisting him, it was pleasing to -see the delight he manifested in the care of his brood, and with what -pride he would discourse on their good qualities to his respective -visitors. Upwards of one hundred pair were given away, and from -the sales of others at five dollars the pair, the old negro’s labor contributed -to the income of the farm more than two hundred dollars. -To suppress the romantic suggestions that his rural pursuits in his -retirement might lead to, he would exhibit his ‘happy family’ uncaged -to his visitors, when he pointed to the fowl, the duck, the turkey, the -pea-fowl, the pigeon, the partridge, the dove, the jaybird, the squirrel, -the rabbit, the red bird, the woodpecker, the humming and mocking -bird, as they occupied their respective places in the forest before -his dwelling, and frequently several of them might be seen eating together, -feeling instinctively conscious, from habit long indulged, that -they had a protector over them, that prevented their being wantonly -destroyed.”</p> - -<p>Comptroller’s Report 1855-6, p. 432.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_276" href="#FNanchor_276" class="label">[19]</a> “He should see,” said Williams, “that their cabins are kept clean -and free from all kinds of filth, and that their hours of retiring -should be regular and at an early period of the night. Their food -should be nourishing and well cooked, with plenty of vegetables in -heat of summer.</p> - -<p>“He should have his negroes comfortably clad, winter and summer, -and see that their persons as well as their clothing are kept clean and -nice, and that they are not driven out in unsuitable weather (which is -too often the case by over-bearing overseers), if he expects them to -enjoy health or live to an age to be profitable to their masters. He -should attend to their morals and instruct them himself, or employ -others to do so, as regards their duties and obligations to their master -and their Creator—so they may thoroughly understand the full nature -of vice and crime, and their consequent punishment here and hereafter. -These instructions will make them better servants by teaching -them their true and relative positions, and prevent cases of insubordination -which so often arise from ignorance and neglect. Let -their treatment be mild and humane, at the same time stern and -uncompromising in the punishment of offenses.”—The Practical -Farmer and Mechanic, October 6, 1857.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_277" href="#FNanchor_277" class="label">[20]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 525.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_278" href="#FNanchor_278" class="label">[21]</a> Ibid., p. 526.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_279" href="#FNanchor_279" class="label">[22]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 527.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_280" href="#FNanchor_280" class="label">[23]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 527.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_281" href="#FNanchor_281" class="label">[24]</a> Ibid., p. 431.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_282" href="#FNanchor_282" class="label">[25]</a> Howard, Rev. Arthur, History of the Church in the Diocese of -Tennessee, p. 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_283" href="#FNanchor_283" class="label">[26]</a> Pendleton, J. N., Reminiscences of a Long Life, p. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_284" href="#FNanchor_284" class="label">[27]</a> Statistical Abstract of U. S., 1906, p. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_285" href="#FNanchor_285" class="label">[28]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1857-8, p. 165.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_286" href="#FNanchor_286" class="label">[29]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1859-60, p. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_287" href="#FNanchor_287" class="label">[30]</a> Stirling, James, Letters from the Slave States, p. 305.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_288" href="#FNanchor_288" class="label">[31]</a> Political Science Quarterly, XX, p. 267.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_289" href="#FNanchor_289" class="label">[32]</a> Thwaites, III, 257.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_290" href="#FNanchor_290" class="label">[33]</a> Ibid., 277.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_291" href="#FNanchor_291" class="label">[34]</a> Ibid., 278.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_292" href="#FNanchor_292" class="label">[35]</a> Thwaites, VIII, 73.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_293" href="#FNanchor_293" class="label">[36]</a> American Historical Review, October, 1897 (Letter of Phineas -Miller to Eli Whitney, July 21, 1797).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_294" href="#FNanchor_294" class="label">[37]</a> Aurora and General Advertiser, September 3, 1802.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_295" href="#FNanchor_295" class="label">[38]</a> Hammond, M. B., The Cotton Industry, p. 70.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_296" href="#FNanchor_296" class="label">[39]</a> Publications of the North Carolina Historical Commission, I, p. -245.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_297" href="#FNanchor_297" class="label">[40]</a> Nashville Banner, November 16, 1833.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_298" href="#FNanchor_298" class="label">[41]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 432.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_299" href="#FNanchor_299" class="label">[42]</a> Ibid., p. 433.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_300" href="#FNanchor_300" class="label">[43]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 434.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_301" href="#FNanchor_301" class="label">[44]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 435.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_302" href="#FNanchor_302" class="label">[45]</a> Memorial from the Colonization Society of Tennessee, 1832 -(State Archives).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_303" href="#FNanchor_303" class="label">[46]</a> Comptroller’s Report for 1855-6, p. 439.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80"></a>[80]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_IV">CHAPTER IV<br /> -<span class="smcap">Anti-slavery Societies</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>The attitude of the people of Tennessee toward the negro -expressed itself not only in legislation and judicial decision, -but also in organized societies, such as manumission and -colonization societies, in the churches and in an abolition -literature that is unique in American history. It is the -purpose of this chapter to give the organization and work of -the manumission and colonization societies.</p> - -<p>The abolition forces made a determined effort to abolish -slavery in the constitutional convention of 1796, and, failing -in this, they straightway decided to establish anti-slavery -societies. There is some doubt as to when the first -manumission society was organized in Tennessee. It is -clear that an effort was made to organize such a society in -1797. The Knoxville Gazette of January 23, 1797, published -a letter from Thomas Embree in which it is stated -that a number of the citizens of Washington and Greene -counties were to meet in March, 1797 and organize abolition -societies patterned after those of Philadelphia, Baltimore, -Richmond, and Winchester.<a id="FNanchor_304" href="#Footnote_304" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> The purpose of the society -was to work for a more liberal basis of emancipation and -for complete abolition as soon as the slaves by education -could be prepared for it. Joshua W. Caldwell, author of -The Constitutional History of Tennessee, claims that either -a Tennessee Manumission Society was organized in 1809, or -that the one mentioned above was still in existence.<a id="FNanchor_305" href="#Footnote_305" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> It is -not corroborated by historical evidence that there was organized -a manumission society in Tennessee in either 1797 -or 1809.</p> - -<p>There was a preliminary organization of an anti-slavery -society in December, 1814, at the home of Elihu Swain, the -father-in-law of Charles Osborn, who was the moving spirit<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_81"></a>[81]</span> -of the organization. Rachel Swain, later Rachel Davis, -a daughter of Elihu Swain, said she was present at the -organizing of the society.<a id="FNanchor_306" href="#Footnote_306" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> The temporary organization -was made permanent at the first session of the society, held -at Lost Creek meeting house, Jefferson County, Tennessee, -February 25, 1815.<a id="FNanchor_307" href="#Footnote_307" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<p>At this first meeting, the society was given the name of -the Tennessee Society for Promoting the Manumission of -Slaves, and a constitution was adopted. The constitution -consisted of a preamble and four articles.<a id="FNanchor_308" href="#Footnote_308" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> The motto of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_82"></a>[82]</span> -society was, “That freedom is the natural right of all men,” -and each member displayed a placard to this effect in some -conspicuous place in his home. The society went at once -into politics by pledging its members to vote for only those -candidates for office in the state government who favored -emancipation.</p> - -<p>There were several anti-slavery societies organized in -Tennessee during this same year. They soon discovered -the unity of their purpose and decided in 1815 to federate. -For this purpose, these societies held a general convention -at Lost Creek Meeting House of Friends<a id="FNanchor_309" href="#Footnote_309" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> in Greene County, -November 21, 1815, and organized the Tennessee Manumission -Society on a federated basis. There were twenty-two -branches of this society.<a id="FNanchor_310" href="#Footnote_310" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> By 1827, there were twenty-five -anti-slavery societies in Tennessee, and 130 in the United -States. Of this number, one hundred and six were in the -Southern States, Tennessee ranking second in the list.<a id="FNanchor_311" href="#Footnote_311" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> -The Tennessee society numbered one thousand members.<a id="FNanchor_312" href="#Footnote_312" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> -Its officers were a president, vice-president, secretary, and -treasurer. At the suggestion of Mr. Elihu Embree, a committee<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_83"></a>[83]</span> -of inspection was provided to censor the publications -of the society.<a id="FNanchor_313" href="#Footnote_313" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> The dues of this society were 12½ cents -per year.<a id="FNanchor_314" href="#Footnote_314" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p> - -<p>The qualifications for membership were republicanism, -patriotism, abolitionism, and morality. The society held its -annual meetings at Lost Creek Meeting House. Its work -consisted in memorializing legislatures and congresses, protecting -runaway negroes, fostering the spirit of manumission, -addressing the churches on slaveholding and opposing -the domestic and foreign slave trade.<a id="FNanchor_315" href="#Footnote_315" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> - -<p>The society repeatedly memorialized Congress on the -subject of slavery. These memorials prayed the abolition -of slavery in the District of Columbia, the prohibition of the -interstate slave trade and separation of families, the proscription -of slavery in the territories, and finally the abolition -of slavery in the United States.<a id="FNanchor_316" href="#Footnote_316" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> These petitions were -presented by Tennessee congressmen, and referred to the -judiciary committee, which never reported on them.<a id="FNanchor_317" href="#Footnote_317" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<p>In 1821, the society petitioned the state legislature to -grant easier terms for manumission, to establish a plan of -gradual emancipation, to urge upon those owning slaves -to teach them the Scriptures, and to prohibit “the inhuman -practice of separating husbands and wives, within the limits -of this state.”<a id="FNanchor_318" href="#Footnote_318" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<p>The legislative committee to which this memorial was referred -dealt with it frankly. It advocated easier terms for -manumission, but desired to restrict them to the emancipation -of the young, healthy slave in order to prevent avaricious -masters from freeing the aged slaves who would -become a charge to society. It believed that the state should -devise a policy for freeing the slaves unborn, and recommended -the passing of a law, prohibiting the separation of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84"></a>[84]</span> -husband and wife. The committee reported unanimously, -but the senate laid its report on the table.<a id="FNanchor_319" href="#Footnote_319" class="fnanchor">[16]</a></p> - -<p>James Jones, president of the society, stated at its eighth<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85"></a>[85]</span> -annual meeting that the objects of the society should be: -First, to obtain the support of the people to the abolition -propaganda because the people rule; second, to establish as -many branches as possible to obtain this end; third, to recommend -to all friends of humanity to use their suffrage to -place men in the legislature who would support gradual -emancipation.<a id="FNanchor_320" href="#Footnote_320" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p> - -<p>At the tenth annual meeting of the society, a memorial -was addressed to the churches of Tennessee which showed -the inconsistency of religion and slavery and bitterly arraigned -society for the crime of slavery. This criticism -of the church, society, and government in this petition was -the strongest condemnation of slavery made by the society -during its existence.<a id="FNanchor_321" href="#Footnote_321" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86"></a>[86]</span></p> - -<p>The minutes of the eleventh annual meeting in 1825 show -that the society was still active. There were at this time -twenty-two branches, eleven of which reported a membership -of 570.<a id="FNanchor_322" href="#Footnote_322" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> This meeting was well attended and appointed -a committee, consisting of James Jones, Thomas -Hodge, Jr., and Thomas Doane to begin the publication of a -quarterly journal to be called the manumission journal. -Thomas Hodge, Jr. was made editor of the journal, which -was to be published at Greenville, Tennessee. The society -drafted memorials to Congress and to the churches of the -United States, and appointed James Lundy as delegate to -the Annual Convention of the American Abolition Societies -in Philadelphia.<a id="FNanchor_323" href="#Footnote_323" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> - -<p>Interest in the society seems to have begun to wane after -1825. The convention in 1826 was not well attended. Only -ten branches were represented at this meeting.<a id="FNanchor_324" href="#Footnote_324" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> The state -was beginning to be alarmed at the increased number of -free negroes resulting from emancipation and immigration.</p> - -<p>The thirteenth meeting in 1827 was a rather important -one. It sent the usual memorials to Congress, legislature -of Tennessee, and to the churches of the country.<a id="FNanchor_325" href="#Footnote_325" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> It made -expulsion a penalty for aiding slaves to escape. The branch -organizations were to try those accused of misconduct. This<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87"></a>[87]</span> -regulation indicates pernicious activities on the part of some -members of the society.</p> - -<p>This meeting was noted for an address made by Thomas -Doane in which he made a very serious criticism of slavery. -He said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Slavery is unfriendly to a genuine course of -agriculture, turning in most cases the fair and -fertile face of nature into barren sterility. It is -the bane of manufacturing enterprise and internal -improvements; injurious to mechanical prosperity; -oppressive and degrading to the poor and -laboring classes of the white population that live -in its vicinity; the death of religion; and finally, -it is a volcano in disguise, and dangerous to the -safety and happiness of any government on earth -when it is tolerated.<a id="FNanchor_326" href="#Footnote_326" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This convention also appointed a committee of which -James Jones was chairman to prepare a report to the -American Convention. Jones, in this report, expressed primarily -his own feelings and showed his earnestness as one -of the greatest anti-slavery leaders of his time. He urged -religious and benevolent societies and all friends of freedom -throughout the Union to join in petitioning Congress to -abolish slavery in the District of Columbia and to use its -power of regulating interstate commerce to suppress the -interstate slave traffic. “It is time,” he said, “for people to -be aroused to their duty, and ask their rulers to abolish -such things in plain, explicit terms.”<a id="FNanchor_327" href="#Footnote_327" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p> - -<p>Jones not only saw the injury that slavery was causing -to society, socially, economically, and politically, but he also -foresaw what the final catastrophe would be unless some -constructive policy of abolition was instituted for the nation. -He said in a letter in 1830 to Benjamin Lundy: “For -if Congress will not listen to the voice of humanity until -destruction cometh, I wish posterity to know that some -among us now are desirous to have justice done.”<a id="FNanchor_328" href="#Footnote_328" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88"></a>[88]</span></p> - -<p>Several branches of the society were active in creating -sentiment for emancipation by means of public meetings, -addresses, and memorials to various organizations. The -Jefferson Branch, located in Jefferson County, the seat of -the state society, led the work in the local societies. In -1821, in an address delivered before the Jefferson Society, -the speaker took the following optimistic attitude toward -manumission:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>When we compare the public sentiment relative -to slavery at this period, with what it was, even a -few years ago, have we not reason to hope that a -propitious epoch is now at hand for benevolent -humanity to exert itself in the cause of the afflicted -innocence? Is not the evil which avarice and cupidity -have drawn around our senses, gradually -vanishing? Is not the monster of cruelty beheld -more generally in his native form? We hail the -increase of this sentiment as the beginning of auspicious -consequence both to ourselves and the unfortunate -sons of Africa. We hope that the sentiment -will spread until we become a willing people -to forsake our iniquity, and let the sufferers go; -not by a miraculous interposition do we look for -it to be accomplished with precipitation; but by -such means as deliberate counsel and the direction -of Providence may dictate, to be conformable with -Justice to those who claim their services, and to -the circumstances of those in servitude, by alleviating -their wretched condition, and instilling -into their minds such instruction as may prepare -them for assuming their proper rank and station -among rational beings, when the universal principles -of propriety, justice, and equity, shall sanction -it.<a id="FNanchor_329" href="#Footnote_329" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>It has already been pointed out that interest in manumission -began to wane in 1825. In 1827, the annual convention -of the state society was poorly attended. No records -of its life and activities after 1830 have been found.<a id="FNanchor_330" href="#Footnote_330" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> -A definite change of policy toward the free negro was being<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89"></a>[89]</span> -formulated during this period and it found expression in -the Exclusion Act of 1831. This change of policy of the -state meant the death of manumission as an organized movement.</p> - -<p>There were also some independent anti-slavery societies -in the state. November 21, 1820, the Humane Protecting -Society was organized in Greene County. Its purpose was -to extend the rights of man to all, irrespective of race and -color, and protect those “unlawfully oppressed.” The qualifications -for membership were good moral character, -friendship toward the government of the United States, -and agreement to pay ten cents on the hundred dollar’s -worth of one’s unencumbered estate as dues.<a id="FNanchor_331" href="#Footnote_331" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p>In 1826, there was organized at Nashoba, Shelby County, -West Tennessee, the Emancipating Labor Society, by Miss -Frances Wright of Scotland. In 1825, she bought eight -tracts of land, aggregating 1,940 acres, lying on both sides -of Wolf River, in the vicinity of Germantown and Ridgeway, -paying $6,000 for the land.<a id="FNanchor_332" href="#Footnote_332" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> The society was managed -by a board of trustees under certain restrictions.<a id="FNanchor_333" href="#Footnote_333" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<p>Admission to the society was to be strictly individual, except -in case of children under fourteen years of age, who -might be admitted with one or both parents, reared and educated -until twenty years of age, and emancipated at twenty-one. -The society planned to buy slaves from those people<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90"></a>[90]</span> -who wished to emancipate their slaves but who felt that -they could not sustain such expense. The society did not -buy old men, women, and children; but would take them and -support them. In 1827, Miss Wright presented the society -with eight slaves and the work of a family of females.<a id="FNanchor_334" href="#Footnote_334" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p> - -<p>The economics of the scheme were typical of the communistic -philosophers of the period. The slaves were -charged with the capital invested on which they were expected -to pay six per cent interest; the farm equipment, -consisting of farming implements and live stock, was loaned -them on the condition that they constantly replace the same -from their earnings. One-half of the produce of the plantation -was placed to their credit, and purchased by the society -at the market price. They shared equally with the -society the proceeds derived from the sale of all live stock -raised on the plantation. By a system of weekly accounts -of income and expenses, they knew their financial status at -the end of each week. As soon as any slave had a credit -equal to what the society had paid for him, he was emancipated. -If he wanted to leave the state for Hayti or Liberia, -he was given the privilege of remaining in the society -until he had sufficient means to pay his transportation to -one of these colonies.<a id="FNanchor_335" href="#Footnote_335" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p> - -<p>The character of the management of this society is very -interesting. The slaves were not put under an overseer -and lashed to work, but were directed in their work as if -they were free laborers. The idea was to make men and -women who would voluntarily develop habitual industry -under advice and encouragement, rather than to exact labor -from them by a decree of force. They were to be fitted for -a state of freedom by being developed into self-governing -men and women, and responsibility was substituted for discipline -just as rapidly as self-initiative could be developed.</p> - -<p>The negroes were fed, clothed, and housed. Those who -showed any interest in acquiring information were taught. -A constant aim of the organization was to improve their<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91"></a>[91]</span> -habits and conduct. The organization’s chief purpose was -to develop humanity, rather than to net the society any pecuniary -gain.<a id="FNanchor_336" href="#Footnote_336" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> The society was not a success because of -Miss Wright’s absence in Europe and the impracticability -of the plan. The trustees resigned in 1831. Miss Wright -emancipated the slaves and sent them to Hayti. The trustees -redeeded the plantation to Miss Wright in 1832. The -estate became involved in court and some minor points remained -in controversy as late as 1886.<a id="FNanchor_337" href="#Footnote_337" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></p> - -<p>A fourth anti-slavery society was the Moral Religious, -Manumission Society of West Tennessee, which was organized -December 18, 1824, at Columbia, Maury County, Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_338" href="#Footnote_338" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> -The spirit of this society is well known in the -following extract from the preamble of its constitution:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We, the undersigned, having fully considered the -subject of Tyranny and Slavery as practiced by -individuals on their brethren in our neighborhood, -and elsewhere in America; and being fully convinced -that it exceeds any other crime in magnitude:</p> - -<p>1st. In motive—being moved thereto by the -“world, flesh and the devil,” or with pride and -laziness.</p> - -<p>2nd. In the execution, it is cruel and unjust.</p> - -<p>3rd. In the consequences, ignorance, hardness -of heart and inhumanity are produced. This ignorance -of right and wrong is manifested in the -words and actions of tyrant and slave and all of -those who approve of the practice in others. They -go forth in practical infidelity and irreligion, which -tend to destroy the blessings of Christianity and -republicanism as they exist in this otherwise -happy land.<a id="FNanchor_339" href="#Footnote_339" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This society limited its membership to fifteen, none of -whom could be slaveholders.<a id="FNanchor_340" href="#Footnote_340" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> Any additional membership -constituted a branch society. The officers of the society<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92"></a>[92]</span> -consisted of a board of directors, one of whom was designated -as chairman. Majority vote of the membership determined -the policy of the society on any question. No -levy for funds was made on the membership, but its revenues -consisted of contributions and donations. The directors -were trustees of such funds. The society met quarterly -at the Republican Meeting House about six miles from -Columbia, Maury County, Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_341" href="#Footnote_341" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> One of these quarterly -meetings was held on the Fourth of July, and was -regarded as the annual meeting of the society. The constitution -was rather elaborate, consisting of twelve articles, -and could be amended by the consent of two-thirds of its -members.<a id="FNanchor_342" href="#Footnote_342" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> The policy of the society was not so radical -in method as might have been expected from the general -tenor of its documents. The constitution in articles 6 and 7 -states that the acceptance of Christianity would destroy in -the tyrant “the will to enslave” and would therefore eliminate -personal slavery. It was the will of “men of talents” -to tyrannize that had to be controlled, and argument was -the leading means to use to accomplish this purpose. The -society, therefore, proposed to circulate copies of “The -Genius of Universal Emancipation” through their several -communities, the state, and the nation, to issue addresses, -to petition churches and legislative bodies, and to preach -the Gospel of humanity to slaveholders.</p> - -<p>This society issued in 1824 a memorial to the Methodist -Episcopal Conference which met that year at Columbia, -Tennessee. The conference agreed to the anti-slavery spirit -of the memorial and to a coöperation with the society in the -realization of its aims.<a id="FNanchor_343" href="#Footnote_343" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> March 22, 1825, the society at its -thirtieth quarterly meeting sent an address to the Manumission -Societies of America, making suggestions for the -celebration of Fourth of July, 1826, as Jubilee Day.<a id="FNanchor_344" href="#Footnote_344" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93"></a>[93]</span></p> - -<p>The Moral, Religious Manumission Society sent an address -to the American Convention in 1826 that was too radical -for publication.<a id="FNanchor_345" href="#Footnote_345" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> The society seems to have been dissolved -about 1827.<a id="FNanchor_346" href="#Footnote_346" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></p> - -<p>The manumission societies came to realize that the state -would not tolerate a large element of free negroes within its -borders. They saw that their success was conditioned on -the colonization of the free negroes as rapidly as they were -emancipated. The Tennessee Manumission Society in its -memorial of 1816 to the churches of the United States advocated -in regard to free negroes, “that a colony be laid off -for their reception as they became free.”<a id="FNanchor_347" href="#Footnote_347" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> The Presbyterian -Synod of Tennessee in session at the Nashville church -the following year, adopted resolutions favoring colonization, -and congratulated the society for its efforts in this direction.<a id="FNanchor_348" href="#Footnote_348" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> -A colonization society seems to have been organized<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94"></a>[94]</span> -in 1822, but there is no evidence of its continued -existence.<a id="FNanchor_349" href="#Footnote_349" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> The Tennessee Manumission Society, in its report -to the American Convention for the year 1823, suggested -that Congress make an appropriation for the purchase -of a parcel of land on the American continent for the -colonization of free negroes.<a id="FNanchor_350" href="#Footnote_350" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> In 1825, the legislature of -Tennessee advised its senators and representatives in Congress -to use their influence in promoting a scheme of colonization -of the free people of color.<a id="FNanchor_351" href="#Footnote_351" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> In this same year, -James Jones, president of the Tennessee Manumission Society, -wrote Benjamin Lundy that he was much gratified -at the progress being made to colonize the free people of -color in the Haytian Republic,<a id="FNanchor_352" href="#Footnote_352" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> and he quotes the resolution -of the Tennessee Manumission Society, favoring the -Haytian Republic as a rendezvous for free negroes.<a id="FNanchor_353" href="#Footnote_353" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> Two -years later, the legislature of Tennessee, in response to memorials -and petitions of manumission societies and churches -again instructed the Tennessee representatives in Congress -to give their aid to the government of the United States in -carrying into effect a plan of colonizing the free people of -color.<a id="FNanchor_354" href="#Footnote_354" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> From 1816 to 1829, there was constant agitation in -Tennessee for a colonization society.</p> - -<p>In 1829 the American Colonization Society worked out a -plan for state societies. The state societies were to be auxiliaries -to the national society, and were themselves to be a -confederacy of county societies which in turn were to be -composed of town and district societies. The town and district -societies were to hold regular annual meetings and -send delegates to the annual meeting of the state society, -which was to be represented at the annual meeting of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_95"></a>[95]</span> -national society.<a id="FNanchor_355" href="#Footnote_355" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> In accordance with this plan Mr. Josiah -F. Polk, agent for the American Colonization Society for the -states of Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee, and Alabama, on December -21, 1829, organized, at Nashville, the Tennessee -Colonization Society, consisting of sixteen members. A -president and one vice-president were elected. The membership -soon increased to seventy-three and a fund of one -hundred dollars was collected.<a id="FNanchor_356" href="#Footnote_356" class="fnanchor">[53]</a></p> - -<p>The society held its first meeting on January 1, 1830, and -elected a complete set of officers. Rev. Philip Lindsey, -D.D., president of the University of Nashville, was made -president of the society; R. H. McEwen, recording secretary; -Henry A. Wise, corresponding secretary; and Orville -Ewing, treasurer. Six vice-presidents and a board of six -managers, consisting of prominent citizens, were elected.<a id="FNanchor_357" href="#Footnote_357" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> -The society at this time numbered about one hundred and -twenty members<a id="FNanchor_358" href="#Footnote_358" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> and contained twenty auxiliaries.<a id="FNanchor_359" href="#Footnote_359" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> These -auxiliaries had a large membership, and a list of strong -officers of the most prominent people of the state. Andrew -Jackson was much interested in colonization. He was vice-president -of the American Colonization Society from 1819 -to 1822.<a id="FNanchor_360" href="#Footnote_360" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> Polk, in reporting on his work to the American -Colonization Society, in 1829, said that much might be expected -from the Tennessee Society.<a id="FNanchor_361" href="#Footnote_361" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> Henry A. Wise, who -was secretary of the Tennessee Colonization Society, made -a very flattering report of its work to the national society -in 1830. “We may expect,” said the African Repository, -“benefits of the most important character, from the energy<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_96"></a>[96]</span> -and liberality of the citizens of Tennessee. It cannot be -forgotten that the legislature of this state was among the -first to express its approbation of our scheme, as meriting -the countenance and aid of the National Government.”<a id="FNanchor_362" href="#Footnote_362" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> -“Believing as I do,” said a Tennessee correspondent of the -African Repository, “that under Providence it is the only -feasible and judicious plan to ameliorate the condition of -the free people of color in these states, and that it is a -cause in which patriotism and humanity, are largely embarked, -I shall do all I can to aid its progress; and I hear, -with pleasure, of its continued prosperity.”<a id="FNanchor_363" href="#Footnote_363" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> Polk, in his -report of 1830, states that “The colored population is considered -by the people of Tennessee and Alabama in general, -as an immense evil to the country—but the free part of it, -by all, as the greatest of all evils.”<a id="FNanchor_364" href="#Footnote_364" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> A correspondent of -the African Repository from Tennessee stated in 1831 that -“the colonization movement had many friends in Tennessee -and that they were determined to make every possible effort -to aid the good cause.”<a id="FNanchor_365" href="#Footnote_365" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p> - -<p>The society at its meeting on November 8, 1831, appointed -a committee of seven to solicit funds to defray the expenses -of sending free negroes to Liberia. A committee of three -was appointed to memorialize the legislature of Tennessee to -make an appropriation for the aid of the society.<a id="FNanchor_366" href="#Footnote_366" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> The legislature -appointed a committee on colonization to consider -the petition of the society, and, on September 30, 1833, -passed two resolutions, requesting this committee to investigate -the expediency of asking Congress for an annual appropriation -of $100,000 and the general assembly for $5,000 -to aid in colonizing free negroes in Liberia.<a id="FNanchor_367" href="#Footnote_367" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> In response -to this request, the legislature in 1833 passed a law, giving -ten dollars to the state society for every free negro sent to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_97"></a>[97]</span> -Liberia, provided that not more than $500 was expended in -any one year.<a id="FNanchor_368" href="#Footnote_368" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p> - -<p>The society held its annual meeting in the Hall of Representatives -at the State Capitol, October 14, 1833, and was -addressed by James G. Birney, of Alabama, agent of the -American Colonization Society. “We admire this institution,” -said the Nashville Banner, “and feel the utmost veneration -and respect for the humane motives of its founders, -and for those who are engaged in promoting its objects. -It would afford us unfeigned pleasure to see all its generous -designs crowned with complete success.”<a id="FNanchor_369" href="#Footnote_369" class="fnanchor">[66]</a></p> - -<p>The petitions received by the legislature in 1832 and 1833 -from the State Colonization Society and its auxiliaries contain -the leading reasons advanced by these societies for -colonization. The memorialists said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We take it to be self-evident general proposition, -that the benefits of government, should be extended -alike to all its citizens; we are compelled, -however, by our peculiar circumstances, to violate -this general principle, by withholding from that -class of citizens, the exercise of many political -rights. They are excluded from the ordinary -means of education, on the ground of prejudices -which are quite natural, and which will probably -never be removed. Nor is it at all likely for the -same reasons, that they will be suffered to participate -to any great extent if at all, in the benefits -of an enlarged system of common schools, when -carried into effect in our State; they must therefore -of necessity remain ignorant, and by consequence -vicious.</p> - -<p>Their intercourse, and association with certain -classes of our white population is calculated to -produce, and does produce, in the estimation of -your memorialists, serious evils to the country. -But the preceding considerations are light, and -trivial, when compared with the injury sustained -by the slaveholder, from this class of persons, as -must be obvious to every member of your honorable -body; Nor should the eminent danger to our<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_98"></a>[98]</span> -social and political condition, by their presence, -be overlooked, which arises from the fact, that -there neither does, or can exist, between them, and -our white population, any common bond of patriotism -or private regard.<a id="FNanchor_370" href="#Footnote_370" class="fnanchor">[67]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The Colonization Society had an intermittent career. A -sentiment for colonization, however, persisted in Tennessee -to 1860, but it did not remain organized. “There is something -in this position of the cause of Tennessee,” said the -African Repository in 1846, “which we cannot understand. -There are many friends of colonization in the state. We -have applications from many of the colored people for transportation -to Liberia. Many slaves have been manumitted -for the purpose of being sent there, and yet little or no -money can be raised for the advancement of the enterprise.”<a id="FNanchor_371" href="#Footnote_371" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> -The next year the Repository stated that “We are -gratified to perceive that Tennessee is beginning to awake -on the subject of African colonization. Between eighty and -one hundred free people of color are now preparing to emigrate -from that state to Liberia. They wish to go in the -vessel that leaves New Orleans in December next; and the -means to take them will probably be raised in the state. A -writer in the Record proposes to be one of fifty who will give -one hundred dollars each to purchase territory to be called -Tennessee in Africa.”<a id="FNanchor_372" href="#Footnote_372" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> The average expense of sending a -free negro to Liberia and supporting him for six months -was $50. Shortly after the meeting of 1846, the “Rothschild” -sailed from New Orleans with emigrants from Tennessee -for Liberia.</p> - -<p>A minister of the Gospel in Tennessee, writing to the -Repository in 1847, advocated colonization for substantially -the following reasons:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. It means ultimately the complete removal of -the negro.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_99"></a>[99]</span></p> - -<p>2. It benefits the negro by placing him in an environment -that erects no barriers to his development.</p> - -<p>3. It affords the Christian an opportunity to -give up his slaves.</p> - -<p>4. It lays claim to the noblest feelings of the -patriot, and of the whole-souled philanthropist. -Its tendency is good, only good, and that continually. -If it has not accomplished all that its friends -desire, what agency has?</p> - -</div> - -<p>West Tennessee was more interested in colonization than -either East or Middle Tennessee. In fact, colonization was -largely anti-free-negro rather than anti-slavery, especially -so in West Tennessee, where it was regarded as a means of -eliminating the free negro from among the slaves. West -Tennessee was not nearly so anti-slavery in sentiment as -East Tennessee. There was organized a separate colonization -society at Memphis, June 12, 1848, largely through the -efforts of the Presbyterian Church. It adopted a constitution -of six articles, and elected a president, vice-president, -secretary, treasurer, and twelve directors who constituted -a board of managers. It was an auxiliary of the American -Colonization Society. It was to accomplish its object “by -the contribution of money to the Parent Society by the dissemination -of intelligence concerning the operations, objects, -and prosperity of the colonization enterprise.”<a id="FNanchor_373" href="#Footnote_373" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> A -campaign was waged in Memphis for funds to support the -society.<a id="FNanchor_374" href="#Footnote_374" class="fnanchor">[71]</a></p> - -<p>The Tennessee Colonization Society was incorporated on -February 8, 1850. Philip Lindsey, president of the University -of Nashville, was made its president. It now became -a corporation and a body politic. It could sue and be -sued, and was permitted to receive gifts of money, goods, -and real estate, provided the total value of such gifts did not -exceed $10,000 in any one year. It used its own seal.<a id="FNanchor_375" href="#Footnote_375" class="fnanchor">[72]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_100"></a>[100]</span></p> - -<p>In 1852, Frederick P. Stanton, of Tennessee, in an address -before the American Colonization Society, advocated the removal -of the free negroes to Africa. He believed this step -would eliminate sectionalism and largely solve the problem -of the runaway which, he thought, was mainly due to the -influence of the free negro over the slave. He was also apprehensive -of the political influence which the free negroes -might come to have.<a id="FNanchor_376" href="#Footnote_376" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> He maintained that the national government -could remove the negroes as well as the Indians.<a id="FNanchor_377" href="#Footnote_377" class="fnanchor">[74]</a></p> - -<p>Senator John Bell, of Tennessee, in a letter to James R. -Doolittle, October 18, 1859, advocated the acquisition by -Congress of some territory south of the United States to be -set aside as an asylum for emancipated negroes. He believed -that such a settlement of the problem would be a -“concordant” between the North and the South.<a id="FNanchor_378" href="#Footnote_378" class="fnanchor">[75]</a></p> - -<p>In 1860, Hon. N. G. Taylor, of Tennessee, in an address -before the American Colonization Society, advocated the -colonization of the free blacks for moral and commercial -reasons. He believed that the negro should be returned -to his native home and that Africa colonized by American<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_101"></a>[101]</span> -negroes would naturally become a great commercial ally -of the United States.<a id="FNanchor_379" href="#Footnote_379" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p> - -<p>It is seen from the arguments of these distinguished Tennesseans -that colonization of the free blacks was to them a -pro-slavery, rather than an anti-slavery, movement. It was -pro-slavery in that it made for the security of slavery, but -it was anti-slavery in that, in Tennessee after 1831, emancipation -could take place only on the condition of removal -from the state. The prophecy that the negroes would receive -the franchise is interesting in the light of what actually -happened. Undoubtedly, the removal of the free -blacks from the United States would have lessened friction -between the North and the South.</p> - -<p>The colonization movement in Tennessee was a failure -either as an abolition or as a colonizing agency. There -were only 287 free negroes sent to Liberia from Tennessee -from 1820 to 1866.<a id="FNanchor_380" href="#Footnote_380" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> A few went to Hayti. Manumission -was able to number only 7,300 free negroes in the state in -1860. Of course, free negroes were constantly leaving the -state, especially after 1831, but not in any considerable -number. The greatest good that came from these movements -was the fostering of a humanitarian spirit toward -the negro.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_304" href="#FNanchor_304" class="label">[1]</a> The Knoxville Gazette, January 23, 1797.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_305" href="#FNanchor_305" class="label">[2]</a> American Historical Review, V, 599.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_306" href="#FNanchor_306" class="label">[3]</a> Indiana Historical Society Publication, Vol. 12, p. 236.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_307" href="#FNanchor_307" class="label">[4]</a> Publication of Vanderbilt Southern Historical Society, No. 2, p. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_308" href="#FNanchor_308" class="label">[5]</a> “We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, having met for the -purpose of taking into consideration the case of the people of color -held in bondage in an highly favored land, are of opinion that their -case calls aloud for the attention and sympathy of Columbia’s free -born sons, and for their exertions in endeavoring, by means calculated -to promote and preserve the good of government to procure for that -oppressed part of the community that inestimable jewel, <i>freedom</i>, the -distinguishing glory of our country; without which all other enjoyments -of life must become insignificant.</p> - -<p>“And while we highly esteem the incomparable Constitution of our -country, for maintaining this great truth ‘That freedom is the natural -right of all men, we desire that the feelings of our countrymen may be -awakened, and they stimulated to use every lawful exertion in their -power to advance that glorious day wherein all may enjoy their natural -birthright.’ As we conceive this the way to ensure to our country -the blessings of heaven, we think it expedient to form into a society, -to be known by the name of the “Tennessee Society for Promoting -the Manumission of Slaves” and adopt the following:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p class="center">CONSTITUTION</p> - -<p class="center">Article I</p> - -<p>Each member to have an advertisement in the most conspicuous -part of his house, in the following words, viz.: <i>Freedom</i> is the <i>natural</i> -right of <i>all men</i>; <i>I therefore acknowledge myself a member of the -Tennessee Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves</i>.</p> - -<p class="center">Article II</p> - -<p>That no member vote for governor, or any legislator, unless we believe -him to be in favor of emancipation.</p> - -<p class="center">Article III</p> - -<p>That we convene twelve times a year at Lost Creek meeting-house; -the first on the 11th of the 3rd month next; which meeting shall proceed -to appoint a president, clerk and treasurer, who shall continue -in office for twelve months.</p> - -<p class="center">Article IV</p> - -<p>The requisite qualifications of our members are true republican -principle, patriotic, and in favor of emancipation; and that no immoral -character be admitted into the society as a member.”—P. of V. -S. H. S., No. 2, p. 12.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_309" href="#FNanchor_309" class="label">[6]</a> The Friends were the moving spirit in the organization of these -early societies.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_310" href="#FNanchor_310" class="label">[7]</a> The Genius of Universal Emancipation, IV, 184.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_311" href="#FNanchor_311" class="label">[8]</a> These societies were distributed as follows: 8 in Virginia; 11 in -Maryland; 2 in Delaware; 2 in District of Columbia; 8 in Kentucky; -25 in Tennessee, and 50 in North Carolina. Poole, William Frederick, -Anti-Slavery Opinion before 1800, p. 72.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_312" href="#FNanchor_312" class="label">[9]</a> The Genius, October 13, 1827.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_313" href="#FNanchor_313" class="label">[10]</a> P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_314" href="#FNanchor_314" class="label">[11]</a> Article 2, Constitution of the Tennessee Manumission Society.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_315" href="#FNanchor_315" class="label">[12]</a> Temple, O. P., East Tennessee and the Civil War, 109ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_316" href="#FNanchor_316" class="label">[13]</a> Annals of Congress, 17th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 642 and 709; -the 18th Congress, 1st Session, p. 931.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_317" href="#FNanchor_317" class="label">[14]</a> The Genius, I, 142; Ibid., IV, 66.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_318" href="#FNanchor_318" class="label">[15]</a> Ibid., I, 173-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_319" href="#FNanchor_319" class="label">[16]</a> This is one of the most important documents in the history of -slavery in Tennessee. The committee reported, “that they have had -that subject (slavery) under examination, and on the first proposition -contained in said petition, to-wit: allowing masters, convinced of -the impropriety of holding the man of color in slavery, to emancipate -such, on terms not involving masters or their estates, provided such -slave offered for emancipation is in a situation to provide for him or -herself, express it as their opinion that it is consistent with the rights -of freemen, guaranteed by the Constitution, to have, and exercise -the power of yielding obedience to the dictates of conscience and humanity.</p> - -<p>“That in all cases where chance or fortune has given the citizen -dominion over any part of the human race, no matter of what hue -and whose reflection has taught him to consider an exercise of that -dominion inhuman, unconstitutional, or against the religion of his -country, ought to be permitted to remove that yoke without the trammels -at present imposed by law.</p> - -<p>“Your committee beg leave to state that, while they feel disposed -to amend the law and guarantee the right, they wish it not to be -perverted to the use of the unfeeling and avaricious, who, to rid -themselves of the burden of supporting the aged slave whose life has -been devoted to the service of such a master would seize the opportunity -of casting such on the public for support.</p> - -<p>“Your committee beg leave further to state that very few cases -have occurred where slaves freed in the State of Tennessee have become -a county charge.</p> - -<p>“Your committee, therefore, recommend an amendment, granting -the prayer of the petition, so far as respects the young healthy slave, -not likely to become a county charge.</p> - -<p>“On the second point, your committee are of opinion that it is -worthy the consideration of the legislature, to examine into the -policy of providing for the emancipation of those yet unborn.... -Liberty to the slave has occupied the research of the moral and -philosophical statesmen of our own and other countries; a research -into this principle extends wide into the evil, whose root is perhaps -dangerously entwined with the liberty of the only free governments. -On a subject so interesting, it cannot be improper to inquire; therefore, -as a question of policy, it is recommended to the sober consideration -of the General Assembly.</p> - -<p>“Your committee also advise a provision by law, if the same be -practicable, to prevent, as far as possible, the separating husband -and wife.”—The Genius, I, 71-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_320" href="#FNanchor_320" class="label">[17]</a> The Genius, II, 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_321" href="#FNanchor_321" class="label">[18]</a> This memorial was as follows:</p> - -<p>“The Manumission Society of Tennessee wish to address you again -on the important subject of slavery. In calling your attention to this -subject, in which we feel a most serious concern, we wish to use that -sincerity and candor which become friends travelling through a world -of error and sin, in which they are to make preparation for eternity. -We therefore beg you to pause a moment, and let us compare the -principles of slavery, as it exists among us, with the holy religion -we profess, and the divine precepts of our common Lord. What is -our religion? Our Divine Master has told us, that the most prominent -features were, to love the Lord our God, with all our heart, -mind, soul, and strength, and to love our neighbors as ourselves. And -it is also written in His holy book, as a rule of duty, to honor all and -to abound in love one to another. We are also there taught to consider -the whole human race as one family, descended from the same -original parent; and that God made of one blood all nations who -dwell upon the earth. We are also taught, that as all mankind are -equally free, for one man to deprive another of liberty and to keep -him in that condition, is an enormous crime. And he that stealeth -a man and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely -be put to death. Exodus, XXI, 16. The man stealer is enrolled by -the apostle amongst the other notorious criminals. Tim., I, 10.</p> - -<p>“Now let us ask what slavery is, as it stands between Africa, -America, and the Supreme Judge of Nations. Is it not injustice, -cruelty, robbery, and murder, reduced to a practical system? The -dreadful answer is, that hosts of the disembodied spirits of unoffending -Africans have taken their flight to eternity from the dark -holds of American slave ships, and their last quivering groans have -descended on high to call for vengeance on the murderous deed, that -stained the earth and ocean with their blood. When we ask what -slavery is, we are answered by the civil wars existing in Africa—by -the thousands slain by the bands of their brethren—by the captive’s -last look of anguish at his native shore—and by the blood and -groans of the sufferers on the seas—by the sighs of men driven like -herds of cattle to market—by the tears that furrow the woe-worn -cheek of sorrow, as oppression moulders down the African’s system.” -The Genius, IV, 73-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_322" href="#FNanchor_322" class="label">[19]</a> The branches were: The Greene Branch, Maryville, Bethesda, -Hickory Valley, Nolachucky, Washington, French Broad, Dumplin -Creek, Jefferson Creek, Holston, Sullivan, Powell Valley, Knoxville, -Colter’s Station, Turkey Creek, Chestoody. The Genius, IV, 204.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_323" href="#FNanchor_323" class="label">[20]</a> The Genius, IV, 185.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_324" href="#FNanchor_324" class="label">[21]</a> Ibid., VI, 160.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_325" href="#FNanchor_325" class="label">[22]</a> Ibid., VII, 194.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_326" href="#FNanchor_326" class="label">[23]</a> The Genius, VIII, 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_327" href="#FNanchor_327" class="label">[24]</a> Minutes of American Convention for 1828, p. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_328" href="#FNanchor_328" class="label">[25]</a> The Genius, XI, 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_329" href="#FNanchor_329" class="label">[26]</a> The Genius, I, 173.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_330" href="#FNanchor_330" class="label">[27]</a> Tennessee History Magazine, I, 272.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_331" href="#FNanchor_331" class="label">[28]</a> The Genius, IV, 69.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_332" href="#FNanchor_332" class="label">[29]</a> Goodspeed, 802. Cf. The Genius, VI, 177, which gives the following -trustees: George Flower, James Richardson, Frances Wright, -Camilla Wright, and Richardson Whitbey.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_333" href="#FNanchor_333" class="label">[30]</a> Goodspeed, 802. The trustees consisted of General Lafayette, -William McClure, Robert Owen, Camille Wright, Cadwallader, D. -Flanary, and James Richardson, who, together with their successors -were to hold these lands in perpetual trust for the negro race, and -were subject to the following limitations:</p> - -<p>(1) A school for colored children was always to be maintained.</p> - -<p>(2) All slaves emancipated from the society were to be sent out -of the United States.</p> - -<p>(3) The Trustees were never to let their number fall below five, -three of whom should constitute a quorum.</p> - -<p>(4) Coadjutors, with unanimous consent of trustees, might be appointed, -if they had lived six months on the lands of Nashoba.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_334" href="#FNanchor_334" class="label">[31]</a> Goodspeed, 803.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_335" href="#FNanchor_335" class="label">[32]</a> The Genius, VI, 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_336" href="#FNanchor_336" class="label">[33]</a> The Genius, V, 366.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_337" href="#FNanchor_337" class="label">[34]</a> Goodspeed, 821.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_338" href="#FNanchor_338" class="label">[35]</a> The Genius, IV, 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_339" href="#FNanchor_339" class="label">[36]</a> Ibid., 76.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_340" href="#FNanchor_340" class="label">[37]</a> Ibid., 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_341" href="#FNanchor_341" class="label">[38]</a> The Genius, IV, 143.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_342" href="#FNanchor_342" class="label">[39]</a> Ibid., 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_343" href="#FNanchor_343" class="label">[40]</a> Goodspeed, 670.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_344" href="#FNanchor_344" class="label">[41]</a> The following recommendations were made in substance:</p> - -<p>1. That all the manumission societies in the United States proclaim -it as the Christian American Jubilee.</p> - -<p>2. That the different societies encourage the keeping of the day, -as a Jubilee, by publishing essays, songs, etc., showing the utility -thereof.</p> - -<p>3. That those societies celebrate the Fourth of July, next, with -preaching, prayer, and singing as a Christian Jubilee.</p> - -<p>4. That those who are sensible of the evil of slavery, form themselves -into Christian Manumission Societies, excluding slaveholders -from their number.</p> - -<p>5. That they send forth missionaries to preach the acceptable -year of the Lord to slaveholders.</p> - -<p>6. That all these societies establish a correspondence with each -other through the Genius of Universal Emancipation. The Genius, -IV, 143.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_345" href="#FNanchor_345" class="label">[42]</a> Minutes of the American Convention for 1826, p. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_346" href="#FNanchor_346" class="label">[43]</a> Tennessee History Magazine, I, 276.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_347" href="#FNanchor_347" class="label">[44]</a> Niles Register, XIV, 321.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_348" href="#FNanchor_348" class="label">[45]</a> “We wish you, therefore, to know, that within our bounds the -public sentiment appears clearly and decidedly in your favor, and -that the more vigorously and perseveringly you combine and extend -your exertions on the plan you have adopted, the more you are likely -to be crowned with the approbation of the people as well as with the -higher rewards of doing good. While, then the heralds of salvation -go forth in the name and strength of their Divine Master, to preach -the Gospel to every creature, we ardently wish that your exertions -and the best influence of all philanthropists may be united, to ameliorate -the condition of human society, and especially of its most degraded -classes, till liberty, religion, and happiness shall be the enjoyment -of the whole family of man.” Tenth Annual Report of -American Colonization Society, 67-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_349" href="#FNanchor_349" class="label">[46]</a> Fifth Annual Report of American Colonization Society, 119.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_350" href="#FNanchor_350" class="label">[47]</a> Minutes of the American Convention for 1825, p. 18; Eighth Annual -Report of American Society for Colonization of the Free People -of Color, p. 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_351" href="#FNanchor_351" class="label">[48]</a> Eighth Annual Report of American Society for Colonization of -the Free People of Color, p. 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_352" href="#FNanchor_352" class="label">[49]</a> The Genius, IV, 66.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_353" href="#FNanchor_353" class="label">[50]</a> Ibid., 67.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_354" href="#FNanchor_354" class="label">[51]</a> Tenth Annual Report of American Colonization Society of the -Free People of Color, 1827, 61-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_355" href="#FNanchor_355" class="label">[52]</a> Twelfth Annual Meeting of American Colonization Society, 1829, -65.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_356" href="#FNanchor_356" class="label">[53]</a> African Repository, VI, 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_357" href="#FNanchor_357" class="label">[54]</a> American Colonization Society Report, VI, 178.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_358" href="#FNanchor_358" class="label">[55]</a> African Repository. VI, 75; Ibid., V, 378.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_359" href="#FNanchor_359" class="label">[56]</a> American Colonization Society Report, VI, 178; Auxiliaries at -Bolivar, Somerville, Memphis, Covington, Jackson, Paris, Clarksville, -Columbia, Shelbyville, Winchester, Murfreesboro, Gallatin, Knoxville, -Marysville, New Market, Jonesboro, and Kingsport.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_360" href="#FNanchor_360" class="label">[57]</a> Tenth Annual Report for American Society for Colonizing the -Free People of Color, 1829, p. 61.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_361" href="#FNanchor_361" class="label">[58]</a> African Repository, VI, 76.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_362" href="#FNanchor_362" class="label">[59]</a> African Repository, V, 378.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_363" href="#FNanchor_363" class="label">[60]</a> Ibid., 379.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_364" href="#FNanchor_364" class="label">[61]</a> Ibid., VI, 276.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_365" href="#FNanchor_365" class="label">[62]</a> Ibid., VII, 145.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_366" href="#FNanchor_366" class="label">[63]</a> Ibid., 313.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_367" href="#FNanchor_367" class="label">[64]</a> Ibid., IX, 282; Niles Register, Vol. 45, p. 182.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_368" href="#FNanchor_368" class="label">[65]</a> Acts of 1833, Ch. 64, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_369" href="#FNanchor_369" class="label">[66]</a> The Nashville Banner, October 15, 1833.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_370" href="#FNanchor_370" class="label">[67]</a> Petitions to the Legislature, 1832-33. State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_371" href="#FNanchor_371" class="label">[68]</a> African Repository, XXII, 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_372" href="#FNanchor_372" class="label">[69]</a> Ibid., XXV, 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_373" href="#FNanchor_373" class="label">[70]</a> Constitution of the Society, Art. 2; African Repository. XXIV, -272.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_374" href="#FNanchor_374" class="label">[71]</a> African Repository, XXIV, 288.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_375" href="#FNanchor_375" class="label">[72]</a> Acts of 1850, Ch. 130, Secs. 5 and 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_376" href="#FNanchor_376" class="label">[73]</a> He quoted from “the celebrated Texas letter of Robt. J. Walker -published in 1844,” which estimated “that according to the rate of -increase from 1790 to 1840, there would be in the six states of New -York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois alone, -no less than 400,000 free blacks in 1853; 800,000 in 1865; and 1,600,000 -in 1890. The number of free blacks in the slave states is even -greater than in the free states.” This great number of free blacks -will have a powerful moral influence for good or evil upon every -interest in the country.</p> - -<p>“I refrain from pursuing the subject further. I will not look to -that dark but not distant future, when in some of the largest of the -free states, this population shall have grown powerful in numbers, -demanding the elective franchise, and when perhaps political parties, -in the frenzy of their excitement shall bid for their influence and -make them a power in the State. They may hold the balance of -power in these larger States, and through them in the Union. With -all their capacity for mischief, through the mistaken sympathy they -are calculated to inspire for the slave of the South, it is impossible -to estimate the amount of discord and of injury they must inevitably -produce among the states.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_377" href="#FNanchor_377" class="label">[74]</a> Annual Report of American Colonization Society for 1852, 62-65.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_378" href="#FNanchor_378" class="label">[75]</a> American Historical Magazine, IX, 275.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_379" href="#FNanchor_379" class="label">[76]</a> “For, sir,” said he, “the day is not far distant, when, instead of -scores of tons, there will be hundreds and thousands of tons, floating -from the shores of Africa to every country upon the face of the habitable -globe. Your report tells us that the agriculture of Liberia is -already in a flourishing condition, and that manufactures, to some -extent, are springing up in the country.” Annual Report of American -Colonization Society for 1860, 28-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_380" href="#FNanchor_380" class="label">[77]</a> Annual Report of the American Colonization Society for 1867, -p. 56.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_102"></a>[102]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_V">CHAPTER V<br /> -<span class="smcap">Religious and Social Aspects of Slavery</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>The Protestant churches in America approached the question -of Christianizing the negro very cautiously. There -were several reasons for this attitude.<a id="FNanchor_381" href="#Footnote_381" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> It was generally believed -that paganism was the basis of slavery, that a Christian -slave was a paradox, that Christianizing the slave would -destroy his humble qualities and lessen his economic value, -that it would add an element in the cost of maintaining the -institution, that an idea of equality prevailed in the slave’s -attending church and participating in communion with the -master, and that this idea would add to the difficulty of -governing him. Of course, there was the social relation -that came into the problem that was very obnoxious. It -was unpleasant to commune with a freshly imported brother -from Africa; even a Stowe, or a Garrison would likely have -hesitated.</p> - -<p>The church, being a human institution, could not disregard -its environment. It worked its way out of all the -complexities of the situation, its position varying somewhat -as to section and as to sect. With the exception of the -Friends, there was very little difference in the attitude of -the Protestants toward slavery, until after the Revolution. -They were, in general, anti-slavery in sentiment, were willing -to baptize slaves and receive them into the church. The -Friends in this early period were the only religious body -in America that saw any inconsistency in Christians holding -slaves.<a id="FNanchor_382" href="#Footnote_382" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> There were a great many slave communicants -in all the churches prior to the Revolution.<a id="FNanchor_383" href="#Footnote_383" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p> - -<p>The general background can be made a bit more specific -for Tennessee by particular reference to the relation of the -churches to slavery in Colonial North Carolina since this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_103"></a>[103]</span> -was the parent state of Tennessee. The Lord Proprietors -in the Fundamental Constitution of 1663 declared that conversion -did not free nor enfranchise the negro.<a id="FNanchor_384" href="#Footnote_384" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> This provision -was kept in the new constitution of 1698.<a id="FNanchor_385" href="#Footnote_385" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> It is noticeable -here that this was primarily a political question—a -question of freedom and suffrage—a question of state, not -of church. The state was declaring its right to state the -effect of conversion on the slave. It is well to note this -point in the beginning, because the splits and schisms in -the various churches in the period immediately preceding -the Civil War came up over this point. James Adams, a -clergyman, of the Episcopal Church of North Carolina, declared -in 1709 that the masters would “by no means permit -(their slaves) to be baptized, having a false notion that a -Christian slave is by law free.”<a id="FNanchor_386" href="#Footnote_386" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p> - -<p>This attitude of the slaveholders did not last long in North -Carolina, because Rev. Marsden in 1735 speaks of baptizing -at Cape Fear “about 1300 men, women, and children, besides -some negro slaves.”<a id="FNanchor_387" href="#Footnote_387" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> In 1742 a missionary speaks -of baptizing nine negro slaves.<a id="FNanchor_388" href="#Footnote_388" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> Through a series of missionary -reports, it is noticeable that, as the idea becomes -fixed, that baptism does not free the slaves nor give them -the suffrage, the number of baptized blacks increases. In -1765, a report speaks of 40 blacks that were baptized<a id="FNanchor_389" href="#Footnote_389" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>; another -report, 46;<a id="FNanchor_390" href="#Footnote_390" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> and a third, 51.<a id="FNanchor_391" href="#Footnote_391" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> In 1771 a report states -that 65 were taken into the church and in 1772 a Rev. Taylor -states that in thirteen months he had baptized 174 whites -and 168 blacks.</p> - -<p>The attitude of the Protestant churches on slavery depended -very largely on the strength of their organic connection -with the South. All the churches that were strong in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_104"></a>[104]</span> -the South preserved a compromise policy so long as it was -possible. The Congregational and Unitarian churches, being -Northern only, could without friction readily become -anti-slavery. The Episcopal church was primarily a Southern -church and was made up of the slaveocracy of the South. -It remained more indifferent toward slavery than any of the -other churches.<a id="FNanchor_392" href="#Footnote_392" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> It is my purpose now to make a study of -the anti-slavery activities of these churches in Tennessee in -the order of the effectiveness of their work.</p> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">The Methodists.</span></h3> - -<p>Methodism came to America in 1766.<a id="FNanchor_393" href="#Footnote_393" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> There were two -wings of it from the beginning. Wesleyan Methodism in -Maryland and New York was anti-slavery, while Whitefield -Methodism in Georgia was pro-slavery.<a id="FNanchor_394" href="#Footnote_394" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> Methodism spread -rapidly from these centers and became national in its organization -by 1773, when the first General Conference was -held at Philadelphia.<a id="FNanchor_395" href="#Footnote_395" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<p>The anti-slavery history of Methodism may be divided -into the following periods: 1766-1784, a period in which -there was a growth of anti-slavery feeling in the church that -reached a high water mark in 1784; from 1784 to 1816, a -period of reaction, culminating in the compromise law of -1816; from 1816 to 1836, a period of practically no change -in legislation, although the church in the North was becoming -more anti-slavery in sentiment, and in the South, more -pro-slavery; from 1836 to 1844, a period of conflict with -1840 as the date of the greatest compromise; from 1844 to -1860, the period of two branches of Methodism.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_105"></a>[105]</span></p> - -<p>A brief characterization of these periods forms a fitting -background for the anti-slavery history of Tennessee Methodists:</p> - -<p>A. From 1776 to 1784. This was a period of little dissension -on the slavery question.<a id="FNanchor_396" href="#Footnote_396" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> It was characterized by -an increasing anti-slavery feeling, expressing itself first in -1780<a id="FNanchor_397" href="#Footnote_397" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> and more effectively in 1784, when the Baltimore Conference -enacted a general code of regulations for both laymen -and preachers, prohibiting “the buying or selling the -bodies and souls of men, women or children with the intention -of enslaving them,”<a id="FNanchor_398" href="#Footnote_398" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> and requiring abolition of the -slaves of its members within one or two years. This was to -be done, however, conformably to the laws of the various -states. This was the high water mark of anti-slavery Methodism.</p> - -<p>B. From 1784 to 1816. This period is marked by concession -to slaveholders, finally ending in the adoption in 1808 -of the policy of letting the annual conferences regulate slavery.<a id="FNanchor_399" href="#Footnote_399" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> -The church here definitely recognized that it could<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_106"></a>[106]</span> -not enforce requirements upon its members in violation of -the civil laws of the states. This really amounted to a split -in the church on this question, because it meant the establishment -of two policies, one conformable to the free states -of the North, and the other to the slave states of the South. -This change in the policy of the church was a victory for -the slaveholders.</p> - -<p>C. From 1816 to 1836. The conference of 1816 adopted -the famous compromise law by which slaveholders in free -states could not be officers in the church. This prohibition -did not apply to the slave states.<a id="FNanchor_400" href="#Footnote_400" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> The conference of 1836 -with absolutely no dissent expressed a determined opposition -to abolition.<a id="FNanchor_401" href="#Footnote_401" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p> - -<p>D. From 1836 to 1844. During this period the anti-slavery -forces were organizing to break the grip of the -slaveocracy of the church. In 1840, the pro-slavery forces -registered their greatest victory in the history of the struggle. -The result was the secession of 1842 and the formation -of the Wesleyan Methodist Church of America at Utica, New -York in 1843, with a non-slaveholding membership.<a id="FNanchor_402" href="#Footnote_402" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> It -was now seen that the church could no longer pursue a -compromise policy. The annual conferences began to adopt -resolutions condemning either anti-slavery fanatics or slaveholding -thieves. It was now impossible for officers of the -church to be administrators in sections of the country with -which their views on slavery did not agree.</p> - -<p>E. From 1845 to 1860. It was early seen that the General -Conference of 1844 would likely divide on the question -of slavery. The contest of 1844 related to Bishop Andrews, -whose wife was a slaveholder, and ended in the passing of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_107"></a>[107]</span> -the Finley Resolution by the decisive vote of 110 to 68, deposing -Bishop Andrews from the Episcopacy,<a id="FNanchor_403" href="#Footnote_403" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> although -he had violated no law of the church.<a id="FNanchor_404" href="#Footnote_404" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> The Southern delegates -attempted in vain to have this action of the conference -interpreted as merely advisory in character.<a id="FNanchor_405" href="#Footnote_405" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -<p>The general conference of the church finally agreed to -its reorganization under two general conferences. This plan -was accepted almost unanimously, and led to the organization -of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, at the convention -of the delegates of the Southern Methodist churches -in Louisville, Kentucky, in 1845.<a id="FNanchor_406" href="#Footnote_406" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -<p>The purpose of this brief sketch of the anti-slavery history -of Methodism in general is, first, to give a reflection -of Tennessee Methodism, which, like that in the nation generally, -was divided on the slavery question; and, secondly, to -form a background for a comparative study of Tennessee -Methodists in particular.</p> - -<p>The Methodists were among the pioneers of Tennessee, -when it was customary to attend church with the shot-pouch -well filled and the rifle in trim. Among their pioneer -preachers were Jeremiah Lambert, who came to Holston -circuit in 1783, Rev. Benjamin Ogden, who in 1786 carried -Methodism to John Donelson’s settlement on the Cumberland, -and Rev. John McGee, who arrived in Tennessee in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_108"></a>[108]</span> -1798.<a id="FNanchor_407" href="#Footnote_407" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> The Methodists were leaders in the famous revivals -from 1800 to 1810.<a id="FNanchor_408" href="#Footnote_408" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p>In 1797, one-fourth of the membership of the Methodist -church was negroes. Of the 11,280 negroes in the church -in 1797, 10,824 were in the Southern States. There were -42 slaves in the Methodist church in Tennessee in 1797.<a id="FNanchor_409" href="#Footnote_409" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></p> - -<p>The Tennessee Methodists were a part of the Kentucky -conference until 1801, and were strongly anti-slavery, because -only the mountainous portion of these states was settled -at this time. In 1801, Tennessee became a part of the -Western Conference, and remained so until 1812. It was -in the first meeting of this conference in 1808 that Tennessee -Methodists first expressed themselves on the question -of slavery.<a id="FNanchor_410" href="#Footnote_410" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<p>It will be remembered that the General Conference of -1808 gave the annual conference the power to legislate on -the question of slavery.<a id="FNanchor_411" href="#Footnote_411" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> In accordance with this plan, the -Western Conference, which met at Liberty Hill, near Nashville, -Tennessee, in 1808, took the most drastic action against -slaveholding to be found in the annals of Methodism. This -conference instructed the Quarterly Conference to summon -before them all persons speculating in slaves and expel from -the church those found guilty. It further declared that any -member of the church “who should buy or sell a slave unjustly, -inhumanly, or covetously,” was subject to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_109"></a>[109]</span> -excommunication.<a id="FNanchor_412" href="#Footnote_412" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> This rule of the conference prevailed until -1812.<a id="FNanchor_413" href="#Footnote_413" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> Some of the presiding elders and circuit riders -were even more strongly anti-slavery than was the conference. -Rev. James Axley and Rev. Enoch Moore refused to -license slaveholders to preach, or even to grant them the -privilege of exhorting or leading in prayer. They denounced -slaveholders as thieves and robbers.</p> - -<p>The Tennessee Conference, which was a division of the -Western Conference, held its first annual meeting at Fountain -Head, Tennessee, in 1812. This conference made some -interesting changes in the regulations for slaveholders that -remind one of the compromise policy of the general conferences.<a id="FNanchor_414" href="#Footnote_414" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> -The phrase, “unjustly, inhumanly, and covetously,” -used by the conference of 1808 with reference to the -buying and selling of slaves, was changed to “justice and -mercy.” The slaves of officers of the church were to be -emancipated when practicable.<a id="FNanchor_415" href="#Footnote_415" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - -<p>An elaborate system of trial for violations was established. -The quarterly conference was made the court of -first instance. If the president of this conference differed -from the majority, he could refer the case to the annual -conference, or the accused could appeal his case to the annual -conference. At this conference, a slaveholder made -application to preach, but he was not admitted to the ministry -until he had given security that he would emancipate -his slaves as soon as it was practicable.<a id="FNanchor_416" href="#Footnote_416" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p> - -<p>The conferences of 1813 and 1814 did not raise the question -of slavery, but in 1815, the conference held at Bethlehem -Meeting House in Wilson County, Tennessee, adopted -a policy with the laws of the states. This was simply a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_110"></a>[110]</span> -recognition of the fact that the church should not undertake -to control civil matters. The committee on slavery -made the following report:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We most sincerely believe, and declare it as our -opinion, that slavery is a moral evil. But as the -laws of our country do not admit of emancipation -without a special act of the Legislature, in some -places, nor admit of the slave so liberated to enjoy -freedom, we cannot adopt any rule by which we -can compel our members to liberate their slaves; -and as the nature of cases in buying and selling are -various and complex, we do not think it possible to -devise any rule sufficiently specific to meet them. -But to go as far as we can, consistent with the laws -of our country and the nature of things, to do away -with the evil, and remove the curse from the -Church of God, it is the resolution of this conference -that the following resolutions shall be -adopted:</p> - -<p>“1. If any member of our Society shall buy or -sell a slave or slaves in order to make gain, or shall -sell to any person who buys to sell again for that -purpose, such member shall be called to an account -as the Discipline directs, and expelled from our -Church; nevertheless, the above rule does not affect -any person in our Society, if he or she make it -appear that they bought or sold to keep man and -wife, parents and children, together.</p> - -<p>“2. No person, traveling or local, shall be eligible -to the office of a deacon in our church, unless -he assures us sentimentally, in person or by letter, -that he disapproves slavery and declares his willingness -and intention to execute, whenever it is -practicable, a legal emancipation of such slave or -slaves, conformably to the laws of the State in -which he lives.”<a id="FNanchor_417" href="#Footnote_417" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This report was adopted and ordered to be copied into the -Steward’s Book of the Circuit.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_111"></a>[111]</span></p> - -<p>The Conference of 1817 dealt very extensively with slavery.<a id="FNanchor_418" href="#Footnote_418" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> -It made provision for the buying and selling of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_112"></a>[112]</span> -slaves. It prohibited the selling of slaves into perpetual -bondage on penalty of forfeiture of membership in the -church. The quarterly conference was given the power to -regulate the term of slavery for which a member of the -church could sell his slave. The preacher of each congregation -was empowered to appoint a committee of three to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_113"></a>[113]</span> -judge of the length of service that slaves purchased by members -could be required to render. All of these requirements -were conditioned on practicability, the consent of the state, -violation of justice and mercy, and assumption of financial -responsibility against charge of emancipated slaves. The -conditions of the execution of these regulations show what -a travesty the whole procedure was.</p> - -<p>The case of Hardy M. Cryer, which came before the conference -of 1817, illustrates the difficulty that the church -faced in trying to enforce its policy. Mr. Cryer was secretary -of the conference of 1817. He had failed to emancipate -his slaves according to a promise made the previous -conference. He had in the meantime bought a negro boy. -He was able to make satisfactory explanation of his conduct -to the conference, and was appointed elder. In other -words, he was able to show the conference that his conduct -had been consistent with “justice and mercy” and that its -requirements as to emancipation were “impracticable.”<a id="FNanchor_419" href="#Footnote_419" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -<p>One of the most eminent of Tennessee historians made the -following comment on the action of the church in the conference -of 1817:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Such was the legislation of a body of ministers -with reference to a subject over which they had -no control, provided the laws themselves did not -admit of emancipation, which they themselves assumed -to be the fact. Hence, the adoption of a -proviso which in every case, taking things as they -were, either nullified the rule or made it easy for -a member or a minister to retain his slaves; for -whenever he determined to own slaves it was easy -to make it appear that it was in accordance with -justice and mercy to retain those already in possession, -or that under the law it was impracticable -to set them free. Such legislation would seem to -be sufficiently absurd, but it is amazing that an intelligent -body of men should gravely attempt to -compel a preacher or member to emancipate a -slave at an expiration of a term of years after -having surrendered ownership and control of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_114"></a>[114]</span> -same. The only theory conceivable that can relieve -the conference of the accomplishment of a -solemn mockery is the supposition that they, having -confidence in the justice of the future, must -have believed themselves to be anticipating civil -legislation—that the legal emancipation of the -slave was an event which the immediate future -must produce. However, the attitude of the conference -on this subject is of great historical value, -bringing into clear relief, as it does, the strong -conviction of the Methodist body of Christians -that slavery was a great moral evil, the existence -of which was deplorable, and to be opposed by -every means attached to which there was any hope -of its gradual abolishment.<a id="FNanchor_420" href="#Footnote_420" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The conference of 1818, which met at Nashville, repealed -the regulations of the conference of 1817, and decided that -the “printed rules on slavery, in the form of discipline” -was full and sufficient on that subject.<a id="FNanchor_421" href="#Footnote_421" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p> - -<p>The conference of 1819 also met at Nashville and decided -“that no man who is known to hold slaves is to be admitted -to the office of deacon or elder.”<a id="FNanchor_422" href="#Footnote_422" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> Peter Burum and Gilbert -D. Taylor, who were recommended for admission to the -ministry, were rejected by this conference because they were -slaveholders.<a id="FNanchor_423" href="#Footnote_423" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> Several applicants for deacon’s orders were -rejected for the same reason.</p> - -<p>The conference of 1819 witnessed a determined contest -between the pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces, caused by -an accusation made by Peter Cartwright,<a id="FNanchor_424" href="#Footnote_424" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> that a number -of ministers in the state were “living in constant violation -of the discipline of the church.”<a id="FNanchor_425" href="#Footnote_425" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> Felix Grundy and Andrew -Jackson represented the two factions. “The discussion -of the subject of slavery,” said Peter Cartwright,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_115"></a>[115]</span> -“worked up some bad feeling, and as we had at this conference -to elect our delegates to the general conference which -was to hold its session in Baltimore in May, 1820, these -slaveholding preachers determined to form a ticket to exclude -every one of us who were for the Methodist Discipline -as it was, and is to this day. As soon as we found out their -plans we formed an opposite ticket, excluding all advocates -of slavery, and we elected every man on the ticket.”<a id="FNanchor_426" href="#Footnote_426" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p> - -<p>Sixteen local preachers filed the following protest against -the action of the conference in refusing to admit slaveholders -to the office of deacon or elder:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We deprecate the course taken as oppressively -severe in itself and ruinous in its consequences, -and we disapprove of the principle as contrary to -and in violation of the order and discipline of our -church. We, therefore, do most solemnly, and in -the fear of God, as members of this conference, -enter our protest against the proceedings of the -conference as it related to the above-mentioned -course and principle.<a id="FNanchor_427" href="#Footnote_427" class="fnanchor">[47]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This protest was supported by the slaveholders, and laid -before the general conference in 1820, but no definite action -was ever taken on it.<a id="FNanchor_428" href="#Footnote_428" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></p> - -<p>The period from 1819 to 1824 was a transition period to -some extent. There was no important action by any of the -conferences during this period. Rev. John Johnson in 1820 -proposed that the church recognize slavery as a municipal -institution and try to humanize it.<a id="FNanchor_429" href="#Footnote_429" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> This was the position<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_116"></a>[116]</span> -that most of the churches had already taken on slavery. -The struggle over slavery in Missouri revealed the earnestness -of the forces on both sides. Anti-slavery leaders began -to leave the state. Among the Methodists were Wesley -Harrison, an influential layman, who went to Ohio; James -Axley, a presiding elder; and Enoch Moore, a strong anti-slavery -preacher.<a id="FNanchor_430" href="#Footnote_430" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> It was in this period, says McFerrin, -that “the church came to a standstill, and was in a measure -paralyzed and powerless for good. As a means of averting -greater evils, and saving the church if possible, colonization -and emancipation societies were formed, and it was believed -by many that such organizations did a great deal to prevent -a serious rupture in the church till the storm passed over.”<a id="FNanchor_431" href="#Footnote_431" class="fnanchor">[51]</a></p> - -<p>The conference of 1824, in response to a memorial on -slavery presented by the Moral and Religious Manumission -Society of West Tennessee, declared “that slavery is an evil -to be deplored and that it should be counteracted by every -judicious and religious exertion.”<a id="FNanchor_432" href="#Footnote_432" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> It is noticed that while -slavery was condemned as an evil, it was to be handled -“judiciously.” What did “judiciously” mean in the eyes of -the slaveholders? “This resolution,” says McFerrin, “was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_117"></a>[117]</span> -proposed by two members, who themselves or their parents -were slaveholders.”<a id="FNanchor_433" href="#Footnote_433" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> Evidently, this was a modified attitude -of the church. “What a misfortune,” says McFerrin, -“that this sentiment had not always obtained, treating the -matter in a religious manner, and not intermeddling with it -as a civil question.”<a id="FNanchor_434" href="#Footnote_434" class="fnanchor">[54]</a></p> - -<p>From 1824 to 1834 was a period of growth of pro-slavery -sentiment in Tennessee. Anti-slavery workers from all denominations -left the state. Manumission societies died. -The colonization movement was a failure. Abolition literature -was discontinued. Exclusion policy was adopted -in 1831.<a id="FNanchor_435" href="#Footnote_435" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> Slaveholders began to advocate preaching to the -slaves, and made heavy contributions for this purpose. -Separate negro churches were established after the master -ceased to be suspicious of the preachers, and missions were -established among the slaves at the expense of the masters. -“Owners of large plantations,” says Harrison, “coming to -the knowledge of this change in the disposition of the -Methodist preachers, and finding many of them following -the example of the illustrious bishop, then Mr. Capers, and -seeing the good effects produced by the preaching to the -negroes on the plantations of their neighbors, ultimately -gave their consent to permit their slaves to hear the gospel -from the lips of capable white missionaries.”<a id="FNanchor_436" href="#Footnote_436" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p> - -<p>The Methodist Church had always had slave members in -it. In 1791, there were 12,844; in 1803, there were 22,453, -most of whom were in the South.<a id="FNanchor_437" href="#Footnote_437" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> In 1824, there were -1749 negro members in the Methodist church in Tennessee; -in 1840, there were 8,820; and in 1846, there were 18,122.<a id="FNanchor_438" href="#Footnote_438" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> -Following the lead of the missionary movement to slaves -begun by Bishop Capers in 1829,<a id="FNanchor_439" href="#Footnote_439" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> the Tennessee annual -conference of 1832 established two missions to which were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_118"></a>[118]</span> -sent Thomas M. King and Gilbert D. Taylor. By the close -of 1832 these missions numbered 190 members.<a id="FNanchor_440" href="#Footnote_440" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> Missionary -work among the slaves in Tennessee expanded conservatively -until 1844. By 1839, Tennessee had nine missions -with 2,316 members and ten missionaries, and was paying -$2,700 to missions among the slaves.<a id="FNanchor_441" href="#Footnote_441" class="fnanchor">[61]</a></p> - -<p>Some very strong preachers developed among the slaves. -Probably the greatest negro preacher in all Methodism, if -not in all Christendom, was Pompey. He was probably a -native of Africa, and in his youth was a slave of Rev. N. -Moore, brother-in-law of Bishop McKendree. He traveled -as a servant with Rev. Moore, and at one of his revivals was -converted. He then became interested in the Gospel, and -soon learned to read. He gave close attention to his master’s -sermons and sometimes suggested improvements. “He -ventured to tell his master one day,” says Rev. H. H. Montgomery, -“that he felt, or believed, he could have made a -better sermon than he did the day before. ‘Pomp, do you -think you could preach?’ ‘Yes, master, I have felt and -thought a great deal about it.’ ‘Then, Pompey, you shall -preach tomorrow.’ He preached the next day and his master -thought so well of the sermon that he set Pompey free.”<a id="FNanchor_442" href="#Footnote_442" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p> - -<p>Pompey studied the Scriptures very closely, and became -able to quote freely from them. He was a very popular -preacher to both whites and blacks. He preached in both -Tennessee and Mississippi. Rev. Montgomery gives the -following account of his preaching:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The first time I remember to have seen him was -in the Christmas holidays of 1832. The weather -was very cold, but the congregation was so large -that old “Center” church could not hold the people -by one-half. So they adjourned to the campground, -where the vast congregation listened attentively -to an evangelical and powerful sermon -for an hour from him. I was a boy of thirteen -years, but a very deep impression was made on my<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_119"></a>[119]</span> -mind. He related the circumstances of his awakening, -repentance, and conversion. There seemed -to be scarcely one that was not weeping. And when -he described the simplicity of that faith by which -he received pardon and salvation, and the great -change of heart and feeling which he realized, and -everything was new—so new that he could hardly -realize that it was Pompey, till he looked at his -hands and felt of his wool, and found it was Pompey’s -skin and Pompey’s wool, but it was Pompey -with a new heart—there was a burst of glory and -praise that went up from many of that congregation.<a id="FNanchor_443" href="#Footnote_443" class="fnanchor">[63]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>There were, in the state, other negro preachers of unusual -ability, among them Emanuel Mark of Fayette County. He -was given a pass by his master to preach anywhere. He -preached to both white and black. Silas Phillips of La -Grange, Tennessee, was another remarkable negro preacher. -Simeon Hunt was also a negro preacher of wonderful eloquence.<a id="FNanchor_444" href="#Footnote_444" class="fnanchor">[64]</a></p> - -<p>After the defeat of the anti-slavery forces in 1834, it was -recognized that slavery was a fixed institution in society, -and that it would require violence to overthrow it. The -Methodists had gradually been reaching this conclusion. -It was easy for them, therefore, to adopt a slightly different -attitude toward it. Their position was well phrased by Dr. -A. L. P. Green, who said he favored the institution, “when -it was properly controlled, and regarded it as a blessing to -the slave. He believed the negro incompetent and unfitted -for self-government, and hence a wise, good master was a -necessity.”<a id="FNanchor_445" href="#Footnote_445" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> The Methodists were forced either to adopt -this attitude or see the slaveholders withdraw their slaves -to churches whose attitude toward slavery was more favorable. -The missionary spirit of the church saw that the -slaves offered a great field for domestic missions, and the -Christian slaveholder came to be regarded as a blessing.<a id="FNanchor_446" href="#Footnote_446" class="fnanchor">[66]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_120"></a>[120]</span></p> - -<p>The eleven delegates from the three conferences in Tennessee—Holston, -Tennessee, and Memphis—to the general -conference in 1844, sharing the above feeling, voted solidly -against the Finley Resolution. These annual conferences -at their next meeting sustained the action of their delegates. -The Holston conference said, “That our delegates to the last -General convention merit the warmest expression of our -thanks, for their prudent, yet firm, course in sustaining -the interests of our beloved Methodism in the South.”<a id="FNanchor_447" href="#Footnote_447" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> The -Tennessee conference said, “That we do most cordially approve -the course of our delegates, in the late general conference.”<a id="FNanchor_448" href="#Footnote_448" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> -The Memphis conference said, “That we do -heartily approve the entire course pursued by our delegates -at the late general conference.”<a id="FNanchor_449" href="#Footnote_449" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> These resolutions also -demanded that the convention at Louisville establish a coördinate -branch of Methodism under a general conference -in accordance with the plan adopted by the conference of -1844, “and, in so doing,” they said, “we positively disavow -secession, but declare ourselves, by the act of the general -conference, a coördinate branch of the Methodist Episcopal -Church.”<a id="FNanchor_450" href="#Footnote_450" class="fnanchor">[70]</a></p> - -<p>Tennessee Methodists sent twenty-two delegates to the -Louisville convention of 1845.<a id="FNanchor_451" href="#Footnote_451" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> They voted for the following -resolution, which the conference adopted without a dissenting -vote, as its interpretation of the law of the church -on slavery:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>That under the provisional exception of the general -rule (or law) of the church, on the subject of -slavery, the simple holding of slaves, or mere ownership -of slave property in states or territories -where the laws do not admit of emancipation and -permit the liberated slave to enjoy freedom, constitutes -no legal barrier to the election or ordination -of ministers to the various grades of office -known in the ministry of the Methodist Episcopal<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_121"></a>[121]</span> -Church, and cannot, therefore, be considered as -operating any forfeiture of rights, in view of such -election and ordination.<a id="FNanchor_452" href="#Footnote_452" class="fnanchor">[72]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>After the organization of the Southern branch of Methodism, -strong efforts were made along the border conferences -to induce them to go with the Northern branch. The -Holston Conference, which included East Tennessee, with -only one dissenting vote, resolved to cast its lot with the -new organization. This one dissenter later joined the M. E. -Church, South.<a id="FNanchor_453" href="#Footnote_453" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> There was no question of loyalty in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_122"></a>[122]</span> -other conferences. There were Methodists throughout the -state who still adhered to the “Old Church.” Even in West -Tennessee, in certain counties there were strong organizations -of the “Old Church” that still persist.</p> - -<p>The Southern Methodists increased their activities -among the slaves after 1845. The slaveholders were now -assured that no insurrectionary doctrines would be taught -to their slaves. “Masters and mistresses, even little children,” -says Harrison, “helped with the work.”<a id="FNanchor_454" href="#Footnote_454" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> In 1846, -the Southern Methodists had 29 missions in Tennessee with -7,100 members in charge of 34 missionaries who received -$7,762;<a id="FNanchor_455" href="#Footnote_455" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> in 1863 there were 41 missions with 5,947 members<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_123"></a>[123]</span> -in charge of 39 missionaries receiving $11,748.46.<a id="FNanchor_456" href="#Footnote_456" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> -The difference in the attitude of the Methodist slaveholders -after the organization of the Southern church is shown by -the fact that from 1829 to 1844 Tennessee Methodist spent -$23,208.01 on slave missions, but from 1844 to 1864 they -spent $213,736.62.<a id="FNanchor_457" href="#Footnote_457" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> The Southern Methodists numbered -18,122 negro members in 1846;<a id="FNanchor_458" href="#Footnote_458" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> 18,045 in 1848;<a id="FNanchor_459" href="#Footnote_459" class="fnanchor">[79]</a> 18,940 -in 1850;<a id="FNanchor_460" href="#Footnote_460" class="fnanchor">[80]</a> 18,748 in 1842; 19,239 in 1860.<a id="FNanchor_461" href="#Footnote_461" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> From 1860 to -1864 there was a gradual loss of negro membership, due, of -course, to the various influences and tendencies of the war -period.<a id="FNanchor_462" href="#Footnote_462" class="fnanchor">[82]</a> Some of the conferences did not meet regularly -during the war, and some met in other states. The statistics -are incomplete and inaccurate.<a id="FNanchor_463" href="#Footnote_463" class="fnanchor">[83]</a></p> - -<p>The interpretation of the laws of the church on slavery -remained unchanged to 1858. In that year, the General -Conference of the M. E. Church, South, met in the House of -Representatives at Nashville, with 151 accredited delegates. -This conference declared “that slavery is not a subject of -ecclesiastical legislation. It is not the province of the -church to deal with civil institutions in her legislative capacity.... -We have surrendered to Caesar the things that -are Caesar’s, and holding ourselves to be debtors to the wise -and the unwise, the bond and the free. We can now preach -Christ alike to master and the servant, secure in the confidence -and affection of the one and the other.... The -salvation of the colored race in our midst, as far as human -instrumentality can secure it, is the primary duty of the -southern church.”<a id="FNanchor_464" href="#Footnote_464" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> They struck from their Discipline at<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_124"></a>[124]</span> -this meeting by a vote of 140 to 8 the rule forbidding “the -buying and selling of men, women, and children, with intention -to enslave them.”<a id="FNanchor_465" href="#Footnote_465" class="fnanchor">[85]</a></p> - -<p>The social side of the relations of the two races in their -religious life is very interesting. The two races came very -close together. The negroes were called together by a horn -or a bell once a day for family prayer in which the master, -mistress, and the children participated. Sometimes the -master conducted the services, and sometimes a slave would -do it. Slaves sang at these services, and frequently became -so religious as to embrace their master and mistress before -the close of service. In their religious life, slaves became -little children indeed.</p> - -<p>On Sunday as a rule, the slaves attended church with the -white folks. They either sat in the galleries or had a -special portion of the church set apart for them. They -were given the communion after the white people had been -served. There was usually in the afternoon on Sunday a -special service for the slaves, conducted by the pastor of the -church, and there was generally a separate business meeting -for the slaves. At these separate services, the slaves -practically had charge. Their own leaders, exhorters, and -preachers were merely directed by the white pastor. It was -in these meetings that they received their greatest training -and had their truest religious experience.<a id="FNanchor_466" href="#Footnote_466" class="fnanchor">[86]</a></p> - -<p>Few men knew the negro so well as the Methodist -preacher, or did so much to elevate his character. He presided -at their church trials, of which one of their number -was secretary. He was the general umpire to whom all -their church difficulties were referred. He baptized them, -married them, visited them in their cabins, comforted them -in their distress, prayed with them when on beds of sickness, -was their counsellor, friend, and spiritual guide, and -he preached their funerals when they died.<a id="FNanchor_467" href="#Footnote_467" class="fnanchor">[87]</a></p> - -<p>The Methodist people did more for the negro than any<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_125"></a>[125]</span> -other denomination, whether for abolition or for their general -improvement. Peter Cartwright once said that the -Methodist Episcopal Church had “been the cause of the -emancipation of more slaves in these United States than all -other religious denominations put together.”<a id="FNanchor_468" href="#Footnote_468" class="fnanchor">[88]</a> “It is a -notorious fact,” said Cartwright, “that all the preachers -from the slaveholding states denounced slavery as a moral -evil; but asked of the General Conference mercy and forbearance -on account of the civil disabilities they labored -under so that we got along tolerably smooth. I do not recollect -a single Methodist preacher at that day that justified -slavery.... Methodist preachers in those days made it a -matter of conscience not to hold their fellow creatures in -bondage, if it was practicable to emancipate them, conformably -to the laws of the state in which they lived. Methodism -increased and spread, and many Methodist preachers, -taken from comparative poverty, not able to own a negro, -and who preached loudly against it, improved and became -popular among slaveholding families, and became personally -interested in slave property. They then began to apologize -for the evil; then to justify it, on legal principles; -then on Bible principles.”<a id="FNanchor_469" href="#Footnote_469" class="fnanchor">[89]</a></p> - -<h3>II. <span class="smcap">The Baptists.</span></h3> - -<p>The Baptists were among the original settlers in Tennessee. -They were strong in North Carolina by 1750,<a id="FNanchor_470" href="#Footnote_470" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> and -by 1780 were coming into Tennessee from both Virginia -and North Carolina in great numbers.<a id="FNanchor_471" href="#Footnote_471" class="fnanchor">[91]</a> They settled in -the Holston country and on Boone’s Creek, but they were -not so numerous in these early days as the Presbyterians -and Methodists.<a id="FNanchor_472" href="#Footnote_472" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> In 1784 there were 400 Baptists in Tennessee; -900 in 1792, and 11,325 in 1812.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_126"></a>[126]</span></p> - -<p>The Baptists were anti-slavery in the early period of -American history, just as were the Methodists. 1783 the -Baptists said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>It is the duty of every master of a family to give -his slaves liberty to attend the worship of God in -his family, and likewise it is his duty to convince -them of their duty; and then to leave them to their -own choice.<a id="FNanchor_473" href="#Footnote_473" class="fnanchor">[93]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>In 1789 John Leland proposed the following resolution in -the Triennial Convention, which was adopted:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Resolved, That slavery is a violent deprivation -of the rights of nature, and inconsistent with a republican -government, and therefore recommend -it to our brethren, to make use of every legal measure -to extirpate this horrid evil from the land; -and pray Almighty God that our honorable legislature -may have it in their power to proclaim the -great Jubilee consistent with the principles of good -policy.<a id="FNanchor_474" href="#Footnote_474" class="fnanchor">[94]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This protest, while very strong in its declaration, was ineffective. -The Baptists were no exception to mankind as -to slaveholding. The Baptists became slaveholders in large -numbers, and adopted the policy that it was the work of -the church to mitigate slavery into a humane institution.<a id="FNanchor_475" href="#Footnote_475" class="fnanchor">[95]</a></p> - -<p>The Baptists were more successful in adding negroes to -the church than any other denomination. There are more -negroes in the Baptist church today than in all other -churches combined. One out of every five Southern negroes -is a Baptist.<a id="FNanchor_476" href="#Footnote_476" class="fnanchor">[96]</a> In 1813, there were 40,000 negro Baptists, -mostly in the South, among whom were a great many negro -preachers and exhorters.<a id="FNanchor_477" href="#Footnote_477" class="fnanchor">[97]</a></p> - -<p>Among the attractive features of the Baptist faith to the -negroes were immersion, the congregational form of government,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_127"></a>[127]</span> -which gave them participation in church meetings, -the liberality of the Baptists in permitting them to preach, -and the Baptist method of communion, which did not discriminate -against them.<a id="FNanchor_478" href="#Footnote_478" class="fnanchor">[98]</a> These advantages of Baptism<a id="FNanchor_479" href="#Footnote_479" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> -caused negroes to withdraw from other churches.<a id="FNanchor_480" href="#Footnote_480" class="fnanchor">[100]</a></p> - -<p>The Baptists despite the advantages that a form of local -church government gave them in handling the slavery question, -were not able to prevent its frequent discussion. It -was not so difficult for the individual congregations to settle -the matter by a majority vote and select a preacher whose -views agreed with the majority. But it was inevitable that -the forces that finally united the Southern Methodists would -produce the same effect upon the Southern Baptists. The -Southern Baptists were among the largest slaveholders of -the South, and in due time came to be defenders of slavery, -while Northern Baptists became increasingly anti-slavery.<a id="FNanchor_481" href="#Footnote_481" class="fnanchor">[101]</a></p> - -<p>That separation was inevitable was evident to many of -the leaders, although both Northern and Southern Baptists -tried to relegate slavery to the background. Rev. Richard -Fuller was one of the first to see this impending division -in the church, and he hastened to take steps to prevent it. -He tried to distinguish between the church as an organization -and its membership. In the Triennial Convention of -1844 he secured the adoption of a resolution to the effect -that as a church they should disclaim all sanction of slavery -or anti-slavery, either expressed or implied, but that as individuals -they should have the freedom both to express and -to promote their views on these subjects in a Christian -manner and spirit.<a id="FNanchor_482" href="#Footnote_482" class="fnanchor">[102]</a></p> - -<p>This was apparently a happy solution of the question, a -philosophical way to handle the problem, but slavery would -not down. The incident that most of all precipitated the -organization of the Southern Baptist Convention was the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_128"></a>[128]</span> -attitude of the Board of Foreign Missions of the church. -This board, apparently on its own initiative, adopted in -1844 a resolution to the effect that,</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>In the thirty years in which the board has existed, -no slaveholder, to our knowledge, has applied -to be a missionary. And as we send out no domestics, -or servants, such an event as a missionary -taking slaves with him, were it morally right, could -not, in accordance with all our past arrangements -and present plans, possibly occur. If, however, -anyone should offer himself as a missionary, having -slaves, and should insist on retaining them as -his property, we can never be a party to any arrangements -which would imply approbation of -slavery.</p> - -</div> - -<p>The American Baptist Home Missionary Society in April, -1845, found itself in the same predicament that the Foreign -Missionary Society was facing. This board said: “We declare -it expedient that members shall hereafter act in separate -organizations, at the South and at the North, in promoting -the objects which were originally contemplated by -the society.”</p> - -<p>This announcement of policy was regarded by the Southern -Baptists as a violation of the rights of the convention -of the church. This policy was soon put into effect by the -rejection of Rev. James E. Reeves, a slaveholder and applicant -to become a missionary.<a id="FNanchor_483" href="#Footnote_483" class="fnanchor">[103]</a> This was a challenge that -was immediately accepted. The Southern Baptists said: -“This is forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles.... We will -never interfere with what is Caesar’s. We will not compromise -what is God’s.”<a id="FNanchor_484" href="#Footnote_484" class="fnanchor">[104]</a></p> - -<p>The Southern Baptist Convention was organized at Augusta, -Georgia, in the summer of 1845. There were 377 -delegates present. They said that “a painful division has -taken place in the missionary operations of the American -Baptists.... They differ in no article of the faith. They -are guided by the same principles of gospel order.”<a id="FNanchor_485" href="#Footnote_485" class="fnanchor">[105]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_129"></a>[129]</span></p> - -<p>The Tennessee Baptists were, like the Baptists as a whole, -divided on the question of slavery. In general, the attitude -of the National Triennial Convention down to 1845 reflects -the opinion of Tennessee Baptists. There are no local histories -nor any minutes of local bodies that give us any insight -into the particular feelings of different groups of -Baptists in Tennessee. Tennessee Baptists went with the -Southern Convention in 1845, but there were anti-slavery -Baptists scattered throughout the state.</p> - -<p>One of the most noted of the anti-slavery Baptists in Tennessee -was Professor J. M. Pendleton, of Union University, -Murfreesboro, Tennessee (now at Jackson, Tennessee). -Professor Pendleton was born in Virginia in 1811. He -moved to Kentucky in 1817 and to Tennessee in 1857. He -was in 1858 professor of theology at Union, and joint editor -with Rev. A. C. Dayton of the Tennessee Baptist, published -at Nashville, and was one of the editors of the Southern -Baptist Review.<a id="FNanchor_486" href="#Footnote_486" class="fnanchor">[106]</a></p> - -<p>In 1858, Dr. Dawson, editor of the Alabama Baptist, accused -him of being an abolitionist. He was brought before -the board of trustees of Union. Professor Pendleton explained -the charge in the following way: “I suppose he -(Dawson) made no distinction between an ‘Abolitionist’ -and ‘Emancipationist.’ The latter was in favor of doing -away with slavery gradually, according to state constitution -and law; the former believed slavery to be a sin in itself, -calling for immediate abolition without regard to consequences. -I was an Emancipationist ... but I was never -for a moment an Abolitionist.”<a id="FNanchor_487" href="#Footnote_487" class="fnanchor">[107]</a> He frankly stated his -views before the board, and was acquitted.<a id="FNanchor_488" href="#Footnote_488" class="fnanchor">[108]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_130"></a>[130]</span></p> - -<p>The Southern Baptists made special effort to evangelize -the slaves after their separate organization was accomplished. -“This department of our labor,” says the report -of 1845, “is increasing in interest every year. Whenever -it is practicable, the missionaries of the board hold separate -services for the special benefit of the slaves. And all bear -favorable testimony to the happy influence of the Gospel -upon the hearts and lives of that people. Their owners -are becoming more and more awake to their special wants. -Some are erecting houses of worship on their plantations, -others are making liberal donations to sustain the ministry -among them.”<a id="FNanchor_489" href="#Footnote_489" class="fnanchor">[109]</a> The general proposition of the convention -to any local church was that it would pay half the expense -of a mission among the negroes if the church would pay the -other half. In 1855, the Baptists had missions at Rogersville, -Knoxville, Chattanooga, Cumberland Mountains, Huntingdon, -and Memphis.<a id="FNanchor_490" href="#Footnote_490" class="fnanchor">[110]</a></p> - -<p>The convention of 1859 said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Our slaves, too, demand our attention. They -form part of our families, speak our language, are -easy of access, and are impressible beyond any -other people. They number more than three and -a half million, and out of this multitude scarcely -more than three or four hundred thousand are professed -Christians.<a id="FNanchor_491" href="#Footnote_491" class="fnanchor">[111]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The character of the slave converts as given by Rev. Pendleton, -seemed to justify the efforts of the church. He said, -“I saw among them in the days of slavery as pious Christians -as I ever saw anywhere. They attended church, occupied -the place assigned them in the meeting-house, and -partook of the Lord’s Supper with their white brethren.”<a id="FNanchor_492" href="#Footnote_492" class="fnanchor">[112]</a></p> - -<p>The special training that the negroes received in the Baptist -church largely prepared them to establish and manage -their own churches. “The first negro Baptist church in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_131"></a>[131]</span> -Tennessee,” says Pius, “was the Mt. Lebanon Baptist -Church, organized at Columbia, October 20, 1843.”<a id="FNanchor_493" href="#Footnote_493" class="fnanchor">[113]</a> This -church now has a membership of 200 and property worth -$15,000. In 1853, Spruce Street Baptist Church was built -at Nashville. Beal Street Church at Memphis was also -one of the early negro churches.</p> - -<h3>III. <span class="smcap">Cumberland Presbyterians.</span></h3> - -<p>The Cumberland Presbyterians present the interesting -situation of a church originating in a slave state after -slavery was rather substantially established. This church -was organized in Tennessee in 1810 in the log cabin of -Samuel McAdoo. Samuel McAdoo, Finis Ewing, and Samuel -King, all ordained ministers of the Presbyterian church, -were the constituent founders of the first Presbytery.<a id="FNanchor_494" href="#Footnote_494" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> -Of these three cofounders, Ewing was a slaveholder, but he -soon emancipated his slaves.<a id="FNanchor_495" href="#Footnote_495" class="fnanchor">[115]</a></p> - -<p>One would expect this church, born of the environment -of slavery, to be rather mild in its opposition to slavery, if, -indeed, not pro-slavery, but, as a matter of fact, it was -strongly anti-slavery. Ewing, after freeing his slaves, -boldly preached against “the traffic in human flesh.” He -said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>But where shall we begin? Oh! is it indeed true -that in this enlightened age, there are so many palpable -evils in the church that it is difficult to know -where to commence enumerating them? The first -evil which I shall mention is a traffic in human -flesh and human souls. It is true that many professors -of religion, and, I fear, some of my Cumberland -brethren, do not scruple to sell for life -their fellow-beings, some of whom are brethren -in the Lord. And what is worse, they are not -scrupulous to whom they sell, provided they can -obtain a better price. Sometimes husbands and -wives, parents and children, are thus separated,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_132"></a>[132]</span> -and I doubt not their cries reach the ears of the -Lord of Sabbath.... Others who constitute a part -of the visible Church half feed, half clothe, and -oppress the servants. Indeed, they seem by their -conduct toward them, not to consider them fellow-beings. -And it is to be feared that many of them -are taking no pains at all to give their servants -religious instruction of any kind, and especially -are they making no efforts to teach them or cause -them to be taught to read that Book which testifies -of Jesus, whilst others permit, perhaps require, -their servants to work, cook, etc., while the white -people are praying around the family altar.<a id="FNanchor_496" href="#Footnote_496" class="fnanchor">[116]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>He says again, “I have determined not to hold, nor to -give, nor to sell, nor to buy any slave for life. Mainly from -the influence of that passage of God’s word which says, -‘Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and -equal.’”</p> - -<p>Samuel McAdoo, one of the three founders of the church, -and a Cumberland preacher, was a most outspoken opponent -of slavery. He did not want his family through marriage -or inheritance or otherwise to become connected with -it. To accomplish this he joined the contingent of anti-slavery -leaders that Tennessee contributed to the Northwest. -He moved to Illinois, where he could preach his -convictions without fear and trembling.<a id="FNanchor_497" href="#Footnote_497" class="fnanchor">[117]</a></p> - -<p>Some of the early Cumberland preachers, who were very -conscientious on the subject of slavery, wanted to free their -slaves, but they did not believe they could be self-sustaining -and independent members of society. Rev. Ephriam McLean -was one of these who decided that he would perform -the experiment of giving his slaves a chance to demonstrate -that they could be self-supporting. He gave his slaves the -use of a farm, farming implements, and live stock adequate -for their purposes, and set them free to work for themselves. -In a few years idleness and drunkenness brought<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_133"></a>[133]</span> -them to suffering, and they begged him to take them back. -He did so.<a id="FNanchor_498" href="#Footnote_498" class="fnanchor">[118]</a></p> - -<p>Rev. Robert Donnel, a Cumberland minister, inherited -slaves. He taught his slaves the Scriptures and called them -to family prayer daily. He wanted to free his slaves, but -they did not wish freedom, because they did not want to go -to Liberia. The free states at the North did not want -them. He could not drive them to Africa. The state would -not let him free them unless he sent them outside of it, so -he did not know how to dispose of them.<a id="FNanchor_499" href="#Footnote_499" class="fnanchor">[119]</a></p> - -<p>Southern anti-slavery men would buy the slaves of their -own brothers to keep them from being sold separately to pay -their debts. Such men would intend to emancipate these -slaves, but they would soon discover that the slaves had -rather die than be sent to Canada or Africa. They remained -slaveholders because they had a real interest in -negroes. In 1855, Dr. Beard, a leading Cumberland Presbyterian -minister, said, “the longer I live the more deeply -I regret that I ever became involved in it. My heart always -hated it, and now loathes it more and more every day.”<a id="FNanchor_500" href="#Footnote_500" class="fnanchor">[120]</a></p> - -<p>Not only were the leading ministers in the Church anti-slavery, -but the literature of the Church denounced slavery, -and the legislation of the Southern States. The Revivalist, -a Cumberland paper published at Nashville from 1830 to -1836, speaking of legislation of South Carolina upon slavery, -said: “Such acts are foul blots upon the records of a free -people, which our posterity will blush to behold. They are -not only unjust and cruel but actually impolitic.”</p> - -<p>“The extensive slaveholder,” said the Revivalist, “is at -too great a remove from the slave to learn the workings of -his mind and the feelings of his heart. There is no contact -of feeling, no interchange of sympathies between most -Southern planters and their servants. They govern, control, -and direct their slaves by proxy; and too many masters<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_134"></a>[134]</span> -are dependent upon their representatives of heartless overseers -for a knowledge of the character and disposition of -their own slaves. Southern planters, who govern by proxy, -are, therefore, unprepared to do justice to the African -character.”<a id="FNanchor_501" href="#Footnote_501" class="fnanchor">[121]</a></p> - -<p>The Revivalist exhorted slaveholders to teach their slaves -to read and to give them moral and religious instruction. -This, it said, “will not only make better men of them but -better servants.”<a id="FNanchor_502" href="#Footnote_502" class="fnanchor">[122]</a></p> - -<p>The Cumberland Presbyterian, of Nashville, mother organ -of the Church, said in 1835: “We proclaim it abroad we do -not own slaves. We never shall. We long to see the black -man free and happy, and thousands of Christians who now -hold them in bondage entertain the same sentiments.”<a id="FNanchor_503" href="#Footnote_503" class="fnanchor">[123]</a></p> - -<p>It will be shown in the chapter on abolition that a change -of attitude toward slavery followed the action of the Convention -of 1834. The Cumberland Presbyterian Church -was no exception to this rule. The action of a Pennsylvania -Synod in 1847 precipitated the issue. This Synod met and -rescinded its action at a previous session declaring that the -relation between it and American slavery to be such as to -require “no action thereon,” and adopted the resolution, -“That the system of slavery in the United States is contrary -to the principles of the Gospel, hinders the progress thereof, -and ought to be abolished.”<a id="FNanchor_504" href="#Footnote_504" class="fnanchor">[124]</a></p> - -<p>The General Assembly of the Church of 1848, which met -at Memphis, appointed a committee to review the action of -the Pennsylvania Synod. This committee in its report regretted -the action of the Synod and disapproved “any attempt -by jurisdiction of the church to agitate the exciting -subject of slavery,” closing with the observation that “the -tendency of such resolutions, if persisted in, we believe is to -gender strife, produce distraction in the church, and thereby -hinder the progress of the Gospel.”<a id="FNanchor_505" href="#Footnote_505" class="fnanchor">[125]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_135"></a>[135]</span></p> - -<p>The General Assembly of 1851, which met at Pittsburg, -received six memorials on slavery from Ohio and Pennsylvania -with about one hundred and fifty signatures.<a id="FNanchor_506" href="#Footnote_506" class="fnanchor">[126]</a> The -committee to whom these memorials were referred made -the following report, which was adopted:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The Church of God is a spiritual body, whose -jurisdiction extends only to matters of faith and -morals. She has no power to legislate upon subjects -on which Christ and his apostles did not legislate, -nor to establish terms of union, where they -have given no express warrant. Your committee, -therefore, believe that this question on which you -are asked by the memorialists to take action, is one -which belongs rather to civil than ecclesiastical legislation; -and we are all fully persuaded that legislation -on that subject in any of the judicatories of -the church, instead of mitigating the evils connected -with slavery, will only have a tendency to -alienate feeling between brethren; to engender -strife and animosities in your church; and tend, -ultimately to a separation between brethren who -hold a common faith, an event leading to the most -disastrous results, and one which we believe ought -to be deprecated by every true patriot and Christian.</p> - -<p>But your committee believe that members of the -church holding slaves should regard them as rational -and accountable beings, and treat them as -such, affording them as far as possible the means -of grace.</p> - -<p>Finally, your committee would recommend the -adoption of the following resolutions:</p> - -<p>1. That inasmuch as the Cumberland Presbyterian -Church was originally organized and has -since existed and prospered under the conceded -principle that slavery was not and should not be -regarded as a bar to communion; we, therefore, -believe that it should not now be so regarded.</p> - -<p>2. That, having entire confidence in the honesty -and sincerity of the memorialists and cherishing -the tenderest regard for their feelings and -opinions, it is the conviction of this General Assembly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_136"></a>[136]</span> -that the agitation of this question which -has already torn asunder other branches of the -church, can be productive of no real benefit to -master or slave. We would, therefore, in the fear -of God, and with the utmost solicitude for the -peace and welfare of the churches under our care, -advise a spirit of mutual forbearance and brotherly -love; and, instead of censure and proscription, -that we endeavor to cultivate a fraternal feeling -one toward another.<a id="FNanchor_507" href="#Footnote_507" class="fnanchor">[127]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This platform remained the orthodox position of the -Church to the abolition of slavery. The Cumberland -Church was primarily a Southern church, and, therefore, -never divided on the question. It would have suffered very -little loss of either membership or property by a division.</p> - -<p>The Cumberland Church, it appears, took the most sensible -position on the slavery question of any of the churches -in Tennessee. It always preached abolition and ultimate -freedom as the final solution of the problem, but, at no -time did it overlook the entire set of facts connected with -the institution. It recognized that slavery had been forced -on the forefathers, that it had become the central institution -of Southern society, that, therefore, it would be violent revolution -to abolish the institution at one stroke of the pen. -It appreciated the fact that only a small part of the slave -population was ready for freedom and a responsible place -in the body politic. The Cumberland Presbyterians believed -that slavery was an evil, but denied responsibility -for it. They thought that slavery was an educating institution, -that the rights of the slave should be restored to him -as fast as his evolution would permit, but that in this process -the welfare of society as a whole was the major consideration.</p> - -<h3>IV. <span class="smcap">The Friends.</span></h3> - -<p>The Quakers led decidedly in the movement of abolition. -As early as 1770 in their annual meeting attention was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_137"></a>[137]</span> -called to the treatment of the slave and to “the iniquitous -practice of importing negroes.”<a id="FNanchor_508" href="#Footnote_508" class="fnanchor">[128]</a> In 1772 it was decided -in their annual meeting that no Friend should buy a slave -of any other person than a Friend in unity. This regulation -might be violated if it was to unite husband and wife or -mother and children, or for other reasons if approved by -monthly meeting.<a id="FNanchor_509" href="#Footnote_509" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> Advance was made again in 1774 and -in 1775 when the yearly meeting decided “That Friends in -unity shall neither buy nor sell a negro without the consent -of the monthly meeting to which they belong.”<a id="FNanchor_510" href="#Footnote_510" class="fnanchor">[130]</a> In 1776 -the Friends reached complete abolition.<a id="FNanchor_511" href="#Footnote_511" class="fnanchor">[131]</a> The yearly -meeting advised with unanimity that the members of the -Friends’ Society “clear their hands” of the slaves as rapidly -as possible. By the close of the Revolution the Friends were -practically rid of slaves. In the year 1787 there was not a -slave in the possession of an acknowledged Quaker.<a id="FNanchor_512" href="#Footnote_512" class="fnanchor">[132]</a> They -never recanted on this proposition.</p> - -<p>The attitude of the Southern Quakers was at first amelioration -of the condition of the slave. They were interested -in the physical condition of the negro, possibly as much for -economic reasons as for altruistic motives.<a id="FNanchor_513" href="#Footnote_513" class="fnanchor">[133]</a> In North -Carolina, where the immediate background of Tennessee -Quakerism is found, the question of slavery was slow in rising, -but soon thereafter became a very stubborn question.<a id="FNanchor_514" href="#Footnote_514" class="fnanchor">[134]</a> -The yearly meetings of 1758 and 1770 took decidedly hostile -attitude toward the buying and selling of slaves, and demanded -that those that were inherited be treated well.<a id="FNanchor_515" href="#Footnote_515" class="fnanchor">[135]</a></p> - -<p>The Quakers in North Carolina worked personally among -the Friends for abolition and as an organization they petitioned -the Legislature of the State to modify its laws in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_138"></a>[138]</span> -direction of justice and mercy. They protested bitterly -against free negroes, who had been given their freedom by -conscientious masters, being taken to other states and sold -into slavery.<a id="FNanchor_516" href="#Footnote_516" class="fnanchor">[136]</a></p> - -<p>The harshness of North Carolina law created a modified -Quakerism not to be found elsewhere. The yearly meeting -created agents to take charge of slaves that masters wanted -to manumit, and look after them. By this method they proposed -to give virtual freedom to the slaves when legal freedom -was not recognized by the state.<a id="FNanchor_517" href="#Footnote_517" class="fnanchor">[137]</a> This practice continued -to the Civil War.</p> - -<p>The Friends in Tennessee not only refrained from owning -slaves themselves, but by manumission societies, by petitions -to legislatures, and by abolition literature, sought to abolish -slavery. Reference is made in a previous chapter to the -work of such men as Embree, Osborn, and Lundy, who, if -they had remained in Tennessee with all the Friends, instead -of going to Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, might have helped to -bring about a different result. Charles Osborn, who was -the leader in organizing the Tennessee Manumission Society, -and who moved to Ohio and began publishing the Philanthropist, -an anti-slavery paper, later moved to Indiana, -whither he was followed by Jesse Wills and John Underhill, -Friends who had helped to organize manumission societies -in Tennessee. The Emancipator, Embree’s publication, referring -to these emigrations to the North, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Thousands of first-rate citizens, men remarkable -for their piety and virtue, have within twenty -years past removed from this and other slave -states, to Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, that their eyes -may be hid from seeing the cruel oppressor lacerate -the back of his slaves, and that their ears may not -hear the bitter cries of the oppressed. I have often -regretted the loss of so much virtue from these -slave states, which held too little before. Could -all those who have removed from slave states on -that account, to even the single state of Ohio, have<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_139"></a>[139]</span> -been induced to remove to, and settle in Tennessee -with their high toned love for universal liberty -and aversion to slavery, I think that Tennessee -would ere this have begun to sparkle among the -true stars of liberty.<a id="FNanchor_518" href="#Footnote_518" class="fnanchor">[138]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>From about 1809 to 1834, the Friends in Tennessee were -regularly petitioning the Legislature of the State. Their -petitions usually asked for the abolition of slavery, if possible; -if not, to mitigate the evil “of separating husbands, -wives, and children.”<a id="FNanchor_519" href="#Footnote_519" class="fnanchor">[139]</a> They believed that the elimination -of this practice would make the slaves more virtuous and -increase their respect for the marriage relation. They -petitioned against the domestic slave trade as they saw this -was increasing the grip of slavery on the state.</p> - -<p>The Friends were the most vigilant anti-slavery workers -in the State. If all the Protestant churches had been as -devoted to the cause of freedom in the early days of the -State before there were many slaves in the state and before -West Tennessee was settled, the story of the Convention of -1834 would likely be different. The Friends like the other -religionists had to succumb to the superior pro-slavery -forces that always controlled the state government.</p> - -<h3>V. <span class="smcap">The Presbyterians.</span></h3> - -<p>The Presbyterians were the first denomination to cross -the frontier line into Tennessee. Rev. Charles Cummings -and Rev. John Rhea, both of this church, were the first -preachers in Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_520" href="#Footnote_520" class="fnanchor">[140]</a> “It was the custom of Mr. -Cummings on Sunday morning,” says Goodspeed, “to dress -himself neatly, put on his shot pouch, shoulder his rifle, -mount his horse, and ride to church, where he would meet -his congregation, each man with his rifle in his hand.” In -1778 Samuel Doak was called to the congregations, Concord -and Hopewell, in what is now Sullivan County. Rev. Doak<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_140"></a>[140]</span> -in 1785 chartered Martin Academy, first educational institution -west of the Alleghanies. In 1775 Abingdon Presbytery -was founded, and it became the gateway of Presbyterianism -to the other portions of the State. Thos. B. -Craighead and Rev. William McGee, brother of the Methodist -John McGee, were also among the early ministers of -this denomination.<a id="FNanchor_521" href="#Footnote_521" class="fnanchor">[141]</a></p> - -<p>The Presbyterians, like all the denominations that were -national, could not in the very nature of things remain a -unit on the slavery question. The question came up in -various synods in 1774, 1780, and 1787, when the synods of -New York and Philadelphia declared in favor of training -the slaves for freedom.<a id="FNanchor_522" href="#Footnote_522" class="fnanchor">[142]</a></p> - -<p>The question reached the General Assembly in 1793 and -1795, when it was decided that as there were differences of -opinion relative to slavery among the members of the church, -“notwithstanding which they live in charity and peace according -to the doctrine and practice of the apostles, it is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_141"></a>[141]</span> -hereby recommended to all conscientious persons, and especially -to those whom it immediately respects, to do the -same.”<a id="FNanchor_523" href="#Footnote_523" class="fnanchor">[143]</a></p> - -<p>At this same assembly, a committee made a strong recommendation, -urging religious education of the slave. The -assembly rejected the report of the committee, and said -they “have taken every step which they deem expedient or -wise to encourage emancipation, and to render the state of -those who are in slavery as mild and tolerable as possible.”<a id="FNanchor_524" href="#Footnote_524" class="fnanchor">[144]</a> -The assembly referred the members of the church -to its action of 1787 and 1793 for its position on slavery.</p> - -<p>This action settled the question for 20 years. It came before -the assembly again in 1815, due to the action of the -Synod of Ohio. This assembly urged religious education -and the use of prudent measures to prevent the slave traffic.<a id="FNanchor_525" href="#Footnote_525" class="fnanchor">[145]</a> -The assembly of 1816 asked that masters who were -members of the church present the children of parents in -servitude for baptism.<a id="FNanchor_526" href="#Footnote_526" class="fnanchor">[146]</a></p> - -<p>The sale of a slave member of the church provoked rather<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_142"></a>[142]</span> -drastic action by the Assembly of 1818,<a id="FNanchor_527" href="#Footnote_527" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> but in the same -proceedings it expressed its sympathy for those upon whom -slavery had been entailed as “a great and most virtuous -part of the community abhor slavery, and wish its extermination -as sincerely as any others.”</p> - -<p>The Assembly of 1825 said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We notice with pleasure the enlightened attention -which has been paid to the religious instruction -and evangelization of the unhappy slaves and -free people of color of our country in some regions -of our church.... No more honored name can be -conferred on a minister of Jesus Christ than that -of Apostle to the American Slaves; and no service -can be more pleasing to the God of Heaven or more -useful to our beloved country than that which this -title designates.</p> - -</div> - -<p>The slavery question came up again in 1836 when the -church was pretty well divided. There was a majority report -which recommended taking no action, and a minority -report which strongly opposed slavery. The majority report -was accepted by the assembly.<a id="FNanchor_528" href="#Footnote_528" class="fnanchor">[148]</a> Twenty-eight members -protested this action of the assembly. The Presbyterians -had an anti-slavery element all along that they could -not control. This element separated from the church in -1821 and called itself the Associated Reformed Presbyterian -Church.<a id="FNanchor_529" href="#Footnote_529" class="fnanchor">[149]</a> There was a second element, calling itself the -New School, that based its action very largely on slavery. -This element kept up an anti-slavery propaganda, repeating -in 1846 and in 1849, the slavery declaration of 1818. The -southern and more conservative element was able to control -the assembly, and in 1853 the New School element withdrew<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_143"></a>[143]</span> -from the church.<a id="FNanchor_530" href="#Footnote_530" class="fnanchor">[150]</a> This was the last division in the -church until the guns fired on Fort Sumter.</p> - -<p>The attitude of the Tennessee Presbyterians on slavery -was well expressed by the Synod of Tennessee in 1817, in -an address to the American Colonization Society. This -memorial, after congratulating the society upon its purpose, -said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We wish you, therefore, to know, that within -our bounds the public sentiment appears clearly -and decidedly in your favor.... We ardently wish -that your exertions and the best influence of all -philanthropists may be united, to meliorate the -condition of human society, and especially of its -most degraded classes, till liberty, religion, and -happiness shall be the enjoyment of the whole -family of man.<a id="FNanchor_531" href="#Footnote_531" class="fnanchor">[151]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>There were several very prominent anti-slavery Presbyterian -leaders in Tennessee, among both the laymen and the -clergymen. Judge S. J. W. Lucky was a prominent example -of a layman who was an active anti-slavery worker. Hon. -John Blair, who was a ruling elder and representative of -his district in Congress for twelve years, became convinced -that slavery was wrong, and offered to give a bill of sale of -his slaves to Dr. David Nelson. He was unable to see any -practical way out of slavery.<a id="FNanchor_532" href="#Footnote_532" class="fnanchor">[152]</a></p> - -<p>Among the ministers were three who did valuable service -in the cause of freedom. Rev. John Rankin’s work as an -anti-slavery leader has been noticed in another connection. -He was one of the pioneers in the cause. Rev. Dr. David -Nelson, a native of Washington County, and brother-in-law -of Chief Justice James W. Frederick, was one of the most -determined anti-slavery men in the country.<a id="FNanchor_533" href="#Footnote_533" class="fnanchor">[153]</a> He had to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_144"></a>[144]</span> -be saved from a mob for proposing to his congregation to -take a subscription with which to buy and colonize slaves. -He was eloquent in promoting colonization.<a id="FNanchor_534" href="#Footnote_534" class="fnanchor">[154]</a> Rev. E. T. -Brantley, a West Tennessee Presbyterian minister, said of -him: “He cordially disapproved of slavery. He found no -justification of it anywhere. All look forward to the extinction -of slavery.... If the North could be aware of the -progress of anti-slavery sentiment at the South, particularly -among Christians, they would think the day of emancipation -had already dawned.”<a id="FNanchor_535" href="#Footnote_535" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> Rev. Dr. Ross, of Tennessee, -was one of the most able leaders in Presbyterianism in the -South. He was the spokesman of Southern Presbyterianism -in the general assembly, which met at Buffalo in May, -1853. It was in this assembly that the committee on slavery -recommended that a committee consisting of one member -from each of the synods of Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, -and Virginia, be appointed to investigate the slaveholding -members of the church on the following points, and -report to the next general assembly:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. The number of slaveholders in connection -with the churches, and the number of slaves held -by them.</p> - -<p>2. The extent to which slaves are held, from an -unavoidable necessity imposed by the laws of the -States, the obligation of guardianship, and the demands -of humanity.</p> - -<p>3. Whether the Southern churches regard the -sacredness of the marriage relation as it exists -among the slaves; whether baptism is duly administered -to the children of the slaves professing -Christianity; and, in general, to what extent, and -in what manner, provision is made for the religious -well-being of the enslaved.<a id="FNanchor_536" href="#Footnote_536" class="fnanchor">[156]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Dr. Ross warmly opposed this action, asserting emphatically -that the South never submitted to a scrutiny. He proposed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_145"></a>[145]</span> -a substitute motion to the effect that “a committee -from each of the Northern synods ... be appointed to report -to the next general assembly on the following points:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. The number of Northern church members -who traffic with slaveholders, and are seeking to -make money by selling them negro clothing, handcuffs, -and cowhides.</p> - -<p>2. How many Northern church members are -concerned, directly or indirectly, in building and -fitting out ships for the African slave trade, and -the slave-trade between the States?</p> - -<p>3. How many Northern church members have -sent orders to New Orleans and other Southern -cities, to have slaves sold, to pay debts coming to -them from the South? (See Uncle Tom’s Cabin.)</p> - -<p>4. How many Northern church members buy -the cotton, sugar, rice, tobacco, oranges, pineapple, -figs, ginger, cocoa, melons, and a thousand -other things, raised by slave labor?</p> - -<p>5. How many Northern church members have -intermarried with slaveholders, and have become -slaveholders themselves, or enjoy the wealth made -by the blood of the slaves, especially if there be any -Northern ministers of the Gospel in such a predicament?</p> - -<p>6. How many Northern church members are -descendants of the men who kidnapped negroes -in Africa, and brought them to Virginia and New -England, in former years?</p> - -<p>7. What is the aggregate and individual wealth -of church members thus descended, and what action -is best to compel them to disgorge this blood-stained -wealth, or to make them give dollar for -dollar in equalizing the loss of the South by emancipation?</p> - -<p>8. How many Northern church members, ministers -especially, have advocated murder in resistance -to the laws of the land.</p> - -<p>9. How many Northern church members own -stock in underground railroads, running off fugitive -slaves, and Sabbath-breaking railroads and -canals?</p> - -<p>10. That a special committee be sent up Red -River, to ascertain whether Legree, who whipped -Uncle Tom to death (and a Northern gentleman),<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_146"></a>[146]</span> -be not still in connection with some Northern -church, in good and regular standing.</p> - -<p>11. How many Northern church members attend -meetings of Spiritual Roppers, are Bloomers, or -Woman’s Rights Conventionalists?</p> - -<p>12. How many are cruel husbands?</p> - -<p>13. How many are henpecked husbands?”<a id="FNanchor_537" href="#Footnote_537" class="fnanchor">[157]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Dr. Ross said: “He did not desire discussion on this subject, -but still he had no opposition to make if others wished -to discuss it. As a citizen of the state of Tennessee, a state -which partakes of the fire of the South and the prudence of -the North, he was perfectly calm on the subject.<a id="FNanchor_538" href="#Footnote_538" class="fnanchor">[158]</a> He -said again, “If anyone would present him with a handsome -copy of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, he would keep it on his center-table, -and show it to all his visitors.”<a id="FNanchor_539" href="#Footnote_539" class="fnanchor">[159]</a></p> - -<p>The Presbyterians had a large number of slaves as members, -but in their reports there is no distinction made between -whites and blacks. “In many places,” says Rev. -James H. McNeilly, “separate houses of worship were provided -for them, and in a great many churches large galleries -with comfortable seats were assigned to them. Often the -planters on large plantations built neat and commodious -chapels for them, and in these chapels the planter and his -family frequently worshipped with their servants. In the -cities and towns the white people gave up their churches -to the negroes for afternoon service.” Dr. McNeilly says: -“I remember that in 1855 the Presbyterian General Assembly -met in the First Presbyterian Church at Nashville, Tenn. -Dr. Edgar, the pastor, gave some of the Northern commissioners -opportunity to see and preach to some of the negro -congregations. These ministers were surprised to see the -fine dressing, the happy faces, the apparent devotion -of the people, and were much gratified to find the evidence -of the interest of the churches in the spiritual welfare of -the slaves.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_147"></a>[147]</span></p> - -<p>“In the spring of 1860,” says Dr. McNeilly, “I was licensed -to preach by the Presbytery of Nashville and spent -nearly six months in preaching in two counties of Middle -Tennessee. The members of my congregation owned a considerable -number of slaves, to whom I preached regularly -every Sabbath afternoon, although most of them were members -of Methodist and Baptist churches.”<a id="FNanchor_540" href="#Footnote_540" class="fnanchor">[160]</a></p> - -<p>The Presbyterians were profoundly interested in the welfare -of the slaves. In the Synods of Kentucky, Virginia, -North Carolina, Tennessee, and West Tennessee, “it is,” -says Harrison, “the practice of a number of ministers to -preach to the negroes separately once on the Sabbath or during -the week.”<a id="FNanchor_541" href="#Footnote_541" class="fnanchor">[161]</a> There were Sabbath Schools also, and, -with few exceptions, a number of negroes formed a portion -of every Sabbath congregation.</p> - -<p>The Presbyterians did not let the negroes preach as much -as the Baptists and Methodists did. These denominations -had real preachers with their congregations, but the Presbyterian -conception of the character of a preacher practically -excluded the negro. They had, however, negro exhorters. -In fact, the negroes did not want a preacher they could -understand. Even a white preacher, if he tried to simplify -his language to suit them, would become unpopular with -them. They liked big words, and would always praise the -Lord when a high-sounding word was used. Rev. McNeilly -tells of a young theologian who began his sermon to the -negroes thus, “Primarily we must postulate the existence -of a duty.” After a short pause, some old colored patriarch -fervently responded, “Yaas, Lord, dat’s so. Bless de Lord.”<a id="FNanchor_542" href="#Footnote_542" class="fnanchor">[162]</a></p> - -<p>The Tennessee Presbyterians voted against the Spring -Resolutions in the general assembly at Philadelphia, and -participated in the convention at Atlanta in August, 1861, -which adopted among other resolutions, the following: -“Our connection with the non-slaveholding states, it cannot -be denied, was a great hindrance to the systematic performance -of the work of evangelization of the slave population.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_148"></a>[148]</span> -It is true that the northern portion of the Presbyterian -Church professed to be conservative, but their opposition to -our social economy was constantly increasing.”<a id="FNanchor_543" href="#Footnote_543" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> The -synods of Memphis and Nashville, together with various -Presbyteries, participated in the convention at Augusta, -Georgia, in December, 1861, which organized the Southern -Presbyterian Church. Tennessee has remained a strong -center of Southern Presbyterianism to the present.</p> - -<h3>VI. <span class="smcap">The Episcopalians.</span></h3> - -<p>The Episcopal Church from the beginning of its work in -America stressed the improvement of the condition of the -slaves. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in -Foreign Parts was incorporated under William III, in 1701, -and on investigation it was decided that the work in America -“consisted of three great homilies: the care and instruction -of our people settled in the colonies, the conversion of -the Indian savages, and the conversion of the negroes.” -Rev. Samuel Thomas, the first missionary, who was sent to -North Carolina in 1702, reported that “he had taken much -pains also in instructing the negroes and learned twenty -of them to read.”<a id="FNanchor_544" href="#Footnote_544" class="fnanchor">[164]</a> The Episcopal Church, like the Presbyterian, -did not report as a rule separate statistics for -colored members of the church. In 1817 there were 828 -colored members in the Episcopal churches at Charleston.<a id="FNanchor_545" href="#Footnote_545" class="fnanchor">[165]</a> -In 1822 there were 200 colored children in their Sunday -Schools.<a id="FNanchor_546" href="#Footnote_546" class="fnanchor">[166]</a></p> - -<p>The Episcopal Church had a sort of philosophical attitude -toward the negroes. It was never the church of feeling, -like the Methodists and Baptists. In 1823 Rev. Dr. -Dalcho of the Episcopal Church at Charleston issued a -pamphlet entitled, “Practical Considerations, Founded on -the Scriptures, Relative to the Slave Population of South -Carolina.” The church was vitally interested in the welfare -of the slave throughout the South.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_149"></a>[149]</span></p> - -<p>The Episcopal Church did not establish itself in Tennessee -until anti-slavery feeling was on the wane. The first -Episcopal Church in Tennessee was established at Franklin, -Williamson County, August 25, 1827, by Rev. James H. -Otey.<a id="FNanchor_547" href="#Footnote_547" class="fnanchor">[167]</a> He began to preach occasionally at Columbia and -Nashville, and by 1830 there were two additional clergy. -In this same year, on July 1, the first convention of the -church was held at Nashville, and in this year the Diocese -of Tennessee was formed. There were about fifty communicants -at this time in Tennessee.<a id="FNanchor_548" href="#Footnote_548" class="fnanchor">[168]</a></p> - -<p>The church grew very slowly. The state was still in a -frontier condition. The inhabitants were democratic, and -were already members for the most part of the Methodist -and Baptist churches. What aristocracy there was belonged -to the Presbyterian Church. There was no American bishop -in the Episcopal Church to consecrate candidates for the -ministry. They were forced to go to England for the laying-on -of hands. Again, the War of 1812 had further intensified -the prejudice against the English church.</p> - -<p>Rev. Otey was a persistent worker, and after his consecration -in 1834 he began to lay the foundation for educational -and religious expansion of this church. Mercer Hall, -a school for boys, was opened in his home in 1836. Columbia -Female Institute was founded in the same year, and -preparations were begun to found a university the same -year, but were not successful until 1857, when the University -of the South was established in the Cumberland Mountains -about ten miles from Winchester at Sewanee, Tenn. -Bishop Otey became its first president.</p> - -<p>By 1844 there were thirteen resident clergymen in the -state besides Rev. Otey. The number of communicants had -grown from 117 in 1834 to 400.<a id="FNanchor_549" href="#Footnote_549" class="fnanchor">[169]</a> In 1860, the last year -of the Journal of the Convention for the South until after -the war, there were 27 members of the clergy, 26 parishes, -and 1500 communicants.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_150"></a>[150]</span></p> - -<p>The Episcopal Church in Tennessee was practically synonymous -with Bishop Otey, who directed and controlled its -policy. He owned a plantation out from Memphis and a -number of slaves. He was a typical Southern, Christian -slaveholder. He believed that patriarchal slavery was a -great institution for the negro. He felt that the North -misunderstood the institution, and was in its agitation doing -irreparable damage to the nation and the South. Writing -to the Northern clergymen, May 17, 1861, he said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>As to your coming South, let me just here state, -for all, that you wholly misapprehend the spirit of -our people. We ask not one thing of the North -which has not been secured to us by the Constitution -and laws since they were established and enacted, -and which has been granted to us until within -a few years past. We demand no sacrifice nor -the surrender of Northern rights and privileges. -The party that elected Mr. Lincoln proclaimed uncompromising -hostility to the institution of slavery—an -institution which existed here, and has -done so from its beginning, in its patriarchal character. -We feel ourselves under the most solemn -obligations to take care of, and to provide for, -these people who cannot provide for themselves. -Nearly every free-soil state has prohibited them -from settling in their territory. Where are they -to go?</p> - -</div> - -<p>Here the bishop is seen as a defender of Southern institutions -and ideals, yet he was loyal to the Union as an old -Whig just as long as he could be. He wrote letters to members -of the cabinet, begging caution and consideration. But -when he felt that the South had been unnecessarily attacked, -he fully identified himself and the Tennessee Episcopalians -with the cause of the South. Writing to his daughter, May -24, 1861, he said, “And now, my dear child, you ask me if I -think the cause of the South just, and that God will favor -us and defends us. I answer, in very deed, I do.”<a id="FNanchor_550" href="#Footnote_550" class="fnanchor">[170]</a></p> - -<p>When his slaves were set free in 1862, he called them into -his parlor and gave them a father’s advice. He said: “I do<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_151"></a>[151]</span> -not regret the departure of my servants, except Lavinia and -Nora (children of eight and seven years of age); I pity -them—I have endeavored to treat them always humanely. -They had as comfortable rooms, and as many necessary comforts -as myself. If they can do better by leaving me, they -are free to do so.”<a id="FNanchor_551" href="#Footnote_551" class="fnanchor">[171]</a></p> - -<p>It is undoubtedly true that the general spirit of frontier -life was against slavery. It was always opposed to convention -and privilege. In the early period of Tennessee politics -when the anti-slavery feeling was strongest, frontier -conditions prevailed. These pioneers, in the period from -1790 to 1834, were fighting for the suffrage, representation, -and the right to hold office. These privileges were enjoyed -only by property holders. Under such conditions, opposition -to slaveholders, who primarily stood for privilege, was -inevitable. The anti-slavery attitude of the churches was -partly a result of these conditions as well as of religious -sentiment. These people could express themselves through -churches and independent societies more freely than through -politics, which was generally dominated by slaveholders.</p> - -<p>In estimating the work of the churches as a whole, one -is compelled to acknowledge the value of their services to -the negro. Practically all of the outstanding anti-slavery -leaders were prominent churchmen. The anti-slavery literature -of the early period was published under the inspiration -of the church. The churches constantly advocated -manumission to the masters, and sought easier terms from -the legislature for emancipation. They preached against -the slave traffic and the inhuman practice of separating -families. Their influence also softened the character of the -slave code in both its make-up and administration. In the -later forties and fifties when the negroes came into the -churches in increased numbers, their field of service was -increased. There was almost as large a percentage of slaves -belonging to the churches in 1860 as there is of negroes in -the church today.<a id="FNanchor_552" href="#Footnote_552" class="fnanchor">[172]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_152"></a>[152]</span></p> - -<p>The church was given a freer hand with the slaves, missions -were established, church houses were built, and many -of the slaves learned to read under the guidance of the -church. Their characters were improved. The influence -of the churches was always directed toward better living -conditions, better food and clothing, and better treatment -generally. Their influences were felt directly by the negroes -as well as indirectly through Christian masters.</p> - -<p>The individual churches in Tennessee differed considerably -in their attitude toward slavery in the early period. In -the order of their degree of hostility to slavery, the Friends -should have first place, the Methodists second, Cumberland -Presbyterians third, Baptists fourth, Presbyterians fifth, -and Episcopalians sixth. From point of service, the Methodists -should rank first, and the Baptists second. These -two churches represented the masses of the slaveholders and -contained the majority of the slaves that belonged to the -church. It is difficult to estimate the work of the Baptists -because there are no records of their local associations or -their individual congregations. Through biographies and -actions of Tennessee delegations to the Southern Convention -after 1845, one can find convincing evidence that Tennessee -Baptists did a valuable work for the negro. The sources -for the study of the Methodists are much more abundant. -It appears, therefore, that their work assumed larger proportions -than that of any other denomination. “High and -low alike,” says Harrison, “entered into this noble work. -There was no phase of it too humble, no duty connected -with it too unpleasant to deter the most earnest and painstaking -effort. Bishop McTyeire, of the Methodist Episcopal -Church, South, declared that during a long ministerial -life there was nothing connected with it in which he took -more pride and satisfaction than the remembrance of the -more than three hundred services he had preached to negro -congregations.”<a id="FNanchor_553" href="#Footnote_553" class="fnanchor">[173]</a></p> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_381" href="#FNanchor_381" class="label">[1]</a> Jernegan, M. W., Slavery and Conversion in the Colonies, pp. -516-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_382" href="#FNanchor_382" class="label">[2]</a> Ibid., p. 576.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_383" href="#FNanchor_383" class="label">[3]</a> Ibid., p. 514.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_384" href="#FNanchor_384" class="label">[4]</a> Col. Recs., I, 204.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_385" href="#FNanchor_385" class="label">[5]</a> Ibid., 857.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_386" href="#FNanchor_386" class="label">[6]</a> Ibid., 720.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_387" href="#FNanchor_387" class="label">[7]</a> Ibid., IV, 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_388" href="#FNanchor_388" class="label">[8]</a> Ibid., 794.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_389" href="#FNanchor_389" class="label">[9]</a> Ibid., VII, 126.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_390" href="#FNanchor_390" class="label">[10]</a> Ibid., 424.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_391" href="#FNanchor_391" class="label">[11]</a> Ibid., 705.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_392" href="#FNanchor_392" class="label">[12]</a> Matlock, L. C., The Anti-slavery Struggle and Triumph in the -Methodist Episcopal Church, 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_393" href="#FNanchor_393" class="label">[13]</a> American Church History, XI, 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_394" href="#FNanchor_394" class="label">[14]</a> Tyerman, L., Life of Whitefield, II, 272. Whitefield is reported -as having said: “I should think myself highly favored if I could -purchase a good number of slaves in order to make their lives more -comfortable and lay a foundation for bringing up their posterity in -the nature and admonition of the Lord.” He died owning 75 slaves. -American Church History, XI, 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_395" href="#FNanchor_395" class="label">[15]</a> Jernegan, op. cit., 515.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_396" href="#FNanchor_396" class="label">[16]</a> Matlock, op. cit., 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_397" href="#FNanchor_397" class="label">[17]</a> Minutes of the Methodist Episcopal Conferences, 1773-1813, I, 5-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_398" href="#FNanchor_398" class="label">[18]</a> The first paragraph of this law shows the general tenor of these -regulations:</p> - -<p>1. Every member of our society who has slaves in his possession -shall, within twelve months after notice given to him by the Assistant -(which the assistants are required immediately, and without any delay, -to give to their respective circuits), legally execute and record -an instrument whereby he emancipates and sets free every slave in -his possession who is between the ages of forty and forty-five immediately, -or at farthest when they arrive at the age of forty-five; and -every slave who is between the ages of twenty-five and forty immediately, -or at farthest at the explication of five years from the date -of said instrument; every slave who is between the ages of twenty-one -and twenty-five immediately or at farthest when they arrive at -the age of thirty; and every slave under the age of twenty as soon -as they arrive at the age of twenty-five at farthest; and every infant -born in slavery after the above-mentioned rules are complied with -immediately on its birth. McTyeire, Holland M., History of Methodism, -II, pp. 375-378.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_399" href="#FNanchor_399" class="label">[19]</a> Minutes of the General Conferences, 1796-1844, pp. 40-1; Journal -of the General Conference of 1800, pp. 37-44; American Church History, -XI, 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_400" href="#FNanchor_400" class="label">[20]</a> Journal of the General Conference of 1816, p. 170.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_401" href="#FNanchor_401" class="label">[21]</a> “Resolved, by the delegates of the Annual Conferences in General -Conference assembled, That they are decidedly opposed to modern -abolition, and wholly disclaim any right, wish, or intention, to interfere -in the civil and political relation between master and slave as it -exists in the slaveholding states of this Union.” Journal of the -General Conference of 1836, pp. 446-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_402" href="#FNanchor_402" class="label">[22]</a> Journal of the General Conference of 1840, p. 136.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_403" href="#FNanchor_403" class="label">[23]</a> The Finley Resolution was: “Whereas, the discipline of one -church forbids the doing anything calculated to destroy an itinerant -general superintendency; and, whereas, Bishop Andrew has become -connected with slavery by marriage and otherwise, and this having -drawn after it circumstances which, in the estimation of the General -Conference, will greatly embarrass the exercise of his office as an -itinerant general superintendent, if not in some places entirely prevent -it; therefore, Resolved that it is the sense of this General Conference -that he desist from the exercise of this office so long as this -impediment exists.” Journal of General Conference of 1844, p. 85.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_404" href="#FNanchor_404" class="label">[24]</a> Bedford, A. H., History of the Organization of the Methodist -Episcopal Church, South, p. 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_405" href="#FNanchor_405" class="label">[25]</a> Journal of the General Conference of 1844, p. 85.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_406" href="#FNanchor_406" class="label">[26]</a> Bedford, pp. 418-503; see also Wightman, W. M., Life of William -Capers, pp. 398-425; Smith, G. G., Life and Letters of James Osgood -Andrew, pp. 336-385.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_407" href="#FNanchor_407" class="label">[27]</a> Garrett and Goodpasture, p. 156; Goodspeed, p. 647.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_408" href="#FNanchor_408" class="label">[28]</a> Ibid., p. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_409" href="#FNanchor_409" class="label">[29]</a> Harrison, W. P., The Gospel Among the Slaves, p. 61.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_410" href="#FNanchor_410" class="label">[30]</a> McFerrin, J. B., History of Methodism in Tennessee, I, pp. 26, -470, 523; Vol. II, pp. 132, 159, 262; see also McTyeire, p. 462; and -Goodspeed, pp. 664, 667.</p> - -<p>Note: The minutes of the Annual Conference of the Methodists in -Tennessee were burned with the Methodist Publishing House in Nashville, -February, 1872. The publishing house has never been able to -find another copy. McFerrin’s History of Methodism in Tennessee, -which contains copious quotations from these minutes, is the only -available source.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_411" href="#FNanchor_411" class="label">[31]</a> Supra, p. <a href="#Page_105">105</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_412" href="#FNanchor_412" class="label">[32]</a> Asbury, Thomas, Journal of Rev. Francis Asbury, Vol. 3, p. 290; -Cartwright, Peter, Fifty Years as a Presiding Elder, pp. 53ff.; Goodspeed, -pp. 663-667; Temple, O. P., East Tennessee and Civil War, pp. -97ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_413" href="#FNanchor_413" class="label">[33]</a> Goodspeed, p. 667.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_414" href="#FNanchor_414" class="label">[34]</a> Supra, p. <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_415" href="#FNanchor_415" class="label">[35]</a> McFerrin, II, 261, 283; Goodspeed, pp. 667, 668.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_416" href="#FNanchor_416" class="label">[36]</a> McFerrin, II, 261.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_417" href="#FNanchor_417" class="label">[37]</a> McFerrin, II, 401.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_418" href="#FNanchor_418" class="label">[38]</a> The Code of 1817 is as follows:</p> - -<p>“If a local elder, deacon, or preacher, in our Church, shall purchase -a slave or slaves, he shall lay his case before the Quarterly-Meeting -Conference of his circuit as soon as practicable, which Quarterly-Meeting -Conference shall say how long such slave or slaves serve -as a remuneration to the purchaser; and on the decision of the Quarterly-Meeting -Conference, touching the time the slave or slaves shall -serve, the purchaser shall, without delay, enter into a written obligation -to the Quarterly-Meeting Conference to emancipate such slave -or slaves at the expiration of the term of servitude, <i>if the law of the -State</i> will admit; and such obligation shall be entered on the Journals -of the Quarterly-Meeting Conference. But should the laws of the -State continue rigidly to oppose the emancipation of slaves, so that -their freedom, as above contemplated, should prove impracticable, -during the term and at the end of the slave’s or slaves’ servitude, as -determined by the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, he, the said elder, -deacon, or preacher, shall, at the end of the time of servitude, again -lay his case before the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, which Quarterly-Meeting -Conference shall determine it according to the then -existing slave rule of the Annual Conference to which he belongs; and -should the said elder, deacon, or preacher, be dissatisfied with the -decision of the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, he shall be allowed an -appeal to the ensuing Annual Conference, provided he then signifies -his intention of so appealing.</p> - -<p>“2. If a private member in our society buy a slave or slaves, the -preacher who has charge of the circuit shall summon a committee, -of which he shall be president, or at least three disinterested male -members from the class of which he or she is a member; and if a -committee cannot be elected from the class to which the slave purchaser -belongs, in such case the preacher may make up the committee -from a neighboring class or classes, which committee shall determine -the length of time such slave or slaves shall serve as a compensation -to the purchaser, and immediately on the determination of -the committee, touching the slave’s or slaves’ time of servitude, he -or she, the purchaser, shall bind himself or herself in a written obligation -to the church to have the emancipation of such slave or slaves, -at the expiration of the given time, recorded as soon as practicable, -<i>if the laws of the States in which he or she live will admit of emancipation</i>; -and such obligation shall be filed among the papers of the -Quarterly-Meeting Conference of the circuit in which he or she -lives. <i>But should the laws of the State in which the purchaser lives -render it impracticable to emancipate said slave or slaves</i>, during the -time of servitude fixed by the committee for said slave or slaves, the -preacher having charge of the circuit or station shall call a second -committee at the end of the time of servitude who shall determine the -case according to the then existing slave rule of the Annual Conference -to which he or she belongs; and if he or she feel him or herself -aggrieved, he or she shall be allowed an appeal to the ensuing Quarterly-Meeting -Conference of his or her circuit. In all cases relative -either to preachers or private members, the colored or bond-children -born of slaves purchased, after their purchase and during the time -of their bondage, male and female, shall be free at the age of twenty-five, -<i>if the law admit of emancipation</i>; <i>and if not, the case of those -born of purchased slaves in bondage to said elder, deacon, or preacher</i>, -shall be <i>cognizable</i> by the Quarterly-Meeting Conference, and in the -case of those born of purchased slaves in bondage to private members, -shall be cognizable by a committee of the above-mentioned kind, which -Quarterly-Meeting Conference and committee shall decide in such case -as the then existing slave rule shall or may direct; <i>provided</i>, nevertheless, -the above rules be not so construed as to oblige an elder, -deacon, preacher, or private member, to give security for the good -behaviour and maintenance of the slave or slaves emancipated, should -the court require it. If an elder, deacon, preacher, or private member, -among us, shall sell a slave or slaves <i>into perpetual bondage, they -shall thereby forfeit their membership</i> in our church. Therefore, in -case an elder, deacon, or preacher sell a slave or slaves, <i>he shall first -submit the case to the Quarterly-Meeting Conference</i> of which he is a -member, and said Quarterly-Meeting Conference shall say for what -term of years he shall sell his slave, or slaves, which term being fixed, -the seller shall immediately record his, her, or their emancipation in -the county court; and a private member selling a slave or slaves shall -first acquaint the preacher having the charge of the circuit with his -design, who shall summon a committee of the above-mentioned kind, -of which he, the said preacher, shall be President. Said Committee -shall say, for what term of years, he, she, or they shall sell his, her or -their slave or slaves, and the seller shall be required immediately to -record the emancipation of such slave or slaves in the county court. -An elder, deacon, preacher, or private member among us, refusing to -comply with the above rules, shall be dealt with as in other cases of -immorality, and expelled.” McFerrin, II, 462-466.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_419" href="#FNanchor_419" class="label">[39]</a> McFerrin, II, p. 467.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_420" href="#FNanchor_420" class="label">[40]</a> Goodspeed, p. 669.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_421" href="#FNanchor_421" class="label">[41]</a> McFerrin, III, 19-20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_422" href="#FNanchor_422" class="label">[42]</a> Ibid., p. 161.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_423" href="#FNanchor_423" class="label">[43]</a> Goodspeed, p. 670.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_424" href="#FNanchor_424" class="label">[44]</a> Ibid., p. 669; Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, the Backwoods -Preacher, p. 195.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_425" href="#FNanchor_425" class="label">[45]</a> Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, p. 195.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_426" href="#FNanchor_426" class="label">[46]</a> Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, p. 196.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_427" href="#FNanchor_427" class="label">[47]</a> Goodspeed, pp. 669-670.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_428" href="#FNanchor_428" class="label">[48]</a> McFerrin, II, 195.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_429" href="#FNanchor_429" class="label">[49]</a> He proposed the following program for the church on slavery:</p> - -<p>1. That every householder in our church shall provide a comfortable -house, with sufficient bed and bedding, for every slave in his possession.</p> - -<p>2. That each slave shall be clothed in decent apparel in summer -and warm clothing in winter, and shall have plenty of good and -wholesome food, and time to eat it.</p> - -<p>3. That every slave over ... years of age shall be taught to read -the Holy Scriptures.</p> - -<p>4. That every slave over ... years of age shall be permitted to -attend the worship of God ... times in every ...</p> - -<p>5. That every slave shall attend family worship twice a day.</p> - -<p>6. That every slave shall be allowed one hour for reading in -every ...</p> - -<p>7. That no master shall inflict more than ... stripes for any one -offense, nor any stripes on any one who is over ... years of age.</p> - -<p>8. That no slave shall be compelled to marry against his will.</p> - -<p>9. No master shall suffer man and wife, parent and child, to be -parted without their consent when it is in his power—he being the -owner of one—to prevent it by buying or selling at a fair price.</p> - -<p>10. On any complaint being made against a member for violation -of these rules let the preacher appoint a committee of ... to investigate -the facts and report to the society.</p> - -<p>11. Any member violating or refusing to comply with the above -rules shall be dealt with as in other cases of immorality.—Recollections -of Rev. John Johnson and His House, An Autobiography, 305-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_430" href="#FNanchor_430" class="label">[50]</a> McFerrin, II, 95.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_431" href="#FNanchor_431" class="label">[51]</a> Ibid., 494.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_432" href="#FNanchor_432" class="label">[52]</a> Ibid., 261; Goodspeed, 668.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_433" href="#FNanchor_433" class="label">[53]</a> McFerrin, III, 271.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_434" href="#FNanchor_434" class="label">[54]</a> Infra, pp. <a href="#Page_153">153-5</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_435" href="#FNanchor_435" class="label">[55]</a> Harrison, p. 151.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_436" href="#FNanchor_436" class="label">[56]</a> Ibid., pp. 61-2; Wightman, pp. 288-302.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_437" href="#FNanchor_437" class="label">[57]</a> Goodspeed, p. 676.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_438" href="#FNanchor_438" class="label">[58]</a> Harrison, p. 155.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_439" href="#FNanchor_439" class="label">[59]</a> Ibid., p. 161.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_440" href="#FNanchor_440" class="label">[60]</a> Harrison, p. 194.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_441" href="#FNanchor_441" class="label">[61]</a> Ibid., p. 195.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_442" href="#FNanchor_442" class="label">[62]</a> McFerrin, III, 387.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_443" href="#FNanchor_443" class="label">[63]</a> McFerrin, III, 389-90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_444" href="#FNanchor_444" class="label">[64]</a> Harrison, 338-343.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_445" href="#FNanchor_445" class="label">[65]</a> Green, Wm. M., Life of A. L. P. Green, 167.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_446" href="#FNanchor_446" class="label">[66]</a> Bedford, pp. 214-5; 301.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_447" href="#FNanchor_447" class="label">[67]</a> Bedford, p. 601.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_448" href="#FNanchor_448" class="label">[68]</a> Ibid., p. 603.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_449" href="#FNanchor_449" class="label">[69]</a> Ibid., p. 605.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_450" href="#FNanchor_450" class="label">[70]</a> Ibid., p. 600.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_451" href="#FNanchor_451" class="label">[71]</a> Bedford, p. 423.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_452" href="#FNanchor_452" class="label">[72]</a> Ibid., p. 449.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_453" href="#FNanchor_453" class="label">[73]</a> These resolutions show the frame of mind of these people:</p> - -<p>“Whereas, the long-continued agitation on the subject of slavery -and abolition in the Methodist Episcopal Church did, at the General -Conference of said church, held in the city of New York, in May, -1844, result in the adoption of certain measures by that body which -seriously threatened a disruption of the Church; and to avert this -calamity, said General Conference did devise and adopt a plan contemplating -the peaceful separation of the South and the North; and -constituting the conferences in the slaveholding States, the sole -judges of the necessity for such separation; and, whereas, the conferences -in the slaveholding States, in the exercise of the right accorded -to them by the General Conference, did, by their representatives -in convention at Louisville, Ky., in May last, decide that separation -was necessary, and proceeded to organize themselves into a -separate and distinct ecclesiastical connection, under the style and -title of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, basing their claim -to a legitimate relation to the Methodist Episcopal Church in the -United States upon their unwavering adherence to the Plan of Separation -adopted by the General Conference of said church in 1844, -and their devotion to the doctrines, discipline, and usages of the -church as they received them from their fathers.</p> - -<p>And as the Plan of Separation provides that the conferences bordering -on the geographical lines of separation shall decide their relation -by the votes of the majority ... and also that ministers of -every grade shall make their election North or South without censure—therefore,</p> - -<p>1. Resolved, That we now proceed to determine the question of -our ecclesiastical relation by the vote of the conference.</p> - -<p>2. That we, the members of the Holston Annual Conference, claiming -all the rights, powers, and privileges of an Annual Conference of -the Methodist Church in the United States, do hereby make an -election with, and adhere to, the Methodist Episcopal Church, South.</p> - -<p>3. That while we thus declare our adherence to the Methodist -Episcopal Church, South, we repudiate the idea of secession in any -schismatic or offensive sense of the phrase, as we neither give up -nor surrender anything which we have received as constituting any -part of Methodism, and adhere to the Southern ecclesiastical organization. -Plan of Separation, adopted by the General Conference of -the Methodist Episcopal Church at its session in New York in May, -1844.</p> - -<p>4. That we are satisfied with our Book of Discipline as it is on -the subject of slavery, as recorded in that book; and that we will -not tolerate any change whatever, except such verbal and unimportant -alterations as may, in the judgment of the General Conference, -facilitate the work in which we are engaged, and promote uniformity -and harmony in our administration.</p> - -<p>5. That the journals of our present session, as well as all our -official business, be henceforth conformed in style and title to our -ecclesiastical relation.</p> - -<p>6. That it is our desire to cultivate and maintain fraternal relations -with our brethren of the North. And we do most sincerely -deprecate the continuance of paper warfare either by editors or correspondents, -in our official church papers, and devoutly pray for the -speedy return of peace and harmony in the Church, both North and -South.</p> - -<p>7. That the Holston Annual Conference most heartily commend -the course of our beloved Bishops, Saule and Andrew, during the -recent agitations which have resulted in the territorial and jurisdictional -separation of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and that we -tender them our thanks for their steady adherence to principle and -the best interests of the slave population.”—Bedford, pp. 500-503.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_454" href="#FNanchor_454" class="label">[74]</a> Harrison, 302.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_455" href="#FNanchor_455" class="label">[75]</a> Ibid., 318.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_456" href="#FNanchor_456" class="label">[76]</a> Harrison, 324.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_457" href="#FNanchor_457" class="label">[77]</a> Ibid., 326.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_458" href="#FNanchor_458" class="label">[78]</a> Minutes of the Annual Conferences of M. E. Church, South, I, -1845-1859, 16-25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_459" href="#FNanchor_459" class="label">[79]</a> Ibid., 167, 172, 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_460" href="#FNanchor_460" class="label">[80]</a> Ibid., 273, 290, 295.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_461" href="#FNanchor_461" class="label">[81]</a> Ibid., 385, 392, 403.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_462" href="#FNanchor_462" class="label">[82]</a> Ibid., II, 214, 218, 223.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_463" href="#FNanchor_463" class="label">[83]</a> Minutes of the Annual Conference of M. E. Church, South, II, -1845-1859, 214, 218, 203.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_464" href="#FNanchor_464" class="label">[84]</a> American Church History, XI, pp. 66-7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_465" href="#FNanchor_465" class="label">[85]</a> 26th Annual Report of American Anti-slavery Society, 1859, 115.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_466" href="#FNanchor_466" class="label">[86]</a> McTyeire, III, 536.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_467" href="#FNanchor_467" class="label">[87]</a> Milburn, W. H., Ten Years of a Preacher’s Life, 337.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_468" href="#FNanchor_468" class="label">[88]</a> Cartwright, Fifty Years a Presiding Elder, p. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_469" href="#FNanchor_469" class="label">[89]</a> Cartwright, Autobiography, p. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_470" href="#FNanchor_470" class="label">[90]</a> Col. Recs., III, p. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_471" href="#FNanchor_471" class="label">[91]</a> Garrett and Goodpasture, p. 156.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_472" href="#FNanchor_472" class="label">[92]</a> Newman, A. H., History of Baptist Churches in United States, -p. 338.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_473" href="#FNanchor_473" class="label">[93]</a> Briggs, Charles A., American Presbyterianism, pp. 59-60.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_474" href="#FNanchor_474" class="label">[94]</a> Newman, p. 305.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_475" href="#FNanchor_475" class="label">[95]</a> Ibid., p. 338.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_476" href="#FNanchor_476" class="label">[96]</a> Pius, N. H., An Outline of Baptist History, p. 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_477" href="#FNanchor_477" class="label">[97]</a> Harrison, pp. 65, 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_478" href="#FNanchor_478" class="label">[98]</a> Col. Recs. VIII, 164.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_479" href="#FNanchor_479" class="label">[99]</a> Buckley, James M., History of Methodism, I, 373, 375.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_480" href="#FNanchor_480" class="label">[100]</a> Harrison, 58.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_481" href="#FNanchor_481" class="label">[101]</a> Riley, B. F., History of the Baptists in Southern States East of -the Mississippi, p. 199.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_482" href="#FNanchor_482" class="label">[102]</a> Ibid., p. 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_483" href="#FNanchor_483" class="label">[103]</a> Riley, p. 205.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_484" href="#FNanchor_484" class="label">[104]</a> Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1845, pp. 18, 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_485" href="#FNanchor_485" class="label">[105]</a> Riley, p. 211.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_486" href="#FNanchor_486" class="label">[106]</a> Pendleton, J. M., Reminiscences of a Long Life, p. 112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_487" href="#FNanchor_487" class="label">[107]</a> Ibid., 113.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_488" href="#FNanchor_488" class="label">[108]</a> Professor Pendleton remained at Union University during the -war and was a loyal unionist. He preached on Sunday and worked -on the farm during the week. He constantly expected to be taken -from his home and hanged. He always prepared at night a method -of escape, yet he, despite proposals by the citizens of the community -to hang him, never had to execute his plans. He lived in constant -fear until the Army of the Cumberland occupied Murfreesboro in -1863.—Pendleton, op. cit., 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_489" href="#FNanchor_489" class="label">[109]</a> Proceedings of Southern Baptist Convention, 1845, p. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_490" href="#FNanchor_490" class="label">[110]</a> Ibid., p. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_491" href="#FNanchor_491" class="label">[111]</a> Proceedings of Southern Baptist Convention, 1859-60, p. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_492" href="#FNanchor_492" class="label">[112]</a> Pendleton, p. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_493" href="#FNanchor_493" class="label">[113]</a> Pius, p. 61.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_494" href="#FNanchor_494" class="label">[114]</a> Garrett and Goodpasture, 160.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_495" href="#FNanchor_495" class="label">[115]</a> McDonald, B. W., History of Cumberland Presbyterian Church, -p. 411.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_496" href="#FNanchor_496" class="label">[116]</a> Cossitt, Franceway Ranna, The Life of Rev. Finis Ewing, p. 273.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_497" href="#FNanchor_497" class="label">[117]</a> McDonald, p. 411.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_498" href="#FNanchor_498" class="label">[118]</a> Letters furnished by Hon. F. E. McLean (Quoted by McDonald, -412).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_499" href="#FNanchor_499" class="label">[119]</a> McDonald, p. 412.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_500" href="#FNanchor_500" class="label">[120]</a> Diary of Beard, A. J., July 11, 1855.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_501" href="#FNanchor_501" class="label">[121]</a> McDonald, p. 414.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_502" href="#FNanchor_502" class="label">[122]</a> Ibid., 415.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_503" href="#FNanchor_503" class="label">[123]</a> The Cumberland Presbyterian, August 19, 1835.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_504" href="#FNanchor_504" class="label">[124]</a> McDonald, p. 417.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_505" href="#FNanchor_505" class="label">[125]</a> Minutes of the Assembly of 1848, pp. 12, 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_506" href="#FNanchor_506" class="label">[126]</a> Minutes of the Assembly of 1851, p. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_507" href="#FNanchor_507" class="label">[127]</a> Minutes of the Assembly of 1851, pp. 56, 57. This committee -consisted of LeRoy Woods, Ind., A. J. Beard, Ky., J. J. Meek, Miss., -N. P. Modrall, Tenn., J. H. Coulter, Ohio, S. E. Hudson, Penn., and -J. C. Henson, Ind.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_508" href="#FNanchor_508" class="label">[128]</a> Weeks, S. B., Southern Quakers and Slavery, p. 199 (Baltimore, -1896).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_509" href="#FNanchor_509" class="label">[129]</a> Ibid., p. 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_510" href="#FNanchor_510" class="label">[130]</a> Ibid., 207-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_511" href="#FNanchor_511" class="label">[131]</a> Ibid., 208.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_512" href="#FNanchor_512" class="label">[132]</a> American Church History, XII, 245.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_513" href="#FNanchor_513" class="label">[133]</a> Weeks, 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_514" href="#FNanchor_514" class="label">[134]</a> Ibid., 206.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_515" href="#FNanchor_515" class="label">[135]</a> Ibid., 207.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_516" href="#FNanchor_516" class="label">[136]</a> Weeks, 221.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_517" href="#FNanchor_517" class="label">[137]</a> Ibid., 225.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_518" href="#FNanchor_518" class="label">[138]</a> Hoss, E. E., Elihu Embree, Abolitionist, p. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_519" href="#FNanchor_519" class="label">[139]</a> Petition of Society of Friends, 1817 (Archives of State). This -petition was signed by Elihu Embree and nine other Friends.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_520" href="#FNanchor_520" class="label">[140]</a> Goodspeed, p. 645.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_521" href="#FNanchor_521" class="label">[141]</a> Goodspeed, p. 646.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_522" href="#FNanchor_522" class="label">[142]</a> Gillet, E. H., History of Presbyterian Church in United States -of America, I, 201. These synods said:</p> - -<p>“We do highly approve of the general principles in favor of universal -liberty that prevail in America, and of the interest which -many of the states have taken in promoting the abolition of slavery. -Yet, inasmuch as men, introduced from a servile state to a participation -of all the privileges of civil society, without a proper education, -and without previous habits of industry, may be, in some respects, -dangerous to the community; therefore, they earnestly recommend -it to all the members belonging to their communion to give those -persons, who are at present held in servitude, such good education -as may prepare them for the better enjoyment of freedom. And -they moreover recommend that masters, whenever they find servants -disposed to make a proper improvement of that privilege, would give -them some share of property to begin with, or grant them sufficient -time and sufficient means of procuring, by industry, their own liberty; -and at a moderate rate, that they may thereby be brought into -society with those habits of industry that may render them useful -citizens; and, finally, they recommend it to all the people under their -care, to use the most prudent measures consistent with the interest -and the state of civil society in the parts where they live, to procure -eventually the final abolition of slavery in America.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_523" href="#FNanchor_523" class="label">[143]</a> Minutes of the Assembly of 1795, Quoted by Gillet, I, 284.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_524" href="#FNanchor_524" class="label">[144]</a> Ibid., p. 285. The committee reported that “a neglect of this -(religious education) is inconsistent with the character of a Christian -master, but the observance might prevent, in great part, what is really -the moral evil attending slavery—namely, allowing precious souls -under the charge of masters to perish for lack of knowledge.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_525" href="#FNanchor_525" class="label">[145]</a> Gillet, I, 453. The assembly urged religious education on the -slaves “that they may be prepared for the exercise and enjoyment of -liberty when God in his providence may open a door for their emancipation.” -As to buying and selling of slaves, it recommended -“Presbyteries and Sessions under their care to make use of all prudent -measures to prevent such shameful and unrighteous conduct.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_526" href="#FNanchor_526" class="label">[146]</a> Ibid., II, pp. 239-41. The assembly said: “We consider the voluntary -enslaving of one part of the human race by another, as a -gross violation of the most precious and sacred rights of human -nature, as utterly inconsistent with the laws of God, which requires -us to love our neighbors as ourselves, and as totally irreconcilable -with the spirit and principles of the gospel of Christ, which enjoins -that all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye -even so to them.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_527" href="#FNanchor_527" class="label">[147]</a> Gillet, II, 241.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_528" href="#FNanchor_528" class="label">[148]</a> Ibid., 242. See also Fourth Annual Report of American Anti-slavery -Society, 1837, p. 62; and Patton, Jacob Harris, Popular History -of the Presbyterian Church, p. 444.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_529" href="#FNanchor_529" class="label">[149]</a> Thompson, R. E., History of Presbyterian Churches in the -United States, p. 123.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_530" href="#FNanchor_530" class="label">[150]</a> Thirteenth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery -Society, 1827, pp. 67-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_531" href="#FNanchor_531" class="label">[151]</a> Tenth Annual Report of American Colonization Society, 1827, -pp. 67-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_532" href="#FNanchor_532" class="label">[152]</a> Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892, 119-120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_533" href="#FNanchor_533" class="label">[153]</a> Methodist Quarterly Review, lxiii, 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_534" href="#FNanchor_534" class="label">[154]</a> Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, 1892, 120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_535" href="#FNanchor_535" class="label">[155]</a> Thirteenth Annual Report of the American and Foreign Anti-slavery -Society, 1853, p. 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_536" href="#FNanchor_536" class="label">[156]</a> Ibid., p. 71.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_537" href="#FNanchor_537" class="label">[157]</a> Thirteenth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery -Society, 1853, pp. 73-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_538" href="#FNanchor_538" class="label">[158]</a> Ibid., pp. 67-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_539" href="#FNanchor_539" class="label">[159]</a> Ibid., p. 82.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_540" href="#FNanchor_540" class="label">[160]</a> McNeilly, James H., Religion and Slavery, p. 42.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_541" href="#FNanchor_541" class="label">[161]</a> Harrison, p. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_542" href="#FNanchor_542" class="label">[162]</a> Ibid., p. 92.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_543" href="#FNanchor_543" class="label">[163]</a> Goodspeed, p. 683.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_544" href="#FNanchor_544" class="label">[164]</a> Harrison, p. 40.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_545" href="#FNanchor_545" class="label">[165]</a> Ibid., 67.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_546" href="#FNanchor_546" class="label">[166]</a> Ibid., 73.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_547" href="#FNanchor_547" class="label">[167]</a> Goodspeed, p. 694.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_548" href="#FNanchor_548" class="label">[168]</a> Ibid., p. 697.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_549" href="#FNanchor_549" class="label">[169]</a> Ibid., p. 698.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_550" href="#FNanchor_550" class="label">[170]</a> Memoirs of Rt. James H. Otey, p. 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_551" href="#FNanchor_551" class="label">[171]</a> <i>Memoirs of Rt. James H. Otey</i>, p. 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_552" href="#FNanchor_552" class="label">[172]</a> Harrison, 304.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_553" href="#FNanchor_553" class="label">[173]</a> Harrison, 304.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_153"></a>[153]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VI">CHAPTER VI<br /> -<span class="smcap">Legal Status of the Free Negro</span></h2> - -</div> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">The Establishment of a Policy.</span></h3> - -<h4>A. <i>The Policy of North Carolina.</i></h4> - -<p>The original policy of -North Carolina towards manumission was that the owner -of slaves could free them by deed, will, or contract. He was -at liberty to renounce his title to them absolutely or in a -modified manner, if he thought proper.<a id="FNanchor_554" href="#Footnote_554" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> In 1777, the state -asserted its control over emancipation by conferring on the -county courts the power to grant petitions for freedom on -a basis of meritorious services.<a id="FNanchor_555" href="#Footnote_555" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> The reasons for this change -were that it was thought necessary to protect the public -against being charged for the maintenance of manumitted -slaves, and that free negroes were a menace to the body -politic.</p> - -<h4>B. <i>The Policy of Tennessee to 1831.</i></h4> - -<p>This policy worked -a hardship in practice because it limited the courts to cases -of meritorious services. It frequently separated families -because all members were seldom entitled to freedom at the -same time. In 1801, Tennessee removed the limited jurisdiction -of the courts by giving them practically plenary power -over manumission.<a id="FNanchor_556" href="#Footnote_556" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> The only restriction on the courts was -that they sustain the policy of the state. Of course, the -legislature could by special act grant freedom in any particular -case. This was the policy of Tennessee to 1831.</p> - -<h4>C. <i>Changes in the Policy.</i></h4> - -<p>There were several factors -that produced the change of 1831. The number of free -negroes had increased from 361 in 1801 to 4,555 in 1831.<a id="FNanchor_557" href="#Footnote_557" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> -Since free negroes voted at this time, this meant that they -were a factor in politics. Manumission societies had been -active during this period, and had created opposition to free -negroes. Abolition literature had flourished. The cotton<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_154"></a>[154]</span> -industry had developed by virtue of the settlement of West -Tennessee, a portion of the Black Belt. Fear of servile insurrections -had increased. There had been Gabriel’s insurrection -in Virginia in 1800; the Vessey insurrection in South -Carolina in 1822; the Nat Turner insurrection in Virginia -in 1831; and an attempt at insurrection in Tennessee at the -same time.<a id="FNanchor_558" href="#Footnote_558" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> The liberal policy of the state prior to 1831 -had caused an influx of free negroes from other states. -The governor, in a message to the legislature in 1815, stated -that fifty free negroes had come into the state that year from -Virginia and as many more were expected the next year.<a id="FNanchor_559" href="#Footnote_559" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p> - -<p>In 1831, the legislature forbade “any free person of color -(whether he be born free, or emancipated, agreeably to the -laws in force and use, either now, or at any other time, in -any state within the United States or elsewhere), to remove -himself to this state and to reside therein, and remain -therein twenty days.”<a id="FNanchor_560" href="#Footnote_560" class="fnanchor">[7]</a></p> - -<p>If a free negro was convicted of entering the state in violation -of this act, he was subject to a fine of not less than -ten nor more than fifty dollars and an imprisonment of one -or two years, at the discretion of the judge. If he did not -remove from the state within thirty days after the expiration -of the term of imprisonment, he was again subject to -indictment as before, and upon conviction was imprisoned -for double the maximum time for first offense. No pecuniary -fine was attached in the second instance.</p> - -<p>There were only two ways by which a free negro could -legally enter the state after 1831. This, of course, is barring -special act of the legislature. If a free negro and a -slave of another state were married, and the owner of the -slave decided to move to Tennessee, he was permitted to -bring the free negro along with the slave, by giving a bond -of $500 to the county in which he chose to reside, guaranteeing -that the free negro would keep the peace and would not<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_155"></a>[155]</span> -become a charge to the county.<a id="FNanchor_561" href="#Footnote_561" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> If a free negro of another -state married a slave of Tennessee with the master’s consent, -he was permitted to come into the state if the master -of the slave would make bond to the county for his good -conduct.<a id="FNanchor_562" href="#Footnote_562" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> The state, however, reserved the right to order -such free negroes to remove, if their conduct proved unsatisfactory. -If they refused to do so, they were subject to the -punishment provided by the Act of 1831.<a id="FNanchor_563" href="#Footnote_563" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<p>Emancipation was prohibited except on the express condition -that such slave or slaves shall be immediately removed -from the state.<a id="FNanchor_564" href="#Footnote_564" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> The owner was required to give bond -with good security in value equal to that of the emancipated -slave, guaranteeing to send the negro out of the state and to -provide sufficient funds to pay his transportation charges -to Africa and support him for six months. Only age and -disease exempted slaves from the operation of this act.<a id="FNanchor_565" href="#Footnote_565" class="fnanchor">[12]</a></p> - -<p>Chief Justice Nicholson in discussing this change of policy -said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The policy of the state on the subject of emancipation -was marked by great liberality until the -year 1831, when the public mind began first to be -agitated by discussions in the Northern states of -the question of abolishing slavery.... A more rigid -policy commenced in 1831, when it was enacted, -that no slaves should be emancipated except upon -the condition of removal from the State. This -policy was based upon the belief that the peace -of the State would be endangered by an increase -of the number of free colored persons.<a id="FNanchor_566" href="#Footnote_566" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Judge Catron said: “The policy of the act of 1831 is not -to permit a free negro to come into the state from abroad; -and secondly not to permit a slave, freed by our laws, to be -manumitted upon any other condition than that of being<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_156"></a>[156]</span> -forthwith transported from the state, to which, by the first -section, he dare not return.”</p> - -<p>He justified the restrictions on emancipation by saying -it meant “adopting into the body politic a new member; a -vastly important measure in every community, and especially -in ours, where the majority of free men over twenty-one -years of age govern the balance of the people together -with themselves; where the free negro’s vote at the polls -is as of high value as that of any man.... The highest act -of sovereignty a government can perform is to adopt a new -member, with all the privileges and duties of citizenship. -To permit an individual to do this at pleasure would be -wholly inadmissible.”<a id="FNanchor_567" href="#Footnote_567" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<p>Judge Catron said the reasons for the policy of exclusion -were fear of rebellion among the slaves incited by free negroes, -the immoral influence of free negroes among slaves, -the injustice of forcing free negroes upon either the slave -or free states, and, finally, justice to the negro. He said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>All the slaveholding states, it is believed, as well -as many non-slaveholding, like ourselves, have -adopted the policy of exclusion. The consequence -is the free negro cannot find a home that promises -even safety in the United States and assuredly -none that promises comfort.<a id="FNanchor_568" href="#Footnote_568" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Judge Nelson, speaking of this change in policy, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Before the unjust, unwarrantable, unconstitutional, -and impertinent interference of enthusiasts -and intermeddlers in other states with this domestic -relation, rendered it necessary for the State to -guard against the effect of their incendiary publications, -and to tighten the bonds of slavery by -defensive legislation, against persistent and untiring -efforts to produce insurrection, the uniform -course of decision in the State was shaped with a -view to ameliorate the condition of the slave, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_157"></a>[157]</span> -to protect him against the tyranny and cruelty of -the master and other persons.<a id="FNanchor_569" href="#Footnote_569" class="fnanchor">[16]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The act of 1831 did not accomplish its intended purpose. -It was passed largely in the interest of colonization. It -also failed to consider those slaves who had made contracts -for their freedom prior to its passage, but who had not -obtained the consent of the state, and those who had been -freed by will, but whose masters were not yet deceased. -The disabilities were removed from these two classes of -slaves by the act of 1833, which excepted them from the -operation of the act of 1831.<a id="FNanchor_570" href="#Footnote_570" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> This policy was further -modified in 1842, when the state again placed the problem -of emancipation entirely in the hands of the county courts.<a id="FNanchor_571" href="#Footnote_571" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> -Judge McKinney held that this act empowered the county -court “to adjudge whether or not it would be consistent -with the interest and policy of the state to permit any manumitted -slave or free persons of color to reside in this state,” -and that their decisions were “not subject to the supervision -and control of the superior judicial tribunals.”<a id="FNanchor_572" href="#Footnote_572" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> He -maintained that the courts were acting as administrative -agents of the state and that the matter was wholly political -and not judicial.<a id="FNanchor_573" href="#Footnote_573" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> - -<p>This meant that the policy of exclusion was considerably -modified. Any slave on manumission had the privilege of -petitioning the county court to be permitted to remain in -the state. The conditions that had to be met by the slaves -were: “First, proof of good character; second, that it would -violate the feelings of humanity to remove the applicant; -third, a bond with satisfactory security for good behavior.”<a id="FNanchor_574" href="#Footnote_574" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p> - -<p>This liberal change in the policy adopted in 1831 was -soon eliminated. In 1849, the state reverted to the policy -of exclusion. The discretionary power granted to the county -courts in 1842 was taken away and emancipation was prohibited<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_158"></a>[158]</span> -“except upon the terms and conditions imposed by -the act of 1831, Ch. 102.”<a id="FNanchor_575" href="#Footnote_575" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> Judge Caruthers, explaining -this shifting policy of the legislature, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>It is a vexed and perplexing question, upon which -public opinion, acting upon the representatives of -the people, has been subject to much vibration between -sympathy and humanity for the slave and -the safety and well-being of society. Hence, the -frequent changes in our legislation on the subject.<a id="FNanchor_576" href="#Footnote_576" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Masters continued to emancipate their slaves regardless -of this prohibition. A class of negroes grew up that were -neither slave nor free. They were free from their masters, -but the state had not consented to their emancipation and -continued residence within its borders. In 1852, the county -courts were instructed to appoint trustees for these negroes. -These trustees hired them out, and used their wages to support -the negroes.<a id="FNanchor_577" href="#Footnote_577" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> The negroes preferred to remain in a -state of semi-slavery than to go to Africa. This act was -really an admission that the policy of exclusion was failing -and it also made provision for continued evasion.</p> - -<p>The weaknesses of the measure were remedied in 1854 -and a more rigid policy of exclusion was adopted. If the -masters did not provide the means to send the manumitted -slaves to Africa, such slaves were hired out by the clerks -of the county courts until sufficient funds were raised and -turned into the state treasury. The governor was then required -to provide for their transportation to Africa.<a id="FNanchor_578" href="#Footnote_578" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> This -act abolished the exclusive jurisdiction of the county courts -over emancipation, and permitted the slave to file his petition -for freedom in any court. He could appeal his case -to a higher court if he desired.</p> - -<p>This act established the policy pursued by the state until -the Civil War. Judge Caruthers, speaking of the difficulty -of establishing a satisfactory policy, said:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_159"></a>[159]</span></p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The struggle has been to devise some plan which -would be just to the slave, and not inconsistent -with the interests of society—that would sustain -his right to liberty, and at the same time save the -community from the evils of a free negro population.</p> - -<p>This, it is believed, has been more effectually accomplished -by the late act than at any time before.... -We regard this as the most wise and judicious -plan which has been yet devised; and, with some -amendments, it should become the settled policy of -the state.<a id="FNanchor_579" href="#Footnote_579" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The free negro continued to be regarded as a menace to -society. In 1858, a bill was introduced into the legislature -to banish all free negroes from the state, but the better -element of the state defeated its passage. Judge Catron, -who had been a member of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, -and who was now a member of the Supreme Court of the -United States, speaking of this measure, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>This bill proposes to commit an outrage, to perpetrate -an oppression and cruelty, and it is idle to -mince words to soften the fact. This people who -were born free and lived as free persons, will -preach rebellion everywhere that they may be -driven to by this unjust law, whether it be amongst -us here in Tennessee or South of us on the cotton -and sugar plantations, or in the abolition meetings -of the free states. Nor will the women be the least -effective in preaching a crusade, when begging -money in the North, to relieve their children, left -behind in this State, in bondage. We are told it is -a popular measure. Where is it popular? In what -nook or corner of the State are the principles of -humanity so deplorably deficient that a majority -of the whole inhabitants would commit an outrage -not committed in a Christian country of which history -gives any account.... Numbers of the people -sought to be enslaved or driven out are members of -our various churches, and in full communion. That -these great bodies of Christian men and women -will quietly stand by and see their humble co-workers -sold on the block to the negro-trader is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_160"></a>[160]</span> -not to be expected; nor will any set of men be -supported, morally, or politically, who are the authors -of such a law.<a id="FNanchor_580" href="#Footnote_580" class="fnanchor">[27]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Since colonization had failed, and efforts at banishment -had been defeated, the only remaining alternative that -would dispose of the free negro was re-enslavement. In -this same year, provision was made for the voluntary re-enslavement -of the free negro. Any free negro eighteen -years of age might convey himself into slavery by filing a -petition to this effect in the circuit or chancery court, signed -by himself and witnessed by two persons. The petition -named the master selected. After due publication, the petitioner -and the master appeared in court and asked the -granting of the petition. If the court granted the petition, -it named a commission of three men to value the slave. The -future master paid one-tenth of this value to the county -to be added to the public school fund. The master by giving -bond to the court, guaranteeing that the negro would never -become a charge to any county in the state, received title -to the slave.<a id="FNanchor_581" href="#Footnote_581" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<p>Voluntary re-enslavement did not accomplish the results -desired by its friends. So in the session of 1859-60, an attempt -was made to force free negroes into slavery. This -measure was known as the “Free Negro Bill.” It provided -that all free negroes, except certain minors, who did not -leave the state by May 1, 1861, would be sold into slavery, -the supporters of this bill contending that the free negro -had no rights except those given him by statutes, which -could be repealed. The opponents of the bill maintained -that the vested “rights of the negro could not be taken from -him because it would be an impairment of contract and that -the legislature could not touch his natural rights.”<a id="FNanchor_582" href="#Footnote_582" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> The -bill was finally defeated after a prolonged contest.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_161"></a>[161]</span></p> - -<h3>II. <span class="smcap">Registration of Free Negroes.</span></h3> - -<p>In the first decade of the history of the state, there was -no notice taken of the movements of free negroes. They -enjoyed complete freedom in their going and coming in the -community. But as their numbers and importance increased -the state began to want to know about their movements. -In 1806, provision was made for the registration of the free -negroes of the state by the county court clerks. This was -a sort of Dooms Day Book of free negroes. A minute description, -including age, name, color, and record of any -scars on hand, face, or head, was made of them. It was -also noted by what court of authority they were emancipated, -or whether they were born free. Two copies of -each registration were made, certified by the county court -clerk and attested by a justice of the peace.<a id="FNanchor_583" href="#Footnote_583" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> One of these -was filed in the clerk’s office, and the other was given the -free negro.</p> - -<p>In 1807, this registration certificate was made the passport -for the free negro in changing counties. If he chose -permanently to reside in a new county, he was required to -have this certificate duplicated. If he were caught without -it, he was arrested and put in jail unless he made bond. If -he lost it, and could not find record of his registration, he -was required to produce evidence of his emancipation or -free birth. If he failed in this, he was sold as a runaway -by the county court.<a id="FNanchor_584" href="#Footnote_584" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> As poorly as county records were -kept, as difficult as it was for the negro to preserve such a -record, and as abundant as kidnappers and slave-stealers -were, the free negro constantly faced the possibility of -losing his freedom.</p> - -<p>By act of 1825, free negroes coming from other states -were required to bring their registration papers with them -and have them recorded in some court of record in the -county in which they chose to reside.<a id="FNanchor_585" href="#Footnote_585" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p> - -<p>The registration policy was given further significance in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_162"></a>[162]</span> -1842 by an act which required all registration certificates to -be renewed every three years.<a id="FNanchor_586" href="#Footnote_586" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> At the time of each renewal, -an inquisition was made into the negro’s character -and conduct. If the county court saw fit, it could refuse to -renew the registration certificate. This compelled the free -negro to leave the state within twenty days, except for sickness -or unavoidable hindrance. If he refused to leave the -state, within twenty days, he became subject to the penalties -of the act of 1831.<a id="FNanchor_587" href="#Footnote_587" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> This system of registration was not -only a severe restriction upon the travel of the free negro, -but it gave chances in its workings for considerable collusion -of corrupt officials with agents of the slave traders.</p> - -<h3>III. <span class="smcap">Protection of Free Negroes.</span></h3> - -<p>It was a $500 fine to bring into the state a free negro -convict and sell him as a slave. Such a person was also -subject to an imprisonment for not exceeding six months.<a id="FNanchor_588" href="#Footnote_588" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> -Knowingly to steal and sell any free negro was a penitentiary -offense and was punishable by not less than five nor -more than fifteen years in the state prison.<a id="FNanchor_589" href="#Footnote_589" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p> - -<p>The children of free negroes were not permitted to remain -destitute and suffer. The county courts engaged their -services to suitable persons in the best and wisest terms, if -their parents did not support them.<a id="FNanchor_590" href="#Footnote_590" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></p> - -<h3>IV. <span class="smcap">The Suffrage for Free Negroes.</span></h3> - -<h4>A. <i>The Suffrage for Free Negroes in North Carolina.</i></h4> - -<p>The historical background for negro suffrage in Tennessee -is found in the laws and practices of colonial North Carolina. -The charter that established the Assembly in North -Carolina empowered the proprietors to govern the province -“with the advice, assent and approbation of the Freemen -of the said Province.”<a id="FNanchor_591" href="#Footnote_591" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> The next paragraph of this charter<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_163"></a>[163]</span> -refers to the “assemblies of free holders.”<a id="FNanchor_592" href="#Footnote_592" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> There is no -exclusion on the basis of color in either of these references. -“In 1703, servants, negroes, aliens, Jews and common sailors -voted for members of the General Assembly.” The act -of 1715 made it lawful for “the inhabitants and free men in -each precinct ... to choose two freeholders ... to sit and -vote in the said Assembly.”<a id="FNanchor_593" href="#Footnote_593" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> It is noticed here that the -terms, inhabitants, free men, and freeholders, included free -negroes. Hence, to exclude them, the act specifically stated -that no negro, mulatto, or Indian could vote for members of -the Assembly. This act remained the basis of suffrage -to 1835.</p> - -<p>Efforts were made by the royal governors to restrict the -suffrage to freeholders. They repeatedly received royal instructions -to this effect, but the law of 1715 prevailed, and -freemen continued to vote.<a id="FNanchor_594" href="#Footnote_594" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p> - -<p>In 1735, a new basis for the suffrage was established. -Freemen were disfranchised, but the suffrage was indiscriminately -given to freeholders who owned fifty acres of -land.<a id="FNanchor_595" href="#Footnote_595" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> The exclusion of negroes, mulattoes, and Indians -prevalent in the act of 1715, was abolished. Land-holding -and not color was the basis of the suffrage. The only additional -change in the suffrage qualification before the Revolution -was made by the act of 1751, which required freeholders -to be twenty-one years of age in order to vote.<a id="FNanchor_596" href="#Footnote_596" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></p> - -<p>The North Carolina constitution of 1776 granted the franchise -to all free men without regard to race or color with -the single limitation of residence.<a id="FNanchor_597" href="#Footnote_597" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> This was the franchise -law that was extended to the Southwest Territory by the -Act of Cession of 1790, which stated, “that the laws in force<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_164"></a>[164]</span> -and use in the state of North Carolina at the time of passing -the act, shall be, and continue in full force until the same -shall be repealed, or otherwise altered by the legislative authority -of the said Territory.”<a id="FNanchor_598" href="#Footnote_598" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> Congress accepted the Territory -on the above condition.<a id="FNanchor_599" href="#Footnote_599" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> The suffrage was not -changed by the legislature of the Southwest Territory.</p> - -<p>The basis of the suffrage remained unchanged from the -establishment of the Constitution of North Carolina in 1776 -to the establishment of the Constitution of Tennessee in -1796. However, the Revolutionary State of Franklin, which -flourished in western North Carolina from 1784 to 1788, -proposed a constitution that gave the suffrage “to every -free male inhabitant” who was twenty-one years old.<a id="FNanchor_600" href="#Footnote_600" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> -This is significant because it was an independent expression -of the people in the territory that later became Tennessee.</p> - -<h4>B. <i>Suffrage in the Convention of 1796.</i></h4> - -<p>Several propositions relative to suffrage were made in the -Convention of 1796. February 1, Mr. Henderson, delegate from Hawkins -County, moved that the first section in Article III be made -to read, “All citizens of this state, possessing of a freehold -in their own right, and all persons who have done duty in -the militia, shall be entitled to vote at any election, in the -county where the freehold lies, or where he resides.”<a id="FNanchor_601" href="#Footnote_601" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> This -motion failed but it is noticed that the suffrage is not based -on color. If the motion had prevailed, it would have disfranchised -all freemen, both white and black, who had not -done military service. Mr. Outlaw, of Jefferson County, -moved that “all persons liable by law to militia duty should -be allowed to vote.”<a id="FNanchor_602" href="#Footnote_602" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> If this motion had prevailed, it -would have given all freemen the suffrage with no limitation, -because by Section 26, the freemen were liable to -militia duty. The Convention finally gave the suffrage to -all freemen. Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_165"></a>[165]</span> -1796, declared that “all freemen of the age of twenty-one -years and upwards, possessing a freehold in the county -where they may vote, and being inhabitants of this state, -and all freemen who have been inhabitants of any one -county within the state for a period of six months immediately -preceding the date of election, shall be entitled to -vote for members of the general assembly, for the county in -which they respectively reside.”<a id="FNanchor_603" href="#Footnote_603" class="fnanchor">[50]</a></p> - -<p>It is worth noticing in this connection that, while the -suffrage was given to all freemen, representation in the -legislature was based on the number of free whites. The -constitution declared that “representation shall be regulated -according to numbers, to be apportioned to each county by -law, upon such ratio, as that the number of senators and -representatives ... shall not exceed thirty-nine until the -number of free white persons shall be two hundred thousand.”<a id="FNanchor_604" href="#Footnote_604" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -The convention in its various discussions used -the terms, “freemen,” “freeholders,” “all citizens,” “all -persons,” and “free white persons.” This clearly shows -that the convention was carefully discriminating between -these terms when it used them. Why did the convention -use “free white persons” as the basis of representation? -It knew that the term, “freemen,” would give representation -to free negroes. The Constitution of the United States -gave representation to three-fifths of the slaves. The Kentucky -constitution of 1799 stated that, “In all elections for -representatives every free male citizen (negroes, mulattoes -and Indians excepted) shall enjoy the right of election.”<a id="FNanchor_605" href="#Footnote_605" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> -It is distinctly shown here that it was understood that “free -male citizen” included “free negro.” Hence, if he is not -to be enfranchised, he must be excepted. Why would this -term be so well understood in Kentucky and not in Tennessee?</p> - -<p>Again, it must not be overlooked that the constitution of -1796 in Tennessee was drafted by a committee of very able<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_166"></a>[166]</span> -statesmen, among whom were such distinguished men as -Andrew Jackson, William Cocke, Joseph Anderson, William -Blount, W. C. C. Claiborne, and John Rhea.<a id="FNanchor_606" href="#Footnote_606" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> Andrew -Jackson was a very prominent leader in the Convention; -William Cocke had participated in founding the Franklin -State, and was, also, one of the founders of the Transylvania -Republic, twice a Senator of the United States from Tennessee, -and a leader in the Mississippi Territory. Joseph -Anderson was one of the territorial Judges for sixteen -years, United States Senator and Comptroller of the Treasury -of the United States. William Blount had been governor -of the Southwest Territory. William C. C. Claiborne -was Judge of the Superior Court of the State, the successor -of Andrew Jackson in Congress, first Governor of the territory -of Mississippi, Governor of Louisiana, and United -States senator-elect at the time of his death. John Rhea -was for eighteen years a member of Congress. It is unreasonable -to suppose that these men together with their -colleagues did not know the meaning of the word “freemen” -in the Constitution of 1796.<a id="FNanchor_607" href="#Footnote_607" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> They certainly knew that the -free negro had been voting in Colonial North Carolina, that -he continued to vote under her constitution of 1776, and that -he would vote in Tennessee as he had been doing before the -separation from North Carolina unless he was disfranchised.</p> - -<p>The contention of this thesis is that the free negro was intentionally -and deliberately enfranchised by the Convention -of 1796. The proof may be summarized as follows: 1st, -that the terms “freemen” and “freeholders” were the subject -of discussion throughout Colonial North Carolina with -thorough understanding as to their meaning; 2nd, that the -act of 1715 specifically excepted the negro from the term -“freemen,” thus disfranchising him; 4th, that the act of -1735 re-enfranchised him; 5th, that the North Carolina -constitution of 1776 enfranchised him; 6th, that the convention -of 1796 in Tennessee used the terms “freemen,”<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_167"></a>[167]</span> -“freeholders,” and “free white persons,” showing that it -must have knowingly used these terms; 7th, that these terms -were carefully used in contemporary constitutions; and 8th, -that it is inconceivable that the able and experienced statesmen -that framed the Tennessee Constitution were not conversant -with these terms.</p> - -<h4>C. <i>Suffrage from 1796 to 1834.</i></h4> - -<p>From 1796 to 1834 -there was a complete revolution in the attitude of Tennessee -people toward the negro. This has already been pointed -out in the discussion of the churches, manumission societies, -and the policy of exclusion adopted in 1831. Attention has -already been called to the growing economic importance of -slavery in the period and the consequent opposition to the -free negro.</p> - -<p>The political influence of the free negro was also a factor -in this change. From 1810 to 1820 there was an increase -of 108 per cent in free negroes and 266 per cent increase -in the period from 1820 to 1830. In 1830, there were twenty -counties containing almost one hundred free negroes each; -five, two hundred each; four, two hundred and fifty each; -three, three hundred each; two, four hundred each; and one -containing about five hundred. The greatest number of -free negroes in any one county was in Davidson County, -and it was a delegate from this county that made the motion -in the convention of 1834 to disfranchise the free negro. -There were at this time about six hundred free negroes -in Davidson County, and there were 471 in 1830 and 794 -in 1840.<a id="FNanchor_608" href="#Footnote_608" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p> - -<p>Hon. John Petit, United States Senator from Indiana, -said on the floor of the Senate, May 25, 1854, in the debate -on the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, that “Old Cave Johnson, an -honored and respectable gentleman, formerly Postmaster-General, -and for a long time a member of the other house, -told me, with his own lips, that the first time he was elected -to Congress from Tennessee, it was by the vote of free -negroes, and he was an iron manufacturer, and had a large -number of free negroes, as well as slaves, in his employ.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_168"></a>[168]</span> -I well recollect the number he stated. One hundred and -forty-five free negroes in his employ, went to the ballot box, -and elected him to Congress the first time he was elected.”<a id="FNanchor_609" href="#Footnote_609" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> -Charles Sumner said he heard John Bell make the same confession -with regard to his election.<a id="FNanchor_610" href="#Footnote_610" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> It is further claimed -that, during political campaigns in Tennessee, “The opposing -candidates for the nonce, oblivious of social distinction -and intent only on catching votes, hobnobbed with the men -and swung corners all with dusky damsels at election -balls.”<a id="FNanchor_611" href="#Footnote_611" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> The fact that the Constitutional Convention of -1834 by resolution excluded the free negro from voting on -ratification of the constitution shows that his vote was a -factor in close elections. Judge Catron in the case of Fisher’s -Negroes v. Dabbs said: “The free negro’s vote at the -polls is of as high value as that of any man.”<a id="FNanchor_612" href="#Footnote_612" class="fnanchor">[59]</a></p> - -<h4>D. <i>Suffrage in the Convention of 1834.</i></h4> - -<p>The contest over disfranchising the free negro in the convention -of 1834 presents the final phase of the suffrage problem. Amendments -to the constitution of 1796, favoring and opposing negro -suffrage, were introduced in the convention and by June 26 -were being debated in the committee of the whole. One of -the strongest advocates of suffrage for the negro was Mr. -Cahall, who said he was “unwilling to disfranchise any man -black or white, who had enjoyed the right of suffrage under -the present constitution.”<a id="FNanchor_613" href="#Footnote_613" class="fnanchor">[60]</a></p> - -<p>Mr. Cahall’s position was as follows: first, he would let -the free negroes then in the state continue to vote; second, -he believed that an unqualified suffrage for free negroes -would make the state an asylum for free negroes; third, -he contended that the suffrage was a conventional and not -a natural right. He said that our government was a “constitutional -and not a natural one.”<a id="FNanchor_614" href="#Footnote_614" class="fnanchor">[61]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_169"></a>[169]</span></p> - -<p>Mr. Allen, June 27, speaking of the third article of the -constitution, in the committee of the whole, said: “I am -against inserting the word white before the word freeman, -in this clause of the constitution, because it goes to exclude -a description of persons from the right of voting, that has -exercised it for thirty-eight years under the present constitution, -without any evil ever having grown out of it.”</p> - -<p>On June 27, the following resolution was introduced into -the committee of the whole:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>That every free male person of color, being an -inhabitant six months previous to the day of election, -of any county in this State six months immediately -preceding the election, shall be entitled to -vote in said county in which he has so resided, for -Governor, members of Congress, members of General -Assembly, and other officers.</p> - -</div> - -<p>Mr. Purdy introduced the following amendment to the -above motion:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>That every free man of color possessing in his -own right in the county in which he may reside and -propose to vote, a freehold or personal property of -$200, on which he has paid a tax that has been assessed -at least six months previous to the day of -election, and being an inhabitant of this State at -least twelve months previous to the day of election, -shall be entitled to vote for members to the General -Assembly for the county or district in which he -shall reside provided no free person emigrating to -this State after the adoption of this Constitution, -shall be entitled to exercise the right of suffrage.<a id="FNanchor_615" href="#Footnote_615" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p class="noindent">This amendment was rejected.</p> - -<p>Mr. Marr offered the following amendment to the motion:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>That no person, who is not a citizen of the -United States and of this State, has a right in any -election in this State.</p> - -</div> - -<p>This motion was laid on the table, and the original resolution -was adopted by the committee of the whole. June the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_170"></a>[170]</span> -28th, Mr. Marr, delegate from Weakley and Obion counties, -introduced the following resolutions:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Resolved, that free persons of color, including -mulattoes, mustees, and Indians were not parties -to our political compact, nor were they represented -in the Convention which formed the evidence of -the compact, under which the free people of the -State, and of the United States, are associated for -civil government. Nor, are they recognized by our -political fabrics as subjects of our naturalization -laws; but on the contrary, are, by the Constitution -and laws of the United States, prohibited from -being brought to the United States, either as property, -or as being within the scope and meaning of -our provision relating to naturalization and citizenship -and hence their supposed claim to the exercise -of the great right of free suffrage is and, shall be, -not only not recognized, but prohibited. Resolved -that all free white men of the age of twenty-one -and upwards, who are natural born citizens of this -State, or of any one of the United States, and all -who have been naturalized and admitted to the -rights and privileges as citizens of the United -States by our laws, and who, being inhabitants of -this State, and who have a fixed or known residence -in the county or election district, six months -immediately preceding the day of election, shall be -entitled to vote for members of either house of the -General Assembly, in and for the county or district -in which they may reside.<a id="FNanchor_616" href="#Footnote_616" class="fnanchor">[63]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p class="noindent">These resolutions were referred to the committee of the -whole.</p> - -<p>July 1, Mr. Loving, in the committee of the whole, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>That when this question was first taken up by -the committee he then believed he should content -himself with giving his silent vote, and he remained -of that opinion until he ascertained that -the friends of free persons of color, were much -more numerous than he had first supposed; he was -truly astonished and regretted to see old members, -yes, Mr. Chairman, old gray headed gentlemen in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_171"></a>[171]</span> -plaintive and importuning language, contending -for a proposition to let free negroes, mulattoes, -etc., exercise the highest right and privilege in a -free government—that of the right of suffrage. -He would have supposed that those old members -could ere this have seen the impolicy of such a -course as he was gratified to see that there were -some, who had long since condemned that feature -on our constitution and who were now ready and -even ably contending with him to expunge that -odious and very objectionable feature from the -constitution.</p> - -</div> - -<p class="noindent">Mr. Loving’s arguments against the suffrage for free negroes -were about as follows:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. He objected to making the suffrage a natural -right, an inalienable and inherent right. He -said it did not belong to the state of society, but -grew out of the body politic.</p> - -<p>2. He said that he knew of free colored men of -respectability, probity, and merit, but that particular -cases of merit did not justify a policy of letting -free negroes vote.</p> - -<p>3. He said some gentlemen contended that Tennessee -should let them vote because North Carolina -did. He pointed out in this connection that North -Carolina and Tennessee were the only states in -the Union that let the negroes vote, and that North -Carolina was calling a convention that would disfranchise -them.</p> - -<p>4. He thought that the suffrage, being a conventional -right, should be in the hands of those -who possess the greatest degree of moral and intellectual -cultivation.</p> - -<p>5. He pointed out that the same argument that -was being made in behalf of the free negroes would -give the suffrage to women and children.</p> - -<p>6. He did not think that because some negroes -fought for American Independence in 1776, they -were entitled to the suffrage.<a id="FNanchor_617" href="#Footnote_617" class="fnanchor">[64]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>July 15, Mr. Marr opposed giving the free negro the suffrage -for the following reasons:</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_172"></a>[172]</span></p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. He did not think the convention of 1796 intended -to give him the suffrage, and he opposed -it now for that reason.</p> - -<p>2. He maintained that black and white men -could not live together on terms of equality; they -must separate or one rule the other.</p> - -<p>3. He contended that Tennessee did not have -the power to emancipate her slaves; the Constitution -of the United States prevented it.</p> - -<p>4. He concluded that the voice of the people, -the admonitions of prudence and the want of -power, all directed that this convention should not -give, nor attempt to give, negroes, mulattoes, or -Indians the suffrage.<a id="FNanchor_618" href="#Footnote_618" class="fnanchor">[65]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Mr. Newton Cannon of Williamson County, who was -chairman of the committee of the whole, reported the constitution -in its first form to the convention, July 25, 1834. -Article II, Section 1, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Every free man of the age of twenty-one years -and upwards, being a citizen of the United States, -and an inhabitant of the county of this state wherein -he may offer his vote, six months immediately -preceding the day of election, shall be entitled to -vote for members of the General Assembly and -other civil officers, for the county in which he may -reside.<a id="FNanchor_619" href="#Footnote_619" class="fnanchor">[66]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p class="noindent">It is noticed that at this time the forces for suffrage for the -free negro had won.</p> - -<p>The constitution was now reported as a whole to the convention, -which began to consider it in detail. By July 31, -Article III, Section 1, was reached. Mr. Robert Weakley, -delegate from Davidson County, moved that the word, -“white,” be inserted after the word “free” in Article III, -Section 1. This motion was carried by a vote of 33 to 23.<a id="FNanchor_620" href="#Footnote_620" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> -Mr. Mathew Stephenson of Washington County moved “that -no freeman who is now a resident of this state and who has -heretofore exercised the right of voting shall hereafter be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_173"></a>[173]</span> -debarred from that privilege.” This motion failed by a vote -of 34 to 22.<a id="FNanchor_621" href="#Footnote_621" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> A change of six votes on the first motion -would have given the free negro the suffrage. The liberal -forces in Tennessee politics at this date were stronger than -history has usually acknowledged.</p> - -<h3>V. <span class="smcap">Limitations Upon the Freedom of Free Negroes.</span></h3> - -<p>The free negro was forbidden to entertain a slave in his -home at night or during the Sabbath. For violation of this -restriction, he was fined $2.50 for the first and $5.00 for -each succeeding offense.<a id="FNanchor_622" href="#Footnote_622" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> This fine was increased to $20 -in 1806.<a id="FNanchor_623" href="#Footnote_623" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> If he could not pay these fines, he was hired out -by the constable of his district until his wages amounted to -the fines and all costs.</p> - -<p>There was no restriction on marriage between free negroes, -but a free negro could not marry a slave without the -master’s consent, given in writing and attested by two justices -of the peace. He was fined $25 for an illegal marriage -with a slave, and, if he could not pay the fine, he was forced -to serve the master of the slave for one year.<a id="FNanchor_624" href="#Footnote_624" class="fnanchor">[71]</a></p> - -<p>It was a misdemeanor for a free negro to keep a tippling -house, and subjected him to not less than a fifty dollar fine. -He was also forbidden to sell, give, or loan a slave a gun, -pistol, or sword without the consent of the owner of the -slave.<a id="FNanchor_625" href="#Footnote_625" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> He could not associate with slaves except with the -permission of their owners.<a id="FNanchor_626" href="#Footnote_626" class="fnanchor">[73]</a></p> - -<p>The free negro was required to carry a copy of his registration -with him wherever he went. He could be suspected -at any time or might be stolen. His registration certificate -was his surest guarantee of personal freedom. In -the mere matter of travelling in the community, he was constantly -subject to this limitation. If he crossed county lines, -the certificate was absolutely required.<a id="FNanchor_627" href="#Footnote_627" class="fnanchor">[74]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_174"></a>[174]</span></p> - -<h3>VI. <span class="smcap">The Legal Status of the Free Negro.</span></h3> - -<p>What, then, was the legal status of the free negro? He -was only a quasi-free man. He could sue and be sued. He -could make a contract and inherit property. He enjoyed -legal marriage. He could buy and sell. He could not be a -witness against a white man. He could not vote after 1834. -He was ineligible for office. He was a sort of inmate on -parole. His conduct was frequently guaranteed by bond. -He enjoyed certain privileges and immunities, which the -state might take away from him if it saw fit. He was not -a citizen in the sense in which the term is used in the Constitution -of the United States, and, therefore, was not entitled -to all the privileges and immunities of the several -states. Judge Green, speaking of the free negro’s rights in -the case of the State v. Claiborne, said: “The laws have never -allowed the enjoyment of equal rights, or the immunities of -the free white citizen.”<a id="FNanchor_628" href="#Footnote_628" class="fnanchor">[75]</a></p> - -<p>He had no place in society, socially or economically. He -could not associate with the whites. He could keep the company -of slaves only by permission. His own class was so -small that his opportunities were very limited there. Poverty, -ignorance, oppression, discrimination, and hostility of -both slave and white man made his position in actual life -much worse than his legal status. In the industrial world -there was no place for him. The labor was done by slaves. -There was no factory work for him. He could farm if he -could rent or buy land. He was usually not wanted in the -community.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The black man, in the United States, said Judge -Catron, is degraded by his color, and sinks into -vice and worthlessness from want of motive to virtuous -and elevated conduct. The black man in -these states may have the power of volition. He -may go and come when it pleases him, without a -domestic master to control the actions of his person; -but to be politically free, to be the peer and -equal to the white man, to enjoy the offices, trusts, -and privileges our institutions confer on the white<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_175"></a>[175]</span> -men, is hopeless now and ever. The slave who receives -the protection and care of a tolerable master -holds a condition here superior to the negro who is -freed from domestic slavery. He is a reproach and -a by-word with the slave himself, who taunts his -fellow slave by telling him “he is as worthless as a -free negro.” The consequence is inevitable. The -free black man lives amongst us without motive -and without hope. He seeks no avocation; is surrounded -with necessities, is sunk in degradation; -crime can sink him no deeper, and he commits it, -of course. This is not only true of the free negro -residing in the slaveholding states of the Union. -In non-slaveholding states of this Union the people -are less accustomed to the squalid and disgusting -wretchedness of the negro, have less sympathy for -him, earn their means of subsistence with their own -hands, and are more economical in parting with -them than he for whom the slave labors, for which -he is entitled the proceeds and of which the free -negro is generally the participant, and but too -often in the character of the receiver of stolen -goods. Nothing can be more untrue than that the -free negro is more respectable as a member of -society in the non-slaveholding states than in the -slaveholding states. In each he is a degraded outcast, -and his fancied freedom a delusion. With -us the slave ranks him in character and comfort, -nor is there a fair motive to absolve him from his -duties incident to domestic slavery if he is to continue -amongst us. Generally, and almost universally, -society suffers and the negro suffers by manumission.<a id="FNanchor_629" href="#Footnote_629" class="fnanchor">[76]</a></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_554" href="#FNanchor_554" class="label">[1]</a> Wheeler, p. 279.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_555" href="#FNanchor_555" class="label">[2]</a> Acts of North Carolina, 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_556" href="#FNanchor_556" class="label">[3]</a> Acts of 1801, Ch. 27, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_557" href="#FNanchor_557" class="label">[4]</a> U. S. Census, 1870, I, Population, 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_558" href="#FNanchor_558" class="label">[5]</a> The Genius, II, 136; The Western Freeman, Shelbyville, Tennessee, -Sept. 6, 1831.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_559" href="#FNanchor_559" class="label">[6]</a> Hale and Merrit, II, 296.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_560" href="#FNanchor_560" class="label">[7]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 102, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_561" href="#FNanchor_561" class="label">[8]</a> M. & C., Sec. 2711.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_562" href="#FNanchor_562" class="label">[9]</a> Ibid., Sec. 2712.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_563" href="#FNanchor_563" class="label">[10]</a> Ibid., Sec. 2703.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_564" href="#FNanchor_564" class="label">[11]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 102, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_565" href="#FNanchor_565" class="label">[12]</a> M. & C., Secs. 2704-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_566" href="#FNanchor_566" class="label">[13]</a> Jameson v. McCoy, 5 Humphrey, 118 (1871).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_567" href="#FNanchor_567" class="label">[14]</a> Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 129 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_568" href="#FNanchor_568" class="label">[15]</a> Ibid., 130.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_569" href="#FNanchor_569" class="label">[16]</a> Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 660 (1870).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_570" href="#FNanchor_570" class="label">[17]</a> Acts of 1833, Ch. 81, Secs. 1-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_571" href="#FNanchor_571" class="label">[18]</a> Acts of 1842, Ch. 191, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_572" href="#FNanchor_572" class="label">[19]</a> The Case of F. Gray, 9 Humphrey, 515 (1848).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_573" href="#FNanchor_573" class="label">[20]</a> Ibid., 516.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_574" href="#FNanchor_574" class="label">[21]</a> Ibid., 515.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_575" href="#FNanchor_575" class="label">[22]</a> Acts of 1849, Ch. 107, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_576" href="#FNanchor_576" class="label">[23]</a> Bridge Water v. Pride, 1 Sneed, 197 (1863).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_577" href="#FNanchor_577" class="label">[24]</a> Acts of 1852, Ch. 300, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_578" href="#FNanchor_578" class="label">[25]</a> Acts of 1854, Ch. 50, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_579" href="#FNanchor_579" class="label">[26]</a> Boon v. Lancaster, 1 Sneed, 583-4 (1854).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_580" href="#FNanchor_580" class="label">[27]</a> Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the American Anti-Slavery -Society, 1861, pp. 215-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_581" href="#FNanchor_581" class="label">[28]</a> Acts of 1858, Ch. 45, Secs. 1-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_582" href="#FNanchor_582" class="label">[29]</a> Hale and Merritt, II, 300-301.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_583" href="#FNanchor_583" class="label">[30]</a> Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_584" href="#FNanchor_584" class="label">[31]</a> Acts of 1807, Ch. 100, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_585" href="#FNanchor_585" class="label">[32]</a> Acts of 1825, Ch. 79, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_586" href="#FNanchor_586" class="label">[33]</a> Acts of 1842, Ch. 191, Sec. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_587" href="#FNanchor_587" class="label">[34]</a> Acts of 1831, Ch. 102, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_588" href="#FNanchor_588" class="label">[35]</a> Acts of 1826, Ch. 22, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_589" href="#FNanchor_589" class="label">[36]</a> Acts of 1829, Ch. 23, Sec. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_590" href="#FNanchor_590" class="label">[37]</a> Acts of 1852, Ch. 158, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_591" href="#FNanchor_591" class="label">[38]</a> McDonald, William, Select Charters Illustrative of American -History, 1606-1775, 122, S. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_592" href="#FNanchor_592" class="label">[39]</a> McDonald, Op Cit., 123, Sec. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_593" href="#FNanchor_593" class="label">[40]</a> Col. Recs. of North Carolina, I, 639; State Recs. of N. C., XXIV, -14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_594" href="#FNanchor_594" class="label">[41]</a> Ibid., III, 93, 560.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_595" href="#FNanchor_595" class="label">[42]</a> Ibid., IV, 106; Davis, James, Laws of North Carolina, 79.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_596" href="#FNanchor_596" class="label">[43]</a> Davis, 177-180.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_597" href="#FNanchor_597" class="label">[44]</a> North Carolina Constitution of 1776, Secs, 7, 8, and 9; Col. Recs., -XXIII, 881.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_598" href="#FNanchor_598" class="label">[45]</a> U. S. Statutes at Large, I, 108.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_599" href="#FNanchor_599" class="label">[46]</a> Ibid., First Congress, 1790; Chap. VI, Sec. II, pp. 106-9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_600" href="#FNanchor_600" class="label">[47]</a> Constitution of Frankland, Sec. 4; Ramsey, J. G. M., Annals of -Tennessee, p. 327.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_601" href="#FNanchor_601" class="label">[48]</a> Journal of the Convention of 1796, p. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_602" href="#FNanchor_602" class="label">[49]</a> Ibid., p. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_603" href="#FNanchor_603" class="label">[50]</a> Constitution of 1796, Art. III, Sec. 1; see also Journal of the -Convention of 1796, p. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_604" href="#FNanchor_604" class="label">[51]</a> Ibid., Art. I, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_605" href="#FNanchor_605" class="label">[52]</a> Kentucky Constitution of 1799, Art. 2, Sec. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_606" href="#FNanchor_606" class="label">[53]</a> Journal of the Convention of 1796, pp. 5-6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_607" href="#FNanchor_607" class="label">[54]</a> Caldwell, Joshua W., Constitutional History of Tennessee, 132.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_608" href="#FNanchor_608" class="label">[55]</a> U. S. Census, 1870, I, Population, p. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_609" href="#FNanchor_609" class="label">[56]</a> Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 33d Congress, 1805; 2nd Session, -38th Congress, 284.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_610" href="#FNanchor_610" class="label">[57]</a> The Works of Charles Sumner, X, 192.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_611" href="#FNanchor_611" class="label">[58]</a> Buxton, Rev. Jarvis Bury, Reminiscences of the Bench and Fayetteville -Bar, p. 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_612" href="#FNanchor_612" class="label">[59]</a> Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 126 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_613" href="#FNanchor_613" class="label">[60]</a> Nashville Republican, July 10, 1834.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_614" href="#FNanchor_614" class="label">[61]</a> Nashville Republican and State Gazette, July 1, 1834.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_615" href="#FNanchor_615" class="label">[62]</a> Nashville Republican and State Gazette, June 28, 1834.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_616" href="#FNanchor_616" class="label">[63]</a> Journal of the Convention of 1834, p. 107.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_617" href="#FNanchor_617" class="label">[64]</a> Nashville Republican and State Gazette, July 5, 1834.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_618" href="#FNanchor_618" class="label">[65]</a> Nashville Republican and State Gazette, July 15, 1834.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_619" href="#FNanchor_619" class="label">[66]</a> Journal of the Convention of 1834, p. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_620" href="#FNanchor_620" class="label">[67]</a> Ibid., p. 28.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_621" href="#FNanchor_621" class="label">[68]</a> Ibid., p. 209.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_622" href="#FNanchor_622" class="label">[69]</a> Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_623" href="#FNanchor_623" class="label">[70]</a> Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_624" href="#FNanchor_624" class="label">[71]</a> Acts of 1787, Ch. 6, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_625" href="#FNanchor_625" class="label">[72]</a> Acts of 1835, Ch. 58, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_626" href="#FNanchor_626" class="label">[73]</a> Acts of 1806, Ch. 32, Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_627" href="#FNanchor_627" class="label">[74]</a> Acts of 1807, Ch. 100, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_628" href="#FNanchor_628" class="label">[75]</a> State v. Claiborne, 1 Meigs, 337 (1858).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_629" href="#FNanchor_629" class="label">[76]</a> Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 131 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_176"></a>[176]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VII">CHAPTER VII<br /> -<span class="smcap">Abolition</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>There was throughout the period of slavery in Tennessee -a determined minority that favored its abolition. This minority -was not confined to the non-slaveholders, but as late -as 1834 slaveholders hoped that some method of abolition -would finally be devised. This abolition sentiment expressed -itself in various ways.</p> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">Private Abolition.</span></h3> - -<h4>A. <span class="allsmcap">METHODS.</span></h4> - -<h5>(1) <i>By Deed.</i></h5> - -<p>There were three steps in the process of emancipation by any -method. Two of these were taken by the owner and one by the state. -The owner renounced his right of property in the slave and then -gave bond with good security for his conduct and maintenance. -To complete the process of emancipation, the state’s -consent was necessary. This was given exclusively by the -county courts until 1829,<a id="FNanchor_630" href="#Footnote_630" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> when the Legislature gave the -chancery courts jurisdiction of cases involving wills.<a id="FNanchor_631" href="#Footnote_631" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> After -1854, a petition for emancipation could be filed in any court -of record.<a id="FNanchor_632" href="#Footnote_632" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> Of course, the legislature by virtue of its plenary -power could and did grant petitions for freedom -throughout the period of slavery.<a id="FNanchor_633" href="#Footnote_633" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> The county court could -not consider a petition for emancipation unless nine or a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_177"></a>[177]</span> -majority of the court were present and the consent of two-thirds -of those present was necessary to grant the petition.<a id="FNanchor_634" href="#Footnote_634" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> -The clerk of the court made a record of the emancipation -and gave the slave a copy.<a id="FNanchor_635" href="#Footnote_635" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p> - -<p>One way by which the master could relinquish his property -rights in the slave was by deed. A deed of freedom -to a slave was valid only between him and the owner or -his representatives. It did not operate against the claim of -creditors. A deed of emancipation had to be witnessed and -recorded before it was binding upon the master.<a id="FNanchor_636" href="#Footnote_636" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> Judge -Catron, speaking of a deed of manumission, in the case of -Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>It is binding on the representatives of the divisor -in the one case, and the grantor in the other, -and communicates a right to the slave; but it is an -imperfect right, until the state, the community of -which such emancipated person is to become a -member, assents to the contract between the master -and the slave.<a id="FNanchor_637" href="#Footnote_637" class="fnanchor">[8]</a></p> - -</div> - -<h5>(2) <i>By Will.</i></h5> - -<p>A bequest of freedom by will was binding -between the master or his representative and the slave, -but, until 1829, the slave could not institute suit to complete -the process of freedom in case the representative of the master -failed to take such action. Administrators of estates -took advantage of this weakness of the law. The result -was that either such a negro, being helpless, was reduced to -slavery again, or was left in a state of semi-freedom. In -1829, the state gave the chancery courts jurisdiction of such -cases and gave such a negro the privilege of bringing suit -for his freedom through his next friend.<a id="FNanchor_638" href="#Footnote_638" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> Children born of -a mother who had been emancipated by will but who did not -receive her freedom until the expiration of a term of years<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_178"></a>[178]</span> -received their freedom at the same time the mother received -hers.<a id="FNanchor_639" href="#Footnote_639" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<h5>(3) <i>By Contract.</i></h5> - -<p>The slave could enter into a contract -with his master for his freedom and the courts would enforce -such a contract.<a id="FNanchor_640" href="#Footnote_640" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> This contract might be by parol.<a id="FNanchor_641" href="#Footnote_641" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> -A contract between purchaser and seller to the effect that a -slave be emancipated at a certain date was binding between -the owner and the slave, and invested the slave with the -right to complete the process of freedom after 1829. Such -a contract did not weaken the claim of creditors, nor did it -compel the state to grant the freedom of the slave. The obtaining -of the state’s consent, while conditioned on the initiate -step of the master, was entirely a separate procedure.</p> - -<h5>(4) <i>By Bill of Sale.</i></h5> - -<p>The owner could sell a slave to an -individual or a society, who wanted to emancipate him. -Slaves frequently bought themselves. A free negro sometimes -bought husband or wife and children, and then petitioned -the state to free them. All bills of the sale of slaves -had to be in writing and attested by at least one creditable -witness. If the bill of sale was contested, two witnesses -were required.<a id="FNanchor_642" href="#Footnote_642" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> Philanthropic individuals and societies -could have emancipated a great many slaves, if the state -had not made its consent a necessary part of such manumission. -When one considers how the benevolence of slave -owners or the generosity of societies might have flooded a -community with stupid, ignorant, and vicious negroes, he -can easily see why society asserted the right to regulate the -ownership of this kind of property.</p> - -<h5>(5) <i>By Implication.</i></h5> - -<p>If the master by his acts or treatment -of a slave, or in conversation with another, indicated -that he meant to give a slave his freedom, the courts would -recognize this as a basis for a suit for freedom.<a id="FNanchor_643" href="#Footnote_643" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> The institution<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_179"></a>[179]</span> -of a suit against a slave was an implication of his -freedom, otherwise the bequest had no effect.<a id="FNanchor_644" href="#Footnote_644" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<h5>(6) <i>By the Effect of Foreign Laws.</i></h5> - -<p>If a slave owner of Tennessee moved to a free state with his slaves -to reside permanently, this would indicate his intention to free them. -If on entering such a state with his slaves, he agreed to free -them at a certain future date, this would give the slaves a -cause for a suit of freedom if he should later decide to return -to Tennessee before the expiration of the time set for -their emancipation.<a id="FNanchor_645" href="#Footnote_645" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> Of course, Tennessee laws permitted -a free negro to adopt a master and convey himself into slavery, -but this was voluntary on his part.<a id="FNanchor_646" href="#Footnote_646" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p> - -<h4>B. <span class="allsmcap">THE EXTENT OF EMANCIPATION IN TENNESSEE.</span></h4> - -<p>It is seldom credited to southern slaveholders that they -gave up as much property as the records show that they -did. The slaveholding states practiced real abolition while -New England and the other great abolition sections of the -country were agitators of abolition rather than practitioners -of it. None of their legislation shook the shackles from -a single slave, according to eminent authority,<a id="FNanchor_647" href="#Footnote_647" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> but merely -abolished slavery that did not exist; that is, these acts said -slaves yet unborn would be free at birth, or at certain age. -This was not abolishing slavery by freeing those actually -held in slavery. As a matter of fact, those held in slavery -at the time of the passing of these acts were retained as -slaves until they died, or were sold to Southerners. Of -course, all over the country there was abolition by private -individuals, but the point is, the Southern slaveholders were -the real abolitionists. They actually gave up their property, -and turned loose their slaves. There were 7,300 free -negroes in Tennessee in 1860. Considering the fact that -hundreds of free negroes went to Liberia, Haiti, Canada, -and the free states, from Tennessee, and that hundreds of -free negroes died in the period from 1796 to 1860, it is safe -to say that, at $1000 each, more than ten million dollars’<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_180"></a>[180]</span> -worth of property was surrendered by the abolitionists of -Tennessee. It was largely the small farmer slaveholders -that made this sacrifice for their convictions.</p> - -<h3>II. <span class="smcap">Anti-slavery Leaders.</span></h3> - -<p>Tennessee made a substantial contribution to the anti-slavery -leadership of the nation. There were two groups -of these men. One of them left the state for a larger field -of activity, and might be called Separatists, while the members -of the other group remained at home and fought in -the ranks. These might be called Puritans. Jesse Mills, -Elihu Swain, John Underhill, Jesse Lockhart, Rev. John -Roy, Peter Cartwright, Charles Osborn, and Rev. John Rankin -are examples of those who left the state for abolition -centers.<a id="FNanchor_648" href="#Footnote_648" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></p> - -<p>Rev. John Roy was a Methodist preacher who rode Green -circuit in Tennessee. He was a man of considerable ability, -strong feeling, full of courage, with an iron will. He was -strongly anti-slavery in his sentiment, and for this reason -moved to Indiana, where he died in 1837 in his 69th year.<a id="FNanchor_649" href="#Footnote_649" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> - -<p>Peter Cartwright was one of the greatest preachers of -Methodism. He was a native Virginian, but entered the -Western Conference in 1804. He gave a great part of his -life to the services of the church in Tennessee. He was a -man of great humor and wit, and was a fighter against -slavery. He finally decided that his labors would be more -appreciated in an anti-slavery state, and moved to Illinois -in 1824. He became increasingly bitter against slaveholders -in his old age, and as a delegate from Illinois to the -Methodist Conference in 1844, he voted for the division of -the church.</p> - -<p>Charles Osborn was one of the greatest of these leaders -who left the state. He was born in North Carolina, August -21, 1795. At the age of 19, he moved with his parents to -Tennessee, where he became a Quaker minister. In December, -1814 he organized the manumission movement in -Tennessee, and was its leader until 1816, when he moved<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_181"></a>[181]</span> -to Ohio, where he did his greatest work.<a id="FNanchor_650" href="#Footnote_650" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> George Washington -Julian makes Osborn the undoubted leader in the -abolition movement of the Northwest, of which Ohio was -the center and one of the two centers of the abolition movement -in the nation. Osborn laid the foundation for his -work in his new field, for which Tennessee had prepared -him by environment and previous service, by establishing -at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, in 1817, the Philanthropist, which -Julian regards as the first anti-slavery publication in the -United States.<a id="FNanchor_651" href="#Footnote_651" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> In 1818, Osborn removed to Indiana, -where he lived the remainder of his life.</p> - -<p>Rev. John Rankin was possibly the greatest of those -leaders who saw fit to leave the State to find an environment -more in harmony with his attitude toward slavery. -He was a Presbyterian minister, “who was destined, during -the three decades preceding the Civil War, to occupy a -position of first importance among the anti-slavery workers -of the United States. In 1825, he published his famous -<i>Letters on Slavery</i>, which went through many editions and -exerted a very great influence. Many western men have -called him the ‘father of abolition,’ and it was not an uncommon -thing in the thirties to hear him spoken of as ‘the -Martin Luther of the Cause’.”<a id="FNanchor_652" href="#Footnote_652" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> Rev. Rankin said that in -his early boyhood a majority of the people of East Tennessee -were abolitionists.<a id="FNanchor_653" href="#Footnote_653" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> The first issue of the Emancipator, -referring to the loss of anti-slavery leadership in Tennessee, -said,</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Thousands of first-rate citizens, men remarkable -for their piety and virtue, have within twenty -years past, removed from this and other slave -states to Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, that their eyes -may be hid from seeing the cruel oppressor lacerate -the back of his slaves, and that their ears -may not hear the bitter cries of the oppressed. -I have often regretted the loss of so much virtue<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_182"></a>[182]</span> -from these slave states, which held too little before. -Could all those who have removed from -slave states on that account, to even the single state -of Ohio, have been induced to remove to, and settle -in Tennessee, with their high-toned love for universal -liberty and aversion to slavery, I think that -Tennessee would ere this have begun to sparkle -among the true stars of liberty.<a id="FNanchor_654" href="#Footnote_654" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>James Jones, Samuel Doak, Mr. R. G. Williams, Rev. Philip -Lindsey, and Elihu Embree were the most eminent of -the group of leaders in abolition who chose to stand their -ground and fight straight from the shoulder. James Jones -was another member of the Society of Friends, who were -really the leaders in the anti-slavery movement in Tennessee. -Jones was thoroughly devoted to the cause of abolition, -wrote several addresses for the Tennessee Manumission Society, -and was for several years its president. His untimely -death in 1830 was a serious loss to the cause of humanity -and undoubtedly was the death of the Tennessee -Manumission Society. Benjamin Lundy paid the following -tribute to him at his death:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>A great man has fallen, one of the brightest -stars in the galaxy of American philanthropists -has set, has set to rise no more, James Jones, -President of the Manumission Society of Tennessee—the -steady, ardent and persevering friend of -universal emancipation, is numbered among the -dead.... No language can impress upon the mind -an adequate idea of his many virtues. Suffice it to -say that few men living can fill the station that he -held, with equal honor and usefulness. Long shall -the poor oppressed African mourn for his irreparable -loss.<a id="FNanchor_655" href="#Footnote_655" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>Rev. Samuel Doak was the leader of that strong and able -Presbyterian contingent that came from North Carolina into -Tennessee in the last quarter of the eighteenth century. -He was also the leading educator of the State in his day.<a id="FNanchor_656" href="#Footnote_656" class="fnanchor">[27]</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_183"></a>[183]</span> -He was a graduate of Princeton, and founded in Tennessee -the first institution of learning in the Mississippi Valley.<a id="FNanchor_657" href="#Footnote_657" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> -He was a prominent abolitionist from 1800 to 1830, and -from 1818 he taught immediate abolition. Among his pupils -was Sam Houston, who opposed secession, John Rankin, -and Rev. Jesse Lockhart, who preached and lectured on abolition -in Southern Ohio.<a id="FNanchor_658" href="#Footnote_658" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></p> - -<p>Dr. Philip Lindsey, who was President of the University -of Nashville from 1825 to 1850, was the leader in organizing -the Tennessee Colonization Society. He was its president -for a number of years and was connected with it until his -death. His educational leadership gave the colonization -movement a prestige and influence that could not have come -through any other channel. The University of Nashville in -this period was the leading educational institution of the -State, if not of the South.<a id="FNanchor_659" href="#Footnote_659" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<p>Mr. R. G. Williams was one of the anti-slavery leaders who -helped to make Maryville, in East Tennessee, the seat of -Maryville Seminary, now Maryville College, one of the great -anti-slavery centers of the nation, a forerunner of Oberlin -in Ohio. “We are rejoiced to know,” said The Emancipator -of New York, “that in East Tennessee and directly in the -very center of the slaveholding country, among the fastnesses -of the American Alps, God has secured a little Spartan -band of devoted abolitionists of the best stamp, whom -neither death nor danger can turn,”<a id="FNanchor_660" href="#Footnote_660" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> and a later issue of -The Emancipator, quoting the letter of a student of Maryville -College, said, “We take the liberty to uphold and defend -our sentiments, whether it is agreeable or not to the -selfishness of the slaveholder. We would thankfully receive -any communication on the subject. We have some friends -in the country around, among whom we have the privilege -of distributing without fear a considerable number of -pamphlets. About thirty students in the Theological Seminary -at this place are preparing for the ministry, of whom<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_184"></a>[184]</span> -twelve are abolitionists.” This same issue, quoting a letter -of Mr. R. G. Williams, said: “We could form a good -Anti-slavery Society in this part of the state, but we choose -to work in an unorganized manner a while yet, before we -set ourselves up as a target, notwithstanding the strict laws -of Tennessee. We meet through the country and discuss -the merits of abolition and colonization; the former is ably -defended by Rev. T. S. Kendall, pastor of the Seceder -Church in this county (Blount), and several others.”<a id="FNanchor_661" href="#Footnote_661" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p> - -<p>The most eminent anti-slavery leader in the state was -Elihu Embree. He was a Quaker, son of Thomas and Esther -Embree, of Pennsylvania, born November 11, 1782. -He moved to Tennessee at an early age, and became an iron -manufacturer in East Tennessee. He early espoused the -cause of freedom, and began at Jonesboro, Tennessee, in -1819, the publication of the Manumission Intelligencer as -the mouth-piece of the manumission societies of Tennessee. -He continued this publication until his untimely death in -1820.</p> - -<p>Embree was a radical, outspoken, and uncompromising -abolitionist. He was the leader of the Society of Friends -in their work for abolition in Tennessee. Embree’s writing -and lecturing on abolition did more to advertise the state as -an abolition center in the twenties than the work of all the -others combined. In Garrison’s Life, by his children, there -is an account of the work of Embree, “to whom,” it says, -“must be accorded the honor of publishing the first periodical -in America of which the one avowed object was opposition -to slavery.”<a id="FNanchor_662" href="#Footnote_662" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> Mr. Embree said he “spent several -thousand dollars ... in some small degree abolishing, and in -endeavoring to facilitate the general abolition of slavery.”<a id="FNanchor_663" href="#Footnote_663" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></p> - -<p>Embree had owned seven or eight slaves, but in discussing -his connection with slavery, he said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>“I repent that I ever owned one. And indeed the -crime is of such a hue, that the time may yet come, -that a man who has, in a single instance, gone<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_185"></a>[185]</span> -astray thus far, may never be able in his life time -to regain public confidence; and should this change -of public sentiment take place in my day, and render -me disqualified to act in the promotion of this -glorious cause, I hope to acquiesce in, and be resigned -to suffer the just judgment, and be more -humble under a sense of my past misconduct; -meanwhile I shall doubtless have the pleasure of -rejoicing at seeing this stigma on our religious -professions, and scar upon our national escutcheon, -eradicated by men of clean hands.”<a id="FNanchor_664" href="#Footnote_664" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - -</div> - -<h3>III. <span class="smcap">Abolition Literature.</span></h3> - -<p>The first issue of the Manumission Intelligencer was published -in March, 1819, at Jonesboro, Tennessee. It was a -weekly at first, and, in this form, about fifty issues were -published, eight or ten copies of which are in the possession -of various individuals in Washington County. In 1820, -Embree changed the paper to a monthly octavo and called it -The Emancipator.<a id="FNanchor_665" href="#Footnote_665" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> Due to Embree’s death, December 12, -1820, The Emancipator was forced to discontinue, after a -very prosperous existence of eight months, during which -time a subscription list of 2000 had been secured.<a id="FNanchor_666" href="#Footnote_666" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> The -numbers issued were bound in one volume of one hundred -and twenty pages, a copy of which is in the possession of -Esq. Thomas J. Wilson, who married Mr. Embree’s daughter.</p> - -<p>Embree said that the purpose of “This paper is especially -designed by the editor to advocate the <i>abolition of slavery</i>, -and to be a repository of tracts on that interesting and important -subject. It will contain all the necessary information -that the editor can obtain of the progress of the abolition -of slavery of the descendants of Africa, together with a -concise history of their introduction into slavery, collected -from the best authority.”<a id="FNanchor_667" href="#Footnote_667" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_186"></a>[186]</span></p> - -<p>Mr. Embree, in discussing the progress of abolition in -Tennessee and his publication, said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Twenty years ago, the cause of abolition was so -unpopular in Tennessee that it was at the risk of a -man’s life that he interfered or assisted in establishing -the liberty of a person of color that was -held in slavery, though held contrary to law. The -lives of some of my intimate acquaintances, I well -recollect to have been threatened, who had felt it -their duty to aid some out of their unlawful thralldom. -And it was sufficient in those times to procure -a man the general hatred of his neighbors, -although he never even succeeded, and the case -made plain that the poor negro was not lawfully a -slave. But by little and little, times are much -changed here, until societies of respectable citizens -have arisen to plead the cause of abolition; and instead -of it being a disgrace to a man to be a member -of these societies, it is rather a mark of the -goodness of his heart, and redounds to his honor. -I have no hesitation in believing that less than -twenty years ago a man would have been mobbed, -and the printing office torn down for printing and -publishing anything like the Emancipator; whereas -it now meets the approbation of thousands, and -is patronized perhaps at least equal to any other -paper in the State.<a id="FNanchor_668" href="#Footnote_668" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>There was a very close connection between Embree’s publication -and those of Lundy and Garrison. Lundy was a -contributor to Osborn’s Philanthropist, published at Mount -Pleasant, Ohio, and made two trips to see Osborn about becoming -connected with his publication. The contest over -the admission of Missouri attracted Lundy’s interest, and -before this matter was settled, Osborn had sold his paper. -Meanwhile, Embree had established at Jonesboro, Tennessee, -The Emancipator. Lundy now abandoned the idea of -an anti-slavery journal, but, on learning of Embree’s death -in 1820, he decided that the anti-slavery forces must have -an organ. In July, 1821, at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, he issued -the first number of The Genius of Universal Emancipation.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_187"></a>[187]</span> -Lindsay Swift, in his life of Garrison, said: “It was the legitimate -successor in spirit of Elihu Embree’s Emancipator, -started the year previous in Tennessee.”<a id="FNanchor_669" href="#Footnote_669" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> Lundy published -only eight numbers of The Genius in Ohio, when he -was persuaded by Embree’s friends to remove The Genius -to Tennessee and publish it on Embree’s press.<a id="FNanchor_670" href="#Footnote_670" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> He, accordingly, -bought Embree’s press and the subscription list -to his Emancipator, and published The Genius in Tennessee -for nearly three years.<a id="FNanchor_671" href="#Footnote_671" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> Lundy in a letter, dated March 16, -1823, said: “My paper circulates well. If any person had -told me when I commenced that I should be as successful -under all my disadvantages as I have been, I could not have -believed him.”<a id="FNanchor_672" href="#Footnote_672" class="fnanchor">[43]</a></p> - -<p>Tennessee is really the mother of abolition literature in -the United States. She was the original home of The Manumission -Intelligencer and The Emancipator, became the seat -of The Genius of Universal Emancipation, and sent out -Osborn who established The Philanthropist in Ohio. Of -course, Lundy was the inspiration of Garrison, who decided -to establish The Liberator after his association with Lundy, -and this publication is just as truly a continuation of The -Genius as it was the prolonged life of The Emancipator. Instead -of assigning first place to the work of Garrison, as -Johnson’s Life of Garrison, Greeley’s History of American -Conflict, Wilson’s History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave -Power, and Von Holst’s Constitutional and Political History -of the United States do, it seems that this pioneer work of -Embree really made possible the work of Lundy and Garrison.</p> - -<h3>IV. <span class="smcap">Petitions to the Legislature for Abolition.</span></h3> - -<p>From 1815 to 1834, the legislature was constantly petitioned -by the abolitionists of the state. These petitions -prayed for easier conditions of emancipation, better treatment -of slaves, prevention of separation of husband and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_188"></a>[188]</span> -wife, prohibition of the entrance of slaves into the state, -and some plan of disestablishment of slavery. The Scriptures, -the Constitution of the United States, the Bill of -Rights, Declaration of Independence, and the laws of nature -were usually made the basis of these petitions.</p> - -<p>In 1817, one of the most suggestive of these petitions was -presented. This petition proposed that the courts be empowered -in granting petitions for freedom to require the -master to “give to those he is discharging a lease on lands -for years, free of rent, charge and taxes, with provisions -adequate for the first year, with a limited portion of stock -and articles of husbandry.”<a id="FNanchor_673" href="#Footnote_673" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> “For years,” it states, “we -have seen monied aristocracies rising in our land; and -wealth attaching reverence, and creating distinction; in -proportion as these evils shall increase, will men’s consciences -be seared and their minds turned against the rights -and liberties of those, who constitute an essential part of -their wealth.” It also called attention to the need for additional -protection for free negroes, and suggested that it be -made a felony to steal and sell a free negro into slavery. -It also pointed out that the young free negroes with neither -father nor mother alive or free should be attached to suitable -persons, preferably their emancipators, to be “reared -to habits of industry, and prepared for the duties of life.”<a id="FNanchor_674" href="#Footnote_674" class="fnanchor">[45]</a> -This petition was signed by eighty-eight citizens, among -whom was Jno. H. Eaton, later Andrew Jackson’s Secretary -of War.</p> - -<p>In 1815, there was a petition presented to the legislature, -signed by four hundred and four citizens, of whom twenty-two -were slaveholders, asking that a general plan for disestablishing -slavery be enacted. There were thirty-six -petitions, signed by 2153 persons, presented to the legislature -in 1817,<a id="FNanchor_675" href="#Footnote_675" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> and twenty-one petitions signed by 2253 persons -in 1819.<a id="FNanchor_676" href="#Footnote_676" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> The Manumission Society of Tennessee presented -a petition to the legislature in 1819, asking that the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_189"></a>[189]</span> -children of slaves be emancipated at a certain age, that -slaves capable of supporting themselves be manumitted -without the assumption of heavy obligations by their masters, -and that the “inhuman and barbarous practice of trading -in slaves be prohibited.”</p> - -<p>These petitions became more numerous in the later twenties. -In 1825, there were 497 petitions presented to the -legislature; in 1827, there were 2818, and 1328 in 1829. -These petitions were signed by hundreds. In addition to -these circulated petitions, there were many individual requests -for the permission to emancipate entire families -without security, or with permission for the negroes to remain -in the state.</p> - -<h3>V. <span class="smcap">Abolition in the Convention of 1834.</span></h3> - -<p>“It is supposed,” said the Nashville Republican, February -20, 1834, “that efforts will be made to insert a provision for -the gradual abolition of slavery, and perhaps the colonization -of our colored population. Upon the propriety of this -step we shall not at present decide. Much would depend -upon the nature of the provision, whether well adapted to -our present and future condition. The legislature of Tennessee -has already taken up the cause of colonization, and -made, perhaps, as liberal provision for it as our finances -permitted. The nature of things, the march of public opinion, -the voice of religion, all have said that American slavery -must have an end. What shall be the legislative measures -to that effect, and where they shall begin, are questions -for prudence to determine.”<a id="FNanchor_677" href="#Footnote_677" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></p> - -<p>In accordance with this prophecy, as soon as the convention -was organized, petitions were presented, proposing -the following amendment to the constitution:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>All slaves born within the limits of the state of -Tennessee from and after the first day of January, -1835, shall be free, together with their issue, upon -the said slaves, so born, as aforesaid, arriving at -the age of twenty-one years, and upon condition -that within one year after their so arriving at the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_190"></a>[190]</span> -age of twenty-one years, they, together with their -issue, remove without the limits of the state of -Tennessee, and never return to reside therein—and -that any slave or slaves who reside without -the limits of the state of Tennessee, on or after -the first day of January, 1835, and who may afterwards -be brought within the limit of the said state -to reside, or who remain within the said limits for -a term of more than sixty days under any pretence -whatever, such slave or slaves shall be free, -and all slaves who shall have attained the said age -of twenty-one years, and who shall not have removed -without the limits of said state within 12 -months thereafter, shall be hired out by some authority, -prescribed by the legislature for one, two, -or three years, and the proceeds of their labor, appropriated -for defraying the expense of removing -them to Liberia, in Africa, or to such places without -the limits of the United States as may be considered -suitable for their reception, and for providing -for their substance for twelve months after -their arrival at their new home.<a id="FNanchor_678" href="#Footnote_678" class="fnanchor">[49]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>The convention, despite the efforts of a determined minority, -well backed by its constituency, steadily refused to -consider these memorials on slavery. They were at first -merely read and laid on the table. On May 30, Mr. Stephenson, -of Washington County, moved the appointment of a -committee of thirteen, one from each congressional district, -to whom the memorials should be referred, and who should -report to the convention a plan for the disestablishment of -slavery. This motion was lost on June 2.<a id="FNanchor_679" href="#Footnote_679" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> June 6, Mr. -Allen, of Sumner County, moved the appointment of a committee -of three, one from each division of the state, to draft -resolutions, giving reasons why the convention refused to -consider the petitions of the memorialists. After vain attempts -to amend the motion, it prevailed. The president of -the convention appointed a committee of three, consisting -of Messrs. Allen, John A. McKinney, and Huntsman.<a id="FNanchor_680" href="#Footnote_680" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> Mr. -Fogg of Davidson County, was substituted on the committee<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_191"></a>[191]</span> -for Mr. Allen, and Mr. McKinney was made chairman. -On motion of Mr. McKinney, the memorial on slavery was -turned over to the committee.</p> - -<p>June 19, the committee reported through its chairman, -Mr. John A. McKinney. The report is very clever in its -arguments and significant for its admissions and professions. -It was really a polite apology for slavery. It gave -the following as the main reasons that the convention refused -to consider the memorials on slavery:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>1. That if Tennessee were to say that the children -of all slaves born after a specified time would -become free at a certain age, it would mean either -that these slaves would be sold to other slave states -before they became free, or that their masters -would go there with them.<a id="FNanchor_681" href="#Footnote_681" class="fnanchor">[52]</a></p> - -<p>2. That such congregating of slaves would aggravate -their situation and tend toward a servile -war.<a id="FNanchor_682" href="#Footnote_682" class="fnanchor">[53]</a></p> - -<p>3. “That in Tennessee, slaves are treated with -as much humanity as in any part of the world, -where slavery exists. Here they are well clothed -and fed, and the labor they have to perform is not -grievous nor burdensome.”<a id="FNanchor_683" href="#Footnote_683" class="fnanchor">[54]</a></p> - -<p>4. That the slaves of Tennessee do not want to -leave the state and that, if their wishes are respected, -the prayers of the memorialists will not be -granted.</p> - -</div> - -<p>This report admits that slavery is a great evil and utters -the following prophecy of its abolition: “The ministers of -our holy religion will knock at the door of the hearts of the -owners of slaves, telling every one of them to let his bondsman -and his bondswoman go free, and to send them back -to the land of their forefathers, and the voice of these holy -men will be heard and obeyed, and even those who lend a -deaf ear to the admonitions in the hour of death, will, on a -bed of sickness and at the approach of death, make provision -for the emancipation of their slaves, and for their<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_192"></a>[192]</span> -transportation to their home on the coast of Africa.”<a id="FNanchor_684" href="#Footnote_684" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> -This report was adopted by the convention by a vote of 44 -to 10.</p> - -<p>Mathew Stephenson, of Washington County, supported -by John McGoughey, Richard Bradshaw, and James Gillespey, -prepared a protest to the committee’s report in which -they said:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>We believe that the importance of the subject, -deeply involving the interest and safety of the -State, both in a political and moral point of view, -together with the number and respectability of the -memorialists, merited from this convention a more -respectful notice and consideration, than merely -to appoint a committee of three, with instructions -to give reasons why the convention would not take -up and consider the matter.<a id="FNanchor_685" href="#Footnote_685" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>This protest from members of the Convention was supported -by petitions from the anti-slavery forces in the state. -A petition from the citizens of Jefferson called attention to -some of the weaknesses of the report of the committee of -three, such as the admission of the great evil of slavery, its -subversiveness of republican institutions, the selling of -slaves to the more southern slaveholding states, the pitiable -condition of the free negroes, which was equally applicable -to white men, and the fallacy of the argument that Tennessee -would ever be more favorable to emancipation.</p> - -<p>The protest of this committee, re-enforced by these “loud -and reiterated calls, for at least some prospective relief from -the evils” of slavery, persuaded the convention to make a -more detailed analysis of the memorials of slavery in order -to make its position clear to the people of the state. On -July 9, a motion was adopted to re-commit the memorials -on slavery to the committee of three for a second report.</p> - -<p>The second report of the Committee of three showed that -there were 1804 signatures to the memorials and that only -105 of these were designated as slaveholders.<a id="FNanchor_686" href="#Footnote_686" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> The report<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_193"></a>[193]</span> -admitted that there might be some signatures of slaveholders -not so designated, but that such a number was likely inconsiderable. -The report showed that the slaveholding petitioners -did not represent the owners of five hundred -slaves, and probably not of half that number, while the -owners of one hundred and fifty thousand slaves were unrepresented -by the memorialists.</p> - -<p>The memorialists represented the counties of Washington, -Greene, Jefferson, Cocke, Sevier, Blount, McMinn, Monroe, -Knox, Rhea, Roane, Overton, Bedford, Lincoln, Maury, and -Robertson, distributed as follows: two hundred and seventy-three -in Washington; three hundred and seventy-eight in -Greene; thirty-three in Maury; sixty-seven in Overton; -twenty-four in Robertson; one hundred and five in Lincoln; -one hundred and thirty-nine in Bedford; and smaller numbers -in the other nine counties from which the petitions -were presented.<a id="FNanchor_687" href="#Footnote_687" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> The number of memorialists was rather -small as compared with the five hundred and fifty thousand -population of the state, and was almost entirely unrepresentative -of the slaveocracy of the state.</p> - -<p>The committee further showed that almost all the petitions -presented a plan of emancipation. About one-half -of the memorialists asked that all slave children born after -1835 be made free, and that all slaves in the state be made -free by 1855. They asked that all negroes be sent out of -the state. The other memorials asked that all the slaves -be emancipated by 1866 and colonized.</p> - -<p>The committee thought, “to assert that the hundred and -fifty thousand slaves now in this state, together with their -increase, could be emancipated and colonized in the short -term of twenty-one or even thirty-two years, with the aid of -means at the command of the State, is a proposition so full -of absurdity, that no person in his sober senses, who had -taken any time to reflect on the subject, would possibly -maintain.”<a id="FNanchor_688" href="#Footnote_688" class="fnanchor">[59]</a></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_194"></a>[194]</span></p> - -<p>This report was followed by another protest, July 21, -made by a committee consisting of Mathew Stephenson, -Richard Bradshaw, and John McGoughey, to the effect that -the memorialists were not fairly treated by the convention, -and that the committee of three rather labored in its report -to ridicule their petitions instead of answering them by proposing -some constructive plan of abolition.</p> - -<p>Mr. Joseph Kincaid protested against the reference made -in the second report of the committee to the free negro. -The report stated that, “Unenviable as is the condition of the -slave, unlovely as is slavery in all its aspects, bitter as the -draught may be that the slave is doomed to drink, nevertheless, -his condition is better than the condition of the free -man of color, in the midst of a community of white men -with whom he has no common interest, no fellow-feeling, -no equality.”<a id="FNanchor_689" href="#Footnote_689" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> “From the above conclusions, which the -committee arrived at in their report, it would seem,” said -Mr. Kincaid, “that they hold slavery to be a more enviable -situation, than that of freedom under the above circumstances: -Therefore, it would seem to follow, that those colored -people, who are now free, should be subjected to slavery, -in order to better their condition—and that slavery -should be rendered perpetual.”<a id="FNanchor_690" href="#Footnote_690" class="fnanchor">[61]</a></p> - -<p>Despite the persistent efforts of a small though respectable -minority in behalf of abolition, it cannot be said that the -convention at any stage of its proceedings evinced any pronounced -anti-slavery attitude. It was more anti-negro than -anti-slavery. It deplored the existence of slavery, and indicated -that in the course of time colonization might eliminate -slavery. In anticipation of a possible compensated -emancipation, the convention inserted a clause in the constitution -by a vote of 30 to 27, forbidding the legislature to -abolish slavery without the consent of the owners and without -paying them a money equivalent for the slaves emancipated. -It was later attempted to place a constitutional<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_195"></a>[195]</span> -prohibition on compensated emancipation, but it failed by -a vote of 3 to 20.<a id="FNanchor_691" href="#Footnote_691" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p> - -<h3>VI. <span class="smcap">Abolition Sentiment After 1834.</span></h3> - -<p>There continued to be anti-slavery forces in the state as -long as slavery existed. In 1835, there was organized at -Rock Creek, in East Tennessee, an abolition society that advocated -immediate abolition. It was one of three abolition -societies at this time in the entire South, the other two -being in Virginia and Kentucky. This society lasted only -two years.<a id="FNanchor_692" href="#Footnote_692" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> In 1836, fifty-five citizens of Rhea County -sent a petition to the legislature, protesting against a law -that the legislature had passed making it a penitentiary offence -to receive abolition literature. This protest states, -“that said law is too bloody, too tyrannical and too despotic -to govern a free people which we profess to be in practice -and should be in theory.” The petitioners further state -that they are “opposed to the manner in which such law -has curtailed our most sacred privileges, the free communication -of thought upon any subject provided we tell the -truth.”<a id="FNanchor_693" href="#Footnote_693" class="fnanchor">[64]</a> The Maryville Intelligencer, issued at the seat -of Maryville College, published reports of the synods of the -Presbyterian Church, yet the editor remarked that “this -publication, we must remember, is after a law making it -penal in Tennessee to receive any anti-slavery paper or -pamphlet, yes, making it a penitentiary offense to receive -this very report of the Kentucky Synod.”<a id="FNanchor_694" href="#Footnote_694" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> Hon. John M. -Lea made one of the last anti-slavery addresses in Tennessee -before the Apprentices’ Union at Nashville in 1841.<a id="FNanchor_695" href="#Footnote_695" class="fnanchor">[66]</a> In -1849, the Jonesboro Whig said: “In Tennessee, the residence -of James K. Polk, especially in East Tennessee, anti-slavery -sentiments are strong and decided.” The Knoxville Tribune -at this same time was publishing a series of papers on<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_196"></a>[196]</span> -abolition, advocating the calling of a constitutional convention -to amend the constitution to “open the way for the full -and final redemption of the state.”<a id="FNanchor_696" href="#Footnote_696" class="fnanchor">[67]</a></p> - -<p>A correspondent from Tennessee in the New York Observer, -writing on abolition in the state, said in 1849:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>The question is being a good deal agitated, and -fully discussed. Many who own slaves oppose the -institution, and non-slaveholders almost to a man. -In my neighborhood of some five miles square, -there are about eighty families, and a number of -them own slaves, and there is but one advocate of -slavery. A slaveholder said, “It is of no use to -avoid the question any longer. The sooner it is -settled the better, for God has declared that right -shall prevail, and slavery must end.” Another individual -who occupies a high station in society said, -“Agitate the question and anti-slavery will prevail.” -I might produce hundreds, yes, thousands -of expressions of opinion equally strong and decisive. -The great difficulty seems to be as to the -means of getting rid of the evil.<a id="FNanchor_697" href="#Footnote_697" class="fnanchor">[68]</a></p> - -</div> - -<p>While there was this anti-slavery minority expressing -itself in an intermittent way after 1834, the great majority -of the state was thoroughly pro-slavery. In 1835, Rev. -Amos Dresser, an active member of the Abolition Society -of Ohio, was arrested in Nashville for publishing and circulating -pamphlets among the slaves to incite them to insurrection. -The Committee of Vigilance and Safety, consisting -of sixty-two citizens, tried him and found him guilty. -He was sentenced to receive twenty stripes on his bare -back and to leave the city within twenty-four hours. He -received the flogging, and did not wait for the expiration -of the twenty-four hours.<a id="FNanchor_698" href="#Footnote_698" class="fnanchor">[69]</a></p> - -<p>Public meetings were generally held, denouncing such -insurrectionists and their accomplices. It was reported -that Arthur Tappan and others of New York City had furnished -funds to aid the circulation of abolition literature<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_197"></a>[197]</span> -in the state. At one of these meetings held by the Committee -of Vigilance and Safety, the merchants of Tennessee -were requested to boycott Arthur Tappan and Company and -all other abolitionists. These incidents were largely responsible -for the Act of 1836 mentioned above and the Gag -Resolution in Andrew Jackson’s administration. In the -debate in the Senate on the Calhoun Resolution, both of the -senators from Tennessee, Hugh Lawson White and Felix -Grundy, defended the flogging of Rev. Dresser. Senator -Grundy advocated a “summary disposal of such abolitionists.”<a id="FNanchor_699" href="#Footnote_699" class="fnanchor">[70]</a></p> - -<p>Tennessee was never a unit on the slavery question. There -were scattered groups of abolitionists throughout the state -as long as slavery existed, while East Tennessee was almost -solidly anti-slavery. The contest over slavery in the convention -of 1834, in the churches, and in politics created divisions -among the people of the state that have had a permanent -influence upon the life of the state.</p> - -<p>It is singularly true, however, that Tennessee did finally -abolish slavery by popular vote. She was the only one of -the Confederate States that was excepted from President -Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation of 1863<a id="FNanchor_700" href="#Footnote_700" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> and that -abolished slavery by its own act. There was an attempt -to hold a convention of Union men in Nashville in the fall -of 1864, but the Confederate army in the vicinity of Nashville -made it unsafe for the convention to meet. It did meet -January 8, 1865, and on the ninth recommended that Article -II, Section 31, of the Constitution of 1834, to the effect that -“the General Assembly shall have no power to pass laws -for the emancipation of slaves without the consent of their -owner or owners,” be abrogated and that slavery be abolished -forever, and the legislature be forbidden to re-establish -property in man. These proposed constitutional changes -were submitted to popular vote of the Union men, February<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_198"></a>[198]</span> -22, 1865, and Andrew Johnson as military governor of -Tennessee announced that the amendments had been adopted -and that “the shackles have been formally stricken from -the limbs of more than 275,000 slaves in the state.”<a id="FNanchor_701" href="#Footnote_701" class="fnanchor">[72]</a></p> - -<p>“The amended constitution of the State of Tennessee -adopted on the 22nd of February, 1865,” said Judge Shackelford -in 1865, “prohibits slavery or voluntary servitude, -in the State of Tennessee, and it has forever ceased to exist.”<a id="FNanchor_702" href="#Footnote_702" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> -It is clear, then, that his amendment was not the -ratification of President Lincoln’s Proclamation, which did -not apply to Tennessee, but was itself the act of emancipation -by which the slaves of Tennessee ceased to be property -and became free men.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<h3>FOOTNOTES</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_630" href="#FNanchor_630" class="label">[1]</a> Acts of 1777, Ch. 6, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_631" href="#FNanchor_631" class="label">[2]</a> Acts of 1829, Ch. 29, Sec. 1. A special legislative grant was requisite -for a valid emancipation in Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, -and Mississippi. See James’ Dig., 398, Act of 1820; Prince’s Dig., -456, Act of 1801; Toulman’s Dig., 632; Mississippi Rev. Code, 386. -In North Carolina and Tennessee, the courts granted emancipation—Haywood’s -Manual, 525; Act of 1801, Ch. 27. In Kentucky, Missouri, -Virginia, and Maryland, the master exercised this power under -rules and regulations established by the statutes of these states. 2 Litt. -and Swi., 1155; 2 Missouri Laws, 744; 1 Rev. Code of Virginia, 433; -Maryland Laws, Act of 1809, Ch. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_632" href="#FNanchor_632" class="label">[3]</a> Acts of 1854, Ch. 50, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_633" href="#FNanchor_633" class="label">[4]</a> Petitions in State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_634" href="#FNanchor_634" class="label">[5]</a> Acts of 1801, Ch. 27, Sec. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_635" href="#FNanchor_635" class="label">[6]</a> Ibid., Sec. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_636" href="#FNanchor_636" class="label">[7]</a> Acts of 1784, Ch. 10, Sec. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_637" href="#FNanchor_637" class="label">[8]</a> Fisher’s Negroes v. Dabbs, 6 Yerger, 119 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_638" href="#FNanchor_638" class="label">[9]</a> Acts of 1829, Ch. 29, Sec. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_639" href="#FNanchor_639" class="label">[10]</a> Harris v. Clarissa, 6 Yerger, 227 (1834).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_640" href="#FNanchor_640" class="label">[11]</a> Acts of 1833, Ch. 81, Sec. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_641" href="#FNanchor_641" class="label">[12]</a> Lewis v. Simonton, 8 Humphrey, 189 (1847).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_642" href="#FNanchor_642" class="label">[13]</a> Acts of 1784, Ch. 10, Sec. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_643" href="#FNanchor_643" class="label">[14]</a> Lewis v. Simonton, 8 Humphrey, 189 (1847).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_644" href="#FNanchor_644" class="label">[15]</a> Wheeler, p. 385.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_645" href="#FNanchor_645" class="label">[16]</a> Ibid., p. 335.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_646" href="#FNanchor_646" class="label">[17]</a> Supra, p. <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_647" href="#FNanchor_647" class="label">[18]</a> Phillips, Ulrich Bonnel, American Negro Slavery, p. 120.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_648" href="#FNanchor_648" class="label">[19]</a> Nile’s Weekly Register, Vol. 14, pp. 321ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_649" href="#FNanchor_649" class="label">[20]</a> McFerrin, I, 150.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_650" href="#FNanchor_650" class="label">[21]</a> Southern History Association Publications, II, 108.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_651" href="#FNanchor_651" class="label">[22]</a> Indiana Historical Society Publications, Vol. 2, pp. 233ff.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_652" href="#FNanchor_652" class="label">[23]</a> Tennessee History Magazine, Vol. 1, p. 264.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_653" href="#FNanchor_653" class="label">[24]</a> Indiana Historical Society Publications, Vol. 2, p. 246.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_654" href="#FNanchor_654" class="label">[25]</a> Hoss, E. E., P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_655" href="#FNanchor_655" class="label">[26]</a> The Genius, II, 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_656" href="#FNanchor_656" class="label">[27]</a> Southern History Association Publications, II, 103.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_657" href="#FNanchor_657" class="label">[28]</a> Phelan, p. 233.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_658" href="#FNanchor_658" class="label">[29]</a> Southern History Association Publications, II, 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_659" href="#FNanchor_659" class="label">[30]</a> The Emancipator, March 8, 1838, p. 175.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_660" href="#FNanchor_660" class="label">[31]</a> Ibid., March 16, 1838, p. 178.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_661" href="#FNanchor_661" class="label">[32]</a> The Emancipator, March 16, 1838, p. 178.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_662" href="#FNanchor_662" class="label">[33]</a> Garrison’s Garrison, I, 88.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_663" href="#FNanchor_663" class="label">[34]</a> P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_664" href="#FNanchor_664" class="label">[35]</a> P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 22.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_665" href="#FNanchor_665" class="label">[36]</a> Temple, O. P., p. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_666" href="#FNanchor_666" class="label">[37]</a> Weeks, S. R., Southern Quakers and Slavery, p. 239; see also -Martin, A. E., Tennessee History Magazine, Vol. I, p. 267.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_667" href="#FNanchor_667" class="label">[38]</a> Hoss, E. E., P. of V. S. H. S., No. 2, p. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_668" href="#FNanchor_668" class="label">[39]</a> S. H. A. P., II, p. 104.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_669" href="#FNanchor_669" class="label">[40]</a> Swift, Lindsay, Life of Garrison, p. 60.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_670" href="#FNanchor_670" class="label">[41]</a> Earl, Thomas, Life of Benjamin Lundy, pp. 16-20.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_671" href="#FNanchor_671" class="label">[42]</a> Temple, p. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_672" href="#FNanchor_672" class="label">[43]</a> Earl, p. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_673" href="#FNanchor_673" class="label">[44]</a> Petitions of 1817, State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_674" href="#FNanchor_674" class="label">[45]</a> Petitions of 1815, State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_675" href="#FNanchor_675" class="label">[46]</a> Petitions of 1817, State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_676" href="#FNanchor_676" class="label">[47]</a> Petitions of 1819, State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_677" href="#FNanchor_677" class="label">[48]</a> The Nashville Republican, February 20, 1834.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_678" href="#FNanchor_678" class="label">[49]</a> Petitions of 1834, State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_679" href="#FNanchor_679" class="label">[50]</a> Journal of the Convention, p. 72.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_680" href="#FNanchor_680" class="label">[51]</a> Ibid., p. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_681" href="#FNanchor_681" class="label">[52]</a> Journal of the Convention, p. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_682" href="#FNanchor_682" class="label">[53]</a> Ibid., p. 90.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_683" href="#FNanchor_683" class="label">[54]</a> Ibid., p. 91.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_684" href="#FNanchor_684" class="label">[55]</a> Journal of the Convention, p. 93.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_685" href="#FNanchor_685" class="label">[56]</a> Ibid., p. 102.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_686" href="#FNanchor_686" class="label">[57]</a> Ibid., p. 125.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_687" href="#FNanchor_687" class="label">[58]</a> Journal of the Convention, p. 126.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_688" href="#FNanchor_688" class="label">[59]</a> Ibid., p. 127.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_689" href="#FNanchor_689" class="label">[60]</a> Journal of the Convention, p. 89.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_690" href="#FNanchor_690" class="label">[61]</a> Ibid., p. 225.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_691" href="#FNanchor_691" class="label">[62]</a> Ibid., p. 201; Constitution of 1834, Art. II, Sec. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_692" href="#FNanchor_692" class="label">[63]</a> The Liberator, July 25, 1835; American Anti-Slavery Almanac, -December, 1836, p. 47.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_693" href="#FNanchor_693" class="label">[64]</a> Petitions of 1836, State Archives.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_694" href="#FNanchor_694" class="label">[65]</a> Quarterly Anti-slavery Magazine, II, 364.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_695" href="#FNanchor_695" class="label">[66]</a> Hale and Merritt, II, 300.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_696" href="#FNanchor_696" class="label">[67]</a> Ninth Annual Report of American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, -1849, p. 52.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_697" href="#FNanchor_697" class="label">[68]</a> Hale and Merritt, II, 299.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_698" href="#FNanchor_698" class="label">[69]</a> Ibid., p. 300.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_699" href="#FNanchor_699" class="label">[70]</a> Fifth Annual Report of American Anti-slavery Society, 1838, -pp. 72-73.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_700" href="#FNanchor_700" class="label">[71]</a> Andrews v. Page, 3 Heiskell, 658 (1870).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_701" href="#FNanchor_701" class="label">[72]</a> Acts of 1865, pp. IX-XIII.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_702" href="#FNanchor_702" class="label">[73]</a> Nelson v. Smithfeter, 2 Caldwell, 14 (1865). See also Graves v. -Keaton, 3 Caldwell, 14 (1866); Wharton v. The State, 5 Caldwell, 3 -(1867); Bedford v. Williams, 3 Caldwell, 210 (1867).</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_199"></a>[199]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VIII">CHAPTER VIII<br /> -<span class="smcap">Conclusions</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>The periods in the development of slavery in Tennessee -are rather well defined. The institution made no remarkable -progress before 1790. Its growth was slow and gradual. -There were no special forces contributing to its development. -Only the mountainous part of the state was -being settled, and the cotton industry had not developed. -The pioneers were not in thought or manner of living favorable -to slavery. They either did their work single-handed, -or combined with their neighbors in the performance of the -heavier phases of it. Slavery was not a controlling factor, -in a pioneer life characterized largely by hunting, fishing, -trading, and small farming. It was more or less a useless -luxury, which only the more fortunately situated could afford. -Whatever progress slavery made during this period -was due to purely natural forces and conditions. There -were only 3,417 slaves in the state in 1790, and their value -was less than $100 each.</p> - -<p>From 1790 to 1835, slavery expanded very rapidly. In -the first decade of this period, the slave population increased -297.54 per cent; in the second, 227.84 per cent; in -the third, 79.87 per cent; and in the fourth, 76.76 per cent. -There were 183,059 slaves in the state in 1840. Frontier -conditions were largely supplanted by a more prosperous -society. Cotton became the chief agricultural product of -the state. West Tennessee, the part of the state especially -adapted to the production of cotton, was settled during this -period. Tobacco was profitably grown in Middle Tennessee, -with the aid of slave labor. The river valleys of East -Tennessee became cotton producing areas. Slavery in this -period proved to be a profitable labor system in by far the -larger portion of the state. This period is especially characterized -by the growing economic importance of slavery -and the weakening of the abolition sentiment. The slave -was worth about $550 in 1835. The state reversed its<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_200"></a>[200]</span> -policy toward the free negro in 1831, disfranchised him in -1834, and refused in the convention of 1834 even to consider -abolition.</p> - -<p>From 1835 to 1855, there was practically one opinion in -the state on the slavery question. There was a dissenting -minority, but it was so inconsiderable as to be almost negligible. -The prevailing opinion was that abolition was impracticable. -The slaves were not regarded as being able -to sustain themselves. They were not prepared for the -duties of citizenship. The state was not financially able to -purchase them and colonize them. It was held that any -policy the state might adopt would in its execution require -the coöperation of the other slaveholding states. The more -seriously the problem was attacked, the larger the proportions -which it assumed. Slavery appeared from every angle -to be a permanent institution. This conclusion led to a -policy of safeguarding its interests, and improving the condition -of the slaves. Legislation restricting emancipation, -preventing influx of free negroes, and establishing voluntary -enslavement was enacted. The change in the attitude -of the churches during this period enabled them to have -more influence over the slaveholders and to establish closer -relations with the slaves. The churches constantly insisted -upon a humane treatment of the slaves.</p> - -<p>There are several outstanding features of Tennessee slavery -that deserve special emphasis. The state, until the -early thirties, may be ranked along with Ohio and New -England as an abolition center. Tennessee had more abolition -societies in 1825 than any other state in the Union except -North Carolina. In 1840, there were 5,524 free negroes -in the state. Maryville College, at Maryville, Tennessee, -was a center of abolition propaganda. Union University, -at Murfreesboro, Tennessee, numbered active abolitionists -in its faculty. The state was the birth-place of -the first out-right abolition paper published in the United -States, and it became the connecting-link between Lundy -and Garrison. The state sent a number of anti-slavery -leaders into Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. The Tennessee -churches were uniformly anti-slavery until they saw they<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_201"></a>[201]</span> -were losing their membership and were being ostracized -from the proper contact with the slaves. As long as slavery -existed in the state, manumission continued, despite legal -restriction, as an expression of an active anti-slavery sentiment.</p> - -<p>The slave’s legal status in Tennessee was exceptionably -favorable. The law guaranteed to him shelter, food, clothing, -and medical attention. It protected him against the -violence of his master and of society. It prevented avaricious -masters from emancipating him when he ceased to be -productive and gave him the right to institute suit for his -freedom. It permitted him to contract for his freedom -against administrators of estates who were seeking to hold -him in slavery. It furnished free counsel for his defense -when his interests were in jeopardy. It also gave him trial -by the same jury that the white man had.</p> - -<p>The patrol system was an elaborate system of government -for a non-citizen class. It was, however, a government -of law. Its administrative agents included searchers, -patrols, magistrates, sheriffs, constables, masters and mistresses. -Every citizen was subject to patrol duty. These -agents enforced a code that reduced almost every activity -and relation of the slave to a basis of law. The patrol system -was characterized by a careful consideration of the -slave’s weaknesses and, with its patriarchal supervision, -gave him a respect for authority that partially prepared -him to be a citizen in a government of law. It is singularly -true that Tennessee negroes today enjoy a greater participation -in politics than any other Southern negroes. The -background for this status and friendly attitude is to be -found in the ante-bellum politics of the state.</p> - -<p>The finest expression of Tennessee’s attitude toward the -negro slave is found in the genuinely humane treatment accorded -him. He was well fed, clothed, and housed. The -evils of the absentee landlord system with its overseer and -slave-driver were never prevalent. The small farmer was -considerate of his welfare. The churches constantly sought -to improve his condition. They reached him indirectly -through their services. Their influence manifested itself<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_202"></a>[202]</span> -in charity, in marriage ceremonies, at the sick-bed, in manumission -societies, in the halls of legislation, and in the benevolent -philosophy of the Christian judge. Efforts at -harsh legislation were either defeated at the time or modified -later by more considered enactments. It has been -abundantly shown, however, that it was the courts of Tennessee -that constituted the bulwark of protection for the -slave. They dealt with him not as a chattel but as a man. -The slave code became in their hands an opportunity and a -means to humanize the institution. They could not annul -the law of slavery, but they did largely abolish it in fact by -their interpretation of it.</p> - -<p>The condition of the free negro was never promising. He -was largely always subject to certain legal restrictions. -The system of registration adopted in 1806, the exclusion act -of 1831, and his disfranchisement in 1834 were expressions -of an increasing hostility toward him. He was always a -possible avenue through which the abolitionists might reach -the slave. This made him a menace to society. His association, -therefore, with slaves was forbidden by law. He -was practically a social outcast. The slaves regarded him -as worthless. Finally, provision was made for his re-enslavement.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="BIBLIOGRAPHY">BIBLIOGRAPHY</h2> - -</div> - -<h3>A. Sources.</h3> - -<h4>I. Records.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Colonial Papers 1661.</p> - -<p>2. Colonial Entry Book No. 73.</p> - -<p>3. Colonial Records of North Carolina, I-X (1662-1776).</p> - -<p>4. State Records of North Carolina, XI-XXVI (1776-1790).</p> - -<p>5. Journal of the Legislative Council of the Southwest -Territory (1794-1796).</p> - -<p>6. Journal of the House of Representatives of the Southwest -Territory (1794-1795).</p> - -<p>7. Annals of Congress, 17th Congress, 1st Session.</p> - -<p>8. Annals of Tennessee, Ramsey, J. G. M., Philadelphia, -1860.</p> - -<p>9. Whig Almanac for the years 1836, 1844, and 1848.</p> - -<p>10. American Anti-slavery Almanac for 1836.</p> - -<p>11. Congressional Globe, 1st Session, 33rd Congress; and -2nd Session, 38th Congress.</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_203"></a>[203]</span></p> - -<h4>II. Documents.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. The Constitution of North Carolina, 1776.</p> - -<p>2. The Constitution of Franklin, 1785.</p> - -<p>3. The Constitution of the United States, 1787.</p> - -<p>4. The Constitution of Kentucky, 1799.</p> - -<p>5. The Constitution of Tennessee, 1796.</p> - -<p>6. The Constitution of Tennessee, 1834.</p> - -<p>7. The Constitution of Tennessee, 1870.</p> - -<p>8. Thorpe, Francis Newton, Federal and State Constitutions, -7 vols., Washington, 1909.</p> - -<p>9. MacDonald, William, Select Charters Illustrative of -American History, New York, 1904.</p> - -<p>10. United States Census of 1850, I, Population.</p> - -<p>11. Statistical Abstract of United States, 1906.</p> - -<p>12. United States Statutes at Large, I.</p> - -<p>13. United States Census of 1870, I, Population.</p> - -<p>14. Colonial and State Statutes of North Carolina, Colonial -Records, Vols. XXIII-XXV (1715-1790).</p> - -<p>15. Statutes of the Southwest Territory, 1790-1795.</p> - -<p>16. Acts of Tennessee.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>a. Public Acts.</p> - -<p class="noindent">1st Sess. (1799), 1st Sess. (1801), 1st Sess. -(1803), 1st Sess. (1806), 1st Sess. (1807), 1st -Sess. (1813), 1st Sess. (1815), 1st Sess. (1817), -1st Sess. (1819), 1st Sess. (1821), 1st Sess. -(1823), 1st Sess. (1825), Extra Sess. (1826), -1st Sess. (1827), 1st Sess. (1829), 1st Sess. -(1831), 1st Sess. (1832), 1st Sess. (1833), 1st -Sess. (1835-6), 1st Sess. (1837-8), 1st Sess. -(1839), 1st Sess. (1839), 1st Sess. (1842), 1st -Sess. (1843-4), 1st Sess. (1846), 1st Sess. (1847-8), -1st Sess. (1849-50), 1st Sess. (1851-2), 1st -Sess. (1853-4), 1st Sess. (1855-6), 1st Sess. -(1857-8), 1st Sess. (1861), 1st Sess. (1865).</p> - -<p>b. Private Acts.</p> - -<p class="noindent">Called Sess. (1824), 1st Sess. (1833).</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<h4>III. General Slave Treatises.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Dobb, T. R. R., Inquiry into the Law of Negro Slavery -in the United States, Philadelphia, 1858.</p> - -<p>2. Goodell, William, The American Slave Code in Theory -and Practice, New York, 1853.</p> - -<p>3. Hurd, John Codman, Laws of Freedom and Bondage, -2 Vols., Boston, 1858-1862.</p> - -<p>4. Straud, George M., Sketch of the Laws Relating to -Slavery, Philadelphia, 1856.</p> - -<p>5. Wheeler, Jacob D., A Practical Treatise on the Law -of Slavery, New York, 1837.</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_204"></a>[204]</span></p> - -<h4>IV. North Carolina Codes.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Davis, James, Laws of North Carolina (this is really -an edition of Swann’s Laws), New Berne, 1752.</p> - -<p>2. Iredell, James, Laws of North Carolina, Edenton, -1791.</p> - -<p>3. Swann, Samuel, Laws of North Carolina, New Berne, -1752.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>V. Codes of Tennessee.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Caruthers, R. L., Laws of Tennessee, Nashville, 1810.</p> - -<p>2. Caruthers, R. L., and Nicholson, A. O. P., Statutes of -Tennessee (1786-1836).</p> - -<p>3. Haywood, John, Laws of Tennessee, Nashville, 1810.</p> - -<p>4. Haywood, John, and Cobb, Robt. L., Laws of Tennessee, -Nashville, 1831.</p> - -<p>5. Meigs, Return J., and Cooper, William F., Code of -Tennessee, Nashville, 1858.</p> - -<p>6. Nicholson, A. O. P., Laws of Tennessee, Nashville, -1846.</p> - -<p>7. Scott, Edward, Laws of Tennessee (1715-1820).</p> - -</div> - -<h4>VI. Court Reports of North Carolina and Tennessee.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Caldwell, Thomas H., 7 Vols. (1860-1870), Columbia, -Mo., 1906.</p> - -<p>2. Hawks, Francis L., 3 Vols. (1821-1825), Winston, -N. C., 1897.</p> - -<p>3. Head, John W., 3 Vols. (1858-1859), Columbia, Mo., -1906.</p> - -<p>4. Heiskell, Joseph B., 12 Vols. (1870-1874), Louisville, -Ky., 1903.</p> - -<p>5. Humphrey, West H., 11 Vols. (1839-1851), Louisville, -Ky., 1903.</p> - -<p>6. Lea, Benjamin J., 16 Vols. (1878-1886), Louisville, -Ky., 1902.</p> - -<p>7. Martin, John H., and Yerger, George S., 1 Vol. (1827-1828), -Louisville, Ky., 1903.</p> - -<p>8. Meigs, Return J., 1 Vol. (1838-1839), Louisville, Ky., -1903.</p> - -<p>9. Sneed, John L. T., 5 Vols. (1853-1858), Columbia, Mo., -1906.</p> - -<p>10. Yerger, George S., 10 Vols. (1818-1837), Columbia, -Mo., 1912.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>VII. Reports of the Comptroller to the General Assembly for the -years 1850, 1855-6, 1856, 1857-8, and 1859-60.</h4> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_205"></a>[205]</span></p> - -<h4>VIII. Reports, Proceedings, and Minutes.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Minutes of the American Convention for the years -1822, 1823, 1825, 1827, 1829, 1830, 1848, 1852, 1860, -and 1867 (1818-1867).</p> - -<p>2. Minutes of the General Methodist Conferences, 1773-1844.</p> - -<p>3. Minutes of the General Conferences of the Methodist -Church South, 1845-1865.</p> - -<p>4. Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodists -in Tennessee, 1813-1865 (Quoted in McFerrin, History -of Methodism in Tennessee).</p> - -<p>5. Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1845-1865.</p> - -<p>6. Minutes of the Cumberland Presbyterian Assembly, -1811-1865.</p> - -<p>7. Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian -Church, 1795-1865.</p> - -<p>8. The Fifth and Twenty-seventh Annual Reports of the -American Anti-slavery Society.</p> - -<p>9. The Ninth and Thirteenth Annual Reports of the -American and Foreign Anti-slavery Society for the -years 1849 ad 1853.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>IX. Periodicals.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>The Genius of Universal Emancipation, Vols. I, II, IV, V, -VI, VII, VIII.</p> - -<p>American Historical Magazine, II, IX, XXI.</p> - -<p>Publications of Vanderbilt Southern Historical Society, -No. 2.</p> - -<p>Indiana Historical Society Publications, Vol. 2.</p> - -<p>The Tennessee History Magazine, Vols. 1, 2, and 4.</p> - -<p>Quarterly Anti-Slavery Magazine, Vols. 1, 2, and 4.</p> - -<p>Niles Register, Vols. 1-75 (1811-1849), Washington, Baltimore, -and Philadelphia.</p> - -<p>De Bow, J. D. B., Commercial Review of the South and -West, 39 Vols. (1846-1870), New Orleans.</p> - -<p>African Repository, Vols. V, VI, VII, IX, XXII, XXIII. -XXIV, XXV.</p> - -<p>American Historical Review, Vols. III, V.</p> - -<p>Publications of North Carolina Historical Commission, I.</p> - -<p>Political Science Quarterly, Vols. IX, XX.</p> - -<p>Southern History Association Publications, II.</p> - -<p>Quarterly Review of the M. E. Church, South, April, -1892.</p> - -<p>Methodist Quarterly Review, Vols. LVII and LXIII.</p> - -<p>The Liberator, July 25, 1835.</p> - -<p>The Emancipator (New York), March 8 and 16, 1838.</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_206"></a>[206]</span></p> - -<h4>X. Newspapers.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>The Aurora and General Advertiser, Memphis, September -3, 1802.</p> - -<p>Nashville Banner, Nashville, October 15 and November -16, 1833.</p> - -<p>The Knoxville Gazette, Knoxville, January 23, 1797.</p> - -<p>Christian Advocate and Journal, Bolivar, 1831.</p> - -<p>Tennessee Gazette and Mero District, Nashville, November -22, 1805.</p> - -<p>The Practical Farmer and Mechanic, Somerville, 1857.</p> - -<p>Nashville Republican and State Gazette, Nashville, July -1, 5, 10, 15, 28, 1834.</p> - -<p>The Western Freeman, Shelbyville, September 6, 1831.</p> - -<p>The Charleston Mercury, Charleston, S. C., April 30, 1861.</p> - -<p>Memphis Avalanche and Memphis Appeal, Memphis, May -9, 10, and 11, 1861.</p> - -<p>Randolph Recorder, Vol. I, Covington, 1834.</p> - -<p>Memphis Enquirer, Vols. I and II, Memphis, 1836-1837.</p> - -<p>The Weekly American Eagle, Vols. II-V, Memphis, 1843-1847.</p> - -<p>The Memphis Daily Eagle, Vols. III-VII, 1846-1850. -Memphis.</p> - -<p>The Tri-Weekly Memphis Enquirer, IV, 1846, Memphis.</p> - -<p>Memphis Daily Appeal, V, 1855, Memphis.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>XI. Petitions in the State Archives at Nashville in Manuscript -covering period 1809-1834.</h4> - -<h4>XII. Personal Writings and Reminiscences.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Cartwright, Peter, Autobiography, Edited by W. P. -Strickland, New York, 1892-1897.</p> - -<p>2. Jefferson, Thomas, Writings, Edited by P. L. Ford, 10 -Vols., New York, 1892-1897.</p> - -<p>3. Johnson, Rev. John and His House, Recollections, An -Autobiography, Edited by Mrs. Susannah Johnson, -Nashville, 1869.</p> - -<p>4. Otey, Rt. Rev. James H., Memoirs, Edited by W. M. -Green, New York, 1885.</p> - -<p>5. Pendleton, James Madison. Reminiscences of a Long -Life, Louisville, 1891.</p> - -<p>6. Sumner, Charles, Works, 15 Vols., Boston. 1874-1883.</p> - -<p>7. Stirling, James, Letters from the Slave States, London, -1857.</p> - -<p>8. Thomas, Thomas Ebenezer, Correspondence Mainly -Relative to the Anti-slavery Conflict in Ohio, especially -in the Presbyterian Church, Dayton, 1909.</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_207"></a>[207]</span></p> - -<h3>B. Secondary Works.</h3> - -<h4>I. State Histories.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Caldwell, Joshua W., Constitutional History of Tennessee, -Cincinnati, 1895.</p> - -<p>2. Caldwell, Joshua W., The Bench and Bar of Tennessee, -Knoxville, 1898.</p> - -<p>3. Garret, W. R., and Goodpasture, A. V., History of -Tennessee, Nashville, 1900.</p> - -<p>4. Goodspeed, History of Tennessee, Nashville, 1886.</p> - -<p>5. Hale, William T., and Merrit, Dixon L., History of -Tennessee, Vol. 2, Chicago and New York, 1913.</p> - -<p>6. Phelan, James, History of Tennessee, Boston, 1888.</p> - -<p>7. Putnam, A. W., History of Middle Tennessee, Nashville, -1859.</p> - -<p>8. Temple, Oliver P., East Tennessee and the Civil War, -Cincinnati, 1899.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>II. General Histories.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Adams, Alice D., Neglected Period of Anti-slavery in -America, 1808-1831, Boston, 1908.</p> - -<p>2. Brickell, John, Natural History of North Carolina, -Dublin, 1911.</p> - -<p>3. Doyle, J. A., The English Colonies in America, 5 -Vols., New York, 1888.</p> - -<p>4. Hammond, M. B., The Cotton Industry, New York, -1897.</p> - -<p>5. Ingraham, J. H., The Sunny South, Philadelphia, 1860.</p> - -<p>6. Lecky, W. E. H., History of England in the Eighteenth -Century, 8 Vols., London, 1878-1890.</p> - -<p>7. May, Sir Thomas Erskine, Constitutional History of -England, 3 Vols., New York, 1910.</p> - -<p>8. Phillips, Ulrich Bonnel, American Negro Slavery, -New York, 1918.</p> - -<p>9. Poole, William Frederick, Anti-slavery Opinions before -1800, Cincinnati, 1873.</p> - -<p>10. Rhodes, James Ford, History of the United States, -8 Vols., New York, 1900-1919.</p> - -<p>11. Roosevelt, Theodore, The Winning of the West, 4 -Vols. (Statesman Edition), New York, 1904.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>III. Biography.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. Cartwright, Peter, Fifty Years a Presiding Elder, -Cincinnati, 1871.</p> - -<p>2. Cossit, Franceway Ranna, The Life and Times of -Rev. Finis Ewing, Louisville, 1853.</p> - -<p>3. Du Bose, Horace M., Life of Francis Asbury, Nashville, -1909.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_208"></a>[208]</span></p> - -<p>4. Earl, Thomas, Life of Benjamin Lundy, Philadelphia, -1847.</p> - -<p>5. Garrison, Wendell Phillips and J. F., The Life of -William Loyd Garrison, New York, 1885.</p> - -<p>6. Green, Wm., Life and Letters of Rev. A. L. P. Green, -Nashville, 1877.</p> - -<p>7. Milburn, W. H., Ten Years of a Preacher’s Life, -Nashville, 1859.</p> - -<p>8. Paine, Robert, Life and Times of William McKendree, -Nashville, 1869.</p> - -<p>9. Parton, James, Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, -2 Vols., Boston, 1867.</p> - -<p>10. Smith, G. G., The Life and Letters of James Osgood -Andrew, Nashville, 1883.</p> - -<p>11. Swift, Lindsay, Life of Garrison, Philadelphia, 1911.</p> - -<p>12. Tyerman, L., Life of Whitefield, New York, 1873.</p> - -<p>13. Wightman, W. M., Life of William Capers, Nashville, -1859.</p> - -</div> - -<h4>IV. Church History.</h4> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>1. American Church History Series, XI, XII, New York, -1894.</p> - -<p>2. Bedford, A. H., History of the Organization of the -Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Nashville, 1871.</p> - -<p>3. Briggs, Charles A., American Presbyterianism, New -York, 1885.</p> - -<p>4. Buckley, James M., History of Methodism, 2 Vols., -New York and London, 1898.</p> - -<p>5. Curtis, George L., Manual of Methodist Episcopal -Church History, New York, 1840.</p> - -<p>6. Emory, John, History of the Discipline of the Methodist -Episcopal Church, New York, 1840.</p> - -<p>7. Finley, J. B., Sketch of Western Methodism, Cincinnati, -1854.</p> - -<p>8. Gillet, E. H., History of Presbyterian Church in the -United States of America, Philadelphia, I and II, -no date.</p> - -<p>9. Harrison, W. P., The Gospel among the Slaves, Nashville, -1893.</p> - -<p>10. Matlock, L. C, The Anti-slavery Struggle and Triumph -in the Methodist Episcopal Church, New -York, 1881.</p> - -<p>11. Matlock, L. C., The History of American Slavery and -Methodism, 1780-1849, New York, 1849.</p> - -<p>12. McConnell, S. D., History of American Episcopal -Church, New York, 1897.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_209"></a>[209]</span></p> - -<p>13. McDonald, B. W., History of Cumberland Presbyterian -Church, Nashville, 1888.</p> - -<p>14. McFerrin, J. B., History of Methodism in Tennessee, -3 Vols., Nashville, 1869.</p> - -<p>15. McNeilly, James H., Religion and Slavery, Nashville, -1911.</p> - -<p>16. McTyeire, H. N., History of Methodism, Nashville, -1904.</p> - -<p>17. Newman, A. H., History of Baptist Churches in the -United States, New York, 1894.</p> - -<p>18. Patton, Jacob Harris, Popular History of the Presbyterian -Church, New York, 1900.</p> - -<p>19. Pius, N. H., An Outline of Baptist History, Nashville, -1911.</p> - -<p>20. Price, R. N., Holston Methodism, 5 Vols., Nashville, -1912.</p> - -<p>21. Riley, B. F., History of the Baptists in Southern -States East of the Mississippi, Philadelphia, 1898.</p> - -<p>22. Thompson, Robert Ellis, History of Presbyterian -Churches in the United States, New York, 1895.</p> - -<p>23. Weeks, S. B., Southern Quakers and Slavery, Baltimore, -1896.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="APPENDICES">APPENDICES</h2> - -</div> - -<h3>A. <span class="smcap">Anti-slavery Societies of Tennessee.</span></h3> - -<p>I. Tennessee Manumission Society 1815.</p> - -<div class="blockquote hanging"> - -<p>County Branches: Blount, Greene, Washington, Jefferson, -Knox.</p> - -<p>Local Branches: Bethesda, Beaver Creek, Carter’s Station, -Chestooy, Dumplin Creek, French Broad, Hickory Creek, -Holston, Knoxville, Little River, Maryville, Middle Creek, -Mount Gilead, Nolachucky, Powell’s Valley, Stock Creek. -Turkey Creek, and Rock Creek.</p> - -</div> - -<p>II. Humane Protection Society of Tennessee, 1821.</p> - -<p>III. Moral, Religious Manumission Society of Tennessee, 1821.</p> - -<p>IV. Emancipating Labor Society, 1826.</p> - -<h3>B. <span class="smcap">Tennessee Colonization Society, 1829.</span></h3> - -<div class="hanging"> - -<p>Branches: Bolivar, Somerville, Memphis, Covington, Jackson, -Paris, Clarksville, Columbia, Shelbyville, Winchester, Murfreesboro, -Gallatin, Knoxville, Marysville, New Market, Jonesboro, -Kingsport, Rutherford, Franklin.</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_210"></a>[210]</span></p> - -<h3>C. <span class="smcap">Anti-slavery Leaders in Tennessee</span></h3> - -<ul> -<li>Anderson, Robert</li> -<li>Brazelton, Santy</li> -<li>Boyd, James</li> -<li>Brooks, Stephen</li> -<li>Buckhart, George</li> -<li>Caldwell, James</li> -<li>Cain, Joseph</li> -<li>Callen, Archibald</li> -<li>Campbell, Alexander</li> -<li>Canaday, John</li> -<li>Cartwright, Peter</li> -<li>Coppock, Aaron</li> -<li>Coulson, John</li> -<li>Cowan, Andrew</li> -<li>Criswell, Andrew</li> -<li>Cummings, James</li> -<li>Daily, Hiram</li> -<li>Dalzel, David</li> -<li>Earnest, Lawrence</li> -<li>Earnest, Wesley</li> -<li>Embree, Elihu</li> -<li>Embree, Elijah</li> -<li>Frazier, Abner</li> -<li>Galbraith, James</li> -<li>Garrett, William</li> -<li>Gray, Asa</li> -<li>Hackney, Aaron</li> -<li>Hammer, Aaron</li> -<li>Hammer, Isaac</li> -<li>Hammer, Elisha</li> -<li>Harrison, Isaiah</li> -<li>Harris, John</li> -<li>Hodge, Thomas</li> -<li>Hooks, John</li> -<li>Houston, James</li> -<li>Huffaker, Justice</li> -<li>Kerr, John</li> -<li>Kendall, T. S.</li> -<li>Kennedy, James</li> -<li>Lee, William</li> -<li>Lee, Ephriam</li> -<li>Leeper, Allen</li> -<li>Lindsey, Philip</li> -<li>Lockhart, Jesse</li> -<li>Logan, Alexander</li> -<li>Lundy, Benjamin</li> -<li>Malcum, William</li> -<li>Mainess, Samuel</li> -<li>Marshall, John</li> -<li>Maulsby, David</li> -<li>McCampbell, James</li> -<li>McClellan, James</li> -<li>McCarkle, Francis</li> -<li>McKeen, Thomas H.</li> -<li>Deadrick, David</li> -<li>Doak, Samuel</li> -<li>Dean, Thomas</li> -<li>Eggleston, Elijah</li> -<li>Newman, Joseph</li> -<li>Osborn, Charles</li> -<li>Osborn. J.</li> -<li>Pardae, John</li> -<li>Pickering, Ellis</li> -<li>Pickering, Enos</li> -<li>Rankin, John</li> -<li>Rencan, Thomas</li> -<li>Roberts, William</li> -<li>Roy, Rev. John</li> -<li>Jones, James</li> -<li>Jones, Isaac</li> -<li>Jones, Isaiah</li> -<li>Jones, Thomas</li> -<li>Johnson, Josiah</li> -<li>Smith, Isaac</li> -<li>Snoddy, William</li> -<li>Stanfield, David</li> -<li>Swain, Elihu</li> -<li>Swain, John</li> -<li>Swan, John</li> -<li>Tuckers, Joseph</li> -<li>Underhill, Richard</li> -<li>Underhill, Jesse</li> -<li>McNees, Samuel</li> -<li>Milliken, William</li> -<li>Moore, John</li> -<li>Morgan, John</li> -<li>Wilkins, J. H.</li> -<li>Williams, John</li> -<li>Williams, Richard</li> -<li>Willis, Jesse</li> -<li>Wills, George</li> -<li>Wilson, P. N.</li> -<li>Woods, W. W.</li> -<li>Yerkley, Henry</li> -</ul> - -<h3>D. <span class="smcap">List of Emigrants to Liberia from Tennessee, 1820-1866.</span></h3> - -<table summary="List of Emigrants to Liberia from Tennessee, 1820-1866"> - <tr> - <th>Ship</th> - <th>Date</th> - <th>No. of Emigrants</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship Harriet</td> - <td>January, 1829</td> - <td class="tdr">2</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Liberia</td> - <td>December, 1823</td> - <td class="tdr">13</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship Roanoke</td> - <td>December, 1832</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Ajax</td> - <td>May, 1833</td> - <td class="tdr">5</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Schooner Oriental</td> - <td>May, 1837</td> - <td class="tdr">34</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Rudolph Gronning</td> - <td>February, 1841</td> - <td class="tdr">10</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Barque Union</td> - <td>May, 1841</td> - <td class="tdr">10</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship Mariposa</td> - <td>June, 1842</td> - <td class="tdr">84</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Barque Rothschild</td> - <td>January, 1846</td> - <td class="tdr">25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Schooner D. C. Foster</td> - <td>March, 1850</td> - <td class="tdr">35<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_211"></a>[211]</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Liberia Packet</td> - <td>December, 1850</td> - <td class="tdr">15</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Alida</td> - <td>February, 1851</td> - <td class="tdr">18</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Liberia Packet</td> - <td>December, 1851</td> - <td class="tdr">25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Julia Ford</td> - <td>January, 1852</td> - <td class="tdr">13</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Zebra</td> - <td>December, 1852</td> - <td class="tdr">28</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bark Adeline</td> - <td>June, 1853</td> - <td class="tdr">96</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig General Pierce</td> - <td>December, 1853</td> - <td class="tdr">85</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship Sophia Walker</td> - <td>May, 1854</td> - <td class="tdr"> 28</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig Harp</td> - <td>June, 1854</td> - <td class="tdr">21</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Brig General Pierce</td> - <td>December, 1854</td> - <td class="tdr">17</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bark Cora.</td> - <td>May, 1855</td> - <td class="tdr"> 13</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bark Cora</td> - <td>November, 1855</td> - <td class="tdr">31</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship Elvira Owen</td> - <td>May, 1856</td> - <td class="tdr"> 42</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship M. C. Stephens</td> - <td>December, 1856</td> - <td class="tdr">13</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship M. C. Stephens</td> - <td>May, 1857</td> - <td class="tdr"> 23</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship M. C. Stephens</td> - <td>November, 1859</td> - <td class="tdr">21</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ship M. C. Stephens</td> - <td>May, 1860</td> - <td class="tdr">8</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Golconda</td> - <td>November, 1866</td> - <td class="tdr">144</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<h3>E. <span class="smcap">Vice-Presidents of American Colonization Society from Tennessee.</span></h3> - -<table summary="Vice-Presidents of American Colonization Society from Tennessee"> - <tr> - <td>Andrew Jackson.</td> - <td>1819-1822</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Rt. Rev. Bishop Otey.</td> - <td>1840-1863</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Rev. Dr. Edgar.</td> - <td>1845-1861</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Rev. P. Lindsley, D.D.</td> - <td>1845-1854</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bishop Soule, D.D.</td> - <td>1848-1867</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hon. Frederick P. Stanton.</td> - <td>1851-1858</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hon. John Bell.</td> - <td>1861-1868</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<h3>F. <span class="smcap">Comparative List of Manumission Societies and Members in United States.</span></h3> - -<table summary="Comparative List of Manumission Societies and Members in United States"> - <tr> - <td>Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New York</td> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td class="tdr">300</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Pennsylvania (East)</td> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td class="tdr">400</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Pennsylvania (West)</td> - <td class="tdr">12</td> - <td class="tdr">500</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Delaware</td> - <td class="tdr">2</td> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Maryland</td> - <td class="tdr">11</td> - <td class="tdr">500</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>District of Columbia</td> - <td class="tdr">2</td> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Virginia</td> - <td class="tdr">8</td> - <td class="tdr">250</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ohio</td> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td class="tdr">300</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Kentucky</td> - <td class="tdr">8</td> - <td class="tdr">200</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdr">25</td> - <td class="tdr">1,000</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>North Carolina</td> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td class="tdr">3,000</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="total">130</td> - <td class="total">6,625</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class="center smaller">Exclusive of ten or twelve societies in Illinois. Observe that 106 -of these societies were in slaveholding states.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_212"></a>[212]</span></p> - -<h3>G. <span class="smcap">Slave and Free Negro Population in Tennessee from 1790-1860.</span></h3> - -<table summary="Slave and Free Negro Population in Tennessee from 1790-1860"> - <tr> - <td>1790.</td> - <td class="tdr">3,417</td> - <td class="tdr">361</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1800.</td> - <td class="tdr">13,584</td> - <td class="tdr">309</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1810.</td> - <td class="tdr">44,734</td> - <td class="tdr">1,318</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1820.</td> - <td class="tdr">80,105</td> - <td class="tdr">2,739</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1830.</td> - <td class="tdr">141,647</td> - <td class="tdr">4,511</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1840.</td> - <td class="tdr">183,059</td> - <td class="tdr">5,524</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1850.</td> - <td class="tdr">239,439</td> - <td class="tdr">6,442</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1860.</td> - <td class="tdr">275,719</td> - <td class="tdr">7,300</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<h3>H. <span class="smcap">Comparative Value of Land and Slaves in the Three Divisions of Tennessee, 1859.</span></h3> - -<table summary="Comparative Value of Land and Slaves in the Three Divisions of Tennessee, 1859"> - <tr> - <th></th> - <th>Land</th> - <th>Town Lots</th> - <th>Slaves</th> - <th>Other Property</th> - <th>Aggregate</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>East Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdr">$ 46,127,012</td> - <td class="tdr">$ 3,044,802</td> - <td class="tdr">$ 10,470,926</td> - <td class="tdr">$ 4,333,845</td> - <td class="tdr">$ 64,186,514</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Mid. Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdr">114,053,549</td> - <td class="tdr">5,832,718</td> - <td class="tdr">55,850,579</td> - <td class="tdr">13,229,968</td> - <td class="tdr">188,867,004</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>West Tennessee</td> - <td class="tdr">52,640,432</td> - <td class="tdr">20,893,338</td> - <td class="tdr">44,638,752</td> - <td class="tdr">5,030,225</td> - <td class="tdr">124,155,123</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="total">212,820,993</td> - <td class="total">29,770,858</td> - <td class="total">110,960,257</td> - <td class="total">22,594,038</td> - <td class="total">377,208,641</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<h3>I. <span class="smcap">Approximate Value of Property, Slaves, Land, and Cotton in Tennessee.</span></h3> - -<table summary="Approximate Value of Property, Slaves, Land, and Cotton in Tennessee"> - <tr> - <th>Year</th> - <th>Property</th> - <th>Slaves</th> - <th>Per Acre<br />Land</th> - <th>Per Lb.<br />Cotton</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1836.</td> - <td class="tdr">$117,845,136</td> - <td class="tdr">$584.00</td> - <td class="tdr">$4.00</td> - <td class="tdr">$.17½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1838.</td> - <td class="tdr">125,013,756</td> - <td class="tdr">540.00</td> - <td class="tdr">3.82</td> - <td class="tdr">.13½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1840.</td> - <td class="tdr">122,957,624</td> - <td class="tdr">543.00</td> - <td class="tdr">3.84</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.09</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1842.</td> - <td class="tdr">118,847,672</td> - <td class="tdr">509.00</td> - <td class="tdr">3.56</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.08</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1844.</td> - <td class="tdr">109,178,121</td> - <td class="tdr">420.00</td> - <td class="tdr">3.35</td> - <td class="tdr">.07½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1846.</td> - <td class="tdr">113,176,959</td> - <td class="tdr">413.72</td> - <td class="tdr">3.03</td> - <td class="tdr">.05½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1848.</td> - <td class="tdr">129,510,043</td> - <td class="tdr">467.44</td> - <td class="tdr">3.06</td> - <td class="tdr">.09½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1850.</td> - <td class="tdr">159,558,183</td> - <td class="tdr">506.93</td> - <td class="tdr">3.25</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.12</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1852.</td> - <td class="tdr">186,621,119</td> - <td class="tdr">547.26</td> - <td class="tdr">3.84</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.11</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1854.</td> - <td class="tdr">219,011,047</td> - <td class="tdr">605.52</td> - <td class="tdr">4.60</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.12</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1856.</td> - <td class="tdr">260,319,611</td> - <td class="tdr">689.00</td> - <td class="tdr">5.49</td> - <td class="tdr">.12½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1858.</td> - <td class="tdr">320,398,012</td> - <td class="tdr">792.23</td> - <td class="tdr">7.04</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.14</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1859.</td> - <td class="tdr">377,208,641</td> - <td class="tdr">854.65</td> - <td class="tdr">8.19</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="fraction">.15</span></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_213"></a>[213]</span></p> - -<h3>J. <span class="smcap">Classification of Slave Holders in Tennessee and the United States, 1860.</span></h3> - -<table summary="Classification of Slave Holders in Tennessee and the United States, 1860"> - <tr> - <th>Holders of</th> - <th>Tennessee</th> - <th>United States</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1</td> - <td class="tdr">7,820</td> - <td class="tdr">76,670</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>2</td> - <td class="tdr">4,738</td> - <td class="tdr">45,934</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3</td> - <td class="tdr">3,609</td> - <td class="tdr">34,747</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4</td> - <td class="tdr">3,012</td> - <td class="tdr">28,907</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>5</td> - <td class="tdr">2,536</td> - <td class="tdr">24,225</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>6</td> - <td class="tdr">2,066</td> - <td class="tdr">20,600</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>7</td> - <td class="tdr">1,783</td> - <td class="tdr">17,235</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>8</td> - <td class="tdr">1,565</td> - <td class="tdr">14,852</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>9</td> - <td class="tdr">1,260</td> - <td class="tdr">12,511</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 to 15</td> - <td class="tdr">3,779</td> - <td class="tdr">40,367</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>15 to 20</td> - <td class="tdr">1,744</td> - <td class="tdr">21,315</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>20 to 30</td> - <td class="tdr">1,623</td> - <td class="tdr">20,789</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>30 to 40</td> - <td class="tdr">643</td> - <td class="tdr">9,648</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>40 to 50</td> - <td class="tdr">284</td> - <td class="tdr">5,179</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>50 to 70</td> - <td class="tdr">219</td> - <td class="tdr">5,217</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>70 to 100</td> - <td class="tdr">116</td> - <td class="tdr">3,149</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>100 to 200</td> - <td class="tdr">40</td> - <td class="tdr">1,980</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>200 to 300</td> - <td class="tdr">6</td> - <td class="tdr">224</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>300 to 500</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td class="tdr">74</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>500 to 1000</td> - <td class="tdr">0</td> - <td class="tdr">13</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1000 and over</td> - <td class="tdr">0</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class="center smaller">These figures are for the United States, exclusive of territories -and District of Columbia.</p> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEGRO IN TENNESSEE, 1790-1865 ***</div> -<div style='text-align:left'> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will -be renamed. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. -</div> - -<div style='margin:0.83em 0; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE<br /> -<span style='font-size:smaller'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br /> -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</span> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person -or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the -Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when -you share it without charge with others. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work -on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the -phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: -</div> - -<blockquote> - <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most - other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions - whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms - of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online - at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this eBook. - </div> -</blockquote> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg™ License. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format -other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain -Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -provided that: -</div> - -<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'> - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation.” - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ - works. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. - </div> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right -of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread -public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state -visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. -</div> - -</div> -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/67473-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/67473-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index aca240d..0000000 --- a/old/67473-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/67473-h/images/u-texas-seal.jpg b/old/67473-h/images/u-texas-seal.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 8750447..0000000 --- a/old/67473-h/images/u-texas-seal.jpg +++ /dev/null |
