PART V. SLAVERY AND THE

WEST

CHAPTER XI

THE GATHERING CLOUD

SLAVERY IN THE COLONIES

Georgia colo

[303]

The prevalence of slavery in the colonies in the seven- 71. The peteenth and eighteenth centuries was chiefly due to the tition of the need of laborers for the cultivation of the soil. A scanty nists for slavery, 1738 population, without manufactures, the colonists, especially in the South, had to work large areas of land to produce the tobacco, cotton, rice, indigo, and food-stuffs to exchange in Europe for their luxuries and many of their necessities. So, for example, the Lords Proprietors of Carolina, in their Proposals to First Settlers," in 1663, offered "to the owner of every negro or man slave brought thither to settle within the first year 20 acres and for every woman negro or slave 10 acres of land."1 James Oglethorpe, founder of the neighboring colony of Georgia, was opposed to slavery on moral grounds, and immediately after the granting of the charter of Georgia the inhabitants were ordered "not to hire, keep, lodge, board, or employ within the limits of the Province any Black or Negro." Nevertheless the

1 Peter Force, Tracts, Vol. IV, No. 2, p. 25. At the census of 1790, Massachusetts was the only state to report no slaves. The list of slaves in New York in 1755 (excluding the counties of Albany, New York, and Suffolk fills twenty-four pages of O'Callaghan, Documentary History of the State of New York, Vol. III, pp. 844-868.

economic pressure of the need for laborers was so great that five years later the following petition was sent to the Trustees of the colony:

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOURS;

We whose Names are under-written, being all Settlers, Freeholders and Inhabitants of the Province of Georgia, and being sensible of the great Pains and Care exerted by You in Endeavouring to settle this Colony, since it has been under Your Protection and Management; Do unanimously join to lay before You, with the utmost Regret, the following Particulars.... We have most of us settled in this Colony in Pursuance of the Description and Recommendation given of it by You in Britain; and from the Experience of residing here several Years, do find that it is impossible that the Measures hitherto laid down and pursued for making it a Colony can succeed. None of all those who have planted their Land have been able to raise Sufficient Produce to maintain their Families in Bread kind only, even tho' as much Application and Industry have been exerted to bring it about as could be done by Men engaged in an Affair on which they believed the Welfare of themselves and their Posterity so much depended; . . . so that by the accumulated Expences every Year, of Provisions, Cloathing and Medicines, for themselves, Families and Servants, several hath expended all their Money, nay, even run considerably in Debt, and so been obliged to leave off Planting and making further Improvements. . .. This being now the general State of the Colony, it must be obvious that People cannot subsist by their Land, according to the present Establishment; and this being a Truth resulting from Tryal, Practice and Experience, cannot be contradicted by any theorical Scheme or Reasoning. The Land then, according to the present Constitution, not being capable to maintain the Settlers here, they must unavoidably have recourse to and depend upon Trade: But to our woful Experience likewise, the same Causes that prevented the first, obstruct the latter; for tho' the Situation of this Place is exceeding well adapted for Trade, and if it was encouraged, might be much more improved by the Inhabitants; yet the Difficulties and Restrictions, which we hitherto have and

at present do labour under, debar us of that Advantage: Timber is the only Thing we have here which we might export, and notwithstanding we are obliged to fall [fell] it in Planting our Land; yet we cannot manufacture it for a Foreign Market but at double the Expence of other Colonies; as for Instance, the River of May [St. Johns River, Florida], which is but twenty Miles from us, with the Allowance of Negroes, load Vessels with that Commodity at one Half of the Price that we can do; and what should induce Persons to bring Ships here, when they can be loaded with one Half the Expence so near us; therefore the Timber on the Land is only a continual Charge to the Possessors of it, tho' of very great Advantage in all the Northern Colonies, where Negroes are allowed, and consequently Labour cheap. We do not in the least doubt but that in Time Silk and Wine may be produced here, especially the former; but since the Cultivation of Land with White Servants only, cannot raise Provisions for our Families as before mentioned, therefore it is likewise impossible to carry on these Manufactures according to the present Constitution. It is very well known, that Carolina can raise everything that this Colony can; and they having their Labour so much cheaper will always ruin our Market, unless we are in some Measure on a Footing with them. . .

Your Honours, we imagine, are not insensible of the Numbers that have left this Province, not being able to support themselves and Families any longer; and those still remaining, who had Money of their own and Credit with their Friends, have laid out most of the former in Improvements, and lost the latter for doing it on such precarious Titles. And upon Account of the present Establishment, not above two or three Persons, except those brought on Charity and Servants sent by You, have come here for the Space of two Years past, either to settle Land or encourage Trade, neither do we hear of any such likely to come until we are on better Terms. . . .

Believing You will agree to those Measures that are found from Experience capable to make this Colony succeed, and to promote which we have consumed our Money, Time and Labour; we do, from a sincere Regard to its Welfare, and in Duty both to You and ourselves, beg Leave to lay before Your immediate

72. The debate on the Missouri

Consideration the Two following chief Causes of these our present Misfortunes and this deplorable State of the Colony, and which, we are certain, if granted, would be an infallible Remedy for both. 1st. The Want of a free Title, or Fee-simple to our Lands.... 2. The Want of the Use of Negroes, with proper Limitations; which if granted, would both occasion great Numbers of White People to come here, and also render us capable to subsist ourselves, by raising Provisions upon our Lands, until we could make some Produce fit for Export, in some Measure to Ballance our Importation. We are very sensible of the Inconveniences and Mischiefs that have already, and do daily arise from an unlimited Use of Negroes; but we are also sensible, that these may be prevented by a due Limitation, such as so many to each white Man, or so many to such a Quantity of Land, or in any other Manner which Your Honours shall think most proper.

By granting us, Gentlemen, these Two Particulars, and such other Privileges as His Majesty's most dutiful Subjects in America enjoy, You will not only prevent our impending Ruin, but, we are fully satisfied, also will soon make this the most flourishing Colony possess'd by His Majesty in America, and Your Memories will be perpetuated to all future Ages, our latest Posterity sounding Your Praises, as their first Founders, Patrons, and Guardians..

We are,

with all due Respect,

Your Honours most dutiful and obedient Servants [signed by 117 Freeholders]

Savannah,

9th December, 1738

THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE

"I went up to the Capitol," says John Quincy Adams in his "Memoirs," under the date of February 11, 1820, Compromise, and heard Mr. King in the Senate, upon what is called the Missouri question.... His manner is dignified, grave, earnest, but not rapid or vehement. . . . He laid down the

1820

[312]

position of the natural liberty of man, and its incompatibility with slavery in any shape. . . . He spoke with great power, and the great slave-holders in the House, gnawed their lips and clutched their fists as they heard him."1 The debate on the Missouri Compromise elicited the most determined assertions of principle and provoked the most violent bursts of passion since the struggle over the formation and adoption of the federal Constitution. King's famous speech and the reply of William Pinkney of Maryland 2 were delivered before an excited audience in the Senate chamber at the height of the struggle. King argued for the power of Congress to restrict slavery in the western territories, and hence to permit them to enter the Union only as free states.

The territory of Missouri is a portion of Louisiana, which was purchased of France, and belongs to the United States in full dominion; in the language of the Constitution, Missouri is

1 J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, Vol. IV, p. 522. Of this speech, Rufus King himself, writing to J. A. King, said..."today [I] delivered my opinions to the Senate; with what effect I cannot say, but if I satisfied nobody else, I may say to you, that I satisfied myself. The cause is desperate in the Senate, and my object was, by taking a bold position, and defending it with some vigor and much confidence, to encourage & hold up others who were languid & discouraged. I shall be greatly misrepresented, but correct in my principles and able as I think to defend them and protect myself, this little warfare will give me no concern. Every new speech becomes the material of another, and the end and issue of the debate are beyond conjecture."- Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, ed. C. R. King, Vol. VI, p. 269.

2 In his Autobiography (Vol. I, p. 60) John A. Dix says: "I was so fortunate as to hear the two speeches which, on opposite sides of the [Missouri] question, were considered the most able . . . those of Mr. Pinkney of Maryland against the prohibition, and Rufus King of New York in favor of it. It would be difficult to conceive a greater contrast than in the oratory of the two Senators. Mr. King's was calm, dignified, argumentative, forcible and at times fervid. Mr. Pinkney's was impassioned, fiery and sometimes bordering on violence, but sustained throughout with surpassing logical power."