USA > North Carolina > History of North Carolina: The Federal Period 1783-1860, Volume II > Part 18
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33
12 Sherrill, the North Carolina Manumission Society (Papers of the Trinity College Historical Society, X).
13 Annals of Congress, 17th Cong., 1 sess., p. 1113.
211
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
against him and contributed to his defeat in the congressional election of 1839. Saunders' action was also cited during his campaign for governor in 1840.
It was difficult for the society to reach the public at large because of the hostility of the press; the Raleigh Register openly refused to publish its communications, but an excep- tion was the Greensboro Patriot, whose editor from 1827 to 1835 was William Swaim, a member of the society. In 1830 an Address to the People of North Carolina on the Evils of Slavery was issued in pamphlet form. After demonstrating that slavery is founded on injustice, is a source of pride, idle- ness and tyranny, is radically evil, increases depravity, and is contrary to the Christian religion, it advocates the same justice for the negro as for the white man, and also gradual emancipation and colonization. From time to time money was advanced to aid in emancipation, and relations were also maintained with the American Convention for the Abolition of Slavery and the American Colonization Society. A school for slaves was established at New Garden in Guilford County, and in 1819 Levi Coffin, a member of the society, organized the Underground Railroad in Guilford.
The zenith of the Manumission Society was reached in 1826; thereafter it waned. For this decline several conditions were responsible. One was the division of opinion between radicals and conservatives. The former favored emancipa- tion exclusively, the latter also endorsed colonization. In 1817 dissension between the two factions began. Says Levi Coffin: "A motion was made to amend our constitution, so that the name of our organization would be 'Manumission and * Colonization Society.' This produced a sharp debate. * We had no objection to free negroes going to Africa of their own will, but to compel them to go as a condition of freedom was a movement to which we were conscientiously opposed and against which we strongly contended. When the vote was taken, the motion was carried by a small majority. * * The convention broke up in confusion and our New Garden branch withdrew to itself, no longer co-operating with the others. " 14
14 Coffin, Reminiscences, pp. 75, 76.
212
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
In 1824 the two factions were reconciled through the efforts of Benjamin Lundy, who in that year visited the state, and apparently the word Colonization was dropped from the title of the society. Another difficulty was the matter of funds, the treasurer never reporting as much as $100 in the treasury, and without money little propaganda could be carried on. Finally, about 1830 a strong pro-slavery tide swept the state, and membership in the Manumission Society declined. By 1834 there were only four branches, and the organization collapsed. However, there were survivals of the anti-slavery sentiment in the Quaker counties. In 1838 James Morehead, representative of Guilford in the legislature, submitted a peti- tion from his constituents regarding slavery, but on objection it was withdrawn and never recorded. In 1859 a propaganda against slavery was disclosed which was led by Reverend Daniel Worth, a native of Randolph County.
Besides the Manumission Society other anti-slavery organ- izations existed. The American Colonization Society had three branches in 1819, five in 1821, six in 1825, eight in 1826, ten in 1828, and eleven from 1829 to 1832. The Genius of Universal Emancipation reported the meeting of an anti- slavery society in 1826 on the Yadkin River, at which 300 were present, not one of whom was a Quaker. There was also a North Carolina Abolition Society at Newberry, with which the Manumission Society was in correspondence. However, little is known of these societies and their activities, because their records have not been preserved, while those of the Man- umission Society are still in existence.15
The trend of conflicting sentiment toward slavery may be traced in legislation and court decisions. Liberal ideas were responsible for better guarantee of justice to the slave and for better protection of his life. In 1793 the trial of of- fences involving life, limb, or member was placed in the county court and a jury of twelve slave-holders, instead of the special court of two justices and four freeholders, which had been the method since 1741. In 1794 it was also provided that the jury should render verdict on evidence submitted and that
15 The MSS. of the Society are preserved at Guilford College, North Carolina.
213
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
the court should then pronounce judgment "agreeable to the verdict and the laws of the country." Apparently, both whites and blacks were now subject to the same penalties in capital offences. In 1816 still further protection was given by provid- ing that slaves accused of capital crimes should be tried in the superior court according to the same procedure as in the trial of freemen, except in cases of conspiracy; then a special ses- sion of the superior court, acting under a commission of the governor, should act. In 1818, also, when the penalty involved was execution, the slave was allowed to challenge jurors. Payment of owners by the state for slaves executed was abol- ished in 1786, since "many persons by cruel treatment of their slaves cause them to commit crimes for which many of the said slaves are executed." This was unsatisfactory, since it be- came the policy of the master to prevent prosecution of his slaves. Hence in 1796 the policy was adopted of allowing counties through special statutes to pay their masters two- thirds of the entire value of the slaves executed, the value to be fixed by the jury, the reimbursement to be derived from a spe- cial tax on black polls. However there should be no reimburse- ment unless the jury also concluded that the master had prop- erly fed and clothed the slaves. So much for major offences. Those of a less degree were also treated more liberally. In 1783 jurisdiction over minor cases was given to the justices of the peace, but many such cases were placed under the county courts to be tried "under the same rules, regulations, and restrictions as the trials of freemen." However, in all cases in which the justices of the peace acted, appeal was in 1842 allowed to the county or superior courts.
The slave's life was also given better protection. By a statute of 1791 he who maliciously killed a slave was declared guilty of murder and should "suffer the same punishment as if he had killed a freeman," except in cases where the slave resisted the owner or master or died under a moderate correc- tion or was an outlaw. However, since there were three de- grees of homicide-murder, punishable by death, man- slaughter, by imprisonment, and accidental, or self-defence homicide, which incurred no penalty-the accused was given the benefit of the doubt and the courts found it impossible to
214
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
convict. Consequently in 1817 it was enacted that "the kill- ing of a slave shall partake of the same degree of guilt, when accompanied with like circumstances, that homicide now does."
This statute became the basic protection of the slave's life. In working out interpretations of it, the courts faced a number of questions. First was that of provocation; it was held that a wider range of extenuating circumstances existed to differ- entiate manslaughter from homicide in cases when whites killed slaves than in those in which whites alone were in- volved.16 A second question was the extension of the common law; was procedure for offences against slaves limited to that of the statutes, or did the common law also apply? The su- preme court in 1823 made a liberal decision, upholding indict- ment at the common law for murder of a slave and declaring that the statute could only modify that law.17 Greatest of all was the relation of the master's property right to his respon- sibility for the slave's life. This was faced from three angles. First was the immunity of the master from punishment for assault and battery on his slave; in 1829 it was held that neither the master nor the hirer of a slave could be indicted for such cause, since "the power of the master must be abso- Inte to render the submission of the slave perfect. ** The slave, to remain a slave, must be made sensible that there is no appeal from his master; that his power is in no sense usurped; but is conferred by the law of men, at least, if not by the laws of God." 18 Now with such authority in the master could the slave, when his life was threatened, resist ? This question was settled in the famous case of the State vs. Will, a case memorable in the traditions of the North Carolina bar, certainly the most important one in which the rights of a slave were concerned.19 Briefly, Will, a slave, under fear of punishment by an overseer, ran, was fired upon and wounded, and when overtaken defended himself with a knife, fatally wounding the overseer. In the superior
16 State vs. Tackett, 8 N. C. 210.
17 State vs. Reed, 9 N. C. 454.
18 State vs. Mann, 13 N. C. 263.
19 18 N. C. 121.
215
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
court he was convicted of murder, but appeal was taken to the Supreme Court. Bart F. Moore, one of the attor- neys for the slave, made an unusually impressive argument, and the decision of the court, written by Gaston, was a victory for humanity. Exceptions to the unconditional submission of the slave and the unconditional power of the master were held to exist. "It is certain that the master has not the right to
BARTHOLOMEW F. MOORE
slay his slave, and I hold it to be equally certain that the slave has the right to defend himself against the unlawful attempt of his master to deprive him of life." Therefore "if a slave in defence of life kills an overseer, the homicide becomes murder. It seems that the law would be the same with respect to killing a master or temporary owner under similar circumstances."
Undoubtedly this decision of the court, rendered at a time
-
216
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
when the pro-slavery spirit was dominating public opinion, did much to conserve the humanitarian tradition. Soon the pro- tection of a slave's life was still more clearly defined. Sup- posing the slave should die under chastisement or punishment, was the master liable for homicide? In 1839 it was held that if death of a slave followed punishment by the master, the courts might review the circumstances, and if they showed in- tent to kill on the part of the master, indictment should follow; indeed, if the punishment were immoderate or unreasonable, it lost the character of correction and indicated contemplation of death.20
While the courts were working out the above principle, the legislature in 1816 conferred on the slave a notable privi- lege, that of benefit of clergy. Accordingly, the slave might escape the death penalty for larceny and similar crimes which at the common law were capitally punished. Cases are on record where this privilege was requested and granted. Ben- efit of clergy for both races existed until 1855, when it was abolished by the Code Commission.
While the slave's right before the courts and the protection of his life were established, the law and also the Supreme Court were not so liberal in other matters. The colonial pa- trol law of 1753 was made more stringent in 1779, 1794, and 1830. Unauthorized meetings of slaves and also the custom of hiring their time were prohibited in 1794, and the articles which they might dispose of without their master's consent were restricted between 1826 and 1833. More important were the limitations on manumission. The colonial statute prohib- iting manumission except for meritorious conduct adjudged by the county court was reenacted in 1777 and further ex- plained in 1796. In its interpretation the Supreme Court was strictly faithful to the evident intent of the law, the restriction of the free negro class. Illustrative was the case of Huckaby vs. Jones in 1822.21 The testator bequeathed four slaves to trustees to keep them as they (the trustees) should "judge most for the glory of God and the good of said slaves." It was held that, as the testator did not intend any personal ben-
20 State vs. Hoover, 18 N. C. 121.
21 9 N. C. 120.
217
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
efit to the legatees, his purpose was undoubtedly manumission, which being contrary to law, the trustees were ordered to hold the slaves in trust for the legatees. More explicit was the case of Contentnca Society vs. Dickinson.22 The defendant conveyed a slave to the Quaker Society at Contentnea, under the condition that he receive the profits of his labor until such time as he could receive freedom by the laws of the state. Practically, however, the policy of the Quakers was to send such slaves outside the state, to the Northwest where manu- mission could be effected. Therefore the Court held in 1827 that a religious society could hold property for its use only, that the custom of the Quakers was manumission except in name, and therefore contrary to law, and that the conveyance of a slave to the Society was not valid. Yet when the rights of individual negroes were concerned, the Court was lenient. Those held as slaves were allowed to bring suit for their free- dom; and whoever claimed the relation of master might be required to give bond to permit the collection of evidence by the plaintiff and to produce him before the court at the appointed session.23 The rule of prescription was also applied in favor of the negro who had lived thirty or forty years out- side of bondage; liberation at the tender age of two years was upheld, since it could not be shown that the child could not per- form meritorious services; technicalities in procedure, such as verbal petition to the court and signature by the master's attorney rather than the master himself, were not allowed to invalidate manumission. But any silent agreement or intent to use slaves for their "own emolument" rather than that of the purchaser was held to invalidate a sale. Yet, direct pro- vision in a deed for ultimate emigration to Liberia at the choice of the slave was upheld for, although slaves have "no capacity to make contracts, or acquire property, yet they have both a mental and moral capacity" to choose between remain- ing in slavery and becoming free.24
Evidently there were two tendencies in the law, one of
22 12 N. C. 190.
23 Evans vs. Kennedy, 2 N. C. 247.
24 Sampson vs. Burgwin; Lemmond vs. People, 41 N. C. 99; Red- ding vs. Long, 57 N. C. 216.
218
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
liberalism, the other of restriction. Each reflected elements of public opinion. By 1830 the restrictive attitude was dom- inant. The causes of its triumph over liberalism were various. One was restlessness in the negro population. In 1802 a plot for a rising of slaves was discovered in the northeastern coun- ties, and two negroes were executed. In 1805 an attempt at poisoning the whites was made in Wayne County for which one slave was burned at the stake and three others were sen- tenced to be hanged. In 1821 alarm in Jones County caused a muster of the militia. Finally in 1831 there was evidence that the Nat Turner conspiracy, which convulsed tidewater Virginia, had ramifications in North Carolina. In the tier of counties along the South Carolina line as far west as Rich- mond, and also in Wayne and Lenoir, a plan to rebel and march on Wilmington was disclosed. Twelve negro leaders were shot, three were hanged in Duplin County, and one in Richmond. In other eastern counties there was considerable excitement, but no evidence of intended revolt. Undoubtedly plans or even rumors of insurrection strengthened the re- actionary sentiment toward slavery. A similar influence was the dissemination of abolition literature; an instance in point arose in 1830, when the governor referred to the legislature a copy of David Walker's Appeal in Four Articles, whose au- thor, a negro of North Carolina birth, sought to arouse the slaves to efforts at progress and even insurrection.26 The im- mediate effect was restriction on the education of the slaves. Finally, the increasing value of slaves as property, due to the extension of cotton culture, undoubtedly strengthened the po- sition of the pro-slavery forces; it was natural that neither manumission nor a grant of additional rights could be pro- cured as easily when the market price was rising.
The fight for greater restriction and its triumph may be traced in the proceedings of the legislature. In 1818 and 1819 bills to prohibit teaching slaves to read and write were re- jected. In 1825 the Governor in his annual message referred to abolition resolutions of the Ohio legislature and sarcastical- ly advised those opposed to slavery to heed the eleventh com-
26 Bassett, Slavery in the State of N. C., ch. V.
219
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
mandment, "Let every one attend to his own concerns." Another bill to prevent the education of slaves was lost, like- wise bills to restrain conversation between free negroes and slaves regarding freedom, to prevent the immigration of free negroes, and to forbid emancipation societies. The next year feeling was more intense. A petition from Vermont praying for abolition was referred to the legislature, but the governor recommended a revision of the patrol laws and restriction on the immigration of free negroes. As a result the sojourn of free negroes coming from other states was limited to twenty days under penalty of fine of $500 or servitude at labor for not more than ten years, the county courts were authorized to hire out vagabond free negroes and to apprentice their chil- dren, and trading between free negroes and slaves in pro- hibited articles was made punishable with thirty-nine lashes. In 1828 another bill to prohibit the education of slaves was introduced but was rejected.
The year 1830 marked the turning point. Walker's Appeal in Four Articles strengthened the agitation for restriction and a series of laws was enacted which prohibited the slaves to be tauglit to read and write, ciphering excepted, against which protest was made by R. P. Dick of Guilford County, forbade games of chance between free negroes and slaves or their intermarriage, and subjected free negroes absent from the state for ninety days to the penalty imposed on alien free negrocs. The circulation of literature tending to insurrection was made punishable with imprison- ment for the first offence and with death for the second, and also imprisonment and thirty-nine lashes were imposed for the first effort to cause insurrection and the death penalty for the second. Manumission by the courts was allowed only after petition sixty days in advance and after bond of $1000 was given that the manumitted negro would leave the state within ninety days, and if he returned, he should be sold into bond- age ; however, negroes above fifty years of age might be manu- mitted for meritorious service and remain in the state, pro- vided a bond of $500 was given as a guarantee for keeping the peace and that the negro would not become a public charge. The following year, 1831, the climax in anti-negro legislation
220
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
was reached with a law prohibiting free negroes to preach before slaves. Thus the sentiment for restricting the privi- leges of the slave and the free negro triumphed. It made fur- ther progress in 1835 when the constitutional convention took from the free negro the right of suffrage. However, much of the liberal sentiment was preserved by the Supreme Court. Many of its decisions previously cited were made after 1830, and in the case of the State vs. Manuel it was held that the free negro is a citizen and that the right to vote was merely a political right.27
The legislation of 1830-31 is also a landmark in relations between the two races. Previously there seems to have been little prejudice against the blacks, but afterwards an ever- increasing hostility on the part of the whites characterized race relations. This change is well illustrated by the free negro. In no southern state except Virginia was this class of blacks so numerous; it increased with each decade, rising from 4,975 in 1790 to 30,463 in 1860. Its origins were various; one was manumission; another was military service in the Revolu- tion; a third was immigration; still another, according to Judge Gaston, was the cohabitation of white women and negro men, the children taking the status of the mother.
The distinctive characteristic of the free negro before 1830 was prominence in religious and educational life. One of the early Methodist ministers was Henry Evans, a shoemaker, local preacher, and free negro. Passing through Fayette- ville late in the eighteenth century, he saw that the negroes of that place "were wholly given to profanity and lewdness, never hearing preaching of any denomination." He stopped to preach the Gospel to them, making a living at his trade. The whites were alarmed and the town authorities ordered him to stop preaching. He then held meeting outside the corporate limits. Reviewing his work the Sunday before his death, he said: "Three times I have had my life in jeopardy for preaching the Gospel to you. Three times I have broken the ice on the edge of the water and swam across the Cape Fear to preach the Gospel to you, and if in my last hour I
27 Bassett. ch. V; Coon. Doc. Hist. of Public Schools in N. C., II, passim; Laws, 1830, chs. 6, 9, 14, 15; 1831, ch. 4.
221
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
could trust to that, or anything but Christ crucified, for my salvation, all should be lost and my soul perish forever." At length opinion changed, especially when no insurrection re- sulted from Evans' labors. Some whites visited his meetings and were converted; a rude frame church building was erected in Fayetteville with reserved seats for the whites; finally the white membership increased until the negroes were crowded to the rear. Fayetteville became a regular charge of the Conference with a white preacher, but Evans was given a room adjoining the church, where he lived until his death in 1810. Even more remarkable was the career of John Chavis. Born free, probably in Granville County about 1763, he won the interest of certain white people and was sent to Princeton, where he was privately tutored by Dr. Wither- spoon. In 1801 he was a missionary in the Hanover, Virginia, Presbytery, but in 1805 he returned to North Carolina and became a licentiate of the Orange Presbytery in 1809, preach- ing to regular congregations at Shiloh, Nutbush, and Island Creek. His notable work, however, was that of teacher. He conducted schools in Granville, Wake, and Chatham counties. Among his pupils were the sons of prominent white families; one of his students, Willie P. Mangum, became a United States senator; another, Charles Manly, became governor; among others were the sons of Chief Justice Henderson. "My fa- ther," wrote Reverend James Horner, "not only went to school to him (Chavis) but boarded in his family. * The school was the best at that time to be found in the State." 28
Among the Baptists, likewise, a free negro attained dis- tinction, Ralph Freeman by name, of Anson County. "He was considered an able preacher," says Purefoy, "and was frequently called upon to preach on funeral occasions and was appointed to preach on the Sabbath at association and fre- quently administered the ordinance of baptism and the Lord's Supper." 29 A white minister, Joseph Magee, was his inti- mate friend, and they agreed that the survivor should preach the funeral of the one dying first. The duty fell to Ralph, and
28 Bassett, Slavery in the State of North Carolina, ch. III.
29 History of the Sandy Creek Association, p. 328.
222
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
he journeyed to Tennessee to fulfill it. The next year free negroes were forbidden to preach, but a petition was sub- mitted to the legislature for an exception to be made in the case of Freeman. It was favorably reported by the Commit- tee on Propositions and Grievances but was indefinitely post- poned in the House of Commons.
Now the legislation of 1830-31 made impossible a continu- ation of such activities on the part of the free negro. Chavis left the state, and Freeman is no longer heard of. Moreover the spirit of toleration and recognition of merit was replaced by one of prejudice and open hostility. An excellent example was the career of Lunsford Lane, an intelligent and industri- ous slave whose master was Mr. Sherwood Haywood, of Ral- eigh. Ambitious to secure his freedom, he hired his time for a fixed sum, and engaged in the manufacture of smoking tobacco. When he had saved $1,000, he found his master's widow will- ing to make a bargain, but as he could not legally purchase his freedom, he was first sold to his wife's master, Benjamin B. Smith, in 1836. Mr. Smith, however, could not free Lane be- cause he could not prove meritorious service. Consequently, when he next visited New York, he took the negro with him and there procured manumission papers. Returning to Ral- eigh, Lane prospered, opening a store and a woodyard in addition to his tobacco enterprise, and also becoming janitor and messenger in the governor's office. Desiring undisputed possession of his wife and six children, he contracted for them at $2,500. But his prosperity won the enmity of the poor whites and the suspicion of the political negrophiles. In November, 1840, Lane was notified by two justices of the peace that he must leave the state within twenty days or else suffer the penalty imposed on immi- grating free negroes. A stay of the prosecution was secured until January, 1841. In the meantime, the leg- islature convened, and his friends introduced a private bill excepting him from the operation of the law. It was rejected and Lane was compelled to leave his business, his home, and the community in which he had prospered. He went North. Desiring to fulfill the contract for the purchase of his fam- ily and to have his wife and children with him, he told his
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.