Chapter XII: +The Decline of Indian Slavery+ (5)

[549] Historians differ regarding the place where these Indians were captured. J. G. Kohl, in _A History of the Discovery of the East Coast of North America_, reprinted in _Maine Historical Society Collections_, series 2, i, p. 142, expresses the opinion that Cabot probably obtained them on some shore south of New York harbor. James S. Buckingham, in _Canada, Nova Scotia_, etc., pp. 168, 337; and Samuel G. Drake, in _The History and Antiquities of Boston_, i, p. 1, regard Newfoundland as the probable home of the savages.

[550] Best, _Frobisher’s First Voyage_, in _Voyages of the Elizabethan Seamen to America_, Payne’s edition, pp. 65, 66.

[551] _Ibid._, pp. 76–88.

[552] _Ibid._, p. 136.

[553] Mather, _Magnalia Christi Americana_, etc., first American edition, (1820), i, p. 52; Prince, _A Chronological History of New England in the Form of Annals_, edition of 1887, ii, p. 26; Rosier, _A True Relation of the most prosperous Voyage made this present year_, etc., in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, viii, p. 145.

[554] Gorges, _A True Relation of the late Battell fought in New England_, etc., in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, vi, p. 51; Williamson, _The History of the State of Maine from its first Discovery_, i, p. 207; Young, _Chronicles of the Pilgrim Fathers of New England_, etc., second edition, p. 190.

[555] Stith, _History of Virginia_, bk. i, pp. 33, 34; Drake, _The Old Indian Chronicle_, edition of 1867, pp. 10–13.

[556] Shakespeare’s jeering remark in “The Tempest,” Act II, Scene II, regarding those who refuse to help a lame beggar, but who will pay their money to see a dead Indian, may apply to one of these captives. Out of the common interest in savages the poet doubtless constructed the monster, Caliban.

When the Plymouth colony was founded, two of these captives were placed on board a vessel bound from Bristol to the coast of Maine. A Spanish fleet captured the ship, and the Indians were carried to Spain. Gorges afterward recovered one of these two, who, with at least two others of the original five, was afterward sent to America. Gorges, _A Briefe Narration of the Originall Undertakings of the Advancement of Plantations into the parts of America_, etc., in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, vi, p. 54; Drake, _op. cit._, edition of 1867, p. 13.

[557] Hubbard, _A General History of New England_, etc., in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 2, v, p. 37; Drake, _op. cit._, edition of 1867, pp. 13–14. No record seems to exist regarding the fate of these Indians. It may have been one of them whom Gorges obtained from the Isle of Wight at the time the Earl of Southampton was in command.

[558] Gorges, _A Briefe Narration of the Originall Undertakings of the Advancement of Plantations into the parts of America_, etc., in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, vi, p. 59.

[559] Drake, _The Book of the Indians_, etc., ninth edition, bk. ii, p. 8; Gorges, _op. cit._, in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, vi, p. 58; Bradford, _History of Plymouth Plantation_, pp. 111–112, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_.

[560] Gorges, _op. cit._, in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, vi, p. 60; Freeman, _Civilisation and Barbarism_, etc., p. 39; Drake, _The Old Indian Chronicle_, edition of 1867, pp. 6–7.

[561] Smith, _A Description of New England_, etc., in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, vi, p. 132. There is no reason to believe that Smith had ideas regarding the Indians different from those held by the Englishmen of his time who did not rank the savage above the position of the slave, and who generally looked upon the Indians as a “degraded, inferior and faithless race, and no more to be regarded than the Africans.” Drake, _op. cit._, edition of 1867, p. 7.

[562] O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Manuscripts_, etc., pt. ii, p. 117.

[563] Ellis and Morris, _King Philip’s War_, p. 294; Drake, _The Book of the Indians_, etc., ninth edition, bk. iii, p. 104.

[564] Williamson, _The History of the State of Maine_, etc., i, p. 531; Holmes, _American Annals_, etc., pp. 403–407; Hubbard, _A Narrative of the Indian Wars in New England_, etc., pp. 332–344.

[565] _Records of the Court of Assistants of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay_, i, p. 86.

[566] Futhey and Cope, _History of Chester County, Pennsylvania_, p. 39.

[567] Rupp, _History of Lancaster County_, etc., p. 89—Based on Gookin’s minutes of a journey in 1711 to the Indians in the vicinity of the Palatines.

[568] Brown, _The History of Missions, or, of the Propagation of Christianity among the Heathen since the Reformation_, i, p. 394.

[569] O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Historical Manuscripts_, pt. i, p. 45, records the manumission of Manuel, the Spaniard, from slavery, February 17, 1648, for the sum of 300 carolus guilders.

[570] _Colonial Laws of New York_, edition of 1894, i, p. 279.

[571] _Ibid._, i, p. 389. In 1685, the master of a Carolina brig, in a petition to Governor Dongan of New York, complained of Humphrey Ashley, who chartered the vessel but ruined the voyage by killing an Indian and kidnapping four others near the Cape Fear River, whom he brought to the port of New York. The result shows the colonial government of New York not in favor of kidnapping. The necessity of keeping on good relations with the Iroquois made it policy to discourage the kidnapping custom. So it was ordered that all the effects of Ashley be sold at auction and the proceeds used to defray the cost of transporting Ashley and the four Indians back to Carolina. O’Callaghan, _op. cit._, pt. ii, p. 117.

[572] O’Callaghan, _op. cit._, pt. ii, p. 117.

[573] _Diary of Cotton Mather_, in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 7, vii, p. 203.

[574] Mayhew, _Indian Converts_, etc., p. 120.

[575] _Boston News Letter_, September 10, 1711; May 2, 1715; January 15, 1719; December 28, 1720; June 18, 1724; March 2, 1732; _Pennsylvania Gazette_, March 7, 1731; _New England Weekly Journal_, August 30, 1731; October 14, 1735; August 10, 1736; _Boston Gazette or Weekly Advertiser_, December 22, 1718; August 1, 1749; _New England Courant_, June 17, 1723; _Boston Weekly Mercury_, October 2, 1735.

[576] _Pennsylvania Colonial Records_, ii, pp. 112, 120.

[577] Spanish Indians are mentioned in the following issues of the colonial newspapers: _Boston News Letter_, November 13, 1704; April 29, 1706; August 5, 1706; May 2, 1715; January 5, 1719; December 28, 1720; June 18, 1724; March 2, 1732; _New England Courant_, June 17, 1723; _Boston Gazette or Weekly Journal_, August 1, 1749; _Boston Weekly Mercury_, October 2, 1735; _New England Weekly Journal_, August 30, 1731; August 10, 1736; _Pennsylvania Gazette_, March 7, 1731; _American Weekly Mercury_, April 10, 1739.

[578] Hurd, _The Law of Freedom and Bondage in the United States_, i, p. 205.

[579] Hening, _op. cit._, i, p. 482.

[580] _Archives of Maryland_, xv, p. 22.

[581] _Ibid._, xiii, p. 525.

[582] _Ibid._, xxvi, p. 514.

[583] _Colonial laws of Massachusetts reprinted from the edition of 1660 with the supplements to 1672, containing also the body of Liberties of 1641_, p. 53.

[584] _Colonial Laws of Massachusetts_, edition of 1672, p. 15.

[585] Vol. XXX, No. 227 A. of the Massachusetts manuscript records contains a petition, dated September 20, 1676, of one John Harton imprisoned for stealing Indians, asking freedom under bail in order to support his wife and family.

[586] Felt, _The Ecclesiastical History of New England_, ii, p. 418.

[587] Leaming and Spicer, _The Grants, Concessions and Original Constitutions of the Province of New Jersey_, etc., p. 105.

[588] _New Hampshire Historical Society Collections_, viii, p. 11.

[589] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 126.

[590] Margry, _op. cit._, vi, p. 316.

[591] _Ibid._, v, pp. 178, 354, 360, 361; _Wisconsin Historical Society Collections_, xvi, p. 332.

[592] _South Carolina Historical Society Collections_, v, pp. 166, 460–462; _Narratives of Early Carolina_ (Woodward’s relation of his Westo voyage), p. 133, in _Original Narratives of Early American History; Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, vii, p. 634. One of the instruments of supply was the Cherokee. Thomas, _The Indians of North America_, etc., p. 96; Logan, _The History of Upper Carolina_, i, p. 174.

[593] In 1666 Robert Sanford, secretary of the proprietors, made a voyage from Cape Fear to Port Royal and reported to the proprietors that the Indians of that section were anxious for friendship with the whites “notwithstanding we ... had killed and sent away many of them.” _Robert Sanford’s Relation of his Voyage in 1666_, in _Charleston Year Book_, 1885, p. 292.

[594] Rivers, _A Sketch of the History of South Carolina_, etc., appendix, p. 353; _Journal of the Grand Council of South Carolina_, August 25, 1671–June 24, 1680, p. 84.

[595] For the character of the Carolina settlers, see McCrady, _The History of South Carolina under the Royal Government_, pp. 297–298.

[596] Rivers, _op. cit._, p. 126, holds that but little credit can be given to the assertion that the colonists instigated the tribes against each other for the purpose of trading in their captives. Hewat, _op. cit._, i, pp. 126–127, asserts that the colonists early found out the usefulness to this end of setting one tribe of Indians against another. Lawson, _The History of Carolina_, etc., p. 325, tells of the Coranine Indians inviting the Machapunga Indians to a feast, taking them prisoners and selling them to the English.

[597] Rivers, _op. cit._, p. 126; Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 127.

[598] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 127.

[599] French, _op. cit._, pt. iii, p. 36.

[600] _Public Records of South Carolina_, 1706–1710, p. 197; _B. P. R. O._, vol. 620.

[601] Winsor, _The Mississippi Basin_, etc., p. 133. The English in their turn accused the French of pillaging the traders.

[602] Margry, _op. cit._, iv, pp. 406, 507, 516.

[603] On June 18, 1718, Robert Johnson, governor of Carolina, reported that he had made peace “with several nations, particularly the great nation of the Creeks who live to the southward near St. Augustine,” and added that “the treaties with them are very precarious so long as the French from Morels and the Spaniards from St. Augustine live and have intercourse amongst them, and do continually by presents and furnishing them with arms and ammunition and buying the slaves and plunder, encourage them to war upon us.” _Public Records of South Carolina_, 1717–1720, vii, p. 135; _B. P. R. O._, _B. T._, x, p. 2157.

[604] Margry, _op. cit._, iv, p. 517.

[605] _Ibid._, iv, p. 578.

[606] _Ibid._, iv, p. 544; _Report concerning Canadian Archives_, 1905, i, p. 523.

[607] French, _op. cit._, pt. iii, p. 32.

[608] _Ibid._, new series, i, p. 86.

[609] _Ibid._, new series, i, p. 97; pt. iii, p. 33.

[610] _Ibid._, pt. iii, p. 34.

[611] _Ibid._, new series, p. 123; Margry, _op. cit._, v, p. 506. The slaves acquired on this special occasion were from the Shawnee nation, and had been taken by a combined force of Chickasaw, Yazoo and Natchez.

[612] Rivers, _op. cit._, p. 132.

[613] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 78. In their letter to West, telling him of their sanction of his appointment, the proprietors cautioned him against appointing any deputies, including Mathews, Moore and Middleton, who might belong to the opposing party. _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, xii, p. 11. West became governor in 1674.

[614] Oldmixon, _The British Empire in America_, i, p. 337; Grahame, _op. cit._, ii, p. 115. Yeamans prospered so well in the traffic in negroes with Barbadoes that, in 1684, he returned to his plantation and the office of governor was restored to West.

[615] Rivers, _op. cit._, p. 126.

[616] West was a member of this commission.

[617] Chalmers, _Political Annals of the Province of Carolina_, in Carroll, _op. cit._, ii, p. 314.

[618] _Public Records of South Carolina_, i, 1663–1684, p. 141; _B. P. R. O._, _Colonial Entry Book_, xx, p. 184.

[619] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, xi, pp. 508–510.

[620] The colonial officials persistently denied that they stirred up the tribes to make war upon each other so as to obtain captives for slaves. Such letters and statements of denial are found in _North Carolina Colonial Records_, ii, p. 252. (A letter of April 5, 1716); _Journal of the Board of Trade, Public Record Office_, Co. 391, 25 R., xvii, p. 175 (Testimony rendered July 16. 1715). The government officials claimed that the Indian outbreaks against the English were caused, not by any action of the officials in stirring them up to obtain slaves, but rather by the abuses practiced upon them by the traders and by the inability of the colonial government to control the traders. _Journal of the Board of Trade, Public Record Office_, Co. 391, 25 R., xvii, pp. 168, 169, 176, 191.

[621] Chalmers, _op. cit._, in Carroll, _op. cit._, ii, p. 314. This special letter of the proprietors was called forth by Captain Godfrey’s treatment of the Indians, and by the opinions of private individuals expressed in letters to them. The proprietors had already struck a blow at the council by giving the parliament a right to punish members of the council for misbehavior. The council had complained of this to the proprietors, who in turn asserted that the Indian dealers (members of the council) feared lest the parliament have too much power over them. Archdale, _A New Description_, etc., in Carroll, _op. cit._, ii. p. 100.

[622] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, xi, pp. 508–510.

[623] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, xi, pp. 508–510.

[624] Archdale, _op. cit._, in Carroll, _op. cit._, ii, p. 107; Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 78; _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, xi, p. 508; _Public Records of South Carolina_, i, 1663–1684, p 266; _B. P. R. O._, _Colonial Entry Book_, xxii, p. 20. _The Journal of the English Board of Trade_, vol. xi, p. 174, under the date August 19, 1698, and the marginal heading _American Indian Slaves_, contains the following direction to the governor of Bermudas: “And upon observation made that it is commonly said there are many Americans at Bermuda kept as slaves; ordered, that the governor be required to give an account, what number there are of them, from whence they are bought and by whom imported.” The governor’s reply was a mere tabulation of slaves, with a statement of their sex and the locality in which they resided, without any special reference to Indian slaves. No further reference was made to the matter by the Board of Trade.

[625] Rivers, _op. cit._, appendix, p. 456.

[626] O’Gorman, _A History of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States_, p. 39.

[627] Rivers, _op. cit._, appendix, p. 456; _North Carolina Colonial Records_, ii, p. 904. The complaint read: “ruined trade in skins and furs (whereby we held our chief correspondence with England) and turned it into a trade of Indians or slave making, whereby the Indians to the south and west of us are already involved in blood and confusion, a trade so odious and abominable, that every colony in America (although they have equal temptation) abhor to follow.”

[628] Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 172.

[629] _State of the British and French Colonies in North America_, p. 25.

[630] _New England Historical and Genealogical Register_, 1859, xiii, p. 300.

[631] Thomas, _op. cit._, ii, pp. 95–100; _Journal of the Board of Trade, British Public Record Office_, Co. 391. 25 R., xvii. p. 168.

[632] _Indian Book_, 1710–1718, i, p. 17, in Columbia, South Carolina, Historical Commission Department. The letters of the missionaries of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts stationed in South Carolina contain frequent mention of the traders’ action: Letters of Le Jau, 1708: February and July, 1711 (The letter of February 20, 1711, relates an instance of the traders bringing back one hundred Indian slaves); August 10, 1714; Letters of Johnston, January 27, 1715; December 19, 1715, in _Records of the S. P. G. F. P._

[633] _Indian Book_, 1710–1718, i, p. 29, in Columbia, South Carolina Historical Commission Department, (directions given to traders, July 24, 1716).

[634] _Ibid._, i, p. 156, (directions given to traders, May 14, 1717); i, p. 28, (directions given to traders July 24, 1716); i, p. 40, (directions given to traders, July 27, 1716).

[635] Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 180.

[636] Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 187.

[637] On being handed over to the board, the Indians were ordered to be sold at auction at a specified time and place to anyone who would promise to export them from the province within a specified time. In the meantime they were fed and sheltered at public expense. Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 156.

[638] Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 171. Johnson became governor in 1703.

[639] _Ibid._, i, p. 182.

[640] Logan, _op. cit._, i, pp. 175, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183 cites such trials. A letter of Steevens, missionary of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, in South Carolina, 1708, tells of the trial and acquittal of traders for the illegal enslavement of Spanish Indians. _Records of S. P. G. F. P._

[641] Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 180.

[642] _Ibid._, i, p. 182.

[643] _Ibid._, i, pp. 183–186. Case of Alexander Long and Eleazer Wiggon who in revenge stirred up the Cherokee to destroy the Euchee.

[644] On July 15, 1715, Mr. Byrd, one of the council of Virginia, appeared before the Board of Trade, and in reply to questions regarding the hostilities lately committed by the Indians on Carolina, declared the action of the Indians to be due to the cupidity of the traders and the custom of encouraging the Indians to wage war on each other that the traders might buy the captives as slaves. _Journal of the Board of Trade, B. P. R. O._, Co. 391, 25 R., xvii, pp. 167–168. Similar statements were made by Mr. Banister, _Ibid._, p. 169, Mr. Kettleby, _Ibid._, p. 175 and Mr. Crawley, _Ibid._, p. 191.

[645] _South Carolina Public Records_, April to December, 1720, vii, p. 226; _British Public Record Office, South Carolina, Board of Trade_, Co. 5, 358 A 14 and 15, October 27, 1720.

[646] Logan, _op. cit._, i, p. 189. Though no estimate of the number of Indians enslaved during this long period in the south is possible, it was so large that the decay of the coast Indians has been attributed to it. Thomas, _The Indians of North America_, etc., ii, p. 95.

[647] Hening, _op. cit._, i, p. 482; ii, pp. 143, 155; Lawson, _The History of North Carolina_, p. 280.

[648] Margry, _op. cit._, iv, pp. lvi, 531, 544, 561.

[649] Hening, _op. cit._, i, p. 455.

[650] Hening, _op. cit._, ii, p. 143.

[651] _Ibid._, ii, p. 155; Tucker, _A Dissertation on Slavery_, p. 32.

[652] Hening, _op. cit._, ii, p. 283.

[653] _Ibid._, iii, p. 69.

[654] Lawson, _The History of North Carolina_, p. 280.

[655] _North Carolina Colonial Records_, ii, p. 252.

[656] A letter from the governor and council of South Carolina, May 7, 1707, states: “We have also commerce with Boston, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New York and Virginia, to which places we export Indian slaves.” _Bancroft Papers relating to Carolina_, in New York City Public Library, MSS., vol. i, 1662–1769; Thomas, _The Indians of North America_, etc., p. 95; Coffin, _A Sketch of the History of Newbury_, p. 336; _Journal of the Board of Trade, Public Record Office_, Co. 391, 25 R, xvii, p. 168. The colonial newspapers mention Carolina Indians in the following issues: _Boston News Letter_, July 31, 1704: October 28, 1706; March 31, 1707; November 15, 1708; August 6, 1711; August 20, 1711; September 10, 1711; December 10, 1711; July 5, 1714; September 17, 1716; March 11, 1717; _New England Courant_, August 19, 1723.

[657] _Acts and Resolves_, i, p. 698. July 15, 1715, Mr. Bannister of Virginia appeared before the Board of Trade and declared that the selling in New England of Indian slaves taken in war had caused so much injury by arousing the hostility of the neighboring natives, that the legislature of Massachusetts had been obliged to pass a law prohibiting the buying or selling of any Indians as slaves. _Journal of the Board of Trade, Public Record Office_, Co. 391, p. 169.

[658] _Acts and Resolves_, ii, p. 364. The unforeseen exigencies were “death, danger of the seas, captivity or inevitable accident.”

[659] Hoadly, _Records of the Colony or Jurisdiction of New Haven from May, 1653, to the Union_, etc., p. 177.

[660] _Connecticut Colonial Records_, v, p. 516.

[661] _Connecticut Colonial Records_, v, pp. 534–535.

[662] _Acts and Laws of the State of Connecticut, in America_, edition of 1784, p. 230.

[663] _Connecticut Colonial Records_, xiv, p. 329.

[664] _Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations_, ii, p. 550.

[665] _Ibid._, iii, p. 483.

[666] _Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations_, iv, pp. 193–194.

[667] _Laws of New Hampshire_, edition of 1771, p. 53; edition of 1726, p. 49; _Magazine of American History_, xxi, 1889, p. 62.

[668] McClintock, _History of New Hampshire_, p. 151.

[669] _New York Colonial Documents_, xii, p. 414.

[670] _Pennsylvania Archives_, first series, xii, p. 280; _Bancroft Papers relating to Carolina_, in New York City Public Library, MSS., vol. i, 1662–1769; Thomas, _The Indians of North America_, etc., p. 95.

[671] _Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania_, ii, p. 236; _Pennsylvania Colonial Records_, ii, p. 213; Bolles, _Pennsylvania, Province and State_, ii, p. 172.

[672] An Indian boy was said to have been imported into the colony in 1708 contrary to the law. The matter was brought before the council, September 14, 1709, but was referred for lack of evidence. _Pennsylvania Colonial Records_, ii, p. 490. It was perhaps due to this event that the council, February 21, 1710, decided that a case of infringement of the act of 1706 should be tried before the Court of Common Pleas. _Ibid._, ii, pp. 508–509.

[673] This was the first effort to restrain negro slavery in Pennsylvania. It was introduced into the assembly in the form of a petition by William Southeby, a resident of Maryland and a Roman Catholic. In 1696 he wrote papers against slavery. For a sketch of his life, see the article by Nathan Kite in vol. xxviii of _The Friend_, pp. 293, 301, 309.

[674] _Laws of Pennsylvania collected_, etc., 1714, p. 165; _Pennsylvania Colonial Records_, ii, pp. 550, 553; _Pennsylvania Statutes at Large_, ii, p. 433; _Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of the Province of Pennsylvania_, ii, pp. 112, 114; _Pennsylvania Historical Society Memoirs_, i, p. 389.

[675] Burge, _Commentaries on Colonial and Foreign Laws_, i, p. 737; Gordon, _History of Pennsylvania_, p. 166.

[676] Lawson, _The History of North Carolina_, p. 351, tells of Indians selling an Indian thief to the governor.

[677] Livermore, _A History of Block Island_, p. 60, mentions an instance of an Indian sold by his brothers for ten gallons of rum; and a second instance when another Indian was sold by his brothers and sisters for a term of thirteen years, for thirty gallons of rum and four cloth coats, the rum to be paid in annual instalments of one gallon each. The Indian was to have his board and clothing and two suits of apparel at the expiration of his bondage. _Ibid._, p. 60.

[678] Green, _Springfield_, etc., p. 153, quotes a deed for land, 1665, in which an Indian girl is given by her parents as security for payment.

[679] Williamson, _The History of North Carolina_, i, p. 95; Lawson, _op. cit._, pp. 73, 74; Hawks, _History of North Carolina_, second edition, ii, p. 73.

[680] Williamson, _op. cit._, p. 95.

[681] _New York Colonial Documents_, v, p. 433.

[682] _Hening_, _op. cit._, i, p. 410.

[683] _Ibid._, i, p. 396.

[684] _Ibid._, i, p. 455.

[685] _Virginia Historical Society Collections_, new series, i, p. 125. (This probably refers to the act of 1666).

[686] _Acts and Resolves_, i, p. 436.

[687] _Ibid._, ii, p. 104.

[688] _Ibid._, ii, 364. Palfrey, _History of New England_, ii, p. 30, points out that the expression in the Massachusetts Body of Liberties, “willingly sell themselves,” related to such as contracted to labor for a term of years, though in some cases, such term might have been for life. The engagement, whatever its duration, would be subject to transference to a third party, in which case the original contractor would be “sold.”

[689] _Acts and Resolves_, iv, p. 641.

[690] Arnold, _History of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations_, ii, p. 101; _Rhode Island Historical Society Collections_, vii, p. 232.

[691] _Early Records of the Town of Providence_, xvi, p. 244. Weeden, _Early Rhode Island_, p. 173, mentions such slaves in 1750.

[692] _New York Colonial Documents_, v, p. 433.

[693] _Ibid._, vi, p. 546.

[694] _New York Colonial Documents_, vi, p. 546.

[695] List given in Ross, _History of Long Island_, i, p. 125.

[696] Rivers, _Topics in the History of South Carolina_, p. 51.

[697] _Ibid._, p. 51. It will be noted that in both the South Carolina cases cited, the sentence of transportation and slavery was passed before the Indians concerned were proved guilty of the charges against them.

[698] Winthrop, _Journal_, Savage edition, i, p. 233 (editor’s note); Hildreth, _A History of the United States from the Discovery of the Continent_, etc., i, p. 239.

[699] Hening, _op. cit._, ii, p. 15.

[700] Hening, _op. cit._, iv, p. 104; _Historical Documents from the Old Dominion_, No. 3, p. 258. The governor and council, without a jury, were to act as a court for the trial of such offenders.

[701] Shurtleff, _Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England_, i, p. 329.

[702] Freeman, _The History of Cape Cod_, ii, p. 72; Thacher, _History of the Town of Plymouth_, p. 149.

[703] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, ix, p. 307; Cook, _Drummond Island_, p. 70. To retain their services for a time longer than that specified in the sentence of the court, the whites were accustomed on the ninth day to furnish the Indians with rum and get them drunk so that they must remain ten days longer. The practice was so long continued that at one time there was several hundreds of Indians on the island, “many whereof had been by the practices aforesaid kept about three months.”

[704] _Plymouth Colony Records_, vi, p. 104.

[705] _Manuscript Council Records of Massachusetts_, ii, p. 40; _Laws of New Hampshire, Provincial Period_, i, p. 116.

[706] _Manuscript Council Records of Massachusetts_, ii, p. 310.

[707] Freeman, _The History of Cape Cod_, i, p. 714.

[708] _Sewall’s Diary_, in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 5, vi, p. 143.

[709] _Manuscript Council Records of Massachusetts_, viii, No. 169.

[710] _Ibid._, ccxxxii, No. 1.

[711] _Boston Public Library Monthly Bulletin_, vii, February, 1902, p. 74. This Indian was stolen from his owner by pirates and carried to South Carolina, but escaped and returned to New England. He was about to return to his master to serve out his term of servitude when he was seized by two white men of Massachusetts and enslaved by them.

[712] _Manuscript Council Records of Massachusetts_, xxxi, No. 148.

[713] _Acts and Resolves_, xii, p. 602.

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

[715] Durfee, _Gleanings from the Judicial History of Rhode Island_, p. 131, in _Rhode Island Historical Tracts_, No. 18.

[716] Arnold, _op. cit._, i, p. 423.

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

[718] Hildreth, _The History of the United States_, i, p. 372.

[719] Orcutt, _The History of the old Town of Derby, Connecticut_, p. lvii.

[720] _Plymouth Colony Records_, ix, p. 71; _Connecticut Colonial Records_, i, p. 532.

[721] Moore’s article in _Historical Magazine_, x, p. 189.

[722] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 352.

[723] _Ibid._, vii, p. 371.

[724] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 385.

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

[726] Hening, _op. cit._, iii, p. 460.

[727] _Ibid._, iv, p. 133.

[728] Stroud, _A Sketch of the Laws relating to Slavery_, etc., p. 2.

[729] _Ibid._

[730] _Archives of Maryland_, xiii, p. 546.

[731] Maxcy, _The Laws of Maryland_, etc., i, p. 115; Bacon, _Laws of Maryland_.

[732] _Colonial Laws of New York_, edition of 1894, i, p. 598; Trott, _Laws of the British Plantations in America_, etc., p. 273.

[733] Moore, in _Historical Magazine_, x, p. 189. The Reverend John Davenport, in a letter to the younger Winthrop, June, 1666, spoke of the baptism of slaves “born in the house.” _Historical Magazine_, x, p. 59. The instance of Mr. Maverick of Noddle’s Island attempting to breed slaves is another example of the general custom of the time of holding the children of slave women as slaves. Littleton _v._ Tuttle, in _Massachusetts Reports_, iv, p. 128; Cushing, _Reports_, x, p. 410. Felt, in _Statistical Association Collections_, i, p. 586. Palfrey, _History of New England_, ii, p. 30, states that no person was ever born into legal slavery in Massachusetts. See also Moore, _Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts_, pp. 24–25, and Steiner, _op. cit._, pp. 18–19.

[734] Pirate _v._ Dalby, 1786 (Pennsylvania), in 1 _Dallas_, second edition, p. 167; Wilson et al. _v._ Hinkley et al., 1787 (Connecticut), in _Kirby_, p. 202; The State _v._ Van Waggoner, 1797 (New Jersey), in 1 _Halstead_, p. 374; Jenkins _v._ Tom, 1792 (Virginia), in 1 _Washington_, p. 123; Coleman _v._ Dick, 1793 (Virginia), in 1 _Washington_, p. 233; Hudgins _v._ Wright, 1806 (Virginia), in 1 _Hening and Munford_, second edition, p. 134; Pallas et al. _v._ Hill et al., 1807 (Virginia), in 2 _Hening and Munford_, second edition, p. 149; Gregory _v._ Baugh, 1831 (Virginia), in 2 _Leigh_, p. 665.

[735] Wheeler, _op. cit._, p. 20; 2 _Leigh_, p. 665.

[736] Ballagh, _op. cit._, p. 31.

[737] _Ibid._, pp. 31–32.

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

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

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

[741] Bartram, _Retrographs_, p. 42.

[742] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 352. The act was repeated in 1722. _Ibid._, vii, p. 371.

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

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

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

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

[747] As typical examples of this kind of advertisement, see _Boston Gazette_, December 15, 1718; _Pennsylvania Gazette_, March 7, 1732; _New England Weekly Journal_, March 5, 1733; _Boston News Letter_, August 20, 1711; January 5, 1719; December 28, 1720.

[748] _Boston News Letter_, July 2, 1711; October 11, 1708; October 6, 1737; February 11, 1717; November 22, 1708; May 24, 1714; _Boston Gazette or Weekly Journal_, November 15, 1748; _New England Weekly Journal_, February 24, 1729.

[749] Stiles, _A History of the City of Brooklyn_, etc., i, p. 233; _New York Mercury_, June 12, 1758.

[750] _Early Records of Portsmouth_, p. 434; Currier, _History of Newbury_, p. 254.

[751] Winthrop, _Life and Letters of John Winthrop_, ii, p. 252; Winsor, _The Memorial History of Boston_, i, p. 489.

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

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

[754] See Weeden, _Economic History of New England_, i, p. 292.

[755] See _Early Records of Providence, Rhode Island_, xvi, p. 244.

[756] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 343.

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

[758] Mason, _A Brief History of the Pequot War_, etc., in Orr, _op. cit._, p. 39.

[759] Mayhew, _op. cit._, p. 26.

[760] Coffin, _A Sketch of the History of Newbury_, etc., p. 153.

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

[762] _Boston News Letter_, August 6; August 13; August 20, 1711.

[763] _Ibid._, August 6, 1711.

[764] _Ibid._, April 7, 1718; May 23, 1745; July 4, 1751; _Boston Gazette and Weekly Journal_, November 1, 1743; _New York Gazette_, July 23; August 6; August 20, 1733; February 13, 1739; _Boston News Letter_, October 30, 1760; November 6, 1760; November 28, 1760.

[765] _Boston News Letter_, March 2, 1732; October 4, 1739; June 28, 1750; _New England Weekly Journal_, October 16, 1727; _New England Courant_, August 19, 1723; _Pennsylvania Mercury_, August 28, 1729; _Pennsylvania Journal_, June 18, 1767; _New York Gazette_, June 24; July 8; July 15; July 29; August 12; August 26, 1734; _New York Weekly Mercury_, October 27, 1740; November 3; November 10, 1740; May 30; June 13, 1757.

[766] _Boston News Letter_, October 7, 1742; August 23, 1744; _New York Mercury_, June 12, June 19, June 26, July 3, 1758.

[767] _Boston News Letter_, November 10, 1748; _Boston Post Boy_, July 25, 1743.

[768] _Boston Post Boy_, July 6, 1752; July 18, 1753; _Boston Gazette_, August 1, 1749.

[769] _Boston Post Boy_, May 2, 1743; July 2, 1750; August 6, 1750; _New England Courant_, June 17, 1723; _Boston Weekly Mercury_, October 2, 1735; _New York Weekly Mercury_, August 16, 1756.

[770] _Boston Post Boy_, February 11, 1745; April 15, 1751.

[771] _Boston Post Boy_, December 5, 1748.

[772] _Pennsylvania Gazette_, October 5, 1738.

[773] _Pennsylvania Mercury_, July 30, 1730.

[774] _Boston News Letter_, August 6; August 13; August 20, 1711; _American Weekly Mercury_, May 24, 1726; _New York Weekly Mercury_, June 12; June 19; June 26; July 3, 1758. _Boston Gazette_, April 7, 1718.

[775] _Boston News Letter_, September 10, 1711.

[776] _Connecticut Colonial Records_, iv, p. 40.

[777] Nevill, _Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey_, pp. 18, 22.

[778] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 343.

[779] _Messages from the Governors of New York State_, i, p. 116.

[780] Weise, _The History of the City of Albany_, etc., p. 209.

[781] _The Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania_, iv, p. 62.

[782] Hening, _op. cit._, iii, p. 217.

[783] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 343.

[784] Drake, _The Book of the Indians_, etc., ninth edition, pp. 60–70; Winthrop, _Journal_, i, p. 267; ii, p. 8, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_.

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

[786] O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Historical Manuscripts_, pt. ii, p. 433.

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

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

[789] Hazard, _Historical Collections_, etc., ii, p. 63; _Plymouth Colony Records_, ix, p. 71. See full text of the resolution, p. 207.

[790] _Plymouth Colony Records_, ix, p. 64; Brodhead, _History of the State of New York_, revised edition, i, p. 429.

[791] _Plymouth Colony Records_, ix, p. 64.

[792] _Ibid._, x, p. 348; Shurtleff, _op. cit._, iv, pt. ii, p. 473; Hurd, _The Law of Freedom and Bondage in the United States_, i, p. 269.

[793] _New York Colonial Documents_, v, pp. 793, 796.

[794] _Pennsylvania Archives_, series 1, xii, p. 280.

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

[796] _North Carolina Colonial Records_, ii, p. 2.

[797] _Massachusetts Manuscript Records_, vol. xxx.

[798] _Records of the Court of Assistants of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay_, i, p. 259.

[799] _North Carolina Colonial Records_, xii, pp. 138–139, 302.

[800] _Ibid._, ii, pp. 95, 97, 113–114.

[801] Ballagh, _A History of Slavery in Virginia_, pp. 39–40.

[802] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, pp. 343–344.

[803] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 314.

[804] McCrady, _Slavery in the Province of South Carolina_, in _Annual Report of the American Historical Association_, 1895, p. 645.

[805] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 397.

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

[807] Williamson, _The History of North Carolina_, i, p. 122.

[808] Raper, _North Carolina, A Study in English Colonial Government_, p. 147.

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

[810] Ballagh, _op. cit._, p. 35.

[811] Hening, _op. cit._, ii, p. 454.

[812] _Ibid._, ii, p. 84.

[813] _Ibid._, ii, p. 170.

[814] _Ibid._, p. 296.

[815] _Ibid._, ii, p. 492.

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

[817] _Ibid._, ii, p. 346.

[818] Hening, _op. cit._, i, pp. 396, 471.

[819] Ballagh, _op. cit._, p. 63.

[820] Hening, _op. cit._, iii, p. 133.

[821] _Ibid._, v, p. 432; Ballagh, _op. cit._, p. 67.

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

[823] _Acts and Resolves_, i, p. 92.

[824] _Ibid._, i, p. 167.

[825] _Ibid._, i, p. 214.

[826] _Ibid._, i, pp. 240, 258.

[827] _Ibid._, i, pp. 278, 302.

[828] _Ibid._, i, pp. 337, 359.

[829] Moore, _Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts_, p. 62; Douglas, _The Financial History of Massachusetts, etc._, p. 31.

[830] The laws are given in _Acts and Resolves_, i, ii, iii, and iv.

[831] See laws of 1707 and 1718.

[832] See laws of 1695 and 1707.

[833] Moore, _op. cit._, p. 64; Sewall’s _Diary_, in _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 5, vii, p. 87; Coffin, _A Sketch of the History of Newbury_, etc., p. 188.

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

[835] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, iii, p. 77.

[836] _New York Colonial Laws_, edition of 1894, i, pp. 682–683.

[837] _Ibid._, ii, pp. 877, 881.

[838] Baird, _History of Rye_, p. 202.

[839] _Ibid._, p. 182.

[840] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, ii, p. 153.

[841] _Ibid._, iii, p. 196.

[842] _Ibid._, iii, p. 196.

[843] _South Carolina Public Records_, xviii, 1736–1737; _B. P. R. O._, S. C., B. T., viii, p. 37.

[844] _The Centennial of Incorporation of Charleston, South Carolina_, p. 210.

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

[846] Hening, _op. cit._, iii, p. 482; _Letters of Governor Spotswood_, in _Virginia Historical Society Collections_, new series, i, p. 52; Ballagh, _op. cit._, p. 14.

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

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

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

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

[851] _New Jersey Archives_, first series, xv, p. 30.

[852] _Ibid._, first series, xv, p. 351.

[853] _Ibid._, first series, xv, pp. 384, 385.

[854] Allinson, _Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey_, p. 315.

[855] Ballagh, _op. cit._, p. 14.

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

[857] _New York Colonial Laws_, edition of 1894, i, pp. 484, 487.

[858] _Ibid._, i, p. 588.

[859] _Ibid._, i, p. 1013.

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

[861] _Ibid._, i, p. 803.

[862] _Ibid._, i, p. 899.

[863] _New York Colonial Laws_, edition of 1894, i, p. 1012.

[864] _Ibid._, ii, pp. 255, 310.

[865] _Ibid._, ii, p. 772.

[866] _Ibid._, ii, p. 877.

[867] _Ibid._, ii, p. 1048.

[868] _Ibid._, ii, p. 1049.

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

[870] _Ibid._, iii, p. 2.

[871] _Ibid._, iii, p. 32.

[872] _Ibid._, iii, p. 88.

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

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

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

[876] Hawks, _History of North Carolina_, etc., second edition, ii, p. 229; Brickell, _The Natural History of North Carolina_, etc., p. 42.

[877] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 128; Schaper, _Sectionalism in South Carolina_, p. 283.

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

[879] Lyford, _History of Concord, New Hampshire, from the Original Grant_, etc., ii, p. 1051; Goodwin, _The Pilgrim Republic_, p. 191.

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

[881] _Boston Gazette or Weekly Journal_, November 15, 1748.

[882] _New England Weekly Journal_, March 5, 1733.

[883] _Boston News Letter_, January 5, 1719.

[884] _Boston News Letter_, November 15, 1708.

[885] _Pennsylvania Gazette_, March 7 and March 16, 1732.

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

[887] Ewell, _The Story of Byfield_, p. 88.

[888] Channing, _The Narragansett Planters_, p. 10, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, iv.

[889] _Boston News Letter_, March 11, 1717.

[890] _Boston News Letter_, April 12, 1714.

[891] _Boston News Letter_, May 24, 1714.

[892] _Boston News Letter_, June 18 and June 25, 1724.

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

[894] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 157.

[895] _Boston News Letter_, March 21, 1715.

[896] _Boston News Letter_, July 23, 1716.

[897] _Boston Post Boy_, May 2, 1743.

[898] _New York Gazette_, June 24, 1734.

[899] Lawson, _A New Voyage to Carolina_, etc., p. 172.

[900] _Public Records of South Carolina_, xxi, 1743–1744, p. 333; _B. P. R. O._, _S. C., B. T._, vol. xiii, H., p. 36.

[901] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 363.

[902] _Ibid._, vii, p. 393.

[903] _Ibid._, vii, p. 409.

[904] Bacon, _Laws of Maryland_.

[905] _Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York_, iv, p. 85.

[906] _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 3, iv, p. 188.

[907] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, v, p. 361.

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

[909] Northrup, _op. cit._, in _New York State Library Bulletin, History_, May, 1900, No. 4.

[910] _Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York_, i, pp. 329, 354.

[911] Porter, _Historical Notes of Connecticut_, No. 2, p. 13.

[912] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 347.

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

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

[915] Bacon, _Laws of Maryland_.

[916] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, ii, p. 636.

[917] Usher, _History of the Town of Medford, Middlesex County, Massachusetts_, etc., p. 352; _Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society_, 1885–1887, new series, iv, p. 214; Field, _Provincial Courts of New Jersey_, pp. 130–131; Washburn, _Historical Sketches of Leicester_, p. 51.

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

[919] _Boston Gazette_, April 7, 1718.

[920] _Boston News Letter_, October 4, 1739.

[921] _Boston News Letter_, May 23, 1745.

[922] _Boston News Letter_, October 30, 1760.

[923] _Boston Post Boy_, July 6, 1752.

[924] _Boston Weekly Mercury_, October 2, 1735.

[925] _American Weekly Mercury_, August 28, 1729.

[926] _American Weekly Mercury_, May 24, 1726.

[927] Hawks, _History of North Carolina_, etc., second edition, ii, p. 577.

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

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

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

[931] Trott, _Laws of the British Plantations in America_, etc., p. 100.

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

[933] _Archives of Maryland_, xiii, pp. 546–549.

[934] _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 5, vi, p. 143.

[935] Weeden, _Economic and Social History of New England_, i, p. 403.

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

[937] Hening, _op. cit._, iii, p. 252.

[938] Bassett, _Slavery and Servitude in the Colony of North Carolina_, p. 29, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xiv.

[939] _The Statutes at Large of South Carolina_, vii, p. 357.

[940] _Ibid._, vii, pp. 375–376.

[941] _Ibid._, vii, p. 389.

[942] Bassett, _op. cit._, pp. 29–30, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xiv.

[943] Hening, _op. cit._, iii, p. 298.

[944] _Ibid._, iv, p. 327.

[945] Maxcy, _Laws of Maryland_, i, p. 140.

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

[947] _Laws of New Hampshire_, edition of 1771, p. 101.

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

[949] Drake, _The Book of the Indians_, ninth edition, bk. iii, p. 16.

[950] Chitwood, _Justice in Colonial Virginia_, p. 99, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xxxiii.

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

[952] Aler, _History of Martinsberg and Berkeley Counties, West Virginia_, pp. 200, 201.

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

[954] Hough, _Papers relating to the Island of Nantucket_, etc., p. 50.

[955] Nevill, _Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey_, i, p. 19.