[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.