Indian slavery in colonial times within the present limits of the United StatesLauber, Almon Wheeler
History
Indian slavery in colonial times within the present limits of the United States
Lauber, Almon Wheeler
Indians of North America; Indians, Treatment of -- United States; Slavery -- United States; Thesis (Ph. D.)
Further directions required that the agents buy no male slaves above
the age of fourteen years;[633] that they should “not buy knowingly any
free Indian for a slave, nor make a slave of any Indian that ought to
be free, that is to say, an Indian of any nation that is in amity and
under the protection of this government”;[634] and that they should
not buy an Indian as slave until such had been at least three days in
the town of the warrior who had captured him.[635] Any Indian trader
who, by his own confession or by verdict of a jury, should be found
guilty of selling any free Indian as a slave, at any time after the
ratification of this act, should forfeit the sum of £60 current money
of the province, and failing to pay such fine, was to receive such
corporal punishment as the judges of a General Session might decree,
not extending to life or limb; and upon conviction for such offense the
Indian slave so sold was declared free. The directions further urged
the agents to aim constantly to promote peace and good will among all
nations of Indians with whom South Carolina was accustomed to trade,
and to engage as many others as possible to embrace the friendship and
amity of the English.[636]
In the enactment of these measures it was not the purpose of the
assembly to stop the traffic in Indians, but only to regulate it by
preventing the illegal acquisition of Indians by the traders and by
requiring the traders to dispose of their Indians to the board itself
which would then sell the Indians as it chose.[637] Their action
was dictated by a double purpose: to prevent the traders kidnapping
Indians belonging to the tribes friendly to the colony and so bring
on dangerous Indian uprisings; and to obtain the profits of the trade
for the colonial exchequer, which not infrequently meant for their
own profit. Humanitarian feeling for the Indians played no part in
their action. The matter was made more complicated by the governor
neglecting to sustain the action of the assembly. The explanation of
his attitude is not difficult. He was accustomed to obtain substantial
perquisites from the sale of Indians. Valuable gifts were presented him
by the traders for allowing them to remain unmolested. On one occasion
Governor Nathan Johnson refused £200 offered by the assembly for his
Indian perquisites.[638]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account