Chapter V

.

[362] “It seems probable that there were no Indian slaves in Plymouth before the division of land in 1623.” _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 4, iii, p. 114.

[363] _Boston News Letter_ and other newspapers.

[364] Ellis, _The History of Roxbury Town_, p. 136.

[365] Felt, _The History of Ipswich_, pp. 306, 320; _Boston Weekly Mercury_, October 2, 1735.

[366] Wilson, _Where American Independence Began_, p. 154.

[367] Corey, _The History of Malden_, p. 416.

[368] _Ibid._

[369] Chase, _The History of Haverhill_, pp. 239, 248.

[370] Earle, _Customs and Fashions in Old New England_, p. 84.

[371] Doyle, _English Colonies in America, The Puritan Colonies_, ii, p. 68. In 1708, Governor Dudley made a report on slaves and the slave trade to the Board of Trade, in which he stated that there were 400 negro slaves in Massachusetts. No mention was made of Indians. _Historical Magazine_, x, p. 52.

[372] _American Antiquarian Society Proceedings_, 1885–1887, new series, iv, p. 216.

[373] _American Statistical Association Collections_, i, pp. 208–214; _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 1, iv, p. 199.

[374] Livermore, _A History of Block Island_, etc., p. 60.

[375] _New England Courant_, June 17, 1723—A Spanish Indian runaway from Newport; _Boston Gazette_, October 28, 1728—An Indian runaway slave from Warwick, Rhode Island.

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

[377] _Ibid._, p. 10.

[378] _Colonial Records of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations_, viii, p. 359.

[379] Bradford, _History of Plymouth Plantation_, p. 342, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_.

[380] See pp. 130–131, 150.

[381] Caulkins, _History of New London_, pp. 330, 335, mentions Indian slaves in 1711 and 1735; An Indian woman slave lived in Westbury until her death in 1774. Steiner, _History of Slavery in Connecticut_, p. 21, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xi.

[382] Steiner, _op. cit._, p. 12, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xi.

[383] Sanborn, _New Hampshire, an Epitome of Popular Government_, p. 137.

[384] Sanborn, _op. cit._, p. 151, states that in 1720, hardly an Indian remained in New Hampshire, except, perhaps, an enslaved captive.

[385] The _Boston Postboy_, May 2, 1743, advertises a runaway Indian slave from Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The same paper, July 25, 1743, advertises another runaway Indian slave from New Castle, in the same colony.

[386] “In theory, at least, the Hollander considered the Indian a man like himself, with analogous rights to life, liberty and possessions.” Consequently, “Indians were not enslaved in New Netherland.” Van Rensselaer, _History of the City of New York in the Seventeenth Century_, i, p. 63. These statements are rather difficult to prove. Holding Indians as slaves who had been enslaved elsewhere and then brought into the colony, and making slaves in the colony and then sending them out of it, were practices that unquestionably existed, even if on a small scale. The declaration of the governor and council of New York in 1680 that “all Indians here have always been, and are, free, and not slave, except such as have been formerly brought from the Bay and Foreign Ports,” (Brodhead, _History of the State of New York_, first edition, ii, p. 331), shows the presence of some Indian slaves in the Dutch colony.

The records of New Netherland contain accounts of manumission in that colony of slaves called Spaniards and bearing Spanish names. Whether these individuals were Spanish Indians, or negroes from the Spanish Islands, is not specified in the records. One such person received his freedom in 1645, by payment of 300 carolus guilders. O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Historical Manuscripts in the Office of the Secretary of State, Albany, New York_, pt. i, p. 45. Another received his freedom in 1646, in return for his long and faithful services. O’Callaghan, _op. cit._, pt. i, p. 105. Two others, slaves in the Company’s service, were freed in 1664. O’Callaghan, _op. cit._, pt. i, p. 264. Still others, belonging presumably to individual owners, received freedom in this same year. O’Callaghan, _op. cit._, pt. i, p. 269.

Two incidents of enslavement of Indians in New Netherland are noteworthy, even if the individuals concerned were subsequently sent out of the colony. The first instance occurred in 1644, in connection with the Indian troubles of that time. At the close of the difficulties, some of the Indian prisoners were sent by Governor Kieft to the Bermudas “as a present to the English governor.” Still others were given to the “oldest and most experienced soldiers,” who, at that time, were allowed to go to Holland. Brodhead, _History of the State of New York_, revised edition, i, p. 396; _New York Colonial Documents_, i, p. 215; Van Rensselaer, _op. cit._, i, p. 235. The second instance was connected with the Esopus Indians. On May 25, 1660, a resolution was taken in the council to transport to Curaçao all but two or three of the lately acquired Esopus Indians, “to be employed there, or at Buenaire, with the negroes in the Company’s service.” Brodhead, _op. cit._, revised edition, i, p. 676; O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Historical Manuscripts in the Office of the Secretary of State in Albany_, pt. i, p. 295. On June 29th, Stuyvesant issued an order, and arranged for their passage. O’Callaghan, _op. cit_., pt. i, p. 214. O’Callaghan, _History of New Netherland_, etc., ii, p. 420, gives the number transported as eleven. Schoonmaker, _The History of Kingston_, p. 16, states it as twenty. Those retained in the colony on this occasion were not enslaved, but were to be punished “as might be thought proper or as necessity might demand.” Schoonmaker, _op. cit._, p. 16. The relations with the Iroquois had prevented any serious Indian wars in the colony, and because of this relation Stuyvesant’s act was considered highly impolitic. His course, which was perhaps patterned after the action of the English following the Pequot War, he sought to justify in his declaration that “their enlargement would have a tendency to create disaffection toward our nation. Our barbarian neighbors would glory, as if they had inspired us with terror.” Schoonmaker, _op. cit._, p. 16. In 1661 these Indians were recalled from slavery. O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Historical Manuscripts_, etc., pt. i, p. 295.

[387] Van Rensselaer, _History of the City of New York in the Seventeenth Century_, i, p. 193.

[388] Brodhead, _History of the State of New York_, revised edition, i, p. 193.

[389] _Records of the Towns of North and South Hempstead, Long Island_, ii, p. 60.

[390] Northrup, _Slavery in New York_, in _New York State Library Bulletin, History_. No. 4, May, 1900, p. 305.

[391] _Ibid._ Note that April 27, 1699, Bellomont reported to the Lords of Trade: “They have no other servants in this country but negroes.”

[392] O’Callaghan, _Calendar of Historical Manuscripts in the Office of the Secretary of State, Albany, New York_, pt. ii, p. 314.

[393] _New York Historical Society Collections_, 1892, i, p. 413.

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

[395] Scharf, _History of Westchester County_, etc., ii, p. 667.

[396] _Ecclesiastical Records of the State of New York_, iv, p. 2357; Dix, _History of the Parish of Trinity Church in the City of New York_, i, p. 203.

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

[398] O’Callaghan, _Documentary History of New York_, ii, p. 984; _Michigan Pioneer and Historical Society Collections_, xxx, p. 596.

[399] _New York Gazette_, July 23, 1733 (a runaway Indian slave from Flushing); March 3, 1734 (a runaway Indian slave from Westchester); February 13, 1739 (a runaway slave from New York City). _New York Weekly Mercury_, October 27, November 3, and November 10, 1740 (a runaway Indian slave from New York); August 16, 1756 (a runaway Indian slave from Long Island); May 30 and June 13, 1757 (a runaway Indian slave from “the mines near Second River”); June 12, June 19, June 26, July 3, 1758 (a runaway Indian slave from Newcastle, Westchester County).

[400] The Delaware Indians had been conquered by the Iroquois, and so humbled that they were glad to accept the friendship of the Quakers and live in peace. Parkman, _The Conspiracy of Pontiac_, etc., sixth edition, i, p. 82.

[401] _The Pennsylvania Gazette_, April 20, 1737, October 5, 1738, March 16, 1731. _The American Daily Mercury_, March 24, 1720; May 24, 1726; August 28, 1729; July 30, 1730; August 16, 1733; July 8, 1771, _The Pennsylvania Journal_, June 18, 1726.

[402] Scharf, _History of Delaware_, i, p. 180; Smith, _History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania_, p. 219.

[403] Martin, _Chester and its Vicinity_, p. 189.

[404] Smith, _History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania_, p. 335; Martin, _Chester and its Vicinity_, p. 189; Futhey and Cope, _History of Chester County, Pennsylvania_, etc., p. 424. The registration was made in accordance with the terms of the act of 1780, which provided for the registration of all negro and mulatto slaves and servants for life.

[405] _Report of the Friends’ Yearly Meeting of Pennsylvania and the Jersies, from the 19th to the 24th of the 7th month, 1719_, p. 211.

[406] Lee, _New Jersey as a Colony and as a State_, i, p. 199.

[407] Cornelius Van Vorst had a slave known as “Half Indian Jack,” who died at Harsimus, February 2, 1831, at the age of 102 years. Winfield, _History of the County of Hudson, New Jersey_, p. 434.

_The New York Gazette_, June 24, July 8, July 15, July 29, August 12, and August 26, advertises a runaway Indian slave, and a second slave, half Indian and half negro, from Monmouth County, New Jersey. _The American Weekly Mercury_, October 24, October 31, and November 7, 1734, advertises a runaway slave, half Indian and half negro, from Perth Amboy, New Jersey.

[408] The Yoamaco Indians of that section had been so preyed upon by the “Susquahannocks” that they had abandoned their country. Oldmixon, _The British Empire in America_, etc., i, p. 189.

[409] Lawson, _A New Voyage to Carolina_, etc., p. 194, states that the Indians of the Carolina country refused to sell their children, though they would sell anything else they possessed for wampum. For precedents when the English sold white captives in war, see Trowbridge, _A History of Ancient Maritime Interests in New Haven_, p. 47; Lecky, _A History of England in the Eighteenth Century_, ii, p. 189.

[410] Quoted in Bannister, _British Colonization and Colored Tribes_, pp. 49–54.

[411] _William and Mary College Quarterly_, vi, p. 214.

[412] _The Narrative of Bacon’s Rebellion_, in Winder Papers, Virginia State Library, reprinted in _Virginia Magazine of History_, iv, 1896–1897, p. 140, tells of forty-five Indian captives taken. “The plunder and captives estimated noe lesse than 6 or 700, the goodes being three horse loades.”

[413] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, x, p. 165. Later all but five were restored to the queen by Ingram, one of Bacon’s officers.

[414] Rivers, _A Sketch of the History of South Carolina_, etc., p. 106.

[415] Hewat, _op. cit._, i, p. 78; Grahame, _The History of the United States_, etc., ii, p. 113.

[416] Rivers, _op. cit._, p. 200.

[417] Religious hatred and race hatred, as well as the desire for personal gain, dictated Moore’s action. Note that the constant enmity of the Spanish and English Indians, and their raids upon each other, gave him excellent opportunity to accomplish his purpose.

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

[419] _Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology_, p. 233.

[420] _Public Records of South Carolina_, v, 1700–1710, p. 196; _British Public Record Office_, vol. 620.

[421] Fairbanks, _History of Florida from its Discovery_, etc., p. 179.

[422] Fairbanks, _op. cit._, p. 189; Fairbanks, _The History and Antiquities of the City of St. Augustine_, etc., p. 139.

[423] Hodge, _op. cit._, pt. i, p. 875; pt. ii, p. 600.

[424] _Records of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts._

[425] A few Indians were captured before this, and a few more were imported, like other slaves. Bassett, _Slavery and Servitude in the Colony of North Carolina_, p. 72, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xiv.

[426] _North Carolina Colonial Records_, i, p. 815.

[427] McCrady, _The History of South Carolina under Proprietary Government_, p. 499.

[428] _North Carolina Colonial Records_, i, p. 826.

[429] _Ibid._, i, p. 875.

[430] _Ibid._, ii, p. iv.

[431] _Ibid._, i, p. 826.

[432] _Ibid._, ii, p. 30; McCrady, _op. cit._, p. 526; _South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine_, ix, 1908, pp. 33, 39, 41.

[433] McCrady, _op. cit._, p. 566; Rivers, _A Sketch of the History of South Carolina_, etc., p. 254; _South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine_, viii, 1908, pp. 28–54.

[434] Bassett, _op. cit._, p. 73, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xiv.

[435] These Indians had never forgotten the seizure of twenty-seven of their number by Thomas Hunt who had been in Smith’s expedition of 1614, and were, in consequence, always antagonistic to the whites. As the result of their depredations, the Connecticut general court, May 1, 1637, declared an offensive war against them. See copy of the court record in Orr, _History of the Pequot War_, etc., p. ix. Mason records that one cause of not pursuing the Indians farther was the Sabbath coming on. Mason, _A Brief Narrative of the Pequot War_, in Orr, _op. cit._, p. 34.

[436] _Ibid._, p. 39.

[437] Winthrop, _Journal History of New England_, i, p. 225, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_; Hubbard, _A Narrative of the Indian Wars in New England_, p. 42. They were carried into the harbor and drowned. Mather, _Magnalia_,, edition of 1820, ii, p. 483.

It has been stated that Massachusetts made no effort to retain the captive male Pequot as slaves because of the admonition given in Leviticus, xxiv, 44, that the heathen of the land in which the Israelitish people dwelt were not to be enslaved, but only those “that were round about them”—the Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, and Syrians, whose utter extermination had not been expressly decreed. _Historical Magazine_, x, p. 49.

[438] Winthrop, _Journal_, i, p. 225, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_; Bradford, _History of Plymouth Plantation_, p. 342, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_. Winthrop states the number of captives as eighty. This is evidently an error, for the sum of those whom he mentions as disposed of is eighty-three. Mason, _op. cit._, in Orr, _op. cit._, p. 39, gives the number of captives as one hundred and eighty.

A division of the Indian captives among the allies would tend to draw them nearer to the English. It was for this reason, and because the Indians enslaved at the first division of captives persisted in running away, that all the Indians of the second division were not enslaved. The Indians distributed among the friendly Indians did not become their slaves. In the case of the Narraganset, Roger Williams informed Governor Winthrop, June, 1637, that they did not desire to use the Pequot as slaves, but preferred to treat them kindly, and grant them houses and lands. _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 4, vi, p. 195.

[439] Winthrop, _Journal_, i, p. 225, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_.

[440] Steiner, _History of Slavery in Connecticut_, p. 9, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, xi.

[441] Morton, _op. cit._, 104; _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 4, iii, p. 360. In the Swamp Fight the Indians were attacked by the combined forces of Massachusetts and Connecticut. Hence the division of the captives between the two colonies.

[442] Winthrop, _Journal_, i, p. 260, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_; Bradford, _op. cit._, p. 342, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_.

[443] Winthrop, _Journal_, i, p. 225, in _Original Narratives of Early American History_.

[444] _Calendar of State Papers_, colonial series, i, 1574–1660, p. 278.

[445] _Ibid._, i, p. 296.

[446] Freeman, _Civilisation and Barbarism_, p. 64, declares that the enslaving of Indians had become a mania with speculators.

[447] Williamson, _The History of the State of Maine_, etc., i, p. 531; Drake, _The Book of the Indians_, ninth edition, bk. iii, p. 40.

[448] Drake’s Note in Hubbard, _A Narrative of the Indian Wars in New England_, etc., ii, p. 94.

[449] Bodge, _Soldiers in King Philip’s War_, p. 209.

[450] _Plymouth Colony Records_, v, p. 173.

[451] _Ibid._, v, p. 174.

[452] Felt, _The Ecclesiastical History of New England_, ii, p. 576.

[453] Baylies, _Historical Memoir of New Plymouth_, ii, pt. iii, pp. 47–48; Church, _The History of King Philip’s War_, Dexter edition, p. 147.

[454] Baylies, _op. cit._, ii, pt. iii, p. 75.

[455] Hough, _A Narrative of the Causes which led to Philip’s Indian War of 1675–1676_, pp. 188–189.

[456] _Plymouth Colony Records_, v, p. 173; ix, p. 401.

[457] Hough, _op. cit._, p. 25; Felt, _Annals of Salem_, second edition, i, p. 507.

[458] _New England Historical and Genealogical Register_, viii, pp. 270–272.

[459] Hutchinson, _The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay_, etc., i, p. 306.

[460] Ellis and Morris, _King Philip’s War_, p. 287.

[461] Drake’s Note in Hubbard, _op. cit._, ii, p. 94. These Indians did not sell well abroad, for doubtless former experience had proved their race to be unsatisfactory as slaves. In one instance, when no immediate market could be found, a number of them were left in the slave market of Algiers from which, by the efforts of John Eliot, they were enabled to return to America in 1683. _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 1, ii, p. 183. Of this incident Cotton Mather said: “Moreover, ’tis a prophecy in Deut. 28: 68, ‘The Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee. Thou shalt see it no more again; and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.’ These did our Eliot imagine were sent to be sold in the coasts lying not very far from the coasts of Egypt, on the Mediterranean Sea, and scarce any chapman would offer to take them off.” _Magnalia_, bk. iii, pt. 3.

[462] Baylies, _op. cit._, ii, pt. iii, p. 190.

[463] For a discussion of the treatment of Philip’s wife and son, see _Massachusetts Historical Society Collections_, series 4, viii, p. 689. For the opinions of the two eminent divines to whom the matter of their disposal was referred before colonial action was taken, see Baylies, _op. cit._, ii, pt. iii, p. 190.

[464] _Plymouth Colony Records_, vi, p. 15. _The Boston Book of Possessions_, p. 145 (quoted in Corey, _The History of Malden_, p. 48), contains a proclamation issued by Governor Leverett, September 23, 1675, relating to the sale of seven male Indians to two colonists who were to transport and sell them anywhere they wished.

[465] Shurtleff, _Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England_, v, p. 136.

[466] Gookin, _History of the Christian Indians_, in _American Antiquarian Society Proceedings_, 1836, ii, p. 449.

[467] _Plymouth Colony Records_, v, p. 244.

[468] Shurtleff, _op. cit._, v, p. 136; _Plymouth Colony Records_, v, pp. 207, 223; vi, p. 15. The Plymouth general court required that the magistrates who disposed of such Indian children according to the order of the court, should sign “indentures for such as are so disposed, to prevent further differences.” _Plymouth Colony Records_, vi, p. 15.

[469] In 1676, as well as several years before and after, the government of Rhode Island was in the hands of the Quakers. Staples, _Annals of Providence_, p. 169. No organized effort against the system of slavery in general was made in Rhode Island until that of the Quakers, 1717. Weeden, _Early Rhode Island_, p. 188.

[470] _Rhode Island Historical Society Collections_, v, p. 170; _Rhode Island Historical Society Publications_, new series, i, p. 234. This same town meeting freed certain Indians and gave them the rights of inhabitants, and sentenced others to be shot for crime. _Early Records of Providence_, viii, p. 12. These Indian captives were carried to the port in a vessel belonging to Providence Williams, son of Roger Williams. Staples, _op. cit._, p. 172.

[471] Roger Williams was a member of this committee.

[472] _Rhode Island Historical Society Publications_, i, pp. 236–238; Arnold, _History of Rhode Island_, i, p. 425. For examples of indentures or bills of sale, and receipts returned to the committee, see _Early Records of the Town of Portsmouth_, pp. 430–433; vol. 01087 of the _Town Records of Providence_. See _Report of Record Commissioners on Providence Town Records_.

[473] Richman, _Rhode Island, its Making and its Meaning_, ii, p. 192; _Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations in New England_, ii, p. 549.

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

[475] _Connecticut Colonial Records_, ii, p. 308.

[476] _William and Mary College Quarterly_, viii, p. 165.

[477] _Ibid._, viii, p. 165.

[478] Hening, _The Statutes at Large_, etc., ii, pp. 346, 404.

[479] Foote, _Sketches of Virginia, Historical and Biographical_, first edition, p. 18.

[480] Hening, _op. cit._, ii, pp. 404, 440; _Virginia Magazine of History_, ii, p. 173. This law is almost a literal transcript of Bacon’s law.

[481] Ballagh, _A History of Slavery in Virginia_, in _Johns Hopkins University Studies_, extra volume xxiv, pp. 35, 50; Hening, _op. cit._, ii, pp. 346, 404.

[482] Hening, _op. cit._, iv, p. 10.

[483] _Ibid._, i, p. 259.

[484] _Ibid._, i, p. 459.

[485] Indians held in captivity before 1670 were not slaves but servants. See