be held for the said county, at public vendue: and the monies arising by such sale, shall be applied to the use of the parish, by the vestry thereof: and if any negro, mulatto or Indian slave, set free otherwise than is herein directed, shall depart this province, within six months next after his or her freedom, and shall afterwards return into this government, it shall and may be lawful for the churchwardens of the parish where such negro or mulatto shall be found, at the expiration of one month, next after his or her return into this government to take up such negro or mulatto, and sell him or them, as slaves, at the next court to be held for the county, at public vendue; and the monies arising thereby, to be applied, by the vestry, to the use of the parish, as aforesaid."

The free Negroes were badly treated. They were not allowed any communion with the slaves. A free Negro man was not allowed to marry a white woman, nor even a Negro slave woman without the consent of her master. If he formed an alliance with a white woman, her offspring were bound out, or sold by the church-wardens, until they obtained their majority. If the white woman were an indentured servant, she was constrained to serve an additional year. If she were a free woman, she was sold for two years by the church-wardens. Free Negroes were greatly despised and shunned by both slaves and white people.

2

As a conspicuous proof of the glaring hypocrisy of the "nobility," who, in the constitution, threw open the door of the Church to the Negro, it should be said, that, during the period from the founding of the Province down to the colonial war, no attempt was ever made, through the ecclesiastical establishment, to dissipate the dark clouds of ignorance that enveloped the Negro's mind. They were left in a state of ignorance and crime. The gravest social evils were winked at by masters, whose lecherous examples were the occasion for the most grievous offending of the slaves. The Mulattoes and other free Negroes were taxed. They had no place in the militia, nor could they claim the meanest rights of the humblest "leetman."

1 Public Acts of N. C., p. 66. 2 The Act of 1741 says, "until 31 years of age."

CHAPTER XXIII.

THE COLONY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.

1679-1775.

THE PROVINCIAL Government of Massachusetts exERCISES AUTHority over the State of New HAMPSHIRE AT ITS ORGANIZATION. -SLAVERY EXISTED FROM THE BEGINNING. THE GOVERNOR RELEASES A SLAVE From Bondage. - INSTRUCTION AGAINST IMPORTATION OF SLAVES. - SEVERAL ACTS REGULating the CONDUCT OF SERVANTS. THE INDIFFERENT TREATMENT OF SLAVES. — THE IMPORTATION OF INDIAN SERVANTS FORBIDDEN. AN ACT CHECKING THE SEVERE TREATMENT OF SERVANTS AND SLAVES.-SLAVES IN THE COLONY UNTIL THE COMMENCEMENT CF HOSTILITIES.

A

NTERIOR to the year 1679, the provincial government of Massachusetts exercised authority over the territory that now comprises the State of New Hampshire. It is not at all improbable, then, that slavery existed in this colony from the beginning of its organic existence. As early as 1683 it was set upon by the authorities as a wicked and hateful institution. On the 14th of March, 1684, the governor of New Hampshire assumed the responsibility of releasing a Negro slave from bondage. The record of the fact is thus preserved :

"The governor tould Mr. Jaffery's negro hee might goe from his master, hee would clere him under hande and sele, so the fello no more attends his master's consernes. "I

It may be inferred from the above, that the royal governor of the Province felt the pressure of public sentiment on the question of anti-slavery. While this colony copied its criminal code from Massachusetts, its people seemed to be rather select, and, on the question of human rights, far in advance of the people of Massachusetts. The twelfth article was: "If any man stealeth mankind he shall be put to death or otherwise grievously punished." The entire code - the first one- was rejected in England as "fanatical and absurd." 2 It was the desire of this new and

1 Belknap's Hist. of N. H., vol. i. p. 333.

2 Hildreth, vol. i. p. 501.

feeble colony to throw every obstacle in the way of any legal recognition of slavery. The governors of all the colonies received instruction in regard to the question of slavery, but the governor of New Hampshire had received an order from the crown to have the tax on imported slaves removed. The royal instructions, dated June 30, 1761, were as follows:

"You are not to give your assent to, or pass any law imposing duties on negroes imported into New Hampshire." I

New Hampshire never passed any law establishing slavery, but in 1714 enacted several laws regulating the conduct of servants. One was An Act to prevent disorders in the night :

"Whereas great disorders, insolencies and burglaries are ofttimes raised and committed in the night time by Indian, negro and mulatto servants and slaves, to the disquiet and hurt of her Majesty's good subjects, for the prevention whereof Be it, &c.—that no Indian, negro or mulatto servant or slave may presume to be absent from the families where they respectively belong, or be found abroad in the night time after nine o'clock; unless it be upon errand for their respective masters.”2

The instructions against the importation of slaves were in harmony with the feelings of the great majority of the people. They felt that slavery would be a hinderance rather than a help to them, and in the selection of servants chose white ones. If the custom of holding men in bondage had become a part of the institutions of Massachusetts, so like a cancer that it could not be removed without endangering the political and commercial life of the colony, the good people of New Hampshire, acting in the light of experience, resolved, upon the threshold of their provincial life, to oppose the introduction of slaves into their midst. The first result was, that they learned quite early that they could get on without slaves; and, second, the traders in human flesh discovered that there was no demand for slaves in New Hampshire. Even nature fought against the crime; and Negroes were found to be poorly suited to the climate, and, of course, were an expensive luxury in that colony.

But, nevertheless, there were slaves in New Hampshire. The majority of them had gone in during the time the colony was a part of the territory of Massachusetts. They had been purchased by men who regarded them as indispensable to them. They had

Gordon's Hist. of Am. Rev., vol. v. Letter 2. 2 Freedom and Bondage, vol. i. p. 266.

lived long in many families; children had been born unto them, and in many instances they were warmly attached to their owners. But all masters were not alike. Some treated their servants and slaves cruelly. The neglect in some cases was worse than stripes or over-work. Some were poorly clad and scantily fed; and, thus exposed to the inclemency of the severe climate, many were precipitated into premature graves. Even white and Indian servants shared this harsh treatment. The Indians endured greater hardships than the Negroes. They were more lofty in their tone, more sensitive in their feelings, more revengeful in their disposition. They were both hated and feared, and the public sentiment against them was very pronounced. A law, passed in 1714, forbid their importation into the colony under a heavy penalty.

In 1718 it was found necessary to pass a law to check the severe treatment inflicted upon servants and slaves. An Act for restraining inhuman severities recited,

"For the prevention and restraining of inhuman severities which by evil masters or overseers, may be used towards their Christian servants, that from and after the publication hereof, if any man smite out the eye or tooth of his man servant or maid servant, or otherwise maim or disfigure them much, unless it be by mere casualty, he shall let him or her go free from his service, and shall allow such further recompense as the court of quarter sessions shall adjudge him. 2. That if any person or persons whatever in this province shall wilfully kill his Indian or negroe servant or servants he shall be punished with death." I

There were slaves in New Hampshire down to the breakingout of the war in the colonies, but they were only slaves in name. Few in number, widely scattered, they felt themselves closely identified with the interests of the colonists.

I Freedom and Bondage, vol. i. p. 267.

CHAPTER XXIV.

THE COLONY OF PENNSYLVANIA.

1681-1775.

ORGANIZATION OF THE GOVERnment of PenNSYLVANIA. - The Swedes and DUTCH PLANT SETTLEMENTS ON THE WESTERN BANK OF THE DELAWARE RIVER. THE Governor of New York SEEKS TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION OVER THE TERRITORY OF PENNSYLVANIA - THE FIRST LAWS AGREED UPON IN ENGLAND.- PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. MEMORIAL AGAINST SLAVERY DRAUGHTED AND ADOPTED BY THE GERMANTOWN FRIENDS. WILLIAM PENN PRESENTS A BILL FOR THE BETTER REGULATION OF SERVANTS. AN ACT PREVENTING THE IMPORTATION OF NEGROES AND INDIANS. RIGHTS OF NEGROES.-A DUTY LAID UPON NEGROES AND MULATTO SLAVES. — THE QUAKER THE FRIEND OF THE NEGRO. ENGLAND BEGINS TO THREATEN HER DependencieS IN NORTH AMERICA. -THE PEOPLE OF PENNSYLVANIA REFLECT UPON THE PROBABLE OUTRAGES THEIR NEGROES MIGHT COMMIT.

L

ONG before there was an organized government in Pennsylvania, the Swedes and Dutch had planted settlements on the western bank of the Delaware River. But the English crown claimed the soil; and the governor of New York, under patent from the Duke of York, sought to exercise jurisdiction over the territory. On the 11th of July, 1681, "Conditions and Concessions were agreed upon by William Penn, Proprietary," and the persons who were "adventurers and purchasers in the same province." Provision was made for the punishment of persons who should injure Indians, and that the planter injured by them should "not be his own judge upon the Indian." All controversies arising between the whites and the Indians were to be settled by a council of twelve persons, - six white men and six Indians.

The first laws for the government of the colony were agreed upon in England, and in 1682 went into effect. Provision was made for the registering of all servants, their full names, amount of wages paid, and the time when they received their remuneration. It was strictly required that servants should not be kept beyond the time of their indenture, should be kindly treated, and the customary outfit furnished at the time of their freedom.

The baneful custom of enslaving Negroes had spread through