SLAVERY AND SLAVE AGENCY – HOUSTON
AND CHARLESTON
When one thinks of slavery, it is of a
singular institution that is uniformly applied across a homogenous region, the
South. Yet this is an erroneous
assumption. The South is far from being
a uniform geographic region and contains many different environments. Likewise, the South, much like the country at
large during the 1800s, was in various states of settlement, with wholly
settled and well-established states in the East growing progressively less
settled the further west one traveled, with New Orleans being the exception
that proves the rule. Then, based on the
argument of David Goldfield, that cities are products of their region.[1] This study intends to demonstrate that this
principle is correct by examining how two cities implemented the South’s
peculiar institution of slavery, the well-established city of Charleston, South
Carolina and the frontier city of Houston, Texas. A comprehensive history of slavery in each of
these cities would fill a much larger work than this essay. However, by narrowing the scope and looking
at how slaves expressed agency and how each city developed and implemented the
institutions employed to control slave populations. This study seeks to demonstrate that the
slave experience varied between Charleston and Houston that each city developed
a specific understanding of its slave population. It is important to examine
the background of each city.
Eight generals who had supported Charles
II in his bid to regain the English throne founded Charleston in 1670. The generals were collectively known as the
Lords Proprietors. Prior to the
foundation of the colony, the Lords Proprietors had John Locke pen the
Fundamental Constitution of Carolina, which he modeled on his work, “A Letter
Concerning Toleration.” The city was
originally named Charles Towne in honor of King Charles II. The colony’s constitution, which provided a
climate of tolerance and Charles Town’s Harbour, led to rapid growth from
groups as diverse as French Huguenots and Sephardic Jews.[2]
However, not all immigration to the
Charleston area was voluntary. Estimates
suggest that between forty and sixty percent of all Africans brought to North
America via the slave trade came through Charleston. A large portion of the slaves worked in the
area around Charleston growing rice, tea, and indigo. By 1729, King George II bought out the Lord
Proprietors and made Carolina wholly a royal colony.[3] By the 1730s, Charleston was a boomtown
populated by hard-drinking, hard-working fortune seekers. The fuel for this boom was rice. By 1732, rice markets opened in Europe and by
1738 the price had doubled. The city was
abuzz with activity. The South Carolina
Gazette was replete with articles in which women called for equal rights while
others openly discussed sex, even interracial sex. Though there were those that condemned such
unions, there were just as many that defended them.[4]
By the 1770s, a very peculiar
demographic pattern developed in Charleston.
More than one-fourth of the white population had estates worth more than
£1,000 and more than two-fifths of the population could be considered
genteel. This wealth was more than twice
that of other colonies. One reason for
this was a society of rich whites who took advantage of the labors of poor
slaves.[5]
By 1739, a few miles south of Charleston
on the banks of the Stono River, an event that would shape the history of the
region occurred. A group of slaves
attacked and killed two white men. Then took
control of a store of small arms and powder and made south for the freedom of
Spanish Florida, killing slave owners and adding to their numbers as they
went. Until by the time, they met the
local militia the slaves numbered between 60 and 100. During the first volley from the militia,
fourteen slaves were killed, and many were wounded. The remainder of the rebel slaves fled. However, forty were hunted down and executed
without a trial. To many in Carolina,
the uprising came as no surprise. The year
1739 had seen hostility between England and Spain which culminated in the War
of Jenkin’s Ear. The Spanish offered sanctuary to slaves from English colonies,
and there had been many successful escapes to Florida in the months prior. Although it was the revolt, that was the
tipping point in the relations of the slaves and slave owners.[6]
In 1741, Africans outnumbered
Europeans two-to-one. In order to
alleviate this precarious situation, South Carolina tried to change the nature
of slavery by effectively stopping the importation of slaves from Africa and
other colonies by imposing stiff tariffs on any slaves brought from outside the
colony. This resulted in the slave community
in South Carolina becoming more Creole than African by the late 1740s. During the same period, the white population
went through a similar demographic change as immigration to South Carolina by
Europeans declined to a trickle. Due to the
threat of yellow fever; however, because yellow fever is less virulent in
children, and once a person has had the disease that person becomes
immune. This resulted in the white
population also becoming largely native Carolinians, which perhaps explains the
slave code of 1742. This code regulated
the behavior of slave owners, not the slaves themselves. It stated that slave owners must supply
adequate food and clothing; not work slaves more than fifteen hours a day;
allow for rest on Sundays; and punishments, such as cutting of tongues, ears,
and testicles, would be punishable by a fine.[7]
The legislation in 1741 and 1742,
however, did little to alleviate the fear of slave insurrection. In 1749, a slave named Agrippa reported a
plot by slaves on a plantation on the Cooper River to seize the powder magazine
in Charleston, to murder white people, and then flee south to Florida. Immediately the militia was called out and a
dozen slaves and half a dozen white “collaborators” were arrested. The people of Charleston breathed a sigh of
relief for having dodged an insurrection like that of Stono.[8] The governor’s investigation of the event
soon revealed that it was a hoax. Finally in the summer of 1822, the fear of
another slave revolt finally came to a head when rumors of an impending slave
revolt aided by an army of recently liberated slaves from Haiti. Authorities continued to interrogate slaves
and free blacks, frequently using torture to get the answers that they were
seeking. It appeared to be a grand
conspiracy. On June 22 through June 28,
1822, a free black man named Denmark Vesey was tried, named as the ring leader,
and, though he maintained his innocence, found guilty and executed on July 2,
1822.[9] Unfortunately, it did not end there. Hundreds of slaves and free men of color were
arrested and “questioned” and in the end the authorities executed thirty-five
slaves and free men of color and sold thirty-eight into exile, most probably to
plantations in the Caribbean.[10] However, the authorities stopping the alleged
revolt did not calm the fear of slave owners.
As had been the case, each insurrectionary scare led to a new wave of repression
for slaves.[11] Perhaps the most important measure to have
resulted from the Vesey conspiracy was the South Carolina Association. A group of slave owners formed this
“vigilance” society in 1823, and it would last into the 1850s. Its main purpose would be to monitor slave
activities and to put pressure on the authorities to see that slave statutes
were strictly enforced.[12]
Even
the fear of slave insurrection did not compare with the desire to gain wealth. Because
the tariff passed in 1741 was being undermined, the South Carolina legislature
voted on June 11, 1751 to reduce the tariff on the importation of slaves to
South Carolina by ninety percent. Even
though, the default position for many whites in Charleston was to dislike
slavery and condemn the slave trade. The
reality of the situation was that most planters chose finances over morality.[13]
By 1760, Charleston had become a
city of 8,000, half free and half slaves, which had grown up together though
that did not mean that whites and African Americans were on the same social
level. The whites generally took a very
paternalistic attitude with their slaves.[14] Though this paternalistic stance did not stop
Charlestonians from taking advantage of their slave’s earning potential even if
the job the slave was called on to perform was a dangerous one, such as
construction or metal working. Historians have described the low country of
South Carolina as a beach head for paternalism.
It is in and around Charleston that this idea begins to take hold. Paternalism
is an idea that required slave owners to acknowledge the humanity of their
slaves. The owner was responsible for
the well-being of their slaves as if they were children. As with children, paternalism taken to its
full realization would require that slaves make progress towards independence
and ultimately being their own person.[15] Though competing with
this feeling of paternalism was the greed of slave owners that fueled slavery
from its inception.
Though
it was not only in dangerous jobs that slave owners took advantage of their
slaves. Slaves in Charleston enjoyed a
kind of quasi-freedom that helped to foster a separate, and to some extent
illegal, economic system that was controlled by slaves and free people of
color. The latter group was a small
minority, especially after the passage of the 1830 bill requiring all
manumission requests to be approved by the state. However, most house business, such as
provisioning and contracting for household repairs, were carried out largely by
the staffs of the white elites, which were largely black. So complete was the exclusion of white
tradesmen that a group appealed to the Charleston city council.[16] This preference, however, did not just extend
to tradesmen alone but to many other forms of business. A fact that some enterprising merchants soon
caught on to by either hiring slaves or free blacks to serve as salesmen and
clerks. Though generally not approved of
in white business circles, the state judiciary ruled “A master may constitute
his slave his agent.” This was one way
that slave owners benefitted from the quasi-freedom of slaves.[17] Another was the “hiring out” of slaves. In this process, slave owners allowed slaves
to work for households or individuals that did not own slaves of their own,
usually as day laborers or domestics. However,
in some instances the slave would be hired out for specific jobs if skilled in
that trade. In most of these cases, the
slave worked autonomously and was even able to keep a small portion of the
money earned from their labor. The
amount and terms were usually negotiated by the slave owners who could make
hundreds of dollars a month with little effort.[18]
However, in some instances slaves were
able to seek out and contract their own work and even set their terms. Though this was technically illegal, it was
rarely prosecuted. This ability to earn
money was important to the slaves of Charleston as well as other cities. It allowed them to purchase food, lodging,
and clothing as well as the occasional luxury item.[19] It was this power that prompted Frederick
Douglass to write of Charleston’s slave population “[the urban slave] is almost
a free man when compared to the slave on a plantation.” [20] Some slaves even
demonstrated a high acumen for business.
An example of this was Joseph Elwig, a successful carpenter, who owned a
home on Coming Street, an area populated by prosperous free persons of color in
Charleston. While another slave, Anthony
Weston, who was a skilled millwright and mechanic, was able to acquire several
pieces of real estate around Charleston and his own slave labor force (listed
in his wife’s name). Due largely to his
talents in constructing and repairing rice mills around Charleston. [21] Throughout its history, slavery was an integral
part of the culture of Charleston. While many Charlestonians got rich as a
result of slavery there were many that looked upon slavery as an institution
that must eventually come to an end, which it did with the ending of the Civil War
in 1865.
In 1836, the Allen Brothers, two
land speculators, purchased half a league of land centered on the confluence of
the Buffalo and White Oak Bayous. The new city would be named Houston in honor
of Sam Houston, the hero of the Texas Revolution. Though Houston only has twenty-nine
years of history as a slave holding city, it is an important time to the
development of Houston as the city it is today.[22]
The history of urban slaves in Houston was
in many ways similar to urban slaves in Charleston and other cities across the
South. This was to be expected because
the peculiar institution was largely transplanted to the region by immigrants
to the area from the deep South of the United States. They not only brought their slaves but also
the means to control the slave population such as curfews, forbidding slaves
from buying or selling alcohol, and forbidding groups of slaves from
congregating without supervision of a responsible white person.[23] Like many other cities, Houston had slaves
that worked as domestics in the homes of Houston’s upper class. They also worked in the cities wharves,
warehouses, and were responsible for much of the unskilled labor that built the
city. That was not to say that Houston
was devoid of skilled slaves. For as
early as 1839, the Houston Board of Alderman had decreed that no slave would be
able to make his or her own labor contract without written permission of his
owner.[24] Whether this measure came as a response to
competition created by slaves or if it was a preemptive move is unclear seeing
that most other southern urban areas had similar statutes.
What is clear, however, was that some of
the largest slave owners did hire out a large portion of their slaves.[25] This was a common practice throughout
southern cities.[26] In Houston, a large portion was hired out to
build the numerous railroads that allowed Houston to serve the surrounding
hinterland. In 1840, in the Houston Morning Star, Andrew Brisco ran
an ad for sixty black men to be hired for six months to two years to work on
the Harrisburg and Brazos Railroad, though the railroad was never
completed. Slaves also performed much,
if not all, of the labor to construct the B.B.B. & C. Railroad that ran to
Houston in 1856.[27] While the hiring out of slaves was not unique
to Houston or even to Texas, it was a practice that was common in all areas of
the south. What was different in Texas was that almost half of all persons who
hired slaves did not own any slaves of their own.[28] In Houston, the percentage of slave ownership
among free males was about seventeen percent in 1850 and by 1860 that had
dropped to less than thirteen percent.[29] This, as well as the demographic make-up of
Houston’s slave labor force, is different than older more established Southern
cities.[30] Another difference is that Houston lacked an
appreciable free black population which could compete with slaves to provide labor;
this was not the case in most cities across the south.[31] As a result, a
significant number of non-slave holders in Houston were able to benefit directly
from slavery.[32]
Regardless of the industry that
slaves worked in, the life of the urban slave generally was preferable to that
of slaves on rural properties. In
Houston, like other Southern urban centers, slaves were allowed a certain
amount of privacy if not freedom, especially if the slaves were able to rent a
residence away from their owners. Contemporary reports from the nearby city of
Galveston estimated that about half the slaves resided in unsupervised
residences, it is likely a similar percentage in Houston lived unsupervised.[33] It was this quasi-freedom
that served as the backbone of the slave society.[34]
While the slave population in Houston was
never equal to the Caucasian population, there were enough slaves about that
they made an impression on one visitor that stated he saw several well-dressed
blacks, some driving carriages. Another
visitor reported a black owned restaurant that appeared to do a good business
providing both food and entertainment.[35] There is even evidence of
black-owned “ice cream saloons”.[36] While the evidence demonstrates slaves in
Houston were able to form social circles free from white interference. There
was also evidence of some overlap of these independent social circles. One example was Houston’s First Methodist
Church. The church’s original
congregation of sixty-eight, which was almost half black. For the first ten years of the church's
existence, the makeup was biracial. It
was not until the 1850s that blacks and whites in the congregation began
worshipping in separate buildings on the same parcel of land. It was not until 1867 that the now split
congregation worshipped at separate churches on separate parcels of land.[37] For slaves in Houston, the Methodist Church was
an important part of their emerging community.
Not only did the church provide a place for slaves to congregate in an
acceptable manner to the white society, there is also evidence that the African
Methodist Episcopal Church provided a private school for the education of slave
children possibly slaves themselves. Historians Howard Beeth and Cary Wintz
wrote, “Since the 1860 census counted only 8 free blacks in the city and only
one of these was of school age, we must assume that either slave children,
adult slaves, or both made up the student body of this early black school.”[38]
Though the church was not the only
place that whites and slaves interacted on personal levels. The Texas Weekly
describes a “dancing master” who was black and not only instructed whites in
dance but hosted soirees at the Houston courthouse.[39] One editor of a Texas newspaper wrote in 1859
about dances that were being attended by both whites and blacks and according
to this individual; these dances were common in Texas’ larger cities. The editorial went on to describe how these,
“low, unprincipled white men,” would soon lead to insurrection or a Negro
stampede to Mexico. Neither of which
happened.[40] Though there were other instances in Houston
periodicals that echoed similar sentiments, such as an editorial that was
printed in April of 1856.
The first thing
that strikes an attentive observer on his arrival in Houston is the immense
latitude allowed to Negros. No matter
what time of night you pass through the streets, you are sure to meet parties
of Negroes, who go where they please, unquestioned and irresponsible such a
thing as a “pass” is unheard of and we doubt if they are even furnished. In certain quarters of the city there are large
congregations of Negroes, who hire their own time, and who live entirely free
from supervision of any white man.
Speaking candidly and impartiality, there is more insolence among the
Negroes of Houston, and more careless conduct, than in any other city or town
south of Mason and Dixon’s line.[41]
Despite
such editorials, there is no evidence that the slave population of Houston was
responsible for a higher portion of the crimes committed in Houston for any
year that slavery existed. While there is evidence that slaves on occasion did
participate in theft and burglary, there is no evidence to suggest slaves
participated in such crimes with any more frequency than did whites.[42]
In
fact, slaves had a greater incentive not to participate in illegal actions because
both slaves and the limited number of free blacks were subject to harsher sentences
than their white counterparts. Per Texas
state law an African American convicted of burglary against a white individual
could be sentenced to death.[43] However, a crime committed against other
African Americans was viewed much less harshly.
For instance, two African Americans who were involved in a fight were
taken before the mayor and both were sentenced to be whipped. While this seems
like a harsh sentence, under the aforementioned statute if one of the
participants had been Caucasian then the African American could have been sentenced
to death.[44]
Charleston, South Carolina and
Houston, Texas are both southern cities, however, when one thinks of each city
separately they conjure very different images. One city is over 300 years old
while the other is not yet 200 years old.
While both cities had slave populations, Houston in 1860 had 1,060
slaves compared to a total population of about 4,000 whereas Charleston had a
population of 26,548 whites and free blacks in addition to a slave population
of 13,606. These two cities were very
different. Even though Houston’s slave culture was imported as an institution
largely intact as its largest group of immigrants was from the deep south of
the United States, they brought not only their slaves but their means for
controlling the slave population.[45] However, Houston never
experienced the imbalances in the slave population that Charleston saw in its
population and Houston was never the host to anything that came close to any
kind of slave insurrection. As a result the way most Houstonians looked upon
slavery and interacted in professional and social settings. This reflected a much different view of slavery
then that which was held by most Charlestonians even if the institution was
carried out in much the same way. Demonstrated by increasing levels of
manumission among slave owners, even while they did their best to control not
only a growing population of free blacks but a shrinking population of
slaves. While Houstonians saw slavery as
nothing more than an advantageous business proposition without the history of
slave rebellions and relatively small slave population. While possessing a large foreign-born
population (German & Irish) that came from a society where chattel slavery
was nonexistent, it leads to a situation where blacks and whites interacted
more freely. Yet there were a growing
number of slaves and a shrinking number of manumissions. Slavery was a much
more vital institution in Houston than Charleston and would have likely
continued if not for slaveries demise at the end of the Civil War.
[1] David Goldfield, Region Race and Cities: Interpreting the Urban South (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State
University Press), 7.
[2] “History of Charleston, South Carolina,” United States History, accessed April 5, 2015, www.u-s-
history.com/pages/h2767.html
[3] Damon Fordham, “A Port of Entry for Enslaved Africans,” Charleston’s African-American Heritage, accessed
April 7, 2015, http://www.africanamericancharleston.com/lowcountry.html.
[4] Peter H. Wood, Black Majority: Negroes in Colonial South Carolina from 1670 Through the Stono Rebellion
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1975), 98.
[5] Joseph Kelly, America’s Longest Siege: Charleston, Slavery, and the Slow March Toward Civil War (New York:
The Overlook Press, 2013), 24-26.
[8] Ibid, 48-50.
[9] James R. Schenck, “An Official Report of the Trials of Sundry Negros, Charged with an Attempt to Raise an
Insurrection,” (Library of Congress, American Memory, accessed April 7, 2015), http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/llst:@field(DOCID+@lit(rbcmisclst0101div1)),
“Narrative of the Events Comprising the Vesey Rebellion,” (South Carolina Executive Department, accessed April 6, 2015), www.teachingushistory.org/pdfs/VeseySummary.pdf.
Denmark Vesey Slave Conspiracy,” The William and Mary Quarterly 68, no. 2 (2011): 287.
House, 1974), 257.
Charleston,” The South Carolina Historical Magazine 78, no. 3 (1977): 191-192.
[14] T. Erskine Clarke, “An Experiment in Paternalism: Presbyterians and Slaves in Charleston, South Carolina,”
Journal of Presbyterian History 53, no. 3 (1975): 223.
[15] Clarke, “An Experiment in Paternalism,” 224.
[16] Loren Schweninger, “Slave Independence and Enterprise in South Carolina, 1780-1865,” The South Carolina
Historical Magazine 93, no. 2 (1992): 107-108.
[17] Ibid, 108.
[18] Schweninger, “Slave Independence and Enterprise,” 112.
[19] Ibid, 112.
[21] Schweninger, “Slave Independence and Enterprise,” 119-120.
[22] Marguerite Johnston, Houston: The Unknown City 1836-1946 (College Station, TX: Texas A & M University
Press, 1991), 9.
[23] Tamara Miner Haygood, “Use and Distribution of Slave Labor in Harris County, Texas, 1836-60,” in Black Dixie:
Afro-Texas History and Culture in Houston, ed. Beeth, Howard, and Cary D. Wintz (College Station, TX: Texas A & M University, 1992), 36-37.
[24] Ibid, 37.
[25] Goldfield, Region Race and Cities, 110.
[26] Ibid, 110.
[27] Haygood, “Use and Distribution of Slave Labor,” 44-45.
[28] Alwyn Barr, “African Americans in Texas: From Stereotypes to Diverse Roles,” in Texas Through Time, ed.
Walter L. Buenger and Robert A. Calvert (College Station, TX: Texas A & M University Press, 1991), 53.
[29] Haygood, “Use and Distribution of Slave Labor”, 45.
[30] Susan Jackson, “Slavery in Houston: The 1850s,” The Houston Review 2, no. 2 (1980): 75.
[31] Paul Lack, “Urban Slavery in the Southwest,” (PhD’s dissertation, Texas Tech University, 1973), 20.
[32] Barr, “African Americans in Texas”, 53.
[33] Lack, “Urban Slavery in the Southwest,” 168.
[34] Ibid, 169.
[35] Howard Beeth and Cary D. Wintz, ed., Black Dixie: Afro-Texas History and Culture in Houston (College
Station, TX: Texas A & M University, 1992), 16-17.
[36] Anti-Meridian, “The Lions of Houston,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), June 18, 1858, accessed April 10,
2015, http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth235897/m1/1/zoom/?q=methodist negro date:1845-1860, “Another Case,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), Sept. 15, 1858, accessed April 10, 2015, http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth236009/m1/1/zoom/?q=burglary%20date:1850-1864.
[37] Beeth and Wintz, Black Dixie, 18.
[38] Beeth and Wintz, Black Dixie, 19.
[39] Anti-Meridian, “The Lions of Houston,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), June 18, 1858, accessed April 10,
2015, http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth235897/m1/1/zoom/?q=methodist negro date:1845-1860.
[40] Robert S Shelton, “On Empire’s Shore: Free and Unfree Workers in Galveston, Texas, 1840-1860.” Journal of
Social History 40, no. 3 (2007): 717.
[41] Jackson, “Slavery in Houston,” 80.
[42] “Galveston,” Tri-Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), Oct. 13, 1858, accessed April 11, 2015,
http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth236013/m1/2/zoom/?q=burglary%20date:1850-1864/, “Another Case,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), Sept. 15, 1858, accessed April 10, 2015, http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth236009/m1/1/zoom/?q=burglary%20date:1850-1864, “Galveston,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), Nov. 4, 1857, accessed April 11, 2015, http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth235965/m1/2/zoom/?q=burglary%20date:1850-1864.
[43] “An Act: To Provide for the Punishment of Crimes and Misdemeandors,” Telegraph and Texas Register
(Houston, TX), Feb. 24, 1838, http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth47975/m1/8/zoom/?q=negro.
[44] “An Affair of Honor,” Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston, TX), Aug. 18, 1838,
http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth48006/m1/3/zoom/?q=negro.
[45] Haygood, “Use and Distribution of Slave Labor,”36.
Bibliography
Barr,
Alwyn. “African Americans in Texas: From Stereotypes to Diverse Roles.” In Texas
Through
Time,
edited by Walter L. Buenger and Robert A. Calvert, 50-80. College Station, TX: Texas A & M University Press, 1991.
Beeth,
Howard, and Cary D. Wintz, ed. Black Dixie:
Afro-Texas History and Culture in
Houston. College Station, TX: Texas A & M University, 1992.
Clarke,
T. Erskine “An Experiment in Paternalism: Presbyterians and Slaves in
Charleston,
South Carolina,” Journal of Presbyterian History 53, no. 3 (1975).
Fordham,
Damon. “A Port of Entry for Enslaved
Africans.” Charleston’s African-American
Heritage. Accessed April 7, 2015. http://www.africanamericancharleston.com/lowcountry.html.
Genovese,
Eugene D. Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World
the Slaves Made. New York: Random
House, 1974.
Goldfield,
David. Region Race and Cities:
Interpreting the Urban South.
Baton Rouge, LA:
Louisiana State University Press.
Haygood,
Tamara Miner. “Use and Distribution of Slave Labor in Harris County, Texas,
1836-
60.” In Black Dixie: Afro-Texas History
and Culture in Houston, edited by Beeth, Howard, and Cary D. Wintz, 32-53. College Station, TX: Texas A & M University, 1992.
“History
of Charleston, South Carolina.” United
States History. Accessed April 5, 2015. www.u-
shistory.com/pages/h2767.html
Jackson,
Susan. “Slavery in Houston: The 1850s,” The Houston Review 2, no. 2 (1980).
January,
Alan F. “The South Carolina Association:
An Agency for Race Control in Antebellum
Charleston.”
The South Carolina Historical Magazine
78, no. 3 (1977).
Johnston,
Marguerite. Houston: The Unknown City
1836-1946. College Station, TX: Texas A
&
M University Press, 1991.
Kelly,
Joseph. America’s Longest Siege:
Charleston, Slavery, and the Slow March Toward
Civil War. New York: The Overlook Press, 2013.
Lack,
Paul. “Urban Slavery in the
Southwest.” PhD’s dissertation, Texas
Tech University,
1973.
“Narrative
of the Events Comprising the Vesey Rebellion.” South Carolina Executive
Department. Accessed April 6, 2015.
www.teachingushistory.org/pdfs/VeseySummary.pdf.
Schenck,
James R. “An Official Report of the
Trials of Sundry Negros, Charged with an
Attempt to Raise an Insurrection.” Library
of Congress, American Memory, accessed
April 7, 2015. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/llst:@field(DOCID+@lit(rbcmisclst0101div1))
Schweninger,
Loren “Slave Independence and Enterprise in South Carolina, 1780-1865,” The
South Carolina
Historical Magazine 93,
no. 2 (1992).
Shelton,
Robert S. “On Empire’s Shore: Free and Unfree Workers in Galveston, Texas,
1840-
1860.”
Journal of Social History 40, no. 3
(2007).
Spady,
James O’Neil. “Power and
Confession: On the Credibility of the
Earliest Reports of the
Denmark Vesey Slave Conspiracy.” The William and Mary Quarterly 68, no. 2
(2011).
Wood,
Peter H. Black Majority: Negroes in
Colonial South Carolina from 1670 Through the
Stono Rebellion.
New York: Alfred A.
No comments:
Post a Comment