DOCSLIB.ORG

Slave Policing and the Rise of the South Carolina Association in Charleston, S.C., 1790S-1820S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Slave Policing and the Rise of the South Carolina Association in Charleston, S.C., 1790S-1820S “How far will they go God knows”: Slave Policing and the Rise of the South Carolina Association in Charleston, S.C., 1790s-1820s Melissa Gismondi Department of History, McGill University, Montreal July 2012 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirement of the degree of Master of Arts, Melissa Gismondi 2012© 1 Abstract In 1820 a South Carolinian judge noted that, ―the Patrol Law ought to be considered as one of the safe guards of the people of South Carolina…as a security against insurrection; a danger of such a nature that it never can or ought to be lost sight of in the southern states.‖ Just two years later, another judge ruled on a patrol behaving badly. The issue of a militia captain ―acting under the colour of authority‖ arose, and Judge Abraham Nott lamented that if the problem persisted ―we are subject to a state of things even worse than that against which they [patrols] were intended to afford us protection.‖ This essay explores slave policing regimes in Charleston, South Carolina, and their relation to political and social changes within the city between the 1790s and 1820s. The project describes problems that arose with slave policing in the years before the 1822 Denmark Vesey rebellion, and then identifies a major shift that followed, in which the South Carolina Association—an elite vigilante group—assumed control of this fundamental dimension of governance within a slave society. En 1820, un juge de la Caroline du Sud a souligné que «la loi de patrouille devrait être considéré comme une mesure de protection pour le peuple de la Caroline du Sud… comme sécurité contre l’insurrection: un danger d’une telle nature qu’il ne doit et ne devrait jamais être perdu de vu dans les états du sud. « Seulement deux ans plus tard, un autre juge a statué sur une patrouille se conduisant mal. Lorsqu’un problème est survenu avec un capitaine de milice qui « agissait sous la bannière de l’autorité », le juge Abraham Nott a déploré que si le problème persiste «nous sommes assujettis à un état des choses encore pire que celui duquel ils (patrouilles) sont destiné à nous protéger. » Cet essaie examine les régimes de patrouille d’esclaves à Charleston en Caroline du Sud 2 et leurs liens avec les changements politiques et sociaux de cette ville entre les années 1790 et 1820. Le projet décrit des problèmes survenus lors de patrouilles d’esclaves dans les années avant la rébellion de Denmark Vesey en 1822 et ensuite identifie un changement majeur qui a suivi, dans lequel la South Carolina Association—un group élite de justicier—a prit la direction de cette dimension fondamentale de la gouvernance dans une société d’esclavage. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements…………………………………………………5 Introduction…………………………………………………………6 CHAPTER 1 “Great Numbers of Negroes”: Evolutions in South Carolinian Lowcountry Slavery……………………………11 CHAPTER 2 “Liberty!” in Revolutionary-Era South Carolina………….........39 CHAPTER 3 “Slavery Disliked a Dense Population”: Urban Slavery in Charleston……………………………………………………….66 CHAPTER 4 “Demons of St. Domingo!!!”: The Denmark Vesey Revolt and Charleston’s Slave Policing System…………………………94 CHAPTER 5 The South Carolina Association: “The Most Important Association, that has Ever Been”…………………………………122 Conclusion………………………………………………………….151 Notes………………………………………………………………..156 Bibliography……………………………………………………….168 4 Acknowledgements This project is the culmination of much thought, debate, research, and writing that would not have been possible without the continual support of many, and the extraordinary support of a few, who deserve mentioning here. Many thanks to those members of the McGill Graduate History community who showed a remarkable amount of enthusiasm when I presented initial ideas of this thesis at the September 2011 series of Topics on Tap, and to those who talked through ideas with me throughout the year. Funds made available from the McGill Arts Graduate Travel award gave me one of two invaluable opportunities to engage with archival material in Charleston and Columbia, S.C. Once there, I learned that a historian is nothing without the work of archivists. In particular, Dr. Nic Butler, Christina Shedlock, and the staff at the Charleston County Public Library were invaluable to this project. Though I’ve yet to meet them in person, I thank Douglas Egerton, Sally Hadden, and Lisa Arellano for either providing unpublished material and/or enriching my understanding of the many themes addressed in this thesis. I’d also like to thank the McGill History Department staff, who—despite it being a difficult year—helped me maneuver the logistics of travel awards and thesis submission. Thank you to Dawn Little who graciously edited pieces that I had looked at far too many times, Chelsea Peterdy whose help in tracking down a rare court transcript made this project look possible in its early stages, and Chris Gismondi who walked through many of Charleston’s museums and historic sites with me. Likewise, I owe Caitlin Stall-Paquet for helping me with translations. Throughout the year, Raymond Leonard squashed any doubts I had in the project or my capabilities as a historian, and Maggie Little’s encouragement always kept me motivated. Many thanks also go to Prof. Leonard Moore who allowed me to sit in his office over the years for hours on end, and who fostered my initial interest in American slavery and the U.S. South. To say this project couldn’t have been completed without the support of my supervisor and mentor, Prof. Jason Opal, is a great understatement. Jason has helped me work through complex historical ideas and gave me the opportunity to travel to, and then tackle often tricky southern archives. I thank Jason for guiding me when I felt that the project was perhaps either out of my hands, or too insignificant to matter. I’ve been truly fortunate to have a mentor who is both a brilliant scholar and one of the kindest people I know. Lastly, I can’t say thank you enough to my parents for their unwavering support in my pursuits, both inside and outside the academic world. 5 Introduction Early in the morning on January 12, 1821 Captain William Cattell, asleep in his Charleston-area plantation, woke to the sound of gunfire. Cattell, a captain in South Carolina’s militia, was soon summoned by one of his slaves to inspect a disturbance in the nearby slave quarters. There Cattell encountered Joseph Cole, a militia beat captain who had recently been given land nearby. Standing next to Cole was one of Cattell’s slaves, who alleged that Cole had been beating her. What, Cattell likely asked, had his slave done to deserve such a beating? Cole replied that he was ―patrolling‖ and that the slave was being ―insolent.‖ Cattell acknowledged that as a slave ―patrol,‖ Cole could enter his plantation and inspect the slave quarters. But Cattell had a right to know exactly why his slave was being physically abused by another white man. While South Carolinian slave patrols had considerable power to punish not only slaves, but also the free black population, they were not supposed to beat another man’s slave without just reason—to do so compromised slaveowners’ sense of sovereignty, a necessary component of a slaveholding society. Just then another slave appeared who attested that Cole had also beaten him—this time with the butt of his gun. As Cattell later learned, Cole’s ―patrolling‖ had also led him to shoot Cattell’s dogs to death, and to chop them up into little pieces. From high atop his horse, Cole then started shouting at Cattell, claiming that he was ―a damned mean fellow,‖ and his slaves were ―a nuisance to the parish.‖ A witness to the affair said he had ―never heard any man so outrageously abused as Cole abused Cattell.‖ The confrontation left William Cattell so anxious that he later moved his family to ―relieve 6 them from the constant alarm in which they were kept by the turbulent conduct of the patrols.‖1 What happened between Joseph Cole and William Cattell was neither unusual nor unpredictable. Rather, the incident was indicative of larger problems surrounding slave policing regimes in Charleston, South Carolina. Indeed, the experience of Cattell—a prominent member of Charleston’s ―slaveowning aristocracy‖—was a manifestation of a much deeper problem for both prominent planters and non-slaveholders alike. Charleston’s slave policing system was complex and convoluted—a mixture of both state and city run mechanisms that sought to keep Charleston’s slaves enslaved. As a militia captain, Cole assumed that he had the right to also be captain of his local slave patrol. But Cattell—and many other prominent planters—resented the role of men who they considered of ―questionable character‖ policing their slaves. As the notorious 1822 Denmark Vesey revolt in Charleston suggested, the slave policing regime had serious flaws. And to Charleston’s slaveowning aristocracy, the revolt—and incidents like what happened between Cole and Cattell—suggested that the official slave policing system needed the guidance of an unofficial association made up of Charleston’s ―finest‖ gentlemen.2 While the confrontation between Cole and Cattell highlights decades of problems concerning slave policing, it was also emblematic of a definitive shift that occurred in the wake of the 1822 revolt. Frustrated with the complexities and ―questionable‖ representatives of the official system, the South Carolina Association, a vigilante group made up of Charleston’s elite, stepped onto the scene and took over Charleston and South Carolina’s official slave policing systems. In so doing, the S.C.A. reasserted the role of 7 Charleston’s slaveowning aristocracy in how slaves and free blacks would be policed throughout the entire state, and in the process, reaffirmed the notion that the state—in the broadest sense of the word—would not overpower a prominent slaveowner’s sovereignty.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Moncks Corner Comprehensive Plan 2017
    MONCKS CORNER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2017 Planning Commission Adopted May 16, 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The 2017 Moncks Corner Comprehensive Plan was developed by a collaboration of the following: MONCKS CORNER PLANNING COMMISSION MONCKS CORNER TOWN COUNCIL Rev. Robin McGhee-Frazier (Co-Chair) Mayor Michael A. Lockliear Tobie Mixon (Co-Chair) David A. Dennis, Mayor Pro-Tem Mattie Gethers Johna T. Bilton Chris Griffin Charlotte A. Cruppeninck (PC Ex-officio member) Roscoe Haynes James N. Law Jr. Ryan Nelson Chadwick D. Sweatman Connor Salisbury Dr. Tonia A. Taylor Karyn Grooms (Alternate) TOWN STAFF Jeff Lord - Town Administrator Doug Polen - Community Development Director Marilyn Baker - Clerk Treasurer With assistance of the Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Council of Governments CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................................1 Background ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................................3 Community Vision ........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Thirteenth Amendment: Modern Slavery, Capitalism, and Mass Incarceration Michele Goodwin University of California, Irvine
    Cornell Law Review Volume 104 Article 4 Issue 4 May 2019 The Thirteenth Amendment: Modern Slavery, Capitalism, and Mass Incarceration Michele Goodwin University of California, Irvine Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Michele Goodwin, The Thirteenth Amendment: Modern Slavery, Capitalism, and Mass Incarceration, 104 Cornell L. Rev. 899 (2019) Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol104/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT: MODERN SLAVERY, CAPITALISM, AND MASS INCARCERATION Michele Goodwint INTRODUCTION ........................................ 900 I. A PRODIGIOUS CYCLE: PRESERVING THE PAST THROUGH THE PRESENT ................................... 909 II. PRESERVATION THROUGH TRANSFORMATION: POLICING, SLAVERY, AND EMANCIPATION........................ 922 A. Conditioned Abolition ....................... 923 B. The Punishment Clause: Slavery's Preservation Through Transformation..................... 928 C. Re-appropriation and Transformation of Black Labor Through Black Codes, Crop Liens, Lifetime Labor, Debt Peonage, and Jim Crow.. 933 1. Black Codes .......................... 935 2. Convict Leasing ........................ 941
    [Show full text]
  • INFORMATION to USERS the Most Advanced Technology Has Been Used to Photo­ Graph and Reproduce This Manuscript from the Microfilm Master
    INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from a computer printer. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. ■UMIAccessing the Worlds Information since 1938 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA Order Number 8726748 Black 'women abolitionists: A study of gender and race in the American antislavery movement, 1828-1800 Yee, Shirley Jo>ann, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1987 Copyright ©1987 by Yee, Shirley Jo-ann. All rights reserved. UMI 300N. ZeebRd. Ann Aibor, MI 48106 BLACK WOMEN ABOLITIONISTS: A STUDY OF GENDER AND RACE IN THE AMERICAN ANTISLAVERY MOVEMENT, 1828-1860 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Shirley Jo-ann Yee, A.B., M.A * * * * * The Ohio State University 1987 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Cannon Wreck” Project, 1986
    The “Two Cannon Wreck” Project, 1986 The “Two Cannon Wreck” Project Archaeology Underwater at Lewisfield Plantation, Berkeley County, SC By Carl Steen 1987 (Revised March 2018) 1987 (revised March 2018) 1 The “Two Cannon Wreck” Project, 1986 ABSTRACT In the fall of 1986 South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology personnel conducted test excavations at the Two Cannon Wreck site (38BK856). This site is located offshore from Lewisfield Plantation, on the West Branch of the Cooper River near Moncks Corner in Berkeley County, South Carolina. A reminiscence of an action that occurred at Lewisfield Plantation in the American Revolution on July 16, 1781, was published in the nineteenth century. Based on this account, three divers found a sunken vessel and recovered two cannons of Revolutionary War vintage. Pursuant to the mandates of The South Carolina Underwater Antiquities Act of 1982, a long-term archaeological recovery plan was undertaken, the first phase of which involved limited testing and extensive archival research. A total of nine five-foot-square excavation units were opened along one side of the keel that revealed about twenty feet of the vessel. This testing revealed a burned vessel of indeterminate length and approximately fourteen feet abeam. Artifacts recovered from the test units date from the entire period of the occupation of Lewisfield Plantation. However, artifacts directly associated with the vessel, including melted glass and military items, date to the period of the American Revolution, supporting the contention that this vessel was burned and sunk during the Revolution. Extensive research into primary and secondary documents on the American Revolution in South Carolina has revealed nothing to corroborate the published reminiscence, or to clearly document (or deny) this, or any, action at Lewisfield.
    [Show full text]
  • Slave Patrol Contract, 1856 Introduction Questions for Discussion
    Slave Patrol Contract, 1856 Introduction In the 1800s, particularly after Nat Turner’s rebellion in 1831, the legislatures of slave states passed increasingly strict laws governing the activities of enslaved and free African Americans and the interactions between whites and blacks. Known as slave codes, the laws generally restricted the right of enslaved African Americans to travel, assemble, marry, practice religion, and learn to read and write. Those free blacks who were allowed to stay in a slave state also saw their rights curtailed. It was left up to local communities to enforce those laws. White men (both slaveholders and non- slaveholders) were assigned to patrols and charged with ensuring compliance with the slave codes. This contract appoints Horace L. Robards captain of a slave patrol in Salisbury, North Carolina, for the month of January 1856, and outlines the responsibilities of the patrol. The men had to patrol two nights each week from 9 p.m. to midnight and on Sunday. The instructions also address some of the specific problems they might encounter and the punishment they could assign. On all slaves found off their owner’s premises, without written permission from some person legally authorized to give such permission, you will inflict not more than fifteen lashes; no slave to be whipped except in presence of the Captain. You will arrest and carry before the Intendant of Police, all free colored men found associating with slaves in the night, or on the Sabbath day, in any kitchen, out-house, or place other than his own premises. Questions for Discussion 1.
    [Show full text]
  • East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility Lisa Briggitte Randle University of South Carolina
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2018 East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility Lisa Briggitte Randle University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Randle, L.(2018). East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/4962 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. East Branch of the Cooper River, 1780-1820: Panopticism and Mobility By Lisa Briggitte Randle Bachelor of Arts University of South Carolina, 1979 Master of Arts University of South Carolina, 1990 Master of Arts University of South Carolina, 2009 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2018 Accepted by: Kenneth G. Kelly, Major Professor Leland Ferguson, Committee Member Michael E. Hodgson, Committee Member Kimberly Simmons, Committee Member Terrance Weik, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Lisa Briggitte Randle, 2018 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION I am honored to dedicate this dissertation to my friend and mentor, Dr. Leland G. Ferguson, for initiating the East Branch of the Cooper River Project and for his wise words of support when the completion of this dissertation seemed overwhelming. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the financial support of the University of South Carolina’s African American Professorial Program, the Anthropology Department’s Dorothy O’Dell Travel Grant, and a grant from the Archaeological Society of South Carolina.
    [Show full text]
  • A Medley of Cultures: Louisiana History at the Cabildo
    A Medley of Cultures: Louisiana History at the Cabildo Chapter 1 Introduction This book is the result of research conducted for an exhibition on Louisiana history prepared by the Louisiana State Museum and presented within the walls of the historic Spanish Cabildo, constructed in the 1790s. All the words written for the exhibition script would not fit on those walls, however, so these pages augment that text. The exhibition presents a chronological and thematic view of Louisiana history from early contact between American Indians and Europeans through the era of Reconstruction. One of the main themes is the long history of ethnic and racial diversity that shaped Louisiana. Thus, the exhibition—and this book—are heavily social and economic, rather than political, in their subject matter. They incorporate the findings of the "new" social history to examine the everyday lives of "common folk" rather than concentrate solely upon the historical markers of "great white men." In this work I chose a topical, rather than a chronological, approach to Louisiana's history. Each chapter focuses on a particular subject such as recreation and leisure, disease and death, ethnicity and race, or education. In addition, individual chapters look at three major events in Louisiana history: the Battle of New Orleans, the Civil War, and Reconstruction. Organization by topic allows the reader to peruse the entire work or look in depth only at subjects of special interest. For readers interested in learning even more about a particular topic, a list of additional readings follows each chapter. Before we journey into the social and economic past of Louisiana, let us look briefly at the state's political history.
    [Show full text]
  • Doctor of Philosophy
    RICE UNIVERSITY Remaking African America in the Lower Mississippi Valley, 1790–1860 By William D. Jones A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE Doctor of Philosophy APPROVED, THESIS COMMITTEE James Sidbury James Sidbury (Apr 13, 2020) James Sidbury Professor, History William McDaniel (Apr 13, 2020) W. Caleb McDaniel Associate Professor, History Jeffrey Fleisher Associate Professor, Anthropology HOUSTON, TEXAS April 2020 Copyright © 2020 by William D. Jones ABSTRACT Remaking African America in the Lower Mississippi Valley, 1790–1860 by William D. Jones This dissertation is a history of black life in the wake of forced migration to the lower Mississippi Valley during the nineteenth century. It is a history of bought and brought enslaved people, of the local material and environmental conditions that drove their forced migration; of the archives that recorded their plight; of the families and churches they remade; and of how they resisted. Its focus is Louisiana because the consequences of the domestic slave trade there were intense, and unique local archives can measure them. If Africans and their descendants made African America in the coastal plains of North America during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, a narrative that historians have extensively explored in colonial Virginia, Maryland, South Carolina, and Louisiana, their descendants remade African America in the lower Mississippi Valley during the nineteenth century. Stripped from their homes to supply the labor for the nineteenth-century cotton and sugar revolutions, black men and women brought to Louisiana remade friends, families, and communities in the new sites of their enslavement. And they remade identities.
    [Show full text]
  • Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report - April 2012 University Libraries--University of South Carolina
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons University South Caroliniana Society - Annual South Caroliniana Library Report of Gifts 4-2012 Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report - April 2012 University Libraries--University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/scs_anpgm Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Recommended Citation University of South Carolina, "University of South Carolina Libraries - Caroliniana Society Annual Gifts Report, April 2012". http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/scs_anpgm/3/ This Newsletter is brought to you by the South Caroliniana Library at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in University South Caroliniana Society - Annual Report of Gifts yb an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE UNIVERSITY SOUTH CAROLINIANA SOCIETY SEVENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL MEETING __________ UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA Saturday, April 28, 2012 Mr. Kenneth L. Childs, President, Presiding __________ Reception and Exhibit ..............................................................11:00 a.m. South Caroliniana Library Luncheon.....................................................................................1:00 p.m. The Palmetto Club at The Summit Club Location Business Meeting Welcome Reports of the Executive Council...................... Mr. Kenneth L. Childs Address......................................................................Dr. William A. Link Richard J. Milbauer Chair in History, University
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Commission Draft Recommended 2/27/17 Introduction Background The basis of the comprehensive planning process is in the South Carolina Local Government Comprehensive Planning Enabling Act of 1994 (SC Code §6‐29‐310 through §6‐29‐1200), which repealed and replaced all existing state statutes authorizing municipal planning and zoning. The 1994 Act establishes the comprehensive plan as the essential first step of the planning process and mandates that the plan must be systematically evaluated and updated. Elements of the plan must be reevaluated at least once every five years, and the entire plan must be updated at least once every ten years. The Town of Moncks Corner is approximately 33 miles from downtown Charleston, South Carolina. Moncks Corner is the county seat of Berkeley County and is also part of the Charleston‐North Charleston Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This MSA has experienced rapid growth over recent decades; from 2000 to 2010, the population swelled from 549,033 to 664,607, a 21.1% growth rate. As the Charleston region is growing rapidly, Moncks Corner has begun to experience significant population growth. According to the U.S. Census, the Town’s population grew from 7,885 to 9,873, from 2010 to 2015, which represents a 24.5% increase. Outside the Town, Berkeley County is poised to add to current growth in the Charleston MSA with the arrival of the Volvo manufacturing plant, expected to be completed in 2018. Other manufacturers, such as Audio‐Technica, an audio manufacturing company, have recently opened distribution centers in Moncks Corner. As of June 2016, Berkeley County has recruited $1.1 billion in new economic investments with more than 4,100 jobs announced in only 18 months.
    [Show full text]
  • "Slaveholders on Guard"--Review of Sally E. Hadden, Slave Patrols
    Review: Slaveholders on Guard Reviewed Work(s): Slave Patrols: Law and Violence in Virginia and the Carolinas by Sally E. Hadden Review by: Walter Johnson Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 59, No. 3, Slaveries in the Atlantic World (Jul., 2002), pp. 799-802 Published by: Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3491485 Accessed: 30-08-2017 03:24 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The William and Mary Quarterly This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Wed, 30 Aug 2017 03:24:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms REVIEWS OF BOOKS 799 Yet Affairs of Honor is an impressive first book, worth reading for its many insights, and joins several recent imaginative books on the political culture of the early republic. It may not attract a general audience, but it already has provoked debate among historians of the era. Slaveholders on Guard Walter Johnson, New York University Slave Patrols: Law and Violence in Virginia and the Carolinas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Thirteenth Amendment: Modern Slavery, Capitalism, and Mass Incarceration
    \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\104-4\CRN403.txt unknown Seq: 1 16-JUL-19 10:06 THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT: MODERN SLAVERY, CAPITALISM, AND MASS INCARCERATION Michele Goodwin† INTRODUCTION ........................................... 900 R I. A PRODIGIOUS CYCLE: PRESERVING THE PAST THROUGH THE PRESENT ..................................... 909 R II. PRESERVATION THROUGH TRANSFORMATION: POLICING, SLAVERY, AND EMANCIPATION ........................ 922 R A. Conditioned Abolition ........................ 923 R B. The Punishment Clause: Slavery’s Preservation Through Transformation ...................... 928 R C. Re-appropriation and Transformation of Black Labor Through Black Codes, Crop Liens, Lifetime Labor, Debt Peonage, and Jim Crow . 933 R 1. Black Codes .............................. 935 R 2. Convict Leasing ........................... 941 R 3. Coercion, Fraud, and Debt Peonage ........ 946 R 4. Children and Binding Out: Apprenticeship Laws ..................................... 949 R 5. Conclusion ................................ 950 R III. MODERN SLAVERY’S TRANSFORMATIONS ............... 952 R A. Incarceration and Preservation................ 953 R B. Transformation Through Perversity and Complicity ................................... 960 R 1. Federal Prisons and Labor ................. 967 R 2. State Prisons.............................. 968 R C. The Rise of Privatized Prisons ................. 970 R D. Conclusion ................................... 975 R IV. REFORMING AND TRANSFORMING ..................... 975 R † Michele Goodwin, Chancellor’s
    [Show full text]