The Abolition of Chattel Slavery in Massachusetts
Slavery in
Massachusetts
The exact date of the first African slaves in Massachusetts is unknown, but may have been as early as
1624 by a man named Samuel Maverick. The first confirmed account of
slavery in the colony came in 1638 when several native prisoners taken during
the Pequot War were exchanged in the West Indies for African slaves. Such
exchanges become common in subsequent conflicts
Chattel slavery is ownership of one person by another
person. The Chatel slave has no rights in the law as he is not a person.
Massachusetts was the first colony in New England with slave ownership and was a
center for the slave trade throughout the 17th and 18th
centuries. No legislation was passed that abolished slavery until the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865 was ratified by the state. Instead, the
practice of slavery was ended through case law; and as an institution it died out in
the late 18th century through judicial actions litigated on behalf of slaves seeking manumission. Emancipation was on a case by case
basis.
In order preclude enslaved people from going to court to
seek manumission some in the slave “owning class” listed the people they
enslaved as “indentured servants” in the census.
Elizabeth
Freeman
Elizabeth Freeman was called Mumbets
or Mum bet in her later years. Although her case was not directly related to the
post American Revolution cases that led to the Massachusetts Court outlawing
slavery, her case is important predecessor.
I especially wanted to include her case upfront
because my Grandmum was called Mother Davis. This form of addressing older
Black women with children was, I thought, unique to my family. Now I know it
has existed for some time. My Aunt
Lizzie has been addressed also as Mother Davis.
Elizabeth
Freeman was born into slavery around 1744 at the farm of Pieter Hogeboom (a descendant
of a New Netherland colonist). She had a sister, Lizzie. When Hogeboom's
daughter Hannah married John Ashley of Sheffield, Massachusetts. Hogeboom gave Bet and her sister to Hannah and her
husband.
Freeman
remained with them until 1781, during which time she had a child, Little Bet. It
is thought that her husband was killed in the American Revolution.
Throughout
her life, Bet exhibited a strong spirit and sense of self. In 1780 Bet
prevented Hannah from striking a servant girl with a heated shovel; Elizabeth
shielded the girl and received a deep wound in her arm. As the wound healed,
Bet left it uncovered as evidence of her harsh treatment. ]
Also
in 1780, Freeman heard the newly ratified Massachusetts Constitution read at a
public gathering in Sheffield, including the following:
]
“All
men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and
unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and
defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and
protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and
happiness.”
Inspired
by these words, Bett sought the counsel of Theodore
Sedgwick, a young abolition-minded lawyer, to help her sue for freedom in court.
Sedgwick accepted her case, as well as that of Brom, another of Ashley's
slaves.
He enlisted the aid of Tapping
Reeve. It has been suggested the
attorneys may have selected these plaintiffs to test the status of slavery under
the new state constitution.
The
case of Brom and Bett v. Ashley was heard in August 1781
before the County Court of Common Pleas in Great Barrington. Sedgwick and Reeve asserted that the constitutional
provision that "all men are born free and equal" effectively abolished slavery in the state. When the
jury ruled in Bett's favor, she became the first African-American woman to be
set free under the Massachusetts state constitution.
The
jury found that "...Brom & Bett are not, nor were they at the time of
the purchase of the original writ the legal Negro of the said John
Ashley..." The court assessed damages of thirty
shillings and awarded both plaintiffs compensation for their labor.
After
the ruling, Bett took the name Elizabeth Freeman and chose to work in attorney
Sedgwick's household. She worked for his family until 1808 as senior servant
and governess to the Sedgwick children, who called her "Mumbet."
From the time Freeman gained her freedom, she
became widely recognized and in demand for her skills as a healer, midwife and
nurse. After the Sedgwick children were grown, Freeman moved into her own house
on Cherry Hill in Stockbridge near her daughter, grandchildren and great
grandchildren.
Although
Freeman’s case emancipated her, it did end the institution of slavery in
Massachusetts. The abolition of slavery was tested in the so called Freedom
suits.
Freedom suits
There were three trials known as the Freedom suits, two
civil and one criminal. These took place during the American Revolutionary
War. The civil cases were: Jennison v.
Caldwell (for "deprivation of the benefit of his servant,
Walker"), apparently heard and decided first, and Quock Walker v.
Jennison (for assault and battery), both heard by the Worcester
County Court of Common Pleas on June 12, 1781.
Jennison v. Caldwell
In the first case, Jennison argued that Caldwell had
enticed away his employee Walker. The court found in his favor and awarded him
25 pounds.
Quock Walker v. Jennison
In 1781 Justice Cushing instructed the jury with these
words:
“…our
Constitution of Government, by which the people of this Commonwealth have
solemnly bound themselves, sets out with declaring that all men are born free
and equal – and that every subject is entitled to liberty, and to have it guarded
by the laws, as well as life and property – and in short is totally repugnant
to the idea of being born slaves. This being the case, I think the idea of
slavery is inconsistent with our own conduct and Constitution; and there can be
no such thing as perpetual servitude of a rational creature, unless his liberty
is forfeited by some criminal conduct or given up by personal consent or
contract ...”]
The jury freed Walker. Because Justice Cushing held that
perpetual servitude is unconstitutional under the Constitution of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, no further action by the Great and General Court
(the formal name of the Massachusetts state legislature) was needed to end
slavery in Massachusetts.
Commonwealth v. Jennison
In September 1781, a third case was filed by the Attorney
General against Jennison, Commonwealth v. Jennison, for criminal
assault and battery of Walker. In his charge to the jury, Chief Justice William Cushing stated,
"Without resorting to implication in
constructing the constitution, slavery is…as effectively abolished as it can be
by the granting of rights and privileges wholly incompatible and repugnant to
its existence." This has been taken as setting the groundwork for the end
of slavery in the state. On April 20, 1783, Jennison was found guilty and
fined 40 shillings.”
Aftermath of the trials
Legislators were
unable or unwilling to address either slave-owners' concerns about losing their
"investment", or white citizens' concerns that if slavery were
abolished, freed slaves could become a burden on the community. Some feared
that escaped slaves from elsewhere would flood the state.
The Massachusetts Supreme Court decisions in Walker
v. Jennison and Commonwealth v. Jennison established
the basis for ending slavery in Massachusetts on constitutional grounds, but no
law or amendment to the state constitution was passed. Instead slavery
gradually ended "voluntarily" in the state over the next decade. The
decisions in the Elizabeth Freeman and Quock Walker trials had
removed its legal support and slavery was said to end by erosion.
Some slavers
manumitted their enslaved people formally and arranged to pay them wages for
continued labor. Other slaves were "freed" but were restricted
as indentured servants for extended periods. By
1790, the federal census recorded no slaves in the state.
Chattel slavery no longer exists in Massachusetts today..
However there are other forms of slavery or restriction of rights and earnings.
There is human trafficking, debt slavery, and wage slavery which still exists
in some forms within the Commonwealth.
