The plantation system is the basis of South Carolina’s economy. Significant income comes from agriculture of rice, tobacco and indigo. Plantation are privately owned units of land meant for the production and export of raw materials. Yet, cultivating this crops is intensive labor, and there is a pressing need for laborers. It is arguable that the use of African Americans for this task would solve the issue; it would be economically convenient, yet it also raises a moral dilemma when considering the harsh work and living conditions slaves endure.
The need for people to work the plantations cannot be fulfilled by Native American nor Europeans. Europeans come to the colonies in search of land of their own, and because of this, they are often
…show more content…
Cultivating this crops requires intensive labour, and African are bodily suited for this. Africa is closer to this lands than Europe. They can always be kidnapped and brought over, even encouraged to mate to increase their number. Remember, “Every child born in slavery is property of the mother’s master.” (Constitution) Also, they know how to grow rice, which is an important crop in this …show more content…
Breaking young horses and mules to send them to market, yoking young oxen and training them, is proper Sabbath work. Piling and burning brush on the back part of the lot, grubbing brier patches that are out of the way, and where they will not be seen. Sometimes corn must be shelled in the corn-crib; hemp is baled in the hemp-house” (Spartacus)
Yet, “Europeans argue that the so-called ‘uncivilised’ Africans are hardly human. This sort of thinking allows the inhumanity of slavery to be dismissed.”(Bristol)
Using African slaves to work the plantations is a necessity for the colony’s economic thrive, yet there are ethical obstacles that arise when considering the type of labor and treatment these people
William Dusinberre’s book Them Dark Days concentrates on the Gowrie plantation, the Butler Island plantation and, the Chicora Wood plantation as examples of the dark reality slavery had in the U.S. South. All three of these plantations are described by Dusinberre as “rice kingdoms”. He theorized that in the U.S. South these types of plantations were the most lucrative for planters and the most cruelly demanding to slaves. First and foremost in Dusinberre’s mind, gentleman planters such as Charles Manigualt, Pierce Butler and Robert Allston were capitalists driven to make profits not benevolent Southern patriarchs. In slave historiography, Dusinberre’s study of rice plantations brings forth a revisionist view that challenges the idea of Southern
Aspects of the law were applying to slaves, those who owned slaves, all white people who either do or do not own slaves, and servants. It shows how all different groups of people in the society have to do their part in order to maintain the economic system. In the Slave Code of South Carolina, it begins stating rules of slaves paying off debts to their owners by saving and paying off with money or goods, or being sold and their profit being given to the original owner. It continues to talk about runaway slaves and the process in which someone must go through if they find one. The document states “ no person whatsoever, except the sheriff or gaoler, shall keep any runaway slave or slaves above four days… employ any of them, or suffer him, or her in custody”, this shows the idea of ownership of slaves in the fact that they must be returned quickly, having done no work for the capturer, and there is a small reward upon return.
During the 1670’s, farmers in Virginia struggled to profit as they depended on tobacco for a source of income. In this early period of colonization, indentured servitude was the most common source of cheap labor. Critically acclaimed author and historian, Lerone Bennett Jr., described this labor system as “the big planter apparatus and a social system that legalized terror against black and white bondsmen” (Bennet). Tied into service bythe promise of land, indentured servants could not profit off their work. By doing so, servants were forced into a continuous cycle of service to provide for themselves and their families.
It was one of the most significant and disputed practice ever to reach the shores of the Western Hemisphere. A dimensional issue that caused much argument and conflict on each of its multiple levels. This was the practice of Slavery. Taking a closer look, there are many different interpretations of what the attitude of American slaves were towards their work experiences. In order to fully answer this question, a closer examination, summary, and comparison will be made of three different historians and their ideas to accurately answer the overarching importance of this question.
The diary writing by William Byrd show us how slaves had a major part in the economy of the colonial America and how most of them were treated. Most elites European come to the Americas looking for wealth and power, but they did not have the workforce to accomplish their goals they need people to work their cultivation. Slave Africans became a shipper and easier solution to this problems. (63) “From 1492 to 1820 enslaved African migrants outnumbered Europeans migrants to the new world by nearly five to one”. This incoming slaves Africans did most of the hurt work for this elite Europeans.
By using this reference, it illustrated the severity of the alienation of blacks in the Southern United States. In 1619, a Dutch ship “introduced the first captured Africans to America, planting the seeds of a slavery system that evolved into a nightmare of abuse and cruelty that would ultimately divide the nation”. The Africans were not treated humanely, but were treated as workers with no rights. Originally, they were to work for poor white families for seven years and receive land and freedom in return. As the colonies prospered, the colonists did not want to give up their workers and in 1641, slavery was legalized.
The American historian Nell Painter made several comments regarding the importance of land for the freed slaves. For example: “So they (sharecroppers) saw their own land as a means of having a stake in society” (Painter para. 4). Some more proof of this is the fact that it’s also stated that due to most southerners being rural, owning land was crucial to their way of life (para. 4). The evidence shows that white farmers who formerly owned slaves felt that by allowing the slaves to own land made them independent took away a resource the farmers heavily relied upon: slave labor.
At the end of the servants’ time they were granted land, the only problem was that the land belonged to the Native American Indians. There was already so much conflict surrounding the relationship
With the invention of the “cotton gin” and other inventions like it, it caused the demand for slaves to go up and to man these machines. The crops they grew in the South were tobacco, rice, sugar cane, and indigo. These were mostly the "big money" crops sold. Near some of the bays in the South, they gathered fish, oysters, and crabs. They also grew cotton as it was a promising crop, but it was difficult for them to get out the unnecessary parts.
The population of the English colonies on American soil slowly but steadily grew: in 1625 it was 2 thousand. People, in 1650 rose to 50 thousand. , And by 1700 was already a quarter of a million. Virginia and Massachusetts were the largest English settlement, at the beginning of the XVIII century they lived almost half of the colonists. Another third of the total population accounted for Maryland, Connecticut, New York and Pennsylvania.
Before the Civil War, the south depended on slavery to sustain its economy. Slaves provided free labor in which they were responsible for tending to the planters land. This included planting, growing, and yielding cash crops to be able to deliver a profit for the plantation owner. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the relationship between the planter and the laborer, as well as deliberating on the interactions amongst mill owners and mill employees to be able to explain how the shared theme of why labor had to change in the south was prevalent in both articles.
For slaves, their lives and value were dictated the plant they labor for and their slave holder philosophy of a slave life expectancy. The slave trade focused with particular intensity on people of “prime age” which being fifteen to twenty five. Slaves were viewed in an animalistic and dehumanized connation. A Mississippi planter John Knight discussed how a planter ideal slave force would be “ half men and half women…young say 16-25,stout limbs, large chests, wide shoulders and hips, etc.”(159) Walter Johnson illustrated “slave labor was a bloody and hierarchical social relation.
In the 1700-1800’s, the use of African American slaves for backbreaking, unpaid work was at its prime. Despite the terrible conditions that slaves were forced to deal with, slave owners managed to convince themselves and others that it was not the abhorrent work it was thought to be. However, in the mid-1800’s, Northern and southern Americans were becoming more aware of the trauma that slaves were facing in the South. Soon, an abolitionist group began in protest, but still people doubted and questioned it.
(“Slavery in Africa”, para 13) The people had to do hard work for the Americans for free or if they fought back they would’ve been killed or worse. The slaves did America a huge favor since they weren’t allowed to stop working, they got a lot of work done which let America have so much crop and material that the African Americans did for them. The people didn’t disserve the cruel and unreasonable punishment that they received.
The absence of education on plantation life is a topic that is deeper than it would appear on the surface. It is a significant part of the stigma that has haunted the African American culture to this