[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.”38 Drayton defendedhis unwillingness to interfere with the work of white evangelicals in the state, eventhose who circulated pro-emancipation petitions among whites, claiming that he“never had any information lodged with me against any white person accused offomenting disturbances among negroes.” 39 But Read wanted a purge: “I wish withall my heart that magistrates across the state could be induced to arrest.all thoseignorant vagabonds calling themselves preachers who are overrunning our Countryimposing on the weak and credulous and bring infi nite mischief on Society,” thesenator complained angrily.40By the time the legislature met in late November, it was clear that the Methodistactivity in the state coupled with reports of Gabriel’s failed insurrection plot hadexposed a raw nerve in the security-conscious Lowcountry.A concerned legislatureproved willing to go well beyond Drayton in its eff orts to reassure slaveholders whoharbored suspicions that evangelical Christianity might prove slavery’s undoing inthe lower South.During its session, the legislature approved a rigid ban on allsecret or “behind-closed-doors” gatherings (including religious ones) that includedslaves and free blacks and were held “for the purpose of mental instruction,” evenif the meetings were held during daylight hours and whites were present at them.Additionally, the new law banned all gatherings held between sundown and sunup,regardless of the circumstances of the assembly.The law allowed sheriff s, patrols,local police, and the militia to “disperse” such meetings, and it subjected slaves andfree blacks who were arrested at such meetings to punishments of as many as twentylashes.These dramatic new restrictions, which in practice fell mainly on black reli-gious gatherings, stymied the eff orts of Protestant denominations, especially theMethodists and Baptists, to proselytize slaves.The instructional meetings heldby the evangelical denominations had often taken place at night, after the slaves’plantation and other work was done, and to a lesser extent even daylight religiousgatherings were often held behind doors that closed once the service or instructionbegan, to avoid profane interference with sacred proceedings.If enforced, the newrestrictions fell just short of constituting a total ban on the evangelical outreach toslaves and free blacks.41In addition to addressing white fears of growing white evangelical activism onbehalf of slaves, Governor Drayton urged the legislature to strengthen the so-calledNegro Acts, legislation that regulated “the government of our slaves.” 42 EagerlyO P E N I N G T H E S L A V E T R A D E89embracing Drayton’s recommendation, legislators quickly turned the focus of the session to tightening white control of the state’s slave and free black popula-tion.By the end of the session, the legislature had approved a draconian new blackcode.In addition to limiting the rights of slaves and free blacks to assemble, it alsoincluded tough new laws concerning three other critical matters: the regulation ofthe interstate slave trade, the strengthening of the slave patrol system, and limita-tions on a master’s ability to voluntarily free his or her own slaves.43Feeling surrounded by insurrectionary tendencies, fi rst in the Caribbean and thenin Virginia, Palmetto State legislators believed that the importation of slaves fromthese troubled areas introduced erstwhile rebels into the state.The interstate slavetrade had been closed since , and the prevailing statute banned the importationof slaves as merchandise for sale or hire but allowed slaveholders who intended tosettle in the state to bring in an unlimited number of slaves without subjecting thesearriving masters (or their slaves) to any special restrictions or regulation.As part of its crackdown, the legislature required slaveholders seeking residence in the stateto present proof to a magistrate that they had owned the slaves accompanying themfor at least two years and to pledge that for an additional two years they would sellnone of the slaves who migrated with them.Moreover, masters who wanted to bringmore than ten slaves with them had to seek special legislative permission for theirslaves to enter the state.Both the prospect of appearances before magistrates and thenecessity of petitioning the legislature to bring larger numbers of slaves into the stateloomed as a deterrent to slaveholders looking to settle in South Carolina.44The legislature also put sharp new enforcement teeth in its regulation of theslave trade.The law subjected local tax collectors who failed to report illegalslave imports to stiff fi nes, and put the burden of proof in slave-smuggling cases onthe accused smugglers.Further, the new legislation authorized the state militia toassist in policing slave smuggling and gave the militia the same authority to “attack,wound and kill” when they encountered smugglers that they had long enjoyed whenacting to quell an insurrection.On the whole, the revised ban on the interstate slavetrade made it much more difficult for slaveholders or slave traders to circumventthe law and much less appealing for slaveholders to migrate to South Carolina withtheir slaves
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]