Page:Journal of Negro History, vol. 7.djvu/413

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Brazilian and United States Slavery Compared
359

in the other's affairs, and often the evaluation of the slave could not be agreed upon.[1]

A slave could be and was manumitted in both the United States and Brazil. In Brazil manumission could be accomplished in the following ways: (1) the slave could purchase himself; (2) his master could liberate him during his life; (3) or he could manumit him at his death; (4) a Negro woman who had brought ten children into the world by virtue of her tenth became free; (5) also, the price of a new-born babe was so slight, that often the infant was purchased its freedom by friends.[2] In fact, manumission had been so extensive, that by 1818 mulattoes and free Negroes had become a considerable part of the population.[3] In the United States there were 488,070 freedmen in 1860.[4]

As for holding common ordinary citizen's rights, the Negro slave in both countries was out of consideration. In the Old South, for instance, a slave could be arrested, tried, and condemned with but one witness against him, and without a jury.[5] In Brazil he was equally as defenceless. Professional slave runaway catchers might pounce upon a slave who was about his duty, imprison him, subject him to indignities, on the ground that he was a fugitive, and return him to his master, claiming money for their trouble. In such a sad case, no one would take the slave's part, none would believe his story.[6]

The privileges of the slave as to being secure against violent treatment, of securing his own freedom, of selecting another master, or of claiming any plain citizen's immunities whatsoever, then, were very slight in both Brazil and the United States, but even more so in our own Southland.

Slave Resistance

Docile as the African slave was, he was bound at times

  1. Koster, pp. 233–235.
  2. Ibid.
  3. Keller, pp. 156–157.
  4. Blake, p. 808.
  5. Brawley, pp. 20–21.
  6. Henderson, pp. 72–78.