The book Slavery In North Carolina emphasizes that New World was a violent and brutal system, especially in the beginning when Africans arriving from Africa could not speak English and it was not even possible for the master to communicate with the enslaved Africans. When people cannot communicate by talking they are more likely to resort to fists and blows and whips and chains. The purpose of New World slavery was to generate profit. But in order to do this it was necessary to CONTROL the enslaved workers. The planter ruling class was obsessed with control. In order to create control, they established a system that relied on two twin pillars. One pillar was terror: the second pillar was co-optation.

Terror in this context means to terrorize or terrify people; to make them petrified with fear. The system of abuse beats submission into the slave. He or she is trained and conditioned to OBEY BLINDLY AND AUTOMATICALLY, WITHOUT QUESTION. The master is given absolute power over the slave, over his or her very life. The enslaved worker lives in fear for his or her life. There is fear of violence, brutality, whipping, torture, sadism. One obeys to escape or avoid brutality. One can be threatened with the punishment of loved one's, children, parents, etc. They could be sold away or brutalized. This is almost like blackmail, with the loved one as hostages and pawns. A man obeys lest his wife and children be harmed, or vice versa. The purpose of terror is to make the enslaved worker afraid, and to intimidate him or her into blind obedience. Thus cruelty has a purpose. Another purpose of terror is to make a gruesome, extreme  example of one person. But the target here is not always the victim. Sometimes the regime brutalizes one person, and may even kill him, in order to INTIMIDATE the OTHERS. Thus, if we kill one runaway who has run away four or five times, the other people will think twice about doing it. The sacrifice of the one is "worth it" if it allows us to better control the others (the other 9 or 99).

North Carolina law defined anyone who was one eighth black as black (to the third generation: one black great grand parent) [p. 67]. As of 1723 all free Afro-Americans aged 12 or older were taxed. The white wives of free blacks were taxed too. Among whites, only males 16 years and older were to be taxed.

The North Carolina law declared that "All Negroes, mulattos, bond and free to the third generation, and Indian servants and slaves, shall be deemed...incapable in law to be witnesses in any cause whatsoever, except against each other (1741 and 1746).

Runaway servants (white) had to serve twice the time gone plus damages to the master and public for the cost of recovery (p. 63).

Conversion to Christianity, and baptism, does not alter the condition of the person as to being bond or free (SC, 1669, continued in NC after 1712) [p. 67-68].

North Carolina set up special "slave courts" to hear cases involving slaves. The jury usually consisted of three justices of the peace (or judges) in the county, plus four freeholders who were slaveholders. This was a "stacked deck," with the majority consisting of slaveholders. Slaveholders only trusted other slaveholders to be able to judge slave matters. Decisions were made by a majority, but in capital cases (death penalty) a unanimous vote was sought (p. 70).

Slaves had NO RIGHT to a trial by a jury. They could not subpoena witnesses. They were rarely allowed to call witnesses. There is only one known case in colonial NC where a free Afro-American was allowed to testify as a witness in a case involving a slave (p. 71).

However, despite the oppressive system of law, enslaved Africans did resist anyway--and paid a terrible price for doing so. Chattel slavery was like a prison.
 

RESISTANCE: THE EXAMPLE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Slaves did in fact resist slavery, by methods such as poisoning or attempted poisoning, arson, self-defense and even killing their tormentors. They also engaged in acts of theft. However, when caught, slaves were subject to brutality and sadism and torture. The complement of slavery was terror. Several examples from North Carolina will illustrate this. These examples come from a book entitled Slavery In North Carolina, 1748-1775. It deals with the colonial period in North Carolina. The authors are Marvin Kay and Lorin Cary.
 

THE LAW OF SLAVERY: NORTH CAROLINA

North Carolina adopted its first slave code in 1715. As amended in 1753, the law made it a crime for a slave to carry any gun, knife or weapon off of the master's plantation (p. 68). Prior to this, in 1741, there had been a limit that only one slave per plantation could carry a gun (p. 68). After 1753 a slave could carry a gun off the master's plantation only if there was a certificate signed by both the master and the chairman of the county court (p. 68). Furthermore, the master would have to post a bond to assure the slave's "good behavior." Any person injured by a slave permitted to carry a gun would receive the bond. On rare occasions masters would allow a trusted slave to carry a gun as protection against neighboring Indians, and trusted slaves could carry them to hunt. But in general masters wished to keep the slaves unarmed.

From the very beginning, in 1715, no slave could leave his master's plantation or property without a written certificate or pass (p. 63). In 1765 the town of Wilmington, North Carolina adopted an ordinance forbidding slaves to congregate in groups of more than three, and imposed a ten o'clock curfew (p. 69). In 1772 Wilmington forbade all slaves from trading merchandise at street stands (p. 69). The elite or ruling class authorities were afraid that slaves were stealing goods and then fencing them or selling them to the public, especially the yeomen or lower class whites. This law was designed to limit contact between slaves and yeomen, and to deny slaves rights in the marketplace. Slaves could not sue, and they could not testify against whites.

The slave code of 1715 specified that if a slave ran away, after two months he would be declared an "outlaw" (Kay and Cary, p. 63). Once the runaway had been "outlawed," it was lawful for any person or persons whatsoever to kill and destroy such slave or slaves by such ways and means as he or she shall think fit, without accusation or impeachment of any crime for the same" (p. 65). In essence, it was permissible to use deadly force to subdue a runaway slave, and killing such a slave was not considered a crime. The law was amended in 1741 to provide compensation to the master, from the public treasury, for the destruction of his slave property (p. 66). Not until 1774 did North Carolina adopt a law making it a crime to wound, disable, maim or kill a slave with malice, that is, on purpose, in a pre-meditated fashion, without cause (p. 75). The penalty for a first offense, for maliciously killing a slave, by a white person, was 12 months in prison (p. 75). The murderer would have to compensate the master (p. 76). The penalty for a second offense was death, but no record of it ever being enforced.

In November 1763 a white man, William Luten, was tried for manslaughter. He was punishing an enslaved "Negro" woman named Kate, and she died (p. 92). The owner (Sarah Lewis) filed  suit. But the verdict is missing. The remaining text says "But if the killing of slave is not a felony..."

In 1771 one Peter Lord was tried for the murder of his Negro slave, while cutting his ears with a knife while punishing him. The jury seems to have been unable to reach a verdict. It asked the judge for advice as to whether the death was murder, manslaughter or misadventure. o final verdict is recorded.

On p. 93 one James Luten, a white man, brought charges against Drury Stokes, in 1761 for trespass, for beating and injuring Luten's slave. The court found Stokes guilty and awarded Luten seven shillings. But the court did NOT charge Stokes with a crime against the slave, only against the master. The slave could not work due to the injury, and this harmed the financial interest of the master.

In another case in 1757 a white man (William Winham) was charged with trespass against two slaves of Charles Jordan. The amount of the damages claimed is not recorded (p. 93).

Slaves could not sue, so they could not initiate a legal complaint against anyone. And they could not testify against any white person. Therefore it was procedurally and legally impossible for a slave woman even to charge anyone with the crime of rape (p. 85) or to testify against any white man on such a complaint.
 

THE ULTIMATE PUNISHMENTS

Arson, poisoning, murder and rape by slaves, were capital offenses in North Carolina as in most Southern colonies and states. Castration was also a punishment for unruly slaves, which is those who are defiant, unmanageable, uncontrollable-- especially if there had been a prior offense.

If we look at the slave courts in North Carolina in the colonial period, records survive that demonstrate resistance by slaves and the brutal repression of that resistance. Running away was a crime. In this crime the slave "stole himself" from his master (p. 70). Running away was the crime of theft, because the body of the slave did not belong to the slave. It was the property of the master. So when a slave ran away he was stealing his or her body from the master who legally owned it.

In North Carolina, from 1748-1772, a span of 24 years, more than 100 slaves were sentenced to death. In some cases the offense is not known, but confirmation of the death exists for 86 of the 100 recorded death sentences (p. 77).

In July 1770 five slaves strangled and suffocated an abusive master. His name was Henry Ormond (p. 78-79). Three of the five slaves convicted of the crime were women. Ormond's house servant was a slave woman named Annis. She was burned at the stake as punishment. The Ormond family received &70 as compensation for the loss of their property (Annis). Her offense was so grievous because she was supposed to have been his "wench."

One of the actors, a man whose name is not given, confessed and became the witness against the other four. His life was spared. Phylis, Cuff and Lucy were sentenced to death, though the manner is not revealed. The master's families received compensation (p. 79).
 

In 56 cases in North Carolina, in the period 1748-1772, the method of death of a slave convicted of a "crime" is known. Of that number:

1 was chained alive in a gibbet and allowed to die slowly

6 were burned

2 were castrated first and then hanged

5 were hanged and then decapitated, with their heads

placed on poles, as a warning to others who might

contemplate misbehavior

1 was hanged and then burned

24 were simply hanged

2 were castrated but had not been sentenced to death but

inadvertently died from the surgery anyway

7 were shot as outlaws (runaways)

5 outlawed slaves drowned themselves rather than surrender

No white person in colonial North Carolina was legally castrated. Nineteen slaves were (p. 82).

Let us now consider the behaviors, some of which might be seen as resistance, and the punishment meted out for them.

Negro Tom stole and killed a hog in 1757. His sentence was 20 lashes, and his right ear was nailed to the whipping post and then cut off (p. 82).

In 1764 a slave named Simon was convicted of burglary. He was whipped 150 times, 50 times each over the course of three days. And then both of his ears were cut off (p. 113).

In 1756 a slave named Tom burglarized a store. Upon conviction, his sentence was 50 lashes, and his right ear was nailed to the whipping post and then a third of it cut off (p. 83).
 

In 1741 North Carolina passed a law specifying that slaves convicted of hog stealing "suffer both ears to be cut off for a first offense, and suffer death for a second offense." (p. 83).

Nineteen slaves were castrated in colonial North Carolina. This is confirmed by records showing the payment of 20 shillings received by the sheriffs and others who performed the procedure (p. 84). In only 5 of these 19 cases is it known what offense the person was convicted of (p. 84).
 

A slave man named Tom, in New Hanover County, was convicted of breaking into the house of a white man and stealing some property. He died in 1755 after "having both his stones cut out by the sheriff." (p. 84).

Another slave named Tom, and a slave named Prymus, in Craven County, in 1761, were convicted of poisoning another slave (who survived, p. 103). Both slaves were castrated. Prymus survived. Tom died from the mutilation (p. 84 and 103; see also p. 112).
 

Also in 1761, in Pasquotank County, a slave named Sambo was convicted of attempting to poison a white woman. This woman was regarded as cruel by the slaves. She wanted to buy Sambo's daughter. He prepared a potion, called "touck,' which was supposed to change her personality and make her a nicer person and dissuade her from buying Sambo's daughter (see p. 107). Sambo was trying conjuration. His intent may not have been to kill the woman, but merely alter her mind. His motive was to save his daughter. But the court considered it attempted poisoning. As punishment, he was castrated, but otherwise survived (p. 84).
 

In 1764 Isaac was convicted of arson. Allegedly he had burned down a house. He was castrated and then hanged (p. 84).

DEATH PENALTY FOR BURGLARY

In 1748 a slave named Stephen burglarized three stores, stealing rum, some knives, and sundry items. Stephen had a prior conviction for having stolen a horse. For a second offense, he was hanged.

In 1762 a slave named Jimmy was convicted of an unspecified felony. The court records do say it was a second offense. He too was castrated and then hanged (p. 85).
 

THE RAPE OF A WHITE WOMAN IS A CAPITAL OFFENSE

In 1743 a slave named Phil was convicted of the rape of a white woman, Sarah Baucum. The penalty for a black man raping a white woman was death. Accordingly Phil was hanged. The sentence specified further, that his "private parts were to be cut off, and thrown in his face." (p. 85).

Between 1748 and 1772 there were three cases of black men in North Carolina convicted of the rape of a white women. All three were executed. One was Phil, mentioned a moment ago. The second was named Cato, in 1766, who was tied to a stake and burned alive (p. 86). The third was George, in Duplin County, in 1770. He was hanged, and then his head was decapitated and placed on a pole (p. 86).
 
 

SLAVES EXECUTED FOR MURDER

In colonial North Carolina, 23 slaves were executed for murder. Fourteen of the 23 murdered their masters (p. 103). Of the 23 cases, in 21 of the cases the victim was white. In one case a slave was executed for the attempted murder of a fellow slave, and in the final case a slave was executed for the actual murder of a fellow slave (p. 103).

In 1764 a slave named Dick tried to kill his master. He was convicted, and hanged, and then his head placed on a pole to make an example of him. (p. 114).

In 1769 Cuff poisoned and thereby killed his master, Benjamin Ward. Cuff was convicted and hanged (p. 115).
 
 

DOMESTICATING THE SLAVES

Please note, arson, poisoning, murder and rape on the part of slaves were capital offenses, receiving the death penalty. Castration was not simply an offense for sex crimes, but a punishment for unruly slave men in order to make them more tame and docile, to make them more manageable. Of course this is what farmers do to livestock, most notably bulls.

This treatment of black men symbolizes two things. First, it illustrates the degree to which black people were thought of as mere animals, as a species of livestock. People of African ancestry were thought of as animals and treated like animals. Secondly, castration is the ultimate weapon against black manhood. To the degree that black men were assertive, to that same degree they were seen as dangerous and as a threat. Castration was designed to remove that threat and neutralize (or neuter) that threat. The slaveholders, and the white power structure, perceived black men to be a threat in a way that they did NOT perceive black women to be a threat. Thus, slavery and white supremacy rest upon the subordination and emasculation of the black man.

THE OBSESSION WITH CONTROL

But in addition, the real agenda here is CONTROL. These sadistic punishments are designed to maximize the control of the slaveholder over the slaves. The slaveholders had an obsession with CONTROL. Slavery was about exploitation. It was about domination. And it was about control. Part of the purpose of white supremacy is to exercise CONTROL over black people and people of color. And violence was used in the service of control.
 
 

THE MYTH OF THE DOCILE SLAVE: REVISITED

These examples illustrate that the slaves were not tame and docile. They were not "happy." The record of slavery is littered with the names of thousands of slaves who were put to death for stealing, for arson, for poisoning, for attempted poisoning, for attempted murder, for actually killing their masters and overseers, and for resisting capture after they had run away.
 

SLAVERY AS A SYSTEM OF VIOLENCE

Instead, it is crucial to understand that slavery was a system of violence. It was a constant war. It was systemic, institutionalized, daily violence. And the slaves sometimes retaliated, and met violence with violence.
 

SUMMARY

These examples from North Carolina and elsewhere illustrate five things:

1. Slavery was a system of daily violence

2. Slaves did resist, in ways both overt and covert

3. But the price of resistance was enormous. Slaves DID resist sometimes--and they paid an awful price for doing so. But they did it any way!

4. Under slavery, the slaveowners met resistance with sadism and cruelty and terror. Slavery was a system of terrorism. It was designed to make the slaves stand in fear, and to be so terrified that they would obey automatically.

5. In order to maintain the slave regime in power, the slave masters used a two-pronged strategy or approach. One approach was violence and terror. The second approach was co-optation.

Masters pursued a policy of sepera et impera, or divide and rule. They deliberately sought to co-opt some slaves to serve as their loyal allies. These slaves would be favored and given special privileges. They might get more rations, or a better cabin to live in. They might work in the house while the majority of the others worked in the fields. They might get better clothes or special little gifts from master, like old hand-me-down clothes or old dishes. This tied these slaves to master and made them more loyal to him. It was a way of buying off some of the slaves and then using them as spies and snitches to control the others.

Master encouraged these slaves to feel that they were better than the others. Furthermore, often these favored slaves were the illegitimate children of master or the overseer anyway. So they had divided loyalties. They served as the middle-men between master and the field slaves. This tactic of co-opting a few of the slaves served to divide and weaken unity among the slaves, while strengthening the grip of master and the slave system.

Thus it was a carrot and a stick. But co-optation is just a more covert and sophisticated method of maintaining control. It is a form of indirect rule. It builds up a stratum or class of flunkies to do master's bidding for him. This stratum or class becomes master's surrogates. He pulls the strings, and they dance the way he wants them to. It is a more clever tactic than terror, which is naked, crude and overt. It was the combination of both violent terror and co-optation together that was the secret of the resilience of the slave regime. And, of course, slavery rested upon the fact that the masters were armed, and the slaves were deliberately kept unarmed. Finally, we must realize that after 1865, even after slavery ended, white supremacy would endure. And the tactics of co-optation and terror would continue as a method of controlling black people.