Enslavement (8 results)

CD. Condition: Sehr gut. B3464-247 4001617266120 Sprache: Englisch Gewicht in Gramm: 120.

Removed. Condition: A very good copy. First edition. 1 pp. 8vo. The Maine resolution was an attack on the heinous process of re-enslaving freed blacks: "Resolved. That we do most solemnly, in behalf of the people of this State, protest against the existence of any laws, in any of the States of Territories of this Union, which subject our free colored citizens to the liability to be arrested and imprisoned, and to be sold into slavery for the payment of the costs of such arrest and imprisonment; that we do protest against such laws as unconstitutional, and as endangering the Union." Maine approved this on March 22, 1843, sent a copy to all members of the House and Senate, and to all the governors of States and Territories. OCLC locates no copies. Not in Sabin, Blockson, Dumont, Work, LCP. Afro-Americana Clark: New England in U.S. Government Publications, 1789-1849: 1145.

Audio-CD. Condition: Neu. Neuware.

Condition: Near Fine. An interesting letter deserving further study regarding the legal fallout for defaults on Negro Bonds following Emancipation, a question of significant economic impact for the finances of ex-enslavers, as a significant amount of private debt endured following Emancipation. The author, a collections agent, warns B.H. Massey, Esquire of pending actions to pursue damages for defaults on Negro Bonds for the sum of $10,000 based on the fact that Massey acted as Receiver of the bonds when they were issued. It is unclear whether Massey was Allison's client at the time or if he intended to pursue collections actions against him. We find no record of the case. Full transcription follows: Kershaw, Allison & Connors Correspondent American Attorneys Collection Association All Legal Business Attended To. Collections a specialty. Lancaster, S.C. Sept. the 14th 1876 B. H. Massey, Esq. Dear Sir, My impression is that Blackwell Wilson is going to try to charge you with the three notes which you signed as though you had collected the money thereon - taking the ground that the moment you were appointed Receiver, that in contemplation of law, by the act of such appointment, these notes by operation of Law were eo instanti paid. And, I confess, that there is great danger to you in this, unless you can show that there was failure of consideration in the Negro bonds - that is that the Negroes were unsound. I deem it my duty to apprise you of the danger, so that you may be prepared for it, if it should come. I do not know how you have your affairs arranged. If you can show failure of consideration of the Negro bonds, we can either take testimony to that effect, or have an issue referred to a jury. Let me know what defense you could make to any of the bonds. Yours truly, &c. R. E. Allison. I think the notes that he desires to charge you with Prin. & Interest will amount to exceeding ten thousand Dollars. An interesting document relating to Reconstruction-era law that should provide insight into some of the legal strategies at play regarding the collections of debt. Single page measuring 9 ½ x 6 inches. Some tears at folds, near fine.

A collection of mainly letters with some documents sent to the law firm Spain & Richardson of South Carolina?Albertus Chambers Spain (1821?1881), who in 1860 would sign the state?s Ordinance of Secession, and James Sanders Guignard Richardson (1815?1879). Most of the documents concern estate administration and debt collection: a letter from Charleston presses the firm to ?force [the debtor] to pay? (August 20, 1855); one from New York complains of ?a rascal [.] trying to swindle me?; and a different Charleston writer complains that a boarder and his father had stiffed him on multiple bills: ?I have not seen or heard from old McLeod since although I have written over one doz letters to him, he has acted in a villanous manner to me, a common hod carrier would not act in the manner he has Done, although claiming to be a Class Leader in the Methodist Church [.] ?Excuse? his mother was sick &c&c which I have since learned was all a fabrication [.] I did not think there was any such tricky folks in Sumter or Clarendon &c [.] You will please write me as soon as you receive this & Read it & give me your advice in the matter, & what is best to Do, if Mr McLeod has his property in his own name if it is in his wifes but I Do not think so, I could hold them, as all the goods he Bought was for the wife, & children & negro?s.? (1860) Also included are a document and a letter concerning the sale of enslaved people by the Kelley family of Sumter County. They were enslaved by the estate of Simon Kelley (1787?1852), which was being handled by his daughter Sarah (1812?d.). Sarah Kelley?s brother-in-law, Castus Belk, writes: ?I received your letter requiring me & the other parties concerned to arrange the matter with the old lady on the terms I have assertained by [Sarah Kelley?s husband] Mr Drury Boykin that the old lady will come to no agreement as yet But I have sent her a return showing to give her concent to the sale of the negros and for her to assigne which if she dose will be presented to you by Mr B Kelley if she dose assigne it and it answers to the perpose intended I shall be glad to hear from you for the old lady intendes to make no defence at all. NB beware of the man R.K. but pick all out of him you can get? (September 1856) R.K. is Reddick Kelley (1815?1886), another Kelley child, who witnessed the following assent to sale included in the collection: ?State of South Carolina } Sep 8th / 56 Sumter District I the said Sarah Kelley of the said state and district do hereby assign and give my consent to the sale of the said negros belonging to the Estate of Simon Kelley Dec of the said state and district here unto my mark Reddick Kelley X Sarah Kelley / her mark? Finally, there is an intriguing letter from fellow lawyer James Hart Norwood concerning the trial of an enslaved man for an unknown crime: ?I attended the trial of Kelly?s negro on Thursday, and we achieved a clean victory, verdict ?not guilty.? Beasley says I made the best speech he ever heard from me. I spoke 55 minutes, Marley followed + spoke 45. The trial was at Brown?s house, + he gave his testimony in bed. Mrs B- gave us thunder during her examination + our argument, but Marley will give you a graphic description of it when he sees you.? (June 14, 1858) We did not find a record of this trial in newspapers from the time. Of interest to historians of enslavement in the law and legal history in antebellum South Carolina. Some with slight water damage, though legible; generally very good to excellent. Approximately 125pp with each item usually about 1 page.

Condition: Very good plus. Austin County, Texas, was the first Anglo-American colony in Mexican Texas, founded in about 1821 by Stephen F. Austin and his "Old Three Hundred": 297 land grantees, mainly from the Trans-Appalachian South, and many of significant wealth. The grantees received either a labor (177 acres, for farming families) around San Felipe de Austin, or a sitio (4,428 acres, for ranching families) along the Brazos River. Many of the Old Three Hundred families already owned enslaved African Americans, and by 1825, sixty-nine of the Austin colony families owned a total of 443 enslaved people, making up nearly a quarter of the colony's population. Many of the enslaved people were concentrated with just a few families; for instance, Jared E. Groce arrived to the colony in 1822 with ninety enslaved people. After the Texas Revolution, which established the Republic of Texas, the county's population totaled about 1,500, rising to 2,687 by 1847 and 3,841 by 1850. Immigration from Germany surged, with Germans outnumbering American-born citizens by 1860. During this time, the expansion of cotton and other agriculture increased the enslaved population as well; in 1847, it comprised over 47% of Austin County. Meanwhile, there were nearly no free Black residents, and none by 1860. Offered here is a tax assessment ledger for the county from 1858, prepared by County Assessor and Collector Sackfield Brewer. It contains two assessments: one for land owned within Austin County and one for land owned by Austin County residents but located in other counties. Among other information, the first assessment lists the taxpayer, their land's original grantee and location (by town and stream), and their assets, including horses, cattle, money, and enslaved people. The second assessment contains location, acreage, and value information, and does not contain information about assets held with the outside properties. The ledger indicates the demographic shifts in the areawith many Germanic surnames among the Anglo onesand the concentrations of wealth and enslavement. For instance, while most taxpayers are listed as owning no enslaved people, J. E. Kirby held 120 people, valued at $60,000, on his nearly 3,700 acre ranch. By contrast, Thomas Cochran's 5,759 acre ranch, taking up five original land grants, held seven. J. A. Kerr, next to Kirby in the ledger, claimed no land, only one $100 horse and one $100 watch. Records from early Texas are scarce; this ledger provides detailed information about families in the county and about their assets, especially enslaved people, who made up a significant portion of the antebellum population. Ledger measuring 7 ½ x 12 inches. Approximately forty-five pages filled out with remainder blank. Spine broken and some pages detached; pages with wear but legible; cover quite worn.

Two legal documents from an Alabama chancery court suit brought against Susannah Nettles by her husband, James C. Nettles, concerning ownership of an enslaved woman named Chloe. The documents are a set of cross interrogatories and objections and their replies, which were given by William Mellard, the writer of the deed that originally gave Susannah ownership of Chloe. Mellard recalls that the deed, written in 1829, provided the following: "Mary Rudd declared to him while directing him how to write the Instrument, that as Susannah was her youngest child and a daughter, that she wished while she yet lived to secure to her that much of her Estate, to wit, Chloe and her future increase; and she wished the Instrument so written that it would convey to Susannah the said girl Chloe, in such a manner that she would not be subject to the control of her husband should she afterwards marry [.] and that the negro girl should not be subject to the debts of her husband should she marry". Mellard claims that, after Susannah's marriage, "James C. Nettles admitted the right of his wife to the Negroes and acquiesced in her title to them, and did not claim any right to them." At the time the deed was drawn up, the legal doctrine of coverture was in effect: a married woman did not have legal rights and obligations, including a right to property ownership, separate from her husband. Though Susannah was single at the time, Chloe would have become James Nettles' property on his marriage to Susannah were it not for the part of Mary Rudd's deed, which Mellard insists he is remembering correctly, that set aside Chloe as only Susannah's property. Though some states had passed Married Women's Property Acts or similar, Alabama would pass any such laws until 1867.[1] These documents are a striking example of the enforcement of a key aspect of women's rightsthe right to own one's own propertyin which it specifically hinges on the denial of rights to another group of womenthose who are owned as property. Of interest to legal historians, particularly of women's rights and enslavement. [1] B. Zorina Khan, The Democratization of Invention: Patents and Copyrights in American Economic Development, 17901920 (Cambridge University Press, 2005), 167. Folded with some stains and wear; Near Fine. Two documents, totaling five double-sided pages measuring 8 x 13 inches and six double-sided pages measuring 7 ½ x 12 inches.

A scarce set of primary source documents relating to the protection of British territory in the Caribbean, in particular along the Mosquito Coast, during the period of varied interests in the area, in the period following the Anglo-Spanish agreement on the slave trade. Consisting of a series of secretarial copies of reports delivered to Peter McQuhae, Commodore of H.M.S. Imauam, stationed in Jamaica, these dispatches offer an overview of the issues confronting the British Navy in Jamaica during the period and in the Caribbean more broadly. Most of the documents refer to issues with Cuba, the most interesting perhaps being a letter warning of an impending filibustering expedition against Cuba by a pro-slavery faction in the American South. The group consists of five groups of bound documents, some bound out of order and likely bound later. Contents are as follows: 1. Addington, A.M. Four Page Report Concerning Placing a Ship of War at Grey Town to Discourage Invasions on the Mosquito Coast, March 13, 1851. Henry Addington writes McQuhae to recommend stationing a warship at Grey Town: ".it would be sufficient that a Ship of War should from time to time look in grey Town, without remaining there at any time long enough to endanger the health of the crew to provide for the case which is possiblee, tho' not at all likely, that during the interval between the visits of a Ship of War, some expedition of Nicaraguan, or some of the North Americans returning from California, might take advantage of the comparatively unprotected state of the lace, to take possession of it, and that the cruiser on its return to Grey Town, might find the place so occupied, Lord Palmerston concieves taht in such an event, it would seem to be inconsistent with the Honor of this Country, that a British Ship of War, should acquiesce in such an aggression, and it would be right that the intruder should be expelled, if the Commander of the Ship of War, should find as he probably would, that he had the means of doing so, without much difficulty, and that in case he should repel the intruders and re-establish the authorities of the Mosquito Government, demanding the liberation of any British or Mosquito subjects who might have been made Prisoners, and holding hostages for their relief if they should have been removed up into the interior of the Country. It It is to be hoped however, that all questions of dispute in regard to Grey Town, will, beoon be settled, because Her Majesty's government has through Her Majesty's Minister at Washington proposed to the Government, of the United States, that an arrangement should be made, by which the Sovereignty of Grey Town should be transferred to the State of Costa Rica Lord Palmerston desires me to add that there are at present at Washington a plenipotentiaries, both from Nicaragua and Costa Rica for the purpose of conducting this negotiation" 2. Addington, G.M. Single Page Letter in Secretarial Hand Warning of Incoming Ships to Cuba Carrying Enslaved Individuals, January 24, 1852. Addington writes to McQuhae about two incoming vessels carrying enslaved Africans, passing on information received at Rio De janeiro by another British vessel: "I am directed by Earl GraH.M. Minister at Rio, reporting that he had recieved information that two Slavers had sailed from Havana to the coast of Africa with the intention of returning with Cargoes of slaves which are to be landed at the Entrade de Cuchillo, in Cuba." 3. Seymour, G.F., et al. Four Reports Bound Together on Varied Subjects, including the Case of the Creole, British Fishing Rights in Spanish Waters off of Cuba and Porto Rico, and the Case of a Detained British Vessel in Cuba, 1852. A series of four reports addressed to McQuhae on various subject, as follows: A. Report dated May 17, 1852, from Seymour, discussing the case of the Creole, detained in 1851: ".enclosing copies of a letter from the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, approving of the course I had pursued with regard to the Creole, and of a despatch from the Earl of Malmesbury to Her Majesty's Minister at Madrid, relative to the rights of British Subjects to fish on the coast of Cuba" B. Letter from Augustus Stafford, Apriul 23, 1852, discussing the Creole, mostly discussing the enclosure of varied reports on the subjects but with little specific information. C. Addington, A.M. April 21, 1852, letter discussing the Creole case and the enclosure of documents. D. Earl of Malmesbury, April 14, 1852, letter discussing the Creole case in more detail: " The Right thus claimed rests on this universally admitted precept of international Law, "dominium finitur, ubi finitur armorum vis," which in modern practice has been construed to mean "about one marine league from the mainland," and H.M.'s Govt are clearly justified in demanding that the Spanish authorities shall be ordered not to meddle or interfere with British fishermen outside that three mile boundary" 4. Earl of Malmesbury, et al. Series of Three Secretarial Copies of Reports Concerning Impending Filibuster Raids on Cuba, Giving Instructions for Assisting Spanish Forces. A very interesting series of reports detailing the planned response to pending "Piratical Attacks," showing the extent to which British forces were prepared for an American filibuster attack on the island and the degree to which they intended on assisting the Spanish forces. As follows: A. Seymour, G.F. Secretarial Copy of Letter Written on May 5, 1852 from Cumberland at Bermuda, relaying the transmission of a full report of instructions to the British forces regarding an impending filibuster raid: " I hereby enclose for your guidance orders relative to the assistance which is to be afforded by Her Majesty's Ships on the application of the Captain General of Cuba, in the Transport of Troops in the event of a Piratical attack being again made on that island by which you will govern your conduct" B. Earl of Malmesbury. Secretarial Copy of a.