Document Text |
Summary |
| Council Journal, December 11, 1745
On Petition of Abram Newton a Mulatto setting forth that he being husband of Elizabeth Young a free Mulatto was purchased by her and lived with her til her Death and that the said Elizabeth by a writing under her hand gave the Petitioner his discharge after her death and praying the Board to grant or confirm to him his freedom ordered that the party who claims a property in him be summoned to appear and shew cause there upon why his prayer shall not be granted. |
On December 11, 1745 Abraham Newton, an enslaved biracial man, is asking the court to set him free. He was the husband of Elizabeth Young, a free biracial Black woman. Elizabeth bought Abraham when they got married. She just died and left instructions that he should be set free in honor of their life together. Abraham hopes that the council will honor Elizabeth’s wishes and grant his freedom. He challenges anyone to prove that it should not be granted. |
| Council Journal, June 13, 1746
Ordered that the said Abram be manumitted and set free according to the Will of the said Elizabeth and the Prayer of the Petitioner. |
On June 13, 1746 the Council of Colonial Virginia sets Abraham free according to Elizabeth’s last wishes. |
Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial Virginia, Vol V, ed. by Wilbur L. Hall, 215. (Richmond: The Virginia State Library, 1945).
Document Text |
Summary |
| Council Journal, March 21, 1772
The Petition of Margaret, late a slave of Dorothy Cartmill, of the County of Frederick, deceased, was presented and read; setting forth that her said Mistress in her late sickness made her last will and testament by which she gave the petitioner to her son Edward Cartmill for five years, and then she directed that the Petitioner should have her freedom, as a reward for the extraordinary diligence and tenderness with which she waited on her during a long and painful Illness; and praying that his Excellency and their Honors would be pleased to give their consent that the said Dorothy’s intentions in her favor may receive a full sanction. On consideration whereof, it was the opinion of the Board and ordered accordingly that the said Edward Cartmill, or any other Person who would be entitled to the service of the said Slave, if the said will had never been made, be permitted to manumit and set free the aforesaid Margaret. |
On March 21, 1772 Margaret, an enslaved woman, asks to be set free. Margaret cared for her enslaver Dorothy Cartmill for many years while she was very sick. When Dorothy died, she left a will that gave Margaret to her son for five years, after which time Margaret was to be set free. The council grants her current enslaver permission to free her. |
Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial Virginia, Vol VI, ed. by Benjamin J. Hillman, 450. (Richmond: The Virginia State Library, 1966).
Document Text |
Summary |
| Council Journal, May 7, 1773
The Petition of Elizabeth Jolliffe, Executrix of William Jolliffe decd. For Leave to manumit Jane, a Negro girl according to her Husband’s will, was rejected for want of proof of meritorious Service as the Law requires. |
On May 7, 1773 Elizabeth Jolliffe tells the council that her dead husband left instructions to free an enslaved girl named Jane. The council denies the request because Elizabeth gave no evidence that Jane did anything special to deserve it. |
Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial Virginia, Vol VI, ed. by Benjamin J. Hillman, 526. (Richmond: The Virginia State Library, 1966).
Background
As the practice of slavery spread in the colony of Virginia, the General Assembly wanted to tighten its control over the enslaved population. One particular concern was the small but growing number of free Black people who lived in the colony. Many of these free Black people had purchased their freedom from their owners. The Assembly feared that the free Black community would grow and inspire or help enslaved people to revolt against their enslavers.
To combat this problem, the General Assembly passed a new law in 1723. It required that every petition for manumission be reviewed by the governor and council of the colony. It also stated that manumission would only be granted if there was evidence that the enslaved person had performed “meritorious services.” Only the governor and council could decide whether a service was meritorious enough.
The new law worked. Between 1723 and 1773 there are records of only about twenty manumission petitions in the council’s records. Petitioning was beyond the power of most enslaved people, and too much of an inconvenience for enslavers.
About the Documents
These three petitions were made after the new manumission law was passed in 1723. They demonstrate how the governor and council enforced the law. The first is the petition of Abram Newton. Abram was an enslaved man who had been purchased years earlier by his free biracial Black wife, Elizabeth Young. Knowing the law, Elizabeth maintained their official status of owner and enslaved person until her death. In her will, Elizabeth freed Abram and called on the council to confirm his manumission on account of his years of work providing for their family. The council agreed that this counted as meritorious service and Abram was set free.
In the second petition, Edward Cartmill asked the Assembly to free an enslaved woman named Margaret. He cited his mother’s will, which said that Margaret was to be freed to reward her for the many years of quality care she provided during her enslaver’s long illness. Again, the council agreed that Margaret performed meritorious service, and she was freed.
The final petition is the most revealing. Recently widowed Elizabeth Joliffe petitioned the council to free a young enslaved woman named Jane. Her husband’s will stated that the enslaved people he owned were to be freed when they reached their eighteenth birthdays, and it seems that Jane was the first person to reach this milestone. The council denied the petition on the grounds that the will did not prove that Jane did anything particularly special. There is no record of Elizabeth petitioning again for Jane or any of her other enslaved people.
The 1723 law put total control of manumission in the hands of the colonial government. It also implied to the enslaved people of Virginia that if they worked hard enough, they too could be set free. If they were not freed, then it must mean they had not done enough. It was a powerful new tool to reinforce white supremacy.
Vocabulary
- General Assembly: The governing body of the Virginia colony.
- manumission: Release from slavery.
- meritorious: Deserving reward or praise.
- petition: A formal written request sent to an authority figure.
Discussion Questions
- What do these documents reveal about the way enslaved people were viewed and treated in colonial Virginia?
- How did Elizabeth Young beat the system in the case of her husband?
- What do these documents reveal about the development of the institution of slavery in the English colonies?
- Why is the rejection of Jane’s petition significant?
Suggested Activities
- Pair this resource with Life Story: Sarah to help students understand the historical context in which Virginia’s new manumission laws were written.
- Pair this resource with Legislating Reproduction and Racial Difference in Virginia for a discussion of the evolution of laws governing slavery in the colonies.
- For a more comprehensive discussion of how enslaved people all over the American colonies fought for their freedom, pair this resource with any or all of the following:
Themes
AMERICAN IDENTITY AND CITIZENSHIP; POWER AND POLITICS
The New York Historical Curriculum Library Connections
- For resources relating to slavery in the Dutch and English Colonies, see New World—New Netherland—New York.
