Footnotes:

Thus it became clear that the planters of Barbadoes could hope for no relief from the king and, therefore, during the few remaining years in which the company was in existence they made no other consistent effort to convince the king of their point of view. On the other hand, if the company expected the king's instructions to be of great assistance it was sorely disappointed. On August 2, 1671,John Reid reported that they had been unable to recover the company's debts,[33]and further appeals to the king for relief were of no avail.[34]

It is difficult to ascertain whether Barbadoes was in as great need of slaves as the planters often asserted. The records kept by the factors in the island have nearly all disappeared. From an early ledger kept by the Barbadoes factors it appears that from August 11, 1663, to March 17, 1664, the usual time for the chief importation of the year, 3,075 Negroes were received by the company's factors. These slaves, 1,051 men, 1,018 women, 136 boys and 56 girls, were sold in return partly for sugar and partly for money. Estimating 2,400 pounds of sugar as equal to seventeen pounds it appears that the average price for these Negroes was a little over sixteen pounds per head.[35]This comparatively low price is to be accounted for by the fact that the women and children are averaged with the men, who sold for a higher price. These figures show therefore that the company's factors were selling adult slaves at about seventeen pounds each, as the company had publicly declared that it would do.

In 1667 the company asserted that it had furnished the plantations with about 6,000 slaves each year. This statement is to be doubted since the Anglo-Dutch war had practically disrupted the company's entire trade on the African coast. On the other hand, there is reason to think that the need for slaves in Barbadoes was not so pressing as might be inferred from the statements of the planters.[36]They naturally insisted on a large supply of slaves in order to keep the prices as low as possible. There seems no doubt, however, that the islanders were able to obtain more Negroes than they could pay for and were therefore hopelesslyin debt to the company. On July 9, 1668, Governor Willoughby estimated the total population of Barbadoes at 60,000, of which 40,000 were slaves.[37]Indeed some merchants declared that the slaves outnumbered the white men twenty to one.[38]

As compared to its trade with Barbadoes and Jamaica the company's trade in slaves to the Leeward Islands was insignificant. The company located at Nevis a factor who reported to the agents in Barbadoes[39]and also at Antigua and Surinam where Governor Byam acted as agent.[40]In Surinam, the lack of slaves was attributed to the prominent men of Barbadoes who were supposed to be influential with the Royal Company.[41]Later, during the Anglo-Dutch war, one of the company's ships in attempting to go to Surinam with Negroes, was captured by the Dutch.[42]

After the war the company seems to have neglected the islands altogether. Upon one occasion the planters of Antigua pleaded unsuccessfully to have Negroes furnished to them on credit.[43]At another time they asserted that the company treated them much worse than it did the planters of Barbadoes because the latter were able to use their influence with the company to divert the supply of slaves to Barbadoes. Their condition, they declared, seemed all the more bitter when they considered the thriving trade in Negroes which the Dutch carried on from the island of Curaçao.[44]

The history of the slave trade to Jamaica from 1660 to1672 does not present the varied number of problems which arose during the same time in Barbadoes. Jamaica was as yet more sparsely settled than Barbadoes and therefore unable to take as large a number of Negroes. Nevertheless, even before 1660, there was a need for servants in Jamaica,[45]and there, as in Barbadoes, the Dutch had furnished the planters with Negroes. When a Dutch ship laden with 180 slaves appeared at the island in June, 1661, Colonel d'Oyley, the governor, who was desirous of making a personal profit out of the sales, was strongly in favor of permitting the vessel to land its Negroes. The Jamaica council, however, realized that the Navigation Act made the Negro trade with the Dutch illegal, and therefore it refused to accede to the governor's desire. This action so enraged the governor that on his own responsibility he purchased the whole cargo of slaves, some of which he sold to a Quaker in the island, while the others he disposed of at considerable profit to a Spaniard.[46]Again, in February, 1662, d'Oyley bought a number of Negroes from another Dutchman. When one of the king's ships attempted to seize the Dutch vessel for infringing the Navigation Act, the governor even contrived to get it safely away from the island.[47]

When Colonel Modyford became governor of Jamaica in 1664, he was instructed to do all that he possibly could to encourage the trade which the Royal Company was endeavoring to set on foot in the West Indies.[48]In the instructions mention was also made of Modyford's previous interest in managing the affairs of the Royal Company in Barbadoes for which company, it was said, he undoubtedly retained great affection. Shortly thereafter he issued aproclamation promising extensive freedom of commerce except in the Negro trade which was in the hands of the Royal Company.[49]

Although Modyford's proclamation indicated a continued interest in the company's trade, he gave his first consideration to the welfare of the colony. This appears from a list of the island's needs which he submitted to the king, May 10, 1664, in which he asked among other things that the Royal Company be obliged to furnish annually whatever Negroes were necessary, and that the poorer planters be accorded easy terms in paying for them. Furthermore he requested that indentured servants be sent from England and that the island might have freedom of trade except in Negroes.[50]His desires for a free trade were denied, but the Privy Council agreed to consult with the Royal Company and to recommend that it be obliged to furnish Jamaica with a sufficient supply of Negroes.[51]

There is no evidence that the Privy Council called the company's attention to Modyford's request, nor is there any indication that it endeavored to send very many Negroes to Jamaica. Modyford attended to a plantation which the company had bought in Jamaica[52]and he sold a few slaves to the Spaniards,[53]but all the company's affairs in the aggregate really amounted to little in that island. There was a continual call for a greater supply of Negroes than the company sent.[54]Two ledgers used by the factors show that 690 Negroes were sold in 1666 and in the following year,[55]170. Although this number was inadequate to meet the colony's needs, it is doubtful whether the company sent any slaves to Jamaica after 1667.

Under these circumstances Modyford lost interest in the company's affairs and therefore it resolved, April 6, 1669, to dispense with his services. Modyford had received a pension of three hundred pounds per year up to Michaelmas, 1666, but after that time the company's financial condition no longer warranted this expense. The company does not seem to have been displeased with Modyford because it requested that he use his good offices as governor to assist it in every possible way. At the same time the services of the other factor, Mr. Molesworth, were discontinued and he was requested to send an inventory of the company's affairs.[56]

Modyford thus free from his connection with the company probably represented the desires of the Jamaica people in a more unbiased manner. On September 20, 1670, he enumerated a number of needs of the island and asked Secretary Arlington that licenses to trade to Africa for Negroes be granted free of charge or at least at more moderate rates. For this privilege he declared that security could be given that the slaves would be carried only to Jamaica. The Royal Company itself could not complain when it realized how much this freedom of trade would mean toward the prosperity of Jamaica, and thus ultimately to the entire kingdom.[57]Modyford admitted that the Anglo-Dutch war had been a great hindrance to Jamaica's prosperity but that the lack of Negroes since 1665 had been a much greater obstruction.[58]

The more insistent demands which Governor Modyford made in 1670 for freedom of trade to Africa show that the company's failure to send Negroes to Jamaica after 1667 was beginning to be resented. Although there had been a constant demand for Negroes in Jamaica there was up to 1670 less need for slaves there than in Barbadoes. At leastthe demands made by the planters of Jamaica were not so frequent and so insistent as they were in Barbadoes. To a certain extent the planters of Jamaica may have been deterred from representing the lack of labor supply while Governor Modyford was one of the company's factors. Modyford had been very much interested in the company's trade, especially with the Spanish colonies. As soon as it became clear, however, that the losses incurred in the Anglo-Dutch war, would make it impossible for the company to continue the slave trade to the West Indies, Modyford undoubtedly voiced a genuine demand on the part of the planters for more slaves. By the year 1670 the island was better developed than it had been ten years before and the need for slaves was beginning to be acute.[59]

About the first of March, 1662, two Spaniards made their appearance at Barbadoes to make overtures for a supply of slaves, which they intended to transport to Peru. If they received encouragement, the Spaniards asserted that they would come every fortnight with large supplies of bullion to pay for the slaves which they exported. Sir Thomas Modyford, the company's factor and the speaker of the Barbadoes assembly, was enthusiastic about this proposition and pointed out that the trade with the Spanish colonies would increase the king's revenue and at the same time would deprive the Dutch of a lucrative trade.[60]Since they were well treated on their first visit to Barbadoes the Spaniards returned in April, 1662, at which time they bought four hundred Negroes for which they paid from 125 to 140 pieces of eight.[61]When the Spaniards came to export their Negroes, however, they found that Governor Willoughby had levied a duty of eleven pieces of eight on each Negro. The assembly under Modyford's leadership at once declared the imposition of such a tax illegal. This resolution was carried to the council where, against the opposition of the governor, it was also passed. GovernorWilloughby, nevertheless, had the temerity to collect the tax on some of the Negroes then in port, and a little later when one of the ships of the Royal Adventurers sold its Negroes to the Spaniards, he again enforced the payment of the export tax.[62]Notwithstanding the governor's actions, Modyford despatched one of his own ships with slaves to Cartagena where it arrived safely and was well treated by the Spaniards.[63]Modyford was now more than ever convinced of the possibilities of the trade with the Spanish colonies, but believing that it could not be conducted successfully by private individuals, he recommended that it be settled on the Royal Company.[64]

When the Royal Company learned that the trade in Negroes to the Spanish colonies offered many possibilities it was very much interested. A petition was immediately submitted to the king requesting that, if the Spaniards were allowed to come to Barbadoes for slaves, the whole trade be conferred on the Royal Company. The company declared that the planters in the colonies had no reason to object to this arrangement because they had not engaged in this trade, and moreover an opportunity was being offered to them to become members of the company.[65]

The Privy Council was favorable to the company's proposition, and on March 13, 1663, the king instructed Lord Willoughby to permit the Spaniards to trade at Barbadoes for slaves notwithstanding any letters of marque that had been issued against them, or any provisions of the Navigation Act. He declared that the Spaniards were to be allowed to import into Barbadoes only the products of their own colonies, and were not to be permitted to carry away the produce of the English colonies. The effect of this provision was that in addition to slaves the Spaniardsmight obtain any products imported into Barbadoes from England.[66]The king settled the question of duties on slaves by ordering that ten pieces of eight on each Negro should be paid by all persons who exported slaves from Barbadoes or Jamaica to the Spanish colonies, except the agents of the Royal Company. The company was to pay no export duties on Negroes especially when the Spaniards had made previous contracts for them in England.[67]

Probably on account of the export duty on slaves which Willoughby had levied in 1662, the Spaniards were not anxious to return to Barbadoes. The company's factors therefore sent one of their ships with slaves to Terra Firma in order to convince the Spaniards that their desire for a Negro trade was genuine. On this occasion Lord Willoughby and the council of the island exacted £320 in customs from the factors. When the company heard of this procedure it immediately asked the king to enforce the order allowing it to export Negroes free of duty.[68]Thereupon the king ordered Willoughby to make immediate restitution of the £320 and to give the company's factors as much encouragement as possible.[69]Willoughby finally obeyed in a sullen manner. On May 20, 1665 he declared that the company had finally monopolized the Spanish trade for Negroes and that, because the king refused to permit an export duty to be levied on them, there was no revenue from that source.[70]The king's concessions to the Royal Company were of little avail, however, because the Anglo-Dutch wareffectually stopped most of the company's trade in Negroes including that from Barbadoes to the Spanish colonies.

In considering the trade in slaves from Jamaica to the Spanish colonies it is well to keep in mind that this island lay far to the west of all other English possessions in the West Indies. It was located in the very midst of the Spanish possessions from which it had been wrested in 1655 by the expedition of Sir William Penn and Admiral Venables. The people of the island realized their isolation and occasionally attempted to break down the decrees of the Spanish government, which forbade its colonies to have any intercourse with foreigners. Although the English government began a somewhat similar policy with respect to its colonies in the Navigation Act of 1660, it was generally agreed that some exception should be made for the island of Jamaica in connection with the Spanish trade.

When Lord Windsor became governor of Jamaica in 1662 he was instructed to endeavor to secure a free commerce with the Spanish colonies. If the governors of the Spanish colonies refused to grant this trade voluntarily, Lord Windsor and the council of the island were given permission to compel the Spanish authorities to acquiesce by the use of force or any other means at their disposal.[71]Accordingly a letter embodying this request was written to the governors of Porto Rico and Santo Domingo, but unfavorable replies were received. In accordance with the king's instructions the Jamaica council determined to obtain a trade by force.[72]This was done by issuing letters of marque to privateers for the purpose of preying upon Spanish ships.[73]

In the following year, 1663, as has already been mentioned, Charles II commanded the governors of Barbadoesand Jamaica to permit the Spaniards to buy goods and Negroes in their respective islands, and to refrain from charging duties on these Negroes in case they were reexported by the agents of the Royal Adventurers.[74]This was followed by a royal order of April 29, 1663, commanding the governor to stop all hostile measures against the Spaniards. Sir Charles Lyttleton, the deputy governor, replied that he hoped the attempt to begin a trade with the Spaniards would be successful, especially in Negroes, which the Spaniards could not obtain more easily than in Jamaica.[75]

When Sir Charles Modyford became governor of Jamaica in 1664, the king repeated his desire to promote trade and correspondence with the Spanish plantations. Indeed Modyford's previous success in selling Negroes to the Spaniards probably influenced his appointment to this office. As soon as Modyford reached Jamaica he wrote a letter to the governor of Santo Domingo informing him that the king had ordered a cessation of hostilities and desired a peaceful commerce with the Spanish colonies.[76]Modyford instructed the two commissioners by whom the letter was sent to emphasize the trade in Negroes and to induce the Spaniards, if possible, to negotiate with him in regard to this matter.[77]Again the answer of the governor of Santo Domingo was unfavorable. He pointed out that it was not within his power to order a commerce with Jamaica, but that this was the province of the government in Spain. The governor, moreover, complained that the people of Jamaica had acted in the same hostile manner toward the Spaniards since the Restoration as they had in Cromwell's time, and therefore his people were little inclined to begin a trade with Jamaica.

The refusal of the Spanish governor to consider Modyford's proposition seemed all the more bitter since it was well known at that time that the Spaniards were obtaining many Negroes from the Dutch West India Company. The Genoese also had a contract with the Spaniards to deliver 24,500 Negroes in seven years nearly all of whom they expected to obtain from the Dutch at that "cursed little barren island" of Curaçao, as Sir Thomas Lynch called it. Lynch also observed that if the Royal Company desired to participate in the Spanish trade it would either have to sell to the Genoese or drive the Dutch out of Africa, because he did not believe it was possible to call in the privateers without the assistance of several men-of-war.[78]Just how much weight should be attached to this opinion is doubtful since Lynch was probably so much interested in continuing privateering against the Spaniards, that he cared little how much this would interfere with the company's attempt to develop the Negro trade.

Lynch's opinion was not shared by the king, who had heard that the privateers were continuing their hostilities against the Spaniards. He therefore informed Modyford that he could not adequately express his dissatisfaction at the daily complaints made by the Spaniards about the violence of ships said to belong to Jamaica. Modyford was strictly commanded to secure and punish any such offenders.[79]The governor issued a proclamation in accordance with the king's instructions,[80]and also notified the governor of Havana that offenders against Spanish commerce would hereafter be punished as pirates.[81]

After the Anglo-Dutch war began the company imported very few Negroes to Jamaica for the Spanish trade or for any other purpose. The king's stringent orders regardingprivateers were gradually allowed to go unnoticed. Modyford again began to issue letters of marque, a procedure which naturally destroyed all possibility of commerce between the Spanish colonies and the Royal Company.

At the time the desultory trade in Negroes was being started with the Spaniards at Barbadoes, Richard White, of Spain, came to England as an agent for two Spaniards, Domingo Grillo and Ambrosio Lomoline.[82]These two men had been granted the assiento in Spain, that is, the privilege of furnishing the Spanish colonies with Negro slaves. In order to wrest some of this trade from the Dutch West India Company the Royal Company entered into a contract with White, in the year 1663, to furnish the Spanish assientists with 3,500 Negroes per year for a definite number of years. According to this contract the slaves were to be delivered to the vessels of the assientists in Barbadoes and Jamaica; one of the company's factors was to be placed on board such ships; and the necessary safe conducts were to be procured for their voyage to and from the port of Cadiz.[83]Sir Ellis Leighton, secretary of the Royal Adventurers, obtained permission for Grillo's agents to reside in Jamaica and Barbadoes.[84]Sir Martin Noell, one of the most important West Indian merchants, as well as a prominent member of the African Company, seems to have been intrusted with the collection of the money due on this contract.[85]

Not long after this agreement was made the possibilityof a war with the Dutch began to appear. The company considered ways by which Grillo might be induced to mitigate the contract.[86]Complications concerning the security to be given arose, and Grillo complained that the required number of Negroes was not being furnished to him. Under the circumstances this was almost impossible because the outbreak of the Anglo-Dutch war made it very difficult to obtain slaves. Nevertheless, on May 26, 1665, the company resolved to procure as many Negroes as possible to fill the contract, providing Grillo made prompt payments.[87]

As may be surmised no great number of slaves was exported from Barbadoes or Jamaica on this contract. Only one ship arrived at Barbadoes from Cadiz desiring to secure one thousand slaves, but the company's factors could obtain only eight hundred. Lord Willoughby carefully reported that he had complied with his Majesty's command not to exact any export duty for these slaves.[88]In Jamaica fewer Negroes are known to have been sold on this contract to Spanish ships which came from Cartagena.[89]There may have been other instances of sales not recorded, but it is certain that the war interfered to such an extent that the number of Negroes sold to Grillo fell far short of what the contract called for. In order to keep the agreement intact the company resolved, March 23, 1666, to lay the situation before the king, and to ask him to permit Grillo's agents to buy sufficient Negroes in the plantations to make up the required number, and that no export duties be charged on them.[90]The king complied with the company's request, and the desired orders were sent to the governors of Jamaica and Barbadoes.[91]Some trouble had arisen in Jamaica, however, between Grillo's agents and Governor Modyford. Since the company believed that Grillo'sagents were primarily to blame for this, it resolved in the future to deliver Negroes only at Barbadoes in return for ready money.[92]

This was virtually the end of the contract. In 1667 the company spoke of the agreement as having been broken by the Grillos, and that it was under no further obligation to carry out its terms. Altogether, it declared, that no more than 1,200 Negroes had been delivered to Grillo's agents.[93]Thus this project which the company at first asserted would bring into the English kingdom 86,000 pounds of Spanish silver per year[94]ended in this insignificant fashion.

Although the Grillo contract and the other attempts to begin a slave trade with the Spanish colonies had proved much less successful than the Company of Royal Adventurers had hoped, a great deal had been accomplished toward bringing to light the fundamental difficulties of this trade. In the first place not much could be accomplished in the way of developing this trade so long as the Spanish government maintained its attitude of uncompromising hostility toward all foreigners notwithstanding the fact that the Spanish colonists would gladly have welcomed the slave traders. Furthermore, although the English government had signified its willingness to disregard the restrictions of the Navigation Acts in this instance, the hostile attitude assumed by the planters toward the trade in slaves to the Spanish colonies also had to be taken into consideration. Whenever the planters were able to do so they endeavored to prevent the exportation to the Spanish colonies of slaves which they maintained were very much needed on their own plantations.

This opposition to the trade in Negroes to the Spanish colonies was only one of the several ways in which the colonistsmanifested their hostility toward the mercantile element in general and the Company of Royal Adventurers in particular. Freedom of trade with all the world seemed very desirable to the planters who regarded the restrictions of the Navigation Acts as gross favoritism and partiality to the rising mercantile class. The monopoly of supplying the colonies with slaves, conferred upon the Company of Royal Adventurers, was most cordially hated on account of the great degree of dependence placed upon slave labor in the plantations. As a result of this conflict of interests the planters early resorted to numerous devices such as the laws for the protection of debtors, to embarrass the company in the exercise of its monopoly. Since the company had received its exclusive privileges by a charter from the crown the English planters in the West Indies soon found that their trouble with the Company of Royal Adventurers brought them also into direct conflict with the king. In this way the planters enjoyed the distinction of being among the first to begin the opposition which later, in the Great Revolution, resulted in the overthrow of James II and the royal prerogative.

George F. Zook.

Footnotes:[1]These were people of the rougher and even criminal classes of the parent country who, in return for their ocean passage, agreed to work for some planter during a specified number of years, usually seven.[2]C. S. P., Col., 1674-1675, Addenda, p. 86, articles agreed on by Lord Willoughby and Sir George Ayscue and others, January 11, 1652.[3]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 14, petitions of merchants and planters, March 1, 1661.[4]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, pp. 29, 30, 45, 46, 47, petitions from Barbadoes, May 11, July 10, 12, 1661.[5]Ibid., p. 117, minutes of the council and assembly of Barbadoes, December 18, 1662.[6]The pieces of eight were to be accepted at four shillings each, and 2,400 pounds of muscovado sugar were to be accepted in exchange for a slave.[7]Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers of England ... to the Petition ... exhibited ... by Sir Paul Painter, His Royal Highness (the duke of York) and others to Lord Willoughby, January 10, 1662/3.[8]C. O. 1: 18, ff. 85, 86, Modyford and Colleton to the Royal Adventurers, March 20, 1664.[9]A. C. R., 75: 13, 14, J5.[10]Ibid., 75: 20.[11]On January 2, 1665, the company estimated the entire debt which was owing to it in all the plantations at £49,895. S. P., Dom., Charles II, 110, f. 18, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king.[12]P. C. R., Charles II, 4: 177, 190-192, August 3, 24, 1664.[13]C. O. 1: 19, ff. 234-238, proceedings of the court of admiralty in Barbadoes, June 17, 24, 1665.[14]Ibid., f. 232, petition of the Royal Adventurers to Arlington, September 14, 1665.[15]P. C. R., Charles II, 5: 402, Privy Council to Willoughby, April 6, 1666.[16]C. O. 1: 20, f. 209, Willoughby to Privy Council, July 16, 1666.[17]Ibid., f. 335, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king, December 7, 1666.[18]P. C. R., Charles II, 6: 231, December 7, 1666.[19]Ibid., 7: 162, 163, Privy Council to Willoughby, January 31, 1668.[20]C. O. 1: 22, f. 191, Willoughby to Privy Council, May 30, 1668.[21]Ibid., 20, f. 149, Willoughby to the king, May 32, 1666.[22]Ibid., 21, f. 170, Willoughby to the king, July, 1667.[23]C. O. 1: 21, f. 222, Willoughby to Williamson, September 17, 1667.[24]Ibid., f. 209, petition of the representatives of Barbadoes to the king, September 5, 1667. This document and Willoughby's letter of September 17, 1667, also urge very strongly that the bars of the Navigation Acts be let down in order to permit servants to be imported from Scotland.[25]The petition and these answers are printed in a pamphlet entitled, "Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers of England trading into Africa, to the Petition and Paper of certain Heads and Particulars thereunto relating exhibited to the Honourable House of Commons by Sir Paul Painter." As to the assertion that the planters refused to ship their products in the company's ships there seems to be no very good evidence on either side. Sometimes the company's vessels were sent home from Barbadoes empty. Upon such occasions the agents always said that there were no goods with which to load them.[26]C. O. 1: 22, f. 42, answer of Sir Ellis Leighton, secretary of the Royal Adventurers, to the petition from Barbadoes of September 5, 1667; C. O. 1: 22, f. 43, proposal of the Royal Adventurers concerning the sale of Negroes in Barbadoes, January, 1668[27]C. O. 1: 22, f. 204, address of the merchants and planters of Barbadoes now in London, read at the committee of trade, June 16, 1668.[28]Ibid., 23, f. 69, address of the representative of Barbadoes to the king, August 3, 1668.[29]Ibid., f. 42, account of affairs in Barbadoes by Lord Willoughby, July 22, 1668.[30]P. C. R., Charles II, 8: 294, May 12, 1669.[31]Ibid., 8: 402, August 27, 1669.[32]Ibid., 8: 424, September 28, 1669.[33]C. O. 1: 27, f. 24, John Reid to Arlington, August 2, 1671.[34]A. C. R., 75: 106, 108, 109, September 11, November 10, 1671.[35]These numbers and prices are gleaned from page three of the Barbadoes ledger. A. C. R., 646.[36]Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers ... to the Petition ... exhibited ... by Sir Paul Painter.[37]C. O. 29: 1, f. 116, Willoughby to the Lords of the Council, July 9, 1668.[38]Ibid., 1: 25, f. 62, memorial of some principal merchants trading to the plantations, 1670.[39]Ibid., 18, f. 86, Modyford and Colleton to (the Royal Adventurers); C. O. 1: 20, f. 168, Michael Smith to Richard Chaundler, June 11, 1666.[40]Ibid., 22, f. 89, Willoughby to Arlington, March 2, 1668.[41]Ibid., 17, f. 219, Renatus Enys to Bennet, November 1, 1663.[42]Ibid., 29: 1, f. 116, Willoughby to the Lords of the Council, July 9, 1668.[43]Ibid., 1: 22, f. 53, proposals of the inhabitants of Antigua to Governor Willoughby, January 31, 1668.[44]C. S. P., Col. 1669-1674, p, 204, William Byam to Willoughby, 1670?; C. O. 1: 25, f. 138, Byam to Willoughby, n. d.[45]C. S. P., Col., 1675-1676, Addenda, p. 125, Cornelius Burough to the Admiralty Commissioners, November 28, 1658.[46]Ibid., 1661-1668, p. 36, narrative of the buying of a shipload of Negroes, June 14, 1661.[47]C. O. 1: 16, f. 77, Captain Richard Whiting to the officers of his Majesty's navy, March 10, 1662; C. O. 1: 17, f. 236, petition of Colonel Godfrey Ashbey and others to the king, 1663.[48]Ibid., 18, f. 58, instructions to Colonel Modyford, governor of Jamaica, February 18, 1664.[49]C. O. 1: 18, f. 81, declaration of Sir Thomas Modyford, March 2, 1664.[50]Ibid., f. 135, Modyford to Bennet, May 10, 1664.[51]Ibid., f. 208, report of the Privy Council on Jamaica affairs, August 10, 1664.[52]A. C. R., 75: 89.[53]Add. MSS., 12,430, f. 31, Beeston, Journal, February 1, 1664/5.[54]C. O. 1: 19, f. 31, Lynch to Bennet, February 12, 1665;ibid., f. 189, John Style to (Bennet), July 24, 1665.[55]A. C. R., 869, entries from January 1, 1665/6 to December 31, 1666;ibid., 870: 62.[56]A. C. R., 75: 14, 89.[57]C. O. 1: 25, f. 127, Modyford to Arlington, (September 20, 1670).[58]C. S. P., Col., 1669-1674, p. 107, additional propositions made to the Privy Council about Jamaica by Charles Modyford by order of Sir Thomas Modyford, (September 28, 1670).[59]C. O. 1: 14, f. 56, proposal by Lord Marlborough, 1663.[60]Ibid., 17, f. 28, Thomas Modyford? to his brother, March 30, 1662.[61]Ibid., f. 29, Thomas Modyford? to his brother, April 30, 1662.[62]C. O. 1: 17, ff. 29, 30, Thomas Modyford to his brother, May 26, 1662.[63]Ibid., f. 32, Thomas Modyford to his brother, September 3, 13, 1662.[64]Ibid., f 32, Thomas Modyford to his brother, September 13, 1662.[65]Ibid., f. 20, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king, January, 1663.[66]C. O. 1: 17, f. 136, instructions to Lord Willoughby, June 16, 1663.[67]Ibid., f. 227 (the king to the governors of Barbadoes and Jamaica). March 30, 1663. That there was some trouble in deciding just what provisions to make regarding the Spanish trade appears from several unsigned and undated letters to Willoughby with conflicting provisions, but they nearly all mention the exception made in favor of the Royal Company in the letter of March 13, 1663. C. O. 1: 17, f. 22; C. O. 1: 17, ff. 24, 25; C. O. 1: 17, ff. 26, 27; P. C. R., Charles II, 3: 336-338.[68]C. O. 1: 17, ff. 225, 226, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king, November, 1663.[69]Willoughby made a restitution of the £320 in March, 1664. C. O. 1: 18, f. 86, Modyford and Colleton to (the Royal Adventurers), March 31, 1664.[70]C. O. 1: 19, f. 124, Willoughby to the king, May 20, 1665.[71]C. O. 1: 16, f. 112, additional instructions to Lord Windsor, governor of Jamaica, April 8, 1662.[72]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 106, minutes of the council of Jamaica, August 20, 1662.[73]A full description of privateering by the English against the Spaniards from the year 1660 to 1670 may be found in an article by Miss Violet Barbour in the American Historical Review, XVI: 529-566.[74]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 125 (the king to the governors of Barbadoes and Jamaica), March 13, 1663.[75]C. O. 1: 17, f. 199, Sir Charles Lyttleton, deputy governor, to Bennet, October 15, 1663.[76]Ibid., 18, f. 137, Modyford to the governor of Santo Domingo, April 30, 1664.[77]Ibid., f. 139, Modyford's instructions to Colonel Cary and Captain Perrott, May 2, 1664.[78]C. O. 1: 18, ff. 152, 153, Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Lynch to Bennet. May 25, 1664.[79]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 215, the king to Modyford, June 15, 1664.[80]Ibid., p. 220, proclamation by Sir Thomas Modyford, governor of Jamaica, June 15, 1664.[81]Ibid., p. 228, minutes of the council of Jamaica, August 19-22, 1664.[82]C. S. P., Dom., 1663-1664, p. 168, Richard White to Captain Weld, June 11, 1663.[83]As this contract cannot be discovered it is difficult to say just when it was made or what were its conditions. Georges Scelle in his book, La Traité Nègriere aux Indes de Castille, 1: 524, gives the date of this contract as February 28, 1663, and says it was for 35,000 Negroes which were to be delivered at the rate of 5,000 per year. This may be true, but on the other hand the company distinctly declares in one place that the contract was for the annual delivery of 3,500 Negroes per year. C. O. 1: 19, ff. 7, 8, brief narrative of the trade and present condition of the Royal Adventurers, 1664/5.[84]C. O. 1: 17, f. 189, memorial of Sir Ellis Leighton to the duke of York, 1663.[85]Ibid., ff. 244, 247; A. C. R., 75: 48.[86]A. C. R., 75: 15, August 5, 1664.[87]Ibid., 75: 34, May 26, 1665.[88]C. O. 1: 18, f. 165, Willoughby to the king, June 17, 1664.[89]Add. MSS., 12,430, f. 31, Beeston, Journal, April 8, 1665.[90]A. C. R., 75: 43, March 23, 1665/6.[91]P. C. R., Charles II, 5: 396, March 30, 1666.[92]A. C. R., 75: 46; Add. MSS., 12,430, f. 31, Beeston, Journal, February 7, 1664/5.[93]Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers ... to the Petition ... exhibited ... by Sir Paul Painter.[94]C. O. 1: 19, ff. 7, 8, brief narrative of the trade and present condition of the Royal Adventurers, 1664/5.

[1]These were people of the rougher and even criminal classes of the parent country who, in return for their ocean passage, agreed to work for some planter during a specified number of years, usually seven.

[2]C. S. P., Col., 1674-1675, Addenda, p. 86, articles agreed on by Lord Willoughby and Sir George Ayscue and others, January 11, 1652.

[3]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 14, petitions of merchants and planters, March 1, 1661.

[4]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, pp. 29, 30, 45, 46, 47, petitions from Barbadoes, May 11, July 10, 12, 1661.

[5]Ibid., p. 117, minutes of the council and assembly of Barbadoes, December 18, 1662.

[6]The pieces of eight were to be accepted at four shillings each, and 2,400 pounds of muscovado sugar were to be accepted in exchange for a slave.

[7]Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers of England ... to the Petition ... exhibited ... by Sir Paul Painter, His Royal Highness (the duke of York) and others to Lord Willoughby, January 10, 1662/3.

[8]C. O. 1: 18, ff. 85, 86, Modyford and Colleton to the Royal Adventurers, March 20, 1664.

[9]A. C. R., 75: 13, 14, J5.

[10]Ibid., 75: 20.

[11]On January 2, 1665, the company estimated the entire debt which was owing to it in all the plantations at £49,895. S. P., Dom., Charles II, 110, f. 18, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king.

[12]P. C. R., Charles II, 4: 177, 190-192, August 3, 24, 1664.

[13]C. O. 1: 19, ff. 234-238, proceedings of the court of admiralty in Barbadoes, June 17, 24, 1665.

[14]Ibid., f. 232, petition of the Royal Adventurers to Arlington, September 14, 1665.

[15]P. C. R., Charles II, 5: 402, Privy Council to Willoughby, April 6, 1666.

[16]C. O. 1: 20, f. 209, Willoughby to Privy Council, July 16, 1666.

[17]Ibid., f. 335, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king, December 7, 1666.

[18]P. C. R., Charles II, 6: 231, December 7, 1666.

[19]Ibid., 7: 162, 163, Privy Council to Willoughby, January 31, 1668.

[20]C. O. 1: 22, f. 191, Willoughby to Privy Council, May 30, 1668.

[21]Ibid., 20, f. 149, Willoughby to the king, May 32, 1666.

[22]Ibid., 21, f. 170, Willoughby to the king, July, 1667.

[23]C. O. 1: 21, f. 222, Willoughby to Williamson, September 17, 1667.

[24]Ibid., f. 209, petition of the representatives of Barbadoes to the king, September 5, 1667. This document and Willoughby's letter of September 17, 1667, also urge very strongly that the bars of the Navigation Acts be let down in order to permit servants to be imported from Scotland.

[25]The petition and these answers are printed in a pamphlet entitled, "Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers of England trading into Africa, to the Petition and Paper of certain Heads and Particulars thereunto relating exhibited to the Honourable House of Commons by Sir Paul Painter." As to the assertion that the planters refused to ship their products in the company's ships there seems to be no very good evidence on either side. Sometimes the company's vessels were sent home from Barbadoes empty. Upon such occasions the agents always said that there were no goods with which to load them.

[26]C. O. 1: 22, f. 42, answer of Sir Ellis Leighton, secretary of the Royal Adventurers, to the petition from Barbadoes of September 5, 1667; C. O. 1: 22, f. 43, proposal of the Royal Adventurers concerning the sale of Negroes in Barbadoes, January, 1668

[27]C. O. 1: 22, f. 204, address of the merchants and planters of Barbadoes now in London, read at the committee of trade, June 16, 1668.

[28]Ibid., 23, f. 69, address of the representative of Barbadoes to the king, August 3, 1668.

[29]Ibid., f. 42, account of affairs in Barbadoes by Lord Willoughby, July 22, 1668.

[30]P. C. R., Charles II, 8: 294, May 12, 1669.

[31]Ibid., 8: 402, August 27, 1669.

[32]Ibid., 8: 424, September 28, 1669.

[33]C. O. 1: 27, f. 24, John Reid to Arlington, August 2, 1671.

[34]A. C. R., 75: 106, 108, 109, September 11, November 10, 1671.

[35]These numbers and prices are gleaned from page three of the Barbadoes ledger. A. C. R., 646.

[36]Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers ... to the Petition ... exhibited ... by Sir Paul Painter.

[37]C. O. 29: 1, f. 116, Willoughby to the Lords of the Council, July 9, 1668.

[38]Ibid., 1: 25, f. 62, memorial of some principal merchants trading to the plantations, 1670.

[39]Ibid., 18, f. 86, Modyford and Colleton to (the Royal Adventurers); C. O. 1: 20, f. 168, Michael Smith to Richard Chaundler, June 11, 1666.

[40]Ibid., 22, f. 89, Willoughby to Arlington, March 2, 1668.

[41]Ibid., 17, f. 219, Renatus Enys to Bennet, November 1, 1663.

[42]Ibid., 29: 1, f. 116, Willoughby to the Lords of the Council, July 9, 1668.

[43]Ibid., 1: 22, f. 53, proposals of the inhabitants of Antigua to Governor Willoughby, January 31, 1668.

[44]C. S. P., Col. 1669-1674, p, 204, William Byam to Willoughby, 1670?; C. O. 1: 25, f. 138, Byam to Willoughby, n. d.

[45]C. S. P., Col., 1675-1676, Addenda, p. 125, Cornelius Burough to the Admiralty Commissioners, November 28, 1658.

[46]Ibid., 1661-1668, p. 36, narrative of the buying of a shipload of Negroes, June 14, 1661.

[47]C. O. 1: 16, f. 77, Captain Richard Whiting to the officers of his Majesty's navy, March 10, 1662; C. O. 1: 17, f. 236, petition of Colonel Godfrey Ashbey and others to the king, 1663.

[48]Ibid., 18, f. 58, instructions to Colonel Modyford, governor of Jamaica, February 18, 1664.

[49]C. O. 1: 18, f. 81, declaration of Sir Thomas Modyford, March 2, 1664.

[50]Ibid., f. 135, Modyford to Bennet, May 10, 1664.

[51]Ibid., f. 208, report of the Privy Council on Jamaica affairs, August 10, 1664.

[52]A. C. R., 75: 89.

[53]Add. MSS., 12,430, f. 31, Beeston, Journal, February 1, 1664/5.

[54]C. O. 1: 19, f. 31, Lynch to Bennet, February 12, 1665;ibid., f. 189, John Style to (Bennet), July 24, 1665.

[55]A. C. R., 869, entries from January 1, 1665/6 to December 31, 1666;ibid., 870: 62.

[56]A. C. R., 75: 14, 89.

[57]C. O. 1: 25, f. 127, Modyford to Arlington, (September 20, 1670).

[58]C. S. P., Col., 1669-1674, p. 107, additional propositions made to the Privy Council about Jamaica by Charles Modyford by order of Sir Thomas Modyford, (September 28, 1670).

[59]C. O. 1: 14, f. 56, proposal by Lord Marlborough, 1663.

[60]Ibid., 17, f. 28, Thomas Modyford? to his brother, March 30, 1662.

[61]Ibid., f. 29, Thomas Modyford? to his brother, April 30, 1662.

[62]C. O. 1: 17, ff. 29, 30, Thomas Modyford to his brother, May 26, 1662.

[63]Ibid., f. 32, Thomas Modyford to his brother, September 3, 13, 1662.

[64]Ibid., f 32, Thomas Modyford to his brother, September 13, 1662.

[65]Ibid., f. 20, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king, January, 1663.

[66]C. O. 1: 17, f. 136, instructions to Lord Willoughby, June 16, 1663.

[67]Ibid., f. 227 (the king to the governors of Barbadoes and Jamaica). March 30, 1663. That there was some trouble in deciding just what provisions to make regarding the Spanish trade appears from several unsigned and undated letters to Willoughby with conflicting provisions, but they nearly all mention the exception made in favor of the Royal Company in the letter of March 13, 1663. C. O. 1: 17, f. 22; C. O. 1: 17, ff. 24, 25; C. O. 1: 17, ff. 26, 27; P. C. R., Charles II, 3: 336-338.

[68]C. O. 1: 17, ff. 225, 226, petition of the Royal Adventurers to the king, November, 1663.

[69]Willoughby made a restitution of the £320 in March, 1664. C. O. 1: 18, f. 86, Modyford and Colleton to (the Royal Adventurers), March 31, 1664.

[70]C. O. 1: 19, f. 124, Willoughby to the king, May 20, 1665.

[71]C. O. 1: 16, f. 112, additional instructions to Lord Windsor, governor of Jamaica, April 8, 1662.

[72]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 106, minutes of the council of Jamaica, August 20, 1662.

[73]A full description of privateering by the English against the Spaniards from the year 1660 to 1670 may be found in an article by Miss Violet Barbour in the American Historical Review, XVI: 529-566.

[74]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 125 (the king to the governors of Barbadoes and Jamaica), March 13, 1663.

[75]C. O. 1: 17, f. 199, Sir Charles Lyttleton, deputy governor, to Bennet, October 15, 1663.

[76]Ibid., 18, f. 137, Modyford to the governor of Santo Domingo, April 30, 1664.

[77]Ibid., f. 139, Modyford's instructions to Colonel Cary and Captain Perrott, May 2, 1664.

[78]C. O. 1: 18, ff. 152, 153, Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Lynch to Bennet. May 25, 1664.

[79]C. S. P., Col., 1661-1668, p. 215, the king to Modyford, June 15, 1664.

[80]Ibid., p. 220, proclamation by Sir Thomas Modyford, governor of Jamaica, June 15, 1664.

[81]Ibid., p. 228, minutes of the council of Jamaica, August 19-22, 1664.

[82]C. S. P., Dom., 1663-1664, p. 168, Richard White to Captain Weld, June 11, 1663.

[83]As this contract cannot be discovered it is difficult to say just when it was made or what were its conditions. Georges Scelle in his book, La Traité Nègriere aux Indes de Castille, 1: 524, gives the date of this contract as February 28, 1663, and says it was for 35,000 Negroes which were to be delivered at the rate of 5,000 per year. This may be true, but on the other hand the company distinctly declares in one place that the contract was for the annual delivery of 3,500 Negroes per year. C. O. 1: 19, ff. 7, 8, brief narrative of the trade and present condition of the Royal Adventurers, 1664/5.

[84]C. O. 1: 17, f. 189, memorial of Sir Ellis Leighton to the duke of York, 1663.

[85]Ibid., ff. 244, 247; A. C. R., 75: 48.

[86]A. C. R., 75: 15, August 5, 1664.

[87]Ibid., 75: 34, May 26, 1665.

[88]C. O. 1: 18, f. 165, Willoughby to the king, June 17, 1664.

[89]Add. MSS., 12,430, f. 31, Beeston, Journal, April 8, 1665.

[90]A. C. R., 75: 43, March 23, 1665/6.

[91]P. C. R., Charles II, 5: 396, March 30, 1666.

[92]A. C. R., 75: 46; Add. MSS., 12,430, f. 31, Beeston, Journal, February 7, 1664/5.

[93]Answer of the Company of Royal Adventurers ... to the Petition ... exhibited ... by Sir Paul Painter.

[94]C. O. 1: 19, ff. 7, 8, brief narrative of the trade and present condition of the Royal Adventurers, 1664/5.

Below the James. A Plantation Sketch.ByWilliam Cabell Bruce.The Neale Publishing Company, New York, 1918. Pp. 157.

This book is, as its title imports, a plantation sketch dealing with that sort of life in Virginia just after the Civil War. While it is a mere story and hardly a dramatic one, it throws light on the Negro as a constituent part of the southern society of that day. As a student at Harvard before the War a southerner comes into contact with a fellow student from Massachusetts, to whom he becomes bound by such strong ties that the four years of bloody conflict between the sections are not sufficient to sever this connection. Some years after this upheaval friend thinks of friend and soon the northerner finds himself on his way to visit the southern friend.

Coming to the South at the time when the Negroes as a new class in their different situation were endeavoring to readjust themselves under difficult circumstances, the observations of the traveler are of much value to the historian. He not only saw much to admire in the colonial seats of prominent southerners like Patrick Henry and John Randolph, but showed an appreciation of the simple life of the Negroes. Their new position as freemen taking a part in the government, the rôle of the carpetbagger, and the undesirable conditions of that régime play some part in the story.

As to the Negroes themselves, however, the most interesting revelations are those dealing with the inner life of the blacks. In the language used to impersonate the blacks the reader sees a philosophy of life; in their mode of living appears the virtue of a noble peasantry; and in their worship of divinity there is the striving of a righteous people willing to labor and to wait. In this respect the book is valuable. We have known too little of the plantation, too little of the life of the Negro before the Civil War, too little of how he during the Reconstruction developed into something above and beyond the hewer of wood and drawer of water. While not primarily historical then and falling far short of being an historical novel, this book is unconsciously informing and therefore interesting and valuable to the student of Negro life and history.

The Emancipated and Freed in American Sculpture. A Study in Interpretation.ByFreeman Henry Morris Murray.Murray Brothers, incorporated, Washington, D. C., 1916. Pp. 228.

This work is to some extent a compilation of matter which on former occasions have been used by the author in lectures and addresses bearing on the Negroes in art. There is in it, however, much that is new, for even in this formerly used material the author has incorporated additional facts and more extensive comment. This work is not given out as the last word. It is one of a series to appear under the caption of the "Black Folk in Art" or an effort to set forth the contributions of the blacks to art in ancient and modern times. This work itself is, as the author calls it, "A Study in Interpretation." His purpose, he says, is to indicate as well as he can, what he thinks are the criteria for the formation of judgment in these matters. Yet his interpretation is to be different from technical criticism, as his effort is primarily directed toward intention, meaning and effect. This thought is the keynote to the comments on the various sculptures illustrated in the work. While one may not agree with the author in his arrangement and may differ from his interpretation, it must be admitted that the book contains interesting information and is a bold step in the right direction. It is a portraiture of freedom as a motive for artistic expression and an effort to symbolize this desire for liberation to animate the citizenry in making. It brings to light numerous facts as to how the thought of the Negro has been dominant in the minds of certain artists and how in the course of time race prejudice has caused the pendulum to swing the other way in the interest of those who would forget what the blacks have thought and felt and done.

The many illustrations constitute the chief value of the work. There appearsThe Greek Slaveby Hiram Powers,Freedomon the dome of the Capitol,The Libyan Sibylby W. W. Story,The Freedmanby J. I. A. Ward,The Freedwomanby Edmonia Lewis,Emancipationin Washington by Thomas Ball,Emancipationin Edinburgh, Scotland, by George E. Bissell,Emancipationpanel on the Military Monument in Cleveland by Levi T. Scofield,Emancipationby Meta Warrick Fuller,The Beecher Monumentin Brooklyn by J. I. A. Ward,Africaby Randolph Rogers,Africaby Daniel C. French,The Harriet Tubman Tablet, The Frederick Douglass Monumentin Rochester,The Attucks Monumentin Boston by Robert Kraus,The Faithful Slaves Monumentin Fort Mill, SouthCarolina,l'Africaneby E. Caroni,l'Abolizioneby R. Vincenzo,EthiopiaandToussaint L'Ouvertureby Anne Whitney,The Slave Auction,The Fugitive's Story,Taking the Oath and Drawing Rations,The Wounded Scout, andUncle Ned's Schoolby John Rogers,The Slave Memorialby Augustus Saint-Gaudens, andThe Death of Major Montgomery.

The Question Before Congress. A consideration of the Debates and final action by Congress upon various Phases of the Race Question in the United States.ByGeorge W. Mitchell.The A. M. E. Book Concern, Philadelphia, 1918. Pp. 237.

This book contains little which has not been extensively treated in various other works of standard authors. It goes over the ground covered in books easily accessible in most local libraries. Yet there is in it something which the historian does not find in these other works. It is this same drama of history as it appears to an intelligent man of color well read in the history of this country although lacking the attitude of a scientific investigator. Whether he has written an accurate book is of little value here. These facts are already known. He has enabled the public to know the Negro's reaction on these things and that in itself is a contribution to history.

As to exactly what the author has treated little needs to be said. He begins with the slavery question in the Federal Convention of 1787 which framed the Constitution of the United States. Then comes the treatment of the slave trade, the debate on the Missouri Compromise, the exclusion of abolition literature from the mails, the attack on the right of petition, the exodus of antislavery men from the South, the murder of Lovejoy, the coming of Giddings to Congress, the Wilmot Proviso, the formation of the Free Soil party, antislavery men in Congress, the effort to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, the slavery question in California, the Fugitive Slave Act, the Kansas Nebraska trouble, the organization of the Republican Party, the Dred Scott Decision, John Brown's Raid and the election of Abraham Lincoln.

Then follows a discussion of facts still more familiar. The author takes up the upheaval of the Civil War and the difficulty with which the Negroes effected a readjustment because of the large number of refugees. He next discusses the rôle of the Negro in politics during the Reconstruction period, the outrages which followed and the failure of the carpetbagger régime. The remainingportion of the book is devoted to the treatment of the Negroes in freedom and the problem of social justice. In fact, almost every phase of Negro political history from the formation of the Union to the present time has been treated by the author.

Negro Population: 1790-1915.ByJohn Cummings, Ph.D., Expert Special Agent, Bureau of Census. Washington, Government Printing Office, 1918. Pp. 844.

This volume is unique in that never before in the history of the Bureau of the Census has it devoted a whole volume to statistics bearing on the Negro. This work, moreover, is more important than the average census report in that it covers a period of 125 years. The compiler has used not only previously published documents but various unpublished schedules, tables and manuscripts which give this work a decidedly historical value. Never before has the public been given so many new figures concerning the development and progress of the Negroes in this country. It is a cause of much satisfaction then that these facts are available so that many questions which have hitherto been puzzling because of the lack of such statistics may now be easily cleared up.

What the work comprehends is interesting. It is a statistical account of the "growth of the Negro population from decade to decade; its geographical distribution at each decennial enumeration; its migratory drift westward in the early decades of the last century, when Negroes and whites were moving forward into the East and West South Central States as cultivators of virgin soil; its drift northward and cityward, and in more recent decades southward out of the "black belt," in response to the universal gravity pull of complex economic and social forces; its widespread dispersion on the one hand, and on the other its segregation with reference to the white population; its sex and age composition and marital condition; its fertility, as indicated by the proportion of children to women of child-bearing age in different periods—again, under social conditions varying from the irresponsible relations of slavery to the more exacting institutions of freedom; its intermixture with other races, as shown by the increase in the proportion mulatto; its annual mortality in the registration area; its educational progress since emancipation, in so far as it can be measured by elementary schooling and by increasing literacy; its criminality, dependency, and physical and mental defectiveness—thosecharacteristics of individual degeneracy which Negroes manifest in common with other racial classes in all civilized communities; finally, its economic progress, as indicated by increasing ownership of homes, by entrance into skilled trades and professions, and primarily and fundamentally by the rapid development of Negro agriculture."

Although this report goes as far back as 1790 most of the facts herein assembled bear on the life of the Negro since emancipation. This is not due, however, to the tendency to neglect the early period, but to the fact that earlier in our history statistics concerning Negroes were not considered valuable. It is only recently that public officials have directed attention to the importance of keeping these records and in many parts of the South certain statistics regarding Negroes are not yet considered worth while. The United States Government, however, as this volume indicates, has taken this matter seriously and from such volumes as this the public will expect more valuable information.

Back to Index Next