The Massachusetts Slave Trade.

Court¹ laying a duty of £4 per head on "any negro or negro's, male or female, of what age soever," which shourd be imported into Massachusetts. Both master and ship were made security for the payment, and the penalty for each violation was £8, "one moiety thereof to her majesty, for and towards the support of the government of this province, and the other moiety to him or them that shall inform of the same." A drawback of the whole duty was allowed on the death of the negro with-in six weeks or on exportation within twelve months and sale in another province.
This is frequently quoted as an evidence of antislavery sentiment. That it was not aimed at the slave trade in itself is clear from the fact that a rebate of the whole duty was allowed on exportation. This is in contrast with the custom in the middle and southern colonies, where a small tax was laid for even temporary importation.² By this provision Boston was made a market for the free exchange of slaves. The object was primarily to afford a revenue from the growing trade; but it is also apparent that these regulations were intended to discourage slavery in Massachusetts. They form part of an "Act for the better preventing of a spurious and mixt issue," the object of which is to deal with existing evils occasioned by the presence of negroes in the colony. In this connection it naturally occurred to the Legislature to guard against an increase of the evils by putting obstacles in the way of an increase of the negro population. Another bit of evidence showing that the intention was to discourage slavery is a letter apropos of the act from Governor Dudley to the Lords of Trade, explaining that negroes are not desirable in New England because "They will always run [i.e., run away] to the Southward for warmer weather, and as the cold is disagreeable to them, so it demands of the master much more cloathing, and gives him much less service, for six months in the year."³
Contemporary thought on this subject is reflected in an article printed in the Boston News Letter, June 10, 1706.⁴ Its theme is the "Bill of Mortality" for Boston in 1705. Forty-four negroes had died in that year. At £30 apiece, the writer argues, this means a loss of £1,320, "of which we would make this Remark; That the Importing of Negroes into this or Neighboring Provinces is not so beneficial either to the Crown or Country, as White Servants would be." Some of the arguments he uses to uphold this statement are: "Negroes do not carry Arms to defend the Country as Whites do"; "Negroes are generally Eye-Servants, great Thieves, much addicted to Stealing, Lying and Purloining"; they "do not People our Country as Whites would do whereby we should be strengthened against an Enemy"; by "Encouraging the Importing of White Men Servants, allowing somewhat to the Importer, most husbandmen in the Country might be furnished with Servants for 8, 9 or 10l. a Head, who are not able to launch out 40 or 50l. for a Negro the now common Price"; and "a Man then might buy a White Man Servant we suppose for 10l. To serve 4 years, and Boys for the same price to serve 6, 8, or 10 years; If a White Servant die, the Loss exceeds not 10l. but if a Negro dies, 'tis a very great loss to the Husbandman; Three years Interest of the price of the Negro, will near upon if not altogether purchase a White Man Servant." In 1718 a similar article appeared with the same text of the burials of Indians and negroes during the preceding year. The writer argued that half the loss would have been avoided if white servants had been employed instead of these eighty slaves. The very phraseology is the

¹ Acts and Resolves of the Province of Mass. Bay, I, 575.
² Du Bois, Suppression of the African Slave Trade, p. 31.
³ Acts and Resolves, I, 580.
⁴ Moore, p. 106.

-- page 10 --