The Evolution of White Supremacy in Carolina (part IV)

During the early to mid 1700s South Carolina receieved lots of horrifying news of racial violence and slave uprisings in the Caribbean. Carolinians were already concerned about the alarming number of Blacks in their colony and the precarious situation for White families in the rice growing areas, in particular. It is evident from newspaper reports and other writings from the time that they developed a sense of racial solidarity with Whites of French, Spanish and other European backgrounds as they struggled in racial conflict in the Americas and Africa.

Racial consciousness continued to strengthen throughout this period as more laws were passed to regulate the activity of Blacks in Charleston and specifically limit their economic competition with poor Whites – which would have hurt efforts to recruit more Europeans into the colony. Licenses were created for various Negro economic pursuits, such as fishing. The money raised went directly to the defense of the town. Dr. Peter Wood in his book Black Majority: Negroes in Colonial South Carolina from 1670 through the Stono Rebellion (1974) writes:

The owners of slaves sent out as carters and porters paid a weekly sum for the privilege, and every Negro fisherman was charged £5 per annum for a license. Each received a numbered badge for identification, and the fees were used in support of the town watch. At the same time pressure mounted against the participation of slaves in a variety of skilled crafts. The Negro Act of 1735 imposed a fine of £50 upon any master who allowed slaves to maintain any “houses of entertainment or trade,” whether in their own names or under his protection, and two years later a protest was issued against the “too common Practice” of barbers, many of whom were Negroes, shaving customers on Sundays. During the reappraisals which followed in the wake of the Stono Uprising, a “Committee appointed to consider the most effectual Measures to bring into this Province white Persons to increase our Strength and Security” reported to the Assembly “that a great Number of Negroes are brought up to and daily employed in mechanic Trades both in Town and Country.” The committee recommended a statute “prohibiting the bringing up [of] Negroes and other Slaves to mechanic Trades in which white Persons usually are employed,” but a formal prohibition was not enacted until 1755 and appears never to have been totally enforced. As suggested in the previous chapter, pressures exerted against Negroes in the trades were paralleled by efforts to curb Negro involvement in the commerce of the province.

Dr. Wood also writes that efforts were increasingly made to separate by race various jobs that had previously been done by Whites and Blacks. Trash collection, for example, was set aside for Negro slaves. This meant that working class Whites didn’t have to directly compete with Black slaves for jobs. As we have seen from previous posts in this series, the colony had already started to strongly discourage freed Blacks from settling in Carolina. Another practical benefit of these measures was that they limited the circumstances in which miscegenation might arise.

We can see from actions taken by the colonial regime that the era in question was one in which White racial consciousness continued to organically strengthen. Also evident was the patriarchal spirit of the plantation culture and an emphasis on providing a demographic future and maintaining indefinite White political control of the colony.

Click here for part III

About Palmetto Patriot 228 Articles
South Carolinian. Southern Nationalist. Anglican.

30 Comments

  1. @Michael Cushman…

    ‘At the same time pressure mounted against the participation of slaves in a variety of skilled crafts. The Negro Act of 1735 imposed a fine of £50 upon any master who allowed slaves to maintain any “houses of entertainment or trade.’

    This must be South Carolina, Mr. Cushman, as in North Carolina those who set the laws, until the late 1940s, were the plantationeers – call their labour slave or the sanitized Yankee term – ‘sharecropper’, it matters not.

    Now, I could go on about this at great length, but, instead, I will focus on Thomas Bragg, father of Confederate General Braxton Bragg, and governor of The Rip Van Winkle State in the 1850s.

    Though a lawyer, by trade, he maintained a varied portfolio of investments on the side, not the least of which was his house-building company – it entirely comprised of the most skilled negro artesans.

    This company, and this kind of company, was much revileed by the White artesan competition, because Governor Bragg’s woodworking negroes were as good as anybody in the land, and, because they belonged to Bragg, the bids he could give to build fancy structures easily undercut all the White only companies.

    (Here we see an early globalist ‘free-trade’ model)

    The upkeep for this company of skilled niggers was remarkably low, in part because they traveled around the state, on foot, going from one construction site to another, and, along the way, stopping at the house of one negress after another, for some hoochie-koo and goodies, such as apple and lemon meringue pies.

    Some of the buildings they left behind still survive today, such as the Wooden gothick churches of Eastern North Carolina, most famous of which is the Anglican church in the little ghost town of Halifax – home of Confederate general Junius Daniel, someone whose name you may now well recognize…

  2. Excellent series. Above all, it demonstrates that the South has different origin and history to that of the Quaker Middle Atlantic and Puritan New England states.

  3. Michael, here’s something that you might find interesting. This is a comment by a woman on Huffington Post along the lines of our current topic.

    She writes:

    In short, Confederates.

    When the Puritans got kicked out of Massachusetts Colony for swinging witches, they flooded into the Deep South. There they found plantation owners who wanted to hear more about how God authorized the ownership of slaves in the very first book of the Bible. Since the plantation owners were white, and the slaves black, that must mean that white is right and black ain’t.

    The White Supremacist movement in this country was born when those Puritans, who had to change their name to Presbyterian, threw God into the mix. That’s why their decendants ‘feel’ so strongly – for the Dominionists like Ted Cruz and Mike Pence, they were born to rule the world. If they have to subvert the US Gov for God and righteousness, they will.

    What do you make of this?

  4. @James Owen…

    Where did you stumble upon the abundance of evidence that we were infiltrated by The Master New England Puritan Race?

  5. @Spahn…

    ‘Any White person who suffers from prolonged exposure to the coloreds will eventually become a White supremacist.’

    LOL!

    You must be right, for I was raised an upper class progressive in Raleigh, at the end of Jim Crow, and though I continue to have affection for certain Negroes, and though I do not believe in White Supremacy as a mean to do them harm, my very significant experience with them, in the adult part of my life in Eastern North Carolina, has led me to believe that, as a group, they are not good managers – especially not for the system our forefathers wrought.

    So, you are absolutely right, or, at least, in my case.

    Southern White Supremacy over Southern Lands – there is not a doubt in my mind.

  6. @John Bonaccorsi…

    ‘In looking at that church, Junius, with its verticality, I was reminded of a certain other type of architecture …’

    As always, you have a stupendous mind for what is wide-ranging and analogous.

    Great link!

  7. Well, thanks, Junius. I’m glad you found the link valuable, as I found yours valuable.

  8. @winbornmill

    winbornmill

    APRIL 14, 2017 AT 7:12 PM

    @James Owen…

    Where did you stumble upon the abundance of evidence that we were infiltrated by The Master New England Puritan Race?

    Well, Junius, at HuffPo. It was a comment on an article about supposed Nazis in Mr. Trump’s administration. This Lady, along with some other inviduals, went into an anti Southern rant, even though Hungarian Nationalists have nothing to do with Dixie.

    This is, to me , an example of the schizophrenic beliefs of Neo-Yankees. Her comment is obviously ahistorical nonsense. It’s also a back handed compliment to the Puritans, in a twisted way. Since, according to folklore, the Puritans created America®, and the can break it, too, if the have to.

  9. “We can see from actions taken by the colonial regime that the era in question was one in which White racial consciousness continued to organically strengthen.”

    The main thing we can see, from the material you provided, Mr. Cushman, is that South Carolina’s racial situation was already beyond satisfactory management, midway between the colony’s founding and the American Revolution–but the South persisted in its folly.

  10. @Winbornmill,

    “This must be South Carolina, Mr. Cushman, as in North Carolina those who set the laws, until the late 1940s, were the plantationeers….”

    The rulers of SC were also mostly planters. But the rice cultivation of the Lowcountry required far more slaves per area of cultivation than other pursuits. The response by the Lowcountry planters was to institute a pro-White system with tight control over the Black majority of the region to keep them from rising up and from competing with poor Whites (who the colony badly needed to maintain some racial balance and keep down the threat of Black revolt).

  11. @James Owen

    “Excellent series. Above all, it demonstrates that the South has different origin and history to that of the Quaker Middle Atlantic and Puritan New England states.”

    Thank you very much.

  12. @John Bonaccorsi, Philadelphia

    “The main thing we can see, from the material you provided, Mr. Cushman, is that South Carolina’s racial situation was already beyond satisfactory management, midway between the colony’s founding and the American Revolution–but the South persisted in its folly.”

    What we see is the quick evolution of the colony’s economy and rice production, which required large amounts of slaves. It was the only reason that the Lowcountry was settled. And in response to the situation the colony’s rulers instituted laws against miscegenation, against free Blacks living in Carolina and against slave competition with trades performed by working class Whites. We alao see efforts to entice more Whites to settle in the colony and efforts to use the profits made by slave labour to strengthen the colony’s defenses. These were sound moves and throughout the era of Black slavery in Dixie we see very few slaves revolts. And we ended up with a White majority of 2 to 1 (8 million Whites to 4 million Blacks) across the South as a whole.

  13. @James Owen…

    Sir, it was my experience in kindergarten to be puncht once of twice a week by a certain someone who liket to watch me cry. When I finally told my daddy, he went right out and bought us a set of boxing gloves, and the two of us hit each other, over and over again, until it dawned on me that there was nothing to fear; that I could get clockt on the nose, and, even though it warn’t pretty, it warn’t the end of the world.

    Then, one day, I baited my tormenter, who coming over to knock off my block, got his knockt off, instead. He never bothered me again, nor did anybody for the rest of my school days – not because I was big (I ain’t) or was such a tough-ass, but, simply because they knew from my dimeanour that, if you disrespect me, and you ain’t a lady, we are going to roll around until you figure it out.

    Along these line, vis-a-vis your recounting off the tale at Huff-Po, my gut tells me that the situation of a lack of respect for the South can only be settled by force of arms.

    Most of our brethren are not ready, but, you and I are.

  14. @John Bonaccorsi, Philadelphia

    Yes, required. The mortality rates for Whites were much higher. Blacks were used to rice cultivation in Africa and were resistant to diseasrs associated with it. And there was a labor shortage. Even with free land it was difficult to get Europeans to move to a sub-tropical, disease-infested swamp.

  15. @Reckonings…

    I went to your link, and was fascinated that it was our enemies who provided this proof in instrinick racism.

    What next?

    A vaccine to screw up the heads of babies even more?

    Anyway, thank you for that.

  16. @John Bonaccorsi…
    @Michael Cushman…

    ‘“We can see from actions taken by the colonial regime that the era in question was one in which White racial consciousness continued to organically strengthen.”

    The main thing we can see, from the material you provided, Mr. Cushman, is that South Carolina’s racial situation was already beyond satisfactory management, midway between the colony’s founding and the American Revolution–but the South persisted in its folly.'”

    It seems to me, after absorbing Mr. Cushman’s series that South Carolina got off to a very bad start – an exercise in ungodly fearing globalist profiteering – a cesspool of those with poor motivations.

    Be that as it may be, I have plenty of acquaintances and family in South Carolina, who make it abundantly clear that it ain’t stayed that way.

    Thank you both for the interesting exchange.

  17. @Michael Cushman…

    Winbornmill said…

    “This must be South Carolina, Mr. Cushman, as in North Carolina those who set the laws, until the late 1940s, were the plantationeers….”

    To which Michael Cushman replied…

    “‘The rulers of SC were also mostly planters. But the rice cultivation of the Lowcountry required far more slaves per area of cultivation than other pursuits. The response by the Lowcountry planters was to institute a pro-White system with tight control over the Black majority of the region to keep them from rising up and from competing with poor Whites (who the colony badly needed to maintain some racial balance and keep down the threat of Black revolt).'”

    Thank you.

    In this sense there is some relationship of The Low Country to Eastern North Carolina, and, as the demographicks show, even in 2017, both these areas remain The Black Belts of both Carolinas.

  18. @Winbornmill

    “It seems to me, after absorbing Mr. Cushman’s series that South Carolina got off to a very bad start – an exercise in ungodly fearing globalist profiteering – a cesspool of those with poor motivations.”

    The Barbadian “Goose Creek Men” who took control of the colony early on got the Anglican Church made into the “national religion” of Carolina. They enacted tougher racial laws and put a truly conservative stamp on the colony. They were called the “Church Party” or “Anglican Party.” They continually fought against the Lords Proprietors and their motley supporters (French Protestants, religious dissenters and so forth) who were far more internationalist. The Goose Creek Men basically replicated Barbados to the degree possible. In 1719 the Lords Proprietors’ regime was overthrown in revolution and the Carolina became a royal colony. It was basically a Right-wing revolution in favor of the crown and ethnic (protection from Indians) and good goverance interests.

    http://www.scencyclopedia.org/sce/entries/revolution-of-1719/

    I will have to better develop this theme in future posts.

  19. @Michael Cushman

    “Blacks were used to rice cultivation in Africa and were resistant to diseasrs associated with it. And there was a labor shortage. Even with free land it was difficult to get Europeans to move to a sub-tropical, disease-infested swamp”

    Something outsiders can’t understand. Subscribing to the slothfulness theory of Slavery, as they do.

  20. @Michael Cushman…

    ‘I will have to better develop this theme in future posts.’

    If you mean this article to be history, then, no, a revision is totally unnecessary. If, on the other hand, you wish it to function as some form of Southern Nationalist propaganda then you have to revise it, because there is no compelling emotion or central expression to it.

    ////////////////////////////////////////////////////

    Advice from a novelist?

    Write three points you wish this history to convey. Make it a 1,2,3 heirarchy and then think about that in relation to these facts.

    Then, to the background of whatever musick you think best matches the mood of that which you wish to convey, write it, carefully injecting some well-aimed, emotionalism, and deleting as much dry history as possible.

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    In fact, you could preface the article with the statement made by James Owen in italicks …

    ‘Something outsiders can’t understand. Subscribing to the slothfulness theory of Slavery, as they do.’

    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    Yes, all history used as Southron Nationalist propaganda ought begin with a premise that is like the beginning of the film, ‘Josey Wales’.

    Then, your readers will not only get it, they will want to so do.

  21. You have much the same situation today in the Carolinas. One White skilled tradesman directing a half dozen or a dozen Mexicans.

  22. Right, air conditioning and water treatment made the costal regions habitable for White men year round.

  23. South Carolina was always precarious, especially in the Low Country in regards to the potential for slave uprisings. Even without Northern interference, there were still plenty of close calls in South Carolina the most famous being Denmark Vessey but there were others as well. The Haitian Revolution was the product of the French Revolution. When the Bourbons were overthrown in 1789, by 1791 the French Legislature outlawed slavery. The chaos in France allowed the skeleton crew army in Haiti no choice but to begin to retreat once the rebellion started. By 1794 the Jacobins declared slavery over.

    The damage was done by the time Napoleon took firm control in 1799. In 1802, Napoleon set out to restore slavery, remember by this time the Negroes had been somewhat free in most of Caribbean France. Haiti was the worst and because of an outbreak of yellow fever among his troops, Napoleon gave Haiti up and of course sold us Louisiana. Thus you see the issue in Haiti was caused by the Jacobins and Radicals in France and had the French Govt of Louis XVI remained in place, there never would have been a Haitian revolution.

    This all being said, there is a point at which a demographic tipping point is reached. Sen Theodore Bilbo wrote about this in his 1947 book TAKE YOUR PICK SEPARATION OR MONGRELIZATION in which he described parts of the Mississippi Delta where whites were moving out because the Negro population had grown too large. Bilbo not only supported repitration he also supported strict population controls as well. Unfortunately Mr. Bilbo died of Cancer, censured by Congress.

  24. @James Owen “Excellent series. Above all, it demonstrates that the South has different origin and history to that of the Quaker Middle Atlantic and Puritan New England states.”

    Pennsylvania was the only Quaker Colony but I think to what you are referring is the Heterogenous population that grew up in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey and spread into the backcountry of Maryland and Delaware as well. The Quakers set up a social anarchy where not one group really dominated, the Scots-Irish, Germans, English and others all jostled for control in Pennsylvania. The Quakers in fact lost control of the state to the Scots-Irish around the Revolution and Pennsylvania became a rather reliable Jeffersonian Democratic state until the demographic shift brought on by the Congress of Vienna in 1815 the Irish famine of 1822 and 1840s and the German Revolution of 1848 caused the Pennsylvania Democratic party to collapse and the Republicans took over.

    New York was always two colonies, New Netherland and New England rolled into one. All of New York north and west of Albany is New England.

    New Jersey during this period was slow-growing a state a mixture of English aristocrat types, Yankees, and others, in fact it was a SLAVE STATE until 1865. New Jersey’s 1804 abolition Act only abolished slavery for those born after July 4 1804 and the 1846 law abolished it entirely except for those born before 1804 and those serving indentures. When the 13th Amendment was passed there were SIXTEEN slaves remaining in New Jersey,

    Delaware was Pennsylvania South, it was part of Pennsylvania till 1776. Delaware was the only outright Northern slave state and in 1861 before Lincoln came to power, Delaware rejected Secession. When the 13th Amendment was passed, there were only 900 slaves left in the entire state. Sadly Maryland and Virginia screwed Delaware. Had the entire Delmarva Peninsula been ceded to create a large State of Delaware, it would have been much more Southern and in 1861 would have undoubtedly been the 14th Confederate State as the Eastern Shore of Maryland was about 98% Confederate. Unfortunately Maryland and Virginia held onto Delmarva and the rest is history.

    The Calverts in Maryland couldn’t settle their Piedmont and Appalachian areas, the true Maryland Cavaliers had to live near the water. So Maryland in the 1700s began selling land to anyone who would come to live in the backcountry. Hundreds of Germans, Scots Irish, and land hungry Yankees descended. This arrangement worked fine, the Immigrants accepted slavery as a fact of life and some began using them in limited amounts. However by the 1850’s this area had grown enough in population to have a say in Marylands affairs. In 1861 when General Butler captured Annapolis, the Unionist Governor Hicks, declared Frederick the temporary capital of Maryland. Frederick had no Yankee troops there, but its population was hostile and every measure to secede was voted down. The Cavalier gentlemen in the legislature were menaced by the local populace. Unfortunately by the time they planned to vote again, the Battle of Manassas had happened and Maryland was under control.

    Here’s a book by a Frederick County Unionist written in 1913 named William Seabrook

    http://www.emmitsburg.net/archive_list/articles/history/civil_war/marylands_part_in_saving_the_union.htm

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Hewatt: Why Negro Slaves in Carolina? – Occidental Dissent
  2. The Evolution of White Supremacy in Carolina (part V) – Occidental Dissent

Comments are closed.