Very interesting, Bob. For the record, Arthur Jordan built "Bacon's Castle" in Surry, a wondrous 17th century home, open to the public, and a "must" visit for all with early VA ancestry. Paul | In the Surry Co. deeds, John and Isabelle actually bought land near that | of Arthur Jordan. The Daule name became Doll. | | Bob Jordan | jorbob@webtv.net

Boston, after which the slave "...was to be a Free Man (to) go wherever he pleaseth....". Then too, none other than Arthur Jordan of Surry permitted two slaves, John and Isabell Daule, to purchase their freedom in 1669. So while later law (18th century) attempted to prohibit the freedom, there were no small number working and moving about VA and both the North and South. And, don't forget that issue of freed slaves were free, as well. Paul In the Surry Co. deeds, John and Isabelle actually bought land near that of Arthur Jordan. The Daule name became Doll. Bob Jordan jorbob@webtv.net

Though some few were here as a punishment of sorts, and a few because they had been taken up from the streets as children, most indentured servants were in the colonies through their agreed contracts, and were not looked upon as other than servants for terms of years. Some, of course, were considered as undesirables (and they were, in fact). I know of no expression outside common parlance that was adopted to reflect that a person had served his/her required term of years. If anyone knows of such, I too would like to hear of it. Generally speaking, there was no middle class, as we know it, however the artisans - those who had mastered some calling - were able to earn more than the lowest of that society, and were viewed as necessary and as being of a higher station. Ownership of land was the true measure of affluence. Quite usually, the more of it you had, the greater your status in the community, and without it, you had no power even to vote, or to influence the limited government in any way. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: <EPERRY4616@aol.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 6:46 AM If an | indentured servant was transported at the expense of another and then served | his contracted time, would he be considered manumitted?? If not, what term | would that have been? |

As an absolute greenhorn on this subject, please tell me this: If an indentured servant was transported at the expense of another and then served his contracted time, would he be considered manumitted?? If not, what term would that have been? And further, in the early 1600's am I correct in believing that there was little difference with regard to race (poor was poor no matter what color??) and that was the real issue?? "Gentlemen" had no pockets, touched no money and that was the difference between the categories of men: barristers/attorneys/lawyers and doctors/pharmicists. Please give me not only the correct terms but the correct spelling as well. Thanks, Ernie

1619 A Dutch slave trader exchanged his cargo of Africans for food. These Africans became indentured servants similar to poor Englishmen who exchanged labor for passage to America. "A brief history of Jamestown" The word slave didn't appear until 1660. Englishmen used the word servant when it meant slave.By 1680 Africans became essential to the economy. With the success of tobacco planting, African Slavery was legalized in Virginia and Maryland. This became the foundation of the southern economy. "Columbia U" The twenty Africans aboard the Dutch man of War that arrived in Virginia changed the face of slavery from American Indians to African between 1650 - 1750. Africans and Indians faced the same problem slavery. These first 20 were sold to the governor and a merchant of Jamestown 1638 first public auction. 1640 the Virginia General Assembly defined this peculiar institution. This became the basic for every slave law in the south. Black Freemen lived in legal fear until 1864. Unable to defend himself even free he had to depend on his old master to keep him safe. Fear that any Englishman would/could sale him back into slavery. Yes some owned slaves for when they are freed the children, the wives are not always freed with them. Some yes had farms. Then the laws changed. The terms Mustezoes, Mulattos, Maroon, Octoroon, Quadroon are terms used to classify Negroes. As in New Orleans the brighter the Negro was the more value but they would still be Negroes in the end of sale. All but one term is mixed White. To remove the class level placed on Negro's from slavery, based on Willie Lynch's speech to the VA assembly of owners, based on color the people chose a name that spoke of history and our home the only one that was known to us. Sorry Jessie didn't do it alone, Cash I suggest reading History of Slavery. African Slave Trade Many Thousand Gone The United States Timeline. Soul By Soul African American use this list to search for owner to find Slaves - Please stick to the fact and not personal life styles. Quan Arnett Pruitt African American ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul" <martee@citlink.net> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 4:58 PM Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Manumission of Slaves in VA > In addition, Karen, it should also be > remembered that in the early and even nearly > to the last quarter end of the 17th century > in VA some folks, usually men, of African > origin came as indentured servants, served > their terms, bore children, bought land (as > you mentioned), and died in VA. Though it is > not easy from this distance to realize how > much time passed, we should bear in mind that > we were an active and vigorous English colony > for more than 100 years - 4+ generations - > between the days of the Jamestown settlement > and the period of "new" laws which undertook > to restrict, even ban, manumission. By 1725 > the free VA population having African or > mixed ancestry was not atall negligible. > Thanks. Paul > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <KDale60909@aol.com> > To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 3:49 PM > Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Manumission of > Slaves in VA > > > | In a message dated 04/28/2001 12:51:25 PM > Mountain Daylight Time, > | martee@citlink.net writes: > | > | > | > . So > | > while later law (18th century) attempted > to > | > prohibit the freedom, there were no small > | > number working and moving about VA and > both > | > the North and South. And, don't forget > that > | > issue of freed slaves were free, as well. > | > > | > | The whole issue of free African Americans > in colonial America is often > | misunderstood. See Paul Heinegg's Free > African Americans of North Carolina > | and Virginia, collection of genealogies > about African American families > | living in the 17th, 18th, and 19th > centuries. > | > | http://www.freeafricanamericans.com > | > | I found this material by sheer accident but > find it fascinating. An Agatha > | Kersey inherited the land of James > Calthorpe in Southampton Co 1793. I had no > | idea who she was, so did a web search--and > there she is in Heinegg's > | material. The very early census/tax records > sometimes don't even indicate > | race. Agatha's probable father Thomas > bought land in Southampton 1760--no > | indication of race in the deed. Walden > Kersey, perhaps a brother of Agatha, > | is mentioned in a will--"land adjacent to > Walden Kersey" with no indication > | of race. Later, 1790 on, they're listed as > "other" on the census records. > | > | So they owned land--and many of the free > African-Americans in the colonial > | south were probably NEVER slaves--or slaves > whose families has been freed > | very early, 1600s. Some were slave owners > themselves. > | > | The family of another Thomas Kersey, free > African-American owning land, was > | also in Mecklenburg Co--and according to > census records, they remained there > | right through the Civil War. Thomas himself > was 85 in the 1870 census--one > | can hardly imagine what his life must have > been like as a free African > | American in a strong slave state. > | > | Karen > | > | > | ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > | USGenWeb Archives Digital Maps Project > | http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/maps/ > | > | > | ============================== > | Search over 1 Billion names at > Ancestry.com! > | http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp > | > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > Hosted by Rootsweb http://www.rootsweb.com > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry's Library - The best collection of family history > learning and how-to articles on the Internet. > http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library >

Southside Listers seem to be quite interested in land holdings (as well we should be). In fact, one well-known genealogist-lecturer-editor of a prominent genealogical journal states that if you are doing Southern research, and you are NOT researching land records, you are not doing research. Sometimes this is the only way we find the name of a female ancestor--without a maiden name, most of the time! Anyway, although the lessons on the following website will not answer ALL of your questions regarding land, it may broaden your knowledge of land records. http://users.arn.net/~billco/uslpr5.htm As many of you know, the State and US laws changed all the time. As one person on the List has already pointed out, North Carolina after a certain period had different laws from Virginia, and you may not see many relinquishments of dower in NC as in VA. Later, when some of the States which came into the Union after being held by the Spanish or Mexican Government, community property came into being in US laws. Many Western states have this legal system. According to experts in the field of community property, this Spanish law came into being upon the accession to the throne of Queen Isabella. And Louisiana has its own different code. So much to know in genealogy!!! But ain't it fun!!! E.W.Wallace southern California

You wrote: | "Anyway, although the lessons on the following website will not answer ALL of | your questions regarding land, it may broaden your knowledge of land records." | Mr. Wallace. Your comments are very well-taken and to the point, particularly as to the influence of the early Spanish and French ("Civil Law") in the law of the South, Southwest and California. Then too, your comments about the absolute necessity that we all examine land records and ALL other courthouse materials is equally important. However, the words found at the URL you cited, NOT having been a part of your accurate comments, demand remark. That writer said, "Remember, also, that the sole purpose of land records is to convey a clear title to a piece of property from one holder to another...." That remark is basically quite in error. Indeed, while original deeds, mortgages, etc., surely do so, "land records" convey NO land title whatever to anybody. A search of the myriad deeds, mortgages, liens of all sorts, and the many other records of judgments and transfers of such as partial interests, sherriffs' deeds and courts' orders affecting ownership, all of which - and more - are an integral and vital part of all land transactions, reveal to the world the present legal status of virtually all land within that county or territory and provide the fundamental and vital information needed by such as the courts, tax assessors - local and at all other levels - who must assess whoever for whatever amount the law of the moment requires. To mention of but one more of the many purposes served by those records, we need but look to the needs of such as surveyors, real estate dealers, and sheriffs when questions of locations, descriptions or names of owners are needed. Your own advice was much better than that cited. Paul

In a message dated 4/28/01 5:29:58 PM, KDale60909@aol.com writes: << > This is because the terms used in the records at that time were "negro, > slave, servant, etc.. Not "African-American". I And sometimes mulatto or colored. Or maroon or octaroon >> Yes, those terms too, but not "African American". Something made up in the last few decades by the likes of"shake - down" Jesse Jackson. I suppose he'll be spending some time in the pokey soon, judging by what I read in the paper today.

In a message dated 04/28/2001 4:00:36 PM Mountain Daylight Time, martee@citlink.net writes: > " laws which undertook > to restrict, even ban, manumission. By 1725 > the free VA population having African or > mixed ancestry was not atall negligible. > Thanks. Paul > I feel fairly certain that the two children of Agatha Kersey mentioned in James Calthorpe's will were probably his--Joshua and an unborn child. Moreover, he left her in the care of yet another child, Mary Black, who may well have been his by another mixed-race union. I have tried without luck to find those children. They're still in Southampton, with their Agatha on HER land as late as 1820--then no trace. Interesting in an era when few women owned land--Agatha Kersey, "other free," did!

In a message dated 04/28/2001 3:40:21 PM Mountain Daylight Time, CASH KILBY writes: > This is because the terms used in the records at that time were "negro, > slave, servant, etc.. Not "African-American". I And sometimes mulatto or colored. Or maroon or octaroon. In fact, many of them may have been mixtures of several races--a number called themselves Indian for want of a better term. The point is, somewhere back along the line was African heritage, but they were free men--the important point. In Thomas Kersey's census records some are labeled B for black, others M for mulatto. Prior to 1850, they were simply "other free."

In addition, Karen, it should also be remembered that in the early and even nearly to the last quarter end of the 17th century in VA some folks, usually men, of African origin came as indentured servants, served their terms, bore children, bought land (as you mentioned), and died in VA. Though it is not easy from this distance to realize how much time passed, we should bear in mind that we were an active and vigorous English colony for more than 100 years - 4+ generations - between the days of the Jamestown settlement and the period of "new" laws which undertook to restrict, even ban, manumission. By 1725 the free VA population having African or mixed ancestry was not atall negligible. Thanks. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: <KDale60909@aol.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 3:49 PM Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Manumission of Slaves in VA | In a message dated 04/28/2001 12:51:25 PM Mountain Daylight Time, | martee@citlink.net writes: | | | > . So | > while later law (18th century) attempted to | > prohibit the freedom, there were no small | > number working and moving about VA and both | > the North and South. And, don't forget that | > issue of freed slaves were free, as well. | > | | The whole issue of free African Americans in colonial America is often | misunderstood. See Paul Heinegg's Free African Americans of North Carolina | and Virginia, collection of genealogies about African American families | living in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. | | http://www.freeafricanamericans.com | | I found this material by sheer accident but find it fascinating. An Agatha | Kersey inherited the land of James Calthorpe in Southampton Co 1793. I had no | idea who she was, so did a web search--and there she is in Heinegg's | material. The very early census/tax records sometimes don't even indicate | race. Agatha's probable father Thomas bought land in Southampton 1760--no | indication of race in the deed. Walden Kersey, perhaps a brother of Agatha, | is mentioned in a will--"land adjacent to Walden Kersey" with no indication | of race. Later, 1790 on, they're listed as "other" on the census records. | | So they owned land--and many of the free African-Americans in the colonial | south were probably NEVER slaves--or slaves whose families has been freed | very early, 1600s. Some were slave owners themselves. | | The family of another Thomas Kersey, free African-American owning land, was | also in Mecklenburg Co--and according to census records, they remained there | right through the Civil War. Thomas himself was 85 in the 1870 census--one | can hardly imagine what his life must have been like as a free African | American in a strong slave state. | | Karen | | | ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== | USGenWeb Archives Digital Maps Project | http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/maps/ | | | ============================== | Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! | http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp |

In a message dated 04/28/2001 12:51:25 PM Mountain Daylight Time, martee@citlink.net writes: > . So > while later law (18th century) attempted to > prohibit the freedom, there were no small > number working and moving about VA and both > the North and South. And, don't forget that > issue of freed slaves were free, as well. > The whole issue of free African Americans in colonial America is often misunderstood. See Paul Heinegg's Free African Americans of North Carolina and Virginia, collection of genealogies about African American families living in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. http://www.freeafricanamericans.com I found this material by sheer accident but find it fascinating. An Agatha Kersey inherited the land of James Calthorpe in Southampton Co 1793. I had no idea who she was, so did a web search--and there she is in Heinegg's material. The very early census/tax records sometimes don't even indicate race. Agatha's probable father Thomas bought land in Southampton 1760--no indication of race in the deed. Walden Kersey, perhaps a brother of Agatha, is mentioned in a will--"land adjacent to Walden Kersey" with no indication of race. Later, 1790 on, they're listed as "other" on the census records. So they owned land--and many of the free African-Americans in the colonial south were probably NEVER slaves--or slaves whose families has been freed very early, 1600s. Some were slave owners themselves. The family of another Thomas Kersey, free African-American owning land, was also in Mecklenburg Co--and according to census records, they remained there right through the Civil War. Thomas himself was 85 in the 1870 census--one can hardly imagine what his life must have been like as a free African American in a strong slave state. Karen

Each state would have had its own procedures for freeing slaves. However, the VA laws have been abstracted in "Black Laws of Virginia," by June Purcell Guild. 1723 Chapter IV. No Negro or Indian slave shall be set free upon any pretense whatsoever, except for some meritorious service to be adjudged by the governor. 1782 Chapter XXI. It is lawful for any person by last will or other instrument in writing, sealed and witnessed, to emancipate his slaves. Other laws had been passed which required indentured servants be issued Certificates of Freedom. The county courts extended this requirement to emancipated slaves upon proof of emancipation. They were subject to jail if they did not carry this paper. 1793 Chapter 22. Free Negroes or mulattos shall be registered and numbered in a book to be keep by the town clerk...... Annually the Negro shall be delivered a copy for twenty-five cents. A penalty is fixed for employing a Negro without a certificate; the Negro may be committed to jail. Every free Negro shall once in every three years obtain a new certificate. The book states that many did not register unless their original papers were lost. This was basically the law until the Civil War.

Notice though, that among numerous other similar incidents, a master set a slave free as early as 1678 by providing that the man serve 10 years after arrival in VA from Boston, after which the slave "...was to be a Free Man (to) go wherever he pleaseth....". Then too, none other than Arthur Jordan of Surry permitted two slaves, John and Isabell Daule, to purchase their freedom in 1669. So while later law (18th century) attempted to prohibit the freedom, there were no small number working and moving about VA and both the North and South. And, don't forget that issue of freed slaves were free, as well. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: <Rbsgenealogy@cs.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 1:26 PM Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Manumission of Slaves in VA | Each state would have had its own procedures for freeing slaves. However, the | VA laws have been abstracted in "Black Laws of Virginia," by June Purcell | Guild. | | 1723 Chapter IV. No Negro or Indian slave shall be set free upon any pretense | whatsoever, except for some meritorious service to be adjudged by the | governor. | | 1782 Chapter XXI. It is lawful for any person by last will or other | instrument in writing, sealed and witnessed, to emancipate his slaves. | | Other laws had been passed which required indentured servants be issued | Certificates of Freedom. The county courts extended this requirement to | emancipated slaves upon proof of emancipation. They were subject to jail if | they did not carry this paper. | | 1793 Chapter 22. Free Negroes or mulattos shall be registered and numbered in | a book to be keep by the town clerk...... Annually the Negro shall be | delivered a copy for twenty-five cents. A penalty is fixed for employing a | Negro without a certificate; the Negro may be committed to jail. Every free | Negro shall once in every three years obtain a new certificate. | | The book states that many did not register unless their original papers were | lost. | | This was basically the law until the Civil War. | | | | ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== | USGenWeb Archives Census Project | http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/ | | | ============================== | Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 | Source for Family History Online. Go to: | http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetr ial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB |

John Fox wrote on 4-28 >Hello All, >I did not receive all of the previous correspondance on this Jones Family >connection to the Royster family, but find it quite interesting. I do know >of a Richard Jones, born about 1768 who intermarried with my Satterfield >family of Caswell County, NC; and my Satterfields did intermarry with my >Roysters of Person County, NC. My Joseph Royster and his wife, Nancy >Ann >Wilkins were of the Mecklenburg county, VA. area. >BEst regards, >John Fox >Winston Salem, NC I don't find a Royster, Satterfield connection in my Jones data. Have written an Ambrose Jones descendant to see if he may have as Ambrose was mentioned in an earlier post. The only Richard Jones I find born somewhat close to date you give is Richard Jones who married Lucy Clay. . Dorothy

In a message dated 4/27/01 10:27:58 PM, dhrenaud@midwest.net writes: << Ambrose Jones that you speak of is in the line of Jones that I am searching. I am however, not a direct descendant of his. My line is from both John and Richard Jones brothers to Ambrose Sr. In the record I have of Ambrose Jr. s/o Ambrose Sr. no spouse is recorded. Not my research. Another researcher gave me the info that Ambrose Jr. married Mary Adams. Dorothy >> Hello All, I did not receive all of the previous correspondance on this Jones Family connection to the Royster family, but find it quite interesting. I do know of a Richard Jones, born about 1768 who intermarried with my Satterfield family of Caswell County, NC; and my Satterfields did intermarry with my Roysters of Person County, NC. My Joseph Royster and his wife, Nancy Ann Wilkins were of the Mecklenburg county, VA. area. BEst regards, John Fox Winston Salem, NC

In a message dated 4/27/01 9:27:53 PM, dhrenaud@midwest.net writes: << Ambrose Jones that you speak of is in the line of Jones that I am searching. I am however, not a direct descendant of his. My line is from both John and Richard Jones brothers to Ambrose Sr. In the record I have of Ambrose Jr. s/o Ambrose Sr. no spouse is recorded. Not my research. Another researcher gave me the info that Ambrose Jr. married Mary Adams. >> I suppose this link to Ambrose Jr. is not completely proved, but Ambrose Jr. m. Mary HARRIS and the source for this is the Ambrose Jones family bible (published in "Georgia Bible Records") which also names his children. The will of Amrose Jones (Jr.) written in 1805 in Columbia Co., Georgia names children Richard, Thomas, Sarah H. Avary, Ambrose (III) and Catherine C. Jones. Three other children (Allen, Charles H., Abraham B.) died in infancy according to the bible. The name "Allen" tends to support the lineage from this Ambrose Jones who d. 1805 in Columbia Co., GA to the Ambrose Jones d. 1792 Granville Co., NC. (The parents of Mary Harris were Charles Harris and Sarah ALLEN).... More on all these people when I get back to St. Louis. Thanks for exchanging notes! Craig Kilby

Hi, is there someone, out there, who could get me a copy of a will of ROBERT PORTER, will proved October 1, 1651, Henrico County, Va. wife unknown, children are Robert, Alice married James Forrest, Anne married Thomas Perrin, daughter name unknown, married Mr. Jameson. According to the Va. Gen., Mrs Porter remarried to Richard Peirce, and died before Mr. Peirce, who died about 1687, then the Porter estate was settled. Will pay for coping and postage. If someone knows of a person, a researcher, please let me know. Thanks. Jane McBride Odessa, Texas

Ambrose Jones that you speak of is in the line of Jones that I am searching. I am however, not a direct descendant of his. My line is from both John and Richard Jones brothers to Ambrose Sr. In the record I have of Ambrose Jr. s/o Ambrose Sr. no spouse is recorded. Not my research. Another researcher gave me the info that Ambrose Jr. married Mary Adams. Dorothy > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: <CASHKILBY@aol.com> > > To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 7:11 PM > > Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Royster family > > > > > > > Dear Shelly: I ran across several of this name on this last research > trip > > to > > > Virginia, In Mecklenburg Co., VA. Which, as you probably know, should > be > > > researched with Granville Co., NC records. I returned to St. Louis > > Wednesday > > > but had to turn around and go to Kansas City yesterday and won't be home > > til > > > Sunday. When I get home and start compiling the notes, I'll send the > list > > > the Royster and other information. This didn't turn out to be a line I > > was > > > pursuing. The names being researched are: > > > > > > Ambrose Jones, Jr. and wife Mary Harris, Ambrose Jones, Sr. and wife > > > Catherine (Collins?, of Caroline Co., VA), Charles Harris and Sarah > Allen, > > > and John Avary and wife Phebe of Amelia>>Mecklenburg>>Columbia Co., GA. > > > > > > Will post more in a few days. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Craig > > > > > > > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > > > USGenWeb Archives Census Project > > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/ > > > > > > > > > ============================== > > > Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > > > Source for Family History Online. Go to: > > > http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB > > > > > > > > > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > USGenWeb Archives Census Project > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/ > > > ============================== > Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! > http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2 > > >

One must think carefully about the law of manumission (removing the bonds of servitude that we call slavery), since it was perfectly legal for any man to simply say to his slave, "Go, God speed, and have good fortune." Provided, that is, that such slave be considered by the community to be able and of an age to reasonably be about his/her business and create no burden for the parish or his community. That method simply did not work however, since we had fugitive slave acts for 2 centuries and more - until the Civil war - hence any Black person walking about, especially the South, was presumed to be an escaped slave, would not be believed if he/she protested otherwise, and quite usually was taken into custody awaiting proof, trial, or the appearance of a master. So it was that all manumitted - freed - slaves did their utmost to carry with them some document - often called "free papers" - revealing the date, place and person or court order by which they were freed. They were freed by will, by will with a stipulation that freedom would come after some additional number of years in bondage, by simple contract, by a wish of a master to be rid of the burden of their keep after they were no longer able by age or infirmity to maintain their required work schedule, by purchase of their freedom for those VERY few who could earn enough to buy their own freedom or that of a parent, child, or loved one, and by simple kindness of a master. In short, if a master intended freedom it was easy to accomplish, and if a slave was so freed, he carried with him a document of his manumission or a copy of a court order so stating. Incidentally, contrary to popular belief, becoming a Christian did not provide freedom; indeed, the church had precious little to say affecting such a decision by an owner or a court. See y'all in 10 days or so. Paul ---- Original Message ----- From: "grumpychump" <grumpychump@yahoo.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 2:50 PM Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Manumission of slaves, mid 1800s | Could someone tell me what had to happen legally for a | slave to be set free in the mid 1800s? I assume there | had to be more involved than an owner simlpy stating | the fact. | | Thanks! | | _____________________________________________ _____ | Do You Yahoo!? | Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices | http://auctions.yahoo.com/ | | | ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== | Hosted by Rootsweb http://www.rootsweb.com | | | ============================== | Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! | http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2 |