During the antebellum period there was a great expansion in agriculture amongst the

states. In the south, cotton was king. Due to the high demand for cotton, large chunks of land
were bought by planters looking to make a fortune. The only problem was who would work this
land to produce cotton. These planters needed labor, and slavery was the easiest and fastest way
to meet the demand. Planters would buy many slaves to help work the land they had invested in.
Slaves would not work just because they were purchased. At least this was the general concept
of slavery. The general concept was that intimidation, brutality, and other methods were
necessary to get the most production out of a slave. This would naturally lead to resentment
from a slave to his master. Was this always the case in antebellum Mississippi? With better
methods of treatment, could a slave possibly show devotion to their master? The answer is yes.
This paper will argue that there were multiple slaves in Mississippi who were still devoted to
their master because of fair treatment. In the terms of fair treatment one could discuss things
such as a slaves diet, what their living conditions were like, what kind of clothes were provided,
and whether or not their master were abusive. Fair treatment could include multiple facets of the
slaves life. This paper will shed light on treatment of slaves and the correlation of their devotion
to their masters.
To help make the argument more concrete I feel it is necessary to define the terms
devoted or devotion. According to dictionary.com the term devoted means, zealous or ardent in
attachment, loyalty, or affection.1 Examples could include what a slave says in regards to their
master. It could include an action performed that benefited the master without the master telling
the slave to do the action performed. It could include multiple things, but the bottom line is that

1 (n.d.). Retrieved December 2, 2015, from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/devoted?s=t

a slaves relationship with their master has no ill will and is sincere regardless of their positions
as master and slave.
One general concept of slavery was the fact that it was a system of corporal punishments.
When one thinks of slavery one would usually think of harsh punishments. These punishments
could range from things such as whippings, use of a hot box, or breaking up spouses or children
just to name a few. This would be impossible to outright deny that these things never took place
in antebellum Mississippi. These things did happen and it is punishments like these that caused
slaves to feel ill will towards their masters. What if their master did not use corporal
punishment? How would a slave act or feel towards their master then? According to Hoppe
there were many reasons as to why a master would take really good care of his slaves. For one it
was the law. She refers back to the law multiple times. She says, Slaves were a trust, placed by
the providence of God in the hand of the Southerners, and every master was called to discharge
his duties, with forbearance, patience and fidelity.2 She continues, The laws of the
slaveholding States protected the colored race from the masters abuse of his power over them.3
According to Hoppe there were laws that were put into place to protect the slaves from the power
of their masters because they could not defend themselves. With that being said, it is easy to
point out why there was so much abuse and violence towards slaves then? That could only mean
one thing, which is the fact that the masters who would actually go too far with punishment were
actually breaking the law. Men who break the law are already typically frowned upon in society
anyways. Why would that be different during the antebellum period? Take today for example.
2 Hoppe, A. (1935). Negro slavery; a review of conditions preceding the civil war. Saint Louis:

R. Volkening. 23.
3 Hoppe, A. (1935). Negro slavery; a review of conditions preceding the civil war. Saint Louis:

R. Volkening. 24.

Imagine that a school is labeled as a racist establishment. The school received this label because
of an incident that involved only three to four of its students. Yet, everyone who thinks poorly of
this school tends to think that every student that attends that school is a racist bigot. This same
concept can be taken into account when discussing the traditional thought of masters and their
slaves. So if there is a possibility that a few awful masters ruined the image of most others, who
is to say there were not more slaves who were actually devoted to their master? If there were
only a few bad apples then there were a lot of good masters who would properly treat their
slaves. This in return would create more of those who would be faithful or devoted to their
master. Hoppe says it best by saying, It must be admitted, that there were cases in which that
power was abused But because some men did abuse them, is it therefore to be charged on
all?4
The experiences of slaves and punishments varied from plantation to plantation as one
could imagine. This quote from Conways The Anti-Slavery Crusade in America does a great job
at summing up the bulk of the paper. He says, I have often heard it assumed that the interest of
a man in his property is sufficient to protect the slaves from cruel treatment. All animals
belonging to the uses of civilized life are property; and yet societies for the prevention of cruelty
to them are found necessary.5 Take Gabe Emmanuel for instance. He was a slave on the Judge
Stamps plantation in Claiborne County, Mississippi. At one point in his narrative he talks about
a slave named Joe who keeps running away from the plantation and is brought back multiple
times. Gabe talks about a moment between Joe and their master. He says, Joe, he say, Is
4 Hoppe, A. (1935). Negro slavery; a review of conditions preceding the civil war. Saint Louis:

R. Volkening. 24.
5 Conway, M. D. (1969). Testimonies concerning slavery. New York: Arno Press. 9.

sho powful tired o huntin you. Ispect Is gwina have to git de marster to sell you somers
else. Another Marster gwina whup in de groun if he ketch you runnin way lak dis. I sho sad
for you if you gits sol away. Us gwina miss you roun dis plantation. After dat old Joe stayed
close in dey warnt no more trouble out o him.6 To some they may read this and accuse this
master of using reverse psychology to keep his slave to stay without any problems like running
away. Why not show compassion? It seems as if the master is being compassionate because Joe
ran away multiple times due to the fact he is not punished when captured. He is not scared of his
master. The reason is he knows he will not get punished if he tries to escape. He then has a
heart to heart pleading that he will be sold to another plantation where he could get seriously
injured by trying to escape. At this moment it is as if he cares about his well being and does not
want to see anything bad happen to him. What does Joe do in return? He stays. Not only does
he stay but he does not cause any more problems as far as running away. It was as if he was
devoted to his master after he showed compassion and pleaded with him. The author of The
Inquiry in a way says it best. The author says, I have before stated my belief that slavery to a
good master might, by checking the propensities of a debased and groveling human being, prove
a blessing.7 After seeing what happens to a lot of slaves who can not support themselves after
the war this statement in theory rings true. A lot of slave narratives actually back up this claim.
On the other hand there were those plantations where the slaves were not properly treated.
Charlie Moses shares his experiences and feelings of his former master in Lincoln County, MS.
He says, When I gits to thinkin back on them slavery days I feels like risin out o this here bed
6 Gabe Emmanuel. Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-

1938. Interviewed by Esther De Sola. American Memory. 45.

7 A. (1839). An Inquiry into the condition and prospects of the African race in the United States: And
the means of bettering its fortunes ..Philadelphia: Haswell, Barrington, and Haswell. 72.

an tellin everbody bout the harsh treatment us colored folks was given when we was owned
by poor quality folks. My marster was mean an cruel. I hates him, hates him!8
It is easy to see that Charlie Moses did not like his former master in any way imaginable. Why is
that? He makes it clear by saying his master was mean and cruel which could only mean that
Charlie Moses has either witnessed or experienced cruel punishments. There was something that
he said that did stand out. He talked about how his experiences came to be because he was
owned by poor quality folks. He did not say anything about all masters who owned slaves being
cruel or anything. It can be speculated that Charlie Moses believes that there are other masters
who are kinder and less violent. Maybe Charlie Moses had talked to slaves who had previous
encounters with kinder masters and he knew he was getting the short end of the stick with the
master he served under. Then there is the point of view from Pet Franks. Pet Franks is a former
slave from Monroe County, Mississippi. According to his narrative he had a real positive
experience with his master and his family. He says, I did work in de fiel some, but us had a
good overseer. His name was Marse Frank Beeks an he was good as any white man dat ever
lived. I dont never member him whippin one o de slaves, leastways not real whippins. I do
member hearin bout slaves on other places gittin whipped sometimes. I guess Niggers lak dat
wished dey was free, but I didnt want to leave my white folks, ever.9 According to Pet Franks
he never experienced cruelties such as that of Charlie Moses. He makes the point that he could
understand that if a slave was experiencing punishments such as Charlie Moses that he too might
want to be free as well. That is not the case here. He said he did not want to leave his white
8 Charlie Moses. Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-

1938. Interviewed by Esther De Sola. American Memory. 113.

9 Pet Franks. Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-1938.

Interviewed by Mrs. Richard Kolb. American Memory. 58.

folks. What does that sound like? That sounds like devotion and it is directed towards his
former master. This all goes back to how slaves were treated. In a book called Masters and
Slaves in the House of the Lord Boles discusses an account about the relationship between a man
and his slaves on his plantation. It says, He believed that Bryans slaves were so well treated
that they loved their master, did not desire freedom, and performed their work well. Bryans
plantation provided proof that slavery could be profitable, even though the slaves were treated
humanely and permitted Christianity.10 Sounds like a bond of devotion between master and his
slaves. Not only was the slaves treated properly but they also loved their master. Why is that? It
probably has something to do with the fact that their master takes care of them and provides for
them on a daily basis. Religion aside, the quote emphasizes previous points made. He talks
about the treatment of the slaves on Bryans plantation. They were treated so well that they did
not desire freedom. At first glance this may seem as if this statement is exaggerated. After
hearing the cruel side of slavery, how could a slave possibly feel as if it was a better option to be
enslaved rather than free? Take Prince Johnson for instance. He is a former slave from
Coahoma County, Mississippi. He also had positive experiences as a slave. It is honest to say
that slavery did constrict those freedoms that were not allowed to African-Americans in
antebellum Mississippi. Slaves were able to work for someone else on a different job to make
themselves and their master some money. Prince says, Marster would let us work at odd times
for outsiders an us could use de money for anything us pleased. My granma sol nough corn
to buy her two feather beds.11 Even though this is not necessarily freedom, it is an act of
10 Boles, J. B. (1988). Masters & slaves in the house of the Lord: Race and religion in the

American South, 1740-1870. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.

11 Prince Johnson. Born in Slavery : Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-

1938. Interview by Mrs. Carrie Campbell. American Memory. 77.

freedom. The master allowed her to go and buy what she wanted with what she made. This is
actually a powerful statement. Though they are in bondage, through their master they are free at
times to make immediate decisions that involve their outcome. This could be interpreted as a
way of devotion. The master allows the grandma to save up money so she can do with it as she
pleases. In most slave institutions this could be a big no no since the slave could buy their own
freedom. The fact that the grandmother did not try to buy her freedom or the freedom of a
family member shows just how devoted she was to stay where they were at. Actions speak
louder than words sometimes.
Another way to measure treatment for the slaves would be what did their diet consist of? Those
who starved were obviously being mistreated, but what about the slaves who received food every
day? Could the food be adequate enough to nourish their bodies? There was an understanding
from the book Slavery in the South: A State by State History. Clayton E. Jewett and John O.
Allen go on to say, Most masters allowed their enslaved minions three and a half to four pounds
of pork a week plus a peck, eight quarts, or cornmeal. Many owners provided additional rations
of sweet potatoes and molasses or sometimes grits and rice.12 The food listed here may not be
the most glamorous but it is a hardy meal. I understand that the foods listed are considered
fillers in an attempt to keep their slaves working at a pretty high pace. These foods were also
cheaper than others. Regardless of the reasoning it would be considered foolish to complain
because the other option is to starve. Honestly thats a solid meal to eat current day. Once
bellies are full there are usually plenty of those who are grateful for the full stomachs. This
could not be more prevalent than what Prince Johnson had to say about the topic of food. He

12 Clayton E. Jewett. John O. Allen. Slavery in the South: A State-by-State History. Westport,

CT: Greenwood Press, 2004. 164.

said, Us always had plenty teat. De old folks done de cookin for all de fiel hans Us ud
mos ingenally have fish, rabbits, possums, or coons. Lord ohilI Dem possums was good
eatin. I can tes em now. Folks dese days dont know nothin bout good eatin.13 The meal
Prince Johnson is describing seems to have more options. Though some of these foods are not
what we would call fine dining (possum) this was a different time where such foods were highly
looked upon. Not to mention that most slaves would normally have their own garden that they
could tend to. They could grow whatever they wanted to add to this feast. What makes this
really interesting and how it ties in to being devoted is the fact that once slaves were freed, most
of them would starve or have serious problems providing for themselves. Multiple times
throughout the slave narratives one could read as to how they are worse off now slavery is
abolished than when they were enslaved. Charlie Davenport describes his experiences by
saying, I was right smart bit by de freedom bug for awhile. It sounded powful nice to be tol
I was fool nough to blieve all dat kin o stuff. But to tell de hone truf, mos o us didn know
oursefs no better off. Freedom meant us could leave where usd been born an bred, but it
meant, too, dat us had to scratch for us ownsefs.14 Things had gotten rough once the war was
over. Former slaves could no longer depend on their masters to keep them fed and nourished.
This was hard for those who sought work as well because with the war it was hard for there to be
fair wages to those who worked in the fields, which primarily consisted of former slaves.
Another example would be that of Henri Necaise. He was a slave of Pearl River County,
Mississippi. He was grateful for the things he once had. He says, Dey didn geve me money,
13Prince Johnson. Born in Slavery : Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-

1938. Interview by Mrs. Carrie Campbell. American Memory. 77.

14 Charlie Davenport. Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project,

1936-1938. Interview by Edith Wyatt Moore. American Memory. 40.

but, you see, I was a slave. Day sho give me verthing else I need, cloes an shoes. I always
had a-plenty teat, bettern I can git now. I was better off when I was a slave dan I is now, cause
I had everthing furnished me dem. Now I got to do it all mysef.15 Another example of how a
former slave feels as if things were better during slavery. Not necessarily the system of slavery
itself, but the fact that they were fed and tended to whenever it was needed. Things were not
just hard on the slaves; it was also hard on the former masters and their families. Dora Franks
talks about her last day on her plantation in Monroe County, Mississippi by saying, When de
war was over, my brother Frank slipped in de house where I was still s-stayin. He tol me us
was free an for me to come out wid de res. Fore sundown dere warnt one Nigger lef on de
place. I hear tell later dat de Mistis an de gals had to git.16 By reading this passage it is
probably conceivable that the master of this plantation was not the kindest master considering
everyone was gone by nightfall. The situation itself is tragic but it is an indicator as to how the
master treated their former slaves. After reading a lot of different narratives it is pretty clear that
most of the slaves who decided to stay after the war was over was generally taken care of by
their former masters. Those who did not stay were usually exposed to some sort of mistreatment
on their plantation. The mistreatment or corporal punishment did not necessarily happen to the
person or persons in the narratives, but it did happen to where they were a witness to it. This
probably left an impact on their decision on whether or not to leave the plantation once the war is
over.

15 Henri Necaise. Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-

1938. Interviewed by C.E. Wells. American Memory. 120.

16 Dora Franks. Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers Project, 1936-

1938. Interviewed by Mrs. Richard Kolb. American Memory. 53.