Aspects of Slavery and Freedom Seeking in North Carolina
Fire-Collaboration
Many acts of confrontation and resistance were planned and carried out through collaborative efforts. This is not to say that collaboration was the norm. Theft and absconding were actions that comprised more individual endeavors. Any action by enslaved people that countered or challenged the slave system was dangerous, life altering, and possibly fatal. As the risk was so high, many acted alone when challenging slavery or the plantation rules.
For instance, in one instance, arson was not only done with others but occurred with others as an act of resistance, for instance, when enslaved blacks and whites colluded to burn down Dr. W. D. Hayes’ storehouse, which had property valued at $10,000. One of the enslaved men was caught, and he confessed that he set fire to a storehouse after he and other blacks and whites robbed it. The newspaper capturing the story noted, “The loss is a heavy one on an enterprising man.” Semi-Weekly Standard April 13, 1861
During the colonial period, one researcher found that enslaved women collaborated in acts of resistance and confrontation more than men. “Forty percent of the major crimes committed by females involved two or more enslaved collaborators; thus was the case for 23.4% of the males.” Women also absconded in groups at a higher rate than men.
Acts of resistance and confrontation, by way of collaboration, entail trust, knowledge, and silence. Some groups' plans were extensive and involved multiple plantations. These plans 'often directed their “criminal” activities not only against their owners, but also against the persons or property of other whites. In doing so, they demonstrated their knowledge of the countryside and skill in handling boats and horses.'
Acts of defiance cost whites psychological, physically, and materially. Material resources’ loss through theft or arson cost money, whereas collaboration among the enslaved, maintenance of the slaveholder’s anxiety of insurrection, and some acts of defiance cost the slaveholder their lives.
The acts of defiance, vengeance, frustration, passion, or countering disrespect are present in the records in slave courts and petitions. For instance, during the colonial period, the most common cases in the slave court of North Carolina were theft, which comprised 57 percent of the cases, and next to theft was poisoning, which was also called conjuring.
Slave courts, newspapers, and petitions throughout the colonial and antebellum period showed poisoning, which alarmed whites. In total, 13 cases of poison were very alarming because it was difficult to learn the exact cause of death or the identity of the culprit. This is why poison was a dredged prospect. Note: Slave murder was not always geared to slaveholders only and the victims of poison varied and included other enslaved persons and free persons of color.
Part of the planning for acts of defiance such as theft occurred when opportunities for mobility increased or when certain actions were unexpectedly granted opportunities to act, such as when the owner was out on travel, period of transition—the death of a slaveholders, period of sale, or being hired out. Sometimes the sex of the slaveholder mattered, as more actions occurred to female slaveholders.