This page is referenced by:

• 1 2021-12-01T18:27:57+00:00 Fire-Collaboration 1 plain 2021-12-01T18:27:57+00:00 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, was often a one person job. 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. 
  
  In one instance, arson was not only done with others but occurred with others as an act of resistance. We see this illustrated, 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,' which increased their chances of success. 
  
  
  
  Acts of defiance cost whites psychological, physically, and materially. Material resources’ loss through theft or arson cost money, whereas collaboration among the enslaved caused the slaveholder’s anxiety-mainly 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 was a great anxiety for whites. In total, 13 cases of poison were mentioned in records. Poisoning caused a lot of anxiousness because it was difficult to learn the exact cause of death or locate the identity of the culprit. This is why poison was a dredged prospect. Note: Slave murder was not always geared to slaveholders only. 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 enslaved persons believe it was the opprtune time to act carry out their plans. These moments could occur at any time but some of the more predictable cases involves events when the owner was out on travel, period of transition—the death of a slaveholders, energy among the enslaved, period of sale, or being hired out.