Manumission

This episode deals with some of the complexities of manumission in 19th century United States.  The main thrust of this episode is the time that Edgar Allan Poe actually sold a slave, Edwin, for his Aunt Maria Clemm using the process of manumission - not as beneficial as it might have seemed at first.

Transcript

Welcome to Celebrate Poe - Episode 216 - Manumission.  All of the episodes this month will deal with some of the many people and issues especially relevant to Black History month.   There were many, many historical figures that I had to leave out, so instead of skimming over a number of individuals, I want to take a closer look at a few of the most influential individuals in the struggle for equality - especially in literature.  As of the writing of THIS. Episode, I have not decided on WHO I want to delve into - there are so many - but one figure that I do want to explore is Frederick Douglass.

Now of course, it is especially interesting to look at Edgar Poe ’s approach to racial issues in his works.  He is certainly not a major figure in the struggle for equality, but he IS the subject of this podcast, and I thought it might be interesting to start off this month by looking at the time he actually sold a slave.   

I was fortunate enough to get permission from a very kind individual by the name of Eben Dennis who works at the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore with their extensive Edgar Allan Poe collection. The Enoch Pratt has the original document that Poe signed in order to sell a slave. This member of the enslaved population was named Edwin and was  name considered the property of Poe’s aunt Maria Clemm.  I had heard about this for years, but it was only in doing research for this episode that I felt that I had a basic understanding of Poe’s actions regarding Maria’s slave, Edwin - and realized that the subject of manumission area can get confusing!

Now Poe was certainly familiar with slavery - the Allans were basically wealthy Southern aristocrats, and Poe grew up with African-American slaves in his household.  It stands to reason that stories told by the African-American slaves around Poe influenced his imagination, and he may have even developed positive relationships with some of the African-American slaves.   

By the way, what is considered the appropriate language usage in the area of racial identity can be tricky here - I used to work at a beautiful home built by George Washington for his granddaughter, Nellie.   Actually, the home, as well as the Capitol and most of the buildings in Washington DC were built by African American members of the enslaved population.   I used that phrase - we were required to use the term  African American members of the enslaved population - routinely during tours, until an African American professor said the term sounded too cumbersome - he suggested to use the common term slave - well, fair enough - but there have been slaves throughout history - and I think the term African American slaves strikes a nice balance - but what do I know?

Anyway, when Poe went to live with his Aunt Maria in Baltimore in 1830, he actually sold an African American slave using the concept of manumission - now a little bit of explanation and background is necessary to understand what manumission is.

Manumission - sometimes called enfranchisement - is simply the act of freeing slaves by their owners. Different approaches to manumission have been developed over the centuries - many of them widely different. - depending on the perceived needs of a specific time and place of a particular society. 

I was especially interested in looking at manumission in Baltimore around 1830, but was more than a bit confused - so I asked Google Bard -

It pointed out that in 1830 Baltimore, manumission referred to the legal act of setting a person enslaved free. It was a complex and often unpredictable process due to the specific laws and social context of the time. 

Then Google Bard proceeded to give me a breakdown:

Legal Framework:
• Maryland law: While slavery was legal in Maryland in 1830, there were no specific state laws prohibiting manumission. However, it was subject to individual property rights and could be achieved through several methods:
◦ Will or Deed: Slaveholders could grant freedom through their will or a formal deed of emancipation.
◦ Purchase of Self: Enslaved individuals could purchase their own freedom if they earned or were somehow gifted the necessary funds.
◦ Merit or Service: Some slaveholders could grant freedom as a reward for exceptional service or good behavior.
◦ Religious Motivations: Quaker and Methodist communities in Baltimore sometimes advocated for and facilitated manumission based on their religious beliefs.

Even upon manumission, individuals might face residual restrictions such as remaining indentured servants, being barred from leaving the state, or having limitations on family relationships.

And manumission could divide families.  You see, Manumission did not always guarantee the freedom of enslaved family members. Children of an enslaved woman, for example, could remain enslaved even if their mother was freed.

There was often Community Resistance: Anti-abolitionist sentiment remained strong in parts of Baltimore, and efforts to free enslaved individuals could face social and legal opposition.

It is necessary to remember that  Manumission in Baltimore was relatively rare in 1830. While estimates vary, studies suggest it likely involved only a small percentage of enslaved individuals, and that was often through family connections or specific circumstances

And Despite its limitations, manumission did contribute to a gradual decline in the enslaved population of Baltimore throughout the first half of the 19th century. It also served as a point of tension and debate, contributing to the growing discourse about slavery and abolition.

Understanding manumission in 1830 Baltimore requires acknowledging its limitations within the context of a deeply entrenched institution. While it offered a path to freedom for some, it was not a uniform or guaranteed process, and the long shadow of slavery continued to shape the lives of both the formerly enslaved and the free.

One thing I learned was that the reasons for manumission were complex and varied. To some, manumission may present itself as a sentimental and benevolent gesture. For those working as agricultural laborers or in workshops, there was little likelihood of being so noticed. In other words, it was more common for older slaves to be given freedom.

Apparently manumission has quite a varied, and very complicated history back to ancient times, but I wanted to concentrate on African slaves in the North American colonies.

Now it is true that African slaves were freed in the North American colonies as early as the 17th century. Some, such as Anthony Johnson, went on to become landowners and slaveholders themselves. Slaves could sometimes arrange manumission by agreeing to "purchase themselves" by paying the master an agreed amount. Some masters demanded market rates; others set a lower amount in consideration of service.

Regulation of manumission began in 1692, when Virginia established that to manumit a slave, a person must pay the cost for them to be transported out of the colony. A 1723 law stated that slaves may not "be set free upon any pretence whatsoever, except for some meritorious services to be adjudged and allowed by the governor and council”. In some cases, a master who was drafted into the army would send a slave instead, with a promise of freedom if the slave survived the war. The new government of Virginia repealed the laws in 1782, and declared freedom for slaves who had fought for the colonies during the American Revolutionary War of 1775–1783. Another law passed in 1782 that permitted masters to free their slaves of their own accord. Previously, a manumission had required obtaining consent from the state legislature, a process that was seldom successful - so like today, controversial issues often take a long time to pass. 

Now As the population of free Americans  increased in the United States - now think slaves from the Northern states - the Virginia legislature passed laws forbidding them from moving into Virginia and requiring newly freed slaves to leave the Commonwealth within one year unless special permission was granted.

See, I told you manumission could be complicated.

In the Upper South in the late 18th century, planters had less need for slaves, because those planters were switching from labour-intensive tobacco cultivation to mixed-crop farming. 
This is often given as the reason why slave states such as Virginia made it easier for slaveholders to free their slaves. In the two decades after the American Revolutionary War, so many slaveholders accomplished manumissions by deed or in wills that the proportion of free black people to the total number of black people rose from less than 1% to 10% in the Upper South - and that is quite an increase!  Together with several Northern states abolishing slavery during that period, the proportion of free black people nationally increased to almost 15 per cent of the total black population. New York and New Jersey adopted gradual abolition laws that kept the free children of slaves as indentured servants into their twenties.

After the 1793 invention of the cotton gin, which enabled the development of extensive new areas for cotton cultivation, the number of manumissions decreased because of increased demand for slave labour. In the 19th century, slave revolts such as the Haitian Revolution of 1791–1804, and especially, the 1831 rebellion, led by Nat Turner, increased slaveholders' fears, and most Southern states passed laws making manumission nearly impossible until the passage of the 1865 Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which abolished slavery "except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted," after the American Civil War. 

In South Carolina, to free a slave required permission of the state legislature; Florida law prohibited manumission altogether.Mothers were almost never manumitted alongside their children, even when the mothers gave birth to their master's own children.

Enslaved people could also be freed as part of a slave owner's last will and testament. Testamentary manumission frequently involved expressions of affection on the part of the slave owner to the enslaved person as part of the rationale behind manumission. Slave owners also frequently cited a desire to die with a clear conscience as part of their reasoning for freeing their slaves.  It was though this practice that George Washington was able to free his slaves after his death.  Interestingly enough, this form of manumission could often be disputed by heirs claiming fraud, or that an enslaved person had preyed upon a relative's weak mental or physical condition.  But such manumissions were usually respected by the courts - not because the courts respected the rights of enslaved people - but considered enslaved people to be part of their owner's property to distribute as they wished. Relatives who claimed fraud had to provide evidence of their claims or they would be dismissed.  Conditions of ongoing servitude were sometimes placed upon the enslaved person, by obligating them to care for another relative.

An enslaved person could be sold in order to cover debts of the estate, but not if they had already paid part of their purchase price towards manumission because this was considered a legally binding agreement. And as long as a person had not disinherited his children or spouse, a slave owner could manumit their slaves as they wished.

So if you’ve stayed with my this far, no doubt you realize the process of manumission is not as simple as it might seem at first - it wasn’t just freeing an African American slave.  And I’ve gone through all his thistorical background - sometimes confusing - sometimes contradictory - and not really talked that much about Edgar Allan Poe - well, for that, this podcast episode will go to the previously mentioned Enoch Pratt Free Library.

Now, according to the web site of the Baltimore Edgar Allan Poe Society, the Enoch Pratt Free Library is Baltimore City’s main public library. Among the treasures of the Pratt Library is the Amelia F. Poe collection of letters and documents relating to Edgar Allan Poe. The library has excellent  selection of books about Poe in the Poe Room, on the second floor.   By 
The way, Amelia F. Poe was one of the two daughters of Edgar Allan Poe’s Baltimore cousin, Neilson Poe. 

According to the Baltimore Sun Archives, during Poe’s life, Baltimore was one of the largest cities in the nineteenth-century United States, and it had one of the largest urban African American populations in the country. The city and its history also had deep-rooted issues of racism, violence, and poverty. These took some of their most bitter forms in Baltimore’s harbor, as it was one of the most prominent ports in the U.S. domestic slave trade. This is the historical context in which Poe sold Edwin to a Henry Ridgeway for $40.00

These events occurred between Poe’s discharge from the U.S. Army in 1829 and his short-lived entry into West Point early in 1830.  During that time, Edgar Allan Poe visited Baltimore. During his stay, Poe, acting as agent for his aunt, Maria Clemm, sold her 21-year-old slave, Edwin, to one Henry Ridgeway for $40. The bill of sale opened with the following statement:

“Know all men by these presents that I, Edgar Allan Poe, agent for Maria Clemm of Baltimore City and County and State of Maryland, for and in consideration of the sum of $40 in hand paid by Henry Ridgway of Baltimore City at or before the sealing and delivery of these presents, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, have granted, bargained and sold and by these presents do grant, bargain and sell unto the said Henry Ridgway . . . a negro man named Edwin, aged 21 years on the first day of March ext to serve until he shall arrive at the age of 30 years, no longer.”
Now during the 19th century, a binding contract could be sealed with the mark of an X if the signer was unable to read or write. Such was the case of Henry Ridgway, who, according to all available records, was a free African-American huckster living near Guilford Alley and Charles Street in Baltimore.
During the preparation of the document, Ridgway’s name was signed for him, allowing him to place his X beside the signature as a sign of agreement.
With this bill of sale, you might consider Poe to be one participant during a despicable period in American history when human beings were bought and sold. The document also shows how Poe tore Edwin from the human connections he had established in his life to that point. Historian Anne Bailey illustrates this well, writing that the sale of an enslaved person in this era “was considered a kind of death since separation from loved ones was most often permanent.”
Once I looked at Poe selling a slave who would later be freed less than 10 years later as a very good thing - a very kind action.  But after looking at the issue of manumission, I can see the potentially cruel aspects of the transaction. 

In the next episode for Black History Month, I want to take a look at Poe’s complex views regarding race as expressed in his writings - specifically The Adventures of Arthur Gordon Pam, The Goldbug, The Murders in the Rue Morgue, The Black Cat, and his final work, Eureka, where he writes that no one soul is inferior to another - that nothing is, or can be, superior to any one soul.

Sources include - and this episode required a great deal of research - the web site of the Baltimore Edgar Allan Poe society, The Price of Freedom: Slavery and Manumission in Baltimore and Early National Maryland by T. Stephen Foley, The Free Black in Urban America, 1800–1850: The Shadow of the Dream by Leonard Curry, The Maryland State Archives,The Baltimore Sun archives, The Weeping Time by  Anne Bailey, and especially the Special Collections of the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore.

Thank you for listening to Celebrate Poe.