 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 513 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
some fine studies show that Maryland, though a slave state, had been losing slaves and slaveholders for years.
to expand a bit more, and I do not remember many details: in the mid to late 1850s, eastern shore slave masters introduced to legislation to enslave *all* Maryland blacks.
They were concerned over the increasing number of freed slaves, the decreasing number of slaveholders and the impact of both on the value and security of the enslaved population. fewer slave holders meant less value when selling the chattel and more free blacks were a 'bad influence' on the enslaved.
the law would have multiple effects, the obvious one being to eliminate all free blacks and their influence on the enslaved population.
another effect would be to increase the number of slaveholders. the re-enslaved would be sold to the highest bidder, many of whom would be previously non-slave-holders. this would prop up the value of slaves.
It was mostly Baltimore and its legislators that defeated the bill. They appreciated the skill set and commerce that the free black population brought to the city and state…