South Carolina Slave
South Carolina Slave Tracy M. Farris History 110 July 31, 2011 Professor Paul Heintz South Carolina Slave South Carolina considered slavery an essential ingredient to establish their rice crop plantations to generate the most amounts of cash. . The mentality of the South was to own as many slave as possible to produce the must amount of product without the cost of labor. The slave traders discovered that Carolina planters had a very idealistic vision how a slave should look – Tall, healthy, male, between the ages of 14 and 18, “free of blemishes,” (similar to a sacrificial lamb) and as dark as possible.
There's a specialist from your university waiting to help you with that essay topic for only $13.90/page Tell us what you need to have done now!
The demand for slaves to fit those descriptions allow trader to charge on average, between 100 and 200 sterling – in today’s economy that would amount between $11,630 and $23,200. Once the slave were traded or bought they were put to work immediately! The rice plantation had gruesome work environments. The fields were in the open fields of the South often filled with floods of muds that breed Malaria and other form of diseases that killed hundreds of slaves, for the lack of proper medical care.
Proceeding to the American Revolution slavery was not a huge concern or had produces much debate, it was all about government power. But on the contrary was an issue that created problem. Traders taking slave and auction those to Christian nations apposed a problem. Ironically, trader by the time the American colonies began to grow or populate, they took the slaves from non-Christian parts of West Africa. It wasn’t an argument about slavery; it was all about church and its principles.
The Constitution or the Declaration of Independence said it very clearly that “all men are created equal” and that people were “endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights . . . So, it made it very difficult for the formers to include slavery into the Constitution. The Articles of Confederation were not focused on individual rights and liberties. They were merely a set of rules that allowed the various States to cooperate with one another. By the same token, the Constitution makes little reference to slavery.
It discreetly states that the Federal government will have the power to regulate importation of slaves after a period of time. The Articles and the Constitution did not have effect on slaves in the States. Slavery was considered a dispute to be decided by the State governments. Even though most northern states took steps to end slavery in their states around this time, South Carolina did not. The Declaration of Independence did not directly address slavery, but did speak in across-the-board terms about all men being created equal and having certain inalienable rights, including liberty.
The Declaration did not have a legal force. It was an attempt to communicate to Great Britain that the American Colonies were no longer a part of the British Empire. These self-truths or moral rights within the Declaration were later used to justify for cement of States to end slavery, but if a person was a salve at the time of the Revolution, they would have been long dead from old age by the time the Civil War would have resulted in their freedom. Granted the Constitution tolerated slavery, it also brought together the States as a single nation.
This union assisted in what eventually help to put to end to slavery by allowing Abolitionist movements in the South to mandate an end to southern slavery. If the people had thought of themselves as separate countries, this movement would not have had as much traction. Both of then tacitly acknowledged that slavery existed, but did little either to protect or end the practice. After reviewing the information one might say that it isn’t much improvement or rational between the two.
I do not think that as slave I would be happy with either one. Yes, the Constitution says that every man is created equal but it was not directly address the issues. In either case a slave was still a slave. Once a slave was free, what could he or she do? They were still slaves to ignorance, they could not read write or spell. So must slave when freed stay with Masters because they had nowhere else to go. All that some knew was to be a slaves. Reference www. en. allexperts. com www. studentoffortune. com www. sciway. net