feasible. But the planters then turned to the use of forced labor to render their large plantations profitable: specifically, the labor of the indentured servants and of the even more thoroughly coerced Negro slaves. In slavery, the laborer is coerced not only for a term of years, or for life, but for the lives of himself and all his descendants. It was an ironic commentary on the later history of America that 1619, the very year of the Yeardley reforms, saw the first slave vessel arrive at Jamestown with twenty Negroes aboard, to be sold as slaves to the tobacco planters. Until the mid-seventeenth century, the planters preferred to rely on indentured serf labor. These white servants, once their term had expired, could obtain their land, generally fifty acres each, on the western fringe of the settlement, and become independent settlers. But Negro slavery, unlikeindentured service, had no means of dissolving into the general society; once introduced, it became the backbone of the Virginian (and other Southern) labor system. It could only remain as a continual canker on the American body social.
The tiny colony was apparently not too young to have “foreign affairs”; and, indeed, it learned all too quickly the ways of interstate relations. French settlers had the temerity to found a colony of their own at Mount Desert (in what was later to be Maine) and on the banks of the Bay of Fundy (in what was later to become Nova Scotia). This “trespassed” upon the land that King James had arbitrarily granted to the Plymouth Company, which had not yet made any settlement in North America. It also trespassed on the greater glory of England. And so, Southern Virginia did the honors: Captain Samuel Argall, disguising his ship as a fishing vessel, sailed from the colony up to Mount Desert in 1613, eradicated the French settlement, and kidnapped fifteen French settlers, including two Jesuit priests. Hauled to Virginia, the prisoners were badly treated. Over a dozen of the hapless French settlers were turned loose by Argall on the Atlantic in an open boat, but they had the good fortune to be rescued by fishing vessels. Later in the year, Argall returned north and expanded his work of destruction, putting to the torch the settlements of St. Croix and Port Royal, the latter in Nova Scotia, and driving the settlers into the woods. A few years later, Captain Argall, now governor of Virginia, continued the tradition by participating in piratical activities against Spanish shipping. He sailed under the aegis of the king’s favorite among the company stockholders, the Earl of Warwick.
* “Tax farming” was the sale by government of the right to tax.
4
From Company to Royal Colony
King James I encountered growing troubles with the Puritans at home, and grew increasingly restive about the Puritan Virginia Company. For one thing, the king had ousted Sandys from his post as treasurer, only to find him replaced by Sandys’ liberal ally, the Earl of Southampton; the disgruntled and influential Sir Thomas Smith persisted in advising the king to confiscate the company. Finally, King James managed, in 1624, to obtain from a court under his domination, the annulment of the charter of the Virginia Company. *
The abrupt change in government, though unwelcome to the Virginia settlers, scarcely altered the social structure of the Virginia colony—for, surprisingly, the king did not disturb the land titles and land privileges that had been allocated to individuals and groups by the company. For many years, indeed, the colony continued to grant land in exchange for the company’s shares. These allotments continued to be made in large tracts, and generally the best tracts—in contrast to the small frontier settlements of the indentured servants—along the navigable rivers. One result of this pattern of land allocation, and of the heavy reliance on forced labor, was that Virginia—in contrast, as we shall
The tiny colony was apparently not too young to have “foreign affairs”; and, indeed, it learned all too quickly the ways of interstate relations. French settlers had the temerity to found a colony of their own at Mount Desert (in what was later to be Maine) and on the banks of the Bay of Fundy (in what was later to become Nova Scotia). This “trespassed” upon the land that King James had arbitrarily granted to the Plymouth Company, which had not yet made any settlement in North America. It also trespassed on the greater glory of England. And so, Southern Virginia did the honors: Captain Samuel Argall, disguising his ship as a fishing vessel, sailed from the colony up to Mount Desert in 1613, eradicated the French settlement, and kidnapped fifteen French settlers, including two Jesuit priests. Hauled to Virginia, the prisoners were badly treated. Over a dozen of the hapless French settlers were turned loose by Argall on the Atlantic in an open boat, but they had the good fortune to be rescued by fishing vessels. Later in the year, Argall returned north and expanded his work of destruction, putting to the torch the settlements of St. Croix and Port Royal, the latter in Nova Scotia, and driving the settlers into the woods. A few years later, Captain Argall, now governor of Virginia, continued the tradition by participating in piratical activities against Spanish shipping. He sailed under the aegis of the king’s favorite among the company stockholders, the Earl of Warwick.
* “Tax farming” was the sale by government of the right to tax.
4
From Company to Royal Colony
King James I encountered growing troubles with the Puritans at home, and grew increasingly restive about the Puritan Virginia Company. For one thing, the king had ousted Sandys from his post as treasurer, only to find him replaced by Sandys’ liberal ally, the Earl of Southampton; the disgruntled and influential Sir Thomas Smith persisted in advising the king to confiscate the company. Finally, King James managed, in 1624, to obtain from a court under his domination, the annulment of the charter of the Virginia Company. *
The abrupt change in government, though unwelcome to the Virginia settlers, scarcely altered the social structure of the Virginia colony—for, surprisingly, the king did not disturb the land titles and land privileges that had been allocated to individuals and groups by the company. For many years, indeed, the colony continued to grant land in exchange for the company’s shares. These allotments continued to be made in large tracts, and generally the best tracts—in contrast to the small frontier settlements of the indentured servants—along the navigable rivers. One result of this pattern of land allocation, and of the heavy reliance on forced labor, was that Virginia—in contrast, as we shall
Similar Books
