scholarly journals Peculiar Quarantines: The Seamen Acts and Regulatory Authority in the Antebellum South

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Schoeppner
Keyword(s):  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
Rhode Island ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Antebellum South ◽  
Free People Of Color ◽  
State Statutes ◽  
Black Immigration ◽  
Free People

In 1824, the American schoonerFoxsailed into Charleston harbor with seasoned mariner and Rhode Island native Amos Daley on board. When officials boarded the ship, they interrogated the captain and crew before cuffing Daley and hauling him off to the Charleston jail, where he remained until theFoxwas set to leave harbor. Daley's detainment occurred because 16 months earlier the South Carolina General Assembly had enacted a statute barring the entrance of all free people of color into the state. Unlike other antebellum state statutes limiting black immigration, this law extended further, stretching to include in its prohibition maritime laborers aboard temporarily docked, commercial vessels. This particular section of the law was passed on the assumption that such sailors inspired slave insurrection and thereby posed a direct threat to the safety and welfare of the citizenry. Over the course of the next four decades, the states of North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas would join South Carolina in passing statutes, commonly referred to as the “Seamen Acts,” which limited the ingress of free black mariners. Amos Daley was only one of ~10,000 sailors directly affected by these particularly Southern regulations.

Prologue

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Milewski
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Antebellum South ◽  
Free People Of Color ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
The Law ◽  
Freedom Suits ◽  
Free People ◽  
Free African Americans

The Prologue traces African Americans’ experiences with the law and the courts in the antebellum South. It shows the ways in which the law upheld the system of slavery and worked to characterize enslaved men and women as property rather than as people. At times, though, slaves could participate in the legal system as criminal defendants or as they litigated freedom suits. Free people of color, too, appealed to the law to challenge the constraints imposed upon them. The experiences of enslaved and free African Americans in the antebellum South gave them an appreciation of the power of the law, leading them to fight to gain full legal rights after the Civil War.

Scipio Vaughan’s South Carolina

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa A. Lindsay
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Native Americans ◽  
Independent Living ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
Free People Of Color ◽  
African American Father ◽  
Plantation Slavery ◽  
Free People ◽  
Cotton Plantations

In 1840, Church Vaughan’s dying father Scipio advised his family to return to Africa, the continent of their ancestors. Although Scipio had spent most of his life as a slave, his ten children and their mother were life-long free people of color in Kershaw County, South Carolina. Through hard work and the careful cultivation of white patrons, they made an independent living and owned their own land. As this chapter shows through the experiences of this family and their neighbors, however, inland South Carolina became increasingly restrictive and dangerous for free people of color in the first half of the nineteenth century. By the time Church Vaughan’s free Anglo-Catawba mother and African American father married in the 1810s, so many slaves worked on Kershaw County cotton plantations that planters had good reason to fear rebellion, such as one that was brutally suppressed in 1816. Over the following decades, plantation slavery expanded over land previously controlled by Native Americans. Though Scipio Vaughan was gradually manumitted, even free people of color faced increasing legal restrictions, social exclusion, and violence. This chapter illustrates their limited pathways to freedom as well as the mounting pressures on free people of color that made emigration attractive.

Confederate Citadel

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary A. DeCredico
Keyword(s):  
Revolutionary War ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
Antebellum South ◽  
Union Army ◽  
Confederate States Of America ◽  
George Washington ◽  
Free People Of Color ◽  
Military Leaders ◽  
Free People ◽  
The City

Richmond, Virginia, became the capital of the Confederate States of America in May 1861. From that point on, it would be the target of multiple Union “On to Richmond” campaigns. Richmond was symbolic: its capitol building bore the imprimatur of the Revolutionary War generation and had been designed by Thomas Jefferson; on its grounds was a famous equestrian statue of George Washington. Nearby was St. John’s Church, where Patrick Henry had demanded liberty—or death. But Richmond was an anomaly in the antebellum South. It supported a diverse population of whites, slaves, free people of color, and immigrants. It had modernized during the 1850s. By 1860, it ranked thirteenth nationally in manufacturing and boasted a robust commercial economy. When civil war erupted in 1861, it was only logical to shift the Confederate capital to the city on the James. Richmond became the keystone of the rebellion. Its people would sacrifice until there was literally nothing left. Rather than allow the Union army to take the city in 1865, the Confederacy’s military leaders fired the tobacco housed there, which created a firestorm that nearly destroyed the city. When the Federals entered Richmond on April 3, they could see the detritus that was a testament to the city’s and its citizens’ contributions to the Confederacy.

Use of the AMA Guides in State Workers' Compensation Systems: 2009 Update

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-16
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Jenny Walker
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
South Dakota ◽  
Rhode Island ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Specific Guideline ◽  
Compensation Systems

Abstract The AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) is the most widely used basis for determining impairment and is used in state workers’ compensation systems, federal systems, automobile casualty, and personal injury, as well as by the majority of state workers’ compensation jurisdictions. Two tables summarize the edition of the AMA Guides used and provide information by state. The fifth edition (2000) is the most commonly used edition: California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Vermont, and Washington. Eleven states use the sixth edition (2007): Alaska, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Wyoming. Eight states still commonly make use of the fourth edition (1993): Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, South Dakota, Texas, and West Virginia. Two states use the Third Edition, Revised (1990): Colorado and Oregon. Connecticut does not stipulate which edition of the AMA Guides to use. Six states use their own state specific guidelines (Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, and Wisconsin), and six states do not specify a specific guideline (Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia). Statutes may or may not specify which edition of the AMA Guides to use. Some states use their own guidelines for specific problems and use the Guides for other issues.

Diabrotica barberi. [Distribution map].

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
New Brunswick ◽  
South Dakota ◽  
Rhode Island ◽  
New Hampshire ◽  
Distribution Map ◽  
Diabrotica Barberi ◽  
New Distribution

Abstract A new distribution map is provided for Diabrotica barberi Smith & Lawrence. Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae Hosts: Maize (Zea mays) and other cereals (Poaceae). Information is given on the geographical distribution in NORTH AMERICA, Canada, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Ontario, Quebec, USA, Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document