“A People not insensible of the sweets of rational freedom”

On 13 Jan 1777, the Massachusetts legislature considered a petition from eight black men on behalf of “a great number of Negroes who are detained in a state of Slavery in the Bowels of a free and Christian Country.”

That petition drew on the natural-rights philosophy that underlay the Declaration of Independence and similar documents in the preceding years. The authors wrote:

That your Petitioners apprehend that they have, in common with all other Men, a natural and unalienable right to that freedom, which the great Parent of the Universe hath bestowed equally on all Mankind, and which they have never forfeited by any compact or agreement whatever—But they were unjustly dragged, by the cruel hand of Power, from their dearest friends, and some of them even torn from the embraces of their tender Parents, from a populous, pleasant and plentiful Country—and in Violation of the Laws of Nature and of Nation and in defiance of all the tender feelings of humanity, brought hither to be sold like Beasts of Burden, and like them condemned to slavery for Life—Among a People professing the mild Religion of Jesus—A People not insensible of the sweets of rational freedom—Nor without spirit to resent the unjust endeavors of others to reduce them to a State of Bondage and Subjection.

Your Honors need not to be informed that a Life of Slavery, like that of your petitioners, deprived of every social privilege, of every thing requisite to render Life even tolerable, is far worse than Non-Existence—In imitation of the laudable example of the good People of these States, your Petitioners have long and patiently waited the event of Petition after Petition by them presented to the legislative Body of this State, and can not but with grief reflect that their success has been but too similar.

They can not but express their astonishment, that it has never been considered, that every principle from which America has acted in the course of her unhappy difficulties with Great-Britain, pleads stronger than a thousand arguments in favor of your Petitioners.

The ask was for a law to free all adults enslaved in Massachusetts, and to ensure the liberty of all enslaved children when they reached the age of twenty-one (essentially treating them as apprentices).

The legislature didn’t enact such a law. The Massachusetts courts eventually made the first big step to making slavery unenforceable in the state.

Here are the signatures and marks of the eight men who submitted the petition, as shown in its digital form, courtesy of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery and Anti-Segregation Petitions project.

The most famous of those men was Prince Hall. Others joined with Hall in the first African-American Freemasons lodge.

Today I’m focusing on the sixth man, whose given name was Nero. I’ve seen his surname transcribed as Funelo, Funilo, and even Suneto. I posit that that surname was Funels, a phonetic spelling of Faneuils, and that this man had been enslaved by one of the Faneuil family.

TOMORROW: Nero Faneuil in court.

A Certificate from Prince Hall

Harvard’s Houghton Library is showing off a recent acquisition, which came through the university’s W.E.B. DuBois Institute. It’s a 1799 Freemasonry certificate signed by Prince Hall, founder of the African-American Freemason movement. The library’s blog says:

Hall may have been born a slave in Barbados (however, several conflicting versions of Hall’s early life exist). He came to Boston in 1765, and quickly became a leader within the African-American community of Boston. In 1775, Hall and thirteen other black men were initiated into Military Lodge No. 441 in Boston, which was then affiliated with the British Army.

Following the Revolution, facing discrimination, (to be initiated into a Lodge, a Mason needs to gain a unanimous vote, but as votes are contributed anonymously, it would be impossible to identify any one dissenting individual), black Masons began urging Hall to form a separate organization. Hall was elected the first Grand Master of the African Grand Lodge of North America, and the Lodge was later renamed in his honor.

Hall and his comrades were initiated as Freemasons by officers of the British army’s 38th Regiment on 6 Mar 1775 at Castle William in Boston harbor. On that same day, Dr. Joseph Warren—Grand Master of one line of Freemasons in North America—gave an oration commemorating the Boston Massacre, which other officers apparently attended to disrupt.

The Freemasons in the 38th may have made those fourteen men Freemasons in an attempt to win the loyalty of some prominent free blacks. They may have done so to highlight the hypocrisy of rebels who spoke about liberty but kept people in slavery (as Warren did). They may even have been lampooning Warren’s Masonic status, which was disputed by an older and wealthier lodge in Boston, by inducting Massachusetts men of African origin into the “real” movement ahead of him.

After the war broke out, a little over a month later, the 38th fought in the Battle of Bunker Hill, suffering more casualties than any other regiment in the final assault. According to tradition, Hall fought on the provincial side in the same battle, but there’s no documentation for that. His activity during the war is clouded by the fact that “Prince Hall” was a fairly common name.

In 1777, Prince Hall signed a petition to the Massachusetts General Court seeking an end to slavery in the new state. (Another signer, Peter Best, might also be the Peter Bestes who had submitted a similar petition in 1773.) In 1788, a letter from Boston published in the New-York Packet referred to Hall as “one of the head men among the blacks in this town.” He continued to lobby and organize on behalf of African-American rights until he died in 1807.

Thanks to Jeremy Dibbell at PhiloBiblos for the pointer.

Newton Prince: civil rights lobbyist

I plan to pay my first visit to the New-York Historical Society today, so it seems appropriate to post about a document there which reveals a bit about lobbying for civil rights in Boston just before the Revolution.

The NYHS owns a leaflet reprinting a letter datelined "Boston, April 20th, 1773," and signed by four men who identify themselves as slaves: Peter Bestes, Sambo Freeman, Felix Holbrook, and Chester Joie. They ask for their liberty, in the same spirit that the province was then demanding political liberties from the Crown. According to their letter, after becoming free those four men planned

to leave the province, which we determine to do as soon as we can, from our joynt labours procure money to transport ourselves to some part of the Coast of Africa, where we propose a settlement.

The printed leaflet was part of a legislative lobbying effort, as shown by the address line printed on it: "For the Representative of the town of". The town name "Thompson" was written in by hand on the NYHS copy. Presumably there was one leaflet prepared for every sympathetic lawmaker.

Who delivered these leaflets on behalf of the four slaves, who had neither the liberty nor the standing to speak for themselves? More than twenty years later, a former member of the Massachusetts legislature's upper house recalled being approached by a free black businessman with a pamphlet. Samuel Dexter, former Council member from Weston, wrote to the Rev Jeremy Belknap on 26 Feb 1795:

I took up a pamphlet which I had not looked into for several years, and found I had noted upon the outside leaf that it was given to me by Mr. Newton Prince, lemon merchant, in the name and at the desire of a number of negroes, then petitioners to the General Court. At the head of these was Foelix Holbrook.

While the petition remained undecided upon, I was called out of the Council Chamber, and very politely presented with the pamphlet by Newton, who, after making his best bow, said that the negroes had been informed that I was against the slave-trade, and was their friend. He had several more to give to particular members of the House of Representatives. Upon my returning into the chamber, I boasted, as I have since, that I was distinguished from all the other members of council by this mark of respect.

What was the outcome of Newton Prince's effort? This Massachusetts legislature voted to prohibit the slave trade from Africa, but did nothing to end slavery within the province. And then the royal governor vetoed the law against importing new slaves, anyway. Slavery did not end in Massachusetts until the high court decided in 1783 that such inequality went against the state constitution (the same basis for the court's 2003 marriage-equality decision).

And what happened to Newton Prince? I'll discuss his past and future in future posts.