Proportionally, more Free Blacks owned Slaves than Whites in the South when compared to their respective populations. This indicates that, although fewer in absolute numbers, a higher percentage of the Free Black population participated in Slave ownership than the White population.
In 1830 the population of Free Black Slave owners was 25.3% by 1860 the population of Free Blacks who owned Slaves had increased to 92%. By 1830, there were 2,193 Free Black Slave owners in the Charleston District.
William Ellison Jr. a Free Black man became one of the largest and wealthiest Slave owners in the South, unfortunately he was also one of the cruelest, breaking the laws of South Carolina on both the treatment of Slaves and the prohibition of selective Slave breeding. His estate exceeded the total wealth of the other 328 free blacks in Sumter District by several times, and he was among the top ten percent of all slaveholders and landholders in the district.
The existence of Black slaveholding in Charleston City was so evident that a Northern visitor to the city commented that “a number are Free Blacks own slaves themselves. This may seem strange to many Northern people especially to that class who cannot understand nor appreciate that system of labor known as slave labor.” -The Charleston Mercury - May 15, 1860
During much of the antebellum period, urban Black slaveholders were predominantly female. For instance, in 1820, Free Black women constituted 68.2 percent of the heads of families and 70.7 percent of the slaveholding heads of colored households. This indicates that Free Black women played a significant role in urban slaveholding, often leading households and managing enslaved individuals.
Contrary to the assumption that all Black Slave owners aimed to eventually free their slaves (manumit them), most did not. These Black Slave Masters often viewed Slavery pragmatically as a means to secure labor for their economic advantage. They saw the Institution of Slavery as a viable method to exploit labor, just as White Slave owners did, to benefit their farms, plantations, and businesses.
Another significant aspect of Black Slave ownership was the practice of hiring out Slaves. Black Masters would lease their Slaves to non-slaveowners, allowing them to use the Slaves’ labor for a fee. This arrangement enabled Black Masters to generate income from their slaves without directly employing them in their own businesses. The proceeds from hiring out Slaves provided a crucial source of support for many Black Slave owners.
The motivations for Free Blacks to acquire Slaves were varied, but similar to the motives of White Slave Owners. Economic necessity, the desire for social status, and the pursuit of financial stability were all potential factors. By owning Slaves, Free Blacks bcould improve their economic standing and secure a more stable and prosperous life for themselves and their families.
The involvement of free blacks in the Institution of Slavery underscores the pervasive and entrenched nature of Slavery in American society. Slavery was not an institution limited to racial lines; rather, it was a universal system that involved and was perpetuated by people across different racial and ethnic backgrounds, including African Americans themselves.
Some Free Black individuals were able to ascend to significant levels of wealth and status, becoming large slave owning planters. This ascension highlights the potential for mobility within the constraints of the system and demonstrates how deeply integrated the Institution of Slavery was into the economic and social fabric of the time.
In South Carolina, some Free Black individuals achieved considerable wealth and status, owning large numbers of Slaves and extensive tracts of land. These Black slaveowners paralleled the more affluent Black slaveholders of Louisiana, who were known for their significant holdings and influence. These substantial Black landowners and slaveowners defy the simplistic narrative that all Blacks in the South were uniformly oppressed and poor.
Despite the presence of several wealthy Black slaveowners, the majority of Black Masters in South Carolina were small slaveholders. These individuals typically owned only one to three Slaves. This pattern was similar to what was observed among Black slaveowners in Maryland and Virginia. The small scale of their holdings suggests that many of these Black slaveowners were not wealthy planters but rather individuals seeking to improve their economic conditions through the limited means available to them.
The existence of Black slaveowners complicates the conventional understanding of Slavery as a purely racial divide between White owners and Black Slaves. It underscores the extent to which the Institution permeated all levels of society and affected individuals of different backgrounds. The participation of Free Blacks in slaveholding reveals the pervasive nature of Slavery and the difficult choices faced by those navigating its realities.
In Charleston, South Carolina, most Free Blacks owned Slaves. It is estimated that many of the Old Black family names in modern Charleston can trace their ancestry back to either Black Slave owners or their Slaves.
In many places in the South, there was a much larger degree of social integration for Free Blacks within the pro-slavery establishment. By owning Slaves, Free Blacks could gain a modicum of acceptance and legitimacy within the predominantly White, slave-owning society. This involvement could potentially afford them some social and political leverage.
James Pendarvis,an emancipated Slave from St. Paul’s Parish in the Charleston District who ascended to substantial wealth and social standing, offers a vivid example of the complex intersections of race, wealth, and social mobility in the antebellum South.
Pendarvis' journey began in Slavery, but through some means—possibly through manumission by a master, purchasing his own freedom, or another method—he gained his freedom. Emancipation was a significant and often difficult milestone, but it was just the beginning of his remarkable rise. After gaining his freedom, Pendarvis not only acquired a plantation but also amassed ownership of 200 slaves. This level of success was extraordinary for any individual, let alone a former slave. His ability to own such a large number of slaves and manage a plantation indicates significant entrepreneurial skill, strategic acumen, and likely a keen understanding of the agricultural economy of the South.
Despite his African heritage, he achieved a level of respect and acceptance within the predominantly white community. This respect was so profound that he was able to marry a White woman, an exceptional and socially controversial achievement at the time. Interracial marriages were rare and often frowned upon, indicating that his wealth and status could override some of the rigid racial barriers.
As Charleston City's economy flourished, the prosperity extended to its free black residents, allowing many to purchase slaves. This economic opportunity turned Charleston into a hub for Black slaveholding within South Carolina. The booming port city's trade and industry provided the wealth and means for Free Blacks to invest in Slaves, utilizing them for labor in various enterprises such as agriculture, skilled trades, and domestic work. As a result, Charleston emerged as a unique focal point where Free Blacks, leveraging the economic expansion, engaged significantly in the ownership and use of enslaved labor, reflecting the complex dynamics of race and class in the antebellum South.
