Inspired in part by journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates, conversations about reparations for slavery and its aftermath have become mainstream. But they aren’t new: Reconstruction’s unfulfilled promise of “forty acres and a mule” had antecedents dating back to America’s founding.
On February 14, 1783, an elderly woman known only as Belinda submitted a petition to the Massachusetts legislature. She asked for an annual pension for herself and her invalid daughter, Prine, to be paid from the estate of their former owner, Isaac Royall. Royall had been one of the largest owners of enslaved people in the colony before he had fled to England in 1775. Because he turned out to be a royalist, his estate was confiscated and his two dozen slaves were manumitted (there’s some speculation as to whether some were sold, including Belinda’s son Joseph). Belinda was enslaved by Royall for four decades and was old and penniless when she finally gained her freedom.
Her petition is one the earliest examples of reparations for the slave trade and slavery, Roy E. Finkenbine reported. He puts her plea in the context of the many freedom lawsuits and legislative petitions for emancipation that were submitted by the African-American community in Massachusetts in the 1760s-1780s. In a 1783 case, for instance, the Massachusetts Supreme Court declared that the enslaved Quock Walker was free and that the equality clause in the state constitution outlawed slavery throughout its jurisdiction. Additionally, some enslaved people, after gaining their freedom, successfully sued their masters for compensation.
Because Belinda was probably illiterate, Finkenbine thinks her petition was written by Prince Hall, one of the most prominent activists in Boston’s African-American community and no stranger to the petitioning process. With Hall’s help, Belinda won her suit—Royall being an enemy of the state probably tipped the scales in her favor. She was granted an annuity, but was only paid once. The executor of the Royall estate ignored further state demands to pay her in 1787 and 1790, after which Belinda disappears from the record.
But the impassioned petition she submitted—which told of her childhood in Africa, her kidnapping, the shock of forced servitude in a foreign land, and the decades of abuse she experienced—lived on, spread by the Quaker anti-slavery network. In England, it was transformed into a potent narrative of slavery (though Royall’s name was dropped from the text). The rewrite vigorously described slavery as a culture of rape.
Finklebine traced the theme of reparations into the early Republic and ends by quoting a sermon by Timothy Dwight, the president of Yale, in 1810:
It is in vain to alledge, that our ancestors brought them hither, and not we…We inherit our ample patrimony with all its incumbrances; and are bound to pay the debts of our ancestors.
Editor’s note: This post has been edited to reflect current standards for referring to formerly enslaved people.
Kwa kuchochewa kwa sehemu na mwandishi wa habari Ta-Nehisi Coates, mazungumzo kuhusu fidia kwa utumwa na matokeo yake yamekuwa ya kawaida. Lakini si mpya: ahadi ya ujenzi isiyotimizwa ya "ekari arobaini na punda" ilikuwa na antecedents dating nyuma ya kuanzishwa kwa Marekani. "Kama mfano, mnamo Februari 14, 1783, mwanamke mmoja mzee aliyeitwa Belinda, aliwasilisha ombi kwa Bunge la Massachusetts.""" Aliomba malipo ya kila mwaka kwa ajili yake na binti yake mlemavu, Prine, kutoka kwa mali ya mmiliki wao wa zamani, Isaac Royall. Royall alikuwa mmoja wa wamiliki wakubwa wa watumwa katika koloni hiyo kabla ya kukimbilia Uingereza mwaka wa 1775. Kwa sababu aligeuka kuwa mfuasi wa kifalme, mali yake ilitwaliwa na watumwa wake ishirini na wawili waliachiliwa (kuna uvumi kama baadhi yao waliuzwa, ikiwa ni pamoja na mwana wa Belinda Joseph). Belinda alikuwa mtumwa wa Royall kwa miongo minne na alikuwa mzee na hana pesa wakati hatimaye alipopata uhuru wake. Ombi lake ni moja ya mifano ya mapema ya fidia kwa ajili ya biashara ya watumwa na utumwa, Roy E. Finkenbine aliripoti. Mwendesha mashtaka huyo alitoa madai ya kwamba kesi za kisheria za uhuru na ombi la sheria kwa ajili ya uhuru zilitolewa na jamii ya Waafrika-Wamarekani huko Massachusetts katika miaka ya 1760 na 1880. Katika kesi ya 1783 Mahakama Kuu ya Massachusetts ilitangaza kwamba Quack Walker alikuwa huru na kwamba kifungu cha usawa katika katiba ya jimbo kilipiga marufuku utumwa katika mamlaka yake yote. Kwa kuongezea, baadhi ya watumwa, baada ya kupata uhuru wao, walifanikiwa kumshtaki bwana wao kwa fidia. Kwa sababu Belinda alikuwa pengine asiyejua kusoma na kuandika, Finkenbain anafikiri ombi lake liliandikwa na Prince Hall, mmoja wa wanaharakati mashuhuri zaidi katika jamii ya Kiafrika-Amerika ya Boston na si mgeni kwa mchakato wa ombi. Kwa msaada wa Hall, Belinda alishinda kesi yake - Royall kuwa adui wa serikali pengine tipped mizani katika neema yake. Alipewa mshahara wa kila mwaka, lakini alilipwa mara moja tu. Mtekelezaji wa mali ya Royall alipuuza madai zaidi ya serikali ya kumlipa katika 1787 na 1790, baada ya hapo Belinda anatoweka kutoka kwa rekodi. Lakini ombi la shauku alilolitoa - ambalo lilimweleza juu ya utoto wake barani Afrika, utekaji nyara wake, mshtuko wa utumwa wa kulazimishwa katika nchi ya kigeni, na miongo ya unyanyasaji aliopata - aliishi, akisambazwa na mtandao wa Quaker wa kupambana na utumwa. Huko Uingereza, ilibadilishwa kuwa simulizi lenye nguvu la utumwa (ingawa jina la Royall liliondolewa katika maandishi). Uandishi huo ulifafanua kwa nguvu utumwa kuwa utamaduni wa ubakaji. "Finklebin alitoa hoja ya kwanza ya sheria ya kulipia hasara ya zamani ya Marekani, akitoa kauli ya Timothy Dwight, aliyekuwa rais wa chuo kikuu cha Yale, mwaka 1810: ""Ni bure kudai kwamba mababu zetu ndio walioleta haki hizo na sio sisi, sisi tuna urithi wa mali zetu nyingi na madeni yake yote." Kumbuka Mhariri: Chapisho hili limerekebishwa ili kutafakari viwango vya sasa vya kutaja watu waliokuwa watumwa.