Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: Dataset CreatorsJazma Sutton, Miami University of OhioThis dataset documents fifty enslaved individuals registered in the Knox County, Indiana circuit court between 1805 and 1807. It provides details such as names, ages, former residences, lengths of servitude, and the names of the enslavers who registered them. The Knox County Slave Registry exists because of a legal loophole in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which officially banned slavery in the Northwest Territory, including what would become Indiana. Despite federal and state prohibitions, the Indiana legislature enacted a series of indenture laws during the territorial period that allowed chattel servitude and other coercive labor practices to persist.The data in this dataset comes from a single source: a fifty-six-page bound book spanning November 1, 1805, to April 10, 1807. The book is part of the Historical Collection at Knox County Public Library’s McGrady-Brockman House in Vincennes, Indiana, and was originally held at the Knox County Circuit Court. Knox County is the oldest county in Indiana; at the time this register was created, Vincennes served as the county seat. French colonists had previously enslaved Indigenous and African people from across the broader Atlantic World in the Wabash Valley. The Knox County Slave Registry, however, recorded the first legally sanctioned introduction of race-based slavery into Indiana by American settlers from the South following the Northwest Ordinance.1 Of the fifty-six pages in the book, thirty-one contain handwritten registrations recorded by the Knox County Clerk, Robert Buntin. The dataset documents fifty enslaved individuals across forty-six registrations and thirty enslavers.The Indiana Territory General Assembly codified indentured servitude into law through the 1805 Act Concerning the Introduction of Negroes and Mulattoes.2 This legislation built on efforts from 1803, when pro-slavery territorial leaders adopted a provision from Virginia’s slave laws that allowed individuals to be enslaved through contracts, which slaveholders could sell or bequeath to their heirs. The 1805 Act expanded these practices by requiring enslaved Black people brought into the Indiana Territory to be taken to the county clerk within thirty days to agree to a service term of indentured servitude. Those who refused were to be sent out of the territory for sale within sixty days. The act further required that every Black resident be registered in their county of residence and that indenture terms be determined by age. Individuals under fifteen had to serve until thirty-five if male and thirty-two if female, while children born to indentured parents served until thirty if male and twenty-eight if female. Contracts for those over fifteen had no time limit and terms of service were determined by the slaveholder. In 1806, the Assembly introduced a new act designed to punish “servants” for leaving their homes without permission, gathering in groups, or being harbored by others. Together, these laws permitted Indiana slaveholders to routinely purchase and sell African Americans, essentially incorporating the chattel principle into the indenture system, a practice Matthew Salafia describes as chattel servitude.3The 1816 Indiana State Constitution should have left no doubt about where the newly formed state stood on slavery. Section 37 of Article 1 explicitly declared: “There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in this state, otherwise than for the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. Nor shall any indenture of any negro or mulatto hereafter made and executed out of the bounds of this state be of any validity within the state.” Yet, in practice, so-called indentured servitude in the territory increasingly mirrored slavery. Indianians representing a spectrum of proslavery, antislavery, and racially prejudiced views led and participated in persistent efforts to restrict African American settlement. One 1813 Harrison County petition urged Congress to bar both enslaved and free Black people from settling on land being donated to “actual settlers,” claiming that their presence threatened white property and “wives, children, and daughters,” and that they were “opposed to [their] introduction . . . in any shape.” The promise of freedom enshrined in the 1816 Constitution inspired many enslaved and indentured African Americans to challenge their bondage in court. They filed freedom suits and petitions for habeas corpus, but in the years immediately following, the Knox County court largely reinforced slavery’s hold, ruling for enslavers in all but one case.4Using the Knox County Slave Registry as a point of entry into other local records produced through the county court at the time, such as tax records, wills, and petitions, a clear picture emerges of how a network of territorial leaders used their legal authority to protect their interests and circumvent the federal ban on slavery. The Northwest Ordinance established a three-stage process for state formation, beginning with the appointment of a governor, a secretary, and three judges by Congress. Most of these men, among the wealthiest and most prominent figures in the territory, from Territorial Governor William Henry Harrison to the county clerk who recorded each entry in the register, Robert Buntin, were slaveholders or active participants in sustaining slavery in Indiana. Within this legal framework, white enslavers maintained the institution at the local level, profited from it, passed on wealth through enslaved people, relied on enslaved labor to “settle the frontier,” and shaped the legal reality Black people would face in Indiana for decades.5Indiana’s legal system ensured that African Americans, regardless of legal status, could not truly live as free people. As free, formerly enslaved, and self-liberated Black people continued to migrate to Indiana, the state legislature enacted a series of anti-Black laws to restrict African American movement and discourage their settlement. Resembling the restrictions imposed in slave states, these laws denied African Americans the rights of full citizenship. Beginning in 1831, Indiana required African Americans to post a $500 bond as proof of “good behavior,” and by 1851, the state constitution outright prohibited their settlement. Free Blacks could not vote, hold office, serve in the militia, testify against white people in court, or attend public schools. Freedom, in Indiana, was hardly free. It was, rather, a perpetual state of unfreedom.6The Knox County Slave Registry is among the most valuable local records of unfreedom in Indiana, as it provides information about the enslaved population that cannot be found in federal census records, which are often the primary means for analyzing the African American population in Indiana during these early decades. The register also allows us to reconstruct the lives of unfree people who appear in wills and estate documents, or as anonymous figures in tax records. They only begin to speak fully, however, when considered through descendant archives and local histories that acknowledge the meanings their lives held beyond the value attributed to them by enslavers.The largest concentration of enslaved people in Indiana was in Knox County. Census data reveal that African Americans were present across the region but represented only a small part of Indiana’s population during the early nineteenth century. Census records for Indiana became more reliable beginning with the census of 1810. According to one source, the 1810 census documented 237 enslaved people in Indiana Territory, 135 of whom were in Knox County. Another source reports that there were 630 African Americans in the territory altogether—237 enslaved and 393 free—compared to 23,890 white residents. It is likely that many individuals listed as “free” in early census records, particularly in the southern part of the state, were in fact indentured or occupied some ambiguous status of unfreedom. Unlike census data, which typically reduced enslaved individuals to numerical tallies or anonymous demographic categories, the slave register both dehumanized and documented them. Although the register systematically recorded African Americans as property within a racialized system of control, it nonetheless preserved names, ages, residences, and familial connections that allow a more intimate reconstruction of their lived experiences in Indiana.7The enduring myth of Indiana as a free state, where slavery’s presence was minimal and confined to a few southern counties, continues to shape both scholarly and popular understanding. When slavery is acknowledged, it is often downplayed as insignificant, implying that too few enslaved people lived there to have influenced the state’s development. This hyperfocus on the local, combined with limited efforts to examine the lived experiences of the unfree and assumptions about where early records of Black life in the state exist, has reinforced the idea that the region stands apart from broader global and diasporic histories. That is why it is essential that we not begin and end our examination with local records like the Knox County Slave Registry, but rather use them as a starting point to dig deeper into the actual lives of those who endured and resisted unfreedom. Doing so reveals that slavery in Indiana, and across the greater Northwest Territory, though often overlooked, was deeply connected to the Atlantic world. It was only with the introduction of the Northwest Ordinance and subsequent laws such as the 1805 Act that Indigenous and Atlantic enslaving practices coalesced into a single system that defined the distinctive form of slavery unfree Black people would experience in the region. Initially, I wondered whether the dataset would reveal significant gender disparities, knowing that local officials had found ways to exploit Black women’s reproductive labor by making indentured servitude hereditary. At the same time, I was aware that both unfree men and women labored in agriculture, transportation, and mining in other Midwestern states such as Illinois, and I sought to understand whether gender shaped those experiences differently within the Indiana context.8 Still, these were only speculations. The numbers of men and women recorded in the Knox County Slave Registry were relatively balanced, with 28 women and 23 men listed. This trend was consistent with broader trends in Indiana immediately before and after statehood. By 1820, the difference became slightly more pronounced, with 65 males and 53 females recorded, according to Social Explorer data.The slave register provides critical insight into both the terms of servitude and the demographic composition of the enslaved population. In 1830, federal census records listed only three enslaved people statewide (all women), while a local census in Vincennes documented thirty-two enslaved individuals in that town alone. By 1840, Social Explorer data indicate that no enslaved people were recorded in any Indiana county, though absence from the official record does not confirm their disappearance. Historian Jacob Piatt Dunn similarly notes that “the national census of 1840 credited Indiana with three enslaved individuals: a girl in Putnam County, and a man and a girl in Rush County.” Taken together, these discrepancies suggest uneven enforcement and interpretation of emancipation laws, as well as inconsistencies in census reporting across counties. The longest terms recorded—99 years—were given to a 16-year-old boy, a 16-year-old woman, and a 30-year-old woman, effectively amounting to life terms. In contrast, the shortest term, 10 years, was assigned to a 15-year-old girl. The age range of those documented spans from a 2-year-old boy to a 60-year-old woman, who was sentenced to a 20-year term, making her a slave for life.9Another critical pattern emerges when considering the terms of the 1805 Act Concerning the Introduction of Negroes and Mulattoes into Indiana Territory. This legislation stipulated that individuals over the age of 15 could be indentured for any term of years, while those under 15 were to serve until age 35 for males and 32 for females. However, none of the individuals under 15 in the dataset had terms of service listed. Instead, those aged 16 to 18 often had disproportionately long terms of 30, 40, or even 50 years. This gap between law and practice raises the possibility that slaveholders intentionally misrepresented the ages of younger individuals to extend their terms of servitude, binding them for the majority of their lives. What is evident is that many individuals listed in Vincennes tax records from 1802, 1804, and 1805 as owning “servants and slaves” never registered them in the book. The 1805 law’s exemption for enslaved individuals held before its passage explains much of the discrepancy, though examples like county clerk Robert Buntin, who appeared in the 1805 tax records as holding “one servant and/or slave” without registering them, reveal that some enslavers continued to evade or disregard the statute.10Examined alongside county court records from the period, the Knox County Slave Registry illustrates how Indiana’s legal framework enabled the continuation of slavery through wills and inheritance. Enslavers and their heirs frequently disregarded the terms of both indentures and wills. Take Nero (ESP-27) for example. In 1817, just a year after Indiana became a state, John Johnston, the son of James Johnston (ESR-26), declared in his last will and testament: I give to my black boy named Nero the sum of eighty dollars when he arrives at the age of thirty three years, which is the time he is bound to serve by the law of the late Indiana Territory under which he was brought here by my father which bequest to my said black boy Nero is only upon the (express?) condition that he continues with my wife Peggy Johnson, and shall be to her a true faithful, and obedient servant until he arrives at the age of thirty three years as aforesaid and provided his conduct during his said servitude shall be perfectly satisfactory to my wife.11The will appears to promise Nero both $80 and freedom at age thirty-three, but that liberty is entirely contingent upon his “satisfactory” conduct and unwavering obedience as judged by Peggy Johnston, leaving him wholly subject to her authority. This conditional arrangement highlights the deep power imbalance embedded in such documents, where enslavers maintained legal control over the labor and future of those they claimed to “free.” The Knox County Slave Registry exposes the full scope of Nero’s exploitation. These records show that Nero was brought to the Indiana Territory alongside his mother, Judy (ESP-26), a 30-year-old woman assigned an 18-year term of service. Nero, however, was not assigned a term of service in the original register. By the time he reached the age of 33, as stipulated in the will, Nero would have served the Johnston family for 29 years.That did not happen, though. In 1822, at the age of 21, Nero petitioned the Knox County Circuit Court for a writ of habeas corpus. He claimed he was being unlawfully detained by Samuel Emison “contrary to his wish and in violation of his rights as a freeman.” Nero explained that he had been sold by the wife of his mother’s former enslaver and that he was only supposed to serve until the age of 21. He further stated that he had “no knowledge of ever having been bound as an apprentice, nor as an indented servant.”12Whether Nero was meant to be freed at 33 according to the will or at 21 based on his recollection of the sale, the 1816 Indiana State Constitution and later, the Indiana Supreme Court in the 1820 Polly Strong case, explicitly prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude: “There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in this state.”13 Yet, as Nero’s case illustrates, many African Americans in Indiana remained in bondage and had to rely on the courts to assert their freedom.Further complicating this narrative is Peggy Johnston’s 1835 legal complaint. Johnston alleged that Samuel Emison failed to pay her $500 for his purchase of Nero and Judy, a year after Johnston’s will was recorded. According to the slave registers, Judy, who was recorded as 30 years old in 1806, should have been freed by 1824 when her term of service expired a decade before this court case. Whether Judy was ever freed or lived to see the end of her term remains unclear, but this case underscores how Peggy Johnston continued to profit from their labor.14By consulting recently digitized freedom suits, marriage records, and free registers on Indiana Memory, we can see how valuable Knox County court documents and others like them are in helping descendants trace the transition of individuals documented in the registers from slavery to freedom. Jacob Hawkins (ESP-01), the first enslaved person legally recorded in Indiana, was assigned a term, which was the longest in the the person was given a term of years. Although the registers not explicitly their their and that the had been from their parents and their in Jacob and like Nero and Judy, were by his who resisted them. In on the legal of the time, the petitioned for their freedom in County and records show that Jacob after slave registers were no of African Americans through free Jacob in this system in the Knox County of Negroes and Mulattoes on as a age about born in the state of South these records, descendants of including a who lived on land by Jacob in have been to trace their in Indiana from slavery to dataset a new for slavery and unfreedom in Indiana. I not the first to examine the data in this register, but my This an to use the Knox County Slave Registry to the of those named in the records, as well as those who and alongside them but were never By making these records the dataset reveals how slavery was legally introduced into Indiana and this knowledge beyond a small of it provides and descendant with to the Indiana their Although scholarly in early African Americans in Indiana has been descendant have preserved their family histories for over that the of and Black practices in the those in deeper about the people named within them, this register appear to be more than they contain details that allow and descendants to trace lives across archives and to family histories registers are not descendant my with descendant practices how I as official records when reveal the of slavery’s in the and the of life within County, or County Slave Registry, Indiana Territory, Knox County, McGrady-Brockman Vincennes, the I with the for the digitized Knox County Slave through the Indiana This of the first by and period of servitude of all individuals listed in the Knox County Slave and the the of the of I this information with the original register to its before the data.The dataset was into of and I expanded the dataset by to more County, in Indiana, Knox County Clerk, and The terms for appear as they did in the or which are also the terms used to Black in census records, with the term required further I the as to to the ways enslavers and could this information for their I both and to the original form of each as documented by the record and in This that practices were often that could in and that individuals across is essential for The names recorded in the register not how the individuals would have or their names, as most were to or and with an making or was I can be further as records become records children, I a to their to their as in the register. One is that children were indentured alongside their the of slavery and that have of and to enslaved women’s The also the only of I have been to in other records. where were also recorded to further insight into the of those listed in the register. for one record that the of the enslaved I documented this in the Most of the enslaved people were from by from South from and one from and though in some the records are or not the The of legal status and in the of servitude and freedom for individuals in the for the McGrady-Brockman House
Author: Jazma Sutton
Institution: Miami University
Language: English
Subfield: Anthropology
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
OpenAlex ID: W7130512528
FWCI:
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: