1741 New York Conspiracy Trials

The 1741 New York Conspiracy Trials was the product of several factors such as racism, fear of slave rebellion and foreign invasion. During the 1740’s, English colonists in New York City felt anxious as they worried about Spanish and French invasions to gain control of North America. In addition, they feared the heavy immigration of Irish immigrants, who may have been Spanish spies. Above all, they were scared of a slave revolt due to the city's growing slave population. They feared a rebellion that could possibly overthrow the white dominant government. The investigation began after a shop owned by Rebecca Hogg was robbed by two slaves. Following the robbery, a series of fires broke out in March and April of 1741. As a result, English colonists …show more content…
Therefore, the government banned slaves from gathering in groups of more than three, drinking in taverns without their owner’s approval and to travel at night without a lantern. Their fear had increased as they came to know about a slave revolt in Charleston, South Carolina, “that produced a controversial set of trials and an even more controversial account of them, has reignited interest in the larger methodological and historical questions that Horsmanden’s text raises” (Zabin 32). Reflecting on such revolts, Horsmanden wrote that slave owners should view their slaves as “enemies of their own household, since we know what they are capable of [doing]” (Horsmanden 45). Such misunderstandings and false accusations encouraged white colonists to doubt on the slaves. The upperclassmen were well aware of the situations happening in other colonies and thus Horsmanden took advantage of the situation by executing …show more content…
The journal provided excerpts that directly showed the way the community and courts interacted with her. Since she was poor and at the bottom of the social hierarchy, the courts framed her testimonies to make the Hughson’s scapegoats. Likewise, her being an indentured servant played a significant role in her testimony. For example, Horsmanden’s entry on 3rd March, clarifies that Mary was motivated to testify for her own benefit. He says, “…and gave her motherly good advice, and said if she knew anything of it, and would tell, she would get her freed from her master” (Horsmanden 51). It was this offer which persuaded her to confess and reveal all of those that were guilty. She was trapped between the power struggle of the Hughson’s and the court. Therefore, Mary was not only scared of what the Hughson’s and culprits would do to her, but also of the court