Slavery has always been a dark cloud over our nation, but what many people are oblivious to is that there were still a handful of free African-Americans living in the North. In 1860, 4 and a half million African-Americans inhabited the United States and out of them 221,000 were free from slavery and were living in the North. The states located in south favored slavery due to their agriculture based economy, allowing the North to become an ideal location for free African Americans. Although these blacks were considered free, they still had a vast amount of restrictions in areas such as politics, economics, and social liberties due to the continuation of white prejudice.
For example, even free African-Americans living in the North were granted …show more content…
This proves that free blacks were limited to what they could do because many could not have their own say in government. Some states even had restricted requirements to be capable of voting. For example they must have had at least a $250 property requirement which was very uncommon. These statistics shown in the table are relevant because it concludes that the government made bias decisions since they did not represent the entire population. This also continued to segregate the free blacks because the white families believed they were not capable of making decisions for society. Even blacks living in the North suffered evident discrimination because they could not get involved in politics through voting or jury duty. Furthermore, Charles Mackay expressed that “...he shall not be free…to share with us the deliberations of the jury box-to represent us in the legislature…” (Doc B). African-Americans that were free still had limited participation in government such as they could not serve on a jury. This idea corroborates with the previous example in Doc A for even if a black man were on trial a white jury would decide his fate. This lack of …show more content…
For instance in Life and Liberty in America,“...he shall not be free to dine and drink at our board...to mingle with us in the concert-room, the lecture-room, the theater or the church or to marry with our daughters” (Doc B). Even free black Americans in the North were not allowed to associate with whites, because they were considered their superiors. If they cannot interact with them in daily locations it would cause society to be divided and neighbors to become complete strangers. Also, if they were not to marry with a white woman then the white and blacks will permanently be separated by blood. The free blacks in the North truly had no rights because these laws restricted their rights even though they have already gained their freedom. If they were banned from interacting with certain people then they are like a puppet being controlled by the white society. The idea of them not being able to mingle in church relates to the note in the Library of Congress, “The church was a place to become involved in community politics, to fight for social causes like voting rights… offered a literary club, ran a sunday school, published a newspaper… (Doc D). As listed, the church took on these many responsibilities because it was a free place to attend where families could not receive these activities elsewhere. Even though the church benefited families, the activities that were
For example, even free African-Americans living in the North were granted …show more content…
This proves that free blacks were limited to what they could do because many could not have their own say in government. Some states even had restricted requirements to be capable of voting. For example they must have had at least a $250 property requirement which was very uncommon. These statistics shown in the table are relevant because it concludes that the government made bias decisions since they did not represent the entire population. This also continued to segregate the free blacks because the white families believed they were not capable of making decisions for society. Even blacks living in the North suffered evident discrimination because they could not get involved in politics through voting or jury duty. Furthermore, Charles Mackay expressed that “...he shall not be free…to share with us the deliberations of the jury box-to represent us in the legislature…” (Doc B). African-Americans that were free still had limited participation in government such as they could not serve on a jury. This idea corroborates with the previous example in Doc A for even if a black man were on trial a white jury would decide his fate. This lack of …show more content…
For instance in Life and Liberty in America,“...he shall not be free to dine and drink at our board...to mingle with us in the concert-room, the lecture-room, the theater or the church or to marry with our daughters” (Doc B). Even free black Americans in the North were not allowed to associate with whites, because they were considered their superiors. If they cannot interact with them in daily locations it would cause society to be divided and neighbors to become complete strangers. Also, if they were not to marry with a white woman then the white and blacks will permanently be separated by blood. The free blacks in the North truly had no rights because these laws restricted their rights even though they have already gained their freedom. If they were banned from interacting with certain people then they are like a puppet being controlled by the white society. The idea of them not being able to mingle in church relates to the note in the Library of Congress, “The church was a place to become involved in community politics, to fight for social causes like voting rights… offered a literary club, ran a sunday school, published a newspaper… (Doc D). As listed, the church took on these many responsibilities because it was a free place to attend where families could not receive these activities elsewhere. Even though the church benefited families, the activities that were