In 1729 the legislature noted that slaves had no belief in heaven or hell and even the death
penalty was not "sufficient to deter a people from commnitting the greatest Cruelties, who only
consider the Rigor and Severity of Punishment." Consequently, in "An Act for the more effectual
Punishing of Negroes, and other Slaves," the judge was authorized in cases of petit-treason (i.e.
murder of a master), murder or wilful burning of a dwelling house by a negro or other slave to
have the "right hand cut off, to be hanged in the usual Manner, the Head severed from the Body,
the Body divided into Four Quarters, and Head and Quarters set up in the most publick Places of
the County where such Fact was committed."178

In 1717, the law prohibited the introduction of testimony in any matter "wherein any
Christian, white person is concerned" of any "Negro or Mullatto Slave, Free Negro or Mullatto
born of a white Woman, during his time of servitude by Law" or any Indian. Their testimony was
permitted "where other sufficient Evidence is wanting" in cases not involving whites, provided
the testimony did not result in depriving defendants of life or limb.179    The Act for the more
effectual Punishing of Negroes and other Slaves was amended in 1737 to provide that
corroborated slave testimony could be used to convict a slave of a capital crime. Still suspicious
of such testimony, the legislature went on to provide that a slave who gave false testimony
against another slave in such a case would have his ear cropped and be whipped.180

The 1737 Act also changed the law to provide that the government would pay the owner
full value for an executed slave.181   After a Virginia owner attempted to collect for the death of
his slave in jail awaiting execution, the General Assembly amended the law in 1747 to bar
payment unless the slave was an inhabitant of the Province when the criminal act was
committed.182

The 1751 Act for more effectual punishment included conspiracy or advising capital
crimes as capital crimes.183     Charles Pratt, later Lord Camden, when asked for advice on
whether to allow the law, noted that "With us no Attempt or Conspiracy is felonious except only
in the case of imagining the Kings death & even that must be proved by some overt act."184
Nevertheless, Pratt advised the regents of the Lord Proprietor to approve the measure because in
the government of slaves the danger might be so great that the local legislature should decide.
Pratt did suggest, however, that the indemnification for killing a slave who resisted arrest should
be clarified to note that the individual who did so was still subject to trial to determine whether
the killing was indeed of a slave who resisted. The legislature did so in 1753.185

4.         Laws on Master-Slave Relationship

Control of behavior of a less threatening nature was left to the master. Some limits did
exist on the master's treatment of the servant or slave. Servants were protected by a statute that
fined masters for failing to provide them sufficient food, lodging or clothes, for unreasonably
burdening them with labor beyond their strength, preventing necessary sleep, excessively beating
them or abusing them or giving more than ten lashes for any one offense. On a third violation of
this law, the servant was freed.186   The 1692 statute, adopted in response to Tom Courtney's
mistreatment of a female mulatto servant, expressly included slaves and permitted manumission

31