Elizabeth Walkup
MSA SC 5496-51590
Petitioned for Freedom, Queen Anne's County, 1821
Biography:
During the early 19th century Elizabeth Walkup was enslaved by Henry R. Pratt, a future state delegate of Queen Anne's County. In 1821 she decided to challenge the legality of her bondage by filing a petition for freedom with the local court system. Walkup hoped to prove that she was descended from a white woman, whose free status would establish that her progeny should also be free. A state law passed in 1681 stipulated that children born of "ffreeborne Englishe or white woman" and an African slave would also be manumitted from their service.1
This tactic had been used with varying effect by the enslaved Butlers of St. Mary's County, who claimed descent from Irish Nell Butler, a white indentured servant.2 Elizabeth and Alexander Walkup were both hoping to prove that their 18th ancestor, "Violet," was a free woman without African blood. Their cases were therefore dependent upon the recollections of older, white members of the community who had been familiar with the servant woman. A 1717 state law prohibited any free or enslaved negro, mulatto, or Indian from testifying in a case "wherein any Christian White Person is concerned."3 The Queen Anne's County Court brought forth numerous witnesses to recount their impressions of Violett. Much of the original material was preserved in the personal dockets of Judge Ezekiel F. Chambers, who covered the local circuit. The first witness, whose identity is unclear from the record, recalled his first conversation with the woman in 1766. He described her as having "an irish and indian look - long coarse black hair." He would further clarify that Violett was enslaved by Christopher Ruth, a resident of the county who died in 1775 or 1776.4
Ruth's probate records confirm some of these details. His 1775 inventory did include a 53 year old, mulatto woman named Violett, who was valued at 16 pounds.5 Ruth's will from the same year stipulated that, after several sums of money were distributed to other heirs, the remaining real and personal estate would be passed to Henry Pratt, his cousin and executor.6 This property would have included all of his human chattel, who were not specifically mentioned elsewhere in the will. The Census reveals that Henry R. Pratt's slave holdings had gradually increased during the intermediate years. He went from owning 36 African-American laborers in 1790, to 62 in 1810, the last year that he was recorded in Queen Anne's County.7 The will and inventory seem to have been introduced as evidence in the trial, by Mr. Chilton, possibly an attorney for either side. However, since Violett was characterized there as a mulatto, the Walkups would not have benefitted from their presentation.8
The rest of the testimony, much of which is difficult to decipher, contains several other claims about her racial identity. Fanny Ball attested that Violett was "a yellowish woman with dark hair," while "D. Robinson's family were always reported ... to be all children of Violett." However, Boon Chance had been told that the woman "was as white as she or he was." Yet another witness, Arthur Holt, claimed he was told that Violett was an Indian. All the while, various others were asked to affirm the character of the previously quoted witnesses, several of whom were elderly by that time.9
Court officials specifically instructed the 12 man jury "that if they
beleive Violett to have been a mulatto, the presumption growing out of
the circumstance of her being a woman of colour is that she was a
slave."10 This determination seems to have derived from the legal stipulations of a 1715 state law,
which modified the terms of the 1681 precedent with regard to
race-based servitude. Interestingly, neither of these laws regulating
interracial affairs explicity accounted for American Indian servants,
who made up a nearly insignificant fraction of the workforce by the 19th century.11
The jury decided that the diverse opinions presented by the witnesses
was sufficient to conclude that Violett had been a woman of colour,
enslaved by Christopher Ruth and others. Therefore, Elizabeth Walkup's
petition was rejected and she would have remained a slave.12
There is no further record of Elizabeth's presence in Queen Anne's or
the adjacent counties. Henry Pratt is also absent from the Federal
Census and most local government records after 1822, when he was a
state delegate from the county. Pratt had begun selling off many of his
slaves and other property during the years surrounding the trial, which
may have been the reason Walkup filed the petition. She may have been
sold or eventually freed, though no evidence has been found of either
outcome.
|
Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!
|