They Were Her Property: White Women as Slave Owners in the American South

Chapter 7 delves into the beginning days of the Civil War and the impact of this tumultuous time on white slave-owning women. Jones-Rogers begins this chapter with the testimony of one white slave-owning woman’s cruelty as she describes Union forces discovering a tortured young, enslaved woman trapped in an enclosed space who was “almost insensible from emaciation, and immersion in the foul air of her dungeon” (151). Suspected of Union sympathies, the woman was locked away by her mistress who aimed to keep her hidden until the Confederates could take back the city. Through this example, Jones-Rogers illustrates the determination of white women during the changing times before and during the Civil War to hold on to their property and identity as slave owners.

Even as the U.S. Civil War approached, slave-owning women did not deter from their business of buying, selling, and hiring enslaved people. Jones-Rogers provides an overview of the historical events of this time period, including President Abraham Lincoln’s 1861 proclamation for Union troops to suppress the rebellion of Southern Confederate states. Many enslaved people took this opportunity to rebel against slave-owners by cautiously seeking the aid of Union officers (152). Their caution was not unwarranted, as “Union soldiers and officers stole from enslaved people, raped and brutalized them, sold them and pocketed the profits, and kept enslaved people for themselves” (153). Enslaved people were also not guaranteed freedom by reaching out to Union forces, as President Lincoln sought to appease rebellious slave owners by initially promising their enslaved people would be given back to them. Jones-Rogers documents the military policies and acts of legislation that initially began as attempts merely to quell the rebellion of Southern states. These policies and acts included the definition of enslaved people “as contraband liable to federal seizure and use,” restrictions on the return of slaves to slaveholders in general, and the prohibition of slavery in certain territories (154). Gradually, these policies and acts slowly eroded slavery as an institution in the South.

By 1862, it became clear that the United States was moving towards the abolition of slavery; to incentivize rebellious states to rejoin the Union, Lincoln promised to compensate slaveholders in states that abolished slavery. Jones-Rogers investigates diary passages and personal correspondence revealing that slave-owning women viewed the looming eradication of slavery as a threat to their independence, personal wealth, and identity.

These women took on this fight for what they saw as their survival, devising tactics to protect their investments in slavery. These strategies included freeing their slaves and hiring them as laborers, trapping their enslaved people through violence and appealing to government and Union officials. Another method employed by slave-owning women was to flee from Union troops and move themselves and the enslaved people they owned in a process known as “refugeeing.”

Throughout this time, more enslaved people than female owners continued to disappear, willingly fleeing with Union troops in pursuit of freedom. With many of their male relatives away at war, slave-owning communities came together to help slave-owning women reclaim human property. Jones-Rogers presents examples of white women calling upon both Union and Confederate forces to offer them protection. Jones-Rogers claims that these women did not fear that soldiers would harm them physically. Rather, these women were concerned that the men would infringe on their property rights to possess slaves, possibly convincing enslaved people to run away with them.

As more and more states and territories began to abolish slavery, slave-owning women increasingly submitted claims for financial compensation for their losses. In Washington, D.C., women composed 40 percent of all claimants seeking compensation. Jones-Rogers returns to her examination of slave-owning women who chose to refugee. Jones-Rogers claims that the act of refugeeing was often traumatic for enslaved people, as it perpetuated the separation of enslaved families. Despite refugeeing being risky for slave owners and enslaved people alike, many slave-owning women chose to do it anyway because “moving their slaves beyond military and government reach was more important than the possible risks to their physical safety” (172). Other slave-owning women chose to hide their slaves. They especially attempted to maintain their ownership of enslaved children by refusing to reunite them with their parents who previously fled. These slave-owning women were motivated by economic interests, as they saw these enslaved children as a promise of continued economic prosperity.

Slave-owning women continued to sell and trade enslaved people throughout the Civil War. Increasingly desperate, these women sold enslaved people to any buyers who would have them, often exchanged them for supplies and goods. These sales resulted in the destruction of enslaved families, separating African American men, women, and children forever. The lives of slave-owning women also changed irrevocably, in both material and social respects.