Searching for the Reality of Indentured Servitude

Searching For The Reality of Indentured Servitude

By: Sarah Whitaker

In today’s world, when we say indentured servant or slaves, we automatically think of the words: horrible; wrong; or unfair! Well, to many that is what would come to our mind. However for Marcus Jernegan author of The Economic and Social Influence of The Indentured Servant, he thought differently. In this paper I am going to show you two different views of indentured servitude. One might surprise you, and the other you may agree with. First is a man named Marcus Jernegan, who says that it was overall beneficial and helped our economy. The other view is of Robert Divine, author of America Past and Present, who says it was not beneficial. Then I will explore three different sources who will either agree with Jernegan or Divine. These three interpretations will lead to the most reasonable interpretation of Indentured Servitude as we will know it.

In Marcus Jernegan’s article, The Economic and Social Influence of the Indentured Servant, he states that “On the whole, the effects of the institution were beneficial” (Jernegan, 59). He viewed Indentured Servitude as a method that grew the economy of the colonies .The population was growing and laborers were in desperate need. Also the servants in a way protected the growing colonies from resentful Indians, and the French and Spanish. During the 1600’s there was such scarcity of labor, and the growing colonies could not pay wages to servant to crop their fields. Indentures Servitude

was the key! Jernegan writes, ”Socially, the white servant was an important factor in

helping to build up a landed aristocracy in the south, because he made possible the cultivation of extensive areas of land”(Jernegan, 71).

Although Jernegan agrees that the treatment of the Indenture Servants was harsh, he still believes that the outcome was beneficial for the economy. We can see from reading his article that even after the servants were freed after five to seven years, they were put on the backlands to protect the frontier. They didn’t have much choice as to where they could settle and live after they were freed. Most were dying of disease or running away from their masters. Some were even killed.

Jernegan points out four main reasons why the institution was beneficial. Those reasons are the following: Britain got rid of the people they didn’t want; Germans were given the once in a life time opportunity to have a better living condition; the colonies grew because they were supplied with laborers for the rougher work; and servant artisans supplied needs that were impossible to meet any other way.

Robert Divine, author of America Past and Present says that Indentured Servitude was not beneficial. He thinks that it was cruel and unfair. However in some ways profitable. He says that to the masters, female servants were a great bargain They cleaned, washed, and minded the children. According to Divine a servant cost three times as less than a slave. Servants were governed more by their masters than the law. “Slavery became the defining characteristic of the southern colonies during the eighteenth century, shaping the regions economy, society, and politics” (Roark 113). Divine feels that it was in a way not worth the money of the Indentured Servants because slavery did eventually take over. The Indentured Servants were not needed like the slaves were. Slaves were kept for life, but the servants were only for five to seven years.

According to Abbot Emerson Smith in his book Colonists In Bondage, he did not think that Indentured Servitude was profitable in the long run. He agreed that it was a good way to crop your fields and have others of less wealth do your dirty work. However there were several things that put a hold on the colonies. Those reasons are inferred as the following: it negatively effected the economy; diminished the wealth of the kingdom; put poverty on the colonies from years of transition; and it depopulated and corrupted the

country with diseases. Smith states that “Indentured servitude was about as close to slavery as you could get”(Smith 4). People of every shape and kind were lied to, seduced and kidnapped, taken to the plantation to be bought as servants. It was all very cruel

Smith agrees that it was profitable for the English merchants to load up hundreds of servants onto the ship. In a way the profit they would make them on the plantation would outweigh the cost them out to the colonies. Smith can also agree with the fact that it was a way of advertising in America. Which would in turn keep