The Internal Market for Enslaved Labor — Splitting Families
Jeanette E. Sherbondy • August 31, 2021
Duke felt “everyone, especially his wife and children … was rich in slaves and they were eating him into the poorhouse. He had the proof in his ledgers. Months of a year the slaves lived all but idle on the Retreat. At that time the lands were in small grains, in strawberries and tomatoes, crops that grew with little need for human assistance. The Duke hired out as many slaves as he could to Baltimore but never got the return he thought he was due; he sold a few from time to time but couldn’t keep up with the population. He knew the whole thing was over anyway … Emancipation was on the way … he recognized that these souls were about to pick up and leave anyway. … One way or another, the Duke figured, his slaves would be gone and he’d be left with nothing for his efforts. So in 1857 he made a deal with a man from Virginia, and one morning in July a hot morning in July, that man was tying up a streaked and deck-rotted schooner at the steamer dock and off-loading a tangle of chains and leg-irons.” (pp. 20-22)
He sold his excess enslaved laborers, not wanting to fight the changing times, but only to cut his losses.
“The slaves were huddled together under the hot sun and in the yellow clay dust of the soil, maybe about forty of them, old and infirm, drooling and uncomprehending, naked babies in the arms of their whimpering mothers, young husbands and fathers who had done exactly what they had been told to do all their lives, teenage boys already burnished by hard labor, and — the most prized by the man from Virginia — the teenage girls, healthy girls … they were all being sold south.”(pp. 23-24)
For the enslaved laborers who were bought, for the enslaved house workers not being sold, and for the free Blacks this cruel sale broke up families and their network of friends and neighbors of a lifetime. Kidnapping was also another frequent danger to African Americans. Lucy Maddox published the true story of two sisters from Cecil County: The Parker Sisters: A Border Kidnapping (2016). The girls were free and working in Pennsylvania, a free state, but they were ambushed and carried off to Baltimore for sale in the Deep South.
Manumission did not always mean freedom for other reasons as well. Delayed manumission was the most common practice. An enslaver got his compensation by not letting a manumitted enslaved person leave for years. Another way enslavers controlled manumitted enslaved people was to free one generation but claim as theirs the children and grandchildren. Each one had to work 25 years before gaining freedom. In Maryland the free Blacks could not claim their unborn children would be free. And the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 considered enslaved people to be forever enslaved, even if they escaped to a free state. The Quakers and the Methodists actively helped enslaved people under fierce opposition from the Episcopalians and the Jesuits.
The enslaved population on the Eastern Shore was decimated by traders who bought and sold African American children and young adults between the ages of 14 and 30 as “hands.” Thousands of enslaved people were sold south. The youth of reproducing years were skimmed off for sale. In Kent County an enslaved person had a 10% chance of being sold off in any one year and a cumulative risk of 50% over the three decades from 1820s-1850s. Many more enslaved persons were sold than those who escaped north.
As a result, Kent County-born Henry Highland Garnet gave a famous speech in 1843, “An Address to the Slaves,” urging enslaved people to get away however they could, to use violence when necessary. At that time Frederick Douglass disagreed with his call for violence, but later saw that it was useless to think a peaceful solution was possible.
Garnet cried: “Brethren, arise, arise! Strike for your lives and liberties. Now is the day and the hour. Let every slave throughout the land do this, and the days of slavery are numbered. You cannot be more oppressed than you have been — you cannot suffer greater cruelties than you have already. Rather die free-men than live to be slaves.”
In addition to the above mentioned historical novels, I have drawn on the research of Edward E. Baptist who published The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism (2014) as well as the research on the Eastern Shore by Jennifer Hull Dorsey, published as Hirelings: African American Workers and Free Labor in Early Maryland (2011). Information on Henry Highland Garnet is available in George Shivers’s article “Henry Highland Garnet: Minister, Abolitionist and Fighter for Justice” in the Key to Old Kent: A Journal of the Historical Society of Kent County, vol. 9, number 1 (2015). The text of Garnet’s speech can be found on the internet.
Jeanette E. Sherbondy is a retired anthropology professor from Washington College and has lived here since 1986. In retirement she has been active with the Kent County Historical Society and Sumner Hall, one of the organizers of Legacy Day, and helped get highway /historical markers recognizing Henry Highland Garnet. She published an article on her ethnohistorical research of the free Black village, Morgnec.
Common Sense for the Eastern Shore
Megan Outten, a lifelong Wicomico County resident and former Salisbury City Councilwoman, officially announced her candidacy recently for Wicomico County Council, District 7. At 33, Outten brings the energy of a new generation combined with a proven record of public service and results-driven leadership. “I’m running because Wicomico deserves better,” Outten said. “Too often, our communities are expected to do more with less. We’re facing underfunded schools, limited economic opportunities, and years of neglected infrastructure. I believe Wicomico deserves leadership that listens, plans ahead, and delivers real, measurable results.” A Record of Action and A Vision for the Future On Salisbury’s City Council, Outten earned a reputation for her proactive, hands-on approach — working directly with residents to close infrastructure gaps, support first responders, and ensure everyday voices were heard. Now she’s bringing that same focus to the County Council, with priorities centered on affordability, public safety, and stronger, more resilient communities. Key Priorities for District 7: Fully fund public schools so every child has the opportunity to succeed. Fix aging infrastructure and county services through proactive investment. Keep Wicomico affordable with smarter planning and pathways to homeownership. Support first responders and safer neighborhoods through better tools, training, and prevention. Expand resources for seniors, youth, and underserved communities. Outten’s platform is rooted in real data and shaped by direct community engagement. With Wicomico now the fastest-growing school system on Maryland’s Eastern Shore — and 85% of students relying on extra resources — she points to the county’s lagging investment as a key area for action. “Strong schools lead to strong jobs, thriving industries, and healthier communities,” Outten said. “Our schools and infrastructure are at a tipping point. We need leadership that stops reacting after things break — and starts investing before they do.” A Commitment to Home and Service Born and raised in Wicomico, Megan Outten sees this campaign as a continuation of her lifelong service to her community. Her vision reflects what she’s hearing from neighbors across the county: a demand for fairness, opportunity, and accountability in local government. “Wicomico is my home; it’s where I grew up, built my life, and where I want to raise my family,” Outten said. “Our county is full of potential. We just need leaders who will listen, work hard, and get things done. That’s what I’ve always done, and that’s exactly what I’ll continue to do on the County Council.” Outten will be meeting with residents across District 7 in the months ahead and unveiling more details of her platform. For more information or to get involved, contact info@meganoutten.com
Way back in 1935, the Supreme Court determined that independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) do not violate the Constitution’s separation of powers. Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935). Congress provided that the CPSC, like the NLRB and MSPB, would operate as an independent agency — a multi-member, bipartisan commission whose members serve staggered terms and could be removed only “for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office but for no other cause.” Rejecting a claim that the removal restriction interferes with the “executive power,” the Humphrey’s Court held that Congress has the authority to “forbid their [members’] removal except for cause” when creating such “quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial” bodies. As a result, these agencies have operated as independent agencies for many decades under many different presidencies. Shortly after assuming office in his second term, Donald Trump began to fire, without cause, the Democratic members of several of these agencies. The lower courts determined to reinstate the discharged members pending the ultimate outcome of the litigation, relying on Humphrey’s , resulting in yet another emergency appeal to the Supreme Court by the administration. In the first such case, a majority of the Court allowed President Trump to discharge the Democratic members of the NLRB and the MSPB while the litigation over the legality of the discharges continued. Trump v. Wilcox (May 22, 2025). The majority claimed that they do not now decide whether Humphrey’s should be overruled because “that question is better left for resolution after full briefing and argument.” However, hinting that these agency members have “considerable” executive power and suggesting that “the Government” faces greater “risk of harm” from an order allowing a removed officer to continue exercising the executive power than a wrongfully removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty,” the majority gave the President the green light to proceed. Justice Kagan, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson, dissented, asserting that Humphrey’s remains good law until overturned and forecloses both the President’s firings and the Court’s decision to award emergency relief.” Our emergency docket, while fit for some things, should not be used to “overrule or revise existing law.” Moreover, the dissenters contend that the majority’s effort to explain their decision “hardly rises to the occasion.” Maybe by saying that the Commissioners exercise “considerable” executive power, the majority is suggesting that Humphrey’s is no longer good law but if that is what the majority means, then it has foretold a “massive change” in the law and done so on the emergency docket, “with little time, scant briefing, and no argument.” And, the “greater risk of harm” in fact is that Congress provided for these discharged members to serve their full terms, protected from a President’s desire to substitute his political allies. More recently, in the latest shadow docket ruling in the administration’s favor, the same majority of the Court again permitted President Trump to fire, without cause, the Democratic members of another independent agency, this time the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Trump v. Boyle (July 23, 2025). The same three justices dissented, once more objecting to the use of the Court’s emergency docket to destroy the independence of an independent agency as established by Congress. The CPSC, like the NLRB and MSPB, was designed to operate as “a classic independent agency.” In Congress’s view, that structure would better enable the CPSC to achieve its mission — ensuring the safety of consumer products, from toys to appliances — than would a single-party agency under the full control of a single President. “By allowing the President to remove Commissioners for no reason other than their party affiliation, the majority has negated Congress’s choice of agency bipartisanship and independence.” The dissenters also assert that the majority’s sole professed basis for the more recent order in Boyle was its prior order in Wilcox . But in their opinion, Wilcox itself was minimally explained. So, the dissenters claim, the majority rejects the design of Congress for a whole class of agencies by “layering nothing on nothing.” “Next time, though, the majority will have two (if still under-reasoned) orders to cite. Truly, this is ‘turtles all the way down.’” Rapanos v. United States (2006). * ***** *In Rapanos , in a footnote to his plurality opinion, former Supreme Court Justice Scalia explained that this allusion is to a classic story told in different forms and attributed to various authors. His favorite version: An Eastern guru affirms that the earth is supported on the back of a tiger. When asked what supports the tiger, he says it stands upon an elephant; and when asked what supports the elephant, he says it is a giant turtle. When asked, finally, what supports the giant turtle, he is briefly taken aback, but quickly replies "Ah, after that it is turtles all the way down." John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
Marylanders will not forget this vote.
More than 30,000 of our neighbors in Maryland’s first congressional district will lose their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid because of provisions in the GOP’s heartless tax cut and spending bill passed last week.
Right now, Congress is working on a fast-track bill that would make historic cuts to basic needs programs in order to finance another round of tax breaks for the wealthy and big corporations.
The House Agriculture Committee recently voted, along party lines, to advance legislation that would cut as much as $300 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the nation’s most important anti-hunger program, helping more than 41 million people in the U.S. pay for food. With potential cuts this large, it helps to know who benefits from this program in Maryland, and who would lose this assistance. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities compiled data on SNAP beneficiaries by congressional district, cited below, and produced the Maryland state datasheet , shown below. In Maryland, in 2023-24, 1 in 9 people lived in a household with SNAP benefits. In Maryland’s First Congressional District, in 2023-24: Almost 34,000 households used SNAP benefits. Of those households, 43% had at least one senior (over age 60). 29% of SNAP recipients were people of color. 15% were Black, non-Hispanic, higher than 11.8% nationally. 6% were Hispanic (19.4% nationally). There were 24,700 total veterans (ages 18-64). Of those, 2,200 lived in households that used SNAP benefits (9%). The CBPP SNAP datasheet for Maryland is below. See data from all the states and download factsheets here.
