How often were slaves whipped?

Sadly, Whippings were not uncommon for slaves. Masters saw it as a form of punishment, and thought it would improve their slaves work. Some were whipped more than others but the punishment was more focused on the severity of the beating than the frequency. Slaves were not only whipped but had other punishments, such as being locked in a plantation jail, being mauled by dogs, and being humiliated. From 1840-1841 for a 23 month long period, Bennet H. Barrow kept a diary of how he punished his slaves. Through out this course Barrow had given 160 whippings and 60 of his 77 slaves were whipped at least one time. Barrow also gave reasons for whipping his slaves and eighty percent of the reasoning was for poor work. According to his diary, whippings did not change the behavior of slaves, an yet they endured the pain of whippings. It is unknown whether all slave owners whipped their slaves this often, though Barrow does say that his neighbor was the most cruel man for castrating three of his slaves. Though we do not know exactly how often the majority of slaves were whipped, Barrows diary gives us a look into what it was probably like for most slaves. A troubled, painful life that was not their own.

Question 1:

If whipping did not improve the work of slaves, why do you think slave owners still felt it necessary to whip the slaves?

Question 2: 

Do you think that if slaves did begin to improve their work, that they would be punished less?

The Declaration of Sentiments, Seneca Falls Convention, 1848

1.What is the author arguing?

 In this document the author is arguing that all women should have the same rights and privileges as men. It goes over basic laws and states that women, in the eye of the law, is civilly dead. So why then do women need to pay taxes, or follow the laws that she had no say in? The point is that men and women were created equally. If woman is equal to man, then they should be able to have the same rights as men, seeing as they are citizens of the United States.

2. How does the author appear to logos, pathos, and ethos with their argument?

In this document the author used lots of reasoning which appears to logos. She stated many facts about how man was not being fair to women and that we are also citizens of the united states so we should have a right to vote and put our word into what laws we should or shouldn't have. Second, the author appears to pathos by saying things like, "He has made her, morally,and irresponsible being.." and "He has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her own confidence in her powers, to lessen her self respect,and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life." Lastly, the author states that women have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States. What she is saying is nothing but common sense and the right for women to be treated as normal human beings.

3. What is the historical significance/ relevance of this document?

 The Seneca Falls Convention was held on July 19-20 1848. Here women had the right to demand there equality in legal and social terms. If these women and men didn't hold these conventions, or write this document the United States would not have been as impacted with the idea of women's rights and privileges. This document helped women's rights become what they are today. Without it, who knows how much longer it might have taken for women to be taken seriously,instead of for granted.

4. Do you find the author's argument convincing? Why or why not?

I definitely found this argument convincing. When there is a document based on treating a person a better way, or giving them the rights and privileges they deserve, how can you not agree? I guess i might be a little biased seeing as I am a woman. The author wasn't saying that men we bad and everything is corrupt without a women's input, but saying that we as humans deserve to have a say in what is happening. To me, it all seems like common sense. So yes. I find this argument convincing and absolutely agree with it.

Going Ahead or Gone to Smash: An Entrepreneur Struggles in the 1830's

The life of an entrepreneur in the 1830's was not an easy one, but because of the economic boom they were given a new hope. American entrepreneurs were considered "the most carless, reckless, headlong people on the face of the earth." An example of an American entrepreneur is Benjamin Rathbun. Rathbun was was Buffalos biggest self-made man, he had everything from real estate, building construction, banks, stores, transportation and not to mention his big success the Eagle Hotel. This man had it all until the sudden collapse in 1836. Rathbun was convicted of fraud when his dozen endorsments revealed to be forgeries. After Rathbuns fraud, Buffalo went downhill 8 months before the panic of 1837, since so many jobs relied on Rathbun and The Eagle Hotel. Historians calculated that one-fifth of all businessmen fizzled. Failures in the five years following the panic of 1837 led to two innovations in busness law and loan practices. First, government passed the U.S. Bankruptcy Act of 1841, a controversial law that allowed failed debtors to rid there debts legally. Second, the credit rating industry was born in 1841, where lenders could look into large books that contained confidential information that assessed the credit worthiness of local business men. If this were so in 1836, Rathbuns fraud may have been unmasked earlier. In 1843 Rathbun left prison and joined his wife. He then moved to New York City where he ran a series of hotels until the day of his death.

Question 1:

Rathbuns failure affected Buffalo 8 months before the Panic of 1837. If the town had been hit at the time of the Panic of 1837, do you think that buffalo would have been able to get back on its feet?

Question 2:

Do you think that Buffalo would have been better off withouth Rathbun's Eagle Hotel, considering more than a third of men were on his payroll?

Declaration of Sentiments, American Anti-Slavery Society, 1833

1. What is the author arguing?

In this document, written by William Lloyd Garrison, the author is arguing that it is a crime to enslave African Americans. Not only is it a crime but also it is morally wrong. He writes that all persons of all color have the right to possess the same privileges and to exercise the same prerogatives. He argues that it does not matter what our skin complexion is, we were all made by god and we should all have the same rights and equal chance at making a living.

2. How does the author appear to logos, pathos, and ethos with their argument?

The Author appeals to logos by saying, “it is a piracy to buy or steal a native African, and subject him to servitude. Surely the sin is as great to enslave an American as an African.” By using simple reasoning he can relate to more people that may not agree with him right away. He said that babies were ripped out of their mothers arms, wives from their husbands, and they suffered from hunger, only because they had a dark skin complexion, it made me angry just thinking about it. This appeals to Pathos. Finally, he appeals to ethos by the respect he had gained. Across the nation his newspaper, The Liberator, had won him respect and praise.  He also showed that he was a man who cared. He wasn’t doing this for his own praise but to help slaves become free men and women.

3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

In 1833, the American Anti-Slavery Society was formed. The declaration of Sentiments was written to argue against slavery in moral, legal, and biblical terms. William Lloyd Garrison’s newspaper, The Liberator, had won praise and it lead to this document. Abolitionists alongside Garrison also worked hard to free the slaves and did whatever they could to get their word out there. They knew it wasn’t going to be easy but because of men with courage and good moral values, we live in a nation where everybody is equal.

4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

Yes, of course. It is awesome to see that people like William Lloyd Garrison were out there trying to make a difference in society. It takes a lot of courage to go out and publish something like this and he did an amazing job. Not everyone would be able to put their word out there and risk their reputation to stand up for something they believe in. No one should be treated with such disrespect or be abused just because they have a different skin complexion. It is morally and ethically wrong and he did a great job of writing that out and revealing it to everyone.