A reader states the members of the First Colony were not indentured, and asks whether the members of the Second Colony were indentured. Before discussing the first point, I will take up the case of the Second Colony members.
One must remember that Spotswood could say two opposite things at different times. The only rule is that what he said fulfilled the need of the moment. As needs changed, what he said changed. I will show this in some detail with the Second Colony members, whom he said were free and not servants (i.e., not indentured). Later, his actions show that he thought of them as indentured.
In his letter to Col. Harrison in 1724, Spotswood wrote, ". . we settled them upon our tract as freemen (not servants) in 20 odd tenements. . ." He added that not a penny's worth of rent had been received from them. His description, in itself, casts some doubt upon the classification. One did not charge rent to indentured servants, but a freeman would be expected to pay rent. Later, he sued the Germans, seemingly to recover the cost of transportation.
An indentured servant did not pay for his transportation. He worked for a fixed number of years for the owner of the indenture contract. His labor during this period repaid the owner. The owner of the contract also got the headrights. This situation was used a lot in Virginia. A free man might assign a contract of debt agreeing to repay the cost of transportation. He would not be obligated to stay for any term. And he would in theory be the owner of the headrights. (This was not used much.)
Spotswood seemed to have set up a new classification. The terms were fixed service for a period of years by the other parties, with the other parties paying for the cost of transportation. Thus, Spotswood was trying to get both the fixed term of service, and a reimbursement for the cost of transportation. And he got the headrights.
Thus, the Second Colony members were obligated for a fixed term (meaning they were servants); they apparently were to repay the cost of transportation (according to Spotswood, which would seem to say they were free); and they were to surrender their headrights (saying they were servants). In fact, Spotswood did use their headrights to help pay for some of his land acquisitions. From this view, and from the fixed term of service, they were indentured servants. This stands in stark contrast to what he wrote to Col. Harrison. All unbiased observers believe the Second Colony members should be classified as indentured servants.
In short, one has to be careful about what Spotswood said. He sometimes "bent the truth".
(19 Jul 00)
We gratefully acknowledge the work of John Blankenbaker who published over 2,500 Germanna History Notes via the Germanna-L@rootsweb.com email list from 1997 to 2008. We are equally thankful to George Durman (Sgt. George) for hosting the list and republishing the notes via rootsweb.com.