City Slaves had life a bit easier because not everyone in the city owned slaves and for this reason slaveholders did not want to appear inhumane towards their human chattels in the eyes of their non-slave holding neighbors. City slaves worked and associated with freemen and therefore their ideas of slavery were much different. They were better fed, better clothed and their appearance seemed less dejected. They were even at times given a few hours to themselves for the sake of their own entertainment without the watchful eyes of their master.
Country Slaves on the other hand suffered immensely at the hands of the owner?s overseers. They were poorly fed, poorly clothed and their appearance seemed utterly dejected. The idea of entertaining themselves or having the luxury of a few moments pleasure without the watchful eyes of a Master was something Country slaves never truly experienced. Christmas, the only holiday in which they were allotted some freedom was never really theirs. The masters found it best if the slaves were supplied with large quantities of alcohol with which they could be inebriated. This suited their purpose better than if the slaves remained sober. Intoxicated, people tend to do things out of the norm such as become boisterous, destructive and at times deadly to those around them. These were all attributes, which throughout the course of the year could be used against the slave. The slaves themselves used it as a means of explaining slavery. The master held it to say that when given the chance to enjoy themselves they took it out of proportion and the slaves believing this thought that it was right to have a master to prevent them from loosing themselves and doing something wrong.
One of the many things in slavery that I believe affected him most was when his first master died and he had to return to Maryland to be counted along with the other properties that were to be divided amongst the master?s two children. He stood as human chattel, in great comparison to the animals at times even lower than the animals he stood beside. His worth was calculated by his youth, his strength and what he could possibly bring money wise was he to be sold.
Through out the book Frederick Douglass describes in what many may consider to be of a graphic nature the many ways in which a slave might be punished for being disobedient to his master or his master?s overseer. One particular incidence, which stands out to me is the treatment of his cousin Henny who was born with a physical deformity. In describing this incidence, he begins by saying ? I have no extraordinary personal hard usage toward myself to complain of, but I have seen him tie up the lamed and maimed woman and whip her in a manner most brutal and shocking.?
Henny would be tied up for three, four and five hours at a time. Their master would tie her up early in the morning whip her with a cow-skin before breakfast; leave her tied up; go to his store and returning to his dinner repeat his previous displays of inhumanity. Laying on lash after lash on flesh already made raw by repeated blows. At the completion of his evil deed with ?blood-chilling blasphemy? he would quote passages from the Bible, which inevitable placed him in the right.
Through out the experiences he puts to words in this book he does his best to be truthful to the period in which he lived. His life as a slave and his eventual escape to freedom are all, interesting to say the very least. But I believe what grabs the most attention is his graphic and albeit downplayed account of the injustices and inhumanities of slavery.