Slaves could be counted on to be more loyal to their masters, and slaves are property and can be bought and sold. Indentured servants are contractually obligated to work for their employer for a fixed amount of time after which they can leave.
slaves would provide more years of labor
They used indentured servants.
No. Indentured workers were very early in colonial history and slaves replaced them as workers.
When the colonies required indentured servants or slaves it was to do the work. The first slave arrived in Jamestown in 1609 and after tobacco got a start in the colony workers were needed. Indentured servants didn't work out as well, so more slaves were brought in than indentured servants.
New York had indentured servants and slaves.
Slaves were owned as property, but indentured servants were white people who signed a 7 year contract for transportation to the colonies. They could also blend in with the population while anyone who was black was a slave.
Slaves could be counted on to be more loyal to their masters, and slaves are property and can be bought and sold. Indentured servants are contractually obligated to work for their employer for a fixed amount of time after which they can leave.
Slaves could be counted on to be more loyal to their masters, and slaves are property and can be bought and sold. Indentured servants are contractually obligated to work for their employer for a fixed amount of time after which they can leave.
Landowners might prefer slaves over indentured servants because slaves are considered property and can be owned for life, providing a more stable and permanent labor force. Slaves also have fewer legal protections and rights than indentured servants, giving landowners more control over their work and minimizing the risk of servants completing their terms and leaving. Additionally, the transatlantic slave trade made slaves more readily available and often cheaper to acquire than indentured servants.
They used indentured servants.
New England had indentured servants
Plantation owners preferred slaves over indentured servants because slaves were seen as a long-term and inheritable source of labor, providing more stability and control over their workforce. Additionally, slaves did not have the legal protections and rights that indentured servants possessed, making them easier to exploit and control. Finally, the racial hierarchy and beliefs of the time perpetuated the notion that Africans and their descendants were inferior and thus suitable for enslavement.
No. Indentured workers were very early in colonial history and slaves replaced them as workers.
There were a significant number of indentured servants in the colony of New York. Slavery also existed in the colony, but it was not as prevalent as in some other southern colonies. However, over time, the number of slaves in New York grew due to various factors like the growth of the economy and labor demands.
When the colonies required indentured servants or slaves it was to do the work. The first slave arrived in Jamestown in 1609 and after tobacco got a start in the colony workers were needed. Indentured servants didn't work out as well, so more slaves were brought in than indentured servants.
Slaves are owned by other people. Indentured servants signed a 7 year contract and were free people.
New York had indentured servants and slaves.
Slaves