The History of Mary Prince: A West Indian Slave

The History of Mary Prince is the narrative of an enslaved woman, Mary Prince, who shares the horrors of slavery and exposes the true capacity of enslavers' cruelty through her experiences on her journey to freedom from Bermuda to England. Her narrative was edited and published in 1831 by Thomas Pringle through F. Westley and A. H. Davis publications in London. Though considered to be autobiographical, the extent of Pringle's role in the transcription and publication of Prince's history are highly controversial; his contributions later revised in a 1997 adaptation by Moira Ferguson.

In the original publication, though Pringle writes of Prince's role, "The narrative was taken down from Mary's own lips...written out fully...pruned into its present shape; retaining, as far as was practicable, Mary's exact expressions and peculiar phraseology," (Pringle qtd. Prince) her narrative is repeatedly compressed by footnotes and "sandwiched between white and black male-authored texts, as if a black woman's story is inadequate on its own and needs the authority of a white man...to make it complete" (Baumgartner 9). Pringle's 'supplement' was nearly as long as her narrative, shorter by just eight pages. Despite working to expose the injustices faced by Prince and defending her against critics, Pringle's approach and supplemental assertions provide that Mary is simply a tool to be used for the 'greater good,' abolition; he writes, "But after all Mary's character, important though its exculpation be to her, it is not really the point of chief practical interest in this case (Pringle qtd. Prince 10). Likewise, the implications behind Pringle's inclusion of a defamatory letter from Mary's previous enslaver, Mr. Wood, one that Pringle admits 'would probably never appeared' if not for his use of it, must be interrogated. His attention to Mr. Wood, who slandered Prince heavily and was the source of much difficulty in the narrative's publishing, seems to be of as much importance to him in this publication as Prince herself, "Prince's goals appear lost, or at least eclipsed, in this struggle between Pringle and Wood" (Baumgartner 11).

In addition to the personal liberties taken by Pringle in the relaying of Prince's history, the need for excessive supports to validate her credibility in telling her story and the claims in Wood's included letter of her untrustworthy promiscuity contribute to a climate of distrust and misuse of Black women, one where "it is not surprising that the former slave's body became the battleground for the ensuing controversy" (Baumgartner 11). This feeds directly into mainstream narratives surrounding the character of Black women; where "the pro-slavery lobby is content to portray Prince as an immoral, untrustworthy sexual monster," despite no evidence of validity in the claims as well as character witness testimonies refuting it, such as that included in the novel written by an old colleague of Mr. Wood, Mr. Phillips (Baumgartner 12). Mr. Wood, like many in the pro-slavery lobby, stand to gain from discrediting Prince and others like her--they work to ensure that Black women's testimonies of the abuse suffered at their hands will be invalidated and dismissed.

In analyzation of the contemporary implications presented by the narrative's conception, publication, and reception, the liberties normalized to be taken in the right to Black women's stories and lives; the insinuated necessity of validation or approval from a White man to validate Black women's credibility; the devaluing use of Black women as a 'tool' to serve personal agendas; the normalization of placing Black women's bodies and credibility up for display and debate; and the dehumanizing perception of Black women as expendable and acceptable sacrifices to be made are important to consider. Through the lens of this historical context, the ways these ideas have evolved in the systemic racism that informs medical malpractice on African American mothers today can be identified.

Excerpts: A Closer Look at Prince

Passages of Prince's narrative present that this disbelief in Black women as a credible source, even in the telling of their own life story, extends to disbelief of their ability to feel emotional or physical pain. Prince relays, "We...worked through the heat of the day; the sun flaming upon our heads like fire, and raising salt blisters...Our feet and legs, from standing in the salt water...soon became full of dreadful boils...in some cases to the very bone" (Prince 10). Her diction leaves no room for oversight of the severity of their pain, with graphic descriptions such as 'flaming upon our head like fire...dreadful boils...in some cases to the very bone.' Calling attention to the inhumane treatment she was forced to endure, she forces the audience to recognize they are not machines for production; they are human, they feel, they suffer, and they are in danger. Notably, "the external surroundings are given more agency than her body," reflecting the loss of autonomy she was also forced to endure (Baumgartner 5). This describes the climate from which evolved the widespread medical malpractice performed on African American mothers today; they are disbelieved in their personal testimonies, disbelieved in their capacity for pain, and refused the autonomy provided much more readily to their White counterparts.

In one of the many cases where Prince provides that her brutal experience is far from singular, she describes an instance exemplifying the complete disregard in the suffering and lives of Black mothers and their babies through Hetty's story, an enslaved pregnant woman punished for a cow's escape. Prince recalls, "My master flew into a terrible passion...flogged her as hard as he could lick...till she was all over streaming with blood. He rested, and then beat her again and again...poor Hetty was brought to bed before her time, and was delivered after severe labour of a dead child...her former strength never returned to her...she died" (Prince 7). Her description of Hetty's dire condition, 'streaming with blood,' followed by her enslaver's subsequent rest and continuation emphasize the extreme damage inflicted and the relentless power exerted in these deadly blows. Hetty's story portrays not only the lack of value placed in the lives of Black mothers and babies, but the active violence readily and exhaustively enacted against them; a scene that sets the stage for the evolution of injustice presented in the medical malpractice in the treatment of African American mothers today.

Works Cited

Baumgartner, Barbara. "The Body as Evidence: Resistance, Collaboration, and Appropriation in 'The History of Mary Prince.'" Callaloo, vol. 24, no. 1, 2001, pp. 253-75. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3300499. Accessed 23 Apr. 2024.

Prince, Mary. The History of Mary Prince, a West Indian Slave. 1831. Proquest, http://ulib.iupui.edu/cgi-bin/proxy.pl?url=http://search.proquest.com/bo....

The Runaway Slave at Pilgrim's Point

Elizabeth Barrett Browning was an abolitionist poet who wrote The Runaway Slave at Pilgrim’s Point. The poem was released in 1848 and tells the story of a “runaway slave” recalling her experiences as a slave leading up to her escape. Browning wished to highlight the true horrors enslaved men and women faced in order to educate her readers on the necessity of abolition. 

England had passed the Slavery Abolition Act in 1834 outlawing the owning, buying, and selling of humans in every English colony across the globe. I believe the United States famously became independent around 1776 meaning the act did not pass and slavery would remain perfectly legal until the passing of the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. Of course, slavery wouldn’t truly end until June 19, 1865: the last time the Emancipation Proclamation was enforced in order to free the last remaining slaves. Because slavery remained in practice, English abolitionists turned their attention towards the United States and Central America. Browning herself chose to set the story in an American setting in order to promote abolition across the Atlantic. 

Browning’s choice to write about a black woman was inspired by the specific horrors they faced under slavery. The poem specifically highlights the issue of sexual assault committed by slave owners and their officers. In the poem, the woman recalls when slavers found out she had been close with an enslaved man and chose to murder the man in front of her. The slavers sexually assaulted the woman who would then have a child as a result. In a heart wrenching stanza, the woman describes her decision to smother her child in the dead of night. Browning provided two possible motivations for the mother’s decision within the poem. The mother describes how her child outwardly appears as a white baby. It is implied that the mother chose to smother her baby in part because of his white skin reminding her of the slavers who have imprisoned her. However, one could read the mother’s actions as protection. She knows her baby looks white yet because of his heritage, will be enslaved. The mother is partly motivated by her desire to protect her baby from the horrors he is destined to experience. It’s really hard to read, but it’s important that Browning chose not to stop just short of the experience of enslaved women. Infanticide was prevelent among enslaved women.

Much like the runaway slave, Henrietta Lacks’ autonomy was stripped from her by white men in power. Her consent was ignored for the benefit of a white man. Of course, the slave owners raped the runaway slave and left her to her own devices, while Henrietta was dying of cancer, the doctors were more concerned with the fame their research would grant them to worry about her treatment. Both women had their reproductive health compromised for the benefit of the white men in power. Nobody would remember Henrietta or her experience, just like the millions of enslaved women who never received justice for their assault. 

Sterilization Act: The Relf Sisters

The forced sterilization of the Relf girls, Mary Alice, and Minnie Lee, serves as an example of medical abuse and malpractice in black women. On July 1, 1973, the two girls were forced out of their home by nurses and coerced into signing documents that changed their lives forever. Sterilization laws were implemented to “keep welfare low, reduce poverty, and improve the gene pool by preventing the ‘mentally deficit’ from reproducing” (Villarosa). Unfortunately, the Relf girls happened to fit all three criteria according to the clinic, which was the leading factor in their rights to bear children being stripped away from them. The Relf vs. Weinberger case helped uncover more than 100,000 minority (mostly black, Latina, and Indigenous women) sterilizations throughout the decades.

The two teenage girls at the time were receiving birth control shots from a clinic named ‘Montgomery Family Planning Clinic’ The nurses had come to the house claiming they wanted to give the girls more shots. Still, instead, they were, “carted into an operating room, where surgeons irrevocably robbed them of their right to bear children” (Davis 1). Coming from an impoverished background, The Relf’s mother had unknowingly consented to sign documentation, because of their inability to read and write, that would later be used to prove that they did agree to the procedure. Racism and medical ethics are being questioned due to mistreatment and forced complacency in a supposed safe environment.

The argument that the sterilization had nothing to do with the girl’s race is that the nurses who brought them into the clinic were also assumingly black: “Clinic employees noted, however, that the nurses who took the girls from their home were also black” ( Ayres 10).  The reason for their sterilization was not because of their race, but rather that they might have children with venereal disease. On the contrary, statistics demonstrate that approximately 65% of women being sterilized in North Carolina during this time were black and the other 35% were white (Davis). Forced sterilizations had a racist undertone, as seen in the case of Fannie Lou Hammer who had her hysterectomy removed unknowingly in 1961 during an operation to remove a tumor. The federal government had allowed the mistreatment of minority groups to go on for far too long.

The biological parents of the Relf girls were both unable to provide proper care and finances for the girls involved. The father had a disability, and the mother was illiterate. That being the case, they were assigned to a social worker who had been responsible for providing the girls with care. One of the girls, Mary Alice, was declared “mentally incompetent”, by a government-funded – diagnostic facility, which inherently “flagged them”. The lawsuit was implemented by the family to prevent government officials from taking away the right to motherhood from children. The case uncovered similar practices that were covered up and financed by the U.S. government: “The Relf case led to changes in laws, regulations, and guidelines regarding forced or coerced sterilizations, the question of compensation for the victims remained” (Villarosa). The Relf family had received no compensation for the damages bestowed upon the girls. It was not until the 21^st century that states finally issued money to the survivors of forced or coerced sterilization. The Relf case is an example of the history of medical malpractice of black women and the unethical practices that were displayed throughout history. 

Work Cited: 

Davis, Angela. “The Historical Context: Racism, Birth Control and Reproductive Rights.” Race, Poverty & the Environment, vol. 4, no. 2, 1993, pp. 21–23. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41554117. Accessed 24 Apr. 2024.

B.DRUMMOND AYRES JR.Special to The New York. "Racism, Ethics and Rights at Issue in Sterilization Case: Money Suspended Nazi Usage Cited Judge Called Biased." New York Times (1923-), Jul 02, 1973, pp. 10. ProQuest, http://ulib.iupui.edu/cgi-bin/proxy.pl?url=http://search.proquest.com/hi....

Villarosa, Linda. “The Long Shadow of Eugenics in America.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 8 June 2022, www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/magazine/eugenics-movement-america.html.