assisting them therein, upon the penalty of twenty
shillings, to be payd as a fine to the county treasury, and
to be leuyed upon theire estates for non-payment in way of
distresse by warrant from any one Assistant or Com'r. This
order to be observed as to vagrant and susspected persons
fownd wandring from town to town, hauveing no passes; such
to be seized for examination and farther disspose by the
authority; and if any negroes are free and for themselves,
travelling without such ticket or certificate, they to bear
the charge themselves of their takeing up."[438]

The general air of complaint that pervades the above bill leads to the
conclusion that it was required by an alarming state of affairs. The
pass-system was a copy from the laws of the older colonies where
slavery had long existed. By implication free Negroes had to secure
from the proper authorities a certificate of freedom; and the bill
required them to carry it, or pay the cost of arrest.

One of the most palpable evidences of the humanity of the Connecticut
government was the following act passed in May, 1702:--

"Whereas it is observed that some persons in this Colonie
having purchased Negro or Malatta Servants or Slaves, after
they have spent the pricipall part of their time and
strength in their masters service, doe sett them at liberty,
and the said slaves not being able to provide necessaries
for themselves may become a charge and burthen to the towns
where they have served: for prevention whereof,

"It is ordered and enacted by this Court and the authority
thereof: That every person in this Colonie that now is or
hereafter shall be owner of a negro or mulatta servant or
slave, and after some time of his or her being taken into
imployment in his or her service, shall sett such servant or
slave at liberty to provide for him or herselfe, if
afterwards such servant or slave shall come to want, every
such servant shall be relieved at the onely cost and charge
of the person in whose service he or she was last reteined
or taken, and by whome sett at liberty, or at the onely cost
and charge of his or her heirs, executors or administrators,
any law, usage or custome to the contrary
notwithstanding."[439]

Massachusetts had acted and did act very cowardly about this matter.
But Connecticut showed great wisdom