The South's Slave Culture Transplanted to the Western Frontier

Abstract

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 had a significant impact on northwest Missouri's settlement patterns. Missouri's slave state status attracted a higher number of southern pioneers than what would have normally been expected. These early settlers brought with them their entire cultural-economic system—the production of hemp and tobacco with slave labor. Within the Platte region, the geographic distribution of these cultural variables is explained by pioneer origins. Those areas settled primarily by Upper Southerners possessed the greatest number of slaves and produced the most hemp and tobacco. The findings demonstrate that by 1850 the Upper South's slave culture had been transplanted to northwest Missouri's Platte region.

Key Words:

• culture
• demography
• pioneer settlement
• and slavery

Introduction

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 set specific geographic boundaries for the extension of slavery throughout the Louisiana Purchase lands, which, in turn, created distinctive migration and settlement patterns. The Platte region's annexation (Figure 1) in 1837 by the state of Missouri essentially broke the Missouri Compromise, and in so doing, opened northwest Missouri for the extension of slavery.

The main focus of this research is to examine how the southern slave culture manifested itself in northwest Missouri. This analysis includes an examination of Missouri's bid for statehood and the political implications of the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The article also concentrates on pioneer origins and provides a detailed analysis of frontier slavery. The inspection of frontier slavery involves several aspects of ownership—holding sizes and slave owner nativity data, for example. Additionally, a demographic breakdown of the slave population—age, gender, and nativity—is provided. Beyond pioneer nativity data and slavery, the research evaluates the production of hemp and tobacco. These two southern crops were transplanted in northwest Missouri as pioneers from the Upper South brought their cultural-economic system with them.

This kind of information is important because most studies concentrate on specific areas within the Deep South, while local histories tend to avoid the entire subject of slavery (Phifer 1962). Northwest Missouri's Platte region is one area that has not been adequately investigated; therefore, an examination of the territory provides important information in regard to frontier settlement and slavery.

Missouri's Statehood

One salient objection to Missouri's admission as a slave state was that it sits in the same latitude with Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois—a segment of the West the North had come to regard as its own. As Moore (1953, 49) points out “each section of the nation wanted to spread its own type of civilization over the western country and appropriate its resources for its own use.” Ultimately, the idea of demarcating a line in the West for the separation of slave and nonslave states came about because of the argument over Missouri's statehood (Moore 1953).

Missouri's appeal for statehood was primarily driven by political and economic concerns. Politically, this decision meant a disruption in the balance of power between the South's slave states and the North's free states. Wexler (1995, 56) contends that “southern leaders strongly supported the admission of Missouri as a slave state, while northern political interests opposed it with equal vigor, fearing that the slave states would have a majority in Congress.”Foner (1997) concludes that each political culture needed to acquire additional territory to perpetuate its ideals; hence, the desire of both the North and South to extend their sphere of influence onto the western frontier.

The Missouri Compromise

Missouri's bid for statehood was tied to Maine's attempt to break away from Massachusetts and form an independent state. Those opposing slavery's restrictions viewed Maine's desire for statehood as an opportunity to ensure that Missouri was admitted as a slave state. In 1819, a majority of the House of Representatives' members were from free states, but after Alabama's admission to the Union on December 14, 1819, the Senate's membership was evenly divided between the North and South: 11 free and 11 slave states. Additionally, southern leaders could count on support from two slaveholding Illinois senators—Thomas and Edwards—and Senators Parrott of New Hampshire, Lanman of Connecticut, and Taylor of Indiana, all of whom were pro-slavery (Moore 1953). With the support of these northern Senators, the South had a clear majority in the Senate (Kolchin 1987). The pro-slavery faction promptly announced its intention of blocking Maine's admission in the Senate until the House of Representatives consented to Missouri's admission as a slave state (Annals of Congress, 16th Congress, 1st Session, 841).

The combination of the Maine and Missouri calls for statehood was deemed the Missouri Compromise. The proposition intended to make Maine a free state, admit Missouri as a slave state, leave the present-day states of Arkansas and Oklahoma open to future settlement by slaveholders, while prohibiting slavery in the remainder of the Louisiana Purchase north of 36 degrees 30 minutes (Annals of Congress, 16th Congress, 1st Session, 841).

President Monroe was in favor of the Missouri Compromise, stating that it was Missouri's constitutional right to be admitted on equal footing with the older states. Furthermore, along with many other southerners, Monroe felt that confining slavery to a specific geographic area would ensure its perpetuation. Restricting slavery to the area below Missouri's southern boundary would allow the pro-slavery faction to remain the dominant political force in that region. Slavery's advocates felt that if slavery were to be diffused throughout several states, they would be pushed into a minority role politically (Ammon 1997). Summarizing the Missouri Compromise, Greeley and Cleveland (1860, 63) declared “it was…an offer from the milder opponents of slavery restriction to the more moderate and flexible advocates of that restriction.” Greeley and Cleveland continue: “Let us have slavery in Missouri,” they wrote, “and we will unite with you in excluding it from all the uninhabited territories north and west of that state” (Greeley and Cleveland 1860, 63).

At the time, the Missouri Compromise's political significance was apparent, involving both the balance of power between the state and federal governments and the so-called three-fifths ratio. The three-fifths ratio stood for the amount of representation the slave states received for each slave; for every five slaves, three votes were allowed. The northern delegates feared that if slave representation extended into the vast areas beyond the Mississippi River, the eastern states' political influence would be drastically reduced. Pennsylvania's Senator John Sergeant declared that “the time may come when the voice of the slaves…will be louder than that of the freeman” (Annals of Congress, 16th Congress, 1st Session, 1205). Senator Jonathan Roberts, also of Pennsylvania agreed: “The further expansion of slavery would…shift the balance of power in the favor of the slaveholding states” (Annals of Congress, 16th Congress, 1st Session, 337). Ironically, for the first time southerners defended slave's rights in Congress. Southerners argued that no taxes could be levied against slave owners without representation.

Southern states feared the federal government's capability to enact sweeping legislation in regard to slavery. Dixon (1899, 121) questioned that “if Congress could…deprive the citizens of Missouri of their property without any compensation…what could hinder this or another Congress from applying the same power to other states?” Concerned that the slave restrictions placed on the newly acquired territory and states could be applied to all of the southern states brought about a solid southern coalition supporting slavery.

Ultimately, the Missouri Compromise allowed Missouri to enter the union as a slave state with the provision that slavery would not be permitted in any new states formed from the remaining lands of the Louisiana Purchase north of latitude 36 degrees 30 minutes—Missouri's southern boundary (Wexler 1995, 56). Martis (2001, 162) states that this “line [Missouri's southern boundary] became another of the symbolic divides in American historical geography.” Furthermore, this controversy was the first occasion in which all of the strands in the fabric of North-South sectionalism were brought together. The westward expansion of slavery was an issue upon which a united North would stand against a united South. Moore (1953, 342) concluded that the Missouri Compromise was the “title page to a great tragic volume.”

The Platte Purchase

Throughout the 1820s, an increasing number of Missourians expressed interest in acquiring the Platte region, although a number of obstacles stood in the way. First, according to Williams and Shoemaker (1930), the Platte region's annexation was opposed by several senators and representatives from smaller eastern states. Some feared that if Missouri—one of the largest states in the Union at the time—increased in size, it would gain an even larger proportion of House seats. However, many politicians realized that “a significant increase to the state's population would be unlikely to come from such a small area” (Paine 1996, 21). Second, Missouri's territorial expansion would have altered the Missouri Compromise line of 1820 in relation to slave and free territory. Senators dealing most closely with the proposal realized that it technically violated the Missouri Compromise, but none seemed interested in contesting it because the action would not affect the balance of power in the Senate (Paine 1996). Thus, many senators viewed support for Missouri's wishes as a way of gaining the good will of Missouri Senators Thomas Hart Benton and Lewis Linn (McCandless 1972). Finally, Missouri's biggest annexation hurdle was Native American occupation. Prior to its acquisition, the Platte region was a portion of the western lands reserved for Native American relocation; at least 10 tribes and bands occupied and/or claimed the area (Combs 2002). In a series of treaties from 1830 to 1837, the Native Americans ceded the land to the U. S. government—clearing the way for annexation—in return for cash annuities, agricultural implements, and territory in the present-day states of Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska. Ultimately, on March 28, 1837, President Martin Van Buren issued a proclamation stating that the Platte region now belonged to the state of Missouri (U.S. Congress 1856, 802).

Origins of Pioneers in the Platte Region

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 had a significant impact on migration and settlement. Many southern pioneers saw Missouri as a “promised-land” for slavery. Hudson (1988, 401) insists that, as a result, slaveholders from the Upper South “extended their domain north to the Iowa border and west to Kansas.” Many settlers crossed free states and territories, such as Illinois and Indiana, to occupy the Missouri Valley, where slavery was permitted (Lynch 1922; Turner 1935; Moore 1953; Hudson 1988).

The 1850 census records reveal the Southern imprint on northwest Missouri's settlement (Table 1). Based on nativity, the states (excluding Missouri's predominantly juvenile population) that contributed the highest number of settlers were Kentucky (7,828), Tennessee (2,728), and Virginia (2,728). These three states alone accounted for 55% (Missouri not included) of the region's pioneers. These findings also represent an alteration of the north-south settlement pattern found elsewhere on the frontier. In general, the majority of early pioneers primarily moved along parallels of latitude, generating a north-south gradation based on nativity (Gerlach 1976; Hudson 1988). But, as Jordan (1967, 668) observes, “in the 19th century, much of Missouri…was added to the domain of the Upper South.” Clearly, a greater proportion of southerners migrated to northwest Missouri because of slavery than would have otherwise been expected.

Slaves in the Platte Region

Beyond pioneer nativity data, one obvious southern cultural manifestation in the Platte region was the presence of slaves. By 1850, 4,589 slaves had been brought to northwest Missouri (National Archives and Records Service 1963b, Rolls 422–424). Of this total, 61% (2,798) were located in Platte County. Andrew, Buchanan, and Platte Counties accounted for over 93% of the territory's slaves (Figure 2). The concentration of slaves in these three counties is correlated to pioneer origins. The percentage of the population from the Upper South—Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia (excluding Missouri)—has been calculated for each county. Platte and Buchanan Counties had the highest percentages of upper Southern settlers, 65% and 51% respectively, and the most slaves, 2,798 and 902. Moreover, Atchison County had the fewest slaves (30) and the lowest percentage of upper Southern settlers—35%.

Slaves as a percentage of northwest Missouri's total population were well below state and national averages. In 1850, slaves comprised 9.7% of the Platte region's total population. Platte County had the highest proportion: 16.6% of all residents were slaves, followed by Buchanan County with 7.0% and Andrew County with 6.8%. Of the remaining three counties, none had a slave population of more than 4.0% of its total population. In comparison, slaves as a percentage of the total population comprised 12.9% of Missouri's 1850 population (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1853). Moreover, at the national level, portions of the Coastal Plain and Piedmont in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia had populations that were 50%, or more, slave (Paullin 1932).

Slave ownership patterns also varied greatly from the Deep South to the Upper South. Throughout the Deep South, large plantations often held dozens and sometimes hundreds of slaves; however, in the Upper South many farmers held only a minimal number of slaves (Jordan 1967; Tadman 1989; Kolchin 1993; Foner 1997). In 1850, for instance, the median number of slaves per owner was more than 30 in Louisiana, South Carolina, and Mississippi, while slave owners in the Upper Southern states of Maryland and Kentucky averaged fewer than 15 (Table 2). Additionally, the Missouri statewide average was 8.6 slaves per owner, and the Platte region's 1,189 owners held only 3.86 slaves on average. Of the two distinct ownership styles, northwest Missouri closely followed the Upper Southern pattern.

The distribution of slaves by holding size further reveals the Upper Southern slavery pattern in northwest Missouri. The earliest published census data at the county level in regard to holding size (1860) reveals that roughly half of the slave population resided on holdings between 10 and 49 slaves (Table 3). However, the Upper South had a much larger percentage of slaves held in units of 1 to 9 (35.4 versus 19.4) and the Deep South had an advantage in the 50–199 category (29.6% to 11.2%) (Table 3). In comparison, 92.2% (1,096 holdings) in the Platte region held between 1 and 9 slaves. Eight holdings in the region contained 20 to 29 slaves, and only five owners held more than 30 slaves. The Platte region's largest individual holding was located in Andrew County, where Samuel Green, from Kentucky, held 36 slaves. Obviously, the Deep South's plantation style economy was not transplanted to northwest Missouri.

Slaveowner Nativity

Missouri's slave state status encouraged slave owner migrations to the Platte region. Based on nativity, northwest Missouri's slave owners came from 31 locations, although the Upper Southern states of Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia dominate the list. For instance, nearly half (47%) of northwest Missouri's slave owners came from Kentucky. Moreover, the top four states—Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia—accounted for 82% of all slave owners in the region.

It is noteworthy that foreign-born pioneers did not comprise a significant proportion of northwest Missouri's slave owners. In Burke County, North Carolina, Phifer (1962, 141) similarly found that the areas settled by a significant number of Germans were “almost untouched by slavery.” The Platte region's foreign-born slave owners arrived from seven countries and numbered 32 in all. Eight of these owners came from Ireland, seven each arrived from both England and Scotland, and six from Germany. However, the total number of foreign owners represents only 2.69% of the territory's slave owners. It is apparent that northwest Missouri's foreign-born immigrants, who were not familiar with slavery, did not bring or adopt the southern slave culture.

The same low rates of slave ownership applied to the South's entire population. Kolchin (1993, 34) points out that “in the South as a whole, slave owners always constituted a minority of the white population.” The Platte region is no exception. In 1850, of the 41,092 settlers in the area, only 1,189, or 2.89%, owned slaves. Even though the South was a slave society, substantial numbers of southerners had no direct involvement with slavery.

Gender, Age, and Demography of Slaves in the Platte Purchase Region

Berlin (1998) and Tadman (1989, 2000) contend that, with the exception of southern Louisiana, trading throughout the South involved approximately equal numbers of male and female slaves. The Platte region, with 2,360 female slaves and 2,229 male slaves, follows this theory. In 1850, all six counties had slightly fewer males than females, although not to a disproportionate degree. Northwest Missouri's population data support the notion that the domestic slave trade was not gender selective.

Life expectancy rates are used to measure the quality of life. During this period, slave life expectancy rates averaged between 32 and 36 years (Kolchin 1987). The average age of all slaves in the Platte region, 16.54 years, reflects the abbreviated life span for most slaves. At the county level, Buchanan County had the highest average age—16.68—and Nodaway County had the lowest—13.95. No doubt the deadly combination of workload, disease, and poor-quality diet drastically reduced life expectancy rates and led slaves to have higher rates of infant and adult mortality than whites (Steckel 1986; Berlin 1998; Tadman 2000).

Another factor that lowered the average age of slaves was the trade itself, which was age selective (Berlin 1998). Tadman (2000, 1551) states that the “slave trade to all parts of the South was age selective, concentrating mostly on teenagers and young-adults.” Because of financial considerations, teenage and young-adult field hands were cost-prohibitive for many potential buyers. These buyers instead focused on young children who cost much less than adult slaves. Additionally, the amount of capital needed to acquire slaves made them a long-term investment. Fogel and Engerman (1974, 220) argue that “children, although not capable of strenuous field work, were valued as household servants.”Tadman (1989, 141) adds that traders desired young slaves who were full of potential, and “able to promise a long career of strenuous labor.”

The population pyramid for the Platte region's slave population demonstrates an age-selective bias, focusing on children (Figure 3). In 1850, 36% of the territory's slaves were in the 1–9 age category, and another 29% were in the 10–19 category. Combined, these two age categories held roughly 64% of northwest Missouri's slaves.

The final variable dealing with slave demography was ethnicity. The 1850 Slave Schedules made the ethnic distinction between black and mulatto—those individuals having at least one-eighth ancestry of another race (Fogel and Engerman 1974). Both black and mulatto slaves counted as three-fifths of an individual; therefore, the number of slaves in each state affected the amount of representation received, and the amount of taxes paid and/or returned. Obviously, nonslaveholding states were concerned about garnering their fair share of government money and representation, as were the pro-slavery states (Jackson and Teeples 1976). Moreover, the separation of race, even distinguishing between black and mulatto, was a means to solidify the “we-they” dichotomy (Kolchin 1987, 185). Additionally, it should be noted that light-skinned slaves often received preferential treatment (Margo and Steckel 1982). It was thought that mulattoes possessed a greater capacity for freedom than blacks and were allowed special status and behavior (Kolchin 1987).

The Platte region's proportion of mulatto slaves was well above the national average of the time. According to Fogel and Engerman (1974), 7.7% of all slaves in 1850 were mulatto. In comparison, 76.2% (3,499) of the Platte region's slaves were listed as black and the remaining 23.8% (1,090) were categorized as mulatto in 1850 (National Archives and Records Service 1963b, Rolls 422–424). Northwest Missouri's higher percentage of mulatto slaves is explained by labor requirements and racial attitudes. As Tadman (2000, 1552) points out “planters associated the darkest skin with the toughest workers.” Additionally, slave traders felt that “black negroes were more desirable and saleable and freer from disease than yellow slaves” (Tadman 1989, 125). As a result, a higher percentage of “black” slaves would have been located in the Deep South where planters produced the most labor-intensive commodities, such as, sugar, rice, and cotton, and where the threat of disease was greater. In upper southern areas, such as the Platte region, where labor requirements were less, a greater proportion of the slave population was mulatto.

Unfortunately, the 1850 Slave Schedules did not record place of birth, although several studies have attempted to generate estimates regarding slave nativity (e.g., Fogel and Engerman 1974; Kolchin 1993; Thomas 1997). In general, slaves came to the settlement frontier either with their owners or by way of a trade network (Fogel and Engerman 1974; Engerman 1976).

It is most likely that owners in the recently opened Platte region brought their slaves with them. Tadman (1989, 42) suggests that during settlement's initial phase, “there would have been a substantial lag before the trade became sufficiently organized to supply a new region.” Indeed, Eaton (1949, 346) contends that the “slave state immigrants were responsible for most of the slaves brought to Missouri.” Furthermore, an early Buchanan County history states that “many of the early settlers…brought their slaves with them” (Birdsall, Williams, and Company 1881, 286). Supporting these statements is the fact that the overwhelming majority (98%) of slaves sold in Boone County (mid-Missouri) from 1830 to 1840 were purchased by buyers from within the county, which indicates that few northwest Missouri slave owners would have had the opportunity to purchase slaves en route (McGettigan 1978). These findings only strengthen the argument that the majority of the Platte region's slaves were brought by their owners from their owners' previous place of residence.

The Geographic Distribution of Slave Labor in the Platte Region

The geographic distribution of slaves in the Platte region relates to the distribution of agricultural commodities. Earle (1987, 2001) suggests that agriculture at this time significantly shaped the patterns of regional economic development and the spatial distribution of slaves. The predominance of certain agricultural commodities also reflects the Upper South's influence on the Platte region's settlement. As Eaton (1949, 346) argues, “it is natural for settlers from the South to adopt the same farm economy in Missouri with which they were familiar prior to their migration.”

Hemp was one of the agricultural staples that Upper Southern pioneers brought to northwest Missouri. Hemp was also a labor-intensive commodity, and, as a result, slave labor was used in its production (Eaton 1949). In the Platte region, Platte and Buchanan Counties held 81% of the slaves and produced 92% of the area's hemp. By 1850, these two counties were more than regional leaders in hemp production; Platte County (4,355 tons) led the state and Buchanan County (1,894 tons) was third (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1853). Eaton (1949) suggests that in the counties where slaveholders settled, the emphasis on hemp culture was apparent. It is not a coincidence that Platte and Buchanan Counties had the region's highest percentages of southern settlers and were leaders at the state level in hemp production as well.

The production of tobacco in the Platte region also highlights the southern influence on settlement and the geographic distribution of slaves. Tobacco was a commodity that required year-round attention, which predicated the use of slave labor (Berlin 1998). For example, in 1850, Platte County produced 66,000 pounds of tobacco, 83% of the territory's total, and held 61% of the region's slaves (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1853). On the other hand, Atchison, Holt, and Nodaway Counties possessed only 5% of the area's slaves and produced 5% of the tobacco. Southern influences on agriculture are still present in northwest Missouri: Weston, Missouri, located in Platte County, has two tobacco auction houses in the “only tobacco auction market west of the Mississippi River” (Platte County-KCI Area Convention and Visitors Bureau).

The absence of slave labor in the production of Indian corn also reflects labor intensity. Corn required a substantial amount of labor in the spring and early summer, but the fall harvest, over a span of several months, was much less intense. As a result, northern cereal farmers supplied their labor demands from rural laborers, having little need for the use of slave labor (Earle 1987, 2001). The Platte region's agricultural data provide evidence of this labor division. Platte County, with 61% of the region's slaves, produced only 38% of the total amount of Indian corn. Atchison, Holt, and Nodaway counties, with 5% of northwest Missouri's slaves, produced 12% of the territory's Indian corn.

Not only did crop production define regional differences, but draft animals did as well. According to Jordan (1967, 683)“in the yeomen-farmer-dominated Upper South the horse was the almost universal work animal of choice, giving way only in frontier areas to the ox.” Moreover, prior to 1860, mules were largely confined to areas where slaves did the field work. Jordan (1967) finds that in many areas of Texas settled primarily by Upper Southern pioneers, the ratio of horses to mules was 10 to 1. In the Platte region, the horse to mule ratio was approximately 8 to 1. Additionally, nearly 91% of the total number of mules were located in Andrew, Buchanan, and Platte counties, where 95% of all slaves were located (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1853). Jordan (1967) also suggests that on the frontier the use of oxen increased; with 10,072 oxen in 1850 the Platte region was no exception to that trend (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1853). Hilliard (1984, 45) adds that in parts of Missouri a “puzzling concentration of oxen existed.” Indeed, throughout Atchison, Holt, and Nodaway Counties oxen accounted for at least 40% of all draft animals (Hilliard 1984).

As the census data reveals, there is a strong correlation between the distribution of slaves, the production of labor-intensive commodities, and pioneer origins. Andrew, Buchanan, and Platte counties, with the most “southern” compositions, produced the most hemp and tobacco and had the highest number of slaves. Although, as labor intensity decreased (Indian corn), so did the reliance on slave labor.

Table 1 1850 Platte Purchase Pioneer Nativity Breakdown

State or Country
Missouri	16,801
Kentucky	7,828
Tennessee	2,728
Virginia	2,728
Indiana	2,177
Ohio	2,121
North Carolina	1,349
Iowa	996
Pennsylvania	827
Illinois	823
*Germany	697
New York	429
*Ireland	398
*England	264
Maryland	227
South Carolina	153
*Norway	125
*Canada	103
New Jersey	94
*Switzerland	94
Georgia	79
*France	75
Alabama	74
Maine	61
Massachusetts	57
Connecticut	57
Vermont	56
Louisiana	55
Mississippi	51
Michigan	46
Arkansas	42
*Scotland	31
Delaware	30
*Wales	24
New Hampshire	21
Texas	20
Unknown	19
*Bavaria	13
*Nova Scotia	12
Nebraska	11
District of Columbia	10
*Isle of Man	10
*Europe	10
*Mexico	9
Wisconsin	7
*Prussia	7
Rhode Island	6
*At Sea	6
Florida	5
*Poland	4
*Belgium	4
*Russia	3
Fort Leavenworth	3
*Bermuda	3
Indian Territory	2
*New Brunswick	2
*Holland	2
*Spain	1
*Upper Canada	1
*Halifax	1
*Denmark	1
*West Indies	1
*Faro Island	1
*Sweden	1
*Italy	1
*Desert	1
*Newfoundland	1
*Cape of Good Hope	1
*Netherlands	1
*South America	1
Total	41,092
*Foreign-Born
Source: National Archives and Records Service (1963a).

Table 2 Median Number of Slaves by Ownership, 1850

State
Louisiana	38.9
South Carolina	38.2
Mississippi	33.0
Alabama	29.9
Florida	28.5
Georgia	26.0
Arkansas	18.4
North Carolina	18.6
Virginia	18.1
Texas	14.9
Tennessee	15.2
Maryland	12.2
Kentucky	10.3
Missouri	8.6
Delaware	5.7
National Average	20.6
Source: Kolchin (1993).

Table 3 Distribution of Slaves by Unit Size, South (1860) and Platte Region (1850)

	Percentage of Slaves Held in Units of:
	1–9	10–49	50–199	>199
South	25.6	49.5	22.5	2.4
*Upper South	35.4	52.7	11.2	0.6
**Deep South	19.4	47.4	29.6	3.6
*Upper South: Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee.
**Deep South: South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas.
County	Percentage of Slaves Held in Units of:
	1–9		10–19		20–29		>30
	N	%	N	%	N	%	N	%
Andrew	182	94.8	7	3.6	1	<1.0	2	<1.0
Atchison	9	90.0	1	10.0	0	0.0	0	0.0
Buchanan	261	96.0	10	3.7	0	0.0	1	<1.0
Holt	44	97.8	1	2.2	0	0.0	0	0.0
Nodaway	18	94.7	1	5.3	0	0.0	0	0.0
Platte	582	89.4	60	9.2	7	1.1	2	<1.0
Platte Total	1,096	92.2	80	6.7	8	<1.0	5	<1.0
Source: Kolchin (1993); National Archives and Records Service (1963b).

Figure 1  Platte purchase region of Northwest Missouri, 1837. Source: H. Jason Combs.

Figure 2  Platte purchase region by county. Source: H. Jason Combs.

Figure 3  1850 slave population pyramid. Source: National Archives and Records Service (1963).

Conclusions

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 significantly affected northwest Missouri's settlement patterns as demonstrated by the pioneer nativity data. Missouri's slave-state status attracted a higher number of southern pioneers than what would have normally been expected. One aspect of the southern culture that these early pioneers brought with them was slavery. By 1850, 4,589 slaves resided in northwest Missouri. The ownership pattern in the Platte region closely resembled the Upper South's, where each owner held only a few slaves. Nearly half (47%) of the region's slave owners came from Kentucky, and another 35% of the owners came from the Upper Southern states of North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. The data indicate that slavery in northwest Missouri was not gender selective, although it was age selective—64% of all slaves in the Platte region were 19 or younger. The geographic distribution of slaves is explained by the distribution of southern pioneers and by the production of hemp and tobacco. Andrew, Buchanan, and Platte counties were the most “southern,” based on their compositions and together held 9% of the region's slaves. Platte County, with 61% of the area's slaves, led Missouri in hemp production in 1850, while Buchanan County, with 20% of the region's slaves, was third. Platte County also produced 83% of the territory's tobacco in 1850. Clearly, slaves were used to meet the labor needs of hemp and tobacco.

The southern influence on settlement is demonstrated by the pioneer nativity data, the presence of slaves, and the production of hemp and tobacco. By 1850, the Upper South's slave culture had been transplanted to northwest Missouri's Platte region.