Yes, I have come across the term "to give a slave his/her time," and it means, as you have surmised, an unofficial emancipation: the person was allowed to live as a free person, but legally they were not free--and thus subject to having their "freedom" revoked at any time by their legal owner or his/her heirs. The reasons for this practice were probably numerous. In Virginia, the law (of 1806, if memory serves?) stating that those who were officially freed either had to leave the state within a year, or have their residence in the state approved by a petition to the legislature, probably led some slaveholders to "give time" in this fashion rather than go to the trouble, and publicity, of turning to the legislature. I don't know, but can imagine, that it might therefore have been an especially useful mechanism among two grooups: those who had themselves been manumitted and were subsequently able to purchase enslaved family members, but who (even if they were literate and could craft a formal petition) might reasonably have supposed that their wishes would carry little weight with the legislature; and those--such as Martha Jefferson Randolph--whose social position was such that whatever informal arrangements they might make for their human chattel would likely have been treated with respect, discretion, and understanding by the white community, thus affording the slaves so treated some measure of local protection. Hope this helps. --Jurretta Heckscher On Feb 27, 2007, at 5:53 PM, Heritage Society wrote: > Martha Jefferson Randolph, by an unsigned note, expressed a wish for > her children > "to give their time" to three slaves ("Betsy Hemmings, Sally and > Wormely"). > Other references in the note make it clear that the slaves are not > being liberated. This note has been referred to as a "codicil," but it > is unsigned and unrecorded , and why it has been referred to as a > "codicil" is unclear. Has anyone run across this term "to give their > time"? The procedure for manumission was specific in the Virginia > statutes at this time , so this term suggests a euphemism for a > practice where slaves were permitted to go on their own , but were not > required to leave Virginia , since they were not legally freed from > slavery . Does this term appear anywhere else in the literature? . Any > comments would be appreciated and it may be off list if preferred. > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html