Social and Economic Aspects of Slavery.

The mildness of slavery in Pennsylvania impressed every observer. Acrelius said that negroes were treated better there than anywhere else in America. Peter Kalm said that compared with the condition of white servants their condition possessed equal advantages except that they were obliged to serve their whole life-time without wages. Hector St. John CrÈvecoeur declared that they enjoyed as much liberty as their masters, that they were in effect part of their masters’ families, and that, living thus, they considered themselves happier than many of the lower class of whites.[109] There is good reason for believing these statements, since a careful study of the sources shows that generally masters used their negroes kindly and with moderation.[110]

Living in a land of plenty the slaves were well fed and comfortably clothed. They had as good food as the white servants, says one traveller, and another says as good as their masters.[111] In 1759 the yearly cost of the food of a slave was reckoned at about twenty per cent. of his value.[112] Likewise they were well clad, their clothes being furnished by the masters. That clothes were a considerable item of expense is shown by the old household accounts and diaries. Acrelius computed the yearly cost at five per cent. of a slave’s value.[113] In the newspaper advertisements for runaways occur particularly full descriptions of their dress.[114] Almost always they have a coat or jacket, shoes, and stockings.[115] It is true that when they ran away they generally took the best they had, if not all they had; but making due allowance it seems certain that they were well clad, as an advertiser declared.[116]

As to shelter, since the climate and economy of Pennsylvania never gave rise to a plantation life, rows of negro cabins and quarters for the hands never became a distinctive feature. Slaves occupied such lodgings as were assigned to white servants, generally in the house of the master. This was doubtless not the case where a large number was held. They can hardly have been so accommodated by Jonathan Dickinson of Philadelphia, who had thirty-two.[117]

In the matter of service their lot was a fortunate one. There seems to be no doubt that they were treated much more kindly than the negroes in the West Indies, and that they were far happier than the slaves in the lower South. It is said that they were not obliged to labor more than white people, and, although this may hardly have been so, and although, indeed, there is occasional evidence that they were worked hard, yet for the most part it is clear that they were not overworked.[118] The advertisements of negroes for sale show, as might be expected, that most of the slaves were either house-servants or farm-hands.[119] Nevertheless the others were engaged in a surprisingly large number of different occupations. Among them were bakers, blacksmiths, brick-layers, brush-makers, carpenters, coopers, curriers, distillers, hammermen, refiners, sail-makers, sailors, shoe-makers, tailors, and tanners.[120] The negroes employed at the iron-furnaces received special mention.[121] The women cooked, sewed, did house-work, and at times were employed as nurses.[122] When the service of negroes was needed they were often hired from their masters, but as a rule they were bought.[123] They were frequently trusted and treated almost like members of the family.[124]

When the day’s work was over the negroes of Pennsylvania seem to have had time of their own which they were not too tired to enjoy. Some no doubt found recreation in their masters’ homes, gossipping, singing, and playing on rude instruments.[125] Many sought each other’s company and congregated together after nightfall. In Philadelphia, at any rate, during the whole colonial period, crowds of negroes infesting the streets after dark behaved with such rough and boisterous merriment that they were a nuisance to the whole community.[126] At times negroes were given days of their own. They were allowed to go from one place to another, and were often permitted to visit members of their families in other households.[127] Moreover, holidays were not grudged them. It is said that in Philadelphia at the time of fairs, the blacks to the number of a thousand of both sexes used to go to “Potter’s Field,” and there amuse themselves, dancing, singing, and rejoicing, in native barbaric fashion.[128]

If, now, from material comfort we turn to the matter of the moral and intellectual well-being of the slaves, we find that considering the time, surprising efforts were made to help them. In Pennsylvania there seems never to have been opposition to improving them. Not much was done, it is true, and perhaps most of the negroes were not reached by the efforts made. It must be remembered, however, what violent hostility mere efforts aroused in some other places.[129]

There is the statement of a careful observer that masters desired by all means to hinder their negroes from being instructed in the doctrines of Christianity, and to let them live on in pagan darkness. This he ascribes to a fear that negroes would grow too proud on seeing themselves upon a religious level with their masters.[130] Some weight must be attached to this account, but it is probable that the writer was roughly applying to Pennsylvania what he had learned in other places, for against his assertion much specific evidence can be arrayed.

The attention of the Friends was directed to this subject very early. The counsel of George Fox was explicit. Owners were to give their slaves religious instruction and teach them the Gospel.[131] In 1693 the Keithian Quakers when advising that masters should hold their negroes only for a term of years, enjoined that during such time they should give these negroes a Christian education.[132] In 1700 Penn appears to have been able to get a Monthly Meeting established for them, but of the meeting no record has come down.[133] As to what was the actual practice of Friends in this matter their early records give meagre information. It seems certain that negroes were not allowed to participate in their meetings, though sometimes they were taken to the meeting-houses.[134] It is probable that in great part the religious work of the Friends among slaves was confined to godly advice and reading.[135] As to the amount and quality of such advice, the well known character of the Friends leaves no doubt.

The Moravians, who were most zealous in converting negroes, did not reach a great number in Pennsylvania, because few were held by them; nevertheless they labored successfully, and received negroes amongst them on terms of religious equality.[136] This also the Lutherans did to some extent, negroes being baptized among them.[137] It is in the case of the Episcopalians, however, that the most definite knowledge remains. The records of Christ Church show that the negroes who were baptized made no inconsiderable proportion of the total number baptized in the congregation. For a period of more than seventy years such baptisms are recorded, and are sometimes numerous.[138] At this church, also, there was a minister who had special charge of the religious instruction of negroes.[139] It is possible that something may have been accomplished by missionaries and itinerant exhorters. This was certainly so when Whitefield visited Pennsylvania in 1740. Both he and his friend Seward noted with peculiar satisfaction the results which they had attained.[140] Work of some value was also done by wandering negro exhorters, who, appearing at irregular intervals, assembled little groups and preached in fields and orchards.[141]

Something was also accomplished for negroes in the maintenance of family life. In 1700 Penn, anxious to improve their moral condition, sent to the Assembly a bill for the regulation of their marriages, but much to his grief this was defeated.[142] In the absence of such legislation they came under the law which forbade servants to marry during their servitude without the master’s consent.[143] Doubtless in this matter there was much of the laxity which is inseparable from slavery, but it is said that many owners allowed their slaves to marry in accordance with inclination, except that a master would try to have his slaves marry among themselves.[144] The marriage ceremony was often performed just as in the case of white people, the records of Christ Church containing many instances.[145] The children of these unions were taught submission to their parents, who were indulged, it is said, in educating, cherishing, and chastising them.[146] Stable family life among the slaves was made possible by the conditions of slavery in Pennsylvania, there being no active interchange of negroes. When they were bought or sold families were kept together as much as possible.[147]

In one matter connected with religious observances race prejudice was shown: negroes were not as a rule buried in the cemeteries of white people.[148] In some of the Friends’ records and elsewhere there is definite prohibition.[149] They were often buried in their masters’ orchards, or on the edge of woodlands. The Philadelphia negroes were buried in a particular place outside the city.[150]

Under the kindly treatment accorded them the negroes of colonial Pennsylvania for the most part behaved fairly well. It is true that there is evidence that crime among them assumed grave proportions at times, while the records of the special courts and items in the newspapers show that there occurred murder, poisoning, arson, burglary, and rape.[151] In addition there was frequent complaint about tumultuous assembling and boisterous conduct, and there was undoubtedly much pilfering.[152] Moreover the patience of many indulgent masters was tried by the shiftless behavior and insolent bearing of their slaves.[153] Yet the graver crimes stand out in isolation rather than in mass; and it is too much to expect an entire absence of the lesser ones. The white people do not seem to have regarded their negroes as dangerous.[154] Almost never were there efforts for severe repression, and a slave insurrection seems hardly to have been thought of.[155] There are no statistics whatever on which to base an estimate, but judging from the relative frequency of notices it seems probable that crime among the negroes of Pennsylvania during the slavery period--no doubt because they were under better control—was less than at any period thereafter.

But there was a misdemeanor of another kind: negro slaves frequently ran away. Fugitives are mentioned from the first,[156] and there is hardly a copy of any of the old papers but has an advertisement for some negro at large.[157] These notices sometimes advise that the slave has stolen from his master; often that he has a pass, and is pretending to be a free negro; and occasionally that a free negro is suspected of harboring him.[158]

The law against harboring was severe and was strictly enforced. Anyone might take up a suspicious negro; while whoever returned a runaway to his master was by law entitled to receive five shillings and expenses. It was always the duty of the local authorities to apprehend suspects. When this occurred the procedure was to lodge the negro in jail, and advertise for the master, who might come, and after proving title and paying costs, take him away. Otherwise the negro was sold for a short time to satisfy jail fees, advertised again, and finally either set at liberty or disposed of as pleased the local court.[159]

This fleeing from service on the part of negro slaves, while varying somewhat in frequency, was fairly constant during the whole slavery period, increasing as the number of slaves grew larger. During the British occupation of Philadelphia, however, it assumed such enormous proportions that the number of negroes held there was permanently lowered.[160] Notwithstanding, then, the kindly treatment they received, slaves in Pennsylvania ran away. Nevertheless it is significant that during the same period white servants ran away more than twice as often.[161]

Many traits of daily life and marks of personal appearance which no historian has described, are preserved in the advertisements of the daily papers. Almost every negro seems to have had the smallpox. To have done with this and the measles was justly considered an enhancement in value. Some of the negroes kidnapped from Africa still bore traces of their savage ancestry. Not a few spoke several languages. Generally they were fond of gay dress. Some carried fiddles when they ran away. One had made considerable money by playing. Many little hints as to character appear. Thus Mona is full of flattery. Cuff Dix is fond of liquor. James chews abundance of tobacco. Stephen has a “sower countenance”; Harry, “meek countenance”; Rachel, “remarkable austere countenance”; Dick is “much bandy legged”; Violet, “pretty, lusty, and fat.” A likely negro wench is sold because of her breeding fast. One negro says that he has been a preacher among the Indians. Two others fought a duel with pistols. A hundred years has involved no great change in character.[162]

Finally, on the basis of information drawn from rare and miscellaneous sources it becomes apparent that in slavery times there was more kindliness and intimacy between the races than existed afterwards. In those days many slaves were treated as if part of the master’s family: when sick they were nursed and cared for; when too old to work they were provided for; and some were remembered in the master’s will.[163] Negroes did run away, and numbers of them desired to be free, but when manumission came not a few of them preferred to stay with their former owners. It was the opinion of an advocate of emancipation that they were better off as slaves than they could possibly be as freemen.[164]

Such was slavery in Pennsylvania. If on the one hand there was the chance of families being sold apart; if there was seen the cargo, the slave-drove, the auction sale; it must be remembered that such things are inseparable from the institution of slavery, and that on the other hand they were rare, and not to be weighed against the positive comfort and well-being of which there is such abundant proof. If ever it be possible not to condemn modern slavery, it might seem that slavery as it existed in Pennsylvania in the eighteenth century was a good, probably for the masters, certainly for the slaves.[165] The fact is that it existed in such mitigated form that it was impossible for it to be perpetuated. Whenever men can treat their slaves as men in Pennsylvania treated them, they are living in a moral atmosphere inconsistent with the holding of slaves. Nothing can then preserve slavery but paramount economic needs. In Pennsylvania, since such needs were not paramount, slavery was doomed.