The Destruction of Slavery—Abolition.

The events which led to the extinction of slavery in Pennsylvania fall naturally into four periods. They are, first, the years from 1682 to about 1740, during which the Germans discountenanced slave-holding, and the Friends ceased importing negroes; second, the period of the Quaker abolitionists, from about 1710 to 1780, by which time slavery among the Quakers had come to an end; third, from 1780 to 1788, the years of legislative action; and finally, the period from 1788 to the time when slavery in Pennsylvania became extinct through the gradual working of the act for abolition.

Opposition to slaveholding arose among the Friends. Slavery had not yet been recognized in statute law when they began to protest against it. This protest, faint in the beginning and taken up only by a few idealists, was never stopped afterwards, but, growing continually in strength, was, as the events of after years showed, from the first fraught with foreboding of doom to the institution. Opposition on the part of the Friends had begun before Pennsylvania was founded. In 1671 Fox, travelling in the West Indies, advised his brethren in Barbadoes to deal mildly with their negroes, and after certain years of servitude to make them free. Four years later William Edmundson in one of his letters asked how it was possible for men to reconcile Christ’s command, to do as they would be done by, with the practice of holding slaves without hope or expectation of freedom.[200] Nevertheless in the first years after the settlement of Pennsylvania Friends were the principal slaveholders. This led to differences of opinion, but at the start economic considerations prevailed.

The reform really began in 1688, a year memorable for the first formal protest against slavery in North America.[201] Germantown had been settled by German refugees who in religious belief were Friends. These men, simple-minded and honest, having had no previous acquaintance with slavery, were amazed to find it existing in Penn’s colony. At their monthly meeting, the eighteenth of the second month, 1688, Pastorius and other leaders drew up an eloquent and touching memorial. In words of surpassing nobleness and simplicity they stated the reasons why they were against slavery and the traffic in men’s bodies. Would the masters wish so to be dealt with? Was it possible for this to be in accord with Christianity? In Pennsylvania there was freedom of conscience; there ought likewise to be freedom of the body. What report would it cause in Europe that in this new land the Quakers handled men as there men treated their cattle? If it were possible that Christian men might do these things they desired to be so informed.[202]

This protest they sent to the Monthly Meeting at Richard Worrel’s. There it was considered, and found too weighty to be dealt with, and so it was sent on to the Quarterly Meeting at Philadelphia, and from thence to the Yearly Meeting at Burlington, which finally decided not to give a positive judgment in the case.[203] For the present nothing came of it; but the idea did not die. It probably lingered in the minds of many men; for within a few years a sentiment had been aroused which became widespread and powerful.

In 1693 George Keith, leader of a dissenting faction of Quakers, laid down as one of his doctrines that negroes were men, and that slavery was contrary to the religion of Christ; also that masters should set their negroes at liberty after some reasonable time.[204] At a meeting of Friends held in Philadelphia in 1693 the prevailing opinion was that none should buy except to set free. Three years later at the Friends’ Yearly Meeting it was resolved to discourage the further bringing in of slaves.[205] In 1712 when the Yearly Meeting at Philadelphia desiring counsel applied to the Yearly Meeting at London, it received answer that the multiplying of negroes might be of dangerous consequence.[206] In the next and the following years the Meetings strongly advised Friends not to import and not to buy slaves.[207] From 1730 to 1737 reports showed that the importation of negroes by Friends was being largely discontinued. By 1745 it had virtually ceased.[208]

It is generally believed that Pennsylvania’s restrictive legislation, that long series of acts passed for the purpose of keeping out negroes by means of prohibitive duties, was largely due to Quaker influence. This is probably true, but it is not easy to prove. The proceedings of the colonial Assembly have been reported so briefly that they do not give the needed information. When, however, the strong feeling of the Friends is understood in connection with the fact that they controlled the early legislatures, it is not hard to believe that the high duties were imposed because they wished the traffic at an end. Their feeling about the slave-trade and their desire to stop it are revealed again and again in the meeting minutes.[209] The most drastic law was certainly due to them.[210] But the small number of negroes in Pennsylvania as compared with the neighboring northern colonies was above all due to the early and continuous aversion to slavery manifested by the Germans. The first German settlers opposed the institution for religious reasons.[211] This opposition is perhaps to be ascribed to them as Quakers rather than as men of a particular race. But as successive swarms poured into the country it was found, it may be from religious scruples, more probably because of peculiar economic characteristics and because of feelings of sturdy industry and self-reliance, that they almost never bought negroes nor even hired them.[212] As the German element in Pennsylvania was very considerable, amounting at times to one-third of the population, such a course, though lacking in dramatic quality, and though it has been unheralded by the historians, was nevertheless of immense and decisive importance.[213]

During this period, then, much had been accomplished. Not only had the Germans turned their backs upon slave-holding, but the Friends, brought to perceive the iniquity of the practice, had ceased importing slaves, and for the most part had ceased buying them. It was another generation before the conservative element could be brought to advance beyond this position. It was not so easy to make them give up the slaves they already had.

The succeeding period was characterized by an inevitable struggle which ensued between considerations of economy and ethics. The attitude of many Friends was that in refusing to buy any more slaves they were fulfilling all reasonable obligations. Sometimes there was a desire to hush up the whole matter and get it out of mind. Isaac Norris tells of a meeting that was large and comfortable, where the business would have gone very well but for the warm pushing by some Friends of Chester in the matter of negroes. But he adds that affairs were so managed that the unpleasant subject was dropped.[214] What would have been the result of this disposition cannot now be known; but it proved impossible to smooth matters away. There had already begun an age of reformers, forerunners by a hundred years of Garrison and his associates, men who were content with nothing less than entire abolition.

The first of the abolitionists was William Southeby of Maryland, who went to Pennsylvania. For years the subject of slavery weighed heavily upon his mind. As early as 1696 he urged the Meeting to take action. His petition to the Provincial Assembly in 1712 asking that all slaves be set free was one of the most memorable incidents in the early struggle against slavery. But the Assembly resolved that his project was neither just nor convenient; and his ideas were so far in advance of the times that not only did he a little later lose favor among the Friends, but long after it was the judgment that his ill-regulated zeal had brought only sorrow.[215]

The next in point of time was Ralph Sandiford (1693–1733), a Friend of Philadelphia. His hostility to slavery was aroused by the sufferings of negroes whom he had seen in the West Indies; and his feeling was so strong that on one occasion he refused to accept a gift from a slaveholder. In 1729 he published his Mystery of Iniquity, an impassioned protest against slavery. Although threatened with severe penalties if he circulated this work, he distributed it wherever he felt that it would be of use.[216] Such enmity did he arouse that he was forced to leave the city.[217]

His work was carried forward by Benjamin Lay (1677–1759), an Englishman who came from Barbadoes to Philadelphia in 1731. He too aroused much hostility by his violence of expression and eccentric efforts to create pity for the slaves. He gave his whole life to the cause, but owing to his too radical methods he was much less influential than he might have been.[218]

A man of far greater power was John Woolman (1720–1772), perhaps the greatest liberator that the Friends ever produced. Woolman gave up his position as accountant rather than write bills for the sale of negroes. He was very religious, and most of his life he spent as a minister travelling from one colony to another trying to persuade men of the wickedness of slavery. In 1754 he published the first part of his book, Some Considerations on the Keeping of Negroes, of which the second part appeared in 1762. He was stricken with smallpox while on a visit to England, and died there.[219]

The last was Anthony Benezet (1713–1784), a French Huguenot who joined the Society of Friends. He came to Philadelphia as early as 1731, but it was about 1750 that his attention was drawn to the negroes. From that time to the end of his life he was their zealous advocate. By his writings upon Africa, slavery, and the slave-trade, he attracted the attention and enlisted the support of many. He was untiring in his efforts. Frequently he talked with the negroes and strove to improve them; he endeavored to create a favorable impression of them; he was influential in securing the passage of the abolition act; and at his death he bequeathed the bulk of his property to the cause which he had served so well in his life.[220]

That these Quaker reformers, particularly men like Woolman and Benezet, exerted an enormous influence against slavery in Pennsylvania, there can be no doubt.[221] Their influence is attested by numerous contemporary allusions, but it is proved far better by the change in sentiment which was gradually brought about. Southeby, Sandiford, and Lay were before their time and were treated as fanatics. Woolman and Benezet who came afterward were able to reap the harvest which had been sown.

The movement which had been urged with violent rapidity from without was all the while proceeding slowly and quietly within. For many years the Friends considered slavery, and almost every year the Meetings made reports upon the subject. These reports showed that the number of Quakers who bought slaves was constantly decreasing.[222] In 1743 an annual query was instituted.[223] In 1754 the Yearly Meeting circulated a printed letter strongly condemning slavery.[224] The second decisive step followed when it was made a rule that Friends who persisted in buying slaves should be disowned. The measure was effective and this part of the work was soon accomplished.[225] Finally in 1758 the third step was taken when it was unanimously agreed that Friends should be advised to manumit their slaves, and that those who persisted in holding them should not be allowed to participate in the affairs of the Society.[226] John Woolman and others were appointed on committees to visit slaveholders and persuade them.[227]

The work of these visiting committees is as remarkable as any in the history of slavery. Self-sacrificing people who had freed their own slaves now abandoned their interests and set out to persuade others to give negroes the freedom thought to be due them. In southeastern Pennsylvania are old diaries almost untouched for a century and a half which bear witness of characters odd and heroic; which contain the story of men and women sincere, brave, and unfaltering, who united quiet mysticism with the zeal of a crusader. The committees undertook to persuade a whole population to give up its slaves. There is no doubt that the task was a difficult one. Again and again the writers speak of obstacles overcome. They tell of owners who would not be convinced, who acknowledged that slavery was wrong, and promised that they would buy no more slaves, but who affirmed that they would keep such as they had. The diaries speak of repeated visits, of the arguments employed, of slow and gradual yielding, and of final triumph. If ever Christian work was carried on in the spirit of Christ, it was when John Woolman, Isaac Jackson, James Moon, and their fellow missionaries put an end to slavery among the Quakers of Pennsylvania.[228]

The penalties denounced by the Meeting were imposed with firmness. In 1761 the Chester Quarterly Meeting dealt with a member for having bought and sold a slave.[229] Through this and the following years there are many records in the Monthly Meetings of manumissions, voluntary and persuaded; record being made in each case to ensure the negro his freedom.[230] In 1774 the Philadelphia Meeting resolved that Friends who held slaves beyond the age at which white apprentices were discharged, should be treated as disorderly persons.[231] The work of abolition was practically completed in 1776 when the resolution passed that members who persisted in holding slaves were to be disowned.[232] If this is understood in connection with the fact that in the Meetings questions were rarely decided except by almost unanimous vote, it is clear that so far as the Friends were concerned slavery was nearly extinct. This was almost absolutely accomplished by 1780.[233]

The wholesale private abolition of slavery by the Friends of Pennsylvania is one of those occurrences over which the historian may well linger. It was not delayed until slavery had become unprofitable,[234] nor was it forced through any violent hostility. It was a result attained merely by calm, steady persuasion, and a disposition to obey the dictates of conscience unflinchingly. As such it is among the grandest examples of the triumph of principle and ideal righteousness over self-interest.[235] It may well be doubted whether any body of men and women other than the Friends were capable of such conduct at this time.[236]

So far the checking of slavery in Pennsylvania had been the result of two great factors; that the Germans would not hold slaves, and that the Friends gradually gave them up. Another factor now made it possible to bring about the end of the institution altogether. There began the period of the long contest of the Revolution, when Pennsylvania was stirred to its depths by the struggle for independence.

Almost at the beginning of the war, in 1776, the Assembly received from citizens of Philadelphia two petitions that manumission be rendered easier. These petitions accomplished nothing,[237] but the feeling which had been gathering strength for so many years went forward unchecked, and by 1778 there existed a powerful sentiment in favor of legislative abolition. Therefore in February, 1779, the draft of a bill was prepared and recommended by the Council; but for a while no progress was made, since the Assembly, though it approved the principle, believed that such a measure should originate in itself.[238] Toward the end of the year the matter was taken up in earnest, and a bill was soon drafted. Public sentiment was thoroughly aroused now. Petitions for and against the bill came to the Assembly, and letters were published in the newspapers. The friends of the measure were untiring in their efforts. Anthony Benezet is said to have visited every member of the Assembly. On March 1, 1780, the bill was enacted into a law, thirty-four yeas and twenty-one nays.[239]

The “Act for the gradual Abolition of Slavery” provided that thereafter no child born in Pennsylvania should be a slave; but that such children, if negroes or mulattoes born of a slave mother, should be servants until they were twenty-eight years of age; that all present slaves should be registered by their masters before November 1, 1780; and that such as were not then registered should be free.[240] It abolished the old discriminations, for it provided that negroes whether slave or free should be tried and punished in the same manner as white people, except that a slave was not to be admitted to witness against a freeman.[241] The earlier special legislation was repealed.[242]

The act of 1780, which was principally the work of George Bryan,[243] was the final, decisive step in the destruction of slavery in Pennsylvania. The buying and selling of human beings as chattels had become repugnant to the best thought of the state, and it had partly passed away. The practice still survived, however, in many quarters, and strengthened as it was by considerations of economy and convenience, it would probably have gone on for many years. Against this the abolition law struck a mortal blow. From the day of March 1, 1780, the little remnant of slavery slowly withered and passed away. In the course of a generation, except for some scattered cases, it had vanished altogether.

Pennsylvania was the first state to pass an abolition law.[244] In after years this became a matter of great pride. Her legislators and statesmen frequently boasted of it. Not only was the priority a glory in itself, but the manner in which Pennsylvania conceived the law, and the success with which she carried it out, furnished the states that lay near her a splendid example and a strong incentive which not a few of them followed shortly thereafter.[245]

Yet this law was open to some objections, and for different reasons received much criticism. First, it was loosely and obscurely drawn in some of its sections, and these gave rise to litigation.[246] In the second place, it was largely ineffectual to prevent certain abuses which had been foreseen when it was discussed, and which assumed alarming proportions in a few years. Some Pennsylvanians openly kept up the slave-trade outside of Pennsylvania, and masters within the state sold their slaves into neighboring states, whither they sent also their young negroes, who there remained slaves instead of acquiring freedom at twenty-eight.[247] They even sent away for short periods their female slaves when pregnant, so that the children might not be born on the free soil of Pennsylvania. Besides this the kidnapping of free negroes went on unchecked.[248]

These practices did not escape unprotested. The Friends were indefatigable in their efforts to stop them, and the government was not disposed to allow the work of 1780 to be undone.[249] So in 1788 was passed an act to explain and enforce the previous one. It provided that the births of the children of slaves were to be registered; that husband and wife were not to be separated more than ten miles without their consent; that pregnant females should not be sent out of the state pending their delivery; and it forbade the slave-trade under penalty of one thousand pounds. Heavy punishments were provided for such chicanery as had previously been employed.[250]

This legislation was enforced by the courts in constructions which favored freedom wherever possible. Exact justice was dealt out, but if the master had neglected in the smallest degree to comply with the precise conditions specified in the laws, whether through carelessness, mistake, or unavoidable circumstance, the authorities generally showed themselves glad to declare the slave free.[251] The Friends and abolitionists were particularly active in hunting up pretexts and instituting law-suits for the purpose of setting at liberty the negroes of people who believed they were obeying the laws, but who had neglected to comply with some technical point.[252]

While these devotees of freedom were harassing the enemy they were engaged in operations much more drastic. The laws for abolition, respecting as they did the sacredness of right in property, had not abrogated existing titles to slaves.[253] This the abolitionists denounced as theft, and resolved to get justice by cutting out slavery root and branch.[254]

First they attacked it in the courts. The declaration of rights in the constitution of 1790 declared that all men were born equally free and independent, and had an inherent right to enjoy and defend life and liberty.[255] In 1792 a committee of the House refused the petition of some slaveholders on the ground that slavery was not only unlawful in itself, but also repugnant to the constitution.[256] This point was seized upon by the abolitionists, who resolved to test it before the law. Accordingly they arranged the famous case of Negro Flora v. Joseph Graisberry, and brought it up to the Supreme Court of the state in 1795. It was not settled there, but went up to what was at that time the ultimate judicial authority in Pennsylvania, the High Court of Errors and Appeals. Some seven years after the question had first been brought to law this august tribunal decided after lengthy and able argument that negro slavery did legally exist before the adoption of the constitution of 1790, and that it had not been abolished thereby.[257]

Failing to destroy slavery in the courts the abolitionists strove to demolish it by legal enactment. For this purpose they began a campaign that lasted for two generations. In 1793 the Friends petitioned the Senate for the complete abolition of slavery, and in 1799 they sent a memorial showing their deep concern at the keeping of slaves. In the following year citizens of Philadelphia prayed for abolition, and a few days later the free blacks of the city petitioned that their brethren in bondage be set free, suggesting that a tax be laid upon themselves to help compensate the masters dispossessed. The demand for freedom was supported in other quarters of the state, and undoubtedly a strong feeling was aroused. The Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery began the practice, which it kept up for so many years, of regularly memorializing the legislature. Later on some of the leading men of the state took up the cause, and once the governor in his message referred to the galling yoke of slavery and its stain upon the commonwealth.[258]

It is probable, however, that the majority of the people in the state believed that enough had been done, and desired to see the little remaining slavery quietly extinguished by the operation of such laws as were effecting the extinction. Be this as it may, it is certain that although many bills were proposed to effect total and immediate abolition, some of which had good prospects of success, yet each one was gradually pared of its most radical provisions, and in the end was always found to lack the support requisite to make it a law.

In 1797 the House had a resolution offered and a bill prepared for abolition. This measure dragged along through the next two sessions, but in 1800 so much encouragement came from the city and counties that the work was carried on in earnest. The course of this bill illustrates the progress of others. At first the proposed enfranchisement was to be immediate and for all; then it was modified to affect only negroes over twenty-eight. In this form it passed the House by a handsome majority, but in the Senate it was postponed to the next session. When finally its time came the committee having it in charge reported that as slavery was not in accordance with the constitution of 1790, a law to do away with slavery was not needed. The measure was still mentioned as unfinished business about the time that the High Court decided that slavery was in accordance with the constitution after all.[259]

The abolitionists did not lose heart. They tried again in 1803, and again the following year. In 1811 a little was done in the House, and in 1821 the matter was discussed in the Senate. In this latter year a bill was prepared and debated, but nothing passed except the motion to postpone indefinitely. Indeed the movement had now spent its force, and was thereafter confined to futile petitions that showed more earnestness of purpose than expectation of success.[260]

This is easily explicable when it is understood how rapidly slavery had declined. The number of slaves in Pennsylvania had never been large. By the first Federal census they were put at less than four thousand; but within a decade they had diminished by more than half, and ten years later there were only a few hundred scattered throughout the state.[261] The majority of these slaves during the later years were living in the western counties that bordered on Maryland and Virginia, where slavery had begun latest and lingered longest.[262] In Philadelphia and the older counties it had almost entirely disappeared. So rapid was the decline that as early as 1805 the Pennsylvania Abolition Society reported that in the future it would devote itself less to seeking the liberation of negroes than to striving to improve those already free. This could only mean that they were finding very few to liberate.[263]

That the decreasing agitation for the entire abolition of slavery in Pennsylvania was due to the decline of slavery and not to any decrease in hostility to it, is shown by the character of other legislation demanded, and the readiness with which stringent laws were passed. The act of 1780 permitted the resident of another state to bring his slave into Pennsylvania and keep him there for six months.[264] A very strong feeling developed against this. In 1795 it was necessary for the Supreme Court to declare that such a right was valid. It was afterwards decided, however, that if the master continued to take his slave in and out of Pennsylvania for short periods, the slave should be free. Again and again the legislature was asked to withdraw the privilege. It is needless to recount the petitions that never ceased to come, and at times poured in like a flood. At last the pressure of popular feeling could no longer be held back, and after the legislation of 1847 following the memorable case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania, when a slave was brought by his master within the bounds of Pennsylvania, that moment by state law he was free.[265] Long before this time the passage through the state of slaves bound with chains had awakened the pity of those who saw it.[266] In 1816 it was decided that in certain cases if a runaway slave gave birth to a child in Pennsylvania the child was free.[267] Later the legislature forbade state officers to give any assistance in returning fugitives; and at last lacked but little of giving fugitives trial by jury.

If it be asked whether at this time Pennsylvania was not rather decrying slavery among her neighbors than destroying it within her own gates, since beyond denial she still had slavery there, it must be answered that first, her slavery as regards magnitude was a veritable mote, and secondly, since after 1830, for example, there was not one slave in Pennsylvania under fifty years old, it was far more to the advantage of the negroes to remain in servitude where the law guaranteed them protection and good treatment, than to be set free, when their color and their declining years would have rendered their well-being doubtful. It is probable that such slavery as existed there in the last years was based rather on the kindness of the master and the devotion of the slave, than on the power of the one and the suffering of the other. It was a peaceful passing away. And so in connection with slavery Pennsylvania is seen to have been fortunate. Seeing at an early time the pernicious consequences of such an institution she was able, such were the circumstances of her economic environment, and such was the character of her people, to check it so effectually that it never assumed threatening bulk. Almost as quick to perceive the evil of it, she acted, and while others moralized and lamented, she set her slaves free. Moreover as if to atone for the sin of slave-keeping she granted her freedmen such privileges that it seemed to her ardent idealists that the future could not but promise well.

Whether this liberality came to be a matter of regret in after years, and whether because of circumstances sure to come, but as yet unforeseen, it was possible for the experience of Pennsylvania with her free black population to be as happy as that with her slaves, it will be the purpose of later chapters to enquire.

[1] Breviate. Dutch Records, no. 2, fol. 5. In 2 Pennsylvania Archives, XVI, 234. Cf. Hazard, Annals of Pennsylvania, 49. The “Proposed Freedoms and Exemptions for New Netherland,” 1640, say, “The Company shall exert itself to provide the Patroons and Colonists, on their order with as many Blacks as possible”.... 2 Pa. Arch., V, 74.

[2] C. T. Odhner. “The Founding of New Sweden, 1637–1642”, translated by G. B. Keen in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, III, 277.

[3] Hazard, Annals of Pennsylvania, 331; O’Callaghan, Documents relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York, II, 213, 214. The Report of the Board of Accounts on New Netherland, Dec. 15, 1644, had spoken of the need of negroes, the economy of their labor, and had recommended the importation of large numbers. 2 Pa. Arch., V, 88. See also Davis, History of Bucks County, 793.

[4] 2 Pa. Arch., XVI, 255, 256; Hazard, Annals of Pennsylvania, 372. Sir Robert Carr, writing to Colonel Nicholls, Oct. 13, 1664, says, “I have already sent into Merryland some Neegars w^ch did belong to the late Governor att his plantation above”.... 2 Pa. Arch., V, 578.

[5] The Records of the Court of New Castle give a list of the “Names of the Tijdable prsons Living in this Courts Jurisdiction” in which occur “three negros”: “1 negro woman of Mr. Moll”, “1 neger of Mr. Alrichs”, “Sam Hedge and neger”. Book A, 197–201. Quoted in Pa. Mag., III, 352–354. For the active trade in negroes at this time cf. MS. Board of Trade Journals, II, 307.

[6] “Wth out wch wee cannot subsist”.... MS. New Castle Court Records, Liber A, 406. Hazard, Annals, 456.

[7] “Ik hebbe geen vaste Dienstbode, als een Neger die ik gekocht heb.” Missive van Cornelis Bom, Geschreven uit de Stadt Philadelphia, etc., 3. (Oct. 12, 1684). “Man hat hier auch Zwartzen oder Mohren zu Schlaven in der Arbeit.” Letter, probably of Hermans Op den Graeff, Germantown, Feb. 12, 1684, in Sachse, Letters relating to the Settlement of Germantown, 25. Cf. also MS. in American Philosophical Society’s collection, quoted in Pa. Mag., VII, 106: “Lacey Cocke hath A negroe” ..., “Pattrick Robbinson—Robert neverbeegood his negor sarvant”.... “The Defendts negros” are mentioned in a suit for damages in 1687. See MS. Court Records of Penna. and Chester Co., 1681–1688, p. 72.

[8] MS. Ancient Records of Philadelphia, 28 7th mo., 1702.

[9] MS. William Trent’s Ledger, 156. For numerous references to negroes brought from Barbadoes, see MS. Booke of acc^tts Relating to the Barquentine Constant Ailse And^w: Dykes mast^r: from March 25th 1700 (-1702). (Pa. State Lib.)

[10] Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania (edited by J. T. Mitchell and Henry Flanders), II, 107. Ibid., II, 285. The act of 1705–1706 was repeated in 1710–1711. Ibid., II, 383. Cf. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, II, 529, 530.

[11] Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of the Province of Pennsylvania, I, pt. II, 132. Stat. at L., II, 433.

[12] MS. Board of Trade Papers, Proprieties, IX, Q, 39, 42. Stat. at L., II, 543, 544.

[13] Jonathan Dickinson, a merchant of Philadelphia, writing to a correspondent in Jamaica, 4th month, 1715, says, “I must entreat you to send me no more negroes for sale, for our people don’t care to buy. They are generally against any coming into the country.” I have been unable to find this letter. Watson, who quotes it (Annals of Philadelphia, II, 264), says, “Vide the Logan MSS.” Cf. also a letter of George Tiller of Kingston, Jamaica, to Dickinson, 1712. MS. Logan Papers, VIII, 47.

[14] Stat. at L., III, 117, 118; MS. Board of Trade Papers, Prop., X, 2, Q, 159; Stat. at L., III, 465; Col. Rec., III, 38, 144, 171. During this period negroes were being imported through the custom-house at the rate of about one hundred and fifty a year. Cf. Votes and Proceedings, II, 251.

[15] In 1727 the iron-masters of Pennsylvania petitioned for the entire removal of the duty, labor being so scarce. Votes and Proceedings, 1726–1742, p. 31. The attitude of the English authorities is explained in a report of Richard Jackson, March 2, 1774, on one of the Pennsylvania impost acts. “The Increase of Duty on Negroes in this Law is Manifestly inconsistent with the Policy adopted by your Lordships and your Predecessors for the sake of encouraging the African Trade” ... Board of Trade Papers, Prop., XXIII, Z, 54.

[16] Votes and Proceedings, II, 152; Col. Rec., II, 572, 573; 1 Pa. Arch., I, 160–162; Votes and Proceedings, 1766, pp. 45, 46. For a complaint against this practice cf. “Copy of a Representatⁿ of the Board of Trade upon some pennsylvania Laws” (1713–1714). MS. Board of Trade Papers, Plantations General, IX, K, 35.

[17] O’Callaghan, N. Y. Col. Docs., V, 604.

[18] Votes and Proceedings, II, 347.

[19] Stat. at L., IV, 52–56, 60; Col. Rec., III, 247, 248, 250.

[20] Stat. at L., IV, 123–128; Col. Rec., III, 359; Smith, History of Delaware County, 261. For a while, no doubt, there was a considerable influx. Ralph Sandiford says (1730), “We have negroes flocking in upon us since the duty on them is reduced to 40 shillings per head.” Mystery of Iniquity, (2d ed.), 5. Many of these were smuggled in from New Jersey, where there was no duty from 1721 to 1767. Cooley, A Study of Slavery in New Jersey, 15, 16.

[21] Cargoes of servants are advertised in the American Weekly Mercury, the Pennsylvania Packet, and the Pennsylvania Gazette, passim. As to enlistment of servants cf. Mercury, Gazette, Aug. 7, 1740; Col. Rec., IV, 437. Complaint about this had been made as early as 1711. Votes and Proceedings, II, 101, 103.

[22] Smith, History of Delaware County, 261; Peter Kalm, Travels into North America, etc., (1748), I, 391.

[23] Col. Rec., VII, 37, 38.

[24] Stat. at L., VI, 104–110; Votes and Proceedings, 1761, pp. 25, 29, 33, 38, 39, 40, 41, 52, 55, 63; Col. Rec., VIII, 575, 576. “The Petition of Divers Merchants of the City of Philadelphia, To The Honble James Hamilton Esqr. Lieut. Governor of the Province of Pennsylvania, Humbly Sheweth, That We the Subscribers ... have seen for some time past, the many inconveniencys the Inhabitants have suffer’d, for want of Labourers, and Artificers, by Numbers being Inlisted for His Majestys Service and near a total stop to the importation of German and other white Servants, have for some time encouraged the importation of Negros, ... that an advantage may be gain’d by the Introduction of Slaves, w^ch will likewise be a means of reduceing the exorbitant Price of Labour, and in all Probability bring our staple Commoditys to their usual Prices.” MS. Provincial Papers, XXV, March 1, 1761.

[25] Stat. at L., VII, 158, 159; VIII, 330–332; Col. Rec., IX, 400, 401, 443, ff.; X, 72, 77. The Board of Trade Journals, LXXXII, 47, (May 5, 1774), say that their lordships had some discourse with Dr. Franklin “upon the objections ... to ... imposing Duties amounting to a prohibition upon the Importation of Negroes.”

[26] Cf. MS. Provincial Papers, XXXII, January, 1775.

[27] Stat. at L., X, 72, 73. It was forbidden by implication rather than specific regulation. It had been foreseen that an act for gradual abolition entailed stopping the importation of negroes. Pa. Packet, Nov. 28, 1778; 1 Pa. Arch., VII, 79.

[28] Professor E. P. Cheyney in an article written some years ago (“The Condition of Labor in Early Pennsylvania, I. Slavery,” in The Manufacturer, Feb. 2, 1891, p. 8) considers these laws to have been restrictive in purpose, and gives three causes for their passage, in the following order of importance: (a) dread of slave insurrections, (b) opposition of the free laboring classes to slave competition, (c) conscientious objections. I cannot think that this is correct. (a) seems to have been the impelling motive only in connection with the law of 1712, and seems rarely to have been thought of. It was urged in 1740, 1741, and 1742, when efforts were being made to pass a militia law in Pennsylvania, but it attracted little attention. Cf. MS. Board of Trade Papers, Prop., XV, T: 54, 57, 60.

[29] In a MS. entitled “William Penn’s Memorial to the Lords of Trade relating to several laws passed in Pensilvania,” assigned to the year 1690 in the collection of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, but probably belonging to a later period, is the following: “These ... Acts ... to Raise money ... to defray publick Exigences in such manner as after a Mature deliberac~on they thought would not be burthensom particularly in the Act for laying a Duty on Negroes” ... MS. Pa. Miscellaneous Papers, 1653–1724, p. 24.

[30] 1700. 20 shillings for negroes over sixteen years of age, 6 for those under sixteen. No cause given. Apparently (terms of the act) revenue.—1705–1706. 40 shillings—a draw-back of one half if the negro be re-exported within six months. Apparently revenue.—1710. 40 shillings—excepting those imported by immigrants for their own use, and not sold within a year. Almost certainly (preamble) revenue.—1712. 20 pounds. The causes were a dread of insurrection because of the negro uprising in New York, and the Indians’ dislike of the importation of Indian slaves. Purpose undoubtedly restriction.—1715. 5 pounds. Apparently (character of the provisions) restriction and revenue.—1717–1718. 5 pounds. To continue the preceding. Restriction and revenue—1720–1721. 5 pounds. To continue the preceding. Revenue (preamble) and restriction.—1722. 5 pounds. To continue provisions of previous acts. Revenue and restriction—1725–1726. 5 pounds. Revenue and restriction.—1729. 2 pounds. Reduction made probably because since 1712 none of the laws had been allowed to stand for any length of time, and because there had been much smuggling. Revenue and restriction.—1761. 10 pounds. No cause given for the increase. Restriction and revenue.—1768. Preceding continued—“of public utility.” Restriction and revenue.—1773. Preceding made perpetual—“of great public utility”—but duty raised to 20 pounds. Restriction. Cf. Stat. at L., II, 107, 285, 383, 433; III, 117, 159, 238, 275; IV, 52, 123; VI, 104; VII, 158; VIII, 330.

[31] See below, chapters IV and V.

[32] “Man hat besonders in Pensylvanien den Grundsatz angenommen ihre EinfÜhrung so viel mÖglich abzuhalten” ... Achenwall’s in GÖttingen Über Nordamerika und Über dasige Grosbritannische Colonien aus mÜndlichen Nachrichten des Herrn Dr. Franklins ... Anmerkungen, 24, 25. (About 1760).

[33] Stat. at L., X, 67, 68; 1 Pa. Arch., I, 306. Cf. Mr. Woodward’s speech, Jan. 19, 1838, Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to Propose Amendments to the Constitution, etc., X, 16, 17.

[34] “Aus Pennsylvanien ... fahren gen Barbadoes, Jamaica und Antego. Von dar bringen sie zurÜck ... Negros.” Daniel Falkner, Curieuse Nachricht von Pennsylvania in Norden-America, etc., (17O2), 192. For a negro woman from Jamaica (1715), see MS. Court Papers, Philadelphia County, 1619–1732. Also numerous advertisements in the newspapers. Mercury, Apr. 17, 1729, (Barbadoes); July 31, 1729, (Bermuda); July 23, 1730, (St. Christophers); Jan. 21, 1739, (Antigua). Oldmixon, speaking of Pennsylvania, says, “Negroes sell here ... very well; but not by the Ship Loadings, as they have sometimes done at Maryland and Virginia.” (1741.) British Empire in America, etc., (2d ed.), I, 316. Cf. however the following: “A PARCEL of likely Negro Boys and Girls just arrived in the Sloop Charming Sally ... to be sold ... for ready Money, Flour or Wheat” ... Advt. in Pa. Gazette, Sept. 4, 1740. For a consignment of seventy see MS. Provincial Papers, XXVII, Apr. 26, 1766.

[35] Cf. MS. William Trent’s Ledger, “Negroes” (1703–1708). Isaac Norris, Letter Book, 75, 76 (1732). For a statement of profit and loss on two imported negroes, see ibid., 77. In this case Isaac Norris acted as a broker, charging five per cent. For the wheat and flour trade with Barbadoes, see A Letter from Doctor More ... Relating to the ... Province of Pennsilvania, 5. (1686).

[36] Some were probably brought from Africa by pirates. Cf. MS. Board of Trade Papers, Prop., III, 285, 286; IV, 369; V, 408. The hazard involved in the purchase of negroes is revealed in the following: “Acco^t of Negroes D^r to Tho. Willen £17: 10 for a New Negro Man ... £15 and 50 Sh. more if he live to the Spring” ... MS. James Logan’s Account Book, 91, (1714). As to the effect of cold weather upon negroes, Isaac Norris, writing to Jonathan Dickinson in 1703, says, ... “they’re So Chilly they Can hardly Stir frÕ the fire and Wee have Early beginning for a hard Wint^r.” MS. Letter Book, 1702–1704, p. 109. In 1748 Kalm says, ... “the toes and fingers of the former” (negroes) “are frequently frozen.” Travels, I, 392.

[37] Mercury, Sept. 26, 1723. MS. Penn Papers, Accounts (unbound), 27 3d mo., 1741. Also Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1697–1698, p. 390; Col. Rec., IV, 515; Pa. Mag., XXVII, 320.

[38] A Report of the Royal African Company, Nov. 2, 1680, purports to show the first cost: “That the Negros cost them the first price 5li: and 4li: 15s. the freight, besides 25li p cent which they lose by the usual mortality of the Negros.” MS. Board of Trade Journals, III, 229. The selling price had been considered immoderate four years previous. Ibid., I, 236. In 1723 Peter Baynton sold “a negroe man named Jemy ... 30 £.” Loose sheet in Peter Baynton’s Ledger. In 1729 a negro twenty-five years old brought 35 pounds in Chester County. MS. Chester County Papers, 89. The Moravians of Bethlehem purchased a negress in 1748 for 70 pounds. Pa. Mag., XXII, 503. Peter Kalm (1748) says that a full grown negro cost from 40 pounds to 100 pounds; a child of two or three years, 8 pounds to 14 pounds. Travels, I, 393, 394. Mittelberger (1750) says 200 to 350 florins (33 to 58 pounds). Journey to Pennsylvania in the Year 1750, etc., 106. Franklin (1751) in a very careful estimate thought that the price would average about 30 pounds. Works (ed. Sparks), II, 314. Acrelius (about 1759) says 30 to 40 pounds. Description of ... New Sweden, etc. (translation of W. M. Reynolds, 1874, in Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, XI), p. 168. A negro iron-worker brought 50 pounds at Bethlehem in 1760. Pa. Mag., XXII, 503. In 1790 Edward Shippen writes of a slave who cost him 100 pounds. Ibid., VII, 31. It is probable that the value of a slave was roughly about three times that of a white servant. Cf. Votes and Proceedings (1764), V, 308.

[39] In 1708 the Board of Trade requested the governor of Pennsylvania that very definite information on a variety of subjects relating to the negro be transmitted thereafter half yearly. Were these records available they would be worth more than all the remaining information. Cf. MS. Provincial Papers, I, April 15, 1708; 1 Pa. Arch., I, 152, 153.

[40] N. Y. Col. Docs., V, 604. As to the necessity for allowing so large a margin in these figures cf. the following. “The number of the whites are said to be Sixty Thousand, and of the Black about five Thousand.” Col. Hart’s Answer, etc., MS. Board of Trade Papers, Prop., XI, R: 7. (1720). “The number of People in this Province may be computed to above 40,000 Souls amongst whom we have scarce any Blacks except a few Household Servants in the City of Philadelphia” ... Letter of Sir William Keith, ibid., XI, R: 42. (1722). Another communication gave the true state of the case, if not the exact numbers. “This Government has not hitherto had Occasion to use any methods that can furnish us with an exact Estimate, but as near as can at present be guessed there may be about Forty five thousand Souls of Whites and four thousand Blacks.” Major Gordon’s answer to Queries, ibid., XIII, S: 34. (1730–1731).

[41] William Douglass, A Summary, Historical and Political, ... of the British Settlements in North-America, etc. (ed. 1755), II, 324; Abiel Holmes, American Annals, etc., II, 187; Bancroft, History of the United States (author’s last revision), II, 391.

[42] Letter in Pa. Packet, Jan 1, 1780. This made allowance for the numerous runaways during the British occupation of Philadelphia. Also ibid., Dec. 25, 1779; 1 Pa. Arch., XI, 74, 75. For a higher estimate, 10,000, for 1780 but made in 1795, see MS. Collection of the Records of the Pa. Society for the Abolition of Slavery, etc., IV, 111.

[43] Slaves, 3,737; free, 6,537. Other enumerations occur, but are evidently without value. Oldmixon (1741), 3,600. British Empire in America, I, 321. Burke (1758), about 6,000. An Account of the European Settlements in America, II, 204. AbbÉ Raynal (1766), 30,000. A Philosophical and Political History of the British Settlements ... in North America (tr. 1776), I, 163. A communication to the Earl of Dartmouth (1773), 2,000. MS. Provincial Papers, Jan. 1775; 1 Pa. Arch., IV, 597. Smyth (1782), over 100,000. A Tour in the United States of America, etc., II, 309.

[44] MS. (Samuel Wright), A Journal of Our Rem(oval) from Chester and Darby (to) Conestogo ... 1726, copied by A. C. Myers; Morgan, Annals of Harrisburg, 9–11; Col. Rec., VIII, 305, 306. Tax-lists printed in 3 Pa. Arch. Also Davis, Hist. of Bucks Co., 793; Futhey and Cope, Hist. of Chester Co., 423 425; Ellis and Evans, Hist. of Lancaster Co., 301; Gibson, Hist. of York Co., 498; Bean, Hist. of Montgomery Co., 302; Lytle, Hist. of Huntingdon Co., 182; Blackman, Hist. of Susquehanna Co., 72; Creigh, Hist. of Washington Co., 362; Bausman, Hist. of Beaver Co., I, 152, 153; Linn, Annals of Buffalo Valley, 66–74; Peck, Wyoming; its History, etc., 240.

[45] MS. Assessment Books, Chester Co., 1765, p. 197; 1768, p. 326; 1780, p. 95; MS. Assessment Book, Phila. Co., 1769. As early as 1688 Henry Jones of Moyamensing had thirteen negroes. MS. Phila. Wills, Book A, 84. An undated MS. entitled “A List of my Negroes” shows that Jonathan Dickinson had thirty-two. Dickinson Papers, unclassified. An owner in York County is said to have had one hundred and fifty. 3 Pa. Arch., XXI, 71. This is probably a misprint.

[46] In 1790 the numbers were as follows: New York, 21,324 slaves, 4,654 free, total 25,978; New Jersey, 11,423 slaves, 4,402 free, total 15,825; Pennsylvania, 3,737 slaves, 6,537 free, total 10,274.

[47] On Pennsylvania’s amazing commercial and industrial activity see Anderson, Historical and Chronological Deductions of the Origin of Commerce, etc. (1762), III, 75–77.

[48] See below, p. 41.

[49] See below, chapters IV and V.

[50] See below, ibid.

[51] Nevertheless slavery took root in the western counties, and lingered there longer than anywhere else in Pennsylvania.

[52] Throughout this work the fundamental distinction between the words “slave” and “servant,” as used in the text, is that “slave” denotes a person held for life, “servant” a person held for a term of years only.

[53] Cf. O’Callaghan, Voyages of the Slavers St. John and Arms of Amsterdam, etc., 100, for a bill of sale, 1646. Sprinchorn, Kolonien Nya Sveriges Historia, 217.

[54] MS. Record of the Court at Upland in Penn., Sept. 25, 1676.

[55] “No Christian shall be kept in Bondslavery villenage or Captivity, Except Such who shall be Judged thereunto by Authority, or such as willingly have sould, or shall sell themselves,” ... Laws of the Province of Pennsylvania ... preceded by the Duke of York’s Laws, etc., 12. This is not to prejudice any masters “who have ... Apprentices for Terme of Years, or other Servants for Term of years or Life.” Ibid., 12. Another clause directs that “No Servant, except such are duly so for life, shall be Assigned over to other Masters ... for above the Space of one year, unless for good reasons offered”. Ibid., 38.

[56] There is an evident distinction intended in the following: “A List of the Tydable psons James Sanderling and slave John Test and servant.” One follows the other. MS. Rec. Court at Upland, Nov. 13, 1677. In 1686 the price of a negro, 30 pounds, named in a law-suit, is probably that of a slave. MS. Minute Book. Common Pleas and Quarter Sessions. Bucks Co., 1684–1730, pp. 56, 57. A will made in 1694 certainly disposed of the within mentioned negroes for life. “I do hereby give ... pow^r ... to my s^d Exers ... eith^r to lett or hire out my five negroes ... and pay my s^d wife the one half of their wages Yearly during her life or Oth^rwise give her such Compensac~on for her int^rest therein as shee and my s^d Exe?rs shall agree upon and my will is that the other half of their s^d wages shall be equally Devided between my aforsd Children, and after my sd wife decease my will also is That the sd negroes Or such of them and their Offsprings as are then alive shall in kind or value be equally Devided between my s^d Children” ... Will of Thomas Lloyd. MS. Philadelphia Wills, Book A, 267.

[57] MSS., Domestic Letters, 17.

[58] “Know all men by these presents That I Patrick Robinson Countie Clark of Philadelphia for and in Consideration of the Sum of fourtie pounds Current Money of Pennsilvania ... have bargained Sold and delivered ... unto ... Joseph Browne for himselfe, ... heirs exe~rs adm~rs and assigns One Negro man Named Jack, To have and to hold the Said Negro man named Jack unto the said Joseph Browne for himself ... for ever. And I ... the said Negro man unto him ... shall and will warrant and for ever defend by these presents.” MS. Philadelphia Deed Book, E, 1, vol. V, 150, 151. This is similar to the regular legal formula afterward. Cf. MS. Ancient Rec. Sussex Co., 1681–1709, Sept. 22, 1709.

[59] See below, p. 65.

[60] “And to buy Souls and Bodies of men for Money, to enslave them and their Posterity to the end of the World, we judge is a great hinderance to the spreading of the Gospel” ... “neither should we keep them in perpetual Bondage and Slavery against their Consent” ... An Exhortation and Caution To Friends Concerning buying or keeping of Negroes, reprinted in Pa. Mag., XIII, 266, 268.

[61] “An Act for the better Regulation of Servants in this Province and Territories.” Stat. at L., II, 56.

[62] Cf. J. C. Ballagh, A History of Slavery in Virginia, chapter II.

[63] Cf. letter of William Edmundson to Friends in Maryland, Virginia, and other parts of America, 1675. S. Janney, History of the Religious Society of Friends, from Its Rise to the Year 1828, III, 178.

[64] The Articles Settlement and Offices of the Free Society of Traders in Pennsylvania, etc., article XVIII. This quite closely resembles the ordinance issued by Governor Rising to the Swedes in 1654, that after a certain period negroes should be absolutely free.... “efter 6 Åhr vare en slafvare alldeles fri.” Sprinchorn, Kolonien Nya Sveriges Historia, 271.

[65] “Let no blacks be brought in directly. and if any come out of Virginia, Maryld. [or elsewhere erased] in families that have formerly bought them elsewhere Let them be declared (as in the west jersey constitutions) free at 8 years end.” “B. F. Abridgm^t. out of Holland and Germany.” Penn MSS. Ford vs. Penn. etc., 1674–1716, p. 17.

[66] Cf. Pa. Mag., IV, 28–30.

[67] Ibid., XIII, 265–270.

[68] Negro servants are mentioned. See Pa. Mag., VII, 106. Cf. below, p. 54. Little reliance can be placed upon the early use of this word.

[69] I have found no instance where a negro was indisputably a servant in the early period. The court records abound in notices of white servants.

[70] Laws of the Province of Pennsylvania ... 1682–1700, p. 153 (1683), 211, 213 (1693). For running away white servants had to give five days of extra service for each day of absence. Ibid., 166 (1683), 213 (1693). Harboring cost the offender five shillings a day. Ibid., 152 (1683), 212 (1693).

[71] Ibid., 113 (1682); ibid., 102 (Laws Agreed upon in England).

[72] Ibid., 152. “No Servant white or black ... shall at anie time after publication hereof be Attached or taken into Execution for his Master or Mistress debt” ...

[73] The rearing of slave children was regarded as a burden by owners. A writer declared that in Pennsylvania “negroes just born are considered an incumbrance only, and if humanity did not forbid it, they would be instantly given away.” Pa. Packet, Jan. 1, 1780. In 1732 the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas ordered a man to take back a negress whom he had sold, and who proved to be pregnant. He was to refund the purchase money and the money spent “for Phisic and Attendance of the Said Negroe in her Miserable Condition.” MS. Court Papers. 1732–1744. Phila. Co., June 9, 1732.

[74] The Roman doctrine of partus sequitur ventrem. This was never established by law in Pennsylvania, and during colonial times was never the subject of a court decision that has come down. That it was the usage, however, there is abundant proof. In 1727 Isaac Warner bequeathed “To Wife Ann ... a negro woman named Sarah ... To daughter Ann Warner (3) an unborn negro child of the above named Sarah.” MS. Phila. Co. Will Files, no. 47, 1727. In 1786 the Supreme Court declared that it was the law of Pennsylvania, and had always been the custom. 1 Dallas 181.

[75] MS. Abstract of Phila. Co. Wills, Book A, 63, 71, (1693); Will of Samuel Richardson of Philadelphia in Pa. Mag., XXXIII, 373 (1719). In 1682 the attorney-general in England answering an inquiry from Jamaica, declared “That where goods or merchandise are by Law forfeited to the King, the sale of them from one to another will not fix the property as against the King, but they may be seized wherever found whilst they remain in specie; And that Negros being admitted Merchandise will fall within the same Law”. MS. Board of Trade Journals, IV, 124. On several occasions during war negro slaves were captured from the enemy and brought to Pennsylvania, where they were sold as ordinary prize-goods—things. In 1745, however, when two French negro prisoners produced papers showing that they were free, they were held for exchange as prisoners of war—persons. MS. Provincial Papers, VII, Oct. 2, 1745. For the status of the negro slave as real estate in Virginia, cf. Ballagh, Hist. of Slavery in Virginia, ch. II. In 1786 the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania decided that “property in a Negroe may be obtained by a bona fide purchase, without deed.” 1 Dallas 169.

[76] “An Act for the trial of Negroes.” Stat. at L., II, 77–79. Repealed in Council, 1705. Ibid., II, 79; Col. Rec., I, 612, 613. Passed again with slight changes in 1705–1706. Stat. at L., II, 233–236.

[77] “An Act for the better regulating of Negroes in this Province.” Stat. at L., IV, 59–64. It became law by lapse of time. Ibid., IV, 64.

[78] “An Act for the better regulating of Negroes in this Province.”, section 1. Stat. at L., IV, 59.

[79] Cf. Enoch Lewis, “Life of William Penn” (1841), in Friends’ Library, V, 315; J. R. Tyson, “Annual Discourse before the Historical Society of Pennsylvania” (1831), in Hazard’s Register, VIII, 316.

[80] MS. Minutes Court of Quarter Sessions Bucks County, 1684–1730, P. 375 (1703); MS. “Bail, John Kendig for a Negro, 29. 9^br 35,” in Logan Papers, unbound; “An Act for the trial of Negroes,” Stat. at L., II, 77–79 (1700), 233–236 (1705–1706); Col. Rec., III, 254; IV, 243; IX, 648, 680, 704, 705, 707; X, 73, 276. For the commission instituting one of these special courts (1762), see MS. Miscellaneous Papers, 1684–1847, Chester County, 149; also Diffenderffer, “Early Negro Legislation in the Province of Pennsylvania,” in Christian Culture, Sept. 1, 1890. Mr. Diffenderffer cites a commission of Feb. 20, 1773, but is puzzled at finding no record of the trial of negroes in the records of the local Court of Quarter Sessions. It would of course not appear there. Special dockets were kept for the special courts. Cf. MS. Records of Special Courts for the Trial of Negroes, held at Chester, in Chester County. The law was not universally applied at first. In 1703 a negro was tried for fornication before the Court of Quarter Sessions. MS. Minutes Court of Quarter Sessions Bucks County, 1684–1730, p. 378.

[81] Col. Rec., I, 61; II, 405, 406.

[82] “An Act for the better regulating of Negroes,” etc. Stat. at L., IV, 59. For an instance of such valuation in the case of two slaves condemned for burglary, see MS. Provincial Papers, XXX, July 29, 1773. The governor, however, pardoned these negroes on condition that they be transported.

[83] “On the trials Larry the slave was convicted by a Jury of twelve Men and received the usual sentence of whipping, restitution and fine according to law.... This case is published as being the first instance of a slave’s being tried in this state by a Grand and Petit Jury. Our constitution provides that these unhappy men shall have the same measure of Justice and the same mode of trial with others, their fellow creatures, when charged with crimes or offences.” Pa. Packet, Feb. 16, 1779. Nevertheless a commission for a special court had been issued in August, 1777. Cf. “Petition of Mary Bryan,” MS. Misc. Papers, Aug. 15, 1777.

[84] Stat. at L., X, 72. What was the standing of negro slaves before the ordinary courts of Pennsylvania in the years between 1700 and 1780 it is difficult to say. They certainly could not be witnesses—not against white men, since this privilege was given to free negroes for the first time in 1780 (Stat. at L., X, 70), and to slaves not until 1847 (Laws of Assembly, 1847, p. 208); while if they were witnesses against other negroes it would be before special courts. Doubtless negroes could sometimes seek redress in the ordinary courts, though naturally the number of such cases would be limited. There is, however, at least one instance of a white man being sued by a negro, who won his suit. “Francis Jn^oson the Negro verbally complained agst W^m Orion ... and after pleading to on both sides the Court passed Judgment and ordered W^m Orion to pay him the sd Francis Jn^oson twenty shillings” ... MS. Ancient Records of Sussex County, 1681 to 1709, 4th mo., 1687. Before 1700 negroes were tried before the ordinary courts, and there is at least one case where a negro witnessed against a white man. Ibid., 8br 1687.

[85] Stat. at L., II, 77–79; Col. Rec., I, 612, 613. Instances of negro crime are mentioned in MS. Records of Special Courts for the Trial of Negroes—Chester County. For a case of arson punished with death, cf. Col. Rec., IV, 243. For two negroes condemned to death for burglary, ibid., IX, 6, also 699. The punishment for the attempted rape of a white woman was the one point that caused the disapproval of the attorney-general in England, and, probably, led to the passage of the revised act in 1705–1706. Cf. MS. Board of Trade Papers, Prop., VIII, 40, Bb. For restitution by masters, which was frequently very burdensome, cf. MS. Misc. Papers, Oct. 9, 1780.

[86] Stat. at L., II, 233–236. These punishments were continued until repealed in 1780, (Stat. at L., X, 72), when the penalty for robbery and burglary became imprisonment. This bore entirely on the master, so that in 1790 Governor Mifflin asked that corporal punishment be substituted. Hazard’s Register, II, 74. For theft whipping continued to be imposed, but guilty white people were punished in the same manner. MS. Petitions, Lancaster County, 1761–1825, May, 1784. MS. Misc. Papers, July, 1780.

[87] See below, p. 111.

[88] “For that hee ... contrary to the Lawes of the Governmt and Contrary to his Masters Consent hath ... got wth child a certaine molato wooman Called Swart anna” ... MS. Rec. Court at Upland, 19; Penn MSS. Papers relating to the Three Lower Counties, 1629–1774, p. 193; MS. Minutes Abington Monthly Meeting, 27 1st mo., 1693. “David Lewis Constable of Haverfoord Returned A Negro man of his And A white woman for haveing A Baster Childe ... the negroe said she Intised him and promised him to marry him: she being examined, Confest the same: ... the Court ordered that she shall Receive Twenty one laishes on her beare Backe ... and the Court ordered the negroe never more to meddle with any white woman more uppon paine of his life.” MS. Min. Chester Co. Courts, 1697–1710, p. 24.

[89] MS. Ancient Rec. of Phila., Nov. 4, 1722.

[90] Votes and Proceedings, II, 336.

[91] Stat. at L., IV, 62. Cf. Votes and Proceedings, II, 337, 345. For marriage or cohabiting without a master’s consent a servant had to atone with extra service. Cf. Stat. at L., II, 22. This obviously would not check a slave.

[92] Apparently such a marriage had occurred in 1722. MS. Ancient Rec. Phila., Nov. 4, 1722, which mention “the Clandestine mariage of M^r Tuthil’s Negro and Katherine Williams.” The petitioner, who was imprisoned for abetting the marriage, concludes: “I have Discover’d who maried the foresd Negroe, and shall acquaint your hon^rs.”

[93] American Weekly Mercury, Nov. 9, 1727; Pa. Gazette, Feb. 7, 1739–1740; and passim. Mittelberger mentions them in 1750. Cf. Journey to Pennsylvania, etc., 107; MS. Register of Slaves in Chester County, 1780.

[94] “A circumstance not easily believed, is, that the subjection of the negroes has not corrupted the morals of their masters” ... AbbÉ Raynal, British Settlements in North America I, 163. Raynal’s authority is very poor. The assertion in the text rests rather on negative evidence. Cf. Votes and Proceedings, 1766, p. 30, for an instance of a white woman prostitute to negroes. Ibid., 1767–1776, p. 666, for evidence as to mulatto bastards by pauper white women. Also MS. Misc. Papers, Mar. 12, 1783. For a case (1715) where the guilty white man was probably not a servant cf. MS. Court Papers, Phila. Co., 1697–1732. Benjamin Franklin was openly accused of keeping negro paramours. Cf. What is Sauce for a Goose is also Sauce for a Gander, etc. (1764), 6; A Humble Attempt at Scurrility, etc. (1765), 40.

[95] See below.

[96] Cf. Col. Rec., I, 117.

[97] Stat. at L., IV, 59–64, (sections IX-XIII). Tippling-houses seem to have given a good deal of trouble. In 1703 the grand jury presented several persons “for selling Rum to negros and others” ... MS. Ancient Rec. of Phila., Nov. 3, 1703. Cf. also presentment of the grand jury, Jan. 2, 1744. Pa. Mag., XXII, 498.

[98] Col. Rec., I, 380–381. “The great abuse and Ill consiquence of the great multitudes of negroes who commonly meete togeither in a Riott and tumultious manner on the first days of the weeke.” MS. Ancient Rec. of Phila., 28 7th mo., 1702; ibid., Nov. 3, 1703.

[99] “The Grand Inquest ... do present that whereas there has been Divers Rioters ... and the peace of our Lord the King Disturbers, by Divers Infants, bond Servants, and Negros, within this City after it is Duskish ... that Care may be taken to Suppress the unruly Negroes of this City accompanying to gether on the first Day of the weeke, and that they may not be Suffered to walk the Streets in Companys after it is Darke without their Masters Leave” ... MS. Ancient Rec. of Phila., Apr. 4, 1717.

[100] Minutes of the Common Council of the City of Philadelphia, 1704–1776, 314, 315, 316, 326, 342, 376; Col. Rec., IV, 224, (1737).

[101] “The Grand Inquest now met humly Represent to This honourable Court the great Disorders Commited On the first Dayes of the week By Servants, apprentice boys and Numbers of Negros it has been with great Concearn Observed that the Whites in their Tumultious Resorts in the markets and other placies most Darringly Swear Curse Lye Abuse and often fight Striving to Excell in all Leudness and Obsenity which must produce a generall Corruption of Such youth If not Timely Remidieed and from the Concourse of Negroes Not only the above Mischeiffs but other Dangers may issue” ... MS. Court Papers, 1732–1744, Phila. Co., 1741.

[102] “Many disorderly persons meet every evg. about the Court house of this city, and great numbers of Negroes and others sit there with milk pails, and other things, late at night, and many disorders are there committed against the peace and good government of this city” Minutes Common Council of Phila., 405.

[103] Pa. Gazette, Nov. 12, 1761.

[104] “An Act for preventing Accidents that may happen by Fire,” sect. IV, Stat. at L., III, 254 (1721); “An Act to prevent the Damages, which may happen, by firing of Woods,” etc., sect. III, ibid., IV, 282 (1735); “An Act for the trial of Negroes,” sect. V, ibid., II, 79 (1700); “An Act for the more effectual preventing Accidents which may happen by Fire, and for suppressing Idleness, Drunkenness, and other Debaucheries,” sect. III, ibid., V, 109, 110 (1750–1751); “An Act to prevent the Hunting of Deer,” etc., sect. VII, ibid., VI, 49 (1760); “An Act for the better regulating the nightly Watch within the city of Philadelphia,” etc., sect. XXII, ibid., V, 126 (1750–1751); repeated in 1756, 1763, 1766, 1771, ibid., V, 241; VI, 309; VII, 7; VIII, 115; “An Act for regulating Wagoners, Carters, Draymen, and Porters,” etc., sect. VII, ibid., VI, 68 (1761); repeated in 1763 and 1770, ibid. VI, 250; VII, 359, 360.

[105] Cf. the story of Hodge’s Cato, told in Watson, Annals of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania in the Olden Time, etc., II, 263.

[106] Cf. Achenwall, who got his information from Franklin, Anmerkungen, 25: “Diese Mohrensclaven geniessen als Unterthanen des Staats ... den Schutz der Gesetze, so gut als freye Einwohner. Wenn ein Colonist, auch selbst der Eigenthumsherr, einen Schwarzen umbringt, so wird er gleichfalls zum Tode verurtheilt. Wenn der Herr seinem Sclaven zu harte Arbeit auflegt, oder ihn sonst Übel behandelt, so kan er ihn beym Richter verklagen.” Also Kalm, Travels, I, 390.

[107] “Yesterday at a Supream Court held in this City, sentence of Death was passed upon William Bullock, who was ... Convicted of the Murder of his Negro Slave.” American Weekly Mercury, Apr. 29, 1742.

[108] Kalm (1748) said that there was no record of such a sentence being carried out; but he adds that a case having arisen, even the magistrates secretly advised the guilty person to leave the country, “as otherwise they could not avoid taking him prisoner, and then he would be condemned to die according to the laws of the country, without any hopes of saving him”. Travels, I, 391, 392. For a case cf. Pa. Gazette, Feb. 24, 1741–1742.

[109] Acrelius, Description of New Sweden, 169 (1759); Kalm, Travels, I, 394 (1748); Hector St. John CrÈvecoeur, Letters from an American Farmer, 222 (just before the Revolution).

[110] When one of Christopher Marshall’s white servants “struck and kickt” his negro woman, he “could scarcely refrain from kicking him out of the House &c &c &c.” MS. Remembrancer, E, July 22, 1779.

[111] Kalm, I, 394; St. John CrÈvecoeur, 221. Benjamin Lay contradicts this, but allowance must always he made for the extremeness of his assertions. Cf. his All Slave-Keepers Apostates (1737), 93.

[112] Acrelius, 169.

[113] St. John CrÈvecoeur, 221; Kalm, I, 394; Acrelius, 169. Personal papers contain numerous notices. “To 1 pr Shoes for the negro ... 6” (sh.). MS. William Penn’s Account Book, 1690–1693, p. 2 (1690). A “Bill rendered by Christian Grafford to James Steel” is as follows: “Making old Holland Jeakit and breeches fit for your Negero 0.3.0 Making 2 new Jeakits and 2 pair breeches of stripped Linen for both your Negeromans 0.14.0 And also for Little Negero boy 0.4.0 Making 2 pair Leather Breeches, 1 for James Sanders and another for your Negroeman Zeason 0.13.0.” Pa. Mag., XXXIII, 121 (1740). The bill rendered for the shoes of Thomas Penn’s negroes in 1764–1765 amounted to £7 7 sh. 3d., the price per pair averaging about 7 sh. 6d. Penn-Physick MSS., IV, 223. Also ibid., IV, 265, 267. Cf. Penn Papers, accounts (unbound), Aug. 19, 1741; Christopher Marshall’s Remembrancer, E, June 1, 1779.

[114] Thus Cato had on “two jackets, the uppermost a dark blue half thick, lined with red flannel, the other a light blue homespun flannel, without lining, ozenbrigs shirt, old leather breeches, yarn stockings, old shoes, and an old beaver hat” ... Pa. Gazette, May 5, 1748. A negro from Chester County wore “a lightish coloured cloath coat, with metal buttons, and lined with striped linsey, a lightish linsey jacket with sleeves, and red waistcoat, tow shirt, old lightish cloth breeches, and linen drawers, blue stockings, and old shoes.” Ibid., Jan. 3, 1782. Judith wore “a green jacket, a blue petticoat, old shoes, and grey stockings, and generally wears silver bobbs in her ears.” Ibid., Feb. 16, 1747–1748.

[115] Amer. Weekly Mercury, Jan. 31, 1721; Jan. 31, 1731; Pa. Gazette, Oct. 22, 1747; May 5, 1748; Apr. 16, 1761; Jan. 3, 1782; Pa. Journal, Feb. 5, 1750–1751; Pa. Mag., XVIII, 385.

[116] Pa. Gazette, May 3, 1775. Supported by advertisements passim.

[117] MS. Dickinson Papers, unclassified. A farm with a stone house for negroes is mentioned in Pa. Gaz., June 26, 1746. “Part of these slaves lived in their master’s family, the others had separate cabins on the farm where they reared families” ... “Jacob Minshall Homestead” in Reminiscence, Gleanings and Thoughts, No. I, 12.

[118] Kalm, Travels, I, 394. For treatment of negroes in the West Indies, cf. Sandiford, The Mystery of Iniquity, 99 (1730); Benezet, A Short Account of that Part of Africa Inhabited by the Negroes (1762), 55, 56, note; Benezet, A Caution and Warning to Great Britain and Her Colonies in a Short Representation of the Calamitous State of the Enslaved Negroes (1766), 5–9; Benezet, Some Historical Account of Guinea (1771), chap. VIII. For treatment in the South, cf. Whitefield, Three Letters (1740), 13, 71; Chastellux, Voyage en AmÉrique (1786), 130. For treatment in Pennsylvania cf. Kalm, Travels, I, 394; St. John CrÈvecoeur, Letters, 221. Acrelius says that the negroes at the iron-furnaces were allowed to stop work for “four months in summer, when the heat is most oppressive.” Description, 168.

[119] Mercury, Gazette, and Pa. Packet, passim. Most of the taverns seem to have had negro servants. Cf. MS. Assessment Book, Chester Co., 1769, p. 146; of Bucks Co., 1779, p. 84.

[120] Mercury, Mar. 3. 1723–1724; Dec. 15, 1724; July 4, 1728; Aug. 24, 1732; Gazette, Feb. 7, 1740; Dec. 3, 1741; May 20, 1742; Nov. 1, 1744; July 9, Dec. 3, 1761; Packet, July 5, 1733.

[121] “The laborers are generally composed partly of negroes (slaves) partly of servants from Germany or Ireland” ... Acrelius, Description, 168. Cf. Gabriel Thomas, An Historical and Geographical Account of the Province and Country of Pensilvania (1698), etc., 28.

[122] Mercury, Jan. 16, 1727–1728; July 25, 1728; Nov. 7, 1728. Gazette, July 17, 1740; Mar. 31, 1743. “A compleat washerwoman” is advertised in the Gazette, Oct. 1, 1761; also “an extraordinary washer of clothes,” Gazette, Apr. 12, 1775; Penn-Physick, MSS IV, 203 (1740).

[123] Gazette, May 19, 1743; July 11, 1745; Nov. 5, 1761; May 15, 1776; Dec. 15, 1779. Cf. notices in William Penn’s Cash Book (MS.), 3, 6, 9, 15, 18; John Wilson’s Cash Book (MS.), Feb. 23, 1776; MS. Phila. Account Book, 38 (1694); MS. Logan Papers, II, 259 (1707); Richard Hayes’s Ledger (MS.), 88 (1716).

[124] Cf. the numerous allusions to his negro woman made by Christopher Marshall in his Remembrancer. An entry in John Wilson’s Cash Book (MS.), Apr. 27, 1770, says: “paid his” (Joseph Pemberton’s) “Negro woman Market mony ... 7/6.” The following advertisement is illustrative, although perhaps it reveals the advertiser’s art as much as the excellence and reliability of the negress. “A likely young Negroe Wench, who can cook and wash well, and do all Sorts of House-work; and can from Experience, be recommended both for her Honesty and Sobriety, having often been trusted with the Keys of untold Money, and Liquors of various Sorts, none of which she will taste. She is no Idler, Company-keeper or Gadder about. She has also a fine, hearty young Child, not quite a Year old, which is the only Reason for selling her, because her Mistress is very sickly, and can’t bear the Trouble of it.” Pa. Gazette, Apr. 2, 1761.

[125] “Thou Knowest Negro Peters Ingenuity In making for himself and playing on a fiddle w^th out any assistance as the thing in them is Innocent and diverting and may keep them from worse Employmt I have to Encourage in my Service promist him one from Engld therefore buy and bring a good Strong well made Violin w^th 2 or 3 Sets of spare Gut for the Suitable Strings get somebody of skill to Chuse and by it”.... MS. Isaac Norris, Letter Book, 1719, p. 185.

[126] See above, pp. 32–34.

[127] “Our Negro woman got leave to visit her children in Bucks County.” Christopher Marshall’s Remembrancer, D, Jan. 7, 1776. “This afternoon came home our Negro woman Dinah.” Ibid., D, Jan. 15, 1776.

[128] Watson, Annals, I, 406. Cf. letter of William Hamilton of Lancaster: “Yesterday (being Negroes Holiday) I took a ride into Maryland.” Pa. Mag., XXIX, 257.

[129] For the treatment of William Edmundson when he tried to convert negroes in the West Indies, cf. his Journal, 85; Gough, A History of the People Called Quakers, III, 61. Cf. MS. Board of Trade Journals, III, 191 (1680).

[130] Kalm, Travels, I, 397. “It’s obvious, that the future Welfare of those poor Slaves ... is generally too much disregarded by those who keep them.” An Epistle of Caution and Advice, Concerning the Buying and Keeping of Slaves (1754), 5. This, however, is neglect rather than opposition.

[131] Fox’s Epistles, in Friend’s Library, I, 79 (1679).

[132] “An Exhortation and Caution to Friends Concerning buying or keeping of Negroes,” in Pa. Mag., XIII, 267.

[133] Proud, History of Pennsylvania, 423; Gordon, History of Pennsylvania, 114.

[134] “Several” (negroes) “are brought to Meetings.” MS. Minutes Radnor Monthly Meetings, 1763–1772, p. 79 (1764). “Most of those possessed of them ... often bring them to our Meetings.” Ibid., 175 (1767).

[135] Cf. MS. Yearly Meeting Advices, 1682–1777, “Negroes or Slaves.”

[136] Cranz, The Ancient and Modern History of the Brethren ... Unitas Fratrum, 600, 601; Ogden, An Excursion into Bethlehem and Nazareth in Pennsylvania, 89, 90; I Pa. Arch., III, 75; Pa. Mag., XXIX, 363.

[137] Cf. Bean, History of Montgomery County, 302.

[138] MS. Records of Christ Church, Phila., I, 19, 43, 44, 46, 49, 132, 168, 271, 273, 274, 276, 277, 280, 281, 282, 283, 288, 293, 306, 312, 314, 333, 337, 341, 342, 344, 352, 353, 359, 371, 379, 383, 388, 392, 397, 399, 416, 440, 441. Baptisms were very frequent in the years 1752 and 1753. Very many of the slaves admitted were adults, whereas in the case of free negroes at the same period most of the baptisms were of children.

[139] William Macclanechan, writing to the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1760, says: “On my Journey to New-England, I arrived at the oppulent City of Philadelphia, where I paid my Compliments to the Rev’d Dr. Jenney, Minister of Christ’s Church in that City, and to the Rev’d Mr. Sturgeon, Catechist to the Negroes.” H. W. Smith, Life and Correspondence of the Rev. William Smith, I, 238.

[140] “Many negroes came, ... some enquiring, have I a soul?” Gillies and Seymour, Memoirs of the Life and Character of ... Rev. George Whitefield (3d ed.), 55. “I believe near Fifty Negroes came to give me Thanks, under God, for what has been done to their Souls.... Some of them have been effectually wrought upon, and in an uncommon Manner.” A Continuation of the Reverend Mr. Whitefield’s Journal, 65, 66. “Visited a Negroe and prayed with her, and found her Heart touched by Divine Grace. Praised be the Lord, methinks one Negroe brought to Jesus Christ is peculiarly sweet to my Soul.” W. Seward, Journal of a Voyage from Savannah to Philadelphia, etc., Apr. 18, 1740.