To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.

1813 United States House of Representatives elections in New Jersey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Jersey kept its delegation at six seats but changed from electing its Representatives on a statewide general ticket to using three plural districts of two seats each. These districts were used only for the 1812 election, and the state returned to using a single at-large district in 1814. This was only the second time that New Jersey used districts (the first being in 1798).

There was a statewide at-large election held in November 1812, that was invalidated:

In October 1812, when the Federalists captured the State Legislature, both parties had already nominated their tickets for Presidential Electors and Congress. That election was scheduled for November 1812. However, … the Federalist[s], now controlling the legislature, changed the method of selecting Presidential Electors, from popular vote, to a choice by the Legislature and as a result the election for Presidential Electors was invalidated. In addition to changing the method of choosing Presidential electors, the Federalist also decided to alter the election of congressmen from state wide At-Large to Districts. The scheduled November elections were postponed and three separate Districts were created, each electing two Congressmen. This election was held January 12th and 13th 1813. Some towns, either because word of the these changes did not reach them in time, or most likely in defiance, went ahead and held elections. The Republican ticket received almost all of the votes cast, with the Federalist getting only a single votes in two towns, which suggests they were protesting the changes made by the Legislature. These returns were never reported in the newspapers.

— "New Jersey 1812 U.S. House of Representatives (Note 1)". Tufts Digital Collations and Archives. A New Nation Votes: American Election Returns 1787–1825. Tufts University. Retrieved October 17, 2018.
District Incumbent This race
Representative Party First elected Results Candidates
New Jersey 1
"Northern district" Plural district with 2 seats
Lewis Condict
Redistricted from the at-large district
Democratic-Republican 1810 Incumbent re-elected. Lewis Condict (Democratic-Republican) 38.8%
Thomas Ward (Democratic-Republican) 38.3%
Jacob S. Thompson (Federalist) 11.3%
John M. Cumming (Federalist) 9.7%
Adam Boyd (Federalist) 2.0%
Adam Boyd
Redistricted from the at-large district
Democratic-Republican 1803
1804 (Retired)
1808 (Special)
Incumbent lost re-election.
New member elected.
Democratic-Republican hold.
New Jersey 2
"Central district" Plural district with 2 seats
James Morgan
Redistricted from the at-large district
Democratic-Republican 1810 Incumbent lost re-election.
New member elected.
Federalist gain.
James Schureman (Federalist) 27.9%
Richard Stockton (Federalist) 27.8%
Henry Southard (Democratic-Republican) 22.3%
James Morgan (Democratic-Republican) 22.0%
George C. Maxwell
Redistricted from the at-large district
Democratic-Republican 1810 Incumbent lost re-election.
New member elected.
Federalist gain.
New Jersey 3
"Southern district" Plural district with 2 seats
Thomas Newbold
Redistricted from the at-large district
Democratic-Republican 1806 Incumbent lost re-election.
New member elected.
Federalist gain.
William Coxe Jr. (Federalist) 49.8%
Jacob Hufty (Federalist) 49.5%
Others 0.7%
Jacob Hufty
Redistricted from the at-large district
Democratic-Republican 1808 Incumbent re-elected as a Federalist.
Federalist gain.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    1 361
    3 018
    4 087
    2 241
  • ✪ The Trouble with Minna: A Case of Slavery and Emancipation in the Antebellum North
  • ✪ AARON BURR - WikiVidi Documentary
  • ✪ John Ross (Cherokee chief)
  • ✪ United States Presidents and The Illuminati Masonic Power Structure
  • ✪ Flushing, Queens


>> Good afternoon everyone, on behalf of David Ferriero, Archivist of the United States, I would like to welcome you to the William G. McGowan Theater located in the National Archives building in Washington, DC. Mr. Ferriero was planning to make the remarks today, he was called to Baltimore on urgent business. As many of you know I am Doug Swanson, Visitor Services Manager and the producer for the public noontime lecture series. Before we bring out today's speaker Hendrick Hartog, I would like to tell you about two other programs later this month. Thursday, April 19 at 7 p.m. we will host the 11th Annual McGowan Forum on Women in Leadership: Women in Foreign Services, a panel of leaders in the diplomatic field will discuss their experiences explore critical viewpoints and offer advice to young women entering the field of American foreign service. The following week, on Thursday April 26, 7 p.m. our program "Remembering Vietnam: Medics, Corpsmen and Nurses" will feature a panel of Vietnam Veterans and historians who will recount their experiences and explain the duties of medical personnel in Vietnam. To learn more about these and all of of other programs and exhibits consult our Calendar of Events you will find online at You will also find printed materials about our programs out in the theater lobby. Another way to get more involved with the National Archives is to become a member of the National Archives Foundation. The foundation supports the work of the agency, especially its education and outreach programs. So you can pick up an application for membership in the lobby or become a member online at When thinking of slavery and emancipation in the United States certain assumptions spring to mind. our first thoughts are probably of the Civil War, the years immediately surrounding it and the states of the confederacy. Further consideration brings up the underground railroad, the Emancipation Proclamation, the 13th amendment and the Freedmen's Bureau. Hendrick Hartog's new book, The Trouble with Minna, takes us to an unexpected time and place New Jersey in 1840, in a period of gradual emancipation in the Northern states, the concepts of freedom, rights and responsibilities were examined and debated. One court case led Professor Hartog to more fully examine the world in which these people involved lived, an unfamiliar world to us, in which slavery and freedom were not neatly defined. The documentary record whether here in the National Archives, in the state archives or in local repositories makes unfamiliar worlds known to us. We often speak of digging through records, and unearthing documents as if the researcher were on an archeological expedition. The historian working in an archive is an explorer, reminding us that there are always new stories to learn and new faucets to stories we thought we were already told. And now I am going to turn over our lecture today to our guest, author Hendrick Hartog is the class of 1921 bicentennial professor in the history of American law and liberty at Princeton and a former director of the University's program in American studies. Before coming to Princeton, he taught in the law schools in the University of Wisconsin and Indiana University. Hartog has spent his scholarly and teaching life working in the social history of American law, studying how broad political and cultural themes have been expressed in ordinary legal conflicts. He has worked in a variety of areas of American legal history as it affects city life Constitutional Rights claims, marriage and inheritance and old age, as well as the histography of legal change. He is the author of Public Property and Private power: The Corporation of the City of New York in American law 1730 to 1870. Man and Wife in America: A History which was cited in the majority opinion in Obergefeld versus Hodges, where the U.S. Supreme Court recognized same‑sex marriage as a constitutional right and Some Day All of this Will be Yours: A History of Inheritance and Old Age. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Hendrick Hartog to the National Archives. (APPLAUSE) >> Thank you all for coming. And thank you Doug for arranging this visit. The book is actually two weeks from actually coming out. So this is the first time I have actually spoken about it. So, you know forgive me if it doesn't ‑‑ you know I am working out the kinks. I thought of using this time to tell you about several of the stories that lie at the heart of this peculiar book about a small site in the United States. They are good stories. I want to emphasize that I really found wonderful stories about arsons escape abandonment care and family reconstructions. And those stories allowed me to begin to see the features of an odd but curiously familiar world. One in which my actors white and black legally trained and illiterate constantly for the most part competently negotiated contradictory norms and rules both with one another, and with the agents of that peculiar state New Jersey.  But I didn't want to suck you into too many weed fields, for those of you who will I hope want to read the book, it's short, accessible, the weeds are fragrant and nutritious. I don't want to rob you of the surprises of these stories told. So, instead let me say a little bit about how this book came to be. About what some of the historiographical stakes were for me what I found, I thought I would read a bit about a couple of events in the legal life of one of my central actors, Joseph Hornblower, the Chief Justice for 20 years of the New Jersey Supreme Court. Finally, I do a quick riff drawn from the introduction about the significance of contract and contract law in the world of gradual emancipation. Which sounds like a contradiction in terms how could there be a contract law in the realm of slavery I will try to explain that. The latter part is especially for the lawyers and the lawerish in the room. Okay. So part 1. There is three parts to this talk. Part 1. I wrote this book to answer questions or mysteries that I couldn't let go of. Or to put it differently, it emerged out of a series of accidents or fortunate conjunctures. One story led to another and another although this book is framed around one central story about Minna, the content and meaning of the story are shaped by hundreds of other stories found as I traced a variety of leads, as Doug said, the Archives sort of suck you in and and keep you going. Meanwhile, the answers to the mysteries I found and explored about New Jersey and gradual emancipation among other things still remain mysterious to me and incomplete. Okay. So the beginning is actually my prior book about inheritance. I was researching and writing a book about care within middling mostly white families. There was a phrase I kept finding in the cases that I was using as my primary sources, whenever a court wanted to deny compensation for what some young person had done to care for an older relative, it would declare that the actions constituted a mere voluntary courtesy. Even if a daughter or a neice had spent years cleaning bed pans and doing all of the work that came with the care of a demented old person, when she finally sued for some compensation, she might be turned down by a judge who mobilized that phrase: A mere voluntary courtesy. Where did that phrase come from? Weirdly enough when I looked I discovered it came from this 1840 New Jersey case, Force v Haynes, about an older white woman who sued apparent master of an apparently enslaved black woman to recover the costs of the enslaved woman's care. The enslaved woman had once been the least property of the older white woman. This is all a really dark story, I want to apologize for that, but that's history. As almost always is the case, there was actually a longer history to the phrase reaching back to a 17th century English case about a man seeking a pardon for his conviction for murder. But that's another story and let me leave that aside. Anyway, finding Force V Hans and Justice Ford's elaborate opinion about what made the care of the apparently enslaved Minna, a mere voluntary courtesy introduced me to the world of slavery in New Jersey. Care was part of the story. But between reading Ford's and other concurring or dissenting opinions of the justices of the new next Supreme Court, I found myself absorbed by the questions that New Jersey slavery raised for me. In those opinions, they argued over the meaning and moral significance of the law of slavery. All to explain why Mrs. Haynes, the white woman, couldn't get the compensation she had asked for. What were they arguing about at a time when the number of slaves in New Jersey was already minuscule. Those opinions led me to ask what was gradual emancipation in the north. New Jersey not a representative state but less different from other Northern states than one might think, or than some historians have claimed had enacted a gradual emancipation law in 1804. What that meant, was that the children of enslaved people from then on would become free when or if they reached the age of 21 if female, or 25 if male basically taking an enormous amount of their labor over the course for their lives before their freedom came about. Although the number of enslaved people in the state declined steadily from then on by 1840 at the time that Force v. Haynes, we decided there was around 600 slaves or slaved in the state. As late as the Civil War there were still a few women and men who were effectively enslaved in New Jersey. New Jersey still had slaves at the time of the Civil War. By then the state identified them as quote unquote apprentices for life. There is a recent literature about slavery in the north which emphasizes how long emancipation took. Why it was that apparently free states remained slave states well into the 19th Century. This recent literature reacts to and challenges an older historigraphy that celebrated the creationof the free north after the American revolution. My questions and the material that I was reading led me into an approach that was different than those that characterized either of those two literatures. I became absorbed by the question and that's really what the book is about, what it meant that people white and black continued to live within a regime of gradual emancipation for the better part of two generations. Over a period roughly as long as the period from the end of World War II to the present day. It's really a very long period that they lived within a world that was called gradual emancipation. What were the legal terms that shaped their ongoing relationships. And their evolving understandings. How did gradual emancipation evolve legally. I became interested in what gradual emancipation was other than as a lead up to an ending. I began to see gradual emancipation as a regime. As a chaotic and contradictory but recognizable state system of legal and governmental rules and practices. Boundaries both physical and conceptual boundaries were constantly be crossed including the boundaries separating New Jersey law from the laws of other states, particularly that of New York. But boundaries are crossed in every legal regime. Gradual emancipation was more than a transition, it was a way of being a legal regime. I dived into this legal regime the law of New Jersey bracketing off the question, whether it was really a free state or really a slave state. Indeed I came to see gradual emancipation as necessarily both. As I mentioned I found many good stories along the way. There was pervasive contracting between masters and their enslaved people. I will say something more about that in a minute. Yet some of the contracting had the ironic effect of preserving the institution of slavery even as the usual effect to contracting were the end to turn enslaved people into free peoples. But in the end in any case would often be a very, very long time. And the New Jersey regime was enmeshed with uncertain relationships with poor relief and other forms of labor relations with uncertainties about the jurisdiction of New Jersey courts over particular individuals who might or might not belong to the state. With deep uncertainties about what was the law. As such, I came to see what I was doing as a challenge to what might be called the neo‑abolitionism that shapes our own constitutional consciousness and culture as American citizens, what do I mean by that? I mean that I worked to think outside of a conventional wisdom. One this that I like most Americans share today, I came to see that our understanding of the relationship between slavery and freedom one that is fixed in our lives by the reconstruction amendments that is the 13th and 14th amendments can blinker us to previous historical understandings to the world free people and enslaved people lived in the first half of the 19th Century. The meaning of freedom our understanding of freedom, one that is deeply imprecated in our constitutional culture, one that is instantiated and made manifest by the 13th amendment, one that draws on anti‑slavery abolitionist thinking and late antebellum slavery thought as well as the intense work of escape slave system themselves. Begins with the truth that slavery and freedom exist in a kind of antinomic relationship to each other in opposition to each other, one is free, one is enslaved, we live in a world of slavery or live in a world of freedom. To understand freedom is to understand freedom is to understand not slavery emblazened in the 13th amendment notion of ending the badges and incidence of slavery. Just as slavery is the antithesis of the terms of life in the free world. Yet, throughout most of human history, at least up to the Civil War, slavery did not end with an exemplary and absolutist act. Indeed unless one imagines the Union Army as the actor, it may never have ended in that way. Even with the passage of the 13th amendment. Throughout most of modern history, putting aside the Haitian revolution, which is an important putting aside, including the end of slavery in New Jersey. Slavery's end was always experienced as gradual and incomplete. As about systems of compensations, and about transitions about family relations, and about the management and the costs of dependency. Often as in New Jersey it became governmentally a question of taxation. In that sense, The Trouble with Minna explores the excluded middle that the constitutional conventional wisdom makes invisible today. It is to use a phrase that I draw from the title of my mentor Willard Hurst's famous book about law and the conditions of freedom, but ironically or paradoxally it's about conditions of freedom that existed in a world of gradual abolition. Where people lived lives sometimes long lives in a space an era which freedom and slavery coexisted. As such it may have something to teach us about the conditions that shape our lives as well today. Okay. That's part 1. Part 2. What were the terms of that world? How were lives lived in the regime obviously the book is my answer. Here is a taste. Consider the early legal life of Joseph Hornblower, the Chief Justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court, and one of the two judges who dissented the in Force v. Haynes. After his death in 1862 all of his biographers and memorialists celebrated his anti‑slavery credentials. They said he had always been an anti‑slavery man who tried to extinguish the last remnants of the slavery institution which lingered in some portions of his state. I n 1836 he challenged the enforceability in New Jersey of the Federal Fugitives Slave Act. In 1844, as a member of the constitutional convention, he argued strenuously but unsuccessfully for an absolute abolition of slavery. In 1845, in one of the first decisions under that constitution, he argued that the opening constitutional statement of rights in that document made slavery an impossiblability. Once again he argued as a dissenter. Without success. In 1857, as an old man he wrote a young admirer that he despaired for his country, that the power that slaveholders wielded nationally. Earlier, however, as a family member and as a young lawyer he had lived and practiced law within New Jersey's regime of slavery and very gradual emancipation. How comfortably he lived within that regime, it's impossible to say, but we have to assume that he managed to reconcile his work life and household and family life with his principles even as he maintained his membership in freedom societies. He knew how to be a slaveholder, at least a New Jersey slaveholder and he worked within the terms of New Jersey law. In 1823, he and his siblings manumitted a slave, Sarah, identified as having been their father's slave. Josiah Hornblower, Joseph's father, died 1809, 14 years earlier. After his death inventory to his estate which Joseph served as executor included five enslaved people two men, each worth $200, one man worth $120, a Negro girl 50 dollars, and a second girl Sal worth only $20. I suspect, I don't know, that Sal was the same woman, Joseph and his brothers manumitted 14 years later as Sarah, where she lived between his death and manumission, it's possible she lived in Joseph Hornblower's house. In his will to give a little more detail of the world that we are talking about, Josiah Hornblower who had himself been controversial engineer and inventor had instructed his executors that he wished his slave Betty to be freed, if she obtained the necessary security for legal manumission, Betty did not appear in the inventory to his estate either because his instructions removed her or because she was of no marketable value due to her age. She was probably over 40, which is why her manumission was premised on payment of security to protect the town's overseers of the poor from responsibility. If she could not find such security she would be free to choose her own master and should be sold for a reasonable compensation. Of course significant that Josiah did not suggest or dictate his executors should pay for her security. We know nothing about how he expected Betty would find the resources to buy her own freedom. Since Betty's name doesn't appear with or without security in the county manumission book it's likely she found a new master for herself. One is left to wonder whom she chose and how she made that decision. What, if anything,the estate received from the master she chose. In 1817 and 1818 Joseph Hornblower the abolitionist anti‑slavery man, who lived in Newark, manumitted his own slaves, Molly and Benjamin. Those acts require us to conclude up until that point well into his adulthood, he had kept slaves in his own household. Joseph Hornblower had been a successful lawyer for a quarter century by the time he became the Chief Justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court. Indeed, in his biographical survey of New Jersey judges, Lucius Elmer argued Hornblower had been a better lawyer than a judge that his temperament was better suited towards advocacy. Like most successful lawyers of the time his practice was a combination of trial advocacy and office counseling. In 1813, one of Hornblower's clients Ann Ogilvie, her father Alexander McCorter had been a famous minister in South Carolina, he died in 1807, Ann was his executor. Hornblower was hired to settle her father's estate and work through other matters. Early on that involved dealing with the death of Katie Ann's black woman, that's how she is identified. A letter from Ogilvie noted the death agitated her exceedingly. It was a loss of some one who acted a conspicuous part in my father's household. By 1813, Katie lived on her own under the hill apart from Ogilvie, but apparently not freed. With her death, rent was owed and clothing and chest and bed, bedsted and rubbish had to be removed and sold. Would Hornblower deal with all of that the sort of thing a lawyer gets asked to do. Since Ogilvie was a fatherless, brotherless, childless widow who looked to the sympathy and kindness in his heart. Hornblower noted on the back of the letter that he had spent $20 on Ogilvie's behalf $2.25 for Katie's remaining rent and $6 for a coffin. In December 1813, Samuel Beebe of New York City, a grandson of McWharter and nephew of Ann send the attorney a note. A black girl, this is how she is identified, who had once belonged to his grandfather called on him he was told Hornblower planned to sell her as part of the estate. Beebe wanted Hornblower to know that was not possible. Ann Ogilvie had given the girl called Leah or Elsie to his sister Mary who lived with their who live with their parents in New York City. She spent several years in the Beebe household but recently married Beebe the granddaughter who had received her had told her if she thought she could procure a living she might leave her and be free. As a result according to Beebe Leah or Elsie could not be sold because she was not a slave. Beebe hoped that Hornblower would drop him a line on the subject. If Hornblower did respond, the letter is lost or I haven't found it. The next we hear of Leah or Elsie is 8 years later in January 1822. Hornblower received a letter from a New York attorney who enclosed an opinion letter from another New York attorney the imminent Josiah Hoffman with regard to the status of a female slave of the late Dr. McWharter. The costs of her care, usually referred to as maintenance was litigated between the township of Newark, New Jersey and the McWharter estate. Evidently the slave moved to Newark after Mary Beebe released her from service she had become a pauper and applied for poor relief. In New Jersey law as expressed in the 1798 slave code, a slave owner might be liable for the care or his or her now dependent slave, even after having manumitted or freed the slave. Such continued liability might apply if it occurred through private contract or deed or by testamentary gift. It looks like Hornblower had written to Bailey to ask him to solicit Hoffman's advice about the legal status of a slave like Leah under New York law. Hornblower was uncertain whether New York or New Jersey law applied. And there is then lots of back and forth. He basically sends all of this information to the Newark overseers of the poor who were unconvinced. And the story continues about if Leah or Elsie properly manumitted or not. And how are we supposed to know and the part of the problem is New York law or New Jersey law goes back and forth. The story goes on and has lots of details. Let me stop with that. And just because you have gotten enough of ‑‑ enough of the weeds for one day.  Okay. Part 3, and then I hope I can take your questions and thoughts, which I would love to hear. This is throughout a study of contractual behavior. To talk legalish for just a moment, one might describe this as a book about questions regarding the law of consideration as it would have been understood in the legal culture of the early 19th Century. Through the lens of care and enslavement explores how particular acts, expressions and transactions did or did not produce legally enforceable duties and obligations. And how other acts, expressions and transactions became consideration for enforceable contract. The reader's attention will be drawn to agreements and bargains suggested implied and challenged. It's not only the usual stuff of contract law, but also a range of writings that become something like contracts as they have attempted to fix relationships in time. Spent a lot of pages on a tiny piece of paper that one apparently enslaved person holds on to after his master has convinced him to burn down the house so that the master can get the insurance proceeds. But ‑‑ and probably the enslaved person would have spent his life in prison or be hung except for the fact that he had this piece of paper and in the end the insurance company will use that to defeat the insurance claims of the owner. It's a pretty good story. (LAUGHTER) >> It's ‑‑ but these ‑‑ there is a lot of contracts all through my ‑‑ what I am writing about. And they all try to fix relationships in time. To take one recurrent example, consider the provisions in many wills you saw some in the wills ‑‑ the will of the father of Joseph Hornblower that promise to free or manumit an enslaved person at the end of something like a fixed term. Or to take another example that will be explored in chapter 3 the writing coercively imposed by a ferry owner on his freed black employee to recreate a condition of slavery at least for a limited term, or to take a third example the fraudulently, but apparently free, quote, unquote, consent which after 1812 was required of enslaved people who their masters wanted to move to Louisiana to the sugar plantations. And in theory the law required them to give their free consent. Now, you know one should assume this is totally fraudulent, no sane human being would have ever agreed to be moved to the ‑‑ to the sugar plantations of Louisiana. But you can see pages after pages of these so‑called free consent that were produced in what was later labeled a kind of kidnapping controversy. Such writings were constitutive of a contractual world, even when mobilized to reproduce the material conditions we and they identify with the chattel slavery. Usually they expressed a slaveholders power. And yet, many of them also extended a present relationship into a defined and bounded future as contracts between free individuals were expected to do. They produced what poet and scholar of the ancient world is called a "now." Each represented a limited but real effort to control the future to thrust a present relationship, a "now" into the future. Each carried the implication that the relationship in question even one called slavery, would come to an end at the conclusion of the contracted for term. A fixed and finite period of time. And once the contract was executed everyone including the apparently enslaved could walk away. Such writings deeds wills bills of pay sale and scraps of paper along with the legal arguments over their meaning produce much of the documentary record that unlies this study. I struggled to interpret conflicted meaning in the contractual language and in legal arguments and trial testimony in order to reconstruct the terms of the New Jersey slave regime, and determine what gradual abolition meant in practice for the enslaved as well as for slaveholders and the community that surrounded them. My goal as with many historians is to reveal how lives were lived within those relationships in order to gain and share a fleeting insight into those people's present tense, their "now." For many abolitionists southern slaveholders and historians alike , slavery was implicitly meant a denial of the fugitive and fleeting but delimited now of C contract. Instead the law of slavery was said to be founded on the belief that a property law writing, a deed for example, could fix an identity in perpetuity. Indeed our confident sense today of the moral illegitimacy of chattel slavery we learned from abolitionists is enmeshed with the denial of the boundaries that contractualism offered that is much of what is captured by the familiar trope we know that slavery privileged property and denied personhood. It was a standard understanding throughout the deep south that contracting was inconsistent with the condition of being enslaved. By contrast, between the early 19th Century and the 1840s when negotiated and bound slave relationships throughout New Jersey, these were relationships that incorporated a particularized and fleeting now a temporality that one ordinarily identifies with contractual freedom. As late as the 1840's New Jersey continued to allow a few white men and women to know themselves as slave holders 1840's New Jersey had a legal culture shaped by contractualism and ubiquitous contracting. That's the paradox at the heart of this study. I can read you more, but I think I will stop and see if you can take your questions, because that's probably a better idea and there is probably more to be said. I learn more from you all then. So, thank you very much. Okay. (APPLAUSE) >> I could keep reading. And I think I have been told that you should ask questions at the ‑‑ from those (indicating). Please go ahead. >> Thank you very much. I was a bit confused at different points through your descriptions. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> But my question has to do with the idea of private property slavery and the rights of people who are in debt to hold themselves as collateral for their debt. Which was a form of by which people went into slavery for many hundreds of years. >> Yes. >> And it occurs that me somehow or other in this idea of contracts between people and then eventual emancipation as an amendment to the constitution that that amendment is actually taking away some right to private property. >> Absolutely. The 13th amendment is the greatest taking of private property, in human history. We should celebrate for that. But it is unlike almost every other abolitionist, for example in Britain, in British colonies, even Haiti, eventually the reason Haiti has been so impoverished for so long eventually it has to compensate France for the ‑‑ for the loss of property. Eventually after you know, ‑‑ but you know, the 13th amendment would happen without war and without the fact that you have ‑‑ that you were basically taking the property of traders. But it's definitely ‑‑ you know, it is an absolute (inaudible). >> Actually, what I was concerned with was the right of a person to consider his own private property of himself as something that he could give away by contract. >> Well, there is certainly ‑‑ out of black freedom literatures, as well as abolitionist literature, the idea of self ownership is a central theme that comes out of our history of abolitionism and the struggle over slavery. And many historians Amy Drew Stanley and others have written wonderfully about what that meant. >> Okay. >> Yes? >> Yeah, I want to thank you very much for this ‑‑ for this talk. I am from the Caribbean. >> Okay. >> And I am happy to see that you kind of is dealing with the fact that of how much the Caribbean has been quite important in the whole slavery development in the United States and even unfolding of slavery of the United States. But one of the issues that I think you are struggling with here, and that is quite important, is the very notion of how ‑‑ how this whole issue of slavery and its unfolding has defined in essence, the position of black in the United States up to today, right? How it continues basically to haunt the reputation in the United States up to today. We have to look at the way police deal with blacks on the White House, the ongoing shootings in the United States, and how very few policemen have responsibility for that at the end of the day. I was wondering whether you ever considered how the different positions of black in the southern part of the United States vis‑a‑vis the position of blacks in the ‑‑ in the Northern part of the United States, how this polarized, vexed differentiating but also gradual change, how that situation has continued to haunt the position of blacks in the United States and how it has made it very difficult for blacks to be able enslaved black people in the United States to be able to find real freedom, real kind of what lawyers would call a kind of a material freedom in the United States. I was wondering what your thoughts were about that difficult question. >> I mean, it's ‑‑ in a sense there are many books to write to deal with that. I have struggled all my life with those questions. And I don't have an answer. I mean, I will say one thing. One of the things that ‑‑ I am not sure my book is entirely original in this, but one of the things that probably differentiates it from many others is the extent to which are drawn on Caribbean and Latin American slavery literature in sort of as a way of informing my understanding of New Jersey slavery. So, that's one part is that I am continuously aware of how much less different the United States is from those cultures than often is marked. I think the question of the difference between north and south around slavery, which is the second question you raise is a ‑‑ I think is an open question. I guess the history, as I understand it today, would mark the difference between north and south less sharply than once was the case. And I think my book contributes to the less sharp differentiation no longer to mark a free north and enslaved south. A more important way of framing it, is the commercial interests in Boston, and New York, and in Philadelphia were entirely committed to the maintenance of southern slavery. You know, the early factories, the shoe factories of New England that are marked as the sort of triumph of free labor were producing shoes for enslaved people. And they were producing what were called "negro" shoes or slave shoes in large number. And the commercial interests of New York were under ‑‑ were the central funding source for southern planter interest. In all of those ways the boundaries between north and south are certainly at the level of economics and material conditions much less sharply drawn than one would have ‑‑ than the historigraphy would have noticed. The underlying thrust of your question about the lingering significance of this history of slavery for how we live today strikes me as a question that, you know, in a sense it goes beyond what a historian can say much about, except I experience it all the time. I agree with you. That it's something that needs to be confronted. Whether it is ‑‑ whether one should mark the continuity with slavery or with the failure of emancipation after slavery strikes me as the deep political question I think ‑‑ I think needs further attention. Okay? Yes. >> I just wanted to ask you a question about the anti‑slavery societies in the north, specifically for example, up in Upstate New York. Garrett Smith who was very wealthy, when his organizations they were able to purchase the liberty of many slaves up north people who were in bondage. >> Yes. >> My question is: How much ‑‑ I mean, what percentage of slaves were purchased by the wealthy anti ‑‑ well, the anti‑slavery movement? And what effect did that have the anti‑slavery movement 1830's, 1840's, 1850's have on those would who were owning slaves? I mean, did they see the time for them to own slaves in the north was coming to an end. I know that's what your talk was about, but I guess that's my question is: What was the percentage of people who were liberated from the anti‑slavery societies in the north from? >> Actually, as far as I know, a question that we don't have the answer to, it's ‑‑ we should. That is, I ‑‑ my intuition is that the numbers who are actually freed through abolitionist societies is relatively small. Now, the legal culture does change, the presence of a free black communities in New York and Philadelphia in the case of New Jersey, makes it relatively easy to disappear into those big free black communities looking at the New Jersey story. One of the mysteries that I have ‑‑ did not find an answer to is how to explain the decline in the population of enslaved people in a state like New Jersey. I can explain pieces of it, it's clear that a lot of ‑‑ a lot ‑‑ some part of it was ‑‑ were manumissions which would have been shaped by this humanitarian manumission societies which the change in culture that made owning slaves both not a good thing if you were a right‑minded Christian to do. And which also probably led to the decline in the price of the slaves the conjuncture of price and moral sentiment, I am pretty cynical, I am sorry you will have to forgive that. You know, went together. Some significant portion of the enslaved people all through the north were shipped south. Some significant ‑‑ we don't know the numbers because it was for the most part illegal. So it had to be done surreptitiously. But the incentives were enormous in part because of the end after 1808 of the international slave trade. More because Britain ‑‑ the British Navy began to enforce constraints on the international slave trade, then the constitution's constrained on the international slave trade. That ironically happened at exactly the moment when there is a sugar boom in Louisiana, and there is the development ‑‑ and cotton becomes increasingly in demand. So that the demand for Northern slaves goes skyrockets so if you can get you know, the incentives to basically to kidnap black people from the north and move them south, becomes very high. But the numbers are very hard to tell. My colleague Rebecca Scott, who teaches at the University of Michigan, and I, she is a wonderful historian of ‑‑ of black‑white relations, and particularly black communities in Louisiana, and we have noticed the same names because there were actually family connections between New Jersey and Louisiana. And so, we are sort of slowly putting together a research project, trying to track at least a few individuals, we will never know the full numbers but at least that we can track the processes through which people were, you know, fundamentally kidnapped to the ‑‑ and even when‑‑the irony is that some of them were actually not slaves anymore. Because if they were children born after 1804, they weren't supposed to be slaves anymore, presumably if they got to Louisiana nobody in Louisiana no white in Louisiana cared that these were not slaves any longer. And until the Union Army arrived in the 1860s they would have served as slaves on slave plantations. Sorry. You wanted a better story than that. (LAUGHTER) >> Yes? >> Hi. I have a quick question about contracts. And I am struck by how your story both tells a ‑‑ a story about how contracts and the law of contracts of course make slavery possible. You can't trade in property unless you have agreements about it, and figure out the legitimate agreements and non‑legitimate agreements and enforce them. And then when you get to the section of post 1812, where enslaved people in New Jersey consent to being shipped down to Louisiana, I am struck by the fact that I thought enslaved people lacked contractual capacity. Did the statute just say we carve out from the general lack of capacity that comes with being enslaved this one capacity which is the capacity to basically sell yourself down river and then a related contract is marriage of course. Because part of ‑‑ >> They copied the marriage ‑‑ they ‑‑ they copied the separate examination in marriage cases. >> Okay. >> And applied it to slaves. >> So could you say a couple of words about separation ‑‑ what the enslaved people in New Jersey get married? >> Actually, from the 1780s on, from the beginning of statehood, the ‑‑ marriage is always the right of enslaved people to marry was always allowed. One could say that if you look ‑‑ or as I understand the legislative record in a state like New Jersey, it was a series of compromises. Basically, in 1798 they enacted a slave code. Sounds just like ‑‑ it actually not that different from Latin American slave codes systematic ‑‑ and you can read through it and many of them are basically gifts to ‑‑ most of it is a gift to pro‑slavery interests or interests of those who would hold slaves. You can see small concessions to a quaker interest and to anti‑slavery interests. The right to marry was one. There is a totally unenforceable right of a enslaved person to be free from abuse. There is a right ‑‑ ostensibly every slaveholder has a duty to teach his slaves to read. >> Is there any case law about the enforcement of any of those and enslaved person who says I am supposed to be able to get married. >> No one stopped slaves from marriage but the control, the power of the slaveholder would have meant ‑‑ made that ‑‑ the actual power would have had immense significance. But I never see a constraint on marrying. >> Not a formal one. >> Not a formal one. The reading ‑‑ the only time I looked systematically through lots and lots of (inaudible) and transactions where slaves are being sold to another master. There are a couple of moments in the prints and archives where I found a ‑‑ the seller saying, you need to teach John to read. >> Right. Delegation of the duty. >> Yes. Was anybody paying attention? I don't know. One of the things that I learned in reading this material is how ubiquitous the illiteracy is among (inaudible), so the quakers may have said you should, teach your slaves to read, but if you weren't a very good reader ‑‑ >> Right. >> ‑‑ it meant a lot less than it would have meant otherwise. >> I'm sorry, I am violating the ‑‑ (indicating). Other questions? >> You mentioned in your talk that Joseph Hornblower was part of a constitutional convention that considered the total abolition of slavery in New Jersey, when was that and what was the political forces in the state, and ‑‑ that were in favor of continuing some slavery as opposed to the ones trying to end it. How balanced were they? >> I ‑‑ in part he was writing ‑‑ well, the constitutional convention ‑‑ basically all through all through the United States north and south in the 1840s new state constitutions are being enacted. This is largely a response to Jeffersonian democracy, the undoing of traditional property constraints on voting, it's about the construction of something that's more ‑‑ a more familiar court structure. So there is a variety of institutional reforms that ‑‑ it's about the rise of corporations and banks and sort of creation of traditional ‑‑ of elimination of what was called traditional special legislation practices. New Jersey, like many states, borrows from the Bill of Rights and enacts a declaration of rights at the front of it. And I think some people thought this meant if all men are free and equal, which is I think what article 1 of the declaration of rights in the New Jersey constitution says that that inherently meant the end of slavery. And you know, Hornblower that's Hornblowers argument the left or the liberal Protestant argument. But the majority said, yeah, that's not what it was intended. And you know, no more than our Declaration of Independence was intended to free slaves in 1776. So it wasn't actually proposed as in the Maryland constitutional convention of 1864. >> Yes. >> Before the 13th amendment it made a specific proposal to ‑‑ >> As far as I know, no. But I don't want to pretend that I, you know ‑‑ (inaudible). >> Okay. >> Yes? >> You mentioned those freed black communities there. Did they have any role to play in this gradual emancipation? >> They played an incredibly important role. First of all, as an attractive ‑‑ as an attractive place for enslaved people to disappear into. >> Right. >> So, that ‑‑ you know ‑‑ >> They had safe haven. >> Also, it meant that you know, it played an important role in the declining price of slaves. >> Yes, I noticed $20 for one of the slaves I was amazed. >> You know so price declined in part because it's harder to hold on to it. One could imagine further that as gradual emancipation becomes the norm, in a sense if you want to hold ‑‑ if you are are a rational slaveholder, and you want the use of your labor, you will need to negotiate. And so, I think those communities play an important role. Now, there is Sarah groaning satter has been writing a history of the ‑‑ of emancipation in New York which is very different from New Jersey because it has a much more powerful ‑‑ both have a much more politically active black community and because it has a continuing man you mission society that plays a white elite man you mission society that plays ‑‑ >> How does she spell the ‑‑ >> GRONNINGSATER. Right. (LAUGHTER). >> I think I got it right. >> Okay. >> But anyway she ‑‑ and one of the things that she ‑‑ the core thing that the free black community in New York does in her rendition, along with these elite whites who will help fund it is create schools for black children. >> Oh, okay. >> Which really don't exist in New Jersey or in much of the northeast. >> Is that so? >> Until you know, in part ‑‑ but I mean there is a Philadelphia school for colored children but the cities become basically the cities where there is enough people, enough resources, some ‑‑ some black people who become middle class and can play a continuing political role. Wards of the cities will have you know, that basically people need the vote, so that changes the politics of it. Which doesn't mean that there isn't incredible racism and violence all through it. But there is some security in numbers that's different than in a place like New Jersey where the black population is highly scatter ited. It's located in households. It's without ‑‑ without those kinds of resources. >> Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. >> We stop? Okay. I have been told to cut it off. Thank you all very much. (APPLAUSE). >> Reminder, there is a book signing one level up at the Archives book store, and we will see you up there in just a moment.

See also

This page was last edited on 21 October 2019, at 16:05
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.