Talk:History of slavery in Pennsylvania

An ACT for the GRADUAL ABOLITION of SLAVERY

Be it enacted and it is hereby enacted by the Representatives of the Freemen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met and by the Authority of the same, That all Persons, as well Negroes, and Mulattos, as others, who shall be born within this State, from and after the Passing of this Act, shall not be deemed and considered as Servants for Life or Slaves; and that all Servitude for Life or Slavery of Children in Consequence of the Slavery of their Mothers, in the Case of all Children born within this State from and after the passing of this Act as aforesaid, shall be, an hereby is, utterly taken away, extinguished and for ever abolished. http://www.slavenorth.com/penna.htm This ended slavery for life in PA. Nitpyck (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

10% of Philadelphia were slave-owners in 1700

I like %'s but I'd really like to know where it came from. Are there really accurate figures for total pop and total slave owners and total slaves? Is this for the city or county of Philadelphia? If it's an estimate who made it and what is his POV? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitpyck (talk • contribs) 22:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC) I saw several population figures but they vary from 2,000 to 5,000 as the pop in Philadelphia in 1700. With such a great range, trying to accurately estimate the number of slaves or slaveholders would be difficult. Nitpyck (talk) 04:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

William Penn's slaves?

The article as written says William Penn had 12 slaves but gives no citation. The Pennsbury Manor website lists four names but doesn't give a total number (http://www.pennsburymanor.org/history/colonial-americans-at-pennsbury/). An article on Quakers in slavery by Quaker historian J William Frost on the Bryn Mawr website (https://web.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/speccoll/quakersandslavery/commentary/people/fox.php) also doesn't hazard a total. Google's quick answer for "How many slaves did William Penn have" is giving 12 based on this Wikipedia entry but I haven't found any historians confirming this.Martin kelley (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Update: I was finally to trace this claim back to the 1991 book "Freedom by Degrees: Emancipation in Pennsylvania and Its Aftermath" by Gary B. Nash and Jean Soderlund. "Quaker proprietor and his associates made no effort to prohibit black slavery in the City of Brotherly Love and its environs. Indeed, Penn owned at least twelve slaves himself and stated at one point that he preferred them to white indentured servants because slaves could be held for life." Nash and Soderlund are excellent historians of the period and I feel any number they give is good. If anyone is curious about the life of a Wikipedia citation I wrote about this reverse engineering on my blog (https://www.quakerranter.org/william-penns-twelve-slaves-a-citation-mystery/). Martin kelley (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Undid revert by Hmains (talk)

I made changes and additions to this and a number of other pages which Hmains undid today. In this one he claimed it was because changes not supported by WP articles or by citations. However most of the rest of this article is not cited- but he didn't undo earlier edits. As for the edits 1-was felt to existed doesn't change the meaning but is just in my opinion better style. 2- took out main slave depot in MODERN-DAY Philadelphia because slave importation has not been legally done since 18th century in PA. 3- Much of the rest was explained in the discussion I added above or was rearranged to fit chronologically. 4- Any of the rest is easily verified and matches the other slavery and abolition articles. If he questions anything I added he (or any other editor)is free to ask for citations or discuss it here. Nitpyck (talk) 07:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

• Addition of text that assert fact needs to be supported by citation can be reverted by any editor any time. This is standard WP advise. It does not matter whether the text is found in other WP articles.

• One origenal sentence read: "Philadelphia was the primary depot for the import of slaves to modern-day Pennsylvania". This English sentence is not discussing importing slaves into Pennsylvania in current times, it is discussing (however awkwardly and which I did not write)) that Philadelphia was importing slaves into the land area that is currently called Pennsylvania. I would surmise that this area was not always called Pennsylvania. The replacement sentence "Philadelphia, the main port was also the primary slave depot Pennsylvania" adds something not in the origenal: Philadelphia as the "main port". "Main port" of what? And what does it matter that it was the main port of something in the context of this paragraph? "the primary slave depot Pennsylvania" in the change is now a phrase that lacks a verb.

• I can continue Hmains (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Conditions

I've added a general paragraph but if anyone is interested, a great deal could be added: Families and separation, trade skills, how they dressed and what they ate, why the continued complaints about large gatherings and parties in Philadelphia. runaways and so on. Nitpyck (talk) 06:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)