Shrewsbury Friends Move to End Slaveholding

As noted in prior articles, slaveholding in Monmouth County was destabilized during the ramp up to the American Revolution. There was increased agitation from African Americans, a number of whom escaped behind British lines. Relatedly, the Quakers of Monmouth County, following the lead of Philadelphia’s Quaker meeting, sought to end slaveholding in the summer of 1776.

On August 19, the combined Shrewsbury and Rahway Friends Meeting issued a new code of conduct for its members as the war commenced. While much of the code was focused on maintaining neutrality and not giving offense to others, the code also included a provision banning “any further buying or selling of slaves.” Item #7 of the code pertained to “manumitting slaves, educating children of slaves.”

That same day the Shrewsbury Friends meeting discussed efforts to have its members free their slaves:

Those [Quakers] who hold negroes in bondage have been labored with, in order to prevail on them to do justice... some of which have manumitted, some of them as are arrived to the age of 18 & 21 years, one has manumitted several young negroes who are to be freed at that age, some others say that those that are young shall be free when of age, but have not yet manumitted them & divers [sic] others cannot be prevailed with to set them at liberty.

Shrewsbury Friends Move to End Slaveholding in Their Meeting

Three months later, the meeting appointed Joseph Wardell, Joseph Jackson, and Edmund Williams from Shrewsbury and three more Friends from Rahway as a committee to counsel slaveholders and report on the results.  The committee filed its report on August 18, 1777, the anniversary of the first direction to manumit slaves. It wrote: "a number of them [slaveholders] have been prevailed upon to execute proper manumissions... others seem senseless with respect to their duty." The committee determined to further counsel the holdouts.

Regardless of good intentions, resetting relationships with former slaves caused tensions. On May 5, 1777, the Friends recorded that James Williams and John Williams beat the freed slave, Caesar Moore. The Friends appointed a committee to investigate. On July 7, the committee reported that James and John Williams had submitted a letter of apology but the committee rejected the letter because they deemed the apology insufficient. In August, John Williams apologized again: “I have deviated so far from our principles as to strike a black man through a passion, for which I am sorry," but James Williams "showed a condescending disposition toward reconciliation." His apologies were not accepted until October.

In April 1778, the Shrewsbury meeting reported on continued slaveholding among Friends. It was noted that:

• Amos White of Rumson and Jonah Parker have freed their slaves;

• Essek Hartshorne agreed to free his adult slaves on bond and pledge to release child slaves when they reach the age majority;

• John Stevenson "has left his Negroes in such a situation that they cannot legally be freed as yet";

• Jonathan Wright had made "several manumissions."

The one strident hold-out was John Corlies who "continues to decline to comply with the annual meeting's advice on that head, therefore John Hartshorne is appointed to inform him that unless he complies with the said advice, this meeting will be under the necessity to disown him." After another counsel, Corlies was disowned on December 7.

In 1779, the Friends turned their attention to the few members who still owned slaves. Essek Hartshorne, it was reported, "showed a willingness to comply with the advice of the yearly meeting, he is desired to produce proof of his manumissions for his negroes.” Proof of the manumissions was provided later in the year. The report also noted that William Corlies freed the slave, Jack, and William Parker freed the slave, Neamus Parker. However, Parker continued to keep another slave named Robin (though Parker committed to freeing Robin in April 1780). The report concluded: "We are nearly clear of them (slaves)."

In November 1779, two problems remained: William Parker had manumitted Robin, but in a manner judged "not satisfactory." Full manumission was completed in October 1780. Benjamin Corlies sold his last slave, but to Esek Hartshorne. Hartshorne promised manumission, but only after this slave worked off the debt related to his purchase. This slave was freed in July 1780.

Support for Freed Slaves

In 1780, the Shrewsbury Friends shifted their focus from freeing slaves to supporting freed slaves. In January, they noted that "it don't appear that the committee appointed to have care & oversight of the freed Negroes have made any report… some of them have been entirely unthoughtful of their charge." In August, the committee appointed for supporting freedmen met with several freed slaves. It reported giving “such counsel as we are capable of... said advice seemed acceptable to most of them, and Friends that have them under care seem disposed to do justice to them.”

By January 1782, that same committee optimistically reported, "not any negro has been offered to that meeting as suffering & that care is extended toward the free negroes there." An August report also offered an upbeat assessment: "Those negroes who have been manumitted have a comfortable subsistence & justice, in a good degree, administered to them by some.” An August 1783 report concluded:

It appears that those negroes who have been manumitted are generally well provided for as to the necessities of life, & some care taken for their school learning, except for the cases of some, who are placed with those not in society with us [non-Quakers].

However, a second report noted that while most of the freed slaves were being assisted, several were not. The report expressed concern about “those freed by Josiah Parker, a part of those freed by Elihu Williams & two of those freed by Essek Hartshorne, which are under care of those not in society with us." The report also discussed the freed child slave of Samuel Allison: “there is cause to fear are [is] sold back into slavery."

As the war drew to a close, there were still three slaveholders among the Shrewsbury Quakers. Curiously, the names of two of the hold-out Quakers are not offered in the minutes in the Shrewsbury meeting:

• “None [are] held in bondage except one friend who purchased & manumitted, but with a promise from the slave of having the purchase money restored;”

• “One other difficult case of which care has been taken but that nothing can be done at present."

The third member of the meeting was “Widow Stevenson.” It was reported that she maintained "6 [slaves] in the estate of John Stevenson.” The report suggested there is no executor to the estate and the family was in debt. Attempts to counsel widow Stevenson were unsuccessful: “The widow cannot be reasoned with."

The Shrewsbury Quakers were part of a larger New Jersey community that frequently discussed the future of slavery. The state’s primary newspaper, the New Jersey Gazette, printed a number of essays on the topic—both in favor of and opposed to slave manumission. New Jersey’s Governor, William Livingston, was a known opponent of slavery. In 1778, he called it "utterly inconsistent with the principles of Christianity and humanity: and in Americans who have idealized liberty, particularly odious and disgraceful." Neighboring Pennsylvania—the state with the largest Quaker population—abolished slavery in 1780.

While ending slaveholding was clearly important to Shrewsbury’s Quakers, an argument could be made that it was not among their top concerns. Between 1775 and 1783, the Shrewsbury Friends meeting censured or disowned two members for refusing to free their slaves. The infomation below lists other misconducts that resulted in more than two censures or expulsions.

Marrying Outside the Faith - 19 censures or expulsions

Fornication - 16 censures or expulsions

Quarreling/Fighting - 7 censures or expulsions

Marrying without Approval - 7 censures or expulsions

Drinking Alcohol - 6 censures or expulsions

Profane Language - 4 censures or expulsions

Meeting Non-Attendance - 4 censures or expulsions

Horse Racing/Fox Hunting - 3 censures or expulsions

The gravest threat to the Friends, however, was the war itself. Strict Quakers vainly struggled to keep other members from militia service or otherwise align with the Continental or British armies; that was the Shrewsbury Meeting’s continuous worry. Some Shrewsbury Quakers faithfully served in the local militia; others took up arms for the British, including those who joined an ill-fated Loyalist association in the neighborhoods of Deal and Shark River.

Caption: In 1776, Shrewsbury’s Quaker meeting pressured its members to free their slaves. The Meeting House, rebuilt in 1816, was likely where the Friends provided education to the recently freed slaves.

Related Historic Sites: Shrewsbury Friends Meeting House

Sources: Swarthmore College, Friends Historical Library, reel: MR Ph 585, Shrewsbury Meeting; Swarthmore College, Friends Historical Library, Reel MR-PH, 51; J. T. Main, The Sovereign States, 1775-1783 (New York: New Viewpoints, 1973), pp. 290-1; William Livingston, quoted in Benjamin Quarles, The Negro in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1996), p 49; John Corlies expulsion discussed in, Graham Hodges, African Americans in Monmouth County during the American Revolution (Lincroft, NJ: Monmouth County Park System, 1990) p 15; David Fowler, Egregious Villains, Wood Rangers, and London Traders (Ph.D. Dissertation: Rutgers University, 1987) p 90 note 70; The abolition of slaveholding in Pennsylvania is discussed in Gary B. Nash, Race and Revolution (Madison: Madison House, 1990) p 19.