APPENDIX A

The state against Tiercke Tenbroecke

New Jersey Supreme Court

The State against Tiercke Tenbroecke

On Habeas Corpus of Negro Philip.1

Gabriel Furman, of full age, being duly sworn, says that in the year 1748 he was a near neighbour of Mr. James van Horne, that in part of the winter season Mr Van Horne frequently resided in New-York, and in the summer season came up to his Plantation at Rocky-hill in Somerset County where Mr. John van Horne now lives. That one Margaret Wiser lived constantly at the Plantation as his Mr. Van Horne’s housekeper. That in the month of March 1748 she came to the house of the Deponent in the dusk of the evening with a small child in her arms; said she had received a [present] from New-York and did not know what to do with it; asked Deponent’s wife, in his Deponent’s Hearing, if she would be good enough to suckle the child, as she then gave the Breast of; that his wife opened the Blanket in which the Child was wrapped and found it was a Blacke; Deponent then observed to Mrs. Wiser that the Mother of the Child must certainly be a white woman, or they would not take so much pains to conceal it from the eyes of the world; her answer was that the mother of the child was a white woman, and further said that the Father and mother of the young woman who was the mother of the child were people of almost the first Rank in New-York; and that it was a Free-Born child and never could be made a slave; that she had received a letter from Mr. Van Horn, then in New-York, desiring her that if she could not have it taken care of in his house, to apply to one of the neighbouring women to keep it till he came up; Deponent’s wife consented and kept the child till Mr. Van Horne came; When Mr Van Horne came up he interceded further with Deponent’s wife to keep the child a year longer; she agreed to nurse it for some time after some persuasion; that Mr. Van Horne requested the Deponent that if should be inconveneint to keep the child here the Deponent would provide another nurse; which the Deponent accordingly did after a little time; That the said Child was a male; that the next time Mr. Van Horne came up from New-York, Deponent saw him, and in Conversation observed to him that the mother of the child must be of Family, or so much pains would not be taken to conceal the matter; that Mr. Van Horn answered her Parents were some of the greatest people in New York, that he (the child) was free born and could not be made a slave; and further, that he was determined to educate him genteely; That Jane Furman, sister of Nowell Furman, was the nurse, he, the Deponent, procured for the child. That the said Jane Forman was aunt to the Deponent lived part of the time while the child was brought up, within two miles of Deponent, and at no time more than three miles and a half from him; that the Child was with the said Jane Forman five years, or about that time, that he saw him frequently and has frequently seen him since he, the said child, after he was grown up having continued in the same neighborhood; and that he verily believes the person called Negro Philip, now before the Court, is the same—Deponent further says, that in a conversation which happened between Mrs. Wiser and the Deponent, while the Child was at Deponent’s House, Mrs. Wiser told him the mother of the child would come up to see it; that about eighteen months after, or thereabouts, the Lady came up who was said to be the mother that Deponent saw her; and that some little time after this, the Deponent’s aunt said Forman and also Nowell Forman’s wife, told him that Lady had been there to see the child in company with Mrs. Van Horne, wife of the said James van Horne. That the Child was always called by the name of Philip, and that it was always the general opinion and report of the neighborhood that the said Philip was the child of a Lady in New York. And further saith with.

Gabriel Furman

Sworn 17 May 1783 before

Mr. Isaac Smith

Superior Court

The State against Tiercke TenBroeck

On Habeus Corpus of Negro Philip

Affidavit of Gabriel Furman—

Agreed by the attornies on both sides to be read in evidence

Filed May From 1783

Houstou

Judgement give in September 1783

The court’s judgement handed down in September 1783, was:

The Court having fully considered the Evidence, and the Arguments of Counsel in the Cause, are unanimously of Opinion, and do adjudge, that the said Negro Philip be discharged and set at Liberty from the said Tierck Tenbroeck, and also from John Vanhorne of Rocky-Hill, in the Couny of Somerset, who hath appeared and claimed the said Negro Philip, On Motion of Mr. Paterson for the State.2

APPENDIX B

The Case of Simon Moore a free Negro1

This informant says he was born at Bath Town in North Carolina the son of Abraham and Mary Moore, that his Father was Mother was a free Woman and born so, that his Father was not. That at the age of 11 years this Informant was bound apprentice to one William Peyton Merchant at Bath Town aforesaid for Ten years. That about five years ago William Peyton upon this Informant’s request, sent him to New York to help man a sloop under the command of Samuel Dunscomb (of which sloop Mr. Peyton was half owner) which was consigned to Captain Samuel Bayard of this City Merchant.

That he was to return back in the sloop, but Captain Bayard under pretense of some Money owing to him from the said Mr. William Peyton kept the sloop here and never sent her back and she has been broke to Pieces since at Hell Gate, and has ever since kept this Complainant in Slavery, and says he shall not go home to Carolina, till Mr. Peyton pays him the Money which he owes him, insisting that this Complainant is a slave and that he has a Right to detain him for the money due to him from William Payton.

That this Complainant’s time for which he was bound to the said Mr. Peyton is expired he being twenty two years of age being bound out till he arrived at the age of Twenty One. That he has often sent to his Friends in North Carolina for Certificates of his Freedom but Never has received an answer.

Mr. Peyton by the Indenture was to have him taught the Trade of a Cooper and during the apprenticeship was to give him two years schooling at writing and reading and was to give him two Suits of cloaths, none of which covenants have been performed, but this Complainant believes they would had not his Mistfortunes compelled to stay here.

Captain Dunscomb and John Brown a Sailor both now in Town can prove his freedom.

Samuel Dunscomb of the city of New York mariner maketh oath that about four years since he commanded a sloop or vessel of which Samuel Bayard of the city merchant and William Peyton of Bath Town in North Carolina Merchant were the owner, as this Deponent then understood and believes to be true that about five years since and better this Deponent went as Master of aforesaid sloop from New York aforesaid to Bath Town aforesaid with cargo of goods consigned to the said William Peyton. Which sloop was there loaded again with goods by the said William Peyton consigned to the said Samuel Bayard, and that this Deponent wanting hands to carry the said sloop from Bath Town aforesaid to New York, Simon Moore a free Negro youth then an apprentice of the said William Peyton as this Deponent then understood and believes to be true told this Deponent that the said Sloop was as he understood to return soon again to Bath Town, he would go the voyages if the said William Peyton his master would give leave; and thereupon this Deponent saith that by his the said William Peyton the master’s leave the said Simon Moore did provide in the said vessel from Bath Town aforesaid to New York to help man the said vessel. And this Deponent further saith that upon the said sloop’s arrival at New York on her return from Bath Town aforesaid the said Samuel Bayard kept the said sloop to his own use and never sent her back and also took and detained the said Simon Moore on pretense of a debt which he claimed as due to him from the said William Peyton, and on that pretense still keeps and detains the said Simon Moore as a slave as this Deponent has heard and believes . . .

Witnesses his Hand this 19th Day of November 1753 Samuel Dunscomb Testimony of Simon More

Sworn this 20th day of December 1753 before me.

And this Examenant further says that near five years ago, he was commander of a Sloop which belonged to the said Mr. Bayard and Mr. Peyton, and sailed about that time from the Port of New York to Bath Town in North Carolina, with Goods consighted to the Peyton by William Bayard and afterwards from there with Goods consigned from William Peyton to Mr Bayard, that whilst he was at Carolina wanting hands to man his sloop for her return to New York th said Simon Moore desird his Mastr Wm Payton that the might go the Voyage, the said sloop being to return to Carolina which his Master William Peyton consented to and sent him to help man the sloop to New York and when the Sloop arrived at New York Mr. Bayard sold her and has ever since kept the said Simon Moore as his slave. 19 November 1753

APPENDIX C

Table 1 Household composition and slaveholding by family member according to the 1790 census

Source: Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957, July 1960, 756. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1960/compendia/hist_stats_colonial-1957.html.

APPENDIX D

Table 2 Extended Stuyvesant-Bayard family slaveholding: Counts of enslaved people by enslaver name and ward—1703 New York City Census