CHILDREN IN THE COLONIAL FAMILY

B. SINGLE PERSONS, BASTARDS, AND ORPHANS

1. Massachusetts, 1636

Mass. Records, I (1853), 186.

It is ordered that all towns shall take care to order and dispose of all single persons and inmates within their town to service, or otherwise; and if any be grieved at the order of a town, the parties to have liberty to appeal to the Governor and Council, or the Court.

2. Connecticut, 1637

Conn. Records, I, 8.

It is ordered that no young man that is neither married nor hath any servant, and be no public officer, shall keep house by himself, without consent of the town where he lives . . . under pain of 20s. per week.

It is ordered that no master of a family shall give habitation or entertainment to any young man to sojourn in his family, but by the allowance of the inhabitants of the said town where he dwells under the like penalty of 20s. per week.

3. Plymouth, 1669

William Brigham, ed., The Compact with the Charter and Laws of the Colony of New Plymouth (Boston, 1836), p. 156.

Whereas great inconvenience hath arisen by single persons in the Colony being for themselves and not betaking themselves to live in well governed families, it is enacted by the Court that henceforth no single person be suffered to live of himself or in any family but such as the selectmen of the town shall approve of. And if any person or persons shall refuse or neglect to attend such order as shall be given them by the selectmen, that such person or persons shall be summoned to the Court to be proceeded with as the matter shall require.

4. Watertown, Massachusetts, 1672

Watertown Records, I, 113.

James Hollon appearing before the selectmen to answer for his living from under family government and misspending his time by idleness, the selectmen gave him a fortnight's time to provide himself a master, and in case he did it not in that time, that then they would provide one for him.

5. Suffolk County, Massachusetts, 1675

Morison, "Suffolk Co. Court Records," in CSM Publications, XXX, 647.

Captain James Johnson being complained of for disorderly carriages in his family, giving entertainment to persons at unseasonable hours of the night, and other misdemeanors, the court orders the said Captain Johnson to break up housekeeping and to dispose of himself into some good orderly family within one fortnight next following, or that then the Selectmen of Boston take care to dispose of him as abovesaid.

6. Connecticut, 1676

Conn. Records, II (1852), 281-282.

Whereas it is observed that young persons getting from under the government of parents or masters before they are able to govern themselves, which early liberty hath or may be an occasion of many evils and inconveniences, and hath moved this Court seriously and heartily to recommend it to the selectmen of the several plantations to be careful to prohibit and not to grant liberty to unmeet persons to entertain boarders or sojourners; and it is also ordered by this Court that all such boarders or sojourners as do live in families as such shall carefully attend the worship of God in those families where they so board or sojourn, and be subject to the domestic government of the said family, and shall be ready to give an account of their actions upon all demands, upon the penalty of forfeiting of five shillings for every breach of this order; and that no children shall be at liberty to dispose of themselves upon pretence of lawful age without the parents' consent and approbation of the authority of the place.

1. Massachusetts, 1660

Colonial Laws of Massachusetts, Reprinted from the Edition of 1660 (Boston, 1889), p. 257.

Whereas there is a law provided by this Court for punishing of fornicators, but nothing as yet for the easing of towns where bastards are born, in regard of the poverty of the parent or parents of such children sometimes appearing, nor any rule held forth touching the reputed father of a bastard for legal conviction:

It is therefore ordered and by this Court declared that where any man is legally convicted to be the father of a bastard child, he shall be at the care and charge to maintain and bring up the same, by such assistance of the mother as nature requireth and as the Court, from time to time (according to circumstances), shall see meet to order. And in case the father of a bastard, by confession or other manifest proof upon trial of the case, does not appear to the Court's satisfaction, then the man charged by the woman to be the father, she holding constant in it (especially being put upon the real discovery of the truth of it in the time of her travail), shall be the reputed father, and accordingly be liable to the charge of maintenance as aforesaid (though not to other punishment) notwithstanding his denial, unless the circumstances of the case and pleas be such, on the behalf of the man charged, as that the Court that have the cognizance thereon shall see reason to acquit him, and otherwise dispose of the child and education thereof. . .

2. Virginia, 1661-1662

W.W. Hening, ed., Statutes at Large of Virginia, II. (New York, 1823),115; hereafter cited as Va. Statutes at Large.

…And if it happen a bastard child to be gotten in such fornication, then the woman, if a servant, in regard of the loss and trouble her master doth sustain by her having a bastard, shall serve two years after her time by indenture is expired, or pay two thousand pounds of tobacco to her master, besides the fine or punishment for committing the offence; and the reputed father to put in security to keep the child and save the parish harmless.

Va. Statutes at Large, II, 167.

Whereas by act of Assembly every woman servant having a bastard is to serve two years, and late experience show[s] that some dissolute masters have gotten their maids with child and yet claim the benefit of their service, and on the contrary, if a woman got with child by her master should be freed from that service it might probably induce such loose persons to lay all their bastards to their masters. It is therefore thought fit and accordingly enacted, and be it enacted henceforward, that each woman servant got with child by her master shall, after her time by indenture or custom is expired, be by the churchwardens of the parish where she lived when she was brought to bed of such a bastard, sold for two years, and the tobacco to be employed by the vestry for the use of the parish.

Va. Statutes at Large, II, 168.

Whereas by the present law of this country the punishment of a reputed father of a bastard child is the keeping the child and saving the parish harmless, and if it should happen the reputed father to be a servant who can no way accomplish the penalty of that act; be it enacted by the authority aforesaid that where any bastard child is gotten by a servant, the parish shall take care to keep the child during the time of the reputed father's service by indenture or custom, and that after he is free, the said reputed father shall make satisfaction to the parish.

1. Maryland, ca. 1658

"Charles County Court Proceedings, 1658- 1672," in G. Hall Pleasants, ed., Md. Archives, LIII (1936), 78.

Anne Williams, plaintiff, Richard Smith, defendant: The plaintiff desires maintenance for a child the defendant hath got by her and desires by her petition that he may be sworn to several interrogatories she hath in equity propounded. But he being unwilling to be deposed to them. . . present[ed] his declaration as followeth:

To the Honorable Governor and worshipful Commissioner of Charles County.

The humble declaration of Richard Smith most humbly showeth that whereas this impudent woman hath most scandalously cast aspersions upon me, and I having taken it into my consideration for the injury, I do think it most meet for me to let her run on in her own perdition as she hath begun. If so [it] be that you will be pleased to permit her to take her deposition concerning the allegation she hath alleged against me, I am contented thereupon to take the child and to maintain it, trusting in the severe judgment of God against perjured persons.

It is therefore ordered that the said Richard Smith maintain the child. And that the woman for her fact committed be whipped and have thirty lashes well laid on.

2. Massachusetts, ca. 1673

Morison, "Suffolk Co. Court Records," in CSM Publications, XXIX (1933), 254-255.

Mary Hunter bound over to this Court for committing of fornication and having an illegitimate child which she owned in Court and charged Joseph Cowell with being the father of her child and took her oath thereof as followeth. You do here swear by the great and dreadful name of the Everliving God that the child lately born of your body, being a son, was begotten by Joseph Cowell and that he and no man else is the father thereof, so help you God.

Sworn in Court, May 1,1673 . . .

 The Court having considered of [Mary Hunter's] offence, do sentence her to be severly whipped with thirty stripes and to pay fees of court, standing committed till the sentence be performed.

Joseph Cowell, being bound over to this Court to answer upon suspicion of his committing fornication with Mary Hunter, he being called to answer to it, did not appear, his sureties being called to bring him in made no answer. The Court ordered a default to be entered, but afterwards, appearing and being convict[ed] of too much familiarity with the said Hunter, and she swearing that he and only he was the father of her illegitimate child. The Court sentenceth the said Cowell to be whipped severely with thirty stripes and to pay four shillings a week, one third in money, one third in goods, and one thirds in provisions towards the maintenance of the child lately born of the body of the said Mary Hunter, until he either marry with her or this Court take further order; and to pay fees of Court standing committed. The said Cowell next day sent in a petition to the Court wherein he did confess that he was the father of the child lately born of said Mary Hunter.

Morison, "Suffolk Co. Court Records." in CSM Publications, XXIX, 433-434.

Joseph Cowell bound over to this Court to answer what should be alleged against him by Hanna Tower of Hingham for committing fornication with her, by whom she hath had a bastard child, of which she made oath in Court and he did not deny it. The Court declares the said Cowell to be the reputed father of the child according to law, and order[s] him to pay three shillings per week in money to the said Hanna Tower towards the maintenance of the said child until the Court take further order, and to give in bond with sureties of fifty pounds for his good behavior till the next Court of this county, and then to appear standing committed until he give in such bond.

Morison, "Suffolk Co. Court Records," in CSM Publications, XXIX, 1012.

Thomas Curtice, charged by Sarah Tower for committing fornication with her, by whom she saith she hath had a child, and made oath in Court that he and no man else is the father of the child late born of her body begotten by him in fornication. The Court sentenced said Curtice to give bond of twenty pounds with two sufficient sureties for the payment of two shillings six pence per week in money to be paid weekly to said Sarah Tower or her order towards the maintenance of her child, from the time of its birth until this Court take further order, and to pay fees of Court standing committed.

3. Rhode Island, 1688

John Russell Bartlett, ed., Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, III (Providence, 1858), 244.

At a General Quarter Sessions holden at Rochester, for Rhode Island. . . in September 1688

. . . . .

Mary Cory, of Portsmouth, single woman, being called in Court, to answer to an indictment by the Grand Jury found against her for having a child born of her body, in June last past, appeared, and being demanded who was the father of the said child, she answered John Wickham.

The Court sentence the said Mary Cory for her offence to pay a fine of twenty shillings in money; and also that she bear the town of Portsmouth, free from all charges concerning, maintaining and bringing up the said child.

1. Inheritance of status through the mother, Virginia, 1662

Va. Statutes at Large, II, 170.

Was a child with one slave and one free parent slave or free? English common law derived the status of children from the father. To follow that course in Virginia, however, would result in freedom for the children of white men and Negro slave women. The Virginia law, which established inheritance of slave status through the mother, was copied in the later southern colonies.

Whereas some doubts have arisen whether children got by any Englishman upon a Negro woman should be slave or free, Be it therefore enacted. . . that all children born in this country shall be held bond or free only according to the condition of the mother. And that if any Christian shall commit fornication with a Negro man or woman, he or she so offending shall pay double the fines imposed by the former act.

2. Inheritance through the father, Maryland, 1664

Md. Archives, I (1883), 533-534.

Maryland seems to have taken for granted that children born to slave women were unfree; a special problem, however, was presented by the marriage of white women servants to Negro slaves.

All Negroes or other slaves already within the Province and all Negroes and other slaves to be hereafter imported into the Province shall serve durante vita. And all children born of any Negro or other slave shall be slaves as their fathers were for the term of their lives. And forasmuch as divers freeborn English women, forgetful of their free condition and to the disgrace of our nation, do intermarry with Negro slaves, by which also divers suits may arise touching the issue of such women and a great damage doth befall the masters of such Negroes, for prevention whereof, for deterring such freeborn women from such shameful matches, Be it further enacted. . . that whatsoever freeborn woman shall intermarry with any slave from and after the last day of this present Assembly shall serve the master of such slave during the life of her husband. And that all the issue of such freeborn women so married shall be slaves as their fathers were. And Be it further enacted that all the issues of English or other freeborn women that have already married Negroes shall serve the masters of their parents till they be thirty years of age and no longer.[1a]

[1a.] In 1681 Maryland attempted to discourage marriages between slaves and white women servants by imposing a heavy fine on masters who permitted such unions and manumitting children born of the marriage. Md. Archives, VII (1889), 203-205.

3. Virginia law prescribes penalties for a white woman having a bastard child by a Negro and sets thirty-one years as a term of service for the child, 1705

Va. Statutes at Large, III (Philadelphia, 1823), 453.

If any woman servant shall have a bastard child by a negro, or mulatto, over and above the years service due to her master or owner, she shall immediately, upon the expiration of her time to her then present master or owner, pay down to the church-wardens of the parish wherein such child shall be born, for the use of the said parish, fifteen pounds current money of Virginia, or be by them sold for five years, to the use aforesaid: And if a free Christian white woman shall have such bastard child, by a negro, or mulatto, for every such offence, she shall, within one month after her delivery of such bastard child, pay to the church-wardens for the time being, of the parish wherein such child shall be born, for the use of the said parish fifteen pounds current money of Virginia, or be by them sold for five years to the use aforesaid: And in both the said cases, the church-wardens shall bind the said child to be a servant, until it shall be of thirty-one years of age.

4. Bastard child of a female mulatto servant compelled to serve until thirty-one regardless of father's color, 1723

Va. Statutes at Large, IV (Richmond, 1820), 433.

Where any female mullatto, or indian, by law obliged to serve 'till the age of thirty or thirty-one years, shall during the time of her servitude, have any child born of her body, every such child shall serve the master or mistress of such mullatto or indian, until it shall attain the same age the mother of such child was obliged by law to serve unto.[1b]

[1b.] In 1770, in the case of Howell v. Netherland, the Virginia courts denied freedom to a mulatto boy who was two generations removed from the union between a white servant woman and a Negro man. The boy was required to serve until thirty-one years of age. See Helen C. Catterall, ed., Judicial Cases Concerning American Slavery and the Negro, I (Washington, D.C., 1926), 90-91.

1. Inheritance when parents die intestate, Massachusetts, 1641

Colonial Laws of Massachusetts, Reprinted from the Edition of 1660, p. 51.

When parents die intestate, the elder son shall have a double portion of his whole estate, real and personal, unless the General Court, upon just cause alleged, shall judge otherwise.

When parents die intestate having no heirs males of their bodies, their daughters shall inherit as copartners, unless the General Court, upon just cause alleged, shall judge otherwise.

. . . . .

No orphan during their minority, which was not committed to tuition or service by the parents in their lifetime, shall afterwards be absolutely disposed of by any kindred, friend, executor, township, or church, nor by themselves without the consent of some Court, wherein two Assistants at least shall be present.

2. A resident of Plymouth Colony provides for the family government of his children and other dependents in his will, 1633

I, Samuel Fuller the elder, being sick and weak but by the mercy of God in perfect memory ordain this my last will and testament. And first of all I bequeath my soul to God and my body to the earth until the resurrection. Item. I do bequeath the education of my children to my Brother Will Wright and his wife, only that my daughter Mercy be and remain with Goodwife Wallen so long as she will keep her at a reasonable charge. But if it shall please God to recover my wife out of her weak estate of sickness, then my children to be with her or disposed by her. Also, whereas there is a child committed to my charge called Sarah Converse, my wife dying as afore, I desire my Brother Wright may have the bringing up of her. And if he refuse then I commend her to my loving neighbor and brother in Christ, Thomas Prince, desiring that whosoever of them receive her perform the duty of a step father unto her and bring her up in the fear of God as their own, which was a charge laid upon me by her sick father when he freely bestowed her upon me, and which I require of them. Item. Whereas Elizabeth Cowles was committed to my education by her father and mother still living at Charlestown, my will is that she be conveniently apparaled and return to her father or mother or either of them. And for George Foster, being placed with me upon the same terms by his parents still living at Saugus, my will is that he be restored to his mother like- wise. Item. I give unto Samuel my son my house and lands at the Smeltriver to him and his heirs forever. Item. My will is that my house and garden at town be sold and all my moveables there and at the Smeltriver (except my cattle) together with the present crop of corn there standing by my overseers hereafter to be mentioned, except such as they shall think meet in the present education of my two children, Samuel and Mercy, my debts being first paid out of them, the overplus to be disposed of towards the increase of my stock of cattle for their good at the discretion of my overseers . . . Item. Whereas I have disposed of my children to my Brother Will. Wright and Priscilla his wife, my will is that in case my wife die he enter upon my house and land at the Smeltriver, and also my cattle not disposed [of], together with my two servants, Thomas Symens and Robert Cowles, for the remainder of their several terms, to be employed for the good of my children; he being allowed for their charge, viz. my children's, what my overseer shall think meet. But if in case my said brother Will Wright or Priscilla his wife die, then my said children Samuel and Mercy, together with the said joint charge committed to the said Will and Priscilla, be void except my overseers or the survivor of them shall think meet. To whose godly care in such case I leave them to be disposed of elsewhere as the law shall direct them. . . Item. My will is that when my children come to age of discretion, then my overseers make a full valuation of that stock of cattle and the increase thereof, and that it be equally divided between my children. And if any die in the meantime, the whole to go to the survivor or survivors. Item. My will is that they be ruled by my overseers in marriage. Also, I would have them enjoy that small portion the Lord shall give them when my overseers think them to be of fit discretion, and not at any set time or appointment of years. . .

3. Widows, orphans, and guardians, New Amsterdam, 1655

Berthold Fernow, ed. and trans., The Minutes of the Orphanmasters of New Amsterdam, 1655 to 1683 (New York, 1902), pp. 3-9.

Whereas Johan van Beeck has perished in the last disaster.[1c] Therefore their Worships, the Burgomasters, as Orphan Masters, consider it necessary, that agreeably to the customs of the Fatherland guardians for the infant child be appointed and for this purpose there has been summoned Maria Verleth, the widow of said J. van Beeck, and the matter was laid before her; but she could not so quickly resolve, whom to name and refused some, who were proposed, she was given time to think of it until the next meeting of the Orphan Masters, next Tuesday at 10 o. c. and the case deferred until then.

Whereas Pieter Cecer, alias Mallemock, and his wife have lately died, leaving six small children, Therefore their Worships, the Burgomasters, as Orphan Masters, have deemed it necessary, that tutors and guardians for said children be appointed and they have selected as such and herewith appoint Pieter van Linde as being the stepfather of the mother, and lsaacq Kip as witness. . . for the youngest child. They are hereby authorized to sell or employ the goods and property, left by deceased, for the benefit of the children, to hire out or bind out the children to honest and suitable people and to do everything, what time and circumstances point out as proper. They shall be held, when called upon, to render account, produce vouchers etc to the Orphan Masters. Thus done etc. November 9, 1655.

Whereas Cornelis Hendricksen of Dort has perished in the late disaster and has left besides a widow a small child and whereas as yet no inventory has been taken of his estate, Therefore his widow Madaleen Direx has been summoned to appear before their Worships, the Burgomasters, as Orphan Masters, and she was asked, whether she knew of any relatives of her husband here in the country; she answered, she knew of none and as their Worships consider it necessary, to appoint, according to the customs of the Fatherland, guardians for the small child, they have chosen and appointed, as they herewith do, Jan Vinje, as being related to the widow, and Hendrick Kip, an old Burgher and inhabitant here, who are hereby authorized to take within three days from date in the presence of the Secretary an inventory of the estate of said Cornelis Hendricksen dec'd and to submit the same next Tuesday to the Orphanmasters who will then decide upon the disposition of it. Done as above.

Whereas Cornelis Clasen Swits and Tobias Teunissen perished in the last disaster and their widows and children are still with the savage barbarians and whereas quite lately in gathering the cattle on the Island some heads were found and brought in, belonging to said Cornelis Clasen and Tobias Teunissen dec'd, Therefore their Worships, the Burgomasters, as Orphanmasters, have deemed it necessary, that proper care be taken to have said cattle put to use for the benefit of the widows and orphans. For this purpose they have chosen and appointed, as they herewith do, Egbert Woutersen, Tomas Hall and Cornelis Aertsen, who are hereby authorized to dispose of said cattle, as they according to time and circumstances shall consider best for the heirs. They shall be bound to report such disposals with proofs, vouchers etc. to the Orphan masters. Done November 10, 1655.

Jan Vinje appeared at the Secretary's office and declared, that he could not attend to the guardianship of the small child of Cornelis Hendricksen of Dort dec'd, as he had too much to do with his own business and had also been refused by the widow Madaleene.

Tuesday, the 16th of November [1655] . . .Whereas Maria Verleth, widow of Joh. van Beeck, was at the last meeting on the 9th inst given time until to-day, to consider, whom she should name as guardian of her infant child, therefore it has been decided to send the messenger for said widow to appear: which being done, the Messenger reports, that she had said, she were busy and could not come.

Then the Orphanmasters decreed as follows:

Whereas Sieur Johannes van Beeck has lately perished in the last disaster and has left behind in this country not only a widow, but also a small minor child. Therefore the Burgomasters of this City as Orphanmasters have deemed it necessary, that following the usages of our Fatherland guardians be appointed for said child, in order that neither the child nor the widow may be injured in their rights and inherited property and having called the widow Maria Verleth to appear they have after due deliberation appointed and commissioned as guardians, as they hereby do, Sieur Joost van Beeck, the brother of Johannes van Beeck deceased, and Nicolas Verleth, the brother of the widow, who are hereby authorized as such guardians, first to make in the presence of the Secretary an inventory of the estate, including furniture, real and personal property, debts and credits, here in the country due to and by deceased, which inventory they are to hand to the Orphanmasters as soon as possible, then to make with their advice a proper disposition. Done this 16th of November 1655.

It is further ordered, that a copy of the foregoing order shall be delivered by the Court Messenger to Sieur Joost van Beeck.

Whereas Madaleen Dircksen, widow of Cornelis Hendricksen of Dort, has refused to accept the guardians, appointed by the Orphanmasters and whereas up to date no inventory of the estate has been taken, therefore their Worships have decided, to call said widow before them, that she may give her reasons and state, whom she wishes. Appearing the widow says, she refuses the formerly appointed guardians, because Jan Vinje is her adversary and has never had any conversation with her or her late husband, while Hendrick Kip is in no wise a relative or friend. She requests, that the Orphanmasters, if they decide, that guardians are necessary, will please to commission Abraham Verplanck and Andries de Haes. Not knowing any reasons, why the named persons should not be made guardians, the Orphanmasters grant the widow's request and the men are sent for. Having accepted the charge they are commissioned in the manner as the preceding guardians and ordered to bring the inventory of the estate to the next meeting. . . .

Tuesday, November 23, [1655] . . . Lourens Jansen appearing before their Worships, the Burgomasters as Orphanmasters, reported that one Barent Driesen and Aeltie N., his wife, had perished on Staten Island during this last disaster and that there remained a minor child, called Jan Barensen, about 7 years, who was at his house; also, that there were still running on Staten Island some cattle and other animals of the deceased. He requests therefore, that guardians might be appointed, to look after and administer said cattle and what else is left for the benefit of the child. Considering the request reasonable the Orphanmasters have chosen and commissioned Jan Eversen Bout and Lourens Jansen, who as guardians of said infant child are authorized to make an inventory of the animals and of whatever else the deceased have left and to administer upon the property for the best of said child, they being obliged to render and prove accounts to the Orphanmasters, when required.

[1c.] Probably the Indian onslaught of September 15, 1655. [Editor's note in Minutes of the Orphanmasters.]

4. Foster care in Maryland, 1661

Md. Archives, LIII, 136-137.

Know all men by these presents that I, Eleanor Empson, late wife to William Empson, deceased, have bargained and sold unto Richard Dod, to him, his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, two heifers of two years old apiece or thereabouts. . . which two heifers I, the said Eleanor Empson, am constrained to dispose of unto Richard Dod for the nursing, keeping, and relieving of Mary Empson, daughter of the aforesaid William Empson, deceased, from the day of the date hereof until two years be expired. And it is to be understood that I, the said Richard Dod, take the said child with this proviso that whether the said child live or die in the said term of time, I, the said Dod, am to enjoy the said two heifers, me and my heirs forever. Also I, the foresaid Richard Dod, doth take the said two heifers as delivered, they and their increase forever. Note that I, the said Eleanor Empson, am constrained to dispose of the said child above specified for the present relief, otherwise it might have perished in the condition I am left in . . . witness our hand this first of April, 1661.

1. Virginia, 1661/62

Va. Statutes at Large, II, 92-94.

Concerning orphan's estates, be it enacted that all wills and testaments be firm and inviolable, unless the executors or overseers do refuse to execute the trust reposed in them by the testator, in which case the court may appoint others to act according to the will; but if the said will be so made that no person will undertake the managing of the estate, or education of the orphans according to the tenor of it, then that the estate by appointment of the court shall be managed according to the rules set down for the ordering the estate of persons intestate, as followeth:

First, that no account be allowed for diet, clothes, physic, or else against any orphan's estate, but that to be educated and provided for by the interest of the estate and increase of their stock according to the proportion of their estates, if it will bear it. But if the estate be so mean and inconsiderable that it will not extend to a free education, then it is enacted that such orphans shall be bound apprentices to some handicraft trade until one and twenty years of age, except some kinsman or relation will maintain them for the interest of the small estate they have, without diminution of the principal, which, whether great or small, [is] always to be delivered to the orphans at the years appointed by the law.

That all cattle, horses and sheep be returned in kind by the guardian according to age and number, according as he received them. . .

That all plate and money be preserved and delivered in kind according to the weight and quantity; that other household stuff and lumber be apprised in money and the value thereof paid by the guardian to the orphan when he comes to age, in the country commodity [tobacco] at the price current as it shall be worth at the time, in the place where the orphan's estate is managed.

That the court take able and sufficient security for orphans' estates and inquire yearly of the security, and if the court see cause, to have it changed and called in and placed as the court shall think fit; the court also to inquire whether orphans be kept, maintained, and educated according to their estates, and if they find any notorious defects to remove the orphans to other guardians; also for those that are bound apprentices to change their masters if they use them rigorously or neglect to teach them his trade.

That such orphans as are not bound apprentices shall, after seventeen years of age, have the produce of their own labor and industry, and liberty to dispose thereof at their discretion, the guardians still allowing them their maintenance for the interest of their estate. . .

2. Maryland, 1671

Md. Archives, II (1884), 18,325-329.

The Maryland statute of 1671 followed the Virginia law of 1661 but adopted new provisions regarding slave property, bound servants, education of orphans in the religion of parents, and legal age of girls.

Forasmuch as the former laws made in this province concerning orphans' estates are found by experience to be very defective and noways sufficient for the preservation of orphans' estates according to the ends and purposes thereby intended and desired, the delegates in this present Assembly now assembled pray that it may be enacted. And be it enacted by the Right Honorable the Lord Proprietary of this Province with the advice and consent of the upper and lower House of this present General Assembly and the authority of the same: That all last wills and testaments shall be firm and inviolable unless the executor or overseers thereby appointed do refuse to execute the trust in them reposed by the testator, in which case the Chief Judge for probate of wills and granting administration shall grant administration with the will annexed to some other person as in his discretion shall seem meet. . . always provided the children, if any, be committed to persons of the same religion of their deceased parents. And it is further enacted. . . that when any person whatsoever dieth intestate . . . the said Judge upon the account given by the said administrators. . . shall make division of the overplus of the estate, after debts paid and funeral expenses defrayed, allowing to the wife of the intestate, if she be then living, one third part thereof, and the rest is to be divided amongst the children, if he have any then living; and in case he have no children, then to the next of the blood of the deceased intestate.

. . . . .

….that no Negroes or other slaves shall be sold or disposed of by any administrator for payment of debts or otherwise or reserved for the administrator's own use in satisfaction for any debt due to the said administrator, nor any execution served upon any Negroes or other slaves so long as there shall be other goods of the deceased sufficient to satisfy the just debts of the deceased. . .

. . . . .

….That every male orphan shall be accounted to be of full age at the years of one and twenty and at that age to receive his estate from the guardian, but in case any person by his last will and testament do appoint any person to be executor that is full seventeen years of age, that person so appointed shall be adjudged of sufficient age to administer as executor. . .

. . . That every female orphan shall be accounted of full age to receive her estate at the age of sixteen years or day of marriage which shall first happen, provided she be above sixteen years of age at the day she is married.

. . . That all Negroes and other slaves shall be, after the transmitting of the estate to the County Courts as aforesaid, appraised to the administrators and gurdians and be preserved by them and employed to the said administrators and guardians use and benefit, and the like number of slaves and of like abilities returned to the said orphans out of their increase if any be at their several full ages by this law limited, and if any of the said slaves be grown aged or otherwise impotent or be lamed, and that the increase will not make the original stock good as to number and ability of body, that then they shall again be appraised by the said County Courts and the administrators and guardians shall pay to the said orphans so much money or tobacco as the County Courts shall judge the orphan's stock of Negroes then to be of less value than they were of at the time of the first apprais[al] and delivery of the said slaves to the said administrators and guardians. . .

That all that are servants for years be likewise returned in kind according to their number, several ages, and sexes, number of years they have to serve, and outward appearance of ability of body, to the orphans by the administrators and guardians as they received them when the orphan shall accomplish the age by this Act appointed.

Guardianship and maintenance cases, North Carolina, 1694

No. Car. Records, I, 396, 398.

A petition exhibited to the Court by Eliza Arnold showing that her husband Lawrence Arnold left his estate to his son John Arnold to be enjoyed at thirteen years of age, but being incapable to manage it by reason of his tender years, prayeth to choose Jonathan Bateman for his guardian. Ordered that Jonathan Bateman be his guardian and that his mother do bring in an inventory of all the said estate to the next Court.

Upon a petition exhibited by Jabell Alford praying to have liberty to choose a guardian. Ordered that the said Jabell Alford be bound to Mistress Susanna Hartley, widow, until he be one and twenty years of age, and that the said Mistress Hartley be bound and enter into bond to learn him the trade of a carpenter or joiner within the said time.

Upon a petition exhibited by Thomas Hassold showing that a child named Thomas Snoden was left with him by his [step father] Edmund Firkins upon condition to pay him 600 pounds of tobacco per year for his diet. Ordered that the said Thomas Snoden serve the said Hassold until his [step father] come for him or else till he arrive at the age of twenty-one years.

1. Indenture of an orphan, Delaware country, 1678/79[1d]

Records of the Court of New Castle on Delaware, 1676-1681 (Lancaster, Pa., 1904), p. 294.

Anna the daughter of Barent Egbertsen deceased was this day by Doctor Thomas Spry and Rebecca his wife, with the consent and approbation of the court, put out to William Grant and his heirs for the term of six years, now next ensuing the date hereof, during which time he, the said William Grant, did engage to find her, the said Anna, with sufficient meat, drink, washing, lodging and apparel, and at the expiration of the said time to give her as good clothes (if not better) as she now brings, as also two heifers with two calves and a sow with pig or with pigs by her side. (February the 5th, 1678/9).

[1d.] For other cases of the binding out of poor orphans see below, Chap. III.

2. The first orphanage in the United States, New Orleans, 1728

In 1727 seven Ursuline nuns arrived in New Orleans to operate a hospital and conduct a school for the Company of the Indies. As the following documents indicate, the nuns soon accepted additional responsibilities, including the care of orphans. The number of orphans under their care increased in 1730 when children of French victims of the Natchez massacre were brought to the convent. In 1731 the Sisters were caring for forty-nine girls ranging in age from three to twelve years. The Company of the Indies paid the Ursulines 150 livres per year for each orphan; in 1732 the French government contributed an annual subsidy of 4,500 livres to the orphanage.[1e]

[1e.] Jean Delangler, French Jesuits in Lower Louisiana (New Orleans, 1935), p. 283.

a. A school for Negro and Indian girls and women

Sister Mary Madeleine Hachard, New Orleans, to her father, in Henry Churchill Semple, The Ursulines in New Orleans, A Record of Two Centuries (New York, 1925), pp. 199, 230.

January 1, 1728. We keep also a school to instruct the negro and Indian girls and women; they come every day from one o'clock in the afternoon to half- past two. You see, my dear father, that we are not useless in this country, I assure you that all our moments are counted and that we have not a single one to ourselves. We have lately taken charge of a little orphan girl who was serving in a house where she did not have a very good example. It is further the intention of Rev. Father de Beaubois that we should take charge, through charity, of some little orphan girls; and he tells us, in order to engage us to do it, that he and Mr. Perier charge themselves with all the orphan boys. . .

April 24, 1728.

Our little community is increasing from day to day. We have twenty boarders, of whom eight have to-day made their First Communion; three lady boarders, and three orphans whom we take through charity. We have also seven slave boarders to teach and prepare for Baptism and First Communion. Besides we have a large number of day-scholars and negresses and savages who come two hours a day to be instructed. . . .

b. The Ursulines have not arrived soon enough

Father le Petit, Missionary, New Orleans, to Father D'Avangour, Procurator of the Missions in North America, July 12, 1730, in Semple, The Ursulines in New Orleans, pp. 272-273.

One could not help being moved to pity, on seeing arrive in this city the French women whom the Natchez had made their slaves. The miseries which they suffered were painted on the countenance; however, it appears that they soon forgot them; at least, many among them were in a great hurry to marry again; and we have been assured that there were great demonstrations of joy at their weddings.

The little girls, whom none of the inhabitants wished to adopt, have greatly enlarged the interesting company of orphans who the religious are bringing up. The great number of these children serve but to augment their charity and attentions. They have formed into a separate class, of which two teachers have charge.

There is not one of this holy community who is not delighted to have crossed the ocean, were she to do no other good save that of preserving these children in their innocence, and of giving a polished and Christian education to young French girls who were in danger of being little better bred than slaves. The hope is held out to these holy religious that, ere the end of the year, they will occupy the new house which is destined for them, and for which they have so long been sighing.

When they shall be settled there, to the instruction of the borders, the orphans, the day-scholars and negresses, they will add also the care of the sick in the hospital, and a house of refuge for women of questionable character. Perhaps, later on, they will even be able to aid in affording regularly each year a retreat to a large number of ladies, in accordance with the task with which we have inspired them.

So many works of charity would, in France, suffice to occupy several communities and different institutions. But what cannot great zeal effect? These various labors do not at all startle seven Ursulines; and they rely upon being able, with the help of God's grace, to sustain them, without detriment to the religious observance of their rules. As for me, I fear that, if some assistance do not arrive, they will sink under the weight of so much fatigue. Those who before knowing them used to say they were coming too soon and in too great a number, have entirely changed their views and their language; witnesses of their edifying conduct and the great services they render to the Colony, they find that they have not arrived soon enough, and that there could not come too many of the same virtue and merit.

3. Disposition of orphans in Georgia, 1735

Edw. Jenkins and John Deane, Savannah, to James Oglethorpe, undated but 1735, PRO, CO 5/636, no. 120.

The letter was written about five years before the founding of Whitefield's Bethesda Orphanage. On the orphanage see below, Part Two, Chap. IV, sec. B, The Bethesda Orphan House, Georgia, 1739-1742.

In this packet we have enclosed an account of the orphans' effects, and must, I fear, be forced to take out executions against most that have not paid. We gain from many people a great deal of ill will by being pretty urgent to get the orphans' money. But as it was your Honor's desire we should undertake it, we will do to the utmost of our power in behalf of the orphans.

Mr. Causton tells us we must pay for the orphans' clothing out of their effects; we wait for your Honor's orders about it.

The children are placed as follows:

The daughter of Henery Clark with Mr. Hetherinton. I can't speak much in praise of the place.

Goddard's son with Mr. Gristwater it's [not] to be doubted will be ruined. We would be glad to have your order to remove him.

The daughter with Mr. Carwell. . . proves an unlucky child. I fear the ill conduct of the master and mistress is too much the cause. Mr. Causton refused paying them for the keeping the girl and order we to pay it which we desire to know where we must or no.

The two sons of Peter Tondees with Mr. Amatis. And by his ill conduct of taking a scandalous wench to himself instead of a wife, I very much fear how they will be taken care of.

John Millige ha[s] got him up a hut by the help of Mr. Young and some of his neighbors. He desired we would let his brother and sisters live with him as we have consented to. But I fear it's too young a family to do well. If they do not we will part them.

Mrs. Doyle being dead and left two sons, the eldest with Mr. Causton.

The youngest with James Turner who has learned to be a taylor and proved an honest man as any in the town and takes a great deal of care of the child.

Mr. Little's child with Mrs. Mercer. They are very kind to the child.

Mary Simons that you gave to Mr. Egcome, as soon as you went from hence he sold her to James Moore. Moore sold her to Wilson. Wilson sold her to Cheseright, which is a very bad debauched house, so that amongst them all, I fear the girl is undone; it's thought by the midwife she is with child. Mr. Causton thought, as she was a gift to Egcome, he could not qualify the selling of her, so took her away from Cheseright and thinks she comes under our care. So we have taken her and placed her to Mr. Tollafield, who is married to a careful woman. If any in the town can break her from her ill habit they will.

I remain your Honored Most obedient and humble servant.