We’ve known there were slaves in Mamaroneck Township in the late 1700s. We’ve known that two local slaves, John Cox and Andrew Cole,  escaped to side with the British during the Revolutionary War and were rewarded with their freedom and passage to Nova Scotia. But until this month, we haven’t known anything about what happened to Cox and Cole after they boarded a ship in 1783 headed for (modern day) Canada. Now, based on new information from two historical societies in Canada, we know Cox and Cole made it to St. John, New Brunswick.

Where We Left Off

In Two Local Slaves “Recaptured” after 200 Years,  we reported Cox and Cole departing from New York City in 1783 headed for either Annapolis or St. John,which were then both part of Nova Scotia.   Cox’s slaveholder Eliazer Goddin and Andrew Cole’s slaveholder Ben Cole had been compensated by the British, and Cox and Cole were off to a new life of freedom – and hardship.

Since that report, we searched for further details. The Black Loyalist Heritage Society in Shelburne, Nova Scotia, did not have any records of either Cox or Cole disembarking or living in the Annapolis area. However, recently, they put us in touch with Stephen Davidson, a teacher, novelist and historian who lives near Halifax and was able to identify several documents that reveal what happened next.

Andrew “Coal” in St. John’s

Davidson reported that Andrew Cole is identified  on a list of Black Loyalists compiled by David Bell for his book, The Early Loyalists of Saint John (in Appendix VIII, pp. 172-255).  His name appears as Andrew COAL, and he is listed as having a wife. Davidson further explained: “In 1783, St. John’s meant the mouth of the St. John River in what is now New Brunswick (but was then the north-western part of the colony of Nova Scotia). Loyalists flooded into Parrtown by the thousands, and within two years the tiny settlement at the mouth of the St. John River became the city of Saint John.”

Joining Up with Corankapone

Land Grant to Conankapone, including Jacob Cox and Andrew Cole.

Cox and Cole's signatures on the land grant petition.

The next set of documents involve a land grant [1] based on a petition [2] by another freed slave, Richard Corankapone Wheeler, which was signed for “Jacob Cox” and “Andrew Cole” and others.  Davidson explains that Cole was therefore  “part of a community of Black Loyalists that began to form as the refugees sailed for British North America. The men were from many colonies, but they acted together, placing themselves under the leadership of Richard Wheeler (Corankapone), another Clinton passenger.”

In A Most Determined Man, Davidson describes Corankapone: “The former Richard Wheeler was a healthy 30 year-old bachelor who had bought his freedom in 1776 from Caleb Wheeler, his master in New Jersey. Although over 210 black loyalists sailed with Corankapone, fifteen of them were to become close friends in the new colony of New Brunswick and would look to him as their leader. Their surnames included Holland, Cole, Sampson, VanRyper, Francis and Stewart. They had once been enslaved in Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, and South Carolina as well as New Jersey. In 1783, they thought they were about to embrace the life of free men as they settled alongside white loyalists at the mouth of the St. John River.”

Is Jacob Cox the Same Person As John Cox?

The Corankapone documents refer to “Jacob Cox” while the Mamaroneck slave was known as “John Cox.” Are they the same person? We don’t know for sure, but there are good reasons to believe they are:

• Jacob Cox is a signer, with Andrew Cole, of two Corankapone petitions. How likely is it that John Cox disappears and Jacob Cox simultaneously materializes as Andrew Cole’s partner in two petitions representing that they are freed slaves?
• The freed slaves on Corankapone’s petition were people who joined with him on the Clinton. There was no “Jacob Cox” on the Clinton, so there is no evidence that Jacob was a different person than John.
• In fact there was no “Jacob Cox” in the entire Book of Negroes which identified all of the former slaves freed by the British.
• Cox’s and Cole’s names appear adjacent in the Book of Negroes and in the petitions.
• In Professor Bell’s census of Saint John in 1783 and 1784, he lists a “Jacob Cox” but not a “John Cox.” Once again there is no evidence of a different “John Cox” in the area.
• There is no evidence that Cox or Cole disembarked in Annapolis. [2]

Did They have Wives and Families?

Professor Bell’s inventory shows Andrew Cole as being married as of 1784, and Jacob Cox as having a “child under 10,” a category which included anyone from infancy through age 9. How do we explain their families?

A review of the ship manifest for the Clinton suggests a possible answer. Passengers on the Clinton (listed on the same page of the manifest)  included Mary Coles, Nelly Cox, and two children of Nelly Cox. On the manifest, Mary Coles was identified as free-born from Mosquito Cove in Long Island, a place now know as Glen Cove. Nelly Cox was listed as the former property of Paul Burtis in Long Island, although the ownership of her two children is not clear. Cox and Cole may have met these women during the war, or they may have met immediately before or during the trip from New York to New Brunswick. While our evidence is incomplete, I believe that the best interpretation of the evidence is that both men were married, since:

• The male and female Coxes and Coles are on the same ship with the same destination.
• Both Cox and Cole  lived as married men soon after their arrival in Saint John.
• It is relatively unlikely that the two women were on the ship in any other capacity than as the wives of male passengers. To qualify for passage, the refugee had to have been recorded as being in service to the British. A women might have served as a seamstress, cook, laundress, and even as a spy, but the more likely scenario is that they were on board as wives.  A woman could not qualify for passage on the Clinton simply as a personal preference. The orders authorizing the emigration clearly stated: “The Refugees and all Masters of Negroes will be attentive that no Negro is permitted to embark as a Refugee who has not recorded himself within the British Lines.” If Nelly Cox and Mary Coles were not the wives of Cox and Cole, what was their status on the Clinton?
• There are notable cases of Black Loyalist slaves marrying and fathering children while in British military service. [3]

So we know that Andrew Cole arrived in St. John. There is reasonable but imperfect evidence that John Cox also arrived, and is the Jacob Cox in subsequent records. The records show that Cox and Cole were both married, and that Cox, in Saint John, also had a child.

What Happened in Saint John?

Stephen Davidson’s essay A Most Determined Man, describes the horrendous conditions which Corankapone and his friends Cox and Cole and their families faced. Blacks were not permitted occupations beyond being servants or laborers and were not even allowed to fish.

Davidson reports: “By January 1785, their situation had become unbearable. Thirty-four black loyalists, including his 15 shipmates, asked Corankapone to be their “captain” and petition the government for land outside the city. Corankapone’s petition reviewed their situation: That the Authority at Carleton were pleased to set apart Small Lots … upon which they have Built and now reside – That they find by Experience that they, their Wifes and Children cannot subsist … and are under Apprehensions of Suffering this Winter, Labour and Provisions being so very Scarce … That Your Petitioner hopes that those that knew him think he sincerely desires that the Blacks, should lead Industrious, honest Lives and instead of being a Burthen, should be an Advantage to the Community … Your Excellency’s Petitioner therefore most humbly Prays a Grant may be made to the Blacks named in the annexed List of the Land … or such Relief in their Wretched Circumstances. “

An Advertisement for the Sierra Leone Land Company

Cox and Cole were among the petitioners, and in 1787 the land grands were issued. However the conditions continued to be terrible, and eventually Corankapone became aware of a project to resettle black loyalist refugees to Sierra Leone. In In A Most Determined Man, Stephen Davidson describes how  Corankapone, upon learning about the Sierra Leone option, walked the 400 miles to Halifax to accept the offer of resettlement in Africa.  In A Loyalist Constable in Africa, Stephen Davidson recounts Corankapone’s life in Freetown, Sierra Leone.

For Andrew Cole, the documentary trail now goes cold. However, when Corankapone walked to Halifax, four of his closest friends walked with him and departed in January 1792 for Sierra Leone. Was Andrew Cole one of the four friends? Perhaps, as the records of life in Freetown are reconstructed and digitized, the name of Andrew Cole will once again emerge.

As to Jacob (or it it John?)  Cox, Stephen Davidson reports the following: “It is interesting that I couldn’t find any other Coxes in this period of New Brunswick’s history other than Jacob Cox. It seems to have been a rare name. The next Cox that I found was a Jeremy Cox who married in a community along the St. John River in 1806. If this were Jacob Cox’s “child under ten” in 1783, he would certainly be of marriageable age by 1806.  If we follow this line of speculation a little further, perhaps Jacob Cox (the true John Cox?) stayed on the land he received while his Clinton friends left for Sierra Leone in 1791. His son Jeremy Cox then married in the riverside community of Gagetown in 1806.”

So, if we adopt the most likely – if not absolutely certain – interpretations of the records available, this is the story:  Cox and Cole, having escaped from their Mamaroneck slave-holders to fight with the British in the Revolutionary War,  embark on the Clinton in 1783 bound for Nova Scotia with their wives and, in Cox’s case, two children. They disembark in Saint John and set out to make new lives for themselves and their families. Facing many hardships, including racist restrictions on their new-found freedom, they take different paths. Cole emigrates to Sierra Leone where he is  promised greater freedom and land. Cox stays on, and perhaps it is his son Jeremy who survives to be married in 1806.

Is this what really happened? It is the most likely interpretation of the documents available at this point. But we will be continuing to search for further clues to solve the mysteries of what happened to Mamaroneck’s former slaves.

References

1. Draught of a Grant made to Wheeler and Company, 1787, Fredericton, “Black Loyalists in New Brunswick, 1783-1854,” Atlantic Canada Virtual Archives, digital image, document no. Wheeler_Richard_1785_08, p. 1. RS 108: Index to Land Petitions: Original Series, 1783-1918, , is available at Provincial Archives of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick.

2.  Stephen Davidson advises, by personal communication: “There was nothing on Cox or Cole in the 1784 Muster Roll for Annapolis County, indicating the two men did not get off the Clinton in Annapolis Royal and then later cross the Bay of Fundy to Saint John. Neither man is found in the early probate records of New Brunswick (which happen to contain details on the property of a number of Black Loyalists).  The petition of Thomas Peters (a Black Loyalist who appealed to the New Brunswick government in 1791 before sailing to Sierra Leone) does not have either a Cole or Cox among its petitioners.  Baptismal records for the Prince William Anglican Church in NB does not contain their names.”

3. See  Thomas Peters. “Peters rose to the rank of sergeant in the regiment and he was twice wounded in battle. During this time Thomas was married to Sally Peters, a slave from South Carolina and he had a son called John (born in 1781) and a daughter Clairy (born in 1771).”

Joseph Stewart is in the background of this 1816 watercolor of Elizabeth Cooper by George Freeman.

By Ned Benton

In the 1800s, in the DeLancey home on Heathcote Hill in Mamaroneck there was a prominent painting in the front hall of a black man. The family called him “The Governor.” With the assistance of the James Fenimore Cooper Society the Historical Society learned some more about the man in the painting.

The grave marker for Joseph Stewart in the Cooper burial plot adjacent to Christ Episcopal Church in Cooperstown

According to Hugh MacDougall, the Corresponding Secretary of the Society, “Joseph Stewart, nicknamed “The Governor”,  was connected with William Cooper, Susan’s paternal grandfather, not with the De Lanceys, and he lived in Cooperstown. His slave-holder was Abraham Ten Broeck, and from 1799-1802 he was “rented” by William Cooper for $76-80 per year (see Alan Taylor, “William Cooper’s Town”, Knopf 1995,p. 299.)  He was subsequently emancipated (the certificate is registered, without a specific date, in the Otsego County Register of Incorporations), and remained as a free servant of the Cooper family.”

Joseph Stewart is buried in the Cooper’s private burial plot adjacent to Christ Episcopal Church in Cooperstown. The inscription says

The Historical Society first wrote about Joseph Stewart in 2006, in an article titled Historical Society Finds More Slaves from Heathcote Hill. The article reported on slaves living wiwith the Delancey family, based on a 1883 essay by Susan Fenimore Cooper, the daughter of James Fenimore Cooper, titled Small Family Memories. Susan Cooper wrote the essay to describe for her grandchildren what it was like growing up on Mamaroneck’s Heathcote Hill during the early 1800s.

Secretary MacDougall also provided additional information about Stewart’s widow  Harris would have lived on  Pine Street (now Pine Boulevard) in Cooperstown, and as Susan Cooper says in the essay:  “His wife Harris married again after his death, and lies in the Churchyard, near the front fence. My grandfather gave her a house and lot, on what is now Pine Street.” There is a  section of the Village Graveyard (and later Christ Episcopal Church graveyard) once reserved for African-Americans along its eastern edge next to River Street.

According to Secretary MacDougall, She may be the Harris Mann who is recorded in Christ Church records as dying in 1847 at the age of 77, and her second husband may have been Thomas Mann,  a Free Black recorded in the 1830 US Census as aged 36-55, with a presumed wife of the same age and a presumed daughter aged under 10.

Joseph Stewart “The Governor” therefore never lived in Mamaroneck.

Additional Information on “Fred”

Susan Cooper’s essay also referred to a slave called “Fred.” She wrote: “There were still slaves in New York at that time, and a family of them belonged to my Grandfather De Lancey. They had an easy time of it, I imagine. Fred was given to my Mother when she removed to Cooperstown, but I think I have heard that my Father paid him wages.“ Later in the essay she writes that Fred deserted the family. “Fred the black boy, who nominally belonged to my Mother, but received wages, deserted about that time.”

According to Secretary MacDougall, Fred was sometimes known as “Frederic”. James Fenimore Cooper “rented” him from his older brother Richard. According to James Fenimore Cooper, The Early Years (New Haven, Yale University Press, 2007, pp. 150-151),  Frederic “seems to have been one of the freed or indentured DeLancey blacks; his indenture had been purchased and he was taken to Cooperstown by Richard Fenimore Cooper, and in 1811 he returned with the Coopers to Westchester. While living with them, Fred was paid wages; eventually, around 1820 (before his indenture was up), he deserted them and they made no attempt to find him and bring him back.” Thus “Fred” may not have been a slave at the time he lived on Heathcote Hill in Mamaroneck. Rather he was an indentured servant, which meant that he had to continue to work for the Coopers until he satisfied the terms of his indenture, which arose because of his prior status as a slave.

James Mott

Jinny, Banjo Billy

Peter Jay Munro, was the original resident of the Manor House in Larchmont and a nephew of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Munro does not appear as a slaveholder in the Mamaroneck U.S. Census in 1790. While he maintained his legal residence in New York City, and reported his four slaves to the census there in 1790, he recorded the birth of a child to one of his slaves in Mamaroneck Township in 1814.

While the community commemorates the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. and his dream of equality this month, the Larchmont Historical Society (LHS) has uncovered additional evidence of slavery in Mamaroneck’s past. Five new names have been added to the list of known slaves, which now numbers more than 80.

Naming the Slaves and Slave-holders

The list in an outcrop of a 2005 Gazette article, which named all known slaves and slave-holders in Mamaroneck Township. (See Slavery in Mamaroneck Township: Remembering Bet, Phelby, Candice, Jack, Hannibal, and Telemaque.) LHS then created a website, Slavery in Mamaroneck Township, that expanded the documentation of the list. Then in 2006, two more Mamaroneck slaves were found in a British Revolutionary War shipping manifest. (See: Two Local Slaves “Recaptured” After 220 Years). More recently, the LHS announced that it has discovered references to slavery at Heathcote Hill in an 1883 essay, originally published in a collection of James Fenimore Cooper papers in 1922, and published online by the James Fenimore Cooper Society.

John Peter DeLancey’s home was relocated from the top of Heathcote Hill, as shown here, to the Boston Post Road. It now houses “Down by the Bay” Restaurant. (Photo from the Larchmont Historical Society Photo Archive.)

“There were still slaves in New York at that time, and a family of them belonged to my Grandfather De Lancey. They had an easy time of it, I imagine.” So recalled Susan Fenimore Cooper, the daughter of James Fenimore Cooper, in an 1883 essay, Small Family Memories, she wrote to describe for her grandchildren what it was like growing up on Mamaroneck’s Heathcote Hill during the early 1800s. The little booklet with the essay was handed down for several generations and was eventually published by one of the grandchildren – another James Fenimore Cooper – in 1922.

Details from the essay have allowed the Larchmont Historical Society to add to the information it maintains on its website. The essay provides important new information and also raises some interesting questions for further historical research.

The Household Names

Slavery in Mamaroneck Township includes Names of Slaves who could be identified based on available records. The Cooper article enables the LHS to add the following names:

Fred, who Mrs. Cooper describes as “a colored boy from Heathcote Hill” and as “the waiter.” Fred may be the inspiration for the image of the black man standing behind John P. DeLancey in the mural at the Mamaroneck Library which is pictured below.

Harriet was described as the daughter of the cook who served as the chambermaid of the household. Harriet might be the same person that Mr. DeLancey identifies, in the Town Records in 1814, as “Harriot.” Mr. DeLancey was registering Harriot’s daughter “Anne or Nancey” as required under New York State law at the time. The registration allowed him to retain ownership of the daughter as a slave until 1828.

Henry was described as Harriet’s son.

The article also describes three other slaves in the household, but does not name them: a “fat black woman,” who was the cook and who was the mother of Harriet, and “a colored child or two.” One of the children might be “Anne or Nancey” – Harriet’s daughter.

John Peter Delancey, with his wife and two of his slaves. From the mural “The Marriage of James Fenimore Cooper to Susan DeLancey, 1811″ painted in 1937 by Warren Chase Merritt for the Mamaroneck Public Library.

So Who is Joseph – “The Governor?”

Susan Cooper suggests another interesting possibility for two more slaves in the DeLancey household:

“The old negro seen in the picture of the Hall was an important personage in the family; he lived with my grandparents twenty years; his name was Joseph, but my Uncles often called him “the Governor.” As you know, he is buried in the family ground. His wife Harris married again after his death, and lies in the Churchyard, near the front fence. My grandfather gave her a house and lot, on what is now Pine Street. Having no children, she left that house to John Nelson. Harris lived, after my Grandfather’s death, with the Russells.”

Mrs. Cooper does not state outright that Joseph was a slave, but it seems likely. He must have been important in some way – perhaps he was a leading person in the community of slaves, perhaps a leader in the church.

We also learn that his wife was named “Harris” and that she and Joseph lived in a house on Pine Street that she left to John Nelson. Is this the Pine Street we know today in Mamaroneck?

John DeLancey gave Joseph and Harris a house – not just the use of a house, but title to a house. This suggests that, at the time, Joseph and Harris were not slaves. Might he also have freed them?

Mrs. Cooper also notes that Joseph is buried in the “family ground.” Does this refer to the DeLancey Family Burial Ground on Palmer Avenue? There are old stone markers at the family burial ground – some with the names weathered away – and one of them may be for Joseph. Harris is buried “in the Churchyard near the front fence.” Is this another burial ground adjacent to a church?

Ongoing Historical Research

The Larchmont Historical Society’s knowledge of slavery in Mamaroneck Township is extensive compared to what is known in other small communities, but the information is still fragmentary. Fortunately, people like Susan Fenimore Cooper have left local historians some interesting clues for further research.

She has also reminded us, as we reflect on Dr. Kings’ dream of freedom and human rights, that slavery is very much a part of our local history.

Originally co-published with the Larchmont Gazette January 17, 2008.



John Peter Delancey, with his wife and two of his slaves. From the mural “The Marriage of James Fenimore Cooper to Susan DeLancey, 1811″ painted in 1937 by Warre Chase Merritt for the Mamaroneck Public Library.

In celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in Larchmont and Mamaroneck, the community reflects on freedom and human rights and recalls their antithesis, slavery. As we reflect this year, let’s remember Bet, Phelby, Candice, Nelly, Charlot, Jack, Hannibal, Telemaque, George, Lewis and Dorathea.

Another of John Peter Delancey’s slaves depicted in the Mamaroneck Library’s mural.

They were slaves – not on a Southern plantation – but here in Mamaroneck Township, where slavery was practiced in the 1700s and did not recede until the 1820s.

We all recall slavery as taking place in the southern United States, or perhaps for a while in New York City, or even up in Hudson County at Philipsburg Manor.The Dutch West India Company had introduced the slave trade to the New York area in 1626, and it had spread north to places like the Philipsburg Manor. According to historian Edgar McManus in A History of Negro Slavery in New York, in the mid 1600s, there was such an acute shortage of agricultural labor in the Hudson Valley that planters advertised to buy “any suitable blacks available.”

As early as 1698, slavery is officially recorded in Mamaroneck Township. Captain James Mott, William Palmer and Ann Richbell are all recorded as slaveholders. (See Census of Mamaroneck, Westchester Co. New York, 1698.)

By 1750, there were 11,014 slaves in the colony of New York — almost one out of every six persons – including slaves residing here in Mamaroneck Township. (See: Establishing Slavery In Colonial New York.)

The 1790 Census Counts 57 Slaves in Mamaroneck Township

Who were the enslaved people? The United States Census for 1790, identifies 57 slaves among the 428 people living in Mamaroneck Township.

The census records include names of owners, but not of slaves. At the time, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, so it is not surprising that some of Mamaroneck’s leading citizens were slave owners as well.

Gilbert Budd, who owned the most slaves between 1790 and 1810, had served with distinction in the Continental Army during the American Revolution and also served as the Clerk of Mamaroneck Township. Mary Palmer may have been a relative of Samuel Palmer, who purchased the area now known as Larchmont Manor. According to Larchmont Village Historian Judith Doolin Spikes, for a Palmer to be listed as a slave-holder is unexpected, because the Palmers were Quakers, who were opposed to slavery. The Allaires and their four slaves were neighbors of the Palmers.

There are two people – Peter Jay Munro and John Peter DeLancey – who do not appear in the census as slave owners in Mamaroneck, yet appear in Township records where they report about their slaves.

New York State Law, Phasing Out Slavery

In 1788, New York State passed a law that banned the slave trade, declared that all current slaves were to be slaves for life, but authorized slave owners to free slaves under certain conditions. By 1799, according to historian Douglas Harper, New York State law went further with the passage of An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery. Children born to enslaved mothers after July 4, 1799 remained slaves, but only during their most “productive years” – until age 28, if male, or age 25, if female. Those born earlier were not granted freedom by the act, though they did get a new classification – indentured servant. (See: Slavery in the North)

With this new act, it now became necessary to register the slaves born after July 1799 so it could be known when they were entitled to freedom. Mamaroneck Township records in 1799 duly started to include the newborn slaves’ names in the traditional manner of slavery — just the first names. Gilbert Budd, recorded the birth of Peg in 1800, daughter of his “black servant girl” Gin.

“This may Certify a Black Female Child born of Gin, who is my black Servant Girl by the name of Peg was born - March 29th, 1800 – Certified by me – Edward Merritt Recorded this 29th day of October, 1800 by me Gilbert Budd, Township Clerk.”

Below is the list of each child born to a slave after July 1, 1799 as reported in the official Mamaroneck Township records.

Considering that freedom was at stake, the records are remarkably informal. How much trouble would “Henry” have had establishing in 1828, after serving as a slave for 28 years, that he was the “Henry” in this record and was now eligible for freedom? When John D’Lancey registered a slave child in 1814, he wasn’t sure whether her name was Anne or Nancey. Twenty-five years later, when the child could have applied for her freedom, how would she have identified herself?

Leading Citizens

The names on the list include a number of leading citizens. “John D’Lancey”, who was unsure of his slave’s name, was John Peter DeLancey (1753-1828), a Revolutionary War soldier and the father of William Heathcote DeLancey (1797-1865), a well-known Protestant Episcopal clergyman and provost of the University of Pennsylvania.

DeLancey reported no slaves in his household in the 1810 census, but did report eleven “other free persons” – a category for non-white persons who are not slaves – sharing his home. This may be a recording error, or an intentional deception, since he regularly reported in Township records about his slaves.

Peter Jay Munro built Larchmont’s Manor House in about 1797 and kept at least 3 slaves there. The image of Manor House in from a mural in Larchmont Library.

Peter Jay Munro, owner of Nelly who gave birth to Charlot, was the original resident of the Manor House in Larchmont and a nephew of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Munro does not appear as a slaveholder in the Mamaroneck U.S. Census in 1790. While he maintained his legal residence in New York City, and reported his four slaves to the census there in 1790, he recorded the birth of a child to one of his slaves in Mamaroneck Township in 1814.

Freeing Slaves

Starting in 1799, the Township records also began to include Certificates of Manumission that officially declared particular slaves to be free.

In Mamaroneck, several slaves who were recorded in Township records as being set free, appear in subsequent census records. There is a Charles Johnson who appears in the “other free persons” category in New York City in 1810. Similarly, “Hannibal Lemmore” in Middletown, Connecticut is identifed as an “other free person” in 1810. He may be the “Hannibal” freed by Gilbert Budd in 1808.

In her book, Images of America: Larchmont, Judith Doolin Spikes describes two former slaves named “Jinny” and “Banjo Billy” who had been owned by the Mott family and who continued to live at the Mott’s residence – the Mill House overlooking Red Bridge on Pryer Manor Road.

“Banjo Billy” and “Ginny,” and the notations in the Census of 1810 indicating that James Mott owned three slaves – the “3″ on the right of the table. These images, from Adam and Anne Mott by Thomas Cornell, may be the only surviving images of slaves in Larchmont.

Banjo Bill and Ginny appear as characters in Mary McGahan’s storybook Raid at Red Mill, which tells the story of the Mott family living through the Revolutionary War. The two slaves also appear in the memoirs of Richard Mott, the grandson of James Watt. As Quakers, they were opposed to slavery. Yet, the Census record reveals that James Mott maintained three slaves as late as 1810. The “3″ in the far right column above is in the category for “slaves.”

However, James Mott made his opposition to slavery clear in another way. In 1811, the Township record states: “I having purchased of Joshua Purdy a negro man named Andrew who is about 26 years of age, he has the promise of the person I bought him of that he should be free at 28 years of age, and as one object I had in view in the purchase was to secure his freedom, I do hereby declare the said Andrew to be a free man from the date hereof Mamaroneck 15th of May 1811.”

Slavery Ends in Westchester County and Mamaroneck Township

In 1817, New York State took another step and granted freedom to all slaves born before July 4, 1799, which was to take effect on July 4, 1827. As explained by Douglas Harper in Emancipation in New York, the law had several huge loopholes. For example, it permitted part-time residents to maintain slaves for up to nine months of each year.

Another loophole involved the children born of slaves after 1799. Consider the case of Peter Jay Munro’s slave Charlot born in 1814. She would be entitled to freedom under the 1817 law, but, according to the 1799 law, was not entitled to freedom until she completed 25 years of servitude, in 1839.

Across the state, a more horrible problem was also taking place. Soon-to-be-freed slaves were being sold or kidnapped, and then taken to states where slavery continued to be legal.

In any case, by 1820, the number of slaves in Westchester had declined to 205, and none were listed as living in Mamaroneck Township. The numbers in New York continued to dwindle: by 1830, of the 75 slaves in New York, none was from Westchester. By 1850, only 4 slaves were reported in all of the state.

Author’s Notes

Appreciation is due to the Larchmont and Mamaroneck Public Libraries that provided assistance with research.

Local slavery records are from Mary O’Connor English: Early Town Records of Mamaroneck, 1697-1881. (Town of Mamaroneck, 1979)

According to Village Historian Judith Doolin Spikes, some of the names in the census records may have been recorded incorrectly. “Gidney” is probably an incorrect spelling of “Gedney.” Similarly, “Belly” is probably actually “Besley.”

An excellent source for further reading, which I relied on for explanations of New York State law, is Edward McManus: A History of Negro Slavery in New York. (Syracuse, Syracuse University Press, 1966.)

The story of Ginny and Banjo Billy – the Mott’s slaves – is further explained in Thomas C. Cornell: Adam and Anne Mott, Their Ancestors and Their Descendants. (Poughkeepsie, NY, 1890)

Originally co-published with the Larchmont Gazette on January 13, 2005.

How did John Cox and Andrew Cole escape from slavery in Mamaroneck Township during the 1770s and end up on Nova Scotia? The story of these two men, whose connection to Mamaroneck had been lost for more than 200 years, is now captured on a new website hosted by Larchmont’s Historical Society that documents slavery in the township.

The Slavery in Mamaroneck Township Website

Census records affirm that slavery was common in Mamaroneck before 1827, when slavery was abolished in New York State. Using those records and other sources, the Larchmont Historical Society has developed a website that identifies all known slaves. It also lists the slaveholders, identifies where they lived and explains what we know about their lives.

The Slavery In Mamaroneck Township website.

Documentation of Two More Slaves

Until recently, the only slaves known were those listed in the census or in a transcription of Mamaroneck Township records. This year, the LHS project learned of a “new” source that revealed the names of two more Mamaroneck slaves. The two slaves appear in the Book of Negroes, a hand-written list of Black passengers allowed to leave New York for Nova Scotia in 1783 because of their service to the British during the Revolutionary War. Two entries for a ship named the Clinton read as follows:

• John Cox, 31, stout fellow. Formerly the property of Eleazer Goddin, Maroneck (sic), New York; left him 7 years ago.
• Andrew Cole, 26, stout fellow. Formerly the property of Ben Cole, Marroneck (sic), New York; left him 4 years ago.

What do we know about John Cox and Andrew Cole? To understand how they came to be slaves and what might have happened when they moved to Nova Scotia, we need to begin with the story of how slavery came to Westchester County.

Slavery in Westchester County

The Dutch West India Company had introduced the slave trade to the New York area in 1626, and it had spread north to places like the Philipsburg Manor. According to historian Edgar McManus, author of A History of Negro Slavery in New York, in the mid 1600s, there was such an acute shortage of agricultural labor in the Hudson Valley that planters advertised to buy “any suitable blacks available.”

As early as 1698, slavery is officially recorded in Mamaroneck Township. Captain James Mott, William Palmer and Ann Richbell are all recorded as slaveholders. (See Census of Mamaroneck, Westchester Co. New York, 1698.)

New Rochelle, Mamaroneck and Rye from a 1781 Chart titled “Position du camp de l’armée combinée a Philipsburg du 6 juillet au 19 aoust.” (Library of Congress American Memory Project)

By 1750, there were 11,014 slaves in the Colony of New York — almost one out of every six persons – including slaves residing here in Mamaroneck Township. (See: Establishing Slavery In Colonial New York.)

Why Did John Cox and Andrew Cole Escape and Join the Brits?

Mamaroneck’s slaves included John Cox, born in about 1752 and owned by Eleazer Goddin, and Andrew Cole, born in about 1757 and owned by Ben Cole. Ben Cole may have been a relative of James Coles, the Mamaroneck cobbler (See Judith Spikes, Larchmont NY: People and Places, 1991, p.13) or Joseph or John Coles, who appeared in the 1790 Mamaroneck census.

In 1775, The Earl of Dunmore who was the British Governor of Virginia, issued a proclamation urging slaves to join arms with the British: “I do hereby further declare all indented Servants, Negroes, or others, (appertaining to Rebels,) free that are able and willing to bear Arms, they joining His MAJESTY’S Troops as soon as may be, foe the more speedily reducing this Colony to a proper Sense of their Duty, to His MAJESTY’S Crown and Dignity.”

In reply, the General Convention of the Dominion and Colony of Virginia threatened dire consequences: “WHEREAS lord Dunmore, by his proclamation, dated on board the ship William, off Norfolk, the 7th day of November 1775, hath offered freedom to such able-bodied slaves as are willing to join him, and take up arms, against the good people of this colony, giving thereby encouragement to a general insurrection, which may induce a necessity of inflicting the severest punishments upon those unhappy people, already deluded by his base and insidious arts; and whereas, by an act of the General Assembly now in force in this colony, it is enacted, that all negro or other slaves, conspiring to rebel or make insurrection, shall suffer death, and be excluded all benefit of clergy.”

The Phillipsburg Proclamation Invites Cox and Cole to Join Up

In 1779, the British Commander of New York issued the Phillpsburg Proclamation, which extended the same offer to slaves in New York, even those who escaped from their masters.

In 1776, John Cox escaped from Eleazer Goddin. It is hard to say whether he was motivated by the 1775 Dunmore Proclamation. But, Andrew Cole made his escape in 1779 – the same year as the Phillipsburg Proclamation, so it’s a good guess that he heard the call and responded.

Following the Treaty of Paris ending the Revolutionary War in 1783, the British forces gathered in New York to be evacuated. Congress instructed General George Washington to claim all confiscated property from the British, including slaves. However, the British commander-in-chief, Sir Guy Carleton, refused to comply with General Washington’s demand that the slaves be returned to their owners. Sir Carleton and General Washington agreed that the slaves would be permitted to emigrate and that the British would compensate their owners.

John Cox and Andrew Cole were among the 3,000 Black Loyalists who were issued certificates of freedom and permitted to emigrate to Canada by ship. Their ship, the Clinton, was bound for Annapolis, Nova Scotia.

Life in Nova Scotia

Life in Nova Scotia for the Black Loyalists proved difficult. One account, by William Dyott in 1788, describes the conditions at Birchtown, which was one of the settlements where Cox and Cole would have been encouraged to live:

Dyott and fellow officers… – walked through the woods about two miles from the barracks to a negro town called Birch Town. At the evacuation of New York there were a great number of these poor devils given lands and settled here. The place is beyond description wretched, situated on the coast in the middle of barren rocks, and partly surrounded by a thick impenetrable wood – Their huts miserable to guard against the inclemency of a Nova Scotia winter, and their existence almost depending on what they could lay up in summer. I think I never saw wretchedness and poverty so strongly perceptible in the garb and the countenance of the human species as in these miserable outcasts. I cannot say I was sorry to quit so melancholy a dwelling.

However, there is no record of Cole or Cox in the registers of Black Loyalists in the two major settlements: Birchtown or Annapolis. Having grown up in Mamaroneck, they may have become involved in a fishing settlement like Brindley.

They might also have been among those persuaded in the early 1790s to emigrate once again – this time to Sierra Leone.

One tantalizing clue to what might have happened to one of the Mamaroneck men is found in a jury report dated in 1794 claiming that an indentured servant had been sold as a slave in the West Indies. The jury asks the court to make inquiries about this potential illegal act. The jury foreman is James Cox. Handwriting at the time was imprecise, and perhaps John Cox of Mamaroneck had lived to the age of 44 to serve as a jury foreman in Shelburne, Nova Scotia.

The Rest of the Story…

The story of slavery in America is told in thousands of documents – legal records, personal letters, government registers, business transactions and public reports. But the story of individual slaves or slaveholders is told when the connections are made – when a name can be traced over places and times to reveal evidence of a life.

Making more of those connections is becoming possible now that historians in the United States, Canada, England and Africa are finding, assembling and digitizing records relating to slavery in America. In the years to come, the Larchmont Historical Society intends that its latest website will make use of the newly available documents to weave together more of the stories of the slaves in Mamaroneck Township.

• Small Family Memories.

• Black Loyalists in Nova Scotia

• Census of Mamaroneck, 1698

• Local slavery records are from Mary O’Connor English: Early Town Records of Mamaroneck, 1697-1881. (Town of Mamaroneck, 1979)
• The story of Ginny and Banjo Billy – the Mott’s slaves – is further explained in Thomas C. Cornell: Adam and Anne Mott, Their Ancestors and Their Descendants. (Poughkeepsie, NY, 1890)
• Larchmont Gazette: Slavery in Mamaroneck Township
• Larchmont Gazette: LHS Finds More Slaves in Heathcote Hill
• Larchmont Gazette: Two “Local” Slaves Recaptured After 220 Years

Slavery in Westchester and New York

• Establishing Slavery in Colonial New York
• Edward McManus: A History of Negro Slavery in New York. (Syracuse, Syracuse University Press, 1966.)
• Slavery in the North
• NY Historical Society: Slavery in New York 1620-1827

Essays

• New York Historical Society: Slavery and the Civil War
• Small Family Memories.

Black Loyalists in Canada

• Black Loyalists in Nova Scotia

Census Records

• Census of Mamaroneck, 1698

Slavery in America – A PBS Television Series

• Library of Congress American Memory project: Slavery – The Peculiar Institution
• PBS: Slavery and the Making of America
• Library of Congress: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers’ Project
• UVA: Visual Images of the Atlantic Slave Trade and Slave Life in the Americas
• Stanford University Library: Bibliography on Slavery