<<

Lehigh University Lehigh Preserve

Volume 21 - 2013 Lehigh Review

2013 , Consumption, and : A Biography of Chief Justice (1722-1810) Brian Hanley

Follow this and additional works at: http://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-21

Recommended Citation Hanley, Brian, "Slavery, Consumption, and Social Class: A Biography of Chief Justice Benjamin Chew (1722-1810)" (2013). Volume 21 - 2013. Paper 1. http://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-21/1

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Lehigh Review at Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted for inclusion in Volume 21 - 2013 by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more , please contact [email protected]. SL AVERY, CONSUMPTION, AND SOCIAL CLASS: A BIOGRAPHY OF CHIEF JUSTICE BENJAMIN CHEW (1722-1810)

Benjamin Chew’s highly visible life as a public official is critical to understanding how ’s mobilized into a dominant social cohort over the last third of the eighteenth century, as well as how the distinctions between the city’s rich and poor became concurrently more rigid. Chew devoted time and money to cultivating his personal appearance, frequently importing luxuries from London that were meant primarily to Brian convey his high and distinguish him in public. Perhaps even Hanley more important to Chew’s public imagewas his exploitation of enslaved laborers. Slave-owning earned Chew more than freedom from physical labor; it also bolstered his reputation as a wealthy and powerful individual. The fact that enslaved laborers kept Chew’s leisure activities afloat reinforced the asymmetrical distribution of and power that crystallized in Philadelphia at the end of the eighteenth century. fter moving to Phila- of the eighteenth century, Cliveden gained number 279 pages in length, beginning delphia in 1754, dual eminence as both the site of the 1777 with the purchase of the receipt book itself Benjamin Chew, a and the refuge that from Samuel Taylor. Unfortunately, there Quaker-born slave- sheltered the Chews during the yellow fever are clear historical gaps in Chew’s receipts. holder and shrewd le- epidemics of the 1790s. Perhaps even more Absent altogether are entries from 1780, gal scholar, emerged important to Chew’s public image, however, 1781, and 1782, a period of self-imposed as one of the most was his exploitation of enslaved laborers. exile during which Chew maintained a low important political The functionality of Chew’s households, in- social and political profile in an effort to figuresA in over the next half cluding Cliveden, depended largely on the mitigate tensions spawning from the Revo- century. Chew received his legal training done by slaves and servants. Further- lution.4 Despite its incompleteness, Chew’s from and throughout his more, Chew owned substantial plantations receipts trace his economic interaction with communicated closely with the Penn in Virginia, , and where various artisans, vendors, and domestic , , and John Ad- enslaved people provided the workforce to workers. The receipts confirm that Chew’s ams. From 1774 to 1776, Chew served as the produce the commercial crops undergirding pattern of em- Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Chew’s extraordinary wealth. Slave owning phasized the asymmetrical distribution of .1 Between 1791 earned more for Chew than merely free- wealth and power that crystallized in Phila- and 1806, he presided over Pennsylvania’s dom from physical labor; it also bolstered delphia over the late eighteenth century. first High Court of Errors and Appeals, mak- his reputation as a wealthy and powerful Chew’s pattern of conspicuous con- ing him, for almost twenty years, the leader individual. Chew’s patterns of exploiting sumption is most evident in the that of the judiciary altogether.2 The cen- enslaved laborers and consuming conspicu- he allocated to domestic laborers. A labor- tral question for this study is how did Chew, ously reinforced the asymmetrical distribu- er’s typically reflected the degree of the jurist assigned significant responsibility tion of wealth and power that crystallized public visibility attached to the individual’s for interpreting Pennsylvania’s provincial in late eighteenth-century Philadelphia. position and the value placed on and commonwealth constitutions, contrib- Conspicuous consumption distin- the individual’s skills. For example, Rob- ute to the formation of the stratified class guished Philadelphia’s elite class from the ert Burnett, Chew’s gardener, occupied a structure that developed over the last third city’s middling and lower sort in two ways: highly visible position with important re- of the eighteenth century in Philadelphia? symbolically, by emphasizing lines of so- sponsibilities and a specific skill . It is Examining Chew’s highly visible life is cial demarcation; and practically, in the no surprise, then, that from 1771 to 1780 critical to understanding how Philadelphia’s sense that carriages and country seats fa- Burnett led the staff in compensation, re- mobilized into a dominant social co- cilitated their owners’ mobility in times ceiving a of £35 as well as clothing, hort over the last third of the eighteenth of disease and armed . In Gentle- room, and board.5 A well-groomed gar- century, and how the distinctions between women and Learned , Sarah Father- den and a well-kept gardener were sym- the city’s rich and poor became concurrent- ly attributes Philadelphia’s growing class bols of wealth and refinement and as such ly more rigid. In this study, Philadelphia’s structure to the conspicuous consumption proved important to Chew’s self-image. elite class is defined as a segmented group of the city’s elite.3 As Philadelphia’s elite Chew’s extravagant carriages, like his consisting of well-off and inde- families grew wealthier, Fatherly argues, gardens, were symbols of prestige intended pendently wealthy gentlemen whose collec- they acquired larger appetites for purchas- to impress his friends and business associ- tive possession of wealth constituted a more ing luxury goods. Frequently importing ates. Chew’s coachman occupied a particu- or less socially cohesive whole. As a leading adornments from London, their consump- larly visible position in which his appearance public official and member of Philadelphia’s tion became both conspicuous and com- and manners were under constant public elite, Chew devoted a significant amount of petitive, as the elite strove to cohere as a review. Therefore, it was important that in time and money to cultivating his personal class while distinguishing themselves from public, Chew’s coachman appeared genteel. appearance. Chew regularly imported luxu- those of the city’s middling and lower sorts. His compensation significantly mirrored ries from London that were meant solely Chew’s receipt book, where he recorded his high degree of public visibility; William to convey his high social status and distin- annual purchases for the Chew household, Watson, Chew’s coachman prior to 1772, guish him in public as a gentleman. Chew’s reveals that from 1770 to 1809 Chew made a earned £30 a year.6 On average, the major- mansion, Cliveden, reflected his pattern of series of large expenditures intended to en- ity of Chew’s domestic servants received less conspicuous consumption. In the final years hance his personal appearance. His receipts than half the annual salary allocated to his

32 the lehigh review coachman.7 Watson’s relatively large salary that defined Philadelphia’s gentlewomen. social functions and the increasing regular- reflected the high cost of operating a coach Between 1773 and 1776, Chew hired ity with which the prominent Chew family and the tremendous value Chew placed the firm of LiBlank & Wagner to dress Mrs. engaged socially, it is fair to assume that all on public displays of wealth and power. Chew and his daughters. Expenditures to of the Chew children studied dance at some No wage allocated to domestic work- this firm fluctuated from £10 to £18 a year, point. However, Chew’s receipt book con- ers matched that of John Maxfield, who, representing presumably a portion of the tains only one record of dancing lessons. from 1770 to 1774, served as Chew’s clerk total clothes purchased.12 It is also fair to as- In 1775, Chew paid Thomas Pike £3.8.0 in the Office of the Register General of sume that Mrs. Chew allocated funds from for teaching his fifteen-year-old daughter Pennsylvania and Delaware. Maxfield’s an- her own accounts. In any event, Chew’s Peggy to dance.14 In 1778, Peggy, accompa- nual salary of £758 was more than double purchasing records confirm his commit- nied by her stepsister, Sarah, showcased her that of Chew’s best-paid domestic servant, ment to upholding a certain self-image, dancing skills publicly when she attended gardener Robert Burnett. However, in ad- one that his family would emulate and the “Mischianza,” Philadelphia’s most elab- dition to Burnett’s salary, the gardener high would regard with veneration. orate ball during the British occupation. also received clothing, room, and board. For Chew, proper dress served as the Chew’s April 20, 1772, payment of These accommodations proved important key index of his high social status. As a pub- £51.10.0 to James Reynolds corresponds to Burnett, who, as a laborer, would have lic official, he devoted a significant amount to a pair of ornate looking glasses that typically spent around £55 annually to feed, of time and money to enhancing his per- still stands at Cliveden,15 an expenditure clothe, and supply shelter for himself and sonal appearance. Prior to the Revolution, largely consistent with Chew’s pattern of his family.9 Presumably, Maxfield’s unri- Chew’s payments to his tailor, John Colling, conspicuous consumption. Reynolds pro- valed of £75 can be attributed to vacillated between £30 and £80 a year.13 At duced the highest-quality looking glasses the fact that a legal clerkship required not a minimum, his wardrobe cost him as much and picture frames in pre-Revolutionary only skills but as well. It is also as his coachman’s salary (£30). At a maxi- Philadelphia.16 Many of the city’s most af- possible that Maxfield’s large income re- mum, it cost more than his clerk’s (£75). fluent families commissioned his work. It flected the fact that as Chew’s clerk, he as- Social dancing, in private parties and is not surprising that Chew employed the sumed a highly visible role in the workplace. public balls, presented opportunities for city’s most talented gilder. Nor is it unusual Frequent social engagement provided Chew and Philadelphia’s elite families to dis- that Chew allocated as much money for a the on which Chew and his sizable play their fine clothes, manners, and physical pair of looking glasses (£51.10.0) as he did family showcased their exceptional fash- ion and sophistication, at times entertaining audiences of Philadelphia’s wealthiest, most prestigious families, and Of course, it is presumptuous to earning, in the process, distinguished rep- utations as gentlemen and gentlewomen. assume that Chew’s purchases Chew had fourteen children: thirteen girls and one boy.10 He considered himself the directly correlated with his values. family’s patriarch. During his 1777 house Nonetheless, his spending habits arrest, Chew found himself separated from his wife and children, who at the time re- offer important insights into the sided in Delaware. Distressed by the separa- goods and services that he tion, Chew wrote to a friend anxiously, “My family consists almost wholly of women deemed most important. and children, who, in their present situa- tion stand in need of that protection, care, assistance and advice, which they can only receive effectually from me.”11 As the head grace. To master the complexities of dance, for his extravagant wardrobe (between £30 of a household with multiple marriage- an individual needed to dedicate time and and £80 annually). His intent in adorning able daughters, Chew sought to provide painstaking practice to the art form. Given his home and his attire was one and the each with the exquisite manners and grace the fundamental role that dancing played in same. Chew strove to consume conspicu-

33 ously, cultivating a sophisticated appear- of the city’s population during the months a sea of visitors, perpetuating its reputa- ance both for himself and for his family. At of August, September, October, Novem- tion as one of the most stupendous exam- the core of his efforts to appear refined was ber, and December.20 Benjamin Chew at ples of Philadelphia Georgian architecture. the unyielding desire to impress the distin- the time resided in one of the city’s most When, in 1768, Chew signed the non- guished members of his high social circle. fashionable sections, in a town house on importation agreement (see Image 1), he As a result of his fastidiousness, Chew South Third Street. The epidemic propor- publicly declared his sympathy for the left a receipt book incredibly tions of the 1762 disease provoked Chew, American colonies. During the politically rich in content. In detailing major as well the following year, to search for a summer volatile decade that followed 1768, Chew as minor purchases, Chew’s receipts trace home outside of the city, where yellow fe- regularly fraternized with prominent pa- decades of financial spending patterns. His- ver persisted. The 1762 epidemic gave birth triots such as George Washington and John torians can observe these patterns to draw to countless real estate advertisements that Adams, men who rose as leaders of the new inferences. It is reasonable to suppose, for festooned the headlines of Philadelphia’s American government. It became clear example, that Chew valued the appearance newspapers. One advertisement in particu- that Chew occupied an unusual position in of his wardrobe at least as much as that of lar, featured in the Pennsylvania Gazette the transformative political of the his garden. Otherwise, he would not have (April 7, 1763), enticed Benjamin Chew: 1770s. As Chief Justice of the Province of paid more annually to his tailor (£30 to “TO BE SOLD. A Piece of Land at the upper Pennsylvania, he represented the proprie- £80) than to his gardener (£35). Of course, end of Germantown, with two small Tene- tary government. While trusted and revered it is presumptuous to assume that Chew’s ments thereon, containing eleven Acres; it is by many notable patriots, Chew’s politi- purchases directly correlated with his val- pleasantly situated for a Country Seat; and cal position and longstanding connections ues. Nonetheless, his spending habits of- there is a good Orchard, Garden, and Nurs- to rendered his allegiance to the fer important insights into the goods and ery on the same, in which are a great Variety American colonies inexorably precarious. services that he deemed most important. of Fruit Trees, of all Kinds....For Terms of Chew’s impressive country estate, Cli- Sale, enquire of EDWARD PENINGTON.” veden, also reflected this pattern of con- Chew purchased the in German- spicuous consumption. In Meeting House town, Pennsylvania and soon began to build and Counting House, Frederick B. Tolles the Georgian mansion that he later explains that by mid-century, Quaker mer- named Cliveden. Construction lasted from chants dominated the largest proportion of 1763 until 1767.21 The final cost of Chew’s Philadelphia’s wealth, social prestige, and countryseat was a staggering £4718.12.3 political power.17 In A Vigorous Spirit of En- including about £1000 for the land.22 terprise, Thomas M. Doerflinger agrees that By carriage, Cliveden was about a two Philadelphia’s distribution of wealth became hour commute from Chew’s Third Street increasingly unequal in the second half of townhouse. That two-hour journey, howev- the eighteenth century.18 One indication er, proved tiresome, often prolonged by un- of the rising inequality, as Billy G. Smith predictable travelling conditions, including argues in The “Lower Sort,” was residential “clouds and whirlwinds [of dust]”23 as Mrs. segregation.19 The lines of demarcation Chew solemnly described in a letter to her between the homes of the rich and poor husband. Suffice it to say, Cliveden served its grew increasingly distinct as the revolution purpose effectively as the Chew’s countryse- loomed near. During the summer months, at, providing safety and comfort for the fam- for instance, when disease beleaguered in- ily in the summer months while simultane- habitants of urban Philadelphia, Chew and ously teaching visitors a thing or two about his elite counterparts had the immense architectural . Cliveden never ceased to advantage of escaping to country estates. impress influxes of Chew’s visitors. One of Image 1. Committee of Guardians Minute Book, In the summer of 1762, yellow fever his friends from England once dubbed the 1790-1797, p. 17, Papers of the Pennsylvania Abolition outbreaks plagued residents of urban Phila- mansion “your Enchanted Castle . . . one Society, microfilm edition, Reel 6, HSP. delphia. Dr. Benjamin Rush estimated that of the finest houses in the Province.”24 To Used with permission of the disease killed approximately one-sixth this day, Chew’s home continues to amaze The Historical Society of Pennsylvania

34 the lehigh review The British occupation of Philadelphia cannon balls swept ferociously across Cli- she refused to do. They were standing at the in the summer of 1777 compelled the Ex- veden’s front , creating at once a har- head of the stairway to the cellar, quarrel- ecutive Council to defuse Chew’s political mony of murderous assault and retreat. ing, when a cannon ball came in through authority, which the colonial government Aligned in four columns, the colonial army one of the windows, crashed through some deemed a threat to public safety. On Au- bombarded British troops, who, under the plaster and woodwork, causing a great com- gust 4, the Executive Council filed a war- command of Colonel Thomas Musgrave, motion; whereupon the gardener, with- rant for Chew’s arrest.25 Upon reviewing were stationed in and around Chew’s man- out further argument, gave the dairy maid the warrant, Chew demanded to know sion.29 In 1899, more than a century after a push, sending her tumbling down the by what authority and for what reason he the musket smoke had faded, Chew’s great- stairs, and then lock[ed] the door upon was charged.26 The warrant, Chew quickly great-grandson William Brooks Rawle col- her. There she had to remain, during the learned, was issued on grounds of protect- orfully recounted the battle of Cliveden: entire battle, in safety, though without the ing the public safety. Later, Chew remarked attentions of her [red] coated admirers. in his notes that the unlawful arrest under- “At the period of the battle the family was What became of the gardener, and where mined his rights as a free man and “struck at away, but `Cliveden’ was left in the charge he hid, as he probably did, is not related.”30 the liberties of everyone in the community and [he believed] it was his duty to oppose it and check it, if possible, in its infancy.” 27 By mid-August 1777, the colonial gov- ernment ordered Chew and Governor to Union Forge, New Jersey, where the two men served an extensive house arrest. Chew and Penn remained in isola- tion until June of the following year, when British troops officially withdrew from Philadelphia. This detachment proved to be a time of great agony for Chew, a man accustomed to free will and the comforts of liberty. With the war intensifying, Chew became particularly anxious about the wellbeing of his family and his property at Cliveden. A September 15 letter from his only son, Benjamin Chew Jr., presumably exacerbated Chew’s mounting discomfort: Image 2. The Battle of Germantown, painted by Edward Lamson Henry, 1874, Courtesy of Cliveden, a National Trust Historic Site, Philadelphia, PA. “As our Army are in the Neighborhood of Germantown, Tenny Tilghman [Washing- of the gardener. At least one person The damage Cliveden incurred received ton’s aide-de-camp Tench Tilghman] has (if not more) was left there- a dairy maid, sufficient attention in the aftermath of the kindly sent to my Mother acquainting her who of course with her pink cheeks and battle (see Images 2 and 3). Observer John that he will procure an officer of rank to other fascinations was a beauty, as all such Fanning Watson reported that “Chew’s take possession of Cliveden though I should are. When the red coats took possession of house was so battered that it took five car- not imagine that any of the private soldiery the house, the dairy maid was much pleased penters a whole winter to repair and re- would be quartered there as my Mother and did not resent the tender familiarities place the fractures. The front door which has procurred [sic] a Protection for the of the soldiers. Seeing this the gardener, was replaced was filled with shot holes”31 At House and Place from the Board of War.”28 who also admired her, remonstrated with the time, Benjamin Jr., his sisters, and their her, but without effect and a `tiff’ was the mother resided in a Third Street townhouse. On October 4, Cliveden experienced ev- result. When the musketry fire began, he In October 1777, Benjamin Jr. wrote to his erything but protection. Early that foggy said to her that the safest place for her was father, reassuring Chew that the wreckage morning, a barrage of musket shells and the cellar and told her to go there; but this described by many observers was largely

35 overstated: “I have gathered strength enough ver, Delaware. That same year, Chew sold shelter at Cliveden from early June to late to ride to Cliveden the damage of which will Cliveden to Blair McClenachan for £2500, October to avoid the terrible sickness that be no doubt exaggerated to you by the sever- not including a mortgage of £3400.33 The spawned in the city in the heart of summer. al reports you may hear of the late action.”32 sale of Cliveden marked for Chew the be- In a letter dated April 15, 1797, Kath- ginning of a period of self-imposed politi- erine Banning Chew wrote to her hus- cal exile that lasted for much of the 1780s. band, Benjamin Jr., celebrating Cli- By 1790, however, Chew’s house arrest veden’s tremendous health benefits: seemed a distant memory. Now in his late 60s, he returned to Philadelphia and at once “With respect to Cliveden your Father writes resumed his legal career. Chew’s remark- all desired arrangements wait your return. If ably keen legal judgment proved as useful we make it a permanent residence I know to the new federal government in the af- that certain inconvenience will arise. All that termath of the war as it had to the British may occur to myself I shall make light of so government prior to conflict. In 1790, the delightful will be its advantages, viz: Health, new government appointed Chew Presi- Peace & Competence! The first year no dent of the High Court of Errors and Ap- doubt may to you I fear bring some fatigue. peals of Pennsylvania. Chew honorably Ever after I hope all will be made easy.”37 held that office until his in 1806. In the summer of 1793, yellow fe- In a November 1, 1798 letter, Benjamin ver returned to Philadelphia and ap- Jr. joyfully informed his friends in Eng- peared more lethal than it had in 1762 land that the Chews were happy and well: when the epidemic inspired Cliveden’s construction. Recognizing the severity of “Happily all my family are safe, having repur- the epidemics, Chew searched for avail- chased to the family a favorite seat built by my able countryseats to provide shelter for Father most healthily situated a little more Image 3. Battle-Scarred Front Door of Cliveden, his family. There is little record of how or than 7 miles from the City and sold by him 20 Chew Papers, Unidentified Subjects, Box 825, when negotiations between Chew and Mc- years ago. I have occupied it since the Spring Folder 5. HSP, Philadelphia, PA. Clenachan occurred. Nevertheless, a let- of last year and it has fortunately proved an Used with permission of ter from Chew to Benjamin Jr. dated April asylum for my Father, Mother, sisters, and The Historical Society of Pennsylvania 15, 1797 reads: “Mr. McClenachan hav- ourselves making up the daily roll call to our ing proposed the making of an allowance different tables of 27 in number besides our By Spring 1778, with the focus of war of £100 for the deficiency of 1-3/4 acres, I visiting friends and occasional hirelings. No shifting away from the middle colonies, closed with him yesterday. Humphreys is complaint has occurred among us but the Chew appealed to the colonial government now preparing the Deeds and they will be keenness of appetite after our usual hour of to be discharged from house arrest. Possess- executed this afternoon or on Monday.” 34 meals was transgressed... The dear partner ing absolutely no evidence that Chew ever Sometime around April 1797, Chew re- of my life is with me and that besides three supported the British cause, the American purchased Cliveden from McClenachan for glorious boys I am in daily expectation of government had no choice but to satisfy a whopping price of £8376.13.10.35 With the presentation of another. My Father, the lawyer’s request. Chew’s demand for re- what seem like mixed emotions, Chew Mother, and my four unmarried sisters un- lease was shortly granted, and in June 1778 wrote to his brother-in-law Edward Tilgh- der my roof and in health, I now find abun- he returned to Philadelphia. Attempting to man, Sr., “I have bought back Cliveden, but dant cause to call forth all my gratitude for avoid future conflict with the law, the astute it is in such dilapidated condition that it will the blessings I enjoy. They are manifold.”38 Chew sought to limit his political presence take a small fortune to restore it.”36 Despite until the wartime tensions subsided. Con- the money required to reclaim and restore Chew and his family were among a mi- sequently, in 1779, he sold his Third Street Chew’s mansion, Cliveden proved critical to nority of fortunate individuals to possess townhouse to Spanish Ambassador the Chew family’s survival during the yellow both the means of transportation and the and relocated his family to fever epidemics of the 1790s. Throughout adequate refuge to escape yellow fever’s Whitehall, the family’s plantation near Do- the course of that decade, the Chews took reach. Chew’s 1797 repurchase of Clive-

36 the lehigh review den marked one of his most strategic and sensible expenditures. When, on July 23, yellow fever returned to Philadelphia, Cli- veden proved enormously useful as a safe haven for the family. In September 1797 or 1798 at Cliveden—year not given—Har- riet Chew wrote to her sister, Sarah Chew Galloway, at Tulip Hill, eloquently encap- sulating the moroseness of the time: “The mortality in our city increases in so dread- ful a degree that we hear and shudder at the account every succeeding evening brings of Image 5. Billy G. Smith and Paul Sivitz, “Philadel- the extreme losses of the day, and no one phia and Its People in Maps: The 1790s,Yellow Fever can tell where it will stop or what remedies Epidenic, 1793” Encyclopedia of Greater Philadelphia, can be effectually adopted. Our princi- 2012, . change in the weather and an early frost.”39 © 2012, Paul Sivitz and Billy G. Smith In Philadelphia and Its People in Maps: Used with permission of Paul Sivitz and Billy G. Smith The 1790s, Billy G. Smith and Paul Sivitz il- lustrate Philadelphia’s residential patterns morbidly urban jungle. The map featured by socioeconomic class. In Image 4, the in Image 5 illustrates the class-specific na- map’s green dots represent the city’s mer- ture of yellow fever in dramatic clarity. chants and red dots represent the city’s la- borers. The former, wealthier group tended II. Advancement through Exploitation to settle on Market Street and along the Combined with his pattern of conspicu- wharves of the Delaware River, where com- Image 4. Billy G. Smith and Paul Sivitz, “Philadelphia ous consumption, Chew’s economic vitality, mercial trade proved the most fruitful. and Its People in Maps: The 1790s,Residential Pat- which resulted directly from his exploita- The latter and larger occupational group terns by Class” Encyclopedia of Greater Philadelphia, tion of enslaved laborers, reinforced his of laborers often established homes in the 2012, . society. Chew profited enormously from the city. Laborers typically rented small, © 2012, Paul Sivitz and Billy G. Smith owning numerous plantations in Virginia, inexpensive quarters, which they shared Used with permission of Paul Sivitz and Billy G. Smith Maryland, and Delaware, where enslaved with their families. The city’s poorest indi- people provided the workforce to cultivate viduals were likely condensed in Hell Town, hicles that mobilized them and countryse- commercial crops. Chew also used slaves an area notorious for its high concentra- ats to which they sought shelter. In 1794, as domestic laborers in his various homes tion of fugitive slaves, servants, prosti- publisher Mathew Carey wrote, “For some in Pennsylvania. Prior to the passage of the tutes, homeless, and the mentally insane.40 weeks, carts, wagons, coaches and chairs Gradual Abolition Act in 1780, numerous Unsurprisingly, when yellow fever epi- were almost constantly transporting fami- elite families in Philadelphia owned slaves demics erupted in 1793, 1797, 1798, and lies and furniture to the country in every and servants. Chew, however, superseded 1799, affliction was class specific. The- dis direction.”41 Yellow fever, Carey continued, his slaveholding neighbors both in the ease struck hardest where the city’s poorest “had been dreadfully destructive among the number of slaves whom he owned and in people lived, especially near the northern poor. It is very probable that at least seven the length of time that he maintained own- wharves and in Hell Town. Philadelphia’s eighths of the number of the dead, was ership. As late as 1806, The Testament and penurious neighborhoods provided of that class.”42 Such was the case that as Last Will of Benjamin Chew, written on spawning places for the Aedes aegypti, the Philadelphia’s elite evacuated to their sum- April 1, listed “my negroes”: George, Jesse, type of mosquitoes that transmitted yel- mer estates, the city’s laborers, homeless, Harry, Sarah, with her children, and a boy, low fever. Chew and his elite counterparts handicapped, and mentally ill too often David, who was to be freed at twenty-eight were fortunate enough to possess both ve- found themselves stranded in a muggy and years of age.43 Chew owned slaves from the

37 time of his birth to the time of his death, and len’s manumission papers provide conclu- in that sense, the peculiar de- sive evidence that Stokeley Sturgis was his fined both his professional and personal life. master.47 It is unsurprising that Chew sold , founder of the Afri- Allen to Sturgis in 1768. Sturgis lived no can Methodist Episcopal Church, wrote in more than a mile from Whitehall, Chew’s the first sentence of his autobiography: “I 1,000-acre plantation in Kent County, Del- was born in the year of our 1760, on aware. When Sturgis encountered finan- February 14th, a slave to Benjamin Chew, cial trouble in the 1770s and 1780s, Chew of Philadelphia.”44 Allen then describes loaned large sums money to his neighbor.48 the sale of his family—mother, father, and And although Sturgis purchased his farm three siblings—“into Delaware state, near in 1754, the same year that Chew moved Dover,” declaring that he was one of “Stoke- to Philadelphia,49 the two men presumably

Image 7. George Ford to Benjamin Chew, Kent County, August 3, 1796, in HSP, Chew Papers, Series 2, Chew profited enormously from Correspondence. (DAMS 6071, image 7) Used with permission of owning numerous plantations in The Historical Society of Pennsylvania Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware, at Whitehall was rather limited. In many cases, Ford complained to Chew about a where enslaved people provided the rapidly deteriorating work environment at workforce to cultivate commercial the plantation. For example, in a letter dated April 26, 1795, he wrote to Chew request- crops. ing additional supplies for the slaves: “The Boys are so naked I Cant git much work out of them.”52 Then, in a letter dated August ley’s Negroes.”45 Records confirm that Chew stayed in relatively close contact. Recog- 3, 1797 (see Image 7), Ford disparaged the sold Allen to Stokeley Sturgis, a struggling nized in Kent County as one of the region’s slaves’ growing indolence: “The people are planter whose two hundred acre farm sat most powerful planters, Chew continued so slow and indlent about ther work that about six miles northeast of Dover.46 Al- to visit Whitehall for years, transporting I have no comfort with them and some of slaves whom he bought and sold between them are solate home from ther wifes that his various homes.50 Sarah Chew’s April 22, they lose two ours time in the morning and 1786 letter to her husband, John Galloway, that three or four times a weak and as for captures the casualness with which her fa- the women they are not worth ther vitles ther regularly exchanged human property: for what work they do. Rachel is hear amust “one, two or three valuable negro men that every night in the weak and her husban he [Benjamin Chew] would wish to give which is free and bears avery bad name.”53 if the laws of Maryland will admit of it.”51 Despite Chew’s lack of direct involve- Chew took ownership of the White- ment at Whitehall, financially, he was as hall plantation in 1760. Image 8 illustrates entangled as ever with the slave trade. a survey of Whitehall’s 918 acres detailing Chew extracted enormous profits from the locations of the tobacco houses and “ne- the commercial crops that enslaved labor- Image 6. Illustration of Whitehall Plantation in Dela- groe quarters.” From 1789-1797, Benjamin ers produced at Whitehall. Chew’s younger ware, in HSP, Chew Papers, Series 22, Delaware Land Chew employed George Ford as Whitehall’s brother, Samuel, kept inventories from his Papers. (DAMS 6259, image 1) overseer. Letters from Ford to Chew sug- Maryland plantations attesting to the tre- Used with permission of gest that at least in the last decade of the mendous that substantial planta- The Historical Society of Pennsylvania eighteenth century, Chew’s involvement tions yielded. Registered in 1812, Samuel

38 the lehigh review Chew’s records further reveal the inhuman- On August 26, 1796, overseer Ford to detach from all emotional involvement. ity with which slaveholders handled their again contacted Chew, apologizing for Chew Jr. and his father shared the prejudic- human property. Each slave represented not writing to him earlier (see Image 8). es common to slaveholders. They conceived an item of property worth a specific mon- A troublesome situation sent Ford chas- of slaves, not as people, but as property, in- etary value that depended on the slave’s age ing “down the Creek after Mr Samuel ferior to and unworthy of the human status. and physical ability. Samuel’s inventories Chew negors that runway from him.”55 They kept lists the slaves at Whitehall, their A lifelong slaveholder, Chew was accus- foot measurements, and corresponding tomed to handling slave runaways and shoe sizes.59 It is not surprising that Chew Jr. the paper trails that subsequently fol- itemized his slaves as if quantifying his food lowed. On January 19, 1778, Benjamin supply. Chew Jr. was raised behind a lens of Chew Jr. wrote to his father, updating institutionalized , in an environ- Chew about a runaway slave named Will: ment economically dependent on slavery. In such an environment, slavery appeared to “Ned arrived here…in Search of Mr. Ben- be a natural and even necessary component net Chew’s Negroes. he came up by Permis- of life for both the younger and elder Chew. sion from Col. Duff….he obtained most of On the evening of January 20, 1810, the Negroes [and] has sent some of them Benjamin Chew died peacefully at his be- to their Plantation, His Fortune was not loved countryseat, Cliveden. His tombstone single, your Man Aaron that went off from stands erect at St. Peter’s Churchyard com- my Uncle Samls Tired of his Frolick came memorating in a succinct epitaph the legacy voluntarily [and] solicited for his Return to of an extraordinary individual. During his his Master—he was immediately upon my professional life, Chew was honored to in- Application discharged from the Service in terpret Pennsylvania’s provincial and com- which he was employed and ordered into monwealth constitutions. He made funda- my possession, he now waits an Opportu- mental contributions to the political culture nity of going down—Will, I fear has made that materialized both before and after the his Escape to some other Country but the . His tremendous Hardships he must experience from a differ- wealth, which derived from the exploita- ent Way of living than that in your Employ, tion of enslaved labor, enabled his habit of will sufficiently punish his Ingratitude.”56 conspicuous consumption. Throughout Image 8. George Ford to Benjamin Chew, Kent his life, Chew expressed a lust for power County, August 26, 1796, in HSP, Chew Papers, Series Benjamin Chew Jr. explicitly stated that he through the direct ownership of both hu- 2, Correspondence. (DAMS 6071, image 32) believed the slave, Will, would experience man and non-human property. He regu- Used with permission of greater hardships from the outside world larly imported adornments from England The Historical Society of Pennsylvania than as a slave of Chew. La Rochefoucauld- intended to enhance his physical appear- Liancourt’s description of the elder Benja- ance and frequently purchased enslaved list by name the price of each slave who min suggests that his racial attitude was less laborers meant to facilitate his household belonged to his estate. Included among than tolerant. “He [Benjamin Chew] rather functionality and cultivate his commercial the slaves were several other types of prop- seems to me to have some of the crops. Over the last third of the eighteenth erty such as sugar, meat, and fabric, items common to owners of slaves.”57 This image of century, Chew, in accordance with Philadel- apparently considered to be on a par with Chew contrasts starkly to that drawn of him phia’s elite families, accumulated a dispro- human lives. Samuel’s records suggest both in Joseph Dennie’s 1811 edition of The Port portional amount of the city’s wealth. As the heartlessness with which slavehold- Folio, which considers Chew “a decided en- Chew and his elite counterparts bolstered ers regarded their human property and the emy of in every form, and actu- their wealth and augmented their economic vastness of the profits that slave labor gen- ated by an unconquerable love of freedom.”58 power, they simultaneously worked to ac- erated. In one inventory, the total value of Chew Jr. presumably learned from his centuate class differences and stratify the Samuel’s estate is listed as $42,800.10,54 a father that when dealing with the fragility socioeconomic structure that came to de- sum that today is larger than $750,000. of human property, it is often advantageous fine post-revolutionary Philadelphia.

39