Parley Grubb BRITISH IMMIGRATION to PHILADELPHIA: the RECONSTRUCTION of SHIP PASSENGER LISTS from MAY 1772 to OCTOBER 1773
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Parley Grubb UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE BRITISH IMMIGRATION TO PHILADELPHIA: THE RECONSTRUCTION OF SHIP PASSENGER LISTS FROM MAY 1772 TO OCTOBER 1773 English and Irish immigration into the Delaware Valley accelerated after the Seven Years War. It reached a climax in the early 1770s and subsequently declined as the American Revolution disrupted trans- Atlantic shipping. The magnitude of British immigration during the early 1770s may have shaped the course of political, economic, and social events in revolutionary Pennsylvania. Yet, little is known about these immigrants. What were their names? What ports did they leave from? What ships did they sail on? What were their total numbers? What was their social composition? Passenger lists compiled by ship captains for each voyage would be the best source of information. However, during the colonial period few passenger lists for British immigrant ships have survived.' This lack of direct evidence may explain why immigration has remained a relatively neglected topic in colonial demographic history.2 Between the Seven Years War and the American Revolution two collections of British passenger lists for ships arriving in the Delaware Valley have survived. One set was collected from August 29, 1768 to May 13, 1772 by the colonial government in Philadelphia.3 The second set was collected from vessels departing Britain from December 1773 to March 1776 by the British government.4 These British records exclude Irish emigration and incompletely enumerate Scottish emigration. Con- sequently, direct information on immigration into the Delaware Valley from passenger ship lists is missing for Irish immigration after 1771 and for English immigration from 1772 through 1773. In the absence of passenger lists, indirect methods of estimating the magnitude and origin of British immigrants to Pennsylvania have been 118 BRITISH IMMIGRATION TO PHILADELPHIA 119 used.5 For example, the volume of immigration can be estimated without recourse to any direct information on immigration. Net migration can be measured as the residual growth in the colonial population after removing births and deaths.6 Because of the lack of knowledge on the vital rates of the colonial population, migration estimates based on population residuals have wide margins of error. They are typically presented only in decade intervals and provide little detail on the source, characteristics, and names of the immigrants. Another indirect method of estimating British immigration uses information from newspapers on both sides of the Atlantic. For example, both the Belfast News Letter and the Pennsylvania Gazette reported ship arrivals, departures, and occasionally commented on the number of passengers. These newspaper accounts along with the few surviving passenger lists can be used to construct a sample of passenger per ship or passenger per ton ratios.7 By multiplying the number of ship arrivals reported in the newspapers by the appropriate passenger per ship ratio, total immigration can be estimated in years when passenger lists do not exist.8 This indirect method has several weaknesses. First, the names of the immigrants remain unknown. Without names, genealogical studies are difficult to pursue. Without names, immigrants can not be traced through other colonial records to study their impact on colonial society. Second, the estimation procedure contains several potential biases. The method assumes a constant passenger per ship ratio. Changes in immigration caused by shifts in the number of passengers per ship will be missed. The variance in immigration can only appear through changes in the number of ships carrying passengers. Many ships did not carry passengers and determining which ships carried passengers from newspaper reports can be difficult. Adjusting for changes in the proportion of passenger to non-passenger ships for each port is seldom possible. Therefore, shipping patterns which change in response to shifting trade patterns may be incorrectly interpreted as changes in total immigration or changes in the relative origin of the immigrants. THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PRIMARY SOURCES The problem of missing primary sources, such as missing passenger lists, might be solved by reconstructing the primary sources from other surviving documents. Reconstruction of primary sources seems to be a novel or rarely practiced approach in quantitative history. While passenger lists of some kind were probably made for each voyage, none 120 PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY have survived for British immigrants arriving in Philadelphia during the important years of 1772 and 1773. For these years passenger lists can be partially reconstructed by combining information from two sources, the Pennsylvania Gazette and the "Record of Indentures" for the port of Philadelphia.9 The Pennsylvania Gazette reported the arrival and departure of ships from Philadelphia during each week, their ports of origin or destination, and their captains. The "Record of Indentures" for the port of Philadelphia recorded the contracts of many types of servants, including British immigrant servants. The contract information contained the servant's name and enough other information to link most British immigrant servants to a particular ship listed in the Pennsylvania Gazette.10 The reconstructed passenger lists are presented here at the end in chronological order of arrival from May 1772 to October 1773 with the passenger names sorted alphabetically." Because they contain only the names of servant passengers and not the names of any free passengers, the passenger lists are only partial reconstructions. In addition to the names of servant passengers, the reconstructed lists include information on marital status, which was the only information in the contract record on the social characteristics of the servants. Finally, the reconstructed lists include information on each voyage, including the ship's names, port of origin, and captain, whether the ship stopped in New Castle on the Delaware before docking in Philadelphia, and an exact date of arrival in Philadelphia based on when the servant contracts started. The servant record for the port of Philadelphia appears to record all immigrant servants debarking at Philadelphia regardless of their final colonial destination. Only 34% were purchased by residents of Philadel- phia. Buyers from distant counties, such as Westmoreland and Willis, nearby colonies, such as New York, New Jersey, and Maryland, and even distant colonies, such as Virginia and the Carolinas, who purchased servants in Philadelphia had the contracts recorded before leaving Philadelphia.' 2 Servants that were purchased by agents for distant owners had both the agent's purchase and the transfer to the ultimate owner recorded in the Philadelphia records.13 Both the buyer and the servant had an incentive to record the contract immediately after sale because the record provided legal protection against unilateral attempts to change the contract. The magnitude of the immigrant servants listed in the Philadelphia record, organized by the county of residence reported by the purchaser, is greater than the magnitude of all servants listed in the tax rolls of the BRITISH IMMIGRATION TO PHILADELPHIA 121 respective counties in the region."4 This comparison indicates that the Philadelphia servant records are at least more comprehensive than the tax records. It also indicates that servant debarkation at other Delaware Valley ports, such as Chester and New Castle, must have been uncommon. The relative completeness of the servant records implies that the reconstructed passenger lists may be a relatively complete count of servant immigration into the Delaware Valley. A statistical summary of the reconstructed lists is presented in Table 1. A total of 55 ships carried 1,363 servants from Britain to Philadelphia between May 1772 and October 1773. The English ports of London, Bristol, and Liverpool accounted for 34% of the ships but only 15% of the servants. English ships had a relatively low servant per ship ratio, under 15 servants per ship. The three ships carrying servants from Scotland represented 10% of the total number of British servants. One ship from the Isle of Lewis accounted for the bulk of the Scottish total, which may have been atypical of Scottish immigration in other years. The southern Irish ports of Cork, Waterford, and Dublin accounted for roughly 16% of the ships but over 31% of the servants. Ships from southern Ireland generally had the highest servant per ship ratio and represented either the first or second most important source of British servant immigration to Philadelphia. Probably the most important British region of servant immigration to Philadelphia was Ulster. The three Ulster ports of Newry, Belfast, and Londonderry accounted for 44% of the ships and at least 28% of the servants. Most of the British immigrant servants whose ports could not be determined had servant contracts with characteristics similar to servant contracts from Ulster ports and different from the contracts of servants arriving from other British ports.15 If the undetermined category in Table 1 is added to the Ulster category then 44% of the immigrating British servants came from Ulster. As a whole, Ireland accounted for 75% of British servant immigration to Philadelphia. The reconstructed passenger lists have many potential uses. For genealogical historians they provide an important link between the Old World and the New. The grouping of immigrant names by port of origin may help in tracing the roots