Jump to content

Talk:History of slavery in New Jersey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Joewesty, Junetitus, Goud96, Christian.CBC, Cnester, Ryanmoor7.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers and percentage of slaves in 1790

[edit]

I'm glad someone has started this article. It is really needed. When I looked at the article on NJ history, I thought material on slavery and African Americans was lacking, as well as a general sense of immigration and population movement. It would be useful to provide context for the number of slaves in 1790 - what proportion of the population was enslaved? Where were they concentrated? It's my understanding (don't have a source right now) that most of the slaves were in south Jersey, in the chief agricultural areas. That would make sense. --Parkwells (talk) 15:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1881 history

[edit]

In terms of sources, the 1881 county history would likely not be considered as reliable as later works by peer-reviewed historians.--Parkwells (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clear Contradiction

[edit]

There is a clear contradiction in this article; the date of abolition. It is widely accepted that New Jersey did not legally abolish slavery until 1866, with ratification of the 13th Amendment. While slave numbers had dwindled extensively (down, at last count in 1850, to a mere 226) they still, in fact and in a legal sense, existed in New Jersey until ratification. 24.88.79.249 (talk) 06:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birth Certificates of Children of Slaves in Burlington County

[edit]

This reference shows "birth certificate" records for 15 children of slaves born in Burlington County after enactment of the 1804 law dictating freedom of such children following servitude until the age of 21 (females) or 25 (males). The Wiki article might benefit from inclusion of one of these "birth certificates" as an example.

http://www.nj.gov/state/archives/cbucl001.html

70.193.196.71 (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2012 (UTC)1712NJfamily[reply]

[edit]

Unfortunately, one of the external links no longer exists as a website. Therefore, I am going to remove it.74.102.216.186 (talk) 19:23, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done.74.102.216.186 (talk) 19:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on History of slavery in New Jersey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:37, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on History of slavery in New Jersey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:40, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged copyvio with no backup to support claim

[edit]

In this edit, Rusf10 reverts back to a version fron December 9, 2007, claiming a copyvio. Per WP:COPYVIO there needs to be discussion of the suspected source but there was nothing from Rusf10 in the edit summary or talk page; Earwig and other tools don't detect copying or close paraphrasing. Without a purported source, it's almost impossible to determine if the material was copied *from* Wikipedia (rather than the reverse).

WP:COPYVIO is clear on the procedure: "If you suspect a copyright violation but are uncertain if the content is copyrighted or whether the external site is copying from Wikipedia, you should at least bring up the issue on that page's discussion page, if it is active. In that case, please tag the page copypaste|url=insert URL here, if known, unless your concerns are swiftly resolved. Others can then examine the situation and take action if needed. The most helpful piece of information you can provide is a URL or other reference to what you believe may be the source of the text. You may also make a note of your concerns at Wikipedia:Copyright problems." However, there was no discussion on the talk page, no tagging with the copypaste template, no suspected URL was provided and there was no notice at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Without following procedures, there is no way for any editor to address the allegations of copyright violation. Alansohn (talk) 03:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alansohn:- If you actually bothered to read the notice I placed on the page, you would see the link I cited [1] (and that page has a copyright notice at the bottom, it is not copied from wikipedia) and if you used the Earwig tool like you claim you would have came up with a 91% match [2] When there is a copyvio, we don't have a discussion, it gets tagged and then an admin reviews it. In fact the notice I put on the page (which you could not possibly have read) says "Note to others: Please do not remove this template before an administrator has reviewed it.", so you are 100% wrong here. I will replace the notice, do NOT remove it again.--Rusf10 (talk) 04:20, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rusf10, I did read the article, but unfortunately your past track record with misunderstanding and misrepresenting policy in general, and in particular regarding copyvio, simply cannot give anyone comfort that you understand what's involved. Just take a look at Rudolph Valentino as a cardinal example. What exactly was the copyvio for which you argue that the article should be deleted in its entirety? Alansohn (talk) 04:31, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So basically you decided I was wrong before even looking at the evidence. As for Rudolph Valentino, I am not sure I agree with DGG's assessment that it is a reverse copyvio, but that's a separate issue. This article clearly is a copyvio.--Rusf10 (talk) 04:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree with DGG *and* you have no track record of properly applying copyvio. Zero. Looking over the Valentino article, the claim of CSD:G12 appears dead wrong and appears to constitute a clear misrepresentation of deletion policy. The claimed earliest date for this article doesn't match the content of the source, and that's just the start. Let's allow the article to take it's course. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Alansohn (talk) 04:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As usual your huge ego is getting in the way of you admitting that this is a legit copyvio, regardless of events elsewhere. I may not be right 100% of time the, but at least I don't create copyvio problems like your best friend. But we're obviously not going to solve this here, so I agree with you on one point only, let's just sit back and the copyvio issue can take it's course.--Rusf10 (talk) 05:13, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rusf10 Can you address the specific above claim about http://www.thomaslegion.net/americancivilwar/newjerseycivilwarhistory.html and address the issue by making the necessary corrections that would satisfy what are in your opinion the violations? Thank you. Djflem (talk) 08:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

wholesale blanking of vast ref'd material is vandalism

[edit]

A cursory check of sources reveal the claim of Wikipedia:Copyright violations to be false. The wholesale blanking of vast amounts of material is Wikipedia:Vandalism, which has been reverted. See below examples:

The Dutch West India Company introduced slavery in 1625 with the importation of eleven black slaves to New Amsterdam, capital of the nascent province of New Netherland. They worked as farmers, fur traders, and builders.[1]


The Underground Railroad had several routes crossing the state,[2] four of which ended in Jersey City, where fugitive slaves could cross the Hudson River.[3]


in part because many slaves were used as laborers in its ports and cities. After the Revolutionary War, many northern states rapidly passed laws to abolish slavery, but New Jersey did not abolish it until 1804, and then in a process of gradual emancipation similar to that of New York. But, in New Jersey, some slaves were held as late as 1865. (In New York, they were all freed by 1827.) The law made African Americans free at birth, but it required children (born to slave mothers), to serve lengthy apprenticeships as a type of indentured servant until early adulthood for the masters of their slave mothers. New Jersey was the last of the Northern states to abolish slavery completely. The last 16 slaves in New Jersey were freed in 1865 by the Thirteenth Amendment.[4]

https://www.google.nl/search?q=James+Oliver+Horton%3A+Exhibit+Reveals+History+of+Slavery+in+New+York+City%22%2C&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=Wql6WsiIN-WA8Qe6w5HwDg

In 1875, "Jack" Jackson, who was described as the last slave in New Jersey,[5] died at the age of 87 on the Smith family farm at Secaucus. In 1820, Abel Smith had manumitted his slaves, but Jackson refused freedom and remained on the family estate until his death. By the will of the late Abel Smith, Jackson was interred in the family burial ground.[6]

https://web.archive.org/web/20101203182055/http://warrenlib.com/warrenlib/local_history/apollovol2.pdf

In 2008, the New Jersey Legislature acknowledged the state's role in the history of slavery in the United States.[7][8]


Djflem (talk) 07:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rusf10 Can you address the specific claim about above and specifc claims you may have and address the issue by making the necessary corrections that would satisfy what are in your opinion the violations? Thank you. Djflem (talk) 08:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


How come the first three paragraphs of this page do not have any citations? Citations should be added. Joewesty (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Joewesty Likely to do with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, where ref's are not always necessary if info later cited in body.Djflem (talk) 22:54, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A fresh look at the article

[edit]

The first two sentences in the lede were edited 13 July 2012. They are word-for word the same as footnoted text marked copyright 1997-2013 American Civil War Institute [3] captured by the Wayback Macnhine 3 March 2013. These two captures are not dispositive. ACWI may have copied from the WP article. Alternatively, the WP editor may have lifted this text from ACWI. The following four paragraphs are substantially the same; the sixth is similar in construction. There were only two references in the first six paragraphs.

A review of the prior year's edits to the lede shows that the structure did not change, but individual paragraphs were modified. I draw the conclusion that ACWI copied from Wikipedia without attribution on or soon after 13 July 2012. Rhadow (talk) 00:44, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's a reasonable analysis, although it doesn't provide 100% proof since we don't have wayback pages from every date. However, I just gave up on this after two different users remove a copyvio notice in violation of policy and when one of them accused me of vandalism when all I was trying to do was bring what appeared to be a likely copyvio to attention of an admin.--Rusf10 (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Hodges, Russel Graham (1999). "Root and Branch: African Americans in New York and East Jersey, 1613-1863". Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  2. ^ ""Steal Away, Steal Away..." A Guide to the Underground Railroad in New Jersey" (PDF). New Jersey Historical Commission. Retrieved 2014-04-15.
  3. ^ Karnoutsos, Carmela. "Underground Railroad". Jersey City Past and Present. New Jersey City University. Retrieved 2011-03-27. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  4. ^ "Interview: James Oliver Horton: Exhibit Reveals History of Slavery in New York City", PBS Newshour, 25 January 2007, accessed 11 February 2012
  5. ^ "Obituary Index 1874 -1882" (PDF). Belvidere Apollo/Intelligencer. p. 116. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2010. Retrieved 3 October 2010. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  6. ^ ""Jack" Jackson." Hunterdon County Democrat. XXXVIII. November 30, 1875. p. 13. Archived from the original on 8 October 2010. Retrieved 28 September 2010. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  7. ^ "Assembly Concurrent Resolution 230" (PDF). New Jersey Legislature. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  8. ^ Peters, Jeremy (January 13, 2008). "A Slavery Apology, but Debate Continues". The New York Times. Retrieved 2011-03-28.

Proposed bibliography for improving the article

[edit]

This bibliography was compiled by a student group currently reviewing this article as part of a history course assignment.--JBhistorian (talk) 23:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary Sources

[edit]

Malberg, Edward I. Slavery As an Institution: New Jersey and the South. 1966. Call Number: E445.N54M53. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Special Collections and University Archives, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. https://catalog-libraries-rutgers-edu.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu/vufind/Record/925201

Raven, Catalogue, 12; Frusciano and Justice, “History and Politics,” 24

Gigantino, Ragged Road to Abolition, 130.

Gigantino, James J. "TRADING IN JERSEY SOULS:". Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies. 77 (3): 282. doi:10.5325/pennhistory.77.3.0281. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joewesty (talk • contribs) 21:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Steven G. Greiert, “The Earl of Halifax and the Land Riots in New Jersey, 1748–1753,” New Jersey History 99, no. 1–2 (February 1981): 13–31

Smith, History of Nova Caesaria, 453.

Kenneth Edward Marshall, Manhood Enslaved: Bondmen in Eighteenth-and Early Nineteenth-Century New Jersey, (Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2011).

Kennedy, Michael V. (2003-01-01). "THE HIDDEN ECONOMY OF SLAVERY: COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL HIRING IN PENNSYLVANIA, NEW JERSEY AND DELAWARE, 1728-1800". Essays in Economic and Business History. 21 (1). ISSN 0896-226X. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joewesty (talk • contribs) 21:05, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

African American Autobiographers: A Sourcebook, ed. Emmanuel Nelson (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2002).

Rutgers: A 250th Anniversary Portrait, ed. Nita Congress (London: Third Millennium Publishing, 2015).

William H. S. Demarest, A History of Rutgers College, 1766–1924 (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers College, 1924).

Richard P. McCormick, Rutgers: A Bicentennial History (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1966).

Stephanie  E.  Smallwood,  Saltwater  Slavery:  A  Middle  Passage  from  Africa to American Diaspora (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007).

J. David Muyskens, ed., The Diary of Dina Van Bergh, trans. Gerard Van Dyke (New Brunswick, NJ: Historical Society of the Reformed Church in America, 1993).

Primary Sources

[edit]

This is a primary source: — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBhistorian (talk • contribs) 20:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC) New Brunswick (NJ) Common Council, Minutes of the New Brunswick, N.J. Common Council 1796-1819 (New Brunswick, NJ: New Brunswick Historical Society, 1910). http://archive.org/details/minutesofnewbrun00newb[reply]

Cooley, Henry Scofield. A Study of Slavery in New Jersey. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1896. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=A9xHAAAAYAAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA7&dq=slavery+new+jersey&ots=6vGhXNjQLt&sig=5J2OXiCuIAZC6Vm-JFi3iubJvEw#v=onepage&q=slavery%20new%20jersey&f=false

17:41, 21 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goud96 (talk • contribs)

Source with census data 18th/19th centuries

[edit]

Page 29 https://books.google.nl/books?id=8VoVAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA265&lpg=PA265&dq=bonhamtown+camden+and+amboy&source=bl&ots=GuWC6JZjEI&sig=ACfU3U3Osmh8TeTz5nXtLrsIq_lpzc-G4Q&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjpo7q_rK7oAhWqM-wKHS72BEo4ChDoATAAegQIChAB#v=onepage&q&f=false

The slave trade was a royal monopoly and had become a lucrative enterprise - vague.

[edit]

The article states that "The slave trade was a royal monopoly and had become a lucrative enterprise." I tried to check this. It is rather vague about dates. I presume the Royal African Company was meant, which by a charter of 1660 had been granted a monopoly over English trade along the west coast of Africa (later including slaves). However, in 1689, the Company acknowledged that it had lost its monopoly with the end of royal power in the Glorious Revolution. The Trade with Africa Act 1697 (9 Will. 3 c. 26) opened the African trade to all English merchants who paid a ten per cent levy to the Company on all goods exported from Africa. Nevertheless the company became insolvent in 1708, surviving until 1750 in a state of much reduced activity. The Company continued purchasing and transporting slaves until 1731, when it abandoned slaving in favour of ivory and gold dust. (Slave trading was doubtless lucrative for some, but it doesn't sound as though it was lucrative for the Company.) So it seems there was no monopoly during the c18. To call it a 'royal' monopoly before that could be misleading - was it not simply created by Royal Charter, even though it had royal interests? So, in short, is the sentence as it stands so vague as to be misleading? Starple (talk) 15:01, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_slavery_in_New_Jersey&oldid=1195381361"