Slavery, Racism, and Charles Willson Peale

Charles Willson Peale (1741-1827) was one of the pioneering artists of the early days of the United States. His portraits of George Washington are familiar to fans of American history. His museum, the first in the United States, combined his love of history, science, and fine art.

Charles Willson Peale, The Artist in His Museum, 1822
Collection of Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts

Looking beyond the surface of his illustrious career, Peale's story reveals the complexity of race relations during the late 1700s and early 1800s. A slaveowner for decades, Peale has been praised for voting in favor of abolition, with one brief biography from 1955 going so far as to claim that Peale "hated slavery and freed those few he had inherited as soon as they could support themselves" (Oliver Jensen, "The Peales," American Heritage, April 1955). In truth, Peale never inherited slaves, he purchased them or accepted them as payment for his paintings. While he did eventually free his slaves, his writings suggest he was not concerned about the harm that slavery did to the enslaved; instead, he was concerned that slavery harmed the slave owners.


The historical evidence suggests that Peale, at least as a young man, accepted slavery as normal -- this was, after all, the world into which he was born. As he matured, he came to view the institution of slavery as problematic, but not necessarily for the reasons we might assume. His "hatred" of slavery seems to have been focused on a belief that slavery was harmful to slave owners and poor white laborers. At least one of his children would later write disparagingly about a family of African Americans who had been enslaved by Peale.

I was not expecting to write about Peale, but while I was doing research for a novel set in Maryland during the mid-1700s, I came across his name as a witness to the sale of four enslaved people in Frederick County.  Intrigued, I did a little more research and learned that the person purchasing the slaves was an Annapolis saddler named Nathan Waters, to whom Peale was apprenticed.

Digging into the stories behind the document with Peale's name reveal some interesting aspects of life in Maryland during the 1700s. Everyone seems to have been interconnected. It was a good exercise in what happens when you ask questions like, who are these people? how do they know one another? What can we learn from them?

What follows is a long essay exploring Charles Willson Peale's origins and his growth from taking slavery for granted to ensuring that his slaves would be able to support themselves after being given their freedom. A little of this research will likely end up in my novel, as it has given me a better understanding of the systems of slavery and freedom that existed in Maryland during the 1700s.


Charles Peale

Charles Peale, father of the artist, had not intended to move to America. His father and grandfather were highly respected church rectors in England ("Charles Willson Peale and His Public Services During the American Revolution," The American Monthly Magazine, Volume 14, 1899, pp. 197-198). Charles Peale chose a secular path in London. During the early 1730s, Charles Peale was the Deputy Secretary of the London General Post Office (The Maryland Gazette, 5 December, 1750, p. 3).

On May 22, 1735, Peale was convicted of embezzling Post Office revenue. Peale pleaded guilty and was sentenced to death for his crime, although this was later reduced to a life sentence of exile to America (The Proceedings of the Old Bailey Online Database).

Peale spent many months at Newgate Prison before being transported to Maryland, and his exploits in prison were covered by the local newspapers. During the summer of 1735, it was reported that he had become ill while at Newgate (The Derby Mercury, 31 July 1735, p. 3). By January, Peale appears to have recovered and was hobnobbing in prison with attorney William Wreathcock, who was notorious for becoming a highwayman and robbing a doctor after having defended an accused highwayman (The Caledonian Mercury, Edinburgh, 5 January 1736, p. 2).

William Hogarth's depiction of a London prisoner from a good family being visited by his family, 1735
Plate 7 from A Rake's Progress, Collection of the Tate Museum

Finally, in January 1736, Peale was placed on a prison transport ship along with 157 other convicts and sent to America (The Derby Mercury, 29 January 1735/6, p. 4 and The Ipswich Journal, 24 January 1736, p. 3). He arrived at Virginia in September, 1736 (Robert Barnes, "School Teachers of Early Maryland," Archives of Maryland Online, MSA SC 5300).

In America, Peale was able to rewrite his life story. His brief obituary in The Maryland Gazette (5 December 1750, p. 3) stated that he had been the Deputy Secretary at the Post Office, with no mention made of why he left that job.

By 1739, Peale was in Annapolis, teaching at King William's School. He met his future wife, Margaret Matthews Triggs (possibly a widow, although little is known of her life before 1740), at about this time. The couple were married at the beginning of November, 1740, at St. Margaret's Westminster Parish in Annapolis (Maryland Provincial Court Land Records, 1762-1763, Volume 724, p. 237). Their first child, Charles Willson Peale, was born five months later, on April 15, 1741.

In 1741, Peale was teaching at Kent County School near Chestertown, Maryland, where he remained for several years. He also taught at Queen Anne's County School.

The Pennsylvania Gazette, 4 April 1745, p. 4
From Newspapers.com

As a teacher, Peale's livelihood was dependent upon the slave trade: the Kent County School was funded in part by taxes on African slaves imported into Maryland. In 1746, Peale wrote to his brother-in-law, Rev. Joseph Digby, complaining that he was not being paid for his work at the school, as "the Fund belonging to this School wch depended chiefly on a Duty on Negroes, none being imported this Warr Time is totally exhausted, and my small Salary not now paid... and every Article of our Cloathing so extravagantly dear that I cannot get my poor dear little Ones a second Shirt or Shift to wear." (Lillian Miller, ed., The Selected Papers of Charles Willson Peale and His Family, Volume I. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 1983, p. 20)

Charles and Margaret Peale had five children: Charles Willson Peale, born in 1741; Elizabeth Digby Peale, born in 1744; St. George Peale, born in 1745; Margaret Jane Peale; and James Peale, born in 1749.  Their household also included Peggy Durgan, who was Margaret Peale's niece and an orphan. Durgan never married, instead staying in the Peale household where she helped raise multiple generations of children (Charles Coleman Sellers, Charles Willson Peale, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1969, p. 12).

Charles Peale died in November 1750. At the time of his death, his property included several horses and pigs, as well as household furnishings. Peale did not own any slaves, but he did have a servant, Elizabeth Piper, with several years left to her indentureship. By the time Peale's estate inventory was taken, in April 1752, his widow was living in Annapolis and had not left a forwarding address for the probate court (Kent County Inventory Accounts, Volume 4, 1749-1759, pp. 181-182).

In his 1825-26 autobiography, Charles Willson Peale recalled that his mother was so overwhelmed by grief after the death of his father, that "she could not, for some time, take any measure to assist herself & Children" (Lillian Miller, ed., The Selected Papers of Charles Willson Peale and His Family, Volume 5. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2000, p. 4). John Beale Bordley, a friend of the family, took care of the Peales while they adjusted to life without Charles Peale. Bordley's aid continued for decades, assisting Charles Willson Peale whenever possible.


John Beale Bordley

Peale's first patron and early influence was John Beale Bordley (1727-1804). Bordley was born into a prominent Maryland family, although his father died shortly before he was born. His mother remarried and moved to England when Bordley was ten, leaving him behind with her sister in Chestertown, Maryland. While growing up in Chestertown, Bordley attended the Kent County School where Charles Peale was his teacher. He married Margaret Chew, a member of an even more prominent Maryland family, in 1751. After his first wife's death in 1773, Bordley married Mrs. Sarah Fishbourne Mifflin, whose stepson Thomas Mifflin was President of the Continental Congress and later Governor of Pennsylvania.

Over the course of his lifetime, John Beale Bordley served as Baltimore County clerk, a commissioner overseeing the drawing up of the boundary line between Maryland and Pennsylvania, a judge of the provincial court and a judge of the admiralty court, and a Maryland Councilor. He was also an artist, although not as famous as Charles Willson Peale.

Charles Willson Peale, John Beale Bordley, 1770
National Gallery of Art

Bordley owned a large plantation on Maryland's Eastern Shore and became increasingly engrossed in agricultural pursuits beginning in 1770. As was typical of large plantation owners, Bordley was a slave owner. Historians have praised him as "a slaveowner who hated slavery," for speaking out against slavery and for freeing his own slaves, while completely ignoring the outrageously racist and profoundly offensive statements he wrote about slaves.

For examples of how historians have glossed over Bordley's grossly racist assertions, see David Hackett Fischer, "John Beale Bordley, Daniel Boorstin, and the American Enlightenment," The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 28, No. 3, August 1962, p. 340 and Max Grivno, "There Slavery Cannot Dwell" Agriculture and Labor in Northern Maryland, 1790-1860, Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, 2007.

The danger in glossing over Bordley's racism is that it perpetuates a false history, one in which Bordley is credited for "condemning slavery," leading us to completely misunderstand the history of racism and white supremacy in the United States. It can also allow scholars to perpetuate racism, as they continue to write about history solely from the viewpoint of the white slave owners.

Bordley published a book on farming in 1801, entitled Essays and Notes on Husbandry and Rural Affairs. In it, he wrote about what he saw as the inevitable abolition of slavery and its impact on the farms of Southern and Mid-Atlantic states. Bordley argued in favor of hired help to work farms, claiming that the slave-owning farmer was "a slave to his slave," that slaves were constantly taking advantage of their master, doing very little work, burdening the slave owner with their families, and "teaching their children to plunder their masters and instructing them that they have a right to do it." (J. B. Bordley, Essays and Notes, 1801, p. 391).

Bordley seemed particularly annoyed by having to care for people that weren't able to work: "the farmer having slaves, generally has supernumerary hands, eating, wasting, making confusion, etc. the year through without abatement."  (Bordley, Essays, p. 393)

Bordley further argued that it was actually cheaper to hire day laborers than to own slaves, proposing a hypothetical situation in which a farmer has 35 slaves, of whom only 18 were workers, as the rest were infants or too old and infirm to work. He estimated that the slave owner would spent $1,200 per year feeding, clothing, and housing his 35 slaves and would lose about $600 to their "mischief, waste, pilfer, etc." for a total cost of $1,800. In contrast, Bordley proposed that the farmer instead hire 12 good workers, spending $610 on their wages and $600 on their food and lodging, for a total cost of $1,210. Bordley noted that with the paid laborers, the farmer would have "peace, quiet, order, economy, etc." (Bordley, Essays, p. 392).

Bordley's argument is a masterful example of victim blaming and a total lack of empathy, never once pausing to consider the viewpoint of the enslaved. Bordley does not specify the race or ethnicity of his hypothetical hired laborers. Either he is assuming that the hired laborers are white, and therefore better behaved than blacks, or he is assuming that blacks will be better behaved if they live paycheck to paycheck.

Bordley's daughter, Elizabeth Bordley Gibson, published a family history in 1865 in which she wrote about the family's slaves in both a racist and white supremacist way [my comments are inserted]:

     His colored people were much attached to him; having always viewed him like a patriarchal father amongst them, they justly considered him their best friend. [Seriously, this is what she wrote and no doubt believed. That's the insidiousness of racism, seeing the world from your viewpoint only, never stopping to consider the perspective of nonwhites.] It was now, when preparing to leave them, that his difficulties arose. Owning them on all his Maryland farms, they were of course numerous; and to have liberated them all at once, would have been an injury to his compatriots [wouldn't want the other slave owners to be bothered]; he could not take on his conscience the commotion and danger likely to ensue. He had only a choice of evils, and made the following arrangement.

    He liberated a portion on each farm, by families, and as a reward for proven fidelity [Great! If you were subservient, you would be freed; if you didn't please the man who owned you, you'd be stuck in slavery. Totally supports the idea that Bordley "hated" slavery, sure.]; others, favorite family domestics, he took to Pennsylvania, where they were bound for a term of years ["hey, we really like you, so we're going to force you to stay with us when we leave everything you've ever known"]; others, on disposing of his lands to different purchasers, he sold to those purchasers for a term of years, after which they and their progeny were to be free; other he left with his sons, and his daughter Ross, from whom they were sure of receiving kind treatment. ["hey, sorry I'm not freeing you, but I'm sure my kids won't whip you too often or sell your children, probably."]
(Elizabeth Bordley Gibson, Biographical Sketches of the Bordley Family, Philadelphia: H.B. Ashmead, 1865, p. 133)

The 1800 U.S. Census listed 6 free blacks living in Bordley's household, while the Pennsylvania Septennial Census of 1800 listed three slaves owned by Bordley, two men and one woman in their 30s. By contrast, the 1790 U.S. Census noted 128 slaves owned by Bordley.

The racist viewpoints of Bordley's daughter are further seen in an anecdote she wrote:

He was in the habit of conversing freely, at times, with his most intelligent blacks, and has often acknowledged himself instructed by some of their remarks, and their untaught, native powers of reasoning. We have heard them say to him, to rouse his attentions, "Ah! now massa wrong--massa say he love right way--ma' he no listen to 'um now!"--and he would become all patience in listening! (Gibson, Biographical Sketches, p. 146 fn)

I'm not certain, but I suspect that Bordley's daughter was far more of a white supremacist than her father. Racism seems to have increased during the 1800s, perhaps as a side effect of trying to justify the perpetuation of slavery.



Charles Willson Peale

Charles Willson Peale, Self-Portrait, 1777-78.
Collection of the American Philosophical Society, published in
Matt White, "What the Artist Saw and What the Editors Ignored," Common Place, Summer 2017

When Charles Peale died, Charles Willson Peale was only nine years old, the oldest of five children. The Peale family relocated to Annapolis, where Margaret Peale supported herself by "Manteau-Makeing," making fashionable women's clothing (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 6).

Charles Willson Peale was apprenticed to Nathan Waters, a saddler, beginning in 1754. His youngest brother, James, also apprenticed as a saddler.

Charles Willson's apprenticeship with Nathan Waters lasted until December 31, 1761. After finishing his apprenticeship, Peale started up his own business as a saddler, borrowing money for a down payment on saddlers' equipment purchased on credit from Waters. Peale would later, in his 1790 autobiographical notes, write bitterly about Nathan Waters' "crul usage of his trusty apprentice," regretting the decision to start his career with a large debt to Waters (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 12).

Later still, in his 1825 autobiography, Peale tempered his resentment, noting that "in many Instances during the time of his apprenticeship [Waters] was a good master to [Peale]" and that "Peale cannot now have any cause to blame Mr. Waters for any treatment that he had ever received from him" (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 12).

Less than two weeks after ending his apprenticeship, Peale married his first wife, Rachel Brewer. His memory of his first meeting with Brewer hints at the casual racism of the era:

A little turned of 17 Yrs. [Peale] rode over/beyond South River to see a Boy of his acquaintance... he arrived in the time Dinner was prepairing, and the Kitchen being in the Way to the Dwelling House, he rapted at the Door to enquire if Mrs. Brewer lived there. two of her daughters were in the Kitchen to look to the preparations of Dinner, and Miss Rachel hearing the rap, supposed it was by some of the Negro children, Called out "go round you impudent baggage" which was immediately obyed by [Peale]. The Young Ladies seeing a stranger, blushed exceedingly, making many appoligies for their rudeness. ... This Lady who accosted him so roughly in her first words to him, shortly became his favorite.... (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 7)

In addition his saddler's business, Peale also sold a variety of other luxury goods, learning the basics of silversmithing. He would soon after study the art of painting, visiting John Singleton Copley's studio in Boston and studying the work of any artist he could. In 1767, thanks to the sponsorship of John Beale Bordley, he traveled to England to study with Benjamin West, the premiere artist of the day, returning to Maryland in 1770. Peale launched his career as a portrait painter, firmly establishing himself as the leading artist of the new nation during the 1780s. He married three times, father numerous children, many of whom became successful artists themselves. One of the people enslaved in the Peale household would go on to become an artist, although he was not given the same training and opportunities as Peale's children.


Peale's Early Attitude Towards Slavery

After establishing himself as a premiere portrait artist, Peale catered to the wealthy and tutored aspiring artists. On occasion, Peale accepted slaves as payment, apparently unconcerned about the lives of the people being traded and sold.

In 1774, Peale wrote to art student William Pearce about the money that Pearce owed him. Pearce appears to have offered a slave as partial payment. Peale wrote "the Negro I make no doubt but will sell so that if you can bring the sum of 70 or 80 £ as you mention, you will have anough after paying me for your board...." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 135).

As the Revolutionary War approached and colonists, including Peale, became caught up with notions of Liberty, the enslavement of Africans and their descendants was ignored in remarkable ways. In 1775, Peale painted a banner for the Baltimore Independent Cadets which featured an allegorical image of "LIBERTY trampling upon TYRANNY, and putting off SLAVERY who is approaching with hasty strides..." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 139). The figure of slavery was entirely unrelated to the actual slavery that flourished in the colonies. In this case, "slavery" was political propaganda, extremist language condemning the British treatment of the white colonists. Freedom from slavery was for whites only.

Rind's Virginia Gazette, 23 Feb 1775, p. 3

Peale's diaries contain snippets of information about how slaves were used by their owners. In 1775, Benjamin Ogle, son of former Maryland Governor Samuel Ogle, sent his slaves to fetch his newly complete full-length portrait from Peale's studio: "Mr. Ogle's Negros carried home Mr Ogles whole Length yesterday Evening." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 156). Similarly, a couple of weeks later while Peale dining at a plantation on the Chester River, "a Negro broght me word that Mrs. Seale was at Mrs. Commeges wanted to see me, I walked over (about one mile)." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 159)

On December 18, 1775, Peale "paid Mr. Bird for the Hire of his Negro  7/ " (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 163). During this era, it was a common practice to hire out slaves (and, if you were poor, your own children), pocketing the money from their labor. People were commodities, assets that could bring profit. The mindset of the era is shocking to us today, but the concepts of equality and human rights have developed slowly. During the 1500s, European society was based on a firm hierarchy in which a person's value and rights were based entirely on the social status they were born with. The social elite were entitled to the finer things in life, while peasants were viewed as their inferiors as ordained (in their minds) by God. The radical idea of the Declaration of Independence was the notion that white men of lowly birth were equal to royalty in the eyes of God.

While serving during the Revolutionary War, Peale went in search of provisions for his company, writing in his diary on December 28, 1776: "I then heard of some flower [flour] & went & got a Barrel. delivered some to Captn. Boyd--I went to desire a Family to let a Negro Girl make up some Bread for us. the Lady of House told me she would do it herself and Bake it in her oven...." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 216)


Peale as Slaveowner

Early in 1778, Peale wrote to his brother St. George saying, "I have a desire to purchase the Negro Boy to wait on me, I have long wanted one, and if I remember Right Bobby told me that he spoke French--which will be Recommendation, if you can add any other, do in your next Letter" (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 262-263). The "Negro Boy" was the property of Capt. Robert Polk, Peale's brother-in-law and a privateer who had been killed by the British the previous year. Neither Peale nor Polk in his will referred to the boy by name. Polk's will specified that his "Negro lad" was to be sold, with the proceeds divided among his children (Baltimore County Wills, Volume 3, p. 347). When Polk's estate was inventoried in May 1778, no slave was listed (Baltimore County Inventories, Volume 12, p. 124).

A key point is that Peale said that he had "long wanted" a "Negro Boy to wait on me." By 1778, Peale already owned two slaves, Scarborough and Lucy. Now he was seeking to acquire a French-speaking youth to be his manservant, a symbol of Peale's growing social status and his disregard for the opinions of the enslaved.


A Change of Heart

Peale's diary entry of December 13, 1778 details a new-found objection to slavery:

...in the Evening a good deal of Company arrived, amongst them some officers of Col. Baylers Light Horse, all Virginia whom from a general Observation are much adicted to swearing much more so than any of the more northern States--this naturely leads one to Conjecture why it is so. one Reason and I think not an inconsiderable one, is the great number of Slaves which they have there and being accustomed to tyranize & domineer over, even in their first Education they are Suffered to Lord it over these unhappy Wreches--And by these Slaves are all the laborious works performed, which makes them so necessary that every man who can possibly purchace Slaves does, and becomes Laisy [lazy] themselves and of Course dissipated--Slaves doing the Labour the poor White Labourer wants employment and Remains poor indeed... (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 301)

As others have pointed out, Peale's objection to slavery was primarily a concern for the harm he thought it caused to white people, from the slave owners who became lazy and corrupt, to the poor whites who lost out on being hired for manual labor that was instead being done by slaves. Here, perhaps, are the roots of racial discord in the United States--the enslaved being blamed for making white men behave badly and for taking jobs from the white working poor. No consideration was given for the possibility that choosing to own slaves was indicative of pre-existing moral failings, just as no consideration was given to the grave injustice of forcing blacks to work for no pay at all.

Peale, as explained in Miller's footnote, may have been influenced in his thinking by Montesquieu's "Of Civil Slavery," in which the French philosopher wrote that slavery was bad for the slave-owners who would naturally become immoral and cruel from having "unlimited authority over his slaves," and it was bad for the enslaved because they "can do nothing through a motive of virtue." Anti-slavery philosophy was about morality, with more concern for the moral well-being of the slave owners than the enslaved. The concept of equality did not apply.

Better known than Montesquieu in the United States today is Thomas Jefferson, whose Notes on the State of Virginia (1787) included his thoughts on slavery. Like Peale, Montesquieu, and Bordley, Jefferson superficially hated slavery, calling it a "blot in our country" and a "great political and moral evil" while also claiming that Virginia's slaves received "mild treatment" and "wholesome, though coarse, food" (Notes, p. 96).

Jefferson wrote further about blacks, delineating all the ways in which he thought they were different from whites, declaring "their griefs are transient," "they seem to require less sleep," "in reason much inferior" although "in memory they are equal to the whites," and "in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous." Jefferson did allow that blacks "are more generally gifted than the whites" in music, but he refused to concede that they could create poetry, trashing Phillis Wheatley's poetry as "below the dignity of criticism," thereby proving (in his mind) that blacks were incapable of being poets. (Notes, pp. 147-150)

Despite his racism, Jefferson was against slavery. Fully aware of the horrific treatment of slaves, and despite his claim of "mild treatment" of slaves in Virginia, Jefferson proposed giving soon-to-be-freed slaves the training and tools necessary to go start a colony somewhere else, to avoid any violent retribution from the former slaves. He would later support the creation of Liberia in Africa as a way to get rid of freed slaves.


Gradual Emancipation

Peale and his family moved to Philadelphia in 1775. He served in the Pennsylvania militia for several years, then was elected to the Pennsylvania Assembly for the 1779-80 term.

The abolition of slavery was being discussed by many at this time. As the rebelling colonies were fighting for their freedom from Great Britain, there was a push to grant freedom to the enslaved.

In 1780, Pennsylvania adopted a Gradual Emancipation law, declaring that no one could be born a slave or "servant for life" in Pennsylvania from that point forward, that all children born to enslaved women would be freed upon reaching the age of 28. Those born before the law was enacted were not freed.

The law also required all slave owners to register their slaves; failure to do so would result in the automatic freedom of the enslaved. (The slave registers for several counties are available online, but nothing yet for Philadelphia. Charles Willson Peale would have registered his slaves in Philadelphia.)

An early draft of the law, introduced February 23, 1779, included language prohibiting interracial marriage: "...no marriage shall be had, or any marriage contract be valid, between a negro and a white person; and if any negro man or woman do cohabit or dwell with any white man or woman, under pretence that they are married, such negro shall, upon conviction thereof, be sold for a servant for seven years...." (The Pennsylvania Packet, 4 March 1779, p. 1). This provision was dropped

An amendment to the law was adopted in 1788, closing loopholes such as taking pregnant slaves to another state for the birth of their child.

The preamble to the law reflects on the legislators gratitude for having themselves been freed from the "Tyranny of Great Britain... that State of Thraldom, to which we ourselves were tyrannically doomed...." The preamble also reflects with humility that "the Almighty Hand" chose to create physical differences in the people of different parts of the world.

The law declares slavery to be "undeserved Bondage" and the abolition of slavery to be an expression of gratitude to God for having been freed from Great Britain.

Charles Willson Peale voted in favor of the Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery. While some historians have used this to claim that Peale "hated slavery," his later actions show that he was in no particular hurry to free his own slaves, nor did he universally condemn slavery.

In 1791, Peale traveled the Maryland plantation of James Gettings (also spelled Gittings) to paint a portrait of the Gettings family. In his autobiography, Peale reflected that Gettings' slaves, "of which he has a considerable number, appear to be happy..." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 175).

By 1804, Peale had become fearful of plantation slavery and the possibility of a mass slave revolt. After a visit to Mount Vernon (owned by George Washington's nephew at this point),  Peale wrote "It is surely a miserable situation to be surrounded with a number of Slaves, however kindly they may be used, yet the very Idea of Slavery is horrible-- and I much fear the consequence should the Negroes in Virginia, N & S Carolina and in Georgia revolt--and however diligent or vigilent their masters may be yet it will certainly take place sooner or later" (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 2, p. 696). Although Peale finally recognized the horror of slavery, his primary concern was, as always, for the white slave owners who would be harmed during a slave rebellion.



Lydia

In a biography of Charles Willson Peale, David C. Ward documented Peale's purchase of a girl named Lydia on June 9, 1764, presumably to assist in his growing household, but offers up no further information (Ward, Charles Willson Peale: Art and Selfhood in the Early Republic, 2004, p. 23).


Philis

Among the people held as slaves in the Peale household was a woman named Philis. In a letter written on July 2, 1787 to the Acting Committee to Prevent the Distress of Negroes (the first abolition society), Peale referred to Philis as a "Mulatto" (mixed-race) with an unspecified number of children:

The Mulatto Woman which I mentioned to some of your Committee I had given a Considerable time to raise the sum of £50 to purchais her freedom, and at the same time I gave up one of her children to the father who is to have it learnt to read & write and have a Trade, to be freed at the age of 21 yrs. for the Mother I have refused £100 and for this Boy I Refused £10. I might have got 15 £ for his servitude to the age of 28 yrs:-- I wrote a subscription paper for Philis to carry to the good & benevolent, and I expected from the Charactor therein given her that she would readily have found assistance, as the act was good and amongst many wants have been very light, she tells me that [she] found several Persons cross and Ill natured, because her master was active in the War & Politicks in the late revolution, others said I was rich enough to free her myself and would not give any thing. They know little of my circumstances, and do me Injustice to suppose I could be active without an approving conscience, or that I would others to do for me what I am able to do for myself.-- In short I want to raise money to pay a debt which I owe to the Gentlemen who owns the board yard at the Corner of Spruce & 3d Streets as well as to some others who have been very Indulgent to me, and your kind assistance with your Society to raise the sum proposed by which this Mulatto Woman will have her freedom will very much oblige. (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 481-482)

Peale was clearly struggling with his duty to free his slaves and his desire for money to pay off some of his debts. He could easily have freed Philis and her children, but he was loathe to give up the profit he could make from them. Despite having written a testimonial to Philis' good character, he still described her primarily in terms of monetary value, trying to make himself out as the good guy for having refused to sell her for twice the amount of money he was trying to secure from the abolitionists.

Peale seems to have been oblivious to the immense cruelty of his treatment of Philis, sending her door-to-door begging for someone to donate money for her freedom. He was offended by his neighbors' low regard for him, but perhaps he also realized that it was demeaning for Philis to have to defend him while begging to be freed from him. That could be why he gave up on sending her door-to-door, although it seems more likely that he gave up on that scheme simply because it wasn't fruitful.

I don't know what happened to Philis or her son. The 1790 U.S. Census lists two people enslaved in the Peale household, while the 1800 Census lists one free nonwhite person and no slaves. Peale family history suggests the person listed in the 1800 census was probably Moses Williams, who grew up as a slave in the Peale household.


Scarborough and Lucy

By 1776, Peale had acquired two people named Scarborough and Lucy as his slaves. On June 17, 1776, Peale wrote that he and his family left Charlestown, Maryland in a stage wagon, listing his family as "My Mother, Mrs. Peale, Charles, Peggy, Raphiel, Angelica, Peggy Durgin, Scarborough & Lucy." Peale further wrote that "Luce gets drunk and leaving the Wagon under pertence to Walk about 4 miles from Cristiana she lays down under the fence, as the other wagon was behind informed me. they could not get her up, I now wait at Cristiana Expectg that Boby Polk coming with another wagon will pick her up" (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 185). Nothing further was written about the incident.

Peale's diary entries for January and February 1778 included mention of making shoes for various members of Peale's household, including Scarborough, but not Lucy (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 265).

Some historians have stated that Scarborough changed his name to John Williams after being freed. Gary Nash, in his book Freedom by Degrees, published in 1988 and revised by Jean Soderlund in 1991, wrote "...when Charles Willson Peale freed his slave in 1786, the freedman took the name of John Williams..." (1988, p. 86), and conflictingly that "Charles Willson Peale... in 1786 had agreed to free two-year-old John Williams at age 21" (1991, p. 108). Nash also wrote that Peale "freed a boy who had been born after 1780 when he reached age 21" (1991, p. 156) who was the boy mentioned in the letter carried by Philis in 1787. No source is cited for any of these statements.

The Nash book is the earliest reference I have found to John Williams. If we assume that he got his information from a reliable source, it still doesn't support the statement that Scarborough changed his name to John Williams.


Moses Williams 

Peale's descendant and biographer, Charles Coleman Sellers, wrote that Moses Williams was the son of Scarborough and Lucy, one of several children born to the couple, although Sellers did not bother to share the names of their other children (Sellers, p. 109). Moses' date of birth is believed to be 1777. As an adult, Moses Williams would eventually earn a living making profile portraits in silhouette using a device called a physiognotrace at Charles Willson Peale's museum.

Silhouette portrait of Moses Williams, c. 1803
Collection of The Library Company of Philadelphia

One of the most frequently repeated concepts, in varying forms, in histories of Peale and Moses Williams is that in 1786, Peale emancipated Williams' parents, Scarborough and Lucy, while young Moses Williams would not be freed until he reached the age of 28, in 1805. It is disturbing that Peale would keep a child enslaved while freeing the parents. What reason could there possibly have been to justify this? Why not just keep the boy on as an apprentice? Keeping him enslaved meant he had fewer rights and was at risk of being sold to someone who would take him to the slave states, where he would never be freed.

In 1799, Peale referred to Moses as "my Molatto Man," a reference to light skin color suggesting mixed race heritage (Gwendolyn DuBois Shaw, "'Moses Williams, Cutter of Profiles": Silhouettes and African American Identity in the Early Republic," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 149, No. 1, March 2005, p. 27).

According to Peale's son, Rembrandt, Moses was kept in bondage because he was "lazy" and "worthless." To the Peales, keeping Moses enslaved was doing him a favor.

Most of what is known about Moses Williams comes from an essay on the physiognotrace, the device used to help create silhouette portraits, written by Rembrandt Peale and published in The Crayon in 1857:

My father, coming from Maryland to the Quaker City, brought with him a family of slaves, whom he shortly after manumitted, except Moses, the eldest boy, who being too lazy to work, my father was compelled to keep in bondage, with the promise or rather threat that as soon as he should show himself capable of self-maintenance, he should be free; but capable or not, at eight and twenty he should give him his discharge--meanwhile he had to maintain the whole lazy and improvident family of blacks in their freedom. It is a curious fact, that until the age of 27, Moses was entirely worthless: but on the invention of the Physiognotrace, he took a fancy to amuse himself in cutting out the rejected profiles made by the machine, and soon acquired such dexterity and accuracy, that the machine was confided to his custody, with the privilege of retaining the fee for drawing and cutting. This soon became so profitable, that my father insisted upon giving him his freedom one year in advance. In a few years he had amassed a fund sufficient to buy a two story brick house, and actually married my father's white cook, who, during his bondage, would not permit him to eat at the same table with her.  (Rembrandt Peale, "The Physiognotrace," The Crayon, October 1857, pp. 307-308)

Before starting the physiognotrace business, Peale had Williams learn taxidermy. In 1799, Moses Williams and Mr. Fenton accompanied Peale on a trip to Cape May, where Peale instructed them in his method of preserving animals for exhibits. Williams, as a slave, had no choice in the matter. He also may have had no interest in becoming a taxidermist, but this would have been irrelevant to Peale. On a side note, during this trip, Peale became convinced that drinking liquor was preventing him from digesting meat; he subsequently prohibited either of his companions from drinking (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, pp. 269-270).

Peale acquired a physiognotrace machine in 1802, charging the public one penny to have a portrait cut out of black paper. The device was a hit, and Moses Williams, still enslaved, was put in charge of its operation. Williams was allowed to charge eight cents a portrait if the sitter opted to have him turn the rough image created by the machine into a more refined image. During his first year using the machine, in 1803, Williams created 8,880 portraits. (Sellers, p. 306)

A pair of profiles, possibly made by Moses Williams,
offered for sale at Brimfield Antiques Flea Market, May 2019

Peale considered cutting profiles (using the physiognotrace) to be suitable for his inferiors: white women and black men. He wrote that the "cuting of profiles might also be an easey and profitable employment for a Lady," although he also praised the French artist Angelica Kaufman for her skill at oil painting (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, rp. 319-320).

After his emancipation, Williams continued to work at Peale's museum creating profiles using the physiognotrace machine. Peale later expressed disappointment that Williams had not become wealthy with this line of work, blaming Williams for failing to make "a profitable use of his money," for owning only one house instead of several, dismissing the fact that Williams was able to support his family and own a home (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 321).

A search of Philadelphia City Directories and the U.S. Census reveals that Moses Williams moved into his own home at 10 Sterling Alley in 1812 or 1813. Starting in the late 1820s, Williams' business address was listed as 47 Arcade Street.

Williams continued working as a portrait cutter until about 1834, which may be the approximate date of his death. The city directories published after 1833 do not list Moses Williams and they do not list anyone living at 10 Sterling Alley until about 1842, when the address was home to Benjamin Atkins, who worked as a porter.

The 1820 and 1830 U.S. Censuses list Moses Williams as the head of a household of seven African Americans, including himself. Guessing by the approximate ages given in the two Census lists, Moses Williams was born sometime around 1776. The rest of his household, presumably his children, included four boys born between 1803 and 1821, and three girls born between 1804 and 1829. The Peale family's white cook, who was said to have married Williams, does not appear in the Williams household on the census records. The census did not list individual names until 1850, making it difficult to trace families.

Sterling Alley running vertically to the south of Branch Street in the Lower Delaware Ward
Sterling Alley is now North Orianna Street.
No. 125 is the German Reformed Church
No. 161 is a Synagogue
Detail of H.S. Tanner, Plan of the City of Philadelphia, 1830
Library of Congress Geography and Map Division

James

Charles Willson Peale was an amateur scientist interested in the natural world. In 1791, he published a brief essay about an enslaved mixed-race man named James, whose skin had gradually gone from dark brown to white over his lifetime. Today, we know this was likely vitiligo, a skin condition in which pigment-producing cells stop working. In 1791, it was a scientific mystery that challenged racist beliefs based on skin color.

Although we don't know exactly what Peale thought of this, we know he thought it was of enough general interest to go out of his way to paint a portrait of James. In a letter written October 30, 1791, Peale commented "...finding there a Negro who had gradually become a White man, I painted his Portrait for my Museum. this I thought as valuable an acquisition that I did not begrudge my trouble and expence in traveling so far...." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. I, p. 625).

Peale's portrait of James has been lost.



Nancy Duffield

In 1798, Peale hired Nancy Duffield, an African American woman, to take care of his children while they were in New York City, where Peale had been commissioned to paint portraits of the DePeyster family.

Peale referred to Duffield as "black girl to tend the Children" and "Nancy a black girl who came with them from Philada. to tend the children" in his autobiography (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 244 and 257).



Yarrow Mamout

Peale's portrait of Yarrow Mamout (Muhammed Yarro) has recently gained interest, thanks to new scholarship about Mamout, a Muslim Fulani who was brought to America as a slave in 1752 and later became a wealthy financier.

Portrait of Yarrow Mamout (c. 1736-1823) by Charles Willson Peale, 1819
Collection of Philadelphia Museum of Art

Peale chose to paint Mamout's portrait because he believed that he was "upwards of 100 years, and in very good health, active, and chearful.... worth the trouble of painting...." (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 419). Like James in 1791, Mamout was a curiosity, an object of scientific interest.

Peale's description of Mamout reflected his bigoted view of slavery. Mamout was "a faithful slave" whose owner promised him his freedom if he would complete an enormous job (making thousands of bricks for a new house). The slaveowner died before freeing Mamout, but the widow was "sufficiently generous" to honor the promise. Peale praised Mamout for his "industry and frugality" by which he was able to purchase a lot and build a house for himself, adding somewhat absently that "he was also a shareholder in the Georgetown bank" (Miller, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, p. 419).



An "African" Bow

In addition to being an artist, politician, and amateur scientist, Charles Willson Peale started the first museum in the United States, filling it with a wide variety of artifacts combining history, art, and science. Among the artifacts was a bow with a highly romanticized history.

According to Peale's promotional material, published in 1789, the bow originally belonged to an African prince named Jámbo who had been defeated in battle and sent by a British merchant to South Carolina, where he was sold into slavery. The somewhat implausible story claimed that Jámbo was allowed to keep his bow and quiver full of possibly-poisonous arrows, "the sole objects of his affections," due to his "placid countenance, and submissive manners."

In South Carolina, Jámbo was purchased by the Motte family. Peale's account is somewhat muddled, presumably to play up a patriotic storyline, stating that Jámbo was purchased by Colonel Motte, "who died a patriot." Jacob Motte appears to be the person referenced by Peale, but it was his brother Isaac who was the Colonel. Peale described Motte as "a humane Master" who cared for his slave (although not enough to free him!).

Peale deftly whitewashed the realities of slavery by writing that, after Jámbo's death, the bow and quiver were kept by the Motte family as a reminder of "a faithful slave" as they "gratefully remember the services, the fortitude and the fidelity of the trusty, the gentle Jámbo."

The African bow was exhibited not just to promote pro-slavery viewpoints. It also served as a tribute to and promotion of a new mythology for the United States. Jacob Motte's widow, Rebecca, became immortalized as a self-sacrificing patriot of the Revolutionary War, with Jámbo's bow and quiver at the center of her story.

Peale's narrative stated that the widow Motte had been driving from her home on the Congaree River by the British, who turned the house into their fort. The widow had fled to a nearby cottage, where the American troops found her and asked for her permission to destroy her house in order to defeat the British. The widow then presented Jámbo's bow and quiver, warning the Americans not to use the arrows, as she feared they were poisoned, but urging them to use the bow to shoot flaming arrows onto the roof of the house. The roof was accordingly set on fire and the British surrendered. In Peale's words, thanks to the "Misfortunes of a Prince, and the Heroism of a Lady," the bow which was "destined for the defence of Liberty in Africa, served the same cause in America."

John Blake White, Mrs. Motte Directing Generals Marion and Lee to Burn Her Mansion to Dislodge the British, 19th century, Collection of United States Senate.

The Independent Gazetteer, 30 Aug 1789, p. 3

The bow has long since been lost, so there is no way to tell where it really came from. Similarly, if Jámbo really existed, there is no way to know what his name actually was. Jámbo is a Swahili word, not a name, used as a greeting.

The painting of Mrs. Motte by John Blake White depicts the same scene that Peale wrote about, but the U.S. Senate Curator has a very different version of the story. According to the catalogue entry for the painting, the bow and its combustible arrows had belonged to Rebecca Motte's brother, Miles Brewton. According to the South Carolina Department of Archives and History, the arrows were "East Indian" (Southeast Asia).

Brewton was a slave trader and merchant who died at sea with his wife and children in 1775. Rebecca Motte inherited his Charleston mansion and his Mount Joseph plantation on the Congaree River. It was the Mount Joseph plantation house that the Americans set on fire during the Seige at Fort Motte.

The East Indies version of the story was introduced in 1855, when her grandson, C. C. Pinckney, wrote an account of the incident, specifying that the "arrows had been brought from the East Indies by a sea captain, and presented to his employer, Miles Brewton...." (The Camden (SC) Weekly Journal, 23 Oct 1855, p. 1). Peale's tale of an African prince was forgotten.

Assuming Pinckney's version of the story is true, why did Peale concoct the tale of an African prince? He had other items from the "East Indies" in his collection, so why decide to make the bow African? Whatever his reasons, the messaging of Peale's story is clear: an African prince is subservient to white Americans; slavery is okay if the slave master is "humane"; and African-Americans will be respected if they are submissive and loyal to whites.


Concluding Thoughts

Charles Willson Peale was born into a world in which slavery was taken for granted, in which owning slaves was a sign of high social standing, which Peale craved. Over the course of his life, he eventually learned to view slavery as a bad thing, but he never saw African Americans as equals to white men, and remained primarily concerned about the well-being of white slave owners.

The racism of Peale's generation became more deeply ingrained in the next generation, who had been raised to see African Americans as both inferior and a threat to white people. When discussing slavery and abolitionism, it is essential to also discuss racism and white supremacism in order to better understand this country's past and present.