Washington DC - Genealogy Trails - James H. Dawson, Apprentice Indenture

Washington District of Columbia

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Apprentice Indenture Documents
from the District of Columbia Archives

Furnished by : John G. Sharp ©

Return to : Apprentice Indenture Documents List

APPRENTICESHIP No 1588 (Vol. V, 142) James H. Dawson} We the Subscribers Guardians of the poor of the City of to } Washington, now by the virtues of an act of the corporation Thomas Perkins } of said City entitled "an act authorizing the Guardians of the } poor, to bind out orphan children and others as apprentices" } Have bound out and placed and by these presents, do bind out and place, as an apprentice James Henry Dawson (col'd) age three years on the first day of November last unto Thomas Perkins until he, the said James Henry Dawson shall arrive at the age of twenty one years, during which time he shall well and truly behave, conduct and demean himself in every respect, as a good and faithful apprentice ought to do towards his said master and he the said Master shall furnish and provide for his said apprentice good and sufficient meat, drink, clothes, washing, lodging and the other requisite necessities during his apprenticeship to cause him to learn the trade of gardening, with the different branches thereof, and when free, to give him said apprentice a suit of clothes of the value of ten- In witness whereof, we have hereunto signed our names, and affixed our seals, this fifth day of January Eighteen hundred & thirty eight- Thos Perkins {SEAL} In the Presence of Leon Harbough {SEAL} Jno H. Riley Secy John B. Furgerson{SEAL} N. Young {SEAL} (Recorded Feby 6th 1838- ) John M. Clelland {SEAL} Edward W. Clark {SEAL}


APPRENTICESHIP No 1588 (Vol. V, 142) James H. Dawson} We the Subscribers Guardians of the poor of the City of to } Washington, now by the virtues of an act of the corporation Thomas Perkins } of said City entitled "an act authorizing the Guardians of the } poor, to bind out orphan children and others as apprentices" } Have bound out and placed and by these presents, do bind out and place, as an apprentice James Henry Dawson (col'd) age three years on the first day of November last unto Thomas Perkins until he, the said James Henry Dawson shall arrive at the age of twenty one years, during which time he shall well and truly behave, conduct and demean himself in every respect, as a good and faithful apprentice ought to do towards his said master and he the said Master shall furnish and provide for his said apprentice good and sufficient meat, drink, clothes, washing, lodging and the other requisite necessities during his apprenticeship to cause him to learn the trade of gardening, with the different branches thereof, and when free, to give him said apprentice a suit of clothes of the value of ten- In witness whereof, we have hereunto signed our names, and affixed our seals, this fifth day of January Eighteen hundred & thirty eight- Thos Perkins {SEAL} In the Presence of Leon Harbough {SEAL} Jno H. Riley Secy John B. Furgerson{SEAL} N. Young {SEAL} (Recorded Feby 6th 1838- ) John M. Clelland {SEAL} Edward W. Clark {SEAL}

Transcription:
This transcription of the Apprenticeship Indenture of James Henry Dawson is from copy of the holographic original from the District of Columbia Indentures of Apprenticeship Volume V, page 142. In transcribing this document, I have retained the original spelling, punctuation use of ampersands dashes and the strikeovers found in the original. Once again, I offer my thanks, to Mr. Ali Rahmaan, District of Columbia Archivist, for his help and assistance, in finding this 1838 indenture and graciously providing this copy for transcription. .
John G. Sharp August 14, 2008


Transcription: This transcription of the Apprenticeship Indenture of James Henry Dawson is from copy of the holographic original from the District of Columbia Indentures of Apprenticeship Volume V, page 142. In transcribing this document, I have retained the original spelling, punctuation use of ampersands dashes and the strikeovers found in the original. Once again, I offer my thanks, to Mr. Ali Rahmaan, District of Columbia Archivist, for his help and assistance, in finding this 1838 indenture and graciously providing this copy for transcription. . John G. Sharp August 14, 2008

Apprentice Indentures and Young Children,
the Apprenticeship of James Henry Dawson age three dated 5 January 1838.

How did a three year old child such as James Henry Dawson become an indentured servant? That our national past "is another country" is today readily accepted, indeed has become something of a cliché yet it must be stressed that for much the first century of the District of Columbia's existence for those who lived within its boundaries and worked in its shops and offices, their environment was often dramatically different then our present one. Throughout much of this time period for the thousands of labors and mechanics who toiled (slave and free), poverty and financial insecurity were not vague conditions Men and women were imprisoned for debt at the District jail, and slavery was a legal institution with slaves sold only blocks from the nations capital. The vast majority of adult population of early Washington, D.C. had only limited or no political rights. The values and attitudes of much of this time period were reflected in the conflict of beliefs and ideas as those citizens who advocated strict social hierarchy and deference to ones "betters" struggled with mechanics and workers who sought a more inclusive and just society. This 1838 apprentice indenture is one example of the large gulf between the antebellum era and the present. Specifically this document and others like it are illustrative of the dramatic changes in perception of how our society ought to care for and deal with the poor and the disadvantaged. The high rate of mortality and the frequent epidemics of cholera, small pox and other virulent diseases were hardest on poor children, and particularly so for African Americans who had the least in the way of financial resources to subsist following the early or sudden death of parents. At first the churches¹ of early Washington attempted to look after their impoverished parishioners but the need to find places for abandoned and orphan children quickly out grew their limited resources consequently, the traditional apprenticeship system was restructured to absorb the very young.
At its creation, the District of Columbia adopted much of the legal system of the state of Maryland including the Maryland Apprenticeship Laws of 1793 and 1794. These laws became the foundation of the apprentice system of the District of Columbia and remained so for nearly one hundred years. In a preamble, the drafters of the Maryland Apprenticeship Laws sought to explain their rationale:
"Whereas it has been found by experience, that poor children, orphans, and illegitimate children, for want of some efficient system have been left destitute of support and have become useless or depraved members of society: An whereas it would greatly conduce to the good of the public in general, and of such children in particular, that necessary instructions in trades and useful arts should be afforded them."

In 1820, the District of Columbia, gave explicit authority to bind out the poor of each ward:
"That from and after the passing of this act, it shall and may be lawful for the trustee of the poor in each ward or district, with the assistance and approbation of two justices of the peace, and they are hereby enjoined to put forth and bind out to respectable housekeepers, mechanics, or farmers, poor orphan children and the child or children of any drunkard, vagrant, or pauper, who appears to be bringing up their children in ignorance and vice sloth and idleness , or who suffer them to be employed in begging, or holding horses for hire, at public places; and the trustees and justices of the peace, or a majority of them , shall put forth and bind out such poor children; if a male child til he shall arrive at the age of twenty-one years and if a female, till she shall have arrived at the age of sixteen years." ²

This is the act referred to at the beginning of this 1838 indenture of James Henry Dawkins to Thomas Perkins, authorizing the Guardians of the Poor, to bind out orphan children such as Dawkins and others as apprentices.
One of the most accepted ideas of the early 19^th century was derived from English political economist and demographer, Thomas Malthus (1766-1834). Thomas Malthus's, popular Essay on the Principle of Population propounded the doctrine:
"...in all societies, even those that are most vicious, the tendency to a virtuous attachment is so strong that there is a constant effort towards an increase of population. This constant effort as constantly tends to subject the lower classes of the society to distress and to prevent any great permanent amelioration of their condition."³

Many people in Europe and America quickly became advocates for such Malthusian ideals as controlling "the surplus population" of the poor and their children. The 19^th century apprenticeship system was for many the epitome of what was possible in the way of social control since apprenticeships allowed society to remove the young and place them under stricter regimes and in conditions where they were subject to greater restrain. Most of the District's elite such as the five Justices of the Peace who signed the above indenture probably considered their long term indenturing of a three year old orphan child like James Henry Dawkins until he was 21 years of age a positive and necessary action. However, whereas most parents privately contracted with masters for craft apprenticeships which required that their children be given an education and taught a trade,⁴ poor children under court-ordered apprenticeships rarely received an education and could be assigned to such "trades" as housewifery, laborer and gardener, and seldom did such children qualify for anything but the most menial work.⁵
In essence, James H. Dawson's indenture and others like it were one sided contracts in which the Justices of the Peace for the District of Columbia, drew the indenture which placed Dawson and other children like him in virtual servitude until they reached twenty one years of age. Absent a parent or guardian to advocate for their interests, young children were very much at the mercy of the District Justices of the Peace. The Justices rationale was that by this indenture and others like it they were serving the best interests of their city. In the District of Columbia, there was no recorded opposition to such indentures of young children, indeed, from the evidence of preamble such actions were perceived as a positive social good and the five Justices simply carrying out their duties and responsibilities. Indentures like this one, provides us an opportunity to glimpse a very different worldview and some indication of how much our modern perceptions regarding how we care for the youngest and most vulnerable members of our society have changed. What then became of James Henry Dawkins? Other then the bare facts in this brief indenture, we know nothing more of his life and fate, for Dawkins name does not appear of the U.S. District of Columbia Census for 1840 or 1850, instead what has been preserved in this indenture is "the short and simple annals of the poor."⁶

Apprentice Indentures and Young Children, the Apprenticeship of James Henry Dawson age three dated 5 January 1838.
How did a three year old child such as James Henry Dawson become an indentured servant? That our national past "is another country" is today readily accepted, indeed has become something of a cliché yet it must be stressed that for much the first century of the District of Columbia's existence for those who lived within its boundaries and worked in its shops and offices, their environment was often dramatically different then our present one. Throughout much of this time period for the thousands of labors and mechanics who toiled (slave and free), poverty and financial insecurity were not vague conditions Men and women were imprisoned for debt at the District jail, and slavery was a legal institution with slaves sold only blocks from the nations capital. The vast majority of adult population of early Washington, D.C. had only limited or no political rights. The values and attitudes of much of this time period were reflected in the conflict of beliefs and ideas as those citizens who advocated strict social hierarchy and deference to ones "betters" struggled with mechanics and workers who sought a more inclusive and just society. This 1838 apprentice indenture is one example of the large gulf between the antebellum era and the present. Specifically this document and others like it are illustrative of the dramatic changes in perception of how our society ought to care for and deal with the poor and the disadvantaged. The high rate of mortality and the frequent epidemics of cholera, small pox and other virulent diseases were hardest on poor children, and particularly so for African Americans who had the least in the way of financial resources to subsist following the early or sudden death of parents. At first the churches¹ of early Washington attempted to look after their impoverished parishioners but the need to find places for abandoned and orphan children quickly out grew their limited resources consequently, the traditional apprenticeship system was restructured to absorb the very young. At its creation, the District of Columbia adopted much of the legal system of the state of Maryland including the Maryland Apprenticeship Laws of 1793 and 1794. These laws became the foundation of the apprentice system of the District of Columbia and remained so for nearly one hundred years. In a preamble, the drafters of the Maryland Apprenticeship Laws sought to explain their rationale: "Whereas it has been found by experience, that poor children, orphans, and illegitimate children, for want of some efficient system have been left destitute of support and have become useless or depraved members of society: An whereas it would greatly conduce to the good of the public in general, and of such children in particular, that necessary instructions in trades and useful arts should be afforded them." In 1820, the District of Columbia, gave explicit authority to bind out the poor of each ward: "That from and after the passing of this act, it shall and may be lawful for the trustee of the poor in each ward or district, with the assistance and approbation of two justices of the peace, and they are hereby enjoined to put forth and bind out to respectable housekeepers, mechanics, or farmers, poor orphan children and the child or children of any drunkard, vagrant, or pauper, who appears to be bringing up their children in ignorance and vice sloth and idleness , or who suffer them to be employed in begging, or holding horses for hire, at public places; and the trustees and justices of the peace, or a majority of them , shall put forth and bind out such poor children; if a male child til he shall arrive at the age of twenty-one years and if a female, till she shall have arrived at the age of sixteen years." ² This is the act referred to at the beginning of this 1838 indenture of James Henry Dawkins to Thomas Perkins, authorizing the Guardians of the Poor, to bind out orphan children such as Dawkins and others as apprentices. One of the most accepted ideas of the early 19^th century was derived from English political economist and demographer, Thomas Malthus (1766-1834). Thomas Malthus's, popular Essay on the Principle of Population propounded the doctrine: "...in all societies, even those that are most vicious, the tendency to a virtuous attachment is so strong that there is a constant effort towards an increase of population. This constant effort as constantly tends to subject the lower classes of the society to distress and to prevent any great permanent amelioration of their condition."³ Many people in Europe and America quickly became advocates for such Malthusian ideals as controlling "the surplus population" of the poor and their children. The 19^th century apprenticeship system was for many the epitome of what was possible in the way of social control since apprenticeships allowed society to remove the young and place them under stricter regimes and in conditions where they were subject to greater restrain. Most of the District's elite such as the five Justices of the Peace who signed the above indenture probably considered their long term indenturing of a three year old orphan child like James Henry Dawkins until he was 21 years of age a positive and necessary action. However, whereas most parents privately contracted with masters for craft apprenticeships which required that their children be given an education and taught a trade,⁴ poor children under court-ordered apprenticeships rarely received an education and could be assigned to such "trades" as housewifery, laborer and gardener, and seldom did such children qualify for anything but the most menial work.⁵ In essence, James H. Dawson's indenture and others like it were one sided contracts in which the Justices of the Peace for the District of Columbia, drew the indenture which placed Dawson and other children like him in virtual servitude until they reached twenty one years of age. Absent a parent or guardian to advocate for their interests, young children were very much at the mercy of the District Justices of the Peace. The Justices rationale was that by this indenture and others like it they were serving the best interests of their city. In the District of Columbia, there was no recorded opposition to such indentures of young children, indeed, from the evidence of preamble such actions were perceived as a positive social good and the five Justices simply carrying out their duties and responsibilities. Indentures like this one, provides us an opportunity to glimpse a very different worldview and some indication of how much our modern perceptions regarding how we care for the youngest and most vulnerable members of our society have changed. What then became of James Henry Dawkins? Other then the bare facts in this brief indenture, we know nothing more of his life and fate, for Dawkins name does not appear of the U.S. District of Columbia Census for 1840 or 1850, instead what has been preserved in this indenture is "the short and simple annals of the poor."⁶

Endnotes
¹See Washington A History of the Capital, 1800 - 1950 pp 101 -102, Constance McLaughlin Smith Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ 1976. Smith provides details of the efforts of churches and religious organization to take care of the orphans and abandoned children.
² The Maryland Apprenticeship Laws of 1793 and 1794 Laws of Maryland Chapter, XLV and Appendix B of Washington City's Apprenticeship Act of 1820 are found in the District of Columbia Indentures of Apprenticeship 1801 -1893 by Dorothy S. Provine, Heritage Books Bowie Maryland 1998 page 329 -333.
³An Essay on the Principle of Population as It Affects the Future Improvement of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and Other Writers Malthus, Thomas London: J. Johnson, 1798 Chapter II.
⁴ Those children who were fortunate enough to have a parent or guardian to advocate and protect their interests typically fared better. These indentures George Dement, Dennis Vermillion and John Moss are representative of such more favorable indentures.
http://www.genealogytrails.com/washdc/appind_dement_glm.html
http://www.genealogytrails.com/washdc/appind_vermillion_d.html
http://www.genealogytrails.com/washdc/appind_moss_j.html
Black families where ever possible attempted to provide for orphans within their own community see for example, the Apprentice Indenture of Thomas Dunlop to Moses Liverpool 1835
http://www.genealogytrails.com/washdc/appind_dunlop_t.html
⁵ Labor of Innocents: Forced Apprenticeship in North Carolina, 1715-1919. By Karin L. Zipf (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2005. xi plus 207 & Markets for Children in Early America A Political Economy of Pauper Apprenticeship, John E. Murray and Ruth Wallis Herndon The Journal of Economic history, Volume 62, Number 2 (June 2002) pp356-382
⁶ John Grey, Elegy in a Country Church Yard.

Return to :
Genealogy Trails - Washington D. C.