Black and white images are scans of documents I photocopied at the National Archives in 1989 when I did research for my book Through a Fiery Trial: Building Washington 1790-1800. I found the color images on the web that were published by the National Archives, US Capitol Historical Society or White House Historical Association in order to show the use of slave labor. This summer while writing Slave Labor in the Capital: Building Washington's Iconic Federal Landmarks I tried to photograph more payrolls at the Archives but archivists had no record of where they were. I place several of these documents in context on my blog Slave Labor in the Capital. However, most of the payrolls here and in the Archives chronicle the work of free laborers. Even taken as a whole these payrolls should not be used to compare the contributions of free and slave labor because the slave laborers hired by the year for a total wage going to their masters of between $60 to $72 were not on payrolls. These payrolls do give a fair gauge of absence of skilled slaves. I apologize for poor quality of many images, the notes I made on the photocopies, the cropping I did to save money at the photocopying machine, etc. I have neither funding, proper equipment nor access to the originals. However, I don't want that. I am doing this in attempt to inspire others who are well funded, well equipped and with full access to preserve and share these documents.
Bob Arnebeck

Labels

Saturday, February 7, 2015

Payroll for laborers June 1795

The primary job of laborers in 1795 was tending masons. That year, rather then continue paying days wages to masons, the commissioners made piece-work contracts with a crew of masons on condition that the commissioners provide laborers. Cornelius McDermot Roe, the Irish mason in charge, had been an indentured servant for George Washington at Mount Vernon, and preferred using slave laborers. So I think most of the slaves the commissioners hired that year were assigned to the piece-work masons, for whom no payrolls were kept or at least I haven't found them, which explains why there are so few hired slave laborers on the lists of laborers kept in 1795.


No comments:

Post a Comment