Philadelphia Ad to Place Two Infant Boys, 1752

Text of advertisement

A Farmer of Reputation, who is willing to take two Negro Boys about a month old, to Nurse, or board, for a Term of Years, is desired to Enquire of the Printer.

Notes

The ad above is taken from William Bradford's Pennsylvania Journal and Weekly Advertiser, March 17, 1752 edition. This was the second week that the ad appeared. An ad with nearly identical wording also appeared on March 10, 1752 in Benjamin Franklin's Pennsylvania Gazette. As both newspapers published the advertisement simultaneously and with nearly identical wording, it seems probable that the text was given to them for publication by a third party looking to place the children, in much the same way that an enslaver would submit a pre-written escape notice or a sale ad to multiple newspapers.

It seems unlikely that both Franklin and Bradford simply agreed to publish an appeal out of humane motives, having learned that there were two infants in need of care. Although they would later develop a bitter enmity toward each other, at this time they were simply competitors. All advertisements brought in badly needed revenue, and while some notices might occasionally be published for the public good, this particular ad, although a humane appeal on the surface, had an underlying monetary component. A farmer taking them in, though he would endure the expense of raising two helpless infant boys, would, in return, gain "a Term of Years" of servitude from them. That phrase sounds innocent, but the term for orphans and poor children bound out to third parties by authorities was typically until age 21 for boys.

The phrase "to Nurse, or board," denotes part of what was actually a business agreement. At one month of age, the boys would certainly require the attendance of a wetnurse to breastfeed them for a considerable length of time, but the term "to nurse" also meant to feed, clean, and generally care for. Boarding included meals, a bed, adequate clothing and medical care when necessary. This is probably why the advertiser was seeking a "Farmer of Reputation," or someone wealthy enough to be able to provide a wetnurse and or a drynurse, daily care, clothing and supervision, and all the necessities for the first few years of the boys' lives while getting no labor in return. In other words they needed a farmer with a significant number of female enslaved or indentured laborers who could take care of the boys.

But also, a person who owned a farm would see the quickest return on his investment since children as young as two years old can perform simple barnyard, farm and farmhouse chores, unlike a craftsman or artisan who would not be able to find enough meaningful work for very young children to make the arrangement worthwhile.

Not stated in the advertisement is an explanation of why the two boys, at one month of age, needed care. What had become of their mother? There are several possibilities, none of them positive. She may have died in childbirth or of disease, or was physically, emotionally or mentally incapacitated. She may have been imprisoned, consigned to the alms house or the workhouse, or she may have abandoned them. Philadelphia's Alms House was in operation and accepting inmates by 1732. Inmates were required to perform productive work to help defray the expense of keeping them. Very young children that were sent to the alms house, whether as orphans or with a parent, were unable to perform productive labor, so were bound out, as noted above.

So it seem likely these two month-old boys, possibly twins, were being bound out by someone who had control over them. There is no mention of an Orphan's Court proceeding, as would have typically been required were they being consigned from the Alms House. The fate of their mother is a mystery, but it seems likely that she was a free Black woman. Children inherited the bound status of their mother. Had she been an enslaved woman, they too would have been considered slaves for life, even at one month old, and the advertisement would logically have indicated so. We do know that they were not placed with a farmer immediately. The advertisements continued in Franklin's Pennsylvania Gazette for a few weeks, but continued in Bradford's Pennsylvania Journal for four months, the last ad appearing in the June 25, 1752 edition. Curiously, the wording remained the same through the entire run, despite the fact that they would have been about five months old by the time the last ad was published.

We don't know if they were ever taken in by a "farmer of reputation." The possibilitiy exists that the boys, at five months somewhat less helpless and possibly no longer in need of a wetnurse, were sold or bound out to any household that would take them, hopefully together, but possibly separately to different households. What is certain is that they were victims of a system that valued the helpless and innocent as commodities, and not as human beings.

Source

The Pennsylvania Journal or Weekly Advertiser, 10 March 1752; The Pennsylvania Gazette, 10 March 1752.