“Pressure of the times.” “Scarcity of money.” “Scarcity of work.” “Persistence of creditors.” “Family sickness.” “Low wages.” “Unemployment.” “Bought high and had to sell low.” Are these familiar phrases heard in the last couple of years? Yes. But they are also verbatim phrases found in petitions for insolvency to the Cumberland County courts from 1750-1860 by debtors who found themselves arrested on a judgment for debt.
Credit
In addition to being legal documents, insolvent debtor petitions are invaluable resources for historical research. In the big picture, they collectively reflect the role of credit and debt as a key factor that enabled economic growth not only in Cumberland County, but also in colonial and early America. Credit still remains a central factor for America’s economic growth today.
Coupled with the scarcity of hard money and the belief that people were basically honest and would pay when they could, credit was used by everyday people for day-to-day needs and for investment. Instead of credit card, one would “charge it” at a store and their name and the amount they owed was placed in “book accounts.” Others signed a promissory note to receive a cash loan. Unfortunately, just as in recent times, many people met with misfortunes, were sued by creditors, and, from the county’s founding in 1750 to the mid-1800s, ended up in jail. The amount of debt resulting in a debtor’s imprisonment ranged from small amounts to considerable sums. In 1809, Mr. John Pollock, a miller, was successfully sued and jailed for $1 by Mary Black. Although most insolvent debtor suits in Cumberland County were under $200, in 1812, Mr. George Connor, a wagon maker, was successfully sued and jailed for $1,000 and Jacob Fought, a blacksmith, was sued and jailed for $500 in 1819.
Questionable Treatment
Collectively, the petitions also document a change in attitude by Pennsylvanians, as well as all Americans, towards debtors. The change reflects that humanitarian movement of the early 1800s. As in England, Americans began to view the system of jailing debtors as unfair, counter-productive for society’s economic growth, and not the best use of taxes. Questions were raised.
1. How could debtors work to pay off their debts if they were in jail? And their debts would increase unless some generous relative or friend paid their room and board and court costs.
2. How could debtors help the economy grow, if they were in jail and not working?
3. Who would provide for a debtor’s family if he was in jail? The taxpayer?
4. Was it fair for debtors who fell on misfortune, and not through any illegal activities, to pay for jail room and board, while convicted prisoners didn’t? Should they be treated the same?
Carlisle millwright Alexander P. Grimes conveyed similar concerns in his petition in 1819. “…not being able to procure bail had to lay in the jail of this County altogether deprived of the means of making a living or procuring money to pay [the debt]…” Mr. Grimes later became a notorious Cumberland County criminal and in 1826 was sent to Eastern State Penitentiary sentences to seven years of hard labor for larceny.
On July 20, 1842, the Pennsylvania legislature passed an act abolishing imprisonment for debt. Only fourteen insolvent debtor petitions have been found after 1842. The Act also addressed the punishment of fraudulent debtors.
The Panic of 1819 was the first great depression in the U.S. In this bicentennial year, the article will first present background about the event. It will then attempt to answer four questions related to the Panic of 1819 and Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.