New Jersey: 3rd most popular state to leave

[MarkBNJ]

Given that there is nobody alive who committed an offense, and nobody alive who was the victim of one, I think the whole thing is rather silly, personally.

I also think the idea that an apology for slavery is required of a northern state that sent 88,000 men to battle in the war that ended it goes a little beyond silly. But that's just my opinion. If it made someone feel good I guess there's no harm in it.

 

[pinelandpaddler]

Jerseyman and Mark,

Thanks for your reasoned responses. I was just wondering about thisisnascar's "going to the crapper" comment, but I will heed Guy's advice.

 

[this_is_nascar]

Jerseyman and Mark,

Thanks for your reasoned responses. I was just wondering about thisisnascar's "going to the crapper" comment, but I will heed Guy's advice.

I too will will heed Guy's advice for one reason and one reason only. It's his board, one of which I'm a member of. It's no difference than me being in his house and if I was in his house, I'd have to respect his wishes or leave. Since I enjoy it here too much, I'd rather not leave, so instead I'll drop the subject and leave it at that. I can understand Guy's concern, based on the topic and will respect that, since I've seen how topics like this just go.

That particular item in my list aside, I still think NJ continues to go down hill. Will I ever leave? Who's to say. I've been in NJ for all my 46 years and have family ties in the area.

 

[Ben Ruset]

I've been fortunate to travel around a fair amount with past jobs that I've had. I've been lucky enough to drive around Colorado looking for Ghost Towns, gotten very drunk in a bar in Dallas with complete strangers, driven across the Golden Gate Bridge in a Mustang Convertable, etc.

One of the things that I think about when I visit these places is "would I be able to live here?" With the exception of Colorado, and rural Colorado at that, I have yet to find a place that I think would equal what I have in New Jersey.

I live about 10 minutes from the beach. I live about 30 minutes from the Pine Barrens. I can be in New York City, barring traffic, in an hour and a half. I live in a town that consistently gets voted one of the safest places to live. I live one county down from a place (Monmouth County) that consistently gets rated as one of the best places to live.

New Jersey is great despite the people in Trenton lousing it up. Lets hope that they start putting things in place to fix it. I don't know if that will ever happen in my lifetime, and for sure it's going to get harder and more expensive to live here. I hope to live here (either in the Jersey Shore, the Pine Barrens, or somewhere up in the North-West part of the state) for the rest of my life.

I love New Jersey.

 

[Enoch]

Given that there is nobody alive who committed an offense, and nobody alive who was the victim of one, I think the whole thing is rather silly, personally.

I also think the idea that an apology for slavery is required of a northern state that sent 88,000 men to battle in the war that ended it goes a little beyond silly. But that's just my opinion. If it made someone feel good I guess there's no harm in it.

I’m a direct lineal descendent of a member of the 3rd New Jersey, part of the Jersey brigade during the American Civil War. My direct ancestor had two brothers also members in Jersey regiments, one of whom was killed at Gettysburg (as a member of the 12th New Jersey). I’ve other ancestors who were veterans of Pennsylvanian and Iowan regiments.

In the case of reparations being paid for slavery, I wonder if those of us who can prove descent from war veterans ought to be paid a bonus of some sort, considering the price paid by our ancestors in fighting for the Union? The pay in those days was pretty horrible, as were the conditions. My ancestors were certainly not compensated fairly by the government for the hardships of campaigning with the Army of the Potomac through several years of war. And the leadership of that army could be considered criminally negligent in many cases.

I don’t want to go off on a tangent on this thread either – but I share Jerseyman’s concern over the apology in relation to reparations. My opinion on the question of the apology itself is rather neutral, given the enormous wrong of slavery. But burdening the current generation with somehow trying to make reparations for the past is absurd. Many of our ancestors got screwed by the government; many of them performed nobly despite that.

To the main point of the thread – I like living in this state as well. New Jersey has a lot more to offer than what is seen from the Turnpike or Parkway, which seems to be how we’ve gotten the reputation we have as a state. If someone would like to leave for the south and south west – don’t let the door hit you in the ass….

 

[Stu]

somewhere up in the North-West part of the state

I love it up around the Water Gap. That was one place I was initially looking at, but it's still out of my range for now. Maybe in a few years.

 

[omega]

Enoch,

how about the opposite, those who's family didn't even arrive on these shores until well after slavery was abolished?

I love NJ too, born and raised here, but I fear it will soon be too expensive for my children to create a life for themselves here. I lived in NEPA for a while, and have visited other areas, but I feel a comfort having the beach so close, not that we ever go, but just it's being there is a comfort. Akin to someone who grew up in the mountains and feels comfort, nestled in a valley. I fear, not having the beach nearby but food on the table and a roof over our heads may prevail.

 

[Stu]

I feel a comfort having the beach so close, not that we ever go, but just it's being there is a comfort.

That's how I feel too. Seaside was always 3 miles away from me for 25 years. I didn't go very much but I still miss it. Lately I really, really miss Berkeley Island and especially Ocean Gate's boardwalk.
I've only ever known bays & oceans; this whole lake & stream thing's taking some getting used to, as is this birch instead of pine deal.

 

[Enoch]

Enoch,

how about the opposite, those who's family didn't even arrive on these shores until well after slavery was abolished?

omega -

I think that's just the point - trying to make reparations for wrongs done generations ago, by making the living pay other living individuals - brings up a rats nest of additional arguments. As you point out - many people in the US had no ancestors alive in the country to participate in the wrong. Additionally, many people living at that time actually opposed slavery or worked in the cause to abolish it.

Some people living now had some ancestors living in the US at that time, and some not yet here. And some might have been slaveholders or benefited from the system whereas other did not directly benefit.

And if you are going to make reparations for slavery, why stop there? Why not try to root out every wrong committed in the past and right it in the present? I don't so much oppose reparations for slavery, as I oppose the idea of paying reparations for any historical wrong. I'm not saying that is true of reparations paid to the living who actually suffered such wrongs. Only of the idea of reparations paid for wrongs done by prior generations.

 

[Ariadne]

Leaving Las Vegas, er, I mean: New Jersey.

I, for one, moved out of New Jersey for purely practical reasons; my move to Philadelphia has allowed me to get rid of my car and streamline my life. I am now able to walk to work, all of my entertainment, significant other, etc... I certainly don't regret my move, in fact, I wish I'd done it years ago.

That being said: I'll always be a Jersey girl. And, if the time comes that I should marry and (perhaps) have children, I'd likely move back to the old stomping grounds.

 

[omega]

enoch,

we are agreed, my question was rhetorical in nature.

 

[Jerseyman]

Folks:

On an individual citizenry level, having the State of New Jersey issue an apology for slavery would be pointless and ineffective. However, the history of lawmaking and slavery in New Jersey is one of inaction, loopholes, and accommodation. In the years prior to the American War for Independence, the state’s Colonial Assembly did little to effect substantive change in relationship to slavery. In point of fact, the Assembly approved an act in 1713 that erected a barrier to slave manumission. While this act served as the law of the land for the ensuing 75 years, the colonial legislators, at the behest of the Quakers, amended the act in 1769 and established a £200 freedom bond, payable at the rate of £20 per annum.

Society of Friends’ members continued applying pressure to the lawmakers. Within three years of the official end to the American War for Independence, the now State Assembly enacted legislation to end the importation of slaves into New Jersey, although this only applied to Blacks arriving from Africa. Many historians consider the 1804 act, allowing for the gradual abolition of slavery, a landmark piece of legislation, although it contained loopholes and an accommodation to those seeking the continuation of slavery for their own gain. State lawmakers continued marching forward with acts passed in 1812, 1818, and 1820, but at no time did these legislators approve an act abolishing slavery and bringing it to abrupt and final end. The 1846 act appeared to abolish slavery on the surface, but it was all about semantics because the law declared former slaves as apprentices for life and their lives were still every bit as regulated as “apprentices” as when they were enslaved. The law declared all children born to these “apprentices” as free, but the lawmakers again fell way short of banning all slavery.

Following the Civil War, the United States Congress dispatched the Constitutional 13th Amendment to the states for ratification. How did New Jersey’s lawmakers perform with this opportunity to finally put a stake in slavery? Poorly, to say the least: the amendment achieved ratification WITHOUT New Jersey’s approval. The original vote in the halls of New Jersey’s State House—held on 16 March 1865—went down to defeat and the state did not approve the amendment until 23 January 1866. Similar to New Jersey, Texas did not approved the act in February 1870; Delaware in February 1901; Kentucky March 1976; and Mississippi March 1995.

So, while we, as current-day state citizens, have no valid reason to apologize as individuals, the historic entity known as the New Jersey Legislature had failed repeatedly over the centuries to respond to all the reasonable entreaties to end one man owning another man as property, and, as a perpetual lawmaking body, probably should apologize for their past sins—but, of course, without using my tax money to do so.

Best regards,
Jerseyman

 

[Enoch]

Folks:
So, while we, as current-day state citizens, have no valid reason to apologize as individuals, the historic entity known as the New Jersey Legislature had failed repeatedly over the centuries to respond to all the reasonable entreaties to end one man owning another man as property, and, as a perpetual lawmaking body, probably should apologize for their past sins—but, of course, without using my tax money to do so.

Thanks for the background information, and I think the distinction you draw here between the "historical entity known as the New Jersey Legislature" and all of us living taxpayers is very well put.

 

[MarkBNJ]

State lawmakers continued marching forward with acts passed in 1812, 1818, and 1820, but at no time did these legislators approve an act abolishing slavery and bringing it to abrupt and final end. The 1846 act appeared to abolish slavery on the surface, but it was all about semantics because the law declared former slaves as apprentices for life and their lives were still every bit as regulated as “apprentices” as when they were enslaved. The law declared all children born to these “apprentices” as free, but the lawmakers again fell way short of banning all slavery.

Looking back over time you can view these as the fits and starts with which any great transformation occurs. One step forward, and two back; that kind of thing. Is the lack of faster, more deliberate action something to be apologetic for? In an abstract historical sense, certainly. We can always wish that we as a race had not thought a certain way, or acted a certain way, a century or two centuries ago. And I think we should bear in mind that these legislative failures largely took place before the war. Morally, with respect to the obligations of the state as an entity, I have to feel the war discharged them. New Jersey never had that many slaves, and probably sent more men to the war than the total number of slaves who ever lived here.

Many people have come to see the U.S. as a major slave power, when in fact what we were was a bit-player in a long European tragedy. About 500k slaves were imported into the U.S. throughout the history of the trade, versus approximately 10,000,000 imported elsewhere in the Americas, and usually into much worse conditions.

I know Jerseyman doesn't need a lecture on these topics . But I feel it is an important perspective.

 

[Enoch]

Mark - generally, I'm in agreement with what you've written. I don't know if what I'm going to post will add anything to the discussion, but I'll throw it out here anyway.

Your post on the Old Union Church in Long Valley got me thinking about Beck's story of New England crossroads and the Old Stone Church and cemetery there. It's a place I haven't yet visited, and I decided I should take a quick trip there in the next few weeks.

The place has a double interest to me - first, I have a general interest in south Jersey history and the places discussed by Beck. New England crossroads also has a personal interest for me; I picked my screen name "Enoch" during a time when I was researching some of my family that emigrated from England to Connecticut in the 17th century, and that is the name of one of those early ancestors. He had a nephew, Henry Buck, who left Connecticut and was among the early settlers in Fairfield.

In doing a little "research" in preparation for the trip (I put "research" in quotes because it didn't go much beyond the internet), I found that Henry died in 1726, and according to his will, owned a farm of 550 acres south of Cohansey Creek. Among his personal property, mention is made of 4 Negro slaves.

In and of themselves, these facts are not very remarkable, I know. It just hit me as ironic that in doing a little background research on a trip to a cemetery, I would so easily come across a slaveholder in West Jersey.

Again, I am not stating this as an argument for or against the "apology". But popping up at the time it did, gave me a little different perspective on the matter.

 

[Jerseyman]

Looking back over time you can view these as the fits and starts with which any great transformation occurs. One step forward, and two back; that kind of thing. Is the lack of faster, more deliberate action something to be apologetic for? In an abstract historical sense, certainly. We can always wish that we as a race had not thought a certain way, or acted a certain way, a century or two centuries ago. And I think we should bear in mind that these legislative failures largely took place before the war. Morally, with respect to the obligations of the state as an entity, I have to feel the war discharged them. New Jersey never had that many slaves, and probably sent more men to the war than the total number of slaves who ever lived here.

Many people have come to see the U.S. as a major slave power, when in fact what we were was a bit-player in a long European tragedy. About 500k slaves were imported into the U.S. throughout the history of the trade, versus approximately 10,000,000 imported elsewhere in the Americas, and usually into much worse conditions.

I know Jerseyman doesn't need a lecture on these topics . But I feel it is an important perspective.

Mark:

You are correct with your analysis of the greater context for slavery in New Jersey and I am glad you added your post to this thread. In my posting, I intended to discuss only the issue of the apology and what the background for that apology could be. I can agree with your point about the war canceling the need for an apology, but only as far as the citizenry is concerned. For the legislative part, perhaps they still need to make an apology, particularly since even after the war, they initially failed to do the right thing regarding the 13th Amendment.

In any case, thank you for providing a framework on which to hang the larger discussion.

Best regards,
Jerseyman

 

[MarkBNJ]

For the legislative part, perhaps they still need to make an apology, particularly since even after the war, they initially failed to do the right thing regarding the 13th Amendment.

I agree: if there is anything the state as an entity should be apologetic about, it is our continued moral reticence during reconstruction.

In and of themselves, these facts are not very remarkable, I know. It just hit me as ironic that in doing a little background research on a trip to a cemetery, I would so easily come across a slaveholder in West Jersey.

Enoch, I think you may in fact have run into the prototypical New Jersey slaveholder. We never really had the vast plantations that required tremendous manpower to operate. The south became completely dependent on slave labor to maintain an aristocratic lifestyle for the top families, but that didn't happen in the north.