Building the White House

Over the course of the next eight years, enslaved laborers worked alongside white wage workers and craftsmen to produce raw materials and construct the President’s House. First, laborers cleared the land, built roads, wharves, and bridges, and felled trees to make way for construction. In December 1791, the federal government purchased a stone quarry belonging to the prominent Brent family on Wiggington’s Island in Stafford County, Virginia. Situated on a small tributary called Aquia Creek, several miles inland from the Potomac River, the quarry provided easy transportation of stone upriver to the building sites of the President’s House and Capitol Building.⁷ While the labor records for the quarry’s operation are incomplete, the records of the commissioners and their published advertisements suggest that enslaved people were later hired to cut and move this stone.⁸ Meanwhile, brick makers built kilns near the White House building site to produce bricks for the building’s interior structure, while axemen felled trees in Maryland and Virginia forests and shipped the lumber to Washington to be used as floor and roof timbers. As these building materials were produced and gathered, laborers constructed the building under the watchful eye of foremen and overseers. Throughout the construction, most unskilled laborers earned around $0.31 per day. Skilled craftsmen like stone cutters earned closer to $1.34 per day. While there were certainly some skilled enslaved laborers, most were probably considered unskilled and their owners were paid as such.⁹ Although the White House was not entirely complete, most construction had concluded when President John Adams moved into the residence on November 1, 1800. Click here to learn more about the households of President John Adams.

The decision to use enslaved labor in construction came naturally to the commissioners. All three of the original commissioners belonged to the landed gentry and owned enslaved people. Some of the later commissioners even hired out their own enslaved people to labor on the Capitol Building and the White House. For example, Gustavus Scott, who began serving in the role of commissioner in 1794, hired out two enslaved men named Bob and Kit, pocketing their wages for himself.¹⁰ In addition, the location of the new Federal City, carved out of two states that permitted slavery, Maryland and Virginia, made it convenient to hire out enslaved individuals from nearby landowners.

The first mention of slavery in the commissioners’ records appeared on April 13, 1792, when they resolved to hire, “good labouring negroes by the year, the masters cloathing them well and finding each a blanket, the commissioners finding them provisions and paying twenty one pounds a year.”¹¹ This course of action was not a new one, as many local slave owners had been hiring out their enslaved laborers to neighbors and businesses for some time. Owners collected a wage while continuing to provide clothing and some medical care. The commissioners typically provided workers with housing, two meals per day, and basic medical care. This arrangement allowed the nascent capital to reap the benefits of labor without bearing total responsibility for the workers’ general wellbeing. If an enslaved worker did not show up to work, the overseer simply docked the pay given to the owner.¹² Many of the documented enslaved laborers worked on both the White House and the Capitol Building. Because these two projects were so closely intertwined, it is often difficult to determine which laborers specifically worked on the White House between the procurement and production of resources and the shuttling of labor between sites.

According to meticulous research by historian Bob Arnebeck, over 200 known enslaved individuals labored on the White House and Capitol Building. You can access an index of the enslaved people currently identified here. However, there are likely many more enslaved people who worked on these federal building projects and remain unknown—their names are either lost to history or await future discovery. Determining anything more than an enslaved person’s first name is extraordinarily difficult. Their names are often denoted as the enslaved individual’s first name, their owner’s full or last name, and their owner’s signature on payrolls and timesheets from 1794 to 1800.¹³

One such timesheet contains the name “N Jacob George Fenwick.”¹⁴ The “N” in front of the name indicates that the worker was enslaved. Jacob was his first name and George Fenwick was his owner. With only a first name, it is difficult to learn more information about Jacob. However, there are some details that can be extracted from just a name, such as location and genealogical information about the slave owner. According to additional records, it appears George Fenwick also hired out another enslaved man—Orston—for federal construction projects.¹⁵ By using available genealogical information about Fenwick, it can be determined that he was born sometime before 1749 in St. Mary’s County, Maryland. He died in Washington, D.C. on October 26, 1811. According to the 1800 census, the year White House construction concluded, Fenwick lived with three enslaved individuals at his Georgetown home.¹⁶ Based on this information, it might appear that Fenwick did not own many enslaved individuals. His 1811 will, however, paints a different picture.

According to the will, George Fenwick left four city lots in the new city of Washington and significant tracts of land in Prince George’s County, Maryland, and St. Mary’s County, Maryland, to his sons. He also left his wife Margaret, “my dwelling plantation in St. Mary’s Co., called ‘Swamp Island’ and lots before mentioned; also half of all my negroes.”¹⁷ The direction to leave his wife “half” of his enslaved people suggests that he owned a considerable number of enslaved individuals. In addition, Fenwick stated that his land in Prince George’s County contained 287 acres, while his St. Mary’s County plantation consisted of 400 acres. The amount of acreage listed in this will suggests that Fenwick was involved in tobacco farming, one of the most lucrative crops in southern Maryland for the time period. The intensive nature of this crop typically required large amounts of enslaved labor to cultivate and harvest. Therefore, this information suggests that Fenwick was likely a wealthy plantation owner. The Jacob and Ortson listed in the commissioners’ records probably came from one of these locations in southern Maryland.

In fact, many slave owners who appear in the surviving documentation came from southern Maryland, specifically Prince George’s, Charles, St. Mary’s, and Calvert Counties. Each of these counties had convenient access to the Potomac River, making it easy to transport enslaved people upriver to work on federal construction projects like the White House. Some slave owners in northern Virginia also supplied enslaved labor to Washington, D.C. Because the capital city did not have a large population at the onset of the initial construction, the commissioners hired out enslaved people from a variety of slave owners in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. Since the commissioners were wealthy landowners themselves, it is likely they communicated with other landowners to create a network of enslaved labor. To further explore the movement of enslaved workers who worked on the White House and the Capitol Building, check out the map below. Through genealogical research, this map tracks the general location of the slave owners and helps visualize where the enslaved people traveled from to work in the District.

This map illustrates the movement of enslaved laborers who were sent to Washington, D.C. to build the White House and the Capitol Building. Because the capital did not have a large population at the onset of the initial construction, the commissioners hired out enslaved people from a variety of slave owners in Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. By conducting genealogical research, this map tracks the general location of the slave owners and where the enslaved people would have traveled from to work in the District. Although some locations are exact, most are estimated based on county and church and census records. This research is ongoing. If you have any additional information about anyone on this map, please reach out to SPN@whha.org.

While available genealogical information reveals more about the slave owner than the enslaved workers, sometimes it is possible to glean additional pieces of information about the lives of the enslaved. This is certainly the case with the Brent sisters: Eleanor, Elizabeth, Mary, Jane, and Teresa. These women each appear in records related to the commissioners’ proceedings. A receipt dated July 7, 1796, from a cobbler named Delphey lists each of the Brent sisters and the shoes made for their enslaved people. According to this receipt, Eleanor fitted Charles and David; Elizabeth fitted Gabe and Henry; Jane fitted Silvester; and Teresa fitted Nace for new shoes.¹⁸ This receipt provides an example of the terms of the short-term contract agreements for the enslaved. While the commissioners were responsible for providing payment to slave owners like the Brent sisters for the labor of their enslaved people, the slave owners were responsible for providing the clothing. The example of the Brent sisters shows how slave owners fulfilled the clothing obligation of their contract with the commissioners. Most enslaved people working on federal building projects probably did not have many items of clothing. Receiving a new pair of shoes in the midst of construction must have been incredibly valuable.

The lives of Charles, David, Gabe, Henry, Silvester, Nace, and Girard, another enslaved man owned by the fifth sister, Mary Brent, can be further fleshed out through the examination of a will left by the Brent sisters’ father, Robert Brent. Robert Brent was a wealthy landowner from Charles County, Maryland. When he died in 1790, his Brentfield estate in Charles County, “near the head of the Wicomico River” was passed on to his daughters for their own use until they married. He also listed the names of enslaved people left to each of his daughters. These names match up very closely to the names of the individuals that appear in the commissioners’ records as belonging to the Brent sisters. According to the will, Eleanor received “Negroes Davy, Charity, and Sall.” The Davy listed here is likely the same David that received new shoes six years later in 1796. The same is true for the remaining Brent sisters. Elizabeth inherited Gab (likely Gabe) and Henry (likely Harry); Mary inherited Gerrard (likely Girrard); Jane inherited Sylvester (likely Silvester); and Teresa inherited Nace. It is extraordinarily unusual to find documentation like this will confirming the ownership of enslaved individuals. It is likely that Robert Brent’s daughters hired out the enslaved people left to them in their father’s will to earn extra income in the wake of his death. This example is also unique because many people assume that all slave owners were men. Although they appear less frequently than men in records and their ownership is more difficult to trace, it is important to recognize that some women also actively owned enslaved people and cashed in on the building boom in Washington, D.C.¹⁹

According to ongoing research, there is only one example of an enslaved person with a listed last name: Catherine Green. Catherine Green is also unique because she is the only known enslaved woman listed in the commissioners' records. A short note in the records for December 2, 1795, states the following: “pay to Barton Ennis for use of Catherine Green negro hire.” Unfortunately, even with a last name, it is difficult to determine more information about either Catherine Green or her owner, Barton Ennis. The closest record comes from the 1800 census where a “Bartin Ennis” was listed living in Georgetown with one enslaved individual. It is possible this enslaved person was Catherine Green.²⁰

In some cases, enslaved people worked alongside their slave owners, like the enslaved laborers of Bennett Fenwick. Fenwick was a contractor who worked with the commissioners on various federal construction projects. Born sometime before 1765 in Charles County, Maryland, Fenwick died in the District of Columbia in 1801 and likely lived in the city during its construction.²¹ Surviving documentation indicates that he hired out enslaved men: Harry, Joe, John, Luke, and Tom. According to Arnebeck, the commissioners asked Fenwick in 1792 to take “up to six hands” to fix stone at the quarries, meaning that they covered stone with seashells for shipment to prevent the stone from absorbing moisture. He brought three of his enslaved workers—Harry, Joe, and Tom—with him on this particular occasion. It is also known that Fenwick was an enslaver. In 1800, he advertised to buy or hire ten or fifteen enslaved men and five boys between the ages of fourteen and seventeen. Fenwick either purchased or hired out these enslaved people to work with him, digging clay for the production of bricks and likely terminating their contracts or selling them when the work was complete.²²

Arnebeck also highlights another interesting note about Fenwick. At one point, another brick-making contractor named John Mitchell heard that Fenwick planned “to bring smallpox to the city” to inoculate members of his family against the disease. Soon, a group of enslaved laborers heard about the inoculation and approached the commissioners, asking to be inoculated against smallpox. The commissioners agreed and sent ten enslaved people to the doctor for the procedure, deducting the cost of the inoculation from their pay. One record for an enslaved man named Emmanuel indicates that the procedure cost his owner, Alexander Scott, seventeen shillings and six pence. Inoculation was a gamble for the commissioners. On one hand, it could prevent disease from spreading through the work force which otherwise would bring construction to a halt. On the other hand, inoculation usually gave the patient a mild form of the illness. The patient needed several days to recover, causing an unfortunate delay for the commissioners. That year, they promised slave owners that they would refrain from deducting wages for illness.²³

Like Fenwick, White House architect James Hoban also hired out his enslaved workers. Payrolls listing carpenters working on the President’s House from 1794 to 1797 list four enslaved individuals belonging to James Hoban: Ben, Daniel, Harry, and Peter. This record is one of the few instances of enslaved people working as craftsmen. Ben, Daniel, and Harry each made the same wage as white adolescents apprenticed to the carpenters while Peter earned a “shilling or two” less than the free white carpenters. While the arrangement was unusual, since Hoban held significant influence, the commissioners likely let him employ the people he wanted on the project. Later, in November 1797, the commissioners ordered “that after the expiration of the present month no Negro Carpenters or apprentices be hired at either of the public buildings.” By this point funds were tight, Hoban’s influence had waned, and the commissioners were likely upset to discover that some of Hoban’s enslaved carpenters were making a similar wage to the white apprentice carpenters. At any rate, Hoban did not protest the order.²⁴

During the final days of White House construction, labor forces—both enslaved and free—were drastically cut by the commissioners. By this point, the exterior was largely finished, and free white carpenters furiously worked to finish the interiors. The final known receipt for a payment to a slave owner occurred on June 7, 1800, when the commissioners paid $19.74 to a slave owner named Joseph Queen for the use of enslaved sawyers. Throughout construction, Queen hired out enslaved laborers named Anthony, Joseph, Moses, Tom, and Walter.²⁵ Although major White House construction concluded around the time President John Adams moved into the home, enslaved labor was used again for the rebuild after the British burned the White House on August 24, 1814.

Additional research into the lives of the enslaved individuals that built and rebuilt the White House is ongoing, as historians hope to learn more about the identities and life experiences of known and unknown enslaved people. If you have any additional information about any of the enslaved individuals listed here or any other enslaved people associated with White House construction, please reach out to the White House Historical Association’s Slavery in the President’s Neighborhood initiative at SPN@whha.org.

Thank you to Bob Arnebeck, author of Slave Labor in the Capital: Building Washington’s Iconic Federal Landmarks and Through a Fiery Trial: Building Washington 1790-1800. Explore Arnebeck's research further on his website here.