Margaret Hull
Margaret Hull was baptized on February 8, 1761. She was the fifth child of Amos Hull and Bathsheba Hull, though no mother was listed for any of the Hull children in church records. She was the second Hull child to be named Margaret. In the 18th century, it was a common for families who lost a child to give the next child of the same sex the same name as the child who had passed away (Hull genealogy, Judd manuscript).
After Bathsheba Hull was forced from her home, Margaret was the only child who remained in Northampton. Her three brothers were separated from the family during this period. We do not know if Bathsheba was able to keep Margaret (who would have been about four years old at the time) with her, or if Margaret was placed (willingly or not) in another Northampton home.
Margaret Hull’s stepfather, Philemon Lee, was warned out of Northampton, and sent to jail in Springfield in 1768. Hull and her mother went to Springfield themselves, but then were warned out of Springfield on May 17, 1768. The document referred to Margaret and her mother as “transient negroes” who were from Northampton. Margaret would have had resident status in Northampton, since she was born there. At this point, she would have been about seven years old.
After they were warned out of Springfield, Margaret Hull went with her mother to Stockbridge. There, she would have been reunited with her brother Agrippa.
Margaret Hull married Cesar Freeman on March 24, 1783, in Great Barrington, MA (Great Barrington Marriages, p. 33). Freeman appears to have been free at the time of their marriage, but we do not know if he was born free or was formerly enslaved.
In the 1790s, the couple lived in Stockbridge, MA. The 1790 census listed Cesar Freeman’s household as having five persons in it, but since they were listed under the “all other persons” category (the category for non-white people who were not enslaved), there is no indication of the sex or age of these people. We assume one was Margaret, and the other three could be three children, but could also be boarders, friends, or other family members. They are just a few entries below Agrippa Hull, which, depending on how the census was conducted, could mean that they lived near each other.
In October 1791, Agrippa Hull filed a claim against Cesar Freeman. The claim stated that Hull was supporting Bathsheba Hull in her old age on his own and Freeman would not contribute. A section reads: “The said Ceasar [sic] is able to contribute to the Support and comfortable subsistance [sic] of the said Bersheba [sic], but doth refuse to contribute anything thereto – And that in consequence thereof the sd Agrippa hath alone for many years past Supported & maintained his sd Mother to his great injury: wherefore the said Agrippa prays this Court that the sd Ceasar [sic] may be oblidged [sic] to do justice…”
This case is just a snapshot of the lives of Margaret and her family, so although it is suggestive, we don’t know fully what the situation was. We can see clearly that at this point Cesar Freeman was unwilling to support Bathsheba Hull, but we cannot see whether he, his wife, or both of them were truly driving this decision. Given the patriarchal structure of late-18th-century society, even if Margaret wanted to support her mother, her husband would probably have had the final say in financial matters. The alternative is that the relationship between Margaret and her mother had not been close or was strained at this time.
In January 1792, the court records state that both Agrippa Hull and Cesar Freeman had been called to court three times and neither had appeared, and that the case was dropped (Berkshire Court of Common Pleas, 11:324, no. 195). Again, we do not know the circumstances behind this filing, but it could be that the family had worked out the matter internally, that the Freemans had moved and were unreachable, or that Bathsheba had passed away.