Helen Law depones, that about the year 1740, 1741, 1742, and since, several of the merchants of Aberdeen were in practice to inlist boys to be indented to carry over as servants to the plantations, viz. George Black, Alexander Gray, George and Andrew Gariochs, Mr Copland, James Abernethy, John Elphingston, all merchants in Aberdeen, and Captain Robert Ragg, shipmaster, and James Smith, saddler there; and that these several merchants have employed the deponent to furnish diet to boys and servants that had indented with them.

Depones, that about seventeen years past the month of May last, the deponent was employed to furnish diet to a parcel of boys and servants that were afterwards carried over from Aberdeen to the plantations by the said Captain Robert Ragg.

Depones, that there were nine of the young boys, whom she dieted at that time, that were never confined, but that several of the big boys and men, who were threatening to run off, that were afterwards confined in prison, or in the workhouse of Aberdeen, for some short time before Capt. Ragg sailed.

Depones, that among the boys that were never confined and dieted at her house there was one boy named Peter William, who would have been upwards of twelve years of age, a long stowie clever boy (by which she means a growthie boy).

Depones, that these boys came not at all at one time to diet with her; she began with some of them a little after Martinmas, and they were continuing to come to her till within a day or two before the sailing of the ship in May thereafter; and that their weekly board was twenty pence a week for each; and that the boy Peter William was some weeks dieted by her.

Depones, that there were four or five of those boarded with her that were delivered back by the merchants to their friends, on paying the charges they had cost the merchants. [1]

Depones, that for five weeks before the ship commanded by Captain Robert Ragg sailed from the harbour of Aberdeen, she lay at the key of Tory, and the boys were carried over to the ship: during which space the deponent went over and hired a house at Tory, in which she made their diet, and carried it to them on board the said ship during that space: and the deponent was informed that the reason why the ship lay at Tory, was, that she was keeled, and had no water to carry her over the bar.

And being further interrogated, if Peter Williamson, whom she now sees before her, is the identical person that dieted at the time aforesaid with her, then named Peter William?

Depones, that she cannot swear that he is the same person, for several of these boys returned from the plantations a few years after, whom she did not know again when she saw them, by reason of the change at that time.

Depones, that she had a son of her own that the year before had been carried over by James Abernethy, merchant in Aberdeen, whom she had asked back, and Mr Abernethy agreed at three different times to deliver him back to her; but he was resolute to go, and went accordingly. [2]

And being interrogated by the said Peter Williamson, whether or not the deponent was not always in use to ask leave of the keepers on board of the ship for the boys to come ashore any time when they lay at Tory, and such liberty was only obtained on the said Helen Law's obliging her to return them back on ship board?

Depones, that she did ask leave of the keepers on board of the ship for some of the said boys to come ashore with her, which she accordingly obtained, and did become bound to return them back to the ship, and on her verbal obligement or promise, she was allowed to bring some of them even over to the town of Aberdeen with her, and always returned them again on shipboard.

Depones, that she knows nothing about their parents consenting to their indentures, as some might have had parents and some of them none, and several of them were begging their bread through the town. But depones, that when any of their parents and relations claimed them, they were given them by the merchants on paying their charges.

1. This woman was a disastrous interview choice for the magistrates.

2. It is difficult to tell with the wording as it is, but her experience seems to have paralleled Peter’s father’s efforts to reclaim his son. The fact that she was put forth as a witness by the accused kidnappers and did not clearly support their cause, refusing to authorize her son’s indenture, suggests that perhaps she was unable—like many parents of bound children—to speak with her son about his agreement to be sold as a servant.

3. Overall Hellen Law provides one of the better, and rare accounts of an everyday woman’s lot of the period.