In Pennsylvania, where the law in this respect was the most favourable, the parties wishing to give freedom to a slave were obliged to enter into a bond for the payment of thirty pounds currency, in case the said slave should become chargeable for maintenance.
In New Jersey the terms were far less favourable, as the estate of the owner remained liable to the consequences of misconduct in the slave, or even in his posterity.

In the southern parts of America manumission was not permitted but on terms amounting nearly to a prohibition.

But, notwithstanding these difficulties, the Quakers could not be deterred, as they became convinced of the unlawfulness of holding men in bondage, from doing that which they believed to be right.

Many liberated their slaves, whatever the consequences were; and some gave the most splendid example in doing it, not only by consenting, as others did, thus to give up their property, and to incur the penalties of manumission, but by calculating and giving what was due to them, over and above their food and clothing, for wages[A] from the beginning of their slavery to the day when their liberation commenced.

Thus manumission went on, some sacrificing more, and others less; some granting it sooner, and others later; till, in the year 1787[B], there was not a slave in the possession of an acknowledged Quaker.
[Footnote A: One of the brightest instances was that afforded by Warner Mifflin.