Comment by CamperBob2

17 days ago

One stumbling block is that OpenAI's best model (o1-pro) can't yet deal with image uploads (edit: I'm wrong, it works now... trying it.)

Gemini 2.0 Experimental Advanced says:

-------snip--------

This document is a petition filed in the Orphans Court of Baltimore County. Here's a breakdown of its content:

Petitioners: Neary Senters and his wife are petitioning the court.

Subject: The petition concerns a boy named James Gannon, who is identified as a pauper and has been bound (apprenticed) to them.

Issue: The petitioners claim that James Gannon is claimed by a certain Henry Haine of Baltimore City. They believe Haine is attempting to exploit the boy's labor. He obtained the boy through a seemingly valid indenture (apprenticeship contract) authorized by two Justices of the Peace in Baltimore City. However, the indenture references records in the Register of Wills' office in Baltimore City, suggesting the boy was already an indentured servant. The petitioners argue that a 1793 Maryland law (Chapter 45) regarding the binding of apprentices invalidates Haine's claim. They assert that the law requires parental consent for binding out a child, and there's no evidence of such consent in this case.

Request: The petitioners request the court to summon Henry Haine and the Justices of the Peace involved in creating the indenture. They also seek to have James Gannon and his parents (if living) appear before the court. Their ultimate goal is to have the indenture to Haine declared invalid, thus retaining custody and the labor of the boy.

Legal Argument: The core of their argument hinges on the 1793 Maryland law, which they believe was violated when James Gannon was bound to Henry Haine without parental consent. They are essentially challenging the legality of the indenture held by Haine.

In essence, this document reveals a dispute over the legal custody and labor of a young boy in 18th-century Baltimore. The petitioners are using a specific law about apprenticeship to argue against another individual's claim to the boy, highlighting the importance of legal procedures and parental rights in such matters during that time.

-------end snip--------

The prompt was simply "Please provide a detailed summary of this document" (I wasn't sure what else to ask.)

Is that closer to your wife's interpretation? I mean, I can't make head or tail of it...

9 comments

CamperBob2

Reply
neom  17 days ago

Ideas are kinda there, details (like names) are wrong wrong.

Feel like I should make this task my personal ASI benchmark lol :D

  • CamperBob2  17 days ago

    o1-pro just answered (it often takes a few minutes). Not sure if this is any better (is it?) but at least it is starting to admit when it isn't sure about something, rather than just spewing BS confidently. That seems like a genuine win.

    ---------snip--------

        From the handwriting and context, this appears to be a mid-19th-century petition submitted to the Orphans’ Court of Baltimore County. Below is a point‐by‐point summary of its content and purpose:

    Address and Purpose
        The document is formally addressed “To the Honorable Judges of the Orphans’ Court for Baltimore County.”
        It identifies itself as a petition—that is, a request for the Court’s action or permission under the relevant orphan or apprenticeship laws.

    Parties Involved
        The petitioners are (1) Henry Jenkins and (2) another individual whose name is difficult to read, but who appears to be the child’s mother (or at least a close guardian figure).
        They describe themselves as residents of Baltimore City and ask the Court’s intervention concerning a minor boy—also named “Henry” (it looks like “Henry Thomas,” though the middle/family name is partly obscured).

    Relationship to the Minor
        The petition states that the mother had this boy by a former husband, meaning the child is not the biological son of Henry Jenkins.
        The boy is described as being about fifteen (or so) years of age.
        The petitioners refer to him as an “orphan,” suggesting his father is deceased and that they (the petitioners) are seeking legal authority over him, or wish the court to confirm or formalize that authority.

    Legal Concern: Binding as an Apprentice
        A key theme is the binding of a minor as an apprentice under Maryland law. In early Baltimore history (and in many states at that time), orphans or children whose parents were unable to support them could be legally “bound” (apprenticed) so that the child would learn a trade and have financial support.
        The petition cites the Act of 1788, Chapter 45, which was one of Maryland’s statutes governing apprenticeships—how they are created, what formalities must be met, and how the Orphans’ Court is involved.

    Specifics of the Request
        The petitioners believe there is either a gap or question about whether they have the legal right to apprentice the boy. They are asking the Orphans’ Court to recognize or approve the arrangement.
        They indicate that the mother (as the surviving parent) and Henry Jenkins (presumably the stepfather or the mother’s new husband) want to place the boy under an apprenticeship, possibly so he can learn a trade and be supported until he reaches the age of majority.

    References to Official Records
        The document mentions the Register of Wills and/or Deeds in Baltimore City, implying that they have looked into or recorded something about the child’s status.
        They point out that the legal forms required for binding a child as an apprentice often must be recorded with an official clerk or the Orphans’ Court, and they want to ensure everything is in proper order.

    Legal Justification
        The petitioners note that under the relevant laws, it “is lawful to bind out any child” whose parents cannot fully support them, or when the father is deceased.
        They appear to lay out the reasons why the boy qualifies for such an arrangement (i.e., he is fatherless and his mother/stepfather lack the resources to maintain him or want to formalize his situation).

    Request for Court Action
        Ultimately, they are asking the Court to review the circumstances and grant them permission (or confirm their right) to bind the boy as an apprentice.
        They emphasize that the law requires the Orphans’ Court to oversee such arrangements to protect the minor’s welfare and ensure the terms are fair.

    Overall Significance:
       This document is a formal petition under Maryland’s 18th- and 19th-century apprenticeship laws. It centers on a minor boy (about fifteen years old), the remarriage of his mother, and the need to have the Orphans’ Court recognize or approve an apprenticeship arrangement. The purpose is to comply with the legal requirements of binding a minor so that he can be taught a trade and maintained financially until adulthood.

    ---------end snip--------

    • neom  17 days ago

      She said it's around 60% there, but not helpful for her specifically as her area of research is on the families of the slave trade, and so in the document, that is actually the only thing that really matters to her. Names and places (she spends A LOT of time tracking transfer of slaves through states) - I guess I should be honest that I'm goalpost moving a bit from my original original post, it can work through some 18th english century text, but generally struggles where it matters, the details.

      4 replies →