Fugitive Slaves Part 14

[Footnote 285: Ibid., 1857, p. 38.]

[Footnote 286: Acts and Resolves of New Hampshire, 1857, p. 1876.]

[Footnote 287: Acts and Resolves of Vermont, 1840, p. 13.]

[Footnote 288: Laws of Vermont, 1843, p. 11.]

[Footnote 289: Ibid., 1850, p. 9.]

[Footnote 290: Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 1848, p. 12.]

[Footnote 291: Laws of Rhode Island, 1854, p. 22.]

[Footnote 292: Laws of New York, 1840, p. 174.]

[Footnote 293: Laws of Pennsylvania, 1847, p. 206.]

[Footnote 294: Laws of Ohio, 1857, p. 170.]

[Footnote 295: Laws of Ohio, 1858, p. 10.]

[Footnote 296: Laws of Michigan, 1855, p. 415.]

[Footnote 297: Lalor, III. 162.]

[Footnote 298: Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II. 763; Von Holst, IV.

551; Parker, Personal Liberty Laws.]

[Footnote 299: Phillips, No Slave Hunting in the Old Bay State; Phillips, Argument against repeal of Personal Liberty Law; Pierce, Personal Liberty Law, 4; Johnson, Speech on Personal Liberty Law, New York, 1861.]

[Footnote 300: 36 Cong. 2 Sess., Congressional Globe, Appendix, 2.]

[Footnote 301: Lalor, III. 162.]

CHAPTER VI.

_THE END OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE QUESTION (1860-1865)._

-- 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1860-61.

-- 86. Propositions to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law.

-- 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law.

-- 88. The question of slaves of rebels.

-- 89. Slavery attacked in Congress.

-- 90. Confiscation bills.

-- 91. Confiscation provisions extended.

-- 92. Effect of the Emanc.i.p.ation Proclamation (1863).

-- 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States.

-- 94. Typical cases.

-- 95. Question discussed in Congress.

-- 96. Arrests by civil officers.

-- 97. Denial of the use of jails in the District of Columbia.

-- 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia.

-- 99. Regulations against kidnapping.

-- 100. Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts.

-- 101. Early propositions to repeal the acts.

-- 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House.

-- 103. Repeal bills in the Senate.

-- 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment.

-- 105. Educating effect of the controversy.

=-- 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1860-61.=--If the number of interesting fugitive slave cases falls off in the latter part of the decade from 1850 to 1860, it is not because the law was better enforced, but because it was little enforced. The continued interference of the friends of the slave had proved that a fugitive could not safely be recovered in Ma.s.sachusetts, and that no punishment could be secured for those who helped him to his freedom. The personal liberty bills added serious legal obstacles. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin even went so far as to declare the national act of 1850 unconst.i.tutional.[302] In 1859 John Brown, in his Harper's Ferry raid, attempted to establish a centre to which fugitives might flock; and although he was defeated, he had the sympathy of a large number of persons in the North, including some public men.

In the violent debates of 1860-61, one of the frequent charges brought by the southern members against the North was its persistent refusal to execute the Fugitive Slave Act, or to permit it to be executed.[303] Even Republican members disclaimed responsibility for their party, and urged that the personal liberty bills should be repealed.[304] Other bolder spirits seized the opportunity to urge a repeal of the act, and in the various compromise propositions introduced were several attempts to modify the existing const.i.tutional provision on the subject.

=-- 86. Propositions to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law.=--In the crisis of 1860 the South seemed to expect a general settlement of the slavery question like that of 1850, and therefore demanded a more effective act for the return of fugitives. President Buchanan, in his message of December 4, 1860, recommended "explanatory" const.i.tutional amendments which should recognize the master's right to the recovery of his fugitive slaves, and the validity of the Fugitive Slave Law. He recommended also a declaration against State laws impairing the right of the master, as being violations of the Const.i.tution, and consequently null and void.[305] This recommendation was followed, December 12, 1860, by no less than eleven resolutions upon the subject in the House.[306] Of these five were const.i.tutional amendments. Several provided, as a pacific measure, that the town, county, or State, guilty of neglect to return a fugitive, might be sued by the owner of the slave for the amount thus lost to him.[307] The most arbitrary proposition was that of Mr. Hindman.

It denied representation in Congress to any State which should hold in force laws hindering the delivery of fugitives.[308]

Another resolution inquired into the expediency of declaring it felony to resist an officer of the United States in the execution of the law, or to attempt to rescue a runaway.[309]

=-- 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law.=--On the other hand, antislavery members insisted that the provision for the return of fugitives was already too severe; but only one of the resolutions proposed any amendment in favor of the slave. Mr. Kilgore proposed to give a trial by jury before a fugitive should be returned.[310]

As early as 1860 Mr. Blake had introduced into the House a bill to repeal the law of 1850. It was read twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, from whom it was never reported.[311] At that time Congress, in alarm at the state of the country, was vainly striving to mend matters by making the Fugitive Slave Law even more effective. March 1, 1861, the select committee of thirty-three brought in a bill for the amendment of the law of 1850; it allowed an appeal to the Circuit Court of the United States where jury trial was to be given. The bill pa.s.sed the House the same day; but in the Senate it never got beyond the first reading.[312]

[Sidenote: Enforcement. Slaves of Disloyal Men.]

=-- 88. The question of slaves of rebels.=--With the beginning of the Civil War in 1861 the last period in the study of fugitive slaves opens, to close only with the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law and the abolition of slavery.

New conditions now surrounded the slaves. Their masters were away in the army; many homes were broken up, and confusion reigned instead of law; the strict discipline and oversight necessary for the maintenance of the slave system was impossible. Opportunities for escape occurred everywhere and at all times. Since war had brought the Northern people down into their own land, the slave no longer needed to travel hundreds of miles to find friends; the Northern camps were perhaps but a few miles from his own plantation. In this way negroes began to gather around the Federal camps in such numbers that the question of disposing of them became serious. If the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 were considered as still binding, their apprehension and return were necessary; but many of the masters were in arms against the government; should they still be protected in their property? The belligerent position of the South seemed to preclude any right on the part of disloyal owners to ask for the benefit of the law.

To meet the changed conditions no policy had as yet been developed by the government. The first solution of the problem was made at Fortress Monroe by General Butler. He drew an a.n.a.logy from international law, which makes material of war imported into the country of a belligerent lawful prize to the army or navy of the other belligerent. Regarded as property, the slaves of rebels could be of great service to them, and of equal help to the government in suppressing rebellion. Regarded as persons, they had escaped from communities where rebellion was in progress, and they asked protection from the government to which they were still loyal. In May, 1861, General Butler therefore replied to all demands for fugitives that he should retain them as "contraband of war." The answer was widely spread, and "contraband" became the name by which such negroes were known.[313]

=-- 89. Slavery attacked in Congress.=--A series of attacks upon slavery now began in Congress. To many persons the fact that the inst.i.tution was recognized in the Const.i.tution seemed sufficient ground for protecting it. No doubt was entertained of the power of Congress to confiscate the ordinary property of rebels; but such persons deprecated all interference with slaves, who were supposed to possess a kind of const.i.tutional immunity, wholly unknown to and above all other property.[314] In the minds of antislavery men, "no greater fallacy was ever a.s.serted than this attempt thus to link 'the inst.i.tution' and the Const.i.tution indissolubly together, to engraft the former upon the latter, to make slavery the corner stone of the nation, to be guarded and protected by the government."[315] Nevertheless, the existence of slavery in the Border States which had remained loyal made Congress very cautious as to general enactments. On the other hand, no form of property held by rebels was so vulnerable; slaves could not only be seized as the lines of the Northern troops extended, they could, by actual law or by kindly reception, be invited across the lines. Both the pa.s.sions aroused by civil war and a humane pity for the slave urged the government to deprive the master engaged in secession of the services of his slave.

[Sidenote: Confiscation Bills.]

=-- 90. Confiscation bills.=--July 18, 1861, Mr. Chandler and Mr. Trumbull introduced general confiscation bills in the Senate; they were both referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. In the discussion Mr.

Trumbull offered as an amendment "that whenever any person claiming to be ent.i.tled to the service or labor of any other person, under the laws of any State, shall employ such person in aiding or promoting any insurrection, or in resisting the laws of the United States, or shall permit or suffer him to be so employed, he shall forfeit all right to such service or labor, and the person whose service or labor is thus claimed shall be thenceforth discharged therefrom, any law to the contrary notwithstanding."[316]

The proposition aroused considerable opposition, since it was a step far in advance of anything which had yet been done against the interests of slavery, and any proposition which advocated "an act of emanc.i.p.ation,"