INFORMATION TO USERS

This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy.

University Microfilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD. ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW. LONDON WC1R 4EJ. ENGLAND B001570

NDUKWU, MAURICE DICKSiiN ANTISLAVERY IN MICHIGAN: A STUDY OF ITS ORIGIN, DEVELOPMENT, AND EXPRESSION FROM TERRITORIAL PERIOD ID I6G 0. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, P H .D ., 1 9 7 9 f

University' ! Microfilms International 3 0 0 n. zeeb road, ann arb o r, mi 48io6

Urw ■ft — ______... Intematk3^al 300 N, ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 ANTISLAVERY IN MICHIGAN: A STUDY OF ITS ORIGIN, DEVELOPMENT, AND

EXPRESSION FROM TERRITORIAL PERIOD TO 1860

by

Maurice Dickson Ndukwu

A THESIS

Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of History 1979 ABSTRACT

ANT ISLAVERY IN MICHIGAN: A STUDY OF ITS ORIGIN, DEVELOPMENT, AND EXPRESSION FROM TERRITORIAL PERIOD TO 1860

By Maurice Dickson Ndukwu

In 1832 Elizabeth Margaret Chandler and Laura S.

Haviland inspired a small group of Quakers in Lenawee County to organize the first antislavery society in Michigan. It was known as the Logan Female Antislavery Society. By 1836 other concerned citizens, mostly clergymen, had not only formed local antislavery societies in other parts of the state but had also united them by establishing the Michigan

State Anti-Slavery Society. As an auxiliary member of the

American Anti-Slavery Society, the Michigan society vowed to agitate through moral persuasion and other constitutional means for immediate and universal emancipation of the Negro slaves in the nation. In their campaigns to convince their fellow citizens that Negro slavery was morally wrong and ought to be imme­ diately abolished, they encountered serious difficulties.

Through their dedication and determination, they gradually shifted their agitation from immediate universal emancipation to opposition against the extension of slavery into new territories. In addition, they became the advocates of free Maurice Dickson Ndukwu white laborers of America, and, to win the support of a larger segment of people, the antislaveryites also focused their agitation on the effect of slavery on the free men, and the oppressive nature of the slave-power of the South. Realizing the limitations of relying solely on antislavery lectures for the success of their cause, the leaders reluc­ tantly accepted the idea of combining their moral agitation with political action. By carefully exploiting issues in national politics involving the slavery controversy, issues which disrupted the unity of the Democratic and Whig political parties, the moral crusaders were able to promote their cause by transforming their movement into a political party. Based on manuscript materials, contemporary news­ papers, printed public documents, and other published works, this study traces the origin of antislavery sentiment in

Michigan, the difficulties encountered by the members of the society, and the strategies and measures the leaders employed to promote the antislavery movement in Michigan during the period covered by this study.

In addition this study also discusses the complexity of the factors which caused most Northerners to join the

Republican Party, the organization of which helped strengthen the antislavery movement in Michigan and elsewhere. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Chapter I. THE GENESIS OF THE ANTISLAVERY MOVEMENT IN MICHIGAN: THE TERRITORIAL ERA ...... 5

II. THE FORMATION OF THE MICHIGAN STATE ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY ...... 27

III. THE PROGRESS OF THE ANTISLAVERY MOVEMENT IN MICHIGAN, 1837 47

IV. BY EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE: ABOLITIONISM IN MICHIGAN, 1838-1839 74

V. ABOLITIONISTS AND FUGITIVE SLAVES ...... 108

VI. THE POLITICS OF OPPORTUNISM: POLITICAL ANTISLAVERY IN MICHIGAN, 1840-1850 ...... 136

VII. THE EMERGENCE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND THE PROGRESS OF POLITICAL ABOLITIONISM IN MICHIGAN, 1851-1860 205

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 269

APPENDIX A - The Declaration of Sentiments ...... 332

B - The Constitution of the Michigan Anti- Slavery Society ...... 341 APPENDIX C - Distribution of Black Population by Counties in Michigan in 1850 . . . 345

D - Resolutions from "Proceedings of Free Soil State Convention in Michigan," 1851 348 E - Platform, State Mass Convention of the Free Democrats, February 22, 1854 . . . 351

F - Resolutions, Mass Convention, Free Democrats, Court House, Kalamazoo, June 21, 1854 ...... 354

G - Call for the "Under Oaks" Republican Convention, July 6, 1854 ...... 357 H - Call for the Mass Convention of the Free Democratic Party, to be Held in Kalamazoo, June 21, 1854...... 360

I - Resolutions, Republican Mass Convention, Kalamazoo, September 12 , 1855 ...... 363

J - Resolutions, Republican Mass Convention, Marshall, Michigan, July 8, 1856 . . . 366

iv INTRODUCTION

Freedom, equality, and liberty for all were and still

are the most important sacred rights of American citizens.

These sacred rights of man were the basic principles upon which the American Republic was founded. Its people earnestly believed in the inalienable rights of man and fought the

British in 1776 in defense of their rights.

Chattel slavery had come under severe attack by 1776 by pamphleteers following out the logic of Revolutionary thought. The connection, for those who chose to see it, was obvious. In eighteenth century political discourse, particu­ larly in America, slavery was a crucial concept. The ulti­ mate political threat, the absolute political evil, slavery was embedded in the structure of political thought. It appeared in every statement of political principle, in every discussion of constitutionalism or legal rights, and in every exhortation to resistance. Political slavery which the Revolutionary leaders fought against in the eighteenth century was not different from the condition of bondage to which the blacks in Southern plantations were subjected. The condition of the slaves was only more dramatic, a more bizarre variation of the condition of all who had lost the power of self-determination. Their

1 2 degradation so painfully visible and unambiguously estab­ lished in law was only the final realization of what the loss of freedom could mean everywhere. There was no such thing as partial liberty, for anyone who had authority to restrain and control the conduct of someone else had every­ thing. Therefore, from this point of view, it made no little difference whether one's bondage was private or public, civil or political. It did not even matter whether a slave was treated well or poorly. Chattel slavery was simply undemocratic, immoral and inhuman. As Stephen Hopkins once observed:

Anyone who is bound to obey the will of another, is as really a slave though he may have a good master as if he had a bad one; and this is stronger in political bodies than in natural ones, as the former have perpetual succession and remain the same; and although they may have a very good master at one time, they'may have a very bad one at another.1 The presence of an enslaved black population in

America became a political issue where slavery had the gen­ eral meaning stated above. The contrast between what political leaders of the Revolution sought for themselves and their fellow citizens, and what they imposed on, or at least tolerated in, others became too glaring to be ignored.

In order to establish the union of the colonies after the American War of Independence, it was thought perhaps wise to

^Quoted in Bernard Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750-1776 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1965) , p. 142. 3

please the slaveholding states by refraining from any attack

on Negro slavery where it already existed in 1787. Neverthe­

less, the Continental Congress of the confederated colonies

took one advanced step in that direction by enacting a law which would check the extension of slavery into new regions.

This measure was the Northwest Ordinance, adopted on July 13, 1787. The ordinance forbade the introduction of slavery in

all the territory north of the Ohio River. The State of Michigan was one of the five states carved out of the old Northwest. By this law of 1787 slavery was not allowed to

exist in Michigan. Michigan entered the Union as the twenty-sixth state

in 1837. It was a free state without slaves and slavemasters.

But slavery was still flourishing in the South and, like

other free states, there were some Michigan people who were opposed to the existence of this institution anywhere in the

Union. Among the settlers some organized to protest and to demand immediate emancipation of the slaves. The state con­ stitution of 1835 contained a clause which outlawed slavery, and when this document was revised in 1850, the same anti­ slavery clause of the first constitution was retained intact.

Thus from the territorial period until the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment by the Congress of the United States at

Washington, D. C., on December 18, 1865, some Michigan citi­ zens demonstrated their opposition to slavery in several ways, and employed every possible measure in protesting against 4

the existence and expansion of the institution in the nation

for the end of human bondage. The motives for the attack on slavery were primarily moral at first, but after 1840 politi­ cal and economic arguments were added in the crusade in the effort to attain their initial objective. The dignity attached to the antislavery movement stemmed from the very fact that the sentiment for human rights of all citizens was at the foundation of the contest. This was true of another factor, that the antislaveryites felt a moral responsibility to fight for the destruction of the institution even though property owners had to suffer a great financial loss. Thus the slavery question, which in origin was sectional, became national, and the people of Michigan shared the same moral obligation to protest against slavery as the issues involved in the struggle grew clearer and more complex.

This study will examine the antislavery movement in

Michigan from Territorial Era to 1860 from the point of view of (1) the forces which gave rise to the movement,

(2) the stages in its development, (3) the actions of mem­ bers in furthering the movement. CHAPTER I

THE GENESIS OF THE ANTISLAVERY MOVEMENT IN

MICHIGAN: THE TERRITORIAL ERA

Antislavery sentiment in Michigan existed long before statehood or the formation in 1836 of the State Antislavery

Society. Of great importance in the development of that sentiment was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. In what could be regarded as an attempt to bring an end to slavery, the government of the Confederation acted to limit slavery in the Northwest Territory (which included the present state of Michigan) to those areas where it then existed.

The sixth clause of the Northwest Ordinance, adopted by the

Continental Congress on July 13, 1787, prohibited the exten­ sion of slavery into the Northwest Territory. The anti­ slavery provision of this Ordinance stipulated that:

There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servi­ tude in the said Territory otherwise than in the pun­ ishment of crimes where the party shall have been duly convicted, provided always that any person escaping into the same, from whom labor and service is law­ fully claimed in any of the original States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to 1 the person claiming his or her service as aforesaid.

Worthington C. Ford, Gaillard Hunt, and Roscoe R. Hill, eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789 (Washington, 1936), Vol. 32, p"I 343.

5 6

It is generally argued that the Northwest Ordinance produced an antislavery sentiment among the settlers of the territory of Michigan. At the same time, the Ordinance was believed to have fulfilled the purpose of keeping slavery out of the Northwest Territory and out of the states created 2 therein. In an address to the Michigan Pioneer Society in

1887, Governor C. G. Luce affirmed this belief. He paid great tribute to the framers of the document, which, he said, had saved Michigan "from the cursed fate of slavery." "Doubtless," he asserted, "if it had not been for this prohibitory ordi­ nance slavery with all its blighting influence would have crossed the Ohio and entrenched itself in this territory 3 dedicated forever to freedom." While later political actions and judicial decisions supported this opinion that the Ordinance sustained anti­ slavery sentiment in Michigan, the Ordinance had no such immediate effect. The Reverend J. A. Girardin pointed out that the Ordinance did not in fact exclude slavery from the

Territory. He argued that slavery remained in the Territory long after the measure was adopted, that no attention was

^"The historical obstacle of the [Northwest] Ordi­ nance," wrote Frederick Jackson Turner, "gave an advantage to the antislavery settlers Northwest of the Ohio River." Frederick Jackson Turner, The Frontier of American History (New York, 1922), p. 140.

^Cyrus G. Luce, "The Ordinance of 1787," in Michigan Pioneer and Historical Society Collections, Vol. XI, pp. 142- 145. Hereinafter cited as MPHS Colls. 7 paid to that Ordinance, and that any slave brought into the

Territory after 1787 was easily sold to any person willing 4 to pay a good price. Girardin was right. After the adoption of the Ordi­ nance, the actual selling and buying of slaves did take place.

On May 16, 1792, Arthur McCormick, a slave dealer in Detroit, sold one Josiah Cuttan to John Askin.^ William Roe sold a

Negro boy named Frank, twelve years old, to James Duperon

Baby, for $532.50, on October 22, 1793.^ John Askin bought a Negro slave from James May of Detroit on October 19, 1794, paying forty-five pounds sterling, New York currency. Joseph

Campau was known as an extensive slaveholder owning more than O ten slaves in Detroit. Slavery continued to exist in the

Northwest Territory throughout the eighteenth century and up to 1830.9

^J. A. Girardin, "Slavery in Detroit," in MPHS Colls. Vol. I, p. 415. ^Milo M. Quaife, ed., The John Askin Papers: 1747 - 1820 (2 vols.; Detroit, 1928-1931}, Vol. 1, pp. 410-411.

^Girardin, "Slavery in Detroit," in MPHS Colls., Vol. I, p. 416. Riddell described James Duperon Baby as a well-known fur trader, resident on the Canadian side of the Detroit River, who owned over twenty slaves. William Renwick Riddell, "The Slave in Canada," Journal of Negro History, Vol. V, p. 333.

^George B. Catlin, The Story of Detroit (Detroit, 1923), p. 507; Milo M. Quaife, ed., The John Askin Papers, Vol. 1, pp. 9-12.

^Girardin, "Slavery in Detroit," in MPHS Colls., Vol. I, p. 416. 9 See more details in Henry M. Utley and Bryon M. 8

The persistence of slavery in the Northwest Territory until 1796, when Detroit was formally transferred to the Ameri­ can Government, did not seem to have caused much concern.^

After 1796, those who shared antislavery sentiment began to question the existence of slavery in defiance of the anti­ slavery provision of the Ordinance of 1787. When Charles

Bernard, a merchant in Hamtramack Township, sold a five-year- old Negro girl named Veronique to a Detroit man, Henry

Berthelet, for sixty pounds sterling, New York currency (the equivalent of $150.00), some concerned citizens wanted an explanation. The girl, it was explained, had been born in

Wayne County when Britain controlled the area, and she had continued to live there after it had come under American jurisdiction. 11 This explanation satisfied few people, but it did not attract much public attention.

Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory and State (4 vols.; New York, 1906); Nelson Vance Russell, The British Regime in Michigan and the Old Northwest, 1760-179TT (Northfield, Minn., 1939); William Wirt Blume, ed., Transactions of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, 1805-1814 [2 vols.; Ann Arbor, 1935); Milo M. Quaife, ed., The John~Askin Papers, 1747-1820 (Detroit, 1928-1931); James Valentine Campbell, Outlines of the Political History of Michigan (Detroit, 1876).

■^From 1796 to 1802, Michigan was part of the North­ west Territory governed from Cincinnati at first, and later, Chillicothe. The area was a part of Indiana Territory from 1803 to 1805, and was governed from Vincennes. In 1805, Michigan Territory was created, and Detroit became the seat of the Territorial government, and for the first time the name Michigan was applied to the area.

■^MS Deed, in Burton Historical Collections, of Detroit Public Library. 9

But in 1807, antislavery men seized a chance to test the meaning and validity of the Ordinance as a vehicle to keep slavery out of the Territory. On September 26, 1807, the Territorial Supreme Court of Judge Augustus Brevoort

Woodward issued a writ of habeus corpus directing Mrs.

Catherine Tucker, who held four Negroes as slaves, to produce the four Negroes and to explain why she held them as slaves.

Mrs. Tucker contended that the Negroes were legally held because they had been her slaves at the time of the surrender of the post in 1796, and that her right of possession was assured under Jay's Treaty. The court granted her claims as , . , valid. 12

Concerned citizens looked to the Territorial Supreme

Court for legal justification of its decision, which appeared to them to contradict the Ordinance of 1787. In a lengthy elaboration of the court's action, Judge Woodward employed a technical but convincing argument to vindicate the court's decision and to define the status of slavery in the Territory.

Woodward admitted that the case placed his court in a serious dilemma. To calm the public, the Judge reviewed the history of slavery in the Territory both under the French and British regimes. He admitted that the motives behind the antislavery clause of the Ordinance were prompted by the greatest ideals of

12 William Wirt Blume, ed., Transactions of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, 1805-1814 (Ann Arbor, 1^35J, pp. 358-359. 10

humanity and social welfare, and should be considered as

imposing a serious and sacred duty on the citizens. But,

the Judge continued, the court had taken the position that the Ordinance was based on the assumption of the absolute

non-existence of slavery in the Territory in the first place;

and, on the other hand, that the laws failed to provide any

specific course of proceedings by which the question of the 13 right of freedom was to be investigated.

Judge Woodward then explained that the court was

handicapped by the failure of the United States to extend its

sovereignty over the Territory until 1796. The court, he

said, took judicial notice of the fact that slavery had existed legally in the Territory under the French until 1763;

and that the British had permitted the institution to con­

tinue after that date while the Territory was a part of Upper

Canada. Woodward admitted to being aware of the act of the

Province of Upper Canada of May 31, 1793, providing for

gradual emancipation,1^ but the Granville-Jay Treaty of

November 19, 1794, had to be given consideration. This

treaty, which guaranteed to all settlers the right to enjoy

their "property of every kind,"1*’ the Judge stated, posed

1^Ibid., pp. 385-389; Judge Woodward, MS. Copy of this opinion is reserved in the Burton Historical Collections of the Detroit Public Library, and was also published in MPHS Colls., Vol. XIII, pp. 511-518. ---- 14 Blume, Transactions of the Supreme Court, Vol. 1, pp. 392-394. 15 Samuel Flagg Bemis, Jayfs Treaty: A Study in Com- 11

the great question whether slaves should be classified as

property. In responding to that question, he asserted the

court had no choice but to declare that:

The human species can be the subject of property in various countries, and among others in our own; and in an expression where property is spoken of in terms so ample and so absolutely qualified as those of the Treaty now in consideration, ’’Slaves" must be con­ sidered to be included if at the time of the use of them slavery had a legal existence in the country in relation to which they have been u s e d .16

Having thus established a sort of principle somewhat justi­

fying its action, Woodward proceeded to lay ground rules by

which future cases of this nature could be adjudicated:

All the slaves living on the 31st of May, 1793, and who were in the possession of the settlers of the Territory on July 11, 1796, shall be slaves for life. Children of female slaves who were born after May 21, 1793, and before the creation of Wayne County and the establishment of the American Jurisprudence shall be free at the age of twenty-five. All persons other than those who have been described, are free by the Congressional Provision of One Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Seven, excepting only where they are refugees from services or labor in another State, and then they must be returned to those lawfully entitled to claim such labor or service.1?

Perhaps the Supreme Court decision of 1807 was more

instrumental than the Ordinance of 1787 in keeping slavery

out of Michigan Territory. Historians of the Northwest

Territory had reservations about the purpose of the Ordinance merce and Diplomacy (New York, 1923), Appendix, p. 322.

■^Blume, Transactions of the Supreme Court, Vol. 1, p . 387. ------

^ I b i d ., p . 395. 12

as a vehicle to prohibit slavery. William Renwick Riddell,

for instance, argued that the Ordinance was not meant to

exclude slavery from the territory of Michigan, which, he

claimed, was added to the territorial domain of the United

States under peculiar circumstances. When the Northwest

passed into British possession under the Peace Treaty of

1763, which closed The French and Indian War, full protection

of all property of the people who were transferred was guar­

anteed. Riddell argued that the right to own slaves as

property was included in the guarantee. The 47th Article

of Capitulation, he explained, provided that Mthe Negroes

and Panis of both sexes shall remain the possessions of the

French and Canadians to whom they belong; they shall be at

liberty to keep them in their service in the colony or sell

them; and they may also continue to bring them up in the Roman

Catholic religion." Riddell therefore asserted that if the

Northwest Ordinance was intended to exclude slavery from the 18 Northwest, it should have repudiated this guarantee.

The historian Burke Aaron Hinsdale observed that the

Northwest Ordinance placed no obligation on the French, the

British or the Americans to end slavery in the Northwest. He

argued that the French people were not the only ones whose property rights to slaves were guaranteed. Such Englishmen as made their way into the country, he said, enjoyed the same privileges accorded to the old residents. Consequently, most

1 R Riddell, "The Slave in Canada," p. 268. 13 of those English settlers who could afford the means took advantage of that opportunity promptly for the improvement of 19 their fortune. Nelson Vance Russell was of similar persuasion, agreeing with Hinsdale that there was no original intention to exclude slavery from the Northwest. Both men pointed out that by the terms of the Treaty of Paris of 1783, which marked the close of the American War of Independence, title to the

Northwest had passed from the British to the American govern­ ment. Slavery in the Territory was not abolished by that treaty, and no provision to that effect was made at the time the actual possession of Detroit took place on July 11, 1796.

Therefore under the Peace Treaty of Paris of 1783, both the

French and English settlers who came under American juris - diction continued to enjoy their property rights in slaves. 20

Hinsdale further demonstrated that the Ordinance of

1787 was not meant to prohibit slavery in the Territory. MThe

Northwest Territory," he wrote, "came to the United States with a slave dowry, and slavery consequently became practically co-extensive with the Union. Although the Treaty of 1783 did not repeat the guarantee of the Treaty of 1763 respecting property rights in slaves, no one thought that slavery would

19 Burke Aaron Hinsdale, The Old Northwest (New York, 1888), p. 348; George B. Catlin, The Story of Detroit (Detroit, 1923), p. 321. 20 Russell, British Regime in Michigan, p. 270; Hins­ dale, The Old Northwest, pp. 184-185. 14

21 be interferred with in any way within the Territory."

Hinsdale argued that the Northwest Ordinance was simply a compromise with slavery. He based his conclusion on the circumstances and political considerations which led to the adoption of the Ordinance. In 1784, the Continental

Congress appointed a committee to draft a document for the organization of the Northwest. Thomas Jefferson, the chair­ man of this committee, proposed the inclusion of an anti­ slavery clause with the intention of excluding slavery, after

1800, in all the newly acquired territory west of the

Appalachian Mountains. The antislavery clause proposed by

Jefferson declared that: After the year 1800 of the Christian era, there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude other than in the punishment of crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty.22 Hinsdale pointed out that because of this provision the work of the committee was rejected. The rejection was partly due to disagreement among the states, especially 23 Virginia and Massachusetts, over their western land claim.

In the second place there was a clear demand from Virginia

21Ibid., p. 348.

22Hinsdale, The Old Northwest, pp. 273-274; Worth­ ington C. Ford, et al., Journals of the Continental Congress, Vol. 29, p. 119. 23 Hinsdale, The Old Northwest, pp. 345-349; Utley and Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory and State, Vol. II, pp. 50-55; Worthington C. Ford, et a l . , Journals of the Continental Congress, Vol. 32, p. 334. 15

for the protection of her citizens' property rights in slaves.

Before Virginia made any concession to the lands she claimed, she stipulated that:

The French and Canadian inhabitants and other settlers of the territory who had professed themselves as citizens of Virginia, shall have their possessions and titles confirmed to them, and be protected in the enjoyment of their property rights and liberties which included rights in slaves.

After three years of heated debates the Continental Congress,

eager to keep the states together, acquiesced in Virginia's

demand and amended the provision. In its amended form the

provisions of the Ordinance contained two weak points:

first, it no longer applied to all the newly acquired western

country, but only to those regions lying north of the Ohio 24 River; second, i.t contained a fugitive slave law. Thus,

Hinsdale declared, the expression, "When there were 5,000

Free adult males in the territory, a bicameral legislature

should be created; and that a population of 60,000 Free

inhabitants was prerequisite for admission into the Union,"

assumed that such slavery as then existed in the Territory

should not be disturbed. Therefore, this amounted to a com- 2 5 promise with slavery.

The sort of controversy over the motives and effec­

tiveness of the Northwest Ordinance was similar to controversy over other acts of Congress related to slavery and civil

74 Hinsdale, The Old Northwest, pp. 334, 346-349.

25Ibid., pp. 334, 346-349. 16 rights. The same is true of judicial opinions on these issues. They could be and have been interpreted and applied by individuals, groups and states to satisfy their desired objectives, and to defend and justify their actions.

Whether the Ordinance of 1787 was intended to exclude slavery from the Territory or not, antislavery sentiment was shared by most of the pioneer settlers. 26 The initial public expression of sympathy to the cause of immediate emancipation occurred in 1832 with the formation of the "Logan Female Antislavery Society." This society was founded by a group of Quakers who lived at Logan, a town which was later renamed 27 Adrian (Michigan). In 1832, while most of southeastern Michigan was still an unsettled wilderness, 2 8 Quakers in that area gathered in a

2 6 The federal census of 1830 listed only 32 slaves, 274 free blacks, and 30,727 whites. Fifth Census: or Enu­ meration of the Inhabitants of the United States, 1830 (Washington, 183 2) , p p . 152-153. 2 7 Laura S. Haviland, A Womans Life Work; Labors and Experiences (Cincinnati, 188lJ^ p"! 32; Menton L. Dillon, "Elizabeth Margaret Chandler and the Spread of Antislavery Sentiment to Michigan," Michigan History, Vol. XXXIX, 1955, pp. 484-494; Benjamin Lundy, ed., Elizabeth Margaret Chandler, The Poetical Works of Elizabeth Margaret Chandler with a Memoir of Her Life and Character (Philadelphia, 1845), pp. 7- 10, 28, 40. 2 8 An idea of wilderness is provided in this observa­ tion: "Wolves, bears, and wolverines, a wild cat especially feared, and Indians were then more numerous than were people who like themselves had left homes and friends to encounter the vicissitudes of pioneer life. The clearing of wooded land, the planting of seed on unknown soil, the waiting for harvest to prove their courage, and industry, were only a small part of the sturdy accomplishment and watchful waiting of the years 17 newly constructed meeting house near the Raisin River. There they organized the first antislavery society in Michigan. A young Quaker lady known as Elizabeth Margaret Chandler was the moving spirit behind this organization. Mrs. Laura Smith

Haviland and Chandler's relatives, including her brother

Thomas Chandler, were among the original members of the 29 society. Born in 1807, Elizabeth Chandler lived in Phila­ delphia until 1830, when she moved with her family and rela- 3 0 tives to Michigan. In the 1820's she had been a prominent member of the Philadelphia female antislavery society. She was described by acquaintances as a brilliant scholar and writer. 31 Because of her scholastic ability, Benjamin Lundy offered her the position of superintendent of the ladies before them. But my grandparents were of true New England stock with high moral incentive of their Quaker forebears and could not and did not fail in the enterprise before them." See Mrs. Warren Rohr, "Reminiscences of Early Days in Michigan. Transmitted From Generation to Generation By . . . The Fore­ bearers of Mrs. Warren Rohr, As Told by Her Mother Mrs. Cora Benster." In Michigan Historical Society Collections of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Hereinafter cited as MHSC. 29 John J. Adam, "Early History of Lenawee County," MPHS Colls., Vol. XI, p. 364; Haviland, A Woman's Life Work, p. 32; Dillon, op. cit. 30 Sarah Bowerman, "Elizabeth Margaret Chandler," Dictionary of American Biography (New York, 1929), Vol. Ill, p . 613. 31 Wendell Phillips Garrison and Frances Wright Gar­ rison, William Lloyd Garrison, 1805-1879; The Story of His Life Told by His children (4 vols.; New York, 1885-1889), Vol. I, p. 145. 18 department of his newspaper, The Genius of Universal Emanci- 3 2 pation. When she moved to Michigan, she continued to write articles, mostly for women, urging them to work for the 33 abolition of slavery. Chandler died on November 2, 1834, at the age of twenty-seven,34 but the organization she founded had made some progress. At first, membership was confined to neighbor­ hood Quakers; before she died, Presbyterians and members of other religious denominations had been admitted to the organi- zation. 3 5 Her importance in promoting the antislavery crusade went beyond the establishment of an antislavery society. Her views on the role of women in the crusade won the sympathy of her readers, especially the women of America. In her writings,

Chandler convinced members of her sex that they could con­ tribute immensely to the antislavery cause, and could be as 3 6 effective as men in the crusade against slavery.

Man may bring to the conflict moral or political feelings, or he may come forward to oppose the demon, clad in divine armor of wide-spread philanthropy. But by all the holy charities of life is woman called upon to lend her sympathy and her aid to the victims of widely extended evil. . . . Will Christian sisters, and wives, and mothers, stand coldly inert, while those of their own sex are daily exposed, not only to the threats and revilings, but to the very lash of a stern, unfeeling task-master? They cannot,

3^Lundy, Chandler, Poetical Works, pp. 12-13.

33Ibid., p. 28. 54Ibid., p. 42.

33Haviland, A Woman's Life Work, p. 32. 3^Lundy, Chandler, Poetical Works, p. 42. 19

they will not! They have tears, they have prayers, and in their eloquence they will plead the cause of the oppressed.37

Benjamin Lundy, who admired Chandler, regarded her as the first American female author ever to make the subject of 3 8 abolition the principal theme of active experience. At a time when many Americans felt that nothing could be done to destroy slavery, Chandler tried to convince American women that they could do a lot for the cause of abolition. In another essay addressed to her female readers, she explained how they could help promote the abolitionist cause:

American women, your power is sufficient for its [slavery] extinction! . . . Have you no influence over those who are bound to you by the closest ties of relationship? Is it not your task to give the first bent to the minds of those who at some future day are to be their country's counselors, and saviors, or, by a blind persistence in a career of injustice, her ruin! As sisters, and daughters, and wives, and mothers of the leaders of the nation, your influence and power are great.39

When the Friends first gathered in“their newly con­ structed meeting house, Chandler made a strong appeal for an organized crusade against slavery. "American slavery," she declared, "is morally wrong; it must be abolished. We must form antislavery societies. We have no other choice. Indeed participation in this holy crusade is an important duty en­ joined by God.”^9 Active participation in antislavery

3^Ibid. , p . 16 .

38Ibid., pp. 12-13. 39Ibid., p. 19. ^9Ibid., p . 69. 20 agitation, she said, required that members know the facts of slavery so that they can speak out against the immorality of the institution. As a first step in this direction, she en­ couraged them to read antislavery publications, particularly the Genius of Universal Emancipation. Most of her neighbors were already familiar with this antislavery journal,^ which was one of the best antislavery publications in the Northwest 4 2 at this time. During this meeting, the Friends agreed to organize a "Free Produce Society," as part of a program to undermine slavery. Chandler and some of her neighbors at this meeting had been members of the Philadelphia Free Produce Society before coming to Michigan.^ The aim of the Free Produce

Society was to bring economic and moral pressure into the antislavery crusade by requiring all members of the anti­ slavery movement to buy and consume only the produce of free labor. They reasoned that the demand for the products of free labor would enhance the significance of free labor. At

^Elizabeth M. Chandler to Jane Howell, February 12, 1832, in Elizabeth M. Chandler MSS in the MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 4 ? Yale Review, (New Series) Vol. XV (April, 1926), 569-570. 43 Lundy, Chandler, Poetical Works, pp. 16-17. For the organization of the Free Produce Society of Pennsylvania, and Chandler's activities in the "Ladies Free Produce Society of Philadelphia," see Ruth Ketring Nuermberger, The Free Produce Movement: A Quaker Protest Against Slavery (Durham, 1942) , pi 51 and Thomas E . Drake, Quakers and Slavery in America (New Haven, 1950), p. 118. 21

the same time, the resulting decline in the demand for the

products of slave labor would render further holding of

slaves inconvenient, expensive and incidentally unnecessary.

The long-run result would be voluntary emancipation. Thus

without physical force on the part of the abolitionists, economic forces would bring the slave labor system to an

end. ^

The moral philosophy of the Free Produce Movement

emphasized the concept of ’’collective guilt." This philosophy

stressed that all patronizers of the products of slave labor

were directly and collectively guilty of the sin of slave-

holding. The consumers of the products of slave labor had

continued to encourage and sustain the great demand for slave

labor. As long as this continued, slaveholding would be

profitable and nothing could halt the expansion of the insti­

tution. In addition, it would discourage the consumption of

the products of free labor and render the employment of free

labor unattractive since free labor tended to be more expen­

sive than slave labor. Convinced of the logic of these argu­ ments, the Logan Female Antislavery Society incorporated the

free produce policy as part of their antislavery measures.

They considered it an important means of weakening and ulti­ mately destroying slavery.

44 Lundy, Chandler, Poetical Works, p. 108. 4 S Ibid., pp. 108-109; see also Menton L. Dillon, "Elizabeth M. Chandler and the Spread of Antislavery Sentiment in Michigan," pp. 487-488. 22

The effectiveness of the Free Produce Movement is difficult to determine. But the ideology found favorable acceptance among antislavery men. The National Society in­ cluded it in their ’’Declaration of Sentiments," and in 1836, the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society adopted the same policy at their organizational meeting.^ There were evidences of antislavery activities in other parts of Michigan at this time. In Detroit, though there was no formal organization of an antislavery society during this period, public discussions included antislavery problems. The Young Men's Society of Detroit, founded in 47 1832, sponsored such a discussion in 1834. In advertising the event, the promoters invited the public "to attend, listen, and participate in a public debate on the question of whether the 'Emancipation' and possible colonization of the slaves of the United States would be just and politically feasible." The discussions covered various aspects of slavery, its moral evils, political and social problems it created, and the safety of immediate emancipation. 4 8

46 For the Declaration of Sentiments of the National Society, and the adoption of the Free Produce policy, see Chapter II of this study. 47 The formation of the Young Men's Society of Detroit and its objectives are contained in an entry in Samuel Zug's Scrapbook, Vol. I, p. 93, in Burton Historical Collections of the Detroit Public Library. 48 Detroit Journal and Michigan Advertiser, March 19. 1834. ------23

In 1835 expressions of antislavery sentiment came from the eighty-nine delegates to the Constitutional Con- 49 vention which met in Detroit, 1835-1836. Acting in their official capacity as a constituted body, the delegates unanimously condemned the institution of Negro slavery. They also approved and adopted an article which prohibited the extension of slavery into their State. This article declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude will ever be introduced into this State, except for punishment of crime 50 of which the party shall have been duly convicted." This probably cleared all doubts as to the will of the people regarding the meaning of the Northwest Ordinance.

By taking a public stand against slavery the dele­ gates had given positive recognition to antislavery activities in the state. They had even given courage to future anti­ slavery activities in the state. Had the delegates to the

State Constitutional Convention adopted a proslavery clause in the State Constitution, they would have damaged enormously the progress of antislavery movements in the state. Those who had made public their antislavery views might have had to go underground as secret organizations or move to free soil Most of the delegates supported an antislavery con­ stitution primarily out of racial prejudice. They were not 49 Harold M. Dorr, ed., The Michigan Constitutional Convention of 1835-1836, Debates and Proceedings (Ann Arbor, p. 15.------

50Ibid. , pp. 135-136. 24 motivated by any moral convictions because their main desire was to prevent blacks, either free or slave, from entering the state. John Norvell, a delegate from Wayne County, left no doubt on this issue. In his argument opposing Ross Wilkin's motion, that the word "white" be striken out and the word

"free men" be inserted in line one of Section 1 of the clause on elective franchise, John Norvell expressed the real purpose of the antislavery clause of the constitution. He said that when he had the honor to report an article prohibiting the introduction of slavery into the state, he had then stated that a very few blacks were in the Peninsula. Granting these blacks the right to vote under the State Constitution, he explained, "automatically meant an invitation and an induce­ ment to the migration hither of a description of population confessedly injurious, confessedly a nuisance, to the com­ munity." The Negro, he said, belonged to a degraded cast of mankind. He concluded with this remark:

. . . let us not present false appearances to them. . . . We are at this time free from the evil of that sort of population. . . . We are called upon by no constitutional duty to open our doors to those of them who are not now here. We are admonished by every consideration of interest, feeling and safety, to protect ourselves from the dangers of such a population.51

Ibid., pp. 154-169, covers Ross Wilkin's, John Norvell's and the views of other delegates to the State Con­ stitutional Convention on this point. A record of earlier opposition against the entry of bla_lcs into the Territory is contained in the Journal of the Legislative Council of the Territory of Michigan, Being the Second Session of the Se~cond 25

Eugene H. Berwanger and others have stressed that racial prejudice and the desire to exclude blacks for economic and social reasons were at the root of the antislavery con­ victions of most supporters of the antislavery cause in the territories.^ This favorable attitude toward the antislavery cause bore significant fruit in the formation of several local anti­ slavery societies before the State Antislavery Society was organized in 1836 and before Michigan was officially admitted into the Union in 1 8 3 7 . ^ In Lenawee County, a second society, the Lenawee

County Antislavery Society, was organized. In February, 1836, a group numbering up to fifty persons organized the Oakland

County Free Discussion and Antislavery Society.^ In the same county another group organized The Farmington Antislavery

Council (Monroe, 1827), pp. 74 and 106; Laws of the Territory of Michigan (Detroit, 1827), pp. 484-486. 5 2 Eugene H. Berwanger, The Frontier Against Slavery: Western Anti-Negro Prejudice and the Slavery Extension Con- troversy (Urbana, 1967), pp. 123-137; Eric Foner, '’Politics and Prejudice: The Free Soil Party and the Negro, 1849-1852," Journal of Negro History, L (October, 1965), 239-240; Robert F. Durden, "Ambiguities in the Antislavery Crusade of the Republican Party," in Martin B. Duberman, ed., The Anti- slavery Vanguard (Princeton, 1965), pp. 362-394. 5 3The delay was due to the controversy over the boun­ dary between Ohio and Michigan. See Dorr, The Michigan Con­ stitutional Convention of 1855-1856, p. 19. 54 Third Annual Report of the American Antislavery Society (New York, 1836), p . 99. 5 5 Society. In March, 1836, twenty citizens of Washtenaw

County founded the Washtenaw County Anti-Slavery Society, the

membership of which was comprised of the settlers of Webster

and Scio, west of Ann Arbor. Theodore Foster, formerly of

Rhode Island, was the first secretary of the Washtenaw County Society. Foster later played a major role in the State Soci­

ety as editor of the Ann Arbor Signal of Liberty, a strong antislavery journal.^

Though the formation of local antislavery societies represented a determination to conduct an organized attack

against slavery, the peculiar institution was too well en­

trenched and too powerful to be shaken by them. The challenge called for a united, well-organized effort which included

antislavery groups throughout the state and nation. Even a

concerted effort of that kind would face serious legal and

constitutional difficulties. Nevertheless, in the summer of

1836 Michigan antislavery groups, believing that through numbers and unity their mission could be accomplished more

effectively, began organizing a Michigan Antislavery Society. CHAPTER II

THE FORMATION OF THE MICHIGAN

STATE ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY

The need for a unified antislavery crusade at a state

level was widely felt in the summer of 1836. Several factors

contributed to the urgency of taking such action. Alvan

Stewart of Utica, New York, a prominent member of the Ameri­

can Anti-Slavery Society, and Chairman of the Executive

Committee of the New York State Anti-Slavery Society,^" had

addressed a large audience on both temperance and abolition- 2 ism at the Presbyterian Church in Detroit on June 14, 1836.

In addition, abolition was a topic of common discussion in

Detroit and other parts of Michigan during the summer of

1836, as it had been for several months in the halls of Con­

gress in Washington. The sessions of the Twenty-Fourth Con­

gress were dominated by heated debates as to whether petitions

should be received which sought the abolition of slavery in

Theodore D. Weld to James G. Birney, January 5, 1836, in Dwight L. Dumond, ed., Letters of James Gillespie Birney, 1831-1857 (2 vols.; New York, 1938) , Vol. 1, p . 293 . Hereinafter cited as Birney Letters. 2 Detroit Daily Advertiser, June 14, 1836.

27 28

3 4 the District of Columbia. The two leading newspapers of

Detroit carried daily accounts of the Congressional debates

and kept the public constantly aware of the abolition

struggles. From the South news of mob violence reached the North.

Angry Southern pro-slavery men, taking the law in their hands, had roughly manhandled Northern visitors. On July 18, 1835,

Amos Dresser, one of the Lane rebels, was severely whipped at Nashville, Tennessee.5 But greatest resentment among the people was aroused by the news that the Reverend Aaron W.

Kitchell of New Jersey, during his visit in the South, was tarred, feathered and ridden on a rail by a mob at Hills- fi borough, Georgia. Detroiters and other Michigan people read about these brutal acts with burning indignation. The Adver­ tiser declared that "these slaveholders are as mad as the

Jacobins of Paris. . . . Are American citizens willing to see quietly the great charter of their freedom . . . trampled 7 down by lawless mobs?" The Advertiser suggested that such

3 Cong. Globe, 24 Cong., 1 sess., Appendix, p. 221. 4 The Free Press and Detroit Daily Advertiser were the two leading papers of Detroit at this time.

5Francis Sawyer, Jr., to George Whitney, January 15, 1837, in Detroit Daily Advertiser, February 20, 1837.

^Detroit Daily Advertiser, July 2, 1836, quoting the Philadelphia Commercial Herald. The incident occurred on June 8, 1836. 7 Detroit Daily Advertiser, July 2, 1836. 29 behavior would not "put down abolitionists, but . . . make O them." At any rate, the abolitionists realized that a

successful crusade would require an effective organization at the state level. In Michigan the would-be participants in

this endeavor had been working independently in small groups

for several years. Now, spurred by a knowledge of increased antislavery activities in various regions, Michigan abolition­

ists geared for organization. The American Anti-Slavery Society had urged the for­ mation of state Anti-Slavery Societies throughout the Northern 9 states during its third annual meeting in 1836. Ohio had acted a year earlier, and, in the fall of 1836, antislavery men of Michigan followed Ohio's lead,^ establishing the second such organization in the West. 11 In July, 1836, the promoters of the antislavery cause in Michigan announced publicly that a convention would be held at Ann Arbor, on August 24, for the purpose of forming a state Anti-Slavery Society. The organizers hoped that

O Ibid., July, 1836, quoting Philadelphia Commercial Herald. 9 Third Annual Report of the American Anti-Slavery Society (New York, 1836), p . 99.

^The Ohio State Anti-Slavery Society was founded at Zanesville, April 22, 1835. Gilbert Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse, 1830-1844 (New York, 1964), p. 83.

11The Illinois State Anti-Slavery Society was organized at Upper Alton, October 28, 1837. Harris, History of Negro Slavery in Illinois, p. 87. 30 every county society would be fully represented and more determined than ever to advance the principles represented in the American Constitution. They included that gentlemen from abroad would present several addresses. 12 For reasons never stated, the first meeting was not held, nor was another that was scheduled for September. 13

On September 5, 1836, the Monroe Times contained the announcement that an organizational meeting, for a convention in November, would be held Wednesday, October 21, 1836, at the village of Ann Arbor. Friends of abolition everywhere and antislavery societies in the state were sincerely requested to send their delegates. 14

On November 10, 1836, the convention opened. In the

Presbyterian Church at Ann Arbor, seventy-five delegates gathered to launch the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society.

They had come from the counties of Kalamazoo, Lenawee,

Livingston, Oakland, Saint Joseph, Washtenaw, and Wayne. Four 15 invited guests came from Ohio.

Alvan Stewart, James G. Birney and the Reverend

^ Monroe Times, July 23, 1836.

^ Ibid., August 4, 1836.

~^Ibid., September 22, 1836.

^^RePort ^he Proceedings of the Anti-Slavery State Convention. Held at Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Tenth and Elev­ enth of November, 1836 (Detroit, 1836) , p"I 3"! The four dele­ gates trom Ohio were John P. Cowles, S. Cole, Sylvernus Arnold and George Whipple. 31

William Goodell, prominent New York antislavery men, were

among the special guests invited to address the convention.

These men were popular among the antislavery circles because

of their antislavery speeches, publications and their efforts

to advance the cause through political action. Birney,

Goodell, and Stewart had written the leaders of the Michigan

group explaining why they would be unable to attend the con­

vention and had expressed the necessity for an organized *1 £ crusade to destroy slavery in the nation.

Birney had been a source of inspiration to anti­

slavery men. His path from acceptance as a reformer in the

South to public prosecution as an abolitionist in the North was an epitome of the problem which faced moderate and extreme antislavery men alike. An Alabama lawyer, with wealth and prestige, in 1832 he made his final turn away from the life of a planter.aristocrat. He had already been converted for a number of years, shown sympathy for the Indians, and en­ gaged in the usual benevolences. It was the uncompromising

stand of the South to the implications of Nat Turner's up­ rising which made Birney consider leaving for Illinois. The offer of the American Colonization Society to make him its agent for the Southwest seemed providential. Birney entered wholeheartedly into the task of winning his fellow slaveholders

^Alvan Stewart to Ezekel Webb, Thomas Chandler, Darius C. Comstak, September 20, 1836, and William Goodell to Ezekiel Webb, Thomas Chandler, Darius C. Jackson, September 27, 1836, ibid., p. 5. 32 over to colonization. In 1833, he moved to Kentucky and there organized the

Kentucky Society for the Gradual Relief of the State from

Slavery. Among disheartening neighbors and with news from

Lane Seminary and New York stirring him, conviction over colonization left him. Birney was now famous among Northern abolitionists; a rehabilitated slaveholder who might create a wedge of antislavery sentiment among his former associates.

However, Birney was losing his faith in old anticipation. "I am more and more convinced." he wrote, "from many proceedings at the north, that they are, in the main, ignorant of the slaveholders tenacity, and of the moral obliquities that slavery has produced in him." Northern hopes that he would publish an antislavery newspaper in Kentucky, though he made courageous efforts to fulfill them, ended before the courteous but firm letter of his neighbors, officially warning him "how you make an experiment here, which no American slaveholding community has found itself able to bear."

Birney had suffered in fortune and family, had freed his own slaves, and would later take his inheritance in slaves in order to free them. He had come to the end of his resources for converting the South. He retreated with the remnants of his family and household goods to Cincinnati, at a time when Ohio abolitionists were ready to organize on a State basis. In Cincinnati Birney's ordeal and experiences 33

did not discourage his zeal. 17 Birney's letter demonstrated that he was far ahead

of his time because Birney had seen in 1836 that the anti­ slavery agitation was necessary to counterbalance the influ­

ence of the slave power on the national government. He attacked the Congressional gag rule which he condemned as

a violation of the Constitutional rights of the people's free­

dom of speech. He condemned the destructions of antislavery

printing presses by pro-slavery mobs as the violation of

the Constitutional guarantee of the freedom of the press.

He condemned the Southern policies which condoned the deten­

tion of antislavery men in Southern prisons as the denial

of the people's Constitutional rights of jury trial. He warned that unless the free people of the North demonstrated

their strong opposition against the slave power's encoach-

ments on the rights of the free citizens, those precious rights

of individuals to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

17 Betty Flander, James Gillespie Birney: Slaveholder to Abolitionist (Ithaca, 1955) ; William Birney, James (T7 Birney and His~Times (New York, 1890); in addition to the two volumes of Birney's letters edited by Dwight Dumond, there are several other antislavery writings by Birney at the William L. Clements Library of the University of Michi­ gan, Ann Arbor; Alvan Stewart's antislavery speeches and writings are in Luther R. Marsh, ed., Writings and Speeches of Alvan Stewart (New York, 1950); the Reverend William Goodell's contributions included his editorial services for the National Philanthropist, the Genius of Temperance, the Emancipator, the Friends of Man, and his study, The Comer- Outer; The Duty of Secession From a Corrupt Church (New Vork, 1845); Slavery and Antislavery (New York. WTttarned. 1852). ------34

18 would be destroyed.

After a noon recess, the delegates took great cogni­ zance of Birney*s statements. Discussions were cogent and to the point. The series of resolutions proposed and adopted demonstrated that the delegates all along shared similar views with the person who would in later years achieve great eminence as a leading figure in Michigan’s abolition movement and would 19 become the standard bearer of the National Society. The first resolution was an outright condemnation of

Negro slavery in the nation. It declared that slavery was a practical denial of the Declaration of Independence, that its existence threatened the very existence of free institutions in the United States, and that it virtually destroyed whatever moral influence Americans and the nation might hope to exert upon despotism in foreign countries. 20 In the next resolution the convention blamed Congress for the continued existence of slavery. The convention held

Congress responsible for the flourishing domestic slave trade, expressed concern over the lack of Congressional effort to enforce its legislation outlawing the foreign slave trade as piracy, and criticized Congress sharply for not using its power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia and in

18 James G. Birney to Webb, Chandler and Jackson, October 6, 1836, Birney Letters, Vol. 1, p. 362; Michigan State Anti-Slavery Proceedings, p . 8. 19 Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 8. 20 Ibid., p. 9. 35

the territories where it had full jurisdiction to act. 21

As Christians, the delegates condemned the Southern biblical arguments in defense of slavery as definite per­ version of divine authority. They denounced as "a direct

and palpable violation of God's command" passages in the

Southern slave codes "which withhold the Bible from the colored population," and condemned the Southern Christian 22 churches for supporting the "sin of slavery."

In compliance with the proceedings of the American

Anti-Slavery Society, the Michigan State Society adopted 23 the "Declaration of Sentiments" of the National Society as a part of their program. The Declaration of Sentiments was to abolitionists what the Apostle's Creed was to

Christians, an expression of faith, belief, and duties.

The Declaration of Sentiments proclaimed essentially their obligations to organize societies throughout the state for the purpose of advocating the peaceful abolition of slavery in the nation. They renounced the means employed by the founding fathers, who in the American Revolution which was aimed at freeing the colonists from their political enslave­ ment had been willing "to spill human blood like water, in

21Ibid., pp. 9-10. 22Ibid. 23 Ibid., Appendix, p. 22; N. B. Jackson, "The Free Produce Attack Upon Slavery," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, LXVI, No"! 3 (July, 1942) ; see Appendix A for detail. 36

order to be free." Instead of violence, the antislavery crusaders would be agitators. They would spread their gospel

of freedom through antislavery lectures and writings. As

agitators, their sole responsibility would be chiefly to

influence the public mind in the interest of some large

social transformation.

They would "purify the churches" and other existing

elements of the nation which tended to uphold the sin of

slavery, because the existing social institutions were basically

coercive and had denied freedom and the pursuit of individual

perfection. In this case, they wished to see that every Ameri­

can, including the Negroes, should have the right to enjoy

those privileges provided in the Declaration of Independence.

They advocated the principle of nonviolent resistance

when they pledged themselves to patronize only the products

of free labor and to boycott all the products of slave labor.

Their program of institutional approach to agitation called

for moral persuasion and other peaceful measures within the

limits of the American Constitution. They would not interfere with slavery where it had been in existence but would request

Congressional action in such areas where Congress had exclu­ sive jurisdiction especially the enforcement of the laws against the African slave trade and the abolition of slavery in the nation’s capital.

In the Declaration of Sentiments, the American Anti-

Slavery Society had introduced the doctrine of nonresistance 37 and nonviolence in reform movement. The Society also aided in the development of the nation’s guilty conscience about race. Their examples have been employed by modern reformers within and outside the nation, notably by Martin Luther King, the leader of the Black civil rights movement of the 1950's and 1960's. The Declaration was unanimously approved and adopted.

This was followed by the motion "to proceed to the formation of a State Anti-Slavery Society, on the basis of, and auxil­ iary to, the American Anti-Slavery Society," which was also unanimously adopted.^

The convention chairman, Darius Comstock, appointed a committee of three persons which drafted the Constitution for the Society. The Constitution, when completed, was fully 2 5 discussed and unanimously adopted. In both the Preamble and in their Constitution, 2 6 the Society incorporated the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Sentiments dis­ cussed above, defined its relationship as auxiliary to the

American Anti-Slavery Society, established the qualification for membership, the methods for the election of Society officials and their respective functions. It failed to specify how to raise funds to sustain itself, a weakness that

24 Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 10.

25Ibid., pp. 11-12. 2 6 Ibid., pp. 11-12. See Appendix B for details. 38 plagued the Society until 1841, when the Constitution was 27 amended and the error was corrected.

Their choice of officers saved the Society from a premature death. Robert Stuart, the first President of the

Society, was an influential member of the Detroit Presbyter­ ian Church, the chairman of the Presbyterian Anti-Slavery

Association, the treasurer of the State Total Abstinence

Society, and the president of the Michigan Sunday School

Union. 28 A. L. Porter, the Recording Secretary and member of the Executive Committee, was a physician in Detroit whose lectures on experimental chemistry had made his name popular among the people of that region. He was also related to

George F. Porter, a law partner of James F. Joy, who was associated with the Michigan Central and other railroad companies. The two brothers were prominent members of the

Detroit Presbyterian Church and of the Presbyterian Anti-

Slavery Association. 29 The Reverend John P. Cleaveland, another member of the Executive Committee, was the pastor of

2 7 In 1841, the Society agreed to raise funds for its operations by taking up collections at every meeting, which had also been scheduled to meet at regular intervals in a year, instead of the former practice of meeting once a year. See Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society, Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841. 2 8 Detroit Daily Advertiser, February 10, 1837, ibid., February 17, 1837, and April 27, 1837. 29 Ibid., January 11, 1837; Birney, Letters, II, p. 723; Paul Leake, History of Detroit (3 vols.; Chicago, 1912), I, p. 309. 39 the Detroit Presbyterian Church whose antislavery convictions made it impossible for that church to comply with the demands of the Southern Presbyteries that the General Assembly should prohibit completely the discussion of the slavery question in the church. As the representative of the Detroit Presbytery at their General Assembly in Philadelphia in May, 1837,

Reverend Cleaveland not only justified the antislavery activi­ ties of his congregation, he strongly advocated separation from the General Assembly. 3 0

Samuel W. Foster was the oldest of the three sons of Senator Theodore Foster of Rhode Island, who emigrated to Michigan. The three Fosters had established themselves as great land holders and prosperous farmers in Scio and

Dexter, had exerted great influence in the local politics and antislavery agitation in the area long before the forma­ tion of the State Anti-Slavery Society. Theodore Foster, the youngest of the three, achieved recognition in the anti­ slavery activities of the state through his financial and editorial services for the Signal of Liberty, a paper established and edited by him and the Reverend Guy Beckly.

The choice of Samuel W. Foster as one of the members of the

Executive Committee of the Society, like the rest of them,

30 Detroit Presbytery Records, 1828-1840, p. 230; Ann Arbor Michigan Argus, June 22, 1837, quoting the Philadelphia Inquirer, June 1, 1837; Detroit Daily Adver- tiser, February 17, T837. 40

31 was a well-calculated decision.

After the election of officers, there were discus­ sions of new resolutions, strategies, obligations as well as the methods and procedures for implementing such measures considered necessary for the achievement of the Society's ultimate goals which were enumerated in their Constitution.

The first decision was made to ensure adequate dis­ semination of information across the state. There was a gen­ eral agreement among the delegates to protest by all possible means any restrictions of freedom of speech and of the press.

They would mount a serious protest against all laws which impaired the "freedom of the press, by unconstitutional interference with the diffusion of its productions through the post office." They also recommended the purchase of a press of their own in the state "for advocating the cause 3 2 of immediate emancipation."

In another resolution, they decided to fight for justice and the granting of the franchise to Michigan blacks.

The convention resolved to petition the legislature of Michi­ gan to adopt measures necessary for the favorable disposal of "the grievances of the colored people," of the state,

31 Washtenaw County, Michigan, Deed Records, Liber D, p. 6; C. B. Seymour, "Early Days in Old Washtenaw County," MPHS Colls., XXXVIII (1898), p. 394; American Freeman, July 2, 1839; MPHS Colls., II (1880), p. 314; Signal' of Liberty, October 27 and November 11, 1841. 32 Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 13. 41

"particularly in the matter of their exclusion from the

franchise."33 The convention accepted the responsibility of ele­

vating the condition of the blacks in the state. "The edu­

cation of Michigan Blacks, so long neglected" the resolution stated, "shall be considered an important duty which every 34 abolitionist ought to undertake." There were few men who were well acquainted with the

facts of slavery and abolitionism in Michigan at this time. Since there was great need to win new converts and to organize

new local societies in various parts of the state, the spon­

sors of the cause felt the need for outside assistance. Con­

sequently the leaders of the movement in Michigan requested

two of the visiting delegates from Ohio, John P. Cowles and

George Whipple, agents of the American Anti-Slavery Society,

"to honor the Michigan Society by occasional lecture tours

of the State." John P. Cowles and George Whipple were among

the seventy original commissioned agents of the American

Anti-Slavery Society. They were members of the Wooster

Central Association of the Presbyterian Church of Ohio. They were the theological students at Lane Seminary at Cincinnati,

the converts of Charles G. Finey, and were among the thirty who were expelled from the school by President Lyman Beecher. 35 They were among the first students of Oberlin College.

33Ibid., p. 13. 34Ibid. 35 Gilbert Hobbs Barnes and Dwight Lowell Dumond, eds., 42

The delegates were convinced by Miss Chandler's statement, that women would play an active role in the abolition movement. The convention urged Michigan women to cooperate with the state antislavery activities and to form female antislavery societies which could facilitate the work of emancipation "by acting in concert with the central organi­ zation . Having completed their initial task of organizing a

State Anti-Slavery Society, the delegates decided to inform the citizens of Michigan what they had done and what they intended to do to promote the crusade against slavery. Ac­ cordingly, the newly elected Executive Committee was author­ ized to prepare an address to be published along with the 37 proceedings of the convention.

Letters of Theodore Dwight Weld, Angelina Grimke Weld, and Sarah Grimke, 1822-1644 (2 vols.; New York, 1934) , T~, pp. 300, 324, 329 (hereinafter cited as Weld-Grimke Letters) ; American Missionary, II (September, 1 8 4 8 j ^ p p . 86-87, pro­ vides information on Whipple's activities with the American Missionary Association; see also Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War Against Slavery (New York: Atheneum Press, 1971), pp. 293, 339, 340; the association of Cowles and Whipple with Theodore Weld at Lane Seminary and Oberline College is detailed in Bernard A. Weisberger, They Gathered at the River, The Story of the Great Revivalists and Their Impact Upon Religion in America (Boston: Little Brown § Co., 1958); and in Benjamin P. TKomas, Theodore Weld, Crusader for Freedom (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1950), hereinafter cited as Thomas, Theodore Weld. 3 6 Michigan Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 13. 57Ibid., pp. 15-16. 43

The address drafted by the Executive Committee was the condensed version of the proceedings of the state con­ vention. It emphasized the moral philosophy of the State

Anti-Slavery Society, the evils and dangers of slavery, and extended a general appeal to all the citizens of Michigan for support of the Society’s cause. In the address, slavery was condemned as an institution which involved a great ques­ tion of morality. It reminded the people that the institu- 3 8 tion had also become a political issue. Since the Con­ stitution of the United States provided that all men must be treated as persons by the federal government, the people of Michigan were called upon to support the antislavery appeal to Congress to strengthen its commitment to freedom by abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia and in the territories. It emphasized that after Britain had emancipated all the slaves in all areas within her juris- . diction, the continued existence of slavery anywhere in the

United States had "rendered the name American, instead of 39 an honor, a reproach among all civilized nations."

3 8 The Congressional adoption of the Pickney's Gag Rule of May 26, 1836, and that of Howe on January 18, 1837, had been the topics of great political controversy and antislavery agitation and propaganda. See Cong. Globe, 24 Cong., 1 Sess., Ill, pp. 75-76, and Appendix, p. 2 2 6 ; Barnes, Antislavery Impulse, Chapters 12 § 13; Thomas, Theodore Weld, Chapter 14. 39 Ibid., p. 16; for reference of British abolition of slavery, see James A. Thome and Horace Kimbal, "Emancipa­ tion in the West Indies: A Six Months Tour in Antigua, Barbados and Jamaica, in the Year 1837" (New York) in The Anti-Slavery Examiner, No. 7, 1837. 44

The committee offered justification for antislavery agitation and why people must consider membership in the movement an important obligation by stressing the powerless - ness of the enslaved person to help himself. The American

Constitution, it pointed out, found slavery and left it a state institution, the creature and dependent of state law, wholly local in its existence and character. Nevertheless, the free people of the nation were by duty bound to agitate for the freedom of their fellow citizens who could not obtain freedom for themselves. The committee, after re­ affirming the faith of the people in the Constitutional guarantee of the freedom of free speech, free discussion and the freedom of the press, declared in a prophetic manner: "Here we plant ourselves on the firm ground of the Constitution, or rather, on a ground firmer than the 40 Constitution--the ground of original imprescriptible right."

Michigan abolitionists had thus helped in the formu­ lation of one of the classical doctrines of the antislavery movement, which was the doctrine of the "Higher Law." This

"imprescriptible right," the executive members of the com­ mittee declared, though not established by the Constitution and laws of the country, was proclaimed and acknowledged by them. The right to property, to personal liberty, to life itself, they claimed, could not be more certain than the

40 Michigan Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 16. 45

right of freedom of speech and of the press which Southern slaveholders and their supporters had in many ways per­ sistently denied their fellow country men. Michigan aboli­ tionists, therefore, made it be known that they would not be frightened nor discouraged in their cause by acts of mob violence or any attempts on the part of proslavery sympa­ thizers to forfeit their Constitutional rights. They had vowed to defend these rights and by thus making their inten­ tions known to the general public, they were urging their fellow citizens not merely to join the crusade, but to realize the necessity to join in the struggle which had among other aims the elimination of a social evil and the preservation as well as the protection of the principles of a Republican government. The abolitionists did not set forth these principles, for they were clearly and unequivo­ cally stated in the Declaration and the Constitution of the

United States. The Executive Committee expressed great confidence in their fellow Christians and in the Christian morality governed by the "Higher Law": a law written in the hearts of men by their Creator, a law emanating from God and sus­ taining the Christian code of morality. By this Higher Law, they declared, Christians are enjoined to do to others what they would like others to do unto them. The authors of the address, with great honesty and sincerity, thus admonished 46

their fellow citizens of Michigan.^ The church was thereby singled out for particular

attention. It was urged to "speak out, and use in the holy

cause of human rights, that vast moral power with which 4 2 its Divine Author has clothed it." The convention adjourned having successfully founded

a State Anti-Slavery Society. The formation of a State Anti-

Slavery Society in Michigan marked the beginning of an organ­

ized effort to agitate against slavery in the nation. It had brought the various local societies together and formulated

a general plan of action for the achievement of one goal

which was to end the system of human bondage. It also defined

both strategies and measures for the accomplishment of this goal. Consciously, these measures were designed in full

collaboration with the principles of justice, human dignity,

and within the legal premise of the American Declaration of Independence and Constitutional provisions. By not encouraging

the use of violence, or any other form of illegal methods,

the movement had adopted policies with respect for law and

order with malice toward none but with justice for all.

41 Ibid., p. 18. The best discussion of the evolution of the Higher Law doctrine is in Dumond, Antislavery Origins of the Civil War in the United States, pp. 70-76. 42 Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 16. CHAPTER III

THE PROGRESS OF THE ANTISLAVERY MOVEMENT IN MICHIGAN, 1837

Abolitionism had not attracted a large number of fol­ lowers either in Michigan or elsewhere in the North between

1837 and 1838. This does not mean that the people were pro­ slavery men. The fact is that opponents of abolition were often opponents of slavery as well. They might deplore slavery but deplore abolition more and abolitionists even more than that. Among men of prominence, personal and prac­ tical considerations caused general apathy that amounted to utter hatred for abolitionists. ’’Lynching was the only way to treat abolitionists," one "gentleman" remarked in Detroit in 1837.^ Many people in the United States, then and there­ after, regarded abolitionists as fanatics meddling with a problem fraught with potential danger to the nation.

In various and important ways the North and the South were bound together by mutual interests. With slave labor the Southern planter produced cotton, and with the proceeds

^See Harriet Martineau, Society in America (3 vols.; London, 1837), Vol. 1, pp. 312-313; for accounts of the guests at the American Hotel in Detroit in the summer of 1836, see Detroit Daily Free Press, June 14, 1836, and Detroit Daily Advertiser, June 14, 1836.

47 48 of their cotton they bought Northern machinery and other merchandise. They sent their boys and girls to Northern schools. They came North themselves when their pockets were full and freely spent their money at Northern hotels, theatres, race tracks, and other places of entertainment. Each of the political parties had a Southern wing, religious denominations had Southern members, and Southern social and cultural influ- 2 ences helped shape sentiment. But the antislavery movement made some progress in

Michigan in 1837 and 1838. There were six local antislavery societies in the state before 1837. The Farmington, Logan, and Lenawee County Societies had been organized prior to 1836.

The Oakland County Society and the Webster Scio Society was organized in February, 1836, and the following month the Niles

Society was established. In November of that year when the

State Society was founded, ten local societies were established, and before the end of 1838 seven additional societies were operating.^

2 Martineau, Society in America, pp. 312-313; for additional information on pro-slavery prejudice against abo­ litionists, see John F. Hume, The Abolitionists Together with Personal Memories of the Struggle for Human Rights^ 1830-1860 (New York: G~. P"! Putnam's Sons, 1905) , pp . 30-40. 3 Accounts of the organization of these local societies are in the following sources: Monroe Times, February 23, 1837; Detroit Daily Advertiser, April 27, 1837; Michigan Observer, August 1837, and January 25, 1838; Ann Arbor State Journal, February 1, 1838. The Chandler Family Papers, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; see especially William Bliss to Thomas Chandler, May 14, 1838, providing an account of the formation of the Blissfield Society which included a summary of the 49

The exact number of people in Michigan antislavery societies in 1837 - 1838 is not known. Not until 1840 did the executive committee of the State Society require all local societies to submit regular accounts of their activities and a list of their active members. Nevertheless, it appears that in 1836 the existing societies had a larger membership than the 313 names on the invitations to the state antislavery con­ vention of that year, since that number represented only the sponsors of the call for the convention.^ At the Fourth

Annual Meeting of the National Society in New York, 1837, twelve of the local societies of Michigan listed their total membership as 638, while five did not provide a list.^ Though one cannot speak of exact numbers, it appears that Michigan antislavery societies had a total of about 900 members. But the success of the movement depended in part upon the success of its promoters in gaining new members for existing societies and in establishing new local societies.

That was not an easy task, but the advocates of Negro freedom were not easily discouraged. Promotion of the move­ ment took three forms. The first was to explain to would-be structure, and the names of the forty-three original members. See also D. C. Jackson to Thomas Chandler, Chandler Collections No. 71, for the account of the Detroit Anti-Slavery Society organization. 4 Monroe Times, September 5, 1836.

5Fourth Annual Report of the American Anti-Slavery Society (New York, 1837), p . 140. 50 members the aim of the movement, which was to achieve imme­ diate emancipation of the Negro slaves. The phrase ’’immediate emancipation" and the demand for it could destroy the future of the movement, because the idea of emancipating all the en­

slaved Negroes frightened the American general public. Every­ body was concerned about the social and economic implications of immediate emancipation. The second step, that of organizing new local soci­ eties, was directly dependent upon the success of the first stage, which had to be accomplished by lecture tours. Usually the establishment of a new local society followed a certain pattern. First, notices for abolition lectures were printed in local newspapers, and people were encouraged to attend; secondly, after the lectures, converts decided to form a local society.

The executive committee of the American Anti-Slavery

Society had prepared these lectures for distribution to antislavery lecturers who could then inform the public of the beliefs and demands of abolitionists. A typical lecture contained the meaning of immediate emancipation, the objec­ tives of the movement, their defense and justification, and how the objectives would be achieved.^

What the abolitionists meant when they called for

^LaRoy Sunderland, ed., Antislavery Manual Containing a Collection of Facts and Arguments on American Slavery (New York, 1834). 51

immediate emancipation was simple. They called upon every

slaveholder to cease immediately the enslavement or the use

of human beings as property. As an alternative to the exist­

ing system of involuntary servitude, masters were asked to

employ their slaves as free hired laborers. Slaveholders

should not simply turn their bondmen loose upon society. They

should treat their subjects as men by giving them the liberty

of choosing to remain in their employment at a fair wage, or 7 to leave in search of free labor.

The various slave states had an obligation in this matter. Since slavery existed under state laws, these states had the first obligation to annihilate the right of man to hold another as a piece of property. Slave states should bring all persons held in bondage under the protection of their respective laws. These states should also see to it that their citizens should observe these restraining and impartial laws. The responsibility of abolitionists in this connection was to demonstrate the immorality, evil and sin- fullness of slavery to the people. By doing so, they hoped to arouse enough hatred to slavery, generate sufficient anti­ slavery sentiment among citizens of the various slave states who would therefore bring pressure on their legislatures to g enact laws favoring the abolition of slavery in those states.

The agent who lectured on immediate emancipation

^Ibid., p . 88. ^Ibid., p . 89. 52 should convince his audience that the demand was based on Con­

stitutional grounds. It was a demand upon Congress to exer­

cise its powers on the areas over which it possessed exclusive jurisdiction, especially in the Territories, in the District q of Columbia, and on the high seas. Debate over whether or not Congress should accept and consider abolition petitions dealing with the question of slavery had aroused public hos­

tility against abolitionists. Agents were therefore required

to stress that the petitioners were exercising their Constitu­

tional rights. They could not be intimidated to surrender the

liberty of speech, of the press, or of conscience, "blessings

they had inherited from their fathers, and which they intend

as far as they are able to transmit unimpaired to their children.

An agent should demonstrate in his lectures that abo­ litionists were neither perpetrators of public disorder nor advocates of slave insurrections. Abolitionists had uniformly deprecated all forcible attempts on the part of the slaves to recover their liberty. If allowed to address the slaves directly, the abolitionists declared, "We would exhort them to observe a quiet and peaceful demeanor, and will ensure them that no insurrectionary movements on their [slaves] part would receive from them [the abolitionists] the slightest aid or countenance." They were quite aware of the calamities and

9Ibid., p. 136. 10Ibid., pp. 136-137. 53 increased severity which it might furnish.^

Antislavery agents should emphasize that their tracts and other publications contained simple facts to prove that slavery was both a political and moral evil and not just incendiary. "If by the term incendiary is meant to imply publications encouraging insurrection, and designed to excite the slaves to break their fetters," they declared, "the charge is utterly and unequivocally false." 12

Agents should inform their audience that antislavery literature had never been sent to the slaves because these publications were not intended for them, "and were they able to read them, they would find in them no encouragement to insurrection." They maintained that they could send packages of their publications only upon request, and that single papers addressed only to public officials, newspaper editors, clergymen and others had been sent through the mails to those 13 who requested such of their service.

All agents were strictly advised to emphasize in their public speeches that slavery was sinful, injurious to the pride of this nation and any other country in which it prevailed. They should also encourage immediate emancipation as the duty of masters, because slavery had dangerous effects to the slaves, their masters, and the states in which it

^ Ibid. , p . 138 . 12Ibid., pp. 137-138. ~^Ibid., p . 138. 54 existed. To deny such a contention, they believed, meant a persistent belief that there was in nature a superior race to lord it over an inferior race. They viewed such a con­ ception an acceptance of what the despots of all ages and nations had offered in excuse for their attitudes, that "the laboring classes of mankind are incapable of self-government and ought to be kept under the control of their superiors."^

Agents were bound to stress that by advocating imme­ diate emancipation, the antislavery men had not insisted that the Negro once freed should be automatically granted the franchise or social equality. Their program would be followed by a period of gradual transition to allow proper adjustment to the new life of freedom. It would require the appropriate training for meaningful participation in the various aspects of life in the society, provided the society could make avail­ able the necessary assistance, more particularly in the field of economic opportunities. In this respect, the first step would be the repeal of all the unjust slave codes, the abolition of the unrighteous things wherein slavery consisted, and the restoration of men from the condition of chatties to the con­ dition of rational beings. "If there are any reasons why this abolition should not take place immediately, there are reasons which will be equally valid in all future time. And these are reasons urged against inalienable rights of man, and

14Ibid., pp. 138-139. ~^Ibid., p . 91. 55

immutable laws of God." Emancipation had already been accom­ plished safely in several nations less powerful than the

United States. Of all the charges against the abolitionists, was that of creating conditions which would lead to the dissolution of the Union, and even of wishing to dissolve it. The National executive committee wished it be known that:

We have never calculated the value of the Union be­ cause we believe it to be inestimable; and that the abolition of slavery will remove the chief danger of its dissolution; and one of the reasons why we cherish and will endeavor to preserve the Constitution is that it restrains Congress from making any law abridging the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.17

This antislavery platform and other instructions were carefully worked out, written down, and issued to commissioned antislavery agents by the National Society in 1833. Gilbert

Barnes stated that these particular instructions were attached to the commissions of agents at least until 1836. 18 John P.

Cowles and George Whipple were commissioned by the American

Anti-Slavery Society and were issued these instructions. Both men were present at the State Anti-Slavery Convention at Ann

Arbor in 1836. At the request of the executive committee of the Michigan Society, the two commissioned agents were assigned to work with the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society. They shared their expertise with future lecturers, residents of

^^Ibid., pp. 90-93. ~^Ibid., p. 139. 18 Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse, p. 243. 56

Michigan upon whom the spread of antislavery sentiment would 19 rest at the departure of the two visiting agents.

John Cowles and George Whipple spent up to six months in Michigan in 1837. Together with their assistants, they toured all through Detroit and several other communities in

Michigan, most especially in the more settled areas of south­ eastern Michigan. As they toured these areas, they lectured on abolition and organized the local antislavery societies already discussed in this chapter. John Cowles worked very hard with Michigan antislavery men. His activities were appreciably noted and local news­ papers reported his various lecture tours and lectures. If he lectured in an institution, the institution also recorded his appearance and lecture. When he attended a meeting of the Detroit Presbytery on January 19, 1837, he was invited to sit and act as a corresponding member. Cowles happened to be a member of the Wooster Central Association of Ohio.

He could not lose such favorable occasion to talk about abolitionism.u i - * • • 2 0 During the same month of January, 1837, Cowles toured

Ann Arbor. On three successive evenings, he eloquently de­ bated the doctrines of modern abolitionism. The Michigan

Argus, an Ann Arbor paper, stressed that each debate "was

19 Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 13.

^ Detroit Presbytery Records, 1828-1840, p. 231. 57 attentively listened to by a numerous audience, and the pro­ ceedings elicited spirited comments." The editor spoke of

Cowles as having "the honesty to avow that he had a political object in view." The editor was pleased to hear this honest admission, because it affirmed his own personal opinion that these "abolition emissaries" were "political partisans." How­ ever, the editor noted that when Cowles said distinctly that if the abolition of slavery would lead to a war, let the war come, he was shocked. The editor commented that Cowles's statement was anathema, tainted with the blight of nullifica­ tion, a doctrine he thought advanced only by certain Southern leaders. The editor doubted that his readers were ready to permit "these black-coated political partisans to destroy our

Union, to reduce our fabric of government to chaos," and he suggested a resort to "the ballot boxes as the best means to put down this wicked attempt." 21

Cowles's lectures at Ann Arbor were productive because an antislavery society, founded in the village in January,

1837, continued to function despite the wrath of opponents like the editor of the Argus. Before Cowles left Michigan, he had one sad experience which, of course, was not uncommon to abolitionists. He was almost the victim of mob violence when he went on a lecture tour to Pontiac in February, 1837.

Cowles's lecture was scheduled on a Sunday evening at a

^February 2 , 1837. 58

Presbyterian Church in Pontiac. The audience was said to be

large, including sympathizers and opponents of an antislavery

lecture. One of the latter group was a man called Samuel N. 2 2 Gantt, a local newspaper reporter. As Cowles was about to

begin, Gantt rose from his seat and told Cowles that he would

not be permitted to lecture and that either he would obey the

order, leave the town or face grave assault. Cowles had never allowed intimidation to stop him from lecturing and this time

he was not willing to listen to Gantt. He asked the audience

whether they wished to hear him speak on slavery and received

the approval of the majority to go ahead. The infuriated

Gantt "mounted the top of a pew, placed his back against the

wall, threw off his coat, vest and stock, drew a Spanish

knife, and swore that 'no lecture should be delivered.'"

Gantt and his supporters, who waited outside, went into action,

poured "a volley of stones and snowballs and any object within

their reach thro' the windows of the Church." But the inter­

ested men would not sit and watch. They stood and moved

toward the rioters with intent to thrust them out. The

rioters, who were armed, quickly drew their pistols and dirks,

and bade defiance to the peaceful audience. The sheriff was

called to the scene, as the situation became unmanageable.

He walked in with a posse and managed to restore order.

Cowles immediately began his lecture which proceeded with no

2 2 Samuel N. Gantt was the editor of the Pontiac Balance, a Democratic paper. 59 further disruption. 23 This first attempt to silence an anti­ slavery lecturer in Michigan had been frustrated.

The editor of the Detroit Daily Advertiser was criti­ cal of Gantt's action. He condemned: Those partisans whose bad passions and attitude and malignant spirit would prevent abolitionists from stating their case. None but the veriest outlaws from reason, will attempt forcibly to prevent the expression of any opinions that are maintained, in a candid and benevolent spirit, and in a gentlemanly language.24

The editor of the Monroe Times equally condemned the action.

Yes, American Domestic Slavery, it is contended, is so interwoven, so mingled, so amalgamated with the vital principles of our free, equal, and republican governments and institutions, that even to tolerate its public discussion would not only jeopardise, but inevitably destroy and annihilate the only free and equal government on earth, introduce an era of anarchy, devastation, and blood-shed, and extinguish the last and best hopes of an oppressed world, strug­ gling for the rights and blessings of civil and religious liberty! Yes indeed, American Liberty cannot be maintained except on the basis of degraded American Slavery.25

Gantt's action produced a favorable effect for the movement. Newspaper accounts of the Pontiac incident helped to create a demand for Cowles to lecture on slavery and abo­ lition in other communities. Abolitionists at Monroe invited him to speak on February 12, 1837, and printed in their local

2 3 Detroit Daily Advertiser, February 9, 1837; Detroit Free Press, August 2, 1837. History of Oakland County, Michi­ gan, p. 55. 24 Detroit Daily Advertiser, February 14, 1837. 2 5 Monroe Times, February 23, 1837. 60

paper on February 2, an advertisement announcing an anti­

slavery lecture at the Court House on February 13, at seven

o ’clock in the evening. Presumably because of the large

turnout and the smallness of the Court House, the lecture was held at the Presbyterian Church of the town.

According to an account in a local paper, Cowles

did a wonderful job on this occasion, treating his subject

in a most candid and impartial manner, ’’showing the views of

the Abolitionists, answering the objections urged against

them, and also showing that Congress had the constitutional power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia." The

lecture was so successful that Cowles was prevailed upon to stay and give a second lecture the following evening. After this second lecture, a local antislavery society was formed, auxiliary to the State Society.^

The Monroe Society chose as its treasurer-elect

Isaac P. Christiancy, a young man destined to become one of the founders of the Republican Party in Michigan.

The antislavery activities of George Whipple were not recorded in local newspapers. However, when the State Soci­ ety met for its first annual meeting, it announced that since

June, 1837, an antislavery agent had been employed in Detroit for a period of five months. This agent's work, it stated, had included the procurement and distribution of antislavery

o £ Monroe Times, February 23, 1837. 61

2 7 publications. It may be assumed that the agent, who was

never mentioned by name, was in fact Whipple, for he did work that year in Michigan and there were no reports that he

had worked elsewhere in the state. The spread of the antislavery movement in Michigan

after the departure of John Cowles and George Whipple around

June, 1837, was left to the leaders of the State Society. In

order to continue the little progress already made, the leaders

used every available forum. They worked through the churches,

they circulated pamphlets and tracts through the mails, they

chose and sent out agents to lecture and organize local soci­

eties. They initiated memorials to Congress and the State

legislatures on behalf of equal rights for the Negroes. They

sought a favorable hearing for their program in the public press.

The first decision of the leaders was to make Detroit

the center of the movement. Detroit was the capital city of

the new state with a population of 8,000 out of the 175,000 2 8 settlers in Michigan in 1837. It had a relatively long history, and many of the prospective settlers passed each year through Detroit on their way into the interior. As a

2 7 Report of the Meeting of the Michigan State Anti- Slavery Society, June 28, 18377 Being the First Annual Meet­ ing, Adjourned from June 1st, 1857 (Detroit, 1837), p7 97 Cited hereafter as First Annual Meeting.

28The state census of Michigan for the year 1837 is in The Red Book for the Thirtieth Legislature of the State of Michigan Chansing, 1879). pp. 181-185. 62 stopping point in the journey into the interior of the state, first impressions of Michigan were to a great degree asso­ ciated with what the new arrivals saw and heard in Detroit.

Since Michigan abolitionists were aware of this, they were convinced that if Detroiters could be won over to active support of the antislavery movement, they would have a whole­ some influence on the rest of the state.

The Detroit Daily Advertiser demonstrated the impor­ tance of Detroit in a very convincing manner. Its citizens, the paper stated, could boast of certain advantages not possessed by their fellow residents of Michigan. To acquaint themselves with either foreign or domestic affairs, they had but to visit the Detroit Reading Room, well fitted up, and the best west of New York City; it contained one hundred papers, foreign and American, besides ten or twelve American and British periodicals. 2 9

Recognizing the important part Detroit could take in the antislavery movement, Michigan abolitionists selected the city as the site of their first anniversary meeting, scheduled for June 1, 1837. They did every possible thing to make the occasion popular and attractive. Robert Stuart, a leading figure in Detroit, began as early as in February to secure the services of the well-known spokesman of the antislavery cause, Theodore Weld, as a speaker for this special event.

29 Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 27, 1837. 63

Since Weld was in great demand by other state societies for his lectures, Stuart thought of assuring success through

Weld's closest associates, Asa Mahan and Charles G. Finney.

Writing to these men, Stuart requested them to persuade Weld to honor the invitation because the state and the Society would greatly benefit from the public knowledge that he would be in Detroit for a week or ten days. Stuart added that the Society would pay all his expenses.

This request was sent to Weld by Mary Mahan, who also pleaded in behalf of Stuart. Mrs. Mahan believed that the news that Weld would be in Detroit during the summer would attract a great number of people from all walks of life and would be good for business and the antislavery cause in ..... 30 Michigan.

Weld declined the invitation for health and other reasons. His health was failing, especially after his heart attack of November, 1836. But most important of all, he had devoted his entire time working at the national headquarters of the Society in New York. During this time he was mainly concerned with writing antislavery tracts, assisting, planning and organizing a nationwide campaign aimed at collecting antislavery petitions and memorials to be sent to Congress.

30 Barnes and Dumond, Weld-Grimke Letters, Vol. 1, p. 360. The best biography of Theodore Weld is Thomas, Theodore Weld. 31 Weld-Grimke Letters, Vol. 1, xxiv. Although Weld was known for conducting antislavery meetings

in the fashion of a revival meeting, he made it a matter of personal principle never to speak at antislavery anniversaries or conventions, or even to attend them, however great the 32 pressure. However, the annual meeting of the Michigan State

Anti-Slavery Society which was scheduled for June 1 was by "previous recommendation of the Executive Committee, adjourned X X until June 28. The reason for such action was not clear, but there was a general feeling that it was taken to accommo­ date out-of-state speakers invited to attend. Meanwhile, Michigan abolitionists were not totally disappointed, for early in June they learned that Alvan

Stewart was in Detroit on a business trip. His abolition friends promptly took advantage of Stewart's presence in the city. Thus a notice was quickly printed June 2, announcing that Stewart would lecture on slavery that evening in the

Presbyterian Session Room.^^ An ardent antislavery man and an eloquent speaker on the subject, Stewart lectured twice on slavery and once on temperance. After the lectures,

Stewart made this observation:

32 Ibid., Vol. 1, xix; Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse p. 134; Thomas, Theodore Weld. 33 First Annual Meeting, p . 3. 34 Detroit Daily Advertiser, June 2, 1837. 65

Having a few leisure days on my hands, the friends of the slave at Detroit, were anxious that I should ad­ dress the public on that subject. I consented; and the first evening a fine audience met, among whom was the governor of Michigan, The Honorable Stevens T. Mason, and many other gentlemen of distinction and class. I addressed the next audience in the large Presbyterian Church which probably forever settles all difficulties as to the use of that house for abolition purposes on the Sabbath or any other. The cause has many able supporters, in this young giant state, who will be found to be true to the rights of man, and who will aid us all in their power to prevent a dissolution of the Union. Slavery will dissolve the Union, and nothing but antislavery will prevent it.35

On June 28-29, 1837, the Michigan Anti-Slavery Society

held the adjourned anniversary meeting in Detroit, and the

Presbyterian Church offered its Session Room for the occasion.

Of the fifty-eight delegates present, the Detroit society

sent twenty-three; the Logan Society of Lenawee County sent

sixteen; the Ann Arbor Society sent five; and one delegate

represented the Young Men's Anti-Slavery Society of Richmond

in Kalamazoo County. Thirteen visitors were admitted to sit 3 6 and vote as honorary members of the Society.

The first day's session opened with a brief statement prepared by the members of the executive committee which read:

Antislavery is essentially a moral enterprise; the great means it employs is the diffusion of moral light. Whatever the auxiliary aid we may draw, from other sources . . . it is still the work of God brought to bear in full effulgence that must dissipate the darkness which now broods over this great question

35Alvan Stewart to William Goodell, July 12, 1837, in The Friends of Man, quoted in The Emancipator, August 5, 1837. 3 6 First Annual Meeting, p. 4. 66

and sits so densely on the nation. . . . Slavery and an enlightened Christianity cannot co-exist. Settle the question of the immorality of slavery, and pene­ trate the public mind with the awful truth, and the great work of abolition is done. The advocates of slavery are aware of this and as a consequence their mightiest effort has been to stifle discussion in the land, for they well know that the bane of slavery is an enlightened public opinion. Anti-slavery courts investigation and free i n q u i r y37 .

The committee then reported on the poor financial status of the State Society. Receipts paid into the treasury had amounted to $345, disbursements totaled $405.96, a deficit of $56.96. Uncollected subscription revenue likely to come in was estimated to be $117. An important item in the expendi­ ture was the purchase of 7,000 copies of antislavery periodi- 3 8 cals which were distributed gratuitously in the state.

Another accomplishment was the establishment of a depository of antislavery books and pamphlets in Detroit.

Members would find a slight increase in the price of these materials above cost because the depository was advised to add a small amount which would cover transportation and other 3 9 expenses. If auxiliary societies in the state expressed the need for more of these publications, the depository would be enlarged to meet such demand. The executive committee would determine the prices of all publications from time to time if there were some changes. However, the advance on the prime cost would be only sufficient to cover expenses.49

37Ibid., pp. 13-14. 38Ibid., p. 18.

39Ibid., pp. 18-19. 40Ibid., p. 19. 67

There were suggestions to facilitate the purchase and distributions of antislavery publications- Since the handling of this responsibility by the State Society involved extra costs and delay, auxiliary societies were advised to supply themselves by dealing directly with the National Society through the mail.4^ There was one exception to this arrange­ ment. During the course of the discussions, the executive committee was authorized by a resolution to purchase 2,500 4 2 antislavery almanacs for distribution during the year. In connection with this, the delegates voted to raise $2,000 by subscription to defray the cost and other possible expenses during the present year.43

The State Society was in great need of a local news­ paper to provide favorable commentary about their program.

They were not satisfied with the reporting of Detroit's two leading newspapers, the Free Press and the Daily Advertiser, daily publications which were strongly partisan in their political affiliation. Their partisanship was reflected in their editorial attitudes toward the antislavery movement.

The Free Press, the principal Democratic organ in Michigan,44

41 This suggestion came from the office of the National Society's publication center. The Emancipator, April 6, 1837.

42First Annual Meeting, p. 19. 43Ibid., p. 4. 44 The importance of the Detroit Free Press was ex­ pressed by its editor who boasted that "there is scarcely a Post Office in Michigan or Wisconsin at which there are not from one to thirty numbers of the Free Press taken." Detroit Free Press, June 5, 1837. 68

exhibited a consistent hostile attitude toward the forma­ tion of antislavery societies, not only in Michigan but

elsewhere in the North. It opposed all forms of agitation

against slavery. The Detroit Daily Advertiser, on the other

hand, was the mouthpiece of the Michigan Whig Party at this

time. It gave support to the abolitionists occasionally, but could be said to have opposed slavery regularly. Being

aware of this situation, the Michigan State Anti-Slavery

Society recommended to their executive committee to con­ sider seriously the purchase of a press with which abolition­

ists could effectively advocate "the cause of immediate

emancipation.". • ,,45 Financially the State Society was in no position to

do this. But the Society was to receive a temporary answer

to this important question. John P. Cleaveland, a member of

the executive committee, was also a member of the executive

committee of the Detroit Presbytery which at this time was

also planning to establish a religious newspaper in Detroit.

The success of the Detroit Presbyterian plan in 1837 was

sure, and the strong antislavery feeling of the Detroit

Presbytery, and Cleaveland's association with the project,

raised hope among the abolitionists that when the proposed

journal should start publication it would possibly serve the

^ Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, p . 13. 69 needs of the Michigan Anti-Slavery Society. This would free the Michigan abolitionists from being at the mercy of editors who were either hostile or at best negative in their treat­ ment of antislavery activities in the state.

Soon the Society received news that an agreement had been reached with the Reverend Warren Isham, the appointed editor of the Michigan Observer, to advocate the doctrine of immediate abolition of slavery in the columns of that paper.

The committee felt some satisfaction with the arrangement which it said was "preferable to the establishment of a paper for the exclusive advocacy of the cause, inasmuch as it commences with an extensive circulation, and subjects the Society to no expense." 46

When the formation of auxiliary societies came up for discussion, the committee reported that returns so far received from established societies were imperfect. On account of this situation, the State Society had no way of ascertaining the actual strength of the movement and therefore had reckoned the number of the State Society on the figures obtained from the National Society. 4 7 The delegates expressed great con­ cern for organizing local societies in as many communities as possible since it became known that there were many communities in Michigan still unaware of the existence of a State Anti-

46 First Annual Meeting, p. 19. 47 Fourth Annual Report of the National Society, p. 140. 70

Slavery Society. In order to spread the sufficient informa­ tion throughout the state, the committee report emphasized the employment of efficient agents who should work under the general direction of the executive committee. The duties of agents so selected would be to lecture throughout the state, to assist in the organization of auxiliary societies, and to promote the overall objectives of the Society. 48

During this anniversary meeting, the Society agreed on certain objectives to accomplish. One of these was to improve the welfare of the Michigan black population. First of all, they would encourage the blacks to engage in other occupations instead of pursuing one single business of farming. Diversity of economic activities would be of great benefit to blacks.

This change in occupation was expected to improve their moral and intellectual acquirements and strengthen their financial position. The delegates therefore resolved that every member , of the Society should "use his influence to induce the colored people to seek agricultural and other possible employments, 49 and to aid them in attaining this goal."

The Society proudly noted that Detroit blacks were already moving in the right direction by pursuing a variety of occupations. They cited a few examples of black artisans listed in the city Directory for 1837: Robert Allen and

William Rush, barbers; Mr. Burnet, "hair dresser of superior

48 First Annual Meeting, p. 19. 49,,Ibid., .i p . 8. o 71 ability” ; Ann Butler, expert laundress; Philip Lewis, boat­ man; Morris Miller, pastry cook; A. Parker, hair dresser;

George W. Tulker, hair dresser and perfumer; and Nero Lucifer, boatman.^ Hiram Wilson, a visiting antislavery man from Upper

Canada, addressed the delegates on the condition of Negro refugees in Canada. Wilson, a member of the seventy assigned to work with these refugees, had visited the Wilberforce

Colony, one of several colonies for Negro refugees in Canada.

During his visit he learned that Israel Lewis, a black person who had assumed the role of promoting a manual labor school, was in fact a swindler, because no such manual school existed at the Wilberforce Colony. Wilson said that he had given this information to the National Society. He was reporting this case to the Michigan Society, he explained, because he suspected that Lewis would come to Michigan to solicit funds for the non-existent manual labor school, merely to improve his personal fortune while the condition of the refugees 51 continued to deteriorate. This piece of information was significant because the Michigan Society had in the past sent contributions for the maintenance of the Wilberforce

^This information is contained in an article from the Detroit Sunday News Tribune, August 12, 1894, in Clarence M. Burton, Scrapbook, Vol. p. 37, Burton Historical Col­ lection, Detroit Public Library.

^ The Emancipator, April 6, 1837, contains Hiram Wilson's letter on this matter, dated at London, Canada, March 2, 1837. 72

Colony. Thus after learning the facts of Lewis's machina­ tions, the Michigan Society adopted a resolution denouncing

Lewis and recommending that "all contributions to the Wilber- 5 2 force Colony should be withheld."

The delegates discussed an immediate action for the

Society which had to do with antislavery and anti-Texas peti­ tions. The plan of action suggested was in accordance with the instructions from the New York headquarters of the Na­ tional Society announced by a form letter in May, 1837. It recommended that "to get petitions thoroughly circulated throughout the country, they would have to overcome the handi­ cap of a lack of names in the several towns of the free

States." 53 The delegates therefore decided that a special

State-wide committee should be appointed to circulate and send antislavery and anti-Texas petitions to Congress. They also added that these same individuals should send petitions to the Michigan legislature to grant the franchise to the free blacks and also the right of jury trial to all persons claimed as fugitives from other states.^ The Michigan State Society announced the names of their members who were appointed to serve on the petition committee. On June 29, 1837, sixty-two persons located in thirteen Michigan counties received notices

5 2 First Annual Meeting, p. 9; Weld-Grimke Letters, p. 404. 5 3 Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse, p. 262. 54 First Annual Meeting, p. 20. 5 5 informing them of their assignments. In the printed pro­ ceedings of this Annual Meeting the delegates appended sample forms which contained the precise wording which committee members were to use in drafting the various types ofr- memorials. • , 56

To prepare for their work in the ensuing year, offi­ cers were elected. Robert Stuart was re-elected president.

They made few changes in other offices: Charles H. Stewart was elected as corresponding secretary, replacing William

Kirkland; Thomas Chandler was appointed to the executive committee in place of Darius Jackson; and Silas Woodbury of

Kalamazoo, 0. C. Thompson of St. Clair, and R. C. Crampton of Macomb were named vice presidents. The rest of the officials were requested to serve for another term. This was the last work of the delegates who adjourned, having voted great thanks to the Detroit Presbyterians for the use 57 of their meeting house.

^ Ibid. , p p . 6 -7 .

^The Society decided to print and circulate 2,000 copies of these sample form letters in their proceedings. Ibid., p . 20.

57Ibid., p. 10. CHAPTER IV

BY EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE: ABOLITIONISM

IN MICHIGAN, 1838-1839

The financial crisis of 1837 affected seriously the activities of the American Anti-Slavery Society. Because of this financial crisis the National Society could not provide the great number of essential services it had previously offered the new state organizations. The cost of these ser­ vices was defrayed by funds from the various state societies. The resolution adopted by the parent society in 1837 provided that state societies should each pledge a definite amount to the parent society, either to be paid directly from their treasuries or to be collected by National agents operating within the state society’s boundaries."''

The economic strain resulting from the panic of 1837 seems to have cut off the supply of funds from state socie­ ties with disastrous consequences to the progress of the anti­ slavery movement throughout the North. At the National con­ vention of 1838, the delegates accepted the only solution possible to avert complete destruction of the movement. They

"'"Friends of Man, May 31 , 1837; Emancipator, December 19, 1839. 75

decided to decentralize the activities of the American Anti- Slavery Society. The important function of travelling agents was discontinued, and the circulation of petitions was sub­ stituted as an alternative. This was followed by the closing of every state auxiliary in the nation to financial agents from the parent society. Thereafter the American Anti-Slavery Society depended for its support upon the voluntary payment 2 of pledges by state societies. The difficulties of the parent society had a dis­ couraging effect on the progress of the Michigan antislavery movement. The elimination of the "Agency System," which had facilitated the formation of the state's local auxiliaries, meant that the State Society would have to deal with the task of keeping the already established local societies from dis­ integrating. Discouraging news from members of these local auxiliaries to the new executive committee signified that the movement was in great danger. Some of the letters reported loss of interest, lack of enthusiasm and diminishing member­ ship, as the original members seemed to have lost their ini­ tial zeal for the cause. This development prompted D. C. Jack- som to express deep concern over the hostility of Detroiters

2 Minutes of the Executive Committee, American Anti- Slavery Society, December 5, 1839; Fifth Annual Report of the American Anti-Slavery Society (New York, 1838), pp. 5^ 43. The Reverend Silas Woodbury of the Presbyterian Church of Kalamazoo and John P. Cleaveland of Detroit represented the State Society at this meeting. Emancipator, January 11, February 8, 1838. 76

toward antislavery. "They think we [antislavery people] are a set of cut-throats and that we ought to be ashamed of meddling with other people's business. 'Let the South take care of themselves, we have nothing to do with them,' every- 3 one is saying here." William M. Sullivan also reported that he had seen hostility toward antislavery in Washtenaw and

Jackson Counties. He felt like "a lonely soldier fighting a lost cause," he said, because all letters from his wife's relatives and from his own, "remonstrated me to desist from laboring in behalf of the slave.

Hostility toward antislavery in Michigan was publicly exhibited. The third anniversary meeting of the State Society held at Ann Arbor on June 7, 1838, was marred by an unexpected development. Having applied to the Ann Arbor Presbytery for permission to use their church, the delegates arrived, only to learn that they could not use the building because church officials feared a disturbance which might wreck it. Although one observer believed that the apprehensions of the officials were "unwarranted and groundless,"^ the confusion they created

3 D. C. Jackson to Thomas Chandler, March 7, 1838, Chandler Collection No. 71, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 4 William M. Sullivan to Thomas Chandler, December 24, 1839, Chandler Collection No. 81, MHSC, University of Michi­ gan, Ann Arbor. 5 Michigan Observer, quoted in the American Freeman, May 21, 1839. 77

caused no records to be kept on the third annual convention 6 of the State Society. The secretary of the Washtenaw County Anti-Slavery Society reported a similar experience to the editor of the

American Freeman. He complained that the Ann Arbor Presbytery, the officials of the Ann Arbor Methodist Church, and the Clerk

of the Ann Arbor Court had all turned down the applications to

hold the meeting of the County Anti-Slavery Society in their

buildings. The timely offer of the Baptist Church, he said, 7 "saved the County Society a great deal of embarrassment." The village of Pontiac, already notorious for Gantt's

attempt to disrupt John Cowles's antislavery lecture in 1837, was the scene of another display of hostility to antislavery. On January 10, 1839, an antislavery convention of about one g hundred delegates from across the state had gathered and begun their meeting in the Presbyterian Church. The delegates

"were given to understand that they were considered as tres­ passers, and that their meeting would be broken up by a mob"

if they persisted. Confronted by an armed and angry mob that appeared determined to destroy the building, the delegates

left the church and organized in the open air. Unable to

^Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 7 American Freeman, May 21, 1839. g Michigan Observer, quoted in American Freeman, May 21, 1839. 9 Quoted in the Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 22, 1839. 78 continue because of the cold, they adjourned to the neighbor­ ing town of Rochester. There, late in the evening, they secured a place for the convention.^

In the middle of 1839 reports of mob violence at local antislavery conventions came from Allegan, Lenawee, and Kalamazoo Counties."^ Although antislavery was not popular at this time, these disruptions of peaceful assem­ blies were not approved by public opinion. The editor of the Detroit Daily Advertiser condemned the Kalamazoo episode as an attempt by the Democrats to crush the people's right of free discussion. "This interference with the liberty of the right of peaceful assembly and freedom of speech is carrying the joke of hostility to abolitionism a little too 12 far," the editor stated.

To leaders of the antislavery movement these viola­ tions of their Constitutional rights were grievances that called for redress through political action. Commenting on this issue, William M. Sullivan declared: "These peaks of anti-abolition generosity are to us as the morning streaks of our success in this State. We say to abolitionists every­ where, hold your meetings whenever and wherever, duty and convenience call you, at midnight or noonday and Sundays not excepted. Watch well the wire pullers of these outbreaks,

10American Freeman, May 21, 1839.

•^Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 22, 1839.

~^Ibid. , December 5, 1839. 79

1 ^ and walk into them at the next fall election.”

Michigan antislaveryites even exploited what seemed to be a setback to the advantage of their movement. They appealed to the public, protesting the abuse of their right

of free assembly. Mob violence and the disruption of anti­

slavery meetings, they declared, ran counter to the concept

of justice and to the Constitutional right of fellow citizens to assemble peacefully. Consequently, each reported out­ break of mob attack and disruption of antislavery meetings

aroused curiosity among some people, who would wish to hear what the antislavery speakers had to say which excited mob hostility. After listening to a proficient antislavery lec­ turer, some people might be convinced to join the crusade; others might lessen their prejudice against antislaveryites.

Nathan M. Thomas of Kalamazoo, who witnessed a series of mob attacks on antislavery men during the winter of 1838-1839, made this observation:

Abolition is evidently on the advance here [Kalamazoo]. Those who were formerly the most violent in their hostilities against it, avoiding principles the most at variance with those of immediate emancipation, are gradually changing their grounds for those nearer in accordance with it, while a milder class are imbibing our principles and becoming interested in its advance­ ment .

This observation is a reminder that there were imme-

13 American Freeman, August 13, 1839.

■^Nathan M. Thomas MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 80 diate emancipationists and gradualists, or those who favored a "milder" movement. It also contains the important caution that the policy of immediate emancipation would destroy the movement because many people were not ready to accept the Negro as an equal person to a white man. Thus the advancement of the cause would depend greatly upon the development of an ideology that took into consideration the racial attitudes of potential members of the antislavery movement. Hostility toward antislavery reflected in part an unwillingness to accept the policy of immediate emancipation. Meanwhile it was an uphill struggle saved only by the tenacity of the determined few. By not giving up the hope of eventual success, they did what they could to promote the cause. The State Society realized the grave nature of their task from the statement of the National Executive Committee which explained that:

It would require an immense means, more than the Society can ever expect to command, to do this work by travelling agents. Hence we look for men in settled life, who from their interest in the cause will take short lecturing excursions in their own vicinity and labor for the Society as a free will offering so far as.they can consistently with their other employments. The State executive committee reacted promptly. The officials sent out instructions to all county and local societies of the state, requesting a list of the officers and membership. They emphasized the importance and urgency

^ Birney Letters, Vol. 1, p. 460n. 81

of local societies across the state: The whole power and efficiency of the antislavery movement consists in the concentration of the feelings and energies of many individuals with reference to a single subject; and it is impossible that they can all act together . . . without some kind of permanent organization. . . . The Committee realized . . . the difficulty . . . of procuring suitable persons in every neighborhood to address public assemblies on the subject of slavery. . . arrangements have been made for the services of competent individuals, who will deliver addresses upon antislavery principles in any town in the county, when application shall be made to the Chairman of the Executive Committee.

The committee also urged all friends of the cause to

circulate in every town some publications devoted to anti­ slavery. The Emancipator and Human Rights were recommended

because the New York office was offering these two papers at

a reduced price when subscribed for in lots. The committee

explained that these publications would supply valuable in­ formation to all abolitionists and the general distribution would remove ill-informed and ill-founded prejudices, "and

would awaken attention to those great principles of truth and righteousness, which would infallibly command themselves to 1 7 every patriot and philanthropist."

The committee claimed that the circulation of anti­

slavery publications in areas where there were no antislavery

societies had succeeded in gaining converts to the cause in 1837, and there was no doubt that it would work in 1838.

^^Ann Arbor State Journal, July 12, 1838. 17 Nathan M. Thomas to Jesse Thomas, December 19, 1837. Nathan M. Thomas MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 82

Nathan M. Thomas had provided proof of the success of circu­ lating antislavery publications in his community. In reply to an inquiry from his father, a resident of Mt. Pleasant,

Ohio, as to the state of the antislavery movement at School­ craft, Thomas explained the success of his efforts in circu­ lating antislavery publications. I have procured sixteen subscribers to the National Inquirer, and two to the Genius of Universal Emanci- pation . . . and I have 5 or 6 more for the former readyto be forwarded soon. . . . When I sent for the Philanthropist, last Spring, there is [sic] not more than one or two if any Abolition papers taken in this place. I suppose there cannot be short of between 40 and 50 taken here at present. 8 One authority on the antislavery movement estimated that as a result of efforts of this kind, the antislavery cause had won close to a thousand advocates in Michigan during 1837. 19 Since the State Society did not own a printing press, the establishment of a separate and independent antislavery newspaper, first considered at the organization meeting in 1836, was not feasible. In 1838 there was great need for such a publication. The Reverend William M. Sullivan, a

Methodist Episcopal minister who had moved to Michigan from

Virginia because of his opposition to Negro slavery, favored, along with other influential Michigan antislaveryites, the establishment of such a paper. They acknowledged that Warren

Isham, editor of the Presbyterian Michigan Observer, had

19 Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse, p. 135. 83

treated the cause of abolition fairly, but not as extensively

as they wished. The group admitted that the great weakness of relying on the Observer was its being under the control of

a particular denomination and principally devoted to other objects of primary interest to the owners. In addition,

there were expressions of concern over what the Society would do should the owners of the Observer decide to discontinue

services to the Society, particularly after the Ann Arbor Presbyterians denied the State Society the use of their church

for the Society's third anniversary meeting. 2 0 Nathan M.

Thomas explained that as the Observer was under the control of the Presbyterians it tended more and more to emphasize matters of more interest to the owners than antislavery and that its circulation had been generally confined to those whose principles it advocated. He believed that a paper de­

voted solely to antislavery would circulate widely and have greater influence on the masses than a paper with diversified

interests and coverage. 21 Thomas first proposed to Sullivan in early 1838 that 22 an antislavery newspaper be published. Sullivan followed the suggestion and, early in the summer of 1838, sent out

2 0 . Michigan Observer, quoted in American Freeman, May 21, 18l^ 21Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MS. 22 Douglas C. McMurtrie, Early Printing in Michigan with a Bibliography of the Issues of the Michigan Dress (Chicago, 1931), pp. 25 3-256. 84

letters on that subject to antislaveryites in various parts

of the state. He received little encouragement to go ahead,

so action was postponed until December 10, the date on which the State Society had scheduled an antislavery convention in

Jackson. Supporters of the proposed independent paper be­ lieved that they would get full cooperation of the State Society. Meanwhile, Sullivan’s prospects for success were advanced by supporters in the eastern and western parts of the state who had promised their help. When the convention met, it approved the project unanimously and appointed an advisory committee to work with Sullivan. Plans for the pub­

lication were drawn up by December 24, and orders to print a 23 prospectus for distribution received approval.

In printing the prospectus, Sullivan announced that the paper would be known as the American Freeman, and \\rould be published in Jackson under his editorial direction. He

also explained that publication would be on a fortnightly basis at first, to be issued weekly as soon as support 24 warranted. Then, evidently with the approval of the convention,

it was planned to issue the Freeman when ’’eight hundred sub­ scriptions" were pledged. It was hoped that this might be accomplished and that the first issue could be published by March 1, 1839. In pursuit of this hope, an adjourned meeting

2 3 Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MS. 85 of the December 10 convention was scheduled to meet at Jack­

son in February, 1839. The purpose was to report on the 2 5 success of the subscription drive. The whole experience of the Freeman was one of finan­

cial trouble. Times were hard and Sullivan had difficulty finding either a printer or the funds to pay him. When the adjourned meeting met in February, Thomas had secured about one hundred subscribers, chiefly among the residents of 2 6 southern Kalamazoo, St. Joseph and Van Buren Counties. But his colleagues were not as successful. When the first number of the Freeman was issued in April, there were only 2 7 four hundred subscribers. Despite the difficulty in getting the project off the ground, antislavery men in Michigan had finally estab­ lished their first independent antislavery paper, the Ameri­ can Freeman. The exact date of the first issue is uncertain.

It must have been before April 19, 1839. In a letter to

Thomas, bearing that date, Sullivan had stated "by the time you receive this [letter] you will have received the 1st No. 2 8 of the American Freeman." There was a delay in getting 29 out the second issue, which did not appear until May 21.

It carried two announcements: The first was Sullivan's re­ quest that the Society should take over the paper and find

25tu., 26 , 27t, ., Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. 28., . , Ibid. 29 American Freeman, May 21, 1839. 86 a new editor; the second was an assurance to those who had paid their subscriptions that they would receive the paper 30 at least till the end of the year. Before Sullivan left his position in August, he published the third issue on 31 July 2 and the fourth on August 13. Issue Number Five is dated September 25, 1839, but the title had been changed to Michigan Freeman, and it was under a new editor, Seymour Boughton Treadwell, who had come to Michigan in 1839 at the request of the State Society to lecture on slavery. Treadwell had lived and worked for the abolition cause in Rochester, New York, before he arrived in 32 Michigan. His taking over the editorship of the paper mere­ ly postponed the death of the Freeman. When he gave up man­ agement of the paper at the end of 1840, it owed him $659 for unpaid salary and for business debts, debts he had met with his own funds. The Society acknowledged its indebtedness to him in 1841 and again in 1842, but it is unlikely that he 33 was repaid, even in part.

31 Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MS. 32 See the Treadwell Family Papers, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Two letters, one to J. C. Bird and the other to the State Society, in which he expressed his financial problems in issuing the paper. 33 Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MS; see also The Signal of Liberty, March 25 and April 28, 1841. The Society acknowledged owing the editor $159.36, an amount in excess of receipts during 1840. 87

The urgent need to sustain the antislavery movement and to broaden its base forced some of the members of the State Society during this period to suggest political action. The demand for including political action in the program of

the antislaveryites stemmed from the realization by some members that the slavery question had become as much a poli­

tical as a moral issue. To prove their case advocates of

political action pointed to the insistence of the Congress

of the United States to maintain the "Gag Rule." Further­

more, considering all the difficulties which the State Soci­

ety had to overcome in order to advance its cause at this time, it had nothing to lose by exploring what advantages

other measures would add to moral persuasion. The first question answered was how to influence the choice of candi­ dates for public office on both the state and national levels. The second was how to secure signatures on antislavery peti­

tions to be presented to the state legislature and the Con­

gress of the United States. When the delegates of the State Society met in Ann

Among other reasons, the antislavery men were great­ ly disturbed by the fact that President Andrew Jackson, in sympathy for the slave-holding South, had suggested censor­ ing the mail through Congressional legislation. He had appointed a committee with John Calhoun as the chairman to work out the details of the plan only to be reminded by Calhoun that such a policy was not only unconstitutional but could cost the South the loss of much of the Northern support in both houses of Congress. The decision of the committee which allowed officials of the postal service to use their discretion in determining what materials to deliver served the purpose. Arbor on July 7, 1838, the question whether to engage in po­ litical action was among the important topics for discussion. 35 Although an unexpected incident marred the normal proceed­ ings of the Society, a written resolution submitted to the delegates by the Reverend Luther Humphrey compelled the dele­ gates to discuss the manner in which the Society could act politically. Humphrey's resolution asserted that it was "the duty of all free men to withhold their votes at the ballot box from those who are known in any way to patronize Slav- ery." 3 6 Reverend Humphrey was a delegate from Kalamazoo, and his resolution was supported by Nathan M. Thomas, also from Kalamazoo. In giving his support, Thomas pointed out that he and Benjamin Lundy had discussed a similar plan in 1837.

Thomas believed that if it became an established policy, all the voting members of the Society would vote only for candi- 3 7 dates who were in favor of immediate emancipation.

Since many were against any radical shift from the original philosophy of moral persuasion, the discussion

The third anniversary meeting had been scheduled at the Presbyterian Church in Ann Arbor. When the delegates arrived, they were told that they could not use the building. Since it was evening, the formal meeting had to be post­ poned until the next day. Detroit Daily Advertiser, Octo­ ber 8, 1838. ^ /* Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 37 American Freeman, May 21, 1839, quoting the Detroit Daily Advertiser and the Michigan Observer of October 8, 183 8 Nathan M. Thomas to Benj amin Lundy, September 22 , 1837. Na­ than M. Thomas Antislavery MS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 89

focused on the principle the plan represented. Supporters of

the plan argued that political action was not contrary to the

Society's original stand. In its Constitution and in its

"Address to the People of Michigan," the State Society had pledged to employ all efforts using every means possible in 3 8 their campaign against slavery. Political action would

only require asking a candidate for public office a set of questions designed to ascertain whether he favored immediate emancipation. It was as simple as that. Champions of poli­

tical action also explained that other societies in the 39 Northern States had adopted the measure in question in 1837. Although some members expressed doubts as to the ef­ fectiveness of the measure,^ the Society decided to question candidates for public office. It authorized the executive

committee to draft questions and submit them to candidates for public office. The Society would have an early oppor­

tunity to test the effectiveness of this procedure, for the

State of Michigan was to hold an election in the Fall of 1838

to fill a vacancy in the Senate of the United States. The

T O Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings (Detroit, 18363 7 P • 16 • 39 References to the adoption of the measure are in the files of the Emancipator, 1837, and of the Philanthropist, 183 7. 40 There were doubts as to the actions the Society would take if a candidate refused to answer the questions and if his answers were proslavery, but most of all there was the question of what the Society should do to those who deceived the Society with false answers. Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 90 contenders for the state's Second Senatorial Seat were Demo­ cratic incumbent Isaac Crary and his Whig opponent, Hezekia

G. Wells. The executive committee therefore submitted four questions to each of the candidates. Each was asked whether he supported the antislaveryite's demand for Congressional legislation abolishing slavery and the domestic slave trade in the District of Columbia and regulation of the interstate commerce so as to end the domestic slave trade in the nation.

Each was also asked to state his position on the annexation of Texas as a Slave State, on recognizing the independence of Haiti, and of establishing commercial relations with that nation on the same terms as with most favored nations.^ Isaac Crary wrote from Marshall, on September 16,

1838, a long reply, anti - abolitionist in tone, expressing his belief that the antislavery Society had been formed not to discuss slavery, but to abolish it. He had small regard for the abolitionists' policy and could find no one on the Soci­ ety's executive committee who would either vote for him or for any candidate of the Democratic Party. Crary stated, however, though he opposed slavery he would not vote for its abolition in the District of Columbia. He explained that slavery had continued to exist there because some states were directly interested in the continuance of the institution in that part of the nation. He offered some candid advice to the members of the Society. To hasten the end of slavery

^ Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 91 without destroying the Union, Crary suggested that the anti­ slavery men ought to purchase as much land as possible south of Mason's and Dixon's line, to encourage the use of free labor. He warned that abolitionists in their advocacy of freedom for the slaves in the nation should respect the rights of other communities and individuals.^ Crary had no reservations about Congressional control of the interstate commerce. He would vote against a measure which, in his opinion, was beyond the power vested in Congress, and which, if adopted, would mean the destruction of the sov­ ereignty of the various states. His views on the annexation of Texas, he said, were already known. He would vote against it under all circumstances. As to recognizing the independ- 43 ence of Haiti, he had no comments to make.

In response to a separate question, sent by the Lena­ wee County Society, requesting his views on the Congressional

"Gag Rules," Crary said that he favored them. Abolition peti­ tions, he said, came from people in the Free States and were designed to disrupt the good feelings that bound the Union together. Had the petitions come from the Slave States, Crary argued, he would have considered them as containing valid grievances which Congress was obligated to redress and 44 would have supported them. The answers from Hezekiah G. Wells were simple and

42Ibid. 43Ibid. 44Ibid. antislavery, with one minor exception,^ and contained all 46 that was satisfactory to the members of the State Society. Since the Democratic Party was the majority party in the state, Isaac Crary won reelection to the Senate. The wisdom of turning to political action is difficult to assess, and the Society was in no position to do so in 1838. Clearly it would be unwise for Michigan antislavery men to attack the Democratic Party, for that party had provided the Society strongest foundation by adopting an antislavery State Consti­ tution in 1835. Moreover, no one expected that the old party loyalty would be broken within a four-month period, that is between July, when the decision was taken, and November, when

it was implemented. Another point to consider was the fact that the two major political parties had completed the for­ mulation of their policies and the choice of their candidates before the Society made its policy public. Finally, the weak ness of the Society in the state was too obvious to the poli­ ticians, if not to the general public, to be accorded any serious consideration in influencing the outcome of the sena­ torial election of 1838. Nevertheless, a new tack had been undertaken, and, though not effective in 1838, the Society was determined to turn more and more to political action.

^Wells said that although Congress had the power to abolish slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia, it could do so if the opinion of the majority of the residents there favored such action. Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 46 Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8, 1838. 93

At the fourth annual meeting of the State Society, which was held in Marshall, June 6, 1839, John P. Cleaveland read a letter from Rev. Luther Humphrey, who could not be present. Humphrey repeated his appeal for political action, and warned members that abolitionists who had begun a struggle to free the slaves, now had to struggle to preserve their own freedom. The best measure, he urged, was through political action. Congressional gag rule, Humphrey insisted could be challenged effectively if antislaveryites voted for public officials of their own choice who expressed their determina­ tion to oppose the Congressional restrictions of the freedom 47 of speech and of the right of petition.

Most of the delegates at this Marshall meeting were not enthusiastic with the idea. Nathan M. Thomas once again urged the Society to consider seriously the advantages of acting politically. He pointed out that in private discus­ sions with members of the Society he had expressed a great concern that the hostility of the politicians of the two political parties toward the movement would greatly hinder 48 the progress of the antislavery cause in Michigan. Perhaps none of the members of the Society was as farsighted as

47 American Freeman, July 2, 1839. 48 Nathan M. Thomas to William M. Sullivan, June 1839. Nathan M. Thomas MS. "I have been decidedly of the opinion for several months . . . that our strongest opposition would arise from that quarter. . . . the bands of political party will present the greatest barriers to the advancement of the antislavery cause in this State." Ibid. 94

Thomas, as events in the following months would show. The delegates, unconvinced by Thomas, discussed Hum­ phrey's resolution but postponed indefinitely action on it.

The Society did agree to continue questioning candidates for public office, adopted a resolution reaffirming the Society's stand on moral persuasion,^ and elected officers for the ensuing year, with its presidency going to Arthur L. Porter of Detroit.^ The Society authorized its newly elected president to draft questions for candidates for the office of the governor of the state. On October 8, 1839, Porter submitted to William Woodbridge, the Whig candidate, two questions: Would he support an amendment to the State Constitution granting blacks the franchise, and would he support a law guaranteeing every

Michigan resident, irrespective of color, the right of jury . - . 51 trial. On October 14, 1839, Woodbridge replied expressing

49 American Freeman, July 2, 1839.

^Vice-Presidents were elected as follows: Ezekial Web (Lenarvee County), N. M. Thomas (Kalamazoo County), Val- orus Meeker (Ingham County), Nathan Power (Oakland County), William Kirkland (Livingston County), Thomas J. Champion (Calhoun County), and Alonson Sheley (St. Clair County). William M. Sullivan of Jackson County was elected Correspond­ ing and Recording Secretary and E. Vedder, also of Jackson County, was elected Treasurer. It is interesting to note that the Executive Committee, listed as follows, were all from Jackson County: Marcus Harrison, W. M. Sullivan, Zephaniah Platt, P. C. Vreeland, E. Vedder, L. Dudley, H. H. Gilbert. ^Arthur L. Porter to William Woodbridge, October 8, 1839. Woodbridge MSS. 95

strong anti-Negro views similar to those of the delegates to

the State Constitutional Convention of 1835. Stating that

Michigan would be better off without any Negro population, he refused to support an amendment giving them the right to

vote. In reply to the second question, he stated that all persons were entitled to trial by jury under Michigan law,

unless they were fugitives from labor, and that federal law dealt adequately with fugitives from labor. In short, he

would not support a law guaranteeing all Michigan residents 52 a trial by jury. Nathan M. Thomas and fifty-five others from Kalamazoo

drafted and submitted three questions to candidates for state and local offices: Would they favor the adoption of resolu­

tions by the State Legislature requesting Congress to abolish

slavery in the District of Columbia and in the territory of

Florida, to abolish the domestic slave trade, reject the ad­ mission of any new Slave States and the annexation of Texas; would they favor instructing their Senators and Representa­

tives to support these resolutions; and were they in favor of the immediate peaceful abolition of slavery throughout

the world.

Thomas also forwarded a letter to the Reverend Calvin Clark of Richland, requesting Clark's opinion on the question

c 7 William Woodbridge to Arthur L. Porter, October 14, 1839. Woodbridge MSS. 53 Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MS. 96 of the antislavery political action. Thomas explained that they had addressed letters to several candidates for public office demanding an expression of their sentiments upon the abolition question, and warning them of the determination of the antislavery men to act politically for the achievement of their goal. He told Clark that since the clergyman had often opposed dabbling much in politics in the antislavery agita­ tion, he would welcome a statement from him. "If you are averse to it [political abolitionism], I hope my limited acquaintance in that vicinity will be a sufficient apology 54 for my troubling you upon the subject."

Andrew Y. Moore, the Democratic candidate, submitted an antislavery statement. He was opposed to slavery and favored its abolition.^ Joseph Miller, the Whig candidate, published his views on November 2, 1839. Miller was not explicit on the question of Congressional authority to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia. He merely stated that the Consti­ tution of the United States had given the whole power over the subject to Congress and not the States, and that Congress knew more than he did why slavery had continued to exist there. He was equally vague on the question of Congressional power to abolish the domestic slave trade. The power to

54 Thomas to the Reverend Calvin Clark, Schoolcraft, October 28, 1839. Thomas, Antislavery MS.

^5Kalamazoo Gazette, October 28, 1839; see also Thomas, Antislavery MS. 97 regulate interstate commerce as was provided in the Consti­ tution, Miller explained, could not extend further than the establishment of laws regulating trade and not to a prohibi­ tion of an article of traffic. With regard to excluding slavery from Florida, Miller believed that the people of Florida should be allowed to de­ cide whether to be a free or a slave state. In this case, he was probably the first advocate of "territorial sover­ eignty," which General Lewis Cass of Michigan advanced during his 1848 presidential campaign, and which both Henry Clay and

Stephen Douglas popularized in the Compromise Act of 1850, and in the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 respectively. Miller expressed great concern over the possible consequences of antislavery agitation on the state of the Union: I hold however (and it should be known to you gentle­ men) that I view the continued union of these States to be vital to the existence of our free institutions, that if we are dismembered and fail, the cause of freedom, fails with us. I should therefore shudder at the consequences, should Congress so act on,-£he subject as eminently to endanger the republic.

Michigan antislaveryites published their constitu­ tional views on these issues on November 23, 1839. They claimed that Congress possessed the constitutional authority to outlaw slavery from the District of Columbia and to exclude the institution from the territories because these areas were under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress.

^ Western Banner, November 2, 1839. See also S. Por­ ter Greves to N. MT Thomas, no date, Thomas, Antislavery MS. 98

They argued that Congress possessed the constitution­

al authority to prohibit an article of traffic and had exer­ cised this constitutional power for the removal of the for­ eign slave trade. The power vested in Congress in relation to the "control of commerce is the same as between the

States as with foreign nations," they pointed out. To sup­ port this case the antislaveryites cited the Congressional act which prohibited the importation from "any kingdom, place or country, any Negro, mulatto, or person of colour, as a slave, or to be held to service or labor." The same law, it was pointed out, punished infractions as follows: For equip­ ping a slave ship, a fine of $20,000 and forfeiture of the ship. For transporting Negroes, a fine of $5,000 and for­ feiture of the ship and Negroes. For transporting and sel­ ling Negroes, a fine of $1,000 to $10,000, and imprisonment from five to ten years, and forfeiture of the ship and Ne­ groes. For knowingly buying illegally imported Negroes, a fine of $800 for each Negro, and forfeiture. The law pro­ vided, among other things, that violations of the act should be felonies, punishable with death, and forbade the inter- 57 state coast-trade.

In further support of their position, they argued that the first clause of the ninth section of the Constitution declares that "the migration or importation of such persons

57 Annals of Cong., 9th Cong., 2nd sess. , p. 484; Senate Journal (repr. TH21) , 9th Cong., 2nd sess., IV, Senate Bill No. 41. 99

as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit,

shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be

imposed on such importations not exceeding ten dollars for each person." If the first clause which stipulated that

"Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, between the several States, and with the Indian tribes," had not given Congress full power upon this subject,

it would have been useless to have followed it with another clause prohibiting its exercise until the year 1808. They

thus argued that the second clause was intended to take from

the first a portion of the power it conferred upon Congress.

Congress, they pointed out, understood the spirit of the docu­ ment and in the year 1808, it made use of the power given to

it to regulate commerce so as to abolish the foreign slave trade. The antislavery men declared that Miller was wrong about Florida. They explained that at the time Florida was purchased from Spain, and when Congress extended its juris­ diction over the territory, the Constitution had been in full force for years. Therefore Florida became a territory of the United States with an express understanding of the pro­ visions of the Constitution. In that case Florida residents ought to have realized that if they possessed an institution subversive of the spirit and designs of the Constitution, there would be no certainty that such an institution should 100

not be ultimately removed. The existence of a like institu­ tion in some of the older states, they argued, could be no

guarantee that Congress would not exercise its Constitutional power, so as to abolish slavery in the territory of Florida previous to her being admitted to the full rights of a sov­

ereign state. Florida would not in justice expect that Con­ gress would not exert its power for the removal of an evil

at war with every principle of free government, "[an evil]

calculated to defeat the very object for which it was found­

ed." The antislavery men admitted that the Constitution might have suffered slavery to remain under the control of

the states where it was already in existence. Nevertheless it was confidently expected, as expressed by the framers of

that instrument, that those states would under Congressional influence, be induced "of themselves, ere long, to wipe out

that foul blot from the American name." Florida, they point­ ed out, became a territory of the United States after the passage of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which excluded slavery and involuntary servitude forever from new territor­ ies acquired by the United States after that date. Further­ more, Florida became a territory after the abolition of the slave trade. Under these circumstances, the antislavery forces declared, Florida would have had no assurance that

Congress should not make the abolition of slavery a condition of her entrance into the Union. Congress never promised 101

Florida that it would not exercise its Constitutional power so as to remove slavery while she remained a territory. They denied Miller's claim that the Constitution of the United States had given all the powers over the subjects to Congress only, and none to the States. The "sovereignty of the people," they argued, was the foundation of the Con­ stitutional powers of Congress "which is composed of the assembled representatives of the people from every part of this wide extended republic." The State of Michigan, they claimed, should "have a part and a say in that body as long as she has senators and representatives there to make known the voice of the people of the state." Michigan representa­ tives in Congress, they claimed, were not there to perform duties independent of the will and interest of the people of the state. The state legislature of Michigan had common interest with other states in Congress,

in restoring from the most degrading vassalage to their long lost rights six thousand native Americans in that District . . . in breaking up that foul slave mart existing there, in wiping out the deep stain it [slavery] has fixed upon the national character, in the removal of an evil that is exerting its baleful influence upon every part of the body politic. It might be obvious upon mature reflection that her interest and duty required her to act promptly upon the subject.

Miller had expressed some fear that if Congress at­ tempted to abolish slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia, such an attempt could lead to the dissolution of the Union. The antislavery men regarded Miller's view as a "strange sentiment to be advanced by a man claiming to be 102 a man of some sense, some decency, and some love of the

Social habits of the country in which he resides.” They claimed that they had been advocates of universal liberty and had hoped that universal emancipation would come through the force of public opinion which would induce those who pos­ sessed the power to achieve this objective to exert themselves for that purpose. They could not be convinced that universal emancipation would produce the disastrous consequence of

’’placing the interest of freedom throughout the world on the cast of dice," as Miller predicted. They had always believed that liberty and not slavery was "the cementing bond of the Union." They had also believed that the men who achieved the nation's independence, "who fought in battle fields, and who settled the Union of our States in the cabinet; toiled, sweat and bled," did not give the nation "an existence with slavery as the chief corner stone of the Republican edifice."

Their concluding remark was striking. If that liberty which is guaranteed to Americans by the Constitution cannot bind us together, then let us at once blot out the Bill of Rights, amend the preamble affixed to the Constitution, and change it so as to read: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more imperfect Union, establish injustice, insure discord, promote the welfare of a few at the expence of the rights of the many, and secure the blessings of slavery to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of America.58

5 8 The antislavery response to Miller's political views discussed in this part of the study are printed in the columns of the Kalamazoo Gazette of November 23, 1839; see also Nathan M. Thomas for an elaborate analysis of the poli­ tical and Constitutional discussions of Miller's arguments. Thomas, Antislavery MS. 103

This limited political action at the state level did not achieve any remarkable result, but it did pave the way for subsequent political abolitionism. From this point on, the agitation would focus on the constitutional, economic, and political aspects of the problems of slavery. The circulation of antislavery petitions was another political activity of the Society. Beginning from January and through March 1837, the Society had submitted petitions to Congress on those aspects of the slavery question under discussion; namely, the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, the enforcement of the laws which prohibited the foreign trade and the regulation of the domestic slave trade, the exclusion of slavery from the territories, and 59 the admission of no more slave states. When the first proposal for the annexation of Texas came before Congress, the State Society instructed its peti­ tions committee to concentrate efforts on the anti-Texas petition. Primarily they opposed the annexation of Texas as a slave state. The argument of anti-expansionists was that such annexation would open up a vast region for the expansion of slavery, and possibly involve the United States in war with Mexico. There was opposition to possible mi­ gration of blacks into the territory because many people 59 Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 13, 1837. Ibid.; Congressional Globe, 24th Cong., 2nd sess., IV, p. 164, has reference to this particular petition presented by Adams. First Annual Meeting, p. 9; Congressional Globe, 24th Cong., 2nd sess., IV, p . T64. 104

believed that slavery in the area would discourage the flow

of free white labor into Texas. Thus the committee on peti­ tions was urged to speed up the drive for the anti-Texas

petition so that it could be forwarded to Congress by the middle of September, 1837, while retaining those related to

the District of Columbia until the regular session of Congress

in December of the same year. Between December 1837 and January 1838, Michigan anti-

slaveryites presented several antislavery memorials to the state legislature essentially praying for the repeal of the "black laws," discriminatory laws repressing free blacks, and

demanding legislative resolutions to Congress on antislavery

subu j• ects. +. 6 0 The Michigan State Legislature debated the legality

of receiving and discussing these antislavery memorials.

Finally, the majority agreed to consider the petitions against

the annexation of Texas. At this point Samuel Gantt of Pon­

tiac moved to lay them upon the table.^ Challenging the

idea of initiating a "gag rule" in Michigan, Jacob Howard of

Detroit argued that since Texas was a foreign nation, and

should not be accorded the same status as the slaveholding

states of the Union, the legislature was free to express its

^ Detroit Free Press, December 16 and 23, 1837, and January ll'i 12 and 13, 1838; Detroit Daily Advertiser, Janu­ ary 12, 13, 24 and 29, also February 1, 1838. ^Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 12, 1838. 105

62 opinion on the subject of slavery in Texas. After a prolonged debate, the House of Representatives voted 42 to 4 against the annexation of Texas. It signified victory for the petitioners. In a vote of 39 to 7, the House declared that it was both inexpedient and unnecessary to express an opinion as to the Constitutional power of Congress over slavery in the District of Columbia or in the territories of the United States.^

The Senate took a similar action by adopting the sub­ stance of the House resolutions on the two issues of Texan annexation and slavery in the District of Columbia and the territories. The Senate requested the Governor to send the copies of these resolutions to the President of the United

States and to the presiding officers of the Senate and the House of Representatives of Congress.^ The legislators took no action on the other requests of the petitioners, namely the demand to repeal all discriminatory laws against Michigan

Negroes, and the demand for the passage of such laws that would guarantee the rights of jury trial to fugitive slaves apprehended within the state. After the November elections of 1839, the antislavery

^ Ibid. , January 27, 1838.

^ Ibid. , January 27 , 1838.

^Report of A Committee of the Senate on State Affairs in Relation to the Annexation of Texas, Senate Journal, 1838, p. 343; Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at tne Annual Session in 1838, pp. 4~71 - 472; Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 27, 1838. 106 men renewed their petition drive. Before the close of the

year, they had presented two of their petitions to Congress

and several to the state legislature. Perhaps many of the antislaveryites were not as interested in the petition drive as they were earlier. Nathan M. Thomas recollected that "we

did not press the matter so as to get them as numerously ft C signed as in 1837 and 1838." Furthermore, it could be pos­

sible that the attitude of their representatives in Congress

in relation to antislavery petitions and the controversy over

these petitions in the halls of Congress frustrated many of

the antislavery men. Thomas had forwarded two antislavery petitions with 421 signatures through Joshua R. Giddings of

Ohio. He explained in a covering letter that he had been

forced to take this course because of the aversion exhibited by the Michigan delegates against all antislavery petitions.

Giddings' reply demonstrated the dilemma of the antislavery men and their supporters in Congress on this issue. Giddings explained that as soon as Congress assembled, "we shall prob­ ably be silenced by some 'Atherton Gag,'" but that he would do all in his power at the earliest moment "to cause the 6 7 voice of the petitioners to be heard in this hall."

^Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MS.

^Nathan M. Thomas to J. R. Giddings, December 5, 1839. Thomas MSS.

^J. R. Giddings to Nathan M. Thomas, December 18, 1839. Nathan M. Thomas MSS. 107

During the ensuing years the fate of the State Soci­ ety would be tied to what was happening on the national scene. As the State Society made the decision to support its campaigns against slavery, it counted upon the political influence that could only come with the national decision to adopt a direct political action, an issue completely new to 6 8 the program of the antislavery movement.

6 8 In the old program antislavery agitation empha­ sized the evil effects of the institution of slavery on the Negro slaves, but in the new program the emphasis will be on the adverse effects of the institution on the white man's well being. CHAPTER V

ABOLITIONISTS AND FUGITIVE SLAVES

The Underground Railroad was a well-developed and

thoroughly organized system by which friends of abolition

aided fugitive slaves in their efforts to escape from slavery

to freedom. Through this system the antislavery men and women offered the escaping slave guidance, shelter, food,

clothing and transportation on his journey. In most cases the system developed in that section of the country where

slavery did not exist which was situated between two regions

from one of which the slave escaped with the prospect of

finding freedom upon crossing the borders of the other. This

was based upon the assumption that many of the people who

lived within the intervening territory were to some extent

opposed to slavery. It could also be assumed that although

these people were bound by law to discountenance slaves es­

caping and fleeing for their freedom, yet they felt themselves

to be more strongly bound by the dictates of their moral con­

science to assist the fugitives.

Being an illegal activity, it was conducted in secret,

and for this reason its history has some unanswered questions. The participants could not tell exactly who started it or

108 109 where it first originated. How early the name Underground

Railroad was applied to the secret trails is also uncertain.

According to one story the designation came into use in

Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, soon after the Quakers in the neighborhood of Columbia began harboring and aiding fugitives. Slave hunters had little difficulty in tracking their slaves as far as Columbia, but beyond that point all traces of them seemed lost. Unable to piece the mystery sur­ rounding these disappearances, the baffled and bewildered slaveowner was said to have declared, "There must be an under­ ground road somewhere." Another version connected with the origin of the name was given by the Honorable Rush R. Sloane of Sandusky, Ohio. In the year 1831, a fugitive named Lice Edwards crossed the Ohio River at Ripley, Ohio, with his owner, a Kentuckian, in close pursuit. When the slave reached the river, he had no choice but to leap in and swim across. Mean­ while the master managed to secure a boat for his transporta­ tion. He followed the fugitive and kept him in sight until he reached the opposite shore. The slave disappeared as soon as he landed and his master found no trace of him. When making inquiries concerning the missing fugitive in Ripley, he said he thought "the nigger must have gone off on an underground road." Since few escaping slaves were captured by their pur­ suers and since all trace of them was completely lost once they reached the free states north of the Ohio River, Southern planters came to believe the legend of the Underground Rail­ 110 road as a fact, a belief that Northerners who were engaged in assisting fugitives to escape pursuit were only too pleased to foster.^ In this mysterious enterprise Michigan had a unique history for the peculiar system of her own operations. In the 1700'.s it was a two-way traffic between Canada and Michi­ gan. This was so because slavery had not been legally abol­ ished in Canada and was tolerated in Michigan Territory. Consequently, fugitive slaves had frequently crossed in both directions in search of freedom. Canadian slaves fled across the Detroit River and sought refuge from bondage under the

American flag. On the other hand, the slaves held in the

Territory of Michigan crossed the same river to Canada seeking the protection of "the British Lion from the merciless talons 2 of the freedom-shrieking American Eagle."

However, the Underground Railroad became a one-way traffic from Michigan to Canada after Canada abolished slavery

Ella Thomas, "The Underground Railroad." A hand­ written account of her personal recollections and partici­ pation in the activities of the Michigan Underground Railroad System. MPHS Colls., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 2 General William Hull, Governor of Michigan Territory to Secretary of War, H. Dearborn, June 22, 1807, in MPHS Colls. , Vol. XL (1929), p. 141; see also Fred Landon" ecT. , "The Diary of Benjamin Lundy Written During His Journey Through Upper Canada, January 1832," Ontario Historical Society Papers and Records, Vol. XIX (1922), p. 116. An Act for the gradual emancipation of the slaves in the province of Upper Canada was enacted on May 31, 1793, as discussed in the case of Catherine Tucker in the Territorial Court of Judge Augustus Brevoort Woodward in 1807 in Chapter I of this study. Ill within her territories. From that time, Michigan attracted the attentions of the fugitive slaves, those who assisted them, and those who sought their escaped slaves. This was so because it was easy to reach Canada by crossing the Detroit

River, but above all the prosperity of the Malden Settlement for colored persons allured those slaves who wanted to enjoy 3 what was left of their natural life. By 1817 Ohio antislavery men sent fugitives to Canada through Michigan,^ and ten years later, H. V. Somerville of

Baltimore, Maryland, came to Michigan hoping to recover Ham­ let, his runaway slave. Convinced that Hamlet was still sheltered by someone in Michigan who intended to assist the fugitive to cross over to Canada, Somerville ran an advertise­ ment in the columns of the Detroit Gazette. This advertise­ ment appeared in the issue of April 17 and was continued through August 31, 1827. He offered a reward of $200 for the arrest and confinement in jail of a Negro servant named Hamlet,

3 The Malden Settlement was one of the colonies for colored persons maintained by the antislavery men. It was located in the western part of Upper Canada, eighteen miles south of Sandwich and very close to the mouth of the Huron River in Michigan. The ex-slaves who settled in this colony cultivated tobacco which was said to be of excellent quality. In 1821, the quantity of tobacco raised in this colony was estimated to be equal to that produced by the people of Ohio and Mississippi combined. See the report by Chief Justice William Powell to the Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, September 25, 1821, quoted by William R. Riddle, "Some Ref­ erences to Negroes in Upper Canada," Ontario Historical Society Papers and Records, Vol. XIX (1922), p. 144.

^William Birney, James G. Birney and His Times (1890) Appendix E, p. 43 5. 112 about twenty-seven years of age, ’’fond of talking, an accom­ plished coachman, and dining room servant who will probably hire out for one of these employments if he stays in Detroit and did not go to Canada."^ In 1840, the antislavery men of Michigan completed the network of trails through which fugitive slaves passed from Michigan to Canada. John Cross, one of the agents in Indiana, and Erastus Hussey of Battle Creek worked out the plans for the interstate connections which linked the Michi­ gan, Indiana, and Kentucky routes. The main route, known as the Central Michigan line, passed through Battle Creek.

Hussey was in charge of this most prominent center of the work in Michigan. The second route passed through Michigan by way of Adrian. Mrs. Laura Haviland was in charge of this line. ^

Dr. Matchett, the agent at Goshen, Indiana, usually supervised the journey of fugitive slaves from Goshen, Indi­ ana, to Michigan. He was responsible for the fugitives until

^Detroit Gazette, April 17 through August 31, 1827.

6MPHS Colls., Vol. XIV, p. 79, gives some important information about Erastus Hussey's life. 7 Charles E. Barnes, "Battle Creek as a Station on the Underground Railway." A paper read at the mid-winter meeting of the Michigan Pioneer and Historical Society at Albion, January, 1909, MPHS Colls., Vol. XXVIII, pp. 279-280; Laura S. Haviland, A Woman’s Life Work; Labors and Experiences (Cincinnati, 1881) covers the entire antislavery activities of this extraordinary woman. 113 O they arrived at Young's Prairie in Cass County, Michigan.

Zachariah Shugart was the agent in charge of the Young's

Prairie Station. Stephen Bogue and Joel East were among the 9 prominent persons there. There were several stations from this point to Detroit which was the last point on the risky adventure to Canada.

The distance from one stop to the other was roughly fifteen miles. Agents used a pass word to protect themselves and their passengers. The most commonly used was "Can you give shelter and protection to one or more persons."'1'^ The trails were never straight. Often several routes started from the same point. Fugitives would be sent over one or another just as seemed safest. Sometimes, if the road on which they were traveling was watched, they would be sent across to a differ­ ent road, or they would double back on the original route.

Although time was important, safety was the greatest concern of the agents. Thus most of the traveling was done at night and the routes sometimes were a zigzag. 11 Many important persons were involved in this humani-

g Wilbur H. Siebert, The Underground Railroad From Slavery to Freedom (1898) , p~ 16; Barnes, "Battle Creek as a Station on the Underground Railway," pp. 279-280. g Barnes, "Battle Creek as a Station on the Under­ ground Railway," p. 281. There were three stations there: Cassopolis, Calvin, and Penn Township.

~^Ibid., pp. 281-282; Siebert, The Underground Rail­ road from Slavery to Freedom, p. 116. 11 Ella Thomas, "The Underground Railroad." 114

tarian activity in the State of Michigan. Parker Osborn was

the chief agent at Cassopolis. Nathan Thomas supervised the post in Schoolcraft. Mrs. Thomas described her personal experiences in Schoolcraft thus: Zachariah Shugart, a Quaker on Young's Prairie, was to bring the cargoes here and my husband was to have them taken to Mr. Erastus Hussey. . . . They soon began to arrive in loads of from six to twelve. This brought much hard work to me and great expense to my husband. Often after my little ones were asleep and I thought the labor of the day over, Friend Shugart would drive up with a load of hungry people to be fed and housed for the night. . . . It has been estimated that during the twenty years that our house was a station, between one thousand and fifteen hundred received our aid. ^

There were agents at Climax who took the fugitives from Schoolcraft to Battle Creek. William Gardner was in charge of Climax. Abel Densmore, Henry Willis, Theron H.

Chadwick, Samuel Strauther (a Negro), Dr. S. B. Thayor,

Henry J. Cushman, Charley Cowles (who was a medical student under Drs. Cox and Campbell), Dr. E. A. Atlee, and his son- in-law, Samuel S. Nichols, assisted Hussey. Mr. Harris, William McCullom, Edwin Gore and Herman Cowles were agents in Battle Creek Township. David Boughton was in charge of the post in Penfield; and Elder Phelps took care of the station in Emmett, Battle Creek. Jabez S. Fitch was in charge of Marshall; and Edwin M. Johnson was the man in Albion.

12Ibid. A part of her account is quoted in Michigan History, Vol. XXXVII, June 1953, pp. 177-182. The name used in this article is Pamela Thomas. 13 Townsend E. Gidley was in charge of the station at Parma.

Lonson Wilcox and Norman Allen were principal agents at Jackson. Abel Fitch^ supervised the station known as the

Michigan Central. There were stations at Leoni and Grass

Lake from which fugitives traveled to Francisco under the supervision of Francisco himself. Samuel W. Dexter and his sons were station keepers at Dexter.^ Theodore Foster, father of Seymour Foster of Lansing, was the principal agent at Scio, near Ann Arbor. Guy Beckly was in charge of the route from Scio to Geddes, a town named after John Geddes who was also the station master there. Plymouth and Ypsilant were the next two stations. Much precaution was taken within the vicinities of Ann Arbor, Plymouth and Ypsilanti. Since obscure routes reached Detroit from Ann Arbor and the Michi­ gan Central branched off at Ypsilanti, fugitives might be taken to Ann Arbor either from Plymouth or Ypsilanti accord­ ing to the circumstances of the time. In most cases agents preferred the route that passed from Plymouth through the

1 ^ Although Townsend E. Gidley was not attached to the antislavery movement, he was active in the Underground Railroad. MPHS Colls., Vol. XIV, p. 402. ■^Abel F. Fitch was involved in the railroad con­ spiracy case and died during the trial in 1848. See Charles Moore, History of Michigan (1915), p. 563. 1 s Samuel W. Dexter's knowledge of the area as one of the government surveyors in Michigan was of great assist­ ance in this activity. See Ibid., p. 537. 116

River Rouge to Swartsburg and thence to Detroit.^

Prominent names, such as Jacob M. Howard, State 17 Assemblyman and afterwards United States Senator from

Michigan, were among the Detroit agents. Alanson Sheley, a wealthy timber merchant who together with Zachariah Chandler raised sufficient funds to assist Charles T. Gorharn during the 1848 fugitive slave case, 18 were agents in Detroit.

Horace Hallock, Silas M. Holmes and Samuel Zug were also

Detroit agents. There were many Negroes at this station who worked hard for the safety of the journey at this most impor­ tant point between freedom and slavery. William Monroe, William Lambat, George De Baptist, George Dolaxson, and the well-known antislavery orator, Henry Bibb, were among the

Detroit agents. These Negroes were credited with the organi­ zation of the "African-American Mysteries, The Order of the

Men of Oppression or The Order of Emancipation." 19 At the

Barnes, "Battle Creek as a Station on the Under­ ground Railway," p. 280. It is important to remark that Erastus Hussey provided most of the information to Barnes in person in May, 1885. 17Jacob M. Howard was a State Legislator in 1839 and was responsible for the defeat of Gantt’s attempt to initiate a "gag rule" in the Michigan legislature when antislavery petitions came up for discussion during the winter session of 1838. See the Detroit Daily Advertiser, January 27, 1838. 18 The fugitive case in question was "The Crosswhite Case" or the Giltner v. Gorham Case. See William Hovert, "The Crosswhite Case" in MPHS Colls., Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 274-277. 19 Silas Farmer, The History of Detroit and Michigan (1884), pp. 346-347; Katherine DuPre Lumpkin, "The General Plan was Freedom: A Negro Secret Order on the Underground Railroad," Phylon, Vol. XXVIII (Spring, 1967), 63-77. 117

peak of the activities of the Underground Railroad, fugitives

were transported across the state by the Michigan Central

Railroad. 2 0 Thus, finally, fugitive slaves had the privilege

to ride in actual railroad cars. Detroit abolitionists did more for fugitive slaves

than taking them to Canada. They organized a society speci­

fically for the provision of aid to fugitive slaves. The

Reverend C. C. Foote of the Detroit Presbytery worked hard

to coordinate the efforts of this relief society. Members collected essential items needed to start a new life, including

food, money, households, clothing and farm tools. Their most

significant contribution to the cause of freedom was the pur­

chase of land, ten miles from Windsor, for the rehabilitation

of the ex-slaves. The land was parcelled into farms of ten

to fifteen acres each. These farms were given to blacks who had successfully escaped from slavery to freedom. 21

Participation in the Underground Railroad was a form

of combined defiance of national laws that sustained slavery.

Involvement in the activity was an illegal act, but it re­

flected a logical refusal of several thousands of Americans

to acknowledge that they had any regard for slavery or that

they were bound to look on fleeing slaves as the property of

?n Siebert, The Underground Railroad, p. 79.

^ Detroit Tribune, December 27, 1889. See the "Obit­ uary of Samuel Zug" in this issue for some account of the Detroit Fugitive Relief Society. 118

another human being. Abolitionists who were involved regarded

their activities as the practical means to bring the princi­

ples of abolitionism to both the indifferent and pro-slavery

people in the free states. Though it had no logical place in

the professed philosophy of moral persuasion, the Underground Railroad was a profound means of convincing the South that

the movement was serious and determined to be effective. It was the best available opportunity to register protest against

the continued existence of slavery. Abolitionists demon­ strated their willingness to do something concrete for the

suffering slaves who came to them. By assisting fugitive slaves in their flight from slavery to freedom, abolitionists sometimes helped to make slavery an inconvenient and expensive institution. In 1822,

Congressman S. D. Moore of Virginia urged Congress to enact

a more stringent fugitive slave recovery law. He claimed

that the district he represented lost at least $5,000 worth

of runaway slaves annually. 22 During the first session of

the Thirty-First Congress, George Mason of Virginia complained

that the losses of his state in runaway slaves were already "too heavy to be borne," and were increasing year after year, 2 3 being in excess of $100,000 a year. Senator Pratt of Mary­

land stated that slaveowners in his state lost over $80,000

22Thomas H. Benton, Abridgment of the Debates of Congress from 1789 to 1856 (1859)7 Vol. VII, p"! 296. 23 Congressional Globe, 1 sess., 31 Cong., Appendix, 1605. worth of slaves every year.24 Thomas L. Clingman of North

Carolina reported to Congress that the 30,000 fugitive slaves

known to be residing in the North were worth over $15,000,000.

Senator Atchison of Kentucky informed the Senate that "depre-

dations to the amount of hundreds of thousands of dollars are committed upon the property of the people of the border slave 7 f\ States of this Union annually." General John A. Quitman at

one time stated that the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Com­

promise Act of 1850 was defective because it did not include a restitution clause to enable Southerners to recover $30,000,000, of which they had been plundered through the

abduction of over 100,000 slaves in the course of the last

forty years between 1810 and 1850. He also estimated that the number of slaves in the District of Columbia had been re­

duced from 4,694 to 650 since 1840 by underground railroads 2 7 and felonious abductions. Andrew Butler of South Carolina

claimed that South Carolina lost over $200,000 every year in

runaway slaves. 2 8 In Texas, slaveowners were reported to have

offered rewards of from $200 to $500, and at times as high as

2 4 Ibid., p. 1603.

2 ^Ibid., p. 202; H. E. Von Holst, Constitutional and Political History of the United States (1880), Vol. Ill, p . 552.

2 6Congressional Globe, 1 sess. , 31 Cong., Appendix, 1601. 2 7 J. F. H. Claiborne, Life and Correspondence of John A. Quitman (1860), Vol. II, pp. 28, 30.

2®Von Holst, History of the United States, p. 552. 120

$600, for the return of an escaped slave. They reported the

loss of 4,000 slaves who were "generally the healthiest, most

intelligent Negroes." This number represented the loss of

$3,200,000 in runaway slaves.^ When Southern Congressmen presented these reports

before Congress, their main concern was to convince that body

to enact a more stringent measure for the rendition of fugi­ tive slaves than that provided by the 1793 Act. In effect it

was a demand to curb the activities of the Underground Rail­

road which threatened the institution of Negro slavery. This

was a direct recognition that the Underground Railroad had

jeopardized slavery. On one occasion, these advocates of

the slaveowners explained the problems which a runaway slave

created whether recaptured or not. When a slave escaped successfully, discontent was created among the others in the

plantation. On the other hand, if the fugitive was returned

in case of an unsuccessful escape, the fugitive told others

how he or she was received by the abolitionists and that in­ formation excited a disposition in others to attempt an 30 escape. In addition to this, the slaveholders suffered further financial costs besides the loss of a slave. Consider for

instance this advertisement:

2Q Quoted by Ronnie C. Tyler, "Fugitive Slaves in Mexico," Journal of Negro History, Vol. LVII, No. 1 (1972), 5 - 6 . 30 House Journal, 1 sess., 7 Cong., pp. 125-128. 121

Negro Dogs: The undersigned having bought the entire pack of Negro Dogs, (of the Hay’s § Co.), he now proposes to catch runaway Negroes. His charges will be three dollars per day for hunting, and fifteen dollars for catching a runaway. He resides 3-1/2 miles North of Livingston, near the lower Jones Bluff Road. William Gambeel

This expenditure was a part of the cost of recapturing a run­ away slave which did not include the cost of hiring profes­ sional slave hunters, whose extravagant manner was described in this way:

Their visits generally produced commotion in our quiet community for there are those who delight to thwart these catchers of dark skins in their laudable efforts to secure their decamped property. Some of the most serious problems which have occurred in our city, have grown out of these visits of these ’’dis­ tinguished gentlemen." Dirks, blugeons, pistols, and those battering rams of nature . . . have all been called into requisition upon several occasions of this type. Blood has been spilt, eyes have been blackened, coats have been torn, and skins mangled in struggles. . . . Who can afford to pay for the luxurious exhibition of the slave catcher who spends weeks in Detroit looking for an escaped slave, and spends money so extravagantly to clad and look like a gentleman, to spend money in hotels surrounded by beautiful ladies.32

Thus an escaped slave did not only represent a direct financial loss to the slaveowner, but also a cause of an additional expense if the slaveowner had the determination to recover his property by securing the services of the pro­ fessional slave catcher. The situation had at times been complicated when the catcher was confronted by abolitionists

31 The Sumter County Whig, Livingston, Alabama, quoted in the Signal of Liberty, March 16, 1845.

32Ibid., March 5, 1845. 122 and a rescue of the fugitive occurred. In such circumstan­ ces slave masters had been compelled to take their cases to the courts and the abolitionists had been subjected to heavy penalties in the form of damages and legal costs. The attempts of Kentuckian slave catchers to recover Adam Cross­ white and his family and the rescue of the Crosswhites by the abolitionists of Marshall, Michigan, was one of the im­ portant fugitive slave cases in the history of abolitionism in Michigan.^

7 7 The raid on Young's Prairie, in Cass County, Michi­ gan, by Kentuckian slave catchers and the rescue of the more than thirty Negroes by the abolitionists of the area in 1847 resulted in a series of suits from January, 1849 to 1851. One of the defendants in this case, D. T. Nicholson, spent over $2,755. See the correspondence of Jefferson Osborn and D. T. Nicholson of June 15, 1851, addressed "To all who may be interested in our behalf," MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. In two handwritten pages, Osborn explained the finan­ cial problems of the defendants who had been subjected to six suits in two years. The story of the raid is covered by Levi Coffin, Reminiscences of Levi Coffin, The Reputed President of the Underground Railroad. Being A Brief History of the Labors of a Life Time in Behalf of the Slaves with the Stories of Numerous Fugitives Who Gained Their Freedom Through Hi's Instrumentality. And Many Other Incidents (1870), pp. 366- 375; Howard S. Rogers, History of Cass County From 1825-1875 (1883), pp. 136-142, see Chapter 17 on the "Underground Rail- road," and Chapter 36, "The History of Calvin Township"; Detroit Advertiser, December 20, 21, 22, 1850. The Signal of Liberty, May 12, 1841, contains the expression of the feelings of the Society in relation to fugitive slaves. For a series of other raids and cases, see Haviland, A Woman's Life Work, pp. 53-58, 91-110, 202-208, 209-210, 212-336. The Crosswhite episode is covered by Washington Gardner, History of Calhoun County (1913), Vol. I, pp. 52- 82; John C. Patterson, "Marshall Men and Marshall Measures in State and National History," MPHS Colls., Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 244-278. William W. Ilobert and Charles T. Gorham wrote some part of the Patterson article; the best source in which most of the confusions were clarified is the court record Adam Crosswhite, his wife and four children,^ were

the slaves of Frank Giltner of Carroll County, Kentucky, until they escaped in August, 1843. Having successfully escaped

from slavery, the Crosswhites settled down to a peaceful life in the town of Marshall, Michigan. Mrs. Crosswhite had con­

fided to a neighbor the story of their escape from Kentucky and the untrustworthy neighbor had passed the word to Ken-

tucky.* i 35 In the fall of 1846, Giltner who had been informed

that the Crosswhites were in Marshall, Michigan, authorized Francis Troutman, Giltner's grandson, to search for and arrest

them, and bring them to Kentucky. Troutman had visited Mar­ shall on December 23, 1846, and having ascertained all about

the Crosswhites returned to Kentucky. On January 26, 1847, Troutman came back to Marshall accompanied by David Giltner, 7 son of Giltner, William F. Ford, and James S. Lee.

of the case reported by the Honorable John McLean, Circuit Justice who presided over the case in the U. S. Circuit Court in Detroit, Michigan. The Federal Cases Comprising Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States From the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Federal Reporter, Arranged Alphabetically by the Titles of the Cases and Numbered Consecutively, Book 10 (1859), Case No. 5453, p p . 424-433. The case is enti1 1ed Giltner v. Gorham et al. 4 McLean, 402. 34 Giltner v. Gorham et al. 4 McLean, 402, p. 425; Patterson, MPHS Colls., Vol. XXXVIII, p. 242; Charles T. Gorham's account puts the number of children as seven on p. 252, Ibid. ^^Gilner v. Gorham et al., p. 425. 124

On the morning of January 27, 1847, the Kentuckians procured the services of Harvey Dickson, the deputy sheriff

of the county and proceeded to the residence of the slaves.

As they approached the house, Adam Crosswhite and his son Johnson, two of the fugitives, came out of the door and pro­

ceeded in different directions, apparently with the intention to escape. They were followed by the Kentuckians and on being 37 requested, returned to the house. The arrival of Francis Troutman and his movements in

Marshall since December, 1846, had aroused some suspicion among the abolitionists of the town. The colored residents of "Nigger Town" in the eastern outskirts of the city had also been at alert and had watched the activities of the Kentuck­ ians with grave apprehension. Thus before the Kentuckians were about to remove the Crosswhites from their home, a crowd of about two hundred people had gathered at the scene deter­ mined to resist the return of the fugitives to slavery in

Kentucky. Troutman and his assistants first encountered trouble when Planter Morse, a Negro, entered the Crosswhite's home and declared that the family should not be taken. Fully

3 8 William W. Hobert, "The Crosswhite Case," a part of Patterson's article, MPHS Colls., Vol. XXXVIII, p. 257. William W. Hobert stated that most of the people were alerted to the excitement by the action of Moses Patterson who rode through the streets of Marshall spreading the news; Giltner v. Gorham et a l , p. 426. 125 excited, Morse took off his coat and said that he would fight

the Kentuckians. He advised Adam to resist arrest, adding

that he and others would stand by him and drive off the kid­ nappers. As Morse reached in his pocket and pulled a knife,

Hacket, James Smith, Charles Berger, and William Parker, all

Negroes, entered. William Parker declared that he would risk his life to prevent the Crosswhite family from being taken.

Troutman then pulled a pistol from his pocket and ordered

the Negroes to keep back. 39

At this point the crowd outside the cottage was be ­ coming agitated. Sensing the tense situation, Charles T. Gorham stepped forward and spoke to Troutman. "You have come here after some of our citizens. You can’t have them, or take them; this is a free country, and these are free persons. There is a great deal of danger in making the at- 40 tempt to take them. We will not allow them to be taken." Troutman explained that he had come as agent of Gilt­ ner, the owner of the slaves, to take them before a justice, with the view to establish the right of Giltner to their services. The wagon to convey the family was then driven near the house. Troutman again stated to the crowd his authority, and declared that he would take the fugitives be­ fore the justice. Oliver Cromwell Comstock Jr., interrupted and declared, "You cannot have the Negroes." Troutman asked

3Q Giltner v. Gorham et al., pp. 425-426.

40Ibid., p. 426. 126

Comstock to explain why they could not take the Crosswhites.

Pointing to the crowd, Comstock said, "You see that in making the attempt your lives will be endangered. You can't have them, or can't take them, by moral, physical, or legal force; and you might as well know it first as last, and the quicker 41 you leave the ground the better for you." Gorham took up the remark of Comstock a short time after it was made and offered the following resolution:

"Resolved, that these Kentuckians shall not take the Cross­ white family by virtue of moral, physical, or legal force."

This was passed by general acclamation and with much noise. Troutman took a notebook from his pocket and asked for the names of all responsible persons who intended to prevent him from taking the slaves. When Gorham gave his name, he re­ quested it be written in capital letters and to bear it back to the land of slavery as a moral lesson, and added that he wanted to make an example of Troutman. Comstock also gave his name in full, "Oliver Cromwell Comstock, Jun.," adding the Junior, he said, that his father might not be held res­ ponsible for his acts.^ Having taken the names, Troutman offered his own resolution. "Resolved, that I, as agent of Francis Giltner, of Carroll County, Kentucky, be permitted peaceably to take the family of Crosswhite before Sherman, a justice, that I may make proof of property in the slaves, and take them to

41Ibid. 42 Ibid. 127

Kentucky.” Some said nobody supported the resolution; Trout­ man said one or two supported it .4 "5 Meanwhile, Troutman had been arrested on a warrant on complaint of Calvin Hacket but was permitted by Dickson, who served the warrant, to remain on the ground. Troutman made out a warrant which Sherman signed, ordering the arrest of the slaves. Dickson refused to execute the warrant. While

Troutman demanded that Dickson execute the warrant, Jarvis

Hurd, offered the following resolution: "Resolved, that these Kentuckians leave town in two hours.” Here some one of the crowd added, "Or they shall be tarred and feathered, and rode on a rail or they shall be prosecuted for kidnapping 44 or housebreaking.” As Troutman was about to leave, Dickson declared that he must take Troutman before the justice, as commanded by the first warrant sworn out by Calvin Hacket, charging assault and battery for drawing a pistol on Hacket and exhibiting a deadly weapon before the officer of the law. A second process was issued against Troutman for a trespass in breaking down the fastening of Adam's door.45 After breakfast, Troutman was taken before "Squire Hobert” and went into trial on the trespass case, which continued until nine or ten o'clock in the evening, and was then adjourned until the next morning. 46 Troutman was fined $100 for damages and costs.

4 5 Ibid. 4 4 Ibid., p. 427. 45Ibid. 46Ibid. 128

On the morning of January 29, 1847, Troutman and his

Kentucky friends were leaving the National Hotel in Marshall, when Hurd, Gorham and others told them "your Negroes are gone and you cannot get them." Troutman replied, "You have all got the advantage of me now, and I cannot tell how it will end."J H47 The abolitionists of Marshall had thus succeeded in rescuing the Crosswhites and assisted the fugitives in their journey from Marshall to Canada. 48 The first act in this drama was over, but the fight had just begun.

Disappointed in their mission, the Kentuckians re­ turned home and told their friends how they were insulted and mistreated by the abolitionist mob at Marshall, Michigan.

The aroused citizens of Trimble and Carroll Counties, Ken­ tucky, gathered at King’s Tavern on February 10, 1847, to consider "an outrage recently perpetrated by an abolitionist mob in the State of Michigan upon an aged and respectable citizen of this State." The assembly, under the leadership of one Moses Hoagland, adopted a series of resolutions which condemned the abolitionists of Michigan, and which called upon the legislature of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, as well as their Senators in Congress, to demand that the legislature of Michigan should take immediate action that would rectify the wrong done to Kentuckians. The group also petitioned

48Patterson, MPHS Colls., Vol. XXXVIII, p. 247. 129

Congress requesting that body to enact a stricter law for the speedy rendition of fugitive slaves.^

The Kentucky legislature took the citizens’ appeal into consideration by referring the matter to their Committee on Federal Relations. On March 1, 1847, the Governor and the legislature approved the release of a report reflecting the position and the action of the State of Kentucky in relation to the rescue of the Crosswhites by the abolitionists of Michigan.^ In May, 1848, Francis Troutman was back in Michigan to collect evidence and to retain counsel. The law firm of

Abner Pratt of Marshall and John Norvell of Detroit was the chief representative of Giltner, the plaintiff. Hovey K. Clarke, Theodore Romeyn, James F. Joy, and Henry Wells repre­ sented the defendants. Gerrit Smith had come from New York prepared to argue the Constitutionality of the case for the defendants if there was any necessity to do so.

On June 1, 1848, the case of Giltner v. Gorham, et al., opened in the United States Circuit Court for Michigan in the city of Detroit. Charles T. Gorham, John M. Easterby,

Oliver C. Comstock, Jr., Asa B. Cook, Jarvis Hurd, George

49 Signal of Liberty, April 24, 1847, quoting the Kentucky Commonwealth, February 25, 1847.

^^"Resolutions of the legislature of Kentucky, in favor of the passage of a law by Congress to enable citizens of slaveholding States to recover slaves when escaping into non-slaveholding States." Senate Reports, 1 Sess., 30 Cong., Report No. 143; 1 Sess., 31 Cong., Report No. 12. For details, see Appendix. 130

Ingersoll, and Randal Hobert, defendants, were tried on four counts. Two, with some variation, charged the defendants with hindering the arrest, and two charged them with having 51 rescued the slaves after they had been arrested. The jury heard the testimonies of twenty-four wit­ nesses between June 1 and June 12, 1848. Before the jury went into deliberation Judge McLean went over the testimonies,

Constitutional and other aspects of the case, in an effort to warn the jury that the case was an extraordinary one. He concluded with the following remarks: This . . . is an important case. It involves great principles on which in a great degree depend the harmony of the States, and the prosperity of our common country. The case has acquired great notoriety by the action of the Kentucky legislature, and of the Senate of the United States. It is the first one of the kind which has been prosecuted in this State. The defendants' counsel . . . have discussed the abstract principle of slavery. . . . It is not the province of this court . . . to deal with abstractions. . . . However unjust and impolitic slavery may be, yet the people of Kentucky . . . have adopted it. And you are sworn to decide this case according to law--the law of Kentucky as to slavery, and the provisions of the Constitution, and the act of Congress. . . . In no supposable case, has a juror a right to sub­ stitute his own views and disregard established prin­ ciples of law. . . . when we are called upon to act upon the interests of others, we violate the oaths, and show ourselves unworthy of so important a trust, when we adopt as a rule of action, our own convictions of what the law should be, rather than what it is. ^

Thus instructed, the jury went into deliberation.

After being out all night, the jury returned at the opening

51 Giltner v. Gorham, et al., p. 425.

52Ibid. , pp. 429-433. 53Ibid., pp. 432-433. 131 of the court the next morning, and declared they could not agree, and they were discharged. At the succeeding term, the second trial began. Pre­ sided over by Judge Ross Wilkins, the new jury reviewed the evidence from November 10, 1848. On December 5, 1848, it had reached a verdict for the plaintiff, and the sum of $1,926 in damages was awarded to Giltner. In addition, the defendants were burdened with the costs involved in the 55 case. Perhaps the verdict did not surprise anybody, even the defendants. In the first place, the actions of the people and legislature of Kentucky, already discussed, had given the case bad publicity and had prejudiced public opinion against the defendants and the abolitionists in general. Moreover, certain individuals believed that political considerations influenced the verdict. They based their claim on the fact that Lewis Cass, Michigan's favorite son, was in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1848, and a verdict against the Kentuckians would jeopardize Cass's Presidential ambitions. It was even alleged that Charles T. Gorham, who was a staunch Democrat, had received assurances from promi­ nent Democrats of the state, that defendants would receive the party's financial assistance if the case was decided in

54Ibid. , p. 433.

55Ibid.; Patterson, MPHC Colls., Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 264-265. 132 favor of the Kentuckians.56 Thus addressing Gorham after the verdict, Zachariah

Chandler, a wealthy Detroit Whig, declared, "I am satisfied that this case is being manipulated in the interest of the

Democratic party, and you are to be sacrificed to appease the slave power of the South so that Cass's Presidential chances may not be damaged." Convinced that the verdict had been manipulated and therefore oppressive, the abolitionists demonstrated their solid support of the defendants by raising the funds necessary to defray costs and damages imposed upon 5 7 the defendants. The Crosswhite case gave rise to the myth that it was a major factor in the passage of the Fugitive Law of

1850. This should be dismissed as historically inadequate because the demand for a more stringent fugitive slave act began immediately after 1793 and was intensified in succeeding

William W. Hobert, "The Crosswhite Case," in Patter­ son, "Marshall Men and Marshall Measures," MPHC Colls. , Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 274-277; Charles Moore, History of Michigan (1915), Vol. 1, pp. 399-400; Philo Dibble Family Correspon­ dence, Archives and Regional History Collection, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, see Box 15. Dibble was one of the jurors in the second trial, a jury assembled by a Democratic Marshall. He was from Marshall, the scene of the incident. He had told Gorham after the verdict that it was extremely unpleasant to at least a portion of the jury to bring a verdict against the defendants, but that they had to do so, on account of the popular sentiment.

5^The Detroit Post and Tribune (Staff), Zachariah Chandler: An Outline Sketch of His Life and Public Services (1880) , pp. 75-79. Part of this shows Chandler's belief that the Crosswhite case had something to do with the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Compromise Act of 1850. 133 years until the passage of the Act of 1850. The allegation that the verdict in favor of the Ken­

tuckians was influenced by political considerations, one of which was to discredit abolitionists and to promote the Demo­ cratic party’s political ambitions, could not be ruled out C O entirely. There had been similar scare tactics and dirty campaign tricks employed by the Whigs in the presidential election of 1844. This was the famous ’’Garland Forgery,” 59 the effort of J. B. Garland and his associates to destroy the presidential campaign of James G. Birney, the Liberty

C O Kentucky raids in Michigan were encountered often and each unsuccessful raid embittered both people of Michigan and slaveholders of Kentucky. The fact was that the con­ flict between Kentucky and Michigan had a deep seated long history which undoubtedly caused those ill feelings. It began before Michigan became a State. During the Revolution­ ary War, the British and their Indian allies used Detroit as a base of operations from which they attacked frontier set­ tlements in Kentucky. By July of 1777, Lieutenant George Hamilton, the British commanding officer of the area, had launched fifteen raids against various targets in Kentucky. Many settlers were killed and many captives were brought back to Detroit. The record showed that during these chaotic days there were about 500 captives from these raids kept in Detroit and mostly they were slaves belonging to Kentuckians. F. Clever Bald, Michigan in Four Centuries (New York, Harper 8 Row, 1954). 59 Birney moved to Saginaw, Michigan in 1842. The county of Saginaw at this time was less developed in relation to other counties in Michigan. The popularity of Birney gave the residents great hope of obtaining state assistance for internal improvements. It had been previously mismanaged, and Birney1s neighbors persuaded him to be their representa­ tive in the State Legislature to remedy the hopeless condi­ tions of the county. Birney accepted the offer on the condi­ tion that he would be the representative of the people and not of any political party. Birney was out of state when he was nominated by the Democratic County Convention. How­ ever, he made it clear that he was opposed to the election of Henry Clay, the Whig presidential candidate. The Whig 134

Party candidate. Had it not been for the nature of Birney's character, the "Garland Forgery" could have remained undis­ covered. Nobody knows how historians would have treated that episode in later writings if it had not been disclosed.

However, the Crosswhite decision had much more sig­ nificance than the people realized. It demonstrated the de­ termination of the people of Michigan to discourage the migra­ tion of Negroes to the state. It demonstrated also the wis­ dom of a few cautious abolitionists who recognized that a large Negro population in Michigan could jeopardize their cause. Therefore, by constantly reducing the number of the

Negro population, they gained the support of those whose hatred for the Negro was the motive for their antislavery leaders of the state who hoped to carry the state for Clay therefore decided to damage Birney's influence and thus destroy the Liberty forces in the state. For this reason they forged several statements published in several Whig papers accusing Birney of a corrupt coalition with the Democratic party. The Whigs forged enough evidence to prove that Birney had secretly negotiated with the Democratic party to obtain the nomination and had promised in return to keep silent forever in the slavery controversy. Thus Birney was labeled a betrayer of the antislavery advocates who placed great confidence on his staunch antislavery con­ victions and who had hoped that his presidential campaign as the Liberty candidate would win more voters in 1844 than in 1840. Detroit Free Press, September through December, 1833; Signal" of Liberty, September through December, 1844; Betty Fladeland, James Gillespie Birney: From Slaveholder to Abolitionist (Ithaca, 1955J, pp. 240-250; William Dirney, James G. Birney and His Times, pp. 343-344, 350-360. ^From practical experience antislaveryites recog­ nized early that the presence of a large Negro population in the free states disturbed the free whites; hence in their Underground Railroad activities they sent the fugitives to the Negro colonies in Canada. The American Missionary So­ ciety, which was very much involved in maintaining these 135

sentiment. It warned those already there and others intend­

ing to come there that Michigan was not a perfect haven.

Above all, it enhanced the political aspirations of those de­

fendants and their strong supporters, who gained public sym­ pathy as victims in the fight for freedom and justice.^ Finally, the heavy financial costs of the case distressed the defendants and taught others the lesson that helping fugitive slaves could be very expensive in Michigan. colonies, stated that in spite of reverse migration back to the United States , the number of fugitives in these Negro colonies exceeded 40,000 in 1861. Ontario Historical Journal, IV (1949), p. 195; Fred Landon, "The Buxton Settlement," Jour­ nal of Negro History, III (1918), p. 366; Brion Gysin, To Master A Long Goodnight . . . (New York, 1946), p. 124; Harold B. Fields, "Free Negroes in Cass County Before the Civil War," Michigan History, XLIV (1960), pp. 375-383; Levi Coffin, Reminiscences of Levi Coffin . . . (Cincinnati, 1870), pp. 366- 367; Howard S. Rogers, History of Cass County from 1825-1875 (Cassopolis, 1875), pp. 136-138. Th 1850 the total population of Michigan was 400,000, and blacks numbered only 2,372. In 1860 out of a total population of over 749,113, there were only 6,799 blacks. However, the most significant part was that the black population was so thinly distributed throughout the state that it could not have disturbed the white inhabi­ tants. John C. Dancy, "The Negro People of Michigan," Michigan History, XXIV (1940), 222, showed that in 1818 there were 144 Negroes in Michigan; in 1820, 174; in 1830, 273; in 1840, 753; in 1850, 2,372; in 1860, 6,799; see also Amos H. Hawley, The Population of Michigan, 1840-1860: An Analysis of Growth, Distribution and Composition (Ann Arbor, 1949) , p~! 56; GForge N^ Fuller's discussion of the composition of Michigan popula­ tion before the Civil War, in MPHS Colls., XXXVII, pp. 357- 361, 542; Compendium of the United States (1850), pp. 116- 118;ibjLd.'i (1860) , pT 248 . See Appendix C.

Before the Republican domination of the State Legislature in 1854, Michigan antislaveryites had supported the election of their spokesmen to Congress, notably Zachariah Chandler, Robert McClelland, Kinsley Bingham, William Howard and Isaac Christiancy; and to the State Legislature, Erastus Hussey, Hovey K. Clarke, Charles Dickie; Alpheus Felch served as State Auditor and Oliver C. Comstock as Superintendent of Public Instruction, under the administration of Governor S. Barry, 1841-1846. CHAPTER VI

THE POLITICS OF OPPORTUNISM:

POLITICAL ANTISLAVERY IN MICHIGAN 1840-1850

The idea of acting politically seemed acceptable to many antislavery men ^ but in 1839 a majority opposed the formation of an antislavery political party. Nowhere in the nation did fifty percent of any state antislavery soci- ety support political action. Indeed, most clergymen, the very backbone of the American Anti-Slavery Society, influ­ ential leaders like William Lloyd Garrison, Theodore Weld,

Professor Asa Mahan of Oberlin College, Lewis Tappan of New

Acting politically involved such pressure political tactics as petitioning Congress and state legislatures to end the domestic and foreign slave trade, to abolish slavery in the territories within the jurisdiction of the federal government, especially in the District of Columbia, and the admission of no new slave states; it included the use of the franchise to influence the choice and election of public officials. 2 The Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society voted against the plan on several occasions. The delegates at the State Society at Tecumseh in Lenawee County rejected the plan in October, 1839. See the "Proceedings of the State Society Meeting of October 9-10, 1839," in Michigan Freeman, November 27, 1839. See also the Proceedings of two national conven­ tions of the American Anti-Slavery Society of May, 1839, held in New York City, and that of July, 1839, held at Albany, New York, at which 494 delegates from eleven states voted against the plan. Michigan Freeman, October 9, 1839.

136 137

York, and S. B. Treadwell of Michigan, and hundreds of rank 3 and file members vehemently rejected the idea. In January, 1840, the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society met twice and each time resolutions proposing the establishment of an antislavery political party were intro­ duced, discussed and rejected. S. B. Treadwell, who later became one of the strong advocates of the plan, warned against the acceptance of dangerous strategy which could weaken the antislavery cause unless approved by the majority of members. He insisted that the Society should profit by the example of slaveowners, who, instead of organizing a political party to promote their particular interests, had retained their hold on their northern partisans, and had as a consequence moulded and governed the politics of the 4 country.

3 The proceedings of the special meeting of the Na­ tional Society held in Cleveland, Ohio, on October 23, 1839, at which 400 delegates voted against the plan, are detailed in Michigan Freeman, November 27, 1839. The radical group led by Myron Holley met at Warsaw, New York, in November 1839, and went as far as nominating James G. Birney and F. Julius LeMoyne as Presidential candidates, which action also failed to receive approval. See the Emancipator, November 7, 1839; Dwight L. Dumond, ed., Letters of James GTllespie Birney, Vol. 1, pp. 511-514, contains Birney1s rejection of the nomination and reasons; ibid., pp. 516-517, 519, dated December 17, 1839, and addressed to Myron Holley, Joshua H. Darling and Joshua Andrews contained some words of advice and caution in relation to the organization of an independent political party. 4 The Proceedings of the State Society meeting held in Jackson, Michigan, January, 1840. Michigan Freeman, January 15 and 19, 1840; Seymour B. Treadwell MSS in MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 138

However, Alvan Stewart, Gerrit Smith, and Myron

Holley, strong exponents of an antislavery political party, could not be persuaded to stop trying. In January, 1840,

they met at Arcade, New York, with 700 of their supporters, and

approved the resolutions to organize a separate political party, and for an antislavery national convention to be held at Albany, New York, in April, 1840.^ The various state antislavery societies were cor­ dially requested to send delegates to the Albany convention. The organizers emphasized that the formation of an anti­ slavery political party would not only save the entire movement, but in addition, was necessary for the election of those who would promote antislavery interests in Congress and in state legislatures.^ In Michigan, Seymour B. Treadwell had joined Nathan

M. Thomas and others who .supported the organization of an antislavery political party. Urging the members of the

Michigan Anti-Slavery Society to approve the plan for an independent political action, Treadwell emphasized that as long as the public had regarded all the abolitionists who accepted the policy of questioning candidates and other

^The Arcade convention began on January 28 and closed on the 29th. Emancipator, February 13, 1840.

^Most of their statements are reprinted in the Michigan Freeman of March 18 and April 8, 1840; that ad- dressed personally to S. B. Treadwell, dated March 23, 1840, by Gerrit Smith, is in Seymour B. Treadwell Papers (in MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor). 139 pressure political tactics as a distinct political party, rejecting the organization of the third party meant suffer­ ing the disadvantages without enjoying the advantages of a 7 political party. The Albany convention met as scheduled on April 1,

1840, approved the formation of an antislavery political party, and nominated James G. Birney and Thomas Earle as candidates for President and Vice-President respectively O in the election of 1840. Although most antislavery men did not at first approve the action of the Albany conven­ tion, opposition to the plan was overcome by the organizers q and their supporters. The measures adopted by the dele­ gates at the Albany convention marked the formal entry of the antislavery forces into the American political scene and the transformation of the moral crusade against slavery into a political movement. An immediate consequence of this decision was a

7 See Michigan Freeman, March 4, 1840. Q See Nathan Power, Account of Antislavery Activi­ ties MSS (in MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor); Nathan Thomas, Antislavery MSS in MHSC; Elizur Wright, Myron Holley and What He Did for Liberty and True Religion (Boston, 1882) , pp. 251-252 ; Brooks Frothingham, Gerrit Smith: A Biography (New York, 1879), pp. 159-163. ^See "Letters of Dr. F. J. LeMoyne, an Abolitionist of Western Pennsylvania," Journal of Negro History, XVIII (1933), pp. 451-474; Edwin B. Bronner, Thomas Earle as a Reformer (Philadelphia, 1948), pp. 25-3(T; Michigan Freeman, April 8 , 1840; Luther R. Marsh, The Writings and Speeches- of Alvan Stewart on Slavery (New York, 1860) , p p . 21-27. 140 split in the American Anti-Slavery Society at its annual meeting one month later.^ William Lloyd Garrison and his followers, who had persistently opposed the idea of politi­ cal abolitionism, retained the Society's old name. Lewis Tappan and his associates organized the American and Foreign

Anti-Slavery Society. The latter Society, whose members were mostly New Yorkers, was dominated by advocates of an independent political party.^ As the entire movement experienced the crisis of disintegration because of the split, and as the prospect of a national political organiza­ tion seemed practically unforeseen, the larger state soci­ eties tended to hold to their respective organizations.

Financial problems, power rivalry, ideological dif­ ferences, the women's rights question were among the serious factors which climaxed the schism. Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse, especially Chapters XIV and XV; Minutes of the Executive Committee, American Anti-Slavery Society, 1837- 1840, pp. 148, 182, 192, 202-207; Emancipator, March 12, 1840; Emancipator, April 23, 1840; Louis Filler, The Crusade Against Slavery, 1850-1860 (New York, 1960), especially Chapter 6 ; Garrison and Garrison, Garrison, I, pp. 224-226; Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War Against Slavery (New York, 1971) , especially Chapter 10; Guy F. Hershberger, War, Peace and Nonresistance (Scotts­ dale, Pa., 1946), pp~ 215- 218. 11 Of most special interest is the fact that at the formation of the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, such figures as Gerrit Smith, Alvan Stewart, Elizur Wright, Theodore Weld were not on the list; Bertha M. Stearns, "Re­ form Periodicals and Female Reformers, 1830-1860," American Historical Review, XXXVIII (1932), pp. 678-699; Mary Grew, "Annals of Women's Anti-Slavery Societies," in the Proceed­ ings of the American Anti-Slavery Society at Its Third Decade (New York, 1864); American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Reporter (June and July, 1840); Bertram Wyatt-Brown, "William Lloyd Garrison and Anti-Slavery Unity: A Reappraisal," Civil War History, XIII (March 1967), pp. 5-24; Wright, Myron Holley, pp. 17 2, 243-252, 256-260. 141

If this fact that there was a doubtful antislavery political party in 1840 is accepted, then there should be no surprise to find no national platform issued by the new political party, which did not even have a name when it was organized. 12 Thus Birney's letter of acceptance was an unofficial platform of the new party. This letter by a former slaveowner in the South, who had become an earnest abolitionist, was a combination of moral, political and prophetic treaties. 13 He accepted the nomination of the Liberty Party,

Birney explained, because he was convinced that only a new political party could effectively challenge the domination of the "slave power" and bring about the emancipation of the slaves. He emphasized that there would never be a sincere union between the North and the South if the North remained true to her republican principles and habits, and the South 14 persisted in her slaveholding despotism.

12 The abolition political party became officially known as the Liberty Party in May, 1841, at their national nominating convention. See the detailed account of the con­ vention written by Theodore Foster in Theodore Foster Papers, 1835-1862 MSS (handwritten), MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. See also Nathan M~ TKomas, Antislavery MSS, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 13 Dwight L. Dumond, ed., Letters of James Gillespie Birney, Vol. I, pp. 563-573. The importance of Birney*s statements is in the fact that he predicted in 1840 what actually happened from 1854-1861, from the formation of the Republican Party to the outbreak of the Civil War. ^ I b i d ., p . 563. 142

Birney lamented that since its triumph on the Mis­ souri question, the slave power had asserted its dominion with great boldness, and the free states had yielded to Southern domination like Ma conquered province, conquered by a power whose intrinsic strength in every respect is comparatively contemptible, but whose weakness is made strength by union." The danger he pointed out was the failure of the South to recognize the superior resources of the North, and to realize that if the North should be aroused to rebel by any sudden and imperious act, the reign of the conquerors would be o v e r . ^ Birney also predicted that the antislavery forces would provide the nation a new direction because the two major political parties would never do so as long as the slave power had the determination to act with united counsels and concentrated vigor on the unsuspecting and divided North.

To replace Van Buren with General Harrison, Birney claimed, would not save the nation; it would merely postpone the national crisis because the slavery controversy could not be forever settled by substituting one proslavery president for another. The national government, he insisted, should permanently settle the slavery controversy; otherwise the slavery question which the American people had often re­ garded as a minor issue would sooner or later lead to

15Ibid., pp. 566-568. 143 the disruption of programs which many considered to be 16 the essential functions of the government.

He did not deny that people should be concerned with other interests such as relate to the pecuniary, commercial, agricultural and manufacturing conditions of the country. But these, he said, should not be the only concerns of a government. The federal government, Birney continued, had been established to uphold the principles of the Declaration of Independence, to respect the doctrine of "human rights and natural justice," to promote the security of life, of liberty, of the rights of conscience, of the right to use our own 17 faculties for the promotion of our happiness. These were

Birney's views and the new party pledged to perform these functions. What was missing was the manner in which it planned to do so. In the succeeding years the ant islaveryites would reiterate and capitalize upon the dangers of the slave power, but in 1840 Birney's views did not seem to have im- 18 pressed the voters and his friends.

On the other hand, the presidential election of

1840 was an exciting event. The Democrats endorsed Van

1 6 Ibid. , p. 567. 1 7 Ibid. , pp. 564-565. I O Lewis Tappan and Gamaliel Bailey, particularly including William Jay, voiced their discontent and concern over Birney's sincerity and openness. Birney was called a prophet, and his friends in objecting to his renomination complained that Birney always spoke like a prophet and not a statesman. See Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War Against Slavery (Hew York, 1971) , p . 273. 144

Buren's bid to run for a second term. The Whigs nominated General William Henry Harrison.

Harrison was equally popular not only as a war hero, but also as a politician. In Michigan, Harrison had an advantage over Van Buren being from the Northwest. He had served as governor of Indiana Territory when Michigan was part of that Territory. He had been the first delegate in Congress from the Northwest Territory of which Michigan was then a part.♦ 19 During the campaign, spokesmen of the Whig Party in

Michigan praised Harrison as an antislavery advocate, a frontier hero who had saved Michigan from Indian attacks. Capitalizing upon their victory in the state election of 1839 over the Democrats, such magnetic speakers as George Dawson, editor of the Detroit Advertiser; James Wright Gordon, the newly elected Lieutenant Governor; Henry W. Taylor, prominent, prosperous Marshall politician; Marsh Giddings, powerful orator from Kalamazoo; Jacob M. Howard of Detroit, Whig can­ didate for Congress, reviewed Harrison's military records to show how he had removed the infamous Proctor from Michigan and how he had crushed the Indian confederacy of Tecumseh at

Tippecanoe and restored Michigan to the American Union. 2 0

19Henry M. Utley and Byron M. Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory and State, the Twenty-Sixth Member of the Federal Union (Michigan, 1903) , Vol. 3~] pp. 186-189.

20The interest of the people in 1840 was how to 145

The values and way of life of the hero of Tippecanoe provided his supporters a significant campaign topic. The

Whigs presented Harrison as a humble frontier citizen, a

soldier - farmer who would restore government to the people.

Harrison's substantial country home was metamorphosed into

a pioneer's log cabin, where it was said that he drank hard cider, and had coon skins nailed upon the logs of the cabin.

This statement, used by his opponents to show that he was not fit for the presidency, captured the imaginations of the pioneers of the region. The common people saw the candidate as one who knew their lives, their habits, and their needs, and "log cabin and hard cider" became the battle cry of the Harrison men. 21 The odds against the antislaveryites of Michigan in

1840 were great. The organization was poor; their prominent leaders were mostly clergymen, not political figures. They recover from the financial crisis of the time especially since Michigan had a serious case in meeting the cost of the bold internal improvement programs initiated by the Democrats. See ibid., pp. 189-196.

21 C. A. Weslager, The Log Cabin in America (New York, 1969), pp. 259-265; R. C. Gunderson, The Log Cabin Campaign (New York, 1957), pp. 99-106; the Baltimore Republican had published on March 23, 1840, the statement to the effect that upon condition of his receiving a pension of $2,000 and a barrel of cider, General Harrison would no doubt consent to withdraw his pretensions, and spend his days in a log cabin on the banks of the Ohio. See Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MSS, and Theodore Foster, Antislavery MSS, for eye-witness accounts of the 1840 campaign; see also Eugene H. Roseboom, A History of Presidential Elections (New York, 1957), pp. 118- 122; Dorothy B. Goebel, William Henry Harrison: A Political Biography (Indianapolis, 1926). 146

had established no state political machinery that could com­

pare with that of the Democrats and Whigs. They were speak­

ing of Negro freedom to residents suffering severe economic

difficulties. Worst of all there was no state election in

1840 except for members of the legislature. Michigan had

held her state election in 1839 in accordance with her Con­

stitution, and the campaign of 1840 lacked the stimulus and inspiration of local issues and local candidates. Moreover, the young state was so sparsely settled and the means of

assembling so difficult that only the major parties were 2 2 able to hold mass meetings in the few larger communities.

The most surprising thing about the results of the

election of 1840 was that in spite of the poor showing on

the part of the antislaveryites, they were more pleased with 2 3 their achievements than any one would have anticipated.

On the other hand, the victory of the Harrison men did not

2 2 Henry M. Utley and Byron M. Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory, and State, Vol. 3, pp. 186-187. 2 3 The Executive Committee of the Michigan State Anti- Slavery Society stated that the jeering of bitter opponents and unbelieving friends at the result of the "Independent Antislavery vote last fall never disturbed us, for we observed that the slaveholders never exalted at it, save for the few who were soft enough to believe what the party papers told them. . . . the 300 abolitionists who carried their prin­ ciples to the polls ought to be commended as men with cour­ age, fixed purpose . . . who would press forward to the attainment of the grand object they had in view." Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841; Nathan M. Thomas to S. B. Treadwell, April Z8 , 1941; Nathan M. Thomas to S. B. Treadwell , Novem­ ber 28, 1840, Thomas Antislavery MSS. 147 seem to have solved any of their problems. They were still frontiersmen engaged in clearing their farms, conquering the wilderness, opening roads, and building bridges and railroads in the vast forests of the peninsula. Lack of funds continued to upset all programs of internal improve- ments.* 24 Governor William Woodbridge had begun to straighten out the programs of Stevens T. Mason, whom he succeeded. This fact plus the victory of Harrison had raised the hopes of the members of the Whig Party that the Liberty Party would soon disappear. Harrison, however, died a month after his inauguration, and Vice-President John Tyler, a Southern slaveholder, became President. The Whigs experienced the greatest shock when John Tyler began to reshuffle the Cabinet and as a consequence antagonized and disappointed his Whig 2 5 supporters and hopefuls.

Meanwhile, Michigan antislaveryites buckled down to reassess their decision to transform their antislavery moral crusade into political action. The presence of a slaveholder from the South in the White House had aroused their fear of the influence of the slave power on the national government.

^Henry M. Utley and Byron M. Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory and State, pp. 188-189. 2 5 Leonard Dinnerstein, "The Accession of John Tyler to the Presidency," The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, LXX (1962j^ p p . 447-458. 148

Members of the Executive Committee of the State Society decided to reform their organization to enable it to per­

form effectively the functions of a political party. They

repealed the section of Article 1 of their Constitution which made their Society an auxiliary of the American Anti-

Slavery Society. They adopted a formal resolution which

officially disassociated the State Society from the Garrison­

ian faction and which made it an auxiliary of the American 2 7 and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. In other actions, they

eliminated requirements for membership by granting to all persons present at any of their meetings the right to partici­ pate in their proceedings. They approved the plan to take up collections at every antislavery meeting as one step in dealing with the vexing problem of lack of operating funds.

They approved the establishment of a weekly newspaper that would be general in its coverage, and with sufficient adver­ tising space to raise additional funds and at the same time

aid in spreading extensively antislavery propaganda. The

Freeman was discontinued on the grounds that its exclusive devotion to the antislavery cause had diminished its popularity and consequently its circulation. 2 8

"Proceedings of the Ninth Anniversary of the Michi­ gan State Anti-Slavery Society held at Jackson, Michigan, February lOth-llth, 1841," Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841. 2 7 "Proceedings of the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society Meeting held at Ann Arbor, February 8 , 1842," Signal of Liberty, April 25, 1842.

2 8The Executive Committee of the State Society ex- 149

The Society began publishing its new paper, The Signal of Liberty. For a time the Executive Committee assumed respon­ sibility for producing it and worked hard to avoid the finan- 29 cial problems that had wrecked the Freeman. The paper 30 became one of the best in the state, with a wide circula­ tion secured by thirty-two prominent citizens in twenty- eight strategic locations who were selected to solicit sub- 31 scriptions and distribute the paper. plained that in view of the extreme severity of the times and the great consequent embarrassments at present attendant upon the support of a paper devoted exclusively to antislavery causes in this state, it is deemed desirable to establish a weekly miscellaneous newspaper, under the direction of the Executive Committee, sufficiently general in its character. See the Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841; Executive Com­ mittee members were Guy Beckley (Chairman), Theodore Foster, Sylvester Noble, Munson Wheeler and Sabin Felch, ibid.

2 9The committee pointed out that the Freeman was m serious financial crisis. The total income from all sources, donations by liberal individuals and from subscriptions, amounted to $502.62 while the total expenditure was $661.18. See the "Proceedings of the Ninth Anniversary of the Michi­ gan State Anti-Slavery Society," in the Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841. 30 John E. Kephart, "Antislavery Publishing in Michi­ gan," in David Kaser, ed., Books in America’s Past (Virginia, 1966), pp. 223-224. 31 The thirty-two agents and their locations were as follows: Dr. A. L. Porter for Detroit; H. H. Griffin for Ypsilanti; Samuel Dexter, for Pittsfield; Thomas McGee for Concord; J. J. Gilbert and J. S. Fitch for Marshall; E. Child for Albion; S. Fifield and W. W. Crane for Eaton Rapids; R. H. King for Rivers; R. B. Retford for Napoleon; J. Marsh, for Leoni; L. H. Jones for Grass Lake; Reverend Samuel Bebans, Walter M. Farlen, and Samuel Mead for Plymouth; D. F. Norton and Joseph H. Pebbles for Salem; Nathan Power for Farmington; Joseph Morrison for Pontiac; Joseph Noyes for Pavilion; N. M. Thomas for Schoolcraft; W. Smith for Spring Arbor; U. Adams 150

The editorials of the Signal of Liberty were moderate

in tone and reflected the gradual shift from the old strategy of advocating primarily freedom for the slaves. Materials were selected and presented in such a way as to stress the disadvantages of slavery to free whites. Beautiful poems, useful economic articles for businessmen and farmers, and national and international news of importance were carefully presented. The objective was to widen the base of the new political party in the state. To top it all, the Executive Committee hired Nicholas Sullivan, the brother of the Rever­ end William Sullivan, who had edited the Freeman, as the first printer of the Signal of Liberty. He had won great reputation in the state as the publisher of the Jackson 32 Sentine1 and the Livingston Courier. The Signal of Liberty was destined to succeed be­ cause before the Society began to experience serious finan­ cial problems in its production, Guy Beckley and Theodore

Foster, two prosperous and informed antislavery men, took over both the editorial and financial responsibilities and for Rochester; R. L. Hall for Tecumseh; L. Noble for Pickney; Dr. V. Meeker for Leslie; Clark Parsons for Manchester; Elias Vedder for Jackson; M. Aldin for Adrian; Josiah Sabine for Sharon, S. Pomoroy for Tompkins. See "Minutes of the Executive Committee, April 8 , 1841," in the Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841. 32 American Freeman, July 2, 1839; S. B. Treadwell to N. H. Thomas, Jackson, March 30, 1841, Thomas Papers, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Douglas C. McMurtrie, Early Printing in Michigan with a Bibliography of the Issues of the Michigan Press (Chicago, 1951) , pp. 2 54 , 281-282 . 151 contracted to publish the paper for the Society for five years. They purchased a better printing establishment to produce the paper. They set up a small book-selling business to handle antislavery publications from other states, and issued their own antislavery tracts, all at a low rate that 33 many could afford. The Society adopted several other new measures to achieve success. Antislavery meetings, addressed by local residents in their various communities, were held at regular intervals during the year. With advanced notices of such scheduled meetings published in local papers, speakers advo­ cated the antislavery cause at regular meetings and at all occasions of public assembly, such as Fourth of July cele- brations.V. 4.- 3 4 The Society was also restructured to perform more effectively the functions of political parties. There were

33 Materials made available to the public included: "Antislavery Almanacs" for 1842; antislavery tracts (10 pages for one cent); portraits of James G. Birney; "Jay's View of the Action of the Federal Government in Behalf of Slavery" (50 cents); The Liberty Minstrel (5 cents); "Address to the Voters of the Second Congressional District of Michigan" (April 19, 1843); Official Proceedings of the State Liberty Convention, 1843 (1,500 copies given away free). Beckley and Foster wrote both the Address and the Official Proceed­ ings; see Signal of Liberty, March 20, 1843, and June 12, 1843. In 1844 more tracts were made available including: "Influence of the Slave Power"; "The Tyrant Paupers or Where the Money Goes"; "Don't Throw Away Your Votes"; "The Right Sort of Politics"; "The South Rule and the North Pay." Signal of Liberty, October 7, 1844. 34 Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1845. 152

central committees on state and local levels. There were county central committees charged with the responsibilities

of organizing towns and school districts. Each county com­

mittee was authorized to organize its own Liberty Committee

and to run Liberty candidates in local elections. Such action was considered both an urgent and necessary responsi­

bility because the Whig Party had decided to deprive all Whigs

who were known to be Liberty men of all political privileges within the Whig organization. 3 5 The antislavery men did not believe that they could possibly overthrow any of the old parties, but rather that they could successfully hold the balance of power in certain localities. 3 6

As the Society gradually shifted its agitation for

Negro freedom, it also expressed greater interest in the working class. The influence of the slave power upon the federal government remained the central focus of their agi­ tation. Since the common people were supposed to be ignorant

3 5 The Whig Party, the abolitionists charged, had acted "unwisely and impolitic in passing resolutions at their primary meetings disfranchising all Whig abolitionists," especially offensive being the prohibition to run for public office in the case of those who happened to vote for any can­ didate of the Liberty Party. The Whigs of Ann Arbor were the first to deny political privileges to members who were known to be Liberty men; see the Signal of Liberty, April 28, 1841. 3 6 This was based upon the fact that by 1845, members of the Liberty Party in the state were estimated to be 3,666, Signal of Liberty, January 13, 1845. Several accounts of progress from the leaders of the Liberty Party in the various counties were reported in the Signal of Liberty, June 30, 1845. 153 of that influence, the Executive Committee of the Society declared that the chief responsibility of the Liberty Party would be the proper dissemination of the principles of the antislavery movement throughout the state. In order to reach the majority of the people, state and county Liberty organizations were requested to hold a succession of conven­ tions at short intervals for the purpose of discussing fully and exhibiting to the people the political and financial 3 7 power of slavery. To illustrate the influence of the slave power on the federal government, speakers stress the increase in the number of slave states, the unequal distribution of the public revenue raised primarily from the free states, and the appointment as ministers to foreign courts of proslavery advocates who fostered the interest 3 8 of slave labor at the expense of free labor.

The strategy of the Liberty men called for the united pressure of the friends of free labor to be applied to Congress through the free-state legislatures, demanding the abolition of slavery and the domestic slave trade in the District of Columbia and in the Territories. They

37 See Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MSS, and John S. Porter Papers, MSHC; see also the Signal of Liberty, Septem­ ber 2, 1841. 3 8 S. P. Chase and Charles Dexter Cleveland, Anti- Slavery Addresses of 1844 and 1845 (1867) , reprinted edition from a copy in the collections of the Brooklyn Public Library (1969), pp. 96-97, 102-107, 136-137, 146-153. 154

claimed that the accomplishment of such an objective would

build up more public sentiment than the slave states could

withstand, and would therefore induce the slave states "at

no distant day to abolish slavery within their own bounds."

The abolition of the internal slave trade, the Liberty men

insisted, would render slavery unprofitable in m a n y of the

slave states, and would as a consequence accelerate the 39 downfall of the institution. Since the black people in the state had supported the activities of the Society from the beginning, their white

comrades saw no harm in petitioning the State Legislature to

grant the right of jury trial to alleged fugitive slaves, and

the right of suffrage to the free blacks. "They are taxed without representation," the members of the Society declared;

this was a source of grievance on the part of the blacks, a

grievance "which the founders of the Republic viewed as so

intolerable as to be sufficient to dissolve all connection with the crown of Great Britain." Petitions to this effect poured into the legislature throughout the forties and fifties with no favorable result.^ Having exerted so much energy with little or no con­

crete results, the antislavery crusade almost collapsed. How­ ever some signs of recovery gradually began to appear. The

5 9 Ibid., 96-119. 40 Selected from Special Documents, House and Senate of Michigan, 2 and 3. 155

failure of the Whig Party to censure John Quincy Adams for his

introduction of antislavery petitions, including one which actually called for the dissolution of the Union, and the publicity given to Adams' defense of his actions brought some new hope for the Liberty Party.^ In the same manner, the censorship of Joshua Giddings, who spoke up in the Big Creole incident,^ his resignation of his seat in the House, and his subsequent re-election by an overwhelming majority of voters in his constituency aided the gradual recovery of antislavery sentiment. Other issues, including the Supreme

Court decision in Prigg v. Pennsylvania,^ and the Latime case in Boston, Massachusetts / ^ all of which led to the end

For the attempted censorships of Adams by the Whig Party, see Cong. Globe, 27th Cong., 2nd Sess., pp. 208, 211, 342. For the reactions of the Michigan antislavery men, see S. B. Treadwell to the Executive Members of the State Society, April 14, 1842, in S. B. Treadwell Antislavery MSS, MSHC; the Signal of Liberty, April 19 and 25, 1842. 4 2 For Giddings' speech see Cong. Globe, 27th Cong., 2nd Sess., pp. 208, 324-346, 348-349, 355-356; Richard W. Solberg, "Joshua R. Giddings, Politician and Idealist" (Un­ published doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1952), pp. 151-152, 157, 174-175. George W. Julian, The Life of Joshua Reed Giddings (Chicago, 1892), pp. 118-119, 134, 417, 421-423. The Signal of Liberty issues of May 5 through May 29, covering over five columns, provided Michigan readers infor­ mation of Giddings' antislavery speeches in Congress. It included his speech on the Florida War to remove the Indians suspected of harboring fugitive slaves. 43 Charles Warren, The Supreme Court in United States History (Boston, 1924), Vol. II, pp. 354-357; Joseph Nogee, "The Prigg Case and Fugitive Slaves, 1842-1850," Journal of Negro History, XXXIX (1954), 197-200. 44 Louis Filler, The Crusade Against Slavery, 1830- 1860 (New York, 1960), p. 171. 156

of the gag rule,^ aided the gradual revival of antislavery

sentiment in the North. The failure of the Southern politi­

cians to restore the gag rule should not be attributed to

the growing strength of the Liberty men, since those who fought the battle in Congress were not affiliated with that group. 46 ' The leaders of the Michigan organization, however,

did capitalize on these Congressional proceedings, which they

claimed had "alarmed the staunchest proslavery advocates,"

and had awakened the whole community to a realization of what the antislavery men had emphasized for so long. The organ of the Society asserted that more Northern Congress­ men were convinced that slavery had become a national politi­ cal evil which the North could not ignore. Michigan anti- slavery men, therefore, placed great emphasis upon political action and became quite optimistic that it would assure the success of their movement.

This feeling of optimism was bolstered by changes that state religious organizations were making in relation to the slavery question. In the past, religious bodies had

4 5The end of the gag rule in 1844 at the opening of the 28th Congress. See Alexander Johnston’s able discussion of the subject in John J. Labor, ed., Cyclopaedia of Political Science (New York, 1890), pp. Ill, 167-169. 46 John Adams, Theodore Weld who did most of the research work in Washington, and Joshua Giddings who defied the gag rules were Whig Congressmen not affiliated with the Liberty Party. 157 been handicapped by the restrictions imposed upon them by their various General Conferences whose official policies either demanded neutralism or outright abstention from antislavery activities. Thus the involvement of clergymen and their laymen in the antislavery crusade had always been a matter of individual disposition and conviction. In the

1840s individual protests against such restrictions were regarded as an attack on the constituted authorities of the various religious denominations.

The Presbyterian Church of Michigan was the first to sever connections with the Southern Presbytery because of the demand of Southern Presbyteries that the General

Assembly should pledge to refrain from the discussion of 4 7 the subject of slavery. After the break, the Michigan

Presbytery took no official stand for or against participa­ tion in the antislavery activities by its ministers or lay­ men. This was left to the individual to decide. The Congre­ gational Church, which had been part of the Presbyterian

4 7 Elijah H. Pilcher. Protestantism in Michigan: Being a Special History of the~Methodist Episcopal Church and Incidentally of Other Denominations, Notices of the Origin and Growth of the Principal Towns and Cities of the State, Biographical Sketches of Many Prominent Pastors and Laymen Connected with the Birth and Growth of Protestantism in Michigan (Detroit, 1878) , pp. 10-24, 56-70; George Duffield, Minutes of the Meetings of the Session, First Presbyterian Church, Detroit, Michigan, 1826-1875, George Duffield MSS, Burton Collections, Detroit; Minutes of the Synod of Michi­ gan, Presbyterian Church, United States of America, 1834- 1849, 1851, 1853, MSS, MSHC. 158

Conference under the plan of union of 1801, had expected a definite statement of policy after the separation. But when

this did not materialize, some of its members broke off and organized an independent General Association of Congrega­ tional Ministers and Churches. Thus Michigan became the

first state west of New York to take such action and to 48 announce its official policy to be antlslavery.

The Baptist Church of Michigan did not hesitate to promote antislavery thought in Michigan. Officially the Baptists condemned slavery as an institution in direct oppo­ sition to the laws of God and man. Michigan Baptists pledged their full support to the Board of Foreign Missions in its refusal to appoint slaveholders to important church positions.

When the Kalamazoo River Baptist Association was formed in

1841, it pledged its support to the antislavery cause in

Michigan, and advised member churches not to receive into their fellowship individuals from slaveholding states unless they disavowed the principles and practice of slavery. This became one of the antislavery policies of the Baptists. Beginning in 1842, the Baptist paper, the Michigan Christian

Herald, advocated the antislavery cause. The Baptists were strong supporters of the Liberty Party, the Free Soil Party

4 8 Lander Smith Hobert, ed., The Congregational Churches of Michigan for the First Fifty Years of Their Organization into a State Association (Michigan, n.d.); Jessie E. Sexton, Congregationalism, Slavery and the Civil War (Lansing, Michigan, 1966) , p p . 7- 10 , 15-20 , 31-35. 159

and the Republican Party. They were outspoken in condemning

the annexation of Texas and the Mexican War, and in supporting

the Wilmot Proviso. In convention after convention the

Baptists adopted antislavery resolutions; and when the Civil 49 War began, they voted strong support for the Union.

The official position of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Michigan was proslavery. Its ministers were pro­ hibited from expressing their personal views on the subject of slavery and from giving antislavery lectures in their

areas, because church authorities claimed that such lectures disturbed the peace and prosperity of the church and con­ flicted with the Church Discipline. Its laymen were not per­ mitted to join the antislavery movement. Individuals who violated these rules were brought before the church authori­ ties for trial. Ministers found guilty of violations were deprived of their licenses. The retention of a controversial clause in the con­ stitution of the Methodist Episcopal Church disturbed the consciences of several ministers, most particularly the

Reverends Marcus Swift, Samuel Bibbins, and Guy Beckley. The clause in question stipulated that "a slaveholder could not

49 George H. Waid, Centennial History of the Michigan Baptist Convention (Lansing^ 1936) , pp. 33-45, 190-196; M. E. Trowbridge, History of the Baptists in Michigan (published under the Auspices of the Michigan Baptist State Convention, 1909), pp. 8-10, 90-94; Michigan Christian Herald, May 6 , 1844; March 31, 1848; August 4, 1848; March 31, 1850; October 10, 17, and 31, 1850. 160 hold any official church position where the state law would admit of emancipation. Any minister, becoming a slaveholder, must either free the slaves or quit the ministry." This pro­ vision had been included in the Church Discipline in 1824. The proslavery attitude of the Methodist Episcopal Church of

Michigan forced the Reverends Marcus Swift and Samuel Bibbins to withdraw from the Methodist Episcopal Church and to organ­

ize in 1841 the American Wesleyan Church in Michigan.^ The trial of the Reverend Guy Beckley, co-editor of the Signal of Liberty, for an article he wrote for the Signal of Liberty in 1842, added to the growth of the American Wesleyan Church in Michigan. Beckley condemned the proslavery position of the Methodist Episcopal Church. "From what we know of the Methodist Episcopal Church in this State," he wrote, "we have reason to believe that she would permit her _ members to buy and hold slaves if our laws did not forbid it."51 t w o ministers of the church, John Scotford and Brad­ ford Frazee, protested the antislavery expression of Beckley, and Frazee in particular insisted that Beckley should be

“^Lucius C. Matlack, The Antislavery Struggle and Triumph in the Methodist Episcopal Church (New York, 1881; reprinted 1969), pp. 13-22, 100, 198; Margaret B. MacMillan, The Methodist Church in Michigan (Grand Rapids: The Michi- gan Area Methodist Historical Society, 1967), pp. 130-139; Elijah H. Pilcher, Protestantism in Michigan . ♦ . (Detroit, 1878), pp. 401-403; W. W. Sweet, Methodism in American His­ tory (New York, 1954), pp. 237-238.

^Signal of Liberty, December 15, 1842. 161

5 2 tried for his attack on the church. At the Ann Arbor Quarterly Conference of 1843, Frazee brought charges against Beckley. He accused Beckley

of ’’slander, falsehood, and inveighing against the Discipline

of the Methodist Episcopal Church." On July 20, 1843, Beckley was formally tried and acquitted. The trial caused

bitter feelings among some ministers and laymen, who became convinced that additional antislavery effort within the

church was hopeless. Beckley left the Methodist Episcopal Church and became active in the organization of the Wesleyan 53 Methodists at Ann Arbor. The Wesleyan Methodist Church of Michigan was one of

the most antislavery churches in Michigan. From its first year

in 1841 to the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861, it stood

out as the strong supporter of political abolitionism. It

backed the Liberty Party in 1844, the Free Soil Party from

1848 to 1852, and the Republican Party from 1854. After

1850, however, the antislavery views of the Methodists and

the Wesleyans were quite similar.^

The major religious denominations in Michigan and

throughout the free states had by 1843 officially severed

5 2 Margaret B. MacMillan, The Methodist Church in Michigan (Grand Rapids, 1967), pp. 7-10.

54 Floyd B. Streeter, Political Parties in Michigan, 1837-1860 (Lansing, 1918), pp. 222-223. 162 connections with their Southern Conferences because they believed in the sinfulness of slavery and because the

Southern clergy claimed that the Bible justified human bond­ age .55 The immediate effect of the separation of the Northern and Southern churches on the antislavery movement, whether in Michigan or in other free states, is difficult to assess. From its beginning in 1833 the antislavery move­ ment had been a sort of religious movement in which clergy­ men played a major role. Their activities, before and after the official breakup, continued to be the moral condemnation of slavery. The political advancement of the antislavery forces, especially in the presidential contest of 1844, is equally difficult to assess. President Tyler's determination to annex Texas to the Union as a slave state indicated that the Texas question would be the major issue of the campaign.

His Secretary of State, Abel Upshur, had been negotiating secretly with the authorities in Texas for her immediate admission into the Union.5^

55Lucius C. Matlack, The Antislavery Struggle and Triumph in the Methodist Episcopal Church (New York, 1881) , pp. 209-226, "Victory on the Side of the Antislavery Members," p p . 2 2 7-295. 5^Nathaniel W. Stephenson, Texas and the Mexican War (New Haven, 1921), pp. 114-119; Leonard Dinnerstein, "The Accession of John Tyler to the Presidency," The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, LXX (1962), pp. 447-458; Claude H. Hall, Abel P. Upshur, Conservative Virginian, 1790- 1844 (Madison, 1964) , p p. 180 - 200. ' ~ 163

The Liberty Party in Michigan and in other free

states opposed the annexation of Texas as a slave state.

When their strategy of pressure politics through petitions

failed, they tried to persuade Britain to purchase Texas and make her a free and independent nation. Their prominent

leaders, including Lewis Tappan, James G. Birney, and Stephen

P. Andrews, went to London for that purpose. This action

would render Texas financially secure and would consequently

terminate her negotiations to become part of the United

States. This effort became a source of great embarrassment to American antislaveryites and provided the strongest argu­ ment of the expansionists for the immediate annexation of

Texas. Consequently, during the campaign of 1844, anti­

slavery agitators renewed their attack against the slave 57 power, and their appeal for free land and free labor.

The Democrats and Whigs of Michigan also opposed the

57 Thomas P. Martin, "The Upper Mississippi Valley in Anglo-American Antislavery and Free Trade Relations, 1837- 1842,” Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XI (1928), pp. 200-220; Jesse S. Reeves, American Diplomacy Under Tyler and Polk (Baltimore, 1907), pp. 138-139; Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War Against Slavery (New York, 19 71), Chapter 13, pp. 248-264 ; Madeleine B. Stern, "Stephen Pearl Andrews, Abolitionist, and the Annexation of Texas," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, LXVI (April 1964), pp. 499-506 and The Pentarch: A Biography of Stephen Pearl Andrews (Austin, 1968) , pp . 36-39, 89-91; Charles Shively, HAn Option for Freedom in Texas, 1840-1841," Journal of Negro History, L (April 1965), pp. 77-90; E. D. Adams, British In­ terests and Activities in Texas, 1838-1846 (Baltimore, 1910), pp. 55-60; Harriet Smither, "English Abolitionism and the Annexation of Texas," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XXXII (January 1929), pp. 139-200. 164 annexation of Texas. The Whig Party stated its position bluntly. It would do everything possible to prevent the ascendency of the slaveholding South. The annexation of Texas for the avowed purpose of extending and perpetuating the institution of slavery, it declared, was unconstitu- 5 8 tional and a declaration of war against Mexico. Martin Van Buren, the leading contender for the

Democratic nomination, expressed his opposition more subtly.

He did not, he said, believe that there was any immediate necessity for the annexation of Texas. With a majority of the delegates to the Democratic national convention pledged to him, Van Buren presumably expected that Henry Clay, almost certain to be the Whig nominee, would take a similar stand, and the issue would be dropped.

Van Buren was absolutely wrong. Former President

Andrew Jackson, who strongly supported Van Buren, was him­ self an ardent advocate of annexation and became greatly dis­ appointed when Van Buren publicly announced his position.

Equally disappointed were the Virginian delegates who had already pledged their support to Van Buren. They turned to

General Lewis Cass of Michigan, a pro-Texas man, while

5 8 Michigan Whig Party opposition: At their state convention on July 4, 1844, the Whigs adopted a very strong resolution to obstruct the annexation of Texas; see Detroit Advertiser, July 9, 1844. For general opposition by the people: see Detroit Advertiser of September 20, 1843; also ibid. , July 1 T~, 1844; Oakland Gazette, April 9 and 24 and May 1 , 1844; Marshall Statesman^ February 15, 1844. 165

Jackson privately looked around for a candidate who could win Northern and Southern support. His choice was James K.

Polk of Tennessee, then a strong contender for second place on the ticket. Calhoun, who had withdrawn his name from the race and had entered Tyler's cabinet in March, 1844, rallied annexationists against Van Buren, his long-time political . , 59 rival. Senator Robert J. Walker of Mississippi headed another block of Southern expansionists who were determined to annex Texas at all costs. Walker went to the Democratic national convention determined to prevent the nomination of

Van Buren. He scored his first victory when the delegates adopted his recommendation for the two-thirds rule for nomi­ nation. After two days and eight ballots, the Democrats 6 0 unanimously gave Polk the nomination on the ninth ballot.

The Democrats made a strong effort to retain the support of the friends of Van Buren. To win Northern support, they adopted a platform calling for the acquisition of all of

Oregon and the annexation of Texas at the earliest practical

59 Charles Sellers, James K. Polk: Continental ist, 1845-1846 (New York, 1962) , pp. 7-14; Eugene H. Roseboom, A History of Presidential Elections (New York, 1947), pp. 113- 117, 127-131; Andrew C. McLaughlin, Lewis Cass (New York, 1891), pp. 196-220; W. L. G. Smith, Fifty Years of Public Life: The Life and Times of Lewis Cass (New York, 1856) is probably the best political biography of Cass.

^Roseboom, History of Presidential Elections, p . 228 . 166 period. The coupling of Texas with Oregon was a shrewd bid for expansionist support in both North and South, and was intended to controvert the charge that the Baltimore conven- £ T tion was under Southern control. Meanwhile the Whigs had nominated Henry Clay. Clay's first position on Texas was similar to that of Van Buren, as shown in this portion of his famous Raleigh letter. He op­ posed annexation of Texas "as involving us certainly in war with Mexico and probably with other foreign powers, dangerous to the integrity of the Union, inexpedient in the present financial condition of the country, and not called for by any general expression of public opinion." 6 2 Had the Democrats nominated Van Buren, most probably the annexation of Texas would have still been an important

£ 1 One measure was the nomination of Silas Wright, Senator from New York, for Vice President. Wright was Van Buren's friend and in refusing the nomination he said he held similar views as Van Buren and that he should not profit at his friend's expense. The nomination went to George M. Dallas of Pennsylvania, ibid., 128-129; "Free Trade and the Oregon Question, 1842-1846," in Facts and Factors in Economic History, edited by N. S. B. Grass et al. (Cambridge, Mass., 1932) , pp. 140-147; Jesse S. Reeves, American Diplomacy Under Tyler and Polk (Baltimore, 1907), pp. 136-140. 6 2 Clay wrote this at Raleigh, North Carolina, and sent it to the National Intelligencer at Washington for publication. Three good biographies of Henry Clay include: (1) Thomas H. Clay, Henry Clay (Philadelphia, 1910). Clay's grandson began this work but Ellis Paxton Oberholtzer com­ pleted it; (2) Carl Schurz, Life of Henry Clay, 2 vols. (Boston, 1887). The partisan tone of this study did not destroy its excellence; (3) Glyndon G. Van Deusen, The Life of Henry Clay (Boston, 1937) tends to be very critical and sometimes belittles Clay's great political achievement; see also Roseboom, History of Presidential Elections, p. 130. 167

issue in the election of 1844. But it would not have given the Liberty Party any gains. President Tyler wanted Texas

as much as former President Andrew Jackson, who still was influential among the Democrats. However, the Senate's

rejection of Tyler's annexation treaty in June left the

issue to the voters. The Whigs in both the North and the South had rallied loyally to Henry Clay, and in the Senate

all but one Whig had voted against annexation. The majority

of the large planters and their business allies, except

speculators in Texas land, had no stomach for war with

Mexico or for stirring up sectional hatred. "The Union without Texas rather than Texas without the Union" was the

slogan.i 63 But the powerful appeal of Texas *to land-hungry

small farmers and some large planters, and Calhoun's in­

6 3When the news of the proposition of Tappan and his associates to influence the British either to purchase Texas or loan the Liberty representatives enough money to secure Texas and thus separate it from any further association with the United States appeared in the papers, Tyler's adminis­ tration had no more problem in getting the support and approval of Congress. The public became so excited with the propaganda that Britian was about to occupy a large and strategic portion of the United States that in almost every state the legislature urged their senators and representa­ tives to support the administration's Texas policy. See Harriet Smither, "English Abolitionism and the Annexation of Texas," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XXXII (January, 1929), pp. 139-200; Reeves, American Diplomacy Under Tyler and Polk, pp. 126-137, 469-473. The Michigan Legislature adopted resolutions urging their Senators and Congressmen to support the annexation of Texas. In the Senate the vote was 16 to 0, and in the House 37 to 10. See Senate Journal (1845), pp. 58, 74; House Journal (1845), pp. 84, 114; Laws of Michigan (1845) , p~! 154. 168

sistence that Texas was necessary to save slavery, played

havoc with Clay's hopes. Threatened with the loss of his

Southern strength, Clay began to modify his views on Texas.

In two letters to Alabama friends, he made it clear that he

had no objection to annexation, "accomplished without dis­ honor, without war, with the common consent of the people of

the United States, and upon just and fair terms." He would

be guided as President, he said, by the facts and the state

of public opinion existing at the time that he might be called upon to act. This change of opinion encouraged his 64 Southern friends, but damaged his chances in the North. In September Clay attempted to return to his Raleigh

letter position to undo some of the damage. Here the Liberty Party darkened the Whig sky. It had previously sought to

nominate an influential politician whose views on Texas

seemed consistent. Lewis Tappan had complained that Birney

lacked experience, public exposure and the gift of campaign management. Tappan and William Jay, son of the old Judge

Jay, believed that Birney's canvas in 1840 rendered abolition­

ists contemptible in the eyes of politicians and abolition­

ists. Gamaliel Baily, Birney's successor as editor of the

Philanthropist in Cincinnati, told Birney: "You have always appeared in the character of a Moralist, and a reformer rather than as a politician or statesman. . . . You denounced

64 Glyndon G. Van Deusen, The Life of Henry Clay (Boston, 1937), pp. 137-200. 169

the people and . . . gave them over to destruction. . . . £ r Prophets make poor politicians . .

Lewis Tappan and his associates therefore wrote

Joshua R. Giddings, suggesting that the five supporters of

the antislavery cause in Congress should announce their sup­

port of John Quincy Adams for president. The strategy was

to destroy Henry Clay's chances; hence Lewis Tappan, Salmon P.

Chase, Samuel Lewis, Gamaliel Baily, Leicester King, and

other prominent Ohio politicians, cherished the idea of uniting Whiggery with the Liberty Party. Chase suggested that

with such men as Adams, William Jay, or William H. Seward to

head the Liberty Party, the united Whigs and abolitionists

could carry on their banner, not just "Northern Rights,"

but in addition "Constitutional Rights, Liberty, Justice,

and Free Labor." 66 Since none of the Congressmen accepted

the offer, James G. Birney and Thomas Morris of Ohio re­

ceived the Liberty Party's nomination. Lewis Tappan and

his anti-Birney group continued to work hard on the plan for

substituting Jay or Adams, but finally gave up when neither

of them agreed. They wound up supporting Birney.

^Joshua Leavit to James G. Birney, February 10, 1843, in Dumond, ed., Birney Letters, Vol. II, p. 716; Birney to Gamaliel Baily, March 31, 1843, ibid., II, p. 734; Fladeland, Birney, pp. 233, 234; Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Tappan, p . 275. 6 6 Joseph Rayback, "The Liberty Party Leaders in Ohio: Exponents of Antislavery Coalition," Ohio State Archeological and Historical Quarterly, LVII (1948), pp. 165-178; Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Tappan~ 274-2 76. 170

The Liberty Party's main objectives were to prevent

the annexation of Texas and to destroy the "Slave Power

Oligarchy." Its appeal for free land and free labor was

not new; the two major parties equally appealed to the common

people, their regular supporters. But the Liberty Party had better organization in 1844 than in 1840, with at

least a dozen newspapers to advocate its cause. Its moral appeal had increased its following, especially in New England,

and Birney, who had moved to Michigan, took the campaign seriously, speaking and touring the state.

Clay's new stand on Texas had strengthened his

position in the North, particularly in Michigan. Here the

Whigs stood solidly against annexation. Clubs were organ­ ized in several counties to boost Clay's campaign. Both

Liberty men and Whigs were advocating similar views, and

to damage Birney's influence the Whigs of Michigan spread

the news that he had accepted a Democratic nomination for

the state legislature and that there was proof of a Liberty-

Democratic bargain to defeat Clay. Birney attempted to

explain the Democratic nomination on the ground of purely local issues, but did openly admit his preference for Polk over Clay. Birney stated that Clay might lead his party to bring about annexation, whereas Polk was too incompetent to accomplish it.

When it was learned that antislavery men had signed manifestoes declaring their decision not to support Henry Clay on the Texas issue, the Whig party of Michigan decided to

attack. Michigan Whigs printed the news that James G. Birney

had been nominated by the Michigan Democrats for the state leg­

islature. This was followed by the statement that there could

be no explanation for Birney's acceptance of the nomination

except a bargain between Birney and Polk, and Birney's promise

to Michigan Democrats that if he were elected to the Michigan

Legislature he would support the annexation of Texas and would

no longer continue the antislavery agitation. Birney's explan­

ation would have satisfied his associates were it not for the

"Galland Forgery" episode. A day or two before the national

election, Whig newspapers in the North published an excerpt

from a letter which appeared in the Genesee County Democrat of

October 21, 1844, and which was supposedly written by Birney to

J. B. Galland of Saginaw, sworn to by Galland himself. In the

letter, Birney was quoted as having told Galland that he ac­ cepted the Democratic county nomination, assured Galland that he was a true Democrat of the Jeffersonian school, and promised

if elected to the Michigan Legislature to support the annexa­

tion of Texas and cease agitation of the slavery question in

the legislature. Birney's refutation of the allegation came

too late. The Liberty Party lost hundreds Of votes. But its

6 7Three first-hand accounts of the Galland Forgery episode were written by Birney: Birney's MSS, William Clement Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Nathan Thomas, Nathan Thomas MSS, MHSC, and Theodore Foster, Theodore Foster MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; see also Flade- land, ~~T3irney, 178-180. 172

power in New York proved decisive.^

Yet expansion and slavery were not the sole issues

on which the election turned. Oregon and Texas might be Demo­

cratic vote getters in the South and West, but protectionist

Pennsylvania, as important as New York in Democratic strategy, had to be appealed to in other ways. A letter from Polk to

John K. Kane of Philadelphia made it clear that he favored a revenue tariff with only incidental protection. Polk's ardent supporters in the Keystone State used it to prove that he was as good a tariff man as Clay. Thus "Polk, Dallas and the Tariff of ’42" was as effective in Pennsylvania as expansion- 69 ism in the West. The election of 1844 did not show whether the Liberty

Party had helped or hindered its cause. The party received about 63,000 votes in the free states. Some of the votes can be attributed to the internal conflicts in the two major par­ ties, and some to personal hatred for and errors of the candi­ dates of the two parties. Although this represented a great increase when compared with the Liberty votes in 1840, it did

6 8 The result of the election proved one of the oppor­ tunities of the antislavery men. In Michigan Polk received 27,703 votes; Clay, 24,237 votes; Birney, 3,632 votes. Detroit Free Press, November 23, 1844; Nathaniel W. Stephenson, Texas and the Mexican War (New Haven, 1921), pp. 157-165.

^Frederick Merk, "The British Corn Crisis of 1845- 1846 and the Oregon Treaty," Agricultural History, VIII (1934), pp. 92-123; Thomas Martin, "Free Trade and the Oregon Ques­ tion," in N. S. B. Grass, ed., Facts and Factors in Economic History, pp. 470-471. Robert W~ Johannsen, Frontier Politics and the Sectional Conflict (Seattle, 1955), pp. 17-20, 40-46. 173

not necessarily reflect a growing antislavery sentiment in any

particular part of the free states. However, as a third

party, the antislaveryites began to lose their identity as

champions of the Negro freedom by their efforts to broaden

their political base and include all major political issues in their party platform. Edward Quincy of Boston observed:

There are many more Antislavery Whigs and Democrats than Third Party men, and many more Whig papers, especially, which are more thoroughly antislavery than any of the Third Party ones.'0 The election of 1844 seems to have taken the steam

from the Liberty men. While the importance of Texas had

tended to give Polk's victory the aspect of a Southern tri­

umph, the result in 1844 was more nearly an endorsement of a

general expansionist, program. The West, as ever, was land-

hungry, and the Democrats had pointed the way by linking

Oregon and Texas. Polk was considered the first dark-horse

President, and his election had spurred Congress to annex

Texas before he was inaugurated. When he entered the White

House, he found Texas on the way into the Union. President

Polk had no problem with the annexation of Texas because Tyler had secured the consent of Congress to the annexation of Texas,

and Polk simply completed the negotiations. 71

70Garrison and Garrison, Garrison, III, pp. 185-186. 71 Charles Shively, "An Option for Freedom in Texas, 1840-1844," Journal of Negro History, L (April, 1965), pp. 77- 90. The Democratic victory in November reunited the party somehow. Taking the election of Polk to be an endorsement of the program of annexation, the party leaders set confidently 174

Nevertheless, President Polk had several difficul­

ties which provided Liberty men some hopes for surival. The President’s first difficulty in his own party was pri­ marily over patronage. In choosing members of his Cabinet,

the President blundered and antagonized certain elements

of his party, such as the still-angry Van Buren supporters, who were not pleased with the choice of William L. Marcy

as Secretary of War; the Calhounites, who wanted their hero retained in office as Secretary of State; the Western States from Ohio to Missouri, which gave Polk fifty-six electoral

votes and were aggrieved at not being represented in the Cabinet 7 2 ; the Jacksonian clique, who felt completely

to work. What could not be done by treaty should be done now by action of Congress. A few Whigs, equally obedient to the popular will, joined the friends of Texas. A joint resolution was adopted by both Houses inviting Texas to become a State of the Union and was signed by President Tyler, March 1, 1845. Alfred H. Kelly and Winfred A. Harbison, The American Constitution, Its Origins and De­ velopment (New York, 1963), pp. 365-366; Roy F . Nichols, The Stakes of Power, 1845-1877 (New York, 196,1), pp. 8-9; Senate Journal, 28th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 426-443; James C. H. Paul, Rift in the Democracy (New York, 1961), pp. 120-1 2 2 . 7 2At the Democratic nominating convention, it was Walker who fought hard for the passage of the two-thirds rule which deprived Van Buren of the nomination. The dis­ placement of Calhoun antagonized many Southern admirers of Calhoun, and the appointment of Walker antagonized Van Buren's faction also. During the election, Clay carried Ohio, but the West and Pennsylvania and New York voted for Polk, and had every right to expect a handsome reward from the President in the distribution of patronage and appointments. But they were disappointed and the feeling of bitterness never stopped. ignored; and the Senators and party leaders who felt entirely left out as the President took personal charge

of all appointments without consulting them. In addition,

several Congressional representatives who were up for re-

election in their various regions were greatly antagonized

as the administration's policies destroyed their chances

for re-election. The President's veto of a rivers and har­ bors bill was disastrous for Western Democrats, his support

of Walker's tariff reductions would be of no help for the

representatives from Pennsylvania and New England, and the restoration of the Independent Treasury affected all 73 who represented the Northern financiers. President Polk also failed to satisfy the expec­ tations of his expansionist supporters from the Northwest who had anticipated the acquisition of the entire territory of Oregon. Oregon was acquired through Polk's own diplo­ macy, leading to an agreement with Great Britain to divide the region at the forty-ninth parallel. Polk's failure to

73Most of the Congressmen were up for re-election, and the various sections, particularly having supported the election of Polk, feared the reaction of the con­ stituencies over the betrayal and disappointment in the adoption of such policies unfavorable to the economic advancement of the industrially advancing regions. 176 acquire the entire of Oregon forced certain Northwestern representatives to reopen the sectional conflict in Con­ gress. Senator Edward Hannegan of Indiana, for example, charged the slave power of the South with "Punic faith" in thus yielding one-half of Oregon after the acquisition of the whole of Texas. When the Senate ratified the Oregon treaty, William Allen of Ohio resigned as Chairman of its

Foreign Relations Committee. With the admissions of Florida and Texas as slave states and only Iowa as a free state, the South gained a majority in the Senate, a cause of serious concern for

Northern Congressmen. This became a very potent campaign issue for the Liberty men. Furthermore, the administra­ tion's attempts to settle the Texas boundary claims and to acquire California, all of which could bring about a war with Mexico, plus the previous faults of the adminis­ tration had resulted in the election of a Whig Congress in 1 8 4 6 . ^ These and all the previously discussed difficulties of the administration sustained the anti- slaveryites hope for survival.

74 Jesse S. Reeves, American Diplomacy Under Tyler and Polk (Baltimore, 1907), pp. 137-150. 177

In Michigan, the Liberty men seemed to have lost

their strength when the State Legislature unanimously

supported the annexation of Texas. Nevertheless, the Michigan Liberty Party had made minor gains in local and

state elections by the time the war began. But Michigan's

part in the war with Mexico, 1846 to 1848, was neither

great nor distinguished, and freedom or slavery had nothing to do with it. The fact is that in 1846, when

the war began, Michigan was a young state, scarcely ten years in the Union. She was a frontier state, with her resources not adequately developed. Her population was widely dispersed over her broad area. Above all, she had no special interest at stake in the contest. However,

the declaration of war against Mexico did not become an

issue in her politics because most of the people were

loyal to the administration. Thus with the exception of a few extreme radicals, the Democrats and the Whigs sup­ ported the federal government and urged measures to be taken which would bring about a successful and speedy ter- 75 mination of the war.

7 5 The State of Michigan was engrossed in a major po­ litical reorganization and in 1846 the adoption of Sanford M. Green's report, "The Revised Statutes of 1846,” was as impor­ tant as the completion of the sale of state railroads, the 178

The great political question which her legislature and those of other states debated during and after the war was whether or not Congress had the power to prohibit slavery in the territory acquired from Mexico. The state Whig Party believed that Congress had the power to prohibit the exten­ sion of slavery into the territory and vowed to oppose Con­ gressional effort to extend slavery in any territory of the

United States. The small farmers of central, southern and northeastern Michigan pledged support in the fight against

Central and Southern, which closed out the state's participa­ tion in the construction of internal improvements. Governor Greenly's account of the state of affairs was quite convincing. He said that in responding to the call for volunteers it was found in practice that the opening of too many recruiting stations made it impossible to get volunteers, and that no one was willing to undertake the raising of companies with no certainty that the companies would be accepted or their expenses paid. He explained that although officers were appointed for the companies and that between November and December 1847 he had spent $10,165.85, there was no law which obliged those who had enlisted and been boarded from one week to two months to muster into the service of the United States. Captains who reported that their companies were full were always disappointed upon their arrival at the barracks to find their companies dwindled down to twenty men, and there was no law by which the delinquents could be compelled to report. See House Document #20, Legislature of 1848; Utley and Cutcheon, Michigan As a Province, Territory and State, pp . 198-199. Favorable responses: the Whigs, see Detroit Adver­ tiser, May 25, 1846; the Democratic justification of the war was published in the issues of the Detroit Free Press of May 27, 28 and 30; the Whig State Convention resolution to put into the hands of the government the means necessary for the speedy termination of the war was published in the Oak­ land Gazette of September 25, 1847; the Democratic blame upon Mexico for bringing the war was published in the Grand Rapids Enquirer, December 9, 1846; Niles Republican, June 13, 1846; throughout the war the state remained loyal to the adminis­ tration, and their local newspapers also printed accounts and materials which were favorable to the administration. 179 slavery expansion. Professional men in the cities, lawyers, physicians, and clergymen in the Protestant churches also believed that Congress should ban further extension of slavery in any territory of the United States. The issue split the Democratic Party, with the westerners and the radical elements of the party strongly opposed to slavery expansion. The conservative faction of the Democratic Party was attacked by the other members because they would not 76 support the antiexpansionists. In Congress this question had stirred up the smolder­ ing dissensions and sectionalism even in the President's own party. While the majority of Americans expressed mere feel­ ings of disaffection over the administration's policies, it was David Wilmot, a conservative Democrat from Pennsylvania, not in any way associated previously with the antislavery elements in Congress, whose action aroused the antiexpansion­ ists and the antislavery sentiments of most of his fellow

Northern politicians. When President Polk requested a Con-

7 f\ The people of Michigan mostly supported the Wilmot Proviso. Congressman Robert McClelland's speech in Congress on February 10, 1849, Cong. Globe, 29th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 1218; the speech of Congressman K. Bingham in support of the Proviso made on August 7, 1847, 2nd Sess., p. 425. The first resolution in the Senate of Michigan to adopt the Wilmot Proviso failed by two votes--ll to 9, see Senate Jour­ nal (1847), pp. 6-9; the resolution was adopted in the House unanimously, see House Journal (1847), pp. 56, 63, 73-79, 135-136, 171; also House Journal (1848), pp. 155-156. The Senate adopted the same resolution later; see Senate Journal (1847), pp. 28, 31, 33, 120; for Governor Ransom's approval of the Proviso, see Joint Documents of the Senate and House (1849), p. 17. 180 gressional appropriation of $2 million to settle things with the Mexican authorities, David Wilmot attached a set of resolutions to the President's appropriation bill which became known as the Wilmot Proviso, and which demanded the exclusion of slavery from any territory which the United 7 7 States might acquire from Mexico. Although Northern politicians were not concerned with the motive behind Wilmot's action, the Proviso was destined to become an antislavery measure. Northern politi­ cians of both major parties and antislaveryites supported the resolution and helped to force it through the House, but the session ended without any action in the Senate on the

Wilmot Proviso. 7 ft During the next session of Congress, Preston King, of New York, brought up the Wilmot Proviso for

Congressional consideration, and though Congress debated the

Proviso till the end of Polk's term, it never received favorable action in the Senate; instead, it stirred up serious sectional controversy and became a major factor which

7 7 David Wilmot had been a pure conservative Democrat who admired Van Buren. He had voted to restore the gag rule in 1845. He voted against receiving anti-Texas petitions of the antislavery men. He voted against receiving anti­ slavery petitions praying to abolish slavery and the slave trade in Washington, D. C. He supported the advocates of non-exclusion of slavery in Texas. See Charles B. Going, David Wilmot: Free-Soiler (New York, 1924), pp. 40-52.

^®See Richard R. Stenberg, "The Motivation of the Wilmot Proviso," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XVIII (1932) , 535-541. 181

79 threatened the unity of the Democratic and Whig parties.

In Michigan, as well as in all the free states of

the North, the Liberty men became outnumbered by those who had nothing to do with the antislavery crusade, except for

their opposition to the creation of new slave states. These politicians and their supporters, who opposed the extension

of slavery beyond where it already existed, urged the

adoption of the Wilmot Proviso. The radical factions of the

two major parties favored the Proviso. The conservatives

of the older parties, fearing the effect which the slavery

controversy might have on their parties and the Union, wished

to keep the slavery question out of state politics. They were therefore unwilling to support the Wilmot Proviso. In

addition, General Lewis Cass kept the pressure on his party

followers through Governor Alpheus Felch to defeat any legis- 8 0 lative measure which might favor the Wilmot Proviso.

7 Q See Clark E. Persinger, "The Bargain of 1844 as the Origin of the Wilmot Proviso," in American History Asso­ ciation Annual Report (1913), Vol. I, p p . 189-19 5. o r\ General Cass produced a strong argument that caused the defeat of the Wilmot Proviso in the Senate. On March 1, 1847, he gave six reasons why the Proviso should not be adopted. The fifth and sixth reasons were the most convin­ cing. Cass explained in the fifth reason that "the adoption of the proviso might bring the war to an untimely issue" and in the sixth he explained that "it would prevent the acquisi­ tion of a single foot of territory, and thus disappoint a vast majority of the American people," or, in other words, the war could be ended in such a way that the United States could not acquire any territory from Mexico which he perhaps believed was the most interesting thing for the people of the United States. 182

Efforts of conservative Democrats to suppress the o -| Wilmot Proviso did not succeed. Although the Michigan

Senate voted against a resolution urging Congress to sup­ port the Proviso, the House adopted unanimously a resolution

asserting that the general government should extend the pro­

vision of the Ordinance of 1787 to any territory which the 8 2 United States acquired from Mexico. The advocates of the

Wilmot Proviso finally triumphed in the debate when, at a joint session of the legislature, the resolution opposing

the extension of slavery into any new territory of the 8 3 United States was adopted. The election of Judge Epaphroditus Ransom of Kalama­

zoo as governor of the state in 1847 was a part of a deal that

brought the western and eastern liberal and conservative

Democrats together. While the united action of the western

81 See Floyd Benjamin Streeter, Political Parties in Michigan, 1837-1860 (Lansing, Michigan, 1919), pp. 94-96.

82The House adopted the Resolution by a vote of 52 to 3, ibid., p. 95. See also House Journal, 1848, pp. 155- 156. 8 3 There were two resolutions. One stated that, they were in favor of the "fundamental principles of the Ordinance of 1787," and that Congress not only had the power, but that it was the duty of that body to prohibit "the introduction or existence of slavery" in any territory "now or hereafter to be acquired." The other resolution instructed the Senators and requested the Representatives in Congress "to use all honorable means to accomplish the objectives expressed in the foregoing resolution." These were passed in the Senate by a vote of 15 to 7 and in the House by a vote of 46 to 17. See Laws of Michigan (1849), pp. 362-363; Senate Journal (1849), p^ 25; House Journal (1849), p. 59. 183

and eastern liberals and conservative Democrats in the elec­ tion of the governor was considered also essential for

the presidential campaign of Lewis Cass, it did not diminish the people’s demand for Congressional adoption of the Wilmot

Proviso. The new governor supported it, insisting that the national government possessed the constitutional author­

ity to exclude slavery from any territory under the exclu- 84 sive jurisdiction of the United States. Expressions of antislavery sentiment by the two major political parties, and by the Michigan Legislature,

seemed to be the general political pattern in all of the free states, the aim probably being to absorb the antislavery elements of those states. Nevertheless, antislavery forces still hoped that the great political issues which the end of the Mexican War would produce held much hope for the survival of the Liberty Party. Those issues, they antici­ pated, would decide "whether American Republicanism is to be the pillar of Liberty, or Propagandist of Slavery." What the Liberty Party needed most in the crisis to come, they

84Governor Ransom declared, "If the Congress may rightfully create and establish a government in and over a territory clothed with the power of legislation, appoint over it a retinue of officers, executive and judicial, may not the same body declare, as needful rule and regula­ tion respecting it, that there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory? ..." See Joint Documents of the Senate and the House (1849) , p . 1T~. 184 believed, was "firmness and truthfulness." 8 5 Leaders of the state Liberty Party anticipated that their organization would gain from the confusion and differ­ ences of opinion on the major issues existing in the Demo­ cratic and Whig parties throughout the North. Following a tour of Northern states, Jerome M. Treadwell found that in every state he visited the Democrats and the Whigs were "feeling entirely at a loss to know what position to take in view of the despotic and impudent position assumed by slave­ holders and the miserable fawning sycophants of the North." This condition, he said, was not found among the Liberty men of the North, who expressed no doubt as to their position and duties, namely, "earnest, straightforward opposition to slavery, oppression, and the slave power." Treadwell believed that when Congress became confronted with the vast details of expenses, and the long lists of murdered soldiers who had sacrificed their lives in obedience to "our government in waging its proslavery conquest of Mexico," no party machina­ tion would prevent the crisis the Mexican War would create for the nation. It would be difficult then for the old par­ ties to preserve their discipline from the effects of efficient antislavery action. The time would arrive, he concluded, when the principles cherished by the Liberty Party could not be stayed. "Minds of the people of the free states," he declared,

Q C Elizur Wright, Myron Holley, p. 244. 185

"look forward to the overthrow of the slave power as the ultimate result of our movement. Joshua Leavit believed that the Democrats and the

Whigs of the free states had exposed the dangers of the slave power to the Federal Union, and that the Liberty Party should take advantage of the situation. I am struck with the facility with which this word [ slavepower] has come into use in the documents of both Democrats and Whigs. The slavepower is now in­ dissolubly incorporated in the political nomenclature of the country, . . . we must make the most use of that word. . . . Let it appear that it is the slave­ power which we wish to resist and curtail; that it is the slavepower whose demands we resist, whose growth we will put down.87

Already Salmon P. Chase and Charles Dexter Cleve­ land had accumulated and assembled in 165 pages all the major economic, political and historical arguments which the Lib­

erty Party proposed to use during the next presidential cam­

paign to show how the slave power had dominated the national government, and had enjoyed undue advantages at the expense

of Northerners. 8 8 Unknown to the Liberty men across the

Q /L Treadwell's account was addressed to Theodore Foster, September 27, 1847, and was published in the Signal of Liberty, October 2, 1847. 8 7 Joshua Leavit to Salmon P. Chase, July 7, 1848, quoted in Eric Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men (New York, 1970), p. 93. ' ~ 8 8 The southern and western Liberty Convention held at Cincinnati on the 11th and 12th of June, 1845, was the greatest antislavery body yet assembled in the United States. Delegates came from both the free and slave states. It was 186 free states was the windfall they would make, in 1848, as the result of feuds within the two major political organi­ zations in the North. Liberty men did not initiate any of the internal conflicts within the existing political parties, but as political opportunists, they began to reap where they did not sow. Like other states of the North, New York was torn by conflicting factions centering around personalities. In New York personal attachment to Van Buren kept many Demo­ cratic stalwarts faithful to him, even though he had not always been antislavery. His rejection by the convention of

1844 had won for him respect from haters of slavery who were not of his party, and had kindled an unexpected spark in the hearts of his old friends, who had seen nothing wrong in slavery until their chief was repudiated by the slaveowners.

While Van Buren's friends had aided the election of Polk, they had not received their share of the patronage after

Polk's election. Hunger for office and disappointment put the disaffected elements even more at variance with the orthodox Democrats who supported the administration. Van not regarded as exclusively a convention of the Liberty Party because of the over 2,000 to 4,000 people in person; letters in support of the convention came from Samuel Fessent and Samuel Pound of Maine; Titus Hutchinson of Vermont, Elihu Byrritt, H. B. Stanton and Phineas Crandell of Massachusetts; William Jay, William Goodell, Lewis Tappan of New York: Thomas Earle of Pennsylvania; F. D. Parish of Ohio; Cassius M. Clay of Ken­ tucky; and John Gilmore of Virginia. See Salmon P. Chase and Charles Dexter Cleveland, Anti-Slavery Addresses of 1844 and 1845 (reprinted: New York, 1969), pp. 129-160. 187

89 Buren supporters were sneered at as "Barnburners."

William L. Marcy's faction at the other end repre­

sented conservative Democrats, who were ready to abide by

the proslavery acts of the administration. President Polk

seemed to have favored the "Old Hunkers," as this faction was

then called. But as the controversy over the Wilmot Proviso

intensified, the Barnburners and the Whigs in New York, as

in Michigan, cooperated to oppose the extension of slavery.

Thus the two factions of the New York Democrats became more widely separated. Of course many of them were less friends

of Negro freedom than foes of those who had thwarted Van

Buren and their own political hopes. Revenge was the moti­

vating force behind the actions of many New Yorkers who

became free soilers.

After the state Democratic convention at Syracuse in

September, 1847, the warring cliques were so widely separated

that they could scarcely be considered portions of one party.

During the convention a resolution was offered by the Barn­

burners which declared uncompromising hostility to the exten­

sion of slavery into the territories then free. The refusal

of the convention, which was in the hands of the Hunkers, to

accept the resolution caused the secession of their opponents.

The Barnburners thereupon organized for themselves and pre-

8 9 Alto L. Whitehurst, "Martin Van Buren and the Free Soil Movement" (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1932), pp. 57, 129-130; Herbert D. A. Donovan, The Barnburners (New York, 1925), pp. 52-56. 188

pared to contest the seats of the delegates chosen for the

national Democratic convention. The Van Buren faction announced the severance of all bonds which would bind them

to vote for a presidential candidate who did not support

the Wilmot Proviso. Therefore, unless this grievous schism

could be healed, there was little hope for the candidate

presented by the Baltimore convention. When the national convention met in May, 1848, it

attempted a simple cure by offering to admit both factions

to active participation in its proceedings. The committee on

credentials first tried to bind both delegations to abide by

the decision of the convention. This the Barnburners refused

to do, and as a consequence New York had no further share in

the proceedings. Cass was nominated on the fourth ballot.

General William 0. Butler of Tennessee was presented for

Vice-President. These nominations were received by the

party with satisfaction. The Hunkers acquiesced quite

readily, and were thus installed as the regular Democratic

Party of New York. The Barnburners became more fierce than

ever, for the Van Buren men had never forgiven Cass for his

candidacy in 1844. Moreover he stood out conspicuously as

the opponent of the Wilmot Proviso. 9 0

The two major parties refused to confront the slavery

question; in consequence after the nomination of Taylor, a

9DWhitehurst, "Martin Van Buren and the Free Soil Movement," pp. 132-135; Donovan, Barnburners, pp. 56-62. 189 mass convention of the citizens of Ohio in favor of "free territory" met in Columbus and decided to issue a call for a national gathering at Buffalo on August 9. About the same time the Barnburners met in Utica and nominated Van Buren

for President and Henry Dodge, United States Senator from Wisconsin, for Vice-President. Van Buren accepted but Dodge

decided to support Cass. 91

In November, 1847, the Liberty Party had nominated

John P. Hale of New Hampshire for President, but hoped that the action of the Buffalo convention would be ratified. On

August 9, there assembled at Buffalo a strange company. The

Barnburners, who had been orthodox Democrats, supporters of

Jackson and Van Buren, met with delegates of the Liberty

Party, who not long before had been hated as crazy fanatics; the "Conscience Whigs" of Massachusetts, the free - territory men from Ohio, the disappointed Clay Whigs, the "Land Re­ formers" and "Workingmen of New York," and the advocates of cheap postage, came together as strange bedfellows in the 92 misery of an eventful crisis.

Their platform, written by Mr. Chase, declared that

Congress had no more power to make a slave than to make a king and contained the resolution that "we inscribe on our

91 Donovan, Barnburners, pp. 67-75. 92 Oliver Dyer, "Report of the Proceedings of the National Free Soil Convention at Buffalo, New York, August 9th and 10th, 1848, Buffalo, 1848"; Whitehurst, "Martin Van Buren," pp. 132-133; Donovan, Barnburners, pp. 97-98. 190 banner free soil, free speech, free labor, and free men, and under it we will fight on and fight ever until a triumphant victory shall reward our exertions." This was the beginning of the Free Soil Party. The convention seemed impressed with the solemnity of the occasion and the weight of its responsibility. Van

Buren was nominated amid acclamations of enthusiasm, and

Charles Francis Adams, the son of John Quincy Adams, was chosen Vice-President. The conscientious Free Soilers were willing to accept the opportunity in the hope that good 93 would result. The Free-Soil Party was officially organized in

Michigan in September, 1848. The convention held at Ann

Arbor included former members of the Whig, Democratic, and

Liberty Parties. After completing the usual organizational work, the convention approved resolutions opposing the exten­ sion of slavery into territories then free and upholding the principles of the Wilmot Proviso. They also denounced the doctrine of "Popular Sovereignty," for which Lewis Cass had long been a leading spokesman. 9 4

9 3 Rayback, "The Liberty Party Leaders of Ohio," pp. 177-178; Theodore Smith, The Liberty and Free Soil Par­ ties in the Northwest, pp. 121 and 13 7-138.

94, Flavius J. Littlejohn, a well-known Democrat from Western Michigan, was among the chief organizers. He was the presiding officer at the Ann Arbor convention. Also present was Hovey K. Clarke, a prominent lawyer and Democrat from Marshall, True Democrat, September 28, 1848. 191

The presidential campaign of 1848 was fierce. Three

top names in American politics, Lewis Cass, Martin Van Buren,

and the Mexican War hero, Zachary Taylor, who was as clever in politics as he was on the battlefields, were in the race.

Taylor had one great advantage over his opponents: he was a great planter, who owned over one hundred slaves, a fact

that won him the support of rich Southern planters and their 9 5 Northern associates. Although this could have been of great

disadvantage to him, he mastered the art of politics so well

as to attract an odd assortment of political admirers and

allies. While Taylor retained the majority of the Whigs on

his bandwagon, he also had attracted the representatives of

several interest groups. These included influential Northern

Whigs, like Abraham Lincoln, Southern Democrats like Jeffer­

son Davis, Southern Whigs like Alexander Stephens, and 96 Northern Democrats like Simon Cameron.

In addition, Taylor carefully acted in public as

a nationalist so that it was not very possible easily to

designate him as precisely a Whig, a Democrat, a proslavery

or an antislavery enthusiast. 9 7 He confided very secretly 98 to his best Southern friends his real intentions.

The election of 1848 was therefore unique in that

9 5Holman Hamilton, Zachary Taylor, Soldier in the White House (Hamden, Conn. , 1966) , p"I 18.

96Ibid., p. 38. 97Ibid., pp. 38-45.

98Ibid., p. 45. 192

the three candidates had long been known as proslavery men,

and no switch in political affiliation could convince the

American voters that Van Buren had become an abolitionist.

However, he had split the Democratic Party, and the new party which nominated him for the presidency in opposing Cass and Taylor had united on the common basis of upholding the Wilmot

Proviso and the destruction of the aggressions of the slave power. The platform also pledged to promote river and harbor

improvement, and a generous program of free homesteads to

actual settlers. It adopted the slogan of "Free Soil, Free 99 Speech, Free Labor, and Free Men." Lewis Cass, Michigan's favorite son, conservative

Democrat and an expansionist, had since 1844 been an advocate of the doctrine of "Squatter Sovereignty" or local determina­ tion of the status of slavery in the territories. Never­ theless, the Democratic national convention which nominated him as their presidential candidate carefully excluded from its platform the principle of Squatter Sovereignty. Their platform, much like that of 1844, denied the power of Con­ gress to interfere with slavery in the states and criticized

99 Oliver Dyer, "Report of the Proceedings of the N a ­ tional Free Soil Convention at Buffalo, New York, August 9th and 10th, 1848" (Buffalo, 1848); Whitehurst, "Martin Van Buren," pp. 56-57, 128-129; William I. Bowditch, Cass and Taylor on the Slavery Question (Boston, 1848), pp. 22-23; "Proceedings of the National Liberty Party Convention Held in Buffalo, New York, June 14th and 15th, 1848, including the Resolutions and Addresses Adopted by That Body and Speeches of Beriah Green and Gerrit Smith on That Occasion" (Utica, 1848) . 193 all efforts to bring the slavery question before Congress.

In a move to quell agitation of the slavery issue, the con­ vention voted down a minority resolution of the Southern delegates favoring non-interference with slavery in the territories.100 Meeting in Philadelphia on June 7, 1848, the Whig national convention nominated Zachary Taylor as their presi­ dential candidate. The Whig platform presented the nation with an interesting account of Taylor's military character and reputation. It was a clever move on their part consider­ ing the mood of the nation and the nature of political issues created by the United States victory and territorial acqui­ sitions from the Mexican War. A non-committal position was considered the safest political strategy.

The results of the election, which was the first con­ ducted on a uniform election day in accord with the Congres­ sional Act of 1845, demonstrated the impact of Van Buren's action. It was probably his break with the Democratic Party and candidacy as a Free Soiler that cost Cass the election.

In Michigan, Cass polled 30,687 votes; Taylor, 23,940; and Van

Buren, 10,389. The Free-Soil Party in 1848 made an astonish­ ing gain of 6,757 votes more than the Liberty vote in 1844.

The Whig vote in 1848 was down and the Democrats high, which

^^Kirk H. Porter and Donald B. Johnson, Comps., Na­ tional Party Platforms, 1840-1856 (Urbana, 1956), pp. 20-23.

^ ^ I b i d . , pp. 21-24. 194

meant that the Free-Soil Party’s gains came mostly from Whig

voters of the central, southern and northeastern parts of the state. Whigs and Free Soilers combined in the Second Con­

gressional District and elected their candidate to Congress,

and the Whigs elected four new state senators and sixteen members to the House of Representatives. The Free-Soil Party elected three members of the House from the counties of Ionia,

Monroe and Branch. 10 2 The possibility of a free homestead for actual set­

tlers and the prohibition of slavery in all new territories

had attracted attention to the Free Soil movement in Michi­

gan. In addition, the leaders of the movement had shifted

their propaganda to total emancipation "On the Soil." Total

emancipation on the soil, they explained, would not be a

threat either to free white labor or the small farmer, because

it meant that slaves who were freed were to remain on the

property where they had been slaves. After gaining their

102 Election results: see Detroit Free Press, Novem­ ber 13 and 17 , 1848 , and ibid. , December 4 , 1858. The Whig determination to fight slavery extension, see Detroit Adver­ tiser, September 18, 1847. Whig pledge to uphold the prin- ciples of the Wilmot Proviso, during the campaign of 1848, see Niles Republican, September 16, 1848, Detroit Advertiser, Janu- ary 11 and May 16, 1848, Marshall Statesman, February 1, 1848, Woodbridge papers, Vol. 138, p”! 212. The switch of the Taylor Club of Lansing to Van Buren, see Detroit Free Press, August 30, 1848. The Jackson Gazette, a Whig paper, renounced Taylor and called upon all Whigs to support Van Buren, quoted in Detroit Free Press, August 30, 1848. Detroit Advertiser, November 18 , 1848, and Detroit Free Press, August 26, 1848, carried reports of the change over from Taylor to Van Buren by the Whigs of Jackson, Oakland, Branch, Lenawee, Monroe, Macomb, and Washtenaw, most agricultural centers. 195 freedom, they were to be hired by their former masters and paid regular wages for their labor. This line of argument 103 which Theodore Foster and Guy Beckley developed was in­ tended to calm the concern of the majority of the people who feared that emancipation would mean the exodus of the freed slaves to Michigan or to other free soil. On the other hand, Cass's doctrine of Squatter

Sovereignty was considered by many as a vehicle to spread slavery in every territory of the United States. Those whose hatred of the Negro constituted the basis of their antislavery sentiment believed that Cass was no longer a safe politician and should be retired. Thus during the election, the resi­ dents of the counties of Lapeer, Oakland, Genesee, and

Shiawasee openly promised to give no vote to Cass and to vote for Van Buren.The difficulty with which Cass secured his nomination to the Senate of the United States, after his defeat in the presidential race, might be another evidence of the disapproval of his view on the slavery controversy.'*'^

*^Guy Beckley, Antislavery MSS, MHSC, and Theodore Foster, Antislavery MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

^^These counties were in Bingham's district and most of the residents, especially those of Scottish origin, were farmers. See Detroit Advertiser, July 24, 1848, for the detailed account which did not suggest that Bingham's support of the Wilmot Proviso influenced the residents of his constituency.

^ ^ O n l y two-thirds of the Democrats attended the caucus meeting held on January 5, for the nomination of Cass for the Senate, and only 31 votes were cast for Cass. Because of this the people adjourned to meet the next day, 196

When he was finally nominated, a good number of those who voted for his nomination also voted for resolutions which advocated the principles of the Wilmot Proviso and which instructed the Senator to use his influence to secure the adoption of the measure- Cass considered their action very insulting and threatened to resign his seat unless the State

Legislature relieved him of such an obligation to vote for the Proviso. With considerable difficulty the legislature managed to rescind the instruction. On the national scene, things were anything but calm. The Mexican War had ended by September, 1847, and by extending invitations to the rest of their members to attend, but the call was ignored, and again the few people in attend­ ance voted for Cass. When the House began to nominate a candidate for the United States Senate on January 9, Cass got 34 votes on the first ballot, Edwin Lawrence 15, Ransom 11, two other candidates one each, and Cass was declared a winner. The same day the Senate began to nominate a candi­ date, and it took them two weeks to reach an agreement. When Cass's nomination was resumed on January 19, he got 11 votes out of the 22 members present, and it was again and again voting after voting. It was not even easy at the joint convention of the legislature. Then finally Cass was nomi­ nated by a vote of 14 to 7 in the Senate, and 39 to 21 in the House. Detroit Free Press, January 15, 1849; Niles Republican, February 3, 1849; House Journal (1849), p. 35; Senate Journal (1849), pp. 34, 46 - 47 , 66", ?F5-118; House Journal (18497, pp. 117-122.

"^^Resolutions to rescind the instructions were introduced in the Senate on March 28, 1850, and the vote was 11 to 11; the President's affirmative vote broke the tie. In the House the vote was 27 to 20. In the Senate, 5 Whigs, 4 Democrats, 2 Free-Soilers voted in the negative. In the House the nays included 13 Whigs and Free-Soilers, and 7 Democrats. The reaction was therefore bipartisan. Detroit Free Press, March 22, 1850; Senate Journal (1850), p. 645; House Journal (1850), p. 806. 197

the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo the United States acquired

the vast area known as the Mexican Cession. Congress, of

course, had to deal with a number of important issues con­

cerning the acquisition, including the status of slavery

and the admission of California as a free or slave state. Congressional debates on these issues stirred up a

considerable antislavery sentiment in Michigan. Thus by the

time Henry Clay presented his compromise measures to Con­

gress, Michigan Democrats, Free Soilers, and Whigs had

openly declared that they would oppose Congressional decisions

which might extend slavery into any part of the Mexican

Cession. They expressed their willingness to support the

admission of California and New Mexico as free states. The

State Legislature had also adopted resolutions in support of 10 7 California's bid for admission.

The Whigs expressed their disapproval of the Presi­

dent's eagerness to interfere in the controversy between the

advocates and opponents of slavery extension. The status of

slavery in the new territories, Michigan Whigs argued, should

107 Cong. Globe, 31st Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 1504, 1555, 1573, 1647, 1659, 1660, 1770, 1774, 1807, 1837; Appendix to the Cong. Globe, Vol. XXII, Part 2, p. 21776; Michigan Argus, July lo; 1850 ; Detroit Free Press, June 15 , 1850; "Proceed- ings of the State Democratic Convention Held at Jackson, September 19, 1849," in Detroit Free Press, September 21, 1849; Spencer Collections, Box 1, contains a typed record of this convention; "Proceedings of the State Whig Conven­ tion Held at Jackson, June 19, 1849," in Detroit Daily Ad­ vertiser, June 22 , 1849; Spencer Collections, Box 1, con - tains a typed record of this convention. 198 be left to the decision of the majority of the members of

Congress, and the responsibility of the President should be the enforcement and execution of the Congressional , . . 108 decision. The Whigs warned that attempts to extend slavery beyond where it already existed would be a source of national weakness, an occasion of widespread discontent, a great injus­ tice to the free states, and offensive to free laborers. The peace and prosperity of the nation, they declared, depended upon the joint effort of the Northern and Southern people to restrict slavery to those states where it legally existed.

Michigan Whigs appealed to the people of the North to be calm and cautious so that their representatives in Congress could 109 perform the great task before them peacefully.

They believed that the elimination of divisions within the political parties in the North would end all ir­ responsible agitations, abate public excitement and the suspicions of Southern people. Thus in addressing their fellow citizens, particularly the antislaveryites, Michigan

Whigs called for party unity in opposing the extension of slavery and for postponing subjects of minor importance until the question of slavery in the new territories has been

■^^"Proceedings of the State Whig Convention Held at Jackson, June 19, 1849," in Detroit Daily Advertiser, June 22, 1849. This was Resolution No. 2.

■^^Ibid. Resolution No. 3. 199 settled. Michigan Free Soilers, on the other hand, recommended the passage of a Congressional law prohibiting the extension of slavery in all the new territories of the United States as the solution of the slavery question. They argued that such a measure was constitutional because there was no clause in the United States' Constitution which authorized Congress to extend, encourage, or nationalize slavery. They denied that they were irresponsible agitators, because they had never asked Congress to repeal or modify any of the laws of the slaveholding states which recognized the legality of slavery in those states. Had the federal government accepted

Thomas Jefferson's recommendation to prohibit the existence of slavery in the territories of the United States , North and South after 1800, they claimed, there would have been no antislavery agitators. The fact that Congress had permitted the creation of slave states in the past, they insisted, was no guarantee that it should be allowed to continue to act beyond its constitutional powers. 111

Although Michigan Whigs believed that Congress possessed no constitutional power to create slave states, they anticipated that the slavery question which had attracted

^ ^ Ibid. Resolution No. 4.

lll"Proceedings of the Free-Soil Party Convention Held at Jackson, June 19-20, 1849," Theodore Foster Anti­ slavery MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 200 such public attention could be resolved peacefully. They thought that this goal could be achieved by discouraging all the separatist movements in both the North and South. To set the example, they appointed a committee composed of one person from each senatorial district to confer with a similar committee to be appointed by the Free-Soil Party. The two committees would then discuss the possibility of uniting the two political parties. There was no indication that the

Free-Soil Party appointed such a committee or that any dis­ cussion of such an action took place before the adoption of the Compromise of 1850. The Compromise of 1850 contained six bills which settled the questions of the admissions of California and

Utah, the Texas and New Mexico boundary dispute, the domestic slave trade in the District of Columbia, and a more strin- 113 gent clause for the rendition of fugitive slaves. The great point in the compromise was that the Northern inter­ ests surrendered the Wilmot Proviso, and the Southern extre­ mists the concept that citizens could take their slave property anywhere as a constitutional right. Both sides

112The Whigs appointed H. D. Terry of Macomb County and C. H. Miller of Branch County. "Proceedings of the State Whig Convention Held at Jackson on June 19, 1849," Detroit Daily Advertiser, June 22, 1849.

113Cong. Globe, 31st Cong., 1st Sess., XXIII, 171, App. 122 ff.; ibid., XXI, 246, App. 79; 31st Cong., 1st Sess., XXI, pp~ 233, 1583, 1588; United States Statutes at Large, IX, pp. 460-463. » 201

compromised on "Popular Sovereignty," which acknowledged the

doctrine that the people in the territories could create their own constitutional and property patterns. The terri­

torial legislatures were given power to legislate on slavery. If these legislatures should prohibit slavery, and if their

acts should be questioned in court, appeals could be taken

to the Supreme Court, which was Southern in composition. A promise was made that the territories should not be refused admittance to the Union because they either permitted or prohibited slavery. A new fugitive slave law, to be enforced by the federal government, was adopted to safeguard Southern constitutional rights and to recognize the obligation of the federal government to protect them. The discontinuance of the slave trade in the District of Columbia, without inter­ fering with the existence there of slavery, was a concession to the North. Lastly, nothing in the compromise either stated or implied a moral judgment against slavery.

Throughout the nation the citizens felt that the passage of the compromise measures had settled the sectional differences which threatened the safety of the Union. In Michigan, the conservative element in both the Democratic and Whig parties expressed their willingness to accept the compromise measures as a finality. * On the other hand,

114 Detroit Daily Advertiser, September 28, 1850; Oak­ land Gazette, October 19 , 1850 ; Washtenaw Whig, October 23"] 1850; Marshall Statesman, October 30, 1850; Michigan Expositor, 202

the Free Soilers and the radical element in the Democratic and Whig parties condemned the Fugitive Slave Law. This group declared that that law had deprived Michigan blacks of the right of trial by jury, the privilege of habeas corpus, and the right to summon witnesses in their defense. The group promised to protect the blacks and to fight for the repeal of the new law. In parts of Michigan citizens held protest meetings and vowed to violate the new fugitive slave act. 115 In October, 1850, the situation was aggravated when slave catchers from Tennessee showed up in Detroit to take one Giles Rose, an alleged fugitive slave from Tennessee, employed on Governor Woodbridge's farm. The United States

Marshal in Detroit arrested Giles Rose, and the city authori­ ties approved his action. Angry citizens, black and white, assembled immediately and protested the attempt to return

Rose to slavery in Tennessee. The United States Commissioner, before whom Rose was taken for examination, sensed the temper of the outraged crowd and adjourned the case, giving the

October 15, 1850; Michigan Telegraph, November 8 , 1850; Hills­ dale Standard, October 15, 1850; "Proceedings of the State Whig Convention Held on September 24," in Washtenaw Whig, October 9, 1850; "Proceedings of the State Democratic Con­ vention Held at the Court House in Marshall, September 20, 1850," Detroit Free Press, September 21, 1850.

^■^Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 14, 1850. Pro­ vides details of the protest meeting held in Detroit on October 11, 1850; see also Marshall Statesman, October 30, 1850, for accounts of the protest rally held at Olivet on October 21, 1850. 203

1X6 prisoner time to produce proof of his freedom. This ges­

ture calmed the protesters. This first case in Michigan under the new fugitive

slave law occurred a month before the election of state legislators and representatives in Congress. The result of

the election was indicative of the determination of the

people of Michigan to oppose slavery. In the First and

Third Congressional Districts, E. J. Penniman and James L.

Conger, candidates of the Free Soilers and radical Democrats

and Whigs, won the election by a majority vote of 1,832 and 196 respectively. Thus, in the 32nd Congress (1851-1853)

Michigan was represented by two opponents of the Fugitive

Slave Act; Charles E. Stuart, who favored the bill, was 117 elected from the Second Congressional District. In the state election, the Democrats elected sixteen members to the State Senate while the Free Soilers and Whigs jointly elected six. The Democrats elected thirty-nine members of the House, the Whigs and Free Soilers jointly elected twenty- 118 seven members. The adoption of the Compromise Act of

^■^Detroit Daily Advertiser, October 8 , 9, and 14, 1850. 117 Michigan Expositor, November 5, 1850; Detroit Advertiser, October 14 , 1850 ; Oakland Gazette, October 19, 1850; Washtenaw Whig, October 23, 1850; Detroit Free Press, October 28, 1850; Niles Republican, November 2, 1850; Emmons and Van Dyke, Papers, Vol. 124, p. 126.

I 1 O James F. Joy, Papers, Vol. 511, p. 167; Cold Water Sentinel, October 18, 1850; Detroit Advertiser, December 19, 1850; Detroit Free Press, November 11 and 20, 1850. 204

1850, therefore, had not discouraged the antislavery agita­ tion in Michigan. On the contrary, the fugitive slave law, which accelerated the division within the two major parties, added new supporters to the antislavery movement in that state. CHAPTER VII

THE EMERGENCY OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND

THE PROGRESS OF POLITICAL ABOLITIONISM

IN MICHIGAN, 1851-1860

The adoption of the Compromise of 1850 placed one major responsibility on the political leaders of the nation: to direct public affairs in such a way that neither the

North nor the South should again feel that its interests were endangered. The effective exercise of this responsi­ bility depended largely upon the manner in which the nation's leaders dealt with the Southern extremists. The reason was that whatever the legal or political rights of the South might be, the slaveholding community had long been on the defensive and in the minority,'*' and the peculiar institution of the South continued to be the object of attack by

Helper estimated that there were 347,525 slaveholders in the fifteen slave states in 1850 out of a population of six million whites; H. R. Helper, Impending Crisis of the South and How to Avert It, pp. 144^ 146. Ji GL Randall had the same number broken into numbers in families: Holders of 1 slave each 68,820 2 - 3 slaves each 105,683 5 - 9 M 80,765 10 - 19 " " 54,595 20 - 49 " " 29,733 50 - 99 " " 6,196 100 - 199 " M 1,479 200 - 299 " " 187

205 206

2 Northern public opinion. The South, therefore, had every

reason to fear that intensification of the antislavery cru­

sade in the North would increase the danger to slavery.

Furthermore, if additional Northerners joined the anti­

slavery demand to exclude slavery from the federal domain

or to use the powers of the federal government to attack the institution, Northern numerical superiority could bring

about the destruction of slavery.^ The Southern concern was based upon practical grounds.

Leaders of the antislavery crusade in the Northern states had since 1848 dropped the demand for equal rights for the

Negroes because they realized that their success as a politi­

cal movement in a society which believed in white superiority

300 - 499 slaves each 56 500 or more 11 Total 347,525 J. G. Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction (Lexington, 1969) , p. 67. 2 Beginning with Quakers of Pennsylvania long ago and the Missouri Compromise controversy in 1820, it was over after that except among antislavery circles, but with the annexation of Texas the attack began again and as one major issue in the slavery controversy succeeded another, the attack became more and more widespread. Caroline Lewis, "The Antislavery Argu­ ment as Developed in the Literature, 1830-1840" (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, 1916), pp. 140-145; Thomas E. Drake, Quakers and Slavery in America (Gloucester, Mass., 1965) . 3 Congressional gag rules of the 1830s and 1840s il­ lustrated the concern over antislavery propaganda. Although these Congressional practices minimized the effect of anti­ slavery propaganda, the Southern concern was the possibility of the establishment of a strong sectional political party, especially after the Compromise of 1850. 207 demanded the abandonment of the idea of equal rights for blacks.^ The antislavery crusade had instead championed the cause of the oppressed, free labor, and majority rule.^ Moral condemnation of slavery was merely words without action, and did not bother Southern extremists. However, the deter­ mined efforts of Northern antislavery political enthusiasts to mobilize Northern opinion against the slave power through a stronger antislavery political party after the Compromise of 1850 seemed too serious a threat to be ignored. The resolutions adopted by the Michigan Free-Soil

Party^ left no doubts in the minds of Southern extremists about the danger of an effective antislavery political party to the security of slavery. The destruction of the slave power was greatly emphasized as the goal of the party.

The appeal was to all friends of freedom, to eliminate past political divisions and party loyalty, and to unite all citizens to resist the South’s demand, as a constitutional

^Eric Foner, ’’Politics and Prejudice: The Free Soil Party and the Negro, 1849-1852," Journal of Negro History, L (1965), pp. 239-240.

^Joseph Rayback, "The American Workingman and the Antislavery Crusade," Journal of Economic History, III (1943), pp. 152-163; Bernard Mandel, Labor: Free and Slave; Work­ ingmen and Antislavery MovemenT in the United States (New York, 1955) , pp. 58-61; William H. Loftos, "Abolition and Labor," Journal of Negro History, XXXIII (1948), pp. 249-288.

^The national Free Soil convention and the state Free- Soil Party conventions adopted similar views. Materials presented in this discussion are from a copy of the "Proceed­ ings of the Free Soil State Convention in Michigan," State Public Library, Lansing, among the Spencer Collections. 208

right, that the federal government should permit the exten­

sion of slavery in new territories. The appeal was strongly

directed to the free people's sense of pride and courage.

The Free-Soilers praised the Northern states for

their courage and wisdom in abolishing the institution of

Negro slavery. They acknowledged the support of the free

citizens for the cause of freedom, and committed themselves

to fight for the protection of the rights of the white

people, the rights of free labor in general and of the free laborers of the North in particular. In this regard they compared their crusade with the revolutionary efforts

of the founding fathers. They called upon Northern citizens to fight against Southern oppressions of free white laborers

of the North, as opposed to the former appeals which called

for the relief of those in bondage in Southern plantations.

The Free-Soilers1 insistence that Congress possessed the

constitutional right to legislate for the people of the

territories was a claim the Compromise of 1850 attempted

to abrogate, and one the antislaveryites continued to

assert. In order to win the sympathy of the common people

7 This statement seemed to ignore the Northern in­ volvement in the African slave trade--a major part in W. E. B. DuBois, The Suppression of the African Slave-Trade to the United States of America, 1638-1870 (New York: Schocken Ed., 1969). Arthur Zilversmit, The First Emanci­ pation- -The Abolition of Slavery in the North (Chicago, 1967) is the authority in the study of Northern abolition of Negro slavery. For resolutions, see Appendix D. 209 and to convince then that the salvation of the nation and her prosperity depended upon the affiliation of the Northern electorate with the antislavery political party, the Free-

Soilers painted a glowing picture of the prosperous Union, which a united South intended to destroy. The adoption of such highly refined ideology by the Free-Soilers was certainly an advancement in antislavery political strategy. But the success of any sectional party,

North or South, depended largely upon the success or failure of the Democratic and Whig organizations. As long as the Democrats and the Whigs were able to draw support from all parts of the nation, it would not be possible for a sectional

President or a sectional Congress to be elected.

It remained to be seen whether the old parties would continue to concentrate their activities on such tra­ ditional issues as the tariff, banks, currency, distribution and sale of public land, internal improvements and others of that nature. Under the administration of Fillmore, whose conservative cabinet included Daniel Webster as Secretary of State, Thomas Corwin as Secretary of the Treasury, and

J. Crittenden as Attorney General, the federal government was in the hands of friends of compromise.

In Michigan, however, a moral revolution was gaining momentum. Memories of the celebrated Adam Crosswhite case of 1848, the influence of Uncle Tom's Cabin, and the impact of the case of Giles Rose, immediately after the adoption of 210 the compromise measures, increased the state's hostility to slavery on moral grounds. Nevertheless, Michigan's conserva­ tive Democrats and Whigs believed they could discourage further development of antislavery sentiment in the state. The first session of the State Legislature of 1851 received several petitions from antislavery groups, requesting the legislature to instruct their Senators and Representatives g to demand the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law. The Committee on Federal Relations, to which the petitions were referred, rejected the request. Michigan, the committee reported, had accepted the finality of the compro- 9 mise measures and opposed reviving the sectional controversy. Governor J. S. Barry had also pledged the coopera­ tion of his state in preserving the Union and upholding the laws of the United States. No state had the right to secede, he declared, nor did the national government have the right to interfere in the domestic affairs of a state.^

Believing that the peace of the nation depended upon a union of Northern and Southern Democrats, Michigan Demo­ crats attempted to restore unity within the state Democratic

Party and urged all Northern Democrats to copy their example.

^House Journal (1851), pp. 113, 385, 399. 9 House and Senate Documents (1851), Document No. 16; House Journal (1851), p. 592.

^ Joint Documents of the House and Senate of the State of Michigan (1851), pp. 2 6-27. 211

Michigan's determination to uphold the sovereignty of the

Union, the Democrats pointed out, had been demonstrated by the ease with which their legislature re-elected Senator

Cass.11

Michigan Whigs also resolved the factional conflict within their party, and the conservative wing, having re­ gained control, pledged their support of the compromise measures. While they opposed the extension of slavery in the territories and upheld the rights of citizens to ques­ tion the merit of laws passed by the national government, they urged every citizen to support the Constitution and federal laws. 12 The reunion of the conservative and radical fac­ tions of the two major political parties cut deep into the antislavery organization, reduced its membership, and threatened its existence. Inspired by Hovey K. Clarke, 13 the prominent leader of the Free-Soilers, its Central Com­ mittee issued a call for a state convention. On August 15,

1852, Michigan antislaveryites assembled at Ann Arbor, re­ newed their determination to obstruct the enforcement of

^ Detroit Free Press, September 25, 1851; Niles Re- jmblican, July 12, 1851; Senate Journal (1851) , p. 4 j House Journal (1851), pp. 9-10. 12 Pontiac Gazette, September 13, 1851.

"^Washtenaw Whig, October 22, 1852; Michigan Exposi­ tor , November 18, 18 5 2; letter of Hovey K. Clarke in Supple­ ment to the Detroit Daily Post and Tribune, July 6 , 1879. 212 the Fugitive Slave Law whenever possible, and adopted a platform which ratified the nomination of John P. Hale and

W. Julian as their presidential candidates. They set the date of September 29 for another convention to be held at

Kalamazoo for the purpose of selecting their presidential electors and nominating candidates for state offices. They 14 also approved the adoption of a new name, "Free Democrats." The campaign of 1852 revealed that the factional con­ flict in the two older political parties had not been settled permanently. Kingsley Bingham, who campaigned assiduously for the Free Democrats, reported that the directors of the

Michigan Southern Railroad had great influence on Michigan politics. These representatives and protectors of the con­ servative Democrats and Whigs (they bought the Southern Rail­ road in 1846^) sought to defeat not only the candidates of the Free Democrats, but any candidate who in the opinion of the conservative element of both parties was a radical. Bing­ ham reported this problem to H. H. Emmons, a Free Democrat and attorney for the corporation, and requested his assistance for the candidates of the Free Democrats for state offices."^

The outcome of the election was a defeat for the

14 Spencer Collections, State Public Library, Lansing, contains a typewritten copy of the call; Detroit Daily Ad ­ vertiser , September 6 , 1852; Hovey Clarke to G. F. Porter, Joy Papers, Vol. 510, pp. 89, 149 and Vol. 511, p. 82.

^ Laws of Michigan (1846), p. 170.

^Emmons and Van Dyke, Papers, Vol. 214, p. 232. 213 antislavery movement. Franklin Pierce received 41,842 votes;

Winfield Scott, 33,860; John P. Hale, 7,237. Robert

McClelland, the Democratic candidate for governor, received

42,798 votes; Zachariah Chandler, the Whig candidate,

34,660; and Isaac P. Christiancy, the Free Democrat, 5,850. The Free Democrats did not elect any member to the State

Legislature. The results of the presidential election of 1852 demonstrated that Whig support for the South was declining. Consequently the South turned to the Democratic Party and its leaders as the true champions of Southern interests.

The Democratic victory meant that Congress was once more in the hands of the slave power. The inauguration of Pierce was as remarkable as his overwhelming victory. All elements, Democrats as well as

Whigs, were disposed to look favorably upon the new Presi­ dent whose aims seemed as high as his prospects appeared secure. The choice of the new cabinet was a masterpiece in the politics of conciliation. 18

17 Michigan Manual (1913), p. 422; Washtenaw Whig, December 1, 1852. 18 The cabinet members included the aged W. L. Marcy, former leader of the New York Hunkers who got the office of the Secretary of State; Robert McClelland, former leader of Michigan Friends of Freedom, as Secretary of the Interior; J. Guthrie of Kentucky, Secretary of the Treasury; and J. C. Dobbin, North Carolina, Secretary of the Navy; most of the conservatives were disappointed but the leader of Southern rights, Jefferson Davis, and former staunch Whig, Caleb Cushing, got the positions of Secretary of War and Attorney 214

The Compromise of 1850, it was hoped, would resolve the problems in the controversy over slavery, and the na­ tional platforms of the Whig and Democratic parties of 1852 seemed to have accepted those solutions as final. At the opening of the session of Congress in December, 1853, there was no federal territory where the status of slavery was not fixed by some law bearing the character of an agreement be­ tween the sections. The federal government and most of the state governments were in the hands of a party committed to carry out the compromise measures. In his first annual message, President Pierce congratulated the country upon its calm, adding "that this repose is to suffer no shock during my official term if I have the power to avert it, those who placed me here may be assured." 19

Early in 1854, the repose was shocked by a bill to organize the Nebraska Territory, repeal the Missour Compro­ mise, and open to slavery a territory where it had been excluded. The bill for the organization of the Nebraska

Territory had been introduced in the Senate by Senator A. C.

Dodge of Iowa, in December, 1853, and had been referred to

General, respectively. James Campell of Pennsylvania was Postmaster General. Roy F. Nichols, Franklin Pierce, Young Hickory of Granite Hills (Philadelphia*^ 19313 , p p . 213-223 , 240-241, 277-281. 19 James D. Richardson, ed., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1908, Vol. V, {K 2 22 ; Roy F . Nichols, Franklin Pierce, pp. 2T4, 295, 299-301. 215

the Senate Committee on Territory of which Stephen A. Douglas was chairman. This committee reported a bill which incorpo­

rated a provision borrowed from the acts organizing New Mexico and Utah Territories. It provided for the creation of two territories, Kansas and Nebraska, and stipulated that

from those territories states might be formed and admitted to the Union "with or without slavery," as their constitu­ tions prescribed at the time of their admission. It also provided that all questions involving the title to slaves in the territories should be tried in the territorial courts, subject to the right of appeal to the United States Supreme

Court. Later, an outright concession to Southern interest was made through the insertion of a provision specifically declaring the Missouri Compromise inoperative and void. In this form the bill received the support of President Pierce and of the Southern delegation in Congress. The Kansas-

Nebraska Act went through both houses of Congress under strong administration pressure and became law in May, 1854.

At once the new law provoked a reaction in which all the suppressed bitterness and passion of the slavery controversy burst into the o p e n . ^

20Cong. Globe, 32nd Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 113; Cong. Globe, 33rd Cong., Tst Sess., Senate Report No. 15; Cong. Globe, 33rd Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 216; Mrs. Archibald Dixon, The True History of the Missouri Compromise and Its Repeal, pp. 440-450; Robert R. Russell, "What Was the Compromise of 1850?" Journal of Negro History, XXIX (1963}; Senator Chase of Ohio who wished to test the sincerity and real purpose of the doctrine of Squatter Sovereignty offered an amendment: 216

The friends of freedom in Michigan seized the chance at once to express politically their feeling of resentment.

Although their leader, Robert McClelland, one of the authors of the VVilmot Proviso, had fallen in with his party leaders in 1852 when he agreed to serve as the Secretary of the Interior under Pierce, Kingsley S. Bingham, also one of the authors of the Wilmot Proviso, assumed the leadership among the opponents of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Throughout the state protest meetings were organized at which resolutions condemning the Act were adopted. A mass meeting held in

Detroit on February 18, 1854, just before the bill was adopted, revealed the extent of discontent among the people. Zachariah

Chandler, Emanuel Barstow, Jacob M. Howard, Bethune Duffield,

Jonathan Kearsly were among the influential speakers at this unique gathering of individuals belonging to different politi­ cal parties. Another gathering took place at Grand Rapids, then Michigan's second largest city. This group, which assumed the name of "Anti-Nebraska," abandoned old party affiliations, held a city convention, nominated and elected their leader, IVilder D. Foster, as Mayor of the city. 21

"Under which the people of the territory, through their appro­ priate representatives may, if they see fit, prohibit the existence of slavery therein." The vote against the adoption of this amendment was 10 yeas to 26 nays. This demonstrated that under the principles of Squatter Sovereignty, the people of a territory might only be able to tolerate slavery but could not prohibit or exclude it. Cong. Globe, 33rd Cong., 1st Sess., Senate Report No. 15. 21 Utley and Cutcheon, Michigan, Vol. 3, p. 37. 217

Remarkably, Democrats of Michigan took an important step in the destruction of the Democratic Party. On Febru­ ary 22, 1854, the "Free Democrats" assembled in state con­ vention at Jackson. Prominent names in state politics were present. The delegates unanimously adopted resolutions, drawn up by Hovey K. Clarke of Detroit, denouncing the pro­ posed repeal of that part of the Missouri Compromise which excluded slavery north of 36°30' in the Louisiana Purchase territory. Since the main objective of the delegates was to defeat the Democratic supporters of the Kansas-Nebraska

Bill, the convention proceded to nominate a state ticket.

This was followed by a powerful appeal to all lovers of

"free speech, free soil and free men" in the Democratic

Party.22 Antislavery leaders in Michigan now had to decide whether to remain an independent political party or to join the anti-Nebraska forces. As might be expected, the Free

Democrats met in convention on June 21, 1854, withdrew their slate of candidates, and appealed for a united action.2^

22"Proceedings of the State Mass Convention of the Free Democrats Held at Jackson, February 22, 1854, for the Purpose of Nominating State Officers Together with the Names of the Men Nominated and the Officers of the Convention" in the Spencer Collections of the State Public Library, Lansing. Original text is in the Detroit Daily Democrat, February 23, 1854, in Detroit City Library. See Appendix E. 2 3 "Proceedings of the Mass Convention at Kalamazoo, Pursuant to a Call Issued by the Free Democratic State 218

Isaac P. Christiancy of Monroe, after consulting important

friends of united action, issued a call for a mass convention

to be held at Jackson on Thursday, July 6 , 1854. The pur­ pose, he stated, was to consider the best measures to concen­ trate the popular sentiment of this state against the aggres- sions of the slave power. The convention met in Jackson as scheduled. (By then the Kansas-Nebraska Act was the law of the land.) The crowd was too large for the Court House where it was to be held originally, so the delegates adjourned to an oak grove on the southern edge of the town, and there under the oaks, they held one of the historic conventions from which the Republi­ can Party emerged. Jacob M. Howard presented a moderate platform, while Austin Blair, later the "War Governor" of

Michigan, presented a quite radical one. The convention chose to adopt Howard's because of its more general appeal to

Central Committee," in Spencer Collections of the State Public Library, Lansing. Original text is in Detroit Daily Democrat, June 22, 1854. See Appendix F. 2 4 The emphasis was upon the repeal of the Missouri Compromise and he insisted that such an outrage upon liberty, such violation of plighted faith cannot be submitted to. This wrong must be righted, or there is no longer a North in the Councils of the Nation. The safety of the Union, the rights of the North, the interests of free labor, the destiny of a vast territory and its untold millions for all coming time, and finally the aspirations of humanity for universal free­ dom, all are involved in the issue forced upon the country by the slave power, and its plastic Northern tools. Details in Appendix G. Original text in Detroit Daily Democrat, June 22, 1854. 219

2 5 citizens of the state.

The convention appointed a committee of 88 that re­

ported a state ticket which the newly organized party sup-

ported in the November election. 2 6 The main plank of the platform emphasized opposition to the extension of slavery 2 7 in the territories. 2 8 The campaign of 1854 was a heated one, and those

who remained in the old parties thought the Republicans were

fanatics. Democrat John S. Barry, one of the strongest

political figures in the state, ran against Bingham, a Re­

publican, in the gubernatorial contest. The result of the

election marked the beginning of a political revolution in

Michigan. The Republicans elected their entire state ticket, with Bingham receiving 43,652 votes, and J. S. Barry, 38,675.

The Republicans also elected W. A. Howard, of Detroit, in the

2 5 "The Proceedings of the Mass Convention at Jackson, Under Oaks, July 6 , 1854." Spencer Collections. Original text in Detroit Daily Advertiser, July 6 , 1854; and the Pon­ tiac Gazette, July 8 and 15, 1"8 54, in Burton Collections. 2 6 Ibid. Kingsley S. Bingham was considered the fa­ vorite to head the ticket and was retained; George A. Coe of Branch was given the second spot in place of Nathan Pierce; John McKinnery of Van Buren substituted for Lowell Moore, for Secretary of State; and Joseph M. Howard for Hovey K. Clarke, for Attorney General--the candidates before named by the con­ vention of the Free Democrats in February, 1854. 2 7 Ibid. See Appendix H. 2 8 Detroit Daily Democrat, August 31 and October 2, 1854; Detroit Advertiser, September 21, 1854; Marshall Statesman, September 6 , 1854; Pontiac Gazette, September 2 and 30, T8 54; Hillsdale Standard, September 19, 18 54. 220

First District; David S. Walbridge, of Kalamazoo, in the

Third District; and Henry Waldron, of Hillsdale, in the Fourth District, to Congress. Moses Wisner, a Pontiac

Republican, was defeated by George W. Peck, of Lansing, in the Second District. The vote was 11,233 to 9,863. In 1856 this district went to the Republicans when Dewit C. Leach won the election by a vote of 18,248 to 14,524. Michigan's delegation to Congress remained that way, unbroken until

1863. The new party did equally well in the contest for the State Legislature, electing 25 out of the 32 senators, 29 and 48 out of 72 representatives. The Republican Party in Michigan received support from a majority of citizens who cared more for their own freedom and liberty than for the emancipation of the Negroes held in bondage in Southern plantations. As the politicians of the new party spread their agitation for the protection of the freedom of free whites, most of the antislaveryites wondered at what had become of the antislavery crusade. "I think the Garrisonian Movement is the soul and body of all the movements of the day," the president of the Michigan

Antx-Slavery Society wrote in 1854. 3 0 One confused leader

29Michigan Manual (1913), p. 422; Marshall Statesman, December 2l~, 1854 ; Detroit Free Press, November 19, 1854 ; Kalamazoo Gazette, December 29, 1854. 30 Cyrus Fuller to Thomas Chandler, Plymouth, October 22, 1854, in Chandler Family Papers, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 221

did not know whether the state society could still hold its 31 annual anniversary. To the pioneers of the Michigan anti­ slavery movement, therefore, transformation of the crusade

from moral persuasion to political action did not really mean a continuation but rather an absorption of the crusade by a political movement that had drawn its support from

individuals concerned with their own political interests. This conclusion seemed premature even though there was some

truth to it. The Republican Party was composed of members of the

Democratic, Free Soil and Whig parties, who for years had been political opponents. These groups had little in common except their attachment to certain principles. In each group there were leaders who had done much for the cause of free­ dom and felt justified in seeking nomination to office as compensation. However, in both the Democratic and Whig parties, the conservative leaders had monopolized appoint­ ments to high political positions. The radical element in both parties, who had been excluded repeatedly from such

31 Thomas Chandler, one of the original members of the Society, was not sure if there was an antislavery soci­ ety after the Republican strong political show in 1854. He asked those questions in a letter to others. Thomas Chandler to Edmund Harriet, Adrian, December 3, 1854, in Chandler Family Papers, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Nathan M. Thomas had expressed such an opinion in 1848; with the emergence of the Free Soil Party, he thought the anti­ slavery movement had become absorbed by the new political party. Nathan M. Thomas, Antislavery MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; see also, Stanton B. Thomas, Nathan M. Thomas (Cassopolis, Michigan, 1925), pp. 96-98. 222 offices, had joined the Republicans because they objected to this dominant conservative influence.-5^ The three factions differed significantly in their views regarding such matters as equality and the reasons for opposing the extension of slavery into the new territories. Antislaveryites had persistently opposed the extension of slavery into new territories because it would discourage voluntary emancipation; however, the interest of free white labor was the major consideration which influenced the Re­ publican Party's protest against such extension. Immediately after the organization of the Republican Party, the friction between the leaders of the agricultural communities and the commercial interests, represented by the politicians in De­ troit, over the extent to which each group should control the party, exposed the real motive of the supporters of the

Republican Party. The agricultural communities claimed that they were responsible for the organization of the new party and its victory in the state election of 18S4. In a letter to Governor Bingham, Henry Barns, representing the agricul­ tural interests, demanded a fair share of political appoint­ ments, claiming that the Republican victory was due to the efforts of the rural and farming communities, and not to

3 2 William Livingstone, The History of the Republican Party from Its Foundation to the Close of the Campaign of 1900 (Detroit, 1900j , Vol. 1^ p^ 37; J. M. Howard and Addison Mandell, Letter Book, No. 49, p. 371; William Woodbridge, Papers, Vol. 138, pp. 139, 135; Hillsdale Standard, July 4, !854. 223 the shrewdness, tact or labor of the Detroit politicians.

Detroit politicians, Barns declared, were the "eleventh hour zealots" who had joined the Republican Party at the last 33 minute because they had no choice. Nevertheless, the apparent conflict among the groups did not discourage the antislaveryites who had realized that without their affili­ ation to the Republican Party they would continue to wage a hopeless campaign if they relied entirely on their own strength. In 1858, however, many people left the Republi­ can Party because they did not get their share of political appointments.34 Under Bingham's administration, Michigan experienced significant advancement in every aspect of economic and social programs. Resentment over the repeal of the Missouri Compro­ mise line of 36°30', and the protest against the federal government's determination to enforce the Fugitive Slave

Law, 3 5 compelled the State Legislature to adopt in 1855 an

33Henry Barns to Governor Kingsley Bingham, December 15, 1854, in Governor Bingham, Papers, State Public Library, Lansing.

^ Detroit Free Press, November 14, 1858; Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, November 8 , 1858; comments were made in relation to the election of 1858 and the panic of 1857. 35 In the return of Anthony Burns, President Pierce showed significant personal interest. When Bostonians deter­ mined to resist the return of Burns, the United States Mar­ shal called upon the United States troops for aid. When the report came to the President, he wired the Marshal, "Your conduct is approved. The law must be enforced." Four days later, on May 31, the President telegraphed the District 224 antislavery measure the purpose of which was to protect the rights and liberties of citizens of the state. The act was designed to prevent and hinder the seizure and removal of free blacks under the guise of the enforcement of the Fugi­ tive Slave Laws. Popularly known as the ’’Personal Liberty

Law," this legislation granted one of the demands made by 7 £ the antislavery men in 1839. It provided that all per­ sons arrested and claimed as fugitive slaves should be en­ titled to all the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus and of trial by jury. It also allowed for appeals from the findings of commissioners, and upon appeal the court was bound to direct a trial by jury, the costs to be charged to the state, when they would have otherwise been the defendant's responsibility. Severe penalties were provided against any persons falsely claiming a fugitive, and no one was to be

Attorney, "Incur any expense deemed necessary . . . to insure the execution of the law," and the President sent the Adjutant General of the United States to Boston to supervise federal protection. When Commissioner Loring had delivered Burns to his master, the President provided a revenue cutter to trans­ port the slave safely back to Virginia. Roy F. Nichols, Franklin Pierce, p. 361. Jane H. and William H. Pease, The Fugitive Slave Law and Anthony Burns (1975}, pp. 41-44, 47-50. 3 6 In 1839, when the antislaveryites adopted the policy of questioning candidates for public office to determine who should receive the votes of antislavery men, the right of jury trial for all persons claimed as fugitives within the state of Michigan was demanded by the Society, but each candidate denied that the state had any right to pass such a law. Nathan Thomas and others to Woodbridge and other candidates, 1839. Nathan Thomas, Antislavery MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 225 deemed a fugitive except upon the testimony of two credible witnesses. Another section of the law prohibited the use of the jails of the several counties for the detention of per- 37 sons claimed as fugitive slaves. In his inaugural message, Bingham not only denounced the Fugitive Slave Law and the Kansas - Nebraska Act, but also requested that the legislature consider the expediency of instructing the Senators in Congress to procure the adoption of such measures as would restrict slavery. 3 8 The legislature responded favorably. A bill demanding Congressional measures for restricting slavery was introduced in the Senate on 39 January 19, 1855, and was passed by a vote of 23 to 4. On

January 24, the House of Representatives adopted the bill by a vote of 48 to 23.^ The legislature denounced the Fugitive

Slave Law as harsh, unjust and repugnant to the moral sense of the people of the state of Michigan, and instructed the

Senators and Representatives to use their best exertions to

37 Erastus Hussey, the leader of the underground rail­ road at Battle Creek, introduced the bill on January 13, 18 55. Senate Journal (1855), pp. 174-175, 348; House Journal (1855) , p p . 606-60 7; Laws of Michigan (1855) , pp~ 413-415. 3 8 Joint Documents of the Legislature of the State of Michigan (1855), Doc. N o . 12, p p . 22-23; George N. Fuller, ed., Messages of the Governors of Michigan (4 vols.; Lansing, Michigan, 1925-27), Vol. 2, pp. 298-299. 39 Senate Journal (1855), pp. 97-98. 40 House Journal (1855), p. 207. 226

secure its repeal.^'*’ Although Congress took no action on them, those reso­ lutions and the Personal Liberty Acts of Michigan and other

states were regarded by the Southern leaders as strong evi­

dence of Northern determination to obstruct the enforcement

of the Fugitive Slave Law, and to contain slavery within the

states where it then existed. Some Southerners believed

that the Personal Liberty Laws would help destroy slavery within a limited period. 42 Michigan Republicans, however,

defended their state's law as the most significant political 43 achievement of the legislature.

Laws of Michigan (1855), pp. 483-485. The governor approved the resolutions on January 26, 1855, and on February 5, Senator Charles E. Stuart presented them to the Senate of the United States. Some portions of the resolutions reflected the mood of the people during this period; for example, one of the resolutions denouncing the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, declared: "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, that we hold the said repeal and the permission granted by said territorial act to introduce slavery into said territories, to be a viola­ tion of a mutual covenant between the free states and the slave-holding states of the Union, justified by no necessity, present or prospective, injurious to the rights of the former, tending to interrupt the internal harmony of the country, and to frustrate the well-known purpose of the framers of the Constitution who by gradual legislation designed ultimately to put an end to slavery." See "Joint Resolutions Respecting Slavery in the Territories of the United States," Joint Docu­ ments of the Senate and House No. 6 (1855). 42 If the real intention of the Ordinance of 1787 had been adhered to and its antislavery clause allowed to apply to all territories of the United States in which slavery was never in existence, the economic law of "Diminishing Returns" would have solved the problems of both the African slave trade and of the institution of slavery before this time. 43 "Proceedings of the Republican Mass Convention Held 227

The determination of Southern proslavery extremists to make Kansas a slave state caused many citizens of Michi­ gan who heard of the violence, border ruffianism, murder, and pillage in Kansas to fear that if slavery were not destroyed, it would destroy the Union. This concern was shared by delegates from twenty-seven states, including

Michigan and the border states of Delaware, Kentucky and

Maryland, who assembled at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on

February 22, 1856, and organized the National Republican Party. The delegates condemned the disorder in Kansas, denounced any extension of slavery in the territories, and arranged for a nominating national convention to meet at 44 Philadelphia on June 17, 1856. Since there had been no strong sectional political party, the action of the

Pittsburgh convention caused little excitement in either the North or the South. But when the national convention met at Philadelphia on June 17, the anniversary of the battle of Bunker Hill, at Kalamazoo, September 12, 1855," Detroit Daily Adver­ tiser, September 13, 1855; see a typed copy of the proceed- m g s in the Spencer Collections at the State Public Library, Lansing. It must be pointed out that important internal improvement bills--rivers, harbors, canals, and bills en­ couraging industrial interests--were at least as influen­ tial as moral reform in heightening free soil and sectional feeling among Michigan citizens. See Appendix H for Resolutions. 44 The call was signed by the following: A. P. Stone of Ohio, J. Z. Goodrich of Massachusetts, David Wilmot of Pennsylvania, Lawrence Brainerd of Vermont, William A. 228 all the free states, four border slave states, the Dis­ trict of Columbia and three territories were repre­ sented. Zachariah Chandler and Kingsley S. Bingham were 4 5 among the prominent political leaders in attendance. The convention adopted a strong platform which endorsed the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Con­ stitution, denied the legal existence of slavery in a territory, and upheld the right and duty of Congress to prohibit in the territories "those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy*^ and slavery." The platform condemned the dis­ orders and frauds in Kansas, blamed them on the President

White of Wisconsin, Rufus Hosmer of Michigan and Edward Fenno of Maine. Detroit Daily Advertiser, February 8 , 1856. ^Michigan was ably represented at the first Repub­ lican national convention by E. J. Penniman, Fernando Bea­ man, Noyes Avery, Thomas J. Drake, Zachariah Chandler, and George Jerome (delegates at large); from the First District-- Kingsley Bingham, D. McIntyre, M. A. McNaughton; Second Dis­ trict- -George A. Coe, Isaac Christiancy, Witter J. Baxter; Third District--Hezekiah Wells, John R. Kellogg, Randolph Strickland; Fourth District--Whitney Jones, A. P. Davis, and H. P. Shank. Detroit Daily Advertiser, February 8 , 1856. The Michigan delegates served on such committees as Committee on Credentials, George A. Coe; Committee on Plat­ form, Isaac Christiancy; Committee on Permanent Organiza­ tion, Thomas J. Drake, Vice-President Kingsley S. Bingham; Member of National Republican Committee, Zachariah Chandler. Ibid.; Proceedings of the First Three Republican National Conventions of 1856, i860, and 1864, Including Proceedings of the Antecedent National Convention Held at Pittsburgh in February, 1856, as Reported by Horace Greeley (Minneapolis, 1893), p p . 54-69. 46 Ibid. Polygamy was then practiced in Utah Terri­ tory by some of the Mormons and was attracting some attention, because under popular sovereignty the territory could rightly decide such matters for itself. See also American Gazette, July 10, 1856; Detroit Free Press, July 28~] 18 56. and his supporters, demanded the admission of Kansas as a 4 7 free state, denounced the Ostend Manifesto, called for a

Pacific railroad "by the most central and practicable route" with federal aid, favored rivers and harbors improvements of a national character, and opposed legislation impairing liberty of conscience and equality of rights of citizens.

Except that the last resolution could be construed as an offense to the Know-Nothings, there was nothing in the plat­ form to arouse opposition from any element in the new party.

The planks for a Pacific railroad and for rivers and harbors were bids for the votes of California and the Old Northwest, although they might seem to have a Whiggish slant. The plat­ form was silent on both the tariff and homesteads. Thus from the outset the Republican Party became frankly sectional with nothing in it for the South.

In choosing a presidential candidate, 49 the delegates

4 7The Ostend Manifesto was the statement of the Ameri can ministers to England, France, and Spain that, if Spain refused to sell Cuba, the United States would be justified in seizing it. So far the Pierce administration refused to endorse the proposal. 4 8First Three Republican National Conventions, pp. 54 69; Lewis Clephane, The Birth of the Republican Party (Wash­ ington, 1889), pp. 8-12; George W. Julian, "The First Repub­ lican National Convention," American Historical Review, IV (January, 1896), pp. 313-3221 Andrew W. Crandall, The Early History of the Republican Party (Boston, 1930), pp. 49-51; Porter and Johnson, Party Platforms, pp. 25-28. 49 The belief was that Fremont's candidacy had been approved before the convention met. Rhodes quoted a remark by an Indiana delegate who wrote to a friend that it would be disastrous to go into the contest and he called upon him 230

wanted a man who was strong on the Kansas issue and who would

not antagonize any faction in the new coalition. They passed

over S. P. Chase because he was obnoxious to Whigs and Sen­

ator Seward because his radical reputation and his hostility

to the Know-Nothings would win no votes in the doubtful states of Illinois, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. Seward was

Michigan’s favorite, but he was unwilling to cause dissension

and pledged his support for any suitable candidate chosen.

Benjamin F. Wade was not acceptable to the Democrats, and Nathaniel Banks was considered a too conservative Democrat.

Justice John McLean, a conservative antislavery man who be­

lieved that Congress had the Constitutional power to pro­

hibit slavery in the territory, was a candidate. But he had

upheld the Fugitive Slave Law and was friendly to the Know-

Nothings, who had even considered him for their nomination.

John C. Fremont of California, the free state senator, aged

forty-three, former Army officer and explorer of the far

west, the son-in-law of Thomas Benton, was the compromise

candidate. He was not well known in politics, but he had been a Democrat with reserved antislavery sentiment, had no

connection with the Know-Nothings, and was supposed to have

a strong hold upon the German v o t e . ^

to defend the acts and speeches of old stagers, and that the Republican Party must have a position that would enable it to be the charging party. Fremont is the man. New York Post, April, 1856, quoted in Rhodes, The History of the United States, Vol. II, p. 178.

^ First Three Republican National Conventions, pp. 60- 1 231

An informal ballot gave Fremont 399, McLean 204,

Banks 1, Sumner 2, Seward 1. In the formal ballot that fol­

lowed, McLean received 37 votes and Fremont 520. The nomina­

tion was then made unanimous. The choice of a vice-

presidential candidate gave the convention some hard time, but WilliamL. Dayton, former Whig senator from New Jersey,

was chosen as Fremont’s running mate.^ The Democrats had nominated James Buchanan of Pen­ nsylvania as their presidential candidate, and John C. Breck­ inridge of Kentucky for vice-president. Millard Fillmore and

A. J. Donelson were the choice of what remained of the Whig

Party, Native Americans and Know-Nothings. The Democrats favored the application of popular sovereignity to the ter­

ritories of Kansas and Nebraska, advocated a vigorous for­

eign policy which would be in line with "Manifest Destiny,"

and supported a Pacific railroad. 5 2

69; Lewis Clephane, The Birth of the Republican Party, pp. 9- 12; George W. Julian, "The First Republican National Conven­ tion," American Historical Review, IV (January, 1896), pp. 319-322.

51 Ibid. At first the Pennsylvania delegates were al­ lowed to chose the candidate for the second spot on the ticket, but they could not decide between former Governor Johnston and David Wilmot. In the second place, the North American conven­ tion when reassembled had accepted Fremont with the withdrawal of Banks, but with Johnston as Fremont's running mate. All summer the committee tried to persuade them to accept Dayton, but not until Fremont promised to reward them in case of victory was the name of Johnston also withdrawn and Dayton accepted.

Edward Stanwood, A History of the Presidency (Boston, 1916), pp. 266-268; Eugene HT Roseboom, A History ofPresi- 232

The campaign of 1856 had its share of excitement and importance. For the first time a major party was contesting a national election on purely sectional grounds. In Michigan the Republicans beefed up their campaigns with every conceiv­ able means. Campaign songs and parades, public speeches condemning the atrocities in Kansas whether real or imagined, were heard in every locality. The Detroit Advertiser carried accounts of assaults on free settlers by Southern proslavery mobs with the support of the officials of the federal government and launched a serious attack on the 53 Democratic Party. But the success of the Republican Party depended on victories in Illinois, Indiana and Pennsylvania. In these border free states the antislavery crusade backfired.

Many voters became frightened at Republican radicalism.

Attempts to arrange fusion tickets with the Fillmore men were ineffective. In spite of the combined efforts of three of the nation's shrewdest and most unscrupulous polit­ ical manipulators and local managers, Simon Cameron,

Thaddeus Stevens, and Thurlow Weed of New York, the Repub­ licans could not carry Pennsylvania. After all, it was

Buchanan's home state, and Pennsylvania had never had a

President. dential Elections (New York, 1956), pp. 163-164; Kirk H. Porter, ed., National Party Platforms (New York, 1924), pp. 47-50. 53 Detroit Daily Advertiser, July 10, 1856 (see Appen­ dix J); Allegan Journal, October 24, 1856. 233

In Michigan, four major factors compelled the voters to support the Republican candidates. The people were still angry because President Pierce vetoed the Rivers and Harbors

Appropriation Bill which had been approved by both houses of

Congress.^ The report of the atrocities in Kansas by William A. Howard, of Detroit, chairman of the House Committee which investigated conditions in that territory had confirmed 5 5 that slavery was a moral and political evil. This was fur­ ther demonstrated by the story of Mrs. Martha Brown, of Cass County, Michigan, whose husband suffered death at the hands

r t i of Missouri ruffians in Kansas. And the physical assault on Senator Charles Sumner by Congressman Preston S. Brooks 5 7 of South Carolina offended many people in the state.

After one of Michigan’s most exciting and enthusi­ astic campaigns, the entire Republican ticket, with Kingsley

S. Bingham at its head, was re-elected. Bingham was elected

54 Cong. Globe, 33rd Cong., 2nd Sess., pp. 610-612; ibid., 34th Cong., 1st Sess., Part II, pp. 1550, 1564-1565; Detroit Daily Democrat and Inquirer, March 8 , 1855; Detroit Free Press, April 4 , 1855 , and July 10 , 1856; Grand Rapids- Daily Eagle, May 11, 1856; Michigan Argus, May 23 and 30,J 1856; Niles Republican, July 12, 1856; James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. V, pp. 386-387. 5 5 "Speech of Honorable William A. Howard at Wayne, September 24, 1856," see newspaper clippings in S. B. Tread­ well Family Papers, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

^ M r s . Martha Brown MSS, MHSC, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. This handwritten account covers twelve pages. 5 7 Cong. Globe, 34th Cong., 1st Sess., Appen., pp. 309- 347; Edward L. Pierce, Memoir of Charles Sumner, Vol. Ill, pp. 462-477. 234

governor by 71,402 votes; Alpheus Felch, the Democratic

candidate received 54,085 votes. The Republicans won 29 of

the 32 Senate seats and 69 of the 81 seats in the House of Representatives. The state sent a Republican delegation to

Congress with the victory of Dewitt C. Leach in the Second

District. Michigan gave John C. Fremont, the Republican candidate for the presidency, 71,762 votes; James Buchanan,

the Democratic candidate, 52,136 votes; and Millard Fillmore, 5 8 the Know-Nothing candidate, 1,660 votes. The results of the election of 1856 demonstrated the

extent to which the people of Michigan had accepted the prin­

ciples advocated by the Republicans. The disintegration of the Whig Party, and the apparent decline of the Democratic Party as shown by the election results, meant that the

Republicans had gained undisputed control of Michigan poli­ tics. On the national scene, the difficulty with which

Buchanan defeated Fremont was an indication that Buchanan's election might be the last proslavery victory. Although the

election had given the national Democratic Party full con­

trol of both houses of Congress, the presidency, and the

Supreme Court, the party was on trial since it was in thrall

to the slave states and assailed by sectionalism. Thus any

Michigan Manual (1913), p. 422; Detroit Free Press, November 20^ 1856; Detroit Daily Advertiser, November 10, 1856; Pontiac Gazette, December 13, 18 56. 235 of its errors in handling those issues upon which public attention focused would help the Republicans.

When Buchanan became President in March, 1857, he presumably believed he could make popular sovereignty work peacefully in Kansas.^ Michigan Democrats and their col­ leagues across the nation must have entertained similar hope; after all Buchanan was held in high esteem as one of the nation's most experienced arbitrators. Moreover, Buchanan had anticipated that the Supreme Court's opinion in the Dred Scott case, which was then pending, would offer the answer to the controversial question of the status of slavery in the territories.^^ However, Michigan Democrats and other supporters of the administration were totally disappointed. In the Dred

/ ; -I Scott decision, the Supreme Court declared that Congress

59 James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789- 1897, Vol. V, pT 431; Philip S'. Klein, President James Buchanan: A Biography (1962) , p p . 269-2 73. ^James Buchanan had been informed by Justice Catron of the position the Supreme Court would take in the case and was urged to talk to Justice Grier of his home state to join the other five Southern justices in deliver­ ing the decision. Allen Nevins, The Emergence of Lincoln (1952), Vol. I, pp. 108-111; Roy FT Nichols, The Disruption of American Democracy (1948), pp. 65-66.

^F. H. Hodder, "Some Phases of the Dred Scott Case," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XVI (June, 1929), pp. 3-22; Dred Scott v. Sanford, 19 Howard 393 (1857), pp. 400-430; Allen Nevins, The Emergence of Lincoln, II, pp. 473-477; Vincent C. Hopkins, Dred Scott Case (1951); 236

had no constitutional authority to prohibit slavery in the

territories. The Supreme Court also struck down the Mis-

f\ 7 souri Compromise, conclusing that the provision prohibiting slavery north of the line "therein mentioned" was not war- 6 3 ranted by the Constitution and was therefore void. This decision, which was a clear attempt of the

Court to extend aid and comfort to the South, became a source

of embarrassment for both the Democrats and the Republicans.

Its acceptance would not only mean the destruction of the

supposed reason for the Republican Party's existence, but

also the surrender of the Northern Democrat's attachment

to Douglas' doctrine of popular sovereignty.

E. S. Corwin, "The Dred Scott Decision in the Light of Contemporary Legal Doctrines," American Historical Review, XVII ( Oct o b e r , 1911), pp. 52-60, 129-157; Stanley L. Kutler, ed., The Dred Scott Decision: Law or Politics? (Boston, 1960j~!

^Alfred H. Kelly and Winfred A. Harbison, The American Constitution, Its Origin and Development (New York, 1963), pp. 391-392; J\ GT Randall and David Donald, The Civil War and Reconstruction (Lexington, Massachusetts, 1969) , pp. 108 -114; Eric Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men (New York, 1970), pp. 292-293; Roy F. Nichols, The Disruption of American Democracy, p. 74; Allen Nevins, The Emergence of Lincoln, I, p . 2 28.

^3C. B. Swisher, Roger Brooke Taney (1935), especially pp. 483-493; Charles W. Smith, Jr., Roger B . Taney, Jacksonian Jurist (1936), especially pp. 157-176; Dred Scott v. Sanford, T9 Howard (60 U. S.), pp. 407-408, 427-430. 237

In the confused state of affairs, President Buchanan's

decision to support the Kansas application for admission under the Lecompton Constitution, which completely disregarded 64 the principles of popular sovereignty, made matters worse

for the Northern Democrats. The President's action not only placed the influential Stephen A. Douglas and the Northern

Democrats at odds with the administration and the Southern wing of the Democratic Party, but also provided the Repub­

licans additional ammunition for their political and anti­

slavery campaigns. By casting his vote in the Senate along with the

Republicans against the bill to admit Kansas under the

Lecompton Constitution, Stephen Douglas damaged his own party and enabled the Republican Party to gain more sup­ porters. His action produced a division among Michigan

Democrats. The party, which lost many of its followers

in 1854, became divided into two opposing factions in

1857 and consequently began to lose its influence in the state. A vast majority of Michigan Democrats, especially

those in the eastern part of the state, opposed Buchanan's

64 Harmon, "President James Buchanan's Betrayal of Governor Robert J. Walker of Kansas," p. 8 ; H. Wish, "The Slave Insurrection Panic of 1856," Journal of Southern History, V (1939), pp. 206-209; H. Wish, "American Slave Insurrections Before 1861," Journal of Negro History, XVII (1937), pp. 299-335; J. B. Moore, Works of Buchanan, Vol. X, pp. 183, 190, 192; Roy F. Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy. pp. 94-97; Allen Nevins, Emergence of Lincoln, I, pp. 133-137. 238 decision and declared themselves the followers of Stephen A.

Douglas, whose version of "Territorial Sovereignty" they were f\ C willing to support. The President was supported by the f-\ f\ few federal officials and their friends. When the people of Kansas rejected the unpopular compromise measure proposed by William H. English of Indiana, by a vote of 11,300 to V 1,788, the last chance of uniting Michigan Democrats dis­ appeared . A vast majority of Michigan people opposed

Buchanan's Kansas policy. In a strongly worded resolution,

The attack on President Buchanan by the majority of Michigan Democrats is detailed in Michigan Argus, Decem­ ber 11, 1857, following his message to Congress, in James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers of Presidents, Vol. V, pp. 453-454; see also Detroit Free Press. December 11 and 30, 1857. f\ f\ The President's supporters were mostly prominent federal office holders especially in Detroit, as for example Cornelius O'Flynn, the postmaster at Detroit and editor of the Detroit Herald, and A. A. Gordon, who edited the Grand Rapids Daily Enquirer and Herald. Their support of Buchanan's position and reasons was covered in the Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, December 2, 1857. 6 7 Under this compromise, the land claim by the Lecomptonites would have been cut down by 4 million acres from their insistence upon having all the 23,592,100 acres originally claimed and would have made it possible to re­ submit the Lecompton Constitution to the people of Kansas for reconsideration. In line with the Crittenden committee's recommendation, by accepting the measure the Democrats hoped they could save their party from destruction. J. B. Moore, Works of Buchanan, Vol. X, pp. 190-195; J. G. Randall and David Donald, The Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 116- 117; Detroit Free Press, April 10 and August 10, 1858; Grand~Rapids Enquirer and Herald, April 27 and August 19, 1858; see also extracts from the Adrian Watchtower quoted in the Detroit Advertiser, May 1, 1858, and the Detroit Daily Press, May 1, 1858. 239 the state legislators instructed their Senators and Repre­ sentatives in Congress to oppose and obstruct any attempt to admit Kansas into the Union under the Lecompton Con­ stitution, or "any constitution which maintained slavery in the Territory." The Senate adopted the resolution unanimously, 68 and the House approved by an overwhelming - „ 69 maj ority. The state of Michigan held the 1858 election in the midst of a national political crisis, which was com­ plicated by a depressing economic panic that spread a great deal of suffering among all citizens. 70 Had the split in the Democratic Party over the President's action not occurred, the Republicans would have suffered a serious setback. But the Republicans exploited the division and 71 confusion in the Democratic Party and made the crisis in

^ Senate Journal (1858), p. 68 69 House Journal (1858), p. 138. 70 Major newspapers carried the gloomy accounts of poor crop harvests, large numbers of unemployed citizens, collapsed banks and commercial houses, and starvation. Detroit Free Press, May 2, June 17, and September 17, 1857 ; Michigan Argus, May 29 , 185 7 ; Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, June 2~, 1857; Niles Republican^ October 16, 1857 ; Kalamazoo Gazette, October 2 and 16, 1857. 71 Most of the disagreement was between one faction of the Democrats under the leadership of A. A. Gordon, editor of the Grand Rapids Daily Enquirer and Herald. This faction insisted that the President should not be held responsible for the actions of the Lecompton Convention. Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, December 3, 1857; Detroit Free Press, December 23, 1857; Grand Rapids Enquirer and Herald, December 25, 1857; Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, March 11, 1858. 240

Kansas the major political issue during the campaign. On the other hand, the leaders of the Democratic Party, eager to prevent the immediate collapse of their party, did not 72 hold the state convention until September, 1857. The convention was dominated by John H. Harmon of Detroit, a shrewd political strategist who commanded the followers of

Stephen A. Douglas. Although the convention made no men­ tion of the Lecompton Constitution, the choice of Senator

Charles E. Stuart of Kalamazoo, an opponent of that docu­ ment, reflected the conviction of the majority of Michigan

Democrats. 73 The Republicans chose Moses Wisner (he had been defeated in 1854 by George IV. Peck in the Congres­ sional election) for governor and the Reverend Edmund B.

Fairfield, the prominent president of Hillsdale College, 74 for lieutenant governor.

Detroit Advertiser, May 5, 1858; Detroit Free Press, August 10, 1858; Grand Rapids Enquirer and Herald, August 19, 1858; Niles Republican, August 21, 1858. These papers provide details of efforts made by the leaders of the Democratic Party to reunite the members and restore harmony and of the unwillingness of the vast majority to support the Buchanan group.

73Detroit Advertiser, September 11 and 29, 1858; Michigan Argus, September 10, 1858; Grand Rapids Enquirer and Herald, September 4, 1858; Ann Arbor Journal, August 18, 1858; Pontiac Gazette, August 28^ 1858; MarshalT Statesman, September 29, 1*858 .

74 "The Proceedings of the Republican State Conven­ tion Held at Detroit, August 19, 1858" in Spencer Collec­ tions, State Public Library, Lansing. 241

In the November election of 1858, Moses Wisner received 65,202 votes; Charles Stuart received 56,067. The

Republicans retained control of the Executive branch, cap­ tured twenty-four Senate seats and fifty-seven seats in the House. Three out of the four-member Michigan delegation to Congress in 1858 were Republicans. The Democrats elected their candidate for Congress in the first district; in­ creased their Senate seats from four to eight, and their

House seats from fifteen to twenty-four. 7 5 Although the Democrats made some gains in the elec­ tion of 1858, they did not demonstrate that the party was

7 f\ recovering from its problems. Those gains have been at­ tributed to three major factors not related to any internal party changes. In the first place, many Republicans felt 7 7 so sure of victory that they did not care to vote.

^ Michigan Manual (1913), p. 422; Grand Rapids En­ quirer and Herald, December 11, 1858.

7 f\ In the gubernatorial contest the Democratic vote was 56,067 as opposed to its vote of 54,085 in 1856. In the First Congressional District, the Democrats elected their candidate by a narrow margin of 842 votes; the Repub­ licans lost 1,954 votes in the Second Congressional Dis­ trict; 3,449 in the Third; and 2,724 in the Fourth. In the legislature, the Democrats elected seven members in Wayne County, three in Oakland, two in St. Clair, two in Genesee, one each from Berrien, Grand Traverse, Livingston, Mackinac, Macomb, Manitou, Marquette, Monroe, Ontonagon and Ottawa. Detroit Advertiser, November 10, 1858; Detroit Free Press, November 14, 1858. 7 7 Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, November 8 , 1858; Detroit Free Press, November 14, 1858; Detroit Daily Tribune, November 6 , 1858. 242

Secondly, there were individuals among the supporters of the Republican Party whose hunger for political office had

not been satisfied and who, as a consequence, had deserted 7 the party. R The most crucial factor was the sufferings of

many citizens caused by the economic crisis which affected

the people between 1857 and 1858. The Democrats had blamed

the high taxes and the increased state debt on the extrava­

gance and mismanagement of public funds by the Republican administration. 79 This campaign propaganda influenced a

good number of voters, particularly in northern Michigan,

where the settlers suffered most. Thus while events in

Kansas were supposed to be the major political issue in

the campaign of 1858, local circumstances played a major

part in the outcome of this election. The Republican administration under Wisner has often

been viewed an intermediary one. Before it there had been

the fresh enthusiasm of the campaigns of 1854 and 1856, and

after it, the tremendous storm and stress period of 1860-

1861. But each Republican administration had demonstrated

a real concern for the welfare of the citizens. Except

for the appointment of John McKinney of Van Buren as State

7 8 Detroit Daily Tribune, November 6 , 1858; Detroit Free Press, November 14, 1858; Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, November 8 , 1858. 79 Michigan Argus, March 13, May 29, and November 20, 1857; Laws of Michigan 0-858), pp. 17-20, 232, 233; Joint Documents (1851), Document No. 1, p. 14, and Document No. 4, p . 14. 243

Treasurer, Wisner’s cabinet members were honest, hard workers.

Jacob M. Howard, the Attorney General who served three terms in that capacity, Superintendent of Public Education John M.

Gregory, who afterwards became the president of Kalamazoo

College, Secretary of State N. G. Isabel, Daniel L. Case,

Auditor, and the Commissioner of Land James W. Sanborn were well-respected citizens.

Although Wisner took office in the aftermath of the panic of 1857, his administration proved to be as progressive as his predecessors. By January 5, 1859, the Twentieth

Legislature of Michigan was in session and within thirty- seven legislative days had enacted 263 laws and 29 Joint Resolutions. The number of cities incorporated exceeded the entire number incorporated from 1805 to 1855. The same was true of the number of villages, townships and counties. Acts encouraging and reorganizing existing institutions of jus­ tice, higher education, manufacturing, and general reforms were considered and adopted. Thus the Republicans attempted as much as it was humanly possible to promote progress and restore confidence in the state government and among the citizens.80

Meanwhile the institution of slavery had become obnoxious to many Michigan residents who had earlier regarded

8 0 Utley and Cutcheon, Michigan As a Province, Ter­ ritory and State, Vol. Ill, pp~ 410-411; Laws of Michigan (1859), p^ 1140; "Governor's Message, January 1, 1850," m Joint Documents (1859), No. 1, pp. 6-10. 244

the antislaveryites as fanatics and trouble-makers whose agi­ tations endangered the peace of the Union. The opponents of

the antislavery crusade had witnessed the repeal of the

Missouri Compromise, had been outraged by Martha Brown's

story and by the newspaper accounts of the events in Kansas,

especially the report of William A. Howard of Detroit,

chairman of the House committee which investigated the con­

ditions in Kansas. In addition, Buchanan's decision to accept the Lecompton Constitution had not only antagonized his fellow Democrats, but had also raised doubts as to the

feasibility of popular sovereignty. But what ignited an

immense outrage among Michiganites was the one-man crusade

of John Brown, who, with a few of his irresponsible friends, had launched a fruitless but alarming attack on Harpers 81 Ferry, Virginia, to free the slaves of the South. In a nation already strained by a very complicated sectional

conflict, John Brown's action broke loose pent-up feelings

throughout the nation. It disturbed people of all walks of

81 F. B. Sanborn, ed., John Brown: Liberator of Kansas and Martyr of Virginia; Life and Letters (Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1910); Stephen B. Oates, To Purge This Land with Blood: A Biography of John Brown (New York, 1970); Louis Ruchames, A John Brown Reader (London, 1959); James C. Mallin, John Brown and the Legend of Fifty-Six (Philadelphia, 1942); C~ Vann Woodward, "John Brown's Private War," in The Burden of Southern History (Baton Rouge, 1960).

82Detroit Free Press, November 30, 1859; Detroit Daily Tribune, November 9 , 1859. 245

Michigan politicians were hopeful that wise counsel would prevail and that the safety of the Union would be the major issue in the Presidential election of 1860. Should party harmony prevail at the national nominating conven­ tions, compromises might be negotiated to eliminate sectional differences which jeopardized the nation. This seemed to be wishful thinking, for the state's Democratic Party was 8 3 becoming more and more disorganized, reflecting the fate of the party throughout the North. In several counties in

Michigan, Democrats and Republicans had united in the choice 8 4 of candidates for state offices. Personal differences and needless quarrels among the leaders of the Michigan Demo­ cratic Party had widened the gap created by factional dis- putes which had since 1857 proved impossible to close. 8 5

The national scene was even worse than the petty party feud in Michigan. Abraham Lincoln, who would be the choice of the Republicans, and Stephen A. Douglas, who had

^ Detroit Daily Tribune, March 14, 1859; Floyd B. Streeter, Political Parties in Michigan, 1837-1860 (Lansing, Michigan, 1918), pp. 281-283. 84 The Democrats and Republicans united in Hillsdale, in Mendon, in St. Joseph County, also in Albion and in Tecumseh. Detroit Daily Tribune, March 14, 1859. 8 5 Michael Shoemaker, prominent member of the Demo­ cratic Central Committee and the collector at the port of Detroit, engaged in a serious dispute with Cornelius O'Flynn, the postmaster at Detroit, and A. S. Bragg, the United States Marshal. These cases damaged the Democratic Party at Detroit and affected the party unity in general. Grand Rapids Enquirer and Herald, July 24 and September 14, 1859. 246

expected to lead his party at the election of 1860, had in­

formed the nation in a series of debates begun in 1858 of their views on the question of slavery in general and in the

territories as well. By the time the national nominating

conventions of the political parties assembled, Northerners

and Southerners had strong reasons to doubt that there would be any compromise on the major issue of the status of slavery .. . 86 m the territories. The "House Divided Against Itself" speech was per­ haps the most popular of the Lincoln speeches remembered by many Americans. This speech left no doubt in the minds of the citizens what Lincoln felt to be the solution to the problem of slavery. In the "House Divided Against Itself" speech Lincoln declared that the United States could no longer be half slave and half free. "It will become all one 8 7 thing, or the other." Determined to expose the inconsist­ ency between the Supreme Court's opinion in the Dred Scott decision and the principle of popular sovereignty, Lincoln asked Douglas at Freeport whether the people of a territory,

Political Speeches and Debates of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, 1854-1861 (Chicago, 1896) , hereafter cited as Political Speeches and Debates; Roy P. Basler, ed., The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln- (New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1953) , Vol. II, hereafter cited as Lincoln, Col­ lected Works. There were seven joint debates m 1858. 8 7 Political Speeches and Debates, p. 52. The entire speech covered seven pages, pp. 52-59 . Lincoln, Collected Works, II, pp. 461-468. 247 prior to statehood, had a lawful right to exclude slavery

from their territory. 8 8 Douglas responded that the people of a territory

could, by lawful means, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a state constitution.

It matters not [Douglas argued] what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide as to the abstract question whether slavery may or may not go into a territory under the Constitution, the people have the lawful means to introduce it or exclude it as they please, for the reason that slavery cannot exist a day . . . unless it is supported by local police regulation. Those police regulations, Douglas explained, could only be established by the local legislature. Douglas concluded that should the people be opposed to slavery, they would elect representatives who would prevent the introduction of slavery into their territory by "unfriendly legislation," and on the contrary, if they were for slavery, their legis- 89 lation would be in favor of slavery extension.

The exodus of antislavery Democrats to Republican ranks which Douglas intended to check in order to prevent

Republican control of the Northern states had already occurred in Michigan. Michigan Republicans, who wished to take advantage of the situation, held two state conventions before the Republican national convention to solidify their

8 8 Political Speeches and Debates, p. 204; Lincoln, Collected Works, III, p. 43. 89 Political Speeches and Debates, pp. 213-214. 248 strategies and evaluate their positions on the key issues of national and state politics. In the first convention the leaders prepared a long list of the achievements of the

Republican administration and condemned Buchanan's Kansas policies.^ In the second convention they did the same and appealed to the voters to support the party of progress and reform. Delegates to the Chicago convention were appointed.

In a spirit full of hope the delegates declared: We see equal cause of congratulation at the power and vigor of a party whose second national assembly is yet to be held, a party that has already the vir­ tual control and supremacy in one-half of the states of the Union, and is destined to rule the councils and mould the policy of our national affairs, an infant "Hercules, which in its very cradle, is strangling the twin serpents of polygamy and slavery."

They promised to cut federal spending and bring economy into the government. They also promised to secure the passage of a homestead act once they elected their candi­ date in the November election, because they believed that the welfare of the nation depended upon "free white labor for its basis and support." This discriminatory statement was fol­ lowed by a contradicting one which claimed that they "recog­ nize the equality, and will maintain the rights, of natural­ ized as well as native born citizens at home and abroad." This was a clever bid for the votes of most of the foreign

90 "Proceedings of the Republican State Convention Held at Detroit in the Fireman's Hall, August 19, 1858," Spencer Collections, State Public Library, Lansing; Detroit Daily Advertiser, August 20, 1858; Utley and Cutcheon, Michi- gan as a Province, Territory and State, III, p. 399. 249 elements who had regularly voted for Democratic candidates.

The delegates for the national convention were instructed to support the nomination of William H. Seward for the presi­ dency "for he had been the tried and life-long supporter of

Republican principles . . . eminently conservative . . . com­ manding, in public and in private life, the respect of all 91 men of all parties, North and South." The Democratic Presidential Convention met on April 23 at Charleston, South Carolina. The anti-Douglas group, which captured the Resolutions Committee, reported a platform with a plank declaring it the duty of the federal government to protect the rights of persons and property in the territories.

The Northern majority on the floor rejected it and adopted instead a somewhat equivocal statement pledging the party to popular sovereignty and promising to abide by the deci­ sion of the Supreme Court. Delegates from seven Southern states bolted the convention, held their own separate con­ vention, and nominated John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky as their candidate and Senator Joseph Lane of Oregon as his running mate. The Northern faction nominated Stephen A.

91 "Proceedings of the Republican Party of Michigan Including Resolutions Adopted in the State Convention Held at Detroit, May 2, 1860," Spencer Collections, State Public Library, Lansing. Much of the optimism had to do with the Democratic repudiation of Douglas when Congress voted for Jefferson Davis's bill for federal protection for slavery in the territories. The Senate vote for the resolution was 35 to 21, the opposition being made up of 20 Republicans and Douglas Democrat Pugh of Ohio; Cong. Globe, 36th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 658, 2321-2322. 250

Douglas as their candidate for the presidency. The schism and confusion in the Democratic Party had thus reached the climax... . 92 The Republican Presidential Convention assembled at

Chicago on May 16, 1860. Michigan was fully represented.

There were twenty-four officially appointed delegates and over one hundred Michigan Republicans at the convention.

The official delegates had been instructed to vote for the nomination of William H. Seward, and to make sure that the

Republican platform reaffirmed the principles avowed by the national convention at Philadelphia in 1856: Congress to exercise absolute jurisdiction over the territories, the admission of Kansas into the Union as a free state, the immediate construction of a railway to the Pacific, liberal homestead legislation, and the improvement of "rivers and 93 harbors."

9 2 The Democratic convention proceedings, see J. G. Randall and David Donald, The Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 127-128; Roseboom, A History of Presidential Elections, pp. 173-176; Alfred H. Kelly and Winfred A. Harbison, The~ American Constitution, Its Origins and Development (1963), pp. 393-394; Utley and Cutcheon, Michigan as a Province, Territory and State, III, p. 42 2; Roy F. Nichols, The~Stakes of Power, 1845-1877, pp. 79-80. 9 3 The delegates to the Republican National Conven­ tion were: First District: Delegate at large, Hon. Austin Blair of Jackson; alternate, G. W. Lee of Livingstone. District delegates: J. G. Peterson of Wayne with H. T. Backus of Wayne, alternate; A. D. Crane of Wastenaw with D. Cramer, alternate. Second District: Delegate at large, W. W. Murphy of Hillsdale; alternate, W. B. Montgomery. District delegates: Jesse J. Beeson of Cass with D. Larzelere, alternate; William 251

In the committees for the permanent organization of the convention, Austin Blair, W. W. Murphy, T. W. Ferry and William L. Stoughton, delegates from Michigan, were among the officials whose activities contributed to the 94 success of the convention. Although Michigan's most favored candidate was not nominated, the motion by William M. Evarts of New York to make Abraham Lincoln's nomination unanimous on the third ballot was seconded by Austin Blair of Michigan. In second­ ing the motion, Blair spoke in behalf of his state, declaring that from first to last Michigan had cast her vote for Seward and did not regret doing so. The people of Michigan, Blair said, would nevertheless support the candidate of the party's choice and he promised Lincoln that in the November election

L. Stoughton of St. Joseph with N. D. Skeels of Branch, alternate. Third District: Delegate at large, T. W. Ferry of Ottawa; alternate, J. H. Andrew of Van Buren. District delegates: Francis Quinn of Berrien with A. H. Cary, alter­ nate; Erastus Hussey of Calhoun and Seth Sprague of Montcalm, alternate. Fourth District: Delegate at large, J. J. St. Clair of Marquette; alternate, Morgan Bates of Grand Traverse. Dis­ trict delegates: D. C. Buckland of Oakland with A. T. Gross­ man of Genesee, alternate; Michael T. C. Piessner of Saginaw with C. P. Parkhill of Shiawassee, alternate. 9 4 The Republican convention proceedings --Roy F. Nichols, The Stakes of Power, 1845-1877, pp. 81-82; Utley and Cutcheon, Michigan As a Province, Territory and State, III, pp. 423-426; Murat Halstead, "The Republicans Nominate Lincoln," in The Tragic Conflict: The Civil War and Recon­ struction , ed~ by William B. Hesseltine (New York, 19 62) , pp. 99-118 (most comprehensive, detailed account); Roseboom, A History of Presidential Elections, pp. 176-180; Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men, pp. 175-176. 252

Michigan would give the Republican candidate a "twenty-five 9 5 thousand majority."

The Republican platform was moderate in length and

in tone and contained all that Michigan had asked for. The

first part incorporated the essential portion of the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence as to the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Two resolutions embodied the fundamental doctrine on which the party was founded: opposition to further expansion of slavery into any territory of the United States. 96

On June 7, 1860, Michigan Republicans assembled at

Detroit and listened as their delegates to the Republican national convention gave detailed accounts of the convention proceedings. Zachariah Chandler, Austin Blair, and Kingsley

S. Bingham brought the Chicago enthusiasm to the gathering, which unanimously approved the platform adopted by the national convention. There was some expression of regret at Seward's defeat, but Lincoln's nomination was also unani­ mously approved. They also publicly condemned the action of

John McKinney, the Secretary of the State Treasury, for his misconduct and declared that "the Republicans of the State of

Michigan will continue to require of all its public servants an unflinching integrity and strict individual accountability 9 7 for their every act of official character."

95Ibid. 96Ibid. 9 7 "The Proceedings of the Republican State Conven- 253

The Democratic Party of Michigan was seriously damaged by the division in the national Democratic party in 1860. The split between the supporters of Douglas and Buchanan became permanent in 1860. One faction supported the nomination of Douglas, and they were the greater part of Michigan Democrats. The second faction, quite few in number, organized a Breckinridge party in the state. The supporters of Douglas held conventions in several counties including Allegan, Berrien, Calhoun, Lapeer, Oakland, Ottawa and

Shiawassee. The delegates at these conventions adopted

resolutions in which they pledged to adhere to the principles embodied in the Cincinnati platform. They declared that the

safety of the Union had been jeopardized by the President when he deviated from those principles and that the actions

of the administration had destroyed the Democratic party. 9 8

In Kent County, the Democratic leaders were concerned with the division in their party. This plus personal antago­ nism had forced the ultra-conservatives to join the Douglas

tion Held in Detroit, June 7, 1860," Spencer Collections, State Public Library, Lansing. John McKinney, the State Treasurer, had embezzled an undisclosed large sum of the state's money, thus leaving the treasury so nearly empty that his successor, John Owen, in the absence of authority to borrow was obliged to pledge his personal credit in order to maintain that of the state. 98 "Proceedings of the Democratic State Convention Held at Detroit Fireman's Hall, February 22, 1860"; "Pro­ ceedings of the Democratic State Convention Held at Detroit June 29, 1860." Copies of these proceedings are in Spencer* Collections, State Public Library, Lansing; see also Detroit Free Press, February 23, 1860. 254 faction. The editor of the Enquirer and Herald, A. A. Gordon, for example, had been a strong supporter of the Breckinridge faction. He resigned in protest of personal attacks on him and pledged to support Douglas. E. 0. Burr, who succeeded

Gordon as editor of the Enquirer and Herald, used his new 99 position to promote the efforts of the Douglas men.

Determined to save the Democratic party, a few of the conservative leaders called for a state convention of the Democrats a few months before the election. The dele­ gates adopted a moderate resolution which opposed the doc­ trine of Congressional intervention in the domestic affairs of the people in the territories. After condemning Southern extremists who disrupted the Democratic national convention by insisting that Congress should protect and condone slavery in the territories, they appealed for a unanimous support of

Douglas. This effort to heal all past wounds failed when

William A. Richmond, a delegate from Kent County, insisted that the convention adopt a resolution stating that Michigan

Democrats were in full support of the foreign and domestic policy of Buchanan's administration. Although some members would have been in favor of approving the foreign policy of the administration, the inclusion of the domestic policy in the resolution outraged the delegates. The vote was 140

99 "Proceedings of the Kent County Convention," Grand Rapids Daily Eagle, February 20, 1860; Grand Rapids Enquirer and Herald, June JO and August 16, 1860. 255 against and 6 in favor. The convention ended in chaos, and having lost the last chance for a united action, the two fac­ tions resumed their separate campaigns for their candidates.

The campaign of 1860 in Michigan was one of the most exciting and enthusiastic in the history of the state. The

Constitutional Union Party, a latecomer in the contest, wished the voters of Michigan to support their candidate John

Bell and Edward Everett, because the Democrats and Republi­ cans had proved to be sectional parties. Claiming to be the only national party in the presidential race, the Constitutional Union Party pledged to close the slavery question which they said had so absorbed the energies of the Democrats and Republi­ cans that issues of national importance had been excluded from the legislative councils. They also pledged that if elected to power they would prevent the slavery question from being a prominent issue in the elections or in the legisla­ tion of the United States. The Democrats who supported Douglas organized "Douglas

Clubs" in every part of Michigan. 10 2 In October, Douglas

^^^Michigan Argus, July 6 , 1860; Detroit Weekly Tribune, July 17, 1860; Detroit Advertiser^ July 25 aria August 4, 1860; Grand Rapids Enquirer and Herald, July 26 and 28, 1860.

^^^The Constitutional Union Party was formally organized in Michigan on October 3, 1860. Detroit Free Press, October 6 , 1860.

102Michigan Argus, August 3, 1860; Pontiac Gazette, August 3, I860. 256

himself came to Michigan and spoke to his supporters in

Detroit, Ann Arbor, Jackson, Marshall, Kalamazoo and Niles.

When he went to Saginaw and Bay Counties, a German speaker was present to address the Germans who did not know the 103 English language well. The Republicans aroused great enthusiasm in the cam­ paign. In Michigan Lincoln's candidacy proved to be a vote winner. His debates with Douglas had won the admiration of his supporters. Everywhere in the state the Republicans 104 organized "Lincoln Wide Awake Clubs." The Republicans published at the Tribune office campaign literature con­ sisting of speeches, detailed reports and party platforms, copies of which campaign workers distributed throughout the state.*- - 105 Prominent speakers from out of state came to boost the Republican campaign in Michigan. Governor Salmon P.

Chase of Ohio spent some days in Michigan in the month of 106 August. At Pontiac and Ypsilanti, he addressed large crowds.

•'•^Detroit Free Press, October 16 and 18, 1860; Michi gan Argus, October 19, 1860; Niles Democratic Republican, October 30, 1860; East Saginaw Courier, October 18, 1860; Alan S. Brown, "Southwestern Michigan in the Campaign of 1860," Michigan Heritage, 11 (Winter, I960), pp. 67-74. l 04 Detroit Weekly Tribune, June 19, 1860; Marshall Statesman, August 15, 1860; Pontiac Gazette, September 21, 1860. 10 5 Detroit Weekly Tribune, August 7, 1860.

^°^Pontiac Gazette, August 17, 1860; Ann Arbor Jour­ nal, August 22, I860. 25 7

William Seward, the man Michigan Republicans respected most, also came to Michigan. When he spoke in Detroit, the people came from every part of the state to hear him. In Lansing and Kalamazoo, there were more than 3,000 Wide Awakes in the crowd that heard Seward explain how the nation had deviated from what he felt was the true path in the preceding forty years. The federal government, he said, had neglected to keep slavery from the territories and had made matters worse by removing the barriers against the spread of the institution

in the nation. In doing so, he continued, the nation had defied the moral opinion of mankind, overturned the laws and systems of the founding fathers, and dishonored the memories of those who founded the American Republic. He fully sup­ ported the principles of the Republican Party and the can­ didacy of Abraham Lincoln. My advice . . . is [ he said] that we return, re­ establish the original policy of the nation, and henceforth hold, as we did in the beginning, that freedom is the normal, enduring, and permanent con­ dition of society in the United S t a t e s . 107

The Republicans made good use of Senator Seward's speeches, calling the voters' attention to the prosperity of foreigners in the state who had fled their native countries

10 7 Detroit Advertiser, September 5 and 14, 1860; Pon­ tiac Gazette^ September T~, HT60; Kalamazoo Telegraph, Septem- ber 12 , 1860; Frederick W. Seward~ Seward at Washington as Senator and Secretary of State: A Memoir of His Life, With Selections from His Letters, 1846-1861 (New York, 1891) , V o l . II, pp. 462-463; Maxwell T. Collier, "William H. Seward in the Campaign of 1860, with Special Reference to Michigan," Michigan History, XIX (1935), pp. 91-106. 258

10 8 in Europe and had sought and found freedom in the state.

The black population in the state had been as industrious as

their white friends, Republican spokesmen proudly declared.

Michigan had never been swamped by a large number of the

so-called degenerated inferior race as some people had pre­ dicted. The Blacks had settled in a few counties, and their numbers were sparsely distributed in these counties. They were among the best of the colored people, the Republicans declared, adding that emancipation was safe and beneficial 109 to the nation. The results of the election of 1860 demonstrated the

extent to which Michigans had accepted the Republican prin­

10 8 Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, Vol. XXXVIII (1912) . p p . 548-549; Silas Farmer, The History of Detroit and Michigan (Detroit, 1884), pp. 336, 532-560; Howard and Mendel, Letter 'Book, No. 49, p. 371; Detroit Advertiser, November 8 , 1856; Detroit Weekly Tribune, April 10, 1860. "Proceedings of Republican State Convention, February 29, I860"; ibid., June 22, 1860. 109 For a good understanding of the nature, number, and pattern of settlement of Blacks in Michigan, see John C. Dancy, "The Negro People in Michigan." This study was com­ missioned by the Secretary of State at the request of the State Legislature in 1850. It appeared as "Negro Population of Michigan, House Document No. 15" (1850); Francis H. Warren, ed., Michigan Manual of Freedmen's Progress (Detroit, 1915). This study was also authorized by the State Legislature by Act 47, Public Acts 1915; Herold B. Fields, "Free Negroes in Cass County Before the Civil War," Michigan History, XLIV (1960), pp. 375-383; W. B. Hargrove^ "The Story of Maria Louise More and Fannie M. Richards," Journal of Negro History, I (January 1916), pp. 23-33; George K~ Hesslink, Black Neigh­ bors; Negroes in a Northern Rural Community (New York, 1968), pp. 29-44; David M. Katzman, "Early Settlers in Michigan," Michigan Challenge (June, 1968), pp. 3-20; Alexis A. Praus, "Enoch Harris; Negro Pioneer," Michigan Heritage, II (Winter, 1960), pp. 61-64. ' 259

ciples. Michigan gave Lincoln 87,457 votes; Douglas 66,163

votes; Breckinridge 805 votes; Bell 373 votes. Austin Blair, the Republican candidate for governor, received 87,806 votes;

John S. Barry, his Democratic opponent, received 67,221 votes.

The Democrats elected only two senators and ten representa­

tives to the State Legislature, a remarkable sign of the party’s decline. The four-member Michigan delegation to

Congress were all Republicans. The victory of the Republican Party in the national

election of 1860 particularly represented the triumph of the political crusaders against the further extension of slavery

in the territories of the United States. It also meant the

triumph of the combined efforts of themoral and political crusaders who opposed slavery. Throughout the campaign of 1860, Southern orators and newspaper threatened secession in case of a Republican vic­

tory. Since that threat was not new, having been witnessed before and after the Compromise of 1850, 111 many people of

Michigan failed to take it seriously. It was difficult for

them to conceive of the possibility that Southern leaders would actually support a dissolution of the Union. Moreover,

110 Detroit ' Advertiser, December 31, 1860; Michigan Manual (1913), pi 422 ; Detroit Free Press, November 13, i860. Ill Roy F. Nichols, The Stakes of Power, 1845-1877 (New York, 1961), pp. 24-281 Theodore Clarke Smith, Parties and Slavery, 1850-1859 (New York, 1969), pp. 3-13. 260

they had great confidence in President Buchanan's ability to

prevent such a tragedy. However, the people of Michigan were astonished by

Buchanan's message to the last session of the Thirty-Sixth Congress on December 3, 1860. In the message he implied

that the federal government had no power to prevent any state from leaving the Union, seizing all forts, arsenals and arms within her borders, and levying war against the United

States. 113 The President's views of the power of the national government conflicted with those of the people of Michigan,

including his Secretary of State, Lewis Cass, Michigan's most prominent political figure. These people believed that the

federal government possessed the power to protect and main­

tain its own existence. Cass's disapproval of the President's 114 views and policies caused him to resign, and three days 115 later South Carolina seceded.

112 Philip S. Klein, President James Buchanan; A Biography (1969), pp. 270-273. 113 James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1897, Vol. V, pp. 626-637; Frank W. Kling- berg, "James Buchanan and the Crisis of the Union," Journal of Southern History, IX (1943), pp. 472-477.

^■^Frank B. Woodford, Lewis Cass, The Last Jeffer­ sonian (New Brunswick, 1950) , p p . 299-342.

^■^Rollin G. Osterweis, "South Carolina and the Idea of Southern Nationalism," in Romanticism and Nationalism in the Old South (New Haven, Conn., 1949), pp. 13-154; Ralph A. Wooster, "An Analysis of the Membership of Secession Conven­ tions in the Lower South," Journal of Southern History, XXIV (August, 1958), pp. 360-368. 261

The leading politicians of Michigan regarded South

Carolina's action as unconstitutional and outrageous. Every member of the State Legislature felt that treason and rebel­

lion in the South were threatening the very existence of the Union. These men were convinced from discussions among them­

selves that the sentiment of the people throughout Michigan was that secession was treason and that treason was war.^^

When on January 1, 1861, the Twenty-First Legislature

assembled at Lansing in a joint session of the Senate and the

House, a feeling of intense solemnity dominated the atmos­ phere. Under such a condition the people listened to the messages of the outgoing governor, Moses Wisner, and the in­ coming governor, Austin Blair.

After a heart-moving and patriotic message to the people, Wisner declared: We believe that the founders of our national government designed it to be perpetuated, and we cannot consent to have a single star obliterated from our flag.

The right of a state to secede, Wisner concluded, had been agitated for over thirty years, and it should be permanently settled. "We ought not to leave it to our children to look after."117

1 1 £ James V. Campbell, Outlines of the Political His­ tory of Michigan (Detroit, 1876) , pp. 565 - 569; George B. Catlin, The Story of Detroit (Detroit, 1923), pp. 512-539; Willis F. Dunbar, Michigan Through the Centuries (New York, 1955), Vol. 1, pp. 282-292. 117 George N. Fuller, ed., Messages of the Governors 262

In his inaugural address Austin Blair declared:

The Federal Government has the power to defend itself, and I do not doubt that that power will be exercised to the utmost. It is a question of war that the seceding states have to look in the face. South Carolina, Blair insisted, was still in the Union in spite of her secession ordinance, and her people could not

be absolved from the obligation to obey the Constitution and

laws of the United States. He recommended that the military

power of the state be offered to the President for the pur­

pose of maintaining ’’the Federal Constitution, the rights 118 of the States and of the Union of the States." The legislature responded immediately by adopting a

joint resolution which declared that neither concession nor

compromise was to be offered to traitors. It also approved

"An Act to Provide Military Force," which authorized the

governor to muster two regiments into the service of volun­

teer uniformed militia, "not to exceed twenty companies,"

to be organized into two regiments of ten companies each; to

appoint the regimental officers; to prepare the men for military duties; to place them under the command of the

Commander-in-Chief, or to transfer them to the military

services of the general government whenever required by the

President; and to purchase all the necessary military of Michigan (Lansing, 1925), Vol. II, pp. 376-400.

1 1 8 Ibid., pp. 400-432. 263

equipments.«. 119

When the news came that the other states of the deep South had declared themselves out of the Union, the legis­

lature of Michigan announced that it had offered without any

reservation her military power and material resources to 120 the general government to defend the Union of the states.

The voices of a few of Michigan's older politicians

kept appealing for patience, calm, further discussions and

negotiations for a possible compromise agreement between the

North and the South. Robert McClelland and Lewis Cass, Ross Wilkins and C. C. Trowbridge were among the most prominent

to speak for compromise. Their efforts did not win many

supporters. At one of their public meetings, held in Detroit

on January 28, 1861, there were demands for the repeal of

the Personal Liberty Laws, a return to the Missouri Compro­

mise line, the cessation of kidnapping slaves, and no further

119 Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representatives and Senate of the State of Michigan, 1861- 1865 (Lansing, 1861), p p . 50-57.

^ ^ Ibid., 57-60; U. B. Philipps, Georgia and State Rights, Annual Report of the American Historical Association, Vol. II (1901), pp. 194-200; Edwin C. Rozwenc, ed., The Causes of the American Civil War (2nd ed.; Lexington, Mass.^ 1972) , pp. 120-14 3; Thomas J . Pressly, ed., Americans Interpret Their Civil War (New York, 1962); William B~ Hesseltine, ed. , Tlie Tragic Conflict (New York, 1962) ; J. G. Randall and David Donald, The Civil War and Reconstruction (Lexington, Mass., 1969), ppT 127- 142 ; Alfred Kelly and Winfred A. Harbison, The American Constitution: Its Origin and Development (New York, 1963) , p p . 39 5-398; Frank W. Klingberg, "James Buchanan and the Crisis of the Union," Journal of Southern History, IX (November, 1943), pp. 472-477. 264

interference with slavery in the South or in the District of

Columbia. Those proposals did not have the support of most

Michigan people. 121 The State Legislature refused to send delegates to

the Washington Peace Conference which opened on February 4.

Senator Zachariah Chandler expressed the mood of Michigan

aptly. The people of Michigan are opposed to all com­ promises. They do not believe that any compromise is necessary. They are prepared to stand by the Constitution of the United States as it is, to stand by the Government as it is, . . . to stand by it to blood, if necessary. . . . Without blood­ letting this Union will not in my estimation be worth a rush.122 There was no power in Michigan or anywhere else to

stop the secession movement in the South, and weeks before

Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated, the Confederacy of the

Southern States had been established. By that time the

legislature of Michigan had already pledged to support the

President of the United States in the defense and mainte­ nance of the Union.

Thus when the news of the bombardment of Fort Sumter

Frederick D. Williams, "Robert McClelland and the Secession Crisis," Michigan History, XLIII (1959), pp. 155- 164; Robert McClelland, "Letter on the Crisis," dated Janu­ ary 2, 1861, in the University of Michigan Public Library; Frank B. Woodford, Lewis Cass, pp. 300-342; Charles Moore, "The Days of Fife and Drum," Michigan Historical Collection, XXVIII (1900), pp. 417-420. 122 Walter Buell, "Zachariah Chandler," Magazine of Western History, IV (1886), pp. 351-352, 432-438"! reached Michigan, Union sentiment was expressed in various

parts of the state. A public meeting was held in Detroit on

the evening of April 13, and speakers for the Union cause

included prominent Democrats. The extent of the seriousness

with which the people spoke was evidenced by the sound of

fife and drum calling recruits to the armories of the Detroit

Light Guard and the Scott Guards. Subscriptions totalling

$50,000 were voluntarily made by those in attendance and

placed at the disposal of the governor for the equipment of

troops. A great public meeting was held at Ann Arbor the next day, April 14, and the formation of a University Company was begun. The scholars of the State Normal School at Ypsilant

also began to raise a company. The railroad and steamboat

companies in the state responded with equal enthusiasm by

offering free transportation to troops. Hotel owners put up

the "Stars and Stripes" in order to test the loyalty of the

customers. Wholesale and retail houses, the railway stations, 12 3 and all public buildings flung out the Union flag.

A day after President Lincoln called upon Michigan

for one regiment of infantry, Governor Blair, military of­

ficials, the State Military Board, leading citizens from

Detroit and other parts of the state assembled at the Michigan

^ 3Charles Moore, "The Days of Fife and Drum," Mich. Hist. Coll., XXVIII (1900), pp. 420-440; George S. May, "Ann Arbor and the Coming of the Civil War," Mich. Hist. Coll., XXXVI (1952), pp. 241-259 ; William H. Beadle, "Ascendat.'" Michigan Alumni, IX (1903), pp. 242-246. 266

Exchange in Detroit to discuss among other things how to raise the necessary funds to arm and equip the troops of

Michigan. During the discussion, John Owen, a wealthy ship­ owner of Detroit who had been appointed the new State Treasurer, pledged his personal credit for half the necessary sum to meet the emergency. However by the time the governor had finished speaking, voluntary cash contributions and pledges exceeded $81,000. This enabled the State Treasurer to negotiate without difficulty the loan to complete the

$100,000 which the governor needed for the equipment of

Michigan's first regiment. ^ Having been provided with the needed funds, Governor

Blair issued a call for ten companies. The response was more than the governor had anticipated. Ann Arbor, Burr Oaks,

Coldwater, Detroit, Jackson, Manchester, Marshall and

Ypsilanti all responded at once by sending their militia companies to Fort Wayne, where the First Michigan Infantry of three month's men was organized with Orlando B. Wilcox, a Detroit lawyer, as Colonel. Thus, on May 13, a week earlier than the President's call required, Michigan's First

Regiment was on its way to Washington, D. C., well equipped

^'^Basler, Lincoln, Collected Works, Vol. IV, pp. 331- 332; George N. Fuller, ed., Messages of the Governors of Michi­ gan , Vol. I, pp. 413-436; Clever F. Bald, Michigan in Four Centuries (New York, 1954), pp. 259-276; James V. Campbell, Outlines of the Political History of Michigan (Detroit, 1876), pp. 565-569; Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Michigan, A History of Governments (Boston, 1885), pp. 341-345. 267

and armed. On May 15, Colonel Wilcox proudly reported to

General W. Scott the arrival of the first Western regiment

at the Capital. The enthusiastic Colonel proudly marched

the men at his command to the White House. There, President

Lincoln spoke to the Michigan soldiers, praising their promptness and soldierly appearance. The history of Michigan's noble role in the nation's

four years of bloody war is beyond the scope of this study.

It suffices to state that Michigan's contribution to the war effort helped the President of the United States to preserve the Constitution and the Union of the states which would be no longer half free and half slave.

125 Annual Report of the Adjutant General of the State of Michigan, Document No. 8 (Lansing, 1861) , p p . 2- TT. " BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY

Manuscripts

Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library

Bingham, Kinsley S. A small collection of letters written while Bingham was Governor, 1855-1859.

Blair, Austin. Letters and papers. There are four let­ ters related to the voting, gubernatorial nomi­ nation of 1847, and to the political situation in 1847. Duffield, George. Minutes of meetings of the Sessions of the First Presbyterian Church of Detroit, Michigan, 1826-1875.

Emmons, H. H. Letters and papers. Useful information on the antislavery movement. and Van Dyke, J. A. Letters and papers. Contain good information on the progress of the Free Soil Party.

Felch, Alpheus. Letters. Provide good insight in the struggle within the Democratic Party in the 1840s.

Hastings, Eurotas P. Two volumes of account books of the First Protestant Society, 1820-1836, 1833- 1848. Howard, Jacob M. Letters and papers. Whig State Assembly man and afterwards a Congressman, 1848-1860. Use­ ful information on politics in the 1850s.

Joy, James F. Sixty volumes of letters and papers cover­ ing the period 1835-1861. A small number relate to the Free Soil Party. Macomb, William. Record book which includes a discussion on the disagreement between John Calhoun and Lewis Cass on the theory of Negro slavery and how the views of Lewis Cass influenced the people of Michi gan in their support for Andrew Jackson’s presi­ dential campaign. 269 270

McClelland, Robert M. Papers covering the period 1843- 1860. Of note especially, his antislavery views as a Congressman from 1844-1852 and most particu­ larly his opposition to the annexation of Texas and his support of the Wilmot Proviso. Porter, John Savage. Letters covering the period 1839- 1860. Provide good information on the antislavery movement. Sibley, Solomon. Papers. Pioneer settler and good friend of Lewis Cass, his manuscript contains a brief discussion of the pro-slavery attitude of French settlers in territorial Michigan.

Vernonique. Deed for sale of this slave. Wilkins, Ross. Letters and papers covering the period 1835 to 1860, including the manuscript copy of the proceedings in the United States Circuit Court at the time of the suit over Adam Cross­ white and the last part of the Gittner v. Gorham et al. decision. Williams, John R. Letters and papers from January, 1835 to 1854. Contain valuable information on the attitude of wealthy Democrats toward the measures of the radical Democrats, especially after the financial crisis of 1837. Woodbiidge, William. Letters and papers covering the period 1834 to 1860. Set forth his pro-slavery and anti-Negro views and Constitutional views and provide useful information in regard to the factional character of the Whig Party which led to the gains made by the Free Soil Party from the Whig Party. William Clement Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Birney, James G. Letters and papers not included in Dwight L. Dumond (ed.), 1831-1857.

Chandler Family. Papers, a few.

Lyon, Lucius. Letters and papers.

Weld, Theodore; Weld, Angelina Grimke; and Grimke, Sarah. Letters and papers. 271

Michigan Historical Collections, University of Michigan.

Beal, Rice Aner. Papers, 1843 to 1860. From Dexter and Ann Arbor, a businessman, publisher, regent of the University of Michigan and Republican politi­ cian. Boyd Family. Letters, 1848, from Alpheus Felch when he was a United States Senator, concerning the slavery controversy in Congress.

Brown, Martha. Account, April 2, 1856, of the death of her husband at the hands of a pro-slavery mob in Kansas in 1856. She was from Cass County, Michi­ gan, and returned there after her husband's death

Cannon, Howard B. Manuscript report, undated, of a lec­ ture given by Frederick Douglass, in Ann Arbor.

Chandler, Elizabeth Margaret. Family papers, 1830 to 1842. Include correspondence about antislavery activities. Clark, George W. Scrapbook, 1840 to 1860, of "Liberty Minstrel" of Jackson. Particularly relating to the antislavery movement. DeLand Family. Papers, 1842-1860. Of note especially, accounts of abolition meeting in Jackson, 1839.

Dunn, Ransom. Papers, 1796-1900. Contain useful informa­ tion on the antislavery movement and the politics of abolition. Foster, Theodore. Papers, 1835-1862, containing notes on the political, sociological and religious aspects of slavery. Records, 1835-1848, and account books, 1835-1862, of the Signal of Liberty.

Hampton, Oliver. Papers, 1827-1860. Contain slavery and antislavery material from Buck County and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Haviland, Laura Smith. .Papers, 1879-1896, including a scrapbook on Raisin Institute. Jones, Lucian H. Papers, 1836-1863. A good deal of correspondence on the antislavery movement in Michigan especially the Liberty Party, 1842, from Seymour B. Treadwell. 272

Methodist Church (Episcopal), Garden City. Petition, June 6 , 1841, for withdrawal from the Church because of its stand on slavery.

Methodist Church (Wesleyan). Eight volumes of minutes of church conferences in Michigan from 1852 to 1942 . Mott, John. Two letters, 1843, discussing antislavery activities. Norris, Mark. Letter, March 31, 1852, from Lyman D. Norris to his parents commenting on his contacts with Dred Scott. Osborn, Alice. Letter, January 26, 1867, concerning Charles Osborn, a Quaker abolitionist who lived in Cass County at the time of the Kentuckian raids there, 1842 to 1847. Osborn, Jefferson. Correspondence, 1851, including one co-signed by D. T. Nicholson of Calvin County, Michigan, concerning financial aid for a court case for aiding fugitive slaves, with a list of contributors. Pierce, Nathan. Papers, 1842-1862. Include five letters from Daniel Arnold discussing slavery and other topics. Pitts, Wills N. Papers, 1744-1860. Of special interest is the agreement between the Presbyterian and Congregational churches and their attitudes toward slavery. Power, Nathan. Record book, 1826-1873, including accounts of antislavery activities.

Presbyterian Church. Presbyteries of Marshall. Three volumes of minutes, 1838-1861, 1863-1870. Reynolds, William Harvey. Diary, 1857, with entry describing antislavery meetings at Hillsdale College, April 30 and May 28, 1857.

St. Clair, Alanson. Papers, 1840-1852. Correspondence about abolitionists.

Society of Friends, Lenawee County, Raisin Township. Minutes, 1838-1854. 273

Taylor Family. Papers, 1827-1908. Eighteen volumes including speeches, articles, and sermons against slavery. Thomas, Ella. History of the Underground Railroad. A handwritten account of the personal activities of Mrs. Thomas and her husband. Thomas, Nathan Marcy. Papers, 1818-1889. Three volumes, containing 750 items, including useful accounts of the antislavery movement in Michigan.

Treadwell Family. Papers, 1818-1869. Contain useful information and several newspaper clippings dis­ cussing antislavery movement in Michigan.

Weissert, Charles Adam. Materials gathered about anti­ slavery and Underground Railroad activities.

Young Men's Liberty Convention. The Proceedings of this convention held in Jackson, Michigan, October 1, 1845, which contain familiar expressions of anti­ slavery sentiment.

The Museum, Michigan State University, East Lansing

Waldron, Henry. Correspondence with Zachary Chandler during the Congressional election of 1854 in which Chandler attacked Lewis Cass for discredit­ ing the Republican candidates.

Printed Public Documents

Compilations

United States of America

Benton, Thomas Hart. Abridgement of the Debates of Congress from 1789 to 1856. 17 vols. New York: 1853-1861.

DeBow, J. D. B. The Seventh Census of the United States: 1850. Washington, 1853.

______. Statistical View of the United States, Being a Compendium of the Seventh Census. Washington, 274

Ford, Northington C.; Hunt, Gaillard; and Hill, Roscoe R., ed s . Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774- 17 89 . 34 vols. Washington, 1904-1937. Richardson, James D. A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789 to 1897. 10 vols. Washington, 1896-1899. Especially Volumes 4 and 5 .

Territory and State of Michigan Blume, William Wirt, ed. Transactions of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, 1805-1814. 2 vols. Ann Arbor, 1935.

______. Transactions of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Michigan, 1814-1824. 2 vols. Ann Arbor, 1938.

Dorr, Harold M., ed. The Michigan Constitutional Conven­ tions of 1835-1836, Debates and Proceedings. Ann Arbor, 1960.

George, Newman Fuller, ed. Messages of the Governors of Michigan, 1824-1860. Lansing, 1925.

McLean, John. Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Seventh Circuit^ Vol. IV, Cincinnat i , 1851. The report of the Adam Crosswhite fugitive slave case is pub­ lished in this volume.

Publications of the United States Government

Adams, President John Quincy. Message transmitting a report of the Attorney-General relative to the introduction of slaves into the United States, contrary to existing laws. May 6 , 1822. 17th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 93. Washington, D.C., 1828.

African Slave Trade Debates. 31st Cong., 2nd Sess., Sen. Ex. Doc. 27. Washington, D. C., 1851.

Amistad Case--Africans Taken in the Amistad. U. S. 26th Cong., 1st Sess. H., Exec. Doc. 185. Reprint: The Basic Afro-American Reprint Library. New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1968. 275

Annals of Congress, 1784-1824. Buchanan, President James. Message communicating informa­ tion in regard to the slave and Coolie trade. 34th Cong., 1st Sess., House Ex. Doc. 105. Wash­ ington, D. C., 1856. Calhoun, John C. Report, with Senate Bill No. 122. The Select Committee to whom was referred that portion of President Andrew Jackson's message which relates to the attempts to circulate, through the mail, inflammatory appeals, to excite the slaves to insurrection, submit their report. 24th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 118. Washington, D.C., 1836. Census for 1820. Washington: 1821. Congressional Globe (The). Covering the debates from 1834- 187 3. Washington, 1875. From the First Session of the Twenty-fourth Con- gress to the First and Second Sessions of the Thirty-fourth Congress. Washington, 1836-1856.

Crawford, W. H. (Secretary of Treasury). Letter trans­ mitting information in relation to the illicit introduction of slaves into the United States; with a statement of the measures which have been taken to prevent the practice. 16th Cong., 1st Sess., Ex. Papers 42. Washington, D.C., 1820.

Departments of State, of Treasury, and of Navy. Extracts from documents in relation to the illicit intro­ duction of slaves into the United States. 15th Cong., 2nd Sess., House Doc. 100. Washington, D.C., 1819.

Kennedy, Mr. African Colonization Report, from the Committee on Commerce to whom was referred the memorial of the Friends of African Colonization, assembled in convention in the city of Washington, May 1842. To which is appended a collection of the most interesting papers on the subject of African colonization, the commerce and other in­ formation concerning West Africa, together with all the diplomatic correspondence between the United States and Great Britain, on the subject of the African slave trade. 27th Cong., 3rd Sess., House Rep. 283. Washington, D.C., 1843. 276

Monroe, President James. Documents accompanying his message of December 1824. 18th Cong., 2nd Sess. Sen. Doc. 1. Washington, D.C., 1824.

Pinkney, H. L. Slavery in the District of Columbia. Report made to the House of Representatives, May 18, 1836. 24th Cong., 1st Sess., House Rep. 691. Washington, D.C., 1836.

Polk, President James. Message communicating a report from the Secretary of State, with the correspon­ dence of Mr. Wise, late United States Minister to Brazil, in relation to the slave trade. 30th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Ex. Doc. 28. Washington, D.C. , 1848 . Population of the United States in 1860. Compiled from the original returns of the Eighth Census. Wash­ ington, D.C., 1864.

Register of Debates in Congress, 1825-1837. Thompson, Smith (Secretary of Navy). Letter transmitting information in relation to the introduction of slaves into the United States. January 7, 1820. 16th Cong., 1st Sess., Ex. Papers 36. Washington, D.C. , 1820. Tyler, President John. Message concerning the abuse of the flag of the United States in subservience to the African slave trade. 28th Cong., 1st Sess., Sen. Doc. 217. Washington, D.C., 1844.

Webster, Daniel (Secretary of State). Report communi­ cating the report of the Reverend R. R. Gurley, who was recently sent by the government to obtain information in respect to Liberia. 31st Cong., 1st Sess., Ex. Doc. 75. Washington, D.C., 1850.

Publications of the Territory and State of Michigan______

Acts of the Legislature of the State of Michigan. Detroit, 1835-1847; Lansing, 1848-1859.

Appeal by the Convention of Michigan, to the People of the United States^ With other documents, Tn relation to the boundary question between Michi­ gan and Ohio. Detroit, 1835. 277

Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Repre- sentatives of the State of Michigan, 1839 to 1842, 1844, 1847 to 1850, 1855, 1859. Detroit, 1839-1847; Lansing, 1848-1859.

Documents Communicated to the Senate and House of Repre- sentatives of the State of Michigan, at the Annual Session of 1843. Detroit, 1843.

Documents of the Senate and of the House of Representa- fives, at the Annual Session of the Legislature of 1844~[ Detroit, 1844 . Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate and House of Representatives of Michigan, at the Regular Session of 1855. Lansing, 18 55. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Repre- sentatives of the State of Michigan at the Biennial Session of 1859. Lansing, 1859.

Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Biennial Session of 1861. Lansing” 1861. House Document 3. Report of the Judiciary Committee in Relation to Striking Out the Word "WHITE" in the Second Article of the Constitution. 1843.

House Document 13. Report of the Committee on Federal Relations to Consider Petitions Demanding the Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. Good for understanding the reaction of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Edward Prigg v. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1842. 1844.

House Document 14. The Report of the Select Committee to Whom was Referred the Petition of Sundry Legal Voters of the State of Michigan, Asking the Legis­ lature to Take the Necessary Action for Amending the Constitution of the State by Expunging from the Second Article Thereof, the Word "WHITE." 1843.

House Document 17. Report of the Committee on Federal Relations, Relative to the Delivering up of Fugitive Slaves, to Whom was Referred Sundry Petitions, Praying for a Law to Prevent the Same; also the petition of Lewis North and 108 others, Praying That it May Be Made a State Prison Offence to Claim the Right of Property in, or Exercise 278

the Right of Property Over, Another in This State. 1859. House Document 24. Report of the Judiciary Committee on the Numerous Petitions, Praying the Legislature to Take the Legislative Action Necessary To~r Amending the Constitution of the State by Expunging from the Second Article Thereof the Word " W H I T E . *'* The Legislature of 1844. House Document 25. Report of the Special Committee on Constitutional Amendments, Relative to the Right of Suffrage. 1859. Joint Documents of the Senate and House of Representatives, Detroit, 1843-1848; changed to Joint Documents of the Legislature of the State of Michigan, 1849 to I860" Lansing, 1849-1861. The messages of the Governors of the State during the same period are published in this set and thus makes them particu­ larly useful. Journal of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Michigan, 185TT Lansing, 1850.

Journal of the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, 1835 to 1859. Detroit, 1836-1847; Lansing, 1848-1859.

Journal of the Proceedings of the Convention of Delegates Chosen by the Electors of the State of Michigan in Pursuance of an Act of Congress of June 15, 18 3 6 ,~~ and an Act of the Legislature of Said State of July 25, 1836, for the Purpose of Taking into Con­ sideration the Proposition of Congress Relative to the Admission of the State of Michigan into the Union. Held in Ann Arbor, September and December, 1836. (No imprint)

Journal of the Proceedings of the Convention to Form a Constitution for the State of Michigan Begun and Held at the Capitol, in the City of Detroit, on Monday, the 11th Day of May, A.D. 1835. Detroit, 18 35.

Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan, 1835 to 1859. Detroit, 1836-1847; Lansing, 1848-1859.

Journal of the Sixth Legislative Council of the Territory of Michigan. Second Session, January 12, 1835 to March 26, T836. Lansing, 1894. 279

Laws of the Territory of Michigan. Lansing, Vol. Ill, 1874; Vol. IV, 1884.

Legislative Manual of the Senate and House of Representa­ tives of the State of Michigan, 1837 to 1859. Detroit, 1837-1849; Lansing, 18S0-18S9. Report of a Committee of the Senate on State Affairs in Relation to the Annexation of Texas" 1838.

Report of the Proceedings and Debate in the Convention to Revise the Constitution of the State of Michigan, 1850. Lansing, 1850. Senate Document 15. Report of the Committee on State Affairs to the Honorable Members of the Senate of the State of Michigan on the Petitions of Numerous Voters' in Oakland, Washtenaw and Other Counties, Praying That the Necessary Legislative Action May Be Taken for Amending the Constitution of the State, by Expunging from the Second Article Thereof the Word ’’WH I T E . " 184 5 .

Senate Document 28. Report of the Committee on Privileges and Elections, Relative to Extending the Elective Franchise to Certain Citizens. The Committee on Privileges and Elections, to Whom was Referred the Petitions of W. B. Wells, A Williams, A. F. Carr, H. Rich, and 153 Others, Citizens of Ionia County; and Also the Petitions of Hon. John Kipp; Henry Walbridge, and 54 Others, Citizens of Clinton County, Which Petition is as Follows, "To the~ Honorable, the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan: . . ." 1861.

Published Speeches and Pamphlets_____

Address of the Democratic Members of the Legislature, Detroit, May 1, 1841. Detroit, 1841. Contains a valuable critical review of the Whig administra­ tion under Woodbridge.

Address to the Democracy of Ingham County. Lansing, 185 6 . This address was issued at Lansing on August 8 , 1856, by a group of Democrats, stating their reasons for supporting Fremont rather than Buchanan for the Presidency. 280

Appeal of the Whigs of Detroit to the Whigs of Michigan. Detroit, 1856. In this pamphlet the conservative Whigs explained why they supported Buchanan.

Buel, Alexander W. Speech, In Defense of the Constitution and the Union. Delivered at a Public Dinner Given to Him by His Fellow-Citizens at Detroit^ November 19, 1850i Washington, 1851. Buel ap- pealed for the preservation of the Union and for acquiescence in the compromise measures.

Minutes of the Convention of the Colored Citizens of the State of Michigan; Held in the City of Detroit on the 20th Day of October, 1845, for the Purpose of Considering Their Moral and Political Condition as Citizens of the State. Detroit, 1843. Throws light on the condition of Michigan Blacks, and expresses their wishes particularly on the ques­ tion of suffrage.

Publications of State and National Antislavery Societies American Abolitionists. An Address from the ,;.American Abolitionists to the Friends of the Slaves Th Britain at the Convention of Abolitionists, West Bloomfield, New YorTTi 1847 .

American Anti-Slavery Constitution. The Constitution of the American Anti-Slavery SocTety, with the Declaration of the National Convention at Philadelphia, December, 1853, and the AdcTress to the Public, Issued by the Executive Committee of the Society, in September, 1835^ New York, 1838.

American Anti-Slavery Society. Annual Reports, lst-6th, 1834-1839. New York, 1834-1839. Contain speeches delivered on the anniversaries of the Society as well as the business records of the meetings of the Society.

*Almost all of the original antislavery tracts and publications of the American antislavery societies, American and foreign antislavery societies, and individuals, including newspapers in bound form, are available at the storerooms of the Green Wood Press, 51 Riverside Avenue, Westport, Connecti­ cut 06880 (Tel: 203-226-3571). 281

American Convention of Abolition Societies. Reports of the American Convention of Abolition Societies on Negroes and on Slavery, Their Appeals to Con­ gress, and Their Addresses to the Citizens of the United States, 1848 . In the Journal of Negro History 6 (July 19 21). A reprint of the original. American Convention of Abolition Societies for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and Improving the Con­ dition of the African Race. Twenty-five volumes of Minutes of meetings held 1794-1839. Phila­ delphia (etc.), 1794-1839. Library of Congress set is not complete. There is none for the 11th (1806), 15th (1817), 16th (1819), 18th (1823), and adjourned meeting of 1826.

American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. Address to the Inhabitants of New Mexico and California, on the Omission by Congress to Provide Them with Territorial Governments, and on the Social and Political Evils of Slavery. New York: The Society, 1849. Address to the Non-Slaveholders of the South on the Social and Political Evils oT~ Slavery. Signed by Lewis Tappan. New York, 1843.

Address to th ‘ ‘‘ ‘ tians of the United States. Lewis Tappan Chase, Francis Adams, John Pierpont, William Jay, J. R. Giddings and 36 others. New York, 1852.

American Tract Society. The Tract Society and Slavery. Hartford, Conn., 1859.

American Union for the Relief and Improvement of the Colored Race. Exposition of the Objects and Plans of the American Union for the Relief and Improve­ ment of the Colored Race. Published by the Executive Committee, Boston, 1855.

Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women. An Appeal of the Women of the Nominally Free States. Issued Hy^An Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women. Boston, T§38.

Proceedings of the Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women Held in the City of New York, May 9th, 10th, 11th~ and 12th, 1837. New York, TKTT. ------282

______. Proceedings of the Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women Held in Philadelphia, May 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th, 1838. Philadelphia, 1838.

______. Proceedings of the Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women Held in Philadelphia, May 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, 1839~ Philadelphia, 1839. This was the last convention of the American Women before their union with male organizations in 1840 and the emergence of the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society.

Anti-Slavery Manual, Containing a Collection of Facts and Arguments on American Slavery. New York, 1834. Useful for the instructions to the commissioned Agents.

Free Soil Association of the District of Columbia. Address of the Free Soil Association of the District of Columbia to the People of the United States Together with a Memorial to Congress, by 1,060 Inhabitants of the District of Columbia, Praying for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery. Washington, 1849.

Friends of Freedom Series. Friends of Freedom in the Eastern and Middle States. Report of the ColTven- tion of the Friends of Freedom in the Eastern and Middle States, 1845. Boston, 1845.

Illinois Anti-Slavery Convention. Proceedings of the Illinois Anti-Slavery Convention, Held October 26th-28th, 1837 , at Upper ------Alton, Illinois. XTton,

Indiana Anti-Slavery Convention. Proceedings of the Indiana Convention, Assembled to Organize a State Anti-Slavery Society. Held at Milton, Indiana, September 12, 1835.

Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. An Address of the Board of Managers to the Abolitionists of Massachu­ setts, on the Subject of Political Action. By the Board of Managers, Boston, 1838.

______. Annual Proceedings of the Meetings of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, lst-21st, 1833- 1852, titled as follows: For 1836-1853--Annual Reports of the Managers of the Massachusetts Anti- Slavery Society; after 1853--these reports were issued by the American Anti-Slavery Society of Massachusetts. 283

____ . Proceedings of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society at the Annual Meetings Held in 1854, 1855, 1856; with the Treasurer's Reports and GeneraT Agent's Annual Statements. Boston, 1856. Massachusetts Disunion Convention. Proceedings of the State Disunion Convention Held at Worcester^ Massachusetts, January 15 , 1857] Boston, T857. Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society. Report of the Meet­ ing of the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society, June 28th, 1837, Being the First Annual Meeting, Adjourned from June 1st, 1837. Detroit, 1837.

Michigan State Anti-Slavery Convention. Report of the Proceedings of the Anti-Slavery State Convention, Held at Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Tenth and Eleventh of November, 1836. Detroit, 1836. New England Anti-Slavery Convention. Proceedings of the New England Anti-Slavery Convention Held in Boston on May 27-29, 1834^ Boston, 1834.

______. Proceedings of the New England Anti-Slavery Con­ vention , Held in Boston, May 24-26 , 1836 . Boston, 1836 . ______. Proceedings of the Fourth New England Anti- Slavery Convention, Held in Boston, May 30-31, and June 1-2, 1837^ Boston, 1837.

______. Second Annual Report of the Board of Managers, with an Appendix (of 18 pages of W. LTT Garrison' s report of his mission to England). Boston, 1834.

New England Emigrant Aid Company, Boston. Two tracts pro­ duced. One was a reproduction of B. F. String- fellow Cof Missouri) titled Negro Slavery No Evil. The second was a reproduction of D. R] Goodloe Co"f North Carolina) titled Answer to the Inquiry: Is It Expedient to Introduce Slavery into Kansas? Boston, 1855.

New Hampshire Anti-Slavery Convention. Proceedings of the [First] Convention, November, 1834. Includes an address to the people of New Hampshire and a description by an eyewitness of the Washington slave market. Concord, 1834. 284

New Jersey Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery. Address of the President of the New Jersey Soci­ ety for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery to the General Meeting at Trenton, September 267 1804. Trenton, 1804.

New York City Anti-Slavery Society. Address of the New York City Anti-Slavery Society to the People of the City of New York. New York, 1833.

New York State Anti-Slavery Society. Annual Report. Pre­ sented to the New York Anti-Slavery Society by Its~ Executive Committee, May 12 , 1854. New York, 1854. New York State Colonization Society. An Appeal in Behalf of the Two Hundred Slaves Liberated by Captain- Isaac Ross, and Thousands of Others--With a Brief History of the Ross Slaves. New York, 1848.

Ohio Anti-Slavery Society. The Description of the Con­ dition of the People of Color in the State of Ohio. Boston, 1839. ______. Memorial of the Ohio Anti-Slavery Society to the General Assembly of the State of Ohio. Cin­ cinnati , 1838 . Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery. An Historical Memoir of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery" the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully Held in* Bondage, and for Improving the Condition of the African Race. Compiled from the Minutes of the Society and Other Official Documents by Edward Needles and Published by the Authority of the Society. Philadelphia, 1848.

Religious Society of Friends. Address of the Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Held in New York City in the Sixth Month, 1852, to the Professors of Christianity in the United States, on the Subject of Slavery^ New York, 1852. Religious Society of Friends of Philadelphia. A Brief Statement of the Rise and Progress of the Religious Society of Friends of Philadelphia Against the Slave Trade. Philadelphia, 1843. 285

Religious Society of Friends of New England. Address of the Yearly Meeting of Friends for New England, Held in Rhode Island in the Sixth Month, 1857, to Its Own Members, and Those of Other Christian Communities. New Bedford, 1837.

______. An Appeal to the Professors of Christianity in the~Southern States and Elsewhere, on the Subject of Slavery; by the Representatives of the Yearly Meetings of Friends for New England. Providence, 1842 .

Religious Society of Friends in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Others. The Appeal to Their Fellow Citizens of the United States on Behalf of the Colored Races. Philadelphia, 1858. Southern and Western Liberty Convention. Principles and Measures of True Democracy; the Address of the Southern and Western Liberty Convention, Held at Cincinnati, June 11-12, 1845. Cincinnati, 1845.

Newspapers, 1817-1860

General American Freeman, Jackson, Michigan. March 1 to August 13, 1839.

Chicago Democrat, Chicago. 1843-1845.

Emancipator, New York. 1837-1850.

Evening Post for the Country, New York. 1850-1858.

Liberator, Boston. 1837-1860. Michigan Freeman, Jackson, Michigan. September 25, 1839. This was the fifth issue of what was formerly the American Freeman.

National Intelligencer. 1837-1860. New York Daily Times. 1854-1860.

New York Daily Tribune. 1841-1860. New York Weekly Tribune. 1848-1854. 286

Niles Weekly Register. 1837. Philanthropist, Cincinnati. 1837-1840.

Michigan (Mostly Democratic Organ)

Adrian Daily Watchtower. 1853-1859. Adrian Weekly Watchtower. 1857-1858.

Calhoun County Patriot. 1838-1840.

Coldwater Sentinel. 1841-1857. Detroit Daily Free Press. 1837-1860.

Detroit Daily Gazette. 1842-1843.

Kalamazoo Gazette. 1846-1860.

Michigan Argus. 1837-1860.

Michigan Democrat. 1838-1844. Michigan State Journal. 1858-1860.

Monroe Times. 1837. Niles Democratic Republican. 1858-1860.

Niles Republican. 1842-1858.

Western Chronicle. 1848-1860.

Michigan (Sympathetic to Whigs and Abolition Political Parties)______

Bay City Press. 1859-1860. Detroit Daily Advertiser. 1837-1860.

Detroit Daily Democrat. 1854-1855.

Detroit Daily Tribune. 1849-1860. Detroit Weekly Tribune. 1859-1860.

Grand Rapids Daily Herald. 1855-1856.

Hillsdale Whig Standard. 1851-1860. 287

Michigan Expositor. 1849-1851 Michigan Farmer. 1851. Michigan State Gazette. 1840-1841.

Michigan Telegraph. 1850-1852.

Oakland Gazette. 1844-1850.

Saginaw Enterprise. 1853-1860.

Signal of Liberty. 1841-1848.

True Democrat. 1845-1849. Washtenaw Whig. Changed to Ann Arbor Journal, October 3, 1856:

Western Statesman. Changed to Marshall Statesman, Octo- ber 12, 1843. 1843-1848.

Michigan (Denominational Newspapers) Christian Advocate. The conservative Methodists of Eastern Michigan. 1837-1860. Michigan Christian Herald. Baptist. 1843-1860.

Northwestern Christian Advocate. The weekly paper of Northwestern Methodists. 1853-1860.

Secondary Sources

Abel, Annie H., and Klingberg, F. J., eds. A Sidelight on Anglo-American Relations, 1839-1858. From the corre­ spondence of Lewis Tappan and others with the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, Inc., 1927. Adams, Alice G. The Neglected Period of Anti-Slavery in America, 1808-1831. Radcliffe College Monograph No. 14. Boston: Crimm and Comp, Publishers, 1908.

Adams, F. C. Manuel Pereira: The Sovereign Rule of South Carolina with Views of Southern Laws, Life, and Hospi­ tality^ Washington, D .C .: Buell § Blanchard, 1853. Adams, Henry. History of the United States During the Adminis­ tration of Jefferson and Madison. Vol. T~. New York, 1889. Addington, Wendell G. ’’Slave Insurrections in Texas." Journal of Negro History, XXXV (1950), 408-435.

Alexander, H. B. "Brazilian and United States Slavery Com­ pared." Journal of Negro History, VII (October 1922), 349-364. American Slavery As It Is; Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses. New York: American Anti-Slavery Society, 1839.

Andrews, Ethan A. Slavery and the Domestic Slave Trade in the United States. Boston, 1836. Aptheker, Herbert, ed. Documentary History of the Negro Peo- ple in the United States. 2 vols. New York: Citadel, 1951. ______. And Why Not Every Man? Seven Seas Books, 1961.

Essays in the History of the American Negro. New York! International Publishers Co., Inc., 1969. "Maroons Within the Present Limits of the United ’States." Journal of Negro History, XXIV (April 1939), 167-184.

Nat Turner’s Slave Rebellion; Together with the Full Text of the So-called "Confessions" of Nat Turner Made in Prison in 1831. New York: Published for A.I.M.S. by Humanities Press, 19 6 6 .

Negro History, Its Lessons for Our Time. New York! New Century Publishers, 1956.

The Negro in the Abolitionist Movement. New York: "International Publishers, 1941.

The Negro in the American Revolution. New York: International Publishers, 1940. The Negro in the Civil War. New York: Inter­ na tTon¥I_ P!i5TTsHeTs^ 1938 . The Negro People in America; A Critique of Gunnar Myrdal1s *'An American Dilemma," with Introduction by Posey A. Wilkerson. New York: International Pub­ lishers, 1946.

Negro Slave Revolts in the United States, 1526- 1861)! New York: International Publishers, 1939.

The Negro Today. New York: Marzani § Munsell, 1962! 289

______. "Notes on Slave Conspiracies in Confederate Mississippi." Journal of Negro History, XXIX (January 1944), 75-79.

______. One Continual Cry; David Walker's Appeal to the Colored Citizens of the World, 1829-1850, Its Setting, and Its Meaning, Together with the Full Text of the Third and Last Edition of the AppeaT. New York: Published for A.I.M.S. by Humanities Press , 196 5. ______. The Schlesinger Fraud; A Critique of the "Third Force" in America. New York: Masses and Main Stream, 1949.

Soul of the Republic, The Negro Today. New York: Marzai § Munsell, 1964.

______. To Be Free: Studies in American Negro History. New York: International Publishers, 1948.

______. Toward Negro Freedom. New York: New Century Publishers, 1956. Arnold, Rose. "The Roots of Prejudice." In UNESCO--The Race Question. New York: Modern Science, 1956.

Avary, Myrta Locket. Dixie After the War. With Introduction by General Clement A. Evans. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1937.

Bailey, Hugh C. Hinton Rowan Helper: Abolitionist-Racist. Southern Historical Publications No. 7. University of Alabama Press, 1965.

Ballagh, James C. A History of Slavery in Virginia. Balti­ more, 1902.

Bancroft, Frederick. Slave Trading in the Old South. Balti­ more, 1931, 1st ed. Republished in 1959 by Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., New York, with an introduction by Allan Nevins.

Barker, Joseph, ed. Interesting Memoirs and Documents Re­ lating to American Slavery, and the Glorious Struggle Now Making for Complete Emancipation. Originally published by Chapman Brothers, 1846. Reprinted from a copy in the Negro Collections of the Fish Univer­ sity Library, Miami, Florida, Mnemsyne Publishing, Inc., 1969. 290

Barnes, Albert. An Inquiry Into the Spiritual Views of Slavery. Philadelphia: Perkins 6 Purves, 1846.

Barnes, Gilbert H., and Dumond, Dwight Lowell, eds. Letters of Theodore Dwight Weld, Angelina Grimke, and SaraH~ Grimk£> 1822-1844. 2 vols. New York: D. Appleton - Century Co., 1934. Barnes, Gilbert H. The Anti-Slavery Impulse, 1850-1844. New York, 1960. Bassett, John Spencer. The Southern Plantation Overseer as Revealed in His Letters. Northampton^ 11524.

______. Slavery and Servitude in the Colony of North Carolina. Baltimore, 1896. Bauer, Raymond A., and Bauer, Alice H. "Day to Day Resist­ ance to Slavery." Journal of Negro Slavery, XXVII (October 1942), 388-419. Beals, Carleton. War Within a War: The Confederacy Against Itself. Philadelphia: Chi 1ton , 1965.

Beard, Charles A. An Economic Interpretation of the Consti­ tution of the United States. New York, 1913.

Beard, Mary R., ed. America Through Woman's Eyes. New York: Macmillan Co., 1934. Beasley, Dellah L. "Slavery in California." Journal of Negro History, III (January 1918) , 33-44.

Beattie, Jessie L, ed. Black Moses--The Real Uncle Tom. Toronto: The Ryerson Press, 1957.

Bell, J. W. "The Teaching of Negro History.” Journal of Negro History, VIII (April 1923), 123-12 7.

Bellot, Hale H. American History and American Historians-- A Review of Recent Contributions to the Interpreta­ tion of the History of the United States. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1952.

Bemis, Samuel Flagg. Jay's Treaty: A Study in Commerce and Diplomacy. New York, 1923.

"Benjamin Franklin and Freedom." Journal of Negro History, IV (January 1919), 41-50. 291

Bennett, Lerone, Jr. Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America, 1619-1962. Chicago: Johnson, TWWT. Bergh, Albert E., ed. Writings of Thomas Jefferson. Wash­ ington: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1905. Volume VIII. Berwanger, Eugene H. The Frontier Against Slavery: Western Anti-Negro Prejudice and the Slavery Extension Contro­ versy . Urbana, 196?. Birney, James G. A Collection of Valuable Documents, Being Birney's Vindication of Abolitionists. Bos ton, 1836. Birnie, C. W. "The Education of the Negro in Charleston, South Carolina, Before the Civil War." Journal of Negro History, XII (January 1927), 13-21.

Bittle, E. Williams, and Gilbert, Gus. The Longest Way Home: Chief Alfred C. Sam’s Back-to-Africa Move- ment. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, T M 4 . Blackiston, Harvey S. "Lincoln's Emancipation Plan." Jour­ nal of Negro History, VII (July 1922), 257-277.

Bledsoe, Albert Taylor. Liberty and Slavery or Slavery in the Light of Moral and Political Philosophy. Boston, 1860. : Botkin, B. A., ed. Lay My Burden Down: A Folk History of Slavery. Chicago, 1954.

Bowen, Catherine Drinker. Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, May to September 1787. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1966. ------Bowine, George. A Condensed Anti-Slavery Bible Argument. New York: S’! W~. Benedict, 1845. Brackett, Jeffrey R. The Negro in Maryland: A Study of the Institution of Slavery. Baltimore, 1889.

Bradford, Sarah. Harriet Tubman, The Moses of Her People. New York: The American Experience Series, Corinth Books, 1961. 292

Brawley, Benjamin. "Lorenzo Dow." Journal of Negro History, I (June 1916) , 265-275.

______. A Social History of the American Negro, Being a History of the Negro Problem in the United States Including a History and Study of the Republic of Liberia. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1921.

Bregnard, Frank 0. I Understand the South. New York: Vantage Press, 1956. Breyfogle, William. Make Free: The Story of the Underground. New York: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1958.

Brittan, Edith H. To Live in Peace: A Sympathizer’s View of the Race Problem. New York: Exposition Press, 1959. Brown, Corinne Ina. Race Relations in a Democracy. New York: Harper 8 Brothers, Publishers, 1949. Browning, James B. "The North Carolina Black Code." Journal of Negro History, XV (October 1930), 461-473.

Bruce, Philip A. Economic History of Virginia in the Seven- teenth Century. 2 vols. New York, F8 9 5.

______. The Plantation Negro As a Freeman; Observations on His Character, Condition, and Prospects in Virginia. New York: G~. P^ Putnam,' s Sons , HT8 9 .

Buchard, Peter. One Gallant Rush. New York: St. Martin's, 1965. Buckmaster, Henrietta. Freedom Bound. New York: The Mac­ millan C o . , 1965.

______. Let My People Go: The Story of the Underground Railroad and the Growth of the Abolition Movement. Boston: Beacon Press, 1941.

______. Out of the House of Bondage: The Story of the Famous Underground Railroad of the American Negro Slaves I London: Victor Gollancz, Ltd., 1943.

Cade, John B. "Out of the Mouths of Slaves." Journal of Negro History, XX (July 1935), 294-337.

Carke, John Henry, ed. William Styron's Nat Turner: Ten Black Writers Respond. Boston: Beacon Press, T968. 293

Carroll, Joseph C. Slave Insurrections in the United States, 1800-1860. Boston, 1938. Channing, Edward. The Narragansett Planters. Baltimore, 1886.

Channing, William E. Slavery. Boston: J. Munroe, 1836.

______. Emancipation. New York: American Anti-Slavery Society, 1841. Chase, Salmon P., and Cleveland, Charles Dexter. Anti- Slavery Addresses, 1844 and 1845. New York, 1867 (Reprint from original copy in the collections of the Brooklyn Public Library, New York, 1969.)

Cheever, George B. The Guilt of Slavery and the Crime of Slaveholding. Boston: J. P. Jewett, 1860.

Child, Alfred T., Jr. "Prudence Crandall and the Canterbury Experiment." Bulletin of the Friends Historical Association , XII (1933) , 33 - 55 .

Child, Maria L. The Freedmen’s Book. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1865.

______. Isaac J. Hopper: A True Life. Boston: John P. Jewett § C o ., 1853.

______. An Appeal in Favor of That Class of Americans Called Africans. Boston: Allen § Ticknor, 1833.

Christman, Henry M., ed. The South As It Is, 1865-1866. New York: Viking, 1965. Republication of a report by John Richard Bennett to The Nation magazine.

Christy, David. Ethiopia: Her Gloom and Glory, as Illus­ trated in the History of Slave Trade and Slavery, the Rise of the Republic of Liberia and the Progress of African Missions! Rickey, Mallory 8 Webb, 1857. Reprinted: New York, Negro University Press, 1969. Clark, Dan E. The West in American History. New York, 1937 .

Clark, Thomas D. "The Slave Trade Between Kentucky and the Cotton Kingdom." Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XXI (1934), 342.

Cockrum, William M. History of the Underground Railroad as It was Conducted by the Anti-Slavery League; 294

Including Many Thrilling Encounters Between Those Aiding the Slaves to Escape and Those Trying to Recapture Them. Oakland City, Indiana: J. W. Cockrum Printing Co., 1915. Coffin, Levi. Reminiscences of Levi Coffin, The Reputed President of the Underground Railroad; Being a"Brief History of the Labors of a Lifetime in Behalf of the Slave, With Stories of Numerous Fugitives,Who Gained Their Freedom Through His Instrumentality, and Many Other Incidents! Cincinnati, Ohio: Western Tract Society, 1876. Coleman, Winston J., Jr. Slavery Times in Kentucky. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1940.

Coles, Edward. "Letters of Governor Edward Coles Bearing on the Struggle of Freedom and Slavery in Illinois." Journal of Negro History, III (April 1918), 158-195.

Coles, Harry L., Jr. "Some Notes on Slaveownership and Landownership in Louisiana." Journal of Southern History, IX (August 1943) , 381-395. Conrad, Alfred H., and Meyer, John R. "The Economics of Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South." Journal of Political Economy, LXVI (April 1958)“ 95 -130.

______. The Economics of Slavery and Other Econometric Studies. Chicago, 1964. Conway, M. D. Testimonies Concerning Slavery. London: Chapman and Hall, 1865.

Cooley, Henry S. A Study of Slavery in New Jersey. Balti­ more, 1896. Corlew, Robert E. "Some Aspects of Slavery in Dickson County." Tennessee Historical Quarterly, X (1951), 226-229.

Coulter, Ellis M. A Short History of Georgia. Chapel Hill, 1933.

Cox, Ernest Levier. White America. Richmond, Va.: White America Society, 1923.

Cox, LaWanda, and Cox, John H. Politics, Principle and Prejudice, 1865-1866: Dilemma of Reconstruction America"! New York: Free Press, 1963. 295

Cralle, Richard K., ed. "Disquisition on Government." Works of John C. Calhoun. New York: Appleton, 1854-61. Vols. I and II. Cram, Mason. Gullah: Negro Life in the Carolina Sea Islands. Durham^ 1940. Crane, Verner W. "The Philanthropists and the Genesis of Georgia." American Historical Review, XXVII (October 1921), 63-67.

Craven, Avery 0. "Poor Whites and Negroes in the Ante-Bellum South." Journal of Negro History, XV (January 1930), 14-25.

Cross, Whitney R. The Burned-Over District: The Social and IntellectuaT History of Enthusiastic Religion in Western New York, 1800-1850. New York, 1950.

Cruden, Robert. The Negro in Reconstruction. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969.

Curlee, Abigail. "The History of a Texas Slave Plantation, 1831-1863." Southern History Quarterly, XXVI (1922), 92 . Current, Richard N., and Garraty, John A., eds. Words That Made American History; Colonial Times to the 1870*3. Boston: Brown and Company, 1965.

Curry, Richard 0., ed. The Abolitionists, Reformers or Fanatics? New York: Hoit, Rinehart and Winston, 1965 . Curtis, Francis. The Republican Party, A History of Its Fifty YearTs Existence and a Record of Its Measures and Leaders, 1854-1904. 2 vols. New York: G~. P~I Putnam Sons, 1904.

______. "The Birth of the Republican Party." Munsey1s Magazine, XXX (March 1904).

David, C. W. "The Fugitive Slave Law of 1739 and Its Ante­ cedents." Journal of Negro History, IX (January 1924), 18- 2 5~1

Davis, Allen F., and Woodman, Harold C. Conflict or Con­ sensus in Early American History. Boston: D. C. Heath, 1968. 296

Davis, Charles F. The Cotton Kingdom in Alabama. Montgomery, 1939.

Davis, Harry E. "John Malvin, A Western Reserve Pioneer." Journal of Negro History, XXIII (October 1938).

Davis, T. R. "Negro Servitude in the United States, Servitude Distinguished from Slavery." Journal of Negro History, VIII (July 1923), 247-283.

Degler, Carl N. Out of Our Past: The Forces That Shaped Modern America. New York, 1959.

"Slavery and the Genesis of American Race Preju­ dice." Comparative Studies in Society and History, II (October 1959), 49-66. Denison, John Hope. Emotional Currents in American History. New York: Charles Scribner * s Sons , 19 32 .

Detweiler, Frederick G. "The Rise of Modern Race Antago­ nisms." American Journal of Sociology, XXXVII (March 1932), 743. Deutsch, Albert. "The First United States Census of the Insane, 1840, and Its Use as Pro-slavery Propaganda." Bulletin of the History of Medicine, XV (1944), 469-482 .------Dillon, Merton L. "The Antislavery Movement in Illinois, 1824-1835.” Illinois State Historical Society Journal, XLVIT (Summer 1954) , 140-166.

______. Benjamin Lundy and the Struggle for Negro Free­ dom" Urbana: University of Illinois Press , 1966.

______. Elijah Parish Lovejoy--Abolitionist Editor. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1961.

Dodd, William E. The Cotton Kingdom. New Haven, 1919.

Donald, David. The Politics of Reconstruction, 1863-1867. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, T965. Donovan, Herbert D. A. The Barnburners. New York, 1925.

Dowd, Douglass F. "A Comparative Analysis of Economic Development in the American West and South." Journal of Economic History, XVI (December 1956) , 5 58-574. 297

Dowd, Jerome. The Negro in American Life. New York: The Century Company, 1926.

Drake, Thomas E. Quakers and Slavery in America. New Haven, 1950.

Duberman, Martin L., ed. The Anti-Slavery Vanguard. Prince­ ton, 1965. DuBois, W. E. B. The Souls of Black Folk. Greenwich, Conn.: A Fawcett Premier Book, 1961.

Dunbar-Nelson, Alice. "People of Color in Louisiana." Journal of Negro History, I (June 1916), 361-376. Dumond, Dwight L. Anti-Slavery: The Crusade for Freedom in America. Ann Arbor, 1961.

Anti-Slavery Origins of the Civil War in the United States. Ann Arbor, 19 59. Eaton, Clement. The Growth of Southern Civilization. New York: Harper, 1961.

Elkins, Stanley M. Slavery: A Problem in American Institu­ tional and Intellectual Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1959 ; reissued, New York: Univer­ sal Library, 1963.

Elliot, Charles. Sinfulness of American Slavery. 2 vols. Cincinnati, 1850. Embree, Edwin R. Brown Americans, The Story of a Tenth of the Nation" New York: The Viking Press, 1943.

______. American Negroes--A Handbook. New York: The John Day C o ., 1942.

Evans, Robert, Jr. "The Economics of American Negro Slavery, 1830-1860." Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, Aspects of Labor Economics (Princeton, New Jersey, 1962), 185-256. Farrand, Max. The Framing of the Constitution. New Haven, 1913.

Filler, Louis. The Crusade Against Slavery, 1830-1860. New York, 1960. 298

______, ed. Wendell Phillips on Civil Rights and Freedom. American Century Series. New York: Hill and Wang, 1965.

Fitzhugh, George. Cannibals All! or Slaves Without Masters. Richmond, 1857.

Flanders, Ralph B. Plantation Slavery in Georgia. Chapel Hill, 1933.

Fleming, Walter L. "Jefferson Davis, the Negro and the Negro Problem." Sewanee Review, XVI (1908), 408. Foner, Eric. Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party before the Civil War . New York: Oxford University Press, 19 70. ______. "Politics and Prejudice: The Free Soil Party and the Negro, 1849-1852." Journal of Negro History, L (October 1965), 239-250. Foner, Philip S. The Life and Writings of Frederick Douglass. 4 vols. New York: International Pub­ lishers , 1955 .

Frank, L., and Owsley, Harriet C. "The Economic Basis of Society in the Ante-Bellum South." Journal of Southern History, VI (February 1940)^ 24 - 45 .

Franklin, John Hope. "Slaves Virtually Free in Ante-Bellum North Carolina." Journal of Negro History, XVIII (1934), 284-310.

______. The Emancipation Proclamation. Garden City, New York! Doubleday, 1963.

Franklin, L., ed. "Diary of a Mississippi Planter." Mississippi Historical Society, X (1909), 331.

Frasure, Carl M. "Charles Sumner and the Rights of the Negro." Journal of Negro History, XIII (April 1928), 126-149. Frazier, Franklin E. "The Negro Family." Journal of Negro History, XV (April 1930), 198.

Furnas, J. C. Goodbye to Uncle Tom. New York: William Sloane Associates, 1956. Gaines, Francis P. The Southern Plantation: A Study in the Development and the Accuracy of a Tradition. New York',' 19 24. 299

Gara, Larry. The Liberty Line; The Legend of the Under­ ground Railroad. Lexington: University of Chicago Press , 1961. ______, ed. MA New Englander's View of Plantation Life: Letters of Edward Hall to Cyrus Woodman, 1837." Journal of Southern History, XVIII (1952), 343-354.

Garraty, John A., ed. Quarrels That Have Shaped the Con­ stitution . New York: Harper, 1964. Garrison, William Lloyd. Thoughts on African Colonization. Edited with an Introduction by William Loren Katz. New York: Arno Press and the New York Times, 1968. Reprinted from a copy in the collections of the New York Public Library. Genovese, Eugene D. The Political Economy of Slavery: Studies in the Economy and Society of the Slave South. New York: Pantheon, 1965.

Giddings, Joshua R. Speeches in Congress. Cleveland: 0. Jewett, Proctor 8 Worthington, T1T53.

Goodell, William. The American Slave Code in Theory and Practice. New York: Anti-Slavery Depository, T853.

lg5r;Slavery and Anti-Slavery.------New York: W. Harned,

Goodwin, Daniel R. Southern Slavery in Its Present Aspects: Containing a~Reply to a Late Work of the Bishop of Vermont on Slavery" Philadelphia: J~. IT Lippincott 8 Co., 18 64.

Gordon, A. H. "The Struggle of the Slave for Physical Free­ dom." Journal of Negro History, XIII (January 1928), 22-35. Govan, Thomas P. "Was Plantation Slavery Profitable?" Journal of Southern History, VIII (1942), 514-526.

Grant, Joanne, ed. Black Protest--History, Documents, and Analyses, 1619 to the Present. Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett Premier Book, 1968.

Gray, Lewis C. History of Agriculture in the Southern United States to 1860. Washington, 1933.

Greeley, Horace, ed. Proceedings of the First Three Repub- • lican National Conventions of 1856, 1860, and 1864, 300

Including Proceedings of the Antecedent National Convention Held at Pittsburg, in February 1856. Minneapolis: Charles W. Johnson, 1893 . Greene, Lorenzo J. The Negro in Colonial New England. New York, 1942. ______. "Slave-holding New England and Its Awakening." Journal of Negro History, XIII (October 1928), 492- 533 .

Griffiths, Julia, ed. Autographs for Freedom. Auburn: Alden, Beardsley 8 Co., 1854.

Gurley, R. R. Mission to England on Behalf of the American Colonization Society. Washington, D"! C . : Wm. W. Morrison, 1841. Gysin, Brian. To Master a Long Goodnight, The Story of Uncle Tom, A Historical Narrative. New York: Creative Age Press, Inc., 1946. Hale, Edward Everett, ed. James Freeman Clarke, Autobiog- raphy, Diary, and Correspondence. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1891.------

Handlin, Oscar, and Handlin, Mary F. "Origins of the Southern Labor System." William and Mary Quarterly, VII (1950), 200-204. Harmon, George Dewey. Political Aspects of Slavery and the Civil War. Bethlehem, Pa.: LeHigh University Press, 1959. Harper, Chancellor; Hamond, Governor; Sims, Dr; and Dew, Professor. The Pro-Slavery Argument; As Maintained by the Most Distinguished Writers of the Southern States, Containing the Several Essays on the Subject. Charleston: Walker, Richards 8 Co., 1852.

Harris, Dwight N. The History of Negro Servitude in Illinois and of the Slavery Agitation in That State, 1719- 1864. Chicago: A. C^ McClurg 8 Co., 1904.

Hartgrove, W. B. "The Story of Maria Louise More and Fannie M. Richards." Journal of Negro History, I (January 1916), 23-33.

Hawk, Emory Q. Economic History of the South. New York, 1934. 301

Helper, Hinton Rowan. The Impending Crisis of the South: How to Meet It. George M. Fredrickson, editor. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1857.

Henry, Howell M. The Police Control of the Slave in South Carolina. Emory: Virginia, 1914 .

Herskovits, Melville J. "On the Provenance of New World Negroes." Social Forces, XII (1933), 247-262.

Hesseltine, William B. The South in American History. New York, 1943.

Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. Black Rebellion, A Selection From Travellers and Outlaws. New York: Arno Press and the New York Times, 1969 reprint (first published in 1889) .

Hildreth, Richard. Despotism in America: An Inquiry Into the Nature, Results, and Legal Basis of the Slave- Holding System in the United States. Boston: John P . Jewett $ C o ., 1854.

Hill, James D. "Some Economic Aspects of Slavery, 1850- 1860." South Atlantic Quarterly, XXVI (1927), 161- 177 .

Hinsdale, Burke Aaron. The Old Northwest. New York, 1888.

Hirsch, Leo H., Jr. "New York and the Negro from 1782-1865." vJournal r r .---- of Negro----- History, XVI (October 1931), 382- Hofstadter, Richard. "W. B. Phillips and the Plantation Legend." Journal of Negro History, XXIX (April 1944), 176-182.

Hopkins, John Henry. A Scriptural, Ecclesiastical, and Historical View of Slavery. From the Days of the Patriarch Abraham, to the Nineteenth Century: Addressed to the Right Reverend Alonzo Potter. New York: W. T! Pooley 3 C o . , 1864.

Hopkins, Vincent C. Dred Scott’s Case. New York: Fordham University Press, 1951.

Howard, Warren S. American Slavers and the Federal Law, 1837-1862. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1963. 302

Howe, S. G. The American Negro--His History and Literature: Report to the Freedmen's Inquiry Commission, 1864-~ The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West. New York: Arno Press and the New York Times, 1969. First published--Boston: Wright § Potter, Printers, 1864.

Hughes, Henry. The Pro-Slavery Argument; as Maintained by Chancellor Hariper, Governor Hammond, Dr. Simms, and Professor Dew. Charleston: Walker, Richards, 1852 .

Cotton Is King, and Pro-Slavery Arguments: Com­ prising the Writings of Hammond, Harper, Christy, Stringfellow, Hodge , Bledsoe, and Cartwright. Augusta: Pritchard, Abbott $ Loomis, 1860.

Hughes, Louis. Thirty Years a Slave, From Bondage to Free­ dom; The Institution of Slavery as Seen on the Planta­ tion and in the Home of the Planter. Milwaukee: South Side Printing Company, 1895. Reprinted-- Detroit: Negro History Press. Hume, John F. The Abolitionists, Together with Personal Memories of the Struggle for Human Rights, 1830^1860. New York, 1903.

Hundley, D. R. Social Relations in Our Southern States. New York! Henry B. Price, i860.

Hunt, (Mrs.) R. A. "Slavery in Kentucky." Journal of Negro History, III (July 1918), 211-334.

Hunter, Frances L. "Slave Society on the Southern Planta­ tion." Journal of Negro History, VII (January 1922), 1-10.

Hurd, John C. Law of Freedom and Bondage: Slave Laws of South Carolina. 2 vols. Boston: Little, Brown § Co. , 1858.

Hart, Albert B. Slavery and Abolition, 1831-1841. New York: The New American Library, 1969.

Imes, William Lloyd. "The Legal Status of Free Negroes and Slaves in Tennessee." Journal of Negro History, IV (July 1919) , 254-272.

Jackson, N. B. "The Free Produce Attack Upon Slavery." The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, LXVl (July 1942), 7'8-9"2'. --- 303

Janney, Samuel M. History of the Religious Society of Friends From Its Rise to the Year 1821H 4 vols. Philadelphia: Ellwood Zell, 186 7. Jay, William. Miscellaneous Writings on Slavery. Boston: John P. Jewett 8 Co., 1853. "Thomas Jefferson’s Thoughts on the Negro." Journal of Negro History, III (January 1918) , 55-89. Jenkins, William Sumner. Proslavery Thought in the Old South. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1935. Jernegan, Marcus W. "Slavery and Conversion in the American Colonies." American Historical Review, XXI (April 1916) , 511.

Johnson, Charles A. The Frontier Camp Meeting: Religious Harvest Time. Dallas, Texas, 1955.

Johnson, G. G. Ante-Bellum North Carolina. Chapel Hill, 1937. Johnston, James Hugo. "The Participation of White Men in Virginia Negro Insurrections." Journal of Negro History, XVI (April 1931), 158-157": Johnston, William. Slavery in Rhode Island, 1755-1776-. Providence, 1894.

Jordan, Winthrop D. "The Influence of the West Indies on the Origins of New England Slavery." William 8 Mary Quarterly, 3rd Series, XVIII (April 1961) , 343-350.

Kardiner, Abram, and Ovesey, Lionel. The Mark of Oppression: A Psychosocial Study of the American Negro. New York: Norton, 1951.

Katz, William Loren. The American Negro, His History and Literature: The Suppressed Book About Slavery. New York: Arno Press and the New York Times, 1968.

Kellar, Herbert A., ed. Solon Robinson, Pioneer and Agri­ culturist . Vol. II. Indianapolis, 1936.

Kemble, Frances Anne. Journal of a Residence on a Georgian Plantation in 1838-1839. New York, 1863.

Kennedy, John Pendleton. Swallow Barn. Philadelphia: Carey 8 Lea, 1832. 304

Kettlell, Thomas Prentice. Southern Wealth and Northern Profits. New York, I860. King, James F. "The Evolution of the Free Slave Trade Principle in Spanish Colonial Administration." Hispanic American Historical Review, XXII (February 1042), 34-56" Klein, Herbert S. Slavery in the Americas: A Comparative Study of Cuba and Virginia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967. Klingberg, Frank J. An Appraisal of the Negro in Colonial South Carolina^ Washington, 1941.

Kogon, Eugene. The Theory and Practice of Hell. New York: Farrar, Straus, 1949. Korngold, Ralph. Two Friends of Man, The Story of William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phillips and Their Rela­ tionship with Abraham Lincoln. Bos ton: Little, Brown and C o ., 1950 .

Labaree, Leonard W. Royal Government in America: A Study of the British Colonial System Before 1783. New Haven, 17 83. Lader, Lawrence. The Bold Brahmins: New England’s War Against Slavery, 1851-1863"! New York: ET P~! Dutton § Co., Inc., 1961.

Lander, E. M., Jr. "Slave Labor in South Carolina Cotton Mills." Journal of Negro History, XXXVIII (1953), 161-173. Laprade, William T. "The Domestic Slave Trade in the Dis­ trict of Columbia." Journal of Negro History, XI (January 1926), 17-34.

"Letter on Slavery by a Free Negro." Journal of Negro His­ tory , I (January 1916), 24-27.

Litwack, Leon F. North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States,1790-1860. Chicago: University of Chicago Press , 1961.

Livermore, George. An Historical Research Respecting the Opinions of the Founding of the Republic on Negroes as Slaves, as Citizens, and as Soldiers. Boston, 1862. 305

Livingston, William. History of the Republican Party from Its Foundation~to the Close of the Campaign of 1900 , Including Incidents on Michigan Campaigns and Biographical Sketches. Vol. T~. Detroit, 1900 .

Lloyd, Arthur Young. The Slavery Controversy, 1831-1860. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1939.

Lock, Mary S. Anti-Slavery in America. Boston, 1909.

Lofton, John. Insurrection in South Carolina: The Turbulent World of Denmark Vessey^ Yellow Springs, 196 4.

Logan, Rayford W., ed. Memoirs of a Monticello Slave as Dictated to Charles Campbell in the 1840*s by Fsaac, One of Thomas Jefferson's Slaves. Charlottesville, Virginia: University of Virginia Press, 1951. Loguen, Jerman W. The Reverend J. W. Loguen, As a Slave and a Freeman. Syracuse, 1859.

Lovejoy, J. C. Memoir of Reverend Charles T. Torrey, Who Died in the Penitentiary of Maryland Where He Was Confined for Showing Mercy to the Poor~ Boston: John P. Jewett § CoT, 1847. Lowell, James Russell. The Anti-Slavery Papers of James Russell Lowell. New York: Houghton Mifflin and C o . , 1902.

Luce, Cyrus G. "The Ordinance of 1787." Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections (Vol. XI), 140 -144 .

Magdol, Edward. Owen Lovejoy: Abolitionist in Congress. New Jerseyl Rutgers University Press, 1967.

Mallard, Robert A. Plantation Life Before Emancipation. Richmond, Virginia: Whi11et § Shepperson, 1892.

Malone, Dumas, and Rauch, Basil, eds. Crisis of the Union, 1841-1877. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, HT60.

Mandel, Bernard. Labor, Free and Slave: Workingmen and the Anti-Slavery Movement in the United States. New York: Associated Authors--The Haddon Craftsmen, Inc., 1955.

Mannix, Daniel P. Black Cargoes: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade: 1518-1865. New York: Viking, 1962. 306

Martineau, Harriet. Society in America. 2 vols. New York: Saunders § Ottey, 1837. Matlack, L. C. The Anti-Slavery Struggle and Triumph in the Methodist Episcopal Churchi New York: Phillips 8 Hunt, 1881.

May, Samuel J. Some Recollections of Our Antislavery Con­ flict; Especially the Efforts of Miss Prudence Crandall. Boston, 1869.

Mayer, George H. The Republican Party, 1854-1960. New York, 1967. Mazyck, Walter H. George Washington and the Negro. Wash­ ington, 19327 McColley, Robert. Slavery and Jeffersonian Virginia. Champaign, 111.: The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, 1964. McDougall, Marion Gleason. Fugitive Slaves, 1619-1865. New York: Bergman Publishers, 1967. (Originally published Boston, 1891)

McKee, Samuel. Labor in Colonial New York, 1664-1776. New York, 1935. McManus, Edgar J. A History of Negro Slavery in New York. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1966.

McPherson, James M. The Negroes' Civil War: How American Negroes Felt and Acted During the War for the Union. New York: Pantheon, 1965. ______. Abolitionists and the Negro in the Civil War and Reconstruction. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964.

Mehlinger, Louis R. "The Attitude of the Free Negro Toward African Colonization." Journal of Negro History, I (June 1916), 276-301. Mellon, Matthew T. Early American Views on Negro Slavery from the Letters and Papers of the Founders of the Republic. New York: Bergman Publishers, I960.

Merk, Frederick, and Merk, Lois Bannister. The Monroe Doc­ trine and American Expansionism, 1843-1849. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1966. 307

Merrill, Walter M. Against Wind and Tide: A Biography of William Lloyd Garrison. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1963. Miller, Marion. MThe Antislavery Movement in Indiana." An unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1938. Miller, William L. "A Note on the Importance of the Inter­ state Slave Trade of the Ante-Bellum South." Jour- nal of Political Economy, LXXIII (April 1965), 181- 187 . ______. "Slavery and the Population of the South." Southern Economic Journal, XXVIII (July 1961), 46-54. Miller, W. J. "J. E. Cairnes on the Economics of American Negro Slavery." Southern Economic Journal, XXX (April 1964) , 333-771'".

Mitchell, Martha Carolyn. "Health and the Medical Profession in the Lower South, 1845-1860." Journal of Southern History, X (1944), 430. Moody, Alton V. "Slavery on Louisiana Sugar Plantations." Louisiana Historical Quarterly, VII (1924), 263.

Mooney, Chase C. "Some Institutional and Statistical Aspects of Slavery in Tennessee.." Tennessee Historical Quarterly, I (1942), 211.

Moore, George H. Notes on Slavery in Massachusetts. New York, 1866.

Moos, Malcolm. The Republicans: A History of Their Party. New York! Random House, 1956.

Morgan, Edwin V. Slavery in New York. Washington, 1891. Morris, Richard B. "The Measure of Bondage in the Slave States." Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XLI (September 1954), 219-240.

Morrison, W. Democratic Politics and Sectionalism: The Wilmot Proviso Controversy"! Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1967.

Morse, W. H. "Samuel Haynes." Journal of Negro History, IV (January 1919), 22-32. 308

Moss, Simeon F. "Persistence of Slavery and Involuntary Servitude in a Free State, 1685-1866." Journal of Negro History, XXV (January 1950), 295.

Muelder, Hermann R. Fighters for Freedom: The History of Anti-Slavery Activities of Men and Women Associated with Knox College! New York: Columbia University Press, 1959.

Myers, William S. The Republican Party: A History. New York: Century Co., 1928.

Nevins, Allan. The Emergence of Lincoln. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1950. ______. Ordeal of the Union. Two vol. New York: Charles Scribners' Sons, 194 7. Particularly Vol. II. Newman, Philip. "Ulrich Bonnell Phi 11ips--The South's Foremost Historian." Georgia Historical Quarterly, XXV (September 1941), 244-261.

Nicholls, William H. Southern Tradition and Regional Progress. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1960. Northup, Solomon. Twelve Years a Slave. Buffalo, 1853. Reprinted by Louisiana State University Press, 1968.

Nuermberger, Ruth Katring. The Free Produce Movement--A Quaker Protest Against Slavery' Historical Papers of the Trinity College Historical Society Series XXV. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1942. O'Dell, Richard F. "The Early Anti-Slavery Movement in Ohio." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michi­ gan, 1948. Olmsted, Frederick Law. A Journey in the Seaboard Slave States. New York! Mason Brothers, 18 56.

______. A Journey Through Texas. New York, 1857 . ______. A Journey in Back Country. New York, 1860.

______. The Cotton Kingdom. New York, 1861.

Osofsky, Gilbert, ed. Puttin' on Ole Massa: The Slave Narratives of Henry Bibb, William Wells Brown, and Solomon Northup! New York: Harper 8 Row, Pub- lishers , 1969. 309

Othello. "What the Negro Was Thinking During the Eighteenth Century; Essays on Negro Slavery Nos. 1 and 2." Journal of Negro History, I (January 1916), 49-60.

Owens, William A. Black Mutiny: The Revolt on Schooner Amistad. Philadelphia: Pilgrim Press, 1968.

Owsley, Frank L. Plain Folk of the Old South. Baton Rouge, 1949. Padgett, James A. "The Status of Slaves in Colonial North Carolina. Journal of Negro History, XIV (July 1929), 300-327 . Page, Thomas Nelson. "The Negro: The South's Problem." McClure's Magazine, XXII (March and April 1904), 548-554, 619-626; XXIII (May 1904), 96-102.

Park, Joseph H. "Thomas Hughes and Slavery." Journal of Negro History, XII (October 1927) , 590-605.

Parker, Theodore. Discourses on Slavery. Two vols. Boston, 1863. Paxson, F. L. The History of the American Frontier, 1763- 1895. Boston, 1924. Paynter, John H. "The Fugitives of The Pearl." Journal of Negro History, I (June 1916), 243-260.

Pease, William, and Pease, Jane H. Black Utopia: Negro Communal Experiments in America. Madison, Wisconsin: The State Historical Society, T963. ______, eds. The Antislavery Argument. New York: Bobbs- Merrill C o ., Inc., 1965.

______. "Antislavery Ambivalence: Immediatism, Expediency, Race." American Quarterly, XVII (1965), 682-695.

Pennington, Edgar L. Thomas Bray's Association and Their Work Among the Negroes. Worcester, Mass., 1939.

Philips, Wendell. Speeches, Lectures, Letters. Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1863.

Phillips, Ulrich Bonnell. American Negro Slavery: A Survey of the Supply, Employment and Control of Negro Labor as Determined by the Plantation Regime. Reprinted, Gloucester, Mass., 1959. Original ed., New York: D. Appleton, 1918. 310

______. "The Economic Cost of Slaveholding in the Cotton Belt." Political Science Quarterly, XX (June 1905), 257-275. ______. Life and Labor in the Old South. Boston, 1929.

______, ed. A Documentary History of American Industrial Society" Cleveland: Arthur H. Clark, 1910.

______and Glunt, James D., eds. Florida Plantation Records from the Papers of George Noble JonesT S t . Louis, 1927. Pickard, Kate E. R. The Kidnapped and the Ransomed, Being the Personal Recollections of Peter Still and His Wife Vina After Forty Years of Slavery. Syracuse: W. T~! Hamilton, 1856. Reprinted, Negro Publication Society of America, Inc., 1944.

Pierre, C. F. "The Work of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts Among the Negroes in the Colonies." Journal of Negro History, I (October 1916) , 349-360. Pike, James S. First Blows of the Civil War: The Years of Preliminary Conflict, 1850-1860^ New York, 18 79.

Pillsbury, Parker. Acts of the Anti-Slavery Apostles. Boston, 1883" Reprint--New York: Negro University Press, 1969.

______. The Church As It Is, or the Forlorn Hope of Slavery. Concord, New Haven: Republican Press Association, 1885. Pinkney, Alphonso. Black Americans. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Pollard, Edward A. Black Diamonds Gathered in the Darkey Homes of the South. New York: Pudney and Russel, T859.------Potter, David M. The Background of the Civil War. National Council for the Social Studies, Washington, D.C., 1961.

Porter, Kenneth W. "Notes Supplementary to 'Relations Between Negroes and Indians.'" Journal of Negro History, XVIII (July, 1933), 282-T2T:------311

______. "Three Fighters for Freedom." Journal of Negro History, XXVIII (January 1943), 51-72.

Post, Gordon C., ed. A Disquisition on Government and Selections from the Discourse" The American Heritage Series. New York: Bobbs-Merril1 Co., Inc., 1953. Postell, William D. The Health of Slaves on Southern Plantations. Baton Rouge, 1951. Preston, Delores E. "The Genesis of the Underground Rail­ road." Journal of Negro History, VIII (April 1933), 144-170. Quarles, Benjamin. The Negro in the Making of America. New York: Collier, 1964.

______. Frederick Douglass. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968.

Ramsdell, Charles W. "The National Limits of Slavery Expan­ sion." Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XVI (1929), 151-171. Ratner, Lorman. Powder Keg: Northern Opposition to the Antislavery Movement, 1831-1840. New York, 1968.

Rawley, James A. Race and Politics: Bleeding Kansas and the Coming of the Civil War. New York, 1969.

Richards, Leonard L. "Gentlemen of Property and Standing." . Anti-Abolition Mobs in Jacksonian America. New York, 1976.

Riddle, William Renwick. "Notes on Slavery in the United States a Century Ago." Journal of Negro History, XVI (July 1931), 322.

______. "Encouragement of the Slave Trade." Journal of Negro History, XII (January 1927), 22-32.

______. "Interesting Notes on Great Britain and Canada with Respect to the Negro." Journal of Negro History, XIII (January 1928), 185-198.

. "Further Notes on Slavery in Canada." Journal of Negro History, IX (January 1924), 26-33. Provides information on the slave trade between colonial Canadians and Americans.

"Observations on Slavery and Privateering." Journal of Negro History, XV (July 1930), 337-371. 312

_ . The Slave in Early New York." Journal of Negro History, XIII (January 1928), 53-8(T!

_ . "A Tragedy of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries." Journal of Negro History, XIV (April 1929), 227-236. Robinson, Donald L. Slavery in the Structure of American Politics, 1765-1820. New York, 1971.

Russell, John H. "Colored Freemen as Slave Owners in Virginia." Journal of Negro History, I (June 1916), 233-242. The Free Negro in Virginia, 1619-1866. Baltimore, 1913.

Russell, Robert R. "The General Effects of Slavery Upon Southern Economic Progress." Journal of Southern History, IV (1938), 35.

______. Ante-Bellum Studies in Slavery, Politics and the Railroads. Kalamazoo: Faculty Contributions, School of Graduate Studies, Western Michigan University, Series V, No. 1, June 1960. Sanborn, F. B. Recollections of Slavery Years. Vol. II. ^ Boston: Richard G. Badger, The Gorham Press, 1909.

Sanders, Jennings B. Historical Interpretations and Ameri- can Historianship. Yellow Springs, Ohio: Antioch Press , 1966.

Savage, Henry, Jr. Seeds of Time: The Background of Southern Thinking. New York: Holt, 1959.

Savage, Sherman W. The Controversy Over the Distribution of Abolition Literature. Washington, 1938.

______. "The Negro in the Westward Movement." Journal of Negro History, XXV (October 1940), 516-528.

"Abolitionist Literature in the Mails, 1835-1836." Journal of Negro History, XIII (April 1928), 150-184.

Scarborough, Ruth. The Opposition to Slavery in Georgia Prior to 186(K New York: Negro University Press, 1968. Reprinted from 1933 copy.

Sewell, Richard H. John P. Hale and the Politics of Aboli­ tion. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965. 313

Shanks, Caroline L. "The Biblical Anti-Slavery Argument of the Decade 1830-1840." Journal of Negro History, XVI (April 1931), 132-157.

Shanon, Fred A. "The Federal Government and the Negro Soldier, 1861-1865." Journal of Negro History, XI (October 1926), 563-583. Sherwin, Oscar. Prophet of Liberty: The Life and Times of Wendell Phillips. New York: Bookman Associates, 1958. Shryock, Richard H. "Medical Practice in the Old South." South Atlantic Quarterly, XXIX (1960), 160.

Simms, Henry H. "A Critical Analysis of Abolition Litera­ ture, 1830-1840." Journal of Southern History, VI, 368-382. Sloan, Irving J. The American Negro: A Chronology and Fact Book. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Publications, 1965.

Sloan, James. The Great Question Answered, or, Is Slavery a Sin in Itself (Per Se), Answered According to the Teachings of the Scriptures. Memphis: Hutton, Gallaway $ Co., 1857.

Smith, Goldwin. The Moral Crusader, William Lloyd Garrison: A Biographical Essay Founded on *'The Story of Garrison’s Life Told by His Children."' New York: Funk 8 Wagnalls Co., 1892.

Smith, James L. Autobiography of James L. Smith: Including Also Reminiscences of Slave Life, Recollections of the War, Education of Freedmen, Causes of the Exodus, etc. Norwich: Press of the Bulletin Co., 1882.

Smith, Robert Worthington. "Was Slavery Unprofitable in the Ante-Bellum South?" Agricultural History, XX (1946), 60-64. Smith, W. L. G. Fifty Years of Public Life: The Life and Times of Lewis Cass~ New York, 1856.

Smith, William Henry. A Political History of Slavery; Being an Account of the Slavery Controversy from the Earliest Agitation in the Eighteenth Century to the Close of the Reconstruction Period in America. New York: Frederick ungar publishing Co., 1966. Reprinted from the edition of 1903. 314

Southall, Eugene Portlette. "The Attitude of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Toward the Negro from 1844 to 1870." Journal of Negro History, XVI (October 1931), 359-370.

______. "Arthur Tappan and the Anti-Slavery Movement." Journal of Negro History, XV (April 1930), 162-197.

Speakman, Thomas H. Divisions in the Society of Friends. Philadelphia: J\ B~! Lippincott Co., 1893.

Spears, John R. The American Slave-Trade: An Account of Its Origin, Growth and Suppression. New York: Kennikat Press, Inc., 1967 . Originally issued by Charles Scribner's Sons, 1900.

Spooner, Lysander. The Unconstitutionality of Slavery. New York: Burt Franklin, Research and Source Work Series #92, American Classics in History, 1965. First Published in Boston in 1860.

Stampp, Kenneth M. The Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South. New York: Knopf, 1956.

______. And the War Came: The North and the Secession Crisis, 1860-1861. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1950. ______. "The Historian and Southern Negro Slavery." American Historical Review, LVIII (April 1952), ^ 15": Standeraus, P. J. The African Colonization Movement, 1816- 1865. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961.

Stanton, Elizabeth C. "The Women's Rights Movement and Its Champions in the United States." In Eminent Women of the Age. Edited by James Parton. Hartford: S’. M. Betts § Co., 1869. Stavisky, Leonard P. "Negro Craftsmanship in Early America." American Historical Review, IV (1949), 315-325.

Steiner, Bernard C. A History of Slavery in Connecticut. Baltimore, 1893.

Stephenson, Nathaniel W. Isaac Franklin: Slave Trader and Planter of the Old South. Baton Rouge: University of Louisiana Press, 1938. 315

Stern, Philip Van Doren. Prologue to Sumter: The Beginning of the Civil War from the John Brown Raid to theT Surrender of Fort Sumter. Civil War Centennial Series. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1961.

Sterns, Charles. The Black Man of the South and the Rebels: Of the Characteristics of the Former, and the Recent Outrages of the Latter. New York: American News Company, 18 7 2. Strother, Horatio T. The Underground Railroad in Connecti­ cut . Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1962. Stroyer, Jacob. My Life in the South. Salem: Salem Observer Book and Job Print, 1885. Sunderland, LaRoy. Anti-Slavery Manual, Containing a Col­ lection of Facts and Arguments on American Slavery. New York: S. W. Benedict, 1837.

Swaney, Charles Baumer. Episcopal Methodism and Slavery, With Sidelights on Ecclesiastical Politics. New York: Negro University Press, 1969. Originally published by Richard G. Badger, 1926.

Sweet, William W. The Baptists, 1783-1830. Religion on the American Frontier. Vol. H New York, 1931.

______. The Congregationalists, 1783-1850. Religion on the American Frontier. Vol. III. Chicago, 1939.

______. The Presbyterians, 1783-1840. Religion on the American Frontier. Vol. II. New York, 1936.

Swisshelm, Jane Grey. Half a Century. Chicago: Jansen, McClurg 6, Co., 1880.

Sydnor, Charles S. "Life Span of Mississippi Slaves." American Historical Review, XXXV (1930), 566-574. ______. Slavery in Mississippi. Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 19o5.

Tannenbaum, Frank. Slave Citizens: The Negro in the Americas. New York: Knopf, 1947.

Tate, Thad W., Jr. The Negro in Eighteenth Century Williams­ burg^ Williamsburg, 1965. 316

Taylor, Joe Gray. Negro Slavery in Louisiana. Baton Rouge Louisiana Historical Association, Thomas J. Moran's Sons, Inc, , 1963.

Taylor, William R. Yankee and Cavalier: The Old South and American National Character. New York, 1961. tenBroek, Jacubus. The Antislavery Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1951.

Thomas, Benton. Historical and Legal Examination of That Part of the Decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Dred ScottCase Which Declares the Unconstltutlonali ty of the Missouri Compromise Act, and th< Self-Extension______of the Constitution to Territories Carrying Slavery Along With It New York: D"] Appleton and Company, i860

Thomas, John L. The Liberator, William Lloyd Garrison: A Biography" Boston: Little, Brown % C o ., 1963.

______. Slavery Attacked: The Abolitionist Crusade. A Spectrum Book. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice - Hall, Inc 1965 Thome, James A. , and Kimbal, Horace. Emancipation in the West Indies:_ A Six Month Tour~~Ih Antigua, ______Barbados and Jamaica in the Year 1837 New York: The Anti- Slavery Examiner, No. 7, 1838 Contains convincing evidence that emancipated Negroes did not pose any danger to society and that free labor was better than slave labor.

Thompson, George. Prison Life and Reflections or A Narra- ______tive of the Arrest Trial Conviction, Imprisonment, Treatment, Observations, Reflections, and Deliverance of Alanson Work James, E. Burr, and Thompson who Suffered an Unjust and Cruel Imprisonment in Missouri Penitentiary for Attempting to Aid Some Slaves to Liberty7] New York: S. W. Benedict, 1848.

Letters and Addresses During His Mission in the United States, from October 1, 1834, to November 27, 1835. Boston: Isaac Knapp, 18 37.

Thorpe, Earl E. The Mind of the Negro: An Intellectual History of Afro-Americans. Baton Rouge: Ortlieb Press tmr .— 317

Tiffany, Nina Moore. Samuel E. Sewall--A Memoir. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1898. Todd, Wingate T. "An Anthropologist’s Study of Negro Life." Journal of Negro History, XVI (January 1931), 36-42.

Towner, Lawrence W. "A Fondness for Freedom: Servant Pro­ tests in Puritan Society." William § Mary Quarterly, XIX (April 1962), 201. Treadwell, S. B. American Liberties and American Slavery: Morally and Politically Illustrated. Miami: Mnemosyne Publishing, Inc., 1969. Trefousse, Hans L. The Radical Republicans: Lincoln’s Van­ guard for Racial Justice^ New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1969. Tucker, S. George. A Dissertation on Slavery with a Proposal for the Gradual Abolition of It in the State of Virginia. Philadelphia: Printed for Matthew Carey, 1796. New York: Reprinted, 1861.

Tuckerman, Bayard. William Jay and the Abolition of Slavery. New York: Dodd, Mead § Co. , 1893.

Turner, Edward R. The Negro in Pennsylvania. Washington, 1911. Turner, Frederick J. Rise of the New West. New York, 1906.

______. The Frontier in American History. New York, 1920.

Turner, Lorenzo D. Anti-Slavery Sentiment in American Litera­ ture . Washington, 1929.

Tyler, Alice F. Freedom's Ferment: Phases of American Social History to I860. Minneapolis, 1944.

Usher, Roland G. "Primitive Law and the Negro." Journal of Negro History, IV (January 1919), 1-6. Villard, Fanny. William Lloyd Garrison on Non-Resistance; Together with a Personal Sketch by His Daughter arid a Tribute by Leo Tolstoi. New York: The Nation Press Printing Co., Inc., 1924.

Voegeli, Jacque. Free But Not Equal: The Midwest and the Negro During the Civil War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press , ±yb'V . 318

Wade, Richard C. Slavery in the Cities: The South, 1820- 1860. New York: Oxford University Press, 1965.

Ward, Samuel Ringgold. The American Negro--His History and Literature: AutoFiography of a Fugitive Negro. New York: Arno Press and the New York Times, 1968. First published in 1855. Weinstein, Allen, and Gatell, Frank Otto, eds. American Negro Slavery: A Modern Reader. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1968. Weisberger, Bernard A. They Gathered at the River: The Story of the Great Revivalists and Their Impact Upon Religion in America-! Boston, 1958.

______, ed. Abolitionism: Disrupter of the Democratic System or Agent of Progress? Berkeley Series in American History. Chicago: Rand McNally § Co., 1963.

Wells, Tom Henderson. The Slave Ship Wanderer. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1967.

Weinberg, Albert K. Manifest Destiny: A Study of Nation- alist Expansionism in American History. Baltimore, 1935. Wesley, Charles H. Negro Labor in the United States, 1850- 1925. New York, 1927.

______. "Manifests of Slave Shipments Along the Waterways, 1808-1864." Journal of Negro History, XXVII (March 1942), 155-174.

Whitehurst, Alto L. "Martin Van Buren and the Free Soil Movement." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Univer­ sity of Chicago, 1932.

Studies on Michigan

Books and Articles

Adam, John J. "Early History of Lenawee County." Michi- gan Pioneer and Historical Collections, II, 357-387.

Adams, (Mrs.) Franc L., comp. Pioneer History of Ingham County. Lansing: Wynkoop Hallenbeck Crawford Co. , 1923. 319

Aiken, Martha. "The Underground Railroad." Michigan History, Vol. 6 , 597-610. Avery, Lillian Drake. An Account of Oakland County. Listed as Vol. III of Historic Michigan (G. N. Fuller, ed.). n.p.: National Historical Association, Inc., 1924.

Bald, F. Clever. Michigan in Four Centuries. New York: Harper § Bros., 1954. Barnes, Charles E. "Battle Creek as a Station on the Underground Railroad." Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, XXXVIII (Lansing, 1909) , 279-285. Baxter, Albert. History of the City of Grand Rapids, Michigan. New York: Munsell § Co., 1891.

Beakes, Samuel W. Past and Present of Washtenaw County, Michigan. Chicago: ST JJ Clarke Publishing Co., 1906. Bingham, Stephen D . , comp. Early History of Michigan with Biographies of State Officers, Members of Congress^ Judges and Legislators'^ Lansing: Thorp 8 Godfrey, 1888. Bonner, Richard Illenden, ed. Memoirs of Lenawee County, Michigan. 2 vols. Madison, Wise.: Western Historical Association, 1909.

Branch, Elam Edgar, ed. History of Ionia County, Michigan. 2 vols" Indianapolis: B~! FT Bowen 8 Co., T916 . Brown, Alan S. "Southwestern Michigan in the Campaign of 1860." Michigan Heritage, II (Winter, 1960), 67-74.

Buckley, John McClelland. History of Monroe County, Michigan. 2 vols. Chicago: Lewis Publishing C o . , 1913.

Burton, Clarence Monroe, ed. The City of Detroit, Michi­ gan, 1701-1922. 5 volsT Chicago: ST J~. Clarke Publishing Co., 1922.

______, ed. History of Wayne County and the City of Detroit, Michigan. 5 vols. Chicago: 5"! JT Clarke Publishing Co., 1930. 320

Butler, Broadus H. "Integration of Detroit Public Schools, Past Problems and Present Promise." Special issue of Michigan Challenge (June 1968). Early attempts to educate Michigan Blacks.

Butterfield, George E. History of Bay County. Also listed as Vol. Ill of Historic Michigan (G. N. Fuller, ed.). n.p.: National Historical Association, Inc., n.d.

Campbell, James Valantine. Outline of the Political His- tory of Michigan. Detroit: Schober § Co., T876T Catlin, George B. History of Detroit and Wayne County. Listed also as Vol. Ill of Historic Michigan (G. N. Fuller, ed.). Dayton: National Histori­ cal Association, Inc., n.d.

______. "The Story of Detroit." Detroit News (1923).

"A Century Marches By, 1836-1936." Jackson County Centen­ nial, June 22, 23, 24, Jackson, Michigan. n.p./ n.d. (at Michigan State Library). Chapman, B. , ed. Portrait--Biographical Album of Calhoun County, Michigan, Containing Full Portraits and Biographical Sketches of Prominent Representative Citizens of the County. Chicago: Lewis Pub - lishing C o ., Inc. , 1891. Chauncey, Albert E. America’s Greatest Subdivision, The Northwest Territory. Benton Harbor: Burch Printers, 1957.

______. Berrien County, A Nineteenth Century Story. Benton Harbor: Burch Printers, 1955.

Chavis, John. "Freedom via Detroit --Movement on the Underground." Negro History Bulletin (October 1963) , Special 30-page edition. Claspy, Everett. The Negro in Southwestern Michigan; Negroes in Michigan in a Rural Environment. Ann Arbor, 1967.

Colburn, Harvey C. The Story of Ypsilanti. n.p., 1923.

Colledge, Orville W. A Twentieth Century History of Berrien County, Michigan. Chicago: Lewis Pub­ lishing C o . , 1906. 321

Collier, T. Maxwell. "William H. Seward in the Campaign of 1860, with Special Reference to Michigan." Michigan History, XIX (1935). Very useful for detailing political opinions in Michigan just before the Civil War. Collin, Henry P. A Twentieth Century History and Biographical Record of Branch County, Michigan. New York, 1906. Comin, John. History of the Presbyterian Church in Michigan. Ann Arbor, 1950. Compendium of History and Biography of the City of Detroit and Wayne County, Michigan. Chicago: Henry Taylor 8 Co’. , 1909. Cooley, Thomas McIntyre. Michigan, A History of Govern­ ments . Boston: Houghton Mifflin and Co., 1885. Dancy, John C. "The Negro People of Michigan." Michigan History, XXIV (1940), 220-240.

Darling, Birt. City in the Forest: The Story of Lansing. New York! Stratford House, 1950. Deland, Charles Victor, comp. Deland’s History of Jack­ son County, Michigan. Logansport, Indiana: B! F! Bowen, 1903! Detroit Daily Post. The Colored People of Detroit: Their Trials, Persecutions and Escapes. Containing Sketches of the Riots of 1833, 1859, 1850 and 186 5. Detroit, 1870.

Dunbar, Willis F. Kalamazoo and How It Grew. Kala­ mazoo: Western Michigan University School of Graduate Studies, 1959. ______. Michigan Through the Centuries. 4 vols. New York! Lewis Historical Publishing Co., Inc., 1955. Vol. I was important for this study. Durant, Samuel W. History of Ingham and Eaton Counties, Michigan. Philadelphia: D! W! Ensign § Co.,1880.

______. History of Kalamazoo County, Michigan. Phila- delphia: Everts § Abbott, 1880. ______. History of Oakland County. Philadelphia: L. H. Everts § Co., 1877. 322

Dustin, Fred. "Saginaw History." Typescript MS (two parts bound in one vol.), undated. At Michigan State University Library.

Ellis, Franklin. History of Berrien and Van Buren Counties, Michigan. Philadelphia: DT WT Ensign Co. , 1880.

______. History of Genesee County, Michigan. Phila- delphia: Everts § Abbott, 18 79. ______. History of Livingston County, Michigan. Philadelphia: Everts § Abbott, 1880. Fancher, Isaac A. Past and Present of Isabella County, Michigan. Indianapolis : BT FT Bowen 8 C o . , 1911.

Farmer, Silas. The History of Detroit and Michigan; or, The Metropolis Illustrated; a Chronological Cyclopedia of the Past and Present, Including a Full Record of Territorial Days in Michigan, and Annals of Wayne County. 2 vols. Detroit: Silas Farmer 8 Co., 1884. Fauset, Arthur Huff. Sojourner Truth, God’s Faithful Pilgrim. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1938.

Finney, Byron Alfred, ed. History of Washtenaw County. Also listed as Vol. Ill of Historic Michigan (G. N. Fuller, ed). n.p.: National Historical Association, Inc., 1924.

Fisher, David, and Little, Frank, eds. Compendium of History and Biography of Kalamazoo County, Michi­ gan . Chicago: A . W . Bowen 8 C o ., n.d. Foster, Seymor. "The Naming of Charles T. Foster, G.A.R." Michigan History, IX (1925), 143-149. Fuller, George N., ed. Governors of the Territory and State of Michigan^ Michigan Historical Commission Bulletin No. 16. Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1928.

______. Economic and Social Beginnings of Michigan. Lansing, 1916. ______, ed. Historic Michigan: Land of the Great Lakes. 2 vols. n.p.: National Historical Association, Inc., 1924. 323

______, ed. Michigan: A Centennial History of the State and Its People. 5 vols. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co., 1939. Vol. I was useful in this study.

Gardner, Washington. History of Calhoun County, Michi­ gan. A Narrative Account of Its historical" Progress, Its People, and Its Principal Inter­ ests . Vol. IT Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co. , 1913. Interesting accounts especially of the individual persons in the Adam Crosswhite episode.

Girardin, J. A. "Slavery in Detroit." Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections. VolT I"j 415-417.

Glover, L. H. A Twentieth Century History of Cass County, Michigan. Chicago: Lewis Publishing C o . , 1906. Hartgrove, W. B. "The Story of Maria Louise More and Fannie M. Richards." Journal of Negro History, I (January 1916) , 23-33"! The character of the Michigan Black population. Hawley, Amos H. The Population of Michigan, 1800-1860: An Analysis of Growth, Distribution and Composi­ tion. Ann Arbor, 1949.

Hobert, Lander Smith, ed. The Congregational Churches of Michigan for the First Fifty Years of Their Organization into a State Association. Addresses Delivered, Papers Read, and Reports Made. Printed by the order of the General Association of Michigan. n.d./n.p.

Johnston, Crisfield. History of Allegan and Barry Counties, Michigan. Phi ladelphia: DT W. Ensign § Co., 1880.

______. History of Branch County, Michigan. Phila- delphia: Everts $ Abbott, 1870.

______. History of Hillsdale County, Michigan. Phila- delphia: Everts 5 Abbott, 1879.

Kuhn, Madison. Michigan State: The First Hundred Years. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1955. Lanman, Charles. The Red Book of Michigan: A Civil, Military, and Biographical History. Detroit: FT FT Smith § C o ., 1871. 324

Lanman, James H. History of Michigan, Civil and Topo­ graphical . New York, 1839.

Lansing and Its Yesterdays: A Compilation of a Portion of the Historical Material Published in the Seventy-Fifth Anniversary Edition of the Lansing State Journal, January 1 , 1950. Lansing: the State Journal Co., 1930.

Leake, Paul. History of Detroit. 3 vols. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co., 1912. Leeson, Michael. History of Saginaw County, Michigan. Chicago: Charles C~. Chapman § C o . , 1881. Matthews, Alfred. History of Cass County, Michigan. Chicago: Waterman, Watkins § Co., 1882. McMurtrie, Douglas C. Early Printing in Michigan with a Bibliography of the Issues of the Michigan Press. Chicago: John Calhoun Club, 1931. Michigan Historical Commission. Michigan Biographies, Including Members of Congress, Elective State Officers^ Justices of the Supreme Court, Members of the Michigan Legislature, Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, State Board of Agrl~=~ culture and State Board of Education. 2 vols. Lansing: Historical Commission, 1924.

Mills, James Cooke. History of Saginaw County, Michigan. 2 vols. Saginaw: Seemann § Peters, 1918. Espe­ cially Vol. I . Moore, Charles. History of Michigan. 4 vols. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co., 1915. Especially Vols. I and II. Pierce, H. B. History of Calhoun County, Michigan. Philadelphia: LT^ FH Everts § Co. , 1877 .

Pilcher, Elijah H. Protestantism in Michigan: Being a Special History of the Methodist Episcopal Church and Incidentially of Other Denominations. Notices of the Origin and Growth of the Principal Towns and Cities of the State; Biographical Sketches of Many Prominent Pastors, and Laymen Connected with the Birth and Growth of Protestantism in Michigan. Detroit, 18/y . 325

Praus, Alexis A., ed. "The Underground Railroad at Schoolcraft." Michigan History, XXXVII (1953), 177-182.

Quaife, Milo M., ed. The John Askin Papers, 1747-1820. 2 vols. Detroit, 1928-1931. , and Glazer, Sidney. Michigan from Primitive Wilderness to Industrial- Commonwealtfi~! New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1948.

Riddell, William Renwick. The Life of William Dummer Powell. Lansing, 1924. ______. "A Negro Slave in Detroit When Detroit Was Canadian." Michigan History, XVIII, 48-52.

Rogers, Howard S. History of Cass County from 1825 to 187 5. Cassopolis: W. H7 Mansfield, Vigilant Book 8 Job Print, 1875.

Russell, John Andrew. The Germanic Influence in the Making of Michigan. Detroit: University of Detroit, 192 7. Russell, Nelson Vance. The British Regime in Michigan and the Old Northwest, 1760-1796. Northfield, Minn., 1939.

Seeley, Thaddeus D. History of Oakland County, Michigan. 2 vols. Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co., 19127 Especially Vol. I.

Sexton, Jessie Ethelyn. Congregationalism, Slavery and the Civil W a r . Published by the Michigan Civil War Centennial Observance Commission. Lansing, 1966.

Siebert, Wilbur H. "The Underground Railroad in Michi­ gan." Detroit Historical Monthly, I, No. 1 (March 1923) , 10-16.

Spencer, Mary G. (Mrs.). The collections of Mrs. Mary A Spencer, Michigan State Librarian, 1893-1923, of platforms and convention resolutions of the political parties in Michigan from 1834-1912. Typescript. Two large boxes. State Library, Lansing, Michigan. Stark, George W. City of Destiny, The Story of Detroit. Detroit: Arnold-Powers, Inc., 1943. 326

Streeter, Floyd Benjamin. Political Parties in Michigan from the Admission of the State to the Civil War. Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1918.

Thomas, Henry F., ed. A Twentieth Century History of Allegan County, Michigan. Chicago: The Lewis Publishing Co., 1907.

Turner, Frank N. An Account of Ingham County from Its Organization. Listed also as Vol. Ill of Historic Michigan (G. N. Fuller, ed.). n.p.: National Historical Association, Inc., [1928].

Tuttle, Charles Richard, comp. General History of the State of Michigan. Detroit: R. D. S. Tyler § C o . , 187 3. Utley, Henry M., and Cutcheon, Byron M. Michigan as a Province, Territory and State, the Twenty-Sixth Member of the Federal UniorT! 4 vols. [New VorkJ: The Publishing Society of Michigan, 1906. Vols. Ill and IV. Waid, George H. Centennial History of the Michigan Baptist Convention^ Lansing, 1936.

Warren, Francis H., ed. Michigan Manual of Freedmen's Progress. Authorized by Act 47, Public Acts, 1915. Detroit, 1915. Good information on the character and industrious nature of the Michi­ gan Black population before and after the Civil War.

Weissert, Charles A., ed. An Account of Kalamazoo County. Listed also as Vol. Ill of Historic Michigan (G. N. Fuller, ed.). n.p.: National Historical Association, Inc., [1928].

Williams, Frederick D. "Robert McClelland and the Secession Crisis." Michigan History, XLIII (1959) , 155-164. Wing, Talcott E., ed. History of Monroe County, Michi­ gan . New York: Munsell 8 Co., 1898.

Wood, Edwin 0. History of Genesee County, Michigan. 2 vols. Indianapolis: Federal Publishing Co., 1916. 327

Woodward, A. B. (Judge). "Resolutions on Sundry Subjects." Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, Vol. XII, 462-547. Useful informa­ tion favorable to Michigan Blacks in the territorial period.

YzenBaard, John H. "The Crosswhite Case." Michigan History, LIII (Summer 1969), 131-143.

Biographies

Bartlett, Irving. Wendell Phillips, Brahmin Radical. Boston, 1961.

Biglow, Martha M. "The Political Services of William Allanson Howard." Michigan History, XLII (March 1957) , 109-114.

Brown, Arthur W. Always Young for Liberty: A Biography of William Ellery Channing. Syracuse, 1956.

Chadwick, John White. A Life for Liberty, Anti-Slavery and Other Letters of Sallie Holley. New York, 1899. Reprint: Negro University Press, New York, 1969.

Claiborne, J. F. H. Life and Correspondence of John A. Quitman. New York, 1860. Cromwell, Otelia. Lucretia Mott. Cambridge, 1958.

Crooks, (Mrs.) E. W. Life of Reverend Adam Crooks. Syracuse: Wesleyan Methodist Book Room, T875. Danforth, Mildred E. A Quaker Pioneer: Laura Haviland, Superintendent of the Underground Railroad. New York: Exposition Press, 1961. Dillon, Merton L. Benjamin Lundy and the Struggle for Negro Freedom. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1966.

______. Elijah Lovejoy, Abolitionist Editor. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1961. Donald, David. Charles Sumner and the Coming of the Civil Wa r . New York, 1961.

Fladeland, Betty. James G. Birney, Slaveholder to Aboli­ tionist. Ithaca, 1955. 328

Frothingham, Brooks. Gerrit Smith: A Biography. New York, 1879. Garrison, Wendell Phillips, and Garrison, Francis Jackson. William Lloyd Garrison, 1805-1879. 4 vols. Boston , 1885 -1889. Gill, John. Tide Without Turning: Elijah P. Lovejoy and Freedom of the PressT Boston, 1959. Hamilton, Holman. Zachary Taylor, Soldier in the White House. Hamden, Connecticut, 1966.

Harlow, Ralph V. Gerrit Smith: Philanthropist and Reformer. New York, 1939. Hinton, Richard J. John Brown and His Men. New York, 1894. Hoar, George F. Autobiography of Seventy Years. New York: Charles Scribners' Sons, 1903. Useful for Kansas problems and the Emigrant Aid Society. Hollowell, Anna D., ed. James and Lucretia Mott, Life and Letters. Boston, 1884. Hubben, Paxton. Henry Ward Beecher: An American Por­ trait . New York, 1942. Johnson, Robert W., ed. The Letters of Stephen A. Douglas. Urbana: University of 111inois Press, 1961. Leland, Godfrey. Abraham Lincoln and the Abolition of Slavery. New York: Putnam's Sons, 1879.

Lerner, Gerder. The Grimk£ Sisters From South Carolina, Rebels Against Slavery. Boston, 1967.

Matlack, L. C. Life of Orange Scott. New York: Wesleyan MethodisTt Book Room, 1848. McLaughlin, Andrew C. Lewis Cass. Boston: Houghton Mifflin § Co., 1899.

Nichols, Roy F. Franklin Pierce, Young Hickory of Granite Hills. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1931. 329

Nye, Russel B. William Lloyd Garrison and the Humani­ tarian Reformers. Boston, 1950.

Pegler, George. Life and Times of George Pegler, An Autobiography. Syracuse: Wesleyan Methodist Book Room, 1875. Pollard, John A. John Greenleaf Whittier, Friend of Man. Boston, 1949.

Potter, David. Lincoln and His Party in the Secession Crisis. New Haven, 1942. Pratt, Fletcher. Stanton: Lincoln’s Secretary of War. New York: W. W. Norton § Co., 1953.

Redpath, James. The Public Life of Captain John Brown. Boston, 1860. Rockwood, George L. Cheever, Lincoln, and the Causes of the Civil War~ Worcester, 1936.

Rollin, Frank A. The Life and Public Services of Martin R. Delany. Boston, 1883.

Sanborn, F. B. The Life and Letters of John Brown. Boston, 1885. Sewell, Richard. John P. Hale and the Politics of Abolition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press , 1965. Stern, Madeleine. Stephen Pearl Andrews, The Pantarch. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1968.

Swift, David E. Joseph John Gurney, Banker, Reformer and Quaker^ Middletown, 196 2. Tappan, Lewis. Arthur Tappan. New York, 1870.

Thomas, B. Stanton. Nathan M. Thomas, His Life and Times. Cassopoiis, Michigan, 1925.

Thomas, Benjamin 0. Theodore Weld, Crusader for Freedom. New Brunswick” New Jersey, 1950. Covers Weld's antislavery activities from Lane Seminary to the end of Weld’s life.

Thomas, John L. The Liberator William Lloyd Garrison, A Biography. Boston: Little Brown and Co., 1969. 330

Tuckerman, Bayard. William Jay and the Constitutional Movement for Abolition of Slavery. New York, 1893.

Van Deusen, Clyndon G. William Henry Seward. New York, !967 .

Villard, Oswald Garrison. John Brown, 1800-1859. Boston, 1910.

Wagenknecht, Edward. John Greenleaf Whittier, A Portrait in Paradox. Oxford, 1967.

Walter, Merrill M. Against Wind and Tide, A Biography of William Lloyd Garrison. Cambridge, MassT: Har­ vard University Press, 1963.

Wright, Elizur. Myron Holley and What He Did for Liberty and True Religion. Boston, 1882. Wright, Philip Green, and Wright, Elizabeth Q. Elizur Wright, The Father of Life Insurance. Chicago, 1937 .

Wyatt-Brown, Bertram. Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War Against Slavery. New York, 19 71. York, Robert. George B. Cheever, Religious and Social Reformer, 1807-1890. Orono, Maine, 1955. APPENDIX A

THE DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS THE DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS

More than fifty-seven years have elapsed since a band of patriots convened to devise measures for the deliverance of this country from a foreign yoke. The corner-stone upon which they founded the Temple of Freedom was broadly this--

Mthat all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness." At the sound of their trumpet-call, three millions of people rose up as from the sleep of death, and rushed to the strife of blood; deeming it more glorious to die instantly as free­ men, than desirable to live one hour as slaves. They were few in number, poor in resources; but the honest conviction that Truth, Justice, and Right were on their side, made them invincible.

We have met together for the achievement of an enterprise, without which, that of our fathers is incomplete, and which, for its magnitude, solemnity, and probable results upon the destiny of the world, as far transcends theirs, as moral truth does physical force.

In purity of motive, in earnestness of zeal, in decision of purpose, in intrepidity of action, in steadfast­ ness of faith, in sincerity of spirit, we would not be inferior to them. 332 333

Their principles led them to wage war upon their oppressors, and to spill human blood like water, in order to be free. Ours forbid the doing of evil that good may come, and lead us to reject, and to entreat the oppressed to reject, the use of all carnal weapons for deliverance from bondage--relying solely upon those which are spiritual, and mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds. Their measures were physical resistance--the marshal­ ling in arms--the hostile array--the mortal encounter. Ours shall be such only as the opposition of moral purity to moral corruption--the destruction of error by the potency of truth--the overthrow of prejudice by power of love--and the abolition of slavery by the spirit of repentance.

Their grievances, great as they were, were triffling in comparison with the wrongs and sufferings of those for whom we plead. Our fathers were never slaves --never bought or sold like cattle--never shut out from the light of knowl- edge--and religion--never subjected to the lash of brutal taskmasters. But those, for whose emancipation we are striving-- constituting at the present time at least one-sixth part of our countrymen--are recognized by the laws, and treated by their fellow beings, as marketable commodities --as goods and chattels--as brute beasts;--are plundered daily of the fruits of their toil without redress;--really enjoy no constitu­ tional nor legal protection from licentious and murderous 334 outrages upon their persons-are ruthlessly torn asunder-- the tender babe from the arms of its frantic mother--the heart-broken wife from her weeping husband--at the caprice or pleasure of irresponsible tyrants;--and, for the crime of having a dark complexion, suffer the pangs of hunger, the infliction of stripes, and the ignominy of brutal servi­ tude. They are kept in heathenish darkness by laws expressly enacted to make their instruction a criminal offense. These are the prominent circumstances in the condition of more than TWO MILLIONS of our people, the proof of which may be found in thousands of indisputable facts, and in the laws of the slaveholding states.

Hence We Maintain--- That in view of civil and religious privileges of this nation, the guilt of its oppression is unequalled by any other on the face of the earth:--and therefore,

That it is bound to repent instantly, to undo the heavy burden, to break every yoke, and to let the oppressed go free.

We Further Maintain---

That no man has a right to enslave or imbrute his brother--to hold or acknowledge him, for one moment, as a piece of merchandise--to keep back his hire by fraud--or to brutalize his mind by denying him the means of intellectual, social, and moral improvement. The right to enjoy liberty is inallienable. To invade 335

it, is to usurp the prerogative of Jehovah. Every man has a

right to his own body--to the products of his own labor--to

the protection of law--and to the common advantages of

society. It is piracy to buy or steal a native African, and

subject him to servitude. Surely the sin is as great to

enslave an American as an African. Therefore We Believe and Affirm--- That there is no difference, in principle, between

the African slave trade and American slavery; That every American citizen, who retains a human

being in involuntary bondage, is (according to the Scriptures)

a man-stealer: That the slaves ought instantly to be set

free, and brought under the protection of law; That if they had lived from the time of Pharaoh

down to the present period, and had been entailed through

successive generations, their right to be free could never have been alienated, but their claims would have constantly

risen in solemnity; That all those laws which are now in force, admitting

the right of slavery, are therefore before God utterly null

and void; being an audacious usurpation of the Divine prerogative, a daring infringement on the law of nature, a

base overthrow of the very foundations of the social compact,

a complete extinction of all the relations, endearments and

obligations of mankind, and a presumptuous transgression of all the holy commandments --and that therefore they ought to be instantly abrogated. 336

We Further Believe and Affirm---

That all persons of color who possess the qualifica­ tions which are demanded of others, ought to be admitted forthwith to the enjoyment of the same privileges, and the exercise of the same prerogatives, as others; and that the paths of preferment, of wealth, and of intelligence, shall be opened as widely to them as to persons of white complexion.

We maintain that no compensation should be given to the planters emancipating their slaves--

Because it would be a surrender of the great funda­ mental principle that man cannot hold property in man;

Because Slavery is a crime, and therefore it is not an article to be sold.

Because the holders of slaves are not the just proprietors of what they claim;--freeing the slave is not depriving them of property, but restoring it to the right owner;--it is not wronging the master, but righting the slave--restoring him to himself; Because immediate and general emancipation would only destroy nominal, not real property: it would not amputate a limb or break a bone of the slaves, but by infusing motives into their breasts, would make them doubly valuable to the masters as free laborers; and

Because if compensation is to be given at all, it should be given to the outraged and guiltless slaves, and not to those who have plundered and abused them. 337

We regard as delusive, cruel and dangerous, any scheme of expatriation which pretends to aid, either directly or indirectly, in the emancipation of the slaves, or to be a substitute for the immediate and total abolition of slavery.

We fully and unanimously recognize the sovereignty of each state, to legislate exclusively on the subject of the slavery which is tolerated within its limits. We concede that Congress, under the present national compact, has no right to interfere with any of the slave states, in relation to this momentous subject.

But we maintain that Congress has a right, and is solemnly bound, to suppress the domestic slave trade between the several states, and to abolish slavery in those portions of our territory which the Constitution has placed under its exclusive jurisdiction.

We also maintain that there are, at the present time, the highest obligations resting upon the people of the free states, to remove slavery by moral and political action, as prescribed in the Constitution of the United States. They are now living under a pledge of their tremendous physical force to fasten the galling fetters of tyranny upon the limbs of millions in the southern states;- - they are liable to be called at any moment to suppress a general insurrection of the slaves-they authorize the slave owner to vote for three-fifths of his slaves as property, and thus enable him to perpetuate his oppressionthey support a standing army 338 at the south for its protection;--and they seize the slave who has escaped into their territories, and send him back to be tortured by an enraged master or a brutal driver.

This relation to slavery is criminal and full of danger: it must be broken up. These are our views and principles--these, our designs and measures. With entire confidence in the overruling jus­ tice of God, we plant ourselves upon the Declaration of our

Independence, and upon the truths of Divine Revelation, as upon the everlasting rock. We shall organize Anti-Slavery Societies, if possible, in every city, town and village of our land. We shall send forth Agents to lift up the voice of remonstrance, of warning, of entreaty, and rebuke.

We shall circulate, unsparingly and extensively, antislavery tracts and periodicals. We shall enlist the pulpit and the press in the cause of the suffering and the dumb. We shall aim at a purification of the churches from all participation in the guilt of slavery.

We shall encourage the labor of free men over that of the slaves, by giving a preference to their productions;-- and We shall spare no exertions nor means to bring the whole nation to speedy repentance.

Our trust for victory is solely in God. We may be 339 personally defeated, but our principles never. Truth, Jus­ tice, and Humanity, must and will gloriously triumph. Already a host is coming up to the help of the Lord against the mighty, and the prospect before us is full of encouragement.

Submitting this Declaration to the candid examination of the people of this country, and of the friends of liberty all over the world, we hereby affix our signatures to it;-- pledging ourselves that, under the guidance and by the help of Almighty God, we will do all that in us lies, consistently with this Declaration of our principles, to overthrow the most execrable system of slavery that has ever been witnessed upon earth--to deliver our land, from its deadliest curse-- to wipe out the foulest stain which rests upon our national escutcheon--and to secure to the colored population of the

United States all the rights and privileges which belong to them as men and as Americans --come what may to our persons, our interests, or our reputations --whether we live to witness the triumph of justice, liberty and humanity, or perish untimely as martyrs in this great, benevolent and holy cause.

The Declaration of Sentiments of the American Anti- Slavery Society was adopted on December 4, 1833, by the organizers of the Society who met in Philadelphia, and was published in the Liberator, No. 3 (December 14, 1833), p. 198, and the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society, an auxiliary of the American Anti-Slavery Society, adopted it in 1836. APPENDIX B

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE MICHIGAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE MICHIGAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY

THE PREAMBLE

The undersigned, citizens of Michigan, desirous of aiding in the progress of universal freedom, and especially in the emancipation of millions of the American people from personal bondage, do form themselves into an Association for this purpose.

They believe that every man has a right (indefeasible except by crime) to his personal liberty, and that the violent deprevation of this right strips the sufferer of the most valued attributes of humanity, and assimilates him to the brute creation; thus inflicting the greatest wrong to which a human being is liable.

They believe that man can rightly hold no property in man, and that every exercise of irresponsible domination in accordance with the opposite principle is SIN, since it is contrary to the precept to do justice and love mercy, a precept which they believe binding on all and toward all and that this sin like every other, ought to be immediately forsaken.

They believe that slaveholding is deeply injurious to the temporal as well as spiritual interests of the master, and that he would find it expedient to do right and restore his bondman to that freedom which, by the gift of Heaven, is the rightful inheritance of every human being.

They anticipate the vengeance of Heaven on their be­ loved country, should it persist in a crime of so deep a dye, and so abhorrent to the spirit and precepts of that religion which is from above.

They design no unauthorized interference with the rights of others, but oppose themselves in the spirit, as they hope, of the Gospel of Peace to practices destructive of all right. Their efforts shall be within the limits of the Con­ stitution of the United States, tending directly to the ex­ tinction of slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia and the Territories of the United States, and operating elsewhere by moral influence.

341 342

Their reliance for success is on the goodness of their cause, the power of justice and truth, and on the blessing of Heaven.

CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE 1. This association shall be called the Michigan State Anti-Slavery Society, and shall be auxiliary to the American Anti-Slavery Society.

ARTICLE 2. The object of this society shall be the entire abolition of slavery in the United States of America, and the elevation of our colored brethren to their proper rank as MEN. While it admits that each State alone has, by the Constitution of the United States, the exclusive right to legislate with regard to slavery within its own limits, its aim shall be to convince all our fellow-citizens by arguments addressed to their understandings and consciences, that slave- holding is a crime in the sight of God, and that the duty, safety and best interests of all concerned require its imme­ diate abandonment.

ARTICLE 3. Any person not a slaveholder, or engaged in the traffic of slaves, may become a member of this society by signing its constitution. ARTICLE 4. The officers of this society shall be a President, one or more Vice Presidents, a Corresponding and a Recording Secretary, Treasurer, and an Executive Committee, consisting of the President, Secretaries, Treasurer and five additional members, three of whom shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.

ARTICLE 5. The officers of this society shall be elected annually, and by ballot, and shall continue in office until their successors be elected.

ARTICLE 6. The Executive Committee shall have power to fill any vacancy in their own body, shall keep a record of their proceedings, and report the same to the society at its annual meeting, which shall be on the first Thursday in June of each year. They shall make arrangements for the annual and special meetings of the society; shall raise funds for the promotion of its objects; direct the Treasurer in the application of them, and transact all other business not otherwise provided for in this constitution.

ARTICLE 7. All moneys belonging to the society shall be paid over to the Treasurer as soon as collected, subject 343 to the order of the Executive Committee, and the Treasurer shall report at the annual meeting the state of his accounts, audited by the President, or one or more of the Vice Presidents. ARTICLE 8. This constitution may be amended, at the annual meeting of the society, by a vote of a majority of the members present. APPENDIX C

DISTRIBUTION OF BLACK POPULATION BY COUNTIES IN MICHIGAN IN 1850 DISTRIBUTION OF BLACK POPULATION IN 1850

County Total Number Number ______Population of Whites of Blacks

Allegan 5,125 5,120 5 Barry 5,072 5,064 8 Berrien 11,417 11,202 215 Branch 12,472 12 ,458 14 Calhoun 19,162 18,996 196 Cass 10,907 10,711 196 Chippewa 898 893 5 Clinton 5,102 5,100 2 Eaton 7,058 7,055 2 Genesee 12,031 12,017 14 Hillsdale 16,159 16,154 5 Houghton 708 708 0 Huron 210 210 0 Ingham 8,631 8 ,613 18 Jackson 19,431 19,367 64 Ionia 7, 597 7,597 0 Kalamazoo 13,197 13 ,100 97 Kent 12,016 11,986 30 Lapeer 7, 029 7,023 6 Lenawee 26,372 26,281 91 Livingston 13,485 13 ,483 2 Mackinac 3,598 3,567 31 Macomb 15,530 15,503 27 Mason 93 93 0 Marquette 136 136 0 Monroe 14,698 14,644 54 Midland 65 64 1 Montcalm 891 891 0 Oakland 31,270 31,210 60 346

Total Number Number County Population of Whites of Blacks

Ontonagon 389 384 5 Oceana 300 291 19 Ottawa 5, 587 5,532 35 Saginaw 2 ,609 2 ,609 0 Shiawassee 5,230 2 ,220 10 Schoolcraft 16 6 10 St. Clair 10,420 10,397 23 Tuscola 291 268 23 Sanilac 2,112 2,112 0 Van Buren 5 ,800 5,798 2 Washtenaw 28,567 28,336 231 Wayne 42,756 42,059 697

Floyd B. Streeter, Political Parties in Michigan, 1837-1860 (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1918), pp. 351-352; John C. Dancy, "The Negro People of Michigan," Michigan History, XXIV (1940), p. 228. APPENDIX D

RESOLUTIONS FROM "PROCEEDINGS OF FREE SOIL STATE CONVENTION IN MICHIGAN, 1851 RESOLUTION 3. That our resistance to the extension of slavery over territory, now free, is demanded, not only by our detestation of the system itself, not only by our self-respect which should spurn all association with the contaminating influences of such a purpose; not only by our regard for the opinion of the world now watching our progress in our experiment in free government, but by a just regard to our own rights, the rights of free labor and the free laborers of the north, that as free labor and slave labor will not and cannot exist on the same soil we are acquitted by the same spirit which in '76 proclaimed the rights of the Free, to maintain the same issue now, and that, in a like spirit of dependence upon that God who "has made of one flesh all the nations of mankind," we hereby declare, that as far as in us lies, that issue, we will maintain. RESOLUTION 4. . . . that the uniform practice of the government from its organization, during its administra­ tion by the framers of the Constitution down to the present time, together with the letter of that sacred instrument, as expounded by a long course of Judicial decisions, afford us abundant reasons for our belief, that in prescribing free institutions to the new territories, as the fundamental law of their existence, we not only range ourselves on the side of the Declaration and the Constitution, and uphold the doctrines of both these instruments, but we are honestly supporting the best interests of the Union, and faithfully representing the genius of Republican institutions.

RESOLUTION 5. That we regard the Union by which our confederacy has been sustained, and its prosperity marked with unexampled prosperity, as of incomparable impor­ tance; that we are resolved to maintain it with the utmost energy of purpose and devoted attachment; but we do not believe that an object so desirable can be promoted by any further extensions of slavery--that the north has given earnest and repeated evidence of her determination to main­ tain the rights of the south; that our hands are clean of all infraction of Constitutional compromises, all invasions of southern rights; and we therefore have a right to give full effect to the popular will of the north; we have a right to pronounce our ultimatum, and that is, "no more slave territories, no slave states."

348 349

RESOLUTION 6. That we have long observed with regret and alarm, that the slaveholding aristocracy of the south unite without distinction of party for the extension of Slavery, while at the north the strength of party ties has hitherto been such as to prevent a union for the extension of freedom and the restriction of slavery to its present limits. And that the dictates of humanity, a regard for the welfare of the free territories of the United States, the preservation of the free institutions and political independ­ ence of the north, imperiously demand the common, united and vigorous exertion of all the friends of Freedom, in opposition to the further extension of slavery--that by allowing party or personal prejudices and preferences, to divide us upon such an issue, we are effectually promoting the designs of the slave power. APPENDIX E

PLATFORM STATE MASS CONVENTION OF THE FREE DEMOCRATS JACKSON, FEBRUARY 22, 1854 THE PLATFORM

The Free Democracy of Michigan, assembled in conven­ tion on the anniversary of the birthday of Washington, deem it an appropriate occasion to express our veneration for the character of this illustrious man and our appreciation of the wisdom and patriotism which laid the foundation of our National prosperity in the admirable instrument, the constitu­ tion of the United States. We desire now and always to pro­ claim our attachment to that union among the people of the United States, of which the constitution is the bond, and that its great purpose "to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the gen­ eral welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to them­ selves and their posterity" is and ever shall be ours. And as a political party, organized to promote this purpose, we believe it to be our duty, a duty which is especially and solemnly enjoined upon every man who has sworn to support the constitution, to support every measure calculated to advance this purpose, and to resist with the energy of inflexible principle every scheme which may defeat or retard it. We therefore resolve:

1. That we regard the institution of domestic slavery which exists in some of the states of the union, not only as a foe to the domestic tranquility and welfare of such states, but as subversive of the plainest principles of justice and the manifest destroyer of the blessings of liberty. As an institution, we are compelled to denounce and abhor it. Yet we concede that in the states where it exists it is politically beyond our reach. But as we cannot deny our responsibility concerning it, so long as it finds protection under the laws of the federal government, so we will never cease to war against it so long as the purpose of the constitution shall remain unaccomplished to secure the blessings of liberty to all within its power.

2. That in following in the footsteps of the fathers of the republic, who regarded freedom as the national and slavery as the sectional sentiment, we best vindicate their claims to enlightened patriotism, and our own to be considered loyal supporters of the government they established; and that opposition to any extension of slavery, and to any augmenta­ tion of its power, is clearly the duty of all who respect the doctrine or the practice of the wisest and ablest of the framers of the constitution.

3. That the attempt now pending in congress to re­ peal the enactment by which the vast territory north of the Missouri compromise line was dedicated to freedom is an outrage

351 352 upon justice, humanity and good faith; one by which traitorous ambition, confederated with violation of a solemn and time honored compact, is seeking to inflict upon the nation a deep and indelible disgrace. We denounce the scheme as infamous, and we call upon the people to hold its authors and abettors to the most rigid and righteous accountability. 4. That executive patronage has grown to be an evil of immense magnitude, consolidating the power of the govern­ ment into the hands of the incumbent of the presidential mansion to a degree subversive of all proper accountability to the people; and for which there is no adequate remedy short of a transfer of this power from the president to the people.

5. That we are in favor of cheap postage by land and sea; of free grants of land out of the public domain in limited quantities to actual settlers; of harbor and river improvements, national in their character; and of grants by the government in aid for the railroads to the Pacific in such form as shall best avoid the wasteful splendor of govern­ ment jobs, and secure the early completion of the road.

6. That upon question of state policy we are in favor of the re-enactment of the law for the suppression of the traffic in intoxicating liquors, with such amendments as shall remove all constitutional doubts and secure the highest degree of efficiency to the law. We are in favor of general laws under which capital may be associated and combined for the prosecution of works of public improvement and of various industrial pursuits. We are in favor of free schools and of such a disposition of the public money as shall promote the interest of the state rather than the interests of any in­ dividual or corporation; and especially are we opposed to the loaning of the public money at 1 per cent interest.

Free Democrat, February 23, 1854. APPENDIX F

RESOLUTIONS MASS CONVENTION, FREE DEMOCRATS COURT HOUSE, KALAMAZOO, JUNE 21, 18 WHEREAS, This convention, called to aid in concentra­ ting the popular sentiment of this State to resist the aggres­ sions of the slave power, as deeply impressed with the impor­ tance of the crisis in our national affairs; we are compelled to contemplate a strife in the councils of the nation, par­ ticipated in to some extent by the people, in which the elemental principles of wrong and injustice are warring against the interests of justice and liberty. We have seen this strife carried to a degree of success shameful to its authors, and which excites the most alarming apprehensions for the peace and prosperity of the country; we have seen our national government sinking from the position of the freest nation on earth, to that of a mere Presidential despotism and that, too, controlled by a system of iniquity which is a disgrace to our country and the scorn of mankind Therefore,

1. RESOLVED, That the Constitution of the United States establishes a government of freemen for a free people; and that in so far as the government has been perverted from its original purpose, it is the duty of every lover of his country to seek its complete restoration to the original pur­ pose of its authors.

2. RESOLVED, That the institution of slavery which existed in some of the States at the formation of the Con­ stitution, was then regarded as exceptional, and local in its character, and was to be limited and restricted until it should finally disappear.

3. RESOLVED, That in the recent passage of the bill for the organization of the territories of Nebraska and Kansas, we see the crowning character of slavery has been gradually changed, until it has become the great national interest of the country, for the protection of which every other interest must be sacrificed; and its power has become so potent that from the President to the Postmaster, all the functionaries of the executive government, and a majority in Congress are twisted and corrupted by it into absolute subjection to its insulting demands.

4. RESOLVED, That evils so great as these demand a remedy; and that if that remedy cannot be found in the virtue of the people, a people who are yet true to the instincts of liberty, to the immortal principles promulgated by the fathers of the Constitution--a people who enjoy the blessings of the government they established, and a people who are yet willing to display something of the energy and perseverance and if need be sacrifice, which moved the patriots of seventy- six to the accomplishment of their great work, then the days of the Republic are numbered, and it must soon become what its laws will make it, a nation of slaves.

354 355

5. RESOLVED, That we do not, and will not despair; that we believe the people of this State are ready to respond to the call of their country in this emergency; that they are ready, irrespective of all past political preferences, to declare in an unmistakable tone, their will; and that will is that Slavery aggression upon their rights shall go no further, that there shall be no compromise with Slavery, that there shall be no Slave Territory, that the Fugitive Slave law shall be repealed, that the abominations of Slavery shall no longer be perpetrated under the sanctions of the Federal Constitution and that they will make their will effective by driving from every place of official power the public servants who have so shamelessly betrayed their trust, and by putting in their places men who are honest and capable; men who will be faithful to the Constitution and the great claims of humanity.

6 . RESOLVED, That the Free Democracy of Michigan rejoice to behold the indications of popular sentiment, fur­ nished by this Convention; they are conscious that the deeply aroused feeling of the masses in this State will seek a suitable expression in a Convention springing from themselves, irre­ spective of any existing political organization; and that if such a movement shall be animated and guided by the principles expressed in the resolutions of this Convention, and shall contemplate an efficient organization to give effect to our principles in this State, we shall willingly surrender our distinctive organization, and with it the ticket for State officers nominated at Jackson, on the 22d of February last; and that we commit the execution of this purpose to a Com­ mittee of sixteen--two persons from each Judicial District, to be appointed by this convention.

Daily Democrat, June 22, 1854 . APPENDIX G

CALL FOR THE "UNDER OAKS" REPUBLICAN CONVENTION JACKSON, JULY 6, 1854 TO THE PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN!

A great wrong has been perpetrated. The slave power has triumphed--liberty is trampled under foot. The Missouri Compromise, a solemn compact entered into by our fathers, has been violated, and a vast territory dedicated to freedom has been opened to slavery. This act, so unjust to the north, has been perpetrated under circumstances which deepen its perfidy. An Administra­ tion, placed in power by northern votes, has brought to bear all the resources of executive corruption to its support.

Northern senators and representatives, in the face of the overwhelming public sentiment of the north, expressed in the proceedings of public meetings, and solemn remonstrances, without a single petition in its favor on their table, and not daring to submit this great question to the people, have yielded to the seductions of executive patronage, and, Judas like, betrayed the cause of liberty; while the south, inspired by a dominant and grasping ambition- has, without distinction of party, and with a unanimity almost entire, deliberately trampled under foot a solemn compact entered into in the midst of a crisis threatening to the peace of the Union-- sanctioned by the greatest names of our history--and the bind­ ing force of which has, for a period of more than thirty years, been recognized and declared by numerous acts of legislation.

Such an outrage upon liberty, such a violation of plighted faith, cannot be submitted to. This great wrong must be righted, or there is no longer a north in the councils of our nation. The extension of slavery under the folds of the Ameri­ can flag is a stigma upon liberty. The indefinite increase of slave representation in Congress is destructive of that equality between freemen, which is essential to the permanency of the Union. The safety of the Union--the rights of the north-- the interests of free labor--the destiny of a vast territory and its untold millions for all coming time--and, finally, the high aspirations of humanity for universal freedom, all are involved in the issue, forced upon the country by the slave power, and its plastic northern tools.

In view, therefore, of the recent action of Congress upon this subject, and the evident designs of the slave power to attempt still further aggressions upon Freedom--we invite our fellow citizens without reference to former political 357 358 associations, who think the time has arrived for Union at the North to protect Liberty from being overthrown and down­ trodden, to assemble in Mass Convention, on Thursday, the sixth of July next, at one o ’clock, at Jackson, there to take such measures as shall be thought best to concentrate the popular sentiment of this State against the encroachments of the slave power.

Detroit Daily Advertiser, July 6, 1854. APPENDIX H

CALL FOR THE MASS CONVENTION OF THE FREE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO BE HELD IN KALAMAZOO, JUNE 21, 1854 FELLOW CITIZENS--A fearfully momentous question is agitating the American people: It is whether within the forms of the constitution (which were designed to establish and extend the blessings of liberty) the scope and intent of that instrument shall be subverted, and its whole power exerted to promote and extend the system of slavery which prevails in some of the states of the Union.

Step by step within a third of a century have the enemies of freedom advanced, at first cautiously, but with increasing boldness, and step by step have its friends been driven back, until by the crowning perfidy of the passage of the Nebraska bill, the constitution is subverted, and that system which at the organization of our government begged for a temporary existance, has become the great controlling power of the nation. Slavery is rampant in the capitol. It makes and unmakes presidents, and its presidential tools buy and sell the representatives of the people like chattels in market. There is no lower depth that the nation can reach but one; and that is, that the people, by adopting the act of their representatives in congress, shall voluntarily con­ sent to share this degradation. People of Michigan, can it be that this foul scheme will receive your sanction? Can it be that the immense region about to be organized as the Nebraska and Kansas territories, in which free institutions ought to be allowed an unquestioned right, which right, moreover, has been bought and paid for by concessions which have introduced three slave states in Union; can it be that free men after they have bought their own domain shall be compelled to submit to the robbery of that which was their own by nature and by purchase? Shall they submit without complaint? Will they raise a voice of remonstrance? Is the spirit of liberty--the spirit of the fathers of the revolution, the haters of oppression of every form--"crushed out" at the impudent command of a demagogue, and crushed out forever? People of Michigan! Look at your representatives in congress. Are you satisfied with their conduct? How recently have most, if not all of them, when seeking your favor, committed themselves fully against the extension of slavery into free territory? Is that their position now? Give all the credit you can to the two who voted, at the passage of the bill, against it. How much are they still justly answerable for in smoothing the way of the dominant majority to this most shameful success; and you will retain them? Are you willing to share their degradation by approving their conduct by which the passage of the bill was finally accomplished?

The undersigned, representing the only political party in this state, which, as a party, adopt as a principle in its political creed opposition to the extension of slavery, believe that the time has come when the people who regard slavery as a 360 361 sectional and not a national institution should rally to vindi­ cate this principle, take the liberty to invite a mass conven­ tion of all who would restore the government to its original position on the slavery question, of all who are opposed to the consumation of the Nebraska fraud, to assemble at Kalamazoo on the 21st of June next, at noon, there to concentrate their opposition to the rapid strides of the slave power, in such a manner as shall be deemed most practical and efficient, and to protect their own cherished rights as citizens of free states. In taking the initiative in this call they intend no disrespect to any party or body of their fellow citizens who may sympathize with them in its object. They could not, without seeming to neglect the interests which they are especially appointed to promote, decline to act at this juncture, and they believe it their duty to act promptly. They desire it, however, to be understood that all who approve the objects of this call, as above expressed, are earnestly invited by their presence and participation in the convention to show that the people are aroused, and that the day of retribution to their betrayers is at hand.

Daily Democrat, June 22, 1854 APPENDIX I

RESOLUTIONS REPUBLICAN MASS CONVENTION KALAMAZOO, SEPTEMBER 12, 1855 RESOLVED, That the affairs of that beautiful but unfortunate territory; the open and undisguised violence in the shape of an armed invasion from Missouri, by which the voice of its lawful inhabitants has been suppressed at the polls; the fruitless efforts of its late governor to procure their rights, punished by a removal from office, by a national executive as supple and corrupt as he is weak and heartless; the numerous acts of lawless violence committed against the persons and property of peaceable settlers, by the petty tyrants of the hour, who affect to lord it over their fellows like banditti treading a piratical deck: the utter disregard of the organic law, on the part of the so- called legislature, in changing their place of session from amidst the great body of the settlers to the Missouri frontier, the better to carry out the conspiracy to enforce slavery upon them; the character of some of their legislative proceedings, indicating a purpose to punish as a felony, every spoken or written thought adverse to the establishment of slavery in the territory, and visiting with imprisonment at hard labor, the exercise of the freedom of speech--a penalty which would not be tolerated in any other country on the globe, civilized or barbarous; all this presents a spectacle disgraceful alike to the government of the United States and the authors, one and all, of the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise; of the miserable delusion known as squatter sovereignty, and the equally miserable sophistries of southern nullification passed through the northern alembic of the "Nicholson Letter." RESOLVED, That it is the duty of congress to restore freedom to Kansas and Nebraska. That, in view of the histori­ cal fact that in every instance of the addition of slave territory to the union, the executive has been the initiatory and primary instrument, the time has come for the representa­ tives of the people to give utterance and effect to the popular will, and to teach presidents and cabinet as well as aspirants for place that they must yield to the will of the majority; that the voice of that majority must govern, and that if the union is ever placed in peril, it will be for the reason that that voice is disobeyed.

RESOLVED, That by the well-settled principles of law, the relation of master and slave becomes absolutely extin­ guished whenever a slave arrives in a free state by the con­ sent of his master; that, therefore the doctrine lately held by Judge Kane in Pennsylvania, under which Passmore Williamson has been imprisoned, is no law; that the order of said judge for such imprisonment is a high handed and tyrannical usurpation of power, by which a respectable citizen has been deprived of his liberty, for no other reason but that he informed an ignorant and defenseless woman of her rights under the constitution of the United States, and the laws of

363 364

Pennsylvania, and that so glaring a prostitution of the judicial ermine fills us with sorrow and shame, and cannot but be regarded even by slave owners with contempt and abhorrence - RESOLVED, That, though the question of slavery as above defined, is one of great interest, yet we regard it with as little apprehension in reference to the safety of the Union as many others which have been peaceably settled, as one the discussion of which, in congress or out, is fraught with none but imaginary dangers; that the constitu­ tion and the Union are too rich in benefits to the whole people, and too firmly imbedded in their affections, to suffer any detriment from the freest discussion and action upon the subject. And we look with pity upon those timid and doubting minds who, yielding to groundless fears or obsequious to their demagogues, are ever exclaiming--Woe, Woe to the Union; as if their feeble cry could either shake down the walls of the citadel or startle the millions of true sentinels who guard it. But should the union be ever seriously menaced on account of slavery or any other subject, we pledge ourselves to defend it with the same patriotic devotion which gave it birth.

RESOLVED, That we hold it to be the duty of congress to make appropriations for the improvement of the rivers and harbors connected with the inland trade of the country; that the commerce of the lakes particularly demands the exercise of this plainly granted power. . . .

Daily Advertiser, September 13, 1855. APPENDIX J

RESOLUTIONS REPUBLICAN MASS CONVENTION MARSHALL, MICHIGAN, JULY 8, 18 2. RESOLVED, That, in the approaching campaign, the self-styled Democratic party have already proffered to the people of the United States the proposition that under the constitution, slavery is national and freedom sectional, that the Republican party joining issue with them, here inscribe on their banner the sentiment that freedom is national and slavery sectional, that the latter cannot be established solely by the laws of the United States, but exists only by local law, and if recognized at all, is not elsewhere, or otherwise recognized by the constitution of the United States. 3. RESOLVED, That the report of the Missouri Com­ promise, and their bloody crusade against Free Territory, under the sophistical name of "Popular Sovereignty," as con­ ducted by the present Democratic party (so called) and lately re-affirmed in their Cincinnati Convention, has wan­ tonly unsealed and broken open the compromises of 1789, 1820, and 1850; already involved the country in the horrors of its first civil war; and unsettled the very foundations of the Republic; that the conduct of the present administration and its supporters, in this respect, and their cruel indif­ ference to the wrongs and demands of the free settlers of Kansas is, in the opinion of all freemen, a palpable and treasonable violation of both the spirit and letter of the constitution, which distinctly guarantees that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," and which was ordained, according to its own language, "to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

4. RESOLVED, That the Congress of the United States, is under the constitution the only repository of power over the Territories; that the propriety of it has long been established by precedent and conclusively demonstrated by the prosperous history of the great northwest; and that the folly and danger of any deviation from this wholesome prin­ ciple, is by the late movements in the Senate now fully con­ ceded, and by the very men who have heretofore assumed to carry out this experiment of squatter sovereignty, were amply sustained by Roder Ruffians and beleagured and violated ballot boxes. 5. RESOLVED, That the Democratic party (so called) of today, is properly and deservedly held responsible for the gross and unparalleled outrages committed upon the Free State men of Kansas, for that newly revised Draconian Code of Laws therein enacted by a Ruffian Legislature and their shame­ less acts thereunder. Nor can they divest themselves of the 366 367

merited odium now visited upon them, by any specious and plausible concession of those settlers' rights as set forth in the bill lately introduced into the Senate by Mr. Toombs, the provisions of which bill requiring all voters at the election thereby contemplated, to be residents of the Terri­ tory on the first day of July, virtually disfranchises all those Free State men who have been driven out by bills of indictment and the bayonet point; and in fact, upholds and acknowledges the validity of the late acts of that bogus Legislature which have disgraced both the nation and the age; and also by its further provisions for a board of commissioners to be appointed by the President, who shall determine the eligibility and qualifications of electors, is evidently designed to give the control of the election into the hands of the pro-slavery party--all of which provisions are fully comprehended by the voters of Michigan and will be effectually remembered.

6. RESOLVED, That the blood of Rus. P. Brown, of Cass County, and William Gay, of Hillsdale, late Shawnee agent, calls to us from the soil of Kansas, where they have fallen victims of Border Ruffianism, and to all who are opposed to the conspiracy against freedom in the territory, to revenge their murder and vindicate their memory at the ballot-box of November next. 7. RESOLVED, That young Kansas, as she stands knock­ ing at the door of the Union, with the Topeka constitution in her hand, is entitled, and of right ought to be forthwith admitted as a free and independent state--that, as such, sooner or later, she must come in, and we hereby unitedly pledge our countenance, support and influence to this end.

8. RESOLVED, That the principle of "might makes right," as advocated by Mr. Buchanan before the Ostend con­ ference, and commended by his friends, is unworthy of a people who call themselves civilized and free, is utterly opposed to the best interests of the country, and that he, as -its advocate, is not entitled to the support of those who wish well to the Republic. 9. RESOLVED, That modern Democracy (so called) has shown itself unequivocally opposed to freedom, and favorable to slavery and its extension: opposed to the constitution and its conservation of freedom, and in favor of platforms and party watchwords, which they place above the constitution; opposed to the restraints of law and the Freedom of Speech, and in favor of outrage and a ruthless proscription of all who do not obey slavery dictation: opposed, persistently opposed, to the improvement of our Rivers and Harbors, and the building of our great national highways, yet in favor of 368 an extravagant squandering of the public money for party pur­ poses and in view thereof, they and their representatives, Buchanan and Breckenridge, are totally unworthy of the support of a free Republic. 10. RESOLVED, That we hearily endorse the ticket presented by the Philadelphia Convention, as well as the principles and measures there adopted and recommended: and that condemning all party cries of "Disunionists," "Black Republicans," "Negro Worshippers," etc., we will boldly advance under the Republican banner, and battle, as of old, for the Union and the Constitution, for Free Territory, Free Men, Free Speech, and Fremont. 11. RESOLVED, That the various officers of the present State Administration, have, by their economy, pru­ dence and vigilance in all the various departments of the • government, secured to themselves the entire approbation of every unprejudiced voter in Michigan, and that it is with confidence they are again presented for a renewed expression of public favor by this convention. 12. RESOLVED, That vigilance, energy, organization, discussion, a free circulation of political facts, and a determination to conquer are requisites of victory in the coming campaign; and we commend an unlimited exercise of the same to the free voters of every county, city, township, and school district throughout the borders of our State.

Detroit Daily Advertiser, July 10, 1856.