STUDENT READINGS: THE FUGITIVE SLAVE ISSUE READING #1 FREEING SHADRACH MINKINS “On Saturday morning, February 15, 1851, two officers posing as customers at Taft’s Cornhill Coffee House seized the waiter Shadrach Minkins, a ‘stout, copper-colored man,’ who had escaped from slavery in Virginia and settled in Boston. Minkins was taken to the nearby courthouse for a hearing. Lawyers Robert Morris, Richard Henry Dana, Jr., Ellis Gray Loring and Samuel E. Sewall offered their services as Minkin’s counsel…. “Later, a crowd of black and white abolitionists entered the courthouse, overcame armed guards and forced their way into the courtroom. “In the chaotic struggle, black abolitionists arrested [captured] Minkins from his court officers, carried him off and temporarily hid him in a Beacon Hill attic. From there, Boston black leaders Lewis Hayden, John J. Smith and others helped Minkins escape from Massachusetts, and he eventually found his way to Canada on the Underground Railroad.” “The Ordeal of Shadrach Minkins,” Massachusetts Historical Society, www.masshist.org/longroad/O1slavery/minkins.htm accessed 5-18-2015. 2 READING #2 FUGITIVE SLAVES In 1850, Shadrach Minkins was one of many fugitive slaves living in the North. Each year 1,000 or so slaves escaped from their owners. Not all of them made their way to freedom. Most runaways were captured before reaching the North, as slave owners offered large rewards for runaways. Those who did escape to free states were a small percentage of the South’s 3 million slaves. Yet many managed to do so. Runaway slaves found different ways to avoid being captured. Some wore disguises. Others used false identification papers that claimed they were slaves freed by their owners. Still others avoided being caught by traveling at night. Most received help along the way, often from other African Americans. The following is an account of a successful escape by William and Ellen Craft. The Crafts escaped from Georgia in 1848 and made their way to Boston. When authorities from Georgia came after them in 1850, Boston abolitionists helped them flee to England. The account was written by William W. Brown, who also was a runaway slave. The Escape of William and Ellen Craft “One of the most interesting cases of the escape of fugitives from American slavery that have ever come before the American people, has just occurred, under the following circumstances:-- William and Ellen Craft, man and wife, lived with different masters in the State of Georgia. Ellen is so near white, that she 3 can pass without suspicion for a white woman. Her husband is much darker. He is a mechanic, and by working nights and Sundays, he laid up money enough to bring himself and his wife out f slavery….Ellen dressed in man’s clothing, and passed for the master, while her husband passed as the servant. In this way they travelled from Georgia to Philadelphia. They are now out of the reach of the blood-hounds of the South…. Ellen is truly a heroine.” The Liberator (Boston), January 12, 1849. As soon as the Fugitive Slave Act was passed, slave owners sent agents into the free states to bring back runaways. They took with them arrest warrants issued by southern courts. Once they had captured the fugitive, the agents brought the person before a federal commissioner. If the captured African American matched the description in the warrant, the commissioner had no choice but to hand the person over. If most runaways failed to reach the North, why was the fugitive slave issue so important to the South? Each successful escape, of course, represented a significant financial loss to individual slave owners. But many also saw the Fugitive Slave Act as a test of the North’s intentions. Enforcing it would be a sign of the North’s willingness to respect the South’s institutions and to compromise on the issue of slavery. As leaders in Georgia declared in 1850, “upon the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Bill…depends the preservation of our much loved Union.” 4 READING #3 A CLOSER LOOK AT THE FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW Provisions of the Fugitive Slave Law September 18, 1850 “SEC 5. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of all [federal] marshals and deputy marshals to obey and execute all warrants and precepts issued under the provisions of this act…and all good citizens are hereby commanded to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient execution of this law, whenever their services may be required. “SEC. 6. And be it further enacted, That when a person held to service of labor in any State or Territory of the United States…shall escape into another State or Territory of the United States, the person or persons to whom such service or labor may be due…may pursue and reclaim such fugitive person…to take and remove such fugitive person back to the State or Territory whence he or she may have escaped as aforesaid. In no trial or hearing under this act shall the testimony of such alleged fugitive be admitted in evidence…. SEC. 7. And be it further enacted, That any person who shall knowingly and willingly obstruct, hinder, or prevent such claimant…from arresting such a fugitive…or attempt to rescue, such fugitive…shall, for either of said offences, be subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding six months. 5 SEC. 8. And be it further enacted, That…in all cases where the proceedings are before a commissioner, he shall be entitled to a fee of ten dollars…in each case, upon the delivery…to the claimant…or a fee of five dollars in cases where the proof shall not…warrant such certificate and delivery….” Act of Congress, September 18, 1850; U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. IX, p. 462ff. A Historian Interprets the Fugitive Slave Law David M. Potter “…The Fugitive Slave Law, as enacted, contained a number of [harsh] provisions. First it denied the alleged fugitive any right to jury trial…. Second, it permitted his case to be…tried before a commissioner appointed by the courts. Third, it allowed the commissioner a $10 fee in cases in which the alleged fugitive was delivered to the [owner], but only a $5 fee in cases when he was set free…. “One must recognize that it was far more than a law to overtake slaves in the act of running away. It was also a device to recover slaves who had run away in the past…. For example, in February 1851, in Madison, Indiana, a Negro named Mitchum was torn from his wife and children and delivered to a person from whom it was claimed that he had run away nineteen years before.” David M. Potter, The Impending Crisis, 1848- 1861(New York: Harper and Row, 1976), p. 131. Anthony Burns Fugitive Slave Trial Few attempts by antislavery people to free runaways slaves who were captured succeeded. Why did this attempt fail? 6 “May 25, 1854, Thursday. — This morning a little before nine o’clock, as I was going past the courthouse, a gentleman told me that there was a fugitive slave in custody in the United States courtroom. I went up immediately and saw a Negro, sitting in the usual place for prisoners, guarded by a large corps of officers…. “May 26, 1854, Friday. — Tonight a great meeting is to be held at Faneuil Hall. There is a strong feeling in favor of a rescue…. May 27, 1854, Saturday. — Last night an attempt was made to rescue the slave. It was conducted by a few and failed for want of numbers….They broke in a door of the courthouse, and a few of them entered, but they were not supported…. The trial of the Burns case occupied all day of Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, 29th, 30th, and 31st of May. Each day the courtroom was filled with the United States marshal’s guard…a gang of about one hundred and twenty men…alarmed with revolvers and other weapons. “June 2, 1854, Friday. —This was a day of intense excitement and deep feeling in the city, in the state, and throughout New England and indeed a great part of the Union. The hearts of millions of persons were beating high with hope, or indignation, or doubt…. Three companies of regulars [troops] fill the streets and squares from the courthouse to the end of the wharf, where the revenue [ship] lies in which it is understood that Burns, if remanded, will be taken to Virginia. “The decision was short. … He was convicted.” Diary of Richard Henry Dana, May, 25, 26, 27, 1854. 7 READING #4 PERSONAL LIBERTY LAWS: PRO AND CON Massachusetts’ Personal Liberty Law May 21, 1855 After Anthony Burns’ capture, the state of Massachusetts passed a personal liberty law to protect fugitive slaves. How did the act make capturing runaways more difficult? “Sec. 15. Any sheriff, deputy sheriff, jailer, coroner, constable, or other officer of this Commonwealth, or the police of any city or town…who shall hereafter arrest…any person for the reason that he is claimed or adjudged to be a fugitive from service or labor, shall be punished by fine…and by imprisonment…. “Sec. 16. The volunteer militia of the Commonwealth shall not act in any manner in the seizure…of any person for the reason that he is claimed or adjudged to be a fugitive from service or labor…. “Sec. 19. No jail, prison, or other place of confinement belonging to, or used by, either the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or any county therein, shall be used for the detention or imprisonment of any person accused or convicted of any offence created by [the Federal Fugitive Slave Act].” Source: Massachusetts, Acts and Resolves (Boston, 1855), p.