aass_:LA.5i Book Jd-U ■ PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE COLLEGIATE INSTRUCTION OF WOMEN Fay House Monographs No. 3 FUGITIVE SLAVES (1619-1865) BY • MARION GLEASON McDOUGALL PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF ALBERT BUSHNELL HART, Ph.D. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY BOSTON, U.S.A. PUBLISHED BY GINN & COMPANY 1891 ■MI3 Co h ^f^Z Copyright, 1891, By the Society for the Collegiate Instruction of Women. Gift The University John Wilson and Son, Cambridge. 5:^ EDITOR'S PREFACE. Every careful student of history is aware that it is no longer possible to write the general history of any important country from the original sources ; on any period, the materials which accumu- late in a year are more than can be assimilated by one mind in three years. The general historian must use the results of others' work. It is therefore essential that the great phases of political and constitutional development be treated in monographs, each devoted to a single, limited subject and each prepared on a careful and scientific method. This first number of the historical series of the Fay House Monographs aims to discuss the single topic of Fugitive Slaves. Mrs. McDougall has drawn together and -compared many cases found in obscure sources, and has perhaps been able to correct some commonly received impressions on this neglected subject. Even in its limited range this does not pretend to be a complete work in the sense .that all the available cases are discussed or recorded. The effort has been made to use the cases as illustra- tions of principles, and to add such bibliography as may direct the reader^to further details. The appendix of laws is as full as it was possible to make it from the collections in the Boston Public and Massachusetts State Libraries. If the monograph prove useful to the student of American history, it will meet the expectations of author and editor. ALBERT BUSHNELL HART. Cambridge, April 2, 1S91. [iii] AUTHOR'S PREFACE. The following monograph was written while the author was a student in the " Harvard Annex " as a study in the Seminary course given by Professor Albert Bushnell Hart. The work has continued during parts of the four years since 1887. The effort has been to trace in some measure the development of public senti- ment upon the subject, to prepare an outline of Colonial legislation and of the work of Congress during the entire period, and to give accounts of typical cases illustrative of conditions and opinions. Only a few of the more important cases are described minutely, but a critical list of the authorities may be found in the biblio- graphical appendix. The thanks of the author are due first to Professor Hart, under whose direction and with whose assistance and encouragement the monograph has been prepared ; then to Miss Anna B. Thompson, without whose careful training in the Thayer Academy and con- tinued sympathy, the work could not have been undertaken. Many thanks are due also to the authorities of the Library of Harvard College for the use, in the alcoves, of their large and con- veniently arranged collection of books and pamphlets on United States History, and to the assistants in the Boston Public and Massachusetts State Libraries for courteous aid. Colonel T. W. Higginson has kindly examined the chapter on the cases from 1850 to i860, suggesting some interesting details; and Mr. Arthur Gilman has read the whole in proof, and made many valuable suggestions. MARION GLEASON McDOUGALL. Rockland, Mass., April 2, 1S91. [iv] CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. LEGISLATION AND CASES BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION. Page § I Elements of colonial slavery i § 2. Regulations as to fugitives (1640-1700) 2 § 3. Treatment of fugitives 3 § 4. Regulations in New England colonies 4 § 5. Escapes in New England : Attucks case 5 § 6. Dutch regulations in New Netherlands 6 § 7. Escapes from New Amsterdam 6 § 8. Intercolonial regulations 7 § 9. Intercolonial cases , ° § 10. International relations 9 § II. Intfernational cases - 'O § 12. Relations with the mother country • " § 13. Regulation under the Articles of Confederation ( 1781-1788) 12 § 14. Ordinance for the Northwest Territory (1787) 13 § 15. The Fugitive question in the Constitutional Conventions 14 CHAPTER II. LEGISLATION FROM 17S9 TO 1850. § 16. Effect of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution 16 § 17. The first Fugitive Slave Act (1793) J^_ § 18. Discussion of the first act '° § 19. Propositions of 1797 and 1802 ^9 § 20. Propositions from 1S17 to 1822 21 § 21. Period of the Missouri Compromise ( 1819-1822) 23 § 22. Status of the question from 1S23 to 1847 -4 § 23. Canada and Mexico places of refuge 25 § 24. Status of fugitives on the high seas 26 § 25. Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850: Prigg case 27 § 26. Necessity of more stringent fugitive slave provisions 28 § 27. Action of Congress from 1847 to 1850 28 § 28. Slavery in the District of Columbia 29 § 29. The second Fugitive Slave Act (1850) 2^^ § 30. Provisions of the second Fugitive Slave Act 3° § 31. Arguments for the bill 3' § 32. Arguments against the bill 3^ [v] vi Fugitive Slaves. CHAPTER III. PRINCIPAL CASES FROM 1789 TO 1860. Page § 33. Change in character of cases 34 § 34. The first case of rescue ( 1793) 35 § 35. President Washington's denaand for a fugitive (1796) 35 § 36. Kidnapping cases 36 § 37. Jones case ( 1S36) 36 § 38. Solomon Northup case (about 1830) 37 § 39- Washington case (between 1S40 and 1850) 38 § 40. Oberlin case (1841) 38 § 41. Interference and rescues 38 § 42. Chickasaw rescue (1836) 38 § 43. Philadelphia case (1838) 39 § 44. Latimer case (1842) 39 § 45. Ottoman case ( 1846) 40 § 46. Interstate relations 41 § 47. Boston and Isaac cases (1837, 1839) 41 § 48. Ohio and Kentucky cases {1848) 41 § 49. Prosecutions 42 § 50. Van Zandt, Pearl, and Walker cases (1840, 1844) 42 § 51. Unpopularity of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 43 § 52. Principle of the selection of cases 43 § 53. Hamlet case (1850) 43 § 54. Sims case ( 1851 ) 44 § 55. Burns case (1854) 45 § 56. Garner case ( 1856) 46 § 57. Shadrach case (1851) 47 § 58. Jerry McHenry case (1851) 48 § 59. Oberlin-Wellington case (1858) 49 § 60. Christiana case ( 1851 ) 50 § 61. Miller case (1851) 51 § 62. John Brown in Kansas (1858) 51 CHAPTER IV. FUGITIVES AXD THEIR FRIENDS. Methods of escape ^}, §64 §65 §66 §67 §68 §69 Reasons for escape 54 Conditions of slave life 55 Escapes to the woods 5^ Escapes to the North 57 Use of protection papers 58 Fugitives disguised as whites: Craft case 58 Contents. vii Page 70. Underground Railroad 60 § 71. Rise and growth of the system 60 § 72. Metliods pursued 61 § 73. Colored agents of the Underground Railroad 62 § 74. Prosecutions of agents 63 § 75. Formal organization 63 § 76. Generaleffect of escapes 04 CHAPTER V. PERSOiYAL LIBERTY LAWS. § 77. Character of the personal liberty laws 65 § 78. Acts passed before the Prigg decision (i 793-1 842) 05 § 79. Acts passed between the Prigg decision and the second Fugitive Slave Law ( 1842-1850) 66 § 80. Acts occasioned by the law of 1850 ( 1850-1S60) 66 § 81. Massachusetts acts 67 § 82. Review of the acts by States 69 § 83. Effect of the personal liberty laws 70 CHAPTER VI. THE END OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE QUESTION (1S60-1SG5). § 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1860-61 71 § 86. Proposition to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law 72 § 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law 7 j § 88. The question of slaves of rebels 7 ? § 89. Slavery attacked in Congress 74 § 90. Confiscation bills 75 § 91. Confiscation provisions extended 75 § 92. Effect of the Emancipation Proclamation ( 1S63) 77 § 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States 77 § 94. Typical cases 78 § 95- Question discussed in Congress 73 § 96. Arrests by civil officers go § 97. Denial of the use of jails in the District of Columbia 80 § 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia 82 § 99. Regulations against kidnapping ,"■ 2 § 100. Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts 83 § loi. Early propositions to repeal the acts 8 ^ § 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House 84 § 103. Repeal bills in the Senate 85 § 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment 86 § 105. Educating effect of the controversy 87 viii Fugitive Slaves. APPENDICES. APPENDIX A. Page Colonial laws relative to fugitives 89 APPENDIX B, National acts and propositions relative to fugitive slaves ( 1778-1854) 104 APPENDIX C. National acts and propositions relating to fugitive slaves (1860-1864) 117 APPENDIX D. List of important fugitive slave cases 124 APPENDIX E. Bibliography of fugitive slave cases and fugitive slave legislation 129 ' INDEX 139 CHAPTER I. LEGISLATION AND CASES BEFORE THE CONSTITUTION. § I. Elements of colonial slavery. § 2. Regulations as to fugitives (1640-1700). § 3. Treatment of fugitives. § 4. Regulations in New England colonies. § 5. Escapes in New England : Attucks case. § 6. Dutch regulations in New Netherlands. § 7. Escapes from New Amsterdam. § 8. Intercolonial regulations. § 9. Intercolonial cases. § ID. International relations. § II. International cases. § 12. Relations with the mother country. § 13. Regulation under the Articles of Confederation (1781-1788). § 14. Ordinance for the Northwest Territory (1787). § 15. The Fugitive question in the Constitutional Conventions. § I. Elements of colonial slavery. — By the middle of the seven- teenth century, the settlements made in America by the English, Dutch, and Swedes were arranged for the most part in a line of little colonies closely following the Atlantic coast. To the west, wide forests and plains, broken only by the paths of the Indian, stretched on to the Pacific ; while long intervals of un- populated country separated the colonists on the north from the French in Canada, and on the south from the Spaniards in Florida. In all the colonies thus grouped together, the system of slavery had already become well established, and with its institution the question of the escape and return of the slaves had necessarily arisen. The conditions of the country, both physical and social, gave unusual facilities for flight. The wild woods, the Indian set- tlements, or the next colony, peopled by a foreign race, and per- haps as yet without firmly estabhshed government, offered to the slave a refuge and possibly protection. Escape, therefore, as a peculiar danger, demanded peculiar remedies. Though it is the purpose of this monograph not so much to study the detail of [I] 2 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch i. legislation or escape in the colonies as to deal with the period trom 1789 to 1865, a. slight sketch of the intercolonial laws and provisions which preceded and in part suggested later legislation will first be necessary. Almost immediately after the introduction of slavery, in 1619, we begin to find regulations made by the colonists upon this sub- ject. At first they applied solely to their own territory, but soon agreements were entered into among several colonies, or between a colony and the Indians or the French in Canada. These acts and agreements recognized not only the negro, as at a later period, but also the white and the Indian slave. There existed in some of the colonies of this time a peculiar class of white people, who received no wages, and were bound to their masters.^ Usually these redemptioners were laborers or handicraftsmen, but some- times they were persons of education who had committed a crime, and were sold according to law for a term of years, or for life. One of the class is curiously connected with the education of no less a person than George Washington. An unpublished autobiography of the Reverend John Boucher, who from 1760 to the Revolution was a teacher and preacher in Virginia, contains the following paragraph noticing the fact : — " Mr. Washington was the second of five sons, of parents dis- tinguished neither for their rank nor fortune. . . . George, who, like most people thereabouts at that time, had no other education than reading, writing, and accounts, which he was taught by a convict servant whom his father bought for a schoolmaster, first set out in the world as a surveyor of Orange County."^ §2. Regulations as to fugitives. — The earliest regulation upon this subject is found among the freedoms and exemptions granted by the West India Company, in 1629, "to all Patroons, Masters, or Private Persons" who would agree to settle in New Netherlands. The authorities promised to do all in their power to return to their masters any slaves or colonists fleeing from service.^ A little later, the Swedish colonists in Pennsylvania asked from their government the same privilege of reclaiming fugitives.* The preamble of an act against fugitives in East Jersey, in 1686, explains these provisions. They found that " the securing of such 1 Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, I. 295 2 Nation, April 18, 1SS9. * Appendix A, No. i. * N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 211. §§ 1-3-] Treatment of Fugitives. 3 persons as Run away, or otherwise absent themselves from their master's lawfull Occasion," was "a material encouragement to such Persons as come into this country to settle Plantations and Popu- late the Province." 1 In many of the Southern colonies, as Mary- land and South Carolina, so severe were the acts against this class of bound colonists that a runaway might be declared outlawed, and might rightfully be killed by any person.^ §3. Treatment of fugitives. — From 1640 to 1700, laws were also passed in New Jersey, Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. It is not necessary to follow out the provisions here,^ but each of the Southern colonics, as in later regulations, provided most minutely for all possible cases. By a Virginia law of 1642, all per- sons who entertained runaways, whether slaves or hired freemen, were to be fined twenty pounds of tobacco for each night's hospi- tality. The fugitives were to add to their tenure of service double their time of absence, and on a second offence to be branded with the letter R "* A curious regulation in 1 660-1, in Virginia, provided that if a negro and white bound servant ran away together, since the negro's time of servitude was for life, and he was therefore inca- pable of making up his lost time, the white servant's punishment should be doubled by adding the negro's sentence to his own.'' Another regulation, entitled " How to Know a Runaway," com- manded that all recovered fugitives have their hair " cutt " close about their ears.*' Sometimes the penalties were even more severe, but the pro- cesses were much the same. A person who found a slave or vagabond without a pass usually took him before the next justice, who took cognizance of the captor's good service, and certified it in the next Assembly: the runaway was then delivered from con- stable to constable, until he was returned to his master. After 1700 the process grows yet more elaborate; for example, take a North Carolina law of 1741. The securer of a runaway was to have seven shillings and sixpence proclamation money, and for every mile over ten which he conducted the fugitive three- pence extra. When seized, runaways were to be whipped and 1 Appendi.x A, No. 45. ^ Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, I. 295. 3 The texts will be iowwA post, Appendix A. * Appendix A, No. 6. 5 Appendix A, No. 23. 6 Appendix A, No. 20. 4 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonics. [Ch. i. placed in the county gaol. If the owner was known, he was notified and went for his slave; if not, a notice describing the runaway- must be placed upon the door of the court-house, and sent to the clerk or reader of each church or chapel within the county. They were required to post all such notices every Lord's day for two months in some convenient place near the church. At the end of this time, should no claimant appear, the slave must be sent from constable to constable, till the public gaol of the government was reached. There, upon consent of the court or of two justices, he might be sold to hire by the gaoler.^ The Maryland Archives record that in 1669 ten thousand pounds of tobacco were appro- priated to build one of these log-house gaols wherein fugitive servants might be lodged.^ § 4. Regulations in New England colonies. — Let us turn now to the New England colonics. Here we must expect to find but few provisions, since the class of slaves and bound servants was so small that it could easily be controlled. The first law in Massa- chusetts Bay was passed in 1630, and was entitled, "An Act re- specting Masters, Servants, and Laborers." In accordance with the arbitrary methods of government then pursued, it included not only runaway servants, but also any persons who should " privily go away with suspicion of evil intention," and ordered the magis- trate " to press men, boats, or pinnaces," and " to bring them back by force of arms." A humane provision, usually wanting in South- ern laws, though also found in New Netherlands, declared that, whenever servants fled on account of the tyranny of their masters, they should be protected until measures for their relief could be taken.^ In Connecticut and New Hampshire similar laws were passed, and in 1707 Massachusetts Bay, in regulating the free negro population, enacted that every freeman or mulatto who should harbor a negro servant in his house without his owner's consent should pay five shillings for the use of the poor of the town.'* In those days, when bridges were few, the ferrymen were ap- parently much relied upon as agents to detect and apprehend runaways. In 17 14 we find that several negro slaves had been carried over ferries, and thus escaped out of Rhode Island. The Assembly therefore enacted that " no ferryman or boatman what- 1 Iredell, 90; Appendix A, No. 73. - Maryland Archives, II. 224. 3 Appendix A, No. 2. * Appendix A, No. 53. §§3-s] Escapes in New England. 5 soever, within this colony, shall carry or bring any slave as afore- said over their ferries, without a certificate under the hands of their masters or mistresses, or some person in authority, upon the penalty of paying all costs and damages their said masters or mistresses shall sustain thereby: and to pay a fine of twenty shillings for the use of the colony for each offence, as aforesaid." All persons were also commanded to take up any slave they might find travelling about without a pass.^ § 5. Escapes in New England: Attucks case. — Although we do not find records of fugitive slave cases tried at this time within the New England colonies, advertisements of runaways exist in sufficient numbers to prove that escapes were common. It seems probable, therefore, that the return of a slave when within his own colony was taken as a matter of course, and roused so little opposition, and required so simple a process at law, that matters concerning it would seldom find mention in the chronicles of the time. Here is a typical advertisement: — " Ran away from Samuel Gilbert of Littleton, an indentured Servant Boy, named Samuel Gilson, about 17 years old, of a middling Stature for his Age, and wears black curled Hair, he carried away with him a blue cloth Coat, a light colored Jacket with sleeves, one pair of worsted Stockings, two striped woolen Shirts, and one good linnen Shirt. He went away in company with a short thick set Fellow, who wore a green coat and a green Jacket double breasted, also a pair Indian green Stockings. Whoever shall take up and secure, or give information of said runaway, so that his master may find him again, shall receive a Reward of two dollars and all neces- sary charges from Samuel Gilbert. "All masters of vessels and others are cautioned against harboring," etc."^ Again a case interesting not only as an illustration of the customs of the time, but also because the fugitive himself bears a name known to history in another connection, is noticed in the Boston Gazette of 1750. Here is advertised as escaping, Octo- ber 2, 1750, from his master, William Browne of Framingham, Massachusetts, " A molatto fellow about twenty-seven years of age, named Crispus." After describing his clothing and appear- ance, a reward of ten pounds, old tenor, is cfiered for his return, and " all masters of vessels and others are cautioned against 1 Appendix A, No. 57; Appendix D, No. 6. ^ Boston Gazette, Jan. i, 1770. 6 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. \. concealing said servant on penalty of law." ^ Tradition has it, however, that he was never arrested, but returned of his own accord after a short time, and was for the next twenty years a faithful servant.^ Then, in 1770, presumably while in town upon one of the expeditions he often undertook to buy and sell cattle for his master, he was drawn into the Boston Massacre of March 5/^ A somewhat famous case, which also occurred in Massachusetts, though many years later, may here be mentioned. About 1769 . one Rotch, a Quaker, and therefore probably opposed to slavery, received on board the whaler Friendship a young negro boy named Boston, belonging to the heirs of William Swain. At the end of the voyage his master, John Swain, brought action in the court of Nantucket against Captain Folger for the recovery of the slave; the jury, whether from lack of evidence or from sympathy cannot be determined, returned a verdict in favor of the defendant.'^ § 6. Dutch regulations in New Netherlands, — The early New Netherlands regulations furnish many interesting provisions con- cerning fugitive servants. Apparently the servile class was nu- merous, and hard to govern. In the words of the ordinance of 1640, " many servants daily run away from their masters, whereby the latter are put to great inconvenience and expense ; the corn and tobacco rot in the field, and the whole harvest is at a standstill, which tends to the serious injury of this country, to their masters' ruin, and to bring the magistracy into contempt." It was there- fore ordained that runaways must, at the end of their term of in- denture, serve double the time of their absence, and make good all loss and damage to their masters; while persons harboring fugitives were obliged to pay a fine of fifty guilders.^ § 7. Escapes from New Amsterdam. — Within these Dutch colonies there is recorded a case of escape as early as 1659. Four men- servants of Comelis Herperts de Jager, of New Amsterdam, ran away to Manhattan. One of them soon returned, and in accord- ance with the regulation made in 1630 by the West India Com- 1 Boston Gazette, Oct. 2, 1750; G. W. Williams, History of the Negro Race in America, I. 330. 2 Liberator, March 16, i860. '^ W. C. Nell's Address at the Nineteenth Anniversary of Boston Massacre.. * Moore, Slavery in Massachusetts, 117. ^ Appendix A, No 3; Appendix D, No. 10. §§5-S.] Dutch and Intercolonial Regulations. 7 pany,^ requiring the return of fugitives in their various settlements, one of the officers of the colony sent to Manhattan an order to arrest and bring back the remaining three in chains.^ § 8. Intercolonial reg^ulations. — It will be seen that most of the colonies considered some provision against runaways necessary to the welfare of the settlements. To secure such legislation in a single colony was a comparatively easy matter; but the un- organized and sparsely settled condition of the country rendered any intercolonial regulations difficult. The first formal agreement of this kind was arranged by the New England Confederation of Plymouth, Massachusetts, Con- necticut, and New Haven, in 1643. In their Articles of Confeder- ation was a clause which promised : " If any servant runn away from his master into any other of these confederated Jurisdiccons, That in such Case vpon the Certyficate of one Majistrate in the Jurisdiccon out of which the said servant fled, or upon other due proofe, the said servant shall be deliuered either to his Master or any other that pursues and brings such Certificate or proofe."^ This clause contains the earliest statement of the principles re- garding the treatment of fugitive slave cases, afterward carried out in the United States statutes of 1787, 1793, and 1850. There was no trial by jury, but the certificate of a magistrate was sufficient evidence to convict the runaway. It is probable, also, that the rendition of fugitives was con- sidered a duty incumbent upon all colonies, whatever their rela- tion to each other, since about this time we find an agreement made for the mutual surrender of fugitives between the Dutch at New Netherlands and the English at New Haven.* Not only did the slaves of the Dutch escape to the English colonies, but they often fled to the forests, where recovery must have been almost impossible unless the Indians could be induced to hunt them out. Curious rewards were sometimes offered. Maryland, in 1669, ordered that any Indian who shall apprehend a fugitive may have a " match coate," or its value.^ Virginia would 1 See ante, § 2. 2 N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 23S ; Letter from Jacob Aldrich to Director Stuyvesant of New Netherlands, New Amstel, 14 May, 1659; Documentary History of N. Y. Colony, II. 556; Appendix D, No. 2. 3 Appendi.x A, No. 8 . Oilman, History of the American People, 605. * N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, I. 342 ; Doyle, English in America, I. 391. ^ Maryland Archives, II. 523. 8 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. i. give " 20 armes length of Roanoke," or its value,^ while in Connecticut " two yards of cloth " was considered sufficient in- ducement.2 We have record of several conferences upon this subject. Governor Burnett of New York asked his Indians to exert themselves in behalf of the Governor of Virginia, who had written to him about the escape of several of his negro servants to the mountains. The Indians promised their help in this and any- other search ; but as they seldom seem to have succeeded, it is probable that their sympathy was with the fugitives.^ Again Governor Burnett demanded the restoration of a certain Indian slave whom they had kidnapped from the English. The Indians acknowledged the fact, but they said that he was then sold to others, and nothing further could be done.'* Canada even in these early times seems also to have been a haven for fugitives. In 1705 New York passed an act, which was renewed in 171 5, to prevent slaves running away from frontier towns like Albany to Canada, because it was of great importance, they said, in time of war, " that no Intelligence be carried from the said city and county to the French in Canada." ° During all this time the Southern colonies, especially the Carolinas and Georgia, were also making many complaints in regard to the difficulty they had in recovering the fugitives, both Indian and negro, who were escaping in large numbers into Florida. There, among the Creek Indians and the Spanish at St. Augustine, they easily found refuge.^ This difficulty was, however, not remedied in colonial times, but continued long after the formation of the Federal Union, and in fact until the close of the Seminole war, in 1845. § 9. Intercolonial cases. — When, as was often the case, no agree- ment upon the return of fugitives had been arranged between the colonies, the rendition of a slave depended wholly upon the state of feeling existing between the two peoples, and sometimes became an important question. Between the New England colonies no cases have been found recorded, although we infer 1 Appendix A, No. 37. 2 Acts and Laws of Connecticut, 229. 3 N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, V. 637 ; Appendix D, No. 4. * N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, V. 793. 6 Appendix A, Nos. 50, 59. 6 Giddings, Exiles of Florida, 2S1 ; Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Tower in America, I. 122. §§S-io.] Intercolonial Cases. 9 that there must have been reason for the insertion of a fugitive slave clause in the Articles of Confederation of 1643.^ Of other early cases one of the most interesting is the escape from Virginia of four Englishmen belonging to the class of bound servants. They rowed in a small boat up the coast as far as Cape May, where they landed.^ They soon found themselves objects of suspicion with the people, and, as was a common prac- tice, took refuge among the Indians. About a year afterward their masters tracked them to their place of refuge, and captured two of them, but the others were again beyond reach. The In- dians, who evidently did not always befriend runaways, had just sold one of them, William Browne, to a Swede, and Browne, learning of his former master's appearance, had found oppor- tunity to escape. The fourth of the fugitives was still among the Mantas, and could not be secured. Of the two recaptured, one was returned without trouble, but the other, Turc, who had just entered the service of a certain Pieter Aldrich, resisted his captors. A struggle took place upon the boat in which they were carrying him away. After wounding three of his guards, he succeeded in making his escape, only to be recaptured almost immediately. When tried for the deed at New Amsterdam, he received a death sentence.^ In this case, one of the most complete in detail left to us, may be found, in the incidents of escape, pursuit, resistance, and final rendition, all the features of the later fugitive slave cases. It is also an example wherein the laws of the period, which re- quired the rendition of a bound white man in the same manner as a negro slave, were strictly carried out: and in the diverse fates of the four men we find instances probably typical of the fortunes of most fugitives of the time. § 10. International relations. — The proximity of the French, Spanish, and Dutch settlements led to escapes from the colonies of one power into those of another. All were slaveholding com- munities, and there was no disposition to shield a slave because his lot was a hard one ; but the distrust and enmity between neigh- boring colonies owing allegiance to different sovereigns caused such escapes to lead to petty quarrels. There was no system of extradition treaties; in fact, there was as yet little international 1 Ante, § 8. 2 Letter from William Beekman to Director Stuyvesaiit, iu N. Y. Colonial Manu- scripts, XIII. 346; Appendix D, No. 3. 3 N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, XIII. 346. lo Fugitive Slaves : — Colonics. [Ch. i. law. Fugitives were demanded as an act of comity, and some- times their delivery was refused. It was hardly a subject on which the home governments bestirred themselves. The colonies Avere left to make their own agreements, or to settle their own disagreements. § II. International cases. — Thus far only those cases have been noticed wliich arose within and between colonies of the same nation. Let us now consider a very early case of disagreement between colonies of different nations, which occurred in 1646. The commissioners of the United Colonies made complaint to the Governor of New Netherlands that his Dutch agent at Hart- ford was harboring one of their Indian slaves. Soon after, Gov- ernor Stuyvesant was refused the return of some of his runaway servants from New Haven. Thereupon the angry Lords of the West India Company issued a proclamation commanding that there should be no rendition of fugitive slaves to New Haven. This provision continued in effect until Governor Elton sent back some of the fugitives to New Netherlands. It was then annulled, and a mutual agreement to return the runaways was entered into by the United Colonies and the Dutch. ^ Governor John Win- throp, in his History of New England, refers to the case, and says that Massachusetts Bay endeavored to bring about a reconciliation, and wrote to the Governor of New Netherlands intimating to him that " at their request he might send back the fugitives without prejudice to their right or reputation." ^ Maryland also found difficulty, from the readiness with which her servants could flee north to New Netherlands. In the State Archives may be found a letter sent by the authorities to the Governor of New Netherlands, as follows : — "Sir, — Some servants being lately fledd out of this colony, into yours, as is supposed, we could not promise o'selves from you that justice & faire correspondence betweene the two governments so needy bordering & w"^ are snortly like to be nearer neighbors in delaware bay, as to hope that vpon the receiving of these Ctres & the demand of the p'ties interessted you will remand to us all such apprentice servants as are or shall run out of this government into yours ; and will compell such other p'sons, as shall flie to you without a passe, being indebted or otherwise obnoxious to the 1 Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts, 28; Doyle, English in America, I. 391 ; compare Appendix A, No. 14. - John Winthrop, History of New England from 1630 to 1649, p. 3S3; Appendix D, No. I. §§ IO-I2.] Inlcniational Cases. H justice of this place, to make such satisfaction to the parties endamaged by their unlawful departure, upon their complaints and proofe thereof, as you shall find justice to require. And you may promise yourself the like helpe and concurrence from this governm't in that or any other thing as shalbe in the power of it : And so we bid you heartilly farewell & rest. " To the ho'"'' the Governor of the New Netherlands." ^ In 1659 the Dutch had occasion to ask the same favor of Mary- land. Whether there had been trouble between the colonies since the earlier letter we do not know, but the spirit of the communica- tion was quite different. Instead of assurances of good will, and expressions of a belief in the certainty of peaceful return, the Dutch threatened, if their servants were not secured to them, "to publish free liberty, access and recess to all planters, ser- vants, negroes, fugitives, and runaways which may go into New Netherland." ^ Trouble was also constantly arising between the French and English, or French and Dutch, in regard to the many runaways who fled from the Eastern colonies northward to Canada. In 1750 there was a dispute about a certain negro belonging to the English, but at that time in possession of the Sieur de la Corne St. Luc ; and, in a letter to a friend, one of the officers of the colony makes the following explanation concerning them : " In reo-ard to the negro in possession of Sieur de la Corne St. Luc I thought proper not to send him back every negro being a slave wherever he be. Besides, I am only doing what the English did in 1747. Ensign de Malbronne on board Le Screux had a negro servant who was at first taken from him; I took pains to reclaim him, but the English refused to surrender him on ground as above." ^ § 12. Relations with the mother country. — With only one country across the sea was any question of fugitives likely to arise. In England white slavery had long since died out, except as a pun- ishment for crime; villeinage ceased about the time the colonies were settled. But the status of black slaves who were taken from the colonies to England was in practice unchanged. The principle thus apparently established by custom was over- thrown by a succession of legal decisions, culminating in the 1 Archives of Maryland, Proceedings of Council, 1636-1667, pp. 134, 135. '^ Archives of Maryland, Proceedings of Council, III. 472. 3 Letter from M. de la Jonquiere to M. de Rouille, in N. Y. Colonial Manuscripts, X. 209; Appendix D, No. 5. 12 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. i. famous Somersctt Case. It was first decided by Thomas Gra- hame, judge in the Admiralty Court, Glasgow, that a certain negro who had been brought into Great Britain must be hberated, on the ground that a guiltless human being taken into that country must be free.-^ In 1762 occurred another similar case. A bill had been filed in equity by an administrator to recover money given by his intestate to a negro brought to England as a slave. The suit was dismissed by Lord Northington, who said that as soon as a man set foot on English ground he was free.^ The Somersett case came ten years later. The circumstances were as follows. A Mr. Stewart, accompanied by his slave Somersett, left Boston on the ist of October, 1769, and went to London, where he kept his slave until October i, 1771. Then Somersett ran away, but his owner soon secured him and had him placed on board a vessel bound for Jamaica, probably with the intention of selling him as a slave. A writ of habeas corpus was then served upon the captain of the ship, and on the hearing Lord Mansfield decided that Somersctt must be discharged. In England, he said, slavery could exist only by positive law; and in default of such law there was no legal machinery for depriving a man of his liberty on the ground that he was a slave. The importance of the case for the colonies lay not in the assertion of the principle that slavery depended on positive law, for the American statute-books were full of positive law on slavery; the precedent thus established determined the future course of Eng- land against the delivery of fugitives, whether from her colonies or from other countries.^ § 13. International regulations under the Articles of Confederation (1781-1788). — When, on March i, 1781. the Articles of Confedera- tion went into effect, the only action taken by the United States on the subject of fugitives had been the negotiation of a treaty with the Delaware Indians, August 7, 1778, by which the parties bound themselves not " to protect in their respective States criminal fugitives, servants, or slaves, but the same to apprehend, 1 Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, Third Series, IX. 2; Appendix D, No. 7. ^ J. Quincy, Reports of Cases, 96 : Appendix D, No. 8. 3 Moore, Slavery in Massachusetts, 117 ; T. R. Cobb, Historical .Sketch of Slavery, 2, Law of Negro Slavery, 164; Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, Third Series, IX. 2; Josiah Quincy, Reports of Cases, 96; Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II. §5 12-14. English Law. Northzvcst Ordinance. 13 secure, and deliver." ^ In seven of the eight other treaties nego- tiated with Indian tribes from 1784 to 1786, clauses were intro- duced for the return of black prisoners, or of " negroes and other property." ^ The States affected were chiefly Southern ; but the article on the same subject in the Treaty of Peace in 1782 and 1783, was intended as much to protect the slaveholders of New York as those of Virginia. It was distinctly agreed that the British should not carry away " any negroes or other property." ^ The failure to abide by this agreement led to reclamation by the American government, but no indemnity was ever secured.'^ § 14. Ordinance for the Northwest Territory. — Since all the thir- teen colonies recognized slavery, the Revolution made no differ- ence in any previous intercolonial practice as to the delivery of slaves; in framing the Articles of Confederation no clause on the subject was thought necessary. The precedent of the New Eng- land Confederation was forgotten or ignored. But the action of the States of Vermont, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, in taking steps toward immediate or gradual emancipation, from 1777 to 1784, brought up a new question, — the status of fugitives in free regions. Before the change of con- ditions in the States was completely understood, the same question had arisen in the Western territories. Jefferson, in 1784, proposed to draw a north and south line through the mouth of the Kanawha, west of which there should be no slavery after 1800.^ The next year a Northern man proposed a similar limitation in the territory north of the Ohio, and added a clause for the return of fugitive slaves to the original slave States.^ Neither of these two propo- sitions was carried, but the principles both of exclusion of slavery and of the return of fugitives appear in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the first legislation by Congress looking toward the sur- render of fugitives by any Territory or State. In providing a government for the new Territory, it was enacted, July 13, 1787, that " any person escaping into the same from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the 1 Appendix B, No. i. ^ Appendix B, Nos. 3, 5. 3 Appendix B, No. 2. * Post, § 22. 5 Randall, Jefferson, I. 397-400; Winsor, VII. 528; Journals of Congress, IX. 153-156- <5 Appendix B, No. 4; Journals of Congress, X. 79; Bancroft, History of the U. S. (last rev.), VI. 132-134; Bancroft, Constitution, I. 178-180; Hildreth, III. 45S. 14 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonies. [Ch. i. person claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid." ^ The fugitive clause seems to have provoked no discussion, but to have been accepted as a reasonable condition of the limitation ol slavery. § 15. The Fugitive question in the Constitutional Conventions. — While the Northwest Ordinance was passing through Congress, the Philadelphia Convention was framing a new Constitution, and the return of fugitives was again eagerly insisted upon by the slave States. The necessity of some positive stipulation that fugitives should be returned was felt to be even more necessary in a Consti- tution meant permanently to bind together a free and a slavehold- ing section. The only debate of which we have a record occurred August 28, 1787. Mr. Butler of North Carolina pressed the point in behalf of the Southern States. To his first proposition, "that fugitive slaves and servants be delivered up like criminals,"^ Mr. Wilson objected ; he saw no reason for obliging the state to arrest fugitives at public expense, while Mr. Sherman saw no more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave or servant than a horse.^ Mr. Butler therefore withdrew the propo- sition. He soon introduced a more particular provision, which was accepted and inserted in the Constitution, as follows : — " No PERSON HELD TO SERVICE OR LAHOUR IN ONE STATE, UNDER THE LAWS THEREOF, ESCAPING INTO ANOTHER, SHALL, IN Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be DISCHARGED FROM SUCH SERVICE OR LABOUR, BUT SHALL BE DELIVERED UP ON CLAIM OF THE PaRTV TO. WHOM SUCH SER- VICE OR Labour may be due."* In the various Constitutional Conventions, there was little dis- cussion upon the matter. The Southern States in general con- sidered the clause sufficient to protect their property. General Charles C. Pinckney, in South Carolina, said : " We have obtained the right to recover our slaves in whatever part of America they may take refuge, which is a right we have not had before. In short, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms for the security of this species of property it was in our power to make. We would have made better if we could, but on 1 Appendix B, No. 6. On the Northwest Ordinance in general, see Winsor, VII. 538; J. H. Merriam, Legislative History of the Ordinance of 1787 (Worcester, 188S) ; Lalor's Cyclopasdia, III. 30-34. ^ Elliot's Debates, V. 4S7. » Ibid., V. 4S7. * Appendix B, No. 7. §§14-15] Fugitive Question in Constitutional Conventions. 15 the whole I do not think them bad."^ In North Carohna, Mr. Iredell explained to the Convention that the Northern delegates, owing to their peculiar scruples on the subject of slavery, did not choose the word " slave " to be mentioned ; but since the present laws were so prejudicial to the inhabitants of the Southern States, some such clause was necessary.^ In Virginia, Mr. Grayson dis- cussed the provision giving Congress exclusive legislation over ten square miles surrounding the capital. It seemed to him that, unless the ten miles square be considered a State, "persons bound to labor who shall escape thereto will not be given up. For they are only to be delivered up after they shall have escaped into a State." ^ This objection, though perfectly good at the time, was later overcome by the adoption by Congress of the laws of Mary- land for the regulation of the District of Columbia, whereby it was made slave territory. Mr. Mason did not think the clause provided sufficiently for the protection of their slaves,* but Mr. Madison urged its adoption, as a better security than anything they then had.^ In the North, there was apparently no discussion upon this article. Everywhere, however, it was thought that without such a clause the Southern States would not consent to the Union, and, in a spirit of compromise, the provision was accepted. 1 Elliot's Debates, III. 277. 2 ibid., III. 182. 3 ibid., III. 401. * Ibid., III. 428. 5 Ibid., III. 335. CHAPTER II. LEGISLATION FROM 1789 TO 1850. § 16. Effect of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution. § 17. The first Fugitive Slave Act (1793). § 18. Discussion of the first act. § 19. Propositions of 1797 and 1S02. § 20. Propositions from 1817 to 1822. , § 21. Period of the Missouri Compromise (1819-1822). § 22. Status of the question from 1823 to 1847. § 23. Canada and Mexico places of refuge. § 24. Status of fugitives on the high seas. § 25. Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850 : Prigg case. § 26. Necessity of more stringent fugitive slave provisions. § 27. Action of Congress from 1847 to 1850. § 28. Slavery in the District of Columbia. § 29. The second Fugitive Slave Act (1850). § 30. Provisions of the second Fugitive Slave Act. § 31. Arguments for the bill. § 32. Arguments against the bill. § 1 6. Effect of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution. — By obtaining in the Constitution the insertion of a clause requiring the return of fugitives, a great step for the advancement of the interests of slavery had been taken. For this embodiment in the Constitution ever afterward formed a basis for the slaveholder's argument that the Constitution recognized and defended slavery, and was a justification to Northern men in their support of the later fugitive slave laws. Although the clause did not in terms apply to the Territories, the Ordinance of 1787 was, on August 7, 1789, confirmed in terms which by implication continued the sixth article, including the rendition of slaves ; ^ and in the earliest treaties made by the United States with Indian tribes, under the new Constitution, the return of negroes was expressly required.^ § 17. The first Fugitive Slave Act (1793). — For some time, how- ever, the provision of the Constitution remained unexecuted; and 1 Statutes at Large, I. 50. 2 Appendix B, No. 8. [16] §§ 16-17.] TJic First Fugitive Slave Act. 17 it is a striking fact that the call for legislation came not from the South, but from a free State ; and that it was provoked, not by fugitive slaves, but by kidnappers. The case seemed to suggest that an act of Congress was necessary, more definite in condi- tions and detail than the provision of the Constitution. A free negro named John was seized at Washington, Pennsyl- vania, in 1791, and taken to Virginia. The Governor of Penn- sylvania, at the instigation of the Society for the Abolition of Slavery, asked the return of the three kidnappers ; but the Gov- ernor of Virginia replied that, since there was no national law touching such a case, he could not carry out the request.^ On the matter being brought to the notice of Congress by the Governor of Pennsylvania,^ a committee, consisting of Mr. Sedg- wick, Mr. Bourne of Massachusetts, and Mr. White, was appointed in the House of Representatives to bring in a bill or bills "pro- viding the means by which persons charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, shall, on the demand of the executive authority of the State from which they fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having juris- diction of the crime; also providing the mode by which a person held to service or labor in one State under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall be delivered up on the claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due,"^ A bill prepared by the House committee, of which Mr. Sedg- wick was chairman, was reported, November 15, 1791;* but for some reason which does not appear, it was dropped, and a Senate committee, of which Calvert was chairman, was appointed, March 30, 1792, "to consider the expediency [of] a bill respecting fugi- tives from justice and from the service of their masters." ^ Noth- ing was done during this session, and, November 22, 1792, a second Senate committee was appointed, consisting of Johnston, Calvert, and Read,6 and they submitted a bill, December 20, 1792.^ Un- fortunately, we have no details of the debate; but on December 28, 1 Cong. Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 1585 . Annals of Cong., 2 Cong. I Sess., H. of R., 147. 2 State Papers, Miscellaneous, I. 39-43. 3 House Journal, 2 Cong, i Sess., 444; Annals of Cong., 148. * House Journal, 2 Cong, i Sess., 454 ; Annals of Cong., 179. 5 Senate Journal, 170; Annals, 115. 6 2 Cong. 2 Sess., Senate Journal, 460 ; Annals of Cong, 616. ' Senate Journal, 16; Annals, 622. 1 8 Fugitive Slaves: — National Legislation. [Ch ii. a third Senate committee was appointed by adding Taylor and Sherman to the committee of November 22, and to them the bill was recommitted with instructions to amend.^ At last, January 3, 1793, the bill was reported in a form not unlike that finally agreed upon.- Of the amendments offered, the text of only one is preserved in the Journals ; it was for the insertion of a less sum than five hundred dollars as the penalty for harboring a fugitive, or resisting his arrest.^ It was not adopted. After two debates, of which we have no record, the bill passed the Senate, January 18.* In the House it seems to have elicited little discussion, and it passed, February 5, by a vote of 48 to ^.^ The bill became law by the signature of the President, February 12, 1793.'' In thus uniting with the clause providing for the extradition of fugitives from justice one requiring the return of fugitive slaves. Congress was but following examples set in 1643 by the Articles of Confederation,'^ and again in 1787 by the Constitution.^ From the scanty records, it is possible to discern only that there was serious difference of opinion in the Senate, and that the measure finally adopted was probably a compromise. In the one amend- ment stated, there is a faint protest against the harshness of the law.^ § 18. Discussion of the first act. — The provisions of the act of 1793 are quoted elsewhere ; ^*^ their purport was as follows. The act provided at the same time for the recovery of fugitives from justice and from labor; but the alleged criminal was to have a protection through the requirement of a requisition, a protection denied to the man on trial for his liberty only. The act was appli- cable to fugitive apprentices as well as to slaves, a provision of some importance at the time. In the Northwest Territory there 1 Senate Journal, 25, 26 ; Annals, 623. ^ Senate Journal. 2S ; Annals, 625. 3 Senate Journal, 35 ; Annals, 630. * Senate Journal. 34, 35 ; Annals, 630. 6 House Journal, 105 ; Annals, 861. ^ Appendix B, No. 9. 7 Ante, § 8 ; Appendix A, No. 8, ^ Ante, § 15. 9 For general discussions of the act, see Von Hoist, Constitutional History, I. 309- 315; Hildreth, History of the U. S , IV. 406-440; Lalor's Cyclopaedia, II. 315-316; Stephens, War between the States, I. 629-636, 674; Bancroft's History of the U. S. (last revision), VI. 309, 310; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery. 227; Curtis, History of the Constitution, II. 450-467; Hurd, Law of Freedom and Bondage, II. 142; Story, Commentaries, HI. 673-678 ; McMaster, History of the American People, I. 508, II. 356, 357 ; Elliott's Debates, V. 357, 4S7 ; Schouler, History of the U. S , I. 219, 220; Tucker, History of the U. S-, I. 500. 1'^ Appendix B, No. 9. §§ 17-19] Propositions of 1797 and 1802. 19 were so-called negro apprentices, who were virtually slaves, and to whom the law applied, since it was in terms extended to all the Territories. Proceedings began with the forcible seizure of the alleged fugitive. The act, it will be observed, does not admit a trial by jury. It allowed the owner of the slave, his agent or attorney, to seize the fugitive and take him before any judge of a United States Cir- cuit or District Court, or any local magistrate. ^ The only require- ment for the conviction of the slave was the testimony of his master, or the affidavit of some magistrate in the State from which he came, certifying that such a person had escaped. Hindering arrest or harboring a slave was punishable by a fine of five hun- dred dollars. The law thus established a system allowing the greatest harshness to the slave and every favor to the master. Even at that time, when persons might still be born slaves in New York, and New Jersey, and gradual emancipation had not yet taken full effect in Rhode Island and Connecticut, it was repellent to the popular sense of justice; there were two cases of resistance to the principle of the act before the close of 1793.^ § 19. Propositions of 1797 and 1802. — Until 1850 no further law upon this subject was passed, but as the provisions of 1793 were found ineffectual, many attempts at amendment were made. In 1796 a troublesome question arose out of the seizure, under the act of 1793, of four negroes who had been manumitted in North Carolina. A retroactive act of that State had declared them slaves again, and they had fled to Philadelphia where they were arrested. January 30, 1797, they petitioned Congress for relief, and after an exciting debate the House by a vote of 50 to 33 refused to receive the petition.^ There is nothing in the scanty records which connects this case or petition with an attempt to amend the act; but it is altogether likely that it occasioned Mur- ray's motion of December 29, 1796, for a committee to report on alterations of the law; * and that it led to the almost simultaneous appointment of a House committee on January 2,^ and a Senate committee on January 3.® No report is recorded. 1 Fosf, § 27. 2 Post, §§ 34, 35. 8 Annals of Congress, 1796-97, p. 2015, and 1S01-2, p. 343. * House Journal, 4 Cong. 2 Sess., 65; Annals of Cong., 1741, 1767. 5 Murray, Cooper, and Kiltera. Annals of Cong., 1767. 6 Sedgwick, Reed, and Henry. Senate Journal, 4 Cong. 2 Sess., 39 ; Annals of Cong., 1528. 20 Fugitive Slaves: — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. The coming on of difficulties with France, and the AHen and Sedition Acts of 1798, absorbed the popular attention. In 1800 debates on the slave trade and on the reception of petitions from free negroes began. January 22, 1801, a House committee was ap- pointed to report a bill increasing the stringency of the act.^ The bill was reported, but failed to be considered.^ In the next Con- gress the matter was at last brought to an issue. A committee, of which Nicholson of Maryland was chairman, was appointed, December 11, 1801,^ and reported only seven days later. The report was made a special order for December 21.* On that day no debate is recorded, but a petition from a free colored soldier of the Revolution was contemptuously denied reception.^ January 14 and 15, the bill was debated freely, and from the debate and sun- dry amendments the character of the bill may be inferred. Not only harboring, but employing a fugitive, was made punishable; and it was ordained that every black employed must be furnished with an official certificate, and that every person who employed a negro must publish a description of him. Southern members " considered it a great injury to the owners of that species of prop- erty, that runaways were employed in the Middle and Northern States, and even assisted in procuring a living. They stated that, when slaves ran away and were not recovered, it excited discon- tent' among the rest. When they were caught and brought home, they informed their comrades how well they were received and assisted, which excited a disposition in others to attempt escaping, and obliged their masters to use greater severity than they other- wise would. It was, they said, even on the score of humanity, good policy in those opposed to slavery to agree to this law."^ This appeal to the humanity of the North failed to produce the requisite effect. On the test vote, January 18, 1802, every South- ern member except two voted for the bill, every Northern member except five against it ; the vote was 43 to 46, and the bill was laid aside.' 1 Appendix B, No. 10. 2 House Journal, 6 Cong. 2 Sess., 220; Annals of Cong., 1053. 8 Nicholson, Goddard, Holland, J. Smith (Va), Lowndes. House Journal, 7 Cong. I Sess., 34 ; Annals of Cong., 317. * House Journal, 7 Cong, i Sess., 45 ; Annals of Cong., 335. 6 Annals of Cong., 343. 6 House Journal, 7 Cong, i Sess., 125; Annals of Cong., 422, 423; Appendi.x B, No. 10. 7 House Journal, 7 Cong, i Sess., 125, 12S; Annals of Cong., 423, 425. §§19-20.] Propositions from 1817 to 1822. 2i § 20. Propositions from 1817 to 1822. — For many years the ques- tion of amendment of the law does not appear to have come up in Congress. The abohtion of the slave trade seems to have ab- sorbed the attention of Congress. Several treaties were nego- tiated including clauses on the return of fugitives.^ The question was brought up again in 1817 by Pindall of Virginia, who for several years urged a revision of the act. A committee of which he was chairman was appointed, December 15, 181 7, and reported a bill, December 29, 18 1/.^ This third proposition of general amendment led to a debate, January 26 and 29, 1818, in which for the first time we have a record of discussion on the principles of the act and its relations to human freedom. The opposition was based not only on constitutional, but on humanitarian grounds.^ A petition of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, asking for a milder law than that of 1793, added fuel to the discussion.* The principle of the bill was that the fugitives should be sur- rendered by a requisition on the State Executive, as in the case of fugitives from justice : the question of proof was thus left to the courts of the State of the claimant, and there was to be no habeas corpus. The strongest expression of disapproval is found in the speech of Mr. Adams of Massachusetts, who said, "that, in guaran- teeing the possession of slaves, the Constitution did not authorize or require the General Government to go as far as the bill pro- posed to render this bill effectual; that the bill contained pro- visions dangerous to the liberty and safety of the free people of color in other sections of the Union." ^ Mr. Rich of Vermont de- sired " that it might be so amended as to guard more effectually the rights of free persons of color. This motion he enforced by urging the oppressions to which these persons M^ere now subjected, and the necessity of some regulation on the subject, which he thought might be very properly connected with this bill."^ Mr. Livermore also showed that it exposed the colored men of the North to the peril of being dragged South, and there convicted.^ All these objections, however, were considered of little value by some who, like Smith of Maryland, thought that the subject of 1 Post, § 22. 2 House Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 50, S6, 182, 1S6, 189, 193, 198; Annals of Cong., 446, 447. 513. 819. 829, S3 1, 840, 1339, 1393. 3 Appendix B, No. 13. * Annals of Cong., S29. _ & Annals of Cong., 838. 6 Aiinals of Cong., 15 Cong, i Sess., 829, 830. '^ Annals of Cong., 838. 22 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. the free colored population and their protection should be treated separately, while Mr. Holmes of Massachusetts suggested that the operation of the writ of habeas corpus would render such acts of injustice improbable.^ Mason, of the same State, objected to a trial by jury, which had been suggested, because "juries in Massa- chusetts would in ninety-nine cases out of one hundred decide in favor of the fugitives, and he did not wish his town [Boston] in- fected with the runaways of the South." ^ Upon two constitutional points the opponents of the bill made a stand. Mr. Sergeant wished to change the bill materially, by making " the judges of the State in which . . . slaves are seized the tribunal to decide the fact of slavery, instead of the judges of the State whence the fugitives escaped," but this was negatived by a large majority.^ Another objection to the bill, raised by Mr. Whitman, is note- worthy, since some years later it was the point made most promi- nent in Judge Story's decision in the Prigg Case.* Mr. Whitman disapproved of the provision making it a penal offence for a State officer to refuse his assistance in executing the act. He did not believe that Congress had any right to compel State officers to perform this duty; they could do no more than authorize it.^ A vote was taken, January 30, 18 18, in the House, and the bill passed by a vote of 84 to 69.^ It was ordered that the title be "An Act to provide for delivering up persons held to labor or service in any of the States or Territories who shall escape into any other State or Territory." For the first time since 1793, amendment of the act seemed within reach. The Senate showed itself in other questions more inclined than the House to consider the claims of the South ; but although Dagget's amendment to strike out the elaborate pro- vision for the return of fugitives by executive requisition was not adopted,*" the Senate first voted to limit the bill to four years,^ and then added other amendments. The result was a non-con- currence with the House, and the failure of the bill,^ March 1 Annals of Cong., S38. 2 Annals of Cong., S38. 8 Appendix B, No. 13. * Post, § 25. 6 House Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 19S ; Annals of Cong., 840. 8 Appendi.K B, No. 14. '' Appendix B, No. 15. 8 Senate Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 12S, 135, 174, 202, 227, 22S, 233; House Jcur^al, 328; Annals of Cong., 165, 210, 259, 262, 1339. §§20-21.] Period of tJie Missouri Compromise. 23 13-16, 1818. A last attempt to take the bill up failed, April 10, 1818.1 § 21. Period of the Missouri Compromise (1819-1822). — The loss of the bill of 18 18 seems not to have discouraged the friends of amendment of the act of 1793. December 17, 1818, a resolution of the Maryland legislature was laid before the House, calling for protection against the citizens of Pennsylvania who harbored or protected fugitives.^ A committee was appointed, January 15, 1 8 19, which promptly reported next day, but the bill was not considered.'^ The question of fugitives came incidentally into the great debate of the next session on the admission of Missouri. The region which sought admission as a slave State was flanked on the east by free territory, and was therefore peculiarly difficult to protect. A compromise, which made Missouri a slave State, prohibited slavery in all other territory gained from France north of 36'' 30'.^ In the prohibitory clause, however, it was provided " that any persons escaping into the same from whom labor or service is law- fully claimed in any State or Territory of the United States, such fugitive may be reclaimed, and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid." ^ During the immigra- tion into Missouri which now began, large numbers of slaveholders took their slaves with them, and on the passage opportunities for escape were often found. In one instance, at least, recorded in Ohio, the public sympathy was so strongly with the fugitives that they were successfully protected from their masters even in court." Hardly was the ink dry on the President's signature of the Missouri Compromise (March 15, 1820) before propositions were made in both the House and Senate for new general fugitive slave acts. March 18, a House committee was appointed,'^ but no report is recorded. April 3, an inquiry was set on foot into the provisions of a Pennsylvania act hindering the operation of the act of 1793,^ and the Secretary of State submitted a copy of ^ Annals of Cong., 1716. 2 cf_ Appendix B, No. 17. >* House Journal, 15 Cong, i Sess., 18S, 191 ; Annals of Cong., 546, 551. * Annals of Cong., 16 Cong, i Sess., 469, 1587. 5 Appendix B, No. 16. 6 Liberator, Jan. 24, 1S40 (N. Y. Evening Post). ■^ House Journal, 16 Cong, i Sess., 427; Annals of Cong., 1S63. 8 Appendix B, No. 18. 24 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. the obnoxious act, April i8. On the day of the Secretary's report a proposition in the Senate to instruct the Judiciary Committee to report a bill was voted down.^ Positive evidence cannot be obtained, but it would seem that a continued effort was made to take advantage of the agitation on the slavery question to secure a new fugitive slave act, as was done in 1850. One more attempt was made in 1821-22. Mr. Wright pre- sented, December 17, 1821, a resolution of the Maryland General Assembly praying for relief against the abettors of the fugitives in Pennsylvania.'-^ He desired a special committee, but the ques- tion was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, which re- ported a bill, January 14, 1822.^ March 27 to April i, it was debated, but finally tabled.^ The character of the bill does not distinctly appear in the records. § 22. Status of the question from 1823 to 1847. — Although no amendment could be procured to the act of 1793, the government of the United States had repeatedly, by diplomatic demands and treaties, undertaken to recover fugitives, or their value, for Southern owners. The first Indian treaty negotiated under the Constitution, that of April 7, 1790, with the Creeks, required the return of ne- groes held as prisoners of war.^ A similar clause appeared in the treaty made in 18 14, at the end of the war with the Creeks, a war which had been provoked in part by their ready reception of fugi- tives.*" In 1832 the government went so far as to promise to expend seven thousand dollars in paying for " slaves and other property alleged to have been stolen " by the Seminoles.^ With Great Britain, also, the encouragement of fugitives became a subject for negotiation. Much bitterness had been felt at the carrying away by the British, in 1783, of slaves who had taken refuge with theni.^ In the treaty of Ghent, therefore, a strict clause forbade the carrying away by the British of " any slaves or other private property."^ A large number of slaves had, dur- ing the war, been received on board British vessels, and the hu- mane but specious plea was set up by the British government that 1 Senate Journal, 16 Cong, i Sess., 319, 326; Annals of Cong., p. 618. - Appendi.v B, No. 18. ^ House Journal, 17 Cong, i Sess., 143; Annals of Cong., 553, 55S, 710. * Annals of Cong, 17 Cong, i Sess., 1379, 1415, 1444- ^ Appendix B, No. 8. c Appendix B, No. ir. ^ Appendix B, No. 19. 8 Ante, § 13; Appendix B, No. 2. 8 Appendix B, No. 12. §§21-23-] Canada and Mexico Places of Refuge. 25 the clause applied only to slaves received after the date of the peace. A convention of 1818 submitted the question to the Em- peror of Russia, who in 1822 made a decision not wholly favor- able to either party; and in 1826,^ by a second convention, Great Britain agreed to pay $1,204,960. This last award was obtained by a Pennsylvanian, Gallatin, acting under the direction of Presi- dent John Ouincy Adams, a citizen of Massachusetts. § 23. Canada and Mexico places of refuge. — The existence on the northern and southwestern frontiers of regions in which slavery was practically, if not yet legally, extinct, brought about another set of complications. January 24, 182 1, a resolution was presented in Congress from the General Assembly of Kentucky, protesting against the kindly reception of fugitives in Canada, and asking for negotiation with Great Britain on the subject.^ In 1826, Mr. Clay, Secretary of State, instructed Mr. Gallatin, United States Minister at the Court of St. James, to propose the " mutual surrender of all persons held to service or labor under the laws of either country who escape into the territory of the other." The British govern- ment replied that any such agreement was impossible, and, though a second attempt was made by the United States, it was without success.^ In 1 841 Mr. Woodbridge submitted a resolution to the Senate requesting the Committee on Foreign Relations to consider the expediency of entering into an arrangement with Great Britain for the arrest of fugitive slaves charged with crime who might escape over the northern boundary of the United States.^ No action was taken upon the resolution. The North, however, was not the only region to which slaves were fleeing at this time. Complaint was heard after 1830, that the " freedom and equality granted blacks by the Mexican Con- stitution and law of 1829, was attracting large numbers of slaves from Louisiana," ^ while in Florida the Seminole trouble was not yet ended. The last case of this kind occurred just at the outbreak of the Civil War. A slave by the name of Anderson was found one 1 Am. State Papers, Foreign, IV. 106-126, VI. 346-354. 2 Annals of Cong., 16 Cong. 2 Sess., 94. 3 S. G. Howe, Refugees from Slavery in Canada, 12-14; Niles's Register, XXIII. 26, LV. 2S9. 4 Appendix B, No. 21 ; cf. No. 24. 5 Niles's Register, XXIII. 26. 26 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii day by Mr. Seneca T. P. Diggs, wandering about his plantation in Howard County, Missouri, without a pass. Mr. Diggs thereupon arrested him as a fugitive slave. In the struggle which followed, the desperate runaway plunged a knife into Mr. Diggs's heart. His captor dead, Anderson hastened on to Canada.^ There he lived a quiet and industrious life until i860, when the American government called upon Canada, under the extradition treaty, to give up Anderson for punishment. He was arrested, but applied to the Toronto court for a writ of habeas corpus, which was re- fused. An appeal was immediately made to the Queen's Bench, England, which granted the writ.^ In the trial Anderson was de- fended by Mr. Gerrit Smith in an eloquent speech, which made a great impression, and was circulated all over the United States.' The prisoner was discharged on a technical point.'^ § 24. Status of fugitives on the high seas. — When in 1830 gradual emancipation began in the British colonies, and in 1837 slavery ceased to exist there, a new set of complications arose. Amer- ican vessels carrying slaves from one part of the United States to another Avere repeatedly driven or conveyed into British ports, and the slaves were there treated as ordinary fugitives, that is, as free men. Thus the Comet in 1830,*^ and the Encomium in 1834,^ were cast away on the Bahamas, and the slaves on board could not be recovered. In 1835 the Enterprise was forced by stress of weather to enter a port of the Bermudas,'' and the officers were not permitted by the British authorities to restrain the persons on board. In none of these three casps were the negroes restored ; but in 1840 the British government paid an indemnity for the first two cargoes, on the ground that at the time of the wrecks slavery had not yet been completely extinguished in the colonies.^ No in- demnity was allowed in the Enterprise case, and the British gov- ernment declared that it could assume no responsibility in cases arising since the abolition of slavery .^ Elaborate resolutions intro- i Liberator, Dec. 31, i860. 2 Pamphlets on Anderson case, Boston Tublic Library; Appendix D, No. 65. 3 Life of Gerrit Smith, 115. . * Liberator, Jan. 22, 1861. 5 Von Hoist, IL 312 ; Calhoun, IIL 9, 464, 4S6 ; Senate Docs., 25 Cong. 3 Sess., No. 216. 6 Wilson, Slave Power, I. 439-442 ; Congressional Globe, XIV. 50. ■? Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 252, 253; Von Hoist, Calhoun, 204-209. 8 House Docs., 27 Cong. 2 Sess., V., No. 242 ; Congressional Globe, XIV. 50. 9 Senate Docs., 26 Cong, i Sess., HI., No. 11. §§ 23-25] Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850. Prigg Case. 27 duced by Calhoun, March 4, 1840, and passed, April 15, by a unan- imous vote of the Senate, condemned the British principle.^ But when, in the next year, the slaves on board the American ship Creole rose and by force carried ht : into Nassau,^ the British gov- ernment refused to return them either as slaves or as murderers.^ Webster, as Secretary of State, strenuously urged the surrender. In 1853, an arbitrator decided that an indemnity must be paid to the American government.* On the other hand, when, in 1839, a Spanish vessel, L'Amistad, in which the slaves on board had revolted and killed their master, was brought into an American port, the Supreme Court refused to permit their surrender, on the ground that they were free by Spanish law, and therefore could not be tried for murder.^ § 25. Kidnapping from 1793 to 1850: Prigg case. — Since slavery was now extinct in the more northern States, their population con- tained many free negroes. Upon them the eyes of the slave trader were often turned, as easy prey under the law of 1793, and many cases of kidnapping occurred. It was such instances, involving as they did the most manifest injustice and cruelty, that first aroused the sympathies of the people.^ The border States like Pennsylvania were often the scene of these acts. The neighboring white families first began to try to protect the negroes settled near them, and a little later to give a helping hand to those escaping from slavery, and at last, in the underground railroad,'^ to complete a systematic organization for the assistance of fugitives. Cases of kidnapping are recorded as early as 1808.^ In 1832 the carry- ing away of a black woman without process of law not only roused the people of Pennsylvania, but led to a decision which took away much of the force of the act of 1793. A slave woman, Margaret Morgan, had fled from Marylai^d to Pennsylvania. Five years later, in 1837, Edward Prigg, an attor- ney, caused her to be arrested and sent back to her mistress with- out recourse either to the national or State act on the subject. In the act he disregarded a law of Pennsylvania, brought about in 1 Congressional Globe, XIV. 80, 113-118; Calhoun, III. 462 ; Appendix B, No. 20. 2 Senate Docs., 27 Cong, i Sess., II., No. 51. 3 Cobbett's Case, 47 ; Dana's Wheaton, note 62 ; cf. Appendix B, No. 23. * Lawrence's Wheaton, 207, n. ^ Von Hoist, 1. 321, 322 ; Opinions of the Attorney Generals, III. 484 ; 15 Peters, 518. 6 R. Smedley, Underground Railroad, 26. ^ ScQ post, §§ 71-76. 8 See post, § 38. 28 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. 1826 through the efforts of the Society for the AboHtion of Sla- very, which forbade the carrying out of the State of any negro with the intention of enslaving him. Accordingly, Mr. Prigg was arrested and convicted in the county court. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania sustained the decision. Thence the case was taken to the Supreme Court of the United States. There the counsel for Mr. Prigg argued that the statute of Pennsylvania on which the indictment was founded was unconstitutional, since it conflicted with the law of 1793. Justice Story delivered the opin- ion of the court, and upon this decision all future judgments were based. He aimounced that the law must be carried out through national authorities alone ; the States or State magistrates could riot be forced into action.^ After this, many States, seeing the advantage thus given them, passed laws which forbade the officers to aid in a fugitive slave case, and also denied the use of their jails for imprisonment.^ Plainly the Prigg case showed a growing in- disposition on the part of the States to carry out the law, however severe its provisions might be; and this disposition to evade its obligations is still further evidenced by the cases given in the next chapter. § 26. Necessity of more stringent fugitive slave provisions. — The increasing number of rescues,^ and the occurrence of several cases of resistance, proved conclusively the inadequacy of the law of 1793. After the Prigg decision the provisions made for its execu- tion through national powers were entirely insufficient. Underly- ing all these acts, the South also could but perceive a sentiment the growth of which, unless checked in some way, would at last permanently injure, if not destroy, their peculiar institution. § 27. Action of Congress from 1847 to 1850. — P'rom 1822 until 1848 apparently no effort was made to secure a new law. Then a peti- tion received in 1847 from the Legislature of Kentucky, urging the importance of passing such laws as would enable the citizens of slaveholding States to recover their slaves when they escaped into non-slaveholding States,* gave rise to a bill from the Committee on the Judiciary.^ The bill provided " for the more effectual exe- 1 Appendix B, No. 22 ; 16 Peters, 957 ; Report of Case of Edward Prigg, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 202; Bledsoe, Liberty and Slavery, 355; J. F. Clarke, Anti- slavery Days, 69. 2 Post, §§ 78, 79. 8 Post, §§ 34, 41, 42. * Senate Journal, 30 Cong., I Sess., 59; Congressional Globe, 51. ^ Senate Journal, 30 Cong., i Sess., 313 ; Congressional Globe, 722. §§ 25-29.] TJie Second Fugitive Slave Act. 29 cution of the third clause of the second section of the Fourth Article of the Constitution." ^ It passed only to the second" read- ing. In 1849, Mr. Meade proposed in the House to instruct the Committee on the Judiciary to report a fugitive slave bill.^ No report apparently was ever made, but this was the last ineffectual proposition. In 1850, a new law was successfully carried in both Houses. § 28. Slavery in the District of Columbia. — During this period, from 1840 to 1850, the subject of slavery and fugitives in the Dis- trict of Columbia began to occasion debate, which was never long silenced. It was notorious that almost under the windows of the Capitol negroes were confined in public jails on the ground that they were fugitives ; and that a free negro so confined might be sold for his jail fees. Resolutions for an investigation of the condition of the jails were offered in 1848 by Mr. Giddings;^ and Mr. Hall also introduced more sweeping propositions to repeal all laws of Congress and of Maryland which authorized or required courts, officers, or magistrates to issue process for arrest or commitment to the jail of the District of any fugitive slave.* Congress, however, was in a mood too conciliatory toward the South to consider these propositions ; and no action was taken. § 29. The second Fugitive Slave Act (1850). — In the early part of the first session of the Thirty-first Congress, Mr. Mason of Virginia introduced a bill to make the provisions of the fugitive slave act more severe,^ and the bill was reported from the Committee on the Judiciary, January 16, 1850. Two additional amendments were soon offered by Mr. Mason. The first imposed a fine of one thou- sand dollars and imprisonment for twelve months upon any one who should obstruct the execution of the law. The second pro- vided that the testimony of a fugitive should not be admitted. Mr. Seward, in opposition, proposed on the 28th to allow a fugi- tive the right of trial by jury, with a fine of five thousand dollars 1 Senate Journal, 30 Cong, i Sess , 313; Congressional Globe, 722. 2 Appendix B, No. 29. 3 Appendix B, Nos. 25, 27, 28. * Appendix B, No. 26. 5 Appendix B, No. 30. In this number of the Appendix is a summary of the legis- lative history of the measure, from the introduction of Mason's bill, Jan. 4, 1850, to the signature of the act by President Fillmore, Sept. 18, 1S50, with references to the records of Congress. 30 Fugitive Slaves : — National Legislation. [Ch. ii. and the forfeiture of office should the right be disallowed by any judge or marshal.^ Mr. Clay's " Omnibus Bill," by which he intended to settle the territorial question then before Congress, and at the same time to check the antislavery movement, contained a fugitive slave clause, though not so severe in its provisions as Mr. Mason's.^ This bill, however, was not debated as a whole, but each proposition con- sidered separately, and thus Mr. Mason's bill became the basis of the fugitive slave provision in the Compromise of 1850. The measure was considered, and various amendments were offered, until August 26, 1850, when it was passed by the Senate, and a few days later by the House ;^ the signature of President Fillmore was readily appended, and it became law, September 18, 1850.4 § 30. Provisions of the second Fugitive Slave Act. — Every pro- vision of the act was arranged for the protection and benefit of the slaveholders. It was based upon the law of 1793, but a num- ber of new regulations were added.^ Commissioners were to be chosen by the Circuit Courts of the United States and the Supe- rior Courts of the Territories, to act with the judges of those courts in fugitive slave cases. Such commissioners could be fined one thousand dollars for refusing to issue a writ, and were liable for the value of any slave escaping from them. The testimony re- * Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., 236. - Senate Journal, 31 Cong, i Sess., 118. ^ Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., 248; Appendix B, No. 6S. The test vote in the House stood as follows : — States. For. Against. Not voting. Total. New England States . . . Middle States Interior and Pacific States Total, Free States . . Border Slave States . . . Planter States Total, Slave States . Total 7 9 16 15 33 27 10 21 S 32 63 51 32 32 45 75 39 6 9 146 38 54 17 15 92 109 75 54 23S * Appendix B, Nos. 83, 84. For general discussions of the act, see Von Hoist, III. 548-557, IV. 9-12, 20-29; Wilson, Slave Power, II. 302-329; Greeley, American Conflict, I. 210-221; Cooley's Story, § 1921 ; Lalor's Cyclopjedia, II. 315-317; Bryant and Gay, U. S., IV. 397-401. ^ For the text of the act, see Appendix B, No. 31. §§-9-31-1 Arguments for the Bill. 31 quired for rendition was the official declaration of the fact of the escape of a slave by two witnesses, and the establishment of his identity by oath. The testimony of the accused could not be admitted. The right of trial by jury was not affirmed, and was therefore practically denied. A sheriff might call upon any bystander for help in executing the law, and the penalty for harboring or aiding in a rescue was increased from five hundred dollars, as in 1793, to one thousand dollars, and imprisonment for not more than six months. Should the slave escape, damages to the same amount were to be paid to the claimant. If a mob were feared, military force might be employed ; and by a discrim- ination little likely to win respect for the act, the fee of the com- missioner was to be increased from five to ten dollars whenever the case was decided in favor of the claimant. § 31. Argviments for the bill. — The debate on the Fugitive Slave Bill more than any other part of the Compromise illustrates the character of the slavery conflict. Most of the Southern members urged the immediate necessity of a new law, but some of the more ardent considered the evil to be one which could be reached only through a change in public sentiment, and they thought all legislation valueless.^ Mr. Mason thus presented the evils with which the law must cope. He stated that the border States had found it an impossibility to reclaim a fugitive when he once got within the boundaries of a non-slaveholding State ; " and this bill, or rather the amendments, . . . have been framed with a great deal of consideration, to reach, if practicable, the evils which this experience has demonstrated to exist, and to furnish the appro- priate remedy in enabling the owner of a fugitive to reclaim him." Under the existing laws, " you may as well go down irito the sea and endeavor to recover from his native element a fish which has escaped from you, as expect to recover such a fugi- tive. Every difficulty is thrown in your way by tha population. . . . There are armed mobs, rescues. This is the real state of things. "^ Not only were the laws thus set aside by individuals, but also through the Underground Railroad an organized system of depre- dation was carried on, whereby thousands of dollars were every year lost to the slaveholder.^ As an illustration of the extent to 1 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 1610. 2 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., 15S3. 3 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Sess., Appendix, 1051. 32 Fugitive Slaves: — National Legislation. [Ch ii. which this disregard of law was carried, Mr. Yulee, one of the most extreme of the Southern men, instanced a convention which was then in session in New York " for the very purpose, openly- avowed, of congratulation upon their successful violation of the Constitution in respect to fugitives, and to devise ways and means to encourage the escape of slaves." ^ Such, according to the Southern Congressmen, was the condi- tion of affairs. They then proceeded to contrast it with the situa- tion as contemplated by the Constitution, and supported by the decision of the Supreme Court in the Prigg case. Mr. Butler insisted that this bill required " nothing more than is enjoined by the Constitution, and which contains the bond of union and the security of harmony; and in the name of Washington, I would invoke all parties to observe, maintain, and defend it." He said it was the handiwork of sages and patriots, and resulted from intelli- gent concessions, for the benefit of all.^ Many speeches were filled with prophecies, more or less openly expressed, of the dissolution of the Union, Mr. Soule said the South must fight for its rights, since it is the weaker of the two sections.^ It had come down to the question, How could the Union be preserved?* Some con- cessions must be made. Mr. Badger urged the bill, because it "will give assurance, it will satisfy the public mind that the Gov- ernment is disposed, is truly anxious, to accomplish the restitu- tion of fugitive slaves ; sincerely wnshed and is resolved to do right to the uttermost of its power. The proof of this will be complete, because we furnish the best means for the recovery of the slave himself, and if these fail we can secure prompt and adequate indemnity for the loss."^ § 32. Arguments against the bill. — On the Northern side, there seems to have been an admission that some bill of the kind was necessary for the interests of the Union, The opposition dwelt chiefly, therefore, upon the details of the measure. Many con- sidered them unjust, as recognizing only one class of rights, those of the masters. Mr. Chase, fronl the antislavery wqng, demanded that a claim of this kind be put on the same footing as any other statutory right. " Claims of right in the services of individuals 1 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Sess., Appendix, 1622. 2 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong. 1 Sess., 79. 8 Congressional Globe, 3i Cong, i Sess., 78. * Von Hoist, III. 493. 6 Congressional Globe, 31 Cong, i Sess., Appendix, 1597. §32.] Arguments against the Bill. 33 found under the protection of the laws of a free State must be investigated in the same manner as other claims of right. If the most ordinary controversy involving a contested claim, of twenty dollars must be decided by jury, surely a controversy which in- volves the right of a man to his liberty should have a similar trial. ... It will not do for a man to go into a State where every legal presumption is in favor of freedom, and seize a person whom he claims as a fugitive slave, and say, 'This man is my slave, and by my authority under the Constitution of the United States I carry him off, and whoever interferes does so at his peril.' He is asked. ' Where is your warrant?' and he produces none; ' Where is your evidence of claim?' and he offers none. The language of his action is, 'My word stands for law.'" CHAPTER III. PRINCIPAL CASES FROM 1789 TO 1860. § 33. Change in character of cases. § 34. The first case of rescue (1793). § 35. President Washington's demand for a fugitive (1796). § 36. Kidnapping cases. § 37. Jones case (1836). § 38. Solomon Northrup case (about 1830). § 39- Washington case (between 1840 and 1850). § 40. Oberlin case (1841). § 41. Interference and rescues. § 42. Chickasaw rescue (1836). § 43. Philadelphia case (1S38). § 44. Latimer case (1842). § 45. Ottoman case (1846). § 46. Interstate relations. § 47. Boston and Isaac cases (1837, 1839). § 48. Ohio and Kentucky cases (1848). § 49. Prosecutions. § 50. Van Zandt, Pearl, and Walker cases (1840, 1S44). § 51. Unpopularity of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1S50. § 52. Principle of the selection of cases. § 53. Hamlet case (1850). § 54. Sims case (1851) § 55. Burns case (1854). § 56. Garner case (1856). § 57. Shadrach case (1S51). § 58. Jerry McHenry case (1851). § 59. Oberlin- Wellington case (1858). § 60. Christiana case (1851). § 61. Miller case (1851). § 62. John Brown in Kansas (1S58). § 33. Change in character of cases. — The cases of escape which occur in the period beginning with the formation of the Constitu- tion, and ending with the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law in 1850, will be found, in comparison with those of colonial times, much more frequent, more complex in action, and more varied in detail. Instead of many colonies under governments independent one of another, there was now one government and one country; [3-1] §§33-35-] TJie First Case of Rescue. 35 nevertheless, the extinction of the system of bondage and the rise of the antislavery sentiment in the Northern States brought into the cases new and difficuh elements. No attempt will be made to mention the cases in their chronological order, or to describe them all. They will be classified into cases of simple escape, of kid- napping, of rescue, and of State interference ; and typical examples will be described in each category. § 34. The first case of rescue. — The first attempt to enforce the act of 1793, of which any record has been discovered, immediately revealed its unfairness, and the indisposition of the North to carry it out. Mr. Josiah Quincy, then a young lawyer, afterwards known as a public man and the President of Harvard College, has left an interesting account of his connection with the case. " He states that the process was issued by a justice of the peace, that he was retained as counsel for the alleged slave, that he prepared his brief, and went down loaded with all the necessary authorities. He found a great crowd of people assembled ; but while he was in the midst of the argument, he heard a noise, and, turning around, he saw the constables lying sprawling on the floor, and a passage opening through the crowd, through which the fugitive was taking his departure without stopping to hear the opinion of the court, and that was the last of that case, and that was the last of the law of 1793 in Massachusetts."^ § 35. President Washington's demand for a fugitive. — As has been noticed in a previous chapter, George Washington's boyhood was connected with white slavery. Now, at the zenith of his public life, we find one of his chattels the occasion of the first recorded refusal on moral grounds to return a slave. In 1796, President VVashing- ' Mr. Quincy also states, that "about a fortnight elapsed, when I was called upon by Rufus Green Amory, a lawyer of eminence at the Boston bar in that day, who showed me a letter from a Southern slaveholder, directing him to prosecute Josiah Quincy for the penalty under the law of 1793, foi" obstructing the agent of the claimant in obtain- ing his slave under the process established by that law. Mr. Amory felt, no less than myself, the folly of such a pretence ; and I never heard from him, or from any one, anything more upon the subject of prosecution. This fact, and the universal gratifica- tion which the fact appeared to give to the public, satisfied my mind, that, unless by accident, or stealth, or in some very thin settled part of the country, the law of 1793 would be forever inoperative, as the event has proved in Massachusetts."— Meeting at Faneuil Hall to protest against the Fugitive Slave Law, letter read from Josiah Quincy, Boston Atlas, Oct. 15, 1850; Goodell, Slavery and Antislavery, 232; Appen- di.x D, No. 12. 36 Fugitive Slaves : — Cases. [Ch. iii. ton wrote to Mr. Whipple, Collector of Portsmouth, N. H., to send back to him one of his slaves who had escaped to that place, if it could be done without exciting a mob. This letter has been pre- served, and the following extract gives us an insight into President Washington's opinions upon the rendition of fugitives : — " However well disposed I might be to gradual abolition, or even to an entire emancipation of that description of people, (if the latter was in itself practicable,) at this moment it would neither be politic nor just to reward unfaithfulness with a premature prefer- ence, and thereby discontent beforehand the minds of all her fellow serv'ts, who, by their steady attachment, are far more deserving than herself of favor." ^ Mr. Whipple answered, that any return would be impossible; public sentiment was too strong against it. § 36. Kidnapping cases. — The great number of cases of kidnap- ping throughout the period from 1793 to 1850 show what cruel and unjust deeds were possible under the existing system, and served as nothing else could to rouse people to the defence of negroes. Various were the methods by which, in spite of law, kidnappers were enabled to secure their prey. Perhaps the most common practice, in places where the courts were known to be, friendly to slavery, was to arrest a man on some false pretence, and then, when he appeared in court without opportunity to se- cure papers or witnesses, to claim him as a fugitive slave. Most of these cases occurred in communities bordering upon or near the Southern States. The risk and trouble of transporting slaves across free States were so great, that up to 1850 we seldom hear of kidnapping cases, and rarely of the capture of a genuine fugitive in the New England States. The natural consequence of such acts of outrageous violence was to rouse people to the forcible rescue of the captured negroes. In the earliest cases, colored people seem to take the leadership ; later on, the whites joined, and became most active in the work. § -^^J. Jones case. — The following instance well exemplifies this form of oppression. George Jones, a respectable colored man, was arrested on Broadway, New York, in 1836, on the pretext that he had committed assault and battery. As he knew that no such charge could be sustained against him, he at first refused to go with his captors ; but finally he yielded, on the assurance of his ^ Appendix D, No. 13. §§35-38-] Kidnapping. 37 employer that ever3^thing possible should be done for him. He was then placed in Bridewell, and his friends were told that when they were wanted they " would be sent for " ; but, soon after one o'clock that same day, he was taken before the Hon. Richard Riker, Recorder of New York, and to the satisfaction of that ma Lalor, III. 162. CHAPTER VI. THE END OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE QUESTION {1860-1865). § 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1S60-61. § 86. Propositions to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. § 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law. § 88. The question of slaves of rebels. § 89. Slavery attacked in Congress. § 90. Confiscation bills. § 91. Confiscation provisions extended. § 92. Effect of the Emancipation Proclamation (1S63). § 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States. § 94. Typical cases. § 95- Question discussed in Congress. § 96. Arrests by civil officers. § 97. Denial of the use of jails in the District of Columbia. § 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. § 99. Regulations against kidnapping. § 100. Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts. § loi. Early propositions to repeal the acts. § 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House. § 103. Repeal bills in the Senate. § 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment. § 105. Educating effect of the controversy. § 85. The Fugitive Slave Law in the crisis of 1860-61.— If the number of interesting fugitive slave cases falls off in the latter part of the decade from 1850 to i860, it is not because the law was better enforced, but because it was little enforced. The continued interference of the friends of the slave had proved that a fugitive could not safely be recovered in Massachusetts, and that no pun- ishment could be secured for those who helped him to his free- dom. The personal liberty bills added serious legal obstacles. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin even went so far as to declare the national act of 1850 unconstitutional.^ In 1859 John Brown, in his Harper's Ferry raid, attempted to establish a centre to which 1 Ableman v. Booth, 3 Wis., I. [71] '^2 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. fugitives might flock ; and although he was defeated, he had the sympathy of a large number of persons in the North, including some public men. In the violent debates of 1 860-61, one of the frequent charges brought by the southern members against the North was its per- sistent refusal to execute the Fugitive Slave Act, or to permit it to be executed.-^ Even Republican members disclaimed responsi- bility for their party, and urged that the personal liberty bills should be repealed.^ Other bolder spirits seized the opportunity to urge a repeal of the act, and in the various compromise propo- sitions introduced were several attempts to modify the existing constitutional provision on the subject. § 86. Propositions to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. — In the crisis of i860 the South seemed to expect a general settlement of the slavery question like that of 1850, and therefore demanded a more effective act for the return of fugitives. President Buchanan, in his message of December 4, i860, recommended " explanatory " con- stitutional amendments which should recognize the master's right to the recovery of his fugitive slaves, and the validity of the Fugi- tive Slave Law. He recommended also a declaration against State laws impairing the right of the master, as being violations of the Constitution, and consequently null and void.^ This recommenda- tion was followed, December 12, i860, by no less than eleven resolu- tions upon the subject in the House,^ Of these five were constitu- tional amendments. Several provided, as a pacific measure, that the town, county, or State, guilty of neglect to return a fugitive, might be sued by the owner of the slave for the amount thus lost to him.^ The most arbitrary proposition was that of Mr. Hindman. It denied representation in Congress to any State which should hold in force laws hindering the delivery of fugitives.^ Another resolution inquired into the expediency of declaring it ' Globe, 1S60-61, p. 356, App. 197. 2 Globe, 1S60-61, (Baker) 228, (Burnham) 970. 3 Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., p. 18. Appendi.v C, No. i. * House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., p. 60 ; Congr. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 77. Ap- pendix C, Nos. 2-12. For a list of proposed constitutional amendments bearing on fugitive slaves, I am indebted to Mr. H. V. Ames, of the Harvard Graduate School, who has kindly furnished me transcripts from his material for a forthcoming monograph on proposed amendments to the Constitution. ^ Cong. Globe, 3 Cong. 2 Sess., 114. Appendix C, Nos. 2-12. 6 House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70 ; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 79. Ai> pendix C, No. 10. §§ 85-S8.] Enforcement. Slaves of Disloyal Men. 73 felony to resist an officer of the United States in the execution of the law, or to attempt to rescue a runaway. ^ § 87. Propositions to repeal or amend the law. — On the other hand, antislavery members insisted that the provision for the return of fugitives was already too severe ; but only one of the resolutions proposed any amendment in favor of the slave. Mr. Kilgore pro- posed to give a trial by jury before a fugitive should be returned.^ As early as i860 Mr. Blake had introduced into the House a bill to repeal the law of 1850. It was read twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, from whom it was never reported.^ At that time Congress, in alarm at the state of the country, was vainly striving to mend matters by making the Fugitive Slave Law even more effective. March i, 1861, the select committee of thirty-three brought in a bill for the amendment of the law of 1850; it allowed an appeal to the Circuit Court of the United States where jury trial was to be given. The bill passed the House the same day ; but in the Senate it never got beyond the first reading.* § 88. The c«uestion of slaves of rebels. — With the beginning of the Civil War in 186 1 the last period in the study of fugitive slaves opens, to close only with the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Law and the abolition of slavery. New conditions now surrounded the slaves. Their masters were away in the army; many homes were broken up, and confusion reigned instead of law ; the strict discipline and oversight necessary for the maintenance of the slave system was impossible. Oppor- tunities for escape occurred everywhere and at all times. Since war had brought the Northern people down into their own land, the slave no longer needed to travel hundreds of miles to find friends; the Northern camps were perhaps but a few miles from his own plantation. In this way negroes began to gather around the Federal camps in such numbers that the question of disposing of them became serious. If the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 were considered as still binding, their apprehension and return were necessary ; but many of the masters were in arms against the gov- ernment; should they still be protected in their property? The 1 House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 67 ; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., ■]■]. Ap- pendi.x C, No. 3. '•2 House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 7S. Ap- pendix C, No. II. 3 Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 132S. * Appendix C, No. 25. 74 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Efided. [Ch. vl belligerent position of the South seemed to preclude any right on the part of disloyal owners to ask for the benefit of the law. To meet the changed conditions no policy had as yet been developed by the government. The first solution of the problem was made at Fortress Monroe by General Butler. He drew an analogy from international law, which makes material of war im- ported into the country of a belligerent lawful prize to the army or navy of the other belligerent. Regarded as property, the slaves of rebels could be of great service to them, and of equal help to the government in suppressing rebellion. Regarded as persons, they had escaped from communities where rebellion was in progress, and they asked protection from the government to which they were still loyal. In May, 1861, General Butler therefore replied to all demands for fugitives that he should retain them as " contraband of war." The answer was widely spread, and " contraband " became the name by which such negroes were known. ^ § 89. Slavery attacked in Congress. — A series of attacks upon slavery now began in Congress. To many persons the fact that the institution was recognized in the Constitution seemed sufficient ground for protecting it. No doubt was entertained of the power of Congress to confiscate the ordinary property of rebels ; but such persons deprecated all interference with slaves, who were supposed to possess a kind of constitutional immunity, wholly unknown to and above all other property.'^ In the minds of antislavery men, " no greater fallacy was ever asserted than this attempt thus to link ' the institution ' and the Constitution indissolubly together, to engraft the former upon the latter, to make slavery the corner stone of the nation, to be guarded and protected by the govern- ment."^ Nevertheless, the existence of slavery in the Border States which had remained loyal made Congress very cautious as to general enactments. On the other hand, no form of property held by rebels was so vulnerable ; slaves could not only be seized as the lines of the Northern troops extended, they could, by actual law or by kindly reception, be invited across the lines. Both the pas- sions aroused by civil war and a humane pity for the slave urged the government to deprive the master engaged in secession of the services of his slave. 1 Liberator, Nov. i, iS6i ; Edvv. L. Pierce, in Atlantic Monthly, November, iS6i. 2 Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1076. 3 Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1077. §§SS-9i.] Confiscation Bills. 75 §90. Confiscation bills. — July 18, 1861, Mr. Chandler and Mr. Trumbull introduced general confiscation bills in the Senate ; they were both referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. In the dis- cussion Mr. Trumbull offered as an amendment " that whenever any person claiming to be entitled to the service or labor of any other person, under the laws of any State, shall employ such person in aiding or promoting any insurrection, or in resisting the laws of the United States, or shall permit or suffer him to be so employed, he shall forfeit all right to such service or labor, and the person whose service or labor is thus claimed shall be thenceforth discharged therefrom, any law to the contrary notwithstanding." ^ The proposition aroused considerable opposition, since it was a step far in advance of anything which had yet been done against the interests of slavery, and any proposition which advocated " an act of emancipation," however limited and qualified, was the signal for hot discussion. The opposing party announced that " nothing will come of it but more irritation," ^ and in each crisis statesmen should " observe all possible toleration, all conciliation, all liber- ality." ^ Mr. Wilson upheld the opposite opinion, and thought that the time had come when this government, and the men who are in arms under the government, should cease to return their fugitive slaves to traitors. The bill passed the Senate July 22, 1861. In the House it was amended so as to limit the negroes to be freed more strictly to those employed in military service.* The bill went back to the Senate, which concurred in the amendment,^ and it received the signature of the President, August 6, 1861.'^ § 91. Confiscation provisions extended. — Propositions more far reaching were introduced into the Senate in the session of 1861- (Si? January 15, 1862, Mr. Trumbull, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom the various propositions had been referred, reported an original bill, and asked that the committee be dis- charged from the consideration of others.^ March 14, 1862, Mr. 1 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 21S. Appendix C, Nos. 30, 31. 2 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 219. 3 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 412. * House Journal, 37 Cong, i Sess., 197 ; Cong. Globe, 409, 410. Appendix C, No. 31. 5 Senate Journal, 37 Cong, i Sess., 17S ; Cong. Globe, 434. Apj^endix C, No. 31. 6 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 454. Appendix C, No. 31. ■? Appendix C, Nos. 37, 40, 44. ^ Appendix C, No. 52. ^6 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. Harris introduced into the Senate a bill to confiscate the property of rebels and for other purposes.^ These propositions were con- sidered at length, but never came to a vote. It is not necessary to enter here into the discussion of confiscations and of the consti- tutional right of Congress to free the slaves ; in most of the bills there was a provision against the return of slaves to disloyal masters. The Harris bill declared that, before any order for the surrender of fugitives should be given, the claimant must establish not only his title to the slave, as was then provided by law, but also that he is and has been loyal to the United States during the Rebellion. Mr. Pomeroy objected to this because it would make it " obliga- tory on the government of the United States to surrender a person claimed to be indebted to another for service or labor, if the claim- ant proves that he is loyal to the government. Would not this re- enact the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 P"^ An amendment was therefore adopted which so changed the law that any reference to the act of 1850 was avoided.-^ After several debates the proposi- tion was recommitted. May 6.^ Mr. Clark reported a bill, May 14, which retained the provision in regard to fugitives as at first offered.^ In the House, resolutions on confiscation and emancipation were offered on the first day of the session, but the final action was based upon one of several bills introduced by Mr. Eliot, May 14, 1862.6 His first bill, upon the confiscation of the property of the rebels, need not be followed out here; but the second bill pro- vided for the emancipation of the slaves of disloyal masters, and forbade their return as fugitives. After various recommitments'^ a bill was brought in, according to which, in any suit brought by a claimant to recover the possession of slaves to enforce such service or labor, it was to be a sufficient bar to allege and prove that the master was disloyal to the government.^ The bill then passed the House by a vote of 82 to 54.^ 1 Appendix C, No. 59. Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and reported by them, April 16, 1862. Appendix C, No. 67. - Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 944. 8 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 946, 4 Appendix C, No. 71. ^ Appendix C, No. 72. 6 Appendix C, No. 73. Previous bills introduced by Mr. Eliot had been unfavorably reported on by the Judiciary Committee. Appendix C, No. 6g. ■^ Appendix C, No. 75. 8 Appendix C, No. 78. §§91-93-] T^^>-^ Emancipation Proclamation. yy When it came up in the Senate, 'June 23, 1862, Mr. Clark moved to strike out all after the enacting clause, and to insert a substitute which would again unite the ''confiscation and emancipation bills. This amendment was rejected by the House, and a conference com- mittee was appointed which reported July ii and 12. The fugitive from a disloyal master was by this compromise to be deemed a captive of war, and forever freed from servitude.^ The report was adopted by both houses, and approved by the President, July 17, 1862.^ From that date any slave of a disloyal master who could make his way into the territory occupied by the Northern troops was ipso facto free. The fugitive was to become a freeman. § 92. Effect of the Emancipation Proslamation (1863). — The complete emancipation of the negroes within the Confederate lines was the next logical step, and was demanded as a war measure. It de- prived the Confederacy of the aid of these slaves, and at the same time made it possible to arm and employ the former slaves against their masters. September 22, 1862, President Lincoln issued his preliminary proclamation, by which he warned the South that, unless it should return to its allegiance, all persons held as slaves in the States in rebellion on the 1st of January, 1863, should be " thenceforth and forever free." At the end of one hundred days the final and absolute Proclama- tion was put forth, January i, 1863. It declared also that negroes might be received into the armed service of the United States ; and henceforth throughout the war, the former slaves were enrolled as soldiers and did good service for the government. The effect of this proclamation was to end slavery, and with it the return of fugitives, within the Confederate lines. But here the legal machinery of the government had no effect ; the State laws relating to slavery might be considered suspended, but prac- tically the laws and practices of the Confederacy prevailed. On the other hand, the Fugitive Slave Law yet existed upon the statute- book where the Union had power ; the arrest and imprisonment of fugitives was yet legal, and many desired to see the law repealed as another step toward the final crushing out of the system. § 93. Fugitives in loyal slave States. — From the beginning of the war one of the most embarrassing questions which had come before Congress was, How shall the slaves of loyal owners be treated ? The necessity of holding the Border States firm for the Union disposed ^ Appendix C, No. 79. 78 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. many to support only the most conciliatory measures ; but these States were a part of the theatre of war. Northern armies now oc- cupied parts of the Confederacy as well, and among the great num- bers of blacks who flocked to the Union camp it was impossible to separate the slaves of the loyal from the disloyal. Moreover, it was necessary that there should be some uniformity of method. Without specific law, the reception given to fugitives from loyal masters must vary with the views of each commanding officer with whom they sought refuge. § 94. Typical cases. — Cases began to occur very early in the struggle. In 1861 a slave called Wisdom ran away from George- town, and was taken in by some wagoners belonging to the North- ern army. He soon found work, but his master succeeded in tracing him, and came to camp to claim him. He demanded the slave of Captain Swan, officer of the day. Captain Swan hoped the man might be smuggled away, and so delayed the search as long as possible. The master then went to Colonel Cowden, who im- mediately ordered the slave to be surrendered, without the form of proceedings prescribed by the act of 1850, and in disregard of the fact that the master was not provided with the necessary certificate. When the facts became known in Massachusetts and elsewhere, there was great indignation. The Colonel was hung in ^^^y in Boston, with the following inscription : " Colonel Cowden, of Burns rendition notoriety, is now practising his tricks at kidnapping in Washington." ^ Major Sherwood of the nth West Virginia Regiment had, in 1 861, employed a colored refugee as his servant. The owner sent a United States marshal to Brigadier General Boyle, who gave an order for his rendition. Major Sherwood sent a message that he would give up his sword, but, while he was in command, no fugi- tive should be returned. He was placed under arrest for disobe- dience, to await court-martial ; but General Staunton ordered General Boyle's order revoked, and Major Sherwood was never tried. In the mean time the boy had been sent away concealed under the seat of an ambulance, and reached Canada in safety.^ § 95. Question discussed in Congress. — As early in the war as 1861, a number of resolutions were brought into Congress, designed to meet this difficulty,'^ and Mr. Lovejoy introduced a bill making it a 1 Liberator, July 19, 1861 ; Appendix D, No. 68. 2 Williams, History of Negro Race in America, 245 ; Appendix D, No. 69. 3 Appendix C, Nos. 36, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48. §§ 93-95- Fugitives from Loyal Slave States. 79 penal offence " for any officer or private of the army or navy to capture or return, or aid in the capture or return" of fugitive slaves.i The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, which reported adversely upon it, April i6. 1862.2 December 16, 1861, Mr. Hale had offered a resolution, which was adopted, looking toward a uniform method of dealing with the slaves of rebels.^ Mr. Sumner brought in another on December 17, which forbade the employment of the armies in the surrender of fugitives.* " I ask, sir," said the writer of a letter read by Mr. Sumnier, " shall our sons, who are offering their lives for the preservation of our institutions, be degraded to slave catchers for any persons loyal or disloyal? If such il the policy of the government, I shall urge my son to shed no more blood for its preservation." ^ Another protest came from two German companies in one of the Massachusetts regiments, who, when they enlisted, entered the service with the understanding that they should not be put to any such discreditable service. They complained, and with them the German population generally throughout the country." ^ Some proof that the owner of the slave was at least loyal to the government seemed necessary, if rendition were to be made at all ; though antislavery men were determined to admit no return of fugi- tives^under any circumstances. December 20, i86r, a resolution of Mr. Wilson's was adopted, for an additional article of war for- bidding officers from returning fugitives under any consideration.' A bill was introduced, discussed, and somewhat amended, but never passed.^ Mr. Blair'sbill.of February 25, 1862, from the Committee on Mili- tary Affairs in the House, was to the same purpose.^ This, however, was successfully carried in both houses, and signed by the Presi- dent, May 14, 1862. In the discussion, Mr. Mallory opposed the bill, because it seemed to him that it would prevent the President of the United States from sending a military force into a State to aid the authorities in enforcing a national law which stands upon the statute-book.!*^ Mr. Bingham answered this objection by saying that it simply determined that for the future, as in the past, the 1 Appendix C, No. 35. '^ Appendix C, No. 66. 3 Appendix C, No. 41. 4 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., no; Appendix C, No. 42. 6 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess , 130. ^ Cong. Globe, 37 Cong, i Sess., 130. 1 Appendix C, No. 47- * Appendix C, No. 48. 9 Appendix C, No. 58. ^° Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 955. 8o Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. army and navy should not exercise functions which belong solely to the civil magistrates.^ § 96. Arrests by civil officers. — The act of May 14, 1862, applied only to army officers. Notwithstanding the opportunities then offered for escape, wandering negroes were still liable to be seized by civil authorities and placed in jail. In this way numbers of negroes, many of them really free, were arrested, on the suppo- sition of being runaways, and were imprisoned without trial for an indefinite length of time. An advertisement in 1863 shows the method then in use. " There was committed to the jail of Warren County, Kentucky, as a run- away slave, on the 29th September, 1862, a negro man calling himself Jo Miner. He says he is free, but has nothing to show to establish the fact. He is about thirty-five years of age, very dark copper color, about five feet eight inches high, and will weigh about one hundred and fifty pounds. The owner can come forward, prove property, and pay charges, or he will be dealt with as the law requires. " R. J. PorrER, J. W. C. " March i6, 1S63. i m." 2 § 97. Denial of the use of the jails in the District of Columbia. — Several efforts were made to remedy this state of things, at least in the territory over which Congress had exclusive control. December 4, 1 86 1, Mr. Wilson, who had been investigating the condition of the District of Columbia jail in Washington, offered a joint resolution for the release of all fugitives from service or labor therein hcld.^ It appeared that some sixty persons were imprisoned solely because they were suspected of being runaways, and had been allowed no opportunity to prove the contrary. A free boy from Pennsylvania came to Washington with the 5th Pennsylvania Regiment. He was found in the streets and sent to jail. Another boy, who was working for the soldiers on the railroad, was also taken up and placed therc.^ Mr. Wilson struck at the root of the matter by a resolution, which was agreed to, looking to the revision of all the laws in the District of Columbia providing for the arrest of persons as fugitives from service or labor, and to consider the expediency of abolishing slavery in the District.^ 1 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 956. 2 Liberator, May i, 1S63 Extract from Frankfort Commonwealth. 8 Appendix C, No. 33. * Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 10. '" Appendix C, No. -^i. §§95-97] District of Columbia. 8l On December 9, 1861, Mr. Bingham introduced a resolution for the repeal of all acts in force in the District of Columbia which au- thorized the commitment of runaways and suspected runaways to the jail; it was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary,^ Mr. Fesscnden asked that the Committee on the District of Columbia investigate and report upon the condition of the jail; this was agreed to.^ A few weeks later, December 30, i86r, Mr. Grimes presented a bill in the Senate in regard to the administration of criminal justice in the District. This was read and referred to the committee, which reported it, January 6, 1862.^ Efforts were immediately made to prevent fugitive slaves from being included in the general jail deliv- ery contemplated by the bill. Mr. Powell, in the debate upon his amendment to that purpose, urged that so long as the institution of slavery existed in the South, no such measure ought to prevail* Mr. Grimes supported his measure by giving some examples of exceedingly unjust cases which had occurred. " A young colored fellow, who came as a servant of an officer from the vicinity of Pittsburg, was thrown into this jail in August last. The regiment to which he was attached went forward toward the face of the enemy. There was nobody here to look after him. There is no doubt as to his being a free boy, yet he was there on the first day of this month." To such cases he desired to have the law apply. " They have here in this District and in Maryland what they call an appre- hension fee. They have a law which declares that if any slave Wanders a certain distance from the residence of his master, he may be taken up as a fugitive. There are persons in this vicinity, I am credibly informed, who are lying in wait all around your city and the surrounding country, in hope that they can find some poor colored man or woman who is out picking berries and visiting a friend, and who will wander a little further than the distance estab- lished by law from the residence of the master." ^ The opinion that such injustice ought to be corrected prevailed, and the amend- ment was rejected. After much discussion the bill passed the Senate, January 14, 1862,^ and it was approved by the President on the same day. Thenceforward the Fugitive Slave Law was prac- tically a dead letter at the seat of government, since the necessary 1 Appendix C, No. 39. - Appendix C, No. 38. 3 Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1S2 ; Appendix C, No 51. * Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 313. ^ Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 264. ^ Appendix C, No 51. 6 82 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. machinery was lacking, and the spirit of the administration was opposed to it. The new act was in effect a national personal liberty bill. § 98. Abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. — The work contemplated by all the propositions was finally accomplished in one act. On December 16, 1861, Mr. Wilson had offered a bill in the Senate for the total abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. It was reported with amendments a few weeks after the passage of the act denying the use of jails, and on February 2\f 1862, Mr. Wilson presented a supplementary bill.^ The debates upon this proposition were long and interesting. The South regarded it as " an entering wedge of something more comprehensive and radical,""'^ as preparatory to the abolition of slavery in the whole country by Congress. The antislavery party rejoiced that at last an opportunity had come for freeing the national capital from the disgrace of slavery. The bill passed both houses, and was approved April 16, 1862.^ By the final section of the act the black code of Maryland was wiped out, and the severe local provisions against fugitives, which had not been repealed by the previous act, were at last taken away. It remained only to attack the last stronghold of the system, — the two acts of 1793 and 1850. § 99. Regulations against kidnapping. In the act of April 16, 1862, were included regulations against kidnapping, — a practice made easy by the unsettled state of the country. It seems to have been largely carried on not only by Southerners, but also by unprincipled soldiers connected with the Union army. The Liberator of March 27, 1863, notices such a case. Some men from the 99th Regiment of New York Volunteers kidnapped a free colored man at Norfolk, Virginia. They took his horse, cart, and the provisions which he had just bought, and offered him for sale to be sent South. During the absence of his captors for a few moments, the man was able to work off his bonds and to escape in the darkness. He immediately went before a provost marshal, told his story, and recognized one of his captors who was just entering the door. What the consequences of this meet- ing were the " Liberator " does not tell us ; but the impression is given that the negro was saved from his pursuers.^ 1 Appendix C, Nos. 42, 54, 56. 2 Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, iii. 273. 8 Appendix C, Nos. 62, 65. * Appendix D, No. 68. §§97-101.] Repeal of the Acts proposed. 83 § 100. Eepeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts. — By the successive acts of Congress and the President, the legal effect of the Fugitive Slave Laws was now confined practically to the limited area of the Border States. No officer, civil" or military, could return a fugitive into the Confederate lines. Slavery was forbidden in the District of Columbia, and there could be no escapes thence ; and Congress forbade the use of the jails of the District for the confinement of fugitives from slaveholding regions. In the free States the rendition of slaves, though still legally required, had long since ceased. The final step was delayed till 1864. § 10 1 . Early propositions to repeal the acts. — Repeal, however, was preceded by many earlier propositions. The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred Mr. Howe's bill, presented December 26, 1861,^ did not report until 1863, and then with the opinion that it ought not to pass. In introducing his repeal measure, Mr. Howe spoke of the bill of 1850 as one "which has probably done as much mischief as any other one act that was ever passed by the national legislature. It has embittered against each other twD great sections of the country."^ To take away the. law of 1850 would leave in force the act of 1793, which was " good enough." June 9, 1862, soon after the passage of the acts on the District of Columbia, Mr. Julian presented in the House another repeal bill, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.'^ As the war progressed, and the antislavery sentiment began to out- weigh all others, it became evident that the old law could not much longer obtain. Nevertheless the question was set aside during the session of 1862-63, but in 1863-64 five bills were introduced looking to the repeal of the acts.* Mr. Morris, from the committee to whom all bills for repeal had been referred, reported a substitute for them, June 6, 1864, and this was the basis of the final action of Congress.^ 1 Appendi.x C, No. 49. 2 Cong. Glolje, 37 Cong, i Sess., 1356. 3 Appendix C, No. 76. * Three bills were introduced in the House on the same day, December 14, 1S63, by Messrs. Stevens, Julian, and Ashley. They were read twice and referred. Appendix C, Nos. 104, 106. Before the final consideration of the subject, on February 8, 1864, two more bills were introduced in Congress, Mr. Sumner's in the Senate, and Mr. Spalding's in the House. The former went to the Committee on the Judiciary, the latter to the Select Committee on Slavery and Freedom. Appendix C, No. 80. * Appendix C, No. So. 84 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. § 102. Discussion of the repeal bill in the House. — Had the country been divided simply into two parts, the slaveholding Southern Con- federacy and the free loyal North, little discussion could have arisen. The third element, the slaveholding States which remained firm for the Union, rendered the question far more complex. The bill therefore aroused much indignation. Mr. Mallory demanded, as an act of justice to his State, that " the Fugitive Slave Act be permitted to remain on the statute-book. If you say it will be a dead letter, so much less excuse have you for repealing it, and so much more certainly is the insult and wrong to Kentucky gra- tuitous. This act, by which you declare your intention not to obey the injunction of the Constitution is wanton and useless, except for the purpose of bravely exhibiting your contempt for that instrument." "The framers of the Constitution gave us the right to reclaim fugitive slaves. It was conceded not as a favor, but as a right." " Kentucky has remained true to her faith pledged to the government, and I warn you not to persevere in inflicting on her insult and outrage."^ Again, one of the reasons for the departure of the Southern States, v^as the "bad faith of the Northern States, — the fatal infringe- ment of this part of the Constitution. It was because of Personal Liberty bills, John Brown raids, and general denunciation and in- termeddling with slavery." ^ Many members urged that there could be no more reckless action than to show to the Border States an apparent disregard of the Constitution. Mr. Cox considered the law .the only refuge left to a certain class of citizens to protect their '• rights." It would be like saying to them, We place the penalty of the treason of the revolted slaveholders on your innoceijt heads. " We add to your calamities the ingratitude and treachery of the government to which you have adhered."^ The final discussion, June 13, opened with a long speech by Mr. King. The old arguments from the Constitution, the far- seeing wisdom of the fathers, the opinion of the Supreme Court in the Prigg case, and the harm done the Border States, were again rehearsed.* In answer to Mr. King, Mr. Hubbard denied that the Constitu- tion provided for the enactment of a law by Congress, and in any 1 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2774, 2775. 2 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2914. 8 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2914. 4 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 291 1. §§ I02- 103.1 Discussion of Repeal Bills. 85 case the treason of slavery had already absolved the people from any such obligation. It surely must be competent for this Congress to repeal any act which a previous Congress had enacted. For yet another reason the law should be repealed. Negro soldiers must be enhsted : " You cannot draft black men into the field, while your marshals are chasing women and children in the woods of Ohio with a view to render them back into bondage. The moral sense of the nation, ay, of the world, would revolt at it." ^ Again, this would make a conflict in our laws, said Mr. Morris. A^colored man might enlist in our army, then, under the Fugitive Slave Law, "he might be seized and remanded to slavery; and as a further consequence, dealt with as a deserter from his post of duty." 2 It was also urged that unless slavery was to survive the war, the two acts were useless and obsolete statutes, which ought to be wiped out of existence. No one who believes that slavery is dead would desire to keep such a guaranty of the institution.^ Mr. Hubbard then demanded the yeas and nays on the passage of the bill. It was declared in the affirmative, yeas 82, nays 57, and thus the repeal was successfully carried in the House.* § 103. Repeal biUs in the Senate. — Mr. Sumner had already re- ported a repeal bill from the Committee on Slavery and Freedom in the Senate, February 29, 1864.' The progress of the bill was so delayed by the opposition, that Mr. Sumner at last gave notice that he should take every proper occasion to call up the bill, and press its consideration.*^ In the debate several speeches were made against the measure, while Mr. Sumner defended it. To the antislavery party the act was constitutionally 7 and morally wrong, so against public senti- ment that it could seldom be enforced, and the question of its repeal was as plain as a "diagram," "the multiplication table," or "the ten commandments."^ They desired to strike slavery wherever they could hit it, and to " purify the statute-book, so that there should be nothing in it out of which this wrong can derive any support." It should be repealed for the sake of our cause in foreign lands.9 « Since the outbreak of the Rebellion this statute has been 1 Con-. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2913. 2 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2919. 3 Con° Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2917. * Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 2920. 5 Senate Journal, 38 Cong, i Sess., 196; Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess.. 869; Ap- pendix C, No. So. , „ ^ o 6 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., iiyS- '' Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Se.ss , 1710. 8 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1709. ^ Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1713. 86 Fugitive Slaves : — Question Ended. [Ch. vi. constantly adduced by our enemies abroad as showing that we are Httle better than Jefferson Davis and his slave-monger crew; for slavery never shows itself worse than in the -slave-hunter. It is a burden for our cause which it ought not to be obliged to bear," To retain the law of 1793, framed by the founders of the Re- public, and repeal the act of 1850 with its manifest injustice, was suggested as a desirable compromise. Mr. Sherman, therefore, offered an amendment to this effect, and it was accepted.^ The friends of the measure then felt that the bill as it stood was of little value to the antislavery cause. Mr. Brown maintained that it was really a proposition to reinstate slavery in its fastness in the Constitution. " The civilized world, when it beholds the spectacle of the American Senate going back for three quarters of a cen- tury to resurrect a statute of slave-catching, and pass it anew with their indorsement, will credit very little all your talk about free- dom. The act will give the lie to all argument." ^ Before further action w^as taken on Mr. Sherman's bill, the repeal bill from the House came before the Senate, and was reported from the committee, June 15, 1864. It was discussed for several days, but no new arguments were offered, and, June 23, 1864, the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 27 to 12.^ On the 25th of June it received President Lincoln's signature, and the Fugitive Slave Laws were swept from the statute-book of the United States.^ § 104. The repeal act and the thirteenth amendment. — The act was a simple one; it runs as follows: — "Chap. CLXVI. An Act to repeal the Fugitive Slave Act of eighteen hundred and fifty, and all Acts and parts of Acts for the rendition of Fugitive Slaves. " Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That sections three and four of an act entitled ' An act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from the service of their masters,' passed February twelve, seventeen hundred and ninety-three, and an act entitled ' An act to amend, and supplementary to, the act entitled An act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from the service of their masters, passed February twelve, seven. 1 Senate Journal, 38 Cong, i Sess., 348; Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1710, 1714. - Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 1752. 3 Cong. Globe, 38 Cong, i Sess., 3191 ; Appendi.x C, No. 83. * Appendix C, No. 116. §§ 103-105] Repeal of the Acts. 87 teen hundred and ninety-three,' passed September, eighteen hun- dred and fifty, be and the same are hereby repealed. "Approved, June 28, 1864." The whole structure of statutes, decisions, and judicial machinery which had been erected to compel by national authority the people of free States to share in the responsibility for slavery, was at last overthrown. But the constitutional obligation remained ; so long as a slave anywhere existed, the neighboring States were bound to pursue him, if he ran away, and might by statute provide for his return. The final step was therefore to complete the work of legal emancipation by the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution. On January 31, 1865, Congress voted to submit the following article to the States for their approval and ratification: " Art. XIII. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction." On December 18, 1865, the Secretary of State proclaimed that the amendment had been approved by twenty-seven of the thirty-six States, and was consequently adopted. § 105. Educating effect of the controversy. — The first act of 1793 was imperfect. It did not provide a national machinery whereby its provisions could be executed, and many of the States by means of the personal liberty laws refused to lend their officers and jails for the work. All eff'orts to amend the law were unsuccessful until the great compromise of 1850 gave opportunity to pass a second act. This new measure remedied certain defects in the first statute, and was therefore more satisfactory to the slave-owners. As soon as it began to be executed, however, its provisions were found to be so severe that the trials and rescues it occasioned served only to educate the people to the evils of slavery by bringing its efi"ects close to them. Thus, far from compelling the North to acquiesce in the system, it greatly increased the number of Abolitionists The arraying of the North and South against each other in the Civil War intensified public sentiment upon the question, and led more and more to a loose execution of the law. It was found im- practicable to return slaves to disloyal masters, and a law to prevent any such return was the next step toward the doing away of the whole system. Next came the question of the duty and power of the general government, within its exclusive jurisdiction: in 1862 8S Fugitive Slaves : — Question)^ Ended. [Ch. vi. all responsibility was disavowed. By this time the force of the law extended only to the loyal slave States, and the force of public opinion in 1864 withdrew the last statutory safeguard of slavery under the Constitution, A change in the text of the Constitution finally took away the force of the clause on which the return of fugitives was based. We can see, at this distance, how clearly slavery was doomed to destruction, from the time the two sections first made it an issue in 1820; but there was no relation arising out of slavery except the territorial question which did so much as the fugitive slave contro- versy to hasten the downfall of the system. The contrast between the free principles of democratic government and human bondage was forced upon the attention of the North by the pursuit of fugi- tives in their midst. Yet without national machinery for the re- capture of runaways the institution could not have long been maintained. There is no evidence that the North was profoundly stirred by the horrors of slavery before 1850; it was only when the North was called upon, in the Territories, and through the Fugi- tive Slave Law, to give positive aid to the system that the anti- slavery movement grew strong. Fugitive slaves and fugitive slave laws helped to destroy slavery. APPENDIX A. COLONIAL LAWS RELATIVE TO FUGITIVES. The precise text is quoted in eacli case. Tlie figures in braclcets [] refer to para- graphs in the text. l"he sign O indicates that the full text is to be found iu the reference cited. 1. New Netherlands : — Running away from Patroons. [§ 2]. 1629, June 7. Freedoms and exemptions. Granted by the West India Company to all Patroons, Masters or Private Persons who will plant Colonies in New Netherlands. — " XVIII. The Company promise the colonists of the Patroons. . . . XIX. — And any Colonist who shall leave the service of his Patroon and enter into the service of another, or shall, contrary to his contract, leave his service, we promise to do everything in our power to apprehend and deliver the same into the hands of his Patroon or attorney, that he may be proceeded against according to the customs of this country, as occasion may require." — O Lazvs and Ordinances of Neiv Netherlands, 7. 2. Massachusetts : — Capture and protection of servants. [§ 4.] 1630-1641. " Acts respecting Masters, Servants, and Labourers." — " Sec. 3. It is also ordered, that when any servants shall run from their masters, or any other inhab- itants shall privily go away with suspicion of evil intentions, it shall be lawful for the next magistrate, or the constable and two of the chief inhabitants where no magistrate is, to pre°ss men and boats or pinnaces at the publick charge, to pursue such persons by sea and land, and bring them back by force of arms Sec. 6. It is ordered, and by this court declared; that if any servant shall flee from the tyranny and cruelty of his or her master to the house of any freeman of the same town, they shall be there protected and sustained till due order be taken for their relief; provided due notice thereof be speedily given to their master from whom they fled, aijd to the next magistrate or con- stable where the party so fled is harboured." — O Charters and General Laivs of the Colony and Proz'ince of Massac /lusetts Bay, 155. 3 New Netherlands : — Runaway servants. [§ 6] 1640, Aug. 7. " Ordinance of the Director and Council of New Netherland, against Fugitives from Service, and providing for the proper drawing up of Legal Instruments." Passed 9 August, 1640. " Whereas many Servants daily run away from their masters, whereby the latter are put to great inconvenience and expense ; the Corn and Tobacco rot in the field and the whole Harvest is at a stand still, which tends to the serious in- jury of this country, to their Masters' ruin, and to bring the magistracy into contempt. We, therefore, command all farm and house Servants faithfully to serve out their time with their Masters according to their contracts and in no manner to run away, and if they have any thing against their masters, to come to Us and make application to be heard in due form of Law, on pain of being punished and of making good all losses and damages of their Masters and serving double the time they may lose. . . . [89] 90 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. a. We do, also, forbid all inhabitants of New Netlierland to harbor or feed any of these fugitive Servants under the penalty of Fifty guilders, for the benefit of the Informer ; ^ for the new Church and y^ for the Fiscal." Dated as above. — O Laws and Oidinances oj A'lIO A'etherliDuls, 32. 4. Maryland : — Runaway apprentices felons. 1642, March 26. Act against Fugitives. — " It shall be felony in any apprentice Ser- vant to depart away secretly from his or her Master or dame then being with intent to convey him or her Selfe away out of the Province. And on any other person that shall wittingly accompany such Servant in such unlawfull departure as aforesaid. And the offendors therein shall suffer paines of death, and after his due debts paid shall forfeit all his Lands, goods, & Chattels within the Province. Provided, that in Case his Lord- ship or his Leivt't-Generall shall at the request of the partie so condemned exchange such pains of death into Servitude, that then such exchange shall not exceed the term of Seaven years, and that the Master or dame of the parties so pardoned of death shall first be satisfied for the terme of such parties Service unexpired from the day of such unlawfull departure, and for double the time of his absence dureing his said departure." — O Archive's of Maryland, Assembly Proceedings, 124. 5. New Netherlands : — Against harboring fugitive servants. (§6). 1642, April 13. " We have interdicted and forbidden, as we do hereby most, ex- pressly interdict and forbid, all our good inhabitants here, from this time henceforward, lodging any strangers in their houses, or furnishing them more than one meal and har- boring them more than one night without first notifying the Director," etc. — O Laws and Ordinances 0/ New A'etherlands, 32. 6. Virginia : — Entertainment of fugitives. [§ 3 ] 1642-3, March. Act XXI. " Whereas complaints are at every quarter court exhibited against divers persons who entertain and enter into covenants with runaway servants and freemen who have formerly hired themselves to others, to the great prejudice if not the utter undoeing of divers poor men, thereby also encouraging servants to runn from their masters and obscure themselves in some remote plantation. Upon consideration had for the future preventing of the like injurious and unjust dealings. Be it enacted and confirmed that what person or persons soever shall entertain any person as hireling, or sharer, or upon any other conditions for one whole yeare, without certificate from the commander or any one commissioner of the place, that he or she is free from any ingage- ment of service. The person so hireing without such certificate as aforesaid, shall for every night that he or she entertaineth any servant, either as hireling or otherwise, ffor- feit to the master or mistris of the said servant twenty pounds of tobacco. And for evrie freeman which he or she entertaineth (formerly hired by another) for a year as aforesaid, he or she shall forfeit to the party who had first hired him twenty pound of tobacco for every night deteyned. And for every freeman which he or she entertaineth (though he hath not formerly hired himselfe to another), without certificate as aforesaid, And in all these cases the party hired shall receive such censure and punishment as shall be thought fitt by the Governor and Counsell : All ways provided that if any such runnaway servants or hired freemen shall produce such a certificate, wherein it appears that they are freed from their former masters service, or from any such ingagement respectively, if afterwards it shall be proved that the said certificates are counterfeit then the retayner not to suffer according to the penalty of this act. But such punish- ment shall be inflicted upon the forger and procurer thereof as the Governor and Council shall think fitt." — O Statutes at Lary^e. Hening, Laws of Virginia, I. 253. 7. Virginia: — Runaway servants. [§3.] 1642-3, March. Act XXII. "Be it therefore enacted and confirmed that all runa- ways that shall absent themselves from their said master's service shall be lyable to 1642-165I] Colonial Laiis relative to Fugitives. 91 make satisfaction by service at the end of their tymes by indenture (vizt.) double the tyme of service soe neglected, and in some cases more if the commissioners for the place appointed shall find it requisite and convenient. And if such runaways shall be found to transgresse the second time or oftener (if it shall be duely proved against them), that then they shall be branded in the cheek with the letter R. and passe under the statute of incorrigible rogues." - O Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virgaua\2SA. 8 New England Confederation: -Articles of Confederation. [§ b.J 1643 Aug. 29. VIII. " It is also agreed that if any servant runn away from his master'into any other of the.se confederated Jurisdiccons, That in such Case, vpon the Certyficate of one Magistrate in the Jurisdiccon out of which the said servant fled, or upon other due proofe, the said servant shalbe deliuered either to his Master or any other that pursues and brings such Certificate or ^.o^it:' -O Plymouth Colony Records, IX. 5. 9 Connecticut : — Servants and apprentices. 1644, June 3. " Whereas many stubborn, refrectary and discontented searuants and app^ntices w^'' drawe themselves fro their masters searuices, to improue their tyme to their owne aduantage ; for the p^euenting whereof, It is Ordered, that whatsoeuer searuant or apprentice shall heareafter offend in that kynd, before their couenants or terme of searuice are expiered, shall searue their said Masters, as they shall be appre- hended or retayned the treble terme, or threefold tyme of their absense in such kynd." — O Connecticut Records, I. 105. 10. New Netherlands : — Entertainment of runaways. 1648, Oct. 6. Ordinance of the Director and Council of New Netherland against Fugitives from Service. Passed 6 October, 1648. — " The Director General and Council her'^eby notify and warn all persons against harboring or entertaining any one bound to service either to the Company or to any private individual here or elsewhere, and against lodging or boarding them at most longer than twenty-four hours, and if any one shall be found to have acted contrary hereto, he shall forfeit a fine of fl. 150, to be paid to whomsoever will make the complaint and it may appertain." — O Laws and Ordinances of Ne7v Netherlands, 104. 11. Maryland ; — Against fugitives. 1649. Archives of Maryland, Assembly Proceedings, 249. 12. Maryland : — Against fugitives. 1654, Oct. Archives of Maryland, Assembly Proceedings, 348. 13. Virginia : — Penalty for second offence. 1655-6, March. " Act XI. Be it enacted by this Grand Assembly that if any runn- away servant offend the second time against the act in March, 1642, concerning runn- away servants, that he shall not onely be branded with the letter R., and passe under the statute for an incorrigible rogue, but also double his time of service so neglected, and soe likewise double the time that any time afterward he shall neglect, and in some cases more if the Commissioners think fitt : And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that he or she that shall lodge or harbour any such runnaway shall not only pay 20 lb. of tobacco per night, but also 40 lb. of tobacco per day so long as they shallbe proved to entertaine them, contrary to an act of assembly in March, 1642." — O Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, I. 401. 14. New Netherlands : — Treaty with United Colonies. [§ii.] 1656. Resolution of the States General ratifying the treaty of Hartford, passed Febru- ary 22, 1656. — " Respecting Fugitives. It is agreed that the same method shall be ob- served between the United English Colonies and the Dutch nation in this country of New Netherland, agreeablv to the eighth Article of the confederation between the United English Colonies in that case provided."-© Lazvs and Ordinances of New Netherlands, 2 16. 92 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. A. 15. City of Amsterdam : — Runa-way colonists banished. 1656, December. Articles and Ordinances revised and enacted by the Right Honor- able the Lords Burgomasters of the City of Amsterdam, according to which shall be engaged and sworn all those who shall hereafter enter the service of the Lord's Burgo- masters of the City of Amsterdam, for the purpose of going with their own, or chartered ships to New Netherlands and the limits of the West India Company's Grant, etc. Passed December, 1856 — "Whoever runs off to the French, English, or any other Christian or Indian neighbors by whatsoever name they may be called, shall, in addition to the forfeiture of all his monthly pay to the City, be banished forever from New Nether- land as a perjured villain, and if he afterward come to fall into the hands of the City, he shall, without any consideration, be punished by death or otherwise, according to the exigency of the case." — O Laws ami Oydhia)ices of New N^etlierlands, 273. 16. Virginia : — Entertainment of runawrays. 1657-8, March. Act XV. Concerning Hireing Servants. Thirty pounds of to- bacco shall be paid for every night a servant or person without a certificate is enter- tained. — Statutes at Lat-ge. Heniiig, Laws of Virginia, I. 439. 17. Virginia : — Punishment of runaways. 1657-8, March. Act XVI. Against Runnaway Servants. Runnaways shall double the time of service absent at the end of their time of indenture. For the second offence they shall be branded with the letter R. and double the time lost. — Lleiiing, Laws of Virginia, I. 440. 18. Virginia : — Huie and crie after runaways. 1657-8, March. "ActCXIII. Concerning Huie and cries. Whereas buy and cries after runnaway servants hath been much neglected to the greate damage and loss of the inhabitants of this colloney. Bee it therefore enacted and confirmed by the authorite of this present Grand Asseynbly, that all such huy and cries shall be signed either by the Governor or some of the Councill, or under the hand of some com'r, nameing the county where the said com'r lives, and the saine shall be conveyed from house to house with all convenient speed according as the direction thereof expresseth: And every com'r of each county unto whose house by this meanes the said huy and crie shall come shall then date and subscribe the same. And the master of every house that shall make default in the speedy conveyance of any such huies and cries shall for every such default forfeit and pay unto the owners of any such runnawaie as the said hues and cries shall mention, one hundred pounds of tobacco, and where the said runnawaie ser- vant is found he shall be apprehended and sent from constable to constable untill such runnawaie or runnawayes shall be delivered to his or theire master or mistresse, and if any neglect can be proved against the constable hee to be fined three hundred and fiftie pounds of tobacco." — O Statutes at La7ge. Hening, Lazvs of Virginia, I. 483. 19. Nev^r Netherlands : — Runa^way servants 1658, April 9. Ordinance of the Director General and Council of New Netherland renewing sundery Ordinances therein mentioned. Passed 9 April, 165S. — " I3thly, not to debauch or incite any person's servants, male or female, or to harbor them, or fugi- tives and strangers, longer than 24 hours without notifying the Fiscal, Magistrates, or Schouts, and all servant men and women remaine bound to fulfill and complete their contracts, on pain of arbitrary correction, according to the Ordinance of the 6 October, 164S." — O Laws of Ncrv Netherlands, 344. 20 Virginia : — How to know a runnaway servant. [§ 3.] 1658-9, March. Act III. " Lt is enaeted a//d ordt/ined thiit the master of everie such runaway shall cutt, or cause to be cutt, the hair of all such runnawayes close above their ears, whereby they may be with more ease discovered and apprehended." — O Statutes at Large. Hening, Lazvs of Virginia, I. 517. I656-I663.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. , 93 91 Vireinia — Payment of Dutch shipmasters. 16,0-60 March. Act XV. An Act for the Pay of Dutch Masters br.ng.ng in kunn- away Serv'ants. Whenever a master shall refuse to pay the cost of returmng a runn- away from the Dutch, the payment shall be made by the secretary at h.s office. - Statutes at Large. Hcning, Lazus of Virginia, I. 539- ^ 22 Virginia : — Apprehension of runaways. ?66oI, March. A^t X. Apprehending of Runnawayes. -" Whereas the pursu. and takeing of runnaways is hindered chiefly by the neglect of constables m making search according to their warrants, Bee Ht enacted that every constable shal make diligent search and inquiry through his precincts, and what constable soever sha 1 upon s arch apprehend suci runaways shall receive from the master of the servant or In encouragement two hundred pounds of tobaccoe, and if any constable shall neglect he Ihall be fined three hundred and fifty pounds of tobaccoe and caske according to former act."-0 Statutes at Large. Henuig, Laivs of Virgima II. 21. 23 Virginia : — English runnaway with negroes. [^ 3.J 1660-1 March. Act XIII. " ^.r /// .;...W that in case any English servant shall runaway 'in company with any negroes who are incapable of making satisfaction by addition of time, Bee itt enacted that the English so running away in company with tl^m shall serve for the time of the said negroes absence as they are to do for their owne by a former act " — O Hcning, Laws of Virginia, II. 26. 24 Virginia • - Glocester to have jurisdiction over runaways. 1660-1 March. It was ordered that the county of Glocester have the power to make such laws for the recovering of runaways as shall be found necessary and con- venient. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, 1 1 . 35. 25 Virginia: —Runaway servants. 1661-2 March. Act CII. Runaways. — Penalties for running away are the same as in former acts. English servants if running away with negroes, and the negroes die or be lost shall pay either four thousand five hundred pounds of tobacco and caske, or four vears service for every negro so lost or dead. - Hening, Laws of Virgrma, II. 1 17- 26. Maryland • — Against runaways. 1662. Maryland Archives, Assembly Proceedings, 451. 27 Virginia : — Pursuit of runaways to the Dutch. '1663 September. Act VIII. " An Act concerning the pursuit of runawayes." It is enacted that runaways are to be pursued at the public expense, and, if they have escaped to the Dutch, letters are to be written to the Governors of those Plantations to return the runaways. Expenses are to be paid according to the provisions of a former act. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, II. 187. 28. Maryland : — Against English servants. 1663 October. Maryhvid Archives, Assembly Proceedings, A^9- 29 New Netherlands : - Quakers, etc. refused admission to colony. 1663 May 17. Ordinance of the Director General and Council of New Netherland prohibiting the bringing of Quakers and other Strollers into New Netherland^ Passed 17 May 1663. -"The Director General and Council, therefore, do hereby Order and command all Skippers, Sloop captains and others, whomsoever they may be, not to convey or bring, much less to land within this government, any such Vagabonds Quak- ers and other Fugitives, whether Men or Women, until they have first addressed them- selves to the government, etc on the pain of the Importers forfeiting a fine of Twenty pounds Flemish for every person," etc. - O Laws and Ordinances of Aew A'cthcrlands, 439. 30 Virginia: — Entertainment of runaways. 1666 October. Act IX. " An act against entertayners of runaways." Penalty for entertaining runaways increased to sixty pounds of tobacco for every day and mght he or they shall be harbored. - Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, II. 239. 94 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. \\.vv. a. 31. Maryland : — Runaw^ays and their entertainers. 1666, May. " An Act providing ag' Runaways, and all such as shall Entertayn them. Whereas there was an act providing against Runnawaies made in the year 1650, and another act made in the year 1662, both which acts being adjudged insufficient Satisfaccon for the reparac5n of their respective Masters, mrssrse, Dame, or overseers damages sustained by their servt running from them, Be it enacted by the right honorble, the Lord Prop^y, by and with the consent of the upper and Lower House of this present general assembly, that from and after the publicacon hereof any Servant or Servants whatsoever unlawfully absenting themselves from their said Master, Mistress, Dame, or overseer, shall serve for every day 10. And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid that any Master, Mistress, dame, or Overseer that shall entertain any servant unlawfully absenting himselve as aforesaid, having been forewarned by the Master, mis- tress, Dame, or Overseer of the said servant, shall be fined for the first night five hun- dred pounds of Casked tobacco, for the second one thousand pounds of casked tobacco, for every other night fifteen hundred pounds of casked tobacco, the one half to the Lord Proprietor, the other to the informer, or them that shall sue for the same within any Court of Record within this province, to be Recovered by action of debt, plaint or In- formacon wherein no Essoyne, protection or wager of Lawe to be allowed, Provided that this Act nor anything therein conteynd shall not be adjudged to the predudice of any person or persons that shall apprehend any Runaway servants who are hereby required to use the best endeavors to Convey them to their owners or next justice of the peace to be conveyed from constable to constable until they be delivered to their said owners, if then living within this province. This act to continue for 3 years, or to the end of the next general assembly which shall first come." — O MaryLind Archives, Asscmi'lv Proccediiis^'s, 147. 32. New Jersey . — Fugitive servants. 1668, May 30. Acts passed and assented unto by the Governor, Council, and Burgess of the General Assembly of the Province of New-Caesarea, or New Jersey, the 30th Day of May, Anno Domini 1668. " Concerning Fugitives, It is Enacted by the same Authority, that every Apprentice and Servant that shall depart and absent them- selves from their Master and Dames, without leave first obtained, shall be judged by the Court to double the Time of such their Absence, by future Service over and above other Damages and costs which Master and Dame shall sustain by such unlawful Departure. " And it is also enacted, that whosoever shall be proved to have transported, or to have contrived the Transportation of any such Apprentice or Servant shall be fined Fm- PoHitds, and all such Damages as the Court shall Judge, and that the Master or Dame can make appear, and if not able, to be left to the Judgement of the Court." — O Xeiv Jersey Laws, S2. 33. Virginia : — Runaways. i658, September. Act IV. About Runawayes. Moderate corporal punishment in- flicted by the master or magistrate shall not deprive the master of the satisfaction allowed by the law. — Statutes at Lar^e. Henhig, Laws of Virginia, W. 266. 34. Virginia : — Runaways. 1669, October. Act VIIL Against Runawayes. "Be it therefore enacted that whosoever apprehends any runaways, whether servant by indenture, custome or cove- nant, not haveing a legall passe, by those in every county that shall be appointed to give passes, or a note from his master, shall have a thousand pounds of tobacco allowed him by the publique, which tobacco shall be repaid by the service of the servant to the country when free from his master, and by the hired ffreeman immediately after ex- piration of his covenant to the man that apprehend.-?." "And be it further enacted that he that takes up such runaway is hereby enjoyned i666-i6S2.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 95 ffirst to carry him before the next justice who is to take cognizance of his good service, and to certify it in the next assembly, and then to dehver him to the constable of the parish where that justice dwells, who is to convey him to the next constable, till he be retorned to his master, and that each constable upon receipt of such runaway give his receipt, and if escape be made from any constable, the delinquent constable to pay one thousand pounds of tobacco ; and for the reimburseing the publique with the tobacco disbursed to the taker up." — O StaUites at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, II. 273. 35. Virginia : — Apprehension of Runaways. 1670, October. Act I. An Act concerning runaways. Reward for apprehending runaways is reduced to two hundred pounds of tobacco. Servants are to serve four months for every two hundred pounds of tobacco. Masters who fail to cut their servants' hair after twice running away shall be fined two hundred pounds of tobacco. Every constable through whose hands a runaway passes is to whip the servant severely. Constables allowing runaways to escape shall pay four hundred pounds of tobacco. Masters must not allow their servants to go free until the time of service has been worked out. — Statutes at Large. Hcuiiig, Laws of Virginia, II. 277. 36. Virginia : — Reward to the first taker up of runaways. 1670, October. Act XIII. Runawayes. Only the first taker up of a runaway shall be rewarded. — Statutes at Large. Heuing, Laws of Virginia, II. 2S3. 37. Virginia: — Apprehension of Runaways. [§ 8.] 1672, October. Act VIII. An Act for the apprehension and suppression of runa- wayes, negroes and sla^'es. Runaways resisting may be killed or wounded, and if they die from the effects of a wound the public shall pay the owner, but the person inflicting the injury is not to be questioned. Indians shall be rewarded by twenty armes length of Roanoake or the value thereof in goods for the apprehension of a runaway. Act is to continue in force only until the next assembly. — Statutes at Large. LLening, Laws of Virginia, II. 299. 38. Maryland : — Apprehension of runaways. 1671, April. The three acts of 1650, 1662, and 1666 have not proved sufficient en- couragement to people to apprehend runaways, therefore a statute against runaways and such persons that shall give them entertainment and others that shall travel without passes is enacted. — Maryia)id Archives, Assembly Proceedings, 298. 39. Ne-wr Jersey : — Fugitive servants and apprentices. 1675, November. "XXXIII. Concerning Fugitives, It is enacted by the same Au- thority, that every Apprentice and Servant that shall depart and absent themselves from their Masters or Dames, without leave first obtaind, shall be judged by the court to double the Time of such their Absence, by future Service, over and above other Damages and Costs which the Master and Dame shall sustain by such unlawful De- parture. XXX [V. And it is further enacted, \}n?it whosoever shall be proved to have transported or contrived the Transportation of any such Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, shall be fined Five Pounds, and all such Damages as the Court shall judge, and that the Master or Dame can make appear, and if not able to be left to the Judge- ment of the Court. // is further enacted, that every Inhabitant that shall harbour or entertain any such Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, and knowing that he hath absented himself from his Service upon Proof thereof, shall forfeit to their Master or Dame Ten Shillings for every days Entertainment or Concealment, and if not able to satisfy, to be liable to the Judgement of the Court." — New Jersey Lmws, 109. 40. Maryland : — Runaw^ays. 1676, June. An Act against rnnawavs. — La-w^ of Maryhvid, Bacon, Lndcx. 41. East New Jersey : — Fugitive servants. 1682, March. Laws passed by General Assembly in East New Jersey. Chap. IX A Hill against fugitive Servants, and entertainers of them. Be it enacted by the Gov- 96 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. a. ernor, Council, and Deputies in General Assembly met, and by the Authority of the same, that every Apprentice, or Servant, that shall depart or absent themselves from their Master or Mistress, without leave first obtained, shall be adjudged by the Court to double the Time of such their absence by future Service, besides all Costs and Damages, which the master or mistress shall have sustained by such unlawful Departure. Be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, that whosoever shall knowingly transport or contrive the Transportation of any Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, or be any aiding or assisting thereto, and be thereof lawfully convicted, shall be fined Five Pounds, and make full Satisfaction to the master or mistress of such Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, for all Costs or Damages which the said master or mistress can make appear to have thereby sustained. Be it further enacted By the Authority aforesaid, that every Inhab- itant, who shall entertain, or afford any manner of Relief to such Apprentice, Servant, or Slave, knowing that he hath absented himself as aforesaid, except of real Charity, and thereof be lawfully convicted, shall pay to the master or mistress of such Servant Ten Shillings for every Days Entertainment and concealment, and be fined accord- ing to the Discretion of the Court." — Acts of the Proprietary Government of New Jersey, 23S. 42. New Jersey: — Prevention ofruna-ways. 1683. No title given. General Assembly. VI. " And for the preventing Servants running away from their Masters, and other Vagabonds, Be it hereby enacted by the au- thority aforesaid, that all Magistrates, Officiers, Ordinary Keepers, and other Inhabitants within this Province, take special notice of all suspicious Travellers, and require their pass or certificates, under the Hand and Seal of the Magistrate or Magistrates, or Publick Notary of the Place of their last Abode, to satisfy the clearness of his, her, or their coming away, and for want of such Pass or Certificate, to secure such Person or Per- sons into the Custody of the next constable; which Person and Persons so to be se- cured, or their Masters, shall pay such Charge and Trouble as the Person or Persons shall be put to, in the securing them as aforesaid, before they shall be discharged, at the Discretion of two or more of the Magistrates of the said Province." — O Acts of the Proprietary Goveriunents of jVew fersey, 477. 43. South Carolina . — Prevention of runaways. 1683, Nov. 7.' An Act to prevent Runaways. Title only preserved. Table of con- tents. — Statutes at Large of South Carolina, II. 44. Virginia : — Repeal of law of 1663, September. 1684, April. Act III. An act repealing the act concerning the persuit of runawayes. The law of September, 1663, has been found inconvenient in practice, it is therefore repealed. — Statutes at Large. He7iiug, Laws of Virginia, III. 12. 45. East New Jersey : — Runa'wray servants. [§ 2.] 1686, April. Chap. XI. An Act concerning Runaway Servants. Whereas the secur- ing of Servants that Runaway, or otherwise absent themselves from their Masters lawful Occasions, is found a material encouragement to such Persons as come into this country to settle Plantations and Populate the Province ; for the better encouragement of such Persons, Be it therefore enacted by the Governor and Council and Deputies now met in General Assembly, and by the authority of the same, that if any Servant or Servants, Prentices or Covenant Servants, Run away or absent him or herself unlawfully from their Masters or Mistress' Service, being taken up or secured, so that the master or mistress hath him or her again, for the better Encouragement of such Person or Per- sons so securing him or them, they shall have Twenty Shillings paid him or them," etc. — N'ew jtersey Laws, 292. 46. Virginia : Lavr of 1670 amended. 1686, October. Act I. Slight change in making out the certificate for apprehension of runaway. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virginia, III. 29. 1682-1705.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 97 47. South Carolina : — Inhibition of trade with runaways. 1691. An act inhibiting the tracking with Servants and Slaves. ''And it is alsoe enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any servant or servants shall at any tyme or tymes hereafter absent or withdraw him or themselves from his, her, or their master or mistresses service, such servant or servants soe offending shall for every naturall day they shall soe absent themselves serve one whole weeke, and for every weeke, if they shall att any one tyme soe long absent themselves, one whole yeare to theire master or mistresse, over and above their contracted tyme of servitude." — O Statutes at Large of South Carolina, II. 53. 48. Pennsylvania : — Regulation of servants. 1700. An Act for the better Regulation of Servants in this Province and Territories. " And for the Prevention of Servants quitting their masters Service, Be it enacted by the Authority aforesaid, that if any Servant shall absent him or herself from the Service of their Master or Owner for the Space of one Day, or more, without Leave first obtained for the same, every such Servant shall, for every such Days absence, be obliged to serve Five Days after the Expiration of his or her Time, and shall further make such Satisfaction to his or her INIaster or Owner for the Damages and Charges sustained by such Absence as the respective County Courts shall see meet, who shall order as well the Time to be served, as other Recompence for Damages sustained. And whosoever shall apprehend or take up any Runaway Servant, and shall bring him or her to the Sheriff of the County, such Person shall for every such Servant, if taken up within Ten miles of the Servants abode, receive Ten Shillings; and if Ten miles or upwards, Tiventy Shillings Reward of the said Sheriff, who is hereby required to pay the same, and forthwith to send Notice to the master or Owner, of whom he shall receive Five Shillings Prison Fees upon the Delivery of the said Servant, together with all other Disbursements and reasonable Charges for and upon the same." — O Province Laws of Pennsylvania, I. 5. 49. New York : — Regulation of slaves. 1702. An Act for regulating Slaves. " And be it further enacted, etc , That no Per- son or Persons whatsoever do hereafter Employ, Harbour, Conceal or Entertain other Men's Slaves at their House, Out-house, or Plantation, without the consent of their master or mistress, either signified to them verbally, or by Certificate in writing, under the said Master or Mistress' Hand upon Forfeiture of Five Pounds for every Night or Day, to the Master or Mistress of such Slave or Slaves, so that the Penalty of such Slave do not exceed the value of the said Slave. And if any Person or Persons what- soever shall be found guilty of Harbouring, Entertaining, or Concealing of any Slave, or assisting to the Conveying them away, if such Slave shall happen to be lost, dead, or otherwise distroyed, such Person or Persons, so Harbouring, Entertaining, Concealing, Assisting or Conveying of them away, shall be also liable to pay the Value of such Slave to the master or mistress, to be recovered by Action of Debt, in manner aforesaid." — O Acts of Province of Nezv York from 1691 to 171S, p. 5S. 50. Ne^v York : — Punishment of runaw^ays to Canada. [§ 8.] 1705. An act to prevent the Running away of Negro Slaves out of the City and County of Albany, to the French at Canada. " Whereas the City and County of Albany are the Frontiers of this Province toward the French of Canada; and that it is of great concern to this Colony, during this time of War with the French, that no Intel- ligence be carried from the said City and County to the French at Canada : ... Be it enacted, and it is hereby enacted by his Excellency the Governor, Council and Assembly, etc., that all and every Negro Slave or Slaves, belonging to any of the Inhabitants of the city and county of Albany, who shall from and after the First Day of August of this present year of our Lord, One thousand seven hundred and five, be found traveling Forty miles above the City of Albany, at or above a certain place called Sarachtoge 7 98 Fugitive Slaves : — Colonial Laivs. [App. A. (unless in Company of his, her, or their Master, Mistress, or such employed by them, or either of them), and be thereof convicted by the Oaths of Two or more credible Witnesses, before the Court of Sessions of the Peace of the said City and County (which Court of Sessions are hereby Authorized and Impowered to hear and determine the same, in manner aforesaid, and thereupon to award execution), he, she, or they so Convicted, shall suffer the Pains of Death, as in cases of Felony." — Acts of Province of New York, 77. 51. New York : — Act of 1702 revived. 1705. An act for Reviving and continuing an Act, Intituled, An Act for Regulating Slaves, 1702 (expired in 1712). — Acts of the Province of A\'w York, 79.* 52. Virginia : — Runa-way servants and slaves. 1705, October. Chap. XLIX. An Act concerning Servants and Slaves. XXI. Pen- alty for entertaining runaway servants without a certificate shall be for every day sixty pounds of tobacco. XXIII. Persons rewarded for taking up runaway according to the distance. — Heninq; Lmvs of Virginia, II. 447. 53. Massachusetts Bay : — Regulation of free negroes. [§ 4.] 1707. An Act for the regulating of free negroes. "Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, that every free negro or mulatto who shall harbour or entertain any negro or mulatto servant in his or her house, without the leave or consent of their respective masters or mistresses, shall forfeit and pay the sum of five shillings to the use of the poor of the town, for each offence." — Charters and General Laws of the Colony and Province of Massacliuselts Bay, 3S6. 54 South Carolina — For the better ordering of slaves. 1712. Statutes at Large of South Catoliua, II. 381. 55 New Jersey —Regulation of slaves 1713. An Act for Regulating of Slaves Sec. 2. "Negroes, etc., not having a pass may be taken up if 5 mites from Home whipped, and Persons so taking up have 5!-." Sec. 3. "Negro belonging to another Province not having license, to be whipped, and the Taker of them to have los." — Acts of the Assembly of A^cm Jersey, 18. 56. New Jersey : — Regulation of white servants 1713. An Act for regulating of White Servants, and taking up Soldiers and Seamen deserting Her Majestys Service, and coming into this Colony. Sec. 2. " Servants absenting without leave to be adjudged by any one Justice to serve double the time, and pay or serve for costs." Sec. 3. " Those who counsel, aid, etc. such Servants to runaway, to forfeit I0;C." etc. Sec. 4. " Those who knowingly conceal them, to pay IOJ-. per Day." Sec. 5. "Those who take up Runaways and carry them back to have ly. and 6d. per mile for so doing." Sec. 8. " Any Boatman, etc., who shall carry them into or out of this Province, etc., not having Passes, as aforesaid, and Publick-House- keepers entertaining them to forfeit 40.?.," tic — Acts of the Assembly of Nr^v Jersey, 24. 57. Rhode Island : — Ferriage of runaways. [§ 4.] 1714, Oct. 27. " Whereas, several negroes and mulatto slaves that have run away from their masters or mistresses, under pretence of being sent or employed by their masters or mistresses upon some service, and have been carried over the ferries, out and into the colony, and suffered to pass through the several towns under the afore- said pretence, to the considerable damage and charge of their owner.s, and many times to the loss of their slaves; — Be it therefore enacted by this A.ssembly, and by the authority thereof it is enacted, that no ferryman or boatman whatsoever, within this colonv, shall carry or bring any slave as aforesaid over their ferries, without a certifi- cate under the hands of their masters or mistresses, or some person in authority, upon the penalty of paying all costs and damages their said masters or mistresses shall sus- tain thereby; and to pay a fine of twenty shillings for the use of the colony, for each offence, as aforesaid. The said fine to be recovered by any two justices of the peace, 1705-1718.] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 99 upon confession or conviction of the said fact ; and all persons in authority, and other His Majesty's Subjects in this colony knowing of any such slaves traveling through their township, wherein they dwell, without a certificate, as aforesaid, they are hereby required to cause such slave to be examined and secured so as the owner may be notified thereof, and have his slave again, paying the costs and charges that shall accrue thereon." — Proceedings of General Assembly, Colony of Rhode Island and Prorjidence Plantations, Providence, 177 ; Records of Colony of Rhode Island, 177. 58. South Carolina : — Additional Act to Act of 1712. 17x4. SfiTfiites at Large of South Carolina, II. 620. 59. New York : — Act of 1705 revived. [§ 8.] 1715. An Act for Reviving and Continuing an Act, Intituled an act to prevent the Running away of Negro Slaves out of the city and county of Albany to the French at Albany, 1705. — Laws Proz'ince of Neia York, 218. 60. North Carolina : — Servants and slaves. 1715. An Act concerning servants and Slaves. Title only given. — Latvs of Noi-th Carolina, 21, 27. 61. New Hampshire : — Runaway minors and servants. 1715. An Act for preventing Men's Sons or Servants absenting themselves from their Parents or Masters Service without Leave. — " That no commander of any private man of war, or master of any merchant ship or vessel coming into, tarrying or abiding in, or going forth of any port, harbour, or place within this province, shall receive, harbour, entertain, conceal or secure on board such ship or other vessel, or suffer to be there harbour'd or detain'd any man's son, being under age or apprentice or covenant ser- vant (knowing him to be such, or after notice thereof givenj without license or consent of his parent or master in writing under his hand first had and obtain'd, on pain of for- feiting the sum oi five pounds per week, and so proportionably for a longer or shorter time, that any son, apprentice, or servant shall be held, harbour'd, conceal'd, or de- tain'd on board any such ship or other vessel, as aforesaid, without license and consent as aforesaid ; the one moiety thereof to her Majesty, to be employed toward the sup- port of the government of the province, and the other moiety unto the parent or master of such son, apprentice or servant that shall inform, or sue for the same, in any of her majesty's courts of record, within this province, by bill, plaint, or information, wherein no essoign, protection or wager of law shall be allowed. § 2. And be it further enacted by the autJiority aforesaid, that every apprentice or covenant servant who shall unlawfully absent himself from his master, and enter himself on board any ship or vessel, as aforesaid, with intent to leave his master's service, or incline there more than the space of twenty-four hours, and be thereof convicted before any two of her majesty's justices of the peace, or in general sessions, within this province, shall forfeit unto his master such further service, from and after the expiration of the term which his said master had in him at the time of his departure as the said court shall order, not exceeding one year." — O Acts and Laws of His Majesty's Province of New Hampshire, 40. 62. South Carolina : — Additional Act against runaways. 1717. Statutes at Large of South Carolina, III. 39. 63. Massachusetts Bay : — Transportation of apprentices and servants. 1718, October. An Act for the preventing of persons under age, apprentices or ser- vants, being transported out of the province without the consent of their masters, parents, or guardians. "Every master of any outward bound ship or vessel that shall hereafter carry or transport out of this province any person under age, or bought or hired ser- vant or apprentice, to any parts beyond the seas, without the consent of such master, parent or guardian, signified in writing, shall forfeit the sum of fifty pounds," etc. — Charters and Laws of the Colony aiid Province of Massachusetts Bay, 750. 100 Fiiiritivc Slaves : — Colonial Laws. [App. a. 64. South Carolina ; —Regulation of Slaves. 1722. An Act for the better ordering and governing of slaves. — Slattctes at Large of South Carolina, 193. 65. Pennsylvania : — Regulation of negroes. 1725 An Act for the better Regulating of negroes in this province. "And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that no Person or Persons whatsoever shall imploy. or knowingly harbour, conceal, or entertain other Peoples slaves at their Houses, Out Houses, or Plantations, without the Masters or Owners consent, excepting in stress of weather or other E.xtraordinary Occasion, under the Penalty of Thirty Shil- liii'^s for every Twenty four Hours he or they shall entertain or harbour him or them as aforesaid." — Province Laius of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1725. 66 Virginia : — Earlier act amended. 1726, May. Cliap. III. The clause in regard to imprisonment when slave would not give name of master has proved very inconvenient. Chap. IV. An Act for amending the Act concerning Servants and Slaves; and for the further preventing the clandestine transportation of Persons out of this colony. IV. The sheriff or under sheriff to whom the slave is committed shall cause a notice containing a full description of the runaway to be posted on the door of the court-house, and shall send a copy to each church or chapel within the county which shall be set up " in some open and convenient place " on every Lord's day for two months. Neglect on part of the sheriff shall be fined five hundred pounds of tobacco ; on the part of the clerk, two hundred pounds. VI. Pro- visions in regard to transportation. VIII. Runaways may be let out to hire by the keeper of the gaol. IX. When demanded by the owner, the person hireing shall de- liver up the servant. X. "'Provided also, that where the keeper of the said public gaol shall, by the direction of such court or courts, as aforesaid, let out any such negro or run- away to hire to any person or persons whatsoever, the said keeper shall, at the time of his delivery, cause a strong iron collar to be put on the neck of such negro or runaway, with the letters (P. G.) stamped thereon ; and that thereafter the said keeper shall not be answerable for any escape of the said negro or runaway." XII. Fees of the goalers given. XIII. Runaways from Maryland or Carolina shall be committed to any public gaol, and the fees shall be according to the laws of the province wherein the master dwells. XIV. The keeper of the gaol shall send descriptions of the run- away to such places of this dominion bordering on Maryland or Carolina as shall be agreed upon. XV., XVI. Fees described. XVIII. Masters of vessels shall take the following oath: " I, A. B., master of the ship (or vessel), do swear that I will make dili- gent enquiry and search in my said ship (or vessel), and will not knowingly or willingly carry, or suffer to be carried, in my said ship, out of this dominion, without such pass as is directed by law, any person or persons whatsoever, that I shall know to be running hence in order to deceive their creditors ; nor any servant or slave that is not attending his or her master or owner, or sent by such master or owner. XX. For forging a pass persons offending shall stand two hours in the pillory, and receive thirty lashes at the whipping-post. XXI. A white servant who shall run away, change his name, or dis- guise himself with intent to escape, shall serve six months longer than his term for running away. — Statutes at Large. Hening, Laws of Virgi)iia, IV. 16S. 67. Connecticut : — Runaway servants and slaves. 1730 (i)robably). An Act concerning Indian, Molatto, and Negro Servants and Slaves. "That whatsoever Negro, Molatto, or Indian Servant, or Servants shall be found wandering out of the Bounds of the Town, or Place to which they belong, with- out a Ticket or Pass in writing, under the Hand of some Assistant or Justice of the Peace, or under the Hand of the Master, or Owner of such negro, molatto, or Indian Servants shall be deemed and Accounted to be Run-aways, and may be Treated as such ; and every Person Inhabiting this colony. Finding or Meeting with any such Negro, 1722-1740] Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 10 1 molatto, or Indian Servant or Servants, not having a ticket as aforesaid, is hereby impowered to Seize and Secure him, or them, and Bring him or them before the next Authority to be Examined, and Returned to his, or their master or Owner, who shall satisfy the Charge Accruing thereby. And all Ferry-Men within this colony, are hereby Required not to suffer any Indian, molatto or negro servant without certificate, as afore- said, to pass over their Respective Ferries, by Assisting them therein Directly or Indi- rectly, on Penalty of paying a Fine of Twenty Shillings for every such Offence." — O Acts and La-cus of His RIajcstie's Colony of Connecticut, 229. 68. New York : — Slave insurrections, etc. 1730. An Act for the more effectual preventing and punishing the conspiracy and Insurrection of negroes and other Slaves; for the better regulating them, and for repealing the acts therein mentioned, relating thereto. Passed the 29th of October, 1730. No fugitive slave provision. Penalty for entertaining Slaves as in 1702. Also Persons who do not discover those that entertain slaves shall pay Forty Shillings. — Acts of Province of New York, 193. 69. South Carolina: — Regulation of slaves. 1735. Statutes at large of South Carolina, III. 405. 70. Delaware ; — Regulation of servants and slaves. 1740. An Act for the better regulation of Servants and Slaves within this govern- ment (a). Sec. 5. "Be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from such time as any servant shall absent him or herself from his or her masters or mistress' service, without leave first obtained for the same, every such servant, for such absence, and the expenses of taking up, shall at the expiration of the time of his or her servitude, make satisfaction by servitude, according to the judgement of any court of Quarter Sessions within this government." Sec. 6. " And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any person shall apprehend or take up any runaway servant and carry him or her before the next Justice of the Peace of the county where such servant shall be so taken up, in order to be sent to and secured in the gaol of the said county, for his or her master's or mistress' service." The sheriff or gaoler shall then send notice to the servant's owner, if known ; if not, the servant shall be advertised in some newspaper in the city of Philadelphia. The reward for taking up runaways shall be, " if ten miles dis- tant from the place of the said servants last abode, or under, the sum of Ten Shillings, if upwards of ten miles, the sum of Twenty Shillings." " And if the master or owner of such servant so imprisoned shall, for the space of six weeks next after notice had of his or her servants imprisonment, neglect or refuse to release such servant, it shall and may be lawful for the said Sheriff, and he is hereby required and commanded, upon affi- davit made of the due service of such notice, to expose every such servant to sale at public vendue, and him or her to sell to the highest bidder, for such term and sum as shall be sufficient for the defraying the "costs and charges arising upon the apprehend- ing and imprisoning the said servant." Sec. 7. " Suspicious persons travelling without a pass shall be deemed runaway servants and treated as such." — Laws of Delaware, zi\, 212. 71. Delaware : — Regulation of servants and slaves. 1740. An Act for the better regulatfon of Servants and Slaves within this Govern- ment. " Sec. 14. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that who so ever shall take up any negro or mulatto slave at above ten miles distance from his or her masters or mistress' dwelling or habitation, and not having leave in writing from his or her master or mistress, or not being known by the taker-up to be about his or her master's or mistress' business or service, and shall convey him or her to the habitation of his or her said master or mistress, if known, such taker-up shall receive of the said master or mistress, for his reward, the sum of Five Shillings, with reasonable charges. iSec. 15. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that no person shall 102 Fugitive Slaves: — Colonial Laws. [App. A. employ or knowingly harbour, conceal or entertain another's servant or slave at his or her house or plantation without the master or owner's leave and consent, except in distress of weather or other extraordinary occasion or accident, under the penalty of Forty Shillings for every twenty four hours he or she shall entertain any such servant or slave, as afore said, and so in proportion for any lesser time." — O Laws of the State of Delaware, 215, 216. 72. South Carolina : —Regulation of slaves. 1740. Statutes at Large, South Caroli)ia, III. 56S. 73. North Carolina : — Entertainment of runa'wrays, etc. [§ 3.] 1741. XXVII. ..Any person harbouring a runaway shall be prosecuted and com- pelled to pay the sum of twenty-five pounds or serve the owner of the slave or his assigns five years. If he actually carry away the slave, he shall be convicted of felony and suffer accordingly. XXVIII. Seven shillings and sixpence, Proclamation money, reward for taking up runaways. For every mile over ten, threepence. XXXIV. Run- aways when taken up shall be whipped. XXXV. Constables must give a receipt for runaway. Any failure shall be fined twenty shillings. Proclamation money, to be paid the church warden. XXXVI. Sheriff who shall hold a runaway longer than the act directs shall forfeit five pounds. Sheriff who allows a runaway to escape is liable to action from the party grieved. XXXVIII. This article takes up the fees of the jailor, etc. — Laws of North Carolina, 89. 74. Virginia : — Ferriage of runavrays. 1748, Oct. An Act for the Settlement and Regulation of Ferries, and for the Despatch of Public Expresses. VI. All constables and their assistants charged with conducting any runaway servant shall be passed ferry free. The ferriage shall then be paid by the owners of the runaways. — Statutes at Large, Hening, VI. 22. 75. South Carolina : Act additional to Act of 1740. 1751. Statutes at Large of South Carolina, III. 738. 76. Rhode Island : — Assistance of runaways. 1766-1798. An Act relative to Slaves, and to their Manumission and support. — Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, that if . any person shall conceal any negro or mulatto slave, or shall in any manner assist such slave in escaping from the lawful authority of his or her master, the person so offending shall forfeit and pay the sum of three hundred dollars, to be recovered by action of debt, one moiety thereof to and for the use of the State, and the other moiety thereof to and for the use of the person who shall sue for the same. — Laws of Rhode Island and Prozndence Planta- tions, 607. 77. North Carolina :— Slave stealing. 1779. An Act to prevent the stealing of Slaves, or by Violence, Seduction, or any other Means, taking or conveying away any Slave or Slaves the Property of another, and for other Purposes therein mentioned. IV. And whereas many evil disposed Per- sons frequently entice or persuade Slaves (without any Intention to steal them) and Servants, to absent themselves from their Master or Mistress, and often times harbour and maintain runaway Servants and Slaves ; Be it therefore further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that any Person or Persons who shall hereafter entice or persuade any Servant or Slave to absent him or herself from his or her Master or Mistress, or who shall harbour or maintain any runawav Servant or Slave, shall for every such Offence forfeit or pay to the Master or Mistress of such Servant or Slave, the sum of one hundred Pounds current money, to be recovered by Action of Debt, in any Juris- diction having Cognizance thereof ; and be further liable to the said master or mistress in an action for Damages, where in no Essoign, Injunction, Protection, or Wager of Law shall be allowed or admitted, notwithstanding any Law, Usage, or Custom to the contrary. — Laws of North Ca7-olina, 371. I740-I779-1 Colonial Laws relative to Fugitives. 103 78. Connecticut : — Escape of negroes and servants. No date given. An Act to prevent the Running away of Indian and Negro Servants. " Be it enacted by the Governour, Council, and Representatives, in General Court assem- bled, and by the Authority of the same, that whatsoever Negro or Indian Servant or Ser- vants shall at any time after the publication hereof be found wandering out of the Town Bounds, or Place to which they belong, without a Ticket or Pass in writing under the Hand of some Assistant or Justice of the Peace, or under the Hand of the Master or Owner of such Negro or Indian Servant or Servants, shall be deemed and accounted to be Run-a- ways ; and every person Inhabiting in this Colony, finding or meeting with any such Negro or Indian Servant or Servants, not having a Ticket as aforesaid, is hereby impowered to seize and secure him or them, and bring him or them before the next authority, to be examined and returned to his or their Master or Owner, who shall satisfy the charge accruing thereby; and all Ferrymen within this Colony are hereby required not to suffer any Indian or Negro Servant, without Certificate as aforesaid, to pass over their respective Ferrys, by assisting of them therein directly or indirectly, on penalty of paying a fine of Twenty Shillings for every such Offence to the County Treasury, to be levied on their estates upon non-payment, by warrant from auy one Assistant or Justice of the Peace : And the like methods shall or may be used and observed as to Vagrant or Suspected Persons, found wandring from Town to Town, having no Certificate as afore- said, who shall be seized and conveyed before the next Authority to be Examined and Disposed of according to Law : And if any Free Negroes shall travel without such Certificate or Pass, and be stopped, seized, or taken up, they shall pay all Charges arising thereby." — O Acts and Laws of His Majesty's Province of Connecticut, 87. 79. Connecticut : — Pursuit of runavo-ays. No date given. " It is also ordered, that when any servants shall runn from theire Masters, or any other inhabitants shall privately goe away with supition of ill intentions, It shall bee lawfull for the next Magistrate, or the constable and two of the chiefest in- habitants where no magistrate is, to press men and boates or pinnaces, at the publique charge, to persue such persons by sea or land, and bring them back by force of amies." — O Colotiial Records of Connecticut, I. 539. 80. Pennsylvania : — Harboring fugitives. Anno Regni Duodecimo Georgii Regis. [1726 ?] An Act for the better regulating of Negroes in this Province. " And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, that no Person or Persons whatsoever shall Employ, or knowingly harbour, conceal, or entertain other Peoples Slaves at their Houses, Out-houses, or Plantations, without the Master or Owner's consent ; excepting in Distress of weather or other E.xtraordinary Occasion, under the Penalty of Thirty Shillings for every twenty-four Hours he or they shall entertain or harbour him or them as aforesaid." — O Province Laws of Pennsylva- nia, 325. APPENDIX B. NATIONAL ACTS AND PROPOSITIONS RELATIVE TO FUGITIVE SLAVES. 1778-1854. This Appendix contains all the important bills, acts, and treaties from the founda- tion of the Constitution to i860. Many minor propositions may be found through the foot-notes to the text of Chapter II. The figures in brackets [j refer back to the text of the monograph. 1. Fugitive clause in treaty with the Delawares. 1778, Aug. 7. Art. IV. "And it is further agreed between the parties aforesaid, that neither shall entertain or give countenance to the enemies of the other, or protect in their respective States, criminal fugitives, servants, or slaves, but the same to appre- hend, and secure and deliver to the State or States to which such enemies, criminals, servants, or slaves respectively belong." — Statutes at Large, VII. 14. 2. Fugitive clause in the treaty of peace. [§§ 13, 22.] 1782-83. 1782, Nov. 13. Provisional articles. 1783, Sept. 3. Definitive treaty. " His Britannic Majesty shall, with all convenient speed, and without causing any de- struction, or carrying away any negroes or other property of the American inhabitants, withdraw all his armies, garrisons, and fleets from the said United States." — Treaties and Conventions, ed. of 18S9, pp. 372, 37S. 3. Fugitive clauses in Indian treaties. [§ 13.] 1784-86. 1784, Oct. 22. Treaty with the Six Nations, Art. I. 1785, Jan. 21. Treaty with the Wyandots, etc. Art. I. " All the prisoners white and black" taken by the Indians "shall be delivered up" or "restored." — Statutes at Large, VII. 15, 16. 4. Fugitive clause in King's ordinance. [§ 14.] 1785, April 6. Report of the Committee on Government of the Western Territory. " Provided that always, upon the escape of any person into any of the States described in the resolve of Congress of the twenty-third day of April, 1784, from whom labor or ser- vice is lawfully claimed in anyone of the thirteen original States, such fugitive might be lawfully reclaimed and carried back to the person claiming his labor or service, this re- solve notwithstanding." — Papers of Old Congress, XXI. 331, cited in Bancroft, History of the United States [last Revision), VI. 133. 5. Fugitive clauses in Indian treaties. [§ 13] 1785, Nov. 28. Treaty with the Cherokees, Art. I. 1786, Jan. 3. Treaty with the Choctaws, Art. I. 1786, Jan. 10. Treaty with the Chickasaws, Art. I. Identical clauses. The Indians " to restore all the Negroes and all other property taken during the late war." [104] ,778 1793-1 Treaties and First Act. 105 1786, June 31. Treaty with the Shawanees. Art. I. " All prisoners white and black taken in the late war from among the citizens of the United States by the Shawanee nation shall be restored." — Statutes at La>\i;e, VII. iS, 21, 25, 26. 6 Fugitive clause in Northwest Ordinance of 1787. [§ 14 ] 1787, July 13. Art. VI. " There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said Territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted ; provided, always, that any person escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service aforesaid." Read first time, July il, 1787. Passed July 13, 1787. — O Journals of Congress, XII. 84, 92. 7. Fugitive clause in the Constitution. [§ 15.] 1787, Sept. 13. Art. IV. § 2. " No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." — Revised Staticies of the United States, I. 18. ' 8. Clauses for returning fugitives in Indian treaties. 1789, Jan. 7. Treaty with the Wiandots, etc. Art. I. " The said nations agree to deliver up all the prisoners now in their hands .(by what means soever they may have come into their possession)." — Statutes at Large, VII. 28. 1790-91. 1790, Apr. 7. Treaty with the Creeks. Art. III. "The Creek Nation shall deliver ... all citizens of the United States, white inhabitants or negroes, who are now prisoners in any part of the said nation. And if any such prisoners or negroes should not be delivered on or before the first day of June next ensuing, the governor of Georgia may empower three persons to repair to the said nation, in order to claim and receive such prisoners and negroes." — Statutes at Large, VII. 35. 1791, July 2. Treaty with the Cherokees. Art. III. All prisoners to be yielded up on both sides. — Statutes at La>ge, VII. 36. 9. First Fugitive Slave Act. 1793, Feb. 12. An Act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the service of their masters. " Section i. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever the executive authority of any stale in the Union, or of either of the territories northwest or south of the river Ohio, shall demand any person as a fugitive from justice, of the executive authority of any such state or territory to which such person shall have fled, and shall moreover pro- duce the copy of an indictment found, or an affidavit made before a magistrate of any state or territory as aforesaid, charging the person so demanded, with having committed treason, felony or other crime, certified as authentic by the governor or chief magistrate of the state or territory from whence the person so charged fied, it shall be the duty of the executive authority of the state or territory to which such person shall have fled, to cause him or her to be arrested and secured, and notice of the arrest to be given to the executive authority making such demand, or to the agent of such authority appointed to receive the fugitive, and to cause the fugitive to be delivered to such agent when he shall appear : But if no such agent shall appear within six months from the time of the arrest, the prisoner may be discharged. And all costs or expenses incurred in the apprehending, securing, and transmitting such fugitive to the state or territory making such demand, shall be^paid by such state or territory. " Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That any agent, appointed as aforesaid, who shall receive the fugitive into his custody, shall be empowered to transport him or her to the io6 Fugitive Slaves: — National Acts. [App. b. state or territory from which he or she shall have fled. And if any person or persons shall by force set at liberty, or rescue the fugitive from such agent while transporting, as aforesaid, the person or persons so offending shall, on conviction, be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding one year. " Sec. 3. A)id be it also enacted. That when a person held to labour in any of the United States, or in either of the territories on the northwest or south of the river Ohio, under the laws thereof, shall escape into any other of the said states or territory, the person to whom such labour or service may be due, his agent or attorney, is hereby empowered to seize or arrest such fugitive from labour, and to take him or her before any judge of the circuit or district courts of the United States, residing or being within the state, or before any magistrate of a county, city or town corporate, wherein such seizure or arrest shall be made, and upon proof to the satisfaction of such judge or magistrate, either by oral testimony or aftidavit taken before and certified by a magis- trate of any such state or territory, that the person so seized or arrested, doth, under the laws of the state or territory from which he or she fled, owe service or labour to the person claiming him or her, it shall be the duty of such judge or magistrate to give a certificate thereof to such claimant, his agent or attorney, which shall be sufficient warrant for removing the said fugitive from labour, to the state or territory from which he or she fled. " Sec. 4. And be it further ettdcted. That any person who shall knowingly and willingly obstruct or hinder such claimant, his agent or attorney, in so seizing or arresting such fugitive from labour, or shall rescue such fugitive from such claimant, his agent or at- torney when so arrested pursuant to the authority herein given or declared ; or shall harbor or conceal such person after notice that he or she was a fugitive from labour, as aforesaid, shall, for either of the said offences, forfeit and pay the sum of five hun- dred dollars. Which penalty may be recovered by and for the benefit of such claimant, by action of debt, in any court proper to try the same ; saving moreover to the person claiming such labour or service, his right of action for or on account of the said injuries or either of them." — O Statutes at Large, I. 302-305. 10. Abstract of amendatory bill on fugitives. [§ 19.] 1801, Dec. 18. " The bill contemplates inflicting a penalty of five hundred dollars on any person harboring, concealing, or employing runaway slaves. Every person employ- ing a black person, unless he had a certificate with a county seal to it, or signed by a justice of the peace, would be liable to the penalty." 1802, Jan. 15. A motion wis made to strike out the second section of the bill, which would create therein and inflict the penalty for employing a person of color who has not a certificate of his freedom. Motion not carried. — 7 Coug. 1 Sess., Annals of Congress, fl. of R., 423. 11. Restoration of slaves by Indian treaties. [§ 22.] 1814, Aug. 9. Treaty with the Creeks. Art. III. "The United States demand that a surrender be immediately made of all the persons and property taken from the citizens of the United States ... to the respective owners." — Treaties and Conventions. 12. Fugitive slave clause in the Treaty of Ghent. [§ 22]. 1814, Dec. 24. Art. I. " All territory, etc. shall be restored without delay, and with- out causing any destruction or carrying away any artillery, ... or any slaves or other private property." — Treaties and Conventiojis. 13. Amendments proposed to Pindall's bill. [§ 20] 1818, Jan. 29. " Resolved, That the said bill be referred to the committee to whom was referred the memorial of the annual meeting of the Society of Friends, of Balti- more, with instructions to inquire into the expediency of so amending the said IdIH as to guard more effectually against infringement of the rights of free negroes and other persons of color." Introduced by Mr. Rich. Resolution not accepted. — House Journal 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 193; Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., S30. 1793-1821.] Bills and Propositions. 107 To change the bill materially " by making judges of the State in which the appren- tices, slaves, etc. are seized, the tribunal to decide the fact of slavery, instead of the judges of the States whence the fugitives have escaped." Introduced by Mr. Sergeant. Amendment not accepted. — Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 830. "Mr. Rich made several successive attempts to procure amendments to the bill, relaxing some of its provisions, which were successively negatived." — Annals oj Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 830. 14. Provision for delivery on executive requisition. [§ 20.] i8i3, March 11. Mr. Daggett moved to strike out the following section of the bill : " Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, that whenever the Executive authority of any State in the Union, or of either of the Territories thereof, shall, for or in behalf of any citizen or inhabitant of such State or Territory, demand any fugitive slave of the Executive authority of any State or Territory, to which such slave shall have tied, and shall more- over produce a certificate, issued pursuant to the first section of this act, it shall be the duty of the Executive authority of the State or Territory to which such fugitive shall have fled to cause him or her to be arrested and secured, and notice of the arrest to be given to the Executive authority making such demand, or to the agent of such authority appointed to receive the fugitive, and to cause such fugitive to be delivered to the said agent, on the confine or boundary of the State or Territory in which said arrest shall be, and in the most usual and direct route to the place from whence the said fugitive shall have escaped; and the reasonable expense of such arrest, detention, and delivery of such fugitive shall be paid by the said agent." Amendment determined in the negative. — Senate Journal, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 227, 22S ; Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 259. 15. Proposed limitation to four years. [§ 20.] 1818, May 10. Mr. Lacock moved to amend by adding the following : " Sec. -. And be it further enacted that this law shall be and remain in force for the term of four years, and no longer." The Senate being equally divided, the President determined the ques- tion in the affirmative. — Senate Journal, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 228; Annals of Congress, 15 Cong. 1 Sess., 259. 16. Fugitive Slave clause in the Missouri Compromise. [§ 21.] 1820, March 19. The Missouri Compromise provided *' that any persons escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any State or Territory of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the per- son claiming his or her labor, or service, as aforesaid." — Annals of Congress, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 1469, 1587. 17. Investigation into the Pennsylvania Act. [§ 21.] 1820, April 3. Mr. Pindall introduced the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Secretary of State be instructed to procure and transmit to this House, as soon as practicable, a copy of such late act or acts of the Pennsylvania Legislature as prohibit or restrain the justices, aldermen, or other magistrates or officers of that State from interposing in the apprehension or surrender of fugitive slaves." — House Journal, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 371 ; Annals of Congress, 16 Cong: 1 Sess., 1717. Mr. Tarr moved to amend as follows : " Provided, any such act or acts shall have been passed." Resolution and amendment agreed to. — //ouse Journal, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 371; Annals of Congress, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 1717. 1820, April 18. Ordered, That the letter from the Secretary of State with the Act of the Pennsylvania Legislature accompanying it, "be committed to the committee appointed i8th of March to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for reclaiming per- sons held to service or labor in one State, and escaping therefrom into another." — //ouse Journal, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 427 ; Annals of Congress, 16 Cong. 1 Sess., 1863. 18. Maryland resolutions protesting against Pennsylvanians. [§21.] 1821, Dec. 17. "Mr. Wright laid before the House an attested copy of a resolution io8 Fugitive Slaves: — National Acts. [App. B. passed by the General Assembly of the State of Maryland, complainiug of the protec- tion offered by the citizens of Pennsylvania to the slaves of the citizens of Maryland, who abscond and go into that State, and declaring that it is the duty of Congress to enact such a law as will prevent a continuance of the evils complained of; which resolu- tion was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary." — House Jou7-nal^ 17 Cong. 1 Sess., 62 ; Ainials of Congress, 17 Cong. 1 Sess., 553. 19. Assumption of claims on Indians for fugitives. [§ 22.] 1832, May 9. Treaty with the Seminoles, Art. VI. "The Seminoles being anxious to be relieved from repeated vexatious demands for slaves and other property alleged to have been stolen and destroyed by them, so that they may remove unembarrassed to their new homes, the United States stipulate to have the same property investigated, and to liquidate such as may be satisfactorily established, provided the amount does not exceed seven thousand (7,000) did\\a.xs." — Statutes at Large, VII. 369. 20. Calhoun's resolution on the status of slaves on the high seas. [§ 24] 1840, April 15. "Resolved, That a ship or vessel on the high seas, in time of peace, ent^aoed in a lawful voyage, is, according to the laws of nations, under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State to which her flag belongs ; as much so as if constituting a part u( its own domain. "Resolved, That if such ship or vessel should be forced by stress of weather, or other unavoidable cause, into the port, and under the jurisdiction of a friendly power, she and her cargo, and persons on board, with their property, and all the rights belonging to their personal relations, as established by the laws of the State to which they belong, would be placed under the protection which the laws of nations extend to the unfortunate under such circumstances. " Resolved, That the brig Enterprise, which was forced unavoidably by stress of weather into Port Hamilton, Bermuda Island, while on a lawful voyage on the high seas from one port of the Union to another, comes within the principles embraced in the fore- going resolutions ; and that the seizure and detention of the negroes on board by the local authority of the island, was an act in violation of the laws of nations, and highly unjust to our own citizens, to whom they belong." — Cong. Globe, 26 Cong. 1 Sess., 327. 21. "Woodbridge resolution on extradition of slaves. [§ 23 ] 1841, Dec. 22. Mr. Woodbridge submitted the following resolution, which was con- sidered, and by unanimous consent agreed to. " Resolved, That the Committee on Foreign Relations inquire into the expediency of entering into some arrangement with the Government of Great Britain, reciprocal in its provisions, for the arrest of fugitives escaping over the Northern or Western boundary of the United States, charged with the commission of any crime or crimes, and for the surrender of such fugitives upon reasonable requisition to the authorities of the State or province from which such fugitives may have fled : Provided, such ar- rangements do not comprehend cases of political offences merely, but be restricted to those which are in themselves criminal." No action taken. — Senate Journal, 27 Cong. 2 Sess., 47 ; Cong. Globe, 27 Cong. 2 Sess., 48. 22. Significant extracts from the Prigg decision. [§25.] 1842, " Upon this ground we have not the slightest hesitation in holding that, under and in virtue of the Constitution, the owner of a slave is clothed with entire authority, in every state in the Union, to seize and recapture his slave, whenever he can do it without any breach of the peace, or any illegal violence." " The clause is found in the national Constitution, and not in that of any state. It does not point out any state functionaries, or any state actions to carry its provisions into effect. The states cannot, therefore, be compelled to enforce them ; and it might well be deemed an unconstitutional exercise of the power of interpretation, to insist that the states are bound to provide means to carry into effect the duties of the 1S21-1S4S.] Prigg Decision. Resolutions. 109 national government nowhere delegated or intrusted to them by the Constitu- tion." "If this be so, then it would seem, upon just principles of construction, that the legislation of Congress, if constitutional, must supersede all state legislation upon the same subject ; and by necessary implication prohibit it." " As to the authority so conferred upon state magistrates, while a difference of opinion has existed, and may exist still on the point, in different states, whether state magistrates are bound to act under it ; none is entertained by this Court that state magis- trates may, if they choose, exercise that authority, unless prohibited by state legisla- tion." — 16 Peters, Justice Story's Opinion, 608. 23. Giddings's resolutions on the status of slavea on the high seas. [§ 24.] 1842, March 21. " Resolved, That when a ship belonging to the citizens of any State of this Union leaves the waters and territory of such State, and enters upon the high seas, the persons on board cease to be subject to the slave laws of such State, and thenceforth are governed in their relations to each other by, and are amenable only to, the laws of the United States. " Resolved, That when the brig Creole, on her late voyage for New Orleans, left the territorial jurisdiction of Virginia, the slave laws of that State ceased to have juris- diction over the persons on board said brig, and such persons became amenable only to the law of the United States. " Resolved, That the persons on board the said ship, in reserving their natural rights of personal liberty, violated no law of the United States, incurred no legal penalty, and are justly liable to no punishment." — Conf;. Globe, 27 Coiiq: 2 Sess., 324. 24. Benton's resolution on slaves escaping to Canada. [§ 23.] 1844, Jan. 29. Mr. Benton presented the following resolution : — " Resolved, That the President be requested to communicate to the Senate the infor- mation, if any, which may be in the Department of State, in relation to slaves coin- mitting crimes and escaping from the United States to the British dominions since the ratification of the treaty of 1842, and the refusal of the British authorities to give them up. Also, that he communicate to the Senate the information, if any such is possessed by him, of the construction which the British government puts upon the said article in relation to slaves committing crimes in the United States and taking refuge in the British dominions." — Congressional Record, 2S Cong. 1 Sess., 206. 25. Giddings's resolution for the abolition of the slave trade in the Dis- trict of Columbia. [§ 28] 1848, Jan. 17. Mr. Giddings described the seizure of a colored man employed as waiter in a colored boarding-house in Washington. He then offered the following resolution : — " Resolved, That a select committee of five members be appointed to inquire into and report upon facts aforesaid ; also as to the propriety of repealing such acts of Congress as sustain or authorize the slave trade in this District, or to remove the seat of the Gov- ernment to some free State " Resolution laid on the table. — House Journal, SO Cong. 1 Sess., 250 ; Cong. Globe, SO Cong. 1 Sess., 179. 26. Hall's repeal resolution for the District of Columbia. [§ 2S.] 1848, Feb. 28. Mr. Nathan K. Hall offered the following preamble and resolutions, which were read, and, debate arising thereon, it was laid over under the rule, viz. : — " Preamble. . . . Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be, and they are here- by, directed to report to this House with all convenient speed a bill repealing all laws of Congress, and abrogating, so far as they are operative or in force in the District of Co- lumbia all the laws in the State of Maryland which authorize or require the courts, officers, or magistrates of the United States, or of the said District, within the District of Columbia to issue process for arrest, or commit to the jail of the said District any run- 1 10 Fugitive Slaves : — National Acts. [App. B. away or other slave or fugitive from service," etc. Resolution laid over under the rule. — House Journal, SO Co7ig. 1 Sess., 450, 453 ; Cong. Globe, 30 Cong. 1 Sess., 390. 27. Giddings's resolution inquiring into the condition of the District of Columbia jail. [§28] 1848, April 18. Mr. Giddings introduced the following resolution : — " Whereas, more than eighty men, women, and children, are said to be now confined in the prison of the District of Columbia without being charged with crime or any impro- priety other than an attempt to enjoy that liberty for which our fathers encountered toil, suffering, and death itself, and for which the people of many European governments are now struggling ; And whereas said prison was erected, and is now sustained, by funds contributed by the people of the free as well as of the slave States, and is under the control of the laws and offtcers of the United States: " And whereas, such practice is derogatory to our national character, incompatible with the duty of a civilized and Christian people, and unworthy of being sustained by an American Congress : Therefore, Be it resolved. That a select committee of five members of this body be appointed to inquire into and report to this House by what authority said prison is used for the purpose of confining persons who have attempted to escape from slavery, with leave to report what legislation is proper in regard to said practice. Resolved, further, that said committee be authorized to send for persons and papers." Objections being made, the motion was not received. — Co7ig. Globe, SO Cong. 1 .Sess., 641. 28. Giddings's resolution on the jail in the District of Columbia, [§ 28.] 1848, April 21. Mr. Giddings visited the jail in the District of Columbia for the pur- pose of interviewing the persons confined there on charge of carrying away slaves from this District. He was then mobbed and his life endangered. " Resolved, That a committee of five members be appointed to investigate and report to this House respecting the points alluded to in the above statement, and that said committee be authorized to send for persons and papers, and to sit during the session of the House." — Cong. Globe, 30th Cong. 1 Sess., 664. 29. Meade's resolution on more effectual enforcement of the constitu- tional article on fugitive slaves. [§ 27.] 1849, Jan. 8. Mr. Meade moved that the rules be suspended to enable him to offer the following resolution : — " Preamble. Whereas it is the duty of the Congress of the United States to enact all laws necessary to enforce such provisions of the Constitution as were intended to pro- tect the citizens of the several States in their rights of property, and past experience has proved that laws should be passed by Congress to enforce the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution, which requires that persons held to labor in one State, escaping into another, shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such labor may be due ; therefore. Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary is hereby in- structed to report a bill to this House, providing effectually for the apprehension and delivery of fugitives from labor who have escaped, or may hereafter escape, from one State into another." Rules not suspended. — House Journal, 30 Cong. 2 Sess., 2\t,; Cong. Globe, SO Cong. 2 Sess., 188. 30. Legislative history of the Fugitive Slave Act. [Jan. 3 to Sept. 18, § 29.] 1850, Jan. 3. Mr. Mason of Virginia gave notice of his intention to introduce a bill. — Cong. Globe, 99. Jan. 4 Senate bill No. 23 introduced by Mason, read twice, ordered printed, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. — Senate Journal, 54 ; Globe, 103. Jan. 16. Kill reported favorably by Butler from the committee, ordered printed, and made a special order for Jan. 23 — Senate Journal, SS ; Globe, 171 ; Senate Reports, I. No. 12. 1S4S-1S50.] Resolutions. Bill of 1850. m Jan. 22. Debate bes^un. Mason offered an amendment which made the fine for any obstruction of the worl. — Senate Journal, 117; Globe, 233-237. • o ^ Jan. 29. Clay introduced, as a part of his compromise resolutions, a declaration that a more effective fugitive slave act should be ^2,i,%ft^. — Senate Journal, 118 ; Globe, 247. Jan. 31. Mason offered a substitute for the bill already before the Senate. It was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. — Globe, 270. June 3. Webster brought in an amendatory h\\\. — Senate Journal, 370 ; Globe, nil. Aug. 15. The debate was again opened, and made the special order for Aug. 19 — Senate Journal, 560; Globe, 1588. Aug. 19. Mason offered as an amendment a substitute for the bill already before the ^QWdXQ.— Senate Journal, s6j,\ Globe, 160^; Globe App., \$%2. Dayton brought in an amendment which gave trial by jury. This was rejected. — ^ Senate Journal, 564 ; Globe App., ift^r- ' Chase offered one of the same character, which was also rejected. — Globe App ,1589. Winthrop brought in an amendment granting the protection of the habeas corpus. This was x^i^cl^A. — Senate Journal, 565 ; Globe App., 1589. Aug. 20. Mason's substitute was agreed to.— Senate Journal, 568; Globe, 1616; Globe App., 1591. An amendment to Mason's substitute was offered by Mr. Pratt. This gave the owner the right of suit against the United States for the value of the slave if not delivered. This was afterward amended by Mason and Pratt, and rejected, August 2^,. — Senate Journal, 570-573; Globe, 1636; Globe App., 1609. Aug 22. Underwood offered an amendment as a substitute, and Davis presented an amendment to Mason's bill striking out the clause providing compensation for escaped slaves. This was rejected. - ^-^/w/.' >«'-'''^''. 573. SSo; Globe, 1636; Globe App., 1609, 1619. -i r-\, A Aug. 23. Amendments were offered to Underwood's amendment by Chase and Badger. Both were rejected. — Senate Journal, 575-58° ! <^^obe App., 1619, 1623, 1625. Another slight amendment by Chase was also rejected. — G^/c^/^^ App., 1624. Mason amended his bill by making the Marshal liable for the value of a slave who has escaped from his cvi?,\.od,^r. — Senate Journal, 576 ; Globe App., 1625. An attempt to amend the bill by striking out the compensation for escaped slaves, and other slight changes, was made by Davis, and the amendment was accepted. - Senate Journal, ^%o; Globe App., i^io. Bill as amended was then ordered to be engrossed for the third reading. — .S^,7<7/^ Journal, 581 ; Globe, 1647 ; Globe App., 1630. Aug. 26. After changing the title to make it an act supplementary to that of 1793. the bill was passed, and sent to the Y^o\x?>&.— Senate Journal, 5S3 ; Globe, 1660. Sept 12. In the House it was read a first and second time by title. Thompson of Pennsylvania moved to put it on its passage, and moved the previous question, which he refused to withdraw, and which was carried — House Journal, 12S9, 1448. Stevens moved to lay it on the table, but the motion was lost, and the bill was ordered to a third rG.2idi\ng.— House Journal, 1449. The bill was passed, 109 to 75. — House Journal, 1451-1453; C'/c'/v, 1S07. It was returned to the Sen:ite. — Senate Journal, 627 ; Globe, iSio. Sept 14. The bill was signed by the presiding officer of the Senate. — Senate Journal, 629; Globe, 1S15. 112 Fugitive Slaves : — National Acts. [App. b. Bill signed by the Speaker of the House. — Hmise Jourtial, 1457 ; Globe, 1812. Sept. 16. Bill sent to the President, and signed by him Sept. 18. — Hcuse Journal, 1472, 1497 ; Senate Journal, 638, 648. 31. Second Fugitive Slave Act. [§§ 29, 30.] 1850, Sept. 18. ''An Act to amend, and supplementary to, the Act entitled 'An Act respecting Fugitives Jroni Justice, and Persons escaping from the Service of their Masters,^ approved February twelfth, one thousand seven hundred and itinety-three. " Be it ejiacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the persons who have been, or may hereafter be, appointed commissioners, in virtue of any act of Congress, by the Circuit Courts of the United States, and who, in consequence of such appointment, are authorized to exercise the powers that any justice of the peace, or other magistrate of any of the United States, may exercise in respect to offenders for any crime or offence against the United States, by arresting, imprisoning, or bailing the same under and by virtue of the thirty-third section of the act of the twenty-fourth of September seventeen hundred and eighty- nine, entitled 'An Act to establish the judicial courts of the United States,' shall be, and are hereby, authorized and required to exercise and discharge all the powers and duties conferred by this act. " S£c. 2. A)ui be it further enacted, That the Superior Court of each organized Ter- ritory of the United States shall have the same power to appoint commissioners to tatce acknowledgments of bail and affidavits, and to take depositions of witnesses in civil causes, which is now possessed by the Circuit Court of the United States ; and all com- missioners who shall hereafter be appointed for such purposes by the Superior Court of any organized Territory of the United States, shall possess all the powers, and exer- cise all the duties, conferred by law upon the commissioners appointed by the Circuit Courts of the United States for similar purposes, and shall moreover exercise and dis- charge all the powers and duties conferred by this act. " Sec. 3. And be it further enacted. That the Circuit Courts of the United States, and the Superior Courts of each organized Territory of the United States, shall from time to time enlarge the number of commissioners, with a view to afford reasonable facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor, and to the prompt discharge of the duties imposed by this act. " Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the commissioners above named shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the judges of the Circuit and District Courts of the United States, in their respective circuits and districts within the several States, and the judges of the Superior Courts of the Territories, severally and collectively, in term-time and vacation ; and shall grant certificates to such claimants, upon satisfactory proof being made, with authority to take and remove such fugitives from service or labor, under the restrictions herein contained, to the State or Territory from which such persons may have escaped or fled. " Sec. 5. And be it further enacted. That it shall be the duty of all marshals and deputy marshals to obey and execute all warrants and precepts issued under the jno- visions of this act, when to them directed; and should any marshal or deputy marshal refuse to receive such warrant, or other process, when tendered, or to use all proper, means diligently to execute the same, he shall, on conviction thereof, be fined in the sum of one thousand dollars, to the use of such claimant, on the motion of such claim- ant bv the Circuit or District Court for the district of such marshal ; and after arrest of such fugitive, by such marshal or his deputy, or whilst at any time in his custody under the provisions of this act, should such fugitive escape, whether with or without the assent of such marshal or his deputy, such marshal shall be liable, on his official bond, to be prosecuted for the benefit of such claimant, for the full value of the service or labor of said fugitive in the State, Territory, or District whence he escaped: and the 1850.] Second Fugitive Slave Act. 1 13 better to enable the said commissioners, when thus appointed, to execute their duties faithfully and efficiently, in conformity with the requirements of the Constitution of the United States and of this act, they are hereby authorized and empowered, within their counties respectively, to appoint, in writing under their hands, any one or more suit- able persons, from time to time, to execute all such warrants and other process as may be issued by them in the lawful performance of their respective duties ; with authority to such commissioners, or the persons to be appointed by thevn, to execute process as aforesaid, to summon and call to their aid the bystanders, or posse coDiitatus of the proper county, when necessary to insure a faithful observance of the clause of the Con- stitution referred to, in conformity with 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, as aforesaid, for that purpose ; and said warrants shall run, and be executed by said officers, anywhere in the State within which they are issued. " Sec. 6. And he it further enacted, That when a person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the United States, has heretofore or shall hereafter escape into another State or Territory of the United States, the person or persons to whom such service or labor may be due, or his, her, or their agent or attorney, duly authorized, by power of attorney, in writing, acknowledged and certified under the seal of some legal officer or court of the State or Territory in which the same may be executed, may pursue and reclaim such fugitive person, either by procuring a warrant from some one of the courts , judges, or commissioners aforesaid, of the proper circuit, district, or county, for the apprehension of such fugitive from service or labor, or by seizing and arresting such fugitive, where the same can be done without process, and by taking, or causing such person to he taken, forthwith before such court, judge, or commissioner, whose duty it shall be to hear and determine the case of such claimant in a summary manner ;. and upon satisfactory proof being made, by deposition or affidavit, in writing, to be taken and certified by such court, judge, or commissioner, or by other satisfactory testi- mony, duly taken and certified by some court, magistrate, justice of the peace, or other lesjal officer authorized to administer an oath and take depositions under the laws of the State or Territory from which such person owing service or labor may have escaped, with a certificate of such magistracy or other authority, as aforesaid, with the seal of the proper court or officer thereto attached, which seal shall be sufficient to establish the competency of the proof, and with proof, also by affidavit, of the identity of the person whose service or labor is claimed to be due as aforesaid, that the person so arrested does in fact owe service or labor to the person or persons claiming him or her, in the State or Territory from which such fugitive may have escaped as aforesaid, and that said person escaped, to make out and deliver to such claimant, his or her agent or attorney, a certificate setting forth the substantial facts as to the service or labor due from such fugitive to the claimant, and of his or her escape from the State or Territory in which such service or labor was due, to the State or Territory in which he or she was arrested, with authority to such claimant, or his or her agent or attorney, to use such reasonable force and restraint as may be necessary, under the circumstances of the case, 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 ; and the certificates in this and the first [fourth] section mentioned, shall be conclusive of the right of the person or persons in whose favor granted, to remove such fugitive to the State or Territory from which he escaped, and shall prevent all molestation of such person or persons by any process issued by any court, judge, magistrate, or other person whomsoever. "Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That any person who shall knowingly and will- ingly obstruct, hinder, or prevent such claimant, his agent or attorney, or any person or 114 Fugitive Slaves : — National Acts. [app. B. persons lawfully assisting him, her, or them, from arresting such a fugitive from service or labor, either with or without process as aforesaid, or shall rescue, or attempt to rescue, such fugitive from service or labor, from the custody of such claimant, his or her agent or attorney, or other person or persons lawfully assisting as aforesaid, when so arrested, pursuant to the authority herein given and declared; or shall aid, abet, or assist such person so owing service or labor as aforesaid, directly or indirectly, to escape from such claimant, his agent or attorney, or other person or persons legally authorized as aforesaid ; or shall harbor or conceal such fugitive, so as to prevent the discovery and arrest of such person, after notice or knowledge of the fact that such person was a fugitive from service or labor as aforesaid, shall, for either of said offences, be subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceed- ing six months, by indictment and conviction before the District Court of the United States for the district in which such offence may have been committed, or before the proper court of criminal jurisdiction, if committed within any one of the organized Territories of the United States ; and shall moreover forfeit and pay, by way of civil damages to the party injured by such illegal conduct, the sum of one thousand dollars, for each fugitive so lost as aforesaid, to be recovered by action of debt, in any of the District ov Territorial Courts aforesaid, within whose jurisdiction the said offence may have been committed. " Sec. 8. And be it further enacted. That the marshals, their deputies, and the clerks of the said District and Territorial Courts, shall be paid, for their services, the like fees as may be allowed to them for similar services in other cases; and where such services a.re rendered exclusively in the arrest, custody, and delivery of the fugitive to the claimant, his or her agent or attorney, or where such supposed fugitive may be dis- charged out of custody for the want of sufificient proof as aforesaid, then such fees are to be paid in the whole by such claimant, his agent or attorney; and in all cases where the proceedings are before a commissioner, he shall be entitled to a fee of ten dollars in full for his services in each case, upon the delivery of the said certificate to the claimant, bis or her agent or attorney ; or a fee of five dollars in cases where the proof shall not, in the opinion of such commissioner, warrant such certificate and delivery, inclusive of all services incident to such arrest and examination, to be paid, in either case, by the claimant, his or her agent or attorney. The person or persons authorized to execute the process to be issued by such commissioners for the arrest and detention of fugitives from service or labor as aforesaid, shall also be entitled to a fee of five dollars each for each person he or they may arrest and take before any such commis- sioner as aforesaid, at the instance and request of such claimant, with such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by such commissioner for such other additional services as maybe necessarily performed by him or them ; such as attending at the examination, keeping the fugitive in custody, and providing him with food and lodging during his detention, and until the final determination of such commissioner ; and, in general, for performing such other duties as may be required by such claimant, his or her attorney or agent, or commissioner in the premises, such fees to be made up in conformity with the fees usually charged by the officers of the courts of justice within the proper dis- trict or county, as near as may be practicable, and paid by such claimants, their agents or attorneys, whether such supposed fugitives from service or labor be ordered to be delivered to such claimants by the final determination of such commissioners or not. " Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, That, upon affidavit made by the claimant of such fugitive, his agent or attorney, after such certificate has been issued, that he has reason to apprehend that such fugitive will be rescued by force from his or their pos- session before he can be taken beyond the limits of the State in which the arrest is made, it shall be the duty of the officer making the arrest to retain such fugitive in his custody, and to remove him to the State whence he fled, and there to deliver him to 1850-1S51.] Act of 1850. Resolutions. 115 said claimant, his agent, or attorney. And to this end, the officer aforesaid is hereby authorized and required to employ so many persons as he may deem necessary to over- come such force, and to retain them in his service so long as circumstances may require. The said officer and his assistants, while so employed, to receive the same compensa- tion, and to be allowed the same expenses, as are now allowed by law for transpor- tation of criminals, to be certified by tlie judge of the district within which the arresi is made, and paid out of the treasury of the United States. " Sec. 10. And be it further enacted. That when any person held to service or labor in any State or Territory, or in the District of Columbia, shall escape therefrom, the party to whom such service or labor shall be due, his, her, or their agent or attorney, may apply to any court of record therein, or judge thereof in vacation, and make satis- factory proof to such court, or judge in vacation, of the escape aforesaid, and that the person escaping owed service or labor to such party. Whereupon the court shall cause a record to be made of the matters so pi'oved, and also a general description of the person so escaping, with such convenient certainty as may be ; and a transcript of such record, authenticated by the attestation of the clerk and of the seal of the said court, being produced in any other State, Territory, or district in which the person so escap- ing may be found, and being exhibited to any judge, commissioner, or other officer authorized by the law of the United States to cause persons escaping from service or labor to be delivered up, shall be held and taken to be full and conclusive evidence of the fact of escape, and that the service or labor of the person escaping is due to the party in such record mentioned. And upon the production by the said party of other and further evidence if necessary, either oral or by affidavit, in addition to what is contained 5n the said record of the identity of the person escaping, he or she shall be delivered up to the claimant. And the said court, commissioner, judge, or other person author- ized by this act to grant certificates to claimants of fugitives, shall, upon the production of the record and other evidences aforesaid, grant to such claimant a certificate of his right to take any such person identified and proved to be owing service or labor as aforesaid, which certificate shall authorize such claimant to seize or arrest and trans- port such person to the State or Territory from which he escaped : Prmided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring the production of a transcript of such record as evidence as aforesaid. But in its absence the claim shall be heard and determined upon other satisfactory proofs, competent in law. "Approved, September i8, \%zpP — Statutes at Lars;e, ix. 462-465. 32. McLanahan's resolution against repeal of the law of 1850. 1851, Jan. 13. Mr. McLanahan moved that the rules be suspended to enable him to introduce the following resolution, viz. . " Resolved, That it would be inexpedient and improper to repeal the law passed at the last session of Congress, entitled 'An act to amend, and supplementary to, the act entitled An act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the service of their masters,' approved Feb. 12, 1793." House refused to suspend the rules. — House Journal, SI Cong. 2 Scss., 139 ; Cong. Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Sess., 226. 33. Clay's resolution on the Shadrach case, Boston. [§ 51.] 1851, Feb. 17. Mr. Clay submitted the following resolution, which lies over one day: " Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to lay before the Senate, if not incompatible with the public interest, any information he may possess in regard to an alleged recent case of a forcible resistance to the execution of the laws of the United States in the city of Boston, and to communicate to the Senate under the above condition what means he has adopted to meet the occurrence, and whether, in his opinion, any additional legislation is necessary to meet the exigency of the case, and to more rigorously execute existing laws." Resolution 2LAo^\.&di..— Senate Journal, SI Cong. 2 Sess., 187 ; Cong. Globe, SI Cong. 2 Sess., 580. ii6 Fugitive Slaves: — National Acts. [App. B. 34. Bright's bill explanatory of law of 1850. 1851, Feb. 10. Mr. Bright obtained leave to bring in a bill (45S) explanatory of the act approved iSth September in the year 1850, entitled, "An Act to amend, and supplemental to, the act entitled, ' An Act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the service of their masters,'" approved Feb. 12, 1793, which was read twice, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. — Senate Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 162. The bill is in the following terms: ^^ Be it enacted, etc., that all action and causes of action, and all proceedings instituted and to be instituted, for any violation of the provisions of said act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the service of their masters, approved the 12th February, 1793, may be instituted and prosecuted to final judgment and execution as if the said act of Sept. 18, 1850, had not been passed." — Con<^. Globe, 31 Cong. 2 Scss., 492. 35. Fitch's resolution affirming the Compromise. 1852, March i. Mr. Fitch offered the following resolution: "Resolved, That we rec- ognize the binding efficacy of the compromises of the Constitution, and believe it to be the intention of the people generally, as we hereby declare it to be ours individually, to abide such compromises, and to sustain the laws necessary to carry out the pro- visions for the delivery of fugitive slaves ordered, and that we deprecate all further agitation of questions growing out of that provision of the Constitution embraced in the acts of the last Congress known as the Compromise." — House Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 408 ; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 659. 36. Jackson's resolution affirming the Compromise. 1852, March 22. ^^ Resolved, That we recognize the binding efficacy of the compro- mises of the Constitution, and believe it to be the intention of the people generally, as we hereby declare it to be ours individually, to abide such compromises, and to sustain the laws necessary to carry them out, — the provision for the delivery of fugitive slaves, and the act of the last Congress for that purpose included, — and that we deprecate all further agitation of questions growing out of that provision, of the questions embraced in the acts of the last Congress known as the Compromise, and of questions generally connected with the institution of slavery as unnecessary, useless, and dangerous." Resolution, as amended by Mr. Hillyer below, agreed to. — House Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 550 ; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 825. 37. Hillyer's finality resolution. 1852, Aprils. Mr. Hillyer moved the following resolution: "Resolved, That the series of acts passed during the first session of the Thirty-first Congress, known as the compromise, are recorded as a final adjustment, and a permanent settlement of the questions there embraced, and should be maintained and executed as such." Resolu- tion agreed to, April 6, 1852. — House Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 548; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., gyg. 38. Chase's resolution of inquiry into payments under act of 1850. 1852, June 3. Mr. Chase submitted the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Secretary of the Interior be directed to communicate to the Senate statements, showing in detail the expenses incurred and claims made under the Act to amend and supple- mental to the ' Act respecting fugitives from justice and persons escaping from the service of their masters,' distinguishing the expenses incurred and claimed by reason of prosecutions for treasons, alleged to have been committed in resistance of said act from expenses incurred and claimed by reason of other prosecutions for offending against said act, and for proceedings before and under orders made by committee." No action taken. — Senate Journal, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 450; Cong. Globe, 32 Cong. 1 Sess., 1519- APPENDIX C. NATIONAL ACTS AND PROPOSITIONS RELATING TO FUGITIVE SLAVES. (1S60-1S64.) This Appendix is intended to contain references to all the resolutions, bills, and acts of Congress, relative to fugitives, from the beginning of the critical session of iS6o-6i to the repeal of the acts in 1S64. The resolutions for amendments to the Constitu- tion have been collected by Mr. Herman V. Ames of the Harvard Graduate School, who has kindly selected out of the numerous amendments proposed in the last session of the Thirty-Sixth Congress those bearing upon this subject. The shigle star (*) indicates a measure which passed one House : a double star (**) a measure which passed both Houses. 1. President Buchanan's message. [ § 86.] i860, Dec. 4. Paragraph on the return of fugitive slaves : Senate yournal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 18. 2. Cochrane's Joint Resolution. [ § 86] i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Constitution, for the return of fugitives : Honse Jonr- nal, 30 Co)ig. 2 Scss., 61 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 3. Morris's Resolution. [ § 86.] i85o, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law: House Joitrnal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess. (i})\ Cong. Globe, 77. 4. Leake's Joint Resolution. [ § 86] i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution: House yo!irnal,36 Co7tg. 2 Sess., 65; Cong. Globe,"]-]. 5. Cox's Resolution. [ § 8S.] i85o, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law: Senate Jonrnal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 66 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 6. Stevenson's Resolution. [ § 86 ] i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 67 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 7. Niblack's Resolution. [ § 86] i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law : House Jountal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 69 ; Cong. Globe, 77. 8. English's Joint Resolution. [§86] i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution on the return of fugitives : House Jonrnal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 68 ; Cong. Globe, 78. 9. MoClernand's Joint Resolution. [ § 86. | i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution, on fugitive slaves : House Jonrnal, So Cong. 3 Sess., 68 ; Cong. Globe, 78. 10. Hindman's Joint Resolution. [ § 86] i860, Dec. 12. Amendment to the Constitution for the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70; Cong. Globe, 79. [117] Ii8 Fugitive Slaves: — Acts Repealed. [App. c. 11. Kilgore's Resolution. [ § 86 ] i860, Dec. 12. To amend the Fugitive Slave Law : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 70 ; Cong Globe, 78. 12. Johnson's Joint Resolution. [ § 86.] i860, Dec. 13. Amendment to the Constitution for the return of fugitive slaves : Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 41 ; Cong. Globe, 83. 13. Crittenden's Joint Resolution. [ § 86.] i860, Dec. 18. Amendment to the Constitution for payment for fugitive slaves : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 114. 14. Douglas's Joint Resolution. [ § 8S.] i860, Dec. 24. Amendment to the Constitution for payment for fugitive slaves : Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 61 ; Cong. Globe, 1S3. 15. Florence's Joint Resolution. 1861, Jan. 15. Amendment to the Constitution for payment- for fugitive slaves: Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 378. 16. Morris's Joint Resolution. 1861, Jan. 23. Amendment to the Constitution on the return of fugitive slaves: Cong. 'Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 527. 17. Douglas's Bill to amend the Fugitive Slave Laws. [ § 101. j 1861, Jan. 28. Introduced : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 586. 18. Florence's Joint Resolution. 1861, Jan. 28. Amendment to the Constitution against the obstruction of the Fugi- tive Slave Law by States : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 598. 19. Kellogg's Joint Resolution. 1861, Feb. I. Amendment to the Constitution on the power of Congress over fugi- tive slaves : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 690. 20. Kellogg's Joint Resolution. i86r, Feb. 26. Same as above: Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess , 1243. 21. Kellogg's Joint Resolution. 1861, Feb. 27. Similar to above : House Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 410; Cong. Globe, 1259. 22. Peace Convention Amendment to the Constitution. [ § 85.] 1861, Feb. 27. Reported by select committee : Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., ^Z-, 637 , Cong. Globe, 1254. 23. Clarence's Joint Resolution. 1861, Feb. 27. Amendment to the Constitution for payment for fugitive slaves ; Cong. Globe, 36 Cong 2 Sess., 1260. 24. Crittenden's Joint Resolution. 1861, Feb. 28. Amendment to the Constitution on the power of the States over fugitive slaves, etc. : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1270. * 25. Compromise Bill to amend the Fugitive Slave Act. [ § 87.] 1861, Mar. I. IJill reported by the select committee of thirty-three for the amend- ment of the act for the rendition of fugitives from labor : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1327. Mar. I. Vallandigham's amendment to the above : Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 132S. Mar. i. Bill passed the House : Co7tg. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1327, 1328. Mar. 2. r.ill read in the Senate . Cong. Globe, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 1350. 26. Pugh's Joint Resolution. 1861, Mar. 2. Amendment to the Constitution on the return of fugitive slaves; Senate Journal, 36 Cong 2 Sess., 37S ; Con^- Globe, 1368. 27. Johnson's Joint Resolution on the return of fugitives. 1861, Mar. 2. Amendment to the Constitution: Senate Journal, 36 Cong. 2 Sess., 382; Cong. Globe, 1401. iS6o-iS6i.] Resolutions and Bills. HQ 28 Powell's Joint Resolution on the return of fugitive slaves. i85i, Mar. 2. Amendment to the Constitution • S.naU Journal, 3U Cong. 2 Sess., ^^29.^Lovejoy's Resolution against the return of fugitives by the Army. ^ Ise'ii' July 9. Introduced : //ous, Joitrnal, 37 Cong. 1 Scss., 653 ; Cong. Globe, 32. 30 Trumbull's confiscation Bill. [ § 90] 1861, July 15. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong 1 Scss., 42 ; Cong Globe, 120. * * 31 Chandler's confiscation Act. [ § 90.] 1861 July 15. Introduced Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., ^^^ Cong. Globe, 120. July 22. Trumbull's amendment : Senate Jourttal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 70 ; Cong Globe -18 July 22. Passed the Senate (yeas and nays not given) : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 71 ; Cong Globe, 219. July 23- Senate bill introduced into the House and referred- House Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 136; Cong Gjobe, 231- -— Aug. 2. Reported with amendment in the House: House Journal, 37 Cong 1 Sess., 197 ; Cong. Globe, 409. Aug. 3. Committee amendments : House Journal. 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 232; Cong Globe, 431. Aug 3. Passed the House (yeas 60, nays 4S) : House journal, 37 Cong 1 Sess., 235 ; Cong. Globe, 431. Aug 5- Passed the Senate as amended in the House ; Senate Journal, 37 Cong 1 Sess., 178 ; Cong. Globe, 434- - Aug. 6. Bill signed by the President- Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 1 Sess., 195; Cong. Globe, 454- 32. Wilson's Joint Resolution for discharge of fugitives from the Washington jail. [ § 97.] 1861, Dec. 4. Introduced and referred: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 24; Cong. Globe, 12. , T^. .. • .. « 33. Wilson's Resolution on repeal of the black code m the District of Columbia. [§97] i85i, Dec. 4. Introduced and agreed to : Senate Journal, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 22 ; Long. Globe, 12. * 34. Clarke's Resolution on persons in Washington jail. 1861, Dec. 4. Introduced and agreed to : Senate Journal, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 22 ; Cong. Globe, 12. 35, Lovejoy's Bill to prevent return by the Army. [ § 95 ] 1861, Dec. 4. Introduced: House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 16, Cong. Globe, 34. * 36^ Sumner's Resolution on Army orders relating to fugitive slaves. 1861, Dec. 4. Introduced and agreed to : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 19; Cong. Globe, 9. 37. Trumbull's Confiscation Bill. 1861, Dec 5. Introduced and read twice: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 27; Cong. Globe, 10. *38. Fessenden's Resolution on the Washington jail. [§97.] 1861, Dec. 9. Introduced : House Journal, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 54; Cong. Globe, 36. Dec. 9. Aldrich's amendment: Cong Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 36. Dec 9. Love- joy's amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 36. Dec. 9. Passed as amended : Cong Globe, 37 Cong., 2 Sess., 36. 39. Bingham's Resolution on the Washington jail. [ § 97.] 1861, Dec. 9. Introduced and referred : House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 52 ; Cong. Globe, 35. 40 Morrill's confiscation Joint Resolution. [ § 91.] 1861. Dec II. Introduced and referred: Semite Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 36; Cong. Globe, 49. 120 Fugitive Slaves: — Aets Repealed. [App. c. *41. Hale's Resolution on the slaves of rebels. [ § 95.] 1861, Dec. 16. Introduced and agreed to : Sctiate Journal, 37 Cong. S Sess., 45 ; Cong. Globe, 88. 42. Wilson's Bill for emancipation in the District of Columbia. [ § 98. ] 1861, Dec 16. Introduced and read twice: Senate Joii)-nal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess, 47; Cong. Globe, 89 Dec. 19. Referred: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 153. [See No. 54.]. *43. Sumner's Resolution against the surrender of fugitives by the Army. [ § 95.] 1861, Dec. 18. Introduced and agreed to: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 130 ; Cong. Globe, 130. 44. Lovejoy's confiscation and emancipation Resolution. [ §§ 91, 95.] 1861, Dec. 20. Introduced and laid on the table : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 106; Cong. Globe, 158. *45. Julian's Resolution to amend the Fugitive Slave Law. [ § 95.] 1861, Dec 20. Introduced and adopted: House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., iot,; Conq: Globe, 1 58. 46. Shank's Resolution on the return of fugitives by the Army. [§95] 1861, Dec. 20. Introduced and referred : House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 102, 124 ; Cong. Globe, 158, 172. *47. Wilson's Resolution for articles of war. [§95.] 1861, Dec. 20. Introduced: House journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 103; Cong. Globe, 158. Dec. 23. Adopted : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109, 114; Cong. Globe, 159, 16S. 48. Wilson's Bill on the arrest of fugitives by the officers of the Army and Navy. [ § 95.] 1861, Dec. 23. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 167 ; Cong. Globe, 161, 209. 1862, Jan. 7. Committee Amendments : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 88 ; Cong. Globe, 207. [ See No. 53.] 49. Howe's Bill for repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. [ § 101] 1861, Dec. 26. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 74; Cong. Globe, 177. 50. Davis's confiscation Bill. 1861, Dec. 30. Introduced and referred : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 75 ; Cong. Globe, 1 78. **51. Grimes's Act on criminal justice in the District of Columbia [ § 97.] 1861, Dec. 30. Introduced: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 75; Cong. Globe, 182. 1862, Jan. 6. Reported: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 199. Jan. 10. Com- mittee amendments : Senate Jou7-nal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 98 ; Cong. Globe, 264. Jan. 10 Powell's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 98, 109 ; Cong. Globe, 264, 319. Jan. 14. Pearce's two amendments: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109; Cong Globe, 319. Jan. 14. Ten Eyck's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109 , Cong. Globe, 320. Jan. 14. Harlan's amendment. Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 320. Jan. 14. Clark's amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2,-0. Jan 14 Saulsbury's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109; Cong. Globe, 320. Jan. 14. Clark's amendment: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 321. Jan. 14. Passed the Senate (yeas 31, nays 4) : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 109; Co7tg. Globe, 321. 52. Trumbull's Bill for the confiscation of property of rebels and to free the slaves of rebels. [ § 91] 1862, Jan. 15. Reported from the Senate Committee on Judiciary : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 113 ; Co7tg. Globe, 334. [See No. 57.] i86i-iS62.] Resolutions and Bills. 12 1 53 Amendments to Wilson's Bill on Army and Navy officers [ §95.] 1862, Jan i5. [See No. 48.J Collamer's amendment ; Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., ii6; Cong Globe, t,^%. Jan. i6. Saulsbury's amendment : Senate Journal, S7 Cong. 2 Sess , ii6; Cong. Globe, 358. Jan. 16. Rice's amendment to Saulsbury's amendment : Cong Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 359. 54. Wilson's District of Columbia Bill. [§98] 1862, Feb. 12. [See No. 41 ] Reported: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 7S5. * 55. Wilson's Resolution on the management of the Washington jail. 1862, Feb 18. Introduced and agreed to; Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., iij ; Cona-. Globe, 861. 56. Wilson's Bill to repeal the black code in the District of Columbia. [ § 98.] 1862, Feb. 24. Introduced and referred : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess , 263 ; Cong, Globe, 917. 57. Amendments to the confiscation Bill. [ § 91.] 1862, Feb. 25. [See No. 52.] Trumbull's amendment : Senate Jour7ial, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 239 ; Cong. Globe, 942. Feb. 25. Sumner's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 239 ; Cong. Globe, 946. Feb. 27. Davis's substitute : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 986. [See No. 59.] * *58. Blair's Act prohibiting return by the Army. [ § 95.] 1862, Feb. 25. Introduced; Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 3 58; Cong. Globe, 955. Feb 25. Bingham's amendment . House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 358 ; Cong. Globe, 955. Feb. 25. Passed the House (yeas 95, nays 51): House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 265; Cong. Globe, 958. Mar. 10. In the Senate; Davis's amend- meiit. Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess.,i%^; Cong. Globe, 1 142. Mar. 10. Sauls- bury's amendment- Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 284; Cong. Globe, 1142. Mar. 10. MacDougall's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 284 , Cong. Globe, 1 142. Mar. 10. Saulsbury's amendment: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2S4; Cong. Globe 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1142. Mar 10. Passed the Senate (yeas 29, nays 9). Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 285; Cong. Globe, 1142. Mar. 14. Approved by the President : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1243. 59. Harris's confiscation Bill. [ § 91 ] 1862, Mar. 14. Introduced and referred : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 304 ; Coni^ Globe, 1228. [See No. 63.] 60. Report of House Judiciary Committee on confiscation. 1862, Mar. 30 Adverse to all bills referred by the House . Con^. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1303. [See No. 64 ] 61. "Wilson's Resolution on the return of fugitives by the Army and Navy. 1862, Apr. 3. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 361 , Cong. Globe, 1546. [See No. 70. | * 62. Bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. [§98.1 1862, Apr. 3. Passed the Senate : Cong Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess.. 1648. [See No. 65 ] 63. Sherman's Amendment to Harris's confiscation Bill. 1862, Apr. ID. [See No. 59] Introduced ■ Cono: Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1652. [See No. 67.] 64. Wilson's Bill to amend the Fugitive Slave Act. [ § 101 ] 1862, Apr. II. Introduced : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 385; Cong. Globe, 1624 Apr. 14. Harris's amendment; Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1652. Apr. 14. Grimes's amendment . Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess , 393, 439 ; Cong. Globe, 1692. 122 Fugitive Slaves: — Acts Repealed. [App. c. * 65. Bill for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. 1 § 98] 1862, Apr. 16. [See No. 62.] Passed the House : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 16S6. Approved by the President. 6G. Lovejoy's Bill on return of fugitives by the Army. [ §95.) 1862, Apr. 16. Reported adversely from the Committee on Judiciary in the House : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 16S2. 67. Harris's confiscation Bill. | § 91.] 1862, Apr. 16. [See No. 63. J Reported from the Senate Committee on Judiciary : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 400 ; Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 167S. Apr. 22. Walton's amendment: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 177 1. Apr. 22. Porter's amendment; Senate yournal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 703; Cong. Globe, 1767, 1772. Apr. 22. Bingham's amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., i'jGt- Apr. 22. Col. lamer's amendment: Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 1782, 1895. Apr. 24. Motion to recommit: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 434; Cong. Globe, 1S56, 18S6. [See No. 71.] 68. House confiscation Bill. [ § 91 ] 1862, Apr. 23. A Select Committee raised in the House ■ Hoiise Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 602; Cong. Globe, 1788, 1S20. 69. Eliot's confiscation and emancipation Bill. [ § 91] 1862, Apr. 30. Introduced: House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 625; Cong. Globe, 1S86. [See No. 73.] 70. Saulsbury's amendment of "Wilson's Resolution. 1862, May I. [See No. 61. j Introduced: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., <\2i9 > Co/tg. Globe, 1S94. 71. Harris's confiscation Bill recommitted. [ § 91.] 1862, May 6. [See No. 67.] Wilson's amendment uf Collamer's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 450 ; Cong. Globe, 1954. May 6. Final vote : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 450; Cong Globe, 1954, 1965. 72. Clark's confiscation Bill. 1§91.| 1862, May 14. Reported: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 476; Cong. Globe, 21 12. May 14. Discussed but not acted upon : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong 2 Sess., 2163, 21SS, 2219, 2S42. 73. Confiscation and emancipation Bill. [ § 91] 1862, May 14. [See No. 69] Reported in the House. House yournal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 6S3 ; Cong- Globe, 2128. [See No. 75] 74. Sumner's Resolution on fugitive slaves. 1862, May 22. Introduced: Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 520, Cong. Globe, 2275. May 23. Grimes's amendment : Senate Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 523 ; Cong. Globe, 2306. May 26. Walton's emancipation bill amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2362, 2363. 75. Emancipation Bill. 1862, June 4. [See No 73 ] Recommitted ; House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 799 ; Cong. Globe, 2561. [See No. 76] 76. Julian's Bill to repeal the Fugitive Slave Act. [ § 101.] 1862, June 9 Introduced with a resolution; House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess.,2)2(); Cong Globe, 2623. 77 Colfax's Resolution demanding trial by jury for fugitives. 1862. June 9. Introduced : House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., S28; Cong. Globe, 2624. * 78. Bill for emancipation of fugitives from disloyal masters. [§ 91] 1862, June 17. [See No. 75] Reported in the House: House Journal, 37 Cong 2 5t'j^., 874 ; Cong. Globe, 2764. June 18. Eliot's substitute ■• House Journal, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 282; Cong. Globe, 2793. June 18. Emancipation bill passed the 1862-1S64] Resolutions and Bills. 123 House ( yeas 82, nays 54) : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2793. June 23. Clark's Senate ,AiTiendment to Eliot's substitute : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2S79, 2996. June 28. "Trumbull's Amendment : Cong. Globe, 37 Cong. 2 Sess., 2999, 3006. * * 79. Progress of the confiscation Bill. [ § 91-] i852 I" (No. 76), 126 (Nos. 80, 82) ; repeal bill passes, 86; te.xt of, 86, 87 ; 124 (No. 83). Fugitive Slave Bill of 1818, passed the House, 20-22 ; title of, 22 ; failure in the Senate, 23. Fugitive Slave Cases. See Table of Con- tents. Fugitive Slave Clause, in the New Eng- land Articles of Confederation, 7 ; in the Constitution, 14-16; in the Treaty of Ghent, 24, 106 (No. 12). Fugitive Slave Controversy, educating effect of, recapitulation of, 87, 88. Fugitive Slave Legislation, opposed by Northern States, 28 ; inadequacy of, proved, 28 ; necessity of more stringent, 26, 28 ; proposition for new, 29 ; must be carried out, 42 ; new element in, 66; in i860, 71 ; resistance to, declared felo- ny, 72, 73 ; propositions to repeal or amend, 73 ; after emancipation procla- mation, 77. GALLATIN, ALBERT, in Treaty of Ghent, 25. Gannett, case of, 126 (No. 44). Gansey, Isaac, case of, 125 (No. 24). " Gap Gang," aid kidnappers, 50. Gardiner, , commissioner in Hamlet case, 43, 44- Garner, Margaret, flight and seizure, 47. Garner, Robert, flight and seizure, 47. Garner, Simeon, flight and seizure, 47; case 128 (No. 58). Garrett, Thomas, trial and fine, reward offered for, 63. Gatchell case, 128 (No. 61). Georgia, difficulty in recovery of fugitives in, 8; Governor of, demands fugitives from justice, 41. Gibson case, 126 (No. 45). Giddings resolution, 29, 109 (Nos. 23, 25) ; resolution, no (Nos. 27, 28). Glasgow, freedom case in, 12, 124 (No. 7)- Glocester, given jurisdiction over run- aways, 93 (No 24). Glover case, 127 (No. 55). Goin case, 126 (No. 29). Gorsuch, Edward, claims a fugitive, 50. Grahame, Thomas, in freedom case, 12. Grayson, , on fugitive slave clause, 15- Great Britain, status of fugitives in, n, 12 ; diplomatic relations, n, 12; encourage- ment of fugitives, 24, 25 ; pays indem- nity, 26. See also England. Great Dismal Swamp, refuge for run- aways, 57. Grey, James B., demands a fugitive, 39. Grimes, criminal justice bill, 81 ; act, 120 (No. 51) ; amendments, 121 (No. 64), 122 (No.74)- HALE, , resolution, 79, 1 20 (No. 41 ) ; amendment, 123 (No. 82). jjall, , resolution, 29, 109 (No. 26). Hamlet, James, case, 43, 44. 126 (No. 43). Hannum, Captain, in Ottoman case, 40. Hanway, Castner, in Christiana case, 50, 51- Harlan, , amendment, 120 (No. 51). Harris, , introduces confiscation bill, 144 Fugitive Slaves : — Index. 76; confiscation bill, 121 (No. 59), 122 (Nos. 67, 71); amendment, 121 (No. 64). Hartford, fugitive harbored in, 10; treaty of, ratified, 91 (No. 14) ; controversy with New Netherlands, 124 (No. i). Harvard College, Library of, 129 (No. 2). Henderson amendment, 123 (No. 82). Hepburne, Judge, in Kennedy case, 39. Higginson, T. W., in Burns case, 45, 46. Hilliard, Mrs. G. S., harbors a fugitive, 64. Hillyer, , finality resolution, 116 (No. 37)- Hindman, , proposition, 72 ; joint resolution, 117 (No. 10). Holmes, , on the fugitive slave bill, 22. Howard, , amendment, 123 (No. 82). Howe, , repeal bill, S3, 120 (No. 49)- Hubbard, , on repeal bill, 84,85; res- olution, 123 (No. 83). ILLINOIS, no full personal liberty law in, 67. Immigration, into Missouri, 23. Impeachment, ground for, 69. Imprisonment of a runaway, 56. Indented Servants. See Servants. Indiana, personal liberty law in (1824), 65, 67. Indians, received fugitives in the wilder- ness, I ; as slaves, 2 ; as slave hunters, 8 ; conferences with, 8 ; escapes to, 9. See Chickasaws, Choctaws, Creeks, Del- awares, Seminoles. Intercolonial cases, early agreements as to fugitives, 1,2; agreement between the Dutch and English, 7 ; difficulty of ar- ranging regulations, 7 ; first contained in Articles of Confederation, 7 ; depend- ent upon intercolonial feeling, 9; case of escape of slaves, 11. Interferences and rescues, 38. International cases, earliest, 10 ; relations unsettled, 9, 10; regulations under the Articles of Confederation, 12, 13. Interstate relations, affected by Prigg de- cision, 41. Iowa, personal liberty laws in, 67. Iredell, on fugitive slave clause, 15. Isaac, case of, 41, 124 (No. 24). JACKSON, , resolution, 116 (No. 36)- Jager, Cornells Herperts de, escape of servants of, 6, 7. Jail, in the District of Columbia, resolu- tion on, 80 ; denied to fugitives, So, 81, no (Nos. 27, 28). See District of Columbia. Jails, State, not to be used, 40, ; denied to fugitives, 47 ; denial constitutional, 70 ; use forbidden, 69. See also Personal Liberty Bill. Jefferson, Thomas, proposition, 13. John case, 17, 124 (No. 11). Johnson, on committee, 17; joint resolu- tion, 118 (Nos. 12, 27); amendment, 124 (No. 83). Johnson Case, 12S (No. 60). Jones, George, case, 36, 37, 125 (No. 19). Julian, George W., repeal bills, 83, 122 (No. 76), 123 (No. 80) ; resolution, 120 (No. 45). Jury trial, not admitted, 7 ; disuse of, 66. KANSAS, personal liberty laws in, 67, 70. Kellogg, , joint resolution, 118 (Nos. 19, 20, 21). Kennedy case, 39, 126 (No. 35). Kentucky, resolutions, 25; petition of Legislature, 28 ; demands extradition of abettors of fugitives, 41 ; contro- versy with Ohio, 126 (No. 37). Kidnapping, suggests new fugitive slave law, 17; from 1793 to 1850, 27 ; in bor- der States, 27 ; character of cases, 36; enlists sympathy, 60; regulations against, 82. Kilgore, resolution, 73, 118 (No. 11). King, , on repeal bill, 84. Kirk case, 126 (No 33). Kline, Marshal, demands assistance, 50, L'AMISTAD case, 27. Latimer, George, case of, 39, 125 (No. 2S) ; effect, 6S ; daily journal, 40. Harris — Negroes. 145 LgP^j^e, Joint resolution, 117 (No. 9). Le Screux, slave on, 11. Lewis case, 127 (No. 54). Lewis, Elijah, prosecution of, 50, 51, 127 (No. 49). Liberator, kidnapping case in, 82. See Newspapers. Liberty, love of, by slaves, 54. Liberty Party, convention of, 49. Libraries, use of, 129 (No. 2). Lincoln, President, preliminary proclama- tion, 77; final emancipation procla- mation, 77. List, counsel in Shadrach case, 47. Loring, Ellis Gray, in Shadrach case, 47; Crafts taken to house of, 60. Louisiana, escape of slaves from, 23. Lovejoy, bills, 78, 79, 119 (No. 35), 122 (No. 66) ; resolutions, 119 (No. 29), 120 (No. 44) ; amendment, 119 (No. 3S). MADISON, on fugitive slave clause, Maine, Governor of, refuses to surrender fugitives from justice, 41 ; personal liberty law in, 69. Malbronne, Ensign de, loses servant, 11. Mallory, , on Blair bill, 79; on repeal, 84. Manhattan, escape to, 6, 124 (No. 2). Mansfield, Lord. See Somersett case. Market women, on Underground Rail- road, 63. Maryland, regulations on fugitives, 3 ; offers reward, 7 ; letter from, to New Netherlands, 10, n ; fugitives escape from, 10, 11; resolution, 24; resolu- tions debated, 24, 107 (No. iS) ; of- fers reward for Thomas Garrett, 63; regulations against runaways, 90 (No. 4), 91 (Nos. u, 12), 93 (Nos. 26, 2S), 94 (No. 31), 95 (Nos. 38, 40). Mason, of Massachusetts, on the fugitive slave bill, 22. Mason, of Virginia, fugitive slave bill, 29, 30, no (No. 30) ; amendment, 29; argument, 31. Massachusetts Bay, regulation against transportation of apprentices and ser- vants, 99 (No. 63) ; on the capture of servants in, 89 (No. 2) ; regulation of free negroes, 98 (No. 53). Massachusetts Colony, first law as to fugitives, 4 ; in the New England Con- federation, 7 ; emancipation in, 13 ; first fugitive slave case in, 35. Massachusetts State, Governor of, ad- vised, 68 ; personal liberty law, 66, 67, 68; no recovery of fugitives in, 71. May, S. J., in "Jerry "case, 49. McClernand, ,117 (No. 9). McHenry, "Jerry," case, 48, 49, 127 (No. 50- McLanahan, , resolution, 1 1 5 ( No. 32 ) . jyieade, , proposition, 29 ; resolution, no (No. 29). Meionaon, mass meetings in, 45. Merrill, Amos B., in Latimer case, 39. Mexico, as a place of refuge, 25. Michigan, personal liberty laws in, 67, 70. Miller, in kidnapping case, 51, 127 (No. 50). Miner, Jo, advertisement of, 80. Minnesota, personal liberty law in, 67. Missouri, admission of, 23; Anderson case in, 26 ; Governor of, offers reward for John Brown, 51. Missouri Compromise, fugitive slave clause in, 23, 107 (No. 16) ; period of, 23- Mob, provisions against, 31. Morgan, Margaret. See Prigg Case. Morrill, , resolution, n9 (No. 40). Morris, cutter, in Burns case, 46, 55. Morris, , substitute reported, 83 ; on repeal bill, 85 ; resolution, n7 (No. 3) ; joint resolution, n8 (No. 16). Morris, John B., demands a fugitive slave, 39- " Moses." See Harriet Tubman, Murray, , motion, 19. NALLE CASE, 128 (No. 64). Nassau, fugitives in, 27. Negroes, ignorance of, 57 ; regulation of, 100 (No. 65) ; against escape of, 103 (No. 78) ; petition of a soldier, 20 ; free, how affected, 21 ; regulation of, 98 (No. 53). See also Fugitives. T46 Fuzitive Slaves : — Index. New Amsterdam, escape of servants from, 67 ; trial at, 9. See also New Netherlands. New England, regulations as to fugi- tives, 4. New England Confederation, composition of, 7, 8 ; articles of, 91 (No. S). New Hampshire, legislation in, 4, 99 (No. 61) ; personal liberty laws in, 67, 69. New Haven, in the New England Con- federation, 7. New Jersey, regulations on fugitives, 3, 94 (No. 32), 95 (No. 39), 96 (No. 42) ; sanctions rendition, 67; slaves, 98 (No. 55) ; white servants, 98 (No. 56). New Netherlands, legislation in, 4 ; on fugitive slave cases, 11 ; regulations against runaways, 89 (No. i), 89, 90 (No. 3), 90 (No. 5), 91 (Nos. 10, 14), 92 (No. 19); Quakers, 93 (No. 29) ; contro- versy with Hartford, 126 (No. i). See also Dutch Colonies. New York, regulation on fugitives, 8, 97 (No. 50), 98 (No. 51), 99 (No. 59); Governor of, in Solomon Northrup case, 37, 38 ; refusal to return abettors of fugitives, 41 ; personal liberty laws, 66, 69, 70; slaves, 97 (No. 49); pre- vention of insurrections, loi (No. 68) ; kidnapping in, 82. Niblack, , resolution, 117 (No. 7). Nicholson, on committee, 20. Norfolk, kidnapping cases in, 82, 12S ; (No. 68). ©BERLIN CASE, 38, 125 (No. 26). Oberlin-Wellington, rescue, 49, 50, 128 (No. 62). Officers, return of fugitives by army and navy, 121 (No. 53). Ohio, fugitjves protected in, 23 ; refusal to return abettors of fugitives, 41 ; per- sonal liberty law, 67, 70. Olmsted, F. L., quoted, 56. "Omnibus Bill," fugitive slave provision in, 30. Ordinance of 1787, for the Northwest Territory, 13, 14; confirmed, 16. Ottoman case, 40, 126 (No. 34). PARKER, THEODORE, speaks on Burns' case, 45 ; indicted for riot, 46 ; protects William and Lucy Crafts, 59, 60. Parker, William, in Christiana case, 50- Pass, necessity of, 55. Patrols, duty of, 55. Patroons, runaways from, 89 (No. i). Peace Convention, amendment, 118 (No. 22). Pearl, carries fugitives, 42. Penalties for escape, 31 ; for violating personal liberty laws, 67. Pennsylvania, emancipation in, 13; Gov- ernor of, in "John" case, 17; act of, reported, 23, 107 (No. 17) ; fugitives abetted in, 24 ; personal liberty laws in, 66, 69 ; regulation of servants, 97 (No. 48) ; regulation of negroes, 100 (No. 65); harboring of fugitives, 103 (No. 80); case in, 126 (No. 46). Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery, efforts in behalf of " John," 17 ; petition of, 21 ; efforts of, 28. Pensacola, Walker embarks from, 42. Personal Liberty Laws, passed, 28 ; char- acter of, 65 ; before the Prigg decision, 65 ; between the Prigg decision and the Second Fugitive Slave Law, 66 ; oc- casioned by the law of 1850, 66, 67 ; change in character, 66; table of, 67; distribution among States, 67 ; report on, 68; effect of, 70, 102; constitution- ality of, 70; obstruction b)', 71 ; repeal urged, 72 ; resolution against, 72 ; Saulsbury substitute on, 123 (No. 81). Petition of North Carolina negroes, 19; of free negroes, 20 ; of a free colored so'dier, 20 ; of the Pennsylvania Aboli- tion Society 21 ; frorh the Kentucky Legislature, 28 ; to remove jailer and sheriff in Latimer case, 40 ; for an amend- ment to the Constitution, 40; for a new personal liberty law, 68. Philadelphia, constitutional convention sits in, 14; attempted rescue in, 39, 125 (No. 22). Phillips, Wendell, speeches on Latimer case, 40 ; addresses mass meeting, 45; New Amsterdam — Rhode Island. 147 speaks on Burns' case, 45 ; indicted for riot, 46. Pierce, Franklin, President, sends execu- tive message, 48 ; issues proclamation, 48. Pindall, on revision of the fugitive slave act, 21 ; made chairman of committee, 21 ; amendatory bill, 106 (No. 10). Pine Grove Plantation, probable refuge, 57, 66. Pinkney, Gen. C. C., on the fugitive slave clause, 14. Plymouth, in the New England Confede- ration, 7. Pomeroy, , on confiscation bill, 76. Porter, , amendment, 122 (No. 67). Potter, R. J., advertisement by, So. Powell, , on District of Columbia jail, 81; joint resolution, 119 (No. 28); amendment, 120 (No. 51). Pratt, , amendment, iii (No. 30). Priggs vs. Pennsylvania case, 27, 28, 125 (No. iS) ; consequences of, 66 ; extracts from, 108 (No. 22). Proclamation, by West India Company, 10 ; on Shadrach case, 48 ; emanci- pation, 77. Prosecutions, carried on, 42 ; after "Jerry" rescue, 49; of Oberlin- Well- ington rescuers, 50 ; of Wendell Phillips, 46. Protection papers, use of, 58. Pugh, George H., joint resolution, 118 (No. 26). Purrington, brig William, 126 (No. 39). Purvis, Robert, connection with Under- ground Railroad, 63. QUAKERS, arrange station on the Underground Railroad, 60 ; fugitives hidden by, 61 ; refused admision to New Netherlands, 93 (No. 29). Quincy, Josiah, account of first fugitive slave case in the North, 35, 125 (No. RAIDS, upon plantations, 56. Rantoul, Robert, Jr., in Sims case, 44. Read, , on committee, 17. Redemptioners, described, 2 ; cases of, 2 ; case of running away with ne- groes, 3. Refuge, place of, 57. Rendition, a duty, 7. See also Fugi- tives. Rescue, first case of, 35. Resolution, by Maryland Legislature, 23, 24 ; on relations with Canada, 25 ; Kentucky, 25; on fugitives on the high seas, 26 ; Giddings, 29 ; against , the return of Latimer, 40 ; to base representation on free persons, 40; Georgia Legislature, 41 ; on arrests by army otificers, 79 ; Fitch, 116 (No. 35); Jackson, 116 (No. 36); Hillyer, 116 (No. 37); Chase, 116 (No. 38); Cochrane's joint, 117 (No. 2); Morris, 117 (No. 3); Leake, 117 No. 4); Cox, 117 (No. 5); Stevenson, 117 (No. 6); Niblack, 117 (No. 7); English joint, 117 (No. 8) ; McClernand joint, 117 (No. 9); Hindman, 117 (No. 10); Kilgore, 118 (No. 11); Johnson's joint, 118 (Nos. 12, 27); Crittenden's joint, 118 (No. 13); Douglas's joint, 118 (No. 14) ; Florence, u8 (Nos. 15, 18) ; Morris's joint, 118 (No. 16); Kellogg's joint, 118 (Nos. 19, 20, 21) ; Clarence's joint, 118 (No. 23); Crittenden's joint, 118 (No. 24); Pugh's joint, 118 (No. 26); Powell's joint, 119 (No. 28); Lovejoy's, 119 (No. 29); Wilson's 119 (Nos. 32, 33), 120 (No. 47), 121 (No. 55), 121 (No. 61) ; Clark, 119 (No. 34) ; Sumner, 119 (No. 36); Fessenden, 119 (No. 38) ; Bingham, 119 (No. 39)'; Morrill's confiscation joint, 119 (No. 40); Hale, 120 (No. 41) ; Sumner, 120 (No. 43), 122 (No. 74) ; Lovejoy, 120 (No. 44) ; Julian, 120 (No. 45) ; Shank, 120 (No. 46) ; Colfax, 122 (No. 77) ; Hubbard's repeal, 123 (No. 83). Revolution, did not change condition of slave, 13. Reward, offered by Missouri, 51 ; by United States, 52; by colonies, 7, 8. Rhode Island legislation, 4 ; emanci- pation, 13; personal liberty law, 66, 67, 69 ; regulation of ferries in, 98 (No. 57). 148 Fiizitive Slaves : — Index. Rice, , amendment, 121 (No. 53). Rice, John, kidnapped, 49. Rich, on the fugitive slave bill, 21. Riker, Richard, in Jones case, 37. Riley, , United States commissioner, 47- Rotch, aids escape, 6. Runaways, regulations against, 6, 7, S; easily regulated, 7; the habitual, 57; methods pursued, 58; harboring upon a ship, 58 ; regulations against, 89 (Nos. I, 3), 90 (Nos. 4, 7), 92 {No. 17). 93 (Nos. 24, 25, 27), 94 (Nos. 31, 33), 95 (No. 40), 98 (No. 52), 99 (No. 61), 100 (No. 6); entertainment of, 91 (No. 10), 92 (No. 16), 93 (No. 29), 94 (No. 37), 102 (No. 73) ; second offence, how punished, 91 (No. 13) ; hue and cry after, 92 (No. 18); from the Dutch, 93 (No. 21); apprehension of, 93 (No. 22) ; English, 93 (No. 23) ; in Glocester, 93 (No. 24) ; apprehen- sion of, 95 (Nos. 35, 38) ; capture re- warded, 95 (No. 37); prevention of, 96 (No. 42); to Canada, 97, 98 (No. 50) ; trade with, inhibited, 97 (No. 47) ; against ferriage of, 98 (No. 57), 102 (No. 4) ; minor, 99 (No. 61) ; pursuit of, 103 (No. 79). Russia, Emperor of, arbitration by, 25. SAULSBURY, amendments, 120 (No. 51), 121 (Nos. 53, 58), 122 (No. 70), 123 (Nos. 81, 82, 83). Savannah Georgian, advertisement in, 57, 66. Secrecy, observed by fugitives, 63. Sedgwick, , on committee, 17. Seizure, of North Carolina negroes, 19. See also Arrest, Kidnapping Cases. Seminoles, steal slaves, 24 ; trouble, 25 ; United States claims on, 108 (No. 19). Sergeant, , on the fugitive slave bill, 22. Servants, English, 93 (Nos. 25, 28); an act concerning, 99 (No. 60) ; regulation of, 98 (No. 56), loi (No. 70), loi (No. 7i) ; fugitive, 91 (No. 9), 92 (No. 19), 93 (No. 21), 94 (No. 32), 95 (Nos. 39, 41 ), 96 (No. 45), 100 (No. 67), 103 (No. 78) ; how to know a, 92 (No. 20). See also Fugitives, Runaways. Sewall, Samuel E., counsels fugitives, 39, 47- Seward, W. H., amendments, 29, iii (No. 30). Shadrach case, 47, 48 ; personal liberty laws tested, 68 ; Clay's resolution on, 115 (No. 33); case, 127 (No. 48). Shank, , resolution, 120 (No. 46). Shanley vs. Haney case, 124 (No. 8). Shaw, Chief Justice, in Latimer case, 39. Shell, O. P., advertises a runaway, 56. Sheriff, power of, 31. Sherman, John, amendments, 86, 123 (No. 82). Sherman, Roger, on the fugitive slave clause, 14; on committee, 18. Sherwood, Major, case of servant of, 78, 128 (No. 67). Ship, refuge for runaways, 58 ; slave on Brazilian, 126 (No. 36). Ship-masters, Dutch, rewarded, 93 (No. 21). Sims, Thomas M., case, 44 ; brigade, 44; courthouse used as jail, 68; case, 126 (No. 44). Slaves, conditions of life, 55 ; Mother's Farewell, extract from, 54 ; stealing of, 102 (No. 77) ; abolition of trade in, 21 ; status of, in England, 24; ques- tion of damages, 31 ; must wear livery, 55 ; new conditions surround, 73 ; regulation of, 97 (No. 49), 98 (Nos. 54> 55)> 99> 100 (Nos. 60, 64), 100 (No. 67), loi (No. 70), Id, 102 (Nos. 71, 72) ; extradition of, 108 (No. 21); status on the high seas, loS (No. 20), 109 (No. 23) ; of the Dutch, escape to the English, 7 ; escape to the forest, 7, 8 ; of rebels, resolutions on, ■]Tj ; bill to free, 120 (No. 52). Slaveholder, demand for legislation, 14; basis of, argued, 16 ; complaints of, 20. Slave-hunters, how received, 62 ; insur- rections to prevent, loi (No. 68). Slavery, condition in the colonies, 11 ; interests advanced, 16; justification of, 16 ; extinction of, 35 ; attacked in Rice — United Colonies. 149 Congress, 74 ; abolition in the District of Columbia, 82, 121, 122 (Nos. 62, 65) ; studies of the institution of, 129 (No. 3) ; studies of colonial, 129 (No. 3) ; speeches upon, 131 (No. 8). Smith, , on fugitive slave law, 21, 22. Smith, Gerrit, in Anderson case, 26 ; in " Jerry " rescue, 49. Smithburg case, 126 (No. 32). Society for the Abolition of Slavery. See Pennsylvania. .Somersett case, 12, 124 (No. 9), Soule, , on the fugitive slave bill, 31, South Bend Case, 126 (No. 38). South Carolina, regulations on fugitives, 3 ; difficulty in recovering fugitives, 8 ; constitutional convention in, 14^ regula- tions against runaways, 96 (No. 43), 97 (No. 47), 99, 100 (Nos. 58, 62, 64) ; regulation of slaves, 98 (No. 54), 100 (No. 64),ioi (No. 69), 102 (No. 77). Southern States, complain of Under- ground Railroad, 64. Spalding, , repeal bill, S3, 123 (No. 80). Spanish colonies, interval of unpopulated country south, i. Sprague, E., 46. State Jails. See Jails. State Officers, power discussed, 20, 22 ; forfeiture of office, 69 ; forbidden to act, 66, 69. St. Augustine, escapes to, 8. St. Luc, Sieur de la Corne, negro servant of, II. Staunton, General, in Sherwood case, 78, 94- Stevens, , repeal bill, 83, 123 (No. 80) ; motion of, ill (No. 30). Stevenson, , resolution, 117 (No. 6). Stewart, . See Somersett Case. Story, Justice, decision in Prigg case, 28. Stuyvesant, Governor, in fugitive slave case, 10. Sumner, Charles, in Drayton case, 42 ; resolutions, 79 ; repeal bills, 83, 85, 124 (No. 80), resolutions, 119 (No. 36), 120 (No. 43), 120 (No. 74) ; amend- ment, 121 (No. 57). Suttle, Charles F., in Burns case, 45. Swain, John, suit for slave, 5. Swamps, as a refuge, 56, 37. Swan, Captain, in Wisdom case, 78. Swedish colonies, along the coast, I ; regulations on fugitives, 2. Syracuse, "Jerry" rescue in, 48. TAYLOR, , on committee, 18. Ten Eyck, , amendment, 120 (No. 51) ; report of, 123 (No. So). Thomas case, 126 (No. 30). Thompson, , case, 125 (No. 27). Treaty, of Hartford, fugitive slave clause in, 91 (No. 14); of 1783, 104 (No. 2); with Indian tribes, 12, 13, 16, 17, 24, 104 (Nos. I, 3, 5), 105 (No. 8), 106 (Nos. II, 12), 108 (No. 19); of Ghent, 24, 106 (No. 12); proposed with Great Britain, 25. Tremont Temple, mass meetings in, 45. Trial, by jury, not admitted, in first act, 19; objected to, 22; denied, 31; pro- posed, 73 ; resolution demanding, 122 (No. 77). Trumbull, confiscation bill, 75, 119 (Nos. 30, 37); bill, 120 (No. 52); amend- ments, 119 (No. 31), 121 (No. 57), 122 (No. 78). Tubman, Harriet, account of, 62. Tukey, Marshal, in Sims case, 44. Turc, escape of, 9. UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, be- ginnings of, 27 ; how regarded by the South, 31 ; methods south of the Ohio, 47 ; use of, by John Brown, 51 ; incident at, 54; description of, 60; rise and growth, 60, 61 ; stations on, described, 61 ; methods pursued, 61 ; extent of system, 60, 61 ; origin of name, 61; in the South, 61 ; in the North, 61 ; colored agents on, 61, 62 ; prosecution of agents, 63 ; formal organization, 63 ; market women as helpers, 63. Underwood, , amendment, in (No. 30). United Colonies, treaty with New Nether- lands, 91 (No. 14). ISO Fusritivc Slaves: — Index. United States, reward offered for John Brown, 51, 52; in Seminole trouble, 24 ; in Anderson case, 26. See also Acts, Bills, Fugitives, Resolutions Runaways. United States Hotel, slave hunters at, 60, 69. VALLANDIGHAM, C. L., amend- ment, iiS (No. 25), Van Zandt, aids fugitive, 42, 125 (No. 25). Vermont, personal liberty laws in, 66, 67, 69- Vigilance committee organized, 38 ; in " Jerry " rescue, 48. Villeinage, ceased in England, 11. Virginia, regulations on fugitives, 3; re- wards the recovery of a fugitive, 7, 8 ; slaves escape, 8 ; constitutional conven- tion in, 15; Governor of, action in "John" case, 17; demands arrest of abettors of a fugitive, 41 ; regulation against the entertainment of fugitives, 90 (No. 6) ; regulations against run- aways, 90 (No. 7), 91 (No. 13), 92 (Nos 16, 17, 18, 20), 93 (Nos. 22, 25, 27> 30). 94 (No. 33), 95 (Nos. 35, 37), 98 (No. 52); reward for the capture of runaways, 93 (No. 21), 95 (No. 36) ; on English runaways, 93 (No. 22); in county of Glocester, 93 (No. 24) ; repeal law, 96 (No. 44) ; amends law, 96 (No. 48) ; amended, 100 (No. 66) ; against ferriage of runaways, 102 (No. 74). "WALKER, JONATHAN, aids fugi- tives, 42, 126 (No. 31). Walton, , amendment, 122 (Nos. 67, 74). Washington, President, asks for the re- turn of a fugitive, 35, 125 (No. 13). Washington case, 38, 126 (No. 42). Washington, jail, resolutions on, 119 (Nos. 32, 34, 3S, 39), 121 (No. 55). See also Jail. Webster, Daniel, in Creole case, 27 ; introduces bill, iii (No. 30). Wellington. See Oberlin-Wellington. West India Company, regulation of, 2 ; execution of regulation 6, 7 ; ordinance of, 89 (No. l). Whipping, motive for flight, 54. Whipple, , in kidnapping case, 35, 36. White, , on committee, 17. White slaves. See Redemptioners, Ser- vants. Whitman, , on the fugitive slave bill 20, 22. Williams case, 125 (No. 17). Williamson case, 128 (No. 59). Wilkins, Frederick. See Shadrach. Wilson, , on Butler's proposition, 14, 15- Wilson, Henry, on confiscation, 75 ; bills, 82, 120 (Nos. 42, 48), 121 (Nos. 54, 56); resolutions, 79,80, 119 (Nos. 32, ol>)' 120 (No. 47), 122 (Nos. 55, 61); amendment, 123 (No. 71). Winthrop, , amendment, iii (No. 30). Winthrop, Governor John, in fugitive slave case, 10, 11. Wisconsin, personal liberty laws in, 67, 70; Supreme Court decision, 71. Wisdom case, 78, 128 (No. 66). Woodbridge resolutions, 25, 108 (No. 21). Woods, as a refuge, i, 56. Wright, , presents Maryland Resolu- tion, 24. Writ, of habeas corpus, in Somersett case, 12; allowed, 22; advisability of, 20, 22; refused, 26; issued, 38, 39; of personal replevin, sworn out, 39. YULEE, on the fugitive slave law, 32. POLIT ICAL SCI ENCE. POLITICAL SCIENCE and COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. By John W. Burgess, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of History, Political Science, and In- ternational Law; Dean of the University Faculty of Political Science in Columbia College. Two volumes, 8vo, cloth, 7S1 pages By mail, post-paid, $5.00. Special terms for class use. The first part of the work is devoted to the general principles of political science. It is divided into three books. The first book treats of the nation as an ethnological concept; the second treats of the State, its idea, its origin, its forms, and its ends; the third shows the historical development of the four typical constitutions of the mod- ern age, — those of England, Germany, France, and the United States. The second part is devoted to a comparison of the provisions of these typical con- stitutions, and a generalization from these provisions of some fundamental principles of constitutional law. The three books treat: the first, of sovereignty within the con- stitution ; the second, of civil liberty ; and the third, which constitutes the second VOLUME, of government, legislative, executive, and judicial. The work is intended as a systematic treatise containing the results of the most modern thought upon the subjects treated. The London Times of Feb. 26 says: America sends us this week a very learned, elaborate, and sug- gestive work on Constitutional Law, entitled " Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law," by John W. Burgess, Ph.D., LL.D. . . - His work ... is full of keen analysis and suggestive comment, and is a noteworthy contribution to the comparative study of political science and jurisprudence. . . . Dr. Burgess possesses a keen insight into essential political and constitutional fact, and his work may be confi- dently recommended to all serious students of comparative politics and jurisprudence. OUR GOVERNMENT : How it grew, What it does, and How it does it. By Jesse Macy, Professor of History and Political Science in Iowa College. Revised edition. By mail, post-paid, 85 cents. It is the best treatise I have seen for school use upon the functions of our national, State, and local gov- ernment. I can heartily commend the book. — Edward IV. Bemis, Professor 0/ History and Econo- mics, Vanderbilt University. THE PHILOSOPHY OF WEALTH. By John B. Cl.\rk, A.M., Professor of History and Political Science in Smith College. By mail, post-paid, $1.10. RAILWAY TARIFFS AND THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE LAW. By Prof. Edwin R. A Seltgman, of the School of Political Science, Columbia Col- lege. By mail, post-paid, 75 cents. THE MODERN DISTRIBUTIVE PROCESS. By John B. Clark and Franklin H. Giddings. By mail, post-paid, 75 cents. SHARING THE PROFITS. By Mary Whiton Calkins. A sketch of things actually accomplished in this direc- tion. By mail, post-paid, 25 cents. HARVARD HISTORICAL MONOGRAPHS. Edited by Professors of Harvard University. No. I. The Veto Power. Bv Edward Campbell Mason. A.B , Instructor in Poli- tical Economy in Harvard University. By mail, post-paid, $1.00. No. 2. Introduction to the Study of Federal Government. By Albert Bush- NELL Hart. Ph.D., Assistant Professor of History in Harvard University. By mail, post-paid, $1.00. THE POLITICAL SCIENCE QUARTERLY. A Review devoted to the Historical, Statistical, and Comparative Study of Politics, Economics, and Public Law. Edited by the Faculty of Political Science of Col- umbia College. I3-00 per year. GINN & CO., Publishers, . - boston, new york, and Chicago. THE SOCIETY FOR THE COLLEGIATE INSTRUCTION OF WOMEN. ("THE HARVARD ANNEX.") INSTRUCTION IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND INSTITUTIONS. A SYSTEMATIC coursc of instruction in American History and Insti- tutions is oiTered, under the joint direction of Asst. Professors Channing and Hart. I. American History to 1783. Asst. Professor Channing. This is a course for undergraduates or graduate students, with lectures and parallel reading and the preparation of topics. It is open to students who have taken no other history course. II. History of American Institutions. Asst. Professor Chantsung. This course is a study, from the sources, of the origin of American institutions and their development, to the founding of the present Constitu- tion in 1789. A knowledge of the annals of Colonial history is presupposed. It is open to graduate students or to well-equipped undergraduates. III. Constitutional and Political History of the United States (1783- 1865). Asst. Professor Hart. This course is for undergraduates or graduates, and is open to students who have taken no other history courses. The work consists of lectures, parallel reading, and the preparation of special reports. IV. Government and Administration in the United States, National, State, and Municipal, Asst. Professor Hart. This course is intended only for those who have a knowledge of the narrative history of the country, and especially for graduates. V. Seminary of American History. Directed jointly by Asst. Professors Channing and Hart. This course can be taken only by students who have had systematic instruction in American history here or elsewhere. INIeetings will be held at regular intervals, and in addition each student will have a half hour of indi- vidual conference weekly. Of the above courses one of the narrative series (I. or HI.) and one of the descriptive and critical courses (H. or IV.) will be omitted each year. Students will have the use of the select working library in Fay House, and of the printed and manuscript collections of the Harvard College Library, Boston Public Library, Boston Athenaeum, Massachusetts State Library, and other Boston libraries. The nearly complete set of Govern- ment documents owned by Harvard College will be at their disposal. For descriptive circulars and other information address either of the instructors, or Mr. ARTHUR OILMAN, Secretary, Fay House, Cambridge, Mass. HISTORY. MYFRS'S Eastern Nations and Greece. Introduction price, $i. With full maps, illustrations, and chronological summaries. Far more interesting and useful than any other epitome of the kind which I have seen. — Professor Beckwith, Trinity College. A I 1 FN'S Short History of the Roman People- Introduction price, |i. _i___i^__^_i With full maps, illustrations, and chronological synopsis. The best I know of for school use — George A. IVilliams, Vermont Academy. MYERS ANdALA^EITS f^"«^t History for Schools and Col- ^■i^^-.^^— i— i-^— ^^^-^^— ^^ leges- Introduction price, $1.50. This consists of Myers's Eastern Nations and Greece and Allen's Rome bound together. IVWFRS'S History of Rome. Introduction price, $1. With full maps, ^^_^.^.._ illustrations, tables, and chronological summaries. This, bound with Myers's Eastern Nations and Greece, is Myers's Ancient History. Price, $1.50. MYERS'S ^^diseval and Modern History. Introduction price. $1.50. «»^^__i^^^^ With a full series of colored maps. Sure to be liked by teachers and pupils and by the general reader. — Professor Snow, Washington University. M YpPQ'Q General History. Introduction price, $1.50. With full maps, ^^_^^_i^^_^ illustrations, tables, and summaries. The best text-book in universal history for beginners that we are acquainted with. — Professor Stearns, University of Wiscoftsin. IV\n!\!TnniV\FRY'S Leading Facts of English History. Introduc- I have never seen anything at all equal to it for the niche it was intended to fill. — Professor Perry, Williams College. IV\ONTnOIV\FRY'*s Leading Facts of French History- I ntroduc- ]V\W1N 1 VJ W1V\L1\ 1 O ^j^j^ pj.j^g^ ^j_j2. With full maps and tables. It is a marked advance on any available work of its scope. — The Nation. M n M Tn n IV\ F R Y '9 Leading Facts of American History- Intro- m\J\\ 1 O WiVlCfX i O production price, ^i. With full maps, illustra- tions, tables, etc. It is in every way 7\dim\x3}o\t. — Professor Myers, University of Cincimtati. F'VIFRTON'S Introduction to the Study of the Middle Ages- In- troduction price, $1.12. With colored maps, original and adapted. An admirable guide to both teachers and pupils in the tangled period of which it treats. — Professor Fisher, Yale College. And many other valuable Historical Books. GINN & COMPANY, PUBLISHERS, BOSTON, NEW YORK, CHICAGO, and LONDON.